So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the
Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
determined.

If her previous works were anti-Chinese, I don't know. But this seems
sufficiently against that that I would expect it would more than make up
for that.

This book, I might add, is also very well written and extremely entertaining
and was just a great read that thoroughly deserved a Hugo. If it had been
on the ballot I would have voted for it. Is there hope for a Nebula maybe?
There were some odd technical problems which all could have been accounted
for by the differences between our universe and theirs but which did seem a
little glaring. But it was still great.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the
>Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
>It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
>the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
>determined.
>
>If her previous works were anti-Chinese, I don't know. But this seems
>sufficiently against that that I would expect it would more than make up
>for that.

Perhaps you are not considering how a /Communist Goverment/ might feel
about a novel extolling the virtues of the non-communist past.

>This book, I might add, is also very well written and extremely entertaining
>and was just a great read that thoroughly deserved a Hugo. If it had been
>on the ballot I would have voted for it. Is there hope for a Nebula maybe?
>There were some odd technical problems which all could have been accounted
>for by the differences between our universe and theirs but which did seem a
>little glaring. But it was still great.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On 3/5/2024 12:38 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>
>> So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the
>> Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
>> It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
>> the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
>> determined.
>>
>> If her previous works were anti-Chinese, I don't know. But this seems
>> sufficiently against that that I would expect it would more than make up
>> for that.
>
> Perhaps you are not considering how a /Communist Goverment/ might feel
> about a novel extolling the virtues of the non-communist past.

Seeing as a Chinese edition has been published, in China, I don't think
they objected to the book. Its disqualification seems to have been at
the hands of a clueless and craven committee of Westerners.

The Opium Wars and in particular, the destruction of the Summer Palace,
are a staple of current Chinese criticism of the West. The period is
known as 'The Century of Humiliation'.

pt

Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>Seeing as a Chinese edition has been published, in China, I don't think
>they objected to the book. Its disqualification seems to have been at
>the hands of a clueless and craven committee of Westerners.
>
>The Opium Wars and in particular, the destruction of the Summer Palace,
>are a staple of current Chinese criticism of the West. The period is
>known as 'The Century of Humiliation'.

This is clear and evident before the book was even read. But what I didn't
realize before reading it was just how fun a book it was.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 3/5/24 5:23 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Cryptoengineer <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Seeing as a Chinese edition has been published, in China, I don't think
>> they objected to the book. Its disqualification seems to have been at
>> the hands of a clueless and craven committee of Westerners.
>>
>> The Opium Wars and in particular, the destruction of the Summer Palace,
>> are a staple of current Chinese criticism of the West. The period is
>> known as 'The Century of Humiliation'.
>
> This is clear and evident before the book was even read. But what I didn't
> realize before reading it was just how fun a book it was.
> --scott
>
>
It does seem that something good may have come out of this, namely that
more people will be motivated to get Kuang's book and read it. Getting
publicity in news stories in the MYT et al can't be bad for her.

--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn, @eleeper@mastodon.social
Musk cares about the border because "the border" is a publicly-
acceptable euphemism for white supremacy. [@passenger@mastodon.social]

On 05/03/2024 17:48, Cryptoengineer wrote:
> On 3/5/2024 12:38 PM, Paul S Person wrote:
>> On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>
>>> So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that
>>> the
>>> Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely
>>> pro-Chinese.
>>> It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War,
>>> and
>>> the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
>>> determined.
>>>
>>> If her previous works were anti-Chinese, I don't know.  But this seems
>>> sufficiently against that that I would expect it would more than make up
>>> for that.
>>
>> Perhaps you are not considering how a /Communist Goverment/ might feel
>> about a novel extolling the virtues of the non-communist past.
>
> Seeing as a Chinese edition has been published, in China, I don't think
> they objected to the book. Its disqualification seems to have been at
> the hands of a clueless and craven committee of Westerners.

Perhaps the "Westerners" were embarrassed
by the contents on their own hurt feelings.

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the
> Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
> It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
> the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
> determined.

> If her previous works were anti-Chinese, I don't know. But this seems
> sufficiently against that that I would expect it would more than make up
> for that.

> This book, I might add, is also very well written and extremely entertaining
> and was just a great read that thoroughly deserved a Hugo. If it had been
> on the ballot I would have voted for it. Is there hope for a Nebula maybe?
> There were some odd technical problems which all could have been accounted
> for by the differences between our universe and theirs but which did seem a
> little glaring. But it was still great.
> --Scott

I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were engaging,
and the magic system was original. One problem was that criticizing 19th-
century colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy and
out of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or suppression
of dissent.

A minor criticism is that, after Kuang makes a big deal about researching
Oxford slang of the 1830s, she gives her characters a lot of 20th- and
21st-century dialogue, which I found jarring.

Begin extract:

'You rile her up,' Victoire said.

'Don't defend her--'

'You do,' said Victoire. 'You both do, don't pretend otherwise; you like
making her snap.'

'Only because she's up her own backside all the time,' Ramy scoffed. 'Is
she an entirely different person with you, then, or have you merely adapted?'

End extract.

"Rile" and "up her own backside" stood out to me. "Rile", though originally
British, was considered regional and American dialect at the time, according
to the OED. For instance, it appears in a list of Essex dialect words in 1815.
There's no reason for Victoire, a Haitian who has lived in Paris, to know it,
or for the two other characters present (one from China and one from India)
to recognize it.

"Be (stuck) up one's own arse" is first recorded in the OED from 1988.

That kind of thing won't bother a lot of people, but every time I see something
like that it sounds like a wrong note.

Also

S
P O
I L
E R

S
P A
C E

H
E R
E

There seems to be a message that every single white person will oppose and
betray the legitimate aspirations of people of color. No exceptions.

--
Jerry Friedman

On 3/12/2024 12:58 PM, jerryfriedman wrote:

> S
> P
> O
> I
> L
> E
> R
>
> S
> P
> A
> C
> E
>
> H
> E
> R
> E
>
>
> There seems to be a message that every single white person will oppose and
> betray the legitimate aspirations of people of color.  No exceptions.
>

This attitude is very much in line with current CCP doctrine. The
memory of the 'Century of humiliation' is actively kept alive
in China, and informs a lot of current Chinese policy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Century_of_humiliation

pt

jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were engaging,
>and the magic system was original. One problem was that criticizing 19th-
>century colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy and
>out of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or suppression
>of dissent.

Those problems were EXACTLY why I was surprised it didn't get a nomination.
Because those problems are very much advantages for promoting the book in
China. That's what I found so boggleworthy.

>A minor criticism is that, after Kuang makes a big deal about researching
>Oxford slang of the 1830s, she gives her characters a lot of 20th- and
>21st-century dialogue, which I found jarring.

I didn't find it that jarring because I am living in the middle of it, but
I agree that it won't age well.

I disagree with your spoiler, though.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Scott Dorsey wrote:

> jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were engaging,
>>and the magic system was original. One problem was that criticizing 19th-
>>century colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy and
>>out of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or suppression
>>of dissent.

Or other forms of oppression.

> Those problems were EXACTLY why I was surprised it didn't get a nomination.
> Because those problems are very much advantages for promoting the book in
> China. That's what I found so boggleworthy.

Seems strange to me. Maybe there's something that only Chinese people, or
people very knowledgeable about Chinese culture, would object to.

>>A minor criticism is that, after Kuang makes a big deal about researching
>>Oxford slang of the 1830s, she gives her characters a lot of 20th- and
>>21st-century dialogue, which I found jarring.

> I didn't find it that jarring because I am living in the middle of it, but
> I agree that it won't age well.

> I disagree with your spoiler, though.

Did I miss a counterexample?

--
Jerry Friedman

On 2024-03-12, jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>
>> jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were engaging,
>>>and the magic system was original. One problem was that criticizing 19th-
>>>century colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy and
>>>out of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or suppression
>>>of dissent.
>
> Or other forms of oppression.
>
>> Those problems were EXACTLY why I was surprised it didn't get a nomination.
>> Because those problems are very much advantages for promoting the book in
>> China. That's what I found so boggleworthy.
>
> Seems strange to me. Maybe there's something that only Chinese people, or
> people very knowledgeable about Chinese culture, would object to.

I just finished reading it. The plot of _Babel_ is very much
pro-Chinese. But the theme is much more questionable. I would argue
that when you map the modern world onto the conflicts of _Babel_,
China is the best analog for Britain, even more than the United States.

While it's changing rapidly, China remains strongly xenophobic. Now
that they are expanding into the rest of the world, the racism and
nationalism of the xenophobia are a definite problem. The incident in
_Babel_ of British children encountering Robin (Chinese) for the first
time is one that is very often reported by foreigners in China today
when they stray outside their normal habitats. I don't know how true
it is anymore, but it is still being said that most Chinese have never
encountered a foreigner or some one of different race in person in
their lifetime.

I can see the worries about the reception of _Babel_ there.

>>>A minor criticism is that, after Kuang makes a big deal about researching
>>>Oxford slang of the 1830s, she gives her characters a lot of 20th- and
>>>21st-century dialogue, which I found jarring.
>
>> I didn't find it that jarring because I am living in the middle of it, but
>> I agree that it won't age well.

I think there was a stronger than realistic distinction between heros
(21-century thought) and villains ( 19th century thought) that
extended to dialogue. I would treat that as intentional rather than
a mistake.

Overall, of the 3 (potential) Hugo nominees that I've read, I would
probably rank _Babel_ ahead of _The Kaiju Preservation Society_ (fun, but
not deep) and both ahead of _Nettle & Bone_ (the winner).

Chris

Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>On 2024-03-12, jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>
>>> jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were engaging,
>>>>and the magic system was original. One problem was that criticizing 19th-
>>>>century colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy and
>>>>out of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or suppression
>>>>of dissent.
>>
>> Or other forms of oppression.
>>
>>> Those problems were EXACTLY why I was surprised it didn't get a nomination.
>>> Because those problems are very much advantages for promoting the book in
>>> China. That's what I found so boggleworthy.
>>
>> Seems strange to me. Maybe there's something that only Chinese people, or
>> people very knowledgeable about Chinese culture, would object to.
>
>I just finished reading it. The plot of _Babel_ is very much
>pro-Chinese. But the theme is much more questionable. I would argue
>that when you map the modern world onto the conflicts of _Babel_,
>China is the best analog for Britain, even more than the United States.
>
>While it's changing rapidly, China remains strongly xenophobic. Now
>that they are expanding into the rest of the world, the racism and
>nationalism of the xenophobia are a definite problem. The incident in
>_Babel_ of British children encountering Robin (Chinese) for the first
>time is one that is very often reported by foreigners in China today
>when they stray outside their normal habitats. I don't know how true
>it is anymore, but it is still being said that most Chinese have never
>encountered a foreigner or some one of different race in person in
>their lifetime.

I find this difficult to believe. Leaving aside the ubiquity of
western entertainment in China, my folks have travelled
in China in the past and have reported no xenophobia (in
fact, due to their white hair, they were treated as
superstars in some smaller communities).

On 2024-03-22, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
> Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>>On 2024-03-12, jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>
>>>> jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were engaging,
>>>>>and the magic system was original. One problem was that criticizing 19th-
>>>>>century colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy and
>>>>>out of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or suppression
>>>>>of dissent.
>>>
>>> Or other forms of oppression.
>>>
>>>> Those problems were EXACTLY why I was surprised it didn't get a nomination.
>>>> Because those problems are very much advantages for promoting the book in
>>>> China. That's what I found so boggleworthy.
>>>
>>> Seems strange to me. Maybe there's something that only Chinese people, or
>>> people very knowledgeable about Chinese culture, would object to.
>>
>>I just finished reading it. The plot of _Babel_ is very much
>>pro-Chinese. But the theme is much more questionable. I would argue
>>that when you map the modern world onto the conflicts of _Babel_,
>>China is the best analog for Britain, even more than the United States.
>>
>>While it's changing rapidly, China remains strongly xenophobic. Now
>>that they are expanding into the rest of the world, the racism and
>>nationalism of the xenophobia are a definite problem. The incident in
>>_Babel_ of British children encountering Robin (Chinese) for the first
>>time is one that is very often reported by foreigners in China today
>>when they stray outside their normal habitats. I don't know how true
>>it is anymore, but it is still being said that most Chinese have never
>>encountered a foreigner or some one of different race in person in
>>their lifetime.
>
> I find this difficult to believe. Leaving aside the ubiquity of
> western entertainment in China, my folks have travelled
> in China in the past and have reported no xenophobia (in
> fact, due to their white hair, they were treated as
> superstars in some smaller communities).

Most of my discussions of racism in China have centered on black
racism so perhaps I was overly general. White skin is prized in
China, but incidents like this are very commonly reported by blacks.
A nice modern report from a black who loves China is
https://www.thinkchina.sg/being-black-china-loving-something-doesnt-always-love-you-back
Another older report:
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/article/black-tourist-china

I haven't looked much at academic research, but just casually looking
now I encountered
https://africansinchina.net/race-racism-in-research/
which has lots of discussion and pointers. Eg.
contemporary research regarding online constructions of identity
in China reports that there is an overriding perception that
Africans/blacks are not only economically and culturally inferior,
but also a threat to the racial purity of the Chinese nation (Shen
2009; Lan 2016; Zhang 2019, Wang 2019).
(General point of this report, with a certain degree of validity, is
that "racism" is a Western concept)

China was tremendously insular in the past but is opening up rapidly.
Social attitudes are slow to change, though.

Chris

On 22 Mar 2024 20:27:49 GMT, Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> wrote:

>On 2024-03-22, Scott Lurndal <scott@slp53.sl.home> wrote:
>> Chris Buckley <alan@sabir.com> writes:
>>>On 2024-03-12, jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> jerryfriedman <jerry.friedman99@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>I thought it was good but not great. The story and characters were engaging,
>>>>>>and the magic system was original. One problem was that criticizing 19th-
>>>>>>century colonialism and especially the Opium Wars seemed too easy and
>>>>>>out of date. And nothing was said about China's conquests or suppression
>>>>>>of dissent.
>>>>
>>>> Or other forms of oppression.
>>>>
>>>>> Those problems were EXACTLY why I was surprised it didn't get a nomination.
>>>>> Because those problems are very much advantages for promoting the book in
>>>>> China. That's what I found so boggleworthy.
>>>>
>>>> Seems strange to me. Maybe there's something that only Chinese people, or
>>>> people very knowledgeable about Chinese culture, would object to.
>>>
>>>I just finished reading it. The plot of _Babel_ is very much
>>>pro-Chinese. But the theme is much more questionable. I would argue
>>>that when you map the modern world onto the conflicts of _Babel_,
>>>China is the best analog for Britain, even more than the United States.
>>>
>>>While it's changing rapidly, China remains strongly xenophobic. Now
>>>that they are expanding into the rest of the world, the racism and
>>>nationalism of the xenophobia are a definite problem. The incident in
>>>_Babel_ of British children encountering Robin (Chinese) for the first
>>>time is one that is very often reported by foreigners in China today
>>>when they stray outside their normal habitats. I don't know how true
>>>it is anymore, but it is still being said that most Chinese have never
>>>encountered a foreigner or some one of different race in person in
>>>their lifetime.
>>
>> I find this difficult to believe. Leaving aside the ubiquity of
>> western entertainment in China, my folks have travelled
>> in China in the past and have reported no xenophobia (in
>> fact, due to their white hair, they were treated as
>> superstars in some smaller communities).
>
>Most of my discussions of racism in China have centered on black
>racism so perhaps I was overly general. White skin is prized in
>China, but incidents like this are very commonly reported by blacks.
>A nice modern report from a black who loves China is
> https://www.thinkchina.sg/being-black-china-loving-something-doesnt-always-love-you-back
>Another older report:
>https://www.nationalgeographic.com/travel/article/black-tourist-china
>
>I haven't looked much at academic research, but just casually looking
>now I encountered
> https://africansinchina.net/race-racism-in-research/
>which has lots of discussion and pointers. Eg.
> contemporary research regarding online constructions of identity
> in China reports that there is an overriding perception that
> Africans/blacks are not only economically and culturally inferior,
> but also a threat to the racial purity of the Chinese nation (Shen
> 2009; Lan 2016; Zhang 2019, Wang 2019).
>(General point of this report, with a certain degree of validity, is
>that "racism" is a Western concept)
>
>China was tremendously insular in the past but is opening up rapidly.
>Social attitudes are slow to change, though.

When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
the core.

During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
people".

In terms of cultures, racism is pretty much universal, in one form or
another.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
>instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
>a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
>vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
>were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
>the core.=20

A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
had different notions of horsepower, also.

In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars
were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was
needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.

>During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
>not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
>immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
>people".

Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to
erase.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 23 Mar 2024 16:36:13 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
>>instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
>>a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
>>vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
>>were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
>>the core.=20
>
>A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
>things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
>the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
>had different notions of horsepower, also.
>
>In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
>Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars
>were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was
>needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
>the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
>
>>During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
>>not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
>>immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
>>people".
>
>Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
>besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
>outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to
>erase.

Watching that historical documentary /Aleksander Nevskii/ shows them
attacked from both East and West. What's not to be paranoid about?

But my point was that the "reasons", however valid, for some
particular nation's racism (and sexism etc) do not explain it. It is
much much deeper and far more universal than commonly acknowledged.

A book I read recently asserted that, by 1914 (it was written in
1896), the world would be a shambles, all states would be dissolved,
all denomination likewise, and the world would be ruled from
Jerusalem, by a partnership between the Saxons (that is, the Ten Lost
Tribes) and the Jews (as junior partners, of course).

Believing you are God's Chosen People probably fed into WASP racism,
but it didn't cause it.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>On 23 Mar 2024 16:36:13 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>
>>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
>>>instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
>>>a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
>>>vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
>>>were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
>>>the core.=3D20
>>
>>A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar=20
>>things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
>>the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
>>had different notions of horsepower, also.
>>
>>In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
>>Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how =
>Tatars
>>were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this =
>was
>>needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
>>the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
>>
>>>During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
>>>not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
>>>immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
>>>people".
>>
>>Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
>>besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the=20
>>outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to
>>erase.
>
>Watching that historical documentary /Aleksander Nevskii/ shows them

Ahem.

There was a constant state of border wars for a thousand
years in eastern europe, which culminated in WWII. Rus
expanded and contracted throughout those years.

Assuming a soviet propaganda film is an accurate
depiction of historic Rus seems fraught.

>attacked from both East and West. What's not to be paranoid about?

Eisenstein was pushing patriotism - how else but to extrapolate
from an historical episode and embellish it a bit for propoganda
purposes?

Since the Visigoths sacked Rome, everyone in europe has
invaded pretty much everyone else at some point in time
and the catholic church was usually either implicitly or
explicitly involved.

On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

>So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the
>Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
>It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
>the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
>determined.

I think I've heard that the issue isn't the current work but that
she's written stuff critical of China in the past.
>
>If her previous works were anti-Chinese, I don't know. But this seems
>sufficiently against that that I would expect it would more than make up
>for that.
>
>This book, I might add, is also very well written and extremely entertaining
>and was just a great read that thoroughly deserved a Hugo. If it had been
>on the ballot I would have voted for it. Is there hope for a Nebula maybe?
>There were some odd technical problems which all could have been accounted
>for by the differences between our universe and theirs but which did seem a
>little glaring. But it was still great.
>--scott

On Sun, 24 Mar 2024 21:01:32 GMT, scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> writes:
>>On 23 Mar 2024 16:36:13 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>
>>>Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>>When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
>>>>instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
>>>>a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
>>>>vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
>>>>were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
>>>>the core.=3D20
>>>
>>>A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar=20
>>>things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
>>>the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
>>>had different notions of horsepower, also.
>>>
>>>In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
>>>Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how >>Tatars
>>>were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this >>was
>>>needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
>>>the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
>>>
>>>>During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
>>>>not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
>>>>immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
>>>>people".
>>>
>>>Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
>>>besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the=20
>>>outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to
>>>erase.
>>
>>Watching that historical documentary /Aleksander Nevskii/ shows them
>
>Ahem.
>
>There was a constant state of border wars for a thousand
>years in eastern europe, which culminated in WWII. Rus
>expanded and contracted throughout those years.
>
>Assuming a soviet propaganda film is an accurate
>depiction of historic Rus seems fraught.
>
>>attacked from both East and West. What's not to be paranoid about?
>
>Eisenstein was pushing patriotism - how else but to extrapolate
>from an historical episode and embellish it a bit for propoganda
>purposes?
>
>Since the Visigoths sacked Rome, everyone in europe has
>invaded pretty much everyone else at some point in time
>and the catholic church was usually either implicitly or
>explicitly involved.

Thanks for confirming my point.

Sort of, anyway.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

Mad Hamish <newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
>On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>
>>So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the
>>Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
>>It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
>>the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
>>determined.
>
>I think I've heard that the issue isn't the current work but that
>she's written stuff critical of China in the past.

Which would be even WORSE because it would be punishing her for "reforming"
and finally writing something less critical.

Whatever it was, it was sure a mess.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>> When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
>> instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
>> a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
>> vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
>> were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
>> the core.=20
>
> A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
> things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
> the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
> had different notions of horsepower, also.
>
> In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
> Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars
> were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was
> needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
> the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
>
>> During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
>> not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
>> immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
>> people".
>
> Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
> besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
> outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to
> erase.

Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a vast
plane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a friendly
ally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean moats
in east and west.

Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.

pt

On 3/25/24 2:18 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
> Mad Hamish <newsunspammelaws@iinet.unspamme.net.au> wrote:
>> On 5 Mar 2024 01:35:28 -0000, kludge@panix.com (Scott Dorsey) wrote:
>>
>>> So, I am reading Rebecca Kuang's _Babel_ to see just what it was that the
>>> Hugo Committee may have objected to, and I find it extremely pro-Chinese.
>>> It is strongly against British imperialism and against the Opium War, and
>>> the Chinese government of the time may not have been very strong but was
>>> determined.
>>
>> I think I've heard that the issue isn't the current work but that
>> she's written stuff critical of China in the past.
>
> Which would be even WORSE because it would be punishing her for "reforming"
> and finally writing something less critical.
>
> Whatever it was, it was sure a mess.
> --scott

As I noted elsewhere, the good news is that all this resulted in a lot
of publicity for the book, which could well reach a wider audience than
if it *had* won the Hugo.

--
Evelyn C. Leeper, http://leepers.us/evelyn, @eleeper@mastodon.social
Musk cares about the border because "the border" is a publicly-
acceptable euphemism for white supremacy. [@passenger@mastodon.social]

On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:15:35 -0400, Cryptoengineer
<petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:

>On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>> When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
>>> instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
>>> a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
>>> vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
>>> were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
>>> the core.=20
>>
>> A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
>> things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
>> the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
>> had different notions of horsepower, also.
>>
>> In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
>> Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars
>> were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was
>> needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
>> the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
>>
>>> During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
>>> not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
>>> immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
>>> people".
>>
>> Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
>> besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
>> outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to
>> erase.
>
>Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a vast
>plane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a friendly
>ally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean moats
>in east and west.
>
>Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.

Indeed.

But does it explain the racism? That's what it was brought up here to
do.

And does it excuse (or explain) their attempts to seize their
neighbors' land -- thus opening themselves up to retribution.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"

On 3/26/2024 11:36 AM, Paul S Person wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Mar 2024 16:15:35 -0400, Cryptoengineer
> <petertrei@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 3/23/2024 12:36 PM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
>>> Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
>>>> When I was taking Russian in the Army, one of our instructors (the
>>>> instructors were all people expelled/fleeing from the Soviet Union, so
>>>> a certain amount of bias may be presumed to be present in these
>>>> vignettes) that the students at Patrice Lumumba University, in Moscow,
>>>> were carefully kept away from ordinary Russians, who were racist to
>>>> the core.=20
>>>
>>> A former co-worker of mine actually went to Lumumba and had similar
>>> things to say (although he was white, which was not unusual among
>>> the Lumumba students). It was interesting when we realized that we
>>> had different notions of horsepower, also.
>>>
>>> In the thirties and forties there was a big propaganda push to convince
>>> Soviet citizens of the unity of their country, with films about how Tatars
>>> were just like normal Russian people and so forth. The fact that this was
>>> needed is a sign of a problem. The fact that it kind of petered out and
>>> the problem continued is a sign of humans being human again.
>>>
>>>> During the Sochi games, their Patriarch asserted that Russians should
>>>> not mix with the locals or other non-Russians, not because it was
>>>> immoral, but because it would "dilute the racial purity of the Russian
>>>> people".
>>>
>>> Well, yes, but there are plenty of other reasons for Russian insularity
>>> besides just racism. Centuries of being taught that everyone in the
>>> outside world is out to get you leaves attitudes behind that are hard to
>>> erase.
>>
>> Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. It sits in the middle of a vast
>> plane without natural barriers; contrast to the US, which has a friendly
>> ally to the north, and a weak nation to the south, and vast ocean moats
>> in east and west.
>>
>> Russian paranoia is based on bitter experience.
>
> Indeed.
>
> But does it explain the racism? That's what it was brought up here to
> do.
>
> And does it excuse (or explain) their attempts to seize their
> neighbors' land -- thus opening themselves up to retribution.

Russian Racism I can't speak on. Russia has a 'Manifest Destiny'
complex known as 'Russki Mir', or 'Russian World', in which it
desires to spread its Orthodox, authoritarian culture to the
rest of the world. [1]

[I note that America, and earlier European colonial powers
are/were guilty of similar hubris.]

As for expansionism, when you have no geographical barriers
between you and your perceived enemies, one vital defense is
creating buffer zones, pushing out until you *do* reach
geographical barriers.

Peter Zeihan [whom I take with more than a pinch of salt]
explains it best [2].

Moscow is now a one day drive from both Ukraine, and Latvia.
That NATO now has direct borders on Russia gives Putin the
vapors.

TLDNR: Putin feels Russia isn't safe unless it can
reconstruct the Soviet Union and regain suzerainty over
the former Warsaw Pact. Russia won't stop, so it has
to be stopped.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_world
[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4QRMcrvyQ_U

pt

On 3/25/2024 4:15 PM, Cryptoengineer wrote:
[snip-snip]
> Russia's been invaded roughly 50 times. [snip]

Would you happen to remember where you read this claim? I wonder if it
included the Crimean Khanate's raids into Russia, Poland-Lithuania and
other regions in the 15-18th centuries. There were well over a hundred
major raids, which resulted in the capture and enslavement of hundreds
of thousands of people. (Estimates vary, but it seems likely that the
grand total was over 1 million, possibly over 2 million.)