The Satanic Verses, Truth And Falsity - 999 Words

Through the violent deaths and hypocrisy, doubt in the sacred is reintroduced. Eileen Barker illustrates brainwashing as the ‘control the religious leaders have exerted over their followers’. This questions whether belief is imposed or cultivated. John Updike writes that ‘Everything seemed still in place, yet something was immensely wrong’. Highlighting the sense of doubt in postmodernist texts, one may find that some things, such as religion, cannot be explained. Faith can waver or hold steadfast, characters revisiting belief in skepticism as ideology falters. In The Satanic Verses, truth and falsity is ultimately ambiguous. Some characters are featured as wrestling with religious doubt, others like Gibreel and Saladin think over their atheism after supernatural events. Definition is resisted, borders blurred, it is questionable whether events are happening or merely figments of imagination. Gibreel asks for ‘some sign’(30) that God is presen t during his illness, but realizes he is talking to air. He ‘lost his faith’(29) and even after metamorphosis, it is revealed that Gibreel is schizophrenic. The metamorphosis may be invented, as Rekha says to Gibreel ‘maybe you are going crazy’(7), but he is seen by several others to levitate. Illustrating the struggle between the real and imaginary, miracles are doubted, neither denied nor confirmed. From ‘Where there is no belief, there is no blasphemy’(380), the sacred is discredited and blasphemy is no more than a simpleShow MoreRelatedMedia Law: Defamation, Copyright, Etc23627 Words   |  95 Pagessubstantially true: section 23 Defamation Act 2005 (SA); section 22 Defamation Act 2006 (NT). The use of the phrase substantially was not a concept previously acknowledged by the common law. Essentially, this is the common law defence of truth. That is, the words or meanings complained of were defamatory of the plaintiff, but true. An example would be Smith is a convicted murderer. That is defamatory, but if true, the plaintiff has not been injured in any reputation to which he is entitledRead MoreMedia Law: Defamation, Copyright, Etc23639 Words   |  95 Pagessubstantially true: section 23 Defamation Act 2005 (SA); section 22 Defamation Act 2006 (NT). The use of the phrase substantially was not a concept previously acknowledged by the common law. Essentially, this is the common law defence of truth. That is, the words or meanings complained of were defamatory of the plaintiff, but true. An example would be Smith is a convicted murderer. That is defamatory, but if true, the plaintiff has not been injured in any reputation to which he is entitled