thameryst's review against another edition
4.0
Wow, I don't know where to begin. This book was such a whirlwind ride. But the important thing about it, I suppose, is that it seemed to accomplish its purpose: giving the reader an Islamic lens through which to consider all of history. What I enjoyed most about this book was the writing style. It was breezy and almost conversational, and thus made it much easier to get through. The author is incredibly deft at rendering such intricate threads of history in a highly accessible way. And no wonder, he has been reading history texts since he was a child. This was a book worth the time investment. I highly recommend it!
saif27's review against another edition
3.0
This book has a very impressive and in some ways noble aim, to bring the Islamic historical narrative to a Western audience. The author feels like he is positioned in a way to do this because he himself is a byproduct of both of these worlds. An Afghani man living in the US, is well armed to deal with both perspectives. He is afraid constantly of being biased or perceived as biased towards what he calls "the middle world", his name for the middle east. So each defense or presentation of a Muslim issue, is countered by an overcompensating attempt to critique it. I am sure he does this with the good intention of restricting his bias, but it actually pushes it in the other direction, where he constantly sounds apologetic and drooling for acceptance from his Western readers. This makes it so that a lot of his points and critiques are irritating to read from an Islamic point of view. He dismisses complex and meaningful figures such as Ghazali and Ibn Taimmayah with such ease as if their views are a simple and backward one that is just a sad consequence of their contexts. He even goes so far to say that the logic behind Ghazali's perspective of causality is easily disproven but that he won't bother us with that analysis of it. Like it's so beneath him to even take the time to explain his disagreement against the towering arguments of such a thinker that thousands of philosopher have dedicated entire careers to refuting or explaining his ideas. Thus, the title of the book is simply not true, this is not an Islamic view of history, this is not a decolonial work, but very much written like an orientalist one.
The second problem for me with the book is its presentation of history. This is a massive undertaking and of course any world history book will have to summarize some stories and not delve too much into details of specific events. I think though that he rushes through the early and medieval history of Islam so much and that extra time should have been spent in those sections for it to be actually valuable as a history book. Furthermore, he adds value judgements to facts that are based on historical myths or at least disputed ideas. This is not limited even to the Islamic narrative, but to a lot of the history he mentions. Such as that the Haganah was responsible for the King David Hotel bombing rather than the offshoot Irgun. Or when he calls Xerxes dimwitted while discussing the Greco-Persian wars. These kinds of mistakes can be ignored because they are not central to the arguments he is making but it just added to my frustration and trust in him as a researcher and sober historian.
The saving grace for the book is that he actually deals pretty well with the modern history and politics of Islam and tries his best to offer some answers to really challenging questions such as: Why did the industrial revolution occur in the West not in the East where a lot of the inventions were already made centuries before? How did the Europeans colonize the Gunpowder Empires if they were militarily and economically weaker at the time? I think the most interesting idea though and one that he covered well was how did the Muslim world deal with Westernization and modernity? To be very fair I did learn a lot from the book and not just random historical facts but a lot of nuanced ideas, historical figures and movements that have led to me taking many notes for more research. I think what partly annoyed me so much is that this book could have been a masterpiece and I am frustrated by the missed opportunity. Yet that is not a fault of the author who is coming at it from a different perspective and aim, I am simply not his target audience.
The second problem for me with the book is its presentation of history. This is a massive undertaking and of course any world history book will have to summarize some stories and not delve too much into details of specific events. I think though that he rushes through the early and medieval history of Islam so much and that extra time should have been spent in those sections for it to be actually valuable as a history book. Furthermore, he adds value judgements to facts that are based on historical myths or at least disputed ideas. This is not limited even to the Islamic narrative, but to a lot of the history he mentions. Such as that the Haganah was responsible for the King David Hotel bombing rather than the offshoot Irgun. Or when he calls Xerxes dimwitted while discussing the Greco-Persian wars. These kinds of mistakes can be ignored because they are not central to the arguments he is making but it just added to my frustration and trust in him as a researcher and sober historian.
The saving grace for the book is that he actually deals pretty well with the modern history and politics of Islam and tries his best to offer some answers to really challenging questions such as: Why did the industrial revolution occur in the West not in the East where a lot of the inventions were already made centuries before? How did the Europeans colonize the Gunpowder Empires if they were militarily and economically weaker at the time? I think the most interesting idea though and one that he covered well was how did the Muslim world deal with Westernization and modernity? To be very fair I did learn a lot from the book and not just random historical facts but a lot of nuanced ideas, historical figures and movements that have led to me taking many notes for more research. I think what partly annoyed me so much is that this book could have been a masterpiece and I am frustrated by the missed opportunity. Yet that is not a fault of the author who is coming at it from a different perspective and aim, I am simply not his target audience.
shrutigeorge's review against another edition
5.0
I read this a really long time ago and found it an amazing and concise history of the Islamic world (and the world from an Islamic context). Must-read
razihecker's review against another edition
a. Three main Empires in MA:
i. Safavid (Persian) – Born out of Shiite resentment and desire to differentiates themselves. Shiites fled out of Ottoman controlled places into Safavid Empire and Sunnies into Ottoman Empire. Additionally, Safavid’s drew on Persian history to differentiate themselves and thus further cemented this Shiite-Sunni difference.
ii. Ottoman – Jannisaries (Devirshme system) converted young boys. This was good at first because bought loyalty and actually was a good checks and balances system for ruling elite, but ultimately backfired and crippled Ottoman’s because they were prone to rebellion and couldn’t keep up with military modernization of the west.
iii. Moghul – Empire in Afghanistan, India, and Pakistan, actually at first pretty religiously tolerant (esc of Hindus in India) but gradually less so.
sweetpeppah's review against another edition
5.0
an *incredible*, fascinating journey through world history. very personably told, with humour, as if the author were sitting with you at a party. innumerable insights and ideas to ponder.. how our point of view narrows our potential for analysis, how the current attitude of Islamic peoples/countries is shaped by 2 centuries of history, how our media/government narrative and that of the Islamic countries slide right by each other without any understanding: we're not fighting the same battles. i got this on CD, and it is read by the author, perfectly!
qas242m's review against another edition
5.0
Destiny Disrupted is a book for people with a good sense of Western history, who are wanting to know more about the Middle World from the perspective of those in the Middle World.
Most books are positioned as a Western look into the Middle East and history of Islam, or entirely from the Middle Eastern viewpoint. Yet, Tamim Ansary blends the two worlds together brilliantly, and the resulting book is told from the viewpoint of those in the Middle World, but with the context of traditional historical events from the West used as framing. This, alongside Ansary’s rather casual style, leads to an effortless and engaging read.
Destiny Disrupted starts around the birth-years of Islam right through to modern life in the Middle World, detailing each era in between. There is always enough to detail to give a comprehensive overview into key historical events, but the pace never slows enough to bog things down or overwhelm readers.
There is a perfect flow to the historical narrative, even though it contains many disparate and branching arcs. Ansary provides enough detail to understand the general picture and leaves us with a strong knowledge base to later pick up more detailed works focused on specific time periods/rulers/civilisations/events. So many sections here piqued my curiosity and made me want to search for entire books dedicated to just those eras of history. Being able to do that over and over and over throughout a book is no small feat, but Ansary does so with ease.
This is a book both enlightening and recalibrating, making me aware of things I’d never known before and making me rethink events I was fully aware of. Because of this, it’s whirlwind of history like no other I’ve read, and is tremendously enjoyable to read to boot.
5 stars.
Most books are positioned as a Western look into the Middle East and history of Islam, or entirely from the Middle Eastern viewpoint. Yet, Tamim Ansary blends the two worlds together brilliantly, and the resulting book is told from the viewpoint of those in the Middle World, but with the context of traditional historical events from the West used as framing. This, alongside Ansary’s rather casual style, leads to an effortless and engaging read.
Destiny Disrupted starts around the birth-years of Islam right through to modern life in the Middle World, detailing each era in between. There is always enough to detail to give a comprehensive overview into key historical events, but the pace never slows enough to bog things down or overwhelm readers.
There is a perfect flow to the historical narrative, even though it contains many disparate and branching arcs. Ansary provides enough detail to understand the general picture and leaves us with a strong knowledge base to later pick up more detailed works focused on specific time periods/rulers/civilisations/events. So many sections here piqued my curiosity and made me want to search for entire books dedicated to just those eras of history. Being able to do that over and over and over throughout a book is no small feat, but Ansary does so with ease.
This is a book both enlightening and recalibrating, making me aware of things I’d never known before and making me rethink events I was fully aware of. Because of this, it’s whirlwind of history like no other I’ve read, and is tremendously enjoyable to read to boot.
5 stars.
blearywitch's review against another edition
5.0
I love history told in captivating narrative form. Ansary did a brilliant job of weaving everything from the very beginning to today in a fast paced, mindblowing, and captivating sequence. I have some notes to organize and will add to my review later. This is a masterpiece. I enjoyed it so much and highly recommend it.