What do you think?
Rate this book
丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞: 鬲兀賲賱丕鬲 賮賷 兀氐賱 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賵丕賳鬲卮丕乇賴丕
賯丿賾賲 丕賱丿賰鬲賵乇 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 賱賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 賵丕賱匕賷 兀氐亘丨 賷毓鬲亘乇 賲賳 丕賱兀毓賲丕賱 丕賱賰賱丕爻賷賰賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 賱丕 睾賳賶 毓賳賴丕 賮賷 亘丨孬 馗丕賴乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 亘賲賯丿賲丞 賵丕賮賷丞 毓賳 丕賱賮賰乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賮賷 丕賱賮賰乇 丕賱睾乇亘賷 丕賱丨丿賷孬貙 賵丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞 丕賱鬲賷 賷賲賷賾夭 賮賷賴丕 亘賷賳 丕賱禺賷丕賱賷 賵丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱貙 賵賷卮乇丨 兀賳賾 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱 賷賳鬲噩 丨賯丕卅賯 賵丕賯毓賷丞貙 賵匕賱賰 賮賷 卮乇丨賴 賱賲賯丕乇亘丞 丕賱賲丐賱賮 亘賳丿賰鬲 兀賳丿乇爻賳 亘兀賳賾 丕賱兀賲丞 "噩賲丕毓丞 爻賷丕爻賷丞 賲鬲禺賷賱丞". 賵賷毓丿賾 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 丕賱匕賷 鬲乇噩賲賴 廿賱賶 丕賱賱睾丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 孬丕卅乇 丿賷亘貙 亘丨孬賸丕 賲毓賲賯賸丕 賮賷 兀氐賵賱 丕賱賵毓賷 丕賱賯賵賲賷貙 賵噩賵賱丞賸 毓賱賲賷丞賸 賮賷 賳卮賵亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賮賷 兀賲賷乇賰丕 丕賱賱丕鬲賷賳賷丞 賵卮乇賯 丌爻賷丕 賵賮賷 丕賱賮乇賯 亘賷賳 丕賱賵胤賳賷丞 賵丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞貙 賵賴賵 賷賯丕乇賳 亘賷賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賮賷 丕賱睾乇亘 賵丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱卮乇賯賷丞貙 賵賷爻毓賶 賱丕賰鬲卮丕賮 丕賱賮賵丕乇賯 亘賷賳賴賲丕. 賵賷賳胤賱賯 賮賷 鬲毓乇賷賮 丕賱噩賲丕毓丞 賲賳 乇氐丿 丕賱噩匕賵乇 丕賱孬賯丕賮賷丞 賱賴丕 賲賳 禺賱丕賱 丕賱賱睾丞 賵丕賱丨乇賮 丕賱賲胤亘賵毓 賵丕賱賲鬲丨賮 賵丕賱禺乇賷胤丞 賵丕賱匕丕賰乇丞 賵睾賷乇賴丕貙 丕賱兀賲乇 丕賱匕賷 賷賮鬲丨 丨賯賵賱賸丕 亘丨孬賷丞 噩丿賷丿丞 賮賷 賴匕丕 丕賱賲噩丕賱 賲賳 丕賱賲毓乇賮丞. 賵賷賯毓 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賮賷 384 氐賮丨丞 賲賳 丕賱賯胤毓 丕賱賰亘賷乇.
賲賵賯毓 丕賱賲乇賰夭 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賱賱兀亘丨丕孬 賵丿乇丕爻丞 丕賱爻賷丕爻丕鬲: http://www.dohainstitute.org/portal
賲賵賯毓 丕賱賲乇賰夭 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賱賱兀亘丨丕孬 賵丿乇丕爻丞 丕賱爻賷丕爻丕鬲: http://www.dohainstitute.org/portal
384 pages, Paperback
First published May 1, 1983
1653 people are currently reading
34237 people want to read
About the author
Benedict Anderson
137听books418听followersBenedict Richard O'Gorman Anderson was Aaron L. Binenkorb Professor Emeritus of International Studies, Government & Asian Studies at Cornell University, and is best known for his celebrated book Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, first published in 1983. Anderson was born in Kunming, China, to James O'Gorman Anderson and Veronica Beatrice Bigham, and in 1941 the family moved to California. In 1957, Anderson received a Bachelor of Arts in Classics from Cambridge University, and he later earned a Ph.D. from Cornell's Department of Government, where he studied modern Indonesia under the guidance of George Kahin. He is the brother of historian Perry Anderson.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,039 reviews
October 21, 2010
UPDATED: Amazing how reading this for a different class brought out a totally different discussion. The last class I read this for was called "Uses of History in International Affairs," and we spent the majority of our time talking about history as an act- history as narrative, history as an agenda, what someone might use these statements for. We were essentially diplomats in discussion, preparing our strategy of attack against the other side's claims. I don't think we discussed the validity of his claims at all, but rather focused on place they had in world events and history and how these ideas could affect our daily lives.
This time, I'm in an international history program, filled with historians. This time we bypassed that discussion entirely, taking it for granted as established and agreed on, and concentrated on dissecting the arguments presented on their structure and substance, in a close analytical read that sought to draw on our knowledge of history to poke holes in his argument. This time, we are being trained to think of ourselves as peers, whose job it is to show the main behind the curtain well... mostly because he's there, to borrow a phrase. It was a trip back to the basics to remind us what these arguments are really about in the end, while also forcing us to question not to accept.
Fascinating experience of the lines drawn between various disciplines and their goals- how the idea that "that's someone else's job" has very real effects in the formation of ideas.
ORIGINAL:Benedict Anderson's Imagined Communities may be over twenty five years old now, but that doesn't make it any less relevant, even had he not added on the chapters (as interesting as they were) that he adjusted himself with later on, after the fall of the USSR and later with his new ideas on the topic. (Though I love that he did that- it shows someone who is not content to rest on his laurels and whose ideas about the world were not set by the best-selling status of one book he wrote, and that he refuses to be tied to it. I like watching geniuses continue to change and develop.)
In any case! It is quite relevant- especially since 9/11, as we see that the impact of nationalism hasn't declined in the least, and the attachment that people feel for it is very real and has very real consequences on people's lives. Anderson's basic thesis is that nations are "imagined communities," created in the New World by the creole bourgeoisie of the British and Spanish colonies by the conjunction of print journalism (which allowed groups of people to imagine themselves as a community, through providing the links that bound regions together), language, cultural imprints (such as "sacred script" cultures) and the forces of capitalism. He is writing this book to be useful to Marxist theorists, in order to fill what he feels is the gap in the Marxist analysis of nationalism. But it is by no means only useful to the Marxist or even liberal theorist. The reminder that nationalism is a new phenomenon, and that any pretentious to antiquity by any nation is absolutely ridiculous, and even the whole concept of a nation worth dying for is invented, not something that, as the Abbe Sieyes wrote in the French Revolution (perhaps understandably, he was trying to turn the nation of peasants into Frenchmen) "exists in the state of nature."
Anderson says that nations have three conditions: that they are sovereign, limited, and a community. He talks about how these resulted from the specific time and place that the whole concept was invented, but also how they have been adapted and used throughout the world. One of the major strengths of his book (surely influenced by the period of criticism he was writing in) is its major focus on areas of the world outside of Europe (though many of those areas- as most of the world was- were European colonies): Southeast Asia, Latin America, China, Japan. It is fascinating to watch first the process by which he believes nationalism is formed and then nationalism's journey across time and space to crop up in its many different incarnations as various groups constantly find different uses for it.
This is a book to be read and re-read constantly to remind oneself about questioning some very basic assumptions that a lot of people take for granted, and then questioning why those assumptions exist in the first place. I think this book constantly challenges you to look inward and to figure out what matters to you, how it got to matter to you so much, and how you may or may not have been steered that way by a government, leaders, education, or some other outside force that has nothing to do with "natural" feelings.
I've always had a hugely negative, shuddering reaction to two things: religious fundamentalism and overbearing nationalism. This book helped give me the language (as Anderson would say himself) to better explain why.
This time, I'm in an international history program, filled with historians. This time we bypassed that discussion entirely, taking it for granted as established and agreed on, and concentrated on dissecting the arguments presented on their structure and substance, in a close analytical read that sought to draw on our knowledge of history to poke holes in his argument. This time, we are being trained to think of ourselves as peers, whose job it is to show the main behind the curtain well... mostly because he's there, to borrow a phrase. It was a trip back to the basics to remind us what these arguments are really about in the end, while also forcing us to question not to accept.
Fascinating experience of the lines drawn between various disciplines and their goals- how the idea that "that's someone else's job" has very real effects in the formation of ideas.
ORIGINAL:Benedict Anderson's Imagined Communities may be over twenty five years old now, but that doesn't make it any less relevant, even had he not added on the chapters (as interesting as they were) that he adjusted himself with later on, after the fall of the USSR and later with his new ideas on the topic. (Though I love that he did that- it shows someone who is not content to rest on his laurels and whose ideas about the world were not set by the best-selling status of one book he wrote, and that he refuses to be tied to it. I like watching geniuses continue to change and develop.)
In any case! It is quite relevant- especially since 9/11, as we see that the impact of nationalism hasn't declined in the least, and the attachment that people feel for it is very real and has very real consequences on people's lives. Anderson's basic thesis is that nations are "imagined communities," created in the New World by the creole bourgeoisie of the British and Spanish colonies by the conjunction of print journalism (which allowed groups of people to imagine themselves as a community, through providing the links that bound regions together), language, cultural imprints (such as "sacred script" cultures) and the forces of capitalism. He is writing this book to be useful to Marxist theorists, in order to fill what he feels is the gap in the Marxist analysis of nationalism. But it is by no means only useful to the Marxist or even liberal theorist. The reminder that nationalism is a new phenomenon, and that any pretentious to antiquity by any nation is absolutely ridiculous, and even the whole concept of a nation worth dying for is invented, not something that, as the Abbe Sieyes wrote in the French Revolution (perhaps understandably, he was trying to turn the nation of peasants into Frenchmen) "exists in the state of nature."
Anderson says that nations have three conditions: that they are sovereign, limited, and a community. He talks about how these resulted from the specific time and place that the whole concept was invented, but also how they have been adapted and used throughout the world. One of the major strengths of his book (surely influenced by the period of criticism he was writing in) is its major focus on areas of the world outside of Europe (though many of those areas- as most of the world was- were European colonies): Southeast Asia, Latin America, China, Japan. It is fascinating to watch first the process by which he believes nationalism is formed and then nationalism's journey across time and space to crop up in its many different incarnations as various groups constantly find different uses for it.
This is a book to be read and re-read constantly to remind oneself about questioning some very basic assumptions that a lot of people take for granted, and then questioning why those assumptions exist in the first place. I think this book constantly challenges you to look inward and to figure out what matters to you, how it got to matter to you so much, and how you may or may not have been steered that way by a government, leaders, education, or some other outside force that has nothing to do with "natural" feelings.
I've always had a hugely negative, shuddering reaction to two things: religious fundamentalism and overbearing nationalism. This book helped give me the language (as Anderson would say himself) to better explain why.
December 29, 2016
One of my longstanding grievances with the public education system is its approach to geography. The jigsaw of nations most children are taught comprise the world is essentially posited as something timeless and ineffable, while in reality are they all very historically recent not to mention ephemeral and in most cases pretty arbitrary.
Benedict Anderson does a great job of deconstructing nationalism (not that hard), but much more importantly rebuilding how national consciousness, "imagined communities" on a national basis," ended up becoming a phenomenon throughout the world. Through the triumph of vernacular languages over universalizing "sacred" languages (ie. Latin, Chinese script) in many countries, the impact of mass-market print capitalism in making this happen, and finally the modern conception of "empty-homogenous time," as opposed to simultaneity and a more cosmic view of the universe, created the psychological conditions where national identities could come into being - mostly starting from some linguistic basis.
The experience of shared pilgrimages, whether to Mecca, an imperial metropole, or an administrative capital city, also helped craft the idea of a shared community (there is a "we" that is traveling all together to this same place"), as did the rationalization of mapping and time. The old ideas of imperial centers and amorphous boundaries of territory, not to mention sovereignty based on identity rather than place of residence, gave way to clearly defined borders that bounded communities.
Anderson is at once harsh and sympathetic towards nationalism. While noting that nationalism has never had its own great thinkers (like Marxism has for instance) he also notes that for all the bloodshed and racism it has inspired it has also inspired profound acts of love and self-sacrifice. He is very, deeply sympathetic to third-world liberation movements, and one of most impressive parts of the book is actually the incredible anti-colonial history it covers.
From the creation of Romanized script in Vietnam by the French ("Quoc ngu") specifically as a means of cutting Vietnam off from its intellectual history as well as the larger imagined community that took part in Sinic script, Ki Hajar Dewantara's "If I Were a Dutchman" letter, and down to Makario Sakay's heartbreakingly fair and anti-racist Philippine republic constitution (he was shortly thereafter executed by the Americans).
During the colonial period education in Western ideas like proto-nationalism was allowed, which gave birth to a fiercely independence-driven intelligentsia. Ironically it was conservatives who were more in favor of reinforcing the "traditional" learning of the colonized, in order that they not develop dangerous ideas. Due to the nature of colonial economic exploitation however this intelligentsia was invariably denied the support of robust economic bourgeoisie with which to build its new vision. As such, "modernization" tended to be a top-down and not a very deep project - the ramifications of which can be felt in many places today.
Another thing that was deeply interesting was the roots of Siamese (later Thai) labor policy, and the importation of a low-paid, poor, linguistically and politically isolated workforce in order to maintain local stability. While this policy is most closely associated with Saudi Arabia today, it actually has its roots in colonial policy in Singapore and Batavia. There is also a resonance with the German "gastarbeitar" program. This is yet another example (the author touches on the garish similarities between colonial and later post-colonial militaries as well) of practices and institutions being passed down from a colonial power to later "independent" countries. The Saudis didn't invent these programs out of some unique nature, they're simply copying the colonialists who essentially created their country in the first place!
There are so many priceless insights in this book, from the development of novels and newspapers and how they changed people's conceptions of time (Hegel's quote about the morning newspaper replacing morning prayer for the man of the world is instructive), the parallels between colonial "solidarity among whites" and trans-European class solidarities among the nobility and the idea of past conflicts being recast as "fraternal" (ie. the American civil war) as a means of incorporating both parties into an allegedly timeless and shared community.
Anderson has really filled an ocean of knowledge into a remarkably short book, albeit one that demands great concentration to get its insights. He also has a biting sense of humor and sarcasm that occasionally shines through, and which did get a laugh out of me a few times.
I know many read this book as part of their schooling and as such it is very popular and well-known. I did not, but I'm deeply glad to have discovered it now.
Benedict Anderson does a great job of deconstructing nationalism (not that hard), but much more importantly rebuilding how national consciousness, "imagined communities" on a national basis," ended up becoming a phenomenon throughout the world. Through the triumph of vernacular languages over universalizing "sacred" languages (ie. Latin, Chinese script) in many countries, the impact of mass-market print capitalism in making this happen, and finally the modern conception of "empty-homogenous time," as opposed to simultaneity and a more cosmic view of the universe, created the psychological conditions where national identities could come into being - mostly starting from some linguistic basis.
The experience of shared pilgrimages, whether to Mecca, an imperial metropole, or an administrative capital city, also helped craft the idea of a shared community (there is a "we" that is traveling all together to this same place"), as did the rationalization of mapping and time. The old ideas of imperial centers and amorphous boundaries of territory, not to mention sovereignty based on identity rather than place of residence, gave way to clearly defined borders that bounded communities.
Anderson is at once harsh and sympathetic towards nationalism. While noting that nationalism has never had its own great thinkers (like Marxism has for instance) he also notes that for all the bloodshed and racism it has inspired it has also inspired profound acts of love and self-sacrifice. He is very, deeply sympathetic to third-world liberation movements, and one of most impressive parts of the book is actually the incredible anti-colonial history it covers.
From the creation of Romanized script in Vietnam by the French ("Quoc ngu") specifically as a means of cutting Vietnam off from its intellectual history as well as the larger imagined community that took part in Sinic script, Ki Hajar Dewantara's "If I Were a Dutchman" letter, and down to Makario Sakay's heartbreakingly fair and anti-racist Philippine republic constitution (he was shortly thereafter executed by the Americans).
During the colonial period education in Western ideas like proto-nationalism was allowed, which gave birth to a fiercely independence-driven intelligentsia. Ironically it was conservatives who were more in favor of reinforcing the "traditional" learning of the colonized, in order that they not develop dangerous ideas. Due to the nature of colonial economic exploitation however this intelligentsia was invariably denied the support of robust economic bourgeoisie with which to build its new vision. As such, "modernization" tended to be a top-down and not a very deep project - the ramifications of which can be felt in many places today.
Another thing that was deeply interesting was the roots of Siamese (later Thai) labor policy, and the importation of a low-paid, poor, linguistically and politically isolated workforce in order to maintain local stability. While this policy is most closely associated with Saudi Arabia today, it actually has its roots in colonial policy in Singapore and Batavia. There is also a resonance with the German "gastarbeitar" program. This is yet another example (the author touches on the garish similarities between colonial and later post-colonial militaries as well) of practices and institutions being passed down from a colonial power to later "independent" countries. The Saudis didn't invent these programs out of some unique nature, they're simply copying the colonialists who essentially created their country in the first place!
There are so many priceless insights in this book, from the development of novels and newspapers and how they changed people's conceptions of time (Hegel's quote about the morning newspaper replacing morning prayer for the man of the world is instructive), the parallels between colonial "solidarity among whites" and trans-European class solidarities among the nobility and the idea of past conflicts being recast as "fraternal" (ie. the American civil war) as a means of incorporating both parties into an allegedly timeless and shared community.
Anderson has really filled an ocean of knowledge into a remarkably short book, albeit one that demands great concentration to get its insights. He also has a biting sense of humor and sarcasm that occasionally shines through, and which did get a laugh out of me a few times.
I know many read this book as part of their schooling and as such it is very popular and well-known. I did not, but I'm deeply glad to have discovered it now.
Read
January 7, 2024errrghgrh.
There are things that I really like about this book and then there are things which threaten to make this a list of what abouts rather than a review, all complicated by the unheimlich feeling that I still have; that I have read this book before and that I have not read this book before .
I love Anderson early definition of a nation as an imagined community, which I think is perfect, but in what perhaps epitomises the strengths and the weaknesses of this book, I don't think he draws out or starts to link together the consequences of this, and maybe by the end of the book one half thinks that Anderson himself was half in love with easeful Death , ah sorry, half in love with seductive Nationalism or the idea of certain nations just as he says certain scholars, including Hobsbawn were with the idea of Great Britain.
One of his interesting points is that the shift in printing from Latin to the vernacular led to the creation and fixing of dominant languages, however curiously in a book that aims to escape eurocentricism, this seems to be a purely eurocentric point, however reading his book I felt that language was mostly a red herring in his discussion of nationalism, as his examples seem to demonstrate the irrelevance of language in nationalist movements except maybe in Europe, which I am more convinced is different to the rest of world and where the example of the French revolution remains I feel particularly significant. And this because I am mostly convinced by his argument about the creole nationalisms in the Americas. The point about printing creating national languages is interesting but it appears to have only indirect bearing on the creation of Nation states - French speakers in Liege or Geneva may not be French, while German speakers in Alsace are, as are Breton speakers in Brittany despite 500 years of print culture.
With my limited understanding, the situation in Asia looks different again and seems mostly to disprove Anderson's Creole nationalism model (with the admittedly significant example of Indonesia), the British Raj did not become a single independent country but four, eventually five countries, nor did Indochina - instead the pre-colonial idea (occasionally historically realised) of Vietnam reasserted itself. Neither has francophone west Africa become a super state. Equally while East Timor resisted being part of Indonesia, Goa and Macau to my limited knowledge seem to have been swallowed up by India and china respectively without similar problems - which according to Anderson's model they should not have done! Plainly they did not realise how naughty it is not to conform to theory.
I loved the chapter on census, map, and museum, this suggests that colonial administrations inadvertently created national identity in - well he talks about East Asian colonies - through censuses, maps and museums. Censuses are interesting in that the racial or national categories that they list people by imply a fixed and actual reality however those categories can themselves be merged together or divided apart or simply disappear from one census to the next. Maps suggest a familiar shape that can be both associated with the homeland but also removes it from its geographical context, making it a pure abstraction, historical maps (more or less fanciful) suggest that a colony rather than being the completely arbitrary result of adventure, exploitation or settlement has tradition even a deep past, while the creation of museums and the management of monuments suggests that you the local people are incapable of respecting, appreciating or preserving your own heritage because you are like foolish children, while we are wise and benevolent and absolutely necessary to look after your own best interests for you. This can blend into racism as in the belief that great monuments could only have been built by great people not the degenerate locals that currently exist, therefore the current inhabitants actually must be barbaric incomers who have been rightfully overpowered by the colonialists. I thought this was all very interesting but missed a trick but not applying this process generally to all national systems of education, which also through censuses, maps, museums, canons of literature, collections of folktales and so on also create and recreate the nation in each generation in various curious ways - hence surely the importance of history wars and culture wars in various countries.
I was glad that he mentioned Uvararov, who to Tsar Nicholas I recommended a policy of Russification in the Russian Empire through 'Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality' but he does not mention or maybe is not so aware how this policy backfired on the peripheries of the Russian empire, most spectacularly in 1905, because effectively it forced people who were not Russian or Orthodox to be opposed to the Autocracy, this shows the dangers inherent in nation formation, policy can destroy what it wants to create.
I
Ultimately I felt that inertia and habit were more significant in creating imagined communities (many of which are pretty weird) than language, but Anderson does not suggest
But there is a lot too that I felt was messy and distracted from his argument.
I wondered into reading Imagined Communities from , as with that book, I am left feeling messy and dissatisfied, maybe even slightly annoyed , again I feel this is the kind of book to explore in a six month seminar course, it is a book which itself arose in a certain context, in answer to Nairn's 1977 and Hobsbawn's response to that. Perhaps there are books which in turn have responded to Anderson In this regard I feel Imagined Communities is a provocative essay that invites debate and discussion rather than the apex or treasury of a period of wider scholarship and thought. I don't seem to have many characters left to continue this review...
There are things that I really like about this book and then there are things which threaten to make this a list of what abouts rather than a review, all complicated by the unheimlich feeling that I still have; that I have read this book before and that I have not read this book before .
I love Anderson early definition of a nation as an imagined community, which I think is perfect, but in what perhaps epitomises the strengths and the weaknesses of this book, I don't think he draws out or starts to link together the consequences of this, and maybe by the end of the book one half thinks that Anderson himself was half in love with easeful Death , ah sorry, half in love with seductive Nationalism or the idea of certain nations just as he says certain scholars, including Hobsbawn were with the idea of Great Britain.
One of his interesting points is that the shift in printing from Latin to the vernacular led to the creation and fixing of dominant languages, however curiously in a book that aims to escape eurocentricism, this seems to be a purely eurocentric point, however reading his book I felt that language was mostly a red herring in his discussion of nationalism, as his examples seem to demonstrate the irrelevance of language in nationalist movements except maybe in Europe, which I am more convinced is different to the rest of world and where the example of the French revolution remains I feel particularly significant. And this because I am mostly convinced by his argument about the creole nationalisms in the Americas. The point about printing creating national languages is interesting but it appears to have only indirect bearing on the creation of Nation states - French speakers in Liege or Geneva may not be French, while German speakers in Alsace are, as are Breton speakers in Brittany despite 500 years of print culture.
With my limited understanding, the situation in Asia looks different again and seems mostly to disprove Anderson's Creole nationalism model (with the admittedly significant example of Indonesia), the British Raj did not become a single independent country but four, eventually five countries, nor did Indochina - instead the pre-colonial idea (occasionally historically realised) of Vietnam reasserted itself. Neither has francophone west Africa become a super state. Equally while East Timor resisted being part of Indonesia, Goa and Macau to my limited knowledge seem to have been swallowed up by India and china respectively without similar problems - which according to Anderson's model they should not have done! Plainly they did not realise how naughty it is not to conform to theory.
I loved the chapter on census, map, and museum, this suggests that colonial administrations inadvertently created national identity in - well he talks about East Asian colonies - through censuses, maps and museums. Censuses are interesting in that the racial or national categories that they list people by imply a fixed and actual reality however those categories can themselves be merged together or divided apart or simply disappear from one census to the next. Maps suggest a familiar shape that can be both associated with the homeland but also removes it from its geographical context, making it a pure abstraction, historical maps (more or less fanciful) suggest that a colony rather than being the completely arbitrary result of adventure, exploitation or settlement has tradition even a deep past, while the creation of museums and the management of monuments suggests that you the local people are incapable of respecting, appreciating or preserving your own heritage because you are like foolish children, while we are wise and benevolent and absolutely necessary to look after your own best interests for you. This can blend into racism as in the belief that great monuments could only have been built by great people not the degenerate locals that currently exist, therefore the current inhabitants actually must be barbaric incomers who have been rightfully overpowered by the colonialists. I thought this was all very interesting but missed a trick but not applying this process generally to all national systems of education, which also through censuses, maps, museums, canons of literature, collections of folktales and so on also create and recreate the nation in each generation in various curious ways - hence surely the importance of history wars and culture wars in various countries.
I was glad that he mentioned Uvararov, who to Tsar Nicholas I recommended a policy of Russification in the Russian Empire through 'Orthodoxy, autocracy and nationality' but he does not mention or maybe is not so aware how this policy backfired on the peripheries of the Russian empire, most spectacularly in 1905, because effectively it forced people who were not Russian or Orthodox to be opposed to the Autocracy, this shows the dangers inherent in nation formation, policy can destroy what it wants to create.
I
Ultimately I felt that inertia and habit were more significant in creating imagined communities (many of which are pretty weird) than language, but Anderson does not suggest
But there is a lot too that I felt was messy and distracted from his argument.
I wondered into reading Imagined Communities from , as with that book, I am left feeling messy and dissatisfied, maybe even slightly annoyed , again I feel this is the kind of book to explore in a six month seminar course, it is a book which itself arose in a certain context, in answer to Nairn's 1977 and Hobsbawn's response to that. Perhaps there are books which in turn have responded to Anderson In this regard I feel Imagined Communities is a provocative essay that invites debate and discussion rather than the apex or treasury of a period of wider scholarship and thought. I don't seem to have many characters left to continue this review...
August 30, 2024
Anderson has a good point about how language and the collapse of religious absolutism created nationalism, but he fails on two points. First, his language is haughty and over the top, including references to obscure stuff. I got most of them, but others will be lost. Second, he fails to elaborate on other things that caused nationalism to rise, such as technology, revolution, ideology, and warfare. Instead, it is mostly presented as a matter of language and media. Also, whenever he steps out of the language argument he seems more confused, as if he didn't really think about things that did not fit nicely into his thesis like culture and nationalism. In conclusion, this work has merit, but it can be difficult to understand, and it is rather limited in scope. There are also some tremendous factual errors. Read it if you are interested in nationalism because it has some great observations, but this is by no means a definitive and complete work on nationalism.
August 9, 2011
卮賴乇鬲購賴 鬲鬲賰賱賾賲購 毓賳賴 兀賰孬乇 賲賳賾賷 ...
賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 兀丨丿 兀賴賲賾 丕賱賰鬲亘 丕賱鬲賷 卮睾賱鬲 毓賱賲丕亍 丕賱丕噩鬲賲丕毓 賵 丕賱爻賷丕爻丞 賮賷 丕賱毓賯賵丿 丕賱兀禺賷乇丞 乇睾賲 兀賳賾賴 賱丕 賷夭賷丿 毓賱賶 200 氐賮丨丞 .
賷賯丿賾賲 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賳馗乇賷賾丞 噩丿賷丿丞 賮賷 賳卮賵亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丞 賰噩賲丕毓丞 賲鬲禺賷賾賱丞 , 賵 毓賵丕賲賱 賵 馗乇賵賮 賳卮兀丞 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲禺賷賾賱 賲賳 丕賱丨乇賵亘 賵 丕賱兀賳馗賲丞 丕賱賰賵賱賵賳賷丕賱賷賾丞 廿賱賶 爻賰賾丕賳 丕賱賲鬲乇賵亘賵賱丕鬲 , 賵 賰賱賾 賵爻丕卅賱 匕賱賰 賵 兀丿賵丕鬲賴 賲賳 丕賱賱睾丞 ( 兀賰孬乇 賲丕 兀賴賲賾賳賷 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 ) 賵 丕賱禺乇丕卅胤 賵 丕賱鬲毓丿丕丿 賵 丕賱賲鬲賱丨賮 賵 睾賷乇 匕賱賰 丕賱賰孬賷乇 , 乇睾賲 爻賱丕爻丞 丕賱賱睾丞 賵 爻賴賵賱丞 丕賱兀爻賱賵亘 ( 賲賯丕乇賳丞 亘毓賲賯 丕賱賮賰乇丞 丕賱賲胤乇賵丨丞 胤亘毓丕 ) 賮丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷丨鬲丕噩 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱賲乇丕噩毓丕鬲 賵 丕賱鬲賮賰賷乇 賮賷賴 賱丕爻鬲賷毓丕亘 丨丿賵丿 丕賱賳馗乇賷賾丞 丕賱鬲賷 賷胤乇丨賴丕 賰丕賲賱丞賸 .
賴賳丕賰 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱兀爻卅賱丞 賵 丕賱廿卮賰丕賱賷賾丕鬲 兀鬲氐賵賾乇賴丕 賱賵 丿乇爻賳丕 丕賱毓乇亘 賰賳賲賵匕噩 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱兀胤乇賵丨丞 ( 賵丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賲乇賾 毓賱賶 丕賱毓乇亘 爻乇賷毓丕 亘丕賱賮毓賱 ) 賵 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷賱睾賷 兀賳賾賴丕 鬲賰卮賮 噩賵丕賳亘 亘丕賱賮毓賱 賲賳 賳卮賵亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丕鬲 丕賱毓乇亘賷賾丞 (丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丞 亘賲毓賳丕賴丕 丕賱兀卮賲賱 , 賰賲鬲禺賷賾賱 賱卮毓亘 賰賱賾 丿賵賱丞 毓賱賶 丨丿丞 賰匕賱賰 )
亘賯賷 兀賳 兀賯賵賱 廿賳賾 毓丿賲 賲毓乇賮鬲賷 - 賵毓丿賲 丕賴鬲賲丕賲賷 亘丕賱兀丨乇賶 - 亘鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賴賳丿 丕賱氐賷賳賷賾丞 賵 丿賵賱 卮乇賯 丌爻賷丕 毓賲賵賲丕 丕賱丨丿賷孬 , 噩毓賱 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱鬲賮丕氐賷賱 賲賲賱賾丕 兀賵 賷賮賯丿 丿賱丕賱鬲賴 丕賱賰丕賲賱丞 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賷 .
賵賱賰賳賾賴 賰鬲丕亘 賲賲賷賾夭 賱賱賲賴鬲賲賾賷賳 亘賲爻兀賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丕鬲 賵 賳卮賵卅賴丕 .- 賴匕丕 兀賯賱賾 賲丕 賷購賯丕賱 -
賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 兀丨丿 兀賴賲賾 丕賱賰鬲亘 丕賱鬲賷 卮睾賱鬲 毓賱賲丕亍 丕賱丕噩鬲賲丕毓 賵 丕賱爻賷丕爻丞 賮賷 丕賱毓賯賵丿 丕賱兀禺賷乇丞 乇睾賲 兀賳賾賴 賱丕 賷夭賷丿 毓賱賶 200 氐賮丨丞 .
賷賯丿賾賲 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賳馗乇賷賾丞 噩丿賷丿丞 賮賷 賳卮賵亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丞 賰噩賲丕毓丞 賲鬲禺賷賾賱丞 , 賵 毓賵丕賲賱 賵 馗乇賵賮 賳卮兀丞 賴匕丕 丕賱鬲禺賷賾賱 賲賳 丕賱丨乇賵亘 賵 丕賱兀賳馗賲丞 丕賱賰賵賱賵賳賷丕賱賷賾丞 廿賱賶 爻賰賾丕賳 丕賱賲鬲乇賵亘賵賱丕鬲 , 賵 賰賱賾 賵爻丕卅賱 匕賱賰 賵 兀丿賵丕鬲賴 賲賳 丕賱賱睾丞 ( 兀賰孬乇 賲丕 兀賴賲賾賳賷 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 ) 賵 丕賱禺乇丕卅胤 賵 丕賱鬲毓丿丕丿 賵 丕賱賲鬲賱丨賮 賵 睾賷乇 匕賱賰 丕賱賰孬賷乇 , 乇睾賲 爻賱丕爻丞 丕賱賱睾丞 賵 爻賴賵賱丞 丕賱兀爻賱賵亘 ( 賲賯丕乇賳丞 亘毓賲賯 丕賱賮賰乇丞 丕賱賲胤乇賵丨丞 胤亘毓丕 ) 賮丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷丨鬲丕噩 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱賲乇丕噩毓丕鬲 賵 丕賱鬲賮賰賷乇 賮賷賴 賱丕爻鬲賷毓丕亘 丨丿賵丿 丕賱賳馗乇賷賾丞 丕賱鬲賷 賷胤乇丨賴丕 賰丕賲賱丞賸 .
賴賳丕賰 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱兀爻卅賱丞 賵 丕賱廿卮賰丕賱賷賾丕鬲 兀鬲氐賵賾乇賴丕 賱賵 丿乇爻賳丕 丕賱毓乇亘 賰賳賲賵匕噩 賮賷 賴匕賴 丕賱兀胤乇賵丨丞 ( 賵丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賲乇賾 毓賱賶 丕賱毓乇亘 爻乇賷毓丕 亘丕賱賮毓賱 ) 賵 賴匕丕 賱丕 賷賱睾賷 兀賳賾賴丕 鬲賰卮賮 噩賵丕賳亘 亘丕賱賮毓賱 賲賳 賳卮賵亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丕鬲 丕賱毓乇亘賷賾丞 (丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丞 亘賲毓賳丕賴丕 丕賱兀卮賲賱 , 賰賲鬲禺賷賾賱 賱卮毓亘 賰賱賾 丿賵賱丞 毓賱賶 丨丿丞 賰匕賱賰 )
亘賯賷 兀賳 兀賯賵賱 廿賳賾 毓丿賲 賲毓乇賮鬲賷 - 賵毓丿賲 丕賴鬲賲丕賲賷 亘丕賱兀丨乇賶 - 亘鬲丕乇賷禺 丕賱賴賳丿 丕賱氐賷賳賷賾丞 賵 丿賵賱 卮乇賯 丌爻賷丕 毓賲賵賲丕 丕賱丨丿賷孬 , 噩毓賱 丕賱賰孬賷乇 賲賳 丕賱鬲賮丕氐賷賱 賲賲賱賾丕 兀賵 賷賮賯丿 丿賱丕賱鬲賴 丕賱賰丕賲賱丞 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 賱賷 .
賵賱賰賳賾賴 賰鬲丕亘 賲賲賷賾夭 賱賱賲賴鬲賲賾賷賳 亘賲爻兀賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷賾丕鬲 賵 賳卮賵卅賴丕 .- 賴匕丕 兀賯賱賾 賲丕 賷購賯丕賱 -
April 26, 2016
Boy, am I glad to have finally read this. Imagined Communities is the force behind much of the scholarship in the social sciences I find most interesting. Seeing someone鈥檚 name so often in brackets (Anderson, 1983) makes you curious, and Anderson does not disappoint.
For me, this is history at its most interesting鈥攊ncisive, global in scope, entertaining, and not overladen with facts. Staying entirely within the purview and methodology of the discipline of history (unlike, say, Guns, Germs, and Steel), Anderson formulates a theory that explains much of the modern world. While the style is perhaps too stodgy for the general reader, the book is mostly free of academic nonspeak and ugly neologisms. Anderson manages to write plain English, use traditional methods, and reach a fascinating conclusion. You鈥檇 be surprised how rarely this happens.
For me, this is history at its most interesting鈥攊ncisive, global in scope, entertaining, and not overladen with facts. Staying entirely within the purview and methodology of the discipline of history (unlike, say, Guns, Germs, and Steel), Anderson formulates a theory that explains much of the modern world. While the style is perhaps too stodgy for the general reader, the book is mostly free of academic nonspeak and ugly neologisms. Anderson manages to write plain English, use traditional methods, and reach a fascinating conclusion. You鈥檇 be surprised how rarely this happens.
February 25, 2009
Definitely an 'essential read', but did his style have to be so annoying? "Unjungled," Benedict? "Museumized?" Those aren't words. Not cute, either. Stop with the scare quotes, too, jeez. And would you translate your goddamn lengthy French quotations??? GOD.
November 13, 2023
bias flag: I am a former student of Professor Anderson. More accurately, he was my undergraduate thesis advisor. I have a neutral memory of my sessions with him, which is to say I don't remember much; I believe he wore flip-flops, which I thought a bit unusual for 42 degrees north latitude. I do carry great shame, even to this day, from my underwhelming academic effort. In my mind, Professor Anderson, as navigator aboard my ship, bears at least some responsibility; if only he told me to. . . .
Professor Anderson sees nationalism as a direct result of the printed word. Until Gutenberg's invention, the construction of communities depended on other means, most notably, though not limited to, religion or monarchy. This is a fairly straightforward observation, I think, yet it is phrased in the most mind-bending, academic way, for as Wallace Stevens is a poet's poet, so Professor Anderson is a social scientist's scientist. Given the opportunity to display a prodigious intellect, Professor Anderson joyfully indulges, delivering 200 pages of erudition with references to a colorful carousel of arcana, and untranslated lengthy quotations in a variety of languages. As a bow to his polymathy, the final chapter describes his perception of this work's impact in the publishing and academic world. Huzzahs and bravos all around.
Imagined Communities does make an important contribution to my understanding of the "we," at least the "we" of the past few hundred years. I wonder for the future, though. What of a world where English is ever more the apparent lingua franca and where the Age of Entertainment offers the internet with all its distractions? Nationalism may have permitted mass conscriptions in the past; what of today? What would happen if America engaged in a call to arms in this electronic era? Would nationalism prevail? I suspect things have changed radically, something not anticipated or discussed in Professor Anderson's musings.
I do wish I could have spent those hours with Professor Anderson as a naive adult, rather than as a naive student. He had much to say; I would now enjoy listening.
Professor Anderson sees nationalism as a direct result of the printed word. Until Gutenberg's invention, the construction of communities depended on other means, most notably, though not limited to, religion or monarchy. This is a fairly straightforward observation, I think, yet it is phrased in the most mind-bending, academic way, for as Wallace Stevens is a poet's poet, so Professor Anderson is a social scientist's scientist. Given the opportunity to display a prodigious intellect, Professor Anderson joyfully indulges, delivering 200 pages of erudition with references to a colorful carousel of arcana, and untranslated lengthy quotations in a variety of languages. As a bow to his polymathy, the final chapter describes his perception of this work's impact in the publishing and academic world. Huzzahs and bravos all around.
Imagined Communities does make an important contribution to my understanding of the "we," at least the "we" of the past few hundred years. I wonder for the future, though. What of a world where English is ever more the apparent lingua franca and where the Age of Entertainment offers the internet with all its distractions? Nationalism may have permitted mass conscriptions in the past; what of today? What would happen if America engaged in a call to arms in this electronic era? Would nationalism prevail? I suspect things have changed radically, something not anticipated or discussed in Professor Anderson's musings.
I do wish I could have spent those hours with Professor Anderson as a naive adult, rather than as a naive student. He had much to say; I would now enjoy listening.
October 25, 2018
Not exactly a Marxist theory of nationalism, but a deeply sympathetic investigation by a man who happens to have Marxists political leanings. While showing how national identities are socially and historically constructed, Anderson at the same time finds the phenomenon too powerful to be simply debunked via ideological critique. In this he reminds me a bit of Gershom Scholem writing on the Kabbalah.
...
Anderson has very little to say about Arab nationalism, and as I read I wondered what he would make of the past decade and a half of wars in the Middle East. Isis was a state of sorts, but not a nation-state. It seems fair to say the scourge of state failure from Libya to Afghanistan has been related at least in part to a failure of nationalism. Note how no one was willing to fight and die on behalf of "Iraq", but after Shia religious leaders issued fatwas, a force was amassed to combat Isis.
While probably its most extreme manifestations are being played out in the Middle East, state failure does also seem to be a more general phenomenon of our times, not least in the advanced capitalist countries. All this makes me wonder if the nation-state will continue to be the hegemonic political formation of the 21st century.
...
Anderson has very little to say about Arab nationalism, and as I read I wondered what he would make of the past decade and a half of wars in the Middle East. Isis was a state of sorts, but not a nation-state. It seems fair to say the scourge of state failure from Libya to Afghanistan has been related at least in part to a failure of nationalism. Note how no one was willing to fight and die on behalf of "Iraq", but after Shia religious leaders issued fatwas, a force was amassed to combat Isis.
While probably its most extreme manifestations are being played out in the Middle East, state failure does also seem to be a more general phenomenon of our times, not least in the advanced capitalist countries. All this makes me wonder if the nation-state will continue to be the hegemonic political formation of the 21st century.
December 25, 2016
Since there has been a good deal of chattering about of late, it seemed a good time to finally examine this neglected long-term resident on my bookshelves. It is a tough slog through impenetrable Marxist jargon and apparent inside jokes. Also, there are enough dense and eye-strain-inducing footnotes in my paperback copy to send David Foster Wallace weeping to his thesaurus collection. And, in addition to untranslated French and German, there is, I am not making this up, untranslated Indonesian. On the positive side, it is short.
My copy also featured footnotes and commentary by that brainy chick I tricked into marrying me. They allowed me to achieve an understanding which I probably would not have achieved on my own. (A Germanist, she also explained what 鈥溾€� and other bits of untranslated German in the text meant.) If you have not had the foresight to be in a long-term relationship with a Germanist who has read and selectively highlighted this volume, I suggest that you refine your Tinder profile to remedy your lack of foresight before starting this book on your own.
It was a frequent experience to come to an end of a paragraph and realized I had retained nothing of what I had just read. I doubted my ability to understand the book as a whole. I made regular trips to the brainy chick to check my comprehension. She said I was understanding it. I think she was sincere, but she might have been just trying to get me to go away. Anyway, here's what I got out of it.
The word 鈥渞eflections鈥� in the titles is a clue that the book is a series of (at best) loosely-connected ideas the author has had about nationalism.
Think of the first part of this book as the first draft of a cookbook for nations. The author implies that no one before now has understood properly how to make a nation from scratch, and the previous explanations are, almost universally, balderdash. I'll try not to beat the 鈥渃ookbook鈥� metaphor to death, but the author as cook doesn't supply the exact measurements of various ingredients necessary to make a nation. Nor does the author claim that the ingredients listed are all the ingredients necessary to bake a nation. Instead, he notices that successfully launched nations have had ingredients A, B, and C, and unsuccessful attempts have lacked these ingredients.
One ingredient, if I understand correctly, is the largely unintentional creation of a locally-born set of civil servants, native in birth to the land they live but steeped for a long period in the culture of the occupying colonial power. Furthermore, this set of civil servants must be allowed to receive education in the capital of the colonial power but then routinely denied the opportunity to rise high enough to work and hold a position of power in that capital.
Another ingredient is the appearance of 鈥減rint-capitalists鈥�, whose products in the local vernacular may include newspapers and books as we understand them today, but also could include pamphlets and broadsheets of the type not really seen in most of the world anymore.
While explaining this book to me recently, above-referenced brainy chick casually threw off the observation that the formulation that different newspapers lead to different nations, may, if true, be a disturbing prediction for our times. We have just come out of a long period where the number of newspaper, television, and other mass media outlets were limited, first by technological constraints and then perhaps artificially. Of course, there was some diversity, and not everybody had the same opinion, but compared to what was before, what is now, and (perhaps) what is to come, it was a period of comparative harmony borne of everyone agreeing on certain basic assumptions. Now that anyone with a computer terminal can generate a story and call it news, we may be headed toward a period of birthing new nations again. Such births are rarely pretty.
In any event, given these (and maybe other) ingredients, then, the sense of nationhood appears. The outward appearance of a nation, meaning, lines on a map that some indifferent cartographer made decades or centuries ago based on a piece of parchment signed by an ignorant King, are not important. The random place where a boatload of adventurers made landfall long before the King laid pen to paper are not important. If the adventurers had landed further north or south, or if the cartographer's pencil had drawn a slightly different line, the results would have been the different only in insignificant detail. (I think that's the message I was supposed to get.)
As a result, we have Chileans, Americans, Ghanians, Indonesians, and others living, declaring allegiance and pride, and sometimes dying for arbitrary lines generated largely by accident, long ago. On one side, the group with which someone shares a vital bond. Many, perhaps most, of members of this group believe their group exceptional, and often that a greater power than themselves guided them and their co-nationals to this spot, making it desirable and worthy of protection.
Outside are people who are at least apathetic and perhaps even downright hostile, the national narrative goes. Depending on circumstance, the malevolence of outsiders can be attributed to envy, or their allegiance to darker powers, either terrestrial or not.
An interesting opinion expressed in this book is that nationalism is not racism, or maybe not racist. The argument, I think, goes like this: Nazis were NOT nationalist because they were not prepared to see, most visibly, Jews as a member of their nation, even the German Jews who were enthusiastic about Germany and its culture, even to the point of changing their religion. On the other hand, says Anderson, real nationalists are willing to admit any and all, regardless of race, who will sincerely believe in the superiority of their nation, because they (the nationalists) are simply champions of a nation. There are certainly cases where this is true, but there are also enough counter-examples of groups excluded by self-proclaimed nationalists by virtue of different appearance or background to draw this assertion into question. However, probably any debate on this topic will degenerate into an argument about definitions (that is, of 鈥渘ationalism鈥� and 鈥渘ationalist鈥�). Another different argument might result if you think that requiring others to admire you and your group to get the benefits of inclusion is a mind-set that co-occurs frequently with racism.
Another contention (if I understand correctly) which is much more difficult to dispute in these days: attempts to get people to believe in, defend, and die for institutions (like the European Union, NATO, and the UN) which were not created with the aid of the above-mentioned ingredients, will collapse in the face of the resolution and combativeness routinely generated by strong love of nation.
Sometimes it feels like, if you read this book and do not agree with author's idiosyncratic interpretations, you are likely to be greeted with the adolescent-like 鈥淲ell, you would think that, wouldn't you?鈥�, which is the consistent last refuge of theorists who have nowhere to hide. Example: near the end of the book, the author notes that, frequently, colonial-era drawings (and other representations) of recently-excavated ruins (like Angkor) are often lacking in human figures. This, says the author, is an implied put-down of the present inhabitants of the land by the colonial image-makers, carrying the message that you, present-day inhabitants of the land, are not capable of such magnificence. This is of course possible. But also possible, and more likely in my sight, is that the makers of illustrations felt they had, on the basis of excavations, enough evidence to make a representation of what the building in question looked like at the height of its magnificence, but did NOT have enough evidence to make a representation of the characteristic skin color, clothing, and activity of the people who lived and worked there. You see? NOT evil hegemons, simply people interested in accuracy. It's possible, right?
Being, on some odd level, an incurable optimist, I hope that everything I read (or even see or hear) will somehow eventually be something practical, something useful. In this case, I hope that understanding this book somehow allow me (or perhaps a more charming person with better persuasive skills) to convince a nationalist that the narrative of history could be different than he/she has imagined up to now. Also, the nationalist will finally understand that the soil for which he/she is prepared to erect walls and limit liberty is an accident of history. A more peaceful and inclusive mindset by the nationalist would be the result, in my dream.
However, even my imaginary conversations are failures. I imagine that, even in the unlikely event that I were to convince the nationalist that Anderson's thesis were a truer reading of history, the nationalist could easily insist that all of it, the print-capitalists, the native-born civil servants, the King's arbitrary lines, are all evidence of God's hand at work on behalf of his favorite nation. It would be, they might say, the intention of divine power to bring the nationalists and their allies where they are now, i.e., threatening the defenseless in the name of liberty.
My copy also featured footnotes and commentary by that brainy chick I tricked into marrying me. They allowed me to achieve an understanding which I probably would not have achieved on my own. (A Germanist, she also explained what 鈥溾€� and other bits of untranslated German in the text meant.) If you have not had the foresight to be in a long-term relationship with a Germanist who has read and selectively highlighted this volume, I suggest that you refine your Tinder profile to remedy your lack of foresight before starting this book on your own.
It was a frequent experience to come to an end of a paragraph and realized I had retained nothing of what I had just read. I doubted my ability to understand the book as a whole. I made regular trips to the brainy chick to check my comprehension. She said I was understanding it. I think she was sincere, but she might have been just trying to get me to go away. Anyway, here's what I got out of it.
The word 鈥渞eflections鈥� in the titles is a clue that the book is a series of (at best) loosely-connected ideas the author has had about nationalism.
Think of the first part of this book as the first draft of a cookbook for nations. The author implies that no one before now has understood properly how to make a nation from scratch, and the previous explanations are, almost universally, balderdash. I'll try not to beat the 鈥渃ookbook鈥� metaphor to death, but the author as cook doesn't supply the exact measurements of various ingredients necessary to make a nation. Nor does the author claim that the ingredients listed are all the ingredients necessary to bake a nation. Instead, he notices that successfully launched nations have had ingredients A, B, and C, and unsuccessful attempts have lacked these ingredients.
One ingredient, if I understand correctly, is the largely unintentional creation of a locally-born set of civil servants, native in birth to the land they live but steeped for a long period in the culture of the occupying colonial power. Furthermore, this set of civil servants must be allowed to receive education in the capital of the colonial power but then routinely denied the opportunity to rise high enough to work and hold a position of power in that capital.
Another ingredient is the appearance of 鈥減rint-capitalists鈥�, whose products in the local vernacular may include newspapers and books as we understand them today, but also could include pamphlets and broadsheets of the type not really seen in most of the world anymore.
While explaining this book to me recently, above-referenced brainy chick casually threw off the observation that the formulation that different newspapers lead to different nations, may, if true, be a disturbing prediction for our times. We have just come out of a long period where the number of newspaper, television, and other mass media outlets were limited, first by technological constraints and then perhaps artificially. Of course, there was some diversity, and not everybody had the same opinion, but compared to what was before, what is now, and (perhaps) what is to come, it was a period of comparative harmony borne of everyone agreeing on certain basic assumptions. Now that anyone with a computer terminal can generate a story and call it news, we may be headed toward a period of birthing new nations again. Such births are rarely pretty.
In any event, given these (and maybe other) ingredients, then, the sense of nationhood appears. The outward appearance of a nation, meaning, lines on a map that some indifferent cartographer made decades or centuries ago based on a piece of parchment signed by an ignorant King, are not important. The random place where a boatload of adventurers made landfall long before the King laid pen to paper are not important. If the adventurers had landed further north or south, or if the cartographer's pencil had drawn a slightly different line, the results would have been the different only in insignificant detail. (I think that's the message I was supposed to get.)
As a result, we have Chileans, Americans, Ghanians, Indonesians, and others living, declaring allegiance and pride, and sometimes dying for arbitrary lines generated largely by accident, long ago. On one side, the group with which someone shares a vital bond. Many, perhaps most, of members of this group believe their group exceptional, and often that a greater power than themselves guided them and their co-nationals to this spot, making it desirable and worthy of protection.
Outside are people who are at least apathetic and perhaps even downright hostile, the national narrative goes. Depending on circumstance, the malevolence of outsiders can be attributed to envy, or their allegiance to darker powers, either terrestrial or not.
An interesting opinion expressed in this book is that nationalism is not racism, or maybe not racist. The argument, I think, goes like this: Nazis were NOT nationalist because they were not prepared to see, most visibly, Jews as a member of their nation, even the German Jews who were enthusiastic about Germany and its culture, even to the point of changing their religion. On the other hand, says Anderson, real nationalists are willing to admit any and all, regardless of race, who will sincerely believe in the superiority of their nation, because they (the nationalists) are simply champions of a nation. There are certainly cases where this is true, but there are also enough counter-examples of groups excluded by self-proclaimed nationalists by virtue of different appearance or background to draw this assertion into question. However, probably any debate on this topic will degenerate into an argument about definitions (that is, of 鈥渘ationalism鈥� and 鈥渘ationalist鈥�). Another different argument might result if you think that requiring others to admire you and your group to get the benefits of inclusion is a mind-set that co-occurs frequently with racism.
Another contention (if I understand correctly) which is much more difficult to dispute in these days: attempts to get people to believe in, defend, and die for institutions (like the European Union, NATO, and the UN) which were not created with the aid of the above-mentioned ingredients, will collapse in the face of the resolution and combativeness routinely generated by strong love of nation.
Sometimes it feels like, if you read this book and do not agree with author's idiosyncratic interpretations, you are likely to be greeted with the adolescent-like 鈥淲ell, you would think that, wouldn't you?鈥�, which is the consistent last refuge of theorists who have nowhere to hide. Example: near the end of the book, the author notes that, frequently, colonial-era drawings (and other representations) of recently-excavated ruins (like Angkor) are often lacking in human figures. This, says the author, is an implied put-down of the present inhabitants of the land by the colonial image-makers, carrying the message that you, present-day inhabitants of the land, are not capable of such magnificence. This is of course possible. But also possible, and more likely in my sight, is that the makers of illustrations felt they had, on the basis of excavations, enough evidence to make a representation of what the building in question looked like at the height of its magnificence, but did NOT have enough evidence to make a representation of the characteristic skin color, clothing, and activity of the people who lived and worked there. You see? NOT evil hegemons, simply people interested in accuracy. It's possible, right?
Being, on some odd level, an incurable optimist, I hope that everything I read (or even see or hear) will somehow eventually be something practical, something useful. In this case, I hope that understanding this book somehow allow me (or perhaps a more charming person with better persuasive skills) to convince a nationalist that the narrative of history could be different than he/she has imagined up to now. Also, the nationalist will finally understand that the soil for which he/she is prepared to erect walls and limit liberty is an accident of history. A more peaceful and inclusive mindset by the nationalist would be the result, in my dream.
However, even my imaginary conversations are failures. I imagine that, even in the unlikely event that I were to convince the nationalist that Anderson's thesis were a truer reading of history, the nationalist could easily insist that all of it, the print-capitalists, the native-born civil servants, the King's arbitrary lines, are all evidence of God's hand at work on behalf of his favorite nation. It would be, they might say, the intention of divine power to bring the nationalists and their allies where they are now, i.e., threatening the defenseless in the name of liberty.
July 9, 2007
This is a very important, but difficult read. Even though the author mentions that he did not want to introduce any academic lingo, it is still difficult to comprehend at times, and the academic structure is obvious.
It will truly make you think about history in a novel way once you do understand what is being described. However, the chapter on the Map, Census and Museum was the hardest to comprehend. Of course, the fact that so many themes in the book were hard to understand only goes to show how different our frame of reference is now that we are products of these 'imagined communities' rather than outsiders looking in.
All in all, it was a worthwhile read, even though a second read would be inevitable.
It will truly make you think about history in a novel way once you do understand what is being described. However, the chapter on the Map, Census and Museum was the hardest to comprehend. Of course, the fact that so many themes in the book were hard to understand only goes to show how different our frame of reference is now that we are products of these 'imagined communities' rather than outsiders looking in.
All in all, it was a worthwhile read, even though a second read would be inevitable.
June 30, 2024
艩is bl墨vais teksts par n膩ciju veido拧anos un nacion膩lismu bija intelektu膩li izaicino拧s, bet kur拧 teicis, ka jauna rieva smadzen膿s veidojas viegli? Varb奴t mans pr膩ts p膩r膩k ilgi ir piev膿rsies praktisk膩kai dom膩拧anai, bet da啪k膩rt nebija viegli izprast teoriju un savilkt kop膩 Andersona argumentus. K膩 teikts gr膩matas p膿cv膩rd膩, jo liel膩ka zin膩拧anu bag膩啪a, jo vair膩k iesp膿jams g奴t no 拧墨s gr膩matas. Mana bag膩啪a attiec墨gaj膩 t膿m膩 v膿l j膩audz膿.
Read
May 2, 2021兀毓鬲乇賮 亘毓噩夭賷 丕賱鬲丕賲 賱廿賰賲丕賱 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 賵氐賱鬲購 廿賱賶 丕賱賲賳鬲氐賮 亘氐毓賵亘丞 亘丕賱睾丞貙 賵賱爻鬲購 亘氐丿丿 賰鬲丕亘丞 賲乇丕噩毓丞 丨賵賱 賲丨鬲賵丕賴 兀賵 兀爻賱賵亘 丕賱賰丕鬲亘貙 賱賱賲乇丞 丕賱兀賵賱賶 兀賳賮乇 賲賳 丕賱賰鬲亘 賵丕賱乇賵丕賷丕鬲 賵賲丕 賷禺氐 毓丕賱賲賷 丕賱丨亘賷亘 亘爻亘亘 賰鬲丕亘 賱賲 兀爻鬲胤毓 賮賴賲賴.
馗賳賳鬲購 丕賱毓丕卅賯 賮賷 賳賮賵乇賷 賲賳 賲毓丕賱噩丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 孬賲 鬲亘賷賾賳 賱賷 兀賳 丕賱兀賲乇 賷賰賲賳 賮賷 賳賵毓賷丞 丕賱賳賲丕匕噩 丕賱鬲賷 丕禺鬲丕乇賴丕 丕賱賰丕鬲亘 賱賲毓丕賱噩丞 賯囟賷丞 丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞貙 賱爻鬲購 毓賱賶 廿賱賲丕賲 亘兀賷賺賾 賲賳 丕賱賯囟丕賷丕 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 賵丕賱爻賷丕爻賷丞 丕賱賲購禺鬲賻丕乇丞貙 賵賰丕賳 丕賱鬲賵睾賱 賮賷 鬲賮丕氐賷賱 鬲賱賰 丕賱丨賷孬賷丕鬲 賲購囟賳賷賸丕 賵賵丕囟毓賸丕 毓乇丕賯賷賱 亘賷賳賷 賵亘賷賳 丕賱賯乇亘 賲賳 賯氐丿 丕賱賰丕鬲亘.
乇亘賲丕 賱賷 毓賵丿丞賹 兀禺乇賶 亘毓丿 爻賳賷賳 毓丿賷丿丞貙 賵乇亘賲丕 賱賳 兀毓賵丿 賱賴 廿胤賱丕賯賸丕貙 賲丕 兀丨夭賳賳賷 賮賷 鬲噩乇亘鬲賷 鬲賱賰貙 丨丕賱丞 丕賱丕賳睾賱丕賯 丕賱賰丕賲賱 亘毓賷丿賸丕 毓賳 賯乇丕亍丞 氐賮丨丞 賵丕丨丿丞貙 兀卮賮賯 毓賱賶 丕賱賲鬲乇噩賲 賵丕賱賲丨乇乇貙 賮丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲鬲卮毓亘 賮賷 賯囟丕賷丕 賵賲氐胤賱丨丕鬲 鬲丨鬲丕噩 賴賵丕賲卮 賵卮乇賵丨丕鬲 賲購胤賵賻賾賱丞貙 賵賱丕 兀噩丿 賮賰乇丞賸 賯丿 賴囟賲鬲賴丕 亘卮賰賱 賰丕賲賱 賱賱賳賯丕卮 丨賵賱賴丕 賮賷 賲乇丕噩毓丞貙 賮賱賲 兀賮賴賲 丨鬲賶 丕賱丌賳 丕賱賮乇賯 亘賷賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賵馗丕賴乇丞 丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞.
鬲賲鬲.
佗 賲丕賷賵 佗贍佗佟
July 16, 2011
A hugely influential work, first published in 1983, which delineates the 'processes by which the nation came to be imagined, and, once imagined, modelled, adapted and transformed.' Anderson is an expert on Southeast Asia, and thus manages very successfully to avoid a purely Euro-centric view. Another extremely successful aspect of this work is the structure: each chapter ends with a succinct summary of its main ideas, a boon for those who need to take notes and revise what they've read, or indeed for anyone at all. The author argues his case cogently, emphatically, and with admirable clarity. Exemplary.
October 20, 2023
兀賳丕 賱賲丕 賯乇兀鬲 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丿賴 賲賳 鬲賱鬲 爻賳賷賳 賯賱鬲 賴乇噩毓 兀賯乇兀賴 亘毓丿賷賳 毓卮丕賳 兀賮賴賲賴 亘卮賰賱 兀賮囟賱貙 賵乇噩毓鬲 賯乇賷鬲賴 亘毓丿 鬲賱鬲 爻賳賷賳 賵兀馗賳 兀賳賷 賴乇噩毓 兀賯乇丕賴 鬲丕賳賷 亘毓丿 鬲賱鬲 爻賳賷賳 鬲丕賳賷賷賳 賱兀賳賷 賲亘賳鬲賴賷卮 賲賳賴 兀亘丿賸丕 賵兀賳丕 賴丕囟賲賴 亘卮賰賱 賰賱賷貙 賵兀賳丕 毓丕賷夭 賮賷 賷賵賲 賲丕 兀賳賮匕 賱噩賵賴乇 丕賱賮賰乇丞 丕賱兀賱賲毓賷丞 丕賱賱賷 亘賷胤乇丨 兀賳丿乇爻賳貙 賰鬲丕亘 賲賲鬲毓 賵賲爻鬲賮夭貙 賱賰賳 賱丕夭丕賱 賷丨鬲丕噩 毓賯賱 賲氐賯賵賱 兀賰孬乇 賵賲乇噩毓賷丞 兀賵爻毓 毓卮丕賳 鬲賵氐賱 丕賱賯丕乇卅 賱賲乇丨賱丞 丕賱丕卮鬲亘丕賰 丕賱賰丕賲賱 賲毓 丕賱賳氐 賵胤乇丨 丕賱兀爻卅賱丞 毓賳 賵毓賷 賰丕賲賱 賵賲噩丕丿賱丞 丕賱賰丕鬲亘 賵賲禺丕賱賮鬲賴 賮賷 兀賲賵乇 賰鬲賷乇丞.. 賱賰賳 賱丨丿 丕賱丌賳 亘賯乇兀賴 賯乇丕亍丞 丿賵賳賷丞 賵兀賳賷 賮賷 賲賵囟毓 丕爻鬲賲丕毓 賵賱賷爻 丕卮鬲亘丕賰
February 20, 2015
As the original text on nationalism as an idea, you would think that this would be a better read. Indeed, the plethora of translations that the author catalogs in the Afterword written for this expanded edition, you would think it would be best thing on nationalism ever. And while it does have a few great ideas, it is a barely developed, almost completely nonsensical book. The first few chapters start out alright as he identifies native languages, bueracratic language requirements, and revolution in public education in the wake of the Reformation as key to the development of nationalism first in Europe then in the Americas. But after that, things begin to break down completely. The author can never sustain a single thought long enough to develop it, bouncing around the globe and the globe of ideas like a ball in a racquetball court, only a ball in a racquetball court would make a loud THUD! to let you know you hit the wall. After the first few chapters, Mr. Anderson can't hit anything. Aside from some good, but half-baked, ideas, I would suggest finding another book to read if you are interested in the development of nationalism as an idea.
August 21, 2019
Imagined Communities : Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism, by Benedict Anderson is an interesting look at the development of the idea of Nationalism, and its close association to human conceptions of community and identity. Nationalism has led to many horrible things; Nazi genocide, colonialism, war, ethnic cleansing, and repression of minority groups. Many of these factors are still at play in the modern world. This is because all nations currently in existence derive their legitimacy, much of their culture, and therefore much of their power, from nationalism. Defined here in this book, nationalism is a set of ideas, principles, and connections that build up a feeling of community within a nation state. These ideas come from many avenues, some which transcend modern concepts of nation states. For example, Anderson discusses the similar feelings of connectivity that have historically been derived from religion (imagine the Haj in medieval times, or Catholics from France and Croatia meeting), and from dynasty (legitimacy often stems from a dynastic seat, think of the multi-ethnic and long ruling empires in Austria-Hungary, Ottoman Turkey and so on).
Anderson goes over this conception of nationalism. The phrase "Imagined Communities" is interesting - Anderson looks at the use and abuse of nationalistic connections and ideas. The development of a group conscious stemming from communal and national connections is fickle, and can come from many sources. The movement away from writing in high tongue - like Latin, for example, into vernacular language, French, German etc. had a huge impact on the development of nationalism in Europe. This stemmed from the translation of important works from Latin and Greek into the local vernacular, and encouraged the development of ideas, the collective consumption of localized myths, legends, histories and ideas, and the collective absorption of the idea of "us" and "other" that has come to define national boundaries and regional autonomous regions or minority groups.
Anderson goes through the history of the creation of nation states, and ironically, the first wave, as he calls it, is in America. The creation of modern American nations were some of the first to remove the old principles of dynasty and religion, and build Republican states. The composition of states varied as well. Some (like Canada) developed dominion status to their old colonial regime, slowly gaining independence through negotiation, and the slow transfer of sovereign power by the colonial power. In the United States, independence was violent. Nationalism was based not upon the idea of a nation per se (the original declaration of independence, for example, makes not mention of an American state as an entity, but discusses the thirteen colonial entities instead), but on a shared sense of community and spirit derived from the mutual feeling of oppression shared by many Americans. The close connection between the colonies, and their similar print culture, ethnicity and language encouraged they join together in union. These two cases, however, are unusual. In South America, which was a homogeneous territory of Spanish controlled territory where the elite were the same ethnicity, spoke the same language, and had the same spirit of oppression as in the North, nation states evolved around colonial boundaries, and larger collections of states, like the UPCA (United Provinces of Central America) or Gran Colombia (Panama, Colombia, Ecuador) broke apart quickly. This is because the metropole in Madrid did not encourage colonial connectivity either economically or through the development of some sort of united culture. Conceptions of unity and community revolved around the colony only, and there was little in the way of economic or even physical connectivity between, say Venezuela and Chile, or Ecuador and Argentina. These states developed their own systems of power, culture and identity that often revolved around religion (Catholicism), indigenous myth, and racial superiority.
Anderson also discusses the creation of completely new nations. Indonesia, for example, was a collection of states of extremely diverse cultures, ethnicity, languages and religion that was very slowly colonized by the Dutch. The slow colonization was barely complete by the end of Dutch control in WWII. Even so, separate identities did not arise that could compete with the wish that many elite had for a united Indonesia. The uniting factor here was a shared sense of oppression against the Dutch, as well as the development of an "us" vs. "them" culture. The Dutch would never hire an Indonesian to colonial posts of any power. Even more alien was the concept of an Indonesian working in the Netherlands. This hostility created the concept that Indonesians were not Dutch, and would never be - a spoiling factor for the Dutch when they sought control. An ironic story from this era speaks about Dutch independence celebrations in Batavia from French rule. Locals were tasked with celebrating this event, and the Dutch seemed confused and shocked when Indonesians did not as enthusiastically participate. The Dutch saw them as Dutch subjects, but not of equal value. The Indonesians, on the other hand, were completely indifferent to Dutch identity due to marginalization and irrelevance. Similar stories can be told about colonies everywhere; in French Africa, Malaysia under the British, and India.
Anderson discusses many other topics, such as the use of museum, census, statistics and the misuse of history to build national identities on the fly. Nationalism, in short, can be created and spread by co-opting ideas, shared identities, history, language and religion, among other conceptions, to build nations with defined borders. Nationalism is a useful concept that allows states to centralize power away from competing institutions or groups, press territorial claims on other regions, reduce unrest by building a sense of common identity that may overcome oppression, and, in the modern world, create electoral success in representative democracies. This book was very interesting. Anderson has done a wonderful job bringing together various ideas into a concise text on Nationalism and how it is created and spread. This is one of the key -isms in the modern world, the real framework that most nations build their legitimacy. This book is an important read, and I can easily recommend it (and indeed strongly recommend it) to those interested in political theory.
Anderson goes over this conception of nationalism. The phrase "Imagined Communities" is interesting - Anderson looks at the use and abuse of nationalistic connections and ideas. The development of a group conscious stemming from communal and national connections is fickle, and can come from many sources. The movement away from writing in high tongue - like Latin, for example, into vernacular language, French, German etc. had a huge impact on the development of nationalism in Europe. This stemmed from the translation of important works from Latin and Greek into the local vernacular, and encouraged the development of ideas, the collective consumption of localized myths, legends, histories and ideas, and the collective absorption of the idea of "us" and "other" that has come to define national boundaries and regional autonomous regions or minority groups.
Anderson goes through the history of the creation of nation states, and ironically, the first wave, as he calls it, is in America. The creation of modern American nations were some of the first to remove the old principles of dynasty and religion, and build Republican states. The composition of states varied as well. Some (like Canada) developed dominion status to their old colonial regime, slowly gaining independence through negotiation, and the slow transfer of sovereign power by the colonial power. In the United States, independence was violent. Nationalism was based not upon the idea of a nation per se (the original declaration of independence, for example, makes not mention of an American state as an entity, but discusses the thirteen colonial entities instead), but on a shared sense of community and spirit derived from the mutual feeling of oppression shared by many Americans. The close connection between the colonies, and their similar print culture, ethnicity and language encouraged they join together in union. These two cases, however, are unusual. In South America, which was a homogeneous territory of Spanish controlled territory where the elite were the same ethnicity, spoke the same language, and had the same spirit of oppression as in the North, nation states evolved around colonial boundaries, and larger collections of states, like the UPCA (United Provinces of Central America) or Gran Colombia (Panama, Colombia, Ecuador) broke apart quickly. This is because the metropole in Madrid did not encourage colonial connectivity either economically or through the development of some sort of united culture. Conceptions of unity and community revolved around the colony only, and there was little in the way of economic or even physical connectivity between, say Venezuela and Chile, or Ecuador and Argentina. These states developed their own systems of power, culture and identity that often revolved around religion (Catholicism), indigenous myth, and racial superiority.
Anderson also discusses the creation of completely new nations. Indonesia, for example, was a collection of states of extremely diverse cultures, ethnicity, languages and religion that was very slowly colonized by the Dutch. The slow colonization was barely complete by the end of Dutch control in WWII. Even so, separate identities did not arise that could compete with the wish that many elite had for a united Indonesia. The uniting factor here was a shared sense of oppression against the Dutch, as well as the development of an "us" vs. "them" culture. The Dutch would never hire an Indonesian to colonial posts of any power. Even more alien was the concept of an Indonesian working in the Netherlands. This hostility created the concept that Indonesians were not Dutch, and would never be - a spoiling factor for the Dutch when they sought control. An ironic story from this era speaks about Dutch independence celebrations in Batavia from French rule. Locals were tasked with celebrating this event, and the Dutch seemed confused and shocked when Indonesians did not as enthusiastically participate. The Dutch saw them as Dutch subjects, but not of equal value. The Indonesians, on the other hand, were completely indifferent to Dutch identity due to marginalization and irrelevance. Similar stories can be told about colonies everywhere; in French Africa, Malaysia under the British, and India.
Anderson discusses many other topics, such as the use of museum, census, statistics and the misuse of history to build national identities on the fly. Nationalism, in short, can be created and spread by co-opting ideas, shared identities, history, language and religion, among other conceptions, to build nations with defined borders. Nationalism is a useful concept that allows states to centralize power away from competing institutions or groups, press territorial claims on other regions, reduce unrest by building a sense of common identity that may overcome oppression, and, in the modern world, create electoral success in representative democracies. This book was very interesting. Anderson has done a wonderful job bringing together various ideas into a concise text on Nationalism and how it is created and spread. This is one of the key -isms in the modern world, the real framework that most nations build their legitimacy. This book is an important read, and I can easily recommend it (and indeed strongly recommend it) to those interested in political theory.
July 1, 2015
賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕爻鬲睾乇賯 賲賳賷 賵賯鬲丕 賱胤賵賷賱丕 賱賯乇丕亍鬲賴貙 賷鬲噩丕賵夭 丕賱卮賴乇 亘賯賱賷賱.
賱賲 鬲賰賳 氐毓賵亘丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賴賷 爻亘亘 鬲兀禺賷乇 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞. 乇亘賲丕 賱兀賳賳賷 鬲毓乇賮鬲 廿賱賶 賱毓亘丞 爻亘丕賯 丕賱爻賷丕乇丕鬲 "廿爻賮賱鬲 8"貙 賮卮睾賱賳賷 賴匕丕 毓賳賴貙 兀賵 賱兀賳 賰賱 賮賰乇丞 -乇睾賲 亘爻丕胤丞 毓乇囟賴丕- 鬲丨鬲丕噩 廿賱賶 賵賯鬲 胤賵賷賱 賱賴囟賲賴丕 賵丕爻鬲賷毓丕亘賴丕.
亘賱睾鬲 卮賴乇丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱丌賮丕賯貙 賵氐丕乇 賲賯乇乇丕 噩丕賲毓賷丕 賮賷 丕賱毓丿賷丿 賲賳 丕賱噩丕賲毓丕鬲 丨賵賱 丕賱毓丕賱賲貙 賱匕賱賰 兀賷 丨丿賷孬 丨賵賱 兀賴賲賷丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賳 鬲賰賵賳 賲賳丕爻亘丞.
兀卮賷乇 賮賯胤 廿賱賶 亘毓囟 丕賱賳賯丕胤 丕賱鬲賷 丕爻鬲賵賯賮鬲賳賷 兀孬賳丕亍 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞:
1- 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賷爻 賳馗乇賷丕 亘丕賱賲乇丞貙 兀賷 乇睾賲 兀賳賴 賷鬲亘賳賶 賲賮賴賵賲丕 噩丿賷丿丕 賱兀爻丕爻 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賵丕賳鬲卮丕乇賴丕貙 廿賱丕 兀賳 丕賱賲丐賱賮 丕鬲噩賴 亘兀睾賱亘 孬賯賱賴 廿賱賶 丨賯賱 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賱廿亘乇丕夭 賳馗乇賷鬲賴 賵丿毓賲賴丕 亘兀賲孬賱丞 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 賵賵賯丕卅毓 賲丨丿丿丞.
2- 賵乇睾賲 丕賱丕賴鬲賲丕賲 亘丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺貙 廿賱丕 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 鬲噩丕賴賱 賲賳胤賯丞 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 鬲賯乇賷亘丕. 兀賷 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賮鬲丨 賲噩丕賱丕 賵丕爻毓丕 賱賱亘丕丨孬賷賳 賰賷 賷禺鬲亘乇賵丕 賴匕賴 丕賱賳馗乇賷丞 毓賱賶 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓丕鬲 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賵禺丕氐丞 賲氐乇. 廿賳 丕賱丨丿賵丿 丕賱廿丿丕乇賷丞 賱賲氐乇 賮賷 兀囟賷賯 鬲賵爻毓丕鬲賴丕 賰丕賳鬲 鬲賯乇賷亘丕 賲孬賱 丕賱丨丿賵丿 丕賱丨丕賱賷丞貙 兀賷 兀賳賴 賱賵 鬲噩丕賴賱賳丕 賮鬲乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賵爻毓 丕賱賲氐乇賷 毓賱賶 丨爻丕亘 丕賱兀乇丕囟賷 丕賱賲噩丕賵乇丞貙 賮廿賳 賲毓馗賲 丕賱兀爻乇 丕賱賮乇毓賵賳賷丞 賰丕賳鬲 賱賴丕 爻賷胤乇丞 毓賱賶 爻賷賳丕亍 賵丕賱賵丕丨丕鬲 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞 賵丕賱賵噩賴 丕賱賯亘賱賷 賵丕賱亘丨乇賷.
廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱賯丿賷賲丞貙 丕賱鬲賷 賷毓丕丿 鬲卮賰賷賱賴丕 丨丕賱賷丕 亘賳丕亍 毓賱賶 兀賵賴丕賲 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 賲鬲乇丕賰賲丞貙 鬲囟賷賮 兀賳賲賵匕噩丕 卮丿賷丿 丕賱噩丿丞 賵丕賱睾乇丕亘丞貙 賵丕爻鬲孬賳丕亍 卮丕匕丕 賱賯丕毓丿丞 "兀賳丿乇爻賳". 廿賳 丕鬲賰丕亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱賲氐乇賷丞 毓賱賶 鬲丕乇賷禺賴丕 -乇睾賲 丕賱丕賳賯胤丕毓 丕賱賲毓乇賮賷 毓賳賴丕- 賵丕賱賲丨丕賮馗丞 毓賱賶 亘毓囟 丕賱毓丕丿丕鬲 丕賱賮乇毓賵賳賷丞 丕賱賯丿賷賲丞 賵鬲賲賷夭 丕賱賱賴噩丞 丕賱賲氐乇賷丞 毓賳 亘賯賷丞 丕賱兀賱爻賳 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賷噩毓賱 丕賱亘丕丨孬 賮賷 賲丨賱 賲賯丕乇亘丞 賵賲賯丕乇賳丞 賱胤亘賷毓丞 賴匕賴 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賵乇亘賲丕 賷賮爻乇 爻亘亘 丕賱鬲囟禺賲 丕賱匕丕鬲賷 賮賷 賳賮爻賷丞 丕賱賲氐乇賷賷賳.
3- 兀卮丕乇 丕賱賲丐賱賮 廿賱賶 兀賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱卮毓亘賷丞 鬲禺鬲賱賮 毓賳 賳馗賷乇鬲賴丕 丕賱乇爻賲賷丞 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞貙 丨賷孬 賯乇賳鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱兀禺賷乇丞 賯賵賲賷鬲賴丕 亘丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞貙 賱賰賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 毓丕賲丞 爻乇 賳噩丕丨賴丕 賵丕爻鬲賳爻丕禺賴丕 賴賵 亘亘爻丕胤丞 兀賳賴丕 賲亘賳賷丞 毓賱賶 賳夭毓丕鬲 廿賷賲丕賳賷丞 賱丿賶 丕賱賮乇丿 亘囟乇賵乇丞 丕賱鬲囟丨賷丞 賵丨亘 丕賱噩賲丕毓丞 賵丕賱賵賱丕亍 賱賱賵胤賳. 賱賰賳 賲丕 賮丕鬲 丕賱賲丐賱賮 匕賰乇賴貙 兀賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 亘賳爻禺鬲賴丕 丕賱卮毓亘賷丞 鬲鬲賯丕胤毓 兀丨賷丕賳丕 賲毓 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞貙 亘賱 廿賳 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱賵爻胤賶 賵丕賱兀賯賱 賲賳 丕賱賲鬲賵爻胤丞 賲丕乇爻鬲 賳爻禺丕 賲賳 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 囟丿 丕賱兀賯賱賷丕鬲 亘丨噩丞 丕賱賵氐賵賱 廿賱賶 賳爻禺丞 "賳馗賷賮丞" 賵"禺丕賱賷丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲卮賵賴丕鬲" 賱賯賵賲賷鬲賴丕 丕賱禺丕氐丞.
廿賳 鬲丨賱賷賱 亘乇賳丕乇丿 卮賵 -乇睾賲 丕賮鬲賯丕乇賴 廿賱賶 兀賷 兀爻爻 賳馗乇賷丞- 丨賵賱 兀賳 丕賱賳馗丕賲 丕賱賮丕卮賷 丕賱廿賷胤丕賱賷 丕鬲賰兀 賮賷 爻賱胤丕賳賴 毓賱賶 胤賲賵丨 賵鬲胤乇賮丕鬲 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱卮毓亘賷丞貙 賴賵 丕賱兀賯乇亘 賮賷 賳馗乇賷 廿賱賶 丕賱氐丨丞. 廿賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 -賲孬賱賴丕 賲孬賱 亘賯賷丞 兀卮賰丕賱 丕賱廿賷賲丕賳 丕賱睾賷亘賷- 賷賲賰賳賴丕 兀賳 鬲賳賯賱亘 廿賱賶 禺胤乇 丨賯賷賯賷 毓賱賶 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷丞 亘賲賮賴賵賲賴丕 丕賱賵丕爻毓.
4- 賷購賮囟賱 賯乇丕亍丞 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲乇丞 兀禺乇賶貙 賲亘丕卮乇丞 兀賵 亘毓丿 賲丿丞 賲賳 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞 丕賱兀賵賱賶. 廿賳 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞 丕賱兀賵賱賶 鬲毓丿 亘賲孬丕亘丞 鬲氐賮丨貙 賱賰賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷丨鬲丕噩 賲賳 丕賱賯丕乇卅 丕賱禺亘賷乇 廿賱賶 丿乇丕爻丞 賲鬲兀賳賷丞 賵丕毓賷丞 賰賷 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 賷乇賰夭 賵賷賱禺氐 賵賷毓賷丿 鬲丨乇賷乇 兀亘乇夭 賮賯乇丕鬲 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 丕賱鬲賷 鬲鬲賵賴 賵爻胤 丕賱鬲丨賱賷賱 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷 丕賱亘丕乇夭.
賵賱毓卮丕賯 丕賱賳爻禺 丕賱賳馗賷賮丞 賵丕賱賲丨丕賮馗丞 毓賱賶 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賳 丕賱兀丨亘丕乇 賵丕賱兀賵乇丕賯 丕賱賱丕氐賯丞. 賱賳 賷賰賵賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賱丕卅賲丕 賱匕賱賰. 氐丿賯丕貙 丕噩毓賱 賱賳賮爻賰 毓賱賶 丕賱兀賯賱 "賳賵鬲丞" 亘噩賵丕乇 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 賮兀賷 賯丕乇卅 爻賷丨鬲丕噩 廿賱賶 鬲丿賵賷賳 亘毓囟 賲賱丕丨馗丕鬲賴.
5- 賷購賳氐丨 亘賯乇丕亍丞 賲賯丿賲丞 "毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞" 亘毓丿 賯乇丕亍丞 賲鬲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵賱賷爻 賯亘賱賴. 廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 丕賱賵丕毓賷丞 鬲卮鬲亘賰 賲毓 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵鬲賮賳丿 亘毓囟 賲賱丕丨馗丕鬲賴 賵鬲毓賯亘 毓賱賷賴. 賵賴匕丕 賷噩毓賱 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 賲卮賵卮丞 賱賱賯丕乇卅 丕賱匕賷 賷鬲毓乇賮 毓賱賶 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賱賲乇丞 丕賱兀賵賱賶貙 亘丕賱廿囟丕賮丞 廿賱賶 兀賳賴 賷禺賱賯 鬲丨賷夭丕鬲 禺賱丕賱 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞. 賵賰丕賳 亘丕賱兀丨乇賶 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 鬲匕賷賷賱丕 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賮賷 丕賱賳賴丕賷丞.
亘丕賱賲賳丕爻亘丞貙 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 廿禺賮丕亍 兀賳 亘卮丕乇丞 賳賮爻賴 賯丿賲 丕賱賳爻禺丞 丕賱毓亘乇賷丞 賲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 賵兀賳賴 賰賮賱爻胤賷賳賷 賷丨賲賱 丕賱噩賳爻賷丞 丕賱廿爻乇丕卅賷賱賷丞 賵賲賴鬲賲 亘丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賷丨賲賱 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賯囟賷丞 卮禺氐賷丞 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷賴.
6- 賷乇賶 丕賱賲丐賱賮 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷爻丕乇賷 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱賱丕夭賲 賱賱賷亘乇丕賱賷賷賳貙 賵賱賷亘乇丕賱賷 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱賱丕夭賲 賱賱賷爻丕乇賷賷賳. 賱賰賳 兀賷 毓賷賳 賮丕丨氐丞 賲丨丕賷丿丞 爻鬲噩丿 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賲賷賱 廿賱賶 丕賱賷爻丕乇 兀賰孬乇. 賵賱丕 毓噩亘 兀賳 賰孬賷乇丕 賲賳 兀賳氐丕乇 丕賱賷爻丕乇 丕賱丿賷賲賯乇丕胤賷 賮賷 賲氐乇 賲賲賳 兀毓乇賮賴賲 賯乇兀賵丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 兀賵 丕丨鬲賮馗賵丕 亘賳爻禺丞 賲賳賴 毓賱賶 兀噩賴夭鬲賴賲 兀賵 賮賷 賲賰鬲亘丕鬲賴賲.
賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷卮鬲亘賰 賲毓 丕賱賲賯賵賱丕鬲 丕賱賷爻丕乇賷丞 賲孬賱 兀賳 丕賱賲丕乇賰爻賷賷賳 賱賷爻賵丕 賯賵賲賷賷賳貙 賱賰賳賴 禺丕乇噩 賲賳 乇丨賲 丕賱賷爻丕乇 賵賲賳 賳賯丕卮丕鬲 匕丕鬲 丿賱丕賱丞 爻亘賯鬲 毓賱賷賴貙 賵丿乇噩賴丕 丕賱賲丐賱賮 賮賷 賲鬲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱丕 賮賷 賴賵丕賲卮賴 賮賯胤.
7- 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷賵賳 丕賱匕賷賳 賷賯乇兀賵賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 亘毓賷賳 鬲亘丨孬 毓賳 鬲丨賱賷賱 賵丕毓賷 賱賰賷賮賷丞 賳卮賵亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賮賷 亘賱丕丿賴賲貙 兀賵 賳賯囟 丨丕賱丞 丕賱丨丿丕孬丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲噩賱鬲 賲馗丕賴乇賴丕 賮賷 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賵匕賱賰 賱廿孬亘丕鬲 丕賱毓賵丿丞 廿賱賶 丕賱賲乇亘毓 丕賱兀賵賱 賵兀賳 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷丞 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲乇噩毓 賲噩丿丿丕 賱鬲禺賱賮 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞. 氐丿賯丕 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賳 賷毓氐賲賰賲 賲賳 兀爻卅賱鬲賰賲貙 亘賱 乇亘賲丕 賷賰賵賳 禺賷亘丞 兀賲賱. 廿賳 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賱賲 賷噩亘 毓賳賴 丕賱亘丕丨孬賵賳 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷賵賳 賴賵貙 賵亘賮乇囟 廿賲賰丕賳賷丞 乇噩賵毓 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷丞貙 賮賰賷賮 賷賲賰賳賴丕 兀賳 鬲鬲賲丕賷夭 毓賳 賲丕賴賷丕鬲 賵賲丐胤乇丕鬲 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞責 兀賷 兀賳賴丕 爻鬲毓賷丿 廿賳鬲丕噩 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賲乇丞 兀禺乇賶 賱賰賳 亘睾胤丕亍 廿爻賱丕賲賷 馗丕賴乇賷.
廿賳 丕賱賲卮乇賵毓 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷貙 亘丕毓鬲亘丕乇賴 氐賵乇丞 兀卮丿 賯亘丨丕 賵鬲胤乇賮丕 賲賳 丕賱丨丿丕孬丞貙 爻賷丿賷賳 亘丕賱賰孬賷乇 賱賱賲噩賲賵毓丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 鬲氐賱 賱廿噩丕亘丞 賴匕丕 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱賲爻鬲睾賱賯.
8- 賱賱賲賯賷賲賷賳 賮賷 賲氐乇貙 丕卮鬲乇賵丕 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賳 "丕賱卮亘賰丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 賱賱兀亘丨丕孬 賵丕賱賳卮乇" 賮賷 卮丕乇毓 毓亘丿 丕賱禺丕賱賯 孬乇賵鬲 亘賵爻胤 丕賱亘賱丿. 賮毓賱賷賴 禺氐賲 賴賳丕賰 賷氐賱 廿賱賶 40%貙 賵毓賱賶 賰賱 廿氐丿丕乇丕鬲 丕賱賲乇賰夭 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賱賱兀亘丨丕孬 賮賷 丕賱賵丕賯毓.
賱賲 鬲賰賳 氐毓賵亘丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賴賷 爻亘亘 鬲兀禺賷乇 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞. 乇亘賲丕 賱兀賳賳賷 鬲毓乇賮鬲 廿賱賶 賱毓亘丞 爻亘丕賯 丕賱爻賷丕乇丕鬲 "廿爻賮賱鬲 8"貙 賮卮睾賱賳賷 賴匕丕 毓賳賴貙 兀賵 賱兀賳 賰賱 賮賰乇丞 -乇睾賲 亘爻丕胤丞 毓乇囟賴丕- 鬲丨鬲丕噩 廿賱賶 賵賯鬲 胤賵賷賱 賱賴囟賲賴丕 賵丕爻鬲賷毓丕亘賴丕.
亘賱睾鬲 卮賴乇丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱丌賮丕賯貙 賵氐丕乇 賲賯乇乇丕 噩丕賲毓賷丕 賮賷 丕賱毓丿賷丿 賲賳 丕賱噩丕賲毓丕鬲 丨賵賱 丕賱毓丕賱賲貙 賱匕賱賰 兀賷 丨丿賷孬 丨賵賱 兀賴賲賷丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賳 鬲賰賵賳 賲賳丕爻亘丞.
兀卮賷乇 賮賯胤 廿賱賶 亘毓囟 丕賱賳賯丕胤 丕賱鬲賷 丕爻鬲賵賯賮鬲賳賷 兀孬賳丕亍 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞:
1- 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賷爻 賳馗乇賷丕 亘丕賱賲乇丞貙 兀賷 乇睾賲 兀賳賴 賷鬲亘賳賶 賲賮賴賵賲丕 噩丿賷丿丕 賱兀爻丕爻 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賵丕賳鬲卮丕乇賴丕貙 廿賱丕 兀賳 丕賱賲丐賱賮 丕鬲噩賴 亘兀睾賱亘 孬賯賱賴 廿賱賶 丨賯賱 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 賱廿亘乇丕夭 賳馗乇賷鬲賴 賵丿毓賲賴丕 亘兀賲孬賱丞 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 賵賵賯丕卅毓 賲丨丿丿丞.
2- 賵乇睾賲 丕賱丕賴鬲賲丕賲 亘丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺貙 廿賱丕 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 鬲噩丕賴賱 賲賳胤賯丞 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱兀賵爻胤 鬲賯乇賷亘丕. 兀賷 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賮鬲丨 賲噩丕賱丕 賵丕爻毓丕 賱賱亘丕丨孬賷賳 賰賷 賷禺鬲亘乇賵丕 賴匕賴 丕賱賳馗乇賷丞 毓賱賶 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓丕鬲 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賵禺丕氐丞 賲氐乇. 廿賳 丕賱丨丿賵丿 丕賱廿丿丕乇賷丞 賱賲氐乇 賮賷 兀囟賷賯 鬲賵爻毓丕鬲賴丕 賰丕賳鬲 鬲賯乇賷亘丕 賲孬賱 丕賱丨丿賵丿 丕賱丨丕賱賷丞貙 兀賷 兀賳賴 賱賵 鬲噩丕賴賱賳丕 賮鬲乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賵爻毓 丕賱賲氐乇賷 毓賱賶 丨爻丕亘 丕賱兀乇丕囟賷 丕賱賲噩丕賵乇丞貙 賮廿賳 賲毓馗賲 丕賱兀爻乇 丕賱賮乇毓賵賳賷丞 賰丕賳鬲 賱賴丕 爻賷胤乇丞 毓賱賶 爻賷賳丕亍 賵丕賱賵丕丨丕鬲 丕賱睾乇亘賷丞 賵丕賱賵噩賴 丕賱賯亘賱賷 賵丕賱亘丨乇賷.
廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱賯丿賷賲丞貙 丕賱鬲賷 賷毓丕丿 鬲卮賰賷賱賴丕 丨丕賱賷丕 亘賳丕亍 毓賱賶 兀賵賴丕賲 鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 賲鬲乇丕賰賲丞貙 鬲囟賷賮 兀賳賲賵匕噩丕 卮丿賷丿 丕賱噩丿丞 賵丕賱睾乇丕亘丞貙 賵丕爻鬲孬賳丕亍 卮丕匕丕 賱賯丕毓丿丞 "兀賳丿乇爻賳". 廿賳 丕鬲賰丕亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱賲氐乇賷丞 毓賱賶 鬲丕乇賷禺賴丕 -乇睾賲 丕賱丕賳賯胤丕毓 丕賱賲毓乇賮賷 毓賳賴丕- 賵丕賱賲丨丕賮馗丞 毓賱賶 亘毓囟 丕賱毓丕丿丕鬲 丕賱賮乇毓賵賳賷丞 丕賱賯丿賷賲丞 賵鬲賲賷夭 丕賱賱賴噩丞 丕賱賲氐乇賷丞 毓賳 亘賯賷丞 丕賱兀賱爻賳 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賷噩毓賱 丕賱亘丕丨孬 賮賷 賲丨賱 賲賯丕乇亘丞 賵賲賯丕乇賳丞 賱胤亘賷毓丞 賴匕賴 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賵乇亘賲丕 賷賮爻乇 爻亘亘 丕賱鬲囟禺賲 丕賱匕丕鬲賷 賮賷 賳賮爻賷丞 丕賱賲氐乇賷賷賳.
3- 兀卮丕乇 丕賱賲丐賱賮 廿賱賶 兀賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱卮毓亘賷丞 鬲禺鬲賱賮 毓賳 賳馗賷乇鬲賴丕 丕賱乇爻賲賷丞 丕賱賲賱賰賷丞貙 丨賷孬 賯乇賳鬲 賴匕賴 丕賱兀禺賷乇丞 賯賵賲賷鬲賴丕 亘丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞貙 賱賰賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 毓丕賲丞 爻乇 賳噩丕丨賴丕 賵丕爻鬲賳爻丕禺賴丕 賴賵 亘亘爻丕胤丞 兀賳賴丕 賲亘賳賷丞 毓賱賶 賳夭毓丕鬲 廿賷賲丕賳賷丞 賱丿賶 丕賱賮乇丿 亘囟乇賵乇丞 丕賱鬲囟丨賷丞 賵丨亘 丕賱噩賲丕毓丞 賵丕賱賵賱丕亍 賱賱賵胤賳. 賱賰賳 賲丕 賮丕鬲 丕賱賲丐賱賮 匕賰乇賴貙 兀賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 亘賳爻禺鬲賴丕 丕賱卮毓亘賷丞 鬲鬲賯丕胤毓 兀丨賷丕賳丕 賲毓 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞貙 亘賱 廿賳 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱賵爻胤賶 賵丕賱兀賯賱 賲賳 丕賱賲鬲賵爻胤丞 賲丕乇爻鬲 賳爻禺丕 賲賳 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 囟丿 丕賱兀賯賱賷丕鬲 亘丨噩丞 丕賱賵氐賵賱 廿賱賶 賳爻禺丞 "賳馗賷賮丞" 賵"禺丕賱賷丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲卮賵賴丕鬲" 賱賯賵賲賷鬲賴丕 丕賱禺丕氐丞.
廿賳 鬲丨賱賷賱 亘乇賳丕乇丿 卮賵 -乇睾賲 丕賮鬲賯丕乇賴 廿賱賶 兀賷 兀爻爻 賳馗乇賷丞- 丨賵賱 兀賳 丕賱賳馗丕賲 丕賱賮丕卮賷 丕賱廿賷胤丕賱賷 丕鬲賰兀 賮賷 爻賱胤丕賳賴 毓賱賶 胤賲賵丨 賵鬲胤乇賮丕鬲 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱卮毓亘賷丞貙 賴賵 丕賱兀賯乇亘 賮賷 賳馗乇賷 廿賱賶 丕賱氐丨丞. 廿賳 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 -賲孬賱賴丕 賲孬賱 亘賯賷丞 兀卮賰丕賱 丕賱廿賷賲丕賳 丕賱睾賷亘賷- 賷賲賰賳賴丕 兀賳 鬲賳賯賱亘 廿賱賶 禺胤乇 丨賯賷賯賷 毓賱賶 丕賱廿賳爻丕賳賷丞 亘賲賮賴賵賲賴丕 丕賱賵丕爻毓.
4- 賷購賮囟賱 賯乇丕亍丞 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲乇丞 兀禺乇賶貙 賲亘丕卮乇丞 兀賵 亘毓丿 賲丿丞 賲賳 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞 丕賱兀賵賱賶. 廿賳 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞 丕賱兀賵賱賶 鬲毓丿 亘賲孬丕亘丞 鬲氐賮丨貙 賱賰賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷丨鬲丕噩 賲賳 丕賱賯丕乇卅 丕賱禺亘賷乇 廿賱賶 丿乇丕爻丞 賲鬲兀賳賷丞 賵丕毓賷丞 賰賷 賷爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 賷乇賰夭 賵賷賱禺氐 賵賷毓賷丿 鬲丨乇賷乇 兀亘乇夭 賮賯乇丕鬲 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 丕賱鬲賷 鬲鬲賵賴 賵爻胤 丕賱鬲丨賱賷賱 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷 丕賱亘丕乇夭.
賵賱毓卮丕賯 丕賱賳爻禺 丕賱賳馗賷賮丞 賵丕賱賲丨丕賮馗丞 毓賱賶 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賳 丕賱兀丨亘丕乇 賵丕賱兀賵乇丕賯 丕賱賱丕氐賯丞. 賱賳 賷賰賵賳 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賱丕卅賲丕 賱匕賱賰. 氐丿賯丕貙 丕噩毓賱 賱賳賮爻賰 毓賱賶 丕賱兀賯賱 "賳賵鬲丞" 亘噩賵丕乇 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 賮兀賷 賯丕乇卅 爻賷丨鬲丕噩 廿賱賶 鬲丿賵賷賳 亘毓囟 賲賱丕丨馗丕鬲賴.
5- 賷購賳氐丨 亘賯乇丕亍丞 賲賯丿賲丞 "毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞" 亘毓丿 賯乇丕亍丞 賲鬲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵賱賷爻 賯亘賱賴. 廿賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 丕賱賵丕毓賷丞 鬲卮鬲亘賰 賲毓 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵鬲賮賳丿 亘毓囟 賲賱丕丨馗丕鬲賴 賵鬲毓賯亘 毓賱賷賴. 賵賴匕丕 賷噩毓賱 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 賲卮賵卮丞 賱賱賯丕乇卅 丕賱匕賷 賷鬲毓乇賮 毓賱賶 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賱賲乇丞 丕賱兀賵賱賶貙 亘丕賱廿囟丕賮丞 廿賱賶 兀賳賴 賷禺賱賯 鬲丨賷夭丕鬲 禺賱丕賱 丕賱賯乇丕亍丞. 賵賰丕賳 亘丕賱兀丨乇賶 兀賳 鬲賰賵賳 賴匕賴 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 鬲匕賷賷賱丕 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賮賷 丕賱賳賴丕賷丞.
亘丕賱賲賳丕爻亘丞貙 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 廿禺賮丕亍 兀賳 亘卮丕乇丞 賳賮爻賴 賯丿賲 丕賱賳爻禺丞 丕賱毓亘乇賷丞 賲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘貙 賵兀賳賴 賰賮賱爻胤賷賳賷 賷丨賲賱 丕賱噩賳爻賷丞 丕賱廿爻乇丕卅賷賱賷丞 賵賲賴鬲賲 亘丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賷丨賲賱 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賯囟賷丞 卮禺氐賷丞 亘丕賱賳爻亘丞 廿賱賷賴.
6- 賷乇賶 丕賱賲丐賱賮 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷爻丕乇賷 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱賱丕夭賲 賱賱賷亘乇丕賱賷賷賳貙 賵賱賷亘乇丕賱賷 兀賰孬乇 賲賳 丕賱賱丕夭賲 賱賱賷爻丕乇賷賷賳. 賱賰賳 兀賷 毓賷賳 賮丕丨氐丞 賲丨丕賷丿丞 爻鬲噩丿 兀賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷賲賷賱 廿賱賶 丕賱賷爻丕乇 兀賰孬乇. 賵賱丕 毓噩亘 兀賳 賰孬賷乇丕 賲賳 兀賳氐丕乇 丕賱賷爻丕乇 丕賱丿賷賲賯乇丕胤賷 賮賷 賲氐乇 賲賲賳 兀毓乇賮賴賲 賯乇兀賵丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 兀賵 丕丨鬲賮馗賵丕 亘賳爻禺丞 賲賳賴 毓賱賶 兀噩賴夭鬲賴賲 兀賵 賮賷 賲賰鬲亘丕鬲賴賲.
賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賷卮鬲亘賰 賲毓 丕賱賲賯賵賱丕鬲 丕賱賷爻丕乇賷丞 賲孬賱 兀賳 丕賱賲丕乇賰爻賷賷賳 賱賷爻賵丕 賯賵賲賷賷賳貙 賱賰賳賴 禺丕乇噩 賲賳 乇丨賲 丕賱賷爻丕乇 賵賲賳 賳賯丕卮丕鬲 匕丕鬲 丿賱丕賱丞 爻亘賯鬲 毓賱賷賴貙 賵丿乇噩賴丕 丕賱賲丐賱賮 賮賷 賲鬲賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱丕 賮賷 賴賵丕賲卮賴 賮賯胤.
7- 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷賵賳 丕賱匕賷賳 賷賯乇兀賵賳 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 亘毓賷賳 鬲亘丨孬 毓賳 鬲丨賱賷賱 賵丕毓賷 賱賰賷賮賷丞 賳卮賵亍 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賮賷 亘賱丕丿賴賲貙 兀賵 賳賯囟 丨丕賱丞 丕賱丨丿丕孬丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲噩賱鬲 賲馗丕賴乇賴丕 賮賷 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賵匕賱賰 賱廿孬亘丕鬲 丕賱毓賵丿丞 廿賱賶 丕賱賲乇亘毓 丕賱兀賵賱 賵兀賳 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷丞 賷賲賰賳 兀賳 鬲乇噩毓 賲噩丿丿丕 賱鬲禺賱賮 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞. 氐丿賯丕 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賱賳 賷毓氐賲賰賲 賲賳 兀爻卅賱鬲賰賲貙 亘賱 乇亘賲丕 賷賰賵賳 禺賷亘丞 兀賲賱. 廿賳 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱匕賷 賱賲 賷噩亘 毓賳賴 丕賱亘丕丨孬賵賳 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷賵賳 賴賵貙 賵亘賮乇囟 廿賲賰丕賳賷丞 乇噩賵毓 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷丞貙 賮賰賷賮 賷賲賰賳賴丕 兀賳 鬲鬲賲丕賷夭 毓賳 賲丕賴賷丕鬲 賵賲丐胤乇丕鬲 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞責 兀賷 兀賳賴丕 爻鬲毓賷丿 廿賳鬲丕噩 丕賱丿賵賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賲乇丞 兀禺乇賶 賱賰賳 亘睾胤丕亍 廿爻賱丕賲賷 馗丕賴乇賷.
廿賳 丕賱賲卮乇賵毓 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲賷貙 亘丕毓鬲亘丕乇賴 氐賵乇丞 兀卮丿 賯亘丨丕 賵鬲胤乇賮丕 賲賳 丕賱丨丿丕孬丞貙 爻賷丿賷賳 亘丕賱賰孬賷乇 賱賱賲噩賲賵毓丞 丕賱鬲賷 鬲爻鬲胤賷毓 兀賳 鬲氐賱 賱廿噩丕亘丞 賴匕丕 丕賱爻丐丕賱 丕賱賲爻鬲睾賱賯.
8- 賱賱賲賯賷賲賷賳 賮賷 賲氐乇貙 丕卮鬲乇賵丕 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲賳 "丕賱卮亘賰丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 賱賱兀亘丨丕孬 賵丕賱賳卮乇" 賮賷 卮丕乇毓 毓亘丿 丕賱禺丕賱賯 孬乇賵鬲 亘賵爻胤 丕賱亘賱丿. 賮毓賱賷賴 禺氐賲 賴賳丕賰 賷氐賱 廿賱賶 40%貙 賵毓賱賶 賰賱 廿氐丿丕乇丕鬲 丕賱賲乇賰夭 丕賱毓乇亘賷 賱賱兀亘丨丕孬 賮賷 丕賱賵丕賯毓.
August 29, 2017
丕賱賱睾丞 丕賱賲丨賱賷丞貙 鬲乇丕噩毓 丕賱丿賷賳貙 鬲乇丕噩毓 丕賱爻賱胤丞貙 丕賱丕爻鬲毓賲丕乇貙 丕賱賲氐賱丨丞貙 丕爻鬲禺丿丕賲賴丕 賰兀丿丕丞貙 賴匕賴 丕賱兀爻亘丕亘 丕賱鬲賷 賰丕賳鬲 賵乇丕亍 賳卮兀丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丕鬲貙 丕賱鬲賷 賷丿賱賱 賱賴丕 兀賳丿乇爻賳 賮賷 賰鬲丕亘賴 丕賱孬賯賷賱 賲囟賲賵賳賸丕 賯賱賷賱 丕賱氐賮丨丕鬲 賲賳 禺賱丕賱 鬲丨賱賷賱 兀賵囟丕毓 丿賵賱 卮乇賯 丌爻賷丕 賵兀賲乇賷賰丕 丕賱兀爻亘丕賳賷丞貙 賵兀賵乇賵亘丕 亘賰賱 鬲兀賰賷丿.
賷睾賷亘 毓賱賶 兀賳丿乇爻賳 鬲丨賱賷賱 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賵賱賲 賷兀鬲 毓賱賶 匕賰乇賴丕 廿賱丕 賮賷 丕賯鬲亘丕爻 兀賳賯賱賴 毓賳賴:"賵賰丕賳 賲賵丕乇賳丞 賵兀賯亘丕胤 鬲禺乇噩 賰孬賷乇 賲賳賴賲 賮賷 丕賱噩丕賲毓丞 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丞 賮賷 亘賷乇賵鬲 賵噩丕賲毓丞 丕賱賯丿賷爻 賷賵爻賮 丕賱賷爻賵毓賷丞 兀賰亘乇 丕賱賲爻丕賴賲賷賳 賮賷 廿丨賷丕亍 丕賱賮氐丨賶 賵丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞"貙 賵賴匕丕 丕賱丕賯鬲亘丕爻 賷賵囟丨 賲卮賰賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 賮賷 賮賴賲賴丕 賵賯鬲 賳卮兀鬲賴丕 賰賮賰乇丞 賲賯丕亘賱丞 賱賱丿賷賳 賵丕賱賲賳賮匕 丕賱賵丨賷丿 賱賱鬲賵丨丿 禺丕乇噩 廿胤丕乇 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 賰賵賳 兀睾賱亘 賲賳馗乇賷賴丕 賲賳 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷賷賳 丕賱毓乇亘貙 孬賲 亘丿亍 丕賱丨乇亘 賵丕賱丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲 亘賷賳 丕賱胤乇賮賷賳貙 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱匕賷 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 鬲氐賵乇 丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱賱睾丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 丿賵賳 丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 賵丕賱毓賰爻 氐丨賷丨貙 亘毓賷丿賸丕 毓賳 賰賵賳賴 丿賷賳賸丕 賲賯丿爻賸丕貙 賵兀賯乇亘 廿賱賶 氐賷丕睾鬲賴 賱孬賯丕賮丞 噩賲丕毓賷丞 賵 賵毓賷 賲卮鬲乇锟斤拷.
鬲賵賯賮鬲 毓賳 賯乇丕亍丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 亘卮賰賱 賲乇賰夭 賮賷 賲賳鬲氐賮賴貙 亘爻亘亘 丕賱賲賱賱 丕賱乇賴賷亘 丕賱匕賷 兀氐丕亘賳賷 賲賳匕 亘丿丕賷鬲賴 賵賱賲 兀賰賳 賱兀賰賱賲賴 賱賵賱丕 兀賳賳賷 兀禺丕賮 兀賳 兀賰賵賳 丕賱睾亘賷丞 丕賱賵丨賷丿丞 賵賯丿 兀噩賲毓 賰孬賷乇賵賳 兀賳賴 賰鬲丕亘 乇賴賷亘貙 賮賰賷賮 鬲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱兀賲丞 毓賱賶 囟賱丕賱丞貙 賵丕賱爻亘亘 丕賱孬丕賳賷 賴賵 賲賯丿賲丞 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 丕賱賵丕賮賷丞 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賵丕賱毓丕乇囟丞 賱賮賰乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賵丕賱兀賲丞 賮賷 賳馗乇鬲賴 丕賱丨丿賷孬丞 賱賴丕貙 賱匕丕 賷賲賰賳賰賲 丕賱丕賰鬲賮丕亍 亘賯乇丕亍丞 賲乇丕噩毓丕鬲 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 兀賵賲卮丕賴丿丞 賲賱禺氐丕鬲 賷賵鬲賷賵亘賷丞 毓賳賴.
賷睾賷亘 毓賱賶 兀賳丿乇爻賳 鬲丨賱賷賱 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞貙 賵賱賲 賷兀鬲 毓賱賶 匕賰乇賴丕 廿賱丕 賮賷 丕賯鬲亘丕爻 兀賳賯賱賴 毓賳賴:"賵賰丕賳 賲賵丕乇賳丞 賵兀賯亘丕胤 鬲禺乇噩 賰孬賷乇 賲賳賴賲 賮賷 丕賱噩丕賲毓丞 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丞 賮賷 亘賷乇賵鬲 賵噩丕賲毓丞 丕賱賯丿賷爻 賷賵爻賮 丕賱賷爻賵毓賷丞 兀賰亘乇 丕賱賲爻丕賴賲賷賳 賮賷 廿丨賷丕亍 丕賱賮氐丨賶 賵丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞"貙 賵賴匕丕 丕賱丕賯鬲亘丕爻 賷賵囟丨 賲卮賰賱丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 賮賷 賮賴賲賴丕 賵賯鬲 賳卮兀鬲賴丕 賰賮賰乇丞 賲賯丕亘賱丞 賱賱丿賷賳 賵丕賱賲賳賮匕 丕賱賵丨賷丿 賱賱鬲賵丨丿 禺丕乇噩 廿胤丕乇 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 賰賵賳 兀睾賱亘 賲賳馗乇賷賴丕 賲賳 丕賱賲爻賷丨賷賷賳 丕賱毓乇亘貙 孬賲 亘丿亍 丕賱丨乇亘 賵丕賱丕鬲賴丕賲丕鬲 亘賷賳 丕賱胤乇賮賷賳貙 賮賷 丕賱賵賯鬲 丕賱匕賷 賱丕 賷賲賰賳 鬲氐賵乇 丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱賱睾丞 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 丿賵賳 丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱廿爻賱丕賲 賵丕賱毓賰爻 氐丨賷丨貙 亘毓賷丿賸丕 毓賳 賰賵賳賴 丿賷賳賸丕 賲賯丿爻賸丕貙 賵兀賯乇亘 廿賱賶 氐賷丕睾鬲賴 賱孬賯丕賮丞 噩賲丕毓賷丞 賵 賵毓賷 賲卮鬲乇锟斤拷.
鬲賵賯賮鬲 毓賳 賯乇丕亍丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 亘卮賰賱 賲乇賰夭 賮賷 賲賳鬲氐賮賴貙 亘爻亘亘 丕賱賲賱賱 丕賱乇賴賷亘 丕賱匕賷 兀氐丕亘賳賷 賲賳匕 亘丿丕賷鬲賴 賵賱賲 兀賰賳 賱兀賰賱賲賴 賱賵賱丕 兀賳賳賷 兀禺丕賮 兀賳 兀賰賵賳 丕賱睾亘賷丞 丕賱賵丨賷丿丞 賵賯丿 兀噩賲毓 賰孬賷乇賵賳 兀賳賴 賰鬲丕亘 乇賴賷亘貙 賮賰賷賮 鬲噩鬲賲毓 丕賱兀賲丞 毓賱賶 囟賱丕賱丞貙 賵丕賱爻亘亘 丕賱孬丕賳賷 賴賵 賲賯丿賲丞 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 丕賱賵丕賮賷丞 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 賵丕賱毓丕乇囟丞 賱賮賰乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賵丕賱兀賲丞 賮賷 賳馗乇鬲賴 丕賱丨丿賷孬丞 賱賴丕貙 賱匕丕 賷賲賰賳賰賲 丕賱丕賰鬲賮丕亍 亘賯乇丕亍丞 賲乇丕噩毓丕鬲 賱賱賰鬲丕亘 兀賵賲卮丕賴丿丞 賲賱禺氐丕鬲 賷賵鬲賷賵亘賷丞 毓賳賴.
March 25, 2022
Imagined Communities is (was) a seminal work on nationalism that people love to reference. Its core argument revolves around how nationalism is a product of a certain political economy of mass consciousness that utilises myths and collectively held memories that charismatic figures then mobilise to draw imaginary boundaries between groups of people. This project is not possible without the existence of an economic order and relations that allow for the mass production and distribution of information; Anderson calls this 鈥榩rint capitalism鈥�. It was this material base along with the colonial project that the idea of nationhood could arise.
A strength of the book lies in its attention to the formation of nationalism in former colonies. These states do not share the same cultural history as Europe yet still developed nationalistic identities. This is because nationalism is not a product of history, but of politics. Nationalism is actively composed through the mobilisation of cultural cues, myths and traumas latent in the people鈥檚 minds. A contemporary example could here be the Hindu-nationalism in India; India is a land that offers an abundance of history and cultures to draw on and conjure a narrative that ultimately serves to justify violent acts against those excluded by it (here, the Muslim population).
A strength of the book lies in its attention to the formation of nationalism in former colonies. These states do not share the same cultural history as Europe yet still developed nationalistic identities. This is because nationalism is not a product of history, but of politics. Nationalism is actively composed through the mobilisation of cultural cues, myths and traumas latent in the people鈥檚 minds. A contemporary example could here be the Hindu-nationalism in India; India is a land that offers an abundance of history and cultures to draw on and conjure a narrative that ultimately serves to justify violent acts against those excluded by it (here, the Muslim population).
July 13, 2008
Asserted as a Marxist text, Anderson attempts to revise readings of the development of nationalism in attempt to sort out the possibilities its offers for a Marxist agenda. Most importantly, Anderson defines the nation as 1) sovereign, 2) limited, and 3) fraternal. He sees the nation as a structural form of collective imagination that works to cohere through the rise of print capitalism (specifically mass-marketed news media and novels, but one could easily add photography to this list) and the institutionalization of what he calls 鈥渃alendrical time.鈥� Through these structural rituals, the nation becomes the primary tool of modernity through which the subject is able to mediate his/her relationship to his/her own finitude.
Obviously this is a seminal text for anyone interested in nationalism. Anderson's argument regarding the connection between print culture and modern national identity made way for so much current scholarship on the topic, and he is easily the most oft-cited critic regarding nationalism studies. However, the most interesting part of Anderson鈥檚 argument for me isn鈥檛 necessarily his discussion of the print capitalism, which is often read as a chronological catalyst for the development of nationalism (almost like a weird sort of telos). It鈥檚 too easy, I think, to read Anderson鈥檚 proposed history exactly within the temporal linearity he critiques (but ultimately advocates), which is why I think this aspect of his argument often gets overlooked, both in the classroom and in scholarly use of the book. It seems to me that the arbitrariness of calendrical time, as a kind of cultural logic that develops in tandem with the culture of print capitalism, is exactly what makes it so manipulatable for Anderson, and thus is where he is able to locate the promise of nationalism.
Obviously this is a seminal text for anyone interested in nationalism. Anderson's argument regarding the connection between print culture and modern national identity made way for so much current scholarship on the topic, and he is easily the most oft-cited critic regarding nationalism studies. However, the most interesting part of Anderson鈥檚 argument for me isn鈥檛 necessarily his discussion of the print capitalism, which is often read as a chronological catalyst for the development of nationalism (almost like a weird sort of telos). It鈥檚 too easy, I think, to read Anderson鈥檚 proposed history exactly within the temporal linearity he critiques (but ultimately advocates), which is why I think this aspect of his argument often gets overlooked, both in the classroom and in scholarly use of the book. It seems to me that the arbitrariness of calendrical time, as a kind of cultural logic that develops in tandem with the culture of print capitalism, is exactly what makes it so manipulatable for Anderson, and thus is where he is able to locate the promise of nationalism.
May 1, 2022
On December 13, 2015, Indonesia expert and history scholar Benedict Anderson passed away in Malang (Indonesia). Many obituaries in his honor have appeared in traditional press and online media. When I read his life story, I was very impressed by his study of Indonesia (esp. regarding the 1965 incident, which led to him being banned from entering Indonesia for over 20 years) and his abilities to speak so many languages! His best-known work is 鈥淚magined Communities,鈥� where he discusses the origins of nationalism and how they were shaped differently in the New World, Old World and Third World. For an academic book, his language was surprisingly very easy to understand (not dry!) and sometimes even humorous. For this review, I decided to add my notes for each of the eleven chapters:
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Cultural Roots
My favorite chapter! Written beautifully. Anderson traces the origins of nationalism to three important cultural phenomena; religious community (& the language/script of the Truth), dynastic realm and the apprehension of time (most of which deals with death and to a certain extent makes an individual question his existence).
Chapter 3: The Origins of National Consciousness
This chapter highlights the importance of "print-capitalism" in forming imagined communities. Simultaneously many vernacular dialects were wiped out by the introduction of print-capitalism.
Chapter 4: Creole Pioneers
A very interesting observation by Anderson, that nationalism began in the New World instead of the Old World! The Europeans born and raised in America ("Creoles") felt a deep connection with the land and due to the arduous travelling conditions back then, many have never even been to Europe. At the same time, creoles were looked down upon by the Europeans, which only reinforced their "us vs them" consciousness. Parallel to Europe, they wanted their own country.
Chapter 5: Old Languages, New Models
This chapter focuses on the Old World vernacular languages that started to shape nations. When people think about history, it is very difficult to pinpoint the beginning, thus language provides an infinite continuity to the starting point, which can never be traced back. I also enjoyed Anderson's descriptions of how various European aristocrats used to speak different languages compared to the lower-class population (e.g. Dutch aristocrats spoke French, Russian czars spoke German).
Chapter 6: Official Nationalism and Imperialism
Chapter 7: The Last Wave
Mainly about linguistic conformity to enforce the imagined community, but Anderson also uses the example of Switzerland to highlight a different type of nation-building.
Chapter 8: Patriotism & Racism
Anderson makes a distinction between patriotism and pure racism, also talks about how strangers are able to become a national of a nation (due to sentiments), but which may lead to varying degrees of racism.
Chapter 9: The Angel of History
Short chapter on the Vietnam-Cambodia-China war and Marxism and how nationalism fits or doesn't fit in.
Chapter 10: Census, Map, Museum
Very interesting chapter on three specific institutions that are used to enforce the imagined communities upon the masses through classification and control. Census is a systematic quantification of the population to proclaim the state domain. Maps visually depict the imagined communities, as well as to classify the border of colonial property. I very much appreciate Anderson's example of West Papua, that is culturally significantly different from the "Malay/Javanese" side of the nation. However, due to the maps and the Dutch imperial concept of the East Indies, Indonesian nationalists are adamant that West Papua belongs to Indonesia. Finally, the museums established the official narratives and also includes the commercialization aspects.
Chapter 11: Memory & Forgetting
Change also brings about some elements of amnesia, which results in a certain "narrative." I'm always interested to understand how these narratives came to be, which essentially means which memories were retained.
Finally, while reading this book, I kept wondering how today's technology and social media have formed even more peculiar imagined communities. Are we now living in two realities?
Rest in Peace Pak Benedict Anderson.
July 21, 2021
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
March 8, 2017
亘丿兀鬲 賮賷 賯乇丕亍丞 賴匕丕 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賵賮賷 匕賴賳賷 兀賳賴 賷亘丨孬 賮賷 爻丐丕賱 賰賷賮 賷鬲賲 鬲禺賷賱 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓丕鬲貙 兀賷 兀賳賴 亘丨孬 賮賷 丕賱氐賵乇丞 丕賱賳賲胤賷丞 賱賱卮毓賵亘 賰賲丕 丿乇爻賴丕 廿丿賵丕乇丿
爻毓賷丿 賵丕賳胤賵賳賷 賲賵乇賷爻賵賳 賵賮乇丕賳夭 賮丕賳賵賳 兀賵 鬲爻乇賷 賴賳丕亍 賮賷 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱 丕賵 賲丨賲丿 兀賮丕賷丞 賮賷 丕賱睾乇亘 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱.
廿賱丕 丕賳賳賷 鬲賮丕噩兀鬲 賵賷丕 賱噩賲丕賱 丕賱賲賮丕噩兀丞 兀賳賴 亘丨孬 賮賷 賳卮兀丞 賮賰乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賵賱丕 卮賰 兀賳 丕賱氐賵乇丞 丕賱賳賲胤賷丞 賲亘丨孬 賲賴賲 賮賷 賮賰乇丞 賳卮丕丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賱兀賳 丕賱氐賵乇 丕賱賳賲胤賷丞 賱丕 鬲賯賵賲 毓賱賶 鬲氐賵賷乇 丕賱丌禺乇 丕賱賲禺鬲賱賮貙 亘賱 鬲賯賵賲 丨鬲賶 毓賱賶 鬲氐賵賷乇 丕賱匕丕鬲 兀賷囟丕
賮賰乇丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱乇卅賷爻賷丞 賴賷 兀賳 賴賳丕賰 乇賵丕亘胤 賲鬲禺賷賱丞 (賵賱賷爻鬲 禺賷丕賱賷丞) 鬲乇亘胤 亘賷賳 兀賮乇丕丿賴丕 鬲丐丿賷 亘丿賵乇賴丕 廿賱賶 賳卮兀丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 兀賵 丕賱兀賲丞 兀賵 丕賱賵胤賳賷丞 兀賵 睾賷乇賴丕 賲賳 丕賱賲氐胤賱丨丕鬲 丕賱廿卮賰丕賱賷丞
鬲氐丿乇鬲 丕賱胤亘毓丞 賲賯丿賲丞 囟丕賮賷丞 毓賲賷賯丞 賱賱丿賰鬲賵乇 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 鬲噩丕賵夭鬲 丕賱孬賱丕孬賷賳 氐賮丨丞 賲賱禺氐丕 兀賴賲 賲丕 噩丕亍 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲毓 亘毓囟 丕賱賲賱丨賵馗丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 乇氐丿賴丕
賴賳丕 亘毓囟 丕賱賲禺鬲丕乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丕賳鬲賯賷鬲賴丕 賲賳 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 睾丕賱亘丕 賵賲賳 賮氐賱 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 賵丕賱賵胤賳賷丞
* 丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞 鬲賳丨爻乇 亘丕賳丨爻丕乇 乇賵丕亘胤賴丕
* 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 鬲賯賵賲 毓賱賶 賲丨丿丿丕鬲 賱睾賵賷丞貙 兀賷丿賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 (丿賷賳賷丞貙 爻賷丕爻賷丞貙 丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞) 丕賱丿賷賳貙 丕賱賯亘賷賱丞
* 賲賳 丕賴賲 丕賱賲賮賰乇賷賳 賮賷 賳馗乇賷丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 丕賱亘乇賷胤丕賳賷 賴賷賵爻鬲賵賳 賵丕胤爻賵賳貙 賳賵賲 賳丕賷乇賵賳 賲丐賱賮 賰鬲丕亘 鬲賮賰賰 亘乇賷胤丕賳賷丕)
* 丕賱兀賲丞 噩賲丕毓丞 爻賷丕爻賷丞 賲鬲禺賷賱丞 匕丕鬲 丨丿賵丿 賵爻賷丕丿丞
* 丕賳鬲賲丕亍 丕賱賮乇丿 賷毓鬲亘乇 賲賰賵賳 兀爻丕爻賷 賮賷 卮禺氐賷鬲賴
* 丕賱丕賳鬲賲丕亍 賷賯賵賲 毓賱賶 丕賱賲丨亘丞 賱丕 丕賱賲氐賱丨丞
* 賮賰乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賷賲賰賳 丕爻鬲禺丿丕賲賴丕 賱賱鬲噩賷賷卮 賵丕賱丨卮丿
* 賱丕 賷囟丨賷 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳 賲賳 丕噩賱 鬲毓丕賯丿 亘賱 賲賳 丕噩賱 丕賳鬲賲丕亍)
* 丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞 賱賷爻鬲 禺賷丕賱賷丞貙 賴賵 鬲禺賷賱 乇丕亘胤 賷乇亘胤 亘賷賳賷 賵亘賷賳 睾賷乇賷 賲賲賳 丕賳鬲賲賷 賱賴賲
* 丕賱丿賷賳 毓賳賷 亘丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賳 兀爻卅賱丞 丕賱賲毓賳賶 賮賷 丨賷賳 賮卮賱鬲 丕賱兀賷丿賷賵賱噩賷丕鬲 丕賱賵囟毓賷丞 賮賷 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賱賷丕
* 鈥溫з勝傎堎呝娯� 賳卮兀鬲 賲毓 丕賱毓賱賲賳丞 賵丕賳丨爻丕乇 毓賲賱賷丞 丕賱鬲丿賷賳鈥� 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞
* 丕賱卮乇賵胤 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 兀賳卮丕鬲 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賴賷 佟-丕賳丨爻丕乇 丕賱賱睾丞貙 佗-丕賱丿賷賳 貙 伲- 鬲睾賷乇 賲賮賴賵賲 丕賱夭賲賳 賵兀囟丕賮 廿賱賷賴 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 鬲賮賰賰 丕賱噩賲丕毓丞 丕賱賲丨賱賷丞 賲孬賱 丕賱賯亘賷賱丞 賵兀賴賱 丕賱賯乇賷丞
* 鈥溬堎勝� 賷賰賳 賲賲賰賳丕 鬲禺賷賱 丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱廿氐賱丕丨 丕賱丿賷賳賷 賲賳 丿賵賳 丕賱胤亘丕毓丞鈥� 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 賷鬲丨丿孬 毓賳 丨乇賰丞 賲丕乇鬲賳 賱賵孬乇 賰賳噩 丕賱廿氐賱丕丨賷丞
* 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 亘丕賱賲賯丿爻 噩毓賱 丕賱賳丕爻 賷鬲禺賷賱賵賳 鬲丿賷賳 賰賱 賲鬲丨丿孬 亘丕賱毓乇亘賷丞
* 鬲賲鬲 兀賲乇賰丞 丕賱賰乇爻賲丕爻 賵乇兀爻 丕賱爻賳丞. 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞
* 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 鬲賯賵賲 毓賱賶 廿卮乇丕賰 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱丿賳賷丕 賵賱匕丕 孬丕乇 毓賱賷賴丕 賲賱丕賰 丕賱毓亘賷丿 賮賷 兀賲乇賷賰丕
* 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱兀賴賱賷丞 賮賷 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賱賲 鬲賰賳 丿丕禺賱 丕賱兀賲丞 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丞 賱匕丕 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 賷鬲丨賮馗 毓賱賶 鬲爻賲賷鬲賴丕 兀賴賱賷丞
* 賰丕賳 丕爻賲 丕賱賮賱亘賷賳 丕賱兀乇禺亘賷賱 賵賱賰賳 賲賱賰 兀爻亘丕賳賷丕 賮賷賱賷亘 丕賱孬丕賳賷 睾賷乇賴丕
* 鬲氐賳賷賮 丕賱賳丕爻 亘賲賵噩亘 兀毓乇丕賯賴賲 噩丕亍鬲 賲賳 賯亘賱 丕賱賲爻鬲毓賲乇
* 鈥溫з勝呝嗁囏� 賲賳 丿賵賳 賯賷賲 賵噩賲丕毓丞 鬲丐賲賳 亘賴匕賴 丕賱賯賷賲 賵賷賳鬲賲賷 廿賱賷賴丕 丕賱賳丕爻 賱丕 賷氐賱丨 賱鬲兀爻賷爻 丨乇賰丞 鬲爻毓賶 賱鬲丨爻賷賳 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 賳丕賴賷賰 毓賳 丕賱爻毓賷 賱毓丕賱賲 兀賮囟賱鈥� 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞
* 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 鬲賮賰乇 亘賱睾丞 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 (丕賱鬲睾賷賷乇) 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 鬲賮賰乇 亘賱睾丞 丕賱胤亘賷毓丞 (丕賱孬亘丕鬲)
* 鈥溬勝傌� 亘丿兀鬲 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲爻賵賷睾 丕賱胤亘賷毓賷 丕賱賳馗乇賷 兀賵 丕賱毓賱賲賷 賱賱爻賱丕賱丕鬲 丕賱丨丕賰賲丞 賵丕賱毓丕卅賱丕鬲 丕賱丕爻鬲賯乇丕胤賷丞 賵丕賳鬲賯賱鬲 廿賱賶 鬲亘乇賷乇 胤亘賷毓賷 毓賱賲賷 賱鬲賮賵賯 丕賱爻賱丕賱丕鬲 丕賱毓乇賯賷丞 賵丕賱廿孬賳賷丞 賵丕賱賱睾賵賷丞鈥�
* 鈥溬呚� 賲賳 卮賷亍 賷乇亘胤賳丕 亘丕賱賲賵鬲賶 毓丕胤賮賷丕 賲孬賱 丕賱賱睾丞鈥� 兀賳丿乇爻賳 亘賳丿賰賳鬲
爻毓賷丿 賵丕賳胤賵賳賷 賲賵乇賷爻賵賳 賵賮乇丕賳夭 賮丕賳賵賳 兀賵 鬲爻乇賷 賴賳丕亍 賮賷 丕賱卮乇賯 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱 丕賵 賲丨賲丿 兀賮丕賷丞 賮賷 丕賱睾乇亘 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱.
廿賱丕 丕賳賳賷 鬲賮丕噩兀鬲 賵賷丕 賱噩賲丕賱 丕賱賲賮丕噩兀丞 兀賳賴 亘丨孬 賮賷 賳卮兀丞 賮賰乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賵賱丕 卮賰 兀賳 丕賱氐賵乇丞 丕賱賳賲胤賷丞 賲亘丨孬 賲賴賲 賮賷 賮賰乇丞 賳卮丕丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 賱兀賳 丕賱氐賵乇 丕賱賳賲胤賷丞 賱丕 鬲賯賵賲 毓賱賶 鬲氐賵賷乇 丕賱丌禺乇 丕賱賲禺鬲賱賮貙 亘賱 鬲賯賵賲 丨鬲賶 毓賱賶 鬲氐賵賷乇 丕賱匕丕鬲 兀賷囟丕
賮賰乇丞 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 丕賱乇卅賷爻賷丞 賴賷 兀賳 賴賳丕賰 乇賵丕亘胤 賲鬲禺賷賱丞 (賵賱賷爻鬲 禺賷丕賱賷丞) 鬲乇亘胤 亘賷賳 兀賮乇丕丿賴丕 鬲丐丿賷 亘丿賵乇賴丕 廿賱賶 賳卮兀丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 兀賵 丕賱兀賲丞 兀賵 丕賱賵胤賳賷丞 兀賵 睾賷乇賴丕 賲賳 丕賱賲氐胤賱丨丕鬲 丕賱廿卮賰丕賱賷丞
鬲氐丿乇鬲 丕賱胤亘毓丞 賲賯丿賲丞 囟丕賮賷丞 毓賲賷賯丞 賱賱丿賰鬲賵乇 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 鬲噩丕賵夭鬲 丕賱孬賱丕孬賷賳 氐賮丨丞 賲賱禺氐丕 兀賴賲 賲丕 噩丕亍 賮賷 丕賱賰鬲丕亘 賲毓 亘毓囟 丕賱賲賱丨賵馗丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 乇氐丿賴丕
賴賳丕 亘毓囟 丕賱賲禺鬲丕乇丕鬲 丕賱鬲賷 丕賳鬲賯賷鬲賴丕 賲賳 丕賱賲賯丿賲丞 睾丕賱亘丕 賵賲賳 賮氐賱 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 賵丕賱賵胤賳賷丞
* 丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞 鬲賳丨爻乇 亘丕賳丨爻丕乇 乇賵丕亘胤賴丕
* 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 鬲賯賵賲 毓賱賶 賲丨丿丿丕鬲 賱睾賵賷丞貙 兀賷丿賷賵賱賵噩賷丞 (丿賷賳賷丞貙 爻賷丕爻賷丞貙 丕賯鬲氐丕丿賷丞) 丕賱丿賷賳貙 丕賱賯亘賷賱丞
* 賲賳 丕賴賲 丕賱賲賮賰乇賷賳 賮賷 賳馗乇賷丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞貙 丕賱亘乇賷胤丕賳賷 賴賷賵爻鬲賵賳 賵丕胤爻賵賳貙 賳賵賲 賳丕賷乇賵賳 賲丐賱賮 賰鬲丕亘 鬲賮賰賰 亘乇賷胤丕賳賷丕)
* 丕賱兀賲丞 噩賲丕毓丞 爻賷丕爻賷丞 賲鬲禺賷賱丞 匕丕鬲 丨丿賵丿 賵爻賷丕丿丞
* 丕賳鬲賲丕亍 丕賱賮乇丿 賷毓鬲亘乇 賲賰賵賳 兀爻丕爻賷 賮賷 卮禺氐賷鬲賴
* 丕賱丕賳鬲賲丕亍 賷賯賵賲 毓賱賶 丕賱賲丨亘丞 賱丕 丕賱賲氐賱丨丞
* 賮賰乇丞 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賷賲賰賳 丕爻鬲禺丿丕賲賴丕 賱賱鬲噩賷賷卮 賵丕賱丨卮丿
* 賱丕 賷囟丨賷 丕賱丕賳爻丕賳 賲賳 丕噩賱 鬲毓丕賯丿 亘賱 賲賳 丕噩賱 丕賳鬲賲丕亍)
* 丕賱噩賲丕毓丕鬲 丕賱賲鬲禺賷賱丞 賱賷爻鬲 禺賷丕賱賷丞貙 賴賵 鬲禺賷賱 乇丕亘胤 賷乇亘胤 亘賷賳賷 賵亘賷賳 睾賷乇賷 賲賲賳 丕賳鬲賲賷 賱賴賲
* 丕賱丿賷賳 毓賳賷 亘丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賳 兀爻卅賱丞 丕賱賲毓賳賶 賮賷 丨賷賳 賮卮賱鬲 丕賱兀賷丿賷賵賱噩賷丕鬲 丕賱賵囟毓賷丞 賮賷 丕賱廿噩丕亘丞 毓賱賷丕
* 鈥溫з勝傎堎呝娯� 賳卮兀鬲 賲毓 丕賱毓賱賲賳丞 賵丕賳丨爻丕乇 毓賲賱賷丞 丕賱鬲丿賷賳鈥� 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞
* 丕賱卮乇賵胤 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺賷丞 丕賱鬲賷 兀賳卮丕鬲 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 賴賷 佟-丕賳丨爻丕乇 丕賱賱睾丞貙 佗-丕賱丿賷賳 貙 伲- 鬲睾賷乇 賲賮賴賵賲 丕賱夭賲賳 賵兀囟丕賮 廿賱賷賴 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 鬲賮賰賰 丕賱噩賲丕毓丞 丕賱賲丨賱賷丞 賲孬賱 丕賱賯亘賷賱丞 賵兀賴賱 丕賱賯乇賷丞
* 鈥溬堎勝� 賷賰賳 賲賲賰賳丕 鬲禺賷賱 丕賳鬲卮丕乇 丕賱廿氐賱丕丨 丕賱丿賷賳賷 賲賳 丿賵賳 丕賱胤亘丕毓丞鈥� 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 賷鬲丨丿孬 毓賳 丨乇賰丞 賲丕乇鬲賳 賱賵孬乇 賰賳噩 丕賱廿氐賱丕丨賷丞
* 丕乇鬲亘丕胤 丕賱毓乇亘賷丞 亘丕賱賲賯丿爻 噩毓賱 丕賱賳丕爻 賷鬲禺賷賱賵賳 鬲丿賷賳 賰賱 賲鬲丨丿孬 亘丕賱毓乇亘賷丞
* 鬲賲鬲 兀賲乇賰丞 丕賱賰乇爻賲丕爻 賵乇兀爻 丕賱爻賳丞. 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞
* 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 鬲賯賵賲 毓賱賶 廿卮乇丕賰 丕賱胤亘賯丕鬲 丕賱丿賳賷丕 賵賱匕丕 孬丕乇 毓賱賷賴丕 賲賱丕賰 丕賱毓亘賷丿 賮賷 兀賲乇賷賰丕
* 丕賱丨乇亘 丕賱兀賴賱賷丞 賮賷 兀賲乇賷賰丕 賱賲 鬲賰賳 丿丕禺賱 丕賱兀賲丞 丕賱兀賲乇賷賰賷丞 賱匕丕 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞 賷鬲丨賮馗 毓賱賶 鬲爻賲賷鬲賴丕 兀賴賱賷丞
* 賰丕賳 丕爻賲 丕賱賮賱亘賷賳 丕賱兀乇禺亘賷賱 賵賱賰賳 賲賱賰 兀爻亘丕賳賷丕 賮賷賱賷亘 丕賱孬丕賳賷 睾賷乇賴丕
* 鬲氐賳賷賮 丕賱賳丕爻 亘賲賵噩亘 兀毓乇丕賯賴賲 噩丕亍鬲 賲賳 賯亘賱 丕賱賲爻鬲毓賲乇
* 鈥溫з勝呝嗁囏� 賲賳 丿賵賳 賯賷賲 賵噩賲丕毓丞 鬲丐賲賳 亘賴匕賴 丕賱賯賷賲 賵賷賳鬲賲賷 廿賱賷賴丕 丕賱賳丕爻 賱丕 賷氐賱丨 賱鬲兀爻賷爻 丨乇賰丞 鬲爻毓賶 賱鬲丨爻賷賳 丕賱賲噩鬲賲毓 賳丕賴賷賰 毓賳 丕賱爻毓賷 賱毓丕賱賲 兀賮囟賱鈥� 毓夭賲賷 亘卮丕乇丞
* 丕賱賯賵賲賷丞 鬲賮賰乇 亘賱睾丞 丕賱鬲丕乇賷禺 (丕賱鬲睾賷賷乇) 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 鬲賮賰乇 亘賱睾丞 丕賱胤亘賷毓丞 (丕賱孬亘丕鬲)
* 鈥溬勝傌� 亘丿兀鬲 丕賱毓賳氐乇賷丞 賲賳 丕賱鬲爻賵賷睾 丕賱胤亘賷毓賷 丕賱賳馗乇賷 兀賵 丕賱毓賱賲賷 賱賱爻賱丕賱丕鬲 丕賱丨丕賰賲丞 賵丕賱毓丕卅賱丕鬲 丕賱丕爻鬲賯乇丕胤賷丞 賵丕賳鬲賯賱鬲 廿賱賶 鬲亘乇賷乇 胤亘賷毓賷 毓賱賲賷 賱鬲賮賵賯 丕賱爻賱丕賱丕鬲 丕賱毓乇賯賷丞 賵丕賱廿孬賳賷丞 賵丕賱賱睾賵賷丞鈥�
* 鈥溬呚� 賲賳 卮賷亍 賷乇亘胤賳丕 亘丕賱賲賵鬲賶 毓丕胤賮賷丕 賲孬賱 丕賱賱睾丞鈥� 兀賳丿乇爻賳 亘賳丿賰賳鬲
April 21, 2024
An interesting account of how nationalism begins, though Andersen offers little insight into how nationalism perpetuates itself. Anderson writes in the introduction that he wishes to understand why "people are ready to die for these inventions"; the nation, that is.
If you're looking for an answer, Imagined Communities disappoints. It's an excellent overview of the way that the idea of the nation spreads and entrenches itself among men who go on to be national elites but it says nothing about ordinary people. Elite nationalists are one thing. But what's in it for a working stuff?
I think Ernest Gellner's book Nations and Nationalism is a better place to start because it tries to answer that question, arguably the most intractable for the left in the 20th Century.
Finally, Imagined Communities has suffered the fate of so many other path breaking books: its main points have been so diffused through the culture that everything Anderson claims seemed so obvious that I wondered why he even bothered to write it. I actually read somewhere that Imagined Communities makes up for 40 percent of Verso's sales. Incredible: it was published in 1983. An ironic accomplishment for a book that rests much of its argument on the notion of "print capitalism"
If you're looking for an answer, Imagined Communities disappoints. It's an excellent overview of the way that the idea of the nation spreads and entrenches itself among men who go on to be national elites but it says nothing about ordinary people. Elite nationalists are one thing. But what's in it for a working stuff?
I think Ernest Gellner's book Nations and Nationalism is a better place to start because it tries to answer that question, arguably the most intractable for the left in the 20th Century.
Finally, Imagined Communities has suffered the fate of so many other path breaking books: its main points have been so diffused through the culture that everything Anderson claims seemed so obvious that I wondered why he even bothered to write it. I actually read somewhere that Imagined Communities makes up for 40 percent of Verso's sales. Incredible: it was published in 1983. An ironic accomplishment for a book that rests much of its argument on the notion of "print capitalism"
July 2, 2019
I finally got around to reading this classic and it's fascinating. It tracks the beginning of the concept of the nation and links it to print and literature and the decline of religion. Having read the book, I see how often this thesis is cited in other works of history and sociology.
November 21, 2020
賲賳 兀賲鬲毓 丕賱賰鬲亘 毓賱賶 丕賱廿胤賱丕賯
August 30, 2022
This is obviously an important book, but it's a tough and at times obscure read. It's not long but the writing is extremely dense and academic. There are tons of Latinisms, full untranslated quotes from multiple languages, long windy sentences, and unnecessarily fancy vocabulary. I have other problems with it, but I'll just say up front that this is a difficult and not terribly enjoyable read.
While the argument isn't super-clear, BA seems to be explaining why/how national consciousness emerged on a global scale, including Europe but not taking Europe as paradigmatic. The title tells you a lot of the argument: people had to be able to imagine a community that stretched well beyond all the people they could possibly know and even most of the places they could or would visit in a lifetime. Certain technologies and historical developments made nationalist consciousness possible, but Anderson particularly focuses on the spread of vernacular languages through print-technology. Advances in printing, and the rise of an educated, literate bourgeoisie, allowed the imagining of a larger community united by language, experience, ideas, race, religion, etc. He argues that as religious authority and devotion faded a bit in the 18th and 19th centuries, the nation rose up to take its place as an object of community and devotion.
Anderson argues that once nations emerged, largely in Europe, they became a sort of model for "pirating" by other states or of "official nationalism." The former refers to the copying and enactment of nation-state polities within or in place of empires around the world, which again relied on colonial education systems and the spread of a unifying vernacular language. The latter refers to state-led efforts to build nationalist identity, often as a replacement for weakening imperial authority (think the Austro-Hungarian Empire here). Along with this literal nation-building or nation-imagining came a rethinking of history; inchoate developments in the past had to be given narrative coherence as "precursors" or "ancestors" to the modern nation, although this led to historical distortions that we are still trying to clear up today.
One interesting aspect of this book is its relationship to Marxism. BA appears to be a Marxist to some extent, but in this book he's clearly criticizing Marxism's tendency to treat nationalism as a mere illusion conjured up by the ruling classes to keep the proletariats of different states from uniting against their true enemies. He argues that by the 1970s, with the fading of international Marxist solidarity and the entrenchment of nationalism as the defining political ideology of the Global South, that scholars have to start taking nationalism seriously as a phenomenon in its own right. After all, people have been far more willing to fight and die for their nations throughout history than more abstract ideologies that animate intellectuals, including Marxism.
As a historian, I have a lot of frustration with this book. There's little attention to chronology or integration of events with larger trends like the rise of print technology. BA skips from place to place without much effort to set the historical context or introduce key characters (another reason why I'm surprised this is such a widely held text-it isn't terribly accessible and I wouldn't assign it to undergrads).
Moreover, Anderson's account of the rise of nationalism overlooks key historical developments. I get that he wants to "de-Europeanize" the study of nationalism, but he seems oblivious to the mostly European (although you could add the Ottomans here to an extent) state-building that occurred in the early modern period. The main drivers of this state building were commerce and war, following Charles Tilly's famous line that "The state made war, and war made the state." As early modern European states waged war, they built state capacity, knowledge, and control through taxation, censuses, recruitment/conscription, lending/borrowing, increasingly taking control of religious institutions, and other state-like behaviors. Now this is not the same as building nationalist consciousness, but the rise of the early modern state clearly helped spread a sense of "Englishness" or "Frenchness" or what have you. You can't understand the explosion of French and other forms of nationalism in the late 19th century without understanding the role that the state played in knitting people together and integrating them into a larger system that enabled a nationalist consciousness to form. I was shocked that BA didn't even allude to this process.
This speaks to a larger problem in the book: the lack of historical agency. There really aren't historical actors in this book. Who is doing the "imagining" here? BA does a better job with this when it comes to anti-colonial nationalism, but overall the analysis is pretty inchoate. A nationalist consciousness just formed in the ether with little connection to state power or historical actors. I think his skipping around from context to context really hurt him here; it would have been better to have a more traditional organization with some theory chapters and then case studies to really show these dynamics to work and to introduce real people doing and saying real things that contributed to the rise of nationalism.
I read this mainly because it is constantly cited and mentioned, but I feel like the most useful thing about it is the title. It is kind of a slog and kind of a mess, although a necessity if you are working in scholarly fields related to nationalism.
While the argument isn't super-clear, BA seems to be explaining why/how national consciousness emerged on a global scale, including Europe but not taking Europe as paradigmatic. The title tells you a lot of the argument: people had to be able to imagine a community that stretched well beyond all the people they could possibly know and even most of the places they could or would visit in a lifetime. Certain technologies and historical developments made nationalist consciousness possible, but Anderson particularly focuses on the spread of vernacular languages through print-technology. Advances in printing, and the rise of an educated, literate bourgeoisie, allowed the imagining of a larger community united by language, experience, ideas, race, religion, etc. He argues that as religious authority and devotion faded a bit in the 18th and 19th centuries, the nation rose up to take its place as an object of community and devotion.
Anderson argues that once nations emerged, largely in Europe, they became a sort of model for "pirating" by other states or of "official nationalism." The former refers to the copying and enactment of nation-state polities within or in place of empires around the world, which again relied on colonial education systems and the spread of a unifying vernacular language. The latter refers to state-led efforts to build nationalist identity, often as a replacement for weakening imperial authority (think the Austro-Hungarian Empire here). Along with this literal nation-building or nation-imagining came a rethinking of history; inchoate developments in the past had to be given narrative coherence as "precursors" or "ancestors" to the modern nation, although this led to historical distortions that we are still trying to clear up today.
One interesting aspect of this book is its relationship to Marxism. BA appears to be a Marxist to some extent, but in this book he's clearly criticizing Marxism's tendency to treat nationalism as a mere illusion conjured up by the ruling classes to keep the proletariats of different states from uniting against their true enemies. He argues that by the 1970s, with the fading of international Marxist solidarity and the entrenchment of nationalism as the defining political ideology of the Global South, that scholars have to start taking nationalism seriously as a phenomenon in its own right. After all, people have been far more willing to fight and die for their nations throughout history than more abstract ideologies that animate intellectuals, including Marxism.
As a historian, I have a lot of frustration with this book. There's little attention to chronology or integration of events with larger trends like the rise of print technology. BA skips from place to place without much effort to set the historical context or introduce key characters (another reason why I'm surprised this is such a widely held text-it isn't terribly accessible and I wouldn't assign it to undergrads).
Moreover, Anderson's account of the rise of nationalism overlooks key historical developments. I get that he wants to "de-Europeanize" the study of nationalism, but he seems oblivious to the mostly European (although you could add the Ottomans here to an extent) state-building that occurred in the early modern period. The main drivers of this state building were commerce and war, following Charles Tilly's famous line that "The state made war, and war made the state." As early modern European states waged war, they built state capacity, knowledge, and control through taxation, censuses, recruitment/conscription, lending/borrowing, increasingly taking control of religious institutions, and other state-like behaviors. Now this is not the same as building nationalist consciousness, but the rise of the early modern state clearly helped spread a sense of "Englishness" or "Frenchness" or what have you. You can't understand the explosion of French and other forms of nationalism in the late 19th century without understanding the role that the state played in knitting people together and integrating them into a larger system that enabled a nationalist consciousness to form. I was shocked that BA didn't even allude to this process.
This speaks to a larger problem in the book: the lack of historical agency. There really aren't historical actors in this book. Who is doing the "imagining" here? BA does a better job with this when it comes to anti-colonial nationalism, but overall the analysis is pretty inchoate. A nationalist consciousness just formed in the ether with little connection to state power or historical actors. I think his skipping around from context to context really hurt him here; it would have been better to have a more traditional organization with some theory chapters and then case studies to really show these dynamics to work and to introduce real people doing and saying real things that contributed to the rise of nationalism.
I read this mainly because it is constantly cited and mentioned, but I feel like the most useful thing about it is the title. It is kind of a slog and kind of a mess, although a necessity if you are working in scholarly fields related to nationalism.
August 16, 2019
喔箞喔侧笝喔勦箞喔笝喔傕箟喔侧竾喔⑧覆喔佮釜喔赤斧喔｀副喔氞箑喔｀覆喔椸傅喙堗箘喔∴箞喙勦笖喙夃箑喔｀傅喔⑧笝喔覆喔⑧釜喔编竾喔勦浮 喔覆喔｀笭喔侧笧喔о箞喔侧笟喔侧竾喔娻箞喔о竾喔箞喔侧笝喙勦浮喙堗福喔灌箟喙€喔｀阜喙堗腑喔囙笗喙夃腑喔囙抚喔權竵喔ム副喔氞箘喔涏腑喙堗覆喔權箖喔浮喙�
喙佮笗喙堗箑喔涏复喔斷箓喔ム竵喔斷傅 喙佮笝喔班笝喔赤浮喔侧竵喙� 喔赋喔福喔编笟喔勦笝喔笝喙冟笀
喙赌喔｀阜喙堗腑喔囙竵喔侧福喔佮箞喔竵喔赤箑喔权复喔断釜喔赤笝喔多竵喔勦抚喔侧浮喙赌喔涏箛喔权笂喔侧笗喔脆箘喔涏笀喔权笘喔多竾喔娻覆喔曕复喔权复喔⑧浮
喙佮笗喙堗箑喔涏复喔斷箓喔ム竵喔斷傅 喙佮笝喔班笝喔赤浮喔侧竵喙� 喔赋喔福喔编笟喔勦笝喔笝喙冟笀
喙赌喔｀阜喙堗腑喔囙竵喔侧福喔佮箞喔竵喔赤箑喔权复喔断釜喔赤笝喔多竵喔勦抚喔侧浮喙赌喔涏箛喔权笂喔侧笗喔脆箘喔涏笀喔权笘喔多竾喔娻覆喔曕复喔权复喔⑧浮
July 27, 2024
D鈥檈ntrada, la idea de naci贸 com a comunitat imaginada pot semblar cutre, per貌 l鈥檃rgument del llibre 茅s apassionant. Per m茅s que sigui 鈥渁cad猫mic鈥� es llegeix molt b茅 a m茅s!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 1,039 reviews
Can't find what you're looking for?
Get help and learn more about the design.