...
Show More
I cannot fathom how this pseudo-intellectual drivel has amassed such a cult following on this website or anywhere for that matter. Perhaps it's due to its hefty size (1150 pages, excluding the bibliography), leading readers to feel compelled to praise the book simply for the effort expended in reading it. But in reality, there's nothing of substance here. West is the quintessential White British petit bourgeois colonialist, offering nothing of value to a discerning reader and presenting an intellectually feeble portrayal of her subject matter. Based on her own limited travels in the region, not unlike a contemporary Instagram influencer, she "found herself" among "her people" and penned this rubbish, fascist treatise. How many of us have had a friend travel to a foreign country and, based on a mere minute of observation, use their social media platform to advocate for a particular political position, indulging in behavior ranging from ignorance to savior complex to outright racism? As if the travel genre weren't already thoroughly irredeemable, here we have West spewing her prejudice on every page. The extent of her historical reasoning is confined to racial prejudice based on phenotype and physiognomy, no different in practice from that wholeheartedly adopted by Nazi Germany. Her criticisms of fascism seem both hollow and hypocritical in light of her rampant racism and Islamophobia. Her depictions of "ordinary people" - supposedly the book's strong point - are Orientalist and reinforce colonial myths of white superiority and Western European enlightenment. They uphold what is known in Orientalist literature as the "anti-conquerer," where the white, guilt-ridden colonialist is portrayed as sympathizing with the subject other. In this book, on every page, the boundaries of the West (through borders, culture, architecture, music, history, dancing, literature, language, religion, etc.) are depicted as the end of civilization, the end of enlightenment. Her subjects, especially when they are Muslims in Bosnia, are alternately depicted as sensuous, animalistic, or with a sympathizing otherization. The prose is also pitiful. The expression in the book is horribly pretentious. Unable to express herself succinctly, West indulges in lengthy, meandering recitals of nothing in particular, often reproducing mundane conversations in full about this or that philosophical or historical tidbit. Moreover, it is empty praise to mindlessly endorse a racist, fascist pamphlet simply because one thinks it is well-written. If Mein Kampf were written with greater attention to the nuances of prose, it would still be no less contemptible. Her approach to reporting history is also laughable, showing not just laziness but a contempt for citation. Her bibliography consists mostly of a few unrelated secondary sources, and I highly doubt her claims and reasoning would withstand even a cursory fact check. While it is accepted as a personal account, when one delves into providing a supposedly exploratory account of the human condition as depicted through a particular region's history and people; in other words, when one writes directly about external and observable phenomena, one should do so with at least a nod or the slightest respect for the facts. Furthermore, precisely because of her self-righteousness, because she casts herself as an intelligent, sympathetic white liberal, because she replicates a racist, stereotypical approach to history, and precisely because she is so well-received with a cult following among readers, this book demands greater scrutiny than the uncritical acceptance and praise it has received within this online community. She does not deserve the benefit of a different era, a different time. If she were truly a genius (as many here seem to believe), she had the ability to overcome those prejudices. What's more, there were many in her day who did not share her prejudices and were able to see beyond the aestheticization and romanticization of peoples, cultures, and history. And finally, it would be a disservice to our own times to ignore our capacity to think critically about what has come before us.