ABSTRACT
“This horrible (almost Slavic) sloppiness of the Siamese” 2 —with such an analogy, Prince Paweł Sapieha (1860–1934), a member of a Polish-Lithuanian aristocratic family that was part of the Austro-Hungarian upper class, commented on the Siamese 3 people after his trip around Asia in 1888–1889. In the same paragraph, he also mentioned that Siamese parents often did not want to send their children to school, which reminded him of his Galician relations. A similar expression of self-criticism through comparison can be noted in his account of British-controlled Hong Kong, where he voiced admiration for “English energy,” saying: “Why don’t we, the poor, have at least some of those riches, importance, reason, work, and perseverance that they have!” 4 This web of analogies and contrasts introduces a number of issues concerning representation and identity. One European writes that he actually has more in common with East Asians than with the English. The figure of the “sloppy native,” typical of colonial rhetoric, serves as a mirror image for “us,” although there is also the poignant question of who exactly is “us”: Slavs, Galician Poles, or subjects of Austro-Hungary? In the background, there is also a class issue. The Polish nobility in Galicia often perceived peasants in oriental terms, so one may wonder if Prince Sapieha, while writing about Slavic sloppiness, was thinking about himself or might have had his subjects in mind. 5
