Oral history is vastly becoming a popular tool for the study of social and cultural history, which has also risen in the ranks of study in academic history. By studying the history (or stories for this blog’s sake) of the everyday people, not the elites, of the past, one gains an insight as to the way of life for the common man. Oral history is the perfect means to not only capture their story, but their emotions as well. In Studs Terkel’s memoir, Touch and Go, this idea is most strongly conveyed. Terkel’s memoir is penned in an almost stream of consciousness manner, where it seems he jumps from one person, event, or idea to the next with almost no segue, but after a couple of chapters (for me anyway) his tale becomes easier to follow. Not only does Terkel give a thorough account of his life and times, from the depression to McCarthyism and beyond, Terkel also documents his method and experiences with recording oral histories.
I would like to pause here to make two personal notes. First, let’s just take a moment to pause and appreciate what a great name “Studs” is. Having never heard of the guy prior to this reading I was a bit bummed to find out it was merely a stage name, but hey, it stuck and I think it’s great. Second, it is easy to see how this man was able to get people to open up to him and discuss their lives. His personality and quirks shine through in his writing. How can you not like a guy who refers to himself as “a hapless retardee” (only in mechanical matters of course, but still)?(p.177) This ability of Terkel to make his interviewees comfortable is a talent that allows him to capture not only their story, but their emotion. As he himself explains when he has his interviews transcribed he has every sound, every pause, and every background noise documented to truly recapture the ambiance of the interview. My favorite part of this book was when he described his quick interview with his wife in order to compare her role as a social worker with another who is quite heartless (to put it kindly). Terkel truly has a knack for recreating a scene from the past and making the reader feel as if they were there observing it all.
The other reading for this week, Michael Frisch’s A Shared Authority: Essays on the Craft and Meaning of Oral and Public History, discusses the particulars of oral history and the increasing role of public history in an academic and technical way that is tough to have to read after the lighter and conversational Terkel reading. Frisch’s book however once again brings in this concept of shared authority that we first read at the beginning of the course. According to Frisch, however, this notion of shared authority in oral and public history has the capacity to “redefine and redistribute intellectual authority” to be “shared more broadly” and therefore historical research will no longer be an “instrument of power and hierarchy.” (p.xx) In other words, that shared authority is bringing history to the general masses and away from the hallowed halls of academia is a very intriguing idea. Another interesting point that Frisch brings up is in his first essay (where he examines a book by Terkel no less, irony anyone?) is that oral history is experiential history. (p.7) I really like this notion and completely agree with him. Oral history has a way of bringing history to life (cheesy I know), and gives a more cohesive view of the times by making it more personal. As we saw in Rosenzweig and Thelen, the general public is relates to and is more attracted to history when it is conceived of as a personal past, not a textbook academic version of events.
PWG Bridal Show- February 8, 2009
15 years ago
2 comments:
I like his term of experimental history also. It makes the bridge between amateur and academic history quite well. Like you, I hate being cheesy but oral historians, such as Studs have the unique ability of bringing history to life and making it relatable ordinary people. It's the exact thing that we said was needed in the first book we read for the class. eople must feel a connection to history in order to be engaged by it.
I too enjoyed the way Terkel was able to bridge between amateur and academic history. Like Nicole and Shelby, I hate being unprofessional when I do anything and especially when I was doing the Oral History project for this class. Studs had such a unique ability to just care on a conversation with the people he interviewed and it brought their stories alive making the stories relatable to anyone who heard them. I was amazed with his ability to do this in every one of his conversations. It made me appreciate the life of a truly great historian even more because this his the first book I have ever read by Terkel. He was a man who truly enjoyed what he did and this is evident when he talks about oral history. I have to agree with Shelby; Terkel, made oral history seem like a natural thing all people possessed and should be able to do. He made it seem so easy and I found out first hand it is not. I wish I knew how he was able to do it.
Post a Comment