If you have any questions about our production please email info@deniedplay.com

As a polemic about Islam, however, Denied is complete hokum. From a human point of view, we’re presented with a rent-a-Muslim image straight out of the tabloids. The Muslims under scrutiny may be Balochs, but most of the actors have Arab accents and why the Pashtun cap? And, theologically speaking, it’s utterly pointless to chuck abrogating verses from the Quran into the script, and some lines in Arabic are unforgivably mangled.

Dear Mr Awde/The Stage,

Thank you for your review of my play DENIED.

Whilst I appreciate your comments regarding the artistic and creative nature of the play, I feel that your review does – regretfully - at times misrepresent the play on the issue of Islam. Firstly, I must point out that this is not a “polemic about Islam” - it is not intended to be and so should not be assessed in this way (as your review seems to be suggesting it should). On the contrary, the play is designed to explore the dialogue that is taking place – and needs to continue to take place – both within and outside the Muslim community about important questions and issues such as what to do with the violent verses in the Quran, jihad, terrorism, women’s rights, honour killings, etc.

Secondly, you ask why the actors have Arabic accents if they are Balochs. Balochistan is of course a large and diverse region covering southwest Pakistan, southwest Afghanistan and southeast Iran (incidentally, you did simply assume in your review that the play was set in “Southern Pakistan” when this was never stated), and though Arabic is not by any means the major language in these regions, it is nevertheless true that there are small pockets of Arabic speaking communities in some of these regions. But more specifically, we deliberately chose an Arabic accent because this is the language most commonly associated with Islam and need not necessarily be associated with one specific country (something which we didn’t want to do). We did check with Islamic scholars whether this was a legitimate thing to do and this was deemed appropriate and even a wise thing to do (again to avoid the charge that we are trying to single out a specific ethnic group).

Thirdly - and the main reason why I am writing - is with regard to your comments about the abrogated verses or ayas from the Quran. I can recall one abrogated verse (Sura109:1-6) that I did use in the play but this is clearly referred to as such, as an abrogated verse (if you recall, it appears in the context of a debate between Mohammed and his fellow student - the fellow student says that the verse Mohammed has quoted has been abrogated).

But your review seems to imply that I have “chucked” many “abrogating verses from the Quran into the script” – if by this you mean that I have included verses which have already been abrogated (mansukh), and therefore not applicable today, this is simply not the case and I would ask that you substantiate this with legitimate sources (if however you mean that I have included the verses which do the abrogating of other verses – the abrogators (nasikh)- then obviously these verses are still valid – I will assume therefore that you are referring to the former, otherwise what is your point?).

Mr Awde, please note that this play has been scrutinised by theologians and experts on Islam. I am fully aware of the doctrine of abrogation (naskh) which the classical scholars of Islam came up with to deal with the contradictory and conflicting verses in the Quran. The orthodox Islamic doctrine states that when the issue of contradiction arises (such as when we are faced with both peaceful and violent verses about unbelievers), one discerns when each verse/aya was revealed in the ministry of Muhammad and then follows the principle that verses which are revealed later (generally in the Medinan phase) supersede or abrogate the earlier verses (the Meccan phase).

I am aware of your studies and writing on the Quran and Islam, which leaves me a little baffled as to your comments on abrogation -surely you know that the ayas I quote in my play on issues like violent jihad – verses such 9:5; 9:14-15; 59:2 - are the later verses from Muhammed’s life and therefore the ones that have NOT been abrogated (but which actually do the abrogating). I include them precisely to raise the issue of how these verses, which according to mainstream Islamic theology are still valid, must be interpreted in the current post 9/11, post 7/7 climate.

Though I do not usually do so, I have taken the time to respond to your review because, regardless of what you feel about the play, I feel it is important that the facts – items which a British audience might not necessarily be familiar with - are presented clearly and not skewed.

Many thanks for your other comments about the play.

Regards,

Jodi De Souza