Rating: 
Summary: Interesting but Flawed
Review: An interesting and very ambitious book by a distinguished scholar. Frank challenges the views of a number of important thinkers about world history including important contemporary historians such as Braudel and Wallerstein, and seminal 19th century theorists such as Marx and Weber. Briefly, Frank attacks a 'eurocentric' model of world development that sees capitalism emerging in Europe and then enmeshing the whole world in a Europe centered world economy. Instead, he emphasizes the vigor of a well established Afro-Asian capitalist economy that Western Europe was able to participate in only belatedly and only by extracting precious metals from the Western Hemisphere. He shows convincingly that up until the threshold of the Industrial Revolution, Afro-Asian trade remained the greater part of the world economy. These points are an important corrective to the existing model. He goes too far, however, in asserting that the world economy was not created by European activity. This is a simple point of logic. A world economy means literally that, an economic system that encompasses the whole globe. It is only with the European expansion of the early modern period that the Western Hemisphere and Oceania were incorporated into the world economy. While the Afro-Asian trade networks would remain quantitatively substantially larger than trade involving Europe, the European additions to the world economy introduce a qualitative difference in world trade networks. Nor is it likely that China, Mughal India, or any other Afro-Asian economic power would have discovered the Western Hemisphere. Another flaw in this book is the somewhat rambling style. At times this can be a real obstacle to following Frank's arguments. There are 2 chapters on economic cycles that are poorly organized and at times seem contradictory. Frank's use of what appears to be a rather nebulous literature on cycles is unclear and he resorts at times to the poorly defined idea of Kondratieff waves as an explanatory force. The book finishes with a sketchy attempt to account for the Industrial Revolution. For those interested in this important topic, I recommend Kenneth Pomeranz's The Great Divergence, which covers some of the same ground in a more logical and systematic manner.
Rating:
Summary: Interesting but Flawed
Review: An interesting and very ambitious book by a distinguished scholar. Frank challenges the views of a number of important thinkers about world history including important contemporary historians such as Braudel and Wallerstein, and seminal 19th century theorists such as Marx and Weber. Briefly, Frank attacks a 'eurocentric' model of world development that sees capitalism emerging in Europe and then enmeshing the whole world in a Europe centered world economy. Instead, he emphasizes the vigor of a well established Afro-Asian capitalist economy that Western Europe was able to participate in only belatedly and only by extracting precious metals from the Western Hemisphere. He shows convincingly that up until the threshold of the Industrial Revolution, Afro-Asian trade remained the greater part of the world economy. These points are an important corrective to the existing model. He goes too far, however, in asserting that the world economy was not created by European activity. This is a simple point of logic. A world economy means literally that, an economic system that encompasses the whole globe. It is only with the European expansion of the early modern period that the Western Hemisphere and Oceania were incorporated into the world economy. While the Afro-Asian trade networks would remain quantitatively substantially larger than trade involving Europe, the European additions to the world economy introduce a qualitative difference in world trade networks. Nor is it likely that China, Mughal India, or any other Afro-Asian economic power would have discovered the Western Hemisphere. Another flaw in this book is the somewhat rambling style. At times this can be a real obstacle to following Frank's arguments. There are 2 chapters on economic cycles that are poorly organized and at times seem contradictory. Frank's use of what appears to be a rather nebulous literature on cycles is unclear and he resorts at times to the poorly defined idea of Kondratieff waves as an explanatory force. The book finishes with a sketchy attempt to account for the Industrial Revolution. For those interested in this important topic, I recommend Kenneth Pomeranz's The Great Divergence, which covers some of the same ground in a more logical and systematic manner.
Rating: 
Summary: ReOrient: sure to be an instant classic in world history
Review: Andre Gunder Frank challenges us to thoroughly reevaluate our understanding of the world economy between 1400-1800, and provides us with enough evidence to command a reorientation of our perspective on this period. Gunder Frank's ReOrient will prove an instant classic, rating among those great books that come along once in a generation, such as with Arnold Toynbee's The Study of History, William McNeill's The Rise of the West, and Immanuel Wallerstein's The World-System as seminal works in world history. For scholars researching the onset of industrialism and the West's eventual dominance, they will be introduced to a whole new set of questions found in neither Marx nor Weber that require exploration if they are to plumb the depths of this historical terrain. Political Science, History, Sociology, and Economics professors should place ReOrient at the center of their class reading lists for courses in political economy and world history. Secondary Education teachers will find their world history teaching revolutionized by ReOrient's important thesis on the centrality of Asia in the global economy between 1400-1800. This book will give world history a research agenda for a generation. Original, contentious, challenging, yet accessible, this is Frank at his best. Agree or disagree with his thesis, if you don't know it, for the next generation you won't be able to knowledgeably discuss world history. Don't miss it!
Rating: 
Summary: Replacing Eurocenturism with the Asian equivelent
Review: Andre Gunder Frank compells his readers to expand their view of how the West actually rose to the top of the economic world. He makes a nobel effort but, he lacks the evidence to support his often changing thesis. Instead he supplements it with a biased view of history, and challenges experts with lame assumptions. Frank neglectes to recognize key factors in Europes rise, including the industrial revolution. this book should be read with skepticism.
Rating:
Summary: How Asia Once Won (And Could Again)
Review: Andre Gunder Frank wrote ReOrient to demonstrate that the present Western predominance in the world economy is fairly new. It began when Europe gained control of the New World's natural resources, particularly silver, and used it to "buy a ticket on the Asian train" (Gunder Frank's apt metaphor).Gunder Frank also speculates that East Asia's present economic growth and potential will eventually help it regain economic hegemony in the not too distant future.
Rating:
Summary: How Asia Once Won (And Could Again)
Review: Andre Gunder Frank wrote ReOrient to demonstrate that the present Western predominance in the world economy is fairly new. It began when Europe gained control of the New World's natural resources, particularly silver, and used it to "buy a ticket on the Asian train" (Gunder Frank's apt metaphor). Gunder Frank also speculates that East Asia's present economic growth and potential will eventually help it regain economic hegemony in the not too distant future.
Rating: 
Summary: Changing my View on World History
Review: Franks has opened my eyes to world history as it really is and was. I must leave my Eurocentric background and focus me at the whole picture. That is the message of 'Reorient' to me. I think this book marks a change in my own academic writing and will certainly reorient my focus.
Rating:
Summary: Frank turns Eurocentric theory and history upside down.
Review: Gunder Frank does it again. He turns standard Eurocentric historiography and social theory upside down, as he did many years ago in exposing the facade of economic development. Back then, in the 1960s and 1970s, he explained how ostensible economic "development" often led to underdevelopment. Despite the massive attack on his explanation by most of the experts (who primarily were from technological developed countries), it turns out he was right then. In ReOrient, he goes much further. He suggests that the Rise of the economically developed West is only a small blip in what was, and is again becoming an Asia-centered world. He challenges the experts again, but this time they are quite a different group at least in terms of theory, e.g., ranging from Marx to Braudel. In simple terms, he thinks they all got it wrong because they did not see the whole picture, especially how the whole is much more than the sum of its parts. You can decide if he is right again this time because, once again, his argument is clear, organized, and often exciting.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best books of this century
Review: Gunder Frank have really helped to open up the eyes of people, who have long gotten used to reading books and literary works written with Eurocentric bias. He conclusively proves that Europe's success was nothing unique, and that Europe was the lesser of the many players in world economics, technology, and industry until about 1800 AD. China, India, Central Asia, South-East Asia, and the Middle East were those main players of the global trade, spanning from 1500 BC to 1800 AD. These above five regions also had the world's highest standards of living, most advanced technology, greatest industrial and commercial enterprises, best art forms, literature, philosophy, and musical styles, and also the most sophisticated government and best infrastructure in roads, bridges, canals, river and seaborne transportation from 5000 BC to 1800 AD. Special note must also be made, about the vast contributions of the Native Americans of the New World to world agriculture, medicine, metallurgy. Also the role that Native American gold and silver played in helping Europe to become a player in the global trade, by giving Europe with the purchasing power to purchase Chinese silks, tea, porcelain, and other goods, Indian cotton textiles, and South-East spices and gems, should be noted. Gunder Frank provides ample proof in his arguments and successfully disproves long held Eurocentric ideas about the origins of the modern economics, commerce, and industry. Gunder Frank's work is an eye-opener to all. This book should be read by every person, willing to learn about world history. I must also say that in the 1800's and 1900's however, it was Europe which played the most significant role in moving the science, technology, industry, trade, and commerce of the world forward and to greater new heights, just as the other six regions of the world have done in the past.
Rating:
Summary: A New Frame in Which to View World History
Review: I confess. I was Eurocentric. Despite a degree in International Economics from an east coast school known for its School of Foreign Service, I firmly believed Max Weber that the Protestant work-ethic was the source of western prosperity. I also believed in American exceptionalism. Frank's book cured me of both those false notions. A couple points I'd like to add to Frank's thesis explained in other reviews. 1) I work for one of the major trans-Pacific ocean shipping companies. The company was founded in California in 1848 and sold to the Singapore government in 1997. (Shipping going East) 2) US-bound shipments are full of manufactured goods. Asia-bound ships are filled with wastepaper or are largely empty. The West continues to produce nothing that Asia really wants. Where in times past, most of the Asian-bound shipments from England and the Netherlands were boats filled with silver and gold, today we "ship silver" to Asia in the form of electronic fund transfers. Given the trade deficit the US alone has with China and the rest of Asia, it seems only a matter of time before the Chinese start buying Manhattan and US assets the way the Japanese did in the 1980s. 3) Frank's book adds an interesting background to the history of the Roman Empire. After subjugating Europe, Rome moved eastward under Constantine the Great. First, Constantinople provided a more defensible position for the New Rome (indeed where the western capital - Rome -- fell in the 5th century, the eastern capital - Constantinople -- continued until the 15th century, despite being "on the way" as it were for invading Huns and other invading armies). But perhaps more importantly, all the commercial action was centered in the East. Moving the capital eastward took it out of the backwater of Italy and moved it closer to the overland trade routes with the Asia). 4)That the East was far wealthier than the West can again be seen in microcosmic perspective during the 4th Crusade. Western soldiers had never imagined a city as wealthy as Constantinople. When they saw it they had to have it. The West, especially Venice, did to Constantinople in 1205 as the British did to Bengal in 1857 and the Americans have been doing to the Native Americans since they got here. They took by force, not by superior ethic, religion, tradition, or racial superiority. The book itself, despite its "must read status" and historical importance, is very poorly written and highly repetitious. If you read the concluding few pages, you will have the main points of the argument. Read the rest of the book if you want the details. And Frank provides plenty of detail, footnotes, references, etc. All in all, this book is important for understanding the world's past as well as the contours of the future. I wonder how long it will take for the pendulum to swing back to Asia. Chinese-US relations are getting interesting, aren't they?
|
