The key foci of this book are urban development and population growth. In the first three chapters, we witness the ups and downs of a small island in the middle of the Seine. Continually, its indigenous population, later identified as the first Parisians, is imposed upon and influenced by successive interlopers. From the Romans through the Capetian monarchs, we watch as the outline of ancient Paris grows in population and construction. Chapter Four, “Paris Reborn, Paris Reformed,” will establish a pattern that we will see throughout the rest of the book: presenting the changes occurring in Paris, and the building projects associated with those changes. If you’re already asleep, Jones’ book is not for you.
This approach to the study of Paris does have its limits. It maintains a traditional historical focus on the wealthy and powerful, since they are the builders and planners. The less powerful are presented only insofar as they create urban challenges to overcome. In addition, some very important events in the life and culture of Paris are ignored because they do not affect planning or population growth.
French Enlightenment culture and ideas, arguably the greatest intellectual contribution of France to the rest of Europe, rates four paragraphs. Buildings and commercial growth during this period cover 32 pages. One could debate from the perspective that a greater proportion of city residents were affected by the changing composition of buildings and business interests, than they were by topics of salons and belles-lettres. But that’s like saying “we should judge McDonalds to be the most important American contribution to 20th Century North American culture, because the number of their restaurants grew so precipitously during that period and many citizens ate there. Even Voltaire is a pawn in the discussion of urban planning. No mention of Candide or his social critiques, just a short blurb involving Les Embellissements de Paris where he proposes combining “humanitarian, hygienic and utilitarian considerations with a concern for urban beauty” (Jones, pp. 207-8).
Some important occurrences in French history that did affect the populace at large, but do not involve urban growth, receive little attention as well. The Dreyfus Affair divided parties and households for a decade. It is dispatched in one paragraph, with just two other mentions in name, within this 566 page book.
We get a reprieve from tales of urban renewal in the first part of Chapter Seven, “Revolution and Empire.” This is largely due to the fact that benefactors of construction were more busy preserving their wealth, their political positions and their heads, than building. But then it’s back to cityscapes with a vengeance as we head into Napoleonic projects, through Baron Haussmann’s reinvisioning of the city, and ending with Mitterrand’s “Grands Projets.” There are a couple of lulls in construction during wars and occupations. But mostly it’s build, build, build.
For tourists interested in the history of buildings they will see in Paris, this book is a fine resource. Architects, urban planners and those interested in municipal physical growth, will find Jones‘ book a fascinating read. But those more interested in a cultural and political history will be disappointed by the dearth of examination.
Jones, Colin. Paris: Biography of a City. New York: Penguin Group (USA) Inc. 2005.
For more on French History and culture see:
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/09/france-in-modern-times-by-gordon-wright.html
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
Wednesday, March 20, 2013
Collapse by Jared Diamond.
Initially, when I decided to read Collapse, I thought that the purpose was, as mentioned in the subtitle, to examine “how societies choose to fail or succeed.” This is only in part true. It is a limited discussion of how specific past and present societies endangered by an environmental component (human mismanagement of natural resources and/or climate change) have chosen to fail or succeed. So the book would not be discussing the collapses of Carthage, the Soviet Union, The British Empire, or any society where an environmental component was not a catalyst. I was hoping for a broader view. But the author’s motivation was to provide information on the environmental threats to modern societies so that we might avert failure.
Diamond presents a framework for analysis using five points that contribute to societal collapse. They are: 1) Damage that people inflict on their environment, 2) Climate change, 3) Hostile neighbors, 4) Decreased support by friendly neighbors and 5) Societies responses to its problems. Not every collapse discussed included all five points, but all did include the first one.
Diamond begins his exploration in Montana. Montana? I’m not going to hear about Rome, Ancient Greece or The Spanish Empire; instead we’re going to cover Montana? First off, Montana is boring both as a state and a subject. Second, it’s not an independent civilization; it’s a state within a still wealthy and successful country. Third, it hasn’t collapsed. Alright, I understand that Diamond has connections in Montana, and an intimate understanding of its environmental difficulties. So I take my deep breath and suffer through a history of environmental depredations and attempts at recovery, in a state that‘s as exciting as an interview with Stephen Hawking‘s stunt double.
After practically flat-lining through the Montana chapter, I am rewarded with an honestly fascinating Part Two of histories involving past societies that failed: Easter Island, The Pitcairn Islands, The Anasazi, The Mayans, The Vikings; now we’re getting somewhere. Diamond discusses these collapses with exceptional detail and complexity. Brilliant and depressing. Just as you’re ready give-up on humanity, he follows with a hopeful chapter on three societies that sustained their populations and environments, for an extended time, through intelligent resource management. This success is somewhat mitigated since each group faced famines, and two of them employed war and genocide against competing tribes. Each was finally overcome by an aggressive, expansionist foreign population.
Part Three is an overwhelming look at modern societies facing environmental difficulties: Rwanda, Hispaniola, China and Australia. It is a numbing set of pictures and problems that leaves you feeling as cornered as the pretty guy in a men’s prison.
Part Four isn’t exactly a reprieve, but it does offer some strategies for success with big business polluters and ends with a few pages on “Reasons for Hope.” His reasons are that we have a choice, and we have information technologies which our predecessors lacked.
Unfortunately, there are elements of human nature about which we do not have choices, and Diamond does not address these. In his truly excellent book The Third Chimpanzee, Diamond elucidates how close we are genetically to other primates. We are animals. As animals, our purpose is to put our genetic material into the next generation. Any more thoughtful goal is secondary for our species. In the face of impending catastrophe, our population continues to climb. Even China’s draconian population control policies have resulted in addition, not subtraction. So it doesn’t matter how much information we have. Our population will continue to rise until an unresolvable ecological crisis occurs (a shortage in food, water, energy, etc). Anyone who wishes to pit wishful thinking against this reasoning need only answer one question: “Is our population going up or is it going down?”
Diamond, Jared. Collapse. New York: Penguin Books, 2011.
Diamond presents a framework for analysis using five points that contribute to societal collapse. They are: 1) Damage that people inflict on their environment, 2) Climate change, 3) Hostile neighbors, 4) Decreased support by friendly neighbors and 5) Societies responses to its problems. Not every collapse discussed included all five points, but all did include the first one.
Diamond begins his exploration in Montana. Montana? I’m not going to hear about Rome, Ancient Greece or The Spanish Empire; instead we’re going to cover Montana? First off, Montana is boring both as a state and a subject. Second, it’s not an independent civilization; it’s a state within a still wealthy and successful country. Third, it hasn’t collapsed. Alright, I understand that Diamond has connections in Montana, and an intimate understanding of its environmental difficulties. So I take my deep breath and suffer through a history of environmental depredations and attempts at recovery, in a state that‘s as exciting as an interview with Stephen Hawking‘s stunt double.
After practically flat-lining through the Montana chapter, I am rewarded with an honestly fascinating Part Two of histories involving past societies that failed: Easter Island, The Pitcairn Islands, The Anasazi, The Mayans, The Vikings; now we’re getting somewhere. Diamond discusses these collapses with exceptional detail and complexity. Brilliant and depressing. Just as you’re ready give-up on humanity, he follows with a hopeful chapter on three societies that sustained their populations and environments, for an extended time, through intelligent resource management. This success is somewhat mitigated since each group faced famines, and two of them employed war and genocide against competing tribes. Each was finally overcome by an aggressive, expansionist foreign population.
Part Three is an overwhelming look at modern societies facing environmental difficulties: Rwanda, Hispaniola, China and Australia. It is a numbing set of pictures and problems that leaves you feeling as cornered as the pretty guy in a men’s prison.
Part Four isn’t exactly a reprieve, but it does offer some strategies for success with big business polluters and ends with a few pages on “Reasons for Hope.” His reasons are that we have a choice, and we have information technologies which our predecessors lacked.
Unfortunately, there are elements of human nature about which we do not have choices, and Diamond does not address these. In his truly excellent book The Third Chimpanzee, Diamond elucidates how close we are genetically to other primates. We are animals. As animals, our purpose is to put our genetic material into the next generation. Any more thoughtful goal is secondary for our species. In the face of impending catastrophe, our population continues to climb. Even China’s draconian population control policies have resulted in addition, not subtraction. So it doesn’t matter how much information we have. Our population will continue to rise until an unresolvable ecological crisis occurs (a shortage in food, water, energy, etc). Anyone who wishes to pit wishful thinking against this reasoning need only answer one question: “Is our population going up or is it going down?”
Diamond, Jared. Collapse. New York: Penguin Books, 2011.
Tuesday, March 12, 2013
Great Soul by Joseph Lelyveld.
I heard about the controversy surrounding Great Soul before I ever got a copy in my hands. So the main question I had was “Is this going to read like a Jackie Collins novel, or is this a factual biography?” The main objections from the State Assembly in Gujarat, India, which resulted in their vote to ban the book, involved suggestions that Gandhi had a gay relationship, and that Gandhi made racist comments. So lets tackle these issues right away.
Regarding the purported gay relationship: the author stays within the evidence and does not stray into speculation. Lelyveld presents the existing letters from the Mahatma to the architect, Hermann Kallenbach, his alleged beloved. The author’s citation and interpretation are as follows:
If not infatuated, Gandhi was clearly drawn to the architect. In a letter from London in 1909, he writes: “Your portrait (the only one) stands on my mantelpiece in the bedroom. The mantelpiece is opposite to the bed.” Cotton wool and Vaseline, he then says, “are a constant reminder.” The point, he goes on, “is to show to you and me how completely you have taken possession of my body. This is slavery with a vengeance.” (Lelyveld, p. 89.)
Lelyveld does not then jump to say “and therefore, they were having sex.” At most, we can conclude that there was undoubtedly an affectionate, homoerotic relationship between the two men. While the question for a free-thinker may be more along the lines of “who cares who Gandhi was intimate with; that’s his business,” the State Assembly of Gujarat clearly has enough issues with gay men that even the suggestion of homoeroticism is too much.
The evidence of Gandhi’s racism is far more conclusive. Here, The Mahatma’s own words indict him. In 1896 Gandhi writes about “the raw Kaffir,” a pejorative term for black South Africans, “whose sole ambition is to collect a number of cattle to buy a wife, then pass his life in indolence and nakedness.” (Lelyveld, p. 57.) Twelve years later, Gandhi’s attitude towards black people has not improved. In 1908, reporting in South Africa on his first incarceration, Gandhi writes:
We were then marched off to a prison intended for Kaffirs…We could understand not being classed with the whites, but to be placed on the same level as the Natives seemed too much to put up with. It is indubitably right that Indians should have separate cells. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized--the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animals. (Lelyveld, p. 54.)
Years later, Gandhi stops using the word Kaffir, which does show some progress.
But there is much to Great Soul, beyond discussions of race and sexual orientation, worth reading. Gandhi, as a political operator, is quite intriguing. The man was a lawyer long before he was a saint. He is shown courting support from Indian Muslims not only because he honestly stands for Hindu-Muslim unity, but also because this stance wins him political prominence. “He stepped to the fore for the first time in the national movement, on a unity platform.” (Lelyveld, p. 159.) Great Soul shows this leader forced into unpleasant compromises on a number of occasions. In dealing with upper caste prejudice against untouchables, Gandhi must temper his commitment to “taking down untouchability” to avoid “cleaving his movement” for independence (Lelyveld, p. 193.) Periodically, Gandhi uses religion inconsistently as justification for his actions. “a method that could be classed as immoral when pursued by others was a religious obligation when undertaken by himself” (Lelyveld, p. 230.) Even the pure white hem of a saint’s garment can be sullied when dragged through the dust of politics.
I must add that Lelyveld writes beautifully and compassionately about Gandhi. At one train stop in India, Gandhi brushes past students and notables, and heads toward a roped-off enclosure of untouchables where he greets them and sings with them:
“He was raising the subject of common humanity, not only for the sake of the untouchables, but for the students and the notables and the villagers who’d taken the dust from his feet. And, as so often in his unusually well-recorded life, it is the action rather than the always earnest, sometimes contradictory, sometimes moving words that leap off the page” (Lelyveld, p. 196.)
This is not a biographer who is attempting to deride his subject. Lelyveld presents his material in a sensitive, accurate manner, without the extremes sensationalism or worship.
Lelyveld, Joseph. Great Soul. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2011.
Regarding the purported gay relationship: the author stays within the evidence and does not stray into speculation. Lelyveld presents the existing letters from the Mahatma to the architect, Hermann Kallenbach, his alleged beloved. The author’s citation and interpretation are as follows:
If not infatuated, Gandhi was clearly drawn to the architect. In a letter from London in 1909, he writes: “Your portrait (the only one) stands on my mantelpiece in the bedroom. The mantelpiece is opposite to the bed.” Cotton wool and Vaseline, he then says, “are a constant reminder.” The point, he goes on, “is to show to you and me how completely you have taken possession of my body. This is slavery with a vengeance.” (Lelyveld, p. 89.)
Lelyveld does not then jump to say “and therefore, they were having sex.” At most, we can conclude that there was undoubtedly an affectionate, homoerotic relationship between the two men. While the question for a free-thinker may be more along the lines of “who cares who Gandhi was intimate with; that’s his business,” the State Assembly of Gujarat clearly has enough issues with gay men that even the suggestion of homoeroticism is too much.
The evidence of Gandhi’s racism is far more conclusive. Here, The Mahatma’s own words indict him. In 1896 Gandhi writes about “the raw Kaffir,” a pejorative term for black South Africans, “whose sole ambition is to collect a number of cattle to buy a wife, then pass his life in indolence and nakedness.” (Lelyveld, p. 57.) Twelve years later, Gandhi’s attitude towards black people has not improved. In 1908, reporting in South Africa on his first incarceration, Gandhi writes:
We were then marched off to a prison intended for Kaffirs…We could understand not being classed with the whites, but to be placed on the same level as the Natives seemed too much to put up with. It is indubitably right that Indians should have separate cells. Kaffirs are as a rule uncivilized--the convicts even more so. They are troublesome, very dirty and live almost like animals. (Lelyveld, p. 54.)
Years later, Gandhi stops using the word Kaffir, which does show some progress.
But there is much to Great Soul, beyond discussions of race and sexual orientation, worth reading. Gandhi, as a political operator, is quite intriguing. The man was a lawyer long before he was a saint. He is shown courting support from Indian Muslims not only because he honestly stands for Hindu-Muslim unity, but also because this stance wins him political prominence. “He stepped to the fore for the first time in the national movement, on a unity platform.” (Lelyveld, p. 159.) Great Soul shows this leader forced into unpleasant compromises on a number of occasions. In dealing with upper caste prejudice against untouchables, Gandhi must temper his commitment to “taking down untouchability” to avoid “cleaving his movement” for independence (Lelyveld, p. 193.) Periodically, Gandhi uses religion inconsistently as justification for his actions. “a method that could be classed as immoral when pursued by others was a religious obligation when undertaken by himself” (Lelyveld, p. 230.) Even the pure white hem of a saint’s garment can be sullied when dragged through the dust of politics.
I must add that Lelyveld writes beautifully and compassionately about Gandhi. At one train stop in India, Gandhi brushes past students and notables, and heads toward a roped-off enclosure of untouchables where he greets them and sings with them:
“He was raising the subject of common humanity, not only for the sake of the untouchables, but for the students and the notables and the villagers who’d taken the dust from his feet. And, as so often in his unusually well-recorded life, it is the action rather than the always earnest, sometimes contradictory, sometimes moving words that leap off the page” (Lelyveld, p. 196.)
This is not a biographer who is attempting to deride his subject. Lelyveld presents his material in a sensitive, accurate manner, without the extremes sensationalism or worship.
Lelyveld, Joseph. Great Soul. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2011.
Thursday, March 7, 2013
Atlas Drugged by Stephen L. Goldstein
I am about to show what a drab, fun-less, plodding reader I am: I don’t like most fiction. For me, it is usually a waste of time because it doesn’t convey factual information. Clearly, the warm summer sun of recreation does not shine in my brain or thaw the ice in my heart.
But occasionally I will break this pattern and pick-up a work of fiction. If the book is historically important (i.e. Tolstoy’s War and Peace), or expresses a philosophy that has impacted culture (i.e. Camus’ The Stranger), or has some relevance to current events (i.e. Hosseini’s The Kite Runner), I may read it.
Stephen Goldstein’s book Atlas Drugged is one such novel for which I have made an exception. It is a response to Ayn Rand’s mammoth ode to corporate greed Atlas Shrugged. In his dystopia, the author represents what would happen if Rand’s characters had attained their results in the U.S. This book has the chilling propensity to be correct in anticipating our own current events.
One example illustrating prescience is how it anticipated the response of America’s financial sector to Hurricane Sandy. Goldstein’s book shows corporations buying-up real estate after a disastrous East Coast hurricane devastates the properties in its’ path. Sound familiar? No, Goldstein is not Nostradamus. He is simply a rational observer who understands how greed works in the business world. Of course, it doesn’t hurt that current events are Dr Goldstein’s stock and trade. He is a columnist for “The Sun-Sentinel” in Florida.
Atlas Drugged
came out at the beginning of 2012. Another plot line involves a power drink called the Atlas Energy Drink, which has less than healthy consequences for those who drink it on a prolonged basis. In November of 2012, in the real world, the FDA began investigations of energy drinks, where suspicions that some of them may have caused deaths were revealed. Amusingly, Goldstein presents his accurate predictions of our country’s misadventures with greed, using the same polemical style, soliloquies and stark language format, that Rand uses in her tome.
Finally, there is the issue of John Galt’s Strike. In both Atlas Shrugged and Atlas Drugged, Ayn Rand’s conservative hero successfully brings the country’s economy to its knees. While not an exact mirror of the GOP-manufactured debt-ceiling crisis, there are enough parallels to make a reader take notice. Both the GOP and Galt reveal attempts to force an economic downturn for their own purposes. We will soon see if the Republican unwillingness to compromise has an effect similar to that produced in both books.
I’m not a political Pollyanna. I recognize that human beings are selfish. This isn’t a judgment, it’s a biological reality. Humans did not get to the top of the food chain by sitting around a camp fire with the antelope singing “Kumbaya.” If a Cro-Magnon tribe controlled a water hole in the middle of a desert, they fought to keep it against invading tribes. The healthier, more cunning, more ruthless tribe, drove the losers into the desert where they would perish. The winners would survive to reproduce their winning traits, including selfishness. If you want a more scientific explanation concerning the origins of human selfishness, read Richard Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene.
It is because human beings are selfish, and because capitalism rewards selfishness, that one of our government’s chief duties is to police capitalism. Atlas Drugged presents a dystopia where unrestrained capitalism harms the public. Its examples only appear to be magically prescient to those who do not understand the nature of human beings or capitalism. Dr Goldstein does understand, so his book’s scenarios pan-out in real life. In addition to being an amusing piece of fiction, Atlas Drugged has proven to be an accurate portrayal of what happens when corporate greed goes unchecked.
Goldstein, Stephen L. Atlas Drugged. Ashland: Grid Press. 2012.
For more political books by Stephen Goldstein, see http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-dictionary-of-american-political.html
But occasionally I will break this pattern and pick-up a work of fiction. If the book is historically important (i.e. Tolstoy’s War and Peace), or expresses a philosophy that has impacted culture (i.e. Camus’ The Stranger), or has some relevance to current events (i.e. Hosseini’s The Kite Runner), I may read it.
Stephen Goldstein’s book Atlas Drugged is one such novel for which I have made an exception. It is a response to Ayn Rand’s mammoth ode to corporate greed Atlas Shrugged. In his dystopia, the author represents what would happen if Rand’s characters had attained their results in the U.S. This book has the chilling propensity to be correct in anticipating our own current events.
One example illustrating prescience is how it anticipated the response of America’s financial sector to Hurricane Sandy. Goldstein’s book shows corporations buying-up real estate after a disastrous East Coast hurricane devastates the properties in its’ path. Sound familiar? No, Goldstein is not Nostradamus. He is simply a rational observer who understands how greed works in the business world. Of course, it doesn’t hurt that current events are Dr Goldstein’s stock and trade. He is a columnist for “The Sun-Sentinel” in Florida.
Atlas Drugged
came out at the beginning of 2012. Another plot line involves a power drink called the Atlas Energy Drink, which has less than healthy consequences for those who drink it on a prolonged basis. In November of 2012, in the real world, the FDA began investigations of energy drinks, where suspicions that some of them may have caused deaths were revealed. Amusingly, Goldstein presents his accurate predictions of our country’s misadventures with greed, using the same polemical style, soliloquies and stark language format, that Rand uses in her tome.
Finally, there is the issue of John Galt’s Strike. In both Atlas Shrugged and Atlas Drugged, Ayn Rand’s conservative hero successfully brings the country’s economy to its knees. While not an exact mirror of the GOP-manufactured debt-ceiling crisis, there are enough parallels to make a reader take notice. Both the GOP and Galt reveal attempts to force an economic downturn for their own purposes. We will soon see if the Republican unwillingness to compromise has an effect similar to that produced in both books.
I’m not a political Pollyanna. I recognize that human beings are selfish. This isn’t a judgment, it’s a biological reality. Humans did not get to the top of the food chain by sitting around a camp fire with the antelope singing “Kumbaya.” If a Cro-Magnon tribe controlled a water hole in the middle of a desert, they fought to keep it against invading tribes. The healthier, more cunning, more ruthless tribe, drove the losers into the desert where they would perish. The winners would survive to reproduce their winning traits, including selfishness. If you want a more scientific explanation concerning the origins of human selfishness, read Richard Dawkins’ The Selfish Gene.
It is because human beings are selfish, and because capitalism rewards selfishness, that one of our government’s chief duties is to police capitalism. Atlas Drugged presents a dystopia where unrestrained capitalism harms the public. Its examples only appear to be magically prescient to those who do not understand the nature of human beings or capitalism. Dr Goldstein does understand, so his book’s scenarios pan-out in real life. In addition to being an amusing piece of fiction, Atlas Drugged has proven to be an accurate portrayal of what happens when corporate greed goes unchecked.
Goldstein, Stephen L. Atlas Drugged. Ashland: Grid Press. 2012.
For more political books by Stephen Goldstein, see http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2014/05/the-dictionary-of-american-political.html
Tuesday, February 26, 2013
The Complete World of Human Evolution by Chris Stringer and Peter Andrews.
Paleoanthropology is a relatively new science in historical terms. It has been only 51 years since Louis and Mary Leakey discovered the biped Homo Habilis, supporting Darwin’s theory of human origins in Africa. By comparison, physics and anatomy have been studied for over 2000 years. So we occupy a privileged position to witness the formation, development and interplay of theories, in a pioneering science. It is valuable to periodically pick-up a recent book on paleoanthropology and discover what new pieces in the puzzle of human evolution have been unearthed.
For this purpose, The Complete World of Human Evolution is a helpful addition to the general public’s knowledge. It is factual, rational and clear; providing a picture of human evolution based strictly on the empirical evidence available. The book was written in 2005, and updated in 2011 to include recent finds, so is fairly contemporary. Conveniently, the back of the revised paperback edition highlights new information between 2005 and 2011:
* New descriptions of [A. ramidus] shed light on the earliest known human ancestor candidates.
*The Newly discovered [A. sediba could prove] australopithecines were ancestral to humans.
*Recent work [confirms that H. floresiensis] was a separate human species.
*New DNA research shows [modern humans outside Africa have traces of Neanderthal genes].
*New discoveries from a Siberian cave suggest another as yet unnamed human species lived alongside Neanderthals and modern humans.
This is a highly user-friendly book. It does not assume that the reader is an expert in the field, so defines new and difficult scientific terms in parentheses. Also, the first section “In Search of Our Ancestors,” provides an excellent introduction to the field’s techniques and history for the beginner, and a helpful refresher for the intermediate. An advanced student would be bored to tears. For them, I suggest skimming to the next section, but don‘t miss the newer means of analyzing remains.
Since I am a confessionally-oriented american, I would like to reveal a guilty pleasure: I love graphs, timelines and glossy photos of hominin bones. It’s the kind of brain candy that reminds me of the Time/Life books like Early Man in the school libraries where I grew-up. This book will not disappoint the visual learner.
Section Two presents the fossil evidence. Section Three interprets that evidence. Very organized. I must caution the reader that these guys love their bones. You will be getting detailed descriptions of form and function. Uniquely, they spend a great deal of time on species that are not considered ancestors to modern humans, but are either predecessors to various living apes or evolutionary dead ends. It’s not a breeze for the casual reader, but it will provide excellent, impartial evidence.
A note on impartiality: Stringer and Andrews have an advantage over pioneering paleoanthropologists who have made important discoveries in the field. The discoverers have undergone frustrations and hardships associated with archeology: years of painstaking sifting through dirt in unforgiving climates, sometimes victimized by armed robbers, always bargaining with local authorities for digging rights. When such a scientist finds something, they want it to be important. They want all the years and hardship to have been worth it. In addition, they understand that grant money for future research is big business and depends upon important finds. These pioneers are the first to analyze their discoveries. The tendency to ascribe greater importance to the find is understandably strong. But a dispassionate, plodding researcher, with access to the evidence, in a climate-controlled office, is better suited to determine the value of the find for the field of paleoanthropology. A good example is an artifact from Slovenia where archeologists claimed to have discovered a Neanderthal flute. Scientists unconnected with the site later refuted this evidence with information suggesting that “the bone in question had been punctured by bears chewing on it” (Stringer and Andrews, p. 210). The authors have a better sense of overview from various sources. Their colleagues in the field are often overly focused on their own find. Also, both writers have spent time on digs, so have that experience as well. Since Stringer and Andrews are not in the middle of the drama, and do not have a personal stake in the conclusions drawn, their information is more reliable.
This book is a haven for rational minds that accept the scientific method. Given the authors’ country of origin, it is difficult to avoid demographic comparisons. Here in the United States, we are surrounded by religious superstition. According to a 2012 Gallup Poll,"Forty six percent of Americans believed in creationism, 32 percent believed in theistic evolution and 15 percent believed in evolution without any divine intervention” (Barooah, p. 1). Large, well-funded religious organizations are attempting to interject their beliefs into public school curricula on evolution. In eastern England, where the authors work, “80% disagree with creationism and intelligent design” (Sample, p. 1). In our US environment, books like The Complete World of Human Evolution are a citadel of reason surrounded by a landscape of Dark Ages superstition. Fortunately for the authors, their homeland has a significantly smaller problem in this regard. Enjoy the solace and intellectual fortification that they provide.
Stringer, Chris & Andrews, Peter. The Complete World of Human Evolution. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd., 2011
Barooah, Jahnabi. "46% Americans Believe In Creationism According To Latest Gallup Poll." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 05 June 2012. Web. 23 Feb. 2013.
Sample, Ian. "Four out of Five Britons Repudiate Creationism." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 01 Mar. 2009. Web. 23 Feb. 2013.
For a book on the history of science, see http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-scientists-by-john-gribbin.html
For this purpose, The Complete World of Human Evolution is a helpful addition to the general public’s knowledge. It is factual, rational and clear; providing a picture of human evolution based strictly on the empirical evidence available. The book was written in 2005, and updated in 2011 to include recent finds, so is fairly contemporary. Conveniently, the back of the revised paperback edition highlights new information between 2005 and 2011:
* New descriptions of [A. ramidus] shed light on the earliest known human ancestor candidates.
*The Newly discovered [A. sediba could prove] australopithecines were ancestral to humans.
*Recent work [confirms that H. floresiensis] was a separate human species.
*New DNA research shows [modern humans outside Africa have traces of Neanderthal genes].
*New discoveries from a Siberian cave suggest another as yet unnamed human species lived alongside Neanderthals and modern humans.
This is a highly user-friendly book. It does not assume that the reader is an expert in the field, so defines new and difficult scientific terms in parentheses. Also, the first section “In Search of Our Ancestors,” provides an excellent introduction to the field’s techniques and history for the beginner, and a helpful refresher for the intermediate. An advanced student would be bored to tears. For them, I suggest skimming to the next section, but don‘t miss the newer means of analyzing remains.
Since I am a confessionally-oriented american, I would like to reveal a guilty pleasure: I love graphs, timelines and glossy photos of hominin bones. It’s the kind of brain candy that reminds me of the Time/Life books like Early Man in the school libraries where I grew-up. This book will not disappoint the visual learner.
Section Two presents the fossil evidence. Section Three interprets that evidence. Very organized. I must caution the reader that these guys love their bones. You will be getting detailed descriptions of form and function. Uniquely, they spend a great deal of time on species that are not considered ancestors to modern humans, but are either predecessors to various living apes or evolutionary dead ends. It’s not a breeze for the casual reader, but it will provide excellent, impartial evidence.
A note on impartiality: Stringer and Andrews have an advantage over pioneering paleoanthropologists who have made important discoveries in the field. The discoverers have undergone frustrations and hardships associated with archeology: years of painstaking sifting through dirt in unforgiving climates, sometimes victimized by armed robbers, always bargaining with local authorities for digging rights. When such a scientist finds something, they want it to be important. They want all the years and hardship to have been worth it. In addition, they understand that grant money for future research is big business and depends upon important finds. These pioneers are the first to analyze their discoveries. The tendency to ascribe greater importance to the find is understandably strong. But a dispassionate, plodding researcher, with access to the evidence, in a climate-controlled office, is better suited to determine the value of the find for the field of paleoanthropology. A good example is an artifact from Slovenia where archeologists claimed to have discovered a Neanderthal flute. Scientists unconnected with the site later refuted this evidence with information suggesting that “the bone in question had been punctured by bears chewing on it” (Stringer and Andrews, p. 210). The authors have a better sense of overview from various sources. Their colleagues in the field are often overly focused on their own find. Also, both writers have spent time on digs, so have that experience as well. Since Stringer and Andrews are not in the middle of the drama, and do not have a personal stake in the conclusions drawn, their information is more reliable.
This book is a haven for rational minds that accept the scientific method. Given the authors’ country of origin, it is difficult to avoid demographic comparisons. Here in the United States, we are surrounded by religious superstition. According to a 2012 Gallup Poll,"Forty six percent of Americans believed in creationism, 32 percent believed in theistic evolution and 15 percent believed in evolution without any divine intervention” (Barooah, p. 1). Large, well-funded religious organizations are attempting to interject their beliefs into public school curricula on evolution. In eastern England, where the authors work, “80% disagree with creationism and intelligent design” (Sample, p. 1). In our US environment, books like The Complete World of Human Evolution are a citadel of reason surrounded by a landscape of Dark Ages superstition. Fortunately for the authors, their homeland has a significantly smaller problem in this regard. Enjoy the solace and intellectual fortification that they provide.
Stringer, Chris & Andrews, Peter. The Complete World of Human Evolution. London: Thames & Hudson Ltd., 2011
Barooah, Jahnabi. "46% Americans Believe In Creationism According To Latest Gallup Poll." The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 05 June 2012. Web. 23 Feb. 2013.
Sample, Ian. "Four out of Five Britons Repudiate Creationism." The Guardian. Guardian News and Media, 01 Mar. 2009. Web. 23 Feb. 2013.
For a book on the history of science, see http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/05/the-scientists-by-john-gribbin.html
Monday, February 18, 2013
In the Wake of the Plague by Norman F. Cantor
Norman Cantor was an excellent writer. He explained his topic in a lucid, organized, fashion, using an economy of words. He would set the stage, present the facts, then provide memorable stories and details. His style was like the best of fluid, casual and interesting, after dinner conversations. He was made for the writing of popular histories.
In the Wake of the Plague is no exception. He begins by relating the plague of the 14th century to our current lack of preparation for an infectious disease disaster. The comparison is a bit of an awkward fit, but it insures that the popular reader will see current relevance to this historical phenomena. Importantly, Cantor describes some of the medical facts of plague pathology. He then launches into the world of Bordeaux in the 1300s, and introduces us to Princess Joan. This is the kind of detail that Cantor loves. He gets to both decorate his text with luxurious detail concerning her possessions (though how he knows that she carried with her 150 meters of rakematiz silk is never explained), and he gets to show the importance of her ignominious death. Though a minor occurrence in history, the death of Princess Joan from plague has international political consequences. She was an English daughter of King Edward III, and betrothed to Prince Pedro of Castile. The goal of the union, to cement dynastic relations between the two kingdoms, was unfulfilled. Her death also illustrates how the Black Death affected rich as well as poor.
While this historical vignette is seductive to casual readers, it is a bit irksome that Cantor provides no citations or notes for this episode. Throughout the work, this is my greatest criticism. Like a conversation, the story moves along smoothly, but one cannot vet the facts presented. This is true for controversial and opinionated portions of the reading where one would want references, like Cantor’s presentation of St Anselm who “did poorly as archbishop, getting into needless quarrels with kings, exasperating the Pope, and turning the monks of Canterbury into an ingroup of young gays” (Cantor, p.111). It is also true for purely factual, non-controversial sections like his description of Thomas Bradwardine’s treatise on astrophysics (Cantor, p.110). Cantor’s bibliography contains a book by Gordon Leff called Bradwardine and the Pelagians, which is probably the source of this information. Names of articles and books do appear sporadically in the text, but they are explained and paraphrased with few quotations and no footnotes. Cantor’s picture is reasonable, as are his conclusions, but we have only his word for it.
Like many good conversations, the book has a stream of consciousness element and frequently runs off-topic. Cantor begins with a discussion of Archbishop Bradwardine, moves on to the cleric’s Oxford roots and his debt to William of Occam, discusses the Oxford Franciscans and dead-ends with a summation of the Franciscan vs. Dominican Thomists disagreement over the relationship of faith and reason. Throughout, I am captivated by both his choice of subjects and his entertaining writing. I can, however, understand how a student who is reading to find out about the Plague might become exasperated by these digressions.
Cantor’s writing is like cotton candy. It is sweet, naturally woven together, and digests easily. But without properly cited scholarship, how do you know that he isn’t just pulling the cotton candy out of his ass? Good history writing without references, like cotton candy, is insubstantial and dissolves easily under scrutiny.
Cantor, Norman F. In the Wake of the Plague. New York: Harper-Collins Publishers, Inc., 2002.
For more on Medieval History see http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-distant-mirror-calamitous-14th.html
In the Wake of the Plague is no exception. He begins by relating the plague of the 14th century to our current lack of preparation for an infectious disease disaster. The comparison is a bit of an awkward fit, but it insures that the popular reader will see current relevance to this historical phenomena. Importantly, Cantor describes some of the medical facts of plague pathology. He then launches into the world of Bordeaux in the 1300s, and introduces us to Princess Joan. This is the kind of detail that Cantor loves. He gets to both decorate his text with luxurious detail concerning her possessions (though how he knows that she carried with her 150 meters of rakematiz silk is never explained), and he gets to show the importance of her ignominious death. Though a minor occurrence in history, the death of Princess Joan from plague has international political consequences. She was an English daughter of King Edward III, and betrothed to Prince Pedro of Castile. The goal of the union, to cement dynastic relations between the two kingdoms, was unfulfilled. Her death also illustrates how the Black Death affected rich as well as poor.
While this historical vignette is seductive to casual readers, it is a bit irksome that Cantor provides no citations or notes for this episode. Throughout the work, this is my greatest criticism. Like a conversation, the story moves along smoothly, but one cannot vet the facts presented. This is true for controversial and opinionated portions of the reading where one would want references, like Cantor’s presentation of St Anselm who “did poorly as archbishop, getting into needless quarrels with kings, exasperating the Pope, and turning the monks of Canterbury into an ingroup of young gays” (Cantor, p.111). It is also true for purely factual, non-controversial sections like his description of Thomas Bradwardine’s treatise on astrophysics (Cantor, p.110). Cantor’s bibliography contains a book by Gordon Leff called Bradwardine and the Pelagians, which is probably the source of this information. Names of articles and books do appear sporadically in the text, but they are explained and paraphrased with few quotations and no footnotes. Cantor’s picture is reasonable, as are his conclusions, but we have only his word for it.
Like many good conversations, the book has a stream of consciousness element and frequently runs off-topic. Cantor begins with a discussion of Archbishop Bradwardine, moves on to the cleric’s Oxford roots and his debt to William of Occam, discusses the Oxford Franciscans and dead-ends with a summation of the Franciscan vs. Dominican Thomists disagreement over the relationship of faith and reason. Throughout, I am captivated by both his choice of subjects and his entertaining writing. I can, however, understand how a student who is reading to find out about the Plague might become exasperated by these digressions.
Cantor’s writing is like cotton candy. It is sweet, naturally woven together, and digests easily. But without properly cited scholarship, how do you know that he isn’t just pulling the cotton candy out of his ass? Good history writing without references, like cotton candy, is insubstantial and dissolves easily under scrutiny.
Cantor, Norman F. In the Wake of the Plague. New York: Harper-Collins Publishers, Inc., 2002.
For more on Medieval History see http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/10/a-distant-mirror-calamitous-14th.html
Friday, February 15, 2013
A People's History of London by Lindsey German & John Rees
A People's History of London is a complex book to review. Complex both because of its authors and their slant on the history they cover. Lindsey German is a former Central Committee Member of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) and former editor of the periodical “Socialist Review.” John Rees also served on the SWP Central Committee, and edited the quarterly “International Socialism.” Their approach to the subject is polemical, but how could it be otherwise. Even a less politically motivated historian would agree that Britain’s history of relations between “the people,” (who are, in this book, the poor and working class), and the ruling class of Britain has been contentious. Still, one finds one’s self constantly questioning, during the reading, “is this just an opinion, or is it empirically researched history?” One thing is certain: you can expect that a history, written by unabashedly leftist writers formerly associated with the SWP, will staunchly advocate for those they define as “the people,” and their definition will not include the wealthy.
This is a book that provides a much ignored history: the history of how poor people and workers gained a modicum of democratic rights in the face of a repressive ruling class and monarchy. It begins unfortunately, with a paean to political correctness. It exhibits one Joshua Virasami, and ticks-off a checklist of his acceptability to the fashion-conscious on the Left: 21 years old, black, working class job at Costa Coffee, college student, paying his way through college. Had he been middle-aged, white and wearing a suit to work, I don’t think he would have made the first page. The book gets worse before it gets better (and it does get better). You see, Mr. Virasami is part of the tragically leftist-chic and ineffectual Occupy Movement (LSX incarnation). In the USA, our racist, homophobic crazies of the Tea Party have transformed their protest movement into a somewhat successful set of campaigns to elect representatives to Congress. At the same time, the Occupy Movement has no cohesive message, and their one political achievement has been their remarkable ability to pitch tents.
Had the book continued in this vein, I would now be using it to prop-up my bookshelves. Happily, I can report that A People’s History of London improves dramatically over the next two hundred pages and now resides on my bookshelf, rather than under it. Chapters one through nine do an excellent job of locating the poor and working class in history, and representing the popular movements for their advancement. Throughout the majority of the chapters, it is a well-researched and footnoted study.
There is, however, a pronounced focus on rioting and the use of force to obtain changes. There is no discussion of citizens campaigning for politicians who favor democratic change. No examples of reformist citizen groups that pressured or worked along side MPs around progressive issues. The authors consistently represent violence committed by the rulers in a negative light. There is no criticism of violence when it is used by “the people” during rioting. In representing the Spitalfields Riots, violence is justified by the authors: “Weavers fought their masters to protect their livelihoods” (German and Rees, p. 71). When exhibiting The Gordon Riots, which were in part motivated by anti-Catholic prejudice, the authors show extraordinary patience and sensitivity towards the perpetrators of harm: “The idea of the riots as a series of mindless acts of crime and destruction does not do justice to the issues, or to the sensibilities and consciousness of the poor in eighteenth-century London.” (German and Rees, p. 90). If we’re being all sensitive here, allow me to weigh in with my own touchy-feely perspective. Can one create a society of peace by using violence? Can one build a society when destruction is an initial tactic? If intimidation is used to silence one’s opposition, can all voices be heard and respected? Mob action may be an outlet for pent-up frustration, but it is not a program for a society’s creation or renewal. Many movements have employed non-violent tactics with success. Abortion Rights, Gay Marriage in Massachusetts and the defeat of Jim Crow Laws, were all won without even one house getting burned to advance the cause. There is a common revolutionist idea that violence is a necessary part of class struggle, which leads to the overthrow of those who own the means of production and their government. I do not know if the authors subscribe to this idea; they never explicitly state it. But if they do support violent overthrow, that would explain their criticism of violence by the ruling class and their silence around violence by peasants or workers.
A People's History of London purports to be just that: “a people’s history.” It borrows its title from Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. Zinn’s book is a lengthy and comprehensive work that attempts to give equal time to as many of the unique cultures and movements in the United States as possible. Conversely, German and Rees, in their well-chronicled first nine chapters on the advancement of peasants and workers , describe other cultures and movements almost exclusively as they pertain to class struggle. To be fair, there is a fine independent section on “Jews in Medieval London” (German and Rees, p. 26-7), but no other culture or oppressed group is presented independently of poor/labor concerns.
The discussion of black civil rights begins well enough with a section called “London and the Slave Trade.” But following representations within the first nine chapters illustrate the lives of black Londoners only as they relate to the main topic of peasant and worker movements. The lives of Ottabah Cugoano, Olaudah Equiano (both in German and Rees, pp. 95-97), William Cuffay (German and Rees, pp. 109-113) and John Archer (German and Rees, p. 191), are well represented. But each man is then linked to the various working class organizations of his time. The advancement of black peoples rights is not covered for its own sake; it is placed in service to worker’s rights.
Women are not treated independently either. The first mention of women states “women have become an increasingly visible part of left-wing, working-class politics in London” (German and Rees, p. 71). A following section entitled “Love, Marriage and Mother’s Ruin” focuses entirely on the economic effects of class inequity on poor women (German and Rees, p. 73). Mary Wollstonecraft is logically linked to the anti-ruling class movement of her time (German and Rees, pp. 78-9). The Match Girls Strike is covered (German and Rees, p. 139). A short section on “Sexual Politics” begins with “the central role of women in building the socialist movement,“ and never escapes the orbit of worker’s rights (German and Rees, pp. 158-161). Finally, even Suffrage is seen through the lens of worker’s rights. After two paragraphs introducing the issue, the authors link it to worker’s struggles, and there it remains until the end of the section. That section ends with a discussion of how Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst push Sylvia Pankhurst out of the organization for socialist sympathies, and concludes with the incredible statement “the suffragette movement was effectively over,” as if women never subsequently obtained the vote (German and Rees, p. 173). Any women’s issues not dependent upon class are ignored: the pro-choice movement, the women’s shelter movement and the eventual success of the women’s suffrage movement, are unrecorded since these issues do not serve as handmaids to working class concerns.
Finally, in chapter 10 the authors discuss the histories of the city’s various minority cultures. “Migrant City” is a 20 page chapter that fairly represents various immigrant populations without subsuming them under the worker’s banner. A 20 page chapter in a 300 page book does not make this work “a people’s history,“ but this does not detract from the chapter’s fairness.
It would be more accurate to call this book “a history of class struggle,” which is a necessary topic all by itself. By calling this book “a people’s history, ” and devoting only a few pages to minorities and women, and then mostly to serve arguments about class struggle, is somewhat sexist and racist. It’s saying “we’ll tack you onto our book, but you aren’t the real subject; you are supporting characters.”
German and Rees occasionally uncritically accept the propaganda of their subjects. Are we actually supposed to believe that General Booth, founder of The Salvation Army, “originally set out to disprove the claims of the Social Democratic Federation that a quarter of Londoners lived in extreme poverty, but his studies showed that the situation was actually worse"? (German and Rees, p. 130) Why would a philanthropic individual waste his time disproving a claim by fellow advocates for the poor? Under what conditions would The Salvation Army founder proclaim everyone in London is prosperous; there’s no need for us here? We must not forget that organizations like The Salvation Army require propaganda to recruit both volunteers and financial supporters.
It becomes difficult to review A People’s History of London as a history from chapter 11 “Welcome to the Modern World” to the end of the book. Difficult because we begin exploring events occurring within the political lives of the authors. There are some excellent sections. Pages 260-269 cover international and peace movements without using their issues as a labor or poor movement springboard. But throughout this chapter, the book is transforming from a researched history to a record of personal memories and political opinions. Footnotes are very telling. The footnotes for this chapter include: “L. German, personal recollection,” writings of socialist colleagues in the authors’ generation, and frequent references to “Socialist Worker” a newspaper of the party personally organized by German. So we have exited the realm of historical research. One reaches a section entitled “The Thatcher Nightmare” and it’s opinion to the end of the book. History students reading chapters 11 and 12, are advised to regard them as primary historical material from one side of a struggle. To draw rational conclusions and gain a full picture of London from 1970 through 2011, would involve further research and a wider scope of primary sources.
In summation, I can recommend this book from chapters one through ten, as long as one is reading it as a history of class struggle in London, not as a people’s history. Despite its flaws, the history of peasants and workers is well-researched. It is a subject that has been under-reported in standard history books, and it is time that someone told this story.
German, Lindsey & Rees, John. A People’s History of London. London: Verso, 2012.
For an essay on "Marxist History vs Marxist Politics," see:
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/06/commentary-marxist-history-vs-marxist.html
For more reviews of books on British History, see:
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2014/03/empire-by-niall-ferguson.html
on the Empire of Great Britain.
and
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2014/09/eminent-victorians-by-lytton-strachey.html
for a book of Victorian Biographies.
This is a book that provides a much ignored history: the history of how poor people and workers gained a modicum of democratic rights in the face of a repressive ruling class and monarchy. It begins unfortunately, with a paean to political correctness. It exhibits one Joshua Virasami, and ticks-off a checklist of his acceptability to the fashion-conscious on the Left: 21 years old, black, working class job at Costa Coffee, college student, paying his way through college. Had he been middle-aged, white and wearing a suit to work, I don’t think he would have made the first page. The book gets worse before it gets better (and it does get better). You see, Mr. Virasami is part of the tragically leftist-chic and ineffectual Occupy Movement (LSX incarnation). In the USA, our racist, homophobic crazies of the Tea Party have transformed their protest movement into a somewhat successful set of campaigns to elect representatives to Congress. At the same time, the Occupy Movement has no cohesive message, and their one political achievement has been their remarkable ability to pitch tents.
Had the book continued in this vein, I would now be using it to prop-up my bookshelves. Happily, I can report that A People’s History of London improves dramatically over the next two hundred pages and now resides on my bookshelf, rather than under it. Chapters one through nine do an excellent job of locating the poor and working class in history, and representing the popular movements for their advancement. Throughout the majority of the chapters, it is a well-researched and footnoted study.
There is, however, a pronounced focus on rioting and the use of force to obtain changes. There is no discussion of citizens campaigning for politicians who favor democratic change. No examples of reformist citizen groups that pressured or worked along side MPs around progressive issues. The authors consistently represent violence committed by the rulers in a negative light. There is no criticism of violence when it is used by “the people” during rioting. In representing the Spitalfields Riots, violence is justified by the authors: “Weavers fought their masters to protect their livelihoods” (German and Rees, p. 71). When exhibiting The Gordon Riots, which were in part motivated by anti-Catholic prejudice, the authors show extraordinary patience and sensitivity towards the perpetrators of harm: “The idea of the riots as a series of mindless acts of crime and destruction does not do justice to the issues, or to the sensibilities and consciousness of the poor in eighteenth-century London.” (German and Rees, p. 90). If we’re being all sensitive here, allow me to weigh in with my own touchy-feely perspective. Can one create a society of peace by using violence? Can one build a society when destruction is an initial tactic? If intimidation is used to silence one’s opposition, can all voices be heard and respected? Mob action may be an outlet for pent-up frustration, but it is not a program for a society’s creation or renewal. Many movements have employed non-violent tactics with success. Abortion Rights, Gay Marriage in Massachusetts and the defeat of Jim Crow Laws, were all won without even one house getting burned to advance the cause. There is a common revolutionist idea that violence is a necessary part of class struggle, which leads to the overthrow of those who own the means of production and their government. I do not know if the authors subscribe to this idea; they never explicitly state it. But if they do support violent overthrow, that would explain their criticism of violence by the ruling class and their silence around violence by peasants or workers.
A People's History of London purports to be just that: “a people’s history.” It borrows its title from Howard Zinn’s A People’s History of the United States. Zinn’s book is a lengthy and comprehensive work that attempts to give equal time to as many of the unique cultures and movements in the United States as possible. Conversely, German and Rees, in their well-chronicled first nine chapters on the advancement of peasants and workers , describe other cultures and movements almost exclusively as they pertain to class struggle. To be fair, there is a fine independent section on “Jews in Medieval London” (German and Rees, p. 26-7), but no other culture or oppressed group is presented independently of poor/labor concerns.
The discussion of black civil rights begins well enough with a section called “London and the Slave Trade.” But following representations within the first nine chapters illustrate the lives of black Londoners only as they relate to the main topic of peasant and worker movements. The lives of Ottabah Cugoano, Olaudah Equiano (both in German and Rees, pp. 95-97), William Cuffay (German and Rees, pp. 109-113) and John Archer (German and Rees, p. 191), are well represented. But each man is then linked to the various working class organizations of his time. The advancement of black peoples rights is not covered for its own sake; it is placed in service to worker’s rights.
Women are not treated independently either. The first mention of women states “women have become an increasingly visible part of left-wing, working-class politics in London” (German and Rees, p. 71). A following section entitled “Love, Marriage and Mother’s Ruin” focuses entirely on the economic effects of class inequity on poor women (German and Rees, p. 73). Mary Wollstonecraft is logically linked to the anti-ruling class movement of her time (German and Rees, pp. 78-9). The Match Girls Strike is covered (German and Rees, p. 139). A short section on “Sexual Politics” begins with “the central role of women in building the socialist movement,“ and never escapes the orbit of worker’s rights (German and Rees, pp. 158-161). Finally, even Suffrage is seen through the lens of worker’s rights. After two paragraphs introducing the issue, the authors link it to worker’s struggles, and there it remains until the end of the section. That section ends with a discussion of how Emmeline and Christabel Pankhurst push Sylvia Pankhurst out of the organization for socialist sympathies, and concludes with the incredible statement “the suffragette movement was effectively over,” as if women never subsequently obtained the vote (German and Rees, p. 173). Any women’s issues not dependent upon class are ignored: the pro-choice movement, the women’s shelter movement and the eventual success of the women’s suffrage movement, are unrecorded since these issues do not serve as handmaids to working class concerns.
Finally, in chapter 10 the authors discuss the histories of the city’s various minority cultures. “Migrant City” is a 20 page chapter that fairly represents various immigrant populations without subsuming them under the worker’s banner. A 20 page chapter in a 300 page book does not make this work “a people’s history,“ but this does not detract from the chapter’s fairness.
It would be more accurate to call this book “a history of class struggle,” which is a necessary topic all by itself. By calling this book “a people’s history, ” and devoting only a few pages to minorities and women, and then mostly to serve arguments about class struggle, is somewhat sexist and racist. It’s saying “we’ll tack you onto our book, but you aren’t the real subject; you are supporting characters.”
German and Rees occasionally uncritically accept the propaganda of their subjects. Are we actually supposed to believe that General Booth, founder of The Salvation Army, “originally set out to disprove the claims of the Social Democratic Federation that a quarter of Londoners lived in extreme poverty, but his studies showed that the situation was actually worse"? (German and Rees, p. 130) Why would a philanthropic individual waste his time disproving a claim by fellow advocates for the poor? Under what conditions would The Salvation Army founder proclaim everyone in London is prosperous; there’s no need for us here? We must not forget that organizations like The Salvation Army require propaganda to recruit both volunteers and financial supporters.
It becomes difficult to review A People’s History of London as a history from chapter 11 “Welcome to the Modern World” to the end of the book. Difficult because we begin exploring events occurring within the political lives of the authors. There are some excellent sections. Pages 260-269 cover international and peace movements without using their issues as a labor or poor movement springboard. But throughout this chapter, the book is transforming from a researched history to a record of personal memories and political opinions. Footnotes are very telling. The footnotes for this chapter include: “L. German, personal recollection,” writings of socialist colleagues in the authors’ generation, and frequent references to “Socialist Worker” a newspaper of the party personally organized by German. So we have exited the realm of historical research. One reaches a section entitled “The Thatcher Nightmare” and it’s opinion to the end of the book. History students reading chapters 11 and 12, are advised to regard them as primary historical material from one side of a struggle. To draw rational conclusions and gain a full picture of London from 1970 through 2011, would involve further research and a wider scope of primary sources.
In summation, I can recommend this book from chapters one through ten, as long as one is reading it as a history of class struggle in London, not as a people’s history. Despite its flaws, the history of peasants and workers is well-researched. It is a subject that has been under-reported in standard history books, and it is time that someone told this story.
German, Lindsey & Rees, John. A People’s History of London. London: Verso, 2012.
For an essay on "Marxist History vs Marxist Politics," see:
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2013/06/commentary-marxist-history-vs-marxist.html
For more reviews of books on British History, see:
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2014/03/empire-by-niall-ferguson.html
on the Empire of Great Britain.
and
http://greatnonfictionbooks.blogspot.com/2014/09/eminent-victorians-by-lytton-strachey.html
for a book of Victorian Biographies.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)