Scan barcode
A review by afreema3
Ornamentalism: How the British Saw Their Empire by David Cannadine
Read for my History Workshop (A class required for my History Major)
If I rated books I read for school Ornamentalism would do poorly. I have read David Cannadine before for this exact same class, and I disagree with his ideas of class. While I completely disagree with Cannadine when it comes to issues of class, I kind of agree with his ideas on Ornamentalism and Empire. I think Cannadine is not incorrect in his portrayal of how the British sought to control their Empire through the use of hierarchy and status, it his dismissal of race as a factor in looking at Empire that I disagree with. I agree more with Edward Said's ideas of Orientalism over Cannadine's Ornamentalism, and I honestly believe if Cannadine brought in parts of Orientalism then that would strengthen his argument. To ignore or to downplay race in the British Empire, to me, is poor history. Cannadine in my opinion at times doesn't even justify his reasons for why race is not critical in the history of the Empire. His reasoning being that Indian princes could get the same medals and honors as a Colonial Governor is almost the same as saying that because Barack Obama was elected President of the United States than racism in the United States has been solved. Cannadine's argument is weak and shows a lack of critical historical analysis that isn't blinded for nostalgia for the Empire. In my history classes I have peers that agree with Cannadine in ways, but still found his argument lacking. Cannadine himself solely focuses in on White men in the Empire which is a great example of race being important to the Empire, who are the major benefactors of Empire? Who are the ones leading the Empire? Those are some questions that Cannadine almost ignores in this book and I think that hurts his argument.
If I rated books I read for school Ornamentalism would do poorly. I have read David Cannadine before for this exact same class, and I disagree with his ideas of class. While I completely disagree with Cannadine when it comes to issues of class, I kind of agree with his ideas on Ornamentalism and Empire. I think Cannadine is not incorrect in his portrayal of how the British sought to control their Empire through the use of hierarchy and status, it his dismissal of race as a factor in looking at Empire that I disagree with. I agree more with Edward Said's ideas of Orientalism over Cannadine's Ornamentalism, and I honestly believe if Cannadine brought in parts of Orientalism then that would strengthen his argument. To ignore or to downplay race in the British Empire, to me, is poor history. Cannadine in my opinion at times doesn't even justify his reasons for why race is not critical in the history of the Empire. His reasoning being that Indian princes could get the same medals and honors as a Colonial Governor is almost the same as saying that because Barack Obama was elected President of the United States than racism in the United States has been solved. Cannadine's argument is weak and shows a lack of critical historical analysis that isn't blinded for nostalgia for the Empire. In my history classes I have peers that agree with Cannadine in ways, but still found his argument lacking. Cannadine himself solely focuses in on White men in the Empire which is a great example of race being important to the Empire, who are the major benefactors of Empire? Who are the ones leading the Empire? Those are some questions that Cannadine almost ignores in this book and I think that hurts his argument.