From: jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed Khan)
Subject: Re: Nos Tacemus -[The Satanic Verses] -- Icarus.
Reply-To: jakhan@IASTATE.EDU (Javed Ahmed Khan)
Organization: Iowa State University
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 02:12:39 GMT

In article <Pine.3.02.9301112052.A9723-d100000@gwunix1.gwu.edu>,
tstpcc@gwunix1.gwu.edu (Paul C. Chemmanoor) writes:
> Nos Tacemus -- [The Satanic Verses ] -- Icarus.
> -----------------------------------------------
> 
> 0] Well folks time for another column.
>    I have chosen to write this time about the 'The Satanic Verses'.
>    I have just finished reading the book, and I thought I would
>    share a few thoughts. 
>    I know this is a controversial topic, and that it usually
>    generates a lot of heat, but it is such an interesting topic I 
>    couldnt resist it.
>    As usual feel free to flame me :-) Chances are posted flames
>    will get wasted, as I read soc.culture.indian only sporadically.
>    I try to be consistent in my writing, but I am as liable to slip
>    up as the next man [ well not quite as much :-) ]. If so tell me
>    about it.
>    
>    ...................................................................
>   . Statutory Warning: The{se musings may contain highly subjective  .
>   . opinions, unsubstantiated allegations, assertions, imperatives, .
>   . subliminal erotica and other material that may be of a harmful  .
>   . nature to the extremely gullible or those under 21.             .
>   ...................................................................
> 
>    1] First things first.
>       Let me state my biases.
>       I like salman rushdies writings.
>       'Midnights Children' was a great book.
>       'Shame' was successful in its imagery.
>       'Grimus' I found too dependant on symbolism that was not 
>        explained suffeciently, still, the power of description that
>        bloomed in salmans later books was evident even then.
>        
>    2] The fundamental premise of the book 'The Satanic Verses' on which
>       the whole tale hangs is just what the title says: 
>       The alleged satanic verses.
> 
>       In short this is the basis:
>     
>       When islam was just taking root in mecca, and mohammed (PBUH) 
>       was still building up his group of followers, mecca was ruled
>       by a local chief who was suspicious and apprehensive of
>       mohammed (PBUH). 
>       Mecca at the time was a great pilgrim centre for people from
>       all over the arab world, who came their to worship a whole
>       army of idols that had collected there since ancient times.
> 
>       Mohammed (PBUH) posed a threat to this pantheistic worship
>       and the revenue that arose from it by preaching his 
>       monotheistic religion where there was no God but Allah.
>       
>       In a fit of genius the local chief makes a proposition to 
>       Mohammed(PBUH): Accept, three, no more, but three out of the
>       hundreds of gods that were housed in the temple, in exchange
>       for the whole of mecca embracing islam.
> 
>       This much is history. I remember reading this in H.G. Wells
>       outline of world history. ["Long years ago", as Nehru keeps
>       saying. I cant think of HG. Wells outline of world history
>       without dredging up memories of 'Glimpses of World History'
>       nehrus answer to Wells book, what with its refernces to 
>       Max Mueller and other souls considered lost in these times.]
> 
>       Now enter, rushdie, and his interpretation of what transpired
>       afterward. 
> 
>       The Prophet communicates to God through the medium of the
>       archangel gabriel, [ who is revered in three world religions:
>       Islam, Christianity & Judaism.]
>       The Prohpet decides he will seek divine guidance and accordingly
>       climbs to the hill where he usually meets Gabriel.
>       When he comes down he walks to the center of the city and 
>       recites the verses that install the three godesses that the
>       local chief had asked to be included as divine. 
>       
>       A week later, the Prophet disowns the verses he had recited
>       accepting the godesses Al-Lat, et al. and composing new ones
>       in their places, explaining that the previous verses were 
>       inspired not by the archangel, but by "Shaitan", the devil.
>       
>       Thus the satanic verses.


Fairly accurate, except that picky muslims would remind you that Muhammad
never "composed" verses himself but recited those "revealed" by
Gibreel(Gabriel). :)


> 
> 2] So this is the single thread that Salman uses to build the
>    massive book. I personally feel that he could have written a
>    better book, so powerful is this single concept. 
>    In terms of style, I think he could have used a linear story
>    telling mechanism to much greater effect. He trivialises the
>    concept with the absurdity of his characters. 
> 
>    This concept in itself has a touch of genius that I have rarely 
>    felt. By this I dont mean any disrespect to any religion, I guess
>    its just my sensitivity for the "power of the story". 
>    I always felt that the movie "JFK" would have been a work of
>    genius *if* there was never anyone called JFK, and no assasination, 
>    but was purely a creation of the author. The same applies to story
>    of Christ, or the story of the rise of Adolf hitler.
>    Life is much too rich and dramatic to fit in one persons
>    mind, let alone, allow him to write it into black and white.
> 
> 3] Now other questions.
>    Did Salman know he was going to get hit by the muslim reaction ?
>    Frankly, I wonder at his affectations of surprise.
>    He was playing with fire. And he knew it. 
>    
>    The references to the prophets wives and the reaction was 
>    unneccessary and pointless. It provided an easy point of focus
>    for his critics and added little to the book.



That's true. I would think that Salman was biased against Islam as a faith.
The references to the Prophet's wives was really uncalled for and was probably
the most inflamatory as far as orthodox and even moderate muslims were 
concerned.

 


> 
>  
> 4] There are even more troubling questions.
>    Is it right to delve into articles of faith for the sake of
>    "drama" ? I really dont know.
>    
>    But I can understand how the "Satanic verses" would become
>    a self-fulfilling prophecy. The book that salman wrote would
>    seem to the devout muslim to be the work of evil.
>    Much like the book "the seven minutes" which is about a 
>    book called "the seven minutes" becomes that book, by the
>    time the reader finishes the book.
> 
>    I agree that the "Satanic Verses" does and will offend 
>    orthodox muslims, while insisting that it is still a work
>    of great artistic merit and achievement, and viewed from
>    a "dramatic" angle even a work of genius.
>    
>    I agree that the book is heretic, but I do not agree that
>    a heretic should be killed.


Me too.

The problem is that the image of muslims and Islam in general have been
maligned to such an extent that Khomeni's fatwa was used by the media in
the west to rob the average muslims right to be outraged and protest the
publication of this book. It was assumed without comment that all muslims
were blodthirsty people who supported the killing and were represented in intent
by Khomeni's fatwa.



>  
> 5] More later if I have more time.
>    I would really like it if someone who knows sends me mail
>    about the historical veracity of the events described by
>    salman, wrt the verses in q.
>    
>    Needless to say, all the comments I have made here are
>    made in sincerity.
> 
>    Any comments to paulchem@tigger.cs.colorado.edu
>    Stay Cool.
> 
> 

No death threats from me :) :)


> 
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> .    ~ ~                                                                  .
> .    o o         signito ergo sum.                                        .
> .     |       i sign therefore i am.               paul chemmanoor        .
> .     =                                            washington d.c.        .
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 


--Javed.
Xref: sparky soc.culture.indian:42747 soc.culture.pakistan:19135 soc.culture.bangladesh:7295