[lc]

Pedagogie from the University of Paris at the age of twenty, but psychologically most fascinating of all, he arranged to get to France at the age of sixteen - no small feat for the son of a poor hamlet tenant farmer. Although the Vietnamese tradition and the values of the tradition constitute a focal dimension of his personality, his subsequent experiences have been such that he falls less than the others into whatever patterning emerges.

In the process of relating to childhood experiences, all informants dissociated hostility as a dimension in their relationship with their parents. This not only held true for their memories about their feelings for their parents, but was particularly marked by their absence of recall for hostility on the part of the parents toward them. When pressed, a few blunted and extremely vague incidents were elicited, but none with any sharpness or specificity. The one exception was that of the intellectual, who remembered one unjustified attack by his father at age seven.

This mechanism not only applied to incidents relating to the expression of hostility, but extended beyond and included the repression of conscious awareness of hostile impulses and ideation. Those memories that were elicited (under pressure) were always hedged with qualifications, justification, and constant self-reassurance as to the intrinsic goodness of the parents and their love for their children.

-5-

[lc]

This censorship applied with particular force to the mothers. All were seen as shadowy figures, amorphous and indistinguishable. Fathers were seen with slightly greater clarity. This stringently restricted perception of the mothers would suggest either that their negative impact was greater than that of the fathers, or that they were more withdrawn and detached or both. Three informants (the exception being the intellectual) expressed a great deal of guilt because they had not adequately taken care of their mothers after they had left the home. This was consistently stated in terms of money. I found myself quite dubious about the validity of the money issue - my sense was that it was symbolic rather than real - a focus for the guilt. Upon investigation, the parents seemed relatively well established in their economic spheres. There is the pattern, apparently widely held, that children should care for their parents in old age. However, my feeling was that the informants' concern about parental support was more drama than serious intent. Only one (the demonstration leader) had helped his parents, and when his income was reduced because of his political activity, he seemed quite casual about discontinuing his contribution although he had savings.

In addition to the interpersonal factors, among the cultural forces that seemed to play a role in the dulled vision of mothers as real people, one stands out as predominant - that of the

-6-

[Lc]

pervasive effect of Confucianism, with its emphasis upon correct
conduct, stylized roles, and parent and ancestor worship. These
values permeate Vietnamese society and quite conceivably constitute
one base for the dissociative process that was observed.

Older siblings in Vietnam are expected to assume responsibility
for the conduct of the younger children. When the younger misbe-
haves, it is apparently the older who is punished - even if he was
not physically present at the time. This was mentioned by two
informants and was confirmed by other Vietnamese. The result seems
to be that it promotes rivalry among the children. There is a
natural resentment by the older and it constitutes a power position
on the part of the younger that can easily be exploited. Perhaps
the most interesting dimension of all is the fact that the parents
seem to be considered essentially blameless; it is the sister or
brother who is seen as directly responsible. The parent is merely
acting in the proper, accepted pattern of good parenthood.

The amount of anxiety elicited as a result of probing in the area
of parent-child hostility was directly proportional to the effec-
tiveness of the repressive process, but all were made uneasy. On
the whole, however, the solidly incorporated nature of the repres-
sive operation was extremely impressive. Although there was some
slight loosening as our relationship deepened and the informants
became more intrinsically immersed in the investigation of their

-7-

[Lc]

own lives, hostility as an interpersonal force in parental inter-
action remained an almost totally forbidden area of recall.

A somewhat dramatic example was that of the young demonstra-
tion leader. His father was an alcoholic, who would get drunk every
night and proceed to beat the children and his wife. The children
would run away, but the mother would not. Yet the only reaction
that the informant could let himself experience was that of sym-
pathy for his father's unfortunate affliction, and guilt because
he could not protect his mother and convince his father that he
should stop drinking.

In the case of the Viet Cong terrorist, a man who stated that
the only moments of happiness he had ever known were those when he
was killing, there were no memories whatsoever for any expression
of anger or derogation in the home - this simply had not existed
for him.

When anger was expressed by the informants toward their
parents, it consistently took an identical form - that of martyr-
dom. This was presented as a dramatic, manipulative device and is
one that seems to be used extensively among the Vietnamese. Thus
when the monk was "dissatisfied" with something his mother had or
had not done, he would go on a hunger strike. She would respond
and cajole him back into eating. It was, in fact, a sort of love
play between them, albeit on a hostile level. In the previously

-8-

[LC]

mentioned incident, when the intellectual's father became angry at him and accused him of a transgression that had actually been committed by his younger brother, the informant took a knife and threatened to kill himself. The father became enraged, not because his son might die, but because this would disgrace the father in the eyes of the community.

It is interesting to note that there is an awareness of martyrdom as a form of hostility by some Vietnamese. At one time the Buddhist Venerable was discussing self immolation. He stated that over twenty monks had written of their intent to burn themselves to death and that the senior monks, recognizing the damaging effect that this now had on the Buddhist image vis-a-vis world opinion, were trying to suppress it. He explained the motivation by saying, "Their hearts are hard and full of anger." Thus the way in which they express their anger toward others was to destroy themselves - the use of guilt as a manipulative device through the internalizing of the destructive impulse.

To a lesser extent, the dissociation of anger also applied to one's peers. Fighting is frowned upon among children, and in fact, one rarely sees anger displayed in the streets - a rather amazing degree of control at an extremely early age, particularly when one considers what a great number of children there are. Two of the informants admitted to getting into fights as children, but both

-9-

[LC]

emphasized that it was the others who started it, that they disen-
gaged themselves as soon as possible and that the occurences were
rare.

The Viet Cong member stated that all of the other children in
his hamlet refused to play with him because his family was poor
(this must be considered symbolically because in actuality they
were no poorer than the others and better off than some), and
constantly beat him. He would not fight back, but would go to his
mother who told him to stay away from the others. One of the
reasons given for not fighting back was that this would then involve
the various parents in antagonisms and this was not permitted. Thus
a simple disagreement between children became a much broader issue
and the children, at a very early age, understood that interfamilial
relations were dependent upon their conduct. The result seems to
be that the usual outlets through which children are permitted
hostile expression are denied and the hostility remains within. It
is my impression that this censorship cuts across all levels of
Vietnamese society.

The elementary truth is, of course, that hostility, to one
degree or another, exists in every parent-child and peer rela-
tionship in every culture, and that when it is not permitted direct
expression (and subsequent drainage), it must find some locus.

The one externalized expressive form that has thus far been

-10-

[LC]

identified in this research that does seem to be permitted, and in
fact sponsored, is that of institutionalized hostility. A cause
and a rationale are required and if this qualification is met, then
acts of hostility, including at times those involving extreme bru-
tality, are condoned. The institutionalized form has to have 1)
coherence and identity and 2) the approval of at least a signifi-
cant segment of one's peers. Within this context, and within the
focus thus provided, one can then channel monumental amounts of
rage. Thus the Viet Cong terrorist repeatedly made the point that
he did not hate the individual American. He realized that there
were good Americans and bad (the criterion being whether they were
for or against the National Liberation Front), and he emphasized
that he knew that within their own country Americans were essentially
a good people. What he was against and had dedicated his life to
destroy was "American Imperialism."

A very good example of the use of institutionalized hostility
as a deflection for direct confrontation was provided by the
demonstration leader. During one session, I focused on the subject
of anger in the family and, without intending to do so, the infor-
mant not only revealed the pattern of his father's alcoholism and
his beating his wife and children, but apparently felt the emotional
impact of this forbidden interactive area. Although at no time had
he let the full weight of the emotional content break through, as

-11-

[LC]

the session proceeded he became more and more related to the data
and his anxiety became increasingly apparent. The next night when
we met, the electricity in part of Saigon was not functioning and
immediately the informant launched into an intense attack on the
Americans for causing the power failure. His accusation was that
they were responsible because they had brought in too many air con-
ditioners and electric washing machines and not enough generators.
He broadened this until he almost literally was saying that no
Americans should be permitted within any cities in Viet Nam, that
they should be totally confined to the fighting front and isolated
enclaves. He developed his accusations until they lost any
semblance of logic. I could feel the weight of his anger against
me, but when I suggested that it might be me with whom he was angry
because of our previous session, he completely denied it and, in
fact, repudiated the content by saying angrily that as he had told
me, his father was not only a good man but had led an essentially
exemplary life. He could not express his fury toward me directly
for opening up an extremely painful area, but he could express it
through an institutionalized channel - that of anti-Americanism.

There were two related phenomena which were dramatically and
consistently manifested, that of 1) the good and bad father image
and 2) a paranoid perception of the world. Both seemed to have
arisen out of the parent-child context.

-12-

[LC]

With the exception of the intellectual (and further analysis may reveal that it was true for him as well), the world was strin-gently divided into good people and bad people, with absolutes attached to both and very few shadings between. Although this varied with the informant's level of sophistication, it remained a powerful dynamic within all and carries with it social implica-tions which are of the utmost importance.

One's perception of the world is primarily monitored by one's perception of the significant figures in one's early life, and there is an amazingly strong tendency to assign this perception to all others from this point forth, regardless of the dimensions of the others' personalities and regardless of the extreme differences in character structure that may realistically exist (paratoxic dis-tortion). When a society, such as the Vietnamese, unites and insists upon seeing the primary figures (parents) as all loving and forbids the acknowledgement of alternate, less benign person-ality characteristics, then what seems to evolve is a division of all people into one of two categories; either all good or all bad. On the other hand, if a society encourages its children to view their parents realistically and permits the expression of dissatis-faction, then one gradually realizes that there is good and bad not only within the parent but within all people. This is one source of true, rather than assumed, tolerance and understanding.

-13-

[LC]

This and other research would seem to indicate that one of the
results of the first position is that the perception of good and
bad is not integrated into the person of any one individual. Cate-
gories of good and bad are established and people are assigned to
either one or the other.

The flexibility of these categories seems to be directly
dependent upon the repressive stringency of the particular family
and the particular society, and in the case of the Vietnamese, this
repressive force seems to be very powerful indeed. Subconsciously,
every child, including every adult child, is fully aware that there
are dimensions of the parents' personalities which are devoted to
the satisfactions of the child's needs; but the child is equally
aware that there are qualities within the parent which are, unfor-
tunately, also dedicated to the limitation of the child's growth
(which is the base line upon which good or bad is ultimately
evaluated). If only one side of this knowledge is allowed to come
into conscious awareness, and if malevolence is disguised as love
(e.g. one informant in a previous study stated that his father
loved him most because he beat him most), then the alternate per-
ception - that of the destructive impulse - becomes equally skewed
and distorted. The result is that both concepts suffer. The
question that evolves is, what is love and what is hate? How does
one identify and distinguish them? The confusion it generates can

-14-

[LC]

indeed be monumental: intimacy and friendship can be interpreted
as attack, helpfulness as manipulation, appreciation and warmth as
subtle forms of condescension; conversely, derogation can be seen
as an attempt to teach, nagging can become concern, and punishment
may be viewed as the ultimate in focal interest and encouragement.

In the case of the Vietnamese informants, the disparate and
unrealistic identity of good and evil has not been integrated; they
are kept widely separate. Although at times intellectually acknowl-
edged, in essence they see no one person, no one group, no one
movement, as embodying the full panoramic range of both - and a
seriously distorted world view emerges.

As an addendum, it is also important to note that the category
to which an individual or a group is assigned is not necessarily
immutable - one can be considered thoroughly Christ-like at one
point, and thoroughly mephistophelian at another.

In addition to the parental categorization concept, the data
produced considerable evidence testifying to the fact that sub-
consciously the informants saw their parents as inadequate. In
diametric contradiction to the conscious view of their parents as
all loving was the deeper awareness of their limited capacity to
give them the affection, nurturance, and support that they needed.
This does not imply that the parents were without love for their
children; what does seem true is that the parents could not give

-15-

[LC]

them the love that they needed. This, of course, is scarcely a
situation unique to the Vietnamese. What does appear unusual here
is that the deification of the parent tends to constrict the search
for alternative sources of affection elsewhere to compensate for
the deficit. The need remains inviolate, but what seems to emerge
is an unconscious prohibition against its achievement, with the
result that one senses a deep, constant, unfulfilled longing for
substitute parental figures.

In this context, however, the point must be made, that as one
observed the large groups of children seen everywhere, on the
whole they seemed essentially happy. Most were warm and friendly
suggesting that although it may be true that hostility is repressed,
there most certainly must be important compensatory dimensions to
the parent-child interaction. A further consideration is that a
great part of the responsibility of caring for the younger children
was in the hands of the older siblings, in fact one had the sense
that this started in late infancy, and one sees many eight and nine
month olds who appear to spend a great deal of the day outside with
the older children. The older boys share in this responsibility,
although the extent is not known. Although the degree to which
this pattern cut across class levels was not able to be determined,
it is evident that a great many (and perhaps all) Vietnamese
children have much more extensive contact with older
children, who bear a much greater responsibility for their

-16-

[LC]

upbringing, than do those in the United States - particularly
those in urban areas.

It was interesting to find, however, that although the infor-
mants realized that older siblings had assumed a great deal of the
responsibility for their care, there were almost no memories for
the event. Recall for early sibling experiences was minimal.
Although it is true that on the whole recollection of all early
experiences was limited, the much greater absence of memories in
this area would lead one to wonder how mutually satisfying is this
sibling arrangement. Certain observations are evident, however;
Vietnamese children, at a very early age, leave the house for major
portions of the day and frequently stay out until late at night (it
is common to see large groups of children in the streets at 10 P.M.);
they begin their peer relationships at the earliest possible point;
these peer relationships must have important early developmental
meaning. The pattern of child rearing, with particular focus on
interactive family and cultural constellation, is one that could well
be specifically studied and that should constitute a source of rich
data in understanding adult behavior.

With the exception of the intellectual (who has had prolonged
relationships with two women, both of which appeared meaningful),
all three informants were essentially celibate. The demonstration
leader, although preoccupied with thoughts of sex, proudly stated

-17-

[Lc]

that not only had he not had sexual intercourse, but that with the
exception of some very proper kissing with the girl whom he appre-
hensively stated he might some day marry, had never physically
touched a girl.

The Buddhist Venerable entered a pagoda when he was twelve
and had had no physical contact with women. This was clearly
demonstrated in "testing the limits" on the Rorschach. He had
given no sexual responses, and as a result, an area commonly seen
as a vagina was pointed out to him. He was fascinated by it,
stared intently and said, "You know, I've never seen one, except
on a child."

The Viet Cong member had no relationships with women until he
married at the age of thirty four. Inasmuch as his wife was in
Saigon and he in Viet Cong territory, it developed that he could
not have seen her after marriage more than three or four times.
The casual, uncommitted nature of the relationship was demonstrated
when he remarked that he was planning to marry someone else, because
his wife had been arrested by the police a year before and he did
not know where she was. Although his wife's mother possibly knew,
he had not checked with her nor asked anyone else to do so because
the police might have been watching the house (highly improbably
after a year).

Far more important than the physical aspects was the striking

-18-

[LC]

tenuousness with which all four discussed the subject of man-woman relationships. All were apprehensive about commitment, and in one way or another expressed a deep basic distrust of women. They seemed to think of the female as constituting a dangerous web to which one must not get too close or one would be engulfed. This also held true for the intellectual. He had entered into both of his relationships only under the most stringent guarantees against responsibility, e.g. that the women would work and provide the complete financial support for the care and education of the children, which they have done. He stated quite candidly that he never felt that he had fully given himself to any woman. Both relations were arranged by others as a cover for his political activities and he did not marry until 1965, after having lived with the first for almost thirty five years (and after having borne eight children with her and five with the second - whom he had not married).

The pattern of expecting the wife to work and to provide the primary support for the family, while the husband devotes himself to his political or cultural interests, is very widespread in Vietnam. For example, it never crossed the Viet Cong informant's mind to give his wife any money after they were married. She had provided for her own support before and she was expected to continue after.

With the exception of the Viet Cong member (who stated that

-19-

[LC]

he had never had any friends), all three informants had many
friendly male acquaintances. They related easily and the social
dimension was obviously a well established one. This, very proba-
bly, is at least partially referable to the early beginning of peer
relationships in Vietnam. Of extreme importance, however, was the
fact that although comraderie as a social form was well integrated,
each informant stated that he had never had what he would consider
a best friend - one with whom there were no interpersonal restraints -
and each spoke of the lack rather wistfully. Thus, the two most
effective compensatory sources for parental emotional deficit,
those of intimate friendships and intense heterosexual relation-
ships, did not exist for any of the informants. Nevertheless, it
was both apparent and documented that relationships with men were
far more comfortable than those with women, and that there was
greater trust in men.

During the course of the interviews, one became aware of a
sense of unfulfillment in the informants that seems to have re-
sulted from the particular nature of the relationship with the
parenting figures and the subsequent inability to compensate with
peers. It has left what one can only describe as a sense of in-
completeness. As a result the search goes on, but here, too, much
of the search seems to have been institutionalized. I have a very
strong impression that much of their very volatile and confused

-20-

[LC]

perspective in regard to the role of America can be explained on
this basis, and I think that there may be some foundation for
generalizing beyond the informants themselves.

A further expansion is the internalizing of the good and the
bad into the self image of the child, and here again a sharp dis-
tinction is found. The analysis of this rather complex area will
have to await a more complete evaluation of the data - particularly
the Rorschach and the Thematic Perception Test material. Psycho-
dynamically, however, the conversion of the concept of good and
bad into that of great and insignificant is a common human trans-
lation; the first usually being a compensatory form of the second,
which is more apt to be the core element. In this context, among
the most interesting data that came from this study was the messianic
stance that every informant held; each, in his own way, saw himself
as the savior of the Vietnamese nation.

I do not know to what extent one can generalize from this
finding, but it is my impression that it is rather widespread.
When, at one point, I smilingly said to a colleague (an extremely
knowledgeable and scholarly social scientist whose area of spe-
cialization for many years has been Vietnam) that it seemed to me
that all my informants wanted to be either the Prime Minister or a
poet, he answered that he had rarely met a Vietnamese that didn't
aspire to at least the first. Three of the informants (the Viet

-21-

[LC]

Cong member excluded) saw their lives as having two directions: the first secular and very much in the mainstream of political and social life, a leader in their own chosen area; the second mystical, devoted to the arts, far from the maelstrom of daily life.

The monk repeatedly said that he planned to study, teach and, to the extent that it was forced upon him, to participate in Buddhist secular affairs until he was fifty (although he did not make the connection, this was his mother's age when she entered a pagoda to live). He then planned to retire to a small pagoda in the northern highlands to study and write. He wrote poetry and was extremely proud that one of his poems had been set to music and had become well known. The demonstration leader, a very energetic and determined young man, constantly referred to the artistic quality that he saw within himself and his gift to me when I left was a collection of his poems - some of which he read and which he felt really expressed the true person within, the part of him that he was most proud of.

The intellectual had strong mystical qualities to his personality, and although essentially a material determinist politically, was extremely proud of the fact that the literary critics referred to the mystical, metaphysical, peasant-myth oriented quality of his writing.

The status of the artist, apparently particularly that of the

-22-

[LC]

poet, is a very high one indeed in Vietnam. The image that is projected is that one is forced, by virtue of social circumstance, into participation in the affairs of the street, but it is a role that is vaguely embarrassing. The poet, in monastic retreat from the vicissitudes of daily life, is the person to be esteemed, and it is therefore very necessary that this image be established. The first series of sessions were very much devoted to this area, and it was only when this aspiration was well established that we could get on to other matters. It is my impression that Buddhism has a very important position in establishing this as a value for personal achievement.

There is a further Buddhist concept that seems to be of
importance in establishing behavioral patterns among the Vietnamese
and which ties in with these findings, that of the "middle way."
This was consistently stated as an ideal, more so, of course, by
the Buddhists, but also by others. The two aspects of the middle
way that were emphasized were 1) no strong emotional experiences
in any direction, and 2) no personal attachments. Although it is
always extremely risky to assign labels to a cultural form with
which we are unfamiliar, in western psychological terms we would
refer to this as the desire to achieve inner peace and harmony
through a sense of withdrawal and detachment. When the middle way
was discussed with the Buddhist monk, although he said that he fully

-23-

[LC]

realized that man could not live without some degree of overt emotional expression (a statement that was most disturbing to the young wandering monk who was serving as interpreter), it remained quite clear that this constituted one of the core conflicts of his life. He very clearly longed for close relationships. At one point, after a particularly warm session (unrecorded), he said that it was not surprising that we had become friends because we had probably known each other in a previous incarnation; it was more apt to have been destiny rather than chance that had brought us together under such unusual circumstances. I felt very complimented.

Historically, Vietnamese literature has addressed itself to establishing two classes of heroes; the warrior and the poet. Both seem to constitute models for the young, each position has great stature and the highest form is a combination of both - the intrepid warrior-savior with a poetic soul. As is well known, this concept is not confined to Vietnam but is also true for many Asian countries. It may be that the messianic fervor and the savior complex that one encounters is a derivative of the national status accorded the hero. I have long maintained the hypothesis, and I think it comes from a solid observational base, that for any national value to become well established, it is not only necessary that it be validated within the cultural structure, but it must also reflect an interpersonal dynamic indigenous to the family interaction. This juxta-

-24-

[LC]

position of two such seemingly disparate values poses psychological problems that this research will hopefully be able to address itself to.

There is a peculiar kind of paranoid manifestation that was found in three informants, the exception being the intellectual. In the good father-bad father constellation, there naturally must always be a scapegoat, someone who is responsible for the ill state of affairs. But the form in which blame was assigned was one that I had not seen expressed elsewhere in a style so consistently identifiable as that found here. Repetitively, when assigning blame, the informants would start in the middle of an incident and totally disregard the precipitating antecedent events. For example, the Viet Cong terrorist stated at one point that American soldiers were dedicated to the killing of innocent Vietnamese civilians. Urged to give an example, he answered that on one occasion he knew for a fact that Americans had shot at a bus filled with farm laborers. This was the end of the statement. Asked to give the context in which this had occurred, he stated that a Viet Cong sabotage squad had just bombed an American installation. At that precise moment a bus of farm laborers was passing on the other side of the same building. The bus stopped and the people poured out. The Americans shot at them, thus proving their murderous intent. There was a complete disregard for the precipitating sequence; it was as

-25-

I have observed, even in the case of a single individual, that when a person is driven to do something he does not want to do, he does it without any consideration for the person he is going to harm. I have seen this happen to me more than once.

I have also seen a person do something he did not mean to do, and then later realize he had committed a sin.

One time, I was driving my car and someone on the side of the road started honking at me. I turned and looked over and saw that a man was driving his car right up beside me. I turned and looked back and saw that he had stopped. I called the police and they came and took him away. It turned out that he was a student and he was going to go to school with me that day. I was so mad that I called the police again and they came and took him away. This time, he was a student who was going to go to prison.

I have also seen a person do something he did not mean to do, and then later realize he had committed a sin. It was on a Sunday when my wife and I were going to church. This man was standing in front of my wife and I was standing next to him. He reached over and took my wife's hand and held it. At first I thought nothing of it, but later I realized that he was trying to take my wife away from me. I told my wife what was going to happen and she told me to do the same thing. I did the same thing and the man left us. I was so mad that I called the police and they came and took him away.

This man was going to go to prison for that, but the judge said to him, "Do you have a attorney?" and he said yes. The judge said to the attorney, "Do you have a case?" and the attorney said yes. The judge said, "What is it?" and the attorney said, "My client was taken away from me."

I have also seen a person do something he did not mean to do, and then later realize he had committed a sin. It was on a Sunday when my wife and I were going to church. This man was standing in front of my wife and I was standing next to him. He reached over and took my wife's hand and held it. At first I thought nothing of it, but later I realized that he was trying to take my wife away from me. I told my wife what was going to happen and she told me to do the same thing. I did the same thing and the man left us. I was so mad that I called the police and they came and took him away. This time, he was a student who was going to go to prison.

23

[LC]

if it had never occurred. The fact that there had been an attack, that at that moment a group of people appeared who were unidentifiable and could conceivably be a part of the attacking force, and that under the immediate circumstances the Americans might understandably not have used their best judgment, was completely disregarded. There is no defense for inadequate military discipline even under the most trying of situations, but the soldiers' actions could have conceivably been based on more than a murderous impulse alone.

At another time during the period that I was in Vietnam, a young monk had burned himself. A very garbled story had appeared in the press which was not consistent with what I knew of Buddhist behavior, and I asked the Venerable about it. He said that he had been present when it occurred, that a policeman had kicked the monk and that the police had not released the body for burial. This was the totality of his statement. In essence he was saying, "See how heartless and unfeeling the police are. A man is dying and they attack him." Again, however, although there is little justifiable defense if the police did kick the monk, in the context of the events, it is at least a thoroughly understandable action. The facts were that the monk burned himself just as a particularly important meeting was ending. It had been attended by many dignitaries and newsmen, all of whom witnessed the event. It was an action that was obviously embarrassing to the government (as

-26-

[LC]

evidenced by the attempt to cover it up to the press), the police had undoubtedly been given strict orders to prevent such occurrences, and those on duty at the time would bear the responsibility for its having happened. Also, the Venerable, made no mention of the fact that it was the newsmen and the police who beat out the flames (not aided by the Buddhists who were present), and that the monk was immediately placed in a taxi and taken to a hospital, where an unsuccessful attempt was made to save his life. As the story was told, the police had simply brutally assaulted a dying man. There are many other examples of this same reporting: that of beginning in the middle of an event and completely disregarding what went before.

It is true that half truths are scarcely the invention of any one group, but what appeared here with predictable consistency was a rather complete disregard for cause and effect. It was not solely a simple, conscious manipulative device to elicit sympathy; a naive form of trickery designed to delude the gullible listener, although because of the Vietnamese tendency to uncritically accept rumors, derivatively it may have had some of that. The pattern had a much deeper psychological significance; it was a form of selective inattention. My sense is that it is imbedded in the dissociative process, that it fits into the broad paranoid dimension of an unevaluated acceptance of good and evil, and that it is an unconscious,

-27-

[Lc]

accusatory, projective device nurtured by self exoneration and
probably guilt. As such, I believe that it has rather broad per-
sonality and societal ramifications and ties in with an additional
observation that was made - that of a profound lack of critical
self evaluation.

Although there was an overexaggerated emphasis on the art of
maneuvering, in an interpersonal sense there was no awareness that,
within broad dimensions, one is the progenitor of one's own destiny --
one's negative destiny as well as one's positive destiny. In the
arena of the hostile integration (those personal and societal
relationships viewed as destructive), at no point did any of the
three informants see themselves as a contributor to the interpersonal
or intrasocietal patterning. This was a consideration that was
quite out of awareness. There was a realization that certain group
actions would cause certain predictable social reactions, e.g. the
Venerable realized that the self-immolations were eliciting contempt
rather than sympathy in world opinion, and the demonstration leader
realized that demonstrations were of similar diminishing value and
seemed not to be effective against the Ky government, but this was
not carried over to the personal dimension. Thus, for at least
three of the informants, one of man's most useful instruments for
change, both within oneself and within one's society, was missing.
The concept was repeatedly and forcefully put forth that others

-28-

[LC]

were completely responsible for their ills; they remained guiltless.
This idea may be reassuring, but it is of rather limited utility.

This lack of insight into the cause-event sequence seems both
to emerge from and to fortify the image of oneself as the innocent
victim of ungovernable forces. The prime compensatory counter-
maneuver seems to be that of mustering equivalent or greater force -
rather than some useful soul searching and eventual mediation.
There would seem to be a strong national pattern to bolster this
view. Historically, whoever has ruled has tended to eliminate or
suppress the opposition rather than incorporate or negotiate with
it. Up to the present, negotiation and conciliation seem not to be
well established Vietnamese conceptual forms within the authority
context. At one point (I believe it was an observer rather than
an informant), someone said that the Vietnamese did not understand
certain of the basic tenets of democracy, and this thought must be
given serious consideration.

Throughout, there was a searching for issues that would bol-
ster one's vision of oneself as being oppressed. It seemed to con-
stitute an important dimension of the personal drama; the impression
was given that without it life would seem rather dull. This is
certainly not to imply that issues did not realistically abound, but
the search at times went far beyond reality. For example, the
Buddhists continually talked of religious oppression. The fact

-29-

[LC]

seems to be, however, that it is not religious oppression they are
facing, but political oppression - and in this sense they are no
more oppressed than any other powerful oppositional group. Politi-
cal freedom is crucial in any society that is to take a democratic
path, but political oppression, although arising from the same
dynamic, is quite a different matter than religious oppression.
The first carries with it the implication of counter force, which
is not necessarily true for religious oppression. The image the
Buddhists expressed was one of complete innocence - a self concept,
that in the light of recent events, can scarcely be considered true.
It was the judgment of neutral, and I think quite unbiased observers,
that had the Buddhists kept to religious matters there would have
been no oppression and no conflict. But if one ventures out into
the political world - and they most certainly have every right to do
so - then one should expect the same treatment afforded others. Not
only is it thoroughly unrealistic to expect preferential status, but
in a sense it is unethical to assign a religious motive to the
predictable counter-reaction. The important consideration for this
research is not the political action, it is the psychological dimen-
sions of the action; the pose of innocence and the assignment of
guilt.

Another example of the search for issues, this on a much
simpler level, would be in point here. During the period of the

-30-

[LC]

interviews, Thich Tri Quang was on a hunger strike. Many important
Buddhists, including my informant, were gravely concerned, because
as the days mounted it was obvious to the world that the fast was
not only partial, but the negative repercussions were beginning to
far outweigh whatever positive gains there may originally have been.
At one point the informant brought out a liter of 5% glucose in
distilled water. He gravely explained that they had been told that
Thich Tri Quang should have a 10% solution. They had searched for
it, but it could not be found and he wondered if I did not agree that
the Ky government may have ordered all of the pharmacies in Saigon
not to sell 10% glucose to the Buddhists. I laughed and answered
that if they had done so, it most surely was the most ineffectual
order I had ever heard; any high school student with an elementary
knowledge of chemistry could whip up a 10% glucose solution in the
kitchen. The matter was dropped, but the point was made.

All four informants set the role of the good child in the family
as one of great importance. Two (the intellectual and the monk)
emphasized that they were the favorite child, but all four assigned
a high status value to this position - and made it quite evident
that not only had they achieved it, but that they esteemed the
benefits it brought. The position of the good child, however, is
not one of unmixed blessing. It is adopted out of a position of
weakness, rather than strength; an indication of insecurity rather

-31-

[LC]

than security. Moreover, it is tenuous and uncertain, because one
can fall from grace and, inasmuch as the platform from which one
falls is higher than that of others, the resulting parental censure
can be equivalently greater. Rivalry is increased, because the
siblings resent the preferential treatment accorded the other and
may or may not vie for commensurate status - and the push on the
part of others is to become equally good or equivalently bad. It
is a form of competitive maneuvering that is established by the
parents and constitutes a conditional form of love: if you are
good, I will love you; if you are not good, I will not; instead of:
I love you because you are you, good or bad.

Of interest is the fact that the two who most vigorously
emphasized that they were the favorite children, spent most time
away from the home during their early years. The monk's father died
when he was four and at five he was sent to live with a succession
of relatives until the age of twelve when he entered the pagoda,
He constantly emphasized his mother's kindliness and concern, but
the fact was that she rarely came to see him. Even when they lived
in the same city, she did not visit more than three or four times
a year, and during the first year that he was away he saw her only
once.

The intellectual made repeated forays out of the home. When
he was eleven months old, he was "exchanged" with a child of the

-32-

[LC]

landholder's concubine (her previous sons had died and this was to
delude the Gods while his mother acted as the other child's wet
nurse), at three and a half he went to live with a teacher for six
months - and preferred being there to being home, when he was nine
he lived in a pagoda for two years while attending school, etc.
Although it is not uncommon for Vietnamese children to live outside
the household at an early age, one wonders to what extent self-
delusion may have played a role in the informants' view of them-
selves as the favorite child.

The intellectual spoke with disdain and a kind of self justi-
fied scorn of his older sister and brother who were considered the
bad children (they gambled, incurred debts, treated the younger
children harshly). The punishment meted out to them, in Vietnamese
terms, was severe indeed: the sister was married to a Chinese (who
had a first wife in China) and thereafter was considered an outcast
from the family; the brother, at the age of twenty three, was forced
lie outstretched on the floor and be whipped by the father - who
then cast him out of the house and apparently did not speak to him
for the rest of his life.

Obviously the censure for any serious infraction of the family
and community code was extremely severe. In both above instances
the children were punished by humiliation, a lowering of status, and
isolation from the family. In Vietnamese values, these are perhaps

-33-

[lc]

the most severe punishments that one can receive.

The monk seemed rather smug about his preferential status in his mother's affections, but when we discussed the rarity of her visits he was much less sure of himself - and he could give none except the vaguest reasons for her conduct. My sense was that as long as he could retain the idealized image of her intact he felt quite certain of himself, but as soon as he was challenged, his system fell apart. The intellectual was also rather complacent about his position in the family and the superiority he felt to his errant siblings, but beneath it there was a trace of envy and admiration for the added latitude of action they had had and that he had not.

Although the thought will have to be investigated further, I sensed that the good child role is one that bore heavily upon all informants, that it limited their freedom. It had its obvious compensations, but they felt hemmed in by it. My hunch is that they were perhaps among the least secure of the children in the home, and that they compensated for it by being particularly obedient. Yet the shackles that it imposed made them quite jealous of the others, who at least were free enough to occasionally defy the superimposed conventional pattern and chance the wrath of parents and community.

According to the intellectual, his father's actions were

-34-

[LC]

directly in accord with Confucian values. The father has not only
the right but the duty to correct his children, regardless of
their age. As he said, a son may be fifty years old but he is still
subject to his father's discipline and even at that age may be
punished by beating. He added that this is no longer as true today
as when he was a boy, but the concept still has strength. When one
considers this kind of absolute autocratic parental authority
sanctioned by the full community, and then juxtaposes the repression
of the awareness of hostility and the absolute insistence on the
good parent image, one finds the potential for a very explosive
situation. Although the society puts restraints on parental be-
havior as well, the fact is that the parent can act with extreme
impunity and, with the support of a tradition, mask it as benign.
One can well understand why the informants devoted so much of them-
selves to courting parental approval. In the final analysis, the
parent has complete sanction and every child must know it. Far
better to be the good child, with its limitations, then the bad
child with its consequences. Each of the informants evolved into a
central figure in a movement of protest, and this constellation
would seem to provide a clue as to its origin.

One of the limitations of this research is well documented
here, simply that of not having enough cases to generalize from.
What position does the role of the good child play in the hierarchy

-35-

[LC]

of rebellion? Is it a cultural pattern that pertains to all - rebels and conformists alike, or is it indeed a dimension of personality unique to the protesters?

The ultimate proposition that one confronts in analysis of data such as these is where, in the continuum of rebellion-revolution, do the informants lie. As of the moment I would consider three of the informants rebels and one a revolutionary. The intellectual is the only one I would place in the last category. The central dedication of the Viet Cong member, the demonstration leader, and the monk seems to me to be essentially that of fighting against, not for. In actuality, none of the three knew what their goals were; none had a workable constructive perspective. When I asked the demonstration leader what he would substitute for the present government, he was quite nonplussed. He took the better part of a week to give an answer, which he wrote out in great detail and read. Although he said that it was his, I had a feeling that much of it was not, but what came through most strongly was that its meaning did not begin to grip him to the extent that the drama of the fight against the governing structure had.

All three were thoroughly preoccupied with the battle against authority, as a central and crucial leitmotif, although the monk less so. He might more accurately be considered a reluctant rebel, caught up in the tempo and intensity of a movement and unable to

-36-

[LC]

disentangle himself because he could not resist the authority of
his superiors. In essence, he was far more of a conformist than
the other two (although the Viet Cong member, within the structure
of the National Liberation Front, could not be more of a conform-
ist). The monk really wanted to avoid the conflicts of the world,
to retreat and be taken care of, to be permitted to study and not
be bedeviled by secular affairs which he felt unable to manage.
But regardless of this quality, he was heavily engaged in the
struggle and it was of deep significance to him.

The demonstration leader was by far the most bombastic. He
was a man of action and he entered into his activities with bound-
less energy. In him, perhaps more than in any of the others, the
glory of the dramatic moment of protest stood supreme. This was
what he lived for; his arm-waving accounts of flights over rooftops
pursued by the police (dragging two obviously terrified young girls
behind him) were, to say the very least, amazingly impressive.

The Viet Cong member was a thoroughly deadened man. Unless
directly addressed, he stared into space, his expression was stony
and flattened, he never reached out nor truly responded. The only
time he came alive was when he was telling of his exploits. His
eyes would brighten and he held himself with greater dignity, but
as soon as this passed, he would lapse back into a lethargic dulled
apathy - a pattern that I am convinced was lifelong and not

-37-

[LC]

precipitated by imprisonment.

But perhaps what one found oneself more impressed by than
rebelliousness was the opposite dimension; the desire, at times
almost wistful, to be embraced by authority. All were looking for
someone, or some group to acknowledge them, to protect them and to
say that they preferred them over others. Although masked by the
sound of battle, this was the essential quality to which one reacted.
All were looking for a kind, loving father figure, and the very
vehemence of the protest was in itself a plea. More than anything
else they were asking to be loved. It is true their concept of love
was all embracing; of necessity it had to be completely supportive
and completely uncritical. In essence, they were not anti-American,
they were pro-American. They had set up the United States as the
all powerful, all giving father image - the institutionalized sub-
stitute for all that they had missed in their own childhood. To
them we had everything; embodied in us was the capacity to solve all
problems, serve all needs, establish their position in this demo-
niacal and confusing world in which they found themselves.

Unconsciously they viewed themselves as children within the
family constellation vying for parental love and we had committed
the grossest of calumnies; we had not only withheld it from them,
but in their eyes we had given it to others. They were the re-
jected and all the fury and rage that had been stored up before and

-38-

[LC]

not been expressed came out toward the parental substitute - the
United States. Thus does the wan cry for love turn into the ex-
plosion of hatred. Their anger was not directed toward the Viet
Cong - the Viet Cong did not carry the symbolism of the father.
Except for the Viet Cong terrorist, the Viet Cong was the Viet
Cong - dangerous, potent, murderous. As such they understood it
and fought it, but detachedly and without great fervor. The central
issues of the war were being defined far away; to a great extent,
father was taking care of that matter. Although one could hear
bombing every night, these were skirmishes and presented no threat.
The Viet Cong was a realistic danger, and one deals with reality
much differently than one deals with deeply symbolic psychological
fantasy, for example, with much less emotional sturm und drang.

It is my strong impression that the triad of sibling rivalry,
deflected parental hostility and unresolved dependency needs con-
stitutes the central psychological core of anti-Americanism in
Vietnam. Although beyond the scope of this research, the responsi-
bility that the United States bears in fostering this unhappy
situation is one that must be profoundly considered. Observably,
it is true for our relations not only with Vietnam, but with many
other peoples throughout the world, particularly in those countries
that are less developed. It may be an inevitable consequence of
bigness on the one side, and emergent nationalism on the other;

-39-

[LC]

of arrogance and lack of true compassion and understanding on the
part of the powerful, and a sense of internal ineffectualness and
envy, a feeling of denegration and contempt on the part of the
weak. But whatever its origins, it is deserving of much greater
focus than it has received from the scholarly community.

-40-