In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

Introduction One learns early on in Thailand that the country is composed of four distinct regions, and that each of these has its own language and characteristics. The stereotypes surrounding the regions are so commonly held and heard as to be unquestioned: the north is inhabited by attractive, light-skinned people who speak slowly and behave graciously; southerners are dark-skinned, hottempered , and speak extremely quickly; northeasterners, who are simple, hardworking, and not too bright, speak a language something like Lao. The north has a respected ancient culture; the south is exotic and a little dangerous, as some of its people are Malays and Muslims; the northeast (or “Isan”) is hot, dry, and poor. What about the fourth region? There are no stereotypes about the central region. It is simply normal, the standard by which the other regions are measured, and the model that they are expected to emulate. These nearly universal views by the center obscure the complex histories and realities of the regions. Why is the northern region’s culture seen to be older and of higher status than that of the other (non-central) regions? How is the language of the northeast like Lao, and does everyone there speak it? The more we investigate, the more we see the complexities of the regions, and the contradictions of the view from the center. For example, more people in Thailand speak Lao as their first language than central Thai, yet Lao is laughed at and its speakers looked down on by other Thais. Since the middle of the 20th century (if not earlier), regional languages have been diluted by the influence of Central Thai, and their written forms have nearly disappeared, due to discouragement and at times hostility from the central government. The center, almost by definition, determines the direction of the country and has the power to dictate to the regions. What has been the reaction on the part of people of the regions? What are their own views on the stereotypes about them? How do they see themselves? What is the nature of the relationships among the regions, and between the regions and the x center? How have these relationships developed? These kinds of questions have been touched upon to some extent in such disciplines as History, Anthropology, and Political Science, but what has not been considered is how these issues come to bear on literature in Thailand. What relevance does the existence of regions, and their relationships to the center, have for modern Thai literature? This book is an investigation of the Isan region, its writers, and their role in modern Thai literature. It seems to me that of all the regions, the northeast and the south have the most distinctive literary presence in the national modern literature. I have chosen to concentrate on the northeast due to my own greater familiarity with that region and its predominant language (Lao). Although effectively all modern literature in Thailand today is written in Thai, some writers do use a certain amount of the local language in their work. Is there such a thing as modern regional literature in Thailand, and if so, how is it defined, if not by language? I believe there is a modern Isan literature, and that it is defined largely by who writes it. This obviously begs the question: how does one define “Isan writer”? The question of who is an Isan writer is a complex and important one. Many factors are relevant, including where an author was born and grew up, where s/he lives (if alive), and what his/her native language is. How the author identifies him-/herself is also significant, as are the subject matter, setting, and readership of an author’s works. Although all of these factors play a role, none is by itself decisive. The most important elements seem to be that an author identifies him-/herself as being from Isan, and that his/her work has some kind of Isan content. Being from Isan is a somewhat fluid concept. People can be born in Isan but move away as children, or spend much of their lives elsewhere, or even move to Isan from a different region. Isan content is also a broad designation, and may involve use of Isan language or culture, common themes, historical references, or landscape. In general, an Isan writer will present him-/herself as such, will likely be involved in Isan-related literary activities (see Chapter 6), and will be recognized by other...

Share