Just Finished Reading: The Revenge of History – The Battle for the 21st Century by Seumas Milne (FP: 2012) [277pp]
This is a bit of an odd one. I picked it up expecting (indeed hoping) that it was an analysis of how the late 20th and start of the 21 centuries got us into this mess. Although there were elements of that it turned out to be, at least for me, rather disappointing on that note. This isn’t to say that the book was bad or defective in some way – it wasn’t. It’s just that it wasn’t what I wanted it to be.
Running from 1999 to 2011 this was a look at the political,
economic and military events of the period from 9/11 to the Arab Uprising.
There was one aspect that took me a little while to get my head around from the
very start. Rather than looking backwards from 2012 when it was published each
section (and sub-section) is contemporary with the events described. Although I
don’t think it actually says anywhere, either in the preamble or the blurb on
the back, the book is (or seems to be) a collection of the author’s articles
presumably printed at the time in The Guardian newspaper. Whilst that is a
valid way of doing things – especially if you hadn’t read them before – it does
I think significantly reduce the authors opportunities to analyse events with
the benefit of hindsight that he obviously had prior to publication of the book
rather than prior to publication of the articles themselves. What might have
been more interesting would be if the author had commented on his own work with
that hindsight from an almost god-like position of ‘knowing’ what was coming
next. A little ‘post-modern’ I know but I think it would have worked and would
have given some interesting and valuable insights into things.
For those who are unaware, The Guardian is/was the premier
left-leaning newspaper in the UK and, before I stopped buying all newspapers
some years ago, I read it for many years from my student days and through my
first 20 years of employment from then. So naturally I found myself in
agreement with almost every word in this book. Unfortunately that was one of
the things that ‘disappointed’ me (*I know*!) and I must admit I did find
myself a little bored from time to time. I also clearly remember much of what’s
covered here because I’m fairly switched on politically (as you may have
realised – lol) and I was paying attention at the time these events were
unfolding around me. If this applies to you as much as me I can’t see you
deriving much from reading this book. If, however, you were *not* paying
attention (for any of a whole host of reasons) or want to see the first part of
the 21st century through a pair of lefty eyes then you might get
quite an education. Reasonable but I’m really looking for something a bit more
analytical.
6 comments:
i'd hate to relive all that, lol...
Indeed - LOL! It was bad enough the *first* time!!
I assume the title was inspired by Fukuyama's outlandishly premature "End of History"?
@ Stephen: Probably. There were a few like this after the Fukuyama book. I still have a few in a pile somewhere.... I did actually think that 'End of History' was a reasonable read - despite being completely wrong!
I admire your forbearance in critiquing this book. I would find it interesting for the challenge to my thinking, but might risk throwing it in the trash can before I could finish it.
@ James: Indeed! I'm not sure what it would do for your blood pressure. If you do want to read it I'd suggest a library copy. I do have a few upcoming books on the Welfare State with you might 'enjoy' more...
Post a Comment