Maxime Rodinson has long been known in Europe as one of the foremost interpreters of Arab history and thought. In this concise overview of the Arab people and their distinctive culture, the author discusses the extend to which Arabs can be defined by religion, language, or race; surveys the Arab diaspora; examines modern Arab nationalism; and questions the degree to which it is possible to generalize about the Arab people and their "personality."
Marxist historian, sociologist and orientalist. He was the son of a Russian-Polish clothing trader and his wife who both died in the Auschwitz concentration camp. After studying oriental languages, he became a professor of Ethiopian (Amharic) at EPHE (École Pratique des Hautes Études, France). He was the author of a rich body of work, including the book Muhammad, a biography of the prophet of Islam.
Rodinson joined the French Communist Party in 1937 for "moral reasons", but later turned away after the party's Stalinist drift. He was expelled from the party in 1958. He became well known in France when he expressed sharp criticism of Israel, particularly opposing the settlement policies of the Jewish state. Some credit him with coining the term "Islamic fascism" (le fascisme islamique) in 1979, which he used to describe the Iranian revolution.
I believe I keep reading books by Maxime Rodinson because he’s a Marxist and I expect to mostly like his worldview and the empathy and generosity I expect him to show his subjects. I also read him because this book happened to be available at my town’s public library. So much of what we read is based on availability, a sort of coincidence of time and space and your own personal interest. We end up teaching ourselves in a mildly haphazard fashion as those elements come together. I kind of love that about books. And that is how I, a woman with a master’s in Arab Studies, ended up reading a 150 page introduction to “the Arabs.” You’ll be surprised to hear that I enjoyed it far more than his more famous “Islam and Capitalism” or his biography of Mohammed (which just couldn’t help itself and had to stress the main character’s supposedly exaggerated sexuality [insert eyeroll]).
It was published in 1979 and you’d be amazed at how correct his predictions are, and his sweeping statements about states and peoples all still really hold up. The man knew his stuff, and I guess writing for an audience that wasn’t his peers allowed him to loosen up a bit and give full rein to his voice and opinions, something I just love in an academic. You can just hear them sigh and really let go. Give it to us, man, we want to hear what you really think.
I’m not, however, sure how much you’d enjoy it if you knew absolutely nothing about the United Arab Republic or the spread of Islam or Morocco, but I’ll go ahead and recommend it anyway. The writing is fine, the subject interesting and the length, approachable. Enjoy!
Les Arabes sont au premier plan de l'actualité. Tout le monde en parle. Mais qui sont-ils ? Les images se succèdent et se bousculent, infiniment variées, contrastées, léguées par le passé ou issues du présent : guerriers valeureux, Bédouins pillards, potentats milliardaires, sous-prolétaires misérables, dévots et mystiques d'un Islam fanatique, politiciens subtils, terroristes implacables, etc. Maxime Rodinson, qui étudie ce peuple et sa culture depuis près d'un demi-siècle, a voulu présenter avec sympathie, mais sans attendrissement suspect, sans complaisance servile, en se refusant aux facilités du pathétique littéraire, une somme d'informations objectives : délimitation et extension du peuple, origines ethniques et culturelles de chacune de ses composantes, ressources et freins sur la voie de son développement, évolution du concept de peuple arabe, puis de l'idéologie du nationalisme arabe contemporain, constantes des structures sociales, politiques, culturelles. Il n'hésite pas ainsi à ébranler bien des idées reçues tant parmi les Arabes que chez les non-Arabes.
Marxist pedagogy meets Orientalism is a senseless mish-mash. Sort of wanna-be Weber style analyses through a Marxist lens applied to "The Arabs". Somehow manages to come across as as crass as Bernard Lewis without really meaning too. I have sympathy for the author but his desire to smash everything into a Marxism shaped hole only hurts his analyses.