At 08:45 PM 6/1/96 -0400, Ferenc Novak wrote:

>I find this statement an eloquent example of the of impertinence Eva
>displayed
>on FORUM before she ran out of insults and did the group the favor of
>stopping
>to post to it.

        Your smear campaign won't work. I have been writing on this list for
two and a half years and readers of HUNGARY know me and my style pretty well
by now.

        What I find interesting is that Cecilia's "impertinence" you didn't
find offensive. Is it possible that the reason for your lack of
even-handedness is that you sense that Cecilia's political views are closer
to yours?

        Eva Balogh

Dear Roman:

Thanks for taking the time to share thoughts gathered while in Slovakia.
(Not that I was elated with the context, mind you;  Just when I was giving
ample credit that positive events would come to be, from having learned from
the mistakes of the past, your account of events have indicated the contrary).

Too bad!  Perhaps humanity needs another century or so, to realize all that
is vitally important?

Welcome back, glad you're safe and sound.  Certainly did not seem like a
'great break'.

Thanks again for the information
Regards,
Aniko Dunford

Joe Szalai wrote:

> At 09:37 PM 5/31/96 -0700, Eva Balogh wrote:
> >        Well, this is what everybody calls it and I am not even sure that it
> >is a misnomer. It was a revolution in the sense of "a sudden, radical, or
> >complete change."
>
> It was not!  It was a revolution only in the sense that revolution is a
> synonym for rebellion.  If the rebellion had succeeded it might have led to
> a revolution.

I can recommend the Collins English Dictionary for clearing up the confusion
in your mind about the meaning of words.  It gives as the first meaning of
revolution "the overthrow or repudiation of a regime or political system by
the governed".  For rebellion, "organized resistance or opposition to a
government or other authority".  Quite apart from the slight negative conno-
tation of 'rebellion' applied to this case, as it is often meant to describe
rebellion against a lawful authority (e.g., 'Bosnian Serb rebels').

> The French, American and Russion Revolutions are remembered
> as such because there was a "sudden, radical, or complete change".  They
> also succeeded. And with success comes permanence.  Without permanence there
> is no revolution.

As for permanence, you obviously haven't yet been told about Napoleon Bonaparte
putting an end to the French Revolution and the eventual Bourbon Restoration.
Or about the Bolshevik putsch finishing off the Russian Revolution.

> That's probably why the Prague Spring of 1968 is not
> called a revolution.

Hardly.  The Prague Spring was a peaceful change of regime, due to the
reformists outvoting hardliners in the Czechoslovak Communist Party.

George Antony

In a message dated 96-06-01 20:06:06 EDT, you write:

>
>

Please send me information on how to order this map.

And let us forgive all our enemies !

So we all could get BETTER  and BETTER  and BETTER  towards
our felow men  !

So the following sentence ( >No Comment....  I am *not* "talking" to you, until
I see that retraction... >so there!)  will sound like (Thank you Aniko I'm glad
to
be back and to see  you too  being concerned !)

Regads
Istvan

P.S       Did you know that ?:-)    love = good   ;  hate = bad !

>   Tony and Celia Becker > writes:
>  Dear Aniko;
>
>  At 06:51 PM 5/29/96 -0300, you wrote:
>  >Hi Cecilia:
>  >
>  >At 02:18 PM 5/29/96 -0600, you wrote:
>  >>
>  >>(P.S. to Aniko--how am I doing with this post?--Hope to be better yet,
after
>  >>the vacation...)
>  >No Comment....  I am *not* "talking" to you, until I see that retraction...
>  >so there!>
>
>  Which/what retraction?  There was something uniquely offensive to all?  I
>  thought everything I've ever posted had someone or other wishing I'd make
>  _a_ retraction.  Did I miss something in particular?
>

>  point, anything I write is inevitably, undoubtedly going to offend
>  someone.--probably this already has--wouldn't you think so, too? :-)
>
>  Good Lord, then I'd better stop adding to this posting or the further
>  dissections will tie up this group until the 22nd century!  Ouch!
>
>  Cecilia
>
>  (er, I'm not in further trouble if I assume everyone knows who this is by
>  just the first name?)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>  N0BBS, Cecilia L. Fabos-Becker -  - San Jose, CA
>
>>>>

A correction: the savoury pancake is Hortobagyi husos palacsinta (meat-filled
crepes a'la Hortobagy), not Gundel as I wrote earlier.

Just to add to the thread of Hungarian food.  I cannot recall if the Keeper
of the Hungarian FAQ (Zoli Fekete) includes Web sites with Hungarian recipes,
but a search of Alta Vista for 'paprikas' came up with quite a few.  Make
sure that you compare them and take a majority vote on variations: chicken
paprikas recipes had such unorthodox ingredients as black pepper and yoghurt.

Presumably http://fatime.fsz.bme.hu:80/hungary/cuisine/foods/ would be the
most authentic but I could not reach it.

George Antony

Andrew Revill wrote:
> I need recipes that can be prepared from ingredients readily available in
> the UK. Aniko is a big chicken fan, but please no recipes for Gulyas or
> Paprikas Csirke, she has already cooked these for me !

In my view, there are few chicken recipes that are typically Hungarian.
Paprikas chicken and Ujhazy chicken soup would be the ones that come to my
mind, while deep-fried breadcrumbed drumsticks or roast chicken (the other
widespread uses for chicken in Hungary) are hardly characteristically Hungarian
.

If you want to stick with chicken, I would suggest a variant of Gundel
palacsinta (savoury pancakes with a meat filling).  Make a chicken paprikas,
cooking it until the meat falls off the bone.  (Check often and add a little
water every time it is getting too dry so that is doesn't burn.)  Take the
bones, skin and cartilage bits out, reserve some gravy for a topping and work
the remaining gravy and meat into a spreadable consistency: reduce if too
thin, add a little white wine if too thick.  Make pancakes, fill with the
meaty paste, mix the reserved gravy with more sour cream and pour on top.
You can prepare this well ahead, arrange on a fireproof dish and just heat up
in the oven before serving.  Serve with rice and pickled dill cucumbers, for
wine I suggest Badacsonyi Szurkebarat (Eminence Gris) or Tokaji Furmint that
you may find in Tesco.

Making the pancakes is the most laborious bit, but if you get started might
as well make more and use them for dessert too (call it a "Hungarian pancake
night" or something).  Fill the second lot of them with a mix of cottage
cheese, sugar, sultanas, egg yolk and lemon zest.  This is a reasonably
typical Hungarian dessert.  Again, prepare ahead, and bake in the oven a bit.
Serve sweet Tokaji Szamorodni with the dessert.

George Antony

I would appreciate if someone would help me to find a Hungarian winery
(phone or fax or address)  OREMUS.

Thank you.

In a message dated 96-06-01 20:06:06 EDT, you write:

>
>

Does this map happen to have the area referred to as upper Hungary and now
called Slovakia?

In article >,
Janos Zsargo > writes:

>I have never understood why peoples think that somebody should be a
paranoic,
>uneducated 'elmebeteg' if (s)he is nazi or racist,etc. I think the real
evil
>things can be done by clever or/and educated people and the ideas are not
>necesserily correlated with mental capabilities.
>
>J.Zsargo

Well put, Janos. I'll go you even one better. I think clever and educated
people can become so besotted by ideas that they willingly forsake
critical scrutiny of those ideas and their real-life implications. They're
usually the same ones who, in this state of rapture over some utopian
scheme or another, are insistent that it be inflicted on their fellow
human beings. The mouth-breathing knuckle-draggers are too busy just
trying to survive to be much of a motivating force.
Sam Stowe

In article >, Gabor Fencsik
> writes:

>The
>East European twist is to use, and abuse, and constantly re-write
>history in order to score political points in the present.  This
>technique would not work in the U.S. because of the general lack of
>interest in historical hairsplitting, or history in general -- as in
>"History is Bunk".
>
>-----
>Gabor Fencsik

In terms of American history, this is pretty optimistic. Just witness the
continued assaults on the reputations of John F. Kennedy and Franklin
Delano Roosevelt by even the more moderate elements of the right wing in
this country. They wouldn't do this if history really didn't count with
many people.
Sam Stowe

I was recently in the Netherlands (ie Holland) and I met a Hungarian
girl.  When I left she wrote me a small message in Hungarian.  I haven't got a
clue what it means.  Does anyone out there know Hungarian and can translate it
for me.  I can't make out all the characters so I can't write it here.  I can
scan it in as a .GIF file and send it to you.  Please help!!!!

Erik Anderson

E-mail:  

A.Kornai wrote:

>no time for this. I accept this explanation. What I do not accept is the myth
>that there was full-fledged resistance, a "szabadsa1gharc".

I don't think it was a full-fledged resistance, too. However I do not think I
am the right person to argue about it. There are enought 'veteran' on this NG
to accept or refuse myths (as you Mr.Kornai probably not such veteran, too, it
is a kind of odd that you 'do not accept' something about 56). I was arguing
only with your cynical approach to those fights and trying to show your
definitions like 'token fight' does not make sense ifself without comparision.
But you are right I might have missed something as I really did not read the
'the thread from the beginning'.
But you finally make a comparission:

>the beginning, asks for how I would define "tough resistance". As he is fully
>aware, Hungary had a large standing army, with artillery, tanks, bomber and
>fighter airplanes, and this army was not engaging in battle with the invading

I am not fully aware, I am sorry. Beside I would be surprised if it were so,
as you kindly mentioned the end of WWII was just a decade earlier and Hungary
was a defeated enemy for the Russian. It would have been strange if the first
thing that the russians do is remilitarizing their former enemies. Also the
Warsawien Pact just celebrated its first birthday by 56 (as far as I know).
Of course I do not say that there weren't hungarian army, but I don't think
it was so mighty and large as you imply. Furthermore I do not know where do
you heard about those hungarian bombers, as far as I know, Hungary has not got
air force. What we have is fighter planes (which can attack ground targets
of course), but they belongs to the air defense (honi legvedelem), and some
helicopter units. But of course I am not so sure about this, I just try to
recall what I was thought at the army.

>Soviets. A decade earlier the occupying Germans put up "tough resistance"
>against the Soviets pushing into Hungary. Budapest was taken street by street,
>corner by corner, and one would expect that a nation defending its own soil
>can do a better job than an occupying force.

Comparing the tomato to the Mickey Mouse. The germans have already fought for
3 hard years against Russia by that time, and knew they could not expect too
much mercy if they were captured. Of course they fought untill the last bullet.
While the hungarian army was set up by the Russians (in the 50s) probably with
a lots of caution, being sure that reliable caders are in the key positions, so
when the turmoil of 56 came, probably the army was paralized, confused and did
not really know what to do.

J.Zsargo

Hi Everyone,

   First of all, let me say a big thank you to all those of you who took
the time to help me with finding Hungarian food recipes. Loads of great
ideas!

   My next question, if anyone is able to help me, is this: Can anyone
recommend to me an authentic Hungarian restaurant in the UK? I'm sure
there must be one or two good ones. I know there is a large and lively
Hungarian community around the West London area.I have asked around here,
but with no luck, so if anyone has any information, please let me know.

Thanks

Andrew

--
Andrew Revill )

To David Kincel,

        I am afraid, I don't know--at least at the moment--where you could
order this map. My cousin saw it in a bookstore and because she knew that I
was interested in getting one bought it on the spot because she didn't think
that she could find anything better than that. I will ask her to find a
telephone or fax number for the publishing house and I will let you know.

>Does this map happen to have the area referred to as upper Hungary and now
>called Slovakia?

        Talking about Slovakia before 1918 is entirely unhistorical because
there was never such designation. Upper Hungary was a vague
territory--northern parts of Hungary. Transylvania, on the other hand, was a
historical entity with definite borders. The 1890 map, of course, doesn't
designate any of these areas separately--only the county borders can be
distinguished.

        Eva Balogh

At 04:24 PM 6/2/96 -0400, Janos Zsargo wrote:

>A.Kornai wrote:
>
>>no time for this. I accept this explanation. What I do not accept is the myth
>>that there was full-fledged resistance, a "szabadsa1gharc".
>
>I don't think it was a full-fledged resistance, too. However I do not think I
>am the right person to argue about it. There are enought 'veteran' on this NG
>to accept or refuse myths (as you Mr.Kornai probably not such veteran, too, it
>is a kind of odd that you 'do not accept' something about 56).

        Of course, just because Andras and Janos were not there it doesn't
mean that they may not know more about the army than someone who was there.
I am sure that the CIA, for example, knew more about the preparedness of the
Hungarian army than any of us.


AK:
>>the beginning, asks for how I would define "tough resistance". As he is fully
>>aware, Hungary had a large standing army, with artillery, tanks, bomber and
>>fighter airplanes, and this army was not engaging in battle with the invading

JZs:
>I am not fully aware, I am sorry. Beside I would be surprised if it were so,
>as you kindly mentioned the end of WWII was just a decade earlier and Hungary
>was a defeated enemy for the Russian. It would have been strange if the first
>thing that the russians do is remilitarizing their former enemies. Also the
>Warsawien Pact just celebrated its first birthday by 56 (as far as I know).
>Of course I do not say that there weren't hungarian army, but I don't think
>it was so mighty and large as you imply. Furthermore I do not know where do
>you heard about those hungarian bombers, as far as I know, Hungary has not got
>air force. What we have is fighter planes (which can attack ground targets
>of course), but they belongs to the air defense (honi legvedelem), and some
>helicopter units. But of course I am not so sure about this, I just try to
>recall what I was thought at the army.

        My guess is that the Hungarian army was relatively well equipped.
Let's not forget that we were in the middle of the cold war and by the
mid-1950s the Soviets were pretty sure of themselves in Eastern Europe.
Sure, the Warsaw Pact was only a year old but I don't think that that made a
great deal a difference. The size of the army was certainly larger than today.

        However, the size and strength of the army really doesn't matter in
this particular discussion. Strong or weak, the army did nothing. Why not?
Good question and I don't think that I know the answer. I don't know on
whose side the army leadership stood and I don't know whether the Imre Nagy
government ever asked the army brass to throw its whatever power on the side
of the revolution. I do know that most of the recruits were sent home. If
the army had not remained neutral but supported the revolution things might
have turned out differently. By the way, perhaps Peter Hidas, who knows the
literature of 1956 very well, is aware of books or articles, dealing the
role of the army in 1956.

        Eva Balogh

At 10:34 AM 6/3/96 +0200, Gyorgy Kadar wrote:
>        Lectoris Salutem!
>        I was asked, I think, questions cannot remain without answer:
>>
>>         As far as the musical program is concerned. Most likely any kind of
>> requiem is not appropriate for the occasion and surely it would have been
>> better to pick a program from Liszt, Dohnanyi, Bartok, or Kodaly. Having
>> said that, do you really think that (1) Mr. Demszky is personally
>> responsible for the program, and (2) the choice of Mozart's Requiem is a
>> political statement.
>>         Eva Balogh
>>
>        (1) One cannot be sure who exactly should say: "...the buck stops
>here...", but in a democratic country somebody must be personally
>responsible for the program in such a case, and it was certainly
>announced with the (at least tacit) approval of Demszky. And my personal
>opinion is, that the "buck" here cannot stop at lower level than Demszky.
>        (2) My answer is yes.

        Yes, I heard that Gabor Demszky is married to a Revai. Jozsef Revai
was born in 1898 and died in 1959. Demszky himself was born in 1952.
Therefore, if that Revai girl is a direct decendent of Jozsef Revai, she
must be, at best, only Jozsef Revai's grandchild. Kind of remote, don't you
think? She may not have been born yet when Revai was already dead.

        As far as the choice of Mozart's Requiem on the program is
concerned, don't you think that as a political statement it is far too
obvious and an easy target? What I mean is that Gabor Demszky would be a
stupid idiot to come out with such brazen attack on the Hungarian nation as
including a requiem at joyous celebration, and I understand that he is
anything but stupid.

        Eva Balogh

George Antony writes:

Gee, have any of you actually made dobos? While I have not made one in
donkey's years, the effort was much less than described.

> Yes, one needs to be quick and nimble in spreading the caramel.  There
are some
> tricks associated with it: (1) do not chill the cake before glazing it,
as the
> warmer it is the more time you have to spread the caramel, (2) when the
caramel
> is spread but still soft, press a well-oiled knife edge to the top where
you
> want the slices to be, to get a small trough on the glazing, and (3)
before
> cutting, place the edge of the knife on the caramel layer and give it a
quick
> tap with a hammer.  The latter, apart from further adding to the exotic
> nature of the presentation and providing your guests with a good
discussion
> topic, will hopefully only crack the glazing, without demolishing the
cake.
> The resistance of the cake can be improved by chilling it to the bone, to
mix
> some metaphors too, before cutting.

First of all where is it prescribed that the whole cake has to be assembled
before the caramel is glazed onto the top. It is adequate to pour the
caramel only on the top layer and then cut it or score it well with a hot
knife. After the top is scored, then the top layer can be placed on the
cream layer that is waiting to be crowned.

Regards,Jeliko.

Just a few more words.

I have heard the expression used in the US that "he was freedom fighter in
the Hungarian revolution". However, I have never heard the reverse. i.e.
"He was a revolutionary in the Hungarian freedom fight."

I am still beleiving, that as far as the English useage is concerned, we got
into semantics. The words have slightly different meaning in English than in
Hungarian.

I disagree with part of all of the postings on this subject and agree with
part of them from all sides.

I have had the chance to fight both the AVH (and most of those who were
involved at the Magyar Radio were NOT drafted kiskatonak but regular run of
the mill AVH) and the Russians when they showed up on the Muzeum korut. I
have not felt that at that point I was at the knife edge of turning from a
revolutionary to a freedom fighter. As a matter of fact the Russians did not
much bother us when they arrived, which was only shortly after the residual
AVH surrenederd. While some stupid things went through, at least my mind at
times, the semantics of who I really was did not.

When you are in a fire fight, you do not hear anything further away then the
firing in your immediate vicinity. At times throughout the night of the 23d
of October, I was expecting a massive reinforcement (either Hungarian
government or Russian) to show up and finish us off. I have not had any
assurance that other places in the city, similar events were taking place.
One does not have to be a "designated martyr" to realize that taking up arms
against a totalitarian government was frowned upon by those who were in
power. Just an interesting sidelight is that someone who knew me already
reported to my boss (in a part time job) that I was seen with a gun in my
hand near the radio station, before I had a chance firing the first bullet.
Anyway, I would have been the least surprised if I was caught and shot on
site.

There were soldiers involved in the fighting but not the orgaized Hungarian
Army. As a matter of fact, I talked a folyamor (Riverine force) out of his
gun at the middle of the intersection of Rakoczi ut and Kiskorut. It did not
take much convincing, but apparently he felt more comfortable to give his gun
away than to join the fight in either side.

Even listening to the radio while taking apart my jammed gun in one of the
apartments facing the radio station, all I heard that armed gangs were being
disarmed and order was being established. It did not make me very cheerful
about the future. In fact there were very few people fighting at the radio
station. Nobody ever made a roll call among the stalled tanks on the street,
but my recollection would be less than 50 people actually involved until the
building was taken. More showed up afterward, milling through the building,
even with the Russian tanks rotating their guns from the korut toward the
radio. About 80% of those who were fighting there on the side of the
revolution were civilians. One fellow in a street car uniform was almost cut
in half by submachine gun fire next near a lightpole on the corner. I am sure
that he did not know whether he was freedom fighter or a revolutionary. He
was just doing something that he decided he had to do. Semantics or what he
would be called in the future was the last thing on his mind.

The situation changed somewhat after the government was obviously collapsing
and the initial Russian troops were not as interested in the fighting than
the AVH cadres have been. But that is another story.

However, even the leftists who politically joined the side of the revolution
had some second thoughts after Nov 4. On the 9th of Nov, 1956 Gyorgy Adam a
professor from the Karl Marx U. said to me that "maybe you were right"
(meaning the actual fight against the regime and not only participating in
the political events). There were those who came from the communist side and
even more from the left leaning but not necessarily communist side, who
became involved in the revolutionary political process after those who
actually fought for the freedom could not be eliminated by the fast changing
government. Several of these also became martyrs. They were also
revolutionaries, even if they never held a gun in their hands.

It is also true that most of the 56-er refugees, whom I also knew even before
the revolution, had been as far away from the fighting as they could be and
still gawk at the residues of fighting. It does not bother me that they also
left for whatever reason. Anyone who could have accurately predicted what
would happen to them or to anyone else after the Russian return would have
zero credibility with me. I am not sure if even the upcoming leadership knew
it.

At times we all think of ourselves as someone else, and at times we even
succeed in convincing ourselves (and others).

You can call me anything you like, Jeliko.

At 05:55 PM 6/3/96 PDT, you wrote:
>Just a few more words.
>I have heard the expression used in the US that "he was freedom fighter in
>the Hungarian revolution". However, I have never heard the reverse. i.e.
>"He was a revolutionary in the Hungarian freedom fight."
>I am still beleiving, that as far as the English useage is concerned, we got
>into semantics. The words have slightly different meaning in English than in
>Hungarian.
>I disagree with part of all of the postings on this subject and agree with
>part of them from all sides.
<vag>
>At times we all think of ourselves as someone else, and at times we even
>succeed in convincing ourselves (and others).
>You can call me anything you like, Jeliko.

Dear Jeliko:

Welcome back!  As for your last statement; how about "straight shooter".  A
welcomed composition (right or wrong, who really cares to debate that at
this point and what real purpose would it serve)?  The point of the matter
being, that, they are your recollections - which at least I greatly
appreciated reading.  Thank you!  It sure beats the argument spurred on by
our fav ol 'doc on semantics!  At least your words, mean something...as did
G. Anthony's which was equally interesting; as did some of Kornai's
statements along with E.B's.  If you all take the time to continue straight
shooting; perhaps all the pieces of puzzle just might end up fitting
together in the end - for those like me.  Failing which, at the very least,
you have collectively succeeded at having shared some of your individually
important facts from which we might all have learned a tad more.

Thanks, and regards
Aniko


.

>>Andras Kornai wrote:
> >> Hungary had a large standing army, with artillery, tanks, bomber and
> >>fighter airplanes,

>Janos Zsargo wrote:
> >I would be surprised if it were so,
> >as you kindly mentioned the end of WWII was just a decade earlier and Hungar
y
> >was a defeated enemy for the Russian. It would have been strange if the firs
t
> >thing that the russians do is remilitarizing their former enemies.

They did it with the East Germans too, to an even greater extent than with
Hungary.  And it was quite rational too.  For the 'allied' troops were meant
to buy time for the Soviet (NB, not merely Russian) army in case of conflict,
by acting as the first line of buffer.

Besides, do not forget that the satellite armies had a hand-picked officer
corps.  As much of the new elite, they mostly came from families at the
bottom of the social heap in the previous regime.  They knew hardship before,
they appreciated their material and social advance, they had something to
lose if the old order returned, hence they had a loyalty to the new regime.
They were often trained in the Soviet Union and mostly trained by Soviet
instructors at the Hungarian military academy.  They associated the Soviet
Union with the new Hungarian regime and extended their loyalty, to a varying
degree, to the Soviet Union too.

On top of this, the Soviet system of political commissars was established in
the Hungarian Army: the most loyal Party members were installed in Army
ranks and acted as the Party's internal security organ in the Army.  It was
a very effective system.

> >Of course I do not say that there weren't hungarian army, but I don't think
> >it was so mighty and large as you imply. Furthermore I do not know where do
> >you heard about those hungarian bombers, as far as I know, Hungary has not
 got
> >air force.

Unless you have good knowledge of an era, do not get into arguments about it.

Yes, Hungary had bombers before 56.  The rumours I heard had it that it was
the Hungarian bombers at Kecskemet that gave the Soviet Army a fright.
Apparently, the pilots were actually in the planes, ready to take off, except
that the order to attack the Soviets never came.  This is supposed to be one
of the reasons why the Hungarian Army had its offensive capabilities reduced
after 56 and turned into a home-guard cum Soviet air defence station.

>         However, the size and strength of the army really doesn't matter in
> this particular discussion. Strong or weak, the army did nothing. Why not?

I think it was the loyal officer corps and the effective political control.
Also, I think that the Army leadership must have been well aware of the
prevailing Soviet doctrines regarding the satellite countries and wanted to
avoid the casualties of a hopeless war.

> Good question and I don't think that I know the answer. I don't know on
> whose side the army leadership stood and I don't know whether the Imre Nagy
> government ever asked the army brass to throw its whatever power on the side
> of the revolution.

I cannot recall any documents suggesting that this happened.  Maleter was
leading a totally volunteer army whose military elements have actually
defected.

> I do know that most of the recruits were sent home. If
> the army had not remained neutral but supported the revolution things might
> have turned out differently.

I fear only in that the number of casualties would have been much higher.
The Soviet leaders were determined to keep Hungary in the fold, and they had
as much concern for the lives of their own soldiers as they did for the
Hungarians', combatant or civilian.  And I think that after a bloodier re-
conquest the Soviets would have given much less freedom to any Hungarian
leader to set internal policies than they gave Kadar.

George Antony

At 09:53 AM 6/3/96 -0400, David Kincel wrote:

>Please send me information on how to order this map.

        Here is all the information you need. Stiefel Kft. H-1155 Budapest,
Kolozsvar utca 13, Tel.: 36/1/272-2816; Fax: 36/1/272-3133. Order # 3878877

        Eva Balogh

At 10:34 AM 6/3/96 +0200, kadargyorgy wrote:

(about Mayor Demszky of Budapest):

>. And everybody
>knows, that he recently married into the family of tovarish Revai (does
>anybody remember: Rakosi-Gero- R e v a i -Farkas).

I didn't.  Is kadargyorgy suggesting that in a democracy people should be
judged by their in-laws? Or that he cannot imagine two people meeting,
falling in love and marrying? The only way of doing it is by "marrying in"?

By the way, if he indeed "married in recently", then he can only be accused
of stupidity, after all who would marry into a family that is definitely on
its way out of power.

Gabor D. Farkas

(as far as I know not related to the -Farkas in the quote from kadargyorgy)

Re: Yes, '56 was a Szabadsagharc

On 29 May 1996, Andras Kornai >, referring to the
cited figures of the Hungarian casualties, writes:

<I think these figures are completely bogus. I would love to
<see some documentation for this...

        The figures are from a report of the Kadar regime on the events of
        '56. They have been repeatedly cited by various authors. See for
        instance the book "The  Hungarian Revolution of 1956." Longman,
        London and New York, 1996 on p. 103.

        "The number of Hungarian losses in the armed uprising between
        23 October and 11 November was set at a minimum of 2,700 dead
        with ten times as many injured in a secret report of the
        Statistical Office compiled in 1957. Of the dead, 1,330 were
        workers, 44 were students and 196 were children under 14 years
        of age. Yet this figure can by no means include all those who
        fell in battle or were shot on the streets, many of whom were
        buried in public parks and gardens. Even less reliable is this
        figure for the casualties in the countryside, to say nothing
        of those shot or injured during the second intervention of
        the Soviet Army...."

        Also, Hoensch, J.C. "A History of Modern Hungary. 1867-1994."
        2nd Ed., Longman, New York, 1996, p.222 writes:

        " The Hungarian government's official report on the uprising
        later cited more than 3,000 dead and 13,000 injured as well
        as over 4,000 destroyed buildings. Actual losses were probably
        higher. The persecution of the 'counter-revolutionaries' which
        followed, despite the amnesty proclaimed by the Kadar regime,
        may well have resulted in over 20,000 people being sent to
        prison and thousands to Soviet forced labor camps. Law 4 of
        1957, promulgated on 15 January 1957, provided for special
        courts to sentence participants in the uprising to death
        without formal charges and speeded up proceedings."


Andras, do you call these figures "bogus" because you think that Kadar
and his minions under-reported the actual carnage caused by the Soviet
invaders? If that is the case, you may make an excellent point!

CSABA K ZOLTANI

Dear Listmembers,

one of my american friend would like to travel and work in Hungary (teaching
English or similar). I used to know guys who did this but I have never asked
them the details, also I know there have already been posts about this subject
(unfortunatelly I did not keep them). I would really appriciate if anybody
can provide the details of finding such a teaching job.

J.Zsargo

Hello Everyone!

On another listserv there is a discussion on superstitions - regional or
in different countries.

Would you like to cite some?  I will forward it to that list.
If you know the origin of it or anything about it, like: it is common in
another country; known only in a certain region, etc.

Please include any and all information that could be of general or
particular interest.

Thanks!
Martha

p.s.  If you want to send some from Slovakia, Romania, etc., it would
also be welcomed.

Lectoris Salutem!
        I was asked, I think, questions cannot remain without answer:
>
>         As far as the musical program is concerned. Most likely any kind of
> requiem is not appropriate for the occasion and surely it would have been
> better to pick a program from Liszt, Dohnanyi, Bartok, or Kodaly. Having
> said that, do you really think that (1) Mr. Demszky is personally
> responsible for the program, and (2) the choice of Mozart's Requiem is a
> political statement.
>         Eva Balogh
>
        (1) One cannot be sure who exactly should say: "...the buck stops
here...", but in a democratic country somebody must be personally
responsible for the program in such a case, and it was certainly
announced with the (at least tacit) approval of Demszky. And my personal
opinion is, that the "buck" here cannot stop at lower level than Demszky.
        (2) My answer is yes.
        I was glad in 1986-87 to watch an American television program
about the underground activity of Demszky. I did not want to believe, that
those "democratic opposition" dissidents were all under "family related"
protection umbrellas of tovarish Aczel. Now I know, that Demszky's father
was a diplomat in DDR Berlin when he was a child (and a diplomatic shame:
on the occasion of his recent visit to Berlin he mentioned this fact
adding in English, that he does not remember German...what a politeness to
his hosts [he would have better not mentioned it...]). And everybody
knows, that he recently married into the family of tovarish Revai (does
anybody remember: Rakosi-Gero- R e v a i -Farkas).
That is: communist internationalism - converted into capitalist but
remaining internationalist - openly wants to force again the nation
to mourn on the birth anniversary of Hungary. It is a simple and
intentional slap to Hungarians. Thus it is political, ... and not only
statement, but action...
        That is why I think he and his friends should mourn the end
of his miserable mayorship - ASAP ...
        May God bless us all...         kadargyorgy