Abstract
Among the most obvious sources for contemporary history are the memories of people who have lived through past events. In the second half of the twentieth century “oral history�?-the interviewing of eyewitness participants in past events for the purposes of historical interpretation and reconstruction-has had a significant impact upon contemporary history as practised in many countries. Yet oral historians have been plagued by criticisms about “unreliable memories�?. In this article I outline the arguments for oral history and the basis of such criticisms, and then use examples from my own interviews with Australian war veterans to show that the so-called “unreliability�? of memory can be a resource rather than a problem for historical research.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Title of host publication | Historical Controversies and Historians |
| Publisher | Taylor & Francis |
| Pages | 23-34 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| ISBN (Electronic) | 0203980794, 9781135361150 |
| ISBN (Print) | 1857287401, 9781138144910 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 1 Jan 2005 |
Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver