Rating: 
Summary: these others are tooooo uptight - kapuscinski is amazing
Review: quite frankly, i do not think some of these other reviewers have read any kapuscinski books prior to this one. shah of shah's is not meant to be the tell-all end-all book on islam, the shah, the history of iran... those books exist already. this book is about one man and his life of utter absurdity. this is not meant to denounce the shah (i have visited his memorial), but to say that when it comes to world leaders we have lost our sense of humor. this book is at times tragic and shocking in the sheer idiocy of human beings, and ironic that it takes a polish journalist to see more than one side to the story.
Rating: 
Summary: Classic Example of How Not to Write a Book!
Review: Ryszard Kapuscinski view of Iran as it was, the Shah and his rule during the period in question is to put it mildly distorted by his lack of knowledge. Here is a classic example of an author who has not done his homework before attempting to write a book. To put things right, I suggest he should talk to a few Iranians or people who actually lived in the country during that period (preferably non communists). I must admit though that the book (and the author's line of reasoning) had a definite comical tone to it. I could only get better if I ever attempted to write a book about the contemporary Polish history!
Rating:
Summary: A great book about hard times
Review: Ryszard's book 'The Shah of Shahs' tells me far more about the country during that turbulent time than drier history books or opiniated polemics on the politics of the region. His style of letting the people and events around him speak for themselves is illuminating. He has an empathic and observant eye, and a knack for being in the right place.
Most important of all, he sees these world shaping events for their effects on the people who must live, suffer or die through them as though THEY are what matters, and not the events or dictator biographies themselves. This is a humane and enlightened viewpoint, and ends up teaching me more about what happened during those times than other approaches.
There is a beauty and truthfulness in this style of journalism of immersion and talking to people that helps to make sense of the many conflicting arguments and perspectives of complex issues. I have nothing but praise for the man and his books, and you would do well to read them yourself
Rating: 
Summary: Artistic non-fiction
Review: This book is an artfully-written collection of some reflections on the last Shah of Iran and the Islamic Revolution. However, the author falls in short in a few regards. He cites no sources to back up his information. He makes it clear in the first chapter that he speaks no Farsi. His writing style is thoughtful and insightful, and he has a lot of experience studying dictators and revolutions. On one hand, he reported personal testimonies of people who had lived through the Revolution, which I found very beneficial, on the other hand, hard detals are sparse in the book. All in all, the book gave me a general framework of knowledge, but to fill in the details, I'll have to read more.
Rating:
Summary: An illuminating book about the mistery of the revolution
Review: This book is probably the best one I have read about the revolution of 1979 in Iran. It is concise and gets to the point very quickly. It is very illuminating. YOU MUST READ THIS BOOK if you are interested to learn about the revolution. I give my utmost respect to the author for perceiving the situation as it was, with such clarity.
Rating:
Summary: Worst book ever written about the Shah
Review: This book, although claiming to show you the inside scoop on what went on in revolutionary Iran, shares no insight, no secrets, no information, and no detail about anything relevant. The web of lies that led to the 79 revolution are much thicker than this entire book and the imagination of one author who thinks he knows it all. There are much better books out there. Don't even think about wasting your money.
Rating:
Summary: FICTION THAT DOES NOT SPEAK ITS NAME
Review: This is a curious book.
It is supposed to be about Iran and its last king, Muhammad Reza Shah Pahlavi.
In fact, it is about everything except Iran and the Shah. The author, who claims to have spent some time in Iran, either saw nothing or imagined what he wished to see.
The exercise may or may not be of literary value. But, even if taken as fiction, this book falls short of its immense pretensions.
It is written in a pseudo-surrealistic language of the kind that was once fashionable in Parisian cafes, and is now the rage on some American campuses. Not a single character is properly portrayed, nor any situation developed to its full dramatic potenial.
A confused, and confusing, syntax covers everything with a fog of misunderstanding.
One ends up wondering why the Polish man ( SORRTY I CANNOT SPELL HIS NAME OFF-HAND, NO DISRESPECT!) wanted to write this book, except to pose as a practitioner of postmodernist prose and a peddlar of politically correct cliches.
Fortunately, those interested in the life of the late Shah and Iran's turbulent politics have a choice of other books.
There is William Shawcross's " The Shah's Last Ride", Amir Taheri's " The Unknown Life of the Shah" and Marvin Zonis's
" Majestic Failure" among others.
Postmodernist obfuscation mayimpress some Ameircan undegraduates. Butthose interested in more serious hstory would stay away from this pretentious, litttle and ultimately sad book.
A READER IN LONDON
Rating: 
Summary: An excellent 'mood' book.
Review: This is a very interesting book. Since there seems to be some confusion about it, let me make clear what this book is NOT; if you are looking for any of the following you should look elsewhere:
- A blow by blow account of the shah's life and the revolution with 30 references per 'fact'.
- A book about Americans. This book, being what it is, is about ehm...Iranians.
- Moral indignation about any of the protagonists whether the revolutionaries or the Shah or the Americans. What this is, is a feelings book, a mood book. What this book will give you a feel for(according to the authors interpretation of course!) is:
- The nature of Iranian life before the oil boom
- The nature of the Shah and how he perhaps saw himself.
- The immense physical and physcological changes the oil boom brought to the region
- The Shah's tragicomic efforts to modernize.
- How Iranians saw themselves, the backwardness and the new modernity entering the land.
- The nature of life under the Shah.
- What would be the mood during the eventful days leading upto the revolution.
- Why these revolutions(Kapuscinski's 27th!) invariably fall apart, why those who could produce positive change invariably get shunted aside.
- What it might take to produce positive change. This is a very good book. Kapuscinski makes some excellent observations. He is very perceptive and has the habit of sifting through the fog, to the root of the subject. Only gripe would be that the photographs should have been printed in the first section on Daguerrotypes, and sometimes his writing style gets a little too cute, and tends to lapse into hyperbolic metaphor.
Rating:
Summary: An essential study of power disappearing
Review: This is the best case study I have ever read of how absolute power drains away. Kapuscinski's "I am a camera" technique gives voices to many different voices of the Islamic revolution in Iran, but the best part of the book is the way it demonstrates the folly and sheer bad timing of the Shah. This book has a kind of torque: as the Shah's reign gets closer to the end, events seem to speed up. The Shah and his circle must make more decisions more rapidly, and they come up short.
Kapuscinksi's eye for the absurd detail and ear for the casual but prescient remark are used to beautiful effect in this book.
Rating:
Summary: Wow...journalists can write!
Review: This is the first of Kapucinski's books that I've read and it takes a little while to get used to his style, but once you've settled in, it is quite entertaining. The book is historical, but written by a journalist, so you expect the style to fall somewhere between that of an historian and a journalist. Suprisingly Shah of Shahs reads more like a novel. The book is divided into three sections: One which introduces the unrest in Iran in the 1970s, another of descriptions of photographs and recollections from notes and interviews, and lastly section called the "The Dead Flame" that hints at what is coming the wake of revolution. It poignantly shows through the author's own experience (Iran's revolution was the 27th that he'd witnessed) that things were no different there than they were in a multitude of Latin American and African countries. Kapuscinski's style is seductive and addictive. I know I will be reading more of his work in the future.
| 
