Thread: Memoirs From War Veterans

Is it unethical for any of them to fabricate or embellish on events?

Views about the controversy surrounding this best selling author: Luis Carlos Montalvan, Iraq Veteran, Memoir Questioned By Comrades

And are certain medals and ribbons (like the Purple Heart) awarded to easily today in the United States?

I know I was awarded the combat action ribbon/medal but I question today if I or anyone on my ship should have been awarded it during Desert Storm (USS Wisconsin). I've come to no conclusion on the matter. Certainly I did not meet the merits of "combat" by USMC tradition. I doubt naval tradition either.

I think it is unethical, especially if it's sensationalist enough to attract a publisher or to sell more. If there's any political propoganda then I'm very wary.

Autobiographers are also probably put under pressure to dish the dirt.

I've got a few Forgotten Voices books (memories of people from the world wars). The testimonies feel real and accurate to me. Luis Carlos Montalvan would be undermining the believed accuracy of others who have gone before if he embellishes, which is a shame (I'll check your link soon). But you know what they say about writers of history...

Yes, it is unethical and is probably not needed. I am happy to read the 'ordinary' stories / experiences from 'Grunts', [I do love that expression!]. But with most stories ghost written these days the emphasis seems to be focussing on sensationalism.

In the UK Andy McNabb's Bravo Two Zero, about the most decorated British unit in Iraq, has come in for particular scrutiny. A number of documentaries have questioned the events listed as to whether they actually happened.

Equally hollywood has played its part in distorting actual events. I believe I read somewhere that Audie Murphy's exploits in WW2 were toned down, because no one would actually believe them!

Private Henry Hook VC, in the film Zulu, was portrayed as a drunken, malingerer and barrack-room lawyer. When in fact he was a tee-total lay preacher who had just been awarded good conduct pay. His family walked out on the first screening and began a successful campaign to right the injustice they saw.

The best places for war memoirs are straight from the people who fought in them, they are usually reluctant to tell them and have no desire to make money by any means from their tales. The BBC's people's war site is excellent, some of the tales may well be embellished, but I just get the feeling that they are truthful because again they are not looking to capitalize on their stories.

As for your being awarded medals / ribbons, as a non-military person I have no problem in anyone who was there receiving a campaign medal. But are you saying you, and presumably your mates, all received combat medals without actually taking part in any combat?
if thats the case then I have to agree with you that those medals are going to be somewhat devalued by giving them away to easily.

Anyway, thanks for whatever you did, or didn't do, out there. Just being there at that time must have contributed in some way.

I think some poster in the link under the article stated that all war memoirs are embellished, and I believe another poster had suggested any war veteran has the right to embellish his story.

There might be a grain of truth to the statement or suggestion all war memoirs are embellished if the goal is to showcase the former heroic struggles of the author.

Kind of reminds me of memoir I've started reading recently written by a young, Black-American male that hails from the same well known (locally) street I do. Aside from it being preachy it's kind of formulaic in my opinion. Like American military men every Black-American male that writes contemporary urban literature is a stoic figure of grand heroism and wisdom.

Originally Posted by DuKane

As for your being awarded medals / ribbons, as a non-military person I have no problem in anyone who was there receiving a campaign medal. But are you saying you, and presumably your mates, all received combat medals without actually taking part in any combat?

if thats the case then I have to agree with you that those medals are going to be somewhat devalued by giving them away to easily.

It's my understanding that the combat action ribbon has been more easily awarded since the end of the Vietnam War.

The battleship USS Wisconsin was active in Desert Storm and even fired upon by the enemy but it was never hit - not even close. There were combat stressors that most civilian life can not offer like sleep deprivation and the constant unknown (e.g., gas alerts). But ultimately life was safer there then in my own city or most cities of the United States or many cities of the world actually. It's not like we lived the life of combat like the police and gang members of Rio de Janeiro. So, a ribbon or medal may embellish a story too.

Now, World War II had some real naval battles.

And I was watching some program on last night about some hardcore prison in California. These Latino members of the Mexican Mafia and Bulldogs and other organizations were some real combatants. Same with the Lowrider Skinheads and Aryan Brotherhood. Stoic cats that live monk-like. But none of them get combat action ribbons.

Of course, the current war in Iraq has been way worse for U.S. military men and women then Desert Storm. I don't envy those cats. I like my limbs too much. Plus, I don't want to live with any traumatic brain injury.





And speaking of Hollywood... I saw that excellent movie The Hurt Locker. But I was trying to figure out when did those bomb cats get trained to be snipers? (the .50 caliber sniper scene)

Addendum: As a thought too... I think the "combat" dangers the vast majority of U.S. police face on typical days is embellished too for socio-political reasons. Amazing how many overweight and out of shape cops there are if they're chasing down criminals on foot daily and low crawling under gunfire.

I thought the Purple Heart was for getting shot in combat? Seems to me that you either are shot or aren't. Can't necessarily see how you could be awarded a medal for almost being shot.

Originally Posted by Sam W

I thought the Purple Heart was for getting shot in combat? Seems to me that you either are shot or aren't. Can't necessarily see how you could be awarded a medal for almost being shot.

I thought it was for being wounded in combat but I wasn't sure, so, I checked with garza's favorite source Wikipedia. Purple Heart - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I can't remember if Montalvan was awarded it for injuring his back for 3 days or for the minor abrasion he had.

I think it all depends on if they're trying to pass off what they're writing as pure fact, or if they're trying to provide something else. I look at a book like Shopping Cart Soldiers by John Mulligan and I think it's nowhere near factual (nor does it claim to be) but the fictional account is as powerful as any factual account could be.

So fabricating or embellishing events in and of itself is not unethical, it's just whether you're trying to be false or disingenuous in your recounting. If you're honest with your audience in how you are approaching them, then you can take liberties in the telling if you so choose.