Have we killed the áo dài?

I should start this by pointing out that I’m as aware as the next human about the invented nature of “tradition” in general and “traditional dress” in particular. I know of the áo dài’s questionably “Vietnamese” roots (looks kinda Khmer now that you mention it), its recent invention (at best a bare 200 years, but really only since the 1920s), and above all how national costumes of any sort tend to promote the objectification if not commodification of women. But all that aside, the áo dài has undeniably become a symbol of Vietnam, ranking up in the top three along with the nón lá and phở. I mean, what else do we have? Honking horns?

Truth be told, there are a lot worse national symbols. If we allow ourselves to put political correctness to one side for just a moment, I think we all can admit that a woman wearing a well-tailored áo dài can be strikingly beautiful. To compare, a young woman in Korea’s national costume, the hanbok, to my mind at least, looks vaguely comical and more than a little uncomfortable. A young woman in an áo dài, on the other hand, looks graceful, demure, and sexy all at the same time. Throw in a Huế accent and she’s pretty much irresistible.

Which is why it saddened me to hear that one of my Vietnamese students had advised her American classmates not to have áo dài made before returning home. As the student explained it, in Vietnam today, áo dài are worn almost exclusively by woman in the service industry, Vietnam Airlines flight attendants, wait staff in certain “traditional” restaurants, and hotel receptionists being prime examples. As a result, the áo dài had taken on certain negative class connotations: essentially it was the uniform of working women. Not quite factory overalls, but close.

While for foreigners and overseas Vietnamese the áo dài remains a beautiful, fashionable, and uniquely Vietnamese style of dress, for at least one young Vietnamese woman, it has taken on a very different set of meanings. In our haste to create a “brand identity” – for Vietnam as much as for Vietnam airlines – have we killed the áo dài?

neoliberalism is alive and well... in Vietam

Okay, I've got to say it. With the possible exception of some policy wonks kept in the basement of the Project for the New American Century, Vietnamese students may well be some of the most unreconstructedly neo-liberal folks in the world.

In class last month during our discussion of urban development projects like "The Manor," I tried to point out the rather specious nature of the claim that they "solve" the problems of rapid urban change. If the problem of urbanization is that the rapidly increasing population of urban poor in places like Hanoi and Saigon does not have access to affordable housing and services, I argued, then it seems questionable whether expensive luxury high-rises can solve anything except the problem of where international capital can make rapid returns.

Happily, though, the Vietnamese students were not taken in by my argument. For them, the problem was less the lack of housing or services for the poor, and more the effect that the increasing population of poor people was having on the quality of life for the rich. Thus luxury developments like the Manor, by providing a spacious, clean, and safe (if sterile) living environment for those who could afford it, really were a solution. Moreover, one student continued, the urban poor really deserved their fate. They had, after all, moved to the city "by choice," and neither government nor society had a responsibility to ensure their access to anything at all. If they didn't like what they got, she added, they could move back to the countryside. Presuming, that is, that their land hadn't been "developed" into a golf course.

Not sure that she really meant what she seemed to be saying, I replied that various societies in history, and even some in the present day, felt that it was important to ensure that all their citizens enjoyed a certain minimum standard of life, often defined to include such things as decent housing, clean water and environment, education, public transportation, and health care. She was unmoved. That might be fine for the wacky Swedes, or even those bland Canadians, but not for Vietnamese. In this nation, people deserved what they got and got what they deserved.

I find this interesting. Is it just a temporary reaction to the perceived failure of socialist policies before đổi mới? Is it that the imported curricula that they study in HANU's Faculties of Management and International Studies carry with them a heavy dose of American-style individualism? Or is it coming from somewhere deeper, from indigenous notions of the individual and their fate? I really don't know. All I know is that the Vietnamese students in our joint class make their American peers look, well, almost communist by comparison. Go figure.