| Review | The History Teacher, 37.2 | The History Cooperative

Review

The American Colonial State in the Philippines: Global Perspectives, by Julian Go and Anne L. Foster, editors. Durham, North Carolina: Duke University Press, 2003. 316 pages. $21.95, paper.

The American Colonial State in the Philippines: Global Perspectives seeks to both explore old ground in new ways and open new vistas of investigation for scholars interested in comparative imperialism. While this collection of essays accomplishes these tasks very well, it is probably safe to say that this anthology is inappropriate for either upper division high school or lower division undergraduate students.

The editors and authors have set a difficult goal for themselves, and that is to analyze the U.S.-Philippines relationship from a global perspective on comparative colonialism and imperialism. While there is a historiography in existence about the U.S. and the Philippine Islands, most of that literature analyzes the Philippines from an American perspective or seeks to answer questions about American imperial exceptionalism. While the editors and authors here recognize the phenomenon of American exceptionalism, they take it far less as a fact and more as a historical frame of mind, and they seek to investigate it vis-á-vis the claims of exceptionalism put forth by other colonial powers, in particular the British, French, Dutch, and Japanese.

One of the major contributions of the text is in terms of categories of imperialism. In addition to exploring the meaning of "exceptionalism," the authors also differentiate U.S. rule in the Philippines from the Manifest Destiny in continental North America by introducing the concept of "settler" colonies versus "administrative" colonies. With the U.S. falling into the latter—in other words, a colony that is to be administered by the metropole but not settled by it—the authors are able to demonstrate that, at least in one sense, U.S. rule was somewhat exceptional since the U.S. did not intend to stay as long as did the other colonial powers and, therefore, brief U.S. rule led to the quick ascendancy of the Philippine elite to power, a power bloc which is still in existence today.

Probably most fascinating is the successful attempt by the authors to carry out a "layered" analysis of comparative imperialism. By comparing and contrasting colonial rule in the Philippines, Puerto Rico, British Malaya, French Indochina, and Japanese Formosa, the authors are able to explore inter- and intra-imperial relations, relations with local elites, tensions between various interests in the metropole, and, of course, problems between the metropole and the colony. This type of "transnational" analysis of imperial relationships is new, at least to a study of the U.S. in the Philippines, and the idea of "transnational tensions" in imperial governance is a concept that numerous scholars can elaborate on in years to come.

The sources cited may also be a boon to scholars. While the bare majority of the sources cited are secondary, something to be expected in a collection of essays, scholars specializing in comparative imperialism, but unfamiliar with the U.S. rule of the Philip-pines, will find a great deal of secondary literature to explore. In particular, much of this historiography is about U.S. rule, but from a Filipino perspective, thus opening a new door for scholars who have looked at U.S.-Philippine relations heretofore from a strictly American perspective. In addition, there are numerous primary sources cited in each essay, predominantly, though not exclusively, from American archives.

As to the usefulness for teaching, some caution is necessary. I think any specialist or graduate student in the history of American foreign relations, U.S.-Philippine, or U.S.-East Asian relations should read this collection. In fact, I think any graduate instructor focusing on the areas cited above or in comparative imperialism or modern world history would be on safe and profitable ground by assigning the text or some combination of its essays. As to upper division undergraduates, it might be something assigned to them, but these would have to be a highly qualified group of history majors or minors. While the essays are clear and fine for experienced scholars, undergraduate students who are unfamiliar as yet with the terminology, concepts, and historiography may just get lost. For this reason, this reviewer would avoid using the book with upper division high school students or lower division undergraduates, except in isolated and special cases.

In short, the editors and authors have taken the study not just of U.S.-Philippine relations but of comparative colonialism and imperialism one step further. Through a skillful use of both primary and secondary sources, the authors have encapsulated some of the issues facing scholars who specialize in U.S.-Philippine relations. In addition, they have also shown those scholars new avenues for research as well as introduced specialists on other imperial relationships to new ways of viewing their corners of the world.


Henry Ford Community College Dearborn, Michigan	Hal M. Friedman

Content in the History Cooperative database is intended for personal, noncommercial use only. You may not reproduce, publish, distribute, transmit, participate in the transfer or sale of, modify, create derivative works from, display, or in any way exploit the History Cooperative database in whole or in part without the written permission of the copyright holder.