“Yellow Card Man” by Paolo Bacigalupi, Hugo Awards 2007 Nominee

September 12th, 2007 gier

The Hugo Awards winners for 2007 was announced last month at Nippon2007. I don’t imagine this little factoid would be of any importance to most of the readers here (all eight of you, plus your pets). Except that one of the nominees for Best Novelette was a story written by Paolo Bacigalupi, titled “Yellow Card Man”.

The story is set in a dystopian future Bangkok, and revolves around a man named Tranh. He used to be the head of a multi-national trading company, Three Prosperities, operating out of “Malaya”, but had been forced to flee the country after the “Incident”. What this Incident was, exactly, was never explained but you get some hints. But the net result was that he had lost his company (probably to a “Malay native”), his sons were dead and probably his daughters too. The story narrates a short snippet of Tranh’s life in Bangkok after all that. It was not a good life.

I don’t really want to say much else, really, except that you should go and read it. That it was set in Bangkok, and that the protagonist was a “Malay-Chinese” is interesting for us, though the story is not so much about that, but more about environmental issues and genetically modified food. However, to whet your appetite further, here are some snippets from the story:

And isn’t that why the Green Headbands in Malaya hated us Chinese? Because we looked so good? Because we looked so rich? Because we spoke so well and worked so hard when they were lazy and we sweated every day?

Yellow card people as far as the eye can see: an entire race of people, fled to the great Thai Kingdom from Malaya where they were suddenly unwelcome.

He searches around, pawing for more portions of the sign, wondering if anyone treadles a phone call to that old phone number, if the secretary whose wages he once paid is still at his desk, working for a new master, a native Malay perhaps, with impeccable pedigree and religion.

For what it’s worth, while the winner of the Hugo for Best Novelette was good[1], I personally think that this one is better.

To read both these novelettes and a whole slew of other fantastic science fiction, I’d recommend buying the book “The Year’s Best Science Fiction: Twenty-Fourth Annual Collection” edited by Gardner Dozois. There are three copies left at MPH One Utama, last I looked, and one in Border’s at the Curve.

[1] “The Djinn’s Wife”, by Ian McDonald. It’s set in a future Delhi, where India’s fallen apart into different autonomous regions, with Artificial Intelligences “living” side-by-side with humans. And djinns.

Posted in Book Reviews | No Comments »

Not quite what it says on the cover

June 22nd, 2007 gier

Title: May 13: Declassified Documents on the Malaysian Riots of 1969

Author: Dr. Kua Kia Soong

Publisher: SUARAM (2007)

This May 13 book has generated a lot of controversy in the past month and a bit since it was published, partly because it deals with a very controversial and painful time for Malaysians, but mainly because it is a subject that the government has actively discouraged from discussing openly. And as we all know, where there is prohibition, there is desire. I obtained this book late last month but only got into it a week ago. A slim tome, it was not that difficult to finish. It was, however, a difficult read because in spite of myself, I was often left quite incredulous by its contents.

The author maintains that the “May 13 Incident” was above all, a coup d’etat by the then emergent Malay state capitalist class to depose the Tunku who represented the outdated Malay aristocracy. It was a critical political putsch which changed the course of Malaysian political history and ensured the rise and entrenchment of the new Malay capitalist class through the New Economic Policy

Introduction, pg. 3.

One did not have to read far into the book before the author’s predetermined bias was made clear, as shown in the excerpt above. In fact, one did not even have to open the book at all to see it, since the blurb at the back said the same thing. In and of itself, that’s not really a problem. Where this book breaks down is that Dr. Kua seems to have failed to provide his assertions with actual, solid proof.

In a sense, it wasn’t what was written in the book that left me dissatisfied, it was what was left out. The blurb at the back of the book also claimed that it is “the first credible account of the May 13, 1969 riots in Malaysia …”

I don’t think so.

For example, in the Introduction, the author wrote that Chapter Two, The 1969 General Elections, examines the 1969 elections, and states that “… But as observers have noted, the jubilation and celebration by the opposition parties after the election results could not possibly be sufficient excuse for the hoodlums to run riot.” (pg. 5). However, in Chapter Two itself, there were no citations or statements from the “observers” refuting the official government line that puts the “blame for the riots on the provocation by opposition parties after they had made significant gains in the 1969 general elections.” (pg. 29).

In Chapter 3, Record of the Riots, the author all to briefly touched on the May 9 Labour Party funeral procession and the May 12 “Victory Parade”, with no real details included. Contrast this with Mubin Sheppard’s biography of the Tunku[1] where he chronicled the events leading up to May 13 to include the genesis of the May 9 Labour Party funeral procession, and the May 12 “Victory Parade” organised by the DAP and Gerakan. While the May 9 funeral procession omission may be understandable, it was inexplicable that Dr. Kua did not elaborate on the May 12 parade. In the Tunku book, Dr. Sheppard wrote “When the main body dispersed, groups of troublemakers, Indian and Chinese, toured the main Malay residential area and deliberately insulted the residents, sometimes accompanying their remarks with indecent gestures. No breach of peace occurred, but the deliberate provocation contributed powerfully to a demand, the next morning — May 13 — for a Malay counter-procession: a demand which could not be refused.” (pg. 163)

One gets the feeling that the May 13 author deliberately put his blinkers on, and choose to not mention several incidents leading up to the May 13 incident, just so that he can assert his own take on things. And his take was that it was a coup d’etat.

I was hoping for some mega revelation, of clandestine meetings, planting of agents provocateur in mobs and some sort of steady eradication of the aristocratic rulers’ (as personified by the Tunku) influence which then led to the May 13 incident and the culmination of the coup by the setting up of the National Operations Council (NOC) and suspension of parliament. The way the book was promoted, you got the feeling that the incident itself was a planned event as part of the coup rather than resulting in the NOC and suspension of parliament.

Indeed, one would better assume that May 13 represented the culmination of disparate events which were used by certain UMNO leaders as leverage to remove the Tunku from power. This was also the opinion expressed by Dr. Syed Husin Ali, in an interview in Malaysiakini.

Going through the rest of the book, I get the impression that the book is more of a diatribe against the racial policies of the government (rightly or wrongly) than an in-depth account of the May 13 incident, betraying the author’s DAP credentials. And that, in the end, is the main reason for my dissatisfaction with the book. The claims made in promoting the book were not substantiated by the contents. Never has the cliche’ to not judge a book by its cover (and its propaganda) been more true.

This book is not a balanced account of the incident, and in that sense, cannot be a “credible” one. And what a shame that is.

[1] Tunku: His Life and Times: The Authorized Biography of Tunku Abdul Rahman Putra Al-Haj; Mubin Sheppard; Pelanduk Publications (1995).

Update 2007-06-25: It has been pointed out to me (by Farish) that Dr. Kua may not, in actual fact, be a DAP member anymore. I have not found any evidence of this either way, so far.

Posted in Book Reviews | 5 Comments »

Is it time yet?

April 18th, 2007 gier

A month or so ago, I promised Farish Noor that I’d write a review on Tun Dr. Ismail’s biography, “The Reluctant Politician: Tun Dr. Ismail and His Time” by Dr. Ooi Kee Beng. Obviously, I haven’t written it yet, because it ain’t on OtherMalaysia.org. Anyhow, in the meantime, my favourite online comic’s published a review by Sharon Siddique. Mr. Jeff Ooi, esq. also covered the book in his own inimitable style, by not actually reviewing the book per se (on account of not actually having fully read it). Rocky mentioned another blogger, Pak Idrus who also made a review of the book from a more personal angle, having known the great man.

Like many people, I started reading the excerpts of the book in the New Sunday/Straits Times (which you can find wholesale (copyright violating) copies of on Malaysia-today.net). From reading the excerpts, I couldn’t wait to get the whole book and I must say that it is not a disappointment. Pending the review on othermalaysia.org (which I may never write, because I’m a lazy fart), all I can say is if you haven’t read the book yet, go get it. It’s quite readable, even if you’re not a bookworm.

Now, one of the most revealing things from the book is Tun Dr. Ismail’s view with regards to the Special Position of the Malays, where during the pre-independence discussions Tun Dr. Ismail noted, on page 82-83:

The Special Position of the Malays

This proved a less intractable problem because the leaders of the Alliance realised the practical necessity of giving the Malays a handicap if they were to compete on equal terms with the other races. The only point of controversy was the duration of the ’special position’ — should there be a time limit or should it be permanent? I made a suggestion which was accepted, that the question be left to the Malays themselves, because I felt that as more and more Malays became educated and gained self-confidence, they themselves would do away with this ’special position’ because in itself this ’special position’ is a slur on the ability of the Malays and only to be tolerated because it is necessary as a temporary measure to ensure their survival in the modern competitive world: a world to which only those in the urban areas had been exposed.

The author wrote after, that “… What is striking is Ismail’s belief that the Malays would do the right thing in the long run, …”.

Further on in the book, covering the aftermath of 13th May, 1969, we see again Tun Dr. Ismail’s view on Malay rights in the speech he gave on television on 2nd August 1969. Excerpts of the speech was inserted by the author as so (page 207):

Without this special provision, the Malays at this stage cannot hope to hold their own against other communities in normal competition. This is a fact that cannot be denied. I am confident that with the passage of time, the Malays will be quite capable of meeting the non-Malays in normal competition without the special position (Siaran Akhbar PEN.8/69/22).

and again (page 215):

[The Malays] must be the judges to determine whether or not the special position is no longer necessary for their survival. Any other course would certainly provoke internal disorder — perhaps of a much bigger dimension than the disturbances of May the 13th (Siaran Akhbar PEN.8/69/22).

and also again (page 217):

The special privilege or position accorded to the Malays under the Constitution is mainly intended to enable them — to borrow an expression from the game of golf — “to have a handicap”, which would place them in a position for a fair competition with better players. Therefore, like a golfer, it should not be the aim of the Malays to perpetuate this handicap but to strive to improve their game, and thereby reducing, and finally removing, their handicap completely (Siaran Akhbar PEN.8/69/22).

Further on, in a separate speech given to the National Consultative Council (NCC) in February, 1970, Tun Dr. Ismail said (page 225):

I regard the Special Position of the Malays as a handicap given to the Malays with the consent of all the other races who have become citizens of this country so as to enable the Malays to compete on equal footing for equal opportunities in this country. That and that alone is the only aim of the Special Position of the Malays. But unfortunately the Malays themselves have tended to give the impression consciously or unconsciously that the Special Position of the Malays is a sign that the Malays are placed superior to the other races in the country. The biggest mistake that the Malays made of course was to coin the term “Bumiputra” because this term tended to convey an entirely different meaning to what was intended for the Special Position of the Malays. By coining “Bumiputra” the non-Malays suspected the Malays of wanting to classify themselves as first-class citizens while they were relegated to second-class (Letters 23 February 1970).

So, in three separate occasions, 1956, 1969 and 1970, Tun Dr. Ismail gave his opinion with regards to the Special Position of the Malays. To me, these are the salient points:

  • The Special Position of the Malays is a handicap given to the Malays to help them us compete.
  • This Special Position is a slur on the ability of the Malays — in other words, the Special Position is an embarrassment, and not something to be proud of.
  • Coining the term Bumiputra is, to him, one of the biggest mistakes the Malays ever made.
  • He believes that when the time comes, the Malays themselves ourselves will ask for the Special Position to be removed.

And therefore, the questions that the we Malays should ask, often and consistently, until we don’t need to ask them anymore is:

Is it time yet? Can we now remove this slur on our abilities and compete on a level playing field? Are there now enough Malays out there to ask these questions? Are there now enough Malays out there that are brave enough, strong enough, capable enough to cut through the Ketuanan Melayu shit and compete on level terms? Are there enough Malays out there who realise that “Malay” is just a construct and have no bearing on whether one is stupid, smart, pious, hedonistic, rich or poor?

Are we embarrassed enough yet?

There are, after all, no Special Ones. Apart from Jose Mourinho, that is. He’s Portuguese, so that doesn’t count.

Posted in Book Reviews, Mentera Moden, Politics | 1 Comment »