Kimberly HutchingsManchester University Press, Manchester and New York, 2008, 200pp., hardback £60.00, ISBN: 978-07190732021.

Hutchings provides a timely analysis of the relationship between time and International Relations. Time, Hutchings argues, has become increasingly prominent to the discipline of International Relations in the post-Cold War era: ‘the themes of temporality and history have come centre stage in debates about world politics in International Relations since the end of the Cold War’ (p. 14). The passing of the Cold War saw the emergence of a new time and new world order. This raised questions about the direction of time. Was time moving toward a progressive end point? Was world political time destined to become a continual ‘clash of civilizations’? Were there spectres haunting the present and the future? These are just three of the most prominent theories that were put forward about where time was heading in the immediate aftermath of the end of the Cold War. Hutchings’ book is particularly timely, because now, 20 years on from the end of the Cold War, we can begin to assess the new theories that have emerged on the nature of the movement of time in world politics.

The book, initially, surveys the subject by discussing and analysing an exceptionally wide range of existing theories about temporality. The book covers much ground and is a useful work for those uninitiated with the various theories on time. The book is split into two parts. The first three chapters provide the basis for thinking about temporality and provide a solid, although overwhelming introduction to theories of time. The final four chapters move the theory forward by providing analysis of the relationship between theories of temporality and contemporary world politics. This split of the book into two parts enhances its overall structure, readability and coherence.

Unfortunately, Hutchings’ detailed overview of the field and literature on theories of temporality leaves little space for Hutchings to elucidate her own theory. This is disappointing since Hutchings clearly does have a distinct and unique theory of temporality. She, even coins a term for this, ‘heterotemporality’. Hutchings puts forward her own conception of time, one that recognises ‘temporal plurality in world politics’ (p. 154). This notion of heterotemporality is at the centre of Hutchings thinking, where the aim of heterotemporality is a desire to ‘undermine the idea that we can theorise world-political time in homogeneous or unified terms’ (p. 155). It seems that heterotemporality is a shorthand way of articulating a temporality that is not unitary, but plural; it is the idea that ‘world politics is a shifting and unpredictable conjunction of times’ (p. 176). Unfortunately, Hutchings’ concept of temporality is insufficiently fleshed out or elucidated and the reader can easily be left wondering, what does Hutchings’ concept of temporality entail?

The problem I find with Hutchings’ concept of heterotemporality is that it may not be as radical as Hutchings believes it to be. Her main argument that different things are going on in world politics at the same time seems plausible. However, it may still be possible to produce a theory of temporality with a unitary trajectory, where events are moving toward a distinct future, even if there is a plurality of things happening in the present of world politics.

However, the book does provide interesting analysis of a wide variety of theories on time and is thus a valuable introduction to the subject. Hutchings begins with an excellent summary and analysis of the two main theories for understanding the movement of time. She unpicks important implications from the cyclical, repetitive account of history and the linear, progressive account of history; and then explains how the first of these conceptions of time, the Classical notion of circular time, gave way to the Enlightenment notion of progressive time. This provides a crucial foundation to Hutchings project, since these modes of thinking about time remain significant when theorising about history and world politics.

Some parts of the book are rather overwhelming because of the vast range of theories that Hutchings attempts to cover. For instance, in Chapter 3, Hutchings moves away from traditional accounts of temporality and considers accounts of temporality that are positioned against historicism, determinism and progression. To produce this theory of time as something that is indeterminate, Hutchings covers no less than six thinkers Nietzsche, Bergson, Arendt, Benjamin, Derrida and Deleuze in just 20 pages. Chapter 4 is also rather overwhelming. Not only does she cover Popper's critique of historicism, Fukuyama's ‘end of history’ thesis and Huntington's ‘clash of civilizations’ thesis – all of which have had books devoted to them – she also discusses a large body of work from the International Relations literature, for example Gaddis, Bueno de Mesquita, Mearsheimer and Wendt. By covering so much ground, the book can feel more like a quick introduction and summary of a wide range of theorists and their theories on temporality, rather than a work that aims to produce an original contribution to theories of temporality.

Chapters 5 and 6 are more focused and present the ideas of fewer thinkers. In Chapter 5, Hutchings provides analysis of accounts of temporality, which ‘acknowledge an explicitly normative, progressive ethical and political agenda and their indebtedness to modernist philosophies of history’ (p. 106). Chapter 6, in contrast, analyses theories of temporality that reject historicism and modernist, progressive forms of history. I found the choice of Virilio and Agamben to present an indeterminate theory of temporality a little bewildering. There are a number of poststructural theorists whose theories on temporality it would have been interesting to see covered, for example, Derrida (there are brief references to Derrida in Chapters 3 and 7, but these could have been expanded), Baudrillard, Foucault, Lyotard (there are a couple of minor references to Lyotard in the index) and Ermarth.

Ultimately, this book is a valuable introduction to a variety of theories on temporality and provides some fascinating analysis of this literature. However, Hutchings concept of heterotemporality remains rather sketchy, leaving the reader uncertain about the meaning of ‘temporal plurality’.