THE IRANIAN
Letters
Accept our differences
It was a real pleasure for me to learn that my country Iran is attracting American tourists, but I guess before a tourist writes an article about a particular event or fact he or she needs to gather some information. In Stephen Shaffer's article "Mostaqim!", there is a little confusion: you need to know -- or at least discuss the matter with an Iranian who has lived in Tehran -- before you write about cabs in Tehran.
These cabs are not the same as taxis in the U.S. They operate according to the ways you have described. The closest example Iranian taxis that would be comparable to those in the U.S. would be "on call taxis" -- you call on the telephone and you can have them just for yourself . These are private, and you are the only passenger. They'll take you wherever you want to go.
As someone who has traveled to many countries as a tourist, I think the differences in culture and customs in countries should be understood and accepted by tourists who decide to visit the given country. Just because things are different in different parts of the world, doesn't mean that we can criticize them. Maryam Khatir <MaryamK@DiamondMM.com>
Reply from Stephen Shaffer <shaffer@smtp.ilo-nylo.org>
I received your comments regarding an innocuous article entitled, "Mostaqim!", and must admit I was a bit puzzled by the thrust of your note which appeared to have a slight overtone of disgruntlement. Initially I did not think it worth my while for me to even respond, but upon further reflection, I thought it only fair and appropriate to attempt to clarify a few points which you may then consume and digest at your own leisure.
The article, (written two-and-a-half years ago) which probably took about a minute to read and deconstruct, was not intended as criticism and rather as advice for other Americans and non-Iranians who might travel to Iran in the future. If you found my own observations offensive then I can only imagine what your reaction would be upon reading the accounts of others in such publications as the Lonely Planet Travel Guide to Iran.
While in Iran I did indeed take the "on-call-taxis". However, most of time it made more sense to simply stand by the side of the road and hail a cab, regardless of my nationality - why should a person pay 500-800 toman with an "on call taxi" when the same distance can be traversed, although with much more effort, for less-than half that amount?
Unfortunately, you have perceived that I was unwilling to accept the customs and practices of Iran and its people; that I found them primitive and barbaric; had absolutely no clue about Iran and could not even find it on a map - had I been unwilling to accept the customs and practices of Iran and its people, would it have made sense for me to have taken a trip to a country with which my own has had no diplomatic ties since 1980 and has held in such low regard, calling it a rogue or outlaw state?
In light of the fact that I was willing to travel there, would it not then also stand to reason that quite clearly I was not entirely unfamiliar with Iran and Iranians and was quite aware that Iran was not the same as portrayed by the media? But then again, who is entirely prepared for every aspect of what awaits him/her when traveling to a new and different country? No one.
However, you have missed two more important and fundamental points. The first fundamental area: the value of outside observers. Your president recently noted in his very eloquent CNN interview one of the most famous books about the United States, Democracy in America (2 vols), written by Alexis de Toqueville, in order to describe and characterize the nature Americans and their government. The book, although written by a French aristocrat in 1835, and its observations are not and have not been considered invalid simply because he was from France.
It is likely that there were and have been Americans who took offense by what was written in the book, but the book was not written for Americans - it was written for a French audience - Americans were a secondary audience. His observations were frank, candid and at times it appeared that he was writing with a specific agenda in mind in order to justify his own theories about people and the nature of governments. The secondary audience, the United States, and more significantly its writers and Presidents, past and present, still refer to and quote from de Toqueville's work as they find the not-always flattering observations contained therein, valuable.
This leads into my second point. If we are to discount the observations of others and allow only our own people to comment on our country, customs, habits, etc., the observations made thereon would be undoubtedly one-sided and lacking a good degree of objectivity; such one-sided opinions and observations would be useless for making an accurate assessment of anything except their inaccuracy.
Additionally, what would such an attitude toward outside observations/criticism say about someone? What comes right to mind is the word "insecure" - why else would a person or people react in such a manner that opinions differing from their own would be considered intolerable? I have almost always found Iranians to be extremely rational people, but I suppose there are exceptions to everything. I wish my own people were as rational as those in Iran today. Perhaps the gap which has separated the two would have been bridged long ago.
Conversely, were I approach such articles and books as you have done, I suppose I should have been very offended by a similarly harmless and charming article called "Merry Mitra" in which the author describes Christians and the Christian faith as one of copycats. However, the article was quite informative and does point out a historical fact that indeed certain ceremonial aspects of the Christian faith were transferred from others. Far be it for me to get bent out of shape simply because of what the author has written - let others read it and decide for themselves. No one is demanding that anyone accept and agree with anything they do not want to believe or accept as true.
Thus far, judging by what you have written, I can draw some conclusions of my own a) you were having a bad day when you read the article and needed some way in which to vent that frustration; b) simply did not think about what you were writing; c) gave great thought to the matter (because you undoubtedly have ample spare time to draft critiques of harmless on-line articles) and could not conceive of someone possibly holding an opinion differing from your own d) should no longer read newspapers, magazines, journals, etc. as the content may differ from your own experience and perception of the world; e) all of the above.
Next time, please think before you write and be sure that you are not writing simply because you've had a bad day.
Related links
* THE IRANIAN Letters
section
* Iran News
* Complete list of Iranian
online media
* Cover stories
* Who's
who
|
|