Why there is no poststructuralism in France: the making of an intellectual generation

and technology on to the solid roots of Chinese cultural heritage, and Chairman Mao exhorted the nation to learn the techniques of the barbarians in order to defeat them. And, in some respects, the Chinese education system has been viewed through the lens of PISA by many foreign commentators as outstripping the competition and providing a gold standard for emulation – a perception that the authors, drawing on their deep personal knowledge and experiences in China as a student, teacher, and academic (Zeng) and as a textbook writer and researcher (Vickers), suggest is “occluded by Oriental mystique” (332) and in need of demystification – which they proceed to deliver. This book unpicks the knotty complexities of the education reforms in a crisp and entertaining style, with regular references to Chinese aphorisms and barbed puns, and the occasional bon mot (‘Women would be unable to “hold up half the sky” as Mao envisaged, if they were left holding the baby’ (82)). Anecdotes drawn from the authors’ experiences add piquancy to the narrative. The tone is neither hyper-critical nor panda-hugging: it is measuredly sympathetic to the scale of the challenges encountered by policymakers, although not always to the adopted solutions. Education and Society in Post-Mao China plugs a major gap in the English-language literature by achieving its aim of offering a “reasonably comprehensive” and “historically informed and critical ... commentary” on the development of Chinese education in the past 40 years of rapidly changing and often turbulent circumstances. The book should appeal to comparativists, with its frequent references to Japan’s salutary experiences under the Meiji Restoration and to commonalities found in other countries. A broader readership is also likely to find this volume informative and thought-provoking.