nothing’s sacred [Charlie Hebdo repost]

[Reposted a tribune by the Charlie Hebdo writers in Le Monde, 15 August]

The assassination attempt on Salman Rushdie is a reminder to those who seem to have forgotten that the basic freedoms of modern society, such as the freedom to create and express oneself, are constantly threatened by totalitarian ideologies around the world.

These hateful and contemptuous ideologies are based on political or religious theories whose self-proclaimed legitimacy raises questions. Salman Rushdie’s case forces us to question the place of religion and sacredness in our modern world.

If freedom of conscience gives each person the right to think what he or she wants about the origin of the world and its creation, the truths of religious revelation cannot impose their precepts on the whole of society. But for several years, we have noticed that religious practices are becoming more and more intrusive and authoritarian – when they are not outright threatening. This slippery slope seriously affects the subtle balance of democratic societies and creates a climate of insecurity, intimidation and violence that is no longer acceptable.

This is the goal of religious fanatics: to dissuade, through terror, the creation of works that challenge their dogmas, which are based on little more than a few visions from great mystics.

Can our modern societies be built around texts written by exalted minds? Nothing is sacred. The paradox is that today the mobilization to condemn the attack on Salman Rushdie seems stronger than the mobilization of artists to continue producing works that will perpetuate his vision. After those who have already been murdered, like Theo Van Gogh, and those who get stabbed during lectures, like Salman Rushdie, who will be left to continue their thinking and their struggle?

While global warming endangers living organisms on Earth, religious intolerance and unbridled mysticism threaten minds by suffocating them with prohibitions and irrevocable sentences.

To those who repeat: “We love death as much as you love life”, we must oppose limitless creativity and incessant insolence. No amount of moderation will allow us to enjoy the slightest indulgence from fanatics. The response must not only be political, through laws that protect freedoms and repress those who attack them. It must also be cultural and intellectual. We must never cease to challenge, using arguments and ideas, the dogmas and narratives of these so-called “sacred” books, which seek only to burn all others and to put to death those who wrote them.

remembering Rushdie in Banff

The awful attack on Salman Rushdie this morning brought back to mind the conversation he hold at the Banff Centre in 2015, when I was taking part in a Banff workshop. The amphitheatre was jammed, with hardly any distance from the speakers and I remember wondering at the level of security involved for the event, as there was nothing apparent around the small platform. Maybe there was none, then, as now… I dearly hope he does not join the Charlie Hebdo fallen to the stand for freedom of speech, including irreverence about irrational beliefs.

two years eight months and twenty eight days [book review]

I have now read through Salman Rushdie‘s version of the tales of 1001 nights (which amount to two years, eight months, and twenty-eight nights—this would make exactly two years and nine months if the last month was a month of February!, not that it particularly matters). It is a fantastic tale, with supernatural jinns playing an obviously supernatural role, a tale which plot does not matter very much as it is the (Pandora) box for more tales and deeper philosophical reflections about religion and rationality. It is not a novel and even less a science-fiction novel as I read it in some reviews.

“It was the ungodly who had been specified as the targets but (…) this place was not at all ungodly. In point of fact it was excessively godly.”

What I liked very much, besides the literary style and the almost overwhelming culture (or cultures) of the author—of which I certainly missed a large chunk!—, in two years, eight months, and twenty-eight nights is the mille-feuille structure of the story and the associated distanciation imposed upon the reader against a natural reader’s tendency to believe or want to believe despite all inconsistencies. An induced agnosticism of sorts most appropriate to mock the irrationality of religious believers, jinns and humans alike, in a godless universe: while jinn magic abounds in the book, there is no god or at least no acting god that we can detect. But gods and religious beliefs are exploited in the war of the jinns against the hapless humans. There are just as many levels of irony therein, which further contribute to skepticism and disbelief.

“Many, including the present author, trace the beginnings of the so-called “death of the gods”, back to this period.”

The book is also very much embedded in today’s world, for all its connections with medieval philosophy and the historical character Ibn Rushdn (whose name was borrowed by Rushdie’s father to become their family name) or Averroes. The War on Terror, the Afghan and Syrian rise of religious fundamentalists, the Wall Street excesses, even the shooting down of the Malaysian airline MH17 by Ukrainian rebels, all take place in the background of the so-called war of the jinns. Which makes the conclusion of the book highly pessimistic if in tune with the overall philosophical cynicism of the author: if it really takes magical forces and super-heroes to bring rationality to the world, there is little hope for our own world…

“He passed a woman with astonishing face makeup, a zipper running down the middle of her face, `unzipped’ around her mouth to reveal bloody skinless flesh all the way down her chin.”

A last remark is that the above description of an Halloween disguise reminded me of the disguise my friend Julien Cornebise opted for a few years ago! No surprise as this is exactly the same. Which shows that Rushdie and he share some common background in popular culture.

Salman Rushdie at the Banff Centre

By a great coincidence, I happened to be in Banff the same weekend as Salman Rushdie was giving a talk at the Banff Centre on his latest book! And got the news early enough to book a seat. The amphitheatre was unsurprisingly full and Salman Rushdie was interviewed by Eleanor Wachtel, first about the book and what led to its creation, especially the influence of his parents, and then second about his life and career, with an obvious focus on Khomeini’s fatwa. (The whole interview is podcasted on CBC.) Rushdie was witty and funny, even about the darkest moments, and discussed how in his youth no one would have imagined that religion would become such a central issue, defining and reducing people rather than being a part of them that would need no discussion. And how his family was de facto atheist, if not in words. The interview spent too little time on Rusdhie’s stand on freedom of expression, although he briefly spoke about the growing threats to this freedom, including those made in the name of religious freedom. (As we were reminded yesterday by the Warwick student union decision to bar Maryam Namazie from speaking on campus.) The experience was quite a treat, adding to the many bonuses of spending this weekend in Banff. Although I must admit I was fighting jetlag that late at night and hence must have dozed at points… (As an aside, I was rather surprised to see no security or police around the Banff Centre theatre, but of course this does not mean there was none. And this is Banff, not New York City or London.)

a day of mourning

“Religion, a mediaeval form of unreason, when combined with modern weaponry becomes a real threat to our freedoms. This religious totalitarianism has caused a deadly mutation in the heart of Islam and we see the tragic consequences in Paris today. I stand with Charlie Hebdo, as we all must, to defend the art of satire, which has always been a force for liberty and against tyranny, dishonesty and stupidity. ‘Respect for religion’ has become a code phrase meaning ‘fear of religion.’ Religions, like all other ideas, deserve criticism, satire, and, yes, our fearless disrespect.” Salman Rushdie