How real is race? What is biological fact; what is fiction; and where does culture enter? What do we mean by a “colorblind†or “postracial†society; or when we say that race is a “social construction� If race is an invention; can we eliminate it? This book; now in its second edition; employs an activity-oriented approach to address these questions and engage readers in unraveling—and rethinking—the contradictory messages we so often hear about race.The authors systematically cover the myth of race as biology and the reality of race as a cultural invention; drawing on biocultural and cross-cultural perspectives. They then extend the discussion to hot-button issues that arise in tandem with the concept of race; such as educational inequalities; slurs and racialized labels; and interracial relationships. In so doing; they shed light on the intricate; dynamic interplay among race; culture; and biology.For an online supplement to How Real Is Race? Second Edition; click here.
#4872949 in Books Headline Book Publishing 2005-09-01Original language:EnglishPDF # 1 9.30 x 1.50 x 6.10l; 1.70 #File Name: 0755310411416 pages
Review
0 of 0 people found the following review helpful. WORTHWHILE BUT WITH IRRITATING BLEMISHESBy PositiveAlmost 400 pages; good coloured plates; 3 clear and helpful maps; useful appendices and bibliography; good paper (for sake of technicalities).On the whole a deeply researched study of Nelson; extending ones knowledge of his whole role as the Trafalgar victor. Napoleon emerges as a more cardboard cut-out figure; largely because he is treated in the usual fashion as leader who "did not understand sailors and the sea"; and the foil for Nelson. It is certainly a thought-provoking book for anyone interested in the subject to read and absorb.Some chapters are better than others.The book is best when explaining the ships; seamen and tactics of the rival navies; and gives clear and vivid accounts of Trafalgar.On the other hand the biographical backgrounds of Nelson-- what shaped him as a leader--serves little purpose. Not only is it sketchy; but it is also constantly interrupted by explanations of events; and other people; which tell us nothing about him; or Trafalgar. For instance; do we really need to know that Lord North resigned in 1782; or that chaplains enjoyed an improved status? Admittedly he had more words in which to do it; but Sugden tells us about the making of Nelson whereas Mr Lee does not. As for Napoleon; there is next to no explanation of how his success in land war influenced his naval thinking but failed to translate into success there. There are one or two good insights from French historians about Napoleon the improviser and chancer; but otherwise he seems to feature only as a foil for Nelson. As for Villeneuve (Nelson's opponent at Trafalgar); Mr Lee prejudices us by dismissing him as a fool and a failure BEFORE suggesting why--indeed the book has a general tendency to give flip judgments which are then inadequately evidenced. (The Spanish admiral Gravina is praised; but no reason is given as to why; for example).Chapters 10 ("Corruption") and 12 ("The Melville Affair") are interesting accounts of controversies about political management of the Royal Navy (Addington and St Vincent v Pitt and Dundas); but are not made relevant to Nelson and Trafalgar; and merely break up the flow. What did Nelson think of these controversialists and what did they think of him? How exactly did the return to office of Pitt or the attacks on Dundas (Melville) shape the buildup to Trafalgar? There are also some odd statements here. Dundas is said to have helped Pitt "improve the daily lives of a rapidly growing electorate" in the 1790s--quite wrong. Middelton (Lord Barham) is dismissed as an "old buffer"; without reference to his important work before the war. Soldiers and sailors are described as having the means--literally--to weaken the nation; because their political loyalty was strained. Why "literally"? And what evidence of this is there? (the remark is not followed up). These two chapters in particular also jump from statement to statement without apparent relevance. Just what has Pitt enobling his banker to do with him returning Middleton to the Admiralty; and what has that to do with Nelson and Trafalgar? (We are not told).So; do get this but better to invest in Sugden--and in my view even the two chapters on Christopher Lloyd's 1954 book "The Nation and the Navy" provide a clearer and more understandable account of the subject in very condensed form.4 of 4 people found the following review helpful. Expands on the Common StoryBy John MatlockHaving just passed it's 200th anniversary; the Battle of Trafalgar was the deciding battle that enabled Britain to rule the waves for the next century and more. In this book Mr. Lee; the author of the award winning radio history of Britain; 'This Sceptred Isle;' takes a view of the battle and of the key commanders.The title of the book reflects the main subjects; a rivalry of commanders that had gone on for years. The secondary commanders such as Villeneuve; Cornwallis; Collingwood are likewise covered in detail.This is a well researched; well written history of the battle and the people. There are a lot of histories of Nelson and Napoleon; this book has a lot more on their lower level commanders. Perhaps best however; is the final fifty pages or so. Here is where the battle itself; and the aftermath is described. In addition there is a very interesting 'What If.''What if Nelson had lived?' Blind in one eye; he was losing his vision in the other. Politically astute and extremely popular; could he have become Prime Minister; what about his temper - not good in a politician. Very interesting book.
