"If she has the right to freedom of speech, we have the right to burn books."

[Notlob]

I don't understand - it seems to be, at the moment, a peaceful legal protest about something they think will be detrimental to their community. None of this book-burning, fatwa-spewing nonsense.

How else are they supposed to respond?

Just out of curiousity - what's your definition of integration?

[imitationleather]

BBC's EastEnders certainly is laughably inaccurate in reflecting the reality of the East End. First of all, it's in English, whereas in reality Bangladeshi is the most common dialect, ahead of cockney.

That said, it's probably just as well that the Beeb doesn't include more Bangladeshis in the cast, as 'The Community' would no doubt hold even more demonstrations against freedom of speech. They clearly don't understand the majority culture and legal framework of the country they're supposed to be living in. Sorry if that sounds racist, but tough shit, that's the bottomline IMO. Either they integrate or fuck off.

Hehe. What are you yapping on about, you plum?

[aaaaaaaaaargh!]

I'd like to see some sort of source backing up the "fact" that Bangladeshi is the dominant dialect if that's possible.

[imitationleather]

Well, unfortunately you won't get one. Because it's not true.

You can't be too hard on Pinball though. It's easy to get facts wrong when you're viewing the world from inside an underground bunker.

[aaaaaaaaaargh!]

Well, unfortunately you won't get one. Because it's not true.

Thanks for poin.............., oh well :o)

I guess if the bunker is encased in lead that might be a reason

[jutl]

Hehe. What are you yapping on about, you plum?

It's all a gag, surely? They can't actually be serious, can they?

[Suttonpubcrawl]

They have the right to buy copies of the book (I assume secondhand, they're welcome to my copy) and protest against the film, but I don't believe they have the right to obstruct the fim.

I dunno, if someone wrote a book called "Falcon Street" about how all the residents of Falcon Street are cunts, then decided to start filming it on my doorstep, I think I'd be within my rights to try and prevent them from filming it there.

Anyway, there seems to be a bit of a default assumption that the book is right to paint them all as nasty misogynistic cunts (if that's what it does? I don't really know, I've never read) and that they're wrong to object, because it's just revealing them for what they really are. Is that actually true? Are they really nasty? Is the book's portrayal of the area fair, or is it going to give the people there a bad image they don't deserve?

[Mister Cairo]

I doubt the veracity of the protestors' claims. I don't remember the book saying

got here by jumping ships and it says we have lice and live like rats in their holes.

And it's a work of fiction. The views expressed by characters in the book won't be the views of Ali. She's not using fictional characters to represent particlar people in Brick Lane. I coulnd't see much offence in the novel.

Out of intrest, were there any protests when the book first came out? Why is there only a furore round the film?

[Pinball]

BBC's EastEnders certainly is laughably inaccurate in reflecting the reality of the East End. First of all, it's in English, whereas in reality Bangladeshi is the most common dialect, ahead of cockney.

That said, it's probably just as well that the Beeb doesn't include more Bangladeshis in the cast, as 'The Community' would no doubt hold even more demonstrations against freedom of speech. They clearly don't understand the majority culture and legal framework of the country they're supposed to be living in. Sorry if that sounds racist, but tough shit, that's the bottomline IMO. Either they integrate or fuck off.

Hehe. What are you yapping on about, you plum?

Ranting. Hard day at work. It's no excuse but I felt better :-))  Also quite fun to do a Daily Mail. I sometimes get tired of the tedious preciousness people have around these issues, scared to say owt. Blast it into the open, I say. Or at least I would if they could understand my flipping language ;

Pinball: ethnically diverse and 50% female.

[chand]

Why is there only a furore round the film?

Because they want to film it in Brick Lane, and some of the residents don't want them to.

[Pinball]

Not their choice - it's the Council's. Film permit? Schpermit.

[23 Daves]

The wife's just made a rather valid point, actually - if the film is a massive hit, the community will lose their opportunity to make some fair cash out of doing location tours of the area, ripping off tourists for ridiculous sums of money and correcting the perceived slights in the movie as they go.  I doubt it will be a box office hit of that magnitude, but still...

I've never read the book, though, so I genuinely can't pass comment on its content.  I've heard that it's a dull, uninspiring read, and I've avoided it off the back of that advice.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

Blast it into the open, I say.

That (and the rest of your post) kind of assumes that you're some kind of 'hero for the silent majority'. Saying what everyone thinks but is afraid to say. Which is bollocks, to be honest if you actually stand by your previous comments. If people aren't making comments, the least likely scenario is that they're scared people will be offended by them. Surely if people are scared to voice their opinions, they're aware they might be considered 'dodgy' by some people.

[Mister Cairo]

Why is there only a furore round the film?

Because they want to film it in Brick Lane, and some of the residents don't want them to.

I'm still surprised they didn't object to the book, though, if it was as offensive as they made out. Are they okay with the film as long as it is not filmed in Brick Lane? I would have thought content would be more of an issue than location. If I walk round with a billboard saying "Give Your Cloth Bowels A Rest Blair, You teapot-fucker", it doesn't matter if I do it outside Downing Street or in Birmingham, it's still alleging Blair fucks teapots.

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

On most occasions when a book is adapted for a film, the most offensive parts are removed even in the scripting stage. This makes me think that not many residents of Brick Lane read books, let alone this one (presuming of course that the book is more offensive than the film).

[Notlob]

Then how do they know they should be complaining, if they haven't read the book?

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

To use the example of the pictures of Prophet Mohammed international crisis- a few people in the know spread the word, and mobilise a group. As soon as someone heard that a film was being made, they'd have researched it, and then told everyone else on the street that it made them look like imbeciles. It seems more likely than the whole street having read the book and misunderstood it, even if they live there.

(This is just supposition though!)

[chand]

Or, it could be the fact that everyone in Brick Lane who read the book read it separately, and then either weren't offended, or were offended and couldn't do anything about it because by that time the book was out and a protest would have been a waste of time. Whereas protesting about a specific action like the filming might be effective and easier to mobilise people for.

[Notlob]

I don't think it's so much a case of misunderstanding the book, but more reading into it what they want (which I think is a little different). Like you said though, I'm surprised it's the film itself that has raised that concern, not the book. Though, maybe if someone wanted to write about my neck of the woods in a negative manner, then try to film it there, I might have issues with that too.

It seems like quite a small-scale campaign though, and I'd like to know how many people actually support it.

Though, it would help if I read Brick Lane for myself and try to come to some sort of conclusion from that perspective.

[Circusfire]

I'm still surprised they didn't object to the book, though, .

Some people did obect to the book when it came out.

[23 Daves]

It's got to be at least very likely that most of these people have actually read the book, surely?  If you lived on the Old Kent Road in London, for example, and a fictional book was released entitled "Old Kent Road" about the perceived habits of the population there and what they did, it's more likely than not that at the very least you'd pick up a copy and have a browse.  It's human nature.  If any Verbwhore on here saw a book written about and named after the street they lived on and its community, I'm sure you'd immediately be very curious.  Especially if you owned retail outlets there as well, and were concerned about negative PR.

As has already been stated, I think people were probably fairly unaware of the book and its contents until it became a bestseller, by which point it was probably too late to do anything about it, whereas the shooting of the film can be inconvenienced at the very least.

[Pinball]

I'm going to write a book called "Ignorant Hampshire Scum". It doesn't really matter what's in it :-)

[Shoulders?-Stomach!]

It's got to be at least very likely that most of these people have actually read the book, surely?

They must have now, yes, but at the time the book was released, I bet a substantial number didn't even realise the book existed.

[TJ]

"if she has the right to freedom of speech, we have the right to burn books" doesn't actually make sense. At all.

[Mr. Analytical]

If we have freedom of speech, they have the right to burn books, if they have the right to burn books, we have the right to burn their shops.

That's the London way!

[Pinball]

"if she has the right to freedom of speech, we have the right to burn books" doesn't actually make sense. At all.

Presumably it's a quote from someone who speaks poor English and/or has a warped view of freedom. A Brick Lane resident, then ;-)

[Ciarán2]

"if she has the right to freedom of speech, we have the right to burn books" doesn't actually make sense. At all.

They should have said "She has the right to freedom of speech and we have the right to burn books". That's true isn't it? You can flip it around and think of how people talk about the BNP. They have the right to say what they say, we have the right to tell them to fuck off out of it.

[Brutus Beefcake]

Don't you need a permit for burning stuff?  Maybe that's just america.

[Pinball]

Religious people are sooo sensitive. Bless 'em.

[23 Daves]

It's got to be at least very likely that most of these people have actually read the book, surely?

They must have now, yes, but at the time the book was released, I bet a substantial number didn't even realise the book existed.

Before it was a bestseller and I saw people going around reading it on the tube, I didn't know it existed either.  Until things filter through into the mainstream, they slip by for most people, regardless of their subject matter.  Out of the hundreds of books released every single week, you can't expect people to be that on the ball.

If a book was published in America declaring the English to be a bunch of tea drinking, atheist, alcoholic, marriage-breaking, immoral and violent arseholes, I probably wouldn't even begin to know about it until it broke into the Top Ten bestseller lists there (to quote a fictional example which shouldn't really be taken very seriously) unless someone did a major article on it.