Vietnam vets: If I publish my book, will anyone read it?

[Bluespicker]

Several years ago I was surprised (shocked actually) to discover that some in the academic community were teaching our kids that Vietnam Era Veterans were not mistreated and that all the stories about this mistreatment, including being spat on, were a fabrication. Actually, the term used was "Urban Myth".

Having served in the USAF from 1973-77 at the tail end of the Vietnam War, I was fairly certain some of this abuse was real. So I decided to research the subject and this is my book about the mistreatment of Vietnam Veterans.

This book is not a bunch of "you-hurt-my-feelings" stories but rather, it is the proud story of those who did their jobs under extreme duress, came home and got on with their lives. It is also intended to put all the revisionist garbage to bed once and for all and make it impossible for those who spent the war rooting for the other side to hide or misrepresent the truth.

The only problem: no one will publish it and so I am not sure that if I publish it, anyone will buy it or read it. My mom, wife, and both my kids said it is a good book. My aunt liked it but to be honest, her mind isn't what it used to be.

There is a lot of great stories in this book taken out of the newspapers of the day and extracted from the literature and books written contemporaneously.

 

What say you: Anyone want to read "Yes Virginia, the Vietnam veterans were Spat on"?

[SFMike]

In the 80s a guy working for the Chicago Sun Times published a similar book.

 

From personal experience and research among the many vets I know and have encountered, the abuse was minimal.

 

I do believe if you were one who did recieve it, that it would leave a big impression.

 

We had a lot of benefits and perk.

The vast majority of us used them and most of us got on with our lives.

 

Historically a lot of combat vets had had some issues, but again, the vast majority went on with their lives.

 

Whwn they began paying guys to have PTSD in 1982, things wentto hell in a lot of ways.

[River Patrol]

I would rethink the title......

[m151mp]

if you are successful in finding someone to publish it, i think you will have great difficulty in publicizing, marketing and selling it. i don't think there are very many people who would be interested enough to buy it. those who opposed the war, those who supported the NVA and the VC, neither of those groups want to be reminded of their actions against american troops. those who supported us when we came home were largely our family members, and maybe a few close friends, it's hard for me to understand why they would want to read it. the turbulent politics of the times were something many of us lived through, and for those who didn't experience any difficulties , i'm glad for them. it can be rather unpleasant to realize so many of your countryman are out in the street waving NVA flags, and giving you grief in the airports of the US. these images of protestors can be easily found today, as i'm sure you are aware. i have seen them with my own eyes, and dealt with them at the gates of ft ord, particularly in june 1971, when a substantial riot broke out at a canned heat concert on post. there was another riot at ft mclellan in nov 1971 as well. it doesn't necessarily have to mean having some stranger spit on you, to qualify as abuse. when i returned through the airport at san francisco, we were warned to get into civilian clothes to travel. i didn't do that, and the only problems i faced were some hostile comments, stares, that sort of thing. i've had worse, as MP's are not popular people anyway. if you feel strongly enough about it, maybe you should consider self publishing as an e-book, and try to strike a deal through amazon, for kindle readers, nook, etc, take that type of approach. good luck, hope this is what you were looking for in a response.

[patchtrader864]

I flew home to Boston in 70 no one spit on me ! Paul

[Garandomatic]

Not sure what it entails, but I bought the memoirs of Robert Copeland, captain of the Samuel B. Roberts, and I want to say it was a kind of print-on-request thing.

 

I'd buy it. While the abuse might have been small in overall quantity, I'll burn until the day I die that Tom Coen had dog crap thrown on him by the gentle flower-in-their hair people of San Francisco. Mountain of a man, good friend of my dad, and afraid of nothing in the world but snakes. Hell, I'm mad just thinking about it.

 

That aside, one of Dad's other buddies was absolutely knocked off his rear drunk when he came home. He wanted Vietnam service, but was stationed in Korea at a nuke base. Anyways, I want to say he came home through Seattle and was so drunk he barely knew his name, and had to get to his next flight who knows where in the terminal. Who should help him, and even carry his duffel bag? A hippie! Led him all the way to his plane.

[automatic]

Listen, you go for man! You keep trying 'till it get's published! I am not a vet myself, but I like to fancy myself a historian, and I personally would love to read that book. And I can't be the only one! Publisher's won't print books for a huge amount of reasons, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't keep trying! I'm sure one of them will say yes. 100% sure!

[skautdog]

Bluespicker,

 

I kinda sorta ditto all the above. As seems to be happening now in our current engagements, the press won the VN War for our enemies, the VC, NVA, Russia, China.. Biggest lie was Tet 68 was a great victory for the communists. Politically, yes it was a victory (as told by our press) for the communists, but militarily it was a significant victory for the allies. Bottom line is I don't believe such a book as you describe would sell. There is a story to be told, but I don't think many folks really want to rehash those turbulent times.

 

If you feel strongly about getting out a message, you might have more success submitting articles to various magazines or trying to get one magazine to publish your articles as a series.

 

As indicated above, most of us just moved on with our lives and most others just really don't care.

 

Ken

[Bluespicker]

Part of the reason I wrote the book is that most people really don't understand what happened:

 

May 30th 1965 Captain O’Sullivan Killed in Vietnam. Family received hate calls

Army Captain Christopher O’Sullivan of Astoria New York was killed on Memorial Day, 1965 when his unit was ambushed by Viet Cong as O’Sullivan’s unit attempted to rescue another Army Ranger unit. O’Sullivan would be awarded the Distinguished Service Cross posthumously for his actions on that day. Those who served this nation recognize the Distinguished Service Cross as one of the highest honors this nation can bestow on a war hero, second only to the Medal of Honor. After announcement was made of Captain O’Sullivan’s death, his family started receiving hate filled phone calls and mail from those opposed to the war in Vietnam . Mentioned specifically “Your husband got what he deserved”, “it serves you right”, and “he didn’t belong in Viet Nam in the first place”. That’s either three different callers or one extremely demented and sadistic person.

[Bluespicker]

And it wasn't just the troops that were harassed:

An AP article that appeared in a number of newspapers around the country mentioned the fear that many of the young wives of soldiers lived with; that a ringing doorbell would bring news of their husband’s death in combat.

One young, recently widowed woman interviewed for the article implored the reporter not to identify her as she was already the target of antiwar agitators. Her sin it seems, was being quoted in a local newspaper stating her “husband had died fighting for his country”. She was receiving harassing phone calls from unidentified callers calling her a hypocrite. The body of the young widow’s husband was still in transit from Vietnam. She asked that her name not be used as in her words “Please don’t publish my name, because I think I have given all I can give to my country”.

The young widow reported that others have received the same phone calls. The callers call back again and again.

[Bluespicker]

Why I wrote the book: Dr. Jerry Lembcke says there was no hostility and that the antiwar movement was on very good terms with the military. This is simply wrong. Vietnam Veterans Against the WAR (VVAW) to this day contends there was NO HOSTILITY, NO SPITTING nothing. The folks over at the American Folklore Society declared the spitting stories an urban legend. Yet I only found 4500 newspaper articles from the 1960s detailing all the hostility. I would wager that the majority of vets were not subjected to any hostility at all but... that does not excuse the actions of those who would spit on a soldier. I just wanted to record what happened so that it wasn't swept under the rug.

[CHASEUSA11B]

In the 80s a guy working for the Chicago Sun Times published a similar book.

 

From personal experience and research among the many vets I know and have encountered, the abuse was minimal.

 

I do believe if you were one who did recieve it, that it would leave a big impression.

 

We had a lot of benefits and perk.

The vast majority of us used them and most of us got on with our lives.

 

Historically a lot of combat vets had had some issues, but again, the vast majority went on with their lives.

 

Whwn they began paying guys to have PTSD in 1982, things wentto hell in a lot of ways.

I have the book, it's called "homecoming" by bob Greene and it's a very interesting read. The original book "stolen valor" by Burkett has a some insightful things to say about this topic as well.

[Bluespicker]

Green's book is very good as he didn't just dwell on the negative aspects of the vets. Green has 65 of about 190 stories about hostility towards the vets. To me, this indicates that he tried to keep these stories in context with the positive experiences many returning vets reported. I state many times in my book: not all vets experienced hostility and many in the antiwar movement were not hostile towards the troops as the troops were brothers, uncles, fathers etc. But there was hostility directed at the troops, the veterans, their families and many associated with the military (National Guard, recruiters etc). It isn't fair to the troops that experienced this hostility to now state it never happened and to accuse these troops of misrepresenting the truth which is exactly what Lembcke and VVAW is trying to do. It is time for these radicals to man up to what they did and just admit it happened.

[skautdog]

Bluespicker,

 

Please understand I am not suggesting your research is not valid nor that your summary position is not accurate. I was there. You present some valid positions. I understand and agree with your position.. I understand your frustration with the academic elite presenting misrepresentations and being supported by the majority of the press. I admire you wanting to take a stand. I just don't believe there is a market for such a book as you described.

 

Best of luck in your quest!!!!

 

Ken

[ka bar]

Bluespicker...

 

The name mate....you really gotta change the title

 

You have a dream...follow it

 

There will always be people that will try to crush any hope/dreams you have

 

Just keep persisting

 

Oh, some ideas for a title

 

"Back Home"

 

"Voices of Vietnam"

 

"Veterans of Vietnam"

 

Just try to be a little more objective in the title...you make Virginia out to be all bad/nasty

 

But mate....you follow your dreams

 

There are 6 BILLION people on this planet, I am sure someone will find it interesting!

[cutiger83]

No disrespect intended but where is your proof? From what I have found both Lembcke and Greene admit that hostilities probably did exist. I can find nothing where the VVAW and Lembcke are saying hostilities did not exist.

 

If I am following your posts correctly:

 

1) You served at the end of the Vietnam War but don’t mention ever going to Vietnam or seeing any mistreatment of the returning vets:

 

“Having served in the USAF from 1973-77 at the tail end of the Vietnam War, I was fairly certain some of this abuse was real.”

 

2) You wrote a book not from interviews but from reading newspaper articles and other books:

 

“There is a lot of great stories in this book taken out of the newspapers of the day and extracted from the literature and books written contemporaneously.”

 

3) You mentioned 4500 newspaper articles but Wikipedia states ”some news accounts that mention spitting do exist, although there has been no evidence to support those accounts.” Unless you have evidence to support any of your information, then your book is merely restating what has already been said in newspapers. Do you have links to any of these 4500 newspaper articles from the 1960s?

 

“Yet I only found 4500 newspaper articles from the 1960s detailing all the hostility.”

 

4) You keep stating Lembcke and the VVAW are trying to state this never happened but where have you seen this stated? I can find nothing where Lembcke and the VVAW are saying anything that you stated. Your post #11 sounds a lot like reviews from Amazon for the book “The Spitting Image: Myth, Memory, and the legacy of Vietnam”

 

In a review of the book on Wikipedia, it quotes from Lembcke’s book:

 

In The Spitting Image Lembcke acknowledges that he cannot prove the negative—that no Vietnam veteran was spat on—saying (p. 68) it is hard to imagine there not being expressions of hostility between veterans and activists.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Spitting_Image

5) You state: “Green has 65 of about 190 stories about hostility towards the vets. To me, this indicates that he tried to keep these stories in context with the positive experiences many returning vets reported.”

 

Also from Wikipedia:

 

Greene's book includes 63 accounts involving spitting, and 69 accounts from veterans that did not believe anyone was spat upon after returning from Vietnam. Like Lembke, Greene questions whether the spitting stories even made sense, noting "Even during the most fervent days of anti-war protest, it seemed that it was not the soldiers whom protesters were maligning. It was the leaders of government, and the top generals—at least, that is how it seemed in memory. One of the most popular chants during the anti-war marches was, “Stop the war in Vietnam, bring the boys home.” You heard that at every peace rally in America. “Bring the boys home.” That was the message. Also, when one thought realistically about the image of what was supposed to have happened, it seemed questionable. So-called “hippies,” no matter what else one may have felt about them, were not the most macho people in the world. Picture a burly member of the Green Berets, in full uniform, walking through an airport. Now think of a “hippie” crossing his path. Would the hippie have the nerve to spit on the soldier? And if the hippie did, would the soldier—fresh from facing enemy troops in the jungles of Vietnam—just stand there and take it?" While Greene admits he couldn't validate the authenticity of the accounts in the letters he received, he did believe spitting occurred, stating, "There were simply too many letters, going into too fine a detail, to deny the fact." Greene concluded, "I think you will agree, after reading the letters, that even if several should prove to be not what they appear to be, that does not detract from the overall story that is being told."

 

...Kat

[gwb123]

Two suggestions:

 

Rather than a print version, look into producing it as an e-book on-line. If enough people pay to read it on-line, perhaps a publisher will pick it up.

This is the route that lot of special interest books are taking these days.

 

As mentioned above, a nice, cogent magazine article to at least get the topic out there and a conversation started.

[Bluespicker]

Kat,

You should read Lembcke's book and then perhaps you would understand why the newspaper accounts were necessary:

• Lembcke stated that he did an exhaustive search of the 1960s newspapers and couldn't find a single contemporaneously reported spitting incident. I found a bunch
• Further, Jerry's whole premise was based on his assertion that no one reported being spat on until the 1980s when movies like RAMBO came out.
• Jerry also stated that the only hostility he could find emanated from right wing veteran groups. Yet I found evidence of this hostility throughout the war and all from the antiwar movement
• Based on these assumptions, Jerry then dismissed all the first person, veteran reported spitting incidents as some type of "false memory" or other unsubstantiated phenomena.
• Why not talk to the vets? I did but Jerry says they are lying and if you have a better term than lying merely prove it.

These are not my assertions, they are Jerry's. And the favorite chant at antiwar protests was "Ho Ho Ho Chi Minh and the NLF are going to win" which is exactly why most antiwar vets did not join VVAW. These vets were concerned about those still fighting in Vietnam. By 1972, VFW had 400,000 Vietnam Vets and American Legion had about 350,000 at a time when VVAW had maybe 30,000.

And one more thing Kat: In 1973 I was going home on leave and a plane ticket was $560 at a time when I was making $512 a month. If I flew military standby, I could get the ticket for $250 but I had to wear my uniform to fly standby. I paid the $560 full fare rather than wear my uniform and risk a confrontation in the airport. In 4 years, my parents never saw me in a uniform. In the 35 years since I have never attended a Veterans day observance and few of my associates even know I was in the military. In 1977 when I arrived at college after getting out of the USAF I told no one I was ex military and that was 1977. I am not a member of any veteran group but then I subscribe to the Groucho Marx axiom that I wouldn't join any group that would have me as a member.

I was in the USAF from 1973-77 and most of the war was over before I enlisted. I am considered a Vietnam Era Veteran as were all those who served through June 1975. I don't consider myself part of the true Vietnam Vets who fought the war or were in-theater. I have a lot of respect for them.

[Bluespicker]

for those who wish to rehash the antiwar movement: Please take that somewhere else as I just wanted to know if there was any interest in my book.

[Bluespicker]

Gil,

Thanks for the suggestion. We probably will do a combination Ebook and print on-demand. I was hoping to find a publisher so that I could get the manuscript polished up a bit. I think my writing would be aided immensely by some top notch editing.

[ka bar]

for those who wish to rehash the antiwar movement: Please take that somewhere else as I just wanted to know if there was any interest in my book.

From my perspective, I think there will always be an interest in ANY aspect of history...

 

Some people may read/buy your book in order to refute it or as a literary critique for another author...

 

I have no opinion about the content as I was not there(thank goodness)

 

But there is one thing I will mention...

 

When the Aussies came back from Vietnam...many soldiers were heckled from spectators during their parades

 

At the battle of Long Tan, our brave Aussie warriors fought and defeated a massive VC army...the only medal they got was some dolls from the locals

 

Too me they are my heroes...

 

So, yes it was evident

 

But I think that objective research is the key

 

Heaps and HEAPS of objective research...

 

But Bluespicker....

 

Please, please reconsider the name

 

Virginia to me is beautiful as is the people

 

My great Aunty who was an Aussie got married there in Drewery Bluff

 

As I said, follow your dreams...you just never never know

[cutiger83]

for those who wish to rehash the antiwar movement: Please take that somewhere else as I just wanted to know if there was any interest in my book.

 

I am not trying to rehash the antiwar movement. I was merely trying to state that it never hurts to verify someone else’s work before assuming it is correct.

 

 

 

So, yes it was evident

 

But I think that objective research is the key

 

Heaps and HEAPS of objective research...

 

Ka Bar summed it up well.

[RustyCanteen]

for those who wish to rehash the antiwar movement: Please take that somewhere else as I just wanted to know if there was any interest in my book.

 

I hardly think suggestions to triple check your sources are 'antiwar'. If you are relying upon 40 year old newspaper accounts to support your case then you will have to provide more evidence to satisfy most readers. Bad information and questionable stories are reported as news frequently.

 

Just as an example, in 2004 the BBC reported that a woman gave birth to a frog, no details were forthcoming. In 2002 Reuters reported a woman became stuck on an airplane toilet, which never happened. The latter story has been around as a joke for years and even took on life when it became an urban legend. Let's not forget that only about 25 years ago there were warnings not to flash your headlights at cars with their headlights off, the reason? Well it was reported to be a gang initiation and they would shoot the first car who flashed their lights. Of course it turned out to be made up with no basis in reality, but people believed it just the same even without any evidence to support it, and yes it made the news as a warning.

 

Just keep in mind that things are not always what they seem. A newspaper clipping also lacks any updates, corrections, retractions, etc. To the story.

[KevinBeyer]

I concur with the previous 3 replies. Sources of information should be referenced and verified for accuracy in any credible accounting of history. I believe this to be true especially for a topic that is a sensitive one.

 

I also agree that a new title should be considered. Right off the bat, the current title (as I perceive it) comes off as argumentative; using a positive cultural reference to address a negative topic.

 

Kevin

[USCapturephotos]

I would read it. I'm also a US history teacher and would probably use vetted excerpts in my classes. Take a look at Armorplate Press in New York state. Great guy who publishes all sorts of military history, first hand accounts and such. Just my two cents.

Paul