Week Five, in which the intern starts contacting interviewees

     Ah the joy of contacting interviewees. "No sir, I am not trying to sell you anything." "No ma'am I am not one of those annoying pollsters." These are but a few phrases that every historian who wishes to conduct oral  interviews must face when starting to contact interviewees. I have learned that the pre-interview process is about as important as the actual interview process. That gaining the trust of the interviewee will determine the outcome of the interview and the overall project. Without it you could get the worst results possible;  mono-syllabic answers or worse yet no answers. When talking with interviewees I have learned that talking to them about the interview in terms of what the project is, what you are going to ask, who will hear it, and telling them a bit of what you already know about the interview topic from extensive research tends to "get them on your side" a bit better than a cold call and a set-up for an appointment to record.
      I want interviewees to feel comfortable with me during the interview. I become a Zelig quick, but it must be an honest "I am just like you" feeling because interviewees can smell dishonesty quickly. I also want them to understand that what they have to say is very, very, very important. Because it is. Despite the theories on memory and perspective what the interviewee says is paramount to any oral history; whether that be an interview, recorded memory, or a podcast. It is history from that individual's perspective. Recording it gives a viewpoint from that interviewee. It gives them a voice; agency in the historical process. So again what they say is important and I want to get that voice recorded. I want a piece of evidence to place in the archive that says "this is _____'s viewpoint" or "this is what _______thought". To parlay that to the interviewee lets them know what they have to say or their opinion is valued. That honesty is what I try to convey to the interviewee during the pre-interview. That to me is where either a good interview or bad one is made.
     Now about this thing called research. I can not stress to anyone how research into the topic helps make or break an interview. You start going on and on about what you know and the interviewee will look at you like a rube. You have to cultivate their response. You have to give them a little bit about what you read and get their response. You do it again but you listen to their response even more intensely. Soon you are having a conversation about the topic and you have gems to mine for your project. Going in with all guns ablaze with "Oh I read this article or this book and it says _______," will get you stares Smartypants. Going in with a soft touch makes you seem like you want to learn more about the topic from them, the interviewee. It reinforces that what they say is important to you the interviewer and in affect the project.
     Well I will step off of my soapbox for now. I have given my opinion on the advantages of a pre-interview process and now have to go off and practice what I preach. Until next week dear follower.