The Vietnam Veterans Memorial

                The Vietnam Veterans Memorial is one of the most visited memorials in Washington D.C. More than 4 Million people come each year to feel the names and see their reflection on the mirror-like granite. Although the real name for the memorial is The Vietnam Veterans Memorial, it is called “The Wall” by most. Even though the wall is extremely popular now, there was a lot of controversy surrounding all aspects of it during its construction and the first few years after. Most notably, there were objections to the design of the memorial, as well as the designer. Thankfully, the objections didn’t halt the construction of the memorial so the world can enjoy it today.

Maya Lin with her Design

Andrews Air Force Base Hangar

                Building a memorial to recognize the veterans of Vietnam was originally the idea of a wounded veteran named Jan C. Scruggs. He and other veterans wanted a memorial that recognized the veterans but stayed out of the politics of the war. Scruggs founded the Vietnam Veterans Memorial Fund (VVMF) to fund the memorial, and eventually 9 million dollars were raised for the construction of the memorial, and all of the money came from private organizations and around 275,000 American people. The VVMF set up a design competition for the memorial. They set 4 conditions on the designs: They had to “be reflective and contemplative in character; harmonize with its surroundings, especially the neighboring national memorials; contain the names of all who died or remain missing, and make no political statement about the war.” By the end of the competition, almost 1500 people submitted designs. The VVMF decided to have 8 artists and designers pick the design, so they spread out all of the entries at the Andrews Air Force Base and labeled them with a number (1-1421) instead of a name. The entries took up more than 35,000 square feet, and in a line, they would stretch 1.3 miles! The 8 judges unanimously picked design number 1,026 as the winner, which turned out to be the design of a Yale student named Maya Ying Lin. 

                Here are some numbers and facts on “The Wall”: The memorial was built from March 16 to November 1, 1982. Each wall is 246.75 feet long and 10.1 feet tall at their tallest. Combined, the walls have almost 500 feet of names! There are a total of 74 panels for the names. They are 40 inches wide. 70 panels have names on it and 4 have yet to be filled. 

The Mirror-like granite

The aspects of Maya Lin’s design angered many veterans. According to them, there were many problems with the design. Maya Lin’s design called for black granite, which is very different from all the other memorials in D.C. To many, black was the color of shame, death, degradation, and that definitely didn’t sound heroic to them. The reason Maya Lin picked the black granite is so that visitors could see their reflection in the wall of names, not because it was shameful. Another problem for some was that it was below ground, which apparently meant that the memorial would be shameful because it was buried. Beyond the main design there were issues too. 

There are 58,272 names listed on the memorial. They are listed chronologically, and then alphabetically, by their date of death or date reported missing. There were many people that opposed this idea. They thought that the names showed no significance in such a list. They believed that the monument should tell what the soldier did. Some even objected to the memorial only listing the deceased or missing. They believed it should also recognize the living veterans. 

Vietnam Memorial Statue

There were a few veterans who were very present in the opposition to the memorial, but there was no one more present than Tom Carhart. Tom Carhart is a Vietnam veteran who believed so much that everything was wrong with the memorial, he started and led the opposition to it. In press conferences and letters, he called the memorial a “Black gash of shame”, a “Slap in the face”, and said that it “Seemed opposite of a memorial to recognize and honor veterans”. He even sent a letter to the VVMF calling Maya Lin a “Gook” and saying that a communist selected the design. These statements summarize the general attitude from some of the veterans opposed to the design. James Webb, a senator and veteran, was a supporter of Tom Carhart’s ideas. He believed the memorial should be raised above ground, the stone color changed to white, and an American flag added. He also believed that the list of names had to be “Modified or abandoned”. In

Vietnam Womens Memorial

an effort to appease the opposition, a statue of 3 men and a flag were added to the memorial, but were placed in the woods not within sight of the memorial, which didn’t come close to stopping the conflicts. These issues didn’t stop after the 1980s. A few female veterans had issues with the statue having only men. They believed that the women should be recognized too. To end tha
t conflict, a women’s memorial statue was added to the memorial in 1993.

The Vietnam Veterans Memorial has been surrounded by conflict and controversy, but it has proven to be a very moving and successful design. Because it is such a memorable design, many memorials follow it. The September 11^th memorial in New York and the Flight 93 memorial (not quite finished yet) are 2 that are remarkably

World Trade Center Memorial

similar. They list the names in the same previously unpopular fashion as the Vietnam Veterans Memorial. 

I very much enjoyed this project mostly because I remember being at the memorial and seeing the long list of names and being incredibly moved. From researching the memorial, I found that this is what it is supposed to do. I didn’t know that there was such a controversy surrounding the memorial. While I was there, I saw no evidence of this anger the memorial stirred up. There was one site in particular that helped me very much was the History On Trial on the Leigh University digital library. It was done by Edward J. Gallagher, a professor of English and History at Leigh University. The website dealt with all aspects of controversy surrounding the memorial and gave very many primary sources. The memorial’s official website was also very helpful. I enjoyed doing this project and all the others throughout this year, and I’m glad I got to research this topic.

Sources:

1.       http://thewall-usa.com/

1.       http://digital.lib.lehigh.edu/

2.       http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/

3.       http://www.usvetdsp.com/

4.       http://www.pbs.org/

5.       http://www.nybooks.com/

6.       http://www.vvmf.org/

7.       http://prelectur.stanford.edu/

8.       www.achievement.org/

Censorship in World War One

           How was journalism affected by censorship and banning? World War One changed journalism for the whole world. Most of the nations that participated had strict regulations on what they could publish and how journalists could obtain their information. The United States had many of their own laws, like the Espionage Act and the Sedition Act, which regulated much of the information about the war that the public should have been able to read. Advances were made in technology that were also regulated, or even banned! Because of regulations on pictures, the citizens of the USA (and other nations too) were not able to see that the war was very bloody and horrifying.

A camera used to photograph WWI

           The passing of the Espionage Act on June 15, 1917 was a major event that halted most journalism on the war. Any information about location of troops, movement,  number of troops, new weapons, or anything else that might be of value to the enemy was restricted. Even though the act stated things of value to the enemy were to be censored, many things that weren't of any use to them were excluded. Things like articles discussing fatalities and various training photographs, both of which would not be useful, were banned. The Espionage Act also banned the operations of the military or war productions, which generally meant that journalists could no longer watch training or the front lines (or nothing at all).  This act very much adversely affected journalism for the war, since journalists couldn't "interfere" with the military and couldn't discuss things that might (or might not!) be of value to the enemy. The Sedition Act regulated this sort of stuff even more! The act made publishing any "Disloyal, profane, scurrilous, or abusive language about the form of government of the United States or the Constitution, military or naval forces, flag or the uniform." This seems specific, but the regulation of these rules was not. This adversely affected journalism just like the Espionage Act. 

           The American use of propaganda is notorious for its portrayal of Germans, but some propaganda also included pictures from the war. Due to the stiff regulations by the government, pictures of battles were not able to be shown. There were more pictures of training and parades than there were battlefield pictures. This is unfortunate, although it did not stop the propaganda from working.

Censored photograph of training

            News coverage of the war was very unfortunate. There had been many new technologies developed, but because of the censorship, most were regulated and censored to no end. The Trans-Atlantic cable was, at the time, the quickest way to move information from Europe to the USA. The cable, unfortunately, was extremely censored, which made using it almost useless. Film Cameras by then were more portable and easier to use, were also heavily censored, so today we have a severely limited amount of video from the war. There was then film in the video cameras, which was new at the time. The camera, of course, was also heavily censored. US photographers weren't allowed to take many pictures of battles. The regulations were less strict in other countries, but not by much. The wireless telegraph (which I had never even heard of before my research) was banned from reporting due to the ease of tapping. 

           The Committee on Public Information (CPI) had a large part in the regulation and censorship of newspapers. The CPI requested many different things to be censored. They requested the censorship of advance reports, troop and ship movements, defenses (including anti-aircraft and harbor), and troop strengths. This was incredibly damaging to Journalists, because that leaves nothing to write about the war in the newspaper! If they had discussed the diet of the troops, that even might have been censored! 

 Military censors working

 Censored envelope

           The most disappointing part of the huge censorship during World War I was the censorship of soldiers mail. Almost everything, including location, numbers, advancements, and most everything else, were banned from the letters. This meant that soldiers couldn't tell their families where they were, what they were doing, when they would be home, or even how they were feeling. This was probably very taxing on both the soldier and his family. The family usually had no clue what was going on, which is very unfortunate. The way the mail was censored, however, is quite interesting. When the soldiers would send a letter, sometimes the officer would be the one censoring, but more often than not, unimportant people (eg. Dentist, Chaplain) would do most of the censoring. Officers actually "Self-Censored", which may have aggravated the soldiers quite a bit. Every once in a while, the officers would be spot-checked, but that usually didn't happen. If a soldier didn't want to have his mail read by his officer (possible reason: if he had been given a hard time by the officer), he sent it off in a blue envelope and have a higher ranking officer read it. I can only imagine what pictures, video, and information we could have today if the censoring and banning of journalism had not been so strict.

     

1.       Library of Congress

a.       I used this article because it talks about the Espionage act and the use of propaganda. I also used the newspapers shown from WWI as first sources

2.       Newseum

a.       I used this website for its discussion of the difficulties journalists faced in the war, as well as the Espionage act and what it did for reporting the war. It also discusses the process of censorship.

1.       USA WWI

a.       I used this article because it discusses the AEF and how Journalism was influenced by it.

4.       PBS

a.       I used this article to talk about what material censors were looking for in the letters, and how taxing that was for soldiers.

5.       ebscohost

a.       This article gives a brief history of the beginnings of WWI. I used it for context.

6.       Censored and Military Postal History

a.       First source – this talks about how and why pictures were banned. This includes inhumane pictures and their banning. I used it to discuss the censorship in relation to pictures.