Menu Sidebar
Menu

Not just dots on a map: life histories alleviate spatial amnesia in San Francisco

View Post on OUP Blog 

By Audrey Augenbraum

The #OHMATakeover of the OHR blog continues as Audrey Augenbraum explores Anti-Eviction Mapping Project organizer Manissa Maharawal’s idea of “spatial amnesia” and engaging with public dialogues surrounding neighborhood change. Stay tuned to the OHR blog throughout the month of July for additional pieces from OHMA students and alumni, and come back in August for a return to our regularly scheduled program. For more from Columbia’s oral history program, visit them online or follow their blog.

For Manissa Maharawal, the struggle for housing justice is personal. When her own father got displaced from his apartment in Prospect Heights—his home since moving from India to the States some thirty years before, in which he raised his family—she was struck by his unstoppable urge to tell the story over and over again. “Why do people need to tell?” she wondered. Why was her father repeating his story to neighbors, to cab drivers, to mailmen, to anyone who would listen?

Maharawal began her workshop at Columbia’s Oral History Masters program’s series on Oral History and Public Dialogue by proposing the idea of “spatial amnesia” in urban contexts. Our city is changing—and fast—but almost incomprehensibly. Sure, there are visible symptoms of it, especially in New York City: the gargantuan Whole Foods going up on 125th Street, the eclectic mix of working families and young students in many neighborhoods of North Brooklyn, even explicit condemnations of gentrifiers on billboards posted outside churches or graffitied on Work in Progress: Residential notices in empty lots. There are the indignities of being priced out, of being evicted, of doubling up with family members and friends, of not being able to hang out on the streets of your own neighborhood. There is the insidious realization that folks from outside your neighborhood are entering it as consumers, buying expensive, boutique versions of the food you eat and the clothes you wear. Certainly, there is never any shortage of rumors, legends, or nostalgic laments about the way things were. But really—how were they? Who remembers?

One problem is, there’s no sense of the whole—the scale of change throughout the city. Worse, there’s no sense of the history of these changes, of the protracted dialogue between two or more communities that has been taking place for decades. Being able to buy $8 artisanal mayonnaise in Bushwick isn’t an abomination of only the last ten or fifteen years. These ironies are the results of processes that unfold over the course of entire life histories; and life histories, in turn, can help us encapsulate and preserve the original spirit of these neighborhoods.

"lower haight anti-hipster stencil" by jeremy avnet, CC BY 2.0 via Flickr.
“lower haight anti-hipster stencil” by jeremy avnet, CC BY 2.0 via Flickr.

That’s Maharawal’s intervention, in the context of the San Francisco tech boom. The Anti-Eviction Mapping Project: Narratives of Displacement maps no-fault evictions and collects and attaches interviews with the victims of these evictions, creating a living archive that deconstructs the collusion between tech-industry corporate interests and the city. It’s a wedding of data visualization and narrative that ensures no one is reduced to a dot on a map. And these aren’t eviction stories alone—they’re life narratives, which come much closer to capturing the complex, subtle processes comprising neighborhood change that we are embedded in. These “located” narratives provide an antidote to our spatial amnesia.

True to the series theme, the project directly engaged with public dialogues in San Francisco—even beyond helping Internet users, zine readers, and mural appreciators visualize evictions, buyouts, fires, and the influence of Wall Street landlords. For example, in 2013, protesters blockaded Google and Apple shuttle buses to articulate growing fears among San Francisco residents that the appearance of a private tech-industry shuttle bus stop in the neighborhood was a harbinger of eviction. In solidarity, the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project mapped the increase in these bus stops for 2011-13 and overlaid them on their eviction maps. They found that, during that time period, evictions increased 69% within four blocks of a shuttle bus stop. A 2014 study they cite corroborates the implications of these findings—that these bus stops are a significant factor in tech workers’ residential choice.

Of course, this evidence isn’t conclusive. It is likely that the shuttle bus stops are just as much symptoms of a larger gentrification process already underway as they are accelerators of that process. No matter—the success, for me, was that the map responded to residents’ fears, validated bus protesters’ actions in the face of criticism, mounted a convincing call for further research, and made this issue legible to broader publics.

The Anti-Eviction Mapping Project also maps killings by law enforcement from 1985 to 2015, so that they can be understood in the context of San Francisco’s gentrifying neighborhoods. This map was created in honor of Alejandro Nieto, who was killed by the SFPD on March 21, 2014. Joey Vaez, a project narrator and good friend of Nieto, sees increased police violence in Bernal Heights and greater San Francisco in part as a result of the changing communities in the neighborhood. He describes a town hall meeting in which the “new community,” voicing concerns about youth, gangs and crack, called for more of a police presence in the area:

What people don’t understand is—what more police enforcement does is, it gives them carte blanche to do whatever they want. And so they would come, they would rough people up. You know, I was roughed up in front of my house.

Life narratives can powerfully expose the nexus of gentrification and ever-entrenched structural racism that, unfortunately, so many in this country still deny. Taken together, maps and narratives allow us to pinpoint each tragedy in time and space, and ask, How did we end up here? At once, the viewer is able to perceive the killings concretely, as events, and abstractly, as structuring a status quo. In this way, the project informs public dialogue by providing a spatial and temporal awareness that contextualizes the disturbing and often bewildering visible symptoms of these obscured and elongated processes.

Introducing the situation in San Francisco over the last few decades, Maharawal said, “What’s happening? Same thing as New York City, but accelerated.” As a native New Yorker and former resident of three boroughs, I also cannot help but compare the two. “Gentrification”—the process by which high-income households replace low-income households in a neighborhood—is a confusing, ambiguous and controversial term for many New Yorkers. For some, it refers to the racism and classism undergirding the displacement of disenfranchised groups. For others, it connotes economic revitalization and the promise of clean streets and safe community spaces. For still others, it means the commodification of their culture for the consumption of outsiders—consumption from which they are excluded.

In my own experience talking to residents of fast-gentrifying neighborhoods, it doesn’t take too long to realize that opinions can’t always be predicted by incomes, ethnicities, or even length of residency. Moreover, many New Yorkers are unsure of whom to blame—wealthy prospective residents and their homogenizing tastes? Predatory landlords? Mayoral rezoning schemes? Ambitious and market-savvy real estate agents? Global trends toward a capitalist cosmopolitanism that rewards the jet setting elite?

In this respect, San Francisco and New York don’t compare: against the ambivalence I’ve observed in my own city, the San Francisco case now presented to me seemed shockingly black and white. The invasion of the tech industry, supported by Mayor Ed Lee, spurred a cascade of negative consequences for long-time residents of San Francisco. Okay, I’m convinced that tech is the enemy. But why did tech move there?

 One of the unique qualities of oral history research is its ability to marshal a 360-degree view of an issue. It can contain a multiplicity of perspectives, and still be revelatory of a vision.

That’s why, despite the fact that my own sympathies lie with those displaced, I’d also be interested in hearing narratives from other players—the landlords who push their tenants out, or the wealthy new residents who are favored by these unjust acts. Granted, we are shown some of the machinations of ‘the other side’—as with this map of Wall Street landlords in California—but not first person accounts. In order to effectively fight gentrification and displacement, we also need their stories and motives, in their terms. Exploring what structures the decisions of tech industry gentrifiers and predatory landlords is a crucial piece of the project of alleviating spatial amnesia, of understanding how we got here. This understanding is empowering because it enables a complete picture of what needs to change, and how we might begin.

The Anti-Eviction Mapping Project portrays historical processes of neighborhood change beautifully, and could render them in all of their complexity. One of the unique qualities of oral history research is its ability to marshal a 360-degree view of an issue. It can contain a multiplicity of perspectives, and still be revelatory of a vision.

This post was originally published on the OHMA blog. Add your voice the conversation by chiming into the discussion in the comments below, or on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, or Google+.

Featured image: “Photograph of Butler Library, Columbia University’s largest single library.” by JSquish, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons. 

Oral history and social justice

View Post on OUP Blog 

By Sarah K Loose

The #OHMATakeover of the OHR blog continues as Sara Loose explains her origins in oral history and how the skills and perspectives she gained at Columbia have influenced her career so far. Stay tuned to the OHR blog throughout the month of July for additional pieces from OHMA students and alumni, and come back in August for a return to our regularly scheduled program. For more from Columbia’s oral history program, visit them online or follow their blog.

How did you become interested in oral history?

I conducted my first oral history with a U.S. Catholic bishop who had been active in the Salvadoran solidarity movement in the 1980s for an undergraduate history paper. But I really fell in love with the power and practice of the field when I moved to El Salvador in 2001 to coordinate a multi-year, participatory oral history project exploring one rural community’s experiences in popular education during the country’s civil war.

How did you hear about OHMA?

After a long stint working as a community organizer and popular educator in the Pacific Northwest, I was eager to more fully integrate oral history into my organizing practice and further develop my skills as an interviewer. I found OHMA through an internet search!

Tell us a little about your master’s thesis.

In 2011, I organized a two-day gathering of some fifteen activist oral historians to share our experiences and explore the possibilities of oral history as a method for movement building and social change. Eventually, that gathering grew into Groundswell, now a national network of over 600 oral historians, activists, cultural workers, organizers, and documentary artists who work at the intersections of oral history and social justice.

Please share one experience from OHMA you find to be particularly memorable.      

I relished the quiet, early mornings sitting in a rocking chair in my Washington Heights apartment, listening to interviews and doing course readings—and then rushing off from a thought-provoking class discussion on interviewing ethics to catch a bus to the suburbs of D.C. to convivir and do another round of interviews with Salvadoran immigrants who had come from the community I had worked with there a decade earlier.

Describe your current job and tell us how you came to it.

Currently, I co-direct Amamantar y Migrar, an oral history/organizing project exploring the connections between motherhood and migration and, more specifically, the impacts of immigration policy and enforcement on breastfeeding practices among immigrant women. I also serve as the co-coordinator for the Groundswell network, together with Amaka Okechukwu.

How are you applying oral history approaches to your work?  

In our project, oral history interviews with immigrant parents serve as the basis for collective analysis to surface barriers that immigrant mothers face in exercising their autonomy in infant-feeding decisions and their potential solutions. From there, we are engaging project narrators in the creation of oral history-based media to share their stories and analysis via forums designed to support grassroots organizing, shift policy, and enact systems change.

What oral history projects have you worked on since graduating OHMA?  

Rural Organizing Voices is the other major oral history initiative I’ve directed since graduating from OHMA. The project documents and shares the stories, organizing tools, and wisdom amassed through the Rural Organizing Project’s (ROP) history of grassroots, progressive organizing in rural and small town Oregon. Over the course of four years, I worked with a small group of volunteers to record nearly fifty oral history interviews with former and current ROP affiliates.

How do you think your year in OHMA has influenced your life and contributed to your career path?      

OHMA provided me with an important theoretical foundation and the opportunity to refine my skills as an interviewer. It also established connections to a broader community of oral history practitioners that has helped ground and propel me forward as I map out a new path for myself and my work as a movement oral historian.

What is one thing you think would be helpful for current or prospective students to hear from someone working in your field?    

In this emerging field of applied oral history, risk-taking and innovation are central. OHMA is a great place to experiment with new ideas with some solid institutional support and resources behind you.

How do you think the field of oral history will continue to develop?  

My hope is that the field will build on its radical foundations to create even more dynamic opportunities for individuals and communities to preserve, share, and interpret their own histories, in ways that actively further the collective liberation of all peoples.

Add your voice the conversation by chiming into the discussion in the comments below, or on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, or Google+.

Featured image: “Photograph of Butler Library, Columbia University’s largest single library.” by JSquish, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons. 

Oral history as a political response

View Post on OUP Blog

By Eylem Delikanli

The #OHMATakeover of the OHR blog continues as Eylem Delikanli discusses the potential of first-person narratives to counter Islamophobia in the United States. Stay tuned to the OHR blog throughout the month of July for additional pieces from OHMA students and alumni, and come back in August for a return to our regularly scheduled program. For more from Columbia’s oral history program, visit them online at oralhistory.columbia.edu or follow their blog here.

Moustafa Bayoumi presented his book This Muslim American Life as part of the Oral History Workshops at the Columbia University Oral History MA Program. A professor of English Literature, Bayoumi successfully analyses the War On Terror culture and critically examines domestic racism and its link with the authoritarian structures of the society. He elegantly elaborates almost all form of stereotypes that Muslim Americans experience today. His discussion about the hypocrisy around civil liberties and incompetencies of the key figures who are marketed as public intellectuals of Islam in the West, Hirsi Ali, Reza Aslan, Irshad Manji to name a few are quite remarkable.

Two days after Bayoumi’s presentation, a series of horrific terrorist attacks occurred in Paris killing 130 people. The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) claimed responsibility for the attacks. Dismissing previous massacres in Ankara and Beirut, the West once more defined which lives are worth mentioning and which are not. Hence, soon after the Paris Massacre, the Western world joined forces in a unified attempt to defeat terrorism. In this climate of “War on Terror”, an Islamophobic choir raised voice in the US led by the presidential candidate Donald Trump. He claimed that Muslims should be banned from traveling to the US. As idiotic as Trump may sound, Islamophobia is real and needs to be addressed.

What is a better response to Trump and his followers than Rasha’s? 

In his earlier book How Does It Feel To Be a Problem? Being Young and Arab in America Bayoumi collected stories of young Arab Americans and their experience after 9/11. Echoing W.E.B. Du Bois’ question “How does it Feel to be a Problem?” in The Souls of Black Folk, Bayoumi asks his narrators about their experiences in the US. The stories that his narrators choose to share evade the clichés and stereotypes that Trump and his cohort delve into in every fashionable way.

Rasha, a Syrian immigrant born in 1983 and one of Bayoumi’s narrators, depicts a remarkable story of racism, elimination of civil liberties and injustice her family had to endure after 9/11. In February 2002, as a working class family, they all were hurried to a detention center in New Jersey without knowing why they were detained in the first place. She remembers the FBI Agent saying “We are cleaning out the country and you are the dirt.” Rasha’s storytelling is simple yet multilayered in its intellectual capacity. When listening to her story one can understand the stereotypical fabric of the society, the unjust, devastating and costly War on Terror culture that many minorities have to endure as well as the complexity of bringing out these issues. Oral history becomes instrumental for Bayoumi to co-create a space for his narrators and himself to resurface what has been truly experienced by Arab Americans to make a bolder and louder statement about Islamophobia in the US.  He questions what we as oral historians carry on our shoulders continuously: who has the authority over the story? Although he yields to trying different approaches to create the story, the narrator is given the authority to tell the story without Bayoumi’s interference. Bayoumi clearly sees and feels the power of the rawness of narratives which at the end connects him to the stories so tightly that he feels betrayal if done otherwise. Here he describes his and imagined others’ reactions to portrayals of Muslims in the media, starting with Homeland:

Memory is an arena for political struggle, thus, what we as oral historians and narrators produce fall in the category of struggle.

As an oral historian, I believe that our subjectivities as a researcher and narrator start the process of creating strong narratives. Once that creation takes place, there is less work left to the researcher to bring out the final product be it a book, an audio or an art piece. The invisibility of the researcher or the absence of a heavily theoretical analysis should not be considered a lack of knowledge or weakness but evidence that the researcher has taken on a harder task: to seamlessly integrate these elements into the narrative with no or limited interference in it. Memory is an arena for political struggle, thus, what we as oral historians and narrators produce fall in the category of struggle. I take Bayoumi’s work as such and salute him for employing narratives as part of fighting against racism, Islamophobia and bigotry in the US.

Thinking of the boldness of these life stories, who can slap Trump better than these hard-to-absorb narratives?

This post was originally published on the OHMA blog. Add your voice the conversation by chiming into the discussion in the comments below, or on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, or Google+.

Featured image: “Istanbul – rainbow over Blue Mosque” by SaraYeomans, CC BY 2.0 via Flickr.

The complexity of biography

View Post on OUP Blog

By Liz Strong

Throughout the month of July the students and alumni of the Oral History Masters program at Columbia University are occupying the OHR blog, bringing some of their insights and experiences to our corner of the Internet. This first post in the #OHMATakeover begins with Liz Strong responding to post originally published here last November, discussing how to strike a balance in the inclusion of biography in oral history interviews. Stay tuned to the OHR blog throughout the month of July for additional pieces from OHMA students and alumni, and come back in August for a return to our regularly scheduled program. For more from Columbia’s oral history program, visit them online at oralhistory.columbia.edu or follow their blog.

I came across Oral History and Childhood Memories by Evan Faulkenbury on the Oral History Review’s blog. His emphasis on narrators’ earliest memories caught my eye. Faulkenbury describes his own experiences as an interviewer, highlighting the importance of talking about narrators’ memories of growing up. Faulkenbury’s insights sent me scrounging through my old notes and photocopies from when I was a student at the Columbia Oral History MA program. Heaped under a pile of thesis drafts, IRB training manuals, and course syllabi was this helpful handout given to me during my first fall semester.

“Tips on Oral History Interviewing,” by Amy Starecheski

In this formative example of grad-school handouts, Starecheski explains the value of a “biographical approach” to oral history interviews:

Oral historians tend to be interested in subjectivity, in how people make meaning and make stories out of their experiences. Asking, as much as possible, for a full, well-rounded, multi-layered life story helps us to bring the interviewee’s subjectivity in to the interview. We need to know what experiences, ideas, and people created the interviewee’s unique point of view.

Oral history sources are distinguished from other historical evidence precisely because they are not objects, or texts. They are people. Where historians can investigate and examine archival documents, analyze and present them within the relevant contexts to understand them, oral historians can interrogate their sources directly. If you ask your source a question about how they came to a certain conclusion, why they were motivated to take a certain action, they’ll answer it. This is what makes oral history unique. Moreover, it is a valuable opportunity to provide key information for future researchers to interpret the records you and your narrator are creating. Don’t miss it!

Faulkenbury’s approach to building biographical context in his interviews, as described in his article, is specifically centered on childhood. He writes, “These memories enhanced the total value of the interview, and they opened the door to more questions, more stories, and a richer interview…” While I agree with Faulkenbury, I would push farther to say that childhood is not the sole font of all motivations, identity, and character-forming experiences. A biographical approach to contextualizing narrators’ memories can be integrated throughout an oral history interview. Interest in a narrator’s personal background need not be relegated to the first portion of a life story. Their adult memories are just as valuable.

There are a few fundamental components of a narrator’s biography that, as interviewers, we look for like trail markers: Who are they? Where do they come from? Who are their people, their family, their community? What events or actions have shaped them? The answers to these questions will change throughout different stages of a narrator’s life, and also through different ways of remembering that life. These answers are vital to the quality of the oral history. However, they are innumerable. As interviewers, we must also avoid the rabbit hole of purely biographical interviewing. Our interviews have a specific research focus, and we won’t be able to capture everything.

Over the past year, I’ve been Oral History Coordinator for the New York Preservation Archive Project (NYPAP). The guiding purpose of our oral history interviews with leaders of historic preservation efforts in New York City is to fill a gap in existing resources about the movement. We have clear goals for our interviews, and limited time and funds with which to conduct them. However, taking the time to understand someone’s perspective on the field, or their expertise on a historic site, requires some meaningful engagement with their biography. As one narrator I interviewed for NYPAP, Sam Goodman, put it, “these stories have a lot to do with who I am, both as an individual and as a professional.” His stories weren’t just about his memories of growing up in the neighborhood, but of coming back as an adult and seeing it change, going to community meetings, being inspired by new people, and getting a job where he felt he could make a positive difference in the area.

Taking the time to understand someone’s perspective on the field, or their expertise on a historic site, requires some meaningful engagement with their biography.

Faulkenbury described his oral history students’ skepticism when he encouraged them to capture childhood memories during the early stages of their interviews. “They may think,” he says, “stories about growing up have nothing to do with their project at hand, and they don’t want to waste time talking about childhood memories.” While biographical stories are indeed necessary, the concern about wasting time is astute. Resources are always limited, priorities must be set to attain the research objectives of an oral history, and not all biographical information is equally useful. There is an important balance to be struck when seeking out the relevant context in a person’s life. This is made even more challenging because those moments of biographical context are woven throughout a person’s entire life, not only their early life. In response to Faulkenbury’s article, I would only caution that chasing childhood stories not become an end in itself. Guided by your research goals, you’ll be able to find excellent personal background from a person’s whole life, and still wrap up the interview on time.

This post was originally published on the OHMA blog. Add your voice the conversation by chiming into the discussion in the comments below, or on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, or Google+.

Featured image: “Photograph of Butler Library, Columbia University’s largest single library.” by JSquish, CC BY-SA 4.0 via Wikimedia Commons.

Making queer history visible in North Carolina

View Post on OUP Blog

By Josh Burford

This year, we have focused on people and institutions using oral history in innovative ways, discussing the challenges they face and their motivations for using oral history to make positive changes in the world. In April we talked to Scott Seyforth and Nichole Barnes about the impressive development of the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s LGBTQ archive. Back in March, we looked at websites that are using oral history to intervene in process of erasure, and talked to Sarah Gouldabout the difficulties of effectively utilizing oral history in museum exhibits. Today we take a very timely look at the work of Josh Burford, a North Carolina based archivist and activist, who is working to make the history of LGBTQ people in Charlotte visible. Read more below, and make sure to check out the archive on Facebook or on their website to explore the collections.

Over the last few months, we’ve seen a mobilization to fight HB2, the highly controversial North Carolina law that curtails the rights of queer people, and limits the ability of local communities to expand nondiscrimination ordinances or protect the rights of workers. Do you see your archival work connected to the current political fights happening in North Carolina?

I think that HB2 has given us a drastic reminder of what can happen when the community is not organized and does not know its history. When our history is invisible then we can be pushed aside as “outsiders” or not part of the community. HB2 reminds us that by making our history visible and accessible, we can see our place in the community and all the amazing work that is being accomplished. I want people to look back on this time and be reminded of how we fought and how we overturned this law.

How have the recent legal changes shaped the project or its reception? 

If anything, I think that the visibility of North Carolina at the moment has pointed our supporters to us in a much faster way. I would have preferred to live without it, but since the news went nationwide we have gotten amazing support. People see the oral history project as a way to get involved and a way to be a part of something that is not overtly political. Insisting on space to capture our history is an act of resistance but one that more people want to engage in and with.

Insisting on space to capture our history is an act of resistance but one that more people want to engage in and with.

Working backwards a bit, how did the project originally begin?

We started collecting Charlotte’s local history back in 2013. The manuscripts and materials are being gathered into the King-Henry-Brockington collection and we always knew that we wanted to expand into oral histories to enhance the collection. In October of 2013 one of our local leaders, Donaldson King, passed away a week before his oral history was to be taken. With his death we lost over 50 years of history and it really forced us to start much sooner than we planned so that it did not happen again.

How did you come to focus the project on historical figures in the LGBT community?

The committee working on the Charlotte Queer Oral History Project really wanted to capture the narratives of community leaders across generations. Since the physical collections had already garnered local and national attention, it just made sense that we start with the most visible leaders in our community and work out from there. Ultimately we will be focusing on historic events in Charlotte through the lens of these people and we will gather folks who are not as visible as we move along.

As you’ve gathered the collection, have you had any particularly memorable successes or frustrations with the project?

For me the biggest success of the project has been the planning committee itself. Our group is led by local community members who are giving their time to make this happen, the group is intergenerational (with our youngest member being 22 and our older in their 70s), and the group represents historic memory from past and present. The group is working so hard to make the project sustainable and accessible to anyone that wants to be a part of it. The only frustration we are experiencing at this point is there are simply too many people to interview and not enough time to do it. This is a great problem to have but one that forces us to work harder every day.

You noted early just how important it is for our history to be visible and accessible, especially in times of struggle. What plans does the collection have for publicizing its collection, or making them available, going forward?

The plan from the beginning has been to make the oral histories as accessible to the public as possible. We are going to try and engage the community in every aspect of the project from taking the histories, to transcribing them. We hope to make the oral histories available to the public as quickly as possible and we already have plans underway to organize events and community forums around the stories we collect.

What pointers can you give to other people interested in doing similar oral history projects?

First I would say to not be scared of doing a project of this size. Getting started is not as hard as people think, especially with a group of committed volunteers. I would find a local University/College and partner with their special collections department for both physical support and ideas. This way when you run into a problem you have an ally to step in to make sure the project continues. Lastly I would say that it is so important to capture the stories of older community members while they are with us, but don’t forget that our current Queer/Trans young people have so much to offer as well. Let this opportunity be one that creates space for dialogue between the generations so that everyone is learning and affirmed.

Let this opportunity be one that creates space for dialogue between the generations so that everyone is learning and affirmed.

You can read more about the King-Henry-Brockington Archive on Facebook and their website to follow along as the collection develops. If you enjoyed this article, make sure to check out the special issue of the OHR, “Listening to and Learning from LGBTQ Lives”, which is available for free until the end of June. Chime into the discussion in the comments below, or on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, or Google+.

Featured image: “Moral March on Raleigh” by James Willamor, CC BY-SA 2.0 via Flickr.

Queering oral history

View Post on OUP Blog 

Murphy, Jennifer Pierce, and Jason Ruiz suggest some of the ways that queer methodologies are useful and important for oral history projects. Moving between Alessandro Portelli and recent innovations in queer theory, the piece offers both practical and theoretical suggestions about what oral historians can learn from queering oral history. This week on the blog we bring you an interview with contributor Jason Ruiz, who explains some of the motivations behind the project, the erotics of oral history, and how others can build on the successes of the Twin Cities GLBT Oral History Project.

In the article, you draw a really productive distinction between identity politics and the politics of sexuality, explaining that doing so can help get beyond some of the problems with identity based research. Can you talk about the issues or conversations that helped to make the importance of that distinction clear?

We started the Twin Cities GLBT Oral History Project about a decade ago, at a time when a lot of us in graduate school were learning to critique identity categories—something that seems so obvious to students today. We had countless conversations about how to collect and explore sexual histories and the personal histories of people who identify as queer or sexually marginal in any way without reifying categories like “gay” or “lesbian.” For example, just calling ourselves the Twin Cities GLBT Oral History Project was a huge compromise, since so many of us personally rejected a gay or lesbian identity and would have called ourselves “queer.” But we also wanted a name for the project that would be legible by older queer people and, to be honest, funders too, and so “GLBT” made sense for us­­ on a practical level.

Another one of the important aspect of the queer methodology you lay out is the erotics of oral history, or the role desire can play in the process of creating oral history. How have you productively navigated desire within interviews?

This is something that I think about a lot and have written about in a chapter in Bodies of Evidence, edited by Nan Alamilla Boyd and Horacio Roque-Ramirez. And of course, some of the early and seminal works in the field, such as Esther Newton’s and Boots of Leather, Slippers of Gold, address the oral historical encounter as a potentially erotic one, so I’m not exactly the first to make note of this. Part of what I argue in the Bodies of Evidence piece is that it was much easier for me to get gay-identified men discuss sex with me than it was to elicit those kinds of narratives from women. This has to be due in part to the fact that erotic spark between the gay-identified men I interviewed and me and/or my intern was an undercurrent in many of our interviews. When those men shared details of their sexual pasts with us, they mostly relished all of the fun that they had had. And I can’t deny that they shared some very hot stories with us. Oral history isn’t only about people bearing witness to big historical shifts or patterns or tragedies, it’s also about—and much is revealed by—the fun romps and sexy secrets our narrators can tell us about.

Given those limitations and possibilities, can you give some pointers to people interested in doing similar oral history projects?

First and foremost, form a team. A large-scale oral history project has a lot of moving parts and many hands make light work. One of the most important aspects of our work with the Twin Cities project was that our team was pretty diverse in terms of academic field and institutional standing. This was, I think, a great strength for us, so I’d also advise those launching a new project to go beyond their own fields and assemble a team that is as intellectually diverse as possible.

Second, take a look at all of the great models out there. I recently chaired a panel at the Organization of American Historians that featured the excellent and quite varied work of the Queer Newark Oral History Project, the University of Minnesota’s Transgender Oral History Project, and StoryCorp’s OutLoud Project. These three endeavors are all really different from one another, but, taken together, provide a wealth of ideas about how to collect and interpret oral histories. When we were starting the Twin Cities project, we looked to oral history projects that had very little to do with sexual identities and practices since there were so few out there at the time, but today there are many more wonderfully inspiring and provocative models from which anyone interested in starting an oral history project can draw.

Finally, I’d suggest that the designers of a new project just have a ton of fun. I know that not all projects explore light or amusing topics, but I found the interview process to be a very fun process, even when the subject matter was very serious. I just taught a queer studies class at Notre Dame that required the students to collect and interpret an oral history for their final project, and I couldn’t emphasize to them enough that it’s a privilege and so much fun to get to meet with a stranger and ask them a wide variety of questions about their lives. Sure, it’s also exhausting, but the only way to counteract that fact is to have fun with your project.

Is there anything you couldn’t address in the article that you’d like to share here?

We wished that we could have name-checked so many more of the innovative and exciting oral history projects currently underway, but there was, of course, not enough room to do so. On a personal note, I wish that I could have gone more deeply into some of the artistic endeavors that we mention in the piece. Right around the time that essay was published, I was lucky enough to see Anna Deveare Smith talk and perform live at St. Mary’s College in Indiana near where I live. When I saw how Smith interpreted her interviewees’ words on race relations in America and helped deepen my understanding of historical events like the L.A. Riots, I cringed at how much more I could have written on her remarkable work and others like it, such as E. Patrick Johnson’s work (which we do discuss in the essay but which I have not been fortunate enough to see in person).

Many of our readers likely have your book, but for those who don’t, could you discuss some of the interventions you make there?

Queer Twin Cities speaks to a broad and diverse history of sexual difference in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and environs, but does so from a distinctly queer point-of-view. Whereas we had to make the compromises that I describe above in launching the project and collecting oral histories, it is in the interpretation of those histories that our intellectual perspectives really became clear. This was, for many of us, the fun part: we were able to take the incredible stories that our oral history narrators shared with us and interpret them from the intellectual perspectives in which we were all immersed. I’m proud that we, the editors, and the authors, were able to interpret oral histories in the ways that felt intellectually vital and provocative to us. This is also part of the work that we Kevin Murphy, Jennifer Pierce, and I try to do in the piece for the Oral History Review. In that essay, which is a natural extension of our collaboration on Queer Twin Cities, we lay out an argument for how queer studies has and should influence the oral historical endeavor, and explore a variety of methodological, historical, and interpretive frameworks that make queer oral history different.

Featured image: Minneapolis I-35W Bridge • Rainbow Colors • Twin Cities Pride by Tony Webster, CC BY 2.0 via Flickr.

Listening to the Queer Archive — a conversation with Marion Wasserbauer

View Post on OUP Blog

By Marion Wasserbauer

The current issue of the OHR invites diverse authors to share their experiences listening to and learning from LGBTQ lives. This week, we bring you a short interview with one of the contributors, Marion Wasserbauer, whose article “‘That’s What Music Is About—It Strikes a Chord’: Proposing a Queer Method of Listening to the Lives and Music of LGBTQs” suggests that music is an integral tool for listening deeply to a narrator’s voice.

On her project website, Wasserbauer explains “One way to acknowledge the participants’ agency and really giving them a voice, is to let them construct their own story with the help of music and musical memorabilia they prepared beforehand and bring along to the interview. I am interested in whether musical key moments or key musicians/ musical styles correspond with key moments in the identity formation.” Each oral history includes a musical playlist.

Load up a playlist and enjoy the music as your read her responses below. You can also check out the rest of the special issue, which is available online until June.

Many oral histories use a “life history” approach, which aims to capture a broad scope of a person’s life in the recorded interview and transcript. It seems like you’re going beyond that, by creating a sort of mini-exhibit for each of your interviewees. How has the final product shaped the way you conduct interviews?

Music, LGBTQ identities, and the connection between both are the subject of my research. As music and musical memorabilia are central topics to the oral history interviews, it was a very natural choice for me to use music and musical memorabilia as access points to the narrators’ life histories. How we tell about our life reflects how we perceive now what we experienced in the past. Music is able to evoke memories and feelings in the narrator, and it helps to convey these experiences to me as a researcher and other readers/listeners as we learn about music and identity in the narrators’ lives. While transcribing and analyzing the interviews, I make a personal playlist and a small queer archive accompanying each life story. These archives contain the playlist, photographs of memorabilia, excerpts of my field notes and fragments of the interview. According to each narrator’s wishes, some archives contain more details, and others simple feature a playlist.

 How we tell about our life reflects how we perceive now what we experienced in the past.

The online archive is therefore an ongoing project, forming an audiovisual companion to my academic work. Where my academic papers are fragmented, focusing on various topics within all of the life stories, the queer archives provide a way to get to know more about the narrators and to get a more complete insight their life (stories).

What difficulties have you found with your archival methodology?

The interdisciplinary character of my research, situated between media studies, LGBTQ studies, sociology of music and history, informed by feminist scholarship and pop music is a wonderful opportunity to explore all of these fields, but at the same time makes it very complex. Inspired by theories of the queer archive, my archival approach adds yet another layer to my already very open and broad research.

Admittedly, it is rather time consuming to make the individual playlists and archives. However, I really enjoy getting to know my research narrators through the music and memorabilia they share with me. These are often vital elements to their narratives, so it only seems fair to spend time on making them accessible. I believe that these mini-archives are a way to not only add vital visual and audio information about the narrator, but to acknowledge their whole life story.

How did you get started?

When I was accepted as PhD student to work on the role of music in the lives of LGBTQ people, I soon decided that I wanted to work with life stories in a creative way. First, there are the theoretical and methodological starting points: A winter school by oral historian Selma Leydesdorff introduced me to oral history, and I got acquainted with Halberstam’s and Cvetkovich’s work on the queer archive through my interest in queer studies. The idea of the queer archive, stressing the importance of ephemera and seemingly irrelevant material in making and telling queer history, really resonated with me.

Also the collaborative character of the queer archive as described by Halberstam struck a chord: “[t]he archive is not a simple repository”, but “it is also a theory of cultural relevance, a construction of collective memory, and a complex record of queer activity” (Halberstam 2005: 169-70) and the researcher becomes a co-archivist rather than a mere observer. This is how I, as a queer researcher and member of the LGBTQ community, need to approach this project on music and LGBTQs. I believe in listening to people’s stories, and in the co-construction of meaning by talking with each other. The idea of the queer archive ties in with the ethics of oral history, although it could be argued that the queer archive has greater attention for affective and subversive dimensions of the narrators’ lives.

 I believe in listening to people’s stories, and in the co-construction of meaning by talking with each other.

I think it is vital that in research like mine, focusing on music and identity, audio and visual elements should not be minimalized and only mentioned in the form of written text, but be acknowledged within academic work.

Second, and most importantly, I started talking to LGBTQ people about music and their lives. In most interviews, music and memorabilia naturally provide a guide for the life stories. Most narrators appreciate receiving their playlists and see their archive online – in that way, the queer archives are a token of gratitude for sharing their stories with me.

You mention that the article is part of your dissertation project. Can you give a sense of how the dissertation project will take up or move beyond the ideas you talk about in the article?

In my article, I provide a general discussion of my methodology, focusing on the theoretical and ethical backgrounds and providing first insights into what putting the theory into practice looks like with several narrators. At the moment, I have collected 22 LGBTQ individuals’ stories, and am looking into a diverse range of topics related to music and identity. In my dissertation, each of these narrators gets introduced thoroughly, before I analyze these topics in different chapters, for example exploring sexual fluidity in women, what being a fan means for my narrators, and how music works in trans* individuals’ lives.

This thematic focus arose from the life histories, as there are clearly musicians, styles, experiences and feelings that are shared by several of the narrators. The thematic focus also enables me to structure what we learn from the life histories. For each topic, I focus on parts of the stories, and here the queer archives come in to provide an insight into their whole story.

Featured image credit: “SCOTUS APRIL 2015 LGBTQ 54663” by Ted Eytan. CC BY-SA 2.0 via Flickr.

Queer history happens everywhere

View Post on OUP Blog

By Nichole Barns and Scott Seyforth 

With the summer issue of the Oral History Review just around the corner, we are bringing you a sneak peak of what’s to come. Issue 43.1 is our LGBTQ special issue, featuring oral history projects and stories from around the country. To dig more into the issue, we sat down with Scott Seyforth and Nichole Barnes to talk about their article, “‘In People’s Faces for Lesbian and Gay Rights’: Stories of Activism in Madison, Wisconsin, 1970 to 1990.” Drawing from the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s LGBTQ oral history archive, their article offers a rethinking of the common stories we tell about the trajectory of LGBTQ rights and activism, showcasing the important role of university towns and the Midwest in shaping queer history.

The archive contains over 200 hours of oral history interviews. In sitting down to actually write the article, how did you decide where to start?

Well, one thing that we really wanted to address is that a lot of the history of queer liberation hasn’t been told, especially in the Midwest. The queer liberation mass-movement happens everywhere, not just on the coasts. But from reading the history books, you’d think queer Midwesterners weren’t doing much. The article addresses some of these gaps, showing how queer politics evolved in Madison, from very early in the days of queer liberation. Drawing on the interviews we have done with many of the participants in this history, we’re able to let them speak back to history and highlight their accomplishments.

Another big thing we really wanted to do with the article was to highlight the varied holdings of the university that go so far beyond just institutional records. Many people would never expect the university archives to have such a broad collecting scope so we wanted to let people know that there’s more here for those who want to come and explore it. Really, in the article, you’re just getting a glimpse of what the archive has collected so far.

A big part of that problem goes straight back to the way that queer history is remembered. You would assume that New York or San Francisco would have great queer collections – and they certainly do – but there’s history here in the Midwest. Queer culture doesn’t come solely out of the coastal cities, but also from places like Madison, where people are making really interesting change in their communities. During the same time period as this article, the early 1970s, other Midwestern cities with university populations are producing really interesting change. Places like Champaign/Urbana, Ann Arbor, and the West Bank of the University of Minnesota await study, to name just a few.

Madison Lesbians marching in the International Women’s Day March in Madison, WI, March 1973
Madison Lesbians marching in the International Women’s Day March in Madison, WI, March 1973

Having been active in the project for years, could you talk about some of the challenges you’ve come across, either in conducting the interviews or in writing up the article.

Some of the very first people interviewed for the oral history project were people who were politically involved. They were some of the most “out” and the most public. They didn’t mind telling their story; in fact they had been doing so for decades. They were also the most well-documented, in newspapers and other sources at the time. So, when we went to write the article, the history of local political involvement was one we could tell in a conventional manner using oral histories and traditional documentation. On the one hand, we are telling an unexamined history—and on the other hand, we are replicating the common problem of telling the history of the most privileged. The project is still collecting materials that will allow future researchers to illuminate diverse aspects of the local community, uncover hidden truths, and engage broadly in telling local stories.

Working on the article has offered an intimate portrait of the way history is constructed. Memories are so malleable, and getting to hear as the past is recreated in an interview has been incredibly instructive.

Many LGBTQ people grow up thinking they don’t matter, and their stories should be kept hidden, so I imagine this is a problem faced by other people doing similar projects. How have you been able to get people to participate?

“LGBTQ individuals oftentimes internalize society’s silencing of history. It can be validating to have someone come and interview you about your life, your activism, and your efforts toward equality.”

For so many of the people interviewed, just having somebody sit and listen for an hour or two is an absolute gift. LGBTQ individuals oftentimes internalize society’s silencing of history. It can be validating to have someone come and interview you about your life, your activism, and your efforts toward equality. At times, narrators weren’t prepared for the way that doing something seemingly so simple as an interview would interrupt the secrecy, denial, and omission of LGBTQ history for individuals.

It’s amazing how willing people are to share once you just offer them a space to talk. In the best oral histories, the interviewer fades quickly into the background, offering a really light touch when needed, but mostly just letting the interviewee share their life.

This might be a good place to pull back and talk about the future of the project, which you allude to in the article. How did the oral history project develop into the Madison LGBTQ Archive?

You know, the oral history project had this problem where we would interview somebody and at the end they would say, “Hey, I’ve got all this great stuff here! Why don’t you take it too?” And, of course, we absolutely wanted to hold onto it, but we simply didn’t know where to put it. We were talking earlier about how little LGBTQ history gets preserved, and here we were, early in the oral history project, seeing this problem in action. After a number of years racking our brains and asking around to different local archives and agencies to see who could house the materials, we finally decided it might make sense to start it at the university archives and have it be connected to the oral history project.

The oral history project has been really instrumental in establishing the LGBTQ archive. Many of our first collections came directly from the people we had interviewed. We could finally go back and say, “Remember that stuff you wanted to give us? Bring it over!” Additionally, the work we had done with the oral history project helped to secure funding, since we could point to those as proof that we were serious and that the funds wouldn’t be squandered. Having already built some relationships with members of the community, we were able to hit the ground running. We continue to try and build community involvement in the project, from the funding to the outreach, to the people involved in putting it all together. I guess we shouldn’t be surprised at how receptive many members of the community have been towards the project. People are excited to finally have a chance to tell their stories in this way.

Summer school for oral historians

View Post on OUP Blog

By Shanna Farrell

Both in the archives and out in the field, we’re pleased to highlight some of the important work that oral historians undertake. Last month Sarah Gould shared some of her experiences and questions about using oral history in a museum exhibit. Earlier this year, we talked to audio transcriptionist Teresa Bergen, who helped us see another side of the oral history process. This week, we hear from Shanna Farrell about UC Berkeley’s Advanced Oral History Summer Institute, and how former students are building on their experiences in the program. Summer training programs now exist in multiple places, and we’re excited about the possibilities they have for bringing even more people into the world of oral history.

When I joined UC Berkeley’s Oral History Center (OHC) in late 2013, I quickly began work designing, planning, and running the Advanced Oral History Summer Institute (SI), which is organized around the life cycle of the interview. Because leading the SI is one of my most important roles at the OHC, it’s hard for me to be objective about its value (I think our week is a robust resource and provides excellent formal training). While it’s easy for me to discuss the importance of seminars and workshops I took in graduate school, this is a tricky task now that I’m on the other side of educational programming. So, I decided to turn to two SI alums for their perspectives on our week-long institute. I spoke with Dan Royles, an Assistant Professor of History at Florida International University in Miami, Florida, and Antonella Vitale, a PhD candidate in the Department of History at the City University of New York in Manhattan.

Dan Royles was a PhD candidate at Temple University when he attended the SI in 2011. He was studying African-American AIDS activism and wanted oral history to play a big role in his research. He had completed a few informal interviews and a day-long workshop on oral history at Temple, but was hoping to learn more about the OHC’s methodology and process so that he could take a more considered approach to archiving. “The highlight of the Summer Institute was learning how to analyze and integrate oral sources into my work, and exploring critical issues of narrative and orality,” he says. He also cites interview practice, panels on the multiple aspects of interviews, and discussion sections as helpful in becoming more comfortable in interview settings. After the SI, he completed interviews with about thirty-five people and defended his dissertation in October 2015.

Antonella Vitale came to the SI in 2014 hoping to learn similar aspects of oral history. “At the time, I was planning on doing oral histories for my dissertation project,” she says. “I had never had any oral history training. I had read practical techniques, some books on oral history, and oral history theory, but I was really excited when I saw that [the OHC] was doing a Summer Institute so that I could learn more and become more comfortable.”

Vitale’s work explores the practice of fuitina in Sicily, Italy, which is a type of rape marriage. “A man can kidnap a women and raping her, with the purpose of marrying her. It’s also a practice in which young couples escape to marry and force their families to accept them being together. Often, families are against partnerships for various reasons. It’s got an ugly, but romantic side. This practice has never been explored in historical scholarship and my work seeks to define it and understand how it manifests in society and juxtapose it with meta-narratives that exist about it popular culture,” Vitale explains.

She says that the week allowed her to formulate better questions and hone the scope of her interviews. “The SI helped to reinforce the way in which people present themselves and tell their stories. It also gave me the confidence to push people a little harder and not back down when they were trying to brush off a question,” she says. She conducted twenty-eight interviews in Italy during the summer of 2015 and is now writing several chapters of her dissertation, which she hopes to defend next year.

Royles and Vitale had something else in common: they both now use oral history in their classroom. Royles teaches a graduate course dedicated to its practice and theory, and Vitale uses oral history in a semester-long interview project for her undergraduates. “The last few semesters I had the students pick a person to interview as their culminating project,” she says. “Throughout the semester I have various workshops on picking a subject, thinking of topics to explore, and how to do the pre-interview. A lot of the things that you taught us I’m teaching my students. We do a workshop on developing interview questions, bring in photos and do practice interviews, and work on outlines. They go off and do the interviews, transcribe them, and then we develop a narrative based on the transcript. They do peer reviews and a five-minute presentation. That’s been really fun and the students really love it as a project, as opposed to writing a research paper.”

Moreover, Royles said that having formal training in oral history gave him a competitive advantage when he was on the job market last year. It gave him traction, and his emphasis on this work, coupled with the passion that he developed for interviewing, helped him get three teaching offers when the market was the toughest it has been in years. He ultimately landed a tenure track faculty position.

It’s encouraging to hear that not only are scholars seeing the value in incorporating oral history into their work, but both they and their home institutions understand the importance of formal training.

For more, check out Dan Royles’ work on African American AIDS Activism Oral History Project, the project’s Omeka site, his work indexing interviews for the Staring Out to Sea oral history project, and his forthcoming article on teaching with OHMS in the Oral History Review. The Oral History Summer Institute is a one-week seminar on the methodology, theory, and practice of oral history. It will take place on the UC Berkeley campus from 15-19 August 2016. For more information about the institute, or to submit an application, visit them online. Chime into the discussion in the comments below, or on TwitterFacebookTumblr, or Google+.

Featured image: UC Berkeley. Photo by Charlie Nguyen. CC BY 2.0 via Flickr.

Launching into oral history

View Post on OUP Blog 

By Adrienne Cain 

Today we return to our ongoing series in which we ask a variety of oral history professionals and practitioners how they ended up in the audio world and why they love oral history. Today Adrienne Cain discusses how she went from future astronaut to oral historian, and the value she sees in preserving the spoken word. To share your own story, contact our social media coordinator, Andrew Shaffer, at ohreview[at]gmail[dot]com.

I was introduced to oral history while completing my Master’s in Library Science at the University of North Texas. I needed to fulfill my practicum requirement, and I took a chance on an advertisement to intern at NASA-Johnson Space Center. (I grew up wanting to be an astronaut, but in high school I met AP Calculus and that dream was indefinitely deferred.) The internship involved working with their History Office, which is where I had the pleasure of meeting Rebecca Wright, Sandra Johnson, Jennifer Ross-Nazal, and Mark Scroggins, and a host of other wonderful people. During that tour we did not conduct any interviews, however we did have a brief session of what an oral history is, how the History Office conducts them, what equipment they use, and how they promote them. At that point I didn’t know or understand why I was so intrigued by this, but it definitely would come in helpful in the future. I completed two tours at NASA-JSC, the first with the History Office and the second with the Information Resources Directorate in which I worked with multimedia digitization. I graduated in December of 2010, but it would be nearly two years before I would begin working in the field.

In October 2012, I began working in the African American Library at the Gregory School in Houston under the direction of Hellena Stokes. I was the Oral History Librarian and knowing that my limited experience was only enough to get my foot in the door, I dove in headfirst. I sought out oral history resources such as Baylor University Institute for Oral History and the Texas Oral History Association (TOHA). Everyone with the Institute was so helpful and accessible, and their webinar is a great tool for people who are new to the field. I also gathered information and best practices from the Oral History Association and looked at different oral history programs across the county. I joined TOHA and took their online webinar “Getting Started with Oral History.” All of the oral histories conducted with the Gregory School are video recordings, so I rearranged the studio to include a backdrop and additional lighting to improve the visual quality of the recordings. I took our mission statement and began to build the oral history program around it. I sought out possible interviewees by reading local papers, cold-calling, emailing, and writing letters to businesses, schools, and local organizations. I loved every minute of it. I was learning so much about the history of African Americans in Houston (which at the time was not well documented), and making connections with people from all walks of life: politicians, educators, community activists, authors, church leaders, and more. Also, these efforts led to the TOHA’s Mary Faye Barnes Award for Excellence in Community Oral History.

In 2014, I received a promotion and moved to another special collections library under the Houston Public Library umbrella, the Houston Metropolitan Research Center. Along with the move came a new title—Oral History and Media Librarian. Not only am I now responsible for the creation and curation of oral histories on various media, I am also responsible for the care and curation of audiovisual materials in our archive. Here I focus on gathering oral histories that encompass all of the city’s history. Houston is one of the most diverse cities in the United States, and there are a lot of great stories to gather and be shared.

Building on what I’ve learned, I am now helping to create the next generation of oral historians.

Building on what I’ve learned, I am now helping to create the next generation of oral historians. I conduct tutorials and give classroom presentations on the importance of oral histories and basic tools to start an oral history project. Every semester Mika Selley, the Hispanic Collections Archivist, and I partner with a local history professor, Dr. Jesse Esparza, to bring his students into the archives for research. A part of their curriculum is to create oral histories based on the subject he provides. At the end of the semester they have a showcase of the work they’ve done and the quality of work they produce is impressive. I convinced Dr. Esparza to present at the TOHA Annual Conference this April and this will be the first professional conference many of the students have ever attended.

I put together presentations based on my findings and research for conferences as well. This past October I presented at the 2015 OHA Annual Meeting in Tampa, FL. This was my second time presenting at the conference, and it’s always a great experience. I encourage anyone interested in oral history to attend. You meet people from all over the world who share the same passions, anxieties, excitements, and headaches in the field. You have experts who are willing and available to share their expertise. You make great connections with people, and believe me those connections come in very handy down the line. (Big thank you to my mentor, Troy Reeves, for dealing with me.) In addition to OHA, I’ve presented at TOHA’s Annual Meeting and will be presenting at the Texas Library Association’s Annual Meeting here in Houston this April.

I believe oral history is important because it provides a different view of history than what we are given in textbooks. Oral histories provide first-hand accounts of moments and events in history. It is one thing to read how veterans struggled with racism during World War II, but to actually hear and see that veteran’s emotion as they recount events is a completely different experience. Oral history makes the past seem more real for those who may not have experienced it.

I love what I do. As far as what the future holds, I know I plan to continue my journey in the field of oral history. Currently, I am a member of the Oral History Association, the Archivists of the Houston Area, the Society of Southwest Archivists, the Texas Library Association, and a Board Member for the Texas Oral History Association. I’m also studying for the Academy of Certified Archivist exam in August (wish me luck!). Come say hi if you see me at the TOHA conference in Waco, TX this April, or at OHA this year to celebrate the 50th Anniversary.

Featured image: Launch. Photo by Sean O’Bryan. CC BY 2.0 via seanobryan Flickr.

Newer Posts
Older Posts

Oral History Review