Colonialism in Question: Theory, Knowledge, History (review)

With what could be called his "state of colonial historiography address," Frederick Cooper offers historians, as well as other professionals in the humanities and social sciences, an invaluable handbook of methodology. Although roughly one-quarter of the book (chapters 2, 3, and 4) has been previously published elsewhere, the inclusion of these essays furthers Cooper's overall purpose. He challenges us to rethink the way we research and write history, appealing to practitioners to use their skilled imagination and to consider "contested and contingent histories" (235), that is, various human visions and networks of interaction within spaces in time. I think it is fair to say, however, that while it examines some interesting episodes in the colonial history of Africa, Asia, and Europe, the book in its entirety holds little appeal for the lay person or general public. Such readers will probably find part 1 ("Colonial Studies and Interdisciplinary Scholarship") and part 2 ("Concepts in Question") difficult to digest. On the other hand, the third and final part, "The Possibilities of History," may well engross a lay audience, not to mention amateur historians. It includes, inter alia, an intriguing piece on the demise of the French empire in Africa.

But Cooper leaves little doubt that Colonialism in Question is really intended for graduate students and for working historians, inasmuch as he explicitly addresses issues of historiography. He reminds us, for example, how crucial it is in our research to utilize clear and powerful concepts that allow us to evaluate and explain situations, events, and behaviors in the most valid way possible. The author questions many of the widely employed ideological constructs in history, economics, and political science paradigms. Thus he contends that concepts such as "identity," "globalization," and "modernity" are so widely used under such varying circumstances that they are practically meaningless. He suggests, for example, that instead of the concept "identity" we use "three clusters of [more discerning] terms": "identification" and "categorization"; "self-understanding" and "social location"; and "commonality," "connectedness," and "groupness" (71–75).

Cooper disdains "canned history," wherein the practitioner demarcates a huge chunk of time, gives it a grossly general name, and proceeds to relate events within that period as traditionally recorded and in a strictly linear fashion. History, he argues, is not about nomenclature or simple chronology. Regarding "empire," for instance, he suggests we employ the notion of "space": empire can be represented as a historical "moral space," as in an era of conquering for Christianity, or as a "civilizing mission." In his sixth and seventh chapters, "States, Empires, and Political Imagination" and "Labor, Politics, and the End of Empire in French Africa," Cooper shows how creativity can be applied to examining space and time. In these engaging and insightful analyses, the author practices what he preaches, something for which he should be commended, since experts often criticize without offering solutions.

In addition, throughout this work he praises both earlier and more recent academicians for their interdisciplinary approach and creativity in handling time, space, and historical narrative: C. L. R. James (Black Jacobins, 1938); Georges Balandier (The Colonial Situation, 1951); Lonsdale and Berman ("Coping with Contradictions," 1979); and Kenneth Pomeranz (The Great Divergence: Europe, China, and the Making of the Modern World Economy, 2000).

Professional historians have much to gain in heeding the suggestions, admonitions, arguments, and examples contained in Colonialism in Question. Indeed, we should do well to emulate how this talented and dedicated scholar "does history."