When Islam meets Bridget Jones

The supposed “Freedom of speech” continues.Yet another author has written a book about Aishah the wife of the prophet, I am yet to read the book but from what i gather from the many reviews that have come out it is a pure attempt by the author to depict Aishah as a character similar to the women portrayed in Aladdin,Sinbad or the thousand and one nights.

Many examples cited in the book reflects the naked ignorance of the writer, one of the most prominent being that at some point in the book she refers to Aishah as the favourite of the Prophet amongst all his wives, and it is basic knowledge that Khadijah was the favourite amongst the prophets wives.



What surprises me is how modern authors distort history and mix fiction with it so as to contemporarise it to make readers today understand it better, in other words it is an assumption by these authors that modern readers cant think beyond tommorrow and they have to have history served to them in todays plate.

I found a review of this book on the bbc website and an even better review here.


Filed under Uncategorized

3 responses to “When Islam meets Bridget Jones

  1. What exactly does “supposed freedom of speech” mean?I would think writing a fictional novel involving historical characters would fall under the definition of ‘freedom’; rather than ‘supposed freedom’.Novelists/scriptwriters twist history for the purposes of entertainment. Movies such as ‘Troy’, ‘Alexander’, ‘Braveheart’ and ‘Saving Private Ryan’ (amongst many others) took liberties with the characters and incidents that they portrayed. The same can be said for books like ‘Making History’ and ‘Ruled Britannia’. None of these works of fiction led to calls for beheadings, fire bombings or any other criminal act because Hitler’s relationship with Eva was wrongly portrayed or William Wallace’s tartan was the wrong colour. So why should a novel about Aisha (a historical figure) be any different?

  2. One man enjoying his ‘Rights’ to assess another’s’ ‘Freedom of Expression’.Thought all religions meant to promote a kind of ‘spiritual enlightenment’ and make us understand the ‘nature of everything’ for individual and common good? Instead, are we going in the opposite direction failing to comprehend the difference between ‘Fact and Fiction’ without getting emotionally victimised?Should we believe in the premise that ‘all that we don’t understand is EVIL’?

  3. thanks for your comments and valid questions, i have responded by post. Please see my post titled “supposed”freedom of speech.

Leave a Reply


WordPress.com Logo


Google photo


Twitter picture


Facebook photo


Connecting to %s