I was intrigued in the first couple of chapters and there were sections throughout the book that I liked, but it never came together for me. It was a jumble and in the places where Rushdie did try to tie it together, it was a bit confusing or contrived. The story lines for Saladin and Gibreel, the two main characters, bogged down and were uninteresting by the middle of the book, and the ending was a mess.

There was a lot of fuss about this book which I suspect is the main reason it became so successful, and I confess the chapters I liked the most were 2 and 6, which focused on Mohammed and the "early days" of Islam. I liken those parts to other books which tell of religious figures in an alternate way, e.g. "The Last Temptation of Christ", which make one think about it in a different way, and point out hypocrisy. I do think it's unfortunate that Rushdie used the name "Mahound" and was incendiary, but maybe that comes along with the package. The book would have been far better had it been more cohesive and focused. ( )

Having loved Haroun and the Sea of Stories, I was eager to pick up another book by Rushdie; I bought this ages ago and only now just got around to reading it. But this book is nothing like that one. I read it in tiny snatches, over meals, in the midst of all my school reading. This is how I do most of pleasure reading these days, but I usually manage to pull down large chunks at some point. I wasn't able to manage that with this; too busy even on weekends. So, my three-week-plus reading experience was disjointed and jumpy.

But the book is disjointed and jumpy. Rushdie moves from idea to idea; Gibreel and Saladin keep on changing location, situation, and circumstance. I feel like keeping track of who was where when would have been hard under normal circumstances. I kept on not being sure when Saladin looked like a devil. I wasn't always sure how the dreams of Gibreel fit into what was going on. So it's hard for me to judge the cumulative effect of the book, because for me there was no cumulative effect of the book. I have snatches I liked (Ayesha the butterfly woman, Alleluia Cone, Saladin's childhood) and snatches I didn't like (some of the stuff (though not all) with Gibreel in the present). And the one part I did read as a big section-- the last 150 pages-- I was reading so hurriedly I suspect the effect was diminished. It never quite came together, though, and so I'm not really sure what to think of it. I want to like it, and I suspect I would if I gave it another read... but at 800 disjointed pages, that's a heckuva commitment. We're doing Midnight's Children in a class I'm taking next semester; I'll render a further (and hopefully better) verdict on Rushdie then.

Salman Rushdie was a relatively unknown writer when The Satanic Verses was published. Though his second novel Midnight’s Children won him an award, most American’s were unaware of Rushdie’s talent. What put Rushdie on the literary map was the death sentence the Ayatollah Khomeini handed down because of The Satanic Verses.
I was not sure what I was getting into when I picked up the book. I know the story behind the title. It is written that Mohammad recited some controversal law given to him by the Archangel Gabriel. When it became apparent these new laws angered both his followers and retractors Mohammad questioned Gabriel about them. Gabriel told Mohamed the devil had desquised himself as Gabriel and lied to bring confusion to Mohammad’s people. These verses were struck from the “books” and are known as The Satanic Verses. So from the title I knew I was reading lies.
The story centers around two Indian men both whom live “lies”. One is a big Indian movie star named Gibreel (though as a child his mother called him Shaten) who always plays Indian deities. The other named Saladin (whose name resembles the author’s enough to not go unnoticed) who left India for England to get away from the Indian way of life. Saladin considers himself British and not at all Indian.
The two meet on a plane heading to London from Bombay. Gibreel is running away from his life because of a woman, while Saladin is returning to London after visiting his dying father in Bombay. Terrorist take over the plane, and after letting all of the women and children go, they demand to be flown to England. During the flight the plane is blown up. Gibreel and Salidin find themselves falling through a cloud like tunnel, and miraculously fall onto an English beach. The fall has mutated the two; Gibreel develops a halo while Salidin turns into a goat like creature, not unlike the classic pictures of Satan.
What follows are stories within the story, which is way the book is so long. Gibreel finds he is drawn into other people’s dreams that in turn affect the person’s life. One story within this book is the story of Mohammad and Gabriel which must be why The Ayatollah went off. Mohammed is not to be portrayed in any medium. Changing Mohammad’s name did not change his story though, so again this is why Rushdie was in so much trouble.
The bigger story is of self realization and acceptance of one’s own life. Saladin must come to grips with his Indian background and accept “his people” . He also had to learn to express his feelings. Once he did all of this he was able to become human again. It really was his story, Gibreel was really just a catalyst for his adventure, as Gibreel was for everyone else in the book.
What I really liked about the novel was Rushdie’s use of Irony and Satire. The archangel Gabriel is an avenging angel but Gibreel is a revenging angel. Everywhere Gibreel goes revenge and death follow (except for the story of Mohammad). Salidin becomes human when he allows his feelings to show. In the end it is up to Salidin to avenge those who have been hurt by Gibreel. Though it is a long book it is well worth the time as Rushdie is a master at story telling. If you like deeper/hidden meanings in books and love characters that stay with you for a long time this is a book not to be missed. ( )

Words are meant to be played with. They have a sound and a meaning. Here's one way to do it: http://www.purao.net/wiki/Argumentati... ( )

Ugyebár ez az a regény, ami miatt az ajatollah fatvát adott ki Rushdie ellen, vagyis minden hithűnek kötelessége lenne meggyilkolnia. Ez a bulváros elem már ok lehet az olvasásra. Én nem ezért vettem elő, és nem is igazán találtam olyan mértékű vallásgyalázást, ami ekkora válaszreakciót kellett, hogy kiváltson. (De persze Galilei is csupán csillagász volt, nem eretnek.)

Rendkívül összetett, elképesztő információmennyiséget és meseszerű elemeket tartalmazó regény, mintha az Ezeregyéjszaka meséit vagy az összes Buddháról szóló történetet egyben olvasnánk el. Éppen ezért csak a kihívásokat kedvelőknek ajánlom olvasásra, mivel az idősíkok állandó változása, a szereplők nagy száma, a 3-4 fő(!) szál folyamatos váltogatása, az allegorikus elemek kifejezetten nehézzé teszi az olvasást. Ugyanakkor lépten nyomon csillogó információmorzsákra lel az ember( például Mohamed történetének bemutatása), melyek az író lenyűgöző tájékozottságát mutatják. A fatva miatt névtelen fordító is mintegy hatvan (!) oldalon jegyzeteli Rushdie lépten-nyomon felbukkanó vallási, történelmi, aktuálpolitikai, irodalmi utalásait. Ebben a kakofóniában a történet másodlagossá válik, a szerző más regényei ezért nekem olvasmányosabbak voltak. ( )