Podcast Episode Summary:

New Books Network — Interview with Amir Moosavi
Episode: “Dust That Never Settles: Literary Afterlives of the Iran-Iraq War”
Date: September 14, 2025
Host: Tirul Mende
Guest: Professor Amir Moosavi (Rutgers University, author of "Dust That Never Settles")

Overview: Main Theme and Purpose

In this episode, Tirul Mende interviews Professor Amir Moosavi about his newly published book Dust That Never Settles: Literary Afterlives of the Iran-Iraq War (Stanford UP, 2025). The conversation explores the book’s examination of how Arabic and Persian literature has engaged with, responded to, and been shaped by the Iran-Iraq War (1980–1988), tracing these “literary afterlives” through multiple decades. Moosavi discusses the persistent metaphor of “dust,” the evolving nature of war literature in both countries, and comparative approaches to modern Middle Eastern fiction.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Author Background & Genesis of the Book

• Academic Crossroads:
  • Moosavi is based at Rutgers University, working on “Arabic and Persian literatures, modern and contemporary, and mostly in fiction.” [02:15]
  • The book’s genesis: merging Arabic and Persian studies, which are “usually studied separately and not in conversation with each other.” [03:03]

2. The Significance of the Title

• Why ‘Dust That Never Settles’?

  • The metaphor of dust is drawn from both literary and visual cultures of the Iran-Iraq War—particularly prevalent in wartime photography and fiction.
  • “Dust is something that is...very much all over the place in those photos.... when we read the fiction...you can kind of viscerally feel it when you read their books, of course, dust sticks to you.” (Moosavi, [04:48])
  • The “dust that never settles” refers both literally to the constant presence of dust in the war’s landscapes, and metaphorically to memories and traumas that remain unsettled decades later.

• On “Literary Afterlives”:

  • While “afterlives” is now a popular phrase, here it refers to “the way that writers have continued to treat this war in the years after it ended.... writers are continuing to bring it up.... it’s having another life after the actual war has ended.” (Moosavi, [04:48])

3. Scope and Timeframe

• Chronological Span:

  • The book covers works from 1980 (start of the war) through 2018—a period long enough to “divide the literature of this war in, into two periods at least: wartime and post-war.” (Moosavi, [09:12])
  • Wartime literature (1980–88): mainly state-sponsored, written in service of the state, “not very good...mostly written in the service of the state.”
  • Post-war literature: more diverse, critical, reflective, and influential.

• Notable Works Marking the Endpoint:

  • Novels such as Nassim Marashi’s Haras and Diya Jubeili’s There’s No Windmills in Basra signaled a fruitful moment to conclude the study.

4. Concepts: Eltizam & State Power

• Eltizam (or ta'ahud): Literature of Political Commitment
  • “Translations essentially of the idea of engaged literature or committed literatures.... The politically engaged, politically committed to support the working classes, the oppressed and such.” ([12:22])
  • Both the Islamic Republic of Iran and Ba'athist Iraq co-opted this concept post-1979, redefining it as a commitment to the state project and war effort, especially after the war’s outbreak in 1980:
    • “Both countries...dumped tons of money and resources into creating a state literature, into creating a state war culture.”
    • Commitment was now equated with allegiance to the state’s aims.

5. Comparative Literary Landscapes: Iraq vs. Iran

• Visibility and Audience:

  • Iraqi authors such as Ahmed Saadawi (Frankenstein in Baghdad) and Sinan Antoon (The Corpse Washer, I'jaam)—part of a “post-2003 wave” benefiting from international translation and recognition—generally reach a wider audience than their Iranian contemporaries. ([17:43])

• State Influence and Creative Freedom:

  • “Iranian writers are simultaneously dealing with [state control]...along with the difficulty in finding translators and publishing houses to publish them on the outside.... There’s a very big difference between writers on both sides now in terms of the audience.” (Moosavi, [17:43])

• Themes and Temporalities:

  • Iraqi postwar literature frames national history by recurring cycles of war:
    • “Among Iraqi writers, there tends to be this conception of time that's dictated by different wars.”
    • Even novels not “about” the Iran-Iraq War, such as Frankenstein in Baghdad, are haunted by it; the war permeates characters’ histories and the city’s psychic landscape.

6. Authorial Approach and Study Boundaries

• Scope Limitations:

  • "This is not an encyclopedic study.... I stuck to...biggest names on both sides in terms of writers of fiction.... [and] common thematic engagement with the war chronologically running parallel.” ([23:01])

• Comparative Method:

  • Moosavi works with notable writers from both Iran and Iraq, focusing on how war literature evolved: mourning and grief on the home front, rebellious ex-combatant writers, and critical engagements with state narratives.

7. Looking Forward: Future Scholarly Directions

• Evolving Interests:
  • Moosavi plans to “leave behind” the Iran-Iraq War for now, turning toward:
    • “The long 1980s,” tracing regional and global upheavals (Iranian Revolution, Saddam’s ascension, Afghan War, etc.), examining how writers process and narrate this era ([26:21]).
    • Ecocritical approaches: “how writers, artists are dealing with the ecological disaster that has struck this part of the world...soaring temperatures and a lack of water and war-based pollutions and pollutants.”

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On the Persistence of War’s Impact:

  • “The dust of this war, I think, is something that many writers have never been able to shake off, and I think many people from both of the countries that were involved have been unable to completely shake off.” (Moosavi, [04:48])

• On the Limitations of Wartime Literature:

  • “There was, of course, a wartime literature, and I think like most wartime literatures, it was not very good.... mostly written in the service of the state.” (Moosavi, [08:45])

• On State Appropriation of Commitment:

  • “The idea of commitment at that moment was redefined to be committed to the causes of the states. And both states were kind of able to silence dissents and kind of, you know, dominate the entire discourse around politics generally. But the war, especially at that moment, commitment being one of those causes....” (Moosavi, [12:22])

• On the Challenge of Comparative Study:

  • “Really, the biggest challenge was...limiting out of this huge, huge body of work to create a coherent story where both sides are...writing about the similar experience of having fought in this war, but in a way that we can use a comparative perspective to illuminate what's going on on both sides.” (Moosavi, [23:01])

• On Future Projects:

  • “I'm very much interested in...the 1980s or what we can call the kind of long 1980s...and how writers have gone back and treated that...highly important period.... The second thing...is ecocritical approaches to this region...how writers, artists are dealing with the ecological disaster that has struck this part of the world....” (Moosavi, [26:21])

Important Timestamps

• 02:15 – Moosavi’s current position and research focus
• 03:03 – Genesis of the book and integrating Arabic/Persian literary studies
• 04:48 – Meaning behind the title and metaphor of dust
• 09:04 – Choosing the 1980–2018 timeframe; differences between wartime and postwar literatures
• 12:22 – Explaining the concept of iltizam / ta’ahud (committed literature)
• 17:43 – Compare/contrast: Iraqi vs. Iranian postwar literature; discussion of Ahmed Saadawi, Sinan Antoon
• 23:01 – Methodological challenges and author’s selection process
• 26:21 – Moosavi’s next research directions

Conclusion

This episode offers a nuanced exploration of how the Iran-Iraq War continues to “raise dust” in the region’s literature, societies, and memory. With an eye for comparison and a careful sense of literary and political nuance, Amir Moosavi charts the evolving legacy of the war in the Arab and Persian literary imaginations, while considering broader questions of state power, trauma, and transnational cultural history.