📖 Course: Rotterdam Stories from the (post-)colonial diverse city
📚 Programme: History
✉️ Contact student →Back to the Collection
Based on her own experience interviewing a Rotterdammer with a Vietnamese background, student Eileen van der Burgh reflects on the value and challenges of conducting oral history projects, especially when exploring urban migration history.
INTRODUCTION
On January 11, I walked with my interviewee through the Euromast Park in Rotterdam to conduct an interview as part of the oral history project Rotterdam Stories from the (post-)colonial diverse city. I was nervous, but I was well prepared in terms of theory and I had given a lot of thought to the questions I wanted to ask. Conducting an oral history interview did turn out to be a bit more complicated in practice than the theoretical literature had suggested. In addition to asking the questions, you have to listen carefully to the interviewee's story. Moreover, as an oral historian you are also occupied with the technical side of recording sound and sometimes video material. The oral historian is thus characterized as a versatile researcher, but what does it actually mean to engage in oral history as a historian?
Oral history is the oldest form of historical research. The Greek historian Herodotus, who is also known as the father of historiography, used mainly oral sources. The current form of oral history, however, did not emerge until later. The need to record eyewitness accounts of World War II concentration camps was one of the first reasons for the emergence of oral history. In the 1960s, oral history was increasingly used to record the stories of marginalized groups. Today we know oral history as a sub-discipline within history, but also as a method for conducting historical research. Oral history is about the intention to record, analyze and preserve the interview as a source for historical research.
The interview is thus the most important element of oral history. For that reason, the interview I conducted in the context of the project "Rotterdam stories from a (post-)colonial diverse city" will serve as a basis for this paper. The structure of this paper is based on the three phases of the interview process. In section one the preparatory phase will be discussed. The focus here is on both theoretical preparation, and practical preparations such as finding and approaching an interviewee. Section two will cover the analysis of the interview itself. The substantive themes that emerged in the interview will be discussed first. Subsequently, extensive attention will be paid to the conduct of the interview and my reflection on this process. Section three will describe the final phase of the interview process. First, the context of the interview as a source will be discussed and then the source critique relative to my own conducted interview will follow. This paper concludes with a brief conclusion.
BEFORE THE INTERVIEW
As an oral historian, how do you prepare for an interview? It is important to do thorough preliminary research so that you are best prepared for the interview. When you ask the first question, much of the work as an oral historian is already behind you. In order to come up with relevant interview questions and to be able to address the answers to those questions, it is important to be well-informed about the interviewee’s background (Ritchie, 2014). In addition, it is important for the oral historian to have a certain level of theoretical knowledge about oral history as a subdiscipline and as a research method. In this section, we will first discuss some important theoretical backgrounds of the oral history interview. Then the practical preparations for the interview and my reflections on them will be outlined.
THEORETICAL BACKGROUND
Oral history can thus be defined as a subdiscipline, but also as a research method within the historical discipline and heritage practice. For the theoretical preparation of an interview, both definitions are important, but the emphasis is on oral history as a method. That is the purpose of the interview: to create a historical source through oral history. The intention to preserve and use the interview as a historical source is the essence of oral history as a methodology. This method was first systematically applied by the American historian and journalist Allan Nevins. During his research for the biography he was writing about President Grover Cleveland, he discovered that there were few personal written sources available. Nevins then came up with the idea of interviewing people closely involved with the president in order to fill the gap in source material (Shopes, 2002).
In addition to supplementing written sources, oral history is also a tool for uncovering unheard stories and unexplored aspects of history. For this reason, oral history plays an important role as a research method within migration history. In general, migration history focuses on migration policies and attitudes towards migrants in the past. However, the stories of the migrants themselves are often not documented. Oral history interviews are therefore an essential source to explore the hidden history of migration. Although economic pressures often influenced the decision to migrate, personal testimonies provide a picture of the complex factors and influences on the migration process. The most important thing that these testimonies can contribute to research on migration history is that the emotions and experiences of the migrants are made understandable (Thomson, 1999). Oral history is a tool to understand the living environment of migrants and through this, a greater historical awareness is created regarding the experiences and feelings of migrants in contemporary society.
Oral history thus plays an important role as a method within migration history. Furthermore, migration history is inextricably linked to urban history. Indeed, cities have played an important role in migration processes on a global scale (van de Laar & van der Schoor, 2018). An example of a city with an extensive migration history is Rotterdam. Within the migration history of Rotterdam both positive and negative narratives can be found towards migrants. In the first migration history work on Rotterdam a predominantly positive migration narrative was outlined. Bouman en Bouman’s De groei van de grote werkstad in 1952 described the contribution of migrants to the reconstruction of the city. From 1970 onward, however, this positive narrative gave way to a negative attitude towards migration because of the major cultural changes that were taking place in the city.
In addition to relevant theoretical knowledge about using oral history as a research method and the development of Rotterdam's migration history, it is also important to be aware of developments in heritage practice. How do cities with an extensive migration history deal with the associated superdiverse heritage? In the context of oral history projects, this concerns mental heritage, namely the stories and experiences of migrants, but also of other groups that are not represented within the archival world. Migration processes leave their traces in the past and present of the city. For this reason, museums and other heritage institutions must have a certain relevance for the urban community. This means that museums and heritage institutions should reorient themselves to preserve the mental heritage for the future (van de Laar, 2013). In this regard, oral history is an essential part of the conservator's "toolkit".
Practical preparations and reflections
The practical side of preparing an oral history project relates primarily to determining the topic of the project. To provide oral history projects with a clear structure, it may be helpful to focus on a historical problem or an issue with contemporary relevance (Shopes, 2015). For the project in the context of the course "Rotterdam stories from the (post-) colonial diverse city" the first criteria was that the interviewees had to be inhabitants of Rotterdam with a migration background. From this starting point, we worked as a group on a theme and research question to guide the project. It was jointly decided that entrepreneurship would be the overarching theme of this project. Personally, I was not very excited about this theme at first, but this changed once we had defined the theme quite broadly as a group. For the purposes of this project, entrepreneurship included not only stores and restaurants, but also cultural enterprises and non-profit initiatives.
After the overarching theme was established, work was done from within groups to create a questionnaire. I think this was the biggest challenge for me in this project, as I am used to working independently and had few good experiences with projects that required collaboration. For this reason, I may have held back a bit. As the process progressed, I realized that the creation of a general questionnaire was important to unify the project and at the same time create space for the different stories. I became increasingly aware of the purpose of the project, which was to create a historical resource for future researchers.
The next step in the preparation process was to find an interviewee. At first, I found it difficult that I had to approach someone because of his or her migration background. For that reason, I kept postponing the search for an interviewee. At a certain point, I was aimlessly scrolling through Facebook and I came across an old classmate from high school: Tessa Yến Nguyễn. She had recently founded the mãi mãi collective whose goal was to allow second generation Vietnamese in the Netherlands to discover or rediscover their culture. I decided to send her a message in which I took her collective as a starting point to start the interview. She quickly agreed to be interviewed. After she indicated that she would like to participate, I explained that the project would also be included in the City Archives and that consent forms had to be signed. I was nervous that this would discourage her, but she didn't think it was a problem.
After finding an interviewee, scheduling and preparing for the interview followed. I tried to arrange a space at the university, but this was not possible due to the lockdown. I then presented three options to my interviewee: visiting her home, inviting her to mine, or taking a walk. My interviewee chose a walk and suggested we meet in the Euromast Park. I e-mailed the consent forms to her in advance so that she could read them. I prepared for the interview by reading the social media pages of the mãi mãi collective extensively and by watching all the videos in which my interviewee appeared. Using that information, I then cut and organized the jointly prepared questionnaire into pieces based on my plan for the interview. My plan was to use the mãi mãi collective as the starting point of the interview and from there naturally move on to questions about my interviewee's background and her parents' migration story.
THE INTERVIEW
What are important qualities in an interviewer? How do you position the sound recording equipment? As an oral historian, you are engaged in several tasks at once while interviewing. The most important thing is to create a situation in which the interviewee feels comfortable. When conducting the interview, the oral historian must find a balance between obtaining historically significant information and establishing a trusting relationship with the interviewee (Yow, 1995). This section will first discuss the main themes of the interview in terms of content. Three significant themes will be analyzed through quotes from the interview transcript. Finally, the interview process will be discussed including the reflection on this process.
Main themes
Personal development and food culture.
The first theme that recurred repeatedly in the interview with Tessa was her personal development and her relationship with Vietnamese culture and, particularly, Vietnamese food culture. I initially asked about the origins of the mãi mãi collective, but its emergence was linked to her own rediscovery of her Vietnamese culture. She told me that she became increasingly aware of Vietnamese culture from the age of sixteen. At the same time, she felt guilty because she felt she had abandoned her culture. When she was twenty she went to Vietnam alone to visit family and there she felt really connected to her culture and she wanted others to experience this feeling as well. Together with a friend she came up with the idea to establish the mãi mãi collective to connect second generation Vietnamese with the culture. Within the mãi mãi collective, Tessa is head of the food department. Food plays an important role within the Vietnamese culture.
Interviewer: And you say that food is very important, but how did you acquire this love of food? Did you get it from home...?
Interviewee: Yes, I had also thought about it, of where does it actually come from. But that comes from home for sure. My parents really enjoyed cooking and we used to…, yes now just occasionally, have big birthday parties, weddings. And I just remember very well that the food was so central. And I just liked to see that and especially the differences between my culture and the parties and family and gatherings that were very different from, let’s say, friends. And I was always very proud of that. So even though I was not necessarily involved with my culture, I was very much involved with Vietnamese food.
This quote illustrates the role of food within Vietnamese culture. Food is more than just a necessity; it is a form of community-building. Tessa indicates that she has inherited this from home through the traditions of her own family. However, food is also part of a broader context of cultural practices, namely the ethnic or national food culture (Fischer, 2015). Through the maintenance of the national food culture, a kind of transnational connection is created between migrants and the community in the country of origin (Fischer, 2015). In the interview, Tessa mentioned that with the mãi mãi collective, she organized several projects that had Vietnamese food as a topic. This created connection within the group of second-generation Vietnamese, but at the same time they also felt more connected to their parents and the Vietnamese community as a whole. Thus, Vietnamese food culture is very important for the identity formation of second-generation Vietnamese.
Postmemory: the first generation's story of refuge.
The second theme that recurred during the interview was the first-generation refugee story. During the interview I talked extensively with Tessa about her parents’ story of refuge. After the Vietnam War her parents fled and were picked up by a Dutch ship off the Vietnamese coast in 1979. Her parents fled separately and only got to know each other in the Netherlands through a mutual friend. The Vietnamese boat refugees, as they were called at the time, had to flee involuntarily and had a hard journey behind them when they arrived in the Netherlands. When I asked Tessa what comes to mind when she thinks of the stories of the arrival of her parents in Rotterdam, she says that they found it very cold. Other than that, there was a lot of nostalgia for Vietnam. For this reason, many first-generation Vietnamese do not want to talk about the past, because leaving Vietnam was very traumatic. Tessa said that fortunately she was able to talk about the past with her father.
Interviewer: But your father does tell a lot?
Interviewee: Yes, my father tells a lot and if I ask something, he also just gives me the answers. But I also know other people whose parents are really damaged and don't want to talk about it, so it varies a lot. And I also notice… about those stories of refuge and the way life was in Vietnam. When I hear all of that I think, wow, what a heavy story. It just gives me goose bumps. And the older they get, the older my parents get, who is going to tell those stories? And I think that we, the second generation, can contribute something to that.
This quote suggests that, as part of the second generation, Tessa feels a responsibility to know and share the story of her parents (the first generation). The relationship of the second generation with the trauma of the first generation is also called postmemory. The second generation is often curious about the past and has an urge to learn about the traumatic stories of the first generation (Hirsch, 2014). This structure of the concept of postmemory can also be found in the story of Tessa and her parents. The traumatic experiences of the Vietnamese boat refugees have become a part of the second generation's life story. Sharing the stories of the first generation is also a personal goal for Tessa, but at the same time it is also a goal of the mãi mãi collective. Capturing the stories of the first generation feels like a necessity because the stories have never been told and are in danger of being lost as the first generation ages. The mãi mãi collective wants to start interviewing people from the first generation to capture the stories. It is also Tessa’s personal goal to one day create a documentary about her father's refugee story.
Superdiversity in Rotterdam
The third theme that was important during the interview was Tessa's daily life in Rotterdam as a super diverse city. This theme was actually only discussed extensively at the end of the interview when I asked Tessa if she wanted to tell anything else. She then indicated that she would like to talk more about how she feels about living in Rotterdam. After finishing high school Tessa moved from Hoogvliet, a district south of Rotterdam, to the center of Rotterdam. Her experience was that in Hoogvliet there was less diversity which made her feel like a minority. In Rotterdam she had the feeling that many more cultures came together. From her love of Vietnamese food, she is also very happy with the presence of a Chinatown in Rotterdam.
Interviewee: Yes, at the West-Kruiskade. I really like the fact that there is here such a street and that there are all these supermarkets there. Because I love food so much, I really like going to supermarkets a lot and especially toko's. Then I just walk around and then I see products that I recognize. And then I can literally walk around for an hour and not buy anything. And I think that's very nice about Rotterdam that that exists there. You just really have a lot of cultures in Rotterdam, but I also notice that uhm, I don't have positive experiences only. It's also true that I once went out and walked home on the Nieuwe Binnenweg and was called at with "ni hao" and so on. These are also things that happen in Rotterdam.
Rotterdam can be seen as a super-diverse city. There are many cultures present in the city and also within the different cultures and ethnic backgrounds there are again different identities. This superdiversity is often simplified to people with a migration background on the one hand and people without a migration background on the other hand (van Bochove & Burgers, 2018). The fact that superdiversity can be a difficult phenomenon in practice is also shown by the example that Tessa was once called at with "ni hao" when she was walking home in Rotterdam. This remark originates from generalization whereby people from Rotterdam with an Asian migration background are seen as someone with a Chinese migration background. However, the group of people with an Asian migration background in Rotterdam is diverse and does not only include people with a Chinese migration background.
During the interview, we also discussed the underrepresentation of the stories of Rotterdammers with a Vietnamese migration background. This is partly due to the fact that the first generation of Vietnamese does not like to talk about their traumatic refugee stories. But also in the social debate there was and is actually little talk about this group. This is because the Vietnamese refugees generally integrated very well in the Netherlands and also in Rotterdam. From the city government there is mainly attention for the problems that superdiversity would bring. When migrants are socio-economically successful, little attention is often paid to them in Rotterdam (van Bochove & Burgers, 2018).
Interview process and reflection
Interviewer: Then people can hear this back later. Nah I may still edit it a little bit so I can cut off this beginning that I'm still talking nonsense.
Interviewee: Yes, I had to do ten, eleven interviews myself and transcribe everything. That was really hell.
Interviewer: Yeah, I just have to do one now, but I don't know. I always get pretty nervous about it because it's just a conversation and I'm like okay take it easy. So I thought well... Basically why I chose you as the interviewee is because I saw that you were working on the, and correct me if I pronounce it wrong, mãi mãi collective.
This quote from the beginning of the interview shows that I found it difficult to start the interview. I have interviewed people before, including during my internship at the journalistic platform Vers Beton, so I was not nervous about the interview itself. An oral history interview does differ from a journalistic interview, I was certainly aware of that. The difficulty, however, came mainly from my personal relationship with the respondent. Tessa is a former classmate of mine and I was in her class for four years in high school. However, before the interview took place we had not spoken for over eight years. This made the interview also a kind of reunion. This made it more difficult for me to make the transition from the regular conversation to the interview. What was an advantage of already knowing my respondent was that there was already a trusting relationship prior to the interview. I noticed that she felt at ease relatively quickly after we had talked at length.
After the somewhat difficult start of the interview, the interview naturally turned into a dialogue between two equal parties. This is in line with the idea from the theory behind oral history that you should not approach the interviewee as an object of research, but as an interlocutor (Portelli, 2018). I believe that I succeeded in applying this idea in practice. I even explicitly stated at the beginning of the interview that I was going to approach the interview as a conversation. I think that this parity made for an interesting interview. In the days following the interview, I was continuously reflecting on the content of the conversation with Tessa. I realized that in a city like Rotterdam there are people walking around with feelings of homesickness and traumatic stories about how they ended up here. I think it's important that these stories are heard so that awareness is created within the urban community.
AFTER THE INTERVIEW
What should you pay attention to as an oral historian when analyzing an oral history source? How do you ensure that this source will be accessible to researchers and other interested parties in the future? After the interview has taken place, only the audio recording, the visual material and transcripts remain. In preserving oral history sources, it is important to ensure the integrity of the interview so that the listener can understand and interpret the source independently (Schneider, 2014). This section will first discuss the context of the interview as an oral history source. This is followed by some source criticism of my own conducted interview.
The interview as a source
It is not the audio recording, the video material or the transcript, but the interview itself that is the source created using oral history as a method. When the interview is over, the recordings and transcript remain, but some of the original context of the interview is still lost (Schneider, 2014). The document and audio recording are representations of the interview and can be read and interpreted as historical sources. The difference between archival sources and a transcript of an interview is that the latter source would not exist without the work of the oral historian (Portelli, 2018). Moreover, it is important to consider that an oral history resource is a product of the collaboration between the interviewer and the interviewee. The interviewee's conscious and voluntary participation in the interview ensures that the interview process is an important part of the oral historian's research (Bornat, 2004).
For these reasons, when analyzing an oral history source, it is important to pay attention to the relationship between the interviewer and the interviewee. This involves not only the personal relationship, but also how the oral historian relates to the interviewee. For example, the interviewer may be too involved or have too much admiration for the interviewee or the organization the interviewee is involved with. This may cause the oral historian to go along with the respondent's story and unknowingly omit critical questions (Yow, 1995). The oral historian must try to create a balance between gathering information for research purposes and constructing a narrative space for the interviewee's story (Portelli, 2018). Therefore, when analyzing an oral history source, it is always important to examine what the relationships were between the interviewer and the interviewee.
Digitization within the field of history makes it easier to share the results of oral history projects with a wide audience. This does not necessarily mean that oral history projects will be studied en masse. Yet, a need has arisen for sustainable and affordable ways to make oral history collections accessible to users. As the accessibility and ease of use of digital oral history collections increases, oral historians and other interested parties will begin to make more widespread use of interviews as historical sources (Boyd, 2014). The oral historian’s work is not complete until the source has also been brought to the attention of relevant agencies for future use.
Source Criticism
After conducting the interview, it is common to make a transcript of the audio recording or video recording. While doing this, as an oral historian, you are already unconsciously interpreting and analyzing the interview as a source. When I had just finished the interview I did not have a good idea of the interview as a whole. After I finished transcribing and read the transcript carefully a few times, I was able to start interpreting the interview as a source. The first step is to apply source criticism. I first started looking at my role as interviewer and how I related to my interviewee. The focused structure I had thought of in advance was partially reflected in the interview. In addition, other topics came up that I had not thought of in advance. This shows that there was a good balance between answering the interview questions and allowing the interviewee to tell her own story.
The oral history interview is a resource that always emerges from the idea of shared authority. Both the interviewer and the interviewee bring in knowledge during the interview and together go through a process of discovery (Yow, 1995). I involved my respondent in every step of the process. Beforehand, I told her about the project and emailed her the consent forms. During the interview, I gave her space to narrate using the interview questions as the basis for the story. In the final phase of this project, I sent her the transcript of the interview and kept her informed of the progress of the project. The presence of a trusting relationship between the interviewer and the respondent remains fundamental to the establishment of an interview as an oral history resource.
When studying an oral history source that is part of a larger oral history project, it is important to consider the goals of the overarching project. In fact, an oral history is judged by the significance of the goals of the project and the material collected (Ritchie, 2014). In addition, it is also necessary to examine how one interview relates to the other interviews in the collection. The theme of this oral history project is entrepreneurship from the experience of Rotterdammers with a migration background. The interview with my respondent fits within this theme because she started a cultural nonprofit enterprise, with the goal of connecting second generation Vietnamese with their culture. However, the themes covered in the interview were more diverse than just the context of entrepreneurship.
CONCLUSION
Oral history is a multifaceted concept. It is the oldest form of historical research. From the 1960s onward, oral history developed increasingly as a subdiscipline within the field of history. The most important part of the oral history concept is its functionality as a method for historical research and studies within heritage practice. The intention behind using oral history as a method is to create a source for future research. The interview is the source that is created when oral history is practiced. The oral historian is the initiator of the interview, but the interviewee also plays a role in the creation of the oral history source. An interview is always a product of the shared authority between interviewer and interviewee. This makes the role of an oral historian more complex because the relationships between researcher and interviewee are central.
It is clear that oral history as a method is a unique approach, but what does it actually mean to engage in oral history as a historian? The use of oral history as a method is often associated with the need to record unheard stories. Within migration history, oral history provides a better understanding of migrants' experiences and social environments. This is partly because marginalized groups, such as migrants, are often underrepresented in archives and other heritage institutions. The oral historian can thus contribute to the democratization of archives by giving a voice to marginalized groups through oral history projects. Especially in superdiverse cities like Rotterdam, urban historians, migration historians and heritage professionals can contribute to the diversity of the heritage of the urban community with oral history projects.
References
“1945-heden. Vietnam.” Vijf eeuwen migratie. Geraadpleegd op 28 januari 2021, https://vijfeeuwenmigratie.nl/periode/1945-heden/volledige-tekst#.
Bornat, J. (2004). “Oral history” in Qualitative research practice, red. C. Seale, G. Gobo, J. Gubrium & D. Silverman (SAGE Publications Ltd). https://www.doi.org/10.4135/9781848608191.
Boyd, D. (2014). ‘“I just want to click on it to listen”. Oral history archives, orality and usability’, in Douglas Boyd & Mary Larson (eds.), Oral history and digital humanities. Voice, access and engagement, New York.
Fischer, N. (2015). “Food,” in Memory Work: The Second Generation, London: Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi-org.eur.idm.oclc.org/10.1057/9781137557629_5.
Hirsch, M. (2014). “Postmemory,” Témoigner. Entre histoire et mémoire 118 (2014), 189-190, https://doi.org/10.4000/temoigner.1276.
Portelli, A. (2018). “Living Voices: The Oral History Interview as Dialogue and Experience,” Oral History Review 45, nr. 2: 240-242, https://doi.org/10.1093/ohr/ohy030.
Ritchie, D. A. (2014). “Conducting Interviews,” in Doing Oral History, red. Donald A. Ritchie. USA: Oxford University Press, 74-75, http://www.myilibrary.com?id=640846.
Ritchie, D. A. (2014). “Setting Up an Oral History Project,” in Doing Oral History, red. Donald A. Ritchie (USA: Oxford University Press, 2014), 35-36, http://www.myilibrary.com?id=640846.
Rooijackers, Wander. “Herodotus van Halikarnassos (ca. 484-424 v.Chr.) – Grieks historicus.” Historiek, accessed on 26 January 2021, https://historiek.net/herodotos-van-halikarnassos-ca-484-424-vchr/9578/…;
Schneider, W. (2014). ‘Oral history in the age of digital possibilities’, in Oral history and digital humanities. Voice, access and engagement, red. Douglas Boyd & Mary Larson (New York), 26.
Shopes, L. (2002). "Making Sense of Oral History," History Matters: The U.S. Survey Course on the Web, http://historymatters.gmu.edu/mse/oral/, gepubliceerd in februari 2002…;
Shopes, L. (2015). “Community oral history: where we have been, where we are going,” Oral History 43, nr. 1 (2015): 101, https://www.jstor.org/stable/24345925.
Thomson, A. (1999). “Moving Stories: Oral History and Migration Studies,” Oral History 27, nr. 1: 24-29, https://www.jstor.org/stable/40179591.
van Bochove, M., & Burgers, J. (2018). “Between Choice and Stigma: Identifications of Economically Successful Migrants,” in Coming to Terms with Superdiversity. The Case of Rotterdam, 82, http://hdl.handle.net/1765/112498.
van de Laar, P. (2013). “The contemporary city as backbone. Museum Rotterdam meets the challenge,” Journal of Museum Education 38:1, 39-41.
van de Laar, P., van der Schoor, A. (2018). “Rotterdam’s Superdiversity from a Historical Perspective (1600–1980),” in Coming to Terms with Superdiversity. The Case of Rotterdam, 21, http://hdl.handle.net/1765/112498.
Yow, V. (1995). “Ethics and Interpersonal Relationships in Oral History Research,” The Oral History Review 22, nr. 1 (1995): 65, http://www.jstor.org/stable/4495356.