1 On 19 Feb. 1975, faculty members in the Thai Language Department at Thammasat University organised a panel discussion, ‘Wannakam hai arrai dae sangkhom [What does literature give to society?]’, as a counterattack against radical students who were accused of trying to destroy Thai literature by reading trashy leftist novels instead of classical Thai literature. The students rejected traditional Thai literature as an instrument of the ruling and oppressive sakdina [feudal] classes. Tomayantri, a conservative writer and one of the panellists, attempted to explain sakdina in a positive light but was booed by the students. I was one of a handful of lecturers who had assigned students to read recently resurrected ‘leftist’ literature. For example, my open-book examination question asked freshmen in the Thai Civilization Foundation course to consider the connection between ideology and history when reviewing the works of Prince Damrong, Luang Wichit and Jit Phumisak. Students were asked which history they preferred and why. Students across campus organised study groups to discuss the exam, much to the dismay of some conservative faculty members who accused me and the students of promoting leftist politics on campus. Rua hang yao refers to the modern, sleek, fast and flashy boats equipped with powerful Japanese car engines connected by a long drive shaft to the propeller (thus ‘long tail boat’). I assume that these boats motoring up and down the Chaophraya River along the Thammasat campus and the progressive faculty members on campus are seen as dangerous to the preservation of order and tradition.

The tension between those in favour of the novel and those against teaching the novel started in the 1960s. Refer to Smyth, David, ‘Towards the canonizing of the Thai novel’, in The Canon in Southeast Asian literatures, ed. Smyth, David (Richmond, Surrey: Curzon Press, 2000), pp. 174–5Google Scholar.

2 The standard text on the social and political role of the Thai novel is Bunkhachon, Trisin, Nawaniyai kab sangkhom Thai [The Novel and Thai society] (Bangkok: Samnakphim Sangsan, 1980)Google Scholar. Also see Hideki, Hiramatsu, ‘Thai literary trends: From Seni Saowaphong to Chart Kobjitti’, Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia, 8 (Mar. 2007)Google Scholar. Among the young progressive literary scholars are Chonthira Kladyu and Suvanna Kriengkraipetch. A comprehensive list of the books that were reprinted during this critical period can be found in Kongkirati, Prajak, Lae laeo khwam khluanwai koh prakot [And then a movement appeared] (Bangkok: Thammasat University Press, 2005), pp. 438–42Google Scholar.

3 White, Hayden, Metahistory: The Historical imagination in nineteenth-century Europe (Boston: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1973)Google Scholar; Gallagher, Catherine and Greenblatt, Stephen, Practicing new historicism (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000)Google Scholar; Munday, Jeremy, Translations studies: Theories and applications (New York: Routledge, 2001)Google Scholar.

4 Smyth, The Canon, p. vii.

5 I am not alone in this assertion. Phichet Saengthong's article on Mom Chao Akatdamkoeng also questions the effects of designating Lakhon haeng chiwit as the first Thai novel. He argues that the current canon does not sufficiently cover literary transmission, and the influence of Thai literary traditions on Akatdamkoeng's novels. Phichet believes that Akatdamkoeng's novel became an exemplary novel because it fits the leftist inclinations of literary critics of the 1970s who wanted to use the novel to critique class society in Siam. He suggests that there is a relationship between the canon and the ideological preferences of its constructors. I agree with Phichet that the division between low-brow nangsu aan len [books that are read for fun], and high-brow wanakam sathorn sangkhom [literature that reflects social conditions] is artificial and not very helpful. The social and cultural impact of trashy low-brow novels on the reading masses may be as important, if not more so, than the effects of esoteric literary works on a handful of literary scholars and their students. Refer to Saengthong, Phichet, ‘Phatthanakan nawaniyai Thai: Korani Momchao Akatdamkoeng Raphiphat [The Development of the Thai novel: The Case of Mom Chao Akatdamkoeng Raphiphat]’, Warasan phasa lae nangsu, 38 (2547): 53–86Google Scholar.

6 Rutnin, Mattani, Modern Thai literature (Bangkok: Thammasat University Press, 1988)Google Scholar; Barang, Marcel, The 20 best novels in Thailand (Bangkok: Thai Modern Classics, 1994)Google Scholar; David Smyth, The Canon in Southeast Asian literatures.

7 Warathorn, Suphanni, Prawat kanpraphan nawaniyai khong Thai [The History of the Thai novel] (Bangkok: Khrongkan Tamra, 1976), pp. 233–4Google Scholar.

8 Senanan, Wibha, The Genesis of the novel in Thailand (Bangkok: Thaiwatthana Panich, 1975), p. 83Google Scholar.

9 One of the earliest and most controversial examples of this is Prince Phichitprichakorn's ‘Sanuk nuek [Fun-filled thoughts]’. ‘Sanuk nuek’ was supposed to be a serialised set of stories that would eventually become a novel. The first instalment was published in Wicharayananwiset journal in 1886. The plot seemed innocent enough. It is about young monks at Wat Bowoniwet discussing what to do after leaving the monkhood. Although the monks and the event were fictitious, Wat Bowoniwet was a real place, the home of the Supreme Patriarch who was King Chulalongkorn's uncle. The abbot was agitated that the temple was depicted in a bad light (the monks were discussing women, among other things), and he demanded that the author rescind what he had written. King Chulalongkorn scolded his brother for upsetting their aging uncle. He subsequently wrote an apologetic letter to his uncle explaining that Prince Phichit was just experimenting with a new form of writing — the nowel farang. He explained that this form of literature is common throughout the world, implying that Siam should also produce these works as signs of modernity. This incident proved to be a minor setback that delayed the appearance of the modern novel in Siam until 1901. An excellent critique and a reprint of ‘Sanuk nuek’ can be found in Khongkanan, Wibha Senanan, Kamnerd nawaniyai Thai [The Birth of the Thai novel] (Bangkok: Samnakphim Dok Ya, 1997)Google Scholar, a revised edition of her English text.

10 An excellent selection of some of these early translations and original essays can be found in Roykaew naew mai khong Thai B.E. 2417–2453 [The New Thai prose writing, 1874–1910], ed. Nawatri Ying Sumali Wirawong (Bangkok: Samnakphim Sayam, 2004). The short stories were published in Darunowat, Wicharayanwiset, Wicharayan, Lak Witthaya, Thalok Witthaya, Thawi Panya, Kula Sattri, Samran Witthaya and Nithranukhro. This edited volume is an amazing anthology of 40 Thai short stories written mostly during the reign of King Chulalongkorn. Sumali provides a concise tabulated analysis of each short story, documenting names of authors, publishers, length in pages, main characters, plot summaries, writing styles, originality (Thai or translation), and other useful observations. This anthology should be required reading for students interested in Thai modernity, literary transmission, the evolution of modern Thai language, post-colonial theory and intellectual history.

11 Corelli, Marie, Vendetta! Or the story of one forgotten (1886), published by Kessinger Publishing's Rare ReprintsGoogle Scholar, www.kessinger.net (last accessed on 1 Sept. 2008). No original copies of Khwam phayabat can be found at the National Library, the only copy still circulating is its reprint for the cremation of Phraya Surintharacha's wife in 1967. Cornell University's Echols Collection has this copy. Marcel Barang's condescending remark, ‘Marie who?’, suggesting that the Thai reader only appreciated mediocre literary works misses several important points (Barang, , The 20 best novels of Thailand: A Thai modern classics anthology, Bangkok: TMC, 1994, p. 60Google Scholar). Corelli's novels outsold male literary rivals such as Arthur Conan Doyle. Corelli was also one of the most popular fiction writers of her time. During the late Victorian age, Corelli was the darling of the middle class. When she died in 1924, numerous articles were written about her in the press. The London Mercury declared that in her hey-day, she ‘was read by the entire middle-class, who bought in all many hundreds of thousands of her works at six shillings a volume’. Her novels were seen as both low-brow and high-brow simultaneously. Refer to Federico, Annette R., Idol of suburbia: Marie Corelli and late Victorian literary culture (Charlottesville: University Press of Virginia, 2000), p. 169Google Scholar.

12 Suphanni also lists 18 titles published between 1911 and 1919, but it is unclear whether these novels are original compositions or translated novels and whether they are still available to researchers. Undoubtedly, this period is indeed a lively period for novels that deserves serious attention. Another popular author whose works have been translated into Thai is H. Rider Haggard. The most famous among his translated novels is She (1886), first translated by Luang Wilatpariwat using the pseudonym Nok Nori some time in the early 1900s or early 1910s under the title Sao song phan pi [Two thousand year old beauty]. This translation has been reprinted several times, most recently in 1990. The term ‘sao song phan pi’ is now a common description of women who refuse to age. Few however, remember how the term originated.

13 Phraya Surintharacha and Luang Wilatpariwat were among the first of seven commoners to receive scholarships from King Chulalongkorn to study in England in 1895. They accompanied Prince Chakkrabongse to pursue further studies in England. Mae Wan, pseudo, Khwam phayabat, 2nd edition, published in Cremation volume of Khunying Nueng Surintharacha, Wat Thepsirintharawat, 8 June 1967. Samran, Nai, pseudo, , Khwam mai phayabat (Bangkok: Double Nine Press, 2001)Google Scholar. Samran, Nai, pseudo, , Nang neramid (Bangkok: 1916Google Scholar).

14 For a discussion of translation as culture and translation as appropriation, refer to Translation, history and culture, ed. Susan Bassnett and Andre Lefevre (New York: Pinter, 1990). Assimilating foreign text into a target culture and linguistic can also be seen as a domesticating process. While generally a negative concept, when used by the subaltern, it can be empowering.

15 The translator's ideology generally wins over all other considerations, be they linguistic or poetic. Lefevre, Andre, Translation, rewriting, and the manipulation of the literary frame (New York: Routledge, 1992), p. 39Google Scholar.

16 For a study of plot variations, refer to Tiongson, Nicanor G., ‘The Rule of Rama from the Bay of Bengal to the Pacific Ocean’, SPAFA Journal, 10, 2 (May–Aug. 2000): 5–25Google Scholar.

17 Spivak, Gayatri, ‘The Politics of translation’, in The Translation studies reader, ed. Venuti, L. (New York: Routledge, 2000), pp. 397–416Google Scholar.

18 Niranjana, Tejaswini, Siting translation: History, post-structuralism, and the colonial context (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993), p. 33Google Scholar.

19 Rafael, Vicente L., Contracting colonialism: Translation and Christian conversion in Tagalog society under early Spanish rule (Durham: Duke University Press, 1993)Google Scholar.

20 Suphanni, Prawat kanpraphan, p. 32. The sign of a shift from Chinese economic and cultural hegemony to an English/European hegemony is the suspension of tribute missions to China by King Mongkut in 1852 when Siam began negotiations with the British about trade and legal authority that led up to the Bowring Treaty of 1855. Refer to Terwiel, B.J., Thailand's political history (Bangkok: Rivers Books, 2005), p. 145.Google Scholar Historians have concluded that the 1893 incident where French gunboat diplomacy forced Siam to relinquish claims to territory on the west bank of the Mekong solidified Siam's policy to emulate western civilisation as a strategy to resist colonial conquest. Refer to Jory, Patrick, ‘Problems in contemporary Thai nationalist historiography’, Kyoto Review, Mar. 2003Google Scholar. It should be noted that soon after that crisis King Chulalongkorn sent two sons, Prince Vajiravudh and Prince Aphakorn, to study military and naval science in England. Others were soon to follow.

21 Refer to Wolters, O.W., History, culture, and region in Southeast Asian perspectives (Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program Publications, 1999), pp. 55–7Google Scholar, 173–14, 182–8. David Wyatt's assertions were presented on numerous occasions in guest lectures in my course, Asian Studies 208: Introduction to Southeast Asia. Appropriation, or to make something one's own, may explain why some of the early translators see themselves as authors and composers of new transformed literary works and therefore did not feel compelled to acknowledge the original manuscript or author. Plagiarism through translation is not seen as the bankruptcy of indigenous genius. Instead of being a prohibited behaviour, stealing knowledge through plagiarism is condoned and taken as clever or keng. Outwitting a better opponent is always keng in Thai culture. The practice of not crediting the work of previous scholars also occurs in re-translations. Later translations of Rider Hargard's She by Chaiwat, pseudo, Sao song phan pi (n.p.: 1943), found in the Chulalongkorn University Library, and Sodsai, pseudo, Amata thewi (Bangkok: Praphansarn Press, 2004)Google Scholar, never even mentioned that the first translation was made by Khru Liam. Note that Chaiwat also plagiarised Khru Liam's title.

22 Phraya Anuman Rachathon translated Rider Haggard's Virgin of the sun in 1916 with the help of his English supervisor. Before that, in 1913, he also published a novel Amnat haeng khwam phayayam [The Power of perseverance] but refused to give the name of the original author or book title. The vernacularisation of western literature through translation became an honourable pasttime for the educated class, both those who studied abroad and those who learned English at local schools such as Suan Kulab, Thepsirin and Assumption. These early writers translated and wrote original prose fiction as a duty, as well as to seek fame. They did this while working at their regular government jobs. Writing did not become a serious profession until the founding of the Suphab Burut group by Kulab Saipradit in the late 1920s.

23 S. Phlai Noi asserts that Khru Liam was not involved in the original phase of Thalok Witthaya which was operated for a few years beginning in 1900 by Wan Thalokwitthaya. He says that Khru Liam revived the magazine in 1912. If this is true, then Sao song phan pi may have been published later than conventional thinking. But it is also possible that Sao song phan pi was serialised in the original magazine. Refer to Noi, S. Phlai, ‘Khru Liam phu khian nawaniyai Thai khon raek [Khru Liam who is the first to write a Thai novel]’, in Khwam mai phayabat (Bangkok: Dok Ya, 2002), pp. 82–3Google Scholar. Khru Liam wrote under many pseudonyms such as Nai Samran [Mr Happy], Kaew Kung [Shrimp Tomalley], Rang Jiap [Absolutely Farang], Khun thong [Minah Bird], Pakka Kaew [Glass Pen], Klue Kaew [Crystal Salt], Malaeng Mum [Spider], Maew Europe [European Cat], Suriwongsongfa [Light in the Sky], Sithanonchai [famous court figure from Ayuthaya period], Nai Talok Khon Thi Song [The Second Comedian], Hong Thong [Golden Swan], Nok Krathung [Krathung Bird], Editor [Editor], Gaw Gaw [First Thai alphabet], Nok Noi [Little Bird] and Nok Nori [Nori Bird]. Refer to Suphanni, Prawat kanpraphan, p. 65.

24 Refer to Peleggi's, Maurizio fascinating study of material consumption and the Thai court in Lord of things: The Fashioning of the Siamese monarchy's modern image (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 2002)Google Scholar.

25 Translated works appealed to the Thai reader because they presented a more realistic picture of life that contrasted with the traditional Thai Jak jak wong wong stories. Suphanni, Prawat ka praphan, pp. 35–6. The Jak jak wong wong stories were variations of a common theme. The leading men usually had names ending with jak or wong, e.g. Jakkaew, Laksanawong, Phra Worawong, or names that suggested noble roots, e.g. Sangthong, Phra Maniphichai. The plot was generally about a romance, where a handsome prince sent to study martial arts or magic meets and conquers hardships and enemies using his martial and magical powers. He would meet the perfect woman and win her hand. The two marry and live happily ever after.

26 Suphanni lists 27 European authors, ibid., pp. 81–2.

27 For example, Amnat haeng khwam rak [The Power of love], supposedly written by Marie Corelli was published in Siew Hut Seng's Chino Sayam warasap in 1911. I have been unable to figure out which of Corelli's novels this is because I have not seen the Thai translation. Other examples of Corelli translations are Thelma (1887) and Absinth (a translation of Wormwood, 1890); both novels were translated and published in 1912 by Mom Chao Suksisamorn and Mom Chao Phansikasem. Absinth was so popular that it was translated twice after that, in 1915 by Chaowalit Setthabutr, and in 1928 by Malai Chuphinit. Treasures of heavens (1906) was translated in 1916 by Luang Naiwichan.

As an aside, plots from nithan [fables], jatakas [Buddhist parables] and epics have been considered as part of the public domain that can be used to form new stories. For example, Bhumibol's, King widely read The Story of Mahajanaka (Bangkok: Amarin Printing and Publishing Co., 1996)Google Scholar is an adaptation and translation – in English and in Thai – of a story from the Tripitika to illustrate how good elements (a productive mango tree) are destroyed, leaving behind unproductive social elements (barren mango tree), and how perseverance wins over evil.

28 Wibha, Genesis, pp. 72–3. Also see Masavisut, Nitaya, ‘Kindling literary flame’, in Thai literary traditions, ed. Chitakasem, Manas (Bangkok: Chulalongkorn University Press, 1995), pp. 8–9Google Scholar. The Act was also to encourage the writing of ‘good’ literature that will be judged and awarded prizes. Thanaphol Limapichat, a doctoral student at the University of Wisconsin (Madison) is currently writing a dissertation that traces the evolution of ‘good’ literature in his study of Thai intellectual history.

29 Khwam mai phayabat, postscript, pp. 718–31. The editor gave Khru Liam some pencils and paper together with a copy of Khwam phayabat. Suchart Sawatsi admitted that he had written about the novel without ever having read it. He based his conclusion that it was a parody of Corelli on erroneous assertions of other literary scholars. Suchat at first believed that Khru Liam serialised Khwam mai phayabat in Thalok witthaya. We now know that Khru Liam finished writing the 717-page novel in 22 days, a feat that impressed his friend Mae Wan.

30 Khwam Mai Phayabat, preface. Khru Liam claimed that this novel was the first pralomlok khwam riang [composition to seduce the world] or an authentic Thai novel. The category pralom lok, according to the Ratchabanditsathan Thai Dictionary (1954 edition), refers to literary works that focus on romance and sex. Such novels, known as ruang pralom lok, are to please the world or worldly passions. This classification is also used in Cambodian literature. Literary scholars conjectured that the term nawaniyai was a term concocted by Kulab Saipradit's Suphab Burut group. During the 1880s, works written for pure entertainment were also called nangsu aan len or ruang aan len [books to read for fun, or fun stories]. By the 1920s, while ruang aan len became identified with fictions and realism, pralomlok was used to describe romances. S. Phlainoi asserted that Song Thepasit wrote articles in 1926 and 1927 to describe their differences. Refer to S. Phlainoi, Khwamrak chiwit lae ngan Song Thephasit tonbaep khong ‘San Thewarak’ [Love, life and works of Song Thepasit: The Model of ‘San Thewarak’] (Bangkok: Dok Ya Press, n.d). I thank Thanaphol for this information and reference (private email, 7 Dec. 2007). Also see Watthanaratchanakura, Phonwipha, ‘Song Thephasit: Nakpraphan ruang san chan khru nai krasae wannakam Thai samai mai [Song Thephasit: A master short story writer in the current of modern Thai literature]’, Silapa Wattanatham, 28 (1 Nov. 2006): 154–5Google Scholar.

31 An excellent discussion of the logic of Thai polygamy is Reynolds, Craig J., ‘A Thai-Buddhist defence of polygamy’, in Seditious histories: Contesting Thai and Southeast Asian pasts (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2006), pp. 185–213Google Scholar.

32 I was eager to find a copy of Nang neramid. My quest was rewarded three years ago while on leave in Bangkok. Ajarn Sombat Phlainoi had just written an introduction in the republication of Khwam mai phayabat in 2002 and I had a hunch that he might have Nang neramid in his book collection. Suphot Chaengrew, editor of Silapa Watthanatham magazine, helped contact Ajarn Sombat, who admitted that he had a copy of the novel. He agreed to let Suphot take digital photos for me. Because the hand-held digital photos were so uneven, some of the pages were too out of focus to read. Suphot eventually received permission to Xerox the entire novel. Unfortunately, I was unable to examine the original or to find its publisher.

Suphanni asserts incorrectly that Khwam mai phayabat appeared soon after Khwam phayabat. Suphanni also believes that Nang neramid was a translated novel published around 1915 during the reign of Rama 5 (sic). I suspect that Suphanni was unable to read Nang neramid because if she had she would have known that Nang neramid was not a translation. Refer to Suphanni, Prawat kanpraphan, pp. 56–7, especially footnote 1, page 57. Khru Liam's contemporaries who wrote in his 1966 cremation volume admitted to having read Khwam mai phayabat but no one was able to give much detail. The only evidence of the plot was revealed by Bunchuay Somphong who said that the novel is based on the Buddhist notion of forgiveness which allowed the wronged husband to win back his adulterous wife. Bunchuay Somophong in Wilatpariwat Anuson, quoted in Kan-ari, Thammakiat, ‘Khru Liam perdchak nawaniyai thai ruang raek duay “Khwam Mai Phayabat” [Khru Liam raises the curtain for the first Thai novel with Khwam mai phayabat]‘, Silapa Watthanatham, 5 (May 1984): 111Google Scholar.

33 Nang neramid postscript, pp. 400–1. The postscript was dated 29 July 1916. Khwam mai phayabat was completed on 4 Aug. 1915.

34 Refer to Chaloemtiarana, Thak, ‘Move over Madonna: Luang Wichit's Huang rak haew luek’, in Southeast Asia across three generations, ed. Siegel, James and Kahin, Audrey (Ithaca: Cornell Southeast Asia Program Publications, 2003), pp. 145–63Google Scholar. It should be noted that I use the anachronistic word Negro to describe Africans in an attempt to maintain integrity of the text. The designation was used in Nang neramid.

35 Rider Haggard's She is about the immortal sorceress Ayesha, or ‘She’ who has been waiting for her dead lover for over 2,000 years. Ayesha – a white woman who rules over a tribe of Africans – has achieved immortality after immersing herself in a sacred fire. In a fit of rage, she kills her lover, a handsome Egyptian high priest. She soon regrets her action and preserves her lover's dead body for 2,000 years, spending nights beside him. She hopes to be able to revive him one day. In the story, she finds Leo, a protégé of Ludwig Holly. Leo is a splitting image of Ayesha's lover because Leo is a direct descendant of the Egyptian priest. Ayesha tries to convince Leo to step into the fire of eternity with her. But when she enters the fire, she turns into an old woman and dies. Although the novel is a romance, pure and simple, it provided the reader with a wealth of information about Africa — its people, its climate, its culture, its geography, and its plant and animal life. The novel is a vivid portrayal of this alluring and exotic place. It is most certain that the insatiable Thai reading public found the idea of ‘knowing’ uncivilised Africa and romantic European culture to be intoxicating and different.

36 Parenthetically, the fact that many societies in Asia read translations of similar novels could be a subject of investigation: would different cultural and intellectual traditions lead to different translations and explanations? Would simultaneous literacy of European novels across different Asian cultures and communities conjure up uniform or dissimilar images of the west? How different is each translation intra-culturally and inter-culturally? How does colonial status complicate translation? An excellent study of this line of research is Jedamski's, Doris pioneering work ‘Popular literature and postcolonial subjectivities: Robinson Crusoe, the Count of Monte Cristo and Sherlock Holmes in colonial Indonesia’, in Clearing a space: Postcolonial readings of modern Indonesian literature, ed. Foulcher, Keith and Day, Tony (Leiden: KITLV Press, 2002), pp. 19–48Google Scholar.

37 Greenblatt, Stephen, ‘Culture’, in Critical terms for literary study, ed. Lentricchia, Frank and McLaughlin, Thomas (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995), p. 226Google Scholar.

38 Phillips, Herbert P., Modern Thai literature (Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1987), pp. 3–4Google Scholar. Phillips said that he owed his ideas to Malinowski, which has never been applied to the study of literature.

39 Suvanna Kriengkraipetch, ‘Characters in Thai literary works’, in Manas Chitakasem, Thai literary traditions, p.135. Suvanna concluded that ‘the concept of “the otherness” helps to understand and then to define ourselves as belonging to a particular group.’ She agreed with a colleague whom she quoted that being Thai was not a set of criteria, but a life-long process. Ibid., pp. 145–6. Another famous assault on Thai identity is Wongthes, Sujit, Jek pon Lao [Chinese mixed with Laotian] (Bangkok: Silapa Watthanatham, 1987)Google Scholar, which suggested that modern Thai identity is a hybrid of Chinese and Laotian cultures. Recently, a friend told me that the Cambodians see the modern Thai as someone who ‘looks Chinese, acts like a farang, and speaks Thai laced with Khmer’.

40 On the subject of mimicry, refer to Bhabha, Homi K., The Location of culture (New York: Routledge, 1994), ch. 4Google Scholar, ‘Of mimicry and man: The Ambivalence of colonial discourse’. The pitfalls of mimicry and imitation are not new to the Thai. These concerns were voiced by King Vajiravudh (1910–25) in his short article, ‘Latthi ao yang [Imitation cult]’, where he warned the Siamese about how to retain their own Thai culture in the face of encroaching westernisation. He wrote that for the Thai to appear European was comparable to a dog learning to sit. The human owner may think that the dog was cute because it exhibited human qualities, but it was still a dog. Similarly, a Thai who emulated the Englishman may gain the empathy of the English but that only emphasised the superiority of Europeans. King Vajiravudh urged the Thai to appropriate only what was needed to modernise Siam and not to try to become an Englishman. Refer to ‘Latthi ao yang’, n.d., in the Cremation volume of Khanet Rueksaphailin, Wat Somanatwiharn, 3 Dec. 1975. I am indebted to Craig J. Reynolds for suggesting this reference.

41 Thongchai Winichakul observed that if we were to employ a post-colonial lens to look at Nang neramid, then Khru Liam's tactic of engaging the west would be an elaborate dance of deception by a subaltern to declare post-colonial independence from western domination. Remarks made by Thongchai Winichakul, Council of Thai Studies Conference, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1 Dec. 2007. Siam's semi-coloniality was a subject of a conference, ‘The Ambiguous allure of the west’, held at Cornell University, 5–7 Nov. 2004. Peter Jackson's conference paper, ‘Semicoloniality and duality in Siam's relations with the west’, raised important questions about the place of Siam and Thai studies in post-colonial studies. The book The Ambiguous allure of the west, with articles based on the conference papers, is forthcoming from Cornell Southeast Asia Program Publications (2009).

42 Robinson, Douglas, Translation and empire (Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing, 1997), p. 84Google Scholar.

43 Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty, ‘Can the subaltern speak?’, in Marxism and the interpretation of culture, ed. Nelson, Cary and Grossberg, Lawrence (Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1988), pp. 271–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

44 The first Anglicised Filipino novel, Zoilo M. Galang's A Child of sorrow, appeared in 1921. By 1966, production of Filipino English novels had exceeded those written in India, Singapore, and Malaya. Refer to Baksh, Abdul Majid Bin Babi, The Filipino novel in English (Quezon City: University of the Philippines, 1970), p. 3Google Scholar. Anglicised novels were not exclusively consumed by the indigenous, but they were more-or-less open to the world, very much in the tradition of Jose Rizal's Noli me tangere, and El filibusterismo which were written in Spanish for fellow Filipino intellectuals but were also accessible to the Spanish authorities. It should also be noted that vernacular novels in Tagalog appeared soon after the defeat of Spain by the United States. These novels were written by journalists and typesetters who combined local literary forms with the novel introduced by Rizal. Resil Mojares believes that the defeat of a repressive colonial Spanish regime freed the Tagalog mentally to allow them to write novels in the vernacular. However, those novels found limited circulation because Tagalog was a language limited to speakers around Manila. It is more recently that Filipinos have embraced Tagalog as their national language. Mojares, Resil B., Origins and rise of the Filipino novel: A Generic study of the novel until 1940 (Quezon City: University of the Philippines Press, 1998)Google Scholar, cited in Espinosa, Shirlita A., ‘Ethnicity and kinship in Filipino centennial novels’, Kyoto Review of Southeast Asia, 8 (Mar. 2008), no paginationGoogle Scholar.