Speaking of Guam, @BESW, I was thinking about asking a question about The SEA is Ours while waiting for my copy to come. I'd like to know what you think about the question; mainly what the answer is, but also partly whether you think it would fit well on the main site.
Since the topic challenge is about increasing diversity in literature, and the purpose (at least one purpose) of increasing diversity in literature is to increase understanding of other cultures, I was wondering if TSiO did a good job of portraying Pacific culture. Are there things it gets right/wrong, and what are those things?
It's steampunk, so I would understand if some things were changed, but I'd like to know if I can read the stories and gain an accurate understanding of Pasifika (spelling?). I haven't had much exposure to that culture (those cultures?) in the past.
So I'd like to know if this first impression gets it right.
(And no, I haven't seen Moana yet. That's also on a list, but I guess I should really ask the same question.)
In the 1980s, the indigenous people of Guam, Chamorros, started writing and performing music in the style of American country artists. "Chamorro country" became very popular. As people do, some folks started arguing about whether Chamorro country was part of the Chamorro culture.
A batik artist, respected for her understanding of Chamorro culture as it relates to American influences, was asked this in an interview.
She said, "Chamorros are doing it, right? So it's part of their culture."
This is, perhaps, an over simplified vision of culture, but I think in the context of The SEA is Ours it's useful.
If SEA authors are writing SEA steampunk, then it would be difficult for it to not in some way be an authentic representation of SEA culture.
Moana's actually a good counterexample here: as much as Disney consulted with an unspecified group of Polynesian "experts," and cast mostly Polynesian actors, Moana is not made by Polynesians and so cannot inherit any authenticity from its creators.
Whatever authenticity Moana might have must lie in accurately and respectfully representing the existing reality of a group outside the creators' experience; The SEA is Ours, by contrast, is about a group exploring new bounds of their own reality.
Okay. (FTR, I wasn't going to watch Moana thinking "this is it, pay attention to the culture," as I might read TSiO)
At the same time, it's still not SEA authors writing about SEA culture as it is today. It's SEA authors writing steampunk; some cultural things might change in the creation of a story that's in a different setting/culture (whichever steampunk is; I suppose we'll get there). But I see your point; SEA authors wrote it as a SEA book, so we'll trust them that they made sure to maintain the essential pieces of SEA culture in the stories.
(And I just realized that SEA stands for "South East Asia," and now I feel like I'm the last one to notice that.)
Yeah, they aren't going to get everything right in terms of portraying historical reality, or even contemporary reality, but there's a different kind of analysis and criticism to be made.
'cause, yanno. You get Chamorros from Guam, Saipan, and Rota and ask them whether chenchule' is more valuable when paid in cash or labour, and you'll get four different answers. Cultures are not monocultures.
@Shokhet culture isn't static. It changes over time. The SEA is Ours doesn't aim to portray an unchanging culture from the past; it aims to create new culture for the future.
@Hamlet You make a valid point; culture is certainly not static. However, I'm not sure that I'd say that's the aim of the anthology (at least not until I've read it).
They also pointed out that steampunk as a genre tends to romanticize the colonial empires that oppressed South East Asia, and that they were, in a sense, taking back that aspect of it.
@BESW Reading guampedia.com/chenchule makes me wonder whether I'll need to keep guampedia or a similar site open while reading the book, or if the authors included a glossary (or explain whatever terms they may use in the stories). @Hamlet?
@Hamlet It wasn't a question of wanting to, it was whether I'd need to. It's likely that I'll want to read it on Shabbat, when I won't use my computer. If I would need it, then I'd either be frustrated by reading it or (more likely) read it during the week.
Glossing, and not glossing, says a lot about who you're writing for--and who you're not writing for.
It's in the same category as whether or not you italicise certain words because they're "not normal English."
(BTW, @Shokhet, Guampedia's a good resource, but don't take everything at face value. The broad strokes of that article are accurate, but a lot of the things it says about chenchule' are very regional.)
The passage in question is:
The philosopher said "From an army of three divisions one can take
away its general, and put it in disorder; from the man the most abject
and vulgar one cannot take away his thought."
Who is Thoreau referencing here? Is it anyone in particular, or is he makin...
Like, it says "chenchule' is now often documented in writing among families, recording the date of the contribution and its type and amount." That's... not wrong... but you'll find at least as many families who laugh and say "What? How do you not know who you're chenchule'ing with? That must be embarrassing for you."
Or who say that keeping track of amounts so specifically goes against the spirit of chenchule'.
Also inafa’maolek is kinda... controversial? It's a relatively new phrase to describe very old social values, and people aren't all sure how they feel about it pushing out the older ways of talking about that stuff.
@BESW Maybe this is a good analogy to my question that started this conversation. guampedia was (presumably) written by Chamorro to describe Chamorro culture, and some will say that they got it wrong.
I know Chamorros who would get throwing-things mad at what it says about mamåhlao.
(Five years ago I was a designer and consultant on a social studies text for contemporary Chamorro culture. The project overseer wasn't from Guam, and had a lot of surprises about just how much variety in culture there is across our tiny islands.)
People will make assumptions about what a "Jewish" last name is, for example, but don't realize that there are and were Jews all over the world. I know some Jews with last names that most people would think are Hispanic ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Anyway, I have to go now. Thanks for the fascinating and enlightening discussion :)
Lots of things to think about. Maybe I will end up posting the question on the main site, but I don't know if I'll do it before reading the book. (But then again, the question probably contains the answer; it's a SEA book by SEA authors.) We'll see.
The passage in question is:
The philosopher said "From an army of three divisions one can take
away its general, and put it in disorder; from the man the most abject
and vulgar one cannot take away his thought."
Who is Thoreau referencing here? Is it anyone in particular, or is he makin...
