Sir Salman Rushdie

Non-Phish General
#1

I’m sorry if this appears insulting to any of Her Majesty’s subjects here on the OKP, but couldn’t they have found someone else to knight? Didn’t anyone consider that knighting Rushdie might be considered insulting to a great many of the world’s Islamic population?

On one hand, artistic integrity should be maintained over religious oppression, and in this case, I believe it has been by the mere fact that Rushdie was given sanctuary in England, and opportunities to write his novels in relatively safe notoriety.

But bestowing knighthood on him, deserved or not, shoves it in the face of the Islamic community in their own country and around the world. Threats of repercussion be damned, there just didn’t seem to be any real need to do this, in quite this way.

#2

I think the fact the Britain is still “Knighting” people in general is the problem.

I mean seriously, Knighthood? WTF?

What year is it?

Crazy Brits.

#3

really i think that the muslims who feel the need to kill anyone who says anything against the koran need to re-evaluate themselves, not england or rushdie. so he said mohammed was a hash smoking hippie who made up the koran while high as a kite… who cares?

i think jesus was a madman who wandered around the desert talking to imaginary devils. would that prevent me from being knighted? ok that probably would. never mind.

#4

This is the first time I think I have totally agreed with what h.selassie wrote.

#5

Religion shouldn’t be afforded extra “respect” that regular society doesn’t get - ie Muslims shouldn’t be allowed to claim offence at things like this. Let the man write a book. Politicians, lawyers, almost every segment of the population/group of people gets insults hurled at them every day, why should religion be given an extra “safety buffer”.

For some reason peope seem to think that religious ideas should be safe from scrutiny and some things simply cannot be argued about/cannot be made fun of. I’m with h.slessie, Islam should re-evaluate itself.

#6

I’m surprised that anyone on this board would condemn the UK or Sir Salman for this.

Free Speech. Freedom of Expression. Pluralism.

Aren’t these ideals that we stand for? Not religious fascism.

#7

… and to say Rushdie was given sanctuary here is somewhat distorting the point. Rushdie was a British citizen long before he ever published any books - he was largely educated here. This whole controversy would have neevr started if it hadn’t been for a bloodthirsty Iranian calling for a Fatwah - Why should any of us even acknowledge let alone bow down to such a ruling.

As for upsetting the Muslims in this country - a few may be upset but I expect the majority will see it for what it is - one man’s opinion that they disagree with - This is a pluralist society and that means having to live with people who you disagree with (rather than having them killed).

#8

I do to a point agree with gamecat’s comment about Knighthoods in general though. In many ways, the whole honours system is another form of elitism. On the other hand - many of these titles are given by communities to individuals (good teachers, carers, community leaders) and that I applaud.

Sir Mick Jagger is the one that makes me laugh though - He may be in the Stones (and none of the others got knighted) but he is hardly a good example of a human being - unless taking drugs and knocking up Brazillian supermodels behind your wife’s back is to be applauded.

Hey! triple post.

#9

you know who i saw at the health club today?..salaman rushdie

his name is sal bass jerry…BASS!..he just substituted one fish for another.

its like a sauna in here.

#10

Wait, wait, wait.

I understand the philosophical justification for conferring knighthood on Rushdie, but who’s going to explain to John Q. average British citizen that his wife and daughter were blown to bits on a London bus by a misguided Islamic terrorist who was motivated to blow people up by the decision?

It’s really easy for people in committees to defend the sense of national honor and autonomy to knight whoever they please, but it’s the average citizen who will pay the price for that “noble decision” as it always is. The point is, as it is with every life lost in Iraq and Afghanistan, who gets to say that the sacrifice is worth it, especially as long as it’s not me who’s actually losing something dear to me?

I certainly hope that the radicals from the Islamic community will not be prompted to retaliate for this decision, but who will really be able to console Mr. John Q British citizen for his loss just so everyone can call Salman Rushdie Sir?

I’m not arguing against the right of the crown to knight whoever is deserving, but when you’ve got a world situation as it is today, why is it so important to throw this in the face of so many people? Except for Rushdie himself, and a few hardcore fans, the award is truly trivial in the light of what it could mean to the lives of so many average people. It’s a tradeoff that I don’t see as worth it. Then again, maybe this point of contention between the secular and ultra conservative religious worlds has to explode sometime, so why not now?

Who knows, maybe the TVLand network will use this as a precedent to start showing Amos and Andy reruns.

#11

Do you really think that these were the Queen’s intentions? To rub one man’s beliefs in the face of an entire religious nation? No, she was honoring a man that has done a lifetime of work. It is totally unrelated to his comments on Islamic fundamentalism. Furthermore, to give in to protests like the one you’re making would be giving into the type of intolerance of free speech that these radicals are calling for.

#12

And the weird thing is Saul Bass designed the posters and credits for many hitchcock films and directed ant-attack classic ‘Phase 4’

#13

It’s not a matter of giving in to protests, it’s a matter of insult to a very large number of people, including many British citizens. I’m sorry if I’m not buying into the whole importance that Rushdie gets a knighthood thing, but whatever group decided to nominate him had to understand the possible repercussions from the Islamic community since Rushdie has been no favorite for a long time. But they obviously decided to dismiss those concerns for probably the same noble arguments that most of you are making here.

I’m just saying, that even though these arguments are correct, is the possible loss of life in this fight worth it just to honor an artist, just to maintain a custom?

Excuse me while I crack this egg on the small end.

#14

Infidels! Death to the…

Oh, this isn’t the Jihad Summit? Sorry, wrong room.

#15

This is a country that made Elizabeth Taylor a Dame which is basically the female equivalent. Compared to that, anyone looks worthy.

#16

Now blow out the candles!

#17

damn it, i thought we agreed to disagree! son of a bitch!

#18

I hear where you are coming from Fone but I can’t see making these kind of alterations out of fear. Fearing retaliation. If we start to live like that we might as well give it up and become Muslim already…

If the British Muslim population doesn’t like it they have two choices: 1) assimilate 2) assimilate. We can’t start cowering in our own countries.

#19

i agree with the sentiment but remember goldy its their country too.

the row continues…

“Iran has stepped up its protest over the knighthood awarded by Britain to Salman Rushdie, whose 1988 novel The Satanic Verses outraged many Muslims.”

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6769671.stm

#20

And now Icc will have to become a Frenchman. Ooh la la.

This is what I’m getting at. All of these possible repurcussions could have easily been avoided by just picking someone else to knight. I mean did it have to be Rushdie of all people? To me the choice is a triviality compared to the potentiality, making it totally not worth the trouble for anyone.