Final Reflection Post

Throughout this semester, I was presented with both intellectual and emotional dilemmas as I tried to complete the course’s assignments, conduct an interview with a Vietnam War veteran, and meet the course’s outcomes all at the same time. Although it is not explicitly stated in our outcomes, the process of using and creating oral history in the past few months often involved questioning “traditional” historical research in ways I had never imagined. I was not only challenged to think differently about how history is presented, but I was challenged to sort of set aside my own set of feelings and beliefs throughout the entire research process, which I did not necessarily expect or feel prepared for. That being said, I do believe that the “fluid” research-based learning process I experienced through employing oral historical methods is intellectually and even culturally richer than the more common analysis and presentation of historical documents.

One of the most difficult but also most worthwhile issues I experienced in the process of employing and presenting oral historical research was simply determining for myself the value and credibility of using oral history in the first place. Admittedly, oral history did not seem particularly important or valuable to me during the beginning of the course. As I studied arguments for and against the practice of oral historical research methods, I remained uneasy and with several questions: Is oral historical research too specific? How could anyone possibly make general conclusions about a major historical event such as the Vietnam War through just twenty or so interviews? How could anyone broadly interpret the roles of race, class, and gender among other things in the Latino/a community from a few recorded sessions with Latino Vietnam War veterans? Also, how could anyone simply choose the “best” parts of their recorded interviews and hope that those parts are indicative of the larger Latino Vietnam War experience? At this point in the process, there are still very few concrete answers to those questions, even from older oral historians. Nevertheless, I began to actually feel the value of oral history through this research process. It became clear to me that these interviews are special methods of recording history that offer so much more than the United States history textbooks; they offer character and a certain depth that I never experienced from reading books about the Vietnam War. Listening to the personal stories of a Latino Vietnam War veteran felt much more enlightening to me than a mere summary or description of war-related events.

The process of conducting the interview and posting small portions of it onto an archive was also a test of what I had learned about oral historical methods and how I could use my own research in the most accessible and effective manner. Conducting the actual interview, for instance, was something I quickly realized I had to figure out on my own, even though we had read so many different sources about oral historical methods and the “proper” way to conduct an interview. The process truly varies from person to person and from interview to interview, as we quickly discovered in our post-interview discussions. For me, I could not help but be extremely nervous; I could only imagine how sensitive the topic of war must be for a veteran, so I controlled everything down to my facial expressions as best I could. Despite my nerves, it became clear to me that the interview was quite an experience for the veteran, too – recognizing that I am merely a young, female college student with no experience or even accurate idea of what war is like. He understood where I was coming from, which made it easier for me to just relax and listen to whatever he wanted to be heard.

Overall, I would argue that the real challenge of HIST110S CH was not actually meeting the outcomes – it was not demonstrating historical knowledge of the 20^th century Latino/a, the employing of oral historical research methods, or the presenting of results. Those were simply all of the necessary steps to creating a Latino Vietnam War veteran archive. The real difficulty was learning to think and analyze like a true oral historian. It was truly a process of thinking about those questions and concerns I had in the beginning of the semester and realizing that oral historical research does address a lot of “bigger” issues about war and race, just in a very unique way. The interviews may have consisted of very specific stories from particular individual veterans, but it does not mean that their experiences are not indicative of some larger issues experienced by Latino/as and/or war veterans – nor does it mean that interviews are insignificant or irrelevant to the processes of collecting and using history to educate. The most obvious proof of the value of oral history throughout this course is that I had no idea a sizeable amount of Latinos participated in the Vietnam War, let alone that they had an experience particular (or not!)  to their Latin American identity. The way that I learned about the Latino veteran perspective – through a live human being with painful but empowering memories of his unit and his experience on the battlefield – was infinitely more fulfilling than reading and analyzing “dead” primary and secondary source documents. Although there is great value in “traditional” historical research, this course pushed me to consider less popular methods that have a special power and value of their own.

Reading Post 6

Gods Go Begging by Alfredo Véa, in one sentence, is a story that connects the harsh realities of the Vietnam War experience with present-day life in the lower-class urban neighborhoods of the United States. Protagonist Jesse Pasadoble, both a Chicano veteran and a defense attorney, constantly makes connections between his time in Vietnam and his experiences as a lawyer and realizes that fighting the war in Vietnam was not so different from fighting “wars” on the streets at home. This is what I understood to be the central theme of the text – that Vietnam, although a daunting experience not meant for the faint of heart, often helps Jesse Pasadoble and arguably any veteran make sense of how and why things are the way they are back home. This is a novel, I think, that is meant to dispel the distance between the Vietnam War and real life and to demonstrate how the developed characteristics and actions of soldiers in Vietnam were not far off from those of Americans back home.

Véa conveys this blurred relationship between the Vietnam War and the real world by similarly “blurring” the stories of Jesse’s experiences in Vietnam and his career as a lawyer. The book constantly jumps between snippets of Jesse’s memories in Vietnam (specifically, the people he met there) and his conversations with clients and friends in America and what their lives both on and off the streets are like. All of these stories address many larger issues that existed both in and out of Vietnam and still exist today, such as racism, sexism, the right to education, morals/ethics, and, perhaps most importantly, power. I can list several examples of how Véa unraveled these issues, but the best one to study more closely is probably in Jesse’s interactions with his clients and the memories of Vietnam that those interactions triggered, especially in the first half of the book. Jesse talked down to his clients, especially those like Bernard Skelley who showed no respect, in ways that are comparable to the way he was spoken to and treated as a sergeant in Vietnam. He gets so worked up when his clients, and even his companions, do not see eye-to-eye with him. A clear instance of this frustration is expressed when someone aggressively points out, “this is not Vietnam, Jesse. Life is not a war,” and Jesse quickly exclaims, “It’s not? Don’t we live in a free-fire zone? There are seventy-five wars going on in this world right now, and only one of them matches the homicide rate in this country. Didn’t Skelley call himself a soldier?” (pg. 69) Jesse sees absolutely everything, down to the hill, as a reflection of his time in Vietnam. He sees the way people involved in “ghetto” life treat other people, weapons, bodies, and death as a mirror image of the way soldiers treated those things in Vietnam. Complications in this perception of a “blurred” life experience occur constantly throughout the book, especially towards the end when Jesse cries his eyes out because he is under the impression that Calvin got killed – Calvin, a boy who previously meant less than nothing to him, and was just another ghetto illiterate kid making nothing of himself on the streets. The end of the book suggests that Jesse comes to almost appreciate his experiences in Vietnam and everything he has learned about life and people through his time as a lawyer. His relationship with Calvin and other clients help him reconcile with his haunting memories of the Vietnam War and see them in a slightly different light.

Overall, I thought Gods Go Begging was amazingly well written and thought out. In this day and age it is certainly crucial to take issues like war, which people uninvolved may not spend a great deal of time thinking about, and connect them more concretely to “normal” life experiences and social issues. Admittedly, there were times I was frustrated with Véa’s style and felt like he jumped between narratives too often; sometimes it just felt like he was trying too hard. At the same time, though, I felt like the way Véa wrote the book certainly added to the central theme and that I would not feel so strongly supportive of it if he had written it any other way.

Reading Post 5

The prologue of Moye’s Freedom Flyers, which consists of a series of individual experiences of black pilots, offers a great prelude to the following chapter about the course of events surrounding black participation in World War II and in American politics. It is clear to me that Moye was deliberate in choosing to present individual histories first because the specific experiences of each person described in the prologue are mere manifestations of the larger social issues between minorities and the American government during the World War II period. For example, in the prologue, Moye includes the history of a man from Boston who wanted to be a pilot and was surprised with his difficulty of finding an institution that would enroll him because he thought discrimination was may more of an issue in the south. In the following chapter, Moye discusses particular policies in the northeast that reflect the same racial issues as those of the south, such as when the North American Aviation company decided in 1941 that it would not hire any blacks, regardless of their experience.

I find it a little tricky to comment on Moye’s work as a piece of oral history because it is not written in the question-and-answer format the class is used to from our own interviews and readings such as Recording Oral History. However, I can imagine that Moye went through his interviews with the narrators mentioned in the prologue and thought about their individual experiences in relation to the sort of omniscient “textbook” presentation of analyses of the past. In my analyses of my own interviews with Vietnam War veterans, I hope to use the same method of looking at a narrator’s particular life experiences through the lens of the larger event or issue that took place in the world at that time. Moye successfully highlighted specific experiences and attitudes of narrators in the larger context of lack of opportunity for blacks before and during World War II. Similarly, I would like to look at the specific feelings and experiences of the people I interview and use various other sources to think about how those individual feelings and experiences are representative of the collective Latin American and/or veteran identity in the States, both during and after the Vietnam War.

Reflection Post 2

Ultimately, I couldn’t use any sort of guide while the interview was happening. I was on my own. I can tell these situations vary case by case, and this particular interview was a lot different from what I expected. I expected to have some difficulty asking questions. I didn’t want to feel like I was prying or asking the wrong kinds of questions. The person I interviewed, however, was more than willing to talk about anything. I think it was obvious that I was more nervous than he was but he was okay with that. It was a challenge to figure out what exactly he wanted to talk about and to gear questions towards those topics, as we have mentioned in class before. I wanted to keep him in control of the conversation even though, at times, I would move from topic to topic. The interview became a little easier as time went on and we both felt more comfortable. I turned off the tape a couple of times to use the bathroom and to talk about other things. I guess I should have expected him to ask me a few questions about myself but I was still sort of surprised at his interest in my own childhood and how I ended up at college. I let him ask me whatever he wanted to know, though – it was only fair. The end of the interview was sort of odd because after I turned off the tape, the person I interviewed kept talking about things extremely relevant to the interview and his Vietnam experience…. It would’ve been great if it were on tape but I felt awkward turning it back on after I had clearly indicated that the recording session was over. In retrospect, it probably would have been fine to do so, but I didn’t want to interrupt his thoughts.

I think next time will be better simply because I have a little experience. I also have a much better idea of the possibly directions certain questions can go, and I can think of good follow-up questions for those. Overall, though, I recognize that this specific interview was not particularly difficult in terms of tension or tough topics, but I still have to be prepared for that kind of interview. I found myself really appreciative and honestly touched with the openness of the person I interviewed, and I’m counting on that experience to make my next interview that much better.

Reading Post 4

Recording Oral History ch. 3-6

After this reading, I definitely feel a little more prepared for my first interview in a couple of days. These chapters brought up a lot of points and advice regarding interviews that I had not even considered, which is kind of overwhelming. One piece of advice that stuck out to me was to remember to phrase questions in a way that will not evoke a biased answer. This will probably be one of the most difficult tasks during my interview because I think we often phrase questions in a biased format without even realizing it. For instance, I already have my own preconceptions of the Vietnam War and how it might have affected veterans but I have to keep in mind that I will be interviewing an individual man with his own thoughts, feelings, and experiences, and that this man in no way represents all Vietnam veterans, or even the war itself as a whole.

Another understanding (and difficult task) I thought about from the reading was being able to use my own judgment when the person I am interviewing goes off on a tangent or talks about something irrelevant to the project. It will be hard to determine what exactly is “irrelevant” – I mean, I feel like if the person I’m interviewing talks about his family during the war, his job post-Vietnam, or basically anything about his life before, during, and after the war, it will probably be relevant to his experience as a Chicano/Latino Vietnam War veteran. I am struggling to think of an example of something that would be irrelevant, mostly because I have this perception that the Vietnam War has been and will always be a humongous part of these veterans’ lives. Regardless, as the book suggests, I guess I will be able to sort of ‘sense’ if the interview is getting off track, at which point I will have to find a way to politely bring the subject back to Vietnam. I think this will also be one of the most difficult things I’ll have to do, mostly because I will probably have to gauge whether or not I am trying to get back on a subject the veteran may not want to further discuss.

A third understanding I got from the reading was Yow’s point about interpersonal relationships. It is not farfetched to say that this interview will be very different from any interview done by a highly-educated male professor because I am a younger woman who is still in college. I am, however, Hispanic/Latina with non-English speaking immigrant parents, which is a different experience from some other students in the Latino/a oral histories class. There is no way of knowing whether any of these things will positively or negatively affect the interview, or if they will even affect the interview at all, but I think, as Yow mentions, it will be important to at least remember the differences in our identities and the way we were raised as I interview veterans about their experiences.

Reading Post 3

Vietnam Veteranos Ch. 5-10

Two things that stuck out to me in this reading were the attitudes Chicano veterans developed towards war post-Vietnam and the feelings that changed towards family. In terms of war, it was interesting to me that, based on these accounts, veterans were basically split – some believed the Vietnam experience was completely worthless and just a nightmare while others would not choose to undo it and still support war as a means of resolving international conflicts. I recall a couple of veterans who hinted that they even became better, stronger people after their Vietnam experiences despite the many psychological consequences. Views on those who escaped the draft by moving to Canada were also split in that some veterans understood the need to flee while others considered it a cowardly, unpatriotic move. This idea of war as a “civic duty” came up for some veterans even after Vietnam, when race and class relations between Chicanos continued to suffer and, in some ways, worsen. Others, though, returned with resentment towards the United States government and foreign policy. It is important, then, for us not to assume certain thoughts and feelings of veterans during our interviews because war quite clearly affects each individual differently.

It was difficult to read the accounts of veterans or of family members dealing with veterans returning home extremely distraught and emotionally damaged from the Vietnam experience. I feel like no amount of counseling, money, or privileges could possibly compensate for everything these soldiers had to live through, especially Chicano soldiers who also had to deal with racial dynamics within their groups. A lot of stories included divorce, death, and simply veterans having to change their entire lives once they got back home because they simply were not the same since the war. It just seems unfair that all of these veterans continued to suffer after the war in a lot of different aspects of their lives with little help or even support from their cities, given the massive protests that occurred once veterans began to come back home. This, along with Chicano attitudes regarding war after Vietnam, reflect an experience very different and unique from any other kind of veteran or soldier.

Reading Post 2

Vietnam Veteranos Ch. 1-4

Two important topics/issues I took away from this reading are how the Vietnam War (and the draft) affected relationships between the United States and its Chicano/Latino community as well as the effects war in general has on the psyche of a Chicano/Latino who already feels under pressure to perform in a particular way. Of the veterans who were not drafted, for instance, many of them felt some sort of obligation to enlist anyway because of their socio-political standing in the United States – that is, a lot of them felt obligated to prove their loyalty to the country and prove that they deserve equality and respect as Americans. Some of them suggested that the United States government and media sort of used this perception to the nation’s advantage and were able to gather massive Chicano/Latino participation (especially through the draft) without necessarily following through on benefits coming back home, i.e. immediate health care and education opportunities. A lot of veterans also reported regret in enlisting because they felt “tricked” or deceived in terms of what they would be getting out of military participation. A couple said they came home to exactly the same things they had left behind, only worse because of their post-war states of mind and the unbelievable amount of casualties among the Chicano/Latino military population.

That being said, although the overall idea of participating in the Vietnam War seemed to hold benefits in regards to Chicano/Latino-American relationships, those relationships really just worsened on top of the mental/emotional destruction of many of these veterans. There were veterans who did not really connect their post-war experiences to psychological stress/damage, but the two were very clearly linked. For example, one veteran said that for fifteen years after the war, his hands felt numb every time he went to bed, and he would toss and turn for hours before he could fall asleep. These things happen when soldiers are trained to be on their toes at all times… also, it is difficult to sleep when there are too many thoughts/memories on one’s mind. Many of these veterans did not even know what post traumatic stress disorder was or whether or not they had it but I think it is safe to say that all of these soldiers had thinking to do when they returned from serving a country their parents may not have even been born in.

Reading Post 1

I think the most important thing I learned from the three readings is that the field of oral history, although it is a specific type of history and method of looking at the past, is extremely volatile in both positive and negative ways. On the one hand, as often highlighted in “An Oral History of Our Time”, the variability of methods and general usage of oral history cause people to disagree on its level of overall legitimacy and credibility. For instance, some argue that it is a primary source and that the intimacy of the interview/recording surpasses any loss of memory regarding otherwise arbitrary details of the past. Others would argue that oral histories are “too subjective” and thus biased by nature. Also, while some would argue that recording an informant is one of the best ways of learning about parts of the past that are not covered in other forms of primary documents, others would argue that oral history needs some more forms of statistical analysis in order to draw more realistic conclusions about the past. These conflicting views of oral history show that yes, it can be very subjective and varied from case to case, but that this inconsistency should not be used to perceive oral history as illegitimate - rather, it is perhaps an “untraditional” but equally powerful and well thought-out way of learning more about the past through people’s personal accounts of particular events. That being said, another very important thing I got out of the readings is that oral history is useful precisely for the aforementioned reasons – it is simply powerful for its “open endedness”. This is to say that perhaps the whole process of gathering objective/statistical data and fitting everything into a “linear arrangement of events” is not necessarily always the best way to look at history because it can distract from the meaning, depth, and hidden knowledge in people’s accounts of the past.

Reflection Post 1

I’m looking forward to taking HIST110S – Latino/a Oral Histories because I’ve been interested in Latino/a studies for a long time. I’m sure a lot of my interest is connected to my own Latin American heritage and and personal relations to the history; still, I genuinely find Latin American studies particularly interesting because it involves so many different groups of people and cultures that one may not even consider when thinking about the Latin American identity and/or experience. Oral history, I think, helps account for those different backgrounds in the field of Latin American studies. Even the terms “Latin American”, “Hispanic”, or “Latino” evoke different reactions/opinions/feelings among different people that do not necessarily come across in textbooks, lectures, or even our own discussions among students at the Claremont Colleges.

That being said, although I do have a veteran family member, I have had little to no contact/discussion with veterans, or anyone, really, about the effects of the war on their families, their lives, and their identities. I think it will be interesting to collect those views from different Latin Americans, especially because they will all probably feel very differently about what they identify as and whether or not the Vietnam War changed that for them. It will also be really cool to have a little database of everything we record and be able to compare different stories, feelings, and reactions to one piece of history.