An intellectual biography of Eric Hobsbawm, one of the most influential thinkers of the twentieth century.
Eric Hobsbawm (1917–2012) was one of the foremost European intellectuals of the twentieth century. He published hundreds of articles on modern history and culture, and his books became canonical works and bestsellers on both sides of the Atlantic. His crystal-clear writing, vast erudition, and ability to make his Marxist analysis digestible to a wide audience brought him worldwide renown.
Yet Hobsbawm was no academic hermit. Through his globetrotting journalism, he was embedded in an extraordinary web of politicians, activists, and fellow intellectuals across Europe, South Asia, and the Americas, including Manmohan Singh, Che Guevara, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, Fernand Braudel, E. P. Thompson, Arno Mayer, and Salvador Allende. Emile Chabal traces the origins of Hobsbawm’s ideas and most famous writings by exploring his scholarly foundations, delving deep into the archives to uncover hidden links and unexpected conversations that shaped his pathbreaking work.
Going well beyond the Ages series of modern history books for which Hobsbawm is best known, Chabal offers the first substantial interpretation of Hobsbawm’s entire body of writing. Indeed, The Age of Hobsbawm is also a trove of unique insights into the generations of Marxist writers with whom Hobsbawm was in conversation―authors whose work continues to shape political debates globally.
I’m not sure we need a biography of Hobsbawn but this isn’t a bad one. The problem is that it spends much too much space on the public or careerist aspects of EH’s career - his networking, associations, cultivating friends/colleagues, logrolling etc - and not nearly enough on his ideas. It gets repetitive.
A biography, not a hagiography, of Eric Hobsbawn as historian. Ample space is given to consider the development of his major published works, and the evolution of his ideas. Space also given to his cultural critiques and jazz reviews, which sadly became stuck in a certain time and era, and didn't develop with trends in the field. Can the same be said of his political writings? Read on, and see what Emile Chabal says in this very lucid book.
What stayed with me most about The Age of Hobsbawm is the way Emile Chabal turns an intellectual biography into a study of how ideas actually develop: through arguments, friendships, political commitments, journalism, and encounters with other thinkers. Hobsbawm emerges not simply as the author of the famous Age books, but as someone whose thinking was shaped by an unusually wide international network.
The archival dimension makes that portrait especially interesting. Chabal traces Hobsbawm’s connections with figures such as E. P. Thompson, Fernand Braudel, Che Guevara, Manmohan Singh, and Salvador Allende, showing how scholarship and political life repeatedly crossed paths. I also appreciated the decision to look beyond the best known historical works and consider the breadth of Hobsbawm’s writing.
This will reward readers interested in intellectual history, modern Europe, Marxist thought, and the personal networks behind major ideas. Its real achievement is showing that an influential historian can be understood not only through what he wrote, but through the conversations that helped him become the thinker he was.
I'm slightly embarrassed to admit just how much I enjoyed this at points.
For an intellectual biography, however, Chabal has surprisingly little focus on the actual ideas and intellectual output of Hobsbawm's life, nor the global struggles and grand narratives that shaped them - quite astonishing considering the bibliography of Hobsbawm's writings runs to 130 pages. This might be because Hobsbawm, unusually for a historian of his stature, did not produce much truly original research nor inspire schools of thought in his name, but also because Chabal is clearly more interested in the tangle of casual friendships, networks, and academic conferences in which ideas pollinate.
I'm sympathetic to the argument that knowledge is a collective activity, but it gets a bit repetitive, and I suspect anyone who isn't a professional historian won't really care much about how many journals he edited or conferences he chaired or papers he presented.
In my mind's eye I can still see Eric leaning back with a faraway smile on his face while some wannabe pseudo-leftie ranted on about his sins. I wonder when we'll start hearing that Eric took cocaine like Freud, or supported Stalin like Jean-Paul Sartre, or had boils on his ass like Marx. Get a life, Emile.