Oral History, Memory, and the Vietnam War
From OHA Wiki
Contents |
Introduction
Defined by horrific images, unfamiliar battlegrounds, an illusive enemy, and an uncertain mission, the Vietnam War is one of the most controversial conflicts in American history, joined now by the War in Iraq. The circumstances and controversy surrounding the Vietnam War have presented many unique issues and challenges for oral historians who attempt to capture and preserve memories of this event. Oral history accounts from Vietnam veterans serve as reminders that memory is not static. Instead, it changes as time passes and there is an opportunity for further reflection, processing, and new perspectives to affect the way an event is remembered. In addition to the challenges presented by memory, the traumatic and controversial nature of the Vietnam War, itself, makes the art of extracting memories a difficult and delicate one. The following is a study of several documentary films done in the years during, the years immediately following, and the years long after the Vietnam War. The videos have been evaluated and are used here as a means to discuss the methodology of oral historians as well as the challenges and issues that are both common to all national and international conflicts as well as specific to the collection and preservation of memories concerning the Vietnam War.
Creating Cohesion
Charlotte Linde coined a phrase that is essential to understand when looking at oral histories of war. Linde’s book, Life Stories: The Creation of Coherence explores the idea of memories that change over time when a narrator has the opportunity to reflect on an experience with new perspective.1 The narrator “creates cohesion,” as Linde says, or is able to identify a big picture or perspective that was not apparent during or immediately following an event. The creation of cohesion allows the narrator to process an event that was fragmented, intense, chaotic, or traumatic at the time and to communicate the memory by making use of current cultural norms or belief systems. Linde writes, "stories rely on presuppositions about what can be taken as expected, what the norms are, and what common or special belief systems are necessary to establish coherence."2 An example of this would be an interview done with an activist during the Civil Rights Movement, and then a follow-up interview done thirty years later. In the first interview, the narrator would probably focus on details: specific protests, logistics, how many attendees there were, and other such things. Thirty years later, narrators would have formed a much more cohesive story of their involvement in the movement, based on their own reflections, things they had read, or talking with others. During these later interviews, narrators would tend to focus more on the overall impact of the movement, the larger goals of the movement, and other big ideas. The narrator would also tell a much different story to someone who had gone through a similar experience, as that person would have common understandings of the cultural or situational norms at that time.
The easiest way to observe the creation of cohesion over time is to evaluate interviews done in close proximity to an event, and interviews done after a significant amount of time has passed. Of course, it is difficult to interview the same narrators for both sets of interviews, but it is still possible to compare each group of narrators and their stories as a whole. The following sections discuss several documentaries containing oral histories. Some were made in the 1970s and some were made as recently as 2008, but each of the films include interview segments with evidence of a lack of cohesion, in the case of the earlier films, or the creation of cohesion, in the case of the later films.
Motivation for Fighting
One of the most controversial and debated aspects of the Vietnam War is America’s justification for its involvement and the motivation for soldiers to fight an often undefined enemy and for a loosely defined cause. In documentaries such as Hearts and Minds, done in 1974, former soldiers talk about how "they fought for their buddies . . . that was what the war was all about."3 Many of the men also discussed pride and a very real sense of excitement that was experienced in the battlefield. The majority of the stories shared are detailed accounts of specific operations with memories of who was killed, when, and how. Those stories represent what was fresh in their minds at the time of the interview – just shortly after their tour in Vietnam. Stories of their friends and details of combat were important to them, were what they understood, and what they felt was worth telling.
Documentaries such as Inside the Vietnam War, done in 2008 by the National Geographic Society, also feature former soldiers looking back on their time in Vietnam. However, after more than thirty years have passed, the men dwell less on the details and more on the larger goals that America had. In his interview, Captain Bonson reveals that his main motivation for fighting, along with others, was to “get the Communists.”4 In general, it can be said that after the war had long passed, soldiers were much more able to identify and communicate a larger purpose for fighting, such as “to stop communism,” “to assert America as an imperial power,” or “to fulfill America’s responsibility to weaker countries.” Like Linde has found in other situations, as time passes, soldiers are able to more cohesively articulate their motivations for fighting and mission in Vietnam. They are able to place their often traumatic and chaotic experiences into a larger political and national framework. Narrators were also much more likely to generalize, as former Marine Philip Caputo does when he simply states, “It was a mess,” rather than going into the instant-by-instant details as is done in the earlier films.5
Justification of Action
One of the most noticeable differences between the documentaries done during the 1970s and those done later is that in the later documentaries, many of the narrators spend a significant amount of time justifying the actions and attitudes of the soldiers and their government. As the war was raging, there wasn’t as much of a need to justify action because things happened very quickly. This doesn’t mean that everyone agreed with what was being done, as is evident by the antiwar movement that erupted. However, soldiers’ lives depended on their ability to move in battle without questioning orders. They were entrenched in battle and that is also where their stories were centered in interviews done shortly after their time in Vietnam.
In the more recent documentaries, however, nearly every narrator felt the need to justify some aspect of the war, government policy, or wartime culture. Most common is the soldiers’ need to justify their actions, decisions, and missions that they were to carry out in Vietnam. In Inside the Vietnam War, Colonel Andrew O’Meara, Jr., an advisor to the Vietnamese military, states, “when your life’s in danger and you’re carrying a loaded weapon, you don’t act like a pacifist.”6 Other documentaries, such as Vietnam: A Television History, done in 1983 and edited in 2004, features narrators who justify both government policy as well as the social problems that existed in Vietnam. The black market and prostitution are discussed as things that “just happened” or “just existed” during the war as a part of the culture.7 As more time passes and soldiers are given more time to make sense of what was going on during the war, the things that they did, and the things that they saw, there was a growing need to justify those occurrences, both to place them in a context that they could process and to release themselves from the delayed guilt that they felt after the chaos of the moment subsided.
The Question of "Why"
Ultimately, as time passes and memory is affected by new experiences, further reflection, changed perspective, and the creation of cohesion, narrators are able to answer the question of “why?” Most obviously, they consider why they were fighting. As they reflect on their lives in the present, they begin to realize just how great an impact their time in Vietnam still holds on their every-day life. Whereas just after the war it may have been unclear why relationships with their family had changed or why former soldiers now struggled with feelings of anxiety, narrators in the more recent documentaries have a deep understanding of themselves post-war. In Vietnam Homecoming, done by the History Channel in 2006, veterans talk about how, through therapy, they had to reevaluate relationships and the way they were going to function in society.8 With therapy and time, however, came relief as they were able to make sense of why life was so drastically different when they returned from Vietnam. These realizations were not possible until a significant amount of time had passed, and consequently, narrators do not discuss these types of thoughts in earlier documentaries. Instead they discussed the details of combat, which would have been essential to their survival at that time and monopolizing their memory.
The Nature of the Vietnam War
Although the process of creating cohesion can apply to all wars and many other traumatic or stressful situations, the nature and circumstances of the Vietnam War pose some unique challenges and considerations for oral historians.
Unlike other wars in American history, World War I and World War II specifically, soldiers received no welcome home upon returning from Vietnam. Of course, this was partly because there was no official victory to be celebrated and the soldiers were sent to their homes scattered across the country gradually over time. As a result, there was no parade to honor them and often times not even anyone to welcome them at the airport. Veteran Joe Moss recalls his lonely arrival at the airport where he picked up his bag, hailed a taxi cab to his mother’s house and was welcomed as if he been gone on an over-night business trip, rather than for several years fighting a devastating war.9
There is also the matter of the controversy surrounding the Vietnam War. Many soldiers received harsh treatment upon their return, something they were not expecting. In recently made documentaries, this is a topic that appears in many of the narrators’ stories. The treatment they received has come to the forefront of their memory now as they see protestors moving against the war in Iraq. Veteran John Hedrick tells the obviously painful story of when he received his membership card for the VFW. On the back was a list of wars during which the veteran had served. Where as other cards had listed “World War Two” or “The Korean War,” Hedrick’s listed “the conflict in Vietnam.” Realizing what this difference in terminology symbolized, Hedrick lamented, “I couldn’t even say I had fought in a real war.”10
Whether it is horror on the battlefield or a lonely homecoming lacking the honor that other homecomings have held, Vietnam drudges up painful memories that continue to resurface even today. As oral historians conduct their interviews, part of their job is to be sensitive to the unique circumstances that Vietnam veterans carry with them. Many of the men preferred to share their memories outdoors in a field or in a specific room of the house. They need a safe place that is comfortable where they can remember and relive their time in Vietnam and talk about how their lives are affected in the present.
Since there was no official homecoming following the Vietnam War and many soldiers, both deceased and surviving, did not receive the honor that is usually bestowed a veteran, oral historians perform an act of restorative justice in their work. Many of the documentaries, as well as the memorials that have been built or gatherings that have taken place to reunite veterans, have been done more for the veterans to honor their memories and the memories of those who did not return to America after the war.
Challenges
Because the nature of the Vietnam War is so unique, there are some unique challenges that oral historians of this area must take into consideration and sensitively work to overcome. As mentioned before, the creation of cohesion, although helpful for the narrator to process difficult memories and create a context for their experiences, causes memories to change and evolve. At times this can be helpful for the historian, as they can collect both a detailed account as well as the big picture or societal trends, depending on how much time has passed or what stage the memory is in. In addition, there are conflicting memories that exist depending on perspective. There are just as many anti-war documentaries in existence as there are documentaries that support the military and governmental actions in Vietnam. In Hearts and Minds, one veteran comments on his observation that for the American soldier, the war was very business-like and professional with a job to be done. For the Vietnamese, however, the war was extremely personal as their homes were destroyed and every-day lives were more drastically changed.11 Oral historians are responsible for identifying narrators’ perspectives and accurately presenting the memories.
Possibly the most difficult challenge to overcome is the simple fact that veterans do not talk about Vietnam for many reasons. The first has already been discussed: the memories are very painful and sometimes unbelievable, even for the narrator. Retired Major Pervis, a former Marine, discusses how he tries to block out his memories of Vietnam to help himself function in his community and his family. He says, “I need control the demons in my head – to keep it all hidden. You also have to keep it hidden so you’re not a target [of anti-war criticism].”12 It is considerably more difficult for oral historians to find veterans of Vietnam who are willing or even able to fully disclose their memories.
The memory of Vietnam does not only affect veterans, but it also affects their families. Family life contributes to the silence concerning Vietnam because they are afraid to ask questions, both trying to save their loved one from reliving painful memories and trying to avoid tension in the home and in the relationship. Pervis talks about the division that Vietnam has created in his family, particularly between he and his wife. He says that “Vietnam is always an unspoken presence. It creates a real division between us who were there, and the ones who weren’t.” When asked if he will ever be as close with his family as he is with his memories of Vietnam, he responds after a long silence, “no, I don’t think that’s possible.”13 So, in a sense, the family is constantly at odds with the war, both vying for a spot in a loved one’s heart and memory.
The challenges do not end here, either. There will come a time when there will be no living veterans of the Vietnam War, and historians will need to rely on the memories that have already been collected and the memories of surviving relatives. In addition, memories of the war have not reached their final state, as veterans and their families continually gain new perspective which alters the way that they remember.
Endnotes
1 Charlotte Linde, Life Stories: The Creation of Coherence (Oxford University Press, USA, 1993).
2. Ibid., 219.
3. Peter Davis, Hearts and Minds - Criterion Collection, DVD (Criterion, 2002).
4. Alberto Mendez, Karl Gustave, and Bill Mallek, National Geographic: Inside the Vietnam War, DVD (Nat'l Geographic Vid, 2008).
5. Ibid.
6. Ibid.
7. -, Vietnam - A Television History, DVD (WGBH BOSTON, 2004).
8. n/a, Vietnam - Homecoming, DVD (A&E HOME VIDEO, 2007).
9. Ibid.
10. Ibid.
11. Davis, Hearts and Minds- Criterion Collection.
12. n/a, Vietnam - Homecoming.
13. Ibid.
Bibliography
-. Vietnam - A Television History. DVD. WGBH BOSTON, 2004.
Allison, Fred H. “Remembering a Vietnam War Firefight: Changing Perspectives over Time.” The Oral History Review 31, no. 2 (Summer - Autumn 2004): 69-83.
Davis, Peter. Hearts and Minds - Criterion Collection. DVD. Criterion, 2002.
Linde, Charlotte. Life Stories: The Creation of Coherence. Oxford University Press, USA, 1993.
Mendez, Alberto, Karl Gustave, and Bill Mallek. National Geographic: Inside the Vietnam War. DVD. Nat'l Geographic Vid, 2008.
n/a. Vietnam - Homecoming. DVD. A&E HOME VIDEO, 2007.
Zeiger, David.Sir! No Sir! - The Suppressed Story of the GI Movement to End the War in Vietnam. DVD. DOCURAMA, 2006.
