Skip to main content

A 1996 Commencement Speech

SALMAN RUSHDIE, INDIA (1947- )

1) Who is Salman Rushdie?

  • He is a British-Indian novelist and essayist.
  • The publication of the Satanic Verses in September 1988 caused immediate controversy in the Islamic World because of what was perceived as an irreverent depiction of the Prophet Muhammad. On 14 February 1989, a FATWA requiring Rushdie's execution was proclaimed on Radio Tehran by Ayatollah Khomeini, the spiritual leader of Iran at the time calling the book "blasphemous against Islam".
  • He graduated from Cambridge University in 1968.

2) What is this speech all about?

Commencement Address at Bard College, May 25th, 1996 by Salman Rushdie:

  • This speech is Rushdie's research into commencement (the beginning of something) and its tradition.
  • Rushdie was charged for this (a few nights before the graduation ceremony- an unnamed person redecorated his room and made it dirty with thick gravy and onion sauce) and announced his deprivation from joining the graduation ceremony.
  • Paid for the damage and got eligible to receive the degree but was plucked out again from the graduation ceremony for wearing brown shoes in place of black ones.
  • He had to stay in the parade, hold the university officer by his hand, kneel at Vice-Chancellor’s feet, hold up his hands and beg for a degree in Latin (a dead language according To him) /got the degree.
  • He was not satisfied with his act: since he surrendered to get the degree/Ultimately he admits that he was wrong to compromise.
  • So he inspires the students of Bard College not to make an accommodation with injustice as he did.
  • He encouraged the students to stand up for their rights/kneel before no man.
  • He was offered an honorary degree from Bard College giving place to intellectual solidarity and human concern/so got the exceptional privilege of addressing the students of Bard College.
  • He believes defiance is an inevitable and essential aspect of freedom. /Advises defying any kind of gods.
  • Focus on self-rule: the rule of men and women by men and women.
  • His advice: we must be guided by our natures; we shouldn't bow our heads.

3) The writer has stated the conflict between Young Rushdie and Old Rushdie:

Young Rushdie:

  1. Submissive (almost sheep-like people, ready to conform to the authority or will of others)
  2. Surrendering
  3. Compromising to receive the degree

Old Rushdie:

1.      Aggressive

2.      Attacking

3.      Admitting that he did a mistake by receiving a degree by bowing his head.

  • The writer has stated the conflict between young Rushdie and old Rushdie.
    • Young Rushdie: submissive, surrendering, compromising to receive the degree
    • Old Rushdie: aggressive, attacking, admitting that he did a mistake by receiving the degree by bowing his head.

• Focus on defying/Defiance is an inevitable and essential aspect of freedom.

• Has severely criticised the system of organising traditional graduation ceremonies where recipients have to bow their heads/feel humiliated to receive the degree.

• The writer has come heavily upon the common truth that Cambridge University had the tradition of fairness and justice which was proved wrong from his own experience.

In ‘A – 1996 Commencement Speech’ Salman Rushdie talks about human rights. He also suggests not to bow against falsehood and conspiracy. It is a speech given by Rushdie to graduate students at Bard College. Rushdie feels happy because all of the graduate students of Bard College are present and listing his speech instead of boycotting. Rushdie shares his own graduation day at Cambridge University. A few nights before his graduation day, someone chucked bucketful gravy of onions all over the walls and furniture in his room. Although he had not done that, he had to pay for the damage before the ceremony if not he would not be permitted to graduate. It was his mistake to be responsible for the mess which he had not done. Next, he went to the ceremony wearing brown shoes. But he was instantly plucked out of the parade and made to wear black shoes. He did what he was ordered to get graduation. And, at last, he had to kneel at the vice chancellor's feet, hold up his hands, palms together and begin Latin for the degree. He had worked hard for three years. So, it was his right to get a degree. But he did all those all things which were ordered to him by the college. Now he realises his mistake and that he was wrong to compromise with injustice. The injustice that he accepted in his college life to get graduation tortures him when he remembers those days.

Rushdie tells that he was very happy for three years when he was at Cambridge and he guesses that the students at Bard Collage might feel the same. In his speech, Rushdie advises the graduate students not to be like him and to accept the injustice. He encourages them to defy even the gods if they try to limit and control their thought and life. He gives many examples from the myths that how people objected to the power of gods. Queen Niobe of Thebes told people not to worship Latona whom they had not seen but to worship who stood before their eyes. The gods murdered her children and husband. Prometheus stole fire from the gods and gave it to mankind. He was bound to a rock where the birds bit his liver. The myths proved that great human beings challenged the gods and were ready to get punishment. They were guided by their own thought. He suggests that graduate student not bow their head in front of the power. They must defy even the god if he is not good. They must enjoy their freedom and rights. If anyone tries to capture their rights, they must revolt against it. They should be ready for suffering because of their objection. Education is a symbol of freedom and right. So, educated people must challenge the wrong ideas. Rushdie also suggests his students not accept injustice and not surrender in front of inhumanity and falsehood for their rights. He also admires Bard College for offering him refugee on the basis of intellectual solidarity and human injustice. He suggests defying even gods if they limit our thoughts, rights, freedom and lives. According to him, a person should be guided by his/her best nature.

Critical Thinking:

The writer’s argument seems to be convincing but at times some questions come into our mind:

• Simply for the reason of the ‘gravy and onion’ issue, how can one university deprive a student of getting a degree?

•Bowing to receive a degree has become old-fashioned now.

• If the writer was so much conscious about his freedom, why did he tolerate the injustice done to him?

• He instigates us to defy the gods which are almost against our right/freedom.

• How can defiance (a hostile challenge/ rebelliousness) be an essential aspect of freedom? Doesn't it give rise to violence?

• The writer on his part surrenders/then why does he give lessons to others?

Critical Thinking on "A 1996 Commencement Speech"

There are few contradictions in between what young Salmon thought about the preservation of his liberty and the manner he compromised with the disgusting Cambridge principles while obtaining the degree with his body down at the knees below the Vice-Chancellor who seemed very likely to drop direct over him from the high placed chair. In a sense, he did right by following all of the University principles as the price for making himself eligible to be conferred with a degree. Otherwise, no value system of higher education could be substantiated unless the individual resigns himself to the established principles handed down as the legacy from the long past in a way of giving credit to those who paved the course for the development of educated culture.

Though Salman surrendered his individual liberty in receiving the degree, he regrets it later and feels very sorrowful for being forced to do so and compromise with repulsive Cambridge traditions and show passivity before gods and the university authorities. In this light, any type of defiance is a counter to the established value system followed as a legacy for ages to achieve the educational goal. So, if no respect is shown for academic formalities established in the past, that would prove to be a great weakness and result merely in causing social chaos and endangering the base of human culture honouring the seniors and being safeguarded by seniors and authorities.


Salman reacts negatively even about the things he did to serve his purpose but addresses the audience not to and says nothing about the duties to be fulfilled by the degree earners. He should fully know that no human right can be ensured or practised without fulfilling the corresponding duties in a way as expressing "thanks" to those who show favour to the other. Of course, this practice doesn't prevail among the beasts always centred for the fulfilment of personal needs. And we know education flourishes only through the practice of mutual care and respect. Keeping the same in mind, the teachers teach and the scholars guide those who come to be guided or instructed.

Salman details largely the pros and cons of Cambridge University from where he graduated but ignores almost to highlight the academic greatness of Southampton University. He simply shows his indebtedness to the University for honouring him with an opportunity to give the 96th Commencement Speech and extends gratitude to the President of the Bard, who offered him a position of teaching in the Department of English even during the crucial moments of his life.

To rationalists and scientific men, religion is a moral code of conduct. They want it to be applied by all men and women for mutual welfare, trust, and happiness. So, they are against the purpose of 'organised religion' characterised these days by blind faith and as means for the power mongers to exploit the ignorant and exert the power over those who are powerless for the fulfilment of their false ego. Maybe holding for similar ideas, Salman was declared an atheist and condemned to death by Mullahs as Thomas Becket and Martin Luther King for their fair attempt to stand up against religious repression. So, as the educationists with a free mind, Mr Feynman, Riva Palacio or Rushdie would not show regard for distorted conventional wisdom and for 'organised religion' characterised now by blind faith, irrational beliefs, power grabs, ulterior motives of greedy ministers, a lack of love and no personal respect.

Summary of the Speech:

Salman Rushdie in his commencement speech at Brad College took his audience back to Cambridge University where he had completed his graduation in 1968. It was just a few nights before his graduation day when someone redecorated his room with a bucket of sauce all over the walls and furniture. Though Cambridge University was reputed for the ancient tradition of fairness and justiceRushdie was found guilty of the mess. It was the first time Rushdie was accused of muck-spreading. He was declared eligible to receive a degree after he had paid for the damage. In a defiant (Boldly resisting authority or an opposing force) spirit, he went to the ceremony wearing brown shoes. But he was plucked out of the parade and ordered to change his shoes because brown shoes were not allowed to wear on such occasions. Changing his shoes, he joined the parade. When his turn came, he was instructed to kneel at the feet of the Vice Chancellor and beg in Latin for the degree. He found it very unusual because he had worked hard for 3 years supported by his family. After all these formalities, he was finally admitted to the degree of arts.

Looking back at the day he regrets his passivity. He should not have paid. Neither should he have changed his shoes, and nor he should have knelt to beg for his BA. He, at that time, preferred to surrender and get the degree. He was wrong to compromise. He was even wrong to make an accommodation with injustice.

This was the message he delivered from the parables {A short moral story (often with animal characters)} of unknown Gravy bomber, the vetoed (Vote against; refuse to endorse; refuse to assent) footwear and the unsteady Vice-Chancellor upon his throne which he wanted to pass on to them that day.

Rushdie suggested the members of the class of 1996 defying such a penalty as gravy abuse the vetoed footwear and going down on their knees before a man. He advised the graduates to develop themselves as avenging (Taking revenge for a perceived wrong) figures like the goddess Nemesis. To him, defiance was an essential aspect of freedom. He noted the graduates that their future days should be determined to fight against all sorts of gods because all of them demanded to be worshipped and obeyed. Rushdie advised to defy them because; myths say by defying gods human beings have best expressed their humanity. According to the Greek stories Prometheus had combative sentiment which gave rise to humanism.

Prometheus stole the fire from god and gave it to humankind; which could be characterized as the desire for progress, for improved scientific and technical capabilities. Certainly defying gods involves personal interests. For example, Arachne competed with goddesses out of pride. Minerva was vindictive, and Niobe fought against Latona for the cruel rule of gods. They all challenged the role of gods to promote the rule of humans. The gods are weakened by their show of strength and power. The message of myths was that we should behave ourselves and know ourselves and that we must be guided by our nature. Finally, Rushdie advised the graduates not to bow their heads, not to know their place, and defy the gods and be guided by better nature.

Assimilation:

From this text, I have come to understand that we should not surrender ourselves to injustice. We should fight for freedom where our progress is. All the old traditions and trends should be replaced by new and progressive ones.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

BBS First Year English Question Paper with Possible Answers (TU 2021)

PROFESSIONS FOR WOMEN - Virginia Woolf (1882-1941)

Summary : Virginia Adeline Woolf (1882-1941) was an English novelist and essayist, regarded as one of the foremost modernist literary figures of the twentieth century. She was one of the leaders in the literary movement of modernism.  The speech of  Professions for Women  was given in 1931 to the Women’s Service League by Virginia Woolf. It was also included in  Death of a Moth  and  Other Essays  in 1942. Throughout the speech, Virginia Woolf brings forward a problem that is still relevant today:  gender inequality .   Woolf’s main point in this essay was to bring awareness to the phantoms (illusions) and obstacles women face in their jobs. Woolf argues that women must overcome special obstacles to become successful in their careers. She describes two hazards she thinks all women who aspire to professional life must overcome: their tendency to sacrifice their own interests to those of others and their reluctance (hesitancy) to challenge conservative male attitudes .  She starts her

Summary and Analysis of My Mother Never Worked

MY MOTHER NEVER WORKED Bonnie Smith - Yackel SYNOPSIS   In the essay “ My Mother Never Worked ,” Bonnie Smith-Yackel recollects the time when she called Social Security to claim her mother’s death benefits. Social Security places Smith-Yackel on hold so they can check their records on her mother, Martha Jerabek Smith . While waiting, she remembers the many things her mother did, and the compassion her mother felt towards her husband and children. When Social Security returns to the phone, they tell Smith-Yackel that she could not receive her mother’s death benefits because her mother never had a wage-earning job. A tremendous amount of irony is used in this essay. The title, in itself, is full of irony; it makes readers curious about the essay’s point and how the author feels about the situation. Smith-Yackel uses the essay to convey her opinion of work. Her thesis is not directly stated; however, she uses detail upon detail to prove her mother did work, just not in the eyes of the