Profil für André Geißenhöner > Rezensionen

Persönliches Profil

Beiträge von André Geißenhöner
Top-Rezensenten Rang: 31.601
Hilfreiche Bewertungen: 73

Richtlinien: Erfahren Sie mehr über die Regeln für "Meine Seite@Amazon.de".

Rezensionen verfasst von
André Geißenhöner (Berlin)

Anzeigen:  
Seite: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5
pixel
Coming In
Coming In
DVD ~ Kostja Ullmann
Preis: EUR 7,99

4 von 5 Kunden fanden die folgende Rezension hilfreich
3.0 von 5 Sternen Es war ein ok Versuch der aber nicht wirklich gelungen ist., 26. April 2015
Rezension bezieht sich auf: Coming In (DVD)
Ich hab ihn mir jetzt endlich mal ausgeliehen, vor allem nachdem ich die Kritik auf Queer.de vom Herrn Thiele gesehen habe. Und ich kann Herrn Thieles Einschätzung nur bedingt teilen und den Hass den so einige auf diesen Film haben schon garnicht.
Ist der Film voll von Klischees? Ja.
War Kreuzpaintner der erste schwule Regisseur der seinen Film voll mit schwulen und heterosexuellen Klischees gestopft hat? Nein.
Andere haben das zu Hauf getan und die wurden bejubelt, auch auf Queer.de, und daher finde ich es recht heuchlerisch sich darüber zu beschweren und zu behaupten, dass der Film deswegen homophob sei.
Nun wird der Film dem Potential gerecht dass das Thema hatte? Nein. Es war ein ok Versuch der aber nicht wirklich gelungen ist. Einige Szenen funktionieren sehr gut aber andere überhaupt nicht, es ist aus meiner Sicht ein ziemliches Auf und Ab aber so etwas hat die Leute bei anderen Filmen auch nicht davon abgehalten sie zu bejubeln (siehe Freier Fall oder Westerland).
Ich denke, dass Problem ist, dass das Thema sich wohl nicht wirklich für eine Komödie eignet und dass man hier nicht sagen kann es wäre nur ein Ausrutscher und der Film war auch nicht der erste mit diesem Thema.
Die schauspielerische Leistung war in Ordnung, aber bei der Besetzung war das auch zu erwarten.

Herrn Thiele's Meinung in Bezug auf die Kritiken der bösen bösen Heterowelt kann ich nicht teilen, und sie waren auch nicht so wie er sie vorhergesagt hat (und nein Tom sagt im Film nicht er wäre jetzt Hetero, so wie Thiele behauptet). Ich stimme denen zu, dass es endlich mal positiv ist, dass es so ein Film überhaupt mal wieder in den Mainstream geschafft hat, denn auch Brokeback Mountain und A Single Man waren nicht wirklich heitere oder positive Filme (worüber sich hier auch nicht beschwert wurde) und er war weit weniger kitschig als Traumschiff Surprise. Denn auch wenn es einige nicht glauben aber ein derartiges Thema geht den meisten Durchschnittsmenschen am Arsch vorbei, egal mit wem der Tom Herzner im Film dann im Bett landen würde.
Dass der Film eher durchschnittlich war und eher eine Geschmackssache ist, daher ob man Kitsch mag oder nicht, ist kein Grund so zu reagieren, denn das gleiche gilt für zig schwule Filme (der letzte den ich gesehen habe war Drown in der Gay-Filmnacht und der war ziemlich schräg und überdreht).
Ich denke auch man hätte so einige der entfallenen Szenen drin behalten können.

Also unterm Strich ist der Film für sich selber nichts besonderes, lediglich dass er es ins Mainstreamkino geschafft hat.


The Werewolf Book: The Encyclopedia of Shape-Shifting Beings
The Werewolf Book: The Encyclopedia of Shape-Shifting Beings
von Brad Steiger
  Taschenbuch
Preis: EUR 19,39

1.0 von 5 Sternen to say that this book was strange and weird would be the understatement, 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
Ok, to say that this book was strange and weird would be the understatement of the year (despite that it was only March when I finished it).
Although the author left out some of the ridiculous examples of the first edition (like gargoyles) I still wonder why he included some entries and ignored other topics altogether. And what do many of them have to do with werewolves anyway or even lycanthropes? By what modus oparandi did he choose them?
Many of his inclusions of serial killers and rapists only make sense if you equate such behavior with some sort of wolf inside humans. But why a wolf? The only part of the Canis lupus species that existed worldwide is the dog and that one he clearly doesn't mean. Most people in history never knew another kind of wolf, so why should it be an internal wolf? Why not a tiger, a crocodile or a wolverine?
For some cases I definitely know that the referenced sources did not state what he said and many of the beings he described… well they don't really have connections to werewolves to begin with but rather have some sort of similarities to them and in my opinion that is not enough to justify having them in a book that claims to be an encyclopedia on shapeshifting beings, not when they are not even shapeshifters.
He often just glosses over topics or seems to be selecting for the stuff that fits his views. Which makes me question whether he is really interested in the research on the subject or simply wants to collect the stories that fit his viewpoints. It seems as though he rather collects what he deems fitting; by whatever definition of werewolf he has because based on the book it seems to be so broad that the book should be thrice as thick.
He might praise the artwork, personally I know hobby artists who can do better. In addition many of the pictures do not fit the text they are supposed to illustrate.
All in all for a book of nearly 400 pages and such a wide variety of topics the sources are rather small of number and I have my doubts how much research he actually did. And there is the next big flaw of the book: it is not an encyclopedia and for the reasons already mentioned and it's no werewolf book either. For it to be one it would have to focus on werewolves but it doesn't and rather wanders in all directions in the realm of folklore and entertainment industry.
All in all it's rather some weird collection of stories, sources and topics (often either citing the authors books or having no reference at all) which the author saw fit to collect for one reason or another.
If you can actually think critically you might be able to use this book without just believing in what it says.
If you have to keep this book, do it. But I beseech all who read it to not, I repeat not, stop at this book; use it as a sort of hint into certain directions but not more.
Considered the nature of his book I am also highly skeptical of his "chrolology" (I didn't do a typo I swear) on werewolves.


Werewolves: A Field Guide to Shapeshifters, Lycanthropes, and Man-Beasts
Werewolves: A Field Guide to Shapeshifters, Lycanthropes, and Man-Beasts
von Bob Curran
  Taschenbuch
Preis: EUR 14,57

3.0 von 5 Sternen I can understand why some reviewers regarded this book as more belonging into the genre of fantasy literature, 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
First I really enjoyed the book and even found some things I didn't know before. However I must say that I can understand why some reviewers regarded this book as more belonging into the genre of fantasy literature which I think might be strongly linked to the artwork of the book by Ian Daniels.
As a matter of fact the artwork was very much in line with the depiction of wolves and werewolves in modern Western Culture (starting with the cover) in that they usually depict wolves and werewolves as invariably male (and white) and also threatening. Therefore I think that many pictures (albeit of good artistic quality) were not such a good choice in my eyes.

As for the information contained in the text:
Some of it is definitely correct what he wrote but there are other texts which made me sceptic. It is quite likely that some of the sources he used state things differently (for mythological beings that is not unusual) however some of the sources he states in his bibliography I know and they do not state what he stated in some instances.
I intend to find that out and see what sources there are for his statements (Curran admits not to be an academic and that he had to rely on the works of others).
All in all this book can bee seen as a way to introduce someone with the topic and to be an eyecatcher. However I would not regard it as a field guide and one should not stop here but look for other books of a more scientific kind.


The Michigan Dogman: Werewolves and Other Unknown Canines Across the U.S.A (Unexplained Presents)
The Michigan Dogman: Werewolves and Other Unknown Canines Across the U.S.A (Unexplained Presents)
von Linda S. Godfrey
  Taschenbuch
Preis: EUR 15,74

4.0 von 5 Sternen I wouldn't say that this books is necessary gold, but its not crap either., 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
I wouldn't say that this books is necessary gold, but its not crap either. It is mostly about the stories themselves and I think the author has a bit too limited knowledge regarding possible origin of such creatures, if they exist that is.
She says herself that stories of such creatures were not limited to North America but her explanation would need to fit those older accounts as well.
If you want to read some modern day stories involving the eerie and unknown (perhaps as inspiration), this is the book for you.


Dingo (Australian Natural History)
Dingo (Australian Natural History)
von Brad Purcell
  Taschenbuch
Preis: EUR 41,06

5.0 von 5 Sternen This is a very informative book about the Australian dingo, 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
This is a very informative book about the Australian dingo and the author passionately argues against the dingo control and the "purity"-mania as well as the flaws in the current practices to identify "pure" dingoes as well as the flaws of the concept of purity itself.
However I must say that the author has one big flaw:
He denies the dingo to be a dog, the genetic study he cites did not state that the dingo is some form of primitive canid prior to the domestic dog but rather that the dingo is a dog. In addition he counts the annual breeding cycle of dingoes as a trait placing them to the primitive canids but ignores the on average all year round virility of dingo-males which is not a feature known for wolves but among the genus canis is one of the defining characteristics of the domestic dog. In addition it has been proven that wolf-packs do not function in the way the author describes and that the known dominance hierarchies for wolf-packs are rather typical for captive packs than those in the wild.
Furthermore a single heat cycle is not unknown among domestic dogs and was proven to exist among Basenjis, Indian Pariah dogs, New Guinea Singing dogs (which can actually have up to three per year), West Siberian Laikas and as far as I know also East Siberian Laikas, Tibetan Mastiffs and Akitas. In addition studies in Germany (of which the author is probably not aware) showed that dingo-females can have two heat cycles per year.
I agree with a critical review of the book I once read and say that the authors assessment of the dingo as a rather wolf than dog is not based on evidence but on his desire to conserve the dogs and in the environmental community a wolf counts more than a dog.

So all in all this book is to be recommended, but when it comes to the taxonomic status of the dingo it is to be read with great care since the author seems to lack a clear definition of what is a domestic dog and what a wolf and his assesment of the dingo's state seems to be rather based on conservation wishes (where a status as a protected animal would be easier to gain if the dingo would be classified as a wolf instead of a dog).


Societies of Wolves and Free-ranging Dogs
Societies of Wolves and Free-ranging Dogs
von Stephen Spotte
  Taschenbuch
Preis: EUR 58,20

2.0 von 5 Sternen on several occasions his data seems to be very incomplete, 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
This book was… well it was useful. But it has big flaws in my eyes and should never be read by a beginner. First you very often need to read the notes since often he dismisses one thing (like the concept of territoriality for dogs) because in his eyes there is no evidence (basically because he knows of no case where they aggressively defend their territory [well I do])) but in other cases he downright accepts it simply because someone stated it and although in the notes he says himself that there is no evidence (like in the statement that free-ranging dogs basically reproduce via recruitment from owned dogs albeit saying in the notes that Boitani provided no evidence for that.

Also due to the notes I could check some sources where the statement seemed weird and so I could check what the given sources actually stated.
Sometimes I wondered how much he researched since I personally know research material saying something different and what his conclusions are based on since they seemed to be the opposite of what the stated sources said.

To give examples:
He states that all canids can admix and cites Villa et al 1999a "Origin, genetic diversity, and genome structure of the domestic dog" and its references as a source. It is true that the source stated "all species of the genus Canis are known to hybridize" and stated as a source "Mammalian hybrids, a check-list with bibliography" by Gray in 1954. Well, my local library had that book and so I checked. And turns out that the author only listed the following cases of interbreeding within the genus Canis (I am using his words, personally I do not agree with his nomenclature):
Canis aureus X Canis familiaris
Canis familiars X Canis familiaris dingo
Canis familiaris X Canis latrans
Canis familiaris X Canis lupus
Canis familiaris X Canis lupus nubilus
Canis familiaris X Canis lupus occidentalis
Canis familiaris X Canis mexicanus
Canis familiaris dingo X Canis lupus
Canis latrans X Canis lupus
Canis lupus X Canis lupus occidentalis
Canis lupus X Canid lupus pallipes
Canis lupus occidentalis X Canis lupus lupus
So while this taxonomy is a notch outdated, even using Gray's taxonomy he only listed combinations of five species, meaning even by that time at least two were missing.

Also he notes Wayne and Ostreander (1999) as a source for his statement of alternative origins for the domestic dog. But in the paper the authors did not state a theory of their own but merely stated that Darwin and Lorenz suggested the jackal to be an additional ancestor of domestic dogs, they actually stated clearly that such a viewpoint is uncommon and that most of the data supports a sole origin from gray wolves. So of his sources only Matznick actually stated a dog origin from a separate species.

Sometimes I do wondered while reading this book how much thought and research he actually spent. He stated on page 23 that "genetic evidence (mtDNA) from dog lineages through time shows matings of female dogs and male wolves to be rare, the reverse pairing rarer still." But how can evidence from mtDNA even detect a mating off female dog with a male wolf? In dogs at least. MtDNA is maternally inherited among canines (which he states himself) and so every offspring of a female dog has dog specific mtDNA. He listed Pang et al. 2009 as a source and so I checked. The paper in question is called "mtDNA Data Indicate a Single Origin for Dogs South of Yangtze River, Less Than 16,300 Years Ago, from Numerous Wolves" and I can't quite understand how he came to this conclusion because the article states: "The mtDNA data presented here strongly indicate that the domestic dog has a single origin from southern East Asia, but further genetic studies are necessary to corroborate this. Independent markers, inherited also through the male lineages, should be investigated to see whether the phylogeographical patterns, for example, the worldwide sharing of haplotypes and largest diversity in southern East Asia, are consistent across markers. They may also show if the extent of crossbreeding between female dog and male wolf has been as rare as that between male dog and female wolf (only three or four cases through time, as indicated by the region specific clades D, E, and F; see Supplementary Material online for details)." They simply don't say what he said.
And when he later mentions that evidence of mixture with wolves have only been found in the "ancient breeds" (he calls them archaic) like Salukis, Chows and the like he never mentions that von Holdt (2010), the source he mentioned himself, also stated in their paper that "The limitation of evidence for admixture to only a few breeds is striking given that backcrossing between dogs and wolves is known to occur and dogs and wolves coexist widely. Given that modern breeds are the products of controlled breeding practices of the Victorian era (circa 1830–1900), the lack of detectable admixture with wolves is consistent with the strict breeding regimes recently implemented by humans." So what he states kind of paints a different picture from what the original authors of the study seemed to have stated.
Another example of weird reasoning is when he cites results of another examination of mtDNA and that none of 350 wolves from 26 regions across the globe had a common domestic dog mtDNA genotype. But again the wild living offspring of dog x wolf matings would be between a female wolf and a male dog, so mtDNA would be useless. Also traces had already been found, the most recent was published in "Bucking the Trend in Wolf-Dog Hybridization - First Evidence from Europe of Hybridization between Female Dogs and Male Wolves."

Also on several occasions his data seems to be very incomplete. Not only did he state that male dogs never rear offspring despite the fact that he mentioned wolf-dogs resulting from such a cross and rearing (in "A Symposium on the dingo" there was also a case mentioned of a male Labrador feeding his dingo-offspring) and later says himself that they sometimes do, but also that dogs are never monogamous, despite clear evidence to the contrary. Also several cases of free-ranging dogs do form packs so I wonder what is criticism of them being unsuitable as mates is based on. Early in the book I started to wonder whether anybody had checked that book for consistency prior to publication.


The Last Tasmanian Tiger: The History and Extinction of the Thylacine
The Last Tasmanian Tiger: The History and Extinction of the Thylacine
von Robert Paddle
  Taschenbuch
Preis: EUR 50,92

4.0 von 5 Sternen This is a really good book with "new" information, 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
This is a really good book with "new" information (technically simply so far unpublished in our times) and interesting thoughts. There is information on diet, behavior (19th century information suggest a social animal), vocalization, captivity, repdroduction, extinction and human society at the time. Actually many things stated about the thylacine look similar to what is now claimed to be true about the Australian wild dog, except that so far scientists do not seem to be taking part in the myth making).
The author did one hell of a job, but to be honest it might be possible that by that he will fall under the "great man" phenomenon he himself criticised because it lead to so much misinformation about the thylacine.
I can definitely recommend that book for all its information and despite being 284 pages long it is for the most part easy to read.

However, how much I like it, I cannot give it 5 stars due to 2 main points that made me wonder about the objectivity of the author:
1) He spends so much time on blaming scientists but doesn't seem to think general public to be responsible. Also the people scapegoating the thylacine don't seem to be blamed for its demise in the same degree that scientists are. His points are valid, but still it is odd, because I think he makes it look as though only scientists can be blamed as a group.
2) He just accepts that the dogs attacking sheep were feral despite the fact that he himself named incidences where dogs were set upon sheep by their owners to destroy flock of rivals and how owned dogs killed sheep. He also simply accepts that feral dogs mostly kill for pleasure due to their "domesticity." But the problem is that even at the time the book was written there had been studies and books available about feral dogs either having no contact with livestock or being only a nuisance and free-ranging owned dogs being the major attackers. So I think in this regard he is "guilty" of the same thing as the scientists who accepted blood-sucking and mass sheep-killing of sheep by thylacines. He basically takes popular mythology as granted.


The Untold History of the United States
The Untold History of the United States
von Oliver Stone
  Taschenbuch
Preis: EUR 12,95

5.0 von 5 Sternen If you are an "America is the best ever" person, this book will be your nightmare., 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
One thing can be said right away:
If you are an "America is the best ever" person, this book will be your nightmare.

However I do not quite understand why, since the authors don't really say so much new stuff actually, they simple put what was previously told in several books into one and especially Stone's name gave it wide attention. They have a lot in it that is technically known simply overshadowed by a lot of myths, which makes books like this one important. However I think covering such a long time period comes at the cost of never going into detail (e.g. if a fellow German is reading this and happens to be Sinti… yeah forget it, the book ignores you like most do), but I don't think you can blame the authors for it since the book covers more than 100 years of USA history and it already has more than 650 pages of text, not counting notes and bibliography. Going into more detail would probably turn this into a book 3-times the size of the Bible.
So like I said, they do not go into too much detail except for big turning points but rather are concerned with the patterns that emerge and continue. And I think in that way they are doing a pretty good job, you can question their conclusions and since this was coauthored by Oliver Stone I am sure many will mistrust his methods, but not the facts; and in my eyes that is no different to any other author of history books.
What this book tackles in its basis is the myth of American exceptionalism and I guess that might piss a lot of people off since it really doesn't shy away from doing it, ever. Reading this there is a good chance that you will find a lot of your views are challenged, which I liked about the book but others will probably hate.
However I am sure most will agree where the book is undoubtedly good: The writing and reading flow. Despite all the information it never felt boring to me and the reading experience was without a doubt good and made this very enjoyable, a lot of history books should do it like this.
There are some problems with it though, for instance they say in World War II 27 Million Russians died, which wass actually Soviets (which they did right in the documentary series, where they had the forced mass migration that was missing here), which I think was due to the common trap of equating Soviets with Russians, others would be the Tiananmen square massacres whose numbers are contested and also it treats it like just a student's massacre, which is not true since most died all around Beijing, however the info on that is usually scarce so maybe that is the reason. It also looked as if they regarded Japanese people as dark-skinned and if that is what they did then I wonder what they consider light then. But these were minor things.
Also, despite what many say, this book was in some way actually even nicer to American foreign policy than it probably should be, e.g. it never mentioned the thousands of instances of rape in Okinawa by American soldiers or the collecting of body parts as trophies (which might be linked to the practice of scalping during the Wild West) and glossed over a few things about Vietnam. So like I said it's actually nicer than many think.
Also not all chapters do equally well, the passages on Bush & Clinton may have been the worst with 9/11 getting stronger again, but the prologue was also very good and made me interested in history more.
But despite its flaws, again nothing new for me regarding history books, I think is definitely a recommendable book. At the very least it would get readers to rethink much of what they thought they knew about USA policy, and possibly their own country's policy, over the last century.


Die Kugel und das Opium: Leben und Tod am Platz des Himmlischen Friedens
Die Kugel und das Opium: Leben und Tod am Platz des Himmlischen Friedens
von Liao Yiwu
  Gebundene Ausgabe
Preis: EUR 24,99

5.0 von 5 Sternen For people who like to romanticize China and its history this would be a shock., 14. Februar 2015
Verifizierter Kauf(Was ist das?)
Two things I can tell you right away:
1) This is a very good book
2) Unless you are off age this is not a book for you, I decided that after having read only 15 % of the book, and the rest confirmed this decision

Now don't get me wrong, this book is not difficult to read or anything, you can read it quickly and easily, the structure makes it easy and there is no problem with the language (of course as far as I know, currently it is only available in German, sadly). But the question is whether you would be able to.
You see while the title suggests that this book deals entirely with the happenings on the Tiananmen square on the 4th June 1989, it actually deals with people before, during and after it in the wider city of Beijing and the massacres happening there. And the author did not shy away from what happened then and afterwards, neither in the interviews nor in the supplement material, like the list of 202 confirmed victims of the shooting. He wrote what the people he interviewed told him and it includes a lot of serious topics. Albeit the people during the demonstrations in Eastern Germany of the same year only knew of the massacre on Tiananmen square, I can understand why they feared the "Chinese solution" since what the book tells you about that incident alone is chilling.
Plus for people who like to romanticize China and its history this would be a shock. Many ordinary citizens of Beijing were infected by the patriotism awoken by the student's and their demonstrations and so went to stop the armed forces, which for a time worked, but not for long. And not just them, we get reports of generals knowing what was going on and of soldiers who clearly had red eyes as if they had been crying. Sadly, that amount of resistance all amounted to nothing and you get told why. So trust me, this is not an easy book for everyone.

I think should anyone ever have the guts to make a TV series (a movie would not be able to cover it, it has to many stories, it does even tell us something about why the authorities acted the way they did) out of it, that person would have made a name for him/herself for lifetime. Remember, talking about this is pretty much taboo in mainland China and due to the Chinese government's actions (suppressing information and research on the incident [e.g. as far as I know the author's works are forbidden in mainland China, only available in Taiwan and Hong Kong]) the death toll estimations range from several hundred to several thousand.

This is a very informative, memorable and captivating book, but it is not something everyone would be able to read.


China in Hamburg
China in Hamburg
von Lars Amenda
  Gebundene Ausgabe
Preis: EUR 8,98

1.0 von 5 Sternen Es erscheint mir als würde er gewisse Fakten nicht kennen oder ignorieren., 14. Februar 2015
Rezension bezieht sich auf: China in Hamburg (Gebundene Ausgabe)
Zuerst schien dieses Buch recht interessant und in vielerlei Hinsicht ist es das auch. Ich bekam einige Informationen, die ich vorher nicht hatte, wie z.B. dass während der Aufklärung Chinesen als Weiße betrachtet wurden (ich wusste dass nur für die Japaner) oder dass es tatsächlich schon im Zweiten Weltkrieg mehrere chinesisch-deutsch gemischt Kinder in Hamburg gab. Und ja, man bekommt mehr Informationen über Politik, Restaurants, Kultur und alles.
Aber für all die guten Seiten welche dieses Buch hat, Ich denke, seine schlechten Seiten und deren Auswirkungen überwiegen bei weitem die positiven und ruinieren ein Buch das wirklich gut hätte sein können.

Dieses Buch fing gut an, wenn auch mit einigen Problemen, aber je mehr ich es las umso mehr hat es mich verärgert. Die Menge an wichtigen Informationen, die der Autor weglässt ist atemberaubend und trotz all seinem Gerede über die Zusammenarbeit und angeblichen "Kampf" gegen europäische Hoheit, bezweifle Ich dass er besser ist. Er behandelt China und Chinesen offenbar mehr als eine Idee als ein Land/Personen.
Die Probleme begannen früh, als es mit dem China des 19. Jahrhunderts begann. Denn obwohl er eine Karte aller fremden Einflussgebiete in China hatte so erwähnt er lediglich die europäischen Mächte aber ignoriert die Japaner völlig und erwähnte sie im Buch auch erst im 1. Weltkrieg. Er erwähnt auch nicht den Taiping-Bürgerkrieg, obwohl er die Opiumkriege nennt (und nein, man kann das eine nicht ohne das andere haben). Er erwähnt niemals dass Qing-China definitiv ein Imperium war, genau wie die vorherigen Dynastien, redet immer nur von verschiedenen chinesischen Dialekten und nicht Sprachen (erwähnt Sprachbarrieren zwischen den Einwanderern nur selten), der erste Sino-Japanische Krieg wird nicht erwähnt, wahrscheinlich nicht einmal der russisch-japanische Krieg, noch die Haltung der Chinesen selbst (z.B. das viele dachten, dass das Problem die Qing-Dynastie war), und man kann darauf wetten, dass er die Rolle der europäischen Imperien während des Taiping-Bürgerkrieges nicht erwähnt hat, weil das nicht in das Bild eines armen hilflosen Chinas, welches er scheinbar darstellen will, passt.
Der Autor scheint zumindest fair zu sein wenn es um Hamburg und dessen Reaktion auf chinesische Seeläute geht (so hatte die Stadt z.B. 1982 eine Cholera-Epidemie mit fast 5000 Toten und während des 1. Weltkriegs wurden Chineesen oft für Japaner gehalten), bis zu einem gewissen Grad, aber was fehlt sind die Gründe weshalb die Seeleute die Arbeit auf den Schiffen trotz Rückschläge angenommen haben. "Die Familie unterstützen" reicht mir da nicht. Und es scheint ihm auch nicht in den Sinn zu kommen das der erste Japanisch-Chinesische Krieg etwas mit der Reaktion der Chinesen zu tun haben könnte wenn sie für Japaner gehalten wurden.
Ich fing an mich zu wundern wieviel der Auto wusste, z.B. spielen bei der Entstehung von Chinatowns zwar eine hohe Anzahl von Chinesen und womöglich auch einige verwandschaftliche Gefühle eine Rolle, aber dass alleine kann es nicht sein sonst hätte New York City weit früher eine Chinatown gehabt.
Genau genommen scheint es mir als würde er gewisse Fakten nicht kennen oder ignorieren. Er schrieb dass ungefähr 200 Chinesen in Hamburg in Lager geschickt und ungefähr 17 von ihnen getötet wurden und andere waren dort länger als geplant. Aber die Frage die er garnicht stellt ist: Warum wurden sie dort nur temporär gehalten und nicht gleich getötet?
Und mal abgesehen von den Chinesen unter ihnen, hat er die vietnamesischen Einwanderer völlig ignoriert, genauso wie er die Japaner im imperialen China ignorierte, oder nichts davon wusste. Und die Vietnamesen sind die größte Einwanderergruppe aus Ost/Südostasien in Deutschland und für eine Weile hatten sich einige als Chinesen ausgegeben um aus Vietnam zu entkommen oder später "Chinarestaurants" zu eröffnen, das hätte er wenigstens erwähnen können.
Und wenn er auch anerkennt das Chinesen aus Vietnam, Indonesian und sonstwo herkommen und daher nicht alle "aus China" sind, so scheint er doch unfähig zu sein Chinesen als echte Einwohner und "Einheimische" eines westlichen Landes zu sehen. Und wenn man bedenkt wie er darüber flennt das deutsch-chinesisch gemischte Kinder nicht völlig in die chinesische Gemeinschaft Hamburgs integriert sind, das Wort "echt" in Anführungszeichen setzt wenn er sie als echte Hamburger bezeichnet und Ah Yue Günther Karl Lou (einen ehemaligen Schauspieler und Mitglied der Luftwaffe) ignoriert, habe ich den Verdacht dass er denkt Halbchinesen gehören in die chinesische Gemeinschaft und Deutsche zu sein ist falsch oder nicht ausreichend.
Und ich glaube dass ich mal wieder auf einen Autor getroffen bin welcher zu naiv scheint was China angeht. Es scheint ihm nie in den Sinn zu kommen, dass Chinatowns nicht nur kulturelle Zentren sondern auch Ghettos sein können. Ganz zu schweigen dass er die Verbrechensliste der Kommunistischen Partei Chinas ignoriert und wenn man bedenkt dass die einzige Gräueltat des kommunistischen China die er erwähnt die Massaker auf dem Platz des Himmlischen Friedens sind, und auch da nur die Massaker auf dem Platz selber, frage ich mich wieviel dieser Trottel weis und ob er Werbung für China machen will.
Und als ich bei dem kurzen Bericht über Zaifeng, Prinz Chun war, fing das Buch an mich wirklich zu nerven. Als er die diplomatische Mission des Prinzen nach dem Boxer-Aufstand erwähnt nennt er ihn lediglich bemitleidenswert. Er ignoriert das nach dem "Besuch" bei Kaiser Willhellm er mit allen militärischen Ehren behandelt und ein Star in Deutschland wurde, und seine "Sühnemission" in einen diplomatischen Erfolg verwandelt hat, was ihm später viele Schlüsselrollen eingebracht hat.
Und auch wenn er erwähnt dass der 1921er Vertrag zwischen China und Deutschland, laut ihm der erste welcher China als gleichberechtigt in westlichen Augen ansieht, so ignoriert er doch andere Dinge, scheinbar solche welches nicht in sein Bild von "Beziehungen wurden mit der Zeit besser" passen. Genaugenommen hatte ich angefangen mich zu fragen ob er Chinesen als echte Menschen mit unabhängigen Absichten ansieht (außer Händler, nicht das er zu erwähnen scheint welchen Platz sie in traditionellen konfuzianischen Gesellschaften hatten).
Und wenn das nicht schon schlimm genug war, er verklärt die Proteste auf dem Platz des Himmlischen Friedens einfach als Demokratiebewegung, was nicht stimmt, und sagt den Lesern nicht dass die meisten Massaker überall in Beijing (Peking) stattfanden (das Buch war in 2011 geschrieben verdammt nochmal) und dieser Typ konzentriert sich angeblich auf die Beziehungen zwischen Hamburg und China, also warum kann er so viel auslassen/so viele Fehler machen? Außerdem, er erwähnt die Massaker und die Brutalität in Tibet aber andere Vebrechen der Kommunistischen Partei erwähnt er nicht. Ich frage mich sogar wieviel er über Chinas Probleme weiß (ganz besonders in Bezug auf Menschenrechte, Armut und Umwelt) oder ob er sie einfach ignoriert. Das einzige das er erwähnt sind Chinas CO2 Emmission und sonst nichts. Ich habe den Eindruck er würde gut zu der Partei passen, er ignoriert was er nicht mag bis es zu groß wird um es in seinem Fachgebiet zu ignorieren.
Amd Ende erwähnt er, dass im Juni 1989 Tausende in ganz Chin starben… in irgendeiner Chronik am Buchende (die einzige Stelle wo er erwähnt das die Manchus Ausländer waren), was die meisten garnicht lesen würden… kombiniert man das mit der Tatsache, dass die gleiche Chronik weder den Taiping Bürgerkrieg, noch den ersten Japnisch-Chinesischen Krieg, noch die Große Chinesische Hungersnot erwähnt und man kann sich denken wie sehr mich dass hier verärgert!
Und hätte es ihn umgebracht wenigstens zu erwähnen ob die DDR andere Beziehungen zu China hatte als die alte BRD?
In meinen Augen ist das was er hier macht wie Lügen. Entweder lügt er schlicht oder ist so faul und/oder unfähig dass was er hier schreibt Lügen sind.
Wenn Sie dieses Buch lesen wollen fein, aber ich persönlich empfehle, diese Bücher hier als Gegengewicht zu lesen:
Chinesen in Berlin
Die Kugel und das Opium
Shanghai – Rise and Fall of a decadent city
Surviving the City: The Chinese Immigrant Experience in New York City
Es mag bessere Bücher für diesen Zweck geben aber das sind die besten die ich kenne.


Seite: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5