In Saigon, we sat in on a lecture by Dr. Bui Tran Phuong, president of Hoa Sen University. She is a progressive-minded activist who today focuses on the history of women in Vietnam’s wars. She began the lecture with a brief history of Vietnam which extended beyond the traditional narrative that typically describes French and US involvement in the country. In her history, she explained Vietnam’s lengthy and tenuous history with China – a history which seems to be characterized more by war than by peace. From this long-standing history stems the Vietnamese mentality that war is accepted as a price willingly paid for independence; war is intrinsic to survival and sacrifice is accepted as sometimes being a necessary part of life. The nature of existing as a small nation alongside the massive force of China instilled a source of pride in “standing alone” and maintaining the cultural legacies that have defined Vietnam for centuries. Dr. Bui seemed to credit this mentality with giving Vietnam its strength and persistence in fighting off colonial invasions during the 20th century.

Dr. Bui spoke of some of the cultural changes since the conclusion of the war against America in 1975. For example, she spoke of the reconciliation between Vietnamese through the Doi Moi reforms as indispensable for the healing process within the nation as well as being required for international reconciliation. However, there still exist today cultural divisions between the north and south in Vietnam. From her perspective, corruption is rampant in Hanoi, an area that is morally unsafe. She gave the example of schoolchildren being handed grades not based on merit but on parental bribery. Hanoi was characterized as a socially conservative, corrupt city, while Saigon was presented as a socially progressive and morally accountable city. Having personally spent even less time in Hanoi than I spent in Saigon, and less than two weeks in Vietnam total, it is difficult to discern whether or not this statement is an overgeneralized stereotype, in which case this would reflect the presence of prejudices between the north and south; or if this is an accurate depiction of increased corruption in northern Vietnam, which would then reflect more discernible cultural differences between the two regions.

Working with women, Dr. Bui spoke of the progressive changes that have occurred in Vietnam, particularly in Saigon, regarding cultural attitudes towards women. While she is one of only two women in Saigon to occupy the position of president out of over one hundred universities in the city, the student population reflects greater gender equality. One of her own changes that she has been working towards is installing a greater perception of social equality in relationships between colleagues, faculty, and students. There is the ingrained perception that one must be polite by using titles of inferiority when describing the self to higher-level colleagues, but this serves to detract from one’s legitimacy and qualifications. Instead, she theorizes that by using titles which reflect equality, relationships will be more comfortable and therefore allow for increased communication and progress.

Describing a pervasive mentality in Vietnam that is reluctant to adapting traditional cultural mentalities, she referenced a children’s book that ends in the poignant line, “And everything restarted the same…” This line describes the dangers of not learning from the past through continued tragedy, lack of progress, and repetition of mistakes: the acceptance of war as a way of life that is necessary for survival is at once admirable and tragic. As such, Dr. Bui advocated for a “new Vietnamity” which respects the historical and traditional culture of Vietnam but is manifested in a new, dynamic way.

Walking through the ‘secret cave’ in Halong Bay was a simultaneously breathtaking and somber experience. Breathtaking from its sheer expanses made somber by its transformation into a highly commercialized, unsustainable industry. It is an unsettling paradox: the very process that brought me to experience this spectacular place, the industry that has made this otherwise inaccessible place available to so many people, is at the very least diminishing its majestic qualities and at worst contributing to its ultimate destruction. This reality was inescapable to me: the warnings by the tour directors of “strenuous activity” as they stuffed fat, over-eager tourists with food every two hours, the stairs with lights guiding the path throughout the cave, and the snack and merchandise tents around every corner in the cave and on the water in little boats. Not to mention the evidence imprinted on the cave itself of this enterprise including the scattering of cigarette butts at the entrance, the graffiti decorating the cave walls, and the price stickers that littered the mountainside below the vendors.

On one hand, it is laudable how refined and professional the experience seemed. The overnight trip was well-coordinated, organized, and a fun, awe-inspiring experience. I was struck by how similar this was to the apparent resources made available to the other museums we visited – in Saigon the War Remnants Museum, the Cu Chi Tunnels, the Reunification Palace; in Hanoi the Hoa Lo Prison and the Ho Chi Minh Mausoleum and Museum. All demonstrated a conscious, deliberate attention to professionalism through signage and pamphlets through exhibits and captions or translations of texts. The structure of the museums and their overall appearance generally also reflected this attention to presentation and the impression that lots of time, money, and effort had been spent to construct these national attractions.

However, particularly at the Cu Chi Tunnels and Halong Bay I was unable to shake two disconcerting thoughts: 1) the flagrant and somewhat distracting effort to cater to tourists and 2) the apparent overlooking of the harm to the environment. Distracting when during breaks from the shuffling between hourly activities we would be approached either by snack boats selling crackers and soft drinks or alternatively by the ship’s captain inquiring about the quality of the stay. Harm to the environment through both pollution associated with industrialization and also the harm of human foot traffic. The physical environment of the cave is not designed to support thousands of tourists annually; I was unimpressed by the efforts (or lack thereof) to maintain the integrity of the cave itself. It makes me uncomfortable to imagine what the cave first looked like upon its discovery, before it became widely accessible to the public, and what it will look like in another twenty years. This raises the question of priorities: immediate profits through heavy tourism or long-term sustainability in order to enjoy the benefits of tourism for a long time to come? How can these two ideas be married to provide high profits and allow many people to experience the region’s natural beauty in an ecologically sustainable way?