Extract from: Government of British Columbia Historical Archives Manual “Oral History” – continued– part 3 of 9.

The Interviewer/Interviewee Relationship: Personality and Culture

Interviewers should understand their own role creating oral history. Interviews are undertaken in deliberate and premeditated way and the structural values and motives involved should be evident both their creation and use. The personal aspect of the interview are unpredictable and challenging, even if human variables make oral history difficult to create and use, it also makes it a particularly rich and valuable historical source.

Oral history fieldwork requires different skills than archival or library research, calling for not only general knowledge and background research to earn the respect of the interviewee, but also social skills and the technical skills to unobtrusively operate the tape recording equipment. It requires flexibility resourcefulness to take advantage of opportunities in the course of an interview. The ability to adapt to changing circumstances and different personalities and to bring out the best in both.

An oral history interview is a co-operative effort in which the interviewer, who initiates and structures the interview, bears the major burden of establishing rapport and ensuring sensitive treatment of the person’s reminiscences as they are recorded, preserved and later used. You must maintain an honourable relationship with the person who has entrusted personal thoughts and you must maintain good faith in all matters of obligation to the interviewee. You can accomplish this if you develop an honest rapport with the interviewee while at the same time retaining a neutral stance toward the interviewee’s ideas, what one writer called “balance of empathy and analytical judgment.” Contact between you and the interviewee should begin with a clear explanation of your aims for the interview and the uses to which the material may later be put. This should involve the later signing of a tape release in which the interviewee can place conditions or restrictions on the use of the recording.

A good interviewer is a person of integrity, a good researcher as well as sensitive, affable and resourceful, with an intense interest in both the topic of research and people. Some people are unsuited to the role of interviewer, not so much because they lack intelligence or interest, but because they are inflexible, do not relate well to different types of people or do not respond well in unexpected situations. They may have set views on a subject which they try to get interviewees to support, or they may be compulsive talkers rather than good listeners. Interviews in which the interviewer participates as much as the interviewee and expresses strong opinions may occasionally be successful. More often, however, interviewers need to be able to listen, and provide positive response to the interviewee’s account, while providing a subtle (but recognized) structure to the interview.

Even your physical appearance can affect the interview. Manners or dress which are an extreme contrast to those of the interviewee can damage rapport, so a modification of your dress and appearance might sometimes be appropriate. It would be inappropriate, for example, to show up for most interviews in bare feet wearing faded jeans and a gaudy t-shirt, even if that is your usual attire.

A good interviewee is difficult to define. People with many different characteristics and personalities make excellent interviewees. There are, however, some basic qualifications. These include a good memory, the ability to understand and respond to questions and to give articulate answers. People with speech or hearing impairments, poor memories, inability to express thoughts clearly, or other difficulties associated with poor health or advanced age may be unsuitable for oral history, regardless of their experiences. For research purposes, recordings may usefully be made of people who are marginal in some of these areas (such as voice quality), but for other users these considerations will be more significant. Broadcasters, for example, prefer strong and interesting voices. In general, however, the life experiences and memory of a person will be the most important factors in making them a good interviewee.

Communication between you and the interviewee can be confounded by different economic, social or cultural backgrounds. Interviewees may be reluctant to speak candidly with an outsider, especially if you are from a group which has traditionally looked down upon that of the interviewee or even persecuted it. For example, a researcher from a government-sponsored project might have trouble in gaining the confidence of interviewees who are being asked about dissident activities in their past. In addition, the outsider may not understand the particular forms of social interaction in the interviewee’s group and not know the appropriate questions. You might ask questions that are relevant to you but meaningless to the interviewee and hence receive only a partial and perhaps distorted picture.

On the other hand, the insider who is from the interviewee’s group (and especially one who knows the interviewee personally) may inhibit the interviewee or only ask questions which are exceptional rather than obvious. The interview may disintegrate into a conversation in which everything is alluded to rather than fully identified or described. (Did you ever work with Joe? Oh, sure, great guy. Remember the time he called Sam and . . . etc.) The insider, however, is more likely to understand the background of an interviewee and may be the only person to whom they will confide their story.

There may be considerable conflict of aims or opinion between you and the interviewee. Nevertheless, an experienced interviewer who is aware of the potential problem can direct an interview without leading or bullying the interviewee. The importance of understanding and empathizing with the interviewee’s point of view cannot be over-emphasized. This is not hypocrisy. In fact, some would argue that this understanding (or rethinking) is the real aim of historical study. Even the best interviewer may find people with whom he can establish no useful rapport but such cases will be rare. Good interviewers will he able to value their own views while gaining insights into those of others.

Next : Part 4 of 9 - Research

Previous : Part 2 of 9 - Interview Types