Iran and the West: Converging Perspectives
1-3 July 2015, University of Warwick
This conference aimed to further our understanding of the relationship and mutual
perceptions between Iran and the West from the earliest times to the present day. We sought to hold
a truly interdisciplinary and international conference, so as to be able to address the issue of
converging perceptions and relationships from as broad a range of views and intellectual standpoints
as possible. This we achieved, with speakers from Britain, Ireland, Germany, France, Italy, Norway,
Russia, Israel, Pakistan, and elsewhere. We also had delegates from a diverse range of academic
backgrounds, such as history, literature, sociology, and art history
By bringing together such a diverse range of speakers, we were able to asses Western-Iranian
perceptions and relations from very wide range of viewpoints. We were able to identify several
themes:
o
o
o
o
o
The importance of history, and well established normative tales. Several papers
described how very ancient tales can profoundly distort the perceptions of the
present, and how these ancient tales can be used, and abused, to address
contemporary concerns
‘Measuring up’ to the other and competition. Relations between Iran and the west
‘matter’ to people on the ground, perhaps to an irrational degree.
Mirrored perceptions – Iranian-Western perceptions not infrequently mirror each
other, with mutual distrust, misunderstanding, assumption of cultural, ideological,
religious, or perhaps military superiority, etc., being held by both Iranians and
Westerners of each other. The reasons why each holds these views might be very
different – but we get to the same place
Mutual respect. Though many of the papers emphasised conflict, it was clear that
westerners and Iranians frequently held a deep respect for the other. Iranians and
‘westerners’ might have had hostile political relations, but one theme which has come
through several papers is that they frequently respected each other despite this.
Finally, the use of the ‘other’ in better understanding oneself, or that a perception of
the ‘other’ actually tells us more about concerns or difficulties in the society doing the
portraying than it does about the society purportedly being portrayed.