Thank you, Ed, for your attempt. Even though I didn’t like the book, it’s good that you are persevering in your efforts instead of, like so many others, just talking about it. I wouldn’t get too upset about reviews; though he got a stellar rating from the Taipei Times, I don’t think Steve Crook’s got publishers knocking down his door at all hours. I’d just let it go and keep writing if that’s what you enjoy doing.
What is a “mantou”?
Do you guys want to see the poem I wrote in Chinese in about twenty minutes? It is pretty not good.
I believe it’s a daily component of Taiwanese conscripts’ diet, and what they count down toward the blessed day when they’ll be released into civvy street. But you’ll probably have to read Poagao’s book if you want to know all there is to know about this.
Yes, Paogao,
Continuing on with writing is exactly what I plan on doing, and it is curiosity and a determination to improve that drives me to go on - not bitterness. I realize that I cannot spend a lot of time worrying about what other people say. As long as there is positive feedback (and, in the main, there had been) then I know I must have done at least something right, and that something can be built on. Most have said (before tactfully imparting one or two suggestions) that they found it to be “entertaining,” and that is really the highest compliment I could have asked for. As for forgetting the review in the Taipei Times, that really depends on them at the moment. But, more on that later.
Oh, and BTW, I’d be very interested to read your own book. Don’t worry, I wouldn’t do so with the intent of saying something bad about it, or hacking it to bits, say. It’s just that curiosity I have. And, I know how hard the first book can be. Also, when it comes to criticizing books, I tend to agree with Kurt Vonnegut:
“A reviewer who expresses rage and loathing for a novel is preposterous. He or she is like a person who has put on full armor and attacked a hot fudge sundae.”
Poagao, to be fair, I can very much see where you are coming from here, but then again, like I said earlier, you have to consider the audience that the book was addressed to.
Ed, sorry for commenting on something I’ve not read, but from this thread would I be fair in assuming the style is pretty much an emails home to sort of look at Taiwan and this part of the world? I presume in that context you can’t run especially deep and so it is by nature deliberately irreverent.
HG
For the most part, the intended audience was Western people in the West with a Western view of what things are like in the East. Having said that, however, I think that long term residents might also enjoy it - especially in places. Someone who’s been here for nearly two decades told me they liked it a lot, for example, and he wasn’t stoking my ego because he also gave me some pointed criticism and tips. Two others have said they’ll never look at a Mormon here the same way again.
And it’s not as if I bought a 12-pack of Heineken one day and then blew the dust off the type-writer. Without question, I poke fun and can be devastatingly critical at times, but I never do so without evidence or reason.
I suppose some people would paint me as some literate Joe Six Pack who turned a rant into a book, but that’s the case at all. The “lost in Asia” tag is very dismissive. I’m not lost. I know exactly where I am.
I’m in Danshui.
Also, the book says much more than its detractors would have you think.
Oh, Paogao,
BTW,
I was just wondering; could you give me an example of a run on sentence that you found in the book? I’m aware of 4 typos and 3 factual errors, but not of any run on sentences. If you could (politely) provide me with one one (or more; you used the plural, no?) that would be great. My publisher is interested in fixing the errors.
Thanks
Ed
I was thinking the same thing Ed. I didn’t notice any run on sentences. I thought your book was well written and had a consistent voice throughout.
Yeah. I’ll be curious to see the examples that he is referring to.
I didn’t record the location of each error, just something I noticed as I was reading.
Certainly, I wouldn’t expect you to have recorded where each error was.
But, perhaps you could narrow it down to a chapter or generally whereabouts in the book the run on sentences occur. I mean, if I read a book and noted more than one run on sentence (and I’d be pretty stunned if I found one, although some writers use them stylistically/on purpose) I’d remember the general vicinity of where they occurred.
I’m not saying they don’t exist, I just can’t think for the life of me where they exist.
So, again: where do they exist?
Poagao wrote: [quote]The book is full of mistakes and awkward run-on sentences that a good editor should have dealt with before publication. [/quote]
Let’s have some examples.
Ed’s book has its faults (for example, the last chapter, about Vietnam, is much too long and should have been broken up into several chapters) but I did not notice run-on sentences. I actually thought his use of short sentences was very effective.
Anyway Ed, I would not worry if the Old China hands dislike your book. It is impossible to write a book that will appeal to both newbies and old hands. Keep writing, and I’m looking forward to a hardcore book on China - god knows, I’m sick of all the “rise of China” shit in the press.
Yeah, you’re right.
“… full of … awkward run on sentences.”
Goodness. If my writing is brimming over with lines that don’t constitute sentences, I want to know about it so I can make amends and correct my ways. My thinking is that if it is indeed full of such sentences, then providing a couple of examples should be relatively simple.
Thank you
Paogao,
Also,…
You mentioned in your review that “(a)lthough good, informative books on (Taiwan) are few and far between, there doesn’t seem to be a shortage of poorly written, ill-disguised rants by jaded ex-pat English teachers trying to pass themselves off as sohpisticated globe-traveling writers.”
I am curious (as I mentioned; I am curious by nature): to which books are you refering?
And, one more thing. You also wrote: “Parfitt’s limited understanding of Taiwan’s political scene is conveyed via his mystification about Taiwanese people’s view of Hitler, as well as a piece mocking Annette Lu.”
The DPP used snippets of a Nuremberg ralley to try and drum up support among youth. When criticized by the German embassy, the Israeli embassy, a Jewish group, etc., a DPP spokesman couldn’t understand what everyone was getting so worked up about. Initially, the gov’t refused to pull the ad.
Hitler has also been used to market a heater and the Holocost was used to endorse a restaurant. All of these stories made international news. The heater made Time magazine (In the ‘Winners and Losers’ section; can you guess which one?)
I’d like to know: how does commenting on this underscore my supposed lack of understanding in regard to Taiwanese politics?
And what’s your take on the DPP using Adolf Hitler to drum up the youth vote?
Thanks so much,
Ed
Ed, I’m not going to fight you on every point of my criticism. You can either spend your time trying to subjugate every bad thing anyone says about your book or working to improve your craft: it’s up to you.
For sure, if I ever decide to read this book I’ll review it under a false name. I’m buggered if I’m going to be browbeaten like this for giving an opinion. These people were doing you a favour! You ASKED them to provide reviews, and then after they take the time and make the effort to do so, you turn around and say “you’re talking shite!”
As it is, you’ve completely put me off even taking a look at the damn thing.
[quote=“Ed Lakewood”]Poagao,
And, one more thing. You also wrote: “Parfitt’s limited understanding of Taiwan’s political scene is conveyed via his mystification about Taiwanese people’s view of Hitler, as well as a piece mocking Annette Lu.”
The DPP used snippets of a Nuremberg ralley to try and drum up support among youth. When criticized by the German embassy, the Israeli embassy, a Jewish group, etc., a DPP spokesman couldn’t understand what everyone was getting so worked up about. Initially, the gov’t refused to pull the ad.
Hitler has also been used to market a heater and the Holocost was used to endorse a restaurant. All of these stories made international news. The heater made Time magazine (In the ‘Winners and Losers’ section; can you guess which one?)
I’d like to know: how does commenting on this underscore my supposed lack of understanding in regard to Taiwanese politics?
And what’s your take on the DPP using Adolf Hitler to drum up the youth vote?
Thanks so much,
Ed[/quote]
Not having read your book, I can’t comment on the views you express there. However, what you are saying here puts me in rare agreement with Poagao on Taiwanese politics. Simply repeating Time’s ignorance does not add anything to our understanding of Taiwanese views of Hitler, or why it is that using Hitler for commercial promotional reasons is widely acceptable in Taiwan even among people who really should know better. Like the rest of East Asia, Hitler is not seen as a symbol of supreme evil, nor is the nature of the holocaust understood. This is for the elementary reason that different people know different things about history. It is now fairly clear as a matter of the historical record that Mao was one of the great monsters of our time as well (Great Leap Forward, Cultural Revolution). Yet many in the west continue to see him as a benevolent figure without incurring the scorn of Time magazine.
The DPP was foolish and should have known better than to have used those images. But to say that they were using them to “drum up” the youth vote distorts the nature of what was being done. The DPP was using ‘exciting’ and historical imagery to try to persuade the Taiwanese youth that Taiwanese politics is exciting and matters–that they are potentially party of a historical movement. The content of that movement was never being compared to Nazism, and the whole episode says more about Taiwan’s status society concerned with images rather than meaning.
You also fail to mention the persistent if clumsy efforts of the KMT and its deep blue supporters to compare Chen Shui-bian to Hitler, including an ad that attracted worldwide media attention during the last election. Why the focus on the DPP when this is so universal.
Minor points include the fact that Israel does not have an embassy in Taiwan, and the DPP ad was likely pulled by the DPP itself, not the government.
Based on your post (and your regard for the opinions of Time magazine), I’m concerned about the breadth of your understanding of Taiwanese politics as well.
Paogao,
Unless I forgot to mention it before, thank you for taking the time to read and review the book.
If you aren’t up for a couple of points of clarification, then so be it.
Have a nice weekend,
Ed
[quote]The DPP was foolish and should have known better than to have used those images. But to say that they were using them to “drum up” the youth vote distorts the nature of what was being done. The DPP was using ‘exciting’ and historical imagery to try to persuade the Taiwanese youth that Taiwanese politics is exciting and matters–that they are potentially party of a historical movement. The content of that movement was never being compared to Nazism, and the whole episode says more about Taiwan’s status society concerned with images rather than meaning.
You also fail to mention the persistent if clumsy efforts of the KMT and its deep blue supporters to compare Chen Shui-bian to Hitler, including an ad that attracted worldwide media attention during the last election. Why the focus on the DPP when this is so universal.
Minor points include the fact that Israel does not have an embassy in Taiwan, and the DPP ad was likely pulled by the DPP itself, not the government.
[/quote]
You’d be wrong though, because he covers all the issues as mentioned.