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
我相信在进行口述史访谈时听到令人不安的内容的，不止我一个人。对受访者来说，回忆痛苦、困难或创伤性的记忆可能会让他们非常痛苦，我们应该始终保持敏感并对此作出回应。然而，在开始访谈之前，双方都无法预知它可能会如何影响我们，或者这些影响是否会持续很长时间。事实上，无论主题是什么，我们有时会对进行访谈所带来的影响感到惊讶或措手不及，因为它唤起了各种联想，既有消极的也有积极的。
Martha Norkunus写道，访谈者和受访者之间形成的情感关系会对双方产生持久的影响：
"因为无论是听者还是叙述者都不知道创伤记忆的轮廓在哪里，那些倾听这些故事的人完全暴露在受害者的痛苦和悲伤之中；叙述者和听者可能会陷入情感的互动之中。有些人在进行生活史访谈时意外遇到情感上令人痛苦的叙述，这些访谈表面上并不是关于种族灭绝或暴力的...这些故事可能会改变听者的自我认知。"
如果口述史学者受到访谈的负面影响，他们该怎么办？应该建立什么样的正式或非正式支持机制？是否可以仅仅向我们无助的伴侣、朋友或家人倾诉，还是我们应该试图忘记这些？不幸的是，口述史学者常常在获得良好支持和完全没有支持之间摇摆不定。
如果我们参与的项目主题令人不安，没有地方可以倾诉，而且我们发现这些事情真的严重影响了我们，那该怎么办？那时我们该向谁求助？这些都是我最近在参与一个特别令人压力重重和不安的口述史项目后问自己的问题，该项目影响了我的睡眠、情绪和身心健康，让我感到脆弱、动摇和缺乏支持。
这段经历让我明白，如果这种情况能发生在我这样一个经验丰富的口述史学者身上，那么它可能发生在任何人身上。因此，我通过口述史学会会员讨论小组联系了其他可能理解我正在经历的事情或能够给我建议的口述史学者。这是一个特殊的在线论坛，会员可以在这里提出问题、寻求建议或探讨有关口述史工作的想法。
来自其他口述史学者的回复为我提供了支持，他们讲述了自己的经历，这让我意识到并不是只有我一个人受到处理困难的口述史内容的负面影响。同时我也发现，访谈者的身心健康似乎在某种程度上被忽视了。我还看到，这对口述史访谈、研究人员和自由职业者都有更广泛的影响，特别是在处理困难、敏感或创伤性内容时。
我向口述史学会提出了我的担忧，他们邀请我在年度CPD活动中与其他区域网络成员分享我的经历。我们讨论了身心健康与口述史的主题，包括一系列可能给已经具有挑战性的主题增添额外压力的因素。我们谈到了这些因素如何影响受访者、访谈者，甚至访谈的结果。
为了回应我们会议中提出的问题，一个工作组已经成立，旨在研究解决这些问题的方法，并为从事口述史工作的人员制定身心健康指南。目标是为开展口述史项目的组织设定专业标准，特别是在处理困难或具有挑战性的材料时，如何保护员工、自由职业者、研究人员和志愿者的身心健康。这在个人身心健康可能因为紧迫的截止日期和高期望而受到损害的情况下可能特别有帮助。工作组将在未来几个月内在口述史学会网页上发布他们的研究结果和身心健康指南。
如果你在从事口述史活动时受到本博客中提到的任何问题的影响，或者如果你觉得你的身心健康受到影响，建议你与他人交谈或寻求正式或非正式的支持。如果你知道口述史项目或研究中有关身心健康的良好实践案例，我们也很希望听到你的分享。
延伸阅读：
《研究者身心健康》是历史学家、咨询师和职业健康专家之间的合作项目。它为历史研究者的脆弱性、心理健康和身心健康制定了指导方针。
D. Jones，《令人痛苦的历史和不愉快的访谈》，《口述史》，1998年，第26卷第2期，第49-56页
Emma L. Vickers在《口述史评论》2019年第46卷第1期发表的《口述访谈中意外的创伤》一文很有趣，并为访谈者提供了一些实用建议。
M. Klempner，《在创伤幸存者生命回顾访谈中的导航》，《口述史评论》，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编著的《记录之外的口述史：走向实践民族志》（Palgrave出版社，2013年），第81-96页。
信息来源：https://www.ohs.org.uk/general-interest/well-being-and-oral-history/
中国人民大口述史研修班（第五期）报名（点击下方海报链接）
中国人民大学口述史研修班（第五期）汇集口述史研究领域知名学者，深入探讨口述史的理论框架、方法论创新与实践应用。课程设置涵盖口述史的问题意识与操作方法、深度访谈技巧、集体记忆理论、情感转向研究以及AI赋能下的可能性路径等前沿议题。同时，通过农村减贫、乡村振兴、传统生态知识、非遗传承人与音乐家口述史等多领域实践案例，展示口述史在记录中国社会变迁、传承文化记忆方面的独特价值。本研修班旨在培养学员系统把握口述史理论框架、掌握访谈实操技能、提升口述史分析能力，推动口述史研究方向着更加自主创新的方向发展，为记录和理解当代中国的社会变迁提供新的研究视角与方法路径。
