This article from the New York Times makes me wonder what the Veterans History Project will look like to future generations.
Karenna Gore Sciiff chronicles an early 20th-century project to document the lives of former enslaved people and their contributions to American culture. However, most of the interviewers are white and community members with specific agendas. Their sentiments often dissent from the interviewee and color the interview. While oral historians are now educated to keep as neutral a stance as possible while documenting the issue at hand, these historians instead contributed to the interview and guided conversations with leading questions in ways that fail to capture the interviwee's true sentiment.
We have not perfected the art of oral history in modern times. I have been an oral historian for two official projects: the African American Texans Oral History Project and the Veterans History Project. I am a white woman with no military service, and my inherent biases coming into these projects is something I must be aware that impacts the perceptions of my subjects and their willingness to be candid with me. I can perform due diligence and research, be familiar with subjects and themes and understand the struggles of my subjects, but it would be a completely different interview if I were a member of their communities.
I highly recommend reading the article. Let me know what you think.
