62 10 1775 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/ff3332aa443b300f60d6fcd8d50afc2c.mp3 5c2eee48a3c8c97326c1de601cab050d https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/42607e87dfe531aec07be626b10d3ffc.mp3 04e0be1c08a8c0c397d5569e9040fd4c 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 Broome County Oral History Project Subject The topic of the resource Broome County -- History Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Description An account of the resource The Broome County Oral History Project was conceived and administered by the Senior Services Unit of the <a href="http://www.gobroomecounty.com/senior">Office for the Aging</a>. Funding for this project was provided by the Broome County Office of Employment and Training (C.E.T.A.), with additional funding from the Senior Service Unit of the National Council on Aging and Broome County government. The aim of this project was two-fold – to obtain historical information about life in Broome County, which would be useful for researchers and teachers, and to provide employment for older persons of a limited income. The oral history interviews were obtained between November 1977 and September 1978 and were conducted by five interviewers under the supervision of the Action for Older Persons Program. The collection contains 75 interviews and transcriptions, 77 cassette tapes, and a subject index containing names of individuals associated with specific subject terms. One transcribed interview does not have an accompanying audio recording. In 2005 Binghamton University Libraries’ Special Collections Department participated in the New York State Audiotape Project which undertook preservation reformatting of the audiotapes, and the creation of compact discs for patron use. Several interviews do not have release forms and cannot be reviewed. See the <a href="https://archivesspace.binghamton.edu/public/repositories/2/resources/44">finding aid </a>for additional information. Acknowledgment of sensitive content Binghamton University Libraries provide digital access to select materials held within the Special Collections department. Oral histories provide a vibrant window into life in the community. However, they also expose insensitive, and at times offensive, racial and gender terminology that, though once commonplace, are now acknowledged to cause harm. The Libraries have chosen to make these oral histories available as part of the historical record but the Libraries do not support or agree with the harmful narratives that can be found in these volumes. <a href="https://www.binghamton.edu/libraries/about/collections/digital/">Digital Collections</a> are created for educational and historical purposes only. It is our intention to present the content as it originally appeared. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 2 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright  Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Ben Coury, Digital Web Designer Yvonne Deligato, Former University Archivist Shandi Ezraseneh, Student Employee Laura Evans, Former Metadata Librarian Caitlin Holton, Digital Initiatives Assistant Jamey McDermott, Student Employee Erin Rushton, Head of Digital Initiatives David Schuster, Senior Director for Library Technology and Digital Strategies Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1977-1978 Relation A related resource <a href="https://archivesspace.binghamton.edu/public/repositories/2/resources/44">Binghamton University Libraries Special Collections, Broome County Oral History project</a> 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. Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Benson, Carl S. Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Dobandi, Susan Date of Interview 1978-06-08 Collection Broome County Oral History Project Subject LCSH Benson, Carl S. -- Interviews; Broome County (N.Y.) -- History; Physicians -- Interviews; Binghamton (N.Y.); Colgate University; World War, 1939-1945; American Legion; Binghamton General Hospital; Lourdes Hospital; Hancock Hospital; Shriners; Lions Club International Streaming Audio Streaming URL <a href="https://eternity.binghamton.edu/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE55822">Interview with Dr. Carl S. Benson</a> 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 Broome County Oral History Project Interview with: Dr. Carl S. Benson Interviewed by: Susan Dobandi Date of interview: 8 June 1978 Susan: Dr. Benson, could we start this interview by having you tell us where you were born, something about your parents, and any of your recollections of your childhood? Dr. Benson: That's easy. I was born on 5 King Ave., between Walnut and, ah, and it's on the west side. It's between, ah, Walnut and St. John. My mother and father came from Sweden—my mother from the north of Sweden and my father from the south of Sweden. Mother talked very much about having come from the place where the King used to spend his summers out in the open, and my grandfather, I realize now, was the man that insulated and fortified the iron mines of Sweden so that if anybody attempted to take over, they merely blew up the bridges and they had so much trouble getting the iron ore out that they never did. They met here in Binghamton, my father being from the south of Sweden and my mother from the north. I always kidded mother about stealing her sister’s girl—boyfriend, but they had a rather happy life together ’til mother overdid and showed herself to me as a medical problem, which I had a lot of fun solving. As for me, I went to St. John Ave. School. I had only one sister, Ruth, who was five years older than I was and followed the same trail, and the thing I think you would enjoy the most was that I was constantly reminded that I wasn't supposed to be relying on somebody else, I was supposed to dig it out for myself and I was supposed to keep going no matter what happened. My father was a tailor, so-called merchant tailor at a time when there wasn't any such things as ready-made clothes, and part of the fun was that I, in the early grades in school, wore tailor-made clothes, and often got in trouble with the teachers because they couldn't understand why the clothes I had on made so much noise with their corduroy knees banging each other, and actually asked me if I didn't have any other clothes I could wear to school. Today I'd like to have such good clothes back. Work—I can remember the very funny things that happened, there was the time somebody stole our Thanksgiving dinner that we had carelessly put on top of the refrigerator, on top—on the back porch at 5 King Ave. We didn't get much to eat that day. It was a lot of fun. We had a lot of time trying to find it. One of the stories that might interest you was that the man on the corner, who was a horse tailor, got after me to prove that he knew more about the things than I did and my father did, and said of course we grew horses and horses’ barns. He said, didn't I realize if I planted a cigar box and watered it regularly every day, in about six weeks it ought to come up and show me a horse barn that I could be proud of? So I tried it, and at the end of four weeks he told me, didn't I know the top from the bottom? So I dug it up and turned it over, and it wasn't ’til the six weeks were well up that—he never admitted, just said I got the wrong kind of cigar box. You see these queer things, for instance his office—his, where he fixed leather and did all this stuff was on State Street behind Sissons, and in front of it was the old canal. My father lives on—worked on the other side in the Bosket Block, and that was the way life was treated. They were both equal—now do we get a rest? I started school at St. John Ave. School, and I can still see our kindergarten and our first grade where Bill and Ed Keeler and some of the—the rest of the boys were sure that if they took their hands and folded them around the side ways, they could see what was going on the room and it was just as good as having them sit, as well as having them sit on the edge of the stage—of the desk. One of the boys, Doff Kane, just followed one of the girls out of the kindergarten and it wasn't ’til two days later that we found out that he had gone on, and supposed to have been promoted anyway because he was older than the rest of us. Third grade was fine ’cause of the exercises, we got up on the desks. We gathered up books as being bricks, stones, and we went through all the stories of the Iliad, the Romans and their troubles, and threw the books on the floor just with a grand abandon that made it a great life. We really enjoyed Mrs. Tillapough's teachings. I could go on, teach and tell you about each of the other kids, each of the other teachers just as well, of course. Miss Hunt was the principal but we never had any trouble with her, we didn't know enough to. She kept us busy and we kept her busy and that's all that was necessary. ’Course, we had her nephew in the class with us. Maybe that helped us stay out of trouble. From the sixth grade we moved over to Laurel Ave. under old Professor Johnson for our seventh—seventh grade, and that was when I used to ride a bicycle across to school. It was quite a ways down from where we were over to Laurel Ave. But that was when we had all the fun, nobody knew what to do, nobody cared. Then we went on to high school. We had the eighth, ninth and tenth, eleventh and twelfth over in high school. No, not the high school you people know about, but in the same place until we wore the building out, or they thought we did or said we wouldn't get a new one if they didn't stop using it, and then I remember when they decided to close it up. They put the letters, the colors and the letters of the class on the school. We got up on the fourth floor on the fire hatches, handed two-by-fours to throw down if the other class got in our way or started to come after us. Instead one of the boys got the fire hoses out of the Front Street fire department, and we had a grand time watching them walk up and chop those hoses to stop the water so they could get at us. Now I got to get back to teaching at our school. It seems to me that I must have been along about the fourth or fifth grade when I started to, to doing some work on the outside. Maybe it was younger, but I was delivering flowers for Oshier up on 148 Court Street. If it was a long shag I got 10¢ for it. If it was a short shag I got 5¢, and he always used to kid me on how much money I took down at the end of the week for a guy that was just riding around on a bicycle. I would almost get, I think, on the average of five dollars, maybe a little less, maybe a little more, depending on how business was. Then he disappeared and I got shipped down to Graham. Graham's Florist Shop was in Wally Webster’s Drug Store, which was 45 Court Street, next door to the corner of Walnut—uh, uh, Washington Street and Court. Wally said the smart thing to do is to buy buildings next to the corners or where, if anybody was going to increase the size of their place, they'd have to take your place in—in that way you'd make money on any enlargement of the town without having too much invested—that was where I learned that if you stole old-time tombstones and you poured a little acid on them, that’d make pretty good soda, and that's what you gave people in place of soda on their ice cream. Ice cream was worth 10¢ or sometimes 5¢, sometimes less. Those were in the days when we used to see these special men come through. The automobile stage was just starting to grow, and there was one man that had a small two-seated or one-seated buggy but he had his wheels on, his pulling wheels on backwards, and therefore the horse was behind you and pushed you forward, and he took—took that, I imagine he'd go pretty fast too, but he was just advertising a new kind of ice cream or a new kind of soft drink. Made quite something to work with. Then, I got interested in other work. The morning newspaper came along, ’course the business belonged to Carl Legg's father, and then he sold it and that brought it out in the open. When I used to go to dances in high school I'd used to have to get up before two o'clock, and we didn't get home much before that, in order to get over and roll the singles for the old morning paper. I'd roll about fifty of those and then lay down on the bags—the mail bags, then get up and carry the longest route up to the top of Mount Prospect and into the old tavern up Front Street next to Prospect Street. That's where they give you the description of the real early things that happened here in Binghamton. My father and I used to argue a lot about Court Street bridges, boats, and spent a good many nice days in the summer pushing a rowboat up and down the Chenango River, borrowing it from Mr. Ritz, or renting it, rather, from Mr. Ritz at the corner of Laurel Ave. and the river. You never knew just what you were going to get into. We had one island that we called Violet Island. We had another island that was a little bit tough to get at, but you went out where the Fourth Ward sewer came in. You always got a little bit dirty. You went out, rode up, then down, and landed on an island. Dad and I always called it our island. Then we had to hunt up the other way. There was always something to think about. If you went up the Chenango, and I've tried and took my canoe, later, up to Port Dick and all the way to Lilly Lake and right up the river, right back down. I left it in Port Dick for a whole summer. I had a lot of fun. We'd sneak around behind a barn, loosed up underneath the barn, drop it into the water, then climb in, then go around the landing to show that we were there. It's a wonderful thing and always we worried about the Chenango River, and then we remembered that there was an old man named Mr. Whittemore that got my interest first in steamboats, because he told me about the steamboat that used to come up the Chenango River—Susquehanna River and Chenango River from Owego every spring, did it for a number of years and the people came up and went down, but in my early days we usually caught the train at about eight o'clock on Saturday night, went down to Owego and then took the boat up as far as Ouaquaga, as Hiawatha Island, or on up further to the endings in Hickory Grove. That was a beautiful stretch in those days. I've heard them talk about it a good many times before my time, but I was too busy working to pay much attention to riding around in it. Then I remembered what Dad had told me about Court Street bridge. It seems that the boats used to come up and stop against those big trees that used to be back of McDevitt’s, so I had to find out about it. Find out what it was, what was happening, and why the end of it there was so little, not big enough, and I did, I stuck my neck in it. Before the bridge was finished or built, there was a ferry that used to come across there, and that tied up just above where the bridge came in and came across the river, almost straight, and stopped about where Main Street or Court Street is, and you could load and unload to catch the bridge, er, to catch the ferry. The next thing that happened was that they commenced to fuss about wanting to do something, and it was because they didn't like the way in which things were done. I know my Dad at that time said he had a chance to buy the old farm that ran all the way down to about where the Lourdes Hospital is and up as far as Leroy Street and down to the river and down to the junction and back up to about Leroy Street. Can't remember the name of the farm right now, but Dad was very seriously interested in buying it and he was going to get that land for $2,000. The people that sold it went over to Quaker Lake. They had a place over there too but I don't remember the name. Then we had to worry about why all these strange things were set up around Main Street, and when I checked up, Sam Wear said his father had a bar there for years, in fact, he said there were five bars between Front Street and the Chenango River. Maybe that accounts for their going after the law, because I understand that's when they got to work—that's when they got to work and built the church at Wal—at, ah, Front Street and Main Street. It took me a long time to figure it out, then I found the ruling, any territory with a church in it cannot have a saloon or a bar within 125 feet of the front door of the church—now that old rule has been in for a long time and probably accounts for why four of the five things disappeared, unless somebody has forgotten the laws. The thing that counts in remembrance is that when we came to building the Sheraton, the Ramada, and the rest of the new hotels that were wanted to be near the water just across the bridge, they all of a sudden stopped and moved them a block away. I think I know the reason, because I looked up some of the deeds on lower Main Street and over on Front Street, and they all contained this record that no building can be put across south of Main and Front—er, Court Street, unless it's far enough away and unless there is an opening through it left down to the river so that people can take their animals to the ford and across the river. That's why you'll find that big mark in the bottom of the Treadway building. I remember also that we built a very lovely little park on the end of Wall Street, and Wall Street was connected with this other stuff but people all forgot it and it disappeared. I wonder how many people remember its name. It was Carmen Park, and while I'm speaking about parks, we had one over on the south side wherein there was a tree for every man killed in World War II and a nameplate on it, but I was over there the other day, and God, if we can go through big wars like World War II with no more losses than that, we better stick up in the first ranks, because I assure you I couldn't find enough trees or enough plaques to justify our even having been considered as being in World War II. Now I think we ought to look up and see whether this new business about extending the high school and shutting off the ford, with kids coming from high school and with a parking lot and with some other things like that, can be done any better and any more legally than shutting it off for hotels and places to eat, particularly when the city is kinda short of money.  It was during these times when I was wandering around town that we all got wrapped up in cigar bands, and we used to argue as to whether it was smarter to stop in the cigar factories—which were on Wall Street, Water Street, State Street was solid from Court to Henry—and see if we couldn't buy, beg, or steal a few cigar bands that were out of the ordinary so we could make money. As a matter of fact, there was a lot of them that were so out of the ordinary that if you found the owner and he had a smile on his face, he would give you half a dozen and then your collection would be way, way above your friends. We had as many as 56 cigar factories around here, then they commenced to get into the factory kind where it wasn't made by hand, it was made by machinery, and the last one I remember being here into this part of the country was the General Cigar factory down on Court Street—er, Main Street, down near Johnson City—that worked for a few years. The problem was that we got much poorer tobacco for a while. If you've traveled up through Canada and seen the various shades of tobacco and seen the various kinds, you realize that it's not a bad crop to grow. It's quite nice, and if you've hunted around the old barns down below Owego and seen the openings in the sides of the barns where they drain and let the tobacco leaves dry, you will quickly get established in your own mind what a handy comfortable thing it is, but it requires a lot of work and we had just the people to roll them and not the people to grow them—maybe that’s why we lost it and then we had to get, so many of our women folks had to get tied up in cigarettes and anxious about cigarettes and they could buy them all rolled so they didn't look different, a lot cheaper, or rather a lot more expensively than we could cigars. High school and schools in Binghamton, it seems funny to talk about them. There was a little girl named Alice VanMoon, and she beat me by half a point when we went up to St. John, er, to Laurel Ave., and on down into high school. I know I could have caught her, but she went and moved away. Oh, so I had to go on, and I graduated as Valedictorian, I think, when I graduated from high school. It was a big problem to remember because I was working all the time on the side, and despite the fact that I worked from 2 o'clock in the morning up ’til school time. I worked after school until 7 or 8 o'clock at night, I thought I was pretty darn lucky when I got in twelve-thirteen dollars a week—as an adult, maybe after I got into college, I realized more about it. I had $285.00 in my pocket when I left for college. If I hadn't been fortunate enough to find some friends up there who knew where the cheap places to eat were—because I remember the chap that went with me, he was a teacher afterwards at Cornell. We paid $1.60 apiece for two rooms—one to study in and one to sleep in—and around the corner we paid $4, and then $4.50, and then $4.60, and then $4.90, for a place to have our three meals a day in comfort. Of course it was the crowd that was there that made it interesting because many of them were inclined to head for the ministry, and many long were the sermons that got preached at us while we sat there waiting to see what was going to happen, but if anybody was hungry they were taken care of, and you could buy a roast beef sandwich for 10¢. You could buy—we were lucky from Binghamton. We could go over to the Candy Kitchen and Jimmy the Greek would say, "I remember you." We'd say, "Yes, and we’re thirsty."  "Wait a minute," and he'd give us an ice cream so we wouldn't feel too bad about it, and we appreciated his kindness. Money wasn't essential. Fifteen cents would take you to the movies. You could always borrow from somebody if you needed to. There wasn't enough girls, but what you had was a good alibi that there wasn't any girls to get so you didn't have one, and I think maybe that's the thing that made life worthwhile, because it certainly made us study a lot more than we would have otherwise. Then we would go on, and I still remember even at my decrepit old age that my first year in Colgate, from the time I left in September to go ’til I came back in June, having finished one year, cost me $496.16. I think maybe that's a record, because I remember my last year in medicine cost me over $1100 or pretty damn close, and I know that's not counting the fact that I worked in the fraternity house and I took care of the animals—the research animals for both physiology, biology. That's why I had to wear a mustache, because one of them got mad and caught me on the upper chin, er, upper lip, and it was a lot better having it covered by hair than not having it covered at all. There are many stories I could tell you about the faculty of Colgate. It was one of the grandest bunch of men I ever knew despite the fact there were a lot of wonderful queer characters. There was Johnny Green, who always bobbed around at us, flashed his eyes back an’ forth and said that if he exercised his eyes enough, that he wouldn't have to wear glasses, and then he had a man who was his assistant, very big dignified fat man that always put his paws down in front of you as though he was going to bite you, Spencer, but he wouldn't. He'd scare the hell out of you. Then I could go on and talk about the rest. My particular sidekick in these days was Bill Turner, six foot tall, a big bass voice, a bachelor. He took care of his mother and sister and always acted as though something was going to push him around into something. He was so afraid that people would misunderstand him, get him into trouble. He even came to me once and said, "I'm going to quit," and I said, "Well, let me look things over a bit for you." And I says, "No, you're not going to quit. You're going to work a little harder than you have worked and you're gonna do it more this way and you aren't gonna get mixed up with so many people." And when he came to me five years later and said, "I'm gonna quit," I said, "Yep, you’re gonna quit now, but not before. You hadn't finished your job." It's a wonderful feeling to be able to say I helped a professor as much as they helped me, but I didn't, because he and his mother and his sister fed me Sunday night’s dinner for a good many years. God knows I couldn't sing, I couldn't do anything else, but I traveled with the Glee Club with the sublime feeling that I didn't have to worry because he told me, "Make your mouth go big, smile good, and for God's sakes, if anybody’s out of tune, shut up.” Now let’s stop a minute. It seems that along about my sophomore year in Colgate I got on the pan, and I never blamed them. I suddenly decided, figuring closely that they were going to let me have my degree in three years, why couldn't I do three years’ work in two and a half—get the degree? And to go on, I made the mistake that so many young fellows do, and old fellows maybe, of thinking that rubber stamping something and throwing it over your shoulder makes it get in your head. It doesn't, and I remember when Dr. McGregory and Dr. Bryant and Cookie Cutter and a few of the others, Brigham, looked at me point blank when I said I wanted to get through in three years, and they argued that it wasn't for my benefit to get through in three years—I'd do better if I stayed four—and I decided that eating those last year was kind of important and much more important than just getting through, so when Hog said that he wouldn't allow for it and he was objecting to it, I said, "OK, Dr. McGregory, just for that, I'll major in your subjects and give you every opportunity to flunk me you can get." He tried to talk me out of taking a couple of subjects instead. But I got through in three years, and they were probably the happiest three years I have ever spent, because Colgate is a beautiful, wonderful institution. I'm glad Craig went there. Afterwards I was tempted or persuaded and almost sure that I was going to go to Cornell in order to get my medicine, but I looked around and I saw that Cornell started a class at Ithaca and a class in New York, and at the end of the year without saying anything you just became half out and half as big as you were before, so I didn't think that was very good, and then Sukie Higgerman said I was nuts. And I started for Buffalo where John, Dr. John Lappious, had helped me get registered. Well, I arrived out there on the train, then went up the street to High Street. I went in, they were very nice to me but I still don't know who saw me—who had anything to do about it, what happened to me, and I think maybe it was the fact that my class, instead of being seventy-six, succeeded in rounding up nineteen for our first year. So, you see, if they do raise the requirements there is a very definite reason for it. Then I had to snoop around and see if I could get a job. Didn't get anywheres on that ’til somethin’ happened down in the so-called jail and the Erie County Penitentiary because of the flu, because of the—because of the, and in came the flu—a most gorgeous mess. So, I had to eat and live, so John took me down to the penitentiary, and they looked at me and took off my soft hat—my, ah, cap, insisted I wear a soft hat—and I was fully signed in as a doctor in the Erie County Penitentiary, which became famous afterwards—after having had three weeks of medicine. Well the first thing I did was told I oughta clean up the drug room—so I started to, and got some nice little country boy. Didn't know why he was in jail, but he did the cleaning with me and helped me, and he'd light my cigars and gave me his tobacco. God, it was awful—couldn't touch it—but he was very proud of being an associate of mine. That was when I had my funny time, when I met the Diamond Lill fame—when I met a lot of other unusual people. Diamond Lill was an operator in a carnival, and in her teeth she had two diamonds—above and one below, so that she could smile as she did the loop the loop on a bicycle and hoped that she was sober to keep on the track. I always remember when they—Dr. Frost, who was in charge, said, "Why hello—when did you—how long you've been back?" and she says, "Why, Doctor—why, you know—I haven't been out yet." This was the kind of stories we would hear. Then we found out if somebody got into a mess that they were more afraid than we were, so we went on and enjoyed it, and that's when I made a reputation, because the waiter, who was a prisoner, leaned over my shoulder one night and wanted to know if I had any good cathartics. I said, "Yes," and rolled him off a half dozen of C.C. pills, asked if he knew how to take them and he said, "Yeah," so I went on back to quarters. The next day I didn't have anybody waiting on me as a waiter, and the day after I didn't have anybody waiting on me as a waiter, but on the third day, when I sat down in my chair, I noticed that I was taken care of when the chief wasn't, and over my shoulder came a faint whisper saying, "You sure do handle powerful drugs, sir.” Buffalo—that's the place where I was supposed to learn medicine. I guess I did. Leastwise I'm still studying it to find out if I didn't. It's hard to understand the study of medicine. My sidekick, the first one, had been a chemist in Canada, got chased down by the police, so on and so forth, so he taught me chemistry and I was supposed to teach him, well, I guess the rest of the stuff. Another chap took the anatomy. I took physiology, pharmacology, and that's the way we divided up our work, so we all had the chance to pile in as much as we wanted to and learn from each other. My class in medicine started out as nineteen. We lost a bunch and brought a bunch up from Fordham University our sophomore year, and then we stayed about the same and only lost one, making it twenty-five instead of twenty-six our senior year, but then the fight came for internships, and what an interesting story it was. They wanted me to go to the Edward Meyer Memorial [Hospital] in Buffalo and I said "No.” I wanted the General, and if I couldn't have The General, I was going down to Blockley in Philadelphia—of course I didn't know anybody in Blockley—I never did get there—I never saw the inside of the place, but Dr. Ryman from our class, from the class ahead of me, went down. [End of Tape I] [Tape II] Dr. Benson: They gave me a royal ride also on internship, because they handed me a fraternity pin when I was already wearing a fraternity pin and asked me if I had lost that in the nurses’ home and would I please tell them which room it belonged in, for sarcasm. Oh, the full money that we were to receive for one year of work, starting at about 8:30 or 8 o'clock every morning and maybe getting one or two evenings after seven out, but otherwise knowing that we were on call all night long, was a very valuable swapping proposition. We got three suits of white clothes. I don't imagine they would be, would be worth something today. I think they were linen, but in those days we didn't think much of them. No socks, no underwear—we had to find that from someplace else—and four meal—three meals and a lunch, and we went on pretty well living but it was damned embarrassing. You didn't have any money to spend. You didn't have any cigars unless you inherited them or somebody gave them to you. Cigarettes were out of question and the nurses got more money than we did, but it was fun. I always remember that at 10 o'clock at night they came around with lunch, usually big pieces of chocolate cake, and after Mary Storm, the night superintendent, had gotten in wrong, the second time we posted ourselves in very advantageous positions, and when we saw her coming, somebody yelled and we all ran out in the hall looking back—looking the other way—and turn around suddenly, and we actually hit her broadside with no less than nine out of the twelve pieces of chocolate cake. Nice treatment for a supervising nurse. I got the blame for the whole thing and rightly so. Then we had to have some parties. ’Course we were learning a lot, and at the parties we took, yes, we took the big machine TV—we took it upstairs to the private operating room and we had a dance and a lovely concert and a lovely time. We pushed the thing out on the roof to hide it, and the only thing they got mad at was, they were afraid we were trying to start a fire to roast some hot dogs on the roof and they couldn't see the sense that we could stake the fire out. Then I got caught riding down the aisle with so and so on my shoulder when I walked into Mary Storm, the night superintendent—of course the fact that we had stolen the liquor from the training school office the day before didn't make any difference. She wanted to talk to the girl, so I put her down in front of her and let her talk. When I heard she was sending the girl home the next day, I went to the training school office and said, “Don’t blame the girl, blame me—she had nothing to do, she was just sitting on my shoulder.” So, it was fun. The next year—my second year I went out to Meyer Memorial, and what a glorious time I had. I was supposed to have three months of contagion, three months of TB, and six months of medicine, especially cardiology. What did I end up with? I ended up with one month added on, of venereal diseases. I ended up with two months off from contagious diseases. I ended up with particular care on pediatrics, which is a whole lot of kids, and I ended up with most of the rest of my time on cardiology and doing it all, oh, yes, one month I was in Boston. It was a lot of fun but you never knew what was gonna happen to you the next day, and then I finished and the big scramble came. Dr. Green said I was getting hospitalized. I was having too good a time in hospitals, and time I got out and earned a living. The rest of them didn't dare disagree with him because he was the chief, so I did, and the first thing I knew, I was running a sanitarium in Dansville that belonged to doctors. That was when they looked at me and said that anybody [who] could vault over the cushions and seats and chairs and couches in a fashionable place, or turn somersaults over them, certainly couldn't know medicine. Of course I lost those patients, but I made up for it, and travel I did, back and forth, all around, and finally I came back to Binghamton. That’s when I had my big surprises—even my father seemed to think it was time I went to work, and Mother couldn't understand why I took two weeks of sitting on the hills around the town thinking, figuring out what I wanted to do and how I wanted to do it and how I was going to do this and how I was going to do that. I started to set up an office on 104 Oak Street, I well remember to this day. My mother decided that, ah, in as much as they had helped educate me and do things for me, that I was going to supply her with amusements for the rest of her life because she was going to sit and watch me work—of course, that didn't work. She got mad at me because I tried. Then Harry came down from Buffalo, tried to give me a check for $50,000 to set up the kind of an office I wanted. I could easily have spent the money but I didn't think I should, because after all, so far all I had received from running the sanitarium was a couple of, three, four blank checks asking me to please put my amount—they were all signed down—and tell them how much I wanted for my work. Nobody ever raised any questions about it and I went over the stuff in the kitchen every day to see if there was anything better I could eat. Didn't do much good, though, ’cause Dr. Goodell's wife was with me as superintendent or something, and then W. George left me and the fellow that come in his place [who] was supposed to be trained as a hotel man happened to be a Christian Scientist, and I've heard that I had the ability to drive anybody nuts, but the next day, when I watched him plunge from a six-story building down onto the ground and splatter around the floor, I wasn't too happy. I hated to think it was my fault. It really wasn't, but it's something I'll never forget by the fact in that time I had an all—all-American swimming instructor. She didn't like me and I didn't care very much for her, but I had one, and I had a staff that was quite remarkable. The old place had established the Boulaire Baths. I had a training school office of about twelve, and I was supposed to teach physiotherapy massage and the various things, I don't know—I think it was just something to keep me from being lonesome, but then I went on home just because they were unkind enough to try to move my folks up to the sanitarium and give them private quarters just to be with me. Now we ready to start the practice of medicine. My God, when you start to think about it, I remember the first thing I did was to talk to the man at Norwich Pharmacal, and he came up and he said, "Well you'll need a lot of this and a lot of that and a lot of this and a lot of that." He said, "I've got a wife that's sick. I want you to take care of her." And I did, and we both fared pretty good. I fared better than he did. His wife died, and I still found some medicine from there the other day when I shut the place up and my office died. Then I became fascinated in studying the various things that happened. I never did find out where I got all the degrees I got after my name. I know there are two others I can't even think of, but somebody told me if you got enough of the alphabet dearranged, never had to know any of it because you'd say, "Yeah, I think so,” and that would be more important than trying to be smart. Yes, I've spent a lot of time hanging around Rochester trying to learn somethin’, and even when I was out in the west, out to Ann Arbor, and when the man that was supposed to have this nice course in electrocardiography looked at me and said, "What the hell do you want to take it for? You know more about it than I do now," I didn't agree with him, or it made me feel awful good to hear him say it. Money—they tell me I've made a lot of it, lost a lot of it. I think the funniest thing was in World War II—er, World War I—when I got back from World War I, Uncle Sam wrote me a letter and said, "We don't think you're able to afford to put as much of your money into insurance as you are doing." I never argued with them. I think he was right but the funny part is that insurance has all disappeared and then the other batch that I had, that's disappeared, so maybe someday somebody will find a way to have me put away insurance as they say I can't now. Nobody ever had more fun in medicine than I did. Nobody ever worked any harder. It's not a plaything. It's a real honest-to-God tough job, but the satisfaction of knowing that you're doing something for other people to help them is the greatest satisfaction in the world. Yes, here in town I had the cardiology at the Binghamton General Hospital. I was on cardiology at Lourdes. I was offered the job of laboratory man at Wilson and at the General. I was a cardiologist at Hancock, but the fun was in trying to diagnose and make up the things when nobody else knew what to do and how to do it. What you did for the cases was easy, but trying to understand them was difficult. I don't know, if I had it to do over again I think I’d probably do the same damn fool thing. Thank you. Oh, by the way, I have had a couple things that have kept me busy, one of them for the last nineteen years. I took care of the blind for the Lions Club, yeah, for the club— Susan: —Lions Club— Dr. Benson: —Lions Club, or rather I took care of Mrs. DeWitt, because I started back in the beginning when she lived downstairs under me in my home. Then we had a disagreement, not Mrs. DeWitt, but I and the Lion's Club, so I disappeared, and after that, out of a clear sky, after having spent some time in the Masons and gotten up into the Shrine back around in 1928, I was suddenly got told that I was no longer Medical Director, but I was in charge of the Charities, and what a surprise that was for me—that meant that I had to hunt up the kids that might be damaged by burns, and believe it or not, one of the hospitals that I represent is the only hospital in the world that ever brought back a child 91% burned. The rest of them think they're damn lucky if they can bring back 50% or 35%. I've made many trips to Boston and to some of the other hospitals and I've had them all do work for me on the burn kids, and then before that we had nineteen orthopedic hospitals. That didn't seem enough to me, anyway, no matter what I found that was wrong, I usually was able to decide it was orthopedic, and you'd be surprised how much my training taught me to make the other fellow think twice. I haven't made as many trips this year, but a little while ago I kept track of them. I think I've gotten stuck in the snow down around Boston at least six times. I think I've been down through over the Hudson when it was frozen solid four or five times, and I get to the clinic once a year, and most people can't understand why my hobby is helping to spend forty-nine million dollars a year and I don't think it keeps me busy. I'm willing to have some help, but the thing that interests me is that very few people understand that this isn't just, ah, patch-me-up stuff. This is a thing of building people, kids, and trying to make them live happy and enjoy things. Sure, it takes longer than it does if you're going to just give them a kick up and let them startle them, but I think it's the greatest charity in the world. What do you think about it? Susan: Well, I think it's remarkable what you've done, and I think you oughta mention that you have several awards for your work and that you were Man of the Year in 1973—was it? Dr. Benson: All right, if it will make you any happier. Susan: Well, you deserve some credit. Dr. Benson:They're urging me to talk about awards. I don't know whether I told you, I have 21-22 letters dearranged after my name. It isn't enough to make an alphabet, but some of the letters I've got so many of I don't know what to do with. The other thing they kid me about is brass plaques. Yes, I've got a bunch of them. When you're young they're important, when you’re old you wonder if you're worth it. I've, yes, this last year I received the award from the American Legion—Man of the Year—then found out that on ‘73 I had the Shriner of the Year from Kalurah, then I got a whole lot more of them, but the thing I think you ought to get is to come along and see the fun and find out how much fun work is when you do it right. Susan: Well, thank you very much, Dr. Benson. It's been very enjoyable talking with you. Dr. Benson: Well, now, there is a lot more if you want it, so if you get stuck just call me. Susan: Fine. Dr. Benson: And we’ll try and see if they’re—because, I don't know, ah, for instance, somebody might get somewheres, like taking a film like this—why I enjoyed being a doctor— Susan:That's right. Dr. Benson: Why I don't want to be a lawyer, do you see what I mean? Susan: Right. Dr. Benson: And I think you might get further ahead with such ideas. Put down a list and then half a dozen of us go through what we can add or take off of it on each one, and then go ahead and get it dictated by someone that you can pick out as being the person that will do the best job, because that's what you gotta do. Susan: Well, certainly if I know someone in trouble, you’re the man to call, Dr. Benson. Thank you again. Dr. Benson: You’re entirely welcome. Susan: This is Susan Dobandi, interviewer, and I have been talking with Dr. Carl S. Benson, who lives at 109 Murray Street, Binghamton, NY. The date is June 8, 1978. Rights Statement This audio file and digital image may only be used for educational purposes. Please cite as: Broome County Oral History Project, Special Collections, Binghamton University Libraries, Binghamton University, State University of New York. For usage beyond fair use please contact the Binghamton University Libraries Special Collections for more information. 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. Carl S. Benson Subject The topic of the resource Benson, Carl S. -- Interviews; Broome County (N.Y.) -- History; Physicians -- Interviews; Binghamton (N.Y.); Colgate University; World War, 1939-1945; American Legion; Binghamton General Hospital; Lourdes Hospital; Hancock Hospital; Shriners; Lions Club International Description An account of the resource Dr. Carl S. Benson talks about his upbringing and education in and outside of his hometown of Binghamton, NY. He attended Binghamton Central High School, Colgate University, and studied medicine in Buffalo, NY before working at the Erie Penitentiary during WWII then moving back to Binghamton to work as a cardiologist at Binghamton General, Lourdes, and Hancock Hospital. He also discusses his charitable work. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This audio file and digital image may only be used for educational purposes. Please cite as: Broome County Oral History Project, Special Collections, Binghamton University Libraries, Binghamton University, State University of New York. For usage beyond fair use please contact the Binghamton University Libraries Special Collections for more information. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Recordings 3A, 3B Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Benson, Carl E. ; Dobandi, Susan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1978-06-08 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Broome County Oral History Project Extent The size or duration of the resource. 34:00 minutes ; 23:38 minutes https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/83ee64455fca24119146b00c156f17b1.jpg 039e94e0a4227171ed21b6812f866d0f https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/3213839f2c2a5415be10276645c95b17.mp3 3914987b5b3954911157722899abb17f 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. <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player (Amplitude.js) This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2010-08-17 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Charles A. Murray Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Charles Murray is a Political Scientist, author, and columnist. Born in Newton, Iowa, Murray received his Bachelor's degree from Harvard University in 1965. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from MIT. He has written with Richard Herrnstein book, The Bell Curve (1994), which looked at IQ as a determinant of socioeconomic status. In 2018, Murray announced his retirement as the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":6531,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,5099745],"10":2,"11":4,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial"}">Dr. Charles Murray is a Political Scientist, author, and columnist. Born in Newton, Iowa, Murray received his Bachelor's degree from Harvard University in 1965. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from MIT. With Richard Herrnstein, he cowrote the book The Bell Curve (1994), which looked at IQ as a determinant of socioeconomic status. In 2018, Murray announced his retirement as the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 1 Microcassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; Anti-war protests; Thailand; Streaking epidemic; Dwight Eisenhower; Activism; Watergate; Religion; Vietnam War"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":2,"4":{"1":2,"2":14275305}}">Baby boom generation; Anti-war protests; Thailand; Streaking epidemic; Dwight Eisenhower; Activism; Watergate; Religion; Vietnam War Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 71:55 Subject LCSH Political scientists—United States; Authors; Journalists; Murray, Charles A.--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. Charles Murray Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Murray, Charles A. ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Political scientists—United States; Authors; Journalists; Murray, Charles A.--Interviews Description An account of the resource <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Charles Murray is a Political Scientist, author, and columnist. Born in Newton, Iowa, Murray received his Bachelor's degree from Harvard University in 1965. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from MIT. With Richard Herrnstein he cowrote the book The Bell Curve (1994), which looked at IQ as a determinant of socioeconomic status. In 2018, Murray announced his retirement as the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":515,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":14275305},"12":0}">Dr. Charles Murray is a Political Scientist, author, and columnist. Born in Newton, Iowa, Murray received his Bachelor's degree from Harvard University in 1965. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science from MIT. With Richard Herrnstein he cowrote the book The Bell Curve (1994), which looked at IQ as a determinant of socioeconomic status. In 2018, Murray announced his retirement as the W.H. Brady Scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. 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 2010-08-17 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright Language A language of the resource eng Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.89 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 71:55 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/97c02042ed74f06130a242024fe5d37e.mp3 d3bcb433718454073e81d409357d62e7 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/faf1d380697d97db773ca15507e3ff25.mp3 0e5b4abcee1e8e7e7aa2e49fd4426c8d 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 Broome County Oral History Project Subject The topic of the resource Broome County -- History Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Description An account of the resource The Broome County Oral History Project was conceived and administered by the Senior Services Unit of the <a href="http://www.gobroomecounty.com/senior">Office for the Aging</a>. Funding for this project was provided by the Broome County Office of Employment and Training (C.E.T.A.), with additional funding from the Senior Service Unit of the National Council on Aging and Broome County government. The aim of this project was two-fold – to obtain historical information about life in Broome County, which would be useful for researchers and teachers, and to provide employment for older persons of a limited income. The oral history interviews were obtained between November 1977 and September 1978 and were conducted by five interviewers under the supervision of the Action for Older Persons Program. The collection contains 75 interviews and transcriptions, 77 cassette tapes, and a subject index containing names of individuals associated with specific subject terms. One transcribed interview does not have an accompanying audio recording. In 2005 Binghamton University Libraries’ Special Collections Department participated in the New York State Audiotape Project which undertook preservation reformatting of the audiotapes, and the creation of compact discs for patron use. Several interviews do not have release forms and cannot be reviewed. See the <a href="https://archivesspace.binghamton.edu/public/repositories/2/resources/44">finding aid </a>for additional information. Acknowledgment of sensitive content Binghamton University Libraries provide digital access to select materials held within the Special Collections department. Oral histories provide a vibrant window into life in the community. However, they also expose insensitive, and at times offensive, racial and gender terminology that, though once commonplace, are now acknowledged to cause harm. The Libraries have chosen to make these oral histories available as part of the historical record but the Libraries do not support or agree with the harmful narratives that can be found in these volumes. <a href="https://www.binghamton.edu/libraries/about/collections/digital/">Digital Collections</a> are created for educational and historical purposes only. It is our intention to present the content as it originally appeared. Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context 2 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright  Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Ben Coury, Digital Web Designer Yvonne Deligato, Former University Archivist Shandi Ezraseneh, Student Employee Laura Evans, Former Metadata Librarian Caitlin Holton, Digital Initiatives Assistant Jamey McDermott, Student Employee Erin Rushton, Head of Digital Initiatives David Schuster, Senior Director for Library Technology and Digital Strategies Coverage The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant 1977-1978 Relation A related resource <a href="https://archivesspace.binghamton.edu/public/repositories/2/resources/44">Binghamton University Libraries Special Collections, Broome County Oral History project</a> 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. Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Sargent, Clealand A. Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview O'Neil, Dan Date of Interview 1978-04-26 Collection Broome County Oral History Project Date of Digitization 2016-03-27 Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 33:49 Minutes ; 17:02 Minutes Streaming Audio Streaming URL <a href="https://eternity.binghamton.edu/delivery/DeliveryManagerServlet?dps_pid=IE56011">Interview with Dr. Clealand A. Sargent</a> Subject LCSH Sargent, Clealand A. -- Interviews; Broome County (N.Y.) -- History; Richford (Vt.); University of Vermont; Orwell (Vt.); Physicians -- Interviews; Health officers -- Interviews; Syracuse (N.Y.); Food adulteration and inspection; Vaccination 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 This audio file and digital image may only be used for educational purposes. Please cite as: Broome County Oral History Project, Special Collections, Binghamton University Libraries, Binghamton University, State University of New York. For usage beyond fair use please contact the Binghamton University Libraries Special Collections for more information. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium Broome County Oral History Project Interview with: Dr. Clealand A. Sargent Interviewed by: Dan O’Neil Date of interview: 26 April 1978 Dan: Doctor would you give me ah your life and experiences, working experiences in the community, starting back to when you were born and where you were born? Dr. Sargent: Well I was born in Richford, Vermont. R-I-C-H-F-O-R-D, Vermont—it's right on the Canadian border. My father was took before the Customs, that's how we happened to be there. I graduated from Richford High School in 1912, June 1912 and entered the University of Vermont that fall in 1912 and I graduated in Medicine there in June, yeah in June 1918. Served my internship at the Mary Fletcher Hospital in Burlington, and ah that was during the War, I came—then I started in private practice at Orwell, Vermont. Orwell, Vermont, which is on Lake Champlain. They asked the college to send a physician there because they had lost two, so I went there and had 5 towns to cover in the practice, practice of medicine and ah I certainly enjoyed it and expected to stay there but in December in 1923, I had pneumonia and it was a very bad case with many complications and eventually from December 11 to April, I didn't do anything and then discovered I had pulmonary tuberculosis so I didn't—I had to quit private practice entirely. I received a fellowship with the Rockefeller Foundation. Now briefly, the Rockefeller Foundation was started in 1919. John D. Rockefeller gave 200 million dollars for public health service from the advice of his minister. He read the Bible and said the next time he came to Heaven—what did I do, so he told him just start out—do good with your money and that's your home. So he established the Rockefeller Foundation with 200 million dollars ah and also with that they named, they established a training station for physicians to go into preventive medicine. They built a medical school in Peking, China—they built the finest Medical College in University of Chicago and ah this fellowship I started on my birthday, January 13, 1925. I started as a fellow of the Rockefeller Foundation in Andalusia, Alabama ah my first I was there under training by men who had, doctors who had worked various stations throughout the world from the very beginning—in fact, in fact they had the United States. My first experience was with the control of malaria. For a boy born in Vermont, we didn't see very much malaria. I, we were thoroughly trained by men who very well experienced it. Ah as an illustration we started out in the morning - we were given a dose of Atabrine then we were given a thing to put on our wrist like a wristwatch but it had no bottom to it. You were supposed to catch mosquitoes—crawl under houses and what not, get mosquitos and put them under here (pointing to wristwatch) have ‘em eat. Dan: Incubate? Dr. Sargent: Feed on your, feed on your skin to keep them alive until you get back to the laboratory because they had to determine what type of infection they had and ah after malaria experience, I was taught to control the hookworms disease and hookworm disease starts by a worm that burrows through the soles of the feet goes up into the bloodstream coughed up and swallowed and attaches itself to the intestinal tract—causes slow hemorrhage. We have taken, while I was there, we as a team—a nurse, a doctor, a nurse and a clerk and go in this school and we got feet for examination and ah if found hookworms, got permission to advance and treat these children and we have taken away as many as 2000 hookworms from one individual. Dan: Is that right? Dr. Sargent: And it is a very serious affair. Well from that, the State passed, they assigned somebody to help establish school health programs in the northern part of the State of Alabama. I was sent up there with a very well trained public health nurse—Rockefeller Foundation and then there was an outbreak of diphtheria at Muscle Shoals and I was sent up to work at Florence, Tuscumbia, Columbia, Sheffield, Ford City in control of diphtheria and while I was there we let the water through the flues to start with—the electric power for the State of Alabama—it was very interesting work there. Well ah we did some roundworm control later and then I was assigned to the City of Montgomery, Alabama diphtheria control and while I was doing that, there was an outbreak of smallpox at Columbus, Ohio and I was sent to Oberlin to establish a control program for the outbreak of this smallpox and we were there about 6 weeks because after we vaccinated several thousand people ah against smallpox and things bought under control, they asked me to stay and help the Health Officer with diphtheria control program. Well being nice about it—children against diphtheria and then they asked me to go to the State of—well they gave me a choice of either going to to Panama or to West Virginia—black lung disease area or Springfield, Ohio or to the State of Delaware and in checking the various areas I chose Delaware because they had several serious and interesting health problems—one of the most interesting was infant mortality. Nearly, at that time, nearly a fourth of all the babies died before they got to be a year old and when we—course the first thing to do when we got there was to study the situation and find out why this occurred and we found that outside of Wilmington, 90% of the babies were delivered by illiterate midwives. Most of them could not read or write. They were either colored or from the southern borough, whatnot. Well after we made our study and got the information we needed, we went to the State Legislature and asked for authority to establish a code and ah they gave us that authority and we examined and tested all the midwives and as a result, we eliminated about 50% of it. They couldn’t read nor write and every midwife was under the direction of one of our public health nurse—she had to report to us when she was engaged on a case. The public health nurse followed the case until the delivery and we brought the infant mortality down to 20-25 per thousand we brought it down to 20 but while we were doing this, the State Health Commissioner asked me if I would do something about diphtheria control because they had it typed over 400 for 1000 population—so we set up clinics—I have a picture of one of them right there where I was working (points to photo) Wilmington, Delaware and we immunized 80,000 against diphtheria—practically eliminated it. Then they had a bad typhoid situation and we started in on a sanitation program—building pit privies and whatnot—sanitarians to control typhoid. Well it was all very interesting ah but I had an opportunity then to go to Johns Hopkins with the Rockefeller Foundation and take some courses in public health that was the school of hygiene and I have two Diplomas from Hopkins besides one I have from the University of Vermont. Well then I, after leaving, got a ride into New York State and I didn't know it at the time but Commissioner Moses of the Parks—State Park Commission was working with Canada to establish the seaway, St. Lawrence Seaway and I had charge of syphilis control along Erie, Lake Erie from Canada to Pennsylvania. Had headquarters in Buffalo and ah it was the most interesting experience. We eventually had about 70,000 blood tests which were recorded by Russel Soundex. We worked at all the hospitals—blood donations and things like that. I worked at Erie County penitentiary which was as large as most State prisons—worked with the Doctor there with control among the prisoners. Then and I also worked at Attica prison every Wednesday—Erie county every Tuesday—only had a day but Wednesday. Attica was most interesting because ah at that time the United States Public Health service had a representative in 150 different foreign cities and if we found a ah sailor or another person there from jail who had syphilis and could name the prostitute or contact in any city of the world, we would notify the State Health Department who would notify the Public Health Service who would notify his representative and we found active cases a far away as Hong Kong. Dan: Is that right? Dr. Sargent: Then ah—I can't remember what happened then, I ah, Oh there's a series of disease known as titseal. They're caused by a bug that burrows in the skin and ah causes a disease like Rocky Mountain Spotted Fever. Well there’s a disease known as "tutsi magutsi" which is a titular disease imported from Japan and it appeared on Long Island and ah I was taken out of, well we've been about 5 years in the census control program and we had clinics well established so on and so forth. I thought my assistant could carry on so they put me down on Long Island and we hired hunters to kill rabbits so we could get the ticks out of the ears of the rabbits and we hired donkeys to roam the countryside, then we catch the donkeys at night and get the, get somebody to get the ticks out of the donkey's ears to bring to our laboratory. Dan: That was the source of the disease? Dr. Sargent: To determine what kind of ticks we had. Dan: I see. Dr. Sargent: There's different kind of diseases caused by various ticks. Well, while I was there ah the man who, the Doctor who had charge of the State Regional office in New York City retired and they asked me to take it over—the State—that’s how I came to being employed by the State of New York and I had supervision over all of Westchester County and all of Long Island and also a $400,000. The State paid New York City for its child health clinics—we had to check that to see if it was spent properly. Well then I got, I got some requests for training assignments and the State gave me permission to take and it was extreme interesting because I think I learned more than I gave my students. I, because on Wednesday nights I went to University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, gave a 2 hour lecture every Wednesday night and many of the students were from foreign countries and they had a lot of experience—I had run into that at Hopkins so that I was made aware of some of the problems of foreign countries. Well then on Thursday mornings I gave a 2 hour lecture at New York University Medical School out there. Thursday evenings I gave a 2 hour lecture at the school of Administration and that was interesting at Washington Square. Then Friday morning I gave a 2 hour lecture for University of Columbia and I had my area covered—everything from Montauk Point top of Westchester County and it was farther from Montauk to my office than on up to Albany, so I had all city driving—I lived in Ossining and commuted 6 days a week in the worst traffic in the world. 9 o'clock in the morning to 5 o'clock at night.  Dan: Gee. Dr. Sargent: And ah I thoroughly enjoyed it but then I got tripped up—I got a coronary. an: Uh huh—what year was this Doctor? Dr. Sargent: That was in 1921 and ah I didn't work from August until April at all ‘cause I had other complications along with other complications and when I had pneumonia, I got collapse of the lower lobe of my right lung and this is tuberculosis—so everything stacked up against me. So the State assigned me, after I could get back to work, they assigned me to the City of Syracuse. First as District Officer which included 5 of the counties upstate. Simply—supervision over the work of the local health officer. Well then the Mayor of the City of Syracuse asked me to take over the job as Commissioner of Health of Syracuse—I didn't want any part of it and said I wouldn't take it. Dan: A little too strenuous? Dr. Sargent: Pardon? Dan: A little too strenuous? Dr. Sargent: No—too much politics. Dan: Too much politics. (laughter). Dr. Sargent: And ah I said I’d have no part of it at all. When I left his office—came out on television that (I have a hiatal when I talk too much—it chokes me) ah it came out on television that I was going to be the next Health Commissioner and ah I said I didn't want it—so I called the Mayor said, "I'll do it as long as I'm in it because my son is in college; when he gets through, he and I are going to run our apple orchard up in Vermont and I'll do it until he gets straightened around," because I thought I’d last just about that long. He's got some real problems and I wasn't going to stand for it. Dan: Uh huh. Dr. Sargent: Now somebody watching it—straighten out some of their problems. Well I took the thing over and found out that first of all—well I wrote to the census bureau and Syracuse has 32 census tracts and in my work you have to know conditions before you can have any programs or do anything. Well I had heard rumors—I knew roughly what the situation was but I wanted facts. So I wrote the Census Bureau and I got the last 5 census figures for the 32 census tracts and asked to name the population as of that date. Then we figured the various for date mortality rates by census tracts and we centered all of our working 10 census tract 5 all downtown—all bunched by downtown and ah first thing which we did was start a housing program which had not been done in this State except in the middle of New York City. I went to Washington and discussed it with them and they assigned a man by the name of Traboney, who had a lot of experience in that field and he came to Syracuse and established a school in the health department to teach sanitary units how to do good building inspections—home inspections and of course we trained our own inspectors—we had several men from other cities come there so we did quite a bit in housing and then they—we got some trouble with food outbreaks, which we didn't like at all and we traced it largely to a salmonella infection from poultry. Then we went at the poultry business ah after the poultry business and ah as a result we were the only place in the State which barred New York dressed poultry and New York dressed poultry in those days all they did was kill the bird and pick the feathers off. Sold it to you with the intestines and everything in. Well that was where we were getting in trouble, so we stopped the sales of New York dressed poultry and then salmonella stopped ah but ah we then, they had a tuberculosis case funding program in which each year they x-rayed all employees of various factories over and over again year after year and it cost about $4500 to find a case of tuberculosis that way—so we went into the tuberculosis problem and we studied very carefully by census tracts, by age groups, by occupation and we found that the bulk of our cases were in the middle age group among food handlers and bartenders—so we stopped examining the factories—we required all food handlers to have chest x-rayed at our expense every year and we, our case load then was quite heavy to find new cases cost us less than $500 against $4500 other way. We also x-rayed all the people once a month at the Onondaga Penitentiary because they had drifters from everywhere. When we found a case that didn't belong to us we notified their Health Officer and we worked our local jail, x-rayed people down there for the same reason. We picked up people we had and gotten away from us and weren't under treatment—so we had intensive tuberculosis control program and housing program. Then we went into air pollution control and again working with Washington, set up an air pollution control program—I think we were the first in the State outside of New York City that was doing that and ah I tried to get rid of meat inspection because they weren't inspecting meat for anything—that we'd be infected by—I couldn't, there's too much influence through the meat people I couldn't—there's some big ones up there.  Dan: This is all in Syracuse now? Dr. Sargent: Yeah and ah there's an interesting thing—I don't want to take your time though. Dan: No, you're not taking my—I've got all the time in the world so you go right ahead Doctor. Dr. Sargent: Well let me illustrate what I meant by wanting to get rid of meat inspection. We had eight slaughterhouses when I worked there and I went to the mayor—was Costello and ah said, "I don't want anything to do with meat inspection—that's Ag and Markets business." I said, "Don't look for anything that infects human beings anyway"—it was just a lot of headaches. The meat men had too much influence and too much money, I couldn't do it. But anyway, I found that every inspector in every plant was working for the guy he was supposed to be inspecting. Dan: Is that right? In cahoots with the slaughterhouse.  Dr. Sargent: So, I, I started raising hell about them, said, "Well if you don't pay me enough money so I can live"—I’ll cite one instance—a burly fellow came to me one day—he need, now we needed another inspector because one of them quit so he asked for the job and I gave it to him and he had a little experience and one of the sanitarians came one day and he says, "You know what your inspector is doing up at such and such slaughterhouse he's a buyer." Well he had only seen me once—he didn't know me very well so I thought I'd go up and see if it was true. I went up—instead of being on the kill floor watching the slaughtering like he was supposed to, he had a straw hat on and a long white coat and was in this little cubby hole—so I recognized him, he didn't recognize me. I went over to him and said, "If I had a load of pigs to sell, who would I see?" He says, "See me, I'm the buyer." Well I said, "I'm your boss—now you don't have a job." Well he hemmed quite a ruckus anyway. Finally I got that straightened. I got, fortunately, there was a Doctor Jackson who had worked for public health for the Ag. and Markets in Washington for years as Veterinarian and ah he was retired. He lived in Syracuse—people lived there—so I asked him if he'd come back to work for us. Dan: Uh huh. Dr. Sargent: And ah first he said "No,” said, "I worked in Syracuse." Well he did eventually come back to work for us. But anyway we had a rendering plant in Syracuse that made an awful lot of smoke and bad odors and so forth and so the inspectors said, "We can't do a thing with them." So I always followed up inspection work and I went down to this particular rendering plane and I told them we had a lot of complaints and ah asked if they wouldn't stop it—they would do something to stop it but he didn't so I went back again about a couple months, I said, "Now if you don't stop it we’re going to have to close the plant," and he kind of smiled, said, "I'd like to see that."  "Well,” I said, "I don't think you would."  "Well what I mean,” he said, "I'd like to see you try it." Said, “Do you know who owns this plant?" I said, "I don't give a—"  “Well,” he said, Swift and Co owns it."  I said, "Well I've already arrested Swift and Company's men 2 or 3 times a year for bumping meat.” Now do you know what bumping means? They get federally inspected meat—they have a stamp on it - beet juice stamped. Circulars going up to Newark to an uninspected slaughterhouse and buying quarters of beef—bringing them down—bumping them against the one that was federally inspected—now you couldn't tell which one, both marks were smeared. Dan: You mean, you mean transferred from one carcass to the other? Dr. Sargent: Yeah and hang two together like this—just put the good one with the bad one and bump them together and this would come off on the bad one and you couldn't tell which was which so we arrested them for that and then another time they sold 1800 pounds of pork shoulders and shaved off the Federal mark and my inspector called on a Sunday morning, he says, “What'll I do?” I said, "Tell the storekeeper he has a choice of one of two things—one, he can pour kerosene on them in his store or out in the yard.” So he said he thinks he wants it done out in the yard so he had to do that but ah I'm glad. Dan: Pretty rough. Dr. Sargent: And the milk inspection was even worse, so when they had change of change of administration ah they didn't want me around anymore. Dan: How many years was now that you spent up there—you went there in 1941? Dr. Sargent: Well I was up there from ‘41 to ‘54. Dan: ‘54. Dr. Sargent: But part of the time I was with the State and part of the time as Health Officer. Dan: Uh huh. Dr. Sargent: Well I wanted to go to the farm and work with the boy but I—my orchard wasn't developed to the point where I—I wanted to be the guy to solve the problems—let the boy run the farm but they hadn't reached that point—later it did, we were shipping 20,000 boxes of apples but then it didn't so I was mulling things over and ah Dr. Dickson, he's dead now, used to be here. Remember him?  Dan: Umhm. Dr. Sargent: He was acting Health Officer—Dr. Tudor had left and we were at a meeting in Syracuse and Dickson said ah, "Well if you aren't going to stay in Syracuse, why don't you come down to Binghamton—we need somebody badly." Well I looked things over and came down. I think I better do something, I can't go to the farm, I’m too young to sit around and do nothing, so I came down and saw Kramer and he ah offered me the job and I took it. Dan: He was Mayor at that time? Dr. Sargent: Umhm. John Burns was his assistant. Dan: Umhm. Dr. Sargent: Well we had some of the same problems as we had up there ah but ah it wasn't as bad. The thing that we did have down here—I came here in ‘54 and ‘56 had a bad outbreak of polio and I had quite a lot of experience in polio because the City Hospital in Syracuse and had a lot of cases up there—so we started a vaccination program here—we got excellent cooperation from everybody. We had two former school teachers who came in and offered their services as clerks at teen clinics—my wife went down to help them file away the records and all of our nurses, not exception, volunteered to work on our clinic teams. Every Monday and every Thursday night we had a polio clinic—vaccination clinics. We didn't use the—I never liked the, in fact I used Salk vaccine which you had to inject instead of a drop on sugar for this reason—Salk vaccine was a killed virus and would do no damage. Sabin vaccine was a live virus and had started as epidemics. In institutions, they would give it to kids and in the sewer system the live virus would come through and they'd get trouble. The Sabin never has done that so I stuck to polio Sabin vaccine. Dan: You stuck to Sabin? Dr. Sargent: Oh, No, no. Dan: To Salk. Dr. Sargent: Salk—I wouldn't touch the Sabin with a ten foot pole. Dan: Now which one is it you have on a lump of sugar? Dr. Sargent: Sabin. Dan: Sabin. Dr. Sargent: Salk is the one. Salk came out originally—it is a killed bacteria. Dan: Yeah—were you Health Officer at the time that they had that testing program? I think you were? Dr. Sargent: Sure. Dan: Where all of the ah ah participants—the children were vaccinated and they were vaccinated they didn't know whether they were getting the real vaccine or a placebo. Dr. Sargent: No I don't think I was here that time. Dan: You were never here then? Dr. Sargent: I probably. Dan: ‘Cause I know that my oldest daughter participated in that program—now she's 31 now and— Dr. Sargent: I think it must have come after we left because we vaccinated—oh gosh I forget how many but we used to do 15 to 1700 a night and nobody was barred. A third of our cases came from Pennsylvania and we had some we had one family came from Wales—we had some families from California and we never barred anybody because clinical disease doesn't know any boundaries for one thing. Dan: Right. Dr. Sargent: Another thing was I was under State aid—in other words the State paid half of my salary and half of all my nurses' salaries. All the city had to pay was one half of what it cost and all vaccine was paid for by the Red Cross so I didn't hesitate taking anybody. Dan: Yeah. Dr. Sargent: So we did that and ah we had oh so many requests from school people and ah people under unemployment for the vaccination records that people asked us—we had very complete records. In fact it stopped it—we haven't had a case since. So that was interesting and then—remember the salt? Dan: General Hospital, yes. Dr. Sargent: I don't like to— Dan: It's all right it's confidential. Dr. Sargent: I'll say this—I had a director of nurses and her assistant I had an agreement with them—one of them stayed there all day long watch that nurse—all day—the other would stay all night and watch her. Dan: Umhm. Dr. Sargent: What we saw and learned—I asked the State Health Officer—I had no authority to do anything better—I asked the State Health authority we wished to be privileged—they wouldn't take away that person. Dan: They wouldn't? That made—that was nationwide publicity it got—Life magazine and everything. Yeah, that was a terrible thing. Dr. Sargent: Yeah, of course what happened—they disobeyed all regulations and the colored maid went down to the kitchen—instead of getting the sugar in the sugar barrel, she got into the salt barrel. Dan: Yeah, yeah. Dr. Sargent: They got the salt—it wouldn't have happened if they had helped me out but they wouldn't. Dan: Yeah, yeah. Dr. Sargent: Everywhere you turn you have to deal with (tarb) Dan: Umhm. Dr. Sargent: And sometimes if you get the cooperation of the community, you can get along very nicely. Dan: Yeah, yeah. Dr. Sargent: Ah Tom Corcoran, in Syracuse, was one of the nicest men I ever knew and he never turned me down on anything I wanted to do and when I wanted to stop the sale of New York dressed poultry ah I told him among other things I said, "These poultry people are putting water into the breasts of turkeys and freezing it so they'd weigh more but they aren't too careful and are infecting the turkeys and people who cook them take care of them—now I want to stop salmonella infection I've got to stop that too. Well he hardly believed me he told me afterwards he was taking his daughter up to Rochester to a party. Her boyfriend was with them—he was telling him this as a joke cause that's no joke, "That's my job, why I inject turkeys with it.” So Tom helped me in every way to bring this end about. It was very interesting but we did air pollution control. First we started out we hired a young lad with a tractor to mow all of the vacant lots in town—we asked to mow them all down. We mowed so to get rid of the ragweed and then we had the ah physician in town to cooperate with us to do pollen counts—published everything in the papers and ah I think our best bet was the centering our problems right in the central part of the city the 10 census tracts and our nurses concentrated their efforts there. When I went there, a nurse visited every home where there was a newborn baby, regardless of whether they got a million dollars or no money—so we stopped that. We had them visit people in 10 census tracts then we sent postcards to other people saying if you want the nurse, all you have to do is let us know. But it let the nurses concentrate their work in the 10 census tracts where our problems were and ah it had its effect very definitely and very interesting. Dan: How about the mortality rate as far as the infants were concerned—did that go down? Dr. Sargent: Yes it went down and then wasn't awfully high but it was higher we wanted. It’s always too high. Dan: Yeah, that’s true. Dr. Sargent: But the thing that concerned us the most in Syracuse ah was the sloppy way the inspectors were operating and the tuberculosis control program wasn't wanted at all and this salmonella infection thing in poultry gave us a lot of things to—in other words, in my field of work, there are plenty of problems to look for but sometimes it's difficult to get the authority to handle it. Dan: What year did you retire Doctor? Dr. Sargent: ‘63. Dan: ‘63 so outside of the ah few years you were in private practice, all your life has been devoted to public health service. Dr. Sargent: That’s right. Dan: And in your private practice days, I suppose you made house calls. Dr. Sargent: Uh absolutely—I was the local health officer. Dan: (Laughter) So what would you say would be the difference in the practice of medicine today as compared to when you first started out? Dr. Sargent: Please—don't. Dan: Please don't get you started, huh? (laughter) It's the age of specialization. Dr. Sargent: Well I could show you some—I've kept information every few days at Johns Hopkins and University of Vermont and so forth—publications and the older men I think are pleading, pleading so as to teach medicine. Pleading with them. This one fellow graduated at same time I did at Johns Hopkins—he had a letter in recent publications says, ''Why can't you go back to teaching medicine?" Dan: Yeah—wasn't it true though in your day too that you had your own pharmacy—no such thing as drugstores? Dr. Sargent: Well there was drug stores. Dan: There weren't too many of them though. Dr. Sargent: We dispensed a lot of medicine. Dan: Dispensed a lot of it yourself. Dr. Sargent: And we didn't have—I have a nephew who is the Vice President of (inaudible) Drug Company. They started, they were American boys and they went to London because they were the first ones to put powders in paper and wrap them up but these boys put them in custom made pills and they went to London to do that and were very successful so they came over here and started a branch station New York Burroughs Co. Well he went to work for them when he was a young pharmacist just out of Temple—he's now Vice President. His job is to fly to Switzerland where all this monkey business comes from through drugs—I don't have the faintest what it is today, I'm taking drugs I haven't the faintest idea what the devil they are—I don't think the Doctor knows either. But ah when there's something new they think is startling comes out. He thinks company policy goes over to Switzerland and talk and see if he thinks it's any good but I guess he's a pretty good pharmacist because he goes over and he twists an arm to find out really ‘cause my job depends on what I tell my people. Dan: Yeah. Dr. Sargent: So if he thinks it's good then he goes to London, where the headquarters really are for his offer and he gets their approval to go on with it. Then he flies to Washington to get approval down there to OK to make it—then he has to fly to his home office here and tell everything is OK to go ahead and make the pills. But ah he tells me—I asked him one day I said, "Why can't you do something so the Doctors know what they're giving their medicine—more about it," said, ''Why we spend a million dollars a year putting into every package of tablets we send out just exactly how we spend our money and how it comes out." Dan: You know I think the public today are getting so confused that every day it comes out in the paper that no matter what you're eating, soft drinks or anything else, it's causing cancer. Now I've got sugar myself and I 'm not supposed to eat sugar but I'm substituting saccharin—now they come out and say saccharin is going to cause cancer so what am I supposed to do—crawl in and cover up? (laughter). Dr. Sargent: Well this cancer thing is ah humm. Dan: Now what medical school did you go to Doctor? Dr. Sargent: University of Vermont. Dan: University of Vermont Medical School and the University of Vermont. Dr. Sargent: For pre-medical work. Dan: Uhhuh and how old are you now Doctor? Dr. Sargent: I was born in 1893 Dan: 1893. Dr. Sargent: 85 years old last January. Dan: And how many children do you have? Dr. Sargent: Two. Dan: Two—boy and a girl and the boy is up in Vermont. Dr. Sargent: No the boy is in Watertown—he and his wife have quite a busy ceramics business. Dan: I see. Dr. Sargent: And the girl lives in Fairport and teaches in East High School in Rochester. Dan: I see. Dr. Sargent: She's married and has three daughters and ah she has—I've asked her to quit many times. She has a class, I think they're idiots—they're assigned to her by the Courts—they can't get along in school or anything else and they kick them out of school so the court makes them go to our daughter's school. Well she's been hit in the face by them, she’s had her foot broken by stomping on her feet. Dan: My God. Dr. Sargent: But she—I think she enjoys it because she gets hold of these—most, a lot of them are colored and she says she had one big bruiser the other day, I think 18 or 19 years old and ah he threatened to haul off and paste her—if he did he might have killed her but ah she likes it because she thinks that's worthwhile. All of them can't read a thing as high as 18, 19 years old—that's about the limit. So whatever she does is clear gain and she has to visit their homes and ah she thoroughly enjoys her work—she's going to retire in June. Dan: That is good—so you never got the farm up in Vermont with the apple orchard? Dr. Sargent: No, no so sold it—no we sold it ah my wife, my son's wife came from Syracuse and she got kind of homesick up there in the country—she lived there 16 years. She wanted to go back to Syracuse so they left for Syracuse and I sold the farm but ah it got to be a very productive farm—sold 20,000 boxes of apples a year. Dan: Gee. Dr. Sargent: And they—the man we sold it to told me 1st summer, told me, "I was offered twice what I paid for it." Dan: Uh huh. Dr. Sargent: And ah it's 150 acres and said for 70 acres he was offered $100,000 no buildings, but it is a very good productive orchard. But the kids, my wife didn't want to stay there and I'm too old to handle it. Dan: Yeah. Dr. Sargent: Sold it. Dan: Have you received any awards in your work through the years Doctor? Dr. Sargent: Yes, I've got one from Syracuse, honorary, ah fraternity from Syracuse School of Medicine, Maxwell School in Citizenship and I'm an honorary come out and I’ll show you (goes out on side porch and shows Dan diplomas) Dan: Is there anything else you'd like to tell me? Dr. Sargent: If you shut that off, I'll tell you. (meaning tape recorder) Dan: Ah well for the record I'll shut it off, sure but I mean is there anything else that you can think of as far as your career is concerned before I shut it off? Dr. Sargent: Yes I had some wonderful opportunities. In the State of Oregon, when I was doing syphilis control work in Rockwell County. State Health Commission asked me to go to New York City at the annual meeting for the entire country and sell our program, with our nurses and all—so what we were doing. Twenty-three States asked for our records and so forth and the State of Oregon asked me to come there. They said they'd give me a month’s salary—they'd pay all my expenses and so forth if I'd come up and set up a program there. They wouldn't let me go because I was—had nobody to replace me and ah they called Remington Rand—the stinkers patented my records and one day six or eight months afterwards, a young lad came into my office—spread out some records looked very familiar to me and he says, "Of course you can use these all you want to," says, "I am using it," says, "You can't let anybody else use it—they're ours—they're patented." They patented my own records. Dan: (Laughter) My God. Well would you like me to play this back for you Doctor? Dr. Sargent: No. Dan: No. Dr. Sargent: No. 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. Clealand A. Sargent Subject The topic of the resource Sargent, Clealand A. -- Interviews; Broome County (N.Y.) -- History; Richford (Vt.); University of Vermont; Orwell (Vt.); Physicians -- Interviews; Health officers -- Interviews; Syracuse (N.Y.); Food adulteration and inspection; Vaccination Description An account of the resource Dr. Clealand A. Sargent speaks about his upbringing in Richford, Vermont, premedical and medical education at the University of Vermont, and his private practice in Orwell, Vermont and why he had to give it up. He discusses entering the public health field, relating his experiences with different diseases and control programs in states in which he was a health officer. He also describes taking advanced courses at Johns Hopkins Medical School and teaching classes at various New York universities, and notes the differences in medical practices from the start of his career to the current day. He discusses his position and experiences as the Health Commissioner in Syracuse, NY. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource This audio file and digital image may only be used for educational purposes. Please cite as: Broome County Oral History Project, Special Collections, Binghamton University Libraries, Binghamton University, State University of New York. For usage beyond fair use please contact the Binghamton University Libraries Special Collections for more information. Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/mp3 Language A language of the resource English Type The nature or genre of the resource Sound Identifier An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context Recording 52A ; Recording 52B Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Sargent, Clealand A. ; O'Neil, Dan Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1978-04-26 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2016-03-27 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. Broome County Oral History Project Extent The size or duration of the resource. 33:49 Minutes ; 17:02 Minutes https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/2ea57eb59a0c65487ac17f3707f6b54c.jpg 9ce45aed36c190df1145e2e5bdcf2dd1 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/e81b37090534585d8e5002bfc39bfef0.mp3 18e428025eefb1ccd9f42b9aaea9b268 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. <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 2010-06-12 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Daniel Bell, 1919-2011 Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Daniel Bell (1919 - 2011) was an American sociologist, writer, editor, and academic, best known for his contributions to the study of post-industrialism. He received his Bachelor's degree at City College of New York and his Ph.D. at Columbia University. Bell became a professor of Sociology at Harvard University, where he remained until 1990."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":15105,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial","16":10}">Daniel Bell (1919 - 2011) was an American sociologist, writer, editor, and academic, best known for his contributions to the study of post-industrialism. He received his Bachelor's degree at City College of New York and his Ph.D. at Columbia University. Bell became a professor of Sociology at Harvard University, where he remained until 1990. Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 1 Microcassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"The End of Ideology; Baby boom generation; Karl Marx; Anti-War Movement; Sociology; Non-Violent Protest; Wounded Knee Massacre; American Indian Movement; Arguing the World; The Pentagon Papers"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":2,"4":{"1":2,"2":14281427}}">The End of Ideology; Baby boom generation; Karl Marx; Anti-War Movement; Sociology; Non-Violent Protest; Wounded Knee Massacre; American Indian Movement; Arguing the World; The Pentagon Papers Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 90:13 Subject LCSH Sociologists; Authors; Editors; College teachers; Bell, Daniel, 1919-2011--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: Daniel Bell Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 12 June 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:01): All right. I will continue to look at it too, to make sure it is not... Yeah. As a former journalist, some of these I am going to read and then I am just going to prompt you to. As a former journalist and great professor at several prestigious universities, what would you say about the students of the boomer generation? Actually, the students you had in the classroom for many years, those were the students that were born, and propped, and going to college between 1964 until 1981 because the boomer generation is defined as those that were born between 1946 and (19)64. Do you feel positive about that generation as a sociologist and as a person who experienced them in the classroom? Do you feel negative qualities starting? Did they stand out in comparison to your students post boomer, those that were in college in the mid to late (19)80s and beyond? And maybe those before? Any thoughts you have on students from that generation? DB (00:01:11): I think the question is too broad. There is a range of students in every generation. And there is a difference to those who come to me as a teacher and those who simply stay away. So, it is difficult for me to talk about a generation. SM (00:01:42): How about instead of talking about the generation as a whole, how about the students that you experienced? The ones that came to you, the ones that sought your advice, counsel, or you were kind of a mentor to, and they were your mentees? Did you find them very inquisitive? Were they fairly well-read? DB (00:02:21): Excuse me. When you think about particular students rather than generation or range of students... And when I think of a particular set of students, they were all extremely bright, very inquisitive, and somebody eager to challenge me, which I like very much. There is no fun or excitement in simply teaching students when there is an attitude to them, but I like students with whom I can argue with and who can argue with me. And sometimes they argue from the left, sometimes from the right. It varies with the class. And the other thing is that I have always liked teaching with a colleague. At Columbia, I taught several seminars with Lionel Trilling on literature and society. At Harvard, I have taught several seminars with Hilary Putnam, who was a philosopher. SM (00:03:48): Yes-yes. DB (00:03:53): And in one sense, we argued well with one another, as well as with the students. So that there was not any sense that we're setting forth knowledge on high. We were interested in what sort of problems when raising. What we have always started to do is to make distinctions, which override some of the clichés. For example, when I was teaching with Hilary Putnam, we would say that some issues are constitutive and some are intrinsic. People often confuse it too. Sex, for example, is intrinsic because it is based on hormones. Whereas, gender is constructed. It is based on cultural norms and such. And when people talk about sex and gender without making those distinctions, they are confusing people. So, our effort has always been to try to cut through many of the clichés of any of the arbitrary statements, to try to really sort out the actual differences. Sometimes, for example, issues are reductive, meaning that they go from psychology, to biology, to chemistry. Sometimes they are what we call emergent. Maybe they are expanding what they tried to cover. We used to say, for example, what is the most important prefix in the English language? And the answer would be, most important prefix is re. Which you sometimes rearrange. So that you are always reorganizing what you are doing. And therefore, you are making distinctions, which allow people to sort out what is it you are trying to do. SM (00:06:09): What is interesting, just looking at your background and you talk about how important Sydney Hook was. You did not actually have him as a teacher, but he was like, you saw him and what kind of teacher he was with his students, and when he taught in college. And one of the things about the boomers, oftentimes they will say is that the teachers were available to them. We could talk to our teachers, we could talk to our professors. Our professors really encouraged us to go out and listen to people, and different points of view, and had different experience in colleges. And if we were not pushed, maybe we would not have gone and had them. So, there was a closeness. There seemed to be a closeness during the time that the boomers were in college. Closer ties with their faculty members. And again, you liked the students had challenged that. Again, you cannot talk about an entire generation. But the experiences from that period, from say (19)64 to the beginning of when Ronald Reagan became president, that was the time when boomers were in college. And there seems to be not that closeness anymore on college campuses like there was in the past. DB (00:07:27): Depends upon the school. A student from Berkeley, I would say, "Who was your teaching in college?" He said, "Oh, I do not know?" He took all elective courses. So, there would be several hundred students in a course. So, I said, "What is the point of taking such a course?" "Well, we had to." SM (00:07:49): Yes. DB (00:07:49): I think these large elective courses are nonsense because you might as well simply have a recording. And so we play it. It is where there is a possibility of being able to interact with students in seminars and such. And one thing about Sydney Hook as a teacher, as one learned, he was always willing to take opposite points of view just to be able to challenge a student. Was not necessarily his point of view per se, but seemingly he would take an opposite point of view. One of my best students, for example, always acknowledged that fact. Was a man, David Ignatius. I do not know if you know the name? SM (00:08:45): That name does ring a bell. Yes. DB (00:08:46): Well, David Ignatius is a columnist in the Washington Post. SM (00:08:49): Okay. DB (00:08:50): And he was the editor for a while in Paris of the Tribune, owned by the Times. And he would always say, "What I appreciate most about you at seminars, is you made me change my mind. Not that you want to per se, but I was interested in the problem and you began challenging me on this to define it, to organize it. Why are you interested, etc." And he says, "Finally, I changed my mind." He has written about that. He has written several columns about that. SM (00:09:27): He was a student here. He is a boomer probably too, probably during that timeframe. Again, a teacher is very important in the development of student. We always say at orientation and for years, it is very important to find that teacher or a few teachers that will be there for you, you can talk to for advice and counsel. And not only on courses you take, but certainly if any issues come up. Sydney Hook seems to be that the type of person. I remember, I have some quotes in there, I put them in the email that I sent you. I have a question on Sydney Hook toward the end of my... But that is a very interesting point of view that students need to hear the other side, and try to wonder and understand the other side. Do you see that was happening back then in colleges, that a lot of teachers wanted people to hear both sides? Some people today say that it is not the same on college campuses. DB (00:10:39): Again, I cannot generalize on that. I find any generalization rather awkward because the thing I constantly deal with students is to say, you have to make relevant distinctions. What distinctions are you making? So you know what belongs there and what belongs there. And therefore, if you know what distinctions you are making or why you are making them, then you can begin to decide what is relevant, what is not relevant. And so that... SM (00:11:24): You are the author of so many classic books, including the End of Ideology. In just a few words, and it is a broad question again, but what was the main theme of the book? It did look at the (19)50s, when boomers were in elementary school. So, when you are talking about that, the book came out in (19)61, I believe. (19)60, (19)61 and boomers were just going into junior high school at the time. So, you are basically writing about the (19)50s and the late forties. And the change that is happening in our society to the service economy. And could you in your own words, say why you wrote the book, why you felt it was important to write it, and the basic theme? DB (00:12:18): Well, I think the title sums it up. Namely, that ideologies have been fabricated or fixed, instead of usages of concepts. And therefore, the subtopic of the book, if I am not mistaken, is on the exhaustion of ideas in the 1950s. SM (00:12:40): Yes. Yep. DB (00:12:43): So that in one sense, the main target was Marxism used as an ideology. Not the law of Marxism was that, and we were wrong. But those who use Marxism as an ideology, in a sense, would be the target of the book. SM (00:13:03): It's interesting because during the 1960s, as you remember, many of the... Particularly after 1965, (19)66, (19)67 and it was very evident on Columbia's campus in (19)68 with Mark Rudd, that a lot of the students were reading that kind of book. They were reading Miles. Somebody told me people only carried Miles's book just to impress people. They had not really read it. But in terms of, I interviewed Mark Rudd, and Mark Rudd said, "Well, Marx was very important. Many members of the new left were reading that." That way of [inaudible] was very important. Revolutionaries were very important. So, the ending of what you were saying was going on the (19)50s, some of the people in the new left, student leaders of the anti-war movement, were bringing those ideas back. Any thoughts on that? DB (00:14:00): Well, in (19)68, add along and count with Mark Rudd because we have been supporting David Truman with the stipulation that they should not call on the police. Because the police would simply go in and break heads. And I was saying to Mark Rudd, what you are doing is trying to play Truman's game. It came out later, as Mark Rudd himself said, one of the issues was the question of the gymnasium on the Harlem side. And he had never been there. He did not know anything about it. He was using these things simply as tools, props. And that was the main thing I disliked about him. That you were not really arguing a problem. You were not really saying, I believe this. I believe that. But you were using them as a tool. And he was using ideology as a tool because he had a language to impress people, but he never understood what the language itself was. And I would say to him at one point, "Who's Bruno Bauer?" He said, "I do not know." I said, "But you're talking about Marx and not know Bruno Bauer? That Bruno Bauer is one of the people that Marx talks about in the Communist manifesto and one of the chief people between Feuerbach and himself. Do you know who Feuerbach was?" "No, who was it?" And so, there was a complete ignorance there of actualities of ideas. SM (00:16:02): Did you change your opinion of him at all over the years as he's... DB (00:16:07): I have no sense of what he was or what he became. The person who I thought most had been in the new left for a while was Paul Berman. SM (00:16:17): Oh, Paul Berman. Yeah. He wrote a book on Vietnam, I remember. DB (00:16:20): Yeah. He has written several books. He has written one book now recently on Islam and on in the Ideology of Islam. But Paul Berman was a young man who had got to think through, he was a good friend one time of Rudd. But after (19)68, he began moving towards the amicus because they were opposing ideas with which he was unfamiliar and he had to encounter. So I think that Paul Berman was the best person to come out of that movement. And Rudd, probably the worst. SM (00:16:55): Are there any people within that movement, because Mark was just one person, but when you think of the anti-war movement, several people come to mind that were... Tom Hayden or Rennie Davis, David Harris. Of course, Dave Dellinger, William Kunstler, the lawyer. Abbie Hoffman, Jerry Rubin. A lot of different... In fact, Rubin was over at Berkeley for a while and Abbie Hoffman seems to be everywhere. Is there anything in any of those people that you admire? Because they are at the cap, the top of the cap, the top of the pyramid in terms of the names of that era. DB (00:17:50): Well, Hayden had been in the University of Michigan and he came to see me. And clearly in his own mind he was saying, have to choose between C. Wright Mills and Daniel Bell. And he chose C. Wright Mills. Recently, there is a book which has come out by Ki Ochs and Arthur Filleg on Gerth and Mills, which is a devastating book. Reputation and Scholarship, how Mills manipulated Gerth and tried to get credit for the work on Max Weber. But they never knew that. And I have in my book collection of essays are the, which I think one of my favorite books is the... It is a book of essays dealing with technology, and religion, and such. And there is an essay there called From Vulgar Marxism to Vulgar Sociology. And mostly about Mills. And there he was thrashing away with these large scale generalizations and you never knew... Well, how things are going right now. There is a power elite. So, there is no change in the power elite from the beginning of the republic to the end. And he said, but you're talking about power, not about politics, which is the distinctions between people and such. No, I had no respect for Rudd because he wanted to go out and swing at people and have them swing at him. Because he thought, "I am going to be a tough guy and we will get into a fight." Well, you want to get into a fight, get into a fight. But that is not a way of making distinctions or understanding issues. SM (00:19:50): I sense that when you are saying these things and you make very relevant points, and that is knowledge is power. And we say this to students all the time, that if you are going to understand your opponent, you need to read about what the opponent stands for. Do not just attack them based on emotion, but have knowledge with power. Do you think that when you look at the movements that came about after the anti-war movement... The civil rights movement was already taking place, obviously, and it was a role model for the other movements that followed. But the anti-war movement itself... Point I was trying to make here. I am trying to get it right. I lost my train of thought here. The anti-war. Yeah. What were your thoughts on the anti-war movement itself and the people that participated in it? Do you think they were genuine? I know you cannot, again, because you cannot generalize, but when you look at the anti-war movement, you see different segments. You see the religious segment, which was the Catholic. Daniel and Philip Berrigan, the anti-nuclear group. Then you had the students. And then you had people like Benjamin Spock, the doctor. And you had these people coming from all different angles and all different walks of life, and violence was something they all opposed until the Weatherman, the Black Panthers, groups like that came around. Did you admire at least some segments of the anti-war movement, these other movements before they were- DB (00:21:41): I admired most of them because I thought it was genuine. I started out in some sense supporting the government and then turning against it. A group of us wrote a long letter to Lyndon Johnson, as we had contact with a lawyer who worked for Johnson. And he encouraged us the write to Johnson, and he would get Johnson to write a reply, which he did. But we were saying that it is the wrong war, so to speak. Sorry, I am being carried out in the wrong way quite often. So that the man, for example, who had been the senator and now became the head of the new school, had- SM (00:22:39): Kerry. Yeah. DB (00:22:43): ... Sent me to kill people. I knew a bit about the Vietnam War, in a personal sense. My son-in-law was in a Coast Guard in Ensign, and he was patrolling the boats. He was patrolling the rivers. And he would write letters to me or he would come home and talk. DB (00:23:03): ... and he would write letters to me or he would come home and talk. He would say, "We are doing it all wrong." So, I had great respect for many of the people there because their feelings were quite sincere. But no respect for people like Mark Rudd who are manipulative, who are using this as a manipulative issue. There is a man who is been a very good friend of mine, Max Lerner, and he wrote a book with a dreadful title called Ideas Are Weapons. Well, ideas are not weapons, ideas are ideas and you debate ideas. But to say, "Ideas are weapons," is to denigrate ideas and to devalue them. I told Max... he is a wonderful writer, very good columnist for New York Post- SM (00:24:01): Is he? DB (00:24:02): ... taught at Brandeis. I said, "Ideas are not weapons. It is the wrong way to think about it. If they are weapons, you should be using it to smash people, rather than to debate with people." But he thought, and maybe he was right in one sense, if you have a good title, you keep it. SM (00:24:29): That is what book publishers like sometimes titles that would get you to sell your book. Obviously, going beyond Mark Rudd, there was certainly Bernadine Dohrn, another person from the Weathermen, and Bill Ayers who was in the news a lot because he was in front of Bill Clinton. Just your thoughts, when you think about... and even as a historian or as a sociologist teaching classes, my golly, you look at the Civil Rights Movement, you look at the anti-war movement, you look at non-violent protests, you look at the Gandhi philosophy of non-violence. Then all of a sudden in the late (19)60s, because the anti-war movement is getting frustrated, you see a segment trying to turn to violence through the Weathermen. There is always the question, people do not understand whether the Black Panthers were violent or not. But there is the scene of Stokely Carmichael challenging Dr. King, basically telling him, "Your time has passed. Non-violent protest does not work." We had the experience of the students at Cornell walking around with guns, although I do not think they had any intention of using them, they just wanted to use them as a symbol. Then in the American Indian movement, you had Wounded Knee where you went from Attica in 1969 to Wounded Knee in 1973, which was about violence. Seems like violence never wins, does it? As a sociologist, I think you have even said some things about violence is just totally bad. I mean, it only brings enemies rather than supporters. DB (00:26:09): Nonviolence can work only in a society which respects people's ideas. Obviously, nonviolence cannot work in Nazi Germany. They can just go in and smash you. But nonviolence works when people respect ideas and say, "Well, if you're willing to take the stand and be nonviolent, well, then I will respect that." I think that in this country, nonviolent worked. Nazi Germany, it would not. In the Soviet Union, it would not. SM (00:26:50): They would be dead if they did that. DB (00:27:10): The thing which I just dislike most the is that the New Left was taking to the university as the focus of their attacks. Any great university and for a while, Columbia was a great university, respects different points of view. And you cannot destroy a university. But someone like Mark Rudd was ready to destroy the university. Not everyone in that Weatherman group, some of have been students of mine and I knew them very well. They would say to me later on, "You know, you made as read a book, which really shook us up and we would argue about it." I would say, "Yes, I know." This was Dostoyevsky's book, The Demons. Had different titles, but the real title was The Possessed. Well, then The Demons, because it is about his group, followers of Akunin, who created violence. I do not know if you know the book? SM (00:28:29): No, I do not. I- DB (00:28:32): Well, it is one of the great books of its kind. New translation, it is called The Demons. It's one of Dostoyevsky's great books along with Crime and Punishment and Brothers Karamazov. Because it is about a revolutionary group and what happens in the revolutionary group. And they identify very strongly with this and it shook them up. SM (00:29:06): You talk about Marco, what did you think of Mario Savio and Bettina Aptheker, and I think Goldberg led that group that were the student leaders of... Ian Rossman... the student leaders of the student protest movement at Berkeley, the Free Speech Movement. Because they said it was all about ideas, the university should be about ideas, not about corporate takeover of the university. In the very same time, Clark Kerr, then the president, talked about the knowledge factory. Of course, that upsets students because many of the students of that era did not want to be their mom and dad who just never questioned authority, they just put a hat on, like an IBM mentality hat. DB (00:29:55): I came out to Berkeley, I met with [inaudible], (19)64, (19)65 because Clark Kerr wanted me to come the head of the Institute on Labor Relations. So he invited me to come out to Berkeley, talk with him about it, I did. Of course now I was crossing the campus with Marty Lipset. [inaudible]. SM (00:30:18): Oh, yes-yes. DB (00:30:20): A man came running across the campus, said, "Hey, Lipset. We are off of the July Days, we're going on to October." I said, "Who is that?" He said, "Oh, it is that crazy nut, Mario Savio." They had an image of the Russian Revolution. The July Days were the ones when after all, they tried to turn against Kerensky. SM (00:30:40): So, the Free Speech Movement was a- DB (00:30:57): I do not know if you have seen the film Arguing the World? SM (00:30:59): No. Well, maybe I have. But was that a documentary? DB (00:31:05): Well, in a way, yes. I strongly urge you to see the film. It's about four of us from City College and our past live [inaudible]. It is about Irving Howe, Irving Kristol, Nathan Glazer, and myself- SM (00:31:27): Kristol? DB (00:31:27): ... coming out of City College and moving out into the larger society. SM (00:31:31): And that was Seymour Lipset too, right? DB (00:31:35): Lipset was not in this one. SM (00:31:35): So, it was Howe... DB (00:31:37): Howe, Kristol, Glazer, and myself. SM (00:31:39): Okay. DB (00:31:40): There is a text of that that had been put up by the University of Chicago Press, edited by Joseph Dorman who did the film. So you may want to get a copy of the book called Arguing the World. This gives you the debate between the four of us and our friends from City College starting out in (19)38, (19)39 and moving up to the 1970s. Well, it is published by University of Chicago Press, the text of it, and the film itself is very strong in many ways. You can probably call PBS. SM (00:32:30): I can get. You can get anything on the computer if you need access to something. I- DB (00:32:40): The film called Arguing the World and directed by Joseph Dorman, D-O-R-M-A-N. I said, then there's a text of it elaborated, probably find the University of Chicago Press. I would say it would be a rather crucial book for you. SM (00:32:57): I may have... I have so many books. I am amazed that... In fact, I have just been here and I have bought a few books up at Harvard Square. I mean, they have great used bookstores around here. But obviously the Mario Savio and the group at Berkeley in (19)64, (19)65 were not the same as the SDSers and the ones we were talking about at Columbia. But they were the precursors, they were the forerunners for all the movements that followed. They just celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Free Speech Movement out there just recently, too. Do you have any high regard for them in terms of the... Because there is quite a few names, the names, because there is like 20 of them that were student leaders. They have gone on in all different directions, some very successful in life. Mario Savio did not live very long. He's passed on. He was not very well for many, many years. There is a new book out on him, too, by Dr. Cohen, I think it is out of NYU. DB (00:34:07): I do not already know the Berkeley people at all. However, there is a long section on Berkeley in this film because of the fact that Glazer was teaching there. There is a woman who comes out attacking Glazer, and it turns out Sam become a member of the city council. SM (00:34:30): Oh my gosh. DB (00:34:34): Excuse me. SM (00:34:34): Yep. I have a couple quotes here that I want you to respond to from your book, The End of Ideology. Here is one quote... Oh, there's three of them and you can respond as a group. Quote number one: "We have seen the exhaustion of the 19th century ideologies of Marxism as intellectual movements that explain the truth." Well, you have already even referenced to that a little bit. Number two: "Many intellectuals have begun to fear the masses or any form of social action." I find that because when you look at the masses and social action, that is a lot of what the (19)60s was about. Then the third one, and I love this one and I hope I can somehow remember this forever. It was a quote, I think it came either you or [inaudible], "The difference between capitalism and communism: capitalism is system where man exploits a man and communism is vice versa." Now I hope I can remember that because that is a classic. When I read that, I said, "That is something, Steve, you ought to remember." But I wanted your thoughts here because when you look about the masses, whether the elite phrase of the masses or whatever, when you think of the Vietnam War and you think of the movements, they were about masses of people. The Montgomery Boycott with was about a mass of African Americans who said that, "We're not going to ride the buses." The 1963 March on Washington was a mass gathering where Dr. King gave his famous speech. You had the Black Panthers, you had these other groups, the Young Lords, the American Indian Movement, the National Organization for Women, the anti-war movement, the Earth Day group, the gay lesbian groups from Stonewall, and of course, the Black Panthers. These were all masses. These are masses of people. So, if what you are saying here is that many intellectuals have begun to fear the masses or any form of social action. How do you respond to that? Because that is what the (19)60s are really all about, and early (19)70s. DB (00:36:52): Well, different periods of time having the keyword. Nobody, today uses the word masses. At one time you had a magazine called The New Masses, which was the communist magazine, edited by Mike Gold and Joseph Freeman. Ortega y Gasset had a book about the masses, the famous Spanish [inaudible]. It is a word which has now gone out of relevance, partly because it never had a defined meaning, who were the masses. In some ways, Ortega's book, and he was after one of the most important philosophers of the (19)20s and such, were the scientists, which was is strange. But the word masses has gone out of fashion. Today you have race, gender, and equality. If you look through a period of the (19)50s and (19)60s, I do not think you will ever find the word gender. It was not a term that was used then. But now, gender became an important word to define the women's movement. You did not have a woman's movement then. Most of the movements in the (19)50s and (19)60s were led by men and you had very few women. In fact, the women were complaining they had to do the dirty work, cleaning up and such. Today, gender became a key word. The question is always when and where are keywords used and why. As I say, gender becomes important because it symbolizes the nature of the women's movement and women's rights. Nobody in that period of time, let us say of Mark Rudd, would ever think of gender. It was not within the framework they are thinking. So, masses disappears. And one of my books has a long essay on nature of masses, maybe in The End of Ideology or some other books. SM (00:39:12): This is another very important quote that... I have a lot of your quotes here, but... "A society is most vigorous..." This is very important, and I wish people would read this today. We maybe could get along better. "A society is most vigorous and appealing when both partisans and critics are legitimate voices in the permanent dialogue that is the testing of ideas and experiences. One can be a critic of one's country without being the enemy of its promises." That is prophetic. In my view, if the people that were either leading the country during the Vietnam War, the divisions over civil rights, if they sat down and discussed these two quotes and just the importance of opposing points of view... They are important in your eyes, are not they? DB (00:40:05): I would say this, that certain statements are derivative of their time and relevant to their time and certain statements transcend that. The one you have given me now, I would say transcends the nature of time. It is a permanent situation in any society where there are differences of opinion. I cannot think of any society, unless it is a totalitarian society, where you do not have differences of opinion. So, if you have differences of opinion, you have to respect the differences. I think one of the important things about this society is that it goes back in the very beginning of society, one of the things I used to say, I am not sure I could pinpoint where I said it exactly, is that until World War II, we never had a state in this country, we had government. You had states in Europe. Because these were unitary elements, were pulled alongside together. We only began to have a state where we got involved in war where you had to pull a pieces of society together. You had a government, and a government is different between a government and the state. Hegel used the word state, but not government, you see? I do not think if you ever go back and look at the writings of John Quincy Adams or Thomas Jefferson, they ever used the word state. They never thought of the United States as a state, even though the various states, the 13 states that made up a union. But it was not a state in Hegelian sense of unitary focus. We had a government, not a state. We began to have a state during World War II when we had to pull the society together and organize an army. We never had much of a standing army. A state has a large standing army. We never had a large standing army until World War II. Even afterwards, we still never had a large standing army. SM (00:42:30): Then, of course, we fought the Civil War and constantly, it was all about the union. It was the union, South and North. But we preserved the union. DB (00:42:40): It was a war between states. SM (00:42:47): Yes. DB (00:42:48): There was not gestalt, you see? SM (00:42:55): Yeah. Again, you had mentioned Mr. Berman, but are there any other people that you truly respected. We are talking about here, about, one can be a critic of one's country without being the enemy, I think there were many people did not understand that in the (19)60s and early (19)70s. Because you had even Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon, two different Presidents, but very distrustful, opposing points of view of their policies. DB (00:43:24): But people forget that are not domestic issues, they are both fairly alike. Then Johnson built The Great Society, which was Medicare and extensive social security. Nixon tried to do that with Pat Moynihan as his advisor. But both got trapped by foreign policy. Therefore, the domestic agenda was pretty much eclipsed or simply laid low. But we forget that there is a domestic agenda in both cases, even with Nixon. Of course, with Pat Moynihan there as Nixon's advisor, there was an emphasis on the family and strengthening the family. I mean, the whole point of Pat Moynihan advice of Nixon is, one of the problems is that the Blacks in this country never had much of a family. They had been slaves or they dispersed. Therefore... I was on six to eight government commissions. The most important one was on technology and automation. Robert Robert Stovall and I directed most of the reports, one called Technology and American Economy. People do not know, do not remember or do not think about it, that one most important situation in increasing productivity in this country, particularly in late 1930s, 1940s, which was chemical fertilizers. Chemical fertilizer increased the productivity on the land. Before World War II, one of the bad, major social issues in this country was sharecroppers. People did not even know the word sharecropper, but these were people like the Blacks who lived on the land and with the chemical fertilizers, they were not needed. So they moved up North, they went to Watts in Los Angeles or to Harlem or Chicago. People say, "Look at all those Blacks that are unemployed." Well, they were never employed. There were sharecroppers on the land. Chemical fertilizers increased productivity enormously and pushed the Blacks off the land and moved them up... and pushed the Blacks off to land and moved them up north. Black became an issue in the north because of this. Great people understand, I know this, you see, because the Blacks had never been there, except in Harlem, had never been there in large numbers before. But the chemical fertilizers pushed them off the land. And what also happened is that the chemical fertilizers polluted many of the lakes and rivers. SM (00:46:28): That is right. DB (00:46:29): And created a social cost, which regular people had understood, because it was not there before, but the pollution in the lakes and rivers came from the chemical fertilizers, which increased [inaudible] society. So, you have the double edge of it. SM (00:46:47): It is amazing. Of course, the Hudson River is one of those rivers that was... Now, it is getting back to normal. I think they have been trying to work on it for years. Let make sure I switch the side here. I cannot even see how far we have got to go here. Yeah, I am going to... Make sure it's working okay. All right. In your opinion, when did the (19)60s begin and when did it end? DB (00:47:26): I have never liked the idea of dating particular periods of time as if there were unitary elements. They were not. It is part of our nature of a journalistic society where you have to have a label or something. So, you talk about the (19)60s, the (19)70s, the (19)80s. So many things were happening in each of them. There were so many cross currents. So, to talk about the (19)60s, as if there is something unitary about it, it is never made much sense. So, I cannot respond to the question, because I do not understand it as a question. SM (00:48:03): That applies to all the decades. Even people when they say that the (19)80s was Reagan. There is more than Reagan then. DB (00:48:13): Well, any period of time has many cross currents, so that, it seems to me, it makes no sense we have to talk about these (19)60s, and these (19)70s, and the (19)80s. What happened between 1975 and 1980. Do you know? SM (00:48:29): Between (19)75 and (19)80? Yeah, that was the year of the disco. DB (00:48:35): I am trying to show you that, what if you were breaking the thing down? What happened between 1975 and 1980, suddenly you find yourself a little wobbly. SM (00:48:43): Yeah, I know that the Iran hostage crisis was in (19)79 and that ruined Carter. Carter had problems with gasoline and all that other stuff. I could write them down, but you got to think a little bit. DB (00:49:01): I was an advisor to Carter. There's a book which came out recently about the Carter administration and the famous malaise speech of his. And Chris [inaudible], and we were both in the White House with dinner with Mr. Carter, and I respected Carter. People forget that Carter originally was an engineer. He claims a graduate of the Naval Academy, meaning he was a peanut farmer, but he was an engineer, and he had a very good rational mind, but he was caught by the circumstances, particularly by the Iran hostage situation. SM (00:49:41): Yeah. When you think of, again, the presidents that were in charge, supposedly, when the Boomers have been in line, that includes anybody from Harry Truman to Obama, do you pin any of them as greater than the others in terms of what they have done for [inaudible]? DB (00:50:03): Depends upon what issue you are thinking about. There are many different issues and many different circumstances. After all, Lyndon Johnson is defined very largely by the Vietnam War, which is true in the sense of, this was a major concern. But at the same time, they were building the Great Society Program, which people then tend to diminish or forget, and forget the people who served him. My friend Charles Haar at Harvard Law School, was very much in charge of the Cities Program and the Metropolitan Program. And they were very important people and who were very-very good, but they were diminished by the attention to the Vietnam War. SM (00:51:06): You wrote in your book... What is the basic theme of your book, the coming of the post-industrial society? And as an added note, are you the person that really came up with that term? It was Professor Bell. We never thought of that term until Professor Bell wrote about it in his book. DB (00:51:31): Well, no term ever comes cleanly out. David Riesman used the term at one point, much earlier, but it was never picked up, never done. There was a man in France who did a book on post-industrial society. But I was talking about two different things. One was the move away from manufacturing to services. The services were not simply the McDonald's hamburger kind of thing, but research services, there is other forms of service to the economy, and the word post-industrial was simply to indicate we are going beyond that. But the more important dimension of it was the development of the theoretical knowledge and the reliance on theoretical knowledge, and that many of the things we think about, we derive with theoretical knowledge. Let me give you an example. You know what a laser is? SM (00:52:36): Mm-hmm. DB (00:52:37): What is a laser? SM (00:52:39): Well, a laser a sends a beam. It is a beam of light. DB (00:52:45): Well, how is it different from other beams of light? SM (00:52:48): How is it different from other... I would think there would be intensity that you could control. DB (00:52:54): No. SM (00:52:55): No? DB (00:52:57): The laser goes back to a paper by Einstein in 1904, 1905, that light is not just a wave, but light is a quanta, a pulse. Laser is an acronym. Do you know what the laser means? SM (00:53:10): Mm-mm. DB (00:53:12): Light amplified by simulation of the emission of radiation, L-A-S-E-R. [inaudible] Charles Townes at Columbia in 1939. It's a different way of focusing light through the emission of radiation. So, it changes the plutonium view of light as a wave. And you have to know the theoretical foundations. That is Einstein to Charles Townes. And the word laser is an acronym. Light amplified by the simulation of the emission of radiation, L-A-S E-R. SM (00:53:51): When Clark Kerr gave that famous speech about the knowledge factory, you're talking about the post-industrial society, that is an important part of it, isn't it? The university is a knowledge factory and that is what- DB (00:54:02): Well, I do not like the word factory. SM (00:54:05): He wrote that in the uses of the university. DB (00:54:07): I know, but it's not a factory. A factory is organized about particular things. The thing about knowledge is, it is very diffused. You never know where it is going to come from, where it's going to go. So, I say the paper by Einstein in 1904 is a foundation of the laser along with many other things. But it went from Einstein to Charles Townes who was then a physics professor at Columbia who created the laser. And with a laser, you can send a beam to the moon. You can also do an operation on the eye. It is the use of light in a different way by the simulation of the emission of radiation, L-A-S-E-R. SM (00:54:51): That is what you mean by the codification of theoretical knowledge. DB (00:54:55): Yes. Exactly. Exactly. SM (00:54:58): You also said something very profound too in this book. And again, I have only read a couple chapters, that the growing tension between equality and meritocracy is something a social and ethical issue of the century. Now, that is pretty prophetic as well, because there's obviously been that... The whole, Dr. King, the (19)50s and the (19)60s short equality, not only African-Americans, people of color, women's, gay and lesbian in a double thing- DB (00:55:32): Well, people do not know who it was who invented the word meritocracy and what it meant. Actually, it was a word invented by a man named Michael Young, who was an Englishman who had been, at a one point, the head of the Labor Party research department. And he used the word meritocracy. In one sense, Jefferson used the same term without calling it meritocracy, namely, opportunities of men of talent to arise rather than birth. Before that, your status in society was based upon birth. And you inherited a piece of land, you inherited if a factory, you inherited a practice as a dentist. But Jefferson said, we want to have this open to men of talent, not just birth. Michael Young, when he did the book on the meritocracy, and he used the term... first one to use the term meritocracy, however, pointed out that there was a negative sense of meritocracy. And to some extent, I have understood that. His notice of the negative sense was, you longer had excuses to be where you were. You had no meritocracy. If you were in a low position in society, you were there because you had no merit. And therefore, meritocracy kept people down as well as moving people up. So, the idea of... When I was [inaudible] phrase a just meritocracy. I have always used the phrase, a just meritocracy, never meritocracy by myself. Because meritocracy also pushes people down. You have no excuses to be where you are, because you have no merit. But Michael Young was a very stimulating person, extraordinary man. SM (00:57:38): When was he alive? Or when was his heyday, so to speak? DB (00:57:43): Well, his main contribution came after World War-War II when he wrote most of the Labor Party documents. I spent the year with Michael Young in the Center for Advanced Studies. SM (00:58:00): Oh, in Princeton? DB (00:58:01): No, in Palo Alto in 1958, (19)59. And I wrote an... a collection of Michael Young's essays published by [inaudible]. And I wrote the introduction to that. And people right now no longer know Michael Young. He became Lord Young of Darlington and there's a Young Foundation in England. SM (00:58:38): There were two books that came out in the late (19)60s that were very popular with the young people. And they kind of explained the Counter Culture, and the different kinds of consciousness that was going on, the changes that were happening. As a sociology, I do not know if you ever assigned them to your students, but what were your thoughts of the Greening of America by Charles Reich? And the second one was The Making of a Counter Culture by Theodore Roszak. Those were very major books. I will add though, that Erick Erickson also wrote several books on protests and descent around that time, and so did Kenneth Keniston. So, when you think of that period, say from (19)67 to (19)73, (19)74, those are major, major writers? DB (00:59:27): Well, the two books you mentioned are forgotten, and rightly so. They are very slim books and very thin books. They were coining phrases, not really making an argument, particularly the Reich book. Whereas Erickson and Keniston, they were more serious people, particularly Erickson, of course. There's also a man in Harvard named Murray who invented The Thematic Apperception Test. But the Greening of America, it is a phrase, it is a title. It is not a theme or an argument. And The Making of a Counter Culture, well, where is the Counter Culture now? SM (01:00:16): I know in graduate school it was required reading. We had to read it. It had different levels of consciousness. And Dr. Roszak, I guess has just retired from University of California, Hayward. And he just wrote an update to it, as people are becoming senior citizens, The Making of a Counter Culture, where are they now kind of a book. But to you, they are not major at all? DB (01:00:45): No. SM (01:00:48): As a group of 75 million Boomers, how do Boomers fit into your definition of the post-industrial society? DB (01:00:58): Well, I find that too loose a generalization. Among 75 million, there must be about 70 million different opinions. So, I cannot respond to a question so loose as that. SM (01:01:14): Do you think that, this is a question I have asked everybody though, that because there were so many divisions in America and during that timeframe because of the Vietnam War, those who supported the troops, those who were against the troops, supported the war, against the war, divisions between Black and white. I was on college campus when those divisions were intense, certainly that the other divisions that were happening in America at that time. Do you think that this has permanently affected the generation, the Civil War generation, that they will go to their graves with not coming to terms with some of the divisions that they experienced in their lives? And I preface this by saying that we asked this question to Senator Edmund Muskie when we took a group of students to Washington DC in 1995, because the students who were not alive in the (19)60s wanted to find out if he had his thoughts on what they had read in their classes, that the nation was on the verge of the second civil war, that all the things that they had seen in 1968 at the Democratic Convention, and the assassinations, and the president resigning, and riots and burnings and everything, wanted to know if that would have had a permanent effect on the generation which was their parents. DB (01:02:40): Well, again, I think of the whole statement, two set of loose terms, the verge or the verge [inaudible] the case and civil war between whom and whom? Again, these are phrases, not ideas. SM (01:02:59): But the healing though, that is really with respect to those who served in the war, the Vietnam veterans and those who protested the war, some of them may have issues as they move on. DB (01:03:15): Well, there is one woman who changed so much of this. You know who that would be? SM (01:03:22): One woman who changed... DB (01:03:24): All these perceptions. SM (01:03:28): No. DB (01:03:29): Her name is Maya Lin. SM (01:03:31): Oh, yes. Oh, yeah. The wall. DB (01:03:36): Suddenly you have a very different feeling about the war when you see all those names on the wall. When she first proposed the wall, Bill Buckley said, "This is dreadful. We do not want this modernist stuff. Why do not we have a traditional thing?" So, most people do not realize, if you go look at the wall, that next to is a man on a horse, a traditional statue, which supposed to symbolize, you see, the Vietnam War, which nobody even looks at. SM (01:04:05): You are talking about the Three Man Statue? DB (01:04:07): Hmm? SM (01:04:08): The Three Man Statue, you are talking about? DB (01:04:10): I do not remember what it is. SM (01:04:11): Yeah. DB (01:04:12): But Maya Lin's wall suddenly became the symbol, and suddenly gave a sense of appreciation of the names of these people. SM (01:04:28): You find it interesting it took the Vietnam veterans to take the lead on the monument issue, because there had been no World War II Memorial, there had been no Korean War Memorial. There really had not been a World War I Memorial. And now, there is the World War II, there's the Korean... They have kind of taken a lead in that area. DB (01:04:47): And the Roosevelt Memorial. SM (01:04:48): Yes, the Roosevelt, and now the Martin Luther King. DB (01:04:50): Quite late. SM (01:04:51): Yes. And then the MLK Memorial, which is being built right now. Jan Scruggs wrote the book To Heal a Nation. That was his book. DB (01:05:01): Who? SM (01:05:02): Jan Scruggs, the founder of the Vietnam Memorial. And the goal of his effort to get the wall built was to heal the veterans and their families, and to pay respect to those, but in some sense, to also help the nation heal from the war. And I will respond that Edmund Muskie, he did not even mention 1968 in his response. His response was, we have not healed since the Civil War and in the area of race. And then he went on to talk about that for the next 15 minutes. And then he said, and by the way, we almost lost an entire generation of Americans when 430,000 men died. The effect that this had on future generations of America, it was devastating. DB (01:06:01): I am beginning to fade. SM (01:06:03): Okay, I got, all right, maybe three more questions? DB (01:06:07): Well, go ahead. SM (01:06:11): See if I can cut this down. I guess maybe what I will do, instead of asking these specific questions, I will just mention some of the personalities of the period and just give you... Because you had strong feelings toward Mark Rudd and others. And I to usually end my interviews by as listing about 20, 25 names, people just give a quick response to them, in terms of that period. For the following people, just your thoughts on the following people mean to you. Tom Hayden? DB (01:06:55): A crooked man. Look at the film Argue in the World. There's interviews with-with Hayden there, you will see what I mean. SM (01:07:05): How about Jane Fonda? DB (01:07:08): Rather forlorn personality. SM (01:07:11): Rennie Davis. DB (01:07:14): No one will ever know that name again. SM (01:07:17): Abbie Hoffman and Jerry Rubin. DB (01:07:21): Two clowns. SM (01:07:23): Timothy Leary. DB (01:07:27): Worse than that. A man who would destroy himself. SM (01:07:36): Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers. DB (01:07:39): Decent man, was unfairly roughed up by the Nixon administration. SM (01:07:49): Eugene McCarthy and George McGovern. DB (01:07:53): Decent men, particularly McCarthy. McGovern, I support McGovern when he ran, because my colleague, Irving Kristol, supported Nixon, but both decent men, but not major figures. SM (01:08:11): How about John Kennedy and Robert Kennedy? DB (01:08:17): John Kennedy was a personal force, but never had sufficient weight of ideas. But we never had a chance to find out. Robert Kennedy, such a mixture of things. He worked for Nixon. One time was pretty much on the right and on the left. You never knew, in a sense, what the man was about. And he died too soon. SM (01:08:50): How about Richard Nixon and Spiro Agnew. DB (01:08:54): Well, Nixon was a very clever man, very shrewd man in his way. Spiro Agnew was a complete crook.... way, could describe as a complete crook. SM (01:09:04): LBJ and Hubert Humphrey. DB (01:09:08): LBJ was a very good man. Could have been a great man, but was trapped by the Vietnam War. Hubert Humphrey was a very nice man, but not an intellectual. He wanted to be an intellectual, but never was. And that was his problem. SM (01:09:28): Gerald Ford and Jimmy Carter. DB (01:09:31): Well, Gerald Ford was a decent man and he played a decent role when he was in the White House. I think Jimmy Carter was very much underrated. And his work after he left office, and going around the world and such, been very important work. SM (01:09:51): How about George Bush Number 1 and Ronald Reagan. DB (01:09:57): George Bush Number 1 was a fairly good politician, and as a political person, played out a good role. Ronald Reagan, I have never understood, really have never understood, because he is a man who responds to cue cards. But he does is very well. I have never understood the adulation for Reagan or what achievements were supposed to have been. I think what he did do, in a way, was to take the country, which felt very guilty by the Vietnam War, and got the country to put it all aside for a while. SM (01:10:45): Well, Bill Clinton and George Bush the Second. DB (01:10:50): Clinton was a very good politician, very shrewd, very smart, but never wholly consistent. George Bush the Second, to me, was a cipher, a little cipher, and in many ways a very unfortunate president. Particularly by letting Cheney do so much behind the scenes. SM (01:11:22): Of course, President Obama and Dwight Eisenhower. DB (01:11:26): Well, I think Obama has great potential. His books of wonderful books, great sense of feeling, but he has not had that much of a chance, now, to really bring it out. Eisenhower was a man who was underrated. He was very good, very shrewd, but he was shrewd enough to appear not to be shrewd. SM (01:11:52): How about Harry Truman, because he was the very first president for the movers. DB (01:11:58): I would say Truman was, again, underappreciated. He was a very good president, most importantly, because like Nixon, he knew how to choose good people around him. SM (01:12:10): Gloria Steinem, Betty Friedan, Bella Abzug, people who stood out for the Women's Movement. DB (01:12:20): Gloria Steinem was a great publicity hound, and very shrewd at that. Bella Abzug, again, she was defeated by Pat Moynihan, and eclipsed by him. SM (01:12:38): Mm-hmm. DB (01:12:41): And who was the third one you mentioned? SM (01:12:44): Oh. It was Betty Freidan, Bella Abzug, and Gloria Steinem. DB (01:12:49): Well, Betty Friedan was important because she was able to re-focus attention on the nature of the Women's Movement, and the Women's Movement's role. But, essentially, it was the ability to put forth an issue rather than anything else. Gloria Steinem always took issues. People forget that one time she worked for the CIA. SM (01:13:15): I did not know that. DB (01:13:16): Yeah. SM (01:13:16): Oh, my God. DB (01:13:17): She and Clay Felker. When the CIA was setting up movements to oppose communist fronts, she worked for the CIA at one time. And then, she married Mort Zuckerman. We could go to any lengths to see how weird this woman is. SM (01:13:37): How about Malcolm X and Dr King. DB (01:13:43): Malcolm X became important because King was killed. And his rhetoric was, for a while, very strong. But after a while people realized it was rhetoric. King had a strength of personality, but people forget, he was also plagiarist. SM (01:14:08): That is come out recently from- DB (01:14:10): Came out sometime ago. SM (01:14:12): Clayborne Carson, or... DB (01:14:13): Sometime ago. But that famous speech of his, it was ad hoc. "I have a dream." SM (01:14:23): He did use that in some of his sermons before, too. It was an ad hoc, but he had used that phrasing in some of his sermons. DB (01:14:31): No. He was very shrewd in terms of knowing when to put forth certain ideas and certain rhetoric. And he was able to take advantage of it. SM (01:14:40): During that period, you had the Big Four. And I do not think you have seen anybody since. The Big Four, which was James Farmer, Roy Wilkins, Whitney Young, and Dr King. That was a powerful portion of this. DB (01:14:51): Well, I knew Farmer quite well. He was a good man, but never had real strength behind him. Wilkins is a very, very good man. Wilkins is a real intellectual among them, in a way. Who was the fourth? SM (01:15:05): Whitney Young, and Dr King. You already mentioned [inaudible]. DB (01:15:11): Whitney Young was a good leader of NAACP, for groups for that kind, but, except for the last one, never played a national role. But Roy Wilkins, particularly in terms of Washington politics, played a much more important role. SM (01:15:28): How about Muhammad Ali and Jackie Robinson, because they were monumental people-people. DB (01:15:33): Well, I have never been a fan of boxing, so I cannot talk about Muhammad Ali. Jackie Robinson was an extremely good baseball player and deserved, in that sense, his fame. SM (01:15:52): And then, the Black Panthers. And I have to admit, because there is [inaudible]. DB (01:15:54): The Black Panthers were a dreadful movement, in which the one-time Horowitz, was-was right wing, wrote about the Black Panthers. They were dreadful people in terms of people they killed and the people they tried to support, and such. SM (01:16:20): There is- DB (01:16:20): I think the Black Panthers did more to destroy the Black movement then almost anything else. SM (01:16:26): Yeah. I will mention, though, that there are six big personalities that stand out here. And of course, it is Bobby Seal, Huey Newton, Eldridge Cleaver, Kathleen Cleaver, Etta Brown, and Stokely Carmichael. And Nate Hilliard is another one. Elaine Brown. They are big names. DB (01:16:46): Well, they are all names. Cleaver, however, as you know, went overseas, and then turned the other way. Went over to the right. SM (01:16:54): Right. DB (01:16:57): Bobby Seal. Well, one has to distinguish those people built up by the press and by the need for certain individuals to build up people like that, from their actual accomplishments. SM (01:17:12): Forget Mark Rudd, here. What did you think of Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers, because they were the weatherman? DB (01:17:18): Well, Dorhrn was a dreadful person, the way she, at one point, approved of the Manson killing. They stuck a fork in a woman. Oh, yeah. I think she is a dreadful person. SM (01:17:41): How about George Wallace? DB (01:17:44): Who? SM (01:17:44): George Wallace. DB (01:17:46): You mean from the south? SM (01:17:47): Yes. DB (01:17:47): Well- SM (01:17:49): He was in the elections there, a couple times. DB (01:17:50): He was a southern politician, and a bad one. And he was very dangerous for the country. SM (01:17:56): How about Barry Goldwater and William Buckley, these real strong conservatives. DB (01:18:00): Well, Goldwater, for his time, was a fairly good man. But then, other than the phrases that he used when he ran for President, had no real substance. Buckley was an incredibly shrewd man, and incredibly good at publicity, debate, and very effective. Had respect for Buckley. SM (01:18:35): And then, the last thing is just these terms or these events. What did Woodstock and the Summer of Love mean to you? DB (01:18:46): Again, these are media terms built up by attention by the media. And Woodstock, somebody gave a phrase. The Summer of Love, people would not even understand what it means anymore. One has to distinguish between media-built sensations and actual movements. And I do not think either Woodstock or so-called Summer of Love, the hate Asbury kind of thing- SM (01:19:13): Mm-hmm. DB (01:19:15): ... are real movements. These were media events. SM (01:19:18): How about Watergate? DB (01:19:25): Watergate was an actuality, and proved how duplicitous Nixon and his camp could be. SM (01:19:39): The other thing I mentioned was just the term, counterculture. What does counterculture mean to you, and communes? DB (01:19:45): Nothing anymore. SM (01:19:46): Communes. DB (01:19:48): Nothing anymore. SM (01:19:49): A couple who have gone on to be fairly successful. Woodward and Bernstein. They are thought to have changed the way journalism was. DB (01:19:58): Yes. I think it did change, in a way, but more so again, as a media event than actuality. And best illustration, the Times never became a Woodward and Bernstein kind of paper, became a sober-grade paper, as it should be. SM (01:20:23): How about the Vietnam Veterans against the War? DB (01:20:28): No understanding of that. SM (01:20:31): The American Indian Movement? DB (01:20:33): Again, no understanding of it. I do not even know what it is. I know what the term is supposed to say, but I do not know what it means. SM (01:20:41): The Young Lords were the Latino version of the Black Panthers. They were big in Philadelphia. DB (01:20:49): Again, I have no sense of what all that is anymore. SM (01:20:53): And the National Organization for Women, as a group? DB (01:20:56): A what? SM (01:20:57): Now. DB (01:20:58): Again, no feeling for what it means. SM (01:21:03): And the Equal Rights Amendment. That failed, but there was strong attempts for it. DB (01:21:13): What rights do you want? When you say equal rights, there is no specification of, what rights do you want? Again, one has to distinguish between a mood, a movement, and actuality, and as all these things roll together. SM (01:21:33): And the year 1968, which is a traumatic year, which included Tet. DB (01:21:40): Well, again, I do not like such terms. I do not think they are useful, at all. I think they obscure more than they help. SM (01:21:53): This might be a general question, too, but you are a scholar, you are a writer, and you have written about periods, you wrote, in the 1950s, The End of Ideology. Do you think that a person like you, 50, 60 years from now, when most of the Boomers have gone on to higher Up, let us not even talk about what they are going to say about the Boomers? What are they going to say about young people and the people that grew up after World War II? What would the legacy be of that period, that many believe is a period of disruption and change? DB (01:22:30): Well, what's interesting to me is how quickly so much of that gets obscured now by the Muslim problem. Suddenly, the Muslim problem's everywhere. Paul Burner writes a book attacking a Muslim thinker, and the papers are full of arguments about that. Suddenly, that obscures everything else before. Beginning of the year 2000, the Times Literary Supplement published a list of the most important books of the last 50 years, or more. And two of my books were listed, The End of Ideology and The Cultural Context of Capitalism. Two books by Isaiah Berlin were listed. Two books by Belinda Orange. David Reisman and Ken Cavalharad had only one book listed. SM (01:23:28): Wow. DB (01:23:28): So, if you look at the Times Literary of Supplement, which afterward, was one of the most important intellectual journals, they list the most important books. But who would know that, Isaiah Berlin, Cavalharad, and myself, the only ones who had two books listed. SM (01:23:42): What an honor, though. What an honor. This book is a classic book. I have actually encouraged people to read it, right now, The End of Ideology. I think it is great. DB (01:23:54): Well- SM (01:23:56): I think it is got so much context. And when I was reading it, and when I read it a long time ago, because it was linked to a class, but now I am reading it, I can enjoy it more, and I can take a chapter, and I can take a page, and I can take an idea, and just stop and try to understand it more, rather than rushing it for a class, which I had to do when I was much younger. But it was very good. My very last question is this. And I thank you very much for spending this time with me. And I truly appreciate I it. It is an honor to meet you. The (19)50s, you were a journalist in the very beginning of your career, and then, you became a professor. But I was curious of what you thought about television and the television media. Because the young people that grew up after World War II, TV was what replaced the radio. And, of course we knew about the Vietnam War through television more than any other war. The question is, do you think that describe the (19)50s television, particularly when this generation was younger in the (19)50s, (19)60s, and (19)70s, really is exemplary of the times they were living in? Can I just put mention these? When you look at the (19)50s, now, this is a little boy. I am remembering now, me as a little boy watching TV near Ithaca, New York. I can remember seeing Victory at Sea, Hopalong Cassidy, watching Walt Disney, Edward R Murrow, I loved him, Arthur Godfrey, I know my parents loved him, and Art Linkletter's House Party, those things kind of stand out, and all the westerns, of course. Then, you get into the (19)60s, and the things that stand out more was TV shows like Laugh-In. You see more and more Black artists. Vietnam War's on TV, the Smothers Brothers seemed to be highly unusual, and All in the Family was something that stood up for the (19)70s. I guess, the question I am asking is this, how has TV influenced the young people of that grew up after World War II? And do you believe that the television and journalism as a whole in the 1950s hid some of the realities of the bad things that were happening in America, right up to the time President Kennedy was elected? DB (01:26:28): Let me put it this way. I think what TV did was to make us aware of a visual culture. Now, it is interesting that there was something before that, which was very visual, but never had that effect. And that was photography. Photography was about a hundred years old by the time of TV. But photography never had that much of an effect. There are great photographers like Steichen, and others, very great photographers. But it never had a mass effect the way TV did. And what TV did was to move, radio did not disappear, radio, in fact, flourished to when people used their cars more. Because when you drove your car, you put on the radio. But it made us predominantly a visual culture, and gave us a sense of the impact of things. Because what it did is allow us to visualize things. So, yes, it has it changed the way the Gutenberg press changed the nature of culture of its own time. Do you know who the Cuopisei were? SM (01:27:40): The who? DB (01:27:40): Cuopisei? SM (01:27:40): How do you spell that? DB (01:27:52): C-U-O-P-I-S-E-I. SM (01:27:52): No. DB (01:27:58): The Cuopisei were all the people thrown out of work by the Gutenberg Press. They were the copyists. Before the Gutenberg, people had books, but they were done by copyists. And Thomas Carlisle wrote a wonderful book about this. But the first technological unemployment were really the copyists, because people had books, but they were copies written out by people who were paid to copy a book. For the Gutenberg Press, you had moveable type. And therefore, you can do away with the copyist. In some way, TV had an impact the way the Gutenberg people did. And the contrast, I would say, is with photography, as you had to the copyists before with the Gutenberg Press. You had photography before, but never had that kind of impact the way television did. SM (01:28:58): One last thing I forgot to mention. What were your thoughts of Kent State and Jackson State? DB (01:29:02): About what? SM (01:29:04): Kent State and Jackson State in 1970. That was such a tragic event. DB (01:29:08): Well, these were horrible events, and rightly so. But there you see the impact was due to photography, the image of the young woman- SM (01:29:24): Yes. DB (01:29:24): ... and the man being shot. There, it was not television, but photography, which became important. SM (01:29:31): Are there any final thoughts you have in terms of, I am writing about Boomers, and we have hit a lot of different areas here. And you have hit different angles that other people have not hit, in terms of ideas and what you have written, and so forth. But is there any- DB (01:29:50): I would hope never to have final thoughts. I would be able to go on and on and on and on. SM (01:29:55): Is there any question I did not ask that you thought I might ask? DB (01:29:58): No. SM (01:29:58): No. DB (01:30:00): You have been very comprehensive. SM (01:30:02): Well, thank you very much, professor. It is an honor, an honor indeed. And I am going to take- (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. Daniel Bell Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Bell, Daniel, 1919-2011 ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Sociologists; Authors; Editors; College teachers; Bell, Daniel, 1919-2011--Interviews Description An account of the resource Daniel Bell (1919 - 2011) was an American sociologist, writer, editor, and academic, best known for his contributions to the study of post-industrialism. He received his B.S. at City College of New York and his Ph.D. at Columbia University. Bell became a professor of sociology at Harvard University, where he remained until 1990. 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.10.2016.22 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. 90:13 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/1268f1e5cac376ef2c72e7244e0b34c0.jpg 8a20a3d68e01509e829bdef1a2e7c0eb https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/fa631efedf8af02f17eff97e12e9f8a9.mp3 e92cb22f082e991fe61d85fd1a44532e 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. <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2010-11-20 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed David J. Garrow, 1953- Language English Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data MicroCassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Born in New Bedford, Massachusetts, Dr. David Garrow is a historian, educator, Pulitzer Prize-winning author, a Professor of Law & History, and Distinguished Faculty Scholar at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. He was the senior advisor for the TV show Eyes on The Prize and a senior research fellow at Homerton College in Cambridge, M.A. He is a regular contributor to the Washington Post, New York Times, and The American Prospect. Garrow graduated magna cum laude from Wesleyan University and then received his Ph.D. from Duke University."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":513,"3":{"1":0},"12":0}">Born in New Bedford, Massachusetts, Dr. David Garrow is a historian, educator, Pulitzer Prize-winning author, a Professor of Law & History, and Distinguished Faculty Scholar at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. He was the senior advisor for the TV show Eyes on The Prize and a senior research fellow at Homerton College in Cambridge, M.A. He is a regular contributor to the Washington Post, New York Times, and The American Prospect. Garrow graduated magna cum laude from Wesleyan University and then received his Ph.D. from Duke University. Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; LGBT rights; Black Panthers; Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; SNCC; Democratic Convention of 1964; Vietnam; Black power movement; Malcolm X; March on Selma; Montgomery March."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":513,"3":{"1":0},"12":0}">Baby boom generation; LGBT rights; Black Panthers; Assassination of Robert F. Kennedy, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.; SNCC; Democratic Convention of 1964; Vietnam; Black power movement; Malcolm X; March on Selma; Montgomery March. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 126:59 Subject LCSH Historians; Authors, American--20th century; College teachers;University of Pittsburgh. School of Law; Garrow, David J., 1953--Interviews Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: David Garrow Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 20 November 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) DG (00:00:04): So, my memory now of the different emails and... SM (00:00:07): I have to check these out every so often. Make sure they are [inaudible]. DG (00:00:10): You run them both on the same thing. SM (00:00:11): Yeah. DG (00:00:11): Yeah, we are on exactly the same thing. SM (00:00:11): Yeah. Well the first hundred I did not, and then Charlie Hardy from the history department told me, "Steve, are you getting two tapes?" Because I have had situations where I damage the tape. And then you have got the backup. And I get them on CD's as fast as possible. And then whatever happens to these tapes, end up at the university or whatever and the CD will be there forever. DG (00:00:36): So, okay. Just the one thought I have had in the back of my mind, looking forward to when we were going to get together. I, for whatever reason, have always been deeply, deeply uncomfortable with any and every invocation of boomer generation as a phrase. Now, for some reason I just really dislike the word boomer. SM (00:01:01): You are not the first that is said that. DG (00:01:01): Okay. Now I do not know. And I am not opposed to periodization or generationalism or eras. So, my problem is not with the concept. My problem is with the word. And it may be that my deep dislike for Bill Clinton is what explains this. Because at least in the journalism of the 1990s, Clinton was presented as the personification of the boomer generation. SM (00:01:39): Yes. DG (00:01:45): Now I gave up on Bill Clinton when he mucked over Lani Guinier in about May or June of 1993. And I sort of wrote him off as any political figure, I was interested in [inaudible 00:02:05]. Well this may be completely my sort of anti-Clintonism being transferred to something that is guilt by association with Bill Clinton. SM (00:02:15): What is interesting is that many people have told me they hate the term. Todd Gitlin actually in my interview said, "If you mentioned the word one more time I am going to stop the interview." There has been some issues. One of the main issues is that people that were born between say (19)39 and (19)45 are closer to the boomers, the frontline, the first 10 years. DG (00:02:37): Todd is a good bit older. SM (00:02:39): Well Todd I think is 42, I interviewed him a long time ago. But Tom Hayden and basically all the leaders of the movement were mostly born between (19)40 and (19)45. And when I was in graduate school, I can remember being taught in class at Ohio State that the majority of the militants were the older people, were the ones that were leading the movement even in (19)70. And they were born before (19)46. For me being born in (19)53. Now I have great respect for Todd, though I do not know him personally at all. I do know Tom Hayden, have known Tom Hayden some personally. DG (00:03:20): But they must have football. SM (00:03:23): Yeah, a football game day. DG (00:03:24): Wow. Oh my god. I do not think Tom Hayden is here from the same generation. I mean I do not exactly know how much older than I am Tom is. SM (00:03:39): Tom is 10 years older. I think he was born in (19)42. DG (00:03:44): I think we may want to wait until the percussion session... SM (00:03:45): Yeah, let me go over, turn it off. DG (00:03:54): And start meeting people as a scholar. I first start meeting people 179, 19 80. So, I am 26 at that time. And whether it is Bayard Rustin, whether it is Mike Harrington, whether it is somebody like Tom Hayden. Bayard is certainly more than a generation older than me. But being 26 at that time, both these are good examples to use, because they are so far apart in age. Being 26 at that time, both Bayard and Tom seemed so much older than I am that they seemed to be more from the same generation. The linkage between the two of them seems to be inherently closer than any possible linkage of say, me to Tom. Now, even the youngest of the SNCC people, say someone who is 17, 18 in say 1964 even, not the first generation of SNCC people in here. I am using generation in a four-year increment. But say even someone who was active in SNCC at age 18 in 1964 is still born in (19)46. So inherently for me, in my Civil Rights movement phase, all of those people seem measurably older than I am. Because to someone who is 26, 27, seven years seems significant. Now that I am 57, seven years does not seem very significant at all. So, I think a lot of my ways of looking at people and thinking about generations and thinking about age is the artifact of how sort of unusually young I was when I first got in the interviewing trenches. SM (00:06:03): Yeah, you raised a good point because you kind of are close to that second half of the boomer generation, which had totally different experiences than the first half. So, for them it is like the older brother and the younger brother. And we had many cases of that. And I think part of the process of doing this book, I have learned so much that you cannot put things into nice packages that there is what I call a spirit. There was a spirit that really crossed, was a part of the front-runners of the generation that were linked to some people that were older, maybe members of the silent generation or those born in World War II. That had similar experiences. And that is what Tom Hayden said. Tom does not like the term boomer. Two questions for you. Up through when does your application of the term run? What is your what is the [inaudible] year? DG (00:06:59): Because I am a higher ed person and all my degrees are in higher ed, higher education looks at the boomer generation as those born between (19)46 and (19)64. And then we get into the generation Xer's, which is 65 to about (19)81, (19)82, there is a little discrepancy there. Just two things then, now given what I am now doing with Barack, Barack was born in (19)61, and all the people I am now interviewing in terms of his contemporaries are either his age, or say in terms of his Harvard classmates, since Barack takes essentially five years off, (19)83 to (19)88 before law school. So, a lot of Barack classmates are five years younger than he is in terms of the people I go interview for this. Now, it is interesting when I interview someone who is born in 1966, entering Harvard Law School of 1988, and they are 13 years younger than me. And I am quite aware that they are younger than me, they do not quite feel like they are from a different generation in the sense that my graduate students are, or my wife's graduate students whom we know. So, I think of some of the PhD's, new PhD's, recent PhD's we know at Cambridge. I am just going to say the names that I think about people like Lee and Julia. They are going to be 30 now roughly, maybe early thirties. So that means they are born 1980. Now they are a generation younger than me in a way that somebody born (19)66 is not so clearly. And then the other thing I was going to say to a Civil Rights historian like me, (19)45, (19)46 looms big, because of how totally different the local world, particularly in the South is, once you have got African American military veterans coming back. When the war ends, (19)45, (19)46, Amzie Moore, Medgar Evers, folks like that. So, my predisposition in terms of how I would periodize things is to draw a line some place in (19)45. And then probably, I guess I would begin in (19)46 because if somebody gets home from the war sometime summer of (19)45, fall of (19)45, the first children of the war are born in (19)46. One my first conscious memories, and I may just be slow and not very good, and I certainly have more reasons than most people to have blocked out good chunks, large chunks, huge chunks of my early childhood. My earliest substantive memories are the Kennedy assassination and the Kennedy funeral, which I saw in person. So, for me, I have vague recollections of my father kvetching about traffic problems because of the march on Washington. So that is three months earlier. So, my first political news memories are from being 10 years old. Now, let me say one other thing, and this is really, really central. And if there is anything profound, I have to say, I think this is profound. And I have been aware of this for going on 30 years and I still cannot wrap my little brain around it. Martin Luther King, the whole ambition of King's public life, takes place in less than 13 years. From late (19)55 to early (19)68. Now, when I started out in (19)79, (19)80, at age 26, age 27, the 13 years from (19)55 to (19)68, 13 years seems like a long time. A really long time. Now here is the crux of my problem. I have now been doing this for, depending on where I put the start point, at least 32 years from when Protest at Selma was published. SM (00:12:16): Yes, I have that. DG (00:12:16): Or in terms of when I started, I started my first day of work on what became Protest at Selma was June 1st, (19)74, which I remember quite clearly because it is when I began work on the senior thesis that ended up as Protest at Selma. Now the notion that I have been doing more or less the same thing, permutations of the same thing for 32 to 36 years. I have very clear memories of, I can picture... One of the weird things with my memory is that I cannot tell you a lot of things about my personal life or things that I did or girlfriends or going to meet, did I speak at a conference? When did I last speak in Louisville? When did I last speak at Princeton? Things about my personal life, personal experiences, none of that sticks. But I can picture almost without exception, virtually every person I have ever interviewed and can picture the room, the scene. SM (00:13:33): So, can I. DG (00:13:34): 1979 forward. SM (00:13:35): Oh, wow. That is really a good story. DG (00:13:38): But it is profoundly weird to me that I have been a historian for 32 plus years. And my 32 plus years does not seem very long to me. Whereas King's public life was only 13 years. I cannot wrap... This is about the limits of my ability to be articulate about this. But in making the answer very simple is that the black freedom struggle of that period happened very, very quickly, very, very intensively. And let me do a further extension or parallel of that. Up until (19)65, when Griswold comes down, and indeed really into (19)66, (19)67, this is just parroting from Liberty and Sexuality, nobody with two or three real, real outlier exceptions, no one has ever thought, ever had the idea of a constitutional right to abortion. Now within the space of six years, never mind 13 with King, within the space of literally six years, and then January (19)73, it is actually more like five. Within the space of five years this, being the idea of a constitutional right to abortion, goes from being non-existent to being the law of the land. That at least initially the relatively non-controversial law of land. So, the speed with which Roe v Wade comes to pass is mind-boggling, even compared to the speed of the black freedom struggle. Now lastly, look at where we are today, where we have been the last 6, 9, 10 years with gay equality, gay marriage. No societal change in my lifetime comes anywhere imaginably close in magnitude and scale and depth to how the status of gay people has changed in American society from when I was in high school until the present day. I have a reasonably clear memory of first realizing that there was such a thing as a gay person in I think maybe my junior or senior year of college at Wesleyan, which should be like 1973. Now that is pretty slow, pretty late. Was I aware that Stonewall had happened? I read the New York Times when I was in high school, so I must have read about this. But I did not have the personal awareness, certainly I had no awareness when I was in high school in Greenwich up through (19)71, there was such a thing as gay people. And I cannot remember who it was at Wesleyan, and I do not know the gay historiography, gay identity theory quite well enough to do this competently. But there is, I think no question as a historical matter, as a legal matter, that the speed and degree of progression with gay social acceptance, gay legal rights is directly concomitant to the public visibility of gay people. Because the more visible, I would argue, the more non-gay people become aware of fundamental similarity, fundamental equality. But needless to say, there is no one who is more totally pro-gay marriage than I am. But I view the speed with which gay people have moved from being either non-present or actively widely harassed, humiliated, discriminated against. I view the speed with which this has happened as just remarkable. So, on all of these things, whether it is the black freedom struggle, 13 years, whether it is right to abortion, five or six years, whether it is gay equality, the last, however, we would put a beginning point on that sometime, whether Stonewall or later. I think the speed of change over the course of my lifetime on the things I care about has been just remarkable. SM (00:19:41): Well those, they are beautiful insights. Because when I was a graduate student at Ohio State, and I believe the spring of (19)71, Dr. Johnson, our advisor, we were talking about the war. In fact, it was a legal aspect in higher ed class. At the very end of the class, he asked all the men to stay after, and well, we were going back to study and whatever. It is in the middle of the winter. And he said, "I want you guys to meet Dr. Allen Hurst." DG (00:20:05): I recognize that name. SM (00:20:07): And we are talking about the war in Vietnam, our whole theory, we were talking about Civil Rights and you were talking about women's issues, whether police can come on campus. We are dealing with a lot of legal issues here. And he says, "I want to introduce to you the guy who is going to get the first PhD in gay history, Amal Hurst from the University of Minnesota." I think he was at Minnesota, and we were looking at each other. First off, we were black and white, no Asians, but black and white. And we were in this room, we all looked at each other, none of us knew hardly anything, we knew nothing about gay people. And we did not even know that there were gay people. And we are talking about African American and white males, who are liberal and pretty well-educated. And so, we did not understand why Dr. Johnson did this, because Phil Tripp was another person that asked Dr. Johnson to introduce them. And he just wanted to make us aware that there is another group that is being discriminated against in our society. And you are going to be dealing with this issue down the road if you are going to have a career in higher ed. DG (00:21:14): Right. SM (00:21:17): And he talked, and Pat comes over. He said, "Was not that strange?" We did not dislike the man. He was brilliant when he talked. And obviously he was a front runner. DG (00:21:24): Right-right. SM (00:21:27): But the fact that here we are dealing with the issues of black and white, male and female, war and peace. And here we are talking about gay rights in 1971. DG (00:21:37): Right now, let me take a pause. Just me to get more coffee. Because given my... Given what you are doing, be sure to look, need to think about the date on it, it is going to be April or May of 2000. So, look on the 2000 menu. And it is a long newspaper piece that I had in the Atlanta Journal constitution discussing the experience of the 40th reunion of SNCC, and the sort of implicit tensions between the ways in which the participant alumni wanted to remember the SNCC experience. Versus what we historians believe we know about the SNCC experience. And my sort of gentle polite point is that, and this reflects a broader belief I have, is that people remember happy experiences much better, much more clearly than they remember negative or unpleasant experiences. That people retain what is happy and pleasing and reassuring and discard that which is troubling and unpleasant. And I first realized that principle, not sure it is correct it is a principle, early on when I was interviewing people who had been in Montgomery (19)55, the (19)59, (19)60 doc's time in Montgomery. And I started to realize that virtually without exception, everybody had very clear, sometimes detailed, memories of the year of the boycott, December (19)55 to December (19)56. But the vast majority of them had very little memory about what happens in Montgomery and what happens with the Montgomery Improvement Association 1957 to 1959. Because there is just a lot of internal tensions and disagreements, and some people are sour about all the attention that is gone to Dr. King. And some people are sour that Mrs. Parks has been sort of forgotten and ignored. But very few people in black Montgomery could sort of narrate their way across the calendar of (19)57, (19)58, (19)59, yet virtually everyone could narrate their way from January to March to June to November of 1956. So, you run into this probably just as much as I do, interviewing hundreds and hundreds of people, whether it is for King, for Roe vs Wade, for Barack Obama. The variegation of human memory, the selectivity of human memory, the way in which human memory moves things around across time and gets chronology bodged up, is fascinating to me. And I deal with it. And in the present context, I deal with it all the time with Obama, especially in the 1980s. Which is the heart of it, the Barack Obama circle, at least in some ways. But so, I have become acutely conscious of the importance of getting sort of it documented, where was Barack at different times in the calendar 1984 or the calendar 1985. So that when I hear different people's memories, I saw Barack in LA or Barack went to this conference in Cambridge, Massachusetts. SM (00:26:06): They do not have any... DG (00:26:14): So that I have got a sort of calendar skeleton to which I can try to attach the memories in some sort of jigsaw puzzle type of way. Because I think I have always thought right back the Selma book, I sort of organize everything I know in chronological fashion. Every set of note cards, every set of three by five cards. Now this 1900-page, single space Obama notes file that I [inaudible]. Everything is organized chronologically, it is the way I understand the world. And maybe I wonder if sometimes I sound an excessively peavey or tiresome interviewer, because I always try to get people to do it chronologically. I sat with someone last Tuesday who has a collection of Barack letters, and we walked our way through them, sort of reading them out loud in order. But I was very pleased that that person had the same orientation I do. The only way to think about the letters is to think about them in chronological order. SM (00:27:37): Well, the question I wanted to ask you is kind of that way, because I was very sensitive, even as a young person in college when I saw that picture of Stokely Carmichael next to Dr. King. And Dr. King has kind of got his arms and... That body language with Dr. King. And then we had James Farmer on the campus, so he talked about Dr. King in meetings. It was a tremendous session. I really liked them. But the question I am getting at here is, in 1954, Brown vs Board of Education was passed. And of course, that was historic. However, when we had Jack Greenberg on campus who worked with Thurgood Marshall and going through the South and all the things that they had to go through, Dr. King was the next phase. And I can remember he really appreciated that there was a past, however, I want now. Right. Dr. King said, Thurgood Marshall has a more gradualist approach. We are going to be non-violent protest, and when we want it now, then you get the time. And Dr. King's only 36, 37 years old. You have got Stokely Carmichael talking to him, out of respect, and said, "Your time is past." Then you have a few years earlier, the debate with Malcolm X and Bayard Rustin, basically the chain... See, what you are seeing is the seemingly older generation was really in the late thirties and early forties being challenged by the late twenties and thirties. And then of course the Black Panthers. The question I am asking you is just your thoughts about young people challenging the system. The question that comes up over and over again is the Civil Rights movement was predominantly, there were not very many boomers inbound of the Civil Rights movement, it was in the fifties. If you are talking about the youngest boomers were going to junior high school in 1959 and (19)60. So how could they really be involved in the Civil Rights movement, except those early students that went on Freedom Summer and they had to be a little bit older. Your thoughts on Boomer participation in the Civil Rights movement, how important were they both black and white? And secondly, your thoughts on this seeming ongoing chronological evolution of the movement by people saying "Your time is past." Yeah. DG (00:30:14): Docs born in (19)29. Most of the other ministers are a little bit older than Doc, or somebody like Fred Shuttlesworth were measurably older. So the ministers, the adult leadership of the movement. I do not know off the top of my head what year Jim Farmer is born in. God, I say his name, I hear that voice. Best voice ever. SM (00:30:34): Oh yeah. DG (00:30:34): So, King is essentially 26 at the time of Montgomery, which certainly seems young to any of us in retrospect. When SNCC gets going in 1960, I do not know precisely what year. Bob Moses is a little bit or older, because Bob's been out, what, three years maybe got a master's degree, he was teaching. So Bob is a little bit older. Jim Forman is probably a little bit older than Bob. Because Jim was, I think, off the top of my head, find out how much older Jim Forman is than John than say Julian Bond. And it is going to be on the order of 10 years, maybe a little more. So, with a few exceptions, for like Jim and to a lesser degree, Bob, most of the people in SNCC are essentially 22, 21 years old in (19)60, (19)61. So, they were born sort of (19)38, (19)39, (19)40. They were 10 years younger than Doc. Now, there was no doubt whatsoever in the context of (19)60 to (19)65, (19)66, that 10-year gap between King and the members of SNCC. Is 10 years a generation? Boy is 10 years a generation. There is no doubt about that. And the younger people who are tied to Doc and SCLC, Bernard Lee, first and foremost. Now Bernard had been in the military. Bernard like Bob Moses may be a little bit older. Well, did Bernard ever graduate from Alabama State? If so, what year? Bernard's, I am not sure. But if you look at the photos of Bernard with Docketing, Bernard is dressing like King and Abernathy and Andy Young. And so, he is sort of acting older than the SNCC people. Now, to my mind, the geographical distinction within SNCC is probably the most important because you have got people like Stokely and Bill Mahoney, people that have gone to Howard and Washington. People whose experience was not simply the South, or not simply the rural south. SM (00:33:30): And Cortland Cox was not ignorant. DG (00:33:32): Yes, exactly. SM (00:33:33): And E Carolyn Brown, who was H Rap Brown's brother. They were both students at Howard. DG (00:33:37): Okay. Now there is another Brown brother whom I know from Brooklyn. SM (00:33:47): We had E Carolyn Brown, we had both of them at our campus and we did a tribute to Bayard Rustin. We did a national tribute to Rustin. DG (00:33:53): Yes-yes, yes. SM (00:33:54): And we had Norman Hill, Rochelle Horowitz- DG (00:33:57): Oh, I love Rochelle. SM (00:33:58): ... And Walter Nagle, Cortland Cox, E Carolyn Brown. Ernie Green came up and spoke, and John Lewis opened the conference. DG (00:34:09): How many years ago was this? SM (00:34:12): Probably we did that conference in (19)99, 2000. John Damilia was the only one that we wanted there that had a bad back and could not make it. And Dr. Levine from Bowdoin College, the historian. DG (00:34:21): Yeah, I am afraid that is not a book I like. SM (00:34:28): Yeah. And then also VP Franklin, we had him there. So, it was a really good conference. And by the way, those tapes are all in the library [inaudible] They were all there. DG (00:34:40): Oh, great. No, I adored Bayard. I saw a lot of Bayard, (19)84 to (19)87 in New York. Because he died what, August of (19)87? I remember we had dinner with him and Walter. I cannot remember where it was. Sometime early that summer, maybe circa June.... right? Sometime early that summer, maybe circa June. This is another weird thing about being a historian. I remember about three, four, five years ago now, picking up ... I certainly did not buy it, but I might have picked it up in a bookstore, I picked it up in the library, there was a somewhat memoir-ish book that Ron Radosh, a historian who started out as a sort of young communist, and then wrote a very good book on the Rosenbergs, and then became a sort of very, very self-identified, very conservative. And Ron had some account in there of a conversation he had with Bayard at a party at the home of myself and the woman I was then living with, Susan, in West Harlem. This would have been probably in (19)85. I have the exact date of the party someplace. And Radosh had the year of the party off by at least two years. I am doing this from memory, we are on tape. I do not want to be unfair. He might have had it off by four years. And I remember thinking, this was weird to me, both because I was not quite prepared for seeing parties I have thrown making it into the history books. And then I was, at best, bemused by the fact that a professional historian could get the date of something from a relatively recent time period so wrong. Then, about two or three years ago, I was completely freaked when someone said to me, a good nine, 10 months after it came out, I know, it is [inaudible] Don Critchlow, who's a conservative Catholic social historian, Don Critchlow emailed me, and said, "Are you aware of what is in Arthur Schlesinger's diaries about you?" I was completely unaware. SM (00:37:08): About you? DG (00:37:09): Yep. And it turned out that someplace in Arthur's diaries, and I have got to think about the date. What was the date of this? Sometime in the early (19)80s. Could be 1980. The first time I met Arthur, I think he invited me to lunch at the Century Club, old and fancy thing, on 43rd or 44th Street, Midtown. Arthur had been acquainted with Stan Levison. Arthur had published his RFK book by that point, talking about RFK signing off on the wire-tapping, and RFK being briefed about King's sex life, and all this. And so, Arthur and I discussed this thing. Discussed family, and certainly discussed some aspects of King's private life over lunch. And lo and behold, there in Arthur's diaries is a perfectly accurate recounting of our lunch conversation. And I was very fortunate. I was quite happy that none of the people that reviewed the book decided that this conversation about King's private life in the diaries merited comment in the newspapers. But again, I mention both of these, because I think of myself very much, and boy, am I conscious about this now in the Obama context. I think of myself as purely a historian. I have no desire to be at ... The last thing I want to do is have anything to do with the 2012 election. So, I find it sort of weird that I am turning up as a character, however minor and brief, I find it sort of weird that I am turning up as a character in the historical record, rather than simply being a third-party chronicler of it, if I am saying this with any clarity. SM (00:39:08): I ended up getting to know Mrs. King's sister, who taught at... DG (00:39:12): Oh, Edith. SM (00:39:12): Edith. DG (00:39:13): Oh, wow. SM (00:39:16): She liked me, and we tried to get her to come, but she was pretty ill, and I have lost touch with her since I left the university. But one time, I asked her, "What did you think of the books written on Dr. King?" And I mentioned your name, Taylor Branch. And she did not like any of them, because of the fact, I think it is because they dealt with the sex life of Dr. King. DG (00:39:37): Right-right. SM (00:39:40): So, probably just does not know the whole history of the ... She just read the books. DG (00:39:44): [inaudible] I mean, I am super conscious of this. And I am firmly comfortable saying this on tape. And this is arguably the most important ethical decision I have ever made in my life. And it was a decision I made in 1979, and it remains an active, live decision today, 31 years later. I first met the woman whom a number of us King scholars referred to privately as the real wife in 1979. And I saw her any number of times back in the eighties. I have not been in active touch with her for some years, though I know Clay Carson has been in very active touch. I will peacefully say that I do not think ... There are certainly some people, or there is certainly one person who has written a lot on Dr. King, who has no clue about who this person really is, and has gotten it wrong in print, and I have politely sort of indicated that. But leaving that one exception aside, there are a good number of us in the world of King scholars, it is true of me, it is true of Clay, it is true of Jim Cone. We have known this lady, and she knows us. She knows we know, we know she knows we know, for 30 years. And I have always thought that so long as she is alive, it is entirely her decision as to whether she wants to publicly acknowledge the relationship. SM (00:41:27): Right. Yeah. DG (00:41:27): Now, I know Clay has said to her, probably more than once, and this is not an exact quote he was to say, that sooner rather than later, she would sit down with a tape recorder, and make some tapes, and put them in an envelope, and wrap it up, and put whatever future date she wants on that envelope. And that is my belief, too. So certainly, I mean, Taylor did not know what he was doing on this. But all the rest of us, we made a conscious decision that I think this is still right, I still believe it, that we could give an honest portrayal of what was going on in King's life, without having to out her. We have been incomplete, but I do not think it has been, in any way, misleading. And I think the balance of interests has played out correctly. Now, 2020, coming up on 25 years later, that is not the world we live in now. So, there is a little bit of an artifact there. SM (00:42:41): When you talk about Dr. King, because he is such an important figure in the lives of boomers, I do not care, you had to be in a cave not to be affected by him if you are a member of the generation. What was Thurgood Marshall's thoughts on Dr. King's commentary, that he appreciated the gradualist approach, and the passage of the law, but we are going to do it a different way. We are going to [inaudible]. What did Thurgood Marshall think of Dr. King, and vice versa? And secondly, when Dr. King had those kinds of challenging comments given to him by Stokely Carmichael, what was the relationship between those two men? I have a sense. Because here was a man of stature, and he knew who he was, but he could take it like, he could take his part, because you have got to be a thick skin to be in the position there. But, to me, those are very important. A lot of people portray Stokely as this Black Panther that is got ... but he was a smart guy. DG (00:43:41): Yes-yes, yes-yes. Yeah. SM (00:43:41): So, talk about Martin Luther King and Stokely. DG (00:43:41): Sure-sure. Sure. Yeah. Let me [inaudible]. Let me grab a book. Hold on. I just want to grab a book. SM (00:43:52): Because these are all important things. And my interviews, again, are oral histories, based on not only about the times that people lived, but the interesting and historic facts within those times, that are part of boomer lives. And of course, I am caught up in this boomer, I am actually not seeing it that much anymore. DG (00:44:16): Okay. There is no doubt that for King, that both Thurgood Marshall and Roy Wilkins seemed a generation older to him than he is. Now, both Marshall and Wilkins, as I am sure you realize, and the Marshall pieces of it are memorialized in that not very good Carl Rowan book, and in the perfectly solid Juan Williams book. Marshall, for whatever combination of reasons, of both ego, and envy, and strategic disagreement, and commitment to being a lawyer, Marshall's view of King is dismissive, sarcastic, hostile, right from early 1956 forward. Now, part of it is reasonably rooted in the lawyer's perception that the NAACP LDF lawyers always have to clean up the legal mess after some protest campaign. And oftentimes get left holding some sort of financial bag. With Roy Wilkins, the envy, jealousy, hatred of King is, I think, less defensible, less explicable. It is just pure competition, that the NAACP is so self-important, and so full of itself, that it does not want a younger organizational competitor. Now, that is mirrored with Wyatt Walker's reaction to SNCC, because Wyatt has the same sort of my organization first attitude, with regard to SCLC, that especially Wilkins and Thurgood Marshall, too, had about the NAACP. Now, Doc, Dr. King, Doc does not share that, because Doc never buys into the sort of organizational ego model. And that is one of the many reasons why King is most oftentimes always a morally superior leadership figure to the whole raft of everybody else, because he is able to practice a degree of self-abnegation that is unusual. And we can say this to mean, and I say that relative, not just the Civil Rights Movement egos, but to egotistical and selfish behavior in the Pro-Choice movement, where I think it is at least as bad. Interestingly, I would argue that there has been dramatically less selfish, egotistical behavior the last 10 to 15 years, in the legal part of the Gay Rights movement. And I think that that absence of self-seeking, self-promoting behavior among Gay Rights legal advocates, has been a significant factor in why they have been so successful. Now, Stokely, then, and Stokely is a challenger. Keep in mind, Stokely is a challenger within SNCC. So, the John Lewis, [inaudible], et cetera. SM (00:47:55): Yeah. DG (00:48:06): Stokely is a challenger within SNCC, as well as a challenger to Doc. And Stokely is a very, very bright ... Stokely was a very bright, and in many, many respects, a very likable person, who unfortunately had a little bit of a sickness, the profound sickness of anti-Semitism. But Stokely did not have the degree of ego self-control that Doc did, which is why Stokely allows himself to be swung into the damaging media circus of what does Black power mean, in the way that he was in (19)66, (19)67. And Stokely is sort of like a comet passing by. I mean, there is John Lewis, then there is Stokely, then all of a sudden, you have got Rap Brown. And then I would make a fourth generational point here, just to sort of complete it. And they may technically, they are older by dint of age, but it almost seems like a subsequent generation, the sort of Oakland-based Panthers represented by Huey Newton, and Bobby Seale, et cetera, et cetera. And this is only the second thing, I would recommended it, and I will limit myself to two. If you are at all interested in Panther stuff, about two and a half years ago, I wrote a really, I think, first rate, really powerful little historiographical essay on the Panther literature, where I put in some deadly, deadly end notes dissecting bad faux scholarship. It is in Reviews in American History, I think December, 2007. So, it will be on the 2007 page on the website. I mean, the Panthers are a hugely important presence, (19)67 to the early seventies. The quality of the literature on the Panthers is horrible, just horrible. SM (00:50:27): I interviewed Roz Payne now, last week. DG (00:50:29): She is incredible. Roz Payne is a good person. SM (00:50:37): Her photography, and [inaudible] you can read any of this stuff. DG (00:50:38): Roz is ... yeah-yeah, yeah. That is great. But so much of the Panther scholarly, big quotation marks, "literature," is the worst sort of fan-ship stuff. It is like bad early communist party historiography, where the people writing about CP USA, wanted to simply celebrate the importance of communists. And CP historiography has improved measurably over the last 15 years. And I am certain Panther historiography will improve over time, once we get past the fan club devotees. But the Panther historiography is really important, because there are many positive commendable things about the Panthers. And many, many more really despicable, horrible, evil things about the Panthers. And just as I was saying earlier about human memory, and people remembering the good and forgetting the bad, oh boy, do we see that, this is not in bad taste, in spades in Panther material, because both the participants themselves and the fan-ship historians want to talk about breakfast programs, breakfast programs, breakfast programs. And not talk about the frigging thuggery where they are killing people. And I do not mean cops, I mean a variety of innocent, undeserving supporters. So, there is that sort of generational succession from Marshall to King to Stokely to Huey. That is inevitable in the same way that we get a sort of succession within the reproductive rights movement from a Katherine Hepburn senior, to an Estelle Griswold, to a Bob Hall, an Alan Guttmacher, or a Roy Lucas. SM (00:52:42): What is interesting about the Panthers, and I have been asked by people that I have interviewed that you cannot just ... it is like you said in that article about always mentioning the organizations, and the top civil rights leaders. Well, yeah, we would like to talk about Stokely Carmichael, and Huey Newton, and Bobby Seale, but there was Kathleen Cleaver, there was Eldridge Cleaver, there was H. Rap Brown, if they liked him or not. There was Fred Hampton who was killed in Chicago. There was Bobby Hutton, who was killed. There was... DG (00:53:33): It is a very mixed bag of people. I mean, Kathleen Cleaver, that group. Newton, at one point, is something of a positive figure, before he goes way downhill. I cannot be, at any time, as positive about Eldridge. I actually think that much of the best Panther activism happened away from the Oakland epicenter, in the same way that an awful lot of the best of SNCC happened away from the Atlanta epicenter. SM (00:54:04): When we talk about the anti-war movement in the (19)60s going violent, we know the SDS and the Weathermen. We know what happened there. We know what happened in the American Indian movement. There was violence at Wounded Knee. What happened at Alcatraz was fine. And then we see some violence with the Young Bloods, the Puerto Rican group that was following the Black Panthers. So, we see a lot of violence here. And the question is, were the Black Panthers violent? There is a question, "No, they were not." "Yes, they are." "No, they were not." "They are not the Weathermen." DG (00:54:38): The Panthers devolved into an organized crime gang. The Panthers are, what is his name? It is not a fully honest book. The guy who was the security head who is now in New York. He has got a very unusual name. I am blocking the first name. I want to say his last name is Forbes. Forbes? SM (00:54:57): Black Panther? DG (00:54:57): Yeah, Panther. SM (00:54:58): Oh. I only know Dave Hilliard is the guy in charge. DG (00:55:01): Yeah. Yeah. I cannot [inaudible]. SM (00:55:03): Elaine Brown, I think. I think David Horowitz believes that she is the person responsible for the murder of... DG (00:55:11): Betty, the secretary. SM (00:55:12): Yes. DG (00:55:12): I mean, I cannot think of anything positive to say about Elaine Brown, or David Hilliard, or David Horowitz. But on the ... I forget her, I am not going to get her name right, Betty Lou Prader? Pratter? SM (00:55:27): Yes. Betty Van Patton? Was that her name, or something like that? DG (00:55:27): Yeah, something on, yeah. I apologize for not having it right. On that one, Horowitz may have benefited from the Blind Pig phenomenon. I am not good enough ... I do not know the SDS decline well enough to narrate all the splits. I wish that people like Bill Ayers, and I have a lot of respect for Bill in some ways. I wish that people like Bill and Bernadine and... SM (00:56:17): I have been trying to get her to be interviewed, and she just [inaudible]. Well, she does not even say yes or no. She would not even respond. Her secretary said, "I give it to her." She does not even respond. DG (00:56:25): Yeah. I wish the people from that whole world were a little more publicly honest with themselves. SM (00:56:36): Martin [inaudible] has been. DG (00:56:38): Has he? Okay. SM (00:56:39): I think Martin... DG (00:56:39): See, I do not follow with that. The person on whom I have always relied, whose judgment I have always relied upon for that world is Todd. SM (00:56:48): Oh, yeah. DG (00:56:48): Todd is sort of my guidepost for that, because to the extent I know it, and that extent is limited and modest, Todd is the person who gets it right. SM (00:57:03): I do not know how much more time you have? DG (00:57:05): It is more a question of my tiredness. We can go to another five, 10 minutes. SM (00:57:09): Okay, great. And then I will finish it on a phone conversation. DG (00:57:12): Sure-sure. SM (00:57:12): I have got some real quick questions I have put together since you are home. The Civil Rights Movement is so important in the lives of boomers. Again, you would have to be in a cage to not realize it. DG (00:57:25): Right. SM (00:57:25): And it is so important, because we all know that have studied the history of that period, that the Freedom Summer of (19)64, but way before Freedom Summer, people like Tom Hayden and others who went South. DG (00:57:36): Going South. Yep-yep, yep, yep-yep. SM (00:57:37): Casey... DG (00:57:37): Casey Hayden. SM (00:57:38): Casey Hayden, who is going to be interviewed with me. She is always... DG (00:57:42): She is a beautiful person. SM (00:57:42): She does not do interviews anymore, though. DG (00:57:44): Oh, really? SM (00:57:45): No, she is very hesitant. And I guess she is pretty sick. And she has got some very bad back problems, and everything. DG (00:57:51): Oh, okay. SM (00:57:53): But the question I am getting at is, would not you say that the Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s was the catalyst for everything that followed? Anti-War movement, the Women's movement, the Gay and Lesbian movement, the Environmental movement, the Chicano movement, and the Native American movement. Because they use that, history books have said that it was the model on how to do things. DG (00:58:18): Yep. Now I am quite positive on Sara Evan's book, which is really the book to make... SM (00:58:25): Personal Choices? DG (00:58:40): Yeah-yeah. Personal Politics. SM (00:58:40): Personal Politics. DG (00:58:40): And Sara's book, if I am remembering this right, is 1980, I want to think? SM (00:58:40): I think that is right. I would say that. DG (00:58:46): Now, I think that basic notion is correct to a degree, but to a modest degree. And it varies by movement. The white folks who go South, both early on, like Tom, like Joni, and then the larger group that go South in (19)64, and a smattering of those who go in (19)65.I think if we look at the individual biographical trajectories of those people, and I do not like saying this, but I mean, it is the honest thing to say, they do not turn out to be, on the whole, terribly influential people. Given their pedigrees, they actually should have been more influential. And that raises the bigger question, which you can see on any SNCC email lists or set of exchanges, that participation in something as intense, and emotional, and threatening as the movement, tends to, at least to some measurable degree, to produce instances of personal emotional traumatization of whatever sort. Now, I do not know enough, and I am rusty enough on that Alden from Saint and company, the sort of psychiatric psychological literature of the mid to late (19)60s on Civil Rights movement volunteers, and I have got various ambivalences about that literature that we do not need to go into. But I guess you could make the argument, quite fair-minded argument, as a scholar, that the people who chose to go South, were, of course, not a random distribution. But these were already people who were self-identified as dissenters, or uncomfortable, or outside the norm. SM (01:00:57): And many red diaper babies. DG (01:00:59): Yeah. It is not just ideological. And certainly, I completely agree on the diaper baby aspect of it. So, the fact that these people end up having a post (19)64, (19)65 higher-than-average casualty rate, in terms of their sort of social connectivity, it could be, to some degree, the result of pre-selection, and not just the result of the trauma of being in Neshoba County Mississippi, or wherever, in 1964. Now, I am not sure where, anywhere I was going to go after that. SM (01:01:47): Would not you say, though, that probably one of the most important results of those young people being around the Free Speech movement at Berkeley in (19)64- It looks like the other one here. I am going to be out at Berkeley. They have got a statue out there that they put up for the Free Speech Movement. DG (01:02:14): Oh, okay. SM (01:02:14): I am going to be out there next week vacationing. But I am going to be going to the... DG (01:02:24): Certainly, in terms of Sabio, and the FS, and then Berkeley, yeah, there is a direct line of connection. And there is some direct line of connection as Sara's book very nicely traces out, to many of the early feminist groupings grouplex, especially in New York. When you look, though, and this is where I am switching over to liberty and sexuality, in terms of the actual legislative initiatives and activism around the legislative initiatives, and with the legal initiatives that lead to Roe and Doe, the right to abortion is the product not of the feminist movement, it is the product of a relatively small-sized network of mainly male, or disproportionately male, professionals, doctors, public health people, journalists, lawyers. So, even if this is sort of politically incorrect in some sectors of the planet, I do not see the ... it is incorrect to see Roe versus Wade as a product of feminist activism. It is a product of professional reformers, very impressive, committed professional reformers. Where the doctors are crucial and the lawyers are crucial. Now, some of the lawyers are young women. But just as many of the important lawyers are young men. And you can argue young men are quite committed to the idea of sexual freedom, unsurprisingly. Now, I do not know. I am not good and I do not know American Indian movement history at all. I do not know Chicano history well at all. But I think that we have to moderate and de-limit the notion that everything else flows directly from the Black Freedom struggle in the South. Both because the direct personal linkages are actually relatively modest, though that is a separable question from a sort of, the category of was a Cesar Chavez, was a whomever, inspired by watching King, inspired by watching John Lewis? That, I cannot judge. That is outside of my purview. So, anything else, or are we... SM (01:05:33): I guess we will finish this up at another time. And I thank you. DG (01:05:37): Oh, sure. SM (01:05:37): I did not expect to have this. And I really, it is an honor. DG (01:05:48): No, I wanted to do it. No, I felt ... I spent 98 percent of my life in your position, trying to get former Obama classmates, or campaign staffers, or whatever, to talk to me. SM (01:05:55): Right. DG (01:05:55): So, my sense of the karma is just too overwhelming. SM (01:06:03): Well, what is interesting, Dr. Garrow, is that this is my first book. All these years I have been in hiding. I have been so busy being a college administrator, working with students, I have not had a chance. But this is actually an oral history. This is going to be like a Studs Terkel [inaudible] ideas. But my next venture, I am in my early (19)60s, and I am starting late, but my next venture is something that Lewis Baldwin, the historian, said that I ought to do. And that is something, Dr. King is one of my all-time heroes. And I worked in higher education for 30 years, and I make sure every year we get a tribute to him. And I got heat for it. DG (01:06:42): Right, right-right. SM (01:06:43): I got a lot of heat. Not in more recent years, but in some of the other years. And my dream is that someday do an in-depth look, in-depth, at him and his Vietnam Memorial. Because Vietnam and Civil Rights were two areas that I am closely linked to. DG (01:07:05): You want to, I mean, I hope he is in good health. Up there in years. SM (01:07:09): [inaudible]? DG (01:07:09): No-no, no. Vince Harding, in Denver. SM (01:07:13): Oh. DG (01:07:13): Look up Vincent. Vincent is someone you need to be aware of. Vincent has some contributing role in Vietnam and Speech. I would have to ask Clay or somebody else, somebody, or Steve Fayer, from Eyes on the Prize. Steve would know. But Vincent would be good. Pay attention to that name. Look up Vincent. Vincent is probably older than Doc. So, Vincent is going to be born in the twenties. But Vincent is, to some degree, a sort of lesser male version of Ella Baker, in terms of encouraging the young people across the (19)60s. SM (01:07:52): Yeah, well, one of my first interviews was with Julian Bond, and he said, that was one of my early ones. And I brought Julian into our campus twice, and went down to the [inaudible] Memorial in Washington, and he was thrust into the emcee role, with about 10 minute's notice. But then I had John Lewis, I interviewed him for the book, and we had him on our campus. Of course, Lewis Baldwin came to our campus. And so, I have been involved in this for a very long time. And the final question I was going to ask here, let us see, my golly. That is a very long one. DG (01:08:29): Go ahead and state it. I mean, this is my body clock. SM (01:08:34): Yeah, I understand. DG (01:08:39): I am just starting, [inaudible], and physically, having spoken this morning, too. SM (01:08:41): I guess the last question I will ask, and that is something that you brought up when you mentioned in that article that I read off the web, about the fact that we tend to, as human beings, and as a society, and the media, to always go to the big-name organizations and the well-known names. We did a program on Dr. King at Westchester University, where we invited Linn Washington. I do not know if you know Linn? He wrote a book on Black judges in Pennsylvania? DG (01:09:13): No. SM (01:09:14): And a Professor from Villanova. And we talked about the unknown heroes. DG (01:09:21): [inaudible]. SM (01:09:24): The things that if Dr. King was alive today, he would say it is all the people that have gone and died that we will never know who they were, and what they did. DG (01:09:36): Yeah-yeah, yeah. SM (01:09:36): Because the movement could not have happened without that. Could you say a little bit about the unknown names [inaudible]. DG (01:09:43): You will see King repeatedly over time use the phrase, ground crew. He has got some extended airline metaphor about, it is not just pilots, it is the ground crew. I mean, that is repeatedly inescapably true, locale after locale, after locale. Whether... SM (01:10:03): It is capably true locale after locale after locale, whether in Montgomery, whether in Albany, whether in Birmingham or Selma. Let me just, the one last thing to say on this, sure you know this already, but just to emphasize it, keep in mind that in Birmingham in particular, we have got such a degree of active participation by people who are not yet high school graduates. And so, you have a degree of youth in terms of 15-year-olds in Birmingham in 1963, so that your actual in the streets lead, wedge in Birmingham, James Orange. James Orange is an important name for you. Because James graduated when did James graduate Parker High School? I am not going to get this right. Look up James. I hope somebody has done a good Wikipedia on James. And who was, I am going to, I am rush on this, who was the principal? Was Angela Davis's father, the principal at Parker High School? Angela Davis comes from Birmingham, and there is a lot of, I may have this, I have to send this, who is principal of Parker High School is important, but I may have [inaudible] about the Davis' versus someone else. DG (01:11:31): He was there when the little girl died in the church fire. SM (01:11:31): Yeah-yeah. DG (01:11:31): Yeah. SM (01:11:36): Look up Sheryll Cashin's father too. John Cashin, who was a dentist in Huntsville. Sheryll was a wonderful... DG (01:11:42): How do you spell that last name? SM (01:11:43): C A S H I N. Sheryll was a law professor at Georgetown. Wonderful lady. And she wrote a memoir, published a memoir about two, three years ago, about her daddy. And the daddy was so committed to activism that he was always putting his family in, potentially, dire straits. So, I have not, unfortunately, read it, but it is a memoir about the family cost of activism. And she was a really good person. Great. DG (01:12:20): She was a Georgetown? SM (01:12:20): Yeah. And so, David, Sheryll. S H E R Y L L Cashin. DG (01:12:26): David Coles there, I think. SM (01:12:27): Yes-yes, yes. Yeah. But Birmingham should stand out for you because so many of the young participants in Birmingham are post 45. DG (01:12:36): Yes-yes. SM (01:12:36): Date of birth. So, we should stop, I am, and I will just put it here. DG (01:12:41): Sure. SM (01:12:48): One of the things about Barack Obama, what is interesting is that he tries to not be identified with the boomers, of the (19)60s generation, yet the press keeps saying he is the reincarnation of it. So, is not been that an oxymoron that he was trying to disassociate himself from it? I have read everything that has been written about Barack, at least with any sort of biographical linkage. And I have not seen that or otherwise, have not thought about it. But that may be, again, me tuning out when I see the word boomer. DG (01:13:28): Oh yes. SM (01:13:29): That may be what is going on. DG (01:13:31): I think they say the (19)60s generation. I think that is what they do. SM (01:13:38): Yeah, sure. And again, thanks again for bearing with me here and... DG (01:13:41): Oh sure. SM (01:13:41): Being patient. What was the working relationship like between Dr. King and the other members of the Big four? James Farmer, Roy Wilkins and Whitney Young? What was their relationship like? Wilkins, like the NAACP hierarchy in general, including Thurgood Marshall and Wilkins' direct deputies like John Marshall viewed King with the, had a leery view of King from the get-go as a potential threat to the or NAACP's organizational primacy. DG (01:14:34): And certainly, once King formed SCLC in 1957, and then especially once the student movement got active in 1960, the NAACP's disdain, dislike for King became more pronounced. So, the King, Wilkins relationship was never close and was pretty consistently fraught with dislike, disdain on Wilkins's part. King learned to just tolerate it. I think King was significantly more comfortable with both Jim Farmer and with Whitney Young. They were never close, close, nor was King in any way close with Floyd McKissick, after McKissick replaces Jim Farmer, (19)66-ish, King and Young, as is well known, had some tensions after (19)65, because, true, Young was much more directly aligned with Lyndon Johnson and did not share King's opposition to the Vietnam War, had one well-known face off, not quite argument, but disagreeable conversation during the period when John Lewis's head of SNCC. They are, that is a somewhat closer relationship, but it is not as close as I think some people may imagine it, nowadays or in recent time. SM (01:16:45): Is there truth to that story that when President Kennedy was concerned about the March on Washington (19)63, when the group met at the White House, was, actually A. Phillip Randolph was kind of the father figure and all the other civil rights leaders, he was very worried about potential violence in the city, and he was hesitant to support it, but he was very concerned what John Lewis was going to say. And... DG (01:17:13): Mr. Randolph was without a doubt, the presiding elder in that entire context of 1963. The overblown or exaggerated worries about the 1963 March were, I think, shared pretty widely throughout the Kennedy administration, not just on the part of the President. And I do not think the President was as, was any more concerned or worried than a good many people in DOJ and in the White House. SM (01:17:55): When you look at the speech he gave in New York in (19)67 against the Vietnam War, did he consult with any of his other peers before giving that speech? In other words, the other members of the Big Four or... DG (01:18:13): No. SM (01:18:14): Either in other members of SCLC? DG (01:18:16): No. The relationship among the leaders is never at any point, that interlinked. Steven Courier, wealthy Financial Person, Foundation head, who died in a plane crash sometime (19)66, (19)67-ish, I am not sure of the date. Steve Courier had tried to bring all of the African American Civil Rights leaders together in a thing called Cook Roll Count, CUCRL, Council for United Civil Rights Leadership, which was a, sort of, effort to create a regular conversational structure. It never really got anywhere, because really none of them were that interested in giving up their independence to that degree. So, King, the people King consulted most closely with, and this is true from (19)62 onward up to (19)68, are the two circles of one his immediate people around him in SCLC, Wyatt Walker, And he, Wyatt leaves in (19)64. Andy Young, oftentimes Jim Bevel, Ralph Abernathy, and Bernard Lee, in a different, less policy-oriented way. But the people who really had the most substantive political policy and analytical, intellectual interaction with King are really King's New Yorkers, Stan Levison, Clarence Jones, Bayard Rustin, Harry Walk Tell, Marion Logan, a little bit less so. Mike Harrington, a little bit less so, but it really is the New Yorkers who were the Brain Trust, and Bayard and Stan in particular, Clarence, probably third Harry Walk Tell, Fourth, they are in many respects, the most important sounding boards for King, even though he spent a whole lot more time in a day of the week, hours per day, sense with Bernard Lee and Ralph Abernathy. Come Vietnam, there are some other important voices in there too. Vincent Harding, John McGuire, who certainly make contributions to that, to the... SM (01:21:07): Did Rabbi Heschel play an important role here too? DG (01:21:10): Excuse me, I am sorry? SM (01:21:11): Did Rabbi Heschel play an important role in his... DG (01:21:14): No-no. SM (01:21:15): No? DG (01:21:16): No, I do not think there is, there is a little bit of contact there. You could say the same thing for Ben Spot, but no, I am... Thanks to the wiretap transcripts. This is, again, one of the great ironies of the FBI. Thanks to the wiretap transcripts, one can have a real good idea of who King is in contact with, because the transcripts we have with Stan, with Clarence, with Bayard, make really clear who else King is talking with too. SM (01:21:50): Very good. Yeah, because I know there is a lot of discussion out there that he played a major role in that Vietnam speech. DG (01:21:58): Heschel? SM (01:21:58): Yeah. Persuading him to do it, not... DG (01:22:01): Oh. No, I would have to think about how the invitation to go to Riverside comes into being, but no, I would not... SM (01:22:19): Would you agree that March on Washington (19)63, how many people were there? I have heard different numbers. DG (01:22:26): I do not want to do that off the top of my head, whatever. I know I looked at that with a critical edge when I did, bearing the cross. So, whatever I said in bearing the cross would be my own best conclusion about the numbers that were used contemporaneously. Hold on just a second for me. SM (01:22:53): Yep. DG (01:22:53): I want to turn the temperature on the fan up a bit. Sorry, here we go. SM (01:23:10): Is it pretty cold in Chicago? DG (01:23:12): No, actually not. When I came back in, I made it cooler and where I am sitting here, it just blows directly on me. SM (01:23:22): One of the, I think we talked about this briefly at Princeton, but one of the sensitivities about the civil rights movement, is the sexism and the few women were at the leader, in the leadership roles. But I have some questions. I met with Dr. Cohen this past, yesterday, in fact, down in New York City. DG (01:23:44): Oh, Jim Cohen? SM (01:23:45): No, Robert Cohen who wrote, [crosstalk] free speech movement. DG (01:23:46): Oh, sure-sure, sure. SM (01:23:48): And he is writing a new book now on the activism in the South, the African American activism in the South amongst the young students in the early (19)60s, which has not been written about as much, and a lot of women were in key roles there. Your thoughts on what the media has portrayed as a sexism within the movement, particularly when you look at the March on Washington (19)63, you see Dorothy Height there and Mahalia Jackson was there singing, but you do not see there, any other, really, women leaders? DG (01:24:21): No, they went through them. I would not get the entire roster of names correct off the top of my head, but there is a series of quick introductions of other women and did it include Mrs. Parks? Did it include Diane Nash Bevel? Did it include Gloria Richardson from Cambridge, Maryland? Part of what is an issue in the limits on women's organizational participation in the movement, part of that grows out of, in some aspects of the movement, grows straight out of the black church, gender roles, gender structure. Part of it too, simply just parallels what there is in all of the US society at that time, wholly separate from, apart from the movement, but the most important women to name, I always draw back when the first name people use is Dorothy Height, because Dorothy Height was simply someone who was the head of an organization with an office in Washington, period. People like Diane Nash, people like Gloria Richardson, people like Joanne Robinson in Montgomery, people like Amelia Boynton in Selma. One could go on and on at the local level, and one could also do the same thing with people like Ruby, Doris Smith Robinson in women played major roles in most of the locales, most of the organizations Septima Clark, Dorothy Cotton in SCL C, and did not get much credit or appropriate credit until years later in some of the literature. But the question of women's roles should be looked at from that fundamentally local, fundamentally southern lens knocked through a sort of DC interest group perspective. SM (01:26:45): Would you say that, I asked a question to everyone. I think I may have asked it to you, as well, but when did the (19)60s begin and end and many people feel that the (19)60s began at the lunch counters? DG (01:27:00): Oh, yeah. No, I would very much agree with the February 1, 1960 dating. I do not think I am going to cast a vote on when they end, because if I had to choose, I think I would say when RFK is shot in Los Angeles, more so than when Doc is killed. SM (01:27:36): Why did, this is interesting because Bayard Rustin's a big name here. Yeah. He is from Westchester, and we did a conference on this, and I have read in several books, Dr. Levine's book and John de Emilio's book. There is a lot of explanations here, but I would like to hear from you, why did Dr. King not fire Bayard Rustin? He had people... DG (01:27:54): Sorry, in what time frame? SM (01:27:57): In that time frame, I think Jose Williams was one of the biggest critics of Bayard Rustin, and did not really like him. And because he was a gay person, and... DG (01:28:08): Well, I was in the major attack on Bayard is what Adam Powell mounts back in 1960, for God knows what reasons, maybe because he is carrying water for national political party leadership, I think is the most likely answer. And King, as I said, in baring the crosses, other people have said Emilio, too. I mean, King behaves very badly towards Bayard in 1960. SM (01:28:43): In what way? In what way? DG (01:28:43): In contrast, everybody behaves very well, very courageously in 1963 when Strom Thurmond and others go after Rustin in the context of the (19)63 March, and Bayard from (19)63 into (19)66, (19)67, what Bayard and Mr. Randolph are saying about, and Tom Kahn are saying about economic policy issues and questions, is a big, big, big influence on what is going on in progressive circles in the 1960s. And a big, big influence on King. Where Bayard draws a lot of criticism, is in Bayard's reluctance, unwillingness, tardiness, to be critical of the Vietnam War, which seems all the more pronounced, and to some people inexplicable or contradictory, given Bayard's, deep pacifist roots and credentials going back to the 1940s. SM (01:30:00): Would you say though that even when Dr. King went north, I remember he went into the Chicago area and there were criticism within the ranks of SCLC and in other groups, that he should stay in the South, that racism was really an issue in the South and not in the North. DG (01:30:20): I think most of the disagreement within SCLC, was fundamentally, rooted in the fact that the staff were virtually all Southerners, lifetime Southerners, who, understandably, felt much more comfortable anywhere in the South than they would in any northern city, whether Chicago, New York, Newark, et cetera. In retrospect, how much of a mistake was it for Doc and SCLC to come to Chicago? The local movement here that invited them, Al Raby was a vibrant local network, although it was a vibrant local network set in a context where a heavy majority of African Americans were, African Americans who were politically active, were unsurprisingly, tied fairly closely to the Democratic machine. SM (01:31:35): Could you describe Dr. King and Bayard Rustin and then maybe some of the members of the Big Four as well? Their response to black power and to the Black Panthers, as a whole? I say this for a couple reasons. Number one, there is that picture of Dr. King next to Stokely Carmichael, and Stokely may be one of the more respected Black Panthers, but he was in SNNC, and then he went to the Black Panthers as... DG (01:32:03): Yeah, but I would never speak of Stokely as a panther. The Panthers, to me are a very separate kettle of fish from what Stokely and Willie Ricks, and other people from SNCC who really use the black power phrase represent. And the people who put forward the black power phrase ,and the black power emphasis from the Southern movement, I think are a quite understandable product of what black people are looking at in a context like Lowndes County, Alabama in (19)65, (19)66, where in contrast, in huge total contrast, to what Bayard Rustin is seeing at the national level, where Bayard and other national political voices are seeing the Democratic party and labor unions, as the best vehicles and allies for the black policy agenda. In a context like Alabama, the Democratic Party simply means George Wallace. So, there is a really almost complete disconnect between what black activists are experiencing in a rural southern context and what the world looks like to someone like Bayard. The Panthers are largely a San Francisco Bay area phenomenon, who then acquire somewhat spontaneously adherence supporters, enlistees, in a series of varied other locales, whether it is Chicago and other cities, both large and small. I think it is very, very difficult to speak comprehensively, about the Panthers in any, to any meaningful degree, because what the Panthers represented in Baltimore or Boston or Chicago, is not necessarily what they represented in Oakland. The historiography on the Black Panther party is not very large, and today, not very good. And we have got a long way to go on that. SM (01:35:01): How did the, I always remember, even in college, I remember Charles, I think it is Charles Silverman's Crisis in Black and White? DG (01:35:09): Oh, yeah. Yep. SM (01:35:10): A great book that we read in sociology class back in the late (19)60s, which was a required reading. And I will never forget the line in there where Dr. King did not fear the bigot, and he knew his supporters, but he feared the fence sitter, the one that we never know what they think, but he felt they were the more dangerous. And one of the things about after King, is that he was very open and you knew what he was thinking. I often wondered what Thurgood Marshall thought when Dr. King was coming to power. And the Brown versus Board of Education decision in (19)54 was monumental. It was historic, but it was a more gradualist approach to rights for African Americans. Whereas Dr. King said, I praise that decision, but we want it now. And so... DG (01:36:05): No, let me... SM (01:36:05): The time of change. So, he was basically challenging the methods of Thurgood Marshall, your thoughts on how did Thurgood respond to Dr. King, and the style of non-violent protest? DG (01:36:13): Well, Thurgood Marshall was, Thurgood Marshall was a lawyer, through and through, and believed totally in a constitutional, constitutional rights, constitutional litigation through the courts approach to civil rights change. Marshall was very dubious, doubtful, sarcastic, about any notion that people getting arrested and facing criminal charges, could make any positive contribution. So, Marshall's disdain, is a disdain for the entire concept of civil disobedience as a social change strategy? SM (01:37:13): Did that, I often wonder then, Dr. King then when he was in his late thirties, and I know Bayard Rustin's the same way, were challenged by the new ones, the Stokely’s and the, I guess, H. Rap Brown... DG (01:37:27): I actually, I actually believe that the King-Stokely relationship was both closer and more respectful than most people have been willing to appreciate or acknowledge. Stokely and Willie Ricks enjoyed the politics of theater, or theatrical politics of, the theatrical aspects of black power politics, a little bit too much for anyone's good. But I view Stokely as someone who was trying to push the envelope without totally leaving the King frame of reference. SM (01:38:26): Yeah, because then you get the H Rap Browns who was in SNNC, and then he became a Black Panther, and a lot of people thought he went to violence. DG (01:38:40): I do not believe Rap had much of any relationship with Dr. King. And again, I do not think either Stokely or Rap should be discussed in terms of the Panthers, because that is a brief potential organizational alliance that goes nowhere. SM (01:39:00): What did Dr. King think of the Huey Newtons and the Bobby Seals, though, would not he... DG (01:39:06): I am unaware of any evidence that he thought about them much at all. SM (01:39:12): Okay. DG (01:39:12): You just do not see much reference to it at all. I do not think King ever met any of those folks in person that I am aware of. Even passively. I would have to, I think that is the right answer. I just want, I would want to think about that. But... SM (01:39:37): In some of my interviews that I have had, and again, your opinion would be very important on this. When we talk about the student protest movement of the (19)60s, a lot of people will say, well, the boomers were both born between (19)46 and (19)64. I know Dr. King had many young teenagers in his movement, but basically the civil rights movement was older people, whereas the boomers really came to power with the anti-war movement of Vietnam, women's movement and all the other movements in the late (19)60s. So thus, the boomers did not have much of an influence in the civil rights movement. Do you believe that? DG (01:40:14): But it varies by organization and by locale. Now, most everyone who was in SNCC would have been roughly 20, 22 years old in 1960, 1962. You do not, I am not sure you have anybody, you do not have many people in SNCC born after (19)46. Now, at a local level, in a place like Birmingham where you have a lot of high school student participation, though simply at a protest or demonstrator level, if you were 18 years old in 1963, that means you were born in (19)45. So, you would have a little bit there. But then even people who are 22 years old in 1968, in terms of people who are graduating from active and anti-war stuff, only a little bit of people who would be born, say (19)46, (19)47-ish. SM (01:41:30): And this is, just the information you just gave me, shows that trying to pinpoint a generation based on years (19)46 to (19)64 really takes away a lot, because I am talking the spirit, and I have had more and more people tell me that those people born, say between (19)38 and (19)45 are as, are closer to the first generation, the first 10-year boomers than the boomers of the last 10 years. Because it is... DG (01:42:03): Yeah, I would... SM (01:42:04): It is a spirit thing. DG (01:42:05): Yep. I would agree with that. Yes. SM (01:42:06): Yeah. So thus, they are linked in a very important way. Your thoughts on the relationship between Dr. King and Malcolm X? Malcolm died in (19)65. Correct me. I think they liked each other, but... DG (01:42:21): As best we know, they only met in person once that, the well-known photo of it. I think they had a significant degree of mutually shared respect. I think it is, fundamentally, erroneous for people to think of them as opponents or opposites. And I think Malcolm needs to be viewed primarily through the lens of the last 12 months of his life, when he is independent from Elijah and the Nation of Islam. SM (01:43:02): I have always thought, as a person who loves history, I am not as a historian like you, but I have always, history was my major, that there is a link between Malcolm X and Bobby Kennedy, and I have always felt that the link was just what you said, that Malcolm changed, all people were not devils. He saw when he went over to Mecca and he came back, he was a change man, and that is, Bobby Kennedy was the same way. DG (01:43:30): Yep, that is a very good, when you first started saying that, I thought, no, this does not make any sense. But no. Then when you explained exact, you explained the parallel. No, I completely confirm with, because that is a very insightful linkage. SM (01:43:47): Yeah. Because the Bobby that we saw in the hearings for Jimmy Hoffa is not the Bobby that we saw in (19)67 and (19)68. DG (01:43:53): Exactly. SM (01:43:55): And so, I just see tremendous passion in caring for fellow human beings. Overall, what was the relationship between SNCC and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference all throughout their history? DG (01:44:08): Oh, that is, I mean... SM (01:44:08): I do not, I... DG (01:44:08): That is book length, yeah. SM (01:44:11): Yeah. DG (01:44:18): SCLC helps give birth to SNCC, by the time of Albany and December of (19)61, especially into the summer of (19)62, many of the younger people in SNCC become somewhat disdain of King's hesitance, as well as King's media stature. The SNCC people are both more impatient and more locally oriented. By the time of the Democratic Convention in (19)64, the SNCC people have a much more critical... The snake people have a much more critical, much more cynical worldview than King and Bayard Rustin. By the time of Selma and Montgomery in the spring of (19)65, the tensions and disagreements are pretty pronounced, and you do have a sort of clear split between the organizations, even though there is still a lot of close personal ties one-on-one. And then ironically, in some respect, the two organizations come together in opposing Vietnam. SM (01:45:55): What some people have written, that when SNCC was breaking up, many went to become Black Panthers. Is that true? DG (01:46:06): No, I do not... I think the Panthers loom rather small in the whole thing. I am not sure there was ever a Panthers operation in Atlanta, for example. I am not sure there is. One thing that has to be kept in mind is that, and some of the more recent literature on the Panthers documents this, that you clearly had people setting themselves up in... I am not sure I would select the town accurately off the top of my head, Omaha, Nebraska, maybe you have people setting, announcing that they are Black Panthers in some city and the official Black Panther party in Oakland does not know anything about them, but the Panthers are as much a media phenomenon as they are anything else? SM (01:47:09): We know the impact that the young students who went south for Freedom Summer and even before Freedom Summer had in terms of many of the students that were at the free speech movement and at Berkeley and (19)64, (19)65, and certainly the influence that the movement had on the anti-war and the other movements in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s. Is there a direct, would you say that the concept of participatory democracy, which was in the SDS manifesto, which Tom Hayden wrote, and also what happened out at Berkeley in (19)64, (19)65 with the free speech where they talked about participatory democracy, it all began with SNCC. DG (01:47:54): Yes. Certainly Tom, and I mean this... It has been years since I read and reviewed Tom's book, but I believe my recollection is that Tom's memoir makes it very clear how much he was influenced by what he saw of SNCC when he went south early on. Because remember Tom is in Albany for some chunk of time. I think there is significant direct influence from SNCC to early SDS to free speech movement in Berkeley. Again, my memory on this is a little rusty because it is, so many years have passed. Tim Miller's book- SM (01:48:39): Democracy in the Streets? DG (01:48:40): Yeah, it has been probably 20 years now since that book came out, but I remember that as being really first-rate and very much on target in analyzing those relationships and influences and linkages. SM (01:48:59): How important was Coretta Scott King, her role before and after Dr. King's death and- DG (01:49:06): Very little. Before Doc's death, close to zero and not that significant after. SM (01:49:21): Because I have a question here because we see a lot of her, but what is interesting is that they had four children yet that it was such a dysfunctional family after his death. Not so much right after his death, but certainly as they got into their twenties and thirties fighting over the center and when are they going to sell it and- DG (01:49:40): Unfortunately, the whole SCLC world becomes dysfunctional after Doc's death because you have disagreements between Ralph Abernathy and Mrs. King. You have disagreements between Jose Williams and Ralph, between... Throw Andy Young into the mix, throw Jesse Jackson into the mix. There are no happy stories from (19)68 forward in SCLC in the King Center, there are no happy stories at all. Joseph Lowry is the one creditable survivor who comes through all of that period. It is a sad story. SM (01:50:30): You had mentioned in, when I was talking to you at Princeton about Dr. King had another wife, something of that effect. DG (01:50:42): Oh yeah. We have always used... I mean, there is someone whom we have never, who is still alive and we have never publicly named who is the most significant person in his personal life from (19)63 forward. I mean, that is in Bearing the Cross without a name attached. That lady has got to be, let me think. Well into her seventies now. SM (01:51:15): Was she the type of person that influenced him politically? In his- DG (01:51:20): No, I do not say political influence, no, but I think he draws more emotional sustenance and support from that relationship than from anything else. SM (01:51:37): That whole J Edgar Hoover... Would you think that Bobby Kennedy really regretted that in the end? DG (01:51:49): I think he regretted going along with the Bureau on wiretapping King himself as distinct from wiretapping Stan Levison and Clarence Jones. That would be my... If we were able to know where Bobby's mind was at on that as of early June (19)68, that is my strong instinct as to what he would say. SM (01:52:22): What do you think these files say? I have read that the three thickest files of any American in the FBI is Dr. King, Eleanor Roosevelt- DG (01:52:39): Oh, that is crap. SM (01:52:40): ... And John Lennon. DG (01:52:40): No. SM (01:52:49): No? DG (01:52:50): No, the John Lennon thing is a complete Looney Tunes trip. No, I mean the largest files the Bureau would be on Communist party functionaries that most people have never heard of. And the FBI file on say Elijah Mohamed would be 65 times larger than anything they have on Mrs. Roosevelt, never mind John Lennon. The Lennon thing is the result of one installer with a sort of creative omelet. And even Doc's file, I mean the main... The 1066, 70 file on Doc is large, but it is my now rusty recollection, though no one has ever gotten the file on Elijah, is that Elijah's would be significantly larger. SM (01:53:48): One of the things that in our conference on Bayard Rustin that we learned... Well, we knew that he influenced a lot of young people, but somebody at the conference had documented that he had influenced almost 2,500 people to go into public services in some capacity. DG (01:54:06): Well, it depends. That would depend on how one defines the term influence. SM (01:54:12): Yeah. And of course, a lot of them were at the conference and some of... Quite a few of them were working in the Clinton administration at the time. But did Dr. King have the same kind of influence on young people to follow in his- DG (01:54:28): I think that is difficult to measure because it is... Does one mean one on one-on-one relationships as opposed to people that see something on TV or on film or read something? In a one-on-one sense, it would be very hard to add up significant numbers. SM (01:55:01): We are looking at the boomer generation, of course there were quite a few presidents from Truman right now to Obama. But when you look at the following presidents, just a brief comment on these few, where would you place them in the area of civil rights? In other words, they were really cared about this issue. It was not just being pragmatic to do it or something. John Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan, and Jimmy Carter. DG (01:55:35): JFK changes very measurably for the better in May, June of (19)63. It is a great step forward for him. LBJ cares a great deal about it, clearly, from November of (19)63 forward, though he becomes very despondent, depressed that Black America in the (19)67, (19)68 context does not appreciate him more. Nixon, I do not think ever views it as any different than interest group organizational politics in other settings. Say the civil rights movement to Nixon is another, is say, like the labor movement, another piece on the chess board. I am not sure I could say anything with regard to Jerry Ford when he is in the house. I do not think he ever focuses on it to a significant degree. Ditto for Ronald Reagan. I do not think Reagan had any personal, negative values about it. I just do not think he had ever thought about it or appreciated it very much. Carter in a way, would be the most complicated because he perhaps should have known more and done more coming from where he came from in southwest Georgia. I do not know the Carter biographical literature, but Carter probably is always more distant from it than he might have been. SM (01:57:54): How about the two Bushes? Bush one, Bush two, and of course Bill Clinton. DG (01:57:58): I do not know enough biographically about either Bush. I mean, they are sort of outside my, I have never written about them, so they are really outside my scholarly purview. SM (01:58:18): And Bill Clinton? DG (01:58:19): No, I- SM (01:58:22): He seemed to care about it. DG (01:58:23): I have not read... Some of the political theatrics, I think playing the saxophone or whatever on, what was that Gentleman's TV show? Arsenio Hall. SM (01:58:41): Yeah. DG (01:58:42): I think those sorts of political theatrics can be taken way too seriously or way too importantly by people. SM (01:58:50): And of course, the last two you have written about Dwight Eisenhower and Harry Truman. DG (01:58:55): Yeah, Eisenhower is a huge disappointment, probably is the one person in the entire panoply of presidents who evidence suggests, did hold discriminatory views. Truman, on the other hand, is a quite pleasant surprise given where he comes from in terms of very modest roots. SM (01:59:20): He integrated the military, did not he? DG (01:59:27): Yeah. Well, I think that is a more complicated story. SM (01:59:28): Yes, I know. Pressures, yeah. DG (01:59:31): Are we about there? SM (01:59:32): We got a couple more questions, a couple more here. Bayard Rustin's. Would you say that Bayard Rustin's most influential person in his life was A. Philip Randolph and that Dr. Mays was the most important influence in Dr. King's life? DG (01:59:49): I think that is correct for Bayard. It is either Mr. Randolph or AJ Musky, though Musky is a complicated, and in some ways unhappy... Ends unhappily, but I would defer to John De Emilio on that. On Doc, with regard to Benny Mays, no. No, absolutely not the most important. Hard to say. I mean, the answer is probably Daddy King in that sense. Yeah. Daddy King is definitely my answer there. SM (02:00:37): This is a question that we asked Senator Edmond Musky, when I took students to Washington in 19... I do not think I asked this question, did I? The question on healing? It is a question that the students came up with when we went down in DC in (19)95, and the question was this. Due to the divisions that were so intense during the 1960s, do you feel that the boomer generation will go to its grave like the Civil War generation not truly healing from the massive divisions that tore the nation apart at the time? Students that came up with a question- DG (02:01:17): No. I mean, I do not... I would critique or dismiss the question because I think the people that really suffered the divisions, as you rightly touched on somewhat earlier, are people who are pre (19)46. SM (02:01:37): Yeah. Because Senator Musky, his response was that, "We have not healed since the Civil War in the issue of race." DG (02:01:43): No, I think that varies a lot by local and class and neighborhood. I mean, simple generalizations do not work on that. I mean, whenever I am in a place like this, Chicago, there are so many complexities. I turn away from all-inclusive generalizations on that. SM (02:02:16): Two more questions and then we are done. DG (02:02:18): Sure. Okay. SM (02:02:18): One question on Roe v. Wade, which is, you have written a whole book on that? DG (02:02:22): Right. SM (02:02:22): And how important is this decision? Because there is this constant behind the scenes in Congress that we are going to change this, we are going to reverse the decision- DG (02:02:33): No, Roe will never be reversed in name. No. Roe has been a crucial landmark in acknowledging women's equality. This is a culture that is now much more child conscious than was American society in 1973. And I think that really the greater appreciation, the greater social cultural appreciation of children as opposed to 35, 40 years ago, is why overall American opinion is so much more ambivalent about abortion now than in the late (19)60s, early (19)70s. SM (02:03:43): Now, my question is, where do we stand today in the area of civil rights? In women's rights and all those rights movements that were so important in the late (19)60s and early (19)70s? They still exist, but [crosstalk] DG (02:52:20): Yep. I mean three things, Barack Obama's election as president, irrespective of whether he ends up as a one-term president, will undeniably always be remembered as one of the landmark events in American history since the Civil War, much more important than the election of John Kennedy or Ronald Reagan or George W. Bush. Second, women have a degree of equality and equal participation in public life and the professions now that almost no one would have imagined in 1960 or 1965. And then lastly, the greatest change in America in my lifetime, I think without a doubt, the greatest change in America in the lifetime of all of us who are presently adults, is the almost complete acceptance of gay people as equal participants in American society and public life. Look at what Bayard went through. SM (02:53:50): Right. DG (02:53:51): Even as of 1970, it was almost impossible to be a gay person in public without being physically victimized. I mean, that is the greatest change, the best change that has happened during the lifetime of the boomer generation. SM (02:54:16): Would you say that the lasting legacy of the boomer generation may be the rights movement? Because Mario Savio talked about- DG (02:54:23): No, I would not. No, I would not want to... I mean, we would have to break down how much of the credit for what is happened, say with gay rights, goes to people who predate (19)46 or postdate to (19)64. SM (02:54:39): Mm-hmm. Is there a lasting legacy that you would say if you were a historian? DG (02:54:46): No, I have not thought about it in the way you have because I do not think about the generational category or the generational construct. SM (02:54:52): Right. Any other thoughts? DG (02:54:54): Nope. I think we are there. SM (02:54:56): Well, I want to thank you very much for not only greeting me at Princeton, which was an honor to meet you, and- DG (02:55:02): [inaudible]. SM (02:55:02): Meeting me at Princeton, which was an honor to meet you, and- DG (02:55:02): Totally. It was great. I very much enjoyed our conversation there. It was really great. SM (02:55:05): Yeah, and I will... Let us stay in touch, and I will keep you updated on my project. DG (02:55:09): Okay. Please do. SM (02:55:10): And continued success in your working on that book on President Obama. DG (02:55:15): Thank you very much. SM (02:55:15): Have a great day. DG (02:55:15): Okay, bye. SM (02:55:17): Bye. (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 3 microcassettes Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Dr. David Garrow Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Garrow, David J., 1953- ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Historians; Authors, American--20th century; College teachers;University of Pittsburgh. School of Law; Garrow, David J., 1953--Interviews Description An account of the resource Born in New Bedford, Massachusetts, Dr. David Garrow is a historian, educator, Pulitzer Prize-winning author, a Professor of Law & History, and Distinguished Faculty Scholar at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. He was the senior advisor for the TV show Eyes on The Prize and a senior research fellow at Homerton College in Cambridge, M.A. He is a regular contributor to the Washington Post, New York Times, and The American Prospect. Garrow graduated magna cum laude from Wesleyan University and then received his Ph.D. from Duke 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 2010-11-20 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.10.2016.191a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.191b; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.191c Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 126:59 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/3876c991568aec6681e66e84c2ea1cdd.jpg 4422338d670cdd1c81366e29c654da71 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/e15c8a773d5e383fdb6d7bf65194b8c1.mp3 ced71b5a41a423cba60263f99de1d50c 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. <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 2010-02-09 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. David Kaiser Language English Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data 2 Microcassettes Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; Individualism; Drug culture; Free Speech Movement; Identity Politics; Gay and Lesbian Movement; Feminist Movement; AIDS; Chicano Movement; Native American/ American Indian Movement; Anti-war Movement; Vietnam War; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; College student protests; Healing; Vietnam Memorial;Woodstock; Kent State; Summer of Love; Counterculture; Hippies; Yippies; Students for a Democratic Society; Weathermen; Black Panthers; Black Power."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":14275305}}">Baby boom generation; Individualism; Drug culture; Free Speech Movement; Identity Politics; Gay and Lesbian Movement; Feminist Movement; AIDS; Chicano Movement; Native American/ American Indian Movement; Anti-war Movement; Vietnam War; Assassination of John F. Kennedy; College student protests; Healing; Vietnam Memorial;Woodstock; Kent State; Summer of Love; Counterculture; Hippies; Yippies; Students for a Democratic Society; Weathermen; Black Panthers; Black Power. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 106:26 Subject LCSH College teachers; Physics; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Kaiser, David--Interviews Biographical Text Dr. David Kaiser is a historian and educator. He also served in the Army Reserve from 1970 to 1976. Dr. Kaiser was a Professor in the Strategy and Policy Department of the United States Naval War College from 1990 until 2012 and has taught at Carnegie Mellon, Williams College, and Harvard University. He is the author of several books and articles. Dr. Kaiser received his Bachelor’s degree and his Ph.D. in History from Harvard University. Accessibility Copy/Paste below: Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Binghamton University Libraries is working very hard to create transcriptions of all audio/visual media present on this site. If you require a specific transcription for accessibility purposes, you may contact us at <a href="mailto:orb@binghamton.edu">orb@binghamton.edu</a>. Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: David Kaiser Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 9 February 2010 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:00:03): David Kaiser. February 9th, 2010. Plug it in- DK (00:00:10): By the way- SM (00:00:11): I am going to start out with some of the general questions, and then we will get into some of the specifics here. First off, I want to say, I think your book, American Tragedy is great. DK (00:00:23): Thanks. SM (00:00:24): Yeah. The way you talk about the Eisenhower administration, it is very, very good. In your opinion, when did the (19)60s begin, and what was the watershed moment when it began, and what was the watershed moment when it ended, in your opinion? DK (00:00:44): Well, I have come to think of this in the terms that were defined by my dear late friend, Bill Strauss and Neil Howe. Rather than talk about the (19)60s, they used the term awakening, which they see as a recurring phenomenon in American history. I would say that the awakening began in 1964 or 1965, and that it continued for approximately 20 years. Although by the end of that time, it was not primarily visible in politics, and there had been a swing to the right in politics. But with respect to social changes and whatnot in American life, it was certainly continuing into the early 1980s. It is interesting, and it was important of things to come really, that it is fair to say that the first baby boomer, even using the relatively narrow demographic definition, who held a major policy position, was I think David Stockman as Budget Director under Reagan. SM (00:02:01): Oh, yes. DK (00:02:01): That was an interesting portent as it turned out, of the political influence that adult boomers were actually going to have. SM (00:02:12): Could you explain that a little bit more? Because I remember David Stockman, I think he was... If I remember right, he resigned or was- DK (00:02:20): No. SM (00:02:21): Forced out? DK (00:02:22): Kicked out the first term. SM (00:02:23): Yeah. DK (00:02:23): He got into trouble for making some intemperate statement, but I think he finished out the first term. Then, again, in a typical boomer move, he wrote a very frank memoir explaining that he never believed most of the things he was saying, and that what the administration had been trying to do could not possibly work. Loyalty is not one of the big virtues of our generation. SM (00:02:48): Right. DK (00:02:49): Then he got onto Wall Street, and I believe he has been in some legal trouble, although I do not remember exactly how that came out, since then. But what I mean to say is, that perhaps because we are so self-centered in politics, we turned out to have a much more conservative impact than one would have cast way back in the (19)60s. SM (00:03:15): You make reference there to a quality that you think was part of the boomer generation. I know it is very difficult to generalize for 70 plus million people. I have heard that from many of my interviewees and a lot of them based their experiences on the people that they knew, grew up with, have worked with, have become friends with and so forth, so then they are able to talk about boomers. Is there some general positive qualities or negative qualities that you think are really linked to this group? DK (00:03:48): Oh, I definitely think so. And remember, again, thanks to Strauss and Howe, I have been thinking about these questions very intensively and discussing them with well-informed people for about 15 years now. I think that the positive contribution came from taking individual feelings seriously, from taking the idea of individualism seriously, and of addressing a lot of personal emotional issues that previous generations, particularly the GI's, our parents, for the most part, at least among the older boomers, had swept under the rug. I think that probably made boomers much better parents than their parents had been, for the most part. On the other hand, I think a major characteristic is a rather terrifying faith in our own opinion, which again, the older generation played into by making the catastrophic mistake in Vietnam, and a belief that whatever we want must be best, not only for us, but for everyone else, and that there really cannot be any serious objections to establishing whatever we regard as good, and right, and just. Now, you see the thing that Strauss and Howe really taught me, for which I am grateful, is to see these qualities on both sides of the political fence. In the same way that some of my contemporaries at Harvard thought it would be great to transform Harvard University, if not to bring it to a halt in 1969, and to eliminate ROTC, and form Black Studies Department, and do all sorts of things right away, no matter what the cost, the same kind of certainty informed our contemporary George W. Bush when it became obvious to him that overthrowing Saddam Hussein and setting up democracy in Iraq was just a thing to do, and that would put the whole world on a great new track. SM (00:06:29): That is interesting you say that about Bush, because when the two boomer presidents, a couple of people have commented, and they do not go into any great detail, but they say, "Look at our two new boomer presidents, Clinton and Bush. There you have all the qualities of the boomers." And then I got to say, "What do you mean by that?" DK (00:06:46): Well, I do not entirely agree about Clinton. And in fact, Clinton did not have a typical boomer childhood at all. He had a very difficult childhood. Clinton, while he certainly is narcissistic and he could be irresponsible in his personal life, he actually was a natural politician and a conciliator who did not try to insist on putting through his own views. I think Hillary is much more of a traditional boomer, in that respect. I would make a little bit of an exception for him in that regard, and that is probably what made him a much more successful president, actually. SM (00:07:35): Yeah. See, one of the things that many of the boomers felt when they were young, is they were the most unique generation in American history up to that point. DK (00:07:42): Absolutely. SM (00:07:44): I can remember being on college campuses, feeling that we can be the change agents for the betterment of society, that we have the power within us to end racism, and sexism, and bring peace to the world, and a utopian mentality. DK (00:08:01): Oh yeah. Wait, how old are you exactly? SM (00:08:03): Oh, I am the same age as you are. DK (00:08:03): Oh, fine. Okay. Yeah. SM (00:08:04): I graduated from Binghamton University in 1970. DK (00:08:07): SUNY Binghamton? SM (00:08:08): Yes. DK (00:08:10): Did you know Camille Paglia? SM (00:08:11): Yes. Oh, I knew of her. Yes. I saw her in classes, but I did not know her personally. Of course, I tried to approach her once with no luck, when I tried to take students to meet her. She was there, and I think she was a graduation speaker in 1969, a year before I graduated. DK (00:08:34): I think she graduated in (19)68, actually. SM (00:08:37): Was it (19)68? DK (00:08:38): The three of us are all the same age, but I think you were a year late, apparently, and she was a year early. SM (00:08:43): Yeah. DK (00:08:44): Yeah, I think that is right. SM (00:08:45): Yeah, and I stayed an extra semester too because I double majored- DK (00:08:49): I see. Anyway, okay. Do you, by any chance, remember a guy named Barney [inaudible]? SM (00:08:53): No, I do not. DK (00:08:54): All right. He was there too, and he went into the Navy, and he taught with me here in the (19)90s for a while. SM (00:09:00): I know the president was one of the good presidents when I was here, Dr. Bruce Dearing. DK (00:09:05): Yeah. Okay. SM (00:09:06): He went onto Upstate Medical Center, but I guess he retired because the students got to him after a while. DK (00:09:11): Sure. All right, well, let us get back to our- SM (00:09:14): Yeah, but anyways, the uniqueness, could you comment on that feeling? Because even if you talked to some boomers who were 62 and 63, some of them still feel that way. DK (00:09:25): Well, again, Strauss and Howe see a repeating cycle. What that means is, that there have been generations like boomers, but we did not know them or at best, we met a few of them when they were very, very old, as I did. The characteristic of these generations, which they call profit generations, that they are born in the wake of great national crises. There was a similar generation born after the foundation of the Constitution. And actually, that was a very long generation that went from sometime in the 1790s till about 1820. Those were the men and women who gave us the Civil War. There was a similar generation, which Strauss and Howe called the missionaries, born from the early 1860s until I would say about 1884. They also had a very strong sense of moral purpose, very intense sense of themselves. I am actually studying them now, in connection with a book about American entry into the Second World War. SM (00:10:35): Oh. DK (00:10:36): I have to give them credit for a lot more self-discipline and realism than boomers have shown, which is an interesting issue. Those are the parallel generation, but boomers are very different from any of the other living generations, yes. And furthermore, not only do they pride themselves on being different from other generations, but they pride themselves, and here I would certainly have to include myself, on being individually unique and on being different from each other. SM (00:11:18): Yeah. One of the things about the boomers that I have been... Everything seems to be placed in context. In other words, did the event shape the boomers or did the boomers shape the events? Because when you talk about the baby boom, you are talking about the largest... I think there are more millennials now, though. Boomers can no longer say... There are more millennials now than there were ever were boomers. DK (00:11:45): That is probably true. Well, again, I think it is a mix. I am convinced now, and again, this is thanks to Strauss and Howe, that there would have been a rebellion against the values of our childhood, no matter what. On the other hand, there is no question in my mind that the Vietnam War made that rebellion much more intent and had tremendous long-term consequences in a lot of ways because it convinced so many boomers, including ones who became very important in one way or another, that we could safely disregard everything our parents had ever said, and toss aside so many aspects of the world they had created without any caution, or regret, or anything. SM (00:12:54): How important were the Beats in this kind of an attitude? This was a group from the silent generation, the Ginsburg's, the Kerouac, the Anne Waldman Serengeti, that particular group of writers that seem to have they were small in number, but their influence seemed to be large in many ways in the (19)50s because they were the epitome of not showing a whole lot of respect for the status quo and- DK (00:13:24): Yeah. Well, again my wife- SM (00:13:26): They were pre-boomers. DK (00:13:27): Well, yeah. Well, they were skeptics, certainly. I do not know if I would call them pre-boomers or not. My wife would have a lot to say about that. She is actually a year older than we are, and she was aware of them from a very early age. They certainly were providing an alternative voice. Also, there was Morton Sahl, the comedian. SM (00:13:55): Oh, yes. DK (00:13:56): There were the early folk singers. That was a kind of wedge in the door. For instance, I can remember in high school, my friends and I getting a little kick out of the song that I think was actually written by Pete Seeger, Little Boxes on the hillside, and things like that. They did provide an alternative view, but I do not think their influence was extremely widespread. SM (00:14:33): When you look at the boomer generation, I have had to clarify to many of the people I have interviewed, they said, "Are you talking about the 70 million, Steve, or are you talking about the 15 percent who were the activists?" Because they said, "I can talk about the activist. They can talk about all those people involved in all those movements, anti-war." DK (00:14:56): I do not think, okay, well, first of all, there is this definitional issue. The demographic definition I know includes people born from what, (19)46 through (19)64? SM (00:15:11): Yes. DK (00:15:12): Okay. The Strauss and Howe definition is different. They started around (19)43, which I think is the shaky boundary and run it through 1960. In terms of experience, I think that is a better definition. Essentially what that means, and this is what I say, they never said it this way, boomers are people who do not remember FDR, but who do remember Kennedy. That is the way I would define it. No, the comments I am making certainly do not refer simply to the activists. SM (00:15:55): Okay. DK (00:15:57): Although the activists demonstrated a lot of key generational characteristics. Now, what you will find and remember, I have a very different kind of student body, and I teach a generations course, and my students who are no longer boomers, most of them are Gen X now, but they write autobiographical papers and I hear about their parents. You can find people born even as late as we were, who either did not go to college or who somehow got on track in life very early so that they were already launched when the awakening began around 1965. Many of them are different, but that would be... Those people could not be significantly younger than we are. I think that everybody, by the (19)70s, certainly, again, there are regional differences too, but by the (19)70s, everybody was growing up in a very different world than the world people had grown up in the early (19)60s. SM (00:17:09): You keep saying the awakening around (19)65. Are you making reference... The Vietnam War, of course, it was around (19)65 that started to get bigger and bigger, and then by (19)67, we know what was happening there. DK (00:17:22): The Vietnam War gave the awakening a political trust. I am talking about different music, I am talking about different ways to dress, different ways to wear your hair, different sexual morays, drug use, which arrived at Harvard, interestingly enough, in a big way in the fall of 1966, brought in by the incoming freshman class, many of whom had done drugs in their last year in high school, particularly [inaudible]. SM (00:18:01): That is my class. DK (00:18:04): Yes, right. And things like that. All that was getting going. There is a wonderful piece. I do not think I referred to it in American tragedy, although I found it doing American Tragedy. It is a piece from the New York Times that appeared sometime in the first six months of 1965, and it is called Narcotics the Growing Problem Among Affluent Youth. It is quite an extraordinary read, in retrospect, and one of the more prophetic pieces that Deborah appeared. SM (00:18:39): I know there is brand new book out right now on Timothy Leary and the drug culture up at Harvard. DK (00:18:45): Oh, okay. SM (00:18:46): Yeah, and that just came out. DK (00:18:47): Right. SM (00:18:48): One of the things I want to talk about here is Newt Gingrich, when he came into power, who is a boomer, by the way- DK (00:18:59): Yes, he certainly is. SM (00:19:00): When he came into power in 1994, I read some of his commentaries about attacking that generation of the (19)60s generation and that era. George Will oftentimes has, when he gets an opportunity, either in his books or his articles, will take shots at the (19)60s generation. DK (00:19:22): Yeah. SM (00:19:22): I think he is a pre-boomer, I do not think- DK (00:19:24): Oh, he is a silent. Yes, he definitely is. SM (00:19:27): Yeah. They are just examples. And then Pat Buchanan in a recent video on the Weatherman, really blasts the (19)60s generation, regarding 1968, and when he was working with President Nixon. Basically, all three of them claiming that all the problems we have in American society today can go right back to that period of time- DK (00:19:51): Well, actually that is a fantasy, which actually I used to share, from a different political perspective. Without Vietnam say, we might have stayed in the early (19)60s indefinitely. I now think that is a fantasy. But what I want to stress, is that Gingrich is being a complete hypocrite, in my opinion, just the way George W. Bush was, when he would criticize the (19)60s and say, "The problem is that for too long we have been saying if it feels good, do it." Well, I blogged a good deal about this, and I can tell you where to find it. It was one of the first things I did back in 2004. George Bush's whole presidency is a testimony to, if it feels good, do it. I want to get rid of Saddam, so I will do it. Do not tell me this is too hard. Do not tell me we do not have any allies. I want to cut taxes, so I am going to do it. Do not tell me about the deficit. He is as much a part of that as anybody. You see this now again, in the total irresponsibility of the Republican leadership in Congress, which is composed entirely of boomers, I think now. Whereas interestingly enough, the Democratic leadership is still composed mainly in silent, which is part of the reason they are such a pushovers compared to the Republicans. SM (00:21:26): You just made a comment there. It is almost as if George Bush sounds like Woodrow Wilson, if you go back to- DK (00:21:34): No. That would be a long discussion and a complicated one. I think that is been unfair to Woodrow Wilson. It is true that they were similar. They were more similar from a personality point of view. Wilson was very intolerant of dissent, and felt it was everybody's duty to agree with him. He was a genuinely very subtle thinker, in a way that Bush certainly never would be. SM (00:22:08): Yeah. I know he had problems with the leadership of the Republican party when... He did not consult with anybody. He was a hero in Europe and then he did not consult with anybody back in the Congress. DK (00:22:21): No. And he refused to come. SM (00:22:23): Yeah. That leads me right into this question here, it is- often times we cannot generalize about an entire generation, but can you see the results this time passes on the influence that one generation can have in America? DK (00:22:36): Oh, yeah. SM (00:22:36): Does the 70 plus million deserve praise or condemnation for any of the major flaws we see in our society today? Have the boomer leaders of Congress, the office of the president, the governors, the state assemblies, and local governments been good or bad overall? Because they have been running things. Generation X's are now in there too. How would you grade them as a whole? DK (00:23:00): I think that they are in politics. They do not even deserve to be mentioned in the same breath as the GI's, as our parents' generation. I think that the silent generation was pretty good in politics, never did get anybody into the White House. They have now pretty much been chucked aside. I think the boomers have had a terrible influence in the economy, although there the silent generation shares the blame, but I would give a lot of it to the boomers, and we are going to be living with that for a long time now. Again, the GI's having lived through the Depression, understood that you needed restraints on the financial community, on industry, and various regulation to avert another catastrophe. Naturally, we assumed that none of that applied to us. A lot of those regulations have been either repealed or simply disregarded, and here we find ourselves once again in a situation parallel to the (19)30s. The other area, and this is my personal view, but it has been acquired at great cost, may I say, I think in academia boomers have been a complete disaster and have done damage that I do not see how it will ever be repaired. SM (00:24:44): Can you talk about that? DK (00:24:47): Sure. SM (00:24:47): A lot of the professors... I have worked at quite a few universities and I have heard for years about the attacks on today's faculty members, particularly in the humanities and social scientists as political correctness and all the attacks by the conservatives toward the universities today, that the people that run the universities, and they were making reference to administrators too, administrators and faculty are basically examples of the (19)60s generation all over again. DK (00:25:19): Well, I think there is some truth to that, but I think again, the biggest single problem... Well, there are two problems, which you see in particular in my own discipline of history. The first is a rejection of the idea of objective truth, and an endorsement of the idea that reality is different for everyone, and that they are entitled to express their own reality, which makes evidence much less important than running history. And secondly, the idea that it is the job of the historian to study the oppressed and the people who have not had any voice in the past, to the almost complete exclusion of studying people in power. The prevalence of that idea, is the reason that I, who has written not only American Tragedy, but five other books, three of which are on the same scale as American Tragedy, more or less, has to teach at the Naval War College because there is literally no room in any history department in the country anymore for somebody like me. This is still happening. We just hired a young guy from a very distinguished university, just finished his PhD, who has written the thesis on the... Well, I do not want to get too specific here because this may eventually be published- DK (00:27:03): Well, I do not want to get too specific here because this may eventually be published. He has written a thesis on a major diplomatic issue in the Cold War, and I heard from a third party that that cost him a chance at a job at a university because the bulk of the people in the department said, "This work is simply too traditional". Yes. So that has been very serious. In economics, the boom generation of economists, with very few exceptions, have swallowed the idea of the rational market, and that which has gotten us into the mess that we are in today. In political science, most of the quote, "cutting edge work", is now based on what is called rational choice theory, which does not really describe human beings at all. And in literature, postmodernism has had a terrible effect. And again, if you could get her to talk to you, Camille [inaudible] would be the best person to talk to about that, but I know she has become almost impossible to approach. And I have tried to approach her several times with no luck, and I have given up. SM (00:28:22): I approached her once. DK (00:28:23): But again, that is somebody else who is probably the outstanding literature scholar of our generation and who works in an art school. SM (00:28:33): It is interesting because the person I just interviewed this past weekend, Dr. Franklin? DK (00:28:38): Yes. SM (00:28:39): Said that because in an article that he wrote criticizing something that somebody had written, he had a hard time finding a job. And he had written three books, very well-established books. DK (00:28:54): Well, that is possible, although the job market has been so tight for the whole of my career. SM (00:29:00): Well, that was back- DK (00:29:01): There could be so many reasons why people have had trouble finding a job. SM (00:29:04): Well, that was 20 years ago though. DK (00:29:06): Okay. But I mean, the other thing that... You see, another problem, which we did not invent, to be fair, in modern academia's specialization, and that also leaves no room at all for somebody like me who has never written the same book twice or written on the same subject twice. And I know that cost me many opportunities. SM (00:29:31): One of the events that took place in the (19)60s, historic event, was the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley in 1964 and (19)65. DK (00:29:40): Sure. SM (00:29:42): And Ronald Reagan came into power based on two things. Number one, that he was going to stop those students who were protesting on college campuses that took their lead from the free speech movement, and secondly, he was going to end the welfare state. I suppose those are two of the big issues. And so he took those issues on as, and of course they support him in California and he won election. But I want to, the question I am basically asking here, is there a fear of activism on university campuses today? Did the universities learn anything from the Boomer protests on their campuses in the (19)60s and (19)70s? I asked that question. And second part of the question is, we did a couple panels at our university when I first got there in the late (19)80s, early (19)90s, where I had boomers in Generation Xers on stage, and they did not like each other. It was very obvious they did not. And it was the current students who were Generation Xers, and some of the faculty who were boomers, and some people from off campus who were boomers. And I can remember the split. There was either two responses between the Generation Xer and the boomers. One, "I am sick and tired of hearing about your nostalgia and the way it was. Shut up. I am tired of it. I do not care about it". And the other one was, "I wish I lived when you lived because you had issues and we do not have them today". So then, there was nothing in between. But, so I am really asking about activism here. Art in today's universities are run by boomers and [inaudible]. DK (00:31:29): Well, no. Well, if you go back to Berkeley, and I assume you are familiar with that documentary, Berkeley in the (19)60s. SM (00:31:36): Yes, I am. DK (00:31:37): Good. Yes. Basically, and I remember this very well, even though I started college year after that, those kids were reacting to the idea that the whole purpose of the educational system, which was run by GI's then, was to turn them out as copies of their parents. So they were dressing like their parents, they were acting like their parents, and so on. Now, Vietnam, again, gave the protests a completely different character and a political character. And nothing like that has happened since. Now, as soon as you get to Gen X, you are dealing with kids, many of whom are short on cash, are borrowing money to go through school, and who are focused on their future. And that was one of the great things about being a relatively young boomer, is that you just assumed that was not going to be a problem. Now today, and I have not followed it that closely, but as you know, there are significant protests going on in the UC campuses again, you have a very different story because you have got millennials who have been told all their lives, here is what you have to do, do it, and you will be rewarded. And they have responded to that very enthusiastically. And I got, you see, I did get a glimpse of this firsthand because I was a visiting professor at Williams College three years ago. That was just for one year though. And now suddenly, they are in a situation where it is not clear the rewards are going to be there, and that could have significant repercussions. But you see, our protests were based on moral criticism, and we had the luxury of focusing on moral criticism because of the extremely secure environment in which we had grown up. And that is the paradox, as I say, of every prophet generation, from the transcendentals after the Constitution, through the missionaries, and right up to us. SM (00:34:06): Well, that free speech movement all started actually by chance, because of the fact that they told a group of young students that they could not hand out literature in... DK (00:34:17): Right. SM (00:34:18): [inaudible] Plaza. And even the students that did not like that group that was handing out literature, when they saw that their fellow students are being attacked, they came together. DK (00:34:28): That is right. SM (00:34:29): And it was, " You cannot tell us what to do". And of course, Clark Kerr made that mistake, and then he gets fired by President Reagan, or not President Reagan, governor Reagan. DK (00:34:38): Governor Reagan. Right. SM (00:34:39): Because he was not tough enough on the students. I have a question here, looking at the presidents that were during the lives of Boomers, and that includes Harry Truman too, even though they cannot hardly remember him. But I remember him as a little boy. DK (00:34:58): I remember the (19)62 election. SM (00:35:00): Yes. DK (00:35:01): I do not have any specific memories of Truman as president. I am sure I knew he was president. SM (00:35:06): I just knew as was a little boy, he did not like McCarthy. Which of the presidents do you feel had the greatest impact on the generation? And when I look at it, I am talking about Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Bush, and now Obama. Because they have been all the presidents of during the time that- DK (00:35:29): Well, that is a big question. SM (00:35:30): That is a big question. I know Kennedy had an influence. DK (00:35:33): I would say Kennedy had the biggest emotional impact, even now. I think Johnson clearly had a huge impact because of the decision to fight in Vietnam. SM (00:35:47): Right. DK (00:35:49): Now, you were touching on something important when you talked about Reagan, mainly that the awakening in the anti-Vietnam War protest was a major factor in destroying the existing Democratic majority and leading to Republican domination of the White House for a long time. Okay, I think Reagan did have a very big impact, coming along when he did, in making conservatism and consumerism respectable among boomers, just as they were in their thirties and having kids and things like that. And that was very important. And, you know, based on the data I saw, boomers split pretty evenly, even in the last election. Just as they split evenly in 1972, even. So they have never been, as a group, a strikingly liberal group. It was Gen Xers and millennials who put Obama in the White House. Now, Clinton, I do not know, I guess I will leave it there with Kennedy, and Johnson, and Reagan, as having the probably biggest impact. Obama is very interesting because this is the end of Boomer tenure in the White House. I mean, he clearly is not a boomer, and if you do not believe it, ask him because he will tell you. SM (00:37:43): Yep. DK (00:37:44): And he is not acting like one. SM (00:37:46): Yeah. And he is being criticized for [inaudible]. DK (00:37:48): If it will ever get back in the White House is not at all clear. SM (00:37:51): There is three things here. First off, on President Obama, he is being attacked because people think that he is bringing back the (19)60s. And then with Reagan and Bush, the thing that really strikes a lot of boomers about Reagan is that, when his bold statement, when he became President, "We are back". We are back. And he was referring not only to the military coming back to the way it used to be, but certainly the country. And then George Bush Sr. made a very important statement that really, if you were cognizant of it at the time it happened, "The Vietnam syndrome is over", and that, to me, whoa, that is a pretty strong statement. So to me, all those really kind of had strong impact on boomers as their agent. DK (00:38:37): Well, maybe so. Maybe so. I would have to think about that. I do not think of Bush as a, I think he was actually, Bush Sr. was a very underrated president. And in foreign affairs, actually, he was a very fine president, but I did not feel he was terribly influential. He did, of course, put the first boomer on the Supreme Court, namely Clarence Thomas. Another interesting example of a, well, that is a fascinating point. It partly has to do with the Republicans being better strategists about the Supreme Court. Well, except for [inaudible]. Now, all the boomers on the court are Republican and they are acting like it. SM (00:39:33): Yeah. Well, explain that. Explain that the boomer Supreme Court justices are acting like boomers. Get some specific- DK (00:39:41): If they do not like a law, they throw it out. If they do not like a precedent, they throw it out. SM (00:39:47): Who are the boomers, again, on the court? DK (00:39:51): The boomers on the court are Thomas, Alito, Roberts, and Sotomayor. No, I cannot say that about her yet. I mean, she has not done anything like that yet. She has not been around very long. And then you have got, Stevens is a GI, and so that would leave us with four silence. It would be Kennedy, Scalia, Breyer, and Ginsburg. That is right. That is right. SM (00:40:24): When you place a label on the generation, and the boomers had had a lot of labels, but which of these do you think truly defines the group? The Vietnam generation, the Woodstock generation, the (19)60s generation, the civil rights generation, the [inaudible]- DK (00:40:41): Certainly not the civil rights generation. SM (00:40:44): All right. DK (00:40:44): That is a complete fantasy. SM (00:40:47): Yeah, because that was more in the (19)50s, I believe. DK (00:40:49): That was in the (19)50s, in the early (19)60s. And in fact, boomers and especially African American boomers, to be blunt about it, destroyed the civil rights movement. SM (00:40:59): Are you talking about black power and Black Panthers? DK (00:41:03): Yes. SM (00:41:04): Could you go into that a little bit? Because that was one of my upcoming questions. DK (00:41:07): I am talking about not only that, but I am talking about the whole shift from a well-organized mass movement that was a very effective pressure group, into much smaller organizations focused on identity politics and turning their back on the system and things like that. But I would say, when you talk about Vietnam generation or Woodstock generation, you are talking about older boomers like us. So I do not know. I guess my generation would probably be the best one if I had to just think of one. But again, I think there is, well, yeah, the tendency is to focus on people about our age who actually lived through such fantastic changes as young adults. I mean, if you or I just think about what college was like the day we entered and the day we left, I mean, those were staggering changes. SM (00:42:19): Oh, yes. DK (00:42:21): But that was just the leading edge of the generation, of course. SM (00:42:27): You mentioned identity politics, the many movements that came out of the Civil Rights movement. Well, of course the anti-war movement took place, but you had the gay and lesbian movement, the women's movement. DK (00:42:37): Yes. Now, those could be- SM (00:42:40): Native American, environmental movement, all those movements. DK (00:42:43): Well, the feminist movement, although started by silence, it was certainly boomers who really picked that up and ran with it. And the gay rights movement was very much a boomer movement, although I guess a lot of the boomer gay rights leaders were decimated by aid. Actually, I have a younger brother who is gay, and he was written a good deal by gay issues. He has been in the gay journalist organization, and he was very fortunate health wise, and he has written a lot about that. But those definitely were boomer movements. And again, that is where I think we do have some things to be proud of, in terms of opening up personal options for people. SM (00:43:43): How would you mention the Chicano movement and certainly the Native American movement with AIM and the environmental movement that worked closely with the anti-war movement? DK (00:43:56): Well, I would have to look at exactly what they accomplished in the same way you would have to look at it for civil rights. Again, the basic pieces of environmental legislation were passed by bipartisan GI majorities, like the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. SM (00:44:24): I am going to change this. Okay, go right ahead. DK (00:44:33): Now again, as boomers have gotten into power, the environment has not been doing very well, so I would not be able to take very much credit there. Now, again, the identity politics issue among Native Americans, Chicanos, and so on, is something that I am very ambivalent about, because I think that, and this is where I am still true to my childhood and the values I learned in my childhood before the awakening, when you focus on things like that, you are making it harder to form the kinds of coalitions that will get actual national action on anything. And that is why you see, at the individual level, I think boomers are pretty good at the... But anything requiring organization, leadership, coalitions, they are pretty hopeless. SM (00:45:42): One of the things that you remember during the anti-war movement, there seemed to be signs for all the groups together. The anti-war movement in its heyday seemed to bring all groups together. And then as you go later on into the (19)70s, (19)80s, (19)90s, you see more of a separation of... DK (00:46:01): Well, sure. But there was plenty of splintering in the anti-war movement, too. SM (00:46:04): Right. Especially around when the weatherman came in and... Yes. And of course, then the Vietnam veterans against the war took over the anti-war movement around (19)71. DK (00:46:17): That is right. You see, one thing you should understand about me, which I certainly think comes out in American tragedy too, is that, you see, my father had been in and out of, he had been in government through my whole childhood in various ways. I had met many leading Democratic office soldiers. I was too involved in that world to give up on the system completely, even after I turned against the Vietnam War. And that is why, unlike most of my contemporaries, I have not changed that much since I was in college. Now, that is also why I am extremely depressed at what I see happening around me now because I do not see those values I grew up with coming back. At least not yet. And I am beginning to wonder if I will ever see that. But that is another story. SM (00:47:17): Of course, the big issue now is, what will boomers do in old age? Because supposedly they are going to change even old age, how people retire. Dennis Hopper has that advertisement on TV about, of course, he is a perfect example of a- DK (00:47:33): Well, he is a silent. SM (00:47:34): Yeah. He is a silent, but still they use him for the advertisement. So the next 20 years still have to be written with respect to how they are- DK (00:47:44): What is interesting, and this makes me very sad. I mean, my wife and I talk about going back to the Boston areas to retire, and we are sure as hell not going to the Sunbelt or anything like that. SM (00:47:57): Right. DK (00:47:59): Well, actually, I think we talked into going to Austin, Texas, but that is a special case. But when you go to The Brattle Theater in Cambridge now, which was one of the great sites of my youth and where my cultural experience was broadened, most of the audience is going to have gray hair. So that, I think there is a good chance boomers will remain more focused on cultural things in retirement. I am kind of curious as to whether there will be any kind of, how shall I put this, self-denial movement having to do with the medical profession? And actually, it would be a great thing if boomers could set an example by accepting the idea that they will die and that it is not worth half a million dollars to prolong their life through four miserable months and things like that. But obviously that will be a very individual manner and we will just have to wait and see. SM (00:49:16): Yeah. Here is a question. So obviously we know that the TV was a big influence on boomers in the (19)50s because the World War II was obviously the radio and the fireside chats and everything, and then TV came about. Of course, today we have the technology and Facebook and the millennials and Generation X have been formed with a whole, and that is kind of split the generations too, just the technology issue. But the question I ask, and this is, I always think of my 1950s and I have had, I have interviewed people and of course an African-Americans experience in the (19)50s was different than a white person, and a female was different than a male, and certainly the gay and lesbians experience and all the other things here. But generally, when we are talking about TV, I am going to read this here. This was the first generation and they saw the news on TV, they saw sitcoms and black and white in the (19)50s. How important was TV in shaping the boomer lives with typical shows of when they were very young with Howdy Doody, Captain Kangaroo, Hopalong Cassidy, TV westerns, which we always saw, the Native American was the bad guy, the variety shows, the game shows, the live coverage of historic events, even early on, we saw the McCartney hearings and the Mickey Mouse Club, the median shaping lives both consciously and subconsciously. Of course, you did not see many people of color on TV in those days. Was there something happening that, what did the media do? Besides being the first TV generation, we saw the Vietnam War on TV in the (19)60s, but what is it about the media that truly shaped this generation? DK (00:51:03): Well, that is a very complicated question. I think that when you look at the TV from the (19)50s, now, I am struck by the sterility of it. I am struck by the use of laugh tracks often as a background of things that were really very funny. And I think it was all giving you a lot of messages about what you were supposed to feel. And that was part of what we eventually rebelled against. So that is one thing I would say. On the other hand, well, there is so many issues here. The news is very good. The news was much better than it was now. The (19)60s is probably the greatest age of TV news, I would say. And it was straightforward, it was no nonsense, and they had a real commitment to giving you the fact, and they would take some time for a complicated story in a way that they never would now. Now, I do think the single most important medium for changing the generation though, much more important than television, was music. And second most important, I would say, was movies. And again, the boomers were the audience for the cultural explosion in film in the late (19)60s. By the (19)70s, a few boomers were even making the new movies. And again, that was a great achievement and a really positive transformation of American life. Again, it is very sad that now that boomers run the studios, they do not sponsor making movies like that. I mean, for instance, if you say, I teach a course called Generations of Film, and it is all Gen Xers now, and the pivotal movie that I use to explain what the awakening was about, not the only one, but the pivotal one is One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and... SM (00:53:52): Jack Nicholson. DK (00:53:53): Yes. And not only is it a great movie, but I believe it was the top grossing movie in 1975. And although my students really enjoyed seeing it and got a lot out of it- DK (00:54:03): ...my students really enjoyed seeing it and got a lot out of it. They unanimously agreed that it would not be a hit today. It is only because it moves too slowly. That is kind of sad too. There was one thing I did want to say. You mentioned the Mickey Mouse Club. There is something I will never forget the Mickey Mouse Club, and it was the end of the introduction, the announcer would read every day, which is very prophetic. It was dedicated to you, the leaders of the 21st century. All I can say is little did they know. It seems to me that the key thing about that was there were only three networks. There was very little difference between the networks. It was an aspect of the uniform, mass-produced culture that we grew up in and eventually rebelled again. I am putting down today's movies justifiably, but actually today's television, if you know where to look, there are a lot of tremendous things on today's belt, particularly on the cable channel and things that you certainly could never have dreamed of way back then. SM (00:55:40): Is there one specific event when you were young that had the greatest influence on you? DK (00:55:50): What kind of influence? SM (00:55:53): It impacted your life. A lot of people say the Kennedy assassination affected... DK (00:55:57): Well, certainly that. That is why- SM (00:55:57): That innocence. DK (00:55:59): That was my next book after American Tragedy and it was about that. SM (00:56:02): Yes. DK (00:56:04): That was the most traumatic event of my life, and it probably still is the most traumatic event of my life. Although, I did not really realize that at the time. The depth of that only emerged later. But no, the most influential event for me was definitely the Vietnam War. SM (00:56:21): Right. Almost everybody remembers where they were when they heard about President Kennedy was shot. DK (00:56:27): I remember exactly. SM (00:56:28): What is your personal experience of remembering that moment? DK (00:56:33): I was in boarding school in Connecticut, and we had been let out of lunch at 1:45, and I had to go see a dean or something in his office. I was in his office and some kid ran in and said, "Hey, they said the president has been shot." But, the way he said it, he clearly did not really believe it, and I did not either. Then I started to walk back to the dorm, and then I began to realize this was serious. I remember, I think I started to run, and when I got into the dorm, the radio was on and everybody knew this was really serious. Then I went down the hall to where the teacher on the floor lived and went into his place and he had TV on. I saw Cronkite read the announcement. When Cronkite read the announcement, I was still in a denial phase and I was sitting there saying, "No, please. Let us stop this tape now." I was not using that language, but that was the way I was feeling. This is all happening too fast. My most vivid memory about all that is I spoke to my parents that day. They were in Washington at that point, and they were very shaken. My father particularly, it was probably the most shaken I ever heard him. The next weekend was Thanksgiving weekend, and I went home. They had a huge party on Saturday night of that weekend with all their administration friends. I could not find anybody at that whole party who wanted to talk about Kennedy. All they wanted to talk about was Johnson and how well he was doing and what was going to be happening in the future. I was very shocked by that. It took me a long time to realize what was going on there. My real personal awakening was in 1968 as a result of Ted Johnson's withdrawal and my own complete reevaluation of a lot of my thinking about American foreign policy. SM (00:59:24): What were the most important books that you read when you were young and what were your peers reading? What were young people reading when you were a college student? DK (00:59:40): I would say the most important book for me, in the context of what we are talking about, and many others was Catch 22. I remember that I finished it on the night before my 21st birthday. That was in June of 1968. That was a great moment to be reading it. I had tried to read it earlier in the decade and I could not get into it because the idea of turning World War II into a joke just turned me off, as it turned off a lot of the older generation at that time. By 1968, I was ready for it. SM (01:00:30): You have actually written a book on Vietnam, An American Tragedy. The venue that I am dealing with here is an oral history and oral interviews. In your opinion, why did the Vietnam War end when it did? What was the main reason that it ended? Secondly, how important were the college student protests on the college campuses at ending the war? DK (01:01:12): How important were the college student protests at ending the war? Until Nixon, not at all. We now know that Nixon, in November of (19)69 decided not to massively escalate, in significant part because of the protests. He denied that at the time but we now know that that is true. Obviously, the reaction to Kent State meant that he was going to have to continue deescalating for political reason. Now, the protests did have another impact, I think, which in the long run was going to be far more significant, which was the end to the draft. Which is certainly not a bad thing. In fact, to some extent, and this is something that we have touched on already, you could also make a case that the protest prolonged the war because Nixon remarked to Haldeman, and I think to Henry Kissinger too, but certainly to Haldeman frequently, that the student protests were a godsend [inaudible] because older people hated the students so much. Again, Johnson decided not to escalate again and to withdraw in the winter of (19)68. I do not think that was mainly because of protests. I think it was because Clark Clifford had been convinced that it was useless, and because of very severe international economic strain that they had to pay attention to. Why it ended was that, I think Henry Kissinger, actually, there is some credit for trapping Nixon into that. The real reason was that they had this other huge agenda with the Russians and the Chinese, and Kissinger simply did not want to drag just to drag on for a few more years. As we now know, knew very well that this is likely to leave the collapses South Vietnam, but he did not care. SM (01:04:39): Could you talk a little bit about the atmosphere in America at the time of the Vietnam War? Particularly in the period between (19)67 and (19)71, (19)72 when deferments were happening all over the country and it basically became a poor man's war. People that did not have the power or the influence and the tensions between those 3 million boomers that served in Vietnam and the rest of the boomers who did not? DK (01:05:21): They lived in different worlds because for the most part, the ones who served were the ones who had not gone to college and vice versa. I do not think there was a lot of hostility between those two groups. I went into the Army Reserve in September of 1970, and I did basic training in (19)71. And my company was divided about 50 50 between draftees and enlistees on the one hand and National Guard and Reserves like myself on the other. That was so late that even the draftees were not living in terror of what was going to happen to them. They knew that their chance of dying in combat by that time was very low. That undoubtedly tanked things somewhat, but I did not feel there was a lot of hostility or much hostility at all based on that. I think it is very interesting that there was so much protest among college students who basically were protected from. One accusation that I think is false is the idea that they were just protesting because they were scared. I do not think that is true. SM (01:07:08): There is always these books out called Spinning Image. You have probably heard of that book where the troops had come back and they were spat upon when they- DK (01:07:16): My understanding is- SM (01:07:17): That really happened. DK (01:07:18): That that is largely amiss and that there are very few documented cases of that happening. I remember, I mean, I was not very lucky. I did my basic training in Fort Leonard Wood in the wilds of Missouri, but I got to go to St. Louis a couple times and I did not wear my uniform when I went. Some people did. I certainly did not hear about anybody getting a negative reaction to wearing their uniform. Of course, in that part of the country I do not suppose you would have. I do not remember ever hearing anything like that from anybody I met. SM (01:08:07): I go down to the Vietnam Memorial on Memorial Day in Veterans Day every year. You see some of the tensions of the commentary against those who were against the war, whether they be Jane Fonda or even when Bill Clinton- DK (01:08:21): Jane Fonda was- SM (01:08:23): Even when Bill Clinton came to the wall. DK (01:08:24): It is true that you can still get a rise out of almost anybody. SM (01:08:26): They booed Clinton when he came to the wall too. Quite a few veterans booed him in the background when he spoke there in (19)93. DK (01:08:35): Who? SM (01:08:36): Bill Clinton. Then when the Vietnam Veterans of America formed the anti-war group, there was tension between that group and other Vietnam veterans, which goes right into the Kerry situation in the 2004 elections. These tensions are still there. DK (01:08:56): That is true. I think that the Jim Webb type of veteran is a very vocal minority and I do not think is all that representative. The whole time I was in the Army, I did not meet one troop who was a developed believer in that war. And that is a fact. SM (01:09:30): Yeah. Even A Rumor of War by Phil Caputo, in his book talks about 1965, how they were starting to go against the war even then by some of the things that were happening. That is the troops thinking that. I have a very important question here that we actually asked Senator Muskie when a group of students that I took to Washington about maybe eight years ago, before he died. We asked him this question, do you feel that the boomers are still having problems with healing due to the extreme divisions that tore the nation apart in their youth? The divisions between black and white, 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 wound. Is there truth in this statement? DK (01:10:34): No. SM (01:10:34): Your thought on whether [inaudible] healing. DK (01:10:38): There will never be a consensus among boomers about the war, about religion, about almost anything. That is the nature of the generation and what is likely to happen. We are in the third great crisis of our national life now. After the Civil War and the Depression of World War II, it is the profit generations that bring about those crises. As soon as the crisis is over, they are stuck into the attic. At some point that will happen again and no one will care what we think anymore. At that point you will see bipartisanship in the Congress and things like that, again. As long as we are around, those qualities will be towards applying. SM (01:11:41): I guess I am really- DK (01:11:43): I would not necessarily put it in terms of wounds and healing. The point is that we wear our heart on our sleeve and we are so obsessed with being right. Most of us will die that way. SM (01:11:58): So, just as there is 70 million different people in the boomer generation, 70 million people have different responses to the issue of healing. DK (01:12:08): Exactly. SM (01:12:11): What do you think the wall has done? Jan Scruggs wrote the book, To Heal a Nation. It is supposed to be a non-political entity to heal the veterans, those who served and the families of those who lost loved ones. He goes further and says we want to heal the nation on this. What do you think the wall has done to not only heal veterans but the nation? Just your thoughts. DK (01:12:38): That is a difficult question for me to answer. I am very pro wall. I am very moved by it. I think its significance may increase in a way. This depends on what is going to happen in the next 20 years. I constantly have to remind my own students, for instance, most of whom now were born when the war was over, that the entire casualties in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, or certainly the killed, the wounded it might be a little different, do not add up to half of 1968. When you look at that wall, it is brought home to you that even though that was thought of as a relatively small war, it was being fought on a scale which would be unimaginable today. That is progress to me, very important progress, which I hope not to see reversed in my lifestyle. There was an aroused minority that resented the wall. One advantage I have, although I have been writing about the US now for 20 plus years, I started out as a European historian, and my teaching here is still involved in the history of a lot of other nations. All great nations have made terrible mistakes and suffered terrible catastrophes as a result. Some of them much worse than what we suffered in Vietnam. Thus, it is not difficult for me to regard this as the kind of mistake that sadly any great nation is going to make once in a while. The wall, to me, can be viewed that way. People have complained that it makes it look like it was a traffic accident. To me, that is fine because I do feel it is a kind of a manmade catastrophe, though quite unnecessary [inaudible], but this is part of life. SM (01:15:11): The other area that I want to look into is the issue of trust. The boomers obviously experienced many leaders who lied to them and were dishonest in many ways. The result is that many, if not most did not trust their leaders. No matter what their role in society, they could be a President of the United States or of a university, a congressman, a senator, a corporate leader, a religious leader, anybody in a position of responsibilities. There did not seem to be any trust toward any of them. The question I am asking, is this a very distrustful generation or is that just a natural thing? I was a political science history major and I learned early on that lack of trust is something that is okay in a democracy because it challenges other points of view. Do you feel that this is a generation that did not trust, and if they did not trust, are they pass this on to their children and thus their children's children? Just your thoughts on that. I bring this up because I can remember in a Psych 101 class once in college, the professor saying, we are going to talk about trust today. In that class he said, "If you cannot trust someone, you will not be a success in life personally. You have got to be able to trust somebody." I have always remembered him saying that, and then seeing the generation that I was around in that classroom not really trusting anybody. Just wondering if that is really part of this generation. DK (01:16:57): I think it is part of the generation. While, I think it is a healthy impulse to distrust your government to a certain extent, I think that as with so many other things, we pushed it much too far so that it has prevented many boomers from looking at leaders of all kinds, realistically, at all. They are too quick to write them off based on one transgression. As a historian, it is my job to make meaningful comparison, not to compare everything to some hopeless ideal. So, that is a problem. On the other hand, that most definitely is not what boomers passed on to their kids. The millennials are very trusting of authority, almost shockingly so. Although, they do resent it very much if authority changes the rules in the middle of the game. That is the one thing that will really freak them out. They just want you to tell them what needs to be done so they can do it. I was shocked. Again, I did the same generations in film course at Williams and had them write autobiographical papers and you would have to waterboard these kids to get them say anything nasty about their parents. That is not true about GenX, at all. SM (01:18:49): Right. DK (01:18:50): And obviously it was not true about boomers. SM (01:18:53): It is interesting. Boomers had that big generation gap of their parents and there was a friction between boomers and Generation Xers. I found in my work in college that millennials get along pretty well with boomers. This is an important point to make. I have read some of the how, and I have read the latest book on millennials. I have read that. DK (01:19:16): I only read a little of that. SM (01:19:18): One of the things is that millennials do want to leave a legacy. But, it is when they want to leave it, that is the issue. They want leave a legacy once they are 40 and beyond. They want to get their job done, raise a family, and they just want to enjoy themselves in the twenties and thirties. Then in the forties, they want to give something back to society. Whereas, the boomers always had this feeling that they wanted to make a difference in the world. Maybe that is where they have a uniqueness, a link, both generations want to make a difference in the world. One wanted to do it when they were young and maybe have failed as they have gotten older. The others do not want to do it when they are young and they want to do it when they are older. DK (01:20:15): Boomers change their own world. I think their record of actually making a positive difference in the world at large is not very strong. I keep going back to that. It is interesting. I have a son who is a kind of an older millennial. He is already the principal of the charter school in Brooklyn. He works 16 hours a day and he has been under tremendous pressure, but he wants this to be the best middle school in New York. He may in fact be successful with that. SM (01:20:52): Wow. That is good. DK (01:20:58): He got into an interesting argument at Christmas with my wife, who is not... Christmas with my wife, who is not his mother, she is my second wife, and what she was trying to claim that the work he was doing was somehow inspired by Boomers. And, he said very politely, "If Boomers have had any influence on the positive changes in American education, I have not noticed it." SM (01:21:22): Wow. DK (01:21:25): And, he said, he came out of Teach for America. And, he said that for everybody who has been in Teach for America, the focus is totally on what works, what does not. What has actually shown results, what has not. And that is all. So, they probably will leave much more of a legacy. But, again, if you look at the transcendentals, I mean the legacy of the Civil War was that the union was preserved, but that was about it. And, they did not have the follow- up power to turn that into a real positive outcome, I think. In either the North or the South. And, the missionaries on the other hand, I mean, they left an enormous legacy. That is another the story. SM (01:22:16): You keep saying that the Boomers are not leaving much. DK (01:22:23): Not at an institutional level. SM (01:22:28): Well, where are they? DK (01:22:29): Personal level, maybe they are. SM (01:22:33): It is like individuals doing good things for others, but not as a community? In the hope- DK (01:22:37): No. And, also opening up emotional lives, opening up opportunities for minorities. I mean, the gay rights movement is a very revolutionary development and obviously a good one. The whole way that the therapeutic profession, the mental health profession has changed and become very important thanks to silencing Boomers. That is a huge step forward. Whereas remember in the (19)50s, to the extent that there was psychiatry, it was based on a very narrow Freudianism that assumed that your problems were in some sense of your fault. And, it certainly was not a result of something somebody had actually done to you or something like that. And, we have gone beyond that, and that is very important. So when you see, in the movies I use about Boomers, when I want to show a positive image, it is something like Goodwill Hunting and the Robin Williams character there who's a therapist. Or possibly An Officer and a Gentleman in which Foley, the drill instructor, is clearly a Boomer although Louis Gossett, the actor is [inaudible]. And, when I want to show a negative image, it is something like Wall Street and Gordon Gekko. And, we are where we are today because of many Gordon Gekkos. SM (01:24:15): Do you share Taxi Driver? DK (01:24:18): No. SM (01:24:18): That is the Vietnam vet who goes nuts. DK (01:24:22): Well, that is an interesting movie. Although I do not think, well, we could have a long conversation. I do not think that movie has a lot of broader significance the same way. Actually, I also have a particular theory about that movie. SM (01:24:40): There is the other movie- DK (01:24:40): Then there is the climax is a [inaudible]- SM (01:24:43): Yeah. There is the other movie too, that Jane Fonda was in. I forget it. It is Vietnam. DK (01:24:48): Coming Home. SM (01:24:50): Yeah. Coming Home. DK (01:24:50): Still have not seen that. SM (01:24:51): Yeah. DK (01:24:53): [inaudible] enough. I do not know why. I think [inaudible 01:24:52] movies about Vietnam are fabulous. SM (01:24:56): One of the things, I interviewed Richie Havens, I want to talk a little bit here about the music. We all know how good the music was, the influence it has had on the generation with all its social messages and all the types of music. Folk, rock, and obviously Motown. But, Richie said something pretty interesting. He said, "People make sometimes fun of Woodstock. One of the things I want to correct about Woodstock is that half the people of the 450,000, that there were not Boomers, they were older people who brought their families and they were World War II generations. So, it is not all about young people if they really study what Woodstock truly was." But, he said what it was is that it finally, "They cannot hide us anymore." And, it is in his book. "They cannot hide us anymore." And, he was referring to the Boomer children, the Boomer kids. He felt that the way the music and the media had tried to hide the Boomers and Woodstock really brought it out that the Boomers- DK (01:26:07): I was not there, but I have to dispute his facts as to the composition of the crowd. SM (01:26:13): Right. DK (01:26:13): I mean, I am sure there were good many silent there, but I certainly do not think there were very many World War II generation people there. And, in fact, one of the funniest things in the movie is that there is some dialogue among towns folk who are very divided, if you remember. SM (01:26:31): Oh yeah. DK (01:26:32): About the whole thing. SM (01:26:32): Yep. Yep. DK (01:26:33): And that is a great scene, actually. But, I suppose that is true, yes. That it did put the generation on the map. But again, the reaction from the older generation was not positive there. SM (01:26:56): But who were your role models when you were growing up? You personally? DK (01:27:04): Oh, what a difficult question. That is a terribly difficult question. I suppose some of the professors I had in one way or another. I had a very strange relationship with my own parents, in that we had very intense family life and they never understood that I was really a completely different person. I was pretty close to a couple of uncles. I had one in particular who was very much of the GI. I was also very... Let us see. There were a number of silent generation women who I became quite close to, who I think sort of picked it out very early on that the Boomers were more interesting than the GI men they were around. And, a lot of what I learned about movies, literature, and whatnot, was from people like that. One in particular actually, who is still alive, but there were a number of them. But, then I was more influenced by contemporary. SM (01:29:00): One of the things that is come up on some of the documentaries about the (19)60s and the Boomers when they were young in that period, is we came close to a second civil war. And, I have had people respond differently because so much was going on here with the cities going up in flames in the early (19)60s. You got Watts and then of course there was the fear when Martin Luther King died, cities were burning. I can remember with my brother going to baseball game at Connie Mac Stadium, were taking the train in from New Jersey, and we had to keep our heads down because there were snipers all over the place shooting at the subways. So, seemed like there was a second civil war happening. And, I would like your thoughts on that, because when people make comments about, and some of these documentaries about the Civil War, they say the next real era of that problem was not the depression World War II, it was the (19)60s. DK (01:29:57): All right. SM (01:30:01): And, then I had something that Malcolm one of my guests said and then we will close. Your thoughts on that? DK (01:30:11): Well, there were plenty of people who would have been willing to be foot soldiers, but I think it was misleading because the older generations who were in charge still, had shared values. Shared belief in institutions, and in fact all of that, by the mid (19)70s, they had not shaken the political structure very much so I think that was an illusion. Again, you could go back to around 1900 and you could find a lot of very violent strikes. You could find bombings, terrorism, things like that, and make the same kind of argument. But revolution, civil war only happens when the old order is really dying, which is what we have right now. SM (01:31:13): Yeah. DK (01:31:14): So, I think that no was, I think that is an exaggeration. SM (01:31:23): So, you make a very important point like what is happening now. I interviewed Malcolm Boyd last week. DK (01:31:28): Yeah. SM (01:31:29): I had a two-part interview with him. And, he mentioned that, that what is happening now in America has a greater chance of tearing this nation apart than anything that happened in the (19)60s. DK (01:31:43): Definitely. SM (01:31:44): Because- DK (01:31:44): Definitely the case. SM (01:31:45): I got you. DK (01:31:46): And, you see now we have got the total paralysis in Washington that at no time did you have anything like that then except maybe briefly during Watergate. SM (01:31:57): Why do you think so many people are actually trying to criticize President Obama? They may not like his policies, but they say he is just bringing the (19)60s back again. You have probably heard that before. DK (01:32:07): Well, that is ridiculous. SM (01:32:08): Yeah. DK (01:32:08): I mean, that is conservative propaganda. And, he is not a (19)60s person at all. But, that is what they pulled out against the Clintons too [inaudible]. SM (01:32:20): And, my very last question, this is it. What has the Boomer generation left to future generations? What in your opinion, have they done? Now remember, they thought they were going to be the change agents for the betterment of society. They were going to- DK (01:32:36): They have changed things enormously for more than half the population that is women and homosexual. And, that is not trivial. Meanwhile, they have unleashed a lot of raw economic forces with very unfortunate consequences. And, they have done great harm to the Western intellectual tradition. So, those are both positive and negative things. SM (01:33:25): Can you say a little bit more about the great harm to the Western intellectual tradition? DK (01:33:30): I already have. SM (01:33:31): Okay. DK (01:33:31): I mean, they have propagated the idea that reality is an individual matter, therefore standards of evidence do not matter. And, they have cut off universities from the real world to an extent that is almost medieval, in my opinion. So, that in a couple of centuries, or even in one century, if people are reading the articles that are appearing today in the American Historical Review, it will be just as difficult for them to intellectually engage those articles as it would be to engage medieval religious controversies. SM (01:34:18): Very good. All right. DK (01:34:20): No, well, I mean, I did not know what this is going to be like, but in terms of, and again, I really am very tired and in general, Mike. SM (01:34:29): Yep. DK (01:34:30): But in fact, what I am going to tell my wife, you may hear from me again about her. I think she expected that you were going to be asking a lot more questions about the interviewee's actual life and that is what she would be interested in bugging you about. SM (01:34:52): Well, I could have done that too. DK (01:34:54): Well, you see, because she actually, she was a hippie. She became a homesteader in Arizona. SM (01:35:00): Oh, yeah. That is- DK (01:35:00): She built this ranch from scratch. So, if you would like to talk to her about things like that, then you should. SM (01:35:06): Yep, definitely. Because, each interview has been different. DK (01:35:10): All right. Well then let me just give you her name and number. SM (01:35:13): Okay. Hold on a second. Let me write this down. Okay. DK (01:35:15): Yep. Patti, P-A-T-T-I. Cassidy. 4-0-1 4-2-3 3-9-0-6. SM (01:44:12): 4-2-3 3-9-0-6? DK (01:44:14): That is right. SM (01:44:16): Does she have an email or do you? DK (01:44:18): Yes. Let me make sure I got that right. Wait a second. Hold it. She has a tricky email. I want to make sure it is right. Yeah. T-A-P-I-T-1. SM (01:44:41): P-A? DK (01:44:42): No-no-no. T as in Tom. T-A-P-I-T-1. That is an anagram for Patti you see, @gmail.com. SM (01:44:55): Say that one more time. DK (01:44:57): T as in Tom, A-P as in Patti, I, T as in Tom, one the numeral. SM (01:45:05): Okay. DK (01:45:06): @gmail.com. SM (01:45:08): Why did you want me to ask more about your personal life or? DK (01:45:11): No-no-no, that is fine. But, we did [inaudible]. SM (01:45:13): Yep. Okay. Very good. Because you are the historian, I think, and you said some things about what made you who you are too. And- DK (01:45:21): I did a little bit. Yes. SM (01:45:23): Yep. DK (01:45:24): You see, it is very interesting. A friend of mine is Jamie Galbraith, who is John Kenneth Galbraith's son. And, John Kenneth Galbraith, by the way, did express himself publicly about American tragedy, which meant a great deal to me. SM (01:45:43): Yes. DK (01:45:44): And, Jamie is an economist at the University of Texas, and he is a new deal kind of economist, of which there are almost none left. Krugman is the best known, but practically none of them left. And, again, I think it is because he was too involved in our parents' world just to completely turn his back on it and decide that he could forget about everything we had ever learned. And, that was certainly the case with me too. SM (01:46:21): Well, one of the things that is come up on some of the documentaries about the (19)60s and the Boomers when they were young in that period is we came close to a second civil war. And, I have had people respond differently because so much was going on here with the cities going up in flames. And, the early (19)60s you got Watts. And, then of course there was the fear when Martin Luther King died, cities were burning. I can remember with my brother going to a baseball game at Connie Mac Stadium, we were taking the train in from New Jersey, and we had to keep our heads down because there were snipers all over the place shooting at the subways. So, seemed like there was a second civil war happening. And, I would like your thoughts on that, because when people make comments about, in some of these documentaries about the Civil War, they say the next real era of that problem was not the depression World War II, it was the (19)60s, and then something. DK (01:46:22): All right. SM (01:46:22): And, then I had something that Malcolm, one of my guests said and then we will close. Your thoughts on that? DK (01:46:23): Well, there were plenty of people who would have been willing to be foot soldiers, but I think it was misleading because the older generations who were in charge, still had shared values. Shared belief in institutions and in fact all of that, by the mid (19)70s, they had not shaken the political structure very much. So, I think that was an illusion. Again, you could go back to around 1900 and you could find a lot of very violent strikes. You could find bombings, terrorism, things like that, and make the same kind of argument. But, revolution civil war only happens when the old order is really dying, which is what we have right now. SM (01:46:23): Yeah. DK (01:46:23): So, I think that no was, I think that is an exaggeration. SM (01:46:23): So, you make a very important point, like what is happening now. I interviewed Malcolm Boyd last week. DK (01:46:23): Yeah. SM (01:46:23): I had a two-part interview with him. And he mentioned that, that what is happening now in America has a greater chance of tearing this nation apart than anything that happened in the (19)60s. DK (01:46:23): Definitely. Definitely the case. SM (01:46:23): I got you. DK (01:46:23): And, you see at now we have got this total paralysis in Washington that at no time did you have anything like that then, except maybe briefly during Watergate. SM (01:46:23): Why do you think so many people are actually just trying to criticize President Obama? And, they may not like his policies, but they say he is just bringing the (19)60s back again. You have probably heard that before. DK (01:46:23): Well, that is ridiculous. SM (01:46:23): Yeah. DK (01:46:23): I mean, that is conservative propaganda, and he is not a (19)60s person at all. But, that is what they pulled out against the Clintons too [inaudible]. SM (01:46:23): And, my very last question, this is it. What has the Boomer generation left to future generations? What in your opinion, have they done? Now remember, they thought they were going to be the change agents for the betterment of society. They were going to- DK (01:46:23): They have changed things enormously for more than half the population that is women and homosexual. And, that is not trivial. Meanwhile, they have unleashed a lot of raw economic forces with very unfortunate consequences. And, they have done great harm to the Western intellectual tradition. So, those are both positive and negative things. SM (01:46:23): Can you say a little bit more about the great harm to the Western intellectual tradition? DK (01:46:23): I already have. SM (01:46:23): Okay. DK (01:46:23): I mean, the idea, they have propagated the idea that reality is an individual matter, therefore, standards of evidence do not matter. And, they have cut off universities from the real world to an extent that is almost medieval, in my opinion. So, that in a couple of centuries, or even in one century, if people are reading the articles that are appearing today in the American Historical Review, it will be just as difficult for them to intellectually engage those articles as it would be to engage medieval religious controversies. SM (01:46:23): Very good. All right. DK (01:46:23): No, well, I mean, I did not know what this is going to be like, but in terms of, and again, I really am very tired and just like, but in fact, what I am going to tell my wife, you may hear from me again about her. I think she expected that you were going to be asking a lot more questions about the interviewee's actual life. And, that is what she would be interested in bugging you with. SM (01:46:23): Well, I could have done that too, actually. DK (01:46:23): Well, you see, because she actually, she was a hippie. She became a homesteader in Arizona. SM (01:46:23): Oh yeah. DK (01:46:23): And, built this ranch from scratch. So, if you would like to talk to her about things like that, then you should [inaudible]. SM (01:46:23): Yep. Definitely, because each interview has been different. DK (01:46:23): All right. Well then let me just give you her name and number. SM (01:46:23): Okay. Hold on a second. Let me write this down. Okay. DK (01:46:23): Yep. Patti, P-A-T-T-I. Cassidy. 4-0-1 4-2-3 3-9-0-6. SM (01:46:23): 4-2-3 3-9-0-6? DK (01:46:23): That is right. SM (01:46:23): Does she have an email or do you? DK (01:46:23): Yes. Let me make sure I get that right. Wait a second. Hold it. She has a tricky email. I want to make sure if I... Yeah. T-A-P-I-T-1. SM (01:46:23): P-A? DK (01:46:23): No, no, no. T as in Tom. A-P-I-T-1. That is an anagram of Patti, you see. @gmail.com. SM (01:46:23): Say that one more time. DK (01:46:23): T as in Tom, A-P as in Patti, I-T as in Tom, one the numeral. SM (01:46:23): Okay. DK (01:46:23): @gmail.com. SM (01:46:23): Why did you want me to ask more about your personal life or? DK (01:46:23): No-no-no, that is fine. What we did was fine. SM (01:46:23): Yep. Because, okay, very good. Because, you are the historian, I think, and you said some things about what made you who you are too. DK (01:46:23): I did a little bit. Yes. SM (01:46:23): Yep. DK (01:46:23): I was, you see, it is very interesting. A friend of mine is Jamie Galbraith who is John Kenneth Galbraith's son. And, John Kenneth Galbraith, by the way, did express himself publicly about American tragedy, which meant a great deal to me. SM (01:46:23): Yes. DK (01:46:23): And, Jamie is an economist at the University of Texas, and he is a new deal kind of economist, of which there are almost none left. Krugman is the best known, but they practically none of them left. And again, I think it is because he was too involved in our parents' world just to completely turn his back on it and decide that he could forget about everything we had ever learned. And, that was certainly the case with me too. SM (01:46:23): Well. (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. David Kaiser Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Kaiser, David ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource College teachers; Physics; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Kaiser, David--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. David Kaiser is a professor of Physics and the History of Science at MIT. He received his Bachelor's degree in Physics at Dartmouth College and Ph.D.s in Physics and the History of Science at Harvard University. His historical research focuses on the development of physics in the United States during the Cold War. Additionally, his research in physics studies the early-universe cosmology, working at the interface of particle physics and gravitation. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 2010-02-09 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.10.2016.71a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.71b 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. 106:26 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/c9c0d40036b678d32dad60d2f9a59089.jpg 2320bb017dc38600ace3196f9e04ea9e https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/30f6e2e5d09aff5bc84f779de2e62cb3.mp3 8567c1f0459af79c352ba82a8e66e80c 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. <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 2004-08-26 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Thi Dieu Nguyen, 1951- Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Dieu T. Nguyen grew up in An Giang during the Vietnam War, is a professor of History at Temple University and a writer. Dr. Nguyen completed her undergraduate and graduate studies at the Sorbonne and the University of Aix-en-Provence. She is the author of The Mekong River and The Struggle for Indochina: Water, War, and Peace."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":7051,"3":{"1":0},"4":[null,2,5099745],"6":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"10":2,"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial"}">Dr. Dieu T. Nguyen grew up in An Giang during the Vietnam War, and is a writer and professor of History at Temple University. Dr. Nguyen completed her undergraduate and graduate studies at the Sorbonne and the University of Aix-en-Provence. She is the author of The Mekong River and The Struggle for Indochina: Water, War, and Peace. 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.) 70:38 Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Vietnam War; French War (Vietnam V. France); American veterans; Baby boom generation; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Robert McNamara; James Fonda; Lynden Johnson"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":5009,"3":{"1":0},"7":{"1":[{"1":2,"2":0,"5":[null,2,0]},{"1":0,"2":0,"3":3},{"1":1,"2":0,"4":1}]},"10":2,"11":4,"12":0,"15":"Arial"}">Vietnam War; French War (Vietnam V. France); American veterans; Baby boom generation; Anti-war movement; Civil Rights Movement; Robert McNamara; Jane Fonda; Lyndon Johnson. Subject LCSH College teachers; Temple University. Department of History; Nguyen, Thi Dieu, 1951--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. Dieu T. Nguyen Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Nguyen, Thi Dieu, 1951- ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource College teachers; Temple University. Department of History; Nguyen, Thi Dieu, 1951--Interviews 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 2004-08-26 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.10.2016.117 Date Modified Date on which the resource was changed. 2018-03-29 Is Part Of A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included. McKiernan Interviews Extent The size or duration of the resource. 70:38 Description An account of the resource Dr. Dieu T. Nguyen grew up in An Giang during the Vietnam War, and is a writer and professor of History at Temple University. Dr. Nguyen completed her undergraduate and graduate studies at the Sorbonne and the University of Aix-en-Provence. She is the author of The Mekong River and The Struggle for Indochina: Water, War, and Peace. https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/12dd2067fa0bc0904c3c27c20e8451af.jpg 92e4f114ceb3e390c715318ab09d11cb https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/7ef5d47bf44d8c2e8c33df2ca23dba48.mp3 5f924d6b33c3a3009e6e36363a7b7dc0 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. <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 1997-09-27 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Douglas Brinkley Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Douglas Brinkley is an author, scholar and academic. He is currently a history professor at Rice University and the presidential historian at CNN. He is an author and has published 12 books. He received the Ann M. Sperber Biography Award in 2013 for his book, Cronkite. Dr. Brinkley has a Bachelor's degree from Ohio State University as well as a Master's degree and Ph.D. in U.S. Diplomatic History from Georgetown University."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":15233,"3":{"1":0},"10":2,"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial","16":9}">Dr. Douglas Brinkley is an author, scholar and academic. He is currently a history professor at Rice University and the presidential historian at CNN. He is an author and has published 12 books. He received the Ann M. Sperber Biography Award in 2013 for his book Cronkite. Dr. Brinkley has a Bachelor's degree from Ohio State University as well as a Master's degree and Ph.D. in U.S. Diplomatic History from Georgetown University. Digital Publisher Binghamton University Libraries Digital Format audio/mp4 Original Format The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data MicroCassette Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Baby boom generation; Civil Liberties; Vietnam War; Democratic party; Activism; Vietnam Memorial; Dwight D. Eisenhower; John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":3,"3":{"1":0},"4":{"1":2,"2":14281427}}">Baby boom generation; Civil Liberties; Vietnam War; Democratic party; Activism; Vietnam Memorial; Dwight D. Eisenhower; John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, Richard Nixon. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 77:37 Subject LCSH Authors; Scholars; College teachers; Rice University; Brinkley, Douglas--Interviews Transcription Any written text transcribed from a sound, or alternative text from a visual medium McKiernan Interviews Interview with: Douglas Brinkley Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: Benjamin Mehdi So Date of interview: 9 September 1997 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) 0:08 SM: Okay, get over there. I will test it after the first question too. First question I want to ask is the recently and I have seen on the news a lot lately, and I have actually heard over many years, you will see George Will who will write articles on it yet he will make commentaries on ABC, you will possibly see Newt Gingrich saying it and on the floor of Congress and politicians generalizing about the boomer generation and their impact on American today, in mostly negative terms. I would like your thoughts and not only as your personal thoughts, but even from a historical perspective, whether the criticisms of the boomer generations has been leveled at them as they are the reason for all the ills in American society today, the breakup, the American family, the increase in the drug culture, the lack of respect for authority, those types of issues that were they were some individuals and even times the media tries to portray this group as the reason why we have declined as-as an American nation. 1:02 DB: In the view. I think it is all a lot of rubbish, that notion of blaming a generation for-for anything, particularly because what-what do you what do you have in a pre Boomer period, Jim Crow America, where African Americans do not have the right to vote, that they are living in, essentially an apartheid system throughout the south, that women are on subpar salaries, that minority migrant workers, minority workers have no rights whatsoever. You know, if you go back to that glorious Eisenhower (19)50s, before his boomers got control over American culture, what you would see is a is a white male autarky controlling the United States, his finances, and in controlling government. And I think we were much better off now in the (19)90s than we ever were in the (19)50s in the sense of more equity of distribution of capital. That is more civil liberties and civil rights for people. The American pie- it has been it was, it was being shared, I think, by more people, and hopefully by more to come in the future. So, I find that the boomer generation has been extraordinarily important in for has equal claim to being a group of a generation that has done more to change America in a positive fashion than any other generation simply on the areas of spite of civil rights and civil liberties which occurred during their period. Now, if there is going to be some criticism, there is-is a kind of feeling of the cheapening of American culture, the-the advent of kind of pop culture gone mad in, in Hollywood and magazines, records, music, but that is only because there is more and more people with capital, because of these changes to purchase, you know, D run DMC, you know, rap albums or to purchase, you know, Garth Brooks Country Albums or to get experiment leisurely in the drug culture. I do think that the promotion of drugs in the (19)60s, in some ways was problematic, because it is it not so problematic for middle class and upper middle class, but that just devastatingly dangerous for the underside, the other side, or Michael Harrington called it of American life. And so, you know, as any generation, there is a downside to certain things. But all in all, I think the boomer generation should be proud that they told the spoke the truth, and opened up the democratic process for more people than ever before. That is a major accomplishment. 3:45 SM: Just double check. It is kind of a little repetitive, because you already hit on some of the points. But if you were to look in 1997, we are heading into the new millennium. The overall impact of boomers not even looking at the criticisms that I mentioned the first question, but just as you know, the boomers are now reaching the age of 50. Bill Clinton has often said as a fore-runner, he feels he just reached 50. In fact, he turned 51 this year. But if you were to again, look at just overall this 65-70 million, I am quite sure the numbers of boomers amount of course, boomers being defined as individuals born between (19)46 and (19)64. Overall impact positive or negative? 4:28 DB: Positive. All generations are positive. I think it is all you know, there is nobody that goes around identifying themselves as I am a boomer. They do they have got kind of a problem. I mean, people are people. Kurt Vonnegut once told me there is no such thing as generation X, we are all generation Z. Each generation comes up together and starts themselves together and you know, there is no- or it could be generation a- but it is mean- meaning they are these deputies’ categorizations of everybody, by age bracket song. It is useful. In some ways, when you are writing and thinking about large, long-term trends in American society, but I do not think it has much bearing when you start talking about real people, they are always gaps between age groups, dad and son, you know, always have differences of opinion. That is kind of the way like this goes back to the days of the Bible. I do not think it is some new sociological generation trend. 5:25 SM: That leads you right into the question on the generation gap. It was a term that I do not even know if they use those terms. As a historian, you might know more than I would. But uh, that term was used over and over again, for boomers during the (19)60s and early (19)70s, to divide themselves and their parents to World War Two generation, mainly because oftentimes, boomers looked at the World War Two generation like they look at IBM, the corporate mentality, everybody be in it alike that, that whole picture of the IBM family of five people walking up front door, their house, all wearing a suit and a hat going into the same current status quo. And boomer said, not me, not me. 6:02 DB: Think it gets exaggerated. But if you look in the (19)60s you know, most Americans college students were pro Vietnam war that they were more college students that were for Richard Nixon then against Richard Nixon, in 1968 on colleges, and he where are the you know, we-we become hostage to is the extravagances of the counterculture of the (19)60s of you know, the Haight Ashbury experience and Timothy Leary's, in the factory in New York of Andy Warhol. And, and we, because of that the it spoke out so loudly and flamboyantly about, from an artistic perspective, and a social perspective. I mean, Abbie Hoffman, remember talking to some years ago at Princeton, he is now deceased, that he has to say, you know, we quickly learned all you have to do is call a rally, get 10 people, but if you grab a TV on a middle of campus, smash it with sledgehammers, burn an American flag, you will find about 300 people watching the freak event. And then the media will come in and cover it and bring it into a million homes. So, what started as eight people smashing up a television suddenly looks like it is this big event on campus. I do not think they are the upheaval that the counterculture had that they kind of impact on American society as the republicans like Newt Gingrich used to say it. It is the revolution in the (19)60s was a social revolution, dealing with civil rights and civil rights for African Americans and women, the battle browns, beautiful, historic battle markers. Sure, there are some from and emerged in the counterculture in certain ways like Kent State, you know, protest, you know, but most of them are aware of Selma. And watts in the march from march to Montgomery, and Birmingham, Little Rock, you know, Albany, Georgia, these were Greensborough. These were places where direct confrontation to change society took place in this massive way. Not that that because there was a love in that in Haight Ashbury, or Woodstock Rock Festival. Those are significant, but it is just a little, that is every generation is going to have something outrages the parents, today, kids will have in college, their three earrings and go to some other kind of concert. And it is an alienation process with mother, father, that is very healthy. I do not trust students that do not have a little bit of alienation. And then when they are young, I find in there, so they are not intellectually engaging, if they are going to be 19-20. And not really care to read poetry or fiction or be idealistic, and think that they can change some of the things or want to take a few swipes at the mainstream American culture. 8:54 SM: One of the things that said would you like some water? One of the things that is interesting, I have worked in higher education on 19 years, I was out of a for a while. And when young people today look at their parents or boomers, I always keep coming back to that term. There seems to be two reactions, and this is [inaudible] your feelings, whether you see the same thing as a scholar that teaches students and has worked with him for quite a few years. Number one, I am tired of hearing about it. I have seen these people live in nostalgia the- you know, the times are so great, you know, and the and the other thing is this, basically they are sick of it and then the then the, there is no middle ground. The other side is I wish I live then. I wish there were the issues today, like the issues then civil rights, you know, certainly ending the Vietnam War, the women's movement, a lot so many of the movements came to fruition the late (19)60s and (19)70s. Your thoughts on that? 9:47 DB: Well, it that part I think is-is true. The (19)60s are exciting, because young people-people in their 20s made a difference. I love looking at the pictures of young Dr. King and Stokely Carmichael and Andy Young and Jim Lawson and you know, John Lewis and they are extraordinary to see these young men in their 20s actually changing the US Constitution and forcing governors to in the federal government to respond to their desires for their rights there is to be 20 and have-have been part of that was so exhilarating. I have talked to any number of young people now that are what you are calling boomers and they are in their (19)50s today, that their highlights of their lives we are working with snick when they you know, we are actually at these sites and the change and the-the excitement and the notion of the antiwar movement. The fact is that they did bring Richard Nixon down. that Watergate in the Vietnam War of a- the people protesting were correct that this was an immoral war. There is- we could not find an honest historian in the country today, not to say that Vietnam War was a mistake. So, what these people were protesting were in many ways, accurate and correct. So and then the fact that the music of the era was just seemed to connect to the social protest in a way through whether it was through Bob Dylan or, or, you know, Janis Joplin or-or, you know, or others that just had that link to the-the soundtrack kind of to the era all makes it combined into a certain kind of counterculture romance that you could get caught up in and look back to, and you are never going to have that now, it is not the world's not quite like that. Now-now, the romance, you know, people are taking set up websites, for their political issues out on their homes, or will, you know, kind of try to organize some kind of rallies, but it just does not quite have the fervor and flavor that it did in the (19)60s. So, if you are interested in social activism, I think there is a, there is a missing element. However, an argument could be made that young people today have more outlets to explore the spiritual realm than they did back in the (19)60s, when you had a when was a much more an LBJ, how many kids did you kill today? Now you be much more defined young people's protesting in society in a sense, by practicing yoga, or work dealing with crystals, or adopting some kind of new age, religion or philosophy, have their own way of making their own spiritual space, you know, between themselves. And in that way, it was one of the reasons why as a writer like Jack Kerouac is so popular in college campuses is he was always dealing with the spiritual, not the political. And so, there is a sense of spiritual activism going on now. People trying to look at self in new ways, understand who they are, as a purpose, trying to explore the meanings of their, their life. And so, it is a different it is a more of an inward revolution. Right now, where I think in the (19)60s, it was an outward one, these things will all come and go and there will be another era of genuine protest in this country and some somewhere down the line. Now this was set versus the (19)60s for a while, but it will come. 13:15 SM: I like to ask you a- something like a what went wrong question. When young people and again, I was in that era, we thought we were the change agents for the betterment of society. We were the most unique generation in American history and, and as a historian, you probably may have a sense of that from other generations as well. But when you are part of it, when you are living it. It was just in the fact is that they felt that there was an empowerment that there we were the change agents you are in somehow that has not been transferred to the children of the boomers. 13:49 DB: Oh, I do not know about that. I think you are a little getting a little tied up on this boomer thing. From your own personal vantage point. The truth of the matter is there is a lot of arrogance of any young generation, gets on the streets and thinks they have ripped down a president and ended a war and brought about a social revolution and through race relations in America. That is a lot of accomplishment at a young age, and you cannot keep that crescendo going. So, you tend to look back on your past glories of that historical epoch in children being raised by parents or going to the dock any generation of kids they are going to say, oh, be quiet dad. It is like some different generation had to put up listening to look through dad's World War One stories. I was there in Europe. Now. This was when I was there Woodstock. It is the same there is not this kind of dividing line. It is as old as time can be. There is no big division between generations today. They accept- you know, in ways that are-are teasingly so or ways that are just kind of surface any more than there is with any other generation, and I would reverse it and say what went right. The Cold War is over the, the equal, we have a real much greater sense of what equal rights are and fair wages, you know employment benefits. The-the bringing income to minorities American, the next century is going to be over 40 percent nonwhite and allowing these people into the mainstream culture. The whole story of the boomer generation is one of just extraordinary success. Now if-if things did not go become, you know, golden for everybody the way you when you are 21, you think things are going to be different than they turn out to be that is another story. And no, in also there is a perpetual Peter Pannus about this generation, because they define themselves not in is a world as an older generation that they defined themselves when they were young. I have to tell you, it is no different than World War Two veterans, I interviewed D Day veterans in battle of the Bulge veterans all the time, that was the highlight of their life. They are 18, throwing hand grenades, and in the, you know, along the Rhine River, and it was their moment of, they have defined their whole lives around that particular experience. So, they may have gone on to own a car dealership or be an insurance salesman, raise a family, send them to school, they still define themselves as a veteran of World War Two, and it is their one thing that they are most proud of their contribution occurred when they were young. And I think you will find some boomers who had their defining moment when they were young. That is there is nothing wrong with that there are also people who get defining moments when they are older. And there will be some boomers that you do not even know their names of now that are going to be known as being the great leaders of that generation, who-who are now in their (19)50s only in the next 10-15 years are going to be excelling in ways that are the ending of AIDS and developing clean blood supplies. So, we do not you know, people that grew up in that generation, you know, they are all over these people. And so, there is was just as many as some people when they were young, they are going to be others that peak when they are older from your generation. It is great. 17:03 SM: When you look at the Vietnam War. In your opinion, why did it end? What is the number one reason that war ended? 17:13 DB: Because we failed to win. I mean, the ended because you can only take so much toward the ark, the domestic or tour economy apart, ruin the great society broke down two presidents, Lyndon Johnson and Richard Nixon. At that point, it is time to cash in it the-the chips, call it a quasi-victory like they did and send the troops home should have been done a long time ago. But, you know, the Vietnam War only ended because we were not winning. And it seemed impossible to win short of doing a kind of massive bombing campaign, which would have destroyed Americans credibility throughout the world, and would have done grave damage to NATO, and to continuing to call us on, you know, fractious relationships in American society. 18:05 SM: How important were the college students on college campuses and contributing to the ending of that war, knowing that when you look at this large generation, the biggest generation in American history, historians will say that 15 percent were really involved in some sort of activist activity at that timeframe. 18:24 DB: They were very important for framing the argument for giving a voice to the antiwar movement, through song through protest through just bodies to constantly apply pressure, though antiwar movement of 1965 looked a lot different than 1970 at Kent State. When you started getting people like William Fulbright and George cannons denouncing the Vietnam War, Walter Cronkite in Johnson's famous line there when Cronkite was anti came out, anti-Vietnam said there goes the war. He was losing America in the Harbinger's of that were ministers, pacifist groups, and youth culture groups were the Civil Rights Organizations find when Dr. King in April in May guess, yeah, April, was in April of (19)68 or (19)67, April (19)67, gave his speech, a Riverside Drive in New York, that in announcing the Vietnam War, and connecting the civil rights movement to the Vietnam War. That was a fatal moment for Lyndon Johnson. It was that that was when everything changed. And I thought that was the point that it was going to be clear that this was truly a social revolution and the antiwar movement now merged with the civil rights movement. 19:46 SM: When you look at the civil rights movement of this year, and when you look at freedom summer of 1964, and again, I know I am getting too caught up in the terminology of the boomers, but the oldest boomers at that, at that stage are 18 years old. And so, when you look at the impact of the boomers had on various issues in American history at that timeframe (19)60s (19)70s, how important were the- these boomers who may have had their first experiences, maybe through the Free Speech Movement at Berkeley when things started in (19)63. And then they went to (19)64, down south. But how important overall were these young people in the issue of civil rights? 20:23 DB: Well, they are extremely important because they first thought the African Americans largely in the civil rights movement were in their 20s. And as they developed many, most of their followers, it is easier to get a young audience that is in college to form a crowd, if you were going to hold on activity here this afternoon and wanted to get 200 people were better than to go to a campus and generate 200 people. They are all in a condensed area at one point of time. So it allowed civil rights, also, to have, you know, a sort of intellectual strongholds scattered throughout the country words like Cambridge and Madison and Hattiesburg and, you know, other college towns became symbols of places where people could share information and read about Herbert Marcuse, or Noam Chomsky, or could share their new enthusiasm for the Bob Dylan album could, you know talk about Mao Zedong and pass out his red books on campus and kind of create a was a place to spread a lot of this kind of, you know, youthful protest energy? 21:36 SM: You have, you have talked about some of the positive and negative qualities of the boomers. But if you were just maybe give through four adjectives positives and negatives? What were those positives again, be for the boomers and the negative? Just brief descriptions? 21:50 DB: Well, I do not-not sure. On the negatives, I think positive was that that when they are they confronted the crisis of the moment at a young age, which was the crisis in American society, the crisis in confidence in American leadership, and a crisis of what is democracy? Who controls the power? Who controls the purse strings of America? And why cannot we open up to allow more people into the system, that was the game going on when they came of age, and they confronted those issues in a in a vocal and forthright manner, and we are able to make a profound difference. They also, I think we are, I think that their contribution, you know, it became the popular culture now started in the (19)50s. But by the (19)60s, it became commerce and by the (19)70s really became commerce with so what I mean, it is the second largest export in America's, after our aerospace is pop culture, they talk about contributing to American exports and money, the whole pop culture industry that that emerged on a rock and roll and, you know, the endless massive Hollywood films and book tie ins and all the promotional aspects of things, which we frown on a lot, is what were some of our biggest money making activities in this country, you know, in the entertainment industry, which kind of emerges in in the spirit. And I think all things considered and entertainment industries is not necessarily a negative thing. I think it has quite a positive impact if it brings some sort of joy into working people in middle class people's lives. I do not really have anything negative on the generation, I think that is bad karma. You know, you know, to start seeing this generation that these negative and this one did it positive, it is, you know, it is just it is too cold. You know, there is, there is every generation confronting different problems. I think that yes, it was correct in the (19)60s generation to talk about sexuality openly, to let women talk about the need for their own sexual satisfaction in life for-for homosexuals to be able to come out like at Stonewall in places and have begun gay rights. The sexual liberation of the (19)60s was long overdue and puritanical America. On the other hand, it went overboard to the degree that free love and multiple partners led into the (19)80s the problems of sexual diseases in herpes and venereal diseases and in AIDS and so there was a cost factor that came in because it went too far. And I think if there was a criticism to that boomer generation, I think it is the sense of the excess in their ideas pushing it is they really believed in William Blake's notion that wisdom is not is excess. Hunter Thompson believes that he is a product of many ways of that period of access through-through excesses comes wisdom. I do not buy that, and I think that that is probably where that generation at that period where period of time pushed these envelopes a little too far. But today they do not. Today there is responsible they are running our government, their weather, and is any other generations responsible and running, you know, they have, they have grown up. But they be because they had an impact when they were 20 and 21. It made them feel they were more empowered Tom Hayden felt like, you know, when he wrote the Port Joran statement that we are going to change the world. This is a revolution right here this statement I just wrote SDS, you know, well, of course, now you may look back at that and realize that they were they were delusional. They think they were good as supplant the World Bank and, you know, these The International Monetary Fund, you know, through their revolutionary pocket proclamations. 25:54 SM: That is, it, there is one specific event that had the greatest impact on your life from this period. What-what was, there was there were so many, but if you could pinpoint one? 26:05 DB: Bob Dylan penning like a Rolling Stone. Because I did not get to live through, you know, when John F. Kennedy was-was shot, you know, I was three years old, when Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy was shot, I was a, Lyndon Johnson resigned, I was eight. I do not my memories of that those events are foggy at best; I was too young to know or appreciate him. So, I do not know quite I can see films. And I can read books, but I do not know just what it would-would have felt like to have been able to drift into San Francisco and go to Haight Ashbury and feel like you were part of this social revolution that was going on. But I can tell you one thing, I do know what it is like to drive in my pickup truck, down a country road and blast like a Rolling Stone and feel and tie all the sentiments and power of that entire generation, all kind of like pull into a funnel and transform in that one song. I get it, then I get chills. And I hear it. And I realized what that must have been like, the day that song came out. And I heard that on the jukebox. And I was sitting in a bar somewhere in America, you know, and I would have been ready to just head to any of these places that time that the moving in the just wispy right up that song. 27:24 SM: As a follow up, I want to recommend that to you. Listen, some of the country- Joe McDonald. Have you listened to the Vietnam Album? Yeah, unbelievable stuff. 27:33 DB: Yeah, that is straight Vietnam War protests like Rolling Stones piece of art. 27:36 SM: Right. One of the issues trying to get at in this project is trying to understand the healing process. There were so many divisions in America that time, different sides, lots of people that listening to each other. Again, getting back to that whole issue of not respecting authority and really challenging authority, but there were tremendous divisions. I want to get back to the Vietnam War. And those individuals who protested the war, were against the war. And of course, those who served. In your opinion, how far have we come in the healing process from the divisions of those times not only with between those who serve and those who did not serve, but even in the political spectrum, because you know, the history of the democratic party that has been the downfall is they started because of (19)68 and all the liberal mentality and conducting themselves in the war issue and, and the end only recently, are they may be trying to make the comeback? 28:35 DB: Yeah, no, I think it has been divisive in many ways. The combination of Vietnam protests the war. Also, Richard Nixon, Cambodia [inaudible], Watergate led to Jimmy Carter and Gerald Ford, led to them the-the reemergence of a jingoistic American stance through Ronald Reagan, and then slowly is led through Bush and Clinton into a moderate, right of center kind of approach in in this country, which is we are back kind of on the center. We are back on track during the Bush and Clinton years. But what the problem is, it is the-the part that is annoying, that still legacy of Vietnam is that in gets into your boomer question is where were how did you stand on Vietnam War. And we have to learn, I think, as a society to realize the antiwar protesters like Bill Clinton, were equally patriotic, as somebody who wanted to fight in the war. That is a hard concept for a certain portion of the population to believe. And in other words, Clinton's was denunciation of the war is refusal to fight in you know, some people look at it is cowardice and an almost cost him the election. I would argue that that he was the people that were protesting the war were equally American heroes, as were the veterans who went to war That concepts not an easy one for people to swallow. So, there was always a feeling well, if you were not pro war did not fight, you did not love your country. And I think there are many ways to loving the country. And it is not always just picking up guns and go into a war that you do not believe in. I think the civil disobedience that occurred during the (19)60s during Vietnam War was justified, I have to say, if I were grew up in that area, I would not I would have gone to war, I would have gone to fight. I know that about myself. On the other hand, I can also appreciate the courage that it took not to. Sometimes it is not just doing what you were told, but it is not doing what you were told that takes more courage. And I think that, you know, we need the-the healing process is there, it is underway, we need to constantly look at that period and realize that there-there are people that it is more people that act out of conscience and convictions of what they believe their best, are people that I can admire are not people who just were doing it because they got walking papers. Also, the disparity of who fought the war is still something that angers the black community. So many poor people and blacks ended up being the ones to shed the blood into a war, you know, where that people with money got out of the war. So, it becomes a sore point Vietnam because it shows the inequity of American life between rich and poor, yet again, I think you nailed the same thing. We look in our country. And you see that problem the vast disparity of wealth in the country. 31:39 SM: The Vietnam Memorial was opened in 1982. And it is now we are going to be having a big celebration down in Washington on the 50th anniversary coming up on Veterans Day, November 11. I have had a chance to go down there the last six years for Memorial Day and Veterans Day to try to get a feel and ambience helped me with this project get a feel about the healing process. I sense a lot of healing has taken place. But I also sense again, a little bit of a continuing divisions, the hatred for the Jane Fonda’s of the world never forgiving her for going and even Bill Clinton at times. Even Peter Arnett, who spoke two years ago, I sat next to three Vietnam veterans and they, he replaced Larry King who was supposed to speak, and they said if I knew he was coming, I want to show up today because he was the media, he was part of the problem in Vietnam. So, they had some negative stories, the media, but how important has the Vietnam Memorial itself, been in respect as Jan Scruggs wrote his book To Heal a Nation has it really healed the nation itself, man. And, of course, it was done a lot within the Vietnam veteran community. But your thoughts on the impact of that wall. 32:46 DB: I think it is important to first remember the war. It is important for the veterans that are alive today to go see, their families to see their-their buddies names on that wall, and it is always moving to watch veterans look at it. Beyond that, the memorial will be there. 100 years from now, 200 years from now, hopefully, you and I will be in our graves dead as can be. And people will be coming look at that wall and remember that moment in American history. But you have to realize its relevancy, what you are talking about today is as simple as because it is so close to our time. Years from now, it will be like going to a Spanish American War Memorial or-or Confederate War Memorial will be interest there but it will not resonate quite as strongly as it does right now in the-the nerves and the in, in the issues are so-so raw still, but it has, it has been a healer, a healer of sorts, it has been a focal point of energies for veterans to come to and hang out at. For people come and talk about the war. It has been a place to go a destination to, you know, to get some things off people's chests emotionally, mentally. So, it has, it has had a wonderful, long, cathartic service for our nation, I think. 34:03 SM: We took a group of students to see Senator Muskie because there were years before he died. And in that session, I mentioned this in your last trip here. We have to question about 1968, the convention was happening in America at that time. He was not well at that time he just got out of the hospital. We asked a question about the boomer generation and the healing process, and the divisions and we were expecting real response to talk about the (19)60s but when he responded he said we have not healed as a nation since the Civil War. He broke American the two parts and is there truth to that? 34:37 DB: No. Absolutely Could not be more true. That is what I am getting at here. When you focus so much on this boomer part, it is indulged self-indulgent because it is so close to us for looking at oh gosh is not a different look at our van it was no different than it ever was. They have it is so easy in every way imaginable. And the problems that we have international problems race has been going on for a long time violence their whole nation was founded on violence the whole selling the West was settled on extermination of Indian slavery, death, not meaning much. We are a violent nation. This is not new news that there can be people killed today in Philadelphia, oldest river countries that but we keep losing track of that in some ways, because we think everything is so new. And that is because we have no real historical sense about ourselves as a people, we always march forward without any understanding of looking backwards. So Muskie statement was one of sober reflection on the events, trying to quell the kind of hype that people keep making over Vietnam, simply because it is in their lifetime, and it is a crisis of their lifetime. Well, there have been millions of crises going on since the beginning of man, and they are going to continue to go on some large, some small, some bigger than Vietnam, some not. It was nowhere near as fatal Vietnam to our country is something like the Civil War. And it did not have anywhere near as damaging of ramifications for our country, as there was World War Two was an isolated bombing of peasant people in a remote part of the world, you know, for us, which, you know, gets way too much press and talked about and constantly simply because it is part of our life script, we experienced Vietnam in some way. So, it is a, it is a talking point, that next year is the 100th anniversary of the Spanish American War, I could not get any of the TV networks to do especially in the Spanish American War, much more significant more than Vietnam, in the forming of American life. We fire Hawaii, Puerto Rico, Philippines empire for the first time. It is the beginning of America and the world theater of trade with China wants to go on and on and on of what the Spanish American War did for American Life. We do not even want to talk about it. Nobody even wants to open a book, you cannot get a near publisher to publish a book on the Spanish American War, because nobody cares. Yeah, my god. 400 books on Vietnam, another veteran writing his story, this one from the protester, and oh my goodness, and-and if there is a criticism, I have on our modern culture is it is developing now. It is this focal point on self, to this degree that that is all we do is think about the, the tone and the tenor of our lives as being so significant, when we are just grains of sand, or just sparrows falling, where we were no different than anybody else. And we are all be ghosts soon. So, we should get on with some of the heavier matters of living in creating communities in a positive fashion instead of getting all tied up in the kind of acrimony over Vietnam. 37:36 SM: I know there is, there is so many books on Vietnam, but say 100 years from now, will they be writing books? Or is it the same? 37:44 DB: Sure, if I am saying all you have left is the war memorial that nobody goes to. 37:48 SM: And books gone on books collecting dust in a library. What do you think of the individuals again, I am just using the term here, the left leaders of that era who became conservative I think of a David Horowitz is in the world of Peter Collier, the world those individuals who are at the forefront of the left than they did a total turnaround, and then condemned all the people that were involved with them when they were young? And Just your thought on. 38:14 DB: Mr. Horwitz was a recent speaker here at your school or he was coming there. But they are, I do not have put much stock in those two gentlemen. Their books on the Roosevelt family in the Kennedy family are sleazy tabloid trash tracks. That just one step above the globe in the store, the National Enquirer in integrity, they their notion of coming out and denouncing a generation of playing all this politics, it is great press, and it puts them in the papers and headlines and people in people that are anti (19)60, anti what occurred in that period, from the left point of view, you know, meaning the right and loves this, you know, here is one coming to our side. It is like Eldridge Cleaver, leaving the Black Panthers to write for the National Review, or Jerry Rubin leaving the Yippies to work on Wall Street. You know, I think that oftentimes those characters that act like that do not have a whole lot of personal integrity of what it means to be a scholar and a true intellectual. They are simply into controversy for the sake and it makes them wonderful guest on-on the gambit of talk shows on television, but as you get right down to it, and not that they are not brilliant in their certain ways, but when you get right down to it, I do not see what they are, I just think what they are doing is creating noise and not putting the kind of sober you know, reality to it. The all of both of those books that they wrote on the Kennedys and Roosevelts are not you cannot put no I cannot use those footnotes without being considered a joke in a serious, scholarly way. It is not even pop history. It is always taking things one step at little too much of what an overstatement and inflation of fact, so you are just you are reading it-it is like you are reading a Harlequin romance, but yet they masquerade as being serious intellectuals and committed to truth so as a historian, those are not my type of characters you know and I would rather the- you know, it is me it is like with Horwitz, and Collier they bottomed out when the left bottomed out they went right there they were there for whatever the fashion of the moment is. I do not think they I mean as soon as America turned to the Reagan period, and that was where the majority seem to be at, that was where they were at. And they are, you know, they will always be there. They are never leading that movement. They are hopping on the bandwagon at any given moment. You know, if tomorrow there is a big social revolution that occurred my guess is you find them, they are jumping off the banding conservatism for the new movement of the moment. Very few people take them very seriously. 41:03 SM: You get a chance to read the radical [inaudible] 41:06 DB: No, you told me about that its worth reading. 41:07 SM: I think worth reading I think then I think that that is a lot better than the other books that you were talking about. I will not read the other two, but I think what I was on I think Brian Lamb had Horowitz or Collier on talking about one of the Kennedys of Academies of- 41:21 DB: They are, they are, they are major their major characters I mean, these are major quotes that, but they are not much above Kitty Kelly, they are getting really with the kind of with brains you know. 41:34 SM: I am going to I have got several other questions here, but I want to get into some of the individuals here of the year and I would like you to comment on your just-just brief thoughts on all of not only your personal thoughts on their impact of that period, but it is personal and an impact on the period itself. Jane Fonda. 41:57 DB: Jane Fonda is a great deal of admiration for her as an actress, she is superb as somebody who is largely been committed to-to you know, she is this is a Hollywood figure essentially, I have never taken her much more seriously than that. But she is a I think a fine woman who is a good actress, and it gets involved with some very good causes- I like her. 42:28 SM: Tom Hayden. 42:30 DB: like Tom Hayden also I think, unlike [inaudible], Collier and Horowitz, Hayden has a-a is constantly staying on the cutting edge of bringing out certain issues certainly he is no longer part of the ease of fringe character now he ran for mayor of Los Angeles and now everybody knows he is not going to win and he is so far on the left obviously but-but I think he raises some interesting points that makes us think about things he takes part in the American political process. I think he is a very honorable legislator and somebody whose ideas are always worth talking to in thinking about. I do not think Hayden does things for the money you know I do not think he is there to-to be sensational I think there is in general social commitment behind him to make-make changes I have looked at some of his recent books which will never make bestseller list because he is dealing one of them has to deal with you know, the need to study Indian culture and nature and environment all over yeah female book on environment and stuff, you know, but he is looking at issues and grappling with them he is not trying to just manufacture kind of you know, you know, hype up things. I do not think he is trying to particularly live on his past, past reputation. I think he is one of those characters has steadily been committed to-to his view of where America needs to go. 44:00 SM: Jerry Rubin and again using I am using 40 names here then so if anybody is my generation. 44:07 DB: Jerry Rubin’s you know, I think at the peak of his notoriety came with his book do it, which, you know, Jerry Rubin’s, just minor fringe figure of a really no import Abbie Hoffman had the great sense of humor, and wit, soon to be a major motion pictures deal this book, he was a lot more in that tradition of a Mort Sahl or Lenny Bruce, and Hannah. There was a great, great comment. He was a comic genius in many ways, Abbie Hoffman and I think you have to look at that side of the spoof of the hippies in his crate creativeness in guerrilla theater. And to understand that he is an important person, I think Ruben was always a second or third tier character who is never had either the charisma or the importance of Hoffman. 45:03 SM: Does not take up for going the next name [inaudible] Abbie Hoffman died several years back just outside Philadelphia. I think we were in Bucks County yeah; he was dead they found them, and he had $2,000 in the bank. Like I will never forget the article that was written the Inquirer stating that he had only had $2,000 to his name you get we have made a lot of money, but he has given away to friends having depression and that something that a note was written on his deathbed or the stating that no one was listening to him anymore. And you know, when I saw that and read that in his short obituary, despite what you might think, and what people might think about the hippie period, when he went into hiding and then he came back on the Phil Donahue show after he came out of hiding out in the state of Washington, I saw him in the Bay Area, he was working behind the scenes in the Hudson River dealing with issues on the environment and you are just your opinion on that statement that was at the end of this obituary. No one is listening to me any more so less I know he was having problems in his life but that struck me especially if people care about issues. 46:11 DB: Well, I think you have as you heard I said very nice things about Abbie Hoffman, but I mean on the front of his resume he is a con man he was a con man in a in a glamorous and funny in good one. We can always use it a couple of con men and they make life spice wants to recently William Burroughs in the New Yorker. He wrote before he died this horrible thing, but I had to kind of sick in a sick way agree with him which is a problem with Burroughs where he was saying not God, I do not. Let us hope to God that there are still people selling drugs in the streets and who wants a bland status quo America where everything looks like the strip mall, and everybody lives this perfect squeaky life what-what boredom? What dullness? I am a writer and one has to appreciate characters and Abbie Hoffman was a flamboyant, exciting, eccentric character. He but he was a con man. I do believe he was socially committed to things that he took on. And he had a massive amount of chutzpah to take on the CIA and to go and change himself to nuclear reactor sites and things as a social activist, which that kind of occupation takes, but I do not use the ways that his declining years dealing with cocaine and alcohol and depressants, I would not pay much attention. I do not think Abby was ever a symbol of that he was a symbol of the (19)60s but I do not think we want to he was only the symbol one certain aside of the (19)60s, which was the kind of hippie guerrilla theater of protest, which was mainly men on self-promotion, in getting in the news, you know, and being pranksters on the American scene. These are anarchists and we are always going to have some anarchist, I think they are healthy to have a few peaceful anarchists, not Unabomber anarchist, but people that could do social protest or play, play mild pranks on the mainstream society to make us see ourselves in Hoffman at his best, was that at his worst he was he was a criminal. And you know, so I just do not you see, it is unfortunate because what will happen is people will take Abbie Hoffman and Reuben as the (19)60s, Abbie Hoffman, you know the Yippies. This is just a fringe element of the period and I would again say take a look at the people wearing suits and ties marching with Dr. King all over the place singing We Shall Overcome. This is where the revolution in American life took place, not Abbie Hoffman staging a guerrilla theater event. And they were important Hoffman's events at the time, they are newsflashes and dramatic, and we will never forget it gets them. But it did not Abbie Hoffman, if Abbie Hoffman did not exist, not much would have changed in that course of American history. 49:00 SM: The Black Panthers is another group that certainly in this period, Huey Newton everybody remembers that poster of him. And certainly Bobby Seale, Eldridge Cleaver. I remember seeing Kathleen Cleaver when she came to Ohio State when I was there. I mean, the whole city was in turmoil. And Kathleen Cleaver, when flew into the Columbus Airport and escorted by many-many cop cars to Mershon Auditorium. 49:28 DB: I do not place; Black Panthers are fascinating to study. I enjoy reading about Bobby Seale and Eldridge Cleaver and Huey Newton and the gang. But ultimately, believer in the nonviolent protest movement, also the politicized internationalizing, the civil rights movement that Dr. King was doing. I can never kind of, I think it is a mistake to glamorize the gangster mentality of the Panthers into acquainted with the-the honest civil rights efforts. That is the problem things got blurred by the late (19)60s and (19)70s where the great accomplishments of the era blurred into the Black Panthers, the great accomplishments of the peace movement got blurred into the Yippies, which became, which in many ways were the worst examples of the positive social revolution that was occurring. Yet one has to say I understand the Black Panthers the great line, the Panthers, Bob Dylan had a song it was all over now baby blue, where he has the line, the empty-handed beggar at your door is standing in the clothes that you once wore. And the Panthers changed into the empty-handed Bay, grab the door standing and the closer you once were, and he was carrying it, aka submachine gun, motherfucker. And you have got to do what we want to we are going to blow your head off whitey. That is a powerful switch of sentiment in in, it did do its desired effect of shocking white America into fearing blacks. And in that sense, hearing them more and empowering them, meaning turn the other cheek, you are not afraid if you can walk up to-to one of the students in Little Rock Nine and spit on them and they keep walking, or you can walk up to a black man and smack him in the face. And he turns the other cheek. White culture is not going to be afraid of black America when you now, since the Black Panthers. You walk down the street, I walked down tonight in Philadelphia with my suit on down the street and I see three black teenagers walking down the young, I have more money than them. I am more educated than them. Second, I see them immediately tense up, you are getting fearful. And then suddenly they are empowered, and I am not. And I think the Panthers are the ones that started that, which is an empowering black culture, which I can appreciate that on the other hand, it is not a solution. It is just, it is just more racial warfare. In so what I want to understand the Panthers and the sentiments that they had; it was it was quite primitive in its approach. 52:00 SM: The Berrigan brothers. 52:03 DB: Let me- mike was down yes, the-the Berrigan brothers are. I just got a letter to go have dinner with one of them. I forget which one, are they both alive? 52:17 SM: Ones in jail. 52:19 DB: Who is the one that is out of jail? 52:23 SM: But- Philip is in jail was give [inaudible] See, there is some- Daniel-Daniel Berrigan is out of jail. Philip is in jail. 52:30 DB: So, Daniel Berrigan went out of jail. 52:33 SM: Yeah, and I think he is not very well either. 52:34 DB: I need to catch up with him. 52:36 SM: He lives in New York, I think. 52:37 DB: He is coming to New Orleans. I am a have dinner with hi- Well, I think there are examples. I am Catholic. So, I think they are examples of the, of the role of what we call radical theology in that continues a wing of the Catholic Church that I have always admired. You know whether it is in Central America or the Philippines or their home of an activist priest and other useful, so I mean, we do not have that many of them and having Daniel Berrigan bringing some, you know, showing up, it had a calming effect for certain people connected the Catholic Church to some of the social the poor people's movement, in a very real way, the antiwar movement. I think some of Berrigan’s-Berrigan’s tactics got a little extreme of pouring blood on tanks and things such as this. But again, that was in do part to the recommendation of the media age that you need to do something extravagant. In order to bring the cameras there. The priest just held candles and sang the media was not going to cover that. But if you have started pouring blood on tanks, my God, you were going to be reading the nightly news. So um, you know, I think the Berrigan’s were shrewd in that way. 53:50 SM: There is a new book written on the Berrigan brothers, by Murray Palmer, and- 53:55 DB: I got to pick that up. 53:56 SM: Yeah, it is I am reading right now because we are trying to bring a group of students to down to Jonah's house to meet his wife because Phillip Berrigan’s his wife is in jail, because his daughter is 21 and she is carrying on the tradition of Jonah house. And I want to I want to ask students to go down and see how people are living their whole life to activism- 54:14 DB: Who is this now? Whose house? 54:16 SM: McAll- Jonah House. That is where [Elizabeth] McAllister. That is the wife of Philip Berrigan and his daughters. He has three kids. 54:24 DB: Phillip Berrigan does? Did they all live there? 54:26 SM: Yeah, they all live there and- 52:27 DB: What is it called? Jon- 52:28 SM: Jonah, j o n a h house it is in Baltimore. I want to go down and meet them. They are supposed to be three nuns there that are in- 54:34 DB: What do they do at Jonah house? 54:37 SM: It is, it is part of whatever they do is there for their livelihood is activism fighting for issues and they have someplace in the Midwest is where they have this weekly or monthly newsletter that comes out that is affiliated with Jonah house from the activities because his wife is like Philip and McAllister, I think is her last name and just impactful people because they were on 60 minutes. So, and the daughters 21. And now she is doing the same thing. 55:02 DB: At the Jonah house? 55:03 SM: Yes, she is a college graduate and- 55:05 DB: What is her name? She uh- 55:06 SM: Oh my God. There is, there is three he has got three kids and ones 16 ones 21 I think [inaudible] 55:12 DB: They all work there at the Jonah House? 55:13 SM: Actually yeah, I think the one works there. The others are going to school. They live in the area. Yep. 55:19 DB: Okay. 55:19 SM: Couple other names here, um Dr. Benjamin Spock. 55:25 DB: Oh Well, you know, Benjamin Spock is of course the baby doctor and antiwar protester and I think have also have a very positive character positive force. In the time of reassuring people in the end, it is just what both Berrigans and Spock so people said other it opened up the net of who can protest it. It brought in in people here is the most famous baby doctor denouncing sending young 18-year-olds to get their heads blown off in Vietnam. I think it had a powerful impact and convinced a lot of people. You know, I am with Dr. Spock, and it gave a celebrity status to gatherings. If you are going to want to draw 3000 people, you need some celebrities. And by having Spock there, you can guarantee people come out to hear Benjamin Spock. So, you know, he had a he had this, he has this footnote in the era. 56:19 SM: George McGovern and Eugene McCarthy. 56:22 DB: George McGovern has transcended the period really. And one of the great new deal liberals of recent times has continued to be somebody above integrity and honesty, decency. And if you really looked at McGovern’s foreign policy stances in the (19)60s and (19)70s when he was in the Senate, you would be amazed to see how right he was about so much. So, he is I think, of all these names are saying somebody is a little more special. I think he is- has a is really a maj- a major kind of alternative voice liberal voice in America and in simply carrying on the Henry Wallace tradition of the Democratic Party. 57:07 SM: And Eugene McCarthy? 57:09 DB: He is a little bit of a crackpot. In some ways, I like him. When I say crackpot, I just mean, he has become so irascible and so co- such a contrarian, that everything he does is he uses his wit and intelligence to win people over all the time. I do not think he has ever evolved out of his role in being the antiwar senator. And that was (19)68 that was 30 years ago, and he has still kind of the, you know, living on that that one moment where I think he could have been more useful in our politics if he continued to work as a congressman or, or did something beyond sort of just living on his past reputation. 57:53 SM: Getting into the presence of this era. And I will start with Eisenhower, because again, you know, as a Young Boomer that was the first person I remember, as President going from Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. 58:06 DB: Eisenhower was underrated, overrated at his time by being double elected, and love, underrated in the (19)60s and (19)70s. In truth, he kept America out of war. He was he most famously taught us that we need to balance our budget that we should not write more money for checks than we then we have to fiscal conservative in those ways, which we are seeing now is probably prudent, and was an honorable and good president. John F. Kennedy was the right man at the right time, that great passing of the torch from Ike the oldest president ever to the youngest, he represented the tenor of the times when society was changing, just think of the number of new African countries coming into the UN at that time. And, and all of this so when I think, you know, I think the Kennedy also, you know, did a fairly decent job of handling himself in the middle I am going to use the restroom. Just a minute. Kennedy. Yeah, so I think a larger question before going through each of these, I think we were lucky we had largely good presidents Sidney Kennedy was a good president in in the Cold War period, except for Nixon, I think we would say Nixon and Reagan are the two presidents that I find reprehensible in certain regards. Both because of largely their great dishonesty that both people and towards the American people, their inability to tell the truth, to me was, was frightening. But the I think Kennedy, of course, has some of that too. But he just could not help but reveal that he was the person representing into the era in a certain way. I think he made inroads with civil rights that were extremely important. I think his handling of Cubism in Britain. And we were important I think he said it kind of tenor for-for the era. And of course, assassination is such a moment in American life that will never be forgotten. I think Lyndon Johnson was much better president and some people think in some regards, certainly his Great Society programs in his fighting for civil rights, puts him at the forefront of American leadership in this period and on the other hand, it is so paradoxical you have that his obsession of seeing the world from a Cold War lens in Vietnam but I would say you know that there was many students of history there many sides of Lyndon Johnson the complex man and-and I have a large amount of admiration for him Nixon it just the paranoia factor with Nixon and with Johnson just drives you crazy as a historian I mean, these people are not are to have that kind of level of paranoia and to be in power is scary to me. You know, one of the things that I liked about Clinton, and I like about Bush, I like about Ford and Carter, was that they were not paranoid. They were my head is something in them was able to take a little bit more balanced. You they were not feeling that they were being you know, people were after them. Even Reagan did not have that kind of paranoia. They did not at all. So anyway, that is my view. 1:01:23 SM: Just a few more here. Timothy Leary. 1:01:29 DB: Leary was a kind of like a carny, at the carni- at the carnival or something, he is not really a serious character. And I think, look, I mean, what was good about Tim Leary, was that here was a Harvard psychiatrist. Experimenting was something worth experimenting with, LSD, what are the effects of this newfangled drug it was legal at the time, he the belief that it had these different powers. But I think what I do not like about Leary is not that he was willing to talk about LSD. But I think that kind of Jack Kerouac once said, when they tried to have him take LSD, then by then I mean Ellen Ginsberg and Leary and all and Kerouac said hey, guys, walking on water was a made in a day in the thought that they can walk on water in a day by eating a little tablet, to me seems, you know, that suddenly they were going to have all the answers to the universe, because of the chemical shows that kind of stupidity and naivete, and it was worse- had some very damaging effects on American culture. On the other hand, if you take the kind of Aldous Huxley approach from his book, doors of perception, certainly I think, experimenting with LSD, did open up perceptions for some people and could have been a thing but as soon as you start going over and over again doing did you become an acid head and fry your brain and to you know, there are a lot of young people that [audio cut] 1:03:14 SM: Barry Goldwater. 1:03:18 DB: Well, let me just say one thing about the Timothy Leary, what I do not like to doing on now, is the inability to talk rationally about these characters like I am trying to do, because as soon as you say anything positive about Timothy Leary people either go love Leary, that was that polarization you were talking about on figures like that? It is disturbing mean, if I told The New York Times Book reviewer that I found Timothy Leary interesting. They would not give me any more books just to review for The New York Times. These are the controversial characters because of the way we look at drugs now. But I think it is a story you just have to understand that put if you put Leary in his time and place you-you can see how he emerged, why he emerged in it was not a matter of promoting Timothy Leary, but it was a matter of just understanding that Leary's bizarre contributions to that period you know, there was all sorts of American history is replete with every kind of religious fanatic imaginable I am not sure Leary is more strange than Joseph Smith was, you know, with the more finding the Book of Mormon you know, these are kind of false prophets that are that are always out there and they are worth studying that we are talking about. That does not mean one embraces their-their efforts. Goldwater was over there was a misunderstood in some ways he is the genuine article, the real libertarian conservative, I think is its harsh anticommunist views were dangerous. With his- the way he would talk kind of cavalierly about bomb dropping bombs on Vietnam and things. I think his inability to understand the civil rights movement properly was a great drawback. In- thank goodness, we got defeated horribly by Johnson and (19)64. On the other hand, Goldwater as his career, we look at his whole career, we can see that he was a man of personal integrity of deep beliefs. A true Western conservative, somebody whose word was good, somebody who had a big role to play in the bringing down in Richard Nixon because he could not stand to have something like that wine to the American people. Somebody who supported the Panama Canal treaties, when Ronald Reagan did not. A genuinely somebody who you could at least deal with, and I think was a very positive figure in American life. As he as we look at his whole life, I think there was a moment of time when he ran for president where he was certainly not fit for that position, due to his at least the rhetoric of a kind of strike militancy that was behind him, which would not have been helpful at the time? 1:06:05 SM: What about Ralph Nader? 1:06:07 DB: Nader's the kind of the perennial watchdog, nothing new there and nothing changes there goes to the beat of his own drum, is that he has the that squeaky clean ethic, which is useful in throwing Nader on corporate America or on any issues always. It is always useful to have people that are keeping others in check. He is the unwritten check in our checks and balances. 1:06:36 SM: Hubert Humphrey. 1:06:39 DB: Classic-classic New Deal, liberal writing of the coattails of FDR well into the (19)60s. First rate senator, not much of a vice president botched his opportunity to be president in (19)68. But it is one of these sorts of honorable senators who has very good for labor and, you know, a positive force also on getting the Civil Rights Act of (19)64 and (19)65 through. so, you know, first rate, first tier senator. 1:07:13 SM: Muhammad Ali. 1:07:17 DB: Absolutely major figure, I mean, more- bigger than all the people he had mentioned so far, in the league of his own because years from now, he will be remembered forever. And probably the most well-known name in the world. Muhammad Ali, everybody knows him everywhere. He just an extraordinary combination of spirituality of political conviction, of athletic prowess, of his ability to speak so fast that in rhyme and in riddles, and he just captured all of our imaginations. And I think his antiwar protest was mutually significant. But as he has moved on in life, through his disease, he has become a symbol of disease. Here is somebody that is handicapped with that Hodgkin's disease, Parkinson's disease, right, and is able to go around the globe and constantly reach out to other people in pain and misery. And he is a symbol of many things that are that are that are positive. It is probably the most singular athlete of the 20th century most well-known athlete of the century. 1:08:31 SM: Spiro Agnew. 1:08:32 DB: Just a you know, a corrupt footnote to the times. Dirty black Asterix to the Nixon era, never had any real power ever. It was just a hat henchmen hatchet man for Richard Nixon, a bit word politician from Maryland who never really had any-any sense of real genuine accomplishment in his career, short of being, you know, working on saying pithy phrases to put down fellow other Americans. It is not leadership to win power by denouncing other Americans leadership. It is about bringing people together, as soon as you have a president that scapegoat’s elements of the population for our nation's problems. You have about bad leader, a good leader should never scapegoat a fellow citizen, no matter who he should end up liking all groups in America and you know, unless you are obviously a murderer in any criminal class, but, you know, you know, you know, in case of Agnew trying to scapegoat gays or women or the women's movement or blacks, that is the lowest kind of thing. It is like the Jonathan Swift notion that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel claim. 1:09:45 SM: Robert McNamara. 1:09:47 DB: McNamara was the as the was our worst Secretary of Defense in the history of the post since it was created in (19)47. He was the worst because he was somebody who knew Vietnam was futile as early as (19)64 and (19)65 and allow the word continue lie to himself to Lyndon Johnson to the American people. And now his as how, has a hard time living with himself, because, he started out to be a wonderful character in many ways he, you know, a decent I think, motor executive with Ford Motor. But by not having the courage to talk candidly and put his career on the line to the best of the country. He ended up leading the president and therefore our nation down the garden path in Vietnam. 1:10:36 SM: Dr. King, Martin Luther King, we could probably talk for hour and a half. 1:10:42 DB: You know the giant of our time because of his ability, oratory of writing, of the sheer courage of Dr. King, and what it took to every minute, every moment knows that there were death threats on your life, something, any protest you were had could be your last, and to constantly pick yourself up with a smile in forge forward. It was the perfect leader for the civil rights movement, and we would be hard pressed to think of a replacement for King those sorts of people with genuine leadership qualities come around even once every couple generation. 1:11:15 SM: What about some of the women of the Gloria Steinem is Bella Abzug, Betty Friedan, the leaders of the women's movement, they are your thoughts on them. 1:11:25 DB: Unfortunately for the women's movement, they never had a Dr. King none of those people can hold a candle to Dr. King, but yet all of them had their significant role I think I think Gloria Steinem's come out of that group to be a somebody who understands women's issues in a way in a larger cultural context. For her generation, at least to Hillary Clinton's of the world, you know, understanding the need to be both a mother and both activists but also to you getting a little more conservative when they get older, but also wanting a sense of sexuality without, you know, saying I do not I am not disowning feminism, totally, I mean, being feminist, feminine qualities totally. So, I think she is the most-most interesting of that group as a personality. But the women's movement itself was usually important. On the other hand, I do not think it ever went far enough, due to the fact of fractions within their either coalition, and a lot of women wanted doors open for them, or wanting, you know, traditional kind of, I want to be a housewife, or I want to have that is, you know, they never really were able to capture the kind of swelling movement of two demands there for the Equal Rights Amendment. Still never really too cold yet. Any woman today, working in network news or in law firms owes a lot to those women who are, I think, a lot of doors down for them. So, the combination of a lot of minor characters added to a lot in the women's movement, but none of them exuded this kind of control or leadership over the movement. 1:13:05 SM: That he had mentioned earlier about Bob Dylan. And I just use a general term the music musicians of this period. And the impact of this generation has there ever other means there has been music in the (19)40s there was Glenn Miller and all of that, but has there ever been a generation in America where music was such a crucial part of their being? 1:13:23 DB: No, but I think everyone now it has become since then, I think it was a post war phenomenon, the beginning of the road record albums, you know, early part of the century so by the but it would be really becoming a mass product in postwar period where everybody had a record player. So, he started having a lot more people identifying with the singers in the (19)50s. But everything Elvis Presley bit more than Bob Dylan, and it was Elvis Presley, who really, really brought, you know, this sort of mass way Frank Sinatra, you know, and (19)50s rock and roll, you know, which is to be made the big change. I think Chuck Berry's an enormously influential and important and underrated figure. But that is different story. 1:14:07 SM: As we are getting close to the end if you get a meeting at 11:30 I want to end around. One question here in the final question is dealing with the issue of trust is a historian you probably can go back to other periods in American history where Americans or even leaders had problems with trust, but want to read this do you think we will ever have trust for elected leaders again after the Vietnam War after Watergate, after the enemies lists that we all knew and [inaudible] as college students, we knew what Nixon was doing. Remember being an Ohio State University and there were cameras over around the entire oval and infuriated our campus because every picture of every student was being shot and we knew it. Why? And if the boomer’s distrust what effect is this having on the current generation of youth, which is the kids- 1:14:56 DB: I think Bob Dylan often has wonderful sayings for all time. He is not a (19)60s character. He has a brilliant album out that just came out right now. And Dylan's and an album out called Empire Burlesque, which emerged in in the early (19)90s. Very, no would have been, it would have been. I am sorry, it would come, I think, in the late (19)80s. But yeah, late (19)80s. Empire Burlesque, which is a line in there, “If you want somebody you can trust, trust yourself,” is the name of the song. And I think that is sort of the subvert ethic of our time. Now, if you want somebody you trust, trust yourself. That is why there is this turning into words to self so much. The distrust of government has led to reemergence of the individual. And people now trying to learn to trust who they are on that deep turning inward right now. So yeah, there has been permanent damage done by Watergate and Vietnam, and in corruption and politics. But look, it has always been there. Nobody is ever, when is the time people truly trusted politicians. I mean, there were moments, you know, I think, during the war time, when there was a kind of, but you know, FDR was moved and distrusted by endless numbers of people. I just do not believe our countries ever based on pure trust in the politician, or anywhere in the world. But I do not think it is eerie damage. That is- I do not see a shortage of people running for Congress. I do not see a shortage of things. And I think our country is in pretty good shape. You know, I do not think that are, I think the American people should be distrustful of their government in some ways, and to keep an eye on them. And that is what the whole checks and balance system is about. We also know that we have the power and we taught our politicians through Watergate, that we can bring you down at any minute. So, you better run a straight path. And so, we get people I think, Watergate does not have to be seen as a negative and Vietnam does not have to be seen as negative. It could be the triumph of-of Watergate, the triumph of taking down a precedent that was breaking the law, replacing them and business went on as usual. 1:17:09 SM: Is that is that the lasting legacy might be that history books are written about? 1:17:13 DB: That is right now. James Cannon’s wonderful book on Gerald Ford, that came out recently, you know, it is really hammers that point home that Watergate is the triumph of the American constitutional system. It is not a negative event. 1:17:27 SM: Dr. Brinkley, thank you very much. 1:17:31 DB: You are welcome. 1:17:32 SM: Great. Excellent. (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 2 Microcassettes Rights Statement Many items in our digital collections are copyrighted. If you want to reuse any material in our collection you must seek permission, or decide if your purpose can qualify as fair use under the U.S. Copyright Law Section 107. If you think copyright or privacy has been violated, the University Libraries will investigate the issue. Please see our take down policy. If using any materials in this online digital collection for educational or research purposes, please cite accordingly. Dublin Core The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/. Title A name given to the resource Interview with Dr. Douglas Brinkley Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Brinkley, Douglas ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Authors; Scholars; College teachers; Rice University; Brinkley, Douglas--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. Douglas Brinkley is an author, scholar and academic. He is currently a history professor at Rice University and the presidential historian at CNN. He is an author and has published 12 books. He received the Ann M. Sperber Biography Award in 2013 for his book Cronkite. Dr. Brinkley has a B.A. from Ohio State University, an M.A. and Ph.D. in U.S. Diplomatic History from Georgetown University. Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1997-09-27 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.10.2016.28a ; McKiernan.Oral.10.2016.28b 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. 77:37 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/e9851186ed075a3d4f2bdd87def8f165.jpg 3e0f52a41002d65b28c99596a3bc41f5 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/2b88251b4d732322cf24e38eb8335ef0.mp3 6f568e405746d6d2ec7500855ae55cfe 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. <h3>The McKiernan 22</h3> <div>Stephen McKiernan interviewed legends of the 1960s. When asked in 2021 where one should start when sifting through his vast collection, he provided the following list:</div> <ul> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/854">Julian Bond</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1866">Bobby Muller</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1175">Craig McNamara</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/910">Dr. Arthur Levine</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/837">Diane Carlson Evans</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/942">Dr. Ellen Schrecker</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/876">Dr. Lee Edwards</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/841">Peter Coyote</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1233">Dr. Roosevelt Johnson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/899">Rennie Davis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1222">Kim Phuc</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/917">George McGovern</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/833">Frank Schaeffer</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/840">Rev. Dr. Frank Forrester Church </a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1240">Dr. Marilyn Young</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/842">James Fallows</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/835">Joseph Lee Galloway</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/911">John Lewis</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/839">Paul Critchlow</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/888">Steve Gunderson</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/1159">Charles Kaiser</a></li> <li><a href="https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/items/show/2407">Joseph Lewis</a></li> </ul> Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Stephen McKiernan Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available Binghamton University Libraries Language A language of the resource English Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource In copyright. Template: Simple Audio Player with Transcription This template displays an audio player by Amplitude.js with a scrollable transcription which is loaded from the "Transcription" metadata field. This template displays an audio player with the first attached image file as the 'cover image'. For its audio source, the template looks for the first attached audio file. If additional audio files exist, they should be combined using audio editing software, or a separate Omeka item should be made for each part. Date of Interview 2009-07-09 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Elijah Anderson Language English Biographical Text <span data-sheets-value="{"1":2,"2":"Dr. Elijah Anderson is a sociologist, cultural theorist, scholar, and professor of Sociology at Yale University. He specializes in Urban Ethnography. Dr. Anderson received his Ph.D. in Sociology at Northwestern University."}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":15105,"3":{"1":0},"11":4,"12":0,"14":[null,2,0],"15":"Arial","16":10}">Dr. Elijah Anderson is a sociologist, cultural theorist, scholar, and the Sterling Professor of Sociology and African-American Studies at Yale University. He specializes in Urban Ethnography. He is the author of several books including his most recent, titled Black in White Space: The Enduring Impact of Color in Everyday Life (2022). His other books include Code of the Street: Decency, Violence, and the Moral Life of the Inner City (1999), winner of the Komarovsky Award from the Eastern Sociological Society; Streetwise: Race, Class, and Change in an Urban Community (1990), winner of the American Sociological Association’s Robert E. Park Award for the best-published book in the area of Urban Sociology; and the classic sociological work, A Place on the Corner (1978). Dr. Anderson received numerous awards and recognition, including the consultant for the White House, United States Congress, and the National Academy of Science.  In 2002, he was awarded the Stockholm Prize in Criminology. Previous to his tenure at Yale University, he was a Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Anderson received his Ph.D. in Sociology from Northwestern University. 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":"Anti-War Movement; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam Memorial; John F. Kennedy; Deviance; Howard S. Becker; Outsiders—Defining Deviance"}" data-sheets-userformat="{"2":2,"4":{"1":2,"2":14281427}}">Anti-War Movement; Civil Rights Movement; Vietnam Memorial; John F. Kennedy; Deviance; Howard S. Becker; Outsiders—Defining Deviance Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 52:43 Subject LCSH Sociologists; College teachers; Yale University; Anderson, Elijah--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: Elijah Anderson Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: REV Date of interview: 9 July 2009 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (Start of Interview) SM (00:02): ... as soon as I get everything ready here. I got to turn the sound up. All right. Can you hear me? EA (00:06): Yeah, I can hear you. SM (00:07): All right. Very good. Pretty nice weather we are having. EA (00:13): Oh, it is. SM (00:15): Considering all that rain we had. EA (00:16): It is not as hot and humid as it usually is this time of year. SM (00:22): First question I would like to ask then ... Again, thank you very much for doing this. When do you think the (19)60s began, in your opinion? And what do you think was the watershed moment for most of the young people from the boomer generation? EA (00:41): Well, I guess it depends on how you think of the (19)60s because, for a lot of people, the (19)60s are thought of as this period of a certain quest for freedom, individualism, that kind of thing, but especially a time of free-thinking people. I know, stereotypically, it is all about relaxing standards and that kind of thing and the so-called deviant people becoming more legitimate, that kind of thing. I mean that is what people like to think. There is a book by a mentor of mine, Howard Becker, and the book is entitled Outsiders. Basically, in this book, what he does is speak about the issue of rules. He tries to account for deviant behavior. Up to this point, scholars have talked about deviance as, again, in an objective kind of way, that mission being that deviant behavior is behavior that goes against society's standards, values, and rules. Basically, given that perspective, it is pretty easy to tell what deviance is and what it is not. What Becker does in his book is raise a lot of questions about that. He comes up with the so-called subjective view of defiance and, basically, this view of deviance says that deviance is whatever powerful people say it is at the time, and to really know deviance, you have to know something about how people react to certain acts and how they then go about labeling people that they consider to be in violation of standards, values, and rules that you care about or that certain people labeling them deviant, that care about them, you see? What he introduced in this book, which was published in 1963, but the source articles were written over a period of time through the late (19)50s, what he points to here is a profound relativity with respect to rulemaking and rule breaking, and I think that, to some extent, his idea was, to some extent, perhaps a manifestation of the period which you are speaking, where people more and more were trying to embrace this kind of relativism and trying to see the other side, trying to put themselves in the place of people who would be thought of as deviant or people who would be castigated, put down, subjected to the whims of the powerful and that kind of thing. What he did was basically he was able to come to appreciate the so-called victims of society and even to underscore the fact that they were not so bad after all, if you know what I mean? But I think this is what you saw more and more in the 1960s with more and more young people raising questions about the status quo, raising questions about the established institutions, especially when those institutions were fomenting and fostering a war that they did not believe in, to go and die in. So, you have every reason, people, to raise up and to rise up, I should say, and raise questions about the system, and this is what people ultimately did in the (19)60s. I do not know if that is what you meant, but- SM (04:55): Yeah. Well, that is beautiful. As a follow-up- EA (04:57): But, to me, that is what the (19)60s kind of represented. SM (05:01): Based on what you just said and what Becker said in his book, The Outsiders, how do you respond? You have heard this over probably the last 15, 20 years from columnists, like George Will, and even politicians, like Newt Gingrich, that they place all the ills of American society and they point right back to that era of the boomer era, whether it be the (19)50s, (19)60s, and (19)70s, for the breakdown of the family, the breakdown of American society, the breakdown of morals, the lack of respect for authority. When Ronald Reagan became president, they praised him for trying to beat these kinds of things. But still, they will write about the boomers in that era in very negative terms. How do you respond to that? EA (05:54): Well, I think basically what you had in the 1950s in America was a strong sense that we lived in a rather homogeneous society, and this society was basically quite Anglo-Saxon Protestant. Of course, this included people who were that way and wanted to be that way, it seemed, even to the point of divesting themselves of their own ethnic particularities instead of joining into this great American way, so to speak. So there was a great and strong pull or a push for people to assimilate, that is to divest themselves of their particularities, whether they be whatever ethnic group, and to really blend in to be a part of this great American way and to contribute, to some extent, to this homogeneity, if not in phenotype, then in values and orientation, so to speak. I think this is what you did have in the Eisenhower era when Blacks and other minority groups basically were pretty much likely to try hard to assimilate, to divest themselves of their own ethnic particularities, and join in the great American way, so to speak. A lot of people, of course, were fine with that. But the (19)60s, I wrote about a kind of license for people to experiment and to move off the plantation, so to speak, and that is what people did. I think that your more conservative commentators react to this with a great alarm, thinking that, well, if people really do go off the plantation, this has implications for the integrity of the plantation itself and the values that uphold that plantation. I think, to some extent, they would be in line with trying to support that ideology that supports the plantation, not to break it down, if you know what I mean, the structures that hold it together, so to speak. SM (08:26): Again, a lot of people that I have interviewed have had a hard time trying to classify boomers over a 20-year period because the early boomers, those born between (19)46 and (19)56, seem to have been more involved than those in the latter part. So, I have had some individuals having a hard time with labels on generations. This is a two-part question. If you were to look at this generation, is there one specific event that you think had the greatest impact on them in those early years, those years between (19)46 and, say, (19)70 or (19)75? And secondly, what is the most important event that affected your life? EA (09:09): Well, I think I could answer maybe both questions with one answer. I mean I think that probably John F. Kennedy's assassination was extremely important for so many of the so-called boomers, but not only his assassination but, not long after that, the assassination of King and Robert Kennedy. These political assassinations, I think, were really very important to the coming of age of boomers and perhaps the rise in a certain ability to question the system and even to embrace a kind of cynicism with respect to the system, I think. This is one of the things that came about for so many of the boomers, a kind of awakening, if you will, of losing one's innocence, so to speak. I think that may be the biggest thing that these assassinations contributed. I think those were probably the major development, so to speak. I am not just talking about one assassination. I am talking about a series of major political assassinations, you see. Even if they were not intended to be political, they became politicized, I am sure, if you will. SM (10:45): If you were to put a couple of adjectives to describe some strengths and weaknesses, you have already mentioned quite a few of them in your opening comments, but just some adjectives to describe the strengths and weaknesses of the boomer generation. EA (10:57): Well, I think probably the biggest thing is just the number of people who were just born after people returned from the war. I think just the number is pretty impressive and certainly provocative to the status quo. Just mere numbers, I think, is very important. I think, with that, faults, so to speak, in the system, you have all kinds of implications for various issues that people are dealing with, whether it is what to do about resettlement after the Great War, or whether it has to do with family life following that, how people live, the suburbanization of people, growing up in the suburbs. At the same time, growing up in the suburbs did not mean that people were leaving behind their racial predilections, so to speak. I think that the racism that we saw that basically undergirded the beginning of this country, not to mention the great Civil War that we had and then Emancipation and then the riots in the cities and then the incorporation process that gave us the Black middle class as we know it and even the split between the Black underclass and the Black middle class that followed thereafter. And yet, many of these people who were the middle class did not enjoy any ability to really live in suburban communities in the same way that their white counterparts lived in these communities before them. In fact, the whole history of this race relations period had to do with the fact that Black people were moving into communities and white people were constantly moving out, and it was almost like a dog chasing its tail, so to speak, getting nowhere fast in terms of really being able to deliberate the problems of race and racism and social place in this country. So I think that, for me anyway, that these are some of the big issues that were at least if not confronted by the boomer, at least these were issues that they were having to deal with, though many abdicated their responsibilities to deal with some of these problems. But at the same time, you have to say that some of these individuals stepped up to the plate, so to speak, and began to fight for social change in a very positive sense. But we have this problem that is really best described as unfinished business, so to speak. SM (14:25): Right. You bring up a very important point because, again, I got a two-part question here. What has been the overall impact of boomers on their kids with respect to carrying on some of their ideals and their activism into the next couple generations? And secondly, along that point, what is your thought regarding these boomers? Have they copped out, most of them? There's obviously many who have stayed with the fight for many particular issues. But did most of them fall by the wayside for the almighty dollar as they grew older EA (15:07): I would not try to judge that. I mean but certainly, there is a lot of work to be done in this country by all people, boomers included. Whether or not the torch has really been passed from one generation to the next in terms of the boomers' responsibility or whatever, I mean that is hard to say because so many of these issues and problems are not so much a function of one generation passing off to another as much as it is an issue of structural forces that beset each succeeding generation, so to speak. That generation then has to deal with what it has to deal with in order to be, and I think this is the biggest issue. When you have a period of quietism, so to speak, you probably get people who are not so energized. When you have a period where people are confronted by exigencies of life that they have no pattern for, no experience in dealing with, then people may well become quite creative, so to speak. So it really is not so much a matter of one generation passing on its values as much as it is one generation having to deal with the exigencies of life that are quite different from the generation and those conditions that preceded them, so to speak. So that is what I would say about this. I would not think that a generation could simply pass its values intact onto another generation without considering the issues and the factors of life that the succeeding generation would have to deal with. I think you would have to consider all that in order to get a good read on that particular generation's ability to cope, so to speak. SM (17:13): How do you respond to some of the young people of that era, when they were young said that we were the most unique generation in American history because we were going to be the change agents for the betterment of society in every way? Of course, young people have idealism. We are going to end racism, sexism, homophobia, and war. But just- EA (17:33): I do not think any generation has any premium on that, so to speak. I mean it is basically up to people to deal with what that we have to deal with. Every generation is unique, really. Every generation is different. I mean no generation has a monopoly on any of these answers, so to speak, to the problems that face mankind up to people to deal with, each and every generation. I would not go so far to say that it is the most unique generation. I think that it is more complicated than that. At the same time, it is really important to appreciate the fact that the generation that faces great challenges certainly have a real set of issues from which they might grow and develop in that a unique generation. But I do not think there is anything intrinsic about a group of people that make them the greatest, so to speak, other than the challenges that they face and the way they responded to those challenges, if you know what I mean? In a sense, out of their hands, if you follow me? It is a matter of how people respond to what is before them. I think that the World War II generation, oftentimes called the greatest generation, but I think you have to look at the challenges that face that generation and subsequent challenges that face the boomers after that, if you follow me, and how they were able or not able to respond to those challenges. That is what I would say. SM (19:30): How important were the college students of that era, I am talking about the (19)60s, early (19)70s again, in ending the war in Vietnam, their influence on policy in America, the pressures they put on universities? But in society, how important, on a scale of, say, one to 10, with 10 being the highest number, where would you place the impact that that protest had in ending the war? EA (19:55): Well, I think that that protest was extremely important for- SM (19:58): Dr. Anderson, could you speak up just a little bit, too? EA (20:00): Yeah. I think that that protest movement was very, very important, but it was not just antiwar. It was also the demonstrations and protests against the racial status quo and the ways in which the movement for civil rights somehow culminated in riots and, ultimately, an incorporation process that brought about greater civil rights not only for Black people, but for all Americans. Also, it paved the way for the emergence of a Black middle class that was no longer so dependent on living in these inner-city communities, but one that was increasingly corporate, so to speak. But I think that we had that situation, which is certainly one that has to be, I think, appreciated. But you also had this group of people who stepped up to the plate and basically demonstrated quite effectively against the war. But they had been previously edified by all the struggles that they witnessed, from civil rights to the cultural nationalism, to ultimately the incorporation process. They were all part of that. Basically, you have them becoming very, very concerned not only about the expression of American power in the world, but they were concerned about their own brothers and sisters being taken away from them and having to fight far off in Asian war. Another piece that is important to this is the fact that we had the draft then, you see, and we did not have the professional army the way we do today. So, the fact that there was a draft basically meant that certain constituencies would be, to some extent, informed and then perhaps active in a way that would call an end to the fighting that they would expect to shore the burden of, so to speak, fighting and dying, you see. That is one thing that we do not have today. We do not have the same political action related to ones that are trying to save one's own blood, so to speak, whether it be your son, your daughter, or yourself or your husband or whoever it was, you see. We do not have the same thing going on today. We have a more professional army. I think that if we had an equal opportunity to be in Iraq or to be in Afghanistan, I think that you would probably see more protests against the war today, you see. But the truth was, back in the Vietnam era, we had more of an equal opportunity for participating in that war. And even then, it was one-sided in terms of the rich and well-to-do versus the poor because the rich and well-to-do oftentimes could get college deferment or whatever or their parents kept them out of harm's way through their political and economic influence, so to speak. So, the burden of it oftentimes fell on the ordinary American more so than the others. But I think that when you have this equal opportunity situation, you are bound to have more protests and you are bound to have political leaders who basically take their decision making a bit more seriously, at least with the consideration of the viewpoint of people who would make up their constituencies, so to speak. SM (24:14): We saw in the late (19)60s, early (19)70s, kind of a split in the antiwar movement where African American students split away from the antiwar movement and, of course, toward what was going on in civil rights here in the United States, and we saw it a lot at Kent State. But I wanted you to comment on Dr. King's [inaudible] Vietnam speech. I think it should be required to be read in every college classroom because he was so far ahead of the game. Just your thoughts on the courage of him and that speech and maybe a couple comments on the reaction in America, not only in the civil rights community, but in America as a whole. EA (24:56): Well, I think basically a lot of people thought he was out of line with that speech, in part because they figured that he was really a civil rights leader, not somebody who should put his nose into foreign policy issues. And yet, he said very, very powerfully that, to some extent, the civil rights movement, it was related to this more general struggle for antiwar and peace and that kind of thing. That really disturbed a lot of people, including Lyndon Johnson himself, who had, up to that point, been listening more and more to King, but then, all of a sudden, recoiled. So there was that issue. But I think that, for King, it was a moral issue, that he thought he had a moral obligation to speak out, and he did. SM (26:00): One of the things that I am trying to get at in this process is the healing process. If you will bear with me, I had taken a group of students to see Edmund Muskie about a year before he died. He had just gotten out of the hospital, and he was not feeling very well. It was one of our Leadership on the Road programs, and there were 14 students. We taped it. We were talking about the (19)68 convention and a lot about the divisions in America as a whole. I asked him, "Have we healed at all since 1968 and the Vietnam War?" And he paused for a minute, almost had tears in his eyes. The students were looking at each other, "Why is not he responding?" And then he finally said, "I have been in the hospital for the last couple weeks, and I have been watching Ken Burns' The Civil War." He said, "We have not healed since the Civil War." So, he went on to talking about that particular aspect as opposed to the response since the Vietnam War. My commentary and question is this, with all the divisions that were happening in that (19)60s and (19)70s, the divisions in America, pro-war, antiwar, divisions between Black and white, between those who supported authority and those who were against, between those who supported the troops and those that were against, and all the other divisions, had we healed at all as a ... Do you think the boomer generation has healed at all since that time? EA (27:40): Well, I think that is a very provocative question, to be sure, and it may be a bit opposed as not so much a matter of healing as it is a matter of just simply ignoring the situation and dealing with other fish to fry, so to speak. Today, as we live our lives, we are dealing with economic change of a high order, probably the most important change since the Industrial Revolution, so to speak. As we make this change technologically, moving from manufacturing to service and high technology as a way to organize this economy, there are great numbers of people who are not making a change. So we have a lot on our plate right now today. You see, it's these kinds of issues, these kinds of demands that we have to deal with. But today, that oftentimes takes our attention away from other issues, so to speak, maybe going to preoccupy us and maybe even substitute for healing, so to speak. So, what we have is not so much healing as a scabbing over, so to speak, looking at issues and challenges all the time. It may be that that is the way it is, that nothing has healed completely. But we get new challenges from time to time. So today, we are dealing with this big economic issue, you see. That does not mean that we're done with slavery. It does not mean we're done with the Civil War. It does not mean that we have done with the civil rights movement. It just means that we have a sort of preoccupation with dealing with the present, so to speak, present problems and issues, the trials and tribulations of living our lives. That is what it seems to me. SM (29:43): Well, that is a beautiful answer because the last couple days I have been seeing some of my former students and the frustrations they have of finding a job. I have a friend who graduated from Penn who has been laid off twice in the last year, unbelievable stories. We are in a very-very, very tough economy. I think we're about hitting our 30 minutes here. Do you want to go 15 more minutes? We might be able to finish it. EA (30:13): Okay. SM (30:14): Because when my tape hits, and it has not hit yet, so we have not hit 30 minutes. I wanted to follow up to your response. Have you been to the Wall in Washington? EA (30:25): No, I have not. SM (30:25): I have been there many times. The Wall was built as a nonpolitical entity, mentored healing the wounds of the troops who fought and their families. It is supposed to be nonpolitical. I go down there every year on Memorial Day and Veterans Day, and I cannot help but constantly hearing politics there, even though they do a great job with the Wall stuff. Do you think the Wall has done anything with respect to ... Well, I know it is done a lot for the soldiers and the troops that fought and their families, but those who may have been against the war before the war ... It gets right back to that healing question. Has it done anything beyond just the military? EA (31:05): Well, I think it is not only a symbol of the war and our involvement there, but it is also a very powerful ... SM (31:18): 15 more minutes. Okay, here we go. EA (31:20): Yeah, I think that is basically a matter of it memorializes people who made the supreme sacrifice, and I think that is a very important consideration here. That is probably the most important consideration. It does not necessarily heal, but it is a way to pay homage to people who gave their full measure, so to speak. SM (31:48): In your eyes, when did the Vietnam War end, and what was the major reason that it did end? EA (31:54): Well, I mean that is a complicated piece. But certainly, you look at the pictures, the iconic photographs of the day. The helicopters were taking people from the rooftops of certain buildings there. You realized that even that moment was not going to be the end the war, so to speak, but it is something more than that. It is just not so much a particular moment that you can say it is over kind of thing, but it has to do with, to some extent, the healing process and the way in which the US military and diplomatic corps basically took themselves out of that situation. That does not happen all at one time, but it happens over a period of months and even years, if you follow me? Some people, even though the war would be officially over, would consider the war to still be going on months after the declaration that it is over, if you know what I mean, because people have to adjust and get back to a sense of normalcy and that kind of thing. So, it is not so much a matter of something that is exact and pinpointed, if you follow me, but it is something that goes on and on. I think today, we could certainly say that we're done with all that and we are moving on to something else. Of course, now you have development in those areas where people once were fighting. You have development. You have hotels. You have commerce. You have all kinds of things that really say quite emphatically that it is a new day. You have people from there and people from here who fought in the war, who fought each other, who are now coming back together and discussing issues and discussing their various roles, not so much in anger, but just as a way to communicate with one another and let one another know that the hatchet has been buried, so to speak. I think when you have that kind of a situation, then you can begin to say that it is done and over, if you follow me, no exact moment, no exact time. Although certainly, we have the official administrative definition of the end of the war, so to speak. But even though you had that, things continued to progress, if you follow me, I think. SM (34:31): One of the things about the civil rights movement, and it was such a great mentor and role model to other movements that followed. I would like your thoughts just on the impact that this movement had on, and just general comments, on the women's movement and the Chicano, the Native American movement, certainly the antiwar movement, the gay and lesbian movement, the Earth Day, the environmental movement. A lot of the people that lead these efforts looked back to the role modeling of the civil rights movement. EA (35:05): Oh, of course. Well, you have to understand that the Black situation was and is a special situation in this country. No other group has been brought here in chains and made to work for no wages and then emancipated in the Great War and then still subjected to second class citizenship, segregated in certain communities, discriminated against, hated, despised by people in the way that Black Americans were. So the civil rights movement, the protests for civil rights for Black people, is iconic and was major in so many respects. As people rose up to challenge the system, of course, a lot of people's heads were turning to this great race dealing with this situation of injustice, so to speak. A lot of people paid attention and even got involved, to some extent. It was not just the Blacks who went through this disestablishment, so to speak, and made itself free, but various people worked with Black people that helped to free not only them, but the country from its past, so to speak. But the civil rights movement itself culminated in the riots that happened in the cities around this country, great demand for civil rights and incorporation. Ultimately, what we did, we had the movement from the civil rights movement to the cultural nationalist movement and the riots in the cities. And then you had tremendous violence all over this country. The powers that existed had a real problem on its hands, how to deal with this whole situation in something of a very public kind of way, if you follow me? It tried to do this by putting these problems down by dealing with the revolts or the riots or whatever it was. You have to understand, too, that when this was happening, it was happening during the Cold War, you see, when this country and Russia, or the Soviet Union, were vying for leadership of the world. They were saying to each other, "Well, we have got the better system. We have got the better system." We were looking at the satellite, looking for people to follow them in some of the developing countries that were colored, in fact, looking for leadership from the Soviet Union or from the West. A big issue was who really had the better system in terms of being able to facilitate the development of people of color, to some extent. So given that this country was trying for leadership of the world, they really had a big fly in the ointment with the way that it had historically treated Black people and still treated Black people. You see? So there was a great need for this country to basically step up to the plate and get on the right side with respect to civil rights, you see, because there was a lot at stake. There was leadership of the world at stake, you see. So this is one thing that they had to do, that they had to deal with. When they did this, they engaged and you had this movement, the riots or what have you. They culled it out with violence. But they also worked to incorporate Black people in the system, you see. SM (39:22): [inaudible]- EA (39:25): Through affirmative action, set asides, what have you, they created a new Black middle class, you see, a class that effectively would cull out other people and show that if you work hard, you can be not only meritorious, but you can also have something in this world, you see. So, this was a very important thing because they brought Black people forward, in part, because of all these other issues that were going on at the time, especially the fact that the issues of the wider world, the third world, the developing countries, the developed nations. All those issues were very important to the success of the civil rights movement here that resulted in first class citizenship for Black people, but also, to some extent, an incorporation process that helped Black people to take their place in American society. That struggle is still going on. It is not over. But we have made a lot of progress, for sure. SM (40:39): Do you consider the Black Power movement a negative or a positive in that process? EA (40:45): I think, in some ways, it was bold. There were times when it was highly negative, and times when it was very positive. I think the major thing was that it set the stage for the incorporation process that we saw that basically gave us the Black middle classes that exist today. I think that without the issues that were put on the table in the (19)60s and the (19)70s by the cultural nationalists and by the so-called Black Power movement, that you probably would not have had the degree of incorporation that we have right now today, or even the motivation to incorporate Black people or to have Black people live as first class citizens in this country without that, without protests- SM (41:41): Could you- EA (41:42): ... on the system's institutions, if you will. SM (41:42): Would you be able to comment on, since you are a scholar, if you think there were any books that were very popular at that time that influenced people of all colors, boomers, and then, of course, the impact that the music of the boomer generation has had because that is all you hear on the radio now is music from that period, it just seems that. EA (42:01): I think that if you are going to think about what effect that the boomers in that period, you have to undoubtedly look at the kind of education they were getting during the civil rights movement and during the antiwar movement and the cultural nationalist period and all that. Increasingly, you had these young students, white, Black, whoever, but especially the white middle class, more and more being edified, educated by people who brought a certain sensitivity to the problems of the history of Black people in this country, including the studies of slavery and race relations and that kind of thing. So many of these schools around the country began to incorporate Black studies courses and that kind of thing. All of this gave both Black people and young white people a clearer sense of the history of this country. I think that was very, very important for their understanding, but also the notion of the possibilities for the country itself. I think those things were very, very important to implement. We could go on and on with that. But I think that is- SM (43:19): Any thoughts on the music? EA (43:21): I think those are important. I think also what you began to see as a result of the civil rights movement and the incorporation process was a proliferation of different kinds of music that Blacks were involved in. You began to see the emergence, undoubtedly, of rhythm and blues and blues and jazz and hip hop and rock and all these variations that came about. You began to see the influence of Black singers and performers crossing over, you see. I think that was very, very important. I think that the music of The Beatles was very important. I think Elvis Presley was very important. I think Michael Jackson was very important. All these stars were important for the way in which they helped us to integrate our society, as it were. I think this, to some extent, is a function of the civil rights movement, but also the ways in which we have been able to move toward the diversity and the acceptance of diversity within our country with all of this, the music, the civil rights movement. All that was very, very important in this process, and I think we are all beneficiaries of what happened there. SM (44:41): I have two more questions. One's a question on trust. I can remember being in a college 101 psychology class many years ago, and the professor said in one of the very first classes that ... He was defining the meaning of trust, and he said, "We all have to trust someone in life. If you go through life and you cannot trust people, you probably will not be a success in life." So, I am bringing this question up because all the leaders that a lot of the boomers saw, they were lying to them many, many times, from presidents on down. The students at least that I knew, and many of the boomers, did not trust anybody that was in a leadership role, whether it be a university president, a congressman, a senator, even leaders in the church, corporate leaders, you name it. It is because they had been disappointed so many times by leaders who had lied to them, whether it be President Johnson and the Gulf of Tonkin, in recent years, the things about John Kennedy and maybe being linked to the killings of the two people in Vietnam. President Eisenhower lied on national television about the U-2 incident. Then we had Richard Nixon and Watergate. And then there were just, over and over, things where leaders who were voted in, people wanted to trust them, realized that they could not trust them. The body counts in the Vietnam War, all these things. Just your thoughts on, finally, if these young people cannot trust, what are they passing on to their kids? So just your comments on do we have a problem with trust? EA (46:26): Well, I think trust is very important, for sure. I think that what you see with the major assassinations I mentioned, this period of political assassinations, that really ended the period of innocence for Americans, boomers in particular maybe, but Americans in general. I think this is very, very important. But it was also important not just in terms of people becoming more mature, so to speak, but it also ushered in a kind of cynicism, if you will. I think this was very, very important. I think that we're still living with consequences of that, and it will take time to get that back. But so many people have basically taken leave, abdicated, checked out, so to speak. But now and then, we have a charismatic figure emerge, and then hope is restored. I think that is what we have today with Barack Obama's emergence as the political leader that he is. The jury is still out, of course, whether or not he is going to do all that he has promised to do or whether he is going to have the integrity, ultimately, that we all like to attribute to him. But so far, I think he has been really showing first-rate leadership that basically begins to heal so much that has happened in our past that has made us doubt. So I think the trust issue is always there, and it gets rebuilt with succeeding generations, but most importantly, through acts that we can have faith in, so to speak. SM (48:19): My last question is, when the best history books or sociology books are written 50 years after a period, what do you think people will be saying about the boomer generation with all its complexities, with all its diversity? What will professors in your shoes be saying 50 years from now at Yale in soc classes and history classes about the boomer era, the (19)60s, the (19)70s, and their lives, basically? EA (48:52): Yeah. Well, why do not we hold off on that one for a while? Once we get a sense of how this works out, then I will respond to that. Okay? Give me time to think about that one. SM (49:03): Very good. EA (49:08): So now you have the tape, and you are going to transcribe it? SM (49:11): Yep. I am going to transcribe it probably myself and- EA (49:19): But let me say this. I do not want to make this available until I have had a chance to read it and to edit it, that kind of thing. SM (49:26): Oh, yeah. I am doing that with everybody. In fact, I have not transcribed any. I am doing the transcribing myself on all of them. EA (49:37): I understand. I just want to look because I like to be able to review it and edit it before it is out there, and I would like to respond more fully to certain points you raised. SM (49:48): Yeah. The only other part I could not ask you today is just responses to some of the names of the period. EA (49:55): Yeah. SM (49:56): So anyways ... EA (49:57): But you have your work cut out for you. SM (50:00): Yep. But ... EA (50:00): If you can get this back to me at a certain point, I can deal with it and we can move along. But you raised a lot of good questions, a lot of good issues. I want to commend you for that. SM (50:12): Well, it is my first book. EA (50:13): I was going to ask you. SM (50:16): You know what I want to do in my next book? EA (50:18): What is that? SM (50:18): I want to write about Dr. King and the Vietnam speech. EA (50:23): Well, that sounds good. That sounds good. I mean he was a great man, for sure, great American. I think that a lot of these issues you have been raising today, are just right on, right on the money. SM (50:36): Well, I know Mrs. Bagley. Do you know her? EA (50:38): No. No. SM (50:39): She is the sister of Coretta Scott King. So, I have gotten to know her. She is not well, but she has taken a liking to me. She was upset that I left Westchester. She used to call me. I have not talked to her in a while, but I am going to call her. She can only sit down for 20 minutes because she is not well. I am going to interview her for the book and go from there. But Dr. Anderson, Yale is so lucky to have you. That is all I have to say. EA (51:10): Well, thank you very much. I am glad I am here. I am glad that I am here and able to teach and spread the word and that type of thing. SM (51:21): Yeah. Of course, every one of my interviews is going to have a picture that I have taken of each of the guests, either when I interview them in person, but I have some great shots of you when you were here in Westchester two years ago. EA (51:32): Okay. Well, when you transcribe it, get it to me. And then I will have to edit it and work it out. SM (51:35): Yep. Will do. EA (51:35): Okay. SM (51:36): You have a great weekend coming up, and I hope your wife's arm's better. EA (51:43): Thank you. Thank you. I am looking forward to getting her back to her therapy today. I am going to leave tomorrow, heading to Philly. Then I got to be back Monday because she has got another appointment for therapy. So anyway, well, listen, I am glad we got this done, and I look forward to reading it and responding and editing the whole thing. SM (52:05): Super. EA (52:06): Okay. SM (52:07): You have a great day. EA (52:08): Okay, Steve. SM (52:09): Yep. Can I call you Eli? EA (52:10): Sure, absolutely. SM (52:13): Because I have so much respect for you, I want to call you Dr. Anderson. EA (52:16): I call you Steve. You can call me Eli. SM (52:18): All right, Eli, thank you very much. EA (52:20): I am glad you raised a lot of those questions. I thought they were good questions, and I tried to answer as best I could. SM (52:26): Yeah, they were great answers. EA (52:28): I think some of the points could be elaborated, that kind of thing. So I look forward to seeing the transcript. SM (52:34): Okay. EA (52:34): Take care now. SM (52:34): Yep, you, too. Bye now. EA (52:37): Okay, Steve. Bye. (End of Interview) 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. Elijah Anderson Contributor An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource Anderson, Elijah ; McKiernan, Stephen Format The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource audio/wav Subject The topic of the resource Sociologists; College teachers; Yale University; Anderson, Elijah--Interviews Description An account of the resource Dr. Elijah Anderson is a sociologist, cultural theorist, scholar and professor in Sociology at Yale University, where he specializes in Urban Ethnography. Dr. Anderson received his Ph.D. in Sociology at Northwestern University. Dr. Elijah Anderson is a sociologist, cultural theorist, scholar, and the Sterling Professor of Sociology and African-American Studies at Yale University. He specializes in Urban Ethnography. He is the author of several books including his most recent, titled Black in White Space: The Enduring Impact of Color in Everyday Life (2022). His other books include Code of the Street: Decency, Violence, and the Moral Life of the Inner City (1999), winner of the Komarovsky Award from the Eastern Sociological Society; Streetwise: Race, Class, and Change in an Urban Community (1990), winner of the American Sociological Association’s Robert E. Park Award for the best-published book in the area of Urban Sociology; and the classic sociological work, A Place on the Corner (1978). Dr. Anderson received numerous awards and recognition, including the consultant for the White House, United States Congress, and the National Academy of Science.  In 2002, he was awarded the Stockholm Prize in Criminology. Previous to his tenure at Yale University, he was a Distinguished Professor of Sociology at the University of Pennsylvania. Dr. Anderson received his Ph.D. in Sociology from Northwestern 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 2009-07-09 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.10.2016.16 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. 52:43 https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/51bd747121c54af5d94405738f3f9e98.jpeg a9a6adaa484fdc34f5cfdba7c85f433b https://omeka.binghamton.edu/omeka/files/original/56b971be93b7aeb0b94a44b539d6d866.mp3 d662a106a623ea36fcfdf901c66477ab 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. <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 23 June 2022 Interviewer The person(s) performing the interview Stephen McKiernan Interviewee The person(s) being interviewed Dr. Elizabeth Jane McCarthy Biographical Text Dr. Elizabeth Jane McCarthy grew up in Cohasset, Massachusetts.  She is a nurse, educator, and activist. Dr. McCarthy served in Vietnam as a nurse in the 95th Evacuation Hospital in Da Nang. Upon returning from Vietnam, she went to nurse anesthesia school. She worked as a nurse anesthetist for several years and returned to school for her Ph.D. in Physiology from the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences in Bethesda. Since her retirement from the US Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, Dr. McCarthy is teaching graduate nursing students at the University of North Florida, Drexel University, and the University of Maryland. Duration Length of time involved (seconds, minutes, hours, days, class periods, etc.) 1:35:39 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 Date of Digitization 23 June 2022 Material Type Sound Interview Format Video or Audio Audio Keywords Vietnam war; Nurse; People, Wounded; Home; Memorial Wall; Veterans; Remember; Uniform; Hospital; Dead; Lives; 1960s. 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: Jane McCarthy Interviewed by: Stephen McKiernan Transcriber: Lynn Bijou Date of interview: 23 June 2022 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ (Start of Interview) SM: 00:10 Thank you, Dr. McCarthy, for agreeing to do this interview. And I would like to start the-the interview by having you, read the, read the speech that you gave at the Vietnam Memorial, the wall, on Memorial Day 2022. And we are going to start with this and then throughout the interview, I will ask questions and linkage to it as well. JM: 00:38 Okay. Okay, here goes. Peter Cogill, KIA, February 1967. Craig Simeone, KIA, May 1969. Eddie Murray, GIA, July 1969. Allen Keating, KIA], October 1969. Dennis Reardon, KIA, November 1969. Those are the names on this wall, from Cohasset. A small town in Massachusetts where I grew up, eight boys in all from Cohasset died in Vietnam. This is why we have Memorial Day. This is why I march each year in the Cohasset, Massachusetts Memorial Day Parade, to remember those friends, those young boys that we lost in Vietnam, to remember the high cost of war. We are here now on Memorial Day once again, here more than 50 years later to remember this loss, to remember the high cost of war. Many of you out there also served in Vietnam. Nurses like my friend from Boston, Kathy Pines, and corpsman and medics, physicians, helicopter pilots, helicopter pilots that I never knew because your job ended when my job began: bringing the wounded to us at the hospital, and radio guys at the hospitals and in the field, like my friend Dick Churchill, who called in the choppers for the wounded. All those who helped in the hospitals and in the field cared for those wounded, please stand. And let us just thank them. And gold star mothers like Joanne Churchill, your sons were not alone, as these veterans were the ones caring for the wounded from the field to the hospitals. Can you want it that is out there who made it back? These nurses, and docs, and corpsmen, and medics are the ones that were there to take care of you. I served as an Army nurse in Vietnam, in 1970 and 1971, just after my friends on this wall, had made their sacrifice. I was not in favor of the war, and did not understand what we were doing here. But I knew many of my friends were being drafted and killed. I decided what would be of more purpose, at that time in my life, a new 21-year-old nurse, then to care for those wounded but were being drafted and sent off to war. I joined the Army Nurse Corps after 10 months working here at the Walter Reed Army Hospital. I was ordered to the United States Evacuation Hospital in Da Nang, south Vietnam. I have worked in triage or what we call here, the emergency room. What was called there priyad and receiving, receiving the wounded. I took care of 18 and 19-year-old young men, boys. I really saw a 20-year-old, shot up, frightened, alone, and afraid to die in a war they did not understand. How does a 22-year-old girl from a small town in Massachusetts tell a 19-year-old soldier that he does not have a foot or leg anymore, and they have wounds. The patient is expected to die because they were not candidates for surgery. I just tell them, or I sat with them until they died? I wonder why we were fighting this war. I thought I would find answers in Vietnam. But I did not. I did learn that war causes deaths and mutilation. So, what was it like coming home? Looking back now, I had a classic case of post-traumatic stress disorder or PTSD, I believe, I believe all of us that witnessed the atrocities of war, experience post-traumatic stress to one degree or another. I had, nightly, trouble sleeping hypervigilance, depressed, I was not eating. In those days, there was no such thing as PTSD. You were told to just put one foot in front of the other and go on with your life. For me, that meant school, work, more school, work, and having my own family. I did get some help along the way. In 1993, we had the dedication of the memorial for the nurses over there. I remember being here. We had a parade of nurses down Constitution Avenue, and each of us had our banner of our work behind, standing behind the banner for our hospital in Vietnam, and we stood behind this banner, and the veterans were on the side of the road. It was very quiet. And you would hear every once in a while, when the veteran guys in their wheelchairs, they would see the sign of their hospitals and you wish you would hear them yell out, "You took care of me, you took care of me. I remember you. You took care of me." This was so healing for all of us, for the vets, and for us the nurses. And it was for us nurses to begin to realize that we needed to heal also. We saw those atrocities day in and day out. And we needed to be healed. And that is what both of these Vietnam memorials have given us over the year. And I am glad that we do what we do every Memorial Day here. At our nurse’s memorial, we have our candlelight service in the evening, AND the storytelling in the morning, And then this Vietnam program here at the wall in the afternoon, all remembering the high cost of war. I would like to end today by sharing a poem written anonymously, by a soldier who must have been wounded in Vietnam and cared for by nurses. It is called, "Angels in War." "Listen, now I have a story to tell about some women who lived through hell. They saw it in the war in a special way, sometimes 16 hours a day. There is a story of pain and strife and agony and fight for life. Listen now to this story I tell about these women who worked through hell. But they were young, like you and me. How much more special can they be? How many hands in the night did she hold while a young boy cried out, "I am so cold." Listen now to the stories they tell. These are the women who lived through hell. Let us not forget these stories they tell. For they are our sisters who lived through hell." SM: 09:14 That was, I was present at the speech this year. And it was a very powerful one. And you received a standing ovation from everyone who was there. And I knew when I, you accepted the, the honor to interview you. I wanted you to give that speech so that others can hear it not only today, but 50 years from now, to remember those brave young men and women who served in that war. And, and, and of course you state the eight who died from your hometown and you went to school with. And I just want to say those names are on the Vietnam Memorial. And I will be asking you some questions about that speech as we go on with this interview. But I do I want to start, start off by saying you mentioned five names. Is there anything a little bit you can say about those names like, Peter Cogill. Could you say something about Peter? JM: 10:13 Peter Cogill was, he was in my class, so I knew him growing up and [inaudible] Peter Cogill. I mean, you know, I knew him growing up, 1967. So, we graduated from high school in (19)66. So, he must have gone in right after high school, went into the army. And then, Craig Simeone he lived up the street from me by the football field, and he was in my class. And, you know, a good student, I am not sure, 1959, if he, you know, went off to college or something, I do not know. My best friend there is Allen Keating, and he was a neighbor of mine. And he was, I knew him, you know, from kindergarten on up, played in the neighborhood, you know, baseball, football. I, you know, I played all of that, did all that with the guys in the neighborhood, rode our bikes. And through high school, he was the captain of our football team. Just, you know, just so well liked by all of us. And, I think Alan especially was missed by so many. I have a friend, my friend that was Dick Churchill, he still wears his, Alan's, you know, on his wrist, like a bracelet, with Alan's name on it. So, those with a 1, 2, 3, Eddie Murray, Eddie Murray was in my class too, four, four of them that were in my class, Dennis Reardon was a year older, I believe, but I knew him. He was in my brother's class. SM: 12:07 When they came home from war, were they buried in the hometown cemetery, or were some of them- JM: 12:12 Yes. SM: 12:12 -buried in Arlington? JM: 12:14 No they-they-they were buried at home because those were the funerals. I was coming home to every six months. Yeah. Yeah, I do not. I do not, you know, back then. I do not remember anybody opting to be buried in Arlington. SM: 12:31 Right. JM: 12:32 My friend Chrissy, Chris was in Vietnam with me, a nurse, Chris McKinley, and she died about 15 years ago, we think from exposure to Agent Orange. And, anyway, and she had her, she was buried at Arlington. And, but I think back then I do not know if we just did not even know you could not be buried, but they probably did not want to be. No, they- SM: 13:10 Right. JM: 13:10 -did not want to be buried in Arlington. They wanted to come back home. SM: 13:14 Could you talk about, could talk about your hometown, your early years growing up? What it was like being in high school before you went off to college and went off to war? JM: 13:27 Yeah, Cohasset is a small town on the ocean halfway between Boston and the Cape [Cod]. So, it is a lovely little town. And I went to the schools there, through high school. And, and there were about 100 kids in my class starting out in kindergarten. [chuckles] And we were all together through high school. And it was a pretty well to do town. I do not know what it was, a lot of the, a lot went on to college. And, there is, you know, there is old money there, there is roots, I mean, my family went back. My mother's family went back several generations. You know, it is one of those towns where you came over on the boat and you did not leave [laughter] and go out but you just stayed. It was very New England. My grandparents had a New England farm and, meaning, you know, with vegetables, and chickens, and a cow, and all that. But, you know that they survived on themselves. And I had a horse growing up and kept it at my grandparents. But they kept, it was really there for us, and I would go up there to ride the horse, and I could run. And then, I had another race horse when I was about 15 that was close to my home, that people had and I rode the horse all through town, I would ride the horse down to the beach [chuckles]. I never run into the water, to heel his leg, and then run him back to town [chuckles]. It was that kind of a town. SM: 15:22 When you were in high school, were the, were the young people in the school pretty well informed about what was happening beyond their town? What was happening- JM: 15:33 Yeah. SM: 15:33 -in the (19)60s about the march on like, for example, civil rights, the march on Washington, the Vietnam War, all the things that were happening in America? JM: 15:41 Yeah-yeah. Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah, we were, we were, we were torn like everybody else, as I was torn, you know. As a matter of fact, when I was in high school and nursing school making that decision, do I go out and protest? With the flower children, you know, go out and protest, or do I join the army? And it was, it was that, those were my decisions that I was going to do one or the other. And, you know, most, by (19)68-(19)69. Most people, families were trying to avoid the drought, that is for sure. My brothers, I had two older brothers, and my parents went to the town. I do not know, I forget, man, what we call Mrs. Bouncer, the draft commission of something. And got, got deferments, my brothers every six months, because they were in school, and to keep them out of the Army, you know, and then by the time all these guys died, they came up with a rule, but Cohasset just lost too many. And we were not going to send any more over to Vietnam from Cohasset. No we were, we were very aware, very aware. I mean, you know, I remember the day that Kennedy was shot and Martin Luther King, and very much part of the, very much part of the illusion and disillusionment of the times. They were some difficult times, were not they? SM: 17:28 Yeah, you bring up a question I was going to ask later, but I will ask it now, because, you know, I call, you are probably what they call the, the early boomer group, which is the front edge boomers, and they were born between (19)46 and about (19)57. And, the impact a lot of this had on that part of the boomer generation was very strong, obviously. And the death of John Kennedy in 1963, and then the deaths of Bobby Kennedy, and Martin Luther King in (19)68. It, people kind of remember, where were you when you heard that John Kennedy was killed? JM: 17:29 Yeah-yeah, exactly. Right. Right. We knew where we were right, what you are asking me. SM: 18:02 Yeah where were, how did you find out, and where were you? JM: 18:18 Well, I was, I was in high school, and November 22nd, and it was at one o'clock in the afternoon. And they made, and I had majorette practice, I was the captain of the majorette group, majorette. And, they made an announcement on the PA system that Kennedy had been shot. And I guess they have dismissed school or something, but I went down to the gym. And by the time I go to the gym, then they announced that he had been killed. And, of course, we did not have majorette practice. That was a first. And then I remember, we did not have school on Friday, and then the funeral was Monday. But the horse, you know, and I remember going over to my friend Linda's house with her dad, in their house, and sitting in their den watching the funeral. SM: 19:22 Yeah. The shock, you know, we were, I am about the same age. We were, you know, we were young and man, that was a shock to everyone. And, and then, of course, as the (19)60s moved on, then we had the, within three months, the killings of Dr. King and Bobby Kennedy, and they were equally shocking. JM: 19:48 Oh, right. But, it was worse. It was scary. It was, you know, and it was sad. It was, it was very painful, very painful. SM: 20:02 When you were, again, you were, you were young, this is before you become a nurse. But, did you start questioning about America? Where was America going? You know, we are having some of that right now in the world today. With everything going on in 2020 people are asking these questions. Is our nation going to survive these things in the long run? Did you think about that? Did you think about any of this when, you, these tragedies were happening? JM: 20:34 Well, I think even when I was in nursing school, I did not understand. Remember, like I said, in my-my speech there, I did not understand why we were in this war. But I had this idea in my head that the government knew why we were. And I thought, if I went over to war, I would find out why we were in this war. And, so I still have this idea that the government knew what they were doing. But boy, did I get disillusion about that? While I was in Vietnam, I think I kind of got awakened that, no, they do not know what they are doing. And I mean worse than that, it was, I mean, to be very honest with you, what I found out was that there was this thing called the military industrial complex. There were people making lots of money off of this war. And, and that seemed to be what was driving them. There was not, it was not the Vietnamese people wanting democracy, they just wanted to know where their next meal was going to be, and they wanted to visit their relatives unknowing. And, you know, who are we? And then this whole idea that they would draft 18-year old and 19-year-old, I think that was done on purpose. Because they figured 18-19-year old did not know any better. You know, they were very more, more pliable than the 25-year-old. And because when I was, l I mean, the only guys I saw wounded and blown up were 18-19-year old. So they must have just really, it seemed to be pretty purposeful. SM: 22:22 Were your parents for or against the war? And did you have any, what they call a generation gap in your family over that war? JM: 22:31 Oh, well, my father had served in World War II, and he was in the Navy. And I thought, when I came up with this idea of going into the army, I had hoped that I would, what do I say, leaned on his, his sense of patriotism or something because they had to sign papers for me because I was only, I was 19, I think when I went in, I went in as I was still a student in nursing school. So, I went into the Army student nurse program, and they take me my last year, and then I owed them too. And so yeah, my parents had to sign in. I remember that day, you know, putting the papers out there after dinner, at the dinner table, and wondering if they would be willing to do it. But they did, and I mean, I think it is kind of crazy doing it. They work so hard to keep my brothers out of war. And then they are wondering, "Oh, my daughter comes home, then wants to do this." I, you know, they just signed, I do not know, I do not know what they were thinking. But I know, I think my father was very proud because he was, in the Legion he would, and you know, Cohasset you heard my speech, we have this- SM: 24:07 Right. JM: 24:07 -Memorial Day parade. And, and he went out within Vietnam. I know they were very upset when I, I mean, I came to Walter Reed. And then I had to go home and tell them, "I got to go to Vietnam." They were very upset. They were, they were not happy about that. Like I could do something about it. You know, they accused me of volunteering. But you know, I had to go. So, off I went. And that Memorial Day that I was away my father at the parade, at the end of the parade at the podium, you know, announced that I was in Vietnam and that he had heard from me. I think that morning, I am not sure I was allowed to call home once a month and so the town, not only my parents, but the whole town knew I was over there. And what I was doing, and then, you know, to come home, and then my father when I came home from Vietnam, I think in (19)72, for Memorial Day, he asked me to march in the parade, and I said, "No, not going to march, not going to put on that uniform." And I remember my mother coming upstairs and saying, "Would you please? Would you do it for your father? You will not do it for anybody else, will you do for your father?" So I said, "Okay," so I pulled out my summary chords uniform. I went down there, and there was only two other guys and me, because most days, remember, you did not put on a uniform. SM: 24:07 Right. JM: 25:51 You would get stoned, or rotten tomatoes, or whatever. And the three of us stood proudly and walked down Main Street of Cohasset, wearing our uniform. And since then, I think there is I do not know how many, 50, I do not know a lot more have come out. You know, of course, that was a long time ago. But, so then my father asked me to give my speech a couple of years later, some time to give a talk at the end of the parade, as the guest speaker, and I remember saying to him, "Okay, I will give you my talk, but it is not going to be a talk. You are going to like." Obvious, I had a lot of anger in me, you know. SM: 26:33 Right. JM: 26:34 And I said, "Yeah, I am not going to talk about heroes. I am not going to do that. I am going to tell you the truth about what, what I observed about war." And so, that was my first anti, anti-war talk on Memorial Day. [chuckles] SM: 26:54 Wow, that is a lot of courage. That is a lot of courage. But yeah, you had a lot of courage and desire to serve by going to Vietnam so, that it kind of came out in your speech. You know, you talked about the military industrial complex. You know, Eisenhower warned us about that, when he was leaving office. Be wary of the military industrial complex. And he, I was telling him this stuff that Kennedy, before Kennedy became president. So it was kind of, his thoughts were right on. Some of the other events of the 1960s, just like you, if, when you first heard, he probably knew where you were, or how about the shootings at Kent State in 1970. That was a shocker too, that killed people. Yeah, you know, there has been a lot of protests, but nobody has been shot. JM: 27:47 Yeah. Well, 1970, so and see, I was probably in Vietnam when that went on. And so in (19)71, or (19)72, I was in Colorado, and I joined, I was going to Colorado University, and I joined the Vietnam Veterans Against the War protest group. So, I was right here with them protesting, you know, doing anything to get us the hell out of war. You know, I was pretty committed to this war was wrong, and we needed to get out of that. SM: 28:43 The, you chose a career in nursing, a career that helps you decide what you could do to serve your nation, which is, which is certainly honorable. And you were against the war, but you still went because of the eight that you knew had died from your hometown. You brought this up at your presentation at the Vietnam Memorial. That must have really created mixed emotions with you even when you were over there serving. Can you talk at all about, first off that the trip over, the flight over, usually when people from, who are going to Vietnam that trip over, they had a lot of feelings and when they got off that plane and felt that heat, that was the second thing and then saw others that were coming home? Just you know, that whole, your feelings over there knowing that these things are going on back in the United States. The anti-war movement was so strong. And I think part of the anti-war movement was also over in Vietnam because the African American soldiers were dealing with a lot of the civil rights issues as well that were going on in America. [crosstalk] JM: 30:06 Yep. Those are two separate issues. Those are two, there was an anti-Vietnam war movement in Vietnam, and there was a civil rights movement of the black soldiers that were being mistreated, you know, send off to jail. And, and we and, and that was scary. Both of that was scary. Now, the anti-Vietnam movement, I will tell you a story is that we, the docs and the nurses, you know, put, you know, we had officers and enlisted in the officers and all of that, and we, but we had a place, Lance's Bar, that where we lived in the barracks, well it was not a barrack, we call them hooches. But anyway, there is, and we would go there to, you know, get together, to say goodbye, have a party, either somebody was leaving, or somebody just came and, and would sing and have drinks, I guess, I do not know, sit around in a circle. Maybe, I do not, maybe 15 of us, 20 of us, and the docs and the nurses, you can imagine, you have got very close to these people. And at the end would always, end by singing, "You have got a friend, you have got a friend," James Taylor. And then would stomp, stomp on the floor at the end, "Peace now, peace now." Well, one night, the group had this same demonstration out on top of the bunkers, and Harvey was there. He is our radiologist taking movies of this, and singing the song, I guess and everything. Well, this got reported to somebody, I guess, the echo, and he reported to Saigon. And then Saigon had an investigation of us, and they all came up in their helicopters, and interviewed everybody. I cannot remember if I get interviewed or not, because I said I was working that night. I am sorry. I missed it, you know. [chuckles] And so, that was a big deal. So with our punishment, I remember was, they were not going to give us any medals. Of course, we laugh about it, because in those days in the army, right, if you did something wrong, they threatened you with going to Vietnam. Okay. Then when you were in Vietnam, they threatened you with going further north, near the DMZ, but we were already about as far north as you could get. [laughter] So, they took away our metals. And I remember a couple of the guys say, "You know, I was not going to wear those damn metals ever again anyway." So yeah, we had our own anti-Vietnam war demonstrations. And I remember the black enlisted guys, scaring, you know, they had weapons in their barracks and they were going to have a revolt and we had a couple of black docs, physicians, thank God, that went over and they went over, and talked to them, and calmed them down. So, we were okay. So yeah, there was there was, there was a lot going on, you know, to the, yeah, there was a lot going on. SM: 33:29 What was that feeling when you got on that plane heading to Vietnam? What were your- what was going through your mind there? That is a long flight. JM: 33:38 It is, it is. And I left from Washington, my family, I had gone home. And I was, I had to be in this wedding for my brother and I was the maid, and I was a, you know, bridesmaid. And oh, my God, my cousin had been injured in Vietnam, and my aunt is asking me to take care of them. And I am like, I was, I am like, "Oh my god, I cannot do all this people." But, and then, I got on a plane, came back here to Washington, to my friends here. And then they had to put me on a plane at [inaudible] and with my duffel bag, and that was it too, being back home in Cohasset, I remember packing a duffel bag and thinking, you know, how do you pack for a year? As a woman knowing there are no shopping malls, people. [chuckles] You know and, and figuring that all out, and packing the duffel bag, and I think they allowed me to have another suitcase, I had a croc suitcase. And getting back here to Washington and then Beth and M drove me to the airport, and then I flew to Hawaii and I called them I remember and I just cried. So then from, then on, Hawaii to Cyprus. I think I landed in Guam. And then on to Saigon, it felt like I cried every 15 minutes, I just cried. I just cried, I was alone. And then I remember being on this plane with 250 GI's. And somebody is saying, "For any second lieutenants out there, your average life is 20 minutes," or something and then someone else saying, "Look to your left, look to your right. One of you is not going to make it back." So it is a very long time, as a woman, as a young woman, 22. And, and, and I do not remember the guys like being overly friendly at all, somehow, or I might, just so caught up in myself, you know, I am scared. And then we come landing into Saigon there, and there were these, what, there is flares going off. And I thought they were bombs. Because what do I know, I do not know what bombs, I do not know anything like that, oh, my God. And, and then I got out of the airplane, yet somehow. And they put me in a hut somewhere that had concertina wire around it, for three days. And there was a guard there, and I did not know if he was guarding me to keep the enemy out or to keep me in. [laughter] I did not know what the hell I was doing. I remember reading a book, and I waited. And then they finally maybe I have got my uniforms then. Somehow, they took me somewhere to get uniforms, and put my name on the uniform. And then I went down to Saigon too, and I met with the Chief Nurse. And I remember her saying, "What are you doing here? I did not know you was coming." And I am thinking, "Oh, my God. All this. And she does not want me." But anyway, and then she goes "What am I going to do with you?" "I do not know," I thought- SM: 34:37 [chuckles} [chuckles] JM: 34:55 -you know, so then she said, "Okay, I am going to put you up with the knives at the backup." And I am going to, so they put me in a C-140 with another 200 guys. And we landed every 20 minutes or something you had to unload and load. In fact, it was nighttime by the time I got up there, and they could not safely get me over to the hospital. So, I had to stay at the airport with the red, with the Donut Dollies place. So I am like, "What the hell are you people doing here? Why would you?" Oh, but then they have got me over the 95th, somehow, somebody got me over there. And so, the Chief nurse was there. And she said, "Here, here is your mooch, go to there. Come back and see me in three days." [chuckles] Because she is such a mess, I guess she figures. So anyway, it was, it was not easy, no. And then she assigned me to the ICU. And because I had come from Reed and I had worked recovering from ICU. And then that did not work out well. So then she moved me down to this, what they call a pre-op and receiving which was, as you heard me say, essentially the emergency room. And she said, I know you can take care of your own patients down there. And you can call the shots more or less. So, I went down there and that is where I met Christy and Annie, and we just became best friends, the three of us, and uncovering the docks, you know, and we had a great team. So things, but it was, it was either. I mean it was, ugh. SM: 38:55 Were you there, [crosstalk] were you at this location the whole time you were in Vietnam? JM: 39:02 Yes. Yeah. I never went anywhere. And you know, you could not go anywhere either. SM: 39:07 How long were you there? JM: 39:10 Ten months. And you could not as a woman, of course you could not drive, of course, you did not have a vehicle. And you could not leave the compound, unless you were in uniform, in a vehicle, where the driver had agreed to take you to another military place. And the only place I went was China Beach where they had an officer's club and, you know, a change area and you know, so and that was, that was I think it was Army, might have been Navy. I do not know. But that was the only place I went to, which is often by myself. SM: 39:52 Were you a seven day a week nurse, or would you, did you, were you five days a week and two days off? JM: 39:59 No, we worked, we worked six days, 12 hours a day. SM: 40:02 Wow. JM: 40:04 Seven to seven or seven to seven. SM: 40:07 Wow. And what were your duties there? JM: 40:12 Well, that is the outright. So, down there in pre-op and receiving, I mean, I had to learn. It was taking care of the wounded, that came in. Amputations, leg [inaudible], above the knee, below the knee, hip wounds, back wounds, chest wounds, and then they came in hypovolemic shock. And so, you were, I was, I learned how to resuscitate somebody in a hypovolemic shock. So, that meant starting IV's. And, you know, my orientation to going to war as a nurse was when Bob Watson in at Walter Reed, he had been to Vietnam, he was an anesthesiologist. And he heard I was, when I am on orders, to Vietnam. So, he took me to the back, to the operating room. And he taught me how to start an IV. Because he knew I needed to know how to do that. And so, by the time I got over there to pre-op and receiving down there, I knew how to start an IV and essentially, so you know, the wounded came in on the choppers on the chopper pad, the corpsman would grab a gurney, go out and get the wounded, bring them in, we put them on the sawhorses. And then I go to work, cut off your uniforms. And started, check, get their name, get a feel on a blood pressure count, start their IV, if you can get something going in the hand, or the arm, if not, I can stick them in the external jugular, I put them head down. If they were in so much shock, I could not get into a vein, I go into the external jugular and I have gotten really good at that, and start an IV and then I would also be doing what is called a femoral tic, stick a needle with the 10-cc syringe into their femoral artery, and ask for a 10-cc's of blood to hook it to two tubes of blood, and I would send it with a corpsman over to the blood bank right across the hall. And then, he would give it to the blood bank person in exchange for two units of-of, O neg, low titer blood, because that is a universal donor. And then in the meantime, the blood bank guy is typing and crossing. So, the next units would be type specific at least. And in the meantime, I am back here starting the IV's, setting up something for blood to get the blood going. And looking at the wounds, I mean, not looking at them, changing the bandages and then oh, and then writing up an X-ray. So because we would want to get them on to X-ray if there was any abdominal or even the legs to see if there were any cracks in the wound, you know. So, we try to stabilize them enough to get them to X-ray, if they were not stable I would have to go with them to X-ray, pumping the blood, pumping the IVs, get them out of X-ray. And hopefully you have got a stable blood pressure, 90 anyway. And then take them up the hall to the operating room. And then those that were not that critically injured went over to what we call pre-op and I would come back and look at them, and try to get them ready better. For the, you know, you had to be prioritizing all the time. You know, this one is going to go, and this one we can wait. So, that is what my day was like. SM: 43:54 When the really seriously wounded individuals, how long were they there? Did they take them, do they take them away to another hospital after a certain length of time? And for those who were not hurt as much, what was the longest number of days that they would stay in at your location? JM: 44:13 I would say for about two or three days. And we would stabilize them enough so that they can transport and so, two or three days and they either went back to their unit if they were really like, you know could, if they were okay, or two or three days and they were medivac to Camp Sama. So, usually we could load them onto a bus, you know on stretchers, and take them down, they would take them down to the airport, put them on a plane, and medivac them to Camp Sama in Japan. Yeah-yeah. SM: 44:47 In your speech you talked about, you know, holding the hand of someone who died. Could you describe a few experiences with wounded or dying vets? What did you do for them, no names? But, what were their wounds? And were you with them when they died? You know, there is different groups here, there is those that may have lost an arm or a leg. And so they found out that they, one of their limbs is gone, and how they reacted and so forth. And those that you could not do anything for, and we were going to die. And just a couple of the times, the experiences and I do not know if you ever mentioned this at the speech, but the thing is, did you ever go back to the wall on Washington, D.C. and tried to look up somebody on the wall that you would actually try to help save? JM: 45:42 No, I did not come home with any names. And I think I did that on purpose. I did not come home with any names. I remember, people, maybe a little bit from Walter Reed. But I do not, but not, no, no. And what was interesting in Vietnam, we never, I guess a nurse, you are used to like, you know, you have patient conferences. You talk about the patients, right? And when Chrissy, Annie and I would get together on the picnic bench with a bottle of bourbon. We would not talk about any patient. We just stuffed it. We just stuffed it. And I remember with Tony, he was a surgeon, and Sherry and, we did not, we just did not talk about it. We just did not talk about it. And then when we, when I came home and I ended up in Colorado, and Chrissy and Annie were out there and couple of other nurses, a couple of docs, about 10 of us, especially in Cafe McKenna. That is right, she was an OR nurse. And we then, we talked, and talked, and talked, and talked, and talked. But in Vietnam, we did not talk, and I did not come home with anything. Nope. SM: 47:16 Yeah, I know that. I have interviewed a lot of people and read a lot of books, and some of the stories about some of the people in Vietnam who are seriously wounded. Now, some of them survived. But, they would always be talking and asking for their mom, or their brother, or their sister, or their, someone in their family because not knowing if they will ever see them again. Did you have a lot of that, or? JM: 47:43 No-no. Well, you know, for the most part, and this is, I remember, if a guy came in alive, they survived. You know, because that is, that is, because we were treating hypovolemic shock, you know, and you pump them up some fluids and some fluids. They will pick up for you, they will survive. Now, the only ones that did not survive in my experience, anyway, were the head wounds, because the nurse, you know, I would call the neurosurgeon down, to come down and assess and say there is nothing I can do with this one. And so, so I would take that patient in the back. And, I would sit with him until he died. But he was not conscious, you know, but I would stay there, I would not leave him alone. But I remember thinking that consciously you know, that, I, that they came in alive. They would leave alive, for the most part, and cause most of our wounds again, were amputations, blank amps. SM: 47:44 Okay. Yep. JM: 48:55 As long as you could catch up. SM: 49:04 The, you had mentioned that R&R was very important. And you mentioned China Beach, I think there was a T.V. show about that. I think there is something there with China Beach. But- JM: 49:14 Yes-yes. Of course. SM: 49:16 You were up north, you were near the DMZ, were not you, you were, you were up north. So, how far away was China Beach, and describe what China Beach is all about for those who have never heard of it? JM: 49:21 Yeah. Well, right there was a show China Beach, and it was a real China Beach and it was not it. [laughs] And as I said it was, it, I guess it was considered it was, it was an in-country R&R. So I guess, you know, soldiers would come in from the field. I do not know if they had any space for them to stay. Maybe they did, but that does not concern me. They need a place to stay. But, they did have an old club that I think served food. And the beach was just absolutely gorgeous, just absolutely gorgeous. And we would go sometimes, like real professional surgeons and nurses, and put down on a Sunday, we would be quote "off," [chuckles] and sit on the beach, and swim. But I remember sitting there one Sunday with everybody, and we are looking over to Marble Mountain. And there were bombs being dropped and stuff. I mean, you could hear the war. And we all said, "Well, we better pack it up. We are going to have business soon. We better get back to work." And that was the craziness of it all. You know. [chuckles] We were enjoying a beautiful day at the beach, in our bathing suits. I remember, I did not bring a bathing suit with me. And I had to write my mother and ask her to send me a bathing suit. I said, "But make it be one for a nun or something." [laughter] So, she sent me a one-piece bathing suit with a skirt to it, you know. So, you know, I just wanted to be, you know, I did not want to be wearing any bikinis on China Beach [chuckles]. SM: 51:30 Now the, China Beach, it was totally 100 percent secure. Was it really? You know, Vietnam was not safe anywhere. But that was one area, you knew you were safe. JM: 51:46 Yeah-yeah. It I think it had a perimeter. And I mean, it was only a section of the beach and it had some kind of a fence up there. And whether, there were probably guards out there. I know we, we had, they had Air Force. There were lifeguards there that we were active duty Air Force. Because I remember talking to one and then he told me he was in the Air Force. I thought, well, that is a nice job [laughter]. SM: 52:22 Now, could you talk about how you left Vietnam, you were there for 10 months? And I remember reading something that a United States senator helped you get home. But could you talk about when that time came when you are leaving Vietnam? JM: 52:44 Right, well, like in February, March, I, I came up with my five-year plan. That is what I call it, my five-year plan, which meant I want to get back, go to college. Because part of my going into was I knew I had the G.I. bill because my parents would not let me go to college and I wanted to go to college. I really, really wanted to go to college. I had good grades. I loved school. I wanted to go to medical school. But my father. and I got into five universities, but my father said "No, you are going to go to Mass General Hospital School of Nursing." Okay. So, that is my part of this thing. I had had the G.I. Bill to go to college. And so, I applied to colleges again, while I was in Vietnam, I got into two universities. And then I put the paperwork in for school. I was supposed to go home in October, but I needed to go home in August, so I could start school, the fall semester. We put the paperwork in and nothing happened, and nothing happened. So, it had to be like July, and nothing was happening. And so, the IG was coming for the day, early in the morning. I remember there was a sign up that said that the IG will be here at 7:30 in the morning, in this little room. So I said, "Okay, I am going to go and talk to the IG." So, I did, and I told him my story. And I said, "I have not heard anything." He said, "Okay, let me look into it." Well, he got back to me and said, "Oh, your paperwork was lost." So I thought really, and I said, "Chief it must have fallen out of the airplane on the way back to Washington, D.C." I was quite cynical when I said it. [laughs] And so, you know, I came back and I realized this army was not going to do anything for me to get out of here. So, I was working nights one night, and I am sitting there and thinking, "Okay, what are you going to do?" I could write to Ted Kennedy. Okay, knowing that if you write to your Senator, your days are numbered in the military. That just is not something you do as an officer. As a first lieutenant in the army, but I decided, and writing a letter from Vietnam, you know, there was no postage, but it could be, somebody could be reading it on the way out of the country. But I did, I wrote an eight-page letter to Ted Kennedy and told him my whole story, I want to go back, I am here today, and they will not let me out of here, and I want to go to school. Well, six days later, on a Sunday morning, the Chief Nurse, Lieutenant Colonel comes running down, I am working. And she said, "McCarthy, go pack your bags, you are out of here." That is how I left Vietnam. SM: 54:31 [laughs] JM: 55:04 And I went back to my room, and I packed my stuff up in my duffel bag. And I found John Robuski, who had a Jeep, I knew he had a Jeep, and we got in our flak jacket and helmet. But that time, they wanted us to wear this blackjack and helmet all the time. And he took me to the airport. And that is how I left. I never said goodbye to anybody. SM: 56:07 But you were on your way home. [chuckles] JM: 56:09 Yeah-yeah. So I got on a plane to [inaudible]. They kept me there for a few days. And then they got me on a plane to Travis Air Force Base. And they processed me out in eight hours. And, you know, now I have been on a plane for 26 hours, and they made me dress up in my uniform, not [inaudible]. And they said I could not bring any [inaudible] home with me. But you saw me, I had my [inaudible], I stuff, I stuffed in my duffel bag to bring home with me. But, that was illegal. They did not want you to do it. But, I did it anyway. But, I had to put on my skirt, and jacket, and stockings, and high heels, black heels to ride on my plane home. By the time I got to Travis I could not even put the high heels on my feet. My ankles was, my feet was so swollen, they walked me around for eight hours, processed me out of the army, and then at the last stop the guy hands me a couple thousand dollars and said "Okay, see you." I definitely did not see other coworkers. I said, "Where am I supposed to go?" He said, "Well, where do you live?" And I said, "Well, I guess Massachusetts." "Then get on an airplane and go," "Well, where is the airport?" "25 miles down the road." I said, "How do I get there?" "I do not know, grab a cab." [chuckles] SM: 57:33 [chuckles] Jeez, very helpful. JM: 57:37 Yeah. Yeah, that is how I left the Army SM: 57:42 Now, you had, you had talked about you had a five-year plan and your goals were to continue our education. And you know you are, you are a doctor, you got a PhD. Could you talk a little bit about, you know, your plans and then on your rival home? I have a couple of questions about post-traumatic stress disorder and Agent Orange. But I want to, just your five-year plan because it was a good one. JM: 58:11 Yeah, it was three years. I knew I needed three more years to get my college degree, a Bachelor of Science degree in nursing. So I had applied to, say Indiana University's School of Nursing, and been accepted into Colorado University. And then my plan was after that was to go to anesthesia school to become a nurse anesthetist because I had found out about nurse anesthetist at Walter Reed and I thought, "Wow, this is something," but I did not think I would have the guts or the know how to do it. But in Vietnam, I said, "I can do this," and then went nurse anesthetists in Vietnam too. And, you know, I figured, yeah, I can do this. If I can do that, I can do this. So-so-so that was my plan, get my college degree, and then two more years in anesthesia school. So that is what I did, I came back. I went to IUP, Indiana University one semester, then I got in my car and drove out to Colorado, went to Colorado University, and went to Loretto Heights College, finished up the degree there. And then I had applied to Fairfax Hospital School, nurse anesthesia, got in there and moved back here to Virginia, went to that program, cut through, cut through there, and then I got a job at the Washington Hospital Center for a couple of years, and then I moved up to Walter Reed again. So now, I am back at Reed civilian nurse anesthetists in 1970, (19)78. And I was working, and Bob Watson was there, the same guy that said goodbye to me, you know, I mean, you know, they have taught me how to start an IV now, and so in the whole department and Bob was my chair, and well, it was connected to the Uniformed Services University. And somehow, I found out about that, and I went over, and I talked to Bob about it. And he said, "Well, you know, you got to go to medical school," but I do not want to go to medical school, I think I want to go on to my PhD in research, to do research. So he said, "Okay," so I went over for a couple of interviews there, and they accepted me. And so I, while I was back being a student and I loved it, I absolutely loved it. I mean, it was really hard. But, I had to give up my job at Reed. And I was essentially in medical school for two years. And then you go off, and do the research for three years, basic science research. And, you know, it was great. It was, it was hard. As I said, it was very hard. But, I learned how to do some really significant research. And from there, I did a postdoc at Mammary Naval Medical Research Institute. And then FDA found me and asked me to come over and work there as their basic scientist because of my pre-doctoral work, which was in high frequency ventilation, and FDA was reviewing the first high frequency ventilators for infants, and my research was preclinical. But anyway, I was a [inaudible], I was living my hat at the time. And so that is how I got into my work at FDA. And I transferred from an Army Reserve. And I became an officer in the U.S. Public Health Service Commissioned Corps, working at FDA. And so I was able to, you know, being in that uniform, Public Health Service for 20 years. With my work at FDA. SM: 1:02:08 Wow. JM: 1:02:09 That is a quick long story, is not it? SM: 1:02:11 But that is a great, I mean, it is a kind of, having a goal and doing it, having a goal, and doing it. And that is, it says a lot about you. And what you have done your whole life. Did you ever experienced Agent Orange? Did you ever have any effects of that when you were there? JM: 1:02:28 Well, I do not. Well, I mean, I do not, do people have acute effects of Agent Orange? SM: 1:02:37 Some people that have had cancer, they figured they got it from Agent Orange. JM: 1:02:41 Well, right. Right, you see, you do not have acute but long years and years later. SM: 1:02:47 I know many Vietnam vets and what they had to go through to prove they were victims of Agent Orange was kind of a living hell and. Right JM: 1:02:47 And my friend Chrissy that I told you about, and Annie's husband that she met there, both have strange Leukemias and died come from them. And, and I often though, and Chrissy did too, but it was our exposure to Agent Orange because we were cutting off their uniforms, right, when they came in, the wounded. And we did not wear, we did not wear gloves, [chuckles] we were not wearing gloves. And we, so we definitely could have been exposed to it. I had breast cancer about 15 years ago. And I think I put a claim into VA for it, but I never really followed up on it. Thank goodness I, I had an early, very early stage. And so, my treatment was successful. Well, my end was going through, my was, of course I never got in the Agent Orange thing, but my thing was hard that was hard was PTSD. SM: 1:04:17 Yeah, could you explain how you knew you had it? JM: 1:04:23 Well, it is not like, okay, okay. Okay. Let us see. I think like, I think I said my job. Looking back, I had classic PTSD and also how I knew that was, okay, when I was getting out of the Public Health Service retiring about 15 years ago or so, or 20, I do not know, 15 years ago. They told me make sure you go to VA and get an exit physical. So this is 2006, right, 25 years or something, or 30, whatever, 40 years after Vietnam, but they said, get an exit physical. So I said, "Okay," so I went down to VA in D.C. And part of that was, I somehow, I met with a clinical psychologist and they took my history. And I told them my symptoms when I first came home from Vietnam, you know, I did not sleep for six months, I did not eat. I was depressed. I was numb. I, you know, the classic stuff. And so he said, anyway, I remember him saying to me, "You have classic symptoms of PTSD." Okay, so I guess he put paperwork in for me to get, to get process for disability for PTSD. And I remember having to do that, I had to come up with letters that I was within Vietnam, and letters of people that knew me and Vietnam, and letters from psychologists with relationship things. And, yeah, I had to do a lot of work to get that but it did finally come through. I think I got 60 percent disability. But then seven years later, they, they asked that I do a reevaluation. So, I went back down to VA again in D.C., and I was seen by this civilian old psychiatrist who said to me, "Well, you look pretty good to me right now," and that was the end of that. SM: 1:06:46 I read someplace, because I have looked up several articles on you, that you were working with a younger nurse and, a woman came in, and died in the office or something like that. And he said, you were not as emotional about that, as you know, because you have seen so much death in Vietnam. JM: 1:07:07 Yeah, yeah. So, when I came back, I was in Indiana, and I was working, I thought, okay, I guess I am an emergency room nurse now. And I got a job at the city hospital there in Indianapolis. And in the ER, and I am working evenings, and I am working with a student who was assigned to work with me, a student nurse, old lady came in with a fractured hip in her bed, and I said, "Why do not you go ahead over to X-ray with her." So the student comes back, and she is crying. And I said, "What are you crying about it," she said, "She died." And I hope I did not say this, I thought about it. I thought, you were crying over that? I was holding a 19-year-old in my arms who bled to death in my arm, two weeks ago. And that is when I knew I ought not to be here. This is not a good place for me to be. So I was so numb, I realized that, you know, so I never did, I do not think, I left that job. But shortly after that, I moved out to Colorado. And I do not think, I worked at the city hospital there. But maybe the Chief Nurse knew enough, that could see that, I was damaged goods or something and then an ER with, anyway, I remember working in a pediatric clinic, and then they put me on the jail ward. But at least, I do not know. Yeah. Anyway, that is- SM: 1:08:51 Great. JM: 1:08:51 -that is what happened. SM: 1:08:53 When you came home from the war, you said you remember a Vietnam Veterans Against, Viet Vets against the war. And you were involved in some of the protests that they did as well. Did you attend, any of the activity that took place on that one weekend where they were actually throwing their, their metals over a fence, and going up to a microphone and, and then that was the same weekend that John Kerry gave that famous speech? Before the Foreign Relations Committee with William Fulbright. You know, he said something about the fact that, you know, how can you say, how can I keep on serving in Vietnam and say, I would be the last man to die in a war that, that was so wrong or something like that. Were you there that weekend? Were you aware that was going on, as a member of Vietnam Vets of America against the war? JM: 1:09:48 No, I did not. I do not, where was it? SM: 1:09:52 It was in Washington, D.C. JM: 1:09:53 No-no-no. No, I, do not know, I did not get involved. And really, I did not come to D.C., I did not. I was barely keeping my own life together, I think [chuckles] you know what I mean? I was not, I was not seeing like John Kerry. I mean, I did, as I said, in Colorado, and I went to a couple of meetings, a couple of demonstrations there. But even when I got back here to go to anesthesia school, I do not remember being really involved. It was not until, but then we had that, I was involved, but in a positive way, rather than a negative way. If you know what I mean, like (19)80-(19)82, we had the dedication of the wall, I was there for that. And in (19)93, I was there and that even, I went to the Congress for the hearings. You know, I was involved, but I do not remember going to any demonstrations. SM: 1:11:10 Yeah, that was just, that is how John Kerry's career really started. He gave that speech and it was a heck of a great speech. And he had a senator and William Fulbright that, that wanted him to come speak. And obviously, William Fulbright was not liked at that time by L.B.J. And so it was, you know, it was his historic time. You know, I like your comments too. You are a Vietnam veteran and how the nation treated Vietnam veterans is disgraceful upon their return. I have a story here I want you to respond to and it is just a typical example of how the vets are treated upon the return. Bobby Mahler who founded Vietnam Veterans of America, told me in an interview, and I have seen him several other times, that the reason why he created this organization was because when he came home, severely wounded, paralyzed from the waist down. He was in the hospital. And they had absolutely no wheelchairs at his hospital, and he asked for a wheelchair and he said, "We do not have any." And he thought that was ridiculous. He, people were coming home from war, and could not walk. And so he put in his mind, personally as one person, that I am going to do something to make sure this never happens again to other vets. And that is how he kind of, the reason why he formed Vietnam Veterans of America. And of course, he was one of the cofounders of Vietnam Veterans Against the War, too. But your overall comments about how Vietnam vets were treated upon their return, it is, it is upsetting. JM: 1:12:54 Well, I do not, well, I mean, which comments? SM: 1:13:02 No, just any thoughts on how America treated its vets who served in Vietnam? JM: 1:13:06 Oh you are asking me what, what- SM: 1:13:09 Yeah. JM: 1:13:10 -I do not, I think I do not, this is my opinion. But, I do not think a parade would have helped. And I do not think my feelings, there was PTSD, or that, you know, having experienced war, we need to heal, we need to heal. And then I guess what we did with the wall and the memorial was healing. That is healing. I mean, I do not think coming home to a parade. I mean, there was nothing to celebrate, what are you going to celebrate? You were just in a war that nobody knows why the hell we were in this damn thing. I think it is more about so, it was not I was not all about that I got spit on and that kind of stuff. It was not about me. I mean, what we needed and Chrissy and I worked on that for years. When we came home I remember you know she was out in California and had a lot to do with that show China Beach. The producers worked with her, and interviewed her. She, a lot of the shows were based on her stories. SM: 1:14:38 Who you are talking about, Chrissy? Whose Chrissy? JM: 1:14:43 Chrissy was with me and, was a nurse there in pre-op and receiving. SM: 1:14:48 Okay. JM: 1:14:48 It was, yeah, yeah, we were best friends. We got home. She was in Colorado. And you know, we stayed in touch. But she was out in California, working with the, working, and on the side, you know, we all did our Vietnam stuff on the side. Then we, what we worked on was like the Vet Centers, you know, Vet Centers, and getting veterans help that way. We, we felt very, that is what we needed, where we needed to be putting our energy away. Not so much a parade, to get them some help. And they started these Vet centers on the sidewalks, you know, that was supposed to be if you were a veteran come in, and we will help you. And we needed to get them more help that way. I do not know if that is making sense. SM: 1:15:48 Oh, yeah, it does. It is a different opinion. And that is, that is important. JM: 1:15:52 I do not think I do not think a parade would have helped. SM: 1:15:55 Right. JM: 1:15:55 You know, I think that the Vietnam vets they had trouble with, we had trouble because we have witnessed atrocities of war. And what are you going to do celebrate that they needed to? SM: 1:16:08 Right. JM: 1:16:09 You know, we needed to process that. We needed to process with other veterans, with other, because you could not talk to anybody that had not been there. They did not understand. And we needed to support the veterans that way to help them get on with their lives. But I mean, and to help heal, and what they went through. SM: 1:16:34 You attended both of the- these historic events, the opening of the wall in 1982, and the opening of the women's memorial in 1993. As a veteran I have seen, I live in California, I could not come to attend. But, that picture of the wall opening is, man, there was a lot of people there. Could you, what was the feelings that, that was there, in 1982? Just-just being there, what did it, how did you feel? JM: 1:17:04 So, it was, it was very exciting. There was a lot of hoopla, there was a lot of, there was a, you know, a lot of veterans here on motorcycles. And so, there was that kind of celebration. But I think afterwards, you know, when-when, like, the wall was a very somber place. It was almost sacred, you know, and it was very different from any other Memorial. And when people would come in, like, I remember when Chrissy came in to see the wall for the first time, and my friend, Mike Camp, who was a psychiatrist. I think he was still at Walter Reed them, and we were in Vietnam together. And, and we both thought, we cannot let Chrissy see that wall by herself, and we met her at the wall. And we walked her through the wall, with her. I mean, that is, that is, that is what kind of a sites it is, when you see it for the first time. And, and then seeing the soldiers, you know, looking at the wall. So, there was a difference between to me anyway, that day when we celebrated the dedication of the wall. And then afterwards, the impact it has on veterans since, even to this day, you know that- SM: 1:18:41 Yes. JM: 1:18:42 -you have airplanes full of veterans coming in to look at that wall. And but then, you look at 1993 right, by then I was at the Uniformed Services University as a professor. I was in uniform now. And several of us went down to the dedication. Oh, yeah. Oh, my goodness. You know, all kinds of nurses came in from all over the country. And I remember this friend of mine, another friend, Janet Smart, from Colorado. She and I were friends in Colorado. I mean, you know, when we ran the streets, and we skied, and partied, and she was a ski instructor, and she had been, she was a nurse in the reserve unit. But so I left Colorado, you know, and came back and now we were, what, 20 years later or so 15 years later, and we were at the Dedication of the Nurses Memorial. I am and I look up and she is tall like I am, and I looked over, and there was Janet. And we both said to each other, "What are you doing here?" [laughter] And she said, "I was in Vietnam," and I said "Well, so was I." We had been friends in Colorado for three years, never told each other that we had been in Vietnam. SM: 1:20:06 Oh my gosh. Yeah. JM: 1:20:08 Yeah. So, I mean, that just shows you how much you can stuff it. But that so anyway, that day I told her in my speech I talked about, the somberness. But the nurse’s memorial, I feel like it is still different. I can go and sit there, and I do not know, it feels more healing, and peaceful, or something underneath the trees. And whereas the wall, you know, if you really look at the wall, it has got all those names on it. SM: 1:20:48 You know, Jam Scruggs wrote, his first book was "To heal a Nation." And, and this is a question I have asked all the people I have interviewed. When Jan used to say a lot, "This is not a political entity. This is all about remembrance. This is about making sure that we never forget those who served in Vietnam and lost their lives. And those who did serve in Vietnam and came home, and for the families of those who are no longer with us," that, you know, it was all about that, it was about healing. He goes on and it is done a great job in terms of healing, the Vietnam vets, and their families. The question is whether what the job is done with healing the nation that was so divided in, in the (19)60s? And that everybody has their own opinions on this. Do you think that wall has helped us heal as a nation? JM: 1:21:49 Yeah, yeah. I mean, I, I think it was a turning point in, in how we looked at war, I mean, every other Memorial, is memorializing the heroes coming home. And I think that this memorial, is memorializing the high cost of war, and the pain of war. And I mean, I differ from Shannon, a bit there that it is not about remembering, it is about, it is about remembering these people. But it is also, it is about remembering the high costs of war, and we ought to think twice about getting into another war. SM: 1:22:39 Right. JM: 1:22:41 But that is very opposite meaning of every other Memorial where you look at "Oh, the soldiers, the heroes." I do not get that from the wall. I do not get that from, from looking at the wall. I get that this, we lost 58,000 men for what? And that is what even the soldiers, the way those soldiers are looking at that wall, you know. SM: 1:23:17 In your view, what is the legacy of the Vietnam War? And what were the lessons learned or lost in that war? JM: 1:23:26 Oh, I was hoping that we had learned the lesson of not getting into war. Nothing good comes of it. That is all we have atrocities, and lives lost, and countries ruin. When you think, you know that poor Vietnam country, the bombing, and everything, ugh. You know, wars are not good, nothing good comes out of them. And in this whole thing, you got a question. Somebody say, well, it was the domino theory. Really? Really, that is what we were told we were there because of the domino theory. Yeah, we lost and I do not see any dominoes falling here. And Vietnam, even though it was under communist rule, it was probably, it was probably better off than-than it was when it was being at war for 15-20 years. SM: 1:24:33 Who do you blame for the war, if you know? JM: 1:24:40 I think, I think all of them you know, the military industrial complex, the people making money off to the war. They were pushing it. The lobbyists, the weapons people, the convinced, and I knew Johnson he knew it was wrong. And then Nixon, you know, he did. It was the one time voted for Nixon was because he said he would get us the hell out of there- SM: 1:25:15 Right. JM: 1:25:19 -but I thought, I thought once we got out of there that we had learned our lessons, and then you see in (19)91, 20 years later, Bush invaded Iran. And I fell apart, then I fell apart. I just did not think our country would ever do that. And that is when I really fell apart with PTSD. Because I just, I, we could not turn the T.V. on in my house. We, you know, I could not I got really depressed, I just could not believe that we were doing that again. SM: 1:25:57 And now we are talking about building another memorial for the Iraq and Afghanistan veterans, so. Because that is what I think Jan is, is somewhat linked to that effort, because he is always we are thinking about those who serve the nation, and so- JM: 1:26:16 I am not. Yeah, right, no. SM: 1:26:20 One of the questions I want to ask before I ask my final two questions is, do you consider the activists who tried to end the war as heroes like those who served in the war in Vietnam, both are not treated well, upon the returned? Nixon called the silent majority; his group was called the silent majority during the (19)60s and early (19)70s. And they are the ones that kind of were, after those who served the anti-war protesters and so forth. But they were trying to save lives. But, the ones that were not it for just fun. The true activist one to save lives in Vietnam, not only the people who served in Vietnam, Americans, but also the Vietnamese population as well. Would you consider them? You know, the divisions of the (19)60s are such that how could you dare call an anti-war protester a hero, but today, when you are talking about today's terms, looking at Vietnam vets who I consider heroes, and, and Viet, and then the anti-war protesters who are against this war for many, many years, all ages, not just young people, if they were sincere, and bringing people home to save lives, I consider them heroes. What are your thoughts? JM: 1:27:45 What that we care about the Vietnamese people too, is what you are asking? SM: 1:27:50 No, it was do you consider the anti-war, the people who were anti-war protesters? Do you consider them heroes too? JM: 1:27:58 Yes, absolutely. Thank God we had them, thank God. Because, you know, that helped get us the hell out of there. But if people just sat back and said, "Okay, let us keep going with this war." We were losing a 1000 men a month, were being killed. No, absolutely. Thank God for the protesters. I think maybe Nixon was who got us the hell out of there, do not you? SM: 1:28:24 Yeah. I agree. JM: 1:28:27 Right? SM: 1:28:28 Yes. JM: 1:28:29 Yeah, thank God to the protesters. We needed more of them. SM: 1:28:35 The, I have a question too as a general question, is several people have talked about the 1960s and early (29)70s as two different groups, two different eras. The one era was 1960-(19)63, and the second era was (19)64-1975, when the helicopters flew off the Embassy in Saigon, of course, they are referring to probably the era of Kennedy, and then his death. And then the second (19)60s started in (19)64. Or do you consider it all one? JM: 1:29:18 Well, yeah-yeah, I cannot say I could separate them. You know, that. What separates them into what? I do not know. Two different eras? Yeah. SM: 1:29:53 No. That is just something, one of the top military people at the World War II Memorial when I interviewed him-him, he broke it down in the 2 (19)60s. It is just a thought that some people have, said it was two different years in one year. JM: 1:30:08 No-no, they were not my life. They were the most influential years of my life. And they were all very much connected, that you know, then our president was killed. And that we were shooting people like Martin Luther King. I mean, then Kennedy was probably killed because of the civil rights that he was willing to, to work with. And so, it was that, and then we got this. I mean, I guess it was different than that. Then we have got another bunch of people that want to get into a war in Vietnam. [laughs]. Oh, God. SM: 1:30:56 Certainly, for the, your, your thoughts on the boomer generation as a whole? Do you have any opinions on them? JM: 1:31:05 Well, I am one, right? SM: 1:31:06 Yes, you are one. JM: 1:31:20 I think, I mean, I always thought that we were very illusioned. I mean, that Kennedy, remember, Kennedy, and he, he had the Peace Corps. And, you know, there were ideals we could strive for. We were very idealistic, that whatever we wanted to do, we could do, and what, and that is what I got out of the (19)60s, you know, whatever I wanted to do, I could do it, and I was going to go do it. And I think it was a woman, a young woman that my mother could not do, or chose or did not do, the things I did, that was another generation. But I decided I was going to, I could, I could see the possibility, the possibility. And I wrote that way, if you want to think about it that way, as a woman, that, you know, there was something saying to me, I could be whoever I wanted to be, and I was going to go be it. And I do not think I would have, I think we were the first generation to be able to do that. In other words, to-to be able to go and get myself educated, to have a successful career, to be a leader, and to have my own family. I mean, I was raised that as a woman, you could not do all those things. SM: 1:32:58 That is very well said, very well said. And I want to end the, this last question. What would you say to young people, or people who are listening to this interview, 50 years from now, long after both you and I are gone, and many of our generation is, the boomers will all be gone too? What words of advice would you like to give to those people? JM: 1:33:27 Well, you know, again, as a woman, that this was the beginning of those opportunities. And I do not know what is going to happen like with, with the, well with the Supreme Court, and remember as a woman in 1973, that those opportunities had just begun, for a woman's right to choose. And, we did not have those rights before. And I think that is what opened up a lot of doors, and I do not know what is going to happen, if those doors are going to close. And, but we had it in 1973. We had it as women, and then, and we believed in democracy, and we believed in equality of all, you know, all, at least I did, maybe I was naive, but I believed in a country where everyone could be equal. Black people, white people, we all had equal opportunity, or at least opportunity to do good things with our lives. And I think that is being challenged now with this autocracy with the Supreme Court, and this, these cowboys and whatever, you know, I hope we are going to be able to keep our democracy going, because that is what gives us the opportunity to do what we want to do from within, inside ourselves. And that could be taken away from us. I hope it is not. But I consider myself very, very lucky that I was right on the cusp of that. And I figured out a way to do what I wanted to do with my life and to not let things like the fact that I am a woman stop me. SM: 1:35:26 Well, this has been one heck of an interview and I want to thank you very much for-for agreeing to do this. I am going to turn the tape off now and say a few more comments afterwards. Thanks again. (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. Elizabeth Jane McCarthy