To begin with, I have always had great respect and affection for Rumi and Shams, and I am quite familiar with Rumi’s works, not only his poetry but his correspondence together with the history and stories of his life. That is probably why I have conflicting feelings about this novel.

On the one hand, the author has done great service to make Rumi, Shams, and their specific mysticism more familiar to the Western World, while offering a version of Islam that is exalted and very different from today’s Islamists.

On the other hand, the author’s attempt at inserting a contemporary love story and making it mirror Rumi’s story, however with good intentions, took away from my enjoyment of the book. Especially likening Aziz to Shams in a few places, even though Aziz himself denied it to Ella at the end, felt like disrespect to Shams and Rumi’s lofty spiritual idealism to me.

The thirteenth-century story--that is Rumi’s and Shams’-- is quite correct, and thankfully, very little fictionalizing has been done to it. Most of the fictionalizing show itself in secondary and supporting characters.

The interweaving of Ella’s story into Rumi’s story gave me something like small electrical jolts together with disbelief because from my point of view, the contemporary story either needed to be left out or developed much better. On top of that, Aziz is not a Shams and Ella is not a Rumi, not by a long shot. For me, these two stories do not illuminate or relate to each other at all.

Having said all this, I did like the author’s handling of the supporting characters such as Suleiman the Drunk, the Zealot, and the Desert Rose. Within the small confines of these characters’ roles, the author succeeded in giving them many sides and conflicting characteristics.

The story is told in the first person from the viewpoint of many characters, which I didn’t mind and even liked. Generally speaking, this author handles her characters quite masterfully by evoking empathy or sympathy in the readers Especially the historical sections are written with skill and accuracy.

The dialogues in Ella’s story felt dull and not very credible, maybe because I couldn’t wrap my head around the believability of the entire contemporary plot sections. The dialogues in the thirteenth-century story felt more authentic.

As to the plot weaving, thirteenth-century story’s plot shines probably due to the author’s minute attention to the original histories of the main and secondary characters. Yet, Ella’s story’s plot that takes place our time is a much inferior one, and probably that is why its mirroring Rumi’s story is a letdown.

As a reader, I’d have enjoyed Rumi and Shams’ story more if Ella’s story were to be taken out of the book.

the forty rules although they were sprayed around inside the plot.

the mirroring of a thirteenth-century story with a contemporary inferior plot

is Elif Shafak, a famed Turkish writer, women's rights activist, and public speaker who has written 16 books.

it is something to learn from, especially the many facets of Islam, good and bad. Despite what I said in the review of it, I am glad I read this book.

I bought and read this book because Lilli 🧿 ☕ recommended it, and also because I have a special connection to Rumi for I know someone from his offspring. Plus, about fifty years ago, I have been to Rumi's grave in Konya which stands in a separate mausoleum in front of the mausoleum in which Shams is resting.

Interested in buying this? Support Writing.Com by making your purchase of The Forty Rules of Love: A Novel of Rumi   from Amazon.Com!

Created Mar 07, 2019 at 7:47pm • Submit your own review...