‘The damage was much worse than I had imagined’: the shocking inside story of Salman Rushdie’s survival — SkimNews
Get the Culture newsletter
Daily culture — film, music, books, the trends and ideas worth your attention. Free.
- Salman Rushdie was stabbed multiple times in August 2022 at a Chautauqua, New York speaking engagement, suffering injuries severe enough that his right eye now requires a black lens, and he recalls the damage was 'much worse than I had imagined.'
- Rachel Eliza Griffiths, Rushdie's wife, began filming his recovery with a proper camera rather than the iPhone Rushdie initially suggested, producing a video diary that became the backbone of the documentary; she has two production credits while Rushdie has none beyond 'based on the book by.'
- Oscar-winning director Alex Gibney was invited by the couple to 'curate' the film, combining Griffiths' footage with archive material showing the global fallout of Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini's 1989 fatwa: the firebombing of the Riverdale Press office, riots in Pakistan that killed six, the stabbing death of a translator in Japan, and the stabbing of another translator in Italy.
- Palestinian-American historian Edward Said predicted before the 2022 attack that Rushdie's main threat would come not from a religious fanatic but from a 'random individual' at some future time — a forecast the film positions as its central thematic bridge between 1989 and 2022.
- The Chautauqua venue had no security at all when Rushdie was attacked, a fact Rushdie now sharply questions, despite having bristed at plainclothes police at a 2019 Guardian event at Oxford's Sheldonian — believing after 'hundreds of public events all over the world with no trouble' that armed protection was unnecessary.
- The film uses large portions of Rushdie's 2024 memoir 'Knife' as narration and concludes with the couple revisiting the attack site to correct misrememberings of the day.
Why it matters: The documentary argues a direct causal chain: that the 1989 fatwa's global climate of violence — which killed translators and burned offices — culminated 33 years later in a single attacker nearly killing Rushdie at a venue with zero security. By juxtaposing archive of those earlier killings with Griffiths' footage of his destroyed eye, the film makes a concrete case that free-speech opposition carries lethal, decades-spanning consequences for the writer, his translators, and his publishers.
Ask SkimNews
