Rushdie Shares Views

"The Satanic Verses" Author Lectures At University

Last updated Wednesday, April 18, 2007 10:05 PM CDT in News

By Dan Craft
The Morning News

    FAYETTEVILLE -- Salman Rushdie, a noted author and essayist, visited Fayetteville on Wednesday as part of the University of Arkansas' Distinguished Lecturer Series.

    Rushdie, best known for the death threat issued against him in 1989 by the leader of Iran, spoke on the role of writers and fielded questions from university students in several appearances.

    'VERSES' AND THE FATWA

    Rushdie was already a published novelist when "a subplot in what's really a very funny novel about a Bombay movie star" prompted Ayatollah Kohemeni, the religious ruler of Iran, to issue a fatwa, or Islamic death sentence, for Rushdie.

    Two factors put him in the spotlight, Rushdie said: Discontent in Iran over losing a war with Iraq meant Kohemeni needed a cause to rally his people, and Rushdie's "The Satanic Verses" had just been published.

    "I guess it was too funny," Rushdie said. "If it had been scholastic and theological, it would have been too boring to upset anybody."

    He recounted the phone call from a British Broadcasting Corp. journalist.

    "He said something to the effect of, 'The ayatollah has ordered a death sentence for you. Do you care to comment,'" Salman Rushdie said.

    Rushdie remembers his first words, but they can't be printed in a newspaper. They got a chuckle out of about 150 University of Arkansas students, though.

    ROLE OF WRITERS

    There is no such thing, according to Rushdie.

    "The great thing about literature is that nobody owns it. The only role of a writer is to be the writer he wishes to be," Rushdie said. "Books don't change the world by making you want to jump up and shout slogans. They change the world one reader at a time."

    Literature succeeds when it brings out the unexpected, or when it applies seriousness to frivolous situations or banter to serious ones, he said.

    "Literature can humanize. It's love in a combat zone. Or, it's like talking seriously about literature by saying nobody reads books anyway, so let's all go to MySpace," he said.

    There will always be a place in the world for literature and art, Rushdie said.

    "The project of art is to open the universe a little more. You go to the edge and push out," he said.

    LIFE CHOICES

    Born in India and schooled in England, he thought he would return to India to live after college.

    "I never expected my life to be lived mostly in the West," he said. "Sometimes, you look back at what seemed like a small choice and realize what large consequences it had."

    Life is a constant series of choices, each of which has the potential for long-term implications, he said. He talks of a "shadow self," the life a person would have led if different choices had been made.

    "It's not about the fork in the road. It's about all the forks, big and small," he said.

    FREE SPEECH

    "The principle of free speech is that it's OK to piss someone off," Rushdie said.

    Each expression is weighed by its creator, judged on relevance and offensiveness, and each person makes different judgments, Rushdie said.

    "I've seen the prophet cartoons, and I would have run them. Some of them weren't funny, some were. The ones that offended people were the funnier ones, I think," Rushdie said. "The apology was wrong, I think, because it wasn't about respect, it was about intimidation. In the grown-up world, sometimes you have to deal with things you don't like. That's just the way it is."

    THE INTERNET

    Books remain a relevant form of speech in the Internet age, especially in non-Western societies where novels have only been a mainstream part of literature for the last century, he said.

    "The Internet is a fantastic creative tool that we don't yet fully understand." he said. "Most of the creative content of the Internet is rubbish, but you can say the same for much of the content in any bookstore."

    GUN LAWS

    Rushdie recalls arguing about access to firearms on a political roundtable television show. Guns are less common in Europe, and the Second Amendment does not specifically allow firearms for citizens, only militias, he said.

    "Jerry Springer and I deeply bonded" in arguing with singer Ted Nugent, a National Rifle Association member, over access to handguns, Rushdie said.

    In response to the recent shooting at Virginia Tech, Rushdie feels people are asking the wrong questions.

    "I take the totally un-American view of asking why this isn't about gun laws," Rushdie said. "We're having the wrong conversation about this event."

    Reader Comments (6 comment(s))


    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsibility of their authors. The Morning News does not review comments before their publication, nor do we guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by our comment policy. If you see a comment that violates our policy, please notify the web editor.

    Pop Culturalist wrote on Apr 18, 2007 11:08 PM:

    " I'd be more interested in seeing his wife, the co-host of Bravo's "Top Chef." She is beautiful and makes the show. Curious that such an intellectual as Rushdie would be paired with a pop celebrity such as his wife. "

    To Rushdie: wrote on Apr 19, 2007 8:29 PM:

    " I would "

    To Mr. Rushdie, wrote on Apr 19, 2007 9:02 PM:

    " It's not about gun laws because none of them were broken. although, I would'nt object if they made one that stated, "Only natural born citizens are allowed to own firearms." Most of the Citizens in this country do own firearms, and very few of us have ever shot anyone or ourselves, whether it be on purpose or by accident, and never would unless it was in defense of our lives or those of our families. What gives you the right to come to our country and tell us we have no right to self defense? And, yes the 2nd Amendment does give the people the right to own guns. What part of: "...and the rights of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed", do you not understand? You are an educated man, it's a very simple sentence, even a fifth-grader understood it after we looked up the meaning of the word "infringed" in the dictionary! "

    To Mr. Rushdie, wrote on Apr 19, 2007 9:09 PM:

    " I find it very offensive when people from other countries try to tell us how to run ours. As for Cho, every country has their share of nut jobs, even yours. At least our religious leaders don't issue death sentences for people they disagree with. Not all of us live in guarded, gated communities with alarm systems and bodyguards, we have to protect our own lives from drug addicts, gang members, rapists, thieves and murderers; none of who would think twice about coming into our homes and causing whatever type of mayhem that happens to be their "thing", if they knew we were unarmend and could not protect ourselves. "

    con't. To Mr. Rushdie, wrote on Apr 19, 2007 9:14 PM:

    " To use your own words, " In the grown-up world, sometimes you have to deal with things you don't like. That's just the way it is." So, if you don't like the fact that our forefathers were intelligent enough to make sure we would always be able to defend ourselves, our families and our country, I suggest you go home. Where things are perfect. (Sarcasm Intended) P.S. Your words, "The principle of free speech is that it's OK to....." tell that to Don Imus, he repeated some lines out of a movie and lost his job. Free speech doesn't apply to white people anymore. "

    Midwesterner wrote on Apr 21, 2007 6:25 AM:

    " You know, I'd like to have Salman give a little display of his grammar skills. I hate this second amendment. The problem with the gun rights advocates who responded here, particularly the one who quoted this amendment, is they neglect to give the entire sentence, nor do they provide for the context in which it was written (the constitution, while quite remarkable, is not perfect: witness, amendments). Please remember, when quoting it, to at least quote the entire sentence. When we don't go any further than that which supports our personal biases, we continue our trek into the abyss of ignorance. I will admit that I go back and forth a bit with this amendment, but it can not be denied that the writer of this sentence did not intended the purpose of this right to be completely unrestricted, it has something to do with a "well regulated militia." In modern times what could this mean? Gangs? My personal view is that in modern times it makes more sense to think of this as municipal police forces. Well, anyway, keep an open mind folks. For those who've not seen it, the 2nd amendment: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. "


    *Member ID:
    *Password:
      Forgot Your Password?
     

    Not already registered?
    Register Now

    Sponsors