I’ve got a fair bit of sympathy for people who get annoyed when their culture is misrepresented or appropriated by some science fiction or fantasy writer looking for some exotic colour, but I think Kosin Grigor’s critique of China Miéville’s The City and the City misses the point:
Since we’re hardly lacking in places where people really do practice the kind of mental gymnastics that’s exercised in Besźel/Ul Qoma, the learned knowing of “ours” and “theirs” and never transgressing – though of course not as drastically as to literally unsee The Other Place – it strikes me as gutless to spend so much energy on crafting an allegory (and inevitably leaving it full of holes and failures in this desperate effort of making it Distinct; hell, one of the characters even attended a workshop on policing (real) politically divided cities so that once again we could be assured we’re not reading a roman à clef on any of them) instead of going all the way and writing a fantasy Stolac or what have you, and labelling it clearly as such. Sure, it would piss people off something rotten whichever real divided city one chose to write an alternative history and present reality of, but it’s not like the book isn’t already insulting in its carefree ignorance of its building blocks.
Some of the objections it raises may very well be valid, but it misses the point of the novel. The City and the City is not meant to be a standin for anything, or function as a metaphor for some really existing Eastern or Central European countries. The setting is not quite meant to be realist, rather than evoke just enough of a feeling of realism to serve its central conceit, that of two cities geographically sharing the exact same space yet being separated through the inhabitants of each city deliberately unseeing the other one. The book would not work if it was based on a real situation. I’m sure Kosin Grigor is right to say Miéville made a mess of the language and names and it therefore doesn’t work for them, but again, this is a fictional city we’re talking about, not meant to be representive of anything actually existing. That the language therefore is reminiscent of, but doesn’t quite work like real Eastern/Central European languages is a feature, not a bug.
It’s one thing to be annoyed by this, which I can well understand, but that doesn’t mean that Miéville is guilty of culturefail, as Kosin puts it. Miéville’s cities are not some Ruritania, created to indulge in “Balkans” cliches, but rather use Eastern/Central Europe as an inspiration in the same way that his earlier creation of New Crobuzon.was inspired by London, but not meant to be London. Ultimately everything about Besźel and Ul Qoma is in service to the central idea of unseeing; their existence only needs to make enough sense to support this and to criticise it for not being real enough is missing the point; it was never meant to be.