I have to disagree. I met and interviewed the WW2 spitfire pilot and author, Geoff Wellum, for my historical fiction novel. Geoff was 92 at the time and he basically brought me back to wartorn Britain with him. Suddenly, I was there, living through his descriptions which were vivid and clear. I met him twice after that and we became good friends. He was the only person I interviewed from that time, so maybe I was just incredibly lucky. He became a muse and a mentor.
I think you are absolutely right about interviewing people decades after the relevant subject occurred. When I was researching in the early seventies for my book 'Nazi Gold' I used to locate as much official documentation as I could (not quite so easy in those pre FOIA days) and then conduct personal interviews. Various aspects connected to the story had been published in the mid to late 1940s and some of the people involved merely re-iterated what had appeared in the media at the time. Very often it conflicted with the official documentation and even with some help from me it stayed that way. The same thing happened in another of my book's 'Hitler's Last General'. I located a contemporary statement given to British War Crimes investigators by a young member of the Waffen-SS Hitler Youth Division confirming that he had actually witnessed his Regimental Commander Wilhelm Mohnke giving the order to execute three Canadian POWs. Other SS prisoners had also provided similar accounts of this incident. When my book was published there was a lot of media interest and a CBS TV crew tracked down the former Hitler Youth Division trooper living in Germany. He gave them an interview on the basis it wasn't televised but he agreed that the document he had signed , indicting Mohnke for murder, was accurate and that he was prepared to testify to that effect in any trial. I think a couple of years passed before the German Investigating Prosecutor (with a little prodding) got round to interviewing the trooper but when subsequently questioned by the media as to his evidence he said that the trooper had signed the document under duress. The investigation lasted over five years and during that time Mohnke was never interviewed by the Investigating Prosecutor.
This is a really important essay. I’ve spoken to Peter Hart about this same issue and I know both he and James Holland have a methodology for minimising the risks of (a) false memories and (b)people who want to please you by giving you the answers they think you want.
I've spent today discussing & identifying the methodologies used in theological research. Many of these can also be applied to historical research questions & it really makes one think about what precisely one is doing when you set foot, laptop or voice recorder in an archive...or memory setting. Ethnographic (or Auto-ethnographic) research, in particular, is so trendy now, which highlights the role of the researcher just as much as the research. Words, especially published ones, have real power, so we should be held to be ethically responsible for what we produce.
Some years ago now I was asked by a family to record their grandmother's recollections of WWII. The lady was French & had been brought up in French-colonial Indochina. Her granddaughter told me the family knew they were "on borrowed time" as far as her memory was concerned. They were right, I discovered, but the exercise of undertaking her oral autobiography was, nonetheless, a fascinating & worthwhile exercise. I felt her recollections of life in the London Blitz (she had married a British Officer) could be said to have fitted a "constructed" narrative, that of dancing, silk stockings & rationing, her childhood memories were as clear as crystal. Of course I was writing for the lady's family; I did not have to argue or draw substantial conclusions. Yet I have never forgotten the power of spending a substantial amount of time with "someone who was there". If we apply analysis critically to oral evidence it can add so much...don't write it off just yet!
I've been asking that question to myself. I've interviewed WWII veterans, but have been interviewing veterans from the Falklands conflict. The first time I've done a project that has been an event within my lifetime. What is interesting is listening/watching accounts from the 1980s and then listening to the accounts from the same people now. Also peoples attitudes, whether political or not. Although what i produce is creative work i am finding that i am having to find more ways of researching things. More so if the people you want to speak to don't use technology or don't want to speak to anyone! But as a mere amateur it is interesting watching how historians alter their views on individuals or on perspectives of their work over the decades. Already it has been 40yrs since the Falklands and it is interesting what people can remember and what they can't. Also, understandably what things they don't wish to remember. Respect has to be at the start. There are a number of people in my town who i could have interviewed, but after their experiences I couldn't ask any questions due to their PTSD. I feel honoured to have met so many fascinating people since getting involved with art and conflict, but am learning that the wonders of recording the human voice can be the most influential and inspiring things.
I have to disagree. I met and interviewed the WW2 spitfire pilot and author, Geoff Wellum, for my historical fiction novel. Geoff was 92 at the time and he basically brought me back to wartorn Britain with him. Suddenly, I was there, living through his descriptions which were vivid and clear. I met him twice after that and we became good friends. He was the only person I interviewed from that time, so maybe I was just incredibly lucky. He became a muse and a mentor.
I think you are absolutely right about interviewing people decades after the relevant subject occurred. When I was researching in the early seventies for my book 'Nazi Gold' I used to locate as much official documentation as I could (not quite so easy in those pre FOIA days) and then conduct personal interviews. Various aspects connected to the story had been published in the mid to late 1940s and some of the people involved merely re-iterated what had appeared in the media at the time. Very often it conflicted with the official documentation and even with some help from me it stayed that way. The same thing happened in another of my book's 'Hitler's Last General'. I located a contemporary statement given to British War Crimes investigators by a young member of the Waffen-SS Hitler Youth Division confirming that he had actually witnessed his Regimental Commander Wilhelm Mohnke giving the order to execute three Canadian POWs. Other SS prisoners had also provided similar accounts of this incident. When my book was published there was a lot of media interest and a CBS TV crew tracked down the former Hitler Youth Division trooper living in Germany. He gave them an interview on the basis it wasn't televised but he agreed that the document he had signed , indicting Mohnke for murder, was accurate and that he was prepared to testify to that effect in any trial. I think a couple of years passed before the German Investigating Prosecutor (with a little prodding) got round to interviewing the trooper but when subsequently questioned by the media as to his evidence he said that the trooper had signed the document under duress. The investigation lasted over five years and during that time Mohnke was never interviewed by the Investigating Prosecutor.
This is a really important essay. I’ve spoken to Peter Hart about this same issue and I know both he and James Holland have a methodology for minimising the risks of (a) false memories and (b)people who want to please you by giving you the answers they think you want.
Such a thoughtful post, Guy.
I've spent today discussing & identifying the methodologies used in theological research. Many of these can also be applied to historical research questions & it really makes one think about what precisely one is doing when you set foot, laptop or voice recorder in an archive...or memory setting. Ethnographic (or Auto-ethnographic) research, in particular, is so trendy now, which highlights the role of the researcher just as much as the research. Words, especially published ones, have real power, so we should be held to be ethically responsible for what we produce.
Some years ago now I was asked by a family to record their grandmother's recollections of WWII. The lady was French & had been brought up in French-colonial Indochina. Her granddaughter told me the family knew they were "on borrowed time" as far as her memory was concerned. They were right, I discovered, but the exercise of undertaking her oral autobiography was, nonetheless, a fascinating & worthwhile exercise. I felt her recollections of life in the London Blitz (she had married a British Officer) could be said to have fitted a "constructed" narrative, that of dancing, silk stockings & rationing, her childhood memories were as clear as crystal. Of course I was writing for the lady's family; I did not have to argue or draw substantial conclusions. Yet I have never forgotten the power of spending a substantial amount of time with "someone who was there". If we apply analysis critically to oral evidence it can add so much...don't write it off just yet!
I've been asking that question to myself. I've interviewed WWII veterans, but have been interviewing veterans from the Falklands conflict. The first time I've done a project that has been an event within my lifetime. What is interesting is listening/watching accounts from the 1980s and then listening to the accounts from the same people now. Also peoples attitudes, whether political or not. Although what i produce is creative work i am finding that i am having to find more ways of researching things. More so if the people you want to speak to don't use technology or don't want to speak to anyone! But as a mere amateur it is interesting watching how historians alter their views on individuals or on perspectives of their work over the decades. Already it has been 40yrs since the Falklands and it is interesting what people can remember and what they can't. Also, understandably what things they don't wish to remember. Respect has to be at the start. There are a number of people in my town who i could have interviewed, but after their experiences I couldn't ask any questions due to their PTSD. I feel honoured to have met so many fascinating people since getting involved with art and conflict, but am learning that the wonders of recording the human voice can be the most influential and inspiring things.