This is an interesting post from Emily Toth at the Wellesley Centers for Women Blog. She is writing about interviewing subjects for her history projects. I have conducted interviews both one on one and in groups for my History Project and it is a daunting thing. I am uncomfortable talking to people in this way and fear I am prying. At the same time, I want them to tell me their history. I very much agree with Professor Toth's perspective on interviews. It is a difficult task, and one should not expect to be good at it the first time one conducts an oral interview. I know I have made mistakes and my most recent interviews were not my first. The problem is that you have to ask the right questions to get them to feel comfortable. If you go right for the one thing you want to know, subjects tend to avoid answering that question.
Depending on who you interview, there will be a tendency to dodge or down play their involvement or role in the historical event you seek to understand. People will also re-write their personal history or miss-remember. The interviews with groups of people (as long as they were small and everyone was friends) proved helpful because if one could not remember accurately, someone else helped to jog her memory or clarify. It is always helpful to have a recording machine of some sort. My notes were not always helpful. They, however, came in handy when I listened to the recordings where the settings were off and there are skips. Another good thing to have is a list of questions for your interviewees. That way, they are prepared.
Now I am in the tricky place of using those interviews. Another set of problems arise. How to be accurate? Interviews have to be substantiated with other sources, just like any other source. A letter or diary entry may describe an event or a relationship just as inaccurately as an oral source. My last and largest concern is that my subjects are still living. I am incidentally also concerned that I am writing a history where many people who lived through this are still living and they may take issue with what I have to say. I try to work through that. For those who I have interviewed, they came to these meetings with the understanding that I would use this information for the history and they signed releases. I am very conscious of my responsibility to write these women's history. I take great care in being accurate and respectful. I get concerned that I am too nice or kind and have not provided enough analysis, but I have to work with what I have.
After listening again to the recordings, I am amazed at these women's lives. They are not saints, but they have devoted their lives to serving others. They have listened to their hearts and to what God wants for and from them. They have done much good in the world. Not everyone can say that about themselves. The listening to God aspect may not fit with every one's life and belief system, but can we all say that how we act in the world is for the best or that some one's life if better for our actions? I have learned this by taking the time to listen and conducting oral history.
Depending on who you interview, there will be a tendency to dodge or down play their involvement or role in the historical event you seek to understand. People will also re-write their personal history or miss-remember. The interviews with groups of people (as long as they were small and everyone was friends) proved helpful because if one could not remember accurately, someone else helped to jog her memory or clarify. It is always helpful to have a recording machine of some sort. My notes were not always helpful. They, however, came in handy when I listened to the recordings where the settings were off and there are skips. Another good thing to have is a list of questions for your interviewees. That way, they are prepared.
Now I am in the tricky place of using those interviews. Another set of problems arise. How to be accurate? Interviews have to be substantiated with other sources, just like any other source. A letter or diary entry may describe an event or a relationship just as inaccurately as an oral source. My last and largest concern is that my subjects are still living. I am incidentally also concerned that I am writing a history where many people who lived through this are still living and they may take issue with what I have to say. I try to work through that. For those who I have interviewed, they came to these meetings with the understanding that I would use this information for the history and they signed releases. I am very conscious of my responsibility to write these women's history. I take great care in being accurate and respectful. I get concerned that I am too nice or kind and have not provided enough analysis, but I have to work with what I have.
After listening again to the recordings, I am amazed at these women's lives. They are not saints, but they have devoted their lives to serving others. They have listened to their hearts and to what God wants for and from them. They have done much good in the world. Not everyone can say that about themselves. The listening to God aspect may not fit with every one's life and belief system, but can we all say that how we act in the world is for the best or that some one's life if better for our actions? I have learned this by taking the time to listen and conducting oral history.
No comments:
Post a Comment