How Finland rebranded itself as a literary country (2018)
theparisreview.org
theparisreview.org
Because this article certainly gave up any pretence of being a neutral account about halfway trough.
What about Linux?
http://staefcraeft.blogspot.com/2013/07/linus-torvalds-there...
Which is the definition of being an ethnic Swede. He's part of the relatively small Swedish minority in Finland. I was never contesting his Finnish nationality.
wassenaar10’s two posts above are quite reasonable and on-topic, though I can understand how they might sound odd or offensive to people unfamiliar with Finland.
I don't know where you got that from. Finland is no less legitimate than all the other European countries whose independence movements arose in the 19th century, like Poland or those which emerged from Austro-Hungary. Finland is a fairly typical European nation-state.
> a comprehensive lack of familiarity with American history.
Ethnicity did not play the same role in the American War of Independence as it did in the 19th-century European independence movements, for the simple reason that that new notion of ethnicity did not arise until the age of Romanticism and the years immediately preceding 1848.
> your parochial resentments
I don’t share the resentments to which wassenaar10 may allude. I am not saying that he is correct, only that his view is one that exists in the Finnish context.
> We are familiar enough with trolls
"Troll" has a very specific meaning in internet parlance and is not merely anyone that you think is wrong.
Question: You were born in Finland, but your mother tongue is Swedish. Do you call yourself a Finn, or a Swede? What is it like to be a Swede in Finland?
Torvalds: Oh, I’m a Finn, definitely. When Finland beats Sweden in ice hockey, it’s a national holiday, and Swedish-speaking Finns are celebrating. I only speak Swedish; there are no ties to the country of Sweden. And don’t say “Swede in Finland,” it’s really “Swedish-speaking Finn” (“finlandssvensk” in Swedish, “suomenruotsalainen” in Finnish).
Finland has only one author at that level: Sofi Oksanen.
In comparison, Sweden has Hundreds and Norway has about three.
Edward Dutton, an Englishman living in Finland has had some success. But the book was about Islam, and it was leeched like crazy, probably millions. Then the book was banned from Amazon and removed from PP. Baddest of the non-bad books.
The global median reader has poor reading comprehension skills and has read few other books. Their main concern is entertainment. Entertaining as many readers as possible in order to be popular requires writing about broad-interest subjects using surface level knowledge.
Dedicated literary critics have read many more books than average and are better at extracting meaning from what they read. They're looking for "quality," which is nebulous but distinct from entertainment value, and they're less likely to be put off by abstract concepts or complexity. Specialized critics are better; if you want a sci-fi book you ask a sci-fi reader.
As anecdotal evidence I submit the sales figures of Fifty Shades of Gray.
The reason for why critical acclaim is a better measure of whether a book is good than popularity is because critical acclaim is explicitly and directly concerned with assessing the quality of the product. As opposed to popularity, which has zero explicit relationship to the quality, it is only concerned with the raw demand numbers.
Just because mcdonalds is one of the most popular (if not the most popular) restaurants in the world, it doesn't mean that the quality of food there is better than that at a random much less popular Michelin star restaurant.
In the same vein, Transformer movie series is of a pretty terrible quality, but it is insanely more popular than something very critically acclaimed like Parasite. Just looked up numbers, and the first Transformers movie alone (from 2007) had about $700mil in worldwide sales, as opposed to about $250mil for Parasite. And mind you, Parasite wasn't some unknown indie movie that was critically acclaimed. It was one of the most popular critically acclaimed movies out there.
But here's a deeper question for you: is a book great if it was only popular in its era?
Most people seem to agree that the greatest books are the ones that outlive their authors, which means that popularity and even critical reception in the short-term matter very little.
The popularity of something has nothing to do with its quality.
More than that, if you’re indeed going by the MC Donalds way of measuring things, you’re bound to be much more interested in:
> “Today Finland’s literary exports have tripled in size...”
Than how many people steal your books. Popularity that you can not turn into profit is completely useless in any professional sort of way.
Popular books aren’t better or worse than “good” books, they’re a different product. Could Michael Crichton have won the Nobel prize? Or could the Nobel prizewinner for literature write - and sell - a massive hit like Jurassic Park?
Sweden has so big lead in the tradition and skill in marketing that it's not even funny. There is this romantic idea that if you do good art, it will be recognized organically. But people want to read what others read. Good writer must be popular to sell books.
Her.
I don't see any evidence that you can promote genders equality meaningfully by changing the language, but I believe there is some truth to the weak form of the Sapir-Whorf Hypothesis (the theory that the particular language one speaks influences the way one thinks about reality).
It may seem odd to some in English in contexts where the gender is well established and/or obvious, but they'll get over it.
Except that's it's typically used a plural. Referring to one person as multiple is weird, awkward and clunky. Or, you're making a multi-personality joke. I thought we were at the point where poking fun at mental illness was a no-no? That's micro-aggression behavior there on your part. So sure, if you don't think about, it works. Just like saying apple instead would work if you don't think about it.
Yes, languages differ. Why anyone still uses accent marks is weird too. Oh well. A few people forcing their own ideals on the masses isn't right either. Two wrongs don't make a right.
I consider it a lot weirder that letters are pronounced differently depending on which word they are used in.
Trying to cater for people who get worked up over singular they/them is not worth the effort.
Talk about burying the lead
Googling him leads to his wiki article
> Edward Croft Dutton (born 1980) is an English anthropologist and white supremacist known for authoring controversial racialist articles for fringe far-right journals such as Mankind Quarterly and OpenPsych.[1][2] Dutton is associated with the white nationalist group Patriotic Alternative.
I was a young kid in the 80s in Italy and somehow someone mentioned Palahniuk to me. I kept hearing this name for the next several years.
However, I never really understood what's so special about him (not to say that there isn't anything, just admitting ignorance), but also failed to find a news piece or a blog post that would clearly explain it.
Literary critics did not get the modern references like "I have constructed my life from Ikea-catalog". And they truly hated misogynist Jordan Peterson - style analysis of man's life "men are all brought up by women" and "everyman lives his days in quiet desperation".