One thing that stands out, at least to me, were your formative years in Vietnam. It sounds like, if I understand your description (obviously the interview was very short without sufficient time for depth and detail) you had a happy, stable childhood up until 1975 when Vietnamese society pretty much collapsed. But then among the chaos of being uprooted you faced a considerable amount of adversity after that.
My life has had sort of the same trajectory. I had a very happy, idyllic childhood from 1957 until my father died prematurely of heart disease in 1968 at which point my mother pretty much fell apart and everything went downhill for me.
My point being that it seems that a peaceful, loving, secure environment during one's formative years is perhaps important, maybe even critical, in shaping the rest of a person's life. Despite all the adversity I faced, for example, after my father's death I managed to complete college and law school and stayed out of trouble. And ( at the risk of being presumptuous) it sounds like you've managed to accomplish a lot as a gifted and successful author despite the chaos.
I was communicating with a friend in California about this issue the other day so it is on my mind; but as a citizen of the world you might be able to understand and relate to this. I was telling my friend how the system we humans have of geo-politically dividing up the world into nation-states (i.e. "countries") is somewhat arbitrary and with the constant warfare between nations arguably very flawed.
My understanding is the idea of dividing the world into nation-states came about with the Treaty of Westphalia about 1650 in an effort to conclude the Thirty Year War in Europe. Along Atlantic Europe an example had been set by four or five spontaneous nation-states that had come into existence in the late middle-ages. These were Spain, Portugal, England. France and perhaps Scotland. The Dutch jurist who crafted the Treaty of Westphalia, Grotius thought that dividing people up by a more or less common language and culture they would feel a sense of commonalty and -- hopefully -- remain peaceful. Obviously it didn't always work out. Instead of warring among themselves the new nations warred against each other often under the pretext of patriotic fervor.
It is perhaps worth noting the ways peoples were grouped before the Treaty of Westphalia and the nation-state configuration. Probably the earliest form of social-political grouping was the clan-tribe of people who shared common ancestor-ship. Later there were empires controlled by a dominant political faction. Not all empires were oppressive. It has been noted that when the Ottoman Turks ruled the Middle-East from about 1500 to about 1900 all the diverse people of that large area, which is today so chaotic, with differing language, cultures and religions, pretty much got along, respected each others differences and lived in peaceful cooperation. It was only after the British took over the lands of the Ottoman Turk empire and oil was discovered in the Middle-East that the region declined into the internecine war and chaos of the last several decades extending to the present time.
Other than tribes, empires and nation-states people have been geo-politically grouped into the feudal manner as in the case of Medieval Europe. This was the Europe that devolved into the Thirty Year War in the late 1500s. Where a petty noble class who owned the feudal manners fought over trivialities such as religious disagreements.
Another fairly minor geopolitical entity was the city-state such as Athens in classical Greece or much of the Italian peninsula in the Middle-Ages.
My point being that we humans haven't done a great job at figuring out how to create geographical boundaries. Such boundaries and borders seem to divide people and make them willing to "patriotically" attack and fight other people behind different borders.
Arguably the League of Nations and then the United Nations were attempts to overcome the problem of the nation-state. And neither of those institutions worked out very well.
-------------------------
You also discuss the current state of fanaticism among people in much of the world today. Perhaps particularly here in the States and in the West. I may be incorrect about this but I see much of this as a reaction to a society in decline in which the collective wealth of society is being increasingly confiscated by the relatively small class of capitalist owners of society. When I was a child in the 1960s wealth in this country (the U.S.) was much more equally distributed. There was a larger middle-class and people (at least among white Americans; I don't want to get into all the racial problems here) could live a pretty comfortable life. Much of that middle-class comfort has been lost as the so-called "1%" take more and more of the wealth of the nation for themselves.
Many Americans sense something is very wrong as their material well-being declines but they don't know exactly what it is that is wrong so they often lash out at scapegoats that they perceive are harming them and taking what had "rightfully" (so it seemed) been theirs. There are many such scapegoats to lash out at but two of the most prominent now are the so-called "illegal migrants" and the "welfare cheaters" who seek to get "something for nothing" from the government. The latter are often perceived to be "too lazy to work" when in fact society does not provide them with enough good paying jobs.
Well, that's just my take on some of the issues you and your interlocutor touched upon in your interview. Sorry to go on so long. As always your essays are great and eye-opening. As I've mentioned before you see the world in a unique and perceptive way that some of us (I have to speak for myself) often cannot.
You must be talking about Linh Phương Supermarket for the cheese. Yes that was my go to place as well. The boss was quite a character with a baritone voice likely shaped by strong cigarettes. After my food shopping was done we had to discuss the alcohol arrangements. I somehow ended up with a Mot Lit Jack more often than not. Great guy, I miss him a lot.
You must be talking about Linh Phương Supermarket for the cheese. Yes that was my go to place as well. The boss was quite a character with a baritone voice likely shaped by strong cigarettes. After my food shopping was done we had to discuss the alcohol arrangements. I somehow ended up with a Mot Lit Jack more often than not. Great guy, I miss him a lot.
Thoroughly enjoyed the interview and your 100 mph commentary. Take care dear Linh!
Thank you for forwarding the interview, Linh.
One thing that stands out, at least to me, were your formative years in Vietnam. It sounds like, if I understand your description (obviously the interview was very short without sufficient time for depth and detail) you had a happy, stable childhood up until 1975 when Vietnamese society pretty much collapsed. But then among the chaos of being uprooted you faced a considerable amount of adversity after that.
My life has had sort of the same trajectory. I had a very happy, idyllic childhood from 1957 until my father died prematurely of heart disease in 1968 at which point my mother pretty much fell apart and everything went downhill for me.
My point being that it seems that a peaceful, loving, secure environment during one's formative years is perhaps important, maybe even critical, in shaping the rest of a person's life. Despite all the adversity I faced, for example, after my father's death I managed to complete college and law school and stayed out of trouble. And ( at the risk of being presumptuous) it sounds like you've managed to accomplish a lot as a gifted and successful author despite the chaos.
I was communicating with a friend in California about this issue the other day so it is on my mind; but as a citizen of the world you might be able to understand and relate to this. I was telling my friend how the system we humans have of geo-politically dividing up the world into nation-states (i.e. "countries") is somewhat arbitrary and with the constant warfare between nations arguably very flawed.
My understanding is the idea of dividing the world into nation-states came about with the Treaty of Westphalia about 1650 in an effort to conclude the Thirty Year War in Europe. Along Atlantic Europe an example had been set by four or five spontaneous nation-states that had come into existence in the late middle-ages. These were Spain, Portugal, England. France and perhaps Scotland. The Dutch jurist who crafted the Treaty of Westphalia, Grotius thought that dividing people up by a more or less common language and culture they would feel a sense of commonalty and -- hopefully -- remain peaceful. Obviously it didn't always work out. Instead of warring among themselves the new nations warred against each other often under the pretext of patriotic fervor.
It is perhaps worth noting the ways peoples were grouped before the Treaty of Westphalia and the nation-state configuration. Probably the earliest form of social-political grouping was the clan-tribe of people who shared common ancestor-ship. Later there were empires controlled by a dominant political faction. Not all empires were oppressive. It has been noted that when the Ottoman Turks ruled the Middle-East from about 1500 to about 1900 all the diverse people of that large area, which is today so chaotic, with differing language, cultures and religions, pretty much got along, respected each others differences and lived in peaceful cooperation. It was only after the British took over the lands of the Ottoman Turk empire and oil was discovered in the Middle-East that the region declined into the internecine war and chaos of the last several decades extending to the present time.
Other than tribes, empires and nation-states people have been geo-politically grouped into the feudal manner as in the case of Medieval Europe. This was the Europe that devolved into the Thirty Year War in the late 1500s. Where a petty noble class who owned the feudal manners fought over trivialities such as religious disagreements.
Another fairly minor geopolitical entity was the city-state such as Athens in classical Greece or much of the Italian peninsula in the Middle-Ages.
My point being that we humans haven't done a great job at figuring out how to create geographical boundaries. Such boundaries and borders seem to divide people and make them willing to "patriotically" attack and fight other people behind different borders.
Arguably the League of Nations and then the United Nations were attempts to overcome the problem of the nation-state. And neither of those institutions worked out very well.
-------------------------
You also discuss the current state of fanaticism among people in much of the world today. Perhaps particularly here in the States and in the West. I may be incorrect about this but I see much of this as a reaction to a society in decline in which the collective wealth of society is being increasingly confiscated by the relatively small class of capitalist owners of society. When I was a child in the 1960s wealth in this country (the U.S.) was much more equally distributed. There was a larger middle-class and people (at least among white Americans; I don't want to get into all the racial problems here) could live a pretty comfortable life. Much of that middle-class comfort has been lost as the so-called "1%" take more and more of the wealth of the nation for themselves.
Many Americans sense something is very wrong as their material well-being declines but they don't know exactly what it is that is wrong so they often lash out at scapegoats that they perceive are harming them and taking what had "rightfully" (so it seemed) been theirs. There are many such scapegoats to lash out at but two of the most prominent now are the so-called "illegal migrants" and the "welfare cheaters" who seek to get "something for nothing" from the government. The latter are often perceived to be "too lazy to work" when in fact society does not provide them with enough good paying jobs.
Well, that's just my take on some of the issues you and your interlocutor touched upon in your interview. Sorry to go on so long. As always your essays are great and eye-opening. As I've mentioned before you see the world in a unique and perceptive way that some of us (I have to speak for myself) often cannot.
Hi Linh,
How about elaborating on this collective trait / personal responsibility thing please ?
It seems it is the crux of al lot of confusion these days !
Cheers
Jerome
it's painful to listen to you. ok, alright, you know, aaah, etc. can't you improve this?
Double post, sorry...
You must be talking about Linh Phương Supermarket for the cheese. Yes that was my go to place as well. The boss was quite a character with a baritone voice likely shaped by strong cigarettes. After my food shopping was done we had to discuss the alcohol arrangements. I somehow ended up with a Mot Lit Jack more often than not. Great guy, I miss him a lot.
You must be talking about Linh Phương Supermarket for the cheese. Yes that was my go to place as well. The boss was quite a character with a baritone voice likely shaped by strong cigarettes. After my food shopping was done we had to discuss the alcohol arrangements. I somehow ended up with a Mot Lit Jack more often than not. Great guy, I miss him a lot.
interesting interview
You should use this photo for your avatar
Hi Craig,
I should use the kid's photo! He's way smarter than I was at that age.
Linh
I don't know if people would buy it, Linh. The accent...
Great interview, btw.
Hi Don,
He found me. I assumed he was in college, so was surprised he was only 15.
Linh