Shaming Literature - ‘Sir’ Salman Rushdie
The current controversy on Rushdie’s knighthood has several dimensions. Amid the knee-jerk reactions alluding to the grand-conspiracy-against-Islam, it brings out various layers and levels of literature’s role and position in societies and now in the globalized world.
I was once a fan of Rushdie and avidly devoured his books with great admiration. From Grimus to The Moor’s Last Sigh, I marveled at his playfulness with the english language and its idiom which undoubtedly he has enriched. The collection of essays titled Imaginary Homelands was a combination of disparate but original writings. Somewhere during this process came the ridiculous Satanic Verses which other than its blasphemous content and brazen disrespect for a vast majority of Muslims was a bad piece of writing!
The decline of Rushdie as a writer, finally, was confirmed by the trashy “Ground Beneath Her Feet“. Thereafter, one read strange, ignorant pieces of his non-fiction in the Western mainstream media that needed his stature to find a rationale for the imperial projects in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Shalimar the Clown, his recent novel was even worse as it proved to be bereft of subtlety and re-invoked all the crappy, soul-destroying images and cliches of our times. In a non-serious piece, published in the Friday Times (Pakistan) in December 2005, I wrote:
Salman Rushdie’s new novel, Shalimar the Clown, is enough to add to one’s misery. I finished browsing it; what else can you do with such stuff posing as quality fiction? As if the name of the central character “Shalimar†was not enough to offend a native reader such as I, the heroine “India Ophuls†changing her name to “Kashmira†was the ultimate illustration of cheap exoticism and a hackneyed dive into passé magical realism. Alas, Rushdie has started believing in his own mantra and the twisting of historical narrative. It simply does not work now. He is more of a bard for the ascendancy of the global tide against Islamism and perhaps he should stick to that. Better if he were to provide some intellectual depth to Fox News, or even better, if he started writing scripts for his young wife’s tele-plays. Shalimar successfully completes the trilogy of Rushdie’s worst novels, the other two being The Ground Beneath Her Feet and Fury . Aijaz Ahmad, a US-based academic, argued a long time ago that Rushdie and Naipul were avatars of ‘oriental’ consciousness. Small wonder that they are reviewed, exalted and globally hyped.
Much to my delight, a friend – an aspiring critic – sent me the review by Theo Tait of the London Review of Books: Noting what Rushdie’s style produces in the novel, Tait writes that it “ .. . is a cross between a piece of magic realism which displays all the worst vices of the style, and the contemporary international thriller. It is passionate, well-informed and sometimes interesting; but also hackneyed, simplistic and often very, very silly…”
Today, I read this brilliant article published in the Guardian written by a noted academic, Priyamvada Gopal that essentially is a lament of all that Rushdie and his new writings stand for:
Sir Salman, on the other hand, is partly the creation of the fatwa that played its role in strengthening the self-fulfilling “clash of civilisations” that both Bush and Osama bin Laden find so handy. Driven underground and into despair by zealotry, Rushdie finally emerged blinking into New York sunshine shortly before the towers came tumbling down. Those formidable literary powers would now be deployed not against, but in the service of, an American regime that had declared its own fundamentalist monopoly on the meanings of “freedom” and “liberation”. The Sir Salman recognised for his services to literature is certainly no neocon but is iconic of a more pernicious trend: liberal literati who have assented to the notion that humane values, tolerance and freedom are fundamentally western ideas that have to be defended as such.
Vociferously supporting the invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq on “humane” grounds, condemning criticism of the war on terror as “petulant anti-Americanism” and above all, aligning tyranny and violence solely with Islam, Rushdie has abdicated his own understanding of the novelist’s task as “giving the lie to official facts”. Now he recalls his own creation Baal, the talented poet who becomes a giggling hack coralled into attacking his ruler’s enemies. Denuded of texture and complexity, it is no accident that this fiction since the early 90s has disappeared into a critical wasteland. The mutation of this relevant and stentorian writer into a pallid chorister is a tragic allegory of our benighted times, of the kind he once narrated so vividly.
In any case, Ali Eteraz is right when he states that what’s there is a colonial siege of the minds in this whole issue.Â
 And, please also see a sensible editorial by the Pakistani newspaper DAWN here.
This dubious honour is yet another endeavour to reward the constructed clash of civilizations. The fact that Rushdie has accepted it, further confirms his degeneration as another script writer of this “theory”. Meanwhile, the protests in Iran and Pakistan only reinforce this vicious cycle of neo-orientalism .
Shameful indeed.
Subscribe
The latest twist in the Rushdie saga takes us back to the discussion on freedom of expression triggered by the Cartoon debate. While Freedom of Expression is and ought to be non-negotiable, it needs to be tempered with “freedom of restraint†and the “freedom to exercise good judgment†and “freedom to not engage in provocative political idiocy†- particularly by the premier imperial power of the day – the US and its sidekick the UK.
I am not sure US public opinion or the USG would be particularly impressed if the Pak govt. bestowed the country’s highest civilian honor on, say, Osama bin Laden for “services to humanity”. It would be well within the rights of the Pakistani state to do so and by hailing said honor, assorted Jihadis would be exercising their freedom of expression. It would nevertheless be a distasteful, provocative and politically idiotic act. It would also be followed by swift US sanctions and sundry efforts to effect regime change in Pak. Muslims across the world are disempowered and at the mercy of the western political and military establishment and their own western-backed oppressive elites. They can’t sanction Britain nor effect regime change. Instead, pathetically, they kill each other and destroy their own infrastructure in frustration. Sometimes, they blow up a high-rise in Manhattan or themselves and others on the London Underground – and thereby unleash another wave of prejudice, hatred and violence against themselves - even more pathetic. 9/11 or Rushdie cannot be viewed in any self-righteous legal bubble divorced from the history of British colonialism or American neo-colonialism. Blathering on about victimhood and prejudice without taking responsibility for the consequences of one’s own actions is even more contemptible coming from Western power-centers than it is from the global Muslim underclass. Clearly, lack of self-awareness and an inability to be self-critical is a global phenomenon.
Rushdie was just another Booker-prize winning author hailed by the British literary establishment and unknown otherwise. He is a western icon today, not because he is a great writer (though that is the ostensible excuse and he may in fact be that) but because he is the poster-boy for the Western construct of a Muslim-bashing “civilized Muslim.” That is why he has been knighted and why he is so hated.
Freedom of expression may include (indeed should include) the freedom to articulate racism, cultural bigotry, prejudice and historical illiteracy but should not be used as a conceptual and rhetorical tool to dignify the same. The European Right and American liberals do exactly that. Islamist extremists on the other hand believe that no one has any right to dignity or freedoms other than them. Just because he is the poster-boy of Western Islamophobia, Rushdie should not be awarded the status of hate-figure in the Muslim world. By elevating him so, it is in fact Muslim extremists who place him in a position of centrality instead of the insignificant and irrelevant place he deserves.
Comment by Thinker101 — June 21, 2007 @ 3:40 pm
To accept or reject knighthood is his personal prerogative. You want him to antagonize the western establishment? Tell me a Muslim country that will take him in. At least he is being grateful to the people who protected him when the whole Muslim world was up in arms against him.
Comment by Mohib — June 21, 2007 @ 7:03 pm
Nice writeup. Your article stimulated me to do a google search for Salman Rushdie’s articles. I came across a few informative articles but I will take some time to digest them and form my opinion on this issue. But it is a fact that British government so unnecessarily revived a dead issue and that too at such a sensitive time. BTW on Wikipedia there is a mention of another novel by Rushdie “Shameâ€. It is about Bhutto and Zia. Have you read this novel? And what are your views about it?
Comment by Skeptic — June 21, 2007 @ 8:43 pm
It is true that Rushdie’s last truly good book was “The Moor’s Last Sigh”. But we haven’t seend the end of him as a writer. We have to understand that an artist can’t come out with one great work after another. (Even Toni Morrison hasn’t written anything sizzling after “Beloved”!) As for “The Satanic Verses”, I would have to disagree with you. While I could see why it offended many Muslims (who actually cared to read it), I have to say it was very well written. By the way Rushdie’s attitude towards Islam should not be taken as some personal grudge against that religion. If you carefully examine his other works, it appears he had a suspicious attitude towards other religions too. (Hindus could have easily been ‘offended’ by certain passages in Midnight’s Children).
I believe Rushdie, Sir or not, is a great writer. To be a great, one classic is enough for a lifetime. Rushdie has more to his credit.
Comment by Mayank Austen Soofi — June 21, 2007 @ 11:17 pm
As usual a thought provoking and timely piece of writing. Being impressed with Rushdi’s writings, I moved heaven and earth to find Satanic Verses but after reading a few chapters, I realized that how low he has fallen to gather admiration from the world that was ready to tarnish Islam in every possible way. I am not astonished or upset with the West to bestow this title on him but upset with the fact that the man didn’t even have to work hard for it.
I wish he had continued his legacy of Moor’s Last Sigh but then there is a lot to be desired. Perhaps you accurately identified best use of his intellectual skills i.e. adding depth to Fox News or CNN (I laughed my head off after reading it in TFT). I feel extremely sad to see the direction this world is taking. We all are individually responsible for our lack of appropriate response… Hence I plead guilty…
Comment by Irum Ahsan — June 22, 2007 @ 6:40 am
Please can we give the man a break! Granted his work has steadily deteriorated in my opinion too, over the last few years, but let us not foget the jewels he has given us in the past- like Midnight’s Children, Shame..etc. Our memories are short, and its easy to forget .. Be it a drop in the ocean, his earlier work was still briliant and to write like that even once, even one good line,a thought, a well formed idea requires great insight and great wisdom.
It is his right and his prerogative to voice his opinions as it is yours. But let us not forget that he has lived in fear of his life for many many years, something most of us are not exposed to in our lifetimes.
Also Raza, I just wanted to thank you for this feast, this wonderful website- every time I look at I learn more and I truly feel so much more creative myself. It is encouraging for all who value and appreciate the different forms of art and artistic expression. Please keep at it, you are doing a fantastic job! I look forward to what’s next.
Ayesha
Comment by Ayesha Salman — June 22, 2007 @ 7:34 am
I agree with Ayesha here that It is his right and his prerogative to voice his opinions as it is ours. The fact that the entire muslim world has been so intolerant of satanic verses to the extent of issuing a death fatwa- has over the years provided stimulus to the West to portray islam as a violent and an intolerant religion. if we just left things alone, seconding Ayesha here, gave Rushdie a break, both the West and Rushdie might not be left with any theme, impetus or stimulus to direct jabs at Islam. It is a fact that muslims are not well versed with the sense of strategy. Its a shame that Rushdie was bestowed with knighthood but the lack of vision and strategy within the muslim world is equally shameful.
Comment by Gohar Sadaf — June 22, 2007 @ 6:11 pm
Thanks to all the readers for leaving their comments.
Skeptic: thanks
Thinker101: your comment is the sanest take on this issue.
Mayank: I respect your views but trust me I am not the only one who though SV was bad - a vast majority of reviewers thought it was nothing compared to his earlier works
Irum: thanks for visiting and the comment. Yes we have not appropriately reacted and allowed the silly extreme fringe to take over the protest.
Ayesha and Gohar: wish we could give him a break - had he not been such a bootlicker. Gohar you are right that ‘our’ protests are provide further reinforcement to the stereotypes..
what to do??
Comment by RR — June 22, 2007 @ 7:07 pm
[...] Pakistani Blog community is abuzz with commentary on the issue as well and you can read them at Jahan Rumi, Cyril Almeida, Not the Whole Truth & Ali [...]
Pingback by Sir Salman Rushdie, Up Yours!!! » Teeth Maestro — June 22, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
And while you are at it, what about Sir Muhammad Iqbal, the great poet-philosopher of Islam, accepting the same knighthood? Hell, his country was under imperialist British rule at that time.
Comment by Mohib — June 23, 2007 @ 10:38 am
Most proponents of freedom of expression are idiots. They will foam at mouth and shout from rooftops in support of bottom feeders like Rushdie while denigrating those voicing their feelings against him.
Just as Rushdie should have the freedom to write, other people have the similar right to voice their opinion, be it in the form of a book, an article, a procession on the street or loud cries of anger and hatred.
I am so sick of the pseudo-intellectuals and desi liberals.
Comment by stanvir — June 23, 2007 @ 3:33 pm
[...] Pakistani Blog community is abuzz with commentary on the issue as well and you can read them at Jahan Rumi, Cyril Almeida, Not the Whole Truth & Ali [...]
Pingback by Quinge.com » ‘Sir’ Salman Rushdie, Up Yours!!! — June 24, 2007 @ 12:32 am
No one is arguing against freedom to critique Rushdie’s work, intentions or the honours he is given. There is an argument however, for not threatning him with death just because we don’t like what he says. He has written some bad books (SV could be among them) but he has also written some great ones (Midnight’s Children definitely), and the measure of a writing legend is by how many good books they write (even one) and not how many bad ones. It pains me to defend Rushdie- I don’t like him, even though I can’t argue with his writing talent- but our overblown response 19 years later to a provocative book most of us have not read only reveals our own insecurities. One look at how the honors list is drawn up in the UK will reveal there was no deep seated conspiracy to denigrate Islam. Any country with such a well respected writing talent would bestow them with an honour. Lets not take it personally.
Comment by Faisal — June 24, 2007 @ 2:25 pm
There are so many issues that are being brought up here which says a lot for this posting! Is Rushdie a good writer? Should Rushdie have been knighted? Is Art accountable to social and political norms? What is the role of an artist/writer? Each of these questions could kindle an extensive debate. As for Mr. Rushdie, of whom I’m not much of a fan, he’s idden on this wave of Islamophobia for a while and it’s time he came up with something that can stand up on its own without the crutches of pro or anti Islam rhetoric!
Comment by IMeMy — June 24, 2007 @ 6:16 pm
I think this whole affair is a bit of a storm in a teacup. After all, the man was only knighted. That is an internal “honour” of a former world superpower. We are not bound to refer to him as “Sir” or “Knight Commander of the Bathwater” or “Commander Bondi 007″.
Those of us Packies who do not think his writings justify accolades for him should NOT vote to award him a Pakistani prize. Those of us who do think he is deserving SHOULD vote.
We Packies, still suffering so debilitatingly from our (for want of a better phrase) post-colonial hangover, obsess about Inglish thingz and Inglish pipplez and Inglish happeningz. I doubt we would have reacted so vociferously if the man had received the Japanese Order of the Rising Sun, or the Mexican Aztec Eagle, or the Norwegian Kings Medal of Merit (gold or silver).
Angrez hamari falan falan mar ke chalay gaye, but we still revere them for some inexplicable reason. Phittay munh hum sub ka.
Comment by kinkminos — June 25, 2007 @ 9:19 am
I have read ‘Shame’ and ‘Midnight’s Children’ and I think they are the best novels that I have ever come across. Both of the books are truly masterpieces and I have yet to find a book that is of the same caliber as Midnight’s Children. Unlike Rushdie, not many authors have ever effectively used magic realism in their works. I have read parts of Satanic Verses and didn’t care much for it. It’s not considered to be his best work but thanks to Muslims it ironically became the cause of his fame. Rushdie has used this fame in his Islamophobic (if that’s what you would like to call it) cause but once again Muslims are also largely responsible for making Rushdie who he is.
I don’t know if he should have been granted a knighthood but he surely deserves praise. Every one has a right to an opinion whether it insults someone’ religion or not. There’s nothing wrong with criticizing Rushdie’s literature or beliefs or opinions but calling for his death and threats of terrorism is idiotic. The governments of Pakistan and Iran are calling on Britain to revoke the honor which is truly laughable. Britain should claim that they have been insulted by members of Pakistani government issuing death threats against a British citizen.
The real issue is that Muslims have to learn to not be so easily offended and threaten others with death over ‘Blasphemy’. Can someone even define Blasphemy? Muslims can be accused to ‘Blasphemy’ against other religions. Muslims certainly don’t hesitate to criticize and offend others so why are they always up in arms when others are offensive to their beliefs. Get over it! It’s just a fictional novel. The Christians and Jews don’t cry murder if someone ‘insults’ their Gods or prophets.
Comment by cubano — June 25, 2007 @ 12:13 pm
I totally agree with cubano.
Comment by Gohar Sadaf — June 25, 2007 @ 5:07 pm
This is an interesting discussion and observation and whereas a Thinker or Writer has right to opined whatever he thought or observed on the other hand u gave opportunity to the readers and viewers to offer their comments likely in favour or against the ……I want to repeat here Jean Paul Satre whom I studied in my mother tongue as trnaslated :If we adopted writing and claimed ourself an author [pen men]we must be responsible to the literature not to a single person either reader,critic or someonelse!
Kindly accept my feelings Mr Shoaib Tanvir
Comment by sajhashmi — April 5, 2008 @ 10:00 am