Histories of colonial blueprints neglect how institutions actually performed locally

Evidence

What is offered below is an attempt to engage with Mitchell’s argument by questioning, not his characterization of what preceded the introduction of modern “reforms,” but by elaborating on his analysis of how they did in fact work in the Egyptian context. For Mitchell, in his attempt to uncover the logic of these modern institutions of power and their physical representations, is not interested in showing how they actually worked in the specific case of Egypt. While recognizing the fact that there often existed a discrepancy between the blueprints he studied and their implementation, arguing, in fact, that the whole process of “colonization” was to effect this discrepancy, Mitchell’s main task remains, however, to see how these “enframing devices” (laws, blueprints, maps, plans, etc.) were drafted and conceived of, rather than how they were implemented and executed. … For example, while ostensibly showing how Egyptian schools were refashioned towards the end of Mehmed Ali’s reign, Mitchell confines his analysis to explaining the rationale behind the new schooling system without in fact studying the actual implementation of that system in its new locale. … What we are offered here is a concise history of the idea of discipline as formulated by British (and Egyptian) educationalists and not a historical account of the performance of Egyptian schools, which, while they attempted to follow the Lancaster system in all its Foucauldian details, could not be expected in all probability to have done so in the neat and automatic manner assumed by Mitchell. — Khaled Fahmy, All the Pasha_s Men_ Mehmed Ali, his…, 114

Categorization

• XREF: Methodological distinction between idea-of-institution histories and ground-level performance — parallels Fahmy’s archive-driven method versus intellectual histories of reform.
• QUESTION: Worth chasing how Fahmy’s own archive work answers this gap for the military specifically.
• DEFINE: Defines Mitchell’s ‘enframing devices’ concept.