Some of the weirdest, longest wars around have been on the other side of the Big River, but for some reason most American war nerds would rather read about Eurasian battles. Not sure why, except I remember when I was growing up Mexico just seemed like a depressing place. That was because us gringos don’t go much past the border towns, which are as scummy as border towns anywhere. Once you get past the zebra-striped burro zone, it gets a lot more interesting—still depressing, but a lot more interesting.
I’ve written about a few of the bigger Mexican battles like Celaya, and Black Jack Pershing’s Elmer-Fudd hunt for Pancho Villa, but there was (still is, in fact) a longer, weirder war down in the Yucatan.
The Yucatan is where the Maya had their wacky world. The Mayans are the leading candidate for alien-bred humans, and you can see why when you look into them. They were weird even by local standards, little big-nosed people who had lots of interesting habits including building uninhabitable mini-pyramids, mutilating themselves to celebrate every holiday—you know it’s Arbor Day if the local Mayans are sticking sharp thorns into their dicks. An interesting set of people, with a kind of depth you don’t get from the Aztecs. Those Aztecs were pretty straightforward: We’ll kill ya, period. In that way the Aztecs were a good match for the Spanish, another bunch of shoot-firsters. The difference came down to weapons and the fact that the Spanish, who were a new brand in Mexico, hadn’t had time to piss off all potential allies like the Aztec had. By the time the Tlaxcalans and other tribes got their buyers’ remorse, they were already enslaved and the Aztecs were gone, another top-heavy over-centralized empire that fell fast.
...
http://exiledonline.com/the-mayan-caste-war-viva-los-machetes/
thirdplace posted:
anyone ever buy a dolanbook? was thinking about it b/c dammit the man deserves my dollars but pleasant hell doesn't really sound appealing and i know nothing of poetry
So get the War Nerd collection! There's probably a bunch of old essays from exile.ru that you've probably missed...
The Spanish had used up their miracle on the flying ants, and the Mayans, like a nerd turning in a set in Risk, decided to use theirs in 1850, after the Spaniards had pushed back and taken the west side—or at least the cleared parts. They managed to capture and kill the closest thing the May had to a leader, Cecilio Chi. The Maya needed a miracle of their own.
And when the Mayan miracle popped up, it was classic Maya weirdness: A Talking Cross. The Mayans had a thing about trees—well, they had a lot of “things,” like you know how the Hero Twins insulted the Lords of Death in the big Maya epic poem? They call them “Users of Owls.” Oooh, that’s gotta hurt! “Mom, he called me a user a’ owls!
Their God-stories said the world came out of a tree, and the hero twins—I dunno, something else about a tree—so it was natural they’d tree up when it was time for a cause-saving miracle. The story went that lightning hit a bunch of trees on a hilltop and they burnt into the shape of a cross. Which was a pretty cool way to hit the perfect demographic mix, actually. The Cat’lics had already been around a while, and the Mayans had gone for that Muthah-Mary stuff in a big way, so some Mayan rebel Karl Rove type realized whoa, we’ve got the perfect story here, it’s got the Catholic cross thing and the Mayan tree thing all in one—and so the Crozoob, the “Cross People,” were launched.
Impper posted:
pleasant hell is really good, whyw ouldnt you read it? there's only one bad passage in the entire book, the rest of it is beautiful prose if nothing else
really? i was always under the impression that it had gotten some mediocre reviews and that other dolan fans were disppointed with it... but if you like it i'll have to check it out.
what's the one bad passage?
germanjoey posted:
Impper posted:
pleasant hell is really good, whyw ouldnt you read it? there's only one bad passage in the entire book, the rest of it is beautiful prose if nothing else
really? i was always under the impression that it had gotten some mediocre reviews and that other dolan fans were disppointed with it... but if you like it i'll have to check it out.
what's the one bad passage?
the mediocre reviews that are on the internet are very weird, like 3 out of 5 of the bad reviews are about finding it in an airport apparently? like... that is just weird lol.
anyway it wasn't disappointing, it was all very dolan-esque. it was better than his poetry, it was dolan being dolan. there were some parts that were very sad, actually
now that i think about it, it is classic dolan. as a NOVEL it doesn't really work at all, but as like 20 separate essays that are united by dolan's simple biography, it is an absolutely brilliant work. i don't know why dolan can't sustain really long narratives, but for some reason he just can't. he trails off, he forgets, he goes on tangents, and the structure gets very funny as a result. that doesn't make it bad, it's just... not really a great novel, but it's an amazing book. i think that explains people's discomfort with it: they're not sure what it is "supposed" to be so they are just confused & angry.
Impper posted:germanjoey posted:
Impper posted:
pleasant hell is really good, whyw ouldnt you read it? there's only one bad passage in the entire book, the rest of it is beautiful prose if nothing else
really? i was always under the impression that it had gotten some mediocre reviews and that other dolan fans were disppointed with it... but if you like it i'll have to check it out.
what's the one bad passage?the mediocre reviews that are on the internet are very weird, like 3 out of 5 of the bad reviews are about finding it in an airport apparently? like... that is just weird lol.
anyway it wasn't disappointing, it was all very dolan-esque. it was better than his poetry, it was dolan being dolan. there were some parts that were very sad, actually
now that i think about it, it is classic dolan. as a NOVEL it doesn't really work at all, but as like 20 separate essays that are united by dolan's simple biography, it is an absolutely brilliant work. i don't know why dolan can't sustain really long narratives, but for some reason he just can't. he trails off, he forgets, he goes on tangents, and the structure gets very funny as a result. that doesn't make it bad, it's just... not really a great novel, but it's an amazing book. i think that explains people's discomfort with it: they're not sure what it is "supposed" to be so they are just confused & angry.
thats so pomo
Impper posted:
pleasant hell is really good, whyw ouldnt you read it? there's only one bad passage in the entire book, the rest of it is beautiful prose if nothing else
I grew up on a farm in the middle of nowhere and lived in major cities ever since so the whole suburban angst thing isn't really relatable or interesting to me. but looking into it more I'm wondering if maybe that's an unfair characterization ? dolan at berkely in the 80s sounds like a good time at the very least
Myfanwy posted:
I love Dolan's article about the Mongols the most. You can tell he just adores the sheer alienness of them. It also introduced me to reading primary source stuff, where I read so many fun things. omg there are like 6 different priest/cardinal/bishops who were sent as envoys to mongols and wrote a little summary of their journey for their sponsor. and they all have these amazing little stories that mongols tell them, like one tells about how the only tribe that ever beat the mo ngols were these dog men who fought with just their teeth and claws, and in the winter they'd get their fur all wet so it froze into impenetrable armor (you actually hear the same story about us soldiers bullets not penetrating the layers of frozen winter wool and leather coats that the n. koreans wore during korean war) and a tribe of guys who had one arm and one leg, and their mouth was on their chest aand they had no eyes, and they fought by turning into circles holding swords, and all of this super awesome stuff like that.
Tell me more, strange one
The Department of Homeland Security was actually a cost saving measure. You see, many of the services that got pulled into its umbrella were all nicely unionized under their previous departments, and kind of expensive as a result. Moving all those workers to a new department however, pulled them out of their old collective agreements, effectively de-unionizing them, and freeing up a substantial pile of cash (and setting some precedent) for the oligarchs.
i did not know this, in fact i have no idea if some random commenter is telling the truth, but lol... lolllll
Impper posted:
sounds plausible enough so i'll choose to belieb it