Before I looked at this book, I expected to find that changes in punishment would mirror changes in state, that is I expected to find during the constitutional revolution (1905-1909) punishments were more humane in contrast to Qajar punishments. That during the reign of Reza shah the great (1925-1941) punishments would be more disciplinary or after the formation of SAVAK in 1957 under British and CIA directions, that punishment would be more psychological and "western" and after the mullah revolution (1979-1981) that punishments, including torture, to conform more closely to Islamic law. this however appears not to be the case. Changes in punishment precede changes in the state by a couple of decades. Changes in punishment seem to occur in periods of political stability, not instability. It occurs when public officials are not preoccupied with political survival and private citizens are relieved of the constraints of daily survival.

The author seems to have deep knowledge of communist theories, and pre-revolutionary "classics" such as garbzadegi. He has tried to bite his lips hard and avoid needlessly throwing too much mud at Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, and taking academic neutrality to issues of torture, incarceration etc. and it's rational over this last century.

There is also coverage of different rationalities of Iranians towards the world such as disciplinary, Tutelary, Carceral, Capitalist (he omitted Islamic). The author mentions that despite on numerous occasions politicians being over thrown, institutions purged, and even classes violently ousted, sooner or later the same state institutions were reinstated by some group or other, as these institutions are rooted firmly in the habits of Iranians. The irony here is that revolutionaries are constrained by the modes of power that enabled them to seize the state in the first place.

The conclusion, chapter 11, is the only part I believe is worth reading, unless you enjoy feeling sick. It discusses torture from the Humanist, develop-mentalist, state terrorist (mullah republic) and Foucaultian approach.

In weakening the position of the Development theorist who believe as societies economically modernize, there is a decrease in the corporal severity of punishments. This decrease does not necessarily occur because people become more enlightened, rather as individuals are introduced to civic and labor discipline, they learn to regulate themselves according to their consciences, the author doesn't mention how, then, can these governments expand the scope of political participation while in a potentially violent and unstable situation?

Modern torture, it seems, rationalizes state power and is here to stay (for now at least)..

This is an important book for Persians. It examines the role that torture has played in the political system of Iran. It is important that we understand this issue if we are to eliminate the use of such instruments in the future.