Acknowledgements and Preface
This book began its awakening in February 1971 in a walnut paneled courtroom on the 16 th floor of the U.S. Courthouse at 312 Spring Street in Los Angeles. I sat alone in the back of the courtroom. Some thirty or so friends and supporters sat closer to the front where my dear friend, and attorney, Charlie Khoury, and the attorney from the Justice Department in Washington, made various arguments to a three-judge panel of the 9 th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals. It was a hearing regarding the appeal of a lower court decision in the case of Lt. James Skelly, USN, versus the Honorable Melvin Laird, the United States Secretary of Defense.
" Skelly, " as he was referred to by the attorneys and the judges, had refused orders to serve in Vietnam where the United States ' government was prosecuting a war, and had claimed conscientious objection to war. " Skelly " had therefore filed a law suit against Laird and some of his comrades in the military hierarchy asking for a writ of habeas corpus, as he claimed that given his conscientious objection to war, he was being illegally held against his will.
As I sat in the back of the courtroom without the companions who knew me in human terms, I began t o wonder who "Skelly" was. Who ever he was, " Skelly " certainly didn ' t seem to be me, and I increasingly felt as though I genuinely didn ' t exist. Instead, " Skelly " existed as an abstraction that the lawyers and judges discussed as though they were arguing about a fine conceptual issue in theology such as the existence of angels. As all institutions with differential power ultimately attempt to do, they tried to define " Skelly, " and construct him as either this, that, or variations thereof conscientious objector to war, or one who wanted to shirk his duty to his country. The circumstances of the hearing had some resonances with those of Joseph K. in Kafka ' s The Trial and thus, why did it matter whether " Skelly " was willing to participate in the organized killing of Vietnamese or not? Like Joseph K, " Skelly " had been held and thus " arrested " by the military, and my physical body was the artifact for this tangible deed.
Following the year-long legal case, I was released from the military, but the question of who " Skelly " was lingered, not least because I gradually came to realize that being defined given an identity by others more powerful, was the normal form of our psychological, and ultimately political, imprisonment " arrest " was a habitual state for humans, as Kafka understood. Throughout the last several decades of sailing through the seas of our human condition many people from many different places in the world have informed my thinking about identity either directly, upon reflection, or through their books. The books are listed in the bibliography, but even though some of those I want to acknowledge are no longer physically on the planet, I ' m still in conversation with them, as well as those who are still present, who, though they might not know it, have provided both insights and a foundation for the writing of The Sarcophagus of Identity .
There are two principal individuals without whom the book would not have been written, Charlie Khoury and Kai Erikson. Charlie because, from our first meeting in his law office in San Diego, I had the distinct feeling that he had become me in a legal sense in the case against the U.S. Secretary of Defense, and it was his genius to draft a restraining order that seemed simple on its surface, that the District Court judge then signed. While the case was being adjudicated, it basically ordered the Navy not to subject me to any duties incompatible with my claim of conscientious objection what I did or didn ' t do was up to me!
Kai Erikson suffered my attempts to write about my experiences and the insights I derived from them for longer than I am prepared to admit, but I will say that it was not simply years. He was always kind, and always precise in his criticisms, and occasionally lauded me just enough to keep me at the task when he found I ' d written something insightful. Throughout it all, our discussions were informed by the strength of his " sociological imagination, " and sometimes tempered by a wee bit of shared " agua sagrada, " that provided the lens through which he and I could see the evolving narrative with clarity and warmth. I feel deeply indebted to him, and to Joanna Erikson for making sure we remembered that there was life beyond sociology!
The other sociologist who fundamentally affected my thinking about identity and how we think we know what we know, was Hugh (Bud) Mehan, whose ethnomethodological approach to our social worlds helped to free me from more doctrinaire approaches to knowledge. Our combined work in what came to be known as the " Discourse Group " at the University of California, San Diego (more about this further on) enriched my thinking enormously, as I think is evident from what we wrote together and singly in the 1980 ' s.
There are three other individuals who played a significant part in my effort to explore the issues I ' ve written about in this book. Ron and Jane McMahan, and their enchanting young toddler and son, Jason, were with me from the start in the summer of 1970. Ron also sued the Secretary of Defense for his release from service as a Navy officer always a bit more intelligent than me, Ron retained Charlie Khoury in his legal battle, studied legal flaws in my case, and although he filed his suit some months after I did, he managed to get out of the military months before me. Unfair though this was (said with a wicked smile), my love for Ron, Jane, and Jason has informed my life ever since those early days. They provided me with support, love, and inspiration many times over the years including when we worked together at The G.I. Office in Washington after Ron ' s and my release from service. It was also Ron ' s decision to pursue a PhD in Sociology, and his innovative research perspective, that also informed my own decision to do so. Another individual that I want to show my genuine appreciation for is Jakob Horstmann, the literary agent, who became so committed to having this book published that his energy in this regard exceeded my own!
Others, whom I want to acknowledge and thank in some sort of chronological order are friends and colleagues with whom conversations shaped these lifetime concerns on my part. These included Dave Chabot and Sue Shelgren Chabot especially, as well as Dave Anderson, Ron Berk, Dan Boehle, Jeffrey Davidow, Tom Doshan, Howie Goodman, Linda Weinhold, and Jai Ryu from our days at the University of Minnesota. Perhaps most significant with regard to this book, have been the enduring friendships of the anti-warriors in San Diego from the Concerned Officers ' Movement (COM), Non-Violent Action (NVA), and the related, Constellation Vote , which was an effort to keep the aircraft carrier USS Constellation from returning to South East Asia to bomb the Vietnamese. These include most importantly the " gang, " my friends from the early ' ' s, that have over the past several years explored why we said " No " to war, including John Huyler, John Kent, Paul Rogers, and Ron McMahan, whom I previously mentioned. Others who informed my thinking during these times included Norm Bleier, Jim Crawford, Lou Font, Jim Lehman, and Jim Pahura from COM, as well as John Gage, Rob Greaves, Anne Jones, Donna Kelly Kent, Will Kirkland, Janis Labao, Susan Lux, Chaz O ' Loughlin, Ted Shallcross, and especially as advocates of non-violence, Will Watson, and the draft resistor who spent two years in prison, and inspired the Constellation Vote , David Harris.