Niall Ferguson's Imperial Passion
2003; Oxford University Press; Volume: 56; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês
10.1093/hwj/56.1.175
ISSN1477-4569
Autores Tópico(s)Australian History and Society
ResumoNiall Ferguson's Channel Four series ‘Empire’ is a missed opportunity. Ferguson's argument is that historians and politicians have emphasized the sins rather than the virtues of the British Empire. In making this point, Ferguson's series subscribes to the classic dilemma of imperial discourse. Ferguson's ‘Empire’ is depicted as having been a dynamic agent of change in the past. But it also portrays the non‐European world as static, timeless and in need of European – or now American – intervention in the future. Ferguson's ‘Empire’ has more to say about the search for a British identity after decolonization than about the British empire itself. He portrays the non‐European world as a scenic backdrop for the great (and occasionally not‐ so‐great) deeds of a few white men overseas. His attempt to tell a story about the relationship between Britain and the rest of the world ends up becoming a tale told about Britain alone. Television offers the opportunity for an intelligent and popular portrayal of the complexity of imperial relations – of the ways in which the engagement and encounter between Europeans and others made Britain and the post‐colonial non‐European world. It would emphasize the existence of many different imperial stories, and stress the extent to which ‘Empire’ meant many different things in different places. Such a TV history would make it difficult to moralize; but TV producers need to realize that good television history doesn't have to offer coherent moral conclusions.
Referência(s)