In Fred H. Allison’s article, “Remembering a Vietnam Firefight : Changing Perspectives over Time,” compares and analyzes the difference between two interviews done, at different times, by a veteran of the Vietnam War who recounts a firefight that occurred during a Marine Corps Reconnaissance Patrol. Initially, I thought the article would be a transcript of the two interviews and I would have to figure out the differences between the two interviews on my own. Instead, Allison analyzed the differences for the reader, and justifying the veteran’s changes in his interview. I believe Allison’s thesis is : “If the same individual is re-interviewed later about the same events, the availability of these contemporaneous interviews provides an opportunity to investigate how combat veterans remember their experiences, both immediately and over the long term.” The author provides Mike Nation’s interviews as a case study to help readers understand how memory differs over time. The purpose…show more content… Allison quotes multiple stories that Nation recalled in both interviews. Afterward, Allison goes on to explain the reasoning for Nation’s change in storytelling. The author emphasizes that the first interview would make for a better primary source, while the second interview gives the reader insight on Nation’s justifications and explanations for his actions after each story. I believe the author challenges other historical viewpoints by taking an approach to view the Vietnam War in a way that many historians do not do. Rather than just summarizing the war, Allison take a first hand source and analyzes the interviews. In this article, Allison states that the first interview would be deemed as more credible as a primary source along with the addition of photo displayed throughout his
