‘Saigon’ shows love story emerging from chaos
By Linus Enriquez
So we’re back to this again, are we? I feel like I’m about to
repeat myself, but I might as well. Obviously the point was missed
the first time around.
Sunny Le and Nhan Nguyen would have you believe that "Miss
Saigon" is one of many spectacles that "project and promote racial
stereotypes and ethnic fetishes of Asian Americans, African
Americans, Native Americans and Latinos" ("Sensitive issues
underlie ‘Saigon’ extravaganza," Feb. 1).
First off, never say "one of many" and list specific ethnic
groups. The only ethnicity that fits a main character in "Miss
Saigon" is African American, but that’s not the point. The point is
that they’ve twisted a story in such a way that they see such
atrocities being committed by this show. Well … here we go
again.
The story boils down to this: it’s war, there’s a soldier,
there’s a prostitute and her pimp. She falls in love with the
soldier and that’s the drive of the story. And there’s another
thing: It’s bad taste to tell the ending of a story. I don’t care
if a lot of people know it, you don’t give away the ending of a
story!
Anyway, a story has characters. Characters are needed to drive
it, and to do so, you need the right type of characters. Here is a
story with a historical background. In other words, these
situations did happen around and during the fall of Saigon in 1975.
There were soldiers (mostly American), and there were pimps with
their prostitutes.
A pimp can be any variety of characters, but here, it is a male;
he is sleazy and yes, he is devilish. More than likely, such a pimp
has and does exist today. And no, his ethnicity does not play a
part of this aspect of character (and for the record, the pimp of
"Miss Saigon" is Eurasian, so you might as well say we’re
stereotyping the French as well).
A female prostitute. She sells sex. This is her job. For the
story to continue with her being as such, she must therefore
practice her trade. And as written above, her trade is sex. For
this not to be obvious in the show when it is needed for it to be
obvious would be bad writing, much like revealing the ending of a
story.
So here, we have not only a prostitute, but an unwilling one.
Her ethnicity is not required for this aspect of character. Of
course, it being Saigon 1975, history would dictate her being
Vietnamese.
Then there are the American soldiers. No one mentioned
stereotyping American soldiers, though you’d think if you’d call
the rest of the cast stereotyped you might as well do so to them.
Oh, but they’re white. Let’s not bother.
Now what’s this about inaccurate portrayals? Are any of the
above inaccurate for the setting? Perhaps if the story were set in
Los Angeles in 1995. But for Saigon in 1975? Ask a veteran. Ask a
woman or man who was around at the time. It’ll be easy. They’re the
ones that hold this show near and dear to their heart.
Maybe they’re masochists.
Or maybe not. Perhaps the show isn’t glamorizing sex and war and
profit as you would be led to believe. Maybe it’s just a love story
with interesting character portrayals. The thing is, the show
portrays a love that emerges in a time of chaos, giving it a
realism only those who were there could truly tell you about.
Yes, the events acted out on stage are vivid, and yes, they do
remind us of a troubled time. But glamorized? Did the images on
stage appear to glamorize the events? Or did they do the opposite?
Did they, instead, instill a reality to it through the use of the
glamour of theatrical production?
If you decide to see "Miss Saigon," remember that it is a story
based on certain events that occurred in the recent past, and that
during that period, such things did happen; not to everyone, no …
that would be stereotyping. But certainly, it happened. Remember
that its characters are driving this story with their actions,
emotions and songs  and that is why they are who they
are.
And remember, don’t get so caught up twisting such stories to
the point where you can see racism, then go off crying, "Aha! Told
you!" at it as if it were the sole cause of oppression. It’s a
waste of time, of energy, and of space, especially for those who
need to go about counterpointing the damn thing.
Enriquez is a third-year anthropology student.