Rating: 
Summary: Going where few others dare
Review: It is difficult not to ask this question when one sees that during the Middle Ages Islamic civilisation was far more advanced than Western Christian civilization in most areas, including science. Yet today, the combined non-petrol exports of all Arab countries amount to less than those of Finland, and in Spain each year more books are translated than the Arab world has during the last 1000 years. Lewis clearly belongs to the school, which seeks to explain the fortune or misfortune of civilisations through their cultures, rather than geography or political events. There have been many studies in recent times trying to explain the backwardness of Arab countries in economical and other matters (see e.g. Arab World Competitiveness Report 2002-2002, Arab Human Development report 2002). All of these stop at secondary explanations, such as the discrimination of women, lack of freedom etc..... Lewis traces these back to their roots : the culture of Islam Lewis paints a picture of an Ottoman world, the most powerful entity in and a proxy for the Islam world, not interested in learning much from the infidel west, except in military matters (to averts defeats). Cultural Exchanges between the West and the Ottoman world had been a one-way street for centuries, the West absorbing what was useful, and the Ottoman empire too aware of its superiority to contemplate learning from infidels. This superiority in part was due to Islam's view of Christianity as a precursor of Islam, i.e. less perfect. Still, military defeats in the 17th and 18th century forced the Ottomans to ask themselves what caused their decline and what was the solution. In the 19th century Ottoman rulers undertook a number of modernisations, which they hoped would strengthen the empire. This led to less freedom and more autocracy in the empire. Lewis points out that, whereas Europeans viewed freedom as the opposite of tyranny, for Ottomans the opposite of tyranny was justice, i.e. the ruler was there by right and that he ruled according to God's law. Little surprise that most experiments with democracy petered out soon. Lewis also notes a fundamental difference between Western and Middle Eastern economic approaches today: in the West one makes money to buy power and influence, in the Middle East one seizes power to make money. In the chapter on social and cultural barriers, Lewis identifies and analyses three crucial differences, which have played a role: (the discrimination of) women, science and music. Lewis points out that, whereas Western powers imposed the abolition of slavery on the world, including Islam, little or nothing was done to promote the rights of women in the Islam world. Lewis does not attempt to elaborate the impact in economical or other terms of the discrimination of women in the Middle East. As to science, the hostility in Islam to science in later centuries is indeed all the more remarkable given the role Islam has played early on in developing and transmitting science from ancient Greece to Europe. Lewis speculates that, while the Ottoman world was willing to learn science from the infidel in military and medical matters, in other areas of science, which had more philosophical or religious implications this, was not the case. Nobody can doubt the importance of the first 2 "crucial differences", women's status and the attitude to science, but to describe the different musical tastes of Muslims as a "crucial" difference strikes me as a bit over the top, and probably more illustrative of the cultural gap between Middle East and West, rather than a cause. Lewis is far more compelling when he describes the very different attitudes between the Islam world and the western world regarding secularism. He notes the well known passage in Matthew where Christ says "render therefore to Caesar the things which are Caesar's and unto God the things that are God's" which has been interpreted as Christ endorsing a separation of the two spheres (I'm not sure though if there is not an element of "hineininterpretieren" or even wishful thinking in this interpretation), but also points out that Christianity has been a persecuted religion for centuries, leading to separate spheres for the (Christian) religion - e.g. canonic law - and worldly or political, whereas Mohammed was both a political ruler and the prophet, hence the only law accepted by Muslims as of divine origin and regulating all aspects of human life, whether civil, commercial, criminal or constitutional is religious law or Sharia. This fundamental difference explains according to Lewis the reluctance of the Muslim world to accept the western import of secularism, because it denies to Islam its role as a religion, which governs every aspect of life, and must be therefore heretic and rejected. It took someone with the stature of Ataturk to impose secularism, although even in Turkey secularism is on the defensive. Lewis clearly suggests that secularism would be a preferable outcome in the Middle East although Lewis does not explain how this could be achieved and this sounds rather like a long shot in view of the very long tradition of the supremacy of religion. Lewis then devotes chapter six to the different perceptions of time, space and modernity and chapter seven to aspects of cultural change, such as the lack of interest in literature etc.... I thought this was interesting, though of secondary importance. Furthermore Lewis only now elaborates on the different musical tastes of Middle East and West (remember the third "crucial" factor of chapter 3 ?) I think this is a very interesting book but it is not well pieced together or structured. It seems it is based on 3 different lectures given in the past by the author. At first it seems as if Lewis doesn't answer his own question; I think he does, but the answer is mixed up with so many other interesting facts and anecdotes that one needs a second read. It deserves it, because the issue is important (and the book is only 161 pages long).
Rating:
Summary: A Necessity
Review: I've been fumbling around since September 11 trying to figure out what happened in the middle East -- I took a course at a theology institute, and read articles by Edward Said, and a book by Abukhalil (pretty good, but limited), and finally read this book by Bernard Lewis in spite of all the fulminations and rants against it by leftist friends and colleagues. In fact -- this book is the only one that has shed any light on the situation at all. Also, far from running the Islamic people into the ground, it reveals with a grand sweep their sense of humor, their charm, as well as their dumb ideas concerning hierarchy, slavery, and women. But inside of this balanced portrait comes a real willingness to take these people seriously. I came away from the book appreciating the Islamic situation for the very first time, and actually liking the people. Sure, he holds them accountable for persecuting women, children, slaves, etc., and doesn't just whine that the west did this to them, but on the other hand, he also does do a lot more finger-pointing at the west than is generally accounted for. The style is impeccable -- the kind of historical writing that was once practiced by clear-minded scholars instead of Marxist hacks like Edward Said who are often so filled with vitriol they can't think straight. After reading this it seems that Edward Said and his friends just don't want the truth known and so are painting this angel of light the wrong color. Edward Said must be a small-minded fanatic to have said the ageist and anti-Semitic things he has said about Bernard Lewis. Read this for yourself and see. Bernard Lewis puts the situation straight, he rights the wrong pictures of leftists, and actually breathes a certain hope into the whole picture through his comprehensive breadth, clarity, and good humor. If you want to understand the middle east, this man is the man, and this book is the book!
Rating:
Summary: A fascinating book!
Review: The backwardness of Muslim world in the field of science and technology compared to the West, has been the paramount question of last three hundred years for all and almost every educated men in the Muslim world. Only a scholar like Bernard Lewis could have covered this subject with such an high authority and objective judgement. After having read this fascinating book, I may admit that this book would be highly interest of anyone who wants to understand today's world of which Muslim societies are important component and more importantly to any educated men inside the Muslim world.
Rating: 
Summary: Smug ethnocentrism in a book about smug ethnocentrism
Review: The short text is a set of lectures turned into essays rather than a continuous exposition. It draws heavily on the same materials and examples as Lewis's book _The Muslim Discovery of Europe_. The first three chapters are revisions of 1999 lectures in Vienna, the rest from earlier; none was written or revised post-9/11. In that the focus is on Ottoman discourse about the west and/or "modernity," this does not much matter, but it does bear stressing that the book deals with earlier attempts to learn not recent violent attacks in/of the west or the reactionary regimes or movements within Islamdom engaged in "a downward spiral of hate and spite, rage and self-pity, poverty and oppression." Lewis does not present convincing evidence that the problem as he has specified it ("What went wrong with our culture?") has or has had much currency even within what was the Ottoman Empire. Insofar as he provides an answer to it, it is an answer that reinforces the widespread view in America of fundamental and total cultural inferiority of The Other and is exceedingly unlikely to be accepted by those presented as inferior and inspire the razing from within of their cultures (the plural is mine, not Lewis's) or aspirations (however unrealized) to justice and equality from the Qur'an. A reader will get no idea of these aspirations from Lewis; a far better introduction is provided in Karen Armstrong's _Islam_. There is certainly much interesting information, particularly on Ottoman observers of European phenomena, and some sound ideas (e.g., what Lewis calls the ecclesiastization of Islam and borrowing the demonization of Jews from Christian traditions) but many questions are begged, especially Lewis's metaphor of polyphony from music to complex society, especially in that the Ottoman Empire was an ethnically diverse society that some Muslims somehow managed to govern for centuries even without appreciating European art and art music.
Rating:
Summary: From the Dean of Mid-East Studies ¿ well reasoned analysis.
Review: With care and nuance, Lewis gives a panoramic description of Islam's history and its challenge in the face of the success of today's secular world. The steady decline of Islamic civilization has left the Muslim in a state of crisis as the world has moved beyond anything imagined by his religious mindset. How does one deal with one's place in the world where one feels humiliated and impoverished? There are two possibilities. One can rationally assess the failure of one's culture or irrationally blame some foreign scapegoat for one's place in the world. In today's politically correct multicultural academia, criticism of other cultures is discouraged. When foreign students study in the West, they are told that they are victims. Lewis has been attacked for honestly focusing on the failures of foreign cultures - which are presented in conjunction with the failures of our response. Lewis, always the gentleman, calmly argues his position. And his arguments are reasonable. One cannot come to grips with the issue of Islam in today's world without knowledge of the work of Bernard Lewis. Nevertheless, I still believe that Lewis is not fully critical of his subject - which after a lifetime of study may seem more "understandable" that merits the case. One may want to compare this book to works by Ibn Warraq and Serge Trifkovic.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting history
Review: From the title and subtitle, I expected this to be another book placing the blame for September 11 on America, but, fortunately, a sense of fair play prompted me to read it anyway. As it turns out, the book was in fact written before (although published after) September 11, and contains mostly neutral history. Where there is commentary (very rarely) it appears equally neutral. Lewis simply describes how the Islamic world rose and fell in comparison with the West, including extensive discussion -- from weapons to music -- of what the two borrowed or refused to borrow from one another. The picture that results is one of a stagnant, rather than oppressed, Middle East -- a Middle East whose problems result largely from internal causes, rather than from exploitation by outsiders. The book ends with a sobering challenge from Lewis: that to restore its former glory, the Middle East must abandon the scapegoating and conspiracy theories currently so popular, and embrace responsibility for itself.
Rating: 
Summary: Very Good, good place to start your study of the Middle East
Review: Mr. Lewis does a great job of looking at the ills that affect the modern Middle East. Sometimes he gets a bit long winded and needs to get back on course, but he makes excellent points. Even though this book was written before 9/11 (it was published after), one can see the forces that are affecting Islam today and why some are lashing out so violently. This is a good book for one that wants to get a basic understanding of the pitfalls that have caused Islam/The Middle East to go off course.
Rating: 
Summary: What Went Right?
Review: Whilst a very respected and knowledgeable writer, Bernard Lewis has committed a major folly. He never explains in this book what exactly went wrong, he simply goes on to describe a genral decline of mainly the Ottoman Empire. To describe what went wrong, Mr. Lewis should have at least told us What Went Right in the first place. How did this band of desert dwellers with a new creed end up ruling the world and developing most of today's known sciences? What political, social, and other systems did they develop that allowed them control over vast areas and wealth? How did they become a military power so quickly? How did the Muslims become the most successful empire ever? Let's find out about these things first and then try to figure out What Went Wrong. The book fails to explain, and is of no use to anyone who is trying to understand the complexity of Islam, its history, and its current issues.
Rating:
Summary: Hard to belive this man is a respected professor
Review: Bernard Lewis may in fact have written numerous scholarly books on the Middle East; this is not one of them. Seldom have I seen such scholarship in the blatant service of agenda. When he lists facts, he is (usually) quite informative. But his constant, anti-Islamic asides grown increasingly tiresome and less and less defensible. By the time he gets to his chapters on Time, Space and Modernity, and on Culture, his drivel on the superiority of Western Music, for example, is pure rubbish. He refuses to acknowledge the that Middle Eastern/Turkish use of percussion (an element of TIME-keeping) re-energized western classical music in recent centuries. Lewis would have you believe that violent persecution in Christian Europe of Islamics had little to do with why very few travelers from the Middle East stayed there and 'absorbed' western ideas, while the more inclusive-minded Islamic societies were not a big reason why Europeans felt more comfortable living in Arab countries. He seems to feel the Ottoman Empire was the sum total of Islamic culture for four hundred years, and completely discounts the divisive policies of French and British (and later, American) colonialist/imperialist powers of the past century as having anything to do with the continuation of repressive regimes in the region. If one wants an enlightening counterbalance to "What Went Wrong", this reader urges you to read Tariq Ali's "Clash of Fundamentalisms". Certainly, you will come away better informed.
Rating: 
Summary: Answer the question, Bernard!
Review: My book club choose What Went Wrong after seeing Lewis' book interview on cable TV. Very intelligent man with insightful things to say. Very refreshing contrast to the media's sound bites.... Or so we thought. Six weeks later we're all struggling to finish what has quickly become an arduous task.... I'm nearly finished now and have yet to discover anything in these pages which Lewis hadn't mentioned in his 30 minute television interview. The content of the book would have been fare more effective as a featured article in a popular periodical (and a lot less expensive). Lewis may be part of the recognized "intelligentsia" but I think he spit this one out to make some quick holiday cash. I recommend Karen Armstrong as an expert who can provide superior insights into the history of the Middle East. When it comes to the middle east the religious point of view seems a fare more effective vantage point. Lewis' book, in my opinion, is only spurious "filler". I'll be very cautious about buying another hard cover book by Bernard Lewis.
| 
