Charlie
Who created the artifact?
- The artifact was created by Roman Kupchinsky.
When was the artifact created?
- The artifact created on July 27, 2008.
Where was it created?
- The artifact was publish in the Ukrainian Weekly.
Why was the document created?
- To express the author take on the 1968.
Why is the document a primary source?
- The document is a primary source because it give first hand account and his opinion of the subject matter, as a person that has live through those times.
How trustworthy is the source?
- The source is trustworthy because Roman Kupchinsky is a Vietnam Veteran, former President of Prolog Research Corp(1978-1988), former Director of Ukrainian service of Radio Free Europe (2000-2008)
What other questions might you ask of the source in order to better understand what it reveals about the events of 1968?
- If I could ask my source questions I would ask him what was his view on the elections before and after the War. Next, if he voted who did he voted for, and why? Third questions, would he still had fought in the Vietnam knowing what he know now? Why did he join the army, was he a volunteers or he got drafted. What was his take on the death of Doctor Martin Luther King. Jr. What are his stances on each candidate and what he satisfy with the outcome of the election.
If you were going to be constructing an argument about the relationship between the cultural conflict embodied by the artifact you’re presenting and the 1968 election, what other artifacts would you look for? How might you go about finding them? What other background reading would you need to do? What other questions would you ask?
- If I were to construct an argument about the relationship between the cultural conflicts embodied by the artifact I presenting and the 1968 election, other artifacts I would look to include in my presentation is other Vietnam War Veterans view on the 1968 election. I would reach out to Vietnam War Veterans through email or mail and conduct an interview with a Vietnam War Veteran I knew from my gym. In addition I would research books, article, journal or diaries written by former Veterans regarding their views on the 1968 election in. I would go about my research by going to my local library, Baruch library and New York Public Library and look for documents written by the Vietnam War Veterans and email or mail the author if I have further questions. The background reading, I would need to do is read about the key debate issues in the 1968 election, and the stances each candidate took on the Vietnam War. As well as research how did the Vietnam War have on the elections. The questions I would ask are how has the war change your views on toward life, society and politics. Any things you would do differently, if you were given the chances. What are you views on the war in Iraq and Afghanistan. Did you think the Vietnam War was justify.
Sources:
Looks like the assignment was completed to fullest and from the last part of the assignment it seems that you are in your way to making a substantial historical argument.
Well done, Guang. I’d push you to think about the fact that this artifact was created 40 years after the historical moment we’re looking at, and to ask yourself how that might impact the perspective that comes across from the document. Might those 40 years have distorted this person’s perspective? How so? Does that mean the document is less useful? Or does it mean that it becomes useful in another way?
More specifically, how valuable would this source be in examining the role of conflict around the Vietnam War and the 1968 election? Does it speak directly to the election? Not really. But it does give you a sense of the perspective of the war veteran. The additional reading and research you propose in your final paragraph would give you additional sources that contextualize this one.
Also, why “Charlie”?
The reason I choose Charlie as the title is because during the Vietnam War, the word Charlie was use to represent the Viet Cong or the enemy. But from the memoir, I get this sense that the author felt this sympathy and connection to the Vietnamese soldiers. Which make me questions, did the author, Roman Kupchinsky sees them as “Charlie” or just Vietnamese soldier fighting for their nation’s independent. So it got me thinking, on one side, Charlie could be the name of any average male in the English speaking Countries, while in War, Charlie could be used to represented this ruthless guerrilla style Vietnamese soldiers. Which, then after examining the two side of Charlie, it got me thinking about the discussion we have in class about a secondary source could be look to as a primary source, depending on how the question is ask. So I think the word Charlie could be view in the same way, you could see Charlie as an average person or a ruthless soldiers, depending on the viewer’s precession and stances. Furthermore, I felt like Charlie is a far more interesting title than “assignment due on Friday” or “research on the 1968 election”. Also, Charlie might attract more attention and curiosity of the reader.