The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #102635   Message #2103802
Posted By: Q (Frank Staplin)
15-Jul-07 - 10:21 PM
Thread Name: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
Subject: RE: Salman Rushdie - Outrage.
Now to the controversial parts. (extracted from the review, it will take me some time to reach them in my reading).
The dream-like adventures of one of the crash survivors, Gibreel, continue. One concerns "an epileptic woman, a seer, who leads a pilgrimage to Mecca, a tale evoking the Sufi theme of the immolation of the moth, the Exodus account (with the promise of the Arabian Sea parting for the pilgrims), the Pied Piper, Jonestown and other more recent religio-political movements in which the faithful follow a charismatic leader into the depths of destruction. There are many magical embellishments: The pilgrims follow a cloud of butterflies by day; their leader is literally clothed in butterflies, andd feeds upon tham for her sustenance. Her name is Ayesha, which is- but only coincidentally here, I think- the name of the youngest and favorite wife of the prophet Mohammed."
"Which brings us to the controversial part... the tales of Mahound and Jahila that embroider upon the life of Mohammed and the founding of Islam. Indeed, the title, "The Satanic verses" refer to an incident in the life of Mohammed, recorded by two early Arab historians (..named..), discredited by later commentators on the Koran, but taken up in western accounts as the "lapse of Mohammed" or his "Compromise with idolatry."
"The story goes like this: confronted by the resistance of the leading merchants of Mecca to his monotheism, Mohammed is reported to have accepted three local deities... (named..) as intercessory beings (or angels- "daughters of Allah"). This would have been a shrewd diplomatic concession, at least in the short run, since Mecca depended upon the income from the pilgrimage trade to the shrines of these deities.
"But Mohammed soon withdrew his verse of acceptance, saying that Satan had placed the words of concession upon his tongue. In the Koran, Mohammed concludes: ""Have you thought on [these deities]? Is he [Allah] to have daughters and you sons? This is indees an unfair distinction!" "They are but names which you and your fathers have invented."
"Mr. Rushdies revival of this story, the duplicitous Gibreel/Satan agonizing over his role in the incident, compounded by the story of a scribe who deliberately placed erroneous words into his transcription of the Koran, was bound to touch an angry nerve in the world of Islam, where the Koran (al-qu'ran means the recitation) is believed to be the word of God, transmitted without error. "

Grounds for complaint lie elsewhere- "particularly in the choice of the name "Mahound" for Mohammed. In the medieval Christian mystery plays, Mahound (spelled variously) is sometimes the friend of Pontius Pilate or Caesar, sometimes the friend or cousin of Herod, but always a satanic figure. (The name "Mahound" seems to have bbe created by the conflation of "Mahomet" and "hound.") How are we to understand the adoption- by a writer born a Muslim- of so defamatory a name for the prophet of Islam? And how are we to account for Mr. Ruhdie's incorporation of the name into the creed of Islam: "There is no God except Al-lah, and Mahound is his prophet"?"

"To understand the shock of this, Westerners might try a satanic substitution in the text of the Nicene Creed."
"Again, it must be remembered that this is fiction."

[I have to admit that I don't know what the Nicene Creed is].

Anyone interested in the complete review may find it by going online and looking for NYTimes- Book reviews, and then the articles on "Satanic Verses." Jan. 29, 1989.