While northern writers and critics since 1945 until recently considered literary essays, investigative reportage, diary, memoir, correspondence and travelogue as subgenres of kí, southern writers did not group them into one umbrella term like that but considered them as different literary genres. In Introduction to South Vietnamese Literature, V Phiến shows that writers in the South did not pay much attention to theorizing kí. While northern writers and critics had a long discussion and debate over kí in early 1 60s so thern writers erely inherite Vũ Ngọc Ph n theory of kí, which was visibly influenced by French criticism and genre theory.194
In à v ệ đ (Modern Writers Vũ Ngọc Ph n consi ers bút kí as equivalent to literary essays (including personal essays and critical essays) in Western literature. Bút kí had roots both in Western and Vietnamese literary traditions.195 He argues that p ó ự (investigative reportage/investigative reportage), lịc ử kí ự (historical reportage), t ệ kí (biography) as modes of narrative. These modes are different from the mode of literary essays: while the former focus on events, the latter put importance on arguments and feelings. He also distinguishes lịc ử t t t (historical novels) from historical reportage and biography. He emphasizes that investigative reportage, historical reportage, and biography should not contain any fictional detail but facts only.196
i il r to Ph n Phiến ifferenti tes the liter ry ess y fro investig tive report ge i ry memoir and travelogue. He explains that in literary essays, events are not important but arguments and feelings are. They play an important role in literary reportages.197 However, he also uses kí as the umbrella term for the latter.
194
See Chapter 2.
195 See Vũ Ngọc Phan, à V H ệ i (Modern Writers) n e n ( noi Văn học, 1998), 454. 196
See Vũ Ngọc Phan, pp. 542–3, 552.
197 See Võ Phiến, pp. 216– 7 Origin l text in Vietn ese “Chúng t chọn cái bên sáng tác hướng v ngh
thu t; c n bên ki h y đư v địa hạt nghiên c u khảo lu n Đ đồng ý v nội dung rồi, xin gọi nó là tùy bút, thay vì bút kí. Vì chữ kí thấy không hợp. Ở đây chuy n ghi chép sự vi c không phải là cái quan trọng. Kí và
99
According to Phan in Nhà v ệ đ (Modern Writers), bút kí is equivalent to what we call tùy bút [literary essays], and p ó ự [investigative reportage/ investigative reportage] is equivalent to what we call kí. In kí, besides p ó ự, we would like to include kí ự [historical reportage], ồ kí [memoir], t p kí [random reportage/notes], which ll foc s on recor ing events Th t is why we w nt to repl ce Vũ’s bút kí with the term tùy bút in order to distinguish bút and kí. If tùy bút focuses on feelings, kí focuses on recording events; if tùy bút focuses on literary techniques, kí foc ses on re lity… […] Accor ing to Phạ Văn 198, kí e br ces s bgenres s ch s “ph ng sự bút kí, tùy bút, thư tr y n kí” Th t is not ppropri te 199
Ng yễn iến Lê memoir also reveals that southern writers did distinguish kí and tùy bút “ i not compose any poem, but was interested in writing kinds of kí (tr velog e e oir n l n [essays]( ị l ậ [critical essays], c l ậ [review], tùy bút [literary essays]) as well as articles abo t e c tion n liter t re” 200
In summary, during 1954–1975, southern writers were different to northern ones because they did not put literary essays and biography into the same group with historical reportage, investigative reportage, memoir and travelogue under the umbrella name kí. Because of the lack of material, it is not clear whether southern writers used the term kí to group historical
phóng sự cốt ghi nh n thực tại đi sát thực tại Trong t y bút cũng c thực tại, có sự vi c, có tài li nhiên. Tùy bút c a Phạ Đình có, tùy bút c a Nguyễn T ân cũng c nữa: có ván cầu Hi n Lương đếm kỹ t ng tấm ch ng hạn; nhưng những cái đ kh ng l r giá trị c a tác phẩm, không phải l đ c điểm c văn loại”
198
Phạ Văn idea of the subgenres of kí reflects Northern criticism and theory of kí since 1960s up to recently.
199
Võ Phiến, pp. 243– Origin l text in Vietn ese “Trước ki Vũ Ngọc Phan phân làm hai bộ môn: bút kí và phóng sự n y c người (như Phạ Văn gộp lại làm một, gọi chung là kí. Theo cái gọi c Vũ Ngọc Ph n trong Nh văn hi n đại thì bút kí tương ng với bộ môn mà chúng tôi gọi là tùy bút; còn phóng sự gần tương ng với cái mà chúng tôi xin gọi là kí. Trong bộ môn kí, ngoài phóng sự ra, chúng tôi muốn bao gồm luôn cả các loại: kí sự, hồi kí, tạp kí, tất cả đ u có một điểm chung là n ng v ghi chép sự vi c. B i điểm ấy, bộ n trước chúng t i đ th y chữ bút kí c ng Vũ r chữ tùy bút, ch ý là muốn phân bi t bút với kí, tách cái này ra khỏi cái kia. Một bên n ng v cả ngh ột bên thiên v ghi chép; một bên chú trọng ngh thu t, sáng tạo, một bên chú trọng thực tại […] C n theo Phạ Văn thì thể kí bao gồm phóng sự, bút kí, t y bút thư tr y n kí’ Như thế e không n”
200 Nguyễn Hiến Lê. Origin l text in Vietn ese “t i kh ng l thơ kh ng viết tiểu thuyết, mà thích loại kí
100
and investigative reportage, memoir and travelogue or not. However, after 1975, in Introduction
to South Vietnamese Literature (1986) and My Writing Career ( 6 both Phiến n Ng yễn Lê
two popular writers of southern literature between 1954–1975, used the term kí to refer to these genres. The reason for the variety of conceptions of ki is in part dependent on local circumstances and in part on literary history, for in Vietnamese medieval literature, kí referred to any nonfictional narrative.
Altho gh so thern writers’ theory of kí was different to one of northern writers, kí nevertheless remained a popular genre in southern literature between 1954 and 1975. Similar to northern kí, the most popular topic in kí in so thern liter t re w s the w r V Phiến sserts the abundance and diversity of kí on the war and distinguishes the development of kí into two perio s before 6 (the first rep blic of the o th n er Ng Đình Di government) and after 1963 (the second republic of the South). He also emphasizes the close relationship between investig tive report ge n the serio sness of the sit tion “The ore serio s the politic l conflicts were, the more memoirs were published; the fiercer the battles were, the more investig tive report ges ppe re ” 201
Phiến even sserte th t while fter 5 in the North investig tive report ge is ppe re bec se no one w s llowe to s y nything bo t soci l ineq lities “kí is one of the specialities of southern literature during 1954– 75” 202 He believes that in the South, writers were free to reveal social evils as well as wrongdoings by politicians. At this point Võ seems to be one–sided: in fact, the wrongdoings by politicians were only revealed after they were no longer in power.203 Phiến lso rg es th t kí in the South was very sincere, accurate because it was out of
201
Võ Phiến. 246. Origin l text in Vietn ese “chính trường c ng s i động hồi kí càng nhi u, chiến trường c ng s i động phóng sự càng nhi ”
202 Ibid, Origin l text in Vietn ese “kí l cái đ c bi t c văn học mi n Nam trong thời kỳ 1954–
75”
203 For ex ples see C o Văn L n B ò lịch sử (By the Flow of History, 1965), Lê Tử Hùng Bốn
tướ à L t (Fo r Gener ls of Đ Lạt, 1971), and Những bí mật cách m ng 1–11–1963 (Secrets of the Coup on 1st November 1963, 1971).
101
the control of power.204 owever he lso betr ys hi self by cl i ing th t “There w s no kí which is against the war or sentimental, utopian. There was no kí which was leftist or coward. There was no secret communist agent among kí writers” 205 The co ent s ggests th t V Phiến h s equated the point of view of southern writers to the official one of the government of the South. Later, some intellectuals who were also southern writers between 1954– 75 like Phiến pointe out that how Phiến anti–communism influenced the way he selected and criticized works of southern writers in Introduction to South Vietnamese Literature. He left out, for example, writers of the journal T ì bầ and the literary group T á độ. The works of other leftist intellectuals such s Ng yễn Văn Tr ng n Vũ ạnh were lso not entione in the book 206
n s ry fro Phiến book, it can be seen that kí in southern literature during the Vietnam War was a popular genre. Unlike northern literature of the same period, investigative reportage was not absent but relatively active. However, it is impossible to say that southern kí during the war was absolutely objective because it was independent from political influence. The following parts of this chapter will argue this case.