Yes perhaps a few passed on it because they thought it was “boring, talkative, and poorly researched.” For your information, however, this is a portion of an email I received upon the submission of the manuscript to one of the main publishers of English-language books in Thailand (which will remain unnamed):
“I would love to be able to accept this mss and work with you toward publication. However, under present circumstances I do not feel that it would be possible to publish this book or distribute it successfully via ourselves (or perhaps any channel) in Thailand. I appreciate the fact that you have reviewed the Thai Criminal Code and have aimed to remain compliant. However, as I am sure you are aware (and as you have even pointed out in the prospectus, and for certain in the body of your book) the rule of law is in a very tenuous state in Thailand and has been so for most of its modern history. ‘Big men’ governments tend to do whatever is necessary when it comes to covering their own hides, and the Criminal Code be damned – this is what I am certain would happen if this book were to be published here.”
This is a great picture, and the issue of monks smoking (and esp the effort to reduce monastic smoking) is quite an interesting one in terms of how monastics are both disciplined and perceived within society. A couple of years ago, I think, the Mahatherasamakhom put out some statements about how Thai monks shouldn’t smoke. Around the same time, a relatively conservative monk I know in Chiang Mai (and by conservative I mean carefully embedded within the institution, not red/yellow etc) mentioned how monks who smoke are “not attractive.” This is the same thing that this (and other monks I’ve spoken with) would say when describing inappropriate actions by monks, and I took this at the time to be a reflective of the effort to get monks to quit smoking. That is, by making it contrary to the aesthetics of being a Thai monk.
Why is this sign up here? I assume that it’s aimed at tourists? Or is it part of a larger effort to reduce smoking among Lao monks?
I find Srithanonchai’s dissing of THAILAND UNHINGED as “boring, talkative and poorly researched” to be the product of what would seem to be a previously made-up mind which seems comfortable in a fixed state of repose.
The book is a powerful and provocative statement about the present structure and situation in Thailand and speaks powerfully about many aspects of Thailand’s structure, power relationships and economic system that many Thais do not want to read, hear about or acknowledge.
It’s surprising that no-one here discussed the possibility of Issarn and Lanna seceding from the fascist construct “Thailand”.
As far as I can see – this is the only way to solve the current dilemma : break “Thailand” in two, or three, or four.
On this topic I have also been alerted to Simon Roughneen’s interview with Julie Bishop where she makes similar comments. Key quotes from the interview are available here.
A comment on the FCCT event calls the book, “too imflammatory” to be distributed here. Having read the book in an earlier PDF version, I found it boring, talkative, and poorly researched. So, maybe, that what the reason why “not a single Thailand-based publisher would touch it.”
Very true Nich. In addition to Kyaw Kyaw’s comments, I would also mention that the exercises were not direct, but rather Burma was one of the participants in the exercises, as was Australia a participant in a group activity. Julie Bishop’s suggestion would be akin to suggesting that Australia should never participate in any engagements whatsoever with ASEAN, simply because Myanmar is a member of ASEAN and would be sitting at the table.
First, the Thai panellist were flown in by the Thai government precisely because they were partisan. After all, they did not chose to recruit Ajarn Somsak, Ajarn Worachet, or the editors of Fah Diewgun, or Prachatai (from the perspective of Suthep, these are “subversive” organs). Thus, from the beginning, this was designed as a partisan event, not as an academic exchange of ideas, “reasoned discussion,” and “meaningful debate.” One should then not be too surprised about what happened. Moreover, we all know how difficult it normally is for Thais to enter into a reasoning discourse. All they would normally do is deliver statements. A friend of mine, after having observed numerous such events, called this behvior “autistic.”
Second, regarding “pragmatism” and “dogmatism,” this indeed sounds rather simplistic, as Ajarn Somsak rightly points out. Readers would need a more elaborate exposition by McCargo to know what was on his mind.
“Actually the exercise was not really of a military nature. It was to do with cooperation on piracy, humanitarian disaster relief, drug trafficking, terrorism etc. It is therefore in Australia’s national security interests to be taking part in these exercises. The arms embargo against Burma doesn’t cover these kind of areas, and it shouldn’t. This is a beat up and thankfully the Rudd government hasn’t overreacted. If you’ve ever seen the ships in Burma’s Navy, you’ll know they’re no danger to anyone but their own sailors.
International politics can be thought of as being hierarchic or anarchic, with little advantage to be gained by imposing the demanding assumption of a hierarchical viewpoint. It is time Australia adjusting her aloof worldviews toward Asian countries. To be fully accepted in the Asia-Pacific region, Australia needs to enter into a much more intimate, energetic diplomatic and cultural relations with Asian countries.
Ok… really can’t skip this one. As a long time reader and (very) occasional commentator, I have come to learn whose comments to read and whose to ignore. In the case of Stang (in Thai it would mean he’s not the ‘whole Baht”), I just ignore his comments completely. However, if it is my choice I’ll probably let him continue on for the spirit of free speech. Any new readers will have to make their own decision whether they want to listen to Stang’s views or any other person’s view for that matter.
Having said the above, NM – it is your blog and you have every rights to do what you think appropriate. I think I can live quite happily without Stang’s comments.
Then again, I think this has served his purpose somehow, having his own thread on NM website! That’s quite an achievement, isn’t it?
[…] February 19th, 2010 by Nicholas Farrelly · Add a Comment We are mainly known for publishing books about Indonesia, but I immediately loved the manuscript and wanted it for our catalog. Then, when I discovered not a single Thailand-based publisher would touch it, I knew it was something we just had to publish…Our first book (“Bangkok Inside Out”) was banned for some silly reason like not enough Thai people were smiling in it, so there’s a good chance we’ll be 2 for 2 with Thailand Unhinged. […]
I’m not sure we should view matter the way McCargo and the author of this post put it, i.e excessive ‘dogmatism’. What does this mean exactly? The current four-years old crises involve certain very important political principles, chief among which, in my view, is whether a coup d’etat like the 19 Sep 2006 is acceptable. I absolutely insist that it’s not and that therefore we should return to the status quo before the coup. Is this dogmatism? I think not. But this is precisely the issue that the current Yellow camp would not concede. I wonder how ‘more pragmatism’ on this coup issue would look like in McCargo’s view? Should I and many of the Red Shirts ‘pragmatically’ accept the coup?
(Notice that to call for a return to the pre-coup situations is in fact already a concession. For the coup-makers committed the most serious crime in the law books, punishable by death. To restore the pre-coup order as if they had not, would really be a mercy to them. But even this is not acceptable to the Yellow camp, as they insist on the coup’s legitimacy and refuse its undoing.)
If what’s reported above is all McCargo said, I must say I’m disappointed.
I’m surprised why the good professor should express surprise at the change from Thais “excessive pragmatism” then a ” remarkable reversal” to “insufficient pragmatism”. The “flexibility” and easy of changing loyalties in the past was limited to lower personages and peripheral ideas (e.g. military dictators, external threat: “jek”, colonial powers, Japanese companies in the 70s, the WB/IMF, globalization) that didn’t challenge the ideologically constructed/imposed identity of Thais (“Thainess”) in which the monarchy constitutes a core pillar. Not having the space to debate such sacrosanct issues could explain why Thais hold such “strong opinions” that had the conference not been held in the “civilized” halls of SOAS would certainly have seen the almost natural reaction of Thais to transform into a Hyde-ish monstrous rage and go dangerously berserk when such issues that touch deeply to their core are challenged. I think no amount of freedom to discuss these topics can change the situation within a short period of time. Remember the years of “true democracy” in 1973-76 and the bloody counter reaction? However, Thais have to confront these issues sooner than later as more and more of them realize the lies they have been led to believe over the centuries, both from royals and would be Taksins.
More power to NM. As I said elsewhere, that the blog continues to keep StanG’s comments coming, even if delayed, is a very strong indication of the health of NM, even if StanG doesn’t get it, perhaps deliberately so, as his campaigns continue.
Facebook 
Twitter 
Soundcloud 
Youtube 
Rss
Getting published in Thai Studies
Yes perhaps a few passed on it because they thought it was “boring, talkative, and poorly researched.” For your information, however, this is a portion of an email I received upon the submission of the manuscript to one of the main publishers of English-language books in Thailand (which will remain unnamed):
“I would love to be able to accept this mss and work with you toward publication. However, under present circumstances I do not feel that it would be possible to publish this book or distribute it successfully via ourselves (or perhaps any channel) in Thailand. I appreciate the fact that you have reviewed the Thai Criminal Code and have aimed to remain compliant. However, as I am sure you are aware (and as you have even pointed out in the prospectus, and for certain in the body of your book) the rule of law is in a very tenuous state in Thailand and has been so for most of its modern history. ‘Big men’ governments tend to do whatever is necessary when it comes to covering their own hides, and the Criminal Code be damned – this is what I am certain would happen if this book were to be published here.”
No incense?
This is a great picture, and the issue of monks smoking (and esp the effort to reduce monastic smoking) is quite an interesting one in terms of how monastics are both disciplined and perceived within society. A couple of years ago, I think, the Mahatherasamakhom put out some statements about how Thai monks shouldn’t smoke. Around the same time, a relatively conservative monk I know in Chiang Mai (and by conservative I mean carefully embedded within the institution, not red/yellow etc) mentioned how monks who smoke are “not attractive.” This is the same thing that this (and other monks I’ve spoken with) would say when describing inappropriate actions by monks, and I took this at the time to be a reflective of the effort to get monks to quit smoking. That is, by making it contrary to the aesthetics of being a Thai monk.
Why is this sign up here? I assume that it’s aimed at tourists? Or is it part of a larger effort to reduce smoking among Lao monks?
Getting published in Thai Studies
I find Srithanonchai’s dissing of THAILAND UNHINGED as “boring, talkative and poorly researched” to be the product of what would seem to be a previously made-up mind which seems comfortable in a fixed state of repose.
The book is a powerful and provocative statement about the present structure and situation in Thailand and speaks powerfully about many aspects of Thailand’s structure, power relationships and economic system that many Thais do not want to read, hear about or acknowledge.
There’s no use crying over dammed rivers
I nominate “There’s no use crying over dammed rivers” for the New Mandala Most Painstakingly Cynical Article of 2010 Award.
great, funny stuff.
Getting published in Thai Studies
“I found it boring, talkative, and poorly researched“.
Care to back up that statement with specific examples?
(in the interests of expanding my/our knowledge:)
Ferrara et al, at the FCCT
It’s surprising that no-one here discussed the possibility of Issarn and Lanna seceding from the fascist construct “Thailand”.
As far as I can see – this is the only way to solve the current dilemma : break “Thailand” in two, or three, or four.
Julie Bishop on Australia’s Burma policy
On this topic I have also been alerted to Simon Roughneen’s interview with Julie Bishop where she makes similar comments. Key quotes from the interview are available here.
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Getting published in Thai Studies
A comment on the FCCT event calls the book, “too imflammatory” to be distributed here. Having read the book in an earlier PDF version, I found it boring, talkative, and poorly researched. So, maybe, that what the reason why “not a single Thailand-based publisher would touch it.”
Julie Bishop on Australia’s Burma policy
Very true Nich. In addition to Kyaw Kyaw’s comments, I would also mention that the exercises were not direct, but rather Burma was one of the participants in the exercises, as was Australia a participant in a group activity. Julie Bishop’s suggestion would be akin to suggesting that Australia should never participate in any engagements whatsoever with ASEAN, simply because Myanmar is a member of ASEAN and would be sitting at the table.
An alternative take on the SOAS event
First, the Thai panellist were flown in by the Thai government precisely because they were partisan. After all, they did not chose to recruit Ajarn Somsak, Ajarn Worachet, or the editors of Fah Diewgun, or Prachatai (from the perspective of Suthep, these are “subversive” organs). Thus, from the beginning, this was designed as a partisan event, not as an academic exchange of ideas, “reasoned discussion,” and “meaningful debate.” One should then not be too surprised about what happened. Moreover, we all know how difficult it normally is for Thais to enter into a reasoning discourse. All they would normally do is deliver statements. A friend of mine, after having observed numerous such events, called this behvior “autistic.”
Second, regarding “pragmatism” and “dogmatism,” this indeed sounds rather simplistic, as Ajarn Somsak rightly points out. Readers would need a more elaborate exposition by McCargo to know what was on his mind.
What you see on New Mandala
screw free speech. this is meant to be an academic-leaning blog, and frankly sometimes the comments leave it open for terribly uninformed opinions.
i love New Mandala’s ‘leave a comment’ policy.
its right up there and announced, so if you don’t like it, don’t post!
Julie Bishop on Australia’s Burma policy
Thanks Dylan,
That Kyaw Kyaw sure does have a way with words. What a quotable, but tragic, final line…
Best wishes to all,
Nich
Julie Bishop on Australia’s Burma policy
From the comments on that article:
“Actually the exercise was not really of a military nature. It was to do with cooperation on piracy, humanitarian disaster relief, drug trafficking, terrorism etc. It is therefore in Australia’s national security interests to be taking part in these exercises. The arms embargo against Burma doesn’t cover these kind of areas, and it shouldn’t. This is a beat up and thankfully the Rudd government hasn’t overreacted. If you’ve ever seen the ships in Burma’s Navy, you’ll know they’re no danger to anyone but their own sailors.
Posted By: kyaw kyaw | Yangon – February 18, 2010, 3:38PM”
The Devil’s Discus – in Thai
Smith, Malcolm. 1986. A Physician at the Court of Siam. Singapore: Oxford University Press. 164 pp. (first published by Country Life Ltd. 1957)
Julie Bishop on Australia’s Burma policy
International politics can be thought of as being hierarchic or anarchic, with little advantage to be gained by imposing the demanding assumption of a hierarchical viewpoint. It is time Australia adjusting her aloof worldviews toward Asian countries. To be fully accepted in the Asia-Pacific region, Australia needs to enter into a much more intimate, energetic diplomatic and cultural relations with Asian countries.
What you see on New Mandala
Ok… really can’t skip this one. As a long time reader and (very) occasional commentator, I have come to learn whose comments to read and whose to ignore. In the case of Stang (in Thai it would mean he’s not the ‘whole Baht”), I just ignore his comments completely. However, if it is my choice I’ll probably let him continue on for the spirit of free speech. Any new readers will have to make their own decision whether they want to listen to Stang’s views or any other person’s view for that matter.
Having said the above, NM – it is your blog and you have every rights to do what you think appropriate. I think I can live quite happily without Stang’s comments.
Then again, I think this has served his purpose somehow, having his own thread on NM website! That’s quite an achievement, isn’t it?
Ferrara on Thai politics
[…] February 19th, 2010 by Nicholas Farrelly · Add a Comment We are mainly known for publishing books about Indonesia, but I immediately loved the manuscript and wanted it for our catalog. Then, when I discovered not a single Thailand-based publisher would touch it, I knew it was something we just had to publish…Our first book (“Bangkok Inside Out”) was banned for some silly reason like not enough Thai people were smiling in it, so there’s a good chance we’ll be 2 for 2 with Thailand Unhinged. […]
An alternative take on the SOAS event
I’m not sure we should view matter the way McCargo and the author of this post put it, i.e excessive ‘dogmatism’. What does this mean exactly? The current four-years old crises involve certain very important political principles, chief among which, in my view, is whether a coup d’etat like the 19 Sep 2006 is acceptable. I absolutely insist that it’s not and that therefore we should return to the status quo before the coup. Is this dogmatism? I think not. But this is precisely the issue that the current Yellow camp would not concede. I wonder how ‘more pragmatism’ on this coup issue would look like in McCargo’s view? Should I and many of the Red Shirts ‘pragmatically’ accept the coup?
(Notice that to call for a return to the pre-coup situations is in fact already a concession. For the coup-makers committed the most serious crime in the law books, punishable by death. To restore the pre-coup order as if they had not, would really be a mercy to them. But even this is not acceptable to the Yellow camp, as they insist on the coup’s legitimacy and refuse its undoing.)
If what’s reported above is all McCargo said, I must say I’m disappointed.
An alternative take on the SOAS event
I’m surprised why the good professor should express surprise at the change from Thais “excessive pragmatism” then a ” remarkable reversal” to “insufficient pragmatism”. The “flexibility” and easy of changing loyalties in the past was limited to lower personages and peripheral ideas (e.g. military dictators, external threat: “jek”, colonial powers, Japanese companies in the 70s, the WB/IMF, globalization) that didn’t challenge the ideologically constructed/imposed identity of Thais (“Thainess”) in which the monarchy constitutes a core pillar. Not having the space to debate such sacrosanct issues could explain why Thais hold such “strong opinions” that had the conference not been held in the “civilized” halls of SOAS would certainly have seen the almost natural reaction of Thais to transform into a Hyde-ish monstrous rage and go dangerously berserk when such issues that touch deeply to their core are challenged. I think no amount of freedom to discuss these topics can change the situation within a short period of time. Remember the years of “true democracy” in 1973-76 and the bloody counter reaction? However, Thais have to confront these issues sooner than later as more and more of them realize the lies they have been led to believe over the centuries, both from royals and would be Taksins.
What you see on New Mandala
More power to NM. As I said elsewhere, that the blog continues to keep StanG’s comments coming, even if delayed, is a very strong indication of the health of NM, even if StanG doesn’t get it, perhaps deliberately so, as his campaigns continue.