2. On the problems of classification, Nguyen Dong Chi is not satisfied with
the ways folklore were classified by his predecessors, claiming that they
were not systematic enough. Nguyen Dong Chi somewhat shares the view
of Truong Tuu on his classification of folk stories into two main types:
mythical and worldly. Nguyen Dong Chi comes up with a three-way
distinction: mystical (hoang duong as used in the first edition, 1957; or than
ky in the fifth edition, 1972); worldly and historical. Nguyen Dong Chi’s
distinction has been highly controversial ever since. Durand contends that
Nguyen Dong Chi’s classification is also "as formal as his predecessors""
(Ibid. : 496), while Dinh Gia Khanh and Chu Xuan Dien comment that
"Nguyen Dong Chi’s classification is adequate"[15] although they both are
critical of the idea of including the mythical stories as a separate category
contending that "all historical and worldly folklore contain mythical
elements (as recognized by the author himself), and vice versa all mythical
stories do reflect historical or worldly facts."[16]
Over the years, Durand’s theme-based approach has generally not been
accepted by researchers in the study of folklore for its sociological bias
without adequate attention to modes of artistic presentation. Dinh Gia
Khanh and Chu Xuan Dien’s views on excluding the mythical category are
no longer from India, Egypt, Greek and Europe. Nguyen Dong Chi rightly
deserves credit for his meticulous comparative research work and his firm
grasp of the typological study that underlie his systematic classification of
Vietnamese folklore. Nguyen Dong Chi is also acclaimed for his inclusion
of third category, i. e., historical stories, those which are rarely found
elsewhere in Asia and Europe. Nguyen Dong Chi, commenting on this
unique feature of Vietnamese folklore , said: "Folk tales on historical events
are typical of Vietnamese folklore because the Vietnamese, throughout their
