Take a photo of a barcode or cover
genius_koala 's review for:
I have so many thoughts about this book.
The major issue is that the author is trying to do too much. It's a biography of Selim, or it's an analysis of global geopolitics from the Ottoman perspective, or it's the relation of Islam to the colonization of the Americas and the evolving relationship of Islam to North American, the United States in particular. Some of these topics are super interesting, but they honestly require their own deep dive. For example, in the chapter, American Selim, he briefly discusses a handful of well known American authors with varying understandings/feelings about Islam, but it's a tangent. This would actually be an interesting topic but it was introduced in the second to last chapter and didn't really fit with any points he was trying to make.
The author also falls into the trap that he tries to attribute EVERY major world event since the 15th century to the Ottomans. As a result he grossly over simplifies a lot of topics. The author also ends up contradicting himself all over the place and really reaching for some of the conclusions he presents. Just one example is the claim that Islam is more spiritually attuned with Protestantism because non-Catholic Christians do not have a central Pope. He makes this claim after an exhaustive description of Selim's military campaigns that were SPECIFICALLY designed to establish himself as sultan and Caliph, and therefore the ONLY legitimate leader of global Islam as justification for his imperial conquests.
The book gets two stars, because he does provide a decent biography of Selim. The issues arise when he tries to force the history to fit his pre-determined framework.
The major issue is that the author is trying to do too much. It's a biography of Selim, or it's an analysis of global geopolitics from the Ottoman perspective, or it's the relation of Islam to the colonization of the Americas and the evolving relationship of Islam to North American, the United States in particular. Some of these topics are super interesting, but they honestly require their own deep dive. For example, in the chapter, American Selim, he briefly discusses a handful of well known American authors with varying understandings/feelings about Islam, but it's a tangent. This would actually be an interesting topic but it was introduced in the second to last chapter and didn't really fit with any points he was trying to make.
The author also falls into the trap that he tries to attribute EVERY major world event since the 15th century to the Ottomans. As a result he grossly over simplifies a lot of topics. The author also ends up contradicting himself all over the place and really reaching for some of the conclusions he presents. Just one example is the claim that Islam is more spiritually attuned with Protestantism because non-Catholic Christians do not have a central Pope. He makes this claim after an exhaustive description of Selim's military campaigns that were SPECIFICALLY designed to establish himself as sultan and Caliph, and therefore the ONLY legitimate leader of global Islam as justification for his imperial conquests.
The book gets two stars, because he does provide a decent biography of Selim. The issues arise when he tries to force the history to fit his pre-determined framework.