Recomended Reading

[Cubswin]

I dont often post on this message board but i thought id chime in today. Last night i was rereading sections one of the best books I have ever read. "From Beirut to Jerusalem" by New York Time's Thomas Friedman (author of the "Lexus and the Olive Tree") is a mix of memoir and commentary about the authors experiences as a reporter working in the middle east. If you want to gain some sort of understanding about what is going on in Iraq and in other parts of the middle east i highly encourage you to read the chapter in this book titled "Hama Rules". Though this chapter talks mainly about the Hama atrocity that occured in 1982 in Syria at the hands Hafez Assad, many parallels can be drawn about Iraqi and middle east society in general. This book, and specifically this chapter, should be required reading for anyone who might have an opinion on the current situation in Iraq.


This is one of the most telling passages:

What you never do in the desert, though, is allow concessions to be arbitarily imposed on you. If someone steals half your water, you can never say, "Well, this time I will let it go, but don't ever let me catch you doing it again," because in this world of lone wolves, anyone who becomes viewed as a sheep is in trouble-- a point underscored by the Bedouin legend about an old man and his turkey. One day, according to this legend, an elderly Bedouin man discovered that by eating turkey he could restore his virility. So he bought himself a turkey a kept it around the tent, and every day he watched it grow. He stuffed it with food, thinking, Wow, I am really going to be a bull. One day, though, the turkey was stolen. So the Bedouin called his sons together ans said, "Boys, we are in great danger now-- terrible danger. My turkey has been was stolen." The boys laughed and said, "Father, what do you need a turkey for?". He said, "Never mind, never mind. It is not important why i need the turkey, all that is important is that it has been stolen, and we must get it back." But his sons ignored him and forgot about the turkey. A few weeks later, the old man's camel was stolen. His sons came to him and said, "Father your camels been stolen, what should we do?" And the old man said, "Find my turkey." A few weeks later, the old man's horse was stolen, and the sons came and said, "Father, your horse was stolen, what should we do?" He said "find my turkey." Finally, a few weeks later someone raped his daughter. The father went to his sons and said, "Its all because of the turkey. When they saw that they could take my turkey, we lost everything."

I hope some of you will pick up this great book. If you dont have time to read the entire thing please just read the chapter titled "Hama Rules"... it will help you gain an understanding of the dynamics of middle east society.

best regards
cubswin

[sam h]

I haven't read this book, and I don't know enough about the subject matter to really comment upon it anyway.

I do know a fair amount, however, about Friedman's other precoccupation, globalization and international political economy. Or at least enough to say that The Lexus and the Olive Tree was a crappy book. Friedman is basically full of it. He isn't asking the most basic and important questions, and he ends up coming off both as clueless and hopelessly ideologically biased.

I only say this because if you don't know much about something, its easy to read a book by a popular journalist and be very impressed and think he's really a knowledgable person when in fact he is just an intellectual dilettante.

Here is a funny article (http://www.nypress.com/16/46/news&columns/cage.cfm) about Friedman by former eXhole and current New York Press columniist Matt Taibbi.

[Cubswin]

Sam

It is been a long long time since i read "lexus" so my knowledge of the book is a little lacking. From what i recall, the book was a good introduction into globalization that was very readible for the novice on the subject. While i agree the book might be seen as a little one sided, i dont think you can totally dismiss this work simply because it greatly added to and increased the dialogue on the subject.

My main purpose of reading "From Beirut..." was to gain some information on the history of Lebanon before my vacation there in 2002... and to tell you the truth i havnt had a chance to read the second part of the book which focuses on his time in Israel. I have read one other Anglo written book on the Lebanese civil war, "Pity the Nation: The Abduction o Lebanon" by the Independent's correspondent Robert Fisk and find the accounts of these two journalist to be quite consistent... though Friedman tends to offer more commentary. When in Lebanon i had the chance to talk to a few people about the war and my beliefs, based mostly on Friedman's writting, seemed to be comfirmed by those I talked to.

I have the utmost respect for Friedman with regards to this work for several reasons. First, being a Jew it was a great risk for him to be in Lebanon covering the war when he did. Second, despite being a Jew he remained extremely objective in his writting. He is openly critical of many of Sharon's actions in Lebanon when, at the time of this publication, many from the Jewish-American community were not. Finally, this is just a plan old good book that is readible for the novice on the subject. That being said, I dont think he simplifies the complexity of the region he covers (this is with regards to his coverage of Lebanon and Syria...like i said i have not read the second half of this book which focuses on Israel).

Please dont be biased against this book based on the "Lexus"... this is a great book and and if you have any passing interest in Lebanese or Syrian history during the 70s-80s you must read this book. Like i said earlier, if you dont have time to read the book in its entirety please just read the 30 page chapter "Hama Rules". You wont be disappointed.

regards
cubswin

[nicky g]

Not a bad book. I don;t agree with a lot of his conclusions, but interesting. I prefer Robert Fisk's book as an account of the Lebanese civil war, but then it's more sympathetic to a lot of my points of view. WHat drives me nuts about Friedman is his overuse of his own slightly absurd metaphors. He really overdoes things like "the lexus vs the olive tree". When I found out he'd written a book of that title I laughed my arse off. He seems to think his one off metaphors contain a lot more insight than they really do. But I would recommend the book, nonetheless. Two other more recent books I liked on the Middle East are Eastward to Tartary by Robert Kaplan and Dreaming of Damascus by Stephen Glain. I sincerely reccommend them; I know many people will think that given my postings they're probably just pro-Arab anti-Israeli propaganda, but they're honestly not anything of the sort, and I;m not recommending them because I agree with everything they say; they're just good. One is by an Atlantic Monthly writer and the other by the WSJ Middle East correspondent; neither fountains of left-wing rantings. Just well-informed well-written books. Hopefully someone less politically suspicious /images/graemlins/tongue.gif than myself can post a review of one.

[superleeds]

Very funny article. Thanks.

[Cubswin]

Nicky

thanks for the recomendations on the books. i will check them out when i get a chance... maybe ill read one of them on my canadian holiday next month.

i agree that friedman does use metaphors quite often.... i guess that is the norm with globalization writters.... think jihad vs mcworld /images/graemlins/smile.gif the metaphors dont seem to bother me too much though.

with regards to fisk's book... it is a great account of the lebanese civil war. if i remember correctly he was the only reporter that made it to hama after the atrocity but before the clean up crew came im. my only complaint about fisk's book is that it is extremely narative and long-winded. his accounts of the details were amazing but sometimes i just became disinterested because there was so much detail and had to stop reading... this is more likely a product of my lack of an attention span though /images/graemlins/grin.gif i would recomend that anyone interested in these events to read friedman first because it is "dumbed-down" a bit. even after reading friedman and having some knowledge most of the players involved i found myself constantly checking fisk's list of "principal charecters" while reading his work. i guess since i wasnt even born when the whole lebanon thing started i am excused for not knowing who some of these people were.

regards
cubswin

[sam h]

Cubs,

It has been a book I've been meaning to look at for a while. Admittedly, I have been somewhat in the mindset of wanting to read it just to confirm to myself that Friedman was a clown. Given your endorsement, though, when I get to it I'll try and approach it more fairly.

Thanks for the recommendation,

Sam