Persian Carpet Industry
I. Introduction
This essay examines Martin Rudner’s article, “The Modernization of Iran and the Development of the Persian Carpet Industry: The Neo-Classical Era in the Persian Carpet Industry, 1925-1945.” It analyzes the historiographic approaches he employs and explores potential alternatives. Rudner's focus on national framing and modernization theory offers both significant advantages and limitations as he traces the evolution of the Iranian carpet as a national symbol, intricately linked to internal decision-making and economic development, both domestically and globally. His well-reasoned article addresses a broad range of topics through an economic and cultural lens during a tumultuous period in Iran’s history. This essay will also discuss alternative approaches that Rudner might have considered to provide a different perspective on the revival of the Iranian carpet industry.
II.
The Author and His Article A native of Quebec, Canada, Martin Rudner has dedicated the past four decades to studying and teaching international affairs. He earned his Bachelor's degree in Economics and Political Science from McGill University, followed by a Master of Letters from the University of Oxford and a PhD from The Hebrew University. His doctoral thesis, titled “Education and the Political Process in Malaysia and Singapore,” along with his articles and books from the 1980s, reflects a strong focus on South Asia. In the last twenty years, Rudner has shifted his attention to counter-terrorism and Canadian intelligence studies. He served as the founding director and President of the Canadian Association for Security and Intelligence Studies from 2000 to 2002. Additionally, he has been appointed to various academic and government panels related to security and economics, including serving as President of the Canadian Council for Southeast Asian Studies and as a member of the Canadian Auditor-General advisory committee. Aside from six years as a research fellow in the Department of Economics and Assistant to the Vice-Chancellor at the Australian National University in Canberra (1975-1982), Rudner has spent his entire career at the Norman Paterson School of International Affairs at Carleton University in Ottawa, Canada. He remains active in both the academic sphere and as an advisor to the Canadian government on a wide range of issues, having authored over sixty books and articles throughout his career.
Article Summary
In the article, Rudner explores the evolution of the carpet industry, tracing its transformation from a small-scale village handicraft to a global export. He examines the implications of this shift for the concept of Iranian nationalism, particularly in the context of the fall of the Qajar dynasty and the rise of the Shah. Rudner highlights how the carpet emerged as a national symbol of Iranian culture, reflecting the changes in governance, society, and the economy. This period coincides with two pivotal moments in modern Iran: Reza Shah’s modernization efforts and the foreign occupations during World War II by Britain and Russia. Rudner discusses how the centralized government and rapid industrial expansion altered the dynamics of the Iranian carpet, a cherished handicraft. The onset of the Great Depression and World War II drastically reduced global carpet exports, paving the way for a burgeoning domestic carpet industry that emphasized nationalist and traditional authenticity. This newfound passion for heritage and lineage had not been seen on such a widespread scale before. Throughout times of crisis, Iranians demonstrated resilience by enhancing their products and striving for cultural authenticity, which became integral to the establishment of a national identity. Rudner focuses on the Iranian carpet as a powerful symbol of this identity, illustrating how carpets serve as a cultural link that reflects the profound effects of political and economic changes within Iran.
III. Discussion
- The historiographic approaches used in the article
National Framing
Following the fall of the Qajar Dynasty, the Pahlavi regime made a deliberate choice to modernize and secularize both society and government administration. While they leaned towards large businesses and global markets, their decision to revive the Iranian carpet as a symbol of artistic and cultural heritage was a strategic move to reinforce the economic and social fabric of the newly modernized nation. Throughout this process, the Shah implemented government subsidies and established monopolies in an effort to create a unified Iranian identity centered around the carpet industry. For example, in response to the widespread use of cheap, low-quality aniline dyes by carpet producers aiming to satisfy foreign demand, the government imposed export prohibitions and enforced strict regulations. In 1936, they further consolidated control by monopolizing the market through the establishment of the Iran Carpet Company. Had the carpet been a commodity lacking distinct Iranian characteristics—like wheat or wool—the basic functions of a capitalist market would have naturally ensured that standards were upheld, as consumers would simply avoid purchasing subpar products. The government’s intervention was closely tied to the symbolism of carpets and was further bolstered by the establishment of the Tehran School of Art, which aimed for an authentic artistic renaissance. The Shah recognized the importance of cultivating a “modernizing elite” to spearhead a national revival and forge a global Iranian identity, using the esteemed Iranian carpet as a unifying symbol.
Modernization Theory
The fall of the Qajar Dynasty began in 1921 with a coup led by Reza Khan and culminated in the establishment of the Pahlavi dynasty in 1925. With Reza Shah came a new era of centralized government, supported by a cadre of well-educated and westernized elites eager to implement a comprehensive social and economic modernization campaign across Iran. The Pahlavis championed secular social values and technical advancements, focusing on railroads, shipping, and urban industrialization, with civil infrastructure and centralized logistics forming the backbone of the “new Iran.” Historically, Iran had struggled with disconnected urban centers due to topographical, ethnic, and social constraints. The Pahlavis aimed to centralize governance and foster a cohesive national identity among a fragmented populace that had long been accustomed to limited connections. Rudner employs modernization theory to illustrate the gradual process of development, highlighting carpets as a reflection of these national changes. Opening Iran to international markets marked the beginning of a rapid transformation in carpet weaving, which had previously been a village-based handicraft. As foreign buyers began to view Iranian carpets as exotic and authentic art, carpet makers swiftly adapted to meet this demand. They hired more workers, developed new production processes, and introduced automation through technologies like looms. In 1860, around 1,000 people were involved in local carpet production in Iran, with negligible exports. By the mid-1920s, however, exports had surged to approximately five million kilograms annually, highlighting the remarkable expansion of the industry. Rudner argues that this explosive growth aligns directly with the Shah’s deliberate decision to modernize and establish an administrative center capable of managing the myriad business decisions necessary to sustain such a large operation. The rise of Tehran as an administrative hub exemplifies how modernization tends to concentrate in urban industrial centers, facilitating connections with foreign entities. As a result, carpet production shifted from traditional villages to larger regional cities, where improved transportation, energy, and communication infrastructures could support increasingly complex transactions. The modernization under the Shah profoundly transformed Iran, enabling carpet makers to adapt to the growing scale and economy of their craft in ways that would have been impossible without the requisite infrastructure. However, Rudner emphasizes that this modernization was not a natural progression; rather, it was a clear manifestation of the Pahlavi regime's commitment to developing centralized infrastructure.
2. The Lineages
National Framing
Leopold von Ranke was instrumental in shaping the writing of history and historiography as a “national project,” aimed at forging a common lineage that unites diverse groups and promotes the concept of the nation-state. Ranke emphasized the state as the primary force and rallying point, adopting a top-down view of history that highlighted the influence of “Great Men.” In contrast, historians like Juan Cole and Deniz Kandiyoti argue that citizens themselves shape their identities, capable of transcending established racial, ethnic, or religious divides. They illustrate this with examples such as Germans, who rely on linguistic homogeneity as a cultural foundation, while Jewish Zionists appealed to the diaspora as a race rather than a multilingual religion.[^6] Other scholars, including historian and political theorist Hroch, suggest that nationalism can also be constructed on an economic basis, particularly through the transition from feudalism to capitalism.[^7] With capitalism and an interconnected national economy, kinship ties are supplanted by merit, allowing for the formation of identities based on a broader spectrum of possibilities. However, while grassroots nationalistic movements do occur, Cole and Kandiyoti caution against underestimating the role of the state. They argue that the establishment of educational systems, linguistic uniformity, and mandatory military service often serve as vehicles for nationalism, alongside national projects like America’s race to the moon or Iran’s revival of its carpet industry.[^8] Rudner aptly acknowledges the central role of the state in his analysis, yet he notes that while most carpets were produced for export, other factors—such as the global economy and transnational corporations—also influenced nationalism and merit further exploration. Additionally, the surge in domestic purchases of Iranian carpets during periods of declining exports (often coinciding with global crises) contributed to the emergence of a new middle class that played a vital role in sustaining the state. The group of Iranians striving for modernization experienced nationalization in a manner distinct from both the lower strata of society and the bureaucratic elite established by the Shah. While national framing has faced criticism from various historiographical perspectives, including social history, “history from below,” and transnational history, it remains a relevant trend in historiography.
Modernization Theory
Modernization theory emerged in the 1950s as a collection of related economic development theories, as social scientists and historians sought to explain the dynamics of political, economic, and social development. This emergence coincided with the purge of Marxist ideology from American academia during the same period, allowing modernization theory to become one of the dominant ideologies in historiography and foreign area studies until around 1980. Rooted in Max Weber’s advocacy for a technically proficient civil administration to facilitate societal growth, the theory posits that development and modernization are interconnected elements of social, political, and economic progress. According to this theory, every society has a natural tendency to develop, regardless of its size, and modernization signifies a shift from traditional structures toward a pluralistic meritocracy. However, this process is largely driven by traditional countries' exposure to Western influences and the perceived advantages of modernization. By emphasizing economics as the foundation of its philosophy, modernization theory argues for a progressive, naturally occurring growth cycle that unfolds along an evolutionary linear timeline. While some nations may achieve rapid development due to their prior industrialization and enlightenment, all countries will find ways to adapt their political, social, and economic landscapes to keep pace with progress in other parts of the world. As society becomes increasingly tech-savvy, traditional agricultural practices and kinship structures will give way to a merit system grounded in occupation and technology, driven by rationality and science. Moreover, economic prosperity fosters greater flexibility in social and political freedoms, highlighting the interconnectedness of these elements in the process of modernization. However, modernization theory has lost influence, largely due to the rise of Dependency theory, which emerged from Latin American studies. This perspective attributes modernization in certain regions to a coercive advantage that perpetuates forms of imperialism. Additional critiques, including Orientalism, flawed economic development forecasts, and narrow representations of pre-modern societies, have further undermined the validity of modernization theory.
The Approach’s Potentials
National Framing
In Rudner’s analysis, the Pahlavi dynasty emerges as the cornerstone of national unification, with the Shah portrayed as a “Great Man” who realized this vision. Iranian carpets became a source of pride for all Iranians, elevating their artistic and cultural heritage on the global stage. Rudner details the implementation of state-directed carpet projects that upheld Iranian standards, illustrating how the nation responded to the industry's evolving global demands. The enforcement of strict export standards and the establishment of the Tehran School of Art, aimed at reviving authentic Iranian cultural traditions, underscore the Shah's commitment to forging a national identity rooted in the past. While this perspective may overlook the global factors influencing the Iranian carpet industry, it provides valuable insights into emerging national identities, particularly among the middle class, who sought to counteract export challenges and aspired to modernization—a goal aligned with the Shah's vision. This approach highlights how a central authority, specifically the Iranian government under the Pahlavi dynasty, unified a diverse array of disconnected villages, creating a logistical framework that allowed the nation to showcase the splendor of the Iranian carpet.
Modernization Theory
Modernization theory plays a crucial role in understanding the infrastructure and foundations necessary for a society to evolve beyond traditional social constructs. In his exploration of the challenges faced by the emerging industry, Rudner skillfully weaves a compelling narrative that reflects the broader modernization of the country—an essential aspect of modern Iranian history. He offers a comprehensive overview of Iran's development, intertwining it with the rich tapestry of Persian culture and artistry, while also shedding light on economic factors that might otherwise remain obscured by a mere presentation of statistics. Rudner highlights a pivotal moment when the Shah issued a clear and decisive demand for national modernization, outlining the significant turning points in this transformative process. He emphasizes that both the economic framework and the necessary infrastructure and administration are vital for fostering and sustaining trade development. Through his analysis, the author effectively addresses the key components of modernization and their profound impact on the Iranian carpet industry.
Its Limitations
National Framing
Connecting the concept of the Iranian carpet to national identity is crucial for understanding how the Shah constructed a nation around this product. Iran, home to a diverse array of non-Persian ethnicities—such as Azeris, Kurds, and Balochis—has experienced fragmentation throughout its history. However, the Shah’s modernization efforts, coupled with his use of the carpet as a national symbol, played a significant role in unifying the country. Yet, this approach may have fostered a superficial identity, allowing large corporations and Western influences to shape the meaning of being Iranian. The majority of Iranian carpets were exported, complicating any analysis of how the carpet industry genuinely impacted the Iranian psyche. Profit motives often overshadowed the true essence of Iranian nationalism. For example, while foreign companies entered Iran to operate looms and meet the burgeoning demand of a globalized economy, they inadvertently disrupted the traditions that made Iranian carpets a national emblem. London, recognizing the allure of Iranian carpets, evolved into an international hub for marketing and distributing these products, increasingly imposing its own standards. Although the Shah did introduce some levels of standardization in the process, the essence of the carpets and their cultural significance faced significant challenges. Foreign loom operators often dominated production, seeking to maximize profits from Iranian origins. Western economic influences shaped Iran's trajectory, often sidelining those who were integral to the country's cultural symbols in order to meet export demands. While national framing can address broad concepts, it tends to overlook the traditions and aspirations of individual villages, replacing them with what some might argue is a Westernized agenda that feels artificially imposed on Iran. The notion of an 'authentic' Iranian carpet, as dictated by the state or large organizations, further obscures the evolution of carpet design and stifles dissent regarding new patterns or materials. There are numerous questions about the extent of Western influence on Iran's development and how much of the nationalism stemmed from Iranian leadership or relationship-building efforts. Rudner effectively centers his article on national framing within Iran, yet there are countless avenues an author could explore to re-examine this complex relationship.
Modernization Theory
Modernization is a crucial aspect of our ever-evolving global landscape, yet it often leaves some individuals and communities adversely affected by these changes. While Rudner highlights the benefits of modernization, particularly in terms of carpet exports and quality, many villages where carpet weaving was a traditional craft were neglected in favor of larger industrial zones. The logistical and administrative centralization in Tehran allowed the Shah to enhance the efficiency and structure of his state institutions, but it also undermined the traditional villages' ability to control the design and manufacturing of Iranian carpets. In some instances, carpets strayed from their Iranian heritage, becoming mass-produced with inferior materials, as evidenced by the crisis surrounding aniline dye quality. Towns like Na’in transformed from centers of high-quality handicrafts into hubs of massive, foreign-owned looms that catered to international clients, even altering Iranian designs to suit foreign tastes. Rudner does not portray modernization as a linear process of natural progress; instead, he presents it as a phenomenon directed 'from above,' with the Shah as the primary progressive figure in Iran. This perspective overlooks the significant role that Iranian citizens played in driving modernization. Artisans and local businessmen united their efforts to meet the growing demand for infrastructure, demonstrating that the push for modernization was not solely a top-down initiative. Assigning one actor as solely responsible for the entire process overlooks the diversity of opinions and the ‘bottom-up’ perspective essential to discussions of modernization. For instance, Iggers argues that both modernization and social science often neglect the true factors of change, emphasizing the need to integrate cultural narratives to reflect society's input. Furthermore, a focus on top-down modernization fails to acknowledge the political and social challenges arising from the same sources, such as the Shah’s increasing autocracy and his repressive policies against dissent. This tendency ultimately contributed to the Islamic Revolution and a complete re-evaluation of modernization philosophy. Modernization theory posits that economic development will naturally lead to political and social growth, a premise that does not hold true in contemporary Iran.
Alternatives
Dependency Theory
Rudner briefly addressed dependency theory but could have expanded on how a smaller nation like Iran became dependent as it entered the global economy. When London emerged as the international trade hub for Iranian carpets, profit motives may have overshadowed the preservation of the Iranian carpet tradition. This shift allowed foreign entities to dominate marketing and distribution, effectively siphoning profits away from Iran. The arrival of foreign industrial loom manufacturers pushed artisans to the margins of the production cycle. In response, the Shah sought to monopolize exports and standardize the product, aiming to redefine carpets as authentically Iranian. This theory posits that a natural order exists within the global economy, where fledgling economies often find themselves at a disadvantage, exploited by developed nations for their raw materials and natural resources. It advocates for these developing economies to focus inward, fostering growth with an emphasis on civil equality. Rudner could have delved deeper into the manipulative effects of foreign interference in Iran or explored how the global economy exploited the traditional villagers who established the Iranian carpet's reputation. Instead, he glosses over the trade's impact on the Iranian villages that stood to lose or gain the most, failing to fully address the significance of foreign intervention. Edward Said expanded on the concepts of imperialism and dependency theory, playing a crucial role in reshaping the discourse surrounding power and autonomy between the West and the Middle East. Rudner's views on European hegemony and his lack of understanding of local culture could serve as a foundation for a cultural dependency theory. In his work, he discusses the broad concepts of Iranian nationalism and modernization but fails to grasp their true impact by framing everything within a Western economic perspective. Edward Said, in Orientalism, argues that the region is not merely a political subject or a passive reflection of culture, scholarship, or institutions. Rather, it represents a distribution of geopolitical awareness expressed through aesthetic, scholarly, economic, sociological, historical, and philological texts. In essence, Said and his supporters contend that Rudner's perspective is too narrow, leading him to make assumptions about nationalism and modernization that overlook the complexities of Iranian society's attempts to evolve. Khaldoun al-‘Azzawi builds on Said's analysis by highlighting the dangers of writing history "from above." He critiques the portrayal of modernization as a struggle solely among the educated elite grappling with Western ideas, while neglecting the experiences of the lower classes. He points out that a "socially pernicious traditionalism" among the unruly rural and urban masses poses a significant obstacle to progress, necessitating their transformation into disciplined, self-motivated individuals who can participate as citizens in a Western-style society. It can be argued that Rudner's understanding of Iran's unification is incomplete without considering the masses that constitute its society.
Additional Perspectives
Rudner might benefit from exploring the carpet industry through a micro-historical lens, examining how carpet making affected individuals, including traditional villagers, workers in foreign-owned looms, and administrators within the Pahlavi dynasty who implemented carpet standardization. This approach could also shed light on how the establishment of a national carpet influenced social dynamics at the grassroots level, revealing the intricate connections between craft, community, and identity. He could have further expanded his analysis to explore the inner workings of the companies involved and their roles in the Iranian logistics system and the marketing of Iranian carpets for export. This perspective would have provided a compelling contrast to Rudner's overarching historical approach, which centers the Shah in the narrative of Iranian carpets. If Rudner aimed to examine carpetry through a purely national cultural lens, he could have investigated the discussions taking place at the Tehran School of Art regarding the defining characteristics of an Iranian carpet. Numerous individuals likely contributed to this discourse, and Rudner could have identified those who wielded influence and shaped carpet design, while also considering the impact of foreign companies and the international market on decision-making processes. Furthermore, he could have analyzed the demand for Iranian carpets, questioning whether it stemmed from an Iranian initiative, the country's reputation, or other external factors. Conclusion Martin Rudner skillfully intertwines the Iranian carpet industry with the country's economic development, offering a cohesive view of Iranian decision-making during the tumultuous years between 1925 and 1945. By merging these two elements, he crafts a narrative that transcends isolated factors of development and enriches our understanding of Iranian history. Rudner emphasizes national framing and modernization theory from a largely "history from above" perspective, focusing on the pivotal role of Reza Shah and the decisions he made. His article effectively illustrates the macroeconomic landscape of Iranian carpet production and the responses to both global and domestic demand. However, it somewhat overlooks the significant impacts at the village level, including the erosion of traditional cultural practices in the face of global demand. Furthermore, Rudner could have explored alternative viewpoints, particularly dependency theory, which would have provided a more nuanced understanding of the negative consequences of expanding the Iranian carpet market internationally, rather than solely fostering internal demand. Overall, Martin Rudner offers a focused perspective on the interplay between cultural and economic development, paving the way for a broader discussion on Iran's transition into the global economy. It seems there was no text provided for editing. Please share the passage you'd like me to refine, and I'll be happy to assist!