Source C written by John Vick, a historian. Written for a history book called “Modern America” in 1986. So, the extract should have a balanced and accurate view of what happened. The aims outlined in Source B weren’t made definite by J.F.K he was unclear in what his policies were, to prevent any broken promise to the public. In source C his basic aims and polices are a lot clearer. He aimed to make a lot of important changes in America. However, Kennedy’s aims and policies weren’t successful. He had opposition with the congress (American parliament). A conservative dominated congress was able to obstruct and delay nearly all of Kennedy’s cherished aims and polices. Also Kennedy’s aims were too ambitious. Kennedy aimed to develop a state health insurance known as Medicare; he also aimed to make “improvements to the education service.” His polices were to decrease the unemployment levels and crack down on poverty. Kennedy also aimed to, which is probably the most “radical and controversial” aim of all, was to ensure “laws that black would benefit from genuinely equal civil rights.” These were domestic policies, as Kennedy tried to enforce civil rights law for American blacks.
William Manchester wrote source F for a book called “One brief Shining Moment” in 1983. Manchester was a friend of the Kennedy family, and the Kennedys gave the seal of approval to his books on JFK. So the source is going to portray JKF positively. One of JFKs’ foreign policies was to get rid of any threats, remove any chances of failure. Kennedy aimed to remove the threat of communism. Also in source F Kennedy wanted to stand up to the Soviet Union. He wanted “peace” to resolve the “Cuban missile crisis” this was a challenge. However the outcome was great and demonstrated to all Americans his maturity of administration. Manchester shows Kennedy in a shining light, he makes Kennedy seem as the unsung hero and above all statesmen. Kennedy foreign policy was acted with great ambition to overcome the threat of communism.
Source H, a primary source that was extracted from Kennedy’s State of Union Address. Every president will make a state of union address at the start of every year. The address would refer to previous successes of his aims and policies. It is a summary of the conditions of America and also highlights the hopes and ambitions the president has for that year. JFK starts highlighting his pass successes at home and abroad. He has success with his foreign policy, as the threat from Cuba was removed and helping other countries to grow and develop. At home more men and women are working than ever before. As “one million” more people are working than two years ago. So JFK had success with his domestic policies. Also Kennedy says that America is producing and manufacturing more things than ever. As factories and industries expand in America. However Kennedy pauses during his speech and emphasise that at home and abroad success is good but the “road is long, the burden heavy, the pace consistently urgenting.” Kennedy is aiming to the people not to stop here, as there is a need to continue and room for improvements in America. In source H Kennedys doesn’t directly display his aims or policies, as he is aware of potential difficulties in America. He refers to the difficulties in his speech as a hidden “turbine” below “still waters.” JFK aim is to build on previous success with caution and optimism.
3. How reliable are sources N and P as representations of Kennedy?
Kennedy wasn’t always represented in a laterally way; Peoples judgement changed towards him from before and after his death. Others judged him too quick and didn’t give him a chance. Sources N and P are short representations of Kennedy, however are they reliable and do they give a balanced view of Kennedy.
Source N is the lyrics of a song by The Byrds entitled “He was a friend of mine.” Written by Roger McGuinn who was the lead singer for The Byrds. The song had a melancholy tune which reflects the mood of the song; the music was played in a slow tempo. The song was written and performed in 1965, two years after the death of Kennedy. This is to flavour the mourning of JFK after his death, and not be controversial and contain much substance. It isn’t very reliable due to this fact. The song is very a one sided view of Kennedy. The song is to express the death of Kennedy and how sadly he will be missed representing the close connection the public had with JFK. It also displayed the on going bitterness felt over President Kennedy’s death as it written two years after his death. This time allows close family and friends to get over the death of JFK. It also gives the writter hindsight to contain how majority of the people felt towards Kennedy after his death. Roger McGuinn, who wrote the song, had written it neither to upset any one nor to be disrespectful towards the family. Inside the two year period, people’s view of Kennedy changed over the mystery of his death. The song wouldn’t contain the initial reaction of his death. Making the source not fully reliable. However McGuinn has no reason to exaggerate in the song, but the song is intended to sell and make money. So, it would contain now majority of American felt towards Kennedy after his death. As the people listening to the music are going to share the same views expressed in the song. This may make the song not fully factual or accurate, but indeed make the source untrustworthy. Due to the content of the song being mainly opinion. Making source N not a fully reliable presentation of Kennedy. As feeling changed towards Kennedy after his death.
However, the song represents JFK as a friend of everybody. As if he made a connection with the public through his personality in his actions. A lot of sympathy was felt towards Kennedy, as the innocent was murdered. Verse three is largely the representation of Kennedy in the source; “He never knew my name. Though I never met him. I knew him just the same.” Then finishing on the line “he was a friend of mine.” Although this is how majority felt, it wasn’t however how everyone felt towards Kennedy. When cross – referencing this source with source E. Which was written by Malcolm X, a black activist who criticised Kennedy for not doing enough to help negroes in the USA. Proves that Kennedy wasn’t a “friend of every body” and perhaps source N only shows Kennedy positively as not to upset the Kennedy family suggesting that source N isn’t fully reliable representation of Kennedy.
Source P is visual source. It is a video paying tribute to Kennedy by his official photographer, Jaques Lowe. Kennedy is represented in the video as a smiling, happy man and a devoted family man. Portrayed Kennedy as an international statesman as well as a man for all generations, a man to which the public could relate with. JFK was also seen as a great public speaker, as he spoke German and was always sympathetic. The Kennedy era was referred to as a Camelot – the perfect era. The video was a celebration of the life of Kennedy in an emotional positive way. Kennedy was a “Shining Star” he was admired, captivated, and charismatic and had strong movie star links. JFK was seen as patron, as the background music was lively suggesting his personality as free-spirited.
I personally think that source P is not completely reliable representation of Kennedy. As the author, was a friend of the president, he had reason to be biased and show Kennedy in all his glory. The video is very a one sided account of Kennedy. It only shows Kennedy in a patriotic light making the source a very unbalanced as it is very opinionated. Therefore this source isn’t a fully reliable representation of Kennedy. It was directed by a friend, so it is obviously going to represent Kennedy in a heron view. It will be most opinionated with very few facts. The director is also going to be extremely biased towards Kennedy making this source untrustworthy and an unreliable representation of Kennedy. It was made in reaction to the growth of criticism towards Kennedy. Some historians in the 1980s had written work criticising Kennedy, calling him a womaniser and humiliating and questioning his rein as president because of his strong links with the Mafia. The video was a reply to the critics; it was to straighten out the bended road. So it portrays Kennedy as a shinning star which helps light America in darkness. Making the video unbalanced and have reason to exaggerate, thus making source P not a reliable representation of Kennedy. Kennedy was seen as “bursting the Kennedy bubble” these historians are known are the revisionist, for example they revise the established views of history – i.e. “Kennedy was a great president.” The video was in order to act as a counter revisionist; it was an attempt to re-establish a positive view of Kennedy. The content of the video didn’t show any negative images of Kennedy. It only showed one side of Kennedy and how his relationships were between him and his family. Making this source an unbalanced view of Kennedy and therefore not a completely reliable representation of Kennedy.
4. To what extent do sources A, D, G and L give a full and accurate assessment of Kennedy’s actions and abilities?
Source A is a Democratic Party poster during the 1960 Presidential Election campaign. Source A announces that Kennedy is the only one who can do it. He has the ability to bring the “good days back.” He is the man who “must become president.”
The reliability of the source would suggest the source isn’t a very accurate and full assessment of Kennedy’s actions and abilities. As the source was written before Kennedy had become president. It is at this stage, all of Kennedy’s abilities are only promises. This is a limitation of the source. The source was also written by the Democratic Party which Kennedy was apart of. The source would be biased not showing a balanced view of Kennedy. As the source is about, what the democratic party thought he could do. The written content of the source also has reason to exaggerate on Kennedy’s actions and abilities. As it is political advertisement for Kennedy to become president. It is an example of progranda. So this source doesn’t give a full and accurate assessment of Kennedy’s actions and abilities, however the source is this useful.
The source is quite inadequate and not a full and accurate assessment of Kennedy’s actions and abilities. As it is written before Kennedy becomes president. So the source doesn’t give us any supporting evidence for the purpose of the questions. The source only claims that JFK has the ability and the view of Kennedy may not be shared by everyone. From the source there is nothing to judge his actions on. The source is just full of vague promises. We can’t tell what his actions are like. The atentation of the source is to make Kennedy sound good. In order for people to vote for him. The source doesn’t give a full picture. It is inadequate but is still useful. The source is still useful despite being unreliable and inadequate. The source is useful as it is a primary example of political advertising (progranda) by the Democratic Party. It also shows the faith and trust the Democratic Party had in Kennedy.
Source D is a short paragraph of what two historians thought of Kennedy. Written in 1989, the source compares Kennedy to former presidents. Accusing him of being “too reasonable and conciliatory.” They though he was prepared to give in to demands too easily. By comparing him with other presidents, they basically say Kennedy isn’t as good. However they back they answer up with supporting evidence. Making the source more adequate. Garraghty and McCaughey, the two historians thought Kennedy had good aims and policies but was unsuccessful in caring them out.
The reliability of the source determines that the source may be an accurate to content assessment of Kennedy’s actions and abilities to an extent. However the source may not be a full assessment due to limitations of the source. The writers of the source are both historians, it’s a secondary source. Historians will provide an accurate source to educate. So, you expect the source to be factual. As a secondary source, the writers have had time to reflect all of Kennedy’s actions. Also as historians their objectives has not been influenced by anything. Even though the source may be reliable it has hughs limitations. As source D only focuses on one area of Kennedy’s ability. It is a parcel account of Kennedy’s abilities on domestic policies. The source doesn’t give any detail of the actions Kennedy did take. It only mentions the aims he tried to get through the congress but failed to do so. The source is a very unbalanced account of Kennedy actions and abilities. However the source is still useful.
The source has hughs limitations making it inadequate. As it doesn’t give us the full picture. It only explains what Kennedy didn’t do. Displaying the ability of president JFK negatively. Even those the source isn’t a full assessment of Kennedy’s actions and abilities. Yet the source is still useful. Even though the source may not be fully adequate. It is factual; as it gives us the laws Kennedy didn’t get passed. The source also compares Kennedy with other president. This shows that the source has been researched for. Plus we can trust the source. It is an accurate assessment of Kennedy’s actions and ability even though these actions are limited. We can also trust the source because it is written by historians. The source is useful as it compares Kennedy with past presidents. The source displays a great deal of factual knowledge, about Kennedy relationship with the America congress. However the source is only useful due to it limitations of Kennedy and his domestic policy.
Source G is a visual source. It is a cartoon from an American newspaper of 1962 during the Cuban missile crisis. It shows how Kennedy’s bullying of Cuba has driven Castor (leader of Cuba) into the arms of Khrushchev (leader of Soviet Union.) the cartoon is entitled “Bully!”. This is a stereotype of Kennedy’s action and abilities. Making the source unreliable and not a full and accurate assessment on Kennedy’s action and abilities as it is an American newspaper, the people buying it share the same view. So America is basically poking fun at their president. However this is only an opinion of Kennedy and isn’t shared by everyone. Making this source unbalanced with hugh limitations by only referring to Kennedy’s actions towards foreign policies like source D. Confirming hat source G isn’t reliable, nor is it a full and accurate account of Kennedys actions and abilities. This was a setback for U.S policies. The source isn’t fully adequate but however shows Kennedy lacked the ability to show social skills. His foreign policies had driven Castro (Cuba) into the arms of the Soviet Union. This became a major problem for America. The source is quite adequate as it shows a picture. The source appears in an America newspaper. Many Americans shared this opinion of Kennedy. However the source is a critism of Kennedy. Using humour in a cartoon to make the point. Making the source unreliable and needing more supporting evidence for a full and accurate assessment of Kennedy actions and abilities this is a limitation of the source.
The source is not a balanced assessment of Kennedy but is still useful. The source is only limited to Kennedy’s actions at the start of the Cuban missile crisis. Plus the view of Kennedy may change over time. It is also limited as it doesn’t tell us how Kennedy resolved it or showed any positive ability in Kennedy. Concluding that the source needs more supporting evidence for a full and accurate assessment of Kennedy’s abilities and actions.
Despite this the source is still useful. As it reflects the moods and view of many Americans towards Kennedy. It is also a primary source making it reliable, as it is a hand on account of what happened. It is also a good example of contempory thinking on foreign policies.
Source L is written by “Daily Mirror” on 23rd November 1963. This source is written by a British paper the day after President Kennedy was assassinated. The country is in mourn, so the source would reflect the mood o its readership. Source L is based on Kennedy. It is celebrating the life of him who tragically died. The source will not be critical of Kennedy. The source is written in glowing terms of Kennedy and focuses on all of Kennedy positive contributions in America. So the source will not be full and accurate assessment of Kennedy’s actions and abilities. The source is sympatric to a man who allied Britain. Kennedy was a world leader, the newspaper will only think of the good things Kennedy did. It will not be a balanced and therefore not reliable.
The authorship of source L is the daily mirror A British paper, an ally with America. It is sympatric to a world leader murdered. Source L refers to action and abilities of Kennedy in a positive way. The source is not accurate or critical of JFK abilities and actions. It is an emotional source to remember a hero of a tragic death. Source L is an extremely exaggerated view of Kennedy making it unreliable. A hugh limitation of the source is that it is only focuses on the positive actions made by Kennedy. So the source isn’t reliable, however the source is still useful. Source L is not very adequate either because of the purpose to why it was written. However it is still useful, highlighting that Kennedy had a close connection with Britain and was truly a world leader. It also expresses how people felt towards him, not just in America but across the Atlantic.
5. Source M states that Kennedy “was an exceptional man…this man was a great success for the United Sates”. Using the sources, explain whether or not you agree with this interpretation of his Presidency. Focus on sources C, E and Q
In source M it states Kennedy “was an exceptional man…this man was a great success for the United States.” It portrays Kennedy in glowing terms in source M. It states that Kennedy was the “finest president,” enriching the country with his glory.
In source C the interpretation of Kennedy is that he is ambitious and good-willed. Source C is valid to an extent. It is a secondary source, so it will supply a balanced and accurate view of Kennedy. Written by a historian, who will provide an accurate source to educate. The historian would have researched this particular topic and made an objective account. Making the source reliable and valid. Source C is a balanced account intended to inform with accurate information. However the source has limitations which were unsuccessful.
Comparing this source doesn’t make out his in an exceptional man. However source C is a more measured source. It’s also a lot more factual than M.
In source E the interpretation of Kennedy is very negative. It criticises Kennedy’s civil rights policy. Claiming Kennedy as a sham and accusing him of civil rights was just a show, there is no real meaning behind it for Kennedy. It refers to Kennedy’s Policy as a joke. Extremely critical of Kennedy.
Source E is not a valid representation of Kennedy. It is highly opinionated written by a black activist. Its limitations are that it only refers to Kennedy and his issue about civil rights. The purpose of the source was to write an attack on Kennedy. Critising Kennedy to gain support for black activist. This takes away from the validity. As the writer would have been writing an unbalanced account of Kennedy.
It’s not an accurate interruption of Kennedy. It is very one sided and doesn’t paint the full picture. The content of the source refers to “white dogs attacking black babies.” This content of the source is a very brutal description. The source is unbalanced making it unreliable. It was written to gain support from the black activist. So it will be a very critisical opinion of Kennedy. The source isn’t very adequate. This view of Kennedy was shared between many black activists when comparing it to source M; it completely contradicts what source M says.
Source J interrupts Kennedy as being clumsy towards his foreign policy. Source J is written by Richard Perle in 1963. Perle was a foreign policy adviser to Eisenhower. Perle was a republican, opposition to Kennedy who was a democratic. Since he is Kennedy political opponent he has reason to be critical. Perle describes Kennedy’s foreign policies, accusing him of not being skilful enough or cunning to get them through the congress. He also compares him to the republican candidate for president, Nixon. This is not fully valid interruption of Kennedy. As Perle is Kennedy opposition the source doesn’t give a balanced account of Kennedy. It doesn’t tell of Kennedy’s successes. The source lacks substance and is in the position to comment on Kennedy foreign policies. As he was an adviser to a former American president. Perle also talks about Nixons Faults. Critising both candidates. Comparing the source with source M, there is a clear difference.
Source Q entitled “the Dark side of Camelot.” From the title it suggests the source is going to be a critical view of Kennedy. It is written by Seymour Hersh, who is seen as a revionist – revises traditional interpretations of history. He is critical of Kennedy’s personal life with his extra marital affairs. He also passes judgement on a democratic president giving permission to assassinate the Cuban leader. Explaining this is not the behaviour of democratic country. Hersh challenged the mist, accepted interruption of Kennedy i.e. the family man. The purpose of this source, he is trying to sell a book. He is willing to question the mysteries. He was to also increase his personal profile as a writer.
Is this source valid? No, it s unbalanced, extremely opinionated. It focuses majority on two objective points for Kennedy. His sex affairs and Kennedy giving permission for assassination. Hersh uses dramatic language to draw reader to get involved in Kennedy’s’ faults. This is not a measured representation of Kennedy.
On comparing this with source M, it completely contradicts what is said.
However is the interruption of source M valid, after cross-references with the above sources? No. it is very biased towards Kennedy. As it is written by a friend for his official biography, it will only show Kennedy positively. The writer William Manchester has reason to exaggerate.
My own interruption of Kennedy using all of the above sources, is that Kennedy was made successful through his assassination. He inspired the people of America through his metaphorical speeches which motivated everyone. He tried hard with all his policies even if he didn’t get them all through the congress. He aimed to treat coloured skin people with he same duty of respect to white skin. At time of Cuban missile crisis, he started off on the wrong foot by pushing Cuba away, but responded to the problem efficiently and resolved it. Kennedy was accused for straying away from his wife with strong links to the Mafia; however Kennedy was seen as a family man and resented by many.