The Absent-Minded Imperialists: Empire, Society, and Culture in Britain

by Bernard Porter

The British empire was a huge enterprise. To foreigners it more or less defined Britain in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Its repercussions in the wider world are still with us today. One might expect this to have been reflected in her society and culture. This is the first book to examine this assumption critically against the broader background of contemporary British society. Bernard Porter, a leading imperial historian, argues that the empire had a far lower profile in Britain than it did abroad. He argues that though Britain was an imperial nation in this period, she was never a genuine imperial society.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, British Literature, 19th Century, Research

Paperback

First published December 17, 2004

Reviews

[Trevor · Rating 4 out of 5]

Bernard Porter argues in "The Absent-Minded Imperialists" that most Britons were not bound to be imperialists, “or to be interested in the empire, or even to be very much aware of it for most of the nineteenth century.” Porter thus challenged a generation of scholars who had come to “see imperialism everywhere,” most importantly Edward Said (Orientalism) and John Mackenzie (Propaganda and Empire). Said portrayed imperialism as ubiquitous by describing it as permeating the West at the deepest levels of racial and cultural discourse, while Mackenzie sought to provide an empirical basis for the study of culture and imperialism by demonstrating the prevalence of imperial themes in popular culture. Porter, however, argues that imperial themes neither pervaded British culture nor influenced British policy, save for the jingoistic era of the “new imperialism” in the late nineteenth century.

Rather, the British Empire was ruled by a small, elite class which did not depend on “propaganda” or “invented traditions” for the empire to continue to function. Accordingly, manifestations of imperialism in popular culture did not necessarily persuade the mass public of the Empire’s virtues. Nor were themes such as militarism, patriotism, or racism, necessarily tied to empire: they were also prominent in non-imperial nations such as the United States, for example. Even in the elite public schools attended by the upper classes, imperial history was absent from textbooks, and was late in becoming a topic of interest at elite British universities like Oxford and Cambridge. These enclaves of the British upper classes, rather than gearing teaching towards imperial knowledge, were instead geared towards inculcating in students the virtues of the British ruling classes through the study of classics and by participation in sport. For the middle and lower classes, meanwhile, the connections to empire were even weaker. Knowledge of empire was mostly limited to the British settler colonies, where ties to kith and kin provided the only contact with the global empire Britain ruled. “Taking these imperial reports and displays out of context gives a misleading impression of their ubiquity,” Porter writes. “Most of them are thinly scattered, marginal, trivial, occasional, or temporary.”

Yet for all the strengths of Porter’s study, it is difficult to apply the same arguments to the twentieth century that Porter so compelling applies to the nineteenth century. One could cite the growing importance of imperial themes as the mass of Britons, newly enfranchised in the Reform Acts of 1867 and 1884, faced a number of empire-related issues during this period: the increasing European competition for overseas territories, Boer War of 1899-1902, and the growing popularity of imperial trading preference in the early twentieth century. Porter acknowledges these issues, but his thesis remains that the increase in imperial themes reflected an attempt to foster national identity and remedy social divisions rather than promote the Empire. Equally troubling is Porter’s insistence that his argument applies to the “dominating” kind of imperialism, whereas the apparent targets of his criticism used the term more broadly. Porter is, in effect, setting up his opponents as straw men, and attacking the arguments they never intended to make. Nevertheless, in Porter’s strictly defined way, "The Absent-Minded Imperialists" is both compellingly argued and well researched, and it serves as a timely (if polemical) corrective to the work of cultural historians of the past generation.

[Matthew Gurteen · Rating 2 out of 5]

An interesting and well-researched study into British imperial culture from the nineteenth century. Nevertheless, I am left wondering what the point is? I tried to go into Bernard Porter's 'The Absent-Minded Imperialists: Empire, Society, and Culture in Britain' with an open mind. I disagreed with his premise, even if he argued it well. Essentially, Porter seeks to challenge the modern 'notion' of England's widespread imperialism. Although Porter does not dismiss the Empire as fact, he does challenge it as a concept in people's minds. He argues that the general public did not perceive the Empire as much as critics have assumed. This point is easy for a white man to argue, which Porter acknowledges. He is undoubtedly aware of his prejudices. If anything, he is too aware of them. The entire introduction is almost a pre-emptive response to critics.

Ultimately, I still do not see why it matters. The 'problem' Porter seems to be challenging is primarily semantic. It does not matter if people were aware of the Empire if they were drinking tea sweetened by sugar picked by slaves. Porter even admits this! I feel as if Porter's criticism has taken one extreme to another. As Porter claims, some academics are hyperaware of the Empire, seeing it in every novel and ballad. 'The Absent-Minded Imperialists: Empire, Society, and Culture in Britain', however, seems determined to dismiss it outright. Add to this a pompous jokeyness in tone and a series of outlandish claims like genocide was caused by a lack of control, not too much, and I did not enjoy reading this book at all.

I am left wondering why Porter wrote it? Was it merely to challenge academia, or are there other motivations? Of course, I will never know the answer to these questions. I could only really recommend 'The Absent-Minded Imperialists: Empire, Society, and Culture in Britain' to anyone studying the subject looking for an alternative opinion.

[Soubresaut · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well written and researched analysis of the impact of Empire on the contemporary British psyche from an academic who takes issue with those who view the subject through a narrow lens. Preferring hard evidence to ‘my truth’, Porter goes in search of what the British thought of ‘their Empire’, if they did actually think about it which probably wasn’t much unless they were of the ruling class seeking employment or capitalists looking for new opportunities to exploit people and resources. Often acquired reluctantly or by inheritance, occasionally to spread British values and offload excess population in settler colonies and nearly always to promote or protect trade, a big fuss about the Empire was only made at home from the late nineteenth century when the expansion of the electoral franchise coincided with the Scramble for Africa and Imperial propagandists felt the need to bring the lower orders on board apparently with little success unless it involved a good tune or a day out at the fair. As the Empire had quietly crept up on the ‘millions’ so it departed after WW2, no domestic riots or military coups just a few moans from retired colonials that the country had gone to the dogs.

[Gayla Bassham · Rating 4 out of 5]

An interesting if not always wholly convincing intellectual history of imperial Britain. Porter argues that in fact, the empire was not always top of mind for Britons during the nineteenth century and in fact made little impact on the thinking of the average British subject of the time. He addresses the twentieth century in a couple of short chapters near the end; these chapters feel less thought-through and are ultimately less persuasive.

[Claire]

This is an interesting take on both the idea and practice of the British empire, particularly with reference to the 19th and early 20th centuries (when the empire was at its height). Porter takes the view that imperialist ideas did not permeate the entirity of British society and culture in the way that they are popularly thought to have done by many modern 'post-colonial' commentators. He is particularly good on the ideas of empire within the context of British education and the school system, and on imperialism in popular culture. This is a thought-provoking and challenging volume which neatly turns much received imperial knowledge on its head, and offers a convincing alternative viewpoint of the British empire and its impact on Britain itself.

[EvaLovesYA · Rating 3 out of 5]

En rigtig god kilde ifb. med et semesterfag på engelskstudiet.

- Brugt på universitetet (engelsk)