Shah of Shahs

This is a somewhat brief account of the infamous Shah of Iran, Mohammed Reza Pahlavi. My guess is that most Americans never even heard of the man until the hostage crisis that occurred when he fled his country from the radical Islamic uprising in 1978. The U.S. harbored the man, Iran wanted him back. A dark period of American history then commenced.Why was Iran so infuriated? Why was the Shah despised so much and by so many? This book does a good job explaining why. This is not an extensive biography of the man, nor does the book go very deep in the weeds. The author is a Polish journalist that spent considerable amount of time in Iran during the height of the crisis, and he does a wonderful job transcribing the feel of the country. We get a strong sense of the mood, the atmosphere, the sights, and even the smells of this backward country, and it’s never pleasant.We read how the Shah came into power, and how he essentially was oblivious to the dissatisfaction of the masses. He had great ideas on how to Westernize his oil-rich country, but was clueless as to how to put these ideas into tangible plans in order to obtain any sort of success. So when he arbitrarily throws money in every direction, what results is a cluttered, chaotic mess that does absolutely nothing to help the country, and it even manages to further inhibit the masses of residents.In many ways, this book is more of a thesis on how revolutions occur in countries such as this. Had this book been about any other country where such an incident occurred, you get the feeling that much of the descriptions would be exactly the same. When countries such as Iran are run by cruel authoritarian dictators that tolerate no dissent, people are afraid to voice their opinion even at a quiet bus stop. There are spies all over who would happily nab such individual and put them through immense torture. So people stay quiet in public amongst the suffering.So with all of the unrest, suddenly the pieces seem to almost accidentally fit together, and the masses unite almost overnight. Of course, the Shah is so sheltered, he can’t believe what he sees. Don’t his countrymen love him unconditionally? We see the dangers of when a high profiled leader mistakes terror for devotion from his subjects.There really isn’t much here about the actual hostage crisis. It may have been mentioned in retrospect once or twice, but that’s about it as it’s never the intention of the author to discuss in detail. So we don’t read about any of the particulars.Again, this is a short book, but it’s very well written and very captivating. This is the sort of book that makes the reader want to learn more, and read more about the man, the place, and the events. It was a nice quick read, and it’s always an advantage when a book is written by an individual who writes current events for “a living” as they are practiced in keeping the reader’s attention.

A. Modern Islam is built on its petroleum reserves, on the sense of divine favor that petroleum wealth confers.B. The "American Century" -- actually a half century at best -- ended with the fall of Shah Reza Pahlavi.C. Everything that has happened in Iran since 1954 is an extended consequence of the CIA overthrow of Mossadegh, the worst mistake in the history of American diplomacy. At least, that's how Iranians and most of the rest of the world interpret history.D. Recovery of sane social and political norms in Iran will eventually depend on the legacy of respect for Mossadegh and his brief era of democracy.E. The world is no longer an Anglophone sea.F. The late Shah's SAVAK made Tamerlane, Vlad the Impaler, and the Spanish Inquisition look like pussycats.G. Any Iranian who didn't celebrate the fall of the Shah was obviously on the Shah's payroll of clientage.H. Revolution, however justified and even salubrious, seldom or never brings out the best human qualities of the victors.If any of these premises seem unfounded or offensive, don't lambaste me! I'm just the reviewer, and these are my clumsily simplified extrapolations of Ryszard Kapuscinski's nuanced impressions, supposedly written on scraps in his hotel room in Teheran in 1980, at the end of Jimmy Carter's ineptitude but before Ronald Reagan's consummate covert idiocy.Kapuscinski was too subtle and artful an essayist ever to have been an ordinary journalist. His writing is too graceful to be merely what it seems. "Shah of Shahs" is an extreme example of Kapuscinski's indirection; it starts out as a collection of snapshots - literally! the first 'chapters' are labeled 'Daguerrotypes - innoucuous impressions at most. As you read on, however, amused by the author's wit, the intensity of Kapuscinski's awed recognition of the significance of the Islamic Revolution builds and builds. Perhaps only an observer like Kapuscinski - an outsider to both sides of everything, a Pole, a man who traveled with Herodotus in his pocket of memory - could have written such a report, placing what he saw first hand the day before in the context of all recorded history. This book was written before the worst days of the Iran-Iraq War and the repression that has occurred under the clerical autocracy, but it is not dated. It's well worth reading today and it will continue to be a source for historians long into the future.

After reading a couple of Kapuscinski's works, the gold standard in my mind continues to be 'Another Day of Life' (his tale of the Angolan conflict). Still, though, it's tough to belittle in any fashion the work of a man who - as he notes late in the book - has just witnessed his 27th revolution in 'the Third World' (and I want to make clear it is the author, not the reviewer, that consigned the Iran of 1979 - 1980 to that category).This short book (no more than a couple of hours' read) does have a some insightful things to say about power, most notably how to abuse it, and how to squander it. And, for those wondering how Iran could shake off the shackles of plutocracy/kleptocracy and plunge into theocracy, Kapuscinski pithily comments:"The Shah left people a choice between Savak and the mullahs. And they chose the mullahs...It is not always the best people that emerge from hiding...but often those that have proven themselves strongest, not always those who will create new values but rather those whose thick skin and internal resiliance have ensured their survival."Towards the end of the book (originally published in Polish in 1982 and first translated into English in 1985), pessimism sets in with Kapuscinski as he notes "the conservative hardliners gradually gained the upper hand over the enlightened and open ones." But, as he points out "a democracy cannot be imposed by force, the majority must favor it, yet the majority wanted what Khomeini wanted - an Islamic republic."

Shah of Shahs is not, and is not meant to be, a history of the Iranian revolution. It is a short book which approaches the Iranian revolution from a particular angle. Kapuscinski, while a journalist, has an ability to report on events in a way that is entertaining to read and focuses on the implications for the people involved and affected. While his account of the events in Iran is no doubt coloured by his own views, is far from comprehensive and I understand from other reviews may even be misleading and/or inaccurate in parts, this book is a light, interesting read and successfully provides a valuable insight into the causes of revolutions and their aftermaths generally, not only Islamic ones or other anti-Western ones. As political turmoil in various regions of the world has taken place over the past several years, I feel I have had a better understanding of the revolutionary dynamics as a result of having read Shah of Shahs.

An intriguing perspective on the turmoil surrounding the creation of today’s Iran and the degeneration and demise of the last Shah.Beautifully written with engaging prose, this offers a great insight into the passing of regimes and contemplates the nature of rebellion and civil unrest itself.A short, but perfectly-formed read.

Amazing! If there’s a one book you can read about Iranian revolution, dictatorship, Islam and humanity this is the one ☝️

I loved Kapuscinski's vivid account of the downfall of the last Shah of Iran. Just so magically written really took you to the streets of Tehran and into the rural villages of Iran from which the revolution sprung. As with all Kapuscinski books "Shah of Shahs" is infused with great passion and insight but also with a great sense of irony and with an eye for the absurd and comical.

I guess Kapuscinski's reporting has been questioned, but the writing is beyond reproach and it gives incredible insight into such a crucial turning point in 20th century history. A must read book (though his "The Emperor" is perhaps even better).