Travel writing in Cambodia through history
Since the 13th century, visitors to Cambodia have been
writing of their impressions – both positive and negative. And while
these opinions can be taken with a grain of salt, with the passage of
time they become increasingly important glimpses into the Kingdom's past
Studying the canon of Cambodia-related literature, it can feel that
the sum total of the Kingdom’s history is that of the Khmer Rouge:
bookshelves flush with historic analyses, biographies and novels that
are framed in relation to the horrors of 1975-79.
But for those with the time and patience to seek it out, there lies a
trove of writing in a different genre – the history of Cambodia as
documented by those who have passed through it as travellers.
It’s a lineage that stretches back to at least the 13th century, when
Chinese imperial envoy Zhou Daguan penned A Record of Cambodia: The
Land and Its People – the only known eyewitness account of the Angkorian
civilisation.
Each of these writers, in speaking to the value of good travel writing, saw the country in his or her own way.
“The chief value of travel books,” wrote Norman Lewis on his trip
through French Indochina in 1950, is that “they give information that
can rarely be obtained elsewhere”.
From that mosaic of impressions – the differences in opinion of which
could be dramatic – a vivid and realistic picture of a bygone Cambodia
emerges.
Angkorian appeal
From Zhou Daguan’s imperial chronicles onwards, it has been
Cambodia’s past greatness, not its modern achievements that have most
wowed visitors.
“The temples at Angkor were what brought travellers to Cambodia,”
writes historian Milton Osborne in his book Phnom Penh: A Cultural and
Literary History (2008) – one of several books he has penned on the
Kingdom.
One of the more inspiring accounts of Angkor came from British
novelist Somerset Maugham, who traversed Indochina in 1922. Maugham was
mystified by the ancient site.
“I have never seen anything in the world more wonderful than the
temples of Angkor,” he wrote in The Gentleman in the Parlour (1930), his
memoirs of travelling through the region.
Angkor’s bas-reliefs, depicting “princes on elephants”, “graceful
trees” and “the dying and the dead”, brought forth from him especially
eloquent prose, which combined an apparently profound respect for the
craft of Angkor with orientalist tendencies: “Here is nothing of the
harmony of the Greeks but the rush of a torrential stream and the
terrible, vehement life of the jungle,” he enthused.
Norman Lewis, too, wrote adoringly about Angkor. The journalist and
author, who spent time in Cambodia on a journey recorded in A Dragon
Apparent: Travels in Cambodia, Laos and Vietnam (1951), managed to
transmit a fantastic amount of hard-to-obtain information in his 10-day
Cambodian jaunt.
Though he had a tendency to describe Cambodia using foreign imagery
(in this one nation he saw “cemeteries of Northern Italy,” “dogs of
India”, “butterfly of the Vietnamese forests”), Angkor Wat was in a
league of its own: “the most spectacular man-made remains in the world”.
Forgotten cities
While ancient Khmer civilisation was a source of great wonder for
writers, the country’s contemporary attractions generally failed to
garner such favourable reviews.
For Norman Lewis, Angkor’s gateway town of Siem Reap was
unremarkable: “another slumbering Shangri-La, perfumed slightly with
putrid fish-sauce”.
Cambodia’s capital itself was often excluded entirely from
travellers’ accounts. As Osborne writes, “Phnom Penh was, at best, an
afterthought” for the Kingdom’s Western visitors.
Where it was included on the itinerary, accounts (many of which are recorded by Osborne in his 2008 book) vary. When American Robert J Casey passed through Phnom Penh in 1929 he found pleasure in “a town of wide, well-shaded streets with a Royal Palace, a pretty park, and a vast and pictureful array of markets”.
But there was something that seemed to repel, or even to disgust, other visitors.
British writer Geoffrey Gorer, who visited the capital just six years
after Casey, took the city’s rural simplicity differently: “filthy
native slums”, “ugly, dull looking people” and palaces “of tawdry,
gimcrack, flashy and pretentious taste” are what he observed in Bali and
Angkor (1936). To Gorer, the capital was “so ghastly that it has a sort
of morbid fascination”.
Steven Boswell, who recently published King Norodom’s Head – an
account of some of Phnom Penh’s more offbeat historical sites –
reflected during an interview with Post Weekend last week on the city’s
less than glowing early reception. “They tend to belittle the Royal
Palace of all places, which surprises me as I find it a lovely place.
And the earlier ones, the French ones, tend to belittle King Norodom a
bit, too,” he said, adding that this in itself was a privilege only on
offer to a bygone generation: “The early ones always managed to meet the
king – that was always part of their visit.”
“[Phnom Penh] was seen as a shabby little place,” Boswell said in summary, “although that may well have been the case”.
Indeed, Cambodia as a whole was something of a footnote in the Southeast Asian experience.
“Very few books were written by people who devoted their entire time
to Cambodia rather than to the whole of Indochina,” Milton Osborne said
last week, referring in particular to the pre-colonial period.
The reason, he suggested, was simple: more people went to (and spent
more time in) Vietnam and Thailand. For Osborne, who believes that
honest travel books transform into “historical documents” with time, the
scarcity of such accounts is regrettable.
Boswell submits that the sidelining of Cambodia by travellers
extended to the time of the French protectorate and beyond. “Maybe it’s
because the French did favour Vietnam and the Vietnamese,” he suggested.
“The people that the French brought over to work as officials in
Cambodia were Vietnamese by and large, so these early visitors would
have spent a lot of time talking with French officials and may have
replicated their views to a certain extent.”
After Pol Pot
The tumult of civil war and the Khmer Rouge years from the 1960s and
throughout the 1970s produced a welter of new authors turning their
analytical attentions to Cambodia’s politics and history.
But for travel writers, the country had been ruined. “The more I
knew about Cambodia’s infernalities and acrimonies,” griped travel
writer doyen Paul Theroux in Ghost Train to the Eastern Star (2008),
“the more ... I just wanted to go away.”
Tiziano Terzani, a gifted Italian journalist who covered Cambodia’s
civil war in the 1970s for Der Speigel, saw Cambodia a few days after
the fall of Phnom Penh in April 1975. He recounted the ordeal years
later in A Fortune Teller Told Me: Earthbound Travels in the Far East
(1995).
Terzani, described posthumously by his friend and war reporter
Elizabeth Becker as “a journalist with a magpie’s attraction to
exotica”, writes movingly of a land traumatised by violence.
“The marks of that suffering were everywhere,” he recalled. “I could
no longer see a row of palm trees without thinking that the tallest were
those most fertilised with corpses. In Cambodia, even nature had lost
its comforting innocence.”
The global relief forces that so changed the face of Cambodia also became targets for a new generation of travel writers.
For Edward Gargan, a New York Times correspondent who spent a year
travelling down the Mekong for The River’s Tale: A Year on the Mekong
(2002), Phnom Penh was not only a capital but an “emergency room of
international relief organizations that stampeded into the country to
rebuild it, demine it, rewrite its laws, repave its roads, patch its
wounds”.
“High on the hope with which UNTAC had infected almost everyone,”
wrote a jaded Carol Livingston in Gecko Tails: A Journey Through
Cambodia (1996), “I’d come to write an optimistic travel book, but I’d
become much more realistic.”
And the scars of Pol Pot’s regime turned writers philosophical. “The
traveller’s conceit is that barbarism is something singular and
foreign,” wrote Theroux, meditating on the frequency of mass murder
after a visit to the Tuol Sleng genocide museum. “The truer shout is not
‘Never again’ but ‘Again and again.’”
Today, Steven Boswell says, travel writing about Cambodia remains a relatively pauce genre.
“You can look at my bookshelf, and my dozens of books about Cambodia
are mostly are about history and religion. There’s just a handful about
travel writing, and again most of those deal with all of Indochina,” he
said.
But it is often hard to distinguish between genres. Milton Osborne
reflected last week that “travel writing is almost always about the
writer’s reaction to the present”, before adding that “this often means
that the author will delve into history in the course of discussing or
describing the present”.
Osborne cited Normal Lewis as a case in point, describing A Dragon
Apparent as “almost ‘pure’ travel writing, but [which] nevertheless
strays into contemporary political history to explain what he
encounters.”
“The distinction is not always clear, and perhaps that is what makes
good travel writing such a popular form of reading entertainment.”
No comments:
Post a Comment