Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

Eric Selbin's Revolution, Rebellion, Resistance: The Power of Story

Revolution, Rebellion, Resistance: The Power of Story stands out from many of the most influential studies of revolution that have come before it. The well-known comparative historical works of Barrington Moore, Theda Skocpol, and other third generation scholars of revolution turn to structural explanations for the origins and outcomes of revolutions, but Selbin instead takes a much more agencycentered approach by analyzing the role of stories in revolutions. He attempts to answer many of the same questions that scholars of revolution have been asking for generations, like "why revolutions happen here and not there, now and not then, among these people and not those" (p. 3). As evident in the title, Selbin explores cases of not only revolution but rebellion and resistance as well. These cases are divided among four categories, four different stories of revolution which Selbin develops. Myth, memory, and mimesis are the three fundamental aspects of stories that are used to connect revolutionary stories from one place and time to another. Revolutions, rebellions, and resistance are inspired and derived from ancient myths, like Greco-Roman revolutionary leaders, the memory of legendary local events, and more recent revolutions and movements which resonate with certain parts of society. Through stories and Selbin's societal and cultural focus, Revolution, Rebellion, Resistance offers a unique perspective on the relationships between and the distinct individuality of the numerous revolutionary cases under investigation.

The first few chapters of the book present background on the discussion, where Selbin justifies his analytic framework and use of the four stories of revolution, identifies and explains the key concepts to be used, and acknowledges both the benefits and drawbacks of his type of study. The differences between revolutions, rebellions, and resistance are pointed out, but equally important is their relationship and Selbin's explanation of how rebellion and resistance can at times lead to revolution;
1

Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

fine distinctions between the three, however, are difficult given their fluid and overlapping nature and are thus absent. The concepts of myth, memory, and mimesis are also utilized to explain how stories work across time and culture through stories. These central aspects of the framework are utilized for their explanatory power for understanding revolutions through stories, and while descriptions are provided, they are not defined in a very measurable way.

Comparing Selbin's approach with a focus on stories with other more traditional structural explanations of revolutions demonstrates very well both sides of the agency-structure debate. By using stories in his framework, Selbin is able to analyze different elements of revolution and even entirely different eras of revolutions; his focus on individuals and communities allows for more societal and cultural analysis but at the expense of using more measurable quantitative or qualitative factors of more structural, often state-centered approaches. Selbin does not completely disregard such factors as political, economic and social structures, ideology, and the international context, common explanatory factors in many structural studies, but rather wants to highlight the role of agency by focusing on the people and societies who make the revolutions. This idea, that individuals and communities and cultures, through historical, mythical, and globally mimetic stories, actively influence the causes and outcomes of revolutions, rebellions, and resistance, stands in direct contrast to Skocpol, who quotes Wendell Phillips as "quite correct when he once declared: 'Revolutions are not made; they come'" (Skocpol, p.17).

According to Selbin, revolutions are made, in large part by stories and through societies. Approaching revolutions from such a perspective, with stories at the center, proves to be problematic in certain ways, including methodologically. For instance, as noted above, some of the key elements of the book, including the main conceptual focus, stories, are not defined. Selbin justifies this by stating that

Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

this work is not a traditional political science work; he claims that his work can be "most usefully construed as a pre-theory: an exercise providing an orientation about the way the world works and proffering raw materials for theorizing" (Selbin, p.27). Selbin does not need to adhere to such rigid and systematic frameworks because he attempts a different type of analysis, one in which strict definitions and easily measurable concepts are neither necessary nor useful. Some argue that perhaps such complex social phenomenon as revolutions should not or cannot be fully understood by only examining it using systematic, methodologically rigorous, and structural frameworks. Selbin demonstrates through The Power of Stories how his analysis, by focusing on the role of stories in the development of different types of revolutions and being intentionally vague in definitions, can allow the discussion to expand to more places, times, and events. This book shows that using more agency-centered approaches, or at least recognizing and including more social aspects into frameworks, can allow for new cases to be examined, lead to new insights, and provide a more well-rounded understanding of revolutions and their complex origins, processes, and outcomes.

Other problems with stories stem from the way in which Selbin approaches stories, through their underlying myth, memory, and mimesis. Some of the difficulties mentioned with using such concepts are matters of truth, transmission, and translation. As stories are passed across generational, geographic, and cultural boundaries, distinctions between historical fact and fiction are not of primary concern. Stories often change not just from one generation to the next, but from one person to another; in the simple act of (re)telling a story, both the teller and the listener may have their own interpretations. This is one of the unique and useful characteristics of using the idea of stories to explain revolutions. Selbin notes this and reinforces the importance (and limits) of agency early on in the book as he says that "what becomes of the story as it is heard and understood is beyond the control of the storyteller" (Selbin, p.2). The revolutionary stories examined in Selbin's book are highly contextualized;

Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

they vary as stories are transmitted and translated across national and cultural lines; and these changes can alter the focus of stories as certain aspects of them that resonate most within a given community are emphasized and others minimized or altogether left out. Despite that stories can mean different things to different people at different places and times and the issues of transmission and translation, these same stories act as a collective memory between and sometimes across communities. Revolutionary stories are "predicated on mythshifted, shaped, and sustained by memory, and finally, often consciously and intentionally emulative that is, mimetic" (Selbin, p.49).

The true test of Revolution, Rebellion, Resistance and its story-centered approach comes in the main empirical section. Chapters five through eight each detail a different story of revolution, including the Story of Civilizing and Democratizing Revolutions, the Story of Social Revolutions, the Freedom and Liberation Story of Revolution, and the Revolutions of the Lost and Forgotten. The oft-studied English (1688), American (1776), and French (1789) revolutions are characterized as civilizing and democratizing revolutions, although the American and French are used in other sections and the American is questioned as even being considered a revolution. What is unique about Selbin's analysis of these particular revolutions is his identification of their Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian origins. Selbin traces back the Western conceptions of democracy and successful civilizations to the ancient Greeks and Romans; the strength of Judaic and Christian stories and practices has also played key roles in the establishment of Western political and social norms and values. In all of the revolutionary stories investigated by Selbin, the influence that one revolution can have on another is emphasized; much credit is given to the French Revolution in 1789 for being the direct inspiration for many different types of revolutions, and the similarities between various other revolutions is often traced to memory and mimicry. While each of the civilizing and democratizing revolutions differed from one another, Selbin notes the simple connection between the three as "Liberty, Equality, Fraternity," the famous slogan of

Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

the French revolution. He briefly connects these main revolutions in this story with some of the constitutional revolutions of the early twentieth century as well as the events of 1989. The focus of the story of civilizing and democratizing revolutions is clearly summarized as "the destruction of old and outdated concept and institutions and structures of governance, and the construction of the appropriate politicalinstitutions to achieve the goals of liberalization and democratization" (Selbin, p.114).

The second story, the Story of Social Revolutions, also known as the Great Revolutions, contains cases which have also commonly been studied by scholars especially throughout the twentieth century. The cases of France (1789, again), Russia (1917), and Cuba (1959) are the revolutions inspected; China (1949) is the obvious one missing, but it is mentioned briefly along with other more minor cases like Nicaragua and Iran. The inclusion of the same cases in multiple categories would initially raise the question of the usefulness of distinct categories if cases can be sorted into multiple categories. However, the dynamic nature of Selbin's theoretical approach allows different aspects of a revolutionary story to be emphasized. France in 1789 represents not just an example of new political and democratic structures and institutions, but the story of social revolution highlights the fundamental not only political but economic and social changes as well. Towns and roads were renamed and interpersonal relationships became less formal, for example using the word citoyen (citizen) instead of monsier and the tu (informal) as opposed to vous part of speech; the separation of church and state and the movement away from religious and royal leaders were other significant socio-political changes. The Russian revolution also brought about similarly drastic changes to society, in addition to the implementation of progressive programs like public education and social welfare provision. One glaring hole in Selbin's discussion of social revolutions is why certain aspects of a revolutionary story end; for example, Selbin is not able to explain using stories the reversal of the French revolution and the

Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

ascension of Napoleon, nor why the Russian revolution resulted in the imperial and oppressive USSR. While the story approach lacks in this particular respect, as many other approaches do, each case has a distinct legacy: the French in 1789 introduced the modern concept of revolution, the Russian case of 1917 demonstrates the importance of revolutionary processes, and the case of Cuba brought revolution global. The small band of Cuban revolutionaries that were successfully able to defeat the great US superpower (according to their story) has been a model showing the plausibility and possibility for countless other movements around the world that successful was possible.

As his analysis of types of revolutionary stories continues, the structure of Selbin's argument weakens. The Freedom and Liberation Story of Revolution includes a variety of different types of revolutions and cases, including slave revolts and rebellions, anti-colonial movements, and anti-imperial wars of national liberation. This combination of cases may seem too broad to be analytically effective, but Selbin only uses two main cases, Haiti in 1791 and Mexico from 1910-1920 and skims over (mostly in name only) a large number of other freedom and liberation revolutions. These stories of revolution are again traced back to ancient times, referencing the Book of Exodus from the Judeo-Christian tradition as well as the great slave revolt leader, Sparatacus. The myths of historical freedom and liberation revolutionary stories, whether local or global, combined with societal and cultural memories and situations, such as slavery or colonialism, and the mimicry of previous revolutions together produce the broad category of freedom and liberation revolutionary stories. While these similarities may be drawn between cases of freedom and liberation stories, it is especially in the ability of their stories to inspire other revolutionaries that their importance lies. Selbin's case descriptions are useful in highlighting these points, his approach would have more explanatory power if it could differentiate the extent to which each factor contributes to the revolutionary movement or at least if most important factor based on his model was explicitly stated.

Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

The final stories of revolution, those of the Lost and Forgotten, seem to be the ones whose placement into Selbin's analysis are most awkward. The cases he explores, including the 1871 Paris Commune, a portion of the Mexican revolution (Mexico City's 1912-1916 so-called proletarian revolution), and the Green Corn Rebellion in 1917 Oklahoma, are all cases most appropriately labeled as rebellion or resistance. Indeed any number of near-revolutions could be used in this section, especially given that revolutionary attempts are much more prevalent, and thus easily forgotten, than successful revolutions. Though he claims this revolutionary story is not a grab-bag category for any revolutions that do not fit his other categories, the lack of structure, either chronological, sequential, or among revolutionary goals among cases, counteracts that claim. Selbin indeed chooses interesting cases to investigate, but the expected explanation of why these cases did not result in successful revolutions was nowhere to be found. If revolutions are claimed to be at the heart of revolutions, is it that certain aspects of stories are missing from those failed revolutions? This again reiterates the weakness of Selbin's methodology and the use of stories; while stories may be able to expose new information on the role of society and culture in revolutions, clearly absent is their ability to explain cases of nonrevolution or attempted and failed revolutions. Such an analysis would perhaps be more explanatory if it included more structural elements; more focused and clearly defined case studies would also prove beneficial, in addition to linking stories to more traditionally considered factors like nationalism or religious ideologies. The use of stories by revolutionary leaders could also be compared to concepts like resource mobilization and framing; perhaps a connection with such existing, utilized, and accepted theoretical frameworks would lend to a more well-rounded approach.

Many things about Eric Selbin's book Revolution, Rebellion, Resistance: The Power of Story make this an interesting and influential book. The unique approach he takes in studying revolutions highlights

Jay C Colburn II GOVT 731

4/13/2011 Selbin paper

the need for other political science works on revolution to include more agency- or society-structured factors to their analyses. Selbin digs deeper into history, to Greco-Roman and Judeo-Christian stories of revolution and democracy, as inspiration for more recent revolutionary episodes. He bases his analysis of stories in myth, memory, and mimesis, as revolutionary movements and events are the result of complex and at times understated but instrumental factors such as these. Selbin's book does not read like a traditional political science work on revolution in other ways as well; the language he employs is very passionate and emotive and his use of alliteration and other literary devices gives the text a rather oratorical flow. While this stylistic difference may be the first noticeable difference in Selbin's analysis of revolution, rebellion, and resistance, it is by no means the most important. The most profound message that comes across in Revolution, Rebellion, and Resistance is the need for a combination of both agency and structural approaches in order to gain a truly broad and encompassing understanding of revolutions.

Bibliography

Selbin, Eric. 2010. Revolution, Rebellion, Resistance: The Power of Story. New York: Zed Books Ltd. Skocpol, Theda. 1979. States and Social Revolutions: A Comparative Analysis of France, Russia & China. New York: Cambridge University Press.