Facul ad de Filología
GRADO EN ESTUDIOS INGLESES
TRABAJO DE FIN DE GRADO
CURSO: 2023/2024
Tí ulo: “I was w ong, Ma. We we e bo n om beau y”: The
A icula ion o Pos -Colonial T auma in Ocean Vuong’s On Ea h
We’ e B ie ly Go geous
Alumno: Daniel Alcobendas Quin ana
Fi mado:
Tu o : Ca olina Sánchez-Palencia Ca azo
1
“I was w ong, Ma. We we e bo n om beau y”: The A icula ion o Pos -Colonial
T auma in Ocean Vuong’s On Ea h We’ e B ie ly Go geous
Table o Con en s
1. In oduc ion .......................................................................................................................... 2
2. In he c oss oads o auma, language, and impe ialism ................................................. 3
3. Analysis o On Ea h We’ e B ie ly Go geous ..................................................................... 8
3.1. English and Vie namese: (M)O he ongue and o phan ongue ............................... 9
3.2. Memo y and auma ................................................................................................... 13
3.3. The he o ic o healing ................................................................................................ 16
4. Conclusions ......................................................................................................................... 21
5. Wo ks ci ed ......................................................................................................................... 24
2
1. In oduc ion
He e a ou sea-washed, sunse ga es shall s and
A migh y woman wi h a o ch, whose lame
Is he imp isoned ligh ning, and he name
Mo he o Exiles.
—Emma Laza us, “The New Colossus”
Th oughou he 20 h cen u y, many we e displaced om hei homelands because o
impe ialis ic wa s whe e he Uni ed S a es o Ame ica played a undamen al ole. The bes
example o he impe ialis ic p ac ices o he US is ound in he Vie nam Wa , an e en ha has
been ma ked in public consciousness as he mos ashaming de ea in US his o y.
Usually, mos media —be i books, ilms o TV shows— whe e he Vie nam Wa is a cen al
issue is old om he Ame ican pe spec i e, mos ly dealing wi h he s uggles and ha dships
Ame ican soldie s wen h ough in Vie namese soil and he auma ic sca s he wa has le on
hem. None heless, he e ec s o he wa in he Vie namese popula ion a e ne e shown, hence,
i is impo an o add ess wha happened wi h he Vie namese people a e he wa . These
p oduc s a e usually male cen ed na a i es old om he pe spec i e o male comba an s and
e e ans, and o en emphasize alues such as pa io ism and he oism. No only ha , bu he
a i ude o he Ame ican soldie s in mos media se du ing he Vie nam Wa is condescending
and pa onizing, pic u ing hemsel es as sa iou s. Hence, he ac ha new media whe e emale
and quee bodies a e he cen e o he na a i e —as in he case ha will be analysed in his
disse a ion— is a de ail wo h o conside in how he pe cep ion o his e en is changing
h oughou ime.
A e he Vie nam Wa ended in 1975, he numbe o Vie namese e ugees in he US ose o
130.000 due o an ambi ious p og am ca ied ou by he go e nmen (Yamane 2). The
Vie namese popula ion g ew o a poin ha i cons i u ed i sel as he ou h la ges Asian
Ame ican e hnic g oup (3). Rega ding he si ua ion o Vie namese e ugees a e he Vie nam
Wa , Ocean Vuong has been one o he la es and mos enowned au ho s o deal wi h his opic.
Vuong’s wo k is plagued wi h e e ences o he wa , o his amily su e ing he endless iolence
ha came wi h i , and o he auma o e i ing hose momen s. Wha is mo e su p ising abou
his wo k is ha Vuong was bo n 13 yea s a e he wa ended. Consequen ly, i is wo h o ask
how he wa has been so pe meable in his poe y and ic ion.
3
This disse a ion aims o s udy how Vuong’s semi-biog aphical no el On Ea h We’ e
B ie ly Go geous (2019) deals wi h auma, memo y and iolence h ough a close analysis o
how language a icula es he p ocess o gene a ional auma. A mixed pe spec i e o pos -
colonial app oaches o language and auma s udies will be employed in hope o p o iding a
de ailed examina ion.
2. In he c oss oads o auma, language, and impe ialism
In he case o Vuong’s no el, —and, hus, he Vie namese case— he e en s o he
Vie nam Wa , al hough no complying wi h a ex book de ini ion o colonialism, and he
Ame ican in e en ion in he con lic a e undeniably mo i a ed by impe ialis ic easons. In he
con ex o he Cold Wa and he decoloniza ion o A ica and Asia, i is un hinkable o he
Uni ed S a es o ecu o he same colonial poli ics ha we e p ac ised du ing he 19 h cen u y.
These new colonial ac ics ocus on he in eg a ion o p e iously colonised coun ies o he
Wes e n wo ld o p e en he in luence o he So ie Union in hese coun ies:
Success depended on he de elopmen o economic in e dependence be ween Sou heas
Asia as a supplie o aw ma e ials and Japan, Wes e n Eu ope, and India as supplie s o
inished goods. Al hough only o "seconda y s a egic impo ance" by i sel , Sou heas
Asia ne e heless ep esen ed "a i al segmen on he line o con ainmen ." "I SEA is
held," Kennan explained, " he links will exis o he de elopmen o an in e dependen
and in eg a ed coun e o ce o S alinism in his qua e o he wo ld." He s essed he
need o an Ame ican policy designed " o con ain and s eadily educe K emlin
in luence," he eby allowing he egion " o de elop in ha mony wi h he A lan ic
communi y. (Hixson 151)
Knowing he easons o he Ame ican in e en ion in Vie nam, i is easonable o acknowledge
Vuong’s no el as a pos -colonial wo k, an a emp o na a e he auma c ea ed by colonial
p ac ices in his communi y, and mainly, in his amily.
In Ca hy Ca u h’s wo ds, auma is “an o e whelming expe ience o sudden o
ca as ophic e en s in which he esponse o he e en occu s in he o en delayed, uncon olled
epe i i e appea ance o hallucina ions and o he in usi e phenomena.” (11) T auma s udies
schola s such as Ca u h ha e ied o p o ide an analy ical amewo k o explain he di icul ies
o na a ing auma ic expe iences. Fo Ca u h, “[ ]h ough he no ion o auma, I will a gue,
we can unde s and ha a e hinking o e e ence is aimed no a elimina ing his o y bu a
4
esi ua ing i in ou unde s anding, ha is, a p ecisely pe mi ing his o y o a ise whe e
immedia e unde s anding may no .” (11) T auma can only be comp ehensible h ough he
he o ical ools ound in na a i e. The e o e, he need o p ocess and unde s and auma
awakens a li e a y sensibili y, and i is in his necessi y o ell ha auma s udies emphasize i s
s udy o he c ea i e p ocess.
Ne e heless, Ca u h and o he auma schola s ha e been igh ully c i icised o hei
Eu ocen ic biases and o he lack o a en ion paid o non-Wes e n eali ies, which is e en
mo e agg a a ing when conside ing ha “ auma heo y con iden ly announced i sel as an
essen ial appa a us o unde s anding ‘ he eal wo ld’ and e en as a po en ial means o
changing i o he be e .” (C aps 45) S e C aps signals h ee main mis akes in auma
schola ship:
[T]hey ma ginalize o igno e auma ic expe iences o non-Wes e n o mino i y cul u es;
hey end o ake o g an ed he uni e sal alidi y o de ini ions o auma and eco e y
ha ha e de eloped ou o he his o y o Wes e n mode ni y; and hey o en a ou o
e en p esc ibe a mode nis aes he ic o agmen a ion and apo ia as uniquely sui ed o
he ask o bea ing wi ness o auma. (46)
F om his b ie accoun o he p oblems which auma heo y p esen s we can de elop a mo e
complex amewo k in which ac o s such as impe ialism will no be le unadd essed, bu , on
he con a y, hey will play a key ole in unde s anding how auma eme ges and beha es in
pos -colonial se ings.
When alking abou auma, i is c ucial o ocus on he ma e ial condi ions ha su ound
he auma ised indi idual and ecognize ha his indi idual auma may ha e also a ec ed he
whole g oup o which his indi idual belongs. Fo example, impe ialism has no only had
economic and poli ical consequences, bu i has also supposed a collec i e auma o he
colonised people. F an z Fanon paid special a en ion o he psychological ou comes o
colonisa ion. Fo him, he co e o he p oblem is he in e io i y complex ha colonialism has
caused on colonised popula ion: “Howe e pain ul i may be o me o accep his conclusion,
I am obliged o s a e i : Fo he black man he e is only one des iny. And i is whi e.” (12) Fanon
exempli ies he impo ance o hinking abou auma as a p oduc o dynamics o opp ession.
Pos -colonial app oaches o language and he di icul ies o na a ing he expe ience o
being colonised in he language o he Empi e become a g ea complemen o he analysis o
a icula ing auma in pos -colonial con ex s. This mul i-modal app oach o he expe iences o
5
auma ised collec i es p o ides a new laye o deepness and place he cause o auma as he
esul o he dynamics o impe ialism in he colonised popula ion. Schola s such as I ene Visse
de ends he need o a mo e comple e app oach o auma: “As a e y complex phenomenon,
auma de ies he cons uc ion o a single heo e ical amewo k o add ess and in e p e i s
mul i a ious complexi ies in pos colonial li e a y s udies.” (111)
In his amous essay Decolonising he Mind (1986), Ngũgĩ wa Thiong’o exp esses how
“[c]ul u e is almos indis inguishable o h he language ha makes possible i s genesis g ow h
banking, a icula ion and indeed i s ansmission om one gene a ion o he nex .” (15)
The e o e, he inal goal o impe ialism is “[ ]o con ol a people's cul u e is o con ol hei ools
o sel -de ini ion in ela ionship o o he s.” (16)
Wa Thiong’o’s s ance on language is well known, mos o his wo k is w i en in Kikuyu
because he does no belie e ha English is an app op ia e language o ep esen A ican
s uggles. Howe e , his hough s on language and cul u e en angle in a mo e complex con ex
when we look a i s and second-gene a ion immig an s. I belie e ha in immig an pos -
colonial li e a u e he English language is an obs acle, bu one ha is inescapable and mus be
c i ically deal wi h and used as a ehicle o sub e sion.
The language o he Empi e is p esen in he li e o immig an s who mo e o he
me opolis, o whom ha language is some hing ha mus be con on ed as hei li es de elop
in i and i pe mea es hei wo ld iew. Consequen ly, I would a gue ha e en hough English
p esen s p oblems in he a icula ion o auma, as he iolence exe ed by he language i sel
con ibu es o ueling he aliena ion o he indi idual, I obse e a kind o “shock he apy” in
Vuong’s wo k when dealing and na a ing auma in English, as he language —and, o wa
Thiong’o, cul u e— o he Empi e is a eali y ha mus be amed and subjuga ed o he
necessi ies o colonized popula ion because “[ ]he c ucial unc ion o language as a medium o
powe demands ha pos -colonial w i ing de ines i sel by seizing he language o he cen e
and e-placing i in a discou se ully adap ed o he colonized place.” (Ashc o e al. 37)
To achie e a be e unde s anding o how his Vie namese he i age a ec s his p esen
wo k and li e in he USA and how English becomes an impe a i e in his w i ing, he concep
“Thi d Space”, enuncia ed by Homi K. Bhabha, p o ides a g ea insigh in how pos -colonial
iden i ies a e de eloped. Bhabha de ined he Thi d Space as he place “which gi es ise o
some hing di e en , some hing new and un ecognizable, a new a ea o nego ia ion o meaning
and ep esen a ion.” (Ru he o d 211)
6
The Thi d Space akes om he cul u e o he coun y o o igin and he coun y o
des ina ion. This hyb idi y b eaks he bina y Sel -O he cons uc ed in Wes e n hough , and
c ea es a dimension whe e he s uggles and auma o colonised popula ions can be na a ed
and deal wi h:
I is ha Thi d Space, hough un ep esen able in i sel , which cons i u es he discu si e
condi ions o enuncia ion ha ensu e ha he meaning and symbols o cul u e ha e no
p imo dial uni y o ixi y; ha e en he same signs can be app op ia ed, ansla ed,
ehis o icized, and ead anew … Such an in e en ion qui e p ope ly challenges ou
sense o he his o ical iden i y o cul u e as a homogenizing, uni ying o ce,
au hen ica ed by he o igina y Pas , kep ali e in he na ional adi ion o he People. In
o he wo ds, he dis up i e empo ali y o enuncia ion displaces he na a i e o he
Wes e n na ion. (Bhabha 208)
Th ough his hyb id iden i y a much mo e comple e iew o he si ua ion is po ayed, he pos -
colonial wo k is placed in a luid and e e -changing place o con ac be ween cul u es ha akes
in o accoun he se e al di e en condi ions ha con e ge o de elop he indi idual and he
communi y.
I is in his “con ac zone” whe e we can unde s and colonial dynamics “no in e ms o
sepa a eness, bu in e ms o co-p esence, in e ac ion, in e locking unde s andings and
p ac ices, and o en wi hin adically asymme ical ela ions o powe .” (P a 8) Rega ding his
con ac zone o which Ma y Louise P a e e s, she makes an in e es ing analysis o he
encla es o mig an communi ies in he me opolis. Fo P a , his phenomenon “implies dual
ci izenship, bo h li e ally, and, in an exis en ial sense, o a kind o doubling o he sel in o
pa allel iden i ies in one place and he o he , one language and ano he . This can be bo h a
agmen ing and empowe ing expe ience.” (242) The con adic o y expe ience o his
occu ence is e lec ed in my s ance, p e iously men ioned, o he impe ial language as iolen
bu sub e si e.
Bhabha’s Thi d Space and P a ’s con ac zone p o ide us wi h he si e in which he
colony and he Empi e collide and bi h he pos -colonial expe ience. The li e a u e bo n ou o
his exp ession mi o s he asymme ical powe dynamics o he colony and he Empi e and
how hese communi ies expe ience “ hei ci izenship in a o m o an o en pe manen
‘awayness’.” (P a 242) Ob iously, we canno assume ha a sense o ‘equalness’ de i es om
hese loci, unde Wes e n ideological appa a uses hese people a e s ill o he ed.
7
Addi ionally, in his analysis o he o igins o auma i is impe a i e o ocus on he
his o y o hese popula ions and how auma is ansmi ed om one gene a ion o he nex . On
his ma e , he concep o “pos memo y”, enuncia ed by Ma ianne Hi sch p o ides a g ea
insigh in his p ocess:
Pos memo y desc ibes he ela ionship ha he “gene a ion a e ” bea s o he pe sonal,
collec i e, and cul u al auma o ans o ma ion o hose who came be o e – o e en s
ha hey “ emembe ” only by means o he s o ies, images and beha io s among which
hey g ew up–. Bu hese e en s we e ansmi ed o hem so deeply and a ec i ely as
o seem o cons i u e memo ies in hei own igh . Pos memo y’s connec ion o he pas
is hus no ac ually media ed by ecall, bu by imagina i e in es men , p ojec ion, and
c ea ion. (172)
T auma becomes a bu den ha pe mea es a whole communi y o gene a ions, so he new
gene a ion ca ies he expe iences and li es o i s ances o s and a e no able o escape he
colonial dynamics o cen e-ma gins es ablished by impe ial s a es in he pas . Consequen ly,
hey need o deal wi h a double auma, he pas and he cu en . In his con ex , na a ion
eme ges as he only possible way whe e i is concei able ha “amid he aes he ics o loss and
mou ning, o make space o memo ies o esis ance and he an icipa ion o change – o mobilize
memo y and pos memo y o ien ed no only o he pas , bu also owa d a mo e hope ul u u e.”
(Hi sch 175)
Thus, ic ion ac s as a ool o poli ical esis ance, i aces he na a i e o he Empi e
and “[i] makes space o al e na i e po en ial his o ies, enjoining us o imagine wha migh
ha e been, in addi ion o wha was. I a emp s o ci cum en linea ajec o ies leading,
ine i ably, o disas e .” (175) Na a ion allows he colonised popula ion o b eak wi h wha i is
imposed o hem, o ind a new iden i y in he pos -colonial se ing. Fu he mo e, pos memo y
ic ion acknowledges he ex as a locus o in-be weenness o he p ecolonial and he pos -
colonial — he al eady men ioned Thi d Space— and i is in his space ha emancipa o y
linguis ic s a egies occu .
I align wi h Fanon’s asse ions ha “[e] e y colonized people —in o he wo ds, e e y
people in whose soul an in e io i y complex has been c ea ed by he dea h and bu ial o i s local
cul u al o iginali y— inds i sel ace o ace wi h he language o he ci ilizing na ion; ha is,
wi h he cul u e o he mo he coun y.” (18) Because his ab up and asymme ic encoun e o
8
cul u es canno be denied, i is because o his clash ha we mus examine he use o English
(o o he impe ial languages) as he ehicula language in pos -colonial na a i es.
Finally, al hough hey a e no pos -colonial schola s hemsel es, Gilles Deleuze and
Felix Gua a i’s wo ks, speci ically hei book Ka ka: Towa ds a Mino Li e a u e (1975) can
p o ide us wi h ano he analy ical amewo k i we conside Vuong’s no el pa o a “mino
li e a u e” acco ding o hei c i e ia. Fo Deleuze and Gua a i, a mino li e a u e mus euni e
he ollowing condi ions:
The h ee cha ac e is ics o mino li e a u e a e he de e i o ializa ion o language, he
connec ion o he indi idual o a poli ical immediacy, and he collec i e assemblage o
enuncia ion. We migh as well say ha mino no longe designa es speci ic li e a u es
bu he e olu iona y condi ions o e e y li e a u e wi hin he hea o wha is called
g ea (o es ablished) li e a u e. (18)
Vuong no el, as I will demons a e in he analysis o he no el, mee s e e y c i e ion o he
no el o be acknowledged as a li e a y wo k belonging o a mino li e a u e. Howe e , al hough
I belie e ha he h ee cha ac e is ics a e pi o al o his analysis, I am pa icula ly in e es ed
in he ques ion o language, he de e i o ializa ion and consequen e e i o ializa ion o an
imposed language esona es wi h many pos -colonial s ances owa ds language (Ashc o e al.
1989), so he addi ion o Deleuze and Gua a i’s pe spec i e on language o he p e iously
men ioned pos -colonial schola s’ heo ies assembles pe ec ly in his analy ical amewo k.
Vuong’s adop ion o a mino li e a u e opens o him a way o ela ing o a wo ld o which he
is bo h pa o and alien o and his ex becomes a way o media ing his mino i y g oup wi hin
a majo language and a majo socie y.
The ex unde analysis in his disse a ion is no only a wo k o ic ion, bu a le e om
a son o a mo he who canno ead. I is an —a i s glance, u ile— a emp by a son o
communica e wi h he mo he , bu i is no only ha . He aims o ell he s o y o he wo ld, o
keep he memo y ali e, and o do epa a i e jus ice.
3. Analysis o On Ea h We’ e B ie ly Go geous
Vuong’s no el commences wi h he wo ds “Dea Ma // I am w i ing o each you—
e en i each wo d I pu down is a wo d u he om whe e you a e.” (3) F om he e y
beginning he ela ionship o Li le Dog, he na a o , and Rose, his mo he , is simply
impossible. The e is an immeasu able dis ance be ween hem because she canno ead wha he
15
This collec i e enuncia ion h ough he indi idual na a o is eminen ly poli ical
because in mino li e a u e “i s c amped space o ces each indi idual in igue o connec
immedia ely o poli ics.” (Deleuze and Gua a i 17) The s o y o his amily is he s o y o e e y
Vie namese e ugee and he s uggles hey mus o e come o su i e in Ame ica. When Li le
Dog desc ibes he nail salon in communal e ms, he says: “whe e ou child en a e aised” and
“whe e, in he back ooms, ou women squa on he loo o e huge woks ha pop and sizzle
o e elec ic bu ne s.” (Vuong 79, emphasis mine) The wo kplace in ades he domes ic and
des oys he bounda y be ween he wo spaces, which anspo s he colonial-capi alis
dynamics o he wo kplace o he ealm o he house. This impossibili y o escape poli ics e en
in he mos p i a e locus o he amily makes e e y expe ience li ed in Li le Dog’s amily
poli ical, and by he sole ac o w i ing abou i , i is a esis ance o he imposed na a i es he
Empi e o ces on hem: “The li e a y machine hus becomes he elay o a e olu iona y
machine- o-come.” (Deleuze and Gua a i 18)
Li le Dog, none heless, is awa e o how he sole ac o w i ing in English ep oduces
ha same iolence he is ying o o e come. In ela ion o he idea ha language is pu ely
ideological, D’U so e e s o Louis Al husse Ideological S a e appa a uses and concei es
syn ax as:
[A] se o ules, p inciples, and p ocesses ha go e n he s uc u e o sen ences wi hin
a language—and is ein o ced by s a e au ho i y h ough educa ional, legisla i e, and
poli ical appa a uses— hen syn ax may be conside ed an ideology: an imagined se o
na a i es which connec s indi iduals o hei eal condi ions o exis ence and
simul aneously subjec s indi iduals o a highe au ho i y. (1)
The e o e, English ein o ces a ce ain se o ideas ha ma e ialize in discou se, such as
iolence, which Li le Dog is despe a e o escape om:
You killed ha poem, we say. You’ e a kille . You came in o ha no el guns blazing. I
am hamme ing his pa ag aph, I am banging hem ou , we say. I owned ha wo kshop.
I shu i down. I c ushed hem. We smashed he compe i ion. I’m w es ling wi h he
muse. The s a e, whe e people li e, is a ba leg ound s a e. The audience a a ge
audience. “Good o you, man,” a man once said o me a a pa y, “you’ e making a
killing wi h poe y. You’ e knockin’ ’em dead.” (Vuong 179)
Bu e en hough he collec s all o hese agg essi e me apho s, he knows how much powe hey
hold because, as Milan Kunde a w i es, “me apho s a e dange ous. Me apho s a e no o be
16
i led wi h. A single me apho can gi e bi h o lo e.” (17, my ansla ion) The e o e, i English
allows his c ea i e po en ial “why can’ he language o c ea i i y be he language o
egene a ion?” (Vuong 179) The ins umen aliza ion o he English language allows Vuong o
c i ically engage wi h he expe iences o his amily and o c ea e a na a i e in which “ o impose
on appa en ly chao ic episodes a pe cei ed sequence, whe he o no ha sequence was
pe cei ed in an iden ical way du ing he pe iod ha is being escued om obli ion by memo y
and language.” (Lange 41) The es imonies he escues om he mo he and he g andmo he
a e insc ibed in o a na a i e o y o make sense o hem. By being na a i ized, he i a ional
and ung aspable na u e o he auma ic e en can inally be add essed; Li le Dog is no elling
“a s o y so much as a shipw eck— he pieces loa ing, inally legible.” (Vuong 190)
This c i ical engagemen , which is c ucial o he p ocess o na a i iza ion o auma ic
e en s, eme ges om he dis ance ha exis s be ween he na a o and he English language, i
allows him o na a e emo ionally cha ged expe iences wi h a ce ain emo eness. This dis ance
does no in e e e wi h he na a ion, on he con a y, I a gue ha his w i ing enjoys a c i ical
pe spec i e ha pe ec ly assembles wi h he d ama ic expe iences o he wa , and ha his
b oken syn ax and expe imen al s yle e lec s he no el’s depic ion o mo al, psychological,
sexual and cul u al disjunc ions.
3.3. The he o ic o healing
Li le Dog o en uses animal me apho s o symbolize his expe iences and hose o his
amily, u he mo e, he explici ly add esses his esou ce a he end o he no el: “Wha we
would gi e o ha e he uined li es o animals ell a human s o y—when ou li es a e in
hemsel es he s o y o animals.” (242) He w i es abou se e al animals, bu o he pu pose o
my analysis I will ocus on he mona chs and he bu aloes as I belie e hey a e he mos ui ul
o unde s and my a gumen .
Li le Dog’s le e s a e plagued wi h e e ences o he mig a ions o he mona chs, which
clea ly e e ences hei own mig a ion om Vie nam: “The mona chs ha ly sou h will no
make i back no h. Each depa u e, hen, is inal. Only hei child en e u n; only he u u e
e isi s he pas .” (8) This e isi a ion is bo h physical, when Li le Dog goes o Vie nam o bu y
Lan, and symbolical, in he o m o he pos memo ies he inhe i ed om Lan and Rose which
“can become a p ac ice o epai and ans o ma ion. I eminds o mul iple pas s while acing
po en ial u u es.” (Hi sch 175) In addi ion, hese me apho s co-exis wi h explici memo ies o
he wa :
17
Some imes, I imagine he mona chs leeing no win e bu he napalm clouds o you
childhood in Vie nam. I imagine hem lying om he blazed blas s unsca hed, hei iny
black-and- ed wings ji e ing like deb is ha kep blowing, o housands o miles ac oss
he sky, so ha , looking up, you can no longe a hom he explosion hey came om,
only a amily o bu e lies loa ing in clean, cool ai , hei wings inally, a e so many
con lag a ions, i ep oo . (14)
In e e y ins ance whe e hese me apho s appea , he e is a conscious s i e owa ds beau y, o
Vuong, beau y is a mean o heal auma and o unde s and i , and h ough he healing o his own
auma he aims o a ec his own amily and help hem h ough he p ocess. This unb eakable
connec ion is emphasized in ano he animal me apho , bu aloes:
One a e noon, while wa ching TV wi h Lan, we saw a he d o bu alo un, single ile,
o a cli , a whole s eaming ow o hem hunde ing o he moun ain in Technicolo .
“Why hey die hemsel es like ha ?” she asked, mou h open. Like usual, I made
some hing up on he spo : “They don’ mean o, G andma. They’ e jus ollowing hei
amily. Tha ’s all. They don’ know i ’s a cli . (179)
Li le Dog is ollowing he same pa h ha his amily has ollowed, one o auma ic iolence
ha ends in despai and pain. Mona chs symbolize he healing om auma and bu aloes he
seemingly una oidable des iny ha he sca o he wa has posed on him h ough his amily’s
s o y. I is a he end o he no el whe e hese wo animals in e lock in a ca ha ic esolu ion
ha b ings he no el’s p o agonis o a comple e unde s anding o wha Rose, Lan and he ha e
gone h ough:
I hink o he bu aloes somewhe e, maybe in No h Dako a o Mon ana, hei shoulde s
ippling in slow mo ion as hey ace o he cli , hei b own bodies bo lenecked a he
na ow p ecipice … And jus as he i s one s eps o he cli , on o ai , he o e e
no hing below, hey igni e in o he och e- ed spa ks o mona chs. Thousands o
mona chs pou o e he edge, an in o he whi e ai , like a bloodje hi ing wa e . I ace
h ough he ield as i my cli was ne e w i en in o his s o y, as i I was no hea ie
han he wo ds in my name. (241)
He inally comes o e ms wi h he iolence he has expe ienced all o his li e h ough he use
o beau y. Na a ion, hus, is no enough, bu beau y is a key ac o o Vuong when he ies o
comp ehend his he i age and how i has a ec ed him.
18
Memo ies a e p esen ed h oughou he whole book, bu i is in he inal pa o he no el
whe e hey acqui e his healing p ope y. Li le Dog ac i ely s i es owa ds emembe ing, i is
a conscious ac i i y because “memo y is a choice,” (75) as i becomes clea h ough he use o
he anapho ic s uc u e “I emembe ” which is placed a he beginning o many pa ag aphs a
he end o he no el and also a he beginnings o sen ences. Memo y, hen, is “a second chance”
(Vuong 159) and “a space o al e na i e po en ial s o ies,” (Hi sch 175) and ha space becomes
a dimension whe e “ he same signs can be app op ia ed, ansla ed, ehis o icized, and ead
anew.” (Bhabha 208) I belie e ha Bhabha’s Thi d Space is c ucial o unde s anding he
p ocess o b inging back memo ies, as o Bhabha, his locus has he same emancipa o y alue
ha Hi sch asc ibes o pos memo y. Bhabha s a es ha his space is a “poli ical and his o ical
si e o enuncia ion [ ha ] ans o ms he meanings o he colonial inhe i ance in o he libe a o y
signs o a ee people o he u u e.” (209) Hence, hese beau i ully w i en epo s o he wa
se e wo pu poses: o gi e oice o wha colonialism did o his communi y and his amily and
o y o comp ehend and heal he damage colonialism has done h ough na a ion. Li le Dog,
inally, a i es o a econciling conclusion:
Yes, he e was a wa . Yes, we came om i s epicen e . In ha wa , a woman gi ed he sel
a new name—Lan—in ha naming claimed he sel beau i ul, hen made ha beau y in o
some hing wo h keeping. F om ha , a daugh e was bo n, and om ha daugh e , a
son.
All his ime I old mysel we we e bo n om wa —bu I was w ong, Ma. We
we e bo n om beau y.
Le no one mis ake us o he ui o iolence—bu ha iolence, ha ing passed
h ough he ui , ailed o spoil i . (Vuong 231)
Beau y, he e o e, plays a key ole in Vuong’s s yle, his p ose being illed wi h beau i ul
me apho s and image y. I is undeniably ha Vuong is ca e ul in s uc u ing sen ences and
choosing wo ds —pe haps, a s yle he owes o his i s wo ks which we e mainly poems, bu
his ea u e migh no be only in e p e ed as a o mal issue. By in using English wi h his
poe ically beau i ul s yle, he aims o e e i o ialize he language, dispossessed i om he
impe ial alues i holds and make i sui able o his decolonial needs (Deleuze and Gua a i 16).
Deleuze and Gua a i, on he ma e o eapp op ia ing language —o , using hei
e minology, e e i o ialize— ask hemsel es:
19
How many people oday li e in a language ha is no hei own? O no longe , o no
ye , e en know hei own and know poo ly he majo language ha hey a e o ced o
se e? This is he p oblem o immig an s, and especially o hei child en, he p oblem
o mino i ies, he p oblem o a mino li e a u e, bu also a p oblem o all o us: how o
ea a mino li e a u e away om i s own language, allowing i o challenge he language
and making i ollow a sobe e olu iona y pa h? (19)
In Vuong’s p ose, beau y is he p imo dial mean h ough which a e e i o ializa ion o language
is accomplished. And being he me hod h ough which language acqui es a sui able alue o
i s means, beau y becomes a poli ical weapon which wi h o con es impe ial na a i es and
hei posi ion o subal e ni y. Hence, beau y se es wo pu poses in his s yle: esilience and
esis ance. Healing colonial auma and esis ing he impe ial o ensi es a e wo s uggles ha
mus no be unde s ood on hei own, because, hough bo h de i e om he same oo and exis
in he pos -colonial con ex , hey a e wo di e en e ec s o he same p oblem.
Al hough o Deleuze and Gua a i he p ac ice o de e i o ializa ion “p oceeds by
d yness and sob ie y, a willed po e y;” (19) and deem any a emp o en ich language as
“a i icial” and “despe a e.” (19) I a gue ha in Vuong’s no el his poe ic s yle canno be, in
any case, conside ed cowa d o escapis . The e y ac ha Li le Dog is e isi ing he
es imonies o a wa ha has sca ed his communi y o li e and da es o w i e abou i in such
an elabo a e p ose, e en aking in o accoun he choice o w i ing in English when he is awa e
o he iolence ha i exe s on his communi y, is p oo enough o a b a e con on a ion wi h
his colonial pas . The de e i o ializa ion and pos e io e e i o ializa ion o language occu s
h ough beau y, as Vuong himsel says:
I y no o w i e ou o ange , I y no o build my a ch wi h age … I’m in e es ed in
when you’ e done wi h ange , when you ange was concealed and edi ec ed o allowed
o de use wi hou mani es a ion. Tha is such an in e es ing hing o me. No supp ess i
o o be ashamed o i bu o eel i and allow i o do no hing on you o le i en e and
lea e like he poison i is. (F agoso 44:14-44:55)
Vuong’s ixa ion wi h beau y is ob iously connec ed o his idea o hope, and how Vuong is
hope ul o he u u e, which is e lec ed in he inal me apho o he mona chs and he
ealiza ion ha he auma caused by wa , al hough i s ill haun s him, can also be o e come. In
he inal pages o he no el, Li le Dog ecalls an episode whe e hey wen o g ab ood in a
20
chu ch and ound blood in he pa emen , his mo he ies o calm him down and makes him
ocus on he bi ds in a ee:
I emembe Red. Red. Red. Red. You hands we o e mine. Red. Red. Red. Red. You
hand so ho . You hand my own. I emembe you saying, “Li le Dog, look up. Look up.
See? Do you see he bi ds in he ees?” I emembe i was Feb ua y. The ees we e
black and ba e agains an o e cas sky. Bu you kep alking: “Look! The bi ds. So many
colo s. Blue bi ds. Red bi ds. Magen a bi ds. Gli e ed bi ds.” … I emembe how you
eyes widened. I emembe s a ing and s a ing a he end o you inge un il, a las , an
eme ald blu ipened in o ealness. And I saw hem. The bi ds. All o hem. How hey
lou ished like ui as you mou h opened and closed and he wo ds wouldn’ s op
colo ing he ees. I emembe o ge ing he blood. I emembe ne e looking down.
(230-231)
A he beginning o he exce p , colou is p esen ed as a sign o iolence only o become a sign
o beau y a he end o he agmen . I is h ough he a o me apho ha , as Bhabha says, “ he
same signs can be app op ia ed, ansla ed, ehis o icized, and ead anew.” (208) Me apho and
beau y, he e o e, b ing Li le Dog o a ca ha ic ending a he end o he no el, whe e he inally
unde s ands and o e come he auma ha his amily has ca ied o gene a ions, and in healing
om his auma, he also libe a es his amily om he same bu den.
The explo a ion o beau y as a me hod o esilience in Vuong’s no el con adic s a
much-ci ed passage o Cul u al C i icism and Socie y (1949), an essay w i en by he Ge man
philosophe Theodo Ado no in which he s a es ha “[ ]o w i e poe y a e Auschwi z is
ba ba ic. And his co odes e en he knowledge o why i has become impossible o w i e poe y
oday.” (281) This impossibili y poin s ou he c isis ha eme ges when ying o ep esen he
auma ic e en , he a emp o na a i ize auma gene ally means a banaliza ion o educ ion
o he auma i sel , as i s na u e is so incommensu able ha i is simply no possible o g asp i
en i ely. Bu hen, i auma is pu ely unspeakable, is esigning o his ac he only answe ? Is
he e no solu ion o his p oblem? Vuong does no sen ence a inal and pe ec solu ion, bu a
pa h ha poin s owa ds new healing scena ios. Beau y, hen, could be an op imis ic jou ney o
epa a ion, ins ead o esigning o wha auma has done on his communi y, he is eluc an o be
quie and does wha he is capable o o come o e ms wi h he legacy o his colonial pas .
The e o e, i is no an e asu e, I a gue i is an o e coming bo h o he auma ic e en and o he
21
colonial legacy, h ough he c ea ion o a new na a i e w i en in a new language whe e he has
been able o escape he condi ions ha cons ic ed him in he i s place.
4. Conclusions
Th oughou his disse a ion, he way language is employed and po ayed in Ocean
Vuong’s semi-au obiog aphical no el, and he p ocesses ha shape his pa icula ela ionship
wi h language ha e been pu unde a ho ough analysis, because I conside i ins umen al o
comp ehend bo h auma and healing.
Fu he mo e, I ha e a gued ha he me hod in which many pos -colonial schola s
(B a hwai e 1984; Fanon 1986; wa Thiong’o 1987) ha e app oached he p oblem o language
in hei colonised na ions g ea ly se e o explain Li le Dog´s s uggles wi h language.
Al hough hese heo ies a e mos ly ocused on pa icula con ex s whe e impe ial na ions
impose a language on he popula ion o he colonized e i o y —such as he Uni ed Kingdom
on Kenya o Nige ia—, hey ha e p o en exceedingly success ul in he analysis o immig an ’s
backg ounds such as he one desc ibed in he no el, as hese kind o mig a ions a e o ced upon
he popula ions o he Global Sou h a ec ed by he p e ailing colonial dynamics o ged in he
pas cen u ies and cu en ly ein o ced by Wes e n coun ies.
Addi ionally, by acknowledging auma as p oduc o a wa ha begun due o impe ial
mo i a ions, i becomes clea how i is impe a i e o add ess how auma pa icula ly a ec s
ma ginalised popula ions and how pos -colonial heo y ques ions and ies o co ec he
Wes e n biases ha auma schola ship ends o ha e.
Thanks o his c ossed pe spec i e o auma s udies and pos -colonial s udies, I belie e
ha Vuong’s aim wi h his no el has become clea . Fo him, he use o he English language, a
symbol o he o ced mig a ion and iolence his communi y has endu ed, in he na a ion o
his auma has p o en o be a key ool o i s esolu ion. This pa adoxical use o English as a
symbol o iolence and esilience mi o s he mode in which auma is usually esol ed: he
e isi a ion and consequen con on a ion o he auma ic e en o na a i ize i in he hopes o
g asping a be e unde s anding o i .
Mo eo e , he way in which he p o agonis ’s mo he and his own es imonies mix wi h
hose belonging o o he immig an s also hin s o he mode in which colonial dynamics a ec
no only his amily, bu his communi y and e en o he immig an s’ communi ies who a e
22
o he ed by hei language, class and ace. Vuong a emp s o p ese e hei memo ies and gi e
oice o he es imonies o hese subal e ns who ha e been s ipped om discou se.
Hence, Vuong’s no el challenges he mains eam na a i es ha he Ame ican media
has c ea ed su ounding he Vie nam Wa , which mos ly ocus on he PTSD many Ame ican
soldie s expe ienced a e he wa , hus neglec ing o he auma ic expe iences o subal e n,
non-Wes e n and acialized subjec s. Fu he mo e, he makes us conscious o how he colonial
dynamics ha de ona ed he wa in he i s place a e s ill pe cei ed e en in he inescapable
ealm o language.
The no ion o mino li e a u e enuncia ed by Deleuze and Gua a i has also been use ul
o my analysis, as a I belie e ha hei heo y, speci ically he concep s o de e i o ializa ion
and e e i o ializa ion o language, p o ide an analy ical amewo k o unde s and how he
sub e sion o he English language is achie ed. E en mo e, hei heo y also connec s Vuong’s
wo k wi h a poli ical s uggle o libe a ion and o his aim o become a oice o he si ua ion
o he Vie namese immig an communi y.
Addi ionally, i should be no ed ha o Vuong, he c ucial concep o accomplish his
ask is beau y, which se es as he mean h ough which Vuong mas e ully o ches a es
sub e sion. Fo Vuong, beau y is bo h he doo o a mo e hope ul ea u e and o a ew i ing o
a auma ic pas . I se es as a me hod o e isi he pas , unde s and i and o e come i , bu
a he han elying on obli ion, he healing occu s h ough a e-na a i iza ion o he e en s ha
ha e b ough he colonial subjec o his cu en s a e, which a e coming o accep his posi ion,
allows him o own and w i e his u u e. Beau y, he e o e, emphasizes he idea o change, he
hope ul hough ha his amily and e e yone ha comes a e hem will enjoy a be e li e. I
sub e s he expec a ions and a che ypes o he enegade colonial subjec and challenges he
na a i es imposed on hem by imagining a new op imis ic u u e, one ha is no p esc ibed by
hei auma ic pas bu ha also ecognises i as a key ac o o hei si ua ion.
Allow me, inally, o e u n o a ques ion I posed ea lie in his disse a ion: why w i ing
a le e o a mo he who canno ead? Li le Dog is hope ul ha jus as he memo y o he wa
was eng a ed wi hin him, his idea o beau y will e en ually each his mo he h ough he
knowledge o hei cul u e, in which einca na ion plays a key ole:
Ma, I don’ know i you’ e made i his a in his le e —o i you’ e made i he e a
all. You always ell me i ’s oo la e o you o ead, wi h you poo li e , you exhaus ed
bones, ha a e e e y hing you’ e been h ough, you’d jus like o es now. Tha
23
eading is a p i ilege you made possible o me wi h wha you los . I know you belie e
in einca na ion. I don’ know i I do bu I hope i ’s eal. Because hen maybe you’ll
come back he e nex ime a ound. Maybe you’ll be a gi l and maybe you name will be
Rose again, and you’ll ha e a oom ull o books wi h pa en s who will ead you bed ime
s o ies in a coun y no ouched by wa . Maybe hen, in ha li e and in his u u e, you’ll
ind his book and you’ll know wha happened o us. And you’ll emembe me. Maybe.
(Vuong 240)
24
5. Wo ks ci ed
Ado no, Theodo . "Cul u al C i icism and Socie y". The Holocaus : Theo e ical Readings,
edi ed by Neil Le i and Michael Ro hbe g, Edinbu gh Uni e si y P ess, 2003, pp. 280-
281.
Anzaldúa, Glo ia. "How o Tame a Wild Tongue". The Mexico Reade : His o y, Cul u e,
Poli ics, edi ed by Gilbe M. Joseph and Timo hy J. Hende son, Duke Uni e si y P ess,
2022, pp. 34-44.
Ashc o , Bill, e al. The Empi e W i es Back: Theo y and p ac ice in pos -colonial li e a u es.
1989. Rou ledge, 2002.
Bhabha, Homi K. “Cul u al Di e si y and Cul u al Di e ences.” The Pos -Colonial S udies
Reade , edi ed by Bill Asch o , Ga e h G i i hs and Helen Ti in, Rou ledge, 1995, pp.
206-209.
B a hwai e, Edwa d Kamau. “Na ion Language.” The Pos -Colonial S udies Reade , edi ed by
Bill Asch o , Ga e h G i i hs and Helen Ti in, Rou ledge, 1995, pp. 309-313.
Ca u h, Ca hy. Unclaimed Expe ience: T auma, Na a i e, and His o y. The Johns Hopkins
Uni e si y P ess, 1996.
C aps, S e . “Beyond Eu ocen ism: T auma Theo y in he Global Age”, The Fu u e o T auma
Theo y: Con empo a y Li e a y and Cul u al C i icism, edi ed by Ge Buelens, Samuel
Du an and Robe Eagles one, Rou ledge, 2013, pp. 45-61.
Deleuze, Gilles, and Feliz Gua a i. Ka ka: Towa ds a Mino Li e a u e. 1975. T ansla ed by
Dana Polan, Uni e si y o Minneso a P ess, 1986.
D’U so, Sophia. “Subjec ing Sen ences: Syn ax and Powe in Ocean Vuong’s On Ea h We’ e
B ie ly Go geous”. Melio a, ol. 1, no. 2, 2022,
h ps://jou nals.lib a y.columbia.edu/index.php/melio a/a icle/ iew/8725. Accessed 29
Ap il 2024.
Fanon, F an z. Black Skin, Whi e masks. T ansla ed by Cha les Lam Ma kmann, Plu o P ess,
1986.
Ha, Quan Manh, and Mia Tompkins. “‘The T u h Is Memo y Has No Fo go en Us’: Memo y,
Iden i y, and S o y elling in Ocean Vuong’s On Ea h We’ e B ie ly Go geous.” Rocky
Moun ain Re iew, ol. 75, no. 2, 2021, pp. 199–220.
