Salman Rushdie, Satanic Verses of Midnight's Children

He is one of the most talented writers I have ever read. He has his share of bad books (Fury is the worst) but his language is always incredible (well in his bad novels it is also embarrassingly bad at times, it's true) and his latest novel, shalimar the clown, though not as good as his masterpieces, is his best novel since The Moors last Sigh. I'm praying for his next novel (let it be a good one, let it be a good one). sadly, that also means that I want him to take his time. rushdie cannot write fast, he seems rushed writing fast. i am fully prepared to wait ten years if the book is thick and good. when rushdie is good, my spine tingles, my ears redden and i am, for several moment, the most happy person in the room. no make that: in the country.

Wow, you almost exactly replicate my opinion about Rushdie onefatman. That's kind of spooky. I wrote my MA thesis on Rushdie (mostly The Satanic Verses, which I think is his best work), and I've read everything he's written. I do think Shalimar was a return to form as well, although clearly not as good as the masterpieces (The Satanic Verses, Midnight's Children, Shame and The Moor's Last Sigh). And my god, wasn't Fury just awful - what was he thinking? However, aberrations aside, if anyone deserves the Nobel Prize for Literature I think it's him...

Nobel Prize???!!!!

well given the errors in judgement
they have previously made
it wouldn;t surprise me
but
Pynchon is W A Y
more deserving

and I'm sure I could come up
with some other authors
I'd put before him

I'm OK with this year's prize, though

Pynchon is more deserving but Rushdie beats most other english-language candidates, including Updike, Roth or DeLillo. Rushdie's scope is bigger than either of these authors.

and no, this year's nobel decision was bad. I was ok with the last couple of decisions (I found Pinter a great choice) but this one? Stylistically, Pamuk is good. That does not make him a good writer, which he isn't. It does not make him innovative or important in any way, which he isn't. Most of his work are overwrought, too long, too dull "crime" novels. His book on Istanbul is nice, true. BUt not better than other famous elegies for metropoles. This decision was 100% political. They are usually at least 30% political but this time, it had nothing to do with literary merits. at all. maybe they wanted to choose "a favorite", after the many previous surprise decisions. dunno. bad decision.

I don't think he deseves the Nobel Prize. I haven't given him a fair chance but I have never been overly impressed by his stuff. I hope to read Satanci Verses someday, unless I get even more cynical...which is possible if not probable

All I know is his wife is a total fox.

I haven't given him a fair chance but I have never been overly impressed by his stuff. I hope to read Satanci Verses someday,

His best book is Midnight's Children. Ground and Fury are his stabs at being post-modern. Satanic Verses is (very) good but less so than for example Shame or Moor

thank you.

Sadly, i think Rushdie is a spent force, a giant sitting condemend to lurk under his own shadow. I think Midnight's Children was brilliant. I could relate to it on a personal level too being my family affected by the gross absurdity of "partition". Satanic Verses is as good as any Marquez book and then came the fall. In my humble opinion, moving away from his territory(india, partition, family, memory etc) has made him defunct. Writing about diaspora and migration and displacement are all good but the guy like him seem misfit to the task. He is more like a down to the ground writer than say roamind high and dry in his rocket ship/balloon Pynchon. Rushdie don't have the handle on things he is trying to write about. I didnt pick up Shalimar the Clown cos i am pretty sure it will ruin my Midnight's Children. Rushdie project is doomed in the mid-air unless he goes back, live in mumbai and reconnect with his stuff.

While I agree with you kline19 that Rushdie's more recent output is somewhat diminished in quality I would hardly call him "defunct". He continued to write about India after The Satanic Verses (which itself is precisely about the diaspora and displacement that you seem to think he doesn't do well), with The Moor's Last Sigh (itself an outstanding novel) set almost entirely in Bombay and The Ground Beneath Her Feet set there partly. Shalimar the Clown is largely set in Kashmir and while it has its flaws it is still a fine novel and something of a 'return to form' for Rushdie after the low point of Fury.

Remember that Rushdie has not lived in India for more than 40 years and it would be almost impossible for him to live there again. Much as it has provided a rich vein of material for his novels thus far I think it's hardly sensible to require a certain subject matter from him - just assess each book on its own merits...

Well. I think you should read Shalimar the Clown , I find it his best book since the excellent Moor, but the best part of this book, too, are set in India (Kashmir, that is).
However, Shalimar appears to me to be a breakthrough insofar as that other parts, especially that description of wartime France, sound nearly as fine as the parts about India.
I agree with you, klime, that Rushdie has not found the power to write about new york yet. His two attempts failed both. But he's getting to it, I think.

Rushdie to be Knighted and _____ upset about it.

unbelievable.

but don't show this to kline19 or else we'll have an anti-islamic rant on our hands (again).

Btw. I am slightly at a loss understanding this demand:

you can be "handed over" either to your home country or -in special cases- to the country you committed a crime in. what country is "the muslims"? weird logic.

Looking for logic? Not the right place.

Regardless of the ________, not that I'm overly impressed with the Monarch and it's anachronistic existence but it's nice to see an author get Knighted considering pop stars and musicians have been. Forgive me if an author has already been Knighted, I don't care.

Hasn't Naipaul been knighted? And one of the Amises?

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle

Hasn't Naipaul been knighted? And one of the Amises?

No idea. I was under the impression that Arthur Conan Doyle was the last. But I really don't pay attention to what the British Monarchy does.

V.s. Pritchett

I was watching the BBC News there a minute ago with the Rushdie story. The Pakistan Foreign Ministry spokes woman said it was a disgrace he was being given the knighthood because he had "always insulted islam through his writings."

?????????

I'm respectful of all religious beliefs but even that beggars belief for me.

That isn't to say I haven't seen it before.

John McGahern and Enda O'Brien both had to leave Ireland for a time because Relgious Crackpots disliked their work.

I think tonight I'll take a big shit on the Bible, the Koran and the Torah.

Seems fair.

(BTW: Martin Amis probably wouldn't acept an award from the Queen, he said once that he dislikes awards in general. He might have been talking about the Booker Prize aswell, I can't remember.)