Here is a popular Islamist criticism of the work: http://www.islamicentre.org/articles/rush.htm
It is rife with sloppy thinking, like “how can the book not be intended as an insult if the author knew people would be upset,” which is of course an insane argument. Hell, the both the Bible and the Qu'ran contain verses which upset me, but I don’t go around saying Mohommed or ancient Rabbis intended to insult me…
(By the way, I’m reading it now — 10% in and no depiction of the Prophet yet [edit: apparently there never will quite be, except in the way Brian in The Life of Brian is kind-of-but-not-really Jesus] — just Rushdie’s trademark highly enjoyable and witty writing)
Here is a popular Islamist criticism of the work: http://www.islamicentre.org/articles/rush.htm It is rife with sloppy thinking, like “how can the book not be intended as an insult if the author knew people would be upset,” which is of course an insane argument. Hell, the both the Bible and the Qu'ran contain verses which upset me, but I don’t go around saying Mohommed or ancient Rabbis intended to insult me…
Lastly, the January 1989 NYT review of The Satanic Verses contains many great insights, accessible to Westerners, into double meanings in the book. Also, spoilers. https://www.nytimes.com/books/99/04/18/specials/rushdie-vers...
(By the way, I’m reading it now — 10% in and no depiction of the Prophet yet [edit: apparently there never will quite be, except in the way Brian in The Life of Brian is kind-of-but-not-really Jesus] — just Rushdie’s trademark highly enjoyable and witty writing)