Discipline-Specific Debates in Oral History?
Hi all, In a moment of cosmic timeliness, I'm currently revising an article on oral history practice as it relates to my work in videogame history. There's obviously a wealth of information on generalist approaches to oral history, or more specific methodological lenses (feminist, postcolonial), to provide lit review. But in writing, I've been wondering if there's any scattering of literature that might constitute something like discipline-specific engagement with oral history (understanding that "the discipline" here ranges from history of technology and science to STS to media studies to library science, etc.). For some reason, in the history of computing and games particularly, there can be a lingering attachment to interpreting oral history sources as unmediated vessels of their own experience, even though this has been roundly debunked by oral history scholarship going back to the mid-1970s. Is it the complexity of technical systems, an extension of their presumed objectivity and rationality, that keeps certain interviewers and historians working in this mode? Are there other issues specific to our shared domains that might form the basis of a reading list on this subject? I would be grateful for any references and readings members of the group could direct my way. Best, Laine -- Laine Nooney www.lainenooney.com DM <http://dm.lmc.gatech.edu/> @ LMC <http://lmc.gatech.edu/> @ GT <http://www.gatech.edu/> Assistant Professor
On 5/24/17 1:41 PM, Laine Nooney wrote:
For some reason, in the history of computing and games particularly, there can be a lingering attachment to interpreting oral history sources as unmediated vessels of their own experience, even though this has been roundly debunked by oral history scholarship going back to the mid-1970s. What do you mean by "unmediated vessels of their own experience" ?
Did you mean "infallible records of their own experience" ? Having been on the staff of CHM for over ten years now and having done my share of oral histories with people whom I am very familiar with, remembrances are not exact, nor would anyone expect them to be, especially with long temporal distances from the events being discussed. Any interview should be taken with a grain of salt and compared to historical documents and contemporary and historical interviews of others. Oral histories can also be biased by the research interests and knowledge of the interviewer through his line of questioning.
No, i believe she meant 'unmediated vessels of their own experience'. Having been a researcher of technology, society, and culture for nearly 15 years now, i find that white people are rarely reflective about their technological selves. Instead, they often interpellate beliefs about technoculture to situate their remembered selves as technical subjects, innocent of cultural values. When histories of marginalized figures in those communities become available, then cultural and social dimensions of technoculture become visible, and if lucky, popular. see also, "Hidden Figures". A. Andre Brock Assistant Professor, Communication Studies University of Michigan On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:16 PM Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> wrote:
On 5/24/17 1:41 PM, Laine Nooney wrote:
For some reason, in the history of computing and games particularly, there can be a lingering attachment to interpreting oral history sources as unmediated vessels of their own experience, even though this has been roundly debunked by oral history scholarship going back to the mid-1970s. What do you mean by "unmediated vessels of their own experience" ?
Did you mean "infallible records of their own experience" ?
Having been on the staff of CHM for over ten years now and having done my share of oral histories with people whom I am very familiar with, remembrances are not exact, nor would anyone expect them to be, especially with long temporal distances from the events being discussed. Any interview should be taken with a grain of salt and compared to historical documents and contemporary and historical interviews of others.
Oral histories can also be biased by the research interests and knowledge of the interviewer through his line of questioning.
_______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org
I did mean what I said, but Al's version works too. And even though everyone constantly says things like "oral history sound be taken with a grain of salt" (which is not exactly a position I'd agree with), we've just witnessed a pretty messy display of intellectual territorialism anchored around the dubious notion that remembered experiences are the primary ground from which historical claims should be made. I'm looking for published resources in this space, beyond the anecdotal, to help ground my own claims. Andre, the points you bring up are potent and relevant to this conversation. If you have other directions for exploration, I'd love to know more. On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:29 PM Andre Brock <brocka@umich.edu> wrote:
No, i believe she meant 'unmediated vessels of their own experience'. Having been a researcher of technology, society, and culture for nearly 15 years now, i find that white people are rarely reflective about their technological selves. Instead, they often interpellate beliefs about technoculture to situate their remembered selves as technical subjects, innocent of cultural values. When histories of marginalized figures in those communities become available, then cultural and social dimensions of technoculture become visible, and if lucky, popular. see also, "Hidden Figures".
A.
Andre Brock Assistant Professor, Communication Studies University of Michigan
On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:16 PM Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org> wrote:
On 5/24/17 1:41 PM, Laine Nooney wrote:
For some reason, in the history of computing and games particularly, there can be a lingering attachment to interpreting oral history sources as unmediated vessels of their own experience, even though this has been roundly debunked by oral history scholarship going back to the mid-1970s. What do you mean by "unmediated vessels of their own experience" ?
Did you mean "infallible records of their own experience" ?
Having been on the staff of CHM for over ten years now and having done my share of oral histories with people whom I am very familiar with, remembrances are not exact, nor would anyone expect them to be, especially with long temporal distances from the events being discussed. Any interview should be taken with a grain of salt and compared to historical documents and contemporary and historical interviews of others.
Oral histories can also be biased by the research interests and knowledge of the interviewer through his line of questioning.
_______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org
_______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org
-- Laine Nooney www.lainenooney.com DM <http://dm.lmc.gatech.edu/> @ LMC <http://lmc.gatech.edu/> @ GT <http://www.gatech.edu/> Assistant Professor
I believe that the work of Elizabeth Loftus on eyewitness testimony is relevant. After all, the participants in historical developments doing interviews are giving eyewitness testimony about themselves, other people, behaviors, events, situations, etc. - Bill ________________________________ From: Members [members-bounces@lists.sigcis.org] on behalf of Laine Nooney [laine.nooney@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2017 5:45 PM To: Andre Brock; Al Kossow; members@lists.sigcis.org Subject: Re: [SIGCIS-Members] Discipline-Specific Debates in Oral History? I did mean what I said, but Al's version works too. And even though everyone constantly says things like "oral history sound be taken with a grain of salt" (which is not exactly a position I'd agree with), we've just witnessed a pretty messy display of intellectual territorialism anchored around the dubious notion that remembered experiences are the primary ground from which historical claims should be made. I'm looking for published resources in this space, beyond the anecdotal, to help ground my own claims. Andre, the points you bring up are potent and relevant to this conversation. If you have other directions for exploration, I'd love to know more. On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:29 PM Andre Brock <brocka@umich.edu<mailto:brocka@umich.edu>> wrote: No, i believe she meant 'unmediated vessels of their own experience'. Having been a researcher of technology, society, and culture for nearly 15 years now, i find that white people are rarely reflective about their technological selves. Instead, they often interpellate beliefs about technoculture to situate their remembered selves as technical subjects, innocent of cultural values. When histories of marginalized figures in those communities become available, then cultural and social dimensions of technoculture become visible, and if lucky, popular. see also, "Hidden Figures". A. Andre Brock Assistant Professor, Communication Studies University of Michigan On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 5:16 PM Al Kossow <aek@bitsavers.org<mailto:aek@bitsavers.org>> wrote: On 5/24/17 1:41 PM, Laine Nooney wrote:
For some reason, in the history of computing and games particularly, there can be a lingering attachment to interpreting oral history sources as unmediated vessels of their own experience, even though this has been roundly debunked by oral history scholarship going back to the mid-1970s. What do you mean by "unmediated vessels of their own experience" ?
Did you mean "infallible records of their own experience" ? Having been on the staff of CHM for over ten years now and having done my share of oral histories with people whom I am very familiar with, remembrances are not exact, nor would anyone expect them to be, especially with long temporal distances from the events being discussed. Any interview should be taken with a grain of salt and compared to historical documents and contemporary and historical interviews of others. Oral histories can also be biased by the research interests and knowledge of the interviewer through his line of questioning. _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org<http://sigcis.org>, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org _______________________________________________ This email is relayed from members at sigcis.org<http://sigcis.org>, the email discussion list of SHOT SIGCIS. Opinions expressed here are those of the member posting and are not reviewed, edited, or endorsed by SIGCIS. The list archives are at http://lists.sigcis.org/pipermail/members-sigcis.org/ and you can change your subscription options at http://lists.sigcis.org/listinfo.cgi/members-sigcis.org -- Laine Nooney www.lainenooney.com<http://www.lainenooney.com/> DM<http://dm.lmc.gatech.edu/> @ LMC<http://lmc.gatech.edu/> @ GT<http://www.gatech.edu/> Assistant Professor
participants (4)
-
Al Kossow -
Andre Brock -
Laine Nooney -
McMillan, William W