California: An Interpretive History

I found this book a surprisingly easy read. I work in the cultural resource industry, writing reports etc., and I have found it extremely useful as a general text on California history. I have also seen it widely used in reports authored by other professionals.

I have yet to come across a better book for a comprehensive introduction to California history.


Strange Book   July 25, 2002
 2 out of 15 found this review helpful

Last semester I took history of california, and I had to use this book. Overall it was a desent book, eccept I like shee photos of the historic sites, and this book gave very few.


does "interpretive" mean neglectful? or just PC?   September 16, 2001
 14 out of 28 found this review helpful

It is true that UC Berkeley is a top ranked school for History. Sadly, this UC Professor misses the mark. This interpretive history does do many aspects of California History justice, but it completely neglects or distorts certain other facts in Early Californian History. The men who wrote it would do well to get a hold of some primary source martial of the earlier times they write about (journals of pioneers and settlers, for example.) But they probably won't, not even for future editions... If they did so, they might find out how wrong they are on a few of their topics and views held by some 19th century Californians immigrants. Also, it seems that they fail to emphasize the dubious nature of some of the late land grants & claims on the verge of the American take over from Mexico. Perhaps I am too harsh and they will consider the impact of the "Mormon Battalion" or the impact of the ship "Brooklyn". Or Inland Empire farming by Sikhs.

In an effort to paint an "inclusive" history (where only the Anglo is the bad guy,) the authors focus on discriminatory practices by whites against Chinese immigrants; yet neglect to take a hard look at graft and oppression Chinese immigrants faced at the hands of other Chinese. While the whites were certainly discriminatory, the Chinese immigrant was harmed and taken advantage of other Chinese immigrants as well. But it's less glamorous to take on those issues and much more self-righteous to point a finger by playing a race card. (If one human harms another, I guess it only matters if they are of different ethnicities...)

The authors also point to the racist-supremacist view of the Anglo-Saxon Republic but fail to point out that the same was true of the Mexican-Catholic government. When Mexico held California, non-Catholics could not own property (which is why the Scotsman, Gilroy converted.) Furthermore, the decline of Native American inhabitants of California under the Spanish & Mexican regimes could be more strongly articulated... but that's not popular to talk about. Lastly, while I am pleased that they did an adequate job of covering the earlier discrimination against Japanese immigrants, the Japanese internment, and Korematsu v. US, they completely neglect the Sikhs, and a landmark case of U.S. v. Bhagat Sign Thind. Obviously, this book is written for the current vogue in History etiquette. Rather than trying for circumspection and providing a durable history based on objectivity, they settle for current interpretation... which leads makes one feel history is not compelling or relevant if it simply changes with the modern political mood.


A monumental waste of time!!!   February 24, 2001
 5 out of 20 found this review helpful

I am presently taking "California History" at the College of San Mateo and our professor is utilizing this text. This book is a real "sleeper." It is one of the most uninspiring history books I have ever read. Very dull!