An analysis on cultural elements (Film daughter from danang)

Name: Nguyen Xuan Khanh
Class: 13E19
ID No.: 13041044

Writing Assignment
Intercultural Material: DAUGHTER FROM DANANG,
Directed by Gail Dolgin and Vicente Franco
With the fast pace of globalization, every nation and region are integrating with one another in
all facets of life. Apart from the advantages it has produced so far, integration could pose some
problems related to intercultural communication. Intercultural competence, therefore, becomes a
paramount and interesting study. In this analysis, I am going to explore the intercultural issues in
three correlative concepts: Language, Individualism versus Collectivism, Culture Shock in the
documentary Daughter from Danang, directed by Gail Dolgin and Vicente Franco.
At the end of Vietnam War, the United States government launched Operation Babylift to send
thousands of Vietnamese-American (or Amerasian) children to the United States for adoption.
There is a rumor that if anyone had racially mixed children both the mother and children would
be killed. Consequently, thousands of Vietnamese mother had to give up their mixed-race
children.
The documentary tells a true story of a Vietnamese family in which the daughter called
“Hiep” is racially mixed. Mrs. Hiep’s mother, Mai Thi Kim, had already had three children with
her husband Do Huu Vinh (Mitchell, 2002). After Do Huu Vinh joined Viet Cong force to “fight
for the country”, Do Thi Kim had to work in an American military troop for the sake of her
family. In 1968, she gave birth to Hiep as a result of her forced relationship with an American
Soldier. At the age of seven, Hiep was brought out of Vietnam in the Operation Babylift and was
put in orphanage Holt Adoption Agency. Since 1975, Hiep or Heidi and her birthmother had had
no contact with each other.
Mrs. Kim have constantly been finding her daughter’s news while Heidi is eventually adopted
by Ann Neville. It is not until Heidi is abandoned by her adoptive mother that Heidi starts to
contact Holt Adoption Agency to search for her birthmother with a view to pursuing
unconditional love. Eventually, they hear from each other after a twenty-two-year separation.

Accompanied by a Vietnamese-American journalist Tran Tuong Nhu, Heidi returns to her
birthplace for assembly.
Throughout the film Hiep meets her birthmother, stepfather, and half-siblings, and other
members of extended family. In early days of the visit, they are very happy and healing of the
reunion. However, intercultural problems that they encounter gradually bring their happiness
down. Their meeting and relationship finally ends in sorrow.
The material analysis explores the intercultural issues in three correlative concepts:
Language, Individualism versus Collectivism, Culture Shock.
1. Language, Ethnic Group Identity and Dominance

Language is one of the tools that make human being different from other living creatures. It
not only functions as conveying messages or being the medium of communication for human
society, but is also of great importance in identifying members with a particular group. Language
can shape people’s thinking patterns and powerfully affect how they experience the world and in
doing so, contribute to the differences among societies (Koester & Lustig, 2010, p.186).
When Heidi and other Amerasian children are sent to the U.S, they cannot speak any English.
They have to go to private school to learn English. In class, they start with “Good morning”,
“How are you?-I’m fine, thank you”. Twenty-two years pass, and then Heidi admits that she
cannot speak any Vietnamese. In America particularly, where people are in favor of verbal
messages and “words are considered very important” (Koester & Lustig, 2010, p.235), language
is one means of survival. Language helps people to participate in conversations, education,
politics, and to work in their professions. Their ethnic group is identified with language because
it partially shape their beliefs, values, patterns of thinking. In the case of Heidi, she now is 100
percent American, not Vietnamese for the fact that she cannot speak any Vietnamese although
she is believed to proficient in Vietnamese at the age of seven.
During the early time in Vietnam, Hiep is willing to be taught to speak some Vietnamese
words and phrases such as “mẹ”, “má”, “con thương mẹ”, “em thương chị”, “xin phép”. With
those common words, Hiep is able to express her love to her birthmother and her relatives, and to
feel convergent. If the new comer wish to use the native’s language behaviors when he or she is

exposed to a country, then it means he or she wants to be considered an in-group member, who is


similar to and has a harmonious contact with others (Gallois, Giles, Jones, C.Cargile, & Ota,
1995, pp.115-147).
2.

Individualism and Collectivism

People are always put in a relationship with a larger group of individuals in which they have
to contact with other to survive. However, people’s view on individual autonomy are different. In
terms of culture, if a person is in favor of independence and uniqueness, they are individualistic;
if he or she tends to be interdependent and conforming, this person is collectivistic. Therefore,
the opposition between individualism and collectivism lies in the question to what extent people
depend upon themselves or upon groups? (Koester & Lustig, 2010, p. 117).
It can be seen that the documentary depicts quite clearly the difference between American and
Vietnamese culture regarding individualism and collectivism. Since early age, the mixed-race
orphans are taught to eat on their own. According to Heide, in America, she has to sleep alone
although she “cries and cries” in the night. She “grew up not have a bunch of affection or touch”.
In her twenties, Heidi was (Myron W.Lustig, 2010) (Myron W.Lustig, 2010)abandoned by her
adoptive mother on the grounds that she came home ten minutes late. From the perspective of
American people, this abandonment is normal. Even if Heidi did not make the mistake, her
adoptive mother could leave her alone. In the United States, where individualistic culture is high,
mature people are expected to be independent and are free to lead their own life. They tend to
live for themselves and create their uniqueness. Koester and Lustig (2010) point out that
individualistic people make decisions based on their own point of view, what they do is for self,
not for a group.
However, the situation turns reverse when Heidi arrived to Vietnam. The collectivistic society
is shot in detail. Not only her relatives but also the neighbors welcome Hiep. Her birthmother,
Mrs. Mai Thi, is extremely blessed with the reunion: “I’m very happy”, “I love you very much”.

She is constantly kissing Hiep’s cheek and hugging her. She stays with her daughter 24 over 24.
“I spent the night in my room, with my mother, she hasn’t left me so far”, says Hiep. Mrs. Mai
Thi brings her daughter to the market, to the place Hiep used to live and then worship her
ancestors. Her extended family often gather and have a reunion party. The siblings and relatives
all wish to show their love to Hiep by hugs, smiles, talks, so on. The Vietnamese in particular
value the best for the group before they think of themselves. In turn, it is necessary for the group


to value individual’s benefit (Koester & Lustig, 2010, p. 117). They are people-oriented. This
culture explains why Mrs. Mai Thi is so loyal to her child year after year; she wants to cover all
affection that Hiep has lacked during their isolation. “I will not let Hiep leave any longer”, Mrs.
Mai Thi says. She is dying to take care of Hiep although she worries about her family’s poverty.
3. Confrontation between Individualism and Collectivism Lead to Culture Shock
The happiness of Hiep and her relatives cannot last long as she hardly interprets the difference
in ways of thinking and perceiving situations. Consequently, she encounters culture shock.
During her visit, she cannot cope with this phenomenon.
According to Koester and Lustig (2010), culture shock arises when people face a number of
changes and new concepts but they are not able to classify what is happening due to a change in
living environment. As result of the confusion, they response negatively to the new context
without any awareness of in-group members’ thoughts.
In the early days, Hiep feels that the reunion lives up to her expectations, which is “I always
want the feeling someone would love me, no matter what”. Hiep adjusts to her Vietnamese
family: gathers with her extended family in party, speaks some Vietnamese. She keeps close to
her mother. She provides her siblings with some money for party. However, the positive and
blissful emotion fades away and replaced with unpleasant one. She cannot imagine how life it
would be here, it contradicts America: the household facilities, the beliefs. With the meticulous
care from her mother, Hiep feels suffocated. “I just want to step back and say wow it is not what
I’d pictured”. Sitting in a bench, she confides she knows her sister is living in poverty so she
offer her family some money to “help them out”, however, sister Hien asks Hiep for money
another twice so that her kids can go to school, she can find a job. Hiep is so frustrated at this

pledge, finds it very rude to her. The journalist Tran Tuong Nhu explains that it is a common
knowledge in Vietnam that the person who is overseas is the person who saves the family and
families those who have that will be more prosperous, they are very upfront about money.
In this case, the culture is resulted from the misinterpretation between Hiep-individualistic
person and her Vietnamese family who are in favor of individualism. Growing up in American,
she values independence, privacy, and the ‘I”. She lives for today and future, not for the past. She
does not accept to live for the sake of anyone else: “I came here not for helping anyone but to be
reunited.” From her perspective, she feels she is being exploited while she does not have


obligation to offer money to her mother. On the other hand, because Vietnamese people consider
Hiep to be an in-group member, Hiep is under obligation to offer help. The culture shock reaches
a wrenching climax in the farewell when the half-brother politely requests her for monthly
financial support. Hiep cannot say anything but gets disgusted. Culture shock forces her to return
to the U.S soon.
Throughout the documentary, we can observe that language barriers and cultural differences
contributes to the culture shock that a person is likely to encounter when they are exposed to a
new country. The unsuccessful interpersonal communication between an Amerasian and a group
of Vietnamese partly caused by language. They hardly understand each other though efforts to
learn other’s language have been made. English and Vietnamese identify Heidi and her relatives
with American culture and Vietnamese culture respectively. We cannot judge who is right and
who is wrong because they have different point of views on individual autonomy. They have
their own reasons to behave the way they behave.
Another thing is that culture shock is associated with the U-curve hypothesis of cultural
adaptation in a very minor aspect. The happiness goes down until it reaches the bottom of the U.
No positive feelings are developed afterwards. It is presumably because of limited time of
exposure. Seven-day stay cannot make every person in that family interpret each member’s
culture.
The documentary not only describes the sadness of post-war but also provides some lessons
and insights into intercultural competence. We should learn from people of other cultures.

Because culture is no right or wrong, we should not jump to the conclusion immediately. Instead,
we should have a deeper understanding of what is happening, stand in other’s position to make
interpretation. Even if when we cannot still elaborate the inner problems, it is advisable for us to
be tolerant and wait for the clarification. In particular, once people come to another country, they
should prepare some cultural background knowledge of the destination in advance. Moreover,
we should share our culture with others for interpersonal communication.

References
Dolgin, G., & Franco, V. (Directors). (2002). Daughter from Danang [Motion picture]. United
States: Sunshine Sara Ludder.


Gallois, C., Giles, H., Jones, E., Cargile, A.C., & Ota, H. (1995). Intercultural communication
theory. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 115-147.
Koester, J., & Lustig, M.W. (2010). Intercultural competence (6th ed.). Boston, United States:
Pearson Education, Inc.
Mitchell, E. (2002 March 23). Film festival review; Danang round trip, sad all the way. The
New York Times. Retrieved from />res=9807E2D61F38F930A15750C0A9649C8B63