|
November 26, 2003 Page 5 I thoroughly enjoyed reading your laudatory essay on Soltan Ahmad Shah ["Persia's honor"]. Your essay provided the reader with some insight into events that helped shape the future of Iran, a future that was lead by the House of Pahlavi. You may view these comments as mere envy from a Qajar-basher, as you have repeatedly done to any objective commentary, such as the one put forth by Mr. Esfahani. However, I firmly believe that to understand and acknowledge accomplishments and shortcomings, especially of the exclusive "Hezar Famille", as we were the country's principal architects, is the first step in appreciating who and what we were, in addition to gauging how we came to be where we are today. Once you perform this monumental task, you will be able to understand why 99.9% of the Persian populace view the Qajars with great dismay. (See reply below) * Arguments. Not cheap shots A reply to above: Dear Mr. Kalhor, Thank you for your comments below. It is obvious that well-meaning individuals looking at the evidence can come to different conclusions. Sometimes evidence comes to light that necessitates a change of perspective. Sometimes one comes to the realisation that evidence till now has been manipulated to present a certain picture and that there is reason to suspect why that was done. I have merely called upon readers to ponder the question anew. Yes, I must admit, it is very tiresome to someone like me to hear such nonesense about the Qajars in most of what has been published in the name of academic rigor, and, no, they are not right in all their criticisms. It is transparent to anyone with a sense of fairness and a willingness to re-evaluate cherished views that this cannot be so. Specifically, Mr. Esfahani's comments ["Leave us alone"] were beyond the pale, as were Mr. Vassigh's ["Iruni-baazi"]. God knows I have a sense of humour, but this was vile, and to defend that kind of expression is also vile. I would be willing to consider issues and discuss them on the evidence until the end of time, but sometimes one must stand up and say something. This happens to be the issue on which I will not compromise, not fanatically, but with reasoned arguments. If I have left out anything, I would be glad to look at it and rectify it, if need be. Arguments. Not invective, not cheap shots, not ad hominems, not vulgarities. Doon sha'n maast! I am sure you would do the same if the issue concerned you, as I trust, you too must be a man of honour. (See reply below) * Go right ahead, argue A reply to above: Dear Mr. Eskandari-Qajar, It clearly is so easy for you to dismiss other people's viewpoints by calling them vile or accusing them of an attempt at humour. Rather, as others have no doubt noticed, it was your article that was the most humorous of all in its unthinkable suggestions which you continue to attempt to support by assuming that we are stupid. I also notice that in your second article published in the "Iranian" that you have made a greater effort at providing some factual evidence for your contentions rather than pointing all of your intelligence and abilities toward defending some of the worst traitors in Iran's history. My article, "Leave us alone", despite its grammatical problems which arose in the process of publishing, was not intended as a joke like Mr. Vassigh's ["Iruni-baazi"] or as propaganda like yours. As Richard Hofstadter writes in his "Anti-Intellectualism in American Life," a book which I assume you have read, as you seem to give yourself airs, justified or not, on having rational arguments for your pre-determined viewpoint on the Qajar legacy: "He [the intellectual] may live for ideas, as I have said, but something must prevent him from living for one idea, from becoming obsessive or grotesque. Although there have been zealots whom we may still regard as intellectuals, zealotry is a defect of the breed and not of the essence. When one's concern for ideas, no matter how dedicated and sincere, reduces them to the service of some central limited preconception or some wholly external end, intellect gets swallowed by fanaticism. If there is anything more dangerous to the life of the mind than having no independent commitment to ideas, it is having an excess of commitment to some special and constricting idea." With all due respect, Mr. Eskandari-Qajar, I implore you to re-read this fine book. As you yourself have written, "this happens to be the issue on which I will not compromise, not fanatically, but with reasoned arguments." Please, go right ahead. Provide us with these "reasoned arguments," or forever hold your peace. On a lighter note, do you not find it slightly odd that the only ones defending your viewpoint are either members of your privileged family or a certain "Princess Nadine Sultana d'Osmana Han" (I thought the Ottomans were deposed from power in 1922! I suppose I was mistaken.), who calls herself the "Valide Sultan of Turkey" and no doubt comes from a similar background which allows her to make pithy remarks ["Dogs bark"] on history and society without even having read anything on the subject, as if people will respect the words that will come out of her romantic notions of her social position (or former position, as the case may be)? Times have changed. And regarding the Hofstadter and other such sources, I will gladly send you a reading list of materials to study before you decide to write another article. * List pluses and minuses Your ex- and present Imperial Highnesses, My Noble Lords and Ladies, and Dear Sirs/Madams (apologies if any category is left out as I am taking utmost care not to disrespect the Princely pride of certain members of this mailing list), ["Persia's honor"] Although the resumption of this debate will have ZERO effect on the outcome of the present and future system of governance in Iran, in the interest of historical research I would like to extend an invitation to all those concerned to compile a list of contributions made to Persia (as it was called then) and the Persian way of life, during the rule of the Qajar dynasty. I believe that instead of, philosophising, or as the Professor Prince, Manoutchehr Mirza Eskandari-Qajar(Kajar) - did I miss anything? - would prefer to put it, interpreting the facts, or names calling, and character assassinations, all it takes is a simple, no-frills, fact-based, list of all the pluses and minuses committed by the Qajar rulers, from the beginning to the end of their reign. I am particularly interested to hear from my noble lord, the Professor Prince whose chairmanship of the International Qajar Studies Association (IQSA) puts him in an exceptionally privileged position in as far as representing his dynastic heritage is concerned. (See reply below) * Attitudes will slowly change In reply to above, As a firm believer in open debate, I feel passionately that unless one is willing to face criticism, even of the kind and quality presented here in this series of e-mails and op-eds, one should not enter this arena. As to presenting the evidence and debating it anew, this task has already begun. It began with the efforts of Drs. Abbas Amanat and Layla Diba, with the comments of Prof. Ehsan Yarshater at the various conferences pursuant to the earlier individuals' efforts, etc. My efforts and those of our association are simply a continuation of those steps. In our own sweet time and in our own sweet way! Attitudes will slowly change. New documents will come to light. More people will be willing to publish and research along these new lines. Given close to an hundred years of concerted efforts at writing a certain history by interpreting facts one way only to suit the designs of a new ruling elite, it is hard to argue for a renewed look over night. But slowly, ever so slowly, people will come forward who will be willing to put things differently. Prof. Yarshater's answer to the question why more people are willing to say positive things about the Qajars now was: "distance." There were volumes in that answer. In the mean time people such as yourselves may feel satisfied in poking fun at the Qajars with sexual innuendoes or poking fun at people's names or their family to satisfy sophomoric needs from the comfort of the anonymity of e-mail. To each his own, I suppose. In the end, however, the only thing that counts is the reasoned argument in the arena of ideas, freely expressed and firmly supported, and the judges over the validity of an argument presented in that arena will be people of good will everywhere. The rest is only so much flotsam and jetsam, haughty in its appearance, but quickly dissipated and forgotten. It is always so much easier to tear down than to build. Let us see who the builders are! For the rest, for God's sake "yek chiz-e taazeh begid!" * He'll back ancestors I am an Iranian and love my history. I read about it and even try to master it so that I could teach my children about our native country. Now, I have one question for Mr. Manoutchehr Eskandari-Qajar. He always backs the Qajar era. Off course he has to back his ancestors. Without any doubt, the founder of this dynasty was a brave man. He was able to organize the Persian army and push the intruders back to their limits. But what happened when he died? Bunch of lazy, unqualified princes took their turn to become kings and take the country back to the dark ages. I definitely do not want to discredit the Qajar dynasty. In fact, we must admit that Ahmad shah did not return to his thrown because he did not want to bow to British and the Ottomans. However, I also know that later in his life he was in a depression due to his weight. Who killed Amir Kabir? A lazy Qajar king named NasserEdin. I like Mr. Manoutchehr Eskandari-Qajar to defend NaserEdin if he could. * Persia's what?! Iranian.com is one of the best websites, and I visit it almost daily. Once in a while, I come across an article that makes me laugh. Recently, I came across the one titled "Persia's honor". At first I thought I had misread it, but then, upon closer examination I realized that I had actually read the title correctly. It is often difficult to get Iranians to agree on one thing. parcicularly in politics. But most Iranians I know, agree about the following: The Qajars were amongst the most inept of all Iranian dynasties. The loss of population and territory that happened under the Qajars was almost unparalleled in Iran's history. Agha Mohammad Khan was a butcher, the rest of the Qajars were inept, and Ahmad Shah left the country as soon as he felt threatened. I don't particularly care for the Pahlavi dynasty, but in all fairness, Reza Khan and his son at least managed to do some good for Iran. The words Qajar, honor and Persia should not appear in the same sentence. Anyways, just my 2 cents. * Skipped chapter on Qajar dynasty I enjoyed reading your article in Iranian.com, "Persia's honor". May I kindly ask what stuff you have been using that gives you such a great high and hallucination. May I ask you where you get these so that I get a high just like you. Khejalat ham khoob chizieh baba. Do you honostly think that the Qajar dynasty was a golden period in our history? Aren't you the chair of Middle Eastern Studies in Santa Barbara City College? Did you skip that chapter on Qajar dynasty, Palang o Doleh va Babr ol Molk and how the Qajar dynasty took a big dump on Iran? A country that was actually a super power in the Safavid Dynasty became so corrupted and poor that its effects are still noted in the Iranian culture and society. While the Western countries experienced the industrial revolution, our Qajar kings were too preoccupied in their heram, they experienced another revolution, the sex revolution. Did you know that more Iranian women started wearing chador during the Qajar dynasty? Guess why Mr. Professor? To cover themselves from the king's horniness. Have you forgotten about the execution of Mirza Taghie Khan also know as Amir Kabir? Should I give you a lesson about Amir Kabir? Have you forgotten about Agha Mohammad Khane Qajar, his slaying of thousands of women and children? Gharardade Turkamanchaie? The cowardiness of Nasereldin Shah? So next time you write something for Iranian.com, do your research professor since I just lost respect for the educational system of great state of California. Eradatmand, Sheitoon Khan More letters (November 26, 2003) |
Archive By
subject Iran/Mideast
|
|