Salman Rushdie tells Matthew d’Ancona that the idea at the heart of his new novel set in 16th-century Florence and India is that universal values exist and require robust champions
The last time I interviewed Salman Rushdie was, as he remarks, a lifetime ago. That was in February 1993, in a safe house in north London guarded by Special Branch officers, only four years after Ayatollah Khomeini sentenced him to death for the alleged blasphemy of The Satanic Verses. On that occasion, quite understandably, the novelist seemed shrunken: not only spiritually subdued, but physically compressed by the ordeal of the fatwa.
Fifteen years on, we meet in very different circumstances to discuss his new novel: The Enchantress of Florence, a lushly magnificent exploration of East and West in the 16th century. No longer creeping in the shadow of theocratic murder, Rushdie — or, more properly these days, Sir Salman — is animated and puckish. In a magic realist touch, it is as though the 60-year-old novelist is actually younger than he was in 1993. At any rate, his countenance and the spark in his eye today prove that you can come back from the dead.
Not that this particular novel, his tenth, was straightforward to accomplish. The idea has been brewing since 1999. And its delicacy of touch and playfulness (how can one not like a book that includes ‘the rarely used Breat Uzbeg Anti-Shiite Potato and Sturgeon Curse’?) conceal the terrible spectre of writer’s block.
‘It was a pretty horrible year for me in many ways, last year, with my marriage [his fourth, to Padma Lakshmi] breaking up,’ he says. ‘There was certainly a moment, early last year, when there was just so much noise in my head that I really feared that I was losing the book and just losing grip of it. I became, for the first time that I can remember, really scared that I would not be able to write it. By some extra gear of concentration and will, I managed to find it. I worked in a more concentrated, more focused way, as a way of shutting out this destructive stuff that was around me.’
Rushdie says he feels as he did after Midnight’s Children, which was published in 1981 and went on to win the Booker of Bookers. ‘I did feel there was an awful lot riding on that book, and fortunately people thought it was OK. I felt the same thing with this. When I finished it I thought: by any standard that I know, this is a good book, and if people don’t agree with me, I will be really devastated. Because it would show that there is either something wrong with the world, or something wrong with me.’
More articles from: Matthew d'Ancona | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
Rod Liddle says that metropolitan liberal ideology is too deeply ingrained in local councils, social services and the judiciary to be overturned by one panic measure driven by Labour’s sudden fear of the BNP
Cass Sunstein — co-author of the hugely influential Nudge and an adviser to President Obama — unveils his new theory of ‘group polarisation’, and explains why, when like-minded people spend time with each other, their views become not only more confident but more extreme
The acclaimed web theorist, Mark Earls, says that the death of Michael Jackson unleashed the extremes of collective action: mass mourning and sick jokes
In the first of an occasional series of interviews over meals, Deborah Ross talks to Dominic West about The Wire and the challenge to an Old Etonian of playing an American cop
My defining memory of Michael Jackson — vulnerable, brilliant, otherworldly — is of watching him dance to the soundtrack of a movie.
The scenes from Tehran have been inspiring and show that democracy is changing the shape of the Middle East, says James Forsyth. But the immediate decision facing President Obama is what to do about Iran’s fast-moving nuclear programme
Boris Johnson talks to Mary Wakefield about being Mayor, playing God and beating David Cameron (at ping-pong)
Liam Fox says that the geopolitical landscape is fraught with danger, not least the risk of an arms race in the Middle East and nuclear terrorism. We shall need much greater resilience
An extended version of Fraser Nelson's interview with Alan Johnson
On the 30th anniversary of the fall of the Shah of Iran, Con Coughlin says that Iran’s rulers today are devoted to the same militant objectives that drove Ayatollah Khomeini
IF YOU ARE PLANNING A CHAMPAGNE RECEPTION and looking for some light entertainment, you can now hire London's busiest steel
BOSC LEBAT, SW France. Only 45 minutes from Toulouse Airport with daily flights from most provincial airports avoiding the horrors
PORTA METRONIA, ROME Standing high on the top of one of the seven hills of Rome- the Coelian- this unique
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2008 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Harry
April 10th, 2008 2:44pmGood interview.
Rushdie is full of common sense.
Roy
April 12th, 2008 9:25amHow true!
Ramesh Raghuvanshi
April 15th, 2008 5:56pmIs Rushdie wish fulfilment come in to reality?I think his reading of history is very weak.First history telling us that war, volience are partand parcel of mankind.Reason is clear, all war fought for selfish reason.Which thing man most afraid? Death. No one can conquire the death.Try to save ourlife every creature struggle,and that is main reason for volience and war.So Mr. Rushdie write as many novels try your best to bring hormany in the world. Be remember= Man think GOD laugh