Product Description
Many non-Indian readers find the historical and cultural references in Salman Rushdie's "Midnight's Children" demanding. In his close reading of the novel, Neil ten Kortenaar offers post-colonial literary strategies for understanding "Midnight's Children" that also challenge some of the prevailing interpretations of the novel. Using hybridity, mimicry, national allegory, and cosmopolitanism, all key critical concepts of postcolonial theory, ten Kortenaar reads "Midnight's Children" as an allegory of history, as a Bildungsroman and psychological study of a burgeoning national consciousness, and as a representation of the nation. He shows that the hybridity of Rushdie's fictional India is not created by different elements forming a whole but by the relationship among them."Self, Nation, Text in Salman Rushdie's Midnight's Children" also makes an original argument about how nation-states are imagined and how national consciousness is formed in the citizen. The protagonist, Saleem Sinai, heroically identifies himself with the state, but this identification is beaten out of him until, in the end, he sees himself as the Common Man at the mercy of the state.Ten Kortenaar reveals Rushdie's India to be more self-conscious than many communal identities based on language: it is an India haunted by a dark twin called Pakistan; a nation in the way England is a nation but imagined against England. Mistrusting the openness of Tagore's Hindu India, it is both cosmopolitan and a specific subjective location. ... Read more

Product Description
A legal historian reviews the history of blasphemy, from Moses to Rushdie, showing what forms of speech societies have found intolerable, tracing the changing meanings of blasphemy, and discussing the costs and benefits of free speech. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

A Study in Religious Toleration and a Warning
Leonard Levy's book titled BLASPHEMY is a well doucmented book re the history of blasphemy persecutions and trials. Levy made clearthat a defintion of blasphemy was an any affront against the sacred. He also states that one man's blasphemy can be another man's "true religion." Another important lesson is that those who are often persecuted in one generation were often those who are persecutors with a vengence in another generation.

Levy began this book with brief mention of punishments among some of the ancients such as the Ancient Hebrews and the Ancient Greeks. The Ancient Hebrews developed a religious system of strict monotheism which, at least in theory, tolerated no deviation. Levy commented on what may be considered blasphemy among the "enlightened" Ancient Greeks. For example, Plato's (427-347 BC) dialogue, THE APOLOGY which dealt with the trial of Socrates, stated that one of the charges against Socrates was that he did not believe in the Athenian gods and corrupted the Athenian youth. Levy made clear that blasphemy has a very old history.

Much of Levy's book dealt with English History. As early as the reign of Henry II (1154-1189), serious penalties were ordered against alleged blashphemers. During the Grand Assize of 1166, Henry thundered loud condemnations and severe penalties against those accused of blashphemy. One man was put to death for converting to Judaism after falling in love with a Jewish woman. As an aside Sir Walter Scott's IVANHOE is a good novel along similar lines.

Levy dealt with English blasphemy trials during Reformation England. The false notion that somehow the Reformation brought freedom of religion is easily undermined in this book. For example, when Queen Elizabeth (1558-1603) came to power, one of her first acts was to order four Baptists to be burned to death at the stake. James I (1603-1625)was constantly attempting to eradicate Protestant dissenters from the English Realm including Puritans, Presbyterians, and Baptists. According to Levy the list could be much longer.

After the English Revolution of the 1640s, Levy informed his readers that the situation did not improve. Oliver Cromwell (1598-1653)tried to grant some religious toleration except for Catholics. Yet, religious passions among Puritans and other dissenters were so strong, that in trying to please almost everyone, Cromwell pleased practically no one. Those who had been persecuted now wanted to persecute almost everyone else.

Even with the Restoration of the Stuarts in 1660, the situation did not improve. Those who held dissenting views were still perseucted often by over zealous religious maniacs and royal prosecutors. Heavy fines, imprisonment,and the death penalty were imposed on those considered heretics and blasphemers. Only when James II (1685-1688)was ousted did blasphemy prosecutions begin to abate. William and Mary had to agree to the English Bill of Rights and The Act of Toleration (1689)to please Parliament to become King and Queen of England. This reduced but did not end blasphemy trials in England.

As late as 1819, the English had blasphemy trials. One such trial that occured between 1817-1819, dealt with William Hone who proved to be a feisty defendant Levy informed readers that some of those tried for Blasphemy were alert men who often befuddled the prosecutors and the judges. Readers should note that British jurists argued that Thomas Paine's (1737-1809)books and essays were blasphemous.

Levy's book also dealt with blashphemy trials in Colonial America and thereafter. For example, between 1659-1660, four Quakers were executed by Massachusetts' Puritans. Some of the Southern Anglicans imposed punishment on those who were not members of the Church of England. Yet, but 1800, most Americans were indifferent if not tolerant to whatever wasconsider blashphemy. During the 19th. century there were very prosecutions for blashphemy. However,during World War I and immediately thereafter, some overzealous prosecutors prosecuted such cases. One example that might be considered the Scopes Trial in 1925.

Levy concluded this book with a few ridiculous British and U.S. cases in recent history. Levy also mentioned the case of Salman Rushdie who is under a death penalty from some Moslems. Rushee's book is in bad taste, but those who condemned to death could very well have improved the sale of his book.

Some readers may ask the relevance of this book. The fact is that some political pundits and office holders are trying to make political points by arguing for condemnation of what they consider heresy and blasphemy. Some have accepted endorsements of those who over the years have argued for the outlawing of Catholicism. Religious views are supposed to a litmus test for public office. However, when someone from the Netherlands was arrested during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I and asked about his religious views, he curtly replied that his religious views were none of the Queen's business.

Levy's book BLASPHEMY is a well documented book with an excellent bibliography. Levy is considered, and rightly so, to be in a class by himself re Constituional History and Legal History. This book is detailed,and readers should give themselves time to read it. Yet, a careful reading of this book is worth the effort.

schmeviticus
The interesting part of the book is the way the justification for blasphemy laws morphed smoothly over the years, even as the punishment changed very little.If you go back thousands of years, blasphemy laws made a great deal of sense -- people literally believed that gods were offended by blasphemy and that they would take revenge against communities that harbored blasphemers.So blasphemy was, from the point of view of a lawmaker, no different from arson.

However, as the centuries wore on, the purported role of the Christian God in daily life became more abstract.By the 16th century the justification for blasphemy laws had become more vague:Since the religion was part of the government (in England, the focus of the book), the blasphemer was essentially advocating the overthrow of the government.A few centuries later, following the appearance of numerous alternatives to the officially sanctioned version of Christianity, the justification switched again:Blasphemy was bad because it threatened to undermine the Church/State-sanctioned oppression of poor people!During all these centuries, the punishment was often quite brutal, ranging from imprisonment to mutilation to death.

By the 20th century blasphemy laws were, not surprisingly, being used to punish homosexuals and others who deviated from the church's views on social issues (notably birth control).In England and parts of the U.S. there are still blasphemy laws on the books, waiting for the right combination of an overzealous prosecutor and someone to pick on.

A lot of this sounds eerily familiar.The U.S. started a War on Drugs in the early 1970s under the reasonable premise that certain narcotics posed a health hazard.But when research showed the health risks of drugs like marijuana and LSD to be comparatively minor, the justification suddenly changed to crime prevention, and more recently, to a component of the War on Terror (which itself started as a legitimate response to a serious problem, then morphed into a way for right-wing loons to consolidate power).There's a lesson here:The Man has no use for democracy.

Minor complaints:The book is almost entirely about England and Christianity, and it's too detailed.Unless you're writing a thesis on the topic, you don't need to read about many of the minor blasphemy prosecutions mentioned in the book.It would have been more interesting to take a wider view of the subject, which is quite interesting and relevant to current politics.

Great and important book, without any agenda
Reviewers too often let their personal beliefs get in the way of their reviews, in which case they are not reviewing the book at all but merely spouting a belief.This book, written by a serious historian and First Amendment scholar, is an incredible resource for the history of blasphemy and heresy laws in Western civilization.It is not anti-Christian, unless exposing Christianity's true history is anti-Christian (which I suppose it could be, to a Christian!).It goes back to the ancient Greeks and Hebrews and gives a very objective account of the laws and attitudes.Particularly valuable are the sections about early American blasphemy laws, which prove once and for all that the U.S. was not created by or for religious freedom; each group had its own "true belief," and anything else was not only false but punishable by law.
If Christians cannot take their own history straight up, perhaps they should think about that, especially when they get to uppity about instituting their beliefs into law today.Otherwise, this is a brave and important book, full of valuable information and worth the read of anyone who is interested in religion and law--and how dangerous it is to mix the two.

No one said history was pretty!
I assume from the first reviewer of this book that he hates to admit that evil has been done in the name of Christianity.He has a hard time seeing it done today, because we have a seperation of church and state.Look, this book may come as a shock to many Christian readers, but these are facts we can't deny.For example, America is a beautiful country, but in our history there is racism (KKK), the Civil War and the brutal murder of gay student, Matt Shepard.The same goes true for any other organization/country.What ever has done good, has done bad too.

This book provides a very detailed, factual account of people being killed in the name of Christianity from it's inception up to the present.You read about mennonites (anabaptists) getting executed by Protestants and Catholics, Jews being stripped of their Civil Rights, and everyone else who didn't take Jesus as their saviour.It is truly sick and stupid that the laws in those days prosecuted someone just because of a difference of opinion, espeically religious.How gruesome and brutal were Christians to people who differed with them on an opinion?Well, picture you are a Muslim, and preaching the Koran on the streets of England.First the government burns your books, since they are not pro-Christian.Second, you get whipped over 300 times until you have no flesh on your body.Third offense, you will get your tongue cut off, a "B" burned into your skin for "blasphemer", exiled or executed.Isn't that a good reason, and why our founding fathers established a seperation between church and state?

This is a good book, though very long.But, hey it's a history book, right?

How Free the Speech?
Were it not for the digressions into post-modernist chic, I might be able to give a more resounding endorsement.Nevertheless, Levy did successfully acquaint the reader with the common court precedents for blasphemy inBritish law, while furnishing modern examples such as the 1976 blasphemytrial of a homosexual poet. Though the traditionalbranding, mutilation,and execution of blasphemers has stopped in modern-day Britain, Levy pointsout that the Anglican Church has argued for an extension of the outmodedblasphemy laws to other religions in the wake of the Rushdie affair. Rather than forego the Church of England's privileged status altogether,the Archbishop of Canterbury proposed the use of government coercion toprotect all flights of lunatic fancy from their deserved ridicule. Needless to say, the lack of separation of Church and State in Europe, andthe diluted freedom of speech provided by speech codes (e.g. laws againstthe expression of unpopular speech, such as Holocaust denial) surelyconstitute an important area of debate as far as the limitations offreedom. At present, the only US equivalent I can think of is theattempts to mold hate crimes legislation.Though certainly justice demandsproper sanctions for those who violate the rights of others, this acts topunish criminals on the basis of their beliefs rather than actions.Whatnext?Love crimes legislation that reduce a person's sentence if the jurythought they were acting for a more socially acceptable cause? ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Helped Me to Understand the Diversity of Islam
Given the gravity of this topic, I think that it is important explicitly to point out, to whoever reads this, that I am not an expert or an authority on Islam, in any way.However, like so many of us in these troubled times, I am trying to learn all that I can about the modern complexities of Islam.Probably most of you reading this are in the same frame of mind that I am!Therefore, in this humble capacity, I would like to share my thoughts on this brave, fascinating, timely anthology.

This book includes a selection of approximately one hundred essays, poems, and songs, by a vast array of thinkers, all writing from the very heart of the Islamic tradition.The voices collected here speak in a variety of modes, ranging from the literary, to the religious, to the philosophical.Some are heartfelt and emotional: others tough, rational, and lawyerly.All, however, join in emphatically, lucidly, intelligently criticizing Ayatollah Khomeini's fatwa against the author Salman Rushdie.All speak from an Islamic perspective -- indeed, there is even an opinion expressed by an actual Iranian ayatollah,Djalal Gandjeih.

These essays were originally penned by Islamic intellectuals in a wide-ranging panoply of occupations.Represented here are filmmakers, newspaper columnists, poets, psychoanalysts, sociologists, and more.They come from many countries.People familiar with Islam might not be surprised to find essays by relatively laid-back Moroccans, but there are also many sane, calm, clearly articulatedvoices coming out of Syria, Libya, Sudan... all over the Islamic world.What this variegated population of thinkers has in common, is an uncommon willingness to speak out, for what their faith tells them is right.

As an American, I was often struck by the kinship of spirit that many of these voices hold, to all that is best in my own country's heritage.If you read these essays, I can promise you that again and again, you will find yourself reminded of the First Amendment!The philosophical framework may differ, but the essential spirit of many of these essays cleaves to a very similar idea to (part of) that which the First Amendment embodies -- freedom of speech.I suppose that these essays demonstrate that what is best in humanity is, after all, universal, and might be expected to crop up in any society on Earth...I can tell you this much, I wish some of these Islamic thinkers were speaking out in America, during the McCarthy era!Their sane, fearless, moderating influence, even founded in the Islamic tradition, might well have had a highly beneficial impact upon the extremist, terror-laden, American political climate of the fifties.It may sound unusual to some readers that an Islamic religious philosopher from Syria could conceivably be more rational, reasonable, and worth listening to than a U.S. Senator from Wisconsin, but, well, if you have trouble with the idea, you really might want to read this book.That's the value of the book to me personally -- it helps me to understand how much of the Islamic world can be sane, calm, humanistic, and sometimes even brilliant.

I would like to point out a few small, structural and stylistic issues about the book.For one thing -- writers are arranged alphabetically by last name.However, if you happen to be looking for a particular writer, you may need to roam around a little in the table of contents.For example, authors whose last name begins with "El" are sometimes listed under "E", and sometimes under the other part of their last name.Just be alert to that, and also to similar, possible alphabetizing errors that a copywriter might make, in transcribing from one alphabet to another.For browsing purposes, you might like to know that the table of contents includes each essay's author's name, country of origin, and profession.This can help you select what you'd like to read, if for example you'd like to clump the essays you approach, one country at a time.Furthermore, you might want to be aware that this book was originally published in French, and can, on occasion, sound almost distractingly Gallic in tone.(Not that there's anything wrong with that!Au contraire, I happen to remain a resolute francophile, despite the country's current lack of standing in the eyes of many Americans.)Anyway, sometimes the essays can sound oddly French, so just remember that many of the essays are TWO translations away from Arabic, and that they may have picked up a tincture of French stylistic features along the way.

Finally, to help you follow a few of the more esoteric, philosophical essays here, I would like to recommend that you consider seeking out a copy of "The Political Language of Islam," by Bernard Lewis, and/or "A History of Islamic Legal Theories: An Introduction to Sunni Usul Al-Fiqh," by Wael B. Hallaq.

Basically, I recommend the living daylights out of this book.I hope you are able to locate a copy, and if you're feeling ambitious, that you encourage your local librarian to find a way to display this book prominently.Books like this have thepotential to go a long way toward developing a balanced view of Islam, amongst an all-too-often confused, fearful American populace.

A Bold and Courageous Document
That post by the guy from Japan is a disgrace. He's says he's not committing himself, but then he proceeds, in essence, to support the fatwa against Rushdie (pbuh). So what if Rushdie offended some Muslims (the vast majority of whom, though claiming to be offended, have never actually read the book). The phrase "Satanic Verses" refers to an actual event that occurred in Islam, and was definitively reported by the medieval Arab scholar al-Turabi.Thus, the phrase and the events depicted in the book are firmly based on Islamic history. They are not just gratuitous attempts to slander Islam. There are plenty of former Christians who say bad things about Jesus and Christianity, but the rest of us don't go around pronouncing death sentences on them for writing books. They will have to answer for their actions and beliefs when they meet God in eternity.

Buy this book. The writers who are a part of it have engaged in a bold and courageous act, and at no small threat to their own personal safety.

So-called Muslims
Whereas I have no intention of commiting myself to this issue, the facts remains the same.Salman Rushdie (May God Punish Him) did blaspheme Islam, a religion that claim more than 1.2 billion people in this world, and thatcannot be forgiven.I wonder what the so-called Muslim writers believe inwhen they wrote their essays. To me they are not Muslims at all, they justclaim to be.

Nothing is New Under the Sun!
Over 100 Arab and Muslim intellectuals compiled this passionate book supporting freedom of expression; some have even urged Muslim intellectuals to re-read The Satanic Verses as a literary work of highest meritdemonstrating original imagination and a compassion for the Islamic world.One must note that even though the book has not included Najib Mahfouz'scontribution (Mahfouz is the Nobel price laureate for literature 1988), theEgyptian novelist expressed his condemnation of the Fatwa in the Arabicnewspaper, Al Ahram (2 March, 1989, p: 7). Mahfouz challenged those whohave not even read the novel to respond to Rushdie's engagement with sacredmaterial with the same amount of originality and depth deployed in thenovel's complex narrative. Furthermore, these brave intellectuals hadexperienced, as some of them freely admitted, forms of despicablecencorship, torture and abuse. Mahfouz himself understands this when 20years before the publication of The Satanic Verses, he wrote his'notorious' novel Children of Gebelawi, exploring theNietzschean notionof the Death of God. The novel was banned in Cairo and published only laterin Beirut in 1967. An English translation was published in 1981. TheReligious Council of Al-azhar University interfered by deleting some partsof the Arabic text. With the publication of The Satanic Verses, there waseven an association made by the same institution between the two novels.This book would have been written in any Islamic epoch where religiousautocracts tried to control intellectual freedom. If anything this bookinvalidates the media's demonisation of 'Islam' and affirms that freedom ofthought is very much and Islamic and Arab streak.One must not forgetIslamic modernity that stretched from Arabia to Spain celebrating culturaldiversity, freedom of expression and tolerence. It is absurd to believethat 'Islam' is inherently undemocratic. The media was certainly unfair toignore such voices who adhere to freedom of expression not necessarilybecause of Western ideals of democracy, but because of their Islamic andArab consciousness. Modernity is not exclusively western in origins nor inits impact on the world. Muslims played a fundamental role in creatingmodernity by translating scientific traditions of Greece, Iran and Indiaand by spreading them over Europe and Asia. This is exactly the type ofworld The Satanic Verses portrays; an interconnected, hybridised world fullof achievements and frustrations- but great promises for those who celebatedifference in dissidence.

Courageous Defense of Broad-Mindedness from (mostly) Islamic
I was much heartened to see that writers, an editor, and a publisher would all have the courage to stand up for freedom of speech, and for broad-mindedness.The courage required to do this, on the part ofintellectuals from barbaric, repressive, and thuggish Islamic countries, isnot to be underestimated.Some of these people took their lives in theirhands, spoeaking up as they did.Hooray!!!! But hear this...Whatmost struck me is:Be it the Bible and right-wing thugs in the US, or theKoran and hateful Islamic thugs in barbaric regimes in the Middle East,there are always those who will find words (in whatever source) to justifytheir hate.I have read the Bible, and I know how to justify hate, fromit.I also know how to justify love and broad-mindedness, from this samesource.I'm very glad to see (from this "For Rushdie" book, andother sources) that the Koran, too, has plenty of verses, and plenty ofreaders, that would speak out for broad-mindedness, and even for Love. Hooray!!!! ... Read more

Product Description
“I did not go to Nicaragua intending to write a book, or, indeed, to write at all: but my encounter with the place affected me so deeply that in the end I had no choice.” So notes Salman Rushdie in his first work of nonfiction, a book as imaginative and meaningful as his acclaimed novels. In The Jaguar Smile, Rushdie paints a brilliantly sharp and haunting portrait of the people, the politics, the terrain, and the poetry of “a country in which the ancient, opposing forces of creation and destruction were in violent collision.” Recounting his travels there in 1986, in the midst of America’s behind-the-scenes war against the Sandinistas, Rushdie reveals a nation resounding to the clashes between government and individuals, history and morality. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (15)

GDR
very interesting story.well told.made even more interesting that Ortega is back in power.

Centra America Observer
Rushdie deserves our respect for his prose and courage.I'm afraid, however, that he was caught up in the contemporary mystique of the Sandinistas -- the nice revolutionaries, such as Jaime Wheelock, with fatigues and Hermes scarf on the European cocktail circuit.Foreign "sandalistas" have for years flocked to Nicaragua to bathe in their vision of revolutionary social justice.Too bad it was always, and is, a fraud.

Rushdie, to his credit, sounds alarms over autocratic tendencies within sandinism, thus, one hears, making him objective and balanced, but he missed what was coming.The Sandinistas were too smart to revere Lenin or Stalin; that makes no sense in Latin America, though Rushdie used this as measure.Even Castro understood that a little distance from Eastern Europe was necessary.Che is the guy, the icon, or became so after he usefully died in a quixotic and wholly unproductive adventure to Bolivia.

The Sandinistas of today are icons of a different sort:they represent corruption at its worst, striking deals with an equally corrupt and ideolgically suspect "far right" to capture the presidency with only around 35% of the vote.President Ortega, leader of the original "revolution," used his deal with the corrupt right to bury charges against him of repeatedly raping his minor stepdaughter, according to his now adult stepdaughter.This stuff is not made up -- check out the March 22, 2009 New York Times on the Chamorro family, which captures the last 30 years of Nicaraguan politics and the state of the press in Nicaragua. It is ugly, but not news to people who have followed the country for years.

This is not to denigrate Rushdie's work.Most contemporary writers were wrong about the Sandinistas.Rushdie's is less wrong and better observed and written than most.It should not, however, obfuscate what the historical record has shown since and therefore should not be read as definitive or "objective," as some reviewers suggest.Who, in the United States, would presume to understand the U.S. Civil War on the basis of one contemporary writer, no matter how well-meaning and articulate?

I would give more stars, on the basis of Rushdie's talent for prose and observation, but I am troubled that the historical cement is setting around old anecdotes, such as Rushdie's, that are moving but out of date.The Nicaraguan tragedy contiunues; so does the "sandalista" delusion.

nicaragua during the war

Rushdie provides a balanced view of the conditions in 1987 that coinside with my seminar work there in 1988. The 1997 preface to the original is helpful. He captured the sence of it.

A "must" for anyone interested in the Sandinista Revolution
The new edition has not been altered by the author.However, the introduction offers a profound reflection on the lost path of the Sandinista Revolution. It is definitely a worthwhile reading.

Commentry on FSLN with third worldian outlook
A bit outdated, but still a very good read. This is probably one of Salman Rushdie's easier books to read :) Well, there is no magical realism here, just realism. A tiny book of 130 odd pages of Rushdie's travelogue of his 3-week Nicaraguan trip in 1986, on the eve of the 7-year anniversary of the revolution. He is not Nicaraguan and he would never be able to capture the complexity of Nicaraguan psyche. But I think he did a good job of observing the then contemporary Nicaraguan political situation through the eyes of a well-read/traveled literary intellectual. His immigrant out look comes through as well. His references to Benazir Bhutto, Indira Gandhi and other third-world political situations add another texture to the often seen political analysis of Sandinista movement.

Rushdie is obviously sympathetic to the revolution, but he maintains a healthy dose of skepticism. Even though he hangs out with the hotshots of FSLN (Frente Sandanista de Liberación Nacional), he is not afraid to ask the uncomfortable questions about the Contras, the shutdown of La Prensa, the economic collapse of post-revolution Nicaragua.

I think the book does a good job of summarizing the Nicaraguan political landscape in '86 through the eyes of an "internacional". ... Read more

Product Description
Rushdie is a major contemporary writer, who engages with some of the vital issues of our times: migrancy, postcolonialism, religious authoritarianism. This Companion offers a comprehensive introduction to his entire oeuvre. Part I provides thematic readings of Rushdie and his work, with chapters on how Bollywood films are intertextual with the fiction, the place of family and gender in the work, the influence of English writing and reflections on the fatwa. Part II discusses Rushdie's importance for postcolonial writing and provides detailed interpretations of his fiction. In one volume, this book provides a stimulating introduction to the author and his work in a range of expert essays and readings. With its detailed chronology of Rushdie's life and a comprehensive bibliography of further reading, this volume will be invaluable to undergraduates studying Rushdie and to the general reader interested in his work. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (2)

Grasping for attention from a disappearing author
STEP ACROSS THIS LINE is Salman Rushdie's second collection of essays, which range from 1992 to 2002. Like his first collection IMAGINARY HOMELANDS, I do not think that this is essentially reading for anyone but dedicated Rushdie fans, but the collection stands out as a commentary on Rushdie's place in the current literary scene.

For ultimately what pervades this collection is a sense of desperation. During the early 1990s Rushdie didn't want to speak about the controversy of THE SATANIC VERSES and the fatwa, prefering to make the media concentrate on his newer works. However, the two novels which appeared during that time, THE MOOR'S LAST SIGH and THE GROUND BENEATH HER FEET, did not gain large critical or public acceptance, and essentially put Rushdie on the way out of public consciousness and critical esteem. In STEP ACROSS THIS LINE Rushdie starts talking about the fatwa and fundamentalist Islam again, and one gets the impression that he is only looking for some way to reach the public again because his latest novels have bombed.

That's not to say some of his insights are not thought-provoking. In "Not About Islam?" he bluntly calls the September 11 attack a manifestation of a sickness indeed widespread in the Muslim world and deplores America's insistence, for the purposes of coalition-building and not rocking the boat, that the attacks have little to do with Islam. He also bemoans the sectarian violence in India, for Rushdie has greatly benefited from mixture and melange--his first big novel MIDNIGHT'S CHILDREN welded a Western genre with uniquely Indian storytelling--and to see people creating divisions and violence saddens him.

If you've never read Rushdie before, try THE SATANIC VERSES, which is a superb novel full of exciting fantasy and at the same time all too real social criticism. STEP ACROSS THIS LINE is an okay read for diehard fans.

For the Rushdie fans
First off, to truly enjoy this you need to have a good working knowledge of a lot of Rushdie novels, as he makes several references to them.Plus, you need to have LOVED them.

Secondly, realize that this is a lot of previously published stuff in one volume, from a lot of different sources, so it is a bit of a jumbled mess (stand alone essays, newspaper columns, letters to the editor, presentations in academia, etc.)

While some is extremely interesting, particularly his experience with fatwah, other essays are just not that exciting.

So with the above caveats, if you are a die hard fan, enjoy! ... Read more

Product Description
The publication in 1988 of Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses triggereda furor that pitted much of the Islamic world against the West over issues ofblasphemy and freedom of expression. The controversy soon took on theaspect of a confrontation of civilizations, provoking powerful emotions on aglobal level. It involved censorship, protests, riots, a break in diplomaticrelations, culminating in the notorious Iranian edict calling for the death ofthe novelist. In The Rushdie Affair, Daniel Pipes explains why the publicationofThe Satanic Verses became a cataclysmic event with far-reaching politicaland social consequences. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (8)

Another look at the Rushdie mess
Daniel Pipes has a definite, often negative view of radical Islam but in "The Rushdie Affair: The Novel, the Ayatollah, and the West," he sticks to research and avoids polemics.

For those who have forgotten, Salman Rushdie wrote a novel called the Satanic Verses which infuriated many Muslims around the world, and led then Iranian leader, the Ayatollah Khomeini, to issue a death sentence.

"Satanic Verses" is a Western term to refer to a very real problem within Islam that attributes words to Mohammed that are deemed incorrect but then blamed on Satan having pretended to be God and whispered them in Mohammed's ear. The words are later withdrawn. Rushdie's decision to title a novel Satanic Verses was seen as blasphemy against the entire religion, and to this day, Rushdie continues to live with the threat of death.

What Pipes does is clearly explain the issues, the history of the Koranic verses, and how Khomeini's actions were perceived and acted upon. Like a lot of books about the Middle East, this is one that should be read against others, because in that region, there's no end to new ways to interpret the same set of facts. Pipes' version is just one.

Views the outcry over Rushdie's book in a larger geopolitical context

THE RUSHDIE AFFAIR is Daniel Pipes' analysis of the uproar by Muslims over Salman Rushdie's novel THE SATANIC VERSES from mid-1988 to March 1989, with especial attention on Ayatollah Khomeini's death fatwa and the resulting diplomatic fallout. Though the book was published in early 1990 and so lacks a long-term view of the matter, it is still a valuable and informative historical document.

Pipes explains how the novel is offensive to Muslims, explicating its references to the founding of Islam which the average Western reader wouldn't grasp, as well as Khomeini's edict and voices of support and dissent with it. The second part of the book is an examination of larger issues evoked by the novel's reception, namely the relationship between Iran and the West, the efficacy or lack thereof of censorship and, quite pertinent to our times sixteen years later, the matter of Muslim communities living in the West. Pipes asks if perhaps the greatest danger against speech isn't far-off pariah states like Iran, but rather Muslim communities in Europe which refuse to integrate and wish to eradicate all opposition to Islam and its sharia law in the society around them.

It is clear right away that Pipes has little sympathy for Rushdie. In the short biography of the author, Rushdie is described as a haughty intellectual, an elitist, an a nihilistic Leftist. I thought this was unfair, and showed the author to have little understanding or appreciation of the literary art. However, Pipes' low view of Rushdie allows him to consider in greater depth the question of whether Rushdie deserved the criticism and fatwa. Ultimately, what Pipes feels about the matter is simple bafflement, because the Muslim world during the 20th century tolerated writers and intellectuals who said far worse things about Islam than Rushdie, and there's no real reason why Rushdie should have been singled out for such a great outcry.

The book is informative, but more on its coverage of international relations than any insights on the literary world. If you haven't read THE SATANIC VERSES yet, don't try Pipes' book, because you've been missing out on an entertaining and truly marvelous novel, and it will be baffling to read about a controversy over a book you know nothing about yet. The book may be worth flipping through if you're curious about why Rushdie's novel sparked such a reaction.

Views the outcry over Rushdie in a larger geopolitical context
THE RUSHDIE AFFAIR is Daniel Pipes' analysis of the uproar by Muslims over Salman Rushdie's novel THE SATANIC VERSES from mid-1988 to March 1989, with especial attention on Ayatollah Khomeini's death fatwa and the resulting diplomatic fallout. Though the book was published in early 1990 and so lacks a long-term view of the matter, it is still a valuable and informative historical document.

Pipes explains how the novel is offensive to Muslims, explicating its references to the founding of Islam which the average Western reader wouldn't grasp, as well as Khomeini's edict and voices of support and dissent with it. The second part of the book is an examination of larger issues evoked by the novel's reception, namely the relationship between Iran and the West, the efficacy or lack thereof of censorship and, quite pertinent to our times sixteen years later, the matter of Muslim communities living in the West. Pipes asks if perhaps the greatest danger against speech isn't far-off pariah states like Iran, but rather Muslim communities in Europe which refuse to integrate and wish to eradicate all opposition to Islam and its sharia law in the society around them.

It is clear right away that Pipes has little sympathy for Rushdie. In the short biography of the author, Rushdie is described as a haughty intellectual, an elitist, an a nihilistic Leftist. I thought this was unfair, and showed the author to have little understanding or appreciation of the literary art. However, Pipes' low view of Rushdie allows him to consider in greater depth the question of whether Rushdie deserved the criticism and fatwa. Ultimately, what Pipes feels about the matter is simple bafflement, because the Muslim world during the 20th century tolerated writers and intellectuals who said far worse things about Islam than Rushdie, and there's no real reason why Rushdie should have been singled out for such a great outcry.

The book is informative, but more on its coverage of international relations than any insights on the literary world. If you haven't read THE SATANIC VERSES yet, don't try Pipes' book, because you've been missing out on an entertaining and truly marvelous novel, and it will be baffling to read about a controversy over a book you know nothing about yet. The book may be worth flipping through if you're curious about why Rushdie's novel sparked such a reaction.

More Serious Than an Affair
This book is a must read for anyone contemplating the reading of Salman Rushdie's, "The Satanic Verses." It places into perspective an insight into all of the hoopla.

Salman Rushdie wrote a little book back in 1988 that literally placed his head on a platter. Was it literature or blasphemy against the Islamic religion? The debate continues to this day. In this book Daniel Pipes (author of several books on the Middle East), attempts to explain the controversy that exists around Rushdie's words. The satanic verses are basically a few words referring to the existence of Meccan goddesses and whether or not they were acknowledged by the Prophet Muhammad. Apparently historical beliefs exist that suggest the possibility of Muhammad being coerced by nobles to recognize their idols/goddesses in exchange for a chance to continue preaching within their vicinity without restrictions. The problem with this theory is that it then makes the religion of Islam non-existent as a faith because it goes against the monotheistic belief that Islam is based upon and also suggests that Muhammad wrote the Holy Qur'an as a human being and not as an inspired prophet of God. Rushdie ran into trouble when he wrote an extremely blasphemous novel based on these controversial verses and basically laughed into the face of the Islamic faith ruffling some very fundamentalist feathers along the way.

Daniel Pipe brings a relatable book to the table which explains how Rushdie, the Ayatollah and the West started and resolved the controversy surrounding, "The Satanic Verses." What was once a complicated issue now seems entirely explainable from all fronts due to this book by Pipes. Rushdie is explained as a highly educated man who spends his life basically making a mockery of many things with an intellectual snobbery and seemingly massive ego. However Rushdie has a right to freedom of speech that is without question, but was that right taken to extremes in order to create a platform for infamy? In my opinion Rushdie knew exactly what he was creating and in fact weathered the storm quite well while receiving a mountain of publicity and notoriety that quite possibly the novel on its own doesn't stand up to. I believe the average reader would not be able to relate to Rushdie's weighty style and cultural references and that had the uproar been non-existent the novel would be relegated to the discount book pile and soon forgotten. Rushdie has great marketing skills but at what price?

So why such a violent response? Pipes writes a thorough explanation as to why the Ayatollah decreed a fatwa against Rushdie and his publishers. In the western world this action appears rather harsh but in the Islamic tradition of punishment towards individuals who blaspheme God it was merely an action supported by a law most westerners do not understand. Call it cultural divide if you will with a huge exclamation point! And so it goes. This book provides additional insight into the ever present differences between the Middle East and the Western world and continues to pertain to modern issues as well. From a tolerant God stems the intolerance of man and his religions. After reading this book you might begin to understand the serious faith of the Islamic world and the laws they live by. Although we live in a complicated world taking a step towards understanding one another can begin with well-rounded explanations such as those found within this book by Daniel Pipe. The ideas are multifaceted but very necessary to contemplate in order to be a citizen of the world today.

For anyone seeking a better understanding contemporary Islam
Now in an updated and expanded second edition, The Rushdie Affair: The Novel, The Ayatollah, And The West by Daniel Pipes (Director of the Middle East Forum and a columnist for the "New York Post" and the "Jerusalem Post", studies the events that played out when Salman Rushdie's novel "The Satanic Verses" was denounced by Muslim clerics as blasphemous to Islam, resulting in a confrontation that led to an Iranian edict demanding the execution of the author. Scrutinizing not only modern history, but also what it shows about further relations between different nations and world views, The Rushdie Affair is a informed and informative account which is very highly recommended for anyone seeking a better understanding contemporary Islam in general, and this defining controversy in particular. ... Read more

Product Description
This book examines and explains the obsession with history in the contemporary British novel. It frames these "historical" novels as expressions of narrative desire, highlighting the reciprocal relationship between a desire to disclose and to rid ourselves of anxieties elicited by the past. Scrutinizing representative novels from Byatt, McEwan and Rushdie, contemporary fiction is revealed as capable of advocating a viable ethical stance and as a form of authentic commentary. Our anxieties often exist in response to what might be perceived as the oppression or eradication of values, whether this is through the modern repudiation of Victorian principles (Byatt), the Western rethinking of Enlightenment narratives in light of the Holocaust (McEwan), or pluralism threatened by religious fundamentalism (Rushdie). Each of these novelists differentially employs postmodern artifice, sometimes as a way to reject the notion of historical construction, sometimes to advocate for it, but always to bring us closer to what the author believes are significant values and truths, rather than relativism. The representative qualities of these novels serve to highlight themes, concerns, and anxieties present in many of the works of each author and by extension those of their contemporaries. ... Read more

Product Description
In this Readers' Guide, David Smale traces the critical reception of this fascinating writer by examining the changing responses to his two best-known works. As a novelist and icon, Rushdie has embraced both 'popular' and 'high' culture; reflecting this, the Guide brings together both academic criticism and journalism to investigate the passions and preoccupations of Rushdie's many critics, steering the reader through the inflamed debates and rhetoric surrounding this much admired but controversial author.
... Read more

Product Description
In Stranger Gods Roger Clark offers an ambitious and wide-ranging study of Salman Rushdie's seven published novels, with a special focus on his earliest, Grimus, and his most powerful and provocative, Midnight's Children, Shame, and The Satanic Verses. Clark shows how Rushdie employs cosmology, mythology, and mysticism to structure otherworldly dramas that are fascinating in their own right, as well as crucial to the more worldly points Rushdie makes about literary tradition, history, ethnicity, and the politics of religion. Clark's exploration of Rushdie's novels works on at least three levels. First, he clarifies and interprets Rushdie's often puzzling references to figures such as Loki and Shiva, settings such as the mountains of Qaf and Kailasa, and experiences such as the annihilation of the self and the temptations of the Muslim Devil, Iblis. Second, he demonstrates how otherworldy motifs work with or against each other, fusing or clashing with Dantean, Shakespearean, and other literary forms to create hybrid characters, plots, and themes.Finally, he argues that Rushdie's brutal assault on tradition and taboo is mitigated by his secular idealism and his subtle homage to mystical ideals of the past. This novel interpretation, which presents Rushdie's first five novels as a heterogeneous yet consistent body of work, will challenge and delight not only Rushdie scholars but anyone interested in comparative religion and mythology, iconoclasm, and the interplay of Western and Eastern literary forms. ... Read more

Product Description
The dialectic between national literary production and the rise of a group of writers with cosmopolitan sympathies is the aim of this book, concentrating on Rushdie's novels and journalism. It comments on the narrowness with which British literary tradition has been conceived and broadens its scope to include the new writing emerging from Britain's black communities. ... Read more

Product Description
academic ... Read more

Product Description

Product Description

Product Description
No description available ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (16)

Just about ready to ditch this series...
My book group, er, short story group, reads this series. We have read the series through maybe about seven years now.Ah, yeah, well we are about to ditch the series as the selections have become dependably disappointing.The stories go nowhere, eh, I so used to enjoy that quaint idea of plot. Yes, plot was good and so too character development, buildup, climax, nay, actually remember that idea of having a point.

The reviewer Fuzzy Lizzard was accurate when it referred to the stories as self-consciously modern.

Okay, well, who exactly are these story collections for then? The prior series editor, Katrina Kenison, produced a much finer product. By far.Go away, Heidi Pitlor.Either that, or you could rename the series the Best American Short Stories for Impossibly Sophisticated Literary Elites.Yea, that'd work well.

Anyway, thank you, Katrina for many delightful years of reading.Sadly, this series has lost something with its new series editor.Bleh.

Is this REALLY the best?
This is the second year I have purchased this anthology, and although I was hoping that in 2008 with the superb Salman Rushdie at the helm it might have improved, sadly it hasn't. Last year found me complaining (as per the title), "Is this really the best...?", to which a colleague replied, "Well, what would you expect with Stephen King as the guest editor? I mean, he's no writer, no literary expert!", that comment left me thinking that perhaps my colleague was correct and that maybe I had expected too much of such an intellectual featherweight as King.

So, to repeat, with this year's volume to hand and the name of the ever inspiring and lucid Mr. Rushdie plastered across the front, I felt we could hardly go wrong. Surely HE would lead us to calmer seas and breathtaking views, surely he would sift through the sand and show us diamonds in various stages of polish. Surely...

In his introduction Rushdie begins very academically by establishing and defining his terms. He asks of the reader to define just what an American Short Story is, and then tries very articulately to give us his definition; a definition befitting of a Modern America. After reading that I felt confident we would arrive safely in port.

To respond to Mr. Rushdie's enquiry, I would like to offer my own definition and then explain why this is SO important and why this book didn't meet that definition, didn't function within those parameters and thus ultimately sunk offshore.

As a teacher of literature and academic writing (not creative writing) I truly value the American Short Story. I concur that in its purest form, it is one of the greatest literary traditions and certainly THE greatest offering to the world of c.20th and c.21st literature. No other country can come anywhere near to challenging the dominance of the distinctive American Story. There is a sense of space and depth, an underlying tension (or lack of it), a distinctive presence and use of language, a unique world-view offered in the American Novel thatis simply unparalleled and unrivalled on the world literary stage.

America is often given short-shrift when it comes to matters of culture and Art, but to do this is simply to display one's ignorance. American Literature and Art is NOT a parody of European values and aims, it is wholly unique and independent. It reflects America in all its diversity, in all its 'superficiality', in all its pop, in all its values, beliefs, desires and aspirations. It is no poor cousin to Europe, not at all. It is a mirror of equal quality and value simply reflecting a different view and scene.

That established, any writer of an American tale should be an American (in whatever form that takes), they should be a product of that country; born of that culture, dyed and immersed in all its colours. The author must be more than a mere tourist or transitory nomad. They must have lived and breathed the air of America, they must have witnessed the struggles and triumphs of that land continually on a daily basis so that it has penetrated every corner, every cell of their being, so that when they exhale, they are exhaling America. If they fail to do this, and if we fail to set these requirements, and simply allow 'someone in America', anyone with a pen and paper to essentially be heir to that Literary Tradition, then we risk (as is proved in this collection) of diluting the strength of the Word, and tainting the colour of the literary fabric.

An American Novel or short story does NOT mean it was simply written in America, or worse, simply published in an American magazine. Far from it. Why this edition fails, is because the editors apparently did not realise that and so they cast their net too wide and too far, and what they hauled in were colourless minnows and not fully grown specimens of weight and beauty.

There is a bar that must be jumped to, a height that must be reached, a point that must be crossed, after which a story can be said to warrant the highly-prized seal of an American Short-Story. As with Champagne and sparkling wine, whilst they may appear similar (to some), anyone with taste immediately know the impostor and the real. In this volume, all but Tobias Wolff's masterpiece, 'Bible', Jonathan Letham's inspired, 'The King of Sentences' and A.M. Homes' dark, 'May We Be Forgiven' can really said worth of a seal that reads 'American Short Story'. The rest with the exception of Kevin Brockmeier's 'The Year of Silence', which deserves and honourable mention, are simply not AMERICAN Short-Stories, are not Champagne, rather, they are merely fizzy coloured water which gives an illusion to something which it clearly is not.

American Short Story is Still Alive
There is probably no more authentically American literary art form than short story, and some of the most memorable short stories that I've read over the years have been by American authors. From Poe, through Hemingway to Tobias Wolff (to name just a few of my favorites through history) American authors had fine-tuned the art of writing short fiction to perfection. For years I had been enjoying "The Best American Short Stories" anthologies, and was eager to read the new volume as soon as it had come in. However, in last few years I had grown increasingly frustrated with the workshop-quality of stories that were presented in these anthologies. Stories were indubitably well-crafted, but lacked much of imagination and excitement that I had come to associate with this genre. A few years back I finally gave up and did not continue buying these anthologies for several years. I gave the series a second chance when The Best American Short Stories 2007 came out. I thought that having Stephen King as the guest editor would be a good sign if not of quality of writing then at least of interesting plotlines. Unfortunately, I was disappointed yet again.

So I am writing this long rambling preamble in order to show that I am a big fan of short stories, and not so big fan of the "Best American" collections of recent years. That's why I was very pleasantly surprised with the 2008 edition. As some other reviewers have commented, it is by far the best collection in years. After reading the first few stories I was completely hooked, but having been burned in the past was apprehensive about each new story that I would read. In the end, it turned out that my apprehension was totally misplaced. I thoroughly enjoyed every single one of the stories in this collection. They were all remarkably well crafted, with interesting premises and plotlines that kept me reading and wishing for more. Several of the writers in this collection were new to me, and now I am interested in reading more of their works. Throughout reading this collection I felt that all of the stories and authors absolutely deserved to be included. Hopefully this is a good sign not only for this series of books, but for the overall quality of short fiction in America.

Wonderful
I love reading these collections as they are released each year.Keep them coming!Was especially impressed with the work of Nicole Krauss.

A collection of very good short stories, but no gems
As always, I recommend both the Best American and O. Henry Prize short story anthologies as being great ways to become exposed to a wide variety of different authors and top-notch writing.For 2008, I would cite the O. Henry Prize Stories anthology as being the stronger of the two, because it features more truly memorable stories.But, for those with the desire to tackle two volumes of vintage 2008 short stories, I can also recommend the 2008 Best American Short Stories.

Usually when reviewing anthologies, I will cite my favorite stories and state why I especially liked them.However, for the 2008 Best American Short Stories anthology, I was unable to do so, because no stories stood out as being especially good.I found the quality level to be uniformly high, but with no truly superb stories.The only story that caused me to question its appearance in this volume was Tobias Wolff's "Bible", which I found to be pretty mundane and perhaps guilty of stereotyping recent immigrants to America.Usually I question the appearance of the de rigueur Alice Munro story, because seemingly every short story anthology always includes a Munro story, which I typically find to be predictable in terms of setting, subject matter and writing style.The Munro story included in this volume, "Child's Play", does indeed have a predictable plot (in stark contrast to the short story style pioneered by O. Henry), but it did hold my interest more than the typical Munro story.

Salman Rushdie's introductory essay is quickly read and forgotten.Often the stories selected by the guest editor of the Best American Short Stories series will tend to reflect that editor's views.If I had to cite a general characteristic of the stories Rushdie selected, it would be that many are prurient in nature.Whether this does in fact indicate something about Rushdie's mindset is subject to conjecture.
... Read more

Product Description