Customer Reviews

Frontier Fictions

5 star:		(3)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I found this book to be a refreshing study of Middle Eastern nationalism. It went well beyond the traditional focus on religion and politics that seems to be the staple of other works on nationalism. It includes a wealth of information that many interested in Iran and the Middle East can profit from. It offers theoretical discussions of nationalism as well as specific historical points that distinguish the Iranian case from others. I found the writing engaging, the research broad and original, and the arguments are new. I would recommend it to those interested in modern Iran or nationalism in the Middle East

This book remains an essential work on the process and imagination of nationalism in Iran. The work is thoroughly researched and includes still-fresh insights into the tension between national ideas and geographical realities. Necessary reading for those interested in modern Iran - and it's neighboring states too!

This is the best available work on nationalism in Iran ... the research unprecedented and the analysis fresh. I recommend it to readers interested in learning something new about Iran. The significance of frontiers in Iranian history and political life is a subject that other scholars have unfortunately ignored. It is a welcome addition.

Make that rating 3.5 stars. This book's effort to examine the rise of Iranian natoinalism in terms of land and cartography are unique. The author takes the "Map" of Anderson's "Census, Map, and Museum" and runs with it. The *frictions* on its borders arising from international intrigue, from the Qajars to the Pahlavis, set the stage for *fictions* of nationality and unity. Of course, as any specific book like this would be, it can be quite dry. At no time is it @ all exhilirating. I would recommend it only for those highly interested in studying modern Iran and how modern historiography is to be applied to examining its birth.

The author chooses in this text to focus on the value of land to the people. She does so by illustrating the various authors that write about the land and it's link to the people. This land-people link is tenuous because the unification of the people is a forced, top-town imposed unity that magnifies differences between the minority groups in Iran. This author concludes by trying to reconcile two really very different ideas of Iran. One is the spirit of the people and the spirit of land; the other is the physical reality. Which, while Iranian authors of old may have reverently felt were synonymous, were actually conflicting views. One is a kind of political conception and the other a rather emotive, spiritual conception having more to do with family and ancestry than with world politics. The author fails to make this distinction. It is more obvious at the end of the text when the author begins to discuss the methods the government used to stop people from speaking Turkish. The dialog changes from the value of land to the value of language. The general idea throughout the text is that nationalism is an innate force that has simply not yet been fully defined. Once defined, whether by land or by language, it will be indisputable. The author notes the use of myths and gender roles to talk about the loss of land and love of homeland. This discourse among intellectuals is intended to incite the general public to feel strongly about the integrity of the boundaries of Iran. The author is also very interested in the employment of family metaphors and gender metaphors in this dialog. Authors in Iran employed metaphors such as a man's responsibility to protect women in general, the women of his family and specifically his mother to create and emotive atmosphere surrounding the integrity of land in Iran. Moreover, the idea of a woman being raped or assaulted by foreigners is employed to discuss the intrusion by foreigners on the lands of Persia.