Thanh Madness

Madness depicted in Thanh differs in comparison to Charles, and the western ways of coping with a traumatic past. Western society depicted in the novel emphasizes that the patient of trauma ought to express how they feel, or what they are thinking in order to aid the victim. Whereas, Vietnamese characters like Thanh choose a different method of coping with their post-war trauma. This is evident as Thanh desires not to think back the past, and move on. Additionally, as Charles requests to know of Thanh’s past, he acts pervasive and states “it’s just my life” (Bergen 111). When Thanh does retell his past, he does so stoically, and the text does not give evidence of verbal emotion, rather Thanh expresses himself through bodily actions. As “Charles

Thanh’s asserts that dwelling on a traumatic past does not do the individual any good, if they wish to progress and individually grow in the future. As it is argued, the actions of regression is significant in coping with trauma, however Thanh expresses that the act of dwelling on the past to comprehend can only backfire. Problematically, attempting to rationalize trauma becomes an irrational action, because it could mentally harm the individual and worsen their state. Whereas Thanh method of dealing with trauma is letting go, and completely moving on from the traumatic event. Insofar as Thanh demonstrates his ability to let go of the past, especially once he was liberated from the reeducation camps. Once Thanh is released from the encampment, he did not desire revenge; Thanh chose to accept the traumatic events that happened, and moved on. However, in the retelling of Thanh’s story, there is a significant tension between Thanh (the presumed rational) and his old companion Hien (the depicted irrational). Thanh’s method of survival is through obedience, as he states in the text “to behave was to survive”

This tension is demonstrated when Charles interacts with neighbor Tomas. However, it is questionable whether Charles’ aggression towards Thomas is appropriate, because Tomas is sleeping with his underage daughter. The effects of this predicament caused Charles discomfort, and in return he desires Tomas to perceive him as a threat if he hurts Del (50). However, this desire to be perceived a threat draws on the tension of balancing a rational, and irrational behavior. This is because Charles is upholding fatherly obligations to protect his children. However, Charles is also required to uphold his duties of respecting his neighbor’s privacy, though he may not agree to what they are doing. Additionally, a deeper form of tension between the rational and irrational is demonstrated when the Charles unwillingly accepts Tomas relationship with Del, because it is for the reasons of economic necessity (49). As Del states to Charles, he ought not do anything brash towards Tomas since he is Charles’ only source of income. Charles admits he must accept to this reality, because he knows if he were to act irrational there would be consequences that would directly affect his children. Furthermore, madness is demonstrated as an innate desire, rather than a physical action/reaction. As it is demonstrated when Charles desired to burn down Tomas’ workshop, envisioning