Salman Rushdie might have become Sir Salman Rushdie courtesy his recent elevation to knighthood but unfortunately he will always be remembered by his middle name: Controversy. It is unfortunate because Salman Rushdie has been one of the most famous Indian exports to the West before they discovered outsourcing. He has influenced and even subtly mentored a whole generation of Indian writers in English and can be called Mir Taqi Mir of contemporary English literature in India. Like every good Urdu couplet, no matter who the author is, belongs to Mir, every contemporary writer in English in India owes something to Rushdie. Like Mir, who wrote:
Mir ke diin-o-mazhab ko, kyaa puuchte ho unne to
kashkaa kheNchaa, dair meN baiThaa, kab kaa tark Islam kiyaaWhat to say of the faith and beliefs of Mir?
He has put a tilak on his forehead, sits in the temple and has given up Islam.
Rushdie, willingly or unwillingly, invited the wrath of all the reactionary forces of the Muslim world through his novel The Satanic Verses. Mir might have died in penury, unattended and desolate, but at least he died a free man. Rushdie, on the other hand may not have such luck. It is sad, really sad, and tells us something of the intolerance that has come to define our modern society.
Ban On The Satanic Verses:
Ayatollah Seyyed Khomeini, Supreme Leader of Iran, signed the death warrant of Salman Rushdie six months before his own death. Iranian government, till this very day, refuses to recant the fatwa issued by Khomeini 
saying that only the one who issues the fatwa can repudiate it. This is a bit of hogwash and the truth is that no Iranian government, not anytime soon at least, can afford to take back the words of Khomeini. The fact that the recent Iranian governments have indicated that they will not actively pursue the enforcement of the fatwa doesn’t nullify the stupidity of it all. India, the country of birth for Rushdie, the land that provided him the inspiration and characters for his novels, was the second country in the world to ban the book after Singapore. The ban still holds good and one can’t buy the book in India. The fact that Salman Rushdie was not allowed to even visit India for over a decade by successive governments of every denominations says something about their absolute timidity vis-a-vis confronting intolerance. People who demanded a ban on the book, and quite successfully too, haven’t even read the book.
The British author Salman Rushdie says he feels hurt and humiliated by India, the country of his birth, because of its actions following the publication of his book, The Satanic Verses.
In an interview with an Indian magazine, Sunday, Mr Rushdie says he cannot visit India or even enter Indian buildings overseas.
Reflecting on the price he has paid for writing The Satanic Verses, Salman Rushdie says in the interview that the biggest loss has been the damage to his relationship with India.
He accuses the Indian government of banning the book without having read it, and of preventing him from travelling to India, even though he was born in the country and has property here. [BBC News 1998]
Just because some ailing mullah decides to score brownie points with his increasingly agitated population by issuing a fatwa, it becomes a life and death question for Muslims the world over. It is the insecurity and sheer intellectual bankruptcy throughout the Muslim world that leads them to believe that a mere book can threaten their very existence.
Why Banning Books Doesn’t Works?
It is a famous saying in marketing that there is no such thing as bad PR. By 
banning a book, the government is unintentionally providing a big fillip to what might have been a totally worthless piece of literature. Taslima Nasreen is a case in point. I have asked many of my Bengali friends about their opinion of Nasreen as a writer and most of them have been pretty disappointed by her literary skills. By banning her books, the Bangladeshi government made her a martyr to the cause of freedom of expression. Her books have now been read by millions of people world-wide and are now available in over 20 languages. Nothing guides a man like curiosity does. Not many people would have cared for The Satanic Verses but for the reactionary fatwa of Khomeini. When I couldn’t find the book in India, I looked for it in Korea just to figure out what the whole fuss was about. To be very true, I found it to be profoundly boring and couldn’t get beyond a few pages. May be it would have remained such but the whole controversy gave it a cult status. Banning things generally don’t work. Be it alcohol, movies or books, people don’t like to be told by some higher authority what they should or should not do. And then it goes against the very notion of freedom of expression. It is this intolerance that has forced India’s best known painter, MF Husain, to leave his mother-country and live in self-imposed exile in Dubai
What Should Be Done?
If you don’t like a book, don’t read it. If you want to do more, write a better book. Internet coupled with globalization has
made it impossible to suppress flow of ideas. You can’t ban the internet, can you? May be you can but still people would find novel ways to get their message across. Internet has also provided a place for people to spread their propaganda. Make no mistake, there will be attempts by individuals to attack religious beliefs and symbols, Islam included, just to create trouble. Incendiary books will continue to be written but banning them should not be an option. The choice should be either a dignified silence or an intellectual rebuttal.
So what if Salman Rushdie wrote a few fictional incendiary passages against Prophet Muhammad? Can it belittle his achievements through which he was able to transform a brutal society and provide a way of life to millions and millions humans over centuries? Would Prophet have sanctioned all the violence and intolerance that goes on in his name? What about the scores of innocents who were killed throughout the world, and many still live in fear, because of the ban on The Satanic Verses? And as I wrote previously, what would that old lady, who used to throw rubbish on the Prophet, think of the acts of violence of his followers? Would she accept Prophet’s message now as she did at that time? If you don’t fan the flames, the fire will die out eventually. The Muslims protesting violently and calling for death are actually playing into the hands of trouble mongers. And the fence-sitters, their curiosity stimulated by controversies, when decide to explore more about the whole issue, there is nothing for them to read and understand the Muslim perspective. So, it reinforces their belief of Muslims as intolerant, violent people who have nothing to say but everything to shout.
Banning books, threatening authors, blackening houses have all been a recent phenomenon and should have no place in modern society. The fact that poets like Mir and Ghalib could write pretty much anything during the 17th and 18th 18th and 19th centuries and get away with it provides us a mirror in terms of freedom of expression. And the picture in the mirror is not pretty.
Very nice article. The only things that the ban got him was
1. Publicity
2. Bad name for Islam
As an Indian, I have tried to read Satanic Verses multiple times and failed (too boring). While I have read a number of authors of Indian origin, Salman Rushdie and Naipaul are pretty much off limit for me. I do agree that both of them have nice styles and superb command of the language. However, their topics and way of presentation makes me choke.
I, for one, am disappointing with India for banning any novel written by a person of Indian origin. I may not agree with an author or the topic, but banning is not the solution. As pointed out by the article, it brings more attention to a book that I could not complete. I challenge people who hate Salman to complete Satanic Verses, they will probably hate him more then for wasting their time with such a painful book. As a person interested in literature, I find the style of authors such as Hermann Hesse, Nadine Gordimer, Ian McEwan and Coetzee more agreeable.
Mohib, good take.
I agree the ban was not justified, and counterproductive.
I agree too that he’s in some way or another influenced most modern Indian English writers.
I read Satanic Verses and found parts of it, esp the later ones, really funny. I did not, and still don’t, have an idea of early Islamic history to associate Rushdie’s characters with ones from the Prophet’s times. So I couldn’t put my finger on what was offensive, but did get the general idea that it was a less than respectful reference to those times and happennings. Muslims will obviously be able to read more into the associations, but I find that most Muslims are so deeply critical of him that they don’t read him. Which is a pity, as it handicaps one in having an educated standpoint.
On Rushdie itself.. I find his writing excellent. His Midnight’s Children is just a treat. I couldn’t marvel enough.
Differing with Prakash, my favorite author of modern times is Naipaul. Naipaul’s ability to construct a sentence simply blows me away..no body close. Yes, he’s opinionated and some of his observations are silly or disagreeable to me, but I can’t grudge him his capability with the English language.
Hermann Hesse – truly deserved the Nobel. The only author I’ve read every single book of.
Mohib I entirely agree with this article. I have always maintained that banning or belittling people for the beliefs they hold is at best petty. It’s nice your speaking up, I’ve even got tired of that
20/006/07
The article is fairly well balanced. But already violent protests have taken place in Pakistan and elsewhere for the knighthood for Rushdie and an Iranian cleric has announced a sum of 80,000 pond sterling for causing his death.
Islam’s image takes another strike.
A good article Mohib and I think you advocated your stance on this sensitive issue very eloquently. There are parts of it I agree to and there are some aspects where I have my reservations.
I think before we pass any judgements and come to any conclusions about Rushdie’s reasons for writing this book we probably should understand the background he came from.
Anis Rushdie and Negin Rushdie’s house in Bombay of the 50′s was not a typical Muslim household as you and me were brought up in. The only time, according to Salman himself, he saw Islam in his house was at Eidul Fitr when he wore new clothes and which was followed by a big party in the evening. He also “fondly” remembered the Christmas tree they used to have every Christmas because they had nannies who were Christians. He did not have a single Muslim friend while growing up, mostly Hindus and Parsees (not that there is anything wrong in that). So Islam probably had a back seat in that particular house. And then he was only twelve when he moved to the UK.
Later when he started writing, and especially Midnight Children, all those elements came forth and we shall find many instances in his books where he, directly or indirectly, attacked some teachings of Islam, the creation of Pakistan etc. etc.
Literature is, of all the arts, the one best suited to challenging absolutes of all kinds and because it is in its origin the schismatic other of the sacred text, so it is also the art most likely to fill our egotistical mental holes, and also on the other hand an instrument to bring forth our shortcomings and deprivations disguised in beautiful words, plots or sub-plots.
I think when he wrote “Satanic Verses” he knew that he was treading on dangerous grounds and had meticulously planned the plot accordingly. What he did not envisage was the reaction he received after Ayatullah Khomeini’s Fatwa and the near violence that ensued as a result. That was beyond his plans and he was totally unprepared for that. I sense his deliberate scheme at riling up the Muslim World not only by the undisciplined plot of Satanic Verses but also by the choice of names of the primary and the secondary characters in his novel. I think there are about 20 or so chaarcters in the book and every name was methodically and intentionally chosen…….Gibreel Farishta, Saladin !!!Chamcha, Rekha Merchant, Abu Simbel, Hind, Ayesha etc. etc. And most of all Mahound!! As one of our friends in this thread mentioned it was the name Europe of the Middle Ages gave to our Prophet (pbuh) in efforts to demean him. Not only that, most of his characters are based on real people, living or dead too.
We can agree with the freedom of speech analogy but everything goes to a certain borderline and thereafter becomes dubious and ambiguous. He is, no doubt, a storyteller of prodigious powers and can conjure up whole geographies, casualties, climates, creatures and customs out of thin air but I deplore his irreverance to sensitive issues and sensitive Personalities. I think he has a confusion about his own beliefs, origin as probably Saladin Chamcha, who is portrayed as more than a bit of a fool in the novel portrays in his rejection of Zeeny Vakil’s accusation that he has betrayed his Indian roots. That I think is a reflection of Rushdie’s own on-going struggle with the issue.
Should he have been condemned to be killed ?
For me that is also one end of the extreme and that is where I agree with you that the response should have been rational, intellectual, and he should have been slain by the sword he himself was flaying in a dangerous way. Maybe another Book…..another story of half-confused emigrants or such ! Extreme judgements like these take away whole benevolent conduct that Islam so proudly and successfully practiced during the Prophet’s (pbuh) days and thereafter for a short time. And do not forget Hitoshi Igaroshi, the Japanese translator of “Satanic Verses” who, poor guy, was stabbed to death in 1991. He, to this day, remains the only casualty of the Fatwa and of Rushdie’s folly. Do not take me wrong. I, being a follower of the Shia’a doctrine of Islam, am a big admirer of Ayaytullah Khomeini. But here I did not agree.
Now as far as the Knighthood goes…….. The British are famous for feeding on such incidents and events and can successfully exacerbate the tensions relevant to any such problem. The Satanic Verses was published in 1988 and I am sure you all remember that it was the finalist in The Booker Prize award in England that same year.
Hence the addition of Sir in Rushdie’s name doesn’t mean much. He needs the same added to his body !!
Pingback: Sir Salman? at Ijtema
Assalamu ‘alaykum wa rahmatullah
I pray that you are in the best of health & imaan.
This is a short message to notify you that this entry has been selected for publishing on I J T E M A; a venture to highlight the best of the Muslim blogosphere.
To find out more about I J T E M A, and how you can further contribute, please click here.
May Allah bless you for your noble efforts.
Wa’salam
salman rusdi awarded by britain this is vey highly insulting act for 120 crore muslims on this world and also UN resulution WHICH adopted in september 2005 by all UN members this called UN SECURITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION 1624 in this resolution calls upon all un members to make harmony between all religious group by insuring not target any one offensive abusing words by any one .every members should follow this one and protect offensive and abusing type thing to make harmony between religious group .
i would like clear that salman all books language not highly littetry buts its known bad language and targeting prophet , sahaba , khalifa , system ,quran, hadis and abusing also by very bad manner.
Pingback: Good Tolerance, Bad Tolerance « Beyond Borders Sri Lanka
In this context here is an interesting piece :
http://pmanzoor.info/PM-Rushdie-97.htm
Satanic Verses was some pretty cool reading. It is not easy to read but that does not make it a bad book. In fact, if you think SV is boring, try reading General in his Labyrinth or any other Gabriel Garcia Marquez books. Magic realism is difficult to digest and comprehend. Suspension of disbelief does not come to our minds readily.
The thoughtfully named characters are mostly from Bollywood. Gibreel Farishta is based entirely on Amitabh Bachchan. Rekha Merchant is Rekha and so forth.
I cannot imagine that Rushdie did not know that the book will offend a lot of people. You don’t have to be intolerant to get offended by what is in there. He reaches pretty far out and calls the entire religion a lie and Quran a figment of a random chap’s imagination.
I find it strange that India – a secular country that guarantees freedom of expression (even if only in theory) – should ban his book and prevent him from entering the country — makes us look like our neighbour (and their neighbour).
I am for the freedom of expression 100%. So let the protestors protest the way they like. They may burn public property like what the followers of Rajkumar did when he died. To name only the Rushdie protestors is biased. I am in the process of writing a book on west and seek assurance from you that you’ll not reject it as it would be truth and which is very ‘DARK BLACK’type of truth. It is originally in Urdu but I am honing my English skills too so that the original thougts should not be blurred in the ornamental presentation of an Indian English translator. As far as Rushdie’s books are concerned, I am sure all the people who had public money at their disposal, did read all his books and I was one of them. One thing is sure that had there been no so peaceful riots, the sane voices of people like Mohib or Urdudaan et al would have gone in vain branding them to be ‘Fundamentalist’. The need of the time is attack from all fronts and on achieving success, the saner voices will prevail as the objectives of the violents would have been achieved.
Pingback: Lajja: Taslima Nasreen Assaulted In Hyderabad at IndianMuslims.in
You’re a good, sane man Mohib.