‘You should read this’, my brother-in-law said, pointing to his well-thumbed copy of Vali Nasr’s The Shia Revival: How Conflicts within Islam Will Shape the Future. I knew, even before he said it that he was right, I should. The book had ‘The New York Times Bestseller’ stamped across the top in a font small enough, and tasteful enough, to ensure it wouldn’t be mistaken for a less serious sort of bestseller. On its back cover a number of prominent commentators were quoted, saying things like ‘brilliant, clear and erudite’.
I knew I should read it, but I was fairly certain I wouldn’t. It looked a bit hard and no matter how much I’d like to think I’m the sort of person who reads ‘brilliant, clear and erudite’ books, unfortunately I’m a bit slippery when it comes to non-fiction. Characters and plot matter to me and I often give the non-fiction section in bookshops the cold shoulder. I tell myself that without a storyline I won’t retain the information a book has to offer. This is, it turns out, itself fiction – a self-spun story to excuse my slightly escapist reading habits.
Two years after my brother-in-law recommended it, I reluctantly pulled the copy of The Shia Revival he’d left with us from the bookshelf. He was right, it is a book that should be read. It gives what I can only describe as an, ahem, ‘brilliant, clear and erudite’ explanation of the sectarian differences within Islam: who the Sunnis and Shiites are, what they believe respectively and how that has led to conflict both historically and recently. Stuff I didn’t know. Stuff I’m embarrassed not to have known and stuff that, when relayed to my Dad as information I hadn’t known, made him shake his head in disbelief. He didn’t call me an eejit, but perhaps he should have.
And all of this stuff is told in such a way to make it thoroughly digestible – there are plenty of anecdotes (keeping my thirst for story-telling sated) and plenty of footnote referenced detail. In many ways the book is a history of the Middle East, Vali Nasr explains the differences in Islam that arose after the prophet Muhammad’s death (put far too simply, Sunnis and Shiites differ in who they believe was Muhammad’s rightful successor); the wax and wane of secular Arab nationalism; Iran under Ayatollah Khomeini; and the political and religious workings within Iraq post Saddam Hussein. Iraq has a Shia majority but the Sunni minority or secular Ba’athists, for a long time, held most of the power. The changes brought about by the US invasion in 2003, Nasr argues have paved the way for a new Middle East and a potential shift, or shifts, in the balance of power between Sunnis and Shiites. All issues I’m ill-equipped to describe – and in many ways I feel I have little right to review a book that does describe them. For a properly equipped review, I’d recommend the New York Times review (it is, remember, their bestseller).
I should have read it back in 2008. It’s now slightly out of date: the edition I have was published in 2007 and things have moved quickly. An additional chapter covering the last three years would be helpful. But the explanation of the differences between Sunnis and Shiites alone has gone a long way to helping me watch and read about recent events in the Middle East, with a better understanding of the region. Glued to Al Jazeera over the past weeks, I’ve watched reports on the Tunisian and Egyptian uprisings and in particular reports on unrest in Bahrain, where a Shia majority population is ruled by a Sunni monarchy, and thought I probably owe my brother-in-law a belated thank you.
No comments:
Post a Comment