154
10
1775
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/85675ac05b2f4469cd57b606563e498e.jpg
ae68d53a4e584ba1d6bf13ef7fe11670
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/227288819d85c1196f5c5cd15ecfe6fd.mp3
f701598fe1945579dcd2245f69a9a4d3
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
1997-09-03
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen Mckiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Anthony Campolo
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Tony Campolo is a speaker, author, sociologist, pastor, social activist, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University and former faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Campolo was a spiritual advisor to U.S. President Bill Clinton. He has a Bachelor's degree from Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary at Eastern College and a Ph.D. in Sociology from Temple University."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":5003,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,5099745],"6":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"10":2,"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial"}">Dr. Tony Campolo is a speaker, author, sociologist, pastor, social activist, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University and former faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Campolo was a spiritual advisor to U.S. President Bill Clinton. He has a Bachelor's degree from Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary at Eastern College and a Ph.D. in Sociology from Temple 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
MicroCassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Generational gap; Ethics; Baby boom generation; Protest; Religion; Cambodian invasion; Vietnam draft; Lottery; Healing; Vietnam War; War photos; Richard Nixon; Gerald Ford."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Generational gap; Ethics; Baby boom generation; Protest; Religion; Cambodian invasion; Vietnam draft; Lottery; Healing; Vietnam War; War photos; Richard Nixon; Gerald Ford.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
54:28
Subject LCSH
Authors; Clergy; Sociologists; Political activists--United States; Campolo, Anthony--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: Tony Campolo
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 15 July 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:01):
Dr. Campolo, the first question I would like to ask is in recent days, and in fact in recent years, there has been a lot of criticism of the Boomer generation in terms of blaming a lot of the problems of today's society on Boomers. Oftentimes we might hear a question, Newt Gingrich on the floor of Congress making generalizations about Boomers. George Will might write an article on the entire generation, blaming this group, that grew up in that era, for the problems of the breakup of the American family, including the divorce rate, the increase of drugs, the lack of respect for authority, and things like that. I would love to hear your thoughts on the Boomer generation and whether that criticism is a fair judgment of this 65 plus million.
TC (00:53):
I feel that the Boomer generation did rebel against authority. I think that it was a rebellion that perhaps was justified in some respects and in other respects it was not. The (19)60s, particularly, were a period where America was struggling to figure out what is right and what is wrong. [inaudible] Older people had absolute values of right and wrong when it came to personal behavior, and they were absolutistic about sexual activity, about what was right and what was wrong. They had absolute values about personal honesty. They had absolute values about respect, all those things that you mentioned. However, they abandoned any concept of absolute values and grappled with what, at the time, would have to be called situational ethics when it came to societal affairs. Case in point, civil rights, they would say, "Well, of course it is wrong to be discriminating against African American people." They would have said Black people, but it is not as simple as all of that. You got to consider the situation. We did not get into this mess overnight. We are not going to get out-out of this mess overnight. To expect immediate change, to expect that we are going to do everything right immediately on this issue is expecting far too much. We have to in fact be gradualists, very, very much into the situational ethic value system. The same thing can be said about the board in Vietnam. No one ever asked the question as to whether it was right or wrong. I do not think you could ask the older generation how we ever got into that war or what it was all about. There was a sense, however, that whether it's right or wrong, we need to stand behind our president. We have to stand behind our brave soldiers. Even if they are wrong, we must support them. And thus, the question was never, "Was the Vietnam War right, or was the Vietnam War wrong?" The question was always, "Are we going to stand behind the president and are we going to stand behind our soldiers, or are we going to be disloyal?" So, the issue was never phrased in terms of morality. It was phrased in terms of loyalty. This set up a conflict in which each generation accused the other of being immoral. The older generation said to the Boomers, "Look at you. You are smoking marijuana. You are sleeping around. You have rejected the sexual morays and values of our generation. You are libertine. You are immoral." The younger generation was saying to the older generation, "Look at you. You have maintained racial segregation. You oppress women. You propagate a war that is immoral without ever asking any questions about it." So that each generation was accusing the other of being immoral and there was a lack of respect across the line because neither group saw either the good or the evil, who never saw the good in those that stood against them, nor the evil in their own position. I do not think the older generation really understood the evil of maintaining a political economic system that fostered injustice, nor did the kids really understand the evil of deviating from moral patterns that their parents had established. There was a sense in which the kids saw the moral bankruptcy of the older generation on societal issues and hence felt that those people in the older generation had no moral authority with which to speak to them. To a large degree, I think that is right. I think that in fact, we lost our moral authority in their eyes because of our very refusal to deal with the social issues of our time in moral categories. We were very pragmatic, we were very realistic. We were very situational ethics oriented, and our kids lost respect for us, and that was the thing that gave them, I think, a sense that they had the right to create their own morality.
SM (06:33):
Very good. I got one follow-up. It is working. As a follow-up to this, if you were to look in 1997 at the Boomer generation, and Boomers are just hitting the age of 50, Bill Clinton is a forerunner of this. We also realize on some of the interviews that I have been doing that it is hard to define a generation, because people of 55 that I know in this process feel like they are closer to the Boomers than those that the younger Boomers might be, and Boomers being those born between 1946 and (19)64. If you are to look at the overall impact right now that the Boomers have had on America, could you give me again just a brief listing of the positive qualities of the Boomers, maybe some adjectives, and some negative qualities of Boomers, adjectives, knowing that Boomers are still right in their prime now and they still have many more years to live and produce?
TC (07:25):
I think the positive side was that they incarnated the best traits of liberalism. They were in favor of ending racism, sexism. They never really dealt with the gay issue in any significant way, although their openness to gay people was the beginning of the movement for gay and lesbian rights. They had a belief [inaudible] the government could be an instrument through which a just society could be created. They believed in the positive potentialities of political power. I do not think anybody believes in that anymore. I do not think we really see political power as something with positive potentialities. I think we almost see political power these days as a necessary evil that needs to be restrained and constrained. But in that era, they really believed that government could do things. They were the people who gave birth to the environmentalist movement. It's no surprise to me that a Gore and a Clinton should be such strong environmentalists, and an older man like Bob Dole does not quite get it. Decent to the core, but never really could grasp what all the fuss was on the environmental issue. I think that this generation, the Boomers also saw the evils that were inherent in corporate capitalism, and were suspicious of big business, and really raised questions as to whether or not we could have it just society unless big business was in some way constrained. Could we clean up the environment without restraining big business? I think of how they would have reacted if the information about the cigarette industry would have surfaced in the (19)60s rather than the (19)90s. There would have been an uproar on campuses. There would have been a furor that, beneath the surface, this is evil at its worst level. Corporate executives sitting around the table having concrete evidence that they have a product that is going to kill 450,000 Americans in any given year, and for the sake of profit repressing, suppressing that information. To me, the (19)60s, the Boomer generation, when they were in their collegiate years would have march, screamed, yelled, and would have, in fact, used that as a cause celebrity for bringing down the establishment. This is what American capitalism is about. I can just hear them. So, I think that that was their good side, that they saw the evils of corporate capitalism. They believed in government, they were idolists, and they really did believe that a better world was a social possibility. They believed they really could create a better world.
SM (11:28):
Negatives?
TC (11:31):
First of all, their values had no religious grounding. And I do not say that just because I am a religious person myself, but there was nothing beyond their own sense of right and wrong that legitimated their cause. They did not hear it. They did not hear a distant drummer. And so, when they marched out of step with others, they did so out of an existential decision, rather than out of a sense of oughtness from God. For instance, when I meet my friends from that generation, I recognize that many of them have given up and their response was, "You cannot change the system." And they gave up because their confidence was in themselves. And when they failed, there was no power to lean on beyond themselves. Religious people, on the other hand, I am talking about friends of mine like Jim Wallis.
SM (12:50):
He wrote a book.
TC (12:50):
Yeah.
SM (12:51):
On [inaudible], yeah.
TC (12:52):
The Soul of Politics
SM (12:52):
W-A-L-L-I-S. It is-
TC (12:55):
Yeah. But Jim is a guy who was active during the (19)60s. He is still active today. I would fall into the same category. It is an interesting thing, about a year and a half, two years ago, rather, it is a year and a half ago now, a group of us went down and protested the change in the welfare bill and were arrested in the capitol building. But the thing that was so interesting was that we were all older people. It was not the younger people that were there. There were elderly women given their... You went to court, as we had to explain why we did this, what happened? Why were not the young people there of this generation, number one? Number two is why we are the only people there to get arrested? Religious people, every one of us spoke out of a religious value system, so much so that the judge that hurt our case could say, "Instead of putting you in jail, I am going to ask you each to write an essay on why your religious convictions led you to stand against the government at this particular point." The fact that only the religious people are left, and the reason is that we recognize that the struggle is not a 20th century struggle, but the struggle is as old as the human race. And the calling to struggle is a calling from a God who transcends time and space. And hence we keep on struggling because we sense this higher calling and if we lose a battle and we lose more battles than we win, we lose battles in a cause that ultimately triumphs, which is what religion is all about. We do not have to see victory. I think the Boomer generation had to see victory. Victory would validate their efforts. And when they did not see victory, they did not have validation for their causes and hence gave up. And now they are selling stocks on Wall Street and have become part of that very establishment that they were so hard against. I think that the younger generation, that the Boomer generation to a large degree, was spoiled in the sense of being spoiled kids. In a sense, maybe more spoiled than this contemporary generation, because they were the last generation that knew that if they got a college education, there was a lot of money to be made after graduation. They never doubted that they were employable. They never doubted that the establishment would take them in on their own terms. This generation knows if they want to get a job, they would better play the ball game as the establishment prescribes it. I think another sense, I remember when the Cambodian invasion took place, there was a meeting at the Palestra at the University of Penn, and one student after another stood up and spoke against Nixon, the government, and all of that stuff, and a young man who is very religious but very radical stood, and he said, "How many of you believe in God?" Which seemed strange in the midst of this anti-war furor, and very few hands went up. He said, "We are the only ones who have a right to protest this war. And the reason is simple. If there is no God, then the highest law, according to the social contract theory, is the will of the people. Well, the people have spoken, they voted in Richard Milhous Nixon for a second turn. The American people want to pursue this war. We are a minority who oppose it. In a society like ours, we either have to win the election, which we did not, or go along with what the majority has prescribed. On the other hand, if you are religious, you never have to go along with the majority, because you are obligated not to the social contract, but to a biblical revelation." Strong point. And so, they were not grounded in anything beyond themselves. They were spoiled. They looked for, they had to succeed. They marched down to Washington like Joshua's army, marched around the city, blew their horns, and when the walls did not come tumbling down, they went home like spoiled little kids saying, "Darn it, they did not listen to us." So that is the negative side.
SM (18:03):
It is interesting and just a commentary for you in the next question, why is it? You know, I am of that generation, and I know that night when Nixon gave that-
TC (18:10):
Yeah.
SM (18:11):
...speech on Cambodia because it was April 30th, 1970.
TC (18:12):
That is right.
SM (18:14):
And I broke my arm that night. It was my senior year at SUNY Binghamton, and it was two, well, weeks away from graduation. And I was in the operating room at the point that that invasion was taking place. And our campus was just being torn apart before graduation. And I will never forget being in the hospital a couple days later, the doctor, I was in a terrible accident, who saved my arm, and I had the magazine that my parents had brought in of the girls sitting over the Jeff Miller, and the doctor saying, "I wish they would kill all those damn students." And this is the doctor that saved my arm. And it was at that juncture that I knew I had to get in higher ed because of the lack of communication.
TC (18:54):
But I think that Cambodian invasion showed both the best and the worst of us. We stood against injustice and the obscenity of bombing people who wanted nothing more than the right of self-determination. It also revealed the phoniness of us. I was at Penn teaching on the faculty there at the time. They called off final exams. They probably did at your school as well.
SM (19:20):
They did.
TC (19:21):
And the purpose of calling off final exams was that students could participate, so that they could talk over the issues, so that they could develop a strategy for changing America. That was the lofty reason for calling off the exams. If you remember, the day they called off the exams, everybody got in their cars and drove home.
SM (19:42):
I was in the operating room.
TC (19:43):
Yeah. Well, that is what happened.
SM (19:44):
Yeah.
TC (19:44):
That is what happened. The discussion ended at that point, and they shouted and said, "How can you have final exams when we must deal with these issues? How can you have final exams at this time of crisis?" And so, the administration's capitulated and said, "You are right. You are right. We must, in fact, call off exams so that the students can come together and talk, and discuss, and come up with a strategy." They called off exams and the next day everybody was gone, which said beneath this veneer of concern was really not as deep a commitment to social justice as appeared on the surface.
SM (20:20):
See, some of the individuals that interviewed, just your thought on this that when the draft, because one of the big things was to end the draft, and again, Boomers, when they felt that that they had one on that issue, that there were no other issues. And even though knowing that, at this particular juncture in time, in 1970, the evolution of the women's movement, the gay and lesbian movement, the Native American movement, well, Latino Chicano movement, they were all around that timeframe.
TC (20:49):
There is no question that it diffused a lot of the concerns, but I have to say that the anti-war movement predated the initiation of the draft. The anti-war movement, if you trace it out historically, basically before they were ever drafting for Vietnam in any way, there were strong protests emerging on campus. The teach-ins started very, very early on, I would say late (19)50s, early (19)60s, the teach-ins were already taking place. So, when the draft was instituted, that stimulated concern, because all of a sudden, "This is going to involve us." But even then, in the early stages of the draft, there was no real problem for students, because students were exempt, as you may recall.
SM (21:45):
Students.
TC (21:46):
And yet, even though students were exempt, the protest movements against the war were still in pretty high gear. When, of course, the lottery was introduced, then it took on higher proportions. There is no question that the lottery, and which brought in the drafting of young people who were in college threw fuel under the fire, but it was pretty intense opposition to the war long before it. As a matter of fact, one of the reasons for the lottery, intriguingly enough, if you go back and trace it, was that the students themselves were calling for it. They were arguing that the war was incredibly racist because the white students were away at the universities and exempt, leaving the inner-city Blacks as the only people left to draft. And so, there was a strong protest theme that the draft has to end because it is a genocide. Instead of them ending the draft, Nixon said, "You are right, it is racist. Therefore, we will start drafting college students, too." It was not exactly the result of the protest that they-
SM (23:05):
Todd-
TC (23:05):
...imagined.
SM (23:05):
...Gitlin did not say that.
TC (23:06):
What is that?
SM (23:07):
Todd Gitlin did not say that when I interviewed him. He would not, probably. He got a-
TC (23:14):
What would he say?
SM (23:14):
You know Todd Gitlin?
TC (23:14):
Yeah.
SM (23:15):
Because he still is a firm believer that any of those individuals that were in the movement on the left were right on everything.
TC (23:25):
Well, they may have-
SM (23:28):
And he has not changed at all. But you-
TC (23:30):
That is interesting.
SM (23:31):
...raised a good point because, you see, what you are bringing up something that someone else has not said, and that is great about this project, is that, you know, we are getting different perceptions on-
TC (23:40):
Hmm.
SM (23:40):
...different questions. If you were to look at the issue of healing, now, one of the concerns that I have seen at the Vietnam Memorial, I have gone down there the last five, six years at the Memorial itself, and tried to get a grasp on whether there has been healing within the Vietnam veterans, and maybe even the people who come to the wall who are not veterans. I would like your thoughts on the Vietnam Memorial that was put together in that was opened in 1982, your thoughts on its impact on America, whether the job that it has done with respect to healing within the Vietnam veterans themselves and in the Boomer generation.
TC (24:19):
Well, on a psychological level, I am sure that the wall in Washington has had-
SM (24:28):
Would you like some water?
TC (24:29):
No, thanks.
SM (24:29):
No?
TC (24:30):
... has had very positive therapeutic effects. To see these veterans that are weeping at the wall, leaving their medals there, in many instances, reaching out and touching the names of their comrades, all of this has had tremendous therapeutic value on a psychological level. I am sure there are social consequences for that. But I would dare say there is no healing on a societal level about Vietnam, that those who are convinced it was right are more convinced than ever. And those that are convinced it was wrong are more convinced than ever. A good example of this is the whole attitude system towards Bill Clinton, who opposed the war on moral grounds. Once again, the question is not whether was he right? Was he wrong? The question was he was not a loyal American. That is what the American Legion says about him. The question is not morality, the question is loyalty. And he was not "a loyal American." And they are still couching it in those terms. The fact that the President of the United States opposed the war on moral grounds, he was not draftable anyway, he was at Oxford. He was a student. He did not avoid the draft. People seem to forget that he did not do anything different than any other college student in America did. But in the midst of all of that, he said, "I am not going, but because I am not going to be drafted." But, on the other hand, and this is the big issue, "This war is wrong." And I find that all across America, the conservative political establishment still says, "We do not care whether it was right or wrong." We just know that you were over there at Oxford and you criticized the US government." That is where we are. And I do not know that there is going to be any social healing on this issue. And there can be no healing for the same reason why, on the individual level, there can be no healing until there is confession. If you're psychologically messed up because of something that happened 20 years ago, you got to get that out on the table. You got to talk about it. If you did something wrong, you got to repent of it. You got to set things right. You cannot simply repress the past. You have repressed Vietnam. I could go out there tonight and ask a very simple question of all your students. "Can anybody tell us what the Geneva Accord of (19)54 said and how that became the basis for war in Vietnam?" And there will not be one out there that will know, not a one. And these are educated people. We have done what the Japanese have done, we have written out of history those things that we would as soon forget. And so, you look at a Japanese textbook for a high school student, and you are amazed. They were the victims of America. They do not acknowledge the fact that they bombed Pearl Harbor. They do not acknowledge the fact that they invaded. It is all forgotten. And history is rewritten in such a way that they repress these things. And only recently, there are those in Japan who are saying, if we are ever going to heal the wounds of World War II, we have got to face up to our responsibility as a nation. Well, what we are saying, it is about time that Japanese do. My response is it is about time that America does, that we, in fact, still suffer from a guilty conscience because down, deep inside of people, there is an awareness that something went on there that was terribly wrong. We dropped more bombs on this little country than was dropped on all the rest of the world during all of World War II. We used chemical warfare, Agent Orange. We devastated the land. For what? What was the point? And if you were to go out there and say, "Did you know that the whole war was about trying to keep a free election from taking place?" Which is what it was about. The Accord of (19)54 guaranteed a free election in (19)58, and the people in Washington at that time knew that there was a free election in Vietnam. Ho Chi Minh would have been elected overwhelmingly. And so, we went to war to save people from voting, because if they voted, democracy would end. The incongruity of that. And if you went out there and- [inaudible]
SM (29:53):
Out there and asked the students.
TC (29:54):
They would not know that. And yet, that is history. So, we really have to say that, in that sense, these things, there will not be any healing. The healing will not take place because America is not ready to face up to what it is done. And I think it cannot face up to what it's done for a very important reason. A generation or two will have to pass away before we can face up to it. Senator Kerry gave a speech before the US Senate hearings on Vietnam when he was-
SM (30:38):
Senator from Nebraska?
TC (30:39):
No, the senator from-
SM (30:40):
Massachusetts.
TC (30:40):
...Massachusetts.
SM (30:40):
Okay.
TC (30:41):
...when he was the leader of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, and he was still in his uniform, he was still a soldier. I think he never has reached the pinnacle of greatness in that speech which will go down in history as one of the great speeches of history, as he said to the US Senate committee hearing, "How do you tell the last- "
Peggy (31:06):
"How do you ask a man to be the last- "
TC (31:06):
"How you ask a man to be the last man to die in Vietnam?" That is a good question. "How do you say to the families of 50,000 men who lost their lives there, 'It was a waste.' How do you tell them that? How do you tell them that they gave their lives, not only for nothing?" Which I think they are beginning to realize now. "Hey, our sons died, and what happened? Nothing." "But worse than that, your sons went over and died in order to perpetuate injustice. How do you tell American? How do you tell hundreds and hundreds of thousands of people who gave their finest and their best to this country they believed in, that not only was it in vain, it was worse than that, that their sons became the instrument of death for three million innocent people? How do you tell them that? That is the truth and how can there be healing when nobody faces the truth?"
SM (32:23):
You look at the Vietnam War, why did it end? How important were students on college campuses? How important was Middle America witnessing the body bags coming home on national television? Jack Smith said the reason why the war ended was because middle America finally saw what was happening. That was his thought. I interviewed him. But I have had different thoughts.
TC (32:46):
I do not know why it ended. I think that the American people, of course, demanded that it end, that, at a particular point, even Richard Milhous Nixon was trying to figure out how to end the war and he was the one that ultimately did. But let me just say that when I look at the end of the war, it never really ended. It just petered out. They closed in on the embassy, and we got on our helicopters, and we flew away, and there were nothing left. Nobody wants to face this. The war ended for one primary reason. We lost it.
SM (33:31):
[inaudible] that.
TC (33:32):
You do not ask the German people. "Why do you think World War II ended?" The answer is, "The Russians entered Berlin and the Yankees met them on the other side. It was over because we were destroyed." Please understand that the last image that I have of the war in Vietnam is a helicopter taking off and people hanging onto it, trying to get out, the Marines making their last escape. It was not like Hong Kong, where the British pulled down the flag, saluted, turned the country over. We left in the context of sheer chaos, and defeat, and confusion. The very fact that you asked the question is evidence to me why there will not be any healing. We have not faced the fact that not only were we involved in something that was totally immoral, but we are refusing to face the fact that we lost it. We are still kidding ourselves to think that we had a ceremony in which we decided to walk away. There was nothing left of us. They wiped out everything. They closed in, it was over.
SM (34:47):
Yeah. It is-
TC (34:48):
Then, when you ask, "Why do you think the war ended?" Answer, "We lost."
SM (34:54):
You are the first person to say that in 41 interviews.
TC (34:56):
Stop to think about it. Did not make any difference whether you were for the war or against the war. Ford was the President when it finally all fell apart. And when it happened, he introduced into Congress a bill to make another effort. And even the right-wingers voted him down. "We are out of there. It is over. It is done. It is kerplunk." What is it about this country, that we cannot face the fact that we sin and that we lose? Must we always be righteous and must we always win?
SM (35:40):
I want to get back to something. When I was young and a lot of people late (19)60s and early (19)70s, the Boomers who protested against the war, those got involved in many of the movements, used to always talk amongst ourselves, that, "We are the most unique generation of American history. The most unique generation of American history." As a person, I still feel we were personally, that is just-
TC (36:00):
Because you were.
SM (36:00):
...my feeling. But your thoughts on that kind of an attitude, that many of that generation of our generation felt? And then you look at as they have gotten older, and you have already made some commentary about the idealism of their youth waned because they wanted to make money on Wall Street. So, your thoughts on, well, we have had some people who said that, "World War II was the most unique generation of American industry. They fought a war. They won a war, they beat Hitler."
TC (36:30):
Yeah.
SM (36:30):
So, it is just your thought.
TC (36:30):
I think it is wonderful. But we won other wars before. Up until the Vietnam War, and the Vietnam War was the climax of something that began during Eisenhower's years. Peggy and I are old enough to remember something you do not remember. It was the U-2 episode. You have no idea what the U-2 episode told us. President of the United States said, "We do not spy. America does not spy." Can you imagine that? Can you imagine a president standing up and saying, "We do not spy. The Russians spy. We do not have spies." And guess what? We believed him. All of America believed Eisenhower when he said that. And the thing is that they dragged out Powers. We will always remember him. And they stood him up in front of the camera, and they said, "What were you doing?" "I was flying a spy plane." Think of the naïvete that we had, that we, as Americans, did not spy. I remember being in school in U-2, when they said, "Do you know what? People in places like Russia, when they read the newspaper, they cannot be sure that what they're reading is true. Aren't you glad that you live in a country where, when you pick up the newspaper, everything you read is true?" You refuse to believe that. But that was not just Peggy and me, that was all of America. We were the nation that did not lie. We were the nation that did not spy. We were the nation that did not commit sins. "America, America, God shed His grace on thee." We were the new Israel. We were the City on the Hill. We were the best hope for democracy. We were the people who were the free. America was the kingdom of God realized in history, and we believed it. We really believed it. And starting with Eisenhower, the disillusionment began to set in. And then beyond that, the cracks began to occur. "Was Jefferson really the wonderful man we thought he was, or did he have slaves? And was Washington really all that good? And what about Lincoln? Well, he abolished slavery. Did not you really believe in the inferiority of Black people?" And suddenly, Eldridge Cleaver wrote a book, Soul on Ice, that was crucial, in which he said, "The heroes of America are falling. We do not believe in them anymore." These heroes played the roles role of saints. They were the embodiment of all that was good, and true, and wonderful. Suddenly they were not that wonderful. Suddenly American was a spying nation, just like the Russians. And suddenly we realized that our newspapers lied to us. We could not believe what we read. And the disillusionment began to set in. And Vietnam was the clash between one generation that was the end of an era, the end of the age of innocence. I am not the first to coin that phrase. The end of the age of innocence. And the (19)60s and the Boomers were the beginning of the age of cynicism. And that was the clash between the two. This generation that came along called the Boomers just did not believe. Think of the songs. (singing) Do you know that song?
SM (40:24):
Mm-mm.
TC (40:29):
See, I do not think you can understand this here unless you understand music. I think Pete Seeger, Tom Paxton, Joan Baez defined the age, the transition came with The Beatles, who made social revolution into a private thing. "You got to get your own head together." That was their message. "Forget the world, get your own head together." But here were the songs of the year. (singing) See the cynicism right at the end? (singing) The cynicism right at the end. (singing) And this song by Tom Paxton. (singing) I remember this song.
SM (41:32):
That is my [inaudible].
TC (41:32):
You remember that song?
SM (41:35):
Yes.
TC (41:36):
"But you must teach me, Sergeant, for I have never killed before." Ooh. "Tell me about the hand grenade. Does it tear a man to pieces with its ... " And people were singing those songs. Bob Dylan singing, "The times- "
SM (41:54):
They are a-changin'
TC (41:54):
" ... they are a-changin'." Your sons and your daughters are beyond your control. There is a new value system out there, a new way of looking at things. We do not believe in you anymore. We do not believe in what you are teaching us. We do not believe in your sense of American history. We are not even sure we believe in American anymore.
SM (42:12):
I know Country Joe and the Fish was another group that sang, and in fact, country, Joe and the Fish did an album recently on Vietnam.
TC (42:20):
Yeah, it was an incredible era in which the music called everything into question. "Little boxes on the hillside, little boxes made of ticky tack." You remember those?
SM (42:37):
Mm-hmm.
TC (42:37):
The suburban dream that we all had. World War II, we were all going to buy a house in the suburbs. And suddenly, as Pete Seeger says, "What is this suburban community? Little houses on the hilltop, and people made of ticky tack and they all drink their martinis dry."
SM (42:54):
You made a very good observation, because most Boomers, and I being one, and others feel that the beginning of the change in the attitude of Boomers was assassination of John Kennedy. A Camelot, the idealism, "Ask for not what your country can do for you, but ask what you can do for your country." And you make a very good analysis here by saying, "A lot of the things in terms of cynicism started with Eisenhower."
TC (43:16):
Yeah.
SM (43:17):
The lies. And again, of course the free speech movement really began on the Berkeley campus in 1963. And they saw authority, just, they were not allowed to do something on a college campus. It spread nationwide, and young people got involved, freedom summer of (19)64 and so forth. But your thoughts, you have already talked about Eisenhower, but if you were to pick one major event that you think had the greatest impact on Boomer lives in their youth, what is that event?
TC (43:46):
Martin Luther King's death, maybe, if they were old enough to remember that, had America going up on flames. It had to be a defining moment.
SM (43:58):
We will finish up. It is 7:30.
TC (44:00):
Yeah.
SM (44:00):
I got a lot of questions, but I am at fault because you got our communication [inaudible 00:].
TC (44:04):
But I think that would be a key thing for me, was the death of Martin Luther King. And the reaction to that was not a reaction of, "Let us go on from here and carry out his ideals." The reaction to that was total frustration, the total polarization of the Black and white communities. Up until that time, we were singing Black and White (Together). You remember that song?
S
M (44:33):
Mm-hmm.
TC (44:35):
(singing)
Peggy (44:35):
[inaudible] we shall overcome.
TC (44:36):
We shall overcome, yeah. Suddenly, it was Black separatism, power now, and the Black people basically moved on the scene. This was the era when Muhammad Ali suddenly emerges on the scene and says, "I am not going to fight this war in Vietnam. So I got nothing against those people." You know?
SM (44:58):
Mm-hmm.
TC (45:00):
"And why should I fight to protect this America, this white America, that has trashed me and trashed my people? And we listened to him because there was a sincerity about him that could not be ignored. All of America saw a sincerity. Even those that despised him, despised him because of his sincerity. But I think that the death of Martin Luther King was the watershed for most young people, in which they had the sense that there would not be a peaceful, democratic solution to the agonies that were tearing this country apart.
SM (45:44):
This leads me into a question dealing with the issue of trust. Do you think we will ever be able to trust again? Now, you made reference to Eisenhower, and certainly, we know what happened with Watergate, and we saw what McNamara did, and the Gulf of Tonkin resolution, President Johnson was not really honest with the American public. So, we had a succession of leaders not being, and just basically-
TC (46:07):
Bipartisan.
SM (46:09):
... crooks. And as young people, as growing up, they see this. And certainly, maybe the first lies we are seeing with Eisenhower lying to the public. Just your overall thoughts about trust, and then, most importantly, when we look at today's young people, the people that you are going to be talking to tonight in this audience, I do not think they trust. And so, where have the Boomer parents been, raising their kids?
TC (46:31):
My argument would be that cynicism had its raise in [inaudible] the (19)60s, but cynicism has now taken on a life of its own. Cynicism is cool. It was a cheap excuse for ignorance. Namely, you have students in a campus who want to look sophisticated. They have not read anything. They do not know anything. But if they walk around with an air of cynicism, it will be a cheap duplication of intelligence. "But I do not believe in politics." "Why," should be the question. "Because they are all a bunch of liars." "Oh? What is the empirical evidence that you have rounded up for that?" They have no reason for their cynicism? It is cynicism without a hook to hang it on. And it's part of the cultural milieu. It is part of what goes with being cool. And if you want to be cool on Westchester's campus, you better act cynical. And if you cannot explain the faces of your cynicism, that is all right. You can put people off simply by using obscenities like, "It's all a lot of bullshit." That is their word, bullshit. Everything's bullshit. And they sound like they have been there, and back, and they know it all. They have read it. They have experienced life. They know what life is all about. The truth is they do not know anything. It has become part of a garb that displays itself as intelligence when in fact it is just a cool way to be. And when cynicism is admired, the cynic should always be cynical, with tears in his eyes, not with the sneer on his lips. The cynic says, "I cannot believe in America anymore." And the tears are running down his cheeks because he cannot believe anymore. But to do it with an arrogant sneer, that, of course, is unbefitting any human being.
SM (49:07):
I am going to close over this question. The final question was going to be actually asking you a lot of names, here, and just getting your response, but I think the basic thrust of what I am after is in the meat of the interview in the beginning. I want to get into your thoughts on the concept of empowerment. Going back again to when Boomers were young, there was a feeling, a sense that, "We can be the change agents for the betterment of society, that we could possibly be the ones to end the war, that we could be the ones to bring Black people and white people together," you know, "because we see the injustices in- "
TC (49:38):
Mm-hmm.
SM (49:38):
" ...society, the injustices against women, injustices against gay and lesbians," all that whole period. Just your thoughts on this concept of empowerment that supposedly so many Boomers had as when they were young, and what has happened with a concept of empowerment today as they have gone into adulthood.
TC (50:01):
Well, I think that the best example of that may be with Bill Bradley, who still believes in the ideals of the (19)60s. I think he is really the best example of the answer to your question. He thought if he went to Washington and became a senator, and maybe even president, he could change things from the top down. He has not given up the idea of empowering people. "But you do not empower people," he is concluded, and I have talked to about this, "by seizing control of the government and doing what is right from the top down. Empowerment begins from the bottom up." And so, he has now gone on to identify with the communitarian movement. "And what we need to do is we need to people together on the grassroots level. We need town meetings. We need to gather people together in a given neighborhood, and have them exchange ideas, and determine what is best for their neighborhood. We need to stop looking to Washington for the answers and start looking to ourselves for the answers." And there is the initiation, I would say, of a whole new politic in America, that maybe is going to be led by the Boomers, who said, "We took a shortcut. We really made a mistake. We said, 'The way for you to have power is to elect me, and I will make the decisions.' No, the way to make power is for me to step out of office." That is why I say Bill Bradley, as a model, is me to say, "The answer is not you elect me. See, you have power, now. No, you do not have power. If you elected me, I have power. And all you have done is given me power." I love Bradley's comment, "People do not live in a democracy just because they are able to elect their kings. If the person up top functions like a king, the fact that he got the crown through tradition and inheritance or that he was elected king makes no difference if he functions like a king." And so, you have a Bill Bradley that said, "I thought that the way for people to be empowered is for them to elect me. I now see that the way for the people to get power is for me to give up my office, and go back, and organize grassroots meetings to get people to seize control of their destinies. And if they cannot do it on a national and international level, at least they can do it on the community level." That is why organizations like Habitat for Humanity are thriving, because the X generation has picked up that theme. "We, too, want to change the world, but we're going to change it from the bottom up, not from the top down. We are not going to go to Washington and ask them to put in a new government housing program. We are going to build a house up the street and we're going to do it ourselves. And when it is done, we are going to look at it and say, 'See, we did not change the world, but there's one family now that has a house.'" And Habitat for Humanity now is picking up momentum. And I was on the executive committee of Habitat for Humanity in its earliest stages of development. And we thought it was great when we completed 1,000 houses a year. Now we're completing 50,000 houses a year across the country. It is picking up momentum all the time. And there is a bottom up change. And so when you go to Washington and hear the State of the Union address, there is Newt Gingrich wearing a Habitat for Humanity button on his lapel, and there's Bill Clinton wearing his Habitat for Humanity button on the lapel. Both of them are committed to Habitat for-
SM (54:09):
Democrat-
TC (54:09):
...Humanity.
SM (54:09):
... nd Republican alike.
TC (54:10):
Yeah. So whatever is going on up here, there is a sense that real power and real change is going to take place from the bottom up and not from the top down. And I think that is the great discovery of the X generation as opposed to the Boomers.
SM (54:24):
Well, thank you very much.
TC (54:25):
Okay.
SM (54:25):
I will let you get some-
(End of Interview)
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. Tony Campolo
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Campolo, Anthony ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Authors; Clergy; Sociologists; Political activists--United States; Campolo, Anthony--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Tony Campolo is a speaker, author, sociologist, pastor, social activist, Professor Emeritus of Sociology at Eastern University and former faculty member at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Campolo was a spiritual advisor to U.S. President Bill Clinton. He has a Bachelor of Arts from Eastern Baptist Theological Seminary at Eastern College and a Ph.D. in Sociology from Temple 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
1997-09-03
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.10.2016.62
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
113:55
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/2ed57e20ff708551da3157ae3a3e8921.jpg
ef749c7ec55504af22e07f4c688ffde3
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b4ee3217d63fe8521477f757e1bcfb6d.mp3
8566fafd4a41a7ef5dba9cff73855a38
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
2007-07-15/17
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Judith Campbell
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Judith Campbell is a sister of a Vietnam Veteran who died in the war. She is linked to the group of families of the Vietnam veterans whose names are inscribed on the wall. Campbell is an active participant in The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund (VVMF) ceremonies and programs, as well as a strong supporter of the Education Center at The Wall. Judy C. Campbell lives in Wilmington, Delaware, and works on behalf of Gold Star Families everywhere."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13311,"3":{"1":1},"4":[null,2,16777215],"5":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"6":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"7":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"8":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"9":0,"10":2,"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Judith Campbell is a sister of a Vietnam Veteran who died in the war. She is linked to the group of families of the Vietnam veterans whose names are inscribed on the wall. Campbell is an active participant in The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund (VVMF) ceremonies and programs, as well as a strong supporter of the Education Center at The Wall. Judy C. Campbell lives in Wilmington, Delaware, and works on behalf of Gold Star Families everywhere.</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
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"The Nineteen sixties; Nineteen seventies; Vietnam War; Flag etiquette; Post-traumatic stress disorder; Activism; Government trust; Robert Mcnamara; John F Kennedy; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. "}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">The Nineteen sixties; Nineteen seventies; Vietnam War; Flag etiquette; Post-traumatic stress disorder; Activism; Government trust; Robert McNamara; John F Kennedy; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. </span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
113:55
Subject LCSH
Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund; Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Veterans; Sisters; Campbell, Judith--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: Judy Campbell
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 7 July 2007
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:09):
Okay, thank you very much for doing the interview. First question I would like to ask is, when you think of the (19)60s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind? When you think of the (19)60s and early (19)70s... And again, the (19)60s and early (19)70s, that period up to about 1973 is still considered part of the (19)60s, a lot of people in the history books consider that. But what comes to your mind when you think of that era?
JC (00:00:45):
Well, when I think of the (19)60s, I immediately think of Vietnam. It was a teenager during that time and the evening news was, "Vietnam-Vietnam-Vietnam-Vietnam." And friends, and loved ones, and family members went to Vietnam, so the first thing I think of is Vietnam when I think of the (19)60s. I know there has been a lot of emphasis on the Vietnam era, the Woodstock era, and the hippies and everything, but to me, I think that was really a small minority of people, it was just that they were in the press. I mean, there was a large majority of people who were not involved in that, but I think there was an unfair assessment that was the typical person growing up in the (19)60s, was a hippie that went to Woodstock, the love generation kind of thing.
SM (00:01:59):
Was there one experience for you that set up, the (19)60s began for me, your personal experience? And also, when did you know that period was over based on a personal experience in your life?
JC (00:02:18):
For me, the (19)60s began in (19)67. As I said earlier, I was just a teenager, I was a kid, I was wrapped up in my school life, my friends. But in (19)67 my brother left for Vietnam, and I remember vividly standing outside the circle of Washington National Airport now Raegan Airport. And it was beautiful January sunny day, we did not even have coats on it was so beautiful. And I took my brother to the airport, and we stood outside the circle, he had on his Green Beret uniform, and he would not let me go into the airport with him. He embraced me, patted me on my fanny, and told me three things which I will never forget. One was, "I am doing this to keep you free. Men with wives and babies should not have to go. My medic skills are needed." And then he turned and he went into the airport, and that was the last time I saw him tragically, 19 days later he was killed. Interestingly enough, my husband and I recently took a trip back to Washington and we went to go to that very spot, as my husband never knew my brother. However, over the years, Richard has often said to me he knows him through me, but based upon the timeframe of when my brother left, Richard said, "I probably checked him in." Because Richard was working at United Airlines at the ticket counter. So we went back to the airport, and it was really funny because the airport's totally different. And we went to the ticket counter, we were hesitating to go to the ticket counter to speak to these ticket agents at their line behind the counter. And we looked at one another and we said, "They are so young, they are not even going to know what we are talking about." Well, a police officer who was very young as well saw us, and came up to us, and evidently they must train the police officers who work at National Airport about the history of the airport, because we told him specifically the spot we were looking for and he directed us to it. And we told him a reason and everything, and he was very gracious. We went to the very spot, and we were able to stand in the spot where I last saw Keith, and wanted to walk through the door that he had walked through, which is now boarded up. The construction crew were working on the door, and they said, "Sorry lady, we just boarded this up. We cannot take the board down, but it is a good thing you came when you did because it is going to be concrete pretty soon, and you are not even going to see the board." So we were able to stand in the doorway per se, with a board behind us, at the exact space where my brother walked through. And the ticket counter is now a storage closet, and the gentleman allowed us a tour of the storage closet. So we went down memory lane, it was a nice venture. But to answer your question about... That was the biggest thing to me, because it was such a rude awakening to me to get out of my own little world, teenager, school, friends. I had a rude awakening to what life was really all about.
SM (00:05:42):
When did it end?
JC (00:05:49):
I do not think there is an ending, I think the boomers of the (19)60s' generation have a tremendous impact on the youth today. There seems to be a perception even in the workforce, that there is not always the respect there for the boomers, but there is a two-sided story there. You tend sometimes to have the younger generation think, my education, my knowledge, I may be your boss someday, which sometimes often is very much the case. Your boss is much younger than you are, and sometimes the age of your own children. And then boomers sometimes tend to have that attitude, "Hey, look, I have been here longer than you have. I have climbed the ropes." And there is a lot of truth to be said for both, but there needs to be a respect between the two. And I think with my generation, I really felt that there was more family time. I have a friend of mine who runs a daycare center, she was having the worst time getting the children to sit down for lunch, she could not figure out why she could not control these children to sit down for lunch. So she finally sent a survey home to the parents about, "What time do you have dinner? Where do you eat dinner?" And 99 percent of the responses came back, "Hey, I do not get home from work till 7, 7:30 at night, the kid is almost ready for bed." Bottom line was the children do not have that family time, that quality time, sitting down and eating meals together. Whereas I think there is a lot to be said for the generation where I grew up, it was very important, family time. I mean, my mother was a single parent with four children and worked three jobs, but there were certain routines in our family that she never allowed to not take place. i.e. Sunday night was always popcorn night, The Ed Sullivan Show, and curling up with mom, and time together. And I do not think there is enough of that anymore, I think the younger generation today raising their own children can really learn a lot from us. And our generation as well, we were children of parents from the depression, and our parents wanted to provide for us the things that they did not have. And we were financially, that timeframe in our country, economy wise, I think probably in one of the best shapes we were ever in. And I think the youth today need to understand that it is important for them not to live on credit, but to strive to work to own something, be it their own home, or car, or just to learn the value of money, and not this perception that things should just be handed to them. And I would even go a step further with that, with our freedoms. I think there is just a perception by so many people sadly, that we just assume we can get up in the morning, and go to work, and go to the gym, and go do our extracurricular activities, and not think about anything else. And I am reflecting on a conversation I had with a Gold Star Mother just earlier today, because she had written a letter to the editor, and I was calling her on a different matter. But recently she had a letter to the editor about we are having some warm weather here lately, in the (19)90s, which is a little unseasonably hot for us. And she was saying, "People are complaining about being in this hot weather." She said, "Think about our men and women overseas carrying all their gear and it is 130 degrees." I just think there is a lot... Now that we are in a war again, there is a lot that people do not appreciate and value. And one of the main things that I think they should really appreciate the value of is our freedom. They affectionately call me at work flag lady, because I keep them straight on the flag etiquette issues. And they affectionately call me that, but they also know why I am a flag lady, because it is not a piece of cloth.
SM (00:10:42):
A very good thought. So what are your thoughts on the boomer generation? And again, when we define the boomer generation, some people will say it's individuals that were born between 1943 and 1961, and then others will say it's those individuals born between (19)46 and (19)64, but basically in that basic timeframe. There has been a lot of criticism by critics like George Will, and Newt Gingrich, and others complaining that the boomer generation is really a lot of the ills of our current society today, we can blame right on that generation, their lifestyles, the way they lived, all the characteristics, their activism, and so forth. What are your thoughts on those individuals who criticize the boomer generation for creating the problems we have in our society, and what are the problems? Again, defining the issues on drugs in our society, the issue of broken families, divorce rates being higher than they have ever been, just the overall characteristics of some of the ills of our society today, and blaming it on the generation.
JC (00:12:11):
I actually think that that is a real misconception, because I think as I said earlier, the percentage of people who did the drugs, and the love movement, and the hippie movement, and all that, were a minority. And I think it is a very unfair assessment to say that the boomer generation was creative of all these negative things. I do not know if it was, because that generation, there was so much. If you look back at film clips from the (19)60s and (19)70s in the news, you will see so much about Woodstock, and the drugs, and the hippies. And I think even my own children probably thought I drove around in a VW bus with peace symbols on it, that was not true. I think it really... Maybe it is a media to blame, I do not know. But there was just too much emphasis put on that, and I really think it was maybe 5 percent of the people were in that category. Actually, I think it's unfair and unjust to say that, because the boomers I know turned out to be very productive citizens who have good jobs, work hard to provide for their families, and are successful contributing citizens. So, I just do not fall into that acceptance of that.
SM (00:13:44):
When you think of...
JC (00:13:44):
When you think of specific individuals, as you mentioned, I think that was a small percentage of people, I truly do. And I just think people tend to sometimes... You want to look at the glass half full or half empty, I am the type of individual that wants to look at it half full. And I think a lot of people then when they're looking at this, are looking at the negative and the half empty glass, and pulling into these individuals. I really do not think that they have the impact that people tend to say that they do.
SM (00:14:19):
It is interesting because this is 2007, and all you are hearing about in some of the higher education materials is the Summer of Love of 1967, which this is 40 years ago.
JC (00:14:30):
And you are still hearing that.
SM (00:14:31):
Yeah, you are still hearing it now, anybody who was in the Bay Area knows that was big. That was big, the Summer of Love, and the music and everything, so there is definitely an impact here. But how many people were actually part of the Summer of Love when you really think about it within the...
JC (00:14:59):
Geographically, you could not have even gotten all those people in Woodstock if you tried.
SM (00:15:01):
Right. Yeah, they were kind of happenings for the people that were there and all. But if you look at the boomer generation now, and again, when someone who might counter what you just said in terms of, "Well, the boomers were 70 million strong, and maybe 15 percent were involved in activism and involved in some of the activities, anti-war movement, civil rights, women's movement and so forth." And some of the interviews I have had come up with that 15 percent as well. But the 85 percent who were not involved were subconsciously affected by this. So, when you look at the bloomer generation as a generation, what are the positive qualities that you see in this generation, and what are some of the negative qualities that you have perceive?
JC (00:15:52):
Well, I would say some of the positive qualities were there was more family time, more openness and communication. And maybe that is why somebody can come back and say all this hippie stuff, whatever, but that was their way of expressing the openness and the feeling of freedom. There was more openness and honesty, and even if there was an era of disagreement, there was a respect with that disagreement, and an acceptance of difference of opinion and values. I would say the least admired, who were rebellious, and tended to lead the forefront for generations. I keep emphasizing that, I do not really think that there were that many of them, I just think there was more emphasis put on them. But I really think our generation had more values, and I think one of the downfalls for some of the values is when they took prayer out of school, I really believe that. I mean, heaven forbid if they ever say, "In God we trust, take that off of our money." I mean, what is next? I mean, when I said there was more openness, I mean, I have friends and still do who were of many different religious persuasions, and they are respecting of my own religion, I am respecting them theirs. But when I was in school, it was a common practice to open the day with prayer, Pledge of Allegiance. And I vividly remember Mrs. Brown, my sixth grade teacher, having the Bible on her desk. I mean, you would never see that today. I remember recently attending a luncheon and there was a veteran there, and we were commenting on the patriotism, " When did you learn how to fold a flag?" We were talking about that. And he said, "I never learned how to fold a flag until I was in the military." And my husband would always ask me, "Where did you learn to fold the flag?" And I said, "In school." In elementary school when we got to school, we stood around the flag pole, we raised the flag, and at the end of the school day we went outside and we sang the song, Day is Done, Gone the Sun, and we dropped the flag down and we folded it. I have been in different buildings, there was a gym that we used to belong to, and they raised the flag every morning. And the gentleman had not raised the flag, and I watched him go to get the flag, and it was in one of those postal plastic mail bins just thrown in there. It just got under my skin to think when they took the flag down at the end of the day, they just balled it up and threw it in there. And then one day I was on the exercise equipment at the gym, and I hopped off, I went running over to the guy at the counter, and he said, "What's wrong?" And I said, "My goodness. Find whoever's responsible for the flag and get it corrected immediately." They had it hanging upside down. And he said, "What does that mean?" And everybody saw all this commotion, and saw how upset I was, and they came running over, and I said, "The flag is upside down." "Well, what does that mean?" I am saying to myself, "You are a veteran." I mean, these are mature people who do not know common things like flag etiquette. I mean, if a flag is upside down it means you are in distress. I mean, that is a very serious situation, especially now we are in a war on terrorism.
SM (00:19:57):
During that timeframe, if you remember, some flag was burned at times.
JC (00:20:03):
Oh, my goodness, nothing gets under my skin more than that. And I think that, again, is something that we need to stress to the new generation. When you talk about the flag, and that that happened, that was despicable. When you talk about things in that area that would get under my skin, that would be that. I had friends after my brother was killed who would come into our home, and say months after he was dead, "I cannot come into your house, it is like a shrine." I said, "What do you mean it is like a shrine? We have not changed anything." His picture was on the mantle. I said, "Do you think we are going to take his picture off the mantle because he is dead?" There is an expression, and I am not going to quote it correctly, you may know what it is, it is something to the effect, "You are not dead until you are forgotten." To me, that is the worst thing that we can do, is to forget. So the current generation can learn from us, and could learn from the Vietnam era. And they are building the center down in Washington to help educate the youth of tomorrow, which is vital, and very important for the continuation of our history because we can learn. Yes, a lot of people get upset about the Vietnam War, it can be a very controversial war. I have several coats, and jackets, and things that have been presented to me over the years that I treasure, and some of them have patches on them. And one has a patch on it, "If we lost the war in Vietnam, we would be speaking Vietnamese." I have had friends say to me, "My gosh, why do you keep talking about your brother and everything. The war is over, it is dead. We have lost that war, blah-blah-blah-blah-blah." And I am like, "The worst thing you can ever say to me is that his life was a loss." I hear that and I cringe, almost as much as somebody burning the flag. I cannot go to the Vietnam Memorial wall and look at over 58,000 plus names and say, "That is a loss." It is not a waste, it is not a loss, those are men and women who sacrificed the ultimate, that war was not lost on the battlefield. I am not into politics, I do not care to be into politics, I am thankful that I have the freedom to vote for politicians, and I hopefully pray and trust that democracy will continue to lead us in the road to continue to have the freedoms to express. I will leave the politics up to the politicians, but I will defend and perpetuate the memory of my brother and his brothers as long as there is breath in me. And I think that it is our duty to do that for the citizens today.
SM (00:23:10):
I am in a hundred percent agreement with everything you are saying here, one thing that really upsets me in a similar vein is you cannot even talk about Vietnam today. I work on a university campus.
JC (00:23:23):
Now I agree with you, I think that bothers me a lot too.
SM (00:23:26):
And I work on a university campus, and I go down to the Vietnam Memorial, I put the pictures up in the glass case. I put it up only because it is an educational tool. Every time I go to the Vietnam Memorial on Memorial Day or Veterans Day, I put the pictures up two weeks later after they are developed. I put them in the glass case. I show the pictures, and it is as an education tool, I have been doing that for 15 years. And when we brought The Wall That Heals to our campus, and we had speakers back in 2000, 2001, I keep hearing amongst fellow boomers that this is a new generation, they had different issues. "Just remember, Steve, when you were young, were you talking about World War II?" It upsets me, because I think we have to really make sure that history is never forgotten. And what is interesting is, if students do not know it, then it is our responsibility to be educators too. We have to be educators here, we all have to be educators. And so, what you are talking about, about your brother, is your brother can never be forgotten, that he did give the ultimate price. Those 58,000 names... When I go down to Washington now, I always go to the Vietnam Memorial first, it is my generation, but I am also going to where my dad served in World War II, who did not live long enough to see that wall. So, I go there and I go to the Pacific War section, and I take my dad down, and I take my dad's picture, and he is with me. And I go over to the Pacific and my dad is there, and so it is about serving your country, it's about giving the ultimate. And that is why Vietnam vets, you always say welcome home to them. I do not care who they are, where they are, I welcome them home. Even though no one said it to them in 30 years, I am going to say it to them.
JC (00:25:46):
We were up in Upper Darby, Pennsylvania, and we were at a store, friend of ours has a store there. And this gentleman had come in the store, and he had on a Vietnam cap. And we were talking, and then we left about the same time, and I was parked on the side of the street, and he was walking across the street. And as he left to go across the street, I said, "Thank you for serving." He got to the island of the street, he turned around and he came back, and he got right in my face, and he said, "What did you say?" And I got a little skittish. I mean, here I am on the street alone in Upper Darby, with this man in my face. And I said, "Thank you for serving." And he said, "Nobody has ever said that to me." So, I echo your sentiments, that it is our responsibility to show the example that we are to thank our veterans of all wars, of Korea, of World War II, Granada. I mean, there are a number of conflicts that people have forgotten about, Beirut. There's all kinds of conflicts that people tend to forget about. When people talk about the Vietnam War, and a negative concept that they have of that timeframe of life. Forget it, get over it. I have something that I always give back to them, and I share this with Vietnam veterans. And there is one Vietnam veteran who is very dear to our... They are all dear to our hearts. But I remember being at a reunion in Rochester, Minnesota, and I remember vividly being in the Fellowship Room hospitality suite, and this veteran who resembles the country western singer... Oh, what is his name?
SM (00:27:43):
Current? Willie Nelson?
JC (00:27:46):
Willie Nelson. Actually, without having this man's permission to use his name, I will not use his name, but he knows who I am talking about. I call him Willie, because he is the spitting image of him, he could be his twin. We went in deep conversation, this group at our table, about PTSD, post-traumatic stress disorder, which a number of youth today do not even know what that means. And I looked at him and I said to him, "Do you remember the best things that ever happened to you in your life? You have got your college degree, you got married, you have had your children, in whatever order." We all start laughing. I said, "Think about the most positive things that have ever happened to you in your life. Have you forgotten them? Of course not, so how in the world can anybody expect you to forget the most difficult, the most painful, the most challenging times that have happened to you in your life? You cannot forget it, it is what molds you, and shapes you, and makes you who you are. And for people to tell people, forget it, it's passed, it is just not possible, you cannot do that." I was talking to Gold Star Mother, [inaudible].
JC (00:29:02):
Yeah. I talked... Was talking to a Gold Star mother, several Gold Star mothers this morning. And one lost her son in Iraq in December of last year. And she told me she does not go out of the house. Now is not that awful? And we are going to work on that. We are going to change that. And these are the kind of things that the generation today. With this current war, you have some men that are being deployed five, six times. Who is cutting the grass? Who is fixing the broken garbage disposal? Who is helping with the leaky roof? We need to be banding together to help these families. And I think this is the thing that we can learn so much from the Vietnam Era, and the Vietnam veterans are doing that. They never want the veterans today to be treated in the manner in which they were. I think another area that is very sensitive but strongly needs to be addressed. Very strongly I believe. And this is our churches. Our very churches who profess love and forgiveness have slammed the door, many of them, on our veterans. I have spoken to a Vietnam veteran who... well, I did not personally speak to him, but I know someone that did. And I value this person's words, so I know it is true. This Vietnam veteran came back from Vietnam, bought a motorcycle in California, drove to Indiana to see his mother. It was Easter Sunday morning. Obviously he was very dirty and grubby. He had just driven across country. And the deacon stopped him as he is going into the church and said, "You cannot go in there looking like that." And he said, "You do not understand. I just came back from Vietnam. It's Easter Sunday. My mother's in there. She does not even know I am home." And the deacon said, "You do not understand. You cannot go in there looking like that." Well, I will give to this generation this. No, I do not agree in today's attire. If that would happen today. The way kids dress today.
SM (00:31:04):
I know it.
JC (00:31:04):
He would be welcome church I am part of. I wear blue jeans to church now. But there is... We have to have this ability to embrace one another and accept one another. And I think too back in the era when I grew up. There was a lot of unjust things done to African Americans. I never understood that and I still do not. Because when I grew up. I grew up in Arlington, Virginia. And I went to Washington Lee High School. To the same high school Sandra Bullock went to. The brother and sister. I cannot think of their names. Warren Beatty. Shirley McClain.
SM (00:31:53):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:31:56):
Of course I graduated much after their time. Much.
SM (00:31:59):
Yeah.
JC (00:31:59):
They graduated way before me. But anyway. I used to walk home from high school and there was a development near us called Halls Hill. Only African-Americans lived there. Only whites lived where we lived. But my girlfriend and I, Kathy Clark, we would walk home together. We would walk through my development first. I would go home and she would walk on her merry way. Kathy to me was not black, African American, whatever. Even today, if I get an application in a store or a survey or whatever. They will have the question on there. What your race is.
SM (00:32:41):
Yeah.
JC (00:32:45):
I always cross it out and I go, "Why does this matter?" And I will put, "There is one color and it is red. It is blood red." And that is the way I was raised. I have never understood this black and white issue because it is not the way I was raised. Now our daughter, when she was in college. Consequently, our children were not raised that way. She went to college in the south. She had a job off campus and she called me. Waitressing. And she called me. She said, "Oh mom, you would not believe this." She is 32 years old, so this is not that long ago. She said, "You would not believe it. We are having lunch break. And the blacks are sitting on one side of the room and the whites are on the other. So my friend who I really talk with them all the time is over with the blacks. So I walk over there to sit with them. And they say, 'You want to sit here?'" She said, "Well, why would not I want to sit here?" Now this is still going on today. This is despicable.
SM (00:33:53):
Yeah. This is a big issue. Again, in higher ed. Because of the fact that... If Dr. King were alive today. Always say if Dr. King were alive. But it was all about integration. And now we have the decision of self-segregation. And to me, it's shocking. And the Boomers who went through this era of the Civil Rights Movement and all the things that happened. And again, a lot of the young people of color and people who were not of color who did not experience this when they were young do not know what it was like. And I do not know what the parents have done to educate their kids. It gets into a question then. When you were young and a lot of people I was around felt that era, the (19)60s, early (19)70s, was a time when as a young people we could change the world.
JC (00:34:52):
Oh, yeah.
SM (00:34:54):
We were going to be the most. And there was this feeling. It's almost an arrogance. But at that time, it was just a feeling, I do not even know if we thought about arrogance. But a feeling that we are the most unique generation in American history. And we are going to end racism, we are going to end sexism, we are going to end... We are going to have peace in the world. We are going to do all things. Your thoughts on that kind of an attitude that was held by a lot of people in the Boomer generation. And just your thoughts on... Thank you. They were the unique generation. Looking at it from when you were young and looking at it today.
JC (00:35:33):
You know I agree. We were a unique generation. And I think it was the values and the principles that we were raised with, and we are willing to stand behind those values and principles.
SM (00:35:53):
What are the values? When you mention the values and the principles. What are the values and the principles again that you felt that...
JC (00:35:58):
Respect. There was no way I would go over to a friend's house and... Say the mother's name is Diane Smith. There would be no way I would say, "Hey, Diane. How are you today?" It would be, "Hi, Mrs. Smith. How are you today?" And we had chores we had to do. Again, as I told you my mother was a single parent with four kids. And we had a bulletin board going down the steps. And we each had our list of chores. And you better bet your sweet bippy those chores better be done, or you were not going to have any extracurricular activities. Be it to the football game or going out for hamburgers on Saturday. My mother always took me out for hamburgers and milkshake on Saturday. I do not recommend doing that today. You have got to spend in another way for that today. But they are... I think today's generation and the... I look at the youth in my office. I do not know when they have time to spend with their children. I am fortunate. I have a very brief commute to work. But some of these people have... Are on the road 45 minutes, hour, two hours a day just to get to work. How can you really have quality time with your children when you get home? I do not know how they do it. And then again, I think... I get back to the values of not living on credit. I look at some of these kids in my office today and hear where they live and go, "My goodness. How can you afford to live there? How can you afford those taxes?" And they keep wanting more and more and bigger and bigger. Some girl in my office working on... She and her husband are working on fixing up their house. And I said, "Oh, that is wonderful. You are doing all this work around the house." Oh, yeah. We are selling it. Buy bigger and bigger. They want bigger and bigger and bigger and bigger. And how are they paying for this? I think they can learn from... Our generation, as I said earlier, had the parents from The Depression. And there was almost an extreme there because they had nothing.
SM (00:38:06):
Right.
JC (00:38:15):
And then they want to provide for us and give us. They need to learn the values of saving a buck. Having respect for their elders. How many times I have been at work carrying a... They are not necessarily work, but some of. Because I do have a wonderful office. I do not want to give that perception. But I am sitting there loaded with grocery packages or whatever. And this 25-year-old to 30-year-old kid walks out the door and left the door kicking in the face while you are standing there struggling. And I am like... I come home and I... Next time I talk to my son, he is 34, I give him the big lecture. "Mother, what are you giving the big lecture for? I did not slam the door in your face." My point is you see a lady carrying groceries, you open the door for her. Now it is amazing to me that one time I said thank you to a gentleman for doing that. And he said to me. I could not believe it. It was at the post office. This was just a couple years ago. And he said to me, "Well, I hesitated doing that." And I said, "Well, why did you hesitate doing that?" And he said, "Because one time I did that and the woman [inaudible]." I got to pay this eventually. He just kept... And now they have the soda machines with the... We were out a couple weeks ago with our kids and we walked by a soda machine. And my son said, "Oh, you want to bottle of water?" I said, "Sure." I started to go in my purse to get out of dollar bill or whatever it was. He said, "Oh no, mom. I will get it." And he gets out a credit card. Flashes it in front of the screen and goes.
SM (00:39:53):
Yeah.
JC (00:39:53):
And I said, "I do not understand. Why did you do that? Why do not you use money?" He said, "Nobody carries money anymore."
SM (00:39:53):
Yeah.
JC (00:39:53):
And I said, "Well, does this mean then that you are managing money well? Because you can keep track of even every dollar you spend for every bottle of water or soda you buy?"
SM (00:39:53):
And what was his answer?
JC (00:39:53):
Yeah. He said, "I can." That is okay. He has got two kids.
SM (00:40:19):
Getting back to this. We talked about the percentage of people involved in activism. I want to ask you about your thoughts on activism as a whole. Activism is defined as... Who defines it? A history professor said this to me yesterday. He says, "Whose definition is this?" And I said, "Well, [inaudible] would say that activism is basically individuals who want to make a difference in this world." People who want to make a difference in the world is to me what the definition of activism is. But there seems to be a... In higher education today, a fear of activism. And looking at activism as a negative activism. Because they kept perceptions of what it was in the past. They think of the (19)60s. They think of disruption. They think of shutting things down. They think of nothing but negative. What is your thought on... When you think of the anti- war movement, how important were the young people of the Boomer generation in ending the war in Vietnam and basically their involvement? What are your thoughts on their involvement in the anti-war movement? Knowing that your brother served and died, yet there were young people that were out there protesting that war. The anti-war movement itself. Your thoughts on those individuals. I have had some conversations with people down at the wall. Some other mothers who have lost their...
JC (00:41:38):
I even watched recently more protests going on in our area. Off of two and two. And I... It is very emotional to me when I see people protesting war. And I just want to go up to them and really get involved. And I know that I should not act on emotion, so I do not do it. I tend to be a very emotional person anyway. I look at it as... Because of men like my brother. Because of men and women that are on that wall in Vietnam. The Vietnam Memorial Wall. And the men and women that died in Iraq. Because of what they did for our freedom and our democracy. It is all for them and afforded these people the right to protest. I do not agree with them. With the current war, nobody wants war. I do not know what the answer is with this war. I just heard today, 10 more Americans were killed. I find sometimes I cannot watch the news anymore. And I know that is narrow minded. Putting on blinders that way, going to that extreme. It is a reality that we are in. I read something one time, and... I read that the dreams we shared as a family, referring to when my brother was killed. The dreams we shared as a family were changed forever on that fateful day. But as the years progressed and grief lifted its ugly veil, I found continued healing. A belief that he is watching every step that I make and [inaudible]. It has not been easy along this journey, and oftentimes it's very painful. But just as my mother taught us, if you believe in something give it your all and always remember to do good for others. [inaudible]. But what really counts in man's heart is the ability to have freedom to express that heart. Your life, the life of my brother, [inaudible]. You will always be missed and we will never forget you. [inaudible]
SM (00:44:11):
Here we go. It is back. The batteries were getting low. I could tell.
JC (00:44:16):
Getting back to what I was saying. Their activism tends to have a negative connotation I think. When people think of activism, they think of... I think most people probably get a negative conception of what the word means. But I tend to agree with you. Activism is giving your all to something that you believe in. And I have an incredible tenacity about me to do that. If I believe in something, I do not care how bad somebody stomps on me or hurts me. And believe me, it has happened. If I still believe in something strongly, I will continue to pursue it with my all. That is the way I was raised. That is the way my brother was raised. That is why my brother did what he did. He heroically... He was an American hero. First of all, he had his honorable discharge. He had already seen combat duty during the Dominican Republic crisis. He served with the 82nd Airborne Division. 11th Special Forces. He had his honorable discharge. He had no reason to even go back into the military. But he too was raised with strong values and principles that one person can make a difference. They believe in something and they know it is right. Give it your all. And that is what he did. He reenlisted because he was a good medic. One of the best. And we have heard this over and over and over. They recently renamed the Fort Sam Houston Library in his memory. It is now the Keith A. Campbell Memorial Library. At the library dedication. After the dedication, we were all at dinner. Keith Sergeant from the 11th Special Forces shared a story about us that we had never heard. And that was when they were out on maneuvers. And Bob had walked into a tree branch. And if it had not been for Keith's medical treatment on site, Bob would have probably lost his eye. Now mind you, he was a teenager. I look at my own children and go, "Can my kids do that?" So, this kid was a phenomenal medic. He was not the kind of kid who liked going to school. Do not give him a clock and say, "What makes it... Do an essay on what makes it tick." He would be taking it apart and putting it back together to figure out what makes it tick. He was a real hands on person. And everything he learned, he learned the hard way and he did a dad gum good job. So, when he went off to Vietnam to save lives, he did do exactly that. And I feel very blessed that I have met two of the men that he died saving. How many people are that fortunate? To me those...
SM (00:47:17):
Those people. Did he save them in Vietnam?
JC (00:47:20):
Yes.
SM (00:47:20):
Wow.
JC (00:47:22):
Yes. One gentleman. Keith's body laid on him for five hours. There was a firefight. A very bad firefight that came up overnight. They were actually in the planning stages for Operation Junction City. And lo and behold, they had to put everything on a screeching halt for Operation Junction City because here comes Operation Big Springs. You will find very little on Operation Big Springs. Very little. Which is very interesting. But all of the medics were down with this one company. And Keith and his buddy Ken were with another company and heard it over the radio. Keith left the safety of his perimeter to go. And as he started to go, Ken pulled him down and said, "Do not go. Whoever goes is not going to come back." And Keith pushed him down and said, "I am going. You have a wife and a baby." Now remember what he told me before he left Vietnam? One of the things? Men with wives and babies should not have to go. Ken literally told me that Keith save his life by doing that. Keith crawled through a hail of grenades and bullets. Now mind you, this is just three days after getting the Bronze Star for another battle. He was not stopped in 19 days. I do not know when that kid slept. I look at the geographic location of these different battles he was in, because I have been really doing a lot of research since (19)99. I cannot believe the adrenaline that kid must have had or how he ever got done what he did. I just do not know. I have talked to veterans that would tell me... It is funny. I do not even know why I was thinking about that this morning because I guess I was talking. These conversations I had with all these Gold Star mothers that is reflected. Brought a lot of stuff back to me. But I was thinking this morning about how these men did not sleep when they were over there. And one told me. All the monsoons and the rain they had, but they had ponchos. But he never took his poncho out because it would rattle and make noise. Think about a man over there who probably was a snorer. He would probably be afraid to have fallen asleep.
SM (00:49:47):
Oh, yeah.
JC (00:49:47):
So these men were in jungle with you name what. And he was just nonstop. But anyway.
(00:49:56):
Keith picked up a rifle of another man that was killed along the way. Took that with him. Shot a sniper in the tree. I have the original article from The Evening.
SM (00:50:13):
Okay.
JC (00:50:14):
There used to be two newspapers in Washington DC. The Washington Post and the Evening Sun.
SM (00:50:18):
Star.
JC (00:50:19):
Star. My mother always... Despite the hardships of being a single parent with four kids, she managed to subscribe to both of the newspapers. Because she always told us, "There are always going to be many sides to a story. You need to read them all." And you would. You would see the same story on the news. And you would read The Post and you would read The Star and you could hear three different things of the same thing. But anyway, I have the original newspaper article that said there was a sniper killed in the tree. One Viet Cong killed. Da-da-da-da. And then I knew that was the Viet Cong that Keith had killed. I had mixed emotions about that too because did not that young man have a mother?
SM (00:50:59):
Right.
JC (00:51:00):
But anyway. Keith reached Eddie Taurus. Drug him to a nearby... Gave him enough medical aid to stop his bleeding and then drug him to a nearby tree where he literally... Because there were more snipers. The guys used to... Snipers used to tie themselves in the trees. He knew there was not enough coverage for the sniper in the tree. That up in the tree. In the tree where Keith had drug Eddie to for that tree to protect him. So Keith used his body for the other portion of Eddie to protect him. And in doing so, he got shot and he fell on Eddie. And it took them another five hours to pull the two of them out of there. Now I was blessed to meet Eddie back in (19)99. Flew out to California to meet him for the first time. Had a wonderful, warm... You can only imagine. Incredible meeting. But the whole weekend if he were facing me, he just clammed up. He could not look at me. He could not talk. And I did not get it. I could not understand it. It was the house. The owner of the home where we were staying who brought it to my attention. She said, "You do not get it. He sees your brother in your eyes."
SM (00:52:19):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:52:20):
So, I approached him and I said, "Eddie, we have come this far to find you after all these years. You do not even look at me." And he said, "Vicky's right, you do not get it. Your brother was on me for five hours. I see Campbell. I see you. I cannot look at you."
SM (00:52:38):
Oh, wow.
JC (00:52:42):
And even at the library dedication. As long as I was not looking at him. But I kind of got off the path a little bit, which I tend to do. But to answer your question about what I think about the people who protest and the activism and everything. I think the men and women who died have given them the freedoms to exercise their opinion. And though I may not always agree with them, we should have the opportunity to respectfully disagree. And I am thankful, very thankful, even though I disagree with some of them. Very thankful that they have that opportunity to have the freedom. There was an email exchange going around for a while. And I do not like all this tit for tat email stuff that people send you. And sometimes emails can... You can go to the office and you do emails all day long. I do not want to come home and do them at night. All this nonsensical stuff sometimes that comes around. Do not waste my time with it. If it is more than a paragraph, do not bother sending it to me. But anyway, I got this one email that was interesting to me about what's your favorite color? What is your greatest fear? What is this? And it was interesting to see family members and friends respond to some of these things. One of the questions on there. What is your greatest fear? It was very interesting to see what people said their greatest fear was. My greatest fear is to be sitting at a sidewalk cafe in America, having a cup of cappuccino, and having somebody drive by and throw a bomb. And that is something that has always been a fear of mine. See this is the difference. Even back in (19)67. Even though my mother. My mother was an extraordinary woman in the process of educating us. We understood even back then what communism meant. We understood that there were people on the other side of the world that did not have refrigerators. That if they wanted milk or eggs or perishable items, that they literally were standing in blocks long to get those things. And then they would have to consume them because they did not have a refrigerator to put it in. We knew that there were people who lived on the other side of the world that could not go into a church or a synagogue or whatever of their choice. We were raised with that. In other words, the values we were raised with were so strong. That our freedom and our democracy is such a gift. It was so instilled into us. That is why Keith did what he did. And that is why I continue to perpetuate his memory. Not only because he was an American hero, which he really was. A true hero. I did not even realize what a hero he was until (19)99. It is because I call it grief lifting its ugly veil. I related very much to this mother today who said she did not go out of the house. I went out of the house because I had to. And I was a sibling. I was not a mother. A Gold Star mother. I was merely a sibling. Then I talked to another mother this morning who told me her 42-year-old daughter will not talk about it. Her son that died. And I explained to her. I understand that. That is the way I was until (19)99. And I called it grief lifting its ugly veil. And I went through all my brother's memorabilia at that time. And then that is when I realized what he really had done. Oh my gosh, this man was a hero. And he would never want to tell you. He would be... He would be sitting here right now saying, "Judy, get off it." And the majority of the men that I know that went over there feel the same way. Point being, he did a job that they were sent to do and they did it with their all. And that is the same for the men and women today. And a lot of these kids today go to the workplace who... We had the draft back then. People are not understanding. These people that are over there today enlisted.
SM (00:57:21):
Right.
JC (00:57:22):
What a sacrifice. They know what they are getting into. Maybe some of the National Guard did not know they were going to have five or six tours.
SM (00:57:31):
What you are really talking about here is... Considering the next question I have is about healing. One of the things. One of the most... Two or three of the most important questions I have been asking every individual in this interview process. We know that the Vietnam Memorial when it was built in (19)82. We know the purpose. To heal a generation as Janice Brooks' book talks about. But we knew it was about a healing. The Vietnam vets. Healing their families. Paying tribute...
SM (00:58:03):
The Vietnam vets healing their families, paying tribute to those who served people who gave the ultimate price, remembrance. And healing... I am asking a two-part question. How much do you feel that wall has done to heal the Vietnam veterans and the Vietnam generation, which includes the 70 million boomers? It includes the individuals who did not serve. It includes those who were for and against the war. We all know about the unbelievable divisions that took place at that time, as some people have said, historians have said, we came very close to a second civil war in with all the things that were happening with the cities up in flames and dealing with issues here at home. And then the war itself had really divided families, generation gap. Just your thoughts on healing, because you are talking about dealing with your brothers, your loss of your brother. So just your thoughts on the whole healing process where-
JC (00:59:24):
The Vietnam veterans. The Vietnam Memorial Wall, you will have to forgive me for choking up, was the greatest gift that America gave the Vietnam veterans. The Vietnam veterans were treated in despicable manners. Spat on, had to change their uniform when they would come home. I know Vietnam veterans to this day that will not tell you they were a Vietnam veteran for fear of the way that they are going to be treated. That is just incomprehensible to me. Men who, good night, look what they ate, look what they slept. Look what they went through for 12, 13 months, whatever, had their buddies blown up right in front of them. Come home and get told horrible... I have not even had Gold Star mothers tell me that their son deserved to die because he was a baby killer. Now, first of all, were you there to see them kill a baby? I remember one veteran telling me, "I came home and I was on the elevator in the Pittsburgh airport and there was this little old lady who had an umbrella and she turned around and she started waving that umbrella at me. And it was one of those ones with a big point on the end of it and said, you baby killer, you a baby killer." And he said, "You know what, ma'am? I never killed a baby and I never hit an old lady. But if you do not get that umbrella out of my face and quit threatening me, I am going to do it." Where do people get off making these assumptions and treating people in such manners when they themselves were not even there? And this conception of all Vietnam veterans did drugs. They did not do drugs. I know Vietnam veterans today who are successful MDs, successful lawyers, professionals. Yes, it is like anything. You have some people who cannot pull themselves up from the bootstraps and move on with their lives for whatever reason, or try to milk the system and do not want to go to work every day. So, they try to get somebody to pay their way of the rest of their life. That is with anything. Look at car accidents. People do that with car accidents all the time, milk the system with that. But the majority of the Vietnam veterans I know are respected human beings who not only gave to our country then but are continuing to give back to our country today. And the Vietnam Memorial Wall is the only safe haven that they could have to go to where they were not judged, where they could pay their respects to those that they were with. And the thing that is the most painful I think for them though, I cannot walk in their shoes and say, what they feel. I can only imagine because I listen to a lot of them, talk about that survivor guilt. They go to the wall and they often think, look at the reflection and think, "Why is it not me on there? Why am I standing here and you're there?" And it was funny, I have always heard everybody talk about the wall with reflection, reflection, reflection. I am like, I do not get it. I do not see the wall in reflection when I go. And people look at me like, "Huh, how can you not see it?" It is because my go, Keith's name is way up there and I am looking up at a name so I am not looking straight ahead. So, I do not see a reflection. But then I have also heard the wall described as angels’ wings, which I think is beautiful. A beautiful description. So, I think the Vietnam Memorial Wall is the great, again, I reiterate that, the greatest gift our nation has ever given to not only our country for future generations, but specifically to the veterans themselves, were so mistreated. Now for healing for me personally, and again, it can only be spoken on a personal level because I do a lot of work with Gold Star Families because it is really where my heart is. Every time I hear of another family who has joined the Gold Star Family ranks, my heart shatters. It shatters because I know their lives have changed forever. I have been privy to the conversations from some Gold Star Families that I will not repeat the conversations, but I can say was certainty that people have no concept unless they are a Gold Star Family of how traumatic it is, and the worst thing we can do is forget. I remember a friend of mine years ago, her son was six years old and he died of Reye Syndrome, which is taking Aspirin and you have a fever and they do not do that anymore. And it was just up here around the corner at the card store. And I saw her in this card store. It was shortly after her son was killed.
SM (01:05:12):
Died.
JC (01:05:14):
Died, I am sorry. Died. And I [inaudible] my way in and out of the aisles to get my cards and get back out of there. And I come home. It's not a half hour later the phone rings. "Judy, it is Carol Lee. I know you saw me in the card store. Why did not you talk to me?" I said, "Carol Lee, I would tell you I did not know what to say to you." And she said, "You know what the worst thing you can do?" And it was a good thing she was a friend because only a friend can get away with this. She said, "The worst thing you can do is what you did. It is like Kevin never existed. Kevin was my only son. If you do not know what to say to me, simply say, I am praying for your broken heart, which I know you are, but do not act like I do not exist." So that is what I tell people. You see Gold Star Families because I think 90 percent of the time people do avoid people for the very reason that I did. You do not know what to say. You have mixed emotions because you think, "Oh, they are having a good day. If I say something, it is going to make them feel bad." But what people do not understand is we never forget anyway. So, if we are having a good day and you think you are going to bring us down by bringing it up, I got news for you. We will never forget. We were blessed to recently be at our daughter's for the birth of our first grandson. Even my husband does not know this. I am holding this beautiful baby to my breath and loving him and praying he may never see more. That he may grow up in a country of freedom and that he will someday learn through going through the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Center the sacrifices made for him to have the life that he hopefully have. Okay? And then my next breath was, "Keith, why aren't you here to hold him? Why are not you here?" We never forget holidays and Christmas. There is always in our mind's eye, in our heart and at place at that table always. And there always will be. And this is for all of these families. And I would like to encourage people to realize that it's okay to say something because when I talk about this Gold Star Mother today, the only thing she says she does is she goes out in her garden and plays with her flowers and that is it. She does not go any... She send me the invitation again about the luncheon. I lost it. I do want to come. And then she said this to me, "I do not go anywhere by myself." And I said, "Well how is your husband with all of this?" "My husband does not talk about it." And see, this is why it shatters me when I hear about another Gold Star Family, because I know this. It divides families. They not only lose their loved one, but it shatters relationships in walls of the family unit itself. Because the biggest mistake we all make when we lose somebody we love, no matter what the circumstances is. I have done hospice work in the past and this is what I will tell the hospice people, the families. Grieve together. We do not do that. Grief has so many facets to it. You have guilt. You have, why me? Shock. You have all these different emotions with it and you stay so... I remember vividly when Keith died. I mean, so angry with my mother for years over it. I remember laying on the living room sofa, we used to have a picture over the fireplace. It was of a seascape and had a warm wood frame to it and a picture light on it. And that was like the nightlight because our house was the revolving door. Everybody came from campus and back then, you did not have to lock your doors. We never did lock our doors. It was always the revolving door. You never knew when Keith was coming home. You never knew when anybody was coming in the room. But after Keith died, I remember laying on the sofa screaming at the top of my lungs. Now it was a small house, much smaller than this. You cannot tell me my mother did not hear me screaming. Never came downstairs. No, we never grieved together. My sister never grieved together. My sister still has not gotten over it. I have not gotten it over yet. I remember Nancy Reagan recently saying on an interview about President Reagan's death, of course things must be getting better. And she looked right at the reporter and said, "Actually it gets worse." She is absolutely correct. The only thing time does is help with controlling your physical outside emotions. In other words, helping you to get a grip and not be a blubbering idiot in front of people. That is the only thing time does. Healing will never happen in the respect. Totally. Because a piece of you has been taken out and cut out. I had a double mastectomy almost 15 years ago. And I remember going to a counselor about it and before it happened, because that was part of the protocol I was in. I went through Hopkins and they're really top-notch. And that was part of the protocol, you had to do that. This breast cancer surveillance unit program. I went through and I went to the counselor and she said, "Well, I will be perfectly honest with you, I do not know..." Kudos to her because she was honest. She said, "I do not know what to tell you what you are going to expect." She said, "But I do know that from what you told me about your brother, you have experienced loss in your life. And so, I am here to tell you, you are probably going to experience the same thing as you did in the loss of your brother. Why me? Guilt, was it something I ate? Was it where I lived? Disbelief, shock. So that is what happens." And she was absolutely correct. You were telling me about a family member in your life having a health challenge and to a certain level, they too will experience in that way. It is a normal chain of events for all people. And like I said earlier, you do not forget the best things that have ever happened to you in your life. Do not anybody tell me to forget the worst because I cannot. But it is my obligation and responsibility to go about living my life in a positive way so it does not demean and bring other people down. I think if enough of us can do good things by educating, and this is my goal in life, educate every American that they know what a Gold Star is. A Blue Star, a Silver Star. They do not know. Even people in the military do not know.
SM (01:12:59):
See, when I met you in Washington, I mentioned to you and the person who was the national director of the Gold Star Mothers. Yeah. I think it would be fantastic to have a program at a university where Gold Star mothers came in and spoke.
JC (01:13:14):
Absolutely.
SM (01:13:14):
Because you never see that. And obviously we are in another war now, but the mothers who have lost... And there is also, I think it is Mrs. Zaalberg, you may have seen it on the national news. She lost her son in Iraq last year. She goes to the Arlington every day and sits in front of the stone in Section 60. Now she is the only one that does it. Everybody comes every day. And she was on the national news because here it is, the middle of the winter, it is almost like a blizzard out there. And she is sitting in front of... They let her in even in days when they are closed, because she has to be in with her son. That might be a good person to link up with. I forget what channel, I think it was Zaalberg. I have been to Section 60 twice, just there last week, I think her last name was Zaalberg. But obviously to be there every day, 365 days a year is unbelievable.
JC (01:14:15):
That is unbelievable.
SM (01:14:17):
And she is the only one. Everybody else comes there. But I went into the Section 60 there and I saw it is very sad.
JC (01:14:25):
Oh, gosh.
SM (01:14:26):
Again, the healing for you, the healing for the vets, but how about the nation? The nation was torn apart with the war and a lot of things.
JC (01:14:36):
Nobody wants to be torn.
SM (01:14:38):
Do you think we are still divided from that era? Do you think you still have the divisions from that era based on-
JC (01:14:44):
I do, but I do not think to the degree that we did then. If you look back then on the news reports and you would see all the protestors, you would see mobs and mobs and mobs of them. I just saw a news clip the other day after Lady Bird Johnson was killed with President Johnson standing in the White House. And you could hear in the background all the protestors and the things they were saying to you, "How does it feel to let another family lose a son?" You could hear that because that is how close the sidewalk. But you do not see that protesting on the news like you did back in the (19)60s. So, to answer your question, yes, but not to the same degree.
SM (01:15:34):
I have always had the thought that, and like your opinion on this too, that those individuals who were in the anti-war movement, who were, whether they be in college or not in college or whatever, that when they bring their kids now and their grandchildren to the wall... But all kids say, "Dad or mom, what did you do during that time?" And then of course the 85 percent who supposedly never was involved in the anti-war or any activism or served, that whole generation, you are-
JC (01:16:15):
I would like to know what they say to their kids as they come to the wall.
SM (01:16:19):
I think that if you have ever sat down in Janice [inaudible], I think this is a story that really has not been discussed.
JC (01:16:24):
I think you are right.
SM (01:16:26):
Because I think the wall is become... To me, it is such a symbol to everything. It is about healing.
JC (01:16:36):
It is.
SM (01:16:39):
And it is about caring for those who gave their lives. There's no room for politics here. It is a time to reflect. It is a time to think. And it is also a time to reevaluate what you did when you were young. And I think that wall does that to every boomer.
JC (01:17:04):
Yeah. That is-
SM (01:17:05):
No matter who they were or where they were at that time. And there is millions of stories, oral histories that need to be told on this.
JC (01:17:11):
I think you are right.
SM (01:17:12):
And hopefully I am going to be part of it because I got to devote the rest of my life to a lot of these things when I leave higher education. The wall, I go down there on my own a lot. I was just down there last week and I go to the wall and there's no ceremonies happening. I just sit there on the bench and reflect.
JC (01:17:28):
See, that is my dream to go in the middle of the night. I have this punch list of things I want to do before I die. One was go skydiving, I did do that. That was the best thing I ever did.
SM (01:17:41):
Wow.
JC (01:17:42):
That was awesome. One is to ride into Washington DC in the middle of the night on a Harley. And I do not even own a Harley, I did not even have a motorcycle license and go to the wall at night when nobody was around. Because when you go during the day, there is all these people there and you just do not feel like... I worry too much about what other people think. You see some kid who is like 12, 13 walking down towards you. You do not want to be standing there, blubbering idiot. And my husband will say, "Well, why do you care? If you want to blubber, blubber?" And sometimes you cannot control it. But I want to be there in the middle of the night. Just by myself.
SM (01:18:26):
I have been there around 12 midnight. But the one thing about they say about the area, it is not safe because there has been some murders at the Lincoln Memorial and that is why they actually closed off the back area there. Because two years ago there were two murders. As you look at Arlington, people had wandered around the back and then they were murdered there. So, I cannot believe... There should be a lot more security there. I think the security should be in that whole area should be increased so people cannot-
JC (01:19:02):
Oh, I remember when 9/11 happened. Of course, it's like President Kennedy's death. We all know where we were and what we were doing. But I remember when that one plane was not quite accounted for. I remember vividly walking into the lady's room, going into the stall and just praying with all my strengths. Dear God, do not let them destroy [inaudible]. I was so afraid of that.
SM (01:19:31):
One thing about the wall that I now know is that if anything ever did happen to the wall, they have backups for the wall. They are made already because those are not the originals. So, some of the originals, I think there is at least one or two of them taken out already. They wear out. That is why they do not allow people to walk on top anymore. Nothing will ever happen to that wall. Because they know in time that certain sections will have to be replaced. The names will all be on there, it will just be replaced. It is there forever.
JC (01:20:11):
Good.
SM (01:20:12):
Just like the World War II memorials. So, they are there forever. They have backup plans. And that is the first thing I ask because that is why they stopped the people walking because in the early years-
JC (01:20:21):
Personal etchings.
SM (01:20:23):
Yeah. Do you want to take a break here or I got a-
JC (01:20:29):
Oh no, I am fine. If you are fine.
SM (01:20:30):
I take a... Maybe, well-
JC (01:20:33):
Why do not you take a break? Because you are the one that is in there.
SM (01:20:35):
Oh, this has been fascinating because it allows you to be able to share your thoughts. And certainly, before I leave, I do not know if you have a picture of your brother, picture of you with your brother, because that is very important. And certainly, when I go down to the Vietnam memorial-
JC (01:20:52):
Yeah. He lives this with me.
SM (01:20:57):
I guess about the healing. This business about healing, just your thoughts, do you think that many members of the generation are having healing problems that were not veterans?
JC (01:21:10):
Yeah, and I think I am thinking about it more after what you just said. I bet there is a lot of guilt from some of those people that protested. I bet they never envisioned the Vietnam Memorial Wall being the most visited memorial in Washington DC. And I would be very interested in going back and talking to some of them myself to see how they are raising their kids. Oh, yeah. I think there's guilt with... We all have guilt for whatever reason.
SM (01:21:41):
I have always thought, and I have had this from some of the people, do you like them or not that when you think of the people who served, and when you think of the people who protested, who were sincere in their protests, and then you think of the 85 percent of the 70 million that did nothing. How are those 85 thinking? Because those people that protested the war may not change one bit. You do not treat a veteran poorly, but they will be very solid in their beliefs against the war. But the question I have is, I am a little child with a father or mother. Mom and dad. What did you do? Did you serve or did you protest?
JC (01:22:32):
I remember my mother worked at the Pentagon when Keith was killed. And she would periodically, not all the time, but sometimes on her way to work, stop at Keith's grave before coming to work. And she went to Keith's grave, now I remember I grew up in Arlington. So that whole section where Keith was buried was nothing but a grassy field when I was a kid. I watched them turn that grassy field into... When Keith was buried, those green berets were in mud up to their knees. Precision. Because it was not grassed over and they were all the temporary markers.
SM (01:23:13):
Right.
JC (01:23:14):
But my mother came to work and she saw this tarp laying over Keith's grave, and she thought, "Well, they are digging more graves and everything." She said, "Maybe one of the workers left this tarp." She walked over and she kind of pushed it and there was somebody in it under, it was a kid. He was sleeping.
SM (01:23:35):
Oh my gosh.
JC (01:23:36):
My mother said, "What are you doing?" And he said, "I am here as a war protestor and I needed a place to sleep." And she said, "Do you know where you're sleeping? You are in a national cemetery. You are on my son's body."
SM (01:23:52):
Oh my gosh, that is terrible.
JC (01:23:54):
Then he told my mother that he was given $25. He was up from New England someplace. He was paid $25 to get on a bus and come to Washington to protest. These kids were paid money to come into Washington.
SM (01:24:13):
They did not really care?
JC (01:24:14):
Did not even know what they were doing.
SM (01:24:16):
Unbelievable. Can I use your restroom?
JC (01:24:19):
Oh, absolutely.
SM (01:24:25):
Here we go. Next question is dealing with the generation gap. There was a tremendous generation gap for the boomers because there was a lot of parents were split from kids during that era. And there does not seem to be today... I work with college students though there seems to be a real closeness between parent and child today because there's so involved in their son or daughter's education. Could you comment your thoughts on the generation gap that happened in the (19)60s and (19)70s? Did you see it? Did you sense it? And you have already said that your family was pretty close in the values and maybe your family-
JC (01:25:17):
Well, my parents were divorced too, and so I did not know my dad, so in that sense. And I would say the majority of my friends, gosh, I think [inaudible] of my friend's parents, if I remember correctly, were married. Phil, my boyfriend, he was killed in Vietnam. His parents were divorced, but they were cordial to one another. His dad lived in Taiwan most of that time. His mother lived in Arlington. But I do not really see that.
SM (01:25:50):
Because the generation gap, there is a Life magazine cover, which showed a young boy. I have it in my office at work and the whole magazine is all about the generation gap.
JC (01:25:57):
Well, I have remember people talking about that. Yeah.
SM (01:26:04):
Do you sense that today's families are closer than maybe they were in the-
JC (01:26:15):
I think they are striving for that now. I think they got along the way to go. But I look at people that I know who have kids in college, and you're right. When they are in college, all the paperwork you got to fill out and all that. I do not know. I do not-
SM (01:26:38):
What do you think will be the, as time goes on, what will be the legacy of the boomer generation?
JC (01:26:48):
Everybody is going to think of Vietnam. I really do. Vietnam will be a big issue, but hopefully it will be a learning experience.
SM (01:27:02):
The issue of trust is something that.
SM (01:27:03):
The issue of trust is something that... I will use my myself as an example. When I think of, when growing up of... When I was very young, I had a minister. My grandfather was a minister, and we would go to church every Sunday as a little boy, and I looked up to my minister. I looked up to my teacher. I looked up to people in authority. I looked up to even President Eisenhower, even though I was a little boy, and John Kennedy. Heck, I met John Kennedy when I was a little boy at Hyde Park one Sunday. Something happened in that era of... With the Gulf of Tonkin, if you read about that, was that contrived, the body counts? Then we ended up in Watergate. Then you had presidents like Nixon with the Enemies List, and there is a lack of trust, and I think it affected a lot of people in the boomer generation. Could you comment on whether trust, how did that whole issue, how important trust is with you as a member of the boomer generation, and your peers, your thoughts on the whole issue of trust and trust in leaders?
JC (01:28:20):
I think trust is something that has to be earned, and I think people have lost a lot of trust along the way for some of the very issues that you have mentioned. I mean, you would think that your leader that you trusted to run the country or whatever would do it in an honorable way. I mean, you just look at Enron and all of that. I mean, you have major individuals who are overseeing corporations, who have stripped people of their future. Their retirement's gone, and I think people have lost a lot of trust in a lot of people, and I think trust is something that is really in a bad way right now.
SM (01:29:16):
Do you blame the boomer parents for maybe their kids not trusting, or do kids trust today? What effect does this lack of trust have on the kids?
JC (01:29:30):
I think the effect it has on people, people pretty much do their own thing anymore. They feel like that they do not... That is why I do not think they look up to leadership with respect anymore because they just feel like... Oh, I mean, I look at a recent incident that was in the news, when the iPhone came out here. Here, you have a mayor, who's mayor of a city that people are dying constantly on the streets, and he is sitting in a lawn chair behind an iPod. When you trust that that leader would be working to make sure people are... I mean, send an assistant to sit in the lawn chair. I think it's not only trust, it is just there is kind of that sense of accountability is gone, and respect, but no wonder. I mean, look at some of the things that you see.
SM (01:30:25):
As a young person, and when your brother passed away, did you put any blame on President Johnson and President Nixon, depending on the year?
JC (01:30:37):
Actually, maybe I was one of those rare birds from the (19)60s. I actually did not get into that accounting of blame. I really did not. I do not think any human being would have a pulse if they did not feel the pain and the loss for each and every casualty that comes across their desk. I look at President Johnson. I look at President Bush. I know we have a letter from President Johnson. Maybe it was just a form letter, who knows? I would have to go back and look at it again, but probably was. But I am sure when he had that stack of letters on his desk, and if President Bush still does that today, if that is still done, they still have to be thinking when they are stroking that pen, and it has to affect them in some way. It truly does. I never did blame Nixon and Johnson. I read books, and McNamara and all of them, and again, there were issues that happened that I am not pleased with, but I really... No, I do not. If it had not been Vietnam, it would have been perhaps another conflict. Nobody wants war, but it's inevitable. I went through a phase in my life where I was almost that generation of peace, peace, peace, but then I realized that that was an immaturity. It is naive to think we're never going to have war. I mean, just look how history repeats itself. Of course, I do not want war. Nobody does, but unfortunately it happens. The thing that scares me is the fact with the technology we have, the weapons get more powerful.
SM (01:32:50):
I have come to the section now where I am just going to read some names from that little section toward the end where you... Just quick responses, they do not have to be any in-depth, just your initial, quick response on your thoughts on these individuals.
JC (01:33:03):
There is one that I am already getting a little blood pressure up.
SM (01:33:06):
Okay-okay. Yeah, Tom Hayden.
JC (01:33:12):
No comment.
SM (01:33:14):
Jane Fonda.
JC (01:33:16):
I do have strong feelings about Jane Fonda, only in the regard that I have seen how Vietnam veterans have responded to her. I was not there. I did not see her palm pass what has been rumored that she passed. I have heard her say in recent years that she was a born-again Christian, but her definition of born-again Christian must be a little bit different than mine because I recently saw her on David Letterman, and that was not my depiction of what a born-again Christian is. I do truly feel if Jane Fonda really is sorry for the wounds that have been created between her and Vietnam veterans, if she truly is repenting of that, that she should spend some time going to different veterans' organizations and trying to have healing before any more veterans pass, and even before she passes because I think there is a strong bitterness there that it would be nice to see healed. I do not know if it will ever happen though.
SM (01:34:38):
Robert McNamara.
JC (01:34:45):
Had a lot of power.
SM (01:34:51):
Does it upset you that he knew in (19)67, as he states in his book, In Retrospect, that we should have left Vietnam, that it was a losing war, yet he did nothing to do it, and then he left. That is getting into politics again.
JC (01:35:11):
I know, but you know what? In the very end of things... You were talking earlier about somebody going to their grave not liking somebody. In the very end, all of these people who have an accountability, I believe that, [inaudible] threefold.
SM (01:35:29):
How about Lyndon Johnson? Again, just quick comments on him. Bobby Kennedy?
JC (01:35:43):
I thought he was very energetic and had potential there.
SM (01:35:49):
Eugene McCarthy.
JC (01:35:54):
Again, powerful.
SM (01:35:58):
How about John Kennedy?
JC (01:36:02):
I thought he was very powerful. When you hear about the Camelot era and all of that, I think a lot of that was just... There was a lot of grace during that era, a lot of grace and respect because I too remember growing up, and it is Mr. President, Mr. President. You hear the youth today talk about Bill, Billy Boy, and that what's-its-name guy in Texas, who cannot even speak a complete sentence. I mean, there is no respect. Even if you do not like the person, even if you do not like any of these names of these people that you are talking about, to me, there should be a respect for the office.
SM (01:36:51):
Is this working? Yes, it is. All right.
JC (01:36:55):
When you are naming all of these names and everything, as I said, and I am not sure if it was on the tape or not, I really think the offices are offices that need to be respected, and even if I do not agree with some of the things that they do, I still need to... As an American, I think it is my obligation. I need to respect the office, and if I have a negative feeling or negative comment about somebody, I am not doing the office any service by expressing that negative attitude. And I think it tends to tear down when we do that because, as I said earlier, I remember it was the president, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, and now it is all these anecdotes, these flippant names about Billy and the Texan, and that is disrespectful, to me, and I do not want to be a part of that.
SM (01:38:02):
Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
JC (01:38:05):
I think Dr. Martin Luther King really did bring to the forefront that there was a definite civil, I mean, a civil rights issue between Blacks and whites. I do believe strongly, though, also that sometimes it has taken to the extreme, and people take advantage of it. I think it is very, very wrong that people talk about people in a Black-white issue, anyway. I think people should be spoken of as an individual, period. Why does it matter if somebody is white or Black? If you are going to do that, we are going to have Black history month, why do not we have Caucasian history month? I mean, where do you draw the line?
SM (01:38:58):
How about Malcolm X?
JC (01:39:10):
There is a concern about, me with certain individuals, that their power to project negative thinking really does impact people. That is why it is that much more our responsibility and duty to project the positive.
SM (01:39:33):
Gets into the next group, which is the Black Power people like Huey Newton and Bobby Seale and Angela Davis.
JC (01:39:40):
And part of it... Yeah. You talk about some of those people, they get radical, and they get extreme, and there is this... To me, if anybody has to scream all the time to get a point across, there is something wrong with that. I just do not like it when there is all that screaming. Do not know how to word that.
SM (01:40:03):
Were you fearful of the Black Power movement, or did that affect you in any way?
JC (01:40:10):
Well, I remember a visit, being at National Airport. It was a wedding, and it was right in the heart of all the clashes that were going on. We were in Roslyn. First, we went to National Airport, and we were expecting people into the plane, and then I had a friend of mine put his briefcase down, and he told me, "Put that briefcase by you, and do not let it out of your sight for a moment." So, I actually straddled it between my legs because he was so adamant about, "Do not let go of this." It was heavy, so I did not want to hold it. Then when he came back and we went to Roslyn to drop the people off at the hotel, I said, "What was in that suitcase?" He said, "Guns." Of course, you could not do that today. We were right in the midst of all the shootings and everything that was going on when Martin Luther King was killed, and I remember all of that. I would just like to express to these people, where does all this hatred... I think sometimes people take... I started to tell you earlier that I think sometimes the Black-white issue is taken to the extreme. Like anything, people try to milk it, take advantage. I mean, where are all these white people who are never mentioned that never grew up with this Black-white issue? I mean, people make it sound like everybody made the Blacks sit on the back of the bus. Well, they only did back then. Well, we do not do it anymore. That was wrong, and so Martin Luther King made a difference there. He really did.
SM (01:41:50):
How about Dr. Benjamin Spock?
JC (01:41:53):
I laugh when I hear about Dr. Benjamin Spock because I think my kids were raised okay. He was raised on their book, but you do not hear about him anymore, do you? I did not get involved into his politics. I just only read about him with raising babies.
SM (01:42:07):
He died in (19)98. He died the same week my mom died, and I remember being with my mom and showing her a magazine where he had passed away. And it was interesting because the week my mom died, he died before my mom died, and Frank Sinatra died two or three days later, all in 1998. So, it is hard to believe it has been that long.
JC (01:42:32):
It sure is.
SM (01:42:34):
How about the Berrigan Brothers? Did you know anything about Daniel and Philip Berrigan?
JC (01:42:37):
No, I did not.
SM (01:42:38):
The Catholic priests who were... We have had them on our campus, and one just passed away. How about Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin, the yippies?
JC (01:42:48):
Yeah, they were yippies, all right. Again, they probably got their little groupies together for all their bus trips and everything, but do you ever hear about them anymore? Here today, gone tomorrow.
SM (01:42:59):
Yeah, though they both passed away. Ironic that Jerry Rubin died illegally crossing the street.
JC (01:43:09):
Really?
SM (01:43:09):
Yeah. That was in Los Angeles. He had actually become very conservative and part of the establishment, so to speak. Yeah.
JC (01:43:15):
Well, I think a part of that, that whole thing was just a matter of maturity, this rebellious way. I mean, all kids go through that, even today.
SM (01:43:30):
Well, they were way out. I saw Jerry Rubin when I was in college, and he came to speak. The place was packed. He was a great speaker. Daniel-
JC (01:43:39):
Oh, that is scary.
SM (01:43:41):
Yeah. Obviously, great speakers can really inspire. How about Daniel Ellsberg, Pentagon Papers?
JC (01:43:48):
Oh, yeah. Yeah.
SM (01:43:51):
Or Ralph Nader?
JC (01:43:54):
Well, Ralph Nader actually helped me unload a car, so I cannot say too many bad things about him.
SM (01:44:00):
Oh, he did?
JC (01:44:01):
We had a car that got off the assembly line without any inspection. It was an Omni, and I remember turning the corner, and in fact, my son was in an infant seat, and the car door flew open. And I remember driving the car when my father-in-law was here and thinking, "Oh, it just handles all the bumps so well," only to find out it did not have the right shocks and everything. And his office literally helped me unload that car without having to pay extra.
SM (01:44:32):
Excellent. Yeah, he wrote a book on that around the (19)70s. How about Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon?
JC (01:44:44):
Gerald Ford and Richard Nixon. Well, I see Richard like this. I remember my brother saying he wanted to be 21, so he could vote. So, when I think of Richard Nixon, I think of the fact that my brother never got to be old enough to vote.
SM (01:45:00):
Oh. Well, what year did your brother die?
JC (01:45:03):
(19)67.
SM (01:45:03):
Yeah, (19)68 was the first election that he could have. Yeah.
JC (01:45:14):
Damn that liar.
SM (01:45:16):
How about Muhammad Ali? Because he is very well known in terms of as an athlete, but he was against the war.
JC (01:45:23):
Yeah. Again, I am glad that he had the right to express his feelings, with democracy, about his feeling against the war. I am glad people afforded him that opportunity.
SM (01:45:37):
Yeah. Right here I am going... Spiro Agnew, I have to mention that name.
JC (01:45:40):
Oh, yeah. I remember Spiro Agnew.
SM (01:45:41):
Yeah. I do not know what you think about good old Spiro.
JC (01:45:43):
Spiro.
SM (01:45:49):
And the Watergate Committee, any thoughts on Watergate and that whole...
JC (01:45:55):
Again, it helped people to lose trust, which is a sad commentary.
SM (01:46:05):
Now, these are just some terms from the period, and just quick responses. Woodstock.
JC (01:46:13):
Hippies.
SM (01:46:13):
Communes.
JC (01:46:13):
Love.
SM (01:46:21):
Black Power.
JC (01:46:23):
Fist up in the air.
SM (01:46:26):
SDS.
JC (01:46:28):
Yes, was that a drug?
SM (01:46:29):
No, Students for a Democratic Society.
JC (01:46:33):
Oh-oh, yes. Yes-yes.
SM (01:46:35):
Started by Tom Hayden.
JC (01:46:37):
Oh, that is right. That is right. Brainwashed.
SM (01:46:42):
The Weathermen. They were the ones that blew up buildings and stuff.
JC (01:46:50):
Oh, that. Oh, yeah.
SM (01:46:52):
They were a take-off of the SDS group, and that is how it died. How about the word the counterculture? How about, let us see, Chicago 8?
JC (01:47:09):
Where is all this today? Hopefully, you do not hear about it.
SM (01:47:13):
Remember the Chicago 8 trial, the (19)68 convention? Kent State.
JC (01:47:18):
Yeah, yeah. I had a girlfriend whose sister was there, who knew that [inaudible] one.
SM (01:47:24):
Kent State and Jackson State. Any thoughts on Kent State?
JC (01:47:30):
I just remember my girlfriend's sister being there. It was not her.
SM (01:47:37):
How about the Beatles?
JC (01:47:39):
Never did like them.
SM (01:47:40):
Never did, huh? What about the music of the (19)60s, Jimi Hendricks, Janis Joplin?
JC (01:47:46):
I never liked-
SM (01:47:46):
Motown, the music.
JC (01:47:49):
I used to always play back my brother's favorites. I liked Buddy Holly and Ricky Nelson. I always thought the Beatles were too twangy, (singing). I truly never understood the big hype for the Beatles.
SM (01:48:07):
How about the Rolling Stones and all those groups?
JC (01:48:13):
Very energetic.
SM (01:48:17):
Let us see, the Missile Crisis of (19)62. Where were you when the Missile Crisis happened?
JC (01:48:31):
Oh my gosh, I was a kid. I remember the Bay of Pigs. We were sitting around the dining room table talking about that to the wee hours.
SM (01:48:38):
How about the astronauts, (19)69, walking on the moon?
JC (01:48:45):
Oh, I remember that. That was my first... I thought that was phenomenal.
SM (01:48:47):
Still remember the astronauts?
JC (01:48:49):
Glenn?
SM (01:48:51):
Well, the three that were on that mission.
JC (01:48:54):
I do not remember all three names. No.
SM (01:48:58):
That is why we do these trivia questions.
JC (01:49:00):
Oh, my husband... You're missing it, Richard. This is your best part. He would have answers to all of this.
SM (01:49:07):
I guess that is about it. I do not have any other questions to ask. I guess the one thing I want to ask you is, you have mentioned the loss of your brother as obviously the event that has touched you the most. But is there another event not linked to your brother or to your family that you remember more than any other that had an effect on you, a specific event during your youth?
JC (01:49:47):
Our housekeeper passing away, she was very dear to us. She was like my grandmother. Actually, I was not really a youth. I was married then. Wait a minute. Let me see if I can... Now when you are saying an event, what kind of an event?
SM (01:50:04):
Like the assassination of John F Kennedy or something that really...
JC (01:50:09):
That really rocked my world back then. I would say that, Kennedy. That was one of those moments in time that you can remember exactly where you were, who was with you, what you were doing. Oh yeah, I can remember that.
SM (01:50:26):
Can you tell me what...
JC (01:50:27):
I was in history class when they came over the loudspeaker. It was the end of the day, and I remember walking home with the same group of friends that I would walk home with, and we were all talking about it.
SM (01:50:38):
Were you around your family like most people were that weekend? Because he died on a Friday.
JC (01:50:44):
He did die on a Friday, yes. I walked home, and the whole family was home.
SM (01:50:54):
It was an unbelievable time.
JC (01:50:55):
It was. It really was. And it was a disbelief, I mean, to come home and turn on the TV and see it over and over and over, replaying that, and Oswald coming through.
SM (01:51:02):
Were you one of those individuals that happened to be seeing Oswald live when he was actually shot?
JC (01:51:09):
No.
SM (01:51:09):
I was. I saw him live, right when the shooting happened. I still remember, Jack Perkins was the announcer for NBC at the time. Yeah. Are there any final thoughts that you would like to mention, that maybe that you thought I was going to ask that I did not ask regarding...
JC (01:51:33):
Well, fortunately, I had copied your questions beforehand, and that was good. I mean, I do regret that I did not go back and look at some of these names, really. I mean, I really did not pay attention to that. I saw them on here, but I did not even look at it, really.
SM (01:51:47):
Yeah. Some people have, during the interview, that-
JC (01:51:52):
Oh, Gloria Steinem.
SM (01:51:54):
Oh, yeah, the women's movement. Some of them have responded in... The gentleman yesterday that I interviewed, he was fantastic. He could not, he said, "Steve, when you mention a name, I cannot just give a quick two-second response." Nixon...
JC (01:52:12):
Barry Goldwater.
SM (01:52:13):
Yeah. Well, yeah. He talked about Barry Goldwater, but he said Nixon was... Nixon has gotten an unbelievable response from just about everybody because of the fact that when you look at the Vietnam Memorial, and you see the fact that when he came in at (19)68, he had a plan to change the war and bring the troops home. Over 29,000 people died after he became president. So that is quite a... And then there is all kinds of things being written about the peace talks, of Paris, and what was really going on there, and that if he really did have a plan that-
JC (01:52:57):
Why did not he enact it?
SM (01:52:58):
... it would not have been in time for your brother, but it would have been in time for 29,000 others.
JC (01:53:02):
That is a lot of people.
SM (01:53:06):
Yeah, because the people were dying through [inaudible]-
JC (01:53:07):
What is your feeling on now, on Iraq?
SM (01:53:10):
My feeling on Iraq? I think it's another Vietnam, and that is the gentleman I spoke to yesterday, but you cannot even bring up... Early on, I felt it was the same. And because we are part of the boomer generation that remembers Vietnam, to even bring the name Vietnam or quagmire up in a discussion is... You just could not do it.
JC (01:53:37):
But have we learned anything from Vietnam? I mean, if this is another Vietnam, did we learn anything from that?
SM (01:53:45):
See, I am going to end right here, and I am going to turn it off. Thank you very much.
JC (01:53:51):
Thank you.
(End of Interview)
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 Judith Campbell
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Campbell, Judith ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund; Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Veterans; Sisters; Campbell, Judith--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Judith Campbell is a sister of a Vietnam Veteran who died in the war. She is linked to the group of families of the Vietnam veterans whose names are inscribed on the wall. Campbell is an active participant in The Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund (VVMF) ceremonies and programs, as well as a strong supporter of the Education Center at The Wall. Judy C. Campbell lives in Wilmington, Delaware, and works on behalf of Gold Star Families everywhere.
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
2007-07-15/17
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.10.2016.61a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.61b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
113:55
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/d2d7823ba9d3ed3db4397280e2554f0e.jpg
08d0d31cd4d72469b526394c7dac6b83
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/a68293686f8f3ea57e9b335a388a5504.mp3
27d4227795dc73d91550704205c2ec15
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
2009-07-28
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Steven F. Hayward
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Steve Hayward is an author, political commentator, and policy scholar. He currently serves as a Fellow at Ashland University's Ashbrook Center where he directs a program in political economy. Hayward earned a Bachelor's degree in Business and Administrative Studies from Lewis and Clark College. He also earned a Master's degree in Government and a Ph.D. in American Studies from Claremont Graduate School."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13057,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Steve Hayward is an author, political commentator, and policy scholar. He currently serves as a Fellow at Ashland University's Ashbrook Center where he directs a program in political economy. Hayward earned a Bachelor's degree in Business and Administrative Studies from Lewis and Clark College. He also earned a Master's degree in Government and a Ph.D. in American Studies from Claremont Graduate School.</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="{"1":2,"2":"Woodstock; Baby boom generation; Counterculture; Self-assertion; Abortion; John F. Kennedy; Nineteen sixties; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam veterans; NAACP; Feminism; Family Ties (TV Show); Civil War generation."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Woodstock; Baby boom generation; Counterculture; Self-assertion; Abortion; John F. Kennedy; Nineteen sixties; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam veterans; NAACP; Feminism; Family Ties (TV Show); Civil War generation.</span>
Subject LCSH
Authors; Journalists; Hayward, Steven F.--Interviews
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
64:55
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: Steven Hayward
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 28 July 2009
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:06):
Today's interview will be with Steven Hayward of the American Enterprise Institute, which is a conservative institution in Washington, DC. This is July 28th, 2009. And this interview is part of my oral history project on the boomer generation. Looking at the (19)60s, the (19)70s, the (19)80s, some of the characteristics of the boomers and certainly, excuse me, issues related to boomer lives and the events that shaped their lives. This is... All right, the first question I would like to ask, when you think of the (19)60s and the (19)70s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind?
SH (00:00:50):
It is just like word association, feel like a war shark test, hippies, rock music, Vietnam War protests. Gosh, I do not know. I struggle a bit. I write about these things. It takes me a long time to come up with my generalization, so it is hard on the spur the moment. But yeah. Well, I mean, I guess a lot of ferment and turmoil and uncertainty and changing rules of the game. And gosh, you could go on forever about all this. Maybe some of your follow-up questions will tease out more.
SM (00:01:23):
Is there one specific event in your life or in your mind that shaped you when you were young?
SH (00:01:30):
No, not really. I mean, I was fascinated by a lot of things. The space program, of course, that was one of the things that went right in the (19)60s was getting to the moon when everything else seemed to be going wrong. I was born in 1958, so by 1970, I am only 11 years old, so I am not quite... I mean, I was aware of what was going on around me. Looking back, I think the whole Woodstock thing was kind of an interesting moment. Because as I write in my book, the media and all the deep thinkers, and of course the people on the new left and the so-called youth or countercultural movement thought of that as the beginning of a new civilization. I mean, you had Time Magazine and the New York Times both talking about how Woodstock youth really were different, and that there really was something new to the counterculture. And in fact, what was it, four or five months later, you had the attempt to do a follow-up on the West Coast at Altamont, which ended up as a disaster. And that was kind of the end of the whole thing. The whole end... all the attempts trying to do Woodstock reunions have really worked. So Woodstock was kind of a one-off, and were it not for the neighbors and people in the surrounding area... I mean, back up a step, the Woodstock was supposed to be 50,000 deep or something, it ended up being 500,000 or something like that. And so they did not have toilets, they did not have food, they did not have water. And if not for the neighbors in those surrounding towns, you could have had a real catastrophe there. So that was always... I guess I am rambling a bit here, but what comes to sight out of Woodstock and a lot of other parts of those years was the pretentiousness of the baby boomers and the so-called counterculture or youth movement, that they really did represent some new phase of human nature, when in fact there really is no escaping some of the basic facts of human nature.
SM (00:03:22):
Following up to that question, what do you think, if you were to look at the boomer generation again, that is defined by the scholars as those born between (19)46 and (19)64 that fall within that generation, what do you think are the strongest characteristics of that group and the weakest characteristics of that generation?
SH (00:03:43):
Oh, let us see. Oh, boy. Yeah, that is another hard question to generalize about. I mean... Yeah, gosh, I do not have a good answer for that question. I mean, I sort of repair to some of my general... I mean, I think the scholars and intellectuals of that period share the same defects with the broader generation, which is a lot of self-indulgence. A lot of self-assertion. I think there is the idea that is quite typical of baby boomers is I mean, a popular form of it is we can have it all, right? But then the sort of more serious intellectual version is that through triumph of the will ideas, I mean, it is very nichey. I think it is people thinking that the only real obstacles to changing the world are failures of our willpower. And so there is a disregard of what conservatives would recognize as some of the lessons and requirements of tradition and authority. And, Tom, you know, those are some general traits, I think you see, I am trying to think of some good examples, but hard-pressed off the top of my head, but they will probably come to me later anyway.
SM (00:04:59):
Do you think that the term activism, because it was a highly activist period, not only in terms of the anti-war movement and the civil rights and the women's movement and the environmental, gay, lesbian, Chicano, Native American, all these movements came about at that time. Do you look at that as a positive quality in America?
SH (00:05:19):
Well, no. And it can be qualified this way, you had the activism for activism's sake. You had the notion that commitment was the way you exhibited your moral purity or moral seriousness. I mean, if you go back a century, let us take the abolitionists, who crusading to abolish slavery, or the early women's movement of people who wanted votes for women and suffragette movement. I mean, they were activists too, but their activism was subordinate to a concrete moral purpose that you could argue about. Whereas I think what you tended to see coming out of the (19)60s and (19)70s was activism for activism's sake. Activism became its own moral category. And you say... In other words, people would say, "I am an activist," and by the way, what you were activist about just flowed from one thing to another because Martin Luther King was a civil rights activist, but the civil rights took the priority over activism, right, whereas I think later in the (19)60s and the (19)70s, as I say, activism became its own moral category, and commitment became the most important moral tribute or moral... what do I say, a moral attribute, but in fact that it represents a certain value-free abstraction from more hard headed thinking about what the moral purpose is behind it. I mean, let us look at, for example, one of the great cultural divides would be abortion. Both pro-choice and pro-life people think of themselves as activists, but obviously on a very different side of a moral divide. But the media tends to treat them equally as well. They are all activists. And so that is why I think the term activism has acquired its own status, separate and apart from thinking about what it is you are activist about.
SM (00:07:05):
Good point. One of the things we would see on television, say in the (19)90s, we would see when Newt Gingrich came to power in (19)94, really, the Republican leadership and the conservative leadership, you would see George Will make comments about it. You would see Newt Gingrich and other people say that... They would really criticize that whole era, that boomer generation because of the breakdown of values, the breakdown of American society, the drug culture, the divorce rate, no respect for authority. Do you think they were blowing a lot of wind there, or do you think there was some truth into what they were saying?
SH (00:07:47):
Well, no, I think there is a lot of truth to it. Here is the... Couple of problems need to be sorted out about this whole phenomenon we are talking about. We tend to think of the (19)60s as when... essentially as America's cultural revolution, like you said, with cultural revolution in China or something. And that is narrowly speaking true. But I think that something that I did not think of, I first heard James Q. Wilson suggest this idea, that in fact, the seeds of what we now criticize of the (19)60s and the (19)70s were present way back in the (19)20s and (19)30s, especially the (19)20s. I mean, you saw in modern philosophy of existentialism, of modernism in the arts, the modernist poetry of certain aspects of T. S. Eliot or Ezra Pound, people like that, bohemian culture, some of it linked of course to radical politics, modernist literature, all the rest. The beginnings of the sexual revolution and so forth, were all very much present back in the 1920s. And what Wilson points out, and a few others, and I think Francis Fukuyama has also talked about a bit of this, is you then had the Depression and World War II in short order when you could not afford to indulge in these kind of escapes from restraint or traditional restraints or traditional morality. I mean, both the Depression and the war, which of course were global phenomenon. In other words, call the halt to the progress of the diffusion of the ideas of modernity. And then, you know, you had the 1950s, you have us and the rest of the world getting back to order. But then with the baby boom and the prosperity that comes in the post-war years, you have a return to realizing the consequences of modernist spot in the 1960s. So in other words, the 1960s are partly the culmination of a long-term philosophical change in social and philosophical thought that really could arguably go back 200 years to the enlightenment when we start explicitly throwing over authority and tradition. And you also have a demographic problem. I think it was Pat Moynihan who said the principal job of civilization is to get young people from 16 to 24. We had a lot of them there in the (19)60s and (19)70s when the kids were surging into colleges and so forth. And Moynihan's argument was you were always going to have some trouble in the (19)60s of some kind just on demographic grounds alone. Too many young kids just surging through our educational system and into the workforce and all the rest of that. You overlay all that with, as I say, the long term social currents going back a century or so along with the particular events, especially the Vietnam War in this country, civil rights and unrest in the streets. And you have quite a phenomenon. One of the curiosities of the (19)60s is that what we think of as the student movement was not just an American phenomenon. Remember, I mean, you know, you had student unrest at universities in Europe and even in Asia and even in a couple of universities behind the Iron Curtain, you had had some student riots and whatnot suggesting that there was something beyond just the war and just the domestic scene in America that was going on in the 1960s.
SM (00:11:00):
Beautiful thoughts there. What is the one event in your eyes that changed the generation forever? What do you think, if you were to ask a room full of, say, a... If you were speaking at West Chester University and a bunch of boomers, particularly those boomers that were in the first 10 years of that age group, what would you think would be the number one event to shape their lives?
SH (00:11:25):
Well, I think it would... takes a little explanation. Probably the assassination of John F. Kennedy, although it did not happen immediately. I think the most interesting work on this subject lately is Jim Pearson's book... What is the title of it? I forget the exact title. It is Camelot and the Unmaking of Modern Liberalism or something like that. James Pearson. It is worth looking up.
SM (00:11:49):
I will get it.
SH (00:11:50):
Yeah. And he makes a very interesting argument in there. Remember that before Kennedy's assassination, the big concern of the establishment liberals was... Well, the radical right, the conspiracy theorists of the John Birch Society and the McCarthyites, and people like that. And liberals were all for rationality and progress and incremental reform. And of course, in the immediate hours after Kennedy's killing, and then later it became through legend as well, it had to have been some kind of right wing plot. Well, it turns out it was Oswald who was a dedicated communist. And what Pearson points out is that Kennedy was a victim of the Cold War. This was a leftist who was out to kill Kennedy because Kennedy was against Castro and so forth. And what happened is in the years since then is the left essentially lost its mind over this. Now it is the left that is in conspiracy theory. Had to be the CIA and the mob involved in killing Kennedy. It could not have been Oswald. 9/11 was an inside job. We hear all these crazy things that have continued to this day. And suddenly it has the left that is interested in conspiracy theories and has gotten somewhat irrational. And it is really kind of amazing that within three or four years after Kennedy's killing, all his leftist ideas had caught on college campuses and had overwhelmed liberals. Portland and Johnson, I think he was kind of a fuddy-duddy to the youngsters searching through the universities of six... Of course, Kennedy had been kind of a hip, stylish young guy. So anyway, I think that was sort of the watershed event in the (19)60s that... and we will never know how it would have gone if Kennedy had lived, but I think it might have gone by differently. We will never know. I mean, Johnson thought after he won the election Ford-Goldwater, he still thought his problems were going to come from the right and from populous conservatism and from the John Birch Society type. And one of the things that, for Johnson and other liberals like him, mainstream liberals, is they were completely disoriented when their "most ferocious" problems came from their left. And they never did understand that and get over it. And I think that is how we get disrupted liberalism, at least in the (19)90s. I think in a lot of ways Clinton kind of righted the ship for liberals. We will see if Obama figures this out.
SM (00:14:13):
Kind of a follow-up, that term watershed, what do you think was the water... What was the watershed moment that began the (19)60s? Because a lot of the books that have-
SH (00:14:23):
Kennedy's assassination.
SM (00:14:24):
Oh, okay.
SH (00:14:25):
Yeah. I mean, until Kennedy was killed, you are still kind of... In my book, I described that year (19)64, right around then, as the tail end of the tailfin era, I call it. And that is because, I mean, Kennedy wanted to, as he created a slogan, was, "Let us get the country moving again." But it really was a continuation of a lot of Eisenhower policies. The economy was growing okay, but not... It was roaring after the middle of the years of the (19)60s. So I think that is the event that really snapped the country out of its sort of post-war stability that you had under Eisenhower and Truman.
SM (00:15:02):
One of the other criticisms of the boomer generation is that this was a generation of 70 million or 75 million and oh, really, only 15 percent were involved in activism of any kind during this timeframe. So it was really a small number. So thus their impact was not as great as people might think. People look at that sometimes as well, that is another attack on that generation and those that were involved.
SH (00:15:30):
Well, I have a couple of thoughts on that. I mean, the number may even be smaller. I mean, in some surveys thought that the number of people involved in campus activism was 5 percent or less. However, it is 5 percent of a large number. You point out if you are talking about 70 million people, you are talking about a couple million at least. And of course, the other thing is that even if it is a tiny minority, that is irrelevant in this sense. I mean, the history of politics is small, concentrated, determined groups that determine political outcomes. I mean, that is the Bolsheviks and the Soviet Union, right? It is the Nazis in Germany in the (19)30s. It is the Federalists in the United States in 1787 saying, "We need to get a new constitution because the Articles of Confederation are not working." So, the history of politics and social change is small determined groups that become the use of shade the tail that wags the dog, and they sort of drag along the rest of the generation with them. And even though you may have only two to 5 percent or even 10 percent, if you want to of people involved in activist activities or sympathizing with the ideas of the new left in the student movement, you probably have at least an equal or double that number who sympathize with it or who find themselves influenced by it, because that is the sort of social dynamic of modern mass movement. So I think that although it is an important point to keep in mind that you did not have a lot of people burning their draft cards and marching in the street, it had a strong magnetic effect on the rest of the generation, I think.
SM (00:16:56):
My next question is actually a two-part question. How important were the college students of that era? And we are talking late (19)60s, and oftentimes when we talk about the (19)60s, we are talking about college students up to about 1973, because it is hard... The (19)70s is often thought about after, sometimes even after the helicopters took off from Vietnam in (19)75. So it is hard to separate those first three to four years in the (19)70s. How important were college students in ending the Vietnam War, number one? And number two, how important was this generation with respect to having a very important influence on the civil rights movement, the women's movement, and all the other movements?
SH (00:17:38):
Yeah. Got to take those in several different parts. I think it is overstated or exaggerated that the anti-war movement actually stopped the war. That that is been their big claim ever since then, "And gee, we stopped the war." In fact, as Todd Gitlin among others recognized, although the war was unpopular, the anti-war movement was even more unpopular with American people. Americans are funny that way. I mean, majority of Americans, they are capable of having conflicting ideas in their heads at the same time. We call that cognitive dissonance. So while the war was increasingly unpopular in the later (19)60s and especially into the (19)70s, a lot of people also do not like anti-war protestors. Whoop, hello? Hello?
SM (00:18:23):
I am here.
SH (00:18:24):
Hm. Uh-oh. Somebody-
SM (00:18:29):
That is me. I am okay. That is not my phone. We are okay.
SH (00:18:34):
Oh, okay. I am not sure what happened there. I have another extension here someone may be using. Anyway...
SM (00:18:37):
Okay.
SH (00:18:39):
Where was I in all that? Oh, the war story is a complicated one. I mean, I argue that the war was lost very early on, as early as 1964 when the Johnson administration decided they were not going to fight it like a real war, but fight it like an exercise in game theory. Once you committed that as your basic strategy, you were not going to win that war in any sense. And then the American people, you continued to support the war majority according to polls as late as mid-1968. And it was after Ted that they started losing heart for it. But yeah, it was... Hold on a second. Oh, mom, who did that? Huh? Nothing. Never mind. I got someone... Anyway.
SM (00:19:26):
Okay. It is okay.
SH (00:19:29):
So where was I? Yeah, I mean, yeah, that is a complicated story. I mean, Nixon, I think knew the war was lost, but wanted to get us out in some reasonable fashion, and that is why it took another few years. But the student movement... By the way, the anti-war movement really loses steam starting about 1971, I think, when draft is abolished, right?
SM (00:19:48):
Right.
SH (00:19:48):
That took a lot of the steam out of the anti-war movement.
SM (00:19:51):
And one of the other points is that the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, if it was not for that particular group, the other groups were waning at that time.
SH (00:19:59):
Yeah, I think that is right. And one of the other things you noticed is when Nixon decided in 1972 to escalate bombing and whatnot in the spring, and then again at Christmas, the public opinion poll showed pretty strong public support for him. So at that point, we were already getting out our ground troops.
SM (00:20:17):
Right.
SH (00:20:18):
But the other question, civil rights, look, the civil rights movement, which mostly means the NAACP and people like Kang and Bill Randolph and all the others who have been toiling at that for decades, deserve the credit for making civil rights happen. An awful lot of... For the rest of the new left and the student activists and the baby boomers came to that quite late. And they showed up for the victory parade, you might say, right? Everyone is proud of marching in the South in (19)63 or (19)64, but at that point, the movement had been toiling for decades to get to that point. So that is always been a little bit of opportunism. If I were a Black civil rights leader from that era, I would have had mixed feelings about all of that. Nice to have the help, but where were you when we needed you in 1948 is what I would have been wanting to ask. And similar, the other thing, the environmental movement... The environmental movement spout itself after the civil rights movement. So the Environmental Defense Fund was sort of thought... was founded to be something like the Civil Rights Litigation Organization. But in fact, a lot of those organizations were not even founded until after the initial Clean Air Act was adopted. And quite the opposite of the civil rights, many whose organizations are now a century old.
SM (00:21:33):
You are right. When you talk about the women's and the gay and lesbian movement, I think even they will say in the beginning, they look to the civil rights movement as their...
SH (00:21:40):
As their model.
SM (00:21:40):
As their model.
SH (00:21:43):
What makes both those movements possible is prosperity. I mean, feminism does not work if you do not have prosperity. I can be flip about it a little bit, but not entirely and say, what makes the feminist movement possible is dishwashers and washing machines. Now, you can... the labor saving devices mean... and also expand educational opportunity. But all that is based on prosperity and technological improvements. So now, the ancient distinctions between male and female labor are eroded, and now women can join the workforce in any capacity at all in large numbers, which is what they did. And I always think there has been, and this is not an original thought, I always think there has been quite a distinction between what you might say, equity feminists, there would be no ordinary educated women who would like to be lawyers or doctors or managers or whatever. And then your ideological feminists who are all about gender differences and all that sort of nonsense that you get in higher education and gender studies and whatnot. That is a really tiny minority, I think. Most real women, I think, do not care anything about any of that stuff.
SM (00:22:47):
How important do you feel the boomer generation who are now in their early six... or in their sixties basically, and in aging, and many of them probably thought when they were young, they never would age.
SH (00:23:00):
Right.
SM (00:23:01):
Some still have their youthful ideas, but I am not sure really how many. What kind of an influence have they had on their children and their children's children because now they are becoming grandparents, and the millennial generation is now the largest generation in American history. There are more millennials than there were boomers, but generation X was basically their kids. And the generation Xers were the born from (19)65 to about 1980. And so what kind of influence have these boomers had, not only... I am not only talking about white boomers, African American boomers, Asian American boomers, even gay and lesbian boomers who have their own issues. What kind of an influence have they had on their kids and their kids' kids with respect to activism and having an influence in their lives in that direction?
SH (00:23:59):
Well, yeah, that is hard to say because I mean, it is hard to generalize about too much, but there is a couple of straws in the wind. I mean, the old joke is that a... One old joke is that a neo conservative is a liberal with a teenage daughter. I mean, one comparison I made in actually my next book that is coming out in a little while is the great politically charged TV show in the early (19)70s was All in the Family, right?
SM (00:24:28):
Yes.
SH (00:24:28):
Archie was the bigot and the son, Mike, Meathead, was supposed to be the enlightened liberal, right, and they were always fighting about stuff. 10 years later, the politically charged sitcom was Family Ties, right?
SM (00:24:43):
Mm-hmm.
SH (00:24:43):
And there what you had was boomer parents who had been hippies in the (19)60s who do not understand their conservative son, Alex, right?
SM (00:24:50):
Yes. Michael Fox.
SH (00:24:52):
His hero was William F. Buckley and Milton Friedman on the show. It was the exact opposite of All in the Family, just in 10 years. I mean, that really to my mind, is a difference between the Reagan years, in cultural terms, a difference between the Reagan years and the Nixon years, or the late (19)60s, early (19)70s. And I thought that was a real cultural marker of things. You know, you see other things, I mean, what I picked up from students today and people in their twenties, teenagers, is they think all this talk about the (19)60s that you folks and parents and grandparents talk about, a lot of them think it is a little puffed up and pretentious, and they have a, "What was that all about?" kind of attitude, and you guys were kind of silly. And the long hair, and God knows the bell bottom jeans and disco, the (19)70s, they look at with complete horror. So maybe that is just the wheel turning that happens in cultural terms. But you do not see, I mean, remember that in the (19)60s you had one of the big totems was the generation gap, the younger generation versus the older generation. And the younger generation... Or the older generation could understand the younger generation. I do not see that as around as much today. You do not see that represented. There has always been parents against kids a little bit, but I do not see it. It was not been blown up into what you might call a metaphysical dimension as it was in (19)60s and early (19)70s. The generation gap, you often see that in capital letters. It was a real social phenomenon. Well, I think that is gone. So to that extent, I think it is the baby boomer parents and grandparents today are maybe a little older and wiser, and their kids are not as, for whatever reasons, do not seem to be as easily swept up into some of these pretentious enthusiasms for the moral superiority of their new generation.
SM (00:26:43):
Right. I think I know your answer to this, but when I was... I am a boomer, and when I was in college, I was around friends who thought we were all the most unique generation in American history, and mainly because there was a feeling that we were going to cure everything. We are going to bring peace to the world, we are going to end racial injustice. Everything is going to be good, almost like a utopia. Your comment on that, just the feelings that be... a feeling of being the most unique generation in American history when they are young, I still think many boomers still feel that as they are old, in their old days.
SH (00:27:27):
Yeah, that is right. They probably still have that attitude somewhere consciously or subconsciously or from some level. I mean, one of the problems with the (19)60s is that the so-called establishment, the parents of the boomers went out of their way to affirm all that nonsense. In my book, my Age of Reagan book, I quote Time magazine saying... Time Magazine, remember, I think it was 1967, named the under 25 generation as Man of the Year.
SM (00:27:55):
Yeah, I have the magazine.
SH (00:27:55):
Yeah, that is the point, they called it Man of the Year, right?
SM (00:27:55):
Yeah.
SH (00:27:56):
Some of the prose in that article, if you got it is really astoundingly idiotic. This is just a new generation, but a new kind of generation, and I am paraphrasing here, but it said they really are better than their parents. They are going to really bring new hope. So if you are a kid and the establishment is telling you this, then what are you going to think? Of course you are going to run away with these intentions. I mean, that was not the only one. You had the Cox commission, Archibald Cox commission appointed by I think Johnson or somebody after Columbia University was sacked. Now, that was essentially a bunch of hooligans who trashed one of our leading universities, and the Cox commission went on about the wonderful idealism of this generation and how terrific they were. And it was just an unbelievable failure of moral... sort of moral accountability on the part of the older generation who should have... That I do not think you would see today. I do not see people today pumping up a younger generation and saying, "Oh, yeah, you are better than we are," in part because of the residue, as you say, of baby boomers who still think deep down inside, they probably are a little better than the World War II generation. And in part because I just think we are not going to run that movie over again.
SM (00:29:08):
I want to read something to you. This has a little bit to do with the meeting we had with Senator Muskie before he passed away when I was working at the university, and I took students down to Washington for our Leadership on the Rope programs. He was kind of... had just gotten out of the hospital, was not feeling well, but I am going to read this question first. Do you feel boomers are still having problems with healing from the divisions that tore the nation apart in their youth, the division between Black and white, divisions between those who support authority and those who criticize it, division between those who supported the troops and those who did not? What role has the wall played in healing divisions? Or was it primarily a healing for veterans? Do you feel that the boomer generation will go to its grave, like the Civil War generation, not truly healing? Am I wrong in thinking this or has 35 to 40 years made the statement, time heals all wounds a truth? And I want to follow it up with... We met with Senator Muskie and I asked that very question to him with 14 students in the room, and I think he was not expecting the question and he did not answer for a minute, and he almost had tears in his eyes. And then he said, "I just got out of the hospital and I had a chance in the hospital to watch the Ken Burns movies about the Civil War." And he said, "My only comment to you is that we had not healed since the Civil War." And then he went on talking about the generation that we lost due to all the men who died and making the comparisons of the populations. And I will tell you, the students, you could hear a pin drop in the room for the next 10 minutes. It was just an unbelievable experience. It was such an experience that one of my students went on to higher ed and got his PhD and that was the moment that he knew he had to go on. But your thoughts on that whole business about healing within the... Do you think there is an issue here on healing?
SH (00:31:07):
Well, yeah, I mean, I tend not to that language of healing and reconciliation and closure and all the rest of that. That is very much therapeutic baby bloomer language that we would not... Our grandparents from the World War II era, parents and grandparents, they would have never used... They would never have had midlife crises, first of all. Right? And they would not have used that therapeutic language about closure and all the rest of that. However, I do think that what is underneath all that though is, the way I sometimes put it, others have too. There is kind of a Hatfield versus McCoys intramural feud among baby boomers. I think on political terms, that is how you can explain Bill and Hillary versus Newt in the (19)90s. I mean, remember Newt calling the Clintons countercultural McGoverniks, which got everybody else that. And there was a business, by the way, last year in the presidential race, and something that, again, Sullivan and others pointed out, is that part of the genius of Obama was saying, "I am not part of all that." Hang on. It is a complicated story. But I mean, part of his genius, I think, was saying, "We ought to give a gift beyond this baby boomer feud that we have been carrying on since the (19)60s." He does not quite mean it because he is very much a product of the (19)60s and (19)70s leftism. But still, I think he had an insight there that yeah, this has now become a long running feud. The Civil War comparison I think is a pretty good one. If this is not geographical, it is ideological and cultural. And yeah, I think probably we will go to our grave with some of all that. I think they are going to have some of the young Americans for freedom fight some old SPSers in their nineties in their nursing homes, yelling at each other about the tent offensive or something. I think it will go on till the very end.
SM (00:32:51):
I know when I interviewed the late Gaylord Nelson, who I thought was a great statesman, I do not know if you ever had a chance to meet him.
SH (00:32:57):
Yeah. Never met him, but you certainly know his work.
SM (00:32:59):
Oh, my gosh. And he passed away and I went to... because he had helped us with some of our speakers and meeting people, and he came to our campus twice. He was kind of the real deal. And he always... When I asked him that question, he said, "People do not walk around Washington, DC with that they have healed on their sleeves." But he made one important point that I think was the most important memory of that meeting, he said, "But forever, it has left its impact on the body politic."
SH (00:33:29):
Yeah, that is right. Yeah. And I think it is interesting to say about Muskie. I mean, Muskie was one of those postwar liberals who I think was completely disoriented and surprised by what happened. And I mean, partly was Lyndon Johnson we know was upset about the riot. He did not understand why Blacks were rioting in Detroit and Newark and places like that after he put it all he can do for them. And I think that the new left, remember the new left was very radical, and their enemies were liberal. I think it was... I forget if it was Tom Hayden or Peter Collier, or which one of them said that our first object was to murder liberalism in its official robes. And so if you are going to establish a liberal like Muskie, you cannot understand... This is completely incomprehensible to you. And I think that explains why he hesitated in answering the question, because I think he still does not understand to this day or cannot accept it or finds it bizarre and hard to come to grips with. And I think he and people like Moynihan and others perceive how damaging this was to establishment liberalism. And it really was 20 years or more getting over it, and to some extent may still not have gotten over it. Clinton, I think, represented a walk back from the brink. I mean, Clinton signing on welfare reform, talking stuff on crime, and in other ways represented that we are no longer going to give in to the radical left and the new left on these subjects, even if he had some sympathies with it himself. But now under Obama, you have got a lot of those folks somewhat older and wiser and a little more shrewd who still believe some of that stuff, I think. As you saw this whole Gates affair the last... has been a real revealing moment, I think, for Obama and people on the left. But nonetheless, I think that is being blindsided by something that nobody could have foreseen as what so upset people like Muskie and probably Nelson too.
SM (00:35:29):
And of course, we had a chance to even have our students meet Senator Fulbright.
SH (00:35:32):
Oh, yes.
SM (00:35:33):
And he probably would fall into that same category there.
SH (00:35:38):
Yeah.
SM (00:35:38):
Overall, now that you mentioned that you were 11 when these things happened, so you are in the younger group of the boomers, but over the years, have you changed your feelings toward boomers? Obviously, you have degrees, you have done a lot of thinking and writing about it as you have gotten older. But have you been consistent in your thinking, or have you been really evolving and changing?
SH (00:36:04):
I think I have probably been pretty consistent in my thinking. Yeah. No, It would take a while for me to sort out my thoughts on all that.
SM (00:36:14):
Yeah. What do you think might be the lasting legacy will be of the boomer generation in... Of course, when I talk boomers now, I am really not only talking about the (19)60s, I am talking about the (19)50s when they were young and raised in that post-war era where hopefully a lot of parents were there. I reflect on it on the (19)50s and on. When I think of the (19)50s, I think of Dwight Eisenhower. I think of security, even though we had the McCarthy hearings and the threats of Russia, seemed to be a much more stable time. I remember that personally. And then all of a sudden, as I got to be a teenager, things, so many things changed. So really, when you are talking boomers, you are talking about the (19)50s, the (19)60s, and the (19)70s, and of course when Ronald Reagan came in and Assay Bay. So you are talking about a lot of things here.
SH (00:37:07):
Yeah. Yeah. I think what explains the (19)50s is, well, a lot of things. But you come out of World War II with a couple things. One is that the whole world's exhausted and broken, destroyed except for the United States, really. And so all that rebuilding time, I think, we have a whole generation of people coming back from national service, and they are very service and dutifully oriented people, and they start having kids like crazy. And I think I recur to the answer I gave a little earlier. I think it takes a while for the rise of prosperity and for some of the social ideas I was talking about that were fermenting back in the early part of the 20th century to exhibit themselves. It is hard to trace out causation on this because there is so many things that overlap. But yeah, I mean, that is why were the (19)50s so sort of placid and quiet. Well, I think the other thing about the (19)50s is, and other people have made this point, is that you had, in the (19)50s, you had the... and coming out of World War II, you had the triumph of bigness. I mean, in the (19)50s you used to talk about three things: big government, big business, and big labor, and big projects. We built the interstate highway system and out here in California, we built the water projects and the modern university system and lots of three ways. We built the suburbs all over the country. And that was regarded as a great success. That is back in the days when people would tell pollsters that by large margins, 60, 70 percent said they trusted the federal government to do the right thing almost all the time. Today that number's under 20 percent almost all the time. So the collapse of confidence in big institutions, like especially big government, but also big labor and big business. So it is a sort of simpler framework for the world then. And most people looked up from their morning newspapers and what they saw the government was a record of success. You had won a big war. You have built a big highway system, you have built middle class prosperity and new communities all across the country, and things went pretty well. It is not still (19)60s when things start going wrong with riots in the streets and the war that cannot be won and all the rest of that. But people start changing their minds about all this.
SM (00:39:18):
How important... Could you comment on the music of the year? Because when you think of the (19)60s, the music continues to be played on the radio. Every generation seems to love it. Most of the young people that I have been around, both generation Xers and millennials, they loved the music of the (19)60s, but it had seemed to have had a very important impact on that generation. When you look at the era when my parents grew up, the big bands were very important to them in the (19)40s and the (19)30s, late (19)30s into the (19)40s. Then you had the Sinatras, and of course Elvis came about in the 1950s and that whole period, rock and roll. But the (19)60s, could you just comment on how important you think when you defined the Boomers, how important music is?
SH (00:40:05):
Well, I mean, obviously, so (19)60s style music was the soundtrack to the student activism and whole youth movement. I mean, I am not a music critic, so I am not going to offer an opinion whether it is better or worse. But I do notice a couple things. One is that if you look at popular entertainment today, TV shows, especially in movies, you will find that for music background, they tend these days to use two periods, use music of the (19)60s and maybe in the (19)70s, and then rap, and rap-inspired styles today as you see in movies and TV shows. Whereas, in other words, the music of the (19)70s, disco especially, and a lot of the music of the (19)80s, has just disappeared. I mean, it is still a little bit of a round. And when Michael Jackson dies, people buy his records again and play them for a couple of days before putting them away again for good. But yeah, there is something, and I do not know if that is because it is connected with historical moments in some way or not, but yeah, I mean, that was the rock fest. Before the (19)60s, big musical events were just big musical events. But of course, bigger rock festivals of the (19)60s, and Woodstock being the best example I already mentioned, those became political events as well, in some sense, larger social events. And they are kind of still thought of that way a little bit today. I do not know if you had benefit concerts before the (19)60s, but nowadays, benefit concerts for political social causes are a big thing and pretty prominent. And all musicians think they have got to be part of doing something like that.
SM (00:41:41):
Right. Like Willie Nelson and Farm Aid, which began in, I think in (19)81. He was just on television last week talking about it. He thought it was a one-year happening, and it is every year since.
SH (00:41:52):
Right. But then you had... I remember one of the first ones was in the early (19)70s was the concert for Bangladesh, which I forget what that was, but that raise... in London or somewhere, that raised some millions of dollars for famine relief, I think was (19)70s. I forget when it was, sometime in the early (19)70s. But yeah, so yeah, music became politicized. That is the other thing is, music has always had some political content to it, but I think it... You know, you saw more of it starting in the (19)60s than you had before. You actually went out and tried to measure it.
SM (00:42:26):
If you were to list some of the bands or personalities music-wise, entertainment-wise who may have had a great influence on the boomers, who would they be?
SH (00:42:36):
Oh, I do not know. That would be a purely subjective response. I mean, you had the leading artists who broke the ground, the Beatles and the Rolling Stones, of course. And then certain individual performers like Jimi Hendrix, but then some of... and they were not especially political, I do not think, I mean they had their politics, but their songs with a couple of exceptions. I mean, one of the Beatles, most famous tracks is their right-wing song Tax Man, right?
SM (00:43:04):
Yeah.
SH (00:43:06):
They was shocked that having to pay 98 percent tax rates on the large amount of money they were starting to make. And so that was kind of an irony in their case. But then you would have Buffalo Springfield, Crosby, Stills & Nash, they were much more explicitly left wing, anti-war, so forth. And help, I mean-
SM (00:43:26):
Mr. Hayward, I want to change my tape here. Hold on one second.
SH (00:43:29):
Yeah.
SM (00:43:34):
Okay. I am back.
SH (00:43:39):
Yeah, I am not sure what else to add to all that. I mean, that is...
SM (00:43:41):
Certainly, we cannot forget the Motown sound because when we are talking about rock, Motown was big.
SH (00:43:46):
Right, right. And that was not especially politic. I mean, off the top of my head, that does not strike me as especially political. Popular with civil rights folks, but I do not think of any... Off the top of my head, I do not think of any particular Motown ballads that were highly politicized in their content. Unlike some of the rock bands who wrote explicitly anti-Vietnam War songs and so forth.
SM (00:44:07):
Were there any books, you are an intellect, and yeah, I have asked this to some people, and I am a book person. I read a lot of books, and I was reading back when I was in college, so I had deep feelings on books. But were there any books that you think college students or young people or the boomers were reading when they were young that influenced them?
SH (00:44:26):
Well, yeah, I mean this I would want to think about, but off the top of my head, I think of a Charles Reich, Greening of America, which is a pretty late book in the (19)60s or maybe early (19)70s. J. D. Salinger's, Catcher in the Rye was popular, I think, for its sensibility. And which swathly fits into the beats out of the (19)50s, with Jack Kerouac and all the rest of that. Herbert Marcuse was very popular. What was his book called, One-Dimensional Man or something, I want to say. I am not sure if that is the right one. And a lot of stuff is kind of impenetrable, but it was popular for especially superficial leftist intellectuals. I know I am missing a whole bunch of books [inaudible].
SM (00:45:11):
I know that Roszak's The Making of a Counter Culture was very big and-
SH (00:45:15):
Yeah, but I guess that was in the (19)60s, or was that a little later? I do not remember.
SM (00:45:18):
No, that was in the... I went to grad school and it was required reading. And then anything that Erickson wrote, the psychologist was-
SH (00:45:28):
Oh, yes. Right. Yeah.
SM (00:45:30):
He wrote a lot about the (19)60s and identity politics. It was so funny.
SH (00:45:33):
I have thought about the books of that era for quite a long time. So once upon a time I did, but I really sort of lost touch with that.
SM (00:45:41):
Right. I have a question here regarding kind of a follow-up to the healing issue, and that is the issue of trust. I start my question by stating that when I was in college in my 101 class in psychology, and I will never forget this professor talking to us, saying that it is very important to trust others. Because if you have an inability to trust, then you most likely will not be a success in life. Now, I was a college student first year, I did not really take that in, but I never forgot it. And then I saw what many boomers thought were lies that leaders did not... Nixon lying, President Johnson lying, Gulf of Tonkin, you studied... Even President Eisenhower lied with the U-2 incident. Now, recent John Kennedy lied about what was going on in Vietnam with saying goodbye to the Diem, the murder of Diem.
SH (00:46:40):
Right.
SM (00:46:40):
And then you have got so many others during that period when people were evolving, do you think that there is an issue... that boomers have an issue, have had an issue their whole lives with trusting others? They do not trust leaders, and in that era, they did not trust anybody in authority, whether it was a minister, a rabbi, a president of the university, a politician, anyone in a position of responsibility, I do not trust you.
SH (00:47:08):
Yeah, that is right. I know. I think that is a common theme is you just do not trust large institutions, public or private. And part of that has got its postulates. And again, some of the intellectual ideas of authenticity and individuality going back at least a century, you know, you want to trust yourself first before you trust somebody else. And partly it is the increasing complexity of the modern world. I mean, anyone who thinks about this seriously for more than five minutes understands that responsible governments and leaders have to conceal certain things and prevaricate about the truth. If you believe otherwise, you would say we would not have any spies at all if we would disband the CIA tomorrow, which no responsible person would ever do. And again, there is some cognitive dissonance in play. We are cynical and distrustful of institutions, and to a certain extent that is healthy, right? I mean, that is not too far from Thomas Jefferson's idea that the Tree of Liberty should be watered with the blood of pirates every 20 years or so, or should have periodic revolutions to renew things. And on the other hand, we always say, "We really want a leader we can believe in." This is part of the enthusiasm for Obama, change we can believe in. And we will always end up being disappointed. People like that. We were disappointed with Jimmy Carter, who told us he wanted to give us a government as good as the people, and then within a few years he was telling us the people were no good.
SM (00:48:32):
And even Ronald Reagan, who most people loved, but then Iran Contra toward the end, and then people started to question him.
SH (00:48:39):
Exactly. I mean, that was the worst part of the whole thing, was as somebody put it, it was as though you had learned that John Wayne had been selling rifles and whiskey to the Indians, and then that was a huge problem, yeah. And right. So no, I think there is something to all that, and we will probably never actually get that back. And that is a mixed bag. Yeah, I do not know what else to say about that.
SM (00:49:07):
Do you think that boomers have pressed this onto their kids and their grandkids, and is that healthy?
SH (00:49:14):
Well, it depends. I mean, a great book about this is now quite old, but I think is onto the origin of this was Robert Nisbet's Twilight of Authority.
SM (00:49:23):
I think I have that.
SH (00:49:23):
Back quite a long time, the erosion. So social reasons for the erosion of respect for authority in any forms, and it is not brand new, did not really start with the boomers, but accelerated around then for some of the reasons you mentioned, read the newspaper headline. If you trust the newspapers.
SM (00:49:37):
Right.
SH (00:49:41):
Walter Cronkite, the most trusted man in America, right? We do not even watch the network news anymore. I mean, if Walter Cronkite were still alive, we would not think of him that way anymore. It is impossible to recreate Walter Cronkite now, but that is just the way we have gone. And I do not think there is any changing that back.
SM (00:49:57):
If some people, even Johnson's, they talk about two things that caused President Johnson to resign. One of them was Cronkite making those comments on television, the second being that McCarthy had finished in second place up in New Hampshire.
SH (00:50:10):
Right, yeah. But then he was going to beat him in the Wisconsin primary the next week.
SM (00:50:14):
Right.
SH (00:50:15):
He knew he was going to lose.
SM (00:50:17):
Why do you think the Vietnam War ended?
SH (00:50:23):
Well, yeah, a complicated story. I mean, as I said a little earlier, I mean, that war was lost at the very beginning when it was decided to run it not as a traditional war, but as an exercise in game theory in one sentence, in this whole theory of graduated escalation with pen signals to the North Vietnamese. I mean, in other words, Johnson's people completely misjudged the character of the North Vietnamese in thinking they were rational actors who could be bargained with. In fact, they were revolutionaries who were determined to win and figured out early on that they could outlast us and were willing to do so. And the failure to recognize that fact meant the war was lost in the beginning, unless you were going to change your tactic. Well, it was too late after 60 days. That is when we made our final flint and said, "We are not going to effectively prosecute the war." But then at the other end of it, it finally ends... Well, it finally ends with North Vietnamese victory, right in 1975. But it ends for us when Nixon decides that he is going to escalate enough to make them conclude some kind of agreement to let us get out in one piece, which we more or less did. I mean, you put up the helicopters taking off in (19)75 was not exactly getting out in one piece, but it was... came pretty close.
SM (00:51:29):
Right. Let us see here. I am coming toward the part where we asked you some of the names for your mission response, but what does the wall mean to you in Washington? I lived in California too until 1983, and of course it opened (19)82. And the first thing I had to do when I came to Philadelphia is I had to take the train down to Washington to see the wall. Because it meant an awful lot to me and I have been at every Memorial Day in Veterans Day ceremony since 1994, and I am not a veteran, just because I feel I have to be there to pay my respects to those who serve. Your thoughts on the impact that this wall has had on America?
SH (00:52:12):
Well, I do not know. I think it was a bigger deal when it first opened up. I mean, in my next book on Reagan, as we were talking about, I have a couple paragraphs about how controversial the whole thing was when it was first announced and then opened up. And also people changing their mind. It is interesting. National Review Magazine initially criticized the design, and then when it opened up, they wrote an editorial saying, Tensiter saying, "Well, we were wrong. This is actually pretty good." So, I do not know, people bring their own aesthetic, philosophical judgements to that kind of memorial. I once reflected that, and actually, I think I tried to do the math once, but if you... In Europe, for example, did the memorial in that style to the dead of World War I, it would stretch down the entire length of the Mall, right? Because the numbers are so much larger. The idea of putting every single person's name on the wall is that is very modern American. It also reflects now our commitment to individuality. And there is certain things about that that are noble and laudable. I do not really have any strong feelings one way or another about those, the Vietnam War Memorial.
SM (00:53:20):
What does Kent State and Jackson State mean to you?
SH (00:53:24):
Oh, gosh. I do not have a strong response on that either. In both those cases I am now sort of vague on the facts about how much it was a provocation, how much was overreaction by the National Guard troops. You can always bring in the old themes of town and gown there. An awful lot of... I mean, this is certainly true of the police in Chicago in (19)68, but true National Guard troops, as long as there are working class people who resented what they were perceived of as these privileged kids who are acting up. And it does not excuse what happened, but I think it sometimes gets forgotten that there really is... Those particular moments, you mentioned Kent State, are reflective of the cultural division amongst the baby boomers. And that is where I mentioned before that Hatfields versus McCoys. So that was one place where real shooting broke out, like the old Hatfield-McCoy feud.
SM (00:54:23):
Right. I am to the part now where I am going to ask just some... give some names of people of that era just for some brief comments, and then also terms of that era.
SH (00:54:35):
Yeah.
SM (00:54:36):
Watergate.
SH (00:54:38):
Oh, the great crown and catastrophe of the (19)60s, you might say, even though it was in the (19)70s, but it was had its origins in the (19)60s, of course.
SM (00:54:47):
Woodstock.
SH (00:54:49):
Yeah, I already said my part about that. It was sort of the cultural apogee of the youth movement.
SM (00:54:57):
1968.
SH (00:54:59):
Oh, yeah. The worst year for America since 1861.
SM (00:55:10):
The term counterculture.
SH (00:55:10):
Yeah, the pretentious name that the youth movement gave for itself.
SM (00:55:11):
Hippies.
SH (00:55:15):
People who did not bathe at all.
SM (00:55:17):
How about yippies?
SH (00:55:20):
Yeah. Well, that was the sort of formalized what? That actually was the acronym for Youth International Protest, was not it?
SM (00:55:24):
Youth International Party.
SH (00:55:26):
Yeah, Youth International Party. Yeah. Right. Jerry Rubin and those guys.
SM (00:55:29):
Yep. SDS.
SH (00:55:33):
Yeah. Students for Democratic Society. I mean, I do not really have a sort of summary one sentence about them. I mean, they were the organized radical force of it.
SM (00:55:43):
The weathermen.
SH (00:55:45):
Yeah, the violent streak of the whole... They were the mad bombers of the New West.
SM (00:55:52):
Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
SH (00:55:55):
Well, John Kerry comes to mind immediately. Yeah.
SM (00:55:59):
Boy, there are a lot of people that do not like him in this group. It is amazing.
SH (00:56:05):
When he was emerging as a candidate, what, four years ago, very early on, I thought, oh, this is all going to come back in a big way, and this election is going to end up being about Vietnam to some extent. And I am kicking myself for not having written an article about that, because what happened with swift boats and all the rest of that, I foresaw all that quite clearly. And yeah, that is another... That was really a classic example of something that Obama understood, is that one of the things that was wrong about the 2004 election is that we were fighting out our old divisions from the (19)60s, especially over the war, because Kerry was really a bad candidate for precisely that reason. But he had all that baggage.
SM (00:56:43):
The people that, not the Swiffo people, but there were other Vietnam veterans against the war that had problems with him. They did not dislike him because he is a Vietnam vet, but there were issues around that period that they liked his speech in front of Fulbright, that took a lot of courage and they praised that, but the fact that he was one of the few guys because he was wealthy that could fly to locations where everybody else had to hitchhike, take planes, ride in old cars, and he was flying in airplanes. That really upset a lot of the Vietnam vet. Young Americans for Freedom, which Lee Edwards has talked about a lot, but is a forgotten group when talking about the anti-war movement.
SH (00:57:26):
Yeah-yeah. Oh, was that your next question?
SM (00:57:30):
Yeah. Just your thoughts on the young Americans for Freedom, which was a conservative group.
SH (00:57:33):
Yeah. I mean, they have finally gotten some of their due. There have been a couple of liberal writers who have talked about how... This is ironic that at one point in the early (19)60s, it was generally thought across the spectrum that the youth movement was going to be a right-wing phenomenon, and Young Americans for Freedom starts before SDS, for example, and it turned out some pretty impressive rallies and turned out some impressive numbers of people who never got the media coverage for it.
SM (00:58:00):
Well, I think there needs to be a book written about it.
SH (00:58:02):
I think there was one by a guy named Andrews a few years ago, a short little book [inaudible] side of the (19)60s. It was mostly about... Yeah.
SM (00:58:09):
Yeah. I think there needs to be more information for scholars because-
SH (00:58:13):
Yeah, I do too. Yeah. That is right.
SM (00:58:14):
The enemy's list.
SH (00:58:17):
Oh, well, Nixon's paranoia again. But all politicians have their enemy's list, whether they write them down officially or not. That was a little bit exaggerated, I think.
SM (00:58:25):
Okay. Ted?
SH (00:58:25):
Yeah. A military victory for the US and a political defeat for the US.
SM (00:58:37):
Cambodian invasion.
SH (00:58:39):
Yeah. Another thing that was puffed out of all proportion. It turned out that key members of Congress had been informed about what was going on, and the Cambodian government knew what was going on, but it was supposedly "secret" for diplomatic and political reasons. You wanted to have certain amounts of public deniability for political reasons, and so that was one of those events that spun out of control.
SM (00:59:03):
Black power.
SH (00:59:05):
Yeah, the militant side of civil rights, which dismayed even Martin Luther King, of course.
SM (00:59:10):
The American Indian Movement.
SH (00:59:13):
A sideshow. Native Americans wanting to get in on all the fun.
SM (00:59:18):
Mm-hmm. Again, these are some names of personalities now. Andy Hoffman.
SH (00:59:24):
Oh, yeah. Sort of the clown prince of the new left.
SM (00:59:27):
Jerry Rubin.
SH (00:59:29):
Same thing. Yeah. He is even more the clown prince of the new left.
SM (00:59:32):
Timothy Leary.
SH (00:59:34):
The pharmacist of the new left.
SM (00:59:36):
Of course Richard Nixon.
SH (00:59:38):
Yeah. The perfect hate figure for liberals of all stripes.
SM (00:59:43):
Spiro Agnew.
SH (00:59:45):
Oh, yeah, I do not have a good quick one for him. Nixon's designated hitman, you might say.
SM (00:59:53):
Eugene McCarthy.
SH (00:59:57):
Interesting guy. One of the unappreciated geniuses of American politics, I think. And certainly this is more appreciated, one of the great wits of American politics.
SM (01:00:07):
Pretty well educated too.
SH (01:00:08):
Yeah.
SM (01:00:09):
And boy, was he a poet. A lot of people-
SH (01:00:11):
Exactly. Yeah.
SM (01:00:12):
He could have been a poet and never been in politics.
SH (01:00:14):
Right.
SM (01:00:15):
George McGovern.
SH (01:00:17):
Yeah. Sort of a tragic figure in a lot of ways. Yeah, I will leave it at that.
SM (01:00:23):
John Kennedy.
SH (01:00:24):
Well, as his reputation had it, but somewhat naive about the movement that he wrote to the nomination.
SM (01:00:32):
John Kennedy.
SH (01:00:34):
Yeah. Well, the boy prince of liberalism and we will never know how that might have turned out.
SM (01:00:39):
Bobby Kennedy.
SH (01:00:43):
The other boy prince of liberalism, about whom I think we have a quite inaccurate perception.
SM (01:00:50):
Sergeant Schreiber in the Peace Corps.
SH (01:00:53):
You do not have too much to say about that. He was this little decent guy, but that was not... a marquee job, but I think actually a fairly ordinary one.
SM (01:01:03):
Lyndon Johnson.
SH (01:01:05):
Yeah. The tragic figure of establishment liberalism.
SM (01:01:08):
Robert McNamara.
SH (01:01:11):
Oh, oh, God. The face of technocratic liberalism.
SM (01:01:17):
George Wallace.
SH (01:01:20):
Yeah. I do not... What do you say about him? Do not have much to say about him really.
SM (01:01:25):
Ronald Reagan.
SH (01:01:27):
Yeah. The other... Boy, what do you say about him? The fulfillment of the Goldwater Revolution in the Republican Party, I guess you would say.
SM (01:01:39):
Jimmy Carter.
SH (01:01:44):
Oh, I do not know. What do you say about him in one sentence? He campaigned on the slogan of Why Not the Best, and we are still asking that question about him.
SM (01:01:57):
Gerald Ford.
SH (01:01:59):
Oh, a very decent man who did well in a bad situation.
SM (01:02:02):
Daniel Ellsberg.
SH (01:02:05):
Oh, yeah. An opportunist little runt.
SM (01:02:10):
Dr. Benjamin Spock.
SH (01:02:13):
Oh, yeah. Another sort of shooting star, sort of overblown... of overblown reputation.
SM (01:02:19):
Norman Mailer.
SH (01:02:23):
Oh, I do not have anything to say about him really.
SM (01:02:23):
Okay. The Berrigan brothers, Daniel and Phillip.
SH (01:02:26):
Yeah. I do not really care about those guys either. I do not have anything to say about those guys.
SM (01:02:36):
All right. Let us see who we have here. Barry Goldwater.
SH (01:02:36):
Ah, yeah. The breakthrough figure for modern American conservatism.
SM (01:02:40):
About Huey Newton, Bobby Seal, Eldridge Cleaver, and Angela Davis, that group.
SH (01:02:45):
Yeah. That would be the same as the Black Power folks, the militant side of civil rights.
SM (01:02:50):
Gloria Steinem, Bella Abzug, and Betty Friedan?
SH (01:02:55):
Yeah, they are the gender... They are the vanguard of gender feminism.
SM (01:03:01):
Mm-hmm. Okay. Let us see. Is there any question that I did not ask you that you thought I was going to ask you that you would like to comment on, on the boomers in the (19)60s?
SH (01:03:13):
No, not really. That covers quite a lot.
SM (01:03:17):
I think I am missing one thing here. I know I have asked most of... You have answered some very good... You have done some deep thinking on these, I can tell, on some of the questions. I want to fill you in also on what I am doing is I will be getting these transcribed, but I am going to send you... I did not realize this because this was my first book, and I actually did early retirement to do this book because I have been working on it since (19)96 when I first interviewed Eugene McCarthy. And then I had my parents were... I had a lot of issues, and I went back and forth. Now I am finishing it up. And so the first 30 people, I did not know about, you had to get a waiver signed by all the people. They all agreed to do it, but they did not... Nobody ever asked about a waiver, but I am sending now waivers to the individuals, and you sign it, send it back to me, and then when I get it transcribed and I send the transcript to you to give the final okay in editing. And that is what I am doing with everyone. The original 30 is kind of an issue because seven of them have died. So I do not know what is going to happen there.
SH (01:04:23):
I have no idea. You will have to talk to your publisher about that or something.
SM (01:04:26):
Yeah. But waivers are important, even though they agreed to do it.
SH (01:04:31):
Yeah.
SM (01:04:35):
You have any other thoughts you want to say on anything?
SH (01:04:37):
I do not think so. We covered a lot of the waterfront.
SM (01:04:39):
Yeah, what I usually do with each interview, I take pictures of people, and I have really good pictures of you when you were here, but you may have gotten a little older looking. I do not know.
SH (01:04:51):
Well, I am balder, I am pretty sure, and I am a lot thinner. I lost a bunch of weight here a couple years ago, so we will be around September if you are in through Washington, or October, if you are in through Washington.
SM (01:05:00):
Yeah, why do not I do this? Because I got great shots of you, but I would like to have a more current, so when you are back down there, I will come down and take some pictures because I am actually going to be interviewing Dr. Sally Satel.
SH (01:05:11):
Oh, right, sure.
SM (01:05:12):
I am going to interview her along with M. Stanton Evans next week. Next week. And then I am going out to Dr. Murray's home to interview him.
SH (01:05:22):
Oh, good. Yeah.
SM (01:05:23):
So I will be down... And I am actually interviewing Ron Robinson from the Young Americas Foundation sometime when he is not having that conference of the... that is coming up for him. And even Dr. Ornstein is interested in doing an interview as well, but he has got a lot of family issues in August.
SH (01:05:42):
That is right. Yeah.
SM (01:05:43):
So, well, Dr. Hayward, thank you very much.
SH (01:05:47):
Sure thing.
SM (01:05:49):
And I will be in touch with you. When will you be back in...
SH (01:05:52):
Early September.
SM (01:05:53):
Okay. I will send you... Do you want me to send the waiver at AEI or at your home in California?
SH (01:06:01):
Oh, how soon do you want it? Do you want it end of this month or...
SM (01:06:04):
Yeah, I am going to be mailing them all out in September.
SH (01:06:05):
Oh, send it to AEI then.
SM (01:06:07):
Okay. And then you just send it back to me, and then of course, then you will see the transcript when it is transcribed and you can edit it and whatever.
SH (01:06:13):
Right. Okay.
SM (01:06:15):
All right. You have a great day.
SH (01:06:16):
Yeah, you too. Bye-bye.
SM (01:06:16):
Thanks. 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 Dr. Steven Hayward
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Hayward, Steven F. ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Authors; Journalists; Hayward, Steven F.--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Steve Hayward is an author, political commentator, and policy scholar. He currently serves as a Fellow at Ashland University's Ashbrook Center where he directs a program in political economy. Hayward earned a B.S. in Business and Administrative Studies from Lewis and Clark College and a Ph.D. in American Studies and M.A. in Government from Claremont Graduate School.
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
2009-07-28
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.10.2016.60
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
66:22
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b9b33a4437579d44ddd3de902a02c143.jpg
9651133f94c1340296e38cb6c0b206e6
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/33413b0059b7833680088a92d291c9c9.mp3
16e02ac00b43aba5889a021d17925db5
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
2010-03-15
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Alice Kessler-Harris
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Alice Kessler-Harris is Professor Emerita of American History at Columbia University. She is also Professor Emerita in the Institute for Research on Women and Gender. Dr. Kessler-Harris specializes in the history of American labor and the comparative and interdisciplinary exploration of women and gender."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13057,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Alice Kessler-Harris is Professor Emerita of American History at Columbia University. She is also Professor Emerita in the Institute for Research on Women and Gender. Dr. Kessler-Harris specializes in the history of American labor and the comparative and interdisciplinary exploration of women and gender.</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.)
89:14
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"ewish immigrants; Jewish labor movement; Women's equality; Sexism; feminism; Working women; G.I. Bill; Post-war period; Anti-Equal Rights Amendment; Women's Studies; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam Memorial."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Jewish immigrants; Jewish labor movement; Women's equality; Sexism; feminism; Working women; G.I. Bill; Post-war period; Anti-Equal Rights Amendment; Women's Studies; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam Memorial.</span>
Subject LCSH
College teachers; Columbia University; Kessler-Harris, Alice--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: Alice Kessler-Harris
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: Kiernan Sullivan
Date of interview: 15 March 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM: 00:00
Testing one two [fumbling with mic] and again, you will see, uh, anything. I am going to ask you though about your early years.
AH: 00:09
Okay. [laughs]
SM: 00:09
Um, could you tell me a little bit about your upbringing? Um, uh-uh- where you were born, and, uh, maybe some professors and teachers that really inspired you. And how did you develop an interest in women's issues, and especially women in labor?
AH: 00:34
Okay, those are a lot of questions, all in one. Um, I was born in England, um, in 1941, uh, of, uh, refugee parents who had, uh, just a year before, um, managed to make it out of Hungary and Czechoslovakia and, uh, to England. Uh, I grew up in Wales, in Cardiff, uh, and, uh, lived there until I was 14, when we started the immigration process to the US. Uh, so all of my early memories are, um, British, Welsh. Uh, I, uh, when we came to the States, uh, I spent two years at, uh, Trenton Central High School.
SM: 01:30
Mhm.
AH: 01:34
Uh, a typical immigration story. My father had a sister in Trenton. My mother was gone already. She died when I was a kid, and, uh, um, so Trenton was where we came and went to school. There was in Trenton, a o-or at Trenton High School, a, um, just a wonderful vice principal, uh, whose name was Sarah Christie, who took me and my brothers, actually two brothers, one older and one younger, on board, and in my case, um, selected the college that she thought would be good for me, and, um, took my father and me down there because I was still fairly young, and he was not comfortable letting his daughter go away-
SM: 02:29
It was Goucher, right?
AH: 02:30
-to school - right. So she actually drove us down to Goucher, made an appointment with the principal, oh sorry, with the dean of admissions for me and with the Dean of Students for my father. And, um, I ended up getting a scholarship there, and spent four very happy years at Goucher. And there I encountered another really super terrific woman whose name was Rhoda Dorsey, um, who was then a young assistant professor at Goucher, and who then went on to, um, become first dean and then president of the, uh, the college. She is still around, and I still see her, and I am very fond of her, but it was she who, um, probably more than anything else, um, uh, influenced, um, my decision to become a historian, and particularly an American historian, given the fact that that was a new arena for me, uh, and it was she actually who, in, in the end, after many steps in between, uh, suggested Rutgers to me as a place to go to school. And, um, a-and that is why I ended up going to Rutgers and ultimately getting my degree there.
SM: 04:04
How did you pick? Uh, why did you care? Was there some experiences you had in college that, uh, turned you toward women's issues?
AH: 04:14
No, I cannot say that I was particularly turned towards women's issues until the late 1960s, until the women's movement began. And, um, before that, I had been turned much more towards immigrant and labor issues, and I think that makes you know absolute sense in terms of my own immigrant background. So you know, I was an immigrant and I wanted to be an American [laughing], that was the sort of bottom line, and the best way to do that was to study American history, and particularly to study immigrant American history. So that is what I did. And even more specifically, I did a visitation on Jews in New York in the 1890s so I was particularly interested in Jewish immigrants. And to do that dissertation, I learned Yiddish because that was my family was Hungarian and German speaking, but not Yiddish speaking. So I learned Yiddish to recoup that piece of a past that I shared, and, um, the rest is history, I suppose. The Women's History piece came out of, uh, the women's movement is the honest answer, and, um, it came out of the fact that I finished the dissertation in 1968 I was already married and had a four-year-old child. I have a daughter who was born in 1964 at that point, and, uh, I had t-to get the degree done, as you can imagine. I had sort of buried myself in books and had not been particularly politically active, y-you know, a-a lot of sort of, um, you know, marches and demonstrations, but no leadership of any one kind in any of those things. And then I lifted my head up, as it were, after I finished the dissertation, and I noticed that there was a woman's movement all around me just beginning, but New York was the, uh, you might say, the epicenter of that.
SM: 06:31
That is right.
AH: 06:33
So I got my first job in September of 1968 started working at Hofstra, where I taught for about 20 years and, uh, joined a consciousness raising group. The same year, uh, met other women who were active in the women's movement, and began to get involved. And it was only after that that I noticed that this dissertation I had written, which was about, you know, the Jewish labor movement in New York in the 1890s had no women in it. You know, that I had systematically just discarded all the women because I was studying the labor movement. And the labor movement was, in those days-
SM: 07:19
Male dominated.
AH: 07:20
-male dominated. So it was at that point that I started to, um, to work on women. I mean, I, I-I went back to some of the Yiddish materials and so on, to recoup some of the women I had overlooked. And so the first things I ever published were, uh, pieces on women in the labor movement. And...um-
SM: 07:48
Do you think, um, we are in the 1960s now, late (19)60s, that the women's movement really came about because of the sexism that took place within all the other movements? Uh, we know that in the civil rights movement, sexism was dominant. Uh, uh, when you leave, when you look at the anti-war movement, it was very dominant. And, um, in talking to some other people, even in the American Indian, American Indian movement, it was dominant. And even to- in the gay lesbian movement, it was very dominant. Um, do you think the women's movement would have happened if the-if they had been treated equal in these movements from the get go? Or, uh, because a lot of people believe it was an offshoot, even though we know civil rights was a, um, role model for the movement. But just your thoughts on the sexism that took place within just about all the other movements.
AH: 08:41
I think that that is, um, certainly a chunk of the explanation for the women's movement, but I do not think it is, by any means, the entire explanation.
SM: 08:51
Mhm. [mumbling]
AH: 08:50
So, uh, you know, I-I would say that, uh, you know, and Sarah Evans first proposed this in personal politics, and I think she is completely right that the sexism within the, um, uh, civil rights movement, the anti-war movement and so on, was an issue, and alerted a lot of women to the, especially a lot of young women, a lot of college aged women, uh, to the fact that here they were fighting for equality for other people, and they themselves were being treated, not only unequally, but unfairly. So, I-I think that that is the case, but I think that after all, limited numbers of women were involved in those movements, and that there is another source of female discontent, if you like, or of the women's movement that should not be overlooked, and that comes out of the- and it is really a long history of, uh, discrimination in the workplace and of the stifling of opportunities for women in those places. So, by the early 1960s it was quite clear that women were going to be earning a living. Large numbers of women were going to be earning a living. And after 1963 after Betty Friedan, uh, the old argument that women were working for pin money, or that they did not really want to be in the labor force and so on, um, I-I think had very little purchase after that point, so that I have called it sometimes incremental changes so women enter the workforce. Uh, they enter the workforce to earn income for their family for the most part, and then they discover that their opportunities as workers are limited. Uh, they their wages are limited. Their wages are unequal, uh, their promotional possibilities are limited. Uh, their capacity to enter certain fields are not only limited, but sometimes denied altogether, and that those things by the mid and late (19)60s are creating - you might call them the fuel for the fire. You know so then perfectly ordinary women who had never marched, you know, had never gone south to, you know, join the civil rights movement. Uh, you know, the mothers of children are, uh, discovering that they are being treated unfairly. And I think that form of sexism, you know, the sort of cultural sexism of who was expected to work and who was expected to, uh, take care of the household just hit home, uh, in about the same period. Now there is a kind of synergy between them that I would certainly agree to. But I do think that there is a strand there that is if you dig deeply, you can find it in the (19)30s. You can find it in the women who were active in the labor movement and would not call themselves feminists. You can find it in the early 1960s in the President's Commission on the Status of Women, where the question of work and family is a major question, you know, unresolved in that, uh, commission, and which spawns, you know, a state commission in every state in the Union, which state commissions are ultimately responsible for creating the National Organization for Women. So, you see, there is another thread there that I think people have perhaps not paid sufficient attention to, and which parallels, um, you know, and energizes, perhaps the younger women, or that the younger women certainly align with.
SM: 08:51
T-the, uh, 1950s to me, women, even though they may have been mothers at home raising children, they were still the teachers because, uh, just about my entire school, I did not see a male teacher in my entire school. It was all female in elementary school, obviously nursing professionals and certainly secretarial because my mom was a secretary. Uh, he raised the kids and then went back to work.
AH: 08:50
Right.
SM: 08:51
So-so [clearing throat] what we saw were people that were in some very responsible positions. Um, what was it about the, the middle-class women of that period in the (19)50s, where they realized, once their kids got a little bit older, that they wanted to go back to work to help raise because, um, my niece is going through this right now? Is it - with a, with a baby - but, uh, she has to do both things to survive, uh, to pay the mortgage. And was this the precursor of the two-income family? Uh, and once the two-income family was present -
AH: 09:36
It was not the precursor; it was the two-income family. The two-income family begins, if you look at the data, it begins in the post war period. So-so again, I have written about this, but-
SM: 14:18
Mhm.
AH: 14:20
-if you look at the trend line, you see that women are entering the workforce at a fairly steady clip and the number but they are mostly single women into the 1930s the Depression period, women continue to enter the [car horn] workforce, and their proportion remains steady. It does not decline, even though there is discrimination against married women. The 1940s women enter at a huge rate, as you know-
SM: 14:58
Right.
AH: 14:58
-because of the war. And then they were pushed out after the war. But immediately after they have pushed out, if you follow that first trend line, it continues to go up. So if you see, the, the war as a blip, you can see the trend line just increasing slowly but steadily, until by 1952 1953 there are almost as many. The proportion of women in the workforce is almost as many as there were during the war. And the proportion of married women and married women with children is now beginning to increase dramatically. So then you have to say, Well, why do women go back to work in the (19)50s? Some people go back to work because they had a great time during the war. You know-
SM: 15:46
Mhm.
AH: 15:46
-they learned that they could be economically independent, and that work was very satisfying. So that is some of it. Uh, some of it is that, uh-uh, they, uh, like their husbands, who sometimes benefit from the GI Bill, uh, begin to go to college and to get an education, and then to want to use that education. And that is the group that moves into the teaching and the nursing this, what we sometimes call the semi professions, uh, social work and-and so on and-and it is the, uh, the desire to use the education that they have that pushes them into the workforce. And then there is a whole other group that, um, moves into the workforce because standards of living are changing in the post war period and the male income is simply insufficient to support, a, a middle-class standard of living for most working-class families, but two working class wage earners can live reasonably well. So, the idea that, uh, y-you know, the male does not have to support a family that the woman can go to work to pay college tuition, to provide ballet classes for the kids to, you know, get that second car, or to buy the new refrigerator, or the leather town house. You know, all those things which, you know, the consumer things which are, uh, and which become necessities in that period. That is, you know, houses do not exist anymore without electricity or with outdoor toilets, or, you know, those are and to maintain or sustain that kind of standard of living requires an extra income. Sometimes it requires half an income, and women become two thirds of the people who work part time, for example, or women leave the labor force while their children are small and then go back into the labor force. But whatever it is, however families work it out, people begin slowly the idea begins to break down that men alone support there, and-
SM: 18:08
It is interesting, I interviewed Phyllis Schlafly about a month ago, and, uh, she has typified the woman, a woman of the (19)50s, because she would not do anything unless she asked her husband.
AH: 18:20
Yes.
SM: 18:21
And, uh, sh- he wanted, um, she wanted to run for the Senate or Congress or whatever, and she asked her husband, her husband said no.
AH: 18:30
Right.
SM: 18:30
So she did not run.
AH: 18:31
Right.
SM: 18:32
So, and she said she, um, she was interesting, because she said, I- she was against the women's movement, obviously, and she was one of the leaders of the anti-ERA effort. Uh, but she also believes that the troublemakers of the (19)60s are now running today's universities, and she p-pointed that out [inaudible] making comments about women's studies and everything.
AH: 18:55
Well, I-
SM: 18:55
Yeah.
AH: 18:56
I am one of those people.
SM: 18:58
[Laughing]
AH: 18:58
So, I proudly declare myself to be a troublemaker-
SM: 19:00
Right.
AH: 19:00
-of the (19)60s-
SM: 19:02
Right.
AH: 19:02
-in that sense-
SM: 19:04
Mhm.
AH: 19:04
-because, uh, I mean, y-you know that that she chose to ask her husband, that her husband said no, and that she responded-
SM: 19:15
[inaudible] sometimes, Yeah, we are doing fine.
AH: 19:18
There was a there was a class issue there. A- that Phyllis Schlafly was of a class status and already involved with a husband who could, in fact, support her and the family, makes her not unique by any means, but relatively speaking, unusual. There were millions of women who, um, they did not even think about running for the Senate, but they did think about becoming school aides, or getting secretarial jobs, or using whatever education they-they had because they needed to. Did they ask their husbands for permission? Probably, but would a husband have said no if he understood that this money could bankroll a kid's education, that you could then send your kid to the State University, because, you know, you would have enough money in the bank to do that, or you could, you know, get that second car for the family, or take vacations every year. So there-there was a class issue that I think people like Phyllis Schlafly often do not, uh, understand. But-but there is another issue too, which is, um, the 1950s 1960s are CUSP years. They are years of transition and transformation. So, uh, you know, it is absolutely the case that many women, particularly many white, middle-class women, benefited from the single income male house holder. You know, they could, as a famous historian named Ivy Pinchbeck once said, uh, they could manage not to have two jobs. So if you consider housework and child rearing one job and going out to work a second job, which most people do, it was a, you know, a great joy and liberation to many women not to have two jobs that is, to be able to stay home with their children, to be able to, you know, make the choice of child rearing, uh, rather than, uh, you know, going out to work and rushing home and you know, so on and, and that is the other piece of this that happens in the (19)50s. So, there is, on the one hand, the pull of income, o-of the need for income, and th-then there on is, on the other hand, an ideology which still says women belong at home, femininity serving the male obedience and so on, are good values. Now I am a great example of that. I grew up in a generation where I firmly believed I would not go to work. I was going to go to college. In fact, I married a medical student in my third year of college, I was set to go. I never intended to spend my life earning a living, and it never occurred to me that that would be but then, uh, you know, I started grad school. Why did I start graduate school? Well, my husband was in medical school. He just finished medical school. He was fairly young. Uh, what was I going to do for a few years? I was going to teach. We were moving from Baltimore to New York. I knew that you could only get a job as a real teacher, not a probationary teacher, if you had a master's degree. So, my initial thought was, all right, I would go get a master's degree, and I would go to graduate school to do that, and then I teach a few years. I get to graduate school. I love graduate school. I do well in graduate school, I think it is, you know, it is just the place I want to be with the conversations I want to have. Now, by now, it is 1962 1963 you know, the word is in the air. You know, there is a civil rights movement. I belong to bits of it. There is an anti-war movement beginning. I am present at that moment at Rutgers where Eugene Genovese bangs the table and says, I do not fear a Viet Cong victory. Indeed, I would welcome one.
SM: 23:44
Were you in the room when that happened?
AH: 23:45
I was in the room when that happened. So, so you see, I am not a leader of any kind, but I am influenced by all these ideas that are in the air. And then I get pregnant, and I have a baby, I am not sure if the order of this is right, but it all happens around the same time. And once I have a baby, the husband says, “Hey, what is going on around here? Why are you continuing to work? What is- but I am committed by now, so I use my fellowship money. I get deprived of a fellowship because I have a baby, I begin to feel that sense of, you know, it is not the same for me as a, as a woman. And then suddenly, in 1968 I finish my degree, I get a job because there are jobs available then, and I discover that I can construct a life, that I am not dependent, that I want this job, I want to work. And at that point, the marriage freys, it is not his fault, it is my fault, because I am the one who changed. His expectations of a wife and a family were absolutely legitimate given the period-
SM: 24:57
Yeah, the time, yeah, the times.
AH: 25:04
-that we grew up in. But I am, you know, there is all this stuff going on around me. I am the one who changes. So, when Phyllis Schlafly says, um, you know, my husband told me not to do it, so I did not, you know, that is great, right? My husband told me not to do it too, but I did, right? And there are as many, there are as many people like me out there as there are like Phyllis, Schlafly, maybe more. And if you want to call us troublemakers, because-
SM: 25:41
Well she used that term.
AH: 25:42
-Right. No, no, I am not-
SM: 25:43
Yeah-yeah. Yeah.
AH: 25:43
I am not blaming you at all-
SM: 25:44
Right, right.
AH: 25:45
-for this. All I am saying is, is I see how she could use that term, because she is really talking about a generation of people just like me who, uh, who do not want to follow the traditional patterns and the traditional lines.
SM: 26:06
See, that is, that is, you know, you are, you are a mover. I-uh-It is not, it is not really a year. It is an attitude. It is really about an attitude. Because, um, if you talk to a, a study of the Free Speech movement with Mario Savio, the very same thing there. Um, it wa- i-it is about the world of ideas. It was the concept of the world of ideas that was important in the free speech movement. And you are talking about 1962-63 that exactly was when Feminine Mystique was written, yeah, and it came out. And, um, I would have to check this thing to make sure this is doing fine. Um, and I noticed, um, in, in an interview that they had with Betty Friedan, before she passed away, talking about The Feminine Mystique, she said it was, um, about- it was all about equality. It was about equality. And then, uh, the person that followed up said, what about the, the radical women of the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, the ones that burned their bras or would not shave their legs, or, um, you know, those kinds of individuals. And she said, you know, they were radicals. That is not what I was into. That is not what I was into. She was kind of, kind of negative toward that kind of stuff.
AH: 27:19
But she is not telling the truth about herself, of course.
SM: 27:22
Yeah.
AH: 27:23
I mean, if you if you read, um, Daniel Horowitz's biography of Betty Friedan, you discover that, uh, you know, she comes out of the left, she comes out of the labor movement. She herself was a radical for a long time in her life that, while she was writing this book-
SM: 27:43
Right.
AH: 27:43
-you know, from a, you know, a sort of middling perspective that really is not where she is coming from. And indeed, I think, uh, only a Betty Friedan that is somebody who came out of the left and the labor movement, those are the women, after all, who are also, at this point, creating groups like women strike for peace, you know, and the ban the bomb movement and so on, you know. And they, you know, many of them have a, you know, what you would call a radical background. So, I mean the, the thing, the thing is that what we understand as radical may not have really been so radical at all. I mean, I do not think I was so unusual in that period. Uh, a-and I certainly, you know, if you think about organizations like now, or the Women's Equity Action League and how quickly they took off. You have to believe that there are millions of women who are somehow dissatisfied. You know, they may not be dissatisfied in the way Betty Friedan describes, but they are dissatisfied with that traditional you know, I-I am just an appendage of my husband, um, and I can be happy if he makes a good living being an appendage. Um-
SM: 29:07
Betty Friedan says, but part of the result of the women's movement, as I help conceptualize it, is to give it a vision and lead it is an end to such a no-win either-or choice. Women today have choices, and demand choices, choices to have kids or not, and the reproductive technology there too. And it is a fact that most women continue to choose to have children. They, they know it as a choice now, but they do not choose to have too many, and they do not choose it as either-or career or children. That is something that Betty Friedan says [inaudible].
AH: 29:44
Yeah, this says there is something true about that, but there is also something sort of oversimplified about that. I do not know when she actually said that, but if you look at the data now, lots of women are choosing not to get married. Lots of women are choosing to have children even though they have no partner. Lots of people are choosing to have same sex partners and to have children with those same sex partners. So, her sort of the underlying assumption there that marriage between a man and a woman is the basis for the choice to have a child is no longer valid. It is for professional women, for teenage black women, it is not legitimate to have a child. But for professional, 30-year-olds who do not have a husband, it is, you know, the numbers of those women who decide to get pregnant or to adopt children is Legion. I have not counted them, but-
SM: 29:45
I know that David Kaiser, who, t-the historian that wrote 68, um, he knows you. I think he knows you.
AH: 30:47
Yes.
SM: 30:53
He knew about you, and when I interviewed him, he said, do not bring up Betty Friedan to me. She is homophobic and, uh, she is not, er, uh, one of the leaders of really, uh, she, and, uh, Gloria Steinem is another story. Yes, she is fantastic. And so is Bella but Betty Friedan is homophobic, so in the gay community, I guess there is some sensitivity toward her. But, um, Phyllis Schlafly, um, trying to think something else that she said, uh, um, oh my goodness, um, it will come back to me. She said a lot of things [chuckling] that you might well know. Um, what do you mean when you say the gendering of society? Because, uh, you, uh, that is I have read some of the things on the web. And, uh, what does that mean to you?
AH: 31:36
I do not know that I ever said the gendering of society. I think I might have said the gendering of the labor force, and I think I have said a shift in the gendered, what I call the gendered imagination. But if I were going to talk about that whole concept of gendering, I would say the following: that we, um, and here I speak as a historian or a social scientist, I guess, uh, that we have often explained, uh, uh, transformation and change in society in terms of class and in terms of race differences. That is, you know, people say, um, uh, the, uh, you know, the industrialization altered people's expectations of work and of their place in society, and that changes how people think about democracy and politics and so on. And we have not often thought of gender as a sort of motivational force. And one of the things I think that we have learned over the last generation, and I think it has really taken 20 or 30 years to learn it, is that gender and gendered tensions might be as important as any other kind of tensions, not more important, but as important. So, you know, you could say, uh, the effort of men and women to, you know, sort of create different kinds of relationships within families, you know, the most intimate level, to create satisfying lives for both of them, then produces a whole bunch of other issues and demands. You know, it produces, well, the demand not only for, uh, equal work for men and women and equal pay for men and women, but also the demand for, um, a more egalitarian view of what work should be and how it should be structured. Uh, it produces a different sense of children and who's responsible for them. It produces a different, uh, perspective on social policy. You know, there is nobody left to take care of the aging parents anymore. We need social security and pensions, not just to be supplements, but to take care of them. It produces a different perspective on the role of the public school system in education. So we note now in New York City that virtually every public school at the elementary level has an afternoon school program which is free and available, and that is a response to shifts in the family. So what I am saying is that the, the gendered tension, uh, produces all kinds of other, uh, incremental kinds of changes that are not easy to deal with. You know, they are, they are very difficult, and sometimes they have backlash effects. And i-if you want me to keep talking, I can say, for example, the thing that comes very painfully to mind is the welfare reform issue. So it used to be that assumptions about women's gender roles meant that poor women who needed support would be supported to stay home with their small children so that they could take care of them and the children would not suffer. Now we have a gendering, a different kind of gendered balance in this society, in which we no longer assume that women with children will stay home. We assume that women with chil- with children will be out to work. And so instead of paying for women to stay home. We pay them to go out to work, but we have not figured out what to do with the children yet. In other words, you know, we have not provided appropriate day care. We have not provided it in appropriate places. We have not given these, you know, women reasonable transportation. We have not figured out what to do when the kids are sick. You know, we...do you see what I mean? So now that requires a whole another set of questions. They have not yet been resolved.
SM: 36:14
You see another just came out. My niece told me this, and it was on CNS, uh, CN-NBC, or whatever is that breastfeeding a child in the first six to eight months, they go to work after the you know, they got to go. There is no privacy.
AH: 36:28
Right.
SM: 36:29
And so that is a big issue. Now, I believe in Obama's, uh, Bill w-was it was not for six months or trying to build something, so they have to build a room for a private area. It was just something there was they were not sensitive at all-
AH: 36:39
Yes.
SM: 36:40
-to women's, uh-
AH: 36:40
Yes.
SM: 36:41
-needs.
AH: 36:42
Look 50 years ago when I got my first job. So 1961 to 62 I taught for a single year in a Baltimore High School, and I had to sign a contract that said, and that is exactly 50 years ago, right? I had to sign a contract that said that if I got pregnant, I would tell them and I would resign within four months of the beginning of the pregnancy. That was normal. I did not blink twice at signing that contract. It was perfectly normal. So nobody had to think about privacy or extra rooms, or it was assumed that it was not that everybody did resign when they had babies, but the expectation was that you would do so. So, you know, it is a half a century later, and look at the consequences of that. You know, whether it is about breastfeeding, or whether it is about on-site daycare, or whether it is about Chinese menu benefit options and employers finding that it is too expensive to provide healthcare anymore, and now maybe we can have national healthcare. In other words, nothing is isolated in a cocoon, and when you start shifting these what look like very intimate gender relationships, you produce huge consequences for the society as a whole.
SM: 38:11
I-I just thought what Phyllis, uh, said, she said, in, uh, she said that one half of all babies born last year were born out of wedlock. That is what she, uh, she had the st-statistic, was a year ago, so, and she was I-I again, I am not sure, we talked about a lot of different things, what she was referencing into, but she put that in as a-a statement that, uh, unwed mothers, and I-
AH: 38:33
I-I would like to check out that statistic, and I would, I would bet you dollars to donuts that included in that number, if the number is correct, and I think it is probably exaggerated, but if the number is incorrect, it probably counts as unwed women and men who live together as partners and men and men and women and women who live together. In other words, if out of wedlock means out of traditional marriage, having a marriage ceremony done, that might be correct, but if, but that, of course, that does not mean anything, because the children who are born under many of those circumstances have two parents, you know.
SM: 39:15
One, one of the first questions I have asked everyone, uh, on the general questions, not specific ones, is that, um, in 1994 when Newt Gingrich came into power, he made some pretty strong statements against the, um, (19)60s and the (19)70s [mumbling]. He has, he has quoted, he talks about it all the time, in certain ways. He is a boomer himself, but, uh, and then, uh, notice, Mike Huckabee recently has said some things on his TV show about the (19)60s generation. He likes to throw these one liners out there and for church will in his writings over the years, always likes to throw a little jab here, jab there. Um, someone told me, uh, in, in response to his chapters, anybody ever really told you or told you that he worked for Jesse Helms, and that is how he got his start? I said, no, I did not know that well, I do not think he likes the world to know it either, so [laughing] s-so lo-, there is a lot of stuff out there, but basically, what I am saying is that it is, it is a general perception on those that do not like, the, the Liberals from that era, whether they be in the anti-war movement, civil rights, uh, women's movement, uh, the gay and lesbian, uh, the environmental movement, the Native American Chicano, um, is that they are just, um, the breakdown of our society really started then the lot of the issues of the divorce, the divorce rate, the lack of responsibility, lack of respect for authority, the, the beginning of the isms. Um, of course, the welfare state will always be thrown out there. That was an LBJ thing. Um, so I do not know, how do you respond to that? Because, uh, it is, it is, it is really, it is becoming very strong now. It is stronger than I have ever seen it the backlash against that era. I preface this by saying that Barney Frank, I mean, I think I am going to have to turn this, uh, no, I am still good. Barney Frank wrote a very good book in the (19)90s called Speaking Frankly, and he is Mr. Democratic and, uh, but he said that we have to as a party, the Democratic Party, we have to say goodbye to the anti-war people and those-those (19)60s people and the-the people that were around McGovern, because if we were going to survive as a party, people are not going to join us. They are going to think of the radi- radical aspects. Uh, and that is always stuck in my mind, and this is a politician saying it. And, uh, so Mike, the basic question is this, when you see blanket statements made, stating that that period, and we all know what they are talking about, the (19)60s and early (19)70s, um, that all our-uh, just about all our problems started, then, um, how do you respond to that?
AH: 42:00
How I respond to that is by saying, some people would call that the breakdown of society, and other people like me would call it the transformation of society, uh, the transformation of society to a more democratic uh, um, uh, ground. In other words, I, I you can look at what happened in the (19)60s from various perspectives. From one perspective, you can see it as an enormous challenge to a variety of traditional value systems. Among them, the, uh, racial segregation, um, gender inequality, um, [car horns] or patriarchy, uh, if you want to put it that way, uh, you know elitist, uh, government, you know, uh, decision making made by political people and so on. So what the 1960s did, from that perspective, is to say, no, we were, uh, we have now moved far enough so that we want to transform the society on more democratic and egalitarian grounds. Uh, now you could say that that is a breakdown in the sense that our forefathers never envisioned such democracy. They did not envision racial equality, they did not envision gender equality, and so look at the terrible things you have done to our society. And that is one way of looking at it. [car horns] But another way of looking at it is to say, you know, this democratic experiment that this country is involved in is an evolving experiment. And the (19)60s and early part of the (19)70s, you know, there was a decade in there when we really tried to push the boundaries a little further. Uh, we got a good way doing that. We did not get as far as some people wanted us to, and we left some problems hanging. But by Jove, you know, we, we created a far greater access for African Americans, for people of color.
SM: 44:33
[mumbling] I know it is at the end. [recording pauses]
AH: 44:40
Okay, so, no, just the point is that we, we created, uh, access. We the- you know, the New Left view of democratic participation. [recording pauses]
SM: 45:04
[inaudible]
AH: 45:04
So, I was going to say the-the new left's, um, uh notion of, um, participatory democracy was in some ways, completely nuts. You know, it is, um, you know, in this in the sense that, uh, it is stymied activity. You know, we all spend hours day and night talking about things. But on the other hand, it also fostered the town hall meetings that you now see, where presidential candidates and so on actually think that upon occasion, they can actually go talk to ordinary people, and that ordinary people have things to say so. So that is what I think about that argument. I think that when, uh, Newt Gingrich should know better, because he was trained as a historian.
SM: 45:58
Yes.
AH: 45:59
You know, change does not come without, um, uh, pain, and, and people will disagree with it, and will, uh, you know, sort of pull in the other direction and try to pull us back in the other direction. But I do not believe that, uh, we-we can or that people will tolerate being moved back, uh, you know, to the sort of pre democratic or and we are certainly not as democratic as we could be, or as egalitarian as we could be, even now,
SM: 46:40
I know that, um, his commentary the other day against, uh, President Obama was pretty strong. [mumbling] He is the farthest left president we have ever had. And what is interesting also that President Obama tries to distance himself from the (19)60s, I think, because of the Bill Ayers and the all the other stuff. But also, um, his critics oftentimes say he is the epitome of the (19)60s. He is the reincarnation of the (19)60s. So here we have a man who wants to distance himself from that period, and yet we have his critics saying that he is the, uh, epitome and the, uh, role model of that period. He is-
AH: 47:21
But he has got critics on both sides. Right?
SM: 47:23
Yeah.
AH: 47:24
On the one hand, they say he is the epitome of the (19)60s and he is too far left, and he is a socialist and so on. On the other hand, people like me are saying, wait a minute, he is not far left enough. You know, what has he done? He has not stopped the war in Afghanistan. You know, he has settled for a health care bill, which is half of what we would like to have gotten. In other words, he is getting criticized from the left as well as from the right. And if you read magazines like the nation, what you get are articles saying, you know, hold off. Do not be too disappointed. He is doing as much as he can, you know, even though he is not doing, you know, enough so, so maybe he is doing something right, because [laughing] he is going right down the middle.
SM: 48:12
You have taught s-since the middle (19)60s, I guess, on college campuses. So you saw the, uh, the boomers when they were coming. Uh, they are 64 so they, they were in the (19)60s and (19)70s, and then you had the Generation X ers that came in the, uh, (19)80s and, uh, (19)90s, and now you got the millennials. Uh, Generation Y is right around the corner. See, everybody has got these terms for them. But, uh, one of the things that people have written is that the gener- that the boomer generation, were the best educated kids that they had, the best teachers, they had the best school system. They were seen to be more knowledgeable about issues, uh, not only that, often, not all of them active on the, um, uh, issues, but as a teacher, as a professor, as someone, you had good students in all your classes and every year. But did you see, c-can you perceive that that period students may have been more inquisitive, more questioning? Even you as a teacher, uh, how they seem to they seem to have been different and I have had other professors who have told me this.
AH: 49:17
I, uh, I think the answer that question is yes, but I think you have to remember that I was closer to their age than I am now, and students are always much more willing to engage and to push a professor who is young and, you know, seen as, uh, responsive, rather than somebody who's been around for, you know, 40 years and-
SM: 49:20
Right.
AH: 49:21
It is like their grandparents so, but that said, uh, I think it is probably true that the kids of the, of the, uh, late (19)60s, I started teaching in (19)68 and those first four or five years were of course, the heart of the anti-war movement. And so, uh, you know, the kids were active. They were engaged in the learning process. Uh, they, uh, you know, if they disagreed with the book, the challenge was not to get them to not disagree. We wanted them to disagree, but the challenge was to, uh, help them to defend their disagreement, to, um, you know, to articulate and to think about, you know, what the roots and the sources were of it. And so I think that that is true. Nowadays, students tend to be somewhat more passive, although I have to say that in my Women's Studies classes and my women's history classes, Phyllis Schlafly notwithstanding, um, those students tend to be, uh, much more challenging, uh, much less willing to accept authority, uh, you know. So they will repeatedly distinguish themselves, you know, from the second wave, you know, they will identify me almost immediately as a feminist and as a second wave feminist, and identify themselves as, uh, the third, or even now the fourth, fourth wave. And that is very rewarding. That is there. It generates very useful conversations about the differences, which, of course, reveals something to them-
SM: 51:48
Mhm.
AH: 51:48
-about, you know, what the past was like and what the present is like. Uh, those kinds of, uh, that kind of pushing, that kind of challenging I do not find in my other classes, but I would suspect that others might you know, others of a younger generation, others of different political persuasion might.
SM: 52:15
In your opinion, um, when did the (19)60s begin? When did it end, and what was there a watershed moment, um, watershed happening? So, it is a three-part question. Uh, [mumbling].
AH: 52:31
Well, it began and ended - is it all right?
SM: 52:35
Yep
AH: 52:35
It began and ended at different points for different people. Um, So I do not think there is one answer to that question. For me, I would say, uh, it probably began in 1964 and it probably ended, well, it did not end, uh, because I remained involved actively in the women's movement. For me, perhaps it still continues, but, uh, the at least that piece of it, the women's movement, piece of it still continues. It is still an ongoing struggle. It is changed and transformed, but, uh, I-I would say it began in 1964 for me, because that is when I became active in the civil rights movement, and that is when the civil rights movement became a kind of living part of my life, although even in college, I had become aware of it, though not particularly active in it, um, I would say, um, that the (19)60s ends, uh, in some sort of grassroots way. Um, by the early part of the (19)70s, (19)73 the withdrawal from Vietnam, you might say was, the is a good day to end it. Now, what succeeds that, of course, is just a ton of legislation and policy changes around the issues I care about, including affirmative action, uh, for blacks and whites and for women and so on.
SM: 54:20
Yeah, I have, I have a question here. Uh, I have a question here because during the period when boomers were growing up and young, um, we had the Brown versus Board of Education. And then we had the Civil Rights Act. We had the Voting Rights Act (19)64 and (19)65, um, so, and then, of course, Roe v Wade, which was a major, major happening. We actually have we had programs on that before I left school, about the threat that it may try to be changed back. Um, that is why the Stevens Point there, right? [chuckling] That is really big. Um, but getting back to the question, when you are talking about women. And of course, I am talking about the boomers, which are now. The oldest ones are 63 and the youngest ones are 46, um, what laws are the most important that you feel for all women? Uh, in and-and when I break it down here, it is hard to not only in terms of equality, but where, uh, discrimination was present, and where it has been improved, uh where, uh, uh, the whole business of the labor force, uh, equal pay for equal work, uh, the whole issue, I noticed there is so much here, so you cannot talk about all of it. But what would be the key points, the legal issues that you feel have really changed how we look at women today?
AH: 55:48
For women?
SM: 55:48
Yes.
AH: 55:49
Um, I-I would say, uh, e-equal pay. Equal pay is not as important as, um, occupational segregation. Uh, it symbolically is important, but, uh, the bunches of studies now that have demonstrated that pay actually that that equal pay legislation is ineffective unless occupational segregation is simultaneously, uh, eliminated and the shifts in occupational segregation have been, uh, not insignificant, especially at the professional and financial levels, but not very, um, uh, I would say, marginal at the level of the trades and the, um, under crafts, uh, which isn't to say that they have not been there. So, the numbers of carpenters, of female carpenters, have doubled from two to 4 percent, you know, like that. But still the notion that, um, occupational segregation is, um, an invalid, inappropriate, um, uh, you know, claim, which was the claim that, um, both men and women agreed to for years that is gone, and it is gone not through a single law, but through a series of successive changes, starting with the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and, uh, with Title Seven of that act, and, uh, through the actions of the EEOC, uh, continuing through the, uh, Labor Department, new labor department regulations and so on. So I would say that is one big change. The second one has to do with reproductive rights, although I agree with you that that is now threatened. Well, I guess we will see how effective it will be, and where I think, uh, the beginning of the challenge to that, I would probably date to Griswold. So that is 1967 that is the Connecticut decision, which makes that illegal for states to limit the distribution of birth control only to married women. You know, women are entitled to birth control whether or not they are married. Uh, and that continues, of course, then through the abortion, uh, protests and demonstrations, and then Roe v Wade, but in there you have to sort of put things the cultural things like Title Nine, you know, women should be able to participate in sports. Um, I do not know quite where that belongs, but I think that was a big one. Uh, and in the reproductive rights thing, there are a whole series of things that sort of tentacles that that leads to including, um, the, uh, court decision on GE which, um, uh, said it was really okay for insurers not to insure pregnancy and childbirth. And then the 1979 government, um, uh, legislation which says nope, and people who provide health insurance for their workers have to include, if you provide any health insurance, then pregnancy has to be so the so-called Pregnancy Disability Act. So, so that whole sequence of things you know, who controls reproduction, who is responsible? How people deal with it, the Hyde Amendment. You know that there are a whole series of we could separate them out, if you like, but if you wanted to summarize it, I would say, uh, the thing that was important in this period was the recognition that, uh, reproductive issues were not were neither wholly private, that is that they were not within the control and purview of women and their husbands, and at the same time they-they were not wholly public either. You know that we, and I think that is what the big debate is about now, but I do not think it takes place just on the yes abortion, no abortion. I think it takes place on all these other fronts too.
SM: 1:00:57
Do you, do you feel that when women have to leave work, they get six weeks no pay. Is what happens, is-
AH: 1:01:05
12 weeks
SM: 1:01:06
I-is it 12?
AH: 1:01:06
[inaudible] family medical leave-
SM: 1:01:09
My, uh, my niece just, uh, says, in New York State, she could only get, um, a month and a half, six weeks
AH: 1:01:17
Family medical leave act. It is a federal act, says 12 weeks. It does not cover some people. Maybe she is in a non-covered job.
SM: 1:01:25
They do not get paid either.
AH: 1:01:26
But there is no pay-
SM: 1:01:27
Yeah.
AH: 1:01:27
-for it.
SM: 1:01:27
Is that right?
AH: 1:01:29
That is right, although many employers now provide, Columbia being one of them, now provide maternity leaves, which they did not. But the difference is, you know, there is a maternity leave and there is a parental leave, so that 12 weeks unpaid anybody can take the maternity leave. Or the, you know, the pregnancy leave is available, often out of sick pay, often for women, at the cost of giving out, you know, a vacation or something else. Not good. Not good. Much better in Europe.
SM: 1:02:05
One of the questions I have been asking everyone centers on a question that we, um, asked Senator Evan Muskie (?) when we took a group of students to Washington in the mid (19)90s, before he passed away, he was not well. He had been in the hospital. And this was organized through, uh, arrangements with Senator Gaylord Nelson, who I got to know quite well, senator from Wisconsin. And the question that the students came up with, because they did not grow up in the (19)60s, and, and they had watched the film of 1968 and they saw the students and the police could club each other. They knew that the Kennedy and King had been killed, and, uh, that Johnson had resigned, and Tet and all the other things. So they knew all this. The question they asked is, do you feel that the boomer generation, the generation of 74 million, will go to its grave like the Civil War generation, not truly healing from the really strong divisions that tore the nation apart in that time? They want to know, number one, from Senator muskie, were we close to, uh, breaking apart as a nation because of the burnings in the cities and all the things that are happening, i.e. close to a second civil war? A-and secondly, uh, with all the divisions between black and white, male and female, gay and straight, uh, those who supported the troops, those who did not for the war, against the war and all these divisions, um, you know, the question was, are they going to go to their grave, like many in the Civil War did, uh, that had all these reunions, but they still never truly healed from the Civil War. What are your thoughts?
AH: 1:03:48
I think the only people who go to their graves thinking that are people who do not know any history, because it does not take much history to recognize that every decade or so, every generation, uh, certainly has seen equally powerful divisions which have threatened to tear the nation apart, and which, as you know, in the case of the Civil War, sometimes did tear the nation apart. But you know, divisions, not only over the Civil War, but divisions over reconstruction, uh-
SM: 1:04:24
Make sure, we are doing okay. Yep! Okay.
AH: 1:04:27
Uh, divisions over reconstruction. Divisions over free silver tore the nation apart. Divisions over, um, uh, you know, World War One and whether we should go to war divisions over the New Deal and the Social Security Act of I mean, you could go on and on. And you know, the 1930s certainly saw its, uh, you know, its marches and people in the street and demonstrations and-and attacks. And you know, people thought the political consequences of that would never end, and not only did they end, but they are now some of the most popular programs that we have. So, I do not know how you-you know the divisions over the Vietnam War, to say nothing of the other divisions were powerful and deep. And, you know, we got beaten up by cops on horses. We did not understand why they were wielding clubs at us or-or, you know, pushing us around at the Pentagon, or arresting we, you know, we thought we were doing the right democratic thing. And 20 years later, do we even remember that? No, those are the stories that we tell our children. They are not, you know, sources of division. I do not know, huge divisions over the civil rights marches and-and would anybody say those tore, you know, Brown v Board of Education, Yeah, they tore the nation apart. But the rifts aren't permanent. I think that what we see now is a, um, is a very articulate, uh, right wing made more articulate by the kind of media and sources that are available to them. So when 200 Tea Party people meet in Boston, 200 is almost nothing, but when every television channel and Fox News Features them so that every household gets a sense that people are uncomfortable. They seem more powerful than in fact they are so no, I would say, um, if you know any history, you know that divisions are, are not unhealthy. I, I wish, I wish there were less racial division. I wish I were not seeing these attacks on Obama. You know, as a socialist, is that a euphemism for the N word? Is that a- you know, you, you really that that scares me a little bit. I wish we had a Supreme Court that, you know, would you know restrain the use of weapons or the handling of weapons. I think you know these recent decisions about, um, allowing weapons on the public streets of big cities without, you know, monitoring or checking or I think those are absurd.
SM: 1:07:54
Do not know why that is doing it. Here we go. All right, uh, I want to mention that, um, Senator Muskie, when he responded he did not even mention 68 he said he did not even talk about it, um, because they thought he was there at the convention. He would, that is what they were asking. He said, um, I just saw the Ken Burns series in the Civil War, and we lost 430,000 men in that war and the South almost lost their entire generation. So, um, he said, we have not healed since the Civil War. And then he explained why when I am talking about it, uh, and he said, all you need to do is go to get his emergency (?). When you drive on one side, uh, the south just leaves flags. In the north, you do not, you do not see anything. [recording pauses]
AH: 1:08:40
Do you have another tape?
SM: 1:08:41
Yeah, I do have another tape. I do not know why it is stopping. There you go. Um, anyways, uh, one, one of the other things of during that particular period, um, in the (19)60s- [recording pauses]. Alright. When you think of the (19)60s and the (19)70s, um, three slogans come to mind w-when I think of period different types of people. Number one was the slogan that Malcolm X gave, which is by any means necessary, symbolic of a more radical, violent group. The second one was Bobby Kennedy speech when they are words, when he said, um, some men, some men, sees things as they are, and ask, why? I see things that never were and asked, why not? And that was a Henry David Thoreau quote, but it was more symbolic of the activist mentality, uh, wanting to, uh, do positive things, things for justice and equality, you name it. And then third one was more kind of a hippie mentality, which was, uh, from a peer Max poster, uh, you do your thing. I will do mine. If by chance, we should get together, it will be beautiful. Which was kind of a hippie mentality. Um, and I thought that kind of civilized the, um, boomers when they were young, the (19)60s, the (19)70s, uh, maybe some of the ideas they carried on even into the (19)80s. Are there any slogans or quotes that you feel are important? The only other one that came out from us other people was we shall overcome, which was the Civil Rights-
AH: 1:10:13
I like that.
SM: 1:10:14
-and the John Kennedy quote, wh-um, uh, ask not what your country can do for you. Ask what you can do for your country. Do you have some quotes that you feel, uh, really are symbolic of the period?
AH: 1:10:31
The woman's, uh, movement. Uh, the woman's movement line was the personal is political, and that was one that was very influential for me. Um, I have to say that, uh, you do your thing, I will do my thing. Uh, that was the Cultural Revolution. You left thing. And maybe that is what distinguishes me from really, the boomer generation. I could not bear that slogan [laughing]. I could not stand it, and I thought, you know, it is an anti-political slogan. It is, uh, you know, let us just drift apart. Leave me alone and I will, you know, so, so no, that that was not what I thought the (19)60s was about. I thought the (19)60s was about, um, uh, uh, a fairer and I like the word fair better than I like the word, uh, equal, but, but I would say a fairer and more equal society, creating one for everybody. So. And I think to do that, we needed, we need the Robert Kennedy slogan. You know, I think that that is the most.
SM: 1:11:46
Uh, I-I have a whole mess of questions here. We are going to cut some of these because we only have 10 more minutes here. Um, uh, all right, uh, w-what were some of the books? Now, we have talked about the feminine mystique. And certainly there were other writers that were important, Betty Friedan and, um, I know Susan Brown Miller has written some major books, uh-
AH: 1:12:09
The people we read before we read Susan Brown Miller and Kate Millett and so on.
SM: 1:12:14
Right.
AH: 1:12:15
We read, um, uh, Herbert Marcuse, Norman O. Brown [Norman Oliver Brown], uh, you know, they were the precursors of this so Marcuse, uh, eros and civilizations. Freud's civilization, and its discontents. Uh, Norman O. Brown, life against death. Those were the books that we, uh-uh Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities. So, before we were reading the women's books, we were reading in the late (19)60s, these books, and those were the books I was sometimes teaching. You know, of-of the women's books, uh Shulamith Firestone's [Shulamith Bath Shmuel Ben Ari Feuerstein], uh, Dialectic of Sex [The Dialectic of Sex: The Case for Feminist Revolution] , uh, was important. Uh, Juliet Mitchell, the Long Revolution or no, I think the book was called Woman's Estate, uh, and then the popular books were Kate Millett, um, Germaine Greer, uh, Betty Friedan was old hat by the late (19)60s. I mean, for people like me, it is probably not for younger people. And then fiction, Marilyn French's the Women's Room. Um, Kathy Davidson, I have forgotten the name of that book, something divisions, sexual divisions or something. Um, Alix Kates Shulman, uh Memoirs of an Ex-Prom Queen. Uh, there was a lot of that, a lot of fiction going on. And then the, uh, black fiction, the African American women's fiction, beginning to emerge in the mid, uh, (19)70s. So, Toni Cade Bambara, um, uh, Toni Morrison, of course, [SM coughing]. Um, Alice Walker, not till later. But that is what we were.
SM: 1:14:23
Was Carol Oaks, one of those? Uh-
AH: 1:14:25
No.
SM: 1:14:25
No?
AH: 1:14:26
Uh, I mean, she was there but she was not from-
SM: 1:14:30
[Interrupting and overlapping speech] Simone de Beauvoir-
AH: 1:14:32
Simone de Beauvoir was enormously influential. Yes, yes, yeah. We read her early on, in fact, now when I teach that period, I start with Simone de Beauvoir.
SM: 1:14:45
In terms of magazines, we all think of Ms., but were there other magazines that were influential? Uh-
AH: 1:14:50
There were.
SM: 1:14:52
-either underground papers or-
AH: 1:14:55
Yeah, there were several of the underground papers. There was a paper called New Directions for Women, which was, which lasted about 15 years, and which was, um, you know, widely read. There was, um, uh, uh, underground paper called red rag. There was another one. There were several underground papers. I cannot remember the names of them all, but, oh, you know, we would get them all and devour them. Is, is, I think there were no, uh, the thing about Ms. was that it was a mass circulation magazine, and that is what made it different. The others had smaller circulations within the feminist, you know, intellectual, but Ms., really, you know, sort of extended beyond that, and that is what made it so important.
SM: 1:15:54
I would like, uh, these are some female um, uh, leaders that have been come to the forefront in the last 30 some years. Um, if you just give your thoughts, just quick thoughts, it does not have to be anything in depth. Some are popular, and some are maybe not so popular.
AH: 1:16:12
This is a trap, [laughing]
SM: 1:16:13
It is not a trap.
AH: 1:16:14
This is a Rorschach.
SM: 1:16:15
Uh-
AH: 1:16:15
[Laughing]
SM: 1:16:17
Lynn Cheney.
AH: 1:16:17
Yuck.
SM: 1:16:17
[chuckling] Okay. Is that - you do not have to go any further. Do you want to say anything more?
AH: 1:16:25
Yeah. I mean, I-I think, um, a very conservative woman, uh, somewhat hypocritical, uh, in my judgment, as a as a, um, uh, the chair of the NEH, which was when she first really came to my attention. Uh, she was enormously destructive, uh, both because she, uh, supported and, well, I would say it this way, she limited NEH support to projects which she found politically acceptable and correct, and that seemed to me to be a violation of the NEHS mission she excluded from panels people of varieties of political and social backgrounds and opinions. Uh, so, uh, right.
SM: 1:17:22
Eleanor Roosevelt,
AH: 1:17:24
Eleanor Roosevelt, one can only have admiration for. I mean, even though you could make positive and negative judgments about her, but she, she was, um, a far sighted and, uh, often a very courageous leader of women, uh, who was limited by her own, you know, politics and class and so on, but, uh, she was a great lady.
SM: 1:17:58
Uh, two, uh, do two at a time here, uh, Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice, because they were the most well-known. Seemed to be.
AH: 1:18:07
Well, Condoleezza Rice neither had much to say or do about women's issues, so I cannot really speak to that. I, uh, did not much like her as a secretary of state because she was too war like and, um, uh, too closely tied to Bush administration policies which she supported. And I dislike, uh, Hillary Clinton. Uh, I find, you know, I have a lot of admiration for Hillary Clinton, though I do not always agree with what she says and does, particularly, did not agree with her stance on the welfare issue or its renewal, but on the other hand, she was very smart, she was thoughtful, she was responsive. Uh, she you know when as senator, she took reasonable positions on many issues. So if I had to choose between them, I, you can tell which one I choose.
SM: 1:19:10
Gloria Steinem and Bella Abzug.
AH: 1:19:13
Uh, birds of a different feather, although, uh, very closely tied, Bella Abzug comes out of her radical background, and though she was an impossible person by all accounts, she was a ,uh, political force, and one has to both respect and admire that force. Uh, I wish she was still alive. I would love to hear her voice out there. Uh, Gloria Steinem has been a different kind of leader of women, um, very active on the range of you know, of women's issues per se, uh, Bella was more interested in broader issues. As well as women's issues, issues of human rights, issues of, uh, well, all the issues that came before the Senate, issues of corporate-
SM: 1:20:07
[inaudible] Yep.
AH: 1:20:12
But, um, whereas Gloria Steinem has a sort of narrower mandate, uh, h-her greatest contributions, it seems to me, uh, were both in the founding of Ms., but then also in the um, uh, the effort to create a kind of inclusionary woman's movement, as opposed to one that was divided so...
SM: 1:20:40
Um, Lindy Boggs-
AH: 1:20:43
Yeah.
SM: 1:20:43
-and Angela Davis [both laughing] Lindy-
AH: 1:20:49
I am going to leave Lindy Boggs out, partly because I do not know enough about her to make quick judgments. About Angela Davis, uh, you know, what is there to say? You know, for her moment in time, uh, you know, she was, uh, uh, just an enormous inspiration to large numbers of young people. You know, black, beautiful, a woman, uh, concerned with feminist issues, a pioneer in trying to sort of, um, think about the relationship between race and gender in a constructive way, rather than in a divisive way. Uh, you know, uh...I do not know about the last 20 years. I mean, uh, you know, she seems to me now to have been sort of repeating what she said earlier, so, but that first decade or so, uh, in the (19)70s, early part of the (19)80s, um, she was terrific.
SM: 1:22:13
Shirley Chisholm and Phyllis Schlafly.
AH: 1:22:15
[laughing] There are two more birds of a very different feather. For, um, Shirley Chisholm, I have only, uh, admiration, um, you know, in all the ways that she broke new ground and did it, uh, um, not in A Bella absent way, not by, you know, pushing forcefully, but by gently opening doors, which opened partly because she was so, you know, she was insistent and yet not strident. I guess is the- I suppose some people would disagree with that, but I think that at the moment that she chose to run for president, for example, and to make a statement. Those were very brave things for a woman to do, and for a black woman to, you know, to take on, to step out, um, know that that is that took some courage. About Phyllis Schlafly, what can I say? I-I disagree with practically every word she has written. I do not know what she is like as a human being. Uh, people seem to like and respect her. Uh, I think, um, uh, she is rooted in an ideology that, um, uh, does not seem to me to be, uh, to work anymore. Uh, she adopts, uh, hypocritical positions with relationship to how she herself lives, you know, she is, she is, uh, you know, argues for particular kinds of lifestyles for women, and then lives a whole another lifestyle herself. Um, I just, I mean, I know she has been an important force and has persuaded a lot of people to move in her direction. But, but I cannot, um-
SM: 1:24:23
At the CPAK conference boy, she is popular.
AH: 1:24:26
Yeah-yeah.
SM: 1:24:26
We are coming up - because she is historic.
AH: 1:24:28
So is Sarah Palin. So ask me about Sarah-
SM: 1:24:31
Yeah, exactly. Sarah, Sarah is on, Sarah is-
AH: 1:24:32
She is on your next-
SM: 1:24:34
Actually, I had a co - uh, Sarah Palin and Bernadine Dorn, because, uh, you have got, uh-
AH: 1:24:39
Why would you pair them together? Bernie-
SM: 1:24:41
Well I got [mumbling] Sarah just happened to be on top of each other.
AH: 1:24:45
Oh okay. Um, one at a time [laugh]
SM: 1:24:49
Yeah.
AH: 1:24:51
Bernadine Dorn, uh, um, you know, she was one of our heroines of the 1970s
SM: 1:24:49
[muffled]
AH: 1:24:59
Oh I was going to say she was one of our heroines of the 1970s even though, uh, the, you know, the radicalism turned some people off, and uh, you know, the, the sense that she would resort to violence and so on, though both Ed Ayers and Bernadine have since said that they, they never, um, targeted people that they-they targeted buildings or, um, institutions, but not people, and that the damage that was done, and there was damage done was often inadvertent, but still, she was, uh, Bernadine. Bernadine Dorn had a kind of presence among people, a lot of them, like me, who never could have imagined ourselves, um, y-you know, actually committing a violent act, but who were angry enough that we, you know, might have wanted to or wished to. So, um, uh, About Sarah Palin, what can I say? She seems to me to be a sort of inversion of feminism, uh, a kind of person who, uh, would only have been, could only have been possible in the light of a feminist movement, and yet, who undermines everything that feminism has ever stood for. So, so I am, uh, you know? I mean, I-I am only not angry about it, because I do not think, at least, I hope it is that the campaign is not going to go anywhere, but in the sense that, um, you know, her, uh, capacity to be elected governor, her capacity to do that with, uh, several children, her, uh, uh, capacity to have a baby and go right back on the campaign trail and so on. All those freedoms were, uh, freedoms which were, um, produced by an active women's movement. But that active women's movement had a sense of solidarity with other women as women, uh, had a sense of, um, uh, commitment to children, not the, you know, the dragging around of a, of a baby just to demonstrate that she, you know, was big enough to handle this child who had been, you know, born damaged. Uh, of that I, I mean, I think contempt isn't too strong a word. I-I, um, I find it really troubling that, uh, women can, you know, sort of place her in the category of a feminist camp when-
SM: 1:28:16
There is another female Twitter. Now, I forget her name. She was a congresswoman.
AH: 1:28:19
Yes, from Michigan, Michelle Bachman.
AH: 1:28:20
Yeah.
SM: 1:28:20
Two peas in a pod.
AH: 1:28:27
Yes, and she is another one like that, who you could not imagine getting where they were. And yet, once there, they want to deny other women whatever you know whether it is their reproductive you know they have made their own reproductive choices. Let other women make their- they have made their own marital choices, their own lifestyle choices.
SM: 1:28:54
The, the only other names I had here, and we are I had mentioned is Susan Brown Miller, Kate Miller, Charmaine, Erin Helen. Helen Gurley Brown. I, I am actually, uh meeting two weeks the person [mumbling]
AH: 1:29:06
She was my student.
SM: 1:29:07
Oh she was?
AH: 1:29:08
Jennifer Scanlon, yeah.
AH: 1:29:09
Yeah.
SM: 1:29:09
Yeah.
(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 Dr. Alice Kessler Harris
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Kessler-Harris, Alice ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
College teachers; Columbia University; Kessler-Harris, Alice--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Dr. Alice Kessler-Harris is Professor Emerita of American History at Columbia University. She is also Professor Emerita in the Institute for Research on Women and Gender. Dr. Kessler-Harris specializes in the history of American labor and the comparative and interdisciplinary exploration of women and gender.
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
2010-03-15
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.10.2016.59
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
89:14
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/ac183043a0a70487c674787765aa9449.jpg
652b25f161722e269d870e640a6484af
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/9f6fb06c0c1f42e05dd4c4b54fcb4abe.mp3
b81d237ba176d76e899de5186968a79b
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
1997-07-25
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Steve Gunderson, 1951-
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Steve Gunderson is the former President and CEO of the Council on Foundations as well as the former Republican congressman from Wisconsin. Gunderson is currently President and CEO of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities. After graduating from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Gunderson went on to train at the Brown School of Broadcasting in Minneapolis."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":4487,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,5099745],"5":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"10":2,"11":4,"15":"Arial"}">Steve Gunderson is the former President and CEO of the Council on Foundations as well as the former Republican congressman from Wisconsin. Gunderson is currently President and CEO of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities. After graduating from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Gunderson went on to train at the Brown School of Broadcasting in Minneapolis.</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
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; Newt Gingrich; Generations; Activism; Civility; Young generation; Individuality; Robert Kennedy's funeral; Bob Dylan."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Baby boom generation; Newt Gingrich; Generations; Activism; Civility; Young generation; Individuality; Robert Kennedy's funeral; Bob Dylan.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
35:58
Subject LCSH
Legislators—United States; Council on Foundations; Gunderson, Steve, 1951--Interviews
Transcription
Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium
McKiernan Interviews
Interview with: Steve Gunderson
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: Benjamin Mehdi So
Date of interview: 25 July 1997
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
00:02
SM: First question I want to ask you is a lot of the criticisms today, for example, I have heard Newt Gingrich oftentimes say it I have heard George will say it in some of his commentaries, and I have even read about it in some of the historical books that I read, that if we look at today's problems in America, there is sometimes there is a generalization that a lot of the problems go back to the boomer generation, the breakup of the American family, the increase in drugs in America, the lack of respect for authority, even sometimes the-the lack of civility between people will be placed back on the boomer generation by Boomer generation. I mean, those born between (19)46 and (19)64. What are your thoughts on that kind of thinking? That places the blame on our problems today to a generation?
00:50
SG: I think it is partially true. I think there are dynamics that were resolved with the baby boomers coming of age, that have profound long term generational effects, certainly, the lack of trust in institutions, the polarization of American politics, the willingness to question and take on authority and traditions, all of those important dynamics from the New Age and development years of the baby boomers. That, however, does not answer the more significant questions about the ability of American or international institutions to cope with a dramatically changing nature.
01:43
SM: This is where [audio cuts] [inaudible] reached her in many ways and personally reach. It's a follow up question to that. If you look at the year 1997. And as we're heading into the year 1998, if you could look at, again, this generation, which is just reaching 50, we hear the news a lot about Bill Clinton being you know, more than 46 being kind of the lead of the boomer generation. But what would you say are the accomplishments of the boomer generation thus far? If you were to look at this generation, knowing that they are just reaching the age of 50?
02:21
SG: I think there are some dramatic accomplishments. I think telecommunications and scientific breakthroughs during this generation’s history are more significant than any other generation in history of the world. You just look, you know at 100 different examples of that area. Second, I think here at home, this generation has had two profound effects. They have created an environmental sensitivity that did not exist before. And I think they have clearly created a fiscal sensitivity in terms of the federal government's ability to match income and revenues without [inaudible] allocations.
03:15
SM: The top of that question, if you were to list some of the adjectives, some of the qualities that you think are the positive qualities of boomers, and then list three or four, their negative qualities, and trying to evaluate them, based on your lifetime, when you were young, maybe as you changed over the years, and how you feel now, but looking at the qualities that they may have compared to say, the World War II generation and even today's younger generation,
03:43
SG: Ambitious, motivated, driven goal setting which more so than the generation before us and the generation after us. At the creative side, we also made the regeneration, which is more selfish, which is more consumption oriented or sensitive to appreciation of the arts and culture, community. Throughout the liberal arts generation were educated to be.
04:22
SM: How about the area of passion? One of the things it is like, you know, when you look at the boomer generations made up 65-70 million, I am sure the final the exact number, but they will say that 15 percent were really involved in some sort of activism, could have been conservative activism could be liberal, but basically 15 percent. I interviewed Todd Gitlin in New York two days ago, and he said, let us break it down to 1 percent activism because really only 200,000 of the true activists at that time, leading protests against the war, ending the battle, the civil rights and so forth. Your thoughts on that kind of?
04:58
SG: Oh, I think we were much more activist generations at the expense of our personal families and human community lives. You can look at the percent that was involved in the war, but they taught the other elements of our society. You see activism today in many different areas, you see it in the religious and social right, you see it the women's movement, you see it in the gay and lesbian movement, you see it in the black history and culture movement. Almost all of this is driven by baby boomers who are affected and taught what activism meant, as they grew up. Even if they were not active in their active classroom when I was done an act of history in Vietnam. There is no I would not say I have not been an activist. Right.
05:43
SM: Right. And you would not ever have tried to find so closely that activism is like the liberal left.
05:49
SG: No. I think-
05:50
SM: -That sometimes that is what they portray activism is left of center, as opposed to right of center. Knowing your history, a lot of people involved in the Goldwater movement, were-
06:00
SG: More activism on the right today than on the left.
06:05
SM: How do you feel about people who try to place labels on activism and activism, again, which was supposed to be a quality of the boomer generation, and whether they carried it on as they have gotten older, is a negative quality. I say this because this past week, I interviewed Ron Castile, former DEA of Philadelphia, who was a diehard conservative, and now he is a judge. And he says, do not ever put up the term activism on me even though when he was a college student, he was active on some issues. And also, as he has gotten older, he was responsible for putting the Vietnam Memorial together in Philadelphia, you know, he did something but he that label, that term is seems to have a negative connotation, some people.
06:45
SG: Well, in terms of histories, and the truth is he is an activist, the truth is the [inaudible] even Christian coalition are activists. The truth is that there are many different activists and social and political right.
07:04
SM: I go many directions here in all interviews, I have about 40 Questions from then I have about 100 of them, really. And one of them is that I deal with students’ day in and day out, and you met many. And when you visit our campus, it is interesting that when they look at people from our generation, no matter who they are, what they represent, they will tend to place them into two categories. And there does not seem to be anything in between. Number one is I wish I had lived when you live, there were so many issues. I mean, life seemed exciting. They were tough things and the war in Vietnam and civil rights. And then many of the movements came about the gay and lesbian movement, the women's movement, the Native American movement, the environmental movement, I wish I could have lived then when all these things are happening. And then the other attitude is I am sick of hearing it. I am sick of hearing about the nostalgia all up all the boomers are you live as in the past, you remember the memories of this, this movement and that movement? And the- you know, we have our own problems today, we have our own issues. And so, the issues then are no longer applicable. What are your thoughts on that, and how we can best reach today's young people when they have those kinds of, those kinds of attitudes?
08:10
SG: To restore that one generation and the next role as part of it is parent child. Part of it is there is a basic historical and cultural transition that occurs from one generation to the next. And some of that is simply irreconcilable. So, I am not sure that we can reach him there to question in the mode in which we can reach in his own civility, if we can find ways to be more civil in our discourse and in our activism. And I think that is what really turns off the young people is not a passion to identify and solve problems, but it is the lack of civility that which our generation addresses those issues.
08:54
SM: Would you talk a little bit more about the civility and whether boomers who it's like, there seemed to be at that time and in your face, attitude, you're never going to satisfy the demands that many of the activists had, and whether that's been able to be transferred as people have gotten older. Some people will say they even see it in the halls of Congress of which-
9:14
SG: Oh, sure.
9:15
SM: -You were there and-and people just cannot be civil. And it goes back to those times is like pointing fingers and arguing and not listening. And you are the reason why we have all the problems in the world. As you know that kind of-
09:27
SG: The problem for my generation is that passion was identified as confrontation in reverse. There was no such thing as a moderate opponent to the Vietnam War. Alteration became the regiment of passivity rather than a compliment of style. And so, as a result of that we have learned and carried with us unfortunately, with the way we display our passion on any issue today is to be loud, confrontational and too often rude.
10:08
SM: How is that affecting today's young people, I do not want -
10:11
SG: It is a turn off. It is a great American turnoff, because they increasingly look at both the style and the issues by which we take passion to that degree endeavor I can identify, it is why they turn off the government. It's why they turn on to volunteerism during your generation did not want to debate issues.
10:41
SM: This leads into another area and that is at 50, which is the oldest the front of the door movement, realizing these potential negative qualities that you have raised about the boomers. can things be turned around in terms of can boomers ever change who they are, as they get older, in order for us to be life is supposed to be constantly changing? We teach students day in and day out that you are constantly evolving and developing.
11:06
SG: Oh, yeah.
11:07
SM: So, it can, for example, what happened in congress this past week with someone who Gingrich's closest people kind of stabbing him in the back it was, was amazing scenario.
11:16
SG: But-but the truth is that that is a classic example of where people are motivated simply by politics, rather than by policy. And but he goes in by passion, you are going to have those kinds of dynamics. It is also why the general public, not just the generation expert, the general public, totally tunes out to what is going on Capitol Hill. They were not only increasingly irrelevant, as government's percent of participation in society decreases, but also, when they see the styles of people though they do not want to be relevant to the water we associate with that. But on the other hand, I think we correct this issue because any generation as it ages mellows out, and also, they just historic that the generation often returns to its roots. And as a result of that, I think you will see the baby boomers, find a new interest in community, and neighborhoods. And, frankly, volunteering the day-to-day problems of their fellow man.
12:28
SM: Activism back in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, was basically define defined into two major categories. Of course, it was the Civil Rights Movement, and it was the war against Vietnam. And of course, then a lot of the other movements evolved from the Civil Rights Movement, the movements that we talked about earlier. Today, there is a lot of different kinds of activism. There's activism on the internet, there is, there is all kinds of different things and that, but it's not geared toward one major happening like the war. Could you comment on two things? Number one, how important were the college students in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, in terms of ending the war in Vietnam? This seems to be a controversy with the people I have interviewed that some say they had no influence at all, others say they had a lot of influences. How important were the students on college campus in the war, and how-
13:22
SG: They were very important because they not only affected change themselves, they affected a nation's perception. The reason that others weighed in against the world was because their consciousness had been raised by college kids.
13:36
SM: That was the point blank asked you, what is the number one reason why the war ended? In Vietnam? What would that one reason be?
13:46
SG: American exhaustion, fighting at home, we were tired of fighting over there. We were tired of being in a war that was recently difficult to determine who was right who was wrong and was winning was losing. And we in essence, decided just plain to come home.
14:04
SM: Looking at the Civil Rights Movement, how important were the boomers in that movement, knowing that in the summer of (19)64, which is really Freedom Summer when the oldest Boomer would have been 18 years old in the summer of (19)64. And a lot of great civil rights efforts has been the late (19)50s through that time period of (19)64. How important were the young people of that era in terms of assisting carrying on the message of the Civil Rights Movement?
14:36
SG: I think in many ways they were the people's army rallying to their leaders call whether it be Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy, whoever it was we were in many ways the troops, but you were certainly not the leaders.
14:57
SM: As you have gotten older and you know, the war ended, and certainly the-the draft was no longer a problem. So many people thought that, well, since that ended, there is really no more cause anymore. And that was what it was all about. But when you when you look at people of your age group now who are close to 50 have been carried on the idealism of that time have, they carried on in their lives now some people have, but your thoughts on that.
15:25
SG: We are a much more driven and materialistic generation; we are an idealistic generation. That has probably been a great transition for the ideals of our young adulthood. To the deals of our business, and professional experiences.
15:47
SM: That caught me the other end. [chuckles] To me, money is real secondary. I thought, when I was young, and the people I was around, we were going to go into the service professions and serve others. Money was secondary, any, any the friends that are going to go to law school, and they were going to go right back to the university, some went on to be very successful corporate lawyers, but so you do not think the majority of the people really carried that the money was secondary as-
16:13
SG: Well. I mean, I think you have seen that in the increasing apathy of the American people. You have elections for less than a half vote, and you look at who those people are. People that are not voting are the young and baby boomer generations.
16:31
SM: Even statistics are astonishing about how many of the college aged students voted, I just cannot believe we have almost begged students to vote, or we have a voter registration drive, we get about three or 400 registered, but it is not easy. What is in it for me, you know, that kind of an attitude. That is another thing, that quality, that an activist is never supposed to say what is in it for me, an activist is supposed to say I want to serve others, or something for the betterment of society. And you think that most of the mountain a great majority of boomers have taken that quality of what is in it for me mentality, which is the total alien nature of what an activist truly is?
17:10
SG: Well, I think we are a selfish generation, motivated by money and our own economic standing. But I will also say that we have also witnessed the selfishness of our parents’ generation, its- their demands on the government. And so, while we are selfish, we are not selfishly demanding of government to take care of us, we are rather preoccupied on a personal basis to deal with our own economics.
17:42
SM: Did you change your thoughts on this generation over the years, say, when you were in college, and then 10 years out of college 15, 20. Now or 25, or whatever, have you been pretty consistent in your attitudes toward your generation? Or was there a point in your life you saw an awakening and your point of view just totally changed?
18:07
SG: I am using doubt in my opinion of our generation has changed, that we use as a classic example. Through this line by Robert Kennedy used in graduation speeches in colleges and high schools across the country at that time, which was some people see things as they are and ask why I dream things that never were and ask why not? You have not heard that use the last 20 years. You have not heard it used because there are no dreams anymore. People, there are no ideals anymore. People have been much more consumed by their own personal day to day than the greater good. That was driven by Kennedy statements. I mean, I remember as a college student the day Kennedy, the day Kennedy, Robert Kennedy's funeral, going home from college, and listening to that funeral all the way home in the radio. It was not just me it was everybody in the car. I got the record of Robert Kennedy's funeral. There is no way my generation would listen to or buy a record of a US senator’s funeral today.
19:25
SM: You are right.
19:28
SG: Dramatic change.
19:30
SM: In your- Why-why did this happen?
19:38
SG: Um, I think it is a combination. On the one hand, it is a growing disaffection with government and the government's ability to make change. I think second it is a simple reality that most as they moved into adulthood, and family life, became the responsible providers of the family as opposed to the social activists that they have been in their youth. So, I think it is a combination too. Third, I am going to go so far as to say, it is also a lack in the last 20 years of inspirational leaders.
20:17
SM: There is a real good point because I even hear that among African American students in terms of trying to who are the leaders within the African American community. And of course, Jesse Jackson is the one name that always comes forward. But he is older, he is like 55 years old, so-so they see him a sense and another-another going back a rappers with Chuck D people that are on the radio and they were really Sister Souljah people like that is what they are identifying to. They are not leaders, their personalities in the media or in the music world, or something like that. I find that amazing that boomers are inspired by the Bob Dylan's of the world, and you know, the music of the year. But like you say, you also admire the political leaders, you do not see a whole lot of that. Very good observation. Wha- one term that is often used when I was young, and I do not know if you heard it around your peers, but that we are the most unique generation in American history that we are going to be the change agents for the betterment of society. And we thought that when we go into a rally, or we are in an auditorium listening to a speaker of that period on a college campus, and whether that attitude was an arrogance on the part of the young at that time thinking that it was going to carry on, that seems to be a term that I heard all the time, I want to know if you heard that when you were young-
21:34
SG: Sure.
21:35
SM: -That we are unique, and that no other generation before us, and certainly none that will follow will ever be like us. And this goes beyond just the numbers game, which is-
21:43
SG: Well, I think I think certainly, we all grew up believing we were different than anyone before us. I do not know that we would go so far as to see what would include generations after us.
21:55
SM: Another quality of youth then more than anything that you need that [inaudible].
22:01
SG: Well, yeah, because part of what we were doing is we were we were rejecting the status quo of American society. And we knew that we were going to be dramatically changing the status quo. But we were not so naive as to suggest that would not also be done by future generations against us.
22:22
SM: Just a straight point question. We are the biggest generation ever. There may never be another one that vigorousness again, believe I wrote an article last week, so we had 76 million I never knew we had that many in the boomer generation. But what is the most significant? Again, it might be a repetition of an earlier question but what made the generation different beyond their size?
22:50
SG: Their view of the world, their view of the United States, first generation that did not want America to be the superpower.
23:02
SM: Melodramatic flaws here. [chuckles] Good observation.
23:11
SG: Just so you know. I am happy to call you next week and finish. I am real sensitive to time here. I have promised somebody at University of Alabama we would be back to them by 230. And I can miss that for a little bit.
23:26
SM: Are you okay through 2:30?
23:28
SG: No, I have got a draft a letter to get to them. That is what I my concern is, can we go 15 minutes, to 2:20. Cut it off.
23:34
SM: And yet, you want me to come back? Like-
23:38
SG: She thought this was going to be half an hour so.
23:42
SM: Oh, she did.
23:43
SG: Yeah.
23:43
SM: Oh. 1 to 2:30. That was a little late too.
23:46
SG: Hour and a half today. I mean, I am happy to call you, if that works. To save you a trip or if you're back in town. I am happy to fish it up. My problem is [audio cuts]
23:55
SM: Okay, right. I do want to take a picture.
23:59
SG: I apologize for that. But this is unpredicted.
24:03
SM: Do you feel the boomer generation is having problems with healing and I raised this because of the fact that the Vietnam memorial was built with the hope that it would heal the generation, it would heal the nation, it would heal the veterans? Where do you feel we stand right now in the area of healing in this nation and knowing that the divisions in that era were so, so wide? Because people were for and against the war, people got involved with Civil Rights Movements. They thought civil disobedience was a precursor to riots, just your thought about the healing processes in America since that time.
24:39
SG: I do not know that Americans know the importance or value of healing anymore. I do not think it is a goal. I do not think reconciliation is a goal. I do not think mutual respect is a goal. I think all of this is a result of the increasing polarization of a nation of society in the increasing cynicism about our institutions, and the combination of the two, produce an attitude which says everybody else claims to be the victim. So, I must be the victim too. You know we’re each a different victim. You're that academic victim, you are that wasp, male, Father, victim of middle America, I am that gay victim, patties that woman's victim, somebody's the black victim, everybody's a victim.
25:38
SM: How would you define the generation gap from that era between the boomer generation of their parents and today's boomers and their children, you are to define the two generation gaps.
25:51
SG: I think our generation better understand the role and temporary importance of generation gaps. And so, I do not think the gap is as great between us and the next generation as it was between our parents’ generation and us, because for parents’ generation had a much more difficult time understanding the dramatically different visions. Because we had a generation gap with our parents that were better at minimizing the generation gap between us in the next generation.
26:31
SM: What will be the lasting legacy of the boomer generation when the best history books are written and say 50 years from now, your thoughts on what they will be saying, many of us will be long gone. How do you think historians will look at this period? And by this period, I mean, when we were young, the (19)60s early (19)70s impact on America. And as they some of the things you referred to earlier, the qualities they took over.
26:55
SG: It is the generation that broke down all the barriers in the world, and broke down the political boundaries, and said that, frankly, they do not matter. We broke down cultural boundaries, we broke down the communications boundaries. In many ways, we break it down into the language, and the economic boundaries, certainly through trade. This generation more than any other generation has made the world a smaller place and increasingly interdependent.
27:25
SM: When I took students to meet Senator Muskie before he died by two years before he died. And we put a question about the impact of 1968 on America. And the divisions were many of the boomers had an equality at least, which is still a lack of respect for authority even as they have gone into adulthood, people like that, who they report to, and so forth. It was getting into the issue of healing again, and he basically said that we have not healed since the Civil War. And he talked about two different Americans before and after the Civil War. The question I am getting at is this. Do you feel this generation boomers because of the divisions of those times have a real serious healing comparable to the Civil War where there were such divisions in America and they went to their grave of bitterness toward the other side? You think this is an issue with many boomers that there is this feeling within their suffering, something missing because they never forgave a lot of Vietnam veterans maybe never forgave the protestors. Protestors feel guilty that they did not serve, but there is-
28:23
SG: No one can minimize the impact of Vietnam on our generation or society. I would not attempt to do that. I do, however, think that there is a big difference. And I would disagree with Senator Muskie.
28:39
SM: Keeping time to-
28:42
SG: I appreciate it. I think that to be honest, technology did not allow the kind of national consciousness that occurred in this country until before World War II. Before that people really did not care what happened day to day in the world or even in Washington, because then find out about it for days to come. They were much more consumed by their own community. And we are the first generation that the majority of kids growing up will not be employed in their home community. When I talked to young people now, I said, the majority of your class probably will not be employed in the US. I mean, there is a dramatic change of that local consciousness there. So, I would disagree a little bit with Senator Muskies’ basis.
29:31
SM: Three important quality and that is the issue of trust in America. I want to know if you feel one of the qualities of the boomer generation that they will be carried to their graves is the quality or lack of trust. They have in their leaders and refer to it earlier, kind of created a consensus cynicism as America. And just your overall thoughts on the cynical leadership that has happened throughout the lives of boomers. And will they be able to overcome that as well?
30:01
SG: No. Because the only way they could overcome that is if Social Security and Medicare would be without any challenges in their retirement years so that they would be able to live totally economic security and comfort. And they are not going to be able to do that. Also, what you are going to have is you are going to have an increasing two class society, not only among the young and the working, but also among the elderly. You are going to have those elderly who had the ability to either put things away or have great inherent inheritances, and you are going to have the majority who did not, and they are going to be bitter, they're going to say life was unfair to me. Now, my retirement is unfair to me as well.
30:43
SM: In the area of empowerment, which we always try to deal with young people, the sense that your voice counts that when you are working with college students, we need to hear your voice, that empowerment is something we try to develop in people so that as they go online, they are heard their voice counts. Your thoughts on the concept that many boomers felt of sense of empowerment, when they, you know, gets the major issues of the day, the war, civil rights and the movements we talked about. Whether they carry that sense of empowerment into their lives. And whether you feel today's young people have a sense of empowerment, that they are really being listened [audio cuts]. model that we try to work with college students about is developing self-esteem that in [inaudible] trying to work on that. So, your, just your thoughts on that concept of empowerment that so many of the boomers had, and where that may have gone.
31:42
SG: I do not think in the area of high technology and individualism, that you can create group empowerment. And certainly, you cannot create the feeling of generational power. Very difficult for a person growing up with a personal computer, somehow understand how they and everybody else their age are going to make a cumulative difference.
32:04
SM: Does that apply to boomers themselves as they hit 50? Certainly, you as a congressperson felt empowered.
32:11
SG: I think, I think we as a generation, were empowered by our impact on Vietnam. We were empowered by our ability to impact the environmental policies in this country. We were powered by our numbers. So, there were there were signs that gave us reason to be empowered. I do not know if those signs continue, however, as we become almost disseminated into increasingly polarized society. I do not think the- a bond which unites us today is not the bond of our generation.
32:55
SM: When you look back at your life? What was the first one experience, one happening that had the greatest impact on your life? What was that one happening?
33:06
SG: [inaudible] the two. I would have to say, John Kennedy's assassination as a teenager, when they close the school down, and everyone was glued to the TV for four days, or we had a National Day of Mourning as a big impact on a young person. The second was landing on the moon. Vividly, we landed on the moon, watch that on TV. And that was the victory of science and high technology, which-which told our generation that we were a part of something far different than the nation in the world's history.
33:52
SM: What did those two experiences, how do they affect you as you moved on until right now, when you when you saw that assassination of John Kennedy, what did that do to you? And then as you grew up, I am going to do something to make the world better, what-what was the date, did those two experiences really-
34:12
SG: Well, they are, they are, significant for very different reasons. Kennedy's assassination in the events which follow led to a distrust or lack of reliance on the government to my generation. It- everybody produces Vietnam as the beginning of the cynicism. I think they minimize the impact of Kennedy's assassination, the underlying foundation for that cynicism and government. On the other hand, the landing on the moon talks all about technology. And it is, it is so dramatically different from this small town I visited or visited I grew up in, where people did not leave their counties say nothing of leaving their globes. Where you communicated through the operator at the local telephone station not through technology thousands, hundreds of thousands of miles away. I mean, like, what a disconnect. And then we sat and watched TV, which took us from that generation of a past where we were sitting in our living rooms with our parents, to the generation of the future we saw it on television that day. That was the bridge between here and here.
35:44
SM: I got many more questions. I think-think we will cut off here and what I will do is, I will either come back to Washington because I am making three or four more trips down here this summer or call you on the phone at times convenient because the rest of the [audio cuts].
(End of Interview)
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>.
Description
1 Microcassette
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 Steve Gunderson
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Gunderson, Steve, 1951- ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Legislators—United States; Council on Foundations; Gunderson, Steve, 1951--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Steve Gunderson is the former President and CEO of the Council on Foundations as well as the former Republican congressman from Wisconsin. Gunderson is currently President and CEO of the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities. After graduating from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Gunderson went on to train at the Brown School of Broadcasting in Minneapolis.
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
1997-07-25
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.10.2016.58
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
35:58
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/08856e16043d3608b54ee9c199508910.jpg
df580c70c1e526970e2d7b42d58e361e
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/140475bf612499df2c1cf731ac0d7950.mp3
b775a668453ea22f6400849cc2224d45
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
1996-07-29
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Dr. Henry Franklin Graff
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
MicroCassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"War protesters; Robert F. Kennedy; Veterans; War injuries; Vietnam War; Media; Civil rights legislation; Empowerment; Healing; Vietnam Memorial; Baby boom generation; McCarthyism; Alcoholism; Generational gap; Lyndon B. Johnson; Trust."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":4865,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial"}">War protesters; Robert F. Kennedy; Veterans; War injuries; Vietnam War; Media; Civil rights legislation; Empowerment; Healing; Vietnam Memorial; Baby boom generation; McCarthyism; Alcoholism; Generational gap; Lyndon B. Johnson; Trust.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
02:04:59
Subject LCSH
Vietnam War, 1961-1975--Veterans
Biographical Text
Dr. Henry Franklin Graff is Professor Emeritus of History, specializes in the social and political history of the United States. He is the author of The Glorious Republic, and the editor of The Presidents: A Reference History, as well as several books and articles. Dr. Graff received his B.A. from the City College of New York, and his M.A. and Ph.D. in History from Columbia University.
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: Henry Franklin Graff
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 29 July 1996
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM:
All right. Well thank you for participating in this project. The first question I would like to ask is, the boomer generation and the (19)60s and early (19)70s is being attacked as one of the reasons for the breakdown of American society. Could you respond to this criticism and comment on the period and its impact on present day America? Is the criticism fair? And when this criticism is often directed to the youth of the era, what can you say about the boomers of the (19)60s and early (19)70s?
HG:
Well, I think there is a change. I guess some people would label a that a breakdown. I see our generation as, it is not the cause of that, as much as we were in the wrong place at the wrong time here. We were the vehicle for much of that change. And when I think about the change today, one of the things I think about first is that the last time I read something, it was-was over 70 percent of women now work outside the home. That was not true of my parents' generation. When I think about the street I grew up on, most of the mothers were home all day with the families. The fathers went to work. And I think about how traditional and conservative my upbringing was, and actually I think about the year I went to Vietnam and when I came.
HG:
Think about the year I went to Vietnam and when I came home, it seemed like everything had changed in my absence, everything. And then I remember the late (19)60s and the (19)70s, and I do not know that I see our generation as having any responsibility for causing that. We certainly had responsibility for trying to cope with economic forces, and I think some shifting of values. Certainly our generation for whatever their purposes began to question basic values such as when your government asks for your help, you provide it without question.
SM:
You made an important point there that when you went to Vietnam and then when you came back. Now, were you there one year, two years?
HG:
I was in country 222 days, and then it was a month and a half in hospital in Vietnam and Japan before I could come home. So it was almost a year.
SM:
What were your feelings at that time toward the protestors before you went to Vietnam and then when you came back from Vietnam, those who were opposed to the war? Did you have any thoughts toward them at that juncture?
HG:
Not really. I mean, I enlisted in the Marine Corps and then I volunteered to go to Vietnam. I did not originally get orders for that. I was waiting to go to Officers Candidate School and then the Tet Offensive of (19)68 took place and I was sitting at Camp Lejeune in North Carolina. And at that point I was told that it might be another six months before everything was done and I could start Officer Candidate School. That would be six months. And then I would start a whole new enlistment as an officer for three years. And I just decided that, well, maybe I will go to Vietnam and see what that is like. And if I want to be an officer, I can always do that. So I resigned from the commissioning program and went over as an enlisted man. I thought it was a personal decision. I did not understand people who said no or even challenged the right of the government to ask for these sacrifices. I always felt that my father's generation and previous generations had sacrificed. That is why we had America. It required sacrifice and I did not question it, and my choice was to go and do what needed to be done without any questioning of that. I thought other people could make their choices. I did not feel they had to make same choices I did, and I never regretted my choice, and even as things have turned out.
SM:
Now, one of the two interesting politicians in that era are Senator Fulbright in his book Arrogance of Power, and I know that Dr. Benjamin Spock wrote a small book on Vietnam in 1968, basically talking about the Diem regime and basically condemning the government, not anybody who went over there, but the government and the leaders of America. And in both, not only in Arrogance of Power, but also in the commentary of Dr. Spock, it was the fact that those individuals who decided that they did not want to go to war and protested against the war were American patriots. That they were true patriots. Now they were not on the one hand condemning the Vietnam veterans who went over there, but they were saying that they looked upon those individuals as true American patriots even though they were being condemned on this side, especially in fighting Johnson and all the other eventually Nixon and so forth. What are your thoughts on Fulbright and Dr. Spock and those types of leaders who were making those kinds of commentaries? Was there some validity to that? Do you think that not only from your own perspective, but from the perspective of other Vietnam veterans, how did they look upon those leaders saying those types of things? And then of course, how did they look upon those people who protested, decided not to go when you said it was your duty to go just like your dad in World War II?
HG:
Well, many Vietnam veterans feel that anyone that did not take their place in the ranks would be anything but a patriot. As I said, I thought it was a personal decision, and I do believe there is times, I do not believe that you always accept the government version and that you do what the government asks. I think there is lots of opportunities for challenging and that sometimes to challenge the government does make one a patriot. It is a patriotic thing to do. I think about Desert Storm, certainly I was against the idea of sending a half million American troops over there when I believe that in the end it would turn into a ground war. I mean, the conventional wisdom was you could not win a campaign like that with an Air War, no matter how smart your bombs are, and that eventually American troops are going to have to close with the Iraqi troops and fight it out, and that is going to determine the outcome. And I was very upset at the idea, and I thought when that happened, there would be tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of casualties, and I did not feel that the stakes were worth it. And so I was against the idea of involvement in the Persian Gulf. So I guess I could be called a patriot of that era because I took a position that we should not be there. We certainly should not send our young men there. It is one thing to provide monetary support and arms to the other combatants. But why are we taking the lead? Why are we the first one there and why are we sending Americans? For cheap gas? I will pay $4 a gallon if it takes that.
SM:
If you knew then now about what was going on in Vietnam and how the leaders were, well, really not telling the whole truth about what was going on in Vietnam, how do you feel most of the Vietnam veterans would have felt? Of course, a lot of Vietnam veterans, Senator Kerry being one of them from Massachusetts, the Vietnam Veterans Against the War, when they came back, Bobby Mueller was involved in that group. He had another group he was involved in, but-
HG:
Jack Smith was one of the founders of that.
SM:
...He was, yeah. Well, do you think that you might have had a different point of view?
HG:
Well, when I came back, I had lots of opportunity. I spent years in and out of the Naval Hospital in Philadelphia, had lots of opportunities to think about the war per se. I mean, when you get there and I do not know how to say this, but when you get there it does not take long to realize it is a bad war. I mean, we are dying for what seems like nothing at that level, and you do not have the big picture. And in a real sense, it did not make any difference anyway. What mattered was surviving and making sure that your buddy survived. It did not matter what the war was all about. It did not matter if I was on the beaches of Normandy or Pusan perimeter or Vietnam or getting ready to go into Iraq. At that level it is really irrelevant.
SM:
Do you think the majority of the veterans, obviously you are saying now that at that juncture most want to survive, the bottom line is to survive, get through their year and get out of there.
HG:
Mortal combat.
SM:
But then when you come back, then that is when the thinking really starts in terms of what it was all about?
HG:
Well then you try to make sense of what has happened to you. You try to find some meaning in it. I was proud of what I did. I was proud of the men that I served with. Was I proud of what we were doing? Not particularly. I did not think it was a very good strategy. I certainly felt that the biggest losers of all were the Vietnamese people. I mean, they feared us and they feared the NVA and the VC. And all they wanted to do, and you could see it in their faces every day, all they wanted to do was scratch out a living, find something to eat that day to feed their family and try and avoid being killed by anybody, either by design or by accident. They were the biggest losers of all.
SM:
Getting back to that question regarding how Vietnam veterans felt when they came back and there was a division. Going to the wall, nowadays, I just tried to see the ambience of feelings of the people, and there is still tremendous dislike for those who oppose the war, at least this is my perception, and this is why I am trying to get some clarity on this from the people I am talking to, the 300 people, Vietnam veterans, people who protest the war, leaders, younger people today. Do you still feel, I know there is some that will never heal, but do you still feel that the majority of the Vietnam veterans are still against the people who oppose the war? Do you think there is still, because after all, when you look at the wall and the formation of the wall, this is getting to a question later on here, but that Jan Scruggs did such a tremendous job putting the wall together because it was supposed to be a non-political statement, it was supposed to state that we were going to pay tribute to those who gave their lives and also those who served, and also try to heal the veterans and give them recognition that they deserve and also try to heal the families. But when Jan wrote the book To Heal a Nation, it was my perception that it has helped the Vietnam veterans along, but I do not know what it is done totally, really for the nation. In terms of the boomer generation, which the Vietnam veterans are part of, and those who protested the war are, is there any healing there happening between those diverse groups?
HG:
Well, in my experiences I have seen what during the war was a division and I have seen those same people now 20, 30 years later and there is not a division. We have all moved on my mind now. I forgot what it was. There are some people who in trying to find meaning in what they have gone through, they have to use other people to create their own meaning. So on the one hand, there was the people who did not go, the people that went to Canada or Sweden or the people that marched against the war, even Vietnam veterans who came home and then protested against the war like Vietnam Veterans Against the War. And they need to use people like that in order to define themselves. I am not one of them. And I have always felt that, as I said, everyone had to make their own decision. I could not make any other decision than the one I made having been brought up the way I was brought up and having had the feelings I had about being an American and being able to grow up in this country and feeling from the start that I owed a responsibility to the country. And when it came time for that responsibility to be called upon, I was there. It was not dependent on whether or not I believed in the war, or whether or not I thought we had a good chance of winning or anything like that. And the nature of the war is what the resistance to it was all about, rather than the fact that our country has the right to become involved in war. I mean, it was the same thing with Desert Storm. For the first time, I was questioning whether or not the country had the right to get involved in that. Not that we should not have helped out Kuwait, but the degree of our involvement was simply due to the oil that was there. That was it. If it was some poor country somewhere that had nothing that we felt was important strategically, we would not have done that. I mean, little countries get overrun or annexed or cut off or whatever for a long time.
SM:
Question here, what has been the impact of the boomers on America? This is a general question beyond just the Vietnam veterans, but you are a boomer, and what do you feel has been the impact of boomers on America? Positive or negative? And I want to preface this question by saying, and I think I mentioned over the phone that we see today from the Christian coalition, an attack on the boomer generation constantly it is all the ills of society seem to stem back to that period. Breakup of the family, the divorce rate is on the rise, the drug culture, the counterculture, and of course we have a lot of drugs in generation X, lack of trust in leaders, lack of trust in politics, lack of trust in any kind of leaders, people not really voting. Boomers do not vote, and their kids do not vote. And it gets into a lot of different areas here. It is not just the Christian coalition. You hear it amongst a lot of the politicians today. There is the Republicans and even some Democrats who are trying to go middle of the road. And I know in all generations there are mistakes made, but is that a fair analysis? And what is your thought as a person who was a Vietnam veteran who was young at that time? You have gone on to become a professional psychologist. What are your perceptions? What are your perceptions of your generation, not only when you were young, but how has that evolved over the last 25 years? And how do you feel today about that generation, your generation?
HG:
Well, in the (19)60s and (19)70s, I felt a part of a generation that was defining itself. Again, it was talking about individuals who defined themselves as the opposite of other people that they can pick out. That is not a rebellion or a revolution. I mean, in the (19)60s and (19)70s, we were talking about revolution and we were going to change things. But if your revolution is that you are going to be the exact opposite of someone else, well, that is no revolution at all because your identity or what you are going to do or what you are going to believe in or what you are going to act on is really defined by the individual or the group that you have decided to be in opposition to. And I thought a lot of our early revolution was simply challenging the status quo and the morals and the values even around basic things like sexuality and the use of drugs for recreational purposes. Most of these people I know from my generation have mellowed out some more into the mainstream once they became people with careers and homes and mortgages and families and they paid taxes. And that our generation went through that shift, and then has become I think more alike. Now we are the middle-aged generation for the country and we have some responsibility. We have responsibility for the younger generation. And as time goes on, we take more and more responsibility for the older generation. We are now the power brokers. We are now the people that decide what happens. Clinton is president. I think the choice this fall between the class of (19)46 and Senator Doll and President Clinton who is a baby boomer, I mean, that is the choice that country's facing. I might happen to think that our generation has done right by the country, and I think we can lead the country and make the choices that we need to make to keep it true to its ideal.
SM:
So you are not one of those boomers who are advising this attack that all the ills of today's society are directly related to the boomers? And their counterculture and the way their rebellious dialogue, which do you see any linkage at all between the divisiveness of that era and what we see in the divisive today in terms of how we talk to each other, how we communicate with each other? In other words, a lot of times we do not talk. We shout at each other. We do not listen to each other. Do you think it is fair or is it depending on who you are, some will say it is ridiculous and some will say there is validity, but that all began back in the (19)60s and early (19)70s. Do you feel that way or could that be a part of-
HG:
I feel like when I was growing up, we did not talk to adults. As children the idea was you were there to be seen and not heard, and you did not sit at dinner table and talk to adults, even in school with your teachers. And I think there is one example of how there is more interaction. One of the things that I think our generation brought was more dialogue between different generations. I think you can look around and find examples of everything from McCarthyism and the Red Scare. I mean, was a better than in the 1950s? The use of recreational drugs was very uncommon, but the rate of alcoholism was much higher than it is today. And the per capita consumption of hard liquor in this country was probably eight times what it is today. Today, hardly anybody except the older generations drink hard liquor and even the distillers are having to branch out and get into other businesses because that is not the culture. But there was certainly alcoholism around and it destroyed families. I mean, we did not invent it. There was divorce around too. What was more common I think, in my parents' generation was to stay together no matter what, no matter how horrible it was, whether you said it was for the kids or just because I am not the kind of person that divorces. I deal with all kinds of pain and suffering in members of my generation who grew up in those kinds of toxic families where no one was going to leave. And these kids who are now adults do not know how to be in a relationship. They do not know how to relate. They do not even know who they are. And I see that as a consequence of growing up in the family where there was not any acknowledgement what was really going on there. Women did not have the ability to leave and be independent and take care of themselves. They were too dependent on their husbands, so they stayed no matter what. You can take any issue like that, and if you really look at it, see that in fact there was something just as awful or just as upsetting going on, but it only looks different on the surface.
SM:
One of the old slogans when I was in college was the IBM mentality. You ever see that old advertising where five people come out the front door with their hat on and their suit on, and they all drove the same car, had the same suit, and the wife kissed as they went away and everything, almost the house was identical. And there was a feeling of in the university, because it was called the multiversity in the late (19)60s, that we did not want to be carbon copies of what preceded us. And so there was kind of rebelliousness, and you raised some very good points about the fact that at the table rarely the parents talked to their kids. Certainly they stayed in marriages and they were not honest with their kids about the things that the kids saw them, but they just stayed on board. Linking back to the boomers, they probably wanted to be more honest and meet more open and to be critical at times, whereas their parents may not have been critical. And the question I want to get into this next question here is can today's generation of youth learn from the boomers? What can the boomers teach today's college students? This question is based on the fact that many of today's students often look at the (19)60s and early (19)70s as a period of activism, drugs, and single-minded issues. Dave Bolt mentioned that he thought they were simple-minded issues. Though many of the same issues remain there are new ones, and the lessons of the past are either not taught in schools today or never discussed between parent, the boomer parent, I mean the boomer itself, and today's kids, which is Generation X or slackers, another term that is used. Please give your thoughts on the issues in boomers lives and how they can have impact on students’ eyes today. This question came forth based on a couple conversations I had with a couple faculty members at West Chester University, one African American who is a dynamic professor and another is a majority professor. And both of them felt that they did not want to relate to their kids about what it was like when they were young because they have too many problems today. So why burden them with their parents' problems and what it was like? And I asked myself, wow, is this an example of how boomers are raising their kids? Are boomers talking about what it was like to be young, what it was like to be a Vietnam veteran, to share the experience with their sons or daughters? I have three students at West Chester. Two of them went to see Lewis Puller. Neither dad had ever talked to their son about Vietnam, and they learned about Vietnam through Lewis Puller. Now that is amazing. Neither parent would talk about it. They loved their dad, but they just would not open up. And then the other person was an African American who was about the civil rights movement, but she did not want to burden her kids with talking about that era when there are other problems today. The question is, can boomers share this experiences and are Generation X and slackers, do they want to learn? Do they want to listen to this? That is what I am trying to get at.
HG:
Well, I actually have not that much experience with today's generation. I mean, that says something. I mean, I will just stay with the example of the students that you had who had never talked to their fathers about being in Vietnam. That is not unusual at all, whether it is Vietnam or World War II or Korea. If you read Lewis Puller's book that his father did not talk to him about being in war. My father did not talk to me. I did not find out until after my father died and I was responsible for all the records. I did not really find out what exactly he did until I found his records and I was able to read those and then piece them together. And then I had some idea. He never talked to me about war before I went to war or after I went to war. And even at the end, I met a professor of mine, he was not a professor of mine but he was teaching and at my school, and he wrote his memoirs of being a fighter pilot in the South Pacific in World War II. And I bought it and read it and wondered, because my father was in the South Pacific in the Army Air Force, and I wondered if this was his experience. And I gave him the book to read and he read it. And the only comment he ever made was that the author had made a mistake with the model type of plane he was talking about, it was not a T-9, it was a T... And that was it. That was his whole reaction. And the reason I gave him the book was to see if maybe it would not spark some conversation about, well, gee Dad, what did you do in the war? And I never told him what I did in the war. So it is not unusual at all in my experience that-
SM:
Hey.
HG:
...That sons do not talk to their fathers, the warriors, whatever their wars. I think we could learn. I think today I would like to think that today's generation can learn from us and that they do not make the same mistakes. My goal has always been to make different mistakes than the ones that my father's generation or the other members of my generation made.
SM:
If you were to describe the youth of the (19)60s and early (19)70s, please describe the qualities you most admire and then describe the qualities you least admire. You can use adjectives or what were the things about the boomer generation, that is people who were born, sometimes I hate using these parameters. People born between (19)46 and (19)64 are boomers when we all know that those born between (19)46 and say (19)58 are so different than those in the...
HG:
I was born in (19)47, and I do not have a lot that I would identify with someone who was born, well, actually, my wife was born in (19)60. She is 13 years younger than I am. And when we hear a music, I mean, I play oldies in the car on the radio, and I will say, "Did you ever hear that song? Do you remember that song?" A lot of times she will say, "No, I do not remember that song," or, "I do not remember that." Or we will watch something on TV and it is about something that happened in the (19)60s...
SM:
Okay.
HG:
Just say, "I do not remember that." And that was an important part of my life. I mean, when I was in Vietnam, she was eight years old. So not all boomers are the same. She does not even think of herself as a boomer.
SM:
She is post boomer probably. Post boomer, pre slacker. Tell her that. Well, if you were to give some adjectives to describe the boomers, the positive things, what would be the positives of the boomers?
HG:
I think our generation was committed to various visions of what America should be, and we took the initiative to try and bring about change. And I think we can take responsibility for a lot of things that have changed. And again, I think of getting women out of the house where their sole role in life is to have children and raise them. A friend of mine called women like that breeders. If you have the kids and you stay at home and you take care of them, and that is your whole life. Boy, I would not want to just have the family as my whole life. I would want to have the opportunity to be fulfilled in other ways. And I think women today, by and large, have opportunities and have options that they did not have in my mother's generation.
SM:
How about any negative qualities about the boomers?
HG:
I am not really used to thinking about us as separate and apart and different than the rest of the population. So I cannot think of any specific negative about us.
SM:
One of the comments, so again, I have not interviewed many people, but a few comments have come forth that the boomers are a very irresponsible group. Do you find that as a negative or-
SM:
Do you find that as a negative, or...
HG:
Well, it would be a negative, I would not say that, and I would not agree with it, but I do not know why someone else would say that.
SM:
I think they were prefacing it with the statement when they were out there protesting and/or some of those Boomers are the so-called elites. That is what they call 15 percent who are protesting the war, and found some sort of activism. They would just-
HG:
Every generation has its elites. America is more elitist than ever. The distribution of wealth is more disparate than ever. Now we are moving into a really very difficult time, when there really is a separation between important parts of the group. I know people who thought John Kerry was very elite because he had money, came from a money family, and he would go to rallies, but he would fly to them.
SM:
Oh, geez.
HG:
It is all on your perspective. The other guys in the Vietnam Veterans Against the War-
SM:
Hitchhike.
HG:
...who did not have money looked at him, or some of the big names now who were officers. It all depends on your perspective. I certainly would not think of our generation of irresponsible. If we are, then the country's in big trouble because right now we are carrying the economy and everything on our shoulders. Our parents' generation, we are going to be responsible for taking care of them, probably at our own expense, and to also take care of our children's generation, and our grandchildren's gen... Well, selling them down the pike like they have been sold down the pike already. I do not believe that that was our generation that is done that. Why you got a friend?
SM:
Hey, how are you?
HG:
That is Shadow.
SM:
You are going to be interview... Shadow, you will be interviewed next. You got to wait your turn, so be prepared. Okay, Shadow? Could you comment on the importance of the Boomers with respect to the Vietnam War itself?
HG:
We fought it.
SM:
You fought it.
HG:
Could not have had it without it.
SM:
There is a lot of historians and sociologists have stated that if it was not for the protestors, the war would never have ended. Do you find that there is validity in that statement?
HG:
Well, in the things that I have read, it was clear that it might have ended sooner without them because toward the end, there was a lot of concern about doing this in a way that politically did not look like they cannot win. I mean, I read that someone said to Johnson, and I think it was his Secretary of Defense, "Look, why do not we just bring all the troops home and say we won?" He was concerned how that would look, and certainly what I read suggested that Nixon was concerned about appearing to give in to these kids that were causing problems, and we cannot appear to let them run things. I think without them it might have been easier to fold our tents, and come home and call it a day. Certainly the war would have been, I mean it was going nowhere, and we did not really pursue, I mean we were not really fighting a war after (19)72. We had very few troops there, and they were advisors, and serving behind the scenes. They were no longer taking the Fed to the enemy. We did get out, is that what we do? And it was too expensive, and there was all kinds of reasons it would have ended.
SM:
Back in (19)64 Dr. Spark's book, and of course a lot of people know about this, that he made a commentary that we will never send during the (19)64 campaign, we will never send our boys to into China because that that is... the Asian boys will fight that war. Our boys will not fight it. Of course, that was a criticism of Goldwater too. They felt he was going to take our troops right over there. And then from 15,000 advisors when Kennedy was there, to the beginning of troops going over after Johnson went into the presidency. I guess, what I give back is a lot of Boomers at that period, from seeing what happened, and of course they feel that they are one of the main reasons for Lyndon Johnson leaving the- ... Not deciding to run in (19)68, because the people that were going to support McCarthy, and then Bobby Kennedy, and the protests, and he did ... Really would not have a shot at winning. It was tearing the nation apart, decided not to move on. During that era, from seeing the Robert McNamara's and Lyndon Johnson, and then Richard Nixon and then leading up to Watergate, there was this whole lack of trust on the part of many Boomers, certainly the 15 percent who were protesting. That is a term that a lot of people use. 85 percent were not involved in any kind of an activity but my thought has always been that maybe affecting the subconscious of the whole generation, so that there was no trust happening. No faith in leadership as Mayor Burns up in Binghamton, a close friend of Bobby Kennedy. Bobby Kennedy was our last hope. Even then, since that time there has really been no one that the nation could get behind in terms of trust and support, as an entire nation. What are your thoughts on this business regarding the concept of trust, and the lack of faith in our institutions? Because, if indeed there is a lack of trust, psychologist was saying, and you are one, I can remember reading in my psychology 101 book. Something about the fact that if you cannot trust then you may not succeed in life. There is a concept before you have got to trust someone, whether it be your parent, or somebody. You have got to have a concept of trust. And yet, if young people are being raised by not having faith in their leadership of the country, and they were not telling the truth about the war, the body counts, all these types of things that were coming back, and we saw it on television, because another person said we are like the TV generation, not the Boomer generation, the TV generation. That there is something within the Boomers about not trusting people. Do you think as a psychologist, not only as a person who works with Boomers as patients, but as a boomer yourself, that there is some validity to the fact that this generation more than any other in history, is a generation that does not trust, and thus, they are passing that on to their kids who are today's young people in college, and they themselves may not be able to trust? Is there some validity to that thought?
HG:
Well, I think part of maturing is moving from naive trust to informed trust, kind of learning to do your homework before you trust someone, whether it is an individual, or whether it is an institution. Part of maturing is learning the rules, and I say moving away from civics 101 to the way the world really works, that I can think about Desert Storm again, that we did not go in there because we were guests. That this big militaristic country had overrun this poor small democracy, and we wanted to go in there, and protect democracy from the tyranny of a dictator. Again, we went in there because it was in our best interest, if we are going to have oil that is easily available and cheap to run our economy. As you grow up, you learn who to trust. Sometimes, you learn it the easy way, and sometimes you learn it the hard way. I do not know that our generation has any more difficulty with trust. There was a concept when I was an undergraduate that came out of Neil Durkheim, who was a sociologist in the 1800s, and he wrote a book on suicide. He talked about a state of enemy when in culture there did not seem to be enough structure, things seemed to be in chaos. I can remember when I was younger reading that, and identifying with that. I bet today's generation is doing the same thing. They are reading about Durkheim's concept of enemy, and saying, "Yeah, that is us," but it cannot be that every generation feels, and some of the things I have read about my parents' generation coming out of the Depression, and you know, read The Grapes of Wrath, or you watch the movie, the messages that society is that society is not working right, there is no structure, it is every man for himself, blah-blah-blah. And then, World War II, the same major shift that an impact that had on the culture, and then the recovery, and then the Cold War. I think again, we are talking about if you look hard enough, none of these things originated with our generation, and I do not think our generation is overly influenced, or practicing them. These are other generations. I think the issues can be different. I think it is sure hard to be a kid today. It is dangerous out there, and I think the rise of violence, the easy availability of guns, the saturation of drugs to the corner level in your little town, wherever it is. When I was growing up, drug abuse was so unusual and so foreign. I can remember a couple of movies, the Man with a Golden Arm, and if you ended up having a drug problem, they sent you to I think it was Louisville or Lexington, Kentucky, or there was a special federal prison for drug addicts from all over the country. Now, you go to any jail, and it is full of drug addicts, or people that have a problem with drugs. It was there, but the magnitude has shifted somewhat, although there are not as many alcoholics as there were.
SM:
But you see that, I do not want to make this in a political interview, but then you have those who comment that well the welfare state, and the policies begun under the Johnson administration began a trend. Special interest groups, we care more about special interest groups than we care about the general public. That is conservative, that is a conservative attack on democratic policy. Well the thing is, and then now that Boomers are in or going into, because they are 50 now beginning of the Boomers, so they are really just have not been in positions of power and authority for very long, and they have still got many years ahead.
HG:
We have all the problems with the previous generation and depositing on our doorsteps. I was talking to somebody about healthcare, and I am old enough to remember that when I got sick, we called up with Dr. Loftus, and we went over there, and whatever I needed then my father paid him for it. There was not any health insurance back then, if there was, we did not have it. A lot of times we were sick, we did not go anywhere, because we did not have the money. I remember in 1965, that was the I graduated from high school when Johnson brought Medicare in, and there were actually quite a few old people who had very little, very little during their working life, and then had very little to retire on. Nowadays, the rate of elderly who are destitute is very small, at least from the statistics I have read, so a remedy was developed to take care of those in need. That is where I remember the great society, and I thought all of that was well-intentioned, and a good idea, and did not have a problem with it then. I think there is some things we can do to... Actually, I think the difference, what I am remembering now is I did not have a lot of good to say about Reagan, the president, but one of the things that I was very pleased with was when he passed, and signed off on a catastrophic healthcare bill for Medicare beneficiaries, I think it was (19)83 or (19)84, so that everyone would have guaranteed catastrophic healthcare, that no one would lose everything as a result of getting sick, and it was to be paid for by the Medicare beneficiaries themselves. They would pay the premium. Well, the AARP people and the well-to-do elderly got so upset, and caused such a ruckus that two years later it was done away with. They did not want to pay the premiums for their poor fellow generation, World War II generation class of (19)46. I thought that is really ludicrous. I think of us, to go back to the other question, I think our generation has grown up with the idea that we are responsible for the rest of society, and I personally do not have a problem with having programs. Can programs get out of hand? Can they take on a life of their own? Can people become too dependent? In politics, it is clear that once you have given somebody something, it is much harder to take it back than if you never gave it to them in the first place, because people come to feel entitled to it. Depending on where you are at, where you are at in the food chain because I do not expect to get anything out of social security, or very little. As I work on my investments, and things like that. I feel that I have to be able to take care of myself because I do not think there is going to be anything there. But my mother's generation, my mother's getting social superior now, and I am real happy for her and her generation, and they are getting much more than they ever put into it. That turns out to be the fatal flaw, and this kind of approach and it remains seen what they are going to do about it.
SM:
You bring up that, it is just an example, I will look at the (19)60s and the Boomer generation as a group that cared about other people, who cared about what was happening in the south. Young people went down to Freedom Summer, even though the (19)64, they were not the Boomers, but the Boomers were coming on, and seeing these experiences because in (19)64, most Boomers old enough to go down south, but that was that group that just preceded the Boomers. You got the issue of civil rights caring about African Americans, you got the issue of certainly poverty in the inner cities. You have got the issue of the environmental movement, which came to fruition with that 1970 Earth Day ceremony in Washington. You have got the women's movement, who ... Even the Native American movement. That happened in Elk- The were a Hispanic movement. The Latino movement started around that time, gay and lesbian movement. It was like a caring about some of the disenfranchise in our society, and I look upon that as a very positive quality within the Boomer generation. But then, there are the naysayers out there who say that in reality we were our very selfish generation, only caring about ourselves, and our own special interests. Then they see what is happening today that African Americans care about only their issues. Gays and lesbians care about their issues, and women care about their issues, and break all the breakdowns. What are your thoughts on that? Would you categorize this generation as a very caring generation, different than any previous generation, or they cared more? Is that a quality that is positive in this?
HG:
I think my parents' generation, and their parents' generation, that it was rugged individualism all the way. My parents did not feel any particular responsibility for other people. They felt that it is what you do for yourself. You got to get up and go to work, and you do not expect nothing from anyone else, and you do not... You are not responsible for anyone else. As opposed to my generation where, as I was growing up, I saw the government turn into turn again... I mean you can just look at the New Deal, and everything that was done to overcome the Depression, and see that in fact the government has created programs, some of which are still around now, and do not need to be that. In fact, I think of the government, if the government is not there to attempt to remedy problems in the society, and problems that only affect special groups or interests, then what is the government there for? Versus the government that is there to keep the status quo, which means some people who are doing swell are going to continue to do swell, and then other people who are not, just too bad for them.
SM:
The haves will continue to be the haves, and the have nots-
HG:
Right. I think of the kind of government that I believe in is a proactive, and a reactive government that does things, and tries new approaches, and does not close its eyes to problems, and it does not have to be a problem that affects everyone in the country in order for the government to be reactive to it.
SM:
When you talk about that, that is directly linked to when these Boomers were growing up. Because they saw the Great Society of Lyndon Johnson, and they saw these things, and it was really affected them, and those that have gone into public service, and want to be involved in working for others beyond themselves. I got a question here. Have you changed your opinion on the youth of the (19)60s over the last 25 years?
HG:
Just on the youth of the (19)60s?
SM:
Yes, the youth. Have you changed at all?
HG:
No, not really.
SM:
Do you feel you are consistent in your thoughts?
HG:
Yeah, I did not look down on us. I thought I served with a lot of guys that felt that they were doing the right thing, just like I thought I was. I could also understand people that did not want to die, and did not want to get hurt, and did not want to be exposed to horrible things. Much of my generation, 90 percent of my generation was not in uniform in the whole Vietnam War. What is that make them? I did not have a problem with Bill Clinton. I do not have a problem with the letter he wrote from Oxford. I do not have a problem with him wanting to get out of serving the Vietnam War. I did not have a problem with Dan Quail, who managed to wangle a National Guard position so he did not have to go. In any war, the majority of the citizenry do not serve, and in anywhere. What is that make them?
SM:
If you recall Don Bailey, when he spoke on our, at that program in (19)75, I mean (19)75, (19)85, he refused to even acknowledge the Vietnam veterans over at that program. Remember we had the reception upstairs, and he said, "No, I will sit downstairs with a program start." So he was very bitter, and I think he had a couple purple hearts, or was right front lines and-
HG:
Personality disorder too. Being a surgeon in Vietnam does not make you a wonderful person.
SM:
That is true. They are always going to be those people of the extreme who are not going to ever change, and are still going to have the bitterness probably to the time they go to their grave, but it is my hope that the majority will want to create a dialogue between, as they get older, and not have this bitterness, when they go to their graves about that era. It is a feeling that hopefully this whole project will get involved with. This is a comment, the Boomers always used to say they were the most unique generation in American history. I can remember in the early (19)70s when I was in Ohio State University, we go to rallies, and they say we are going to show the world that we are the most unique generation in American history. Not only were they fighting the war, but all the other issues that were involved, and to this day, as a Boomer, now in my late 40s still, I feel that we are something unique. That is just me. Certainly different than my dad's generation, and I work with student’s day in and day out, and they are totally different than what we were, but they are not activists. I have perception, do you think that for that we are the most unique generation in American history, or in this century?
HG:
No, I do not think we are the most unique. Again, I can think about the first generation who came over as English subjects, and what it took them to decide that they wanted to set to get freedom from England, and pursue a war that there was no consensus at the time that we could even pursue successfully, and everything went on. I look at the generation that fought to keep the Union together. I look at the generation that came out of a Depression and joined a World War, and wanted... I do not think that we are any more unique. I think we have had some challenges that other generations might not have had, but they have had their challenges. I think we have met our challenges by and large, well. I think of this as unique.
SM:
If you are described a good quality or an adjective that would describe this generations' activist, they may have been more activist than any other generation, irrespective of the American Revolutionary period, which they were obviously activists risking their lives, but they were in the minority too, at that time because I think one third, only one third were against Britain. One third supported Britain, and one third care less.
HG:
Well, I also think that one of my pet peeves is the media. I also think that our generation saw the sentencing of the media, as not only people who reported the news, but people who make the news. You can look around for many examples today, that young girl that made her walk on the women's gymnastics team pretty strong. When in reality, we had already won. She did not know that. She was... The next day I heard on TV that she was being told that she could probably make four or five million dollars now if she wanted to put her efforts into marketing herself, and whatever. My major problem with the news today is that I think they spend too much time making the news from the start. They have been committed to the idea that the TWA flight 800 blew up with a bomb, regardless of evidence, or lack of evidence. These stories take on a life of their own, and I think that began with our generation. The electronic media was really coming into its own. I mean, I remember growing up watching the news of Walter Cronkite, and he just, he was just a talking head there most of the time, and would have a couple of clips. He reported it in his monotone, and then he would end up with, "and that is the way it is." The news is presented differently. It has spin on it, just like, I mean, everything anybody is feeding the media has spin on it, and then they put their own spin on it. I think that we came of age during the electronic media era, when the electronic media was coming of age is starting to realize it is potential.
SM:
I think a lot of the perceptions of Vietnam came from those reports too, especially morally safer. In that one report that everybody remembers, and I remember it was because I was there seeing the news that night of burning down that village, setting in a fire. That might have been 60 minutes. I am not even sure what it was, but I just know... I think it was Morley Safer.
HG:
60 minutes.
SM:
Yeah.
HG:
-went over.
SM:
Yeah, I think it was Marley Safer. Yeah, he was there, and so was Mike Wallace.
HG:
I can remember every night hearing the casualty count, and how many people, how killed in action there were that week.
SM:
From now we know that the true numbers that were coming in. This might be repetitive here, but Boomers used to say they were going to change the world. They were offering quotas being the youth that would change the world in a positive way. Was this true? Were they different? And in what way? I think you have already kind of made a comment in there. It has often been quoted that only 15 percent of the Boomers were truly activists, were involved in some sort of activity linked civil rights, Vietnam War protest, the women's movement, the gay and lesbian movement, the environmental movement, or any kind of activism overall in politics. Any issues today? Is this true, or is this another way to lessen the impact this group has had on America since the (19)60s? In other words on, there has been reports on the television, public broadcasting, documentaries on the Vietnam War, and they will always say that actually there were not that many people really involved in that. They lessened the impact these people had on what was happening in America based on the numbers. Since this is a generation of 60 million, 65 million, only 15 percent on were involved, so thus it was not that great a movement. But, that is the media again.
HG:
Well, I think-
HG:
I called Tom Williams up and I said, "Where did you get this statistic?" And he mumbled around and I spent years trying to track it down. It supposedly, and you can ask Jack Smith about this if you talk to him, because it apparently came out of some church study that he had some involvement in. A church group had given him some money, and some people he was involved with, but it was patently untrue. And Tom Williams, we finally identified that he heard it from Jim Webb, who wrote Fields of Fire and was Assistant Secretary of the Navy or something like that. Well, he was an Annapolis classmate of Tom's, and Jim was going around the country doing the radio shows, pushing his book, and that is where he was throwing this out. But it is patently untrue. The VA, who has the best data... Suicide data, for one, is difficult data to work with. There was lots of problems with it, but they have done the best study to date, and there is nowhere near that. And other states have done their own studies of this. I mean, it is such a statistic that really gets a reaction out of people. So a lot of people have looked at it, but it is not true. It is not even close to being true. And I am really disturbed to hear that they are still pushing it down there.
SM:
They did not do it this year, it was last year. There is the guys at the wall, the guy that go around showing they have a...
HG:
Right. I have little patience with veterans who are professional victims at this point. As we all approach 50, it is like time you get on with it, although there are many veterans who just will not ever get on with it. And so they identify themselves with the fact that they have been victimized, and they have never moved on to a survivor identity. So they are stuck in Vietnam and they will never make it home.
SM:
Are many of those peoples not diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder, they just do not move on?
HG:
They just do not move on. And that is true of any war. Not everybody gets over it. And so we owe them. Lincoln said, when the VA was created, care for the, what is it? "Care for the Warrior and for his wife and for his orphan, for his widow, and for his orphan." But that does not make it sell to Vietnam veterans as a group and not come home and off themselves as a way of dealing with what they found when they came home. That is not true at all.
SM:
Remember when we did the program back in (19)85? That was a big issue even back then, because we had the Harry Gaffney, who would always dress in a suit, and Dan Fraley would dress in a suit, remember? And then you would go down to the Vietnam Memorial in Philadelphia, you would see those that are still wearing their army fatigues, but that it was okay for that opening ceremony. But I remember Harry saying that there is just some people, they ought to learn to dress now. I mean, they have got to move on from it. So what are your thoughts on the former left leaders who state that their past activities and those of their peers had more negative impact on society than good? Many of the... We are talking about the David Horwitz, the Collier who wrote that book on the Destructive Generation, basically condemning the entire generation as real negative, especially those people who were on the left. That is, the war protestors. Those people took over the Democratic Party in 1968. Those people that were affiliated with Eugene McCarthy, and possibly Bobby Kennedy and certainly, oh, during that timeframe. And of course they disrupted the Democratic Convention in Chicago in (19)68, some of the Republican convention too, in a smaller way. So what are your thoughts of those people who look back on when they were younger and did things, and from a psychological perspective, what does that entail?
HG:
Well, I think we all look back at our coming of age, and we all have things to regret, and we all have things to be proud of. We can all say, "Boy, if I knew then what I know now," and I think no matter where you stand on the issue, that is a common experience. Whatever your positions are on different issues, that maturity and wisdom and the things that we pick up as we grow, we might be in a different place.
SM:
When you look at people that, either the boomers or whether... You said you have been consistent on your thoughts from then and now toward your perception of people in your age group. But what about those individuals that have kept their ideals? Another word term that has been used from our generation is that they were idealistic somewhat. Dr. King coined the phrase Dreamers, hoping for a better future for all of us, but certainly idealistic. And you almost also made a comment earlier on that many have moved on, and mellowed out, and raised families, and the idealism was just something in their youth. And that is even psychologists and psychology will say that most young people are idealistic when they are young. And as they get older, they have to raise families and get into the reality of what life is. But there are many that still live those ideas.
HG:
Mellowing out or becoming responsible to a family and all that does not mean you have to give up your ideals or change who you are, what you believe in or what you feel a lot about.
SM:
Do you feel that the people that you have worked with, the boomers, what was the percentage that they have given up their ideals and just live day to day or they still fight for things?
HG:
Fight for issues? Well, certainly the populace is less, if you take the voting rate, is less involved. And I could not wait to vote. I came home from Vietnam and I was not old enough to vote, or old enough to have a drink in the state of Pennsylvania as I was laying in the Naval Hospital in South Philadelphia. But once I became old enough to vote, I vote, I vote regularly, and I stay aware of what the issues are and I try to understand the world that is going on around me. The people I spend a lot of time with and who are in my generation seem to do the same thing. We can talk about it. In my experience, we have not lost our passion. We are not 19 with a lot of free time on our hands, but we can write letters, we can make donations to political organizations, we can join political organizations. We can do things like that to try and continue to support our vision of what we think America ought to be.
SM:
I have a list of names here that I would just like you just comment your thoughts on them. If you were to try to place the following names in the minds of boomers, what overall reaction we do for the following names? I would like your thoughts, just a couple sentences on each of these individuals personally, and maybe if you can speak for the boomers, try to think what they think of them today now that they are almost 50. First name is Tom Hayden.
HG:
Well, from what I understand, he was an effective legislator in California, and that is really all I know about him. Besides the fact that he was married to Jane Fonda.
SM:
How about the fact that he protested, went to Hanoi and all the other things?
HG:
So did Jane.
SM:
Now as a Vietnam veteran, have you forgiven them for that?
HG:
I never had a problem with him doing it. I personally felt, again, to confuse the warrior with the war was the big mistake. What I had hard feelings about with the American society was they confused the warrior with the war. I did not have any problem at all with what people felt about the war, but I really felt that they should not be hostile or against the warriors, meaning the Americans who went over and pursued what the government policy was.
SM:
So again, getting back, and I am going to put Jane Fonda in here too, because she is down further. One of the things when I go to the wall is that is the name that is up on all the details. Jane Fonda bitch, upside down. I have a picture of a Vietnam veteran, I think I told you on the phone, with an artificial arm and an artificial leg, and he has got these big badges and I think they even sell them down there. It is like that is the name. Jane Fonda seems to be the name that you see on the badges.
HG:
I never heard Jane Fonda say anything against Vietnam veterans except we were being abused or used by the government. She even tried to... She made a movie, Coming Home, which was one of the better movies about Vietnam veterans' adjustments and issues, and that was 1980.
SM:
Okay, then what draws the ire of people? She was in Hanoi, that picture that that was taken, of course the North Vietnamese should win. Of course, they are fighting. That is the enemy of the American Soldier.
HG:
And again, that that is speaking to the nature of the war. And I do not begrudge anybody their feelings about the war and the validity of the war. But if you are going to say something about the warriors that carried out that war, then I have a problem with it.
SM:
Lyndon Johnson?
HG:
I feel that he was a good president, that the Great Society and many other programs that he created were important programs that were... I believe the government should have been getting involved in these issues.
SM:
In terms of him bringing the troops to Vietnam, he was the guy that brought the first large numbers of troops. You do not begrudge him or have a negativity toward him?
HG:
Yeah, we had a mindset that we had won the Second World War. It was the same mindset that got a lot of guys killed in Korea, and it was felt that it was just like in Desert Storm. And Desert Storm worked out really nice. Vietnam did not, but basically, they were very similar actions. We felt that if Vietnam fell, the domino theory, all the Southeast Asian countries were going to become communist strongholds, and this was against our strategic interest. So we got involved to try and prevent this. I mean, that is what it was all about.
SM:
How about Bobby Kennedy?
HG:
It is funny. I was in Vietnam most of 1968, so I did not even know when people were getting killed. They did not tell us.
SM:
Really? How long was it before you knew that Dr. King and Bobby Kennedy were killed within a two month-
HG:
I found out when I came back home.
SM:
Really?
HG:
Yeah. Anything that happened in 1968, I went over in early March, and I got back on December 5th, and they were not... For example, when Martin Luther King got killed, they were not playing us up as big news. We only had one radio station, Armed Forces Radio, and they were not playing that up, and I can imagine why they were not. And same thing with Bobby Kennedy.
SM:
What are your thoughts on him though, as you think back on the boomers?
HG:
I thought that had he not been assassinated, he might have made a good president.
SM:
How about Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin?
HG:
I think of them in the same terms. Actually, the thing that we were watching a week ago was a special on the serial murders, and Charles Manson was in there, and my wife was saying, "I seem to remember something about him." But she was only seven or eight at the time, and this guy was nuts, and did crazy things. And I think of these people as individuals who were in the right moment at the right time, and they got their 15 minutes of fame. And I do not have any enduring feelings about them one way or another. I think Abbie Hoffman died in New Hope of an overdose. That is what I think about him. It does not sound, from what I read at the time, it did not sound like he ever got over the (19)60s.
SM:
Right. What is interesting, Jerry Rubin was criticized often as selling out because he went on to become a successful businessman. He got killed in a crime. I thought it was interesting. He was doing something illegal when he got killed. He was crossing the highway in LA, jaywalking, and he got run over, but he was a successful businessman. Whereas Abbie Hoffman, the Yippies, that period, that was just a bunch of, you satisfy this one issue and we will find another issue, that kind of mentality. Yet he did live his entire life as an activist, because he tried to fight to save the Hudson River.
HG:
He was here to fight the pumping station on the Delaware.
SM:
And I guess what struck me, not so much the eccentricity of the man, but the fact that the way he died, and the fact that as he was older, because he was about 54 or 53 when he killed himself, he only had $2,000 in the bank, and he had given all his money away. And that suicide note or something like that is they said he had nothing more to live for because no one was listening to him anymore. And I thought, "Ooh, is there something to be said there? Is this the fate of the boomers?" Even though he is only one person, is this the fate of the boomers and all the issues that they cared about when they talk about today's young people who have their own issues. When you talk about the issue of civil rights, that we have still got racism there. "I do not want to hear about it. I do not have other problems. I want to get a good job. And we got our own problems here, and you are just living in the past." So that is what struck me about Abbie Hoffman more than... He was a legitimate activist, but his earlier years hurt him because he played all these games as a Yippie. As he matured, he was a mature activist. So I am wondering what that says about our generation, in terms of...
HG:
He is clearly in a minority and most of us are not, do not spend our lifetime being activists, at least in that sense.
SM:
How about Timothy Leary?
HG:
He just died of cancer. For someone who had made it into academia, Harvard, and he developed some psychological constructs that are still useful today, that people still talk about them. And I learned them, and was surprised to know that that was him. I originally at the time thought he was just wispy professor that was on the fringe, but he was very much a part of the establishment. You cannot get much more than faculty at Harvard. And he gave all that up.
SM:
To get into the drug scene.
HG:
Yeah. I could not imagine why he would, why he revoke all of that.
SM:
Name a couple more here. Huey Newton?
HG:
I think the Black Panthers, was not he?
SM:
Mm-hmm.
HG:
All right. My experience with the Black Panthers was kind of a fascination with them. That felt like, well, if everyone is talking about revolution, this is as close as you can get to revolution, armed revolution, and that is my association to him.
SM:
It is sad, too, that I think he was gunned down in Oakland when he eventually died in later years, in the late (19)80s. Ralph Nader?
HG:
A fellow alum, who is still fighting for the consumer. I think world is a safer place for Ralph, and it is good that we have him.
SM:
He is an example of a guy who has been an actor his whole life. He goes from one cause to another.
HG:
Most of them have to do with protecting the citizens from big business.
SM:
George McGovern?
HG:
He seem like a nice man.
SM:
Boomers latched on to him in 1972 in large numbers, even though he got clobbered in the election. Many people blame him for the demise of the Democratic Party, or part of the demise. It is basically a lot of the Democrats, McCarthy, and Mondale, and Jimmy Carter, and Dukakis, they bunch all these people in together, and other Democrats of that era, Hubert Humphrey. He is a liberal. A lot of boomers still, when I think of the names of that era, (19)72, it is McGovern, McGovern, McGovern, McGovern. Do you still think that strikes a chord with a lot of veterans? They still think of him in positive terms?
HG:
Yeah, I guess as they think of him. Most of these people I do not think about.
SM):
They have moved on, huh?
HG:
I cannot remember the last time I thought about any of them. Yeah, certainly he was identified with getting out of war.
SM:
How about Gene McCarthy?
HG:
Do not really have any association with him. More association to Joseph.
SM:
Because of the Red scare. Of course, Eugene McCarthy was the guy that the young people started latching onto to fight against the war.
HG:
Nixon was one of them.
SM:
Yep. In fact, he is next. Richard Nixon?
HG:
My association to him is that he managed in 20-some years to come back from what I thought was probably the biggest disgrace you could possibly have. And, at least in some quarters, he kind of rehabilitated, politically rehabilitated. And I still hear people say that he was the greatest political mind around, and whatever. And I remember when Watergate was going on, I just could not believe that these people were that stupid, and that this was all going to... This stupid little project was going to bring down the presidency. And it was scary at the time.
SM:
His impact with Watergate had last lasting imprints on boomers, how they lead their lives?
HG:
It has not on me. Everybody does dirty tricks. And everybody... Maybe not everybody, and maybe this is my own lack of trust in politicians, but I assume that everybody is going to try to get away with what they can get away with in the political game.
SM:
How about George Wallace?
HG:
A racist. Did not deserve a bullet in the back.
SM:
Daniel Ellsberg?
HG:
The first word that popped into my mind was a patriot. We were talking about that earlier. He did what he felt he had to do. He took on the federal government, which is no small thing.
SM:
Hubert Humphrey?
HG:
The memory I have of him is that he supported programs that took care of people.
SM:
And Robert McNamara?
HG:
Well, I did not buy his book, I am sorry to hear he is distressed with his performance in the war. Then again, Secretary of Defense, all you do is provide your opinion. You do not make the decision.
SM:
But he is criticized for holding his opinion back.
HG:
I do not believe that. I believe that that opinion was represented at the highest levels of government. And if he did not share it, someone else would. Certainly from what I have read, is there was a group that always felt that it was a losing proposition from the start. And there was always someone around who would take that position. It was not like everyone was telling the president, "Oh, yes, we are going to win this one." And it became in (19)67, (19)68, not the question of would we leave, but how are we going to leave, and how do we do it and look good, and how do we manage it politically?
SM:
Do you think inviting him to the wall would be, and having him come to the wall would be positive or negative, if he would come?
HG:
I think it could be positive.
SM:
I do not know what [inaudible] would think, but I have a sense, knowing he is very open-minded that he would like him to come, and just like Lewis Puller believes we need to heal. Bill Clinton, all of need to come at some juncture. And it is not an interesting too, that the only president who has visited the wall is President Clinton. Ronald Reagan did not come. Neither did George Bush. And it is amazing. I do not know if they have invited Jimmy Carter ever, but I know that Al Gore was there once to speak before he was a candidate, John Kennedy?
HG:
Well, I was not old enough to really know what was going on. My enduring memory of John Kennedy was I was in ninth grade when he and Nixon were running against each other, and the class was arbitrarily split in half, and I was made a Nixon devotee, and had to argue that Nixon should be elected.
SM:
You look at the assassinations of Johnson, not Johnson, assassinations of both Kennedys and Martin Luther King, and then in a smaller way, of Malcolm X and Medgar Evers, and the bombing of kids down in that church in the south. And then, of course, the attempted assassination of George Wallace. They were all over a period of time. How does that affect the boomers in terms of their psyche?
HG:
Well, I think it was a traumatic time, to have the president assassinated. Makes you feel pretty helpless.
SM:
As a professional psychologist, you cannot have 60 million people in front of you. But if you were to analyze the effect that this man had on, remembering that that boomers would only be, what, 14 when John Kennedy was killed? The earliest boomers. The oldest boomers. I met him, by the way, when I was a kid at Hyde Park, just by accident, and had a chance to shake his hand. But just for a brief moment, he had an impact on me back in 1960. That was when he was at Hyde Park. But the sense that things would have been different, but you cannot always project what may have been. You got to deal with what is. Do you think boomers, I know they do not think about it, but in the subconscious they may be thinking, "What if John Kennedy had lived? What if Martin Luther King had lived? What if Bobby Kennedy had lived?" All these what ifs. Because some of the what ifs, if John Kennedy had lived there may not have been a Vietnam War. We may have not sent the troops over, but there is no proof that there would have for that.
HG:
Well, he sent the first ones there.
SM:
Right.
HG:
What I remember about John Kennedy is the Cuban missile prices. And I was convinced we were all going to get nuked. And that is from going through it, and then watching things on TV or reading about it, you realize how extraordinary that was, to take that position. What would have happened if he would not have, and they would put more and more missiles on Cuba. That really was a time, in everything I have read and watched, that that really was a time when we could have had a nuclear war. That was the one time that it could have went either way.
SM:
Getting back to the question on the psychology, has this... What effect has that had on the generation in terms of-
HG:
Well, I do not know if it has had any effect on our generation as opposed to the rest of the populace. None of us voted to put him in office. None of us probably paid much attention to his campaigning. And I remember the big point in the election was, well, he was a Catholic. We have never had a Catholic elected president. So I would guess that it probably would have had more of an impact on the adults who were involved in the election and had voted for him. And I did not really know what he stood for when he was elected. And no, I do not know that it had big an impact at all on our generation.
SM:
A couple of more people here, Spiro Agnew?
HG:
Another crook. And the only person I ever knew that used the word effete.
SM:
Muhammad Ali?
HG:
As I have gotten older, I have come to admire him for his position. He took on military service. Because I remember when Elvis went in the service. And he went in, he put his time in. That was the expectation. And Muhammad Ali said, "No." I had always admired him as a fighter and as a boxer.
SM:
How about Barry Goldwater?
HG:
I did not really know much about Barry Goldwater. I did not have much of a reaction to him. All I remember is the bumper stickers, AUH2O. He was not a major player as I knew.
SM:
How about Dr. Benjamin Spock?
HG:
Well, I did not read his book. I knew that he was against the war and was an activist. And all I remember thinking is he could have stuck to being a doctor. Being a doctor does not necessarily make you knowledgeable about the bigger world, and the issues of war and peace.
SM:
And Gerald Ford?
HG:
He was the first president I voted for. Maybe the second. That is right, I voted for Nixon in (19)72. It was only recently that I finally voted for somebody who got elected. Yeah, Clinton from the first. Now I voted for Nixon, and he got elected. But that was my first vote, and...
HG:
Yeah, that was my first vote and I felt he had experience and the alternative... At that time, I thought we needed people with experience, but since then until Bill Clinton, everybody I voted for lost.
SM:
I have not voted for too many winners either. How about Sam Ervin, the person who headed the Watergate Committee?
HG:
I just remember watching him on TV and he seemed fair and impartial and I mean, I thought that was great drama.
SM:
And John Dean.
HG:
Well, I bought his book, Blind Ambition and read it, and then I watched a movie where Martin, what has he called, played him.
SM:
Martin Sheen?
HG:
Yeah.
SM:
Okay.
HG:
Played him. Yeah, he seemed like he was in over his head.
SM:
He spilled the beans though. He just...
HG:
Well, yeah, when he started to see that he was going to go for a ride.
SM:
And John Mitchell.
HG:
John Mitchell, he was a crook too when it came down to it. Our highest judicial officer. And he was a crook too.
SM:
How about the musicians of the era? I will just put like Bob Dylan and Jimmy Hendricks and Janis Joplin, those are the types.
HG:
Actually, my taste in music was like early to mid (19)60s and that kind of real hard stuff. I have gotten an appreciation for it as I have gotten older. I did not at the time. Yeah.
SM:
Because at that time, a lot of the era, the society of young people listen to that music and they think about the war and the big issues in society, and there was a lot of social commentary in the music and it kind of excited me. You wanted to get out there.
HG:
I was listening to Motown all the time and they did not sing about any of that. They were not commenting about anything except men and women and falling in love stuff.
SM:
And the last name here I have is Gloria Steinem. A lot of the women's movement people you know.
HG:
Right. I have come to appreciate the women's movement, although to the degree they want to become men. I think they were nuts because they had a better deal as a woman whether they realize it or not, in many ways. Much of what men are about in this culture and have been is very unhealthy.
SM:
Do you think the movement has changed from the early (19)70s to what it is today?
HG:
Well, yeah, I think everyone agrees there has been gains and they were fighting very basic issues. Well, first of all, they were fighting to be taken seriously, and I think they are taken seriously today.
SM:
What do you think of the Berrigan brothers? They burned the documents there and they went to jail for it.
HG:
Again, they were priests or brothers or something like that.
SM:
Yes, Philip and Daniel Berrigan.
HG:
I am just thinking that they must have been acting out of their conscience.
SM:
And the last one is Martin Luther King Jr.
HG:
I felt that he did have a dream and that he pursued that, that in his death he became more important than he may have become, had he not been assassinated. He became the symbol, and I think he helped polarize people around the issues and not just black against white. I think a lot of whites moved to support racial equality as a result of what happened to him.
SM:
In all these names that I have given, whether they be positive or negatives, do you still feel tremendous bitterness toward any of them at all in your thoughts? Say your thoughts 10 years ago, 15 years ago, back in, when you came back from the service, from early (19)70s to now, was there a period when you may have felt that negative toward them, but now it since time has passed-
HG:
No, I did not feel bitter towards any of them. I mean, I can certainly disagree with people.
SM:
How do you explain then a lot of the, again, I will not say a lot, but some of the commentary that is out there that as soon as they start talking in political terms, the politics of the day, they will refer back to those times. And you just mentioned the name, whether it be a, I do not want to say the Berrigans, I do not want to talk about them anymore, but any of the activists of that era, the Tom Hayden, I can imagine what they are going to say about him when he goes to the convention in Chicago because he was out protesting in (19)68. Now he is going to be inside the convention as a delegate from California. And the commentary that will be out there is, "Well, look, this party has not come anywhere. Look at that. The guy who protests is now inside. So the liberals are still in charge." And I am not saying I am a liberal or conservative, I am trying to be fair here, but there are many people that just cannot forget and cannot forgive. Congressman Dornan, for example.
HG:
He is not a good example of anything.
SM:
But he goes ballistic.
HG:
Nuts.
SM:
And Don Bailey, which we all witnessed in (19)85. And then I have a few people that I have witnessed down at The Wall who just talk amongst themselves and I just listen. It is just amazing, some of the things they say. Do you feel these are in the minority, that these people are in the minority now as opposed to-
HG:
Sure.
SM:
Okay.
HG:
Yeah, extremists are a minority by definition. Thank God there are not that many Bob Dornan around.
SM:
Yeah. What is amazing about him is he served this country well and he fought in the Korean War there is a lot of good things about him, but boy, when he starts talking about his opponents, it is really below the belt.
HG:
Well, I think personally, having been through it all myself, having served in combat or been wounded or this or that, that does not necessarily prepare you for anything. You can still be nuts. You can still be out on a limb. You can still have just really weird ideas.
SM:
Could you comment on the generation gap in the (19)60s and early (19)70s and the generation gap, if you sense one today between boomers and Generation X?
HG:
Well, my sense of it is that today's young people did not get the same kind of introduction to certain values and beliefs and practices that our generation did. At least my experience was, my parents passed on their values and beliefs and practices, and there was a lot of should, should, should, should. And so your choice was to accept that or reject it or negotiate what you are going to accept and what you are going to reject. And my sense today is that there is a lot less of that. I guess the boomers have tried to encourage younger people to make more decisions for themselves and to be more of their own person. But that I think can make the process harder as far as finding out who you are and what you do believe in and what is important to you and how important it is to you.
SM:
That generation gap, there is a couple of books written on the (19)60s about the generation gap between the World War II generation and boomers and trying to understand that, a lot of it was what you talked about earlier, the status quo and being different, wanting to be different.
HG:
There was books on the me decade or the me generation and the ones I read just took it to an extreme and maybe a Leary or someone, but the idea of gaining self-knowledge and understanding yourself I think is important. And sure anything, can be taken to an extreme. I believe that in the end, we do not have the answer for whom the bell tolls, it tolls for all of us. We are all in this together. And anything that diminishes others in the end will diminish us. And so we are either all going to make it or we are not. But the strides the human race has made, we have made not through competition and aggression, but we have made through working together. That is how the human race has come as far as it has. And 10,000 years working together for the common good is where it is at-
SM:
See, that is interesting because that is another commentary. And when they talk about boomers is they were very impatient. It was on the category, they were an impatient group because they saw things as they were the status quo, and they had seen the roadblocks all these years for the status quo remaining. So they said, the heck with this, we want it now. That is where that revolutionary rhetoric came. And so they were not going to wait, even when you look at Dr. King at his non-violent protest, it was actually not a condemnation of Thurgood Marshall and the gradualist approach through the courts. But it was saying well, there was another way, and certainly we admired, but we want it now. We were not going to put up with the road blocks anymore. We were going to end segregation. We were not going to wait for the courts to do it for us. So there was kind of a symbolic thing that passed off into the boomers, that they were an impatient group at times, wanting it now. And that many of these boomers are now in positions of authority and responsibility, and what characteristics, are they still using that quality in their own everyday lives of wanting it now, not going through the process?
HG:
I think being young and all young people are impatient. I think Martin Luther King used a non-violent approach because it was very powerful. He learned that from Gandhi and you do not have to the amount of power and with a lot less of a downside than if you try to have a revolution and overtake something.
SM:
What has been the lasting legacy of the boomer generation?
HG:
Well, I feel that we were a hopeful generation.
SM:
The legacy of the boomer generation.
HG:
Well, as I said, I think we were a hopeful generation. The motivations of the generation were to make American culture and society, I will say more user-friendly, and to take care of those who needed help.
SM:
And as a follow-up, you feel that is one of the real good things about the boomers.
HG:
[inaudible]
SM:
What role, if any, does activism in the boomer generation penetrate into the lives of their children, Generation X?
HG:
I do not know if I can answer that. I do not have children.
SM:
I put that question in there because it is a biased question on my part, even though it is supposed to be fair here. I do not see a whole lot of activism amongst today's college students, except I see a tremendous amount of volunteerism. 85 percent of our students today and nation are involved and volunteer, which means they care about others. But in some sense, they feel somewhat lack of empowerment, because they do not vote. All the time, low numbers in terms of college students and young people. I think 18 to 24-year-old who vote, it just like amazes me. And of course we know from the data how they feel about elected leaders and their distaste for politics and wanting to become involved in politics. It is like what, between 15 percent and 17 percent in some of the entering classes, last two years amongst entering freshmen in higher education. Their interest in politics is way-way down, yet their interest in volunteerism is way-way up. So I am just trying to see what the perceptions are of those individuals who may work with them or have kids and so forth. Just again, let me repeat this, even though it may seem repetitive, do you think it is possible to heal within a generation where differences and positions taken were so extreme? Is it important to try to assist in this healing process? Should we care? And is it feasible? And the premise of this question goes back again to the many trips that I have taken to The Wall in Washington over the last five years basically. And I have been to several ceremonies with veterans in the audience and commentary like, they hate Bill Clinton. They hate Jane Fonda. They hate those who protested the war and never gave veterans a royal welcome on the return of the mainland. The Wall has helped in a magnificent way, but the hate seems to remain for those on the other side, should have never be made to assist in this healing beyond The Wall. Your thoughts? Are you optimistic or pessimistic? And again, maybe I am just seeing a very small group of people that always come to The Wall every year during those ceremonies.
HG:
Well, I mean, I have been to The Wall, I have been to the ceremonies down in the Philadelphia Memorial and I have talked to 1000s of veterans. I would say at this point in time, there was a clear minority who have not been able to come home from Vietnam and continue to identify with some kind of Vietnam dynamic as opposed to, I am a Vietnam veteran, I was there, but it was not something I tell people about myself. It is not something I think about or remember. I got too many other things that are more here and now and I have a whole other identity. And this is one part. And I think that is where the majority of Vietnam veterans are today. I think we can heal a lot of veterans and a lot of people that did not go ahead and hard feelings 20, 25, 30 years ago.
SM:
Do you have any [inaudible] people you have gotten to know who regret that they did not go? There is a guilt complex? [inaudible]
HG:
Well, there was a couple of people that wrote famous articles in the early (19)80s. It was almost getting to the point where it was in to be a Vietnam veteran, but it did not, and it has not, I do not think it ever will be. I felt the same way for them that I felt for McNamara, you have got your burdens to bear from the Vietnam era and I have got mine. I feel like everybody's a Vietnam veteran who lived through that period in America.
SM:
Even those who did not go?
HG:
Yeah, Women, mothers that sent their sons off. We all went through that period. We all suffered through that and watched it unfold and were upset by it.
SM:
Historian sociologists will say there has been two real traumatic experiences in American history that have come close to tearing the nation apart. Of course, most people will agree that you cannot really put the Civil War on the same scale as the Vietnam War, but it is close. Because when you look at what was happening here at home and the breakdown of the college campuses, the shutting down of college campuses in the cities and the protests in Washington and all over the country, and the divisions were there. I mean, it was just like, you cut it with a cake, when you are in the room with someone who was against you or for you. And there was not a whole lot of listening either between those who were for or against. Not just that issue, but there were a lot of other issues too. So those were tough times. Bear with me, I have just got a few more questions and we are done. Again, this is getting back, it sounds like a little repetitive here. Do you think we will ever have the trust for elect leaders again after the debacle of Vietnam and Watergate? If boomers’ distrust, what effect is this having on the current generation of youth? I think we have covered that in an earlier question. How did the youth of the (19)60s and early (19)70s change your life and attitudes toward that and future generations?
HG:
My experiences in the (19)60s, (19)70s?
SM:
Just overall, how did the young people of that era, of the (19)60s and early (19)70s, because when you think of the (19)60s, people will really say that the (19)60s is really (19)65 to (19)73, (19)72, (19)73 ish, that juncture. Then it goes into the (19)70s, which is the me decade and all this other stuff. So how did that change your life, the attitudes and all those things you were witnessing and seeing? Certainly the young man who went, before you went over, was different than the young man that came back.
HG:
I do not know how much of an impact on me because at that point I was trying to physically and mentally and emotionally find out who I was, now that I was different, I was very different. And I was in and out of the hospital most of that period. Well, from the end of (19)68 through (19)73 or (19)74, at a military hospital, [inaudible], I was very protected and insulated against a lot of this.
SM:
Were you were injured on the front lines during the war? Were you in the Army or the Marine Team Corps? Did you step in a booby trap or you were-
HG:
The guy in front of me did. Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I was no longer in the service. I was retired, but I was in the hospital having reconstructive surgery done for most of that time, and everybody around me was in uniforms. And so it did not have as much reality for me as, I guess if I would have been home living there seven days a week, 24 hours a day.
SM:
There is a brand-new book out right now called Quarantine Diary. Have you heard of it? There was a documentary on it. It was written by Jack Reid who was a Vietnam veteran from Texas. And it is a story about, well, there was an encampment that was overrun by the American soldiers and North Vietnamese army. And he took one of these little diaries and he thought it was from a dead Vietnam veteran. And he kept that in his backpack at his home for over 20 years after he came back from Vietnam. He served there, I think (19)68, (19)69, thought the guy was dead. And finally he had a hard time healing and was having a hard time, and so he decided, somebody encouraged him to try to find the family in Vietnam of this dead soldier.
HG:
Actually, the Vietnam Veterans of America has a whole program now to try and return kind of personal memorabilia like this, to get it back to survivors of these soldiers in Vietnam. It might have been in that program that he got some encouragement.
SM:
Well, actually the guy was still alive. It was a mistake. But the thing what came out in this book was that there was a concern that he brought forth, and that is that many of the Vietnam veterans went over there and saw their buddies get killed and they just wanted to kill Charlie, and they would go into a village and sometimes kill others. And so there was a sense of, it was not premeditated, but it was like a vengeance, I want to get back at the person who killed my friend. And thus he tried to bring over the fact that when he came back to America, he did not know what kind of an impact this had on him in terms of when he saw violence happen or someone was killed. He had no sensitivity. There was no sensitivity toward it because he had seen it all in Vietnam and seen people killed, kids killed, older people killed and so forth. And what he was before he went over there and what he was when he came back again, was a totally different person. And he was very concerned that when he saw tragedies on television and death and murder in America, that did not ring, it did not really strike him as anything out of the ordinary because he had witnessed it all in Vietnam as a different person. In fact, he would kill himself and things he never told his parents about. And I guess the question I am getting at here is, this is not a condemnation of Vietnam veterans. It is basically looking at the warrior and all warriors in all wars, that when they come back and they see violence, and of course the media portrays it on television all the time too, the violence, we were no longer sensitive toward it anymore. It is just an everyday happening. And I guess a question I want to ask also to you, as a result of the boomer generation in World War II, we did not see these things. There were not films taken of dead people, but during this era there was. And then of course it is documented much more in the stories too, of Vietnam veterans. That is this another quality of the boomer generations that is different than others, is this accepting violence as an everyday happening? Even not only those who went but those who saw it on television. "Oh, that is just part of being a part of a living human being." And so then this had transferred on to young people.
HG:
Well, I see much more of that today, where you turn on the local news and somebody has probably been murdered or run over and that is what they put on. And they show the body or the blood trail or the pool of blood or the spent casings in the drive-by shooting. That is happening today. I still remember things were not that gory on evening news and during the Vietnam era, at least they were not on CBS.
SM:
It did show that one scene where the South Vietnam soldiers shot that one, that was [inaudible] and you saw the young girl running down the road burned.
HG:
Yeah, those were the exceptions. That is why they became timeless.
SM:
One of the best history books ever written on the growing up years for the boomers, say in 25 to 50 years from now, and I was a history major, political science, and they say the best books of any period are 50 years afterwards. The best books in the World War II are now, really good books. Stephen Ambrose, really good books. What will be the overall evaluation of boomers? I talked to you about the lot of Left leaders are condemning their whole backgrounds, like Horowitz and the destructive generation. There is a lot of good books, like Lewis Puller talking about one of the best books ever written. He deserved the Pulitzer. What a writer. He should not have killed himself. He had such a skill in writing, that is why he was hired at George Mason University to teach writing to young people, because he knew how to write. What do you think historians, how will they write about this period, the (19)60s and early (19)70s in 25 years when it is that 50-year period? How would you project they will look at this whole era and the young people that came out of this era?
HG:
Well, I think they will identify it as a period of questioning the status quo, large numbers of the generation.
SM:
And that they say that it is an identity of a group that questioned the status quo. What was the impact? The concept that the boomers feel empowered and why do not Generation X, the children feel that way of boomers? That is amazing. When you had these people who felt empowered and yet their kids do not, not all, there is some that probably do, but not as empowered as their parents.
HG:
I do not know.
SM:
It is something you cannot quite answer, huh?
HG:
NO, it is too bad, if our legacy is that our children become passive and introverted and are focused on only themselves and their own needs.
SM:
Final question here, is the youth of that era believed they could have an impact on society, government policy. The (19)60s and early (19)70s is the Vietnam War policy, the draft, civil rights legislation, non-violent protests via Dr. King and the multiple movements that I have already described. In other words, that concept of empowerment, which is a term we use in higher education today. We want young people to know that they are at this university, they are empowered. They say, "What? I am only a young person of 18. What do you mean I am empowered?" Well, we are here at your leisure. And so you get involved in things and you give them a sense of empower. Why is society today resisting this today? And why, in your own words, do the sons and daughters of boomers feel less confident about their ability to have an impact on society and oftentimes less desire and seemingly less opportunity? This is just a concept that I have and I am trying to find out here. Am I wrong in assuming this in the question?
HG:
No, I do not think you are wrong in assuming it.
SM:
Do you have any answers, any more commentary on that or-
HG:
No, I think my brain is fried. I mean, we use empowerment in the healing professions. The idea is to empower. I mean, I believe it is much better to teach somebody to fish than to give them a fish if they are hungry. To not do for them as much as to teach them to do for themselves. That is where the real payoff is for them and society.
SM:
I think we are almost done here and we are down to the last thing here, but I want to follow up. Since you are a person who is a professional psychologist, what are the most important qualities for healing? When you talk about just a general concept of healing, especially if you were around a group of Vietnam veterans who was at The Wall and you kept overhearing this commentary, of course you would not butt in, but if you were in a room with them and had an opportunity to talk to them, what would you tell them in terms of-
HG:
Well, I would say that healing is a process, not an event. It requires a willingness to be aware of yourself and your surroundings. It is an active process, not a passive process. And you need to find-
(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 Dr. Henry Franklin Graff
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/fef00cbff6579b4d66b7d49cbb60f1ec.jpg
370736aae2bfee75b91e7c7b173a3d5a
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/ad702399ce88deb7805e51d36c31f867.mp3
896f22a18c05296ccab313f2719ccf90
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
2010-04-23
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Peter Goldman
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
MicroCassette
Material Type
Sound
Interview Format
Video or Audio
Audio
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Columbia, Journalism, Baby boom generation, Racism, Bourgeoisie, Self Expression, War, Silent generation, Yippies, Brown v. Board of Education, Thurgood Marshall; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Black Panthers, Segregation, Liberals."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Columbia; Journalism; Baby boom generation; Racism; Bourgeoisie; Self Expression; War; Silent generation; Yippies; Brown v. Board of Education; Thurgood Marshall; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; Malcolm X; Black Panthers; Segregation; Liberals.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
187:25
Subject LCSH
Journalists; Goldman, Peter--Interviews
Biographical Text
Peter Goldman is an author, editor, and journalist. He was the national-affairs writer, senior editor, and team leader of a special-projects unit for <em>Newsweek</em> magazine. Goldman wrote over 120 cover stories on race, politics, Watergate, criminal justice and other aspects of American life. Goldman additionally generated a half-dozen books, including the best-selling <em>Charlie Company: What Vietnam Did to Us</em>, and won numerous awards for the magazine. Goldman has a Bachelor's degree in English Literature from Williams College and a Master's degree in Journalism from Columbia University.
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: Peter Goldman
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 23 April 2010
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:07):
Testing, one, two, three. Testing. Testing, one, two. Okay, good. I will keep double checking this to make sure this is working. Thanks again. Mr. Cohen, could you give me... Peter, I apologize. Could you give me a little bit about your background, where you came from originally, your parents, your college, your schooling, and how you chose journalism as a career?
PG (00:00:40):
Well, I will start with the last one first. I chose journalism as a career when I was probably eight years old and at the time wanted to be a sports writer at eight or nine, and just never changed. The sports part of it changed totally obviously, but I knew that is what I wanted to do. Ask me why, I do not know. But as a child, I was a reader and attempted to be a writer. I have the old-fashioned composition books with mottled-color covers and I would be writing all the time. My dad, when he was single, he came from St. Louis, had a graduate degree in economics, but he wanted to be a writer and so there may be a genetic connection there, and he actually had a fair start as a freelance. He sold some stuff to Mankins Old American-
SM (00:02:15):
Old American, yep.
PG (00:02:19):
Was talking to the New Yorker about writing a Wall Street letter for the New Yorker. But when he got serious about getting married and having kids, he decided that is not a stable life. At the time he was living in Greenwich Village, so he joined a stockbrokerage and was off to a hot shot start in that when the depression happened. He had a bumpy time for a while and wound up willy-nilly in the shoe business. He and my mother met in the '20s with both of them living at Greenwich Village. My mother had some talent as an artist that she never really attempted to pursue professionally. For a while during the depression, she was supporting the family working in the books department at Macy's. Department stores in those days actually had book departments, and rather good ones actually. They were pretty good bookstores. That was until my father found his way into the shoe business first as a retail manager then and other aspects sort of corporate side and then finally in his later years as a traveling salesman. Where am I from? That is a much more complicated question you want to know. I was born in Philadelphia. In between birth and my second year in high school, I lived in many places is the simple way to put it. If you want them all...
SM (00:04:44):
No, that is fine
.
PG (00:04:48):
We finally came to roost in the suburbs of St. Louis, which had been my father's hometown, and I went to high school there, went to Williams College.
SM (00:05:01):
Great school.
PG (00:05:04):
At the time, I was not especially happy there, but that is a whole another story.
SM (00:05:08):
Was James McGregor Burns there when you were there?
PG (00:05:10):
Yeah-yeah. They had a great faculty, a great teaching faculty actually. They put more stress on teaching than on publication. It was not a publish or perish school.
SM (00:05:26):
Right.
PG (00:05:26):
I was very happy with that part of it, but it was a school with a lot of problems. A lot of it was essentially ruled by fraternities. It had next to zero Black students that had a very clear quota of Jews, and if the fraternities had clauses and I saw one of them, it was standard for the fraternities. It is limited to white Americans of Christian persuasion, which meant the rest of us were outcasts. If you were one of the outcasts, you had a hard time with extracurricular stuff.
SM (00:06:31):
Now, what years were you there?
PG (00:06:33):
I was in the class of (19)54. I was there from (19)50 to (19)54. Then I went to Columbia Journalism School, which was a one-year graduate school program, and then I went back out to St. Louis, worked for seven years at the St. Louis Globe Democrat, which is now defunct. One of those years I spent at Harvard on a fellowship. Then (19)62 I got married to a New York newspaper woman. We met accidentally at a murder trial in Boston and courted for a year and got married in (19)61, moved to New York in (19)62, and I went to work for Newsweek at that point. Stayed at Newsweek on active duty for 25 years and have continued to do work for them ever since. Took early retirement in (19)88, but since then I have done work for them usually on presidential campaigns.
SM (00:08:04):
Obviously from all of your scholarship and your work and your writing from the book on Malcolm X to your book on the 12 young African American men-
PG (00:08:14):
[inaudible].
SM (00:08:15):
That project, certainly Vietnam veterans as they came back, of course many of them were treated poorly upon their return to America and some of your other early books that looked at the African American experience in the (19)40s, (19)50s and the (19)60s, can you say that maybe that experience of being at Williams College and seeing discrimination and exclusion really sparked something in you and then you wanted ... Well, how did your interest in African American issues develop?
PG (00:08:51):
It was another childhood phenomenon. When I was in grade school in New York, my last four years of grade school, I went to a private school that was progressive in both senses of the world. It was progressive educational philosophy, but also politically progressive. For a great school library, they had an amazing library, and I found my way to just willy-nilly to some books about the Black experience. The one that had the most powerful impact on me was Howard Fast's Freedom Road, a novel about the Reconstruction Era and the betrayal of the Reconstruction Era. It just had a huge impact on me. This is not right, this is not fair. The school was good background music for that because it was a recurring subject. As eighth graders, we got to write our own class play and it was about Jim Crow in the south and the part that everyone wanted and I did not get was the Black character, the Black protagonist. I got to play Senator Bilbo, who was the outrageous segregationist senator from Mississippi. Had to play him in short pants.
SM (00:11:04):
Oh my God.
PG (00:11:17):
Got laugh from some of the parents. So I really think that was the origin. My sister and I went around collecting signatures to allow Blacks into Major League Baseball. This was obviously before Jackie Robinson, that would have been (19)45, I guess. We got neighbors to sign petitions. So, it has been an issue with me essentially for all my whole entire life.
SM (00:11:58):
When you were doing that, was that just before Jackie went in, it was (19)47?
PG (00:12:04):
Jackie went to the Montreal Royals who were the Dodger farm team in (19)46. This was before that, it was (19)45. Our petitions had pictures of six Black ball players who would certainly have been qualified. Jackie Robinson was one of the pictures.
SM (00:12:30):
Probably Monte Irvin was in there and Larry Doby.
PG (00:12:33):
I do not remember the others. Satchel Paige was one.
(00:12:44):
So, it has been with me all my life, continued in high school. I continued to be fascinated by that, did a lot of reading. To me, the Williams experience was just an example of the unjust practice. You are in college for four years, you spend seven classes from the people who were seniors when you arrived to the people who were freshmen when you left, and I think during that whole time we had three Black Americans and one Black African, and two of the three Black Americans were essentially basketball mercenaries who flunked out in freshman year.
SM (00:13:49):
I have a lot of questions on Malcolm and some of your other books and your experiences, but the Boomer generation are those born between (19)46 and (19)64, and I have tried to make sure that I am inclusive here because someone early on in the interview process said they thought that Boomers were white men. That is the first perception they get. Then they said, well, maybe white women too. And I said, no. Other people say, when we talk about the 74 to 78 million Boomers, we're talking about all Boomers. Black.
PG (00:14:27):
It was one of the things I was going to raise with you.
SM (00:14:27):
Oh, yes.
PG (00:14:27):
If you had not raised it.
SM (00:14:27):
Oh no, because I want to make sure it is for everyone. That is why in all these different interviews when we talk about the break ... well, people used to go to church in the (19)50s and then church attendance went down and the African-American family was also fairly stable in the (19)50s and then in the (19)60s, the African-American family as well as many white families and the [inaudible] went up and all the other things. I am trying to connect everything here. It's for all groups, it is for Latinos, Native Americans, which I am trying to include here by getting different perspectives. The Asian American experience is very difficult because they were not in any anti-war activity and they were almost non-existent. So that is one group I am not sure if I am going to really be able to do well on. But what I am getting at here is when you think of that period between 1946 ... I break the periods for Boomer lives all 63 years now, Boomers are now 63 in the front-runner and the youngest is 46.
PG (00:15:32):
The Tea Party is the last Boomer movement.
SM (00:15:35):
Yeah. Well you may be right. I do not know what the average age is, but-
PG (00:15:44):
The average age ... The Times just did a full issue, which if you have not seen you ought to look at, which has a pretty good typology of the Boomers. I do not know if it was the average age or whether it was the location they used was 45 and up, but they are Boomers. The great majority of them are 45 and up, which would make everybody 45 and up as a Bloomer.
SM (00:16:23):
Did it say whether they were more conservative or more liberal?
PG (00:16:27):
Tea party people?
SM (00:16:28):
Yes.
PG (00:16:28):
Oh, much more conservative inherently. It is a conservative movement, got strands of racism, but I do not think that is the driving force. It is kind of a classic revolt of the petit bourgeoisie I think. It is the angry. They are economically better situated than the average.
SM (00:17:10):
They are the haves more than the have-nots.
PG (00:17:11):
They are more the haves than the have-not. They are the have-some, I would think.
SM (00:17:18):
I have not kind of pinpointed it. Do you feel also that they are more against those Boomers who were protesting in the (19)60s? That group, I do not know, do they shun them?
PG (00:17:32):
I have not seen data on that, but I doubt that they would have anything in common. It is interesting that the Tea Party movement does not seem to have violent feelings on the so-called social issues, which were the culture war, which has been typical of our slightly earlier past. The [inaudible] and standing in front of Republican conventions anywhere in the middle of a culture war. These people seem to be more Ross Perot rebels. Anti-government, anti-tax, anti- deficit. As I say, I think there is a strain of anger that we have got a Black president, but I do not think that is the central of that.
SM (00:18:35):
I have noticed that if you watch Mike Huckabee, oftentimes he takes shots of the (19)60s a lot. Of course, Glenn Beck does too, but I do not put them in the same category. I know that when Hillary Clinton was running for President, John McCain liked to make some comments about her, even though they are friends, that she is from the (19)60s and those kinds of comments. We all know what Newt Gingrich said when he came into power in (19)94, he made some commentaries about that era even though he is a Boomer, and certainly George Will oftentimes in his books will have a little segment about that period. Even Barney Frank, who I am a big fan of, we brought students to him, he even wrote in "Speaking Frankly," a book that came out in the (19)90s that the Democratic Party had to get away from the anti-war, those movement types and the George McGovern types, if the party was going to survive. And he is a Democrat.
PG (00:19:36):
Yeah. Well, I mean, my own feelings about the Boomer politics of the (19)60s are somewhat mixed. I think the most consequential Boomer movement was Black rather than white. The civil rights movement, when it really exploded in the (19)60s, starting with the sit-ins and the Freedom Rides, that was young, Black baby boomers, college students and people slightly older than college age. To me, it was a more mature movement than some of the later whiter movements. More politically mature, accomplished more, and generally stirred the country I think. It made it impossible to be overtly racist. That did not happen overnight, but we have evolved to a point now where in polling, it is impossible to measure racism because everyone who's polled knows there are certain things you do not say.
SM (00:21:39):
It is subtle of everything.
PG (00:21:40):
Yeah, yeah. It did not make racism impossible, but it drove it underground. They had political successes, like the Civil Rights Acts of 1964, 1960, the Voting Rights Act of (19)65, the engagement of the federal government, the war on poverty. So, I think that of all the movements, that is the one I most admire. The anti-war movement, I completely sympathized with it, but I do not think it was a mature political movement. I think in fact that the Boomers who were of fighting age really split in two directions. Boomers fought the war, young Boomers. Boomers opposed the war. The Boomers who opposed the war, I think were what we classically think of in an oversimplified way as who the Boomers were, privileged kids from suburban backgrounds, college-educated and deeply into self-expression and deeply against fighting the war. I am a member of the Silent Generation. I was in college when the Korean War was happening. There was no movement against the Korean War. There were a lot of reasons for that. The Korean War was in the penumbra of war, it happened five years after World War II. World War II united the country almost wholly, about as close to wholly as you can get. In the penumbra of that, people did not question wars. If the country called, you served. But we were not Boomers. We were the Silent Generation and we just shut up.
SM (00:24:53):
We’re not The Beats part of that though? We’re not the beats part of the silent?
PG (00:24:57):
Yeah, certainly in age terms. When I was in college, I was enamored of The Beats. Yeah, yeah, yeah. That I was must reading for me. Kerouac, Chandler Broussard, Ginsburg. Yeah.
SM (00:25:19):
Pearl Kennedy.
PG (00:25:19):
Yeah, Pearl Kennedy. I was an English major and was very much taken with them. Part of the reason I was taken was because the degree to which they were white writers, but they intersected with the Black culture and adopted some of its language, some of its style. But I think the Black movement, the Black boomers very strongly influenced the style of all the subsequent movements, including the anti-war movement, the women's liberation movement, which consciously adopted the Black style of protest, the music, the march, the demonstration as an expression. I think the American Indian movement, about which I am not very well educated, but I think they borrowed heavily from the Blacks. So, to me that was the most con-, and it is not just because of my particular affection for Black America, I think it was the most consequential Boomer movement.
SM (00:27:12):
I think the gay and lesbian movement also took a lot from the civil rights movement.
PG (00:27:17):
Yeah, definitely. Yeah.
SM (00:27:18):
And even the Chicano movement, although the Young Lords tried to copy in Philadelphia the Black Panthers.
PG (00:27:27):
Yeah-yeah.
SM (00:27:27):
Now, when we are about the Boomers now, we are talking-
PG (00:27:32):
Just parenthetically, it is movements like the Young Lords, the Black Panthers, the Black P. Stone Rangers, that to me is not mature politics. The SDS to me is not mature politics. What do you accomplish if you blow up a ROTC building? What do you accomplish if you blow yourselves up in a townhouse in Greenwich Village? What did the Symbionese Liberation Army accomplish? Politics to me ought to have a reasonable prospect of gain or chance of gain or a realistic assessment of the possibility of gain for the common good. It should not be just self-expression. Abby Hoffman smoking dope and wearing an afro is to me, not-
SM (00:28:50):
I mean that is the hippies.
PG (00:28:53):
Yeah-yeah, yeah.
SM (00:28:54):
I have been interviewing some of them, so...
PG (00:28:56):
Yeah. Good. No, they belong in this project.
SM (00:29:01):
The Hippies and Yippies. I always have to check this to make sure. It is a crazy tape player. What is fascinating me, because actually, this particular area is the greatest interest in my life because I had an African-American professor at Ohio State University, Dr. Johnson. I was there in 1971, (19)72, and all these things were happening, and African American issues have always been very important to me. I did internships in prisons for prison inmates. I have spent my whole life really caring about this issue. Man, monumental. We had Dr. King celebrations every year for 33 years, wherever I worked to honor him. We have had a tribute to Bayard Rustin, and we have had a tribute to Jackie Robinson, but what I am getting at here is, what's interesting is if you look at the Brown versus Board of Education, I would like your comments on this, Thurgood Marshall, Jack Greenberg, they were the types that, it was more of a gradualist approach, and Dr. King was challenging. He loved them, but he was more, "I want it now. I do not want to wait."
PG (00:30:16):
The fierce urgency of now, which Obama used this quote.
SM (00:30:20):
So, he wanted it now, and I know some of the big four, not even as much as Dr. King, but then you have Stokely Carmichael challenging Dr. King, basically saying, "Your time has passed." Even Malcolm debating Bayard Rustin, I believe in (19)64, telling him, "Your time has passed." So more Black power type of a-
PG (00:30:45):
They debated each other several times. I saw Malcolm debate several people, and I think the only one who held his own required Bayard Rustin. Rustin was really good. It's very tough to debate Malcolm X, who first of all is very gifted at argument and second of all, the case for the prosecution is a whole lot easier given the history of race in America is a whole lot easier. The prosecution case is a whole lot easier to make than the ... Rustin was not arguing the defense, but he was arguing the defense of a strategy of one step at a time. Malcolm was arguing for essentially millennial strategy, give us [inaudible]. At the time he debated Rustin was before his conversion to traditional Islam.
SM (00:31:53):
Obviously, Malcolm died in (19)65. He was 39, just like Dr. King. I find that ironic. The irony that they both died at 39, both at the hands of a gun.
PG (00:32:02):
Yeah.
SM (00:32:02):
That they both died at 39, both at the hands of a gun. But do you feel that Malcolm was the inspiration for the Black Panthers and people like that? Because when you listen to Stokely Carmichael, or H. Rap Brown, or Eldridge Cleaver, Kathleen Cleaver, Dave Hilliard, that whole ... Huey Newton. I mean they were, Kent State's having their 40th remembrance ceremony, Bobby Seale's going to be there. There was a link between Black Panthers and SDS, and before, the Weathermen. Just your thoughts on those personalities, and Bobby Seale too. They were personalities. [inaudible] they were serious.
PG (00:32:49):
Yeah. There is an arc that was happening here, starting in Montgomery in the middle (19)50s, through the demonstrations led by King, not only by King, but king is the sort of cover boy of the movement. There were a lot of people that I regarded [inaudible]. He was the most prominent one. Which, and the first incarnation of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, which began as kids sitting in lunch counters. Its early members were, a lot of them were students studying for the ministry, believed in the doctrine of nonviolence. Believed, not in integration, but in desegregation. And I think sometimes movements get hung up on semantic difficulties, but I think that is, that it really is a difference. Integration meaning it is better for Black people to be in the company of white people. Desegregation means you cannot legally, that separate but equal is not viable. And the SNCC kids were younger, more radical than the people of King's generation. King, some of the field workers in King's organization, the Southern Christian Leader Leadership Conference, were also young and radical and being radicalized by the movement. Same with CORE, Congress on Racial Equality, which I had been a member of in the (19)50s. Did a couple of sit-ins before they were called sit-ins.
SM (00:35:31):
Were you with. James Farmer at all or?
PG (00:35:33):
I never, I was in St. Louis and it was during summers in my college years. I knew the local leadership.
SM (00:35:44):
Right.
PG (00:35:45):
Farmer was a distant and lofty figure. I did not meet him at ... I met him years later.
SM (00:35:53):
I knew when Roy Innis replaced him, or Bruce Wade McKissick, I believe.
PG (00:35:57):
McKissick.
SM (00:35:59):
And then after McKissick, Roy Innis.
PG (00:36:00):
Yeah.
SM (00:36:00):
Oh my God, it is not even in the same league.
PG (00:36:07):
But I think there was, even as the, even while the so-called mainstream civil rights movement seemed to be making progress, engaging the Kennedys, sort of. The Kennedys were quite timid, but Jack was obliged to say finally, for the first time by any president, this is a moral question. Lyndon embraced it wholeheartedly. So, they did what King urged them to do, which was to catch the conscience of the nation, and by doing that, make it politically impossible, make themselves a politically irresistible force to the people in real power. That worked. But a couple of things were going on. One was the increasing discovery, particularly among the younger movement people, that this all had to do with segregation in the south, that the real problems were much more difficult. The problems in the north, which was widely supposed by liberals, by white liberals to be the promised land, was not really the promised land. It had different forms of segregation, and they were not written into law. But housing segregation, which in turn led to school segregation and prejudices not much different from what you found in Alabama or Mississippi. They were just quieter. So, there were, with that discovery, that the relevance of what the mainstream movement had been doing was beginning to seem less important. And second was there was a, the doctrine of nonviolence began being called into question by people in the movement. Because there were too many funerals, was the way the young field workers in the movement expressed it, "I have been to too many funerals." And the doctrine of the non-violent movement was that you cannot defend yourself, or so it seemed to be. Malcolm arrives as a public figure in the early (19)60s. He becomes visible first, I think, on a program, TV program called The Hate That Hate Produced. I am not sure of the date. I think it may have been 1959, in fact, that looked at the Muslim movement, the Nation of Islam, with considerable horror. And Malcolm was one of the people, I think Mike Wallace [inaudible], I think he did. And Malcolm was an extremely, as you know, an extremely articulate spokesman for that point of view. And Malcolm's level of political sophistication even at that point was rising. He was straining against the bounds of the teachings of the Nation of Islam in this matter. Elijah Muhammad, his preaching was getting to be more speechifying and more politicized. So, by late 1963, he is still a member of the Nation of Islam, but he did, one of his most famous speeches was called Message to the Grassroots, and it is wholly politicized, and it is wholly a critique of white America and of the non-violent movement. And he often forgets to attribute the teachings to the ... He had ritually, practically every sentence, in his past, he had, practically every sentence would begin, "The honorable Elijah Muhammad teaches us," such and such. In Message to the Grassroots, we do not hear much about the honorable Elijah Muhammad. So he was on, no matter what the cause, we know why he was first sort of suspended, then sort of shut down entirely and why he broke. But I think he was destined to break anyway because he was on this arc. As he gets on this arc, he begins to influence local ... This is way too much detail for you.
SM (00:42:35):
This is important because he was a major influence.
PG (00:42:39):
He begins to influence first the more militant local leaders in, people who were leaders in Cambridge, Maryland, for instance, Gloria Richardson, a number of others around the country. And in fact, the Message to the Grassroots was at a conference they had put together, and he spoke there. They called it the Conference on Grassroots something or other. So that is his first audience outside the orbit he had been in. And then he begins influencing the younger SNCC people, and SNCC is beginning to come apart at the seams, the people who were committed to something like the King doctrine, non-violent direct action-
SM (00:43:52):
The John Lewis types, yeah.
PG (00:43:53):
The John Lewis-
SM (00:43:53):
Julian Bond.
PG (00:43:55):
Julian Bond, yeah. Another good example. And they're moving toward Stokely, and Rap, and Willie Ricks, who was, a field worker, who was probably the first person to utter the slogan "Black Power."
SM (00:44:16):
Oh wow.
PG (00:44:17):
On the Meredith March, which would have been, was that (19)65?
SM (00:44:23):
Wow.
PG (00:44:24):
I am a little rusty on my dates. And that became the battle cry of the younger, cutting-edge movement. That, there was a direct influence of Malcolm X on those guys, the Stokely and the Raps and the SNCC workers particularly. And from SNCC it spreads into CORE. So, CORE, which had been called to Congress on Racial Equality, began kicking out its white members. SNCC kicked out its few white members. And King is moving more toward different issues, to the annoyance of the, what you might call the right wing of the civil rights movement, the Urban League, the NAACP. He begins talking about the war and about and about economic as against purely color problems. So, what we are seeing in that period is a radicalization, we are seeing ripples in a pond flowing out.
SM (00:46:09):
Right.
PG (00:46:13):
And it was affecting everybody, including King, who in the general public impression was the teacher of peace and nonviolence.
SM (00:46:33):
Even on college campuses in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, there was the split. And...
PG (00:46:38):
That is my experience.
SM (00:46:48):
Yeah, a couple times the [inaudible] came off today, even before, on the other side, I do not know why. But around that timeframe, many African American students were instructed to not protest the war anymore, you need to concentrate strips solely on issues of African Americans. And that is when they had big afros on college campuses and the real tensions when there were separatism, particularly in (19)71 and (19)72. I taught at Ohio State, and you cannot find, except for one picture of one African-American student at Kent State.
PG (00:47:23):
Yeah.
SM (00:47:24):
They were told to stay away, and "Your cause is not Vietnam. It's African American issues." So, this might be a continuation of it.
PG (00:47:34):
Yeah, I thought that the, actually, I think the style piece of that happened as part of the Black Power movement. The afros, Black is Beautiful, which to me was a crucial development. The idea that Black is Beautiful. Malcolm taught that the worst crime the white man ever committed against us was teaching us that we were inferior. And we believed, and that was the demoralization of the race, which limited its possibilities, that it had...
SM (00:48:40):
Right.
PG (00:48:41):
Great and potentially glorious possibilities. But that if you wake up in the morning and look at yourself in the mirror, and you have accepted white standards of beauty among all the other white standards, that you're, it's not healthy mentally. So, I think the Block is Beautiful business was-was more than just a slogan, and I think the afros were more than just a style. It was an assertion Block is beautiful.
SM (00:49:28):
I know at Ohio State it was intimidation too, because you could sense it. And I was not really involved in this at Ohio State as a grad student. I will tell you a little bit more about it after the interview, because there is this thing I want to tell you about what happened at the Ohio Union, which is kind of historically, Glen Llewellyn was then the director. When you look at that, what does it mean, By Any Means Necessary?? Is that the call to violence? Is that the call to say that non-violence will not work anymore, so pick up a gun. If the cops are going to do something else, we're going to do something to them?
PG (00:50:11):
Malcolm, I think when Malcolm used it, it was meant to be mysterious. It was meant to be suggestive. Watch out for us. And it was not, he never, to my knowledge, preached aggressive violence. But he believed very strongly in arming yourself for self-defense. But he kept an ambiguity that was partly ... He was very politically, he was very gifted of political rhetoric, but he was also under legal advice to sort of watch it. The Smith Act was still in force, he could be tossed in the slammer for advocating the overthrow of the government by force of violence.
SM (00:51:23):
I have been looking, in preparation for this interview, looking at some of the tapes on YouTube of Malcolm. And I find that, and also, I found this with Abby Hoffman, the people that may not have liked his politics, but they liked him personally. I get a sense from Malcolm X and from Abby Hoffman, I do not like Jerry Rubin, but people liked him. If you got to know them, when Abby Hoffman was in jail, they did not like the other members of the Chicago Eight, but they liked him, because he was funny, he had a sense of humor, and they liked talking to him. With Malcolm, the tape that I really liked was when he spoke over in England, I guess at Cambridge or Oxford.
PG (00:52:09):
Oh, the Oxford Union, the [inaudible].
SM (00:52:10):
Yeah, that was, with Bill Buckley or whatever. I wish I could see that whole debate. But I think the students, boy, they were really listening, paying respect. But he had a sense of humor that was amazing, and how could you dislike him? And I am just seeing this from afar. And the other one I like, he responds to, he was being interviewed on a television show, it is actually in color, and they're asking him, "I would like to know your last name." It was Malcolm X. There is one on YouTube, and he tried to explain to him, "I do not have a last name."
PG (00:52:50):
Yeah, actually he did. It was Shabazz by that time. But he-
SM (00:52:54):
Yeah.
PG (00:52:57):
The doctrine of the Nation of Islam was, his name was Malcolm Little, and the doctrine of the Nation of Islam was what you think is your last name is actually your slave name, it was the name of your slaveowner. Which is historically accurate, in most cases.
SM (00:53:16):
You we're going to get into some Vietnam veteran issues here, but I think I already had your feelings on the Black Panthers and Black Power. I would like your thoughts on the 1968 Olympics with Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised their fist. We have had Tommy on our campus and he said, "I was never into the Black Panthers."
PG (00:53:37):
Yeah.
SM (00:53:37):
It was about black power. The second one was the 1969 takeover of the Cornell Union, remember, with the guns, and I think Harry Edwards was the advisor on that at the time. Those are major events. Some other ones, Freedom Summer in. (19)64, Fannie Lou Hamer, [inaudible]-
PG (00:54:00):
Which was not really called Freedom Summer by the sponsors, it was-
SM (00:54:05):
What was it called?
PG (00:54:06):
The Mississippi Summit.
SM (00:54:07):
Oh wow.
PG (00:54:09):
Freedom Summer was the name of a book by a white woman student, Sally Belford, who wrote her story of her experience.
SM (00:54:18):
Yeah, I think I-
PG (00:54:18):
It is quite a good book.
SM (00:54:24):
...I have that book. Then of course, the sexism that was often in the civil rights movement, where women were second class citizens.
PG (00:54:31):
Yeah.
SM (00:54:31):
These are just some of the things that were happening to boomer African-American women in that timeframe. And I know Dr. King, if he were alive today, would be very sensitive about this, really. But just your thoughts on that, those things. The Olympics first in (19)68, I do not know if that had any impact on you at all, or was...
PG (00:55:01):
Not a large impact. I thought it was a gesture, it was fine with me. Again, I tend to separate politics that ... meaningful politics from the politics of gesture. I think that was the politics of gesture. They were entitled to do it, it was an act of free speech and a gesture. I just, I do not think it helped anything, but, except a segment of Black America responded positively to it. But I do not think it advanced the ball anywhere. The Harry Edwards thing, I did not really think about at the time. You mentioned the women in the movement being the second-class citizens. So that was a very real problem. And what I want to just dial back to, we have talked about the transition to Black Power and purging the young militant movement of white people. There was a guy named Bob Moses who was in the early SNCC. I mean, wonderful, bright, educated, just almost saintly guy. Was not Stokely or Rap, he was not in that bag. In fact, it was almost the opposite. But he talked to me once about, white volunteers would come down to the south and would walk into a SNCC office, and there might be, in Mississippi, let us say, and there might be a young Black woman trying to type a document and really struggling with it, struggling with the process of typing it. And the tendency of, as Moses described it, the tendency of white kids, with the best of intentions, best of intentions, would be to say, "Let me help you with that. I can do it. I can do it faster. I studied typing," and moving the Black kids out of the way. And that had an impact. It did not send Bob Moses out into the street yelling, "Black power," but it was part of a cumulative impact of, over a fairly condensed period of time, a couple of years. It was part of the flow that led to the Black Power Movement.
SM (00:59:09):
When you think of that period, there has been a couple books, a lot of Jewish male and female students went south. I know David Hawk, who I interviewed, who was on the Mo Committee, the Moratorium. I know that, well, [inaudible], who was at Berkeley in the free speech movement, certainly Abby Hoffman. He went down there, and then of course they brought these, a lot of these ideas back to Berkeley and the free speech movement. Mario Savio actually was down there as well, in the summer. So, you saw this young people coming together. What I also liked about it was there were Catholic priests, there were Jewish rabbis, there were young people. And I know the relationship between Rabbi Heschel and Dr. King is something that needs to be pursued a lot more than it has. I think the relationship that those two men had with each other, and the criticism that they both received within their religious communities for their stands against the war in Vietnam are historic. And of course, he died young too. He looked like he was older, but he was not that old when he passed away, Rabbi Heschel. So that is the period, and that, boomers that were really influencing, and then a lot of them became part of the anti-war movement, and they went into the women's movement, and where all the other movements, there is a lot of links here, how important civil rights is to the boomer generation.
PG (01:00:50):
Oh yeah, no question about it. One of my ambivalences is that for some of the white kids who carried those influences back into various aspects of the struggle, there was a strain of wanting to be white Negro, so far as some of the [inaudible]. My view of the anti-war movement is perhaps heretical. I mean, I am glad they did it, I was rooting for them. I do not think it ... And that the war made it very difficult for Lyndon Johnson, literally difficult for him to leave the White House to go anywhere other than a military base in his last couple of years. Is that productive politics? I have mixed feelings about that. But I think the popular sentiment that ended the war was the sentiment of the families who were sending their kids to be cannon fodder. People in the anti-war movement were finding ways out. They were getting college exemptions, they were moving to Canada. They were hiding, they went underground. And so, I have always had a lingering question, it is not an issue, it is not a suspicion, but I have had a lingering question about the degree to which the motivation for a lot of what happened in the anti-war movement was self-preservation, not wanting to go to Vietnam and get trashed. The parents of the kids ... I wrote in the introduction to Charlie Company that the anthem that marked the turning point politically, that told us that the war was no longer sustainable, was not Give Peace a Chance, which was...
PG (01:04:02):
Give Peace a Chance, which was Anne and some of the student anti-war movement, the young anti-war movement. It was a Country song, Ruby, Do not Take Your Love to Town. A song by Mel Tillis. And it is the ballad of a quadriplegic veteran who's come home and his wife is straying, he's no longer sexually capable, and his wife is straying and he's stuck in bed and pleading with her not to go out and winding up saying, if I could move, I would get a gun and put her in the ground. That song, when it was first recorded, went nowhere. Two years later, it was number one on the Country Charts and high up on the National All Purpose Charts. That told me something very profound that Johnson and then Nixon had lost the faith of the people, of the people who had classically supported the war. That dear honor of-
SM (01:05:44):
I have seen ahead. A great movie.
PG (01:05:50):
Some of my friends objected to the closing scene in which they're gathered around the table and they start saying, God bless America. But that is unrealistic because look what it did to their family. I think it was exactly accurate. There are people who believe, a lot of people who believe that when your country calls you answer the call and you may die, your sons may die. But that that is part of being an American. And then when you lose those people, those tend to be working class people. People who really were not looking at much of the future beyond high school or maybe high school and community college or junior college. In the North, kids who were going to go to work for the auto plant or the steel mill, where their dads worked. In the South, where there's a strong military tradition. I think they are the people who entered the war and they did not have a movement. They were not out in the streets, but it was clear in polling that they were gone or that they were going. That that support was happening, made it impossible. I think it finally turned Nixon into Nixon, and probably Kissinger into, we got to find a way out of this thing with saving face. That we have got a weakness, is not supported. We cannot keep this going.
SM (01:08:10):
Some of the music of the (19)60s that really were the inspiration, obviously after Kent State, four dead in Ohio, which we will be hearing that in a week from now, a week from tomorrow, I will be there. And they will be playing that a lot because that was a very popular hit by Crosby, Stills, Nash & Young. And then you had Country Joe doing those songs that he wrote that are classic. And of course, she had John Lennon and his music. All we can say is Give Peace a Chance. And Bob Dylan and his music were anthems of the anti-war movement.
PG (01:08:50):
If God is on our side, He will stop the next war. And of course, there were anthems of the anti-war movement that I just do not think the, and I do not denigrate the contributions of the anti-war movement, but I do not think the anti-war movement ended the war. I think they helped, but I do not think they ended the war.
SM (01:09:20):
Do you feel it was when the people in middle America, Ohio, realized that their sons are coming home in caskets, they realize it's over? And while I cannot say it had a lot to do, the other two were white students killed on a college campus.
PG (01:09:47):
It is over because the kids are coming home in coffins or body bags or however they were coming home. And because there was very clearly no sign of progress, we went through a period between, I think the Tet Offensive, which militarily, a defeat for the other guys, the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese. Was a huge victory for them? A huge psychological victory. Huge. Had a devastating impact on the American national psyche and on the American war effort. In some months, or maybe a year later, maybe a year and a half, again I am rusty on the dates, we had My Lai. American troops massacre a village. You take those two and print those on the American public's psyche and you are in a... The old saying in politics is, when you have got a failing campaign, the dog food is purple and the dogs do not like it. And at that point I thought the dog food is purple and the dogs did not like it.
SM (01:11:35):
Charlie Company, they were 65 different young men who came home.
PG (01:11:44):
All of them did. We started with a roster of one company, which consisted of, I think it is somewhere around 160 soldiers. We found as many of them as we could. It was very difficult. Very, very difficult. We spent half a year just finding a workable, startup list of names, and with any contact information. Addresses, sometimes just a hometown.
SM (01:12:17):
Wow.
PG (01:12:23):
And they had fought in the (19)67, (19)68, (19)69 period, (19)68, (19)69 really, which was the period of America's maximum involvement. We had 560,000 troops there at the time. And we picked that particular company. We wanted a combat infantry company. I did not want any special, we wanted ordinary grunts. We did not want special forces. We did not want chopper pilots. We wanted just ordinary on the ground infantry grunts. We found our way to The Big Red One, has an alumni association. We have looked through their records, found one battle that sounded interesting to us. We wanted to get a collective account of one battle. We got a list of names of people who had served in that company, but with no contact information. The Army was only allowed to give us contact information for people who were still in the military, and I think only four of them were. So, we had to scratch and claw for half a year, as I say, and then another half year to do the, we had a team working on it, and to do the necessary interviewing. And for the magazine version we found 50 some, maybe 54, that included a couple or three who had been killed over there, and a couple who had died back home. And after we published the magazine version, we began to hear from other guys in the company and we checked them against our roster and they were legit. And so, for the book, I think we had 65 members, that is less than half the company. And one of the ironies was the battle that attracted us originally, none of them remembered. It was not that it was not that significant, but they told us about another battle that was significant, to the extent that any of those battle were significant. I mean, we were fighting over patches of real estate that nobody wanted. We would hold them for a few days and then leave.
SM (01:15:47):
And even Caputo, I interviewed him and he said, you read the Rumor of War, and even in (19)65 he started asking questions, what are we doing here? Because they are taking a hill. Then they have to go back and they would not lose as many people, but they would lose one. And then he lost his life and we just gave the hill up again. I mean, it was starting in (19)65 with the attitude, but (19)67 to (19)71 was the heyday.
PG (01:16:18):
Was the heyday.
SM (01:16:21):
These young men, did most of them feel they were discriminated against when they came home in terms of-
PG (01:16:26):
A lot of them.
SM (01:16:27):
A lot of them. Was it because of that image of My Lai, that Vietnam veterans were all baby killers? That kind of an attitude?
PG (01:16:37):
And it was not just My Lai, it was an unintended consequence of the anti-war movement, which was throwing around terms like baby killers.
(01:16:52):
Several of them told us when they were being flown home on commercial jets under contract to the government, they would get to the airport, duck into the first men's room they saw and change into civilian clothes. They did not want to walk through the airport in military clothes.
SM (01:17:24):
Is it true that at least some of them had a hard time getting a job, but also that some of your military organizations like Veterans of Foreign Wars did not even welcome them? In the beginning.
PG (01:17:41):
In the beginning, and I think that is one of the reasons for the formation of the Vietnam Veterans of America, or whatever the group is called, their own thing. I think the traditional, the VFW and the American Legion, caught onto and began welcoming them. But I think if you're a young guy and you have got people my age sitting with their caps on, that is not an environment that is going to make you feel real good.
SM (01:18:34):
I can remember affirmative action included Vietnam veterans at that time. Because I worked at Ohio University and they put Vietnam veterans in with African-Americans and Latinos. And because there was a feeling that they were certainly being discriminated against too. And of course, when the wall was built, everything changed. It went from being not popular to being popular to be a Vietnam vet. And everybody wanted to be one and people lied about being vets. And what's the thing that you learned the most about Vietnam from these 65 men. They were mostly probably middle or lower class in terms of economics.
PG (01:19:19):
I will tell you the main line would be working class. It was not everybody, but working class. For some of the Black guys it was a job opportunity where there were none. For some of the white guys, a lot of the white guys it was, well, I am waiting for my factory job, but I just got my draft notice. And ooh, that is what you do.
(01:20:00):
What I learned was that all the stereotypes of the Vietnam veterans were precisely that. They were stereotypes. They were empty stereotypes that what we found, 65 is a fairly good sample. It's not a statistic out of a commitment of a couple of million troops over the whole period of the war. And of all Vietnam era veterans it's not a very good sample. But I am a believer in journalism. And what we found was, what the stereotype was, was they come home, they're crazy, they shoot up their families, they drank too much. They do drugs. They cannot hold jobs. That was the stereotype. In some cases, that is what we found. In some cases, we found people who just resumed-
SM (01:21:34):
Life as normal.
PG (01:21:35):
Life as normal. We found a tendency among them not to want to talk about the war experience, even to their own families. A lot of them had wives. Did not talk to their wives about the war experience. One of our guys was interviewing a vet down in Texas at the vet's home. And they sat and talked just as we were sitting and talking. And my guy looked up and saw 90 percent hidden behind the door frame, the veteran's wife. And she had been eavesdropping. And when he left she said, he has never told me any of those things. I think that is been true in past wars as well, that it was very hard for veterans to talk to anyone except people who had shared the experience. But what we were astonished by was the degree to which they... We were the big-time national press and suddenly we were asking them. And we had a feeling that a lot of them, a lot of them, maybe a majority, were just waiting for someone to ask them. Not family, they did not want to talk to the wife or the kids or their parents, but they wanted the country to notice them, I think.
SM (01:23:48):
That is why the words, welcome home, is such an important. If you see a Vietnam veteran, I always say welcome home. Because even though it's been 35 years or whatever, that means something to him.
PG (01:24:00):
I agree.
SM (01:24:09):
You're a journalist and your career as a journalist is amazing in its own right. You talk a lot about Malcolm and African Americans and the civil rights experience and how important it was for the other movements as a model for the movements that followed in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s. We talked a little bit about the Vietnam veterans here. But I would like to talk a little bit about journalism and about newspapers and about magazines during that timeframe. Question I asked Richard Reeves, who I interviewed yesterday, we were about three hours on the phone, was the fact is between 1946, which is the time that rumors were born, and 2010, when was journalism at its finest and when was it at its worst? And I preface this by saying that two things. Number one, during the Vietnam War, even though it was a terrible war, it seemed like journalism was unbelievable because of the fact that journalists had total access to the war with Halberstam, Sheehan, Peter Arnette, Malcolm Brown, the names go on and on. Television, the reporters, they had access. The access that you did not see in other wars. And then of course you had the Pentagon Papers, which was very important. And the whole issue of Watergate and the coverage and then the whole situation with Woodward and Bernstein, investigative journalism to me, just as a person who's not a journalist, this seemed like a heyday. But I do not know when you look at journalism in the 1946 after the war to John Kennedy, was that a good period? Was it a good period from (19)60 to (19)70? When were the best periods during this timeframe?
PG (01:26:15):
Well, I always thought I walked into national journalism at the almost perfect moment. I started at Newsweek in (19)62, national affairs writer. They discovered that I was interested in civil rights. Civil rights was a burgeoning story. I had been there two months when they sent me to Ole Miss to cover and get shot at.
SM (01:27:00):
Wow.
PG (01:27:05):
And the civil rights movement was a monumental story for years. The Vietnam War and the anti-war movement was a monumental story for years. The other movements we have discussed, and Watergate, which became also my beat. I was not working as an investigative reporter. We did not really have a serious investigative capability and it certainly was not me. I am not good at sleuthing. But I wrote something like 35 cover stories on Watergate.
SM (01:28:04):
Wow.
PG (01:28:08):
And so that period in my life, from (19)62 to (19)74, that was the flowering of American journalism. Certainly, it was at Newsweek. It was when Newsweek engaged with those issues in a way that news magazines traditionally had never engaged with issues. We were doing journalism on Gaje, essentially on civil rights. The war, Watergate. Since I was working out in the provinces in the latter (19)50s, but I think beginning with probably the Montgomery bus boycott, well, probably beginning with Brown versus Board and the Montgomery bus boycott, we saw a flowering of journalism. I think journalism responded to those stories very, very well. So, it was not like the day I started at Newsweek was when the golden era of journalism. A lot of things were at play there. We had an editor at Newsweek who wanted to engage with those stories. A man of serious conscience with a very clear sense of right and wrong. Was not a liberal. He was like an old-fashioned-
SM (01:30:10):
What was his name again?
PG (01:30:12):
Oz Elliott. Osborn Elliott. O-S-B-O-R-N. Elliott with a double L and double T. He was a man of breeding, high church, but a man. He reminded me of the old Progressive Movement in the early part of the 19th century that if the good people would get together, we could fix everything. And I think that was a core belief for him. And it was a motivating thing for our engagement with the political and moral questions of the day. But I think there were other editors around similarly disposed. I think the issues made journalism better. The money situation made journalism better. In those days you could afford to cover stories and cover them really all out. For a big story we used to say, we're going to scramble the jets on this one. And we would scramble the jets. I wrote the Jack Kennedy assassination story, and I think I had files from maybe 15 to 18 correspondents. Similarly, with Nixon's resignation. And when you have money to throw at a story, you can really cover the socks off it. That does not much exist in the industry anymore. Everybody is shrinking.
SM (01:32:32):
And also, I will say this, people read. Magazines and papers. Because on my college campus, New York Times. Everybody was reading the paper. So, you knew that when you were writing a piece people were, and even the Binghamton Press, when I was at Binghamton, they were reading. And I remember Joseph Craft, you started to get his name. He wrote a lot of good articles and boy, I learned a lot from him. He was a good writer.
PG (01:33:03):
He was. Smart guy.
SM (01:33:07):
What are your thoughts on Daniel Ellsberg, The New York Times was involved in that.
PG (01:33:11):
And the Washington Post.
SM (01:33:11):
Right.
PG (01:33:15):
The Times, first.
SM (01:33:19):
There is a feeling today in journalism that... Here we go. Is this going? Yes. Very good. The audio. The computer will check it just to be on the safe place. I was just mentioning about the journalists, Woodward and Bernstein, and certainly Daniel Ellsberg. Your thoughts. Was he right in doing what he did?
PG (01:33:43):
I think so.
SM (01:33:46):
And then the relation. I did not know Neil Sheehan was somewhat linked to this. Because I am reading a book now by Harrison Salisbury where he talks about The New York Times and how he had approached The Times and so forth through that link. So, I am learning that as well. There is a movie out now. Any thoughts on Daniel Ellsberg? Because the Pentagon Papers were like...
PG (01:34:09):
It is not a story I covered, so I have no close information about it. I just was glad they did it. I think it was an act of great courage and it was a contributing factor to the end of the war, to the sense that this war never made any sense and we're losing it. So, I think my tendency is to honor him, but again, I was not closely involved in the Pentagon Papers.
SM (01:35:12):
The gentleman I mentioned who I interviewed a couple of weeks back, mentioned he thought you were a god because of what you did at Newsweek regarding gay and lesbian writers. And I am doing an interview with him about his book, 1968, and we're talking about Harvey Milk, and we're talking about a lot of the issues. Because I have interviewed a lot of gay and lesbian Americans for this book project. So, they are going to be well covered. But, obviously that was a very courageous stand to take. Could you explain now a little bit about, obviously it's very important to people who are gay and lesbian, but how important.
SM (01:36:03):
It is very important to people who are gay and lesbian, but how important, maybe the criticism you even had for doing it that the courage it took.
PG (01:36:09):
No. I felt it took zero courage. I think part of the gestalt, which Oz Elliot's reign lasted through the (19)60s, but the gestalt continued for a long while after that, and we were a magazine with conscience. I think one of our sins was that we did not notice that while we were writing, well, while we were taking sides essentially, in print with the Civil Rights Movement, with the Anti-War Movement, to a degree with the counterculture, which I was a little less happy with, we were working with a caste system, a gender caste system. The model for Newsweek was Time Magazine. Time was, I think, again, my dates are rusty, but it was seven or eight years older than Newsweek. Some of our senior leaders have, including Oz Elliot, came from Time. That caste system had been created a time where researchers actually were required to wear white gloves and they were really a serving class. The men were the writers and editors and the women were researchers, fact Checkers, clippers. Newsweek imitated many, many things about Time when Newsweek was born in (19)33, a date that is familiar to me because I wrote the 50th Anniversary Edition. I turned 50 about the same time as Newsweek did. The original model was Time and we did things the Times way and that endured. The Newsweek I walked into in (19)62 still had this caste system. The women were essentially an underclass and we were blind to it, all of us. In 1970, the women, all of whom had been schooled and they were children of the (19)60s, they were Boomer young women. They filed an equal opportunity complaint, hired a lawyer, Eleanor Holmes Norton. Now, a sort of member of Congress and essentially sued Newsweek. The reaction was interesting because Newsweek was not angry. It was sort of public humiliation because it obviously made all the papers and everything, but the management response was not angry. I think the management response was chagrin. How could we have been blind to this situation? It did not work wonders overnight, but one of their demands was that, "Since they have been kept in this box for so long, they wanted a course in Newsweek writing and reporting. They wanted classes." They asked for me and one other guy to teach those classes. I taught three, eight-week semesters. And a few of them actually turned out to be very good Newsweek journalists or got enough confidence in themselves to work outside the nest, for other magazines or freelancing and stuff. That was our big blind spot. I think gays and lesbians were not. Charlie may think I played some important role. I never thought of it.
SM (01:42:29):
He is very gifted in terms of his ability to write and his ability to think and to be very critical where criticism is due. So, he is not going to give a whole lot of praise, but he praised you.
PG (01:42:44):
Well, we are friends and have been for a long time. I honestly think he gives me too much credit. There was nothing brave about it.
SM (01:42:57):
Would you say that here we are again, Boomer Generation, we have been talking today a lot about African Americans, Boomers, and certainly women taken as a role modeling here. Can you also say that even what was happening at Newsweek or even Time, may have been happening at other newspapers and magazines around the country, that newspapers grew up due to these pressures of the Boomers, when in all these different movements?
PG (01:43:36):
I have only circumstantial evidence, but I think the circumstantial evidence is pretty good that they did. You began to see women with serious roles. My wife was an extremely gifted journalist, extremely gifted journalist. She worked for the New York Post when it was a good newspaper. It is very hard for someone seeing it now in the Murdoch Era to believe that. Back in its day, back in the (19)50s, (19)60s, even into the (19)70s, it was, in the (19)50s and (19)60s, if you were talking about what are the best written papers in America, the conversation would not have included the New York Times, would not have included the Washington Post, would not have included the LA Times, would not have included the St. Louis Post Dispatch, would not have included the Chicago Tribune. The conversation would have included the New York Herald Tribune and the New York Post. They had extremely gifted writing staffs. And one day, my wife Helen got a call. Helen Dudar, D-U-D-A-R, D as in-
SM (01:45:18):
It is in the book.
PG (01:45:19):
Yeah.
SM (01:45:19):
You had devoted, I think, one of your books to her. I think it was Malcolm.
PG (01:45:26):
Yeah. I also, when she was terminally ill, I compiled and self-published an anthology of her work. Did I just lose my train of thought?
SM (01:45:49):
Talking about newspapers and the New York Tribune and that.
PG (01:45:53):
The Herald Tribune and The Post, yeah. The editor of The Times called her one day, when she was still working at The Post, and he said, "I do not suppose we could tempt you into writing for our society page?" I will not quote her exact language because it would be like... But the short version was, "No."
SM (01:46:41):
It is really amazing. I worked at a medical school, I will not mention it, in Philadelphia for four years, the manager of activities, they did not have any women in medical school, and the first one started in 1965. Now they make up over half of the medical school. I am shocked. I heard about these stories in law school. I have heard all these. Now, there were obviously exceptions. Obviously, Phyllis Schlafly may have been an exception because she was a lawyer and she went through that timeframe.
PG (01:47:16):
There are always exceptions. But I think now the majority of students in all med schools are now women. When my wife was in the hospital with what turned out to be the terminal breast cancer-
SM (01:47:43):
That is what my mom had.
PG (01:47:44):
Yeah, it is pretty common. It is very sad, but common. We dealt a lot with the young woman resident who was running the service where my wife was hospitalized, and I liked her a lot. She was very straightforward. She leveled with me. There was no feel-good stuff, but there was sympathy without sugarcoating, which was very important to me. I told her, "How great it was, I was seeing more and more through my wife's illness, I was seeing more and more women in the profession on their way up." And she said, "Yeah, but it is still very tough in the prestige professions." Surgery, not so much, very tough for women to crack that. That is a fraternity. It's not universally, but it's pretty much a boy’s club. And I said, "Well, what about pediatrics? Everybody loves pediatricians." She said, "Yeah, we can, but it is not a prestige."
SM (01:49:24):
Everything is evolving and hopefully it continues to evolve.
PG (01:49:29):
I think that is an evolutionary stage, [inaudible].
SM (01:49:33):
Two of the questions I have asked every single person somewhat, is we have gone into just unique things that you have been involved in, is the issue of healing and the issue of trust. I have been prefacing the question on healing based on a group of students that I took to see Senator Edmond Musky in the middle (19)90s. We had a program where we took students to meet the leaders, small numbers of students. He had just gotten out of the hospital and Gaylord Nelson helped me to organize this. So, students, we put the questions together, and one of the questions they came up with is... They had seen all the divisions in 1968 and assassinations and the convention. And the question is, "Whether the Boomer Generation is going to go to their graves with lack of healing within their psyche?" And the reference was also made that it was a common knowledge that the Civil War generation went to their graves without healing. And you can see it at the Gettysburg Battlefield right now. I go five times a year over there to try to get a feel of war and everything. And the question was this, "Due to the tremendous divisions between those who supported the war, those who were against the war, those who supported the troops, those who were against the troops, those who between black and white, between male and female, between gay and straight, between, and then of course, they had threw in the burnings of the cities throughout the (19)60s, and the tremendous divisions, is that generation that experienced it when they were young, going to go to their graves with really very sad feelings of not healing, whether that is the activists who participated or the people who experienced these things? Do we have an issue with healing as Boomers age and pass?"
PG (01:51:47):
I think the important question is the generations that follow, will the Boomer experience affect future generations in a positive way? I think there is some fragmentary evidence that, that is happening. The Boomers... I am 77, I feel as if my life is defined. I have done some good stuff. I have done some not so good stuff. Healing is not an issue with me. I cannot read the minds of Boomers. I guess that some of them will be sad or disappointed that they did not change America. The problem with the revolutions is you never get to the Emerald City because it does not exist. I hope they go to their graves in some degree of peace about their lives and times. My guess is they are far enough past it now that they have got their old war stories, but at peace. The Boomers I know I do not think are particularly broody about it. But I just do not know. To me, again, the real question is did the Boomer Generation advance the ball politically and socially? Are we a better society or are we more just society? To me, I know that Tea Partiers say, "That a just society is a Communist slogan." But to me, it is not. To me it is a [inaudible] principal [inaudible]. I think if they even incrementally advanced the ball toward a just society or what became called the Beloved Committee, they have a right to go to their graves feeling okay about it themselves. But I do not know, I do not think it is an answerable question.
SM (01:55:00):
The wall has done a tremendous part in healing a lot of the Vietnam veterans and their families. Although, I have gone to the memorial every year on Memorial Day and Veterans Day since 1994, after I had met Lewis Puller who wrote Fortunate Son. There's still a lot of healing amongst the Vietnam veterans coming together in brotherhood is very important to them.
PG (01:55:26):
I still know some of them from Charlie Company. I am still in touch with very few of them. And that book is what, was published in the early (19)80s, so it is-
SM (01:55:40):
To Heal a Nation, by Jan Scruggs.
PG (01:55:43):
No, my book was, I think, published in 1980.
SM (01:55:48):
(19)85, I think, was not it?
PG (01:55:50):
No, it was not that.
SM (01:55:51):
Well, I got the date here.
PG (01:55:54):
It does not matter, but it is 25 or 30 years later, and I am still in touch with a few of the guys.
SM (01:56:05):
Scruggs wrote his book because he felt it was not only to heal of vets, but to heal a nation, that is why he wrote the book. The question I have asked myself at times and others, is whether it has healed the nation, whether the wall has done some part in healing the nation? But most importantly, as people have said, "Please define this question in a more clear way. It's really what you're saying, Steve, is Vietnam veterans and those who opposed the war, the anti-war people, and can they ever come together and hug and be friends and be accepted at the wall?" Whereas Bill Clinton, when he came there, some people were yelling at him, "As a coward," and everything. And certainly, people like McNamara and Jane Fonda and those types, there would be a war if they were ever there.
PG (01:56:59):
I tend to doubt that, that is going to happen, the hugs between the Jane Fonda's and the veterans who knew people on that wall, that ain't going to happen. Again, among other things, there remains a class difference between the anti-war people and the people who actually fought the war. It was interesting when I wrote Charlie Company, the wall was still just a plan, it was an architect's drawing. The veterans we interviewed, almost to a man, hated it, hated it, hated the design. When it happened, they fell in love with it. One guy I am in touch with in Oregon helped bring up a scaled down model of it, a traveling affordable model of it that he's been up and down the West Coast with.
SM (01:58:27):
We brought it to our campus. We had over 5, 500 people that came. I would say, maybe only about one third were students. I mean, it is just like they came out of the woodwork and they came at night. But no one was around. I stayed there for four days. I had three hours of sleep, I think, in those four days. Veterans had come in after midnight when no one was around. I was amazed. Musky responded by saying... He did not talk anything about (19)68 when we asked him the question. He said, "We have not healed since the Civil War," talking about race. That is what [inaudible]. The other one is, and again, as a political science major and history major, dissent and protest is very important. So not trusting your government is really we are taught that, that is good for a democracy. But the question is, was the Boomer Generation more than any other generation that just did not trust because their leaders had lied to them, whether it be the Gulf of Tonkin with President Johnson, whether it be Watergate with Richard Nixon, McNamara's lies about the numbers and the bodies? You can even go back to Eisenhower, and he lied on national television about the U2 incident with Gary Powers, he lied.
PG (01:59:51):
One of my quarrels with the Boomer Generation is that they did not do what needs to be done in a democratic order, which is get serious about creating an electoral movement. The marches and levitate the Pentagon and blowing each other up, that was all to me, theater. If you want to change the trustworthiness of people in government, you have got to organize in a very serious way, and it is hard work, and you have got to elect people you trust. You have got to find people you trust out of your own ranks. And you have got to organize, you have got to get people to the polls. You have got to do all the hard work. You have got to raise the money, so that you can call attention to your movement. In that sense, when I talk about mature politics, that to me is mature politics. I think the Tea Party Movement, which I earlier called the Last Movement, is not there yet. They love to complain. They love rallies. They love signs. But they're not a party. They're not a serious political organization. I am nowhere near on their side politically, but if they want to be taken seriously, I will tell what [inaudible] to be taken seriously.
SM (02:02:15):
One of the things I observed in the (19)60s and early (19)70s is that when there was a protest... And I only got a couple more minutes, then I am done. The protests were, you could see posters from just about all the groups. When Earth Day took place, Earth Day and when Gaylord Nelson met with the anti-war people to make sure he was not stepping on the anti-war people, so there was a working relationship between that group and the beginnings of Earth Day. Phyllis Schlafly said, "All the people that were involved in the Environmental Movement were all former commies." That was her perception.
PG (02:02:53):
That is her perception of everything that is left of Genghis Khan.
SM (02:02:59):
But it is interesting, you could see the posters, you could see the... Actually, all of the movements, the posters were there, probably at the moratorium in (19)69 and in Earth Day, the first one. But now, it does not seem to be that way. It seems that they have become separated again. They're into the Women's Movement is really into women's issues. The gay and lesbian organizations are into their issues. The Latinos, they are into their issues. And of course, the Anti-War Movement is all scattered all over the place. So, it seems like there's a separatism happening within the movements even. I might be wrong in this.
PG (02:03:49):
I think at least in the period we're talking about, I think that is always just... We were talking about the cleavage over the pressure on King, not to talk about Vietnam or the economy. What you described, the students who did not show up, the black students who stayed away from-
SM (02:04:15):
Kent State.
PG (02:04:17):
... from the Kent State mobilization. I do not think that is new. And within those movements, there were many tendencies within the Civil Rights Movement, certainly. Even within the Anti-War Movement, you ran the range from the Fellowship of Reconciliation to the Weather Underground. I think that is inherent, that is inherent. And people with grievances are going to have a hierarchy of grievances. And the top at the of the hierarchy is the one that most affects me, my life, my friends, my circle, my peers. If I am a college kid and during the Vietnam War, all my friends are going to be agitated about the draft and the possibility of getting called up.
SM (02:05:54):
I am down to the last part, which is basically, you already spoke to this, some names, terms, people that were well-known during the period. They could be just quick responses. But my final question before that is, you had mentioned that you were there in Mississippi, James Meredith and you have obviously experienced so much, number one, were you at Malcolm's funeral?
PG (02:06:21):
No.
SM (02:06:21):
Okay.
PG (02:06:22):
No. I made a conscious decision to stay away.
SM (02:06:33):
Your meetings with him, they must be unbelievable memories, just interviewing him for a couple hours. What was it like to be in the same room with him?
PG (02:06:53):
What is your reaction seeing him on YouTube? It was very hard not to like him. I would love to be able to say, I got to be friends. I cannot say that because I cannot speak for him. The first couple of times I interviewed him, he was a prisoner of a theology that held that white people were devils, blue-eyed devils. But the first time I met him was in St. Louis. I had seen him during my fellowship year at Harvard. I had seen him speak at the Harvard Law School Forum. He happened to be there when I was in the middle of reading Sierra Lincoln's book called The Black Muslims in American. I was quite absorbed by it, so I thought I better go watch this guy. And I did and-
PG (02:08:01):
And when I got back to St. Louis, one of my first orders of business was to go to my city editor and say, "This is an important phenomenon in America, and let me go find out what they're doing here." They had mosques all over the country. And he said, " Okay." The St. Louis newspapers did not really cover the Black community in St. Louis very well. And so, I decided I was going to make that migration to start covering the Black community in St. Louis. And I started with a four-part series on the local mosque of the Nation of Islam. And a couple of months later, I got a call from Malcolm saying, "I am going to be in St. Louis to visit the local mosque. Would you like to meet with me?" And I said, "Yeah." Helen, my wife, was then freelancing, because we were looking for a year in St. Louis. And she was leading her not very successful freelance session. She said she wanted to see him. That conversation was, I think probably the best word I could find for it is civil. Was civil for the most part. But I thought it kind of got a little easier, a little more conversational, a little less interview-y. Went on for a couple hours and Malcolm was defending a theological position. But a lot of the reporters he was confronting those days were portraying him as a preacher of hate, dangerous dude. And we were not asking that kind of question. We were not coming on like district attorneys. We were just asking him civil questions about what's this all about? And by the end of it, the tone was pretty good. And as we were getting up to leave, my wife said one of the objectives of the Nation of Islam was to create a lot of small businesses, black owned businesses in the ghetto, was sort of the beginnings of building economic independence in their minds. And my wife said to Malcolm, "What if all those businesses succeed? And all the people running them got successful and they run off and joined the NAACP?" And at first, he did not understand she was kidding. And then there was a double take and then a wide smile. And I think that became a key to my subsequent interviews with him. And Helen interviewed him a couple of times there. She wrote about him separately in the New York Post. She wrote pieces about him. But I think in our subsequent interviews, they really were more like conversations. And I think I won his trust, but I also did not feel he was obliged to like me or embrace me as a friend. I did want his trust and I was happy when I felt that I won it. In fact, after the last piece I wrote about him, he had one of his staffers call me and say, "Minister Malcolm thought that piece was very fair."
SM (02:13:10):
So, you may have shown him that, because I was around students at Ohio State that really did not like white people, and if you show that you care about them, about what they are saying, we can never live in the skin of a black person. But if there is a sense that a person truly does care, and you may have been, he sense you cared about this.
PG (02:13:41):
I think I probably conveyed that. But I also think what was important to him was, he had two public persona when he was dealing with the White Press. One was playing the caricature Malcolm. People would say, "Are you teaching hate?" And he would do riffs like "by any means necessary", or if you ask them questions about the state of Black America and how his beliefs might help and responded with someone understanding. One of his, a line he used once when he was under a lot of pressure about his advocacy of Blacks owning guns for self-self-defense, he said, "I am the man you think you are." He said to a white reporter, "I am the man who you think you are." What he meant in the context of that conversation was, "If you hit me, I am going to hit you back." But I think he applied the same principle to just personal interaction. And if you respect him, he will respect you. And I think that worked between us.
SM (02:15:26):
That is very important because I think that TV segment on YouTube, if you have not seen it, maybe tonight or whatever, go on YouTube and check out the-
PG (02:15:35):
There is hundreds of them.
SM (02:15:36):
There is hundreds of them, but there is only a few that are in color. And it is actually one of the first ones. And it was a person challenging him about his name, and I did not think he was saying it in the right way. And I think he did not show any respect to Malcolm at that time. And you could sense it. Are there any other personal stories you would like to share about people you met during the (19)60s and the (19)70s, or (19)50s, (19)60s and (19)70s that would be little good anecdotes? Did you meet James Meredith?
PG (02:16:13):
I met him, but I had very little interaction with him. When I was down there, he was surrounded by US Marshals and Federalized National Guard troops. So, he was pretty insulated. I met him later on. I cannot remember the circumstance, but I never had a real conversation with him.
SM (02:16:40):
Specific instances, the ones that really stand out amongst the events that you covered? Obviously, you have mentioned, you wrote the article on the JFK assassination and you wrote about Malcolm and you covered James Meredith. Were there others that stand out? Watergate, but what other others that stand out?
PG (02:17:06):
Well, I think the whole Civil Rights movement, I was writing about that practically every week during the civil rights season, which tended to be spring, summer, fall. It tended to be a warm weather movement. The active street, the street movement. I remember scenes, but they do not particularly make great anecdotes. I covered George Wallace a couple of times, a couple of his campaigns. One when he was running his wife, maybe he couldn't succeed himself, so he ran his wife who had terminal cancer for governor in his place, and I just felt sorry for him. You asked earlier about, parenthetically, you mentioned Woodward Bernstein. We never got back to that. And you asked about-
SM (02:18:28):
Investigative journalism, which seemed to have brought in a whole new generation of writers that wanted to be like them.
PG (02:18:42):
And I think that was a very mixed blessing. I know them both well, I worked with them both. I excerpted their second book for Newsweek and I had to work with them for that. And I excerpted Bob's book on the Supreme Court. Got along well with both of them. I kind of got along better with Carl than with Bob. But Carl was more the writer. Bob's a very serious man.
SM (02:19:24):
He has been on TV. He was a commentator.
PG (02:19:27):
Yeah. Yeah. So, when we were working on the Final Days, which was their second book, I spent a lot more time with Carl than Bob, and also, we were friends with Carl's... One of his wives or Alfred.
SM (02:19:52):
Oh yeah. No, she was married to him.
PG (02:19:56):
Oh, yeah.
SM (02:19:57):
She's wrote a book out about something about Double Chins or-
PG (02:20:02):
I do not like my neck.
SM (02:20:03):
Yeah.
PG (02:20:05):
Well, she wrote a novel about him, and which became a movie about her marriage to Carl, which ended unhappily. Carl was a bit of a Tom Cat. I will look. I may have better inside information on the website. Just going back to that, I think that they were a mixed blessing in a number of ways. Obviously, what they did with Watergate was fantastic. That was a great, I think that was a great contribution. I think the subsequent book was, the Final Days was a great contribution too, as a first rough draft of history of the period. But as you said, I drew a lot of people into the business, and that is been a mixed blessing. I think it partly had to do with glory and money. Carl and Bob were played by Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford in the movie. That is pretty glamorous. That makes sense. Carl looked pretty glamorous and they made a ton of money. And I think that was catnip for a lot of young journalists. And it changed. It was not their fault, but the character of investigative journalism began to change. When I was beginning my career, there was a kind of gentleman's agreement in the press, and it was all gentle. There was the kind of agreement that there were certain subjects you did not talk about, like people's sex lives, drinking habits, other vices. What the Watergate period led to was what came to be called character journalism. Look at Nixon. The guy was an epic neurotic, so much so that he was trying to tear up the Constitution. So, we have got to look closely at all these guys. Okay, that is good. That is a good outcome. But it's now what it became, which I think is connected with the glory and money piece of it. The definition of what is character has broadened and broadened and broadened. And now it is in the age of bedsheet journalism. And we look under bedsheets.
SM (02:24:21):
Edwards.
PG (02:24:22):
Yeah. And the National Enquirer got nominated for a Pulitzer for their expose of Edwards's a fair, which I think is a low moment. Now, do I find Edwards's behavior acceptable? No. The guy is what used to be called a cad. Clinton and Monica, or Clinton and Jennifer Flowers, I am not fond of that. My test is what matters to their conduct in public office, what matters to their capacity for leadership. John Kennedy was leading an extremely vivid sex life back in the (19)60s. Everybody in the business knew. Everybody in my business knew about it. It was just common gossip. And we knew a lot of detail. But the code was different then, and you did not write about those things. And the irony is that there were two of the women that we should have written about, probably. One was a woman named, who was, as it turned out, an East German-
SM (02:26:04):
Spy.
PG (02:26:05):
I do not know if she was really a spy, but she was connected with the East German Secret Service. And the other was Judith Campbell Wexner, who he was sharing with a mafia Don. And those would be legitimate subjects of journalistic investigation. I have said a moment ago that we knew his activities were common gossip, but we did not have those two names at the time. And I think if we had had those two names and their affiliations, we probably would not in that time, we probably would not have written about them. But it would have, there would have been conferences about them.
SM (02:26:58):
Even speculation about Marilyn Monroe.
PG (02:27:00):
Oh yeah. She is the most popular subject of the Kennedy stories. And I think it was real.
SM (02:27:10):
Peter Lawford was obviously a friend of hers. It is amazing, the story of Bobby Kennedy flying back to California, meeting with Peter going over to the house, and whether that is true or not. Then she died. Whether she would be on drugs or whether it was to shut her up. I mean, who knows.
PG (02:27:33):
I am a violent Eddie conspiratory theorist.
SM (02:27:35):
There are lot of books on Kennedy though, Kennedy and King on the conspiracy theories. The other question I have, and then you know what? You have been here a very long time and you do not have to respond to all these names, if that is okay.
PG (02:27:52):
No, go ahead.
SM (02:27:55):
But I want to ask you, Malcolm's death is very suspicious. And we had a speaker on our campus.
PG (02:28:05):
No, it is not.
SM (02:28:07):
Is there a link to Farrakhan and that fascination?
PG (02:28:11):
Farrakhan was involved, yeah. There are all kinds of CIA and FBI and New York Police Bureau of Special Services conspiracy theories. They are all junk. They all knew what was going on. We have bushels of tape recorded. The FBI, which was playing a really invasive role and to me, objectionable role in surveillance of Malcolm and Elijah Muhammad and the Nation of Islam turned out to be a boon to historians, because there are bushels of transcripts of phone calls in which we have Elijah Muhammad saying, among other things, "The brother's eyes need to be closed," which was a death warrant. The FBI and the NYPD were privy to everything that was being said in the Nation of Islam. They had both, they had room bugs and telephone taps at Elijah Muhammad's home in Chicago, Elijah Muhammad's second home in Phoenix, Malcolm X's home, Malcolm X's office. They knew everything. A senior official of the New York Bureau of Special Services and Investigation told me, "We knew what they were thinking." They did not have to lift a finger because they knew Malcolm was going to be dead. There were six attempts by the Nation of Islam before the one that succeeded. I have interviewed in prison. Three people were convicted. Two of them should not have been, although they have been involved in one of the earlier attempts. I interviewed all three of those guys in prison. The guy we know was guilty and who was caught at the scene essentially told me the whole story, named the names of the assassins, told me how the assassination was generated. Another one of the, I think wrongly, in fact, I know wrongly convicted men, told me about a meeting at the New York Mosque where the national leadership from Chicago was extremely angry that the New York Mosque had not been able to whack Malcolm. So, they sent in Elijah Muhammad's son, Elijah Muhammad the second, a very-very tough guy who was in charge of the Fruit of Islam, which was their paramilitary corps. They assembled enforcers from all over the country in the Harlem Mosque. And Elijah Jr., as he's also sometimes known, said Malcolm then was living in a house that had been bought for him by Elijah Muhammad in Queens. They were trying the Nation of Islam after Malcolm defected and was trying to get him back. Elijah Jr. said, "What you all need to do is go out to that house and clap on the walls until the walls come tumbling down. Then you want to go inside and cut the nigger's tongue out and I will put it in an envelope and I will send it to my father." I have zero question that the assassination was the work of the Nation of the Islam and that while the FBI and the New York police, not so much the New York police, because it became a New York because it happened here. But the FBI no doubt celebrated. I mean, Hoover was nuts and they no doubt celebrated the outcome, but they did not have to. They knew they did not have to do anything. They knew this was internal, and that sooner or later his former brothers would get him, and they did.
SM (02:34:19):
When you talk about Malcolm here, because I do not like conspiracy books either, because I am tired of them, and I know Groden wrote one on the Kennedy assassination. We had him on our campus, but after he wrote that book, everybody's been reading it. But do you believe that the John Kennedy assassination is, as they say, it was Oswald. That Bobby was Sirhan Sirhan alone, that there was not a second person with a gun, and the third is Martin Luther King was the guy at the-
PG (02:34:52):
King, I think there were... The best evidence on King, I think, is not that there was a government conspiracy, but that a couple of rich and slightly illuminated brothers in Missouri put a bounty on his head. And this is not original reporting with me. This is stuff I have read and it's the most persuasive stuff I have seen on King, on the King murder. That James Earl Ray heard about this when he was in prison for whatever he had been in prison for before the assassination. He escaped and lived on the lam for, I think, a couple of three years and found his way to these brothers, and they financed him. That is the most persuasive version, I would say.
SM (02:36:06):
It is amazing that the King family was starting to believe him.
PG (02:36:11):
Believe Ray? Yeah.
SM (02:36:12):
Yeah, yeah.
PG (02:36:13):
Well, Ray was a story about Raul and yeah.
SM (02:36:20):
When the best books are written about the Boomer generation, which includes, is all-inclusive, all ethnic groups, and we have not even talked about Cesar Chavez, who was a very important person to me in the Latino community. Bobby Kennedy, he's a major figure too. Better than-
PG (02:36:36):
I covered a little of Bobby's (19)68 campaign and I interviewed, I did, I think three cover zones.
SM (02:36:43):
Did you ever get to meet John Burns, the mayor of Binghamton, New York, who ran his presidential campaign in... I mean, senatorial campaign in New York? He was our mayor in Binghamton. He was my very first interview. He has passed away quite a few years back. But when the best books are written on the Boomer generation after the last Boomer has passed on, what do you think they will be saying about the generation and the period?
PG (02:37:17):
I hope they will be saying something complicated. A generation is a vast population cohort, and they do not define very easily. They do not profile very easily. I doubt that a majority of Boomers lived what we think of as Boomer lives. We think most people got up in the morning, went to work, got married, had kids, lived plain lives. I think the politically active Boomers, which we sometimes... Boomers sometimes become shorthand for... The term "Boomers" sometimes become shorthand for the politically active minority of Boomers. So, my guess is they will get mixed reviews. I would give, if I were writing the book, I would give them mixed reviews.
SM (02:38:34):
Certainly, the media plays a role here, because you talk about if indeed they are only talking about Woodstock, summer of love, some of the more eccentric activities, along with the more serious too. But the media has to play a role here, and how history and history formed. You said that you would be willing to do this, but there is a lot of names here, so yeah. You want to use the restroom or?
PG (02:39:11):
Yeah.
SM (02:39:11):
But that is actually one of the questions I did not ask that is in here, and the books that influenced you in your life, but particularly some of the books that may have been written in the (19)50s, (19)60s, and (19)70s, that really said a lot. Whether you read that for King's Books or Strike Toward Freedom, what are the most important books that influenced you in your life?
PG (02:39:35):
In my life, All the King's Man, The Plague. There is what nobody's ever heard of, by a rudder called Bernard Wolfe, called The Late Risers.
PG (02:40:02):
Writer called Bernard Wolfe called The Late Risers, which is Book of the 50s. The non-fiction works of James Baldwin. The Autobiography of Malcolm X, although it's a quite flawed piece of work. King's writings, although if I had to pick out a single document, would be the Letter from Birmingham Jail. The speeches of Malcolm X, of which there are several collections. A lot of political books and a lot of old books I am currently reading. I am reading up on the Gilded Age because I am finding so many parallels to our own time.
SM (02:41:30):
Did you ever read The Greening of America by Charles Reich?
PG (02:41:32):
[inaudible].
SM (02:41:33):
And then The Making of a Counter Culture by Theodore Roszak?
PG (02:41:36):
I have not read that.
SM (02:41:37):
Those are major ones from that [inaudible 02:41:41] period and anything that Eric Erikson wrote and Kenneth Keniston, they were great writers of the movements that was happening on college campuses in that period. All right. Here we go.
PG (02:41:58):
Hofstadter. Richard Hofstadter.
SM (02:42:00):
Oh, yes.
PG (02:42:01):
Major influence on my political maturation, such as it is.
SM (02:42:09):
Did you read The Making of a Quagmire by Halberstam?
PG (02:42:13):
Yeah.
SM (02:42:13):
I thought that is a classic book too. A Rumor of War by Phil Caputo. What a great book.
PG (02:42:20):
I read a syllabus of war books during the run up to Charlie Company. Michael Herr...
SM (02:42:32):
Dispatches.
PG (02:42:32):
Yeah. But I also read some war novels from past wars when I was doing that.
SM (02:42:43):
I want to recommend a book for you to read if you have not read it. And that is Fortunate Son, not the book on George Bush. It's the book that was written by Louis Puller that won the Pulitzer Prize back in (19)92. And he killed himself in the spring of (19)94. And I am very pleased that Toddy Puller, his wife agreed-
PG (02:43:08):
Yeah. Is this Chesty Puller's son?
SM (02:43:09):
Yes, it is a great book. It is a sad story. The book is a really good story, but it is a sad story about how he ended his life. And Toddy Puller has agreed to be interviewed. She is a state representative in Virginia.
PG (02:43:25):
I met her once there just briefly on a political campaign.
SM (02:43:31):
I thought she would never say yes because there was friction at the end when he killed [inaudible] they were heading for a divorce. But the story is... I will mention that too. These are just to respond to some names and not in any length. The first one is Tom Hayden. Just quick thoughts, responses to these people, whether you like them, dislike them, thought they were important, not important.
PG (02:43:58):
I thought among that whole Students for a Democratic Society orbit, I thought he was the smartest.
SM (02:44:10):
Jane Fonda.
PG (02:44:13):
I do not think much about her. I do not really have a good answer for that or even an answer for it.
SM (02:44:28):
How about Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin? The two hippies.
PG (02:44:34):
Hoffman, I thought once, this is off the record, I once smoked dope with him.
SM (02:44:39):
Okay. That will not be in the transcript.
PG (02:44:43):
Okay. He was fun to be around, but I thought he was mostly show business. I thought of him as a standup comic with political content. And he's not one my heroes.
SM (02:45:04):
What about Rubin?
PG (02:45:08):
Rubin was a standup comic without the comic sense and the revolutionary who winds up on Wall Street. It's not what revolutionaries...
SM (02:45:27):
Timothy Leary.
PG (02:45:30):
Leary... The whole drug piece of boomerism never appealed to me. I thought all that stuff was... Even though I smoked dope with them. I thought all that stuff was self-indulgent and I have no fondness for Leary or his works.
SM (02:46:18):
How about Daniel and Philip Berrigan?
PG (02:46:23):
I honor them. I think they were true Christians. And there were a lot of people who call themselves true Christians. They do not know a lot. I honor their memory.
SM (02:46:43):
I think you have already mentioned this, but the Black Panthers. I mentioned the seven names.
PG (02:46:49):
I thought the Panthers were interesting and attractive. But I have low respect for them in the struggle. I think Huey Newton, one of his classic documents was called Revolutionary Suicide. I am not a believer in revolutionary suicide. I once wrote a cover on the Black Panthers and it gave them mixed reviews and got involved in the picture picking. And the pictures were spread over... Some stories you wrote, there might be six pictures. We had a conference table covered with pictures. They were beautiful images. And the then editor of Newsweek looked at that tabletop and said there were too many pictures of these guys. They're not serious. And I went out there, I interviewed Bobby Seale in jail, interviewed him a couple of times since Huey was in prison and not accessible. I interviewed Donald Cox, David-
SM (02:48:27):
Hilliard.
PG (02:48:28):
...David Hilliard, a couple of others. I think it was an exercise in futility. I am not pro futility.
SM (02:48:44):
A lot of people that I have talked to said that Fred Hampton was probably the most dynamic of all of them. He was the one that was murdered in Chicago. Yeah, the FBI wanted him outed. The National Organization for Women, and I put in here Betty Friedan, Gloria Steinam, and Bella Abzug. The Women's... There are others but...
PG (02:49:07):
Yeah, I am pro feminist I think those people you have named were major contributors. Steinem, who could have lived a very soft life as a glamor girl.
SM (02:49:36):
She was a Playboy bunny.
PG (02:49:37):
Yeah. Instead gave her life to that. Gave her working life to that movement or commitment to that movement. I honor her particularly. But [inaudible] Friedan, Abzug, they're parts of what when America and Newsweek finally woke up to the woman question, they were very important.
SM (02:50:11):
The Feminist Mystique, Mr. Kaiser, mentioned to me, or Charles, that she's not very well liked, Betty Friedan, in the gay and lesbian movement because she was homophobic. And so that is an issue there. Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
PG (02:50:37):
I was for them. I do think the vets needed something [inaudible].
SM (02:50:45):
That was Bobby Muller and Ron Kovic and all that.
PG (02:50:49):
Yeah-yeah, yeah.
SM (02:50:50):
How about Mark Rudd and Rennie Davis? These are two other big names from that period.
PG (02:50:58):
No, I just do not think much of them. I do not mean that negatively. I just do not... They do not populate my interior landscape. I do not really have anything interesting to say about them.
SM (02:51:14):
How about SDS before The Weatherman or then The Weatherman themselves?
PG (02:51:21):
The Weatherman, I think, were practicing, essentially... I was about to say "juvenile," I will be a little kinder and say immature politics. SDS, I think was an attempt at being a white [inaudible]. And I think a lot of the women in SDS were not very happy with their roles as women in SDS.
SM (02:52:03):
How about Dennis Banks and the American Indian Movement? Do not forget the American Indian movement took over Alcatraz in (19)69 and the American Indian movement itself, we're not talking about the... I have learned this, that Native American movement was pretty strong even before AIM. But AIM looked at some of the more revolutionary tactics so that what happened at Alcatraz in (19)69 and what happened at Wounded Knee in (19)73 where there was violence. Because the FBI was all over this group.
PG (02:52:36):
Again, they are not part of my psychic population.
SM (02:52:41):
How about Stonewall and Harvey Milk?
PG (02:52:47):
Well, Milk obviously is a martyr, and Stonewall was a great liberating moment. But Stonewall was an amazing turnaround. And the Blacks went through the whole, "We're human too." And I think gays had to have similar moments. And I thought that was a major, major moment. Yeah.
SM (02:53:32):
How about the Free Speech Movement, when you think about that, what happened at Berkeley in (19)64, (19)65, Mario Savio, [inaudible]?
PG (02:53:37):
[inaudible].
SM (02:53:41):
Yeah, that particular group. Just your response on that movement.
PG (02:53:46):
I was not there. I did not write about it. So again, I do not really have...
SM (02:53:55):
Okay. Just the term "counterculture." Your thoughts on the counterculture, the hippies and yippies. I think you have already mentioned them, but I just...
PG (02:54:03):
Yeah, politically, I thought they were immature. I thought they had a high show biz quotient. In terms of political gain, I do not think they achieved actually anything much.
SM (02:54:26):
How about the conservative group, Young Americans for Freedom, which has often been forgotten? They were very strong in the anti-war movement, and they were conservative, Young Americans for Freedom. Of course, I think Bill Buckley was involved in that. So, I have down here Young Americans for Freedom and William Buckley.
PG (02:54:45):
Well, Buckley's obviously a seminal figure in the development of what we now think of as movement conservatism. I disagreed with a lot of what he said, but I have a soft spot for him in my heart because he essentially subsidized an anthology of the columns of Murray Kempton, who is one of my heroes.
SM (02:55:27):
God and Man at Yale. I do not know if you had that book.
PG (02:55:30):
I had it a long time ago.
SM (02:55:32):
I read it and I thought he was kind of a radical, conservatively. He handles the system at Yale. So, Barry Goldwater, and-
PG (02:55:42):
He was also an apologist for Joe McCarthy and-
SM (02:55:48):
He wrote a book on that.
PG (02:55:52):
And then one of the things that politicized me as a very young man was McCarthy. McCarthy and McCarthyism.
SM (02:56:06):
Barry Goldwater and Dr. Benjamin Spock. What a combination.
PG (02:56:12):
What a combination. Goldwater is... I think my first political cover was on the Goldwater campaign in (19)64. Another seminal figure. And really, I was happy he was not elected, but was nowhere near the monster that he was made out to be. He was really a classic libertarian, a western libertarian and a likable guy. Dr. Spock, Dr. Spock, I do not think much about. It's another one.
SM (02:57:15):
I found it interesting too that the irony, and there's a lot of irony in the (19)60s, in the (19)70s. The irony is that Barry Goldwater, who was really defeated by Lyndon Johnson. And then Nixon becomes president in (19)68, beating Humphrey. And then it was Barry Goldwater and Hugh Scott that walked into the White House and told him that he needs to resign.
PG (02:57:40):
That is right.
SM (02:57:43):
McCarthy, Eugene McCarthy and Bobby Kennedy.
PG (02:57:47):
Bobby Kennedy is a major figure for me. Major positive figure for me. As I mentioned, I covered a couple of states in his primary campaign for President. I did an early Bobby cover when he was Attorney General. I did a cover on him when he was US Senator, thinking about running for President. I thought he was one of the most powerful political figures I have ever seen. And it was in an anti-matter way. Bobby wore tragedy on his sleeve. I think he never recovered from Jack's death ever. I think part of what success he had... I do not think he would have won the presidency. I think it was fairly well wired. You could still wire elections and in those days. We did not have primaries or caucuses in all 50 states. I think it was pretty much wired for Hubert. And I am not an anti Hubert. I think he got bashed around more than he deserved.
SM (02:59:34):
[inaudible].
PG (02:59:42):
But Bobby looked like a man in pain practically all the time. His hands shook when he would make speeches. I saw his... He did a famous speech to the University of Nebraska Medical School students in Lincoln. They had a podium, a carved wood replica of a sawed in half Greek column with fluted... And all through the speech, it was sort of sad and harrowing to watch. His fingers were working into the flutes, the fluting on the column, up and down, up and down. It was just a nervous tick. He was very uncomfortable in his skin. The only time I saw him relaxed and peaceful was in Indianapolis. He had gone to a stop on his schedule and he cut the stop short. Because he had, on the way there, he had passed a schoolyard for a... Must have been a preschool. The children were very small. And he led his staff and the not very large press corps into that schoolyard and just started connecting with the kids. And one little black kid, maybe four... He radiated something to children. He was extremely good with children. And children saw it immediately. And this little boy came up to him and Kennedy was squatting like this, and the kid just sat on his knee. Kennedy did not put him there or beckon him there. He just sat on his knee. And Bobby asked him, "What's your name?" And he said, "Eldridge," which I thought was interesting, it was pre-Cleavers.
SM (03:02:44):
Oh my God.
PG (03:02:48):
So, he was not named for Cleaver. And he said to Kennedy, "How did you get out the television?" He thought Kennedy lived inside-
SM (03:03:01):
Oh my gosh. Wow.
PG (03:03:07):
...the television.
SM (03:03:07):
Well, that is the one heck of a story.
PG (03:03:09):
Yeah. And it was so sweet. And he was so at peace. And it was the only time...
SM (03:03:19):
That is when he gave his speech too. He was in Indianapolis [inaudible], the impromptu speech-
PG (03:03:23):
I was not there for that one. [inaudible].
SM (03:03:28):
He did not like McCarthy.
PG (03:03:30):
No.
SM (03:03:31):
[inaudible] Eugene was [inaudible].
PG (03:03:32):
They hated each other. Eugene used to brag that... Well, he was furious at Bobby for getting into the race after he, McCarthy, had opened the door a crack. And he would say, "Well, I got the A students."
SM (03:03:53):
Wow. So how about Robert McNamara and John Kennedy? Just a couple comments on them.
PG (03:04:13):
John Kennedy, I think did a lot of good. And I am not one of his worshipers, but as an inspirational leader, I think that may have been his most important single contribution. The creation of the Peace Corps, which was actually Hubert Humphrey's idea. But it happened on Jack's watch. A lot of boomers did the Peace Corps experience. And I think it was a great happening for them and it led a lot of people, a lot, to public service. I think for the better. And Jack Kennedy was the first to say something that Eisenhower had refused to say that race was a moral issue in America. It was very important. To this day, you visit homes in a black neighborhood and the pictures you will see on the wall are Jesus, Jack Kennedy and Martin Luther King. McNamara, I really was not covering the policy under the war, so my feelings about him are really third hand from stuff I have read. Those guys all got themselves trapped into this notion that this was something doable, that this was something winnable. And by the time he... I give him credit for realizing late, way too late, but the fact that he realized it at all, that it was a losing proposition, that it essentially had been a mistake. I think [inaudible] he had a learning curve.
SM (03:07:08):
What about Nixon and Spiro Agnew?
PG (03:07:16):
Nixon, I think is one of the most wonderfully... From a writer's point of view, I think is one of the most-
(End of Interview)
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 Peter Goldman
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Goldman, Peter ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Journalists; Goldman, Peter--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Peter Goldman is an author and journalist. He was the national-affairs writer, senior editor, and team leader of a special-projects unit for <em>Newsweek</em> magazine. Goldman wrote over 120 cover stories on race, politics, Watergate, criminal justice and other aspects of American life. Goldman additionally wrote several books on Malcolm X.
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
2010-04-23
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.10.2016.56a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.56b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
187:25
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/5634ec59b1b14f9281820f622859e952.jpg
5cec64179a174808acb010f89bf3e972
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/2b498f5c680ccbfaa0f6eaa80dc44de2.mp3
1752dd40c7aa5de5decc6a8a10a3a0c3
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
2010-11-01
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Carolyn Garcia, 1946-
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Carolyn Garcia, a native of Poughkeepsie, NY, is known as \"Mountain Girl\", and is a former Merry Prankster. She is the former wife of Jerry Garcia. She wrote a book on marijuana cultivation, called Primo Plant: Growing Sinsemilla Marijuana, first published in 1976. "}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13117,"3":{"1":0},"5":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"6":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"7":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"8":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Carolyn Garcia, a native of Poughkeepsie, NY, is known as "Mountain Girl" and is a former Merry Prankster. She is the former wife of Jerry Garcia. She wrote a book on marijuana cultivation, called <em>Primo Plant: Growing Sinsemilla Marijuana</em>, first published in 1976. </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
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; Polio epidemic; Nuclear pollution; Psychedelics; Communal living; Acid tests; Counterculture; Vietnam War; Nineteen sixties; Nineteen seventies; Summer of Love; Vietnam Veterans; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Marijuana; Golden Gate Park; The Grateful Dead at Harpur College; Sexism; The Beatles; Woodstock; Academia; Psychotherapy."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Baby boom generation; Polio epidemic; Nuclear pollution; Psychedelics; Communal living; Acid tests; Counterculture; Vietnam War; Nineteen sixties; Nineteen seventies; Summer of Love; Vietnam Veterans; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Marijuana; Golden Gate Park; The Grateful Dead at Harpur College; Sexism; The Beatles; Woodstock; Academia; Psychotherapy.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
98:21
Subject LCSH
Merry Band of Pranksters; Marijuana; Mountain Girl, 1946--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 Carolyn Garcia
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Description
An account of the resource
Carolyn Garcia, a native of Poughkeepsie, NY, is known as "Mountain Girl" and is a former Merry Prankster. She is the former wife of Jerry Garcia. She wrote a book on marijuana cultivation, called <em>Primo Plant: Growing Sinsemilla Marijuana</em>, first published in 1976.
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
2010-11-01
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.10.2016.55
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
98:21
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Garcia, Carolyn, 1946- ; McKiernan, Stephen
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/4232cc90b9fab3cba52af6e2ee2be636.jpg
8e0fb9331cdda59de3c2405cbbfff2d0
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/d5863e11537dc265494c4ad622163851.mp3
5dfdea803901823af58c26f1645a69c8
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
2012-01-24
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
Lise Funderburg
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Lise Funderburg is an author, educator and editor. She went to school at Reed College and Columbia University School of Journalism. She has had publications at The Washington Post, the New York Times, The Nation, Salon and many more."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13057,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Lise Funderburg is an author, educator, and editor. She went to school at Reed College and Columbia University School of Journalism. She has had publications at the <em>Washington Post</em>, the <em>New York Times</em>, <em>The Nation</em>, <em>Salon</em> and many more.</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
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Drug culture; Racism; Culture wars; Race and Identity; Baby boom generation; WWII; Korean War; Welfare mentality; Drug culture; Watergate; Christian right; Great recession; Dr.Martin Luther King Jr.; Nineteen sixties; Equality movements; Vietnam Memorial; Vietnam Veterans."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Drug culture; Racism; Culture wars; Race and Identity; Baby boom generation; WWII; Korean War; Welfare mentality; Drug culture; Watergate; Christian right; Great recession; Dr.Martin Luther King Jr.; Nineteen sixties; Equality movements; Vietnam Memorial; Vietnam Veterans.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
148:37
Subject LCSH
Authors; Educators; Editors; Funderburg, Lise--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: Lise Funderburg
Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan
Transcriber: REV
Date of interview: 24 January 2012
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Start of Interview)
SM (00:00:08):
You are what we call a late-stage boomer, and I say this because the boomer generation is defined as people born in the years 1946 to 1964, and there is often, in my interviews, been a discrepancy in terms of impact over the events that transpired when boomers were young between those that were born between (19)46 and (19)56 and (19)56 and (19)64.
LF (00:00:35):
Sure.
SM (00:00:36):
However, my question here is, knowing this, do you personally identify yourself with the boomer generation, and if so, in what way?
LF (00:00:47):
I do not generally think of that label as being pertinent to me, although I have to admit that when I see characteristics of boomers in the media, there are times when I have to admit that they describe me. For example, the idea that everything that happens to me is being invented for the first time, that no one has ever gone through whatever my current stage of life is. It is like an amazing discovery. That applies to me and my peers, but I do not really identify with that label.
SM (00:01:46):
Yeah, it is interesting. One of the questions I have asked is do you like the term, period, in defining a group of people. Obviously it was linked toward the large numbers of babies being born after World War II for almost 18 years, as men and women came home from the war. Others say that it could be the Vietnam generation or the (19)60s generation or the movement generation, a lot of different terms, but they still identify because it is based on a large group of babies being born over a period of time. Is there another term that you feel would be more applicable to this group?
LF (00:02:27):
Well, your first question was do I like the label. I would say not particularly, because although its origins have a simple factual basis in referencing a spike in the population, like many labels of generations, it has come to be a shorthand that is generally, I think, pejorative. I think that is true of other ones, like how Generation X became better known for the limitations of the people in that group or the negative ways in which they interacted with society as opposed to something positive about them. Maybe one of the only exceptions to this that I can think of is... what was the group Tom Brokaw wrote about?
SM (00:03:29):
The Greatest Generation?
LF (00:03:32):
Yeah. That was a pretty positive label. I think that has pretty positive connotations, but generally boomers, that label connotes a kind of self-interestedness, a desire for luxury and comfort. While those may be true attributes for many of us born during that period, it is not a particularly positive one. I do think it is interesting to think about this generation. I mean, what is more pertinent to me now is a sub-category. I should also ask you, are you taping this?
SM (00:04:18):
Oh, yeah. I tape everything, and then eventually you will see it. I have got 250 transcripts.
LF (00:04:23):
Oh, sure.
SM (00:04:24):
Yeah. It is a long ordeal. I love it, though.
LF (00:04:27):
Right. I currently identify more with a subcategory, which is the sandwich generation, and that is an experience that other people have had in history where they are taking care of or have some level of dependence from the generation below as well as the generation above them, at the same time. Because of the numbers of boomers, it is a phenomenon that is changing our culture. That is an interesting thing about my boomer generation. Wherever you were born in it, you are part of a cohort that is so large that the life stages you are going through are more evident in the culture, and have more of an impact in the overall culture than other generations have.
SM (00:05:20):
Given the long-view perspective over time, what are your overall feelings on this generation? We do not even have to call it boomer, but this generation. Things you admire or things you do not admire, characteristics you like or dislike?
LF (00:05:40):
Well, I guess my feeling about that is in contrast with generations that have come before and after. For example, I think that what I like about a lot of people my age is a combination of idealism and pragmatism. Again, that might just be that we are in our (19)50s and (19)60s now, and that is when you become more pragmatic in life. I think that maybe, particularly having lived through the protest and social justice movements of the (19)60s and (19)70s, many of us retain a kind of hopefulness that has perhaps been tempered by the years, but persists, and I am comfortable with that. Again, that may be because that is what I know, so I like that about my generation. I also think that we are permitted to have that kind of an outlook and that kind of hopefulness in part because of the sacrifices the generation before us made to, whatever, get us into the middle class, to get us through some big wars, World War II and the Korean War. I think it is partly we are afforded that ability to be optimistic and hopeful because of the sacrifices made by our parents and grandparents, but also, we did not grow up under the dark, dark clouds that the generations after us have grown up under. There might have been the atom bomb, the Cold War, but not AIDS and not, for Americans, the Twin Towers, and no other globally frightening questions of who can make nuclear bombs. Weapons of mass destruction, real or imagined, were not as pervasive when I was a child. There were freedoms just in lifestyle. The over attended child now, that looks horrible to me, parents who are trying to give their children the best, but over program them and are constantly involved with them. I look back and I relish that I had a childhood where my parents were not always paying attention, so that I could have the life of a child with other children. Even though we lived in an urban environment that had crime, it just felt so much safer. I see kids today living with more fear.
SM (00:08:55):
Those are very good points. Over I would say the past maybe decade or two decades, a lot of the critics of the boomer generation have said that many of the problems we face today in this country, including those right here in 2012, we can go right back to that generation and blame that generation somewhat for the problems we face. Of course, the critics say the drug culture, the welfare mentality, where it is a handout over individual responsibility, a decline in church and synagogue attendance, where people left religion and went into more inner spirituality, a breakup of the family, the increase in the divorce rate, the lack of respect for law and order, lack of respect for authority because so many leaders lied to them when they were young or witnessed it nationally. A whole lot of things. Even some people that criticize the generation say remember on college campuses when college students would make a demand, and if all the demands were met, they would make more demands. They would be absolutely sure that the demands would never be met. It is an, "I want it now," mentality, and so that is some of the financial problems we face in the generation, directly related to that attitude of spending now and worrying about how to pay for it later. When you look at all these criticisms of the generation, some of them could be directly related to what we call the culture wars today too, so just your thoughts on these people that criticize this generation for a lot of the problems we face today in America.
LF (00:10:44):
I am sure there is some validity to those critiques, but I am not sure that it is appropriate to hang the blame solely on the door of baby boomers, but in fact maybe it is more of an American epidemic, part of the broader culture, up and down across generations and classes. It is hard for me to find a kind of across-the-board validity to critiques like that because we are such a diverse people, even inside of this generation. To pick out one of those critiques you listed, these people critiquing baby boomers for the fall of social order through something like an abandonment of organized religion, organized religion seems to me not an absolutely good thing, as evidenced by pedophilic scandals in the Catholic Church. Or in the South and in terms of race, which is a topic I am more familiar with, the usage of the Church to justify the sanction and further the cause of racial bigotry and to perpetuate an unjust order of Jim Crow, that was in the house of organized religion. Perhaps some of the turning away from such places was to an attempt to keep close to God, but not the deeply flawed behaviors of the people practicing in His name.
SM (00:13:14):
When I was on a college campus, I know this was an attitude many young people had in the late (19)60s through the mid (19)70s, and that was that we can be the change agents for the betterment of society. There was a feeling that the world was going to change for the better, that eventually because of this generation, war would end, peace would come, racism, sexism, homophobia, all the structure of the environment, all these ills would be corrected by these 74 million young people. As time goes on, critics will say... again, critics; you cannot generalize everyone because many people have done good things... that war has continued, all the -isms have continued. There have been improvements in many ways, but as some people say, we take one step forward and two steps backward many times. What we are seeing here is this attitude that many within the generation, that they were going to be the change agent for the benefit of society, that they have miserably failed. Your thoughts? That is another general criticism, but progress has been made in so many areas for people if you look at the 1950s and 2012, but then you see these terrible individual instances. You have raised a couple of them already in your remarks.
LF (00:14:43):
Once again, I think to place on any group of people the responsibility to cure all of society's ills is an awfully heavy burden to carry. Whoever expected that maybe needed a sort of realistic adjustment, some adjustment in their outlook, to expect that. Again, because one of my areas of professional focus is race and race relations, I have often said that many people place a parallel expectation on mixed-race people, that they are the hope for a future without racial animosity, and that is such an unrealistic expectation. On the one hand, I think that is a highly unrealistic expectation, and it is a superficial expectation too. It does not allow for the complexity of who we all are as people, and also how our identities are overdetermined by the circumstances around us. In other words, we are made up of so many different components of influence, whether it is our generation, as you are interested in, and what that means, our place on the timeline of history, what came before and what comes after, our gender, our religion, our geography. In this country, it makes such a huge difference whether you are born and raised in a city, suburb or rural environment, in the Northwest, in the Southeast, in the Northeast. The composition of the area around you, the personalities and convictions of the people who raise you and the people on the street in which you grew up, the kind of education you have, the amount of education you have, and on and on and on. You can put 10 people in a room who seemingly have so much in common and you will find as much, if not more, that they do not have in common. Therefore, expecting that group of people to all behave in a certain way or fulfill a certain goal I think is unrealistic. On the other hand, I would say that not only is it unrealistic to expect a particular generation to take on such a large burden, but I think it is also unrealistic to expect anyone to be able to solve such enormous, profound, entrenched problems essentially overnight, in one generation. I mean, look at slavery. We are nowhere near where we should be in this country in terms of racial and social justice and equality, I think. We still have a tremendously far way to go. If I were to only look at that, I would not be able to get out of bed every day. It is too bleak to only look that way. If I also look at where we have come from in just a handful of generations, then that gives me some hope that there has been progress, which is now the time when I would trot out Obama.
SM (00:18:35):
Yeah. I have a question on him later, but you can talk about him, because you are talking about, first off, the first African American, but he is biracial.
LF (00:18:43):
Yes, he is.
SM (00:18:48):
Just your thoughts on how he has been treated in America, in terms of not only race but biracially.
LF (00:19:00):
Well, that is a big question. I think that he has been put on a pedestal by some people and expected to be the messiah for Black people particularly, but also other people who feel that they have not historically been allowed to play on a level playing field in this country. I think that he has raised the knap of racism that had been smoothed over in certain areas, acts of racism, especially in a polite society. Not people with swastikas tattooed on their foreheads, lynching someone, but instead in say the halls of Congress or the Senate chambers. Maybe we are a less civil society in general, but the idea that a representative, a government representative, would shout out, "You lie," to a president was inconceivable to me. Does that have something to do with race and a feeling of not needing to respect someone? I do not know the man who shouted that well enough, but that is one example of a way in which I think Obama has not been accorded the respect that a white person in his position would have. Meanwhile, though, of course, people said horrible things. Progressive Democrats, liberals, said horrible things about George Bush, the second Bush. It is hard to know when it is just horrible behavior and when it is horrible racist behavior. It is very hard to identify it, to separate them. As far as a biracial president, it gives me a great pleasure to see him in office for many reasons, some of them having to do with his actual capacity to serve, but in an iconic way to see a Black president and to see a biracial president. To me, he is both of those things, which is not how some Black and biracial people feel, who would have him choose.
SM (00:21:57):
What is interesting about President Obama is that one little note, that he has really wanted to separate himself from the (19)60s generation. Oftentimes he says, "I am not a part of the (19)60s generation," but he is in terms of years. He falls within that boomer generation. He was two years old, so I think he was born in (19)62 or (19)61, in that particular area. He does fall into that area, but he is tried to disassociate himself from the (19)60s, yet his critics say he is the reincarnation of the (19)60s. It seems like an oxymoron at times.
LF (00:22:37):
What is it about the (19)60s that he is trying to divorce himself from, do those critics say?
SM (00:22:42):
Well, I do not know. I just know early on I saw him on television. He has said several times, "I am not part of the (19)60s generation," and probably because he was two years old, but then he does not go on any further. You read articles in magazines, how he tries to separate himself from that period, which was the period of activism, the period of the movements and everything. Then his critics say he is the reincarnation of the (19)60s, the more progressive, way to the left. It is part of the culture wars, almost, that we are seeing today.
LF (00:23:28):
Well, I am not familiar enough with that criticism, I guess, to really have a way to comment on that.
SM (00:23:35):
This gets right into that. How did you become who you are in terms of your growing-up years? What were your early influences, some of the mentors, the role models that influenced you as a young person? I know you have written a new book, and I know your father is a very important part of this, but what were your high school years like and your college years, before you started your professional career as a writer? What was it like... and I know that I am saying a lot here... growing up as a biracial female in the (19)60s and (19)70s?
LF (00:24:09):
Well, I was just a little kid in the (19)60s. I was not 10 until 1969. I do not know how much I looked outside of myself for models, but of course, my mother and my father were big models for me. The neighborhood they chose to raise me and my sisters in was really significant in my developing outlook of the world. They chose a very rare situation, which was a stable integrated neighborhood. I make note of it being stable because there are a lot of neighborhoods that go through, say, a gentrification process, and halfway through, or the old neighborhoods that went through white flight, there was a point at which it looked like it was the 50/50 neighborhood of two races, but it was really just in the midst of a transition. This neighborhood my parents chose to raise me and my two sisters in in Philadelphia was... well, I considered it a tremendous gift they gave us to live in a microcosm of possibility, which is to say that we were able to live in a neighborhood that was by no means perfect... again, there are always humans involved when you are talking about people, which means that no one is perfect and everyone is complicated... but to grow up in a neighborhood where it was normal to be around people who were different was both a sense of possibility of what the world could be like, and it was an affirmation and a reinforcement of the normalcy of my own immediate family. I had a Black side of the family and a white side of the family, and they were all equally my cousins and uncles and aunts and grandparents, but that was a very rare image in the world around me. That has changed significantly, probably because of a lot of the boomers. It would be interesting to look at the particular rates of intermarriage and how much it spiked with the boomers, but there were not that many images around when I was growing up. It was an epiphany for me to watch the ship...
SM (00:26:51):
Still there? Hello? Oops.
LF (00:26:58):
Where did you lose me?
SM (00:26:58):
Well, you were talking about your parents and growing up, being a biracial person in your early years.
LF (00:27:09):
Had I gotten to the neighborhood?
SM (00:27:10):
Yes. You were starting to talk about your neighborhood.
LF (00:27:13):
Okay. It was a tremendous gift and sense of possibility to grow up in a neighborhood where it was normal to interact with people who were different, who looked different, came from different backgrounds. That was not only a sense of possibility of what the world could be like, which was very unusual then, and in terms of residential integration is still highly unusual in this country, but it was also a reaffirmation of my own family and the normalcy of that. Having a Black set of cousins and aunts and uncles and grandparents and a white set was my reality and my normal, but it was very unusual in much of the world around me. In this neighborhood, that did not seem so strange. I remember as a kid watching the show, The Jeffersons. Had I gotten to that part?
SM (00:28:20):
No.
LF (00:28:21):
Okay. I did not love the main character, George Jefferson, and so did not enjoy the basic humor of the show, but it was an epiphany for me that there was a character on the show who was biracial, the son of the upstairs neighbors, who looked like I did, which is unusual even for a mixed-race person in that I look very, very... well, I look white. Typically it is often hard for people to see or believe, in fact, that my father was Black. That was a powerful sense of who I was. The writer Paule Marshall said once you see yourself depicted in the world, you have a sense of your right to be in the world. Once you see yourself truthfully depicted, you have a sense of your right to be in the world. There were exceptions like that that I looked for, that would speak to my reality. Maybe in a way, perhaps there is a way in which people like me were outliers to our own generation, because we had some significant experience or piece of our identity that gave us a different vantage point, forced it upon us by birth. Also I think of that as a great advantage, that I know what it is like to be on the outside looking in as much as I know what it is like to be on the inside looking out. I actually think that that is one of our presidene strengths.
LF (00:30:03):
I actually think that that is one of our president's strengths, which may well have come from that shared experience.
SM (00:30:11):
One thing that when your parents, when you were very young, did your parents ever sit down with you? Your neighborhood may have been different obviously than what was happening in the South. And I am not sure where your parents grew up themselves, but did your parents ever talk to you about the fact that in the 1950s, if you were, I think mixed marriages were even a crime in the South. And of course, we all know what happened to Emmett Till for just simply whistling at a white girl. He ended up being murdered, thrown in the river, the hatred in the south between a black male and a white female and all these other things, that southern mentality. And then here few years later, what it was like for your parents to even grow up and to be living during that time, even before you were born.
LF (00:31:03):
Well, my father was from rural Georgia.
SM (00:31:06):
Oh wow.
LF (00:31:07):
From a part of a neighborhood called Colored Folks Hill. So he knew all too well about what was happening in the south and where racial violence could go. My mother was from Chicago and was less familiar with that. When my parents decided to get married, my father went to the library, they met in Philadelphia, and my father went to the library to look up the laws because he knew it was illegal in many states to be married. I think there were still 17 states that had laws on the books the year my parents married, which was 1955, and they were not completely eliminated until 1967, in the case of this famous couple, Loving, whose last name happened to be Loving, L-O-V-I-N-G. And I think their case went to the Supreme Court and was Loving versus Virginia. So my father was much more aware of racial issues and concerns than my mother, which is not uncommon for who was white. I mean, it is not surprising given that she was white and did not need to know a lot of those things, and he was black and had to know them in order to survive. That said, neither one of them had, I think there was not much of a vocabulary for talking about issues of race and identity then in the way that there is now. There were not identity politics, there was not such a self-consciousness either celebratory or self-denigrating about identity in the public sphere. There were not these public conversations the way there are now. And my mother tells a story that in her own effort to somehow bring more black culture into our home, because my dad, I do not know, I guess she felt that my dad was not perhaps doing enough of it. She suggested that we subscribe to Ebony and Jet. And my dad just laughed and that was the end of that conversation. But we did know my parents were pretty active. I think they were more involved in the (19)60s and (19)70s politically than I could ever claim to be.
SM (00:33:50):
Hold on one second. I [inaudible] change this one tape player here. Hold on a second. Almost there. Okay. All right. Go ahead.
LF (00:33:57):
And were very upfront and honest about what was happening in the news. So we were not unaware of racial issues when we were growing up. So they did not really talk about it. And I think one of my sisters may have asked my dad once what she should fill out on a form that gave her the options of black, white, other. And I think that he said she should fill out other. But we were pretty much left to our own devices in terms of figuring out what we wanted [inaudible] or how to think about our racial mix. But again, they more than words, they gave experience of living in this neighborhood, which in the end I think had much more power than any talks might have and really, really shaped my view of the world.
SM (00:35:00):
Now, this neighborhood is where?
LF (00:35:02):
It is in Philadelphia, it is called Powelton.
SM (00:35:04):
Oh, I know that, yes. And this is kind of a follow up to this question, but it is no longer, I will just read this and make sure I get it correct. The Civil Rights Movement in the (19)50s and (19)60s and (19)70s centered on equality for African Americans. Could you describe the confusion and or lack of insight that most people of that time had for biracial Americans? And I want to follow this up with the following statement, that the African American community and the white community both agreed at one time that this concept of the one drop of blood meant that you were black, not white. Am I correct on this? And what findings in your book, Black, White, and Other, did your family and many others of the people that you interviewed for the book feel about this?
LF (00:35:58):
I would say that this notion of the one drop rule, which is also, I believe it is called hypo dissent, that a particular race will trump another race no matter how much or little of it you have in you persists to this day. So many people, black, white, and mixed, feel that that is true. That if you are part black, you are black. And some of that comes from the history of where mixed race people found a home. They were relegated to the black community. And the black community, either by choice or without choice, puts them in. Now, I think the way that people identify is so complicated, but a lot of people choose their identity based on how they look to the world and how they are treated. Most biracial, black, white people are brown-skinned. So they are treated in the way that much of our society acts upon race, which is based on your surface. So for a lot of people, it is just easier. There is nothing bad or good about it necessarily. So that is where they identify. Other people have different layers of identity that are sort of a public identity versus a private identity. A recognition that people respond to us out in the world in one way, but we may feel a different way in our experience and our chosen association. But mostly I think what is most important to think about is that race is a made-up concept, does not actually exist. It is a social construct by and large, which is why the US Bureau of the Census has changed its definitions of race over the years, many, many times over, who is white and who is not. So what I found most liberating in the research for Black, White, Other was that what had long been pathologized by social scientists was actually really healthy. So that is to say the truth for a lot of biracial mixed race people is that they feel different ways and different sort of pieces of their identity in different contexts in the world. When you say it that way, that is not surprising to anyone. If you are, let us say Greek and Jewish, you might feel more Jewish during the High Holy Days and more Greek when you go visit that Greek neighborhood in Chicago that serves food just like your grandmother made. So how is that any different from these cultural associations with black and white? I think it is not. But it used to be seen by psychologists and social scientists as a kind of unhealthy inability to choose a kind of sitting on the fence, an inability to resolve your innermost identity. And what I would say I found in working on Black, White, Other, and what is increasingly accepted in the social sciences and psychological communities is that identity is more plastic. It is flexible. The truth of our identities is that they wax and wane of the pieces of our identity. And I think for biracial people, that is just more exaggerated than it is for everyone else. But everyone has some experience with that. You are more political in one context. You are more an identified with being a man in one context, you are more identified with being someone's son versus being someone's father.
SM (00:40:04):
It is like when in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, if you were a college student, you filled in, you were African American or Latino American, Native American or Asian American, or white, depending on the background. But working in the university in the 1990s, when you came to visit our school, particularly in the early part of this century, the first 10 years, students were confused. I remember students coming in filling out forms on, well, wait a minute, I am Latino, but my parents are white and Latino. Should I put Latino or other? And they were actually going to the vice President of student affairs and asking for a clarification because a lot of them identified as Latino, but they really want to put other because they are proud of their white heritage too.
LF (00:40:53):
Right.
SM (00:40:54):
So I see a difference. There seems to be clear cut back in the boomers, but today with the children and the grandchildren, it seems to, it goes to a lot of different ways.
LF (00:41:06):
Well, I do not think there was a choice. There was no choice before. There was no sort of critical mass of a mixed experience. And it has grown to the point where people are finding their voices. And it is also less threatening than it used to be. I mean, you were literally taking your life into your hands. If you tried to stand up as a black, white, biracial person in a lot of situations and say, "Oh, no, no, I am half white. I am as white as I am black." That just was not going to fly.
SM (00:41:42):
We might be seeing some of these experiences you went through is now expanding into the areas between Jewish and Arab Americans. Because I am seeing a lot of the universities a-a microcosm of society, you probably see it at Penn, and I see it at Westchester when I was there, is that if a guy falls in love with a girl and vice versa, or even in a same sex relationship, I tell you, I am seeing more others than I am straight white, straight black. I am amazed at the relationships that are really forming today in society, which to me is a positive. And I think it is good. And I think if there is anything that can really heal our nation in so many different ways, it is the category of other where we appreciate the backgrounds of all Americans because that is the dream of what America is truly about. And Dee, do you know what percentage of African Americans or white Americans were biracial at say, in (19)68 as opposed to 2012?
LF (00:42:43):
I do not.
SM (00:42:46):
Okay. And when one thinks about that, 74 million, you have [inaudible] and wonder about the numbers within the group who were biracial at that time, who identified as black or white, and was mostly probably they identified as black during that timeframe.
LF (00:43:01):
I am sure that is true, yeah.
SM (00:43:07):
[inaudible]. Are there any events or developments that you feel shaped the post-World War II generation more than any other? I am referring to events that may be called watershed moments or moments where members of this generation reflect on when they look at their past that really shape them then and still shape them now. Could be individual events and since post-World War II America, any time that the Boomers have been alive. What do you feel were the watershed moments and what were the watershed moments in your life?
LF (00:43:46):
Certainly the Cold War and Vietnam War. The Vietnam War, particularly because it was the first televised war, which made it such a personal experience that this was in our living room. Then the microwave, think revolutionized our relationship with food and not necessarily in a good way. I think technology, which continues to just shift us on every level of relationships. It changes how our minds work, it changes our expectations of each other. It changes the boundaries between public and private. And I am definitely more comfortable looking backward than looking forward on that. I do not enjoy... I use social networking media, but I do not feel very comfortable with it. I do not even feel that comfortable with my apps.
SM (00:45:12):
When I asked this, I interviewed two people, actually within the last week. I have added six people, and I thank you for being one of the six that I added to my long list of interviews. And when I mentioned that business about the watershed events, you have already mentioned Vietnam here, but some of the things that have come up throughout these 250 plus interviews, the events that shape them in individual ways. And I have got 10 here and I just want to throw them out to you and see if there is anything that clicks.
LF (00:45:45):
Okay.
SM (00:45:45):
I will just read them. And certainly the election of John Kennedy in 1960 and his assassination in 1963.
LF (00:45:52):
Well, that is actually my first memory is his assassination.
SM (00:46:02):
Oh, yeah? Well, that is an interesting, you were very young.
LF (00:46:02):
I was.
SM (00:46:02):
What do you remember?
LF (00:46:02):
I remember that I was with my mother in a thrift store where she bought a lot of our clothes and that the women all began to cry and gather around a radio at the checkout desk. That is what I remember. And then coming home, and then a neighbor of mine, also a grown person crying about that too. But I was more connected to the assassinations of his brother. And I was much more cognizant then of Martin Luther King.
SM (00:46:40):
Yeah, that is interesting because when John Kennedy was killed, you must have been four or five and when Dr. King was killed, you would have been about 10?
LF (00:46:53):
Nine or 10.
SM (00:46:54):
Yeah, nine or 10.
LF (00:46:54):
(19)68, right? Yeah.
SM (00:46:56):
As a young person, what were you thinking about this nation that you were growing up in? Sometimes I wonder what young kids think, but what does it do to the psyche to see three major leaders of your nation murdered?
LF (00:47:14):
Well, I do think that that was a period of hopelessness where the carriers of the torch were being assassinated one after another. And what were the other 10?
SM (00:47:31):
Well, the other items I had here, the other was the march on Washington (19)63.
LF (00:47:35):
I was there.
SM (00:47:36):
You were? Wow. You were so lucky. Oh my God. Your dad and mom took you there?
LF (00:47:44):
Wait a minute, I might have been at the Poor People's March. When was the Poor People's March?
SM (00:47:48):
Well, that is it.
LF (00:47:49):
Oh yeah, I was there. My mom took me.
SM (00:47:51):
250,000 Americans were fortunate enough to be there in the presence of all those great speakers, but just to be around and... Oh wow, you, that is history.
LF (00:48:02):
And I remember being afraid of the National Guard with their rifles because I did not know anything about guns.
SM (00:48:06):
Wow. Yeah. The other ones were of course, the Vietnam War, the Civil Rights Movement, Kent State in 1970.
LF (00:48:15):
Of course.
SM (00:48:16):
The Ronald Reagan election, because things seems to really change in a different direction. Watergate in (19)73, certainly the entire year, 1968. And the rise of the religious, which seemed to really evolve in the late (19)70s and has been around ever since. And then certainly the election of President Obama. I put all these down as watershed kind of developments. I do not know if anything clicks there, but they were just, for a lot of people watershed moments.
LF (00:48:47):
Well, they are all major. I mean, I think more currently the current economic downturn, this major recession is a really affecting experience for everyone I know. So it feels like one of the most widespread, powerful forces going on in my life today.
SM (00:49:11):
When you think of, were you aware as a young person of Dr. King's speech too, in 1967 against the Vietnam War? And if you did, were your parents talking about the extreme criticism that he was receiving not only from the civil rights community, but from the administration of LBJ and others, that he should just stay in the area of civil rights and not be going into world issues? Did that ever come-
LF (00:49:39):
I wish I could remember. I cannot remember that specifically. I mean, my household looked up to Martin Luther King. And I would say my parents would have supported that position wholeheartedly?
SM (00:50:03):
Still there? Yep. Hello?
LF (00:50:07):
Actually, I am going to have to go in about three minutes.
SM (00:50:11):
Oh really?
LF (00:50:12):
Yeah.
SM (00:50:12):
Oh my God, I am only halfway through here.
LF (00:50:14):
[inaudible].
SM (00:50:16):
You do not have 90 minutes?
LF (00:50:19):
Oh, I thought we would said (19)60.
SM (00:50:21):
Oh no, it was 90 it minutes. W-
LF (00:50:24):
Well, I can probably squeeze in another 10, so you should, I guess, cut to your favorite.
SM (00:50:29):
All right. All right. I guess we will go down here. In your view, when did the (19)60s begin and when did it end?
LF (00:50:35):
Around 1970, it began. I mean, I have always heard and believed the joke that the (19)60s really happened in the (19)70s. But again, I was so young. Maybe an older boomer would have more of a personal connection to that. But I was just a little kid.
SM (00:50:59):
Did the (19)60s ever end?
LF (00:51:01):
Not in the neighborhood I was growing up in. It is still in the (19)60s. People still walk barefoot on the city streets there.
SM (00:51:12):
Wow. So it is still ongoing. Describe your feelings about watching the equality movements in the (19)60s, the civil rights, the black power, the certainly women's, rights Latino movement. There was the yellow movement, the environmental movement, disability movement, you name it. And obviously there was no biracial movement, but what were your overall thoughts on all these movements that were happening when you were very young? And that is why when they talk the culture wars, there is a feeling that the culture wars is the battle to really put a stop to a lot of the progress that is been made here almost to go back to 1950s America. Your thoughts?
LF (00:52:02):
That was a multi-part question.
SM (00:52:08):
Well, it is about the movement.
LF (00:52:10):
Oh, okay.
SM (00:52:11):
Yeah. Just your thoughts on-
LF (00:52:12):
All of those movements could come under the umbrella of social justice, seeking social justice for people who have been disenfranchised from the rest of society. And I was a child at that point, being led by my parents' values, which I continue to hold. I never broke away from them as some children do. And it was in support of every social justice movement. I think we were not aware of some of those because geographically they were not happening. Probably the, did you call it the yellow movement?
SM (00:52:48):
Yeah, the Asian-Americans.
LF (00:52:50):
That was probably more West Coast space.
SM (00:52:52):
Yes.
LF (00:52:53):
And we were in Philadelphia, so that was not very, I think on the screen. That was not so visible to us. But my household was a household that was interested in social justice. So all of that being good.
SM (00:53:13):
One of the questions I have asked everyone is the issue of healing. Do you think the boomer generation will go to its grave, like the Civil War generation not truly healed from all the divisions that took place when they were young? The divisions-
LF (00:53:25):
Did you say naturally healed?
SM (00:53:28):
No-no-no.
LF (00:53:28):
Truly healed. I just could not hear you.
SM (00:53:30):
No, the question is the issue of healing. Do you feel that the boomer generation, like the Civil War generation, will go to its grave, not really healed? Oh, okay.
LF (00:53:42):
Oh, okay, not really. Okay.
SM (00:53:43):
Not really healed from the intense divisions that took place when they were young, the divisions between black and white, male and female, gay and straight, those who were for the war and against the war, those who supported the troops, did not support the troops. The divisions were intense. And do you think, does this generation like the Civil War will not be healed? And is that an important issue within a generation?
LF (00:54:10):
I do not think that it is as divided as the Civil War generation was. But I do think people will go to their grave from my generation without having resolved the gulf between their position and other people's positions, whether it is about race or disability or class. Sure, I think that is always going to be true.
SM (00:54:39):
Have you been to the Vietnam Memorial?
LF (00:54:43):
Maybe. I actually do not remember. I might have gone on a class trip. When was it?
SM (00:54:49):
It opened in 1982.
LF (00:54:54):
I do not remember.
SM (00:54:55):
I know the Vietnam Memorial was built as a non-political entity with a hope that it would not only heal the veterans and their families, but start the steps toward healing the nation. Do you feel that that wall has done anything beyond the veterans themselves?
LF (00:55:16):
Not personally for me.
SM (00:55:21):
How about the generation? Do you think it is done anything in terms of healing the divisions and the generation over that war?
LF (00:55:29):
I do not know if that memorial itself provided healing, but I do feel like the generation has done some significant healing where people who were against the war have developed their points of view to be able to separate the warriors from the war, to be able to honor soldiers while disagreeing with the war, which was not a feeling during a lot of the protests. They sort of threw the baby out with the backwater in terms of vilifying soldiers as well as the policies of the government. So there was a lot of antipathy between protestors or from protestors toward the vets who are coming home. And I think that has certainly shifted. And those people who protected the war have become more humane and I think wiser in their outlook.
SM (00:56:41):
Phyllis Schlafly, who I interviewed, said that the radicals of the (19)60s now run today's universities. And they are the most influential teachers now running departments like women's studies, gay and lesbian studies, black studies, Latino studies, Asian studies, native American studies. David Horowitz has also said that. When you hear that, what do you think?
LF (00:57:02):
I think that sounds stupid. That is what I think.
SM (00:57:13):
Okay. She-
LF (00:57:13):
That just sounds like a gross generalization. And I think generalizations are a risky way of trying to make sense of the world. And it is tricky, even in your project, which I think it is a great enterprise to ask questions about this humongous cohort of people who have affected the world as a group in lots of ways and have had a very particular and interesting experience. So it is not that I am against investigating these large groups, but when people make a comment like that, I have to wonder what Horowitz and Schlafly are basing that on. How carefully have they looked at who is running what programs in university? It just seems like a knee-jerk partisan viewpoint, which from any [inaudible] spectrum, knee-jerk, partisan viewpoints are generally stupid.
SM (00:58:21):
I got three more questions and then we will be done. Are you still there?
LF (00:58:25):
I am.
SM (00:58:25):
Okay.
LF (00:58:25):
[inaudible].
SM (00:58:29):
This question I have asked just about everyone too, would you say the following quotes truly define the boomer generation? Quotes, what people say oftentimes are re-quoted for a particular era of defining a time and a group. And I have got six of them here. And you can add one if you think there is another one that is important. Bobby Kennedy is really signifying about activism that, "Some men see things as they are and ask why. I see things that never were and ask why not?" Of course, Dr. King, " I have a dream that one day my little children will grow up in America that is more equal," from the March on Washington that you experienced as a little girl. Timothy Leary, who talked more about the drugs, "Tune in, turn on, drop out." "We shall overcome," which is the slogan of the Civil Rights Movement. John Lennon, about the anti-war, "All we are saying is give peace a chance." And certainly Peter Max symbolizing the kind of the hippie mentality, "You do your thing and I will do mine. If by chance we should come together, then that will be beautiful." And then I know there was a historic one from the women's movement. That really defines a lot of different groups. Do you have a quote that-
LF (00:59:43):
Well, the one from the women's movement might have been, "War is not healthy for children and other living things."
SM (00:59:49):
Yeah, that is it.
LF (00:59:49):
Yep.
SM (00:59:52):
That would be another one there that could define the boomer generation based on the quotes that people listen. Do you have any others?
LF (00:59:59):
Well, I think that goes towards defining the experience-
LF (01:00:03):
...That goes towards defining the experience then. But the Boomer Generation now is a while different ...I mean, I guess you are focusing mostly on the (19)60s and (19)70s.
SM (01:00:12):
(19)60s and (19)70s and actually their influence even today, because they have now reached 65 years old this past year.
LF (01:00:21):
Right. I think one of the things that is happening is that our large cohort is helping to revolutionize the way this country treats old people because we are becoming old people, and we are a force to be reckoned with. So I think that is actually a really positive thing and a positive legacy we will leave. But let us see, those were really fun quotes to hear. War's not healthy for children or other living things. I remembered the poem, Desiderata. "So placidly amid the noise and the haste," and then it goes on from there. In Sunday school, I made a giant banner and spelled out at least the first stanza of that in yarn with glue on burlap.
SM (01:01:24):
Oh my gosh.
LF (01:01:28):
War is not healthy for children and other living things. Make love not war. That was back then. Also, I do not know if I remember this more, this has such an impact on me now, in the aftermath of King's assassination, but his speech in the church where he says, "I have been to the mountaintop" speech was very big, and the chillingly resonant line was, "I may not get there with you."
SM (01:02:00):
Oh, yes. What-
LF (01:02:04):
Go ahead.
SM (01:02:06):
When the Boomer Generation is long gone, what do you feel historians, sociologists and writers will be saying about the Boomer Generation and the time they lived in terms of your feelings? And then secondly, what do you think some of the lessons learned or the lessons lost?
LF (01:02:25):
Those are very good questions and big questions. Well, what I would hope for is that historians and sociologists, the good that my generation did. One of the things might be, as I just mentioned [inaudible] because we had strength in numbers, that was a distinctive quality of our generation. We had strength in numbers. We had probably more mixed-race people. That strength in numbers perhaps dovetailed with things like technologically base increase in being able to be heard. You know what I mean?
SM (01:03:34):
Mm-hmm.
LF (01:03:35):
So we not only had strengthened numbers, so we had more voices, but now what we grew up in a world that made it easier for voices to be heard. So when we did good, we did very, very good.
SM (01:03:55):
Excellent. And then my last question is broken down to parts here. This is the period that Boomers have been alive, just it can be a few words or a couple sentences, in your own words, briefly describe the America of the following periods when Boomers have been alive. 1946 to 1960.
LF (01:04:20):
You mean like the keywords?
SM (01:04:22):
Yeah. Just what comes to your mind, what was America like in that period?
LF (01:04:28):
Well, I think that was a period of recovery and retrenchment. Post-war. It signified the rise of the middle class. It gave birth to social policies which have both benefited and plagued us, for example, public housing. It was a period of survivors turning away from their losses and beginning to envision a future.
SM (01:05:20):
How about 1961 to 1970?
LF (01:05:25):
All right, first help me, what were the years of the Vietnam War?
SM (01:05:30):
Vietnam war was 1959 to 1975.
LF (01:05:34):
Oh (19)75. (19)59 to (19)75, okay. So we are saying the 1960s right now?
SM (01:05:45):
Yep, just 1960s.
LF (01:05:46):
Okay. So that was a fracturing of that unified society that had just come before that I was just describing before over social policy, civil rights and the war.
SM (01:06:14):
1971 to 1980?
LF (01:06:25):
Oh, that is a weird period because when was Reagan elected?
SM (01:06:32):
(19)81.
LF (01:06:32):
Oh, okay. So we are not there yet. Extraction from Vietnam. I do not know, that is the hard one to characterize.
SM (01:06:55):
A lot of people think that period between (19)70 and (19)75 is still the (19)60s because we did not get out of Vietnam until (19)75.
LF (01:07:04):
Right.
SM (01:07:04):
And on college campuses, student activism was still strong through (19)73. So then of course the disco period came.
LF (01:07:12):
Oh, right, maybe that is why it is so forgettable.
SM (01:07:16):
Then we had (19)80-
LF (01:07:17):
The styles. I had a Farrah Fawcett then.
SM (01:07:24):
Oh, did you?
LF (01:07:26):
Mm-hmm. I am not saying it was a good thing.
SM (01:07:28):
Then (19)81 to (19)92?
LF (01:07:28):
(19)81 to (19)92, so I was just out of college. Well, those were the go-go years. Well, that is sort of "The Bonfire of the Vanities" years. That is what I can say about that. And an increasing tug of war between the right and the left.
SM (01:08:03):
1992 to 2000?
LF (01:08:11):
More of the same tug of war. To 2000, yeah, I do not have much to say about that.
SM (01:08:20):
Okay. And then of course, 2001 to 2012?
LF (01:08:28):
Well, we are now global. I think 2000, we were headed towards this before the World Trade Towers and the war against terror, but in positive and negative ways, we are a global village now. Americans used to feel like the big fish, and now we are just the same sized fish in the world pond. I mean, we are a little bit cut down to size now, that is been happening in the last decade, that our place in the world is shifting. We have to take a slightly more humble stance.
SM (01:09:14):
What is interesting about terrorism that a lot of the young people today, the Millennials, think that terrorism began on 2001. Obviously, it was extreme in 2001, but anybody who lived in the (19)80s and (19)90s know that terrorism was ongoing, and actually really since the 1972 Olympics when the Jewish Olympic team was murdered. So it is like ever since (19)72, there has been some terrorism, a takeover of airplanes and all the other things we saw during the Reagan administration, it was just progressively getting worse. My final question and then we are done.
LF (01:09:50):
Oh yeah, we really do have to be done. Okay.
SM (01:09:54):
This is the last question, and this is about the free speech movement in (19)64 (19)65, obviously you were very young, but how important do you feel that movement was on the Berkeley campus with respect to laying the groundwork for all the movements that took place in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s that we have discussed? Secondly, because you teach in a university and experience going to college in I guess the (19)80s, the changing university in the college campus with respect to how it deals with student activism on the campus? Because my perception, I may be wrong, I would like you are feeling, is that I think universities today, for many years are forgetting the meaning of that movement. That the students at that time fought against the corporate takeover of the university and they wanted it stopped. They felt that university life should center on the exchange of ideas, not corporate domination that basically wants students to take and act in a certain way in order to get ahead in the world. Have universities forgotten lessons of the (19)60s and have they forgotten what it was like to be a student in that period and are universities today afraid of activism returning to college campuses because corporate control seems to dominate today? So it is a lot involved here in that question, but-
LF (01:11:11):
Well, and I remember when I was an undergrad that the big issue for activism on my college campus was apartheid.
SM (01:11:26):
Oh yes.
LF (01:11:26):
Anti-apartheid movement and a rising sense of, which may be borrowed from the Berkeley movements or grew out of that, a rising awareness of the connection between corporate profit and abuse of other people in the world. But the problem is I am an adjunct professor, so I am not involved in the wider university life, and I really do not know enough about what goes on at Penn to tell you that. So I am afraid it is a quick answer which is to say I do not.
SM (01:12:08):
There has not been a whole lot of activism on college campuses except that brief period of anti-apartheid period in the early (19)80s, (19)83 I believe. Now we are seeing the Occupy Wall Street group with many college students involved in that. There could be a reawakening here of activism on college campuses and the universities could be afraid of that returning knowing what happened in the (19)60s.
LF (01:12:34):
Yeah, well, my anti-apartheid experience was in (19)77.
SM (01:12:41):
Okay.
LF (01:12:41):
Or it was (19)78, so it was happening back then, but maybe.
SM (01:12:48):
Yeah, I guess if you have any final comments on the Boomers, any final thoughts you want to say?
LF (01:13:00):
I cannot think of any. If I think of any, I will email you.
SM (01:13:05):
Yeah, I have about 20 more questions here, but we are doing fine. I really thank you.
LF (01:13:09):
Oh, sure.
SM (01:13:10):
And eventually you will see the transcript.
LF (01:13:14):
Great.
SM (01:13:15):
I will work on it. Somehow, in some way, I have to take your picture.
LF (01:13:20):
Can I send you a picture?
SM (01:13:21):
You can send a couple pictures.
LF (01:13:23):
Okay.
SM (01:13:24):
I do not know if you have a picture of you when you are in college.
LF (01:13:27):
I may.
SM (01:13:29):
It is that kind of stuff because I am trying to do this at the top of each interview, there will be two pictures. One will be when some of these people were younger and one current. I have done that with a lot of them. Of course, the politicians that were older, just I have their pictures, I took them in person. You have my email address.
LF (01:13:48):
I do.
SM (01:13:49):
You can send them.
LF (01:13:50):
Can you do me a favor and just email me the request for the photos and be specific about what you are looking for and jpeg size and all that?
SM (01:13:58):
Yep.
LF (01:13:58):
Okay. That would be great. All right.
SM (01:14:00):
Lisa, thank you very much and you have a great day, and thanks for spending this time with me.
LF (01:14:04):
Sure. Thank you.
SM (01:14:05):
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 Lise Funderburg
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Funderburg, Lise ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
Authors; Educators; Editors; Funderburg, Lise--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
Lise Funderburg is an author, educator and editor. She went to school at Reed College and Columbia University School of Journalism. She has had publications at the <em>Washington Post</em>, the <em>New York Times</em>, <em>The Nation</em>, <em>Salon</em> and many more.
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
2012-01-24
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.10.2016.54a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.54b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
148:37
-
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/720d17f8efd07001e02b0361ff89d86f.jpg
e2fcc22995a7a2ecdca529aa40f85843
https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/58af0198e0506e0f488f9f3d6b8da9c3.mp3
c4eaae83e953462122c1f5c1f92db3a2
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
2010-02-06
Interviewer
The person(s) performing the interview
Stephen McKiernan
Interviewee
The person(s) being interviewed
V. P. (Vincent P.) Franklin, 1947-
Language
English
Biographical Text
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. V.P. Franklin is a Distinguished Professor of History and Education at the University of California, Riverside. Dr. Franklin is the editor of the Journal of African American History. He is the author of The Education of Black Philadelphia: The Social and Educational History of a Minority Community, 1900-1950, Black Self-Determination: A Cultural History of African American Resistance, Living Our Stories, Telling Our Truths: Autobiography and the Making of the African American Intellectual Tradition, and Martin Luther King Jr.: A Biography. Dr. Franklin received his Bachelor's degree from Penn State University, his Master's degree in Teaching from Harvard University, and a Ph.D. in the History of Education from the University of Chicago."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13057,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. V.P. Franklin is a Distinguished Professor of History and Education at the University of California, Riverside. Dr. Franklin is the editor of the <em>Journal of African American History</em>. He is the author of <em>The Education of Black Philadelphia: The Social and Educational History of a Minority Community, 1900-1950</em>, <em>Black Self-Determination: A Cultural History of African American Resistance</em>, <em>Living Our Stories</em>, <em>Telling Our Truths: Autobiography and the Making of the African American Intellectual Tradition</em>, and <em>Martin Luther King Jr.: A Biography</em>. Dr. Franklin received his Bachelor's degree from Penn State University, his Master's degree in Teaching from Harvard University, and a Ph.D. in the History of Education from the University of Chicago.</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
Keywords
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Penn State University; Harvard; The Young Americans for Freedom; African American student; Black Power; Jackson State; Anti-War Movement; Black Panthers; John Carlos; Students for a Democratic Society; Weathermen; Nation of Islam; Richard Nixon; Black capitalism; Ronald Reagan; George H.W. Bush; Vietnam drafts."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13228792}}">Penn State University; Harvard; The Young Americans for Freedom; African American student; Black Power; Jackson State; Anti-War Movement; Black Panthers; John Carlos; Students for a Democratic Society; Weathermen; Nation of Islam; Richard Nixon; Black capitalism; Ronald Reagan; George H.W. Bush; Vietnam drafts.</span>
Duration
Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.)
151:14
Subject LCSH
College teachers; University of California, Riverside; Editors; Authors; Franklin, V. P. (Vincent P.), 1947--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 V.P. Franklin
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Franklin, V. P. (Vincent P.), 1947- ; McKiernan, Stephen
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
audio/wav
Subject
The topic of the resource
College teachers; University of California, Riverside; Editors; Authors; Franklin, V. P. (Vincent P.), 1947--Interviews
Description
An account of the resource
V.P. Franklin is a distinguished Professor of History and Education at the University of California, Riverside. Dr. Franklin is the editor of the <em>Journal of African American History</em>. He is the author of <em>The Education of Black Philadelphia: The Social and Educational History of a Minority Community, 1900-1950</em>.
<span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. V.P. Franklin is a Distinguished Professor of History and Education at the University of California, Riverside. Dr. Franklin is the editor of the Journal of African American History. He is the author of The Education of Black Philadelphia: The Social and Educational History of a Minority Community, 1900-1950, Black Self-Determination: A Cultural History of African American Resistance, Living Our Stories, Telling Our Truths: Autobiography and the Making of the African American Intellectual Tradition, and Martin Luther King Jr.: A Biography. Dr. Franklin received his Bachelor's degree from Penn State University, his Master's degree in Teaching from Harvard University, and a Ph.D. in the History of Education from the University of Chicago."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":13057,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. V.P. Franklin is a Distinguished Professor of History and Education at the University of California, Riverside. Dr. Franklin is the editor of the <em>Journal of African American History</em>. He is the author of <em>The Education of Black Philadelphia: The Social and Educational History of a Minority Community, 1900-1950</em>, <em>Black Self-Determination: A Cultural History of African American Resistance</em>, <em>Living Our Stories</em>, <em>Telling Our Truths: Autobiography and the Making of the African American Intellectual Tradition</em>, and <em>Martin Luther King Jr.: A Biography</em>. Dr. Franklin received his Bachelor's degree from Penn State University, his Master's degree in Teaching from Harvard University, and a Ph.D. in the History of Education from the University of Chicago.</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
2010-02-06
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.10.2016.53a; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.53b
Date Modified
Date on which the resource was changed.
2017-03-14
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.
151:14