61 10 1775 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/1253bd9a4899545841efd5b0aecf643e.jpg d95cfea19488fda41725b712e0e96211 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/0d6122397365ba1599a944e1214ea348.mp3 e7080e4ba5e91da83fa8987cb544fa66 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 2010-10-15 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Alexander W. Astin Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Alexander Astin is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Higher Education and Organizational Change, at the University of California, Los Angeles and the founding director for the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA. Dr. Austin has authored 23 books and has been a recipient of awards for his outstanding research. In addition, he was apart of the National Academy of Education."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":8403713,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"14":{"1":2,"2":4995385},"15":"Arial","16":11,"26":400}">Dr. Alexander Astin is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Higher Education and Organizational Change, at the University of California, Los Angeles and the founding director for the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA. Dr. Austin has authored 23 books and has been a recipient of awards for his outstanding research. In addition, he was a part of the National Academy of Education.</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":"Psychology; Gettysburg College; Television; Baby boom generation; Civil Rights Movement; Women's Movement; Environmental Movement; Chicano Movement; Jimmy Carter; Activist; Millenials; Political correctness"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":2,"4":{"1":2,"2":13689059}}">Psychology; Gettysburg College; Television; Baby boom generation; Civil Rights Movement; Women's Movement; Environmental Movement; Chicano Movement; Jimmy Carter; Activist; Millenials; Political correctness</span> Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 96:20 Subject LCSH College teachers; Authors; Astin, Alexander W.--Interviews Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Alexander Astin Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: Benjamin Mehdi So Date of interview: 15 October 2010 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) 0:03 SM: A question that I have been asking everyone that I have been interviewing in the process. Can you tell me a little bit about yourself, your early influences? How did you become who you are? Maybe the people that inspired you as a high school or college student, and how you chose kind of higher education, [inaudible] particular emphasis on studying students and working with them as a career. 0:33 AA: Well, a lot of it was fortuitous I have to say, I guess that I guess not-not a typical answer. I was originally very interested in music and majored in Music in college. But my, my parents represented what I liked to call the-the snows, two cultures family. My father was a physicist, and my mother was into the art, writing and theater and that kind of thing. And so, I was influenced, pretty equally by both of them. I initially wanted to go into music as a, as a career, but I got very interested in Psychology, as well during college and so quite I guess, serendipitously, I decided to go to grad school in my college route. Music, I had minor- 1:45 SM: You are fading away. 1:49 AA: Hang on a sec, let me, let me put my speakerphone on here. And this phone may run out of juice on the speaker, but I have got another phone I can- 2:02 SM: Okay. 2:03 AA: I run out of juice. But anyway, so I, when I graduated college, I decided not to pursue Music as a career and instead went to graduate school in Psychology. Very scientific Psychology, of experimentation and measurement, that kind of thing. Not-not necessarily, Clinical Psychology. Although my first job when I got out of graduate school is I had to do two years in the service. So, I was commissioned as a Clinical Psychologist, US public health service, relief Medical Corps for the Coast Guard. And other than wearing a uniform though, was a relatively painless two years, I did work as a Clinical Psychologist in a federal penitentiary. But I, while I was there, I was doing a lot of research, I was always applying for [inaudible] so pretty much stuck with that the rest of my professional career. 0:3:38 SM: Were there any people that really inspire, were there teachers- were there? Someone out there in the world that, wow, that person really impressed me and inspires me. 03:54 AA: Well, I think certainly in high school, there were, there was a music teacher that was very much a mentor for me, and I was inclined for having a good time partying, not taking school very seriously. And it was- I thought to at least to stay reasonably clean and take me under her wing, and I did have a lot of musical talent. She tried to cultivate that. But so, she was very important influence and really, in college, nobody in particular. Our choir director was very supportive, but it was not until I got into graduate school, and I did a-an internship at a Veterans Hospital that I met I say one of my first major mentor in psychology, that was a psychologist named John Holland, who was [inaudible] but sort of developed a reputation in the field of interest measurement, career development- 5:29 SM: You went to Gettysburg College, which is not far from where I live. 05:34 AA: Where do you live? 5:34 SM: I live in West Chester, Pennsylvania, just outside Philly. I go to Gettysburg four times a year to the battlefield right I know that college really well, in fact, when I worked at West Chester, we took a group of students over there, we had a leadership on the road, we met the president. He has since retired, but very nice college was very good students and what was it like going to college there? Obviously, you went in the (19)50s. 6:02 AA: At the time I went, it was still very firmly connected to the Lutheran Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church. And I was not a religious child. Although I was very interested in religion, study to attend as many different types of religious services. But I was not a member of particular faith. I went there because of their choir, they have a world class, choir, and I was arranging choral. 6:24 SM: What were or are your views of the students who were in college in the late (19)60s and (19)70s? Yeah, in the following areas, and I will just list these and then you can just comment overall. 6:57 AA: Is it just the late (19)60s and early (19)70s? 6:59 SM: Uh, yeah, I would say from (19)65 till about the late (19)70s. Because when you talk about the boomer generation, they were those born between 1946 and 1964. But by the time they were going to college, it was around 1965 that they started college. So, I am really looking at, you know, that frontline boomers that were in college say from (19)65 to (19)75. And then you had the late-stage Boomers who were (19)75 to (19)83. But I would like your views on the students, the Boomers in these areas, just your thoughts. And I will list them. They, what, where were they with respect to their willingness to challenge faculty and interacting in class, their knowledge of history, keeping up with the news, caring about the social issues, as opposed to having fun events would seem to be very much what the (19)50s were all about with Panty raids, and all that other stuff, awareness of their world, and sensitivity toward people of different colors. How do they differ from the students that were, that preceded them? The students in the (19)50s and late (19)40s, and then the students that came after in 1983? Just your observations? 08:22 AA: Yeah, well, I guess I was a member of the preceding generation, the boomers came after I finished college. But I think the thing to remember about the boomers, and I have given this some thought, since we originally thought since we originally talked s, and I and I, it is impossible to overestimate the effects of elements. And what you see in the boomers, in many respects, the things that the ways in which they differed from previous generations. Many of these things, I think, are the result of television. And the boomers span the period from no exposure, basically, to full immersion in television, if you base it on stuff like the number of homes that had television sets ore the number of homes that have colored television sets, or whatever you want to measure it. They, if you lag it back to when these Boomers were at the most sensitive age in terms of being influenced by that kind of media, say around the age of five or six, then the early Boomers had very little exposure to television, and the late Boomers were fully exposed. And the effects of that, I think, show up clearly, in the data that we collected on the new college freshmen beginning in the in 1966. With the freshmen entering college, that year and they, they would have been born in (19)48, (19)47, (19)48. And the ones who kind of brought up the tail end, which would have been the late (19)70s freshmen entering late (19)70s, the most dramatic changes imaginable occurred in between early and late bloomers in just about every respect. You are really, if you take-take that span of years, you are talking about dramatic changes in the character, values, aspirations, etc., of 18-year-olds. And so, you know, to rump the Boomers into one category, it really kind of masks a lot of that does know these changes were in we have documented them in a number of publications, and so forth. But I do not think we will ever see anything like that, again, that massive change in the really in the population, country and the Boomers were just simply reflecting that because they were the ones, I think who were most influenced by television. 12:28 SM: Yeah, you know the Boomers in my interviews, it has come up over and over again, that people have problems with lumping people in the generation because within a generation, there is so much difference. And for example, those born after the war (19)46 to say (19)56. And the experiences of those born say from (19)57 to (19)64 is totally different. Because those later Boomers were not involved in the antiwar movement. They were they heard about it, they were the young brothers and sisters of the front runners. And so, the experiences are somewhat different. And which is I have had this theory, and I have been asking a lot of my interviewees this question, that what is amazing about the Boomer generation is that you, you have what I consider three criteria that really symbolize what they stood for as elementary school kids, that period between (19)46 and (19)60, when President Kennedy came in, and I liked your thoughts on this, I looked at them and then then you also ask yourself, Well, how did they become so you know, how have they changed so differently in the (19)60s, and the three areas are, number one, the quality of being very quiet. Number two, the quality of fear. And the third one being very naive, which is the case with most young people when they are growing up in elementary school, but the fear centers, you know, the threat of nuclear annihilation, the McCarthy hearings, the fear of speaking up, if you speak up and you were labeled a communist or it was really frowned upon the organization man was what was okay in the (19)50s. And naive because when you saw that television, over and over and over again, you did not see people of color very often, you did not see a whole lot of women, except in roles where they played moms raising kids and stuff. You see him as independent people on the road making decisions. So, there is a lot of things happening here. And then obviously, when we get into the, you do not see a whole lot about the civil rights movement, and then all of a sudden you get to the (19)60s, and things just really change your thoughts on those thoughts about those three qualities in the Boomer generation when they were very young. 15:13 AA: So, I, just to add another comment here about television again with is I think, I think what happened with television was that young people began to become more passive in their, in their recreation. And I think that remained this way ever since. And but most importantly was the message that television was purveying, which was a message of materialism. And not only in the commercial but also in the, in the program, a lot of a lot of the TV series, dialog exposed the world to material wealth, and so forth. And what we saw beginning in the late (19)60s and going on through the talking about 18-year-olds. And continuing through the early (19)80s, there was a dramatic increase in materialism. So, in a sense, the commercial message of television was having was having its intended effect, we were breeding a new generation of people who believe that material wealth was the ultimate goal in life. And whatever form it might take, in the academic, having lots of thoughts, acquiring lots of possession and so forth, so on was, was a very high value. And we were also at the same time, however, running, breeding a generation, a new population, really, of citizens, who were not very reflective. They have done studies on what happens to five- and six-year-olds who watch a lot of television. And the certain circuits in the brain are actually bypassed compared to radios, where-where in listening to the radio, you are these areas of the brain are activated, because we use a lot of you participate in radio with a lot of visual imagery and imagination, and that kind of and, and they are one of the social critics [inaudible] has written several books about this. And his view is that young people are brain damaged today, that their brains are not fully developed, so that we have all the ADD and all this kind of stuff. So, the evidence for the advent of this change in our young people is shown in the Boomers from the early to the late. All of these changes, as each new-new generation a new class, as you will of Boomers, has been more exposed to television as watch more of it. So on to the point where it became saturated, and at which point, all young people were being exposed. And what is interesting is the materialistic values that peaked out in the (19)80 have plateaued in a sense, which you would expect because the degree of exposure has remained high. So that basically the-the Boomers are the guinea pigs for this social experiment of television. They document the effects of this medium on-on our values and attitudes, this sort of thing. Now that there are some confounding factors here and you mentioned some of them, one of them is civil rights movements. So, the early Boomers, I think we were very socially conscious, very, very much more aware of some of these issues than I think the late Boomers were to tell you the truth. And they, they had experienced the Jim Crow bout, and the racist tendencies of the north and the West. And they had to confront that even-even the late Boomers really did not have much exposure to the Jim Crow world. The early ones did, and I think that is why they got so exercised about racial issues. And why civil rights movement really had a lot of white input in the early days, because a lot of thinking, young people suddenly became aware of the growth in equity that they had been exposed to growing up, and that they had taken for granted growing up. And so that began to crack. The early Boomers and so there was a lot of energy, a lot of idealism, a lot of engagement. And I think the antiwar movement was really just the perpetuation of that. The antiwar movement came a little later. But buried in all of this civil rights movement, the antiwar movement was American sexism. You know the- In the antiwar movement, the men provided all the leadership and the women provided sex, or painted signs, or whatever, but they were not really invited into positions of leadership and sharing of power in the, in the civil rights movement, and in the student protests. And so, the woman's movement became a- I think, a-a-an- that, and that really emerged in the late (19)60s that became a competing force for student activism. In fact, a lot of the energy out of the antiwar movement, a lot of it, and on and, and but the Boomers span, all three movements, kind of a tail end of the Civil Rights Movement, which really began in early (19)60s. And is to the kind of culmination of a woman's movement in the city, and in the (19)80s. Now, what, what you’ve got there, are that women were so profoundly influenced by the woman’s movement. And this shows up in the late Boomers. So profoundly influenced that the net result of this was that women and men today, because of this, much more alike than they were at the beginning of the early Boomer day. Basically, feminism effectively come become more right because the women have become much more like the men. Men have changed some, but nowhere near as much as the women. And we have all this is all documented. It is amazing when you compare men and women entering college 18-year-old in the late (19)60s, with their counterparts in years later. It is just a profound change. Even a change in politics. The men used to be to the left of the women, and they have traded places. women now a way to the left of the men. And that is true nationally, not just with college students and women's movements was I think, an impetus for that political change. 25:24 SM: Where would you play saw these other movements that also evolved around in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s. We all know that the gay lesbian bisexual movement was strengthened because of Stonewall in 1969. Then you had the Native American Movement, the American Indian Movement, which was in the took over Alcatraz, and of course, it ended sadly, in 1973. At Wounded Knee, you have Earth Day in 1970, really setting in motion the well, the environmental movement as a whole of course, I interviewed Gaylord Nelson many years back and he said they respected the antiwar movement so much that they met with them before they made the decision to have this protest with respect to the importance of understanding the importance of teaching, and then of course, you have also got the Chicano movement, then you have the Young Lords that follow the [inaudible] the Black Panthers, and you have you have all these groups of black power, all these things are happening in the late (19)60s going into the (19)70s. Is that all part of what was going on with the women's movement? 26:36 AA: So, I, the women's movement was very much of sisterhood. [inaudible] And what is interesting now is that this is a short memory we have in this country, the feminists today or the or the, you know, leading women, thinkers and theorists so forth have really forgotten. They I mean, they and women in general today take for granted the-the status of women today, as if it has always been this way. There is no question in my mind that, that is, by far, the biggest social change in our country was brought by the woman’s movement. I think there is no question about it. And every aspect of life was affected by that family life, community life, the life of the individual woman, the life of the individual man, because now suddenly, men have women as, as peers as work [inaudible]. And in the fields that you see. Nearly exclusively men of engineering, law, medicine, and so forth. You know, we have not really had a men's movement yet. That amounted to much of anything, and we may never have one. But the women have certainly been emancipated slavery [inaudible]. 28:23 SM: Don’t you think some of the African American students today and people overall forget what it was like to be African American is? Back, I mean it is the same thing. It is like it has always been this way, kind of- 28:36 AA: Absolutely. 28:37 SM: And I know it has even been brought up in the gay and lesbian community with the people I have interviewed that, oh, it has always been this way. I mean, all the battles, but an extreme prejudice. 28:52 AA: I-I- My African American Graduate students, when I tell them my experience growing up in Jim Crow, Washington, DC, they cannot believe it. They think I am making it up. 29:04 SM: Wow. What, what are some of the distinctive characteristic characteristics you have seen in this group of 74 million? I will preface this, first, do you like the term the Boomer generation, do you like it? 29:19 AA: Not really, it is a rubric to refer to a particular group of people that came of age in a particular time, but I think it is. It does a lot of violence to reality. [chuckles] And as the sort of main reason is that the early Boomers were so wildly different from the late later one. And, you know, the pundits like to stereotype you know, were the Boomers, you know, the protesters of the (19)60s and (19)70s? And that is really, really not a very good description. 30:17 SM: Right, What? When you look at the generation, what do you think? Are their strengths and weaknesses? And, and what do they contribute to our society as a group that was not here before or after or during, before World War Two and the end of the war. 30:36 AA: Well, I think the certainly the idea that it is possible to have a bad war. And it is patriotic to protest about it. I think that was a tremendous contribution. Now, that value judgment I just made is not shared by everybody in the country, obviously. But you know, given the stakes involved in warfare, at all levels of it, human, the social and economic, the international, etc. The high stakes of any kind of a war would seem to me to be justify, in a democracy, some discussion and debate and dissent about the act of waiting for one thing, to have a defensive war, but to that have an offensive war where you initiate the hostility. It seems to me worthy of some discussion and debate and the Second World War [inaudible] against that, and there probably would have been a lot more of protesting about the Korean War than there was if it had not come so closely on the heels of World War Two. 32:25 SM: very good point. 32:26 AA: So, the Vietnam War. War are longer now that I think the young people did really pave the way in the draft factor I wax and wane on how important the draft was. The Senate failed with the whole reason I do not I do not really do not agree with that. In any case, that that was a, I think, a major contribution. Another one was language, the use of language, the, you know, the 30 words movement at Berkeley was one of the earliest ample this certainly seems to me, began the loosening up of our language, the freeing up of our language, and I think the use of the free or use of language has been a major contribution, that ability to be authentic and honest with each other. 33:54 SM: Good point. 33:55 AA: I think I think that, if you will forget that. You know, I remember my first trip to Europe as a young man, I had to smuggle a couple of Henry Milller books. And my wife smuggled Ulysses. That change in language is another major cont- I think providing the environment in which the woman's movement could take off was very important. In other words, with the atmosphere of questioning and protesting and with the atmosphere of equity and fairness came out of the civil rights movement and in the student protest movement. People forget that the biggest protest movements, by any measure is not civil rights was not the woman was not the antiwar movement. It was the student’s movement for students’ rights. 35:14 SM: Yes. 35:15 AA: That drew more participants, and there were more protests about student’s rights. So that was, again, an issue of fairness, of empowerment, that sort of thing. So that all of that activity provided an environment in which the woman's movements could really take off. And where it was that women felt comfortable, uh- 35:45 SM: Yeah, you know too, it is, to me, the people that I have talked to, and when I-I am in that front group, because (19)47 is when I was born. And I graduated from college in 1970. And I can remember as a young person, this feeling on college campuses, that we are the most unique generation in American history. And there was a feeling and just a feeling that the Boomers were going to make a statement call themselves Boomers either, but the generation and the (19)60 generation was going to make a big difference in the world by ending all the wars, racism, sexism, homophobia, saving the environment, making the world a better place to live. And now, I am always reflecting just like you are, when you when you reflect on the women's movement, did they? Did they make this world a better place to live? Second, was this just the liberal wing of a generation, the new left, as they always talk about and so-called liberals, and was the rise of the conservative neo cons and the new right. They also were there in the (19)60s and became really powerful in the late (19)70s. And they, they became involved due to the reaction to the movement, the civil rights movement, the antiwar, the environmental, the Native Americans, the women's, the gay and lesbian, they have been kind of reacting to it ever since the late (19)70s. So, I am saying a lot here, but [inaudible] what-what has been the overall impact? Or do they? Did they make a difference in the world by ending any of that stuff that I mentioned? 37:32 AA: Oh, they I think they made a tremendous difference. It is tremendous. I do not even think you can question the difference, because- you know, the thing is, is that the-the protests accomplish their objectives. That was really remarkable and-and they, and they have remained in force, ever since. Women were basically allowed to be like men; have the same power and privileges and opportunities as men, then African Americans, almost all the jury of discrimination was removed. In fact, that, to me, that took the gas out of the civil rights movement, because also, affirmative action became an established policy, in the workplace, in the academia, and everywhere, affirmative action was taken for granted. You know, it has been questioned and challenged the last 20 years, but basically, the same in business industry, they took it for granted. And they still do, but it is in their self-interest is to have representation from different racial groups. And so, it seems to me that that, you know, one of the profound changes, changes from the rights of women and the opportunities for women, the changes in our language, the changes in our in our racial relations and in racial- Now, you know, a lot of the cynics say oh well, you know, the situation for African Americans or some African Americans for large numbers, that is true, but that is in spite of the civil rights movement not because but the snake in the woodpile, if you will, is the materialism. I really, I really believe that is the hidden legacy of corporate takeover of our mind. And that is what television is. And we have become a more materialistic society, and we still are. But that is not something you blame the Boomers for something that happened to while the Boomers were growing up. And, and it shows up in their in their values. As a change from the early Boomers as I said. that materialism is still with us. It is what got Reagan elected. It is now going into the realm in political discourse, money, money, money. We have a political establishment, and a citizenry that’s willing to borrow and spend instead of taxing and spending. Because the, the, the appeal of no taxes or low taxes, is the selfish appeal. An appeal to our selfish. The Kennedys, the 1961 inauguration speech would not fly today. But he made that speech in a very different value climate then today's value climate and the Reagan era, for me was just simply a consequence of this change in value. Not-not, not a cause of it. It- of course, reinforced it, but-but you can see these value changes year by year by year leading up to 1980. And it was pretty clear that something was going to happen politically. 42:17 SM: So, when people say that when they talk about the Boomer generation, and they talk about the new left and-and all the groups involved in the movements that the conservative students and the conservatives were kind of never talked about, even though they were probably some say maybe even larger number than those that were main movement protests and so forth. I have had this in some of my interviews that the conservatives have been excluded when you talk about the Boomer generation and-and then of course, there is there was a national, I think Student Association, there was William Buckley's group that met and then of course, the rise your you mentioned the rise of Ronald Reagan, but it kind of started with Barry Goldwater in (19)64. And those ideas really came to fruition, the late (19)70s. That and that is why we see today, the neo cons and the conservatives and their attacks on the (19)60s. And that generation as a breakup of our society, were the conservative students of that era, which some say were more were larger in number than the new left and the liberal students and students of color. 43:34 AA: No-no, now we have now we have done surveys of that, that is a myth that is- the peak time for the left politically, in terms of political identification was in the early (19)70s. When you had the left outnumbering the right, by better than three to one, we would have never seen anything like that since. As far as defining concomitantly with the materialist because let’s face it, the left does not make a very good appeal to your individual read, right? That is not something that the left is very good at. And-and the right, of course, is all about that. And so that, that helps to account for the fact that now the left barely outnumbers the right. And it has been that way for twenty years. That the left-right balances, are pretty much even lean, tilts slightly left. And it always has, but it is- of course if you break it down by gender, the women are still significantly and then the men significantly right today, and that has been that way for- 45:23 SM: In your view what? You have made reference to several of them already materialism. But in your view, what were the main issues of Boomer generation before they reach the age of 30? And-and I asked the same question, again, what has been the main issues of this generation after the age of 30? Since the oldest are now 64? And the youngest are 49. 45:46 AA: I am not sure that-that the issues are any different for the Boomers today than they are for other people today, you know, younger people today. I do not. I do not, I think it is difficult to single out something called the Boomers in contemporary times, as really being very different from anybody else. We have all been sort of swamped by technology and by materialism and by knowledge, distribution of wealth and that has impacted all of us. I do not know. 46:42 SM: How about before the age of 30? 47:43 AA: Well before the age of 30? Certainly, I think there was, there was a legacy of the days of activism of the days of hope, for humanity, that we-we have power to make things better. I think the, you know, Jimmy Carter was a big disappointment to a lot of the Boomers. He was seen as too timid and, in a way, we were sort of seeing the same things today with Obama, I think people are seeing him as too timid, to willing compromise, who willing to sort of cave in to pressure his enemies. And I think that Carter was the same, although the whole Carter thing was so confounded by the- Iranian contraband, you know, that rumble in the desert has been-been successful. Our perception of Jimmy Carter might be entirely different. And Reagan may never have been elected. Oh, yeah, you have that little military adventure in the desert was the- such a damaging thing that Carter's image and he had nothing to do with it. Bad weather. So, you know, I but I, he was, I think, seen as timid and as a disappointment and not having the courage of [inaudible] and by the, and then Reagan pu-put sort of finality to it, that was the [inaudible] for boomers and [inaudible] and then become as popular as he did further disillusion at least to the Boomers on the left. 49:09 SM: One person told me that when they think of the Boomer generation, they think of white men and women, and they had not, they never thought of even thinking of African Americans and people of different orientation. I have only had a few people say that, but people were upfront about it saying, this is not just about white men and women. So, have you heard that before? 49:38 AA: No but I-I do think that there is a tendency for-for white people, at least, in probably maybe people of color as well to think of Boomers as white. I think that-that is what comes to mind. 50:01 SM: What? What is your- I have gotten a lot of questions here. What is your reaction to conservative thinkers who say most of the problems that Americans did to society today are due to the generation that came of age in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s? And I am referring to the drug culture, the sexual freedom, no respect for authority, lawlessness, center, a sense of no moral character or break up the American family, the idea of the welfare state, the rise of special interests, the ugly dressing and clothes that they used to wear rock and roll culture, linked to drugs, that they mocked the IBM mentality of their parents in the (19)50s. And, you know, when I say, you have heard this before, I know that Newt Gingrich, when he came to power (19)94 made commentaries and he is a Boomer. And George Well, over the years has always had articles in his books, shooting at this generation, and of course, you see it today on Fox with Glenn Beck and Mike Huckabee, and even Senator McCain made comments about Hillary Clinton, they are close friends, but made kind of derogatory comments during the campaign a couple years back. So just your thoughts on that? 51:31 AA: Well, it is sort of a revenge thing going on here. I mean, I think that all the attention that the that the activists got during the Boomers, the advent, aggravating people who did not agree with the civil rights movement, or the women's movement or the antiwar movement, or any of that. 51:51 SM: Please speak up to. 51:54 AA: Well, Yeah, I was just going to say that. But there was a lot of attention and a plane that flowed on Boomers on the left, and they did outnumber those on the Right. I think. So, it is important to realize that the psychology of the right, I think, I think, but the psychology of the right is a fear of losing control. It is all about control. And so, now, the right feels better having a big army having a tough belief, tough laws, tough courts, tough judges, you know, we got to maintain control, because we are all flawed center. And so, we need a song, ironically, a strong authoritarian government to keep people under control. And that is a-that is a big part of the psychology of people on the right. And I think, I think they saw the (19)60s and (19)70s as a time of loss of control. people got out of control, so it was very threatening. And so, you know, it is-it is the paradox. Me arguing that we have, you know, the government to say, we got to cut it down, but also to be advocating, this has always been the, the, the contradiction of right wing thought is that, there is theoretical claims of freedom and, and what that really means is freedom to make as much money as you want, and are able to at anybody else's expense is what that really means, which was very narrowly limited to the economic sphere. Right? Because the control is all pervasive on sex life on what you put in your body, so forth. And, and I think that is-that is what we are seeing is just the manifestation of that that dynamic. I think that is why the alliance was the religious right as the and the political right. It is really a pretty new thing. You know it did not exist during the Boomer’s pay day. 54:53 SM: Right. 54:53 AA: That is a relatively and I think that around this whole issue of control. 54:59 SM: You know it is interesting when I lived out in the Bay Area, I am going up to visit a couple days, some old friends, but when I lived out there, there was a minister on the radio. I was I was out there, late (19)83, (19)76 to (19)83. And I will never forget this minister, I was listening to him on a Sunday night, and he said, the world will be a much better place when the last member of the Boomer generation has died. And then he went on his whole sermon was about why because he felt that the not only that those who were the active and protesters, but he said the entire generation, even those that did nothing, were totally subconsciously affected by it. And then it could be nothing, but we create a negativity in our society down the road. It was a I almost threw the radio out the window [laughter] but-but I am. Phyllis Schlafly and David Horowitz and other critics of today's universities say that. Oftentimes they say the troublemakers of the (19)60s now control today's curriculum, and they were referring to obviously the Women's Studies Program, the black studies, gay studies, environmental studies, Asian American, Native American, Chicano, that is what they were referring to. And then, of course, they always say, they are educated. They are indoctrinating, and they are not educating by these things, your thoughts on their thoughts? 56:31 AA: Oh, right. They are, right. They, largely, the curriculum and the faculties are controlled by the troublemakers. And I think the differences in how the troublemakers are perceived and characterized. You know, if these are the people who helped to bring about equality for women, equality for African Americans, the end to an immoral war, the beginning of the end of the suppression of speech. Yeah, they are the troublemakers. And, if that is, you know, that is, that is the group that is in charge of academia right now. Then I am perfectly comfortable with that. 57:34 SM: What did what did universities learn from the students they served in the (19)60s, with particular emphasis on those who protested on campus when activism became the norm? What- I fear that today's universities have forgotten, the lessons that were that they should have learned particularly whether it be in linkage to the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley in (19)64, (19)65. And the reasons why it happened. Not being upset with the fact that it did happen but understanding the reasons why it happened. And then all the protests, obviously from babies (19)65, (19)66 through the probably the 1973 time period when activism kind of died on campuses. What-what did universities learn, or do they have amnesia? 58:28 AA: I think the one thing they learned about-about protests was a tactical one. 58:34 SM: Hold on a second. I am going to turn my tape here. Hold on one second. How is your weather out there today? 58:40: AA: Very cloudy. 58:43 SM: We were-we were supposed to have some pretty strong 60 miles- [tape cuts] I do not know where they would be would it be, but I did not really the only reason. I am back. Go right-ahead. 58:59 AA: Okay. Well, I was going to say that. 59:06 SM: Still there? 59:10 AA: Yes, just a second, I dropped my phone. The- let us see what was on my mind, my mind was wondering- 59:35: SM: I was wondering what the universities learned from the students and service of the (19)60s, or do they have amnesia? 59:32 AA: they learned I mean, some tactical ways of dealing with protesters, and that is stop their issues, to have a conversation with-with the protesters. And-and in many cases, they did not do that. We did a major study on that during the (19)70 and the real difficulties on campus that came when the administration refused to stop or negotiate with the protesters. That is that. And also, the other one is bringing police on the campus inventorially. Because that was always an instigator to violence. I think they are much more sophisticated tactically, because they were on the other side of the protests during the during the (19)70s, late (19)60s, early (19)70s. So, they learned that much. Not allowed to negotiate with seemingly unreasonable people. 1:01:04 SM: Yeah, I think their whole experience at Kent State and Jackson State Police and guard coming on campus, when I was in Ohio State, Dr. Philip trippy, you may have known was my well, he was-he was one of the reasons why I went to Ohio State. And then I had a great advisor. In Dr. Roosevelt, Johnson went on to Johns Hopkins University, and they were like, to close the faculty members. And we have a lot of classes dealing with the issue of illegal aspects in higher education, about who can and cannot come on a university campus. And so, you are really right down there with respect to responding to that. Still there? 1:01:46 AA: Yes, I think, I think they-they learned a lot about the tactics. You know, the problem is, is that we do not have these big, weeping social issues, that can galvanize a lot of people. You know, you enumerated all the other much smaller scale protest movements of various sorts. Not only are they not able to galvanize large numbers of students around an issue, but also the ethical and moral issues are not as clear cut. You know, just to take one example, in the American Indian distaste for team mascot name, as you know- 1:02:49 SM: Cleveland Indians, and- 1:02:52 AA: Basically, the main issue that seems to get the attention of activists in the American community, and one of my former doctoral students, devoting pretty much all of her spare time to this issue. And it does not, it does not get any attention from people outside of the community involved. Like racial discrimination got the attention of a lot of white people. And gender discrimination got the attention of a lot of men. And of course, woman was a large enough group. It did not need the men, but it nevertheless, there was a lot of attention. So, these, a lot of these more specialized protests do not seem to get that much attention. And, and also, I think the-the, what is required to deal with it is a fairly minor things like, okay, Stanford, led the way back in the (19)60s, aging, his name from the Indians to the Cardinals. And then, I mean, big deal. And of course, professional sports teams are refusing fraud. Basically, that-that is the problem is it is the issues do not get the attention, get the empathy, empathy of people outside of the group. 1:04:49 SM: Bear with me here I have a question to ask here. And we will read this thing-thing, man, we will read this one. Universities today- This is just me thinking. Universities today emphasize service learning, and really have a push for volunteerism as important goals and preparing students for the world they will face in the future, by giving them the sense of helping and caring for those less fortunate than themselves. However, I feel universities are afraid of the term activism, which is really a 24 to 24/7 mentality as opposed to volunteerism that is oftentimes required, especially in Greek life organizations, and but although others do it on their own, maybe for two hours a week, because they we because they remember a time of disruption in the (19)60s and (19)70s. Where students demand. Where students were making demands that is greater questioning of what money is or accepted or used from corporations linked to war. These are just examples. In my right in my perception that money over ideas and social conscience is the number one thing in higher ed today. Because they are constantly doing fundraising, everybody has a link to it. And if there is a threat to that, these other you know, a lecture, they want to put a lecture because of that speaker is controversial, it could affect the money coming into the university. Are universities afraid activism, the term activism? 1:06:32 AA: That is hard to say? I guess I would put it differently. I think, what the materialism has infected. Is university, far beyond what we could have imagined, back in the (19)60s and (19)70s. And it has been exacerbated by policymakers who starve the institutions. And they find out, they can get away with that, because the institutions have a way of compensating mainly to raise their fees. And so, I think the-the focus on money is-is way too powerful. And it distorts our thoughts, distort our policies. And so, you know, we-we hire fundraisers to lead our institutions rather than educational leaders. And I think that is a huge mistake. 1:08:06 SM: That was what Arthur Chickering said, when I interviewed him, about six months ago, at the end of the interview of a job and revenue, book, education, identity, in depth, comparing about the boom generation, I asked him this. Is there one final thought you would like to give me as we end the interview? Is there anyone concern you have about higher education today? And he said, yes. Corporations have again, taken over. 1:08:34 AA: He is right? 1:08:35 SM: And, and you see, that is what really upsets me as a student, the (19)60s and you think of the Free Speech Movement, you think of Mario Savio, whether you like the guy or not, he is his voice. And if you read his speeches and what he had to say, to universities, about ideas, that is why I went to school, I went to school because I loved to learn about ideas. It is not about corporations taken over. And I know and so I have interviewed quite a few people linked to the Free Speech Movement. And even though they like Clark Kerr, as a human being, and many of them because he got fired by Ronald Reagan, and that was a plus in the eyes of the movement because that was a good thing. They did not because they just did not like Reagan so much that they call that a badge of honor for-for him. But, you know, he talked about the knowledge factory, well knowledge factories, what that upset a lot of students at Berkeley, and I tell you, it worries me today that history has forgotten in the university. And those students back then we were really fighting for the students of the day because the universities of our learning and ideas of education first, will last and forever. That is just me. 1:09:49 AA: I would agree with you. And the tragedies that we seem to have come to the place now where bottom line seems to predominate over everything else. And it is, it is bad. 1:10:13 SM: I want to get this quartered here that you have a tremendous interview that I have read over the web with T. Mills, do you remember this interview? And this is a quote from you, you have already mentioned this, but I want it for the record. This is a quote from you. “The problem is really larger than that, because the society is so different than it was in 1969. Kids grow up with a different set of stimulation, their ability to concentrate, their ability to read to listen well is different. It is different primarily because of TV, and the electronic media.” [chuckles] And that is-that is a beautiful quote [inaudible]. I actually sent this quote to some of my friends on Facebook that are in higher ed, did not. You basically, that was what you have been saying. 1:11:02 AA: Yeah, and, you know, we even tested this out, we-we studied a couple of cohorts of college undergraduates to see how their materialistic values develop during college. And, of course, in general, they tend to decline. And I think that is one of the salutary effects of the college experience is, students began to reassess their values and priorities. And this has been true from the earliest studies back in the (19)30s. That the college experience tends weaken your materialistic values, but there are individual exceptions. And one of the interesting studies we did was to see what-what kinds of experiences during the college years tend to promote materialistic values and guess what it is the television that you watch in your, in strengthening your materialistic values. 1:12:25 SM: You mentioned in that interview with cane Mills that the students today, in 2010, that you stated in the same interview is as much different is a much different clientele than those in the (19)60s and (19)70s. In the year that because their values are different. There is less learning for its own sake. And we learn in order to get credentials, get a job and to make more money. And you are-you are pretty good at saying, this is not a blame game. But it is just the basic fact that our culture is different. When you talk about their values are different. Could you just explain how the Boomer-Boomer generation values are different than say the millennial values of today? 1:13:13 AA: Well, first of all, they are much less politically and gay today. They are more cynical about politics. So of course, that leaves the field to the people who want to manipulate the political world, because the populace is not that interesting. And that is reflected of course in voting patterns and a lot of other things. The- I also think that not having access to print media that you and I were used to, is another factor because I really believe that print media, getting your news, through print media is a different experience. Again, you are more reflective. I think getting it off the internet or on television, which is worst thing is- makes you much more vulnerable to being manipulated, frankly. And so, I think it is easier today to manipulate public opinion than it ever has been. The so-called mainstream media are responsible here, it seems to me again, because they are primarily out to make a buck. And so, you know, if it bleeds, it leads, and the most outrageous things that politicians say and do get the attention. And so, people who are willing to be outrageous who are willing, and the attention really is-is simply look what this person said, rather than this person made up a story or this person lied, or this person to sort of the facts, they do not have that kind of reporting anymore in the mainstream media very much more. And maybe we get a little bit of that on MSNBC. But it is not right-wing propaganda. It is a being a funnel, for right-wing propagandists, I am overstating the case, but the problem is that our brains are being watched. And we do not know it. And there are some people who-who resist it. You know, years ago, Leo Postman used this wonderful metaphor in the sidebar, you know, what education really needs is the capacity to develop our craft detectors. I think he is lifting a line from Ernest Hemingway or somebody earlier. But the idea that, particularly this day, where were barraged with opinions and, and distortions and lies and so forth, is that we need to have the capacity to sort out reality from propaganda. And I think we lacked that kind of critical capacity. People do not have it. 1:17:14 SM: You-you mentioned in-in a lot of your writings that one of the key components of a successful college career is the emphasis on diversity. And I 100 percent agree. I went to Ohio State because I knew in that program, even in early (19)70s, little (19)70s, that multicultural diversity was a very important part of their program. And I was honored to have Dr. Johnson's my advisor who really, you know, made a strong in that particular area. But there, you mentioned in [inaudible] talking about diversity, that there were several ways of talking about it, you felt it was important that if you had to preach it, then do it, you were able to incorporate it into your courses or workshops and speakers on campus. And students that are encouraged to interact between the races. And then you see the very end student outcomes that are not positive come out of this emphasis. Have you-have you again, respond to these critics? And again, I always bring this because I would have to have both sides here, who say that some that all of these activities centered around indoctrination, not education. Because when you say preaching it and incorporating it, I think you have already responded with respect to an earlier question on this, but diversity is important, but for those some students today, and I hate it, I do not like it forced down my throat. And I have had that from some of my conservative students over the past 10 to 15 years. 1:18:51 AA: Well, I do not know exactly what they mean by forced down your throat. You know- 1:18:56 SM: Well, that is, there is nothing wrong with preaching the importance of it in the university environment for its students. That could be from administrators or faculty members? 1:19:08 AA: Well, you know, the, the whole idea of a liberal education is based on this concept of exposing the students to new and different points of view, people, cultures, ideas, and so forth. That is-that is the whole idea behind it. And of course, there are some people who are do not want their kids to be exposed to a liberal learning, and so they will send them to an evangelical college or the Military Academy or something like that. Wonderful aspects of our diversity. But the vast majority of our institutions are committed to liberal learning, and to providing a liberal education. And a good part of that involves exposing the students to new and different people and ideas. And, you know, what is really interesting is that we have just finished in fact, you might want to check out the microsite he developed for the book that is coming out at the end of this month. So, cultivating the spirit, “How college can enhance students’ inner lives,” that is the subtitle. Anyway, you can just go to cultivatingthespirit.com. And the website, indorses the book and so forth. But we were very excited about this. Because what we found is that experiences that expose students to new and different kinds of people and ideas and cultures, so forth. experiences like study abroad, interdisciplinary study, service learning, and even interracial interactions. All these experiences contribute to student's spiritual development and enhances their lives. And when we have defined spirituality as-as a multi-dimensional quality of all traits like equitability and your sense of connectedness to the world, your, your ethic of caring for other stuff like that, these are spiritual qualities that we looked at. And, and, and all of these kinds of liberal learning experiences, enhance spiritual development. And spiritual development, in turn, enhances the college experience in general. Qualities developed in college, they get better grades, they are more likely to be satisfied with college, they become more interested in graduate study and so forth. So, it is a very exciting study, and we had no idea we are going to find something quite-quite exciting. 1:22:28 SM: It is amazing, because as I am reading this question here, where were the students in the (19)60s and (19)70s, with respect to spirituality, the perception is the perception that you read from the books on the (19)60s is as they were reared in large numbers going to church and synagogues in the (19)50s. And that religion was very important then. And, and of course, religion was an issue when John Kennedy was elected president there of all the concerns of the Catholics, the pope would control his thought. But as the late (19)60s, early (19)70s, showed many less organized religions, and became involved in what I call the inner spirituality. We saw it with the Beatles, we saw with rap groups, we felt with entertainers that will the media portrayed Zen Buddhism became very strong. Course people went into communes and so forth. And so, they continue their religion but not in a structured way. are your thoughts on the Boomer generation and their sense of spirituality? 1:23:44 AA: I think it was expressed in their-in their moral outrage about, about the war about racism, both myself I think, I think we are sensitive of meaning and purpose and value and that sort of thing came out in that form. And it was all self-righteousness involved, and no question about that. But I think in general, the run of the mill student protests were motivated by altruism and by concern with social justice and equity and caring about the others. And that is an important aspect of one spirituality is one sense of connectedness, and people. Some-some theorists argue that it is the essence of what spirituality is all about. But, you know, the religious engagement Actually, we found declines during college while your spatial qualities tend to get stronger. Even though spirituality is more often a quality of religious people, and is not always that question about that, but in spite of the fact that the two kinds of qualities are positively associated, one of them decline in college and the other gets stronger. And I think that has a lot to do with the fact that, to a certain extent, the entering college students religious versus a product, a heavily a product of the family experience. They get away from that he is exposed to other religions and other religious perspectives. And then he begins to wonder, well, maybe this is not the one and only fate, and so forth. And I think that because we have a measure of religious struggle and that-that does show a substantial growth during college. 1:26:07 SM: I think it was about eight years ago, at West Chester University at the Student Affairs meeting. I do not know how it came out during the round came along around any news to report and someone said, well, are you aware of the students meeting in the basement of Challenger Hall, and they are meeting at seven o'clock in the morning before classes meet students of color or sexual orientation? Male, female or all ethnic groups. And I said why? Well, because one of their fellow students was killed in an automobile accident, over the Christmas holidays. And when they came back, they were meaning to try to figure out, why did this happen to her? And what is my meaning? Why am I here? And it had nothing to do with whether you are Catholic or Jewish, you know, Muslim, Protest- It had nothing to do with any of that it had to do with the fact of they loved the students. They could not understand why she had been taken away in and acc-. the person was a drunk, that did it. And he was just coming back from Christmas break, and he was killed. And so, they were just sat over there for dinner. they were talking about why are we here? What is our purpose? 1:27:22 AA: Yeah, and that is-that is exactly what-what we call that a spiritual quest. That shows a lot of growth during college, and they begin to attach more importance to exploring questions like that the big quest of life and living, 1:27:39 SM: Right. One of the things that- 1:27:41 AA: I am going to have to take off. So, can we wrap this up in a minute? 1:27:50 Yeah, I ever run another five pages of questions, but I guess I will not be able to get them in. Can I ask two more questions? 1:27:54 AA: Okay. 1:27:55 SM: Maybe; let us see? Which ones do I want to ask you? I guess. One of the questions is that in the in the late (19)80s, and early (19)90s, political correctness was a very, we heard that all the time on college campuses, the PC, and there is a sharp attack on some of the programs we mentioned, and so forth. And then, of course, in the (19)50s, we saw attacks on trying to find communists, you know, behind every wall or whatever. Did you think when you heard all these talks about political correctness in the late (19)80s, and (19)90s. Any comparison with McCarthyism in the (19)50s trying to drown out people that in a university environment that for whatever reason? 1:28:51 AA: I have not heard that comparison, but I-I understand it, I mean, I can see the parallel and it probably has some validity to it because, like with any-any social movements, they are going to be excesses. And I think some of the political correctness, you know, represents an excess is, you know, inevitable social movement. And I, my sense about it is that is that we just should not take ourselves too seriously. [laughs] That have a bit of a sense of humor about-about that. You know, it is interesting that the phrase political correctness was actually coined by people on the web to and they would use it to joke with each other about-about being too clapper with language or whatever. The right picked it up and ended against it. Last- 1:30:02 SM: We had a-we had a conservative politician in the mid (19)90s. Coming to the university checking to make sure faculty members were in their office. And they were supposed to be looking at liberal [inaudible]. It was unbelievable. And I thought is this McCarthyism all over again? 1:30:18 AA: Listen, I know a guy in the Department of Education when the Reagan administration came in. They sent some guy with a clipboard around to one office after another, classifying people as to their politics. And I would say how they would classify you, and he says, as a communist. 1:30:41 SM: Oh, my God. 1:30:42 AA: Okay. Department of Education. 1:30:45 SM: Oh, my God. My last question here is that data has shown that less than 16 percent, were involved in any sort of activism within the Boomer generation, the (19)60s or (19)70s. And that could be conservative or liberal activism. People that I have interviewed for this book, have said it was much less than 15 percent. Do you have data to verify this? As far as values are concerned. Do you have data to show the impact that this period had on Boomer youth both consciously and subconsciously, as time went by? 1:31:20 AA: You know, it all depends on the, you know, the most widely participated in protest was, of course, first day in 1971, (19)70, (19)71. Whenever they say was, we do a national study of this of this whole issue. In the published in a book called The Power of Protest, it is a jokey book of 19- whenever that was 1980, I cannot remember exactly when it might have been earlier 1977. But a lot of it is in there. I could not dig that out right now. But there is a lot of sorts of normative data on how many participated and what impact that participation had on them and that kind of thing. And so, you might want to check that out. 1:32:16 SM: What is the name of that Book? 1:32:19 AA: The Power of Protest. There were four of us who were authors if I recollect my wife, and I think we had four authors on that. 1:32:36 SM: What do you think the legacy will be in this generation once they are all gone? What will the historians’ educators and-and the sociologists be saying about the generation and secondly, in the current way, you feel this generation will go to its grave, like the Civil War generation, with so much division, that they will not be healed. The reason I asked this question is because I took a group of students to Washington in 1995 and I cannot understand this [inaudible]. And they were very concerned that the Boomer generation that they had seen on film reminded them of the Civil War generation that they had been reading about in their books, where divisions were so strong between black and white male and female gainsay. Those who supported the war and those who were against the war that that they were going to go to their grave like the Civil War generation bitter, feeling hate remorse and not feeling like they did in the Civil War. So basically, it is a two-part question, question of healing and the question of the legacy. 1:33:53 AA: I think if they it depends on who they are going to believe. You know, the right-wing propaganda machine is well oiled and has starting with, I guess, the Nixon and on with [inaudible], with these are books that are being drowned out by the Heritage Foundation and the taser and so forth. If you want to believe those characterizations, when you know, you are going to, you know, feel like you are a failure, nothing happens, but deceit to me. We got to look at the facts. And the facts are the generation initiated a lot of very-very important, positive changes and provided an atmosphere for other social movements to take foothold. And also, they popularize the idea of a value-based approach to public policy and government, so forth, as opposed to a cynical power approach. And so, there is so many positive aspects to it. And the excesses are easy to burlesque like political correctness, like reverse discrimination, and so forth. And but I think in, all in all, it has been very positive force in our society and-and the folks who, who were part of that movement, need to step up and be counted. So, you know, we are proud of what we accomplished, and we think society is better off for it, and it is not drugs and rock and roll. 1:36:16: SM: Much more I thank you; do you have any other final thoughts? 1:36:20 AA: I think that is about it. I really got to run. (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 Dr. Alexander Astin Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Astin, Alexander W. ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource College teachers; Authors; Astin, Alexander W.--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. Alexander Astin is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Higher Education and Organizational Change, at the University of California, Los Angeles and the founding director for the Higher Education Research Institute at UCLA. Dr. Austin has authored 23 books and has been a recipient of awards for his outstanding research. In addition, he was a part of the National Academy of Education. 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 2010-10-15 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.10.2016.35 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. 96:20 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/85a2e332ce2c49576b950b114a7eb46c.jpg fa712d46ece6d368ae60c16bec4559fa https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/9b382a7f1e7b21148a47f943cb63898d.mp3 7275b8ce9da1ee7814ddc96ac860a024 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 2010-06-21 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Alice Echols Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Alice Echols is a professor of History and Gender Studies at University of Southern California. She authored four books and several articles. Dr. Echols has a Bachelor's degree in History from Macalester College and a Master's degree and Ph.D. from University of Michigan."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":15105,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Alice Echols is a professor of History and Gender Studies at the University of Southern California. She authored four books and several articles. Dr. Echols has a Bachelor's degree in History from Macalester College and a Master's degree and Ph.D. from the University of Michigan.</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":"SDS; Racism; Weathermen; Affirmative Action; Women's Studies; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Graduate Employees Organization; Activism; Feminism; Women's Movement; Racial Discrimination; 1960s; 1970s; Environmental Movement; Anti-War Movement; Soul Music; Funk Music; Disco Era; Identity Politics; Sexual Revolution; Janis Joplin; Roe v. Wade; Sexism; Anti-War Movement; Civil Rights Movement; Abortion Rights; Demobilization; John F. Kennedy Assassination; Drug Culture"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":515,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13689059},"12":0}">SDS; Racism; Weathermen; Affirmative Action; Women's Studies; Ann Arbor, Michigan; Graduate Employees Organization; Activism; Feminism; Women's Movement; Racial Discrimination; 1960s; 1970s; Environmental Movement; Anti-War Movement; Soul Music; Funk Music; Disco Era; Identity Politics; Sexual Revolution; Janis Joplin; Roe v. Wade; Sexism; Anti-War Movement; Civil Rights Movement; Abortion Rights; Demobilization; John F. Kennedy Assassination; Drug Culture</span> Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 145:52 Subject LCSH College teachers; Echols, 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>. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Alice Echols Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 21 June 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:04): Alice Echols. AE (00:00:08): Okay. SM (00:00:09): My first question is, when you were in college during the late (19)60s and early (19)70s as an undergrad and then in graduate school in the late (19)70s through the mid (19)80s, what did you see both socially and culturally? What stood out? I know that you have written in Disco about the music and the movements that were taking place in America in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s, and some of the influences that were happening too, and not only African Americans, but women and gay and lesbian Americans. Just your thoughts on your college years and what you saw. AE (00:00:51): Do you mean on campus? I mean- SM (00:00:54): Yes, on campus. AE (00:00:55): Okay. Okay. Well, I went to, as an undergraduate, I attended Carleton College, which is in Northfield, Minnesota. It is sort of surrounded by cornfields. And yeah, there were not a lot of attractions beyond the campus. There were a few, but there were not very many. In fact, I left Carleton and did my senior, so my last, pretty much last year and a half, I guess I would say, at Macalester College, which was in Saint Paul. I did that for a number of reasons, but certainly, one of the reasons I transferred... Because I had a lot of friends at Carleton and we stayed friends, and they were a big piece of my story. I am still Close to some of them. But I went to Macalester because it was a more politically active campus. As I said, it was in the city. It had, I think, the greatest proportion, the highest proportion, I believe, of EEOC students of any college campus. And it also had, and this is kind of remarkable, it had... The student council or student government had been able to hire an organizer to organize students, and he was a Saul Alinsky trained organizer. And so, how many college campuses could that be set up? Probably none other. Highly unusual. Very much greater population of minorities, especially African Americans at that campus when I was there. And to make it even stranger, this was pretty much underwritten by DeWitt Wallace money, which is to say Reader's Digest money. At a certain point in time, you cannot trust me on this because it is a sort of more hearsay than anything I have actually read, but I think he pulled a good deal of his money from Macalester. But in any case, it was a very different kind of experience. At Carleton, we smoked a lot of dope, and people within my friendship network certainly dropped a good deal of acid. I did not do much of that myself because I never had as well a time, but it was a... Carleton was a college campus, which was pretty intense by virtue of being in the northern frozen tundra. So, there was not a lot of activism happening. We were one of the colleges to go on strike as a result of the invasion of Cambodia. And I have this very, very dear memory, and I may be completely wrong about this, but Kai Bird's name started to cross my radar some years ago. I think that Kai Bird may have also been a student at Carleton. But the long and the short of it was that it was not as politically active a campus as Macalester, which is, again, one of the major reasons that I switched. For me, I mean, college was... I had gone to Sidwell Friends in DC, so I had gone to a prep school. I was fairly well-prepared, I would say, academically. Culturally, socially, well, there was a lot of sex. Not very much of it, for me, very meaningful. And I do think that many of us felt as though men... I should say that among the women with whom I was friends, I certainly think that there were friends of mine who were having more fun sexually than I was probably, but I still think that there was a way in which there was some pressure to be heterosexually active. There was really no overt feminist consciousness at Carleton when I was there. I remember my roommate who became a Wall Street banker turned organic farmer, a wonderful woman. And this is much, much later, obviously, in her life. I remember her showing up with Kate Millett's Sexual Politics, and it was like, "Wow." SM (00:06:05): Wow. Yeah. AE (00:06:08): This was highly... Feminism was not part of the fabric of that school yet. Although I do remember, I think it was after I had already moved to Macalester, Gloria Steinem and Margaret Sloan, who was her sidekick then, African American woman who was very important. They came to campus and there was a huge turnout. SM (00:06:29): Wow. AE (00:06:30): And they were great. I mean, they were just wonderful. That probably would have been, I would imagine (19)73, I suspect, (19)72 or (19)73. But feminism was not a very lively presence. There were rumors. I remember the first transgender person I ever met was at Carleton, but was, again, not somebody who I at least understood as having any kind of feminist... This was SM. And it was rumored that when this person had... Well, I mean, let us just say that I was not really aware of any openly lesbian or gay people on that campus. Now, when I went to Macalester, I was living off campus. It was much less intense. It was much more of a commuter campus. Carleton was not. Everybody who was a student there lived on campus pretty much. And it was not even possible to have a car. I mean, when I was at Carleton, I had one of the few cars that you had to park it off campus and pretend that you did not own it. So, it was a kind of hot house. And I do not mean necessarily altogether intellectually so. It was sort of claustrophobic. We often tended to... It was easy to get involved with your best friend's boyfriend and stuff like that would happen. So, there was a lot of that kind of drama around. Macalester was different. As I said, it was a commuter college. There certainly was the beginnings of a feminist and lesbian feminist community there in Saint Paul. And I got introduced to it a little bit when I was a student there, but it did not... I was still rather nervous about all of that and what that meant. It really did feel like jumping off the cliff sort of to even get involved with any group. Not that I am particularly aware of there being any on-campus groups. I think I left there probably about (19)70... This is when it gets tricky. Probably, I think it was the summer of (19)74, and that is when I moved to Santa Fe. So, just to try to answer your question a little bit better, my sense was... I had been politically active, you have to understand, before I went to college. And I write about that in the introduction to Shaky Ground. I had been involved in a strange, little group outside of DC where I had grown up that was supposed to be fighting racism in the suburbs, and more specifically at University of Maryland stuff. I had done a good deal of... I had read a good deal of stuff that summer of (19)69 of some of the people who we met, because we hung out at the SDS house in DC, and we supported breaking furniture workers and did various things. Taxicab drivers went on strike that summer and we supported them at Union Station. But we were allied with this SDS office in DC that I think was viewed by the national office as rather dysfunctional. I do not know if it was. I do remember Bill Ayers coming here and being there one evening when he told us... He was very provocative, and he told us that we really had to pick up the gun if we were serious about fighting racism and stopping the war. SM (00:10:26): Is that when they were going to the Weatherman? AE (00:10:30): Yeah. This was when Weatherman was developing. Trying to remember when the War Council was in Flint, Michigan. It may have been... I think it was right around that time. You'd have to check, but there was Weather people around that factor. And I remember one of them trying to recruit me to go to David's grave, and it just did not make sense to me, actually. And I cannot really tell you why, except that I think I was probably nervous, made uncomfortable by the violence and also the elitism, I think. But again, this could very much be retrospective because certainly, I have been pretty critical of Weatherman in my hourly work. And let me just say, I was not impressed by Bill Ayers. I thought he was a real prick. So, when I came to Carleton, I thought that there was going to be more political activism. And what I found was some people who indeed had a political consciousness, but it was a pretty... Really, the life at the campus was really organized. I mean, at least among my friends, it was really about partying and keggers, and smoking dope, and the occasional dropping of acid, and having a lot of sex. It was not that... And I am not saying that that does not have a political dimension, but this was not a very strong political campus. Although that said, I did take a class with Paul Wellstone when he was- SM (00:12:26): Oh, yeah, the former senator who died in the plane crash. AE (00:12:29): And he was really incredible. I remember taking the class with him on civil disobedience. And there were indeed some political people there who influenced me. So, I do not know. I was one of those people who I suppose could have gone in the direction of further political activism of that sort. Organized, in other words, some sort of variety of left activism. And what happened to me was I ended up after college... Or again, on both campuses. Although at Macalester, there was less [inaudible]. And oddly enough, even though it was a more political campus, I do not remember being that much more politically involved. But be that as it may, I ended up moving with a bunch [inaudible] to Santa Fe, New Mexico, because I just fell in love with it when I came and visited. And one of my friends had grown up here and had been as an architect in Santa Fe and was just somebody who knew Pen La Farge. I think he was the half-brother of Peter La Farge, a folk singer in The Village and was the son of Oliver La Farge, the writer who was the author of Laughing Boy. And so, we stayed in this wonderful house that had belonged to Oliver La Farge. It was still in the La Farge family while Pen was at graduate school in Boston. We lived there for a year. And during that time, I heard about this interesting program in women's studies at the University of New Mexico in Albuquerque. And I started to go to their meetings. Again, this is something that I write about again in the introduction to Shaky Ground, but that experience was really pretty life changing because this was not... Even though it was ostensibly meant to be an academic program, this is a pretty wild and wooly one. I mean, this one- SM (00:14:55): It was certainly new. AE (00:15:01): It was new. It was definitely new, and one had the feeling that there was very little out there, actually. And one was really making the curriculum. But it was unusual in the sense that community people like myself, because I had not gotten my BA. But I got my BA from Macalester, not from UNM. I was not doing anything there but working as actually a gardener trainee too eventually. But community people were able, like myself, were able to speak in the program for a period of time, which was really probably not a great thing. But looking back on it, I do not think I had the expertise. I do not think I had the skills to teach effectively. I do not think I knew enough. But nonetheless, being part of that group of mostly graduate students, because there was, I believe, only one faculty member who was married, I think, to someone in the philosophy department, and I think taught as an adjunct at the university. I think she was the only faculty member. Again, very, very telling, working as an adjunct. That would change over time, but when I was involved, which probably would have been about, I think it was probably (19)74, (19)75. Again, my dates here are fairly shaky, but it was a really impressive group. I mean, impressive, yes, a lot of smart women in that group, and it was a group only of women. A lot of political tensions between socialist feminists and those who were more mainstream and those who were lesbian feminists. This was my first real introduction to lesbians, and they both inspired me and terrified me. But I would say that there was probably more in the way of admiration than terror. But they were so super articulate. They were so articulate. They were so sure of themselves. They did not seem like the kind of miserable, dysfunctional losers that they were meant to be. And that really did completely blow my mind. And so, I began to tentatively... I eventually moved to Albuquerque. I started to go to the lesbian bar. And indeed, my first visit there was terrifying because none of those women were there, but it really was life changing. Two of the women who were part of that Women's Studies Collective, as we were called, had ties to Olivia Records. And that was the all-women's record company that recorded only women, people like Cris Williamson, and not Holly Near, but Meg Christian and several others. I mean, it was a pretty accomplished group of women, Lucia Valeska, who would then go on to be one of the heads of the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force. This is not to romanticize it. I would say that... This was what? Probably, as I said, (19)74, (19)75, and they were all... There was a kind of dogmatism there that I did not like. I have never been a big fan of dogmatism. So, even then, that is certainly in play. I had a kind of uneasy relationship, I think, at first to that group because I was perceived very much and indeed did identify first as bisexual. And that was not a good thing to be in those days. You were not seen as farther along. You might think that lesbian feminists would think, "Oh, well, there is a bisexual. So, at least, she's more open than her heterosexual sisters." But no, it's not that way at all. It was much more the case of people, those folks, regarding you as really lacking conviction. You were seen as wishy-washy. You were seen as being the epitome of the liberal. And as you know in the (19)60s, in the long (19)60s, there was really nothing worse than being a liberal. People would rather deal with, in some sense, at least this was the rhetoric, would rather deal with somebody who was overtly inimical to their aims than somebody who they felt was dodgy in the way that they felt liberals were. So, I think bisexual women were really seen as dodgy characters, sketchy characters. And so, yeah, like many bisexual women, I did come out. And indeed, I suspect that even probably some of the women who were, I am quite sure this is true, who were the most vociferous, fiercest lesbian feminists have since gone back to men. But I did not really. I did not. But I would say that those were both wonderful years and scary years. Being involved, not so much in that collective, but in that first community and going to the bar, going to the lesbian bar, it was a very scary thing to do. It was not in a good neighborhood by any stretch of the imagination. There was sometimes men who would prowl the parking lot in order to beat up guys. That never happened to me. But I remember evening or nights when men were chased away. There were fights inside the bar for sure. There were tensions between Chicanos and Anglos, between working class women and middle-class women, between town and gown. I would not say antagonism but mistrust or distrust. So, it was a pretty... It was also a wonderful place in many ways, although it was a complete [inaudible]. But I would say you really did feel like you were leaving your life behind. And I started to see much less of my friends in Santa Fe when I moved down there, and I came out. Relations with my family became much tenser. They had been a little tense because I had been involved in these political groups. And I can remember calling my mother up to tell her that I was coming out, and she was just so actually relieved that I was not calling to say that I was joining some terrorist group. That actually, her reaction, I would not say that it was great, but it could have been a lot worse. There was definitely, I think, an element of relief. SM (00:23:16): So, your generation gap between your parents was over this issue? AE (00:23:21): Well, I would say my father was a pretty interesting character because he had been a new neoliberal and he subscribed to I. F. Stone weekly, at a point in time when actually it could have hurt him because he ended up, he worked at the Veteran's Administration, and he became the head of the mortgage loan guarantee division. And that was a job, it was a position that required congressional approval, as I understand it. And they could subpoena anything, everything, anything, including what he was subscribing to. So, that was pretty nervy of him. But over time, I will say that he became, and this was a source of a lot of conflict between us, he became a Reagan nut. He ended up moving to the right. For all I know, he voted for Nixon. I am just not sure. But he ended up moving to the right. And we did have fights about racism and about affirmative action, and about the ERA, and abortion. Yeah, we definitely did. Not so much as my mother. My mother was not as politically invested as my father was because he worked at a government agency. I do not doubt that he saw a good deal of abuse and fraud, especially in his workings with HUD because he had [inaudible]. SM (00:25:08): Do you think the McCarthy hearings had anything to do with his fear of what could happen to him if he was a liberal and... AE (00:25:23): Well, no, because he was subscribing to I. F. Stone. And I. F. Stone, as you know, was- SM (00:25:24): Yeah. Pretty much, yeah. AE (00:25:31): Certainly, was judged a dangerous lefty by some people in the administration. And I think by the time that my father... This would have been during Nixon's years when he was going up. So, I do not know. I do not really think so. I think he had every reason to be fearful given Nixon and given that administration about what might happen to his appointment. And it ended up not happening. He ended up being fine, but he was an odd person in that, as I understand it... Again, I have not checked this independently, but as I understand it, he was the first person at the VA in his division to hire an African American. And indeed, I had lunch with my father and this man a number of times. And he was not, by any stretch of the imagination, a man that could be characterized as an Uncle Tom. He really was not. So, my father was odd. I would say he was an interesting mix, who over time, I think mostly goes to the right, turns to the right because of the riots in DC. I think what happened there were friends of his were attacked by Black people in the street, including people who he knew to be very honorable liberals. That really changed him, and it was very hard to see that happen. It was hard to experience that. But we did continue to... So, he goes to the right. And for years, he would send a weekly letter, both of them, both of the parents would. And he would include a page usually, which would deal with current events and his sort of sense. He was forever making disparaging comments about gays and lesbians and feminists, and you name it. And finally, towards the latter part of his life, my mother, finally, because we had a big, serious falling out at some point, I think it was in the (19)90s, and my mother persuaded me to ratchet that down, ratchet that rhetoric down. And in fact, before my mother died, she really became quite wonderful. Now, because father has died, she became much more open to- SM (00:28:22): Did you pick the University of Michigan for your master's and PhD because you wanted to be real competent in your knowledge of the subject matter that you were talking about earlier? AE (00:28:34): I had applied to a number of schools including UCLA, I think Yale, which I did not get into. But I think UCLA was definitely one of them and I did get in there, and Michigan and Yale. I think there was another school that I did not get into, and there was another one that I did, maybe Wisconsin. I ended up going to Michigan because it was meant to be very good in women's history. And Robin Jacoby was then a young and tenured faculty member there and Louise Billie was in European history. And so, it was very strong in social history. And as you know, women's history really grows out of social history. And there was a young urban historian there by the name of Elizabeth Pleck, whose husband Joe Pleck has done a lot of work on sex-role, as they were called, through sex- role socialization as it was involved in at that point in time. So, I really went there because of its reputation as a very strong department, but one that was especially strong, I hope, in women's history. That turned out not to be true. It turned out to be a very conservative department that I was getting into. For instance, Liz Pleck was denied tenure pretty early into my- [inaudible]. Pretty early into my time there, Robin Jacoby did not go up for tenure, knowing she would not get it. And they did not make any replacement. There was no real woman's historian hired there in the US side, which was what I was supposed to be in, until Phil Carlson was hired, which was, I think the year that I was... the year that I was defending or the year before I was defending my decision. So I effectively had the decision. I remember very clearly going and had... I had nobody to work with. I will get back to that interesting problem in a minute. But I went to Michigan also because it was Ann Arbor, it had this whole aura of, and history of radicalism, right? SM (00:30:59): Yes. AE (00:31:00): And so I was very eager to be there. And I knew that women's studies there were meant to be really interesting and it was really interesting. It was so terrific. This is where Gal Rubin was a graduate student and Kathleen Stewart or Katie Stewart was a graduate student there, and there were other people and it was just the most amazing collection of people. Believe me, it was a wonderful, wonderful experience to be part of that program. And that is really where my intellectual life was, it was not in history. History was still very conservative and that changes. Indeed, it is changing by the time I am finishing up, but really much too late to help me. But I was also part of the so called women's community there, which is to say really, basically the lesbian community and the collectives that ran the women's Bookstore in town. And then there were various struggles there, three of the VA nurses who again, we argued wrongly accused of killing people. This was legalized prostitution. Ann Arbor was the home of legalized marijuana and we thought legalized prostitution. So we were sort of the leading edge of the, I would say, the protest front before the sex board actually emerged. And some of it actually was because of the fact that a number of the women who were the most active women in the lesbian family community there also worked as bus drivers at the Unionized Trust company in Ann Arbor and also moonlighted as prostitutes. They worked, they were sex workers at a brothel that were city corner from where I [inaudible] later in the [inaudible]. So politically I was involved in the Graduate Employers Organization too, but that was not really where my heart was as much as it was in the women's community over time as against, over time as those organizations there were fewer of these mobilizations and I became more involved ultimately in writing the dissertation. So I became less politically active, but I was pretty politically active at first in my first years in Ann Arbor. But the person, the people who really saved me back to faculty members, and it was Barbara Fields, the Columbia historian, Barbara [inaudible], who I had done coursework with and had been on my world. And she and I ran into it. But there were a grocery store and she offered to co-chair my committee. And Louis Hilly, who was the Europeanist, was the other co-chair. But it is quite telling that in the dissertation it was really about radical feminism in the recent past. I had no one to work with others in, and they were Louis me. I am not complaining in the sense that they were wonderful to work with, but it was not their field. This was not their field. It was still mean. The history department there, as I said, was still fairly backwards. SM (00:34:32): I got a lot of questions here that are looking at the era. Can you discuss, I just had an interview last week with Susan Brown Miller and some of these questions I asked her too, and though she had some individual questions about her background, but please discuss the movements that evolved in the late (19)60s and (19)70s. And I am talking about the women's movement, the gay and lesbian movement, the environmental movement, the Native American movement, the Chicano movement, but civil rights movement was already taking place. But please discuss the movements that evolved in the late (19)60s and (19)70s and why they seem to have declined once the Reagan era began in the (19)80s. And a lot of people blame Reagan because of the administration, but the movements were, a lot of them were shoot offs from the civil rights and anti-war movement for a variety of reasons. I got questions down the road for that, but your thoughts on why they do not seem to be as visible today that is my perception and they really have not been as visible since the (19)80s. AE (00:35:50): Well, I do think that the (19)70s is a period in which there is a good deal activist biology, and so I do think the (19)70s, the business character, I do think by the time he gets the (19)80s, absolutely, I think it is true. And there was a cultural shift of course, that put him into office as well was inimical to the kind of political organizing that had characterized the (19)60s and into the 1970s. So I think that that was the fast. But I also think that it is very, very hard to maintain movements. Movements by their very nature or some, maybe not seminal, but they are limited. they do not just go on forever. And there shifts and they change and they rarely are, and they usually go through foul periods. Now, I do not know who is to say that there is not going to be some sort of resurgence of feminism tomorrow. Certainly people have thought that that was going to happen any number of times since the (19)70s, but I guess in the (19)80s, I have just been reading this wonderful book by 15 sample called The Feminist [inaudible], which is a history of, for the first and the second place. And one of the things that she points out, and I think this is really key, is that in part because of Reaganism and the tone that Reaganism took on feminist fear. Because faith that you felt if you were a feminist, and I would say if you were a member of a sexual or racial minority as well, or somebody who was elected, it was not one of the things that keeps movement going is a sense that you are gaining, you are actually gaining ground. We have had the experience of losing ground and having to fight and fight and fight, continuing to fight for abortion, for instance, that was getting acquittal away, continuing to fight for the era that was a losing battle. We thought that she had managed to diminish the possibilities of foreign adventures, right? Involvement in the affairs of foreign government, well, no, as Iran. So there were a number of ways in which I think people who were associated with those movements, the challenges to affirmative action, certainly there were a number of programs that had been instituted, especially during the LBJ and even during the Nixon years that were dismantled during the raging years. And I think there was this sensation that many of us had of a total fatigue. And then they are having to gear up around the pornography battle and faith in the first, within the sum movement, but it was also an internally divide movement. So one of the things that Christ stamp points out in her very really brilliant book is that when we are looking at feminism, it is not case that the movement end, which is, I would have to say that I would now revise my argument in daring to be bad. I think that radical feminism does sort of peter out. But feminism as a whole, I think that I was far too harsh on liberal feminism. I think that then becomes the ancient, I mean, as I say in my book, even the radical feminist engine cuts out and it was less liberal feminist. I do not feel as now as gloomy about that. I think an awful lot was accomplished. And I think as a result of what I was going to say that Chris in her book is that as a result of Reaganism, you find American feminists working globally and having great success in working globally. Which is not to say that global feminism has been unproblematic because there has been a tendency, as she points out in her book, to flatten women's experience out and not be yearly as attentive as one should do the sort of local conditions and traditions. But nonetheless, I think that made a huge difference. And so I would not say that feminism totally heated out. And I think there are still conversations that are happening. There are still, I would not say that there is a movement in the way in which there was in the (19)70s, but there is still happening. And I think it is even significant when you have people like Lady Gaga saying quite forthrightly on the Larry King show, that yes, she is a feminist and that she wants to change the way that girls and women think about themselves. SM (00:41:51): You wrote a book on radical feminism, and of course a lot of people I have interviewed are proud to be feminist, but they do not say they are radical feminists. How do you define the difference between a radical feminist and just a feminist or a mainstream feminist, or what is the difference? AE (00:42:08): Well, I think that really defies easy descriptions. I, again I would have to say, I really tried very diligently in that book to give a definition of radical feminism that would be broad enough to include even radical feminists who did not agree with each other. SM (00:42:39): Hold on one second. I have to turn my, okay. AE (00:42:47): But I mean, Susan Brown Miller, I do not know how she identified herself to you in her interview, but for instance, she was involved in a group called New York Radical Feminist. And I would say still that what characterized radical feminism, and this is where I would be more critical of my book now, is that I think that this began to characterize liberal feminists as well over time because it was a very powerful idea. Which is the idea that personal is political, which means this is an idea by the way that I think has been understood, has been used in ways that have not always been productive. But be that as it may, I think that the personal is political was originally an idea that was really put forward by Seawright Neural the radical sociologist, and then popularized somewhat by Hayden and then further picked up on by the woman who begin to form these little groups that become the basis of the Women's liberation Movement. And what the personal is political really means is that there is that personal life, this area of our existence that we usually assume is purely personal, actually has the political dimensions. And so it actually says something about the culture in which we live that, for instance, heterosexual sex at that point in time often was a three-minute affair that did very often was more centered around male pleasure than female. It was significant and said something about the culture that there were certain people who were changing the diapers and cooking the meals and cleaning up, et cetera, et cetera. That was what it was really, I think originally supposed to mean. Not that if you lived with a man or if your hair was long, or if you wore high heels and you were not a feminist, which is very often the way that it was construed, I think. But so a radical feminist was somebody who really felt that the real focus of our political activism needed to be around the personal and needed to be around the psychological. Not to the total dismissal of dealing with and working on employment discrimination or rape laws or violence against women more generally. But that the real meat of this, the real meat of the struggle was psychological and it was relational. And so for me, radical feminism was really about an immense challenge to personal life and to the sort of social organization of private life. And again, in some cases it led to things that I think were unfortunate. The personal political was one of the arguments that was used to by some feminists to supports the impeachment of Clinton. And I myself, could not have cared less. I should not say I could not have cared less, but I did not think that that should be the basis of impeachment. But I do think that the attention to personal life, whereas liberal had been much more tuned to sort of more conventionally understood political realm of employment discrimination laws, legislation. But here is the thing, over time, inevitably the radical feminist's agenda, the sort of focus on the personal, it be very visible and so now begins to organize CR groups now takes up the struggle more effectively than radical feminists does. Abortion rights and rape laws and on and on and on. So the liberal feminist, the liberal feminist, played an incredibly important role, and they were themselves changed and transformed by radical feminists. I would say radical feminism played a role in the women's business, not unlike the role that, for instance, Nixon rights. It pushed the issue it went deeper and sometimes in somewhat wacky ways, but it was still liberal feminism would never have developed as it did without that kind of push for radical feminists. Does that help too? SM (00:47:53): Yes. I have some names here. Would you put Gloria Steinem and Betty Fordam and Sherry Height? Would you put them in the liberal feminist where you have, but you would have Bella Abzug, Robin Morgan, Andrew Derkin, Susan Johnson, Jermaine Greer would be more in the radical. AE (00:48:16): Well, I think one of the things that I really feel at this point in time is that I am very uninterested in making those kinds of distinctions, in part because very often those distinctions were much more meaningful in the very early years of the women's movement. And over time I think became less so. Certainly somebody like Dudy Friedan had no use for radical feminism. On the other hand, she herself, her thinking was to some extent transformed by what was going on within the radical feminist sphere. But I am not comfortable making those kinds of judge, I just do not think it is, it gets us anywhere. Let us just say that at its best, at its most optimal radical feminism and liberal feminism when they worked together, were able to really accomplish a lot, sometimes in a kind of good cop, bad cop way. SM (00:49:24): The (19)60s and early (19)70s are often defined as the era that defined the color culture that includes long hair, unique dress, drugs, rock music, the sexual revolution. And a lot of people say that the (19)60s included goes right up to 1973 and that the real (19)70s began in the mid (19)70s, but the (19)70s were also important. So basically what I am saying is, and I have heard this from other people, that a lot of the things that define the (19)60s, many of them really defined the (19)70s and were more important in the (19)70s. AE (00:50:08): Well, yeah, that is maybe argument that I make in the disco book. I think this notion of the me decade, it was a great essay from Will, but think we have outlived, I think there was an awful lot of, if you want to talk about narcissism, there was an awful lot of narcissism in the (19)60s too. And I think, but to get at the question of the (19)70s, I think that what is distinctive about the (19)70s is that over time, one does have the feelings as a result of the loss of Vietnam, which different parts of the population experience differently right? As a result of that, as a result of the energy crisis, as a result of the shuttering of factories as a result of the recession and stagflation, it is a different kind of consciousness mean you do not have the sense of nearly the same sense, which was very important for the underwriting of protests. This sense of, hey, this is let the good times roll. This is just not going to end. We are going to continue to be able to live for $30 a month in a beautiful, somewhat rundown Victorian in the middle of a city. So that sense of optimism and hopefulness, I think begins to take a beating. And I think, again, more systematic research has to be done on this. And when that sort of sense of pessimism sets in, and I think also the political assassinations take their toll. I think in black communities, certainly the sense that you are able to elect mayors is important, but it is also becomes increasingly undeniable that these are cities that are in pretty bad shape. So I think, again, I think that the periodization is probably going to vary somewhat depending upon the group that one's talking about. But I think if you think about the (19)60s as being a time that did involve actually both collective action and assigned an ethos of individualism, if you think about it at the time, which was pretty hedonistic and pleasure oriented. This goes through, this runs through the threads that run through the (19)70s, and the kind of hedonism that you might have seen at the full auto auditorium becomes much more available to more people in disco culture. And in fact, one of the things that is quite striking about disco culture is that it is not, I do not want to oversell it, I do not want to romanticize it because there was racial discrimination in discos, but it is a much more integrated nightlife than what you found at Hip Ballroom where black people tended to be not typical. Something of a rarity. SM (00:53:59): Hold on. Somebody is calling. I will let it go. My cell phone. I will just let it ring. Yeah, it is interesting because as a student at Ohio State in the early (19)70s, this is before disco, African American students had their own dances and white students had their own dances, and there was this black power thing and there was a lot of intimidation going on. And then disco came about later in the (19)70s itself. Would you say, as some people have told me that some people think that the (19)70s were more about the sexual revolution and drugs was more a (19)70s thing than a (19)60s thing? AE (00:54:42): Well, I think drugs become, drugs had been part of various, if you think about it, if you think about pharmaceuticals, the (19)50s were a drug era. You think about just the very casual use of speed in the 1950s. There was a reason that so many beatniks were so many of the beats were using feed. It was that it was pretty much the drugs that a lot of people were using. And it was easy to get at Carlton, they would hand it out at examination time. And that was way into the (19)60s. So I think it depends on the kinds of drugs that you are talking about. And I certainly would not make the argument that a lot of people do that the (19)60s were good drugs and the (19)70s were bad drugs. I think that is very simplistic. But I do think that drugs in some sense become more available. I think that the sexual revolution affects more people in the 1970s. I think certainly gay liberation really changes the landscape for Williams Samaritans. So I think that it is absolutely true that there is more sexual expressiveness. There is probably, again, do not quote me, but there is certainly a lot of drug use. I think it does permeate the population more fully. And I think some of the biggest protest marches actually happened in the 1970s. I think all of that is true. SM (00:56:38): One of the things I interviewed Phyllis Schlafly, and I know David Horowitz, who you are aware of, a liberal who became very conservative and has attacked the (19)60s generation in many ways. You teach women's studies and well, another areas, how do you respond to the criticism of colleges today that the troublemakers of yesterday now run today's colleges and oversee departments like women's studies, gay studies, Asian studies, and black studies. It is a criticism that some more conservative people make toward the universities today. AE (00:57:21): Well- SM (00:57:22): And it is not only been since 2000. It was all through the (19)90s too, and probably the latter part of the (19)80s. AE (00:57:31): Well, I think that it would be fair to say that the university tend to be places where faculty members tend towards the liberal. I do not think that that is the preserve only of women's studies department. There tend not be, there are departments called things like lesbian and gay, bisexual, transgender studies. I do not know. I am associated, I have taught in many places in women's studies, gender studies, LGBT, I have encountered some dogmatism. But anybody who has read my work knows that I am really not dogmatic. I am not a defender of weatherman. I am not a defender of, I have been known to be critical of the last, I have been known to be critical of other strands of feminism. I am not really a very [inaudible] person. And in fact, that whole term, politically correct or PC was a term that was created that came about within the feminists and sort of larger progressive movement as a way of poking fun at that kind of the more ideologically oriented amongst us. And so I tend to think that actually in the programs that I have been involved with, that there has been a good deal of debate. And these are not places that are characterized by semi-Nazism as some people have alleged. I think I am somebody, and I know I am not alone in this, who when she teaches feminism, will often teach well, I always teach people who are critical of the movement as well. I will teach Camille Pollia, I will teach people who... AE (01:00:03): ... I have taught Phyllis Schlafly. I think it is really important for students to be exposed to something other than simply a certain strand of feminism, a certain kind of let us say, gay and lesbian history writing. So, I have always encouraged people in my classes, and I have seen this a lot among other faculty, encouraged people to question orthodoxies no matter what the orthodoxy, even if it's a political tendency that is represented in the program that I am teaching in. I do think that feminists have been really extraordinarily self-critical, perhaps not in ways that Schlafly and Harwood would agree with, but I think we have certainly taken on board very seriously the criticisms that, for instance, women of color have made of these women's studies programs. So I would say I am very well aware of those criticisms, of course, but somebody like myself, who I really do think of as in many ways, really a free thinker. I have not felt constrained, shall we say, by my involvement in these [inaudible 01:01:47]. SM (01:01:48): You are a cultural historian, and of course the boomers have been alive since 1946. The oldest Boomers are 63 going on 64, and the youngest Boomers are 47 going on 48. So they have all been around a while. So I break it down here, and I have been asking this to all of my interviewees, at least the second half of my interviewees, is, in your words, define the culture of these particular periods. I will do one at a time here, define the culture of the late (19)40s and (19)50s and how the (19)40s shaped the (19)50s and the (19)50s shaped the (19)60s. It does not have to be anything in length, but just general, what it was like to be a kid growing up in America, or a young parent like the Boomers parents or World War II generation raising kids in this era. Just define the culture of the late (19)40s and (19)50s, and then how the (19)40s shaped the (19)50s, and how the (19)50s shaped the (19)60s. AE (01:02:54): Well, I suspect that it goes farther back. I mean, I suspect that certainly the (19)30s did a lot of shaping of the (19)60s in the sense that initially a lot of the people who were (19)60s activists, and by that, I mean people who were involved, not in Young Americans for Freedom, I am talking about the people who were involved in FBS and other left-leaning groups, the liberal groups, what they knew about the (19)30s and the left through the (19)50s was very sobering. So I think that to a great extent, there was a caution about dogmatism and about relying upon a predetermined or any kind of dogma, any kind of Marxist-Leninist thought. There was a real uneasiness about that, which of course was an uneasiness that was encouraged and to a great extent by some of the liberals who were mentoring people like Hayden and others. So I think that, you have to go even further back. When it comes to my own childhood, I think the way that I make sense of it, and I write about this a bit in the Janice book, is that Lord knows Port Arthur was not Chevy Chase, Maryland by a long shot, and her parents were not my parents. But I do think that many of us grew up feeling as though our parents were just completely unreasonably invested in a kind of safe and secure existence. They wanted stability, they wanted safety, they wanted stability, and they did not want excitement. This is what I believe in the Janice book I talk about, I think I quote Peter Coyote about the adventure shortage. SM (01:05:21): I am interviewing him in three weeks. AE (01:05:23): Yes, check it out. I am pretty sure that he's the one who talked about the adventure shortage, and I did not interview him. I could not get to him so more power to you. But I think that that is true. I think many of us growing up did feel as though there was an adventure shortage. I think there was also a sense that a number of the people that I interviewed for the Janice book talked about, which was this sense of potential oblivion. I mean, I had nightmares myself about Soviet troops marching down the street. I mean, those of us who lived through the Cuban missiles crisis and were aware of and worried about the arms buildup, I think did grow up feeling fearful. I suspect that all of that, the sort of enthusiasm that our parents had for stability and for a lack of excitement and the kind of adventure shortage that that resulted in, and these sorts of fears about nuclear destruction, probably made us take risks. It did not make us better, it did not make us more noble. It did not make us the best generation or a better generation. It made us different. I think, again, each of us dealt with us differently, and some people took no risks at all, but a lot of us did take risks, whether it was deciding to come out as a lesbian as I did, which believe me, was not a great career move, although you would not know it now, but for a long time, I did not have a tenured position, and this had to do with the kind of risks that I took in my work and it had to do also with the fact that I was not at all closeted. It was pretty easy to tell from my acknowledgements that I was not exclusively heterosexual. So a lot of us took risks, I think as a result of that, as a result of feeling this kind of claustrophobia. A lot of us grew up in suburbs that did not have a lot happening in them also. So I think in particular, many of us were drawn to African American culture and African American music. Eventually, certainly for me, and I am sure this is true for some others too, from listening to soul music, you started to read Malcolm X and Eldridge Cleaver, and there was for sure some pretty problematical stuff in Eldridge Cleaver. But nonetheless, this stuff changed the way that you understood power and the way that you understood America. So I guess that is what I would say. SM (01:09:05): Yeah. You do not have to go in, because I got quite a few questions here, and your explanation was beautiful there. You have talked about some of these things, but if you could define how the culture of the (19)60s shaped the (19)70s and how the culture of the (19)70s shaped the (19)80s. AE (01:09:24): I do not know if I can really do that. I mean, I think- SM (01:09:33): From a Boomer's perspective. AE (01:09:35): I think that the (19)60s got its best, and there was a worse to the (19)60s, too. I mean, I am not a romantic, I am not somebody who thinks that everything about the (19)60s was just hunky-dory. I do not. I think that there were some real mistakes. I teach the (19)60s, and so some of my favorite books are things like... Oh, what's the name of this? The TC Boyle book about the commune, which is so funny. It is just really a devastating critique. "Drop City," devastating. But at its best, I mean, the (19)60s gave people, and I know this is an overused word, but it gave some people a sense of empowerment. At the same time, it made others feel, who had been used to taking certain privileges for granted, it made them feel angry about the loss of that. But certainly for people like myself, it was an incredibly empowering experience. You really did feel as though the world could be changed, a war was stopped. I am just looking outside because we are having a hailstorm, and I am trying to think if I should call you back in a minute and move my car. SM (01:11:23): You are having a bad storm. AE (01:11:27): Yeah, we are having a hail storm, so I am just looking outside. I think it is okay. SM (01:11:32): Let me know, and then I could call you back in 10 minutes if you want me to. AE (01:11:36): I tell you, why do not you call me back in five? SM (01:11:41): Okay. AE (01:11:41): Okay? SM (01:11:41): Yep. Bye. AE (01:11:41): Okay, great. Okay, bye. SM (01:11:46): You were talking about the (19)60s. I think you were finishing up on the culture of the (19)60s and the influence on the (19)70s, and then the culture of the (19)70s. Basically, what I am really asking here is because we are talking about when Boomers have been alive and the feelings that Boomers have. It is 74 million people so they have experienced all these. So what the (19)70s, the (19)80s, and the (19)90s, and the (20)10s mean to them, just from your perspective. AE (01:12:16): Well, I think that probably the fact that I was involved in the feminist movement and the gay and lesbian movement, these were movements that did have real momentum through a large part of the (19)70s. So I think that for me, and again, this is taking into account the fact that obviously, as I said, look at what's happening as regards to global feminism, had I made that move, then I am sure my feelings would be very different. But the feelings that I had, I would say in the (19)70s, I think that I still had a sense of momentum. I think in the (19)80s, the (19)80s definitely felt like a real break on change. I think that is when I felt, and I am not sure, again, this is hard to know, it is not clear to me to what extent I felt this and to what extent this was what I was reading in at the time. But it did feel as though there was more of a backlash in that decade against feminism. Then of course, there was, in this period, this was when I was teaching, it was the beginning of AIDS, so that really reverberated. So I think there was this sense of, that I was probably not explaining very well, but I think that there was frequently this sense in the (19)80s of not only not momentum, but of having to defend the victories that you had won much, much earlier. It led to a kind of wariness, at least on my part, a kind of fatigue. I was quite pleased when Clinton won. If you were to go beyond that, obviously from the standpoint of 2010, I am almost 60, the way that the culture has changed, it takes your breath away. It's difficult sometimes to comprehend how much it has changed. In the sense of being able to be, at least in my world, pretty openly gay, being able to not have nearly the kinds of impediments that I would have had and that I did have when I first was studying history because I am female. There is just so much that is changed. On the other hand, we have this incredible poverty and we have this environmental disaster and on and on and on. So I do not know quite what else to say. I mean, I think I would say this about the (19)60s though, to go back just for a moment, that my predominant experience of the (19)60s, well into the (19)70s, was this sense of really being able to have agency and feeling a real sense of empowerment and seeing it in other people, and just really how beautiful that was. It is kind of amazing, if you consider how, for instance, the university has changed, now we can look at the fact that the university has changed in all kinds of ways that are agreeable to me, whereas other parts of society a bit more resistant to change or have actually changed in ways that have contributed to greater inequality. You think about banking, you think about the lack of regulation. But if I think about the university, I think one of the reasons that that place has been so transformed is that so many of us from the (19)60s did have the sense of we can really do this. Right? That was such a strong ethos. SM (01:17:33): Yeah, you make a good point here about the fact that in the (19)80s there was this feeling of the gains that had been made, now there was greater challenge, and it is like you are fighting the battle all over again because that is when affirmative action was challenged. So the African Americans, I know about Latinas, Caesar Chavez working with them, of course, the labor unions were set back in those times, the women's movement. I know a lot of attacks on the environmental movement took place then. Certainly, I think just about every movement we have discussed, the anti-war movement was almost nonexistent. There was a small group of anti-war, but then we saw it all over again in the early (19)90s in the Gulf War. So my next question, I am getting into some of the disco questions, which I am kind of excited about. This is Steve McKiernan now. When I think of disco, I think of Barry White, Isaac Hayes, the Bee Gees, Tavares, Thelma Houston, Donna Summer, Sylvester, Chaka Khan, Andy Gibb, Gloria Gainer, and I forget the, again, oh, Love Unlimited Orchestra. However, in this same period, these groups were very popular. And I do not know, I think Mothers and Fathers and Sisters and Brothers would be on that other side. But I think of Earth, Wind and Fire, Cool and the Gang, Eddie Kendricks, Curtis Mayfield, Al Green, the Isley Brothers, Stevie Wonder, Donny Hathaway, Roberta Flack, and Patty LaBelle. Now, I do not know if you categorize them in the same as you would the disco performers. They are all around the same time, though. AE (01:19:30): They are all around the same time, and you will doubtless remember that one of the early big disco hits before a lot of people were really very aware of disco, was Lady Marmalade, which was done by the group Trio LaBelle, and which Patti LaBelle was a member, and certainly Earth Winds and Fire was great. Roberta Flack and Donny Hathaway back together again. I used to play them all the time in [inaudible] where I DJ'ed. Again, I tend not to be particularly driven by the urge to categorize in that way. In the book, one of the arguments that I make very early on, and I am pretty attached to this idea, is that when it comes to rock music, nobody says about heavy metal, "Well, that is heavy metal. That is not really rock." Or nobody says about punk, "Well, that is punk. That is not really rock." Other words, we understand rock as being almost infinitely malleable. It's a big category that can kind of attach all category. It can contain a lot of different kind of phonics, a lot of different kinds of sounds. But that is not been true of disco. And so there will be people who say, "Oh, well, Michael Jackson was not really a disco artist." "Oh, the Philadelphia International Group, like the OJs, they were not really disco." It just goes on and on and on. SM (01:21:14): Yeah, the Stylistics were another group of that period. And the Delfonics, I mean, there was group after group and they were all great. AE (01:21:22): They were great, and many of them were produced by Tom Bell. So I would argue a couple of things. I would say, first of all, that those distinctions between artists do not mean that much to me. That when I think about disco and when I try to define disco, what my definition of it is, the music that certainly took as its template soul music, but which transformed it in ways that made it much more lush, much more symphonic, was characterized very often by as you know, the four-four thump. But it was music that included anything that really worked on a disco dance floor. That could be Betty Hendrick, and often was, it could be Parliament Funkadelics, One Nation Under A Groove. It could be Patti LaBelle. I mean, to me, it's whatever worked. I think because disco has been so stigmatized, people have been very eager to define disco very narrowly, as really referring to only the most classic disco records in, again, a very narrow and circumscribed period. Now, that said, I do think that there are some differences between funk and disco, although I would say that there is an awful lot of disco dance floors featured funk. And the Isley Brothers, for instance, did a song called "Fight the Power," that was a great song and a very political song just as The Temptations did a song "Papa was a Rolling Stone," that also was a very socially conscious song. These were songs that played in early disco. "Papa was a Rolling Stone," I think was three years before "Fight the Power," but nonetheless, this kind of music, music by Black musicians who sometimes define themselves as more oriented towards funk, sometimes more towards disco, sometimes more towards R and B, sometimes more towards rock, like Chaka Khan or LaBelle, they were all being played for a period of time on disco dance floor until disco became Disco with a capital D and then the sound narrowed somewhat. But phonically funk tended to be more about getting into a groove and finding that groove and digging deep into that groove. Whereas disco phonically, orally, it sounded more obviously constructed because it was. It was music that was remixed an remixed in ways that emphasized its dance ability. It was music whose musical movements often had a kind of arbitrary feel to it. Why do the horns come in there? Why suddenly does the vocal end here? So I think that made it phonically somewhat different from funk. But on a dance floor, I always found that most people were quite eager to dance to the full spectrum of what was danceable. I do not know if I answered your question. SM (01:25:08): A lot of rock musicians, so were really into rock in the (19)60s and early (19)70s, and jazz musicians too, could not stand disco because from what... Hold on. Okay, here we go. A lot of musicians did not like it because of the fact that it took jobs away from people because they were com- AE (01:25:39): Oh, yeah. That is true. I think that there was a whole segment of the rock community that hated disco because of the fact that a lot of rock venues, rock clubs went disco and understandable. But of course, there were a lot of other criticisms made of it too, and that it was boring and predictable. SM (01:26:07): Well, some of the things that I heard around the years when I was at Ohio State, and then of course my years as an administrator at Ohio University through (19)76, is that when you think of disco, well, the (19)60s is over because the (19)60s was about activism, the (19)60s music was messages. The folk musicians, the rock musicians, they had a lot of messages in their music. This was just pure dance. That is one of the criticisms. Another one is that the (19)70s began when disco began, because a lot of people of the (19)60s think that up to 1973, that is still the (19)60s because of the way that is. And that the (19)70s really began around (19)74 and (19)75, and you had "Saturday Night Fever," the movie, and that is when it really began the Disco era. Just your thoughts on all that hodgepodge that I just mentioned. AE (01:27:15): Well, again, I think most music of the (19)60s was not political music. It was music that very often yearned to be meaningful. I would say it very often tried to be meaningful, but I do not think very much of it actually was political. I mean, if you really look at it, if you really look at the most popular. If you look at the very earliest music that was popular on disco dance floors, what's interesting is that a lot of that music actually was not utterly apolitical the way that it has been represented. Again, a song like "Fight the Power," most people would say, "Oh, well that was funk," but it was being played in discos. So I would say that there is a shift over time in disco to a less overtly political register. Now, I think that one of the groups that is most interesting in this respect is Chic, the Bernard Edwards- Nile Rodgers group, because Nile Rodgers had been a member of the Black Panthers. Chaka Khan had been involved with Black Panthers as well. I would say that both of those musicians, both Nile Rodgers and Chaka Khan, and I would say this is true of LaBelle as well, who were popular in the early years of disco, these are musicians who wanted their music to be empowering. So "I am Every Woman," now not everybody will think of that as a political song, but I think Chaka Khan did actually. Not everybody will necessarily think of "We Are Family," as a political song, this is the Chic song, but Nelson Mandela has said that when he was in prison, this was a song when it would come on the radios that the guards were listening to, it kept him going. It was a song that Nile Rodgers claimed to have written at Woodstock. Certainly the vocal Trio LaBelle did a number of songs, which were really pretty overtly political. But I think that what is interesting about disco is that to a great extent, it is music that is not overtly political. It is satisfy- AE (01:30:03): ... political. It is satisfied with getting people dancing. And to the extent that there is a political message in any of it, it is usually rather hidden and obscured. For instance in the song, Good Times by Chic, many people thought that, that was the song that is completely out of touch with America. It seemed, for many people, to be a song celebrating the good life in the midst of a terrible recession, but it was tongue-in-cheek. It is just that nobody expected a disco group to be smart enough to do a song that was tongue-in-cheek. As Nile Rogers said, "If this had been Bob Dylan, everybody would have said, "Check out Bob. Pretty cool."" But because it was a disco group, people took it at face value. So I think that, I do think that disco tended to make its meaning obscure, it tended not to favor the politically explicit. And I think that is really interesting that, that is true. I think to some extent, because disco was really about, to a great extent, about escapism and it was much more about taking evasive action. Again, as I point out in my book, there are songs that do make political points. But this was not really, there was not very much finger pointing music, to use Bob Dylan's expression, in disco. But again, I think partly that the meaning was made on the dance floor. I mean, the meanings were made in the kinds of contacts that happened between people. The ways in which, at its best, racial boundaries were crossed, gender boundaries, sexual boundaries were crossed. So I think that, more often than not, was where the meanings were. SM (01:32:22): I will tell you one thing, going to a disco in downtown Columbus in 1975 was a lot different than going into the Ohio Union in 1972, where there was total separation. AE (01:32:36): Mm-hmm. SM (01:32:37): One of the questions here is disco, you bring this up in your book, was basically performed by Black performers. It is often scorned as a terrible period for music between rock and roll and the Motown sound of the (19)60s and mid-(19)70s that, we already just went over that, to the new wave music in the (19)80s. Does this scorn or attack have anything to do with racism, prejudice, or the lessening of the value of something because it does not come from the majority? AE (01:33:07): Well, I think unfortunately, by the time we get to the attacks on disco, it comes to be understood within the community, within communities of rock, was that rock music is a largely white genre, with the exception of Jimi Hendrix. If you were to tune into classic rock stations in 1977, and I mentioned an article by Bill Marcus who talks about a Bay Area station that does a history of rock that includes precisely one Black artist, and that is Jimi Hendrix. So there is this sense, by the time we get to the mid to late (19)70s, that rock is really... that Black people do not belong in rock music. Which is, of course, such an irony given the fact that you would never have had the rock music without Black musicians, because R&B is the essential backbone to rock. So yeah, I mean, I think there is a sense in which you have to understand the backlash against disco as certainly involving a certain kind of racism. And if you look at the two DJs in Detroit that tried to organize an anti-disco army, they called themselves the Disco Ducks Klan, I think it is. And they hatch this plot to go on stage wearing white robes. I mean, that cannot be accidental, the use of Klan, the use of... The decision is later aborted, but of course it is. I think it has to be understood, within the context of a situation, a moment in which some white heterosexual men feel under attack. They feel as though their music is being shoved off the airways. They feel like they are being shoved out of certain jobs because of affirmative action, because [inaudible]. And so, I do think that disco comes to, it is a lightning rod of sorts for a lot of discontent about racial minorities, and about feminism, and about gay men. Because certainly, even though a lot of people were unaware of the fact that gay men were the, really, disco's early adopters, a lot were not. And a lot of people did know that there were significant numbers of gay men who were among disco's poor constituencies. So I think that, the backlash against disco is inseparable from homophobia and racism, and probably as well from a kind of uneasiness about feminism. I also think, and I argue this in the book, that for some rock and rollers, it was also the case that they felt as though their style, their way of being [inaudible], their masculinity, was threatened by this new style. Which today, we would sort of characterize as metrosexual. This sort fastidiousness, personal fastidiousness, attention to clothing, attention to grooming, attention to looking good, a buff body, and a willingness to dance. And these are all sorts of characteristics that women like in this. And they like their boyfriends and husbands to look good, dress up. To, basically, look like gay men. And the biggest affront to a lot of the disco folks who were white was that, the men who were sort of responsible for these new norms were gay men who had no use for women. So, you know. SM (01:37:20): Wait, you write beautifully... Barry White is one of my favorite artists of all the time. And again, I worked for the university, and most, I know there were some gay and lesbian students at Ohio University in these dances, but obviously, they were not out. But I think when you describe the difference between Barry White and James Brown, it is beautiful. Because you talk about vulnerable masculinity, Barry White pleasuring the ladies. And I have got my notes here, from being a sex machine, James Brown, to a more loving style that was Barry White, and what a difference. And so, I never thought of it that way. But obviously, when you listen to Barry White, there is a respect for women there. And there is a respect, whereas with James Brown, it was all about sex. AE (01:38:23): Yeah. Well, with James Brown, it was all about what he wanted sexually. And I mean, listen, I am a great lover of both of their music, but I think it is really true that Barry White was much more woman friendly. And so I think that, that kind of shift, it is hard. I mean, that is something that becomes more obvious later, as you look back at the era. I think it was harder to see at the time. But I also think that, one of the reasons that rap developed the way that it did was as a backlash against that kind of love man style that was characteristic of White. SM (01:39:10): Yeah. (01:39:11): I have a quote here from your book, and this is, I think, in your introduction. "Throughout Hot Stuff, I placed disco within the discourse of feminism, de-industrialization, globalism, ongoing struggles for racial justice and greater sexual preferences." And you have already gone over most of this in your commentary, but does that really put it in a nutshell? AE (01:39:35): Yeah, I think so. I think so. I mean, I think it is just that disco, I mean, I think it is a great paradox for many. I mean, it is a paradox of sorts because disco was primarily music about getting down, which is not to say that sometimes it was not about something else. But it was, in its essence, about getting down whether on the dance floor or in the bedroom. And much of this music did not strive to be more meaningful. And yet, it nonetheless both expressed and aided and abetted a number of changes that were absolutely central to American culture, in that period. And it is just paradoxical because the music itself did not, for the most part, strain to be meaningful the way that (19)60s music did. And yet, it had such an impact. But it is an impact that, I think, some people, especially boomers, resist learning about. I mean, there was... I opened the book with a great article by Andy Costumes who was the journalist who wrote at the Nation in The Village Voice, and he published this article about disco. And he talked about the contempt that so many of his (19)60s friends had for it. And yet, both of us had a very similar experience. I mean, there were a lot of my friends who were (19)60s people who hated disco because it seemed synthetic, it seemed unnatural, it seemed sleazy. It seemed like a real regression back to the sort of universe of bubblegum. And yet, there was a lot. Because they did not go to disco, they really did not know all the work, all the cultural work, that music was doing. Because Costumes was gay and because I am gay, that gave us a different perspective because we were part of those clubs. And we could see the way that the music was actually being used. And one of the things that I wanted to do in that book was that, I have been very influenced by the work of musicologists and scholars of music, like Susan McClary and Simon Firth. I mean, many of others have been. And they talk about how music is too often seen as a reflection of the culture, and not often enough seen as actually doing cultural work itself. It is not understood as changing us, making us, changing us, socializing us. And one of the things I really came to believe as I wrote this book, it was not something that I understood at all well as I began it. But I came to understand that as I was working on it, was that disco... Everybody always looks at punk and says, "Ah, punk." This was a really transformative moment, you know? And yet, I see... Actually, I do not want to get into a hierarchy here. But, I see a whole lot of change happening in the way that people understand their bodies and the way that they understand their gender, and their sexuality in these years through disco. And so, that was something I really wanted to make manifestly clear in the book. SM (01:43:13): Well, something that really struck me was one of the criticisms of all the movements today, or the issues, was identity politics. You hear that from the more right-side that... they criticized identified politics. And of course, the (19)60s was about that. But you say the (19)70s was a time when numbers of gay men, excuse me, African Americans, women, ditched predictable social scripts. Disco played a central role in the process, which broadened the contours of Blackness, femininity, and male homosexuality. I often wonder where Native Americans and Latinos fall in there. But what I want to comment here before you respond, as a person who has worked 30 plus years with college students, the most important thing we want to see when they walk into university to when they graduate, besides a sense of knowledge about why they were there, is a sense of self-esteem, a feeling of comfortableness with who they are and a sense of belonging. And it seems like everything you talk about, about disco, and particularly in terms of the gay and lesbian community, and women, and African American as a whole, that this helped in that feeling, in our society as a whole. And I know from seeing students dance in the (19)70s that the criticisms that we are seeing today, and actually we have seen since that time, the students that I have worked with, they loved it, so. AE (01:44:54): Well, yeah. I mean, I think that disco did enable, especially gay men and women across the board, who generally like dance better than men. I mean, again, it is a generalization and there're exceptions, but it tends to be true. And I think African Americans as well, it did afford them real kinds of opportunities for changing themselves. And I do think that, you do find people in all those categories, all those identity categories, who do ditch social scripts. I mean, I would say, and this is a kind of thread throughout the book, I do think though that, that was scary just as it was in the (19)60s. I mean, change is scary. And for instance, and it is not... there are losses too. And so when we are talking about disco, and we are talking about women, we are talking about sexual expressiveness, I mean, I think it is significant that Donna Summer and some of the other disco divas end up renouncing that world because on some level it makes them uncomfortable. And I do think that the sexual revolution of (19)70s made a lot of women uncomfortable. I think that, for instance, when you are talking about African Americans, there was a way in which what had been so exciting about disco to so many Black musicians and producers, which was that it allowed them to occupy the kind of sonic territory that had been more the preserve of white musicians, right? Sophisticated, symphonic arrangements, very kind of sweet music, music that was not necessarily gritty and was not recognizably Black. That was all very liberating. But it came to feel, to some African Americans, like a selling out of Black music. And when we come to male homosexuals, I think that the move away from effeminacy to gay macho also meant that certain categories of men who were effeminate really felt sidelined. So one of the things that I tried to express in the book is that, as liberating as all this stuff could feel to these three groups, there were certainly dissenters. There were certainly people who did not buy it or people who came to feel disillusioned. So I think both of those things are true. Change is like that, isn't it? I mean, you know? SM (01:47:47): Yeah. AE (01:47:47): It is obviously, it is dialectical. And so, it makes a lot of sense that you would then have this kind of ambivalence. SM (01:47:55): Yeah. I think that what you are talking about here, when you listen to Barry White and his music from (19)75, Let the Music Play, and then when you hear Marvin Gaye, What's Going On, his album in 1971 is the difference of night and day. One is just really about, I will not say having fun, but just getting out on the dance floor and being free. And Marvin Gaye, that is a very important thing, it's a sensitivity and sensitizing people to the issues that we must all care about. But that there is a difference there, one may be more macho than the other, so to speak. AE (01:48:33): Yeah. And the thing about Marvin Gaye that is interesting is that, then he goes totally into bedroom music himself. I mean, and I think that is a really, really interesting phenomenon and it is one that I write about in the book. And I cannot say that I have cracked the nut here, that I totally understand it. I think it's fascinating that you find R&B going through this shit where there is this period, and I think it really begins early. I mean, it begins as early, I think, as (19)71. And I think it goes through, it sort of peaks in about (19)74. And I think Fight the Power is one of the last instances, I think of (19)75, but do not quote me on it, is this really fascinating period of social commentary. And much of it is not about racial uplift, it is about confusion, it is about feeling sold out, it is about disappointments. And yet, it is like then you have R&B turning on a dime and becoming... You see it with Papa Was a Rollin' Stone from the happy people. I mean, that is a really interesting shift. And I do not know exactly just what to attribute it. I mean, I think it could be that, that kind of music of reflection and social commentary and disappointment got to be almost a cliché. I mean, I think that, that is quite possible that it was just so flooding the airways. And it could be that there was this sense of, enough already. But in any case, it is a very interesting shift that it does turn, and it turns so emphatically towards something else. SM (01:50:31): You mentioned in there that you think that Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes, their song was the first disco song? AE (01:50:40): Well, I say that a lot of people think that it is, The Love I Lost. SM (01:50:45): Yes. AE (01:50:45): I am reluctant to actually name one. I mean, I think there's that, I think, Girl You Need a Change of Mind. I mean, I think there are some contenders out there. I mean, there are certain elements that are beginning to cohere. But I think, yeah, Harold Melvin & the Blue Notes. I think, The Love I Lost is a key moment. Yeah. SM (01:51:18): But you have got to admit one thing, that Saturday Night Fever really awakened this nation to disco with John Travolta dancing. And here's a guy that is not a gay male, he is a macho male, but he is out on the dance floor wearing those clothes and feeling comfortable wearing those clothes and really into dancing. And they had the Bee Gees music in the background, and you had Tavares. Would not you say that, that is a historic moment when that movie came out? AE (01:51:48): Yeah. Yeah, I would. I would not argue against that, no. SM (01:51:56): You wrote a great book that I read a long time ago, I did not reread it, but Janis Joplin. And the question I want to ask you about her, is her life and death an example of the counterculture gone wrong, because drugs killed her? AE (01:52:14): Well, I think, yes. I mean, in some ways, drugs killed Janis, but I think [inaudible] killed Janis. I mean, I think that the disappointments in life, I think, I mean, she could never hold on [inaudible], right? And I mean, who knows? Had she lived in the age of Prozac, I am sure she would have been medicated. And probably her music would, I do not know what her music would be like. People have written about this a lot now. I mean, but we have the kind of works of art that fed off in programmed misery and unhappiness if the writers were medicated people. So I do not know, but I do not think she was... I think that the counterculture... And many of us of the boomer generation were attracted to risks and were reckless. I think that was one of the, it was part of what made it so exciting, and also so dangerous that people played with that. Janis knew what she was doing. Janis knew that she was taking a risk every time. I mean, after all, she was no stranger to ODing. So she knew what she was doing. And I think in her case, I guess I would say that, there is both this element of recklessness that is generational. And in her case, I think also very much driven by the fact that there is a lot of person unhappiness there. SM (01:54:03): Yeah. I interviewed a person who loved Janis, knew her. But she committed a sin in the drug community, she brought alcohol. AE (01:54:13): Yeah-yeah. So she- SM (01:54:14): And she was never forgiven for that by some purists who did not drink, but they were into every other drug you can imagine. AE (01:54:24): Yes, exactly. Yeah, no, it is absolutely true that there were people who really thought that Janis' love of alcohol was just completely, made her kind of beyond the pale. SM (01:54:40): This is a question I ask, because I know... this is Roe v. Wade. And I asked Susan Brownmiller this question last week, and I went to her apartment in New York and it was three hour interview. It was a great... she is a very nice person. AE (01:54:54): Yes, she is a very nice person. SM (01:54:55): Yes. The 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, the most important legal decision since the end of World War II, during the time that boomer women had been alive, so we are talking about the (19)63 years. Is there any other legal decisions that are more important than that one? AE (01:55:12): Well, I think that there was a lot of... I think there were some decisions around equal employment. SM (01:55:27): Brown v. Board of Education. AE (01:55:29): Oh, well, I mean. I think, yeah. Again, I mean, I would say it is very hard to... I would advise against those making any kind of hierarchy. I think that there are some legal decisions that have been very important, that would include Brown and Roe v. Wade. I think some of the stuff that has not been studied very much, but is interesting, are some of the rulings around equal employment, especially their applicability to gender. And so, I think those were important as well. And these happened in the (19)70s. So I think, again, Roe v. Wade was very important. Would I say that it was the most important? I probably would not say it was the most important, but it is important. But of course, it's flawed, and that enabled it to be picked away at. SM (01:56:27): One of the things that is historically documented is the excessive sexism in the other movements at the end of the (19)60s, during the (19)60s and before the (19)70s began. And that would be in the anti-war movement and the civil rights movement. I talked to people in every movement, and they said it was in the gay and lesbian movement, it was in the Chicano Movement, it was in the Native American movement, and it was in all the movements. And the question I am asking here is, sexism in the movements of the late (19)60s and early (19)70s played a very important role in stimulating the onset of the second wave. Is that true? And secondly, without the sexism, would the movement have gone in a different direction, because it was so dominated by white men? AE (01:57:16): Well, I mean, I think white men... SM (01:57:22): And Black men, because of the civil rights movement. AE (01:57:24): Well, I think that all men... I mean, in the case of white men, you had men who were accustomed to feeling entitled. They were accustomed to a certain kind of entitlement based upon their skin color and their gender. I think when you are talking about men of color, because of the way in which they were constructed by the dominant white cultures, they often did not necessarily feel that sense of entitlement. But that did not mean that they were any better, at all. I mean, it meant that very often they were, as Fran Beal put it in writing about some Black male activists, I mean, it was like they were trying to... I mean, their idea of what their women should be like was derived from the pages of, might as well have been from Ladies' Home Journal. And they had a very macho kind of aspect as a result of being disempowered. So yeah, I mean, it had a terrible... I mean, it's paradoxical. Because it was for the feminists who... For people like Susan Brownmiller and Ellen Willis, and all of the others who played such an important role, Fran Beal, Margaret Sloan, Marco Jefferson. I mean, all of them. It was crushing to feel how little feminism mattered and how disparaged it often was. It was really terrible. But on the other hand, it did, of course, enable the development of the second wave. I mean, it was so strange that women did begin to organize autonomously. I mean, I guess I would say that, I think I am probably... I guess, the only other thing I would say is that, I think that one of the things, one of many reasons that I have written critically about Weathermen is that- AE (02:00:03): ...that I have written critically about Weatherman is that I think both Weather and ... I think there is certain elements of the Black freedom movement, as well in the sort of fetishizing of revolution, the kind of vanguardism that they assessed, really ensured that women would have to go their own way, and that it would be a painful break. Yeah, I think it could have been different. I mean, I think if people had remained committed to participatory democracy, if people had really listened to one another and been respectful, then yeah, it could have turned out differently, but it did not. SM (02:00:57): What are the major accomplishments of the women's movements in the second wave, and what are the greatest disappointments? AE (02:01:06): Well, I mean, I would say probably the greatest would be the expansion of ... Well, I guess many things, but I mean, at the level of policy, basically, we live in a culture in which discrimination against women, gender discrimination in education and employment is ... it happened, for sure, but it is not, for the most part, seen as a good thing, right? SM (02:01:42): Mm-hmm. AE (02:01:42): So I think it is widely ... Discrimination against women is just ... I am trying to think of a way to say this that sort of takes in the complexity of it. To a great extent, it is no longer tolerated. I think that is the biggest thing. I mean, violence against women, which was just assumed to not exist or exist on the margins and not be very important, and very often was understood as [inaudible] being a woman's fault has been completely reinterpreted. That is an enormous shift. It is not to say that there's not violence against women that happens in this world, and there are not people who turn a blind eye, but it is really significant, a very significant change. Significant change in the understanding of the importance of sexual freedom for women. I mean, again, coming back to the ... too often [inaudible] in a way that none the less seems to ... for some women to have been understood as nothing more than pleasing men, but I still think that there has been significant ... I think we are talking about employment. We are talking about education. We're talking about violence against women. We are talking about right to sexual pleasure. All of those things. Abortion rights, all of those things. There have been major achievements in women's athletics. Again, more can be done, more needs to be done, but there has been considerable achievement. SM (02:03:38): This is just a general question. I have asked this to everybody. Again, we have talked about the (19)60s. When, in your opinion, did the (19)60s begin, and when did it end? And what was the watershed moment in the (19)60s? I ask the same question again. When did the (19)70s begin and end, and what was the watershed moment in the (19)70s? AE (02:04:00): Well, I do not really know. I mean, I am not trying to cop out on this. I think that this is something that is constantly ... that is changing and shifting. I mean, obviously, it just depends on what one's looking at. I mean, the (19)60s do not really begin, in some sense ... I mean, what we know as the (19)60s, a kind of period of protest. They do not really begin, for instance, gay and lesbians, until really late in the game. But if we are looking at African Americans, you can argue that in some sense the (19)60s begin in (19)55. You could go back even further. I mean, you could go back to the demobilization after World War II and the fact that so many Black soldiers had different experiences in other parts of the world and that emboldened them in certain ways. It created a shift in consciousness. It really, I think, depends upon the group in question, so that is why I am sort of reluctant to say. But clearly, you could make the argument that the (19)60s really begin back in the (19)50s. You could put it at (19)54, (19)55. You could similarly make the argument that there was an awful lot, if you're looking at college campuses, that was the same in 1964. That not very much change had actually happened, and you do not begin to really feel those shifts until probably (19)65, (19)66. Still, they really remain the land of ... many of them, many college campuses, the land of the beehive and the crew cut until well into the (19)60s. So I think I am just not ... I am sort of uneasy making those kinds of generalizations, but clearly, shifts do happen and shifts in consciousness over a long period. SM (02:06:16): Do you remember, I know you do, but I have been asking this, when you heard John Kennedy was assassinated? AE (02:06:23): Yeah, I do very, very well because I was in a Quaker meeting. I forget the day of the week, but we were having a Quaker meeting at Sidwell Friends, where I was, I think in the ... Would I have been in the seventh grade? No, no, no. Anyway, I was at Sidwell Friends. Bobby Kennedy's two boys ... two of Robert Kennedy's sons were students there. I am sure everybody at that Quaker meeting remembers it because we did not know what had happened. None of us knew. But what we did know was that in the middle of this meeting, they were ushered out. So, again, we did not know. I did not know. I remember taking the bus home, public transportation, city bus back home. It really was not until I walked into the house that I knew what had ... I knew for sure what had happened. Yeah. SM (02:07:28): Yeah. Were you another one of those that watched four straight days of TV? AE (02:07:32): Watched a lot of it. Yeah. SM (02:07:36): Yep. One of the questions that ... When Newt Gingrich came into power ... I do not want to always refer Newt, but in 1994, and when George Will writes a lot of his articles, and more recently, Huckabee on his TV show and others, they like to take shots at the (19)60s generation as to the reason why we have so many problems in today's society is because it goes right back to that time in the (19)60s and the (19)70s. They are talking about the drug culture, the sexual freedom, the lack of respect for any sort of authority, the challenging that took place, the beginning of all the isms, all these things. They blame some of the problems we have in our society today and the unwillingness to talk to each other on that period. Your thoughts on those individuals who continue to attack the (19)60s generation, which is basically attacking the Boomers. The way they lived. The way they acted. It's not all of them, now, because there is 74 million and only about 10 percent, or maybe even 5 percent, were involved in activism, but blaming them for where we are today. That includes the divorce rate. AE (02:09:06): Well, I think it is a very easy deflection for conservative politicians, many of whom have had their own marital problems, have not they, to continue to bash the-the (19)60s. I mean, when in point of fact it is hardly a problem that ... I do not know how you get from (19)60s protestors to Newt Gingrich having an affair with another woman when his wife is dying of... I do not know how you- SM (02:09:41): Yeah. AE (02:09:43): I mean, I just think it is a kind of scapegoating that these folks have engaged in all along. I think that it is true that the right wing actually... I mean, I think what I would say is more significant is... because I think that marriages are difficult things to make work. Especially when you are in denial, and especially when you are ... I often wonder if those people who are most apt to be pro-family in their rhetoric, and to bash the (19)60s, and gays and lesbians and feminists, I mean, do not really do it in order to be deflective. I mean, not just with their public, but personally deflective. You know? SM (02:10:34): Mm-hmm. AE (02:10:34): I mean, because they cannot really cope with their own indiscretions and transgressions. Because certainly, I mean, there has been such a parade of right-wing politicians who have screwed up. I mean, it is hardly the case that this is ... that the marital woes and the ... What is the word I am looking for when you have relationships outside of marriage? SM (02:11:06): Adultery? AE (02:11:08): Yeah, adultery, but there is another word. Begins with a T and I cannot remember it. But anyway, that liberals and leftists have any kind of monopoly upon whatsoever. I just think it is a kind of case loop that they just constantly run. What I would say is that that lack of ... I mean, it is true that the (19)60s was about challenging authority, and this was a message that I think was picked up on by conservatives. You look at, for instance, the anti-busing protestors in Boston and other places, and they directly borrowed the tactics of (19)60s activists. You look at the anti-abortion movement, and you see the same thing. There is a real borrowing of [inaudible]... that kind of commerce. I mean, there was a real circulation of attitudes and stances and ideas, actually, between the right and the ... I hesitate to say the left because I do not even know if we have a left in this [inaudible], but there has been significant amounts of circulation there. The thing that strikes me is that I am just consistently struck by, if you want to talk about incivility and rudeness, by the extent of which this has been so absorbed and modeled by the right wing. I think that they have become models of incivility in a way that most of us on the left or within liberalism just have not. SM (02:13:03): Well, one of the qualities that is been defined within the generation as a whole is their inability to trust. Obviously, they experienced leaders that lied to them as they were growing up. In the Vietnam War, we all know about the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, and certainly Watergate with Richard Nixon. If you were really in tune as a young boomer, you knew that Eisenhower lied about U-2. You see constant... McNamara and the lies about the numbers of people that were being killed over there. The number scheme. So many things. It is a quality that has somehow been aligned with the generation. Of course, we all know about Jerry Rubin and do not trust anyone over 30, and then they switched it to over 40 when they were getting close to it. But also, there is a conflict here too. It is the fact that if you are a political science major, one of the best qualities one can have as a citizen is to not trust your leaders because that shows that democracy is alive and well. So that is a normal thing. But then psychologists will oftentimes say that if you cannot trust someone else, then ... You have got to be able to trust somebody. That is not a good quality either. Would you say, first off, that they ... I think we can say about the generation. Was this a trusting or ... Is this a quality that you see within the generation, they do not trust, and is it a negative or positive? AE (02:14:42): Well, I think that ... I mean, I would say this about the generation as a whole, that, if anything, people trusted too much. I mean, they assumed that America was the country that it said it was. Many of us, we grew up with this Cold War rhetoric. I think many of us assumed it to be true. So I think it was our faith in America being different, and being democratic, and being the beacon of liberty that then caused ... that it helps to explain the philosophy of the anti-war movement and end of some of the other movements. It is that you grew up thinking that you were living in this country, which was a citadel of freedom, and then you discovered that, hold it, it was more complicated. I think as a consequence, people ... I mean, I tend not to be a conspiracy theorist. I think that most of the important left-wing thinkers are not, but are we skeptical? Yeah, probably. I do not think that skepticism is a bad thing. I think conspiracy theories, that can be disabling in its own way, because then it's sort of like, "Well, why bother, if this whole thing is sewn up?" Of course it cannot be sewn up because you would never have really had the (19)60s, and you would never have really ... you would never have had the changes that have taken place. You know? SM (02:16:37): Mm-hmm. AE (02:16:37): That is what I would say. SM (02:16:39): I only got four more questions here, so we are almost- AE (02:16:42): But Steven, you know what? I am going to have to get off in just a few minutes. SM (02:16:48): Okay, yeah. I am going to ask... Let us just cut this down to two questions here then. AE (02:16:52): Okay. SM (02:16:52): This is a big one, because this is the issue of healing. I took a group of students to Washington, D.C. in 1995. Actually, the students that came with me, 14 of them ... It was our Leadership on the Road programs. We met Senator Edmund Muskie before he passed away. The students came up with this question because they saw the films. They were not alive. They saw what happened in Chicago in 1968, of all the divisions. The whole world is watching what happened there. Of course, he was the democratic vice presidential candidate. They thought he would respond to this question based on that experience. The question was basically, "Due to all the divisions that were happening in America in 1968, do you feel we were close to a second civil war? Number one. But most importantly, do you think that the divisions between Black and white, male and female, gay and straight, those who supported the war and those who were against the war, those who supported the troops or against the troops as a generation, are going to go to their grave, like the Civil War generation, not healing from the divisions that took place in their lives?" So it was a generational question, because they'd cite the Civil War, and some things had come up with those gatherings in Gettysburg. It was very obvious that no healing had taken place when so many people went to their graves in the Civil War. Muskie answered in a certain way. How would you answer that question? Do we have a problem with healing in the nation? Is it an issue? AE (02:18:31): Do we have a problem with healing in the nation? I do not know. I mean, I tend to think that a lot of ... that the (19)60s are used politically to great effect, and they continue to be. I mean, there was an article recently about this in the New York Times. I cannot recall what it was about, except that... I cannot remember the issue that the author was exploring. But I think it's become a political... People make political hay with it. But honestly, am I able to have conversations with neighbors who I know feel very differently about certain things? Yes. Am I able to have conversations with colleagues who I know think differently about a variety of issues that were hot issues in the (19)60s? Yeah. I mean, I do not know. For me, personally, no, I do not see it as being ... I do not see it as being quite like that. I mean, I guess with the Civil War, though, I mean, eventually you do have a kind of reconciliation that happens between North and South. That is through reconstruction and the denial of rights to Blacks. And this increasing move in the north away from an ideology of equality towards one that stresses separatism indifference. Eventually, that point is reached through unfortunate ways. This would be late in the lives of that generation, for sure. But for our own, no, I guess I do not. You know? SM (02:20:27): Yeah, Senator Muskie responded. He did not even respond to 1968. He made no comment to them. He gave a melodramatic pause for about a minute. It looked like he had a tear in his eye. We have it on videotape. Basically said, "We have not healed since the Civil War due to the issue of race." Because he just saw the Ken Burns series and it had really touched his life, and he said, "When you lose 430,000 men, and you almost lose an entire generation, that is another issue in itself." AE (02:21:00): Yeah. I think he is right about that. I mean, I think that... SM (02:21:08): Others have said to me that ... In response, he said, "You ought to be a little more specific on this question because if you simply say those who fought the war, the three million plus who went to Vietnam, and those who protested the war, you might have some issues there." AE (02:21:24): Yeah. I think that that is possible. Although, I will tell you, I mean, one of the things about my background is, by virtue of going to a prep school, I was in school with Robert McNamara's son. SM (02:21:39): Oh. AE (02:21:39): There were other people who were sons and daughters of policy makers and government leaders who were in that school. SM (02:21:48): The name of the school? AE (02:21:51): Sidwell Friends. SM (02:21:52): Okay. Yep. Yep. AE (02:21:54): It's where the Obama daughters are. It is where many, many presidents put their kids, right? SM (02:21:58): Right. AE (02:21:59): It would seem. So, I mean, I did not know that many people who actually went to Vietnam. I really did not. of course, that was not unusual in the Vietnam War. I mean, there were a lot of people who went to college, especially elite colleges, who did not know anybody who went to war. I have subsequently had contact with people who were military people who went to fight. What struck me, actually ... Maybe this is because I am in Santa Fe part of the year, and that I am in university communities to some extent, but what struck me is the extent of which so many of the people who I met and have met, who did serve in Vietnam, really shared many of the views that I had about that war. That is been quite striking to me. SM (02:23:03): You have been to the wall on Washington, do you think the ... Jan Scruggs wrote the book To Heal A Nation, do you think that wall has helped heal the nation in any way? AE (02:23:13): I do not know. SM (02:23:14): Beyond the veterans. AE (02:23:15): I do not know. I just do not. I mean, I could not say. SM (02:23:21): My last question, very last one, and thank you for going over the time, I truly appreciate it, is that when we're talking about boomers now, who were born in 1946 and beyond, we're talking about a lot of different presidents from Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower, John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson. Of course, we had Jimmy Carter, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, and Bill Clinton, George Bush the first, George Bush the second, and President Obama. I do not think I have missed anybody in there. Jimmy Carter, of course. What presidents, when you look at them and you look at your life's work, not only with gay and lesbian issues, but with women's issues, which ones are the ones you most admire in terms of those two issues? AE (02:24:27): Well, I think it is too early to say about Obama. I mean, I have been disappointed, as many have, with a lot of what he has not done. So it's too early to say. There was a lot that I admired about Clinton, but I did not admire the Welfare Reform Bill. But this does not ... I mean, a lot of my criticisms about Clinton go to other things beyond the issue of gender and sex discrimination. I have to say that in many respects, I have admired Clinton. It's too early to tell about Obama. I would say that. SM (02:25:29): Are there any questions I did not ask you thought I was going to ask? AE (02:25:32): Oh, well, yeah, I mean, there would be any number of questions that you could have asked. It is not as though I have been sitting here thinking, "Gee, why has not he asked me this?" SM (02:25:43): Right. Okay. AE (02:25:44): I have not. No. I have not. SM (02:25:45): Okay. AE (02:25:47): Now, when is your book coming out? SM (02:25:49): Let me turn this off. One second. (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. Alice Echols Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Echols, Alice ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource College teachers; Echols, Alice--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. Alice Echols is a professor of History and Gender Studies at University of Southern California. She authored four books and several articles. Dr. Echols has a bachelor's degree in History from Macalester College and master's and Ph.D. from University of Michagan. 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 2010-06-21 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.44a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.44b 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. 145:52 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/8db33061672de922b958b947995e5bbf.mp3 bccad46922c8ac6893060d19d53d70d1 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Oral Histories Title A name given to the resource Oral Histories from 1960s Binghamton Alumni Description An account of the resource In 2019, Binghamton University Libraries completed a mission to collect oral interviews from 1960s alumni as a means to preserve memories of campus life. The resulting 47 tales are a retrospective of social, professional and personal experiences with the commonality of Harpur College. Some stories tell of humble beginnings, others discuss the formation of friendships; each provides insight into a moment in our community's rich history. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Irene Gashurov Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-2018 Relation A related resource <a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/browse?collection=18">McKiernan Interviews : 60's collection of Oral Histories</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2018-03-09 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Irene Gashurov Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. Amy Weintraub Year of Graduation 1964 Biographical Text Amy Weintraub, PhD, led the Center for Victim Support at Harlem Hospital Center for 25 years and assessed patients with a history of domestic violence and sexual assault. She currently teaches courses on these subjects at Mercy College. She was a sociology major at Harpur College. She was a National Institute of Mental Health Fellow. Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education; Harpur College – Alumni working with victims of domestic violence/sexual assault; Harpur College – Alumni from New York City; Harpur College – Alumni living in the New York City area Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Subject LCSH Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education; Harpur College – Alumni working with victims of domestic violence/sexual assault; Harpur College – Alumni from New York City; Harpur College – Alumni living in the New York City area Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium Alumni Interviews Interview with: Amy M. Weintraub Interviewed by: Irene Gashurov Transcriber: Oral History Lab Date of interview: 9 March 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) AW: 00:02 Okay, so we begin with your identifying yourself, who you are, where we are, and the date of the interview. AW: 00:12 My name is Amy Malzberg Weintraub, and this is an oral history project being conducted by SUNY Binghamton, and we are in my apartment at 95 West, 95th Street. IG: 00:25 Okay, thank you. So, can I call you Amy or Dr. Weintraub? AW: 00:31 You can call me Amy. IG: 00:32 Okay, so Amy, tell us where you grew up. AW: 00:36 I grew up in Albany, New York. IG: 00:38 Oh, who were your parents? AW: 00:43 Dr. Benson Malzberg, and my mother was Rose Malzberg Hershberg, yeah, Rose Hershberg Malzberg, IG: 00:50 Okay, and so your father was a doctor in? AW: 00:57 My father got his PhD at Columbia in sociology. IG: 00:59 Oh, so- AW: 01:00 He also studied in Paris. He got a fellowship to study continue their studies in Paris. So my father spoke French fluently. IG: 01:07 Oh, very good. It was very interesting. So-so tell us about what your parents did. AW: 01:13 My father was a director at the department Mental Hygiene. He studied the incidence and prevalence of mental illness in New York State, and he published a great deal. And my mother had been a teacher in the Albany Public School System. When she married, she was working for the New York State Department, I think it was the accounting department. And then when I was in the eighth grade, my father retired and became a principal investigator with a grant that was funded by Department of Mental-Mental Health, Department of Health and Mental Health, Federal Department of Health and Mental Health. My mother became his administrative assistant. IG: 01:57 Oh, and this was all in Albany. AW: 02:00 Albany, New York, yep. IG: 02:01 Okay, so were your parents--can I ask how many generations ago did they come to the United States? AW: 02:12 Well, my father was born here, his mother was born here, also. IG: 02:15 Yes. AW: 02:15 It was his um, it was his grandfather who migrated, I believe, from Poland. IG: 02:21 I see, I see. AW: 02:21 My mother was a year old when she came here. IG: 02:25 From? AW: 02:25 Poland. IG: 02:26 From Poland. So, I assumed that, since your parents were highly educated, that the expectations of you were that you would go on to college. AW: 02:41 Well, I did not assume I was going to get my PhD. I did cer- I decided that on my own, but they sort of expect me to get a college education. IG: 02:48 Yes, and so they valued education. AW: 02:51 Oh, they certainly did. IG: 02:52 Very-very much. AW: 02:53 They used to correct my English. I used to write them letters from Harpur. We called it Harpur College then and I made spelling mistakes, and they used to write me back letters telling me just how you spell the word. [laughs] IG: 03:07 Did that- I mean, what did that irritate you? AW: 03:12 Was kind of cute. IG: 03:13 Did you- AW: 03:15 I do that with my own children? IG: 03:17 Oh! Did you- I have done it with my daughter. AW: 03:20 Okay. IG: 03:21 So-so-so did you have siblings? AW: 03:24 Yes, I have a twin sister, and I had no I had an older sister. IG: 03:29 And the expectations for them were the same as- AW: 03:36 Absolutely-absolutely. IG: 03:39 So what were your reasons for going to Harpur College? AW: 03:45 Well, Harpur type was not my first choice? IG: 03:47 No, okay. AW: 03:48 My first choice is Brandeis University. IG: 03:50 Uh huh. AW: 03:52 Because my mother had been part of a Brandeis University chapter. I know Brandeis University just hit my imagination. IG: 03:58 Yeah. AW: 03:59 But I was not accepted. IG: 04:00 You were not accepted? AW: 04:01 No, I think three people from Albany applied, and only one was accepted. So I had to find another college, and of a fellow student of mine, Stuart Lewis, on his- parents night and I went to the middle school, which was a private school, and one of Stuart's parents happened to mention Harpur College and my mother and father. So mother [inaudible] "Why do not you apply to Harpur College"? So I did, but it was not half the time. It was not my first choice, but by the time I graduated from Harpur College, I realized what a great school it is, and I am very glad I went there. But when my own children enter college, I- it was so important to me to go to a private school, because, of course, SUNY is a public university, right? IG: 04:47 Yes. AW: 04:48 And although it was a great university, I got the most [inaudible] education you could possibly get at a school. I wanted my own children go to a private school. So my son ended up going to Union College. My daughter went to New York City. She went to Marymount, Manhattan. IG: 05:07 Well, so Harpur College was not your first choice, but you had other SUNYs to choose from. So why did you choose Harpur and not Albany or SUNY [crosstalk] AW: 05:24 Oh, first, I did not want to go to Albany because I grew up in Albany. So I want to go away to college. IG: 05:29 I see. AW: 05:30 So I had to pick a school that was not no, not anywhere near Albany. And there are other schools but my-my older sister, went to Russell Sage. IG: 05:40 I see. AW: 05:40 But that was like 20-minute drive from the house, so [inaudible] was not going to go to Russell Sage. IG: 05:49 So what was the reputation that you knew of about Harpur College at the time? What reputation- AW: 05:56 I did not know that much about it, but I knew it was a top-notch school. IG: 05:59 Yeah. AW: 06:00 I do not know where I got the information from, but I knew it was a top-notch school. It was, it still is, the elite of the SUNY system. IG: 06:07 Oh, the SUNYs. Absolutely, it is. Um, so- AW: 06:10 That we were told when we got there, look around, look to the left, look to the right, because some of you would not make it through Harpur College. IG: 06:18 Really? AW: 06:18 Really. IG: 06:19 Who told you this? AW: 06:20 The dean. IG: 06:21 The dean. AW: 06:22 Yep. IG: 06:23 When you first arrived? AW: 06:24 Yeah, we had a gathering of the first-year students. IG: 06:28 So, what-what do you remember any of the first impressions that Harpur made on you- the campus of the- AW: 06:34 It was a beautiful campus, and it is right, that is the Susquehanna River. IG: 06:39 Yes. AW: 06:40 Floats in right down to the bottom of the campus. So I remember every morning walking to my classes and seeing- being able to see the river, and that was, I was very impressed by that. And I hope there was about there were mountains behind the campus. And in the springtime, my twin sister and I and a friend of ours went hiking and the mountains behind the college. And that was that was lots of fun. IG: 07:05 Just tell us for the record, what were the years that you went to Harpur College. AW: 07:11 1964 1960. IG: 07:14 So, you were one of the earlier recruits to Harpur College. AW: 07:18 What do you mean? IG: 07:19 Well, because, you know, it came into existence when in the Harpur College in the (19)50s. Or? AW: 07:32 That is true. That is true. By time I got to the college, it was already new campus. IG: 07:37 It was already a new campus. AW: 07:39 It was a new campus. Yep. IG: 07:40 I see. So did you live in? Were there- you know, what were the dorm situations like? Did you have a roommate? AW: 07:49 I had a roommate. IG: 07:50 You had a roommate, and the dorms were segregated at the time. AW: 07:54 You got the [inaudible] coming from the main client campus. AW: 07:59 Yes. AW: 07:59 The men's dormitories, I think, are on the left. IG: 08:02 Uh huh. AW: 08:02 And the girls are on the right. IG: 08:05 So, and you liked the-the dormitories, and where do you remember any of the I-I heard- told that there were different kinds of restrictions on curfews- AW: 08:19 Of course- IG: 08:19 -women then there will- AW: 08:20 You had to be back by 12 o'clock. IG: 08:22 Yeah, every night, or just on weekends. AW: 08:26 I think the weekends, it was either 12 o'clock or one o'clock. IG: 08:28 Yeah. AW: 08:29 And the course, during the week, I think they closed the doors by 10 o'clock at night. AW: 08:35 No, it did not bother me at all. IG: 08:35 And did you think that-that? Did you think anything of the curfew- IG: 08:36 It did not bother- AW: 08:37 I am currently talking about the (19)60s, right? IG: 08:37 Yeah. AW: 08:37 I am trying to go to college now, course, would be a major problem IG: 08:47 Of course, of course, of course. So, um, did you make friends? AW: 08:52 Of course, I did. IG: 08:53 Yeah. And so were your friends, like-like, you from the Albany area, or they were from- AW: 09:01 The only person from the Albany area was Stuart Lewis. IG: 09:05 Uh huh. AW: 09:05 Everybody else came from across New York state. IG: 09:09 Right. But the majority came from New York City and Long Island. AW: 09:14 Yeah, my first roommate came from the Bronx. IG: 09:16 Yeah. AW: 09:16 And my second roommate, Ann Goldman, grew up in Brooklyn. IG: 09:21 Did you have opportunity to visit the city? AW: 09:26 In college? IG: 09:27 While you were in college, or before? Did AW: 09:29 I have relatives who lived in New York. So I see before I entered college, of course, I was in college, I came to New York. IG: 09:35 Yeah. AW: 09:36 That is when- I went to Brown after Harpur College. IG: 09:39 Right. AW: 09:39 And I got my masters at Brown, and that is why I want to come to New York because I knew New York. IG: 09:43 Yes, okay, so-so you were no stranger. So there was no cultural, you know, difference that you noticed between New York City, because that is also something that you know interviewees that I speak to uh, from that, from that period, talk about that there was kind of a cultural difference between people from more rural parts of the state- AW: 10:08 No, I knew New York. That is why I wanted to come here. [crosstalk] going to some place like Boston, I did not know anybody in Boston. AW: 10:16 I have relatives in New York. IG: 10:16 Right. IG: 10:17 I see. AW: 10:17 So coming to New York was, um, very natural for me. AW: 10:20 I am from upstate. [crosstalk] IG: 10:20 Of course. AW: 10:20 Well, I think- IG: 10:20 Very natural for you. Okay, so did you have but did you notice differences between, you know, upstate students and New York City students? IG: 10:20 Whatever the difference is. AW: 10:28 Probably not very prejudiced, but I think the New York City students were a bit more aggressive. IG: 10:41 Yeah, a bit more aggressive. AW: 10:43 [inaudible] others? IG: 10:45 Not in those terms, but that there were differences. I mean, so they were more aggressive, and in which way? AW: 10:54 They were real quick to raise their hands. IG: 10:57 Yeah. AW: 10:58 They took over more organizational leadership. IG: 11:00 Uh huh. AW: 11:01 There is a, I know there is a Democrat- Democratic Club, and I think the leadership is from New York City. IG: 11:07 I see, were you involved in any of the clubs yourself? AW: 11:11 No, I was only involved in Jewish program. IG: 11:13 What was a Jewish program like at the time? AW: 11:16 Well, it is certainly a lot better than it was when I was there. First of all, my sister and I went to synagogue every Saturday because we had done that in Albany. So of course, we continue doing it. And Binghamton, I still do it. I am a member of a congregation in New York City. IG: 11:30 Yeah. So what was that like? Describe to us what that congregation was like, where you met and um- AW: 11:38 Well, it was a very small congregation. There was, they were located in downtown Binghamton. Now they have moved to Vestal. I see, I know they have a new building. IG: 11:48 That is right. So you would travel to Binghamton from- AW: 11:53 I took the bus [inaudible] from the Student Union. IG: 11:55 Uh huh. AW: 11:56 And stopped right in Binghamton like and maybe two blocks in the synagogue. IG: 12:02 What was the name of the congregation? AW: 12:05 I do not have no idea. IG: 12:05 You do not remember. So it was a small. AW: 12:09 It was very small. IG: 12:10 It was very small from-from people in the town, or from students. Essentially. AW: 12:14 No, we were the only students who went. IG: 12:16 But it was a congregation of people from Binghamton? AW: 12:19 I would say they had maybe, at 25 to 35 people had service on a Saturday. IG: 12:26 At most. AW: 12:28 Unless there was a Bar Mitzvah. IG: 12:29 I see, I see. And so what do you remember? Were it? What, where it was in, downtown- AW: 12:38 Well, I remember how to get there, but I remember the street. There was a hotel in Binghamton. It was a Sheraton. I think. IG: 12:44 Okay, so it still exists, I think. AW: 12:46 And I think we walked passes the Sheraton took a right-hand turn. IG: 12:50 I see, I see. AW: 12:51 That is the synagogue. IG: 12:52 So what do you remember of Binghamton? This the city of the time? Did- was it- did it strike you as rural, or was it- AW: 13:03 Well, obviously, I come from over New York, which is not a well now Norman, New York has definitely changed. IG: 13:09 Yeah. AW: 13:10 We have the state office buildings downtown, yeah, and so there are more restaurants and much more to do in Albany, New York now, but Binghamton was very rural. I think it still is. IG: 13:22 Was it in comparison to Albany? Was it more rural? AW: 13:27 More rural? Yes. IG: 13:27 Yes. So-so you have the worship activity, did you have any kind of community involvement outside of that. AW: 13:45 Well, I sang in the choir. IG: 13:48 Attendance. Oh, I see. AW: 13:50 I sang in this choir at Milne. I went to the Milne school. I sang of the choir at Harpur College. IG: 13:54 Oh, well, so tell us about that. AW: 13:56 Well, I do not- IG: 13:57 Tell me about it. AW: 13:58 I really do not remember the various songs that we sang. But do remember we gave a concert once in one of the high schools, and I remember getting in a bus and going to the concert to perform. IG: 14:08 Do you remember anything about the repertoire? Was it classical music? AW: 14:12 It was classical. IG: 14:14 It was classical. What-what kind of- so you were studying music? Were you? AW: 14:19 No, I-I played piano when I was in high school. IG: 14:23 I see. AW: 14:23 But I quit when I was, like, in 11th grade. Well, we have a piano here. My husband's a great pianist. He entertains me all the time. IG: 14:30 Oh, well. AW: 14:32 But I could barely get two notes on the piano now. But I love to sing. So when I sang at the Harpur into the um, I sang in the Milne school choir. I sang in my synagogue choir. IG: 14:41 Yeah. AW: 14:42 And I sang at the Harpur College choir. IG: 14:44 Did you sing, Alto, Soprano? AW: 14:46 Alto. IG: 14:47 Alto, I can tell by your voice. Okay. So what other activity- well, first of all, tell us, what was the program of your- what was the what was your major? [crosstalk] AW: 15:01 My father was a sociology major. IG: 15:02 Yes. AW: 15:03 So obviously I had a bench for sociology. IG: 15:07 Yes. AW: 15:07 So I became a sociology major. IG: 15:09 And tell us about you know, the program of your study. What? What did you find that interesting? AW: 15:14 I love sociology. I have a PhD in sociology. IG: 15:18 So what-what kinds of things about studying sociology appealed to you at Harpur College. What did you learn? AW: 15:26 I was learning about sociology is a study of society, right? IG: 15:30 Yes. AW: 15:30 So I learned all about a society, particularly American society, by studying sociology. IG: 15:37 Okay, so in general terms and more. You know what-what were you learning at the time? Do you remember what-what kinds of things were you learning about America? AW: 15:46 I had a professor today of course on a Soviet Union [inaudible] still existed. I took a course on American sociology, Richard Hamilton, and would discuss America being a melting pot. IG: 15:47 Yes. AW: 15:47 I remember that class very well because he made a comment about the Yiddish newspapers. IG: 16:07 Yes. AW: 16:07 Yiddish newspapers played a very important role in acculturating American Jews to American society. So I made that point when my grandfather was a Hebrew scholar. IG: 16:19 Oh. AW: 16:20 And he had no use for the Yiddish papers. He read it Hebrew papers. IG: 16:24 Right. AW: 16:24 So I remember my mother made a comment my father had no use for the Yiddish papers, whereupon my father hit the roof, because Yiddish papers were written his household. IG: 16:34 Right. AW: 16:34 He said, "Your grandfather was wrong. It played very important." He confirmed what I had learned in class. British newspapers played a very important role in enabling American Jews to become American. IG: 16:44 Right-right. AW: 16:46 So I remember that class very well. IG: 16:49 Do you, I mean, this is just of-of attention to little bit. But do you remember any Yiddish newspapers being around at the time in the (19)50s and the (19)60s? IG: 17:02 The forward. Was still written in English? AW: 17:02 The forward. AW: 17:03 [inaudible] IG: 17:04 Yeah. Was still written in Yiddish. AW: 17:05 Was still written in Yiddish. The fact I asked my mother wants to teach me Yiddish. IG: 17:10 Yeah. AW: 17:10 Because they spoke Yiddish in her household. IG: 17:12 Uh huh. Oh. AW: 17:14 We had maybe one or two lessons, and I gave up because it was the same letters in Hebrew, but totally different vocabulary. IG: 17:20 Right. AW: 17:21 And I could not. I simply could not learn it. My husband came from a family, they speak Yiddish. IG: 17:24 Yeah. AW: 17:24 So he-he, maybe he cannot speak it, but he has a much better vocabulary than I do. IG: 17:33 So-so was there, you know, an act of Yiddish life in-at the time of your growing up in New York City? AW: 17:40 No. IG: 17:40 That was already gone. It was already, you know, people were assimilated. AW: 17:44 There was nobody-nobody who really knew Yiddish. IG: 17:46 No. AW: 17:46 Nobody. IG: 17:47 Nobody. AW: 17:47 I am sure there are people who knew, but nobody spoke it. IG: 17:50 Well, I know that there was, there was a center at Columbia, YIVO was- AW: 17:54 There is. IG: 17:55 And there-there still is. AW: 17:57 YIVO is now part of the Jewish history. IG: 18:00 I see. So it is [inaudible] AW: 18:00 Something of the Jewish history on 16th Street. IG: 18:03 I see. AW: 18:04 But when I went to Hebrew, when I grew up in Albany, New York, Hebrew was a language that we were all supposed to learn. IG: 18:11 Right. AW: 18:12 So I am able to speak Hebrew. IG: 18:15 Were you able to I mean, we are going off tangent? But this is very interesting to me. So did you have a chance to speak sort of a lot, you know a Hebrew you, I see you have paintings of Israel. Did you have occasion to speak Hebrew in Israel? AW: 18:36 I have been to Israel 14 times. IG: 18:38 And did you speak Hebrew? AW: 18:39 I speak Hebrew all the time. IG: 18:41 All the time, fluently. So it was not a book, language that you know? AW: 18:45 Not a book. But I spoke as much as I spoke Hebrew, they only answered me in English. IG: 18:49 I see, I see. AW: 18:50 They picked up my American accent. IG: 18:52 I see, I see, I understand. AW: 18:55 I love the language. I speak it all. IG: 18:56 Yes, okay, do you read? AW: 19:00 Do I read Hebrew? IG: 19:01 I do. IG: 19:01 Yes. IG: 19:01 Yes. So you continue with [crosstalk] AW: 19:04 I, when I came to New- I took an opponent with my twin sister, but she moved out to marriage. When she married, it we both married to Arnies. She and Arnie moved to America. She was not going to come out. They go upon so I started taking up on my own. You know what Ulpan is? IG: 19:05 No. AW: 19:05 It is the way Hebrew is taught in Israel. I see it is when you walk into an Ulpan class, it is all in Hebrew. IG: 19:29 Uh huh. AW: 19:29 They gave you lots of readings to do, and there is a textbook, and you have to know, learn the grammar of Hebrew. And I have taken Ulpan any number of times in New York. IG: 19:40 Oh, where is it taught here? AW: 19:43 JCC, and [crosstalk] IG: 19:45 I know where that is, yeah, so, but Hebrew was not taught at Harpur College at the time. Do you remember any of the language? AW: 19:55 It was not. IG: 19:56 It was not, it was it was not. So- AW: 20:00 Nobody spoke it. There was nobody spoken to it. IG: 20:02 Nobody-nobody really spoken so. So let us get back to your sociology courses and how you felt they prepared you for your future studies in your future. AW: 20:13 Well, from Harpur College, I went on to Brown University. IG: 20:15 Yes-yes, but we are, you know, focused on a little bit more on Harpur College, because I represent Harpur College and Binghamton University. AW: 20:24 I also got a great education at Harpur College. I did learn sociology. IG: 20:29 Yeah, you learned sociology. So you learned about, you know, how did it expand your mind? How did it expand your understanding of sociology? AW: 20:40 Well, I learned about American society. Most of the courses had dealt with American society. Did take a course on Soviet Union. IG: 20:48 So what were you learning about the Soviet Union in the early (19)60s? AW: 20:52 I do not remember. I do not remember the details of that class. We are going back 50 years. IG: 20:58 Okay, anything that stands out. I mean, can you speak in journal terms about it being in a kind of an enlarging experience for you, it gave you- AW: 21:07 Of course, it was. IG: 21:08 So how so? AW: 21:09 I have got to know my professors, and I got to- I was an honors student. I wrote an honors thesis. IG: 21:13 Okay, so who were some of your professors, do you remember? IG: 21:16 Dr. Peter Dodge. IG: 21:17 Yeah. AW: 21:18 Donald Trump [Donald Throw]. Edwards, I forget his first name. He was very popular. Everybody wanted to take his courses. Um, those are three. I remember most. IG: 21:37 Okay, so-so you said, you know you learned about- AW: 21:40 Richard Hamilton. IG: 21:40 Richard Hamilton. So did you have interaction with your professors after class? Did they invite you to their home? AW: 21:53 My honors professor invited me to his home and we did, and I saw him after I graduated from Harpur, he went on to University of New Hampshire. IG: 22:02 Who was this? AW: 22:03 Peter Dodge, and he was studying in New York one year, and I was already working in New York, so I visited him. He was studying at Columbia. I visited him at his apartment on Riverside Drive. I visited him. And when he moved to New Hampshire, my family and I stopped off on our way to Bar Harbor Maine. So we stopped off and visit with him. IG: 22:24 Yeah. AW: 22:26 And we wrote, he wrote, we kept in contact with each other by way of the United States mail system for many-many years. IG: 22:34 Okay, so you know, so were you- did he, for example, invite um, students over to his- AW: 22:45 No. IG: 22:46 No, it was just after class [crosstalk] AW: 22:48 [crosstalk] myself, as we had developed a special relationship with him. IG: 22:51 I see, I see um, so, you know, just going back to sociology, what were some of the big ideas that you took away from your undergraduate experience? AW: 23:04 The importance of class. We did a lot of work at SES socioeconomic status, so I learned a lot about the role of class in American society. I think class was one of the biggest, the biggest variables that we concentrated on, because there were no Women's Studies. When I graduated Harpur College, IG: 23:30 There were no women women's studies. AW: 23:30 There were no women's studies. IG: 23:33 So-so what were, you, know, you said, variables of class. How was it, for example, how did it relate to the immigrant communities, the melting pot idea? AW: 23:46 Well, of course, when the immigrants came over, they were very lower class, right? AW: 23:50 They had lower class jobs. IG: 23:51 Yeah. IG: 23:52 Yes-yes. AW: 23:52 But as and particularly for the Jews, it was so important that children get college education. IG: 23:57 Yes. AW: 23:58 Now my mother-in-law, my father-in-law, both came from Poland. IG: 24:01 Yes. AW: 24:02 But they were bright enough to have had a college education, but did not have the opportunity to so very important for them that their children go on to get educate, have acquired educations, but I had already come from a family that was well educated. IG: 24:14 Right. IG: 24:15 Right. AW: 24:15 So it was not something that was- it was not um, stress has opened value, AW: 24:16 Just knew it was there. IG: 24:23 Yes. AW: 24:24 House was filled with books. All my parents friends were college educated. AW: 24:28 And it just assumed that we were going to go in on the college as well. But in my husband's example, it was exceptionally important, because his parents had not had an opportunity to be educating. So then they really did stress getting a college education. But in my household, it was just you. It was assumed that you were going to go on and get a college education. IG: 24:28 Right. IG: 24:52 Right. So, how- you know- so-so I guess you did not have the same class struggles that other immigrants have? AW: 25:03 No I was born. Well, my parents were lives of the depression. So, they always say, you know what, we were middle class. It just the matter was we were probably much more upper middle class. But I always assumed we were middle class, because what my parents had conveyed to me when I look back now, your father was the director and departmental of mental hygiene. How could we have just been middle class? We were obviously, we were upper middle class, but my parents kept and saying, oh, we were middle class, we were middle classroom. I tell my own children we were upper middle, we were upper middle class, because it is so important to me. I am having grown up with parents who grew up in the depression that my children have a sense that we were well off. IG: 25:41 Mm-hmm, okay, What-what- tell me about your children. You mentioned that, you know, they went to private schools, and so what-what-what careers are they- AW: 25:57 [crosstalk] royalty expert, he does not want to go on to get his CPA. IG: 25:58 Right. AW: 25:58 He says "I do not want to spend the rest of my career working on doing people's taxes." He thinks certified public accountants do. But he is a royalty expert. He works for Cats Media. IG: 26:14 Right. AW: 26:15 And which is, obviously, it is a media company. IG: 26:18 Right. IG: 26:18 Right. AW: 26:18 And he works on their royalties. Now, it is a lot of computerized work. When you when-when you publicize somebody and they become famous, they owe you a certain amount of royalties for your having pushed them forward. AW: 26:18 So he works in the royalties aspect. IG: 26:23 Uh huh. AW: 26:25 And my-my daughter, works for on the Wall Street Journal. IG: 26:35 Oh, well. What does she do? AW: 26:39 Well, she works in the business part. IG: 26:43 Okay, well, that is publishing. AW: 26:46 She does a lot of scheduling of business meetings. IG: 26:50 I see, I see, I see, that is- it is a good job. AW: 26:55 She loves it. She said, [crosstalk] "Why do you read The New York Times?" I said to her, "You work for the Wall Street Journal. Bring it home and I will read it." She does not bring it home, and I am not going to go to my way to buy a copy. IG: 27:07 No. And besides, it is all online right now. AW: 27:11 That is just true. IG: 27:13 Okay, so again, going back to your experience at Harpur College. So just so you feel that Harpur College prepared you for a future career. IG: 27:27 Oh, absolutely. IG: 27:29 Well, so gave you, you know, kind of a breadth of learning and, you know, understanding of key ideas, and how quickly after that did you go on to grad school? AW: 27:41 Well, I went on to graduate school when I graduated. I was at Brown for two years. I was supposed to have stayed to get my PhD, but after two years, have not been in school for six years, six well, we do not-not including high school and grammar school. I had been studying for so long, I want to come back. I want to work. So I applied for jobs in New York City, and my first job was at Columbia. IG: 28:06 Oh, what did you do at Columbia? AW: 28:07 Well, it was a strictly a first level job out of graduate school. IG: 28:12 Sure. AW: 28:12 It was a study with teamsters, and they would ask them all kinds of questions about their health. IG: 28:17 Oh. AW: 28:17 And I had to quote all that data. IG: 28:20 So, did you work for a department? Or did you- what-what part of Columbia did you work for? AW: 28:25 It was a school of public health. IG: 28:30 I see it is on 1/68 Street, Mailman School of Public Health. AW: 28:30 [inaudible] called the Mailman School then. IG: 28:30 It was not called Mailman [crosstalk] AW: 28:31 No, it was called Columbia University School of Public Health. IG: 28:36 So you enjoyed that? And um- IG: 28:39 It was your first job. AW: 28:39 I cannot say I enjoyed as my first job. AW: 28:41 Yeah. And I think I worked there for two years. IG: 28:45 Yeah. AW: 28:46 And then I got a job. I-I had mostly gone to a sociology convention, American sociology, sociological convention. And I think I saw the job advertised. It was job working for the Community Council of New York. It was also a grant study, and I worked with that Dr. Putter, and we collected data on older people. I forget where the data came from, and I was in charge of developing the questionnaire, analyzing and running it up. AW: 29:17 I see. AW: 29:18 I love that job. IG: 29:19 Yeah. How long were you there? AW: 29:21 I think I was there for two or three years. IG: 29:23 Uh huh. AW: 29:23 [inaudible] a grant ending. IG: 29:25 I see. So you had your graduate degree and then- AW: 29:31 My master's degree. IG: 29:32 Your masters. So tell us, you know, tell us about that journey toward the PhD and what happened? AW: 29:42 Well, actually the job of the Community Council ended- IG: 29:45 Yeah. AW: 29:45 I got a job at the American Jewish Committee. IG: 29:45 okay. AW: 29:45 And I was working with the famous Milton Himmelfarb. I am sure that name does not mean anything to you, but he is one of the editors of Commentary Magazine. IG: 29:55 Oh, wow. AW: 29:56 Commentary Magazine- IG: 29:57 I know about Commentary Magazine. I know. Of course, about Commentary Magazine. AW: 30:03 Well, you know, it is a very conservative magazine. IG: 30:07 Yes. AW: 30:07 So when I was working for him, he was giving me these assignments, and I had to confirm his conservative view of the world, and IG: 30:10 You did not share them? AW: 30:11 I did. I not only did I not share them, I did not agree with his view of the world at all, but I did not tell him that, because he was my boss, right? IG: 30:21 Yes. AW: 30:22 So I worked for him for two years, and I said to myself, what are you going to do with the rest of your life? And that is when I made the decision, “You are always going to be a middle level person unless you go and get your PhD.” IG: 30:34 That is right. In academics, that is right. AW: 30:37 Well, I knew I did not want to teach, but I do teach now. I teach at Mercy College. IG: 30:42 Oh, well, I did not know. AW: 30:42 Excuse me. IG: 30:44 I said, "Oh, wow. I did not know." AW: 30:46 Well, this is my this is a textbook which we are using. IG: 30:50 Oh, wow. Oh, that is so great. So just read it out loud for our listeners. AW: 30:55 The textbook is Family Violence Across the Lifespan: An Intro [Family Violence Across the Lifespan: An Introduction], and it is written by Ola Barnett, Cindy Miller Perrin and Robin Perrin, and it is my first time in my life ever teaching a class. Now, I did lecture when I got to Harlem Hospital and I became head of the department of the Center of Victim Support. IG: 31:18 That is so interesting. AW: 31:20 I did lecture for physicians, I lectured to nurses, I lectured to police officers, but I never actually taught a class from beginning to end on the theme of domestic violence. IG: 31:34 So how did you get interested in that? AW: 31:36 Well, I was working on the hospital Department of Social Work. IG: 31:36 Yes. AW: 31:36 I am the head of domestic violence coordinator. And she resigned. IG: 31:43 Right. AW: 31:44 And she did not know how to look at her data, so she was constantly coming to me to help her analyze her data. So when she left to the director of Department of Social Worker, said to me, I am going to make you a new director of domestic violence. IG: 32:00 Right. AW: 32:01 Because I knew how to work with statistics, but I did not know anything about domestic violence, but I knew from her data- IG: 32:10 Right. AW: 32:10 -what, no- the importance of subject matter. AW: 32:13 But I had never studied it, because I did not have that course on domestic violence, and I was in graduate school, so I took the job and I started reading. You need to know two things. You come of domestic violence coordinator. You have to know the subject matter, and you have to have a feel for what these women have been through. And I also interviewed some men. They were also men. Are also different domestic violence, but much smaller numbers than women. IG: 32:13 Right. IG: 32:36 How did you?- when did you get involved in this? How-how- what were the years that you kind of, that you entered into this field? AW: 32:47 Well, I became the domestic violence coordinator in 1994. IG: 32:56 What was your PhD in, I know that sociology, but what else- AW: 33:00 Well, I got my PhD, I was running for national genetics foundation. So my PhD- IG: 33:01 Where were in? AW: 33:02 In New York City. IG: 33:05 In New York City! AW: 33:08 So my PhD was in the physician recognition of a new specialty, because medical genetics is back in 1970 when I went back to graduate school in 1972 and I started working the national genetics foundation in 1974. IG: 33:24 And just remind us, where is your PhD from? You got your masters in Brown, and your PhD. AW: 33:30 I got my PhD at Columbia. IG: 33:32 I see. So you were at Columbia. What years? AW: 33:37 I was like- well, I did my coursework from 1972 to 1974. I got my PhD in 1979 I got my PhD when I started working the National Genetics Foundation. They knew when I started working there, they needed to have a subject matter from which I could develop my thesis. So I studied the physicians at a GHI hospital. I think GHI provided the funding for my salary, and that is how I got my PhD. IG: 34:13 But you- so-so your PhD was in what analyzing the data of the- AW: 34:23 A hundred patients form the GHI hospital- IG: 34:25 Yes. AW: 34:26 -located in Queens, and I asked them a series of questions of their knowledge of medical mimetics. So is it a study of their knowledge- IG: 34:26 Yeah. AW: 34:35 -their awareness of medical genetics as an important field, their knowledge of genetics. It was their knowledge, their awareness. And there is a third part of it, I cannot remember the third part was. IG: 34:48 Yes. So this was to demonstrate their general level of- AW: 34:56 -understanding. IG: 34:57 of understanding of- AW: 34:58 -emerging field, [crosstalk] IG: 34:59 Of course, of course. AW: 35:00 I had already become a major part of health care- IG: 35:04 I see. AW: 35:05 -for women who are pregnant women-women who are over the age of 35 so it was emerging field with very important, relevant techniques that physicians should know about. IG: 35:16 Yes. AW: 35:17 Even- well today everybody knows about amniocentesis. IG: 35:19 Yes. AW: 35:19 But when I was working on my thesis back in the middle and late (19)70s, so many physicians did not know that much about it all. IG: 35:27 And this is New York City- AW: 35:29 -this is New York City. IG: 35:30 -and this is so you could imagine what the rest of the country. AW: 35:32 And the base- the basic finding of my thesis was the fact that, well, physicians knew very little about mental genetics and had very little understanding of it, and then that realize relevance. IG: 35:44 Right. So were there recommendations that you made in your thesis of how to educate this? AW: 35:53 I do not think I did. IG: 35:55 [crosstalk] populations. AW: 35:56 That was not [crosstalk] AW: 35:57 Well, I did it for 25 years. IG: 35:57 That was not okay. So, tell us about, I am very interested about your work with victims of domestic abuse, and how long you did this. And- IG: 36:07 That is tremendous. And so, I mean, was not it emotionally? I mean, how do you heal- AW: 36:17 You should talk my family. They will say [inaudible] it took a toll on you. IG: 36:20 Yeah. AW: 36:21 When I come, when I come home at night, I had to admit, I was probably did a lot of snapping every family in numbers. You come home and you hear these stories that, [crosstalk] it is called vicarious trauma, traumatization. But I loved working with these abused women because they had such strengths. IG: 36:38 Yeah. AW: 36:39 Um, they have been through so much. IG: 36:40 Yes. AW: 36:40 And yet they were able to open up and tell me about the violence I had experienced. IG: 36:46 Right. AW: 36:47 And you have to have a sense of rapport with these women. IG: 36:50 Right. AW: 36:50 And I did not just work with women who are being physically and emotionally abused. I also work with women who are victims of rape. IG: 36:58 Yeah. AW: 36:58 And at that point the rape do you know about the rape exam? IG: 37:00 Yes. AW: 37:02 Well, the whole process of the rape exam had already been developed, and women would come to the emergency room seeking the rape kits. IG: 37:09 Right. AW: 37:09 So I work with a lot of women who are victims of rape. Now the statistics show, and it is probably very true, most women who are raped are rape in the context of intimacy. They are being raped by their husbands; they are being raped by their boyfriends. They are being raped by people they know. IG: 37:23 Yes. AW: 37:24 It is not the woman who goes to a fraternity party at night. IG: 37:26 Right. AW: 37:27 And ends up being raped. So I was dealing with women who were very traumatized by their experiences. And I also wrote a grant in New York State Crime Victims board, and they gave me a grant, which enabled me to hire three or four social workers, and we developed a center for different support, and we provided therapy at night. IG: 37:45 That is tremendous. That is really, that is, that is tremendous. IG: 37:52 Thank you. IG: 37:52 Yeah, so, I mean, is your work known about in the field of domestic violence and abuse? AW: 38:08 When I retired, I was working at the freedom houses domestic violence shelter, and I was interviewing women and their understanding of their self-confidence. The whole purpose of the study was develop their self-confidence over time. Site, I interviewed them. They came to the shelter. I interviewed them. Shelter stays are only for three months. That is what the funds come from. The no brother Power Act, Violence Against Women Act, which is a law that comes from the New York the United States legislature. So it only pays for three months, and the monies are funneled through the New York state, New York State Department of Health. So I interviewed them when they first got to the shelter. I interviewed them at the end of two months. I interviewed them right before they were being ready for discharge. And I did write a paper, and I presented at two different conferences. IG: 39:00 Okay, so what were the years of that? AW: 39:03 Years of [inaudible] IG: 39:04 Of-of-of-of your paper, and- AW: 39:06 Well, the first paper I gave, I gave in Washington at the future Futures Without Violence. That is the name of the organization. IG: 39:14 In what year? AW: 39:15 2014. IG: 39:18 Okay, so it was quite recent. AW: 39:24 Maybe I do not. Maybe it was 2013. IG: 39:26 Yeah, but it is quite recent. AW: 39:28 And then I gave the same paper I gave at the American Public Health Association. IG: 39:34 At the American what? AW: 39:34 Public health association that was in Chicago. IG: 39:38 So you know your-your work is known of in the community. AW: 39:46 I would say so. IG: 39:46 You would say so. AW: 39:47 I would say so. IG: 39:56 So what-what did you do you know, what did you. I mean, I, I am, I am really fascinated to learn about this and your work with, you know, victims and what-what-what impact do you think that you have had on this constituency overall? AW: 40:18 Well, you know, you cannot change people. IG: 40:20 No. AW: 40:20 You can give them insight. IG: 40:23 Right. AW: 40:23 But in the end, if they are going to change their way of life and move beyond the violence, that is an individual decision. IG: 40:30 Right. AW: 40:31 Every victim has to make on her own or his own. But other people I worked with at Harlem Hospital. IG: 40:38 Right. AW: 40:39 Many of them went on to move away from their abusive relationships and went on to develop relationships that were not abusive. IG: 40:49 Right. AW: 40:50 And I strongly believe it is because of the dialog that I had with them about the fact, and I always say to every victim, that is what I teach in my class, you never accuse the victim of causing the violence. That is what the perpetrator tells them. IG: 41:05 Right. AW: 41:07 I am hitting you because you have aggravated me. IG: 41:09 Right. AW: 41:10 So the first message you have to get across it every victim is the fact that they did not cause the violence. Does not matter what the perpetrator said to them. Does not really matter how they absorb that-that fact that they are the cause of the violence, the victim is never the cause of the violence. And I made that point to every victim I saw. I saw 150 victims a year in Harlem Hospital, and I made the same point of victims I interviewed at Freedom House. The victim did not cause the violence. IG: 41:37 It must be a look, a very liberating idea for them to- AW: 41:41 I am sure it is- IG: 41:42 -absorbed AW: 41:42 -because they have so much inculcated themselves this belief. IG: 41:46 Right. AW: 41:46 They cause the violence. IG: 41:47 Right. AW: 41:48 They never put any blame on the perpetrator. IG: 41:50 Right. AW: 41:51 Blame themselves. I did not do this right; I did not do that right. IG: 41:53 Right. AW: 41:54 There is nothing that a victim can do that justifies the perpetrator being out of control. IG: 42:01 Right. AW: 42:01 The perpetrator is out of control for any number of reasons. First of all, a lot of them are depressed, and they are- also have very low self-esteem, and they tend to be attracted to women who also have low self-esteem, because that makes their-their task of destroying a person so much easier. I am not saying that all women who enter into violent relationships enter low self-esteem, but by time they end it, they certainly do have very low self-esteem. IG: 42:27 Is it oftentimes tied to economic dependence on the- AW: 42:31 Well, that is why a lot of women do not like to leave because their perpetrator does not. Perpetrators do not like them to work. They do not like them to be exposed to the world. So you do not work. I work now. I am bringing in the money. And when I worked at Freedom House, I encourage all of them to get the GEDs. You know that is? IG: 42:51 Yeah, of course I do. AW: 42:53 Because without a college, high school education, there is no job market for you. IG: 42:58 Right. AW: 42:59 So, I encourage all of them to get their GED, not only because they needed to get a job, but they needed for their own understanding of themselves as-as responsible adult human beings. IG: 43:12 Right. Did you see these women over time? Or did you see- I mean, how, how much exposure did you or your program have? AW: 43:21 Well, I usually, I saw many of them only once because they were coming to the hospital identified by doctors and nurses. IG: 43:27 But you did not, so you did not really know the impact that your interaction would have on them over time. AW: 43:35 Well, I only know those who, say, through whom we offered therapy. IG: 43:38 I see. AW: 43:39 I have a grant from New York State, crime [inaudible] support, and we started out often in 12 weeks of therapy. But I realized when I had, when I renewed the grant, that 12 weeks is really not that much time. No so no one that was renewed. I asked for 16 weeks. So those who came to therapy, I had a great deal of contact with, and those who did come, who came to therapy, definitely were able to change their lives. IG: 44:01 But you were not the one conducting the therapy. You ran, [crosstalk] of course, yeah, you ran. You ran that right effort. I mean, how do you feel doing that work in in hindsight, do you feel- AW: 44:21 I am glad, and the board, who's Director department associate I am glad she made me the domestic violence coordinator. AW: 44:28 Obviously, when I first started doing, I did not know that much about domestic violence, but I just had a feel what these women were going through, and to be a good domestic violence coordinator, even without having the knowledge, you have to have a feel for your clients. IG: 44:28 Right. IG: 44:47 Right. AW: 44:48 And I definitely had that feeling. IG: 44:50 Yeah. AW: 44:50 And I was obviously able to convey it. IG: 44:53 Right. Do you think that most of the people that you saw were, you know a segment of the population that suffers from domestic abuse because sort of, you know, the- you mentioned that a lot of the women did not have GED, but you know, oftentimes women who have who are more educated and come from maybe more well to do families may also be victims, but you-you probably did not see that population? AW: 45:26 I did have a certain number of not only to have certain number of middle-class clients, I had a certain number of middle-class clients who were college educated, and they also were victims. IG: 45:36 Did they have sort of the same scenario as in their homes, as the women from poor families? AW: 45:46 Yes. IG: 45:46 They have the same so their husbands sort of kept them isolated from the world. AW: 45:51 Yes. IG: 45:51 Yes. AW: 45:52 Yeah. IG: 45:52 And they ranged in ages. AW: 45:55 Well, most of them were in their 20s, 30s, and then for [crosstalk] 40s. IG: 46:02 So, tell us, you know, this is really-really valuable work that you have done in your life, and now you are teaching a course at Mercy College. And you know, who are your students there? AW: 46:19 A lot of them are going for a degree mental health counselor. IG: 46:22 I see, I see. AW: 46:23 So and I talked about that my cases, I asked them to expand on their own cases. IG: 46:28 Right. AW: 46:29 Because I am not just teaching the theory of family violence, I am trying to get their understanding- IG: 46:36 Right. AW: 46:37 -the case of they have seen- IG: 46:38 Right. AW: 46:39 -from-from the perspective of the points textbook is making, and from my own perspective, having worked with no 150 cases a year for over 20 years, and I also bring in the cases that I had at Freedom House, if I asked them to tell me about their cases, also. IG: 46:57 Right. AW: 46:57 Because I want you know how their cases relate to what the theory says. IG: 47:04 Right. And there is no indication of you letting up on this class? AW: 47:10 No-no. I am going to continue teaching it. IG: 47:14 That is wonderful. That is wonderful. So you know, just, let us, let us move to the past a little bit. And I just wanted to know, you know, so, when did you meet your husband? And you know, where did you meet your husband? AW: 47:33 I have a friend, Lenny Bergman. IG: 47:35 Right. AW: 47:35 She was dating Joe Friedman. IG: 47:37 Yeah. AW: 47:38 And my husband was friendly with- was very close with Joe Friedman. I was very close with Laney. IG: 47:44 Right. AW: 47:44 So they said, why do not you come for Friday night dinner. IG: 47:45 Right. AW: 47:45 And you can meet Arnold Weintraub. I said, I am not really interested. IG: 47:52 Yeah. AW: 47:53 And he said the same thing to Joe. So, Laney said to me, you are not going to marry the guy- IG: 47:58 Yeah. AW: 47:59 -just come and meet him for dinner. IG: 48:01 Right. AW: 48:01 So on the assumption I did not have to marry him, I met her for dinner. IG: 48:05 Right. AW: 48:06 And I was going to a synagogue on the west side. It must have come up in course the conversation. So then the following this Saturday, after the Friday night dinner, he showed up my synagogue. IG: 48:17 This is sweet. That is really nice. AW: 48:19 Well, I totally ignored him. IG: 48:21 Yeah. AW: 48:22 I do not know why my daughter says me to this day, "Why did you ignore dad so much." I do not know why I ignored him. I just ignored him. But he called me up anyway for a date. IG: 48:32 That is very lovely. AW: 48:33 And when we hit- our first date was April 21 1972 and so every April 21 we always celebrate everyone having and he and he proposed a year later. IG: 48:47 Yeah. AW: 48:48 April, things like April 22. IG: 48:50 That is very, that is very sweet. AW: 48:52 So, two people really wanted me and he said, his joke, I am not innocent. Joe said, you know, you are not going to marry her. So, I mean, some people were not going to marry each other. He met- we fell in love. IG: 49:03 It took the pressure off of you, you know. AW: 49:05 That is true, that is true. IG: 49:06 That is, that is, I think that that made things more possible. So also, you know, going back, so what-what were you like? I mean, this is 1972 you were, you know a young woman who was very kind of on a, on a career track to an academic career in sociology. How do you think that you know your people of for example, of the time during that time, remembered you and you know, how do you think that your classmates at Harpur College would remember you, you know, this is- AW: 49:44 I think, well, my daughter says, Mom, "You are quiet and you are very serious." She is right. I am quiet and I am serious. IG: 49:52 Yeah. AW: 49:53 But when I have something to say, I have no trouble-trouble getting it out. AW: 49:57 Right. Right. AW: 49:58 So I say, Rebecca all the time. I am. Be quiet, but I am not a pushover. IG: 50:03 No. AW: 50:03 I have my ideas, and if I am in a room when people express themselves, I either agree with them and I tell them why, or I disagree with them, I also tell them why. So why I am quiet. I am not, I am no, I am not a wallflower, right? But I also, I was very quiet in high school, and I was very quiet in college. I am a quiet person. IG: 50:24 You are a quiet person, I think, with a real capacity for taking people in, right? Because you- yeah- AW: 50:34 I also chair my synagogues Israel committee now. IG: 50:37 Yes. AW: 50:38 We just had a meeting last night, so I am able to take on leadership capacities, and I think I do it very well. IG: 50:46 Tell us about that leadership capacity outside of your role with victims of domestic abuse. AW: 50:56 Well, I am very active in my synagogue. IG: 50:56 Right. AW: 50:56 But I am particularly active in Israel committee. I am the chairperson. IG: 51:01 So what do you do? What do you- AW: 51:03 Run weekly me- we run monthly meetings, and we plant programs throughout the year. IG: 51:07 Yeah. AW: 51:08 And I have to get the speakers, and I have to know, getting the orientation of my- there is a reconstruction in synagogue. So I have to [inaudible] a little bit [inaudible] reconstruction is [inaudible] all of that. So, when they come, they prepare, they know what they are meaning. We are also very warm congregation. We do a lot of singing. My husband plays a piano services, so I give him some idea--know what kind of congregation you are. We are also very intellectual congregation. IG: 51:35 Right. AW: 51:36 I am not the only PhD in the congregation. IG: 51:38 Yeah. AW: 51:41 So and I had- we, and I developed the speakers based on what the interests are of the committee. Meanwhile, we pick somebody out of the blue, I am right in the committee. We discussed now what-what our interests are for the year, and we develop our programs based on the interest of the committee and what we think will interest the congregation. IG: 51:59 Right. AW: 51:59 And then we line up our speakers. IG: 52:01 Right. So does your-your congregation, do any outreach or philanthropy work with Israel or the you know, New York community does- AW: 52:16 Well, we are not a fundraising. IG: 52:17 You are not a- Yeah. AW: 52:18 I mean the people who come speak to us, I always say, bring your literature. IG: 52:24 Right. AW: 52:24 People want to give and give on their own. IG: 52:26 Right. AW: 52:26 But we do not do active fundraising. IG: 52:28 You do not do- AW: 52:28 -for Israel. IG: 52:29 Yeah. AW: 52:29 I myself give money to UJA Federation. IG: 52:33 Right. AW: 52:34 I also give money to the new Israel fund. IG: 52:36 Uh huh. AW: 52:38 The new Israel did not know anything about the new Israel fund? IG: 52:40 No, but I know about the UGA. AW: 52:41 Well, new the new Israel fund believes the importance having a binational state, and they also work very closely with the Israeli Arab population. So, and I feel me for really the importance of a two-state solution. So, I do give my money to us, to um New Israel fund. IG: 53:01 Right. AW: 53:01 But I also give the Federation, UGA Federation, because I play very important role in aiding the lower—there is, there is three categories, low-income Jews in New York City, Russians, Russian Jews, who came over in the (19)70s and (19)80s. My husband actually worked for highest- IG: 53:21 I know that, yeah. AW: 53:22 And you work for- IG: 53:22 a lot of, a lot of parents of my friends came through that- AW: 53:26 We also worked in NYANA. Highest brought them over- IG: 53:29 Yes, I know, NYANA. AW: 53:31 -provided the services. IG: 53:33 yeah. AW: 53:33 So a lot of the Russians made- IG: 53:34 In the 80s. AW: 53:35 -a larger portion New York City poor Jews. IG: 53:39 Yeah. AW: 53:39 And the Hasidim also. IG: 53:40 Right. AW: 53:41 Because they are very large families and they have middle class jobs. IG: 53:46 Right. AW: 53:47 And the third category is the [inaudible], because they have not been able to know they did not have the kinds of jobs that provide them with pensions. IG: 54:05 Of course. Or they did not have jobs, or- AW: 54:08 A lot of them are living- I did that job for just the Jews Association, service of the agent. Most of them are living on Social Security. IG: 54:16 That is right, that is right. AW: 54:18 Some that does not get you very far, does it? Not- IG: 54:20 It does not. AW: 54:21 Especially living in New York City, governments are so high. So I do not get talking about this. IG: 54:29 About-about outreach and philanthropy that you do. AW: 54:32 I am also very active in the Social Action Committee--my husband, I run a program every at the synagogue called Hunger Shabbat. IG: 54:38 What is that? AW: 54:39 Well, we talk about the number of people in New York City who are living below the poverty line. And West Side Campaign Against Hunger is a food- is a it is a supermarket right for people who are living below the poverty line. And they provide wonderful services. They also have a van that goes up the Washington Heights because there so many people living below the poverty line in Washington Heights, and so we run Hunger Shabbat usually have a speaker, someone from West Side Campaign Against Hunger, who talks about the-the level of poverty in New York City, and how was they called themselves whisker and how was good, tries to address that through their through their supermarket approach, and they have an annual dinner, which my husband, I go to every year. I really- It means a great deal to me to support people who do not have the kinds of money that you really need to live on, to live on in the city, this is probably one of the most expensive cities in the world. IG: 55:39 Yes, can I agree. AW: 55:43 And then there are people who come here. We a lot of immigrants who come here. IG: 55:47 That is wonderful. AW: 55:47 So I am very active on our social committee. I am also part of it is called Synagogue Coalition for Refugee and Immigrant cooperation. IG: 55:47 Right. IG: 55:47 Right. AW: 55:47 We know they come from South America. They are coming for because of being victimized by the gangs in Honduras in Nicaragua and Colombia, sort of coming here to seek safety. We also many refugees coming from Africa. [inaudible] hospital- There are a number of refugees that are from-from Africa, and of course, we have the Syrian problem. AW: 56:08 We are actually meeting next Thursday, and we develop all kinds of programs to get the Jewish community on board in terms of helping the Syrians. AW: 56:09 That is tremendous. That is wonderful. AW: 56:40 I enjoy. IG: 56:41 Yeah, I mean, it is a meaningful life. It is very it is a meaningful life. AW: 56:45 My daughter says all the time, "Mom, you have such a good heart." IG: 56:48 Yeah. AW: 56:48 And I do. Where I got it from? My parents were very much involved in the Jewish community and giving. So I know I got the broader strokes from my parents, but how I am playing it out in New York City, it is all coming from me. IG: 57:05 It is all coming from you, yeah, and the people that have fed that right, that that that give that emotion, that kind of disposition, to give up yourself, because there must have been, you know, I mean, it is, it is, you probably had a lot of grateful people that you, that you, that you saw, you know, throughout your life, I mean, the people that you were helping. So, there is sort of a gratitude that is feeding that- AW: 57:40 That is true, that is true, right. AW: 57:40 That is true. IG: 57:40 -that impulse. IG: 57:44 Okay, well, you know I- AW: 57:49 You know what, let us eat, let us have some snacks. Okay. IG: 57:52 Okay, you know what, I have to really leave in like five minutes. AW: 57:58 Okay. IG: 57:59 But I want to still ask you just some concluding questions--so you know you have answered a lot of the questions that I-I set out to ask. I know how you spend your time. Do you have any kind of recreational things that you do outside of your community work and your teaching? AW: 58:26 Well, I live abroad in Central Park. No. So soon, another month, when it really warms up, I am going to start my jogging again. Oh, good. I love jogging. AW: 58:35 Yeah. AW: 58:36 It is, it is when I fit and I jog around the reservoir. It is like a little over a mile, right? And when I get back to this apartment, I feel so revitalized. AW: 58:47 Yeah, I could imagine. AW: 58:48 Do you jog? IG: 58:49 I-I-I run on the treadmill. It is not my favorite thing to do. I swim. AW: 58:55 Oh, I love swimming also. IG: 58:57 I-I-I swim in the Binghamton pool, and I do yoga. I mean, I been a yoga devotee for the last [crosstalk] AW: 59:08 Swimming is one of my two favorite sports activities. Are all spring, summer time? IG: 59:14 Right. AW: 59:14 Yeah, but you cannot swim in the wintertime. And I do not like indoor pools. I cannot stand the smell of chlorine. IG: 59:20 Well I swim in the actually, the Binghamton pool is extraordinary because it does not really smell of chlorine. So have you been back to Binghamton? AW: 59:30 No, I have not. I went back my- I had a friend who lived in Binghamton. IG: 59:37 Oh really. Well, you should come to visit us. You know when you are whenever you visit your friends, we would be very happy to introduce you to the Dean of Libraries, who is very forward thinking, and he has big visions AW: 59:56 [inaudible] still the same place? IG: 59:58 Still the same place. I. AW: 59:59 Okay. IG: 1:00:00 But it is expanded. AW: 1:00:01 I am sure it has. IG: 1:00:03 Now the- there are, there is not just one Binghamton library. There are four libraries. IG: 1:00:10 We call- because there is a science library on campus. There is a downtown, a smaller downtown library for the student community that lives downtown. And now we are opening a school of nursing [crosstalk]. So, there is, there is this [crosstalk] but they are now transferred to a new campus in Johnson City. AW: 1:00:10 Why? AW: 1:00:38 Where? IG: 1:00:38 Johnson City. AW: 1:00:39 Oh right, Johnson City was just [inaudible] of Binghamton. IG: 1:00:42 So, there are four libraries, and there are different programs that we do for-for example, you know, employing low-income students to learn to work in the library and learn, you know, technology and research skills while they are doing it. But let us, let us conclude this interview asking you about, you know, what are the most important lessons that you have learned in life that you would like to share to with you know, current and future students listening to this [crosstalk] AW: 1:01:18 I honestly, most important part of anyone's life is first of all getting a college education, because it broadens your understanding of the world. You begin to realize it is not just about me, but you begin to realize that there is a whole world out there beyond yourself with different values you learn about different cultures, and it just expands your understanding of the world. So I would say to anybody and everybody, how important is- [squeaky door] Hi. This is my husband. Amy's husband 1:01:49 How are you? So, you found it. [squeaky door] I am going to head over to the [inaudible] now. AW: 1:01:55 This is my warm ass going husband. [crosstalk] IG: 1:01:59 We have learned a lot about you. Amy's husband 1:02:01 You have? IG: 1:02:02 Yes. Amy's husband 1:02:02 Yeah, you think it is all true. IG: 1:02:05 No. So your wife is concluding her interview with me and telling us what life lessons were the most important that she learned in her career and in her life that she would like to share with this current generation of students and future generations who are listening to the tapes. [crosstalk] Yes. AW: 1:02:38 I would say to anyone, everyone. I know college educations cost a lot. IG: 1:02:42 Yeah. AW: 1:02:44 But if-if there is a famous founder of Israel theater, Herzl [Theodor Herzl] said, if you dream it in well, if it is if you dream it, "If you will, it is no dream." IG: 1:02:57 Repeat it. AW: 1:02:58 If you will, it- IG: 1:02:59 Yes. AW: 1:02:59 It is no dream. IG: 1:03:01 Yes. AW: 1:03:02 So if you have the intellectual capacity to get a college education, I know that New York State, you can earn up- your parents can earn up $220,000 and you still can get an education for free if you go to a school in New York State, and if you go to one of the SUNY schools. So I would urge everyone, anyone and everyone, to get a college education, because just broaden your understanding of the world. And I am glad I got a college education, and I am glad I got it at Harper College. IG: 1:03:37 Wonderful. Thank you so much. AW: 1:03:39 You are very welcome. (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. Amy Weintraub Subject The topic of the resource Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education; Harpur College – Alumni working with victims of domestic violence/sexual assault; Harpur College – Alumni from New York City; Harpur College – Alumni living in the New York City area Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Weintraub, Amy ; Gashurov, Irene Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource Amy Weintraub, PhD, led the Center for Victim Support at Harlem Hospital Center for 25 years and assessed patients with a history of domestic violence and sexual assault. She currently teaches courses on these subjects at Mercy College. She was a sociology major at Harpur College. She was a National Institute of Mental Health Fellow. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-03-09 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 Amy Weintraub.mp3 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-09 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Oral Histories from 60's Binghamton Alumni Extent The size or duration of the resource. 63:41 minutes https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/db07d2a3541c28677edb4bffcdcffe75.mp3 2a4a5b8141094ebfb7f9fa67a87824f2 Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource Oral Histories Title A name given to the resource Oral Histories from 1960s Binghamton Alumni Description An account of the resource In 2019, Binghamton University Libraries completed a mission to collect oral interviews from 1960s alumni as a means to preserve memories of campus life. The resulting 47 tales are a retrospective of social, professional and personal experiences with the commonality of Harpur College. Some stories tell of humble beginnings, others discuss the formation of friendships; each provides insight into a moment in our community's rich history. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Irene Gashurov Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2017-2018 Relation A related resource <a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/browse?collection=18">McKiernan Interviews : 60's collection of Oral Histories</a> Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2018-02-14 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Irene Gashurov Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. Andrew Grant Year of Graduation 1967 Biographical Text Dr. Andrew Grant is a retired Assistant VP for Institutional Advancement at Hebrew Union College in NYC. He worked as a disc jockey at WHRW-FM. Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni at Hebrew Union College; Harpur College – Alumni living in Suffolk County, Long Island Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Subject LCSH Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni at Hebrew Union College; Harpur College – Alumni living in Suffolk County, Long Island Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium Alumni Interviews Interview with: Andrew Grant Interviewed by: Irene Gashurov Transcriber: Oral History Lab Date of interview: 14 February 2018 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) IG: 00:00 Where are you, if I may ask? Are you at home or in your office? AG: 00:04 I do not have an office. I am retired. IG: 00:06 Oh! AG: 00:07 On January 2. IG: 00:09 Could you- well, congratulations on your retirement. We just want to make you a little bit louder. I am- Third speaker 00:15 Okay. This is, I think, the loudest. IG: 00:19 That is the loudest it can go? IG: 00:20 do I need to do that? Or you do that? Yeah, it does. It does not get louder, yeah, can you? Can you do it from your end? Dr, Chris, AG: 00:31 I do not think so. I think my volume control is only- my machine, Third speaker 00:37 Yeah. AG: 00:37 Is that better, or no? IG: 00:40 I think so. I think so, okay, okay, so why do not we begin, um- AG: 00:48 [inaudible] you need to move a little bit more together so I can see. IG: 00:54 Okay-okay, so we are not- Third speaker 00:58 Okay, okay, I will just- IG: 01:00 I am just looking through my notes. That is, that is why I moved away. Okay, so why do not we begin with you identifying yourself when you were born, what you do and when you went to Binghamton, AG: 01:27 What was the last one? IG: 01:29 When you went to Binghamton? Or we could ask that later. AG: 01:34 Okay. My name is Andrew grant. I was born in November of 1946. I went to Binghamton. I graduated in 1967. IG: 01:46 Okay, very good. So where did you grow up? AG: 01:51 In Manhattan and the Bronx. IG: 01:54 Oh, may I ask where in Manhattan? AG: 01:58 In Washington Heights. IG: 01:59 Oh, I lived in Washington Heights. AG: 02:02 Where? IG: 02:04 By Fort Tryon Park. AG: 02:05 Yeah, that is where I lived. IG: 02:07 Okay, 1/80 and Fort Washington Avenue in probably the most beautiful apartment building and apartment that I have ever lived in. It was beautiful, Art Deco. AG: 02:24 Yeah, I was, we were on 1/90 and Hillside. Speaker 1 02:27 Okay, AG: 02:27 At the lower at the lower end of the park, my sister actually still has an apartment up there. IG: 02:31 Oh! Well, um, yeah, I am familiar with that area very well, and a lot of my Russian emigre friends lived there. There was a big Russian community in Washington Heights, but that is, that is after your time. AG: 02:52 That is after my time. My time was, it was many Holocaust survivors, as-as-as was my family. IG: 03:02 Yeah, okay. These were, these were refuseniks who came to the US in the late (19)70s and early (19)80s. A lot of- AG: 03:15 My parents. My parents came from Germany in 1940. IG: 03:18 Okay-okay, all right, so and who were your parents? AG: 03:25 Who were they? Who were my- the names? IG: 03:27 What you can tell us their names, what did they do? What was their occupation? Where were they from? You mentioned this briefly. They were from Germany. They came in 1940. What did they do in Germany? What did they do in the United States? What was their occupation? AG: 03:47 My father, my father had a- his family had a textile company, and when he came to the States, he became a textile salesman. My mother was a homemaker. IG: 03:59 Okay, all right. And did they- did your parents go to college? IG: 04:06 No. IG: 04:07 Yeah. And what were their- 04:09 -and they did not pick it up when they got here. IG: 04:12 I see what were their expectations for you in terms of college? Was education valued in your family? AG: 04:20 It was they expected that I would go to college, and I did. IG: 04:31 So can you elaborate a little bit? Were they supportive of your- I mean, did they help you study? Did they help you choose your college, or were they, yeah- Speaker 2 04:46 It was, it was not a- an issue- was always assumed that it would go to college and we- they, you know, it was very different in those days. I just- my daughter just graduated from Colby, and the process of getting her situated in the school that she wanted to go with all the visits and the trips was very different. We went to visit Binghamton. I saw it. I do not think I visited any other schools. I chose it for a number of reasons. It had a good reputation. It was a state school. It was inexpensive. I had a regional scholarship, so it became less expensive, and there was not as much thought about it when I went to school, certainly as when my daughter weighed her options for which school she wanted to go to. IG: 05:52 Okay, I-I-I- that was also the experience, my experience versus my daughter's, I think a lot more thought went into her college selection. So what was your experience at Harpur College? AG: 06:18 It was- IG: 06:19 Yeah. AG: 06:20 I guess the best word I could use is bland. IG: 06:23 Bland. AG: 06:24 It was bland. It was, it was- I was not, you know, there was a lot going on in the (19)60s. I was not much of an activist. It was, it was a question of getting through my studies. I was not a superior student by any means my academic success came much later on, when I, when I proceeded, pursued my doctorate. I had a small group of friends and was not very much involved. I was involved with the radio station, so that was my extracurricular activity. And it was really a question of trying to find myself at that time. IG: 07:05 Well, that is, I mean, these are all very interesting points, so maybe let us start with the most interesting to you, which was the radio station. Tell us about that. AG: 07:19 It was, well, I was, I was looking for an extracurricular opportunity there as and all of the clubs and all of the other extracurricular activities, there was, you know, I guess there was a fair, or whatever it was they displayed. And it was, it was, I had never done that before. And it was, it was an interesting group of people, and we all got our FCC licenses, and that was where I spent most of the- my time that was not in class and in the library. IG: 07:53 So the radio station was conducted from the library, the physical space? AG: 07:58 No-no, It was conducted- IG: 08:00 Oh, I see I misunderstood. AG: 08:03 I was either in class or in the library study- IG: 08:05 I see, I see I misunderstood. Okay, so I would like you to talk more about the radio station. Where was it located? AG: 08:15 I think it was in the student center, if I remember correctly. And we had a- in those days was it was, I think while I was there, they expanded it, they bought a much more powerful transmitter, and I had many of my friends that I was close with and I met through the through the radio station. Third speaker 08:45 Wait, what was it called? AG: 08:47 WHRW. Third speaker 08:49 Because it is still continuing, and I still listen. They play great music. New Age, different- IG: 09:00 Oh. Third speaker 09:00 Yeah, they do. I even listen some Turkish music there. IG: 09:04 Oh wow, that is incredible. Third speaker 09:06 Yes. AG: 09:09 They still have reunions. I know that I did not go to my reunion. I went back to Binghamton a few years after I graduated, and I got lost on the campus, and that was the last time I went back. AG: 09:20 I graduated in (19)67 maybe (19)71-(19)72. [crosstalk] you have to remember, if you look at an aerial photograph of the campus, there is a kidney shaped drive that goes around in the middle. That is all there was. And in those days, that kidney shaped drive that went around a number of the buildings, but that was the entire campus at that time, and then it expanded tremendously. IG: 09:22 When was that? IG: 09:55 Hmm. Yeah, that that is our impression from speaking with other graduates from-from this time, from the (19)60s, that it was kind of a, you know, a smaller, much smaller version um-um. of-of- it was, it was actually a different-different-different type of campus. It was very kind of bare bones. But returning to the- excuse me. AG: 10:27 It was tiny. IG: 10:28 It was tiny. But returning, I am really curious about the radio station. What role did you play? Was-was the- was it a sound studio? I mean, how- what-what was the equipment that you used? AG: 10:42 I did not hear the question, was it a, what type of studio? IG: 10:48 Sound studio, sound studio. AG: 10:51 inaudible] It was- there was a, there was an office, and there was a, there was a- an on-air studio with offices, you know, an office around it, and wherever the trend, the transmitter was someplace else. And we- I did some of the, some administrative activities we all managed, helped manage it, and I did a little bit of on air announcing. IG: 11:29 What kind of music did you play? What kind of talk shows did you have, if any? AG: 11:35 [inaudible] talk shows. I did some-some music, some-some popular, current music and of the day. IG: 11:43 So what, what was, you know, some of the- AG: 11:46 Easy listening kind of stuff. IG: 11:47 I see. It was, is that? So, what role did you have? Did you decide on, on what music was? Went on air? AG: 11:58 Yeah, for those, for those few shows, and I was what they call the traffic manager, and now we are talking 50 years ago, so you are testing my memory. IG: 12:09 I am. [laughs] AG: 12:11 More than 50 years ago. IG: 12:13 More than 50 years ago. Okay, so it was, it was really easy listening. There were no, there were no, there was not much reporting. Or did you do any reporting? AG: 12:27 A little bit, we did a little bit of news. I think I filled in one night for-for somebody who, who did the news, who was not able to make his show. So I was, I was, I was a fill in for that night. IG: 12:39 Was the news local, or was it national? AG: 12:44 It was national., IG: 12:45 it was national. AG: 12:46 National. Yeah. IG: 12:47 So- AG: 12:49 We had a UPI ticker. So we read the news from the UPI ticker that came in. We had a subscription to that. It was, it was a fairly well supported function. IG: 13:04 How many were you? AG: 13:08 Oh, I would not begin to try to remember that well. IG: 13:12 Approximately. Was-was it 10? Was it two? Was it 100? AG: 13:19 I would say that maybe involved in the in the station at that time, maybe there, there were 20 people. IG: 13:24 I see. So, you, you do not remember what the news of the day was. What were the important discussions that were taking place during those years? Do- AG: 13:37 Well, I was it was the Vietnam War, obviously. Was that- was this, the 67 war, these- in Israel was development of the State of Israel, the war. Those are the ones that that stand up. IG: 13:58 Yeah, do you remember what you know, position, politically, the radio talk show hosts would take of the war. Were they- were you just neutrally reporting events? Or- AG: 14:18 I do not remember. IG: 14:19 You do not remember. AG: 14:20 I would assume it was, it was an anti-war stance because of who we were, but I cannot conjure that out of my memory. IG: 14:32 Right. That is understandable. So how many years did you spend on the radio? Was it your entire college career, or...? [crosstalk] AG: 14:50 My college career was only three years, because I took advantage of the trimester system, I went, I went two summers, I should have graduated in (19)68. I graduated from high school in (19)64 but I went two summers and made up a full year that way. IG: 15:10 That is pretty intense. AG: 15:12 It was a mistake. IG: 15:14 Yeah. So what was, what were your academics like? What did you study? What was your major? AG: 15:23 Major was political science. I intended to go to law school. I went- had a year of law school, and then I would have been drafted. So at that time, there was- we were looking, everybody was looking for an option, and I became a New York City school teacher. IG: 15:43 Oh. AG: 15:44 I was in, I was in law school, and my mother called me up, and she said she and my friend's mother had gone down to the Board of Ed, and that they, they had, there was a teacher shortage, and they-they had a program which was called manpower channeling, so anybody became a teacher got a deferment. I spent, I think was five or six years teaching in elementary school, and I was already pursuing my-my doctorate at that time in public administration at NYU. What happened with that program is the city bought courses in all the local universities, and they paid for 12 credits for anybody who was accepted in that program was fairly competitive, as you can imagine, because-because it was all guys who were looking for an alternative to the draft. So I completed, they gave me 12 credits at NYU. I completed a master's in an education in 1970 and then I was very much interested in urban planning and enrolled in the- what is now the Wagner school for public service. Wagner that time known as the graduate school for public administration, and I was in that master's program for maybe a year or two, and they came out with a PhD MUP option, which is what I eventually graduated from. IG: 17:38 Interesting. So while you were teaching, where did you teach? Which neighborhood? AG: 17:45 In Marble Hill, in the Bronx. IG: 17:46 In the what? Excuse me. AG: 17:48 Marble Hill in the Bronx. IG: 17:50 Oh, I know where that is- a beautiful museum. So returning to Harpur College, how- did-did- Was there any- do you remember any faculty at Harpur that made an impression on you? AG: 18:12 Yeah, I remember, I- as a political science major. I was- I took many of the political science courses I but I the one that stands out most was an English teacher by the name of Sheldon Grebstein, who I eventually met later on he became the president of SUNY Purchase for a while since retired, but I was there, and I lived close by to that campus. I had a membership to their swimming pool, and I had met him before I was a senior, and I took his poetry clothes- course. There was also a political science professor by the name of Blair Ewing, who left there, whom I remembered because I was accused of having stolen his final exam. IG: 19:12 And did you, did you? AG: 19:17 I did not. AG: 19:18 It was a, it was quite a, quite a traumatic- I was a very naive young man, and I had a- one of the best final exam schedules I ever had. It was a dream schedule. I was done on Wednesday, and I had a date in New York to see one of the other students at Harpur's, to go to Peter Paul and Mary concert. And I was home for a day, and I get a call from the Dean, and they say, "You have been implicated in a cheating scandal. You have been accused of having stolen Professor Ewing's final exam." "What-what are you? No, they did not tell me that." They just said that I had been implicated in a cheating scandal, and they wanted me to come back. So, I said, I am not coming back. I did not do anything. We will deal with it when I get back after semester break, so the phone goes back and forth and back and forth, and they got my attention when they told me I could have an attorney present. IG: 19:18 You did not. [laughs] IG: 20:31 That you could what? AG: 20:34 That I could have an attorney present. IG: 20:38 Oh-oh, wow, wow, that is serious. AG: 20:41 That was serious. So, I said to the dean, "Give me the benefit of the doubt and assume that I have no idea what you are talking about," which I did not, "and tell me what I have been accused of, or I will not come back. Either give me some details," I said. They told me that I was holding up the entire classes grades. Remember very well it was, it was Blair Ewing's course in totalitarians, comparative totalitarian systems. And I said, you tell me "Why you think I did something, and then I will come back." So they said that I had been accused of having stolen an exam. I had broken into his office and stolen exam. And then I sort of started remembering I had spoken to a friend of mine who actually was the general manager of the radio station, and I had spoken to him previously, and he had, like most students do, give me the details of this professor's previous exams, and he never changed his exams, so the questions were familiar. And I called him up and I said, I this is what is going on. He was still on campus because he was, he was involved in some activities that that he needed to be there for. And I said, "Look, I do not want a character reference. I want you to write a letter to the dean and tell her detail exactly what you told me without any without any value judgment." So this also happened to me, my first plane flight ever. I get back up to campus, I go into the dean's office. Ewing is sitting there. First words he said to me. And I- you can remember, you can imagine how-how prominent this is in my memory, because I remember it exactly. 50,52, 53, years later, he looked at me said, "Mr. Grant, I do not think you cheated. You should have done better." IG: 22:59 What an excellent response. AG: 23:01 I said, "What did I get?" He said, "You got to be on the exam." So, I sit down, and there is a young woman who is sitting there, and I recognized her as a student in the class, and then I remembered that I had met her in the in the snack bar just before the exam, and I saw her studying for the exam, and I said to her, "Well, you, you should study these things, and this is going to be the-the format of the of the exam." So I was talking to her, she reported me for having stolen test. IG: 23:34 How terrible. Third speaker 23:35 Oh my god. IG: 23:36 How terrible. How terrible. AG: 23:38 She thought she had missed out on something. So, I said to them, first of all, you had the letter from-from Joe Breast who was the, who was the general manager of the radio station. His main name may be familiar with Columbia, if you were going through the records of those days, who he and I graduated again, look to the data. I said, "Is it considered absolute academic dishonesty to research previous exams?" They said, "Absolutely not." I said, "Is it my fault?" And I looked at him "that you never change your exam questions." And so they got a chuckle out of that. And then this student looked at me, and she said, "But you knew the exact format of the exam," and I said to her, "As would you had you not cut the class where he gave that to us in class?" IG: 24:28 I am sorry. As- what did you tell her? AG: 24:31 She-she had cut the class where he gave us the format. IG: 24:35 I see. I see. I see. I see. I see. Oh, how terrible. AG: 24:41 I said "Was there ever any evidence of your office having broken into it that somebody had taken your exam?" "No-no-no." I looked at them and said, "So, what am I doing here?" And they looked at me and they said, "Well, there was a good faith accusation, and we had to follow up." So, they paid all of my expenses and sent me on my way, and the dean looked at me, and she said, "Next time, do not be so forthcoming with information for somebody else." IG: 25:13 What was the good faith student reprimanded? AG: 25:18 Again, I never saw her again. She just she vanished from campus. I think she was embarrassed. I do not think they reprimanded her, because she felt that she had enough information to-to make that good faith accusation. But she-she was the kind of student who cut a lot of the classes and all the and he had given us a great deal of information about the exam, so that was kind of one of the highlights of my college experience. It was not a pleasant one, but it came out okay, but I did not realize in my naivete how close I was to being expelled. IG: 25:56 But what I mean, it is just, it is awful. It is an awful experience that-that you know, reminds me of, of the time of Stalin, where, you know, neighbors would denounce each other. You know, but- AG: 26:16 Certainly, the case Nazi Germany for my parents. IG: 26:18 Yeah-yeah. Yes-yes. I mean, it is very, it is very similar, and but it must have been a really formative experience as well. Do you, do you- how do you think that that- I mean, it was a shock, probably to the system, and how did- what-what impact did it have on you? AG: 26:38 It was, it was, really, was not a shock. Because I-I believe I did not do anything so there was nothing, there was nothing. There could be no consequences, because I did not do anything which is stupid. I become much more circumspect in terms of information I give at the people and what you know, what I say, I felt I looked at them and I said, we could have done this on the phone. IG: 27:06 Yeah. AG: 27:08 If there was no evidence of any breach, we could have done it on the phone and-and have saved ourselves all of this time, expense and-and stress, [crosstalk] much more cautious person. I am- I certainly have disabused myself of the notion that-that being innocent protects you so that those- that was, that was, in fact, a formative experience. Third speaker 27:39 When did that happen? Were you a sophomore, freshman? Would- AG: 27:43 I think it was a sophomore. AG: 27:45 No. IG: 27:45 No, it is okay. It is all right. IG: 27:45 Do you remember the Dean's name? AG: 27:52 I remember the professor's name. He certainly can. IG: 27:55 Yeah. AG: 27:55 I am sure that is in the annals someplace. IG: 27:58 Well, so you were a sophomore, you returned for your junior year? What did your friends say about this incident? Do you remember? AG: 28:08 They just shook their heads. I said, you know this thing, it was, it was just, it was just, you know, kind of bureaucratic stupidity. If they told me what they needed to know on the phone I would have, it would have jogged my memory, and I was about this. I do not remember her name anymore. I said I had a conver- [his phone rings] Hold one second. Okay. IG: 28:34 Okay. AG: 28:35 That was my-my cell phone. My cell phone goes through my computer, so. IG: 28:44 I see, I see, okay, so, um, how do you think- AG: 28:51 I tried to close because it is if I, if I disconnect by accident, I will call you back. IG: 28:58 All right, that is fine, sure. That is fine, but you still have a little bit of time. AG: 29:04 Yeah, we are good. Okay, good. I close it and you are still there. IG: 29:08 Okay, very good. So how do you think your classmates remember you, if they were to tell me, those-those who remember, and those, for example, those you worked with on the radio? How would they describe you? AG: 29:28 Not sure I think they would describe me as that is hard to put-put into words that they were required to describe me as, you know, nice guy, not a, not a not a great student, not somebody who was, who was very involved and in any kind of political activity or any kind of activism, somebody who was, you know, we were kind of just there and good friend, but I have not really kept in touch with anybody from-from Binghamton at all. IG: 30:13 You have not? AG: 30:15 I have not. IG: 30:15 You have not. AG: 30:18 I tend not to do that. I tend to move on from one-one experience to the next very small circle of friends from, you know, different-different stages of my life. What is, what is amusing at-at this point is I have recently, become through Facebook, got connected with a group of friends from high school. I have, I have a distant cousin who I have been friendly with, and I was on his Facebook page, and there was a friend of his who looked familiar. His name was familiar. And I wrote him. I said, "Are you the same David who went to Clinton High School?" And he said, "Yes," and we had put together. There are five, five couples who all went to high school together, except my cousin. My cousin did not go to high school with me, but he met many of my high school friends at City College, where he went. So we now have a group of five couples who we meet every three or four months, and we go out to dinner, to a theater, to a Broadway production. And that predates. That is certainly from, from that era. IG: 31:46 That is, that is very nice. I wonder if I know of other couples who from Binghamton who see each other annually. They have reunions in different parts of the Northeast. So just tell me a little bit about campus life. You know, the majority of students were like you from New York City or Long Island. And then there were some students from upstate New York. Did you notice differences between these you know, city-city folk and townies, they were called, I think. AG: 32:33 I remember one, one of my one of my friends, was he was convinced that Jews had horns. That is how he grew up and-and his exposure to a lot of the New York students and a lot of the Jewish students was-was a kind of an eye opener for him. So yeah, we found a lot of, a lot of the upstate students a little bit provincial when I- before I got there, and my-my housing preferences, I put down that I did not want to.- I would prefer to room with somebody outside the area that came from. And I did that, and I had a roommate. We did not get to be good friends. And then through the radio station, I met some other people, and eventually roamed with them. And they were from -from the New York area, also from Westchester. And then eventually, my senior year, over junior, senior year, I got a single. IG: 33:38 So do you- did your impression of students from upstate- I mean, you mentioned that there was a cultural difference between New Yorkers and, you know, upstate New Yorkers. Did you, did your impression of upstate New Yorkers change over the time that you were at Harpur? AG: 34:05 I got friendly with people. I, yeah, there was one I- we exchanged visits during vacation. So a number of people come home to New York with me and show them New York. I went to their homes and- IG: 34:19 Where? In Binghamton or? AG: 34:22 No, upstate, and that now these were not people who these were all people within the dorms, I said, people who were local. I see. And we, you know, we realized we had more in common than we had differences, as is typical when you put different cultural groups together. IG: 34:45 Yes-yes, I agree. So tell me a little bit about more about your free time on campus. Did you spend it all at the radio station? Or did you hang out with your friends in the dorm? Or, how did you spend- AG: 35:04 Partially, even the radio station, mostly hanging out with friends in the dorm, doing, you know, going to movies. I- nothing really stands out. IG: 35:16 Yeah. AG: 35:17 As-as you know, spectacular. We- it was, it was very much a lot of my-my friends were pre-med and pre law, as I was, and we did a lot of it was, there was a lot of- and we mostly were, were studious, and that was a reputation of the institution in those days, and I still, I think it is still the reputation of the institution that it is, it is certainly not a party school. It was very much a place where people paid attention to their studies, spent time in the library, and yet spent some time, you know, dating and going on dates and going out to dinner and campus events when there were performances, but that was pretty much it. IG: 36:10 So, how did you get around? Did somebody have a car, or did you take a bus? AG: 36:18 [inaudible] The- you know, the under the underclass years there were, there was transportation into town. Some people have had cars. There was a, there was a shopping mall within walking distance, right- next to campus. So wanted to go shopping. A good while they would walk. Some people had cars. We would go. There was a I am sure it is still there. I think it is still there. We did not go out with some of us went out to bars. We were not heavy drinkers. We were more when we went out. It was more to a place called Pat Mitchell's, which was an ice cream place. We would go out and we would, we would have ice cream, and there were weekend nights, sometimes we would go out drinking and in the bars. In those days, drinking age in New York was 18, so it was much easier to-to go out and socialize that way. IG: 37:32 I wanted to ask, were there women who worked on the radio? AG: 37:38 Yes-yes. IG: 37:40 Yes. Um, were- you know, do you think that there were different expectations for men than there were for women, or did the women who worked on the radio serious about what they were doing and maybe thinking of a career in radio? AG: 38:03 I do not really think, except for one person who became a journalist, I really do not think that anybody expected to make a career out of this, certainly not the people that I was close to. And no, I do not believe that the expectations for the women were any different for the men. Also the women who wanted to be on air. Broadcasters certainly had the opportunity to do that, and it may have been a question that I was not astute enough for any kind of discrimination as far as that was concerned. But I certainly the women who were interested in doing whatever they wanted to do on that particular extracurricular activity had ample opportunity to do it, and did and did so. IG: 38:58 it is interesting. So you know what looking back, what lessons do you think you learned from this time, including your unfortunate brush with this false accusation? What lessons did you learn from this time in your life? I mean, there are probably several, you know, because you spoke about, you know, the impact that the false accusation had on you. But what would you say? What did, what did this experience give you? AG: 39:38 The college experience? IG: 39:39 Yes. IG: 39:40 Or? IG: 39:41 Yeah, in a broader sense, not just a degree. AG: 39:44 It certainly was-was for the first time, I was away from home, and I was determined I had the same, I had the same offer that many of my friends did if I went. To City College, my parents would buy me a car. I said, keep your car. You know, the Holocaust families were very overprotective, and there was a friend of mine later said, you know somebody I had met. Much later, he said he went, he went swimming and got wet, off to your ankles. They sent out the lifeguards, my parents, my parents drove me up and we were 50 miles outside of Binghamton. She said, "You know, you can still go to City College." IG: 40:42 They were more comfortable with that alternative. AG: 40:45 Yeah. The irony was that I had a friend who did exactly that and was killed in an automobile accident while he was, while he was in it was going to City College. So you never know. You just never know. IG: 40:58 You really never know. AG: 40:59 It gives you, yeah, I think, I think that whole experience was, I did not come out. You know, everybody comes out of those experiences different. But I, you know, it was an experience. I-I-I, when I was in graduate school, I look back and I said, it is you really need to apply yourself a little bit more to your studies than you did when you were in school. It was a question of trying to find out, find my find-find out who I was as an individual. I got part of the way there, but [crosstalk] IG: 41:34 What did you, yeah, find out about yourself as an individual from that short period for from those three years? AG: 41:45 that I was, that I was very much a solitary kind of individual. I know that when my father was a road salesman, and he would leave on Monday, he still had institutional textiles, and he had a fairly broad territory, which included the Adirondacks and his- many times during school vacations. When I was in high school, our vacation where we would go along with him, we go up to-to the resort areas, and sometimes he took me along by myself. And I remember thinking to myself, What a horrible, lonely existence this is. And later on in life, I find, I found, I learned the difference between loneliness and solitude. And although, you know, I married, I have a family, but there are, there are many times, right- My wife is still working, and I cherish the time that-that I have to myself. You know, it is kind of a transition when you retire, and I was worried about filling the time that I am reading. One of the things that-that happened in Binghamton was that that I was not very much of a reader. I had difficulty in talking to people about current events other than what was going on classes. I remember I once went gone with a friend to his home, and they had-had a very animated political discussion, and I had really had nothing to say. I was very quiet, and I went to a counselor when I was in law school, and he looked at me, and I feel I often have nothing to offer intellectually. And he said, "Well, do you read?" I said, "Well, you know, do subscribe to magazines?" And at that time, I started reading for pleasure and for information. And I am, sometimes I am reading two, three books at the same time, thanks to my Kindle switching back and forth, and I very much value the time that I have to myself. You know, I did not realize that when I was at school as an undergraduate, but certainly developed that I was I always you know, found myself many times. I found myself doing things by myself, and realized later on that, well, you know, you-you, you know how to be your own best company. And that is, that is a very, very valuable lesson to learn. IG: 44:38 It is a valuable a lesson to learn. I am just wondering you spoke. [crosstalk] Yeah. AG: 44:46 I kind of came late to things throughout my whole life. My daughter was born. I was 49 when I had, when I had, she was an only child. I think that makes you better parent, certainly a mature-mature parents, because you are done building your career and-and have a wonderful relationship with her now. So it is, it is better late than never [inaudible] IG: 45:15 And just-just remind us, well for the record, your career was in development, or um- AG: 45:24 I started out as a New York City school teacher. IG: 45:27 Yes. AG: 45:28 And as I am fond of saying, it was the second to the last place in the world, I wanted to be, as I told you earlier. IG: 45:35 Yes. AG: 45:36 Vietnam was last, and I had a- was in the school, and one of my colleagues in the school got a job at the Central Headquarters of the New York City school system. And he was in the federal- he got a job in the federal aid office. And at that time, I was taking a course at NYU and Intergovernmental Relations. And I said to him, you know, I am taking a course in that sounds really interesting. And if anything opens up in that office, give me a call. I would be interested in pursuing it. And he did, and I went down there. It was a everybody said, "Do not do it. It is a dead-end job." That office was a, I do not, we do not have enough time to explain the city school system to you at that time, but it was a liaison. It was, it was a, really, a glorified clerk of being a liaison between the city school district and the, and the State Education Department for the compensatory education program. So, we reviewed the-the entitlement program applications that went up, they were not competitive then, and if there were anything, if there was anything in that application that the state wanted modified, we acted as liaison. That- I did that for about a year and a half, which brought us to 1975 and there was a- our suit, our superintendent. She was an old-line superintendent, and we were bringing in $400 million in competitive compensatory education at that time in the 1970s. IG: 47:25 That is huge. Yeah. AG: 47:28 And they- there was a there was a recognition that that as a central entity, as a school district, we were not making a great enough effort to go after some of the smaller competitive programs, some of the small competitive grant programs. And they wanted a wanted to form a unit which was sort of like an in-house consultant, grants consultant unit. There were 32 districts and a number of central divisions, and we were there to help them mount competitive applications get more money, as a matter of fact, that is what my dissertation turned out to be. And in terms of competitive- how the competitive grant system works, but in 1975 there was a devastating fiscal crisis in New York City. There was a hiring freeze. Nobody could hire anybody, and so this superintendent formed this little unit, and anybody who could make a paragraph out of two sentences got drafted. We were very small. We started out and we were, we were unsuccessful for three years, and only because she was unwilling to admit that she had made an error, that she let us continue. And then once we-we had some breakthrough, very significant grants that-that-that that unit took off, and we had a wonderful reputation, we- IG: 49:06 State from the state of New York grants or? AG: 49:06 Federal government, state in New York. And then later on, I had, I became the director of that unit, and we started reaching out. We had a new superintendent who new chancellor, who opened up. It was like opening up the windows and waiting the air in. And we started going after private foundation money. And I initiated and spearheaded that drive. I remember I was I got a meeting at it with a foundation executive, and she looked at me and she said, "We would never fund you. I was just so astonished that there was an actual human being who called me up." But before we got done, we were bringing in money from foundations. And I- as I was finishing my doctorate, I was interested in moving on into higher-higher I guess that that was perhaps a holdover from my experience at Binghamton, because all I ever wanted to do in my career was go back and be on a college campus, which I started it I started at Hofstra University, and I have been in and out of education, higher education, elementary and secondary, initially higher education. I had a few jobs in healthcare, long term care, and major medical centers. My foray into healthcare was-was everybody has at least one train wreck in their career. That was mine, and then I wound up back in, back at higher ed. IG: 49:09 Okay, that is, that is very interesting. So, I am just, you know, I am latching on to something that you said in the past, that you, you know, you are a child of Holocaust survivors. Did you connect with any other students at Harpur College who had the same background? AG: 49:09 I did not. IG: 49:09 You did not. You did not find anyone who was like that. AG: 49:09 Most of my friends were very much American. I grew up in a community where everybody was of that background. IG: 50:15 Yeah. AG: 50:15 I was 10 years old. My parents moved to the Bronx and to Riverdale, and I had, a I had one friend that I gravitated to who happened to live in my building, and his parents also- There was a number of families in that building with the same background, but at Binghamton, I did not connect with anybody, nor did I know of anybody who had that background, IG: 52:09 Because they were not first generation like you were. You are first generation American. AG: 52:16 I am. IG: 52:17 Yeah. AG: 52:17 I am. And most of the people that I knew there were not. IG: 52:21 Yeah, that is, that is very interesting. AG: 52:24 American first-first in my family, to go to college. IG: 52:28 Yeah. AG: 52:28 Yeah, immediate family. IG: 52:31 That is remarkable. What you know- what were the most important lessons you-you have learned in life that you would like to share with future Binghamton students who are listening to this recording years from now, what advice do you have to give to them. AG: 53:05 I think part of it is to is to be serious about your studies, but have fun while you are doing it. Again, I kind of relived part of my-my undergraduate experience, and also had experiences that I did not have through my daughter in her and her undergraduate time. Spent a lot of time visiting with her and going to, going to, certainly the first apparent Parents Weekend was-was a highlight, which my parents never did. They dropped me off and dropped me off, and anytime I came home, I made my own arrangements, whereas my daughter we were, we drove up, picked her. She had a car all four years, but there was never enough room in her car for her to come home by herself. So we were back and forth many times. And I cherish that, because I loved it. Matter of fact, when she went to school, I saw the piles building I left, I left home to go to Binghamton with a suitcase. As I saw her collecting the material that she was going to cut the mattress covers the all of the stuff and the bins and things, I said to my wife, I am buying a plane ticket. She said, ridiculous. I said, “I see what you are putting together. I am not fitting into this car. Oh, do not be ridiculous. That is, that is stupid. It is a waste of money.” I said “I bought a plane ticket,” and sure enough, there was. There was no room for me in this car. So I flew up to Portland Maine and rented a car because they drove up, we met and then. My daughter kept the car that she was driving up there and we drove back. But it was, it is just such a totally different experience today. So, somebody who graduated in 1967 I do not even know what I what advice I would have given to my daughter. IG: 55:14 I see, but I mean, you did give advice. Study very hard. Have fun. Yeah, I think, I think those lessons hold true from generation to generation. AG: 55:27 She was always-always a kind of a student who was intrinsically motivated. This is a kid who she graduated, summa cum laude, phi, beta, kappa, Colby College. That is quite an achievement. And as-as self-possessed a person at her age as I never was, and I look at her in awe, because the what she knows about herself and her, her, her goals and her-her ability to pursue those goals. It was not anything that I never picked that up until much, much, much later. IG: 56:11 Well, you had a different upbringing than your daughter. That is very different. AG: 56:16 I never wanted to be the parent my parents were. Yeah, as I think most people would admit to- I do not think you know, there is an old saying, first to become yourself, and then you become your parents. IG: 56:32 Yes-yes, oh, I have never heard that expression that is very good. Yeah. AG: 56:38 When you think about it, it is alarmingly accurate. IG: 56:44 So in which way have you become like your parents? AG: 56:49 I am more overprotective than I should be, and my wife counter balances that, because she is not. She is much more, you know, permissive in terms of what my daughter so there was good balance. You know, we try to keep her safe, but, but she has to learn her-her own. She has to find her own way in life, which-which my parents kind of never got. So she fell in love with Maine, and she decided that all she had, the credentials she could have, she could have pretty much done anything she wanted. And one of the, one of the, one of the things that she did she was on, she was a psychology major. She was on her way to applying for PhD in clinical psych. And I knew, I know the first one of the things that she did at Colby. Colby has what they call Jan plan. You have you take a full course in-in a January semester. You can either make your own class, you can take a standard course. So her first course in January, she became an EMT, and she eventually was one of the one among the leaders of the EMT squad on campus. She was an EMT on the COVID campus for her entire years, and she was going to go and the be a clinical psychologist and get a PhD. I always knew from watching her that she-she was the kind of person who needed to be on front lines, kind of a first responder, not really an academic, and she had her mentor arranged for an internship for her summers. And she had an internship. She went the first summer, and then the second summer, she came home. The middle of it, she said, I do not want to do this seriously my life, which is kind of a wonderful outcome for an internship, because she could have been down the road to a PhD, and then found out she did not really want to. I want to have that kind of an experience. IG: 59:02 She sounds like a girl who knows her mind. AG: 59:05 And she is now at the University of New England. She is pursuing a nursing degree. As I said, we were tearing her hair out because we thought she should go to medical school. She says, I do not want anything to do with being a doctor. That is not what I want. I want to be a nurse practitioner. So, she is in now, in a program, a 16-month program for students who already have a bachelor's in something else, and she will come out with a BSN and an RN, and then pursue a career in as a nurse practitioner. IG: 59:37 You know that Binghamton is starting up a PhD program in nursing. AG: 59:45 I can see her eventually going through. I will mention it to her. IG: 59:53 Yeah. Mention it. I think that this program is beginning in 2020. Third speaker 59:57 Yeah. And I think Binghamton has a. Very strong nursing program. AG: 1:00:02 Yeah, she did not want to follow in my footsteps, IG: 1:00:11 As most children do not. So, yeah. AG: 1:00:14 One of the more amusing things that we when we went to the Colby Information Center session, there was a very engaging student who presented, and he said, "My- I am a legacy student. My parents met at Colby." And he said, "First visit, I hated it. I wanted nothing to do with it, and they prevailed on me to come back." And he said, "My parents realized that they were giving me their experience, and when they went, what they did was they let me explore the campus on my own, and then I enrolled, and I loved it." So, it is again, it is question she-she eventually may seek that out, but, but she does not want to come back to New York. She loves Maine, and that was her criteria for-for a college campus, it had to be rural, it had to be a self-contained campus. It had to be a small liberal arts school need to be [inaudible] all of which she got. AG: 1:00:16 But it is close enough to New York. AG: 1:01:26 Yeah, and none of which I knew about myself at that time. IG: 1:01:30 Do you have any concluding remarks for us? AG: 1:01:35 In terms of-of what you are doing with-with the (19)60s? I do not know I would be interested in seeing how typical my experience is. And I guess some of these interviews, or all these interviews, are going to be available online some point. So, I would hope that you would send out the links for that so that we could, we could watch each other and well, I have not kept in touch with any of my classmates from those days, a few of them on LinkedIn and Facebook, perhaps, but I would like to see what their responses are. IG: 1:02:14 Right. Because in conducting these interviews, there are commonalities, you know, but-but I think that every-every experience is very different. So I think that you will be very gratified to hear the interviews of your classmates. AG: 1:02:33 At Binghamton--you cannot even it is so different that you cannot even call it the same school. Those of us who were there when I was this was an incipient, brand-new school. It was, and I was among, certainly, probably among the first students, first years where it was, where moved from Triple Cities College to the current campus at that time, it was, again, as I said, very small. So if you look at it today, there is, there is no comparison. It is, it is, it is like comparing something like Colby to Penn State, just a totally different [crosstalk]. Harpur College was a small liberal arts institution. Was nothing else. There was no graduate school. There was there was, it was, you know, it was Harpur College. That only happened after I was after I graduated. So that to make comparisons with those with the students of my day and the students who are there today, it is just too different a place. IG: 1:03:42 Well, that is why I think it is- yes, and you experienced the (19)60s, which students today are not. So, it was really, you were a pioneer in-in terms of, you know, being a one, one of the-the first graduating years from this institution. But you were also living in very different times, you know. And that is why we are conducting these interviews, and that is why we are creating this center, virtual center. AG: 1:04:18 If I had to do it over again, I would never, I would not go back to Binghamton. AG: 1:04:22 You would not? AG: 1:04:24 I would have not given my background. I found it; it was- IG: 1:04:28 Where would you go? AG: 1:04:30 -it was, and what I know about myself today. IG: 1:04:35 Yes, AG: 1:04:35 That I did not. I probably would have gone to school in Boston in a more urban environment Boston. And I did not have grades to get into, into the Ivy Leagues, but certainly a Boston University, a school that had much more of-of a social component that Harpur College that I would, I think that probably would have brought me out a little bit more than-than the experiences that I had where there was the sameness of the students in terms of their-their academic aspirations, there was that certainly was partying, but the social component was weak, and I probably could have benefited from a school that had a had a more structured, more extensive social component, not that I wanted to be in a fraternity or anything which was, which was not my thing. I do not know my daughter also we-we went to on our visits. We were we drove up to Colgate. She was one of the schools. She first thing you see when you drive to Colgate is Fraternity Row. And she looked at us, get me out of here. IG: 1:05:45 Yeah. AG: 1:05:46 The reason she chose Colby is because I had eliminated Greek life many years ago. IG: 1:05:58 Right. Well, that is all very interesting, and it is- we will be in touch with you and let you know about the progress of the website of the center and when your interviews will be digitized and put up online. AG: 1:06:19 Where are you at the beginning, the middle, the end. Terms of- IG: 1:06:23 We are I think we think- Third speaker 1:06:25 You are the ninth, the ninth informant that we interviewed so far. IG: 1:06:32 -to do another eight. It is just, Aynur, and me, we are going to do another eight in the next couple of weeks. So, I think that, you know, as soon as-as we are going along, we are going to put up these interviews, each are an hour an hour half long. AG: 1:06:52 Let me know as I sent you an email. I think coming from a development office, as-as given all my years of experience in development, I think that was a deterrent. I almost deleted your message. IG: 1:07:04 Well, what could I do? I mean, I was given this assignment, given my reporting background, and should I write, perhaps, that I am a reporter for, I was a reporter for Fortune Magazine, but I am not anymore. AG: 1:07:18 But I think, I think coming from a development office gives the wrong impression. IG: 1:07:23 I will let the Dean know. I will let the Dean know. I am also, you know, I will. I will, you know, I think that you have a very valid point. IG: 1:07:32 Okay, that-that is a very that is very good advice. I do not know how much I can do about it, but I agree with you. AG: 1:07:32 I have been a VET Development Professional one way or another my entire career, and maybe I picked up on it because, okay, it is coming from a development office. They want to this is a pre solicitation gimmick, and I really do not want any part of it. And then I researched the- I looked up the center online. I saw that it was a legitimate thing, connected with you on LinkedIn. I think yours, your email signature. It should not be coming from a development officer or just my two cents. AG: 1:07:38 Well, you have another title, and that is= AG: 1:07:53 Not here, not here, it is not here. I can just leave it out, maybe the Development Office part, AG: 1:08:25 but yeah, because it is not relevant, [crosstalk] development officer, IG: 1:08:32 Maybe it could come from you. All right, well, we will figure it out, but you have certainly given us food for thought, and thank you so much for a great interview. IG: 1:08:43 All right, thank you. I appreciate you reaching out. (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. Andrew Grant Subject The topic of the resource Harpur College – Sixties alumni; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni in higher education administration; Harpur College – Alumni at Hebrew Union College; Harpur College – Alumni living in Suffolk County, Long Island Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Grant, Andrew ; Gashurov, Irene Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Description An account of the resource Dr. Andrew Grant is a retired Assistant VP for Institutional Advancement at Hebrew Union College in NYC. He worked as a disc jockey at WHRW-FM. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2018-02-14 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In Copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Andrew Grant.mp3 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-08-01 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Oral Histories from 60's Binghamton Alumni Extent The size or duration of the resource. 69:46 minutes https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/5837692b27da9cb0fb4d5feb48986684.jpg 2bc7a8ca41d9c7919bb81173026dbc00 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/8fee1262dfe3b647d685daf091227a1c.mp3 762ce4ce473ba39d3e926dc6021a60ec 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. Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Arthur W. Chickering, 1927- Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Arthur W. Chickering is an author, scholar, and researcher. His research is in the field of student affairs and he is known for his contribution to student development theories. He previously taught at George Mason University and Goddard College. Chickering earned awards such as the Outstanding Service Award from the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators and the Distinguished Service Award from the Council for Independent Colleges. He received his B.A. in Modern Comparative Literature from Wesleyan University, M.A. degree in English Education from Harvard University, M.F.A degree in Creative Writing from Goddard College and Ph.D. in School Psychology from Columbia University. \n"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":8403713,"3":[null,0],"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,4995385],"15":"Arial","16":11,"26":400}">Dr. Arthur W. Chickering (1927-2020) was an author, scholar, and researcher. His research was in the field of student affairs and he is known for his contribution to student development theories. He previously taught at George Mason University and Goddard College. Chickering earned awards such as the Outstanding Service Award from the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators and the Distinguished Service Award from the Council for Independent Colleges. He received his B.A. in Modern Comparative Literature from Wesleyan University, M.A. degree in English Education from Harvard University, M.F.A degree in Creative Writing from Goddard College and Ph.D. in School Psychology from Columbia University. </span> Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Harvard University; Students; Black Panthers; Higher education; Existentialism; Racism; Baby boom generation; David Horowitz; Assassination of John F. Kennedy ; Robert F. Kennedy; George McGovern"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":515,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":13689059},"12":0}">Harvard University; Students; Black Panthers; Higher education; Existentialism; Racism; Baby boom generation; David Horowitz; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; Robert F. Kennedy; George McGovern</span> Date of Interview 2010-03-09 Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 91:09 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 1 Microcassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Subject LCSH Authors; Scholars; Chickering, Arthur W., 1927--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: Arthur Chickering Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 9 March 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:04): Arthur Chickering, March 9th, 2010. Phone interview for the book on Boomers. In looking at your biography, I kind of broke it down into three parts at the very beginning. You started your college career at Goddard College as a psychology teacher from 1959 to 1965. Could you describe the students of that era? As the (19)50s came to an end, JFK became president, then of course he was assassinated, and LBJ expanded the war in Vietnam, what were the college students like from (19)59 to (19)65? AC (00:00:50): Well, I cannot really describe college students in general, you have to go to other people or other literature for that. Goddard was very small, when I went there in (19)59, there were 180 students. SM (00:01:07): Okay. AC (00:01:08): And it was a very unique institution based on progressive education principals, on Dewey and Kilpatrick, with whom then President Tim Piston had studied. And it had a work program, during January and February, students went away for a work term. They pursued independent studies. They had to apply for admission to the senior division after their first two years. There was a strong emphasis on independent studies. And so, my basic point is that because of its unique characteristics and because of its small size, it did grow over the years to about 1,000 students, but it attracted a very special kind of student, mainly from the Boston, Washington, DC corridor, the Northeast. So those two, and if you look at the way Goddard is described in education identity or in other of my publication, you will see that students are at the extreme left end, if you will, of the sort of political attitudinal continuum. And those were the students I knew best. When I did that project on student development in small colleges, which involved thirteen small colleges across the country from (19)65 to (19)69, then I encountered a wider range of students. But again, all those colleges had enrollment of fewer than 1,000 students, and they themselves were self-selected. We had evangelical and conservative protestant institution like Bryant College and Messiah College and Westmont College at that end of the continuum. And then there was Goddard and Shimer at the other end of that long continuum. And in the middle, there were the Western New England College, Oberlin, which is Quaker based, that is putting it moderate. So those are the students I grew up with if you will. SM (00:04:07): When you worked with that small number of students from (19)59 to (19)65, and then from (19)65 to (19)69 you worked around development in small colleges, and then you were also a visiting scholar at the American Council on Education, (19)65 to (19)70, did you notice any changes in those students in terms of their political attitudes, from (19)59 to (19)70, because of all the things that were happening in the world? AC (00:04:44): Well, again, I do not think I could make any generalizations. The impact on students of those diverse colleges was fairly substantial, and that is what education identity is anchored in. But that population of institutions certainly was not representative of the bulk of students in state colleges and universities across the country, which then were practically free. And of course, the community college movement hit the streets during the (19)60s, and that brought a whole new sector into higher education. And those students did not really bear any resemblance really to the undergraduates I was studying in these very small residential, highly self-selected. I mean they were not selective in the sense that they were meritocratic, but they were sharply defined image self-selectivity operated in a very powerful way. But again, the little colleges had a major impact on students. And I wrote about that. But in terms of knowing about the kinds of general changes that they are asked about across large research universities or publicly support institutions. SM (00:06:46): Well, the last question in this area is those other timeframes from (19)70 to (19)77 when you were the founding Vice President for Academic Affairs, and you were very poor in the founding of Empire College from that, in that period from (19)70 to (19)77, and then you were a distinguished professor at Memphis State University from (19)77 to (19)86. So, you saw not only students who were boomers, but you saw the beginning of the generation Xers coming in there at that time too. Is there anything you saw within the students during that timeframe that was different from the earlier timeframe? AC (00:07:30): Well, of course, during those years, I was heavily involved with adult learning. Two major things happened from (19)70 to (19)87. One of the most important, of course, was the [inaudible] of higher education with the Pell Grant and student loans and open admission. And so, the diversity among students, traditional college age students increased dramatically. And also, of course, there were sharp increases in the numbers of adult learners. And that is what led to the creation of the Council for Adults and Experiential Learning. The Empire State was created to respond to those adult learners. When I was at Memphis State running the Center for Higher Education, I had to see federally funded grants to help institute [inaudible] of institution respond to the educational needs of adult learners. So, during that time period, I was heavily involved with that particular sub sector, if you will, or subpopulation of college and university students, and not with traditional college age undergraduate. I went to George Mason in my role there as university professor. There I was much more directly involved with traditional college age graduates. But in those particular intervening years from (19)70 or (19)71 to (19)87, (19)88, I was heavily involved with adult learning. SM (00:09:44): Wow. What is interesting is when I look at some of these people like you and the other great student development theorists, how did you become who you are? What led you into higher education? I know you went on and got a psychology degree, but your background, who were your role models and your mentors? Who were the people that inspired you when you were young to go the direction that you went? AC (00:10:14): I have just finished an essay called Learning [inaudible] twenty pages long, which details I kind of educational [inaudible], if you will. And I can email you a copy of that if you want. SM (00:10:35): Okay. AC (00:10:37): But the short answer is that I majored in modern comparative literature at Wesleyan University and graduated in 1950. And I was headed for a doctoral degree in comparative literature, but I had to earn a living, so I went to the Harvard Graduate School of Education for their Master of Art Teaching English program. When I was teaching high school students during teaching, I got interested in the way they were processing problems with peers and with authority and with their parents and so forth. As we discussed Mill on the Floss and Silas Marner, which were two novels that were part of the high school curriculum at the time. And that led me... I found I was more interested in working with a student around those issues than in literary criticism. So, I discovered that there was such a thing in school psychology. So, I went to Columbia and got a PhD degree in school psych, and I worked as a school psychologist for three years. And then I was recruited to create a new teacher education department at Monmouth College in Long Branch, New Jersey. I have had a pretty [inaudible] experience at the Harvard Graduate School of Education, and I got fired for-for a variety of reasons, some of which are detailed in this essay that I can email you if you want. But that is what introduced me, that was my first year in higher education. And then I heard about this really interesting little college in Vermont Goddard College and my wife and I, and they had been living in the New York metropolitan area for 10 years or so. We had both grown up in Massachusetts, outside of Boston, and we loved skiing and hiking in Vermont. So, we moved to Goddard. At Goddard I really got introduced to the world of higher education. I was hired to work halftime as Gordon coordinator of evaluation of a fourth foundation supported six-year program in college curriculum organization. And so, I started gathering all that data, a lot of shared and education community. And that is how I migrated over into the world of higher education. Most of what I have built a career on in higher education I learned at Goddess from (19)59 to (19)65 and then with the project of student development in small colleges. The sort of educational principles in terms of learner, student centered learning and contract learning, independent studies, experiential learning, individualized education and the like were really all part of what Goddard was doing back in the early (19)60s when I was evaluating the program. So, I suppose my number one model and mentor was Tim Pitkin, then President of Godard College, but also Forests Davis is academic Vice President, George Becher, another senior faculty member. Those are the people... And I went there in (19)59, so I would have been 32 when I went there. So, I was just very young, naive, professional coming into the world of higher education and they had an enduring impact on my [inaudible] functioning. SM (00:15:11): Very good. How about your parents? How important were your parents when you first went off to college? AC (00:15:20): Well, my folks were divorced when I was nine. My mother was critical. She always wanted me to go to college. The expectation that I would go to college was built into my upbringing. Because I was getting into a lot of trouble in high school and she had to work during the depression and we were poor, she managed to get me a scholarship to Mount Hermann School in northern Massachusetts for my junior and senior year. And I was not a good student. I graduated 103rd in the class of 107. Nobody who knew me then, or none of my teachers certainly would have ever predicted that I would become a distinguished [inaudible] of all things. And when I graduated from Mount Hermann in 44, I was going to be drafted, and instead I enrolled it in Army Specialized Training Reserve program and was sent with 30 other kids from the University of New Hampshire. And I got kicked out of the University of New Hampshire that fall. Went back to live on to my mother, who was then working in Connecticut and went over to Wesleyan University and met with the admissions officer because I knew I would turn 18 in April, that April, after which I knew I would be drafted. So, I managed to... Well, when I met with him, I said, "Here's my situation." I did not tell him I had been kicked out of the University of New Hampshire, but I told him that I wanted to go to college for a semester before I went in the Army. And he said, "Well, send me your transcript and your test scores from Mount Herman and we will see." And at that time, of course, all the eligible men were in the army. But I said, "Well, you do not want to see that Mr. [inaudible]. If you see that you will never let me in here." And he said, "Well, we never let anybody in here without paying that information." I said, "Okay." So, I had it sent to him, he called me up at about 10 days and asked me to come in. And he said, "You're right. We have never let anyone into Wesleyan University with a record like yours." But he said, "I noticed your aptitude scores are very high, even though your grades are terrible, and your achievement test scores are lousy. How do you explain that?" And I said, "Well, I have never studied, I have never been interested in academic stuff. I like sports and parties and cards and so on." And I said, "I am ready to study. I know I need to establish a record before I go in the Army." I said, "I am going to be a commuting student and pay my full semester's tuition upfront. You set any grade point average you want me to meet, according to whatever test schedules you want, and if I do not meet it, you can keep my money and alcohol." So, he said, "Well, let me think about that." So, I left, and in four or five days, he called me up and asked me to come in and he said, "Okay, you got a deal. You give us your tuition; you need to have a B average on your midterm exam or you're out of here." And I said, "Okay." So, I went back and studied and ended up with a B plus average and finished this semester. Went off and spent a couple years in the Army. And of course, while I got back there was highly select institution there. They're only admitting valedictorians and [inaudible], but I went back and got into Wesleyan. And one of the critical things that happened when I went back into Wesleyan, I was back into playing cards and partying and into athletics when I was on probation the first two semesters. And then it came time to decide on a major. And I had enjoyed reading literature, particularly contemporary literature, but at that time, at Wesleyan, you can major in English or Spanish or French, but they all had this historical trajectory starting at the beginning and working their way up. So, I went in and talked with the dean and said, "Isn't there any way I can slice this stuff horizontally? I really enjoy reading contemporary literature and thinking about the relationship between the social context so forth and the literature." And he said, "Well, there is such a thing as comparative literature. We do not have that major here. But if you go talk with Brent Mann was head of French department and Juan Rural who head of Spanish, and Navi Brown, Norman O'Brien, who then was head of the classics department and Fred Miller, head of humanities, and if they all put together a series of courses and if they will write an evaluation for your comprehensive exam," which they did not have then, "You can have that kind of major." So, I walked out of his office at 10:30 and by five o'clock I had talked with all four of those people. And they were very enthusiastic really about doing that. Wesleyan was small. It only had 750 people and because of my gambling and so forth, I was fairly well known on campus. And this is the first sign of any intellectual interest they have seen out of me. SM (00:22:44): What were the students like that you were going to college within the late forties and fifties? What were they like? AC (00:22:51): Well, they were mainly, of course, it was a whole influx of veterans from (19)45, (19)46, (19)47. And so- AC (00:23:03): ... (19)46, (19)47, and so at Wesleyan at that time, it probably was about 50 percent veterans and 50 percent typical graduate from high school. So, the veterans really had a significant influence on the college environment and college cultures during those... In fact, I joined Sigma Nu fraternity, which was started in the South and did not admit Black students. One of the things we did after we tried to change that policy with the national and they would not change. And so, we took Sigma Nu out, we got a loan from the local bank and borrowed enough money to buy the fraternity house and took Sigma Nu out of the national organization, so we were able to admit Black students. SM (00:24:05): Wow. AC (00:24:07): But the influx of veterans during those years, I mean, that was just a bubble. After the war got over and after all of us guys on the GI Bill and so forth went through the system, and everything tried to reverse its fist. SM (00:24:25): Were there many students of color on the campus at that time? AC (00:24:29): Not a lot. There were some and they were terrific. SM (00:24:33): You wrote The Education Identity, which is a classic book on student development of theory, and it's been a major guide for college administrators working with students for a long time. And particularly this came about at the time, in (19)69, when Boomers were in their heyday, because Boomers really started going to college in (19)64, (19)65. So, we are talking about that, particularly the early Boomers, which were the most activist and most involved. Were from (19)64 to about (19)74. How did you come up with the idea, and what was the inspiration to write this great book? AC (00:25:18): Well, I have read everything that was written really about, partly because of my background in school psychology. I read a lot of stuff about adolescent development, and there was not much literature about young adult development. There was not much literature on college’s impact on student learning and development. But I had a file of data from Goddard and from the project, and I had read, as I say, about everything that was to read. My main concern was to have an impact on the quality of undergraduate education. I was not really interested in complex theory development, so I wanted to write something that would be useful, and it would have an impact on practice. I knew from my psychological background that about the largest number of items anybody can remember and work with is five or six or seven. I was determined to try to organize my findings and my orientation toward student development and student learning in a parsimonious way that would fit into that number. As I looked at the literature and so forth, seven vectors as I called them, grew out of that combination of looking at the changes that occurred as the function of the data and the major conceptual framework that [inaudible] and Ted Newcomb and other leaders in that whole arena, for articulate. I was just lucky I happened to right at a level of abstraction that made those ideas pretty broadly accessible and applicable. But I worked hard to try to do that. And underneath each of those seven dimensions, seven vectors, there was possible to create three or four major subheadings and so forth, the kind of Christmas tree on which you could hang a variety of key ornaments. SM (00:28:24): Did you expect it to have the impact that it had, particularly on graduate school education, and why has it been able to withstand the test of time, not only for the Boomer generation, but for Generation X that followed, the Millennials that are in college now, and obviously for Generation Y, which are the really youngsters that will be coming up in 15 years. Your book is now going to be heading toward its fourth generation. AC (00:28:54): It is surprising. Well, I did not expect, in fact, I was very surprised when I got that American Council on Education book award that came out of the blue, because I thought that I was off the scale or off the street in terms of where a higher education was, A, and B, I had no idea that there was such a thing as a student personnel services profession or that there were graduate programs for students. I have been in these little, small colleges. I had never been in any institution that had the kind of array of student services and professionals that larger colleges and universities had. So, when they got picked up by those professionals, I was very surprised. I was frequently embarrassed when folks in Indiana or Michigan or Ohio or other graduate programs could come out and ask me to speak about the implications of my work for their graduate programs, because I did not know anything about those graduate programs. SM (00:30:16): You were big at Ohio State and I know that, did Phil Tripp? AC (00:30:22): No. SM (00:30:23): Yeah, he was Dr. Phil Tripp. He was the head of the program at Ohio State when I was there, along with my advisor, Dr. Roosevelt Johnson. They were unbelievable educators. One of the things that is interesting at that- AC (00:30:38): I am a little surprised. SM (00:30:39): Pardon? AC (00:30:40): I say all of that was a total surprise. And I think when Linda Reisser and I did the (19)95 or (19)96 revision, we were amazed at how all those basic conceptual frameworks still stood up when you looked at research on college impact on student learning and development that had occurred from the mid (19)60s to the early (19)90s that had been preferred that elaborated those. Of course, the gender differences and differences, the function of race and so forth, had emerged dramatically since the (19)60s. SM (00:31:38): I know on our master's exams at Ohio State in the summer of (19)72, the ones we prepared, we had to read 60 books in preparation along with never missing a class. Oh my goodness, you never knew where the questions were coming from, but one of them was on your book. And I remember writing a long essay, in that four-hour exam, writing at least one hour on your book. So it was a very important part of our education. Another thing that was happening during this time in the (19)60s and the early (19)70s was encounter, you probably heard about that. It was- AC (00:32:15): Oh yes. SM (00:32:16): What were your thoughts on encounter? Because I was in encounter classes at Ohio State and a lot of the purpose of encounter was we looked at the seven vectors and the ultimate being integrity at the very end and there was supporting each other. So, there was a combining of the encounter book and then combining of education identity. What was your thought about the whole concept of encounter during that time with college students? AC (00:32:46): Well, I think the whole encounter group movement with the National Training Lab, I have to go get another phone, so I am switching phones here because the battery is running down. Bear with me a sec. Can you hear me? SM (00:33:01): Yes, I can. AC (00:33:01): Still? SM (00:33:01): Yep, I can still hear you. AC (00:33:08): I thought that whole encounter group movement with National Training Lab was extremely helpful. It had a lot of extremists associated with it, but it did call attention to the internal life of people and led people to think about themselves in serious ways. Both my wife and I went to encounter group weekends, and I read a lot of that literature. And by and large, it seemed to me to be a very positive thing. SM (00:33:58): As a graduate student, it was intimidating at time. It was tough to be called, "You sound like a racist," in an encounter class because we had many African American students in our program. And so, it was a great learning experience in the end, but at times it was tough and you needed support. So, a lot of the things you were talking about, about development and theory and everything, a lot of the stuff in the encounter, it was what you were trying to say in your book. AC (00:34:26): Well, it raises that whole movement, raised all those existential issues. I mean, I think another way to think about your earlier question as to why those seven vectors seem to have stood up across generations is that they are really the basic existential areas for human development purposes. I mean, when now we have Goldman's work on emotional intelligence, all the issues of autonomy and interdependence, we have huge literature now on purpose and meaning. Integrity has been an issue in relationships. I mean, those issues do not go away just because there are sort of larger cultural forces that tend to have an impact on particular generation. I think the collision between all the new communication information, social interaction technology and these different vectors is going to be fascinating to observe. SM (00:35:55): I know what- AC (00:35:58): ... and I am not close enough to it or young enough to really get involved with it in detail, but I have grandkids in their 20s and late teens, and they are in professional communication with each other and their high school friends. I went to South Africa with one of my grandsons, to Cape Town, and while we were there every night around 10 o'clock, he would get on, he was a computer guru, had his laptop with him. He would get on his laptop and be interacting with his girlfriend and with his high school friends back here in Vermont. At first, I was put off by that and I thought, well, why cannot you let go of that for a little while? But then as I started about eavesdropping on what he was doing, I realized that he was processing our experiences in the township and with the young people he was meeting with all the race and social and economic dynamics there in Cape Town in South Africa we were encountering. But anyway, the whole interaction and the ways in which current young people and future young people are going to work through those basic human development issues in the context of these new technology and media, I think, are going to be fascinating to try to understand. SM (00:37:54): That is excellent. One of the most important qualities that we try to instill in students is by the time they graduate, that all students have a sense of self-esteem, of comfortableness with who they are as human beings, and obviously, that is one of the goals of integrity in your seventh vector. I will never forget at Ohio State, I really felt comfortable after my years there because I really got what the seventh vector was all about. It is almost like a person standing up in front of an audience, and I said this to students, through my 30 years in higher ed, that these people who come and speak about certain issues really have integrity, whether you like their views or not, because they stand for something, they are willing to be in front of people, to give a... So thus, they have integrity because they are willing to be confronted as well. But the critics of the (19)60s generation, the Boomers, oftentimes attack the Boomers as being one, oh, this self-esteem business is a bunch of baloney. Why do we have to constantly build these people up? It is a criticism that is often been leveled that the era that they do not like, because many critics, political critics in particular, had looked at the (19)60s and the early (19)70s through mid (19)70s as a time when the divorce rate was at an all-time high, the lack of respect for authority, the victim culture started to come about, drugs, sexual revolution, a sense of irresponsibility. "I want it now" type of an attitude without thinking that you have to pay for these things down the road. The question I am asking is what do you think of those people that criticize basically this whole concept of self-esteem and this generation of Boomers that grew up during the (19)60s and (19)70s and putting the blame on them for the issues, the problems, we had today? AC (00:40:06): Well, one reflexive reaction I have is that people who have to support their own self-esteem by knocking others are not in very good shape. I think that that variable has been demonstrated to be critical for career success, for personal mental health. We have the whole positive psychology movement now. The [inaudible] and others have been so instrumental in putting on our screen. We have fortunately migrated away from the mental illness deficit model of thinking about people, and so I think it is highly unfortunate. Now, I think it is important to recognize that narcissism is not very healthy. This is one of the dynamics that occur during that sensitivity training era that you refer to that, if your only focus is on yourself and what is important to you and what makes you feel good and so on, that is pretty unhealthy. But self-esteem linked to purpose and identification, I mean with something larger than yourself, those two things need to go together. An exclusive focus on self can be pretty dysfunctional both for the person and for society, and that is why all the issues of purpose and meaning are important. But you do not have to engage with serious issues of purpose if you feel you are incompetent and inadequate, cannot function with other people, nobody ever pays attention to what you think or what you do, or you are irrelevant to things. You cannot have any impact on anything. So, when those attitudes and feelings are dominant, then there is no way you can invest yourself heavily in something larger than those preoccupations and your own immediate self-interest. SM (00:43:18): That is beautiful. Oh, I can see why you are so great at writing because you are able to put your words and have so much meaning there. You obviously raised... You have grandkids, so you had kids. Did you have a generation gap with your children over issues? AC (00:43:48): I do not think so. We are very lucky. We have a son and four daughters. They are all in their 50s now. They all love each other, they all support each other. They all love us and support us. And as we get into our 80s, they do so in increasing the specific ways. I mean the most difficult dynamic for me particularly, not so much for my wife, was with our oldest child, our son Allen. We have a son and three daughters. So, his movement through adolescence and into young adulthood was complicated in a variety of ways. Partly, I think because he took very seriously the attitudes and values and social concerns that Jo and I actively tried to address and live in terms of. He felt he had to go further and do more. So, he lived a life of intentional poverty for a while, and was draft resistor or not a draft resistor, but tax resistance. SM (00:45:31): Hold that point. I want to just turn my tape. Go right ahead. AC (00:45:41): And he was very interested in teaching, learning, and educational issues. But because of my status in the world of our education, but he was going up and going to college, trying to find his way into higher education. He spent six months at Empire- AC (00:46:03): ... Empire education. He spent six months at Empire State, but it was just created yet. Then he went to University of Wisconsin at Green Bay when it was trying to be [inaudible] U, and finally ended up at the Evergreen State College. His whole relationship with the world of education and higher education was complicated by my status. As often occurs, I guess we had issues around money and stuff like that. So, we had a... I do not know, pick your number, maybe five, eight, 10-year period between his graduation from high school and getting through Evergreen and so forth that were very difficult for him, and challenging for Joe and me to know how to deal with it. Fortunately, we somehow ended of loving each other and supportive of each other. We own a house in Olympia, Washington where he stayed since he graduated from Evergreen, and I have a wonderful relationship. The girls are very supportive of him and us, and they have always had a good relationship with my wife, Joe, and me, and wonderful relationships with each other. SM (00:47:37): Good. AC (00:47:37): So, we are very lucky to have such a wonderful nuclear family, if you will. SM (00:47:47): Because I know that generation gap did tear a lot of families apart. The Boomer generation, my generation, of course, I looked at heroes and I never thought of my parents, although I do now as I have gotten older as my real heroes. But a lot of the heroes of the Boomers were leaders, political leaders, whether it be Dr. King or Bobby Kennedy or someone else, John Kennedy. They looked up to heroes. Whereas I have noticed today, Millennials very rarely if ever say any political leader of any kind, it could be a teacher, it could be a parent, it could be an uncle, it could be a minister. But very rarely any public figures, and I have even noticed in Generation X, the generation that followed Boomers, that there were very few political leaders or national leaders. The Boomers seemed to have them. What made Boomers so different than these others with respect to the people they looked up to? AC (00:48:48): Oh, well, I think the generation that followed the Boomers had a lot of anti-models. Nixon, I mean, whether you look at politics and all the scandals and self-interest and so forth, politics, whether you look at corporate sector and all the greed, and [inaudible] there, whether you look at the international domain and all the of religious and inter- tribal and inter-ethnic conflict, it was very hard to see people functioning in very admirable ways that you would want to identify with. I think that is why you had the whole shift of political and social activism to a much more local level. They were meeting people in their communities and in their states and so forth who they could know and who had a lot of integrity and who were putting their money where their mouth was and walking their talk, and all that, those bumper sticker ideas. So, the context, particularly I think with the Reaganism, is with the whole conservative movement that started with Reagan, had shifted the focus away from social concerns, about the environment, about race, about peace, away from those organizing issues that dominated the (19)60s and early (19)70s. Away from that, the self-interest and capitalism run amongst it. It was a very uninspiring and disillusioning social context to be growing up in. SM (00:51:21): What is interesting is that one of the characteristics of Boomers is that they do not trust because they saw a lot of leaders lie to them, whether it be Lyndon Johnson and the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution, be it Watergate with Richard Nixon, even there was questions about President Kennedy and whether he had some links to the Diem overthrow in Vietnam, if you were pretty adept at keeping track of things, even President Eisenhower in (19)59 lied about the U-2 incident and of course, McNamara and the numbers. So, a lot of the Boomers just did not trust anybody in position of responsibility, whether it be a President of the United States, a Congressman, a Senator, a minister, a rabbi, a priest, a corporate leader, anyone. And president of a university and administrators. But in the end, they looked at the leaders as their heroes, but then they did not trust them. Do you think that is one of the qualities of the Boomer generation, that they are not a very trusting generation in your experiences with them? AC (00:52:33): Well, I had a lot of experiences with them, but I think as you kick off that litany, they had good reasons to not trust people. I think one of the things that made Obama an appealing was that, and particularly young people felt here was a guy who walked the talk, who could be trusted, and whose background was untarnished, and who we could put some faith in. Unfortunately, the political dynamics now are such that he is thought in politics as usual, and I think maintaining that hope and trust that he ignited is very difficult. SM (00:53:40): When you look at the Boomer generation, again, it is those people born between (19)46 and (19)64, and I know that many of the people born between (19)40, (19)41, and (19)46 are a little sensitive because a lot of them are linked to the Boomers, in many ways. In fact, many of the leaders of the anti-war movement were the age of graduate students. So, they were really in the (19)41, (19)42, (19)43 years. So, there is a link there, but when you look at some of these events, I would like your response to them, because these are the events that the Boomers were involved in when they were young in the (19)60s and through the mid (19)70s. Just your thoughts on the students who were going South for voter registration, the Freedom Summer, and the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley in (19)64 and (19)65, and obviously the anti-war movement and the students involved in civil rights and the protests, and then you had the groups like Students for Democratic Society and the Young Americans for Freedom, and the Black Power students. These were all part of those (19)60s, and of course, the students that were involved, that persuaded President Kennedy at the University of Michigan to consider the Peace Corps. Then I am going to list some more later on, but your thoughts on those experiences of students and how important they were, and just your thoughts. AC (00:55:12): Well, I think one of the major points to recognize is that if you look across the population of college and university students during those years, only five to 15 percent of the students, even at the most activist campuses like Berkeley, Michigan, Kent State, so forth, only five to 15 percent of the students were really active and involved. When you look at the research on their background, by and large, their parents were activists during the Depression, during the (19)40s and so forth. But for me, the important point about that is that it demonstrates how a small, active, committed, energetic group of people can define the conversation and present the issue, can enable the creation of things like the Peace Corps. As Margaret Mead said, never underestimate the ability of one person or a small group of persons to change the world. But I think it is important to keep that in mind, and it is important to keep that in mind now as we confront the horrendous global problems that are rushing toward us in terms of global warming and peak oil, and all those issues. Unfortunately, I think what happened with the disillusion that sat in that you had referred to is that we forgot that taking on a small number of people who were willing to take on those issues could really have an impact. Obviously, those set of subcultures created context where people with similar concerns could put their time and energy and emotion and get invested in, and that is what higher education ought to be about in relation to our general culture. It ought to be about helping persons with in fact, on this self-esteem, purpose issue, helping persons connect their own particular attitudes and values, conservative or liberal, but with particular social issues that they can invest themselves in, at the same time they're raising a family and earning a living and so on. SM (00:58:48): During the (19)60s, obviously more minority students were on college campuses than ever before. That is so important. More women were admitted into medical schools and to law schools, and some all-male schools became co-ed. So those were important developments. But you saw in the late (19)60s something that upset a lot of people that cared about coming together as a nation. That was the Black Power Movement, which was in some respects, the Black Panthers, that historic scene of Stokely Carmichael challenging Dr. King in (19)67 and telling him that his time had passed. Then in (19)65 or (19)64, the debate between Malcolm X and Bayard Rustin where he said the very same thing, the non-violent protests, its time has passed. So, what you saw at Kent State University and the protests in 1970 was an all-white protest against the Vietnam War with African American students and students of color concentrating on the Civil Rights Movement and Black Power. Did that upset you at all when you were in college, that you saw the Dr. Kings, you saw affirmative action coming in strong into the universities, and then all of a sudden you had the Black Power, which started a separatist movement again of dividing people? Just your thoughts on that. AC (01:00:15): Well, whenever you have a hugely important social issue that has a direct impact on individuals, specifically those who are subject to the injustice and unfairness and prejudices, it is very hard to address that type of thing without having both significant diversity within the movements that are addressing it and extremes. So that is part of I think the way group processes and social dynamics work. I mean, that is what we are experiencing now with the Muslims. SM (01:01:16): Yes. I have a question later on that, yes. AC (01:01:19): And the extremists tend to drive, for better or worse, the extremist minority tends to drive the conversation, tends to drive the political responses. It is very hard for moderates, if you will, to know how to function within those concepts. we see the polarization within our own Congress, our Senate and Representatives now are between the Democrats as Republicans, are being driven wider and wider apart. So, you have really good moderates like Senator Bayh and others who say, "Well, I guess this is not the way I want to work now." I do not know how to combat that fundamental social dynamic other than increasing education, if you will, increasing everybody's awareness and sensitivity to these dynamics and increasing their capacity to think in more complex ways about the issues. Unfortunately, that is where higher education is failing us, I think. SM (01:03:04): Yeah, and I mean, you had right on target because we did a conference on Islam just before I left. It was packed, yet we had criticism from the Jewish community for even doing it. Would you say the Muslim students are the African American students of the (19)50s? Which would you compare them to what was going on with African American students in the (19)50s? AC (01:03:29): Oh, first I should say, I do not know. I do not know the data and I do not know from personal experience. Having said that, I think the issue of racism was much more broadly based and widespread and affected many, many more people in the United States than the religious prejudices that are operative now, with regard to Muslims. I think a lot of the dynamics are similar, the magnitude of the problem and the numbers of people affected, they were dramatically different. On a global scale, I think it is a much more serious issue obviously with... We did not have Black suicide bombers. We did not have to worry about African Americans or other Blacks from the Caribbean getting the nuclear bombs to blow the rest of us away. So, the issues of scale and potential danger are hugely different. SM (01:05:01): What are your thoughts on of course, in the early (19)70s, the Black Studies programs were under a lot of criticism when they were developed, and I was directly involved in those, actually did an independent study on it when I was at Ohio State. But with the development of the Women's Studies, Native American Studies, Black Studies, Environmental Studies, Asian Studies, Gay and Lesbian Studies, Chicano Studies, is that good for a university? Because the critics like David Horowitz and Charles Murray and others, and Phyllis Schlafly say that this is nothing but the troublemakers of the (19)60s now controlling universities of today. They have been doing so since the (19)90s, according to these individuals, that we have a politically correct campus. That just is not obvious. Again, just your thoughts and the development of all these studies programs and the criticisms of political correctness on university campuses, particularly with our professors. AC (01:06:04): I think those criticisms are very far-fetched. In the first place, it would be much better from my point of view if the criticism was more accurate. That is to say if issues having to do with racism, with gender equality, with hot button topics like abortion or so on were dealt with throughout the curriculum, but that does not happen. So, in the absence of that, I think it is extremely important and useful to have centers, institutes, whatever for the organization form they take to keep these issues alive, and where students and faculty and others learn about them, but with which they can identify and where they can get involved. If you look at [inaudible], I mean both criticisms have ignore the fact that higher education is dominated now by a market mentality that emphasizes professional and occupational preparation. That has in many colleges and universities driven a whole series of policies and practices with regard to consumers, students and parents and so forth, that are a direct reflection of the worst of our capitalistic practices. SM (01:08:11): That is amazing that you are saying that. I had this down as my last question. This is not my last question because we have got quite a few more, but I got to read this because you hit a button here that was going to be my last question to you. This was, do you believe today's universities are so driven by money, for example, just about everything is linked to fundraising, including out of classroom activities like lectures, forums, debates, conferences, cultural events, that quality out-of-classroom experiences are being denied, eliminated, or allowed with a price tag to the detriment of quality educational experience for students? And i.e., I say, top administration wants to dictate what can or cannot happen, only if it means it can be linked to a fundraising effort during tough economic times. SM (01:09:03): The fundraising effort during tough economic times, did you feel that is happening? AC (01:09:08): Oh, of course. It is happening dramatically, and I am going to have to stop in a bit here. I think what has happened is that, I did the speech at Florida State. I [inaudible] also email you if you want. That addresses a bunch of these problems. And higher education for years was seen as the public good, and that is why we had all state support, why you could go to the California system or New York system, virtually at very little cost. Now it has seen as a private benefit. State support now is, last numbers I saw for public institutions, is in the order of 20 or 25 to 30 or 35 percent. And as state support has dropped, states have authorized tuition increases to cover the cost. We are moving back into a meritocratic, aristocratic orientation for higher education. And that major shift in the last 10 or 20 years is what has driven this whole mentality that you're talking about. So higher education is not something that is seen as a politically important and socially important institution as a public good. And so consequently, our focus is more and more for professional vocational preparation and dollars drive the system. SM (01:11:06): We have got 15 more minutes if that is okay. Still there? AC (01:11:13): What? Say again. SM (01:11:13): We have 15 more minutes. Is that okay? Because that is an hour and a half. AC (01:11:17): Okay. SM (01:11:18): Okay, great. I am glad I got that question in. Kent State University in 1970 and Jackson State was certainly a monumental nightmare for the Boomer generation. Where were you when you heard about it and what do you think the impact of that day, May 4th and two weeks later when two African American students were killed, what impact did that have on not only the generation but on higher education? AC (01:11:56): I just have to say I do not know. I remember when Kennedy was shot, but I do not remember where I was when I got that news. Just thinking off the top of my head, I do not know that those two horrendous events had a major distinctive impact because they were part of the whole continuum of dramatic events and activities that were going on with all the sit-ins and demonstrations. They were an unfortunate, tragic extension of that whole process. So, in and of themselves, they amplified that, but I do not think had any particular distinctive impact. SM (01:13:00): Well, in your opinion, when did the (19)60s begin and when did it end? AC (01:13:07): When did the (19)60s begin and end? SM (01:13:09): Yes. AC (01:13:19): Well, I think it began, the early (19)60s for me and my family and the Goddard community were dominated by Cold War issues and the atomic bomb issue. And when Gorbachev came to power and that whole dynamic, if you will, started to get cooled out, I think that allowed us to turn our attention to other issues like the environment, race and other major social issues. So, for me, I think the dropping away of the Cold War was a major variable in freeing us up to address other issues, economically, politically, socially. SM (01:14:39): And when do you feel it ended? AC (01:14:42): With Reagan's election. SM (01:14:45): Good. That is a good point. I personally felt that when streaking started on the college campuses in (19)73, I knew it was over. If you remember, that happened in the fall of (19)73. AC (01:15:00): Well, you have all these wonderful details. SM (01:15:05): Yeah, this is your interview, but- AC (01:15:07): It is going to be an interesting book. SM (01:15:10): Yeah. The AIDS crisis was obviously a very important thing in the (19)80s and on college campuses, the AIDS quilt. There was a lot of sensitivity toward that particular issue and gay and lesbian students obviously came to the forefront at that particular time. Just your thoughts on the impact that the AIDS crisis had on the higher education community. AC (01:15:38): Well, it is certainly pulled out the whole sexual freedom that burst onto the scene in the late (19)60s, early (19)70s, with the drugs, drink and sex. SM (01:16:02): Right. AC (01:16:12): But it is also in a more healthy way, helped us be more aware of and thoughtful about the whole issue of homosexuality, particularly among men. And I think that was a good thing. SM (01:16:32): Where did the universities fail in the (19)60s and the (19)70s? Are you aware, as obviously as a college administrator has experienced and a professor who has experienced so much, there has been little talk about the loss of a lot of the great professionals in student affairs who just burned out. And I have even read stories of some people became sick, some who died even because they could no longer take the students of the (19)60s and early (19)70s because many of the students had this philosophy, well, if you give into these issues and I will just make another 10. And so there was no, oftentimes criticism of the Boomers is that they were never satisfied even when administrations tried to satisfy them. Just your thoughts of, and certainly Kent State was an example of presidential failure, the President being away, and some of the other examples. Just your perceptions of the universities in the (19)60s. And when I say (19)60s, I mean right up to about (19)73, where did they fail and where did they succeed? AC (01:17:49): Well, I really cannot respond to that question. I was drowning, from (19)71 to (19)77, I was working 70 or 80 hours a week creating Empire State College. As I said earlier, I was focused on adult learners. And I knew about the University Without Walls movement because it started at [inaudible]. Empire State was associated with that, but I was really not tuned into the rest of the world of higher education. SM (01:18:37): Okay. One of the main questions I have asked beyond the question of trust is the question of healing. And everybody has given me a lot of different responses. I took a group of students to Washington, DC when I was working at the University at Westchester. And the students came up with this question because they had seen a film on 1968, and they wanted to ask Senator Muskie this question because they thought that they had gotten the perception that we were close to a second civil war in 1968 with all the divisions. And basically, I am going to read it here, if I can find it. Let us see if I can find, probably not going to be able appointed here. I think the basic thrust was, oh, here it is. Do you feel bloomers are still having a problem with healing due to the extreme divisions that tore the nation apart in their youth, the divisions between black and white, the divisions between those who supported authority and those who criticized it, division between those who supported the troops and those who did not? Do you feel the Boomer generation will go to its grave, like the Civil War generation not truly healing? Am I wrong in thinking this or has 40 years made the following statement true? Time heals all wounds. And so, they asked Senator Muskie that question because of 1968 and his response, he did not even respond in the way we thought. He said we had not healed since the Civil War and went on to give a lecture on why we had not healed since the Civil War. But your thoughts on whether you think the Boomer generation has issues. Well, I know they do not wear it on their sleeve as some people said, but do you think there are some of the divisions and think people care enough that they really have not healed since those times? AC (01:20:36): Well, I am no social historian, but certainly if you look at what is going on politically, we have become, and if you listen to seasoned legislators like [inaudible] and others, the whole culture of Congress in the Senate and the House has changed so that it has become more divisive, more acrimonious, less civil, less collaborative, and our whole culture has become divided. And I think the media, particularly the blogs and social technology media, which give a loud voice to a very small number of people. And so, you have extreme points of view that yes, a level of visibility and attention that unwarranted both by the substance of the basis for their comments and also by their numbers, helped drive these extremes seriously. SM (01:22:15): If you were to give a term to the Boomer Generation, a lot of people say they are the Vietnam generation. Some say they are the Woodstock Generation or the protest generation or the movement generation. What if you were to give them a title, what would it be? AC (01:22:45): Transition, I guess. SM (01:22:47): Transition generation? Do you think that the universities today did not learn from the student activists of the (19)60s and they are afraid of a return of activism? The kind of activism we are seeing in California right now with students protesting against the tuition increases, and there is a fledgling movement against the war in Afghanistan and other issues. But are they afraid of a return? AC (01:23:17): Well, I do not know about afraid of a return, but universities are typically afraid of vigorous activism. Anything that challenges authority or threatens the status quo is scary. And when it gets mobilized, and again, now if it gets mobilized by extremists, it make sense to be concerned. SM (01:23:46): Right. When the best history books are written, sociology books on the legacy of the Boomer Generation, that is those born between (19)46 and (19)64, what do you think the history books, books on higher ed, sociology books will say about this Boomer Generation? AC (01:24:06): They brought a whole range of ideals that went unrealized. SM (01:24:20): Good point. Now, I had this one little segment here, but we may go over. You have to finish right at 1:30? AC (01:24:26): Well, I need to stop in five or 10 minutes, yeah. SM (01:24:31): Okay. What we will do is real fast here is I am just going to give some names. Some of them were the heroes of the generation, and just your thoughts on these individuals that were all well-known during the timeframe. Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda. AC (01:24:52): Oh, they were good models. SM (01:24:55): John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy. AC (01:24:58): They were fabulous example, each. Kennedy was flawed by his womanizing some, John. Jack, was. Bobby, in a way was cleaner, but also very aggressive, unbalanced, wonderful. SM (01:25:24): How about Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern? AC (01:25:28): They were my heroes. SM (01:25:30): You liked them both? AC (01:25:31): Yes. SM (01:25:32): How about Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X? AC (01:25:37): Well, certainly Martin Luther King is everybody's hero. Malcolm X played a major important role, I think, in strengthening Black pride and Black activists. SM (01:25:53): Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew? AC (01:25:58): Nixon got what he deserved, and Agnew should have been more severely chastised. SM (01:26:10): LBJ and Hubert Humphrey? AC (01:26:13): Oh, well, they were both wonderful populists and excellent contributors to the public good. SM (01:26:23): Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin? AC (01:26:27): I do not know enough. I recognize the names, but I do not know enough of what actually impact they might have had to make a comment. SM (01:26:37): Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, Bella Abzug, the women leaders? AC (01:26:43): Well, Friedan and Steinem certainly put the whole gender issues on the public screen, and Bella Abzug was a wonderful feminist political leader. SM (01:26:58): Dwight Eisenhower and Gerald Ford? AC (01:27:03): Well, they were establishment politicians that did not have... Well, I was going to say, have any enduring legacy. Of course, we have Eisenhower to thank for our national highway system, which has become a very unfortunate kind of phenomenon in the degree to which it has totally undercut investment in public transportation. SM (01:27:35): Robert Reagan and Jimmy Carter? AC (01:27:36): Well, as I have said, I think Reagan's conservatism caused major problems. Jimmy Carter, unfortunately, was not a very effective president, but has been a wonderful post-president the person. SM (01:27:59): How about George Bush senior and Bill Clinton? AC (01:28:05): Well, Bush senior was thought of a modest, mediocre President. Clinton was one of our most effective politicians who unfortunately was incapacitated by his sexuality. SM (01:28:29): 1968? AC (01:28:32): 1968? SM (01:28:34): The year. AC (01:28:39): I do not know. I do not have anything I identify with [inaudible]. SM (01:28:42): Was the year of the assassinations and the conventions. AC (01:28:45): Ph, okay. So sorry. SM (01:28:48): The Black Panthers, Huey Newton, Bobby Seale, Eldridge Cleaver, Kathleen Cleaver, and Stokely Carmichael, H. Rap Brown, that group? AC (01:29:00): Well, those extreme activist for the Black Power, Black is Beautiful orientation were probably necessary and helpful. SM (01:29:19): Dr. Benjamin Spock and Daniel and Philip Berrigan. AC (01:29:24): Two very different people. We raised our kids on Spock and I admired Berrigan for his activism. SM (01:29:33): How about Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers? AC (01:29:36): Wonderful, wonderful example of conscientious activism. SM (01:29:46): Jackie Robinson and Muhammad Ali. AC (01:29:50): Well, two wonderful Black athletes who broke a lot of ground, especially Jackie Robinson. SM (01:29:57): How about the original seven astronauts? AC (01:30:02): Well, I think on balance, going to the moon was a good thing, although I do not place a high value on our investments in space exploration. SM (01:30:15): Robert McNamara? AC (01:30:19): Well, bringing a General Motors mentality to the Defense Department I do not think was very helpful. SM (01:30:31): Watergate? AC (01:30:34): Well, it was a wonderful demonstration. In its aftermath, one way it represented the extreme of political self-interest in Woodward and Bernstein revelations, turned out to be a wonderful example of how investigative reporting and democratic processes [inaudible]. (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. Arthur Chickering Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Chickering, Arthur W., 1927- ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Authors; Scholars; Chickering, Arthur W., 1927--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. Arthur W. Chickering is an author, scholar, and researcher. His research is in the field of student affairs and he is known for his contribution to student development theories. He previously taught at George Mason University and Goddard College. Chickering earned awards such as the Outstanding Service Award from the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators and the Distinguished Service Award from the Council for Independent Colleges. He received his B.A. in Modern Comparative Literature from Wesleyan University, M.A. degree in English Education from Harvard University, M.F.A degree in Creative Writing from Goddard College and Ph.D. in School Psychology from Columbia 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 2010-03-09 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.10.2016.39 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. 91:09 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b5c283fccadf7918c75f56bd48fc090a.jpg dbb17fb20fd2552e16d27af3a9d4280f https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/c66f08ecf1d856579133f47d17b70fff.mp3 b50e4e4333d44609e4021bc361dd7509 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 2004-07-23 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Arthur Levine 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 1 Microcassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 65:09 Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Arthur Levine is scholar, educator, author and administrator. Dr. Levine is currently the president of of the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. Previously, he was president and professor of education at Teachers College, Columbia University and Bradford College. He is the author of several books and articles. Dr. Levine received his Bachelor’s degree from Brandeis University and his Ph.D. from the State University of New York at Buffalo."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":15107,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,16777215],"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Arthur Levine is a scholar, educator, author and administrator. Dr. Levine is currently the president of the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. Previously, he was president and professor of education at Teachers College, Columbia University and Bradford College. He is the author of several books and articles. Dr. Levine received his Bachelor’s degree from Brandeis University and his Ph.D. from the State University of New York at Buffalo.</span> Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"College in the Nineteen sixties and Nineteen seventies; Baby boom generation; Generation gap; Vietnam War; Civil Rights Movement; Watergate; Vietnam Memorial; Ronald Reagan; Lynden Johnson; Kent State; Jackson State.\n"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":769,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0}">College in the Nineteen sixties and Nineteen seventies; Baby boom generation; Generation gap; Vietnam War; Civil Rights Movement; Watergate; Vietnam Memorial; Ronald Reagan; Lynden Johnson; Kent State; Jackson State.<br /></span> Subject LCSH Scholars; Authors; Woodrow Wilson Foundation; Levine, Arthur--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 Dr. Arthur Levine Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Levine, Arthur ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Scholars; Authors; Woodrow Wilson Foundation; Levine, Arthur--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. Arthur Levine is a scholar, educator, author and administrator. Dr. Levine is currently the president of the Woodrow Wilson Foundation. Previously, he was president and professor of education at Teachers College, Columbia University and Bradford College. He is the author of several books and articles. Dr. Levine received his Bachelor’s degree from Brandeis University and his Ph.D. from the State University of New York at Buffalo. 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 2004-07-23 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.10.2016.79 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. 65:09 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/3f400c1d25d82b746b81cf07ad20d83b.jpg 5dbcc26e1e34e42395300a3733e0f57e https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/da609577937f41936d7db512b2e12e70.mp3 584dbbc537c7c8ba6871440fdbf5f244 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. Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Bettina Apthker Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Bettina Apthker is a political activist, radical feminist, academic, and author. As a former member of the Communist Party USA she was active in civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s and 1970s, and has worked in developing feminist studies since the late 1970s. Dr. Apthker has a Ph.D. in History of Consciousness from UC Santa Cruz."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":15105,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Bettina Apthker is a political activist, radical feminist, academic, and author. As a former member of the Communist Party USA, she was active in civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960s and 1970s and has worked in developing feminist studies since the late 1970s. Dr. Apthker has a Ph.D. in History of Consciousness from UC Santa Cruz.</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 Date of Interview ND Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Protests; UC Berkeley; Free Speech Movement; Communist Party; Civil Rights; Police; Holocaust; WWII; Black Panthers; Weathermen; Feminism; Activism; Contraceptives; Montgomery Bus Boycott; Baby boom generation; Sexism; Equal Rights Amendment; Patriarchy; Women's Suffrage; Equality; McCarthy; Government Corruption; Fear of Activism; Vietnam Memorial; Kent State; Jackson State; Watergate; Summer of Love; Woodstock; 1968; Bobby Kennedy Assassination; Hippies and Yippies; Vietnam Veterans"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":14281427}}">Protests; UC Berkeley; Free Speech Movement; Communist Party; Civil Rights; Police; Holocaust; WWII; Black Panthers; Weathermen; Feminism; Activism; Contraceptives; Montgomery Bus Boycott; Baby boom generation; Sexism; Equal Rights Amendment; Patriarchy; Women's Suffrage; Equality; McCarthy; Government Corruption; Fear of Activism; Vietnam Memorial; Kent State; Jackson State; Watergate; Summer of Love; Woodstock; 1968; Bobby Kennedy Assassination; Hippies and Yippies; Vietnam Veterans</span> Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 61:26 Subject LCSH Civil rights movements—United States--20th century; Peace movements—United States--20th century; Feminists; Political activists--United States; Apthker, Bettina--Interviews Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Dr. Bettina Apthker Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: Kimberly F Mourao Date of interview: ND -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) 00:02 SM: Testing, one, two testing. And we can take a break too if you want to. 00:07 BA: Well, actually, I have other things I have to do today so, and since Will Song was late, which you are very gracious in waiting, but- 00:15 SM: Okay, when you think of the (19)60s and the early (19)70s, what is the first thing that comes to your mind? 00:21 BA: Huge crowds of people and protests, demonstrations. 00:25 SM: Can you kind of give a little detail, were you connected to those? 00:30 BA: Yeah. You know, the first thing that I mean, in the, just in the context of this conversation, the, we had very, a week of very dramatic rallies at UC Berkeley, in the climax of the Free Speech Movement, in which I co-lead with Savio. And, and there is this, many moments there. But when I when I think about it, you know, if you asked me what I remember, was, so you probably know this incident, but we had all been arrested, and we had been released, after we had occupied the administration building. And President of the University was Clark Kerr. And he had assembled everybody from the campus at the Greek Theater, it was December 7th. And the objective was to take back control of the university from those of us that had disrupted it, get the faculty on the stage, all the chairs of different committees and everything like that. And he gave a speech. And in his speech, he said, you know, invoke the idea of the university as a center of light and learning. But he did not, he did not concede the major point on freedom of speech, which was why we had sat in in the first place, right. So, when he was done, Mario and myself, and I think it was Art Goldberg got up. And we approached the stage. And Mario, his intention was to make an announcement that the Free Speech Movement will hold its rally on the steps of Sproul Hall, which was our traditional place, the administration building, immediately following and ask everybody to come down there, and we will give our response. And as Mario approach the podium, police officers rushed out from the back of the stage grabbed him by the throat, actually the tie’s tie. And, and, and arrested him, pulled him back away from the microphone. And of course, pandemonium broke out in the, in the theater there were 20,000 people. And Kerr was still on stage. He was in the back looking, he knows it is a mistake, he was looking to shoes, he still had his written notes in his hand, and Art, and I faced the crowd, and it was like, there was going to be a riot. And so, we took up a chant, “let him speak, let him speak,” you know, and the crowd took it up. And then moments later, Mario was released, and he was up, and they turned the microphone back on. And he stood up. And he said, he just said to everybody, “come with us to Sproul Hall where the FSM will hold its rally.” And I think he said, “Let us leave this disastrous place.” So, we all left then. And so, the image in my mind is, there were 20,000, maybe more people in Sproul Hall Plaza immediately following. And so, if you know that Plaza, which you do cause you are from the Bay Area. So, you know, it is huge, and every single space was taken, and they were kids up on the, on the roof of the Student Union Building, across the way and the, I mean, it was called the Bears the, the restaurant, there was a restaurant there too. And there were people on the roof of the restaurant and every, every imaginable thing, we had our microphones set up and we gave a rally to great cheers and so forth. So that is like a moment that I completely identify with that period of, of my life in that period of the (19)60s. 04:26 SM: Would you say that moment more than any other shaped you when you were young? Was there something you did? Well, is there, is there one event that made you who you are even before you got to Berkeley? 04:38 BA: Well, in my case, that is a hard question because I came from such a, you know, my father, my parents were communists, and I came from a radical family already. So, I was already shaped in terms of politics in a certain kind of way. But there is a particular moment that, that was very personally empowering for me. In the, in the fall of protest, and that was October. I think it was October 1. Yes, it was the night of October 1. So, this was the start of the Free Speech Movement. And we had set up tables of the civil rights organizations right in the center of Sproul Plaza. And the police had come, and they had arrested Jack Weinberg, who was sitting at the table for the Congress of Racial Equality. And they brought a police car at 12 noon. I mean, I do not know what they were thinking. And so, everybody was coming out of class. I mean, they were just thousands of people coming out of class and did not know anything, you know. And they arrested Jack, and they put him in this police car, and I was there on the plaza, you know, hundreds and hundreds of other people and somebody shouted, “sit down.” So, we all sat down around the police car. And we prevented them from moving and from arresting Jack. And that is the start of the Free Speech Movement. Well, that night, the night of October 1, what happened was we used the top of the police car as a speaker's podium. And we would take our shoes off, and we climb up onto the roof of the car. And we were shouting- 06:23 SM: There is that picture that David has on the front of the- 06:25 BA: Yeah, yeah, I think it is picture Mario. Well, that night, I got up to speak at the top of the police car. And I had never given a public speech before. It was the first time I had ever given a public, that was, ever said anything in public. And it was in, it was at night, and, and then I would have been able to see people but the TV cam- the TV crews were there, and the lights were in my eyes. So, I could, I could, I could feel the crowd, but I could not see them. So, it was pitch black, and then another light coming in your eyes. And I started to talk with, with what I hoped was considerable, you know, feeling about the issue of freedom of speech. And, and this, this moment, and I invoked the quote from Frederick Douglass. That power concedes nothing without a demand. And when I said those words, and I said, you know where they were from, the crowd roared back as approval. And as they roared back at me, as they roared back at me, I felt this tremendous sense of empowerment. Just a tremendous sense of empowerment. And it was a glorious feeling. So, it was not, I was someone that had not experienced that before. I do not mean that I felt powerful in quite that way. But I mean, I felt human. I felt heard, I had been heard. And if you know something about my personal background, and you have read into it, politics and so forth, you know that that the emotional significance for me, of actually having my voice hurt. And it was a tremendous moment. 08:14 SM: Wow, wow. What, it is interesting that the three people that I am interviewing yesterday, and today are all born 1944. So, I consider you boomers, even though the classification is (19)46. You know, it is really not clear. But when you look at the young people of that era, with the (19)60s and the (19)70s. What would you consider their strengths, some of their weaknesses? 08:46 BA: Well, I cannot, sorry, for my voice. I cannot give an overview. I cannot give an overall estimate. I just know the people that I knew and the people that I knew from the civil rights movement and the Black Panther, I knew people in the Black Panther Party and of course in the Communist Party. So, one of the points I want to make here is that the Berkeley campus itself was it was almost exclusively white. Because this is before affirmative action. If you go to the Berkeley campus, now it is transformed. But there was a total of 100 black students on the Berkeley campus in 1964. Out of 27,500 students. That is something like the statistic, but I knew a lot of African American folks and, and other people from other races because of my political background, because of the political work that I did. So, I just wanted to make that as an observation. And I would say that the people that I knew in my generation, younger and older, some were a little older than me very idealistic, very much informed by World War II and the Holocaust, it is very, very fresh in our minds. In fact, in one of his speeches, Mario actually invoked the Holocaust, in which he talked about the pictures that he saw as a child, and that he cannot understand that the world has not changed as a result of what happens. I think for a lot of us who are Jewish, like myself, the Holocaust, the experience of fascism, the experience of World War II, was very fresh. And, and, and compelled opposition to racism, and, of course, anti-Semitism. But in this country, racism was very, very prevalent, and a tremendous commitment to never allowing that kind of violence to happen again. And they were very strong. If you actually look at those statistics, you will see that a very disproportionate number of the white people that went south in the (19)60s were Jewish. And I think that it comes out of this feeling. So we were, we were white, but we had this, you know, in this country, a Jew can be a white, but a Jew could also be a person of color, depending upon their skin color. Right, there is Jews who are very dark complected, you know, but I am talking about, you know, Jews who were Ashkenazi who were white like myself, but we were not quite white. A little complicated. And you had that awareness. And so, I found my generation to be very, very idealistic. And if there was a weakness, and I think there was a weakness, and it came out of this idealism, that was also a, among some people, tremendous frustration, at the lack of responsiveness of the power structure, which led I think, people to commit very unfortunate acts in the late (19)60s and (19)70s, part of the Weather Underground and Weathermen, and yeah, I did not agree with that. I have never agreed with those forms of violence, you know. So, I do not think that they were they were a relatively small number of people, overall, in terms of who was involved in, and I put the Black Panther Party in a different category, because in terms of the use of self-defense, you know, because although there has been a lot of publicity about the Black Panthers, having guns and all of that, and they did defend themselves with the police. They were constantly, young black people in that period, were constantly under attack, constantly being arrested, harassed shot, as they still are, I mean, it is still going on. So, they were not engaged blowing up buildings or something like that, which is what the Weatherman did. They were, they were very much engaged in trying to defend and protect their communities. I think that was why the Panthers had such a tremendous draw. So, they also had enormous idealism. I see the idealism that too, it just took a different slightly different form. And you think about the in the Panthers, you know, they, especially the women, like Erica Huggins, and, and Kathleen Cleaver and Elaine Brown, they, they ran breakfast for children, they ran freedom schools, they ran health clinics, they provided people with free clothing. In other words, they really tried to do very concrete, compassionate actions in their home communities. It did not get a lot of publicity. You know, if you think about Panthers, everybody thinks guns, you know, they do not think about all this tremendous daily work that- 14:11 SM: Kathleen, I actually been communicating with her down at Emory. She is working on a book right now. I think she is working on a biography. And she has agreed to be interviewed by me, but not until May. Because she has gotten to concentrate on getting the book done. One of the things, one of the criticisms of the, this era, the, the idealistic young people from the (19)60s and (19)70s, is that they have not followed through as they have gotten older. Now, I know you can only give the experiences of your friends, but have you been disappointed in some of your friends that what you saw at Berkeley, one of the things I like about David, David Lance Goines, is he was so committed he did not even go back to Berkeley. And he had not changed one iota. You know, he is an artist, and he is proud of his artwork and everything, but he has not changed, he is still the same guy he was then. Are you pleased with your peers, or are you somewhat disappointed in them? And the second part of the question is this. One of the things that really gets me is when the Newt Gingrich’s of the world or the George Will’s of the world, whenever they get a chance, will take shots at the (19)60s and (19)70s as the reason why we have problems in our society today, with the increasing divorce rate, the drug culture, the lack of respect for authority, the victim culture, you know, all the bad things happened then, and that is why we have problems today and we are going to try to fix them. So that is kind of a two-part question. 15:38 BA: Well, the first part, no, I am not at all disappointed in my generation. One of the things that you do not understand when you are young is that you have a life to live, a full life. So, David, for example, goes on to become a great artist. He is a tremendous graphic artist. Jack Weinberg, was the other example. Which is now one of the key leaders of Greenpeace. Very important. Jackie Goldberg, was one of the leaders of the Free Speech Movement, taught school for a long time in Los Angeles, then ran for the school board and ran for the LA City Council then joined the California State Legislature. She did tremendous work, built tremendous coalition of gay, lesbians, blacks. Chicanos, you know, Latino community, made a real coalition and was a very radical progressive person in Sacramento for twenty years. She recently retired. You know, if you look at Mario, even Mario himself, he was very, he was the same guy in terms of his activism, up until the time of his death, which was in (19)96. He was involved in the struggles to protect immigrants, you know, to reform immigration law. He did remedial mathematics teaching at Sonoma State College, in order to help mostly working-class kids of various races to be able to succeed in the university. I continued to be very critical of university hierarchy. And, you know, the politics that existed there, he was also a brilliant physicist. So, you know and say myself, I have taught for thirty years at UC Santa Cruz, I taught a very popular introduction to feminism class that had an annual enrollment of five hundred. And it was a course that my students filmed. So, it is available on DVDs now, but, but my point in talking about it is that it was it was to infuse students with a sense of empowerment, especially women, because I am part of the feminist movement, and activism, and what it means and now I am teaching a class called socialism, I am, excuse me, not socialism, called feminism and social justice. So, but I just started, you know, a new class. And so that is in myself, you know, and everybody. Margot Adler, who was part of the Free Speech Movement, is the, is a leading journalist for NPR. She is the head of the NPR in New York, she published a book many years ago called Drawing Down the Moon, which is a study of Wicca. And in the United States, you know, the resurgence of, of Wicca and the spirituality in that book is still in print. It is like, you know, one of the major texts, very progressive, very important journalists, NPR, as we all know, is plays a critical role. So, when I think of, or Angela Davis, if we want another person, you know, Angela has been out there in the trenches for thirty, thirty-five, forty years. She almost single handedly launched a national, international movement against the prison system. And the way it was set up and was finishing a book on that subject. She taught in the history of consciousness program at UC Santa Cruz, where I am for quite a number of years training graduate students to engage in radical intellectual work. She is, she is one of the she is one of the few recognized public intellectuals in the United States and internationally, you know, as public intellectual. So, I mean, these are examples, we could go on, but these are examples of people- 19:59 SM: So, what the George Will’s, and I do not single them out. But it is very obvious that when you see their writings, they love to take shots at the era. And that the permissiveness, the all the things that I had just mentioned, the drug culture- 20:17 BA: You know, that is also a very stereotypical view of that period. Because what, what the mass media did in a certain kind of way is focus on the drug culture, you know, the so-called permissiveness and free love and all of that. But, you know, try to give a little historical perspective, okay. The changes in sexual behavior had to do with the invention of the pill, which made it possible for women to engage in in sex, premarital sex. Without the continual fear of pregnancy. It is revolutionary, it was revolutionary. Did people get pregnant when they did not intend to? Yes, of course. And then the other thing that happens is the legalization of abortion in 1973. I know we are still fighting about it. But it made it possible for people to engage in sexual union without, you know, guys have been doing it. You know, it is, from a feminist point of view it is very interesting, you understand? Guys have been doing this forever. Guys. I am on tape. So, guys fool around, like, there is no tomorrow, you know, especially young guys. And I mean in, everywhere in the world, as far as I know. And there are no consequences, right? Because they do not get pregnant. So, they can just, you know, have a good time. feel like it is great. And all this sort of stuff they want to, but then, and then you look at, you want to talk about promiscuity, guys are promiscuous. But when women became promiscuous, then we have a promiscuous generation. Why is that? Because there is a double standard. And guys like Wills and these other, you know, these other commentators. That is it. That is really what you are talking about? What happens to the women, that is what they are talking about? They never say that because women are always invisible. But that is really what that movement is about. 22:30 SM: How have you or even Angela, could you know, or how have you been able to deal with the critics like David Horowitz and, and others who label certain individuals, obviously, the experiences you had when you were young, you kept your idealism, your sense of empowerment and your belief system, you kept it, whereas others have given in maybe, and accepted the status quo again. How have you been able to handle the critics like that, you know, and I know David, David used to be in the ramparts I interviewed him for the book too. And he is a real good speaker, he is a real good guy, he changed and everything, but he is really out there. He has got that book on the one-hundred professors- 23:13 BA: I am in it. 23:13 SM: Yeah. And Larry Davidson's on his list from West Chester University, but not in that book, but he has got Larry on his list, along with Bill Hewitt from West Chester, but how do you? How did you and Angela, how do you handle that? 23:28 BA: Well, I cannot speak for Angela, so I am not going to do that. I do not pay much attention to it. That is just nonsense. It is just nonsense. So, I just, you know, I mean, if you look at Horowitz’s book, for example, everything, almost everything he says about me, is, is untrue. It is, I am not saying I do not know whether he lies, whether, whether this is deliberate lies, or whether there is just an incompetence of research. I really do not know. But virtually every so-called facts in the paragraphs about me were wrong. I mean, even basic, innocuous information was wrong. I do not have it here, you know, it is in my office there, I can go, I mean, so I do not pay much attention to it. He was on Fox News not very long ago, and he was attacking me on Fox News. And I came into class the next day, and I told my students, you know, and I get a cheering ovation. I mean, they think it is funny. It is nothing. And most of this is nonsense. And the other thing I would say about it, and whenever I have come under attack, I do not give it much energy. It is, you do not put, do not put energy into it. This is like sort of advice to no energy because that just fuels it. So, he can have whatever viewpoint he wants to have. He has freedom of speech; he can publish whatever he wants. That is his business. I know- 24:56 SM: I know he had a very big problem with the Black Panthers because one of his associates came on our campus. One of the things I want to ask you, when did the (19)60s begin, in your opinion, your view? And when did it end? 25:10 BA: Well, I think the (19)60s in terms of the civil rights movement, myself, and I think it began in the mid (19)50s. With you know, this is always, I am a historian. So, when did something begin? Well- 25:31 SM: I am a history major, political science double major. 25:35 BA: Because then this led to this, and then that led to this, you know, I am saying, but I usually think about it from the point of view of the Montgomery Bus Boycott, in (19)50, you know, the winter of (19)55, (19)56, there is stuff before then. But I usually, I mean, you could go back to the integration schools, you know, Arkansas, Little Rock, you know, you could, maybe, maybe there, but I usually think I will tell you why with the Montgomery Bus Boycott, because that was the first definable visible mass action, mass, you know, hundreds, thousands of people involved. And, and I do want to say that the women, the black women in in Birmingham and Montgomery were the backbone of that movement, because they, they provided the carpools that that arranged for people to get to doctor's appointments and get to work and, you know, provided food, and I mean, they, they were just it was the committee of one hundred. Committee of one-hundred black women. But anyway, I date it from them. Then the first march for integration on Washington was in (19)57. I was on it. There was a second one in (19)58. I was on that, too. And these were, you know, I do not know if there were thousands of people, but there were hundreds of people, we took buses, we camped out- 27:07 SM: Dr. King was in (19)57. 27:09 BA: Yes he was. Yeah. And, and then of course, by (19)60, you have the lunch counters, (19)60, (19)60, (19)61, the Freedom Rides, and then you are off, you know, and then the voter registration is (19)63, (19)64. And I think this is another thing in terms of how people view the (19)60s in the, in the sort of media type view of the (19)60s is they see it as white. But see, the backbone of the (19)60s was black. 27:50 SM: You raise a good point, because the fact that I have met with the individual, three or four interviews ago, said when I when I saw that you were doing something on the boomer generation, I think of boomers as white. And I do not, and then I tried to explain to him that I am trying to get boomers from all ethnic backgrounds, sexual orientations, you name it, and then I understand what you are trying to do now. But when I first see that term, Boomer, I think white and white male. 28:19 BA: Yeah, absolutely. Because that is the dominant media image, you know, that is absolutely right. You know, so that is why I say what I am, you know, what I am saying is, the (19)60s is, is a fundamentally in many ways, a black era. 28:36 SM: When did it end? Was there a was there a watershed moment when you date it. You know a lot of these young people moving on in jobs and careers, and they are still doing great things as leaders of different organizations. But was there something where you thought “it is over”? 28:54 BA: Well, you can mark it from different moments. I mean in the context; I would use is the fierceness of the repression. See, by the time Reagan comes in, as governor, Nixon comes in as President, Hoover, of course COINTELPRO, the mobilization of federal and state authority to crush this movement. It takes it a while to mobilize because it took them by surprise, but the effort to crush them when you think about what COINTELPRO did, you know and the numbers of young black people who were murdered, like Fred Hampton, for example, and Mark Clark in Chicago, I mean it is, or, or Bunchy Carter and John, John Huggins in Los Angeles. And that is just the tip of the iceberg. The deliberate murder, assassinated, they were assassinated. This is horrific. So, the movement took one blow after another. People were arrested. You know, think about Mumia still in jail. You know, Mumia Abu Jamal. It took one blow after another. And then there was a there was an anti-war protest that was inadequate. It was in Washington, DC and an SDS had organized it- 30:34 SM: (19)69. David Hawk, I interviewed him yesterday. 30:37 BA: Yeah, no, there was mass arrests. At that protest, the way I remember it, they released everybody afterwards. But they rounded everybody up, they rounded up thousands of people. And then they, then they did not know what to do with them. And I do not know where they put them, and then they let them go. Because they could not process that many people or do anything about it. Kent State 1970, Jackson State, same time. So, the movement is still I think, you know, there is still momentum, there is still momentum. And then I would mark the end of the movement with Angela Davis's freedom. We won her freedom in (19)72. And then I think the momentum after that is much diminished. Even though even though you have to say, the mobilizations against the war in Vietnam continued until (19)73, When the war ended. 31:36 SM: That is when Vietnam Veterans against the war come and took it over. 31:39 BA: Yeah. So, right. Nixon ends the war in (19)73. So, we are still out there. I was still part of the mobilization committees and things like that. So (19)72, (19)73, Angela’s acquitted on June 4, 1972. You know, and the war ends in (19)73. Right? Remember it is December or something? (19)75. 32:00 SM: (19)75 is when helicopter on the roof on April 30th. The very end. Well, it is interesting. I- 32:09 BA: So that is about when I end the era. 32:11 SM: I know, I know, the whole thing. When I was in my first job with George Jackson, the books and everything. And while I was in California, I actually did a concert in San Quentin Prison, and we broke a janitor by the San Francisco child's fancy, because I know the Bread and Roses group, Joan Baez’s sister had been able to do concert there. But they were really limiting the concerts. And so, I tried. And then finally, within a year, I was able to get in there with the jazz group, and it was one heck of an experience. Machine guns, the loved them, they loved the janitor, there is a rock group that came, and they booed them and threw apples at them and within five minutes, but that whole scene out there, I do remember, I want to, I got two parts here, one of the one of the general questions or one or more specific, and that is the second side. But I want to ask you about the boomer women. That is your age group. And that group that through 1964. Your thoughts on boomer women, all colors, sexual orientation, you name it, because one of the things that I found through studying history is the sexism that took place within the movements, within the anti-war movement, within the civil rights movement. And then I am, now I am even asking more about and now I, when David mixtures says “oh yeah it has been in the gay and lesbian movement. Oh, yeah.” And the Native American movement, the Chicano movement, and there was some of that because I have already spoken to a couple people of Chicano movement the same way. What is it about all these great, these very important movements that evolved in the early or late (19)60s, early (19)70s? And they use the example of civil rights movement. And women were in secondary roles. We all know, the women's movement kind of evolved from there, but is there truth to that. And in your views, what do you think about all these movements? 34:09 BA: Well, men were tremendously sexist. Just tremendously sexist. And they had no clue they were completely clueless. But in fairness, which I have to say, is some of the women you know, consciousness evolved slowly. And in particular conditions and circumstances. So, one of the things you have to acknowledge or you have to say is that Betty Friedan’s book was published in (19)59. I think it was the Feminine Mystique. When Kennedy ran for office, President Kennedy, he wanted Eleanor Roosevelt's endorsement and she said, I will give you your, my endorsement if you promise to establish a Commission on the Status of Women when you become president and investigate the institutional discrimination against women. So, President Kennedy said: Yes, I will do that, she endorsed him. She was the titular head of that commission when he came into office. And it was actually headed by Esther Peterson, who, as you probably know, was in FDR’s cabinet. And Peterson did a thorough study of institutional discrimination against women in housing, employment, education, everything. So, there was a tremendous report came out in (19)62. So, I remember those things. I did not read the Feminine Mystique until later. But I remember Mrs. Roosevelt, and I remember the, you know, the Peterson report, the commission report, I remember all of that. And I remember thinking about it. Because so I, here is what I am trying to say is the men ridiculed any kind of feminists or women centered movement, these are radical progressive men. I remember conferences of SDS, they were awful, they ridiculed, they booed, they hiss, they did not want to hear anything about it, they made jokes about it, and so forth. This was true in the Communist Party, also, except in the Communist Party, there had always been an understanding of the inequality of women in the workplace, equal pay for equal work and that sort of thing. So, there was a, there was a tradition in the communist movement of understanding, discrimination against women. But they saw it as a function of class, class struggle, not as something that had an independent existence. nobody talked about violence against women. We had all experienced it, but nobody talked about it, because it was to the woman's shame. Now. So, I think all these things are true. And if you look at the histories that have been written about the (19)60s by men, and you talked about it, Todd Catlin, and stuff like that. If the women's movement enters those histories at all, it is as a minor point. And they hardly talk about any of the women who were leaders of the movements. It is amazing. It is amazing to me, somebody just published a book on the left, I just got it on my email. And I do not know the name of the book, it must be the History of the Left in the (19)60s and (19)70s and does not mention any of the women's radical organizing that was going on. This is hundreds of pages, and there is no mention of it. 38:09 SM: Even when the Vietnam Memorial was built, Diane Carlson Evans had to fight to get the Women's Memorial. And a lot of people they do not know the battles behind the scenes, where she was called every name in the book, but she will not be, and she was just trying to get the Women’s Memorial. 38:23 BA: Yeah so, so my point is, yes, sexism was very deep and very profound. And it infused everything in all of the movements. And it was true, regardless of racial designation. But there were differences. For example, in the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, black women held leadership positions, and lead field projects. white women in SNCC did not, the white women in SNCC were, they did voter registration work, they did dangerous work like that. They did office work, and so forth. They were voter registration workers, but most of the leadership, of course, it was black in general. But, so, black women have not, it was different, it is not that there is not sexism among black men there is, but it has a different history. So, I do not want to just lump everything together. And no, that is not true. Like Ella Baker, for example, Fannie Lou Hamer as another example, they are like key leaders, about civil rights movement, often unsung. Now, now they are known, you know, but there is, there is definitely on the part of men, which is, the women are just invisible. They are just there, but they are invisible. So, and then the other thing I am trying to say is that those of us as women who were involved in these movements, slowly developed the consciousness about sexism. It is not like we had it all at once or something. But because we were involved in freedom struggles for everybody else on the planet, it occurred to us at some point that we did not have very much. And people, you know, women began to talk to each other. And the so-called consciousness raising groups formed, you know, in the late (19)60s and the (19)70s, which were very important, informal groups in which women started actually talk about their own lives. And out of that experience, a feminist theory emerged, which had to do with the idea of there was something called “patriarchy” and it had a history. And there was something called “violence against women” and most women or a very large percentage of women had experienced it. And you know, and we began to define what you know, and then we gobbled up the Second Sex, Simone de Beauvoir. You know, these other things, and everybody all of a sudden discovered, Rosa Luxemburg, and what is the other woman? I am trying to. Emma Goldman. You know, and all of a sudden, we are like, Holy smokes, you know, and then there is the suffrage. You know, the saying “you discover your history” is what happened. 41:21 SM: You know Johnnetta Cole who was president of Spelman- 41:23 BA: Yeah, I know Johnnetta quite well. 41:24 SM: She wrote a great book when she was president there. And then there, she talked. And she talked about the women that, from the (19)60s and (19)70s, about the split that took place between the anti-war movement and the civil rights movement, and that Kent State, like there was no students there of color. They were all told not to be there, there was a split happening. I know, at Ohio State when I was there, I saw the split. And so, she talks about that, too. But she also talks about Boomer women, or women as a whole who were black, who were, they wanted to identify more with racism, and not with the, the anti-war, and certainly not with gay and lesbian issues, and she did a tremendous job in that book of describing the conflicts, which I still see today at the university, that we all come together in a time of crisis like 9/11, and we were all standing there. But how many other times do we come together? You know, and because I know African American men who were gay at West Chester, who were afraid to walk across the hall to the gay and lesbian office for fear of being labeled, and it shows that there is still that happening within the community. And I always question what are the boomers gone to who are now reaching sixty-two. And then that particular age and kind of doing what they were doing in the (19)60s, helping these people along, their children and their grandchildren. Do you see that as there is still some conflicts within the boomer African American female community and in the areas of sexual orientation? 43:05 BA: Well yeah because the problem is, you see that. So my first point that I was trying to make to you was just that our own consciousness had to develop. That was where I was going with, my prior comments, now. And then every community was different, you know. So, I mean, there are two kinds of feminists, for example, who are coming out of their own experience in the struggle of Lavasa, you know, on the west coast and in the southwest, so, beginning to react to the sexism that they were experiencing and beginning to talk to each other, because liberation is contagious. Now, the other part of what you are asking about is, there were tremendous contradictions in these movements. For example, white women had almost no experience with race, or racism. Black woman that was what was in their face all the time, it was not that black women were not aware of sexism, especially. I mean, they bore the brunt of violence, especially for white men. So, it was not like they were not aware of it. But they tried to figure out how they were going to unite with black men in order to confront racism. You know, it was very complicated. All I am saying is, it was a complicated struggle. So, it is not a lack of consciousness about sexism. Any more than, I mean, they are perfectly aware of the sexism. And I think, you know, if you think about Ntozake Shange’s play “For Colored Girls Who Have Considered Suicide.” That play was a groundbreaking breakthrough play, came out in (19)78. Because it named the violence against women in the black community. And it was a very controversial play and in (19)82 when Alice Walker published “The Color Purple,” a lot of black guys went nuts, attacking her and everything else, but there too she was naming, in that case its incest and, and violence against black women. So, it is not a lack of awareness. It is like, “Where is the priority?” I mean, you are one human being and how many battles can you fight? But white women will completely, almost, almost completely I mean, white women like me who are not but many white, let us put it that way, completely unaware of racism, even women who had been in the south thought “Well, the Klan is racist, but I am not.” You know, not thinking about all their assumptions, you know, it is, these are complicated questions. 45:50 SM: I can remember my first boss, Betty Mensen, after Betty Mensen. She has passed on now, but she the Equal Rights Amendment, why did I say that? I think actually we were, we were halfway through. 46:12 BA: Well, the equal rights amendment was introduced in 1923. Then it gets blocked and blocked and blocked and blocked, it is exactly the same history is suffrage. And another thing that needs to be said, I just want to, I am trying to make a point here, but say that the women's suffrage Okay, we get it in 1920, it was introduced first in about what 1868? Forty- or fifty-year struggle for almost forty years, I think. 46:57 SM: Patriarchy is deep. And men do not want to give up their power and, and privilege. Then say that the suffrage movement, it got intertwined with Southern white Dixiecrats not wanting to extend suffrage at all because they wanted to take it away from black men. So, the major opposition to suffrage, to this to the women's suffrage. The major opposition was from Southern racists, white racists, were trying to prevent it from being passed. So, you needed two thirds of the states, right? Or was it three fourths? Is it two thirds of the state, two thirds, whatever it is to pass it right? So, the last state to endorse women's suffrage and only men are voting, right? So, it is only men in the state legislatures. The last state to pass it is Tennessee. Okay. And it wins by one vote. And who was the guy, this guy named Huberts. I happen to know his history, the guy named Huberts voted for it. And when he was asked by a historian named Eleanor Flexner, “why did you vote for women's suffrage?” He said, “because if I had not, my mother would have killed me.” Now, so the way that women organized the suffrage campaign was, they went to speak to the wives, mothers, daughters of every man in the state legislatures, and then organize the women to pressure the men. That was how they won that campaign. Now, you say the Equal Rights Amendment, right? So that was introduced in (19)23, that was supposed to be a simple constitutional amendment. And it is logjammed at every possible point, it is about patriarchal privilege. That is how I see it. It is about not wanting, not truly wanting equality, because equality is a very deep concept. What would equality mean in a marriage? I mean, if you look at what does equality mean, in a marriage? What does equality mean in the workplace? What does equality mean in education? It is not just you know, if we really believe in equality, then women should have as much to say, as men about everything, the arrangement of human affairs. That is my definition of feminism. Women should have as much to say about everything in the arrangement human affairs, well, that is not true, is it? Who does who is the- who are the architects to design the buildings, who designs the cities, who, who decides allocations if there is going to be allocations for childcare, healthcare, for God's sake, you know, which is going on right now? You know, who is it that takes up the slack when the kids get sick? It is the, it is the women who stay home almost 90 percent, 100 percent of the time. Who takes care of the elderly? I am talking about average families that cannot afford fancy nursing homes. It is the women. Some women have a family, including their husband’s mothers. But a lot of times they cannot stand, moved in because well you cannot put them out. You cannot put them out in the hot in the you know, in the in the desert somewhere, you have to take care of them. So, you say these are very feminist issues, this healthcare things, very feminist issue. But it is always women who take up the slack. It is always women are doing these, performing social services, basically, these are all, this is all interesting. 50:55 SM: Do you think the Equal Rights Amendment will ever be passed. 50:57 BA: I do not know. 50:57 SM: Because I do not see any effort to bring it up again, 51:00 BA: No, it is kind of got dead. After the, there was a big push in (19)70s and then it kind of died, you know, and it, but the opposition to it, you know, the opposition to it is really about the, my point where I was going with this is it is the implications of what equality means. And if you have a constitutional fact like that, then a woman could sue and say, the conditions of my employment are not equal. I am not getting equal pay, then we are talking about economics then we are talking about restructuring the whole economy. No. So all this fluff about the Equal Rights Amendment, like how we got to have unisex toilets and all that, that is just fluff. That is just, that is not really what the issue is. 51:49 SM: Yeah, I see a lot of them on university campuses. 51:51 BA: What? Unisex? Yeah, I mean, you know- 51:54 SM: In the airport and everywhere. I want to read this question. Now, this is two basic issues that I want to deal with here. And one of them is the issue of healing and the other is trust. Qualities that I am not sure, I would like your opinions on, I have to read this. We took a group of students to see Senator Muskie about a year and a half before he died. And we asked this question to him, because the students thought that he was going to respond to the 1968 convention he was at. Do you feel that the boomer generation is still having problems from healing from the divisions that that tore this nation apart in their youth, divisions between black and white, male and female, gay straight, divisions between those who supported the verdict and those who criticize it, division between those who supported the troops and those who did not? Kind of a preface here what did the Wall playing in this process? And 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 thirty-five to forty years made this statement “Time heals all wounds” a truth? Basically, what I am saying is, do you think that that generation of students who were at Berkeley in (19)64, the students that went through the (19)60s that at the moratorium in (19)69. And we are talking now about a generation of, I am not even sure they know the exact number of boomers I hear its seventy to seventy-eight million. So, there is, so we are talking about quite a few people here, and probably 15 percent were involved in some sort of- 53:25 BA: I was going to say the vast majority were not involved. 53:26 SM: Yeah, but still 15 percent is a lot. And actually, I am a firm believer that this, that all of them were affected, subconsciously, you could not live through this period without having some sort of a feeling and to share whatever it might be and or come to some sort of revelation later in life that this really did influence me. But your thoughts on whether this is an important thing, or it is just impossible to heal, is healing it problem here in America? Oh, yes, he- 54:00 BA: Oh yes, healing is a problem. We carry our grudges. It is an interesting question. And- 54:15 SM: Let me say that Jim Scruggs wrote the book “To Heal a Nation,” which is his book, I am sure it is probably in here some place, which was “To Heal a Nation” obviously, the Vietnam Memorial was built to help the veterans and certainly their families and the people who died in the war and so forth. It is done a pretty good job. And I have been to the Wall twice. Yeah, I go to the Memorial Day and Veterans Day, have been doing so since (19)94. There is a lot of black ideals on there. I mean, still it helps, but I know a lot of Vietnam vets, I cannot even go there. So, but on to the next statement healing a nation and the question is whether what, what is the Wall done for the nation? And maybe the boomer generation and what and then of course, it is a general question. I asked on healing overall because of all these other divisions. 55:03 BA: Well, my opinion about healing is that it is an individual process. And it has to do with the willingness of individuals. You cannot heal a nation unless individuals heal themselves. Healing begins in the heart. And it really is, it is an individual process, you can create certain conditions that facilitate healing. But and, you know, you can watch, like myself, for example, I try to be very careful about what I say, and to whom I say it and how I say it, and to have what the Buddhists call” right speech.” In other words, not to, I try not to attack, you know, and try to be very careful about anger, you know, very hard, these are hard practices. Building a wall, oh it is fine. I mean, that is not fundamentally where healing happens. In my opinion, healing happens in the individual hearts of people. And it requires intensive work. Nobody can heal you, you must heal yourself. And part of the healing process for each individual is a decision that you are making about the quality of your own life. When you carry anger, when you carry hatred when you carry wounds, you are injuring yourself. And so, the, the ability to, to heal is your own decision. I am an incest survivor, for example. And I write about it in my memoir, and I had to make a decision to forgive my father. 57:23 SM: He is a Big Nicky; I have one of a couple of his books. 57:26 BA: And I had to make that decision. Otherwise, I was going to carry the hatred. The anger, it was more anger was not so, I do not know if it was hatred, but anger, frustration, and other things that it was all part of a constellation of things, because he never saw me as I really was, as I truly was, he only saw me as an extension of himself in my opinion. So, what I said earlier about standing up on top of a police car and making that speech of being heard, that is what I meant. That was a healing moment for me to be heard. Because I was never heard as a child. I was always an extension of my parents. So, what I said had to conform with what they believed, then I could be heard, but then I was not really heard was I? Now, my father helped me to forgive him by asking me to forgive him. So, I had, I was, I was very fortunate in being able to talk to him. I was very fortunate in his response to me, for other people it does not happen that way. But the decision to forgive is your own decision. Now- 58:42 SM: Could you like for example- 58:43 BA: So, you have, so Angela Davis tells an interesting story in public. Very interesting story. When she was a little girl, she was in Birmingham, Alabama. She was one of the, she lived in a, in a home that was called Dynamite Hill. There it was called Dynamite Hill, because there were black families as they moved in the Klan would bomb their homes. So, you know, little kid, right? She was a little kid grows up with feelings about white people. So, she tells the story, I just, she just told that the other day, and remember this the bombing of the Birmingham church. Right and all that, she was, she was a child when that happened. I mean, she remembers it. She remembers bombs going off when she was a little kid, you know, like brushing your teeth in the morning, and she would hear the explosions. So, she told the story. She said the doorbell would ring and she would go to answer the door. And then the person would say, you know, is your mother home or whatever, and she would yell out: Mama, there was a white guy at the door. Or there was a white man at the door, something like that. And her mother would come in and very gently she would say, “Angela, there is a man at the door.” Angela was saying to us, you know, my mother did that. Because my mother did not want me to hate white people. She was teaching me, so, so then but I am just saying, so then that is trying to, you know, in terms of healing here, that was a very important moment that Mrs. Davis was doing for her children, not just Angela, but all of her children, because she had a different consciousness. She was a very radical woman. She was a political activist. She wanted her children to understand that not all white people were enemies. So that so that they would not internalize all that stuff and have to heal from it. See? So, yeah, that is what I am trying to get at there. 1:01:04 SM: It is very well said. Like, I know Alan Canfora at Kent State is trying to meet with some of the guard. Of course, one and finally he met with had passed away of a heart attack. So, I think one of the things is to try to, I guess it is tough for him to be in the room with them, but he is trying to come to terms and, and certainly, 1:01:23 BA: Give me another example- 1:01:24 SM: Senator Muskie said that we had not healed since- (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 Dr. Bettina Apthker Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Apthker, Bettina ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Civil rights movements—United States--20th century; Peace movements—United States--20th century; Feminists; Political activists--United States; Apthker, Bettina--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. Bettina Apthker is a political activist, radical feminist, academic, and author. As a former member of the Communist Party USA she was active in civil rights and antiwar movements of the 1960's and 1970's, and has worked in developing feminist studies since the late 1970's. Dr. Apthker has a Ph.D. in History of Consciousness from UC Santa Cruz. 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 ND 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.10.2016.17 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. 61:26 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/e2a0a93029c21a62a530072a87a36424.jpeg ca3e87efd198802a7e4e9431e015b868 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/04de1d3b64d7ee82f3f4d9e51d19d2a6.mp3 28e8c50c8c3455100a42e75df01c0e17 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 19 November 2021 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. Bruce Johansen Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 1:54:15 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 Digital file Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Biographical Text Dr. Bruce Johansen is a Professor of Communication and Native American Studies, the University of Nebraska at Omaha. He had authored 39 published books as of 2014. He writes frequently about environmental subjects. He also writes as a journalist in several national forums, including the Washington Post and The Progressive, with letters to the editor in The Atlantic, New York Times, National Geographic, Wall Street Journal, et al. He earned his Bachelor's degree from the University of Washington; a Master's degree from the University of Minnesota, and he has a Ph.D. from the University of Washington. Keywords Washington State; Nato; 1960s; Native Americans; American Indian Movement; John F Kenndy; 1950s; Wild West; Wounded Knee; Activism; Vietnam; Healing. 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: Bruce Johansen Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: Lynn Bijou Date of interview: 2 December 2021 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM: 00:02 All right, we are all set. BC: 00:05 Okay. SM: 00:06 Thank you very much Dr. Johansen for agreeing to be interviewed for this, for the Center for the Study of (19)60s at Binghamton University. The first question I want to ask you is could you tell us a little bit about your growing up years, your early influences, your parents, where you went to high school, college, those early years before you became a professor? BC: 00:28 Okay. I was born in 1950 in San Diego by, was in the, Coast Guard, it was, you know they have a, Coast Guard bases you know, all over the place. So, I grew up, you know, moving you know over about half-half the world you know, they have a Coast Guard in the Philippines, they have it in you know, in [inaudible] up in Canada, in Puerto Rico, so they even have all these here in Omaha, but you know there is not any coast here, but they have one. You know, so, I grew up until age 18, you know, traveling, you know, with my family at age 18, okay I mean between ages 15 and 18 which was 1965 to (19)68, I was at high, high school in Fort Angeles, you know in Washington State. And there is a Coast Guard base there too, and the, the time change to you know to, apply for college and I, favorite the- you know, the view of Washington. My parents had been transferred to San Diego again, and they invited me to come but I was, I mean I was itching to get out of that, you know there else. And so, I went over to Seattle and got a scholarship which we, they hired me to go to school there, so I did [chuckles]. [inaudible] provide scholarships so then I was in the, you know in the, Seattle in school when you know the whole anti-war movement blew up. And in 1971, I was the editor of the, "The Daily," which is this student paper, so I mean I spent all kinds of time covering this, you know, and it is on the record if you go back far enough to do that. I started in (19)69, I became the editor in (19)71, and I graduated with my BA in (19)72, and after that I went over to Seattle two times and this takes us up to about, let us see, (19)74 and five. I took ten months in Minnesota, and then came back to Seattle, and I went back to the times, I mean I was overeducated for my job so I ended up getting a PhD at this, you know, famous school and graduated 1971. My thesis and dissertation was on the ways in which the {inaudible] help to fight our government, in you know in the (19)30s, (19)40s, (19)50s, (19)60s and onward. And that blew up a debate all over the country which, it did not actually start up till the (19)80s, and it got bigger you know after that but the- there was all kinds of throwback and there were other people who were you know, interested too. Then I put it, I mean after a long search for a publisher in (19)82, the dissertation came out as a book. [inaudible] awaited it starts to spread, and I am being slimed by people such as you know, [inaudible] and others you know, you have not listened till you been slimed with [inaudible]. And in some of his books too, he hated, of course. So, this takes us up to about 1982, you know, I am out of college, I have my PhD and I started to become active in, in Indian fishing rights, you know also in the early (19)70s, you know, things were heating up in the northwest. Most people outside that area do not have a good idea of why this, you know, battle over salmon was a such big item in that area. But I started out, I was still at the times (19)72-(19)76, and I covered this, the fishing rights, and got to know some of the people behind it. So, jumping ahead to (19)82 again, my book is out, you know, I am a starving artist, you know, books, I mean, even books that have an audience, I mean, often do not support you so, and I did you know, side gigs, I mean, I wrote articles. [inaudible] I could not feel as if I could go back to the times before my [inaudible] job there, and the [inaudible] had been hiring a lot of its own graduates because everyone wanted to stay there. So, when I graduated there, just before that, the dean of arts and sciences, sciences issued an edict or an order that said that the school of communications, which I was in could not hire any more of its own graduates. So, I was you know, when I was looking for an academic job, I went out on-on the road, and I ended up in 1982 in Omaha and I worked here, and I was pretty tired. I think it was 2018 so that, you know, that puts me probably at over 37 years as an academic in Omaha you know and, and I am still to receive books and articles- SM: 15:16 Right. BC: 15:18 -from here so you know it has added up to 53 books- SM: 15:29 Wow. BC: 15:29 -and hundreds of other things you know if you Google me you will, you will get an idea of what is out there. SM: 15:44 Yeah you, you are quite a scholar, I mean you wrote the Encyclopedia of Native Americans and some of the other books are just unbelievable. And my question is, how, I know that you are talking about the issue with salmon and so forth, River Race and so forth? But how did you get an interest in Native American issues? BC: 16:14 Back in about 1970, I read a book by Keith Brown called [inaudible] and that is what started it, and also when my PhD, you the time came to start a PhD dissertation I had just I had several friends who are you know urging me to do the Iroquois connection with, with Benjamin Franklin and others, and the people on my PhD several, one of them did not, had never heard of the idea. And they did not take it to be you know, part of history or part of what could be in the historic scholarly record. So, I had to start pulling evidence and I pulled out accounts from the past and quotes from the papers, and other things. And just feeding them to the people on my committee and after a while they do it, that opened the first door and then I had to do it, and as you can see from looking at, at my stuff prior, I am- mean a writer. And as a journalist earlier, I mean, I did write fast and accurately, I am quick so, and I, you know, I mean people freeze up but I freeze up when I talk, and as a kid, about the age of eight I started to stutter. And for a while I was real, I am unhappy because I did not think I had any outlets. You know, I mean, I just be taken as a stupid kid. So, then I started work on it since about the age of nine. And I am now 71, and as sit here at my keyboard, I mean, I am working on some books and chapters today. So, I mean it, it has not stopped. SM: 20:56 What was, what was the name of that first book that came from your dissertation? BC: 21:04 That was "Forgotten Founders," and it was my, actually, it was my second book. SM: 21:16 Okay. BC: 21:17 The first one was, was called "The Iroquois," which was about how, you know, Indian issues were still alive. So, I mean, it brings things from the past up to date. You know, and so that was the first one, second one was "Forgotten Founders," which has gone on to have a real, you know, interesting, you know, impact all over the world. People, you know, hear this idea, and they either go, that is fascinating, or that is crap [chuckles]. SM: 22:22 And that is the one, is that the one that Rush Limbaugh criticizes you for? BC: 22:27 Yeah, yeah. SM: 22:31 What did he say about your book? BC: 22:33 Well, he just said it was false, and that there could not possibly be a connection here. I mean, after all, you know, the founders were the founders, and the Indians were the Indians. And that is all there was. And he obviously had not read it. And that was [inaudible], you know, when after it, I mean, they paid attention. So, I had a real fun time taking them on and going into their publications and their audiences, and countering them. I mean, I turned them into, guess the word would be foils for my argument. And it, it was spread it out. It had an effect, which was opposite of what they wanted. You know, so it was, I mean, I had a really good time going after them and going into publications, which I could not get into, on my own. But since there was a debate here, I was able to worm my way into scholarly journals in history, and anthropology, and others. The idea has a really interesting fact in several academic fields if you look at it, there is obviously there is history, there is anthropology, there is [inaudible], there is law, you know and-and others you know, so it is spread like that. Also, when I am getting up with audience in several academic fields and the public, and also a lot of people in other countries are interested in American history in a way and I decided to teach audit in India which was fascinating, in Poland- SM: 26:45 Wow. BC: 26:46 -[inaudible]. SM: 26:49 What was the, what was the basic, what was the basic argument in the book that upset people like Limbaugh? What was, what was your basic premise in the book? BC: 27:02 Well that there was an effect of what was, first of all, you understand that Franklin was on the way to do the Iroquois guardian and let us see, in let us say (19)50 or so, you know, he was an on [inaudible] and so, he observed how they operate, you know there is, just the culture you know, who does what, and he had a, he wrote, you know, CDs of [inaudible], you know which, which were you know, well-read small books at the time, you know, they had an audience and he published them I mean, he had a press too. So, he, at an audience and he described you know, how they operate their councils you know, their law, and gave people an idea that the, you know, Iroquois and other Indian nations had a, they were democracies, you know they, they operated in in counsels. So, Franklin takes this idea back home and puts it in his little books, and they, they spread out, you know, (19)50, (19)54, (19)50, (19)50-(19)60s and a bit after that, and this plants some seeds and some of the other founders pick it up, but he is the main one. You know, Franklin who loved going into other cultures and observing them, and writing about it. And towards the end, this real interesting [inaudible] he might have even used [inaudible] in his own time. So, he is fascinating, and almost every, you know, public library has published copies of his, his [inaudible]. You know, so it was really easy to praise what he was up to, you just had to work at it. Because there was so much of it. SM: 31:57 The, from this experience from one of your earlier books, how have, obviously in the academic community, your books have been praised. But for critics, when you look at your writings, say in the since we are talking about the (19)60s here, (19)60s and (19)70s, we can include the (19)50s too, what was your awareness meeting meter with respect to all the major issues of the (19)60s amongst them? How did you become interested again, in the Native American issues and indigenous peoples movements, particularly in the 1960s and 1970s? Did you feel that this period in American history was positive or negative with respect to how Native Americans were, you know, presented in, through books, through television, through movies, through writings, and obviously, your contribution has been so positive and so educational, but just your perception of what was going on in America in the (19)60s and (19)70s in respect to Native American issues? BC: 33:16 Well, I mean, I was, I got involved in these issues is about (19)70. And there were, you know, native people, you know, making their case, about you know, what ended up being forgotten. Founders early on, you know, I mean, it you can phrase it, you know, and they would tell me a bit about it and I was fascinated before about 1968, I was in high school in a rural area, you know, and I was not really old enough to take part in these things. But, I got to college in (19)68 just as the upheaval was flowing up, and the Vietnam war movement was, was also opening up all kinds of other issues, issues having to do with, you know, Latino rights, Black rights, Native rights, you know. fishing rights, all kinds of things, you know, gay rights, things that filtered into our culture after that. It was a galvanizing, anti-war movement, it was a galvanizing event that caused all these other, insurgence to have a platform and it also increased conflict, you know, around all, all these issues, I mean there was a great deal of upheaval in this I think. You know, my next book is on you know, black lives matter, and you see the same issues there that you did in the (19)60s and (19)70s, the whole you know, whole, American movement like Aim and other, other things. All kinds of, the idea was to get out from under a system which had made Native life very tough you know, to basically turn it over and start again you know, get fishing rights back, get land rights back, and then change, the damage which was, they worked on that too. And of course, that is still on, on-going you know the, you know the, the idea of you know, say, you know it is, it is an example but, Indian mascots, okay, which was getting started in the (19)60s. You know, the idea of this stereotypical Indian in shines and advertising it all, all over the place. In Omaha if you have ever seen it, we have the [inaudible] of Omaha trademark, and here in town where the company had its home office, they have a building that had their, their-their Indian, Indian on it, mutual on the top and then [inaudible] you know, Indian. Black lives matter as part of their efforts pointed that, Indian taken down. And if you come to Omaha today, you will see that it has been taken down in the field [inaudible] on it. So, you know, things have some things have changed. You know, and it is just an idea to make people think, and this has been going on. I mean, in the (19)70s, the American Indian Movement, you know, they, [inaudible] of this school I taught at, had an Indian mascot, you know, up until the, the early (19)70s. It was an ugly piece of work. I mean, it was dumb looking stick, bad art, bad idea. And so, Aim, you know, the Aim's head office was in Minneapolis, and they came down here and said, sack that thing, and they did, the early (19)70s, the, you know, the teens came up [inaudible] which, you know, is a big, fat animal that has an attitude you know. The Cleveland Indians- SM: 42:25 Right. BC: 42:25 -that was there, you know, the ugly, ugly mascot got there, too. And I am not sure if you know, they still have, have it. I mean, I have not checked it out. The Washington Redskins, they took that one off and they have not settled on anything else. So, I think the team is now called the team or something like this, the team from Washington. [chuckles] There certainly have been some changes and that is, that is for the positives for sure. Oh, yeah so, I write books as I look at them, have been part of the changes and you go out and you talk about these things, you educate people, and you get out the stereotypes, all kinds of stereotypes and, you know, history about Indians. And these are even carried on by people who have good educations, you know, but I got in there with the scholars and debated the stereotypes, which was an interesting turn of events. The idea at the basis of all of this, was the idea of the frontier, you know, basically said our ancestors came here over the ocean and established for 13 states on the eastern seaboard and expanded out west. And you can see, if you go to a place like, Omaha, the ages of the buildings that go up as you get further from the-the old party town. Omaha was started in the 1850s, you can get the whole idea that was always taught is that so, whites, you know, the Anglos, the people who came over the ocean you know, I mean my, my grandparents are from Norway, that the frontier will move from east to west and I was arguing that it was not that simple. You know, there was a movement of course, east to west, but then there was also feedback, which came from west to east, you know, when we start to learn from the Indians and it shapes our culture, so we have, you know, to some degree now, a hybrid culture, and you can see that in our own language, in some words that we use that people in England could not recognize. The names of our states, you know, half of them, you know Omaha is an Indian name. Nebraska is an Indian name; half the states have Indian names. And this is just an idea of the feedback, I mean the idea that we just rolled over them is too simple. You know, there was feedback and part of that feedback were things like Franklin, going out in the 1840s and 1850s, and building the case himself that that was feedback, in fact, his being part of it. Now, he understood that, and it is really interesting to read his papers because he, he understood things which have since been lost. I mean, I have, I found it fascinating. And if there was one person in the past that I could go back, just one, the one I would pick would be him, fascinating person. SM: 49:11 Well, his grave is in Philadelphia as you know, yeah, and if you have ever been to Philadelphia, a lot of people are still throwing change on his stone, on that corner. Yeah, he is a, he is an icon in Philadelphia. And I want your thoughts on this because you and I are about same age. And even though you started college in 1968, which is the year the American Indian Movement began. If I want to go back to post WWII, I want to go between that 1946 to 1960 when John Kennedy became president, you know, the young Boomer kids, which are born between (19)60, excuse me, (19)46 to (19)64 grew up with you know, black and white television, all those Westerns on T.V. During the 1950s, with a Kodachrome, Technicolor and so forth at the movie theaters, every Saturday, you could go watch Westerns on Saturday, you can actually see him during the week, but when we were in school, and so, and of course, the comics, and everything was the Wild Wild West. It was all about, you know, you had Hopalong Cassidy and you had, you know, you had the Lone Ranger, and Tonto you had, and of course, you had Bonanza, as you got into late (19)50s, early (19)60s, you got all those, all those television shows Rawhide, Wagon Train, you know, the list. And of course, the movies, the many, many, many movies in the (19)60s, they were all these top actors, okay, [inaudible]. And this all the question is this, Native Americans were in all the movies, but they were always at war, with the people, with the white men. And I, you know, as a little boy, I grew up, I had cowboys and Indians, you probably had them too. They were composted Indians that your parents gave you for Christmas, or for your birthday, they were in all the stores. And, of course, you had the happy outfits, you had Davy Crockett, and it, you had all this stuff. But it was always the Native Americans, or they were always at war with the white man. And, and I, and I never really, as a kid put two and two together. I do not think a lot of kids did. And then as you get into the (19)60s, as you start getting older, you find out the truth. That, you know, that, about how they were treated, and you will learn about how they lost their lands, and how the trees you know, they were lied too, they, you know, then you learn more than it is, it is more than just six or seven Native American groups, it is smaller groups that were part of a nation and nations all across the country. And then the, the cavalry going to war, you know, people going west, taking up the land, all the way to California and of course, then you have the situation, big, Little Big Horn. You are, you are a kid growing up and hearing all this as well, by the time you got to 1968. What were, what were your thoughts as a boomer kid, before you even went to college in (19)68 about how Native Americans were portrayed on T.V., in the movies, in comics, in books, everything? BC: 52:51 I think this goes back to, back to, from age two, I mean I was fooling with my parents and we were going into, I mean also, Village Theory has its own basis, you still go out and you see other cultures. And I recall from early on, you know, having an interest in other cultures, you know, and this was the (19)50s and I spent a great deal of time outside the country. So, I had something to compare it to, you know, and I was very, very interested in Puerto Rico, and both my friends were Puerto Rican and I was also for, for prolonged periods you know got exposed to Indian or others stereotypes, and when there was no Americans in the Philippines or Puerto Rico. And I just had different interests, you know, the cowboys and Indians, it did not appeal to me. So, I was from, from early on, I was looking at things from a different angle. And so, as I started to find out that there was actually something here, something interesting I mean, all these other cultures had interesting things to teach us now, the actual, the actual attachment to native peoples started to come up, up about 1970, you know, as I said, earlier, but I mean, I have been prepared by my early experiences to tell this, this standard line now, not everyone has that, you know, has that advantage, you know, being shown other cultures and other people, and having, kind of built in, I mean, I was receptive, you know, putting back to Canada, what this culture stuff is, it did not appeal to me. I mean, I did not like it. So, I am, I have felt better, you know, hanging out with, you know, Black people, Latinos, Native people, and then others, you know, that do not fit these-these groups and that is just genuine over time. I mean, I had a very interesting time in India, basically telling [inaudible] on topics that they had not heard about, but it opens their minds up and they will be receptive, so it is interesting to be on the, on the wave. And, I have kept, my, my basement here that is my library, my papers at all if anyone is interested after I go, it is all here. You know, and I have gotten more interested in people from around the world all the time and people resegregate. And I think that as [inaudible] it is our responsibility to be citizens of the world. But, of course there are all kinds of other people out there who do not think like that. I mean, things, some of them [crosstalk]. Oh, there is also a whole sector in our culture that, you know, have these symbols in their heads. They are the old thinking, I mean, it is still out there, the cowboys and Indians in the south. SM: 1:00:25 The- the, the image was always presented now as a little kid that the, the Indians were always the bad people. BC: 1:00:36 Yeah. SM: 1:00:37 And, the cowboys are always the good people, even when the Cowboys did real bad things toward the, I mean, you know, little boys and girls have a hard time putting two and two together at times. But boy, as times go on, you reflect. And that is the way I reflected it. And but then, in the 1960s, when the American movie came about (19)68, like all the other movements in the (19)60s, I mean, I was kind of happy that it was happening. Because when I look at the 20th century, with an emphasis on the 1950s through the (19)80s, where would we place the concerns of Native American citizens in the scheme of things? I do not remember in the 1950s any president talking about Native American issues. And, and but in the 1960s, I see, I see people like Senator Fred Harris and his wife, Madonna Harris, who were very involved in Native American issues from the get go. And I know Madonna is still very involved, have been her entire life. But, when you look at some of the some of the issues in the (19)60s and (19)70s that stand out to me, this is just me as a white man. But, a little boy growing up in the Syracuse area, that I saw a lot of Native Americans ads on T.V., I remember the one who, of the Native American who wanted to save the environment. And he got a tear in his eye, if you remember that ad. BC: 1:02:14 Yeah. SM: 1:02:14 Yep. Buffy Sainte Marie, who was the great singer of the (19)60s. I mean, she still is great today, what an icon in the Native American community. And her songs all talk about the Native American spirits, the Marlon Brando, the Native American female, going to the Academy Awards, when he was getting in, she was there and there was a scene. And of course, I already talked about all the T.V. shows and they were on T.V. and, and then, too, I would like you to talk about a couple of things here, because you are a scholar that can see the insight into these more than I can. I would like you to talk about Wounded Knee. How important Wounded Knee is in the history of Native Americans, and the original Wounded Knee, and what happened in (19)73. And then also the takeover of Alcatraz, I interviewed John Trudell, who was there and of course, he has passed away and I am really upset that the interview is lost, but, but that was (19)69 to (19)71. And then of course, again, the information of the American Indian Movement in (19)68. So, I am I am really asking about Wounded Knee, AIM, and Alcatraz if you could talk on all three? BC: 1:03:36 Well, that is a big hawk there [chuckles], yeah, after having read [inaudible] book, okay. I came to understand that, did people at that time had to go out and take some toys, you know and-and also point out you know, who owned what, you know and, and who shared culture with whom. And so, in part, I mean, all of these things were skills by eating, and science, you know, with other people in, in movements to point out that Indians were humans, they were fighting stereotypes. It comes as you kicked down from all these you know, Indian movies, and other things which can improve their entity, you know and to turn them into stereotypes. Some of this was also kind of, it tends to go both ways, you know, some people perceive, for example, the Indians you know Alcatraz as, as stereotypical. But I think part of it was, you know, bringing attention to certain issues that they had publicized and part of that was, pointing out that they were human, and part of it was working on getting back the land, you know all these things happened at the same time. And, all of these things had these roots, they were, they were teaching the rest of us these things, that is what I think of it. SM: 1:07:08 The, the, could you talk a little bit about Wounded Knee? BC: 1:07:20 Again, it was a [inaudible] to, to get people to pay attention, I mean to all the things that I talked about earlier. I mean part of it was publicity vehicle part of it was establishing humanity, part of it was understanding, you know, who owns what and where. All of these things, also it goes into, you know the, Wounded Knee happened at the very end of the Vietnam War, so all of the elements that contain that movement, [inaudible] Wounded Knee. But, other than that I do not think of myself as an expert on any-any single incident, and I have not really gone into what, people who established, people who planned it and carrying it out what they thought. SM: 1:09:34 Yeah, I know when reading about the American Indian Movement in (19)68, the people who created it back in Minneapolis, Minnesota. Certainly, Dennis Banks and people like that, were certainly major activists of the 1960s and (19)70s and beyond. Some of the issues you already talked about, the issue of fishing rights the, the revitalization of traditions within the Native American community, the economic independence, which is very important to any group, legal rights, tribal areas, restoration of lands that had been lost. The things that came up in the (19)60s over cemeteries on Native American lands, I grew up in Syracuse, where the Mohawk Nation was fighting to make sure that the New York State Thruway would not go through their, their cemeteries. And there were major protests on the highways near Syracuse for many years. Many college students from Binghamton were involved in those protests, the broken treaties, and obviously AIM started because of the assistance for those who were living in poverty in Minneapolis, and of course that group that came together. Could you talk about, and you know them because of the, you know, who they are, you know, Bell Corte, you know, banks, the leaders of the AIM movement how important they were as leaders? BC: 1:11:19 They were important to but there were all kinds of other people behind them, you know who, you know in the crime life you know, who's [inaudible] we have heard only every so often who are just as important and there are also, how conflicts inside of the movement. Women were not being treated fairly in the movement so, there was a big effort going on inside to address that. There was a group called "Women of all Nations," [inaudible] which was big into you know, pointing out that the majority of Asians were patriarchal and this was not reflected in AIM's behavior which it, at least at the start was very, very male oriented, right. That is an example, but it, you know, other things happened it was not as simple as-as it appeared on T.V. So, you know, they were important, but then AIM also fell hard, you know, in the, let us see after about 1978 and there were major, major differences, between you know different people which were exploited by the FBI and other agencies that were trying to break them up, so. SM: 1:15:02 Yep. Yeah, you know, it is, it is in the antiwar movement and in the civil rights movement, that patriarchal thing was present. BC: 1:15:13 Oh, it was. SM: 1:15:15 Yeah, it was certainly in the American Indian Movement as well. And also, whenever any group starts going toward leaving nonviolence and going toward violence, you start getting into some trouble there. And that whole thing about the COINTELPRO, you bring, it was a question I was going to ask later on here, but they seem to be going everywhere with this thing. The COINTELPRO was the term used by Nixon's government to spy and to infiltrate activist groups challenging the government, any group that challenged the government's issues, linked to the states, what was happening with the, while the eighth, I think you have just described it, you know, they, they COINTELPRO was such a terrible thing, in terms of trying to break up groups, infiltrating groups getting, you know, people to go against each other. Have you done any writing on COINTELPRO and what they did in the American Indian Movement? BC: 1:16:27 [inaudible] SM: 1:16:28 Oh, yes-yes. BC: 1:16:32 Yeah. Look in the index. SM: 1:16:36 Yep. BC: 1:16:37 And from time to time, and type of [inaudible], I have done that. You know, it would be helpful to us, the, you know, in Texas. SM: 1:17:07 Yeah, one of the things, Native Americans also served in the Vietnam War. BC: 1:17:13 Oh, yeah. SM: 1:17:14 There is a brand-new book out now and why, I think it is called, "Why We Serve," it is a brand new one and Barnes and Noble. It is a big book. I would like to ask you, how many, do you know how many Native Americans actually served in the war? And did, most of them come from the inner city or were they from reservations in the inner city and how were they treated in the military? I heard one story from somebody who wrote a book on the Vietnam War. And they said many times, they would put a Native American on point simply because they were Native Americans. Now, all these things, so, you know, how many died in the war? How many around the wall? BC: 1:18:07 Well, I have not ever looked that up. I do know, just by the stories, I have heard that the, [inaudible] was quite high. And it was high, for the most part, because at the time, you know, there were not that many native people in college. So, they, they were not deferred, you know, and they were not, they could not get it. You know, [inaudible] says to, any of those, you know, ways that you can stay out of it. And, some of them actually went on their own because there was an appeal to this stereotype of warrior at the time, but then they get over there. And they find out that well, you know, Uncle Sam is fighting the Vietnamese, and the Vietnamese are the Indian soldiers over there. So, that there is some interesting dialogues where Native Americans find out that they are on-on the wrong side. And that they are being oppressed too, and of course, all the stereotypes and discrimination and all of that went over. You know, this stuff was in the armed forces too. So, I mean, again, I have not studied it and I do not know how, how many there were, just incidentally [inaudible]. SM: 1:20:48 Yeah, I, well I read it in two different books, I cannot remember the two books but they are different ones where in, in a platoon. If there was a Native American within the platoon, the person in charge would say you are on point. And the question, that is a dangerous thing to be on point. BC: 1:21:02 Yeah. SM: 1:21:05 Cause there is a chance you will not come out alive. But also when you are on point that means you are helping the group go in the right direction, and so because there was a stereotypical response "You are good at point, on point, and that is why you are going to, we are sending you there," so, it was so obvious to me when I read it in both instances, in a sense to me they were sending them to their deaths. And because many people on point died and or, they landed or walked on a booby trap or whatever when they were on point. When you look at the 1960s, and the 1970s, because this is the Center for the (19)60s and you brought a lot of historic information in your writings. And your writings are going to be here too, many of your writings. I am going to, my three books I have written by you including the one we have been talking about, I am giving to the university. So, they will be here, at the center. But when you look at the (19)60s and (19)70s, was there, was it a positive or negative time for Native Americans? There was a lot of activism, but were they, was the activism kind of an organizing, a more frustrating or was it a feeling of, good feelings that we were doing something, we were bringing more attention to the world to our issues? BC: 1:22:55 Well I think it was both, you know, there were lots of people who were discovering their history, and what they did, and dealing with problems of their time, with things like fishing rights, and land rights, you know, being mistreated by the FBI and other things. That gave everyone a sense of, you know, spirit, discovery, change, all of that. But at the same time, there was still a lot of people still living on reservations, still unhappy, despicable, inescapable poverty, all of this was happening at the same time, so it goes both ways. You could not change everything at once. So, AIM and others, there were, you know, other older groups have been activists too going back even further, so that tends to fire people up. And when you get active, you get things done and that is a good feeling but you are still looking back at your hometown or you are in places like that where there is people you know, and there is still people who are poor, unhappy, drunk, and that did not disappear. It has not disappeared in our time either. We just, in this area we just disposed of a small town on the South Dakota border, which leads up to [inaudible]. They did not sell anything except beer, so you know Indians were always going up there and buying beer, and cracking it open on the sidewalk. It was quite a sight of the old days, AIM and others have not been able to change the way that human beings, humanity like that. And there is others stores on the boundary because you cannot buy alcohol on the rez, but you can buy it off the rez, and there is still stores which are basically getting people drunk. SM: 1:27:02 Wow. One thing I will say about AIM, and any of the groups from the (19)60s or any activist organization is when they come together, it does create a sense of community, a group of people who think alike, care about the same issues, and then builds, it builds. And certainly, any of those kinds of activities, activist activities, let us the world know that there are many concerns that need to be addressed. And I think another thing too, is, I just finished an interview with Ted Glick, another person from the Catholic movement in the (19)60s. And the fact is that urgency, the concept of urgency is another important quality within any activist group. And what he was trying to do in Minneapolis, like many possible groups, even years before Native American groups, is the fact that these are urgent issues that need to be addressed. And, and part of being an activist group too, or being organizing, is the organizing, of course. But it is the fact that often times, division happens. And of course, we live in a society now that is so divided over everything, but you cannot really bring attention to an issue unless there is some sort of division happening with one's efforts. You know, Alcatraz may have been remembering John Trudell was interviewing. You know, that may have been the people may have been upset about it. And it was, you know, a way to get the attention of Native American issues. But, you know, division was automatic because people did not like it. Jane Fonda arrived at that and they did not like it even more. And so, it is, these are all qualities. I look at these as positive things in an era of a very tumultuous period because whether they would be the people of AIM or the people of the ant-war movement, women's movement, or any of the movements they spoke up, and they did it for a reason. And it was to bring attention to the world, that things need to change and we are living in a world that is equal. We are all one, we are a community and so anyways, I just wanted to kind of throw that in there just from my thoughts on, on that type of thing. One of the things is, was I, maybe you do not know this but was there a generation gap in any of the Native American families with respect to any of these issues we talk about in the (19)60s? BC: 1:30:42 Well, yeah, I mean, there were every family is different and there were things of this type, I mean in all families, you know, my own was that way too. But I detect that there were older families that had this happen, you know, Vine Deloria was still real active in the (19)50s and (19)60s and he influenced a lot of us who came after him. I mean, I do and he was the leader of all kinds of things. Also, kind of a bridge between the older people, and you know, younger ones, you know, he was older, but he was in the movement. And I think the same struggle was happening in Indian households, you know, and others. SM: 1:33:09 Oh, we got a couple more questions then we will be done. Who, who are the icons in the Native American movement of writers, artists, actors, activists, politicians? When you look at the (19)60s and the (19)70s who are the icons that come to mind? BC: 1:33:36 Well the first is [inaudible] who I was, you know, I am really, well of course, and I cannot really think off the top of my head who else you know, because there are all kinds of people in different areas. SM: 1:34:36 Certainly, that book by Dean Brown had influenced you as well. BC: 1:34:45 I am [inaudible] in person, and he said to me that you do not know how any times I have stuck up for you in, you know, debates and whatnot. And you know, I am pretty sure he created it because he was, he had a great influence on me. And if it had not been for him and his book I might have, you know, ended up doing other things, what everything might have been. SM: 1:35:47 Well, I am going to add one name though I am going to add one additional name here. BC: 1:35:51 Yeah. SM: 1:35:52 And that name is Bruce Johansen. BC: 1:35:57 Thank you. SM: 1:35:57 You know, you-you you have no idea the influence that you were having in an awakening in this world about Native American issues and everything. I mean, I, you, you know, I, it is just an honor to talk to you. I mean, you are you are a gifted scholar, and you deeply care about the topic you talk about, and it is, even how you answer your questions, just, just brilliant to me. I have only two more questions. One of them is obviously about the Vietnam Memorial in Washington D.C. Have you visited it yet? BC: 1:36:37 Have I seen it? SM: 1:36:40 Have you been to the wall? BC: 1:36:43 I have not. I mean, I have seen pictures of it. SM: 1:36:49 Yeah, well, I just want to ask this question. In 1982, the wall was built. And all the guys that came home, and gals, who came home from Vietnam were treated terribly, all over the, including the Native American veterans. I mean, nobody treated any of them with any sense of respect. Only until 1982, when the wall was built, Jan Scruggs, John Wheeler, and that group of people that had the courage to make it happen. It was built in remembrance for those who died in that war, the 50,000 plus. Plus, many that were wounded, and all Vietnam veterans who served and as many have told me it is also in memory of the 3 million Vietnamese who died in that war. And so, I-I want, the question I want to ask is, our nation has, was so divided in the 1960s and (19)70s. It was a tumultuous period, but it was also many people say a great time to be alive. So, cause so many issues were being brought to the attention. People were fighting one way or the other. But, the key thing is I want to ask is the healing. I asked this question to a lot of people I remember asked it to George McGovern, Eugene McCarthy, and Gaylord Nelson. And I asked them, as politicians have we healed since the war? And should we care about the healing process, the divided soak of so many different issues? Has the wall done anything really to heal the nation beyond healing those who served, and died, and their families, in just your thoughts? You know, I will mention one thing before you answer this question, and that is that when I asked Gaylord Nelson, Gaylord Nelson was very blunt with me. You know, he was the one that was responsible for ending the funding for the Vietnam War in Congress. He proposed a bill that ended it, and of course, he found it Earth Day. And he looked at me and he said, Steve, people are not walking around Washington, D.C., you know, have they healed from the war, they were not wearing it on their sleeve. But, let me tell you one thing it forever changed the body politic. And just your thoughts on whether this, the wall itself has helped the nation heal? BC: 1:39:29 I think it is a symbol of healing. You know, and in-in that way, I think it helped us heal, heal. I was in a, you know, as a, as you heard, a military family and I was very anti-war myself. And so, that line that split us up with right through our house. And so, we, we had come to terms with that issue, I mean, at home and we kind of did. And I have always thought that everyone deserves honor as a person, you know, as, and as different as we are I have tried to be behave honorably with everybody, no matter what their race, creed, color background, etiology might be. And in part, that is because my, you know, my associations with people who are not by culture or color, or background, are so easily diverse you know, and I think that people need to open up to that, to people who are not like them because there is going to come a time when we are going to have to face the ultimate issue, which is what is happening with our Earth. Because humans have gotten to the point where we control what happens to the Earth, the heating up out there, they are more storms and all these things we can see. And I prayed about that, too, because it is the existential issue, and it is an issue that we all face. And, and if we are going to treat each other honorably, that means we have to deal with the fact that people are different from each other, that they perceive those differences in negative way often. We have to get past that. We have to get past the idea that we are different, and so different that we have to claw each other's eyes out. SM: 1:42:49 Right. BC: 1:42:50 Even if it comes with bargaining ourselves back to bows and arrows. Our resources are going to have to be put to healing the whole Earth, and stopping certain things which are going to screw it up forever. And I have done a stack books on climate change too, and it is real, and it is happening right now. And we are, you know, like, Bob Dylan once sang a heart, brain is going to fall and already has, we have to get to. SM: 1:43:58 Yeah, yeah. Yep, I agree. And it brings in right here, this issue of, the issue of environmental racism with respect to indigenous populations. That is another issue we have to deal with- BC: 1:44:13 Yeah. SM: 1:44:13 -you know, about what is going on in African American communities all over the country, but also Native American. And this especially, and I mentioned Gaylord Nelson, because I know he cared about this, because he founded Earth in 1970. He was about everybody. Yeah, and, you know, environmental racism is certainly an issue in the Native American community. I want to close with this, very broad question here. I, you know, you can be, if I can find it here. I want to thank you again for answering all my questions. But this is, you can be as short or detailed as you want to on this, but could you describe how Native Americans have been treated from the founding of our nation through today? We know about the lies, the broken treaties, the broken promises, the stolen land, the treatments, the dehumanizing of them, Native Americans, as we, as oftentimes being unequal to the white man or anybody else. And, and lack of often times respect for their culture, and understanding of their traditions. And, and been taking these things as part of our culture now, because Native Americans are Americans too, as you talked about, we are all family if we can ever understand this, just in your, just you know you have written books on the history of in so many different areas, you wrote the encyclopedia. If there was one major thing you could just say, toward the end of our interview? How, how have Native Americans been treated from 1776 To 2021? [silence] Are you still there? Okay, could you describe in detail or in your own way, how Native Americans have been treated from the founding of this nation through today, we know about the lies, the broken treaties, the broken promises and stolen land, the treatment, treatment that is been so abusive, often times dehumanizing the group, as unequal’s due to their culture, and their race, just you are, you know, you have written books on many subjects, you have the encyclopedia. But to hear a scholar of your magnitude talk about in a, in a very succinct way, how Native Americans had been treated since 1776 to 2021? BC: 1:47:22 If I could go back to the idea of honor, they often have not been treated with honor. We talked about the wall, you know, the Vietnam Veterans wall are people who died from our country. There is one image that sticks in my head that I cannot get out of it. It is some of the, you know, the service members who came home, who were bat on, and I do not think they deserve that dishonor you know, even though I was against the war, I was not against them. Every person has a different reason or two or more for ending up in that war, or doing anything else and everyone ought to be treated with honor, and it has been a long time, I mean, in fact, the Indian, Indians being maltreated, goes back to 1492, you know, with Columbus and I could go on and on about how Indians were stolen from and mistreated that time, on. People, people from Europe, took the land, they took the resources, and the history is all there. I mean, at least [inaudible] of an open society, that we can go find these things out, we can talk about them, we can demonstrate. That is what has been happening. And, that is a good thing. I mean, it is a good thing to be able to discuss, and get these things out in the air, and make our, make our system more perfect. I mean, if we can face the history act with honor, and honor, honor the people who gave us this land, as it turned out. Some of it was given and some of it was by, by force, think of what all of us have learned. And this is what, why I do, what I do is to try and increase the idea of honor between everybody. And to do that we have to get over some hurdles. And this extends on what I was talking earlier about the existential issue. We cannot be fighting each other and I, this is a high bar. But given what is happening, and we can almost see it on the evening news, and other places that there are more storms. I mean, I could go on, [inaudible], we have not seen them. I mean, I live in Seattle, where things were easy. I mean, it did not go up to, and they did not have you know, huge storms and wash everything away and it was easier in the (19)60s in some ways. So, native people they open it, they offer us the opportunity of seeing history with their eyes. It is necessary, necessary that we think about it, we take it to heart, or we change things because as a scholar, part of the job is it just to watch, I mean, part of the job is to define what we need to do with knowledge to cover it, debate it, and to think things over, to draw other people in because this just gets us together to tackle the really big issues that we all face. You know, that is my two bits. SM: 1:54:07 I think that is, that is a great way to end the interview. And, let me up turn the, can we turn this off? (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. Bruce Johansen IIIF Item Metadata UUID e24e750a-7adf-4895-b4ee-c3676409e812 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/42646d95192a07a5fd4680a0da1ab574.jpeg 019b5a9eb59cfeac4d3f555856175032 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/b36b14bd398cfaa6e534e583cb0756a4.mp3 44b1cba641c4cf09468fa281510249ad 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 ND Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. Bruce Schulman Biographical Text Dr. Bruce Schulman is the William E. Huntington Professor of History at Boston University. Born in New York City, Dr. Schulman is the author of three books and the editor or co-editor of five others. His teaching and research concentrate on the history of the modern United States, particularly on the relationships between politics and broader cultural change. Dr. Schulman received the B.A. summa cum laude with Distinction in History from Yale University and his M.A. and Ph.D. from Stanford University. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 1:29:51 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 Date of Digitization 11 February 2022 Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords Andrew Jackson; Corruption; Yale University; 1960s; Free Speech Movement; 1970s; Ronald Reagan; Idea; 1950s; Richard Nixon; Boomer generations; Disco; Students; University; Protest. Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Dr. Bruce Schulman