Two years ago, Salman Rushdie published an open letter that increasingly condemned a “climate of intolerance” and warned that “the free exchange of information and ideas, the lifeblood of liberal societies, is increasingly restricted by the day.” joined prominent cultural figures to sign the . It is a principle that Mr. Rushdie has embodied since 1989, when Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini called for his murder a fatwa that made Mr. Rushdie a symbol of passive free speech. was the declaration of
letter, Published by Harper’s Magazine After racial justice protests swept the United States in June 2020, it sparked a backlash, with some decrying it as a reactionary display of thin skin and privilege — as one critic put it, “rich fool“
The reaction disappointed Mr. Rushdie, but he did not surprise him. “Speaking of this, the kind of people who stood up for me in a bad year may not be so now.” He told The Guardian in 2021“The idea that being offended is valid criticism has a lot of support.”
After Rushdie was stabbed about 10 times on stage at a literary event in western New York last Friday, many responded to his novel “The Satanic Verse” more than 30 years ago. I wondered if the fatwa had reached its ghastly heights. Conclusion.
Writers were quick to condemn the attack, as were British, French and American leaders. But the attack quickly became the spark of his 21st century controversy over free speech, liberal values and “cancel culture.”
speaking on BBC news night On Friday, British columnist Kenan Malik suggested that Rushdie’s critics “lost the battle” but “won the war.”
“The novel The Devil’s Verse continues to be published,” he said. But “the argument at the heart of their claim that it is wrong to offend certain people, certain groups, certain religions, etc., has become much more mainstream.”
“To some extent, we can say that many societies have internalized fatwas and introduced a kind of self-censorship into the way we talk about each other.”
American author David Leaf suggested on Twitter that if “The Satanic Verse” were submitted to a publisher today, it would rebel against “sensitive readers”. They say it’s violent,” he said. I have written.
When “The Satanic Verse” was published in 1988, the struggle for free speech was not as neat as some remember. The novel angered many Muslims and inspired sometimes violent protests around the world, including in India, where at least 12 people died in 1989, with depictions considered blasphemous. In Mumbai, Mr. Rushdie was born in his 1947 into a wealthy and liberal Muslim family.
In the West, Mr. Rushdie’s defense was not universally sound. Former President Jimmy Carter, writing for The New York Times in 1989, condemned Fatwa but accused Rushdie of “defaming” the Prophet Muhammad and “defaming” the Quran.
“Rushdie’s First Amendment freedoms are important, but we tended to promote him and his book, but it’s the violation of sacred beliefs and the suffering in suppressed silence.” I am even more ashamed of the irresponsibility of the ayatollahs, who hardly acknowledge it as a direct insult to the millions of Muslims who live there.”
Salman Rushdie’s most influential work
Salman Rushdie’s most influential work
“Midnight Children” (1981). Salman Rushdie second novel, which depicts adulthood in modern India, won the Booker Prize and was an international success. The story is told through the life of Saleem Sinai who was born at the very moment of India’s independence.
British writer Roald Dahl called Mr Rushdie a “dangerous opportunist”. British novelist John Berger suggested that Mr. Rushdie retract the novel. ” is released.
At the same time, there was also protection from the Islamic world. Egyptian novelist Naguib Mahfouz found the book offensive but signed a letter defending Rushdie’s publishing rights.And in a 1991 article, Syrian intellectual Sadiq Jalal al-Azm said Western liberals slammed Patronizing Muslims.
“Perhaps there remains a deep-rooted tacit assumption in the West that Muslims are unfit to be serious dissidents, unfit to be dissidents, and ultimately incapable of producing dissidents.” he wrote
In 1990, Rushdie issued a carefully worded statement of apology (which he later regretted) in a futile attempt to get the fatwa to be withdrawn. In the years after Fatwa, Rushdie lived under heavy security in London.
In 1998, after the Iranian government announced it would no longer support the fatwa, he moved to New York City and became a regular in the literary and social scene, appearing at parties, events and in the media ( cameo On “Curb Your Enthusiasm” he advised Larry David, who also rebelled against the ayatollahs, about “fatwa sex”).
But as fatwas (which were never officially revoked) appear to lose weight, the debate over free speech has changed, especially in the United States. The idea that offensive speech is “violence” took hold, and young progressives increasingly criticized the principles of free speech and too often shrouded hate speech. became the rallying cry of conservatives who used it as a weapon against the liberals they accused of wanting to censor opposing views.
Tensions over free speech have been heightened in 2015 when French Muslim terrorists killed 12 staff members in an attack when the writer group PEN America decided to award the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo with an award for bravery. When I continued to publish even after I did it, it became very embossed. office.
Rushdie’s reaction to the protests was lukewarm. “I hope no one goes after them,” he told the New York Times. a name and labeled them “Six Writers Looking for a Little Character”)
After last week’s attacks, many writers and world leaders rushed to express solidarity with Mr. Rushdie. French President Emmanuel Macron hailed him as the personification of “the fight against freedom and obscurity” against “the forces of hatred and barbarism”.
Hadi Matar, a 24-year-old New Jersey man, was arrested at the scene and charged with attempted second-degree murder and assault with a weapon. Law enforcement officials have not disclosed a motive for the attack, which Mr Rushdie’s family said had inflicted him with “life-altering injuries.”
But in the literary world, some observers were hesitant to identify a particular force that had long targeted Mr. Rushdie.
In an email, writer Thomas Chatterton-Williams, one of the organizers of Harper’s letter, said he was impressed by the response from many of the writers, but said he was “impressed by the response from many of the voices that have dominated the conversation.” I was struck by how “relatively understated” it is. Centered around justice and oppression since the summer of 2020. “
he wrote on twitter After Friday’s attacks: “Words are not violence. Violence is violence. That distinction should never be taken lightly or forgotten, even when we represent groups we consider oppressed.” .”
But some people close to Mr. Rushdie have expressed reluctance to immediately use the attack as prey for the highly politicized debate about free speech. British-born novelist Hari Kunzul said in an interview that he faced four separate lawsuits in India for his participation in a public reading of “The Satanic Verse” in 2013, but the change Rushdie declined to comment on his role in free speech debate.
He cited both the rawness of his emotions and the way free speech is “weaponized by people who don’t really have a real commitment to it.”
Noting that “the terrifying irony of this ingenious and playful writer” is defined by “this terrifying, brooding menace” to many, Kunzl said Mr. Rushdie had his every throat down. Ringing said, “I never wanted to be a symbol.”
Another close friend of Rushdie, Mexican novelist Valeria Luiselli, expressed disappointment at the rapid expansion of online conversations into politics.
Some participants say the stakes are too high and too personal. Loya Hakakianan Iranian-American writer in 2019 warned by the Federal Bureau of Investigation posted on Twitter on Saturday that she had been targeted by Iran Attack What she said was a lack of prompt condemnation from U.S. government officials.
(President Biden on Saturday statement It condemns the “malicious” attacks and hailes Mr. Rushdie as a symbol of “essential and universal ideals.”Sunday evening was followed by sharper language statement from Secretary of State Antony J. Brinken, the first US government official to cite Iran).
In an interview on Sunday, Hakakian, who came to the United States as a refugee in 1984, said the crux of the Rushdie case was that “we as writers, as novelists, as thinkers, have taken absolutely every issue necessary to our work. — that includes Islam.”
But “nobody said that,” she said. Instead, “people are paying lip service for free speech.”
In his recent autobiographical novel, Hometown Elegy, American author Ayad Akhtar examines the complex implications of the Satanic Verse controversy for Muslim readers and writers, including himself. .
In an email on Sunday, Akhtar, the current president of PEN America, said the attack on Rushdie was “a ‘harm’ of speech and a reminder that free speech cannot claim equality for us.”
“We may rightly acknowledge that speech can be harmful, but we see the absolute centrality, the supreme value, of freedom of thought and freedom to express that thought. What stands out is the terrifying culmination of Salman’s dilemma.”
For many, it may be easy to protect Mr. Rushdie and “Satanic Verse” from his assassins, Akhtar said. But the defense “must also apply where there is less unanimity, where there is more involvement.”
“That’s the principle,” he said.