Now that I am back in China and had some time to stew I now feel like it is time for a South East Asia (Vietnam, Laos, and Thailand in my case) retrospective. The first thing I would like to note is that Thailand, particularly Bangkok, is clearly more developed than ether Vietnam or Laos. While Vietnam is trying, and to a fair degree succeeding, in becoming a developed country Laos is simply not. Chiang Rai did feel more like Hanoi in terms of development, but both cities were clearly more developed than Luang Prabang. I would also like to note that I think Luang Prabang is Laos's "model city." The problems I heard about Laos, like starvation level poverty and corruption, are not visible in Luang Prabang; this dosn't mean that these aren't issues Laos faces, it is simply that the government has put there effort into saving face in Luang Prabang for the tourists. Hanoi and all the cities in Thailand felt like better representations of their respective countries than Luang Prabang did.
It is interesting to compare temples in the three countries, since I seemed to spent most of my time in Buddhist temples. Vietnam had temples but they seemed touristy. I did end up in one temple that was actually used by real Vietnamese Buddhists and many of the restaurants had little shrines but the Buddhism was not as visible. I think Luang Prabang gets tourists by marketing itself as a Buddhist temple city. The locals are apparently religious but all the temples did feel like they were set up to handle tourists. The Thai are a remarkable religious people. All of the temples, even the touristy ones, were all used by real Thai Buddhists and basically every public building had a spirt house that people would pray and make offerings to. Another interesting comparison is the attitudes toward their colonial past. Being colonized seems like it plays a big role in the Vietnamese national identity, at least historically. Vietnam is moving past that but it is still very evident in many of the historical sites in Vietnam and I would argue in some of modern Vietnamese foreign policy. While Vietnam and Laos had the same colonizers, the French, Laos seems way more accepting of the French then the Vietnamese. For instance, many young Lao can still speak French while most young Vietnamese can't. I believe that this is because Laos was granted more self government under French administration than Vietnam was. Thailand has a totally different colonial narrative. Thailand was never actually colonized and remained independent through the Age of Imperialism. In Thailand this is attributed to the wise leadership of the House of Chakri (the family of the current Thai monarch). The depictions of The House of Chakri, in particular the late Thai King HM Bhumibol Adulyadej, and Ho Chi Minh were remarkably similar. Both are show as wise leaders who are above criticism and are loved by all. Their images can be seen around, although I saw way more of HM Bhumibol Adulyadej and even the current King HM Maha Vajiralongkorn, who is far less popular than his father, in Thailand than I did Ho Chi Minh in Vietnam. Still, Ho Chi Minh is still on all the money and he is sitting in a glass box in Hanoi (while Bhumibol Adulyadej was also sitting in a glass box when I was in Bangkok the government had plans to cremate him soon). The reverence for Ho Chi Minh extended to Laos, who's current governement was put in place by Ho Chi Minh and the Vietnamese Communists during the Vietnam War. Ho Chi Minh seemed to pop up more randomly in Luang Prabang than he did in Hanoi actually. The relationship between Laos and Vietnam andros and Thailand is kind of odd. All three are ASEAN member states so Lao, Vietnamese, and Thai citizens can all easily travel to and work in any ASEAN member state. This seems to mean that Vietnamese and Lao citizens go to Thailand to work and not the other way around. Furthermore, while the Lao language is actually closely related to Thai (and are actually mutually intelligible) and Thailand (still called Siam thrn) even ruled over parts of Laos for a time, Laos is still closer to Vietnam. While I could go on, this post has to end somewhere and that might as well be here. If I end up feeling like I have more to say I will do a part two.
3 Comments
sharon
1/17/2017 07:38:22 am
very interesting, but what about the green curry?
Reply
Dad
1/17/2017 07:53:49 am
I get the feeling that Ho Chi Minh is an icon, a figure of national pride while the Thai royalty as an almost spiritual, god-like aura that cannot be criticized or ignored, even if they have no true constitutional power.
Reply
Gramma M
1/19/2017 10:50:49 am
Your S.E. Asia commentary sounds like the beginning of a Master's thesis. Waiting for a combined commentary to include your China experiences.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorI am a junior at Juniata College spending a year studying abroad at East China Normal University. Please feel free to join my on my journey to China and beyond. Archives
November 2021
Categories
All
|