The Satanic Verses

[Slim]

Anyone read it? Or know why it's considered offensive by some Muslims?

I've just bought Kindle copy with an audiobook addon. It's been on my todo list for many years.

I will say that while I'm appalled by the idea of a 'fatwa' as a response for someone writing a novel, I also disapprove of religious groups being insulted in the name of freedom of expression. I was disgusted by that episode a few years ago of people passing round caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad online, because that offended a lot more people than the Islamist headbangers.

[pdw1]

I have not read it but know people who have tried. Talking to Muslim friends over the years, it is basically a satire of the stories in the Koran. If you to that and name a whore in it after the prophet's wife you are asking for trouble. Not that I condone the violence. Some times religious groups need to be characterised and insulted to break their hold on people and society.

[pdw1]

by the way if you want to read Rushdie at his best try
Midnight's Children
or
Haroun and The Sea Of Stories

[dom]

Always wanted to read Midnight's Children. For A levels we studied Scott's Staying On about an old English couple who remained in India after Independence.

Midnight's Children was a common reference point for that book

[Matt2112]

It's very, very simple why The Satanic Verses is considered by a significant demographic as offensive - it's because Islamists have extremely low offence and anger thresholds, by definition. 

And demonstrably they have many sympathisers and apologists, including - to their shame - a fair amount of Western "liberals".

Even the slightest tinkering of the narrative of Islamic sacred texts is considered a gross and inexcusable blasphemy, the punishment of which is often considered to be death.  This is why we see various sub-sects of Islam direct most of their hate and violence at each other, routinely and on a daily basis.

All religious groups have elements that knee-jerkingly find even the most factually-based, calm, measured, rational, insightful and astute scrutiny and criticism of their supernatural beliefs and ritualistic practises insulting in some way because, overall, as part of their devotion they also believe they are due automatic deference from everyone else, including the State, and believe any kind of vengeance is justified if they don't get it; this can take the form of demanding religious exemptions and privileges in laws, right through to slaughtering people in cold blood.

Why should non-adherents cede any ground whatsoever to this sort of bullying primitivism?  To do so is an act of self-harm, a surrender to de facto blasphemy laws in places that have long-since officially ditched them.