<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Modern Turkey's Real History
Review: I knew absolutely nothing about Turkey when I picked up this book, which I bought in preparation for a trip to Turkey next month. I found that the author, unlike some academics, writes limpid, readable prose. He does dwell in considerable detail on the political jousting that takes place inside the government; it seems that there have always been competing factions within the power structure in Turkey, and they appear at times to have changed position from week to week. I therefore found myself skimming through parts of this book. I wish he'd focused a bit more on cultural history, as this was the bit I found most interesting. Still, all in all, a good read for what is essentially a textbook. I've started "Turkey Unveiled" by Hugh and Nicole Pope, two journalists who are clearly aiming for a more popular treatment of the subject matter, and I can tell that my having read Professor Zurcher's book will make their book much more interesting.
Rating:
Summary: Turkey
Review: It tells everything you want to learn about Turkey... And i am sure when you read it you will admire Ataturk ,founder of Turkey, like Che Guera or Martin Luther King.
Rating:
Summary: The best MODERN history of Turkey
Review: This is the probably the best history of Turkey in the modern period now available in English. Zurcher makes the point that his is a MODERN history of Turkey, rather than just a history of modern Turkey. The distinction is important, as he utilizes a wealth of recent resarch to flesh out the fairly one-dimensional and celebratory approach of many earlier Western writers dealing with Turkey, such as Bernard Lewis. Zurcher deals objectively with topics, such as social and ethnic problems, that are often neglected by some other writers.The book emphatically does not display anti-Turkish bias, as suggested by Mr. Pipes in his review below; the Armenian genocide may indeed be an "incendiary" topic in Turkey, but its reality is accepted by serious historians throughout the world, and to conclude that it was ordered by the government in power at the time is hardly controversial except among Turkish-nationalist circles and those who seek to curry favor with them. All in all, an excellent account, by a master of the field.
Rating: 
Summary: Useful history of modern Turkey
Review: This study succeeds where others fail because it dares to take on the myth and the legend of Kemal Attaturk, a figure revered in Turkey (it is illegal and a crime to criticize him in print or on the internet in Turkey). This study discusses in detail Attaturk's voracious homosexual appetite, his taste for young boys, particularly Greek, Jewish and Armenian under the age of 14, and his male lover who lived with him until his death in 1938, a national hero and legend. This study understands the unarticulated issue of modern Turkey, which is the bisexuality and homosexuality of many Turkish men. Although hardly a gender study, this book is a step in the right direction. The homosexuality of "gastarbeiten", guest workers, from Turkey living in Germany, is well-known but largely uncommented upon. This dichotomy largely explains the frictions between Greek and Turks, between Turks and Kurds, between Turks and Iraqis and between Turks and Iranians. An excellent book, and one which will interest the political scientist as well as the gender studies specialist or the gay/lesbian reader.
Rating: 
Summary: Turkey: A Modern History
Review: Zürcher, professor of history at the University of Amsterdam, has written a synthetic account of Turkey over the two centuries 1789-1991. The book will probably become the standard English-language account, for it is fast-moving, comprehensive, and reliable. By looking at the Young Turk and the Atatürk eras as a single whole, stretching from 1908 to 1950, it offers valuable new insights into a time too little understood. As for the future, Zürcher sensibly concludes that the country's two main problems are inflation and the Kurdish question. At the same time, Zürcher's text reflects the anti-Turkish biases regretfully so prevalent among Europeans. On the incendiary issue of Armenian genocide during World War I, he writes that "this author at least is of the opinion that there was a centrally controlled policy of extermination, instigated by the CUP [i.e., the top leadership]." Without condemning Atatürk, Zürcher knocks him down a peg or two. Here we learn that his rule had "totalitarian tendencies." There we are told that his ideology "lacked coherence and . . . emotional appeal." In another place, we find out that his interpretation of the Turkish national movement "distort[s] the historical picture." Instead of this grudging attitude, it would be more helpful if the author (and Europeans in general) celebrated the Republic of Turkey as a success story and as a model for the Muslim world to emulate. The Turks need that boost; and the outside world very much needs for them to succeed in their bold, Atatürkist experiment. Middle East Quarterly, June 1995
Rating:
Summary: Turkey: A Modern History
Review: Zürcher, professor of history at the University of Amsterdam, has written a synthetic account of Turkey over the two centuries 1789-1991. The book will probably become the standard English-language account, for it is fast-moving, comprehensive, and reliable. By looking at the Young Turk and the Atatürk eras as a single whole, stretching from 1908 to 1950, it offers valuable new insights into a time too little understood. As for the future, Zürcher sensibly concludes that the country's two main problems are inflation and the Kurdish question. At the same time, Zürcher's text reflects the anti-Turkish biases regretfully so prevalent among Europeans. On the incendiary issue of Armenian genocide during World War I, he writes that "this author at least is of the opinion that there was a centrally controlled policy of extermination, instigated by the CUP [i.e., the top leadership]." Without condemning Atatürk, Zürcher knocks him down a peg or two. Here we learn that his rule had "totalitarian tendencies." There we are told that his ideology "lacked coherence and . . . emotional appeal." In another place, we find out that his interpretation of the Turkish national movement "distort[s] the historical picture." Instead of this grudging attitude, it would be more helpful if the author (and Europeans in general) celebrated the Republic of Turkey as a success story and as a model for the Muslim world to emulate. The Turks need that boost; and the outside world very much needs for them to succeed in their bold, Atatürkist experiment. Middle East Quarterly, June 1995
<< 1 >>
|
