Memories are not simply about the past. They define the present and shape the future: collective memory making, as Maurice Halbwachs’ influential work demonstrates, personal memories, and iterative interchanges between and among personal, interpersonal, and collected memories. I have been thinking about this on the occasion of the anniversary of a parade in Chicago.

I recently received from someone on a Vietnam War listserv comments and links to Chicago Tribune articles discussing the “Chicago 25^th Anniversary Welcome Home Parade” for Vietnam War veterans. Held originally on June 13^th, 1986 over a decade after the last Americans had left South Vietnam, the Chicago Welcome Home Parade provided for Vietnam Vets the recognition they felt they were denied upon their return from an unpopular war. The 25^th anniversary of the parade was held last weekend, on June 17, 18 and 19, as its original participants are fading away, many no longer able to march.

It is estimated that about 200,000 veterans marched and another 300,000 spectators cheered them on in 1986, a surprisingly large number. In 1985, New York City had a ticker-tape parade in which about 25,000 Vietnam veterans participated. Prior to 1982, when the Vietnam Veterans Memorial was dedicated, Vietnam Veterans received very little recognition and many rarely talked about the war. The memorials and parades changed attitudes towards Vietnam Veterans and how they felt about themselves.

The Chicago Tribune’s multimedia links capture objectified personal and collected memories, providing insights into interpersonal and collective memories. This year’s anniversary celebration afforded numerous associational opportunities for the participants including a banquet, the display of the Moving Wall, a half-sized replica of the Vietnam Veterans Memorial, a ceremony which honored soldiers who have returned from the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, and an interfaith service held at Chicago’s Vietnam Veterans Memorial. The organizers believe that no soldier should have to wait a decade or more for a homecoming welcome. Memories of the past and associational activities are reshaping the present and future treatment of veterans.

As Halbwachs suggests, the associational aspects are diminishing as organizers and participants have continued to be lost to age-related issues, illnesses and death. One organizer died of pancreatic cancer last year and another continues the effort despite a continuing fight with hepatitis C, which he contracted during transfusions associated with a limb lost during the war.

Some of the remembrances, real and imagined, raise sensitive issues and are part of a battle for Vietnam War meanings and memories. For instance, Jack Shiffler, chairman of the Welcome Home 2011 anniversary event, shared his recollection of his homecoming in December 1967. He contends that although military officials cautioned returning Vietnam Veterans against wearing their uniforms while traveling because of war protests, he chose to wear his. He reports that as he was walking through an airline terminal in Los Angeles, he was approached by an attractive young woman dressed in the attire of someone belonging to a Hari Krishna group. She asked if he was a Marine back from Vietnam. He acknowledged that he was, and then Shiffler says that she spit in his face and verbally abused him. He didn’t talk about the war for years. Shiffler contrasts this with the love and affection that he was given during the 1986 celebration,remembering seeing a sign, “Honor the warrior, not the war.”

Spitting in the face is part of contested Vietnam War remembrances. Although it is recalled in many narratives of the war, it is contested by sociologist Jerry Lembcke in his book The Spitting Image, Myth, Memory, and the Legacy of Vietnam. Lembcke contends that the spitting in the face narrative is a myth, and sees it as his role to help write an alternative history, constructed from other memories to help establish other identities. His work is highly controversial among Vietnam War Veterans.

Few people wanted to talk to me about the war upon my return from Vietnam. I was welcomed home by family and a small group of friends. The 25^th anniversary celebration links helped me recall them. I also recall being virtually shunned by two editors who took my place on my college newspaper when I visited them. On the other hand, I probably was given my first job out of the Army by a company which was very supportive of veterans. My recollections are part of the memory making process.

One of the 1986 articles on the Chicago Tribune website was by Anne Keegan, a very influential journalist in Chicago. On a visit to Vietnam, years after the first Chicago parade, Keegan brought home four Vietnam War Zippo lighters. She was able to return one to its owner. Keegan shared in the Captain’s memories, and they influenced her and her readers. In one of her stories, Keegan noted “The three things a soldier treasured besides mail were the picture of his girl, his toothbrush and his Zippo lighter because the rest belonged to Uncle Sam.” Keegan passed away in May 2011. She helped break the gender glass ceiling in reporting and went to places and reported on stories traditionally off-limits to women journalists. I became aware of Keegan through my dissertation research on the Vietnam War Zippo lighter and meaning and memory making.

While, the 25^th anniversary celebration may be a small thing, going unnoticed by the media generally, it illuminates how we actively connect the past, present and future.