Dear Eva:

>I am not at all sure why Paul Gelencse1r finds uniculturalism a bad thing.
> I think that the blurring of nations and nationalities and the formation of a
>more pronounced European type would be a blessing for the Continent.
>Untilrecently the United States was boasting that it was basically a melting
 pot
>where the second- or third-generation immigrant was as American as the apple
>pie. Some people may have regretted the loss of Polish, Hungarian, Italian,
>whatever, culture but in the long run it created a fairly homogenous,
>English-speaking population.
>As we know lately multiculturalism is in
>fashion. Whether it is a good idea or not is certainly debatable.

Since the USA was a melting pot, it was certainly unicultural.
I certainly feel, that it would be nice, if Hungary would be also, unicultural.
(Hungarian speaking, since the language also carries the culture).
I certainly would not like the world to be unicultural. (i.e. Hungary being
taken over by the english language and american culture, just like, most
americans would not like the USA to be taken over by the spanish language.)
I also when I go to Ireland, like to meet Irish, in  Italy italians etc.
Therefore, I would not like too much blurring of the nationalities.

But within our country, we hungarians, have to promote
multiculturalism, i.e. encourage minority cultures, treat them fairly, so
that hungarian minorities elsewhere might be treated accordingly.

Lengyel Sa'ndor

Va1radi Ju1lia continues her series on members of the media in *168 o1ra*
(August 2, 1994, pp. 14-16). This times the interview is with Ga1bor Betlen,
the man responsible for MTV's news. He is the one who had to appear in public
and apologize for unfounded accusations in connection with the departure of
General Sabjanics. This time, I have a question for those who have lived in
Hungary in the 1970s and 1980s. Let me quote a passage from this interview.

Q: It is well known about your father that as the high-level employee of the
*Szabad Ne1p* [the precursor of Ne1pszabadsa1g before 1956), as a member of
the MDP [Magyar Dolgozo1k Pa1rtja, the precursor of the MSZMP] had a large
role in the formation of the socialism of the 1950s. . . .

What I would like to know whether it is customary to refer to the Ra1kosi
regime as "the socialism of the 1950s" or not. To me it sounds like a
euphemism of the worst kind. After all, "the socialism of the 1950s" was one
of the most notorious regime of the Soviet bloc, bearing all the signs of the
worst kind of Stalinist totalitarian regime in existence at the time.

Eva Balogh

Flora Fencsik, whom I quoted a few days ago in connection with her criticism
of referring to the "kisser/pofika" of the former anchor woman of MTV, wrote
a piece on the op/ed page of HVG. The title is "Throat Clearing." The upshot
of is that the "independent publicists" ever since the elections "only
listen, shake their heads, and clear their throats--and are quiet." They find
it difficult to be critical of the new government although there is quite a
bit to criticize. "Psychologically" it is difficult to switch although,
similarly to the Antall government, the Horn government has produced a host
of mistakes. "From the first minutes there have been a lot of nervous, hasty
decisions and mistakes. Perhaps all these mistakes eminate from the
personality of the prime minister, from his assertiveness, from his distrust
of people, from his obstinacy. The way he chose a portion of his ministers
from his closest circles. . . . The way he ignores valid arguments (for
example in case of Mr. Bod [head of the National Bank]. The way, in spite of
promises of real change in political style, he follows on the road of
Antall's obstinacy. The way he is unable to rise above his grievances
received earlier from the press. . . .
I believe the journalists are suffering from role confusion. They can't find
their place, their voice under these new circumstances. Naturally, they don't
want to be pro-government. But they don't feel joining the loud criticism of
the opposition media either."

Finally, Fencsik urges the journalists to stop clearing their throats and
start writing "calm analyses" instead of "black and white comments." Eva
Balogh

On Fri, 12 Aug 1994 15:43:31 PDT Sandor Lengyel x5786 said:
>
>>I am not at all sure why Paul Gelencse1r finds uniculturalism a bad thing.
>>more pronounced European type would be a blessing for the Continent.

--I'm not Eva, but since your message went to the whole list, I guess it
is fair game.  I suggest that Europe will become unicultural in the same
year that pigs learn to fly!

>>Untilrecently the United States was boasting that it was basically a melting
> pot
>>where the second- or third-generation immigrant was as American as the apple
>>pie.

--The Melting Pot was a play written by a Russian immigrant to England
called Israel Zangwill.  He gave up on the idea within ten years and
became a Zionist.  The play was performed in New York around the time
of the First World War, and the phrase caught on.  But it was never
a very good analogy.  See Moynihan and Glazer's *Beyond the Melting
Pot* which was published in the 1960s.  It was a study of New York
politics that concluded that ethnicity was very much alive and a
major force in politics.

 Some people may have regretted the loss of Polish, Hungarian, Italian,
>>whatever, culture but in the long run it created a fairly homogenous,
>>English-speaking population.

--Again, I must respectfully disagree.  While, for example, Polish
neighborhoods may not be the same as they were in Poland, many of
them cling to Polish customs, food, holidays, etc. and maintain
connections to Poland well beyond the third generation.

>>As we know lately multiculturalism is in
>>fashion. Whether it is a good idea or not is certainly debatable.
>
--Yes, it is in fashion, but nobody knows just what the term means.

>Since the USA was a melting pot, it was certainly unicultural.

--Again, I must respectully disagree.  The early European immigrants
were English, German, Dutch, French, Spanish, and later Scottish and
Irish.  See Creve Couer's *Letters from an American Farmer* published
in the 1780s for an early account.  And, remember, there was a very
complex set of native cultures that the Europeans tried very hard to
destroy.  We do not have a single American culture now.

>I certainly would not like the world to be unicultural. (i.e. Hungary being
>taken over by the english language and american culture, just like, most
>americans would not like the USA to be taken over by the spanish language.)

--Nor I, but there is a McDonald's in downtown Budapest (I wouldn't go
near it, let along patronize it) and the Coca Cola in Budapest tastes
like it used to in this country before our bottlers started watering
it down.  I also saw Hungarian kids wearing American football teams'
warm-up jackets!

>I also when I go to Ireland, like to meet Irish, in  Italy italians etc.
>Therefore, I would not like too much blurring of the nationalities.
>
--If I may interject what I think is a funny incident, I went to an
Italian restaurant recently and there was a large African-American
making pasta in a glass-walled kitchen.  I said to him, "Pardon me,
but you don't look Italian!"  He smiled and said, "Looks are deceiving!"

>But within our country, we hungarians, have to promote
>multiculturalism, i.e. encourage minority cultures, treat them fairly, so
>that hungarian minorities elsewhere might be treated accordingly.
>
--I think that you have a good point here.

Charles Atherton

Eva Balogh writes: (most deleted)

> Media watch

> I have several interesting bits and pieces from *168 ora* which might
help to
> evaluate the state of certain segments of the Hungarian media. Here is
the
> first one.

> Adam Sztankay published a piece of investigative journalism in *168 ora*
the
> title of which was "The Technomark Scandal" (July 26, 1994, pp. 6-9).


Eva, was it printed on yellow paper?

Regards,Jeliko.