By Maria Bregman
The Royal Society of Literature (RSL) is facing a crisis of identity and credibility, as it is accused of being silent and complicit in the wake of Salman Rushdie’s brutal attack. The RSL is supposed to be a champion of literature and writers, but some of its Fellows and members are questioning its role and relevance in the current cultural climate. Is the RSL pandering to the culture wars, stifling authors and ignoring literary merit? Or is it trying to balance the diverse and conflicting views and interests of its community? And what does it mean to be a great writer in the 21st century?
A Shocking and Horrifying Incident
Salman Rushdie, one of the most celebrated and controversial writers of our time, was stabbed on stage at a literary event in New York in August 2022, by a masked assailant who shouted “Death to the blasphemer!” Rushdie, who is a Fellow of the RSL and a former Booker Prize winner, was rushed to the hospital with serious injuries, but survived the attack. The incident was widely condemned as an act of terrorism and a threat to the freedom of expression, by various organisations and individuals, such as PEN America, the Authors Guild, the Booker Foundation, and many prominent writers and celebrities.
However, the RSL, which is the UK’s oldest and most prestigious literary organisation, did not issue any official statement or comment on the attack, nor did it express any solidarity or support for Rushdie. This silence was noticed and criticised by some of its Fellows and members, who felt that the RSL had failed in its duty and responsibility to defend and celebrate one of its own. They accused the RSL of being cowardly, hypocritical, and irrelevant, and of betraying the values and principles of literature.
A Divided and Discontented Community
The RSL’s silence over Rushdie’s attack was not an isolated incident, but a symptom of a deeper and wider problem within the organisation. The RSL has been undergoing a radical transformation in the past few years, under the leadership of its president, Marina Warner, and its director, Molly Rosenberg. They have been trying to make the RSL more diverse, inclusive, and representative of the contemporary literary scene, by appointing new Fellows and members from different backgrounds, genres, and perspectives, and by organising more events and initiatives that reflect the current issues and debates in the literary world.
However, this transformation has not been welcomed by everyone in the RSL community, especially by some of the older and more established Fellows and members, who feel that the RSL is losing its identity and integrity, and is compromising its standards and criteria of literary excellence. They argue that the RSL is pandering to the culture wars, and is favouring writers who are more concerned with their identity and politics, than with their craft and quality. They also claim that the RSL is stifling the freedom and diversity of writers, by imposing a narrow and rigid agenda of political correctness and social justice, and by censoring and silencing any dissenting or challenging voices.
A Question of Greatness and Relevance
The RSL’s turmoil over Rushdie’s attack and its transformation raises a fundamental and existential question: what does it mean to be a great writer in the 21st century, and what is the role and relevance of the RSL in the literary world? The RSL was founded in 1820, with the aim of “rewarding literary merit and excelling in writing”. It has a distinguished history and tradition, and counts among its Fellows and members some of the most eminent and influential writers of the past and present, such as Jane Austen, Charles Dickens, George Eliot, Virginia Woolf, T.S. Eliot, W.H. Auden, Doris Lessing, Margaret Atwood, and Kazuo Ishiguro.
However, the literary world has changed dramatically since the RSL’s inception, and so have the definitions and expectations of greatness and excellence. The 21st century is a time of unprecedented diversity and complexity, of rapid and radical changes and challenges, of global and local conflicts and crises, of new and emerging forms and platforms of writing and reading. In this context, how can the RSL maintain its reputation and authority, and how can it recognise and reward the writers who are making a difference and leaving a mark? How can the RSL balance the demands and needs of its community, and how can it foster a culture of respect and dialogue among its members and Fellows? And how can the RSL uphold and protect the freedom and diversity of writers, and how can it support and celebrate the writers who are facing threats and dangers for their views and expressions?
These are the questions that the RSL needs to answer, if it wants to survive and thrive in the 21st century, and if it wants to honour and commemorate one of its greatest and bravest writers, Salman Rushdie.