| |||||||||||||||
Product Details
Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
|
|
Share your thoughts with other customers:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
5 of 5 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
It clears the cruelty of the fanatics in Iran.,
By A Customer
This review is from: The Man in the Mirror (Hardcover)
As a young Iranian who belongs to the after revolution's generation Carole Jeromes "The Man in The Mirror" gave me a clear vision of the Iranin revolution. Its touching love story as well made the book more interesting. It farely jodjes the beliefs of the moderates and radicals who struggled to gain power after fall of the king of Iran. It also contains the biography of Sadegh Ghotbzadeh who dedicated his life to Iran's freedom.
2 of 2 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
For a love story, lots of historical narrative - which is great,
By
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Man in the Mirror (Hardcover)
If you're looking at this book and wondering if she's going to focus more on the love story than the history, you'll be surprised to know she gives very little attention to her relationship with Ghotbzadeh (probably because there really isn't much to say about it). The entire book is essentially her description of the revolution, and she provides a lot of fascinating information which I (nor my family, who were active in the revolution) did not know. So, it's a wonderful guide to understanding a revolution which is so often twisted by American perspectives; she clearly states the importance of other surrounding countries and non-Iranian figures active in shaping the revolution (it isn't all about Iran spurning America).
The reason I give it four stars is that the book is riddled with judgement calls which I found really obnoxious. I'm an atheist, and Iranian, and my family is really critical of the regime and of Islam in general, but she really shouldn't have written so extensively about her opinions. It makes the book unprofessional and condescending, making me wonder how factual she's being. She seems to know EVERYTHING before it happens, before even the Iranians know (she says that she knew immediately that Khomeini was evil, which is kind of a prepostorous thing to say and seems entirely based on his cold demeanor and the fact he's religious; she says she knew immediately that Beheshti would be a leader in the revolution, based solely on one interview, while Ghotbzadeh ignored him; she says she knew certain figures would be inherently sexist because they refused to look at her during interviews, something which is more characteristic of cultural attitudes toward modesty and politeness). She also does not venture into describing Iranians she encounters in the country to give an impression of the people (except that they look raggedy, dirty, or - how exciting for her - they are wearing western clothes). She consumes herself with religious figures and disparaging the country for falling for religious calls. Well, of course religious figures have conservative mannerisms and will present the movement as based on the religious sensibilities of their people. But, as she said, Khomeini did not consider religious and politics as separate - to many Iranians, religion=anti-colonialism, it wasn't necessarily that Iranians were religious, as Ayatollahs and Mullahs may have insisted, but they were cetainly anti-colonial. If she had discussed this matter with Iranians, she would have immediately realized that. But she never depicts Iranians she met on the outside. I assume if she had then the idea of Iran she was presenting would have unraveled. Iranians in general are not really religious, proven by Sadegh's willingness to take lovers and not enforce prayer in buildings he supervised because he thought work was more important. Sadegh was not special in his "westernness," as Jerome writes he was. If she had written a LITTLE bit about Iranians, the reader would get an entirely different impression. This would have been especially important for her discussion of veiling, which she never complicates, only presenting her own perspective (and Sadegh's wavering opinions on how it's not really necessary but preferrable). The revolution was fought on a cultural front as well (very well presented by Afsaneh Najmabadi, who writes about her activism during the revolution). Women took to the streets protesting against the hijab (which I'm surprised Jerome does not discuss), but most women thought that these protesters were shah's "painted dolls" and regarded them as relics of the overindulging king. Still, most women (until veiling was enforced) did NOT wear hijab, something Jerome does not discuss. She makes Iranian women seem like a mass of black chadors, nameless, faceless, uneducated, floundering in their inability to see that religious leaders were manipulating them. This is disgusting, proving her an absolute colonial sexist. If she wanted to approach the veiling issue then she should have presented all sides, she should not have given a cursory glance with her own not-so-veiled feeling of cultural superiority. I would recommend Persian Mirrors by Elaine Sciolino as a better anthology of Iranians and the revolution (from its beginnings, she was there in Paris with Khomeini as well during the mid-70s, to the early 2000s). In general, Jerome doesn't describe herself in a very redeeming light, she's annoying, always harassing Sadegh with questions, and she seems to always be trying to prove that their relationship was real (though she admits he had many other lovers and it didn't seem like a very close relationship except for moments where she insisted he would tell her how she was the only person who made him feel at peace). The book generally characterizes Iranians as passionate, backwards people who have been manipulated by dignified western "us" which, admittedly, treated their uneducated, backwards child badly. You can see it on the first few pages where she describes Ghotbzadeh as a snake-oil salesman (which she eventually retracts, but that proves her general impression of middle easterners) and throughout the book she continuously reminds the reader of her disinterest in the region (basically because they're backwards and are suspicious political schemers). By 1980 she says she's sick of hearing Iranians blame America... That was when I was seriously shocked. The west had been taking advantage of the country since the early twentieth century and after six or seven decades Iranians started agitating and one year after the revolution you're already tired of hearing their frustrations? It was amazing. However, when she takes herself out of the book it is quite good and the historical narrative is very important. So, though I find her condescending (especially in condemning the hijab, which I agree should not be forced on women; but she implies that women who do voluntarily wear it are somehow stupid and that the only relatable eastern woman is one which is western - which she continuously reminds us is the reason she got along with Sadegh, his "westernness"), racist, and politically prejudiced, I still think it's a necessary read.
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
A very important and yet ignored book to read!!!,
By shahram (CA, United States) - See all my reviews
Amazon Verified Purchase(What's this?)
This review is from: The Man in the Mirror (Hardcover)
This book is about the very life of a man who had played a key role for the Islamic revolution to take place. He was no one, but Saddeq Ghotbzadeh whom was considered one of the closest people to Ayatollah Khomeini (father of the revolution). It gives us an ostensible account of the early days of the Islamic Republic. It draws a picture (very accurate) about the fights between all revolutionary forces and groups, the mosque and its role to capture the power and eliminate competitors who played much more important roles for the victory, but they were erraticated from the political spectrum one after another.
We have a chance to know more about a man who was so close to Khomeini to be considered as his right hand man or his son. We receive information about the US embassy occupation and how that event was used as a political means to eradicate rivals and how it helped the republicans to win the presidential election and rap up Carter's presidency. We get information about the war and the first president of the Islamic Republic and their efforts (including Ghotbazadeh's) to end the war with dignity and victory which was Torpedoed by Rafsanjani and Khameneyie (the current leader). Carole Jerome gives us an accurate picture about Saddeq Ghotbzadeh who was executed in the early years of the Islamic Republic. She also draws a private picture of Saddeq, because of her relationship with him. Most of the stories are in line with the facts which I compared and checked, and yet this book gives us more details about his death (which I did not know). The book is a very good read. I am surprised of how this important book has been ignored all these years. It is quite shocking.
Share your thoughts with other customers: Create your own review
|
|
Tag this product(What's this?)Think of a tag as a keyword or label you consider is strongly related to this product.
Tags will help all customers organize and find favorite items. |
|
This product's forum
Active discussions in related forums
Search Customer Discussions
|
Related forums
|
