Rating: 
Summary: Mohammed in the parlor with the sword?
Review: This book is a bit like a Who-Done-It written by a writer with novelistic pretensions, in which the author abandons the plot in the events and scenes leading up to the murder. A lot of this short book is spent describing the cultural evolution of Muslim society in response to Western hegemony, down to such details as sports and time pieces. The details are often worth reading, and Dr. Lewis does tie things together in the end a bit. In the last chapter Ace Detective Lewis sorts through the various suspects and clues (the history he has been giving) to bring closure and lay blame -- a little vaguely, however. Along the way Lewis has some worthwhile insights, for example, his idea of "harmonization" as the key to Western culture. (One of the values of learning about another culture is what you learn about your own in the process.) Worth reading, but not quite what I expected from the title. My prior impression was Lewis was supposed to be hard on Islam. But it is hard to see why any reasonable person would object to this book on that ground. He claims Medieval Islam offered "vastly more freedom" than its competitors, at least for the male, Muslim, and free minority. (A completely different verdict from that of Donald Treadgold in Freedom, a History.) Lewis also claims Islam didn't have "wars of religion" like the West. Does that mean he defines Muslim civil wars, Shiite-Sunni conflicts, slave-raiding and invading, as non-religious? It seems to me Lewis bends over backwards to be fair to Muslim civilization. (Though he shows less patience for modern lunatics.) Overall, his approach struck me as moderate, honest, and well-considered. He made me think a bit better of Islam than I had previously. What went wrong? Not only does the question not get answered well, as some reviewers note, I am not even sure it got thoroughly asked. Lewis claims it would be "implausible" to blame Islam itself, considering how successful the Muslim civilization was for so long. But it seems to me that is because he defines "the problem" as the relative weakening of Muslim culture. After reading Paul Fregosi's Jihad, a swash-buckling and romantic (but historical) record of Muslim attacks on Europe, it seems to me Lewis defines the problem too narrowly. Neighboring peoples might be forgiven for thinking there was already a problem before Islam began to go into relative decline, and that the decline was a partial solution to it. The seclusion of women and the thousand-year jihad that swallowed Persia, Babylon, Nubia, India, Byzantine and a fair chunk of Europe was "wrong," too, wasn't it? Broaden Lewis' question to that extent, however, and it might appear that what went wrong in the first place was, to put it crudely, Mohammed. Lewis, while too honest to be politically correct, does not however seem ready, in this book at least, to consider that answer. But until Muslims renounce Mohammed's idea that believers have a God-given right to slaughter infidels and treat women like loot, a renewed Islamic civilization is not something that I, personally, am going to pray for. Lewis touches briefly on the correlary to his title question, what can set things right in the Muslim world. Perhaps healing might come (for us as for them) from listening more faithfully to a different Muslim prophet -- the one who, in the third century of Islam, was apocryphally quoted as saying: "If you desire to devote yourself entirely to God . . . Forgive those who have done you evil . . . Be kind to those who have been unkind to you." What was his name? Oh, yes -- Jesus.
Rating: 
Summary: Quite Objective
Review: As a historian, he tried to be objective. I appreciate his work of denying the -so called- Armenian Genocide.
Rating: 
Summary: Not Objective
Review: I don't believe this book is completely based on true facts. Unfortunately, I found some prejiduces and subjective thouhgts.
Rating:
Summary: Critical Background on How Resentment of the West Came To Be
Review: Why is it so important to read this book now? Well, it IS NOT a book about 9/11 or Islamic Radicalism directly. Instead, it is a book that delivers background on Islamic culture and how the power or resentment became a dominant force that has lead time and time again to extreme expression against the West in various forms. Bernard Lewis has a depth of understanding of the history of this region that few others can equal. Add his wonderful way with words and his manner of expression and you have an unequaled treasure. Some have complained that the book centers on Turkey rather than Iraq, Iran, Israel, Palestine, or Saudi Arabia. The reason is the Ottoman Empire ruled the region from Turkey for hundreds of years until it broke apart in the twentieth century. Others have complained that they felt it boring because it doesn't deal with the latest events. It went to press BEFORE 9/11. More than that, however, is the truth that the background provided here is essential to have more than a surface understanding of how these contemporary events came to be. It is a slim volume but it is packed with wisdom, insight, and just plain wonderful writing. Treat yourself to this pearl.
Rating: 
Summary: Overall, a Disappointment
Review: Because Bernard Lewis is one of the primary acknowledged experts on the Middle East, and because I have found his recent television interviews to be enlightening, I had high expectations for this book, published so soon after the September 11 wake-up call. Who better than a true historian to help us understand what has gone so horribly wrong between the US and the Islamic ciilization? Unfortunately, this book is focused on the decline of the Ottoman empire relative to Europe starting in the 16th century, and its content seems to be only indirectly related to recent momentous events. The book asks the question "What Went Wrong?" in the Ottoman empire during the last 500 years, and does a good job of documenting its decline as paralleled with the rise of the West. His answer seems to be that the decline was not due to Western imperialism, even though Imperialism is often blamed by the people who were being surpassed. I find it easy to accept this conclusion, but that is not the question that screams to be answered right now, namely 'How could these people hate us so much that a segment of the population celebrates the results of the September 11 attacks?' I hope that this eminent and well-respected historian decides to turn his attention to our modern dilemma and attempt to shed some light on more modern history.
Rating: 
Summary: Historical and Authoritative
Review: Bernard Lewis is, as far as I can tell, the utmost authority on the Middle East in academia. I first encountered him after 9/11 by researching Islam on the Internet and found one of his authoritative articles entitled Muslim Rage that he'd published in 1990. The Atlantic then published What Went Wrong in January, twelve years later, which is almost entirely the last chapter of the book. It's such a wonderful piece I've read it repeatedly and sent it to many friends. The book, What Went Wrong, is not quite as good as the last chapter, this is for two reasons: it was written before 9/11 and taken from lectures for European academia. One can tell from the change in style that the last chapter was modified after 9/11 and is much more succinct and hard hitting. That having been said, the book is short, historical, and sheds light on a people, religion, and culture that precious little is known about, especially in America. The book historically covers every known or theorized item that differentiates our cultures, our thinking, and what may have contributed to Islam's precipitous fall from power. Some of these items are very entertaining and enlightening, such as the obvious absence of time- pieces in the Middle East. Mr. Lewis is a product of the West and shares our understanding and sympathies, even though most would feel the book is explanatory and morally neutral. However, if "red meat" is what you're looking for, the last chapter is pretty hard hitting and even more so coming from such an authority and written in such an erudite style. I let a Muslim acquaintance read the last chapter and he was so enraged that he though Mr. Lewis was a loose cannon, an agitator and a liar. It is indeed incredible how differently we can see the same set of facts. A must read for those who want to understand the historical context of Islam.
Rating:
Summary: Much Like the Middle East
Review: A confusing rehash of the same ideas over and over with never a conclusion. Obviously a slapped together set of lectures.
Rating:
Summary: Read an unabridged history instead of this book...
Review: This book is a "repackaging" of a series of lectures/papers by the author over the years. As such, it was highly repetitive, and did not present information in an orderly fashion. If you are looking for a true history of the region, I would suggest other titles by the same author which are not "taking advantage" of the events of 9/11...
Rating:
Summary: The West and the Middle East: A Historical Perspective
Review: Bernard Lewis, prominent Middle East scholar of Princeton University, presents us a historical perspective of the Middle East response to the West. Most of the book is about the Ottoman Empire's respond to the rise of the Europe and the West in general by the sixteenth century; how did the Ottoman elites conceive the reasons why the Empire had begun to fall in various realms including military, political, economic, culture, science and technology? As Lewis stresses in his book, the Ottoman elites first heeded attention over military aspects of the increasing power gap between the West and the Empire. Then, the focus has been switched to legal, social and cultural aspects of the gap. 'Modernization and Social Equality', and 'Secularism and the Civil Society' chapters are about these aspects. Lewis also touches upon the distinctions in the areas of music, art, and even in the notions of time and space. This part of the book has several entertaining stories. Bernard's Lewis's discussion about two different Middle Eastern approaches to the West deserves close attention. One of them is blaming the West for the increasing gap between the two worlds. The other is to make self-criticism in asking 'what did we wrong'? These two different and clashing perspectives, in fact, can be channeled into two mainstream movements in the Islamic world/Middle East; reactionary factions and positive activists. While the first always blames the West, the latter envisions a modernized and developed world in keeping peace with both the West and the Middle Eastern/Islamic values. B.Lewis's book has an important shortcoming. Lewis is by and large biased toward the West and he ignores the significant importance of Western colonialism-dominance over the Islamic World vis-a-vis the Middle Eastern response to the West. This shortcoming is, however, a great obstacle to have a thorough analysis of Islam-West relations. In general, the book is by and large about history rather than current politics. One important note dealing with Lewis's work is that the book does not cover anti-Western or anti-American movements within the Islamic World during the twentieth century. It is also not about the September 11. In fact, as the author suggests, the core of the book is composed of series of three public lectures given in Austria in September 1999.
Rating:
Summary: Doesn't answer the question
Review: This book does not live up to its provocative title. It never addresses the question head on. While not a bad read, it is largely a rehash of parts of Lewis' earlier "The Middle East" -- not surprising since "What Went Wrong" is based on a lecture series Lewis gave. If you have not read "The Middle East" -- get that instead as it is a better book. If you have read it, you may not want to bother with this one unless you want a refresher.
| 
