Afterword II

In the Afterword to Poul Anderson's and Gordon R Dickson's Hoka (New York, 1985), S*ndr* M**s*l describes Rudyard Kipling as "...a jingoistic journalist..." (p. 243). I had thought that the slang term "jingo" became associated with nationalism because of a poem by Kipling and therefore that Sandra Miesel was consciously ironic when she made her alter ego in the Hoka timeline apply the adjective "jingoistic" back onto Kipling himself. This may be so but will require more research for confirmation. A quick google search has disclosed a long history for the term "Jingo" and its use by many other people.

"...the obsessively imitative behavior of the Hokas toward humans is a servile response typical of oppressed peoples. They emulate their vile oppressors in the deluded hope of thereby bettering their own condition." (p. 246)

There is a real point in there somewhere! Ango-Indians, Anglo-Irish, the latter denigrated as "West Britons" by some of their countrymen. A black work colleague once told me that he was "...a field nigger!" (I would not use this word if I were not quoting Negel's own self-description.) He elucidated, "Your house niggers are your cooks and your maids who feel that they are part of the family. Your field niggers are your field workers who want to burn the house down!" Yeah, right. I must assure everyone that he was usually a mild-mannered man who only said this once.

But the Hoka's imitativeness is not of that Anglo or "house" sort, although Miesel has cleverly made this comparison in order to show how M**s*l's ideological approach would misrepresent the beings that the latter claims to represent. If the Hokas had wanted to ingratiate themselves with humanity, then they would have mimicked the life-styles of the plenipotentiary and his wife and would have maintained an obsequious relationship with them. Instead, they imitate every possible historical figure and fictitious character with a thoroughness that causes endless problems for the plenipotentiary and then suddenly switch to following another fashion with bewildering rapidity.

M**s*l says that Alexander Jones:

"...led his first delegation of Hokas to Earth shortly after his appointment as plenipotentiary (the chaotic expedition is described in 'Don Jones')..." (p. 246)

In fact, in "Don Jones," Jones is merely assigned to host a visiting delegation. The story ends:

"'Ah, there, Jones. No hard feelings, I trust? There's something that just occurred to me. How would you like to be a plenipotentiary -?'" (Earthman's Burden, New York, 1979, p. 60)

But, again, Miesel has a point to make. Crucial historical details like the date on which an individual became a plenipotentiary become hotly disputed with opposed interest groups citing contrary sources and arguments. If Jones was not already the plenipotentiary, then why was he in charge of that delegation? - and so on.

Again:

"'Undiplomatic Immunity' boasts of the collaboration by Hoka pawns in human-engineered espionage schemes...'" (p. 247)

Excuse me, surely it was the Hokas who nearly wrecked everything by role-playing espionage to the ludicrous extent of really breaking into other delegations' apartments? But then why should we believe Anderson's and Dickson's highly implausible account? - and so on.