That's not an Imperial attitude, though, that's just typical English EU think. Having holiday homes elsewhere in Europe is not uncommon for well-to-do people on the continent either.
-
-
How can you separate that from imperial attitude given the breadth and longevity of the British Empire? Maybe they didn't colonize Europe, that doesn't mean they didn't think they should have. Just look at C18 and 19 travelogues by English. See also, the Grand Tour.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 4 tykkäystä -
The Grand Tour wasn't an exclusively English phenomenon, though. Wealthy Germans went on grand tours long before Germany had any colonies -- long before "Germany" even existed, in fact.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
But the OP wasn't about Germany, nor were any of my responses. The point I am making is that imperial formations and desires influence how cultures orient themselves toward the rest of the world. That's it.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystä -
I wasn't talking about Germany either, except to note that something that may look particularly British wasn't that. I guess I don't really buy that the logic of Empire produces a culture of travel that lasts generations beyond the end of that Empire.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @literasyme ja @DrDadabhoy
I don’t think you can really argue that the logic of empire doesn’t endure much, much longer than the formal structures of empire. The continued global ubiquity of Shakespeare is an example of the ways that imperial logic endures.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 6 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @noraj_williams ja @DrDadabhoy
I think I agree with Liza -- I've allowed myself to slip into the most Imperial of things, the Oxbridge tutorial mindset: ooh, an argument to pick, let me pick it! Obviously I don't disagree that Empire has lasting, profound structural consequences
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 3 tykkäystä -
I don't agree that "Londoners are well-travelled because Empire" is an especially plausible narrative, but that's neither here nor there as far as the broader point is concerned.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
I agree with Ambereen's point though that it's impossible to separate what it means to travel "abroad" (and who can) from empire, which was a shaping force in where borders got drawn, where infrastructure for travel was built, how people imagined what spaces they could occupy.
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystä -
Absolutely, to the extent that Empire and colonial exploitation reshaped the world. But are modern "Londoners" uniquely privileged by those historical preconditions in their attitude to travel?
2 vastausta 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä
Yes, because of a thing called passport privilege as well.
-
-
I don’t want to keep belabouring this, but that privilege applies equally (or more, soon) to other Western countries without the same history of global empire.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @literasyme, @DrDadabhoy ja
I’m NOT denying that these privileges exist, nor that they have a strong historical connection to colonialism, nor that they’re sustained by modern global capitalism. But they’re not specific to the UK.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 0 tykkäystä - Näytä vastaukset
Uusi keskustelu -
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.