You were wise to verify your slave narrative information with documentation. Alas, too often the information is not verified. Certainly the interviews in the Slave Narrative Collection present problems beyond the general issue of the reliability and accuracy of recollections of the past. Not only had more than seventy years elapsed between Emancipation and the time of the interviews, but most informants had experienced slavery only as children or adolescents. Those interviewed were extremely old and most were living in conditions of abject poverty during the Depression years of the 1930s. These factors often combined to make them look upon the past through rose-colored glasses; they fondly described events and situations that had not been, in reality, so positive as they recalled them. Moreover, it is apparent that some informants, mistaking the interviewer for a government representative who might somehow assist them in their economic plight, replied to questions with flattery and calculated exaggeration in an effort to curry the interviewer's favor. Exaggeration may often have been the consequence of the interview itself, which gave informants an opportunity to be the center of attention. It is uncertain, then, whether the former slaves reported their experience under slavery accurately and truthfully. Two other major questions surrounding the use of the slave narratives concern, first, whether the interviewers were able to elicit candid responses from their informants and, second, whether what the informants said was accurately recorded. It is axiomatic that the quality of an interview depends on the skill of the individual who obtains it. The quality of typewritten accounts contained in the Collection is grossly uneven, reflecting the varied talents of the Federal Writers. Most of the interviewers were amateurs, inexperienced and unsophisticated in the use of interview techniques. Most expressed little concern about the problems of distortion inherent in the interview process and were insensitive to the nuances of interview procedure. A questionnaire devised by Lomax suggesting possible categories of discussion was often partially or totally ignored, frequently resulting in rambling and trivial comments. When the questionnaire was too closely followed, the result was stylized and superficial responses, devoid of spontaneity. Moreover, it is problematic how accurately interviewers wrote down exactly what the informant had said, especially when, as in many narratives, there was great attention given to dialect. In addition, as Rawick's searches of state Writers' Project records indicate, some of the writers and editors themselves undertook to revise, alter, or censor the accounts.

The more things change, the more they stay the same. The same critique could be applied to today's interviewers on national news interviews such as Meet the Press, etal. ----- Original Message ----- From: <JohnR25442@aol.com> To: <MSWILKIN-L@rootsweb.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 28, 2006 2:57 PM Subject: [MSWILKIN] Re: MSWILKIN-D Digest V06 #76 > > You were wise to verify your slave narrative information with > documentation. > Alas, too often the information is not verified. > Certainly the interviews in the Slave Narrative Collection present > problems > beyond the general issue of the reliability and accuracy of recollections > of > the past. Not only had more than seventy years elapsed between > Emancipation > and the time of the interviews, but most informants had experienced > slavery > only as children or adolescents. Those interviewed were extremely old and > most > were living in conditions of abject poverty during the Depression years > of the > 1930s. These factors often combined to make them look upon the past > through > rose-colored glasses; they fondly described events and situations that had > not been, in reality, so positive as they recalled them. Moreover, it is > apparent that some informants, mistaking the interviewer for a government > representative who might somehow assist them in their economic plight, > replied to > questions with flattery and calculated exaggeration in an effort to curry > the > interviewer's favor. Exaggeration may often have been the consequence of > the > interview itself, which gave informants an opportunity to be the center of > attention. > It is uncertain, then, whether the former slaves reported their experience > under slavery accurately and truthfully. Two other major questions > surrounding > the use of the slave narratives concern, first, whether the interviewers > were > able to elicit candid responses from their informants and, second, whether > what the informants said was accurately recorded. > It is axiomatic that the quality of an interview depends on the skill of > the > individual who obtains it. The quality of typewritten accounts contained > in > the Collection is grossly uneven, reflecting the varied talents of the > Federal > Writers. Most of the interviewers were amateurs, inexperienced and > unsophisticated in the use of interview techniques. Most expressed little > concern > about the problems of distortion inherent in the interview process and > were > insensitive to the nuances of interview procedure. A questionnaire devised > by > Lomax suggesting possible categories of discussion was often partially or > totally ignored, frequently resulting in rambling and trivial comments. > When the > questionnaire was too closely followed, the result was stylized and > superficial > responses, devoid of spontaneity. Moreover, it is problematic how > accurately > interviewers wrote down exactly what the informant had said, especially > when, as in many narratives, there was great attention given to dialect. > In > addition, as Rawick's searches of state Writers' Project records indicate, > some of > the writers and editors themselves undertook to revise, alter, or censor > the > accounts. > > > ==== MSWILKIN Mailing List ==== > unsub: mswilkin-L-request@rootsweb.com > unsub: mswilkin-D-request@rootsweb.com > admin: MSWILKIN-admin@rootsweb.com > Webpage: http://www.rootsweb.com/~mswilkin > archives: http://searches2.rootsweb.com/cgi-bin/listsearch.pl > threaded archives: http://archiver.rootsweb.com/ > Tina Halls webpages: > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~thall/censuses.html > http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~thall/mississippi.htmL > > ============================== > Search the US Census Collection. Over 140 million records added in the > last 12 months. Largest online collection in the world. Learn more: > http://www.ancestry.com/s13965/rd.ashx > >