Benedict Anderson stands as one of the most frequently cited yet least fully grasped thinkers of the 21st century. Certain influential books, dangerous when superficially referenced, might be better kept under strict supervision to prevent misunderstanding. Among these is Edward Said’s Orientalism, a work combining remarkable literary strength with a troubled and incoherent argument that attracts a certain type of activist-minded student.
However, in today's era of resurgent nationalism clashing with the post-national ideals of 1990s cosmopolitans, Anderson’s 1983 book Imagined Communities arguably represents the most perilous and misinterpreted text of recent decades. This nuanced analysis of how nationalist sentiment developed in New World creole societies has often been reduced to a simplistic, distorted view.
The crucial term “imagined” has frequently been misunderstood as meaning “imaginary” or “fake.” This misunderstanding has fueled careless deconstructions of national identities, such as the popular claims on social media that “St George was a Turkish migrant” or “fish and chips were invented by Jewish refugees.” These reductive interpretations trace back to this widespread undergraduate misreading.
“The ‘imagined’ was taken to mean ‘imaginary’, and thus ‘fake’. The laborious deconstruction of their own national identities by Twitter bores — the lower-middlebrow purveyors of ‘St George was a Turkish migrant’ and ‘fish and chips were invented by Jewish refugees’ discourse — are all, in their own strange and sub-literate ways, downstream of this undergraduate misreading.”
Anderson’s work remains a subtle exploration of nationalism’s complexities, rather than a simplistic dismissal of national identities as mere fabrications.
Summary: Benedict Anderson’s Imagined Communities is often misunderstood; its subtle insights on nationalism are diluted by popular misreadings that mistake “imagined” for “fake.”