147 10 1775 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/28ed262ac5ebc6bb3b8df7ab741ca2f7.mp3 dfd24e54737213ac823efb45b077053a https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/7ba1e3137489841bf3ad117b4fb08e3a.png 08f47b8e52a383cbdd0dd99bc85b1d27 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Oral Histories Title A name given to the resource Oral Histories from 1960s Binghamton Alumni Description An account of the resource In 2019, Binghamton University Libraries completed a mission to collect oral interviews from 1960s alumni as a means to preserve memories of campus life. The resulting 47 tales are a retrospective of social, professional and personal experiences with the commonality of Harpur College. Some stories tell of humble beginnings, others discuss the formation of friendships; each provides insight into a moment in our community's rich history. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Irene Gashurov Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-2018 Relation A related resource <a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/browse?collection=18">McKiernan Interviews : 60's collection of Oral Histories</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2018-05-18 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Irene Gashurov Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. Ruth Silverman Year of Graduation 1964 Biographical Text Ruth Silverman, PhD, is a sociology professor at Nassau Community College, where she created the Women’s Studies Program. She is the sister of Dr. Amy Weintraub. Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education; Harpur College – Alumni in Women's’ Studies; Harpur College – Alumni from New York City; Harpur College – Alumni at Nassau Community College; Harpur College – Alumni in the New York City area Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Subject LCSH Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education; Harpur College – Alumni in Womens’ Studies; Harpur College – Alumni from New York City; Harpur College – Alumni at Nassau Community College; Harpur College – Alumni in the New York City area Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium Alumni Interviews Interview with: Ruth M. Silverman Interviewed by: Irene Gashurov Transcriber: Oral History Lab Date of interview: 15 May 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) IG: 00:01 Testing, testing, 1,2,3, it is working. Okay. So, we are here with Ruth Silverman. Ruth, RS: 00:08 My name is Ruth Silverman. I graduated in 1964 with a BA in sociology. I am being interviewed today, May 18, 2018 in my sister's apartment, who also graduated in 1964, my birth date is 11/24/(19)42. IG: 00:31 Perfect. Okay, so wh- where did you grow up? RS: 00:40 Do not worry about your back. IG: 00:42 Okay, all right, and I am going to actually move this up closer, if you do not mind, sorry, because I am hard of hearing, right. So, Amy, where did you grow up? IG: 00:56 Albany, New York. IG: 00:58 And tell me a little bit about your parents, what they did and- RS: 01:06 Well, my father had a PhD in sociology from Columbia University, and he headed up the Bureau of Statistics, the Department of Mental Hygiene in Albany. And my mother, my father retired and got a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health. My mother became his assistant, his office assistant, under grant. IG: 01:35 Okay, so you are the only two siblings in your family. You are the two daughters. Were there other siblings? RS: 01:42 We have an older sister? IG: 01:44 Yes, so were the- were the expectations of for you similar? Do you think that all girls were expected to go on with their higher education? RS: 02:00 It was definitely an expectation. It was a- my mother came from a family. We were six children, and my grandparents, of course, were immigrants, and all six children went to college. I mean, that was just an expectation. And my mother's family and of course, my father was, well, let me put it this way, his brother did not go to college. My father went all the way through, but there was an expectation that you were going to go to college, of course. IG: 02:33 One thing that we did not say, I think that, you know, at the beginning we say, what you what you currently do what your profession is. RS: 02:43 I have been teaching at Nassau Community College since 1986 in sociology department. My appointments in the sociology department, but I have also taught courses in it was the Women's Studies project. There was no Women's Studies Department. Some people come from other departments. So, I was active in creating the Women's Studies program courses, the intro course, the first course. My doctoral work was in sociology of health, especially women's health. So, um- IG: 03:19 And where did you do your doctorate? RS: 03:22 I did my master's work University Wisconsin, Madison, and the PhD work at NYU. IG: 03:30 So, you know to backtrack, we will touch upon this a little bit later, but tell us a little bit about your growing up, what was that like, and where did you go to high school? What you know, what the preparation for Harpur College, what you know, predisposed you to- RS: 03:53 Albany was very small when we were growing up there. It has changed considerably. The State University of New York in Albany was originally State Teachers College at Albany, and it was a local teacher’s college. There were no dormitories. But of course, the State University has expanded tremendously. The State Government has expanded. I mean, it has got this downtown campus called the mall, and they traded the Avril Harriman campus out by the university. So, you know, it was, um, it was a different city. It was much, much smaller and more what insular, less cosmopolitan, I guess you would say, when we were growing up, but we did not go to the public school. My parents sent us to the middle school, which was the training school for the teacher. We were right next door to the Teacher's College. IG: 04:51 I see, I see. RS: 04:52 And so, we were- our teachers kept moving. As you know, we worked in semesters. And they had to do their student teaching, but the supervisors were the same. IG: 05:05 I see. So, do you think that you got over? Did you get your grounding for your future studies at the high school? RS: 05:17 I think we got a very good grounding. Because we were neither completely public. Of course, the state, the college was a public institution, but and we were already completely private. [laughs] We were- so it was a funny coming so we did not have to take, we want to- we did not take regents. They only recommended that for applying to colleges, you should take a few regions so they could have some basis to compare you with students in the in the public school system. And the preparation must have been very good, because we did very well. I did very well in the ones in the regent’s exam said I chose to take so they could see that that the middle school was teaching at a level to take the New York State Regents. IG: 06:17 So, I take it that you got the regents scholarship for college. RS: 06:24 No, and I do not know why we did not get it. IG: 06:32 Many-many-many people did get a regent scholarship, you know, but nonetheless, um, so-so, why did you decide on Harpur College? Did you apply to other schools? And what kind of- RS: 06:49 We applied to other schools, but Harpur, Harpur was just beginning then, and if I remember correctly, it was um Dr. House, the guidance counselor who recommended to my parents that it would be a good place for us to go. And four of us- we went. It was a small school. I think that there were 60 people in the graduating class. It was not and four of us applied to Harpur and got in. Yeah, four of us in the middle school applied to Harpur and got and we all got in so we were not competing against each other. So, the middle school must have had a good reputation. IG: 07:30 Right. And what you know, what- why did you decide on Harpur rather than, you know, buffalo, or any other school in the SUNY system, or anywhere else. Why? RS: 07:46 I guess my parents thought that that is they put us in instead of tending us to the big high school in Albany. I guess they figured that a smaller school would be good for us. And they were right. They were absolutely right. I think Amy and I both. I mean, we just blossomed. IG: 08:04 Well, so tell me about this experience. You know what- how when you arrived, you know what were, just tell us a little bit about that arc of what you were like when you first arrived at Harpur College and how you blossomed? Can you- RS: 08:25 I think I blossomed intellectually, definitely. I blossomed in the way I felt about myself being a competent person, one of our professors, or we both had the favorite, our favorite professor, Dr. Peter Dodge, who we had just because the fact that when we were freshmen, and we had to take World History two semesters of it, and we both ended up in his class. And we-we just connected. And actually, he was Amy's honors advisor, but he also mentioned the fact that to us how, and I think it is a tribute to the kind of school Harpur was that you could have a relationship with a professor for four years, and he could say to you at the end, how he saw us grow from when he had us as freshman in the history course to when we graduated. IG: 09:28 But any sense of the girl that you were when you first arrived in Binghamton and well, you mentioned that you became more self-possessed and more sure of yourself, but you know what-what-what were some of the big world view changes or internal changes? RS: 09:52 Oh, because Harpur was small and it took students from all over New York State, but there definitely was a cultural difference between the students who came from New York City and those who came from upstate. And I have a call. I am going to get a glass of water so I can hear my voice beginning to- IG: 10:25 Okay, we are back on so we continue with Ruth Silverman. RS: 10:33 There was a cultural difference between the students who came from New York City and political cultural and political difference between those who came from New York City and those who came from upstate. And it was the beginning of the Civil Rights Movement, the protest against the war in Vietnam and most of the people who were politically active. And it was also the beginning of a student the student uprising against in loco parentis. And the students who were leading the movement were all the students from New York City. IG: 11:14 So, and how did you look upon these rebelling- RS: 11:19 Well, the big rebellions had not started when I got, when I got to the University of Wisconsin, you know, there it is, but the beginning of, you know, it was beginning- was beginning at Harpur, and it was my introduction to politics. I would have to say. Yeah. IG: 11:44 Because you had not thought of the world before in terms of politics. RS: 11:50 I do not think that if the student, if Harpur, had not attracted such a large contingent of students, I do not know whether or not the campus would have been the same, and I would have been the same because I teach at a local community college, and you do not, you do not get what at my at the local community college. What you got, and at Harpur, these were bright students. Sophisticated, used to traveling the subways, you know, traveling subways and busses by themselves. When they were younger, they just bought a different vibration, a different view of the world, a different politics as they had a different culture. IG: 12:38 And you found that exciting. RS: 12:40 Yes, yeah, the ones, the ones from upstate New York, were more laid back, placid, I guess, looking back upon it now, I would say they were more conservative. They were certainly not [inaudible] and forth on the moon. In fact, I remember there being some kind of a friction between a young woman, I think she was in our dormitory, who was Republican or something. Amy 13:09 Oh yes. And I had never been a Republican in my life. RS: 13:14 And there was some friction there between her and the ones who were beginning to leave, leave the upcoming movement [inaudible] are from upstate. [laughs] IG: 13:25 So, did you get involved in any of the student protests? Yourself? RS: 13:33 No, we were there because of the fact it was just beginning. Then, I mean, people were talking. And because you were in the sociology department, you know, issues were being discussed. But I think because by the time one year later, two years later, when I was at Wisconsin, I mean, that was the really beginning. You know, the free speech movement. The Free Speech Movement began at the University of California, Berkeley, during the time that I graduated Harpur and was at Wisconsin. And the free speech movement at that point, then just moved out, I-I assumed it also began. It went to Harpur, but it certainly went to University of Wisconsin. And interesting enough, one of the faculty members in the sociology department, William Sewell, circulated a letter around faculty at the University of Wisconsin supporting the free rights, free the free speech movement at Berkeley. So, things were just beginning to happen. I think if I had graduated in (19)66 I would have seen a bit more, but we were just on the cusp of it. I mean, you knew, you could tell it was coming. IG: 14:56 Right. So-so tell us you know, for those give us. A very quick history lesson. What was the free speech movement? Was it? And see, sort of, you know, the beginnings of it in at Harpur College. RS: 15:17 The free speech movement emerged as a protest against the war in Vietnam, and the students were, if I remember correctly, the students at Berkeley, Mario [Mario Savio], something about if I remember correctly, was the leader of the free speech movement at Berkeley, and he-he generated the students to come together and openly, you know, in protest-protest on campus, the war in Vietnam. And of course, at that point, college administrators were not we were not used to students protesting like that. In fact, I have a colleague who went to the College of William and Mary in Virginia right at the same time that I was going to Harpur, and she was editor of the newspaper, and she said that even a conservative-conservative-conservative place like the College of William and Mary, protest was beginning to start, even at a place like that, and she was editor of the newspaper, and somebody wanted to come to campus. Was it Aptheker [Herbert Aptheker], the historian, who was also a communist, and the students the college president would not let him come? And the college newspaper got involved, and they were writing articles in the newspaper, you know, free speech. So that was the issue. But you certainly did not have it in the (19)40s and the (19)50s, students organizing on campus, publicly coming out and protesting. And that is where the free speech, free speech movie goes. It is new. It is ever right to the same, you know, free speech that is in the bill of rights as students. IG: 17:04 Right. I mean, it must have been a very heavy time. Did it spill over into the way, into the dynamics of the classroom? Was there more, you know, challenging intellectually of the positions of your professors, although- RS: 17:26 Well, we had one professor in sociology. IG: 17:29 In Harpur or Wisconsin? RS: 17:31 Well, I will get to Wisconsin later, but now we are talking about Harpur. IG: 17:34 Yes-yes. RS: 17:35 Richard Hamilton, who seemed to attract a lot of those students, intellectually and politically. Oh, yes, a new club was formed in I think my junior year, the International Relations Club. And I think Ronald Bayer is one of the founders of the International and they managed to get Eleanor Roosevelt to come and speak, and that was what launched the International Relations Club. IG: 18:15 I remember speaking about Eleanor Roosevelt's visit. Amy 18:20 She visited the campus. Amy 18:21 Yes, it was a fantastic visit. The whole the whole campus, was filled with excitement that Eleanor Roosevelt was coming. IG: 18:29 Amy, just for the purpose of this interview, just tell us who you are. AW: 18:35 I am Amy Weintraub. I am Ruth Silverman's twin sister. IG: 18:38 Very good. AW: 18:39 Who also went to Harpur? IG: 18:40 Thank you. AW: 18:41 Yes, who also went to Harpur? RS: 18:44 So, yeah, Harpur, it was just beginning to Harpur, but I remember our professor, Dr. Dodge, we were listening there was talk show. So, they were talk shows back then, and I do not remember what the issue was, but it was just like today. And I do not know how I was listening to the radio, to this particular station and to this particular show, but somebody in the community was calling in and complaining about that socialist professor at Harpur College, you know, named Peter Dodge, and I remember being floored. And I remember going over to his office and saying, I just heard somebody on the radio call you a socialist professor. IG: 19:36 What did you think about that label at the time? Did you think it was ridiculous? Do you want to protect him? What-what- RS: 19:43 Absolutely it was absolutely ridiculous. Took, you know, to confuse sociology socialists. But he must have been interviewed somewhere, yeah, you know, and he must have said something. And he must have said he was a social- artfully, a sociology professor, and she heard that he was saying and she heard it a socialist. So, you know, it was just beginning at Wisconsin. I mean, at Harpur, two years later, at Wisconsin, I was taking a course on social change, and social change was happening on the campus and the course, I think that is the only time I dropped a course. But this course had no it was so up here, and it had no relation to what was happening outside on the campus. By the time I left, they were teachings all the time. And I was going through the teachings. I was learning so much at those teachings. IG: 20:46 Tell us about that. RS: 20:47 I think if I had, if I had entered Harpur two years later, it would have been the same thing. Okay, I do not because, in fact, it was the times, so it had nothing to do, I think, with Harpur versus Wisconsin, just the fact that I was at Wisconsin who graduated just on the cusp of the movie and the change. And one of the things, the changes that were being asked of the college at that time to do away with, it was not just, you know, the war and civil rights was the whole notion of in loco parentis, and we had to be in the dorm at 10 o'clock at night on weekdays, 12 o'clock on weekends. And there was a dorm mother who would lock the doors, and if you came in late, you have to ring the doorbell and explain where you were. But the big thing was, when you got to be a senior, you could stay out, but remember, there was no place to go. Anyhow, we were on the Harpur campus. Where were you going to go if you stayed out at night? The library closed right? Everything, everything closed down, right? So, the movement was to do away with this whole notion that you had to be in by a certain time and co-ed doors. Why were men and women separated. IG: 22:11 You know, clearly, you know, the movement reached a crescendo at Wisconsin. And you know, just if you could tell us about the teachings, because a lot of these institutions are, maybe have been absorbed by, you know, the culture, but we really do not know what they were at their very beginning. So, what are teachings? RS: 22:37 What is a teaching? IG: 22:38 Yes. RS: 22:38 A teaching is when you announce a public space and that you get some experts, like not-not-not necessarily people from your own university, but people who you have contacted, who are experts, and they come -and it can last for a whole day, and you can choose which one of those talks you want to go to, and it is like rolling, you know. And so, you are learning so much that is not part of a set curriculum. So, I remember, you know, learning so much about the history of Vietnam. And why? You know, why worry in Vietnam. They had never taken any history courses on that part of the world. But by (19)65, (19)66 we were really involved in Vietnam. And so, for that reason, there was more protest that was also, Wisconsin is a larger school, generate more people involved. It was a graduate and, you know, it was a graduate training school. But as I say, it was because you could feel it in the air. You could feel it in the air at Harpur. IG: 23:56 I am just trying to really see what a teaching is, is it, is it an auditorium filled up with experts, as you know, expounding on their subject? RS: 24:10 There was a certain sub, there was a certain topic that is going to be discussed, and it is going to be announced. The lectures are announced at a certain time, and who the speaker is, and these teaching because last the whole day. And you just decided which one it is that you wanted to go to. It was not like one little classroom where somebody was coming was a huge arena, and students were going to the teachings, rather than to their classes, as I did. I mean, I learned nothing about social change in the classroom, but boy, did I see social change occurring right before my very eyes, those two years at Wisconsin and-and the point is the fact that was students who were generating it. This was the whole notion of student. I mean, once before that time, administrators said one thing and everybody. The administrators were not used to students saying no. IG: 25:06 I can see that that is, that is- RS: 25:08 And at Harpur, we began to see students saying no. And I assume that after we left, that the young, the people who were one year, two years, three years behind us, moved into those positions, and, you know, because they saw what was happening. So, I assumed that after we left, it must have been like not, maybe not, because University of Wisconsin was such a large place, such a major university. But it must have been the same way at Harpur, because it was already beginning when we were there. IG: 25:42 So-so, for example, you said, you know, saying no to your administrators was one of the, one of the type of, you know, social, social changes that took place during those during those years, (19)64, (19)65 what were some other social changes that you were witness to, you know, during your college and early graduate years? What were some other social changes that were student-student initiative- RS: 26:18 Between our sophomore year and I am Junior here that summer, Amy and I were counselors at a camp in North Carolina, and we traveled down there by bus to a place called Hendersonville, North Carolina. I mean, train to Hendersonville, North Carolina, right? And it was the beginning of the student, students being involved in the Civil Rights Movement and going down in summertimes. And the last thing my father said to us before we left, he says, "Do not get involved in it." AW: 26:58 I am going to tell that story. RS: 27:00 What? AW: 27:01 I was going to tell that story. RS: 27:02 Do not get involved. You were going down there for the summer. I do not know what he thought we was doing. We were going to do. We were going to go. So, we take the train from New York to Washington, DC. This is, this is a fascinating story. We take the train and at Washington, DC, we have had to switch to another train. So, we walk into the first car, and it is really an old, old train, an old car, and it is completely black-black. So, Amy and I walk we made no what to do, so we walk out into the next car. It is the same thing. What we realized later on was that further up there were the nice, white coaches. We looked at each other, and when you are twins, you do not have to speak. But we knew being nice Jewish girls, that we could not move. We could not we would have to go in. And so, we traveled from Washington to Hendersonville AW: 28:13 In a black car. RS: 28:14 Completely black. AW: 28:15 Only whites in the car. RS: 28:17 And it was not years later until my husband could not take his class one day, and he said, I am showing a film called Eyes on the Prize, a very famous film about the Civil Rights Movement. And this particular one that I was showing was how interstate commerce, how Robert Kennedy had declared that anything that was going between states had to be desegregated, and it had recently been issued okay, that you had to- we did not know that. We just sat on the car, on the train, on the car, because we felt that we could not turn our backs people on the car, that particular car. Must have thought that Amy and I were two civil rights workers, and my father's words came back to me as I am sitting in this class, watching Eyes on the Prize and saying to myself, "Oh my gosh, my father's last words." And here we were. It had just been promulgated, and we were sitting on this train, the only two whites, what else could they think of us? That we were two young civil rights workers, right? Not that we were going to a Jewish camp to be councils for the summer. We were civil rights workers Testing, testing the new law. AW: 29:37 We got to know we got the house to go. They still had the black and white bathrooms. This was 1964. RS: 29:46 So now we go after in (19)64 This was (19)62, so of course, it would still be, AW: 29:51 You were right, we did not go in (19)64 we went in (19)62 years between [crosstalk] at a junior camp north and [crosstalk] [inaudible] to North Carolina. RS: 30:04 [crosstalk] When I went to Wisconsin and met my husband. [AW is offering tea: milk and the sugar and tea} and met my husband see between (19)64 he was two years ahead of me, so he arrived. When I arrived in (19)64, he arrived in (19)62 and between in January, I think between (19)63 and (19)64 He and three other white friends rented a car and drove down to the south. And they went to the trial, the Medgar Evers trial, and again, had just been the court said rumors had just been desegregated. But of course, they go to the trial, and there are these four white kids sitting in the with the blacks, even though it was desegregated, and I did not think anything of it when he first told me a story, but years later, I said, you drove down to the south with a car, four of you white with a Wisconsin license plate, and then you drop in on the trial, and you sit in that part of the courtroom that had been reserved for the Blacks. I said, "Where was your head?" But, of course, I did not purposely integrate the train, but in our own naive way. IG: 31:39 Yeah. But it is, it is, it is a wonderful story and a wonderful act, because we are too, either polite or-or- RS: 31:50 -to living. Yeah, Jewish-Jewish liberal. IG: 31:58 That you did not leave and you did. You know, it is, it is a wonderful thing. It is, you know- RS: 32:06 But anybody, could have come and looked at us and thought we were civil rights workers. Never told the story to my father. But of course, it was years like not that was not that long after, maybe, what 10 years later, when I saw that film and learned that they had just integrated the interstate, the trains and the busses going interstate. I mean, they had just done it like it was not a year before. IG: 32:39 But I am just interested, what were the feelings that sort of, you know, compelled you that no, we were going to stay here? Was it because of your liberality, of your, you know, ethics, of your politeness, or a combination? RS: 32:58 You know, it was both, because the year later, we broke that was the first time. Then we split up. Amy went back to the camp, and I was working at what was called the major camp, the head camp, and it was part of a new movement called Young Judea. And at the end of the summer, there will be a national meeting of everybody at the camp. Okay? So, Amy came up, and then there was this march on Washington. It was August 1963 and we had a debate whether or not young Judea, a delegation from Barryville, New York and [inaudible], would go to the March on Washington under the Young Judea banner. And there was pro and con. It was one of the most it was an epiphany for me, and we voted the vote Benjamin that we were going to send a group down and marching with a Young Judea banner. But what won the day was when people were talking about the prophetic tradition, that we must live that prophetic tradition as Jews of Isaiah, Amos, and that we had to go, and that was the first time in my life I had ever really seen religion used to justify, maybe not justify. So not a good word, but to use, just talk about, IG: 34:43 -to legitimize or- RS: 34:46 -maybe legitimize, also to back up a moral movement. IG: 34:51 Yeah, that is tremendous. It is tremendous. RS: 34:55 And, yeah. So, there was a lot happening. And Harpur being in Binghamton and being a small college, it was even happening there. But of course, it takes a while. I you know I was going to say earlier that this is the 50th anniversary of the sit ins at Columbia University. IG: 35:24 That is right. RS: 35:24 So, when we graduated in 19, when we were graduated in 1964 it was about two, three or four years before the-the real movement started. IG: 35:41 The only thing, the only you know, comparable thing that I could think of, was the when a religious movement actually legitimized a political one. Remember liberation theology in Latin America? IG: 35:57 Oh, yeah, yes, [inaudible] RS: 36:00 Yes, yeah. And we had, we belonged to a conservative synagogue. In addition to going to the middle school, we went to Hebrew high school three nights a week, from six to eight. But we had never really learned about talked about that prophetic tradition. That was the first time in my life, anybody brought up that prophetic tradition, but in Judaism, now, that whole profession, prophetic tradition is the thing that is behind what we call Tikkun Olam. AW: 36:29 Yes, it is called tikkun olam letak, a means to fix so the Reform Movement is very dominant. In the Reform Movement Tikkun Olam to fix the world, which means no to better the world. RS: 36:43 Actually, it comes from the Cesar Terek book. David has more of a mystical meaning, but it has taken over to have a social justice meeting that when Adam and Eve were expelled from the Garden, something was broken, and the sparks went out in- AW: 37:03 The Kabbalah. RS: 37:05 What? AW: 37:05 Kabbalah. RS: 37:05 Kabbalah, yeah, Kabbalah. Madonna said, the Kabbalah. But so, it had a mystical thing to bring together, those-those sparks as one. But then it became tied to, not mysticism, black social action. IG: 37:20 And there is a magazine Tikkun [crosstalk] RS: 37:27 So, Lerner, what is his name? Michael Lerner. IG: 37:33 So that, do you think that this prophetic movement was kind of a, not a driving force, but an accompaniment-accompaniment. RS: 37:44 It was a driving force for me because of the fact that I was not into Marxism. That was the time, basically, when Marxism came to college campuses. And a lot of the students from New York were into but they were political science majors, history majors, sociology majors, and they were into reading Marx. RS: 37:46 So, and you decided against that. RS: 37:46 Yeah, it did not. It did not speak to me. But when I discovered that I could be active and stand for certain things, and I could find it in my own tradition, I could find and I felt more I felt more comfortable coming to it from that tradition. IG: 37:46 So, tell us about sort of the formation of Ruth Silverman, the scholar, the- RS: 37:46 Yeah, and a lot of that was due to-to Dr. Peter Dodge, as I said, when we graduated, he said to us that we had grown so and when he first met us as freshman in his history class, and actually he became Amy's honors thesis advisor. And as a matter of fact, it was Amy, this is how close we were when we were sophomores. She said to me, “You know what?" When we are a senior, we are going to do an honors thesis, and we are going to graduate with honors." And I said, "Okay, sounds good to me," but she was determined to do it, and Dr. Dodge, which he could not, he could not be both of our thesis advisors, so Amy-Amy took him and I took somebody else. But Dr. Dodge was much more supportive of her, much more interested in what she was doing than the one that the one that I chose, what was exhilarating when at the end there was an honors thesis presentation, and all the faculty who had honor students and maybe some who did not, were invited to hear our presentations, and I had to get up in front of all of these professors and talk about my honors thesis, that changes you a lot. IG: 37:46 Susan, what did you talk about? RS: 37:46 What was my thesis in sociology? We had in sociology religion; we have read this book called Oligarchy. Well, the original book was by the Italian sociologist [Robert Michels] The iron law of oligarchy, and which he says, "Whoever says democracy", I think the famous quote was, "Whoever says democracy, it is actually me in the end, it is oligarchy." And he- Michelle's and he was, he had studied how the labor unions in Italy started out as being democratic, and then eventually they become less and less democratic as a small group of people tend to take over and run it. Okay? And so, a lot of people started taking that idea and applying it to other kinds of organizations. So, it was applied to the American Baptist. I know what you call the American Baptist Convention, or something like that. Somebody had written a book how they were supposed to be very lay oriented and very democratic. And he said, even in there, you tended towards this oligarchy. And then Seymour Martin Lipset did a study of the book was called Union Democracy. And he said, it is very interesting that when you have some people on top who form the organization or the union or whatever you want to call it, it is not going to be democratic. It tends to be more democratic when the groups exist already and then they coalesce together and forming a national organization. And then you tend to get more democracy, because they were autonomous to begin with. They were not so. So, I started the conservative movement in Judaism, which had three, three parts. There was the rabbinical training school. There was the organization for graduates of the rabbinical school. And then there was the organ, the organizational arm, which was called- AW: 37:46 Not son of America. United Synagogue of- RS: 37:46 United synagogue of America. And so, I did, you know, I went to conventions, I went did a lot of interviewing, and it was obvious that the one arm of the seminary had the- was, you know, the major controlling element, and that the congregational arm of it was not also autonomous, you know. And so that was my that was my honors thesis, and I had to get up and did not talk about my thesis. The fact that I still remember it. IG: 37:46 I was about to say, it is remarkable, but it really must have been a formative experience writing this. RS: 37:46 I see I see this today. I am on the board of the Long Island Progressive Coalition, which is the Long Island chapter of citizen action of New York. There are there is another called Metro Rochester, something like that. Both of us existed before citizen action of New York existed, but with they formed chapters in many places there were top down. It is actually top down because every chapter other than Rochester and Long Island were formed through Albany. So, because that we existed, we existed because we existed. You know, it is nice to have a statewide affiliation, but because of the fact that we existed before they existed, we have much. We have made it clear to them and certain issues, we are part of you, but we existed before you. But I can see that Seymour Martin Lipset was correct. It depends upon how the union was formed, or the organization was formed. And if you had [crosstalk] if you had individual chapters that people, come together, saying the strength in numbers, it is less likely to get oligarchy. IG: 37:46 D-o you think that that was a work that determined the future of your, you know, interests or, I mean, this is it must, you know. I mean, it must have propelled you on to- RS: 37:46 It must have, in some way. I mean- IG: 37:46 In some way, in some way. RS: 37:46 -because of the fact that I know every time there is some kind of a little friction between says an action in New York and us, I always say "I have said it before, I am going to say it again," that this is, this is what we learn in sociology, okay? And it is our history. That makes for that friction, because we existed before they did. IG: 45:24 By the time you got to your PhD studies- RS: 45:28 I was- I had changed my area. Well, when I got to Wisconsin, I became interested in sociology of health and illness, because that was my father's area. IG: 45:38 The sociology, excuse me, of- RS: 45:39 Health and illness. AW: 45:40 There is a thing here for you. Keep it. RS: 45:43 Became interested in sociology of health and illness, and my husband had done a master's thesis in that area, so actually, I built upon his master's thesis, and then when I went back to graduate school, there was a space between my masters and my doctoral work. IG: 46:03 How many years would you say I went back in (19)76 Yeah. So, what happened? You mentioned a husband. So where did you meet? RS: 46:19 At Wisconsin. IG: 46:20 At Wisconsin. RS: 46:21 Two years he was there, two years before me. So, there was, there was no sociology of health program major or anything like that. I am soon there is now. But being a small college, the course offerings were courses that you had to take if you were a sociology major, but Wisconsin, that was one of the major areas. My husband had a fellowship in national from the National Institute of Mental Health. So, but when I went back to NYU, I had given birth to my first child, and I became interested in studying the history of childbirth in the United States. And that got me- IG: 47:13 That is fascinating. RS: 47:14 What? IG: 47:14 Fascinating. RS: 47:15 And that got me involved. When I went back to NYU, I majored in women's health in the sociology department. IG: 47:24 Why did you decide to come to New York City rather than is that- RS: 47:28 Amy, I stayed in Madison the summer between my first and second years. Amy had a fellowship to New York City, and she stayed in New York City with three friends of ours. They rented the apartment of the wife of Hal Holbrook. Hal Holbrook, the actor Hal Holbrook, he would call up every once in a while, to find out how they were doing after his one of his performances as Abraham Lee, that is Mark Twain. He invited them to come. AW: 48:01 It was, um, it was a classroom, naturally. RS: 48:05 He, no, he was playing Tom Sawyer, not Tom Sawyer, Mark Twain, Mark Twain. He was the famous performer of Mark Twain. IG: 48:12 I have seen him on television, yeah. RS: 48:14 So, he, they met him afterwards, right? And I had spent the summer, and Madison had a job with one of the State Departments doing something, and I came to New York before going back from my second year. And I said, "I have to, when I get my masters, I have to take a break between Albany Binghamton and Madison." I said, "I need to go to New York," right? I have had enough, you know what, these little places. So, it was fascinating that actually my husband came from Philadelphia during that semester, the Winter Break in (19)65 or going on (19)66. We met in New York, and we had a great time together. And then we get back to Madison, and the first Saturday back, he says to me, he proposes. And I remember saying to him, I will never forget it. Of course, I will never forget anything. Well, I want to tell you something. "My sister and I have both decided that after we get our masters, we want to go in. We want to live in New York." I said, "So if you want to join me in New York. [laughs] IG: 49:33 You must have, he must have been very much in love with you. RS: 49:41 So, it was not the yes, it was not the No, it was a kind of a strange proposal. And it was not until, like two weeks later, that we finally came to realize that that was a proposal. [laughs] IG: 49:55 That is very sweet. RS: 49:56 So, I just wanted to be able to be in New York. And of course, the minute we moved to New York was it, I cannot say it was the very minute, but by the time (19)68 rolled around, we involved. We got involved in the McCarthy the whole "Stay Clean for Gene." We got involved in the McCarthy campaign. IG: 50:22 So, tell us about that. RS: 50:28 57th Street. Amy saw a notice somewhere that there was an office, and Amy can open the door if you are hot--your apartment, as usual, it is hot. AW: 50:44 Huh that the Parker's village. When you leave, before you leave. No, I have all my flowers. We bought those chairs. So, my husband managed to assemble all those four chairs, and I think he did a great job. But the bathroom looks so pretty with the new chairs and my flowers. So, I thought we could sit out there today. But given the weather, we cannot do that. IG: 51:21 I think another time, but it is a lovely view. AW: 51:24 It is. RS: 51:26 So, Amy went and someone said to me, if you were from the Bronx, you do not want to work out of here. So, they sent me to a place in the Bronx on 161st Street. And I told them where I lived, and they said, oh, there is a lovely reform Democratic Club up right where you live. That is organizing for McCarthy, Gene McCarthy. So, it was right near me. And not only did I work for Gene McCarthy, um I became- my husband, and I became members of the club, it drew in a lot of young people, even up in the Bronx, because he was teaching at Fordham, they were young people who were protesting the war in Vietnam. And this little reformed Democratic Club attracted lots of young people who revitalized it. And I stayed with the fact. As a matter of fact, I ran for state office from my assembly district, and I won. I was taken the democratic state committee woman from the 83rd assembly district for several years. IG: 52:38 You have a very storied career. RS: 52:43 And the funny story is, the second they did not expect me to win the machine Democrats. So, the second time I ran, they put the assemblyman's mother ran against me, because this was a inter Democratic Party, intra Democratic Party primary, general election. So, I would go, you talk about how I changed. I went as a quiet little girl entering Harpur and a few years later, in 1968 in the morning, time I am doing subway stops, handing out my literature. And then I said, you know, I can do a lot, get to a lot more people. I cannot keep running up and down the platform. You know, a lot of people coming in on this end, and I cannot get to the people coming in on this end. So, I recruited Amy. I took one end of the platform, [laughter] I took my literature, and then about eight o'clock, it starts thinning out, because at eight o'clock I am going to work, and I see Amy heading towards somebody at the other end of the subway, and I look, oh my gosh, it is my assemblyman. She was heading over to him with my piece of literature, asking I made a [inaudible] something. [laughs] I got there just as she got [inaudible] [laughs] IG: 54:17 And does Amy realize what-what= RS: 54:21 She did not know who he was. I said, you know he was- I said, "Good morning, Assemblyman, taking the subway, the subway station." [laughter] IG: 54:22 It is a good story. So, you are in your work as a politician, what do you think are your main achievements? What did you aspire to do? What did you accomplish? RS: 54:52 I think, I think you know who started it, the position of a committee woman. Eleanor Roosevelt, she insisted that there be a position for women. So, from each district, each assembly district, there was a female committee woman and a male committee woman, and it started with her. So, I was not running against a male. I was running against I was running against a female. Um, so what-wat was the question? IG: 55:31 Accomplishments? RS: 55:32 Accomplishments. Oh, yeah. So, you know the reform Democrats wanted to reform the way elections and politics are in. They wanted to move away from the back room, okay, where people decided who was, who the candidates were going to be. So, there would be the statewide conventions, and if you got enough votes at the statewide convention, you did not have to go the petition, right? Which, when I learned that, I thought, well, this is not much of a reform. There should not be a convention at all. Why are we having a convention? Anybody who wants to run you get enough signatures and you get on the ballot to run. Why should it be that some people get, you know, the blessing that the convention and they get more than 25 percent and somebody else has to go to the petition route. So, my proudest moment was when Hugh Carey ran for governor. Oh, that year I got so many phone calls from people who wanted me to give them the vote at the state convention in Buffalo, and he calls me, and he asked him for my vote. And I said, well, the time that she placed it, I really do not like this convention system. I said, I would rather there would not be any convention at all, they say. So, I think when I get up to Buffalo, I am just going to pass. I am not going to vote for anybody. And he says, "Ruth Silverman, you could sound just like my kind of person." [laughs] And then the other thing was my Bronx- IG: 57:27 How old were you at the time? RS: 57:33 That was not the [inaudible] Well, I was 21 when I graduated in November, (19)64 and this was like (19)74 maybe by now 31 it takes, it takes growing up, but my growing up and becoming who I am started, started at Harpur and my parents were absolutely correct to realize that we needed a small college in order to grow we- I just, you know, I cannot, I cannot, I cannot sing the praises of small colleges enough. I even, I, no matter how large national is, we do not have large lecture classes. I mean, you have a large load of, you know, 4, 3, 5, classes to teach with. each class is top well, in sociology, it is 34 so students Nassau Community College do not sit in a large lecture hall. Well, nobody cares about you and who you are and what your name is. IG: 58:32 No, I have heard said a number of people I have interviewed from Harpur College, the Harpur College at the time, was equal to an excellent, you know, elite- RS: 58:48 You know what they call- IG: 58:50 Private college. RS: 58:53 You know what AW: 58:54 [crosstalk] Brown University. And I worked harder at Harpur College, and I did at Brown University. RS: 58:58 And, you know, they used to call Harpur when we were there, we were called the Swarthmore of the state university system. I do not know whether or not what it is like now. So-so much larger, whether or not students who go there IG: 59:10 Have the same experience. I do not think so. I do not think so. It is a very different- AW: 59:15 How many students are there now? IG: 59:18 At Harpur College? AW: 59:20 For college? IG: 59:20 I do not know. I do not know. I mean, it is, it is, I am sure that it is, RS: 59:25 it was, it was a special place. It was very special. And I felt when I went to University of Wisconsin that I was totally prepared. As a matter of fact, my theory course at Wisconsin was a- what was the exact same course I had to take social science majors. Had to take up what was it called at the end of the there is a word for it, to take- AW: 59:49 Colloquium. RS: 59:51 Yeah, it was, and it was based upon the philosopher Nagel. So, I had to go through the if then stuff about theory. I-I cannot tell Wisconsin, it is the same course I have already taken it at Harpur. IG: 1:00:06 Must have given you a great deal of confidence, right? You know and well, and it is probably an easy pass into a difficult graduate course. What was NYU like? What you know, you-you did a very interesting dissertation. And was kind of, what was, sort of, you know, the climate, what was then, what like in New York City- RS: 1:00:33 In NYU, I did part time- IG: 1:00:36 In intellectual circles- RS: 1:00:38 I did NYU part time, taking two courses in the fall and one course. You would not go to NYU for the high quality of the teaching. IG: 1:01:03 Really? RS: 1:01:04 I had Elliot Friedson was one of the top experts in this field of sociology of medicine, sociology and healthcare, whatever you-you know, whatever you want to call it, right? And then he moved from there. He became very much involved in studying professions, not just the medical profession. So, I take a seminar with him. Meets one day a week for an hour and 40 minutes. So you go to NYU, you take a course with one of the leading experts. He was writing a new book. He would come in, start reading us from where he had left off, and at an hour and 40 minutes, he put the book and correct there. And then the next time we would he would read from where he had left off, reading and chewing gum at the same time. IG: 1:01:59 Did not any of the students complain or about his manner of teaching? RS: 1:02:08 Not him in particular, but what the students did at one point, they wanted to have a student rep on one of the faculty committees. I do not remember how I got it, but I was the student rep, and by this time, you know, I knew my own mind, and I remember the students, well, it was not formal, but I remembered that some informally, the students were taking one stand, and I was supposed to be the representative, and I sitting in on this meeting, and I am listening and I am listening, and I think it was maybe by hiring somebody. I do not remember what it was, but I decided that their position was not the right one. So, I voted the way I felt the vote should go. And I do not remember what the issue was, whether or not it was courses, the hiring of somebody, I do not remember what it was. They were not faced with me, the students, I said, but I have to, you know, I am sitting there, I am listening to the arguments, and you know, you did not, you know, I was not sent here just to do what you [inaudible]. I was sent here to listen and to, you know, do the best I can, you know, but to raise my hand and to vote on something that you know based upon what every argument that I am hearing. And it just so happened that there was an argument that was, you know, different than I thought, better than yours. IG: 1:03:44 So-so, you know- RS: 1:03:46 But all this happened, I have to say this will happen, yeah, from going to Harpur. I do not know whether any of this would have come through if we had gone to a larger, a larger school, but it was the atmosphere of excellence, academic excellence, but also interaction between students and professors, beginning to feel that the times were changing. IG: 1:04:13 They were changing, but also your own upbringing, because your father was an academic. I think that- RS: 1:04:21 he was not, um, he was a state employee. He headed up the Department of Statistics. We did not teach, but AW: 1:04:27 He headed up the department was called epidemiology. I remember statistics or epidemiology; it was one of those. RS: 1:04:36 It was interesting that my father had done a study through the data from the Department of Mental Hygiene on violence committed by people who were mentally ill, and he did it with at that point, the Commissioner of the Department of Mental Hygiene and. Somebody wrote an article in The New Yorker, which I had never heard of at that point, in which they mentioned the study done by Benjamin Malzberg and Hoke. I think hope was the depart was head of department at that point, and Dr. Dodge got the New Yorker, and he was reading this article, and Malzberg is not a very common name. [laughs] So after class one day, he comes up to us, and he says, "Would you happen to have a father, Benjamin Malzberg, who is a sociologist. So, do you relate to him? " and we said, "Oh, that is our father." IG: 1:05:36 A proud moment. RS: 1:05:42 Very proud, very proud. Also in history, American history, when we got to the point about the nativist movement, the nativist movement of the early 1900s and a lot of my farmer, [crosstalk], that led to the passage of the immigration law in 1926 and he had done a lot of work using his data from the department, but that was his dissertation. As a matter of fact, using statistics to show that any tendency to immigrants having more mental illness was due if you control for variables like age, etc., you know, AW: 1:06:21 Or acculturation. RS: 1:06:22 You know, was, it was a culturation. AW: 1:06:23 The second generation, the mental illness among Jews had definitely dropped. RS: 1:06:27 So, any anyhow, um- IG: 1:06:29 From the first? AW: 1:06:30 From the first generation, RS: 1:06:32 Anyhow, that was- AW: 1:06:33 On the first generation more mental illness because they were getting, they were culturing a totally different culture. It was, you know, being- IG: 1:06:40 I have heard that said that they carried kind of the burden of- AW: 1:06:45 Exactly. IG: 1:06:45 -of, you know, scrambling, both [crosstalk] RS: 1:06:50 Alcoholism, anything that it was a matter of migration, and especially- IG: 1:06:54 That is so fascinating. RS: 1:06:55 So, and especially a lot of young men being here by themselves. They did not have any-any families with them? IG: 1:07:01 What are you calling first generation? Though, is it? Is it? You know people first gen born? RS: 1:07:07 I know people get confused on that. First generation is with those who are first born in this country. IG: 1:07:12 Yes, rather than their parents. RS: 1:07:14 Their parents are not first generation. First generation means those who were young. Yeah. So anyway, he-he asked us whether or not we were related to Benjamin Malzberg. AW: 1:07:27 The history professor, Oscar Hamlin had written a book. RS: 1:07:30 Oh, yes, so we got something, yeah, to the section on him when we had this book at that time. I do not know maybe that is the lead from colleges, but was every topic had a pro and a con. I mean two people, you know. I mean not-not opinion pieces, but from the academic literature. And so, the piece that was in there from the academic side. And there, in the body of one of the articles, a name pops up. And of course, the history professor also got it. [crosstalk] But that would not have happened had we gone to a larger university. IG: 1:07:31 Of course, of course. RS: 1:07:31 So, you know, our preparation for graduate school was top notch. And I am so happy that we got into Harpur, because while I was fourth in the class and Amy was fifth, math was not our [inaudible]. So, we got through algebra, and we got through geometry, and we decided not to take any more math, which was, I do not know how they allowed us to do that, because these days, in order, they did not call it the advanced Regents diploma, but you really need the third that third math class and that they took. They took the two of us anyway, and they took one other student who did not take the third math class, and the three of us, when we got to Harpur our first semester, had to take a course to make up for it in probability. There I am- we are without my father, the statistician I recently was talking to a friend who was an electrical engineer, and I told him that I had to take probability my first year because I did not take trigonometry in high school. He said, "Ruth, you should have taken trigonometry. It is much easier than probability." So, we made Harpur anyway. IG: 1:07:35 Yeah, you made Harpur anyway. RS: 1:07:35 And as a matter of fact, I do not know whether or not I even remember who Kathy Henderson and Stuart Lewis from Harpur also went and the admissions officer at one point. I guess, he, I do not know how my parents knew this, but the admissions over asked Dr. House, who was the guidance counselor at Milton, whether or not there were any more students and more [inaudible] and more students on the level of the four of us. RS: 1:07:35 Well, but that is, that is, you know, certainly a great, great accolade to Harpur College and the education that you all have gone. RS: 1:07:36 But I am curious, because people who were at Harpur, this is the (19)60s, yeah, so people who were at Harpur in (19)68 was there ferment there? IG: 1:10:43 Yes. RS: 1:10:44 Eventually? IG: 1:10:45 Eventually-eventually, I think that they were more certainly politically involved. But Ron Bayer, for example, is quite a graduate of (19)64- RS: 1:10:57 (19)64 and I think he was active in students for democratic [crosstalk] IG: 1:11:00 He was extremely-extremely active- RS: 1:11:02 When I think, when I think of the students coming from New York and how politically active they were, the name that always comes to mind is Ronald Bayer. IG: 1:11:12 I mean, he is tremendous. And so, in my mind, he sorts of, you know, epitomizes the most [crosstalk] RS: 1:11:19 He is the one who started the International Relations question, I am positive of it, and he must have been the one who contacted Eleanor Roosevelt. IG: 1:11:27 Right. So-so, yeah, you know, and I have heard from, you know, the majority, I would say, the vast majority, of individuals I interviewed what you know, superlative-superlative education, and they, they got at Harpur and individualized attention and all that. So, you know, just your career trajectory, you graduated from NYU. What-what did you do? RS: 1:12:01 I teach at Nassau. IG: 1:12:02 No, I know is that your, was that the job that you got after getting your PhD, and did you just stay there? Or did you, kind of- RS: 1:12:14 I had a teaching assistantship at NYU. RS: 1:12:16 I also had a research assistantship one year, and then when I graduated and was trying to work on the dissertation as well, but I had, you know, children, I had to go somewhere. So, I had to pay for-for Ari, and that when I had the second child to go, to go to daycare, so I taught a course at Nassau Community. And then, you know, I eventually just stayed there and I got two National Endowment for the Humanities awards, [inaudible] IG: 1:12:16 I see. IG: 1:12:54 In what? RS: 1:12:55 The first one because my area, that was a fascinating seminar. I spent the summer, spent eight weeks at Cornell. It was called humanities and medicine, but it was, really was a sociology, in many ways, a sociology, of course, but it was interdisciplinary. And was Sandra Gillen was an interdisciplinary and he ran the seminar. We read lots of literature to see the connection between medicine and how people illness is defined and how it is reflected in the humanities and in the literature, etc. It was a fascinating seminar and- RS: 1:13:37 And what was that? RS: 1:13:38 My essay to get in- IG: 1:13:40 Excuse me, what-what year was- RS: 1:13:44 1986. And then 10 years later, I think it was, I was asked to teach a course on the history of Israel in the history department, because, actually, my husband was approached by the chairperson because of the fact that they had it on the books and it had not been taught in years and years and years, the chairperson happened to know my husband, and my husband said, my wife can teach it. She has got an acknowledge. You have an excellent background. But in her graduate work at NYU, one of the first papers she wrote was a history of the labor movement in Israel. And so, she knows something. So, I taught the course. And then one summer, Michael Stanislavski was one of the leading experts in the history of Zionism, was giving a seminar. The first seminar at Cornell was open to people from community colleges and four-year colleges. No, that was the community college one, the one at the one at- AW: 1:14:51 Columbia. RS: 1:14:51 -Columbia. Now I do not remember which one, one of them was only four. For community college people. So, I was only competing against people from community colleges, but the other one was open to anybody, from anyone and yet, I was able to I was able to get in a community college competing against people from four-year colleges, and the college is very proud, because college likes to publicize the people who get these national awards- IG: 1:15:23 Of course. RS: 1:15:24 -and I brought two of them. IG: 1:15:26 So, humanities of medicine and? RS: 1:15:28 The humanities, it was so interdisciplinary. We were reading Roth [Philip Roth], The Anatomy Lesson and using that as a parttime to understand something about modern medicine. People were doing. There were people there who were art specialists. There were people there who came with a drama background and all bringing a different perspective on-on medicine and illness from their, from their disciplines. They, I mean the famous, but the famous painting, I do not remember. It is in the universe. It is in Philadelphia, at the Philadelphia Art Museum, the famous one, when the-the operation and shows the doctor. [crosstalk] IG: 1:16:19 I can see it. I can see it. I do not know. I can see it the very it is a surgery. It is an autopsy. RS: 1:16:29 Autopsy or something. IG: 1:16:31 I think it is an autopsy. And it is very stark, and so same colors black- RS: 1:16:35 It was brilliant, and they were the way he-he wove us back and forth between different disciplines and the understanding of- IG: 1:16:44 That is more commonplace now. You know, places like Columbia, for example, have narrative and medicine program that was started by a doctor who also has a PhD in literature in the early 2000s I forget her name, but it is sort of, you know, but when, when you were looking back at (19)86 I think it was really you were in the vanguard of such a movement. RS: 1:17:09 Oh, yeah. I remember somebody did a slide presentation on Da Vinci of his drawings. And he had one picture of himself in which he drew himself with a wound. I was taken aback. I raised my hand and I say, you know, psychology, psychiatry, has so much to say about penis envy. He said, "Look at this picture." I said, "Why has anybody ever written up womb envy?" AW: 1:17:46 Written up what? RS: 1:17:49 Womb envy, W, O, M, B, and it was actually directed towards Sondra Gilman, silence. But to me, that was an obvious. He was depicted in this drawing, having a womb. That tells us a lot about something. IG: 1:18:14 So, you got this- you had two awards, and that allowed you to do what? RS: 1:18:21 Well, when you get into the seminars, first of all, it is, it is prestigious for a community college to have somebody come in and get to get to and then you have to write a paper as part of this. You have to do some research. IG: 1:18:35 Right. Do they give you money to- RS: 1:18:37 Oh, yes, you get a stipend, of course. And actually, the one that I took, the one at Columbia, that was, that was the summer that my mother had her first heart attack, so I was going up and back to war on a lot. So, I did not do the best piece of research I possibly could, but I did something I was interested in. What since Freud did not consider himself Jewish in the traditional sense, I was always curious about, well, how did he feel about Zionism so? But then they were nine of us. All seminars are 12 people, three women. I was one of them. One of them was a Palestinian woman. It was very-very interesting. So, she was not, you know- Two years later, my colleague in the English department, Sharon leader, who was both a developer of the Jewish Studies project at the college and the Women's Studies project, called me up and said, "Ruth, you know, the National Women's, National Women's Association, the women of studies, whatever it was, she said, you know, has been very cool to having panels, having anything to do with Jewish women." And she says, "I finally worked on them, and they have agreed to have some panels this summer at Skidmore, which where they met. He said, “Would you give a talk on women in Israel?" And I said, "Well, I am not an expert on Israel." I said, "I am not an expert on women in Israel." But as for talking, I said, "What, you know, Sharon, I think I want to do a paper on women and Zionism. And I said, you know, of all the papers in that seminar on Zionism, not a single one of them was about a woman." AW: 1:20:36 And there is a book. Arthur Hertzberg. RS: 1:20:37 I am going to get there. I am going to get here. So, they made your book in the field, Arthur Hertzberg, Zionist Idea, came in 1959 published. It was a hit, and it was reissued and reissued and reissued and reissued. There is not a single woman in that compendium, right about of a woman I said, you know, I think I need to do a paper and do some research called Women Written out of History. So, I gave the paper, and I revised the paper so many times, and gave the paper at various places, and I was on to something. IG: 1:21:20 You were so forward looking. RS: 1:21:22 I was so for- because did you see this month- IG: 1:21:28 And when was this? This is- RS: 1:21:29 1990s. IG: 1:21:30 That is, that is tremendous. You know- RS: 1:21:32 -had awesome magazine, which my mother made us like [crosstalk] maintenance life, members of this organization had, also has an article this month. It just came the other day. [crosstalk] let me finish yet. I will get it. You can take a look at okay, go, get go, get it. Has been reissued, not reissued. A new a timely, new book, new people in it. And guess what? This volume now includes women. [inaudible] magazine [inaudible] to do about it that, finally, that women are coming back into the history. IG: 1:22:14 Well, exactly, [crosstalk] RS: 1:22:17 Zion is invented now, putting women back in the picture. I- boy, was I on to something? IG: 1:22:26 Just recently, the New York Times started doing an obituary column of the women were forgotten. [crosstalk] AW: 1:22:39 Yeah, right. I read some of those. It was absolutely fascinating. IG: 1:22:45 This was very recent. RS: 1:22:51 "Female and Zionist then and now, reclaiming the voices of the women who helped shape the Jewish liberation movement." Now, what is really fascinating is, okay. This is the article. IG: 1:23:02 Yes. RS: 1:23:04 Yesterday I get the Jewish week, and the Jewish Week has an interview with Gil Troy, the new the one who put he is fighting it. He is quite a scholar. AW: 1:23:16 if you want to take a look at that. RS: 1:23:17 Could not believe, I could not believe it was the same book, the person who was interviewing him does not mention there is not one mention that what is new about the new is that, not only that, it has got some new men in it that were not in the original one. Not one mention in this conversation, going back and forth, that the new book now includes women for the first time. IG: 1:23:43 Right. AW: 1:23:45 Here it is. IG: 1:23:47 It is, it is a tremendous- AW: 1:23:50 Jewish Week, Gil Troy, the most recent one. RS: 1:23:55 [crosstalk] And I got this earlier in the week, and then this came yesterday, and talking about the new addition, there is only one, there is only one mention of women in this conversation, right? And it is a criticism that Anne Roiphe was included in it, but does not mention any other woman that is included, and there is no addition. 63 women were mentioned. I am glad that it mentions, you know, it has been re-re edited, and includes women. I am not very happy that a major paper that goes out to hundreds, 1000s and 1000s of Jewish people in, you know, in the New York City area has this- is unhappy with the fact that, but Roiphe does not know diaspora Jewish or Zionist history or religion or philosophy, it is hard to place Roiphe seriously in a serious volume on Zionist ideas. Other than that, there is no mention in this- AW: 1:24:56 This whole review. RS: 1:24:58 -about all the other women who have been included, but having a problem with Anne Roiphe. [laughter] IG: 1:25:06 Right-right. So- RS: 1:25:09 Write that to the answer room. I think it is time to write a letter. IG: 1:25:11 Yes-yes-yes. So-so you are still kind of charging ahead and-and, you know, challenging the status quo, and you are sort of, you know, true to your value, to your roots, and as a young person, you know- RS: 1:25:32 Actually, in many ways, we are following me through on my father, not just, but not just the fact that we are sociologists, but he was one of the first immigrant boys, okay, Jewish boys, to go to City College, and then he went. He got a- he went, he got his masters at Columbia. Then he got a friend's fellowship to go to Europe. He was going to study with Emile Durkheim, but by the time he got there, and it was the war of an on Emile Durkheim had died, but he studied with, you know, I think, Amy Durkheim, son in law, who was also an expert in the field. And he went to the London School of Economics. Then he goes back to Columbia and finish up his PhD. And the reason why he did his dissertation on immigrants is it is because of that that when he you think, you think academia has left us today, back then, academia was leading the nativist you look at the literature on nativism is all coming from academia and especially from sociologists. And he is sitting in all of these courses, whether it is at Columbia City College- IG: 1:26:42 Oh, I remember, I remember- RS: 1:26:44 English, England, and they are all talking about, you know, these immigrants- IG: 1:26:50 Right. RS: 1:26:55 -whose genetics are lesser, and that, you know, what will happen if we cream them into the country. It was not coming from, you know, the- it was coming from academia. I took a seminar once at the American Museum of Natural History with Professor associate of biology, actually from Stony Brook, who became interested in these racist biological ideas. And he pointed out we were sitting in the Museum of Natural History that in the 1930s the guy named Mueller, who was head of the Museum of Natural History here in New York, was one of those nativist racists, and that Hitler thought in many ways that the United States would join the war on his side, because we had all of these academics and the Institute out in Long Island, the scientific Institute. IG: 1:27:46 Oh, that is [crosstalk] springs-springs. That is where [crosstalk] the people- RS: 1:28:05 That is what eugenics records were kept. IG: 1:28:05 Cold springs. RS: 1:28:06 Cold Spring, that is where the oceanic records were kept. So he is, so here is a young Jewish [crosstalk]. Here is a young Jewish boy, and he is sitting at all these classes, and he is hearing people lecture and talk about immigrants. And so, when he got the job up in Albany, he had a wonderful mentor. He first got the job as the assistant director, and the person who, Dr. Pollock, who was the director, was his mentor and helped him do his dissertation using the statistics from the Department of Mental Hygiene. And from there, he just, he has mentioned in the introduction to Gunnar Myrdal’s An American Dilemma [Gunnar Myrdal’s An American Dilemma: The Negro Problem and Modern Democracy (1944)]. His work is mentioned. So anyway, one of the things I am involved in when I moved to the island is I am on the board of the Central American refugee center. And when people, when people ask me why I joined the Central American refugee center? Well, I joined it for two reasons. I said, I follow this. I am following through on my father's work. I said, he did it academically. I said, I give you I joined the board to do it in a different in a different fashion. IG: 1:29:19 That is beautiful. I think that you know we are going to, you know, think of wrapping up [crosstalk] RS: 1:29:29 When I think this, all began, shy, a shy little girl, I have a story to tell we all had to take on our freshman year at Harpur, this broad-based social science course that it was neither sociology political science, okay? And we read books like gold race all of a sudden, IG: 1:29:51 Not kingdoms of nations. RS: 1:29:54 No. IG: 1:29:55 Something of nations. RS: 1:29:57 No. We were reading. We were reading those books, right? Um, broad, general books, Pirenne. We did not read that in history, Pirenne], [Henri Pirenne], Medieval Cities [Medieval Cities: Their Origins and the Revival of Trade], right? I think we read that in that social so, I mean, we were reading really high-level stuff, and the professor, one day, who was not Jewish, decided that he was going to devote the class discussion to the {inaudible] trial. AW: 1:30:22 I am not going to say that. IG: 1:30:24 To the what? AW: 1:30:24 [inaudible] trial. RS: 1:30:26 [inaudible] Franklin [crosstalk] was on trial. So, you know, instead of discussing this high level, okay, Richard Sawyer, I even remember his name, so he starts talking about it. And one of the first comments that come out, Paul [inaudible], I even remember the kid's name, Jewish from New York. Says, "Oh, well, why are we discussing that now, that was a while ago," and the teacher was not Jewish, literally, the mouth fell down. And from my community, where I grew up, in old New York, nobody, but nobody would ever say that. And what did I do? RS: 1:31:09 What did you do? RS: 1:31:10 I kept quiet. I had not yet found my voice, and in many ways, I was too shocked. IG: 1:31:21 Wonderful example, that is, that is, that is what I was searching for, I think, in the beginning, because that that shows you that huge road [crosstalk] RS: 1:31:30 In front of him was a small class, but nevertheless, in front of all these people, I was open my mouth. I had never heard a Jew speak like that. IG: 1:31:43 No. RS: 1:31:44 -not where I came from. IG: 1:31:45 No. RS: 1:31:45 -you would not. You would never say a thing like that. IG: 1:31:47 But-but you are saying this that you had not found your voice, that you-you were to, you know, we are taking a back. I was embarrassed for him. RS: 1:31:59 And I tell you, actually, I think the first time I ever found my voice, I used to go to services in Albany. We would go to service Saturday morning Binghamton. So, at Wisconsin, I went to the hill. Now, I went to services every Saturday. And one February, cold February day I walk in, it is quiet, it was so cold, and I walk into the sanctuary. There is eight men. They look at me and the look of disappointment on their face, but you cannot walk [crosstalk]. So, I sit down, and then somebody says, "Well, you know, we only need one other man, because then we can take the Torah out and count the Torah as a male." AW: 1:32:50 And the Torah is a female word. RS: 1:32:53 Well, this is the second time in my life I have got this total I had never known this. Heard anybody say that, and I had no control of what came out of my mouth. I was thinking this, and as it was in my head, I hear it coming out of my mouth. I do not believe this. I said, "I am sitting here a living, breathing human being, and you are not going to count me, but you are going to take the Torah out. And not only you and count the Torah, you are going to count the Torah as a male, [inaudible] this." Absolute silence. Nobody said anything, and we never did [inaudible] They got the Torah. It must have been my second year. I must have been engaged already, because the fact when I left to come to New York and get married, the rabbi called my apartment and spoke to my roommates. He-he had been sitting on it my comment for months and months, and he wanted to call and let me know that he wanted me to participate in the high holiday services in the fall. The only problem was, I was gone. [laughs] IG: 1:34:14 [inaudible] what? RS: 1:34:14 I was gone. IG: 1:34:15 You were gone. RS: 1:34:16 He waited until August, and I had never told him that he knew my husband, but I had never told him that Arnie and I were leaving and that we- I was too busy, you know, finishing up looking for a job, looking for a place where we were going to live, you know, preparing a wedding from Wisconsin that never thought on me to go tell him I should have. I really feel badly. I did. I so he waited until I am gone- IG: 1:34:43 Yeah, but-but you changed his mind. RS: 1:34:47 To-to think about it, and to say yes, he wanted me to, and I would have loved to have been there to participate, but I cannot be in two different places at the same time. IG: 1:34:56 That is a great That is a great story. That is a great story. Let us, let us, if you were, you know, since, since students are going to be listening to these interviews, I always ask my interviewees toward the conclusion, what advice would you give a beginning student about a beginning you know person, either you know about to graduate or how they how they should think about the rest of their career. You know, what are the most important lessons that you have learned from-from your you know, studies and from your life that you would like to impart to these young people. RS: 1:35:42 As important as the academic part is, one of the things that you should be open to is getting involved in groups and issues that are not tied completely to what you are there should be a connection, but there should be some kind of cause, or some kind of a group, because of the fact that often it is for these kinds of connections that you make, not completely in the academic world, but that can lead you into very, very interesting places. Now, if somebody wants to get a PhD in neuroscience, of course, my advice was, stick closely to your academic career and find yourself a professor who will be a mentor you would give academia but I still think that it is important to try and move outside of academia and try and, you know, there are groups out there that, even with your interest in getting a PhD in neuroscience, that would be love to have you come and join them, and, you know, be on some kind of, let us say, advisory board, and that can lead you often to all kinds of interesting, interesting places, people that you never would have met. IG: 1:37:15 That is very good advice. RS: 1:37:22 So it was, it was, you know, moving beyond-beyond, moving into McCarthy campaign. And then, you know, they are being so involved in running for a political office. And then when I moved to Long Island, I felt, I felt like, I need to, I need to join something. I need to become involved. take how to take my time. But it is all these groups that are now involved in that, you know, they make an- in fact, I become the expert on immigration and what is happening in Long Island, in my department, because my involvement with the immigration issue. Fact, in fact, actually, I wrote up a paper. I presented a paper at a Hofstra conference. They have a suburban study of suburbia center, or something like that. And they were having a conference, and they were talking about the changing nature of Long Island. And I actually, I know, because my involvement there, I actually went and did a research paper. We went to the census. I did, you know, I did a number of things, and I present [crosstalk] as a matter of fact- IG: 1:38:32 So-so about what-what-what- you know, in a nutshell- RS: 1:38:37 Why-why, why was, why was there so much conflict all of a sudden around immigration on Long Island? And I thought of this because Andrew Beveridge, one of the leading sociologists of immigration at Queens College, I attended a session of his sociological national meeting in New York City, and he said he is talking about the fact that, you know, there were no immigrants on Long Island. That is the guy ever driven around the place. You go to certain communities on Long Island, well, the South doors are, I mean, you are not going to see them. In memory where I live. You go to Hempstead. Yeah, you will see them. You go up to Glen Cove. Glen Cove had such a bitter- they tried to, they tried to pass that that they could not stand out. And you know, I said, so yes, I give him. And I said, the proper the problem is that, in terms of the general numbers, they might be like, but you take a place like Glen Cove and all of a sudden, for some reason or other, you see the numbers of immigrants increasing. And then I did a similar community out on Suffolk County Farmingdale. And he said, it is not so much whether the numbers are 70 percent the point is the fact that if you census after census, you see the numbers increasing. That is the important point, not whether you have a map of the census and you see that, you know, in a large census district that you look at within the census district, and that is why there was conflict on Long Island, because they were moving into suburbia, where they never been. We associate immigrants with New York City, right? But they were moving into suburbia, and maybe your census figures did not pick it up. But you cannot always go by the Census figure, and you got to break it down into smaller units, and that is why we had so much conflict. They were moving. It was the new movement, and there was a woman who came to Carson for a while, got a BA at Harvard. She got her law degree at Harvard. She came involved in a Spanish organization in western so when she came to New York, she started something the clinical the workplace project, because Carson deals with the legal issues. She was dealing with what was happening in Long Island, and she wrote a book called suburban sweatshops. How immigrants are moving to the Long Island, and maybe they are not working in a factory. But one other sweat shops, lawn care. Kitchen, restaurant kitchens, you know, you go through the issues, calling them suburban sweatshops. IG: 1:41:23 Right. That is very interesting. RS: 1:41:27 And but you know, if I had not looked out of the confines of academia and become involved with community organizations, would I know this. And as a matter of fact, then, matter of fact. Deborah, not, no, Jennifer-Jennifer, something, she kind of, she got a MacArthur reward for her work in setting up a workplace project and her book. IG: 1:41:50 Jennifer who? RS: 1:41:50 Jennifer Gordon, I think. She got it. She got she became a MacArthur scholar. But how would I know about this if I had just, if I had not gotten out of academia and looked around and said, “What else can I do?” IG: 1:42:04 Yeah, well, you know, there is, there is a tradition, I think in Italy, of that was sort of personified by Umberto Echo where, you know, intellectuals were public, public intellectuals, so they have both the role in their larger community- RS: 1:42:24 Europe has [crosstalk], the public of the public until at the public intellectual right? IG: 1:42:28 This has been a tremendous pleasure. RS: 1:42:32 Well, it was really lots of fun going back and thinking about Harpur and the- (End of Interview) Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Ruth M. Silverman Subject The topic of the resource Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education; Harpur College – Alumni in Womens’ Studies; Harpur College – Alumni from New York City; Harpur College – Alumni at Nassau Community College; Harpur College – Alumni in the New York City area Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Silverman, Ruth ; Gashurov, Irene Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource Ruth Silverman, PhD, is a sociology professor at Nassau Community College, where she created the Women’s Studies Program. She is the sister of Dr. Amy Weintraub. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-05-18 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Ruth Silverman.mp3 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-05-18 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Oral Histories from 60's Binghamton Alumni Extent The size or duration of the resource. 102:37 minutes https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/777f545d3c4124d217e0435f9adbcca1.mp3 268280458446fae268623115b1aadc3d Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Oral Histories Title A name given to the resource Oral Histories from 1960s Binghamton Alumni Description An account of the resource In 2019, Binghamton University Libraries completed a mission to collect oral interviews from 1960s alumni as a means to preserve memories of campus life. The resulting 47 tales are a retrospective of social, professional and personal experiences with the commonality of Harpur College. Some stories tell of humble beginnings, others discuss the formation of friendships; each provides insight into a moment in our community's rich history. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Irene Gashurov Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-2018 Relation A related resource <a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/browse?collection=18">McKiernan Interviews : 60's collection of Oral Histories</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2018-06-12 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Irene Gashurov Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. Michael McGoff Year of Graduation 1969 Biographical Text Dr. McGoff is senior vice provost and Chief Financial Officer for Binghamton University. His doctorate was in computer-oriented onomastics, the study of names, which he programmed to study the indigenous languages spoken in New York State. Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni from Broome County; Harpur College – Alumni in linguistics; Harpur College - Alumni living in New York City. Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Subject LCSH Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni from Broome County; Harpur College – Alumni in linguistics; Harpur College - Alumni living in New York City. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium Alumni Interviews Interview with: Michael F. McGoff Interviewed by: Irene Gashurov Transcriber: Oral History Lab Date of interview: 12 June 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) IG: 00:00 Okay-okay. MM: 00:02 My name is Michael McGoff, Senior Vice Provost and Chief Financial Officer for Binghamton University. We are in my office, Administration Building 711 and today is June 12, 2018. IG: 00:15 Okay. Thank you. So, Dr. McGoff, where did you grow up? MM: 00:22 I grew up here in Binghamton. I was- my grandparents came from Ireland to work at Endicott-Johnson Shoes. My- they did and my father was born in the south side of Binghamton. When he got back from World War Two, he became a Binghamton policeman, and married my mother, and they had nine children. I am the eldest. IG: 00:48 That is tremendous. So, was your mother a homemaker? Or did she work? MM: 00:55 She worked in some as a bookkeeper, accountant. It was a finance company, but most of the time, after you have nine kids, you need to be home. IG: 01:06 I would think so. So did your and-and you mentioned that your grandparents are from Ireland. What about your mother's side? Are they Irish? [crosstalk] MM: 01:18 My grandparents were from Ireland. That was my father's side. My- her grandfather was from Ireland, and her grandmother was from Ireland. IG: 01:26 Do you know what part of Ireland? MM: 01:30 My- well on the paternal side, my grandfather was Monahan, and my grandmother was Claire. I believe that the um, my grandfather's side, I would have to look it up. Actually, I think it is an ancestry, but I cannot remember. IG: 01:46 Okay, that is fair enough. So, in your family, was education encouraged? MM: 01:55 It was not discouraged. I was a good student when I was in high school and in an elementary school, my father had nothing past high school, my mother had nothing past high school, and I was encouraged to do what I wanted to do. IG: 02:12 I see. So did the conversations in your house revolve around local events, your family events. Did you talk about? MM: 02:26 Well, my father worked three jobs, so he was not home very much. IG: 02:29 I see. [crosstalk] MM: 02:32 As I was growing up, you know, most of the talk, I think, was about school and about family. There were, you know, current events, I guess so, right, yeah. IG: 02:46 So, what were you a big reader? Did you like certain subjects? MM: 02:53 I always read a lot. I still enjoy reading. When I finished high school--I went to St Mary's Elementary School and was encouraged by the teachers there to study, and I always did well in school. IG: 03:12 Right. MM: 03:13 And then when I went into high school, I went to something called St. Patrick's Academy, which closed in my sophomore year, and I graduated from Catholic Central in 1965 it was, I was among the first graduating classes from what is now Seton Catholic Central High School when I [inaudible] just opened. IG: 03:41 Where did your number in the what-what number child were you? MM: 03:45 I am the oldest. IG: 03:46 You are the youngest. MM: 03:47 Oldest. IG: 03:48 Oldest-oldest. MM: 03:49 And my father died when he was 52 so when any girls got married, I was the patriarch. IG: 03:56 Oh, so who- what did the- your other siblings become? I am, I am watching. MM: 04:06 No, getting a message. Two of my brothers became firemen since retired, one of them is still very big in sports. He was division one referee in basketball. He also is the assigner for still is the assigner for soccer and basketball, and most of central New York for referees. I have a- there is diabetes in my family. I have a brother Jim, who had severe diabetes, type one, and had a rough life with it, and he was disabled, but everybody is still around. My sisters went into the health sciences, worked in the hospitals. IG: 04:57 As what, doctors? MM: 04:59 The technicians, technicians, yeah, and a brother, John, who was longtime fireman, who went back and got his bachelor's and then his master's [inaudible] all the way, and ended up not being able to do what he wanted to do, because if he taught, he would not be able to collect his retirement as a fireman. So, he ends up he is the- whatever the title is, Head of Education for what I know a Spectrum was Time Warner, the others. Let us see, uh, some-some of them had some higher education, and no one finished a degree, except for John. IG: 05:52 So as the head of your family, by default, you-you sort of stepped into your father's shoes. MM: 06:02 For somethings [crosstalk] IG: 06:02 Obviously-obviously. No. Okay, so how did that change your direction? Did you feel more the weight of responsibility on your shoulders? Did that determine certain interests? MM: 06:14 When he died, I was already was not living there anymore. IG: 06:20 I see, I see. MM: 06:22 In fact, by then, when he died, I had already finished my bachelor's, I think, my associates, my bachelor's and my master's, and was working on the doctorate. So, I was living someplace else. I actually had been married, and she and I were both graduate students together. IG: 06:45 Okay, so let me backtrack, then. Did you have a sense of what you wanted to do when you were graduating high school? MM: 06:55 No, in fact, I was surprised. I must have applied, though I do not remember it. I was surprised at the high school graduation that I got a scholarship to go to Broome Tech Community College, where I went for a couple of years and-and at the same time, was here on campus, studying and doing other things here on campus. And then I went out to New Mexico for a short time. IG: 07:23 To New Mexico? MM: 07:25 New Mexico. Yeah. IG: 07:25 Where in New Mexico? MM: 07:27 New Mexico State University in Las Cruces. IG: 07:29 Oh, that is where my daughter lived for a while. MM: 07:31 I was going to go to school there, and I decided that that the education was not as good as New York. So, I came back. IG: 07:39 But it is a beautiful place. MM: 07:40 It is beautiful. As long as they keep the water running all the time, then they can have grass. IG: 07:45 So, when were you there? What are the years that you were there? MM: 07:48 I was not there for a whole year. I was there for weeks. Let us see when was it? It was 1967, summer and fall of (19)67. IG: 08:04 So, you know, let us backtrack. So, did you have a you know, why did you decide on Harpur College? MM: 08:19 I was in New Mexico. I had already been- I was with the woman that I ended up marrying a few years later. We both decided that New Mexico State was not the right place for us. We had both been admitted to Harpur. We both drove back to New York day and night until we got here to start classes in August, late August, early September, somewhere around there. Yeah, that is when I forgot my first job and on campuses. IG: 08:51 So-so, wait and you got your first job. So, you were working while you were a student. What-what? MM: 08:59 I was self-supporting. IG: 09:00 You were self-supporting. You were self-supporting. That is not surprising. Coming from a family that- MM: 09:08 Yeah, they did not have the resources help, although I had scholarships, and I just- IG: 09:13 You had a regent scholarship, MM: 09:15 A what? IG: 09:15 A Regents scholarship? MM: 09:17 Yes, I had a, I do not remember exactly what the title of the thing was. Tell you the truth, it was a scholarship that I got in high school. But I do not, not sure they called it Regent scholarship, whatever. Yeah, but I needed to work or I would not have lived. IG: 09:38 So, you had this idea that Harpur College and New York education was superior. Did you have an idea? Did you have a direction? Did you know what you wanted to pursue? MM: 09:48 Well, to tell you the truth, as I said, I grew up in Binghamton, and at that time, most people in the area did not hold the college in very high regard. In fact, my father was a Binghamton policeman, and right around that time, Herbert Aptheker had been here. And so, there were a lot of people that just thought this was a communist place. A lot of communists, long haired hippie. I do not think they said hippie at the time, but long haired, sandal wearing communist, but I knew that had a good education, and I knew that I wanted to come back to it. IG: 10:29 No, did you, did you? I am just wondering you know how you mentioned that you went to Catholic High School, that your siblings went to Catholic high schools. MM: 10:42 Actually, they did not. IG: 10:43 They did not. MM: 10:44 No. IG: 10:45 They did not. MM: 10:45 Because at that time, my brother Kevin did, but with my brother Jim and my father being sick and then dying, there was not enough money to pay those tuitions, so they all started going to public school, and all of them graduated from public high school. IG: 11:07 Do you think that your family was particularly Irish? Was there a sense of Irish culture in your family? IG: 11:14 Yes. IG: 11:15 How was that expressed? I was I was getting around that through Catholic- MM: 11:19 My-my-my grand my paternal grandfather and paternal grandmother were still alive. My father was very close to them. They had very thick brogues, which a lot of people would probably not understand now. We just spent a lot of time there. There were also like cousins that visited from Ireland and so on. Cousins of my father. So, you know, it was clearly Irish. And my grandmother, on my mother's side, was very proud of having been Irish. Her father came from Ireland, and he was he drowned. He drowned in trying to get them dinner by shooting a duck in a river. And so, she had to quit high school about 14 or so, something like that, in order to help the family. But I do not know how she got so smart, but she helped me learn algebra when I was in high school, even though I do not think she ever, I do not know what she finished, eighth grade, seventh grade, I do not know, but all of them were very Irish, yes. IG: 12:32 So also, you know, what was the sense in your family that you know you said everybody was proud of being Irish? What were they? Were they proud of the of the rich culture of the or their personal sort of stories of survival, of surviving through struggles? What do you think it was? MM: 12:53 Just a, the love of the heritage, I guess. My I have to admit. I mean, I do not think of myself as Irish very often. But when my wife and I did ancestry, and I found out I was 99.4 percent or 93 percent something like that, Irish, I was proud of it. IG: 13:17 Right. MM: 13:18 Yeah. IG: 13:19 Have you ever heard that the Irish and the Slavic nations were one? There is one theory that they were once one. They came from the same family tree. MM: 13:35 I never heard that now. IG: 13:39 Yeah, MM: 13:39 It is interesting. IG: 13:39 It is interesting. It is very interesting. MM: 13:39 My wife, my present wife-- have been married 39 years her-her grandparents and family members came from Russia, Ukraine, whatever it was at the particular time to work at Endicott Johnson, so I have got this whole kind of, we were married in a Russian Orthodox Church. So, I have got this whole- IG: 13:57 Oh, which, which one? MM: 13:58 It was called our mission of the Blessed Virgin that is over on- IG: 14:02 That is where [crosstalk] that is where I go. MM: 14:04 Okay. IG: 14:05 So that is very interesting. It is a very interesting connection. So, I was just trying to get a sense of your background and sort of you know what the ethos of this family was, and- MM: 14:19 It was very close family. I do not know that we thought about being Irish and all that as much as we thought about taking care of each other. It is interesting. People would never [inaudible] a big family. I would come home and, you know, 11 people were living there, and yet, within a few minutes, you would say, “Where is John?” It was just like; it was like a hive or something. [laughs] IG: 14:42 Right-right. I can imagine. And so-so, you were in school. You were at Harpur College, after, you know your- MM: 14:55 Came back from Mexico. IG: 14:56 From New Mexico, and what did you know, and you had this, obviously, you had heard that, you know, Harpur College was full of communists and hippies. What was your first impression of the school? I mean- MM: 15:14 My first impressions of the school was a lot of hard work, but it was lot of folks from downstate, which was different for me and proud to be here. And the- I said a lot of hard work, it was a lot of hard work. And also, I was working full time, but it was just filled with all this stuff to learn. I mean, I took a lot of different courses. I studied a lot of different things. I love language. So, I was involved with early on, with folks in the English department, mostly, but I ended up in my later, in my undergraduate and then in my graduate work, studying languages. So- IG: 16:05 Which languages did you study? MM: 16:07 Old High German, Old English, Middle English. Did some Frisian I studied some- IG: 16:15 How interesting. MM: 16:16 [inaudible] and some Algonquin. I did some my dissertation was in languages, or actually it is in an area called onomastics, which is I used I was, I was working in the School of Advanced Technology. So, I had a background in computing, and so I was able to marry computing and onomastics, which is the study of how my study was how names through bilingual interaction, names pass from one language to another, typically becoming meaningless, but also being able to carry that language into a different language, able to study the first language. My-my teacher was a guy named Bill Helm, or Bill Nicolaisen [W. F. H. (Bill) Nicolaisen], who ended up just dying here about a year ago, a year and a half ago in Aberdeen, that he taught here for many years. He came from Ohio State, and we studied together for years. I studied with him. IG: 17:20 What-what you know, what predisposed you? I mean, this is serious linguistics at an undergraduate level, which is quite unusual. MM: 17:30 Yeah, there were no linguistics programs, so, yeah, work with individuals, as I said, Old High German, Old Norse, with some faculty members who were here. IG: 17:40 Do you remember their names? MM: 17:42 Bill Snyder. I worked with him on some Sanskrit and some Old High German and-and Old Norse. I did [crosstalk] IG: 17:53 That is phenomenal. That is really phenomenal. I really [crosstalk] no, no, that is okay, that is, that is, but this is at the undergraduate level. MM: 18:03 We started that stuff at the undergraduate most of the work was at the graduate level. Yep. IG: 18:11 Most of the work- MM: 18:11 At the graduate I mean, I was just getting the background in order- IG: 18:11 So, at the undergraduate level, were you studying old German and Frisian and or did you were you exposed to that in graduate school? MM: 18:21 In undergraduate I mostly like, I work with Bill Snyder in German, and we did some, some work and older versions of German I did, let us see what I do Middle English with, with I um, with faculty here. And then I got introduced to Bill Nicolaisen, and I started working with him on some things. And the old Norse was in my first year of graduate school. IG: 18:55 That is fantastic. MM: 18:56 So, I was here all the time. IG: 18:59 So, Binghamton, but that is, that is tremendous. So, Binghamton actually had a strong linguistic presence. Were these- MM: 19:09 It was-there were no programs in it, and so to say strong. We had strong faculty members. It had backgrounds, but it- IG: 19:17 So, they were teaching these subjects out of their language programs, right out of the German program or English programs. MM: 19:25 English program, yeah [inaudible] Barney Huppe [Bernard Huppe] is the first one to introduce me to older languages, Middle English. We did Chaucer and some other things. Bernard F Huppe, he was one of the leading lights of the early faculty members here. IG: 19:42 What is really interesting is that you were kind of ahead of the curve in that you combined your interest in onomastics with computer you know, generated what- to study. MM: 20:01 Yes, when I first started working here in my first job in 1967 August in 1967 was in the school, the brand-new school of advanced technology, which the current incarnation is the Watson School. And so, I worked for a man named Walter Lohan, who was the first dean, and at the same time was working. We hired a- was a little while later, but we hired a guy named John McHale, who was colleague of Buckminster Fuller, and John was a sociologist who was a futurist. So, when I worked with him for quite a while, I think they called me a research associate, but I read for him, and he had a need to, you know, constantly be reading things. So, we, there were some of us who read things in order to, you know, get rid of the chaff and give him the pearls through the- we at the end of the day, he would have a whole bunch of things to take home that I had sort of filtered out for him so they get so they did not have to read things that were just worthless. I read a lot of things for him. Same time, I worked for Walter Lohan, who was, who was the Dean of the School of Advanced Technology, and eventually, at the end of the life of the school advanced technology, I was acting dean for a couple years. IG: 21:36 It is very interesting. You know, there is so much that I want to ask about. MM: 21:43 I am jumping all over the place. IG: 21:44 No-no. And, you know, it is a personal interest of mine, because I, too, studied linguistics many years ago. So, for example, what was and you got your doctorate in linguistics, what- MM: 21:56 The doctorate is actually mean, this was, what was what was the title, computer-oriented onomastics survey. It was sort of independent study, kind of thing that I had, I did with Bill Nicolaisen. And then, in fact, I am still involved in, I am still on the editorial board of onomastics journal. And um- IG: 22:17 So, what were your some of your findings in your thesis, you know, if you could summarize this in in a nutshell. What-what did your research find? MM: 22:28 Well, that is about 300 and some pages, but I have not looked at in a long time, but it is. What I did was a study of the place names of New York State and the Aboriginal languages and some of the New World, world languages that came here, and was able to trace some things back, how the names came to be, what the language was about, and so on. But I was able to do it on many, many, many, I do not know how many 1000s of names, physical features and so on, and use the computer to be able to analyze it. And nobody at the time was using computing. So, it was a hot topic. And I went around a lot and talked with folks about it, introduced some people to it. And in fact, Peter Raper, who is in South Africa, he does South African onomastics. He was I- he came here and I introduced him to computing, and he is still using-using it. IG: 23:35 So let me understand. So, you had, you know this corpus of words from names from various Aboriginal languages. MM: 23:44 Not only all the names, yes, but- IG: 23:48 Not only the names, but the languages themselves. MM: 23:51 That I was interested in the languages, we use the names to get to the languages. IG: 23:54 To get to the to the languages. So, you reconstructed the language through the names, or? MM: 23:59 In some cases, you know, I do not know, pick on something Susquehanna, the Susquehanna River. IG: 24:04 Yeah, right. MM: 24:07 The, it does not matter to me. It did not matter what the what it etymologically meant. I was interested in, like, hannah is pleonastically repeats river right. Hannah is river that kind of thing was what I was interested in. You are taking me back a long way. IG: 24:27 No-no, but I hope you do not mind. So, this is, you know, we can- MM: 24:33 So, you can study the languages and reconstruct things about the languages by using what was brought into our everyday language and changed over time. See, you know, you can trace the changes and things like that. People do not know what they are saying when they say Susquehanna. What it means or where it came from, anything else. But you can, that is what I was interested in. IG: 24:57 Right. And you were. You know, did you find, did you find evidence of-of, you know, a people's history, of their migrations, of their contact with other, other tribal cultures? MM: 25:18 And you can trace, like you know, you can trace where dialects of the Iroquoian language, for instance, where they were based on the names that are still the areas where those dialects [inaudible] IG: 25:33 Did you present your papers and at linguistic conferences? MM: 25:38 Um, onomastics conference, yes uh huh. I [inaudible] international at the time, was called International Congress of Onomastics Sciences, big one in Ann Arbor one year. Just about every major city and the country where there were conferences would be middle- we were mostly associated with MLA in the early years, and then the conferences that I went to, and then in the later years, within the last 25, 20 years, we moved to LSA, Linguistic Society of America, and so that we meet now in January--used to meet during the Christmas break, but that is when MLA met and spoke at MLA, various places like that. IG: 26:28 Did you- are you acquainted with the work of Chomsky [Noam Chomsky]? Did that influence you do anything MM: 26:34 [crosstalk] here, and I heard him speak, probably in the (19)60s. IG: 26:38 Tell us about that. That is wonderful. MM: 26:42 He gave a lecture, and I believe was Cassata Sioux. I had to be in the late (19)60s sometime in there. Do not remember much of what he spoke about probably was more social than it was linguistics. But- IG: 26:56 Even then? MM: 26:56 Yeah, right, oh yeah. He is- had on things then, yeah. A lot of people came and spoke-spoke in Binghamton over the years. Then I tried to go as many as I could. One that comes to mind is Christopher Hitchens. And lots of, lots of big names came. IG: 27:15 In the (19)60s? MM: 27:16 (19)67. Yeah, it was, it was a different- the university was a different place than during those years. It was mostly known for the humanities; the sciences were there. And of course, you know when, but in the like, for instance, that we went through a horrible time in (19)76, 1976, (19)75, (19)76 when New York State was financially going south, because New York City was-was having difficulty, and we had huge cuts here one and would not remember what it was--must been the fall of 75 we hired six assistant professors in our school, and in May of (19)76 we laid them off. That was that kind of bad times. And so, it was big on humanities. But my point was going to be that during those bad times, the sciences and the nation engineering school and things like that, they were the ones taking the hits. We had a PhD in physics, which we got rid of at that time. Now that would not happen, but that is what happened then, because Harpur was well known for the humanities and some social sciences, but most humanities are big, very I mean, it was the most famous English department in the country, I think in public schools. IG: 28:49 It had a great reputation from it had the reputation of being an elite, the equivalent of an elite private college. That is what I hear from almost all the alumni I speak to. MM: 29:04 Yeah, they call it the public Brown or something like- IG: 29:07 Something like that. It was based on the University of Chicago system, was not it? MM: 29:14 Partially also the collegiate was based on the collegiate colleges were based supposedly on Oxford, but there were, there were a lot of people who thought a lot about education in those years, just and higher education and how students learn and that kind of thing, much more discipline oriented now. IG: 29:38 Did you-you know, I imagine that you were, in part, influenced by your family's perspective on the college you know, the academic community here and the students. Did this perception change over the years? I mean, how did you regard these hippies and communists? MM: 30:05 Well, I never thought of them that way. I was quoting the local people. Was interesting, because the woman I told you about became my first wife. Her- when we started, we went out to New Mexico. We had gone to school together at Broome. We came back here. We were students here, but her father was a violin maker and played viola in the orchestras. Her mother was a pianist and taught music. She was a dancer herself and a violinist and so but all of her parent’s friends, many of her parent’s friends, were also university faculty, like Ken Lindsay and Christine Lindsay were Ken started the art programs here. We would spend a lot of time with them, either up at the cottage, or they would be coming over Harry Lincoln, who was the beginning of the music programs here, they would be there too. So, I would he even when I was not on campus, I was involved with people from on campus. So, I thought of that. I just came to think of it as a family. And I will have been here 51 years in August, and- IG: 31:18 That is tremendous. MM: 31:21 [inaudible] it is. It was. They were different times, but they were still did not seem to be. It was a much more close knit. I think when I stepped on campus first time at (19)65 there were like 22- 2200, 2300, 2300 people here. Now there is 17,300 students, let alone a couple 1000, more than a couple 1000 people that work here. IG: 31:50 And you never considered leaving when you, for example, earned your PhD. Did you seek employment elsewhere? MM: 31:58 Well, when I finished my doctorate. I was, let us see, (19)79 I was an assistant dean already. So, I became an assistant dean in (19)76 during all the issues, all the problems and people were being laid off, and I took on new responsibilities. And so, by the time I got the doctorate, I was married second time, and have been married now to my wife, Donna Pylypciw, who for 39 years it will be so, I guess I have forgotten the question. But no, I this was, I mean, I had, I had possibilities of jobs in other places. In fact, went out to Michigan to interview for a job out there. But just this was home. IG: 32:53 Yeah, I see. MM: 32:54 I think even though job was home. IG: 33:00 How did you get involved in the financial aspect of administration? MM: 33:11 Well, as I said back in the (19)70s, when I stepped into administration from some of the various other jobs I had had. You had to know something about financials. I had lived through the Rockefeller years, when there was plenty of money up here on campus, but I became assistant dean and then associate dean, and so the fight I was, at one-point, Associate Dean for Administration and academic affairs. I think it was the other way around Academic Affairs and Administration. And so, all the financials were reporting to me budgets and that kind of thing. So, I got into it. And when I became acting dean of the School of Advanced Technology, again, you know, I had to oversee, but at the time, was probably like a five or $6 million budget, something like that became much larger over time. And now, when I the provost at the time, when I was Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Administration in the Watson school from (19)83 we started the school in (19)83 so for like 15, 14, 15, 16, years, I was in the Watson school. And then in 1999 the provost at the time, Marianne Swain, asked me to come over and be vice provost. I think we were called Associate Provost at the time. And I took on the academic all the academic budgets, and then in 2014 Harvey Stinger decided, when a good friend of mine and colleague, Vice President for Administration, Jim Voorst VORs [James Van Voorst] left, Harvey decided that he was going to put the financials underneath Academic Affairs. So now all of the all the financial side, reports to me. So, you know, I would have some courses and those kinds of things, but I just learned it by working it, I guess. And now I have CPAs who report to me, and they can worry about the details. [laughs] IG: 35:21 That is a perfect situation. I am just thinking how unusual your background is. I mean, I have known people who have wedded the technologist background with a humanist. I know some people you know. I know some people who have made a career of that. But do you see any future for this direction in engineering, for example, is the Watson school doing anything that you sort of naturally fell into? MM: 35:56 Well, of course, when I was in the Watson school, I was an administrator. But because I take things on and because I maybe I do things well, I do not know, for a couple of years, I was the chairman of computer science and Associate Dean, because I had had background in computing when I came here in the (19)60s. I, you know, I learned some programming languages in that time. It was over key punch cards, and I helped create a program called foundations in computer science--actually before computer science existed. It was foundations computer systems. And we took people from various backgrounds, everything, art, music, English, whatever, and put them through a series of six courses to prepare them for a master's to study in a master's degree in computer systems. It was called the foundation of computer science. We created video tapes. This is like 1969 right in there, and taught an awful lot of folks, especially folks in IBM and General Electric, Sarah Link, enough background in logic and Boolean algebra, set theory, numerical analysis, that kind of thing, and some programming languages to be able to step in and start learning computing. So that I was, since I was involved in that, and I have got involved in it, I became knowledgeable, and so I did all those things too. IG: 37:19 Do you think that the (19)60s, in any way encouraged this exploration of different disciplines? And you know, was there a greater experiment, experimentation and searching from one-one area of I mean, I am just thinking about this computational linguistics. I think that it was very innovative. Do you think that it is a product of the time, or just that technology was headed in that direction, and this was exploited by other disciplines? MM: 38:05 Not sure I can understand or I can answer that question, but I do not know that it was as much the (19)60s as was this place. This place was wedded to people exploring it was big. We still say these things. We do less of it, but in the (19)60s and (19)70s and even into the (19)80s, people were encouraged to explore. When you came into Harpur College, you were, you know, they tried not to lock into things. There were fights. In fact, when people tried to make it easier for registration by picking courses for people and having locked in courses, it was just unheard of. So, I mean, I took many-many courses undergraduate that I, you know, from anti just was lots of there was, it was a big plate, and you could eat whatever you wanted. It was the best part. And things like computer science was not entirely defined at the time. That was so that people from various areas could get into it. It was, there was something called the ACM association for computer machinery. ACM 68 was a curriculum. That was when people first started defining what computer science was. So, it was open to everybody. I mean, as I say, the it was the School of Advanced Technology at the time was designed in order to take advantage of this exploration that people in Harpur [crosstalk]. IG: 39:33 Right. Do you think that this exploration exists at the present time? Is it still sort of, you know, is there still a, you know, a partnership, a collaboration between the arts, the humanities and technologies? I mean, I know that it exists in in the library field with Digital Scholarship. But do you think that there is this kind of- MM: 40:04 I think it is- IG: 40:05 -bridging of different [crosstalk] MM: 40:07 I think the possibility is still there, but it is it. You know, I do not want to sound like some old fogy, but I think it is it is different now in that there are so many forces working against students being able to explore. If you look at the Excelsior program or TAP, people are encouraged just to figure out where they want to head, and they are locked into a set of courses. If they do not follow those courses, they are going to lose TAP, or they are going to lose the Excelsior, or they are going to lose whatever it is. So, you cannot do a lot of exploration when you are being trying to focus like that, because politicians, geez, I lose my job. Politicians have set it out so that it is no longer the responsibility of the state to help create the future of the state, as much as it is the personal responsibility. When I first came here, the tuition, the cost of education, was born by the state and by the student. At that time, it was in the 20 to 30 percent range that the student paid, and the 70 or 80 percent in the 70 percent range that the state paid. It is now exactly reversed so these same politicians have put in place, in my opinion, I think they are abdicating their responsibility for the future of the state. But anyway, they put this in place where now students create these great, enormous financial burdens, which now the politicians complain about by saying that, you know, the colleges are burdening these people with all this cost and they have got to pay for loans into their waning years. The fact of the matter is that there are so many more constraints on people now I did not have the constraints that some of these students have. Now they got to take that lab course. They do not have to want to take that lab course. They got to take. So again, sound like an old fogy. Things have changed, no, and it is, it is back then it was a lot less discipline oriented for the faculty and for the students, and a lot more of this exploration I talked about. You can learn different things, but right now, you will find students that have to take these courses or they are not going to get in pre-med. IG: 42:26 And essentially, it is because of financial constraints. MM: 42:29 That is one of the big ones. IG: 42:31 That is one of the big ones. MM: 42:31 Yeah, and also that higher education has changed. People are much more discipline oriented. When I first came here, people were wed to the college. Faculty were wed to the college. They, you know, they would come out to things. There was a faculty review. There were things like that. Now a lot of faculty, of course, it is bigger, but a lot of faculty do not know each other. You have to encourage connections so that people can do some interdisciplinary work, whereas then it was, you know, the people from various areas hung out. The physicists were there when there was a concert. Now you find you do not even mind some music faculty when there is a concert. IG: 43:20 So, what is, you know, what-what is, what is the how? What is the solution? How did you reproduce, you know, very scientifically oriented students to the liberal arts and import and educate them in the importance of having a rounded education? MM: 43:45 Well, I do not want to sound like an old toot here, but as I say, a lot of things are working against it. And instead of that, and again, I am sure it is different for some people, I am just seeing what I observe generally. And that is that you hear students say, instead of having this exploration I talked about, now we have Gen Ed courses. You got to take a general education course. You got to take it. You hear students saying, well, as soon as I get rid of my gen eds. IG: 44:15 Right-right-right. MM: 44:17 You do not want to get rid of your gen ed. That is interesting stuff. So, it is just the world has changed. I cannot say it is better or worse than, you know, I am sure. I am reminded of one of the first Deans I worked with, Leo Faisal said, you know, students are not as good as they used to be, and they never were. [laughs] There is always people looking back at a golden age, right? IG: 44:44 Well, you know, maybe, maybe there is truth to that, because I have really been meeting with extremely accomplished people from who are (19060s alumni. So, there is probably something to that and-and they all attribute their success to the education that they received at Harpur College and the breadth of courses that they were allowed to take that had nothing to do with their major. So, you know, I just, just give us, you know, maybe, an overview of the significant events that you recall in your life as an undergraduate or even as a graduate, and how the student community, and you yourself responded to them. For example, you know the death of JFK, or, you know, some something that really stuck in your memory, and what the campus was like on that day, or days, or? MM: 46:00 Okay, I remember something my early years here, the Vietnam War was a big thing. Most men and women were affected by it. Men because they were going to be sent there. I had friends who were sent to Vietnam and were killed. People were constantly worried about whether or not they are going to be drafted or whatever. Bruce Deering was president. I came in just as Glen Bartle was had stepped down and Bruce Deering was inaugurated. I think in (19)67 or (19)68 something like that, (19)60 somewhere in there, and we did not have the Binghamton campus Harpur did not have the kind of intensity and the demonstrations and the anger that went on at many campuses, And I attribute part of that to Bruce Deering, President, went out and he demonstrated with the students. We went down, and we did a march down to Binghamton, and we were all on the city hall, you know, listening to speeches and so on. And he had gone with the students. And so, it was not like, you know, there was something here on campus and administration to say, you know, they were the establishment. He was a major force in keeping this a common campus, even though students were very upset with people were being drafted and going and not coming back. Those were intense years. It was a lot of building going on at the time, so things were constantly changing. What your hose built. This building was built not too long before it came that kind of thing in the (19)70s, the early (19)70s, the big thing was the state being in financial trouble, and so we lost a lot of lost a lot of people at that time. And it was and trust. There was a lot of trust lost because basically people started pointing fingers at each other and saying, you know, they were not my words, but the thought was, they were not as important to this university or this college as these people are, and you ought to, and they did. They-they cut [inaudible] at the time, and I remember some of the painful things about that. There was a lot of change through the years. I mean, I am not doing well at remembering kind of things are going on, but I do have you know, the emotions were quite high most of the most of those years, the early years. IG: 48:56 Did you feel solidarity in as a student with the other students- MM: 49:00 And the faculty, IG: 49:02 And the faculty. MM: 49:03 We had teachings, for instance. And I still remember Ed Wilson, who was a sculptor, who was in the art department, a black man. I do not remember where it was, but I remember being in a room with a bunch of students and Binghamton, there were not a lot of black people. And so just talking about the world from his perspective, was mind opening for me, and that had also to do with the Vietnam War. But a black man in the Vietnam War era, there were just, I mean, when something happened, the faculty were involved. When there was a teach in, all the faculty were here, doing, helping with the teaching. They did not just stay home. IG: 49:49 That is quite wonderful. MM: 49:58 Yeah. I learned a lot from a lot of folks. Stuart Gordon, who was a good friend of this Walter Leon and I talked about, and he was, he never was. He might have been acting president. I think he was chief officer in charge, or something like that, for a while, but he was dean of Harpur. One it was just Harpur. He took over after Bartle stop being dean of Harpur and became a president. And then Stu Gordon became vice president for academic affairs and so on, but he taught people a lot about how to work together. I remember a lot like, for instance, you would at that time, no, of course, no email. You would be preparing memos to each other, and the Secretary would type those memos. And sometimes it takes a whole day to get a memo out, because you were trying to just get it right, and so on. We typed on a letterhead, and sometimes Stu Gordon would send back those memos corrected it was read and saying, nobody was going to work here unless they, you know, think about things this way and express themselves well. And you had to be a good writer. So it was, it was even part of, I mean, that, thankfully, it never happened to me. But I had a colleague who got one back that was, you know, who had somehow complained about something, and the memo that came back was, never shake your hoary locks at me. IG: 51:26 I wish he were editing over our president's shoulder dispatches, all these misspelled tweets. So, you know, you know, let us see, I am looking at the time, and I am thinking that, you know, if what were some of the most I mean, you have, you have given us a lot of examples, but what do you think were some of the most important lessons that you learned as an undergraduate at Harpur, about studying, about life, about- MM: 52:10 Well, I had to learn it. First of all, high school, elementary school all that came relatively easy to me. I was a good student, but when I got here, and even Broome was I was excellent student, but he did not have to work as hard as you had to work here, not at the expectations were not as hard high as they were when I came here, unlike probably most of the people you were talking about or have talked to, I was a local and a transfer student, and both of those things were not held in high regard, in fact, by a lot of faculty, transfer students are still not held in high regard. And so, I had to prove myself, but I also had to work very-very hard, because so much was expected of you. And so, I remember my father, who, as I said, never finished or finished high school, but never went to college. He-he one time said, because it was just a different life than he had ever experienced. He said, you cannot really be studying all that time. What are you really doing? No, you had to study. It took hours and hours and hours. It was a full-time job. And unlike, and I should not be saying this, but because I do not want SUNY to hear this, unlike now for many faculty, for credit courses were really for credit courses. They were designed to be more than the three credit courses at other colleges, this whole public Brown and all that kind of thing. They really meant it. There was you earned that extra credit outside of class and inside of class, and it was really four credit hour courses. Now you will bump into faculty will tell you not, the same course I taught when I was at so once, it was a three-credit course. There is four credit here. What is the difference? It was- they were, they were. Expectations were much higher of the students at the time. It was a lot of work. IG: 54:14 So, yeah, I-I see that. I But what were, what were some of the takeaways from that experience of really working very hard and- MM: 54:33 Well, I do not know takeaways or some. I mean, I do not think I learned it there, but it became important there the pride in what you do. You do not do anything is half assed. When you write a memo, somebody might be correcting it, right? You do it because you were trying to do your best. This is not just me. This was a lot of these students; I have friends now that were here back in the (19)60s. You know they. We still talk about people and things that happened then, and it was a lot was expected of you, and I felt I am proud to graduate from Harpur. IG: 55:16 Students are going to be listening to this recording. And I always ask as we are nearing the end of our interview, if you have any advice for them as they embark on their careers. I mean, you have had such a varied and robust and interesting career. You know, from linguistics to computational linguistics to engineering to finance, what is there anything that you can draw from that that would put these students in good stead for their future? MM: 56:01 I do not know that I am that wise, but I can tell you that, first of all, I should say these students are not the students who are here are not any less smart or less hard working than the students when I was here in the (19)60s. Matter of fact, we had a speaker at the commencement here a couple weeks ago said, you know, your students are far better than we were when I was here. And it is true, these are excellent students. But if I had to encourage anybody, I would encourage them to, you know, do some things you care about because you care about them, and not just because somebody tells you-you cannot be a physician without having done them. Do those things if you have to too. But you know, when you are I do not the Anderson center reports to me. It is the Performing Arts Center, and I go to all the concerts. And oftentimes there will not be anybody there whose hair is not my color which is white there-there are no young people going to classical concerts. You have an orchestra and the place will be half full. That would never have happened in the (19)60s. People are not exploring the way we explored. And I or they do not appear to be, and I would just encourage people to-to open up their lives to other possibilities, other thoughts. Remember that you are going to have to live a whole life, and it cannot just be because you are good at writing code. You got to, you got to enjoy your life to learn other things. That is what I was encouraged to do. IG: 57:37 That is very good advice. Any concluding remarks? MM: 57:44 No, I just hope this gets buried for about 10 years and then I do not have to worry about it. IG: 57:51 [laughter] MM: 57:51 Probably [inaudible] IG: 57:52 Thank you very much. MM: 57:53 Okay. (End of Interview) Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Michael F. McGoff Subject The topic of the resource Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni from Broome County; Harpur College – Alumni in linguistics; Harpur College - Alumni living in New York City. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource McGoff, Michael ; Gashurov, Irene Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource Dr. McGoff is senior vice provost and Chief Financial Officer for Binghamton University. His doctorate was in computer-oriented onomastics, the study of names, which he programmed to study the indigenous languages spoken in New York State. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-06-12 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Michael McGoff.mp3 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-06-12 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Oral Histories from 60's Binghamton Alumni Extent The size or duration of the resource. 57:54 minutes https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/0d859f78e9f059ecc4edf71249c12d31.mp3 6d5957095abda2b5ea0e79f966775655 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b98660f9c3203b3aa53447be97f8f9af.png 8040c05abed95639500dcb8b9c6c64c0 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Oral Histories Title A name given to the resource Oral Histories from 1960s Binghamton Alumni Description An account of the resource In 2019, Binghamton University Libraries completed a mission to collect oral interviews from 1960s alumni as a means to preserve memories of campus life. The resulting 47 tales are a retrospective of social, professional and personal experiences with the commonality of Harpur College. Some stories tell of humble beginnings, others discuss the formation of friendships; each provides insight into a moment in our community's rich history. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Irene Gashurov Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-2018 Relation A related resource <a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/browse?collection=18">McKiernan Interviews : 60's collection of Oral Histories</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Irene Gashurov Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Geoffrey H. Strauss Biographical Text At Harpur College, Geoffrey studied accounting. A summer job as a counselor with the college’s Upward Bound Program for disadvantaged youth decided him on a career in teaching. He taught accounting at Broome Community College and Endicott High School for 33 years. Date of Interview 2017-12-14 Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Year of Graduation 1968 Keywords Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in secondary education; Harpur College – Alumni from Upstate New York; Harpur College – Alumni living in Broome County. Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Subject LCSH Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in secondary education; Harpur College – Alumni from Upstate New York; Harpur College – Alumni living in Broome County. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium Alumni Interviews Interview with: Geoffery Strauss Interviewed by: Irene Gashurov Transcriber: Oral History Lab Date of interview: 14 December 2017 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) IG: 00:00 Oh, it is snowing again. Okay, so are we on? Third speaker: 00:15 Yeah. IG: 00:22 So, Jeff, please tell me your name, your birth date, and where we are. GS: 00:32 Okay. My name is Geoffery Strauss. My birth date is May 3, 1946 and right now we are in my living room. IG: 00:43 Okay, so what are the years that you attended Harpur College? GS: 00:47 For our bachelor's, I went there from 1964 graduated in 1968. Then for my master's, from 1969 to 1971. IG: 01:01 Where did you grow up? GS: 01:03 Grew up on Long Island. IG: 01:04 Where in Long Island? GS: 01:06 Baldwin, small town on the south shore, middle of Nassau County. IG: 01:10 So, so what? What were your- What did your parents do? What? What was their occupation? GS: 01:20 My father was a certified public accountant. My mother was for most of my life, a homemaker. IG: 01:27 Right. GS: 01:27 And then when I got to high school, she started a business. So she was a businesswoman for-for a few years, IG: 01:35 Oh, what kind of business? GS: 01:36 Uh, she made things, she made- took-took umbrellas and decorated them, and they had these things called bobeches. They were like a tube. She decorated those, and you put a candle inside, so the candle looked pretty. IG: 01:55 What were- where did you go to high school? GS: 01:59 Baldwin Senior High School in Baldwin. IG: 02:02 Was there an expectation in your family that you would go on to college? GS: 02:07 From the time I was born. [laughs] Yeah, that was one of the things fairly typical for Jewish families. Education is very-very important. So yeah, the expectation was- my father always said you could do anything you want, but first you go to college and then you can do whatever do whatever you want. IG: 02:24 Did you have siblings? GS: 02:25 My sister, had an older sister. She went to Smith. IG: 02:30 So of course, the expectations were for her as well. GS: 02:34 Oh, absolutely. IG: 02:35 Why did you, why did you decide to go to Harper College? GS: 02:38 Kind of a funny kind of story. There was uh, I had been accepted by Drew University in New Jersey, and I went there to look at-- it was a beautiful campus, absolutely gorgeous, like a little piece of New England in New Jersey. Uh, and they had a wonderful program for social studies where you spent your senior year, your junior year, I am sorry, abroad. So I was all set to go there, and then I got accepted at what was then Harpur College, and my mother sat me down and said, "Still, we are still paying on your sister school, Harpur College, your scholarship will take you all the way through while your father said you can go anywhere you want. This would be much less expensive thing." So I ended up going, I ended up going there. So which was actually, I guess, changed my life. My wife there. I changed my occupation there. So it was kind of interesting. IG: 02:57 Right. So what were some of your expectations going in to Harpur? Did you have sort of a career in mind that you would pursue? GS: 03:55 Yeah, I was going to, I majored in accounting, so I was going to take over my father's or join him in his practice, and then eventually take over his practice when he retired. That was the initial thing there. Accounting had no part of my life when we went to Drew, but they had a good accounting program at Harpur, so I switched, and that was my idea there. And I also enjoyed social studies, so I took a lot of classes in the social science department, and a professor there thought I was a social studies major and offered me a graduate position. But I said, I am an accounting major. He said, “You are an accounting major. Why are you taking 200 level courses?” So I said, I like it. So that was a holdover from-from Drew. I just love the politics and the history and-and that. So it is still interested in that. IG: 04:50 So you graduated with a degree in- GS: 04:53 Accounting. IG: 04:54 -in accounting, in accounting. What are you- what is your profession now? GS: 05:01 Well, of course, I am retired now, but for many years, I taught accounting at high school, the local high school, Union-Endicott, and then we also had a program with Broome Community College whereby I taught college accounting. The kids got college credit for-for that as well as high school credit. What was your graduate degree at Binghamton? And- That was in teaching accounting. IG: 05:26 Oh, and teaching in accounting. GS: 05:27 Mm-Hmm. IG: 05:28 What made you decide to go into the teaching profession rather than join your father in his business? GS: 05:38 I had in my- I forgot whether it was my freshman or my sophomore year, they had a pro- they began a program at Harpur called Upward Bound. This was a program for college or kids with college ability, but because of economic or social reasons, probably would not go to school. So this was to encourage them to go. And I became a counselor there, started working with kids, and really enjoyed it. So when I graduated, I sort of combined the accounting and working with kids and went to- started at Maine Endwell, and then moved over to Union Endicott, and played high school for 33-34 years. IG: 06:26 Was your father disappointed that you did not join him in his business? Or did he really like the direction that you were going in? GS: 06:36 It was funny. I think at first, he did not want me to become an accountant. He said as much, too much work, too much work, too much time involved. And I remember, I remember as a kid, you know, he would go- leave in the morning. He would not come home until seven at night because he worked in New York City. And by the time he got home, he did not have dinner until 7:30 or so forth. And then it was basically, after you did your homework, time for bed. So during the week, yeah, hardly ever got to see him, so I realized he spent a lot of time working, but still, that seemed like the thing to do. But I think as I went through college, he sort of warmed to the idea. For a couple of summers, I worked for him, and we worked together going into the city during the summer. We are trimester then, so we had four months off. And so I think he wanted the idea, but then, you know, I sort of moved away, and I do not think he was too upset by it. IG: 07:36 Where did he work? And did he have his own firm? Or...? GS: 07:40 Yeah, he was, he was in, he was in practice by himself, and but most of his clients were in New York City, although he had some up-up- upstate Westchester County. And then actually he had some down in Georgia too. So he would fly to Georgia, do some of his work there. And then he would, he would fly home. IG: 08:00 So what- before going to Harpur, what reputation did Harpur have in your mind and- GS: 08:10 My mind, oh, it was a real, highly academic school, high pressure school, but certainly one of the better-better schools and in the, in the SUNY system. I was out for liberal arts. And so it met my-my requirement there. So it was, it was, it was a good mesh, but it met with its reputation. It was a very high-pressure school. IG: 08:39 And when you arrived and spent some time here, did that impression change? GS: 08:45 Oh, no-no. It just reinforced, once I was a student, that everything revolved around the-the curve, you know, and if you were having a good time, there was some kid back in the in the dorm, studying a little more, which would mess up the curve. So you had a, you had to be back there and studying yourself, so you could get up on that on that curve. IG: 09:13 What was the- so you took liberal arts at first as a requirement. GS: 09:18 Mm-Hmm. IG: 09:18 So what were some- did you have any outstanding courses that you- outstanding faculty that you studied with that kind of pushed you in the direction of teaching? GS: 09:30 Uh, not actually in the direction of teaching. I had a few professors who I really liked. There was one, again, in the Social Studies Department, Dekmejian [Richard Hrair Dekmejian], who was just fantastic. He was he really- I really enjoyed the classes I took with him, and the accounting classes we had Phil Piaker, who was also a local CPA, had his own firm here, and he was terrific. I-I really enjoyed the courses I took from him, but nothing pushed me toward the teaching during the school year, it was, it was the program, the Upward Bound, during that during the summer, that sort of moved me in that direction. IG: 10:14 So you spend most of your time studying, what did you do? What was, what was residential life like? You know, you would spend all your time studying in your room or in the library. And what did you do for recreation? GS: 10:32 [laughs] It was kind of interesting back then. I remember in my freshman and sophomore year that they only had one classroom building called the CA building. Half of it was the administration, and the other, other way was the classroom building. So very often you would go there find an empty classroom. You just sit in there in the evening and then you would study there was nice and quiet. I do not know if they still do things like that, but we did it back then. The library--I did not study in the library too much. It was either in my room or over in the classroom building. IG: 11:04 Right-right. So um, your wife mentioned that she met you in your freshman year. GS: 11:14 Yeah. IG: 11:15 And could you just describe how you remember her from that time? You must have a lasting memory. GS: 11:22 Well, it was funny. She was one of the few upstate people up there. There were so many kids from the metropolitan area, so we sort of called her the funny little upstate girl. And she was very naive, very Catholic. So it was a real change for me. IG: 11:46 Yeah. GS: 11:47 Because most of the kids that I knew on Long Island and associated really with in college too, were nice Jewish boys and girls, and somehow, she-she came, she came to the fore, and there was just something that clicked, right from the very beginning, when I first met her, there was just something special about her, and seemed to work. We have been married for almost 50 years, so it seems seemed pretty good. IG: 12:13 I would say. So, did you first interact after class? Where would you go out? Would you be in your- GS: 12:24 Well, a little bit of both- IG: 12:26 -segregated dorms, which were called co-ed dorms. GS: 12:28 Well, the first semester where we were in what they considered at that time a co-ed dorm, you know, boys in one wing and girls in the other wing. IG: 12:36 Right. GS: 12:37 Then come the fall, that dorm was filled up. So I started during the summer, and then I went over to Broome when Broome first opened up. Now that was the Broome that is not there anymore. They built that building. The construction of it, even when it was brand new, we knew it was really poor. I was like, this building is not going to last. And obviously it did not, because now they have a brand-new dorms. You know, that whole section there. So we, you know, we were there. I had her in a couple of different classes, Spanish class, which was not my forte. So she, she helped me with that. IG: 13:16 She mentioned that. GS: 13:17 Yeah, sometimes by looking over her shoulder, [laughs] uh, languages were not my thing. I took Spanish in seventh grade, eighth grade, ninth grade, tenth grade, eleventh grade and twelfth grade, and they wanted to put me in Spanish. I think two were Spanish three, and all they did was speak Spanish in there. And that was just way beyond me. So they let me audit once again, and then I made it through two, and somehow, I managed to squirm through the language requirement. But boy, that was not easy for me, and it actually runs in the family. My sister had the same problem with languages. She-she took Latin, and then she took Spanish in college, and had the same, same difficulties. We have comprehensions and different thing. Languages not mine- IG: 14:04 You have ability in math, and you have probably for accounting. GS: 14:10 Well, in accounting. And what I really wanted to be for many-many years was an architect. IG: 14:15 Oh really? GS: 14:16 Uh, there was no room for me an architect. I could not do like, I could do the accounting kind of math, the higher math, calculus and stuff like that. I had a lot of difficulty with that. So the architecture was-was going to be out. But I do have a- I do enjoy building things. So that is, that is my idea. I like, I like building accounting systems. I like building physical things, IG: 14:47 Did you build any part of this house? GS: 14:47 Uh, not the house--some of the cabinetry, that clock there, that clock there. So all these things, I build the porch. If you look out in the porch. The porch I built. So, you know, I do like working with my hands, and I got that from my father. He did a lot of woodwork, so I followed with that. I have gone further than but then he did. But then I have- I had being a teacher. I had more time to really do that, and my father never took vacations except to play little golf. IG: 15:19 Um, in my mind, Harpur College at the time was really strong in liberal arts, but you said that you had good experiences in the accounting department. Can you describe what the accounting department was like at the time? GS: 15:35 Uh, kind of difficult at that time we- I was just taking courses, uh, but the idea of eventually, of course, joining-joining my father. Uh, but you know you, they had the courses set up and the catalog--this was the one you took in your freshman year; this is the one you took next, one, next one. So I just follow the progression some professors I like better than others. You know, just like in any, any of the departments, but Dr. Piaker showed he was, he was one of the one of the better ones, because he-he explained things so-so wonderfully, and he had the practical experience to do it, because, you know, he was a practicing CPA as well. Anyway, I just, I just followed her through and eventually got my degree. IG: 16:30 Were you as sort of politically aware as-as your wife at the time? GS: 16:38 She was more politically aware than me. I like more of the history part of it, but the-the mechanics of politics I enjoyed. IG: 16:52 How do you mean? GS: 16:53 You know how different countries worked. You know how they set up their political systems. One of the professors I had in one of my classes, Dr. Ulc [Otto Ulc] I believe he was from one of the communist countries and-and was a judge there and escaped into, you know, into the West. And he was really an interesting guy, really interesting guy. And, of course, he showed us how, taught us how the legal system and the political system worked in the, in the communist regime at the time. And we- you know, compared those to, you know, democracy most of the time in Europe, United States always being sort of a little different. Now, it is all falling apart, but-but-but at the time it was, it was the years of the war in court, kind of liberal, progressive, and it was, and it was kind of kind of fun. I just like those kinds of things. IG: 17:50 Yeah. Were you influenced by the Vietnam War? GS: 17:54 Oh, yeah, a lot, yeah, certainly against the war. Probably one of my reasons for not going into-into accounting itself, we could get a teaching deferment. So that-that-that influenced me a little bit, but if I did not have any interest in teaching, I do not think that would have entered my mind just-just to pick up teaching as for deferment. But that was part of it. IG: 18:17 Yeah. GS: 18:18 Yeah. Vietnam war, with to me, was a disaster from-from the get go, and it turned out, turned out to be- IG: 18:23 Were you aware of it being a disaster? Did-did- GS: 18:26 Oh, yeah-yeah. I did not think it would be such a disaster, where we, you know, I mean, the mightiest army in the world, and could not defeat a whole bunch of, basically a ragtag army. IG: 18:39 Right. GS: 18:39 But they were very dedicated, very clever, very-very dedicated to the to their cause. And I do not think we really had our heart in it. And the truth, I do not think the guys over there had their heart in I do not think the country had their heart in fighting this war. It was more of war for the politicians. And as it turned out, it seemed to be even they knew it was not a good war, but they just felt to save face, we had, we had to stay in. IG: 19:09 Was there- do- in your memory, was there a lot of student activism? GS: 19:15 Oh yeah, there was, you know, a lot of marches-marches, busses going down to Washington, DC. Yeah IG: 19:23 Were you involved in that at all? GS: 19:25 Not as much on campus a little bit, but not-not so far as going down to Washington. I stayed pretty much, you know, on campus with our studying and with our- the group of people who are our friends. IG: 19:41 Did the army recruit at all at Harpur College? GS: 19:45 I do not think so. No, I am not even sure they were allowed on campus. Looking back, it was pretty anti- Very anti-military. -military at that particular point. IG: 19:57 Um, there was a big town and gown separation, and I- in Binghamton, GS: 20:02 [inaudible] IG: 20:04 You know, town and gown. GS: 20:07 Oh, town and gown. I am sorry, yes-yes, I gotcha, yeah. IG: 20:10 So, you know, I imagine that many of the Binghamton locals were probably supportive of the war. GS: 20:18 Yeah, there was not a real close town and gown relationship while we were there at all. There was the town and there was the gown. IG: 20:25 Right. GS: 20:25 And they seemed very resentful of the campus. They did not mind us spending the money in town, but they did not associate with us. I am not sure if that is changed or not. There was very few of the students who lived off campus. IG: 20:40 Right. GS: 20:40 Almost everybody lived on campus at that particular time. Uh, so I guess the relationship between students and-and the community, I do not think we are very strong at that particular- during those days. IG: 20:58 Well, perhaps you know now I noticed that the I know that the university is very invested in helping them- Binghamton community, but before it might not have happened. GS: 21:11 Now, it is a little satellite all by itself. IG: 21:14 And you felt that very much, that you were sort of a culturally apart. GS: 21:19 Yeah, since most of us were from downstate, yeah, and more liberal, this was a pretty conservative. Was and is a pretty conservative area. Harpur sort of stood by itself. IG: 21:30 Right. GS: 21:31 You know, pretty iso- physically, it was isolated. IG: 21:34 Right. GS: 21:35 You know, on campus, small campus, lots of land all around where- which the campus owned, but kept us, kept us separate. The only way to get into town was a bus, you know, the public bus, which had to stop. And the only, you know, the mall, as we know it was not built yet. All we had was the Vestal Plaza and the stores that were there, Britts, which was a department store that is long gone. And so that is where we would go shopping. IG: 22:05 Nobody had cars at the time. GS: 22:07 Very few, very few. There was not even much parking. Eventually, I got a car. I think it was in my junior year, and that really liberated up a lot of us, but we- as far as driving around is concerned, you drove home, you drove back, but once you were on campus, unless you went out for dinner or something like that, yeah, you pretty much stayed on campus. IG: 22:31 So um, tell me about, you know, residential life more and the dormitory situation and where you would visit your wife. Did you go out? Did you visit her at her dorm when you started going out? GS: 22:51 Yeah, well, we did both--for a couple of years, couple of semesters, we were separated. I was in Broome, I think she was in Whitney, and then eventually a place opened up, a room opened up, so I went there. So we were, we were pretty close, because they locked the ladies up. So that, you know, after that the guys would go out, but, and you had to have your girlfriend back on campus, by-by-by curfew. But, you know, we would go out. We would go to dinner together. We would study together. She would help me with my Spanish, one way or another. She did not help me with my accounting. IG: 23:08 Yes-yes. I understand that there were a number of breakups in that relationship. GS: 23:35 Oh, yeah, that is the religious thing. Yeah, we had being Jewish and her being Catholic, my parents were not really keen on-on the-the-the joining of the two, but there were just something about her which I just could not- IG: 23:50 [laughs] That is funny. GS: 23:52 -could not-could not shake. So we kept on going back. And eventually we decided to get-get married. That was, that was a somewhat traumatic area, because my parents did not want us to get married because of the religious factor, and my father said he would disown us and so forth. But once we got married, he got to know her, found out the wonderful person she was and we did not, you know, we did not have any difficulty from that standpoint. But before we got married, my parents sent me to talk to a cousin who was a rabbi, to try and talk me out of it. And then from her, from her side, we had to go to, I think it called pre cana classes, which did not mean much to me, but you did what you had to do, and so we eventually ironed out all the problems, and things seemed to work. Third speaker 23:53 How did you raise your kids? Did they get the both culture? GS: 24:00 Yeah, they did, but that was basically my wife. I was not very religious. I was not very religious. And if it were not for my wife, I do not think they would have gotten much of the Jewish side. But we celebrated both. They did not go to Jewish religious school. They went to Catholic school. Well, you know the after-school kind of Catholic school, Sunday-Sunday school for a couple of years until they were confirmed, but after that, they did not, they did not go and we tried to show them that there were different ways of looking at things. Everyone has their own stuff, but there was really basically a commonality of all religions. But my kids aren't very religious either. Maybe that is my fault, but Jan was the one who made sure that we celebrated both and that the kids knew of both cultures. IG: 25:51 Yeah. Do you think that-that kind of acceptance of, you know, of just of the coexistence, the possibility of coexist, of two religions, coexisting side by side in a family. Was that in any way influenced by sort of the liberal attitudes on campus at the time, or is that something that came to you. GS: 26:23 That is an interesting- that is an interesting question. I cannot answer that. I do not know if it was my liberality. It was more my love for Jan than anything else that seemed to- I could not shake her out of my mind. She was, she was, she was pretty important to my life. From the time I met her, there was a chemistry there, obviously, and I was just determined to make it work. But two of us were determined, even though I said, "No," this is not going to work. This is not going to work so we would break up. Was not her breaking up with me? Was me breaking up with her because this is just going to be too much of a hassle. But then could not get her out of my mind, so I would be back. And then eventually I just scrapped that idea of this is not going to work, and decided it is going to work. IG: 27:14 Did you have expectations of staying in Binghamton, or did you want to return to Long Island? GS: 27:20 Well, that is sort of, sort of interesting. I- uh, Jan was from Niagara Falls. I was obviously from Long Island; we were physically almost right in the middle. It was four hours to her house, four and a half hours to my house, you know, her parents’ house. So her parents, I think, wanted us up there. I know my parents wanted us down there, and we thought, well, this is a good compromise in between, you know, from a physical standpoint. Plus the city in Long Island really started to get to me. It was just the long lines, the hassle down there, working for my father for a couple of summers, pretty much turned me off from-from wanting to-to be down there. It was just too stressful--was not-was not- I adapted more to the Upstate way of life than it was to the to the to the city way of life. We like to go to visit down there. I mean, museums and things were great, nice place to visit, but we did not want to live there. IG: 28:24 So you stayed in touch with Binghamton, with Harpur College and then Binghamton University through the years, right? I mean, you went back to graduate school. GS: 28:37 Right. IG: 28:37 Would you- your wife mentioned that you had exchange students that- welcome to- into your home. GS: 28:44 Right. IG: 28:45 And some of them came from Binghamton. GS: 28:47 Uh, the exchange students did not come from Binghamton. IG: 28:50 Not the exchange but what was the name of the program? GS: 28:53 There was a rotor- the rotary program, yeah-yeah, that, yeah. The Business rotary had the exchange program where they brought students in. They would go to high school, but they needed homes for the for the kids, and they would rotate them, I think, every three or four months, so they had experience with various families in the United States before they, before they went home. And through, I sort of, I think I gave her the idea, I am trying to, trying to think way back, because my-my school participated in the program. We had kids from the program, and my department and the language department shared an office. So they had, they had asked, does anybody have you know- is anybody interested in hosting some of these kids? So I went home and asked my wife, and she said, "Oh, that would be a great idea." IG: 29:44 Right. GS: 29:44 So this started really when my when my daughter was born. IG: 29:48 Right. GS: 29:49 So 40 some odd years ago, and it was, it was really, really, very nice. The kids came into the house. They- our kids had had exposure to. IG: 30:00 Yeah. GS: 30:01 Kids from all different- IG: 30:04 Parts of the world. GS: 30:05 -parts of the world. And then eventually we went and visited some of them in Brazil and so forth. And of course, Jan had the Spanish we had a lot of Spanish speaking students. We did have one from South Africa. We had one from the Philippines, I think all told we had 11 or 12-12, kids here and we and we also had a professor, a teacher, who stayed with us for a few weeks, because we-we were like a sister school of a German- our German department had a relationship, so the- our teacher went over to Germany, and their teacher came over here Helmut, and he was, he was, he was quite a fella. IG: 30:49 But, you know, looking back, there was not a lot of international students or diversity at Harpur College when you were going there were there any students...? GS: 31:00 I think, I think there was not to the extent that they have today. IG: 31:05 No. GS: 31:06 We developed a friendship with one guy from, from Africa, Yeah, your wife mentioned. Yeah. And he was, he was a super guy, but also very-very bright man, and went-went back. We-we have been in contact on occasions, through-through email. IG: 31:28 Right. GS: 31:29 Other than that, we have not but he was a really gutsy guy. He went back to try and improve a lot of the blacks in-in Africa. And he went into some problems with-with the government, which was a, you know, a white government back there. So he was, he was a very, very brave fellow, but, and just a super-super nice guy. IG: 31:51 So you stayed in touch with him, since, you know what he did after graduating. GS: 31:56 Yeah, he-he went on to graduate school, I believe, in Canada and also in England, he kind of got some degrees. We did have a tendency to lose touch during those-those years. We just hit on each other, you know, once in a while. IG: 32:12 By email, by phone? GS: 32:14 Well, back then, it was basically by-by contact, either someone knew of what he did, or things of that nature, or maybe by phone, email was unheard of back then. IG: 32:26 Right. GS: 32:27 So it was not until, I guess, a few years ago, somehow, we got in touch with him, got that phone. We somehow made contact there. It was interesting. We were down in New York City and visiting my sister-in-law, and there were posters on the telephone poles, and he was giving a talk, and we wanted to see him, so we called, and we for some reason, we just could not make contact there, and I was, I was really disappointed and but I cannot remember how, but we did make contact again once email came about a few years ago, because he was a friend, not only of jam myself, but also the-the group of people who we were with. So somehow, we made and then, you know, by this time is his brother had passed away, and, you know, he had his kids and-and what have you. And then we lost, lost contact again. IG: 33:30 So it seems like you had a close group of friends that- GS: 33:34 Yeah, we did. IG: 33:35 -stay with- what-what do you think maybe it was a special thing about the school that kind of engender that type of relation, GS: 33:44 Yeah-yeah. I think so. IG: 33:44 Not everybody stays in touch with their- GS: 33:49 Yeah, well, I think part of it was-was you needed a support system there, because of, again, the pressure, the pressure of the school, so you needed a support system to maintain your-your sanity and your ability to keep on going. So we developed this-this group of, I do not know about ten of us, I guess, and several of us married each other, you know. So now-now we are couples. So we-we certainly stay in touch. We see each other. We are going to see each other over New Year. One of them, one of the one of the group, became a doctor, so we use enough money to buy a home in the Poconos. So we all, we all meet in the Poconos, and then we then meet again, usually during the summer. And now he is going to retire, so I think they are going to be moving permanently to the Pocono place so well they will be close enough to- [crosstalk] IG: 34:47 -is that, did he come to the (19)67 reunion? I see. GS: 34:50 No-no-no, he did not know. The reason being that they, they had another commitment. Uh, but they had, they had wanted to, but they-they they could not do it, but he had graduated at that time to the (19)67-(19)66-(19)67 time. So he was, they were the only ones at the group who did, who could make it. IG: 35:04 [crosstalk]-interested in- what was his name? GS: 35:13 Oh, Wolraich. Mark Wolraich. IG: 35:16 How do you spell it? Because I might [crosstalk] GS: 35:18 Oh, boy, W, O, L, R, A, I, C, H. IG: 35:23 Mark? GS: 35:24 Mark, yeah, and his specialty is working with-with kids like-like our granddaughter. So when our granddaughter was first born and we started to see difficulties with her, he pretty much knew what was, what the problem was, and-and without him, she would not have gotten the help as soon as she would have. It is so difficult to get young kids to see the doctors and the organizations that will analyze and finally determine that-that she was autistic, and he knew people up in Rochester, and he got us, got us in-in just a couple of months, where, if we had called ourselves, it would have been over a year before she could have been seen, because they were just so backed up. I mean, so few facilities, so many kids like this now. So he has been through any-any calls to see how things are going. He looked at the SUNY has a thing for autistic kids, which-which we did not know until the situation came and then and John said- IG: 36:36 It is new center. It is a new center, right? GS: 36:38 It is a school. IG: 36:39 It is a school. GS: 36:40 It is a school. Yeah, it is down behind the old men's gym. Yeah. So we went and visited there, and we went and visited the Handicapped Children's Center in-in Johnson City, looked at both programs and because she is, she is kind of social, where a lot of autistic kids cannot. Along with Mark's input and so forth, we decided that-that would- the one at Johnson City would be a better fit for her. So it has- he has been just terrific. I do not know what we would have done without him. He just moved mountains for her. IG: 37:19 That is very fortunate. GS: 37:21 Very fortunate. Yeah, it is one of those things, you know. It is who you know. IG: 37:24 It really is. GS: 37:25 We were very fortunate. Yeah, one that he was our friend, and that he just happened to go into this field. He runs a big program out in the university where he where he teaches. IG: 37:26 Where does he teach? GS: 37:30 Uh, trying to remember, he has moved around so often. Jan-Jan [calling his wife], Midwest. IG: 37:47 Well, it does not matter, I mean, um, so maybe you could tell me about some of the ways um, that you have seen the university change over the years. GS: 38:09 Oh, yeah. Well, first of all, it became a university. It was not a university. And we were there when we started, and while we were there, it became the State University of New York at Binghamton. IG: 38:20 Right. GS: 38:21 That was the last couple of years. So they developed a small graduate-graduate program, and you get graduate degrees there. And just a physical plant itself has grown enormously since we were, since we were, we were there. We just had the little-little core the brain was-was there. No, but the brain. IG: 38:22 Yes-yes. GS: 38:23 So just-just basically the-the old buildings and the brain were there with a couple of dorms. Then by the time we finished, or almost finished, they built what we called the self regs, which is the Hinman complex, and-and the cafeteria up there. And of course, they have expanded their-their program tremendously, I mean, to the point where they have a school for-for kids with-with difficulties, right on campus. I mean, we had- we did not know the building was there, let alone that there was a school there. IG: 39:18 And now they are expanding the health sciences to Johnson City. GS: 39:22 Right-right down in Binghamton, they have a campus, so they are going to have one in Johnson City. So now they have a, you know, a nursing program, which was not there when we were there, in addition. So, you know, the physical plan and the academic pursuits have just expanded dramatically since-since we have been there over the years. IG: 39:47 Do you think that it still has the spirit of Harpur College? You know, the reputation that it had of being socially committed students and academically rigorous. How has, you know, the- GS: 40:04 From everything I understand, yeah, it is rated one of the, you know, the highest schools in the state university system. IG: 40:10 Yeah. GS: 40:11 So I would say absolutely. And the kids, when we, when we go over there, we do not get off and talk to this, to the students therapy. You could see it. It seems very academic. They have the libraries in each of the complexes now. Now we just have the library now they have satellite libraries all over. The quality of the faculties remain very high as far as doctorates are concerned. So I would say academically, it is probably as good as- IG: 40:43 As it was. GS: 40:44 As it was, yeah. IG: 40:45 But what really differentiated, you know, Binghamton now from Binghamton at Harpur College when you were going? Because it was a smaller school. GS: 40:55 Much more. That is one of the reasons we went there. IG: 40:57 It was, it was a smaller school, was it would you say that it was politically active more so? GS: 41:05 Yeah. IG: 41:05 Do you think that-that is was a response to the times, to the (19)60s, the culture those sort of the youth culture of the (19)60s? Or do you think that it was, you know, peculiar to unique to the school, or, you know- GS: 41:23 Well, I think that the universities, a lot of the universities at the time, in the (19)60s, with the Vietnam War, Kent State, and a lot- IG: 41:23 Right. GS: 41:23 I know that stuff occurred during, during our, our growing up time, and I think that necessitated all the activity, the political activity that was generated on campus at that time, and now-now, I think again, because of the political situation which we have, it probably has, well, it rejuvenated our political interest and made much more active again, after years of, you know, raising a family and and-and working, we have got much more politically active now as a result of the Republicans taking over. So it is- [crosstalk] IG: 42:17 Do you think seeds were planted at Harpur College? GS: 42:19 Yeah-yeah, I think so, yeah. Plus-plus our-our liberal attitude, all right, we are much more inclusive that society has become. We-we just like everybody. That is one of the reasons we like to travel. We like to meet people, talk people. One of the advantages of taking the cruises that we do is we sit dinner with people from all over the world, and you get to talk politics. Although it was interesting. The cruise we just got back from, nobody taught politics. It was sort of a subject which was not brought up. This is the first time, and just so- IG: 42:56 To Sydney, when you went to Sydney? GS: 42:58 Yeah, we went to Australia and New Zealand. IG: 43:01 Right. GS: 43:02 People just steered away, even people from other countries just did not bring it up, which is totally different. IG: 43:08 Well, maybe they are afraid to hurt you by saying anything negative. GS: 43:12 Yeah. Well, you know, you are on vacation, you do not want to get into an argument. And in all-all truth, we probably would not get into an argument because we probably would agree with them. [laughs] As far as the situation is concerned, we are an awful situation. I am really worried about this country staying together as the United States, and we are so-so polarized that I just will be amazed if we survive this as a united country. So hopefully things will change. Do you remember any legends or great stories about Harpur College at the time? IG: 43:53 But the only one was Lake Lieberman. Talk about that. GS: 43:59 Well, behind- in the Broome complex, behind the Broome complex and behind the Newing dining hall, which is now, I understand it is gone. There was a pond, and the story was the time that one kid fell in, and they said, "Should we get them out?" And said, "No, just leave them in." So that is, that is how, that is how the name came about. That was the story. I do not know what the real story was- [inaudible] Lieberman got but that was the story at the time. So that was one of the thing. And then we had the coat ceremony. IG: 44:41 So did the kid live? GS: 44:42 Oh, yeah. I mean, this was not a pond, still there. It was not very deep, and it was brand new. It was a man-made pot. So that was, that was one story which we had, and that was, that was, that was behind our dormitory, so that there were. Two other, I guess, activities, the stepping on the coat ceremony, which was on the Esplanade, which is now gone, unfortunately, that took place, and that was annually, in the spring, when the cold weather stopped and the warm weather began to officially state that spring was here, they would have a stepping on the coat ceremony, where they take an overcoat, do a few speeches in old, an old English--some, some kid wrote an old, I cannot repeat it. Some of the people remember, I do not know if you have a recording of it, but it is it was quite something. And then they, when it was official, they would step on the coat. Okay. Spring has now arrived. That was, that was the official statement. IG: 45:44 Did you see the ceremony performed at any point? GS: 45:47 Oh yeah. IG: 45:47 Oh you did. Speaker 1 45:47 Oh yeah, I saw it, but I cannot repeat the Old English speech that was given, but oh yeah. That was probably the last couple of years I was there. And then the other- [crosstalk] IG: 46:00 [inaudible] as-as being a student on campus, did you attend this? Oh-oh, so people kind of you know, plugged into the student events. GS: 46:05 Oh, sure. Oh yeah. IG: 46:10 on your [inaudible], yeah. GS: 46:11 When we were there, you had the campus was our life. IG: 46:13 Yes. GS: 46:14 When we were there, that was, again, we did not do much off campus. Campus life was-was the life. And there were no other campuses to go to at the time. So, uh- IG: 46:24 Were you into sports? Were you into any other activities? Really? GS: 46:27 No activities. That is kind of interesting. One of the reasons I went to Harpur was--I was a target shooter, and I was on the rifle team in high school, and Harpur had, at the time, a target range by the time I got- but when I came up here, I found out that they had basically closed it down. So I was quite a, quite a disappointment to me. It was still there, but it was not being used. So I even brought my rifle up with me, which had to be locked up with the, with the campus police, and I never took it out. Yeah, or they would not let you keep in the dorm or anything. So that is where it had to be kept. And then if, well, even the campus police did not have guns back there, all they had was a night stick. Everybody has guns, yeah, on campus. I mean, kids have guns too. IG: 47:20 I do not think so. GS: 47:21 Oh! Third speaker: 47:21 Maybe not on campus, but in America- You go to the Walmart and purchase- GS: 47:26 I know it is a gun crazy culture. I know a lot of our friends, yeah, we call them gun nuts, but a lot of my friends are gun nuts, so it is just part of our crazy cultures. I do not understand it, and I am an old NRA person, but that was the NRA back when I was a member. Was a lot different. That organization has been hijacked from an educational to a political group. Anyway. That is sort of an interesting story of itself. But yeah, from a sports I am not very sports oriented. I am also very, probably because I am very, not very good at sports. I am more into reading and doing my woodwork, things of that nature. I wish they would have to work- a wood shop on campus. We could have worked, worked up, but they-they did not. That would have been really cool. And the but the one other activity, if you are talking about sports, was train you were [inaudible] up train, you would- the cafeterias had fiberglass trays. That was very important, that they were fiberglass, and we would steal them borrow and there was a hill right by Broome that goes down towards the-the old gym and the fields down there. So when it snowed, we would take these trades, we would sit on them, and we would shoot down the hill. So that was that was about the extent of my-my kind of physical activity, but it was kind of funny. At some point, they bought new trays, and they were metal trays that were encased in a rubberized plastic case that was textured and they would not slide. So that was the end of tray, unless you got some other device. But we, I guess maybe they did it to save the trays in the in the cafeteria. IG: 49:32 Probably somebody caught on. GS: 49:35 Yeah. [laughs] IG: 49:38 So, you know, tell me what you miss most about those years. GS: 49:43 It had to be the people and the camaraderie we had with-with our group, that was great. I mean, we still meet with the people, but we have, we have, we have spread out so we do not see each other all the time, but I really miss. Living and being together with all-all of our friends, that was really great. I do not miss the pressure of the, of the academics. I mean, it was, I think 10 or 15 years after I graduated, I would still wake up in the middle of night, well, for my nightmare, saying, oh my god, the papers due tomorrow, only to realize, you know, you graduated, like, 10 or 15 years ago, but you had these nightmares, but the people were terrific. And I think also living, you got to learn to live on your own, away from your parents, you know, without their protection- IG: 50:37 But in a community. GS: 50:39 -but in a community which was which was loving and-and safe for the most part. I miss, I miss that a lot, because the world is not safe anymore. My world is not-not safe the way it was. You like-like any most colleges, you are protected. So. IG: 50:58 It was safe, it was a haven. But the world still was not safe with the Vietnam- GS: 51:03 Oh, absolutely. IG: 51:05 -and- GS: 51:05 Yeah, but- IG: 51:06 I am being very aware that you could be- [crosstalk] GS: 51:09 Oh, drafted. Oh yeah, the draft was-was-was an ever-present worry, yeah. But while you were on campus, as long as you had that deferment from- for being a student deferment. You were, you were safe as soon as you graduated. You were, we were in trouble. But they-they had the-the war boards. Well, one of the ways you could be deferred from-from the armed forces was to take this exam. And if you got a certain score in the exam, then you could continue your student affirming. If you did not do it, then you were up for- to be involuntarily taken into the, into the army and sent over to Vietnam. So I remember those. And then they had the lottery late later on, where they picked your name out of a or your birth date out of a hat. And if they picked your-your date, it was more difficult to get into deferment, you know, so and those people who were later dates than they would be recruited later on, but if they had the number of bodies that they needed to-to satisfy the-the army at that particular point, if you were in the-the end of the-the lottery, you did not get called. IG: 52:36 Did any of your classmates get called during the college? GS: 52:42 Uh, only one that I remember, we were not very close. One of the brothers ended up going over, and then, of course, we lost contact with him once he was recruited. But most of us went on to graduate school so we could continue our-our deferments, or we had occupations such as teaching which-which would defer. So most of us did not go. We mark got into a program whereby he had to do public service while he was in medical school, and that kept him out of the army, per se, but he was in the Public Health Service on an Indian reservation. IG: 53:27 Oh, how interesting. GS: 53:27 Well, they adopted- IG: 53:29 Here in northeast, or...? GS: 53:32 Oh, no-no, out west. Okay, see, I- IG: 53:45 You want to stop this? GS: 53:47 Yeah. Third speaker: 53:54 Okay. IG: 53:59 Soum, tell us about- do you recall any great characters from among your group of friends? Could you tell us about anyone you know who was a real character? GS: 54:15 Māori Cruise. I think he was from Cuba. IG: 54:18 Yeah. GS: 54:19 He was a character. IG: 54:20 How so? GS: 54:24 Never took anything seriously. He was always one of those free flight people who just seemed to enjoy life. I think that was probably his Cuban upbringing. He got a mo- he even got a motorcycle. You know, it was my first and only motorcycle ride. Was holding on for dear life. Māori around, but he was, he was just a fun, a fun guy. I do not even think he lasted for more than a year or two at school. He just enjoyed life too much. But he was a real character. We had a, we had a good time, if you wanted, if you wanted a good time. Māori was the guy to go out with. I think he was Cuba- he was Cuban from Cuba. IG: 54:59 Was he a Cuban American or Cuban from Cuba? So, how did you how did he talk about Cuba? How did you feel about Cuba at the time? Did you think that it was an enemy state? GS: 55:13 I do not think so. We-we did not talk politics. As far as that was concerned with the Māori, everything was-was social. You did not talk to him seriously about things like that. In my memory, he was just happy to be here and was enjoying life. So he- his happiness was very infectious. IG: 55:43 How do you think your classmates would remember you from your years at Harpur College? What would they say about you? GS: 55:50 Oh, gosh, if they even remembered me. IG: 55:53 Basically your friends. GS: 55:54 Well, those people, the ones are still friends. Oh, I think they would remember me. IG: 55:59 How? GS: 55:59 Well, how? I do not know. IG: 56:04 [inaudible] yourself from those years. GS: 56:06 Sort of, I am sort of a jokester. I- not practical jokes, but I use a lot of double intenders. I turn words around and things like that. That is sort of my reputation. But also sort of to a certain thing serious. And you can have serious discussions, which we do whenever-whenever we get together, we all talk politics and so forth. We are all of the same kind of political persuasion. And- IG: 56:36 So, You are pretty much the same person that you- GS: 56:40 I do not, I do not see me changing. I think, I think I am more tolerant. I thought I was tolerant them. I think I am more tolerant now. I think my attitude toward women have changed dramatically. I was used- I was brought up at a time when, you know, women did what they were told. Kind of idea. Wives did what they were they were told they were subservient to the husbands. Jan made quick disposed of that very quickly, [laughter] and obviously it was for the good, you know, but I learned quickly that-that is not the way you treat a woman or a wife. IG: 57:27 So you are emotionally intelligent, not only book smart. GS: 57:30 Well, I like to think so. Plus, I was in a profession where there were a lot of women. IG: 57:34 Right. GS: 57:35 In teaching there were a lot of women, so I always considered them my-my equals. I never considered them subserving to me in any way, shape or form. But then I felt the same way about secretaries and custodians. I never- there were a lot of professionals who think of those people and-and the I hate to use the term lesser occupations as somehow being inferior. And I was always friends with all these people. Yeah, we had to treat them- I mean, they are people who just were in a different field. That is all. That is why I looked at it. So I think most of my friends feel that way. And this, I think when they think of me, they-they think of a person who's very accepting and very tolerant and liberal. IG: 58:24 Good. Just [inaudible] I forget this one thing, you were on a judicial board, the punishment for your wife's infraction. GS: 58:38 Oh, not her infraction, her roommate. IG: 58:40 Her roommate. GS: 58:41 Her roommate, her roommates, infraction, yeah, yeah, judicial review board, we had [talking to his wife] No. [his wife replies] Okay. Okay, I have to read this later. Uh, supposedly we were self-governing. Okay. When it came to the real thing, of course, the administration took over. But for minor infractions of the rules, a student was brought before the judicial review board. Nine out of 10 of these things, maybe 99 out of out of 100 were curfew infractions. So we had to come up with some way to punish the girls because their boyfriends brought them home late. I mean, looking back, I was so absurd, [laughs] but we did not take it really all too seriously. Because, I mean, even then, we knew that curfew was kind of, kind of kind of dumb, so we imposed a penalty on Jan's roommate, who came back late, of having to make chocolate chip cookies for the dorm. I mean, this is a kind of a [inaudible]. We had this little, little cubby hole of a kitchen with this little tiny oven, and I knew that Jan mother had sent her with cookie trays and mixing bowls and so forth. So I thought, gee, this would be a good, a good thing. I like chocolate chip cookies. The dorm likes chocolate chip cookies, so why do not we have her make chocolate chip cookies for the dorm? So I did not realize at the time how much work was involved. We probably would have thought of something else, but it was sort of like almost in jest, almost in fun, because a silly infraction, you make a silly punishment. I mean, what do you- what kind of things are you going to do? How did you join this judicial board? You applied. IG: 1:00:49 You applied. GS: 1:00:49 You applied. Yeah, you know, they had different organizations on campuses like the radio or-or the newspaper thing. And I applied. And I do not even know how you got accepted. Right. Just all of a sudden, I was I said, "Sure, I will join that." And you were there. IG: 1:01:08 You were there. Well- GS: 1:01:11 So long ago. IG: 1:01:14 I am, you know, I think that we are going to wrap up soon. I would like to know if there are any concluding remarks that you might have about Harper College and your experience there, and you know how it impacted the rest of your life? GS: 1:01:32 Well, obviously it had a great impact in my life. My best friends, I met there, and we kept, we have kept in touch for 50 years, met my wife there, and we have been married for 50 years, but looking back on it, we had a super-duper education for a super-duper bargain price. The tuition was only $200 a semester at the time-- region, scholarship took care of that, so it was room and board, which I think was $400 or $435 a semester plus books. Why we do not continue to do that is beyond me. I know there is a cost involved, but here we had a situation where superb education a price that anyone could-could pay for and then we went on to make a country. Why do not we continue to do that? Encourage people to do that. I mean, people cannot just go out in the world without an education, especially now. So why do not we willingly and happily educate our populace at a reasonable price, right? Why burden them with years of debt? It is crazy. So I am definitely appreciative of the education I got, and every time I think of the costs, it just makes me laugh, because how- it was what an opportunity we had, what an opportunity we had, and we did not. I do not think we realized it at the time, how great, because we thought that would continue forever. State University is always going to be $200 a semester, and the quality of the education was just terrific. Could not, could not do better. And I assume the quality of education that the kids are getting there to State University today is at least equal to what we had, although the cost is-is a lot more, well, still cheaper than private schools, but because my son went to Ithaca, so we know how that is. But what an opportunity. I am indebted to the state of New York for the education they provided me, both elementary high school and college. Could not be what I am today without them. IG: 1:03:59 Well, thank you very much. GS: 1:04:00 Oh my pleasure. My pleasure. IG: 1:04:02 Thank you so much for your time welcoming us into your lovely home. (End of Interview) Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Geoffrey H. Strauss Subject The topic of the resource Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in secondary education; Harpur College – Alumni from Upstate New York; Harpur College – Alumni living in Broome County. Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Strauss, Geoffrey H. ; Gashurov, Irene Description An account of the resource At Harpur College, Geoffrey studied accounting. A summer job as a counselor with the college’s Upward Bound Program for disadvantaged youth decided him on a career in teaching. He taught accounting at Broome Community College and Endicott High School for 33 years. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-12-14 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2017-12-14 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Oral Histories from 60's Binghamton Alumni Extent The size or duration of the resource. 64:09 minutes Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/3af0aaaaf33f3a72ec1cc707d907bac3.jpg 3216026ec51de77ea9b86d494134b1d4 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/62c085bf8fdc0d4558ba7f992896ba4d.mp3 63f56184dbd954919e6e2ccc02c5a85c Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Audio interviews Title A name given to the resource McKiernan Interviews Description An account of the resource Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br /> <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2011-03-08 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Ladonna Harris Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Ladonna Harris is a Comanche Native American social activist and politician from Oklahoma. In addition, she is the founding member of Common Cause and the National Urban Coalition. Harris is also the president of the group Americans for Indian Opportunity. She had been an outspoken advocate on the agendas of the civil rights, feminist, environmental and world peace movements.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:6535,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;4&quot;:[null,2,5099745],&quot;5&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:[{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;5&quot;:[null,2,0]},{&quot;1&quot;:0,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;3&quot;:3},{&quot;1&quot;:1,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;4&quot;:1}]},&quot;10&quot;:2,&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;14&quot;:[null,2,0],&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Arial&quot;}">Ladonna Harris is a Comanche Native American social activist and politician from Oklahoma. In addition, she is the founding member of Common Cause and the National Urban Coalition. Harris is also the president of the group Americans for Indian Opportunity. She has been an outspoken advocate on the agendas of the civil rights, feminist, environmental and world peace movements.</span> Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data MicroCassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 191:34 Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Native American; Comanche; Culture; Assimilation; Senator Joseph Tydings; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act; Baby boom generation; Stereotypes; Ethel Kennedy; Kerry Kennedy&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:513,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;12&quot;:0}">Native American; Comanche; Culture; Assimilation; Senator Joseph Tydings; Bureau of Indian Affairs; Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act; Baby boom generation; Stereotypes; Ethel Kennedy; Kerry Kennedy</span> Subject LCSH Civil rights workers; Political activists--United States; Comanche Indians; Politicians--United States--Oklahoma; National Urban Coalition (U.S.); Americans for Indian Opportunity; Harris, Ladonna--Interviews Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Ladonna Harris Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 8 March 2011 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:04): Testing one, two. And could you describe your upbringing and the importance that being a part of two cultures played in your life? Because I know your parents were, one was from Irish background, I believe, and one was Comanche? LH (00:00:23): Yes. SM (00:00:24): So- LH (00:00:26): Well, my Comanche side overrode my Irish side because my father left to California like all the good Okies did at that time to try to find work. And so when I was just a baby, he and his folks, all of his mother and sisters all went Bakersville, California, which was kind of the whole, The Grapes of Wrath, I guess. They were not quite that bad off because they were able to buy a little motel and use it for resources. But he never came back to Oklahoma. So I heard from him, periodically. I never really got to know him. So, my whole upbringing was Comanche until I started school. SM (00:01:18): What was it like growing up in the (19)30s, being Native American background at that particular time? LH (00:01:27): Well, in relative terms, my grandfather, my Comanche grandfather, was well off because his father was a Spanish [inaudible]. And during when they allotted the Comanche land to the Comanches, he put all of his children's lands together. So, we had a large with several, it was 180 acres. SM (00:01:57): Wow. LH (00:01:57): 160 acres, excuse me, 160 acres. And then each allotment, each person that was alive at that time got that. And so he put his sibling's land together and my grandfather then farmed it, which was not the Comanche way necessarily. But what was interesting was, that my grandmother was the second Comanche to be converted it to Christianity. So that was kind of the difference between us in the growing up. My grandfather was, he had eagle medicine and then took up peyote as part of his medicine way. And so, I grew up going to... grandfather driving me to church, driving us all to church, and going to church services. And he would sit out in the car. And then, after the church was over, we would visit around with people and then go home. And then he would sing his peyote songs in the evening as the sun was going down and he could cure certain illnesses with his peyote medicine. So that was kind of the atmosphere I grew up in, and we did not know that there was a Depression going on because we were pretty self-sufficient. By that time the grandfather had gotten... and my uncle lived close by and they had farmed together. And so that we had reproduced things. And so relatively, we were better off than say, French folks, who were kind of migrant, not migrant workers so much as, but sharecroppers. And he lived across the creek, but I never knew him at that time growing up. So, we just played on the creek, had lots to eat, we had all kinds of farm animals and grandmother had a garden. And we went to town on a Saturday and took milk and eggs and whatever that grandmother had to produce to take into town for trade. And it was a weird town, not weird, but it was a weird situation. In Temple, Oklahoma, there was a big department store that two brothers built right there in the flat plains of Oklahoma and Cotton County where there was not a population, but it worked. People from all around the region came and traded there. They had from cars to dry goods to everything, farm implements. So it was kind of like one stop shopping. And it was kind of fun to go to town and they would drop off the produce and grandmother would get money for a produce and give us some change to go to the movies and the Lone Ranger and all of those crazy Indians, kind of. So short subjects. SM (00:05:16): And Tom Mix was big then, was not he? Tom Mix- LH (00:05:18): Tom Mix and... SM (00:05:18): Gene Autry. LH (00:05:18): Gene Autry. SM (00:05:18): Yeah. LH (00:05:27): Lone Ranger was much later because he had an Indian's house. And... Go ahead. SM (00:05:30): Yeah, you are very proud of your Comanche heritage and could you give a little history about the Comanche heritage with respect to their traditions, cultures, and history? LH (00:05:45): Well, they just recently came... a book has come out talking about the Comanche Empire. And because of our ability, we came out of the north, out of the Shoshone from... We were related to the Shoshones, and we came because our family story is that they had a great illness outbreak. So we came south and then dominated and got the Spanish horse and dominated the plain. And they called it the Comanche Empire. There is no reason the author did with prejudice, with Western educational knowledge. So, he really investigated it and said that we were the only tribe in the United States that dealt with the Spanish, the French. We actually made treaties at different times, trade treaties with these different governments and then the Mexican government and the US government that we had actually worked with that many countries, nationalities and countries. So, that we dominated the plains and even came over the mountains here to New Mexico and that every tribe here has a Comanche dance, recognizing the... acknowledging the power of the Comanche. And the Hispanics have a theater performance about the Comanche, so that we had a great impact in this part of the country. So, from Colorado to down into Old Mexico, to over to Louisiana where we dealt with the French and up to Arkansas and Missouri corner, that corner. So, we dominated those because we became the horseman and we created, I mean, we embraced change more rapidly. When the Anglos killed off of the buffalo, we created a trade route. And what we would do, we would go down to Old Mexico and steal horses and come back and sell them to the New Mexican Hispanics, the Spaniards here in New Mexico, because they were treated... Since they did not find gold and precious everything in New Mexico, the Spanish in Old Mexico did not pay much attention to them so that they were very well... they did not have very many things to continue their lives. So, we developed a trade system and we were also very fierce. And we burned down Santa Fe a couple of times and we have great stories about our fierceness. And that when you saw a Comanche footprint, you could tell it was Comanche because it had a fringe that it would come across it and looked like a snake walked across the foot. SM (00:09:05): Oh, wow. LH (00:09:08): And so we were greatly admired in some ways and feared in others. We also stole children, and I have got a lot of that history of Spanish grandfather on one side and the Mexican Indian grandfather of my grandmother's, so that most of the Comanche have that kind of history that somebody in their family were. SM (00:09:40): And at it is high point, how many Comanches were there? LH (00:09:46): You know what? I will have to look that up because I have heard it and then I cannot remember. Now I know that there are 4,100 of us. And that is really a growing number. I think all tribes have grown in this decade. But we were very proud. Growing up with my grandparents, they were old enough to remember the old way and knew, but also smart enough to know how to deal with the contemporary situation. And whereas my mother, on the other hand, was really the transitional person who had to really make real hard changes like Indian boarding school. Though my grandparents went into Indian boarding school. They both got out of them before they were destroyed by the boarding school system, grandfather running away and grandmother having to go back to help get her aunt who was sick had go take care of her. But they got out of the Indian boarding school where they were. SM (00:10:59): What is the role of women in the Comanche culture? Is there a respect for women? LH (00:11:06): Oh, yes. And in most tribes, not matriarchal, but you inherit through your mother, and cure your mother's [inaudible] and you are our child. And inherit and they were the property owners. They owned their house, the teepees or the housing in most tribes that is how. And even in the Iroquois Nation, they had a formalized ways the dim mother's... [inaudible] what they were called. They were called pine mothers and felt that they were variations of that. But we were very much more democratic and participatorial. And the things that made the Comanches different when they came down on the plain off the mountains of Montana, that we broke up into bands, and we never were together until the after the Civil War. All of the military that was left in the Civil War came down to dominate us. And the Comanche powers and the Cheyenne, and they were all looking... the generals were all looking like... Oh, what the General's name? SM (00:12:33): Custer? LH (00:12:34): Custer. Yes. Like Custer, they all wanted another star on their... SM (00:12:39): Oh wow. LH (00:12:40): And so they built with them to help with the Buffalo shelter, built Forts from Fort [inaudible 00:12:46] to New Mexico. And in order to control us because the regular military did not until all of them had the guns from the Civil War and the people who wanted to go gain... What am I trying to say? Gain recognition or gain... go up in the military, like Custer. SM (00:13:23): Before I get into your high school years, if you could name some of the leaders of the Comanche in the 1800s or early 1900s. We all know about Sitting Bull and Crazy Horse, but were there ones that really stood out? LH (00:13:40): Quanah Parker. Well see, that is the difference too than the other tribes. We did not have one Chief over all of them. Each band had different leaders. And it was that if people followed you, then you were a leader. There was not a leader who was inherited the position. There was not a leader who was selected by the group. Each person had certain divisions of responsibility. Like there were the elders who decided where we would move to. There were groups who would protect us to see that we were secure when we camped out. They all had different responsibilities. And so, for instance, if it said that when a person, particularly a man, would need to go on a hunting trip, he would send his nephew up to the camp and say that so-and-so is going to go down into Texas to either raid or to hunt buffalo, and if you want to come, join him under the tree at this section before sunset. So, if people came, they followed him because he had the right characteristics of a good leader, of a person who was generous, mostly, that was the first most important thing. Generous and was seasoned in combat or knew how to deal responsibly with other people's lives. And so that people followed you. So that we did not have... We had a transition leader that the government picked out for us, which was Quanah Parker. And he was a... After we were brought to the reservation, it's like we do today, when we go to Afghanistan, we have to have appoint some leader, one person. And when they're all tribal people, we always say, if the State Department understood Native Americans, they would understand how to deal with Afghanistan and other countries where tribal people exist. And so, what they do, just like they have done in Afghanistan, put this guy up who is corrupt. Well, this was not the case in Parker's place, but installed somebody so that was the person they had to make a deal with. And so that all of these different bands, there were about nine different bands of us who roamed all over those plains and rarely ever got together in one place. And so that it was... There's a book called On Being Comanche. And for a long time, Western anthropologists and people who studied different cultures never said that Comanche did not have any structure, so therefore they were not valuable. But there was value in, well, we did have structure, but it just did not conform to Western value systems, so they could not interpret it. Until just more recently seeing how valuable it was and how that the fact that we supposedly chose disorganized, that we could control the whole southern plains from Kansas down into Old Mexico. And so that they are now at a whole new different viewpoint of it. And my grandfather's father was a captive who became a War Chief, and that meant that people followed him during battle because he was brave. And it is the whole idea of being more, I say we're more democratic in participatorial than what we now refer to as democracy. Because all people were valued. The difference about tribal people is that we are communal and that we live, we're collected, and that the land we own, we own collectively. And the resources that come from those lands that are divided up amongst us. So that is so different than the capitalist society. SM (00:18:20): Is that still present today? LH (00:18:23): Yes. SM (00:18:24): So you kept it. Because when you read the history of Native Americans and different tribes, one of the pressures that you have always seen in America is Americanized. You must become Americanized. And that was one of the battles that I think of, at least from my study, culture meant a lot. LH (00:18:49): Absolutely. And that is what those Indian boarding schools and the missionary, they tried all these different things and they had a policy of... What do I want to say? Of assimilating. The federal policy was to assimilate into the American society where we would no longer exist. And then probably they could disband the treaties and what lands and things that we did have, because every time we would have land, like in Oklahoma, they had found oil there, then they would open it up for white settlement. So those kinds of things, but other people of color are integrated, but we were assimilated. So totally different approach to it. So that they used every method that they could think of to assimilate us, which was very hard and very difficult for my mother. SM (00:19:59): Yeah, I noticed that... Well, I have some questions that will follow up on this in a minute or so, but what were your high school years like? I know you met your future husband, Senator Fred Harris. How did you meet him and then fall in love and get married? And I know you played a very important role in getting him through college too. So just a little bit about that. LH (00:20:29): Well, I had lived in Bethany, Oklahoma, which was a suburb of Oklahoma City, but my sister was working for the... during World War I, I think, working for an airplane, Boeing airplane, putting airplanes together. So I was taking care of my little niece in the summertime. And then I just stayed over and went to school there a couple of years. And then I moved back to Walters. So when I moved back to Walters, my aunt was going to school there, and I asked her, "Well, who is the student president?" And she said, "Freddy. Freddy Ray," she said. She pointed him out. And I said, "Ooh, him?" And then later, he took the initiative and finally we started dating. But it was interesting, really. I was convinced that he must have been... He told me he worked for The Walters Herald, and The Walters Herald was our local newspaper and I just saw that he was like... I visualized him being a reporter, but of course he was a printer. But anyway, we had great fun. So, we became very close, got married, and probably my senior year he went off to college. We got married the next year, and then, which was the sign of the time that women were mostly, they were coming back from Korea. [inaudible] would come back from Korea, and wives were working and putting their husband... I guess, still the veterans from World War II who were going back to school so that they had a large segment of wives and families there. And we lived very, very, very simply, I guess. Folks would give us produce from the farm. My mother would buy clothes from me. And then we had Catherine first year and our first child. But I did not really have that much skill just coming out of high school but I was able to find enough work to... And then we lived in a greenhouse where we could grow flowers to pay for our rent, and then we would have some money to make. And then he would get scholarships. He was smart enough to get scholarships all through undergraduate and into law school. So, we just became... And so in his classwork, he shared what he learned with me. And then in law school, all of the law students, his class, would come over and study at our house, because he had great notes and they could discuss it. And so that I was a part of all of his learning experience, although I did not take the classes. And I was very dyslexic as well, and impaired learning going through the public-school system and through educational systems so I had to learn other kinds of ways. But I managed to hold down jobs and work. And then we went, after he graduated from law school, he immediately went into this law firm. And then there was a death of [inaudible]. But we became real partners in our relation... interdependent on each other in our relationship. And it went on for 31 years of existence. So, I think... SM (00:24:29): You see, in a sense, that your marriage was similar to just about all the marriages of that period where family and husband came first, and the wife sacrificed is basically for their husband and family. Is that true? LH (00:24:46): That is right. SM (00:24:47): Yep. LH (00:24:48): That is right. But the interesting part, from my Comanche background, one of the things that I learned, so I would not get my feelings hurt, I would study people and figure them out, and figure out how to deal with them in a way that they were comfortable with. So it was a skill I learned in high school, actually, to get through high school. I wanted to belong to this whole high school sorority. I would figure her all of that out and get myself in there. I was the first Indian person to be nominated for Football Queen and all those little things that... the popular things in high school. So, that was unique. And then after he graduated from law school, but even in his classes, he shared with me in a different kind of way. Like with his botany classes, we would go out and look at the trees and he would explain them to me as he was learning it. And then in anthropology, he said he took anthropology so he could understand me better. And then he became quite involved in Comanche culture. He can still sing today and still very well remembered in the Comanche. [inaudible] he does not miss being married to me. He misses being part of the Comanche family. But it was a fascinating, wonderful experience. And then when he ran for state senate, well, when he was in law school, he ran for the House of Representatives, and he would be 21 years old when he got sworn in, and he ran against the 68-year-old County Commissioner and lost by 16 votes, I think. SM (00:27:07): Wow. LH (00:27:08): So that was down in Cotton County, our old home, and then the ran for Senate to Creek County, Cotton County, and Comanche County. And we organized and just worked ourselves. And we had friends who made homemade posters. And television had just come in too. And I was the first wife that would appear on television. I was the first wife who would go to Oklahoma State legislature, and we were known as Freddy and the Indian by the older members of the- SM (00:27:41): Oh my gosh. LH (00:27:44): And because it was enduring. That was an enduring thing for me. SM (00:27:49): I noticed, I saw you were on the Dick Cavett Show once, and Dick Cavett was speaking to both of you then, but he immediately went to talk to you because you were well known, because you were the wife of a Senator in Washington, and you were getting more press than your husband. And you have probably seen that on YouTube. LH (00:28:09): Oh yeah. SM (00:28:13): What were your activities on behalf of Native Americans prior to going to DC? LH (00:28:19): Well, when Fred went off to the State Senate, I had too much time on my hand. I had two children though, but I had lots of relatives and friends who helped babysit for me. So what we did, I went to the University of Oklahoma that Fred was supposed to go to in the Southwest Center for Human Relations, put on the program to see about white-Black relations in Oklahoma. And it was early in the (19)60s before the [inaudible] in the South. And so, I said, " What about the Native Americans in Oklahoma?" And they said, "Oh, they do not have problems. The Bureau of Indian Affairs is taking care of them." And just said, "They're the problem. They're part of the problem, the major part of the problem." And I was so frustrated that I could not explain to them. They had no knowledge, these were the cream of the crop, OU University. And they had no idea about what was happening to Indians in Oklahoma. And we had 36 different tribes in Oklahoma, but some were pushed in for the [inaudible] from the eastern side of the state. And then the plains people were on the western side of the state. And so, I cried. I got so frustrated because I could not get them to understand what the problems were. So I burst into tears and that embarrassed them. So they started coming down to... They came to our house in Lawton, Oklahoma from Norman. And once a week [inaudible] seen people together and they began to articulate our own needs, mostly were Comanche relatives of mine. And then we organized and organized part of the state, the tribes on the western part of the state went over to the east- SM (00:30:27): Could you speak up a little bit too, please? LH (00:30:29): Okay. We organized the western side of the states, which mostly were plains tribes. And then we moved over to the eastern part of the state. And we ran into a lot of trouble that we did not realize. Because there were no books or nothing published about how to work in race relations or even about Blacks, much less Indians. But we organized, and because we had such high dropout rate, 75 percent dropout rates in some of our schools, so that was something we could organize around. And so, we organized the first Indian statewide organization of all of the 36 tribes in Oklahoma. And that was a major accomplishment. And then by that time, Fred was in the [inaudible] and we were able to get the war on poverty, our charter, and Chris Mondale could come to Oklahoma [inaudible]. And Ron Bart came to Oklahoma to talk to our youth. And so, I was organizing the tribes and we changed policy. The tribes in the east, the federal government is still appointing their leadership. But we asked them why they let them do-do that, and they tried... turned it around. And that really took a lot of power away from members of the Congress, which we did not realize at the time, because the Congress would recommend and they would... LH (00:32:00): ...would recommend [inaudible] they would get somebody that they liked with. The Congress members were all friends [inaudible] because [inaudible] the US Senate by then. One day a week, we were doing that, and the other day a week, we were integrating [inaudible]. We had the railroad track that had the Black community on one side and the rest of us on the other. One of my babysitters was African American. I saw her picketing at this theater and I said, "My goodness. Why in the world are we letting that happen?" And so, one day a week we would integrate African Americans and one day a week we would stop assimilating. SM (00:33:01): Yes. Different word. LH (00:33:02): It was interesting. Interesting thing to go on working both sides in the different. They were the same, but had this different ending that the folks wanted. So we were very, very good about integrating Lawton. The [inaudible] we used to tease him. He was on the mayor's committee and they could not get anything done. But our group was kind of an ad hoc group that we would find somebody who knew this restaurant owner and go and talk to them. We had the churches involved. Finally, we had one holdout. We got the military, Fort Sill, military college off base so that the soldiers could not go there and that was their main constituency or patron. So, they finally gave up and we integrated the whole town. Had one holdout, which was a swimming pool. We finally closed them down rather than them integrate. So... SM (00:34:05): This is [inaudible] LH (00:34:05): But we were very successful in Lawton in integrating. This was just at the time of the sit-ins in the South. SM (00:34:11): What year was this? LH (00:34:18): Oh, I am so... SM (00:34:18): (19)60s, (19)61, (19)62, or? LH (00:34:18): Yeah. SM (00:34:18): Yeah? LH (00:34:18): In that time period. I will make sure. I cannot think chronologically. I am... part of my... SM (00:34:28): What is interesting about the kids, I am one of them, growing up in the (19)50s, is that what the history of Native Americans or the American Indian is, they used to say all the time on television, from the Civil War till about the end of the (19)50s, what you learned about, basically, was a history of broken treaties between the government and various tribes. I know there's the one with U.S. Grant was well known in history books, perceptions that Native Americans were forced onto reservations, they lost their land, had to battle over everything with people coming West. You had to constantly fight and battle for everything. You lost the buffalo. Then on top of that, you had this perception out there that many Native Americans were drunks, were derelicts, and the labels being put on a population by the white population. LH (00:35:43): We were the vanishing race, was even part of the [inaudible]. SM (00:35:46): Yeah. LH (00:35:47): We even got national reports that we were vanishing. But what happened during the civil rights and the War on Poverty Program, we came alive and changed our whole methodology. The First Americans, the Native Americans, we changed the terminology to help people see us differently. Then this lazy, drunk Indian thing, though alcohol was a major issue, but that was something that the press would focus on it. Every Thanksgiving, there would be a story about poor old Pine Ridge, of course it still is one of the poorest counties in the country, but they would go and focus on them and their poverty level, whereas the rest of the country was not that bad. But we would be all stereotyped into that Pine Ridge drunk Indian syndrome. It still kind of goes on that way. But the press has changed quite a bit, mostly because the Native Americans got organized under the War on Poverty Program, Johnson. People say, "Well, it did not work." But it worked for the Indians. For instance, in Oklahoma, because we did not have reservations, we do not have reservations; we have individual land allotments and tribally-owned land. They were not called reservation. So, we were not able to get funding from the War on Poverty Program because we did not have reservations. That was some termination policy made in Washington. Soon as we moved to Washington and got with Art Schriver and became an advisor to our tribe. He changed the policy because what the money was going to the counties and the counties were the ones who would discriminate against Indians and they would not be get any of the funds to grow and help themselves. So, we changed that policy. Then we worked to change and break many policies. What we did, we used the money from the War on Poverty to undermine the Department of Interior's control over us. They were still acting like colonial government and had control of our lives from childhood to adulthood and controlled our resources and all of those things. So, we organized. We organized Americans for Indian Opportunity. So, we had a national organization then as well as the Oklahoma one. And we learned from that Oklahoma experience, was not an organized, and then the War on Poverty gave us a platform and we saw Schriver's support and Lyndon Johnson. We really made a lot of gain. Interestingly enough, we made a lot of gain under Nixon, who had another strange relationship with Indians that shows him to be pro-Indian Indian with all of his other faults. SM (00:39:17): But your husband had mentioned, I remember last summer in an interview, the Taos Pueblo? LH (00:39:25): Mm-hmm. Taos Blue Lake. SM (00:39:26): Yeah. That that is one major thing that you did in your life. LH (00:39:31): Yeah. SM (00:39:31): And also, the Menominee tribe... LH (00:39:34): Gained recognition. SM (00:39:35): ...gained recognition. Could you tell a little bit about those two? Because those are supposedly very historic events in Native American history. LH (00:39:42): Yes. Well, the government took the land that was designated to the Taos people. They took a part of the land which was part of their creation story, that they came from under this lake at the volcanic crater. It got way up in the mountain there above their pueblo. They took it over and let cattle run and people could use it. So, it was very painful for the tribe to see their sacred site being decimated. And they fought for 60 years. Some reason they came to Fred, I guess because they knew that he was married to an Indian. Fred, of course, called me in and then we all met with them, and Fred told the staff said, "If we do not do anything, we're going to help these folks." It was a very interesting... But this is how we worked together so well. Because by that time I had been involved with the Urban League, and because of my work in civil rights, I was known in the Black community as well as the Indian community. And then started women's rights as well, too. But by that time, women's rights were not the big issue of the day. So, we made it a civil rights issue. That was my part of the job. He had to convince the Congress, and he could not get it out of the committee because Senator Anderson from New Mexico was against it. [inaudible] go against a sitting Senator. He told Fred that, "I do not mess with your Indians and you do not mess with mine, and we're not your Indian's senator." So, they started this struggle. Then I had a young friend who became a White House intern and White House fellow, and she got very interested in the issue, and I became her mentor. She got me into the Lynn Garment and Nixon. The only picture of Nixon and people of color were with the Taos people, and it went all around the world and it made him look like he was really for brown people. So, I says, "I think they will owe the Taos people [inaudible] for your election." And he agreed. He called the Republican side of the Senate and said that the White House going to make a non-partisan bill and to work with Fred. And so he did. He said, "Come on over." And I went over. So, they sent me over and he gave a staff person to work with me and Fred, and then I would go and work with maybe the civil rights issue, not just an Indian issue. I got all the civil rights groups, labor and other people to support it outside. But Fred had to get it out of committee, which was where Anderson was ahead of that committee. So, that is how we would work [inaudible] could work both sides of any issue and make it happen. And that was the success of it. There were so many funny stories in that, getting there with Fred was the knothole gang with Rich Mandell and by Bobby Kennedy. We lived right around the corner from Hickory Hill. McLane got to be friends with them. And that is how I got to know Schriver so well, and we would go up Anisburg as well. So anyway, there were four of them that were all came to the Senate at the same time and worked together as a group, called themselves the Knothole Gang. But Congress passed the Taos Blue Lake. That was a great first victory of any Indian reclaiming their land, getting their land back. So, that was why it was so historical. Then the next one that was there was the Menominee that had been terminated. That was during the Eisenhower administration, though Eisenhower himself was not for it, but the study came out and he just let it happen. That was that vanishing race syndrome. So, they were terminating tribes, which means they were no longer tribes; they would just be a part of the county or whatever community they were in. And so they had terminated the Menominees when they got a big land settlement. They told them that they could not get their settlement money until they terminated themselves. So some of them did, some of them voted, about half of them. Anyway, it was poorly done... carefully done. Ada Deer, who was the Menominee woman who came and told us that, and I was concerned. I could not see the Congress ever changing their mind on termination. But she worked and she stayed with us most of the time and ride in with us and then walk [inaudible] calls to Congress and get somebody, and then we would have a reception for the Menominee. People would come into town to lobby their Congressmen. Just doing things like that to bring attention to the issue. Not only did they reinstate the Menominees as a tribe; Congress voted that they would never use termination as their national policy because it was so destructive. So, that was turning around old policy, the past into contemporary more understanding of what it was like. Then there was another piece of that with the Alaskan claims. The Alaskan claims would not be settled. So, they came to Fred again. But the lawyers, I have forgotten to ask who the lawyers were who were for the tribe, were going to agree for, what, 10 million acres and a whole bunch of money. Then the Eskimos way up where the oil was, and they discovered oil there, and that is why they finally decided they have to settle with the Natives in order to produce that oil. So, these people came to Fred and said that "we were subsistence. We live off the land, and land is more important than the money." So, Fred introduced legislation for 60 million acres and the White House and their lawyers had agreed to 10 million acres. But we got enough support where they got 40 million acres and a whole bunch of money... SM (00:47:45): Wow. That is... LH (00:47:46): ... settlement. But we were not smart enough to know that they're getting [inaudible] in Alaska, made them into corporations because we did not think about how they were going to govern themselves. So, they set up corporations and they felt that they could buy the corporations and do away with the Indian profits ownership, but they still are going. Some of them are going better than others, the corporations up there. They tried to change it back to governing like we do down here. SM (00:48:26): Who were the Knothole Gang again? LH (00:48:29): Mandell, Bobby Kennedy, and Tidings. SM (00:48:33): Senator Tidings. LH (00:48:35): Uh-huh. SM (00:48:35): And Teddy was not part of that? LH (00:48:37): No. SM (00:48:38): Oh, okay. LH (00:48:40): He had already been in the Senate. SM (00:48:43): Yeah. And you were part of the Knothole Gang, right? LH (00:48:46): Yeah. SM (00:48:47): Behind the curtains. LH (00:48:48): Yeah. I drug around and plotted with them. Then Fred was chairman of the party. When Jonathan appointed me to be a... He was really doing different things. He said, "You're not owned by the Department of Interior." He appointed the first Indian to be head of the Bureau of Indian Affairs. They would go to the Smithsonian and get a war staff and knock the deadhead wood out of the Department of Interior. So, with that kind of attitude, then he appoint me to the Indian Opportunities Council, where I was the only woman and non-elected leader to sit on it. Then, of course, after the war came along, I mean, not that it is already there, but the war just destroyed all those good works that the civil rights movement and all the things that we were doing. SM (00:49:56): I have a question here, which is just based on a perception as a white kid growing up in the late (19)40s... Well, actually the (19)50s, early (19)60s, because this is what white boomer kids became, and this is how they entertained themselves in the (19)50s. Bear with me as I just give these descriptions, and it gets to a question here. The boomer perceptions in the late (19)50s and early (19)60s, television and movies and comics and coloring books, everything was about cowboys and Indians. They were the biggest toys. There were outfits, TV shows. Indians were always the bad guys. Saturday morning movies was very big, would be Westerns for kids. Then the adult movies were in the afternoon and the evening. TV had a Lone Ranger with a very good Native American in Tonto. But the majority of the TV shows, Native Americans were portrayed as the bad guy or the enemy or the evil one. Every white boomer had played cowboys and Indians, never thinking about the true meaning of what they were doing as youngsters. LH (00:51:20): Uh-huh. It is a stereotype. SM (00:51:23): Pardon? LH (00:51:24): They continued the stereotype. SM (00:51:29): Yes. Did these experiences shape many attitudes of the boomers to the point that when they matured in the early (19)60s and late (19)60s and (19)70s, they saw the lies and the real truths here, too, just like they saw a lot of lies throughout America because when you looked at television, you saw the stereotypes of Native Americans, but then you never saw African Americans. I think during the (19)50s, Nat King Cole had a show for six weeks. There was a show in the early (19)50s called the Amos and Andy, but it was more slapstick. You did not really get to see any African Americans until the (19)60s. So, there's a perception here, in different approaches, that African Americans were second-class citizens, and then the way they portrayed Native Americans, that they were second-class citizens. So, just your thoughts on the influence that this had on a whole generation of young people. LH (00:52:33): Yes. Well, where it starts is in our educational system. We do not study American history. We study Europeans coming to the Americas, and so there is no knowledge; you have no working knowledge about Native Americans until you get to college and you have to take a special course in Native American study to learn about them. So, there is no place to have an experience or a learned experience, even, about Native Americans. So, that starts the problem. Why we were so effective and our organization became so effective, is that people became so embarrassed on how little they knew. That is how we were able to get them to change the federal policies about Indians with every department having an Indian policy statement. But what the boomers did when they went through that whole Vietnam War exercise, they had a little broader mind experience, but they did not have any base of learning to fall back on. But all of our time and energy was to educate the decision makers, policy makers, and the general public. And it's still a major issue. SM (00:54:06): Yeah. I can remember, and you may remember this as well, but in the (19)50s, there was a cereal that came out in the early (19)50s, and it that had pictures of Native American leaders. You could the whole box up, and I still had them. That was a respectful portrayal of Native Americans. I do not know if that is Kellogg Sugar pops, but I remember I still had those. That, to me, upon my reflection was the only respectful portrayal that I ever saw of a Native American except Tonto on The Lone Ranger. LH (00:54:43): That is right. The next one came was... Ohm God, what is the name? What is the name? Oh, the wolf... Oh. What is the name of it? SM (00:54:58): On Daniel Boone? LH (00:55:00): No. SM (00:55:00): Oh. LH (00:55:02): Wait. No. He was not. Daniel Boone was an Indian color. SM (00:55:08): I mean, Ed Ames was on one of those shows. I forget, which one. LH (00:55:13): Yeah. All of they were just kind of marginal. We were always marginalized. Yeah. I was just trying to think of... SM (00:55:19): When... LH (00:55:19): …of the first movie that showed Indians and that they had their own language and own culture with... Why cannot I think of it? SM (00:55:33): I know another one where there was a sense of respect. That was on the Walt Disney. The Native American who was in a lot of the movies there. There was an advertisement of his crying, a tear was coming out. They always treated him with respect, I remember. LH (00:55:50): I had an opportunity to meet him in California. They honored him for his good work and his imagery. SM (00:55:58): When you raised your three kids in the (19)50s and early (19)60s, how did they handle these perceptions that were on TV all the time? They had to go to school with kids that had grown up and seen this. What were your kids, and how did you explain this to them as they were growing up, particularly since you were in Washington when they were probably in elementary school? LH (00:56:25): Catherine, the oldest, was exposed to that whole civil rights and then the beginning of Oklahomans for Indian Opportunity. So, she was knowledgeable about all these things that we were working on. When we got to Washington, she said at dinner table one night... You remember the Love case that was at the Supreme Court to decide where there were some states had laws against mixed marriages, mostly was between Blacks and whites. But this particular Love case was a Indian and a white person, I guess that was it. So, Catherine came home and said, "Mother, you and I should go to jail because you and dad are breaking the law," and we were living Northern Virginia. I said, "What do you mean?" And she said, "Well, the Love case, if we went to jail, that would really dramatize the unfairness of that law." So, we had a long talk about it at the table. My son, who was, I do not know what age. He was about 10 or 12. He said, "You mean you and dad are not married?" We had to explain it to him. But he was real proud of his great-grandmother, my grandmother, came to visit us and her Comanche clothes, but she always wore Comanche clothes. She campaigned for Fred in her Harris headliner shaw. She met Lady Bird Johnson and gave her a shaw when the Johnsons were out campaigning Oklahoma. Then, she invited us to the White House and we have pictures of grandmother. Fred said, "I am not letting y'all out of my sight. I am going with y'all to the White House." So, she gave us a tour of the White House and picture of my mother and my grandmother and Catherine and I and Fred in the Green Room with Lady Bird. She got so much attention and all the members of the Congress, and of course, Vice President Humphrey was showing her around and doing all kinds of things for her. The press wanted to interview her. They asked, "Would she be interested?" I said, " Yes." I said, "I am sure she would, and let me ask her, though." I asked her and she said, well, if I would be with her, she would. And then I said, "Sure." Because it will not be hard. You're smarter than they are. You can keep this laugh then. They asked, "Well, what do you think of Washington?" She said she had been in the White House. She had met with the vice president and every member of the Congress, practically. So, she said what impressed her the most was all these trees because we lived in the southern plains of Oklahoma and did not have any trees except on the creek banks. She said, oh, these trees were the most things that impressed her the most. SM (00:59:44): Oh, wow. LH (00:59:46): So, she just had a great, great time. The children invited her to their class to meet their teachers and their classmates. So, it was a big [inaudible] surprise that they [inaudible] her off. Then Ethel and her children, because I was teasing, their children were asking me if I lived in a teepee, and I would get after Ethel about, "Gosh, what are you teaching your kids?" [inaudible] grandmother came to visit. She invited us over for tea and all children were there, and the big old slobbery dogs. They would ask her questions. Carrie Kennedy would ask her the most questions. So, grandmother said, "I will give you an Indian name," and said the one who is always curious or always interested. So, she can tell you her Comanche name now even as a grown woman. SM (01:00:50): Wow. LH (01:00:50): She remembered that so well. That was kind of the way we lived in Washington. We were different, Fred and I. I was told, somebody asked... SM (01:01:06): Could you hold on one second here? I have to turn a light off here. Yeah. LH (01:01:08): We do not have weather like we did before. We jumped the mountain. The snow would be in the mountains, and then we would jump it and then go onto Oklahoma and have tornadoes and stuff, ice storms and rain. So all those, you just watch it go from here over the mountains to the East Coast. They are going to get some more and bad weather right now. I think Dallas is predicting, and Oklahoma, predicting tornadoes. SM (01:01:43): Yeah. We had snow just a couple days ago. LH (01:01:47): Where are you? SM (01:01:48): Well, I am in Philadelphia. LH (01:01:48): Oh, okay. SM (01:01:51): But we did not have much. It melted already. But my sister lives up in Binghamton, New York. Her daughter and her family lives up in Rochester. They got 26 inches two days ago, and my sister got 15. LH (01:02:02): And some more weather is coming their way now. SM (01:02:09): Yeah. It has been a crazy winter here. You can finish that story you were talking about. LH (01:02:14): Okay. Where were [inaudible] SM (01:02:15): You were talking about Ethel and the kids and... LH (01:02:21): Oh. Well, it was the first time she had ever flown in an airplane. It was just a really wonderful experience. Just to describe that, I always had a space, but when he was in the state Senate, I would sit on the floor of the Senate at a chair next to his desk and go to his hearings. But I was very different. I was the only wife that would go. But it made a lot of difference to the older members. They would invite us to go, the old guys who were not messing up or messing around, and they would invite us out to eat with them and help Fred go up the ladder of leadership in the Senate because he was serious. I would act as hostess to all those guys in do the ashtrays and fix them drink or do something. Then Fred would ask me, "What did I think about so-and-so?" Because I would know enough about the subject that Fred was working on to listen to what was being said. So, he would depend on my interpretation of people a lot because I studied them all my life. SM (01:03:48): That is what I call teamwork. LH (01:03:50): It was. SM (01:03:52): Yes. LH (01:03:52): He had enough Comanche language that we would tell that here comes somebody. "Here comes your friend, or here comes your enemy." SM (01:04:01): Yes. LH (01:04:02): And it just [inaudible] LH (01:04:02): ...becomes your enemy. SM (01:04:05): Yes. LH (01:04:05): And then nobody could even pick up, it is a very soft thing. And we had teased each other in Comanche. And when he was chairman of the party, I had a room in the Watergate there, where we started Americans for Indian Opportunity, actually, when Nixon was listening, was taping them, I guess, we used to accuse one of our people for. But they would make a decision in the evening and I would always be there and ride back with Fred, listen to all of them. And then they would always, a lot of people would say, even in Oklahoma, would say, "There is [inaudible] LaDonna," because I was the first wife to ever do anything like that, be prominent. And what we found out was when we campaigned, that my presence, men would behave differently and then we would get all of his classmates in law school to come and their wives would come and it would create in a whole different environment because we had not had the women's rights movement come along yet. SM (01:05:13): Yes. LH (01:05:13): And so it was a real important thing. It changed people's behavior. And we found it as an asset. And besides, that is the way we worked and that is what we were comfortable with. And we just did it, whether it was popular or not. It became popular, then everybody. SM (01:05:30): Before I get into your work and yours, a lot of the appointments to various committees by President Johnson, you mentioned a couple of them already, could you discuss, what you know here, the role that Native Americans played in the Vietnam War? I know many were drafted or joined, like a lot of African Americans, to improve their circumstances in life. LH (01:05:56): Mm-hmm. SM (01:05:56): How many went? And how many died? And how were they treated upon their return, particularly into the tribes? And were they treated like Vietnam veterans all over America? Well, they were not treated very well. And were they stereotyped during their service? And I say this because I read a book once, where one of the leaders in Vietnam, at a platoon, and he put the Native American on point because he is Native American, so he must be very good at that. So that was stereotyping right there. So, I am not sure if that happened a lot. But in your experiences with Native American Vietnam vets, how have they been treated? LH (01:06:41): Well, in every war, we would have more Native American volunteer and go into service, percentage to our population than any other peoples in the United States. Every war. World War I. World War II. And in World War I and II, we had code talkers, not just the Navajo code talkers in the Pacific, but the Comanches had code talkers on the Normandy Beach and going into France. SM (01:07:11): Mm-hmm. LH (01:07:14): But they were never recognized. The French government honored us, the Comanches, but the US government did not, until just recently. And then everybody had died except one of them. Then next to us were Hispanics. So that it was kind of like... And you say, "Well, why would they do that?" Well, it was their homeland. They were protecting their homeland and they were always honored. We would always have feast and religious ceremonies and powwows honoring them when they came back. And I was just reading, they had a big front page, in our tribal newspaper, about our World War I veteran and naming them and they have honored them. It's a big thing. They have veterans mother... World War II started that mothers have... If your child was in the armed services, they have these mothers, I cannot remember the right title for them, where you put a flag up in your window and all of that. Well, all through the Vietnam thing, when they would come back, we would honor them. We would have a powwow and religious ceremonies around them. Dances, ceremonies around them. Returning safe, though. SM (01:08:41): That is really more than anybody else did in America for any vets coming back because we all know, most were not welcomed home. They just came home. LH (01:08:52): That is right. I have one friend who went twice. And I said, "Why in the world did you go back and volunteer again?" And he said, "Well, because it got where I had learned some, had so much experience in the first time, that all I did was keep those boys alive. And they all would figure out how to get in my platoon." And he is a lieutenant. And he said, "And my whole thing was to keep them alive." But that is why he went back the second time. SM (01:09:34): Was there any issues with post-traumatic stress disorder amongst the vets from the Vietnam? LH (01:09:41): Yes, because [inaudible]. SM (01:09:41): Was there a good, strong support base? LH (01:09:43): They were always put up front, just like you described, that they were good scouts. They would be good scouts. SM (01:09:51): Right. LH (01:09:52): But of course, they never had those kinds of experience by the time Vietnam came along. Maybe World War II. I mean, One. But not since then. That was the stereotype. And then they got more Medals of Honor and anything than any other group of people, percentage of their population, too. So that was the other thing. And I do not know how we are doing in this horrible thing that we are in now. SM (01:10:30): Yeah. Your kids are boomers and they are defined as part of that generation that was born between (19)46 and (19)64? LH (01:10:40): Yes. Kathryn was in Harvard and she would bring all her Harvard kids down, who were protesting in the war, and they would bail them out with you and oh, it just would make you cry. They were getting ready for protesting. They had their blood handkerchief, their Vaseline to protect from teargas. And all of them were just awful. And my youngest daughter participated more marches than anybody in history, I think. Poor People's March. The Hispanic, Chavez's March. SM (01:11:21): Oh, yes. LH (01:11:22): Vietnam marches. And I have forgotten that. And the women's. SM (01:11:25): Wow. Now, your oldest was at Harvard. What year was she there? Or years? LH (01:11:46): She graduated a year early in school. We were just talking Sunday night. SM (01:11:46): Was she there when Harvard Yard happened? LH (01:11:52): What was Harvard Yard? SM (01:11:52): That is when they protested. They took over Harvard Yard. Took over the building. LH (01:12:00): Yeah, I guess so. The other thing, too, was that that horrible Democratic Convention in Chicago. SM (01:12:07): Oh, yes. (19)68. LH (01:12:07): And she was with us. And we sat up in the windows and watched the sight below us and cried and cried and cried. SM (01:12:19): Yeah. That experience in Chicago, was the whole family there in Chicago? LH (01:12:26): Yes. Well, the two oldest ones, the littlest one. SM (01:12:30): What did that experience of seeing.... Some people say it was a riot and some people say it was police brutality. It depends on what angle you're coming from. What was your read? LH (01:12:39): It was police brutality. Just outright craziness. And it was such a horrible time. We were, of course, for Humphrey. And Fred and Mondale were running his campaign. And then Humphrey was considering Fred for vice president, told his vice president running mate and what is the name? What is our senator's name that became his running mate? SM (01:13:07): Muskie. Senator Muskie. LH (01:13:10): Yeah. Had he chosen Fred, that we might have gotten past a lot of this anti-war stuff. I mean, because of Pres position. And we tried to change Humphrey and we never could. I do not know exactly what hold President Johnson had on him, but in some way, he would not... I guess it was his own belief because he was such a good man, that he just would not let go of that war. And that campaign was horrible. He battled with him, all over the country. SM (01:13:43): Yeah, in my interviews, I had somebody that was very close to Senator McCarthy, who was looking out the window of his hotel room, looking down, just like you were. And the person told me, he showed no emotion. Just watched. Whereas others had tremendous emotion and he was shocked because he thought he would be upset about what was happening, but he just did not say anything. Yeah, that (19)68 year was unbelievable. LH (01:14:16): And campaigning and it was just horrible. SM (01:14:21): Well, what did that say about, not only about the experience of how Native Americans have been treated, and we all know the civil rights rule was happening, the women's rule was starting, the environmental movement, the Chicano rule, the gay and lesbian. They were all evolving at this time. But what did this say about America to you? LH (01:14:45): Well, I never separated. One of the things that we... We have an ambassador's program, a leadership program for young Native Americans between the age of 25 and 35. SM (01:15:00): Mm-hmm. LH (01:15:01): And we reinforce their cultural identity and say, "How do you do that and live in a contemporary situation?" Because if you try to divide it up, you get paranoid that people say you live in two different worlds. And I said, "You cannot live in two different worlds." You can be who you are and know your cultural identity and you still be contemporary at the same time. It is not an either/or. And always, the American society's always try to make it an either/or. You had to give up being Indian in order to be a good American. But we say that is nonsense and that is what hurt us most, by trying to live like that. But I could never separate my stuff, that I was a Comanche Indian doing. But I was doing these things that were in the women's movement. I was the convener of the women's political caucus and bidding for Dan and Bella, Doug and Gloria. And started off with all those people. Now, it was hard to make people understand how to bring people of color into the circle though. That was the hardest part. SM (01:16:28): Mm-hmm. LH (01:16:31): But I learned so much from the experience of it, even the negative part of it, that I do not resent it. There were times I probably... Somebody said, when I talked to these young people, I said, "You're blessed because you have an Indian worldview, your tribal worldview, and then you have an American worldview." And so that gives you two ways of looking at an issue and said you have to figure out techniques and methodology to overcome barriers that you are confronted with, that I have used every time, from trying to use logic, to that I cried or flirted. There is not any method I did not try. So just have a broad conception of how you solve a problem. Not just that there's just not one way of solving it. SM (01:17:32): You worked with many boomers in your life and you certainly raised three. Based on the people that you witnessed, remember there are 70 million people in this generation, of which only between five and 10 percent may have been activists, based on those that you knew or witnessed, what are some of the qualities you admired about the boomer generation? And which you did not like about the boomer generation? LH (01:18:00): Well, I liked that they did take on the war and that they taught us how to look at it differently. So, I admire them for that. SM (01:18:14): Mm-hmm. LH (01:18:17): And most of them have stayed involved, like Kathryn has stayed involved with non-profit kinds of work or education. So, she has got a law degree. She works mostly in education and then nonprofit. And within the Indian community, she's an advisor to our program, where my youngest daughter is actually the director of our program now. SM (01:18:38): Excellent. Yes. LH (01:18:41): And our son is out in LA television production, so he is a little different, but he is still involved with his cultural identity. SM (01:18:51): Mm-hmm. LH (01:18:53): And so, we still go to Comanche there... Things that we do at home, back to Oklahoma. And so, it has been a real... So, I do not see the need to make it an either/or, that I see to go in way that I can do that as a Comanche Indian woman and do it as effectively as anybody else can. And kind of that attitude. And that I have, in many ways, have a special responsibility. SM (01:19:34): Yeah, you have been in it for the long run. Longevity means a lot. And that actually means genuineness, too, in terms of your passion for something. Your work, over the years, on behalf of not only Native American issues, but you have been involved in women's issues, environmental issues, peace, you have even gotten involved in mental health issues. I would like you to define activism, in your own words, and why it is today that some people fear this term and feel more comfortable with the term "volunteer"? LH (01:20:14): Okay. They are telling me I am going to have to ditch my write-in. I think that is a very good question. I think it is because my Comanche culture, that the more... What's the right word? What is the... The more blessed you are, or I do not want even put it in a religious term, but the more you have, the more you have to give back. SM (01:20:53): Mm-hmm. LH (01:20:53): You have a responsibility to give back, so that the good things that happened to me are the recognition that I received, that I have more obligation to give back to the community. So that value came through my Comanche [inaudible]. And a lot of people have it, through their religion or other kinds of ways of looking at it. And it is terrible that we have, and particularly it seems that liberals have, kind of dropped the ball this day and age. And that fundamentalists have kind of taken over. And in some way, they seem less generous and caring for the general public, for all people. SM (01:21:51): Right. LH (01:21:53): And I have a great concern of that. We teach our young ambassadors and we also have a sister organization in New Zealand with the Maori. And we are working with now with Ainus in Japan. And Bolivia, Indians in Bolivia. But that they all have those same values, too. It is interesting that when you belong to a communal society, like tribal society, that you have an obligation for the group to move with you, that you cannot move by yourself. The whole group should be moving up with you, is the ideal. And that is what the value, that most people value the most, is they see it in the person that does that. You are valued in the community because you are generous. SM (01:22:58): You have to leave in eight minutes? LH (01:23:00): Yeah. We got one more question. SM (01:23:04): I got two more questions. I got a lot more, but I guess I can get these two in. LH (01:23:10): See if we can call it again tomorrow and finish up. SM (01:23:12): Maybe. Would that be possible? LH (01:23:13): Uh-huh. Sure. SM (01:23:16): Yeah. What time would you like me to call tomorrow? LH (01:23:19): Tomorrow is Wednesday, huh? SM (01:23:22): Uh-huh. LH (01:23:23): Okay. Let us try 10 o'clock tomorrow. SM (01:23:26): 10 o'clock, which would be 12 o'clock my time. LH (01:23:30): Yeah, because I wanted to tell you about Pennsylvania [inaudible]. SM (01:23:33): Yeah. This will be my last question at Aiden. LH (01:23:35): Okay. SM (01:23:36): What are your thoughts on the American Indian movement? It is a group that one could describe as more confrontational group willing to do violence to protect Native American rights and property values. LH (01:23:52): Yes. SM (01:23:52): And the question is, were they the Weathermen and the Black Panthers of the Native American movement? LH (01:24:00): Well, I probably should not put them in that category, but they were urban Indians. That is the other thing. Half of our population now, they live in urban areas. SM (01:24:14): They were from Minneapolis? LH (01:24:15): Yes. SM (01:24:16): Yes. LH (01:24:16): That was started in Minneapolis, then all over. So, there were people from reservations that joined it. But like you say, their style was more confrontational. Our was more trying to be reasonable, reasoned. But they were helpful to us because when they acted out radical, then we looked like we were tame. But we had the same goals. But our methodology was different. SM (01:24:46): Mm-hmm. LH (01:24:47): So that they were valuable to helping bring about change. But it was because they made us look reasonable and easier to deal with. SM (01:25:01): Yeah, your work I would say was more in the system, like Martin Luther King and Bayard Rustin, James Farmer, Roy Wilkins, Whitney Young, John Lewis, and Jesse Jackson. I think they were more in the system. LH (01:25:19): Yes. Change the system because they are the ones, they have control. SM (01:25:23): Right. And the people that were a little more confrontation where the John Trudells, Russell Means Dennis Banks. They were like Bobby Seale, Huey Newton, Cleaver, Hampton, Brown, Davis. Those people. LH (01:25:37): And they let their hurt... They were hurt. And that one of the things we had to deal with a lot in our leadership program, is how to manage that, so that you do not medicate yourself with alcohol or dysfunctional behavior. SM (01:25:57): Right. LH (01:25:59): Because those things can hurt so bad that it is difficult to overcome them. So that is one of the things we examine, in our program. SM (01:26:08): And then the last thing in this question regarding the American Indian movement. Maybe we ought talk about this tomorrow? And your thoughts on when they took over Alcatraz in (19)69. LH (01:26:20): Yeah. SM (01:26:21): The Bureau of Indian Affairs in (19)72. Then the wounded knee situation in (19)73. Those were historic events in the (19)60s. LH (01:26:34): Yes. And I was much involved in a particular one at the BIC, BIA takeover. So, I will have a lot to comment on that. SM (01:26:40): Why do not we do that tomorrow? And thank you very much. LH (01:26:43): You are very much [inaudible]. SM (01:26:47): Yeah. I feel like I am a friend of yours already. LH (01:26:51): [inaudible] share with us, but he was thinking about it, either. We were already committed because Humphrey had been such a good person to us, as a young... He came and campaigned for us. And he did just so many good things. And we would always wind up... I would have Oklahomans come visit us and we were lined up at his office and he would come out take pictures [inaudible]. SM (01:27:20): He always had a friendly nature. He would be on Mike Douglas Show. And he was on Mike Douglas quite a bit. And he was always jovial and friendly. And one thing people, and I will close with this, people do not realize he wrote a book in 1948 on civil rights. LH (01:27:35): Yes. SM (01:27:36): 1948. LH (01:27:41): He deserves much more credit than he [inaudible]. SM (01:27:41): Yeah, I agree. Well, I will call you tomorrow. LH (01:27:43): All right, my dear. I look forward to talking. SM (01:27:47): Yeah, same here. Have a good day. Bye. LH (01:27:48): Bye-bye. SM (01:27:50): ... as we were ending our conversation yesterday. And so I just wanted to hear, again, your thoughts. I think I was trying to rush through that last question. Just your overall thoughts on the American Indian movement. And I was trying to say, I was wondering if you thought it was more of a confrontational group, similar to the Weathermen that SDS became, or when the civil rights movement changed from Dr. King and Bayard Rustin and the non-violent protests, the Gandhian method to the more confrontational Black Panther method? LH (01:28:30): Well, I hate to compare them. SM (01:28:31): Yes. LH (01:28:32): [Inaudible] them because they were different, but in some ways similar. And I do not think it would be appropriate to compare them to those groups. Two things, is that they were urban people. I think I mentioned that yesterday. SM (01:28:49): Mm-hmm. LH (01:28:50): And they were, half of it was, and this was government policy, putting them in urban area. That was part of the relocation, it was called. It was a national policy of taking, because there were not any jobs on the reservation, because it was lack of imagination and creativity. There were not any jobs on the reservation. So, they said, "Well, let us send to the cities and sent them to manufacturing jobs." So, they just went around. And I had a cousin who went through it and he was sent to Detroit to work on cars. And the amount of suicide. I mean, the program did not work at all and it was just a horrible program. But they kept it up for about 10 years. I do not know why, even after we proved, over and over again, it was not working. And it was part of that termination and relocation, part of that Eisenhower report. It was not his report. It was some paint group that came out, that I mentioned earlier, about we were the vanishing race. And so they were... Again, it was an attempt to assimilate us. So, they took people off the Navajo and took them to Los Angeles and dumped them. And they said, "We are not going to put them together because we do not want barrios," or whatever we call the Black community. And so, they scattered them all over town, which made them really lost. SM (01:30:29): Yes. LH (01:30:31): And I think one of the things that drove them, drove the AIM group, was to reaffirm their identity. And that is how I view them, because I have gone to their meetings. I know them all very well. And so they were trying to reaffirm their identity as well as try to change the policy. And how to articulate that whole failure of the urban relocation program. And no one could quite articulate it at the time, but just the anger and the hurt from it, was part of their behavior. SM (01:31:23): I know the three names that are the most well-known are Russell Means, Dennis Banks, and John Trudell. And I remember reading about John Trudell, that his family died in a very... I think there was arson. And he lost his wife and two kids. And they never quite understood what happened there. LH (01:31:42): I know. The FBI was supposed to have looked at it. He accused the FBI. SM (01:31:44): Mm-hmm. LH (01:31:50): But he worked for us in Oklahoma, for Indian Opportunity, for a while, when he was passing through. And then he went out and got... And then that is what happened and it radicalized him. SM (01:32:00): Right. LH (01:32:01): And so, he has been a real strong activist. And course, Dennis, Dennis and particularly Russell. Russell was a dance instructor for... I have forgotten now, where. And I am thinking out in Chicago, but someplace. And the whole... Finally, they all got together. I mean, what happened that the urban people organized themselves, sometimes it was just the bar where they went to have a drink after work or something. And then they finally started urban Indian centers. And I was very... Under Johnson and I had hearings on, because I said half of our population were... Sorry, I have got a frog somewhere. SM (01:32:49): That is all right. LH (01:32:54): Let me drink a little bit of water here and get [inaudible]. SM (01:32:55): Okay. LH (01:32:55): And under the Johnson administration, as part of his National Indian Opportunities Council... Excuse me. SM (01:33:14): Some of the events, I am just listing them, but the four major events that I remember and what I have read about two of them- LH (01:33:23): I... Go ahead. SM (01:33:25): ... that certainly was the takeover of Alcatraz in (19)69 and Wounded Knee in (19)73. And I know they also took over the Bureau of Indian Affairs in (19)72, in Washington. And they also took over Mount Rushmore. Those are four major activities that AIM did during that (19)69 to (19)73 period. But Alcatraz and Wounded Knee were the big ones. LH (01:33:50): Well, they were not responsible for Alcatraz. That was kind of the... It was a local idea that started up, so AIM did-did come in, Trudell and everybody. It drew a lot of outside people. SM (01:33:58): Mm-hmm. LH (01:34:08): But I do not give them credit for that takeover. But I do not need to say that. But I do not need to be putting- SM (01:34:17): What was the purpose of Alcatraz? I know they were there 13 months or? LH (01:34:26): ... Well, they wanted to make Alcatraz their urban center, take it over and run their programs out of it. That was the urban Indians. There were two groups in San Francisco when I had hearings there. There was what? In Oakland and then San Francisco proper. And had the hearings about how many arrests they made. And the sentences were longer than other people. There was all kinds of horrible complaints about how the city treated them. And so that was one of the reasons that they did the Alcatraz. But the first one they did was the Bureau of Indian Affairs. Was not it first? SM (01:35:05): You may be right. Yes. LH (01:35:11): Yeah. Well, we were of cursing Washington then. We were courting some plunders, my director and I, Margaret Gover. And who happened to be Kevin Gover, who runs the museum now. She and I were having dinner with some possible funders for AIO. And we said, "Well, we heard that they were some Oklahoma Indians down in the occupation." So, we said, "Let us go down and see who is there." And we went there. And of course, there was the big crowd all around. And John Trudell saw us and said, "Oh, there is LaDonna. Come in." And Mike, he would come in. So, it was kind of like the Red Sea opening up. SM (01:35:56): Yes. LH (01:35:56): It all bear [inaudible]. So, we went in that night and Commissioner Lee- LH (01:36:03): And Commissioner Louis Bruce was there, and they were... It was being occupied, but here was all of the BIA [inaudible] trying to figure out how to get them out, or see what they want. Well, my God, it was so weird. You just cannot imagine. It was like... What is the term? Unbelievable, given how you could get in that set of circumstance. Well, when they got in there, Louis Bruce loves to say that they spent the night with me that night. So we stayed there all night, to keep them. I did not think they would storm the... US Marshals were going threaten to storm. So, then the AIM guys, Russell and them says, "Well, we are ready to negotiate out, but we want to negotiate with a certain party," like... Oh, God, I cannot think of everybody's name. He was Secretary of Health and Human Services at the time, in the Nixon administration. So, I said, "Well, have we all requested it?" And they said, "Well, no, we do not know who to talk to." And I said, "Well, do y'all have any contact with him?" And they said, "Oh yeah, they are in the building with the US Marshal." So, I said, " Go sit down and talk to them and tell them that you are ready to negotiate under these, with this thing." So, they did. And they came back and said, "Well, they did not have the authority to make any decision." So, we stayed there all that night. And the next morning I went back and started calling. And of course, so much like AIM's activity, the whole city was out of session, and Nixon was back in California. So I started calling Leonard Garment and everybody I knew in the White House to say that it's going to be horrible if... because the US Marshals, again, said they were going to storm the building. So, I kept calling and calling and calling, and finally found out, and Brad Patterson was one person they would talk to, and the guy, [inaudible] who later became Head of the Pentagon. So finally, they agreed, but in the meantime, they kept threatening and threatening. And then I do not know why, some of the young people in there busted up some toilet and did some stupid things. Anyway, they got out. They negotiated out. The government paid them to go home, paid for their fare to go home. And then the next day we went back down there, and Margaret was taking in some food and they said, "Oh, every tribe has an office, and there is a Comanche." And I said, "Well, I better go see who's there from my tribe." And it was my kids, had gone earlier with Maggie and her children, who were Comanches too. They were sitting in that room and acting like they had taken it over. SM (01:39:25): Oh my God. LH (01:39:25): The ridiculousness of it was so absurd. The whole strategy and the outcome, they did get a lot of attention, and it was so hard to work through because there was not any logical... They did not have a set thing that they wanted, but they did negotiate out. So, what I was trying to show you, they could get into situations, but they could not figure out how to get out. SM (01:40:06): Was that what happened at Wounded Knee too? Because they were there for a long time, but their grievance at Wounded Knee was the terrible tragedy of 1890, I believe, and the original Wounded Knee. LH (01:40:19): It was Wilson and the Goon Squad, remember? SM (01:40:22): Yes. LH (01:40:27): And it was chairman of the Pine Ridge. And he was supposedly... He had his law enforcement. And again, I do not know exactly all of the grievances, but as soon as it happened, I called the same people that negotiated out the White House. And I said, "Why do not you set up a committee like Vine Deloria and some prominent Indians, come up there to talk to them and see what their grievance, and let them articulate what it is, the grievances are, and see if we cannot get them out?" And so, Brad Patterson of the White House said, "Oh, Ladonna, we think we have got it all figured out." And I said, "Well, if there is any deaths or any violence, that is going to be in your cat." Of course, they constitutionally sent in the National Guard, which they did not have the authority, the governor did not have the authority to do. So, nobody was convicted of anything except, what is his name, that is still in prison today? He is the poster child of that. Everybody perceives him to be a political prisoner and not- SM (01:41:33): Oh, Peltier. LH (01:41:34): Yeah, Peltier. SM (01:41:34): Leonard Peltier. LH (01:41:36): And he was there and apparently he had... When he was arrested, had guns in his car, illegal guns he did not own, or whatever. So they had to chance to arrest him. And he became, because the judge let everybody else go, because they did not have enough, they did not anything to charge them with, and the action of the state was all wrong, and the Federalist government was wrong, and what they did. So all of that, and the two deaths happened at the very last of the occupation. So, I think Peltier was guilty of carrying those guns, but whether he was guilty of the death of the FBI, but FBI just went nuts. And to this day, they cannot get him out of there. We thought we were going to get him out under Clinton, and Clinton had to back off. So, if you can imagine, that former FBI man picketed the White House, I would have fired their behind [inaudible 01:42:46] the President. He had to back down that off of it. So that shows you that he was an example of- SM (01:42:55): Yes. LH (01:42:55): It was revenge more than it was justice. SM (01:43:00): I think there were two Native Americans killed there as well as, I think I heard over a thousand were arrested, or 1,400. It was a large number, were arrested. LH (01:43:13): They were all in the church there, and people were smuggling food in, they could go past. Oh, again, it was the not ridiculousness, but I was trying to think of it, of how they got in there, how they got fed for all that time. And then the people that got killed in it, it was like a bad grade B movie. And very poorly planned and executed, the whole thing. And so, the White House was not, on my part, and Vine Deloria and others, and let us get them out, and find [inaudible], but the White House would not move on it, because I guess they thought the governor was going to take care of it. SM (01:44:06): Right. You and your husband were in DC during an unbelievable time. I guess it was (19)65 to (19)80 or (19)78, I think it was. When did your husband... You started in (19)65. When did he leave? LH (01:44:25): When Carter came. SM (01:44:28): Okay. Yeah, seven... So those 15 years were, well- LH (01:44:33): Yes. They were the best years actually, in many ways, because of the civil rights and the war on poverty, all the good things that were happening, positive things that were happening. Of course, that horrible war. SM (01:44:46): Yeah. I have just your response. This is a general question, and then just you can respond to it, that your husband was a key senator looking at all these issues, from civil rights, anti-war, Native American issues, obviously, women's rights and gay rights, gay/lesbian rights were coming about in (19)60s9. Then you had Chicano rights. LH (01:45:06): Oh, yes. SM (01:45:07): And I have talked to even Asian American rights, because I have talked to several people on that. And then you had the environment, of Earth Day in 1970. And when you look at all these events during the time from the Chicago that you talked about yesterday, in 1968, and Kent State in 1970, and you had the King and Kennedy assassinations in (19)68, you had McCarthy running for president in (19)68, and McGovern in (19)72. And then Carter of course ran for president and won. And Humphrey, you were supporting of him. LBJ withdrew in (19)68, and then Nixon came in in (19)68. You had Watergate in (19)73, and Gerald Ford pardoning Nixon. And then in 1980, you had Reagan coming in with his law and order, kind of a backlash to what had happened in the previous administrations. You witnessed all this. LH (01:46:02): Yes. And was involved, to some degree, almost in every movement that took place, particularly the women's movement. As I said yesterday, I was the convener of the women's political caucus that still exist today. It was an exciting time, and a person can make a difference. That is, I think the main thing to say, that an individual could contribute to it. And a lot of people came, did that, in the women's movement, and the civil rights. And it was a very tragic time. Of course, Bobby and [inaudible] were our neighbors. And when we... Oh, it was just awful. And we were friends and we supported Humphrey over him. Just the tragedy. And then it made it harder when we went to the funeral, we attended the funeral, on the train and all of that. It was very emotional and very tragic for those kids. And even after that, we supported Joe Kennedy when he ran for Congress. Me and my daughter, his age, my children grew up with those kids. So, it was- SM (01:47:43): Did you feel, basically you, because I did speak to your husband, did you feel that we were heading toward another civil war? The divisions were so intense, especially in (19)68. LH (01:47:51): But you know what? I feared today more than I did then, because I guess we had some successes. We had successes along the way, that made a difference in how people behaved. So there was a lot of tragedy involved in Birmingham and all of those things that the African American community had to go through. I served on the board of the Urban League and the Urban Coalition. So we cross-generated. In many ways, I was kind of the token Indian, but I felt that I was learning a lot of different kinds of strategies and that it was very useful. I played all those roles. I said I did not mind being token, if you know you are being token. That was all right. And people then started... Like, the Girl Scouts of America asked me to be on the board, because they were trying to be diversified. And unfortunately, still all of that is... We are going backwards in all the gains that we made in the (19)60s on civil rights, and the attitude of the government now, with the interesting Tea Party group. SM (01:49:31): Yeah, and the budget cuts, they are unbelievable, particularly in education. LH (01:49:35): And they do not make sense. They really do not make sense in the scheme of things. But what to say about it? It is just weird. SM (01:49:45): Yeah, but you saw that period when the anti-war people were coming to DC, and they were not very popular, because most of the nations supported the war. And then as we got into the middle and late (19)60s, more and more people started going against the war. But you saw the tremendous divisions support the troops, and it was just an unbelievable period. LH (01:50:13): Well, Fritz said he would go over to briefings at the White House, and all these generals were telling them, not like what we are doing now, telling them, "Well, we will be able to do this. We will be able to take control." Excuse me. SM (01:50:32): Yes. Yeah. That was interesting. And then, of course, when Richard Nixon talked about the, what do you call it, the silent majority? LH (01:50:43): Yes. SM (01:50:43): Most of America was supporting him and the pro-war forces. What did your husband and you think about that? LH (01:50:56): By that time, we had finally decided that... because we were so entrenched in civil rights, and Fred was head of the Kerner Commission. I was on that. I was appointed on the National Mental Health Department. Anyway, the department had a committee of people to look at the mental health of children. And I was appointed on that board because I had been active in mental health for Fred in Oklahoma, looking at them and reporting to him, because he had... So, I was only Senator's wife, but was interested in that and they asked me to be on it. And I start staying. Of course, I was very much involved in Oklahomans for Indian Opportunity, and had not quite started [inaudible] yet. And I always felt, well, oh, I am so glad, because I want to be around psychiatrists and psychologists, because they may have some answers that we could use. And unfortunately, they were just like everybody else, that they had not had any learned experience about people of color. SM (01:52:29): Wow. LH (01:52:33): And I was the only person who was not a professional in the field, a psychiatrist. And so, I would periodically say, "Well, that would not be so with Indian children, and I do not think it would be so with children of color." And I loved them individually, but collectively I just was so... I felt frustrated. But I liked them so much. I invited them over to my house for supper, and for Fred to meet them. Franklin Roosevelt's granddaughter was there. I cannot think of her first name now. But anyway, everybody came. And it so happened that my folks from Oklahomans for Indian Opportunity were there. And in Oklahoma, there was the African American Harvard Professor of Psychiatry, who was doing some work in Oklahoma. And I forgot why he was there, but he and I were like the token black and Indian on lots of the boards and things. So we got to be friends. And he went back to Harvard. SM (01:53:57): Is that Dr. Pusant? LH (01:53:59): No, it was not Pusant. Pusant was a mentor of his. It was Chet Pierce, Dr. Chet Pierce. He did a lot of work with the... And when he would come to Washington and go to dinner or lunch with him, he would say he predicted the people's behavior about me and him going, not that they recognized me, but just an African American and perceived to be an Anglo, how their behavior was. So it got to be quite a thing. It was a long friendship from Oklahoma, then back to Washington. Anyway, I invited him to that dinner, and my relatives who were running Oklahomans for Indian Opportunities was intimidated by everybody had at least two or three degrees in psychiatry or sociology or social worker. And one of the men with these two or three degrees had a bolo tie on, but it was wooden. Bolo ties, that was the Indian neckwear. And so, he had a little too much to drink and he went up to this man and said, "Just be [inaudible] glad [inaudible]. I am glad that that was not turquoise, or I would have to whoop your ass." They just shocked everybody, that they saw that kind of anger in the Indian community, because they would not believe me. They would just like... It was like so many places in my life, I was always at... When is it when you just give somebody a little bit of a nod of acknowledgement, but not take them seriously? I think it was [inaudible]. SM (01:56:04): Yeah. LH (01:56:06): So, they would never, because I was not professional, and so they would not take me seriously. But after they talked with Chet Pierce that evening, and he of course was very professional, and he talked, and he was not threatening, but here comes the Indians, threatening. So they accused me, or teasingly accused me of planning it. And I said, "I did not. They just happened to be there, and I had already invited this group over for dinner," but we did not match because we were looking for new ways of dealing with problems in Oklahoma. So, they started a commission on the mental health of minority children. And they put me on that committee, and we got Chet Pierce and Price Cobbs, who wrote Black Like... What is the book? Black Rage. SM (01:56:59): Oh, yes. LH (01:57:01): So, we got [inaudible], one a Puerto Rican, and one a Mexican-American from Mexico, people from the Jewish community, and Japanese, a person who was a psychiatrist who was interred in one of the Japanese camps, and generation growing up in a Japanese concentration camp here in the State. SM (01:57:30): Yes. LH (01:57:31): And what others? And myself and Ada Deer, of course Price Cobbs and Chet Pierce. So we came out, we immediately were all working in civil rights, and we immediately came to an agreement. And the committee who appointed it, or created it, said that the blacks had taken over. They were too radical. And of course Ada Deer and I were the two Indian, two radical ones. Ada Deer was the social worker. And so, we came out with... White racism was the number one mental health problem, because the people that were discriminated against were hurt, and the people who did the discrimination were hurting too, that they had issues that we should pay more attention to. Well, they would not accept our report. So all the professionals resigned from the committee. Business things I get into, and resigned from the committee. And we kept... Those of us who did not have anything to lose professionally kept on fighting them, but they never would print our report. And then when Fred... Fred was doing the Kerner commission, he had us come and testify. And the white racism was part of that Kerner Commission report. We testified before his committee. So, I just said- SM (01:59:11): And what year was that? LH (01:59:16): It was early in the Johnson period, because I was trying to think of who was the head of... Who was Johnson's First Secretary of Health and Human Services? SM (01:59:31): I should know that. Do not know. LH (01:59:35): But he was the one who set up the committee. But it was right at the time of the Kerner Commission, or what do we call it now, when downtown was burning and the- SM (01:59:58): Yeah. It was the Commission on National... Oh my God, I have it. I have the book, I have the paperback of the Kerner Commission book. I will have to check it. LH (02:00:12): And of course, Kerner turned out to have a bad reputation. Turned out was a bad reputation, but he still gets the name of it. But the worst part about it, it was a real good report, and Fred worked very closely, I do not know if he told you about this, but that Johnson got mad at him. And when Johnson got mad, he [inaudible] like a dead dish. Otherwise, he would be with his arm around you and talking right in your face. And we went to something at the White House and he told Fred, he said, "Well, Fred, I am surprised to see you up." And Fred says, "Well, why's that, Mr. President?" And he said... because he called him... You would have to get Fred to tell you this, he called and appointed him on the Kerner Commission because it was a recommendation Fred had made, to do a commission report. And Fred said, "What do you mean, Mr. President?" He said, "I thought..." Who was the mayor of New York at that time? SM (02:01:12): Lindsay? LH (02:01:16): Yeah. So me and Fred were the hardest workers on that commission, and really we're basically calling the shots, though Kerner was supposed to chair it. And then they had some people who really did not believe. It was not strongly forced civil rights on it. So, Fred went over and talked to him and said, "Well," like Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression, that you have to figure out what's happening and get some solutions, or they will just keep festering. So, what was happening, the FBI was coming over there and telling them... It was Hoover still in office at the time, was telling them that this person met with somebody two years ago. SM (02:02:17): Can you hold on one second? (02:02:23): All right. We are back. LH (02:02:23): So finally, Johnson told Fred, said, "Well, the FBI was here, saying that they were communists." And he said, "They are not communists. They're people that are hurt about discrimination." And he suggested to be like Franklin Roosevelt during the Great Depression, that if you do think it is communist, then to take the fire out of what they are upset about. So, they had a good talk then. But yet, what really happened was that the Washington Post came out and reported the report, that white racism was the number one mental health problem, before Johnson got to see it. And I do not know who leaked it to him, to this day. But it really upset Johnson and he did not ever embrace the report. But it was the handbook of the times, along with Black Rage and other- SM (02:03:31): Yeah, I have that book too. LH (02:03:34): Yeah. SM (02:03:35): What were the successes of the Native American movement in the (19)60s and (19)70s and beyond through today, and what have been the failures? And what are the main grievances today within the Native American community? So it's kind of a two-part question. What were the successes of that period, the (19)60s through today, and the failures in the efforts? And then what are the main grievances today? LH (02:04:09): The successes were those three things that we talked about earlier, was that the [inaudible] getting their land back, doing away with termination as a policy and reestablishing the Menominee and the Alaskan claims. So those successes gave us in voting, and then there was a whole new set of leaderships that came out of those programs, that became community organizers and then became chairmen of their tribes. And I feel like I was the product of that, as we organized Oklahomans for Indian opportunity. So a new set of leaders who came with some ideas of change, and we did. We have Indian 101 and you can- SM (02:05:05): Yes, I saw that. LH (02:05:05): And it starts moving up then. And then what we did when we organized Americans for Indian Opportunity, we started working with the federal agencies to... We took Johnson's message seriously, that we were not... The Bureau of Department of Interior was in our colonial office, that all agencies in the federal government had responsibility to Native Americans. So, we really took his message, and took it around to his secretaries, and interpreted it for them, to mean that we have to work with tribes, like EPA and environmental things and health and all of those kinds of different programs that were never doing anything. But we had gotten the Department of Labor and Commerce involved during the war on poverty, to put resources into the Indian community. So we got a whole set of new resources. And that emboldened and brought about new leadership and change on the reservations, and then within the government. So we were still in Washington, we had Indian desk in every federal agency. Well, the next time then when Nixon came in, he did away with all of them except the war on poverty put over in ANA, over in Health and Human Services. So, it is still alive today, in Head start. They were going to kill Head start over in Health and Human Services. So a group of tribal leaders came to me and said, "Would you help us set up a meeting with those people?" They were all friends. We had a national network of about, oh, 25 people, that if something went wrong, we could call everybody and it would activate this group of people over in leadership positions, and we would all move on it. Slade Gorton, we killed Slade Gorton because he was so anti-Indian. We did things like that. And then we took it on ourselves as AIO to... It was every new administration, that we would go. And then Nixon came along with his policy statement, was self-determination. So, we interpreted that to the department, saying self-determination means we had the right to self-government and make our own decisions, and that they cannot make policy decisions for us within our own tribe, and that we get to determine our tribal membership. It was before the federal government did it. So, a whole bunch of things changed. Just amazing. Many of the organizations that exist- LH (02:08:03): Amazing. Many of the organizations that exist today were started during that time. The NARF, Native American Rights Fund. And then, one of the things that we did, there was a report that came out, an international report, that there's going to be a food shortage and a fuel shortage and water shortage. We said, "How is that going to impact us?" And all of a sudden, we said, "Why are we the poorest people in the country, when we have land and resources?" So, we said, "Well, what are the resources?" So, we tried to find that out, and the Bureau could not even tell us. We sent some interns over there who did some research. We added percentages to it, like 35 percent of all the coal in the United States was on Indian land, 75 percent of the uranium was on Indian [inaudible], and oil and gas. So, one of the things we did in the Nixon administration is said, "With the creation of the new Energy Department, that you cannot have an energy policy when this much private land is held by Indian people, but Indian people had to be at the table." That was what we said. Frank Zarb was the Czar at the time, and he worked with us, and we slapped around the Bureau of Indian Affairs and got them to change their policy. We brought in experts from international negotiation, and said that the leases that the tribes got into, whether it was oil and gas, or coal, or timber, all of those things were negotiated by the Bureau of Indian Affairs, and they were running things as bad as [inaudible] that may be one of the African countries had a poorer contract than we did. We picked that and ran with it, and organized the Council of Energy Resource Drive. They called it the OPEC. But what that did for us, then, is that we got involved with Department of Energy and changed the policy of the Department of Interior, and then gave more control of their tribal resources in the hands of the tribes. And then, from there, the timber tribes got organized. We brought some people with specialty in to help interpret, because they were clear cutting Indian timber and not replanting it, and all of those things. And they were getting the lowest price possible for the resources. And that is why they were poor. So, we brought people together, the tribes together, that had oil and gas, had energy resources, and brought them together and they got organized, and we helped staff them until they got their own funding. And they are still alive today in Denver. And the timber tribes are organized. The fishing tribes are organized around natural resources to get a better price for their product. And then, going through that, it is an evolution. We find that the next thing that hit you in the face was that we were not under EPA. That we were considered part of the state, which the state did not have any jurisdiction over us. And so, we said we were falling through the cracks. So, we, under the Carter administration, got a ruling from the Assistant Director, who is a very dear friend of mine to this day, of the Profit Post, Barbara Blum. And she made an administrative decision, so we did not have to go through the tribes, we tried to get the agency to change their policy, and she made the policy that tribes had the right to create their own tribal environmental regulation. So, it gave us a lot of [inaudible] development on the reservation. And that also provided that the companies that were on the reservation had to renegotiate their contract with the tribe, because the tribes can set up their environmental policies to stop their forms of development. That- SM (02:12:56): That is a lot of success. LH (02:12:58): Yes. SM (02:13:00): As we stand today in 2011, what is the greatest need? LH (02:13:05): Well, it mostly is an informed public. It goes back to in the educational experience that people have has no basic knowledge of Indian people. And that is what I was going to tell you about Pennsylvania. Two years ago, I do a lot of lecturing around the country in colleges and universities, and the University of California there in Pennsylvania? Familiar with it? SM (02:13:34): Yeah. LH (02:13:35): They invited me, and I gave them my regular talk, in which I even said to you, is that we do not study American history, we study Europeans coming to the Americas. Well, the good president said that was so shocking to him, here he had two PhD degrees, and he did not know anything about Native Americas. So, he invited me to come back. They made me an honorary doctor. Then, we took our ambassadors and had a week-long program. And then, they're wanting to set up a Donna Harris Indigenous Institute there at the college, which they have done with African-Americans. Instead of having Indian studies or African American studies, they set up an institute where they would bring a teacher in that would work as faculty with the university to help to integrate it into the total college setting instead of just having women's studies and African [inaudible] Hispanic studies, and all that. Because that marginalizes. That is why we are not making any gains in education, because that still marginalizes, and particularly Indians, because the tribes are governments, and unlike any other minority in the country, we are governmental entities, and we should be in the textbook of government, political science. We should be a part of the literature of all those departments, so that they can see us in a different way rather than just a minority group trying to work for its rights. Basically, Laura, my daughter, was on Clinton's minority rights thing. And that was what they found on Indians that the lack of information about Native Americans was the biggest problem that we had, because we had to spend more than half our time educating people through the Indian 101 thing for them. And we do not mind doing it. But that keeps us from doing the activist kind of things [inaudible]. SM (02:15:55): Probably Native American college students that go off to predominantly White campuses, just like African American students, the one thing that upsets them more than anything else is when they are in a class, and hopefully teachers do not do this, but I still know they do, that if there's a student of color, they will immediately, "Well, you are a student of color. What do you think?" LH (02:16:16): Yeah. SM (02:16:17): You put pressure on a college student to be the educator of the other peers. And the people doing it are the teachers. LH (02:16:25): That is right. And they are probably one of maybe five students on the whole campus. So, really it is pressure. I know when, oh, yellow Springs, oh, what is it the little college up there? I was chosen by the students to be on the Board, there. SM (02:16:45): Yellow Springs? LH (02:16:47): Yeah. SM (02:16:47): Is that in Ohio? LH (02:16:49): Yes. [inaudible] college. SM (02:16:51): Antioch. LH (02:16:53): Yeah. SM (02:16:53): Yes. LH (02:16:53): And it is very progressive. SM (02:16:58): Oh, yes. LH (02:16:58): And that was what the Indian students complained to me about, said that, "We were always having to try to explain Indians to [inaudible] when we're trying to figure out what our role is. And the other thing is that, if you go through the American educational system, you still cannot find yourself within the history of the United States. And then, if you go on to Law or to some other specialty to get your PhD degree, by that time you have almost, not divorced yourself, but you have become less connected to your community, so the people back home get annoyed with you. It's one of the issues now. And that is what we try to work at in our Ambassadors program, is how do you maintain your cultural identity? SM (02:18:03): Another thing here is, you were involved in the Women's Movement, and I know you were involved in that organization at the very beginning. One of the things that the history books teach us is that one of the reasons why the Women's Movement came about was because of the sexism that was so prevalent in the Civil Rights and Anti-war movements. Not all, but many of the women who were in secondary roles went into the Women's Movement so they could begin leadership roles. And I think I have already asked this question, because I think you have already said that women are treated with a lot of respect in the Native American communities. But your thoughts on whether that is indeed true, that the Women's Movement that really came to fruition in the latter part of the (19)60s and early (19)70s was because many of the women had had it up to their ears with men in these other movements. And... LH (02:19:08): That is absolutely correct. One of the things that I noticed, and really got me involved, is I got to know a lot of the women in government who had offices, and they could not travel, which would have allowed them to gain higher positions in their department. Only men could travel. Women could not travel without being escorted, junk like that which kept women from raising in their position in the government. I was not really ready to jump into the Women's Movement. But when I got to know that as an issue, I got involved. And again, the women played a major role as, what is her name, that rode the bus. She was a major player in the movement, but never got the recognition. Again, it was always the males who got the recognition. So, that became an issue. We went through a lot of stress, and then they even had to organize the women of color, because they were not enough women of color moving in to the national movement. There were all kinds of reasons why. But just all of those things, it was taking a course in college to see how all of those evolved. SM (02:20:52): Yeah. What is interesting today is, when you interview people, you see what they call the mainstream feminists, which they say it was Gloria Steinem and Betty Fredan, the Frustrated Housewife as some people have told me. And the Feminine Mystique, the book that was written. And then, you had what they called the radical feminists, who look down upon the mainstream feminists, respect them, but do not like their approach. When you look at the movements that have really changed and grown and evolved since the late (19)60s, there is this split between the radical feminists and what they call the mainstream feminists. LH (02:21:40): If you look at who the radical feminist is, their lesbian. And it was an interesting interaction between the two groups. I remember meeting in New York, and a big group of them came in together, and were going to challenge our whole movement, our whole activity. And Maggie Glover said, "Well, do we all have to declare our sexuality to be in the Women's [inaudible]?" That was basically what they were demanding. They wanted to be-be more accepted, which was not a bad thing, but [inaudible] probably pretty radical [inaudible]. But we got past that. It was more of, how do you get women of color involved than it was a bigger [], so that they have the voice. Indian women did not really need it, but Black women felt that it was being disloyal, because they could get jobs easier than their male counterparts, because they were less a threat. And there was a whole underlining [inaudible]. SM (02:23:00): Yeah. I know that Johnnetta Cole, former President of Spelman, in her book, Sister Present, I forget the name of the title of the book, she talks about those pressures of being an African American, then being an African American female, and then wanting to be involved in the Women's Movement, all these different pressures. LH (02:23:21): Yes. And that was so. And it was very hard. And Anglo [inaudible] Movement people did not know how to deal with it. And it was with great pride that I was the bridge, but I could not make it work. I could not figure out how. Something would just break down right in the middle of it. And it was not intentional. It was... SM (02:23:53): Why did the ERA fail? LH (02:24:01): I do not know. I really do not know. I think, by that time, I have forgotten what it was all happening in my life. I got diverted. I think we were out here in New Mexico a bit [inaudible 02:24:13] Mexico. I cannot remember. But it was such a threat to people, the two-party people, all kinds of social things, threats, "Who do these people think they are?" SM (02:24:37): Yeah. LH (02:24:38): And so, that is my interpretation anyway. SM (02:24:43): One of the things that, when you talk about all the movements that were taking place in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, the Anti-war Movement and Civil Rights was ongoing, going through unbelievable changes in strategy. But then you had the evolution of the Women's Movement, the Environmental Movement, the Gay and Lesbian Movement from Stonewall, and Native American Movement, you had Chicano and Asian American, as well. And even the beginnings of the Disability Rights Movement was around this time, too. And certainly you brought up the issue. I am really glad you were involved in mental health issues, because I remember the only female that really seemed to care about this was President Carter's wife. She took it out as an issue. What- LH (02:25:31): I served on her committee, too. We did a special thing on Indian Mental Health, which there is no program for. There's one institution. And she was just amazed at our report. I had a Native American person who was on my Board, actually, he called and said, "Could I help you work on that?" And I was calling her on the other line saying, "Would you come help me?" But we visited heavily Indian populated states. And then, the mental health providers not knowing how to deal with different cultural people, and she was just amazed at that report. And of course, look what happened to her stuff, too, even Mental Health for Children. And was it Reagan that came along and just [inaudible] mental health, threw them out onto the streets where they're homeless now. We call them homeless, not mental health. SM (02:26:34): Yeah. The question I was getting at here is, these movements, when you saw a protest, you saw the signs of all these movements together. At the moratorium in (19)60s9, you might see the Native American movement, all the movements had signs. Now it seems like they are never together anymore. The movements have all become isolated and unto themselves. Am I reading correctly into this? LH (02:27:04): Yes, I think so. And that is what troubles me. My youngest daughter had a birthday party, Catherine and Manuel who were really the baby boomers. And I said, "You all are getting a lot of blame because you all are not activist enough." They are, she and her husband. But I said, "What happened to the Anti-war Movement? What happened to the Civil Rights Movement, which you were part of?" But there is no movement out there. I told you I went around and lectured in colleges. And at one point, I think about five years ago or more, god, [inaudible], but that I was going through liberal arts colleges [inaudible]. And those liberal arts colleges were all, "How are we going to go [inaudible]? They were majoring in business and da da da da da da, so that the whole direction turned toward obtaining wealth. And that is how I am seeing it now, trying to evaluate where in the heck we are, right now. SM (02:28:26): Oh, yeah. LH (02:28:28): The whole big push for about the last 10 years or more has been, "We're going to all be millionaires. How do we go to Wall Street and learn how to do that?" so that we have now all of these people that do not know how to function in what they're confronted with during this recession. We also do not know how to organize ourselves, because we disassociated ourselves from those groups. And we do not know who they are anymore. I try to stay in touch. I was made an honorary sorority sister of the Deltas, which is a Black woman's sorority. And I stay in touch through them. And of course, New Mexico, they have a very small African-American community. But I stay in touch with them. And they recognize that my national work, because it was the national organization that made me an honorary member, and the local membership has brought me in, which gives me some ties to all parts of the community. SM (02:29:43): Right. LH (02:29:44): Because we are mostly heavily Indian and Hispanic, Hispanic being the larger. But now, New Mexico has a lot of middle-class Hispanics, and they do not fit. The national, you have the Caribbean Hispanic, and Florida is dominated by the Cuban. And then, you have Puerto Ricans in New York, and that is another kind of island people. SM (02:30:19): Right. LH (02:30:20): And then, out here we have the Mexican, and now the immigrants that are coming, which is also an issue. One of the things we are confronted, with, the majority of them are Guatemalan who are [inaudible] escape persecution from their own country. And they have to go all the way through that horrible Mexico situation, and then get to the border, and they get across the border, and then they are deported back. It is something that, as an Indian organization, we have to look at. But the other thing is that it is a continuous program like the federal teachers. It is like the volunteer teachers who are very well-educated and they are come out here to work on Indian reservations, and they do not know [inaudible]. They have had to hire us to come and give them Indian 101 so that they can become effective teachers. Because all of a sudden, they are just thrown out here without any [inaudible]. But we accept that responsibility, and it brings in some resources for us. But again, it is time consuming, so that the continuous education of the general public is probably one of our big- SM (02:31:48): You taught 101 to the United States Senate, did not you? LH (02:31:52): [inaudible]. SM (02:31:52): Because I remember you had mentioned yesterday that your husband, obviously there's 100 senators, but did you do 101 for the 100 senators? LH (02:32:02): No. It was a group that had members of the Congress and the Senate who had Indian populations [inaudible] get the White House involved. And we brought Indians in. And again, that was one of our big success stories, because at that time, the Indians were the experts. And members of Congress [inaudible] so they did not have any excuse, and it was interesting. We had the literature on it. SM (02:32:35): In your opinion, when did the (19)60s begin and when did it end? LH (02:32:41): I think, to me, it began with Johnson and the Civil Rights and [inaudible]. That was the backbone that started people changing, and changing their vocabulary, and changing what was politically correct, which has been a real disservice by many people by saying, you can go overboard with politically correct language. But it was so necessary. Even Fred's father who came from specifically Oklahoma, he had to control his need to say "negro." Including Johnson, too. Johnson had to learn to change his rhetoric, too. It was a great learning experience. And now, it's all [inaudible] nothing. I always wondered, during all this time, remember we were still fighting the great communist threat- SM (02:33:52): The Cold War. LH (02:33:53): Yeah. And all of that. And Reagan gets to take credit for what Gorbachev did, actually, and everybody gives him credit for bringing down the wall, and all that stuff. But he was slow in coming, and forced into it by what Gorbachev achieved. [inaudible] said, "who are they going to hate when they do not have the communist to hate?" Because, oh, the people would just talk like they knew a communist was right around the corner and going to take them over. Now, the-the poor Tea Party people have now found somebody to hate, which is Obama and the "liberal democratic party." SM (02:34:38): And all the activists from the (19)60s. LH (02:34:40): Yeah. All the activist- SM (02:34:42): No matter what the issue. LH (02:34:44): No matter what, we are going to change the social nature of those. That is really true. And so, they truly do hate us. And why they are worried, and why they are so dogged about it, is that, in my opinion, they are afraid that the browning of America is occurring, has occurred. And there is no one talking about it. Nobody preparing our society to accommodate it. And that is why immigration is such a big issue, and English First, all the kinds of [inaudible] that they think up. But what is so obvious is the immigration, so that the Hispanics get all of the recognition. But if you talk to Clayburn out of Oklahoma, he hates Indians and will say so, and thinks that we have too much rights. That is the new thing that they say about Indians, we have too many, because we have the right to be self-governing. And it is a very peculiar thing. And we're kind of glad that people are ignorant sometimes, because I think that they understand, here we are a collective tribal institutional government, but in the middle of capitalism, that we own things collectively. And people, they do not understand it, so they cannot quite figure it out. SM (02:36:20): And the attitude is, they do not like the victim mentality. The- LH (02:36:24): Yes. SM (02:36:25): And the anti-environment hatred. Oh, my gosh. LH (02:36:30): Oh, gosh. Well, goes particularly against how they interpret the Bible [inaudible] them interpret the Bible. There was the article in one of the Indian magazines, that one of the fundamentalists was preaching, they were going back to the first part of the Bible, saying that we were not the lost tribe of Israel, and we were not good enough to own this land. He was just far out. But you see how they are thinking, and where they are going to come from. And we are going to have a lot more trouble, I think, with this group than we had with any Republicans in the past. SM (02:37:18): Yeah. The culture wars are really going on, here. LH (02:37:25): That is a good point. The culture wars, and that browning of America is a part of it. SM (02:37:31): Yeah. And the anti-environment. I hear, in Pennsylvania, so much disgust for those people that want to save the environment. The dislike is intense. LH (02:37:50): Oh. Well, everything they do is so intense and ugly and rude and vulgar. No- SM (02:37:58): What was the watershed moment of the (19)60s and (19)70s, in your opinion? LH (02:38:04): The war. SM (02:38:05): Yeah. LH (02:38:06): It just brought everybody down. SM (02:38:07): Did the (19)60s ever end? LH (02:38:10): Did not for me. SM (02:38:11): Yeah. I have got a couple more questions and we will be done. One of the questions I have been asking everyone is this. When you look at the boomer generation, which your kids are part of, and when I say boomer generation, I mean all ethnic groups, all backgrounds, male, female, gay, straight, you name it, all boomers, all 70 to 74 million, so you cannot even come up with an exact number here, do you feel that this generation, the boomer generation, will go to its grave, like the Civil War generation, as a generation not truly healing because of the tremendous divisions that were so prevalent, and the divisiveness that was so prevalent in their lives between Black and White, those who are for the war, those who are against the war, male against female sometimes, all these tremendous divisions and divisiveness. Some say the divisiveness that we have today is directly linked to the divisiveness back then, where no one listened, just basically screamed at each other. Do you feel that this boomer generation is going to go to its grave not truly healing? Is that an issue in your viewpoint? LH (02:39:31): I do not see it as an issue. I do not understand them. Mine have gone through this, but they have stayed connected to Indian causes, women causes, and productive rights, and those kinds of things that the far right is trying to over override, but they do not have the zest. They do not have- LH (02:40:03): They do not have the zest, they do not have the passion, and they seem rather dull. SM (02:40:11): You mean the boomers? LH (02:40:12): Yeah, and now. That they are dull now. They do not have any passion. SM (02:40:17): Well, as they have gotten older, they do not have any passion? LH (02:40:20): That is my [inaudible]. Because where are they? You do not see them organized. And we named a half a dozen real prominent people that were in that boomer group that stayed all night at our house to go demonstrate against the war, and they have all become very good professionals. They did not have children. Some of them did not have children. Like my oldest daughter, and her husband became a professional. It is a different kind of thing. I do not know. I cannot get hold of it. I do not know that I could interpret it. There is an AARP magazine section, there is a whole big story on the boomer's list. Boomers Mean Business, it says, but I have not read the story yet. But they are asking the same question you are. I guess I will read that and see if I agree. But I do not have to... SM (02:41:24): Some of the activists that I have talked to in my interviews have said that the activists themselves have continued to be activists in their own way, in different ways. But that the majority of the population that was not involved never got involved. LH (02:41:40): Yes. I just watched the, oh, flashback on Jim Taylor and Joan who sang with him. SM (02:41:50): Yeah, Carly Simon. LH (02:41:52): Yes, and how they were on drugs and everything. I cannot think of his name right now, but heavy-set guy with a gray beard and gray hair. Crosby would be- SM (02:42:10): Yeah, Crosby still is nice and young. Yes. LH (02:42:14): Well, he said it was a great life because it was between birth control and Aids. And that sex was fun and drugs, we could try anything, there were no limitations to what we could do. And said now they have to have reunions just to relive that, and trying to bring it back into some, which is alarming. SM (02:42:43): Well, the religious, not the Christians but the religious right or the conservatives will attack this era of the boomer generation, (19)60s, (19)70s as this is when the divorce rate started to rise. This is when people did not go to church anymore, they had inner spirituality. They were supposed to be such a social group, a community group, yet they all went internally and into their religion. This was the sexual revolution, drugs were rampant, they had no respect for authority, the protests were about law and order. That is how Reagan came to power in California's governor and as president on the issue of law and order. He was against those students at Berkeley and of course he was against the rise of the Welfare state. LH (02:43:34): Where do you see them? I do not see them actually psychologically affected by that, but seemed like they all went to become more wealthy and power, wanting power. I do not know. SM (02:43:51): I think the criticism really is of the counterculture and the people that did all those things. They feel that the breakup of the family and everything, everything started going downhill because of that generation. The people making these comments are Newt Gingrich, George Will in his writings, Fox News. Governor Huckabee talks about it all the time on his TV show. Rush Limbal on his radio show, Hannity, they all make these kinds of comments. Of course, that is Fox, but conservatives have been making this for a long time that America really went backward in the (19)60s and the (19)70s in their eyes. It is amazing. LH (02:44:40): Okay. Well, I guess we better quit because I just realized that long we have been talking. SM (02:44:46): Yeah. I got two more questions and then I am going to be done. LH (02:44:48): All right. SM (02:44:50): Let us see. Did you have any generation gap issues with your kids? LH (02:44:56): Not with my children, but I did when we started our program. We first started our program and we had kids, and we were going to run it and all. We found that identity, cultural identity, and people were trying to out-Indian each other. It was very hurtful, too, whether they lived in the city or they were... We always tried to have non-federally recognized tribes to make that one of the issues that people have to be confronted with. That was one of the main contingents of the group, that they were more Indian than somebody else, and that somebody's feelings were hurt because they felt that people were treating them as equal because they were from a non-federally recognized tribe like the Lumbees of North Carolina. We immediately jumped onto it and created a whole first part of the meeting into that they have to all know about their families, their tribes, their bands. And then the community from which they come, the Anglo community, the state, so that they can put themselves into the reality of who they are. We have a pretty close meeting, usually at my house, where they can talk freely, and it becomes very emotional. Some of the pains that they have gone through, how do they deal with racism if they have experienced it? How to let go of it and not let it control your life, and how not to have the anger that is so destructive it creates destructive behavior. But when I had that, I called one of my board members who was in his (19)60s and helped me with all this work. He said, "Well, how did it go?" I said, "Well, we are having trouble with identity." He said, "Hello, LD, I thought we did that in the (19)60s." I thought we had established identity back then but this generation, they do not have the historical knowledge of their ancestors nor do they have the contemporary knowledge of what happened in the (19)60s, because there is not enough written about it. So, there was that vacuum and that is why we created that Indian 101 to help them see a roadmap of how these things developed and how far down we have gotten in the 1800s. And how we have come up now in the (19)60s and how important the (19)60s were to them. And that it created this environment where they are more educated people and all those things, so they can get a holistic picture of how we got to this place. For ancestors historically and then through the (19)60s, which brought about so much change that created the situation we are not at. SM (02:48:19): I have two more questions, then we are done. LH (02:48:19): Okay. SM (02:48:20): This is a broad one. I am just going to list some names. What was it like working with and getting to know the following people? Now, you do not have to talk about everyone, but maybe there is a couple of anecdotes and I will just list them. President Johnson, Senator Humphrey, Bobby Kennedy, Eugene McCarthy, George McGovern, Wayne Morris, Everett Dirkson, Barry Goldwater, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Al Gore, Spirow Agnew, Richard Nixon, Senator Hart and Proxmire, NOA Whiker, Baker Gurney, Montoya Irvin, Musky Culver, Ted Kennedy and Margaret Chase Smith. Those were all names that were so well known in the 60s. Then, of course, the women were Shirley Chisholm, Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug, Lindy Boggs, who took over her husband. And then the first ladies, Lady Bird, Mrs. Ford, Mrs. Nixon, Mrs. Schreiber, who you got to know, and Mrs. Carter and Mrs. Reagan. I do not know if you have any anecdotes on these people because you got to know all of them. LH (02:49:28): Mm-hmm. Well, Hubert Humphrey was my hero. He was the most... He seemed to be right. I think as we discussed earlier, that he was the real civil rights and that darn convention, democratic convention to make the party take civil rights decision, and all the things that he did. There was something about him. He was so good-natured and when he talked to you, he was talking to you. He always showed a personal interest in and the conversation. He was not looking over his shoulder to see who was next in line. Johnson, we grew up in Oklahoma, so Texas is right over the border. He was much like Oklahomans, so we had a lot in common with him. He was sometimes prude, but his leadership was an interesting phenomenon. Bobby Kennedy was neighbors and a friend, and we were hosted by him and many times. They were very competitive. They even competed with each other, Bobby and Ted, and the Thrivers and their children, adults, would be competitive. It was interesting. They all had assets that you admired and some things that you said, oh my goodness. What drove them in these certain areas [inaudible]. Anyway, it was a wonderful time. I was annoyed with George McGovern because North Dakota was one of the worst states in the Union about Native Americans, and I made a statement thing that South Dakota was our Mississippi. I got a letter from his wife saying how dare I say something like that. He could articulate it, but he did not see it exotic, as in the Black/white relationship and not in... But we were friends, we were social friends, and there was a lot of social... You had dinner parties and you had members of the Senate, usually mostly members of the Senate, and the press, journalists. What do you call them? The dark and the little fish that goes with it? You had them too, because... And I liked the Eudaws. The Eudaws were great Indian advocates and great- SM (02:52:29): Oh yeah, Stuart Eudaw. LH (02:52:29): Stuart, he just recently died. I was sitting here looking at pictures of he and I. And Lee, his wife, and I did a lot of Indian art exhibits together. We were neighbors and we would share, and we would get to ride on the go with him on the Sequoia. Because we were kind of different, we got invited to so many ridings and going down the river in the Sequoias. Again, even the Republicans, you could talk to them. There were a few Republicans like Goldwater, and I am just trying to give a couple of others that would be invited to Democratic. SM (02:53:06): Everett Dirkson. LH (02:53:08): Dirkson and one- SM (02:53:10): Hugh Scott. LH (02:53:12): Yeah. SM (02:53:12): Yeah. LH (02:53:17): Some way, I got involved with the international, the Moroccans, because... Anyway, it was a wild experience to consider a Comanche girl from Cotton County getting exposed to all of this. It was just a marvelous, marvelous experience. I was just trying to think of how to do that. And we knew the journalist as well as we knew members of the Congress because they were so important to getting the message across as they were trying to... SM (02:54:03): Yes. LH (02:54:04): Now, that relation does not exist and it seems like we are not really getting good information. There is no investigative, well, the whole journalist. SM (02:54:14): My final question is, what is the legacy of Red Power or Native American Movement overall? As time goes by, when the historians are writing the books of this period, what will be the legacy of Red Power or Native American Movement, and what will be the legacy of the boomer generation, in your opinion? LH (02:54:39): Well, it was not just Red Power that did it. Well, I guess if you are putting Red Power, it is everybody that was activists are not the same. Are you just using it- SM (02:54:48): Yeah, I am using all. LH (02:54:51): Oh, okay. Well, we made such almost extreme changes in the federal attitude toward tribes, and that we gained control of our own lives and we were decolonized. That is what I said what the (19)60s did, decolonized us from the Department of Interior. We became now, where tribe used to work together, now they are all working on their individual, strengthening their own tribal government. Now, we have very wealthy tribes. The gaming tribes are over the top and other tribes are better off. We still have pockets, great pockets of property still up in South Dakota. But they have gotten together and they elected Johnson, and we can be swing votes. We found out that we can be swing votes in like New Mexico, Oklahoma, Montana, Arizona. When we get our act together like that, we can really make a difference. We did it for Clinton and for Obama, but we do not do it on a regular basis because leadership changes. But so that we are more involved in the political process. SM (02:56:20): What do you think the legacy of the boomer generation will be? LH (02:56:25): That they were born. The numbers and how ill-prepared we were for them. The sociologists who study the up and downs of our country gave us no warning that we were going to have this boom, and that created this problem. Then we rushed out and built colleges and overbuilt them for them. Just the peer numbers of them. Of course, that was because of the war. It was just their existence is their legacy. And that they made us change in some ways, and then we did not... But they made us change by the peer numbers of the positions. They took like sex, what is it? Sex, drugs and rock and roll, that period. And it gave a lot of freedom. It opened a lot of minds and freedom for people. So, I would just say that the fact that they existed was their legacy, that made us had to change, shift our gears to accommodate. SM (02:57:54): One final additional note here is books. You're obviously very well-read. We all know about Dee Brown's book, but who, in your opinion, are the greatest Native American writers? And that no matter what era anyone was born, if they read their works, they will truly understand the Native American's history in America? LH (02:58:26): Vine Deloria. His book, God is Red. SM (02:58:35): He would be the number one? LH (02:58:38): Yes. There was three books. His first book was best, I think, and then God is Red. And then, so we have got three books that he saw it and articulated it. The other is Scott Momaday. He had one book that was a Pulitzer Prize that cost him. It was talking about urban Indians, reading that, which is half our population. It was the [inaudible] that urban Indians went through. I count that as a very important book, too. SM (02:59:17): What is his name? LH (02:59:17): Scott Momaday. SM (02:59:17): How do you spell that last name? LH (02:59:19): M-O-M-A-D-A-Y. SM (02:59:24): Okay. LH (02:59:25): He is the Kiowa and his book was House Made of Dawn. We were invited to go to his, when he received the Pulitzer Prize. He was the first. He had never received it. Probably the only one to receive a Pulitzer Prize. There is some newcomers, but they're all anger books, angry. They do not give you a sense of direction. SM (02:59:51): How about, do you like Winona LaDuke? LH (02:59:56): Yeah, but she is narrowly an environmentalist. SM (03:00:02): How about Wilma Mankiller? LH (03:00:05): Oh, Wilma? Yeah, she wrote a book. She and I wrote it. We are in one book together, Beloved Women. She was at the Alcatraz, and we just lost her last year, latter part of last year. She became an urban Indian, then came back to the reservation. So, she's the picture of the transition of coming back and contributing to the tribe. I think she's symbolic of that. And she had a publisher that became quite a national speaker. SM (03:00:49): I am almost done here. Hold on one second. I know this is going to end it. I really appreciate the time that you have given to me. Bobby Kennedy's funeral train. But did you go to Dr. King's funeral? LH (03:01:06): No, Fred did. SM (03:01:07): Okay. LH (03:01:08): He and Bobby went to Doctor... I do not know exactly why I did not go. I think they were, the children, something about the children and I needed to say. Because it was very traumatic for all of us. We all took it so hard and personally because we were so involved, and he was such an image to it. In the same way, of course, with Bobby. The children would go over and swim in their pool and watch movies and do things, because they are special children. And besides, just the adults became friends, not just the children. SM (03:01:51): Did Fred ever talk about the picture of Robert Kennedy that was in Life Magazine? He was sitting at the funeral in Ebenezer Baptist Church and the light was coming through the window, and it was right on him. It made the front cover of Life Magazine. Was Fred with him? LH (03:02:11): Yes, they walked together in the parade. I mean, not parade, the funeral, the funeral [inaudible]. SM (03:02:21): Did he ever talk about that after Bobby was killed, the light falling on him in the church? LH (03:02:30): No, he did not because... I do not remember. He may have, but it was such a tragic thing. Everybody was mourning in peculiar ways. Same way with when President Kennedy was killed. I remember where I was and how angry I became. I said, "I hope people are satisfied," because in Oakland, they were preaching against him with these Catholics. SM (03:03:04): Well, your kids are boomers, and I guess I will end with this. That is, that here we had a president of the United States killed in (19)63 and we had the distinguished civil rights leader killed in (19)68, and then a United States Senator killed exactly two months later in 1968. I know your kids were teenagers or going to college or younger, but how do you explain that as a parent to kids when they see these kinds of things happen, murder in your own country? How were you able to talk to your kids about why, and just being a parent? LH (03:03:50): Well, they felt some of those things. They felt them the same way that we did, that they had lost something, and thought why it was they were exposed to the hate. That is what makes the Tea Party people so painful is that their rhetoric is so hurtful. And that we were exposed to that, and during equal, we integrated into Oklahoma and other things, particularly against African-Americans, because it was so overt. And recognizing these. I do not know. I how we dealt with it. I think they felt so sorry for us, too, because we were in such mourning that they were comforting us. I guess that is [inaudible]. SM (03:04:53): Yeah, and certainly your husband being in the United States Senate, having those two people killed a two-month period of time, it had to change the atmosphere within the Senate, too, I would think. LH (03:05:04): Yes, and I am sure it was very worrisome to the children, too, about going out and campaigning for Humphrey after Kennedy was killed. I am sure that they were, well, something, though they never articulated. I guess I was so stuck with my own grief that I would not considered them. Though, we discussed it to some degree and we sent food over and we did things that we're supposed to do to make ourselves feel better. It is an interesting question. I never thought about that. SM (03:05:50): I will end with this, and that is I think Dr. King, who was so prophetic in so many ways, and I want to see if you agree with this. He would always say... Let us see, what was the word I was going to say? Oh, my golly. I forgot my train of thought here. It was a word he always used when... Oh. He used to always say, you can kill the dreamer, but you cannot kill the dream. LH (03:06:13): Kill the dream. Yes. SM (03:06:15): That is a great lesson for young people, no matter what age they are. LH (03:06:18): That is right. SM (03:06:19): Because if people think they can wipe out a cause, it is like saying, okay, I am going to shoot... LH (03:06:27): Like it will stop. Yeah. SM (03:06:30): Yeah, it's like if you kill someone, it will stop what is going on. That is ridiculous. It is the idea. It is what is just. LH (03:06:38): Look what is happening in Northern Africa. They will never be the same. Just that is a gigantic world change. SM (03:06:51): Yeah, it is amazing. I am done. I want to thank you very much. LH (03:06:56): Okay. SM (03:06:56): You have given me three hours of your time and I really treasure it. I have nine to 10 months of transcribing. My interviews are ending this month, and then I got to just sit and transcribe all these. You will see your transcript. I am going to need two pictures of you, you can send by email to my address. A current picture and then maybe one when you younger with Fred. LH (03:07:22): Okay. SM (03:07:23): Because those pictures will be at the top of the interview. I was wondering, do you still go out and lecture? LH (03:07:30): Yes. SM (03:07:30): Have you ever gone out and lectured with your former husband? LH (03:07:34): Well, we did. Before we divorced we did. But we are very good friends and these other... Well, let us see. When our son comes in from LA, we always have a lunch. We manage to see each other at least once a month. SM (03:07:50): Well, I know when I interviewed him last summer, actually towards the latter part, he has tremendous respect for you. He brought up several points when I was interviewing him about, "You got to talk to LaDonna because she is the leader of this." You were an unbelievable team, and boy, what a life you have lived. You have got your legacy. LH (03:08:11): Yeah. SM (03:08:12): You have your legacy, and it is not only in your kids but it is in your deeds. I hope I can meet you sometime. LH (03:08:19): Yeah, that is what I was thinking. Maybe when I come back. I am right now going through a little cancer scare, so I am thinking sometime- SM (03:08:28): Well, I hope you are okay. LH (03:08:29): Yes, but I have to go through this medication. As soon as I get through that, I am going to California, Pennsylvania and start working on their institute, helping work on creating that institute. SM (03:08:45): Well, geez, I will drive over and meet you. We will take you to lunch. LH (03:08:48): Yes, and I have a crazy... Our only non-Indian board member is a crazy Greek. Dr. Christoff is there in Pittsburgh, and I was hoping he could come down. Maybe we can all get together and talk. SM (03:09:03): Yeah, and I could take some pictures, too. I was thinking, I have gotten to know Rennie Davis, the (19)60s radical. I do not know if you knew this, he became a multi-millionaire. LH (03:09:16): No. SM (03:09:16): Oh, yeah. You go on his website. Rennie is very successful. He went into some sort of technology business and made lots of money, then he sold it. Now, he has been doing spirituality stuff. One thing about him, when he left the anti-war movement in the late (19)60s or early (19)70s, a lot of the guys like Tom Hayden were saying, this guy has gone into a strange direction because he was into inner spirituality and all this other stuff. But he was the intellectual of the anti-war movement. He was the smart guy. He went to Oberlin College in Michigan. Now, because of what has been happening with the protests in Wisconsin and elsewhere, he's inspired now to go back out and talk. He hasn't talked about the (19)60s in 30 years. LH (03:10:02): Golly. SM (03:10:03): It's driving him. I interviewed him in Washington last summer when he was on one of his spirituality trips with his assistant, so he's a Facebook friend of mine. Now, he and Bobby Sealer are starting to go out next fall on the lecture circuit again, talking about this is the time, protest is necessary. America's going through some unbelievable changes. LH (03:10:28): I cannot understand how people can work and be so avid against their own self-interest. Like those Tea Party people are tearing down the unions and killing the middle class, being against... Can you imagine those poor people being against health? SM (03:10:50): Well, some people are comparing the Tea Party people to the anti-war movement of the (19)60s. I do not agree with that. LH (03:10:59): No. There was a positive outcome that they were trying to see. SM (03:11:04): Right. LH (03:11:07): You cannot see anything positive coming out of the [inaudible]. SM (03:11:09): Yeah, and the unions are under assault. Oh, my goodness. LH (03:11:13): I know. SM (03:11:13): They are called thugs in Pennsylvania. Anyways. LH (03:11:18): Okay, we will get on another- (End of Interview) Description 2 Microcassettes Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Ladonna Harris Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Harris, Ladonna ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Civil rights workers; Political activists--United States; Comanche Indians; Politicians--United States--Oklahoma; National Urban Coalition (U.S.); Americans for Indian Opportunity; Harris, Ladonna--Interviews Description An account of the resource Ladonna Harris is a Comanche Native American social activist and politician from Oklahoma. In addition, she is the founding member of Common Cause and the National Urban Coalition. Harris is also the president of the group Americans for Indian Opportunity. She has been an outspoken advocate on the agendas of the civil rights, feminist, environmental and world peace movements. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2011-03-08 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.129a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.129b Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 191:34 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/77b48a955f81cba82ba0e0c5b42e2eb7.jpg 83c078d57c19a4be1f6ff5d95c961fdd https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/9f869f88c51b436addacb4dd43e555c1.mp3 15a6f6f115d47bc8e0692015fc0056a9 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Audio interviews Title A name given to the resource McKiernan Interviews Description An account of the resource Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br /> <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2010-07-01 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Fred R. Harris, 1930- Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Fred Harris is a former Democratic United States Senator elected twice from the state of Oklahoma. Harris received his Bachelor's and Law degree from the University of Oklahoma. He won a special election in 1964, succeeding Robert S. Kerr. In 1976 and he also became a professor of Political Science at the University of New Mexico.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:4995,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;4&quot;:[null,2,5099745],&quot;10&quot;:2,&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;12&quot;:0,&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Arial&quot;}">Fred Harris is a former Democratic United States Senator elected twice from the state of Oklahoma. Harris received his Bachelor's and Law degree from the University of Oklahoma. He won a special election in 1964, succeeding Robert S. Kerr. In 1976 and he also became a professor of Political Science at the University of New Mexico.</span> Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 2 Microcassettes Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 144:35 Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Native Americans; Comanche nation; Comanche culture; Americans for Indian Opportunity (AIO); Civil Rights Movement; Integration; Taos Pueblo; Menominee tribe; Racial stereotypes; Baby boom generation; Activism; Native American/ American Indian Movement (AIM).&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:5009,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;7&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:[{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;5&quot;:[null,2,0]},{&quot;1&quot;:0,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;3&quot;:3},{&quot;1&quot;:1,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;4&quot;:1}]},&quot;10&quot;:0,&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;12&quot;:0,&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Arial&quot;}">Native Americans; Comanche nation; Comanche culture; Americans for Indian Opportunity (AIO); Civil Rights Movement; Integration; Taos Pueblo; Menominee tribe; Racial stereotypes; Baby boom generation; Activism; Native American/ American Indian Movement (AIM).</span> Subject LCSH Legislators—United States--Oklahoma; College teachers; Harris, Fred R., 1930--Interviews Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Senator Fred Harris Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 1 July 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:08): Testing, one two. Ba, loud. And again, thank you very much. It is an honor to talk to you. Before we even start, I consider you one of those great senators of the senators that I got to know, I think, that were really men of character back in the time when Senator McCarthy and Senator McGovern and Senator Nelson, who I all know or knew. So again, thank you very much. FH (00:00:40): [inaudible] well, thank you, Jeff. That is very nice for you to say. SM (00:00:41): Yeah. First question I have is, how did your growing up years in Oklahoma make you the person you are today, including where you grew up, your high school and your college and your early political efforts? I say this because I am very impressed with your background because things that stand out in your background include things like human rights. You dealt with the issue of desegregation, caring about the plight of African Americans, women, and Native Americans. So, just a little bit about how you became who you are. FH (00:01:18): Well, I grew up in a working class family. By most standards, we were poor, but we did not really feel poor. We would grow a big garden and we raised our own beef and pork and chickens for food, and I grew up in little town where it was not a place where there was a great deal of economic stratification where there are rich people and poor people; we were all fairly alike. I think that was a big help. Went to public schools there in that little town of Walters, Oklahoma. The interesting thing is, I was just back to a class reunion and it was amazing how many out of my class graduated class there in 1948. There were just two of us, I think. A potential majority got a college educations and a significant percentage, advanced degrees. I do not know, but that seems very unusual to me. I think we just all somehow always thought we would go to college, and did, and I did though no one in my family had ever been in college before. When I was a sophomore in high school, I somehow decided I wanted to be a lawyer, but I was not quite sure what a lawyer was. But I did think, I think now looking back on it, that it was sort of involved with being in politics, too, which I was intrigued by very early. About race, I do not know. I grew up in the school and in the county, the town where there were a lot of Comanche Indians. I later married a Comanche Indian woman, LaDonna Crawford, and some of my closest friends then, and that remained true through the years were members of the Comanche Indian Tribe, and I think maybe that gave me a somewhat different perspective than I might otherwise have had in regard to race. I was writing a memoir book not long ago and I was remembering that in a high school speech class, there was one little project where we had to recite some passage from Shakespeare. I chose the Shylock speech about the Jews, but I changed it. I did not really know anything much about Jews then, and I changed it to "negro." For example, as I gave the [inaudible] I said, "If you prick a negro, will he not bleed," and so forth. Where I got all that, I do not know. But ever since I remember, I had a great deal of interest in equality, ethnic and racial equality. Of course, that was something that I got very much involved in both in private life early and when I was practicing law on integration and then in the Oklahoma State Senate where I offered the bill that created the Oklahoma Human Rights Commission and prohibited discrimination in state employment, and then eventually starting right off in the United States Senate, but sort of the Voting Rights Act in 1965. That is a short amount. That is kind of my background. SM (00:05:54): Yeah. What really intrigues me about your background is why you became a leader at such a young age. Some people I know... The only other person that was as young as you was Senator Biden, who became a United States Senator in at the age of 29. When I look at your background, and I do not know, I have not studied Vice President Biden, but I know that he was a senator at the age of 30. You both became leaders at a very young age. What was the inspiration there? Did you feel that you were ahead of the time, that you felt you had to play an important role in some of these decisions earlier rather than later? FH (00:06:36): Hey, I do not know exactly why, but I do know this. I was always sort of grown, I think. I really enjoyed being around older people and listening to their conversations. It was sort of the practice among the people I grew up with there in Southwestern Oklahoma, and it certainly was true of my own father, that they gave the boys a lot of responsibilities at an early age. That was the way my father was with me and it was, too, of several of my classmates. They treated us more or less like adults and gave us the responsibility. I think that I was considerably more mature than I would have otherwise been. But that was, too, a lot of my high school classmates. SM (00:07:33): Do you remember, you have given a lot of important speeches in your life, certainly in the United States Senate, when you were in the State Senate, and maybe even in high school, and even now that you have been a professor for so many years... But do you consider one of your speeches the most favorite of all time? Was there one that you felt dealt with an issue better than anything you had ever dealt with before? What speech stands out? FH (00:08:04): I do not know. It is probably obscure kind of a subject outside of New Mexico. But I led the fight in the United States Senate for the return to Taos Indian Pueblo here in New Mexico their 48,006 Blue Lake lands. [inaudible] was not in my home state, but I got very interested in that after talking with the old leaders of the Pueblo. It was a precedent-setting bill that we passed. The tribe had gotten a claim against the federal government, a court of claims that was upheld for the wrongful taking of that land and were going to be compensated for money, but they would not have kept money. They wanted the land back. It was inside of the National Forest at the time. So, it was not in private hands, and we finally got that done. I would say my speaking on the floor of the United States Senate on that circuit was probably something that I am proudest of, though as I said, it is not a thing known much outside of the state here in New Mexico, my adopted state where I have lived now since 1976. Taos Pueblo is such wonderful, generous people, gentle people. They have had I do not know how many different ceremonies where they have thanked me and my then wife, LaDonna Harris, for our help on returning that land to them. That is about to happen again. They are going to have a 40th anniversary celebration this September of 2010 [inaudible] their land returned and again, honoring us. SM (00:10:22): Well, that is excellent. Since the project I am working on is, of course, dealing with the boomer generation, and that is those individuals born between 1946 and 1964, and I preface this by saying that many people, one-third of the people I have interviewed, are not boomers; they are older than boomers. Many people that were born, say, around (19)40 to (19)46, many of them consider themselves boomers even though they do not fall into that timeframe. I have had a lot of different people comment on the generation itself. But what I am looking at here is what was America like during the following periods in your eyes? Because you experienced it growing up after the war, after World War II. And of course, you went to college in the early (19)50s, you became a lawyer in the (19)50s and then, of course, you were serving already at that time before you went into the (19)60s into the Senate. But if you, and just your own words, I am looking at the years that boomers have been alive, which means that the oldest boomer now is 64 this year, and the youngest one is 48 this year, if you were to describe the period 1946 to 1960, how would you describe America? FH (00:11:43): Well, it was almost a nation. I actually was born in 1930 in the midst of the Depression and Dustbowl days in Oklahoma. I grew up in those years prior to 1946 with people who that... SM (00:12:20): Still there? FH (00:12:22): ...if they had been victims of circumstances beyond their control and that the government had to do something about it, my people who were not active in politics revered Franklin Roosevelt, and I think we grew up thinking that the government could be, it should be your friend. Then came at World War II and the world just radically changed. People moved all from their home place, became very mobile. And that was true of my own family and friends. People scattered and went elsewhere to find jobs and so forth. You had this pent-up consumer demand during the war which suddenly caused enormous economic activity and growth. You had the GI Bill, which provided for those boomer people who would come back from the war, or actually they were earlier than the movement of people that came back from the war, the opportunity for higher education and showed the rest of us, too, that if we would go to school, we could go to college and university, and we did. So, it was just a radical change in American life and the national life about the time these people were born, this boomer generation. I think everybody was growing and developing as the country was, and I think there was just sort of an inevitable optimism as that group was growing up, as was true for me, too, that the possibilities were unlimited, that you could do almost anything you wanted to. It is the kind of thing that the Clintons, one of the boomer generation, used to say, people that played by the rules, worked hard, you could do just about anything you wanted to. I think that was the general feeling of that era. SM (00:14:59): Because that is from (19)46 to (19)60. And then we get into the era of 1961 to 1970, which is the Kennedy being elected, and of course we get the Vietnam War. Just your thoughts on that tumultuous decade. FH (00:15:13): Well, the Vietnam War of the (19)60s, I think for the first time caused people of that boomer generation, and a lot of rest of us as well, to come to the really shocking and depressing view that the government was not always right. There was a real question whether our leaders could be trusted, and they had gotten into this terrible mess in the war. Then, we sort of papered over, white people had, the terrible fight of the African Americans in particular, Indians, too, and all of that came to the forefront in the (19)60s. We had the terrible riots, which exploded in Black sections in most of America's cities. In the summer of 1967, I was evidently appointed by President Johnson to the President's National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, the [inaudible] commission to report and recommend concerning those terrible events. That was kind of with the war and these horrific conflicts, racial and ethnic conflicts in the country that told us what America was really like, and a lot of us had not thought about it that much. That really sort of destroyed the innocence of the people at that time. I think that made people a lot more distrustful of government, a lot more concern. Maybe there are not any solutions to some of these problems, and made people somewhat more fearful and more self-centered about their own families and their own problems, and less willing, as have been true of that Depression generation, to reach out to others and to cooperate and so forth. The (19)60s was a time of enormous change and rapid depression. SM (00:18:01): Where would you place the (19)70s? Because we all remember Kent State and Jackson State in the middle of 1970. Then we get into (19)71. We all know what happened with Watergate and those early years of... A lot of people say, I do not know how you feel about it, that the (19)60s really continued right through about 1973 or (19)74. A lot of people- FH (00:18:27): I think that is absolutely true. I think what happened... Back in the (19)50s, we had men all very optimistic and cheerful during the Eisenhower years, that is evidenced by white people and the people in the dominant society. Then the (19)60s really shocked us into a depressing reality, and then with the (19)70s, the beginning of the (19)70s particularly, the events just sort of confirmed the kind of increasing distrust and fearsomeness or fearfulness that had developed in the (19)60s. SM (00:19:19): Well, when you get to the end of the (19)70s, Jimmy Carter's ousted from office and Ronald Reagan comes in. Then when you talk about the (19)80s, (19)81 to (19)90, it is really the era of Ronald Reagan and George Bush I. Just your thoughts on the (19)80s and its reaction to the (19)70s. FH (00:19:45): There has always been two mainstreams, I think, in American life. One, that we are neighbors and neighbors ought to help each other, and we are all in this thing together. And then the other thing has always been lift yourself up by your own bootstraps; do not be going around begging other people to help you. I think the (19)80s, the advent of the Reagan and Bush administration, the thing that became dominant was this idea that you were on your own. Nobody was going to help you; you got to yourself, and quit complaining and protesting. Straighten up, take care of yourself, or you will be sorry. SM (00:20:45): Well, what is interesting, Christopher Lasch, the author wrote The Culture of Narcissism, and he wrote that in the late (19)70s, and he said, many of the people that grew up and were formed by the (19)60s and the (19)70s became so into themselves, they did not care about anybody else. They became narcissistic. They cared about a nice car, a beautiful home, just basically narcissism. Do you believe that? FH (00:21:18): I think there is some of that. I think there is something to that. With the riots, for example, in the mid-1960s or later, there was, I think, a feeling that... Well, for example, my own father, who [inaudible] and believed in me, when he read about the Carter Report as a result of those riots, the way he saw our report was that it said, "Mr. Harris, you ought to pay more taxes so we can help poor Black people who live in Detroit," and he was thinking to himself, "Wait a minute. I am paying too much taxes myself and we never protested and rioted, and I do not think we ought to condone or reward that kind of disorder." I think that began this idea of distrusting each other and began to erode that feeling that had developed back in Roosevelt years, that government ought to help those who are left fortunate, who cannot to help themselves and that we ought to help each other. Then I think Reagan, and Nixon to some degree, and then later when Reagan got elected as a benefit of that kind of individualistic tendency in the country. SM (00:23:08): Dr. King used to always talk in his speeches about "we." Even though he was up there on a platform, he always looked in the audience and says, "You are me, because it is about we. It is not about me." I think the question that always comes up, there is always exceptions to the rule, but whether as a generation as a whole, when you look at the fact that this generation of 74 million, people I have talked to say that only between 5 percent and 15 percent, depending on who you talked to, was really involved in any kind of activism. The 85 percent just went on with their daily lives, but were certainly affected by everything. So- FH (00:23:49): President Carter was a disappointment as president. He did not push enough in the right directions, and very early lost his mandate. He became the greatest and best former president we ever had [inaudible]. Bill Clinton I think sort of turned us back toward this idea that we are our brothers' keepers and that we ought to cooperate together, work together. But Clinton, too, he lost the control of the Congress and really pulled his own horns in on the great issues. He lost on some of them like health insurance, and the nation then just moved on more toward this individualistic kind of tendency [inaudible] before [inaudible] SM (00:25:01): Right. You remember this, even whether you liked President Reagan's politics or not, he and Tip O'Neill got along quite well. Remember Tippo used to always say, "All politics is local." They used to debate a lot and had tremendous disagreements, but when the day was over, they would shake hands and if they could have, they would go out and have a drink. But it was just a different time. It seems like when Ronald Reagan came in, maybe it is a result of what from LBJ and Richard Nixon and what they did to America and divided the country, that when Reagan and Clinton were in office and even George Bush II, I mean, the divisiveness and the dislike for them as leaders was immense. What has happened between 1980 and 2010, in your opinion? It has been 30 years in the boomers' lives as their middle years going into their now senior citizen status. What has happened to America in the divisiveness, and do you see any links between this divisiveness and unwillingness to work together and if someone said, "Today, if President Obama likes this, then we have got to be against it even though we might like it, but if he is for it, were against it." I mean, where did this all start? FH (00:26:22): Well, I think a few things we ought to think about. One is I think the approach, the appeal of progressives in politics and government, it was not very effective because it tended to be preachy and to call on people to do the right thing, for example, in regards to poor people or in regards to Black people because it was the moral thing to do, appeal to the people's morality and sense of the right and wrong. I thought that back then, and I still do, that it was far more appropriate and effective to, and I called this the populism, to appeal to people's self-interest, to say to a person like my dad, "You are not going to be able to live in a society of self-esteem where there is security and stability unless there is some better distribution of the income and power in this country." You may think that problems of poor Black kids down in Mississippi and [inaudible] education which consigns them forever to poverty, or that heavily discriminated against and unable to reach their full potential, you may think that is not your problem. They are off down there in Mississippi or they are up there in Harlem or something. But we are all in this thing together. They do not stay in one place. For example, they may move from Mississippi to New York [inaudible] state. You are going to [inaudible] these kind of things one way or another. As Jesse Jackson was saying at the time, "It is a heck a lot cheaper to get in on the front end, to give people some real opportunity in their education and so forth, than it is to send them off to prison or put them on welfare or whatever." That is the one thing. I think that we could have made a better... FH (00:29:03): That is one thing. I think that we could have made a better appeal on the basis of the [inaudible] of everybody rather than just on morality. And the other thing that we should notice is what was happening in the country, and therefore, in the Congress. When I first went to the United States Senate in 1964, there was no Republican member of the Senate from any of the old 11 Confederate states. And I think there are only about two Republican house members from that whole Confederate area. And all that now has changed. The majority of them in both houses are Republicans. In those days, the Democratic party in those states was an all-white racist, highly conservative party. Well, that all began to change with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Voting Rights Act of 1965. So that black people who had been prevented from voting and throughout the south, from as far back as President Wilson's day, suddenly flooded into the voting poll. And they were overwhelmingly Democrats. And the white people fled. And after a little trouble with Strom Thurmond, for example, moved into the Republican ranks. And the same thing was happening all around the country as people, the electorate began to differentiate itself on a long party line based on economic flags. And people working in [inaudible] and below were increasingly Democrat, and the others were Republicans. African Americans and the growing numbers of Hispanics were overwhelmingly Democrat. And they were increasingly different on those who identified themselves as Democrats and those who identified themselves as a Republican on issues. And that was especially true of the party activists, the people who nominate the people of Congress so that the hard right of conservative Democrats in the House and Senate disappeared, and the liberal Republicans in the House and the Senate disappeared, so that we came to have, from the (19)80s on at least, we came to have two parties in each house that were internally homogenous, and therefore, very much unlike the others. All major votes of any conflict became party line votes for a majority of one-party votes against the majority of the other. And very often, nearly all, or sometimes all, of one party voted against nearly all, or all, of the other party. So we have become highly partisan and it has made it extremely difficult to reach any compromise on any major issues. SM (00:33:05): I think this was also seen when President Kennedy was elected because he certainly cared about civil rights and the plight of African Americans, but he was a little hesitant knowing that the South was basically southern Democrats, and if he wanted to be reelected, I think there was a concern there. And I like your thoughts on that. But also the fact that on the 1963 March on Washington, when he brought the civil rights leaders into the White House, he was a little hesitant and a little fearful that the march could become a riot. And I know he was concerned about John Lewis's commentary and [inaudible] Randolph told him to really cool it, so to speak. But your thoughts on the... He was a pragmatic politician basically. FH (00:33:51): That is right. You take, for example, in the Senate in those days, and when I first went there also, in the Senate, we could not take the position as a party on issues, although we tried a time or two in the Senate talking to do so, because we were split. We had people as liberal as George McGovern, and as conservative as John Stennis and Jim Eastland. And Kennedy was having to deal with that kind of situation, both in the Congress as well as in the country. So as you know, [inaudible] his election back then the first time, he did not want to make a big fight out of civil rights. And the thought was that if he could get reelected, they would begin to pick up that issue after. Johnson who had a great change of heart himself on those kinds of issues, Lyndon Johnson came into office. We had begun to see on television the terrible violent things against black people and the horrible way as many of them were [inaudible], and we would see it on television. And then with the outpouring of sympathy, there was about... on the assassination of President Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson was able, finally, to get a filibuster broken in the Senate and pass and the Civil Rights Act of (19)64, the Voting Rights Act of (19)65. But up until President Kennedy's assassination, I think the view of his administration was that a rising tide lifts all boats. And while we will not single out African Americans to help if we do something for all people, particularly in poverty and so forth, that will automatically help them, which was true of course, but it was not enough. SM (00:36:23): When you look at that period from (19)46, actually right through to 2010, who were the role models and people you looked up to the most during this timeframe? People you worked with or people that inspired you. It does not always have to be in politics. And who and which leaders do you feel had the greatest impact on boomers themselves, both good and bad? FH (00:36:50): Well, a magazine once said that I was the only person in Washington who could have a breakfast with Lyndon Johnson and lunch with Vice President Hubert Humphrey and dinner with Andrew Robert Kennedy. And that was true, and they all knew that I got along with each one of them. But I was closer to Hubert Humphrey and to Robert Kennedy. Robert Kennedy was my seatmate in the Senate and we lived around the corner from each other in Virginia, and we know each other a lot. [inaudible] work together. And he was, in a way, like me. When I went to the Senate, in the process of becoming himself, he was terribly injured, as you can tell, damaged himself by the defamation of his brother. And he was deepening in his concern about the poor people and about African Americans and others. I liked him in [inaudible]. And then Hubert Humphrey was, of course, the greatest legislator of my generation. And then several others. He was a very well-motivated person who became awfully handicapped by his association with Lyndon Johnson as his vice president, and was very much convened by Johnson, and was put in the terrible position of having to support the Vietnam War until he finally was liberated when he was running for president himself. He almost got... I was together with Senator Walker Mondale, national co-chair of the country campaign for president, and we almost won. The country would have been a much different country had we pulled it out. SM (00:39:13): This is important because even in the history books that I have read said that if it had been two more weeks, two more weeks before the election, he would have won, that he was really rising. And even at two or three or a month earlier, he would have showed a difference between Lyndon Johnson and himself, he would have won. FH (00:39:34): Well as Larry O'Brien, who was the Democratic chair just before me, and then the National Democratic Chair took advocate, has written, and I have too... Humphrey promised him and promised me and Senator Mondale that he was going to break with Johnson on the war and called for unconditional [inaudible] and for de-Americanization of the war so that we could begin to pull out of there. And we had a platform blanket at the Chicago Convention in 1968 to do exactly that. And then Johnson moved in and blocked it. I bet his office did. And Humphrey backed down a little and compromised, which I found very disappointing. But finally late in the campaign, I was with him and helped write the speech he should have given much earlier on Vietnam, breaking with Johnson. And from that moment, we began to go up in the polls. It was not as strong an anti-Vietnam war speech as I wanted, but it was taken by the country and by people like Ted Kennedy as a peace speech. And Humphrey went up in the polls everywhere from that moment. At the very last, he went down to Texas. It was very well received and the polls in Texas showed that we had gone ahead. We went up from there to California for a last night, a national television program, and the field poll, very respected California poll, showed that we pulled even and were still moving. Other polls showed us that we were really coming up, up to that time, for a long time. Humphrey was the only one who thought he could win, and he just kept working at [inaudible]. So we went to bed that night. We flew back from California with Humphrey to Minnesota so he could vote the next morning. And when we went to bed that night in Minnesota, election night, we were pretty well convinced we were going to win it. But turned out we do not win by... they do not win the presidency by the popular vote. You have to think of states that led up to a majority of electoral college. And the next morning when I got up, I started thinking about that. I could see we were not going to make it, and of course we did not. The country would have been a wholly different country if he had been elected and Richard Nixon had not. SM (00:42:50): I agree. Let me... Okay, great. Question here. In John Kennedy's speech, " Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country," certainly was a major influence a lot on the young people that... Actually boomers were just going into junior high school at that time. I am one of them. And I mean, that was one heck of a speech. And you all knew it was about the Peace Corps and Vista. And serving in the military, I guess, was maybe not like it was in Korea and World War II, but in the early (19)60s people were still serving. And do you believe the Vietnam War was a class war based on the fact that the large proportion of the minorities, low income people who were white, served, but people that were more educated and were in college and got deferments or hardship cases or went on to grad school and all other reasons for not serving or abated the draft. How would you define that war and the whole concept that really surprises me as James Wood or Senator Webb has said in a book he wrote quite a while back that here was a generation that was inspired by Kennedy to serve, and yet we have so many of the most educated and elite who did not want to serve. FH (00:44:25): Well, I think the result, it was people who were in lower economic brackets who did the fighting. There was no press about that mostly, although nobody sat down and [inaudible] on that in advance. But I never was caught up in the Kennedy thing at first because while I could not attend the convention in Los Angeles [inaudible], I had to been a supporter of [inaudible]. I kept hoping that that Stevenson might be able to pull off first nomination. But I did get very excited about the John Kennedy campaign and was a member of the group, an informal group, in my hometown in Oklahoma. So we had to call upon the Baptist preacher and threaten him with campaigning ourselves at church if he continued to speak against Kennedy from the pulpit as he did. And I think he did that as preacher, not so much because Kennedy was a Catholic, although that is what he gave as the reason, but because he was liberal. And so I was very much caught up in the excitement of the campaign. And I do not think we listened clearly to those words about... that were really sort militaristic in a way, in their anti-communism of their breadth. We were just caught up within the thing, "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you do for your country." And that was, I think, a great inspiration for people to get involved in public service. I already was. But during that war, I had Robert Kennedy down to Oklahoma one time, and he spoke in the Fieldhouse on the campus of the University of Oklahoma. And he had a question after session, afterwards, that... He was asked at one point, "Do you favor the continuation of the student deferment from the draft?" And he said, "No, I am against that." And they was booing, a lot of booing. And he said, "As long as a person's economic class or income determines whether or not they go to college, which is largely true," he said, "I do not think that there ought be an automatic deferment for college." And then after some other questions and so forth, he said, "Let me ask you all some questions." And he said, "On Vietnam," he said, "how many of you support the position of Senator Eugene McCarthy for an immediate unilateral withdrawal from Vietnam?" Well, there was a smattering of the pause. It was certainly a small minority of the two who agreed with that. "How many of you," he said, "agree with my position that we ought to begin to de-Americanize the war and begin to turn it over, over time, to the Vietnamese?" And again, there were some... it was more applause, but it was still a minority of the students that agreed with that. And then, "How many of you agree with the President Johnson's policy of just sort of continuing to muddle through, doing what we are doing?", and there was more applause but still a distinct minority. And then he said, "How many of you think that we should, as some are suggesting, escalate the war and increase the military involvement and effort?" And there was a huge applause. There was a majority. SM (00:49:08): And what year was this? FH (00:49:10): It would have probably been about 1967 or somewhere in there, something like that. It was after Robert Kennedy had finally come out against the war, and it was just before I, myself, had finally come out against the war rather late. At any rate, the majority were for escalating the war. And rapidly, just immediately, he said, "How many of you who just now voted to escalate the war also support the student deferment from the draft?" And there was just a gasp in the crowd as people realized what they had just done. And then they break into applause. And I asked him, I said, "Have you done that before?" I asked him afterwards. And he said, "Yeah, I do it everywhere." I said, "Was it different here?" And he said, "No." He said, "It is a minority of students that against to war," but like that Newfield wrote, they are a pathetic minority. They are going be growing. But he said, "The same result, I get everywhere." SM (00:50:45): Wow. And of course, after (19)67, (19)68 things really changed. FH (00:50:48): Yes, they grew and the percent of people that finally grew into a majority vote in the country... getting out the war. SM (00:50:59): And what-what was really amazing, you talk about, you knew Senator McCarthy and Senator Kennedy, and I think there was an extreme dislike between the two. That might be mild. I do not know the whole story. I know when I interviewed Senator McCarthy many years back, the one section that he had kind of hesitated on responding, and he just simply said, "Read it in my book," was when I said what his thoughts were on Bobby Kennedy. Do you feel Senator McCarthy was really upset with him because he decided to run for president after he had told him he was not? FH (00:51:35): Yes. SM (00:51:35): Is that the main section? FH (00:51:38): By the time I knew McCarthy, and he and I were on the Senate Financial Committee together, and I saw him socially too a lot. He was a fairly bitter... He was a very witted person, but his wit was very often sharp and bitter. His first business was against Johnson and also, therefore, Humphrey because Humphrey had sort of dangled the vice presidential nomination back in 1964 in front of McCarthy. And then later, it became clear that he never intended to choose McCarthy; he always intended to choose Humphrey, but had only banded around McCarthy's name like he did Senator Tom Dodd because they were Catholic. And McCarthy was quite bitter about that, and really bitter about Humphrey for that reason too. The Kennedy people, they did not respect McCarthy. They thought, in a way, he was kind of... SM (00:53:09): He was what? FH (00:53:18): He was... SM (00:53:18): Oh, okay. FH (00:53:20): He did not really get down him to the trenches and fight like crazy. I do not know if it was true but they thought he was a supporter of the oil companies, for example, on the depletion allowance and on some non-liberal kind of subject like that. I know that they did not think he was the right leader to oppose Johnson and to lead the country on the war and on other issues. And I know that was Robert Kennedy's feeling. But I think that Robert finally decided to run after McCarthy, ran surprisingly well against Johnson in New Hampshire. I think he finally got to see that there was a possibility that this could be done. And there are no questions that, that certainly embittered McCarthy at his... I think he felt, also like Eleanor Roosevelt and others, that John Kennedy was too conservative, and that he and Robert both had been supporters of Joseph McCarthy. SM (00:54:44): Right. FH (00:54:45): And so there was some of that. But a lot of people felt... A lot of McCarthy's supporters felt that Kennedy was an opportunist, and only after McCarthy showed he might be able to beat Johnson for the Democratic nomination did he finally come in. SM (00:55:07): I know that the Clean for Gene group, which was the young people that had their haircut short, and I remember Senator McCarthy really had nothing to do with that. I interviewed the person that was responsible for that. He went along with it, but he was not the guy that told them to cut their hair, but he went along with the people that were advising him. But several of the people that were in the Clean for Gene said they really, when they heard that Kennedy was running, they really would have liked to have switched but feared doing. But I guess the question is, why, after Senator Kennedy, was killed, why he kind of just dwindled, just kind of petered out? FH (00:55:57): I think he was really just really very bitter, just generally. And so for example, he would not enjoy Humphrey, and even said then and later publicly some generally good things about Richard Nixon... in a way in support of Humphrey. SM (00:56:12): Yeah. The next question, how is your cell phone doing? FH (00:56:26): What did you say? SM (00:56:27): Is your cell phone still strong? FH (00:56:29): Well, hold just a second. I am going to have to... but I will be right back. SM (00:56:33): Yep. Okay. FH (00:56:35): You mind calling me on this home phone now? SM (00:56:37): Yeah. Let me get your phone number. FH (00:56:49): It is 5 oh 5- SM (00:56:49): 505. What is it, 505- FH (00:56:49): 898... SM (00:56:49): What was the last four? FH (00:56:58): 0860. SM (00:56:59): Okay, I got 505-898, and what are the last four? FH (00:57:00): 0860. SM (00:57:02): Okay. I will call you right back. Yep. Okay. (00:57:08): I knew because I have interviewed some other people and their cell phones went dead about 45 minutes. My cell phone is actually only good for 45 minutes. FH (00:57:17): Well, this is working good here. I live in an adobe house too, and sometimes that does not help the signal. But anyway, we are okay now. SM (00:57:27): Okay. Could you discuss a little bit about the anti-war movement? Were the United States Senators at that time, and I am talking really the senators in the (19)60s and early (19)70s, were they sympathetic to the college campus protests? I say this because Nixon was emphatic right around the time of Kent State, where he said that they never affected him or his policies. They can do all the protesting they want. And Johnson, on the other hand, even though he withdrew, he saw Ted in 1968 and he saw what McCarthy did up in New Hampshire. SM (00:58:03): 1968, and he saw what McCarthy did up in New Hampshire. I think, and correct me if I am wrong, that he was seeing the college students, and what they were saying, and it was a failed policy in the end. So basically, I am saying, how important were the young activists at the time, in shaping the views of Congress? FH (00:58:21): I think they were quite important. As I mentioned, Jack Newfield wrote a book, he was a columnist for the Village Voice, he wrote a book called I think, the Prophetic Minority. So his idea was the people particularly the students who were protesting against the war, were a minority to start with. But they were a prophetic bunch of minority, they were going to become a majority. I think that is exactly what happened. Very early right away in the Senate there were a lot of people, Robert Kennedy was one, and so was Ted Kennedy, and George McGovern, and Gaylord Nelson, and some others who I think began to react to that. I think McCarthy came to it late, but for example, I came to it late, but even before I changed my public position, about before, I was busy with the current commission, which is a full-time job in regards to riot. I sort of suspected be to focusing on this before. My daughter, Catherine Harris, now Catherine Harris [inaudible]. She was a student at Harvard and [inaudible] a protest. SM (01:00:09): Hello? Hello? FH (01:00:16): The effect of those student activists against the war, was especially pronounced when members of Congress had some contact from their own family members, student family members, or directly without the students. And that was certainly true in my case, my daughter Catherine Harris, that was a Harvard student and she came down one weekend with a group of other Harvard students, to take part in an anti-war protest, in Washington DC. This group camped out at our house in McLean, Virginia. The next morning it was just really was very moving to me, as I watched them prepare for their riot, I mean for their protest. They were worried about a police riot, they were worried about getting beat up. So they pinned to their clothes, their contact information, their names, and phone numbers, and so forth. They tapped to their wrist some gauze that had Vaseline on it, that they were going to use. How they knew how to do all this? I do not know. They were going to use in case they got into tear gas. Here they then bravely marched off, these kids to take part in this anti-war protest. SM (01:02:09): Wow. FH (01:02:21): I found that in just overwhelmingly moving. I think there must have been a lot of other situations like that, where members of Congress saw the same thing. In addition to the public protests, both all that had begun to work. SM (01:02:23): As a person who was heavily involved in the campaign of (19)68, began the campaign of Senator Humphrey. Chicago in 1968, was like the epitome of all the tragedies that happened that year. From Dr. King's assassination, Bobby's assassination happened early in the year. President Johnson announces he was not going to run, and there were some riots going on. Just everybody knew that something was going to happen in Chicago, and it did. What are your thoughts as, what were your thoughts then, as a person who was an elected leader in Congress? Secondly, as a person who was helping the campaign to see these students and police going at each other, and there were even skirmishes inside, with some of the newsmen being arrested, I remember Dan Rather was arrested, or he was taken away. It was unbelievable. FH (01:03:26): Well, 1968 was just a horrible year for America. Not only that situation, and the convention, and struggle. Also, the earlier assassination of Robert Kennedy, and then the later assassination of Dr. King. Walter Mondale and I, as I said, we were co-chairs with the Humphrey campaign and brought in Mario Bryan, to sort of spearhead it, prior to the convention. We, Mondale and I, started seeing what was likely to happen in Chicago, went to the Attorney General Ramsey Park. That Johnson had sort of put in charge of planning for the convention, Lyndon Johnson had, and we asked him to change the location of the convention to Miami. That was our only other choice, because the Republicans were planning on having their convention in Miami. So the logistics would work on a sort of price basis, and we told Ramsey Park what our concerns were about their Chicago situation, and Mayor Daley, and so forth, the planned protest. He did not agree, I am sure he was protecting something, those feelings, something obligated to Mayor Daley. So we could not get it changed, and our worst fears were realized. We not only had those huge protests against the war and against the auction, but we had all sorts of strikes, communication strikes, [inaudible] strikes. The city was just in a mess, and one scene that was indelible in my mind, backstage of convent watching on closed circuit television, because a lot of it was not on television. My daughter Catherine, and my son Brian, and I, sitting in tears watching the clubbing of these kids and all that. I went out once and rescued a paraplegic Vietnam veteran Tommy Frazier, in his wheelchair up against the hotel where we were, [inaudible] good police cut him into the hotel. Way up on the-the top floors of our hotel, the tear gas came all the way up there. So, it was just a horrible thing, then when the Humphrey. SM (01:06:57): That me again? Hello? What is going on here? What is going on here? At the end of the Chicago convention there? FH (01:07:00): Yeah, I left the convention after we had had Howard Kennedy's vaccination and then we had all terrible, well Humphrey backed down temporarily on the anti-Vietnam war flank, and we did not get that speech until later. Then the horrible, what the Citizen Commission called, the police riot in Chicago, at the convention. I left there very dispirited and depressed, and I did not get involved again in the campaign until much later, when Larry O'Brien, by then partly my doing I was in on asking him, had become the chairman of the Democratic Party. He asked me, he called me and asked me, to join Humphrey's plane. To be sure that the speech he was-was going to give on national television out of Po Lake, would be a strong enough anti-war speech. So I got back in his campaign then, but that is a horrible year. SM (01:08:07): Yeah. One other thing too I just wanted to mention here, is about Martin Luther King's speech against the Vietnam War. Did that surprise you? Or you thought it was appropriate too, because he was criticized heavily, within the civil rights community? FH (01:08:26): Well, I thought it was a justified thing. It was quite logical with what else he was saying, but I did not really focus that much on it at the time. I was very much involved with the current commission on Civil Rights, and the anti-poverty program like we recommended. SM (01:08:58): What are your thoughts on all those movements that evolved in the late (19)60s, and early (19)70s? We had the women's movement that many people say evolved because of the sexism that was prevalent within the civil rights and anti-war movements. Of course they went on to form the National Organization for Women, and other groups. Again, we talked briefly about the Native American movement, but the period 1969, to (19)73, was a very strong period with Alcatraz in (19)69, and Wounded Knee in (19)73. Of course, you had the environmental movement with Earth Day in 1970, you had Stonewall in (19)69, that was linked to the gay and lesbian movement, kind of inspired it. Then at the very same time within the civil rights movement, during these mid to late (19)60s, you had the more of a black power mentality. Where you had Malcolm X challenging Bayard Rustin. Or Stokely Carmichael challenging Dr. King. Concept of, say some people thought nonviolence going to violence. So that you had, what you had in the early (19)60s, were people like Dr. King, James Farmer, Roy Wilkins, Whitney Young, John Lewis, and Robert Moses or Bob Moses. Then in the later (19)60s, you have Stokely Carmichael, Eldridge Cleaver, Kathleen Cleaver, H. Rap Brown, Huey Newton, Bobby Seal, Angela Davis, Fred Hampton, a whole different type of a mentality. I know I am giving an awful lot here, what are your thoughts on these movements that evolved in that period? Because the (19)70s, seemed to be the period where a lot of them really gained strength. Then when the (19)80s came, and they kind of seemed to go separate? FH (01:10:44): In 1965, I made a trip with Senator Birch Bayh of Indiana, down to in the number of Latin American countries. In one, in Peru, in Lima in it they had the oldest university in this hemisphere, San Marcos University, there in Lima. And found that it was closed down, that the activist students had taken over the campus and they closed down the university. We both thought to ourselves, well that is very interesting that students here and elsewhere in the world have become very active, and we do not see that at home. Well it is just a matter of, wait a minute and you would. The same thing was true, the civil rights movement, I think, began to show people that you have got to stand up and not just beg for what is yours and rightfully yours, but you have got to demand it. We saw that with the student population then, we saw it with women. Frantz Fanon had written that, "Oppressed people," and studies showed this was absolutely true, "Come to have the same, hold the same bad areas about themselves, that the dominant society has." We will not really work, and we are not reliable, or women cannot be managers, and just that. "How you get out of that," he wrote, "Was confrontation." I think, he believed violence. I think it is true, it takes confrontation for people to change their self-image. I think what changed, or the main thing that changed for example, in regard to African Americans in the country, after 200 years. Was that they came to view themselves differently, and they came to feel that they had to stand up. In the process of standing up to authority, they became different people. That is what happened I think with students, with the African-Americans, then with Indians, Indians and Hispanics for example, women profited from the African-American example, but without so much of the terrible violence being practiced against African-Americans. I was very much involved together with my then wife, LaDonna Harris. With people like Gloria Stein, and Betty Friedan, and others formation of the national organization for Women, of Women, the National Organization of Women. And the Women's Democratic talk and so forth. I was involved with them when they eventually ringed around the capital building in action against, the protest against the Vietnam War. I saw that Betty Friedan was quite right, that the old [inaudible] concept, that women had to change their consciousness. They had to begin to change the way they thought about themselves, and that is what had happened in all these groups. So that for example, the success that African-Americans had eventually, in changing the laws and practices. Came as a result of their own effort. SM (01:15:13): I know the environmental movement in Earth Day in 1970, Gaylord Nelson, he met with the anti-war group to make sure he was not stepping on their toes. Because they had just had the moratorium in (19)69, and they used to teach in. So even that movement at the very beginning, Senator Nelson was, I am glad he was honored this year at the 40th anniversary, because he is the man that made it all happen. FH (01:15:44): Absolutely. He was truly a visionary in regard to that, and the poor people were really that conscious of it. That is a movement too, as your question indicates that benefited from the example of the African-American correction. SM (01:16:03): Just a thought, because you have seen this today being a professor on universities, the movements became so special interest. One of the critics, the critics today, the conservative critics say that all these movements, and throw the gay and lesbian movement in there too. FH (01:16:16): Yeah. SM (01:16:17): Became so special interest, that there seems to be no unity today. In the very beginning they were working together, you could see them at protests, but now they seem to be more insular. Am I correct? This is a perception I have. Do you think that groups have become more insular, and they were not working with the other groups anymore, they were all just doing their own thing? FH (01:16:42): Well maybe that is probably true. I do not know. I think that the main problem is, it is both an advancement and a retreat in a way, is that all over the country, I do not care what city you go in, you find all sorts of really successful, vigorous local citizen effort of various kinds. Whether it is against banks redlining poor areas, or black areas. Or against some utility raising freight unjustly, or whatever. In every community in this country, there are those kinds of efforts going on. It is just amazing, and quite successfully in the local community. My friend Jim Hightower. SM (01:17:36): Oh, yeah, the journalist. FH (01:17:38): Yeah, and a great text to the populist, but he says, and this is the thing we had to fight to do this when I ran for president, is that many of these people, they are willing to work in a place giving out the free food to poor people, but they somehow do not see that you have got to get active in politics in order to change things. So that there will not be so many poor and hungry people, and Hightower feels, and worked for this. That if you could get those people like that, all they seeing their common interests and understanding that if they did not get active in politics and work together, they would be adjusted in principle majority. I think that is a tremendous populous challenge, and one that Hightower is working on, and that I also talk about. SM (01:18:45): When you ran for president in (19)72, and (19)76, what did you learn most about America, that maybe surprised you before you ran? And, what did you learn about young people, that you did not know? FH (01:18:57): Just about what I said, I will give you an example. One time I went to Hattiesburg, Mississippi and I have put together a tremendous rally. This was in (19)76, (19)72 really, I did not run for president, so much as I jogged. I did not ever enter in, I did not ever, was not able to raise money and get the kind of people that had already signed up with for government. (19)76, I really ran for president. Anyway, I put together this meeting down there which is sort of a metaphor for the whole campaign, and what I learned. There were a lot of African Americans in the crowd, a lot of Choctaw Indians, from nearby reservation. A lot of what I jokingly called, but truthfully called my redneck kin folks, my dad's people all came from Mississippi. I told that group when I got up to talk I said, I was in Minnesota last night, and I told them I was on my way to Hattiesburg, Mississippi and that I was going to put together here the darnedest, the best I could say, the best political rally anybody ever saw, or the damnedest race riot. One or the other. Everybody laughed sort of nervously and so forth. I said, my feeling is you do not have to love each other, I wish you would. All you have to do is recognize that you have common interests and that if you get yourself together, you are a majority in this country. I said, I came down here when I was 12 years old and stayed where the great aunt, who had an elderly black couple come and clean her house all day, washed all the sheets, and aired all the mattresses and everything, washed down the walls of this pine house. She paid them with a jar of end green beans, and a bucket of ribbon cane syrup for their daily work. I am sure she did not realize, that that was one of the causes for the fact that a lot of folks were working for 25 cents an hour. Afterwards I had a great uncle come up me, he had tears in his eyes, and he called me Freddy and he said, "Freddy, I have been waiting all my life to hear somebody talk like that." I think that is the kind of thing that was in the country, we talked to people about their own self-interest that would work. For example, I spoke that same year in Akron, Ohio, where most of the people in the audience were rubber workers. Somebody asked me a question about gay rights and I said, "I think the government has got enough to do, without worrying about what people are doing in the privacy of their own homes." It did not fit in the flow. I said, I really thought it was true. Like George Wallace said at the time, "You be to get the hay down where the goats can get at it." SM (01:22:53): Let me change my tape. FH (01:22:53): I think it is the McGovern, are you ready? SM (01:23:04): Yep, I am ready. FH (01:23:05): I thought at the time, that if McGovern could talk that way and couch these matters, in terms of the death interest of his listeners. He could have put that thing together. Instead what Nixon was able to do, and then later Reagan, was to appeal to people's concerns, and fears, and so forth. That trumped what would have been sensible off on economic. SM (01:23:49): Both you and your wife LaDonna, have been involved with Native American issues all of your lives. FH (01:23:54): Yeah. SM (01:23:55): Where is the movement today? I have read some books on the, that the Native American movement was actually pretty strong even in the (19)50s, and the (19)60s. Then of course, then the American Indian movement came about. What were the successes of the 1960s, and (19)70s, with respect to Native American issues? Your thoughts on the American Indian movement, which people say it was only four years from (19)69, to (19)73. It started where they overtook Alcatraz, and then it ended with the violence at Wounded Knee. When you think of the American Indian movement, I think of Dennis Banks, there is one other person I forget his name now, there is two that come to the forefront. FH (01:24:39): Yeah. SM (01:24:41): Just your thought about that? FH (01:24:43): Dennis I thought was, he was a very sensible and steady person, not a kind of wild radical. But I did not agree with a lot of Roseanne people, or lot of the SDS student people. Violence as a tactic, I think that was actually wrong. I often heard people advocating, in those days, violence as a tactic. Who themselves, would not be found within 100 miles of the actual violence. They sort of this thing, let you and him fight. I thought that violence was often hurting people, and was inhumane therefore, and that it was impractical. That you could not beat the government, or those with power. Because, they wind up having a hell of a lot more guns than you got. That set us back somewhat I think, people who advocated or used violence, on a whole range of those issues. It was the more activists, and really very strong and big activists, my former wife Ladonna, who actually accomplished it. What happened with Indian movement, is they were successful. We were able to write into the laws all sorts of provisions for self-determination, for Indians to run their own programs, to run their own schools, and to run their own governments. Princeton governments, courts, Indian courts and so forth, and that is the situation today. There is still, of course those that have not been able to, or were not able to set up casinos, gambling casinos, are still struggling economically. It is pretty interesting that Indians who for a long time were victimized by black people, are now making money off of them. SM (01:27:01): Yeah, that that is right. FH (01:27:01): I do not like gang. FH (01:27:01): ... making money off of them. SM (01:27:01): Yeah, that is right. FH (01:27:03): I do not like gambling, but it has provided a way by which tribes have been able to [inaudible] their governments and their economies, and also to preserve their traditions and ancient ways. SM (01:27:20): When I think of the last 20 or 30 years in terms of writers, of course, you think of Dee Brown and I think of Mr. Alexie, Sherman Alexie- FH (01:27:30): [inaudible] yeah. SM (01:27:30): ...who was another great writer, and Vine Deloria. FH (01:27:35): Yeah, Vine. SM (01:27:36): But then there was also Ward Churchill, who has become very controversial. FH (01:27:40): Well, I do not think he is Indian, really. SM (01:27:42): Yeah, I do not know what your thoughts are. He has written a lot about the Native Americans. As a lawyer, what were the most significant laws that were passed after World War II during this time frame between (19)46 and 2010? We are talking about the years that boomers have been alive. I have asked this question and I started out by saying that I think Roe v. Wade in (19)73 and certainly the Brown vs. Board of Education (19)54 and the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act, (19)64, (19)65, are those the four that really stand out in terms of impact on America, as well as even I could say impact on the generation? FH (01:28:25): And I think they are symbolic of a lot of other laws, and I think because a lot of them fit in with what we came to call self-determination for American Indians. It gives people more control over their own lives and knocked down the barriers that kept them from becoming what they want to become. SM (01:28:52): Are there any laws that you would like to add to that you think were very important, particularly for this generation that is now between the age of the 48 and 64? FH (01:29:03): Well, one important development was we moved toward, but in a fairly meager way, more of federal aid to education. And we need to do a great deal more in that respect, for smaller classrooms and better prepared teachers and so forth. And also a huge hole in our social fabric was the lack of any kind of national health program. And we have made a major step in the right direction there with Obama. Obama's election I think was really historic. And I think that while for the short run, the Republicans are able to delay and block a lot of what he is going to do and wants to do and said he would do, they are increasingly marginalizing themselves, I think. I mean, if you look at the demographic between number of Hispanics and African Americans, the greater progressive activism of students and all of that, I think makes things look pretty bad for the future for the Republicans, but we are going to win out more issues- SM (01:30:41): So the criticism of President Obama and some of the politicians of the left... I just interviewed a person a couple days ago. Why does he, and why does the left, and why did the liberals always think that they know better what to do about my life than I do? FH (01:30:57): I think that is a serious claim. That is simply not true. All of the things that Obama ran on and that he was pushing are supported by a majority of the people in the country [inaudible]. And he, after all, was elected. SM (01:31:16): Right. The Kerner Commission, you mentioned it earlier, but I want to talk about it now, which is the National Advisory Council on Civil Disorders. Why did LBJ form the committee? What were their findings? What were the main reasons for the riots? And was this a change? I guess I cannot read the file. Did this have anything to do about this change between what we called nonviolent protests, the Ghandian type of attitude that King professed, and the more violent protests that was actually happening in our cities? FH (01:31:57): Well, we had had a terrible riot in Watts, in the Black section of Los Angeles, in 1965. And we thought that was kind of an isolated thing, but it turned out to be a harbinger of things to come. We had some more of that in (19)66, but not a whole lot. And then terrible explosions in the Black sections of nearly every city in the summer of 1967, and caused enormous concern and fear. I got the Walter Mondale to co-author a resolution in the Senate to create a blue ribbon citizen commission to look into the causes and prevention of such a riot. And I had the resolution sent to my subcommittee that I chaired, the subcommittee on government research. And we held hearings. We had Daniel Patrick Moynihan, not yet in the Senate, and Whitney Young headed the National Open League as witnesses and [inaudible] about it. And then it occurred to me after a day or so that we did not have to wait until Congress passed the law and created that commission, but that the president could do it himself. So I got the majority leader, Mike Mansfield, to say he would bring it up with Johnson at his meeting that night with the president, and also talked with Douglass Cater on the president's staff, and suggested that he do that. And then it was announced that he was going to make a publicly televised speech doing that. And he called me just before his speech and he said, "I am going to appoint you to that commission that you have been talking about, and I am going to put you on it." And incidentally, he said, "I want you to remember" ... Well, first he said, "I do not want you to be like some of your colleagues and I appoint them to things and they never show up." And I said, "Well, I will show up. I will work at it." Another thing, he said, "Fred, I want you to remember you are a junction man." I said, "Yes, sir, I am a junction man." And he said, "If you forget it," he said, "I will take my pocket knife and cut your Peter off." There were some people were back in my living room, we were going to watch this thing on television. And I came back, they knew I was talking to president. They said, "What did he say? What did he say?" And I said, "Well, some of it was kind of personal." SM (01:35:07): Yeah, I heard he used to have meetings in his bathroom [inaudible]. FH (01:35:11): Oh, yeah. SM (01:35:12): And then of course, we met with Senator Fulbright when I was working at the university. And Senator Fulbright, when he went against Johnson, Johnson told him, "You will never be invited ever again to the White House." He never was, never invited to a dinner, nothing. There was a complete break. FH (01:35:32): Well, we started ... we had just a wonderful staff, David Ginsberg, who just died lately, [inaudible] lawyer, was our executive director, and put together a terrific staff. And we authorized a lot of academic studies and surveys, and then we divided into teams. John Lindsay, the mayor of New York, and I were one team. And we went to various places in the country where there had been riots. And John and I, for example, went to Cincinnati and Milwaukee and just spent the day walking around talking to people. And then we held interminable hearings. I got a room in the Capitol building where we met most of the time. Sometimes we met in the Indian Treaty Room, in the Executive Office Building. And we met days and days and days and days and days. And this was a commission written report. In these hearings, we had witnesses from J. Edgar Hoover to Martin Luther King, and lot in between. And we eventually voted line by line on every word that went into that report. What we found was that... well, the most famous words of course in the report were that America was moving toward two societies, one white, one Black, separate and unequal. And what most people cannot understand is that racism, white racism, is very much involved in what is happening in the ghettos or where people live with inferior schools, no transportation, no jobs or virtually no jobs. Jobs have moved out of the central city and gone to the suburbs or disappeared altogether, gone overseas. And so we recommended vigorous enforcement of the recently passed civil rights laws and massive new federal programs, particularly around jobs, but also the training and education and so forth. We know that a member of the commission leaked to Johnson the idea, I mean we learned later, "That this report," they said to him, "condones riots, and they do not have a good word to say about you." All of that was quite wrong. But our idea was that we would ask Johnson to continue our commission in operation for an extra six months so that we could lobby for and push for our findings for recommendations. And we set up already an official meeting where he would receive the report and so forth. But he canceled that. He would not see us, and he would not agree to have the commission's life extended. There were... both Hubert Humphrey, the vice president, for example, and Willard Wirtz, the Secretary of Labor, and others, who did endorse our findings. Willard Wirtz [inaudible] in the commission, in the words of the great American philosopher Pogo, has said that "We have met the enemy and he is us." SM (01:39:22): Golly. FH (01:39:22): And Robert Kennedy strongly supported our findings and recommendations and was involved in the Senate hearings where we appeared and [inaudible] the paperback edition of our report, which the New York Times published, was a bestseller, runaway bestseller, amazingly. And we made progress, America [inaudible] of race and poverty for about a decade after the report. But with the advent of the Reagan administration, that progress stopped and we began to go backwards. SM (01:40:09): I was reading one of your interviews that you did in 2008 on the web, and I love a quote here that the interviewer said, you remember this. You said in your announcement speech in 1972 something along the lines of, "A lot of people cannot believe America has ever been to the moon because they doubt the credibility of government." That is a classic quote. And then something else here, what you said in this interview that actually I think you have already talked about it, but I want to put it on record here. You said in response to the question to this interviewer, "No, no. Starting with the Vietnam War and with Richard Nixon, we have never recovered from the great skepticism of government. I think the skepticism about government is generally pretty healthy, but I do not like the aspect of it which came out of the Ronald Reagan years; the government cannot do anything right and everything you try turns out badly and so forth. I wish we had a little bit more skepticism of the military than we do, but it is going to be a while before we build back the sort of confidence in the government that we once had." I think that is beautiful. FH (01:41:18): That is absolutely true. I think it is true that one of the worst things that come out of the Reagan administration was that government cannot do anything right and that everything we tried, for example, even with a New Deal, failed. That is not true. Virtually everything we tried worked. We just quit trying it or we did not try it enough. And we began to move back toward doing something about all these problems with the election of Bill Clinton, but then we went the other way again with the eight years of George W. Bush. SM (01:41:59): Did- FH (01:42:00): [inaudible] a very heartening thing that Obama was elected, saying all the things that I believe in. SM (01:42:09): I interviewed Phyllis Schlafly, who I think is single-handedly responsible for the defeat of the Equal Rights Amendments. FH (01:42:16): That is right. SM (01:42:17): But do you believe ... And this is what she said. She said that she believes that the troublemakers of the (19)60s now run today's universities. And she says they have taken over women's studies, Black studies, Asian studies, Native American studies, environmental studies, Chicano studies, GLBT studies. She was mainly referring to women's studies, but the reference was there toward all of them. Do you believe that? FH (01:42:42): Well, she and her fellow right-wingers, they are always critical nowadays of universities and academia generally, because they say, "They need more balance than they need more Republican hired as teachers," and so forth. But it should occur to them, I think, that what most professors believe, they believe because it is correct and it is the sensible position, and that theirs is the more selfish and the incorrect position. SM (01:43:24): This is a university question, because you are a professor and have been one since the late (19)70s. And I spent 30- some years in higher ed. But what did universities of the (19)60s and (19)70s teach the universities of the (19)80s and beyond? Did they learn about the importance of student empowerment as opposed to student power? Or are they afraid that it could happen again, what happened in the (19)60s, more controls? What I have seen in some universities is they are trying to get more controls again over students. Students today are so busy, they do not have time to protest or even to be active, although they get involved in volunteer work. And even on college campuses today, space is allocated for protests. They just cannot go anywhere. They can only have a little dinky space on campus. And I know if I was a student, I would be fighting that, but- FH (01:44:17): I think there is a distinction in that respect between the faculty and the administration. I have found administration really nervous about any kind of student activism. It worries them. But faculty, I do not think tend to feel that way. They are closer to the students. And on students, I worry about these students being too serious and too intent on getting themselves credentialed with their college and university education. And up until the Obama election, I found them not willing to be active in politics, rather disdainful of politics, and back starting with Reagan, more reflective of their parents' conservative views than is today the case. Now but even then, and especially now, what I have found for years, many years, is that there is an extremely high percentage of students who were involved in some kind of service activity. And a lot of them also began to, I was glad to see, get involved in politics, with the campaign of Obama. I am worried about them, just as I am worried about a lot of progressives who supported Obama, that they were becoming sort of disappointed and disillusioned that everything he advocated and they thought they were fighting for by supporting him cannot be done right away. A lot of them did not realize what an intransigent bunch the Republicans are in Congress, and how the archaic rules of the Senate allow a minority to block [inaudible] majority, and just became disgusted with the long fight over health insurance and so forth, health reform. So I do not know what is going to happen, just a lot of those are not going to be active, I am afraid, in the 2010 Congressional race. We always lose seats, the president's party loses seats in the years after the election. And how many depends primarily on the condition of the economy. So we are going to lose seats. I am worried about disillusion rather than about the economy as to how many we lose. SM (01:47:08): One of the things that as a professor who has taught students from... You have probably taught three generations of students now- FH (01:47:14): Yeah. SM (01:47:15): ...the boomers, the Generation Xers that actually were born between 1965 and 1982, and then you have got the millennials that are in college right now- FH (01:47:25): [inaudible] SM (01:47:26): ...with the Generation Ys now being in elementary school. FH (01:47:30): That is right. SM (01:47:30): And I do not know if you sensed this when you were teaching in the (19)80s, but there seemed to be friction between Generation X and the boomers. We had panels on this, and I do not know if it was just our campus, or my observation is just my observation, but they seemed to have two reactions to the boomer generation. One is they are sick of hearing about the nostalgia, about what it was like then, with all the protests and activities and all the rock and all the music and all this stuff, or they have a feeling, "Gee, I wish I lived then, because you had causes that were important to you. We have nothing." And that was the Generation Xers. We are not talking millennials now. Did you sense that at all? FH (01:48:17): Well, I do not know. Here is my overall feelings [inaudible]. When I first started teaching back in 1976 at the University of New Mexico, we still had quite a few older professors who were still having trouble with affirmative action. My chairman said to me one time... We were talking about women, "We ought have more women on our faculty," is what I was saying. And he said, "You know what? I think we ought to just hire people on the basis of qualifications," with sort of the [inaudible] implied idea that if we gave special attention to hiring Black people and women, we were reducing the quality of the people we hired. But all of that has changed quite a bit. But what I found today is that white kids and Black kids really have no idea of how it used to be. And it embarrasses Black kids a little bit in my class when I talk about segregated water fountains, even. In Oklahoma, there was a law that Blacks and whites could not play chess together. And then much more bitter things like killings and lynchings and bombings, and so forth. It was a shock to people to really hear that from a person who lived it and knows it. And from young women, I used to hear this, it is getting a little better, I think, used to hear a lot of them saying, "Well, I think women ought to be able to go to law school and to med school and all right. And I think they ought to have equal pay for equal work, but I am not a feminist. I am not one of those feminists." But just by definition you are [inaudible] believe in those things. SM (01:50:28): Right. FH (01:50:31): But I think a lot of young people simply think, "Well the way things are now is the way they always have been and the way they were going to be." And it takes sort of eternal vigilance, as Abraham Lincoln said. SM (01:50:49): With your kids, did you have a generation gap? I can remember there is a LIFE magazine cover that showed the face of a student wearing sunglasses. I have it framed. And it shows the father and a son arguing. Was the generation gap... was it pretty strong then? And then I followed this up with an interview I had a couple days ago with James Fallows. You probably know him. FH (01:51:16): Yeah. SM (01:51:18): And I was reading something in a book, I am not sure if he said it, but there was a discussion where the generation gap was not that bad between parents and students. The generation gap is really between those who went to the Vietnam War and those who did not. The real gap is within the generation in between those who served in war and those who protested the war or evaded the draft or service. So the history books say the generation gap is pretty strong. FH (01:51:50): I think it was, probably, but it narrowed because of the kids, just like my daughter being against the Vietnam War before I came out against it, and what influence her own example and feelings had on me. Or even smoking, my youngest daughter as a little girl saying, "Daddy, why do you keep smoking?" Or on something even more mundane than that, you threw down the piece of trash or something: "Oh, daddy, you want to see beauty, you have got to leave beauty," straight off the television. So I think there was a generation gap. A bigger gap for a good while was an economic class gap. For example, my dad, [inaudible] farmer in southwest Oklahoma, and my son, he had hair... my son had the hair no longer than the Beatles. But at the time we thought that was long. And my dad would always make it a point to say to my son, "You look like a girl with that long hair." But eventually, and it was not too long after that, you see these country and Western stars out in Nashville with long hair and mustaches and so forth. So things began to change, but there was, I think, an economic class gap on these social issues. And perhaps to some degree there still is. SM (01:53:45): And also, you think there was that generational gap too between those who fought and those who did not? FH (01:53:49): I suppose that is true. And I think if there was resentment on the part of those who went to Vietnam against those who did not, that would be understandable, because here were people going to college and having a good time and doing all right, while these other people went off to the war. I never heard of what you now hear sometimes people say, that people were disdainful of the Vietnam veterans when they came home, or spit on them, or whatever. I never knew of any such thing as that. SM (01:54:34): Yeah. That leads me into my next question. Bear with me as I read this little information here on the Vietnam veteran, because I have gotten to know them quite well, a lot of them. And I pay my respects to the people who served this nation. I have gone to the Vietnam Memorial every year since 1994 on Memorial Day and Veterans Day to pay respects to Lewis Puller, who wrote Fortunate Son. But this is the question here: was the My Lai incident and others like it, including those scenes... I remember there was many scenes on television where Vietnam vets were using their lighters to burn down villages. Do you think that these were the main reasons why vets were treated so poorly upon their return to America, this kind of baby killer image? Secondly, from the veterans I have talked to, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, the American Legions, did not want them in as their members, even though they run the organization now. And I worked on a university campus in my very first job, and they were treated so poorly that affirmative action became... they were put into affirmative action plans, which now included hiring Vietnam vets. There seemed to be a hostility on the home front that had been against the policies of the government, but I did not sense that people disliked the vets. They disliked the government that sent them to Vietnam. So there was a lot [inaudible] - SM (01:56:03): ...the symptoms of Vietnam. So there was a lot going on here. And my final thing, when I throw this in here, is that people who did serve, and came back, also oftentimes had bad experiences at health centers and in hospitals. They had served, like Kennedy had asked them to, but they were not treated well, even in the hospitals. And you can sense this over the years of battles over Agent Orange and post-traumatic stress disorder, which now for all Vietnam vets is recognized as a problem, but it took 20-some years, "Prove that you became stressful and have anxiety due to your experiences." So there was a lot happening here. And I do not know what your perceptions are of Vietnam vets, but just in reaction to what I just said here. FH (01:56:54): Well, I never knew of that kind of mistreatment of Vietnam veterans by people back home. But I do know this, even now we have had problems with the Veterans Administration operating in a bureaucratic way. Just like insurance companies try to pull their losses down, and their payments down, I think the Vietnam... I mean the Veterans people, even now, have been much too strict and rigid in recognizing legitimate veteran claims in regard to health and so forth. But I never saw that. I saw the other thing in Oklahoma, where particularly early, until fairly late in the war, where a majority of Americans were for Johnson, and Johnson's war policy on the Vietnam War. When I was beginning changing in the other direction. I remember, for example, I was holding town meetings around the state shortly after the My Lai incident became known, and I had a sheriff and his wife in one meeting, and I think they were drinking a little bit too, so they were pretty vociferous and forceful in the way they talked, but they just thought it was terrible. I said, "Well, now wait a minute, we are going to find out more about the facts, but you do not believe that our people ought to be shooting women, and children, and the innocent non-combatants and so forth, do you?" And they both said, "Hell, they are going to grow up, and they are the enemy, and they ought not to be around there if they are not part of the Viet Cong and supporting them." I heard that kind of stuff a lot, until very late in the war. But I never did see, maybe it is because it was Oklahoma, I never did see the anti-vet. SM (01:59:09): Did you have a chance to work with any Native American vets who talked about their experiences? Because even... Again, I read too much. And, again, it is only based on what you have read, and what people have told you, it may not always be fact. But that Native American Vietnam veterans were also felt put upon when they served over there, because they were automatically put on point, because the discrimination there was, well, they are Native American, and they must be great leaders, in terms of being heads of units or whatever. And so a lot of them died, because they were put on as the front of their units there. FH (01:59:51): Well, I never was aware of that, and I had not heard it. What I noticed always among American Indians, a very proud tradition of serving in the military and- SM (02:00:10): Yes, that is true. FH (02:00:11): A warrior tradition. And they are much honored in the tribe and at home. We never had a powwow, or any kind of thing like that, in Oklahoma, during or after that war, that it did not start off with some kind of tribute to the veterans and- SM (02:00:31): Good. Well, that is good news. FH (02:00:33): Yeah. SM (02:00:33): I think that is true, they are very proud. But sometimes it upset them that they used qualities that they thought they possessed, and it cost many, many lives in Vietnam. FH (02:00:48): Yeah. I just do not know about that. SM (02:00:51): Yeah. Well, we are getting toward the end here. I got a few more questions here. There has been some commentaries too where general statements are made about blaming the generation, or that period of the (19)60s and (19)70s for the problems we have in our society today. Issues like the drug culture, the welfare state, big law government versus small government, the creation of the isms, the divorce rate, all these things, the family is important. So that period of the (19)60s and the (19)70s is oftentimes condemned by many, probably on the right, more conservatives, as opposed to liberals. Do you believe that? FH (02:01:35): Well, I think there were just millions of people who, as I was growing up and entering into politics and so forth, who were living lives of quiet desperation, and, well, they decided not to be quiet anymore. Much to their credit. They changed America. They have changed the way they thought about themselves. They developed a much better and stronger self-image in the process. And they changed us too. And they changed society much for the better. So I think that is one of the proud results of the (19)60s, is America is much closer to its ideal than it has ever been in history. SM (02:02:26): I know you cannot generalize on 74 million people, because that is how many there were. And some people will not even respond to this, except based on personal experience of people they knew, but are there any positive or negative qualities that you can place on the generation? And when I say generation, I am meaning everyone. This project that I am involved in here, it is not just about white men and women, it is about African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, gay and lesbian. It is not so much about Asian culture, because we do not hear a whole lot about that during this timeframe. But how do you respond to that? FH (02:03:06): I think that they are much more aware of the world, and how it worked, and of their place in it. And they are more self-confident than was true of generations before them. I talked to, in the old days, I talked to people like my uncles who went off World War II, and they did not know anything about the world, and they had no self-confidence. They felt like victims. The times were hard, and they had a hard time finding a job that was worth a damn and so forth. I think most people today have a much stronger feeling about things like that than the people- SM (02:04:01): In your opinion, when did the (19)60s begin, and when did it end, and what was the watershed moment? FH (02:04:08): Well, I think the watershed moment probably was with the election of John Kennedy. He was the of that post-war generation himself, and he said the torch passed to a new generation of Americans. And this was a different crowd. I entered the University of Oklahoma in 1948. And a lot of people that were in college with me then, or just before me, were veterans. And they were the kind of people who were not going to take that shit anymore. It used to be, I understood, the hazing of freshman, and all that kind of stuff, and people were ordered around and so forth. And these were people that just were not going to stand for it. And it rubbed off on the rest of us. So I think when John Kennedy came in, in 1960, that tendency was accelerated. SM (02:05:18): So the beginning was when Kennedy came in, and the watershed moment. When did it end? FH (02:05:25): Well, I do not think it has ended. I think it has been renewed with Obama. We backslid during the Reagan, and Bush, and the second Bush times, to some degree. But, still, I think people just, they will not stand for being held down and pushed around anymore. And I think that is all for the good. And that is true of people who are right-wingers too, they do not want the government telling them what to do. SM (02:05:58): That is the Tea Party movement that is going on now. FH (02:06:01): That is right. People see, they know... I think the Tea Party movement... People see all these changes in the country, for God's sake a Black getting elected President of the United States, and things are changing, and the world seems as dangerous, and I think they just are very fearful, and unhappy, and angry. And the kind of remedies they talk about do not fit with what the fears are. For example, they say stop raising our taxes, and Obama's taxing us. Well, there is recent studies that show that our combined tax burden now for individuals, their state, local, and federal, is the lowest since the 1950s. But people's perception is, "Well, they just keep taxing us, telling us what to do and so forth." There is just a lot of that. But nobody... I never got elected by a unanimous vote. There has always been a lot of people that are dragging along their thinking, and frame it, and I suppose that is always going to be true. We have to, I think, do our best, as Obama has tried, to reach out to them, and fill their fears, and appeal to their self-interest in doing the right thing. But some of them we just are not going to get. SM (02:07:45): ...We are here too. Because I got... And your answers are just fantastic. Vietnam... In the university, being in there for so many years, two words that seem to really stir people up when we are dealing with foreign policy on any particular issue, if you mention the word Vietnam, or you mention the word quagmire. FH (02:08:10): Yes. SM (02:08:11): I can remember, during the Gulf War, when Vietnam vets were coming out saying that they were against the war, a lot of them. Of course, then it kind of waned, it did not last very long. We lost some lives. But certainly the Iraq war, and where we are in Afghanistan right now, and I know it upsets... Many of them are Boomers. They get tired. They say this has nothing to do with Vietnam, and has nothing to do with the quagmire. They do not like going back to that period, because I think, whether it stirs up memories they want to forget, or they want to have amnesia, or... What I am getting at here is that when President Reagan came into power, he said, "We are back." It was kind of a feeling that we are back. And then President Bush number one said the Vietnam syndrome is over. And my feeling about this is that... President Reagan said we were going to have a strong military again. The military fell apart in Vietnam, now we are going to build it up again, and have a strong military, and we are going to bring values back. Our values are gone. And then Bush saying this Vietnam syndrome was over, saying we do not have to talk about it anymore. It is a different world. Your thoughts on those kinds of attitudes by those two presidents? FH (02:09:27): Well, the thing, to me, that Republicans began, especially with Reagan, to talk about, we got to get back to family values. Here was Reagan, he never went to church. He had a dysfunctional family, but was talking about family values. Or Phyllis Schlafly, she is against the women working and so on, and that is all she has ever done. SM (02:09:56): Or Newt Gingrich talking about values, and he is running around with a woman while his wife is fighting cancer. FH (02:10:03): Absolutely. All of that seems awfully hypocritical to me. But I think that over time America rejects elitist warmongers like Henry Kissinger, and Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush, and rejects their idea that it is just terrible that people have gotten involved in making foreign policy and national security policy, because it puts too much limits. Democracy has a hell of a time on the world stage, because the people limit what they can do. I think that is a damn good thing. I think I am for a populist of foreign and national security politicians. It has limits on what they can do, because the two worst things a government can do to us is tax us and kill us, or send us to get killed. I would like to have a lot of popular restriction on that. It is, I think, very difficult for a democracy like America to be involved in a long war, because people began to question, as they are now with Afghanistan, saying, "What the hell are we doing? Is this in the interest of our people?" And they begin to say, "Wait a minute, we ought to get out of this. We got a lot of problems here at home we ought to be dealing with, instead of this. Are not we killing a whole lot of innocent people in the process?" I think that is a good development. They will let you do it for a while, but over the long pull, they are going to begin to ask a lot of questions. Just as this Afghan war has become unpopular now. That really irritates the elitists, who some I have mentioned, like Henry Kissinger, and George Bush, and Dick Cheney and so forth, but I think it is good for America to speak. SM (02:12:10): This is a question I have asked everybody that is been involved in my interviews, even way back to Senator McCarthy back in 1996. That is a question of healing. I used to take students to Washington DC. I got to know Senator Nelson when we brought him to our campus twice for Earth Day events. And after his first speech, I said I was trying to get ahold of Senator Fulbright. I knew he had a stroke, but he had not said yes, or had not said no, to meeting our students. And finally Senator Nelson said, when he was here, "I will contact him. I will get him over to the Wilderness Society." So it began the first of nine senator visits, where Senator Nelson gave us almost two and a half hours with each of these unbelievable people. And the question, when we went to see Senator Muskie, he had just gotten out of the hospital, he was not feeling well, and he had just seen the Ken Burn series on the Civil War, which had really touched him. But the students came up with this question, and this is the question... Due to all the divisions that took place in America in the 1960s and (19)70s, divisions between Black and white, between male and female, between gay and straight, those who supported the war, those who were against the war, those who supported the troops, and were against the troops... Then they brought up the riots in the cities that they had seen in the (19)60s. These were all people who were not born at the time. Do you feel that the Boomer generation that experienced all these terrible events are going to go to their graves... That includes not only the activists, but those 85 percent who were not activists, they were going to go to their graves not healing from a lot of these divisions that were part of their lives? Like the people in the Civil War never healed. That was the question. Do you think we have, as a nation, and particularly the Boomer generation of 74 million, that there is a problem with healing? FH (02:14:14): I think most are healing, and will heal, but we are always going to have a minority of people, just like in the South, who still want to complain about the war between the states as they call it. And there is a lot of people who, they do not like to say it aloud these days, but who are worried about women getting out of their place, and the pushy African Americans, and these longhaired kids that are not so longhaired anymore, but that are much too activist and independent. There is always going to be people like that. But I think there is healing. And I think Obama's election showed it. SM (02:15:11): Yeah. I think Senator Nelson mentioned that, he said, "People do not walk around Washington DC with a lack of healing on their sleeves." But he said it permanently affected the body politic. FH (02:15:25): Yeah. SM (02:15:26): And Senator Muskie did not even comment, because the students wanted... They thought they had a golden opportunity, here was the man that was picked at the last minute to be Humphrey's running mate. FH (02:15:35): Yes. SM (02:15:35): And he did not even comment on 1968. He looked up and he... Actually, he is pretty emotional about it. He looked up and he said, "We have not healed since the Civil War over the issue of race." And then he went on to talk about that. Never even mentioned 1968, which meant the divisions go back to the Civil War. So that was a pretty interesting experience. FH (02:15:58): The decision came down to me and Muskie, did you know that? SM (02:16:01): Yes. FH (02:16:01): Yeah. SM (02:16:02): Yeah, I knew that. Well, actually I have read that in books. I read a lot of history. I read your book too, many years ago, but I was rereading it again, and did you feel, right to the last minute, you were going to be the person? FH (02:16:20): Well, he had us up to his hotel room, and each in an adjoining bedroom, at the last, and each of us did not know the other was in an adjoining bedroom. But he came in and talked to me awhile. And then he would say, "I will be right back." Do not know where he is going, but it later turned out he was going across the hall into the bedroom with Muskie. SM (02:16:48): Oh my gosh. FH (02:16:56): And then he came back again, we talked some more. Did I know anything that he should know that might make it difficult for him to choose me and whatever? Then he went across the hall. And then he came back. The last time he came back, had tears in his eyes. We were very close friends. He had tears in his eyes. Humphrey was very emotional. And he said, "Fred, I am going to have to choose the younger man." And so I said, "Well, if that is your decision, I will nominate." And he said, "Will you?" And I said, "Yes." He said, "Will you go with me to tell him?" I said, "Yes." I did not know where we were going, but we walked across the hall, opened the door, walked in there, there was a bunch of people just standing by the bureau over in the corner. And Humphrey said what is probably the longest sentence I have ever heard, he said, "Ed, shake hands with the man who is going nominate you." SM (02:17:49): That is a great anecdote. FH (02:17:52): And I did nominate him. I was the one who nominated him. SM (02:17:57): I heard that ... I did not know him that well, but I heard he had a temper at times. FH (02:18:03): Oh yeah. SM (02:18:03): But, oh my God, the students loved him. He was so good with the students. You could tell he loved students. FH (02:18:09): You mean Muskie or Humphrey? SM (02:18:12): No, I am talking about Muskie. FH (02:18:14): Yes, Muskie, that is true, both. Yeah. See, I told you that though, because what Humphrey gave in his reason, which was a good way to say it properly too, because it did not indicate he saw any fault in me. SM (02:18:33): Was not it because you were too young? FH (02:18:35): Yeah, that is what he said. SM (02:18:36): You were 37 years old. FH (02:18:37): Yeah. He said, "Fred, I am going to have to choose the younger man." That is why I told you that anecdote, because that is the reason he gave, and I think maybe that was the main reason. SM (02:18:51): Yep. FH (02:18:52): He later told somebody that he thought he and I were too... I do not know how he... That Muskie seemed stable compared to me and him. We were both very enthusiastic and so forth. I think the age thing was an indication, sort of, of how he felt about it. SM (02:19:21): One of the qualities, that may be a good quality, but I would like your thoughts, is that this generation is often looked upon as the generation that does not trust people, because so many of the leaders lie to them, whether it be Watergate, Nixon, the Gulf of Tonkin with Johnson, even President Eisenhower lying on TV, that we found out later about U-2. There were questions about Kennedy and his knowledge of the overthrow of the Diem regime, although I do not believe President Kennedy ever wanted him killed, but he just wanted him sent off to France or whatever. And, of course, McNamara and the numbers game that was really not really true. Do you think- FH (02:20:02): Well, I think that is absolutely true. There has always been, I think, a very healthy skepticism about the government. I have thought there was too much of it, but I see the justification for it. SM (02:20:24): Yeah. FH (02:20:27): When people say, "Well, we lowered your taxes," well there is a minority of people, the teabaggers and ... who do not believe it. Or say this health thing is going be good for you. SM (02:20:43): When I first started asking this question on trust, I did it because I remember a Psychology 101 class that I took in college, and I graduated in 1970 from undergrad, and it was basically the professor saying, "If you cannot trust people, then you will not be a success in life. Trust is a very important quality you must possess." And so I said, "Well, if my generation did not trust anybody, and they are passing this on to their kids and grandkids, that is not good." But then you take Political Science 101, and it says basically that... Because I was a history political science major just like you as an undergrad. And I learned that trust shows that democracy is alive and well, that dissent is part of our society, so lacking trust is a good quality. FH (02:21:30): You bet. I think so too. We went through the (19)50s, where we were too satisfied, and did not ask enough questions, and so things got worse. Well, I am sorry, but I am going to have to... They were waving to me here, I have got to take off. SM (02:21:46): Can I ask one last question? FH (02:21:47): Yeah, you bet. SM (02:21:48): What do you think the lasting legacy will be of this generation when they pass on? The best history books are often written 50 years after an event, like the best ones of World War II are being written now. What do you think the sociologists and historians will say after the last Boomer has passed away? Kind of like what they do over in Gettysburg, when the last Civil War soldier died, they have a statue to him over there, he died in 1924. But what do you think they will be saying about this generation that grew up after World War II overall? FH (02:22:34): I think they were more self-confident, and more concerned about others, in addition to themselves. SM (02:22:50): Well, very good. Well, Senator, thank you very much. FH (02:22:53): All right. SM (02:22:53): I do not know, you have mentioned your wife, or your former wife, she would be great. FH (02:22:58): Yeah. SM (02:22:59): How would I get ahold of her? FH (02:23:02): LaDonna Harris, and I do not have it right in front of me here the... Well, let us see, if you hold on a second, I can find it. SM (02:23:09): Either that, or you can email it to me. FH (02:23:11): Yeah. She is in... Well, I will just tell you. Hold on a second. I will look it up. She lives here in Albuquerque. I have been remarried for nearly 30 years. But let me just, if you hold on just a second here, I will look on my Blackberry, and I will tell you what... SM (02:23:30): If she has an email or... FH (02:23:35): Yeah, her email is AIO, that is the name of the organization which she heads, Americans for Indian Opportunities, aio@aio.org. SM (02:23:52): Aio.org. And the last question, how would I get ahold of Senator Mondale? FH (02:23:57): I do not know. Somebody just talked to him the other day, and sent me greetings. He is up in Minnesota, but I will be darned if I- SM (02:24:07): Yeah, I want to try to get ahold of him. And also Geraldine Ferraro is another one, but she is in New York. Senator, thank you very, very much. FH (02:24:15): All right. SM (02:24:16): I will keep you updated on everything. You will see the transcripts. I will need your picture though. FH (02:24:21): Okay. SM (02:24:22): But I will email you on that. FH (02:24:24): All right. SM (02:24:25): You have a great day. FH (02:24:26): All right. Thanks a million. SM (02:24:27): And thanks for serving our country, because you did a great job. FH (02:24:30): Well, thank you. That is very generous of you. Thank you. SM (02:24:33): Yep. Bye now. (End of Interview) Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Senator Fred Harris Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Harris, Fred R., 1930- ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Legislators—United States--Oklahoma; College teachers; Harris, Fred R., 1930--Interviews Description An account of the resource Fred Harris is a former Democratic United States Senator elected twice from the state of Oklahoma. Harris received his Bachelor and Law degree from the University of Oklahoma. He won a special election in 1964, succeeding Robert S. Kerr. In 1976, he became a professor of Political Science at the University of New Mexico. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2010-07-01 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.128a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.128b Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 144:35 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/a7b00200acf255c9a97c00f7170e0b82.jpg 8783fbf6c770d20c1ea405a2ffbb7c73 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/ec70fd84868024a7fb0210d2ca40e02a.mp3 786bbae4a9e91e46ecfc3ba9841107da Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Audio interviews Title A name given to the resource McKiernan Interviews Description An account of the resource Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br /> <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player (Amplitude.js) This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2009-12-14 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed W. Wilson Goode Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Wilson Goode is a former mayor of Philadelphia and he was the first African American to hold in that office. He was a community activist, commissioner for the state Public Utility Commission, and managing director for Philadelphia. He got his Bachelor's degree at Morgan State University. Then graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in the school of the Felts Institute of Government.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:13057,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;12&quot;:0,&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;16&quot;:10}">Wilson Goode is a former mayor of Philadelphia and was the first African American to hold that office. He was a community activist, commissioner for the state Public Utility Commission, and managing director for Philadelphia. He got his Bachelor's degree at Morgan State University, then graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in the school of the Felts Institute of Government.</span> Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 2 Microcassettes Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Subject LCSH African American mayors; Mayors--Philadelphia; Goode, W. Wilson--Interviews Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 111:43 Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Baby boom generation; Immorality; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Civil War generation; African American; 9/11; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Vietnam Memorial; segregation; Trust; sexism; democracy; inauguration; Richard Nixon; Philadelphia; Brown v. Board of Education.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:513,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;12&quot;:0}">Baby boom generation; Immorality; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Civil War generation; African American; 9/11; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Vietnam Memorial; segregation; Trust; sexism; democracy; inauguration; Richard Nixon; Philadelphia; Brown v. Board of Education.</span> Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with W. Wilson Goode Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Goode, W. Wilson ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource African American mayors; Mayors--Philadelphia; Goode, W. Wilson--Interviews Description An account of the resource Wilson Goode is a former mayor of Philadelphia and was the first African American to hold that office. He was a community activist, commissioner for the state Public Utility Commission, and managing director for Philadelphia. He got his Bachelor's degree at Morgan State University, then graduated from the University of Pennsylvania in the school of the Felts Institute of Government. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2009-12-14 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.127a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.127b Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 111:43 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/36442a9eeae91fecf5114d691b595705.jpg 29e1a602ee6115d8311087f606dfa258 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/71cf4fbac027db2f632143620b28443d.mp3 79aaa1991cd1dbcac5aec5c763534fdb Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Audio interviews Title A name given to the resource McKiernan Interviews Description An account of the resource Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br /> <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 1996-11-18 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Fred Grandy, 1948- Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Fred Grandy is an actor and politician. Grandy is well known for his role as \&quot;Gopher\&quot; on the sitcom The Love Boat. He was elected congressman for Iowa’s Sixth District from 1987 to1995. In 1997, he became president and CEO of Goodwill Industries. He served as a speechwriter for various shows and hosted radio talk shows. Grandy received his Bachelor's degree in English from Harvard University and Master's degree from the Washington Shakespeare Theatre and George Washington University.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:5039,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:1},&quot;4&quot;:[null,2,5099745],&quot;5&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:[{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;5&quot;:[null,2,0]},{&quot;1&quot;:0,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;3&quot;:3},{&quot;1&quot;:1,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;4&quot;:1}]},&quot;6&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:[{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;5&quot;:[null,2,0]},{&quot;1&quot;:0,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;3&quot;:3},{&quot;1&quot;:1,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;4&quot;:1}]},&quot;8&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:[{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;5&quot;:[null,2,0]},{&quot;1&quot;:0,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;3&quot;:3},{&quot;1&quot;:1,&quot;2&quot;:0,&quot;4&quot;:1}]},&quot;10&quot;:2,&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;12&quot;:0,&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Arial&quot;}">Fred Grandy is an actor and politician. Grandy is well known for his role as "Gopher" on the sitcom <em>The Love Boat</em>. He was elected congressman for Iowa’s Sixth District from 1987 to1995. In 1997, he became president and CEO of Goodwill Industries. He served as a speechwriter for various shows and hosted radio talk shows. Grandy received his Bachelor's degree in English from Harvard University and Master's degree from the Washington Shakespeare Theatre and George Washington University.</span> Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 1 Microcassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Feminism; Baby boom generation; Television; Activism; Vietnam Memorial; Civil War; Civil Rights Movement; Veterans Day; Robert McNamara; Generation Gap; Vietnam War. &quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:513,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;12&quot;:0}">Feminism; Baby boom generation; Television; Activism; Vietnam Memorial; Civil War; Civil Rights Movement; Veterans Day; Robert McNamara; Generation Gap; Vietnam War. </span> Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 60:47 Subject LCSH Actors; Love boat (Television program); Legislators—United States; Grandy, Fred, 1948--Interviews Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Fred Grandy Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 18 November 1996 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:02): And I will double check here. Recently, within the past couple years, there has been a lot of criticism of the era of the (19)60s and the early (19)70s and for example- Speaker 2 (00:00:15): Peggy Archer, please call the operator. Peggy Archer, please dial the operator. SM (00:00:20): Part of the criticism is saying the breakdown of the American family, the increase of drug usage, a lot of the things that are the breakdown in America today are geared right back to the (19)60s and the early (19)70s and thus a lot of the young people of the Boomer generation. Could you comment if that is really a fair analysis of the Boomers and that generation? FG (00:00:42): I want to go back to what the analysis of the Boomers was, that somehow this is a misguided or failed movement? SM (00:00:50): Well, Boomers are the young people that were reared right after the war. And certainly within the Boomer generation there is a difference too. But they were in college, they were involved in a lot of the movements at that time, the late (19)60s and early (19)70s. The protests on college campuses, the women's movement, the gay and lesbian movement, even the Chicano movement. A lot of the movements happened at that time. So when we see a lot of critical analysis today of America and the wrongs of America, a lot of them are pointing fingers right back to that era. FG (00:01:19): Oh, I see. SM (00:01:20): And I would like to know what your thoughts are on that. FG (00:01:23): Well, I guess I qualify as an early Boomer because I was born in 1948 and was participating, although perhaps not as [inaudible] as some of my classmates in school during my... I think what is frequently left out of these retrospective criticisms of the (19)60s and what is called the Spock Mark Generation, that is quite the phrase, although I found it somewhat repugnant. The fact of the matter is, this was, I think, a kind of golden era of progressivity in American politics and culture and social change. Net impact of this generation is that they looked at the thinking of this country. They certainly heightened awareness. They heightened awareness about American foreign involvement and what the real role of American... And I think it is safe to say that that generation ended the Vietnam War or certainly provided the catalyst to end the Vietnam War. In terms of sheer output, in terms of sheer accomplishment, find me another generation since that can make those kinds of claims. There is not. The late booming generation of the people that were born in the late (19)50s, early (19)60s, that supposedly technically qualifying in your analysis, in your survey, have they upon reaching their legal maturity, their late adolescence, their legal maturity, cohered into a group and created a kind of national consciousness raising? I do not think so. I would like to know what they have done. My view is that this is a group that is much more narcissistic and much less altruistic. Now having said all that, I think we sometimes became infatuated with our progressivity and with our idealism and to some degree did not stay on the case. We created, I think, or participated in an awakening of civil rights injustices, participated in what was probably the incipient movement towards feminism and consciousness raising for women to a lesser degree, gays and lesbians. But I do not think we accomplished the change there that we did with the war in Vietnam because you still have a rift in thinking about civil rights. Women you can say are more accepted at all levels of society, but I assume they are motivated by a gender movement as opposed to a generation. The Baby Boomers, to some degree, lost steam as a movement when they graduated and got a life. And I think the fact that they were so aggressive, so in your face, in some cases, so over the top, it was a movement that was defined by extremism, not by its center, that we lost credibility over time. And then it began to trickle out into these kinds of, I think in many ways, Aersot's consciousness raising movements like Guest and Scientology and a lot of things that basically were I think sanctified leads to narcissism. Lost our sense of a cohesive society and became more involved with our own success or failure within that society and the movement began. In a way, I equate the generation of the (19)60s, at least the early Boomers, with their motivations and commitment to the changing of country. The generation that entered World War II, they were conscripted. But I still think there would have been an enormous, and there was, an enormous outpouring of volunteerism into a kind of national goal. And really the only example of a national goal I have seen since Vietnam, was the rallying behind our efforts. And that was almost over before it began, it stayed for a while. Well, I guess wistfully, I look back and say, I wish we had a movement in this country that was causing the kind of social cohesion that we had back then. It was controversial. It pitted parents against their sons and daughters, a very political time. But the balance, I think the dividends were pretty positive. I have to give that generation, not just because [inaudible]. SM (00:06:33): I am going to check this. When you look at the critics today of that era, you do not agree with them in terms of- FG (00:06:45): Well, they tend to stress the excesses rather than the successes. There was another element though that I think cannot be left out of this discussion. This generation matured as a political force [inaudible] with the health of a tool that was maturing as a force itself and that was television. I am not sure you would have had one without the other. The ability to see these kids on TV, to basically broadcast and transcribe and transmit, really aided and abetted by a broadcast media that war of its capability. Obviously, through the (19)68, Kent State, places like that. And again, the serendipity of the awakening of this generation as a political force, the awakening of the media, a conduit for that force, but whatever it was, it provided that generation, I think, other the generations of either not taking advantage of or have not been able to take advantage of because now it is second nature. Inundated with information now, back in days it was exciting and you watched your television and you were not grazing... The focus, there was a kind of serendipity of focus that allowed our generation to perhaps get away with more than we should have. And I think what the critics now do is basically talk about the stuff we got [inaudible]. There was mischief, there was immaturity, there was a pandering to us. Clearly the media, I mean the media is struck gold with this generation. Having said all that, there is I think a forgotten heroism of this group. I do not see in present generations the desire to be part of a society as opposed to an individual player within it or in spite of it. This television changed... Happened to be back at Harvard a few years ago and of course Harvard was one [inaudible] student. Talking to some people at the Kennedy... About the time Robert Kennedy cranked this thing up. Now it kind of toddles along as a think tank and convener of seminars, but the problem is it does not act as a magnet now in discussion. You have got Asian Americans, you have got gay and lesbian Americans, you have got Harvard students who are interested in the collapse of the Soviet Union, it is back to being kind of an adjunct of academia as controlled [inaudible] of social discussion. [inaudible] kids do not get out of school and say, what kind of service do you want to want to fulfill before I go? SM (00:09:54): I want to check with... You have already reiterated some of the points in terms of the most positive qualities that you saw in the Boomers in terms of their activism and so forth. When you look... Have you changed your views over the last 25 years? When you were a young person and of course one of the characteristics of the Boomer generation is the late time we were going to change the world or we are the most unique generation in American history because we can do anything. We can stop the war Vietnam, we can hop out with the civil rights movement and all other movements are started. So there was a feeling that you can be change agents for the betterment of society, but you already reiterated as people got older, a lot of people as they had the job market, but they have the realities of raising a family and so forth and maybe there is still a few that are still idealists out there doing the thing they did 25 years ago, but it is in a minority. When you look at the Boomers again, what are the strengths, the weaknesses? Were they very positive for America in the long run and what are the things you most admire and things that you least admire? FG (00:11:10): Well, what I admired the most was the enthusiasm and the almost missionary zeal to exchange. What I admired the least was the frequent amount of self-awareness and self-serving and ego-driven activity that became, I think the product of that and probably an inevitable one. And that to they also kind of suppose inevitable swelling of the ego as the media began to embrace this movement as the new relative change. I mean I do not think there is a generation anywhere that has not thought of itself as the foremost generation of its era. I do not think you can not feel that. I remember actually saying that when I was a young, I guess I was a senior at Harvard or something, I mentioned to a professor of government named Louis Harts who was a guy who was basically taught about American government and democracy, good teacher, [inaudible] but anyway, I managed to try out on him this idea of being a unique generation. He came out of the depression and lived through World War. You have not lived through major depression, you do not know what it is to be in the bread line, blah-blah-blah. So historically, I do not think that really is important where we actually place on the spectrum of how unique we were. The fact was that we were able to kind of galvanize ourselves and create a movement that although it was kind of [inaudible] and in some cases and in other cases sometimes pernicious, on balance was a laudable effort and all of the people that I know now back upon that as a time when they were to some degree freed from the daily banality of earning a living and raising a family and mortgage payments or reconciling two income kind of commitment. That may just be a function of youth, but the interesting... This particular generation of youth had such more common goal in collective mission than the youth today does, which is seems to be much more individually oriented. And... SM (00:13:53): Yeah, I am from that era too. One of the common characteristics was the concept of passion. FG (00:13:59): Yes. SM (00:14:00): You got involved in issues, you were passionate about the issues. You really did care. It was not just a community case of altruism, it was just, I really do care. FG (00:14:08): Now, there was more passion than there was reason. I look back on some of the efforts that we before and had indicated for, and now that I have actually been in government and sat on the other side of some of those policymaking decisions as a public official, I can see that the pace at which we insisted on change was a much more accelerated rate than the country ever could have been doing. The converse of that is true now is that we are probably moving too slowly now and that we to some degree, I think go down to a snail’s pace because we are almost, I think, at this point victimized by our own success is that essential embodiment of capitalism and democracy and personal freedom, and there is really not much to complain about. As the last election indicated. I know from a corporate point of view now that the best time to fix the roof is when the sun is shining and the tree that is I think somewhat complacent without crisis and that is somewhat vulcanized by its lack of universal purpose. But when it happens we tend to push ourselves in matters that deal with the nation. You can see that now in this is a nation that in 30 years has gone from being very internationally and globally focused to one that really could not care less about foreign loss because we are lulled into a sense of security now that the Soviet Union does not seem to show up on our screen. The things that we would... There is there is a lack, I think, of awareness to the global position, which was not true when I was brought up. We were obviously focused on Vietnam, but at the same time, Harvard was ginning out reams of activity against the war. Were also forcing the university to divest of its holdings in South Africa, the Harvard corporation held that had investments, low engagement, you do not see as much of that. SM (00:16:48): One of the comments that I try to raise with each of our guests is to look at the voting record of the Boomers and the voting record of their kids, which are now today's college age students. And to me it is a tremendous disappointment when you look at the voting records of Boomers as well as their kids, and here is a generation that was so committed to a lot of things and certainly the vote was something that he strove for and everything. I remember my first vote was 1968. I remember voting for Hubert Humphreys, my first vote, but what is the responsibility of the Boomers and how have they been raising their kids? In terms of, I think, this past election it was Bill Clinton won with a 23.7 percent of the electorate and only 48.6 or something like that voted. The voting trends continue to go down. This is the worst voting year in many, many years. Your thoughts on how the Boomers have been raising their kids in looking at the voting records of both groups? FG (00:17:47): I do not think the Boomers have insisted on the same passion and commitment or progeny that they insisted on in themselves probably because they are sadder and wiser and possibly a little bit of disillusionment has set in. Leave us not forget that the last chapter of Vietnam or the enthusiasm of the Boomers was not the fall of Saigon. It was probably the fall of the Nixon government. It was the collapse of confidence in government institutions and it is pretty hard now to find people of my era who will rigorously get up and defend every paragraph and subparagraph of the war on poverty, which is clearly a war that we lost. So the strategy somehow went awry and it was I think a collective withdrawal from public debate, which has now translated into the way we raise our kids. We are writing my kids a letter, my oldest daughter is apparently, but in 1991 when the balloon went up, so to speak, it occurred to me that my children had no knowledge of the war. They had no knowledge of risk for a nation. I had done nothing really, and I did not feel the need to do anything to apprise them of what it meant for this nation to be a war, to have various threat all, although it is a kind of little tinpot desperate over on the other side of the world, this was serious business. Personal delegation. I knew the guy's capabilities in terms of hardware alone, let alone his own... And I was not completely convinced that anything I had ever said or done could prepare these two children for the consequences of a war. Now, happily, that war did not have consequences beyond those that were in the aftermath of the chemical involvement in that war, which was not clearly [inaudible]. But would have never had to write a letter like that. My father had, he lived, would not have needed to write a letter like that to me in 1968. I had a better understanding of risk and dreams and losses, and I think the Boomers, once they started becoming parents, like most parents, tended to protect their children from the downside and the cynical side of the world as they saw it, maybe they had become sadder and wiser and maybe they did not think that their change was really lasting when they saw the Nixon government go up in smoke and out by various other scams. I have had great liberal impulse now kind of congealing into a rather stale bureaucracy that was spending more money than it could ever take in. So all lessons that I think have changed this generation from its original ideas. SM (00:21:14): Through the issues that is paramount to this project. It was about with was the concept of healing. That whole situation that I explained early on with Senator Musky was just one of the examples. Another one was I used to work at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia and we had a panel with our top Vietnam veterans who put together memorial in Philly, Dr. Zuckerman, a well-known historian from Penn and Don Bailey, who was the Republican auditor general for the state of Pennsylvania. As the person who was just doing a program post-traumatic stress disorder, it became much bigger than just talking about the medical illnesses of our Vietnam veterans. He came to that event and refused to sit down with Vietnam veterans who were involved with Memorial and Philadelphia. So even though it was a non-political statement, he would not shake hands with them? FG (00:22:03): No-no. SM (00:22:06): This was Don Bailey, the auditor general of Pennsylvania around 1985 when they had this program at Jefferson and at that time again, it was just another member of the tremendous divisions over this war, even within the Vietnam veteran community. FG (00:22:20): And the guys that were involved in the memorial had attend, attended to what? SM (00:22:25): Well, they were just there to talk about the historical aspects of the war. FG (00:22:29): But were they tended to be vets who supported the US involvement in Vietnam- SM (00:22:35): Actually, they were split. I think there were some that were for and some that were against. It was a potpourri of mixed, it was mixed. Don Bailey was there just because he was, I guess upset with the Dutch Zuckerman, the historian who protested against the war and he was for the war and he was a Purple Heart and he said he felt we were treated poorly and he was one of the few people that was against the building of the memorial in Philadelphia. It was amazing because he thought it was a political statement. FG (00:23:02): No, I think that at least as I look at the aftermath of the war, if you factor out the public policy question of whether we should have been there in the first place, and the following question is whether we stayed too long and squandered assets, human and [inaudible], you still have the question of did we as a nation dishonor the people that served there and who did so because they thought they were committing an honorable act by obeying their call to go to service? If there is healing left, it is there. It is how we treated that era of vets because you got fairly prominent vets in this United States Center. Two of them are named Carrie, right, that were military heroes and [inaudible] critics of the war. You have got guys like John McCain that were prisoners of war, but I do not see him as some kind of defender of America's Southeast Asia policy in the late (19)60s. The real question is whether or not we pay tribute to a generation of mostly young men, got some young women, who got caught up in a political maelstrom and were essentially sacrificed to a bogus cause and some rebelled at the time, and some just put their heads down and did their job. Interestingly enough, the enthusiasm and support for American troops going into the Gulf acted as a home found for Vietnam vet groups that were to some degree vindicated by an American public that was finally acknowledging that it is important to bring what you believe in and that the use of force is not always a bad thing. A lot of these things got merged in the Vietnam question. It almost became that all American use of force is imperialistic and bad and a powerful military is merely a capitalist tool and a lot of, I think, notions wrapped up into the Vietnam War were over time, I think dispelled. The veteran groups themselves, because I am not a member of them. I do not know... It is hard to know what the level of post-traumatic stress will be in these generations, but I do not see us as a nation divided over our role in Vietnam civil rights. That is not where I think the healing needs to take place. SM (00:26:15): For example, that within a generation when Senator Musky talked about the fact that most of the people after the Civil War went to their graves with no healing and still hatred toward each other, even though there were things happening in Gettysburg ceremonies bringing back both sides, that many people in our generation... Some people have told me, Steve, you cannot win in this process, you cannot heal 60 million plus people and Vietnam veterans have their own healing, but there are still, I sense, still tremendous divisions between those people who fought the war, those people who were against the war and should not any effort be made to bring them together to try to create a better understanding that because of the passions of the time, that is the way they acted out their feelings. But that still, it was never against the Vietnam veteran. It was always against the government policymakers and to try to bring people together who were on both sides of the issue. That is where I thought when the Senator Musky the divisions within America, people go to their graves without any healing and now we have a possible another generation where there is no healing people going to their graves with still bitterness. I do not know. This gets beyond civil rights because I think you are exactly right about civil rights, the division is there, but still over Vietnam, I have gone to the wall the last four memorial days. I was at Veteran's Day on Monday. I have tried to get a feel and the hatred that still happens between those who oppose the war and those who have served is present. FG (00:27:53): Who is there a hater or a hatee at this point or is it mutual? I mean, is it on afar with the Serbians and the Bosnians in terms of the source of the animosity is almost lost in the intensity of it. SM (00:28:14): Again, I know that the wall's goal has been to heal the Vietnam veterans and their families. I think it is done a great job. I think Jan Scruggs and the memorial is right on there, but the healing is still not there because for example, they will make commentaries about Bill Clinton. I have talked to some of them. Many hate Bill Clinton because he did not serve and many do not... Jane Fonda and those people that were in Hanoi. So I sense it is still there that they have healed somewhat, but they are never going to heal toward those who hold- FG (00:28:46): See I see Jane Fonda and that movement, the people that were actively looking in an alliance with the NLF, there is an extreme fringe that did not define in any way, shape or form the spectrum of criticism of people. That is why I think that level of [inaudible] you are still talking about, that lack of healing, I think is happening more at the margins than in the center. A little of misunderstanding and denial about the lack of progress over civil rights is still very much very central issue. I was not sitting there with Edward Musky when he broke into tears, but if this is a guy that is replaying the Civil War, given his history, I would have to think about was the level of hatred that still exists between race and regions, and sometimes the legislative initiatives will change the concepts of the country. Principally the southeast become probably more progressive just by the nature of their economic growth as opposed to their cultural political growth but you still have these divides and that is still troubling. The Vietnam thing, I mean, I do not know how you ever make that hole because now you are almost down into a kind of reading exercise where you have to go back and relive all those hurts on a case level. There is no question that a tremendous injustice was perpetrated against a lot of soldiers that were over there. A guy that worked for me in my district when I was first offices and the guy was basically, he had been a grocer in a small town, without the need to become involved in politics at a kind of customer level, constituent level because although he had been in the military, he was one of those guys who were in the early (19)70s, this would have been the early (19)70s, he was on his way to Vietnam as a door gunner, which was the highest level of casualty of all of the professions that he could... His orders were cut, and he was sent somewhere. My impression from his discussions was my life was saved for some reason, and I do not know. This guy is not in any way a [inaudible] on the war or against the war. He was just one of those... He was just one of these mainstream Americans that reached draft age and went into the lottery and said, well, that is it. I am going. I got to do something. He did not come from any privilege or special status so that he could wangle his way out of the draft. So consequently, he was on his way and then it did not happen, and in retrospect, he said, I got to do something because my military service was essentially... I was able to avoid the contract, possibly serious. I cannot help... I think that there are a lot of people that came home and wanted to start over, although they might have a certain reverence and wastefulness, and I do not sense that vendetta. I may not be close enough to it. I do not participate in veterans’ groups, but there were a lot of vets in congress when I was there, and there were a lot of people that opposed the war too. For every Bob Dornan or Ron Dellums who might have represented two political extremes, there was a huge middle of people that had just kind of come to a quiet conclusion about what Nam was or was not and how we proceeded... SM (00:32:53): Were able to state emphatically that the student movement on college campuses is the main reason why the Vietnam War ended. In your opinion, why did the Vietnam war end and who were the people most responsible for ending it? FG (00:33:11): Well, I think, as I said, again, there was this serendipity of focus from students who opposed the war, and let us face it, these kids were at risk because they were the ones that were going out and peopling the escalation of the war, for the Tonkin golf resolution. A lot more kids were sent over. And that coupled with a national broadcast media that was beginning to understand its power, not just to record events, but perhaps influenced them themselves created a very powerful wedge from the American consciousness is to say that that guys like Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman and Tom Hayden and Mario Savio and others brought the war to a close. I think the one person that we have to thank for ending the war in Vietnam is Ho Chi Minh. He had a strategy for winning the war, and we did not. We had a strategy for engaging enemy and that strategy with the best and the brightest that began with the Kennedy administration and then was taken over by the inheritors of that responsibility administration, did not know what they were up against, did not have a strategy, took a military engagement, turned it into a political contest and it will be sustained. They were not going to commit the resources to win the war. Did not know how to fight. They did not know how to engage. There was no statement that people could understand. I would have to say that Lyndon Johnson, by his lack of understanding in Ho Chi Minh by his complete understanding are probably have more responsible for ending the war than Richard Nixon or Henry Kissinger, or... Well, you sat around the peace table in Paris who actually into... There was a myth about American might already unraveled by the time Kennedy sent the group into that had changed in such a way that we did. We were basically fighting military engagement using tactics that we probably employed in World War II, and for all I know Korea. Oh, it was... Forget the strategy for them. It was a tactical disaster, and of course that eroded confidence within the rank and file of the military, and that had to be terribly frustrating, particularly for those people that were the door gunners or the second Luis that were running those platoons up the hill. This is where I think our real collapse in government as a chameleon that Kennedy had kind really developed. SM (00:36:35): And the next question that is one of the unfortunate results of the Vietnam War was the lack of trust. Was under the leadership and not being told the truth on television in terms of body counts. I mean I read McNamara's book in retrospect and all the things that were going on then, and then of course that led it into Watergate, and so this business of trust to me is a very serious issue in America today, and it directly goes back to that era. As a person who is really committed to public service, which you are doing here, not only here at Goodwill, but certainly United States Congress and working for others and constituencies, how do we get back the trust that is been lost in government because people do not want to serve. I know students today on college campus, only 18... Latest statistics in the Chronicle higher education at 18.5 percent have an interest in politics, but they do want to volunteer with 85 percent caring about volunteer activities. So it directly goes back to the sense, well, I am not empowered. I really have no interest. My vote does not count. The Boomers who did not have trust, saw that concept of trust lack thereof in their elected officials and policies and being lied to, and now that is probably carried down into their kids. So I know you probably do not have an answer, but how do we get back the trust? FG (00:38:05): Well, first of all, it is not that we have lost trust. It is that we have defined the standard progressively downward probably from Vietnam through Watergate, through Irangate, Iran [inaudible] the present occupant of the White House has done nothing to kind of trust in public officials, but the guy was reelected handsomely enough so that people almost factor that in and they say, forget what the guy says, let us just watch what he does, and if the minimum raise... The economy remains solid. I do not feel particularly threatened in my workplace... That I am going to be drafted and sent to some forsaken place on the planet. My politicians are not that important to me. The answer to this question really is mercurial because this is really a discussion about leadership. Who are the leaders out there that can make us really the major questions affecting our age truth among other things, different racial gaps that are now developing widening over public spending, ongoing schizophrenia over... For reform as long as we do not have to change anything, our desire for expanding public benefits and lower taxes, I mean, we are still, although the Cold War is over and Cold Warriors are gone, we still have, at least in our political classes right now, the apostles of the Cold War myth that we can be all things to all people at home and abroad, and that there is no real day of reckoning and that should we confront the [inaudible] of middle-class entitlements. It just makes for friction, your father, we have just been through that. You would have thought perhaps a third party might be able to capture this new consciousness. I think the American people are very realistic about these things and have just basically withdrawn from the rest of their lives culminating about campaign finance reform. I am just cannot save my money. The real problem with government right now is not that it is becoming irresponsible, but it is becoming... People are saying to perform public service, I do not have to be in public office. I do not need to be on a public payroll. Right now, I am part of a group, the Goodwill being one of the largest human service agencies in the United States, along with Red Cross and Salvation Army and Boys Clubs and others are actively sitting down with groups like the National Corporation [inaudible] America Group and of [inaudible] Life Foundation and talking about whether or not we need to create a kind of ad-on service, what it means to be a volunteer, to basically focus on and sense private civilian environment as an alternative to... This became an alternative to politics. I will shed Mary a tear. Say, well, that will just leave you with a bunch of threats to run. But what will happen over time is your political jobs will [inaudible]. A lot of this will really, I think, be fixed or changed or modified at least by a new generation of leaders that can actually make us want to confront the truth about our... Grow with the inevitable personal and public sacrifice that it will take to kind of... Sacrifice is not something that either our public institutions or their counterparts in the media are set up to do. The whole era, the following from the Vietnam War and the participation with television and sources of media has been more promising and more promises shattered and more illusions and more illusions dashed. So I think what we have done is we have created a generation of Americans that not only like to be lied to, they expect it. You cannot ask a politician to not be a politician. I have always got [inaudible] why are there no more... Why are not politicians’ states being [inaudible] I am not sure if there are any... Are ex politicians for a variety of reasons. In a country like this with freedom of speech, movement and basically... People like to be pandered to, they like the salesman telling them that these products are better than any they ever had. So that is kind of the dark side of a pre-market society, but I am seriously talking about changing that. SM (00:43:38): It is a really good point because today college students, when you talk about leadership, it is like it is going in one ear and out the other. The term that seems to be most applicable. Now, to them, that raises their ears as citizenship because we have had a leadership program where students meet leaders and they are excited, but they get thrilled when they have an opportunity of the concept of citizenship or they see that it is the local communities now or though- FG (00:44:02): [inaudible]. SM (00:44:03): Right. FG (00:44:04): It is just what we do not have any more is that kind of national leadership. The thing that might be happening here, and this would be good, is that Americans, now that they are a little wiser to the constant assault of information that is barraging over television, radio, the internet, do not automatically associate leadership with celebrity, and quite honestly, politicians are celebrities and they are made to be celebrities and they are revered as such, and they are... At the citizen level very often, it is the quiet... It is a guy like Aaron Feuerstein who basically has a mill in Malden, Massachusetts that burns down and says they are not going to want these people, become another New England ghost town with an economy that used to be... That decision and then became a celebrity. I think most people associate politicians with the opposite reaction. Do something that will make you a celebrity. Supposedly get people to beat a patent to your door. So there is, I suppose the quick and dirty word for it is a kind of benevolent cynicism about these things and people are saying, I will make these solutions at my own level. Goodwill is an organization that has a national organization that I am the president of, but it is local community based, citizen driven organizations. It is not a new concept for us, but we are not an organization of celebrities. We have not been out basically. We may start doing that now because obviously there is a greater comfort with attention. But almost to me we are somehow kind of reached a point in our public consciousness that is somewhere between the preachings of Marshall McClellan and Andy Warhol. We are basically talking about the global village, balkanized around a set of information sources that are just coming right into your home. They are all saying everybody is famous for 15 minutes. Most people know that. Most people accept that, and most people know that when your 15 minutes are up, that is up. They have got to deal with the other 12 million minutes of their life. We have this particular focus... Couple of professions were becoming a celebrity [inaudible] itself, and that is how we got balance. I think people are pulling away from that. Solutions that lend themselves to show host or evidence that feel are pain. SM (00:47:07): There was one event when you were young that had the biggest impact on your life? Speaker 2 (00:47:15): When I was young? SM (00:47:16): By young, when you were in college of college age, during that time when you were at Harvard or either a junior senior in high school at Harvard or just getting started after... What was the most important... What had the greatest impact on your life? Was there a specific person, a specific event? I am just talking about Vietnam War now, but for example, for me, the event that turned my life around was the shootings of Kent State because I was a senior at that time and I had broken my arm and I was about two... I went to State University New York at Binghamton, SUNY Binghamton, and I was ready to graduate and I broke my arm two weeks before graduation, was in the hospital, and the shootings at Kent State happened, and the doctor that saved my arm that operated on my arm, came in and said, when he saw the front cover of the young woman standing over Jeff Miller, I wish they would kill and shoot all those students. Now, that is a moment in my life, and at that juncture I decided I want to be spend a career in higher education because of the lack of communication. But that was a moment for me. But was there any magic moment for you that sent you in the direction of public service? FG (00:48:27): At that point, no, because I did not pursue a career in public service. I had a quick interim stop when I got out of college working for a member of Congress as something in that experience that really kind of propelled me into my foray in politics several years later. Talking about a defining event... At that point in my life, no, I had a very serious accident on location in 1982 when I was... Television... And had period of convalescence where I was not sure just how rehabilitated I ever been and had more influence... But during that period, I found myself basically in the role that I carved out for myself during the anti-war movement, during the participant/observer and humorous because I was working in a small organizational and satirical comedy group in Boston that was obviously taking the stuff... I mean weekly on the campuses and turning it in... Speaker 2 (00:49:55): Steven please call the Operator. Steven please call the operator. FG (00:50:00): That I found was a very kind of valuable and a kneeling service to the community who would be laughing about something a week later that they had been screaming about. SM (00:50:13): And that was the week that was that- FG (00:50:17): That was the week that was, or the early Saturday night shows or... Penn City back before it became basically just a farm system for Saturday night, and I know that one of the things that did for me was always kind of forced me to try and get the perspective on the situation as opposed to just the passion... On this most of my plate. SM (00:50:48): Just a couple more minutes here on the tape, I want to throw out a couple names. People that were well known in that era, and I would like your thoughts on these individuals just with a couple sentences, whether you thought they were positive people or negative people, they had positive impact, negative impact for you and for the Boomers and the first of the people that I would like to list are the ones you mentioned earlier, the Abbie Hoffman’s and the Jerry Rubin’s. What are your thoughts on them in terms of that era? FG (00:51:17): I do not lump them all together. First of all, Hayden was part of that group and Hayden is pretty much as mainstream and liberal as you can be and put those two phrases together without creating an oxymoron. Jerry Rubin wound up becoming some kind of materialist, I do not know, and Abbie Hoffman just kind of became a fringe player. So again, they to me, fall under the Warhol theory of being famous for 15 minutes. Now their 15 minutes for glorious, but I think they represented a movement rather than ramrodded it and they were the celebrities, but I was never particularly impressed by anything that they said or did. I always thought guys like William Sloane Coffin were the real kind of soldiers of that movement because they kept going back and making their statements and were not as interested in throwing themselves in front of a camera. SM (00:52:17): That would bring up people like Dr. Benjamin Spock, another individual of that era, the [inaudible] brothers, catholic priests who put themselves on the line. FG (00:52:28): Well, again, Spock almost had a second career in the anti-war movement after being our renowned writer of richer, he all of a sudden emerges as this anti-war guy and abide by the right wing and [inaudible] our children, ever since they came out of the wound. Again, was one of the celebrities that kind of orbited around the movement. I do not see him having a profound historical significance on the movement as much as just being one of the agents of it. I mean, this guy is not a Dr. Martin Luther King. He is not a Robert McNamara. He is not one of the people who is actually weaving the tapestry of history. SM (00:53:25): I said, hi. I interviewed him out of his house in Denmar. In fact [inaudible], I was thinking of implying for the National Service Corps this next year, but I am not sure yet because I love working in higher ed, but some of the other names would certainly be Martin Luther King, Robert Kennedy, and John Kennedy. Your just quick thoughts on those three? FG (00:53:46): Robert Kennedy, yes. John Kennedy no. John Kennedy almost predates this era. John Kennedy is in the preamble, I think, to this movement that you are talking about, but not actually in the Constitution. Robert Kennedy. Yes, because Robert Kennedy was very much a part of it, was somebody that I think a lot of people identified with, certainly Dr. King, because this guy created the entire ethic of non-violent resistance, social change, and his like has not been seen since. I mean, all you have to do is look at the follow ones, the Jesse Jacksons, the Al Sharptons. SM (00:54:26): Not even the same league. FG (00:54:27): They are not giants. They are midgets and consequently difference between being a leader and a celebrity. SM (00:54:40): Dean McCarthy and George McGovern. FG (00:54:47): I think McCarthy... SM (00:54:50): Hello. FG (00:54:58): McCarthy I think is significant in that he was one of the first guys to really put this issue on the line. He was defined by this movement and he rose and fell with it and perhaps more successful in what he did then McGovern was. We were along [inaudible] I am not sure that is in the historical context, as valuable to the era as what McCarthy did. SM (00:55:30): We just had Senator McGovern on our campus two days ago. FG (00:55:33): Oh, really? SM (00:55:33): Talking about his daughter Terry. He has not talked about politics anymore. He was really out talking about the alcoholism issue. FG (00:55:39): Oh, so it is more meaningful. SM (00:55:40): Yeah. It talks about being a father and not being at home, so he is always reflecting all those years. Just a couple other people here. And then Robert McNamara again, your thoughts on him? FG (00:55:56): Well, McNamara McNamara has emerged I think only recently as one of the great influences of the era, because he has finally owned up to the... But to me, the great Darth Vader of all of this is Lyndon Johnson. Johnson escalated the war. Johnson believed in this guns and butter theory. Johnson took a kind of, I think, backroom cracker barrel politics about promise of anything, but cut your deals and put it on the national stage, and I think just rest of intentions devastated society. SM (00:56:35): When you look at the three presence, even though you talk about John Kennedy as being kind of the preamble, but still we were involved in Vietnam. There is a talk that the DM killings were... He gave the okay for those that, of course- FG (00:56:52): Killings [inaudible]. When were they? SM (00:56:55): They were just before he was assassinated in the fall of 1963 and all the things I have read about Lodge who was our ambassador then, and given the okay to go ahead and kill them. Then we have, of course Lyndon Johnson. Then of course we saw what happened with Richard Nixon. It is like our innocence kind of... We were supposed to be the good guy- FG (00:57:15): We just never had had the kind of public eye on it until the (19)60s. But I mean, [inaudible] Iran was obviously somebody we were ping around with in the early... Actively aiding abetting some of these pot dictators around the war. Kind of grew out of our Cold War mentality of forming alliances with people that would temporarily give us a tactical advantage and not... Plus, there was this uniform and loathing and anathema towards communists and the attitude was any alternative to communism is worth the US support, even if it is a vicious form of fascism. The first guy to blow that off was Castro who had the bad, kind of the manners to be right in our own backyard and is still there. SM (00:58:15): Probably die in office. FG (00:58:16): Oh, I am sure he will- SM (00:58:17): There will be a democracy there and eventually I have a belief that Cuba probably become a state by the middle of the next century, stranger things have happened. Richard Nixon. The next to last person, Richard Nixon. FG (00:58:30): Nixon, I do not equate Nixon with that era. I, Nixon came in and ended the war through a series of strategies that we can argue about forever, but Nixon was great contribution in opening of China and taking what had been any communist stance and refocusing it in the post war era. He actually is social liberal, although always be recognized for the war game, so he actually probably did more than the rest of these folks combined to discredit confidence in government and scuttle the euphoria of the baby Boomers when they ended the war. As a politician and global strategic thinker, he was without parallel and nobody was... He just [inaudible] of American politicians. Purposely gifted. Brilliant. SM (00:59:38): Last question and two minutes here, and that is going back to the very first question that I asked about looking at the Boomer generation, their impact on America, both then and now, what do you feel the lasting legacy will be of the Boomer generation? The 60 plus million that are now all entering middle-aged, Bill Clinton being the first one, although we know that many of the people who are 51, 52, 53, 54 still identify with that era. In your thoughts, when history books are written, what will be the lasting legacy of the Boomers? FG (01:00:12): Well, to go back to a term that you used earlier with the generation, this was a generation that actually managed to galvanize the best parts of leadership and citizenship are hungry for that. Now it seems to be a lost arm. It happened in small subgroups. It can happen in certain regions, but it does not seem to happen nationally. SM (01:00:43): Thank you very much. I- (End of Interview) Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Fred Grandy Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Grandy, Fred, 1948- ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Actors; Love boat (Television program); Legislators—United States; Grandy, Fred, 1948--Interviews Description An account of the resource Fred Grandy is an actor and politician. Grandy is well known for his role as "Gopher" on the sitcom <em>The Love Boat</em>. He was elected congressman for Iowa’s Sixth District from 1987 to1995. In 1997, he became president and CEO of Goodwill Industries. He served as a speechwriter for various shows and hosted radio talk shows. Grandy received his Bachelor's degree in English from Harvard University and Master's degree from the Washington Shakespeare Theatre and George Washington University. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1996-11-18 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.126 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 60:47 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/c8e771633f6eb3269e83e023582fc7b8.jpg 2cbe6671ced709c03b61932f90430dc9 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/6af36a516868bec14de5602f1111fca2.mp3 fd4e61953ba9079b69b4a83fcff342f0 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Audio interviews Title A name given to the resource McKiernan Interviews Description An account of the resource Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br /> <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player (Amplitude.js) This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2010-01-03 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Adam Green, 1963- Language English Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 2 Microcassettes Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 115:37 Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Civil Rights Movement; Baby boom generation; African Americans; Nineteen sixties; Racial issues; Philadelphia; City government; Communities; Prisons; Women in prison; HIV/AIDS; John F. Kennedy.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:513,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;12&quot;:0}">Civil Rights Movement; Baby boom generation; African Americans; Nineteen sixties; Racial issues; Philadelphia; City government; Communities; Prisons; Women in prison; HIV/AIDS; John F. Kennedy.</span> Subject LCSH Historians; College teachers; Central High School (Little Rock, Ark.); Green, Adam, 1963--Interviews Biographical Text <span>Dr. Adam Green is a historian, professor, and son of Ernest Green, who was one of the Little Rock Nine. Dr. Adam Green received his Bachelor's degree from the University of Chicago and his Ph.D. from Yale University. He does research and teaches in a variety of fields, including twentieth-century U.S. history, African American history, urban history, cultural studies, and social movements. He has written and co-written two books,</span>&nbsp;<em>Selling the Race: Culture and Community in Black Chicago 1940-1955</em> and <em>Time Longer than Rope: Studies of African-American Activists 1850-1950</em>. Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Dr. Adam Green Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Green, Adam, 1963- ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Historians; College teachers; Central High School (Little Rock, Ark.); Green, Adam, 1963--Interviews Description An account of the resource <span>Dr. Adam Green is a historian, professor, and son of Ernest Green, who was one of the Little Rock Nine. Dr. Adam Green received his Bachelor's degree from the University of Chicago and his Ph.D. from Yale University. He does research and teaches in a variety of fields, including twentieth-century U.S. history, African American history, urban history, cultural studies, and social movements. He has written and co-written two books,</span>&nbsp;<em>Selling the Race: Culture and Community in Black Chicago 1940-1955</em> and <em>Time Longer than Rope: Studies of African-American Activists 1850-1950</em>. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2010-01-03 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.125a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.125b Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 115:37 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/fb0a875e02ce5184d06d2a910b2fa55b.jpg d94de9645816965072ce76d4ff40a0a7 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b48e9839c6ee7f18e91be4ab97325ba1.mp3 9586fe3e50ac3b9987e6ccb27c791827 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Audio interviews Title A name given to the resource McKiernan Interviews Description An account of the resource Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br /> <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2010-11-14 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dirck Halstead, 1936-2022 Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Dirk Halstead is a photojournalist, editor, and publisher of The Digital Journalist. Halstead started photojournalism in high school and at the age of 17, he worked with Life Magazine to cover the Guatemalan Civil War. He worked at United Press International (UPI) for 15 years after attending Haverford College. He has dedicated his life to photography and has created some great pieces of work.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:13057,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;12&quot;:0,&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;16&quot;:10}">Dirck Halstead (1936-2022) was a photojournalist, editor, and publisher of <em>The Digital Journalist</em>. Halstead started photojournalism in high school and at the age of 17, he worked with <em>Life</em> Magazine to cover the Guatemalan Civil War. He worked at United Press International (UPI) for 15 years after attending Haverford College. He has dedicated his life to photography and has created some great pieces of work.</span> Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 2 Microcassettes Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Subject LCSH Photojournalists; Editors; Publishers; Halstead, Dirck, 1936--Interviews Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 118:45 Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Photojournalism; Vietnam; United Press International (UPI); Military draft; Tet Offensive; End of the Vietnam War; Dangers of Photographing War; Racism; Sexism; Drug Culture; Beatles; Rolling Stones; Apocalypse Now (film); Platoon (film); Richard Nixon; China; United States Military; Draft; Harry Truman; Dwight D. Eisenhower.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:513,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;12&quot;:0}">Photojournalism; Vietnam; United Press International (UPI); Military draft; Tet Offensive; End of the Vietnam War; Dangers of Photographing War; Racism; Sexism; Drug Culture; Beatles; Rolling Stones; Apocalypse Now (film); Platoon (film); Richard Nixon; China; United States Military; Draft; Harry Truman; Dwight D. Eisenhower.</span> Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Dirck Halstead Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 14 November 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:02): Testing one, two, three. First off, first question I have been asking most of the second half of the people that I have interviewed is, how did you become who you are as a photo journalist? Really, how did you start so young at the age of 17, I believe? DH (00:00:23): Well, I was given a camera by my parents for Christmas when I guess I was 15. It was a Kodak [inaudible]. And the thing that made the difference was they gave me a little dark room outfit with it, which allowed you to make contact prints. That was the thing that got me hooked, the ability to make prints, back before digital, of course. So I started taking the camera to school and making pictures of the kids and bringing the prints back and they loved them. Within a year, I was the official photographer for the school. So at that time I had talked my parents into giving me a two-and-a-quarter by three-and-a-quarter speed graphic. By the time I was in my senior year in high school, I was working on a part-time basis for a local newspaper. The local newspaper was owned by a guy named Carl Tucker in Bedford Village, New York. It had been a weekly newspaper. So I volunteered to take pictures for him and set up a dark room in the newspaper office, and he gave me $5 a picture for every picture that was run. Well, over the course of sixth months, he bought six other newspapers. SM (00:02:21): Wow. DH (00:02:24): All of a sudden I was shooting for seven newspapers and I was the only photographer. So that $5 per picture started to multiply and I was making real money. I was 17 years old and I was pulling in a couple hundred dollars a week. SM (00:02:53): Wow. DH (00:02:53): Taking these pictures. During the course of that spring, I went down to Washington to photograph the Army McCarthy Hearings, and would stay there on the day that Joseph Welch said, "Finally, sir, have you, no sense of shame." SM (00:03:19): Remember that very well. DH (00:03:21): Photographed that. And I have been through a series of circumstances, I wound up several weeks later going to Guatemala as part of a student expedition to build some schools, which resulted in my being the first, the youngest war correspondent Life Magazine ever had. SM (00:03:51): Wow. Quite an experience. Can you describe your parents? Who were your parents and what were the role models you had as a young person? What was it like going to your high school and actually, what were your college days like in Haverford, because that is not far from where I live? I have known several graduates of Haverford. DH (00:04:13): Yeah. Is that feedback I am getting? SM (00:04:18): Oh, no, I am fine. DH (00:04:20): No, I seem to hear feedback coming on the line. SM (00:04:22): I do not know. DH (00:04:22): Okay. Anyway. My parents were probably the perfect hybrid for being my parents. My mother was an advertising agency executive, and my father was a telecommunications engineer. So that is the mix I came out of. SM (00:04:54): What was it like going to college there at Haverford? What was college like then? DH (00:05:00): Well, I will tell you quite honestly, I did not pay much attention to it because I had just got my first story in Life Magazine, and I really was not the slightest bit interested in Haverford. And so the main thing I did was I started a photo service at Haverford. I set up a dark room in the biology building and pretty much did my own thing for a year. I would say I was not really participating much in the Haverford lifestyle. SM (00:05:52): Now, did you graduate from Haverford? DH (00:05:55): I did not. I did not graduate. SM (00:05:57): Okay. When you- DH (00:06:01): No, [inaudible] at the end of the first year. SM (00:06:02): Oh, okay. One of the other things I was reading about your background, you were the UPI's Bureau Chief in Vietnam. Some of the questions I have about there from when to when, did you do that and how did you secure this position, and what did the job entail? DH (00:06:21): Well, I did Haverford for a year, and then I was offered a job by UPI in Dallas, Texas at the Dallas Times Herald. So I worked at the Dallas Times Herald for two years as a general assignment photographer. When I got to be, I guess, 19, I was drafted like everybody else being drafted in those days. That resulted in actually the best job I ever had. When I got my draft notice, I ran into another photographer named Don Uhrbrock, who was a Life photographer, who had just gotten out of the Army. We met at a Cotton Bowl game in Dallas. He said, "Well, listen, you ought to go see General Clifton." General Clifton at that time was the chief of information for Department of the Army. So I just called General Clifton's office and I made an appointment. On my way back to New York to go to Fort Dix for basic training, I just popped into the Pentagon with a portfolio, and I showed him my portfolio. Obviously, I have been recommended by Don Uhrbrock and he said, "Well, how did you like a job?" I said, "Well, great. What do I do?" He said, "All you do is when you get in basic training, you send me a postcard and you tell me what your serial number is and when you are expected out of basic, and I will take care of the rest." SM (00:08:35): Wow. DH (00:08:35): I will never forget, there was this major who was sitting outside the general's office, and he looked at me as I came out of the general's office and he said, "Kid, let me get this straight, you just got drafted and you just came in to show your portfolio?" I said, "Yeah, it seems to work." Sure enough, for the next two years, I had the best job ever. I was the chief photographer of the Department of the Army and wrote my own orders and traveled all over the world. SM (00:09:15): Wow. DH (00:09:15): Did all these different stories. Lived in a great apartment in Arlington. Never wore a uniform. SM (00:09:25): Oh my goodness. DH (00:09:25): So I had a great time in the Army. SM (00:09:30): Now you went to Vietnam as the UPI Bureau chief? DH (00:09:35): Yeah. There is some feedback I keep getting. After two years working for the Army, I went back to UPI, I first went back to UPI in Washington, and I was there for about six months, then I went to New York and I staffed UPI for New York for about six or eight months. And then I became a picture Bureau chief in Philadelphia. I was there for two years. Then in 1965, I got ready to send the Marine to Vietnam, and I was assigned as the Picture Bureau chief Saigon. SM (00:10:37): Wow. DH (00:10:38): [inaudible] Operation. SM (00:10:39): Wow. DH (00:10:40): I was there for two years. SM (00:10:45): Did you oversee many other photographers, or were you the photographer? DH (00:10:49): Yep, I was the Picture Bureau chief. I went out and I shot, but I also ran the bureau. SM (00:10:58): What were your personal feelings about that war when you went over there? Some people, when they first went, depending on whether you served in the military or were in other capacities, the early years, which you would say (19)64, (19)65 years were a lot different than the (19)67, (19)71 years, early on what were your thoughts about the war when you first arrived, and then what were your thoughts when you left? DH (00:11:27): Well, I photographed the first US Marines arriving on China Beach in March of (19)65. And I also photographed the last US Marines leaving in 1975. SM (00:11:44): Wow. DH (00:11:45): From the roof of the embassy. SM (00:11:45): Yes. DH (00:11:48): So I saw the whole hill. Actually, it was very exciting. We had a lot of mobility in those days, and you could go anywhere and do anything. Helicopters, boats, jeeps, everything was available to you. You could get on transport at the drop of the hat, go anywhere you wanted to go and get back to Saigon at the end of the day for a nice drink on the shelf of the Continental Palace. It was a great story. The US experience of the troops and Vietnam was a gradual learning curve for the first few months. This was a great, wonderful experiment in the use of the military. Everybody was having a great time. They were getting to test all the new weapons, and the leaders were gung ho. It was not for almost a year before US troops really began to be sucked into situations where they could no longer prevail. Then it became a very serious business. I think that the people who had been photographing or writing about Vietnam prior to March of 1965, had a much better perspective on how difficult this was going to be because they understood the tactics of Vietnam. They understood the corruption that existed within the South Vietnamese. Most of what we call the old hand, were very pessimistic right from the beginning. But for most of the new arrivals, people like me, we were just having a great time and we just were happy as it could be. SM (00:14:48): Would you say that this learning curve that the people you talked about, but even your learning curve as a professional photographer over there from early on, is when you look at (19)65, then you look at Tet in (19)68, and then you look at 1975, the helicopters going off the roof, those are three monumental happenings in this whole phase. Would you agree with that? Were you there with Tet? DH (00:15:18): I was not there at Tet. I was on home leave during Tet, but I was certainly there for the beginning and the end. Yeah. I mean, everything totally changed. But to this day, I do not believe that that war had to end the way it ended. The reason why I say that is because we walked away from Vietnam. The Congress stopped appropriating and by March of 1975, the North Vietnamese were pretty well shocked. The bombing offensives had been very effective, especially the Christmas bombing offensive. They had been cut off by China, they had been cut off by Russia. They were not getting their supplies anymore, and they were not in a good position. The way it all fell is that the North Vietnamese decided that they would launch an experimental offensive in the Highlands at a place called Ban Me Thuot. So they assembled an overwhelming force for this little place, and took Ban Me Thuot and started to march down the Highway 19 toward Saigon and the general who was in charge of what we called Free Corps, which is where [inaudible 00:17:36] was, he panicked because actually he had taken prisoner by the North Vietnamese during the French War, and he did not want to become a prisoner again so he got on a helicopter and he just left his headquarters and left it undefended and just told his troops to make their way to Saigon. At the same time, the president of Vietnam panicked, Nguyen Van Thieu, and he pulled the Marines out away and left the South Vietnamese marines trapped on the beach [inaudible] and totally cut off. From that point on, it was all that the North Vietnamese could do to keep up with the retreating troops. It was total complete panic. To this day, I believe that if that general had not bolted from Pleiku actually and if Thieu had not pulled the Marines out of Vietnam, probably it would have wound up with some sort of conciliation government. In fact, the day before Saigon fell, a conciliation government was formed by a guy named Big Ben, and they put up the new colors of this conciliation government. But by that time, it was academic because the tanks were already in Saigon. But no, I have always believed it was a very bad mistake all around from the beginning to end. SM (00:19:53): If you were to be asked, which I am asking now, the main reason why we lost that war, what would your response be? Still there? DH (00:20:19): Yeah. I am thinking. I think it is very easy to blame the media, but after Tet, and specifically after Walter Cronkite turned against Vietnam, that signaled the end of any US public support in the war. There was none. There was no support in Congress. The American people did not believe in it. The news media did not believe in it, and it was a hopeless case. SM (00:21:14): When you looked at McNamara's book, he just passed away this past year, but Robert McNamara's book, "In Retrospect," he had mention in that book that he made mistakes, and then of course, even in McGeorge Bundy's book that came out about six months before he passed away, he was against that war from the get-go, and actually told President Johnson that we should not be there, and it was a mistake. Yet they continued to stay in Vietnam regardless of these attitudes of some of our leaders. Do you put any blame at all on President Johnson, and particularly with the people, Robert McNamara, McGeorge Bundy- DH (00:22:00): Of course, yeah, it was a very bad idea. SM (00:22:10): But that scene where you are taking pictures of the helicopter, I believe it was April 30th, 1975, if I remember correctly, were you inside the facility? Did you get on a helicopter yourself? DH (00:22:28): Yes. Yeah. Yeah. SM (00:22:31): There is all kinds of stories there that the Vietnamese people that were able to leave were friends of the Americans or linked to the Vietnamese military, that a lot of them were left. Of course, we know what happened in Vietnam after the helicopters left with the reeducation camps. There were stories of South Vietnamese troops throwing their uniforms away because they did not want to be identified as that whole thing. When you arrived at the aircraft carrier, what were the scenes like? What was going on there, just firsthand description? DH (00:23:16): Well, by the way, I have written at great length about that whole experience, and it is on the Digital Journalist, and it is called White Christmas. Just go onto Digital Journalist, and it is a very long piece, which goes into great detail. SM (00:23:48): All right. Any short little anecdote you want to say though for the interview? DH (00:23:55): Well, it was total chaos. The group that I left Saigon with came out of the defense attache's office, which was out at Tan Son Nhut. The Marines were busing Americans and Vietnamese from meeting points in downtown Saigon, and they were being bused out to Tan Son Nhut. When they got to Tan Son Nhut, they were taken inside the bowling alley, which was full of Vietnamese and Americans and civilians. Once the Marines established their landing zone, almost immediately these big Chinook helicopters started to come in and they would just hover. They were loading those helicopters as fast as they could. Then everybody was being flown out about 12 miles out to ships in the Gulf. I was landed on the Coral Sea, which was one of about a dozen carriers that were receiving people. What was interesting was that among the helicopters that were coming in were all these South Vietnamese helicopters. What they would do is they would touch down and the South Vietnamese would jump out, and then they would push those helicopters off the ship. In fact, in a couple of occasions, they did not even land. There was one pilot who just ditched his helicopter right next to the carrier, but there were a lot of helicopters thrown overboard that day. SM (00:26:22): Wow. Of course, that was the beginning of the Boat People that we all know what happened afterwards, trying to escape in the thousands and thousands who drowned at sea trying to escape Vietnam. DH (00:26:36): Right. SM (00:26:38): What pictures do you remember most from your time there in Vietnam? Were there any pictures that you took that stood out? Can you describe the exact environment when you took that picture or pictures? DH (00:26:54): You know what, I hate to tell you this, but I have to do it all the time, and every photographer who is interviewed says the same thing. We are very bad when it comes to saying, my favorite picture is... or, I like this picture. We cannot do that. It is something that we are just not wired to do. I cannot objectively discuss my pictures. The only picture I can objectively discuss is the Monica Lewinsky picture. SM (00:27:32): Oh, yes. DH (00:27:32): Other than that, I cannot. SM (00:27:36): But you would say though, you had full access in that war to take pictures, but obviously there was dangers too, that you could have lost your life. Did you know other photographers who lost their lives during the Vietnam War? DH (00:27:52): Yeah, many. Vietnam had the highest casualty rate among photographers of any war in history. SM (00:28:03): Did any of your UPI photographers die? DH (00:28:03): Oh, yeah. Well, in fact, are you by your email right now? SM (00:28:07): No, I am not. DH (00:28:09): Oh. Because I just answered a question to the John Winslow of News Photographer Magazine, who more or less asked me a similar question and I sent him a reply. I will read it to you. I am going to put you on speaker for a minute. SM (00:29:59): Okay. Were the troops well aware of what was going on in America at the time with respect to what many people call the war at home? SM (00:30:03): America at the time with respect to what many people call the war at home, the protests. DH (00:30:04): Oh, yeah-yeah. SM (00:30:07): I have read some novels, and I have also read some books depending on the year, obviously, the late (19)60s and early (19)70s were the greatest amount of protests in America, but what were the troops thinking when they... What part do you believe that played in the war itself? Not only in terms of the feelings that many of the troops had, but the enemy? DH (00:30:33): Well, I think it was encouraging for the enemy, and I think that it was very, very difficult on the troop. It was fighting in those jungles and the common instances of fragging where an enlisted man would throw grenade at an officer, and it was a very volatile situation. There were some units that were much higher performing units, like the Marines, for example, but army draftees. It was a very difficult war for them, and it is a war that they were not prepared to fight. SM (00:31:49): The troops came back to the United States, particularly in the early (19)70s and started the Vietnam veterans against the war, and there were a lot of veterans against the war, I guess, that were serving, especially in that 67 to 71 period when it seemed like chaos was not only in America, but also in Vietnam within the troops. Did you see that as well? Did you actually see troops who were against the war who were actually fighting it? DH (00:32:17): Yes, sure. Yeah, you run into that. As I say, episodes of bragging just were units just would not go out, right? I mean, there was a period during the Christmas bombing offensive over no, where all the B52s stopped flying. They just decided they were not going to get shot down anymore. The North Vietnamese had gotten that down to the science, and they could target those B52s as they would come over the mountains. They were taking them out left and right. At one point, all the B50s in Guam just had a stand down. SM (00:33:15): Did you see all... A lot of the things that were happening in America, not only the protests, but certainly the battles over racism and sexism and the drug culture, the rock music, the sense that government is lying, all these movements that came about in the early (19)70s, were a lot of these things happening within the troops too? The troops were a microcosm of what was going on in America. DH (00:33:47): Yeah, sure. Yeah, especially in 1968, yeah. SM (00:33:52): What was it about (19)68 that made a difference than any other year? DH (00:33:55): Yes, (19)68 was really the crucial year. SM (00:34:01): And could you explain a little further what made it a crucial year or- DH (00:34:07): Everything came together that year. So the war was heavy casualties. The lifestyles of the young people were changing. The Beatles were happening. The Rolling Stones were happening, long hair was happening, drugs were happening. It was the overthrow of what we would think was normal in the society and the general generational conflict. SM (00:34:51): Is there any movie that you feel portrays that era better than any other, because many Vietnam vets have been pretty critical of the movies that have been made on Vietnam. DH (00:35:09): Apocalypse. SM (00:35:11): Apocalypse Now? DH (00:35:14): But that I said, right. From the standpoint of... And if you get the idea, well, this was all just totally nuts. SM (00:35:41): Yeah, also the movie Platoon was one that most Vietnam vets did not like. Why do you think they did not like that film? DH (00:35:51): I think I cannot speak with Vietnam vets. I found Platoon really to be estrin. Platoon is really sort of what we call a TikTok. That is how it was, that is how it was. Emotionally, it has no heft. There are Apocalypse Now. Those crazy people were really there, when all those crazy things, and it was totally out of control. SM (00:36:43): How has the experience in Vietnam differed from any of the other photo experiences you had since that time? What made that unique in itself? DH (00:36:56): Well, first off, Vietnam was "my war". If you talk to most professional journalists who been around for a while, almost all of them have an event that they identify with, and that this was the core event of my life. And for me, Vietnam was that core event. It is what shaped me, it is what shaped all my colleagues. You have to remember, anybody who is anybody or has been anybody in journalism, went through that experience. And rather, Tom broke off. Peter Jennings, Tech Poppel, they all went through Vietnam. They all served their time there, but roughly the same time. And the thing that was unique about Vietnam was that you were very much in control of what you did. In previous wars as World War II, such as Korea, if you were a correspondent or a photographer, you really had no control over where you went. You joined up with some troops and wound up mowing with those troops wherever they went for as long as they were gone. And it was a shared experience with the troops. Vietnam was totally different, Vietnam was covering a fire. Every morning you would read the wires and find out what had happened overnight, and then you would take your car out to [inaudible] and hop on a helicopter and buy off a couple hundred miles and be set down in the middle of a raging battle And cover that battle, and then when you would have enough of that, you would get back on a helicopter and go back to Saigon and go have a beer. And so it was always a matter of personal choice that you did. And so that puts a whole different perspective on it because once you realize that you are making those choices, you are not being forced, you have a much different feeling about the whole process. And it becomes much more of a personal adventure. And I will tell you that I personally ever met a photographer who covered Vietnam, who did not love the experience. Love it, not like it, loved it, did not get enough of it, did not stay away. I was there for two years in (19)65 and (19)66, came back to New York for two years, and from the minute I was back in New York, I wait to get back to Saigon. And I was totally miserable in New York. There was nobody to talk to or everything seemed like total bullshit to me. I had no depth, they did not understand what was going on in the world. And after going back to Vietnam for Time Magazine in 1972, the first morning I woke up and was walking down Main Street in Saigon. It felt like I had gone to bed several years earlier and woke up that next morning in Saigon and nothing else had happened in those three years I was away. It was just a total complete, okay now I am back where I ought to be. SM (00:42:00): Okay. DH (00:42:02): And so very important that you understand, but point of view now, a lot of that point of view was because we were in strand of what we did. We were all accredited by Max V. So you have identification cards allow you to get on any helicopter or plane with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. And I actually could come home at the end of the night. And the press facilities, by the way, were very good. Even in places like Danang with bars and all that stuff. Word since then, have not been that much fun. Places like Bosnia, Iraq, Afghanistan, there is no booze. Where is the fun. There is no fun. It is miserable places where people get dismembered by. IEEs. And there is not a lot of, after going on in those places. Vietnam, we laughed our asses off. SM (00:43:43): What is interesting when you talk about the freedoms that you had in Vietnam, it is almost like that is the culture of that (19)60s generation or that era, that one of the goals of the cultural revolution at that period was that people were in charge of their own lives. They did not have to worry about the corporate, having a corporate image that I am empowered to do, I am empowered to speak up. I am empowered to fight injustice. I am empowered to do these things. There was a feeling, a sense of my voice counts, and basically what you are saying is even in the world of porno journalism in Vietnam and your fellow photojournalist, there was that same cultural feeling of you are in charge. DH (00:44:31): Yeah, well- SM (00:44:33): That was the time. DH (00:44:34): Yeah and after I attribute a lot of this one man, and that is Barry Zorithian. SM (00:44:45): Who? DH (00:44:46): Barry Zorithian. SM (00:44:47): How do you spell that name? DH (00:44:49): Z-O-R-I-T H I A N. Barry Zorithian. SM (00:44:54): Okay. DH (00:44:55): Barry Zorthian was acting Spokeman. He was not a spokeman, he was head of Max V military assistance command Vietnam of the press operation. And he said all the policies, and he was a former time incorporated guy, and his heart was a journalist heart. But he had a very high rank within Max V. He was number two people of organization. And so he is the one who made these decision. Chris could do all that, one of the lessons because the Vietnam people who were in charge in Vietnam after the Vietnam War blamed Zorithian and blamed themselves were losing the war. And their theory was that they lost the war... SM (00:46:22): They lost the war at what? Still there? DH (00:46:30): Yeah, I am here. SM (00:46:30): Oh, okay. SM (00:46:30): Yeah. SM (00:46:38): Are you waiting for another question or... One of the questions that I wanted to ask is, I was looking at one of your videos on the computer and you were talking about when you take pictures, you feel that it' is an educational process and you have a very strong philosophy of responsibility. Could you go into detail on that with, you had mentioned that in the video? DH (00:47:18): Very strong sense of responsibility, people to do all of the things that I have done over my life. My job is to... SM (00:47:51): I think we are getting cut off here. DH (00:47:54): Oh, is really- SM (00:47:56): Want me to call you again? I am getting cut off now. DH (00:47:59): Oh, you better call me back. SM (00:48:00): Okay, thanks, bye. Oh, you teach me any courses or? DH (00:48:12): I do not teach courses currently. SM (00:48:17): So the next few questions are going to be based on a lot on the generation, the boomer generation, and of course Vietnam bets were part of that. When you hear people, especially in recent years, blame all of the problems we have on to have today in our society on the era known as the (19)60s and the (19)70s. And of course they are talking about the drug culture, the welfare state, the divorce rate, some people call it the beginning of the handout society, the lack of respect for authority, the divisive nature in our dealings with people with that we disagree with. In other words, placing the blame on the boomer generation really. What are your feelings when you hear that from politicians or pundits? DH (00:49:05): Well, I laugh because it seems to me that things have reversed itself. The liberals are now the professors and the conservatives of the students, and you see this all over. Right now, a lot of anxiety on a part of the current generation is they are not going to get what they are entitled to. SM (00:49:50): That is interesting because one of the most important things when you learn about what an activist is, an activist never says these words, 'what is in it for me?' It is 'what is in it for we' was the mentality of the many of the college students of the (19)60s and (19)70s. And if you hear the reverse, what is in it for me? They are not an activist. DH (00:50:16): No, they are not, no-no. And I will say one of the big problems I have with students and having taught photojournalism, I find a total lack of curiosity there. When I look into their eyes, there is nothing there. There is lifeless. I do not know if it is too much time spent in front of video games, whether it is not learning to read, but there is nothing there. I did an exercise the first two times I taught my photojournalism class. I would walk around- SM (00:51:17): What year was this? DH (00:51:20): And there would be a dozen kids at the table, and I would walk around and I would get up real close and I would look them in the eye. And about one in four, I would say, okay, you are crazy. And I meant that in a good way because what I was seeing is there was something going on in those eyes. There was life, there was some flickering there, there was some wildness in there. There was something, there was a pulse in that person. The rest of them, if I did not say that, I knew they might as well drop out of that class right then because they were not going to do anything. I find that the greatest problem in teaching journalism today is teaching what a story is. Students have no idea whatsoever of what a story is, what makes up a story. How do you do it? How do you find it? I used to be good at that stuff. I mean very fast, but they are not anymore. SM (00:53:03): Would you say that the students of the (19)60s and the (19)70s had that, whereas the students of the (19)80s, (19)90s, and what we call the 2010s, which is the next two generations, generation X and certainly the millennial students of the day, are they in the latter group? DH (00:53:24): Yeah, I mean, I think the students in the (19)60s and (19)70s were on fire that they could not consume enough experiences or ideas. They were ravish. They wanted to ingest anything and everything, all. They were hungry for experience. They were hungry for drugs, they were hungry for sex, they were hungry. They were raiding maniacs. Look around you today, you do not see it. SM (00:54:11): Back in the (19)90s. I like your thoughts with the generation Xer group that followed the boomer generation. We had a panel of boomers and generation Xers, and they were having some problems with each other. And I found in my programs that I did the university that Generation Xers, and they are people born from (19)65 till about 1982. They either looked at the (19)60s as their sick and tired of the nostalgia that this generation of boomers is always talking about or they regretted that they did not live during that time because there were causes and there was nothing in between either like you or they did not. Did you find that too? DH (00:54:57): Yeah. SM (00:54:58): When you look at the boomer generation, which is those born between (19)46 and (19)64, and I want to preface this statement by saying that I now know that people that were born between (19)35 and (19)45 are as much of boomer as those born in that period because of the sense of spirit and they were kind of the mentors and role models for many boomers. When you look at the boomer generation, are there any basic characteristics or strengths or flaw that you can apply to them as a group? And of course we know there is 74 million people in this generation, but just from the ones you knew. DH (00:55:36): Well, I think that my experience is that people of my generation was stewarded earlier. They were out doing things, talk about me working for my newspaper at the age of 17. I was not drifting around aimlessly. I knew things I wanted to do. And that same thing went for all my friends. I had class reunion that long ago. We were talking about this very thing. People became young adults at the age of 18 and some cases 17. Now, God help us, you are lucky if you find a young adult at 30. SM (00:56:42): So the criticism that some people have of boomers is that they were a generation that never grew up. Some people think, well, again, I am just putting the shoe on the other foot there. Some people just do not like boomers and that they never did grow up. So I do not know if you have any concepts on that. DH (00:57:12): Not really, no. SM (00:57:14): And also the many of the boomers thought they were the most unique generation in American history, particularly when they were young. And again, many felt they were going to be the change agents for the betterment of society by ending racism, sexism, homophobia, ending war, bringing peace and making the world a better place to live. Is the world we live in an indictment of the generation or are we a better nation overall because of their activism? DH (00:57:43): That is the meaning of life question. I do not know. I do not know. SM (00:57:55): Can you give any other strengths or weaknesses of that generation? If you have any other thoughts? DH (00:58:04): Well, everybody has got their idea of the greatest generation. We know We are Tom [inaudible] fan. And I think for me, the most interesting generation was the boomers. Were the greatest or not, I do not know, but [inaudible] info. Well, I think we are in a society today that is just sort of drifting. SM (00:58:47): And again, I am just trying to understand the boomer generation from many different angles. Do you put any blame on that on the parents of today's young people, generation Xers were the children of Boomers. And now if you look on college campuses, only 15 percent of the millennial students of today are the kids of boomers. Most of them are the kids of generation Xers. So do you think this is also a criticism of the parents who maybe did not pass on some of the feelings that they had when they were young. DH (00:59:23): Yeah, I think so. And I think that that is probably a fallout from the boomer generation as far as caring for your young. But I think that as we all know, the basic family structure as we knew it has disappeared. Dinner around the table, the participation of adults and kids' activities, and certainly among minorities, it is- DH (01:00:02): And certainly among minorities, it is a disaster. No place at the table. SM (01:00:13): In your opinion, when did the (19)60s begin and when did it end? DH (01:00:19): (19)60s began with John Kennedy being inaugurated. SM (01:00:27): And when did it end? DH (01:00:38): When was that big concert, San Francisco? Was it the Rolling Stones? SM (01:00:46): Altamont? DH (01:00:47): Altamont, yeah. SM (01:00:48): That is when the violence, yes. Is there a watershed moment that you think that stands out for most boomers? DH (01:01:03): I do not know. I think that is an individual thing. SM (01:01:04): I think you were born in 1936, correct? DH (01:01:05): Correct. SM (01:01:08): Then you have lived through these periods. And just give a couple [inaudible], because these are the periods that boomers have lived. The oldest boomer is now 64, and the youngest is 49. So I think most boomers now realize that they are mortal, like every other group. In your own words, can you describe the America of the following periods as you remember? Just from your growing up, and just what these periods may symbolize to you, because these are all periods in boomers' lives. That period from the end of World War II, 1946, to the inauguration of President Kennedy. DH (01:01:53): I think that was a period of excitement and possibility. We were getting into the space race. And because the space race, there were so many technological changes. Just everything that you had in your house was changing, and becoming high-tech, we are on our way to that. And so I thought that the (19)50s, we still had the [inaudible], but I thought that the (19)50s was an optimistic and innovative time. SM (01:02:53): How about the period 1961 to 1970? DH (01:02:57): Sixty-one to (19)70, of course that is when everything exploded. And the Kennedy, and Kennedy's assassination, and Bobby Kennedy, and rock and roll, and drugs, and Andy Warhol. And total changes in dress, and the way people related to each other. Very casual sex, all those things. SM (01:03:38): How about 1971 to 1980? DH (01:03:43): (19)71to (19)80, Jimmy Carter, Gerald Ford. First off, you really have to understand that the first two years, we were totally bogged down in Watergate, where I think we were collectively losing our senses. And Nixon was totally out of control. The war went on in Vietnam. And then we had a breather with Gerry Ford, who was a very nice man. And then Jimmy Carter, who has since proven to be one of our better ex-presidents, but who was a total disaster when it came to the concept of protecting presidential authority of power. And the period of malaise. So I do not know if you remember the kind of clothes that Gerry Ford and Jimmy Carter wore, but these real weird plaids. SM (01:05:15): Yeah, and then Jerry Ford is not a very good golfer, and he hit a lot of people. DH (01:05:24): Yeah. But a very nice man. I liked Gerry Ford the whole time. But it was not much doing. And we were limping along with malaise, and everybody just generally not feeling very good. And then we got to (19)80s, and there was Ronnie. SM (01:05:47): Yeah, (19)81 to (19)90 was the next period. DH (01:05:52): Yeah. And as I was concerned, that was a wonderful time, because I got to spend all my time in Santa Barbara. But everybody seemed to feel really good. They liked Ronnie. Nobody took him too seriously, except when he said, "Tear down this wall, Mr. Gorbachev." Promptly did exactly that. And so I think the (19)80s was a feel-good period. SM (01:06:31): Do you think it was a period where he was trying to bring back the (19)50s? DH (01:06:32): Not really, no. SM (01:06:39): And bring the military back to power, the way it should be, as opposed to the way it was in the (19)70s? DH (01:06:45): Well, see, I personally always looked at Reagan, I saw this happy-go-lucky warrior, who always seemed to have such a good time. And I personally prospered during the (19)80s. I thought I was just wonderful. And like I say, I spent, out of eight years, I spent a whole year in Santa Barbara. And so that was not hard to say. SM (01:07:22): How about the (19)90s? 1991 to 2000? DH (01:07:29): Now, I am beginning to run into short term memory loss. What happened in the (19)90s? I cannot remember. SM (01:07:40): Well, we had the president of Bush I and Bill Clinton. DH (01:07:42): Yeah. Well, that is the answer. Bill Clinton, I thought was a hoot. He seemed to have a wonderful sense of humor and good time. But I thought, personally, he was a total fraud. I kept watching, as a photographer, I am always watching the eyes of my subject. I am trying to read what is in there. And what I found out very early on in the Clinton administration was for the first front that I covered him, I thought I had never covered anybody as fascinating as Bill Clinton. He could get to the point he could make a smart, a steep statement, his eyes had empathy, sympathy. He knew how to reach out to just the right person. And then I realized, after lunch, I was watching an act. SM (01:09:08): Wow. DH (01:09:14): But he would do the same thing, every single time. And I could tell in advance that he was going to tear up. I could tell what he was going to do. And so, for eight years... Actually seven years. For seven years, I studied Bill Clinton's face from up close, waiting to get him. And I finally did. If you go on my webpage, on the digital journalist and go to the covers, you will see a picture of Bill Clinton. And it was during the middle of the Monica business, and he was at a rally with the First Lady, and she was having absolutely nothing to do with him. And he would sort of reach out, tentatively toward her, and she would bat his hand away. And I soon suddenly started to notice that his right jaw kept clenching. And it went on and on. And his jaw was just clenching. And I have a whole roll of that, the [inaudible] Magazine. And I said, "I got you. I finally got you." After seven years, I finally saw the real Bill Clinton. SM (01:10:56): I know there is a picture on there too of them with masks. DH (01:11:02): Yeah. Yeah. And I consider that a metaphor, because I think they are both the same. I think they are two sides at the same point, that they deserve each other. And I have always thought that. SM (01:11:23): You have covered presidents from Kennedy to Clinton, I think maybe even a little bit above Bush too, but you say you finally got Clinton. What do you have to say about these other presidents in terms of maybe the photographs, and what their personalities were? And maybe even, I have got a question here, which President had the greatest impact on the boomer generation, in your opinion? Because you covered the White House for 29 years, and that is basically the time when the boomers were young, and then going into middle age. So you are dealing with Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, and Bush I, and Clinton. DH (01:12:05): All right. Let me give you my quick rundown. Kennedy, I covered from his inaugural until he was killed. A totally fascinating character, and very, very similar to Bill Clinton. In fact, they are almost alter-egos. Bill Clinton, the same characteristics I mentioned of Bill Clinton, I talk about John Kennedy. The photographers used to call Kennedy 'Jack the Back'. And the reason for that is Kennedy was very camera conscious. And so whenever he would come into view of the camera, he would immediately turn his back to the lens until he had composed himself. Until he had his face where he wanted it to be, hair was where he wanted it to be, and then he would turn his face to camera. But the first thing was always the turning of the back. SM (01:13:25): Wow. DH (01:13:26): So he was 'Jack the back'. And a fantastic energy to cover, and just a total wild man. Everything you read about him is true, including the midnight trips to the swimming pool. One photographer I knew, he really sort of served as an on the road pimp for him. He would run alongside the car, and as they were going in these motorcades, and they were in the open car, we had all these teenage girls, and Kennedy used to call them leapers. And he would see one that would strike his eye, and he would just look at my friend, Stanley Tretick, who is a photographer, and just point to her. And it was Tretick's job to go over to her and say, "How would you like the come meet the Senator?" SM (01:14:31): Wow. DH (01:14:34): And so, that was bad boy. SM (01:14:41): Always think of him with the older women, not younger women. DH (01:14:43): Oh, no-no. He loved the leapers. And they were just like hors d'oeuvres. I mean, Marilyn Monroe was the main course. SM (01:14:47): Right. DH (01:14:55): And then Lyndon Johnson, totally fascinating. And far bigger than life. Just huge. And he would dominate the room. He would intimidate, physically, anybody he was with. One of the best stories that I have ever heard, and it is apocryphal, is that at Camp David, Johnson was having a meeting with the president of Canada, Lester Pearson. And Lester Pearson, they were talking heatedly about Vietnam, and photographers were able to watch as Kennedy reached forward, grabbed Lester Pearson's [inaudible], and raised him off his feet, and said, loud enough for us to hear, "Boy, you have been fishing on my front lawn." SM (01:16:12): Wow. DH (01:16:15): That was Lyndon Johnson. SM (01:16:19): Wow. DH (01:16:29): And he was obsessively narcissistic. He insisted, for example, that his photographer, Okamoto, photographed him sitting on the bathroom. He wanted every piece of shit recorded. And he was something else. I could tell you stories about Lyndon Johnson [inaudible] and all that. And so then, of course, after Lyndon Johnson, we got Nixon, right? And of course Nixon was my favorite because Nixon was the best subject a photographer to ever have. He was totally crazy. And you could see every emotion. The world's worst poker player. And his face was... Anytime he made an address, his face was like a living contradiction. His eyes would be delivering one message, and his mouth would be delivering another. And there would be this moisture above his mouth, and his little eyes would be darting around the room. And he was nuts, in a word. And in fact, he did a whole bunch of nutty things. For example, during Watergate, he could not stand it. And so, one night, he bolted from the White House, in the middle of the night, called a car, drove to Dulles Airport, and got on a PWA DC-10, fly out the Santa Barbara. All alone. There was one Secret Service agent who was on the plane. And then, of course, then they had the problem, how would they get him back from Santa Barbara? Because he had not officially left. And so he was stuck in Santa Barbara, it was terrible weather. It was raining, and he was stuck there for a week. And fortunately, Henry Kissinger had taken a Jetstar down to see one of his [inaudible] in Mexico. And that plane had come back up to 29 Palm to resurface. So that is how they got him back. They had to put him in the closet of the plane to get him back Washington. Another time, he bolted from the White House and he went to Lincoln Memorial, and stood in the rain in front of Lincoln Memorial, soaking wet, for an hour, just staring at Lincoln. And of course, the more intense that Watergate story got, the better it, got. I mean, I could not wait to get to the White House in the morning. I mean, I would have paid thousands of dollars just for the privilege of going to those briefings. Because with Ron Ziegler up here, and Jerry what was his name dismantling Nixon, and all the craziness that was going on. And of course, during that period, I had, I think 20 of my 50 covers just on Nixon. And my trick was... And the other guys never caught onto it. My trick, from day one, was to use the longest possible lens that I could find. And so where my colleagues were all using 80 to 200-millimeter lenses, from his speeches, I was using eight hundreds. And I was getting in so tight on his face because I wanted to see those eyes. And there is a very famous picture in my covers of, it was taken during the American Legion Convention in New Orleans, and it was toward the end of Watergate. And he was walking into the convention hall, and he was not sleeping at all. There was just this wildness in his face. And as he was going into the hall, a reporter said, " Mr. President, what about the missing eight and a half [inaudible]?" And Nixon turned around and grabbed Ron Ziegler, and just hurled him backwards, yelling, keep those bastards away from me. And then he went on stage and there is this haunted face of Richard Nixon, where it is all there. The whole thing. The whole crazy is all there. So I mean, he was a wonderful story, you could not ask for anything better than that. SM (01:22:37): Was Agnew an important part of that story too? DH (01:22:40): In retrospect, no. Early on, yes. And then, of course, Gerry Ford, who is probably the sweetest guy ever be president. Really very nice man. Never had any desire at all to be president. Perfectly happy up on the house. And loved photographers. He used to come over to the house for drinks. Almost fell off our balcony one night. But just a really nice man. And that gave way to Carter, who was just, as I say, just a mess. I will never forget one time he was at Normandy, visiting the graveside soldiers to [inaudible]. And it was a gorgeous spring day, and he was with Valérie Giscard d'Estaing. And Valérie Giscard d'Estaing was... Hang on a minute. SM (01:24:23): Yep. DH (01:24:23): Are you there? SM (01:24:23): Yep, I am here. DH (01:24:23): Good. I dropped my phone. SM (01:24:23): Okay. DH (01:24:23): Anyway, Valérie Giscard d'Estaing was this very handsome, tall, distinguished looking guy. And he was wearing this bespoke [inaudible] suit. And next to him is this guy, in this Colombo [inaudible], looked like a flasher. And that was Jimmy Carter. And so that is when we started calling him the [inaudible] Flasher. SM (01:24:58): Oh my God. DH (01:25:05): And then after Carter... SM (01:25:07): Reagan. DH (01:25:09): Reagan, and I have already talked about Reagan. And then I have Clinton, and I have talked to you about Clinton. SM (01:25:19): George Bush I. DH (01:25:21): Oh, yeah. George Bush I. How could I forget George Bush I? Again, a very good friend of mine. And a very loosey goosey guy, except when he was deciding to go to war. Basically, a very decent man. And I will never forget, when after Saddam Hussein had invaded Kuwait, and Bush had been up at Kennebunkport, and he came back later that day. And he walked off of Air Force One, and I knew George Bush very well, the face that I saw, I had never seen before. It scared the living shit out of me. And somebody turned to him as he was going in the door of the White House and said, "So what are you going to do about Saddam Hussein?" And he pointed and said, "Wait. Just wait and watch." I said, "Whoa." And of course he did. Yeah. And wait [inaudible] war. But by and large, he was fun to be around. Hilarious. If you look at some of the pictures on my site, there are all these really funny pictures of him. He liked making fun of himself. He was deliberately goofy. And then there is George W. Bush, who I hate. Totally nasty man. Nasty in ways I cannot even calculate. But he is a bully. And he thinks he is too clever by half. And I have no regard for him whatsoever. SM (01:28:05): Yet he has got a really nice wife, Barbara. DH (01:28:09): No, that is George H. SM (01:28:11): Yeah, I mean Laura. DH (01:28:12): Laura. Yeah. SM (01:28:15): And then of course, you have got a really nice picture on your website of President Obama. He is only been in there two years, but I guess your thoughts on him so far. DH (01:28:25): Well, I think he is doing the best he can. I mean, God help you. I mean, who would want to be in that position? The mess he has inherited. And I do not think he has made any big mistakes. I think he has strapped himself with an overwhelming schedule. And I think doing as well as he can. Time will tell. SM (01:29:04): Yeah. It is amazing how people... He says that he tries to not be identified with a (19)60s generation, and he tries to disassociate, yet his critics say he is the epitome of it. That he is farther to the left than in any other president. Which, they may just be critics saying it, but he cannot seem to win no how, no matter what he does. What are your thoughts on the two pictures that were very big during the Vietnam War. And as an observer, as a photographer observing another person's photography, what did you think of the picture, the girl in the pitcher? With Kim Fuchs? And the second picture was the colonel killing the Viet Cong person in, I guess it was Saigon, or whatever it was. DH (01:29:52): Yeah, of course. Both of those were taken by very dear friends of mine. Colonel [inaudible] being killed, that was [inaudible] Eddie Adams. SM (01:30:01): Right. DH (01:30:01): And that- DH (01:30:03): ... [inaudible] Eddie Adams. SM (01:30:01): Right. DH (01:30:01): And that is certainly one of the most influential pictures that is ever been taken. It definitely turned the direction against the war. There is no question about it. And it is a picture that haunted Eddie Adams until he died. He wished he had never taken it. And then the Kim Phúc picture, that is taken by another friend of mine. And I think that is a lesser picture than the Eddie Adams picture, which of course on a scale of one to 10 is 10. But again, that was an influential picture. SM (01:31:03): And of course the other pictures, the My Lai pictures, which seemed to say to Americans that our troops are committing atrocities. And what did you think of all the coverage of My Lai? Because it got a lot of press. It was on the front cover of magazines, and people refer to it all the time. DH (01:31:25): Yeah, exactly. Yeah. SM (01:31:30): Did you think that from... depending on who you talked to, this was happening all the time in Vietnam, or was this just one of those rare happenings? DH (01:31:42): Well, I think it happened a lot more, most people realize. In a war where there are no lines and you have these guys with guns walking through villages, and those guys had been shot at an hour before, that sort of stuff happened. SM (01:32:12): One of the questions that I have asked everybody from the time I started with Senator McCarthy back in (19)96 was the question of healing, this issue of healing. I took a group of students to Washington, D.C. in 1995 to meet former Senator Edmund Muskie, who was the vice presidential candidate in 1968 at the Democratic Convention in Chicago. And the students that went with me came up with this question. They were not born at the time, but they had seen all the videos of that year, 1968, and what happened in Chicago. And their question was this: "Due to all the divisions that were happening in America at the time, 1968, divisions between black and white, male and female, gay and straight, those who supported the war, those who did not, those who supported the troops and those who did not, do you think the (19)60s generation, the Vietnam generation, will go to its grave, like the Civil War generation, not truly healing, due to the tremendous divisive issues that tore us apart?" I will give you what Senator Muskie's response was after I hear yours. DH (01:33:26): You know what? I do not think so. I think time has passed. I mean, I certainly do not find myself dwelling on it. SM (01:33:39): Do you think we as a nation have a problem with healing? And what has the wall done in Washington, D.C. to help this process? Some people say it has really helped the vets and their families, but the question is, as Jan Scruggs, when he wrote in his book, To Heal a Nation, has it really gone beyond the vets? DH (01:33:59): Yeah. Well, no, I think for the vet, I mean, that is who it is for after all. And so, no, I love the wall. I think it is a beautiful tribute and I think that is great. SM (01:34:15): So you would not put the Vietnam generation in the same league with the divisions that took place during the Civil War? Because it is well documented they did not heal from that war. DH (01:34:30): Yeah. Well, except that was a big difference. It was fought here on our property, on our country. Everybody was involved. SM (01:34:45): Right. The other question is the issue of trust, obviously because of a lot of the leaders lied to members of the boomer generation throughout their youth. Obviously the biggest examples are Watergate with President Nixon, but we also know the Gulf of Tonkin with President Johnson. And more astute young students, and there were many of them, saw the lies that Eisenhower even gave in 1959 on the U-2 incident where he said it was not a spy plane. And then you had all the numbers that McNamara was giving on the troops, and we knew that those were not actual numbers. So there was a sense that no one trusted anybody in a sense of responsibility, whether it be a university president, a corporate leader, a congressman, a senator, a principal. No matter who they were, there was this lack of trust. Do you think that is been a negative quality within the generation? It has been characterized as part of them, or do you see anything positive in that? DH (01:35:52): What concerns me is the divisions that are deepening among citizens. It used to be you could go to a dinner party in Washington and the table would be full of Democrats and Republicans. That would not happen today; one or the other. You are either a Democrat or a Republican. And as somebody who has lived for a long time in Washington and taught people there every day, it is the thing that I think bothers everybody the most. Half of the population is not talking to the other half. And I cannot remember any time that that has happened. And I credit to a large extent the rise of cable pundits who are yelling at each other 24 hours a day, except on Saturdays. They take off on Saturday. But I think they are responsible to a large degree. I think that we are suffering from a breakdown in civility that I think is just going to get worse. And I only know, is now we have got these commissions at work. Everybody is [inaudible] is going to start getting [inaudible] simultaneously. That could be a lot of very pissed off people. SM (01:37:53): Do you see any links there between the divisiveness in the (19)60s? Because a lot of people were not talking to each other back then, they were shouting people down at times and were not listening to the other side. Do you see any kind of link between then and now? DH (01:38:06): Totally different. Totally different. I think that you had a lifestyle conflict which would manifest itself primarily in the long hairs versus the short hairs. And of course, you always had the police on the side of the short hairs. And so I think that that was a lifestyle division. This is a much more ... How do you explain this? This is a division over who gets what. And I think it is going to be very nasty. SM (01:39:09): I have only got three more questions and then I am... One of the things here, and I know you say this in your literature, and I know it was important, regardless of what we say about Richard Nixon, the pros and the cons, we got to give credit for him in terms of his trip to China, and you were- DH (01:39:33): Oh, absolutely. SM (01:39:35): Yeah. I would like to you to talk about in your own words, as a person who not only took pictures and have said that this is one of the most important experiences you have went through, how important that trip was to this country and to this world. DH (01:39:50): Well, as somebody who was chosen to photograph that trip to China, I have always regarded that at the high point of my life. And I certainly think it is at the pinnacle representing what a person of the United States is able to do. This was a... I guess you would call it a Hail Mary pass, that Kissinger and Nixon cooked up one summer. And we were in San Clemente, and Kissinger disappeared for a week and came back and we discovered he had been to China. And that was the beginning of the process of setting that trip up. But there has never been a more important presidential trip. And I do not see how there could ever be, unless maybe we are sitting on the confrontation of World War III. But it changed everything. Because of that trip, China and Russia stopped supporting North Vietnam. And so it was the precursor to ending the Vietnam War, really. Totally realigned world politics, shifted alliances. And it was responsible... Hello? Hello? SM (01:41:54): Yeah, I am here. Yeah. DH (01:41:56): Okay. It was responsible for liberating China from [inaudible] and start them on a path which God only knows how that is going to finally play out. But that one trip changed everything. And there is another trip I want to mention to you because it is along the same lines. And that was the trip to the Soviet Union for the SALT agreement. And I do not know if you remember when that happened, but that was two weeks before Nixon resigned. And he did two trips back-to-back in a 10-day period in that period immediately before he resigned. One was he went to India and Israel, and the other was he went to the Soviet Union. And Nixon and Kissinger were frantic to get the SALT treaty signed the, because they knew time was running out. And so Kissinger went to see... Was it Brezhnev then, I think? I think it was Brezhnev. But Kissinger went to see him and he said, "Listen, we need to have a talk. As you realize, the president is under extraordinary pressure in the United States." Can you hang on just a sec? SM (01:43:59): Yep-yep. DH (01:43:59): Okay. The president is under ordinary pressure in the United States. He has not been sleeping well. I personally am very worried about his mental health. So I would recommend that when you have your discussion, you treat him very carefully, very carefully. And that is how we got the SALT treaty passed. SM (01:44:54): Geez. He did an awful lot toward the end. DH (01:44:57): Yes, he did. SM (01:45:00): Were you in the room when he resigned? DH (01:45:02): Yes, I was. SM (01:45:02): Yeah. I remember watching that on television, and by golly, that was an emotional event with his family right there behind him and his thanking all of his staff. And yeah, I remember he talked about his mom. Would you say of all the presidents we have talked about that really were alive when the boomers in their lives, that he is the most Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde? He can have the greatest moments and then he can have the worst moments, extremes, almost like psychosis or something psychologically. DH (01:45:40): Yeah, absolutely. SM (01:45:41): That seemed to be a another really... even though it was a sad moment, he said the right words. DH (01:45:48): Yeah. Well, he was a great president, except he was crazy. SM (01:45:54): Yeah-yeah. Well, Bobby Muller, when he came back from Vietnam, the person who founded Vietnam Veterans of America, this is a famous quote from him. He said, "I knew that when I came back from Vietnam, that America was not always the good guy," because he had been a Marine and he went in there, and of course he was injured. But he saw things that we have discussed in the late (19)60s over in Vietnam, and knew some things. Is that what a lot of veterans were saying around that time, that for the first time... I know in World War II, we did not say that. I do not think in Korea we said that. But a lot of Vietnam vets were saying, "America is not always the good guy." DH (01:46:40): Yeah-yeah. Mm-hmm. SM (01:46:41): Did you sense that from a lot of vets? DH (01:46:42): Not a lot, but some, yeah. SM (01:46:52): And then there was, in The Wounded Generation, which was a book written in 1980, there was a panel with Phil Caputo, James Fallows, Bobby Muller, Jim Webb, who is now Senator Webb. And they talked about the issue of the generation gap between parents and young people. But then Jim Webb said something that changed the discussion. He said the real generation gap, it was not really between father and son or mother and daughter, or whatever; it was between those who went to war and those who did not, those who fought the war and those who did not. And he was very critical in the discussion that this is what we call a service generation, i.e. Kennedy, the Peace Corps and serving your country when your nation calls... that in reality, the boomer generation is not a service-oriented generation. Your thoughts on the generation gap between those who served and those who did not, and the concept of service, which is often linked to the (19)60s generation. DH (01:48:00): Yeah-yeah. SM (01:48:03): Any thoughts? DH (01:48:05): Well, I personally, I told you I had a great job when I was in the Army. I personally benefited enormously from the draft. And I think that when the draft was discontinued, we lost something, lost something as a basis of shared service that we regret today. And the military's got broken. We cannot keep sending the same people back over and over and over again. You cannot keep on doing this. And I think you see the estimate of we are going to be in Afghanistan until 2014. Where are these people going to come from? So I personally am for the draft. It sure did not hurt me any, and I thought it was a very valuable experience. SM (01:49:37): I heard the other night on TV, Eliot Spitzer was talking, the former governor of New York, and he says he is for the draft. And quite a few of the Democrats now are starting to think, in fairness... because we all know about the fairness issue during the Vietnam War; in fairness, all people should be called. And that actually should be even service for everyone. And they went to the point of even people that may not be qualified for military service be required to do other kinds of service for two years. It is across the board, so you are not... just because you physically cannot do it, you still can do two years of service. I will end with this. Two other presidents we did not talk about, and they were the beginning when boomers were very young, and that is President Truman and President Eisenhower. Your thoughts on them? Because Eisenhower was the president that all the boomers saw in the (19)50s, this grandfather figure from (19)52 to (19)60. And of course the boomer generation was just going into 7th grade around the time President Kennedy was coming into office. Your thoughts on Eisenhower and Truman? DH (01:50:45): Yeah, I do not have any. SM (01:50:45): Do not have any? DH (01:50:46): No [inaudible]- SM (01:50:49): Pardon? DH (01:50:50): That is before my time. SM (01:50:52): All right. And the last thing, my very last question is this. I proposed that the (19)60s generation or the Vietnam generation that grew up in the (19)50s, before all these changes happened in the (19)60s, had three qualities. They were fairly naive, they were quiet, and there was a lot of fear within them. Fear, because of course the worry about nuclear annihilation, we all went through the tests at school. Some may have seen the McCarthy hearings, fearing about speaking up, being labeled a communist. Naive, just not really knowing what was going on in the world, certainly in the area of civil rights. You did not see a whole lot on TV in the (19)50s about some of these things. And then a fairly quiet generation. Those are qualities when boomers were very young, and then of course then John Kennedy in the (19)60s, and a lot of things changed. Do you think those qualities of fear, being naive and being quiet is pretty on-target for boomers when they were very young? DH (01:52:08): It is an interesting question. I think there is a pervasive fear right now that things are out of control. I think that fundamentals that we took for granted, that I would be able to always find a job, provide for my family, have a place to live and shelter and food, these fundamentals are now in grave question. And they have never been a question before, that I know, except for the homeless. But now everybody is potentially looking down the same barrel. And so I think people are... I am terrified. I think people are terrified. SM (01:53:37): Are there any questions that I did not ask that you thought I was going to ask? DH (01:53:39): No-no. SM (01:53:43): Do you have any final thoughts or comments on the boomer generation itself? DH (01:53:51): I think I pretty well talked it out. SM (01:53:55): When the best history books are written, it is often 50 years after an event. What do you think, let us say maybe 30, 40 years from now, historians and sociologists will be saying about the Vietnam generation once they have passed on? DH (01:54:20): I am not sure they are going to have much to say. It is already faded. I am glad we have that wall there. It is a reminder, but I do not think... You used to see, for example, lots of Vietnam vets. You do not see many anymore, because they are all dying away. And I think people are more preoccupied with the current crises that are coming down the road than they are thinking about Vietnam. SM (01:55:06): Or any of the stuff in the (19)60s- DH (01:55:13): Right, yeah. SM (01:55:14): ...all the movements. Do you think that is why we do not hear as much about civil rights and women's rights? And we hear a little bit more about gay rights because of the marriage issue, and then in the environmental issues, and the Native American, all the ethnic groups... They were very prevalent in the (19)70s and the (19)80s, but they seem to have waned. DH (01:55:41): Yeah-yeah. SM (01:55:41): By the way, I want to say that Edmund Muskie's response to that question, I did not give you the answer, about the healing issue. He said we have not healed since the Civil War in the area of race. And that is what he went on to talk about, so anyway. DH (01:55:57): Anyway. Well, I think that is probably true. I think it is getting much worse. I think we are basically watching the devastation of Black families. Looking at all the figures, it is an unbelievable thing. I mean, the Black family structure has totally disappeared. SM (01:56:30): When you think about all the things that are happening to the unemployed today, it is up at close to 10 percent, but now they say different parts of the country, it is 18 percent. But we talk about people's pensions are being threatened; in Pennsylvania, they are being threatened right now. And so Social Security can be become... What are people going to live on? I am just amazed at where we are heading. It is really scary. DH (01:56:58): Well, I told you, I am terrified. And I will tell you, there was a statistic I heard just the other day, which shocked me, which was [inaudible] the town that if you were a young white man with a prison record, you stood a better chance of getting a job than being a young Black man with no prison record. SM (01:57:34): That is amazing. That does not shock me. Wow. Well, I thank you very much. DH (01:57:44): Okay. Let me know how it works out. SM (01:57:46): Yeah, you will see the transcript eventually. I am going to be hibernating six months doing my transcripts. I am going to need two pictures of you. DH (01:57:55): Okay. That we can do easy. SM (01:57:57): Yeah. And I love that picture of you with all those book covers in the background. That is a great shot. DH (01:58:02): Okay. I can get that to you. SM (01:58:04): Yeah. And keep doing what you are doing. You are one heck of a photographer. I kept a lot of magazines over the years. I think I have got about seven of your magazine covers, and the one of George Bush I have. I know I have a stack here. I do not ever take the covers off a magazine. I keep the magazine. So I got boxes of magazines that I have kept over the years from my archives. So I have got quite a few of your covers on the original magazine. DH (01:58:31): Well, that is good. SM (01:58:35): Yep. Well, you have a great day, and thank you very much. I really appreciate it. It has been an honor to talk to you. DH (01:58:41): Okay, take care. SM (01:58:41): Take care. Bye. (End of Interview) Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Dirck Halstead Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Halstead, Dirck, 1936-2022 ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Photojournalists; Editors; Publishers; Halstead, Dirck, 1936--Interviews Description An account of the resource <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Dirk Halstead is a photojournalist, editor, and publisher of The Digital Journalist. Halstead started photojournalism in high school and at the age of 17, he worked with Life Magazine to cover the Guatemalan Civil War. He worked at United Press International (UPI) for 15 years after attending Haverford College. He has dedicated his life to photography and has created some great pieces of work.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:13057,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;11&quot;:4,&quot;12&quot;:0,&quot;15&quot;:&quot;Arial&quot;,&quot;16&quot;:10}">Dirck Halstead (1936-2022) was a photojournalist, editor, and publisher of <em>The Digital Journalist</em>. Halstead started photojournalism in high school and at the age of 17, he worked with <em>Life</em> magazine to cover the Guatemalan Civil War. He worked at United Press International (UPI) for 15 years after attending Haverford College. He has dedicated his life to photography and has created some great pieces of work.</span> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2010-11-14 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.124a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.124b Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 118:45 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/5d4c797751fa45bb17b6ae887e92a43b.jpg a4c079a074970c3da0c3993789e161d9 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/3b34154c31e6be1c012acf5563be5028.mp3 0e516e7b49bc6ac776ab65f050ed51c0 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Audio interviews Title A name given to the resource McKiernan Interviews Description An account of the resource Stephen McKiernan's collection of interviews includes more than two hundred interviews with prominent figures of the 1960s, which were collected between the mid-1990s to 2023 The collection provides narratives of people who were actively involved in or witnessed events in the 1960s, an era which spurred profound cultural and political transformation in the twentieth century. Interviewees include politicians, artists, scholars, musicians, authors, and veterans who delve into the decade’s most prominent issues and events, including the civil rights movement, the free speech movement, the anti-war movement, women’s rights, gay rights, segregation, the Vietnam War, Woodstock, Hippies, Yippies, and individualism.<br /><br /> <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player (Amplitude.js) This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 1996-09-21 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Harris Wofford Language English Biographical Text <span>Harris Wofford is a lawyer, educator, politician, author, and co-founder of the Peace Corps. Wofford has more than sixty years of experience, starting with the Army Air Corps in World War II and continuing through government and community service during the terms of ten Presidents. </span><span>Wofford also served as the first President of SUNY School at Old Westbury and Bryn Mawr College. </span><span>He received his Bachelor's degree from the University of Chicago and he graduated from Yale and Howard University Law Schools. </span> Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 1 Microcassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 62:11 Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{&quot;1&quot;:2,&quot;2&quot;:&quot;Vietnam Veterans; Baby boom generation; Contemporary American Society; Rock and Roll; Drugs; Andy Warhol; Jimmy Carter; Gerald Ford; Nineteen eighties; Bill Clinton; John F. Kennedy; Lyndon B. Johnson; Richard Nixon; Spiro Agnew; George H. Bush; George W. Bush; Barack Obama; Vietnam Memorial.&quot;}" data-sheets-userformat="{&quot;2&quot;:513,&quot;3&quot;:{&quot;1&quot;:0},&quot;12&quot;:0}">Vietnam Veterans; Baby boom generation; Contemporary American Society; Rock and Roll; Drugs; Andy Warhol; Jimmy Carter; Gerald Ford; Nineteen eighties; Bill Clinton; John F. Kennedy; Lyndon B. Johnson; Richard Nixon; Spiro Agnew; George H. Bush; George W. Bush; Barack Obama; Vietnam Memorial.</span> Subject LCSH Lawyers; Politicians--United States; Authors; Wofford, Harris--Interviews Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Senator Harris Wofford Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Wofford, Harris ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Lawyers; Politicians--United States; Authors; Wofford, Harris--Interviews Description An account of the resource Harris Wofford is a lawyer, educator, politician, and author. Wofford has more than sixty years of experience, starting with the Army Air Corps in World War II and continuing through government and community service during the terms of ten Presidents. <span>Wofford also served as the first President of SUNY School at Old Westbury and Bryn Mawr College. </span>He received his Bachelor's degree from the University of Chicago and he graduated from Yale and Howard University Law Schools. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1996-09-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.123 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 62:11