|
I like Salman's response: "Well, I don’t like the work of Kingsley Amis, there it is. I don’t have to explain or justify. It’s allowed."
That, to me, is exactly the point.
I must admit that I find it interesting when my favourite authors reveal what they like to read, and sometimes I'll try a few out (if I haven't already). Sometimes I agree with them, and sometimes I don't. It doesn't matter, it doesn't change what I think of their work.
It's worth remembering, too, that many of us read famous books because they're famous, not because they are what we might normally pick up. If it turns out to be a disappointment, it may simply be because it doesn't match our tastes - quite likely we guessed that at the start, but we read it anyway to see what all the fuss was about.
The article claims "But the ratings, if Rushdie really did think they were private, might be some of his most honest expressions of opinion about literature." That's a bit of a leap. Other possible interpretations include: he thought it was private he could just muck around with the ratings to see what happened; he thought it was private so filled in a lot very quickly without much consideration. My guess, from what Salman is quoted as saying, is that it was probably a mixture of all that.
|