The Collective and the Individual in Post War Vietnam Literature

7/27/2019 The Collective and the Individual in Post War Vietnam Literature

1/37

Northern Illinois University Center for Southeast Asian Studies

Board of Trustees of Northern Illinois University

THE COLLECTIVE AND THE INDIVIDUAL IN TWO POST-WAR VIETNAMESE NOVELSAuthor(s): John C. SchaferSource: Crossroads: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, Vol. 14, No. 2(2000), pp. 13-48Published by: Northern Illinois University Center for Southeast Asian StudiesStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40860735 .

Accessed: 09/10/2013 15:07

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Northern Illinois University Center for Southeast Asian Studies andBoard of Trustees of Northern Illinois

University are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Crossroads: AnInterdisciplinary Journal of Southeast Asian Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 123.203.240.9 on Wed, 9 Oct 2013 15:07:23 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions


2/37

THE COLLECTIVE AND THE INDIVIDUALINTWO POST-WAR VIETNAMESE NOVELSJohnC. Schfer*

In the late 1980s, when Vietnam's renovationpolicy loosenedrestrictionsn writers, ovels mergedhatdescribedhe haracters'private reams ndfears n muchgreater etail thanhad beendonebefore.woofthesemorenward-lookingovels reanalyzedhere:LLu'u's A Time Far Past and Trn Manh Ho's Separation. Bothnovels rguethat imits houldbeplacedon "collective oncern" ndthat ndividuals houldhave more ay in choice fmarriage artnersand in other spects ftheirives.The article elates his rgumentocurrentssues nd topast iteraryebates,nd itconsiders ow ife ndliteraturen Vietnammight hange f collective oncernbecomesseverely eakened.Until he ate1980s, ietnam'sommunisteaders equired oveliststo support henational ndeavorby authoringtereotyped orksthat eaturedypicalharactersnd themes ndthat ocused nthegoalsofthe ollectivetruggle.he iberalizationsftherenovationpolicyannounced n 1986 encouragedthe appearanceofmorecreativeworks uch as L Lulu'sA TimeFarPast (Thfri a vang),published in 1986 (L Lini 1997/1986), nd TrnManh Ho'sSeparationLythan), ublishedn1989 TrnManhHo 1990/1989).These two novels deviated frompreviousnormsby featuringatypical haractersnd situations,xploringhe nnerives oftheircharacters,nd criticizinghecollectiveoncern hat estrictedhecharacters' ndividual choices.A TimeFar Past uses the term"collectiveoncern"tapthequantain) orefer o thenotion hatgroup, rcollective,hould nstructn individualnhow to eadhis*John . Schferaught nglishnVietnamnthe ate1960s ndearly 970sand nowteaches nglish tHumboldt tateUniversitynArcata, A. Hehaspublishedrticles nVietnameseiteraturentheJournalfAsian tudies,VietNamForum,Hrp iu, and other ournals.Recently e publishedVietnamese erspectivesn theWarin Vietnam:AnAnnotated ibliographyfWorksnEnglish.

Crossroads: n Interdisciplinaryournalf outheast sianStudies14(2):13-48Copyright 000bythe Centerfor outheastAsian StudiesNorthernllinoisUniversity



3/37

John . Schaferor her life (104). In the Confucian-influencedocietyof pre-revolution ietnam, he most mportantollectives ad been thefamilygi dnt),he xtended amilydnghoordaigi dnt),ndthecountrydai nw&c). ince 1945,communisteaders had beenencouraging ietnamese o be loyal nstead o thenation,heParty,and party-controlledollectives uch as militarynits and workteams. he twonovels rgueforimitinghefamily'sndtheparty'spowerto restrictnd direct person's hoiceofmarriage artner,showing hat ollectiveoncernouldharmndividuals' ives nthesamewaythatthad beencorruptinghe uthenticityfVietnameseliterature.henovels'fates eveal he ouchy ature fthe ssue: ATime arPastreceived hehighestwardfrom heVietnamWriters'Association,while Separationwas confiscated oon after t waspublished.1As theyhighlighthe tension etween ollective oncern ndindividualdesire the novels evoke a numberof long-standingquestions hat ffectll aspectsofVietnameseife. s thegrouptoconcerntselfolelywith ollectivewell-being?s it tobalance theneedsofthe ndividual nd thegroup? hould tpromotehewell-being f ndividualsn thegroundshat ontentedndividualservethe collectivemore effectively?hould it promote ndividualhappinessevenwhen thegroupdoes notbenefit? nd themostseditious uestion f ll: fthewayto make ndividuals appy s togrant hemmorefreedom,hould thecollective eavethem lone?These ge-old uestions, hich he wonovelsraiseprimarilynthecontextof love, marriage, nd the arts,are perhaps the mostimportantnes in post-warVietnam.Exploring ow thenovelsaddress hese uestions an teach s a great eal aboutrecent ocial1A copyofSeparation ade tto France nd thebook was republishednParis n 1990.Thenovelhas never eentranslated.nhis ntroductionotheParisedition, hi V saysTrnManhHo's novel "had justbeen on themarket or fewdayswhen t was immediatelyakenback.The secretpolicesuddenly ntered rinting ouse Number at 387TranHirng ao,District , Saigon and confiscatedll thecopies thathad notyetbeendistributed"ThiV1990:5).Bi BchH,writingn a Californiaournal,saysthat he"doesn't elieve herumors hat eparationas confiscatednSaigon" 1990:36).However,nJuly,999, friend ecentlyeturned romVietnam oldme that eparationas stillnot vailable nbookstoresnHoChiMinh ity.14 Crossroads4:2



4/37

TheCollectivendthe ndividualn Vietnameseiteratureand iteraryrendsnd about he ssues ikely ooccupyVietnamesein the wentieth-firstentury.The tensionbetween ndividually-orientedove and group-oriented uty s an old issue whose revival npost-wariteraturereflectsoung eoples'growingesistanceo the nvolvementftheParty nd theco' quan state-sectororkplace) n theirmarriageplans. Not only do the novels promote individualism byhighlightinghis struggle, ut theyalso exemplify he recentemergencefworks hat resent more ndividualisticerspectiveby exploringthe psychological ives of theircharacters.Thisemphasison individualism as precursorsn the iterature fthe1930s, nd somecritics ave even ought vidence orndividualismin premoderniterature. ut individualism omes at a price.Apreviousiterary oveto radical ndividualismytheNew Poetsofthe1930s ed to some remarkably xpressive oetry ut also topsychologicalonfusion. ccustomed o collective oncern, hesepoetsfoundWestern-stylendividualismttractiveutdestabilizing,inpart ecause tpromised reedomshat hey ouldnot, s colonialsubjects,njoy. fVietnameseompletelyiberate hemselves romcollectiveoncernnmatters f ove andmarriage,he ffect n lifeand literature ill be profound. uch a development ould, forexample, pellthedemiseof thesentimentalovel and usher n amorecynical iterature. et one ofthe novelsholds forth lessextremeossibility,uggestinghat hequestfor ove and for ruthserves oth he ndividual nd the ollective.The"UntyingftheStrings"ntheLate1980sWhen he econd ndochinawarended n1975,Vietnameseeadersandwritersnticipatedhat reatworkswould be writtenbout t.Bythe end of the 1970stheywerealready skingwhynonehademerged.nHanoi, iteraryritics uchas Nguyen inhChu 1978)andHongNgocHin 1979)blamed thestereotyped ritinghatfeatured ypical haracters nd stressed ollective truggle. hisliteraryocus n the ollective as required ythe ocialist ealismthattheVietnamese ommunists ad adopted from oviet andMaoistsources, specially romMao Tse-tung's1967/1942) enantalkson literaturend the arts.Reinforcinghisemphasison thestereotypicalwas the requirementaid down by Mao and byVietnam's evolutionaryeader,Ho ChiMinh, hat iterature ust

Crossroads 4:2 15



5/37

John.Schaferservepolitics.Criticsuggestedhatwhile focus n the ollectiveand thetypicalwas appropriate uring hewar, t was no longernecessary owthatvictory ad been achieved ndpeace restored.The criticswereparticularlyisturbedythenotion hat iteratureshouldserveas governmentropaganda.Thecritics ad tomakethesepoints ndirectly,or xamplebyalluding osocialist ealismwith uphemistichrases uchas "wishful ealism" r"doctrinairerealism."3 hey also avoided directattacks on the notionthatliterature ust ervepolitics.Nevertheless,hey elt hat iteratureshouldpayattentiono theprivate attles fparticulareopleandshould xpress hehopes nd fears f ndividuals.The iterarylimate ecamemore penafter guyen anLinh,progressiveoutherner,ecameGeneral ecretaryf theParty ndannounced tthe ixth arty ongress1986) policy fdoimi,orrenovation, hich s sometimes eferredo as Vietnam's lasnost.Responding o an arrayofproblems ncluding orrupt fficials,bureaucraticnefficiency,hortcomingsn education nd training,and theeconomic tagnation rought n by a rigidly entralizedeconomy,renovation'smoves towarda market conomywereaccompanied y greater reedom orwriters. heHanoileadershiphad apparentlyecided oopenthepressure alve a little,voidingan explosionofpent-up nti-governmententimenty allowingsomemanageableriticism.InOctober,987, ecretaryinh alled nunprecedented eetingwithwritersnd artists.nstead f ecturinghem, e askedthem oexplainwhyworkssince liberationwere "poorerthanbefore"(1991/1987).He received ome ncrediblyrankxplanations. hecritic o Ngocfor xample,tated luntlyhat heproblemwas that

2See Ho ChiMinh'speechesollectednVeCngTc VnHo VanNghOnLiteraryndArtistic asks].See especially ages 33 and 59. In thenovelSeparation,hecharactersttributehisprinciple o Mao (TranManhHo1990/1989:63)0Nguyn inhChu 1978) aid Vietnameseiteraturead described "hinthu'c lang y vong"wishful eality), ot actualreality; ongNgocHin(1979) aid recentiteraturead been writtenccordingo theprinciplef"chungha in hux hi iao"doctrinaireealism), hich e contrasts itha literatureocusingn the ruthsf xistence.16 Crossroads4:2



6/37

TheCollectivend the ndividual nVietnameseiteratureliteraturead becomepropaganda, n instrumentfpolitics.4nresponse,ecretaryinhpromisedo"untie he trings"c&i tr)bit.He toldwritershatwhilethey hould notabandonsocialistrealism,hey houldfeel ree o"portrayad peopleand bad thingsto arouse public indignation nd censure" (NguyenVan Linh1987:122).You areengineersfthe oul,"continuedheSecretary."Don'tdepictpeopleas saints.You mustperceive heir ailingsnorder omakethem etter"123-4).A Time arPastwouldprobablynothave beenpublishednVietnam,nd Separationouldn'thavebeen writtent all, without hisuntying f thestrings.Writtenbefore i m&iwas officiallynaugurated, Time arPastbreakswith he ocialist ealismmoldbutrefrainsrom tridentriticismfParty olicy ndofficials.eparation,n the ther and, learlyakestoheartSecretary inh's advice to "portray ad people and badthings."treads ike a catalogue f communistailings,eginningwiththe disastrous and reform rogram f themid-1950s ndcontinuinghroughheNew Economic onesof hepost-warra.Collective oncernnLe Lafu'sA Time ar PastThemain haracterfA Time arPast sGiangMinh i,a manfromthe smallvillageofHa Vi innorthernietnam.n 1954,whentheFrenchredefeatedtDinBinPh, he en-year-oldi is alreadymarried. raditional amiliesommonly rrangedmarriageswhenchildrenwerestillyoung, nd Si's fathers described s having"old-fashionedonfucian ttitudes"1997/1986:6).5he collectiveconcernmanifestedn thisarrangedmarriageeads to a host ofproblems.Si dislikeshis wife and soon falls in love with aclassmate, ircmg.e lateroinsthe rmy, otbecausehe lovestherevolution,utprimarilyogetawayfrom is wife.His exploitsnthemilitary,ncludinghe ingle-handed owning f anAmericanplane,earnhimthe tatus Emulation oldier."6 uthis continuedloveforHircmgetshim ntrouble. is superiors iscover hathehas beenkeeping diaryfilledwithromantic antasieshewrites4Ho Ngoc s quoted n an article boutthemeetingwith ecretaryinh,"Hai NgyDngGhi Nh-Mai" [TwoDays to Remember orever], hatappearednVanNghLiteraturend theArts], o.42,Oct.17,1987, -2.5Pagereferencesreto theEnglishranslationublishedn1997.6 An "Emulation oldier" chien i thidua) s a modelsoldier.Si waselected othis onorwithin is nfantryegiment84).

Crossroads4:2 17



7/37

John . Schaferthathiswifehas died ofthroat ancer nd he imagines pendinghappytimeswithHircmg). ecause his diary"reekedofquixoticpetit-bourgeoishinking"60),they solateSi from ew recruitsuntil hepolitical fficer o Manh ntervenes nd establishes hatSi's attitudeoward abor nd study s fine. i's troublesre notover, ecause aterhissuperiors emand hathe lovehis wife s aconditionoroining heParty. hesuperiorsmake t clear hat heyhave n mindboth motionalndphysicalove."Canyoudo that?"a deputypolitical fficersks (85). Dutifullygreeing o love hiswife, i returnsome ndgetsherpregnant.hisact ofobedienceonlymakesthingsworse.Hircrngad beenwaiting orhimon theunderstandinghathis marriagehad never been consummated.When hehears hat is wife spregnant,hemarries omeone lse.To compoundhis tragedy, i is thendeniedPartymembershipbecausehiswife'sfatherad been a deputy anton hiefwith loseties o theFrench.Thepolitical fficer o Manh, generallydmirable haracter,recognizeshat i's chances orhappiness avebeendestroyedythe xcesses f ollective oncernhat ad been nflictednhimfirstbyhisold-fashionedonfucian arentsnd then yParty fficials.Si'scasetroubles im:

"I must dmit hat feelverydepressed bout thismatterf'livingotherpeople's lives,' about the so-calledcollectiveconcern.Feel freeto demandfrom very ndividual theirutmost contribution o the needs of the society andcommunity.utas a community,urconcernmust ake ntoaccountwhatheneeds,whathehimselfs hungry rthirstyfor, otwhatwe wanthim obe" (104).Si's superiors ventually llow himto divorce, nd laterhemarries city irl. hismarriagelsofails, utfor ifferenteasons.Thewoman, owhom iwas introducedya friend fhisuncleHa,was desperate omarry ecause shewas secretly regnant y anoldermarriedman withwhom shehad beenhaving longaffair.Despitethisnewdisaster,henovelendson an optimisticote.Sireturnso hishomevillage ndbecomes very uccessful hairmanof Agriculture.n just threeyearshe improvesproductionofpeanuts,potatoes,and soybeansand directsa commune thatincludes daycare enternd a two-storychoolhouse.

18 Crossroads4:2



8/37

TheCollectivend the ndividualnVietnameseiteratureIn A Time arPast, he ollectiveoncern f hePartymergeswiththat fthefamily:othSi s uncleHa and hisbrotherinh rePartymembersnd importantistrictfficials,hileDo Manh,hewell-meaning olitical fficer,s a friend fthefamily.romotingamilyharmonyndadministeringhe ocialist tate re oneand the ameenterprise.urthermore,hearmyofficersnd Party fficials representeds admirable haracters ho meanwell.Though hePartymakes messofhisaffairs,tsfamilial ndpoliticaloncern or i slove ife swell-intentioned,nselfish,ndbenign.

Collective oncernn TrnMnhHo's SeparationIn TrnManhHo's Separationhe ollective oncern tfirstppearsto be similarlywell-meaning, ut it is later revealed to be adeliberatelymanipulative dministrativeechniquewielded byofficialswho turnout to be cynical, orrupt, nd hypocritical.Though eparation ocks elf-criticismessions,t s itself work fcommunal elf-criticism.n itsattempto exposecorruptionndcurbextreme endenciest would appearto be the kind ofworkSecretaryinh nvitedn his talk o writersnOctober,987. Yetthenovel's post-publication uppressionalso reveals the Party'sdiscomfortith uch riticism.8^ Somemembers fthe Vietnamese xilecommunityave detected hisaspectofSeparation nd have warned against considering he novel"dissident iterature"van chw&ng hn khng). i Bch H (1990),forexample, rguesthat hegunthatTrnManhHo uses in Separationoexposeofficial isdeeds isonly fakegun, he ffectfwhich s tomakethings rettier,oincrease nottodamage theprestige f theregimentheeyesofthepeople" 36).Recent eports rom ietnam hatTrnManhHohas made nabrupturnnd snowalignedwith onservativelementswithin heParty ave made Vietnamesexiles venmore uspicious fhismotivesnwriting eparation.ther xile ritics VHuyQuang1990) ndThiV (1990),for xample are morewilling o acceptSeparations thework f true issident. It seemsclearthatwhile n Separation rnManhHo did not criticizecommunistocietynough osatisfyll exiledissidents,ecriticizedt toomuch opleasethe uthoritiesnVietnam.n a vitrioliceview ublishedn1990,Hanoi criticL ThnhNghi faultsSeparationor its one-sided,completelyegative iewofpeopleandprograms uring hetwo warsofresistance. [B]ecoming xcessively ngry t thepast is not theway tobecome renovation riter,"his riticays. Literatureanwrite bout he

Crossroads4:2 19



9/37

John. SchaferSeparations the fictitiousutobiographyfa mannamedTranHirng. orn n 1928,Hiragfights ravely n the war againsttheFrench,speciallyfter egets henews untrue,e learnsater) hathis girlfriend as married omeone else. As a reward forhisheroism, e is admittednto the VietnamWorkers' arty t theyoung ge ofnineteen. irags woundedtwice nthewar,once n1947 ndonce n 1953.His second njurys tooserious o allow himto return o his unitand he is assignedtowriteforVictory, isdivision's ewspaper.Hirng'supervisor,hepaper'sgeneral ditor,s a model cadrenamedTrngGiangwhom the narrator ortrayss a paragonofcollectivismwho had purged himself of all petit bourgeoisindividualism. Trng Gianghad almostnothing eft that waspersonal ohim," aysHirng.His entireife, othmateriallyndspiritually,elonged o the rganization,o the ollective"61).Hung dmiresTrngGiang ut soonrealizes hatTrngGiang'sdevotion o the collective as reached bsurdproportions. rngGiang s sucha caricaturehathis prominence irects he novel's

attack otat socialism r communisms a system ut rather t thesystem's xcesses. n one sceneTrngGiang,n a dramatic how ofcontrition,wnsup totaking tastymorsel rom communal late(73). n another assage, fterheGeneva ccordshadremoved hethreat fbombing, rngGiangs disturbed hat hemenofHirag'sunitaregoingout alonetocontemplatehe fullmoon n solitude.The arch collectivist rng Giangtellshis men that"only theexploitinglasses,onlythefeudal olonialists ithdrawntotheirindividualmindswhenthey rehappy,whentheywatch flowerbloom,whentheywait for hemoonto rise."Butwe aresocialists,he continues,nd "in ourcollectivistdeology here s no privateownership"82).He organizes collective iewing f themoon nwhichthemen sittogetheruietly nd listen o the advice of amisstepsndwrongs foursociety,utthe hallengesto make ureone'sbookdoesn'tgivepeoplethe dea that hesewrongs elong o thenature fthesociety, o thesystem fthought. . . Literaturepens up painfulwounds, ut ndoing o it mustmakereaders ealthy;t mustmakethembelieve hat odaysbetterhanyesterday"99-100).9 Page referencesre to theVietnamese-languagedition epublishednFrance.20 Crossroads4:2



10/37

TheCollectivend the ndividual nVietnameseiterature"collectivistmoon/' which Trng Giangpersonifiesand calls"comrade oliticalfficial."A keyevent nHirng'sife s the and reformampaign f themid-1950s, program hat Hanoi leaders later admit was mis-handled.During his ampaignHirng's athers accused ofbeingalandowner, houghhe is onlya moderatelyuccessful armer.naddition,Hirng's irlfriend'sather s falsely ccused ofbeingareactionary py, and the girlfriend, anh, s reactionarybyassociation.Hirng enounceshis father nd his "bourgeois"girlfriendn order o savehis father rom eathand prevent is ownexpulsion rom heParty.n this ct,Hirngays,he "abandonshisownnaturen order ofollow he rganization"96).Afterhis vent,Hirng ecomes cooperativeool of theParty,whichhevariouslyalls the"collective" r the"organization." issuperiorsrder im owrite series fnovels, hefirsteing workbased onhis ownexperiencehat llustratesndpromoteshe andreformampaign.Hirngdutifully roduces a thinlydisguisedautobiographyeaturingcharacter ho abandonshis landownerfatherndhisreactionaryirl riend.Whilehe is working n thisnovel,theParty ssignsa girltoservehim foodand cleanhis room.Thisgirl,whose name MngRung means"Dream ofRiceFields," s a poster irlfor he andreformprogram.Her parentshad died of starvation and alandownerhad tried o rapeher,but she was savedby guerrillasoldiers ndnurturedytheParty.Hirng nows hathissuperiorshopethatRung illtakehis attentionswayfrom anh ndthereby"proletarianizeislove" (107)so thathewillcontinue ropagand-izing fortheParty.He findsRuong hysically nattractivendobjects oherblind llegianceo Marxist ogma, ut n a moment fweaknesshe kissesherand thendecidestomarry erfor ear hatotherwisee'llbe accused f aking dvantage fher.Hirag'sovelessmarriageoMngRung estroys ishopesforhappy life.Furthermore,heprograms n supportof which hewrites the andreformampaign f the1950s, hecollectivizationofagriculture,nd theNew Economic ones are allrevealed atertobe failures. u'ng ndergoes eeducationhroughorcedaborforhisrole npromotinghefirst f hese. omakematters orse,whentheAmericanwarends,hissuperiorsbandontheir evolutionaryvirtuesand begin living ike the mandarinsof colonial times.Revolutionaryadres used tobe described ythepopularslogan,

Crossroads 4:2 21



11/37

John.Schafer"First o suffer ardships,ast to enjoypleasures." n TranMannHo's post-warVietnam,gingrevolutionariesnd Party eaderssuchas TrngGiang ave reversed hepriorities.rngGiang'snewyoungwife s described s having eenborn notfor evolutionaryworkbutfor heworkof thebed" (168). n another assage,TrngGianghas becomeso absorbed n promoting book of his ownmediocre oetry hathe can'tbe botheredwhen told of a granaryfirenda pest-infestediceharvest281-82).In Separationollectiveconcerndestroysnot only love andindividualhappinessbut also literature.eparations an answer oSecretaryinn'squestion:Why re no greatworksbeingwritten?Thenarratorearnsfrom ardexperience hatneitherovingnorwriting an be done according o instructionsrom collective.Remembering rngGiang's early praise for Chairman Mao'slectures n literaturend art, articularlyispoint bout iteraturebeingan instrumenthatmust ervepolitics63),Hirngommentsthatfor hirty-odd earshe has tried owrite ccording o theseedicts utnever roduced nythingf asting alue.

Hirng'sober ssessmentfhisownoutput ppliesonly o worksthathave beenpublishedup to thatpoint.He does producetwohonestworks,which,fpublished,might e judgedto havelastingvalue.Living ext othe ead, novelisticccount f theResistanceWaragainst heFrench, as writtennresponse o a suggestion yTrng iang.nthis ovelHirngought oportray arrealisticallystragic, otfun,whilehighlightinghe ndividual oldier's ften-loststruggle ith owardicend selfishness.is noveldescribes oldierswho fight eroicallynmanybattlesbutthen, inally osingthisinternalattlewith owardice,esert r surrendero the nemy. hecultural ivision fthe ecret oliceprohibitsublication,bjectingparticularlyo thenovel'sportrayalfsome soldiers s cowards.WhenHirng nsists hat some soldiers ndeed act cowardly, hepolicethrow ngels'sdefinitionf iteraturethim:"Literaturestypical haractersn typical ituations,on'tyou getthat? fyouwrite hat ursoldiers urrenderhatmeansourarmy urrenders"(124).The other onestwork,whichhaspurportedly ade tsway ntothereader's wnhands, s an autobiographyitledeparation.irngwrote hiswork fter e had bravely eparated rom is wife nd

22 Crossroads4:2



12/37

TheCollectivend thendividual nVietnameseiteraturefrom is acquiescence o theParty'sdirection.10ormost of thenovel,Hirng,ikeSi in A Time arPast,has been a heroon thebattlefieldut coward nhispersonalife.HiswritingfSeparationis an act of belatedheroism n his ownbehalf, decision ofindfreedomhroughdevotionorevealinghe ruth.Earlier, irng'sear f he ollective adestranged imfromothtruthnd freedom. irng ad been keeping diary n whichhesecretly rote ad,romanticoemsthat e fearedwouldgethim ntroublewith the"organization."His wifeseized thisdiaryandthreatenedo turn t overto thecultural olice fhe didn't t leastpretend o be a properhusband.Shewas seeking highpositionwithinhePartynd neededthe ppearance fa happymarriagenorder ogetthepromotion. erblackmailworked or while, utHirag ventuallyonquered isfear,eparated rom er, ndbegantowrite novel n whichhe confesses ll and cleanseshissoul. Attheend of the book Hirngs in conversation ithhis rebelliousdaughter, ho bears hishopesfor hefuture. hehas conceivedchildwith youngwriter ho, s courageous s Hirngs cowardly,hasbeenkilled nprison orwritinghe ruth. hiscoupleandtheirchild re describeds "precious roductsf heRevolution"273).While the novel Separationxpresseshope formore literaryfreedom, t provides evidence thatthe hope may be wishfulthinking. irng's ovel about the warwiththeFrenchnevergetspublished,heoutspokenwriterwhomhisdaughteroves s killedinprison, nd when thebookends it is not certain fthefictionalSeparationilleverbepublished. he real-life ovel ufferedimilardifficulty,eingconfiscatedoon after tbeganto be distributed,though otbefore copyreached aris.11 oth nfictionnd inreallife,collective concerndefinitely till meant concern for thecollective'swell-being t theexpenseof the individualwriter'sfreedom.10Thework's itle eferso "maritaleparation/'hats, situationnwhicha husband ndwife re legallymarried ut do not ivetogether.hi Vsuggests hat inceHirng's ife s so closely ssociatedwith heParty,he"separation"fthetitle efers lso toseparation rom heParty1990:24).Thosewhodo not ee TrnManhHoas a true issidentseenote )wouldprobably ot nterprethe itle nthisway.11 eenote .

Crossroads 4:2 23



13/37

John.SchaferLove and Duty in Law and LiteratureCommunityoncern bout choiceof overs s common hroughouttheworld,but its application n these novels has particularlyVietnameseresonances.Throughout he ages storiesfrom allcultureshave featured oupleswhose love is not condonedbyparents rexistingocialrules.Romeo ndJulietadproblemswithcollective oncern.Manytraditional ietnamese tories ikewisefeatured youngman and a youngwomanwho loved eachotherbutcould notmarryecausetheir arents adarranged or hem omarry ther eople.In thosetraditionaltories t was usuallythefamilyhat ontrolled homyoung eoplewouldmarry, hile n ATime arPast ndSeparationt s thePartyhat locks hewayto oveandhappiness.Intraditionalietnam girl's arentsought oarrangemarriageallianceswithfamilies hatweremateriallynd socially qual orsuperior.Traditionalmarriagesexchanged a daughterfor abrideprice aid by thehusband'sfamily.When a newlymarriedwomanmoved nwithherhusband'sfamily,hewas expected oservehermother-in-lawvenmore espectfullyndobedientlyhanshehad servedherown mother. hisfamilyystem as ustifiedyreferences o Confucianism, hatcollectivist ystemof socialrelationsagainst which Vietnameseare constantly ebelling.Confucianisms based on hierarchical onds betweenkingandsubject, arent nd child, nd husband nd wife,with achbondbeing n extensionf theothers. hesystem onors bedience, otindividualnitiative.ccordingly,hebride's ubmissivenesso hernewfamily as ustified yreferenceoConfucianeachings.The communistsbjected nseveral rounds othe ustoms ndrulesof thetraditionalonfucian amily,ncluding hecustom farrangedmarriages. irst, or hecommunistevolutionaries,hetraditionalamilywas an outdated emnantffeudalism,ecausetheConfuciantress n loyaltyo the mperorwas an extensionfloyaltyoparents. econd, ecausethe ight-knitietnameseamilydirected ttention rimarilyo kingand to kin, thampered hecommunists' oal of fosteringoyalty o new social formations.Communist eadersaddressed these conventions y redirectingtoward ountryndpeopletheConfucianoyaltytrung)reviouslydirectedowardking nd thefilial ietyhiu)previously irectedtoward hefamily.Be loyal trung)o thePartyndpious hiu) othepeople,"Ho ChiMinhwouldtellrevolutionaryroops, sing hetraditional onfucian erms.Yet even whilethey onsidered he24 Crossroads4:2



14/37

TheCollectivend thendividual nVietnameseiteraturetraditionalVietnamese familya remnant of feudalism,thecommunistslso viewed tthroughhe ens of Marxand Engels'scritiquefthebourgeois amily. s such, he raditionalietnamesefamily ystemwas objectionable ecause it was associatedwithaccumulation f private property, sually in thehands of thehusband, and because it perpetuated nequalitiessuch as theexploitationndoppressionfwomenPhamVanBich1999:48).The revolutionariesonsequentlynactedseveral iberalizingreforms,utowing otheir esire oforge Party f oyalandlike-thinking embers he ommunisteaders lsoundercutomeoftheliberalizingmeasures. The 1946 Constitutionnd laterdecreesoutlawedforcedmarriagesndpolygamyPhamVanBich 1999:57-58). Yetaccording oHongVanChi, heseprogressiveuaranteeswerefollowed ya 1951decree hatgavetheParty strongayinwhom soldiers and Partymemberscould marry.The decreestipulatedhat cadres fvillage evelandsoldiersmust nformheparty eforeheymarry,hat adresofdistrictndprovincialevelsandnon-commissionedfficers ust btain heparty'sgreementotheirmarriages,nd that hemarriagerrangementsfhigh-rankingofficialsn theparty nd ofofficersn thePeople'sArmy re theparty'sffair"HongVanChi1964:145).The 1960Law on Marriage nd theFamily ook iberalizationfurthery allowingyoungpeople to choose their wn marriagepartners,nd by banning hildmarriages, ride-price,nd wife-beatingPhamVan Bich1999:57-58). s PhamVan Bichnotes, his1960law "emphasizedfirst f all theprinciple ffree hoiceofmarriage artner, onogamy,quality etweenhusband ndwife,and theprotectionfwomen's and children'snterests"1999:58).However, hetwo novels uggest hat venafter 960 oldiers ndPartymemberswere imited n their hoice ofmarriage artners,because thePartyhad takenon itself he roleonceplayedby thefamily. haractersn the twonovelscomment n thischange. nthankingi's superiors or inallyettingi to ovehiswife, i'smother cknowledges hat "wordfrom hesuperiors s worthmorethan ensof thousands fwords from arents, rothersndsisters t home" (95). Hirng's riend ai Gifrnomplains hatthe"organization"s even stricterbout themarriage hoicesof itsmembers han the Confucianelders had ever been with theirdaughters110).

Crossroads 4:2 25



15/37

John.SchaferI do not meanto suggest hatgovernmentalnterferenceithindividualhoice fmates sunique oVietnam.nboth hesenovelstheprimary ictims f collective oncern resoldiers, nd even inindividualist merica oldiers re not free o lovewhomever heywish.WhileI was readingtheseworks,American fficers erebeing xpelledfrom hemilitaryecause theiruperiors bjected otheir hoiceof overs.Yet,unlikenthese wonovels, heAmericanmilitary'snterferenceoes notgo so far s to direct hesoldiers'selectionfcivilian pouses.Even f tdid,the ituationsnthetwonovelswouldstill esonates uniquelyVietnamese,or s it took nthedirective oleonce reserved or hefamily's lders, hePartyreplicatedheConfucianonventionshat t ought odisplace.Many modern Vietnamese novels have criticized familyinvolvementnpersonalmaritalhoices,nd the wonovels xtendthiscriticismo theParty.Many prewar tories ttacked otonlyparentally-arrangedmarriagesbut also the mother-in-law'sdictatorial oweroverherdaughter-in-law.n Nht Linh's 1935novelDoanTuytBreakingff],12hich sperhaps hemost amousmodernVietnamesenovel, the heroine Loan's life is nearly

destroyedwhenherfamily orces ertomarry man shedoesn'tevenknow.Our authors e Lu'u ndTrnMannHo are cut fromdifferentoliticalloth han he nti-communistationalistuthor fBreakingff,utthey harewithhim n aversion oanyone parentorParty fficialwho wouldtellpeoplewhom heyhould ove andmarry.nA Time arPast, i's family rranges poor marriage orhim, nd thePartymakes hingsworsewhen t tries o ntervene.nSeparationheParty chieves qually poorresultswhen, cting nplace ofthetraditionalamily,tarranges orRung o be Himg'smate.Evenwhenthey renotexplicitlyttackingraditionalamilystructures,ietnamesetories repersistentlyomantictatementsof faith n the abilityof individuals if freed fromcollectiveconcern to select ifepartnerswithwhomthey an buildhappylives.Vietnameseometimesontrast hecompeting irtues f"atnh"love) and "ngha vu" (duty). In theirdreams and in theliteraturehat mbodies hosedreams here s always hepossibility12Thenovel nd tsfamousuthorrediscussedyJamieson1993), hotranslatesongexcerpts.he fullnovelhas been translatedyJamesBanerianNhat inh997/1935).26 Crossroads4:2



16/37

TheCollectivend the ndividual nVietnameseiteratureofai tnh,ffindingne's soulmateand livinghappily ver after.However,because the Vietnamese re neverfreefrom ollectiveconcern,ndbecausethey lso feel strongenseofduty oparentsandsociety,heir aithn ove s rarelyested. oth he ension nditstypical utcome reexemplifiedn The Tale of Kiu Nguyn u1983/C.1800),n whichThyKiu, hemostbeloved ofVietnameseheroines, as to choosebetweenher ove forKimandherduty ohelpherfather, ho has beenfalselyccusedof a crime. ecidingthat uty oparentss a "heavier" irtue hanher ove forKim, hemarries man she doesnot ove n order o obtain bridepaymentthat he canuse tosave herfather.13he tensions also llustratednthepre-warworks ftheNew PoetsXunDieuandLiruTrong ir14and in HongNgocPhch's entimentalovelTo TarnPureHeart](1963/ 925)15bouta girlwho died of a broken eart ecauseherparentswouldnot ethermarryheman he oved.A Time arPast and Separationortray eoplemaking imilarlydifficulthoices etweenove andduty.Bothnovels anbe seenasromantictories f overs njustly ept part ytherules f ociety.In this sense, the novels are similar to pre-warworks thatcommunist riticshad rejectedas examples of self-absorbed,bourgeois omanticism.owever,ncontrastothose arlierworks,thenovels uggest hat vensocietywould have beenbetter ff adthe main characters een free to choose love over duty.Theforbidden omenHircmgnd Oanh readmirable haracters howishto serve heir ountry,ndboth re more dmirable han heunwantedmatesthat he collective hoosesfor i andHirng. he"bourgeois" anh, or xample,s active n theresistancegainst he13Theparticularuty hat hy iudemonstratessfilial ietyhi u).14ForEnglish ranslationsf some ofXunDiu'spoems, eeHuynh anhThong 1996)and Nguyn hac Vin and H-uNgoc (1983?:661-667).translatedhree oemsofLatuTrong u' including is most amous,Tingthu"TheSoundofAutumn),or collectiondited yJacqui hagnon ndDon Luce (1974:27-29).or a translationf"Ting huD" (TheSound ofAutumnI),which iruTrong irwrotenreply ohisearlier re-war oem,see Nguyn hac Vin ndHuNgoc 1983?: 04).Additional iscussion ftheNew Poets ppears elow, eginning ith he ection itledVietnameseLiteraturend theFirst ppearancef I.'"15Forcritical iscussion f thisnovel,whichhas notbeentranslated,eeCao thiNhir-QuynhndJohn . Schfer1988).

Crossroads 4:2 27



17/37

John . SchaferFrench. he later ecomes doctor nd is killedwhiletryingo aidvictimsof an Americanbombingraid. Duringthe land reformcampaign, s she saysfrom ergrave, they ut me off rom herevolution,ut was the evolution"145).Whynotrebel gainst ollective oncern? hequestions raisedinbothnovels.As Political fficero Manh sksSi,"Why ouldn'tyouopenly ay,This is a coercive ituation.Myfeelingswillnotallowme to ivewith hatwoman?'" 140).Speaking romhegrave,Oanh imilarly onderswhyHirng,ho hadbeen sobrave nbattle,had surrenderedo easily nthe battlegroundf onscience"145).In bothworksthemaincharactersventually ealize that houghtheymayhave been victims f collectiveoncern,heymight aveavoidedtragedy ad they akenmoreresponsibilityor heir wnlives. The troublewith a collectivemakingdecisionsforyou,whetherhat ollectives one's Confucianamilyr theParty,sthatyoumaynever earn omakedecisions or ourself.Rebellion gainst heWorkplaces MatchmakerIn recent ears heVietnamese ave indeedbeenrebelling gainsttheParty's elf-appointedole ofmatchmaker.ntilrecentlyhePartywas notonly aking directnterestnthe election f oldiers'and officials'pouses,but twas alsoplaying n indirect ole nthemarriagehoices fother ietnamese.hamVan Bich's tudy ftheVietnameseamilyuggests hat or tate mployeeswhoworked nurbanareas,not all of whom would be Partymembers,he"ayquan,"or workplace n the statesector, layeda crucialrole inspouse selection.16mploymentn the state-sectorworkplace,especially in urban areas, was desirablebecause it providedopportunitiesor ocialmobilitynd for btainingmaterial enefitssuchas housing, ouponsfor ood ndclothes,ccessto health are,andtravel ermits1999:132-38).ecause f he dvantagesccruingfrommploymentn state-sectorositions, anyyoung eoplewere"instructedytheir arents ochoose anothertate mployee s a16 nhisanalysis ftheroleoftheworkplacenchoice f marital artners,PhamVan Bichrelies eavily nresearchy BelangerndKhuatThuHong(1995),whichfocuses nlyon state mployeesn urban reas.PhamVanBich's upplementshismaterial ith eferenceso hispersonal xperience(he ived n Hanoi until t east1993) nd tostudies,ncludingnebyBinhMinh 1991),thatfocuson ruralfamilies.However,his analysis s mostreliable or rban reas.28 Crossroads4:2



18/37

TheCollectivendthe ndividual nVietnameseiteraturemarriagepartner.Anotherfrequent racticewas forpeople tochoose theirmaritalpartnerthemselves, hen reportto theirworkplace,whichwouldapproveordisapprove f their hoiceontheground fclassendogamy"138).Thereweresomeadvantagestomarryingstate mployee. heworkplaceometimes elpedanemployeefind a spouse and helped him or her keep weddingexpensesdown.However,whether heworkplacewould typicallyintervenes directlys itdoes nTrnManhHo'snovel s a questionthat, hamVan Bich ays, needsto be confirmedyhard cholarlyevidencewhich snotyet vailable"138)17Thus, t the ime he wonovelswerepublished, arty fficialsttheworkplaceometimeslayeda morepaternalisticolethandidthe parents.Yet though peoples' cooperationwith the Party'sdirectioneemedvoluntary,henovels'contentsuggest hatmanyhad beensilentlybjectingo theworkplace'snterference.n thelate 1980s resistance o that interference as becomingmoreobvious.Duringthe warmanyVietnamese ad followedHo ChiMinh'smodelby sacrificingamilyifefornational ife.Protestsagainststate-sectornterferencead been muted eitherbecausepeoplefeared heParty r becausethey ccepted hemessagethattheyhad tosuppress heir ndividual reams, urge hemselves fall soft ourgeois motions,nd dedicate hemselves o achievingthegrandiose ollective reamof ndependencend freedom romforeignomination.fter hewar,young eoplebecame esswillingtosuppress heirndividual reams.Now that eacehadcome, heyweremore eluctantoacceptHo Chi Minh's edefinitionffamily,formulationhichdirected ttentiono "thepeople" or (in someversions) heworking-classeople of the entireworld,yetwhichsomehow verlookedoncreteamilymemberssee PhamVan Bich1999:60).After 986,underthenew freedomsfrenovation,heybeganopenly racticingndividual hoice. hese hangingttitudesincreased esistanceo state nterferencenpersonalmaritalhoices.In recent ears hedesirefor ndividual hoicehasbecomeevermore obvious,as therehas been a trendaway from he stateinvolvementnd toward amily-ratifiedndividual hoice f pouse.In the ate1980s, he tate ector ecame essimportantnpeople's^ Hirngsa Partymember.erhaps hePartynterfered ore irectlynhismarriage lansthan t would ntheplansof a stateworkerwho was notmemberf heParty.

Crossroads4:2 29



19/37

John Schafereconomicnd social ives.With hepromotionf marketconomy,youngpeoplecouldfindwork ndmarriage artnersntheprivatesectorsnsteadofrelyingn the state gency.According oPhamVan Bich, n urbanareas young people now choose theirownpartnersutgettheir arents' pproval 139-40). hisconventionsa compromiseetween he raditional arriage rranged yparentsand thewestern-style odernmarriage rranged olely by theyoung eople.Yet in themidst of thischangethe state continued rying oimposenormsoffamilyife.The 1987 Law on Marriage nd theFamilyrepresents morepositiveview of thefamily hanthatpromulgateduring hewar. t sawfamilyoyalties ot s obstacleson theroadto socialism ut as waysofhasteninghe ourney. utthefamilymustbe a socialistor "new culture amily" ased onequality, ot hehierarchicalfeudal" amily:

In the ocialist amily,usband nd wife reequal, oveandhelp each otherto make progress n all aspects, activelyparticipatensocialist onstructionnd national efence,ndbring p their hildrenobecomeusefulmembers fsociety.(1987MarriagendFamily aw)Thissoundspromisingntil ne realizes hat he aw's requirementofharmoniousocialist amilyife s similarothe ollectiveoncernthatmotivates irng'swife o blackmail im nto tayingwithheragainsthiswill.Thus the tate-directedollective oncern rotestedby thetwonovels remains n importantorce n contemporaryVietnam.FromOutward-lookingo nward-lookingThe twonovelsexemplifyndividualism otonly ntheir iews onmarriagendfamilyutalso intheir election fdetail nd intheirverymanner fpresentation.n the arly 990s, anoi iteraryriticsidentified he 1980s as a timewhen writing ecame "inward-looking"hirng i).Theymentioned Liru ndTrnManhHoespeciallyL Lyii as pioneers of a new kind of novel thatdistinguishedtself ybeing nward-looking.ccordingoNguyenNgocThin, Time arPast"marked movement oa newliteraryperiod"because it "'tried o describe ife nd people ust as theywere hectic,various,multifaceted,nd often omplicated nd30 Crossroads 4:2



20/37

TheCollectivend thendividual nVietnameseiteratureirrational7"31). 8 The developmentwas also notedby NguyenNgoc, then the head of the creative section of the Writers'Association, howroten1990,

Literaturenow]paysmore areful ttentiono a person s arich and individual world complicated,multifaceted,multidimensional,nd multi-layeredwho relates n manyalso complicatedndmultifacetedaysto thewholesocietyand tohimself r herself.Previouslytconcentratednlyonseeing person t the evelof itizen ndstressed hat itizen'srelations osociety.)One can saythat iterature as becomemore nward-looking,oredirected t the omplicatednnerworld f person.QuotedbyNguyn gocThin 990:31)

In addition o our twonovels,Nguyen gocpoints othe xample fBo Ninh's1990)Noi buon hien ranhTheSorrow fWar),whichexplores the innerworld of Kin,a war veteranhaunted bymemories f ost comrades nd overcome ynostalgia or moreinnocent imebefore he war.Also said to fit he nward-lookingcategorywas Du'crnghuHuang's (1988)Nhfrnghin w&ngM(Paradise f heBlind). 9NguyenNgoc (1991) sees the inward-lookingovel replacinganother indofpost-1975 ork hathe calls"tiuthuythngu'"(novelsofreportage).Phng ir"resembleswhatAnglo-Americancritics all new journalism: t containsa greatdeal of realisticdescriptionnd blurs hedistinctionetween ictionndnon-fictionprose.Often t is used to expose societalevils and governmentmalfeasance.However, t criticizes ocietywithout evealing heinnerworlds f haracters. s examples fthis ype fnovelNguyenNgoc mentions hreenovels: two 1983worksby NguyenManhTun Dirng m&cbien Standing acing heSea) and C lao Tram(TheMangrovesland)- andNguyenhacTru'frng's1990)Mnh tlamnguj&i hiuma Land of Lots ofPeopleandManyGhosts).20These threenovels detail the corruption nd incompetence fofficialsn ruralVietnam fter hewar.Bypresentingarty fficials18Nguyn gocThinuotes notherritic, oPhircrng.LyBoth hesenovelshave been translatedntoEnglish. ee thereferenceslist or etails.20Noneof hese ovelshas been ranslatednto nglish.

Crossroads 4:2 31



21/37

John.Schaferas less thanheroic,hese journalistic"ovelsdifferedrom orks fsocialist ealismwrittenuring hewar,but, nthewordsofNguyenNgoc,theypresented a picture fsociety"without xploringheinnerworldof ndividuals 13). In someways,Separationits hiscategory, orHirngppearsat times o be not a living, reathingperson, utrather narrative evice hat he uthor ses to eadus,in journalisticfashion,through history f Partyerrors andexcesses.21 ut,as we will soon see, in otherways Separationsinward-looking.

The criticHuynhNhirPhircmg1991) sees the nward-lookingnovelas another tep n the"democratization"f iterature. owthat hewar s over,he says,writers o longer ose theproblem fsacrificingndividualhappinessfor greatundertaking.nsteadthey escribe the earch or ndividual appiness ndthe hirst orlovebetween man and a woman" 15).AccordingoHuynh hirPhu'cmg, Luu and otherwritersresuggestinghat venwhileengaged in a great undertakingwe should never forget heimportancef ndividual appiness:In considering oththeresponsibilityf the ndividual nregard osocietynd theresponsibilityf ocietynregard othe fate ndhappiness fthe ndividual,we shouldn't iewoneas lighterhan heother. umanityndthedemocracyfliterature est on thatpoint,on the realization that theindividual s not thefuelofhistoryut rathertscenter nddrivingorce.15)Huynh hujPhu^ng dentifieshewidespreaduse of thediary

motifn currentovels,ncluding Time arPast ndSeparation,s asignof ncreased espect or he nner ife f ndividuals. n A TimeFar Past,after i's diary s discovered,Do Manh ashes out atsuperior fficersornvading i's privacy. ow wouldyou ike t,he asksthem,f seizedall your ettersoyourwivesand lovers?"Ourlaw stipulates certain reedomor ll people, ndyouhaveviolatedthisprinciple.Who instructed ou to politicizeothers'thoughtsn thisway?" 61). n Separation,u'ng lsokeepsa diary,theverydiaryhis wifeuses toblackmail im.Thetruth-revealing21 According to the criticBi Bch H (1990:36), "In grammar and style TranManh Ho in this novel [Separation] tends toward reportage [phng sir] ....32 Crossroads4:2



22/37

TheCollectivend the ndividual nVietnameseiteratureautobiography e laterwrites, eparation,s writtenn the firstperson:n a way yet nother iary.Separationmphasizes he rrepressiblend uncontrollablennerlife f ndividualsnyet therways.When rdered oparticipatenthe ollective iewing f"comrademoon/'Hirngooks t hisfellowsoldiers nd observes: Their yes gaze at themoon but it's notcertainhemoon s on theirmind."As for imself,e says, I had aprivatemoonofmyown" hisbelovedOanh82).Whenherequestsfromhe rch ollectivistrngGiang ermissiono visitOanh,whois studyingmedicinen a nearby own, rngGiang ellshim hat ecango,but thathe shouldn't issher. Forget rivatematters ndservetheorganization,"e instructs. irngan't restrain imself,andhekissesOanh assionatelyndclumsily,like buffalo ites nearofcorn" 72).Later,peaking oHirngrom ergrave,Oanh aysthat peoplecan directhematerialife f person, uttinghemntheframeworkf theorganization,utthey an'tcontrol he nnerlife, ot he ife ffeeling"150).Vietnamese Literature nd the FirstAppearance of"I"Hownew s this ttentiono the ndividual,he I," nthehistoryfVietnameseiterature?hequestionhasprovoked ontroversyndconfusion.Some critics both Vietnamese and Western havesuggested hat he"I" arrivednthe1930swith heromantic ersenow knownas New Poetry,with thenovelsoftheSelf-StrengthGroup, ndwithnew forms freportagend autobiography.22llthese developmentswere the result of Frenchinfluence, sVietnamesewriterswho had read French iterature n Franco-Vietnamesechoolswerebeginningoexperiment ithnewstylesandgenres.n 1942,n a now-famous ork f iteraryriticism,wobrothersfromHu, Hoi Thanh nd Hoi Chn,published aninfluentialriticalnthologyfVietnameseNew Poetry.As thesecriticsmakeclear, he 1930s New Poets a group ncludingXun22 For criticaldiscussion of the New Poets, see Jamieson1992) andJamieson1993:Chapters and4, 100-233). ormore n theSelf-StrengthGroup, eeJamieson1993:111-159ndpassim). or xamples fnewformsofreportagendautobiography,ee the electionsnLockhart1996). nhisintroductiono this ollection,ockhart iscusses he rrival fthe activeT" whichhe associateswith the destructionf themonarchynd theemergencef owerworkinglasses ncities.

Crossroads 4:2 33



23/37

John . SchaferDieu,HuyCan,andLiruTrong u',amongothers)were nfluencednotbytheFrench oetsoftheir wnperiodbutbythesymbolistsand romantics of the nineteenthcentury Chateaubriand,Lamartine, igney,ndMussett, or xample.Thehighly omanticNew Poetsabandoned therestraintnd rigidrulesoftraditionalVietnameseprosody.Theirpoems were wildlyexuberant ndemotionalries f heheart.As Hoi Thanh nd Hoi Chn ellthestory, greatdeal oftheNew Poets' exuberance derived from theirdiscoveryof theindividual erspective,perspectiveupposedly ew toVietnameseliterature:

Thefirst ay who cansayexactlywhatdayitwas that heword "I" appeared in Vietnamesepoetryit was trulysurprised.twas as if t were ost n a strangeand.This isbecause tbrought ith t perspectivehat adnotbeenseenin this ountry:he ndividual erspective.ince ncient imestherewas no individualnVietnameseociety. herewas onlythecollective: largeone,thecountry,nd a smallone,thefamily.As forthe individual,the individualaspect wassubmergedn thefamily nd in thecountryike a dropofwaternthe ea. 51-52)

This argumentfor the recentappearance of the individualperspectivewould seem to be supportedby the simultaneousappearance ffirst-personarrationnd thegeneralizedirst-personpronoun.The first-personointofview was rare n "classical"Vietnameseiterature.raditional ietnamesetorytellersresentedtheirstories as third-personetellings f ancienttales,not ascompletelyriginal irst-personccounts ftheir wn ife ndtimes."By lamplight urn hesescented eaves and read a tale of loverecorded n old books," is theway NguyenDu introduceshispurportedetellingfan old storynhis versenarrative heTaleofKiu.23 venmodern rosenovelists avepreferredhe hird ersontothefirst erson.Thispreferenceor hethird ersonwas rooted23This sHuynh anhThong's ranslationfTheTaleofKieu, . 3. A noteexplains hatnancient hina ventswererecorded ngreen amboo lips.Hence thereferenceo "leaves'' (169).Fora discussion fthedifferencesbetweenraditionalersenarrativesuch s TheTaleofKiu ndthemodernVietnameseovel, eeCao thiNhir-QuynhndJohn . Schfer1988).34 Crossroads4:2



24/37

TheCollectivendthe ndividual nVietnameseiteraturepartlyn the Vietnameseanguage. n pre-modern ietnam herewas no generalized irst-personronoun. he first ersonpronounused today, toi,"meant servant" r "subject" nd untilrecentlywriters ound ttooself-deprecatory.s PhanKhinoted n 1930,writersvoidedthewordbecausetheyfelt hat T (toi) s thewayslavesrefero themselves"1930:13). onsequently,norder or hepronountoi"tobecame vailable or sebymodernwriters,thadtobe sprung oose from ts associationswith a hierarchicalndmonarchical orldorder.This did nothappenuntil he 1930s seeLockhart996: -13).Despitethis voidance f thenarrativend linguisticormshatWesterniteraturesse to mark ndividualism,omeVietnamesecritics,ncluding ovelist rnManhHo (1996), rgue hat form findividualism as been evidentnVietnamese iteraturell along.Forexample,TrnManhHo arguesthat heassumption hat heindividual erspective as introducedytheNewPoetrysanerrorinspiredywronglyquating rench classicisme" ithVietnameseclassical iterature,anhoc co dien.Just s French lassicismwassucceededbyFrench omanticism,o also was Vietnameselassicalliterature ollowedby the New Poets who drew on thoseveryFrench omantics. onsequently,manypeoplehave assumedthattheVietnameselassical iterature,hich acked he inguisticormsof"I,"musthave been as anti-individualisticnd anti-emotionalstheFrench lassicalschool.TrnManhHo arguesthatwhiletheequation fromanticismnd New Poetrys a justone,the quationof thetwo typesofclassical literaturemisses the mark.Frenchclassicism ruly xpressed n emotionally istanced pproachtoliterary xpression,but the same is not true of the so-calledVietnamese lassical iterature. rench lassicismmayhave beendeliberatelyphi ng" (freeof self),or "non-moi."t may haveglorified easonand ignored ndividualfeelings. utVietnameseliterature as not ikethis.TrnManhHoargues hatVietnameseclassical iteraturea diversecollection fpre-twentiethenturymaterialshat ncompassedncientmyths,olk oetryca dad), ndnineteenthenturyersenarrativesgave expressiono thepeople'syearnings for freedom,self-expression, nd individualisticdevelopment:

The feudal regimedid not recognizethe individual,butliteraturexpressedtheyearning or ndividual iberation,Crossroads 4:2 35



25/37

John . Schaferdemandedtheright fpeople todevelopas individuals, oexpressheirndividualism.heTaleofKiubyNguynu,themost elebratediteraryork fourpeople, sprimarilycallforndividualism,or he iberationfthe ndividual romhedoctrineffeudalism.65)

TrnManhHo'spositions controversial.is case s strongestfweconsiderndividualismn a psychologicaleinrather han ntermsof iteraryorms. raditional ritersertainlyxpressed hemoods,emotions,nd feelings f their haracters.olkpoetry nd versenarrativesowerfullyxpressed oththe oysand sorrows f ove.Yettraditionaltorieswere notpsychologicaln the sameway asmodern tories. orexample, n The TaleofKieu,Nguyen u usedforms hat llowedhimtoconvey nner eelingsmoreeffectivelythandid poetswho favored he old style.He wrote n a popularverseformalled uebt}^whichwas used also for olk oetry,ndhe employed olloquial xpressionsnd folk dioms.Nevertheless,hewas limited y poetic onventions. guyn u conveyedKiu'smoods not throughnnerfirst-person onologuesbut throughpoetic dictionand by means of allusions to well-known ino-Vietnamese exts.Kieu'semotionswere thereforeilteredhroughthe anguageand rhythmsf a fixedpoeticformwithrigidrulesregardingmeterndplacementftones. venpoetrywrittenntheluebtform ends opurifyeelingsndpresenthem s objects oraestheticppreciation.When the criticNguyn gocThin rguesthat neofthedistinguishingeatures ftheversenarrativeenreofwhichTaleof Kiu s themostfamous xample is itstendency"todevote ittle ttentiono the xploitationf the nner eelingsfcharacters"32), he is probablyreferringo thegenre'sstylisticconstraints.et theTale'spopularity ith ater overs uggests hattheepic's emotions esonatewith ndividuals' xperience espitethat motion'sxpressionhrough eter nd allusion.By arguing hatndividualismxistedn classical iterature,ranManhHo makesmorepalatablehis ownplea forgreateroleranceof ndividualityn ife nd literature.o a Marxist-LeninistikeTran24The Vietnameseerm lue bt"means six-eight"nd referso thenumberf yllablesn he irstnd econdines f couplet,he onstituentunitofpoemsemployinghisverseform. or a gooddiscussion fVietnameseerse orms,eeHuynhanh hng996:1-25.36 Crossroads4:2



26/37

TheCollectivendthendividual nVietnameseiteratureManhHo'scharacterrng iang,ndividualisms a petty ourgeoisquality ssociatedwithWesternolonialism. rnManhHo evadesthechargebyfindingndividualism lso infolkpoetrynd in thepopularTaleof Kiu.TrnManhHo implies herebyhat verthewhole ofVietnameseiterary istoryt is not individualism utobsession with collectivism hat is the aberration;his novelSeparation mpliesfurthermorehatthemostrecent orm fthisaberrationwas not even Vietnamesein origin,since it wasintroducedyChairmanMao's Yenan ectures.TheEnd ofSentimentalism?I saidearlier hat ecauseVietnamese renever ree romollectiveconcern,ndbecausethey lso feel strongenseofduty oparentsand society, heirfaith n love is rarely ested.This collectiveexperience f the romanticdeal ofunrequitedove mayexplainwhy Vietnamese literaryworks have been so persistentlysentimental.fthis s so, then he ncreased ersonalfreedoms frecent earsmay pell he nd of iteraryentimentalism.Separationemains omantic,ut A Time arPastdoes not. Thelatter ovel ncludes cenes uggestinghat reedom romollectiveconcernwon't guaranteehappy marriages, nd it presentsanunsentimentaliewof exualfreedom.nA Time arPastSi entershissecondmarriage airlyree f nterferencerom amilyrParty,yetthemarriages a disaster ecausehisspousehad secretlyeenmaneuveringo avoid thepublicdisgraceof a pregnancy ottenthrough er affairwith anotherman.The novel also includes apassagethat aints hefollowingleakpicture ftheworld henewsexualfreedomsavecreated:

In the late morning,n offices ll across the city, t wascommonforpeople to be absentfrom heirdesks.Loversusually cheduled heir endezvous uring hese imes.Withparentsat work and children n daycare or school, thecollectiveousing rojects ere s deserted s graveyards.ora fewhours, overs had theirprivacy n theseapartments.Then,theyreturnedo theirwork and became,once again,respectable embersf he ommunity.158)Thesenoontimeiaisons nthehousing rojectsppearunromanticanddreary affairs rivenmore y ust hanove.

Crossroads 4:2 37



27/37

John . SchaferA Time arPast s nottheonlypost-renovationork o hint hatthenewfreedoms ave created ewproblems.n a celebratedndcontroversialhorttory yNguyn uyThip1992/1987),womanemployed n a maternityospitalbringshome abortedfetuses ofeed to Alsatiandogs that she is sellingto make extramoney.Thoughtheavailability f the fetusesmayindicatepoor familyplanning ather hanthe adulterous ncountersmentionedbove,Nguyn uyThip's tory evertheless ints t coming roubles stheVietnamesedapttonewsexual ndeconomic reedoms.In an environmentn which ll liaisons repossible nd nwhichpeoplefreed rom ollectiveoncernmaketheir wn bad choices nmarriage,perhaps cynicism, rony,or despair will replacesentimentalisms thedominantmood ofVietnamese iction.houldsentimentalismass away,Vietnamesewriters nd readersmaysoonwaxnostalgicor ollectiveoncern.

SwingsofthePendulumOfcourse, t shardto magineVietnam ecomingn individualistculture.Vietnameseee themselves otas free-floatingons butasparticles onstrainedya network f social bonds. Their anguagereinforceshese onds:kinship erms ouble as personal ronouns,and everyfirst-personronoun xcept oi I) refers ot to oneselfalonebut also toone'srelationship ith heperson o whomoneisspeaking.25ortheNewPoetsofthe1930s,ndividualism as likepowerful rugthatcollectivistpbringing ad left hepoets ill-prepared o withstand.ventually,his rugbroughtheNewPoetstothebrink fpersonal isintegration.hemost amous ase is thatof LiruTrongLu% erhapsthe mostromantic f thegroup,whoallegedly ecame ddicted oopium nthemid-40snd livedapartfrom iswife na wretched uton theoutskirtsfHu Nguyn y1969:100-113).oi ThanhndHoiChan1968/1942),he arly 940scriticswhohelpedmake theNew Poetsfamous, cknowledge hepoets'psychologicalroblems,inkinghepsychologicalurmoil othevainattempto ivewithin he I":

25Because t contrasts ith heothermore ntimateirst-personronouns,themorempersonaltai"maybe selectedwhen ne wishes o create ocialdistance.n otherwords t also can be used to define relationship,utgenerallyot closeone.38 Crossroads4:2



28/37

TheCollectivendthe ndividual nVietnameseiteratureOurlives iewithin he phere f I.' Having ostbreadth, eseekdepth.But thedeeperwe go,thecolder tbecomes. . .Neverbefore as Vietnamese oetry een so sad or in suchturmoil. longwith ur senseofsuperioritye have ostthepeaceofmind fprevious imes.(53-54; ranslationyNeilJamieson)ManyoftheNewPoets ventually egained heir eaceofmindby returning o the collective. The most prominent f them

eventuallyoinedtherevolution,s did their romoter oi Thanh.Indoing o they xperienced hatHoi Thanhalled a "miraculousresurrection":In thenew atmosphere f thehomeland,we, thevictims f thecenturyf ndividualismvictims r theguilty werealizehow ittle ur ndividual ifemeans nthe mmenseife f hecommunity" quoted by Nguyn Khac Vin and HfruNgoc19837:145). ccordingoNeilJamieson,hissyndrome fpsychic nd social "rebirth"xperienced s a"miraculous resurrection," especially insofar as itcharacterizedmanyof themore articulate nd influentialmembers f the intelligentsia,s an importantlement nexplaininghe esurgencefthe CP [IndochineseommunistParty] n theyears mmediately receding1944-1945) ndespeciallyimmediately ollowing 1945-1947) he AugustRevolution.26209)

Writers howentnorthater han heNew Poets in1954 fter heendof theFirstndochinaWar have described heir onversion ocommunismnsimilar erms. guyn ang aysthat itwas like anescapefrom heT/that thatwas the auseof o muchpain; twaslikebeingreleased rom small age nto n immense uterworld."AccordingoAnhDux, oining heresistancenabled theunitingf26 Thatrevolutionaryctivity,which nvolvedsharinghardships nddangers,could generate ntense camaraderie nd be a transformingexperienceeemsundeniable,utonesuspectsiterary yperbole as alsoinvolved in some accountsof these "miraculousresurrections/' orexample,thoughNguynVyand othersdescribeLiruTrongLu7spre-revolutionary ears n Hue as unhappyand bleak, the poet suggestsotherwisen a memoir ublishedwoyears efore isdeath LujuTrong u'1989).

Crossroads4:2 39



29/37

John . Schaferthecommunal nd theprivate; he ntentionsftheParty ndmyown soul came together s one withno interferinglements"(QuotedbyPhan u-De 1979: 1-32).Thus Vietnameseiterature as experienced ildswingsofthependulum etween ndividualismndcollectivism.nthe1930s heNew Poets broughta swing toward individualism.Then thependulummoved o the ollectivistide with heAugustRevolutionin 1945, s thenecessity fcollective ctionto defeat woworldpowers n two warsbroughtcceptance fsocialist ealism nd ofthedoctrine hat iteraturehouldservepolitics. hencamepeaceand Secretary inh's looseningofthestrings estrictingriters,allowing move wayfromxtremeollectivismoward omemorecentral oint.Toward Sustainablendividualism?In contemporaryietnam here restill imits n theretreat romcollectivism,s suggestedby thefictional eath ofthewriter owhom Hirng's aughter s espoused and by the real-life ost-publicationuppression fTrnManhHo's novel.TheTiananmenincident n China and thefallof communist arties n EasternEurope made Hanoi leaders fear openness and led almostimmediately o a tighteningf the strings ecretary inh hadloosenedn 1986. nJune 988 resolutionf heFifthlenum ftheSixth ongresswarnedwritersot ostray romhePartyine NhnDan22June 988:1). InAugust, 989,nthewakeoftheTiananmenincident, resolutionfthe eventh lenum alledformore autionin implementingeformssee Heng 1998:40).The difficultyrnManh Ho had in distributing is novel Separation, hichwaspublished henextmonth,was probably elated otherestrictionsreimposedythese esolutions.Up to thepresentrenovation as not led to any significantincreasenfreedom fspeech, ndeven iteraryritics avemutedtheircalls for liberalization. n his articleabout the growingdemocratizationf iteraturenthe1980s,Huynh hir hircmg1991)arguesthat n individual's esponsibilitiesothecollectivehouldbe balancedwith n awareness f the ollective'sesponsibilitiesothe individual.However,he does notmention he individual'sresponsibilityohimorherself,ordoes hesaywhat houldhappenwhen an individual's responsibility ecessitatesopposing thecollective.As Vietnamesebecome more accustomed to a de-40 Crossroads4:2



30/37

TheCollectivendthe ndividualnVietnameseiteraturecentralizedconomy,nd as individual nitiativeecomes morerespected irtuen economic ontexts,ndividualismmaybecomemore oleratedn other ontextss well. Butwhatwillhappen fasociety accustomed to collectivism becomes suddenly moreindividualistic? illthe ndividualism e a trulyelf-realizingne,or will t be another earningnever atisfiednpractice againstyet notheretof ocial onstraints?nd f ndividualismsrealizedin practice,will it be a healthy ndividualism, r will it be theexciting utpsychologically ebilitatingypethat he New Poetsfirstmbracednd ater ought oescape?The recentrecord of Vietnamese iterature,with its strongoppositionetween I" and "we" and tsradical wings etween heindividual nd thecollective,mightwarnwriters obe waryoftoomuchfreedom.A Time arPast ndeed expressesthatwariness.Nevertheless,nSeparationrnManhHo searches orwaysout ofthedilemma,nd indoing o he forefrontshevalues of ove,goodhumor,nd truth.Separationpleads forpeople to make love, not politics, he"generaln control."27rnManhHoshowsunquestioned aith ntheability f ndividuals o choose their wnmates, nd hisnovelsuggests that the oppositionbetween the individual and thecollective an be brokendown through acrificialndividualisticlove. n a philosophicalassageHirngaysthat he tory fhis oveforOanh s the"tragedy f theperiod,"because itrepresentsheopposition etween he ndividual nd thecollective,he and thewe.Hirng'sove forOanh s thehateful. Eventhepowerofthis ovecouldn't defeat his fear of the collective that opposed therelationship,o he plungedhimself nto "thegrandiose ollectivewe" 148).He hasrealized oo atethat is ovecouldhavedissolvedthedestructivepposition etween andwe,forwhen we sacrificefor hosewe lovewe are alsoliving or urselves. shesays, Onlylovehas thepowertoharmonize hetwo elementsntoone . .Weor I, I orwe that'snot at issue any longerwhenwe have love"(201).2' Trng iangays hatpoliticss the eneral,he oulof ach ndividualand very eriod(72). peakingromhe rave, anh ontradictshe rchcollectivismThegeneralf heworld f he piritanonly e ove" 150).Hai Giern,irag's riendnd themost dmirableharacternthenovel,blameshemistakesf ecenteaders nthe act hatpoliticaloctrine"asbeen the eneraln ontrol"211).

Crossroads 4:2 41



31/37

John . SchaferAnotherharacternSeparationints t thepossibilityffreedomthroughoodhumor ndthroughevotion o truth. hischaracteris HaiGicVn,ne of group f outherners ho wentnorthfter he1954GenevaAccords.HaiGiernndHirngirstmeetwhenHai GicVnbecomesHirag's ssistanturinghe andreformeriod.HaiGiernsa modelof the ndependent,omanticpirit hat utspokenlyndwithgoodhumor evoteshimselfotruthn ife nd literature.aiGicVns "cheerfulightnddayand couldfind omethingumorousinevery ituation"85).He also finds ourage ospeakthe ruth nd

topreserve is ndividualityndefiance fthe ollective's irection.Consistent ithhispersonality,icVn'sivennamemeans joker,"fact hatdisturbs he eader of his unit. Our socialist ocietys aserious ociety,"aysthe eader. A cadre ndPartymemberwithhumorous ame sunacceptable"86).Ordered ochangehisname,Hai GicVn oes so, but later he changes t back. Hai GicVn lsodemonstratesndependencenhis ove ife.After heParty reventshim frommarryingis firstove becauseshe is Catholic, e lashesoutat theParty or eing n "organizationhat s fiercerhanwereConfucianlderswith heir aughtersnprevious imes: hey aysithere,youhaveto sit here, ithnopower o choose" 110).Whenhemarries notherwomanlater,he does so withoutnformingheParty. ai GicVnftenriticizeshePartyeadership, articularlytstendencyopoliticize verything,ven scientifictudy.Consistentwithhisgeneral utspokenness,n the arlypagesofthenovelHaiGicVnrgesHirngotell ruthfullyhepersonal toryhat ventuallybecomes henovelSeparation.Hai GicVnits hestereotypefsouthernerss more asy-going,less formal,ess bound by rigidrules,and more nfluenced yfeelingsnd emotionshan re northerners.28y makingHai GicVnthemost dmirable haracternhisnovel,TranManhHo maybesuggesting hatas communicationetweenthe north nd southimproves,henorth ould become "southernized" bit MoreHaiGicVns,ewerTrngGiangs!),and in this way the destructiveoppositions etween heheart nd themind,between and we,couldbe softened.fcommunist fficialsnthenorth ecamemore"southernized" warmer,more flexible n applyingrules andregulationsthen erhapsharmonyouldreplace onflict. hetherthis harmonywould provide opportunity orpsychologically28Manyouthernersgreewith he tereotype.42 Crossroads 4:2



32/37

TheCollectivendthe ndividualnVietnameseiteraturehealthyindividualism s uncertain.Whatseemsclear s that heissue of collective oncern aised in these ate 1980s novelswillremainmportantell nto henewmillennium.

ReferencesBo Ninh1993/1990The orrowfWarNoibuon hin ranh].nglish ersion

byFrank almosbased onthe ranslationromheVietnamesebyVo BangThanhndPhanThanhHao,withKaterina ierce.London: Seeker nd Warburg. riginally ublished s Thenphan ua tinh u TheFate ofLove].Hanoi:NhXutBanHiNhVan, 990.Belanger,. and KhuatThuHong1995 "Marriage nd Familyn UrbanNorthVietnam, 965-1993/'Paperpresentedt theAnnualPAAMeeting,anFrancisco.BinhMinh1991 "V quanhhnnhn rong i ctnhng hn innay" OnMaritalRelationshipsn the PresentRuralFamily].n Nhndiengi dnh VitnaniMen nay [Identifyinghe PresentVietnameseamily]. anoi:Ky yeuhoinghi.BiBchH1990 "Toi doc Ly than' a TrnManhHo" [ReadingTranManhHo'sLy than].VanHoc [Literarytudies] Tustin,CA) No.52:35-45.Cao thiNhir-QuynhndJohn . Schfer1988 "FromVerseNarrative o Novel: TheDevelopment f ProseFictionn Vietnam." ournalfAsian tudies 7:756-777.Chagnon, acquind Don Luce editors)1974 OfQuietCourage: oems romVietNam.Washington, .C.:IndochinaMobileEducation roject.

Crossroads4:2 43



33/37

John.SchaferDircmghuHipcmg1993/1998Paradise ftheBlind NhfrnghinDu^ng M].Trans.PhanHuyDu'frngndNina McPherson. ew York:WilliamMorrow. riginallyublishedn1988 n HanoibyNamViet.Heng,RussellHiang-Khng1998 "Media in Vietnamnd theStructuref tsManagement."nTheMassMedia n Vietnam.avidG.Marr, d. 25-53. oliticaland Social Change Monograph25. Canberra: Australian

NationalUniversity.Ho ChiMinh1977 V CngTc VanHo VanNgh On Literarynd ArtisticTasks].Hanoi:Si*That, 977.HoiThanhndHoiChn1968/1942ThiNhnVit-NamVietnameseoets]. aigon:HoaTien.HongNgocHin1979 "V mtdc dim a vnhocngh hut rong iai doanvfraqua" [SomeCharacteristicsf Our Literaturend Art n thePeriodJust assed].VanNgh Literaturend theArts]No. 23:June .HongNgocPhch1963/1925T tarn:arnyticu huytTotm:A Psychologicalovel].N.p.:Thanh un. riginally ublishedn1925.HoangVanChi1964 FromColonialismo Communism: Case History fNorthVietnam.ewYork: raeger.Huynh hir hircmg1991 "Van xuinhtmgm80 v vn d dn chu ho nnvanhoc"[Prose n the80sand theDemocratizationfLiterature].apChi VanHoc JournalfLiterarytudies]Hanoi)No.4:14-17.

44 Crossroads4:2



34/37

TheCollectivendthendividualnVietnameseiteratureHuynhanhThngeditorndtranslator)1996 AnAnthologyfVietnameseoems. ewHaven:YaleUniversityPress.Jamieson,eilL.1992 "Shattereddentities nd Contestedmages:ReflectionsfPoetryand History n 20thCenturyVietnam."Crossroads7(2):71-134.1993 Understandingietnam.erkeley,A:UniversityfCaliforniaPress.L Li*u1997/1986A TimeFarPast Thfri a vang].Trans.NgVnhHai,Nguyen Chung,ndKevinBowen.Amherst, A:UniversityofMassachusetts ress.Originally ublished n 1986 andrepublishedn1996byWriters' ssociationublishing ouse,Hanoi.L Thnh ghi1990 Nhn ocLythan"OnReading eparation],nNghQunDi[Literaturend theArts ndtheArmy], ugust, 7-100.Lockhart reg1992 "Introduction."n TheGeneraletiresndOthertudies. guyenHuyThip. -38. ingapore: xford niversityress.1996 "Introduction."n The Lightof theCapital:ThreeModern

Vietnameselassics. ranslatedyGregLockhartndMoniqueLockhart.-49.KualaLumpur: xford niversityress.Lu'uTrong ir1989 Na DmSiteTnhWakingntheMiddleoftheNight].huanHo:Thuan oPublishing ouse.MaoTse-Tung1967/1942"Talks at theYenanForumon Literaturend Art." nSelectedWorksfMaoTse-Tung. ol.3. 69-98. eking: oreignLanguages ress.

Crossroads4:2 45



35/37

John. SchaferNguynu1983/c. 800 TheTale of Kiu Truyn iu].A bilingual ditiontranslatedyHuynhanhThng. ew Haven: YaleUniversityPress.Nguyn uyThip1992/1987"The GeneralRetires" Tu'6-ng hiru]. ranslated yGregLockhart. n The GeneralRetires nd Other tories. 15-136.Singapore:OxfordUniversityress.Originally ublished n

1987.NguynhacVin ndHfru goc1983?Vietnamese iterature: istoricalBackgroundnd Texts.Hanoi:Foreign anguages PublishingHouse. Someresearchersist1983 as thedate ofpublication ut no date is given n thebook.Nguyn inh hu1978 "Vietve chin ranh"WritingboutWar].VanNgheQunDoi[Literaturend the Arts nd theArmy].November. or anEnglish ersion ee: "WritingboutWar."Trans.HuynhanhThng. heVietnam eview (Autumn-Winter,997): 38-447.Nguyen goc1991 "Van xuisau 1975: h*hm dintve quy uatpht rien[Prose fter975:ExploringomeFeatures elated oLaws ofDevelopment]. apChi VanHoc [JournalfLiterarytudies](Hanoi)No. 4:9-13.Nguyn gocThin1990 "'Tiu thuyt u'frngi' trong an xuiVitnamhindai"[The"Inner-directedovel" and ContemporaryietnameseProse].TapChi VanHoc [JournalfLiterarytudies] Hanoi)No. 6:28-34.Nguyen anLinh1990/1987"Let Writers and ArtistsActively Contributeto

Renovation." ietnamesetudiesNew Series)21 (1991):117-125.Translationf"Dongchitng thu'Nguyn anLinhni46 Crossroads4:2



36/37

TheCollectivend the ndividual nVietnameseiteraturechuyn &i vanngh [ComradeGeneral ecretary guyenVan Linh alkswithWritersndArtists]. anNgh Literatureand theArts]No. 42: Oct. 17, 3. [Van Nghereprints hecomplete peningpeech f heGeneral ecretary.]

Nguyeny1969 VanThi Tien hienPre-WarWritersndPoets]. aigon:KhaiTri.Nht inh1997/1935Breaking ffDoan Tuyt]. rans.JamesBanerian.LosAngeles?):J.Banerian. riginally ublished 935.PhamVanBich1999 TheVietnameseamilynChange:The Caseof heRed RiverDelta.Surrey: urzonPress.Phan u-D1979 "V motnnvanxui eachmang a muodnam ua 1945-975"[On theBasisfor Revolutionaryrosefrom 945-1975].nNhvanViet ani1945-1975)VietnameseWriters1945-1975)].Vol.1.Lu'cmg anDangandVuCngTien, ds. 15-77.Hanoi:Dai hocvatrungocchuyen ghip.PhanKhi1930 "Php mvan: each dai dai danh u'" RulesforWriting: heUse ofPronouns]. humr anvan NewLiteraturenWomen]

No. 73:Oct.9,13-14.ThiVu1990 "LfrigicVihiu" Introduction].n LythanSeparation].-26.Paris:QuMe.TranManhHo1990/1989LythanSeparation].aris:QuMe.Originally ublishedbyDongNaiPublishingompanynHo ChiMinh ityn 1989.1996 Phbnh hnphbnhCriticism gainstCriticism]. ChiMinh ity:NhXutBanVanNgh.

Crossroads4:2 47



37/37

John . SchaferV HuyQuang1990 "Thngdiepcua Ly than . .vaTranManh Ho" [TheMessage ofLy than . . and Trn ManhHo]. VanHoc [Literary tudies](Tustin,CA) No. 52:46-53).

48 Crossroads4:2

The Collective and the Individual in Post War Vietnam Literature

Documents

Transcript of The Collective and the Individual in Post War Vietnam Literature