
Explaining a Novel to Pakistani Intelligence - hooboy
https://www.cjr.org/special_report/explaining-a-novel-to-pakistani-intelligence.php
======
vinceguidry
One of the more interesting aspects of this article was that it touched on
this concept I have of 'narrative density'. It's closely related to
Brandolini's law, that the amount of energy it takes to create bullshit is an
order of magnitude higher than the energy it takes to refute it.

A story takes more effort to _explain_ than it does to simply read and
experience it. The author's efforts to explain the story to the intelligence
officials quickly turned into a _re-narration_ of the story. At some point
they weren't dealing with the original but rather a new story tailored to the
need to give the intelligence officials something they could understand,
because they certainly didn't have the training / education / smarts to
connect the dots at the speed needed.

Any effort to explain a story that's not proper analysis invariably produces a
new story. And to properly analyze a story you need a lot more in the way of
training or prior experience than you do to just read or experience it.

The underlying mental model I'm using here is to see narrative as a kind of
analytical tool in and of itself as a compressive technique for masses of
information. The mind doesn't want to deal with complex things all at once. A
story is a form of information that is uniquely capable of providing not just
'idea units', but also examples of that information being used, and also why
anyone would care.

~~~
laputan_machine
>It's closely related to Brandolini's law, that the amount of energy it takes
to create bullshit is an order of magnitude higher than the energy it takes to
refute it.

Isn't it the opposite?

~~~
vinceguidry
Perhaps, though I would call it a converse or inverse rather than an opposite.
Either are close relations. You can't be a thing's opposite unless the two of
you share a lot together. North has more in common with South than it does
with East.

~~~
jacobush
Entropy is a harsh mistress. Easier to burn down than to rebuild.

~~~
vinceguidry
Yeah. The intriguing thing about knowledge and the study of it, epistemology,
is that once discovered, it doesn't just go away. It sets the world on fire
and burns away cruft.

Bullshit can be seen as both the cruft that gets burned away by true
knowledge, or the fire that demolishes old ways of understanding, however
true. To see it the other way, imagine attacking the hegemony of the Catholic
Church with incisive bullshit.

Small societies have their reactions to the larger one and the veins of
bullshit they'll propound onto the larger. By the time you or I see a
particular incarnation, it's already been through numerous iterations. We
can't have witnessed the genesis of Pizzagate, but we know that idea has to
have one and the subsequent generations until it reached final, grotesque,
form.

These ideas are self-defense weapons, shields against an onslaught of
'liberal' ideology.

------
baud147258
> You don’t know these people, he said. Sometimes it can take them 10 years to
> get the joke.

------
k_sze
The skeptical part of me says none of this actually happened and that the
article is just a piece of publicity stunt. The other part thinks the author
is too careless/not paranoid enough: he just guaranteed himself a spot on a
watchlist by publicly admitting that he deceived the officers who interrogated
him.

~~~
vegiraghav
And knowing Pakistanis both are equally possible.

~~~
x3ro
How are social stereotypes relevant to this? The same could be said for India,
Germany, the US...?

~~~
iamnotacrook
I think OP is implying talking to natives familiar with the culture confirms
that the situation is not incredible. It's got nothing to do with stereotypes.

------
vinceguidry
> But many readers in Pakistan have come to me and asked how I uncovered it
> all. It’s almost frightening to think that people read a work of fiction
> full of fantastical happenings as a piece of history. A retired spy chief
> once cornered me at a party and said, “Son, you have written a brilliant
> book, but who were your sources?”

This dynamic should be familiar to anyone who works at the art of telling
stories. People want pretty-sounding stories to be true and will believe in
them regardless of any evidence to the contrary. Even if important aspects of
the story are demonstrably, verifiably false, they'll seize on some other
aspect of the made-up story to believe in the truth of it.

I think this is the underlying dynamic behind the motte-and-bailey rhetorical
tactic: [https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-
bri...](https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/03/all-in-all-another-brick-in-the-
motte/)

Once every three weeks or so, my father catches me up on the latest in the
alt-right scroogery. There's always some grand reveal just over the horizon,
and the time shifts from 'real soon now' to 'in a few years', to mine and draw
out that human feeling of being in on the conspiracy as much as possible.

That's the real feeling being sold here. Certainty in a realm in which there
can be none. They're willing to overlook countless bits of evidence that there
can't be any certainty here either, just to keep the magic of the feeling of
seeing things from a higher perspective alive.

On a lighter note, a friend and I often refer to the concept of the
mondegreen, misheard lyrics or dialogue that winds up being more iconic than
the original. One audience member for the play on which the term originated,
upon learning the original reading, refused to accept that it was ever
different from how she heard it.

It's a form of audience participation in storytelling and is probably older
than civilization itself.

~~~
blaser-waffle
> Once every three weeks or so, my father catches me up on the latest in the
> alt-right scroogery. There's always some grand reveal just over the horizon,
> and the time shifts from 'real soon now' to 'in a few years', to mine and
> draw out that human feeling of being in on the conspiracy as much as
> possible.

Is he a watcher, or a believer?

> On a lighter note, a friend and I often refer to the concept of the
> mondegreen, misheard lyrics or dialogue that winds up being more iconic than
> the original

"Excuse me while I kiss this guy" and "Rock the Catbox"

~~~
vinceguidry
Believer. Initially it was pretty darn annoying and I had to tune out his
constant pleas for me to take him seriously. One time I fought back by
compared his new direction to finding religion, which he seemed to take
favorably.

But eventually he settled down, somebody must be coaching these media outlets
to encourage the conspiracy without fomenting revolution. Now he's in a
comfortable routine, spouting nonsense to whoever will listen. He'll find ways
to convert any topic we find ourselves on to an angle into the conspiracy web.
I let him wander around the conspiracy space, trying to find an angle to get
me interested in it, then I'll hit back with actual history as I read it.
Since these discussions don't have the benefit of Google, we mostly talk
around each other without getting into the meat of anything. Which is fine for
my purposes.

I try to walk the fine line between humoring and encouraging him, balancing my
need for real intellectual stimulation with accommodating his emotional ones.

------
onetimemanytime
Priority #1 after getting power is keeping it. With power come billions of
dollars in bribes, stay-out-of-jail-cards, favors and jobs to maybe millions
of people.

You think that these guys are willing to risk all that because you say you
have freedom of speech? Nice try.

------
iooi
If you're interested in learning more about Pakistani Intelligence, I can
highly recommend Steve Coll's _Directorate S_. It's the sequel to the
pulitzer-prize winning _Ghost Wars_ , but it can be read on its own.

------
baybal2
Something in my head rang "A Case of Exploding Mangoes," and down the article
it finds out that the guy is the one who wrote it.

------
pjc50
> "In a press conference last December, he issued a heartfelt plea: if
> journalists filed positive stories for just six months, [...] would become a
> great nation. Mostly, [...] journalists obliged."

Hmm.

The story of a novelist being detained by customs and subject to political
interrogation to see if the novel is sufficiently patriotic is not unique to
Pakistan, either. Even in countries which pride themselves on free speech.

~~~
rrix2
> Even in countries which pride themselves on free speech.

Where else have you seen this?

~~~
novaleaf
yeah, kind of annoying to see this "everythings fucked" narrative as the top
post, while it lacks any kind of evidence (even anecdotal would work)

~~~
BeetleB
Not quite the same, but the FBI has a history of this:

>The Federal Bureau of Investigation had great influence over the production,
with J. Edgar Hoover acting as a co-producer of sorts. Hoover even forced
LeRoy to re-shoot several scenes he didn't think portrayed the FBI in an
appropriate light, and played a pivotal role in the casting for the film.
Hoover and LeRoy were personal friends, but Hoover only approved the film
after he had a file of "dirt" created on LeRoy.[11][12] Hoover had to approve
every frame of the film and also had two special agents with LeRoy for the
duration of filming

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_FBI_Story](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_FBI_Story)

------
m23khan
You have to understand something about a subset of 'elite' Pakistanis. This
subset cherishes creating controversies as it generates the most attention in
Pakistan and puts them on global platform as 'expert' on Pakistan issues.

Pakistanis are addicted to 'conspiracy' theories and he who can garner most
attention in this circle will ultimately get most media limelight within
Pakistan and hence most money.

Pakistan is a simpleton Country and Society in many respects and it is quiet
easy to herd the masses and profit out of it. And with certain Countries
always looking to drag Pakistan's name and reputation into mud, these people's
outlandish claims will go unchallenged and will be etched into global media's
output.

This is not to say there aren't any problems with Pakistan -- there are some
very serious problems and media and authors and journalists do a great job
highlighting them. But unfortunately, certain class of 'elite' Pakistanis tend
to view themselves as universe revolving around them.

And icing on cake is that these are same Pakistanis who typically hold dual
nationalities and foreign visas and on slightest signs of trouble, quickly
take next flight out of Pakistan in order to evade authorities in Pakistan.
They from outside of Pakistan, they continue to preach against Pakistan.

~~~
taway712
I think you're getting downvoted because you're not really linking the content
of your comment to this submission. I assume you are referring to the author
as the elite? It sounds like you are criticizing the piece (or him?), but I
have no idea what that criticism is.

>These people's outlandish claims will go unchallenged and will be etched into
global media's output.

Can you tell me which claim is outlandish in this story? The appeal for
positive news? The killing of the journalist?

Getting to your comment:

>Pakistanis are addicted to 'conspiracy' theories and he who can garner most
attention in this circle will ultimately get most media limelight within
Pakistan and hence most money.

I'm not sure the conspiracy theories about the US and/or the Jews gets people
much money. In my experience, those who most vociferously push them in
Pakistan are usually those with the least money.

>Pakistan is a simpleton Country and Society in many respects and it is quiet
easy to herd the masses and profit out of it.

They've had far too many people killed by mob violence. Someone I personally
know was severely beaten by a mob on the basis of a rumor (thankfully not
killed). Yes, if by profit you mean gain the upper hand in a personal vendetta
by the one spreading the rumor, I can see your point.

------
subhrm
"a case of exploding mangoes" has been on my reading list for long. Would give
it a read this weekend.

~~~
perkee
I strongly recommend. The audiobook is good too!

------
moomin
The future is already here — it's just not very evenly distributed.

------
mnw21cam
Blank page, and outline.com doesn't seem to like the site. Anyone have a
tl;dr?

~~~
pjc50
Pakistani novelist visits Bangladesh. Shortly after his return, he is subject
to a visit and interrogation by Pakistani security services. They demand a
detailed explanation of the plot, which he embellishes to make as patriotic as
possible and hide the subplot about disappeared activists in Pakistan. He
talks about his other, first novel:

> My first novel, A Case of Exploding Mangoes, grew out of my frustrated
> attempts to investigate the plane crash that killed General Mohammad Zia ul-
> Haq, Pakistan’s military dictator, and half a dozen top generals, along with
> the US ambassador to Pakistan.

> A Case of Exploding Mangoes had to be printed in India; the publishers in
> Pakistan found it a bit over the top and disrespectful to the establishment.
> To the surprise of everyone, nothing bad happened to me when it came out: no
> lawsuits, no ban.

~~~
blaser-waffle
>> A Case of Exploding Mangoes had to be printed in India; the publishers in
Pakistan found it a bit over the top and disrespectful to the establishment.
To the surprise of everyone, nothing bad happened to me when it came out: no
lawsuits, no ban.

I'm reminded of Bill Gates' appearance in Pirates in Silicon Valley, which was
generally not flattering, which he described as "reasonably accurate".

~~~
shuaib
What makes your remind of that?

------
shuaib
What warrants this story making it to the front page of HN?

~~~
arethuza
_" On-Topic: Anything that good hackers would find interesting. That includes
more than hacking and startups. If you had to reduce it to a sentence, the
answer might be: anything that gratifies one's intellectual curiosity."_

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

~~~
shuaib
Talk about having a clause that you can bend in any direction when needed. :/

But fair enough. The story isn't really that uninteresting.

~~~
phoe-krk
I greatly prefer "off-topic, but interesting" to "interesting, but off-topic".

Stuff belonging to the former category can be eye-opening at times.

~~~
nosianu
> off-topic, but interesting > interesting, but off-topic

I believe you just said the same thing twice, you only reversed the order (I
think the "but" here just is an AND) :-)

~~~
mzanchi
It makes perfect sense when you think about it.

~~~
nosianu
I _did_ think about it. Before I posted I spent more than just a small bit of
effort. I still don't see what the difference actually is though. Yes I know
what "but" means. I know all those words... _but_...

I do not see any _actual_ difference. Anything you apply those two
descriptions to are _both_ "off-topic" as well as "interesting", according to
those descriptions. The "but" does not make any difference at all as far as I
can see. The other replies say there is a preference implied (I already knew
that that was the intention), but as I just wrote, however you parse it, you
end up with both attributes and I don't see any preference _actually_ being
applied. I see the attempt, yes, but I don't see that there is any effect.

