Well-Being and Oral History

Sarah Gudgin

I’m sure I’m not the only person who has listened to upsetting content during oral history interviews.Recounting a painful, difficult or traumatic memory can be very distressing for the interviewee and we should always be sensitive and responsive to this.However before we begin an interview, we can never know, on either side, how it might affect us or whether the effects will be long lasting. Indeed, we can sometimes be surprised or blindsided by the impact of conducting an interview, regardless of the topic, because of all the associations it has brought to mind, both negative and positive.

Martha Norkunus has written about how the emotional relationship that develops between interviewer and interviewee has a lasting impact on both people involved:

“Because neither the listener not the narrator knows where the contours of traumatised memory lie, those who listen to these stories are fully exposed to the victim’s pain and grief; the narrator and listener can be trapped in an interaction of emotions. Others encounter emotionally painful narratives unexpectedly, in the context of life history interviews not ostensibly about genocide or violence… the stories can change the listener’s sense of self.”

What should oral historians do if they have been negatively affected by an interview? What sorts of formal or informal support mechanisms should be in place? Is it ok to just offload on our hapless partners, friends or family, or do we just try to forget about it?Unfortunately, too often the oral historian falls between the gaps, of good support on the one hand and no support on the other.

What should we do if we are engaged in a project where the subject is upsetting, where there is no place to offload and we find that things have really got to us in a big way? Who do we turn to then?These are the questions I found myself asking recently, after working on a particularly stressful and upsetting oral history project which affected my sleep, my mood and my well-being, leaving me feeling vulnerable, shaken and unsupported.

This experience made me understand that if this can happen to me, a seasoned oral historian, it can happen to anyone. So I reached out to other oral historians who might understand what I was going through, or might be able to advise me, via the Oral History Society member’s discussion group. This is a special online forum where members can ask questions, seek advice or explore ideas about work with oral history.

The replies that I received from other oral historians, offering me support and telling me about their experiences, made me appreciate that I wasn’t the only person who had been negatively affected by working with difficult oral history content. It also seemed to me that the well-being of interviewers was somehow getting overlooked. I could also see that there were wider implications for oral history interviewing, for researchers and for freelancers generally, especially when dealing with difficult, sensitive or traumatic content.

I raised my concerns with the Oral History Society and they asked me to share my experiences with other Regional Networkers at our annual CPD event.We discussed the subject of well-being and oral history, including a range of factors which can add extra layers of stress to already challenging subjects. We spoke about how these factors can affect the interviewee, the interviewer and even the outcome of the interview.

In response to the issues that were raised in our meeting, a working group has been set up to look into ways of addressing these concerns and develop well-being guidance for those engaged in oral history. The aim is to set a professional standard for organisations undertaking oral history projects, especially when working with difficult or challenging material, of how to protect the well-being of employees, freelancers, researchers and volunteers.This might be especially helpful where there is a danger that individual well-being could become a casualty of tight deadlines and high expectations. The working group will be publishing the results of their findings and well-being guidance on the Oral History Society webpages in the coming months.

If you have been affected by any of the issues in this blog whilst engaged in oral history activities, or if you feel that your well-being has suffered, it is advisable to talk to someone or seek support, either formally or informally. We would also like to hear from you, if you know of examples of well-being good practice in oral history projects or research.

Further reading:

‘Researcher Wellbeing’ is a collaborative project between historians, a counsellor and an occupational health professional. It sets out guidelines about history researcher vulnerabilities, mental health and wellbeing.

D. Jones, ‘Distressing histories and unhappy interviewing’, Oral History, 1998, vol. 26 no. 2, pp. 49-56

Emma L. Vickers, ‘Unexpected Trauma in Oral Interviewing’ from the Oral History Review, Vol 46, 2019, issue 1, is interesting and has some practical suggestions for interviewers.

M. Klempner, ‘Navigating life review interviews with survivors of trauma’, Oral History Review, 2000, vol. 27, no. 2, pp. 67-83.

Martha Norkunus, ‘The Vulnerable Listener’, in Anna Sheftel and Stacy Zembrzycki, Oral History off the Record: towards an ethnography of practice (Palgrave, 2013), pp 81–96.

身心健康与口述史

Sarah Gudgin

我慑服在进行口述史访谈时听到令东说念主不安的施行的，不啻我一个东说念主。对受访者来说，回忆痛苦、贫瘠或创伤性的操心可能会让他们十分痛苦，咱们应该永恒保持敏锐并对此作出恢复。然而，在启动访谈之前，两边王人无法先见它可能会若何影响咱们，或者这些影响是否会连接很万古期。事实上，岂论主题是什么，咱们有时会对进行访谈所带来的影响感到惊诧或措手不足，因为它唤起了多样联思，既有颓败的也有积极的。

Martha Norkunus写说念，访谈者和受访者之间酿成的心扉联系会对两边产生耐久的影响：

"因为岂论是听者照旧叙述者王人不知说念创伤操心的抽象在那边，那些倾听这些故事的东说念主彻底线路在受害者的痛苦和缅怀之中；叙述者和听者可能会堕入心扉的互动之中。有些东说念主在进行糊口史访谈时未必际遇心扉上令东说念主痛苦的叙述，这些访谈名义上并不是对于种族死字或暴力的...这些故事可能会改顺耳者的自我证据。"

若是口述史学者受到访谈的负面影响，他们该奈何办？应该建设什么样的认真或非认真救济机制？是否不错只是向咱们无助的伴侣、一又友或家东说念主倾吐，照旧咱们应该试图健忘这些？不幸的是，口述史学者频频在获取邃密救济和彻底莫得救济之间扭捏不定。

若是咱们参与的神态主题令东说念主不安，莫得所在不错倾吐，并且咱们发现这些事情真实严重影响了咱们，那该奈何办？当时咱们该向谁求援？这些王人是我最近在参与一个荒谬令东说念主压力重重和不安的口述史神态后问我方的问题，该神态影响了我的就寝、心理和身心健康，让我感到脆弱、动摇和短少救济。

这段阅历让我赫然，若是这种情况能发生在我这么一个素养丰富的口述史学者身上，那么它可能发生在职何东说念主身上。因此，我通过口述史学会会员筹办小组研讨了其他可能交融我正在阅历的事情或概况给我建议的口述史学者。这是一个特殊的在线论坛，会员不错在这里淡薄问题、寻求建议或探讨研讨口述史使命的思法。

来自其他口述史学者的回复为我提供了救济，他们阐扬了我方的阅历，这让我雄厚到并不是只好我一个东说念主受到处理贫瘠的口述史施行的负面影响。同期我也发现，访谈者的身心健康似乎在某种过程上被忽视了。我还看到，这对口述史访谈、研究东说念主员息争脱行状家王人有更鄙俚的影响，荒谬是在处理贫瘠、敏锐或创伤性施行时。

我向口述史学会淡薄了我的担忧，他们邀请我在年度CPD看成中与其他区域集结成员共享我的阅历。咱们筹办了身心健康与口述史的主题，包括一系列可能给依然具有挑战性的主题增添特地压力的成分。咱们谈到了这些成分若何影响受访者、访谈者，甚而访谈的遵循。

为了恢复咱们会议中淡薄的问题，一个使命组依然建树，旨在研究惩办这些问题的流毒，并为从事口述史使命的东说念主员制定身心健康指南。宗旨是为开展口述史神态的组织设定专科门径，荒谬是在处理贫瘠或具有挑战性的材料时，若何保护职工、摆脱行状家、研究东说念主员和志愿者的身心健康。这在个东说念主身心健康可能因为蹙迫的截至日历和高生机而受到毁伤的情况下可能荒谬有匡助。使命组将在夙昔几个月内在口述史学会网页上发布他们的研究遵循和身心健康指南。

若是你在从事口述史看成时受到本博客中提到的任何问题的影响，或者若是你合计你的身心健康受到影响，建议你与他东说念主交谈或寻求认真或非认真实救济。若是你知说念口述史神态或研究中研讨身心健康的邃密施行案例，咱们也很但愿听到你的共享。

延迟阅读：

《研究者身心健康》是历史学家、筹议师和行状健康民众之间的谄媚神态。它为历史研究者的脆弱性、激情健康和身心健康制定了交流宗旨。

D. Jones，《令东说念主痛苦的历史和不舒心的访谈》，《口述史》，1998年，第26卷第2期，第49-56页

Emma L. Vickers在《口述史驳倒》2019年第46卷第1期发表的《口述访谈中未必的创伤》一文很原理，并为访谈者提供了一些实用建议。

M. Klempner，《在创伤幸存者生命精致访谈中的导航》，《口述史驳倒》，2000年，第27卷，第2期，第67-83页。

Martha Norkunus，《脆弱的倾听者》，收录于Anna Sheftel和Stacy Zembrzycki编辑的《记载除外的口述史：走向施行民族志》（Palgrave出书社，2013年），第81-96页。

信息开端：https://www.ohs.org.uk/general-interest/well-being-and-oral-history/

中国东说念主民大口述史研修班（第五期）报名（点击下方海报贯穿）

中国东说念主民大学口述史研修班（第五期）网罗口述史研究限制知名学者，真切探讨口述史的表面框架、症论断革命与施行哄骗。课程莳植涵盖口述史的问题雄厚与操作流毒、深度访谈时代、集体操心表面、心扉转向研究以及AI赋能下的可能性旅途等前沿议题。同期欧洲杯体育，通过农村减贫、乡村振兴、传统生态学问、非遗传承东说念主与音乐家口述史等多限制施行案例，展示口述史在记载中国社会变迁、传承文化操心方面的专有价值。本研修班旨在培养学员系统主持口述史表面框架、掌持访谈实操妙技、进步口述史分析能力，股东口述史研究标的着愈加自主革命的标的发展，为记载和交融现代中国的社会变迁提供新的研究视角与流毒旅途。