Where the Streets Had A Name

Where the Streets Had a Name by Randa Abdel-Fattah 2010 (2008-Australia, 2009-UK)
Scholastic

Rating: 3/5

IQ "I suddenly understand that there is dignity in being able to claim heritage, in being able to derive identity from a rocky hill, a winding mountain road. Sitti Zeynab's village has never stopped calling her, beckoning her to return home. Her soul is stamped into these hills, and I feel her presence as strongly as if she were standing on the peak of one of the mountains." Hayaat pg. 181

Hayaat is thirteen years old but she has a clear mission: to bring back some soil from her grandmother's (Sitti Zeynab) ancestral home in Jerusalem. Samy, her best friend, will accompany her. Their journey is hindered however, by the fact that they live with their families in Bethlehem and there are curfews and checkpoints to deal with. Not to mention, the Wall that divides the West Bank and the fact that they can't travel wherever they like since they are not Israeli citizens. Samy is loyal and has a good heart, but he's obstinate and trouble follows him and his lack of respect for authority. He may put the trip in jeopardy on his own or the security checkpoints could stop them. The journey starts off on a high-note since they have a curfew-free day to travel, but it's just a start....

This is going to sound so silly to people but I was quite bothered by all the mentions of 'farting' in the book. I know I'm persnickety but I just didn't think it continually needed to be mentioned. And I'm pretty sure someone farts and another character takes note of it in every single chapter. On a more serious note, this story moves at a snail's pace. Hayaat doesn't form the idea for heading for Jerusalem until we are more than a few chapters in which I thought was frustrating. What made it more irksome was that the 'grand finale' so to speak felt rushed and the book ended on a happy but anti-climatic note. The ending just seemed odd and after the climax, I didn't understand why the book just didn't end (with a simple epilogue in place of all the details in the ending). Also, Hayaat recalls certain memories at various points in the story but they appear out-of-the-blue and it's not quite clear when her memory fades and it's back to the present.

The descriptions of life in Bethlehem are what makes this book so impressive. It's impressive because the descriptions are so simple but suddenly seemingly-mundane tasks (such as going to the grocery store) become a big deal when there is a curfew to contend with. Friends may end up as overnight guests if a curfew is ordered (sometimes random, sometimes due to protests as a form of punishment) and big celebrations could end up becoming small celebrations if travel restrictions are imposed, thereby limiting the mobility of guests. It's a ridiculous and frustrating situation especially when it limits people's abilities to get to the hospital, or attend a family wedding, etc. It's even more unbearable to read about the destruction of Palestinian homes and/or the possession of Palestinian homes by Israeli families who believe they have a claim to the land. There's a lot of Arabic food for thought, imagine being forced to leave your home (much like a refugee I think) and then essentially imprisoned in your new home. The story never becomes depressing, there are moments of levity (and no for me they did not come from farting references) especially concerning Hayaat and her beloved grandmother, Sitti Zeynab (sitti means my grandmother). The author describes people in a plain manner but with a little spark/unique touch such as when describing Sitti Zeynab's eyes "bright and untouched, having never caught up with the wrinkling, shrinking curse of the clock" (pg. 233).

One thing I am absolutely positive about is that when you finish Where the Streets Had a Name you will question (if you hadn't already) the Israeli government's treatment of Palestinians as well as America's policy towards Palestine. That's not to say there aren't sympathetic Israeli characters, as in real life, the characters are all human and Hayaat realizes that the Israeli soldiers have families, and that not all Israelis hate Palestinians. I think the author should have included an afterword explaining the situation because I was still curious/confused about quite a bit (for example: who orders curfews, the military or the government?). And obviously you can't make up your mind about such a complex issue after reading one or two or three books on the subject, after all this has been an issue since the '50s. Samy is an interesting best friend, I admired his spirit and obstinacy while at the same time it made me wince. I was glad that Hayaat had him at her side. A more concise ending, smoother transitions, and fewer mentions of bodily odors would have been nice. Hayaat's family is entertaining but mysterious since they aren't on the journey to Jerusalem with her, the reader learns little about them. Hayaat is a likable, genuine, brave main character but she wasn't particularly memorable in my mind. Furthermore, the glossary was strange to me because it didn't list definitions of every word mentioned (such as the 'curse' words or expressions). A good story with uncomplicated descriptions but complicated characters who needed to be more fleshed out, it moves slowly and while it took me some time to remember to go back to the story, I always remembered eventually. My favorite book by the author (and one I would recommend starting with if you want a hysterically funny read) is still Does My Head Look Big in This?

Disclosure: From the library

PS I really liked this quote from Sitti Zeynab "We Arabs say that the wound that bleeds inwardly is the most dangerous" (pg. 54). What an eloquent, interesting and accurate way of describing how hate can eat at your insides (so to speak).

Throwback Thursday: A Bottle in the Gaza Sea

A Bottle in the Gaza Sea by Valerie Zenatti 2008 (English translation done by Adriana Hunter)
Bloomsbury U.S.A. Children's Books

Rating: 3.5/5

IQ "Only complete idiots are really ugly. That's a rule I made up, but I do believe it. You can't be as sensitive, inquisitive and intelligent as she is and have a face like a rat. People's qualities show on their faces, in their eyes, in whether or not they tense their lips when you're talking." Gazaman pg. 75

Tal Levine is an Israeli but she's curious about the "other side". The other side being the Gaza Strip so she decides to write a letter, place it in a bottle and throw it into the Gaza Sea. She's not 100% positive that she will get a reply but it's worth a shot. The letter lands in the hands of "Gazaman" (the email address and pseudonym he uses), a sarcastic Palestinian guy. Tal spills her guts to him, Gazaman refuses to reveal much of anything about himself. He makes fun of her constantly but things slowly start to change and they become-against all odds-acquittances via email. Beliefs and attitudes will be changed, expectations will shatter and the world might appear a bit more hopeful than before.

The author is an Israeli and I personally thought it showed. Her portrayal of "Gazaman" felt incomplete. I might be being too hasty but I was annoyed that "Gazaman" was so down on his faith and all aspects of Muslim culture. He had nothing positive to say about Palestine which I thought took away from the supposedly neutral tone of the book. He mocks his culture in addition to Tal and since I have a lot of respect for the Muslim culture, this grated on me. In addition I have mixed feelings about the ending. I liked how open-ended it was (which is rare for me because I usually detest those. I'd take a sad ending over no ending almost any day), it works just right for this book. I would however, have appreciated a sequel/epilogue just to know where both of them are in their respective lives three years later. I finished the book not liking Tal but I respected her. She was just SO CHEERFUL and optimistic, it was too much. No wonder Gazaman felt the need to bring her back to reality sometimes. I found her a bit unrealistic in that she immediately told this male stranger all about her life, included a picture, etc. Also on the author's part, sometimes she would explain a lot about a character (for example Tal's brother, Eyyan) but not others (like Tal's boyfriend, Ori). Plus Tal would write down conversations she had with people and they were often extremely long dialogues.

This may sound odd but I was pleased that Ori was a good guy. I'm growing tired of the storyline where a new guy comes in and then the girl wakes up and realizes that *GASP* her boyfriend is actually a jerk. Ori was fairly one-dimensional but he wasn't perfect and yet they had a strong relationship, even though Tal was writing to Gazaman. I adored Gazaman and his biting sense of humor, mainly because I'm sarcastic all the time with my friends so I have a fondness for good sarcasm. The author did an excellent job of making it clear when Gazaman was being sarcastic and when he was serious, "[w]e should set up an Israeli-Palestinian asylum, you and me. It would be a beautiful symbol of reconciliation as Westerners say. We could call it the Majnun & Meshuga Institute, with our motto engraved over the door: Peace comes from insanity" (pg. 121), I think that's an utterly brilliant motto. Perhaps the email exchange between two strangers is an easy way to explain a complex situation but I didn't care because I was fascinated by the descriptions of life in the Gaza Strip (Palestine) versus life in Israel. Different hardly begins to describe the two places.

A Bottle in the Gaza Sea has one of the most appropriate endings I've come across, not hopelessly optimistic but open ended enough that it could be happy. I wanted a bit more clarity but the ending works. I loved every minute of observing Jerusalem with Tal, surveying the Gaza Strip with Gazaman. And like both Tal (and although he wouldn't admit it at first, Gazaman) I eagerly awaited their emails to each other. I became caught up in stories about the bombings, fearing the author would utterly break my heart (and she sort-of did. Just consider lines like the following, "I don't understand how life can hinge on so little: whether or not you feel like going to the cafe along a certain street", pg. 9). I would have liked more space/explanation/introspection in between the dialogue and further exploration of Gazaman's Muslim faith (why is he so delusional? Was he even raised Muslim?). On a more personal note I really enjoyed this book because I knew bits and pieces about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict but not much. This book pried my eyes wide open and forced me to do a double-take, I love when a book makes me do that! An arresting tale that manages to walk the fine line between not being naively optimistic nor being pessimistically realistic. I wish I could give this book not only to all American high school students and government leaders but to all Israelis and Palestinians as well. Like the letters Tal and Gazaman write to each other, it would be another drop in the ocean. And to be perfectly honest, before reading this book I would have said I was more sympathetic to the Israeli cause. Now I'm torn. But I will keep reading so that I can make up my mind and be truly well-informed.


Disclosure: From the library

PS I actually prefer the French cover (left). Which cover do you prefer?

I also loved the following line said by Tal's (typical wise, artistic, intellectual father) "instead of loving this city [Jerusalem] in the way it deserves, instead of getting along, they've [Israelis and Palestinians] fought over her for more than fifty years, the way men might once have fought for a woman, with passion, with a little more hate for their rivals every day. They don't even realize their wars are now damaging the thing they claim to love, damaging it more and more violently in one way or another" (pg. 9)

Honeymoon in Tehran

Honeymoon in Tehran: Two Years of Love and Danger in Iran by Azadeh Moaveni 2009

Random House



IQ "I wondered whether most Americans had any idea how the actions of their government influenced the lives of those across the world. Iranians had a long, sophisticated tradition of conducting their own opposition to autocracy. When would Washington realize this, and allow Iranians to resist their tyrants in the manner of their own choosing?" pgs. 245-246

In the sequel to Lipstick Jihad, Azadeh Moaveni is living and working in Tehran, having finally adjusted to the many nuances of life in the Islamic Republic. The author notices vivid contrasts, the people of Iran want openness with the West and civil liberties. But if that is the case, how did the conservative , anti-west Mahmoud Ahmadinejad win the 2005 election? In addition to the surprising political turn, Azadeh falls in love, with an Iranian man. They decide to get married in Iran and raise their future family in Tehran. Her upcoming marriage coincides with the Iranian government once again bearing down on 'immodest dress' for women and there is increased intimidation of journalists, especially ones who write for Western newspapers and magazines. Then the unthinkable occurs, the author discovers herself to be pregnant before she is married. The punishment is 100 lashes and one year of banishment. The author must decide to stay in Iran or leave for the West, does she really want to raise her future children in Iran?

There's a lot of information in this book, much like in the other, although there are some natural extraneous details, but to me that added an even more personalized touch. I think another bit of information worth keeping in mind is that besides being the perspective of one Western-educated woman, it is also the perspective of an upper middle class woman. Class plays a big role in Iranian society and this is not the best of books if you want to learn about daily life for the working class (something I'm now interested in after reading this book). Something worth keeping in mind as well is that this book is very slow-paced. As someone who has discovered a passion for the Middle East (and as such I'm willing to read anything I can on those countries) I eagerly read through this book, but if I wasn't so personally enamored with the topic, it probably would have taken me much longer to finish.

Most importantly if the reader has read Lipstick Jihad they will notice immense growth in Ms. Moaveni. "When I first arrived in Iran, fresh and green from northern California, I had obeyed like a schoolgirl in such situations, naively deferential to authority, certain the worst could not happen to me, of all people. Only when the worst (arrest, near arrest, public humiliation and so forth) befell me, repeatedly, as a result of my submissiveness, did I learn to respond like the Iranian young people of my generation: with loud, shrill confrontation. This was the rather simple trick by which my friends; indeed, most young Iranians-managed to evade the bullying ways of the Islamic system: by shouting down its enforcers, daring them to engage in hostile, full-fledged confrontation. It sounds counter intuitive, but it was actually effective. Very often the authority figure in question was either too young, cowed, bored, or poorly paid to deal with an angry female whose shrieks typically gained her the solidarity of passers-by" (pg. 96). I really like this quote because while it very summary-ish, it gives a peek at the change Ms. Moaveni goes through, a change that is well worth reading about. Another intriguing aspect of the story concerns falling in love in Tehran, what life is like for dating couples, for those who just want to hook up and married couples. It's not as restrictive as one might suspect but it's no America.

Honeymoon in Tehran addresses one of the toughest questions future-parents must make, do I really want to raise my child in my home country? In my opinion that is an extremely difficult decision and the author takes great care in weighing the pros and cons of raising her children in Iran. She doesn't want her son to be confused because while at home she could tell him that women are equal to men, Westerners aren't all evil, etc, at school it would be a different story. Furthermore there's a chance that a young child will accidentally let something slip about private family life that is technically against shari'a (Islamic law). Such as 'Mommy made fun of the Ayatollah', the risks are great. At the same time she loves Iran, the people, the beautiful landscapes, the passionate discussions (I'm so jealous of this fact. Debates are a big part of Iranian culture and it seems to me that they manage to passionately argue politics without really offending anyone. That would not be the case in America unless Iranians simply don't discuss controversial issues such as abortion, gay rights, etc because it's a moot point under their theocratic government?) and she has made many friends there. The author's love of Iran is clearly reflected in this book and I personally hope I never have to make a decision like that because there's a downside either way. I also appreciated how this book tried to explain how Ahmadinejad was elected. The author chronicles everyone's surprise at his win but she also notes that many of the people she talked to decided not to vote. Neither one of the author's two books are political, when discussing matters of politics the information is presented in a straight-forward manner with diverse viewpoints. The heart of the story however concerns relationships and how they have been both hurt and strengthened under the Islamic Republic. A fun, informative story for those who like international politics (but not too in depth) and simply reading about other countries.

Disclosure: From the library

PS Fun fact (or not) the author is friends with Shirin Ebadi, in fact she co-authored (and I believe translated) Ms. Ebadi's memoir, Iran Awakening. You can find my lukewarm review here

Throwback Thursday: Reading Lolita in Tehran

Reading Lolita in Tehran by Azar Nafisi 2004
Random House

IQ "An absurd fictionality ruled our lives. We tried to live in the open spaces in the chinks created between that room which had become our protective cocoon, and the censor's world of witches and goblins outside. Which of these two worlds was more real and to which did we really belong? We no longer knew the answers. Perhaps one way of finding out the truth was to do what we did: to try to imaginatively articulate these two worlds, and through that process, give shape to our vision and identity." pg. 26

From 1995 to 1997, Azar Nafisi and seven of her most committed female gathered in her house to discuss Western literature, the classics that have been forbidden. They gather ever Thursday morning to discuss Vladmir Nabokov, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Henry James, Jane Austen and other greats. This book covers each of the above mentioned authors, but many others are discussed for a bit as well. Not only does the author talk about herself but she reveals an intimate portrait of each one of her young students as well as what life was like in the early days of Islamic Republic and at the end of the 20th century. The author was a professor at the University of Tehran but she was expelled for refusing to wear the veil.

If you don't want Lolita, The Great Gatbsy, Washington Square (or Daisy Miller) and Pride & Prejudice to be spoiled for you, don't read this book. I didn't mind since I'd read two of the four. Also I'm ashamed to say I'd never even heard of Henry James. Not sure where I was when people talked about his classics. Lolita I knew the gist of, but it's sounds so much more suffocating and horrifying than I anticipated. I do want to read it, if only because I think the experience will be all the richer after having read Reading Lolita in Tehran. The book is divided into four parts, each part named after Fitzgerald, James, Nabokov or Austen. What really drew me to this non-fiction story was how easily (or so it seemed to me) the author was able to make comparisons between the lives of herself and her students in Iran with the lives of those they were reading about in books. For example in talking about Lolita she states "I added that in fact Nabokov had taken revenge against our own solipsizers; he had taken revenge on the Ayatollah Khomeini, on Yassi's last suitor on the dough-faced teacher for that matter. They had tried to shape others according to their own dreams and desires, but Nabokov, through his portrayal of Humbert, had exposed all soplipsists who take over other people's lives. She, Yassi [one of the seven students], had much potential; she could be whatever she wanted to be-a good wife or a teacher and poet. What mattered was for her to know what she wanted" (pg. 33).

Unlike Lipstick Jihad this book is much more distressing to read because the rules are so much stricter. Lipstick Jihad took place in the early 2000s, this book is from the '70s to the '90s and I highly recommend both, or at least that you read this book and then one set in present-day Iran so you can see the changes. It's rather astonishing. I do think at times the author waxed on philosophically a bit too much, talking more about the books than life in Iran and/or her students. In fact, I do wish we had gotten to better know the seven girls; Yassi, Mahshid, Manna, Azin, Nassrin and Mitra. We get glimpses of their personalities, but I think the author only lightly touched on the complexities of their lives. Perhaps she couldn't go into much detail for fear of getting them (or herself, loved ones, etc.) in trouble. Stylistically I wasn't a huge fan of how the book was told. The passing of time was confusing and the conversations weren't italicized or put in " " so I wasn't always sure if the author was having an actual conversation or just thinking in her head. What bothered me most was once we hit the 2nd or 3rd part, the book became less about the author/teacher AND the girls and more about just the author. I had been expecting equal playing time so to speak so that surprised me. I also had high expectations for the Pride & Prejudice part, I think the comparisons fell flat except when talking about Iranian society and British society of the 19th century. It was truly sad to read about these young women who knew nothing about relationships but still yearned for their Mr. Darcy, even though he seemed very, very far away indeed. I did however really like this lengthy quote "Mr. Nahvi was one of the few students in whom I was unable to find a single redeeming quality. I could say, like Eliza Bennet, that he was not a sensible man. One day after a really exhausting argument, I told him Mr. Nahvi, I want to remind you of something: I am not comparing you to Elizabeth Bennet. There is nothing of her in you to be sure-you are as different as man and mouse. But remember how she is obsessed with Darcy, constantly trying to find fault with him, almost cross-examining every new acquittance to confirm that he is as bad as she thinks? Remember her relations with Wickham? How the basis for her sympathy is not so much feelings for him as his antipathy for Darcy? Look at how you speak about what you call the west. You can never talk about it without giving it an adjective or an attribute-decadent vile corrupt, imperial. Beware of what happened to Elizabeth!" (pg. 290).

Reading Lolita in Tehran delivers excellent literary analysis with the bonus of raising the curtain off of life in Iran during the early days of the Islamic Republic especially concerning what life was like for students and teachers. It's hard to read about the suffering the people went through, the jobs lost, the rather ridiculous-sounding rules, and worse, the interrogations and the executions. I found it especially sad at how people bewail the brain power that is leaving Iran. I think I can understand why young people wouldn't want to stay, but I can also see how others would see it as betrayal (i.e. why don't they stay and try to work with the system to make Iran better). This is not a book for you (I don't think) if you don't like learning about Iran and/or reading literature analysis. The story is slow-moving but that allows for plenty of details about life in Iran, although I do think the seven young women the book was supposed to be about as well, got pushed to the side towards the middle and end of the book. The transitions and passing of time was confusing as were conversations held, but I can't help but marvel at how this book manages to take seemingly unrelated topics and show how they are similar, to illustrate how classics can literally be applied to people's lives ANYWHERE. Even in what we may think of as a repressive society. For most of the book the literary references went completely over my head, but I found the analysis fascinating and I definitely intend on re-reading this book after I've read (or re-read) each of the main four classics. I'm particularly excited to read some Henry James (I definitely didn't get her comparisons when it came to his work and Iran but that's probably because I know nothing about him or his work)! My favorite part is when they put a book of his on trial in class. It was a lot of fun to read about, but stomach-churning at how much disgust some students had for the book, not all though and that was reassuring.

Disclosure: From library

PS I had quotes picked out from each part

On the Great Gatsby "[w]hat we in Iran had in common with Fitzgerald was this dream that became our obsession and took over our reality, this terrible beautiful dream impossible in its actualization for which any amount of violence might be justified or forgiven. This is what we had in common, although we were not aware of it then. [...] When I left the class that day I did not tell them what I myself was just beginning to discover: how similar our own fate was becoming to Gatsby's. He wanted to fulfill his dream by repeating the past, and in the end he discovered that the past was dead, the present a sham, and there was no future. Was this not similar to our revolution which had come in the name of our collective past and had wrecked our lives in the name of a dream?" (pg. 144), powerful! And I actually understood that connection (it helps that we just finished studying Iran).

On Washington Square "[t]hus, Dr. Sloper commits the most unforgivable crime in fiction-blindness.[...]This I believe, is how the villain in modern fiction is born: a creature without compassion, without empathy. [...] I think most of my students would have agreed with this definition of evil, because it was so close to their own experience. Lack of empathy was to my mind the central sin of the regime, from which all the others flowed. My generation had tasted individual freedom and lost it; no matter how painful the loss, the recollection was there to protect us from the desert of the present. But what did this new generation have to safeguard them? Like Catherine's, their desires, their yearnings, their urges to express themselves were manifested in bizarre ways." (pg. 224) I don't know if I agree that they expressed themselves in 'bizarre ways' , their ways of expressing themselves were merely differently from what one might expect. Honestly I think it was more of a generational thing. Maybe the author just didn't get 'young people'. Ha

Throwback Thursday: Lipstick Jihad

Lipstick Jihad: A Memoir of Growing Up Iranian in America and American in Iran by Azadeh Moaveni 2005
PublicAffairs Books


IQ "The urge to translate, this preoccupation with language I had dragged around with me, had been a resistance to the sense of foreignness I felt everywhere-a distraction from the restlessness that followed me into each hemisphere. If I could only have conquered words, purged from my Farsi any trace of accent, imported the imagery of Persian verse into English prose, I had thought, then the feeling of displacement would go away. [....' I didn't want to accept that displacement was an inescapable reality of a life between two worlds." Azadeh pg. 243

Azadeh Moaveni is a journalist who has worked for Time magazine and the Los Angeles Times. She was born in Palo Alto, California, where there was a thriving community of Iranians. They didn't view themselves as immigrants, more like "victims of the diaspora", they would one day return to Iran, when the government eased up on its oppression. Azadeh felt caught between two worlds, her American upbringing often clashed with her family's more traditional Iranian beliefs. She didn't always notice or care about the culture clash, but while in college, it became glaringly obvious that there were some serious differences between Iran and America. after graduation, Azadeh moved to Tehran to work as a journalist. While in Iran she learns about the 'rebellious' youth who throw parties, go skiing and try and fight the Islamic regime in any way that she can. She becomes a part of this world, the world of the Iranian youth who are fighting to bring modernity to Iran.

This book is an absolute treat to read. I'm embarrassed to admit that I'm one of those Americans that the author rallies against. She talks about how people would ask her questions (upon her return from Iran) like "were you allowed outside?", etc. I would never ask that question, but I would probably wonder at how much freedom (and fun) a person could have living in Iran. Truth be told, I've never really thought about it. But in my Comparative Politics class we studied Iran's history and I wanted to get a better picture of what modern-day Iran was like in order to be prepared for class. Lipstick Jihad was on our summer reading list so I decided to read it (on my own) while we studied Iran in school. It blew my mind. I have nothing to compare it to but I think the author does such a great job of reflecting Iran's struggle to become modern (the Islamic Regime wants to keep Iran firmly Islamic and traditional, many of the young people want to see Iran embrace modern times). Azadeh has lots of family in Iran and through them (along with her job) she meets many new people. Through these people, she begins attending parties. At the parties, people are drinking, doing drugs, having public displays of affection and essentially doing everything that they are forbidden by law to do. Granted many of the parties she attends are held by the middle and upper classes, but even the working class participate in acts of rebellion, in their own way. There are loud celebrations held in the streets during religious festivals, days the religious leaders have declared sacred but the crowds are too large for the police to force them to settle down.

It's difficult to review a memoir because I've found that I often want to comment more on the content, than the writing. I do want to share two things that I learned that I probably never would have discovered if it weren't for this book. The author is looking for a gym to work out in and she discovers one for the rich. Men and women are allowed to work out there but there are "ladies' hours" and "gentleman's' hours." The women could only work out from nine in the morning till two o'clock. Obviously the women were not expected to have jobs (the author calls it the "mistress gym" because many of the women were mistresses of the religious clerics). Furthermore, none of the other women were there to work out. They mostly gossiped while walking leisurely on treadmills. Eventually the author finds a gym that will suit her, one in which toe women actually sweat as well as chat. There were also classes held at instructor's homes, including yoga and aerobics. I have to admit, I was surprised that gyms were even allowed. On a different note, I was struck by the idea of temporary marriage. Apparently in order to fulfill their most intimate needs, people would enter a temporary marriage, called sigheh. Only men can initiate them however and they "can be as short as fifteen minutes, and the vows can be exchanged in fifteen seconds." (pg. 73). It was started by clerics who wanted a theological excuse to sleep with as many women as possible, but after the revolution of 1979, everyone started getting a sigheh. It was especially useful for dating couples who were not allowed to hold hands or even appear together on the street, if they participated in any of such activities, they could be arrested. The men would be thrown in jail and/or beaten and the women would most likely be raped.

Lipstick Jihad is an eye opening read that should be required reading for anyone who wants to visit/work/live in Iran. The author covers many topics ranging from fashion, dating, entertainment, politics, and the arts. Interspersed throughout the book is information about Iran's rich history and eagh chapter starts off with an Iranian poem. The author seems to write candidly about her family, her mother is committed to social justice, although she is not liberal on issues relating to dating or any other freedom of young people. Her father wants nothing to do with Iran after the Islamic regime comes into power. Both parents present two different opinions on Iran and it's very interesting to read about. The author is genuine and her writing is fused with humor (I rellay liked the titles of her chapters, one of them was called I'm Too Sexy For My Veil. Which is both sad and funny), but she's clearly not telling this story simply to entertain. She wants to educate all of us Westerners who remain blissfully ignorant of Muslim/Iranian/Middle Eastern culture. Clearly we can no longer afford to be so ignorant, and I adored this book so I would recommend it to everyone. It never grew too tedious and I never suffered from information overload. The writing is concise, the story unique and her ultimate conclusions about life in Iran and America are both enlightening and obvious.

Disclosure: From the wondrous library :)

Throwback Thursday is hosted by Take Me Away Reading