The Ayatollah Begs to Differ

Title: The Ayatollah Begs to Differ – The Paradox of Modern Iran
Author: Hooman Majd
Publisher: Penguin Books 2009 (First published 2008)
ISBN: 978-0-141-04741-6
Pages: 252

A contemporary view of what’s happening in Iran like the attitudes of the political and religious elite and the common masses is given in a witty style in this book. Hooman Majd was born in Tehran and being the son of a diplomat, was brought up in U.K and the U.S. He is an American by citizenship and lives in New York. His claim that he is cent per cent Iranian and cent per cent American is borne out by the ideas and the ways in which he presented them in this book. It is essentially regarding the impressions two or three visits to Iran has generated in the author’s mind. Majd is a relative of the former President of Iran, Mohammed Khatami and being the official translator of the current President Mahmud Ahmedinejad when he visited the U.N, had easy access to the top echelons of Iranian bureaucracy.

Hooman Majd stresses the falsity of the ideas embedded on the western psyche about what Iran is and what the Iranian people desires. Contrary to vicious propaganda, the people in Iran are not oppressed by the clerics and a counter-revolution is definitely not on their agenda. Iran is a deeply religious society and being the only theocratic state ruled by the clergy except Vatican, the achievements of that country are not to be seen lightly. Several drawbacks and characteristic blunders of the current incumbent in the Presidency are described such as the intransigence and the ill-advised denial of the Jewish holocaust. Ahmedinejad is a doctor by profession but has poor working class background. He still preserves that image and every middle class citizen can associate with him. The west don’t understand this basic concept and that’s why Iranian dissidents operating from abroad don’t find resonance to their ideas inside Iran.

Interesting customs and practises of the society are given in a very humorous manner. The ta’arouf, is the social etiquette where each one belittle their own self and showers lavish praise on the other. A guest visiting a friend would find himself surrounded by requests like, “we know you didn’t have a good time, but we’d compensate for it when you visit next”. Similarly, you may have to beg a taxi-driver to accept your money, as out of ta’arouf, they won’t specifically name the sum. An example is given, in which the author had to pay more than the actual tariff. This is a quirk of the social life there. A very apt proverb is mentioned. “You say something; I believe it. You insist; I begin to wonder. You swear on it; I know you’re lying”.

Majd describes how the ancient name of Persia was replaced with Iran in 1936. “It is said that Reza Shah’s ambassador to Berlin in the mid-1930s, probably with advice and nudges from German ministers, put forth to the foreign ministry and his king that Persia should be known to the outside world as “Iran”, a word meaning “land of the Aryans” and used by inhabitants of the land since at least Sassanid times (226 C.E.). In an article in the January 26, 1936 issue of the New York Times, Oliver McKee stated, “At the suggestion of the Persian Legation in Berlin, the Teheran government……substituted Iran for Persia as the official name of the country. Its decision was influenced by the Nazi revival of interest in the so-called Aryan races, cradled in ancient Persia. As the Ministry of Foreign Affairs set forth in its memorandum on the subject, ‘Perse’ the French designation of Persia, connoted the weakness and tottering independence of the country in the nineteenth century, when it was a pawn on the chess board of European imperialistic rivalry. ‘Iran’ by contrast, conjured up memories of the vigour and splendour of its historic past”. (p.160-161).

In a prescient analysis of the Iranian middle class, Majd’s comments on them fits admirably well to the corresponding class in India’s society. “As long as they can continue to make a living, maintain their wealth, travel freely, and party as they please in private, the members of this secular elite are generally unwilling to jeopardize their comfortable lifestyles for the sake of any form of political activism. They have political opinions, of course, and they express them openly among friends in the privacy of their homes, but they seem uninterested in any real activism – the kinds of efforts that would include attending or organizing protest rallies or marches – and they are no threat to the Islamic Republic”. (p. 189).

Being a good book in which the author is firmly in touch with the ground realities, as compared to the works of some of the western journalists who churn out books of encyclopediac nature with little regard to what the concerned public’s opinions are, this book is highly recommended. There are some aspect, of course, in which the author’s opinions hardly differ from that of the religious fanatics who rule Iran. Unnecessary praise is heaped on his relative and former President Mohammed Khatami while piling up scorn for his successor, Ahmedinejad. One drawback which can be said against is the absence of a glossary of terms at the end. The term ‘Ayatollah’ is never in fact defined in the entirety of the text! They are the top most religious leaders and the most senior among them are called ‘Grand Ayatollah’. The leader of the Islamic revolution, Ruhollah Khomeini, and the present supreme leader, Ali Khamenei are Grand Ayatollahs.

Rating: 3 Star