From: TABRON-AT-BINAH.CC.BRANDEIS.EDU
Date: Tue, 18 Jun 1996 18:04:48 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Salman Rushdie in the Age of Reason


It's considered good etiquette on the net to refrain from reproducing 
completely the text to which you're responding in your message, especially
when it is as long as Samuel's article.

Especially if it's as bad as you say.

Personally, I didn't find it all that bad; it seems to me that all Samuel
was saying was that the book "The Satanic Verses" was not particularly
stylistically innovative nor was it a fresh insight into... well, anything
at all; that it was largely an attempt to annoy fundamentalists by someone
who well knew that to annoy fundamentalists would have repercussions, and
that one of those repercussions would be increased sales of the book in
the West.

I thought Samuel made it quite clear _why_ he thought the book wasn't
particularly innovative. I also think you're confusing some of his statements
about what Rushdie wanted the book to be, and his statements about what the
book actually ended up being.

Surely we can discuss what's innovative or not innovative (and why that
is or isn't an interesting question) and whether or not it's a fair critique
of a book to say that it was designed to sell, without being too rude amongst
ourselves.

Judith Tabron
Dept. of English
Brandeis University
tabron-AT-binah.cc.brandeis.edu


     --- from list postcolonial-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---