The chapter “Changes of Values during the Renovation Period in Vietnam” by Mr. Nguyen Trong Nhuan gives a brief overview of value changes in Vietnam in various life aspects since 1986. Though there are some points that I am not really persuaded, I think this chapter is still a good article. First of all, I am highly impressed by the author’s comprehensive and systematic approach to the issue in this chapter.
This is clearly shown in the article’s smooth and rational organization with four main parts of which the third one referring to specific changes in values during the renovation period in Vietnam carries more weights than others with the greatest length. As can be seen, besides reaching the targeted issue, the readers are provided with related background knowledge and information such as the situation of these changes, the definition of value… so that they can have an all-inclusive view on the problem.
In my opinion, this type of approach is very effective in fully conveying a writer’s thoughts and ideas to the readers. Secondly, each given idea in the chapter is touched deeply and comprehensively. For example, instead of directly giving a general definition of “values”, the author chooses a very unique way by stating different aspects of “values” such as the characteristic, classification or orientation, etc… This type of definition can reduce the theoretical features for the idea which often discourage the readers.
As a reader, I believe that the author must really master his knowledge of the subject when he is confident to challenge himself with such a new way of writing. Next, I generally share the same view with the writer on most of the points. However, I notice a minor detail in his argument that is not very persuasive enough when talking about “extremism”. He stated that “it blindly follows Western and foreign values”. In this point, the author seems to criticize the Western and foreign values.
However, I see no wrong in these values, but the problem lies in the inappropriate way they are applied and followed by the Vietnamese. In other words, we should blame the trend of extremism on the human, not other countries values’ influence. Besides, the writer quite succeeds in supporting his argument with very specific statistics on trends in value changes, but he fails to indicate his source. In fact, despite the author’s thorough and detailed explanation for given statistics and their implications, the readers can hardly trust the information.
In sum, the article is very praiseworthy regarding its effective approach, deep and valuable ideas thanks to the authority though it cannot avoid some minor points that are not really convincing. To my thinking, this is a worth-reading piece for those who are thirsty for new and interesting knowledge and those who really enjoy doing research on issues of life by learning the author’s unique way of approaching and exploiting the issue.
