What do you think?
Rate this book
Islam in a Globalizing World
This book takes a historical approach to examining Islam’s role in globalization. The author identifies complex historical and geopolitical trends in Islamic history, and constructs from these a clear assessment of contemporary Islam. Most important, the book examines historical trends from a perspective that contributes to an understanding of Islam in the aftermath of September 11.
The author takes us through a review of the first Islamic millennium and Islam’s role as a globalizing force, to subsequent changes in the Muslim world, through a comparison with earlier radical movements in Russia, and finally to trends in contemporary political Islam and projections for future developments. Along the way, the author points out many of the challenges Islamists have faced, some of their pitfalls, and some modernizing attributes of contemporary Islam.
This accessible, timely book should be of strong interest to anyone with a desire for greater understanding in this transformed global environment.
The author takes us through a review of the first Islamic millennium and Islam’s role as a globalizing force, to subsequent changes in the Muslim world, through a comparison with earlier radical movements in Russia, and finally to trends in contemporary political Islam and projections for future developments. Along the way, the author points out many of the challenges Islamists have faced, some of their pitfalls, and some modernizing attributes of contemporary Islam.
This accessible, timely book should be of strong interest to anyone with a desire for greater understanding in this transformed global environment.
128 pages, Paperback
First published May 6, 2003
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
May 7, 2021
Good book. The author really knows his stuff and my professor has stated that Simons, the author, has written one of the best summaries of early Islamic history there is in the first chapter. However, I don't think that this book is necessarily for the layman. If I hadn't taken notes the second time I read it, and reviewed them, I don't think I would have been able to really get a good picture of the information in the book. . . nor would I have retained much.
The author is a diplomat and an academic. I don't think he properly accounts for readers' ignorance in matters of history and political science. Often, he'd state things that I desperately wanted more elaboration on, but. . . I wasn't going to get what I want. He'd tell the 'what' but not the 'why' which is foundational to understanding. Perhaps assuming that the reader would be able to make connections, he doesn't necessarily fill in all the blanks. This is understandable when you consider who his colleagues must have been (diplomats and academics) and that they would most likely have been the same people who read his book before publishing to provide critique.
I also don't think that the book is as well-organized as it could be. This may be due to the fact that the book is based off of the Payne Lecture Series that Simons, the author, gave at Stanford following 9/11. Perhaps when he began writing the book, he worked to expand upon his lectures instead of stepping back and wondering how best to approach writing a book like this and using his lectures as a resource. That's just my guess.
There aren't clear paths to follow. Things are sometimes reiterated, but not the things you would want reiterated, like main points in the a summary of a chapter (summaries or recaps were nonexistent). When something was first introduced, it could be glazed over or just not explained and when if it's mentioned later, he sometimes provided more information and/or explanation on the matter. That information and/or explanation would have been best placed when the matter was first introduced.
Hope this helps.
The author is a diplomat and an academic. I don't think he properly accounts for readers' ignorance in matters of history and political science. Often, he'd state things that I desperately wanted more elaboration on, but. . . I wasn't going to get what I want. He'd tell the 'what' but not the 'why' which is foundational to understanding. Perhaps assuming that the reader would be able to make connections, he doesn't necessarily fill in all the blanks. This is understandable when you consider who his colleagues must have been (diplomats and academics) and that they would most likely have been the same people who read his book before publishing to provide critique.
I also don't think that the book is as well-organized as it could be. This may be due to the fact that the book is based off of the Payne Lecture Series that Simons, the author, gave at Stanford following 9/11. Perhaps when he began writing the book, he worked to expand upon his lectures instead of stepping back and wondering how best to approach writing a book like this and using his lectures as a resource. That's just my guess.
There aren't clear paths to follow. Things are sometimes reiterated, but not the things you would want reiterated, like main points in the a summary of a chapter (summaries or recaps were nonexistent). When something was first introduced, it could be glazed over or just not explained and when if it's mentioned later, he sometimes provided more information and/or explanation on the matter. That information and/or explanation would have been best placed when the matter was first introduced.
Hope this helps.
Displaying 1 of 1 review