Back to Proposal for a Clinton Oral History Project [binder]

Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page

doc

Scholar

Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity

localId

286412772

label

Proposal for a Clinton Oral History Project [binder]

core

doc

dtoType

document

citationUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/286412772

pageCount

Source metadata

286412772

sourceUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/286412772

contentType

document

title

Proposal for a Clinton Oral History Project [binder]

citationUrl

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/286412772

collections

Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration)

Alison (Lissa) Muscatine's Press Office Files

iiifBase

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-fl/18558021/Batch0001/18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023.pdf

thumbnailUrl

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-fl/18558021/Batch0001/18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023.pdf

largeImageUrl

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-fl/18558021/Batch0001/18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023.pdf

imageCount

hasImages

yes

source

import

hasTranscription

Source extras

url

https://catalog.archives.gov/id/286412772

naId

286412772

levelOfDescription

fileUnit

otherTitles

18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023

Subject Files

recordType

description

ocrSource

nara-archive

Single page context

seq

pageIndex

type

document

url

https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-fl/18558021/Batch0001/18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023.pdf

mediaId

48c31107018f5736

ocrText

PROPOSAL FOR A CLINTON ORAL HISTORY PROJECT SERVATION OTOCOPY ORAL HISTORIES UNCLASSIFIED ADNENT DEFENSE INFORMATION *********** Audio-Visual Division MAITE Mission Provide broadcast quality audio and videotaped documentation of the activities of the President of the United States and the Vice President, First Lady, and others as directed by White House Military Office. Original audio and videotapes are cataloged and prepared for delivery to the National Archives. Supervisor of Audiovisual support, Mr. James VanKeuren UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED STATE DEFENSE AGENCY Audio-Visual Division Camera Section WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS HOWEY (WHTV) Mission: - Document by videotape all activities of the President of the United States Critical Processes: - Document all constitutional, statutory, official and ceremonial duties including White House events, "Intowners," trips within CONUS and OCONUS events - Document closed events as requested - Document the President's personal life as requested - Catalog, edit, and duplicate videotapes as requested - Prepare final tapes for submission to the National Archives UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED DEPENDE INFORMATION 52 SYSTEMS AGENCY DEPARTMENT Audio-Visual Division THITE HOUSE COMMUNICATION Master Control Section Mission: -Capture all audio/video inputs as directed in support of the President, Vice President, First Lady and others as directed. Provide editing support as directed. Critical Processes: - Provides direct audio and video support to the President, Vice President, First Family and White House staff throughout the White House complex and the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area and all others, as directed by the White House Military Office - Daily coordinates, monitors, records and catalogs POTUS, VPOTUS, First Lady and Senior White House staff audio and video tapes - Receive and record audio feeds from Presidential event sites worldwide - Provide broadcast and closed circuit TV coverage throughout the 18-Acre complex UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED DEFENSE DEPARTMENT ************ Audio-Visual Division SADE WHITE HOUSE TENNS Master Control Section Critical Processes (cont): - Provides satellite viewing of special events not shown in the D.C. area for the President, Vice President, First Family and Senior White House staff - Provides copies of audio and video tapes requested by the President, Vice President, First Family and White House staff - Prepare final tapes for submission to the National Archives UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED DRFENDE DIPORMATION SYSTEMS ADMICY ************ Audio-Visual Division STATE WHITE HOUSE ADDRES Event Productions Mission: - Provide podium, microphone, lighting, and teleprompter support to the President, Vice President, First Lady and others as directed Critical Processes: - Sets-up and operates audio distribution systems, sound reinforcement systems, audio tape recordings and teleprompter systems at various locations worldwide. - Operates various fixed installations on the White House complex (carriage call and White House Press Lobby.) - Install and operates temporary audio sound reinforcement systems in the White House complex (East Room, State Dining Room, Map Room, Oval Office, Roosevelt Room, Cabinet Room, Diplomatic Reception Room, etc.) - Records and catalogs all events and provides the original to the National Archives. UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED DEPENDER INFORMATION SYSTEMS MOBINCY Audio-Visual Division Event Productions Critical Processes: - Sets-up and operates audio distribution systems, sound reinforcement systems, audio tape recordings and teleprompter systems at various locations worldwide - Operates various fixed installations on the White House complex (carriage call and White House Press Lobby) - Install and operates temporary audio sound reinforcement systems in the White House complex (East Room, State Dining Room, Map Room, Oval Office, Roosevelt Room, Cabinet Room, Diplomatic Reception Room, etc.) - Installs lecterns and podiums (BTL, GTL, TL, Reading Surface & Stand Up Mics) for Official Events - Announces the President, Vice President, First Lady, Mrs. Gore and others as directed at official events UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED DEFEAUE INFORMATION SYSTEMS AGENCY ***** Audio-Visual Division MATE/ENDUSE COMMUNICATIONS AGENCY Photo Laboratory Mission: - Supports White House Photography Office photographic requirements to the President, Vice President, First Family and others as directed. - Provides photographic support to the White House Military Office, WHCA and other WHMO elements as directed Critical Processes: - Color and black & white film processing, automated printing, custom printing, image transmission, digital scanning and processing photographic paper - Rush workorders (less than 24-hour notice) take priority - Routine workorders due within 5 days - Provide all photographic supplies and equipment UNCLASSIFIED FY99 Audio-Visual Division OA Budget Report 1999 OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP TOTALS EVENT PROD. (AUDIO) (x7) 126 115 119 128 111 132 185 79 85 94 132 81 1387 POTUS-WH Complex 77 70 70 87 47 74 154 50 58 65 98 53 903 Audio Record 28 28 26 22 16 10 63 48 21 23 45 19 349 Teleprompter 1 1 2 6 1 2 1 2 5 0 2 3 26 Audio Feeds -Press 26 25 25 31 13 35 60 42 16 20 38 19 350 Public Address 22 16 17 28 17 27 30 27 16 22 13 12 247 VPOTUS-WH Complex 18 21 19 7 17 13 10 8 0 3 4 6 126 Audio Record 7 12 11 2 5 2 4 5 0 1 -1 2 52 Teleprompter 1 3 0 1 2 1 2 3 0 0 2 1 16 Audio Feeds -Press 6 3 3 2 4 1 4 5 0 1 1 2 32 Public Address 4 3 5 2 6 9 0 0 0 1 0 1 31 FLOTUS-WH Complex 15 11 11 13 12 15 3 6 11 9 14 8 128 Audio Record 5 3 10 4 3 5 0 4 4 3 5 2 48 Teleprompter 1 2 1 2 2 4 3 2 5 1 0 5 28 Audio Feeds -Press 4 3 0 4 3 0 0 4 0 2 4 0 24 Public Address 5 3 0 3 4 6 0 3 2 3 5 1 35 STAFF 16 13 19 21 35 30 18 15 16 17 16 14 230 WHPL/Other Press Briefings 15 13 19 17 31 26 18 14 13 14 15 13 208 WHMO Directed 1 0 0 4 4 4 0 1 3 3 1 1 22 WHTV OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP TOTALS White House Complex 29 20 20 22 19 16 37 22 16 16 9 9 235 White House-Non Audio (x7) 45 27 32 30 29 28 28 26 22 25 18 11 321 Intown Events/OTRs 14 3 17 9 11 12 24 11 8 10 7 7 133 CONUS/OCONUS Events/OTRs 80 61 44 32 55 92 41 74 116 125 66 61 847 Shot Tapes Used 117 83 144 93 111 130 131 83 91 124 76 75 1258 Tape Dubs 7 5 15 59 9 48 18 12 17 17 35 18 260 PHOTO LAB OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP TOTALS POTUS - Rolls B&W Processed 124 56 89 112 81 61 51 41 53 43 22 24 757 Rolls Color Processed 689 578 740 518 556 664 727 611 965 829 600 621 8098 Frames Printed 2712 3423 8382 4963 5125 4724 5681 3557 4360 4957 5391 3544 56819 VPOTUS - Rolls B&W Processed 98 72 73 81 66 95 46 50 86 48 41 57 813 Rolls Color Processed 284 246 171 387 295 301 264 321 327 342 182 325 3445 Page 1 FY99 Frames Printed 1659 1361 4239 599 1119 1870 1811 2115 3445 1408 2290 1571 23487 OTHER - Rolls B&W Processed 0 0 0 8 6 4 3 0 1 8 0 0 30 Rolls Color Processed 1 0 1 9 47 19 23 11 21 32 13 8 185 Frames Printed 35 11 48 59 110 271 143 221 148 205 134 221 1606 TOTAL ROLLS PROCESSED 1196 952 1074 1115 1051 1144 1114 1034 1453 1302 858 1035 13328 TOTAL FRAMES PRINTED 4406 4795 12669 5621 6354 6865 7635 5893 7953 6570 7815 5336 81912 TOTAL PRINTS 16189 14869 31342 14873 13570 15538 16661 12078 15961 13291 14226 12596 191194 TOTAL WORK ORDERS x9 577 554 1235 807 750 870 878 731 883 821 819 677 9602 MASTER CONTROL OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP TOTALS SOP Video Recordings 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 252 3024 SOP Audio Recordings (POTUS) 65 24 52 39 40 59 43 38 62 41 38 47 548 SOP Audio Recordings (VP) 52 10 26 13 15 36 6 3 27 41 13 21 263 SOP Audio Recordings (Staff) 16 16 27 20 13 22 31 8 23 18 18 17 229 Audio Courtesy Copies 93 39 61 49 58 71 70 54 57 46 49 68 715 Video Archive Recordings 56 30 70 37 41 66 60 42 47 29 29 33 540 Loaner Copies-Video (Dubs) 81 74 99 66 205 103 78 41 118 62 63 69 1059 Feed to WHPL 70 26 50 45 42 43 36 40 57 41 47 47 544 Receive Feed from Event 85 35 76 53 56 51 47 42 77 41 46 57 666 Radio Address Playback 5 3 4 4 4 3 4 7 4 to 4 4 50 FIXED MAINT. CALLS (x6) 69 58 78 34 44 48 13 50 47 28 37 29 535 TRAVEL (TOAD) OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP TOTALS POTUS Intowner (x1) 14 8 12 10 7 14 9 9 13 8 9 16 129 Conus (x2) 14 1 5 6 9 10 8 15 6 13 9 6 102 OCONUS (x3) 0 4 2 0 2 4 0 6 6 3 0 4 31 VPOTUS CONUS (x4) 20 12 5 20 5 11 19 19 25 16 12 16 180 OCONUS (x5) 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Event Prod. (Audio)+WHTV Non Audio=x7) x8 = NA for AVD Page 2 PROPOSAL FOR A CLINTON ORAL HISTORY PROJECT National RECORDS ONE STATILTRY ADMINISTRATION TOTALITY Archives Washington, DC 20408 1931 Date : October 27, 1999 Reply to Attn of : Nancy Kegan Smith, Director Presidential Materials Staff Subject : Proposal for a Clinton Oral History Program To : Janis Kearney, Special Assistant to the President and Records Manager Oral history programs on Presidents including those conducted on Presidents Truman, Kennedy, and Johnson have provided an extremely important supplement to the historial record files. Oral histories increasingly add the rich personal documentation and insights which are not as well documented in the record files. They "fill out" the President - his motivations on decisions, his feelings, and his character. They do this is a narrative format which is not normally available in the record collection. Oral history programs that are successful are conducted by a trained historian, with well prepared staff and interview questions. Early on, a decision needs to be made as to who is funding the program and where the program will be based - Little Rock or Washington, DC. I have attached the following information which I hope will be helfpul in deciding how to start an oral history program: 1. A Clinton Oral History Program Proposal. 2. Background documentation on the Johnson Library oral history program. These documents discuss some key considerations in establishing an oral history program. 3. A sample list of Johnson Library oral histories. 4. A copy of a book by Bill Moss, a former Kennedy Library employee, entitled Oral History Program Manual. (This book is no longer in print.) Please contact me, at (202) 501-5700, if I can be of any further assistance on this issue. Sincerely, Many Regan Amith NANCY KEGAN SMITH Director, Presidential Materials Staff National Archives and Records Administration WHITE HOUSE PHOTO OFFICE Holdings that will be transferred to the Clinton Presidential Library: Over 80,000 rolls of film that are stored in our Lab in Anacostia and at the National Archives All contact sheet books. Each book holds 100 contacts, we currently have 800 books Historical Clinton family photos that have been copied (negatives, contact sheets and prints) Release Books containing copies of White House photos that have been released by the White House Press offices and Media Affairs Office Jumbo Books containing copies of photos that have been displayed in the West Wing Staff Portrait Books containing portraits of staff members Prints in file including release prints, official portraits and photos in stock for media requests. Subject headings for Mrs. Clinton include: arts, children, foreign trips, groups, health care, senior citizens, speeches, sports, with the Gores, and with the President The White House Archive System, which is a database of over 25,500 records detailing the activities of President and Mrs. Clinton during the Clinton Administration. The database is a "finding aid" to the photos, using key word searching for names, dates, events, locations and subjects. It is a narrative description of an event, with some participants listed. Please contact me if you have any questions regarding these materials. Janet Philips Photo Librarian Room 475 X65034 200 NONE 470 JEWS 100 PRESIDENT HEAD SHOTS 471 SPORTS PERSONALITIES 105 PRESIDENT WITH 472 MOVIE. TV PERSONALITIES 115 PRESIDENT AT PODIUM 473 ARTISTS-DRAMATIC ACTORS.DANCERS.MUSICIANS.AUTHORS.ETC 120 PRESIDENT AT DESK 480 MEDIA REPRESENTATIVES 130 PRESIDENT IN OVAL OFFICE CHAIR 482 NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL 135 PRESIDENT ON TELEPHONE 483 SPECIAL INTEREST CROUPS 140 PRESIDENT FULL LENGTH SHOT 485 RELIGIOUS LEADERS 145 AIR FORCE ONE 486 EDUCATORS 146 MARINE ONE 487 CORPORATE LEADERS 148 PRESIDENT CASUAL ATTIRE 488 BUSINESS LEADERS 149 PRESIDENT FORMAL ATTIRE 489 VOLUNTEERS 150 POTUS & FLOTUS TOGETHER/ALONE 490 LABOR GROUPS 151 GROUP SHOTS 491 FARMERS 152 PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT 492 POLITICAL, FUND-RAISING, CAMPAIGNING DNC 153 PRESIDENT AND SENIOR STAFFER - ALONE 500 SITTING 200 1ST LADY HEAD SHOTS 501 READING 201 1ST LADY HEAD SHOTS 503 WAVING 202 1ST CADY WITH 504 DANCING 203 1ST LADY CASUAL ATTIRE 505 KISSING, EMBRACING 204 1ST LADY FORMAL ATTIRE 506 WITH)SOCKS 205 1ST LADY MRS. WITH 507: BUDDY 508 JOGGING 215 MRS. CLINTON SPEAKING 509 PLAYING SAXOPHONE 300 FAMILY ALL MEMBERS 510 GOLFING 320 CABINET CHELSEA=310 512 RADIO ADDRESS 330 SENIOR STAFF 515 SPORTS 332 MISCELLANEOUS STAFF 333 516 WRITING 398 MRS. GORE 531 WHITE HOUSE PERFORMANCES, EVENTS 399 VP GORE 532 KENNEDY CENTER EVENTS 400 FORMER PRESIDENTS 533 OTHER PERFORMANCES, SOCIAL EVENTS 401 MISCELLANEOUS COVT. OFICIALS 535 WHITE HOUSE RECEPTIONS 410 U.S. SENATORS 536 WHITE HOUSE DINNERS AND LUNCHEONS 415 U.S. REPRESENTATIVES 537 CHURCH AND RELIGIOUS FUNCTIONS 420 JUDGES, OTHER LEGAL 538 MUSEUM. GALLERY VISITS ETC. Distorical sites 425 AMBASSADORS 540 INAUGURAL EVENTS 430 FOREIGN LEADERS 600 CABINET MEETINGS 432 OTHER FOREIGN OFFICIALS 610 PRESS CONFERENCES 435 ROYALTY 611 STATE OF THE UNION MESSAGE 440 GOVERNORS 612 MOTORCADE 450 MAYORS 613 DEPARTURES AND ARRIVALS, SOUTH LAWN 455 MILITARY (U.S.) 635 ANNOUNCEMENTS 456 MILITARY VETERANS (U.S.) 645 SWEARING-IN CEREMONIES 457 POLICE AND LAW ENFORCEMENT 650 PRESENTATION OF DIPLOMATIC CREDENTIALS 459 STUDENTS 660 BILL AND OTHER SIGNINGS 460 CHILDREN 670 STATE VISIT FROM FOREIGN COUNTRY TO THE U.S. 461 YOUNG ADULTS 675 AWARDS AND PRESENTATIONS 74 462 SENIOR CITIZENS 690 FOREIGN TRIPS 680 ELONOMY/BUDULT 463 ETHNIC GROUPS 692 DOMESTIC TRIPS 464 HANDICAPPED, ILL 694 CAMP DAVID 465 AMERICAN INDIANS 696 EDUCATION 698 Health Care 467 BLACK 697 ENVIRONMENT 468 HISPANICS 700 AGRICULTURE=MIKE ESPY 717 DAN GLICKMAN 469 WOMENS GROUPS 701 JUSTICE- dinet Zeno 702 COMMERCE=RONALD H. BROWN 717 AGRICULTURE= Dan Glickman 701 DEFENSE-LES ASPIN JR. 720 COMMERCE= Bill Daley 704 EDUCATION-RICHARD W. RILEY /715 Perry 719 DEFENSE= William 8. Cohen 705 ENERGY-HAZEL R. O'LEARY 704 EDUCATION= Richard W. Riley 706 HHS-DONNA E. SHALALA 712 ENERGY= Federico Pena 707 HUD=HENRY CISNEROS 706 HHS= Donna E. Shalala 708 INTERIOR-BRUCE BABBITT 721 HUD= Andrew Cuomo 709 LABOR-ROBERT B. REICH 708 INTERIOR= Bruce Babbitt 710 STATE-WARREN. M. CHRISTOPHER 701 JUSTICE= Janet Reno 711 TREASURY-LLOYD M. BENTSEN BOB RUBIN 716 722 LABOR= Alexis Herman 712 TRANSPORTATION-FEDERICO F. PENA 803 STATE= Madeleine Albright 713 VETERANS AFFAIRS-JESSE BROWN 723 TRANSPORTATION= Rodney Slater 714 DRUG CONTROL POLICY L.EE BROWN 716 TREASURY= Robert E. Rubin 807 EPA-CAROL M. BROWNER 713 VETERANS AFFAIRS= Jesse Brown 800 CIA-R. JAMES WOOLSEY 9 801 NSC ADVISER- W. ANTHONY LAKE OMB=LEON E. PANETTA Alice Rivlin 801 CIA DIRECTOR= Tony Lake 802 803 U.N. AMB. -MADELEINE ALBRIGHT 810 FRANKLIN RAINES COUNSEL OF ECONOMIC ADVISERS CHAIR= Janet Yellen 804 CHIEF OF STAFF=THOMAS F. "MACK" MCLARTY NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL= Gene Sperling 805 U.S. TRADE REP.=MICKEY KANTOR 811 NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL ADVISER= Sandy Berger 806 COUNCIL OF ECON.ADVIS.-LAURA D'ANDREA TYSON New 807 EPA ADMINISTRATOR= Carol M. Browner 910 BUILDINGS, CROUNDS. INTERIORS, ETC. 810 OMB DIRECTOR= Franklin D. Raines 920 JUMBOS 718 NAT'L DRUG CONTROL POLICY= Gen. Barry R. McCaffrey 930 RELEASE BOOK 815 SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATOR= Aida Alvarez 813 UNITED NATIONS AMBASSADOR= Bill Richardson bee 940 STAFF PORTRAITS 814 U.S. TRADE REPRESENTATIVE= Charlene Barshefsky 950 CURATOR'S FILE (F#) 914 GLUSGE TENCT. C19 960 website 812 Chief of Staff= Erskine Bowles y.7 Togo 812 ERSKINE BOWLES 818. Larry Summers Treas. 7/2/99 519 AND Richined Helbiocke on VITAL AND VOICES - documents I to 10 Page 1 of 3 Search Results Documents 1 to 10 of 12 matching the query " VITAL AND VOICES ". Next 2 documents New query 1. BOSPHORUS UNIVERSITY - 024849 Abstract: 19-Nov-1999 : ISTANBUL, TURKEY : HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ATTENDS A VITAL VOICES: CENTRAL ASIA AND TURKEY CONFERENCE IN ALBERT LONG HALL, BOSPHORUS UNIVERSITY. SHE GREETS NGO AND CHAMBER OF COMMERCE GROUPS AND OTHER GREETERS. SHE IS PRESENTED WITH GIFTS. INCLUDES DRIVERS. http://plserver/events/024849.htm size 2,812 bytes - 12/13/99 8:13:53 PM GMT Summary Full 2. WOMEN AND DEMOCRACY CONFERENCE CLOSING SESSION -- 024432 Abstract: 10-Oct-1999 : REYKJAVIK, ICLEAND : HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ADDRESSES THE CLOSING SESSION OF THE WOMEN AND DEMOCRACY CONFERENCE AT THE REYKJAVIK CITY THEATRE. SHE GREETS THE VITAL VOICES WORKSHOP CHAIRS. MRS. CLINTON ALSO ATTENDS A MEET AND GREET. PRIME MINISTER DAVID ODDSSON IS PRESENT. MRS. CLINTON TALKS WITH KITTY HIGGINS AND OTHERS. MELANNE VERVEER IS PRESENT. http://plserver/events/024432.htm size 3,047 bytes - 10/22/99 3:42:33 PM GMT Summary Full 3. VITAL VOICES MEETING -- 023362 Abstract: 18-Jun-1999 : PALERMO, ITALY : HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ATTENDS A VITAL VOICES MEETING AT THE VILLA NISCEMI. SHE GREETS MEETING PARTICIPANTS. THE FIRST LADY IS PRESENTED WITH A BELT AND A PITCHER. http://plserver/events/023362.htm size 2,174 bytes - 7/15/99 3:31:27 PM GMT Summary Full ./query.idq?CiBookMark=N-14ece0-23-b&CiBookmarkSkipCount=-10&CMaxRecordsInResu2240 VITAL AND VOICES - documents I to 10 Page 2 of 3 4. VITAL VOICES FOLLOW-UP CONFERENCE 022993 Abstract: 13-May-1999 : BELFAST, NORTHERN IRELAND HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ARRIVES THE SPIRES. SHE IS MET BY LORD MAYOR DAVID ALDERDICE: REV. DEREK POTS, CLERK PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH OF IRELAND; AND OTHERS. MRS. CLINTON ATTENDS TWO MEET AND GREET RECEPTIONS. SHE ADDRESSES THE VITAL VOICES WOMEN IN DEMOCRACY FOLLOW-UP CONFERENCE. http://piserver/events/022993.htm size 2,618 bytes - 7/1/99 10:49:06 AM GMT Summary Full 5. VITAL VOICES 022114 Abstract: 15-Feb-1999 : MERIDA, MEXICO : HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON MEETS WITH VITAL VOICES GROUP. http://plserver/events/022114.htm size 1,482 bytes - 7/1/99 10:44:46 AM GMT 8 Summary Full 6. VITAL VOICES MEET AND GREET - 021467 Abstract: 21-Nov-1998 : PORT-AU-PRINCE, HAITI : HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON MEETS WITH MRS. RENE PREVAL AND VITAL VOICES PARTICIPANTS AT THE U.S. AMBASSADOR'S RESIDENCE. http://piserver/events/021467.htm size 1,501 bytes - 7/1/99 10:41:25 AM GMT Summary Full 7. ADDRESS TO CONGRESS 021445 Abstract: 19-Nov-1998 : GUATEMALA CITY, GUATEMALA HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ARRIVES THE CONGRESS BUILDING. SHE IS MET BY DR. RAFAEL BARRIOS, PRESIDENT OF CONGRESS; ANABELLE DE LEON, FIRST VICE PRESIDENT: AND MARIO FLORES, FIRST SECRETARY. MRS. CLINTON ADDRESSES THE CONGRESS IN CONGRESSIONAL HALL. THE FIRST LADY IS PRESENTED WITH A MEDAL. AMBASSADOR DONALD PLANTY IS PRESENT. MRS. CLINTON GREETS VITAL VOICES PARTICIPANTS IN THE SALON DE PUEBLO. http://plserver/events/021445.htm size 2,999 bytes 7/1/99 10:41:19 AM GMT Summary Full ./query.idq?CIBookMark=N-14ece0-23-b&CiBookmarkSkipCount=-10&CiMaxRecordsInResu2/24/00. VITAL AND VOICES - documents I to 10 Page 3 of 3 8. DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SPEECH - 021431 Abstract: 17-Nov-1998 : SAN SALVADOR, EL SALVADOR HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON AND MRS. ARMANDO CALDERON SOL ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AT AN EVENT AT THE HOTEL PRINCESS. MRS. CLINTON ALSO GREETS VITAL VOICES PARTICIPANTS. http://piserver/events/021431.htm size 2,097 bytes - - 7/1/99 10:41:15 AM GMT Summary Full 9. WOMEN IN THE 21ST CENTURY -- 021049 Abstract: 11-Oct-1998 : SOFIA, BULGARIA : HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ARRIVES THE IVAN VAZOV NATIONAL THEATRE. SHE GREETS DR. RUMYANA KOLAROVA, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, THE VALUE FOUNDATION AND DR. VASSIL STEFANOV, THEATRE DIRECTOR. SHE GREETS PRESIDENT AND MRS. PETAR STOYANOV (ANTONINA). MRS. CLINTON ADDRESSES THE WOMEN IN THE 21ST CENTURY CONFERENCE. SHE GREETS BULGARIAN VITAL VOICES DELEGATION. http://piserver/events/021049.htm size 3,046 bytes - 7/1/99 10:39:29 AM GMT Summary Full 10. VITAL VOICES CONFERENCE - 020949 Abstract: 02-Oct-1998 : MONTEVIDEO, URUGUAY : HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ADDRESSES THE VITAL VOICES CONFERENCE AT THE HOTEL VICTORIA PLAZA. DAIS PARTICIPANTS INCLUDE: THERESA LOAR AND ENRIQUE IGLESIAS, PRESIDENT, INTER-AMERICAN BANK; AND MRS. JULIO SANGUINETTI. THE FIRST LADY TALKS WITH AIDA ALVAREZ AND AMB. CHRISTOPHER ASHBY. http://plserver/events/020949.htm size 2,290 bytes - 7/1/99 10:39:04 AM GMT Summary Full Next 2 documents New query Page 1 of 2 ©1997 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved. Microsoft Running Legal Notices. Explorer ./query.idq?CiBookMark=N-14ece0-23-b&CiBookmarkSkipCount=-10&CiMaxRecordsInResu2/240. VETERANS HOSPITAL - -- 008142 Page I of 1 Event Number: 008142 VETERANS HOSPITAL Start Date: Thursday, 16 February 1995 End Date: Thursday, 16 February 1995 Event Location: WASHINGTON, D.C. Photographer: SHARON FARMER Event Codes: 205 456 462 713 698 Contact Description: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ARRIVES THE VETERANS HOSPITAL ON IRVING STREET. SHE IS MET BY SEC. JESSE BROWN, DR. KEN KIZER, UNDER SECRETARY OF HEALTH, DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS; AND PEDRO GARCIA, DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE WASHINGTON, D.C. VA HOSPITAL. MRS. CLINTON VISITS WORLD WAR II VETERANS IN THE NURSING HOME WARD. SHE PARTICIPATES IN DISCUSSIONS WITH VETERANS. SHE ALSO MEETS PRIVATELY WITH PROFESSIONALS REGARDING THE PERSIAN GULF WAR SYNDROME. MRS. CLINTON TOURS THE FACILITY LOOKING AT VETERANS' ROLLS AND A COMPUTER DEMONSTRATION. NICE SHOTS OF HER GREETING VETERANS INDIVIDUALLY. INCLUDES WIDE LUX VIEWS. Images Contact Sheets: P24662 P24663 P24664 P24665 P24666 P24677 http://plserver/events/008142.htm 2/25/00 HARRIET TUBMAN HOUSE - -- 020285 Page 1 of 1 Event Number: 020285 HARRIET TUBMAN HOUSE Start Date: Wednesday, 15 July 1998 End Date: Wednesday, 15 July 1998 Event Location: AUBURN, NEW YORK Photographer: SHARON FARMER Event Codes: 205 215 450 460 485 692 Contact Description: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ARRIVES THE HARRIET TUBMAN HOUSE DURING HER WHITE HOUSE MILLENNIUM COUNCIL SAVE AMERICA'S TREASURES TOUR. THE FIRST LADY GREETS REV. PAUL CARTER, RESIDENT MANAGER. MRS. CLINTON VISITS THE TUBMAN HOME AND DELIVERS REMARKS AT THE HARRIET TUBMAN HOME FOR THE AGED AND INFIRM. THE THOMPSON MEMORIAL YOUTH GROUP PERFORMS A SHORT PLAY. MRS. CLINTON GREETS EVENT GUESTS. CHILDREN PRESENT HER WITH A "FREEDOM RECREATIONAL SERVICES" T-SHIRT. Images Contact Sheets: P65158 P65162 P65163 P65167 P65168 http://plserver/events/020285.htm 2/24/00 Page 1 of I ERIC is TRI ASURE THE HARRIET TUBMAN HOME AUBURN, NY http://plserver2/Images/P65167/P65167-03a.jpg 2/24/00 MARS MILLENNIUM PROJECT -- 021871 Page I of 1 Event Number: 021871 MARS MILLENNIUM PROJECT Start Date: Thursday, 14 January 1999 End Date: Thursday, 14 January 1999 Event Location: WASHINGTON, D.C. Photographer: RALPH ALSWANG Event Codes: 205 401 459 460 696 704 920 Contact Description: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ARRIVES THE SMITHSONIAN AIR AND SPACE MUSEUM. SHE GREETS MICHAEL HEYMAN, SECRETARY OF THE SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTE: SEC. RICHARD RILEY: DANIEL GOLDIN, NASA ADMINISTRATOR: WILLIAM IVEY, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL ENDOWMENT FOR THE ARTS: DR. TED MITCHELL, VP FOR EDUCATION AND STRATEGIC INITIATIVES, J. PAUL GETTY TRUST: AND DONNA SHIRLEY, FORMER MANAGER OF THE MARS EXPLORATION PROGRAM AT THE JET PROPULSION LAB, PASADENA, CALIFORNIA. MRS. CLINTON TOURS THE LIFE ON MARS EXHIBIT. SHE LOOKS AT THE MARS PATHFINDER AND MARS ROVER REPLICAS. MRS. CLINTON PARTICIPATES IN A MARS MILLENNIUM PROJECT DISCUSSION WITH STUDENTS IN THE MARS-SCAPE ROOM. THE STUDENTS PRESENT MRS. CLINTON WITH THEIR GROUP ART BOOK ON MARS IDEAS (JUMBO P69398-13, JUMBO P69401-25). MRS. CLINTON ADDRESSES THE MARS MILLENNIUM PROJECT LAUNCH IN THE EINSTEIN PLANETARIUM. Images Contact Sheets: P69398 P69399 P69400 P69401 P69402 P69404 http://plserver/events/021871.htm 2/24/00 2/24/00 I 10 1 Page - MARY'S CENTER FOR MATERNAL AND CHILD CARE -- 008860 Page 1 of 1 Event Number: 008860 MARY'S CENTER FOR MATERNAL AND CHILD CARE Start Date: Friday, 21 April 1995 End Date: Friday, 21 April 1995 Event Location: WASHINGTON, D.C. Photographer: BARBARA KINNEY Event Codes: 205 460 698 706 415 Contact Description: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON GREETS DR. HENRY FOSTER IN THE HALLWAY OF THE GROUND FLOOR RESIDENCE, MELANNE VERVEER IS PRESENT. THEY VISIT MARY'S CENTER FOR MATERNAL AND CHILD CARE. THE FIRST LADY TOURS THE CENTER WITH DR. FOSTER, SEC. DONNA SHALALA, REP.. ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON AND MARIA GOMEZ, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER. THEY VISIT THE WAITING AREA, IMMUNIZATION ROOM AND EXAMINING ROOM. THE PRINCIPALS PARTICIPATE IN A GROUP DISCUSSION WITH PARENTS AND CHILDREN. NICE SHOTS OF THE FIRST LADY WITH CHILDREN. Images Contact Sheets: P26955 P26956 P26957 P26958 P26959 P26960 P26961 P26962 P27016 http://plserver/events/008860.htm 2/24/00 MAMMOGRAM EVENT -- -- 009022 Page I of 1 Event Number: 009022 MAMMOGRAM EVENT Start Date: Thursday, 04 May 1995 End Date: Thursday, 04 May 1995 Event Location: WASHINGTON, D.C. Photographer: RALPH ALSWANG Event Codes: 205 215 698 Contact Description: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON VISITS THE MOBILE MAMMOGRAM VAN PARKED AT THE WASHINGTON HILTON HOTEL. THE FIRST LADY MEETS WITH SANDEE KOLODNY KATZ, R.N., MOBILE TREATMENT UNIT DIRECTOR; SHARON DEVORE AND KATHY CHANDLER, RADIOGRAPHERS: AND ANNETTE BERTONE, R.N. MRS. CLINTON ALSO ADDRESSES THE WHITE HOUSE CONFERENCE ON AGING ABOUT BREAST CANCER. SHE PARTICIPATES IN A DISCUSSION WITH DAIS PARTICIPANTS AND GREETS GUESTS. FERNANDO TORRES-GIL, ASSISTANT SECRETARY, ADMINISTRATION ON AGING, HHS. ALSO SHOWS MRS. CLINTON TALKING ALONE WITH BRIAN MCPARTLIN. Contact Sheets: P27464 P27465 P27466 P27467 P27468 P27469 P27470 P27471 P27472 http://plserver/events/009022.htm 2/24/00 PRESERVATION MEETING -- 015563 Page I of 1 Event Number: 015563 PRESERVATION MEETING Start Date: Monday, 03 March 1997 End Date: Monday, 03 March 1997 Event Location: STATE FLOOR Photographer: SHARON FARMER Event Codes: 205 332 401 151 910 Contact Description: HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON ATTENDS A WHITE HOUSE PRESERVATION MEETING IN THE STATE DINING ROOM. PARTICIPANTS INCLUDE: ROGER KENNEDY, KAKI HOCKERMSITH, GARY WALTERS, J. CARTER BROWN, LESLIE GREENE BOWMAN, WENDY COOPER, JONATHAN FAIRBANKS, NANCY M. FOLGER, MARK HAMPTON, JANICE M. JOHNSON, WILLIAM KLOSS, RICHARD NYLANDER, JOHN L. RICHARDSON, J. THOMAS SAVAGE, JR., JOHN WILMERDING, REX SCOUTEN, EARL A. POWELL, III, BETTY C. MONKMAN, BILL ALLMAN; AND LYDIA TEDERICK AND DONNA HAYASHI WHO HOLD UP A CHAIR COVERED IN RED FABRIC. BILL ALLMAN HOLDS UP A PIECE OF RED FABRIC. PARTICIPANTS POSE FOR A GROUP PHOTO IN THE BLUE ROOM. Images Contact Sheets: P50685 P50686 P50687 http://plserver/events/015563.htm 2/24/00 INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON WOMEN - -- 015603 Page 1 of 1 Event Number: 015603 INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON WOMEN Start Date: Saturday, 08 March 1997 End Date: Saturday, 08 March 1997 Event Location: OVAL OFFICE Photographer: BOB MCNEELY Event Codes: 105 151 205 330 469 675 706 Contact Description: PRESIDENT CLINTON AND HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON PARTICIPATE IN THE PRESENTATION OF THE INTERAGENCY COUNCIL ON WOMEN REPORT. SEC. DONNA SHALALA AND BETSY MYERS ARE PRESENT. MRS. CLINTON TALKS WITH MYERS, SEC. SHALALA, NICOLE RABNER AND KATY BUTTON IN THE OUTER OVAL OFFICE. Contact Sheets: P50833 P50857 P50866 P50869 P50871 http://plserver/events/015603.htm 2/24/00 Clinton Presidential Records Digital Records Marker This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff. This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately scan such dividers. The title from the original document is indicated below. PROPOSAL Divider Title: CLINTON ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM PROPOSAL 1. OBJECTIVE To supplement the textual collections that will be at the Clinton Presidential Library, an oral history program will preserve the significant first hand recollections, experiences, and personal insights about America's 42nd President. Through oral history, memories that will otherwise perish with time can perpetuate a greater understanding of the life and Presidency of Bill Clinton. Oral histories can document personal sources, the thinking behind major decisions and policies, and can provide information not otherwise available in Presidential records. Oral histories are, in most cases, the only documentary source that provides information in a narrative format, rather than individual documents located in many different files. II. SCOPE The oral history program should include extensive interviews on the Presidency of Bill Clinton, as well as biographical interviews spanning his entire life and career. The program should also include interviews on the First Lady. Comprehensive interviews should document the major events and policy issues of the Clinton Administration. The decision-making process and the implementation of policy should be systematically documented. Interviews should also cover his early career as a Law Professor, Attorney General and Governor. His formative years, including his youth, education, and political campaigns should also be documented. III. APPLICATIONS While the oral history program will be an invaluable resource for scholars, students, and journalists who do research at the Clinton Library, the interviews will have many additional uses. The recordings can be incorporated into the Library's exhibitions, used in educational productions, and excerpted in documentary files. Interviewees can use the transcripts as the basis 2 for writing published memoirs. To maximize these applications the audio recordings should be broadcast quality if possible. Videotaping should also be done on a selective basis. IV. PROGRAM STRUCTURE AND FUNDING The staff of an oral history program normally consists of a director, interviewers, researchers, and transcribers. Since private or non-federal money would need to provide the funding for this program, possibilities for funding could include the Clinton Foundation, the University of Arkansas or other academic institutions. The federal government could provide some administrative support such as space in the Clinton Library to house the program, computers, and other equipment. Although qualified contractors can perform interviewing and processing, an administrative component will either have to be created or carried out by one or more of the participating institutions. There should also be an advisory board to provide guidance and recommendations. V. ADVISORY BOARD An advisory board can provide valuable guidance and direction for the program while monitoring its progress. The advisory board can suggest topics and prospective interviewees. Board members can also facilitate participation in the project by encouraging their colleagues to participate. The board should consist of former advisors to President Clinton, scholars, the Clinton family and representatives of the Library, Center, University. VI. INTERVIEWERS Professional historians or archivists who are experienced in oral history should conduct the interviews. Suggested places to go for interviewers are the history or political science department of colleges or universities in Arkansas including the University of Arkansas at Little Rock and 3 Fayetteville. Additionally, the Miller Center at the University of Virginia has conducted oral history projects for the Carter and Bush Presidential Libraries. Interviewers can be salaried for a period of time or retained as contractors for an established fee for each interview session conducted. If the latter method is utilized, then preparation time should be factored into the fee. Interviewers should be knowledgeable of the historical period of Bill Clinton's life and of the major topics to be covered. It is imperative that interviewers respect the confidential nature of the project and that they agree not to divulge the interview material or use it in their own publications until it is generally available. VII. PREPARATION In order to fill the gaps in the written record, the interviews should draw from as much original source material as possible. Pre-interview research will define questions and topics that should be explored and identify prospective interviewees on various subject areas. Interviewers should also have access to Nexus to facilitate research in published sources. Preliminary interviews will assist in defining the elements of interview topics and provide a structure for the narrative. VIII. INTERVIEW LIST The list of prospective interviewees should reflect the program's scope and priorities. The best sources will be the President himself, those who had the most contact with him, and those who had responsibilities for his major programs. White House staff members, Cabinet officers and senior departmental officials, members of Congress, political associates and people more senior in age should be high priorities. Family members, colleagues, and personal friends can provide important biographical facts. 4 IX. INTERVIEW FORMAT The interviews should be chronologically and topically organized sessions in which the narrator offers thoughtful, expansive reflections. To encourage candor, interviewees should have the opportunity to review and edit the transcripts and to stipulate the terms of access. The interviewee should be advised of these rights prior to the interview. Multiple interview sessions, each lasting about an hour, will allow each major topic to be covered thoroughly. If the interviewees are provided with topical outlines, chronologies, and copies of relevant memoranda before each session, their recollections should be improved. Although some programs utilize panels of interviewers in public forums on a particular subject, the traditional one-on-one interview format seems to allow for greater candor and introspection. X. PROCESSING THE INTERVIEWS The Oral History Project staff should prepare an accurate and readable transcript of the interview. To produce this transcript, the staff should prepare a verbatim transcript and edit the transcript. Editing should be limited to the addition of appropriate punctuation, elimination of false starts and interruptions, and full identification of individuals and geographic place names. In rare instances, more substantial editing may be necessary because of special circumstances under which the interview was conducted. A clean copy of the transcript should be returned to the donor for editing, correction of errors, and approval. Donors should be encouraged to add relevant information to the transcript. To avoid prolonged delays, the interviewee should be given a reasonable deadline as to when the edits are expected to be completed. It has been our experience that at times this process can take years when deadlines are not required. When approved, the Library or interviewer should prepare a final clean copy for research use. The library traditionally 5 gives the interviewee one copy of the final transcript and retains at least one security copy. A copy of the tape may be given to the interviewee if requested. XI. DEED OF GIFT AND OTHER LEGAL AGREEMENTS The legal custody of oral history interviews passes to the federal government via a deed of gift agreement. A sample deed of gift is attached and follows a model used in the presidential libraries. The deed donates both the oral history and transcript. Often minor modifications are made to suit the donor. The interviewee or his heirs and the Archivist of the United States or his designated representative should sign the deed of gift. Two copies should be signed, the original to be retained by the library and one copy returned to the donor. XII. BUDGET The basic cost elements of an oral history program are the salaries of interviewers, editors, and transcribers; travel expenses; administrative costs; and equipment. The amount of funding available will influence the number of interviews that can be conducted. With in-kind support from participating institutions, the actual funding requirements may be reduced. The administrative responsibilities, which are often carried out by the interviewers and the processing staff, can also be shared by an existing institution with an interest in the project. Travel costs, which represent a large variable, can be significantly reduced by locating the project, or at least interviewers, near the largest concentrations of interviewees. If the project includes a large number of foreign interviewees, the required international travel will constitute a major expense. 6 The sample budget below is based on 300 interviewees averaging three sessions each: 900 Interviews Interviewers (@ $200 per session) 180,000 Tape processing (@ $150 per hr. Of tape) 135,000 Travel (over a 2 yr. period) 24,000 Equipment 7,500 Administrative (20%) 69,300 Total 405,800 7 SAMPLE ORAL HISTORY LEGAL AGREEMENT NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION CLINTON LIBRARY Legal Agreement Pertaining to the Oral History Interview of @ In accordance with the provisions of Chapter 21 of Title 44, United States Code, and subject to the terms and conditions hereinafter set forth, I (Name) , of (City and state) do hereby give, donate and convey to the United States of America all my rights, title, and interest in the tape recording and transcript of (a) personal interview(s) conducted on (Date) at (Location) And prepared for deposit in the Clinton Library. This assignment is subject to the following terms and conditions: (1) The transcript shall be made available for use by researchers as soon as it has been deposited in the Clinton Library. (2) The tape recording shall be available to those researchers who have access to the transcript. (3) I hereby assign to the United States Government all copyright I may have in the interview transcript and tape. (4) Copies of the transcript and the tape recording may be provided by the Library to researchers upon request. (5) Copies of the transcript and tape recording may be deposited in or loaned to institutions other than the Clinton Library. Donor Date Archivist of the United States Date Clinton Presidential Records Digital Records Marker This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff. This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately scan such dividers. The title from the original document is indicated below. BACKGROUND Divider Title: MEMORANDUM THE WHITE HOUSE WASHINGTON Thursday, June 20, 1968 11:00 a.m. TO: THE PRESIDENT FROM: Ernest Goldstein Enic George Reedy Doris Kearns Douglass Cater Pa After interviews with key members of the Oral History Projects at Columbia and Princeton, as well as those connected with the Truman, Kennedy, and Dulles Oral Histories, we have arrived at the following recommendations about the Lyndon B. Johnson Oral History Project: (1) Auspices: It is essential to the standing of the project that it be conducted under auspices independent of the White House. We believe this can best be accomplished in the following ways: (a) Sponsor for the project should be the University of Texas. Harry Ransom says that it can be readily done as a special project with a separate independent budget under the University Development Board. Sponsorship by the LBJ Library would subject the project to GSA controls. This proved a great handicap for the Kennedy project. Sponsor- ship by the LBJ Institute would require a delay until the Institute is formally established.) (b) Oversight of the project to be carried out by a distinguished Board of Advisers. Attachment A is. our recommended list. (2) Financing: We recommend that the major costs of the project be financed through the foundation to be established by Arthur Krim. We have reviewed this with Krim. He is prepared to undertake financing of the budget with your approval. (3) Attachment B represents our budget estimate. It comes to $200, 000 for the first year of operation and envisages approxi- mately 2,000 interview hours. The more important interviewecs 2 will require several hours. Each interview must be preceded by careful preparation. The transcribed tape has to be edited and cleared by the interviewee before deposit in the Lyndon B. Johnson Library. We estimate that the first 6 months operation before January 20 will take care of the top priority interviews leading members of the government and others who are well along in years. The entire project, it is estimated, will require approximately 3 years. (4) Staffing: Professor Frantz is prepared to serve as Director of the project. Our budget envisages 4 full-time interviewers, together with part-time assistance from selected White House Fellows and, possibly, 2 or 3 members of the White House Staff. We were advised by all the experts that it is unwise to maintain a large staff of interviewers. The experience of the Kennedy project during its first year indicates that such a large scale effort can be unproductive. (5) Foreign interviews: The experience of both the Kennedy and Dulles projects indicates that to interview foreign Heads of State and diplomats is largely a waste of time. Particularly, while you are still in office, the interviewee is likely to be excessively cautious in his statements. We recommend that the list of foreign interviewees be narrowed to a highly selected few. In addition, we recommend that even these interviews be held off until after January. Our budget estimates contain no funds for foreign travel. (6) One suggestion made by Ed Barrett at Columbia deserves special attention: Barrett proposes that you may wish to tape-record selected occasions at the White House during the next 6 months -- a Cabinet Meeting, and other events of historical importance. He believes it would be of great value to the Lyndon B. Johnson Oral History Project to have a live transcription of these events. Attachment C is a memorandum prepared by Professor Frantz giving further details of the proposed schedule for the Oral History Project. Attachment D is the minutes prepared by Doris Kearns of the meeting of the Oral History group at Columbia. MINUTES FROM ORAL HISTORY DINNER AT COLUMBIA June 14, 1968 I. Setting the framework: Doug Cater opened with a. general description of the plans for developing an oral history of the public career of Lyndon Baines Johnson and a variety of questions regarding both the objectives and the techniques of oral history. II. Experience with previous libraries: Truman's oral history has been proceeding very slowly (only 39 interviews are finished) in large part, the delay has been due to a backlog in transportation and the procedure of sending the transcript back to the subject for editing -- a process which can take months and even years -- on this experience, it is suggested that a battery of girls be on hand for immediate transcription and that the interviewer edit the tape minimally for grammatical errors and false starts and then send it on to the subject with a note letting him know gently both that syntax is unimportant and that unless he returns it in X days, the library will assume it is adequate for placement. while Eisenhower's life could be divided neatly into three discrete categories childhood, military, and presidency with different organizations handling each phase, Johnson's life is not so easily compartmentalized and it will be important to understand how the roots of the Presidency stem back to the Vice Presidency, to the Senate and House and eventually to Texas. while the crash project on Kennedy produced 120 interview sessions it ran into difficulty by allowing the respondents to choose their interviewer and by relying too much on transient volunteers who failed to provide consistency and who often fell into the trap of asking non relevant or duplicative questions -- on this experience, it is suggested that if part timers are used they should be "regulars" to the maximum extent possible. 2 in contrast to all the others, Johnson's oral history will begin while he is still in office, a critical advantage in securing access to top officials but presenting a problem in not having the documentary base from which to start. III. Overall objective: To portray the perspective of the President, indicating both how he was shaped and how events were shaped by him, to build a skeletal framework of what is significant about time periods and relationships, inside sources will be invalu- able in blocking out major events, decisions and themes. IV. Techniques Sending prior questions is often a constraining factor and should be avoided unless the subject requests - - it is desirable, however, if between appointment date and interview, the subject refreshes his memory by glancing back through his diary or daily calendar, in general, it is not wise to be too aggressive, to interrupt too frequently or to stick too closely to the subject when poten- tially interesting sidelines pop up (e.g. S. Longworth's comments on TR's mistress) -- but in some cases (e. g. Rockefeller) 2 series of quick fire questions may produce short but targeted answers and in other cases, time will preclude following out all the sidelines which prove promising, in general, it is not a good idea for the relationship between the interviewer and the subject to be too close as too many obvious but critical points may go unsaid -- but it may be good to start with an "inside" interviewer and then follow up with a more objective source, in general, it is good to start with a few second or third level people, then gc to the Cabinet member, back to the secondary figure and back again to the Cabinet member, 3 though the interview should not be a cross examination or a third degree, a tactful interviewer can correct blatant factual mistakes and try to cross check the subject's interpretations, past experience with foreign heads of state has been disappointing due to lack of bluntness; the most fruitful interviews in foreign affairs have been done with Americans involved in the policy decisions. V. Legal questions unless the subject relinquishes the tape by signed agree- ment, the subject owns his words without agreement, the library is simply the repository, in sensitive areas, the most workable practice seems to be closing off the sensitive portions of the tape for certain periods of time (lifetime of subject is most common) while letting the nonsensitive parts open immediately, the most frequent restriction placed by subjects on the use of transcripts has been the requirement of permission to cite or to quote. VI. Budget The best unit to use as a base for calculations is the number of hours of tape produced rather than the number of interviews or the number of people interviewed, part timers are paid per hour of tape the fee is usually fixed regardless of the number of hours of preparation, though reserve amounts can be given at the start for unusual amounts of preparation. EXECUTIVE MEMORANDUM EL 18/20 THE WHITE HOUSE FRANTZ, the McCcmb, David WASHINGTON BARR, Alwan May 21, 1968 Multollow, Palige BANER, T. Harrison Fergusen, Keene MEMORANDUM FOR MRS. JOHNSON me. Mrs. Johnson: In line with our conversation of this morning, I am outlining what I consider to be the major considerations of an oral history program. We start with the fact that no President has had as long and productive a public career as President Johnson. The order of magnitude of the interviews is thus increased to a figure that must be estimated to be over a thousand. Professional opinion is unanimous that certain essential conditions must be met to insure a good study -- and a poor study would be worse than no study at all. 1) A trained historian should prepare a total plan for the history. This should include an outline of topics and individuals to be reached here and abroad. Friends, relatives and political acquaintances should be listed along with people who have never met the President, but have nonetheless been involved in some of the great contributions such as, for example, Medicare. 2) The overall plan should include the location of files, archives and the like which can serve as a research resource for the interviews. 3) The interviews should in most cases be conducted by trained interviewers. No one directly or indirectly involved in a relationship or problem should serve as an interviewer. 4) Except for anecdotal interviews with relatives and purely social friends, we must estimate an average of 10 hours of research for each hour of interviewing. Not only should the interviewer have his interview fully outlined, but the interviewee should be given well in advance a summary of the topics to be covered. -2 - 5) The pre-interview research should be geared to accomplish two major objectives: a) When the public and documented record discloses potential blanks -- this is the age of the telephone -- the interviewer must identify and seek to fill the gaps. b) When the public record is inconsistent, possibly inaccurate, or implausible, the interviewer should seek to set the record straight. 6) Transcription is the most expensive part of the project and must not be underestimated. On the basis of the foregoing considerations, I should like to make the following recommendations: 1) As soon as possible we ought to put a young historian to work to develop the master plan. This master plan will be the professional basis for seeking funding for the total program. 2) This work can go on along with the priority project suggested by Dr. Grover in his May 9, 1968 memorandum. I concur in Dr. Grover's views. Moreover, he and I have agreed that it might be well to ask Ford to permit the use of a portion of the grant for the overall planning. If this is not feasible, it is possible that the Johnson Library and School Foundation might provide the seed money. Joe Frantz at the University of Texas has given me the names of five recent University of Texas PhD's in History who would be able to do the job. All are presently teaching. They are: Dong can may 23 Ernie beginning give Q -3- T 2, David McComb, presently at the University of Houston. Alwyn Barr, presently at Purdue. Paige Mulhollan, presently at the University of Arkansas. T. Harrison Baker, presently at Mississippi State College for Women. (former journalist) -- Keene Ferguson, presently at St. Mary's in San Antonio. (son-in-law of Hal Dewar) All of them are supposed to be bright with McComb, Barr and Baker in the lead. McComb might be available immediately or on September 1. I cannot stress too highly the necessity for an overall plan and set of priorities. Such a plan is needed to obtain serious Foundation support. The Kennedy project started off helter skelter and much has been wasted in the compilation of several hundred interviews. Many of the early interviews were useless. Many have had to be redone. The job to be done is exciting. Done right -- and there will be nothing to equal it. If done poorly, it will do more harm than good. Therefore, I recommend: 1) Approval of Dr. Grover's approach to the Ford Foundation for the priority program with an amendment allowing the initiation of the planning project. 2) The hiring of the planner with Ford or other money. 3) A review of the present legal instrument dealing with the various property rights involved in oral history for the purpose of affording greater protection to the project. TRANSFERRED TO HANDWRITED -4- - Thereafter, with a well organized plan and budget, and with the use of professional interviewers, we should succeed. Ernest Eur Goldstein May 18, 1968 11:55 a.m. MEMORANDUM FOR JIM JONES Jim, Attached is a memo I have done for Joe Califano on oral history. I will be seeing Mrs. Johnson on Tuesday to discuss the program. I have done extensive research which convinces me of the following: 1) Better no oral history than a non-professional one. 2) Professional oral history means: a) Massive organization and central planning to determine a rational set of priorities. b) Research facilities to make it possible for the interviewer to plan his interview in depth. c) This means an average of 10 hours preparation for each hour of interviewing. Otherwise we will have only a bunch of folksy anecdotes. d) It is essential that interviewers be professionals who have not been involved with the President. The present need, if Mrs. Johnson agrees, is to get on board a professional historian who will do the central planning and help develop a meaningful budget. I have talked with Dr. Grover and he agrees with this professional approach. The President's oral history can be a landmark in itself -- but it must be done right. Attachment Ernest Goldstein RECEIVED MAY 20 1968 original sent CENTRAL FILES LB/2-4 Oral History Project for the Lyndon Baines Johnson Library (For Discussion on November 6, 1967 Acquisitions Committee Meeting) The phrase "oral history" is used to designate a special kind of historical documentation that is the product of a specific technique. Despite some initial skepticism as to its value to scholarship, oral history in the past decade has gained wide acceptance in this country as a useful supplement to traditional forms of documentation. Scores of oral history projects are under way and reputable scholars and writers have made significant use of the materials that these projects have produced. There are two basic distinctions between "oral history" and the ordinary interview or memoir. a. The traditional interview has an immediate purpose in connection with a particular piece of writing. Oral history is produced as a unit of historical source material to be added to existing documentation. The students and scholars who will eventually make use of oral history interviews, and the specific research topics with which they will be concerned, cannot be known at the time the interview is recorded. b. Oral history differs from the ordinary interview in that it is produced and used in accordance with certain professional standards. These require that the interviewer have a systematic training in history and in the techniques of historical research and writing; that he prepare himself by thorough study of his subject in advance of each interview; that the interview be devoted primarily to the systematic recording of information not likely to be found in existing published or manuscript materials; and that the information be safeguarded in accordance with the wishes of the person interviewed. Memoirs have been a valued form of historical writing for centuries. The invention of the tape recorder and the development of historical inter- viewing as a profession have made it relatively easy for good memoirs to be produced. This accounts for some of the increased interest in oral history. Busy people who would never think of going to the trouble of writing a memoir can now be induced at least to be interviewed. Another persuasive justification results from the declining quality of modern records documenting activities at the higher levels. Face-to-face and telephonic communications are so easy and the pace and pressure of public life BO demanding that much important information is not documented. An official in the midst of the many crisis that daily surround him is not 2 likely to find time to write background memos for the record. Nor is he apt to apt to write long, intimate and informative letters, as Jefferson and his generation did, to friends easily reached in person or by phone. Today's paperwork is so onerous and massive that an official more often wishes to escape it than add to it. Oral history thus tries not only to fill the gaps in the record but to restore to documentation some of the liveliness it is losing. Persons charged with responsibility for planning oral history pro- jects must bear in mind two basic factors. The first is the right of the person interviewed with respect to availability, use and publication of the interview. Journalists and people in public office frequently assume that consent to grant an "interview" carries with it consent to have the interview published. That connotation does not apply to an oral history project. The success of such a project depends on a clear under- standing by the interviewee that he will have control over the use of the interview after it has been completed, and that this control will be administered by a competent archival staff accustomed to dealing with confidential materials. Failure to understand this inhibits frankness and completeness and diminishes the value of the interview. The second factor to be recognized is the expensiveness of oral history. Persons to be interviewed should be carefully selected so that the expense is justified. Though it is difficult to make firm projections, the experience of the Presidential Libraries indicates that a single interviewer can prepare for and conduct a maximum of two interviews a week. If one assumes that each of these interviews will last approximately two hours, it will be seen that an interviewer spends approximately one-tenth of his time doing actual interviewing. The remainder is spent in research preparation, arrangements, and other necessary activities. A typist-transcriber can, at most, trans- cribe one hour's tape in one working day. Thus the full time of one trans- criber for two days is required to transcribe the tape produced by one two- hour interview. Each tape must be fully typed twice, first in rough draft, and, after editing by the person interviewed, in a final fair copy, so that the ratio of typists-transcribers to interviewers is at least one to one. It usually. pays to have an editor-researcher on hand to assist in research and to review the first rough-draft typing for correction of punctuation and identification of obvious errors and omissions. When everything is added up, the cost of a fully processed and completed two-hour interview is close to $300. Despite its expense oral history produces unique and valuable historical information. Since the evidence it captures and preserves is perishable it should be retrieved and recorded if possible while memories are still fresh. For this reason it is not too early to initiate a long range oral history program covering the life and career of President Lyndon Baines Johnson and the persons, issues, policies, and events with which he is associated. There are certain areas, especially his early life and career, which ought to be covered at once before those persons who have the most information to give have passed from the scene. EXEGUTIVE into Lyndon B. Johnson History Project Purpose: Since both the President and the remainder of us agree on the validity and desirability of illuminating his long career of public service through oral taped interviews, I won't elaborate on the strengths and weak- nesses nor the philosophy of such a project. Certainly the President's career is almost without precedent. As a young man he charged from the chute at full buck, and for more than a third of a century he has performed in or near the center of the arena. The show has revolved around him, not he around the show. This longevity of spotlighted significance means that the project is limited only by time, money, and mortality. Thousands of people have flashed by, each with his own contribution, and the purpose and problem will be to select those who are available and articulate. The further purpose will be to reconstruct an era that began in the early 1930's and continues and dominates down to this day. Approach: At least two necessities precede any actual interviewing. The Johnson career must be segmented and reduced to manageable outlines so that direction can be given to the interviewing. Just to plunge in will result in waste. Also, of course, a flexible list of people to be interviewed must be compiled. It should regularly be reviewed by the people involved with the project, including the President. Undoubtedly some interviews will suggest other subjects, or will raise new questions. It is anticipated that some of the President's associates will need to be interviewed again and again, both to flesh out their own versions of the story and to clarify points raised by others but not considered previously. In general, it is anticipated that considerable research will precede any interview. The interviewer must know his subject and the questions to be raised. The Columbia University Oral History Project found its ratio of inter- view time to research hovered between 1:10 and 1:13. We're not interested in ratios, but simply in doing the job as efficiently as possible. The first people to be interviewed will be chosen on the basis either of availability or age. Following the mortality tables, we will try to reach back quickly to capture those persons who should be approaching the end of their chronology, fully cognizant that death dips down into the ranks of men in their 40's and 50's. But men like Senator Hayden and James Farley, whose careers have a long span, will be sought as subjects just as soon as possible. Chief among those chosen for availability are people who either have worked or are currently working with this Administration. One reason is to obtain their memoirs while events are fresh or even current. More important, many will be more easily accessible while the President is still in the White House, and will more likely have at hand whatever records are necessary to job their memories or authenticate their views. Once the original master list is compiled, priorities will be assigned and the fun will commence. The mere task of directly traffic will be enormous, 2 for it is anticipated that the road will be strewn with reluctance, broken appointments, postponements and cancellations, transportation schedules that won't gee, and questions by the sackfull. When the research is completed, the subject to be interviewed will be sent a list of questions that will be covered during the taping. This should trigger his thinking well in advance, and should likewise enable him to focus more carefully on the information being sought. Naturally there will be digressions, and if these digressions prove to be high yield, they will be mined to the end of the vein. But as a rule nothing serves less purpose than a volley of random questions met by an equally random answering volley. Time: While this project is virtually open-end, it should be completed in three years. Beyond that, the interviewer loses his momentum and the subjects scatter even more. But most important, the purpose of the interviews is to make knowledge and understanding available; if the period of interviews drags out, the availability of knowledge is delayed. Besides, most people, including this one, work better under relatively short deadlines. The period from now through next January 20 will be crucial and will require a crash approach. After January, the pace can be more nearly even for the next twelve to eighteen months. The third year should be reserved for mopping up. Since we are usually dealing with busy people, and since every interviewer will suggest other questions or other interviews, this tidying year may prove to be as busy as the others. Availability: Most happily, interviews would be available for use shortly after they have been transcribed, edited, and re-transcribed. Cn the other hand, some material will undoubtedly be either sensitive or classified. In all cases, the wishes of the subject have to be respected, and material with- held for as long as he insists. A good procedure is to make all of an inter- view quickly available, except for those certain portions that might currently be too sensitive. In all cases the subject himself should designate a specific time--at his death, or in 1976, for instance. If the time designation is left to heirs or assigns, we are inviting trouble. The local archive may place its own limits on availability, especially if the President writes his own memoirs. This question, though, is one of local agreement and not pertinent here. Transcription: Apparently this is the tedious chore. Most people don't talk in good written English. Consequently the transcriptions need to be edited, and then returned to the subject, so that he may check for accuracy and nuances. When unedited transcriptions have been returned to subjects, they often have failed to return them, evidently appalled by the awkwardness of their own expression. 3 One way around this is not to return the transcription. I am not certain that return is necessary, except where obvious inaccuracy or contradiction exists. I do believe that transcription is necessary, as the eye can range so much faster than the ear through the ramblings of a long interview. Also, in these days of xerox, the availability of typed transcripts is enhanced enormously. Ownership: Ownership of the tapes and the transcriptions should be vested in Lyndon B. Johnson Presidential Library. Some singular situation might exist under which the subject would retain ownership rights, but such owner- ship should be rare. Storage: Some projects have followed the practice of erasing tapes and re-using them as soon as transcriptions are complete. I think that tapes should be retained so long as they are effective; technically their life span lengthens every year. Storage is not a disastrous problem, and the sub- ject's manner of speaking may throw new meaning on his words. Verbally I can praise a man with sufficient edge to my voice that the praise is actually an insult; such twisting does not come across on paper. Foreign Interviews: The Kennedy Project's experience in this field has been dismal. I believe we can avoid its mistakes. For one thing, the foreign leader was interviewed by someone of his choosing, either from his own staff or from the local American embassy. The result was that the interviews had no direction or analysis, but were simply little paeans of praise to the late President, suitable for re-broadcast at eulogy time but otherwise of no his- torical value. By informing the subject that his interview is meant as an assay of his relations with the Johnson Administration and by having the interview con- ducted by someone who does not have a personal relationship, we should be able to develop the pros and cons of relationships between that country and the United States. I know that when I have brought in foreign visitors, chiefly Latin Americans, we have understood beforehand that they were to lay their objections to United States policy on the line logically and unemotionally. I have never been disappointed with the result. Not only have they given my students charges to answer, but in their avowal to eschew emotion, they have taken great pains to balance the presentation. The foreign interview should either be conducted by the director person- ally, or by an expert in the particular area who is on the scene. If an expert is used, he needs to be briefed on precisely what topics should be developed. Office and Staff: Obviously, Washington should be the central working point through the remainder of the Johnson Administration. The advantages of a White House address are incontestable. At the same time an office has already 4 been arranged at the University of Texas, which is central for President Johnson's Texas operations. Presumably, though not necessarily, the Austin end of the operation will assume the greater importance after January 1968. The staff should remain small and cohesive, as continual improvising will be necessary. In addition to myself as director and chief interviewer, I suggest either one or two assistants, as the budget will stand. These would be younger historians, aggressive and personable, who could handle the less sensitive interviews. Naturally two assistants would get more done than one. In addition, certain other men would be utilized on a per diem basis. For instance, Richard Wade of the University of Chicago has been the author of much of Mayor Daley's dicta regarding Chicago's urban developments. As an intimate friend of mine, as well as of Mayor Daley, he possibly could obtain a more candid interview than I, or might be invaluable to have along when I do my interviews. One of the real strengths I bring to a project like this is a wide range of other such contacts throughout the nation. As for the more technical aspects, you need at least two secretaries, one in Washington and one in Austin. While I am hesitant to suggest, for fear of seeming to empire-build, I have an administrative secretary now with me at the Texas State Historical Association, a rare jewel of manager and secretary who could be borrowed for the Washington operation until January 20. She would be perfect for the job of cajoling, placating, chang- ing schedules at the last minute, and so on that will likely be necessary. The only trouble is, she's fairly expensive, and makes $600 a month already, and would need an adjustment upward to make the move. But she could take over the operation fifteen minutes after she arrived, and she could insure continuity between Washington and Austin. On the other hand, financial realities may dictate utilizing strictly stenographic and filing help. If so, I am prepared to go along. We also need a girl to make subject indexes and to keep general records of the project. When you remember that the interviews Columbia made with Secretary Frances Perkins ran 5000 pages, you get some idea of the potential magnitude of the project. Office supplies should not be too expensive, and some will be non-recur- ring. We will need two tape recorders and transcribers, about $400 each. We will need the usual paper, office stationery, filing cabinets, and so on. I am presuming that at one end the Executive Office Building can supply office furniture, and that I can persuade the University of Texas to do the same at the other. We will need three electric typewriters, about $400 each. Tele- phones should be furnished by the housing facility in both Washington and Austin. Three hundred fifty tapes are listed, or 1,050 interviews in 3 years. On the other hand, I would guess that telephone expenses should be com- puted in any estimate of expenses. I would be surprised if we averaged less 5 than two long-distance calls a day, so that at least $5 a day should be written in for telephoning. Perhaps a Watts line would be preferable. Subjects: The list of subjects to be interviewed is almost endless. In general it consists of these classifications: Congressmen (since the 1930's) Cabinet (esp. since 1961) Bureau heads Party leaders Opposition party leaders Former Presidents Truman and Eisenhower Businessmen Organized labor Civil rights leaders Space age leaders Former administrative assistants (associates of the first years in Washington) Various lobby and special interest groups Visiting diplomats Heads, and former heads, of foreign states esp. England and Western Europe Latin America Australia Viet Nam India and Pakistan Texas leaders in various aspects Central Texas associates and old-timers Some effort will be made to cooperate with the oral history projects of the Truman, Eisenhower, and Kennedy libraries to avoid duplication of inter- viewees. Princeton spent three years obtaining 279 interviews for its John Foster Dulles project. We anticipate about 1,000 interviews over the same period. Transportation: Undoubtedly this will be a fairly large item, though impos- sible to predict accurately until the first master list is completed. My guess is that one of the interviewers would be making a trip a week. I doubt that we would bring many subjects into our office for interviewing but would tend to go to them. It might also be possible to hitch-hike on some other projects now and then: for instance, I have at least three speech commitments between now and January that will pay my transportation expenses. While fulfilling the commitment, I could also conduct interviews in the same area. At any rate, for budget purposes I will presume one of us will be going halfway across the country and return for an average of two days per week, at a roundtrip rate of $150 and a per diem of $25. 6 Budget: This budget is for the first year only. It will be the most expen- sive year, because a full-time Washington office will be maintained, and the program will be undergoing the pangs of birth and organization. I would anticipate that during the second year the Washington office could be closed and that perhaps the director could retreat to half-time. The third year the rhythm should be so well established that even less time of the director would be required. However, planning should proceed on the idea that this project will run full tilt for three years, and any lessening of intensity and there- fore of expense will simply be a bonus in the form of money not spent. In listing my stipend, I am giving my regular salary plus $200 a month for cost of maintaining two residences. I am not so naive as to think that this procedure is financially sound for me, but I am so impressed with the importance of the project that I am willing to take it on this basis. I would also guess that the junior interviewers might be on a less-than- full-time basis after the first year, but again we should plan for their giving 100 per cent of their time. 7 Lyndon B. Johnson History Project 1968-1969 Salaries $ 74,400 Director @ $2500 a mo. $30,000 Assistant Director @ $1200 a mo. 14,400 Assistant Interviewer @ $1000 a mo. 12,000 Administrative Secretary @ $800 a mo. 9,600 Secretary @ $400 a mo. 4,800 Clerk @ $300 a mo. 3,600 Telephone 1,300 @ $5 a day, 5 days a week Postage 1,300 @ $5 a day Office 4,300 2 tape recorders @ $400 $ 800 350 tapes @ $4 each 1,400 3 typewriters @ $400 each 1,200 Paper, etc. 500 File cases, boxes, etc. 400 Travel 13,360 52 trips @ $150 each 7,800 Per diem, 104 days @ $25 1,560 Foreign travel (no formula) 4,000 Part-time Interviewers' & Researchers 2,400 24 days @ $100 honorarium & per diem Contingencies 1,000 Total for first year $ 98,060 Clinton Presidential Records Digital Records Marker This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff. This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately scan such dividers. The title from the original document is indicated below. SAMPLE LIST Divider Title: LBJ LIBRARY ORAL HISTORY COLLECTION The LBJ Library Oral History Collection is composed of interviews conducted for the LBJ Library under four separate projects: those done under the auspices of the National Archives; the White House during the Johnson Administration; the University of Texas Oral History Project; and the LBJ Library Oral History Project. The names of interviewees who have participated in more than one of these projects are repeated on this list to highlight this fact. Names of those with multiple interviews done by the same project are repeated when terms of access to their various interviews vary. Otherwise, the name of an interviewee is listed once even though he or she may have given more than one interview. Interviews which have been completed and accessioned into the Library's collection are followed by an alphabetical symbol in parentheses describing their status and terms of access. Those interviews without a symbol are in various stages of processing and therefore are not yet available for research unless specifically authorized by the interviewee. Please note that special oral history interviews in the Library's custody are not included on this list. These special interviews include those recorded by researchers, by federal departments preparing administrative histories, and interviews conducted by other oral history projects. Symbol Key: A - available for research A/CR - available for research; retains copyright privileges* A/R - available for research although all or part of transcript is restricted* A/R/T - tape recording is restricted* A/R/ILL - Inter-Library Loan prohibited; reading room access only* R - restricted for lifetime or until specified date* R/WP - restricted, but can be made available if researcher obtains written permission from interviewee*; see archivist in Reading Room for permission forms * See individual deed for specific terms of access and time restrictions ** Some of the oral history transcripts contain inaccuracies and typographical errors. Researchers who intend to rely on an excerpt or quotation from an interview are urged to verify the passage on the tape recording, when available. Oral History Interviews - Page 3 Bohlen, Charles E. (A) Burkley, George G. (A) Bolling, Richard (A) Burleson, Omar (A) Bolton, Donnelly P. Burney, Cecil E. (A) Bolton, Paul (A) Busby, Horace Bonanno, Phyllis O. Buscher, Jack Bookbinder, Hyman Bush, Dorothy B. (A) Booker, Ruth Byers, Bo (A) Bortz, Nelson M. (A) Borum, Rodney L. (A) Bowdler, William Cabot, John M. (A) Bowles, Chester (A) Cahn, Edgar & Jean C. (A) Boyd, Alan S. (A) Cain, James (A) Boyd, Roland Califano, Joseph A. [UT] Braestrup, Peter Califano, Joseph A. [LBJ] Brandt, Willy Calvert, Robert W. (A) Braswell, T. Edward (A) Camp, William B. (A) Brenner, Edward John (A) Cannon, William B. (A) Bridwell, Lowell (A) Capron, William M. Brigham, Percy (A) Carey, William D. Brisbin, Albert (A) [NYA group] Carpenter, Elizabeth (A/CR) Brisbin, Albert (A) [LBJ] Carpenter, Leslie (A/CR) Brooks, Jack (A) Carrillo Flores, Antonio (A) Brooks, Marietta Moody [UT] Carter, Clifton C. (A) Brooks, Marietta Moody [LBJ] Carter, Hodding, Jr. (A) Brooks, Max Carter, Joseph H. (A) Brown, Edmund G. (A) Carter, Lisle C. Brown, George R. (A) [Bolton] Carter, Margaret (Mrs. Jack) (A) Brown, George R. (A) [UT] Carver, George Brown, George R. (A) [LBJ] Case, Clifford P. (A/CR) Brown, H. S. "Hank" (A) Casparis, John Brooks (A) Brown, Harold (A) Castro, Nash (A/R) Brown, Lester R. (A) Castro, Raul Brown, Richard (A) Cater, S. Douglass (A) [UT] Brown, Russell M. (A) Cater, S. Douglass (A) [UT] Brownstein, Phillip N. (A) Cater, S. Douglass (A) [LBJ] Bruce, David K. E. (A) Cavanagh, Jerome P. (A) Bruck, Oliver N. (A) [w/Sam Fore] Celebrezze, Anthony J. (A) Bruno, Joseph Celler, Emanuel (A) Bryant, Ashbrook P. Chancellor, John Bryant, C. Farris (A) Chapman, Oscar L. (A) Brzezinski, Zbigniew (A) Chartener, William H. (A) Buchanan, W. Evans (A) Chiarodo, Marie Fehmer [UT] Buck, Raymond E. (A) Chiarodo, Marie Fehmer [LBJ] Buffum, William Christian, George E. (A) Buford, Anthony Christopher, Warren M. (A) Bui Diem Chudars, James E. (A) Bullion, J. Waddy Church, Frank (A) Bullock, Arthur V. Cikins, Warren (A) Bundy, McGeorge Clapp, Norman M. (A) Bundy, William P. (A) Clark, Ramsey (A) Bunker, Ellsworth (A) Clark, Tom C. (A) Bunshaft, Gordon (A) Clements, Earle C. (A) Oral History Interviews - Page 5 Durr, Clifford & Virginia (A) Foster, John S., Jr. (A/R/T) Durr, Virginia (A) Fountain, Lawrence H. (A) Dutton, Frederick G. (A) Fowler, Henry H. (A/CR) [UT] Fowler, Henry H. [LBJ] Fox, Lawrence (A) Easley, L. T. "Tex" (A) Fox, Sanford L. (A) Eastland, James O. (A) Francis, Sharon (A) Eckhardt, Nadine Branmer Frankel, Charles (A) Eckler, A. Ross (A) Frankel, Max (R/WP/CR-lifetime) Edgeworth, Georgia Cammack (A) Frantz, Joe B. Edwards, India (A) Freeman, Orville (A) [UT] Edwards, Louise Casparis (A) Freeman, Orville [LBJ] Eisenhower, Milton S. (A) Friday, William Clyde (A) Elkins, James A., Jr. (A) Fried, Edward R. (A) Ellender, Allen J. (A) Friedman, Irving S. Ellington, Buford (A) Fulcher, Gordon (A) Elson, Roy Furness, Betty (See Midgely, Betty) Elstad, Leonard M. (A) Engelhard, Jane English, Joseph Gaither, James C. (A) [UT] English, Virginia Wilke (A) Gaither, James C. (A) [LBJ] Enthoven, Alain C. (A) Galloway, Eilene M. (A) Evans, Courtney A. (A) Garmon, Samuel Evers, Charles (A) Garcia, Daniel C., Sr. Ewell, Julian J. (A) Garcia, Hector T. (A) Gardner, John W. (A) Garza, Reynaldo G. (A) Farley, James A. (A) Gaud, William S. (A) Farmer, James (A) Gehrig, Leo (A) Faulk, John Henry Geissinger, Michael A. Fauntroy, Walter Gelb, Leslie Howard (A) Fawcett, Truman and Wilma G. (A) Germany, Eugene B. (A) Feild, John G. Gideon, Olga Bredt Feldman, Myer Gideon, W. Sim (A) [UT] Fenn, Dan (A) Gideon, W. Sim (A) [Bolton] Ferguson, Tom C. Gilpatric, Roswell (A) Finch, Robert Gilpatrick, Donald S. (A) Finletter, Thomas K. (A) Ginsburg, David Fischesser, Elaine (A) Ginsburgh, Robert N. Fisher, Adrian S. (A/CR) Glick, Mrs. Tommy W. (A) Fisher, O. C. (A) Godfrey, Horace D. (A) Fitt, Alfred B. (A) Goldberg, Arthur J. (A) Fleming, Harold Goldberg, Irving L. [UT] (A) Fleming, Joe W., II (A) Goldberg, Irving L. [LBJ] (A) Fletcher, Thomas W. (A) Golden, John M. Flott, Frederick W. (A) Goldfarb, Ronald L. (A) Flynn, John P. (A) Goldschmidt, Arthur & Elizabeth (A) Fore, Sam, Jr. (A) Goldschmidt, Elizabeth Wickenden (A) Fore, Mrs. Sam, Jr. (A) Goldstein, E. Ernest (A) [UT] Forrestal, Michael V. (A) Goldstein, E. Ernest (A) [LBJ] Fortas, Abe (A) Goldwater, Barry (R/CR-lifetime) Forsythe, Patria Gonella, Ashton (A) [UT] Oral History Interviews - Page 7 Hornig, Donald F. (A) Johnson, Claudia Taylor Horowitz, Harold W. (A) Johnson, Elizabeth Horwitz, Solis (A) Johnson, Lester (A) Howard, Jack (A) Johnson, Luci Baines Howard, James M. "Mike" Johnson, Nicholas (A/CR) Howe, Harold, II (A) Johnson, Paul B., Jr. (A) Howsam, Earl Johnson, Sam Houston (A) Hoyt, Palmer Johnson, U. Alexis (A) Hubbard, Douglass H. (A) Johnson, W. Thomas [UT] Hughes, Allie T. & Lorena D. (A) Johnson, W. Thomas [LBJ] Hughes, Inez Johnston, Dean Hughes, Phillip S. (A) Jones, Bess Hughes, Richard J. & Betty (A) Jones, Boisfeuillet Hughes, Sarah T. (A) Jones, Curran L. "Jack" (A/CR) Huitt, Ralph K. [UT] Jones, Herman Huitt, Ralph K. [LBJ] Jones, James R. Hummel, Don (A) Jones, John T., Jr. (A) Humphrey, Hubert (A) [UT] Jones, John Wesley (A) [Truman Library] Humphrey, Hubert (A) [LBJ] Jones, Luther E., Jr. (A) [UT] Humphrey, H. H., III Jones, Luther E., Jr. (A) [LBJ] Huntley, Chet R. (A) Jones, Marvin (A/CR) Hurd, Henriette Wyeth (A) Jones, Roger W. (A) Hurd, Peter (A) Jordan, Barbara (A) Hurst, J. Willis [UT] Jordan, Robert E., III (A/R/WP/CR)* Hurst, J. Willis [LBJ] Jordan, William H., Jr. (A) Hutchinson, Everett (A/CR) Jorden, William J. (A) [UT] Jorden, William J. [LBJ] Joseph, Edward (A) [UT] Ignatius, Paul R. (R/WP-lifetime) Joseph, Edward (A) (LBJ) Ikard, Frank N. (A) Judd, Walter Ingram, Janet Wofford Just, Ward (A/R/ILL*) Ink, Dwight A. (A) Inouye, Daniel K. (A) Karnow, Stanley (A) Katzenbach, Nicholas deB. (A) Jackson, Henry M. (A) Keach, Carroll (A) [UT] Jackson, Robert M. (A) Keach, Carroll (A) [LBJ] Jackson, William A. Keating, Val M. (A) Jackson, William F. Keenan, Joseph D. (A) Jacobsen, Jake (A) [UT] Keeney, Barnaby C. (A) Jacobsen, Jake [LBJ] Keith, A. M. "Sandy" Jacobson, Dorothy H. (R/WP/CR-9/1/88) Kellam, Claud (A) Jacobson, George Kellam, Jesse (A) [Goldman] Jaeggli, Victor Kellam, Jesse (A) [UT] James, W. Ervin "Red" (A) Kelly, William P. (A/CR) Jansen, Ebba (Mrs. Alvin J.) (A) Kennedy, Edward M. (R/WP) * Javits, Jacob Kennedy, Mylton L. (A) Jaworski, Leon (A) Kennedy, Vann Jenkins, Herbert (A/CR) Keppel, Francis (A) Jenkins, Walter (A/CR) [UT] Kerner, Otto (A) Jenkins, Walter (A/CR) [LBJ] Kerr, Clark (A) Johnson, Alfred T. "Boody" (A) Kerwin, Walter T. Oral History Interviews - Page 9 McKee, William F. (A) Mayborn, Frank W. (A) McKnight, Felix (A) Mayer, Margaret (A) [LBJ] McLean, William Hunter (A) Mayer, Margaret [LBJ] McMahon, Robert F. Mayhew, Lewis McNamara, Robert S. (R-2000) Means, Marianne [UT] McNeil, Marshall (A) Means, Marianne [LBJ] McPherson, Harry (A) [UT] Meany, George (A) McPherson, Harry (A) [LBJ] Mehren, George L. (A) McQuade, Lawrence (A) Melasky, Harris McWilliams, Roy L. (A) Melinger, Alfred (A) Meloy, Guy S. Menzies, Sir Robert (A) Maclay, William Dayton (A) Merrick, Samuel V. (A) Macomber, William B., Jr. (A) * Mesta, Perle (A) Macy, John W., Jr. (A) [UT] Midgley, Betty Furness (A) Macy, John W., Jr. (A) [LBJ] Millenson, Roy Maddox, Lester (A) Miller, Dale & Virginia "Scooter" (A) [UT] Magnuson, Warren (A) Miller, Dale & Virginia "Scooter" [LBJ] Maguire, Charles M. (A/CR) Miller, Erma Guffy (A) Mahon, George (A) Miller, George P. (A) Mahoney, Florence Miller, Nell Colgin (A) Malechek, Jewel (See Scott, Jewel Malechek) Miller, Virginia "Scooter" [LBJ] Manatos, Mike (A) Miller, William M. "Fishbait" (A) Mankiewicz, Frank F. (A) Mills, Tom Mann, Dave Mills, Wilbur (A) [UT] Mann, Gerald C., Sr. & Jr. (A) Mills, Wilbur (A) [LBJ] Mann, Thomas C. (A) Minow, Newton (A) Marcus, Stanley (A/CR) Mitchell, Clarence (A) Marder, Murrey Mitchell, Mrs. J. M. Markman, Sherwin J. (A) Monahan, John L. (A) Marks, Leonard (A) '[UT] Monroney, A. S. "Mike" (A) Marks, Leonard (A) [LBJ] Montague, Robert M. Marland, Sidney P. (A) Montgomery, Robert H. (A) Marshall, Burke (A) Mooney, Booth (A) [UT] Marshall, Cecille Harrison (A/CR) Mooney, Booth (A) [LBJ] Marshall, Thurgood (A) Moore, Powell (A) Marston, Robert Q. (A) Moore, Wyatt Martens, Clarence C. Moorer, Thomas H. (A) [UT] Martin, Crawford (A) Moorer, Thomas H. (A) [LBJ] Martin, John Bartlow (A) Morehead, Richard Martin, Louis (A) [UT] Moreland, Ralph (A) Martin, Louis [LBJ] Morris, Charles A. (A) Martin, Ruby G. (A) Morton, Thruston (A) Martin, William McChesney Moss, Frank E. (A) Martini, Steve (A) Moursund, A. W. Martz, Clyde O. (A) Millen, Mark T. Mashman, Joe (A) Mullen, Robert Mattson, Everett (A) Mundt, Karl E. (A) Matthews, Alwyn "Matty" (A) Murphey, Robert W. (A) May, Edgar Murphy, Charles S. (A) May, Ernest (A) Murphy, Patrick V. (A) May, Timothy (A) Murphy, Vicki McCarmon [LBJ] (See also Oral History Interviews - Page 11 Quie, Albert H. (A) Rogers, Will R. (A) Quigley, James M. Rogovin, Mitchell (A) Quill, Daniel J. (A) [UT] Rolvaag, Karl Quill, Daniel J. (A) [Goldman] Roosa, Robert V. (A/CR) Quill, Daniel J. (A) [w/Sam Fore] Roosevelt, James Rosenblatt, Peter R. Rostow, Eugene V. (A) Randall, Kenneth A. (A) Rostow, Walt W. (A*) [UT] Randolph, A. Philip (A) Rostow, Walt W. [LBJ] Rasmussen, Boyd L. (A) Roth, Fenner (A) [Bolton] Rather, Dan (A) Roth, Fenner (A) [NYA] Rather, Mary (A/CR) [LBJ] Roth, Fenner (A) [LBJ] Rather, Mary [LBJ] Rountree, Payne (A) Rauh, Joseph L., Jr. (A) Rovere, Richard H. (A) Re, Edward (A) Rowe, Elizabeth (A) Read, Benjamin H. (A) Rowe, James H., Jr. (A) [UT] Redford, Cecil Rowe, James H., Jr. (A) [LBJ] Redford, Clarence Rowe, James M. (A) Redford, Emmette S. (A) [UT] Rowley, James J. (A) Redford, Emmette S. (A) [LBJ] Royal, Darrell Reedy, George E., Jr. (A/CR) [UT] Royals, Thomas (A) Reedy, George E., Jr. (A/CR) [LBJ] Rusk, Dean (A) Reedy, George E., Jr. [LBJ] Russell, Harold J. (A) Reischauer, Edwin O. (A) Rustin, Bayard (A) Resor, Stanley R. (A) Ruttenberg, Stanley H. (A) Reynolds, James J. (A) Reynolds, William (A) Reynolds, William A. Sadler, Mrs. Wade Rhodes, Sharon Salas, Luis Richards, Horace E. (A) Salisbury, Harrison (A) Richardson, Elliott (A) Saltonstall, Leverett (A) Richmond, Julius (A) Samuels, Howard J. Ripley, S. Dillon (A) Sanders, Carl E. (A) Risner, Robinson (A) Sanders, Harold Barefoot (A) Rivlin, Alice Sandlin, George Robb, Lynda Johnson (R/WP/CR/ILL-life) Sanford, Terry (A) Robb, Lynda Johnson Saperstein, Sidney A. (A/R) Roberts, Chalmers M. (A) Saunders, Harold H. Roberts, Charles (A) Saunders, Josefa Baines (A) Roberts, Juanita (A) [Goldman] Sauvageot, Jean A. Roberts, Juanita (A) [UT] Scarmons, Richard M. (A) Roberts, Juanita (A) [LBJ] Schlei, Norbert A. (A) Roberts, Morris Schlesinger, Arthur (A/CR) Roberts, Ray (A/CR) [LBJ] Schmidt, Fred (A) Robeits, Ray (A) [NYA] Schneider, Wunibald W. (A) Robertson, A. Willis (A) Schnittker, John A. (A) [UT] Robertson, Joe Schnittker, John A. [LBJ] Robinson, James A. Schreiber, Harry J. (A) Roche, John P. (A) Schultze, Charles L. (A) Rockefeller, Laurance (A) Scott, Bess Whitehead Rockefeller, Nelson (A) Scott, Jewel Malechek Rogers, Paul Selden, Emily Crow (A) Oral History Interviews - Page 13 Timmes, Charles Weedin, Harfield (A/CR) Timmons, Bascom N. (A) Weeks, Christopher (A) Tocker, Phillip (A) Weinheimer, Tom and Betty Tolmach, Eric (A) Weisl, Edwin L., Jr. (A) Tooley, Erma Boehringer (A) Weisl, Edwin L., Sr. (A) Torp, Kenneth (A) Welsh, Edward C. (A) Tower, John G. (A) Wentzel, Volkmar K. (A) Trejos, Jose Joaquin (A) West, Wesley Trowbridge, Alexander (A) Westmoreland, William C. (A) [UT] Trueheart, William (A) Westmoreland, William C. (A) [LBJ] Tucker, Sterling (A) Wheeler, Earle G. (A) Tully, Grace (A) White, J. Roy (A) Turman, James A. (A) White, June (Mrs. William S. White) (A) Turner, Francis C. (A) White, Lee C. (A/CR) White, Robert M. (A) White, William S. (A) [UT] Udall, Stewart L. (A) White, William S. (A) [w/Sam Fore] Underwood, Marty White, William S. (A) [LBJ] Whiteside, R. Vernon (A) Whittington, Gerri Valenti, Jack (A) Wicker, Tom G. (A) Valenti, Mary Margaret Wiley [UT] Wiggins, James Russell (A) Valenti, Mary Margaret Wiley [LBJ] Wilcox, Walter W. (A) Vance, Cyrus R. (A) Wild, Claude C., Sr. (A) [UT] Vasey, Lloyd R. Wild, Claude C., Sr. (A) [Goldman] Vaughn, Jack Hood (A) Wildenthal, John (A) Vinson, Carl (A) Wilkins, Roger W. Vinson, Fred M., Jr. (A) Wilkins, Roy (A) Voigt, Kathleen Williams, Donald A. (A) Voorhis, H. Jerry (A) Williams, Eugene & Helen (A) Votaw, David Williams, G. Mennen (A) Williams, Jerre (A) Williams, Mary Pearl Waldron, Robert E. (A/CR) Williams, Samuel T. (A) Wallace, George C. (A) Willis, A. M. "Monk" (A) [LBJ] Wallace, Victor M. Willis, A. M. "Monk" [LBJ] Waller, Sir Keith (A) Wilson, Cynthia Walt, Lewis W. (A) Wilson, Glen P. (A) Walter, Louis F. (A) Wilson, Glen & Marie (A) Warner, Volney F. (A/CR/R/T) Wilson, Henry Hall (A) Warnke, Paul C. (A) Wilson, Isabel Brown (A) Warren, Earl (A) Wilson, James W. (A) Washington, Walter and Bennetta (A) Wilson, Logan (A) [UT] Wasserman, Lew (R/CR-lifetime) Wilson, Logan [LBJ] Watson, W. Marvin (A) Wilson, Marie (A) Wattenberg, Ben J. (A) Wilson, Will (A) Weaver, George L. P. (A) Winters, Anita P. Weaver, Robert C. (A) Winters, Melvin C. Webb, Erma (Mrs. Charles W.) (A) Wirth, Conrad L. (A) Webb, James E. (A/CR) Wirtz, Mrs. Alvin J. (A) Webb, Terrell Maverick (A) Wisner, Frank G. Weber, O. J. Wolkstein, Irwin Interviews Conducted after 1990 DeLoach, Cartha Goodman, Abram Silver, George Volkstein, Irwin Wittington, Gerri Special Interviews (Not Conducted by NLJ) McNamara, Robert S. (A) [Dallek] Clinton Presidential Records Digital Records Marker This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff. This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately scan such dividers. The title from the original document is indicated below. MANUAL Divider Title: PRAEGER SPECIAL STUDIES IN U.S. ECONOMIC, SOCIAL, AND POLITICAL ISSUES Oral History Program Manual Publishers New York Washington London Praeger Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Moss, William W 1935- Oral history program manual. (Praeger special studies in U.S. economic, social, and political issues) 1. Oral history. I. Title. D16.M857 907'.2 73-19446 PRAEGER PUBLISHERS 111 Fourth Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10003, U.S.A. 5, Cromwell Place, London SW7 2JL, England Published in the United States of America in 1974 by Praeger Publishers, Inc. PREFACE The practice of oral history grew rapidly during the decade from 1962 to 1972, and it is likely to grow even more in the succeeding one. This growth has been documented in Oral History in the United States (Gary Shumway, ed., Oral History Association, New York 1971) and in Manfred Wasserman's Bibliography on Oral History (Oral History Association, 1971). With growth has come a need for sharing the lessons learned by established programs for the benefit of newer ventures into oral history. Willa Baum has produced an excellent manual for local history projects: Oral History for the Local Histor- ical Society (American Association for State and Local History, Nash- ville, 1971). Various articles have been written about oral history, and the Proceedings of the annual national colloquia of the Oral History Association have contributed significantly. More recently, the Oral History Association and various institutions have set up workshops in oral history techniques for the benefit of new users. This book supplements these efforts by describing some of the concepts and practices of an oral history program in a Presidential library, and by presenting some of the lessons learned by one inter- viewer. Although the example may be specialized, the concepts, practices and problems are instructive and may help in the planning and conduct of other programs. The book has grown out of an earlier compilation of the processing procedures of the Kennedy Library program, for which there have been numerous requests by those just starting out in the field. It seems likely, too, that each new Presi- dential library will have an oral history program of its own. The extensive use of oral history in the existing libraries and the enthu- siastic response of researchers who have used the product suggested the need for at least some treatment of the practices and methodology of a Presidential program as a starting point for those to come and as a common reference point for debate among older ones. The opinions and conclusions in the book are, of course, my own, drawn largely from my service as an interviewer and director of the Kennedy Library oral history program, and should not be attributed to the John F. Kennedy Library, the U.S. National Archives and Re- cords Service, or to the personnel of those agencies. At the same time I must honestly and thankfully acknowledge that this book could not have been written without the critical assistance of a number of people who added facts, suggested changes in style and format, probed weaknesses in the text, caused me to think twice about some of my opinions, corrected grammar and spelling, and in many other ways V helped make it all possible. Not least must I thank all those inter- viewees who so willingly gave their time and careful attention to the recording of historical information for the Kennedy Library Program. Waltham, Mass. CONTENTS Page PREFACE V Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION: ORAL HISTORY IN THE KENNEDY LIBRARY 1 Background of the Program 1 A Brief Chronology 3 2 SOME GENERAL OBSERVATIONS 6 A Description of Oral History 6 Oral History as Evidence 8 The Ethics of Oral History 12 Some Legal Considerations 14 3 STARTING AN ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM 19 The Uses of an Advisory Council 20 Defining the Subject 22 Who Should be Interviewed 25 Who Should Do the Interviews 27 Choices of Historical Approach 29 4 TECHNIQUES FOR INTERVIEWING 32 Planning and Scheduling Interviews 32 Preparing Interviews 35 Considering the Interviewee 38 Conducting the Interview 41 5 PROCESSING INTERVIEWS 46 Tape Identification and Registration 46 Transcription 49 Staff Review of Draft Transcripts 51 vii Chapter Page Interviewee Review of Draft Transcripts 53 Negotiation and Preparation of the Legal Agreement 55 Final Typing 57 Accessioning 59 A Final Note about Processing 59 6 RESEARCH USE OF ORAL HISTORY TAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS 61 Screening 61 Finding Aids 62 7 PROCESSING RECORDS 64 Correspondence File 64 Interviewer Logs and Files 65 Files of Interview Tapes and Transcripts by Processing Stage 66 Worksheets and Master Control Sheets 66 Status Logs 67 Periodic Progress Reports 67 Name List 67 Name File 67 8 STAFFING AND EQUIPPING A MAJOR PROGRAM 69 The Program Director 70 Interviewers 71 Transcribers 72 Clerical Support 73 Reviewers or Tape Auditors 73 The Processing Supervisor 74 Research Assistance 74 Investing in Equipment 75 Tape Recorders for Interviewing 75 Tapes 76 Tape Recorders for Transcribing and Reviewing 76 Typewriters 77 Maintenance and Repair 77 A Final Note, about Office Space 77 APPENDIX Page A TRANSCRIBING MANUAL 78 B PROGRAM STATEMENT OF THE JOHN F. KENNEDY LIBRARY ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM 95 C GOALS AND GUIDELINES OF THE ORAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION 98 D OUTLINE OF PROCESSING STEPS 100 E PRELIMINARY QUESTIONNAIRE TO DETERMINE TERMS OF USE OF ORAL HISTORY TAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS 104 GLOSSARY OF ORAL HISTORY TERMS 108 ABOUT THE AUTHOR 110 ix Oral History Program Manual CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION: ORAL HISTORY IN THE KENNEDY LIBRARY The observations about oral history described in this book are drawn from the experiences of a particular program, with its own characteristics, capabilities and limitations. Several things should be understood to put what follows into proper perspective. The oral history program of the John F. Kennedy Library cen- ters on the life of a particular man and the politics of a particular presidency. The man's life and presidency were terminated abruptly, but the politics went on. The press and the public have continued to maintain a lively interest in the man, his family, and the circumstances of his leadership. Those who were his colleagues and his friends continue to have important roles to play in public life, and sensitivity to their current prospects for public service and to John F. Kennedy's place in history continues to be high. BACKGROUND OF THE PROGRAM The program began both as a memorial and as an attempt to document major events and personalities for the use of future schol- ars-two purposes that have sometimes been confused and intertwined. Influential people gave the program its initial thrust and direction under circumstances of widespread public sympathy. After an initial phase from March 1964 to March 1965 in which scores of interviewers gave their services in a voluntary effort to accumulate many interviews rapidly, the program was turned over to a professional staff in the National Archives. More recently, the second look at the Kennedy Administration by revisionist historians has added another critical dimension to the task of documenting the Kennedy Administration. The life of the program has coincided roughly with a rapid growth of oral history as a major addition to the basic equipment 1 of historical research and with the gradual acceptance of oral history as an essential and integral part of Presidential libraries. The Truman, Eisenhower and Kennedy libraries oral history efforts began in the early 1960s within three years of each other, rapidly followed by a privately funded and privately directed program on the career of President Hoover. The first national colloquium on oral history was held at Arrowhead, California, in 1966, just as the Kennedy library program was emerging from its growing pains into a stabilized research effort. The staff of the Kennedy Library oral history program has been acutely aware of the impact of these factors on its own work and on oral history in the Presidential libraries. Commitment to historical integrity has been a paramount concern throughout, but there has also been a recognition of the responsibility to protect donors from the premature or mischievous publication of their off-the-record and candid remarks meant for the use of future scholars. The emotional and public implications of the Kennedy name have opened doors but have also sometimes inhibited attempts to collect all the relevant information from all potential interviewees. The lack of a retired President to assist the program in solic- iting the cooperation of reluctant interviewees has been partly offset by the generous help of members of the Kennedy family and their associates. But we have not enjoyed the full advantages that surely would have been provided by John F. Kennedy's lively and energetic interest in the Library and the oral history program. We have, con- versely, been spared the inevitable influence, however benign or well intentioned, that a living principal exerts on his own research projects. With the exception of the first year or so of the program's life, in which general guidelines were laid down, and during which there were certain restrictions on research in the documents, the Kennedy family and associates have exercised no control whatsoever over the program and choice of interviewees or materials collected, nor have they in any way exercised review of the product at any time. The professional staff has carried the program without interference and with generous support and sympathy since it emerged as an on-going program in 1966. The rather loose administrative control (unavoidable though it may have been) in the early "crash project" phase of the program was followed beginning in 1965, with a more careful insistence on regularized procedures and meticulous record-keeping. In rare cases it has been difficult to return to some interviewees simply because they were dissatisfied-or too well satisfied-with the first efforts of the volunteer phase. While some volunteer interviewers had been admirably equipped to do the job required and produced much valuable material, others, for a variety of reasons, were not able to produce material that measured up to the quality of the better interviews. In the first year or SO of the regular professional staff, work was handi- capped by lack of access to the relevant documents in the President's papers. Since that time, with access to the papers and with a trained staff, the quality of interviews has depended more frequently on the skill and commitment of the interviewee than on the preparation of the interviewer. The staff of the Kennedy program learned as it worked, exchanged experiences with other researchers using oral history techniques and materials, and gradually developed routine policies and procedures. Through these exchanges and experiences, trials and errors, the staff also gained a firsthand and lasting appreciation for the ethical implica- tions of the relatively new and untested field of oral history. All of this places a responsibility on the Kennedy Library oral history program to make use of its experiences by sharing them with others. A BRIEF CHRONOLOGY The following brief chronology will serve to acquaint readers with the more significant benchmarks in the development of the Kennedy Library oral history program. 1964 January Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., and others discuss plans for the John F. Kennedy Library, including an oral history project to be undertaken in two phases: a crash project using many volunteer interviewers to capture fresh impressions; and a long-range detailed program of oral history interviews for in-depth research. March Phase I begins under the direction of Frederick M. Dutton, then Assistant Secretary of State for Congres- sional Liaison; funding is provided by a grant from the Carnegie Corporation and is administered by Harvard University; technical support and storage of completed interviews is provided by the National Archives. 1965 March Phase I ends after spending only about one-third of the Carnegie grant and taping several hundred interviews, not all of which were transcribed or turned over to the National Archives for eventual deposit in the Kennedy Library; the balance of the grant and the administration 3 March of the program are turned over to the National Archives: Charles T. Morrissey is appointed director of the program. May An advisory committee for the project is formed; its members are Robert F. Kennedy, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., Richard Neustadt, Franklin L. Ford, Oscar Handlin, William Leuchtenburg, and Frederick M. Dutton. Prof. A. B. Rollins, Jr., submits a report to Harvard University, evaluating the first phase of the project (The Oral History Project of the John Fitzgerald Kennedy Library, copyright 1965 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College; a most thoughtful report, not in general circulation). November Morrissey completes forming his initial staff of three interviewers and a small processing unit; he develops division of effort into domestic and foreign-affairs inter- viewing; he develops intensive interviewing on 1960 primaries. 1966 June John F. Stewart succeeds Morrissey as chief of the pro- gram. October The advisory committee, deciding it need no longer meet on a regular basis, offers the availability of individual members for advice as needed. 1969 September Stewart moves to Waltham, Mass., to become Acting Director of the Kennedy Library in temporary quarters at the Federal Records Center; Larry J. Hackman is appointed chief of the program; the staff at this point consists of four full-time interviewers, one part-time interviewer and processing supervisor, four reviewer- editors, four transcribers, a secretary and a clerk-typist. December The last of Carnegie grant is spent: the program is run entirely on funds from Congressional appropriations for the Kennedy Library. 1970 September Hackman leaves for a year of study at Harvard and is succeeded by William W. Moss; plans are begun for the September phased transfer of the program from the National Archives to the Library in Waltham; Stewart begins to hire oral history processing personnel at the Library. 1971 February Transfer of processing supervisor from program offices in Washington, D.C., gives opportunity for starting phased transfer of the program to the Library in Waltham; the staff in Waltham begins to assume more of the processing tasks. September The entire program is moved to Waltham and is integrated with the operations of the Library; Hackman rejoins the Library staff. By the end of 1972 more than 1,000 people had been interviewed by the oral history program of the John F. Kennedy Library. The program, presently consisting of three staff members who interview on a part-time basis and other staff members who process material on a part-time basis, will continue to collect interviews and will continue to reinterview people recorded earlier as the need arises. However, the pace of interview production will be much reduced in the years to come compared with the peak production years through 1970, when three or four full-time interviewers were supported by a processing staff of three or four editors, eight to ten transcribers and one or two clerk typists. It may be instructive to note that, exclusive of volunteer interviewers in the first year's crash project, the Kennedy program in six years had four directors, twelve full-time or part-time interviewers, and nearly fifty additional persons employed as transcribers, draft transcribers, draft transcript reviewers, pro- cessing supervisors, typists, secretaries, and research assistants. This high rate of turnover has at times made continuity and control somewhat difficult. 5 CHAPTER 2 SOME GENERAL OBSERVATIONS It has become evident to those of us who have worked on the Kennedy oral history program that the way in which each person individually and the staff collectively view the oral history mission will to a great extent affect the conduct and content of the program. An inquiry into the nature and capabilities of oral history, and the ethical and legal responsibilities involved, should be a continuing concern of those who undertake major programs. The concepts in- volved are not static, nor can they be prescribed as models of under- standing or behavior. They can be appreciated only through practice, mistakes and experience. Nevertheless, it is profitable to sketch out areas in which experience should be sought and to offer some conclu- sions against which each new program can measure its own realities. A DESCRIPTION OF ORAL HISTORY Oral history is difficult to define exclusively. It is far easier to talk about it than to pin down the boundaries between what is and what is not oral history. At the first national colloquium on oral his- tory at Lake Arrowhead the participants failed to arrive at a concise and commonly accepted definition, although they agreed on many ele- ments.* Some found it wiser not to attempt such precision. Nor were the charter members of the Oral History Association entirely happy with the term "oral history"; they felt constrained to use it *See "Definitions of Oral History" in Proceedings of the National Colloquium on Oral History, 1966, Oral History Association, New York, 1967, pp. 5-30. because it had become habitual and none of the alternatives suggested were sufficiently inspired to last. At least with programs that concentrate on major historical events and personalities, oral history interviewing is a systematic collection, arrangement, preservation and publication (in the sense of making generally available) of recorded verbatim accounts and opinions of people who were witnesses to or participants in events likely to interest future scholars. It is basically an information-collecting technique, the results of which may be found in loosely coherent col- lections of tapes and typewritten transcripts or in use as source material for a film documentary or other published work. This rather neat conceptual enclosure is not adequate to the description of oral history, however. The subject matter of oral his- tory varies as widely as the occupations of its practitioners. Any interview that is recorded may become "oral history," whether it be done by a historian, a sociologist, a folklorist, a journalist, a military intelligence officer, or whomever. The diversity of occupations in- volved makes it difficult and perhaps fruitless to apply specialized professional standards to oral history except in the most general sense that any oral history program ought to be rooted in sound and rational scholarship and should be justified by the usefulness of its product. In another vein, there has been much use of the tape recorder as a device to assist historians in writing books, particularly bio- graphic studies such as Forrest Pogue's biography of George C. Marshall and T. Harry Williams's work on Huey Long. There have also been several books that rely chiefly on taped interviews to pro- duce edited "transcripts" as content, such as Jean Stein's American Journey and Studs Terkel's Hard Times. There is much feeling among oral historians that these "end-products" that use oral history are not themselves "oral history" even though the compilers and authors may be practitioners of the technique. The original tapes and tran- scripts from which the writers worked may be oral history in the purer sense, especially if they are deposited in a library or other institution for eventual use by general researchers, but the published books are something quite different. There has also been much discussion among oral historians about what kinds of records may properly be called oral history. The most orthodox form of activity is an interview in which one person solicits from another his recollections and opinions of people, places, events and concepts. Although purists may shudder, some oral his- torians would allow other activities as diverse as speeches, Congres- sional hearings, telephone conversations, barroom debates, or any other human communication that might be recorded and transcribed for the purpose of preserving it as a primary research source for 7 future scholars. In the broader view, anything that is "oral" and that is recorded and preserved becomes "oral history." The medium in which the record is preserved for oral history is-at least in recent times-magnetic audio tape or typewritten tran- script or both. When recording equipment is not readily available, a stenographic record of an interview may be substituted for audio tape, as in the days before the tape recorder. Cinematic film with synchronized sound track may also be used, as may videotape. With recent advances in technology the reduced size and cost of equipment to produce video cassettes may encourage greater use of simultaneous audio and visual recording for "oral" history. However, many people still feel that the impulse of both interviewers and interviewees to dress up their physical appearance and their dialogue for the camera jeopardizes the intimacy, candor and confidentiality that is the standard oral history stock-in-trade. For a time at least, it is likely that simul- taneous video and audio recording of interviews will be limited to more formal occasions or situations where the participants have very little personal ego at stake in the record. Some very good multimedia work has been done for film and television documentaries, but these, like biographic studies, tend to be consumers, not producers, of oral his- tory. (An excellent "oral history" documentary is "The Sorrow and the Pity," the Marcel Ophuls film about France during World War II.) ORAL HISTORY AS EVIDENCE The case for oral history is an obvious one. It can provide information that historians would not otherwise be able to acquire. Historians have long appreciated the value of memories of witnesses, but only recently have we learned to appreciate the persistence of oral traditions as rich sources of historical evidence in the modern world. Among illiterate and semiliterate societies, whether primitive or civilized, oral traditions are still the chief form of historicalaware- ness and cultural continuity from generation to generation. The oral history work at Cornell University in New York and at Mary Holmes College in Mississippi has been to collect the "oral history" of rural families whose lives have been changed by the changes in technology and who have kept few if any written records. Other attempts are being made to record the stories of city-dwelling poor and migrant workers, or people with special experience in one of the many facets of our society. Even in literate record-keeping societies much information goes unrecorded. Frequently the banal is preserved while the significant is left off the record. It has become clear that personality differences and adversarial skills have been significant factors in many high-level government councils. Too often the record of the meetings at which debates occurred read like rational seminars or academic dialogues. Only the personal testimony of those present, their views of them- selves and others in the debates, can suggest the depth to which per- sonal egos were engaged in the arguments, and further, that perhaps more was at stake than the objective pros and cons of the issues be- fore a meeting. To further compound the need for oral history, the appetite of scholars for what is relevant and significant has taken on new dimen- sions in recent years, and the scholar's need for evidence extends far beyond the data and exposition traditionally committed to written rec- ords. In addition, one rarely finds in this fast-paced world of electronic communications those thoughtful and reflective diaries that historians often have used to provide a human counterpoint to the dominant themes of political and social development. Oral history offers a means for the accurate recording and preservation of personal sources to fill the gaps in written documents. It is not a modern contrivance. It is ancient, and its modern employ- ment is one answer to the increased demand for information and to the increased appreciation for where evidence may be found. What is new is the magnetic tape recorder, used on a large scale to capture exact verbatim accounts, together with accents, intonations and inflec- tions, without the interpretive intervention of stenographers and note- takers. New also, perhaps, is the frequent use of this technique to record not only recollections of the past but the reflections and opinions of those whose lives are still engaged in public activities. This kind of oral history deals with a dynamic and ever changing source of data, the minds and memories of interviewees. Documents may decay with time, but they do not very often change before your very eyes. Inter- viewees, on the other hand, are capable of rapid and startling changes. Memory is not merely a passive reservoir of data, the contents of which can be pored over and scrutinized at leisure. It is engaged and integrated with the present-with continuously changing attitudes, perspectives and understandings-working and reworking the data of experience into new formulations, opinions and perhaps even new creations. What is captured by oral history is seldom an exhaustive study of all the relevant data, but rather a segment of human experi- ence-the interaction of interviewer and interviewee-in the context of a remembered past, a dynamic present and an unknown, open-ended future. To presume to search for historical evidence in such a source is a special challenge and adventure with both opportunities and limi- tations. Oral history interviewers normally engage in an open inquiry that searches the memory of interviewees for historical evidence. The interviewers may know the approximate nature of the evidence, 9 but not until discoveries begin to be made can it be known what any given interviewee has to offer history. The search may be deliberate, and it may be directed by circumstantial evidence in documented sources, but the discoveries themselves are largely accidental, de- pending on factors over which the researcher who must eventually use the information has no control. An interviewer must settle for just so much as an interviewee is willing to provide. An archeological site does not willfully withhold or distort evidence, but an interviewee can. If the interviewee is com- mitted to the purpose of the interview, if he is by nature a candid and reflective person, and if he is also articulate and expansive in the exposition of his memories, then the "artifacts" may be plentiful and significant. If not, then the "dig" may yield only a few shards, and those grudgingly. The factors that have gone into shaping the inter- viewee's responses may be dimly perceived by the interviewer, but they are even more obscure to the casual reader of the transcript years later. There is practically no opportunity in oral history for the controlled testing of evidence that characterizes scientific re- search. Oral history information may be tested in a variety of situa- tions, and standard questions may be asked of a large group of re- spondents, but the factors affecting the answers are not subject to systematic and scientific control by the interviewer. For some of these reasons, oral history is looked upon with suspicion in more orthodox historical quarters as being substandard evidence. Actually, much of the more traditional evidence is subject to the same intellectual reservations. Each "document" creates its own new reality that is an abstraction of the people, places and events it represents in history. So those who practice oral history should do so with the firm conviction that the evidence they are collecting is not second-rate just because it is oral history. At the same time, they should be aware of the limitations. Most scholars trained in the sciences and social sciences need no reminders of the rules of evidence. However, many practitioners of oral history may not be in the habit of the testing and comparing of evidence that scholarship requires. Some, quite legitimately, are experimenting with impressionistic art forms involving recorded oral communication, but that is not usually thought of as oral history. Some, regrettably, are just plain sloppy, careless and lazy or so unskilled as to produce little that is meaningful. There is also a new population of users of historical materials who could use a word or two of caution on oral history as source material. The growing numbers of undergraduate researchers, amateur historians, free-lance writers and journalists who now prowl the archives once limited to "serious scholars" fre- quently employ different criteria for judging the usefulness of material than those habitually used by trained social scientists. What is useful for these new researchers is often not the value of data as historical evidence but rather the uniqueness of a piece of information and its authoritative association with a distinguished public figure which, when quoted, can draw special attention to their work and make it "sell." If oral history is to be used in this manner-and it would be most difficult to prevent such use in an open society-then those who practice oral history and those who encounter it in their studies should heed a word of warning. First, oral history is patently and unavoidably a collection of subjective evidence, and if a researcher treats it uncritically, if he accepts and publishes out-of-context remarks without comparing them with other evidence or without qualifying the quotation properly, he will often be led to mistaken interpretations. Oral history interviewers may have some responsibility to pursue errors of fact during the course of an interview (bearing in mind that the error may be as illuminating as the truth) but there is little that can be done to correct the more subtle bias of individual perspective. It can be recorded and perhaps vaguely identified for future generations to puzzle over and sort out, but it cannot be tested or proved in the course of an interview. A wide sampling from a number of witnesses may serve to enrich the evidence of the total project, but each part is at best an approximation of reality, a personalized metaphor of the world as seen by one person. Secondly, it is easy to do bad oral history. In an age of jour- nalistic "talk shows" the temptation of dilettantism is strong. Anyone with audacity and a tape recorder can "do oral history" after a fashion. Until oral history has matured enough for researchers to compare various programs for quality and value, the casual reader as well as the careful scholar should exercise great care in accepting the product of any program at face value. Oral history, then, may be regarded as one of the tools of the scholarly trade. It requires careful thinking and planning if it is to be a good tool. Only after thorough immersion in the primary and secondary sources and the development of a masterful competence in the subjects should an interviewer feel justified in committing the time, expense and effort required by oral history for a major pro- gram. Nor should an interviewer feel comfortable at so bold an intru- sion into the lives of his interviewees as to expect candor and con- scientious replies unless he has sufficient mastery of subjects and details to win the respect and willing cooperation of those he is re- cording for posterity. It is probable that oral history will become more and more widely used as a source of historical evidence, and it will be increasingly subject to critical scholarly appraisal. It should be expected to measure up to professional standards. (I have been gently and justly reminded that an attentive listener may be all that is needed in some forms of oral history, such as "old-timer" tales. 11 While agreeing with the exception, I shall stick to the principle, espe- cially for programs dealing with major political and social develop- ments.) THE ETHICS OF ORAL HISTORY The Oral History Association, recognizing a need for some com- monly accepted reference point for practitioners to consider the ethics of oral history, adopted in 1968 a brief statement of goals and guide- lines (see Appendix C). Like many such statements it is most useful to and most understood by those who have come to similar conclusions through practice. It is an expression of commonly shared opinions of people who have made hard decisions without guidelines; perhaps each new practitioner should face the same decisions in his own conscience rather than mechanically use the OHA rubrics as a model of ethical behavior. Other than the OHA guidelines, few criteria are commonly ac- cepted for the practice of oral history, and there are no laws written for its regulation. The dearth of guidance and regulation is a double- edged sword. The moral consequences are uncertain (there is no professional standards committee of the OHA to inquire into the con- duct of its members) and therefore subject to wide tolerances of be- havior. It is probably best that it be so. The same uncertainty, how- ever, can lead careless people into embarrassing confrontations with interviewees, users of oral history materials, or their fellow oral historians. One may proceed a long way in ignorance without en- countering hazards knowingly, and may be far afield when a crisis finally comes. It is prudent to be aware of the problems beforehand and to take time to ponder the moral implications of oral history so as to come to some useful commitments to professional integrity be- fore a great deal of work has been done in producing oral history interviews. It should go without saying, and perhaps too often does, that oral historians have a primary obligation to truth. This is a commitment not to be entered into lightly. It is tempting to engage in oral history for purposes of other than scholarly inquiry, and other purposes are easily served under its guise. The memorial nature of Presidential libraries, the religious nature of a church or movement, or the revolu- tionary nature of some causes often compel eulogistic or propagandistic "witness" in even the best-intentioned interviewer's approach. Biased memoria certainly have their place in the historical context, but it should be the responsibility of a professional oral historian to balance them with more detached views and opposing testimony. The moral obligation to the future requires that the interviewer be a detached 12 observer and reporter, a critical analyst of his subject, and not an apologist for a person or an ideology. Those who engage in oral his- tory should insist that their programs are insulated from such com- pelling influences as mentioned above. Another most important and related consideration is that collec- tors of oral history have two primary obligations that are often in con- flict. They are obliged to acquire and preserve candid and confidential interviews about the lives and careers of people; interviews that, if they are any good, contain information not normally accessible to the public. At the same time, oral historians are similarly obliged to make these interviews available to the public as soon as practicable for general research that will increase public knowledge and under- standing. This is particularly true of the programs in Presidential libraries, where a manifest justification is the education of the American people in the workings of their government. The demand for the kinds of confidential revelation that are found in many oral history interviews is large and growing. It can- not always be satisfied without jeopardizing the chances of acquiring a collection that is candid enough, significant enough and complete enough to be useful in the long run. The premature disclosure of confidences of interviewees for short-term gains can be counter- productive in that future interviewees may refuse to be candid, may refuse to discuss controversial or personal topics, or may even re- fuse to be interviewed at all. The danger from irresponsible publication of confidences extends beyond any given program and affects the entire range of oral history work. Oral history interviewers enter into a moral relationship with each interviewee, a relationship that is similar to but does not have the common law protection of the doctor-patient or lawyer-client relationships of privileged communication. Each oral history inter- viewer enters into an implicit (but preferably explicit) understanding with each interviewee, in which the interviewee agrees to be candid and the interviewer agrees not to publish or otherwise use the con- tents of the interview contrary to the wishes of the interviewee. An oral history interview is markedly different from a journalistic inter- view, or even the interviews that participants in historic events often grant scholars. In these latter cases the mutually understood objec- tive is imminent publication by the interviewer, and the interviewee knows that he takes his chances even when he identifies information as "off the record" or "for background use only." Publication is usually determined in a time and context convenient for the reporter and his publisher. The interviewee in such an interview knows that he virtually gives up any right to control the manner of publication. In oral history the understood objective is to make the contents avail- able for historical research and perhaps eventual publication at a 13 time and under circumstances at least partly dictated by the inter- viewee as a condition of the interview being granted. Moral commitment may at times be at variance with public opinion, the demands of particular groups, or even the public interest as decreed by public officials. The prevailing notion that sources be made public in the public's own interest runs counter to the traditional view that there are privileged communications which ought to be re- spected even if they are not protected by law. It may seem intolerable, even to scholars who are not politically motivated, that an oral history interview with a public figure, an interview that was produced at public expense with a government employee acting as interviewer and that is deposited in publicly funded archives, should not be made available to the public. Pressure groups of whatever political persuasion may clamor for access if they sense that an oral history collection may have grist for their particular mills. The special opportunity and special challenge of doing oral history interviewing in events as they are still unfolding creates commensurate problems. Information dis- closed in confidential interviews may be seen as pertinent to current administrative or judicial proceedings or to current political issues. The oral historian's obligations and the duty of the collecting institution in such cases should be to the protection of their sources. But there are many conflicting duties involved, and each person and each institution must make many decisions on a case-by-case basis with little guidance other than a solemn warning to consider each one carefully and to explore the implications carefully before taking a firm position. SOME LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS There are several areas in which the ethical problems referred to above have legal implications, and it is well for those engaged in interviewing and collecting oral history materials to be very sure of their ground in these cases. The advice of a competent lawyer is rec- ommended. In particular, oral history programs dealing with modern, sensitive political subjects should look into the areas of access by subpoena action, libel and slander, literary property right, and classi- fied national defense and foreign policy information. What follows should not be taken as authority on any of these questions but merely as an introduction to make readers more acutely aware that there are problems and pitfalls to which they must be alert. Subpoena and Access to Oral History Interviews In normal circumstances the restrictions imposed by an inter- viewee and accepted by the collecting institution should suffice to 14 control access to an oral history interview. Mutual interest argues strongly for the conscientious obedience to these terms and conditions. Publicly funded institutions are obliged, by their public responsibilities, to open an interview once the restrictions expire. Private institutions may, if they deem it appropriate, impose their own additional restric- tions on interviews to which they hold title but on which the interviewee restrictions have expired. A responsibility of interviewers and col- lecting institutions is to make this very clear to each interviewee and to make certain that the interviewee knows he has the primary re- sponsibility for determining the conditions of access. The legal agree- ment between interviewee and collector is normally more than adequate to protect confidences against premature disclosure for the sake of historical evidence or a journalistic coup. There is a great deal less certainty when the question of a sub- poena duces tecum arises. It is not likely that oral history interviews will be a profitable source of legal evidence, but even the remote possibility of subpoena action, especially in sensitive or controversial matters of recent history, may threaten the protection normally af- forded by legal agreements. Up to the present time there has been no test case in this area, and most oral historians devoutly hope there will not be one. It is to be hoped that time will develop a tradition of privilege for these confidential communications that will be linked to the constitutional protections of privacy, and that the requirement for demonstrable probable cause with respect to subpoenas will serve to protect oral history material. But in the meantime interviewers, collecting institutions and interviewees should give great care and attention to necessary safeguards to prevent such legal interest in oral history interviews. Libel and Slander It is prudent for oral historians and interviewees to be aware that they are responsible for libelous or slanderous material contained in interviews. While publication (in the sense of sharing or making generally available) and malicious intent are commonly thought neces- sary to establish a case, the personal reflections and opinions that characterize many oral history interviews contain the potential for legal action against interviewers, interviewees, and even the institu- tions having custody of the interviews. In some cases institutional depository staffs are protected by law from action for libelous or slanderous material in their archives, but it is not entirely clear whether such protection would extend to an archives official who him- self took part in the creation of the material of record. It is wise, therefore, for interviewers in both public and private institutions to 15 advise interviewees that material which may be potentially libelous (transcripts) or slanderous (tapes) should be placed under seal for SO long as the danger of legal action may exist.* Literary Property Rights A most complex legal question with respect to oral history is the problem of literary property rights. The basic premises of liter- ary property right come from common law, with few precedents in case law and no statutory provisions on which to rely. Theoretically, the originator of a verbal or written expression is the owner of that particular formulation of words, and is entitled to publish it or profit by it as he sees fit. In theory, too, each participant in a recorded interview shares in the literary property of the whole (in proportions that are not always easy to determine). Furthermore, publication in any form, including generalized access by the public to transcripts in a library, may constitute an abridgement of literary property right unless the originator can be shown to have acquiesced in the publication. In such a case the originator may be regarded as having voluntarily surrendered his literary property rights. In practice the concepts are not so easy to apply. An interviewer in business for himself, such as scholar preparing material for a book, may share in the literary property right of the interviews he conducts, but he should be careful to obtain the consent of the interviewees to publication of verbatim quotations from interviews. It is believed but not certain that the simple exchange of correspondence indicating the purpose of the research and the granting of an interview implies inter- viewee consent to publication. Interviewers for institutionally based projects should obtain, as part of a legal agreement, a provision that covers the question of literary property rights of the interviewee. The rights may be explicitly transferred to the collecting institution, or may be reserved to the interviewee for a time, after which the rights are automatically transferred to the sponsoring institution. If the interview is to be made available to general research before the expiration of the interviewee's period of literary property right, the legal agreement should also contain explicit prohibitions against verbatim quotations, permitting only limited quotation with proper attribution for the purposes of illustration in the publications of re- searchers. *See H. Mason Welch, "A Lawyer Looks at Oral History," Pro- ceedings, Fourth National Colloquium on Oral History, Oral History Association, New York, 1970, pp. 182-195. 16 While property right, like copyright, cannot be originated by a publicly administered and funded institution, it is probable that the explicit assignment of such rights to the institution by the interviewee may be useful in preventing the wholesale pirating and publication of interviews by profiteering third parties. This hypothesis requires some testing before it can be relied upon fully, and interviewers, interviewees and the collecting institutions should exercise every caution in framing legal agreements to provide adequate protection where literary property right may be important. Classified National Security Information Interviews with government officials who have been principals in recent U.S. government activities in national defense, nuclear power, foreign policy and foreign intelligence may very well contain infor- mation which, if produced by a government agency, would have been classified in accordance with laws and executive order protecting the information from unauthorized disclosure. It is not the purpose here to discuss the merits or failings of current policies, regulations and procedures, but rather to observe that such things do exist and that they may have practical consequences for active oral history pro- jects in recent sensitive political subjects. Project officials and staff members should be thoroughly familiar with Executive Order 11652 of March 8, 1972, and laws protecting specific technical information such as atomic energy data or sophisticated intelligence-gathering methods. Staff members may require formal security clearances, and the storage and handling of materials may have to conform to government standards for their protection. In public institutions security regulations are administratively enforced. Private institu- tions, not subject to either the regulation or the protection of govern- ment administration, should exercise extreme care and make some quite deliberate decisions about how far they want to get involved with national security material, and what kinds of prices they are willing to pay for it. Whether the oral history program is a private or a public one, interviewees should be advised that it is their own personal responsi- bility to check with the government agencies of primary interest to seek guidance on applying security classifications to material that may be discussed in an interview. While it is preferable for inter- viewees to seek advance guidance and then apply their own best judg- ment to the question of what protection is needed, there may be cases in which it is advisable for the interview to be reviewed by successor authorities in government. Usually these will be the more technically detailed interviews such as those in the areas of arms control, weapons 17 development or other military and intelligence fields. It is seldom that a former presidential appointee whose position was a highly politi- cal one will choose to have his interview reviewed by his successors, particularly when another party has succeeded to the presidency in the interim. In most cases the interests of all are best served if material suspected of being classifiable is closed by the interviewee for a spe- cific term as a condition in the legal agreement by which the collecting institution accepts the interview. 18 CHAPTER 3 STARTING AN ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM In Lewis Carroll's Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, at the trial of the Knave of Hearts, in answer to the question, "Where shall I begin, please your Majesty?" the King of Hearts replies, "Begin at the begin- ning and go on till you come to the end: Then stop." It may at first seem facetious, but the advice is aptly suited to oral history programs. Any program, even one in which the general subject is readily and fairly narrowly defined, should begin with the very basic questions of who is to be interviewed, about what, how extensively and in what manner. At the same time, one of the inescapable characteristics of an oral history program is that despite every good intention it will go right on to the end until it is thoroughly exhausted. One of the reasons for this is that content, scope and approach seldom are understood or appreciated until much interviewing has taken place. Planning for oral history is not definitive at the beginning or at any point along the way, and a program staff must feel its way through trial and error toward the limits of its intellectual identity and practical management patterns. It is usually long after a point of diminishing return has been passed that the program staff can really begin to appreciate a sense of achievement and completeness in the work that has been done. It is perhaps fitting that one of the early oral history projects under- taken by Allan Nevins was a study of wildcat oil speculation in Texas.* Oral history resembles wildcatting for oil in that superficial indica- tors may suggest the presence of rich sources hidden below the sur- face, and disciplined research may justify further exploration, but *See Nevins, "The Uses of Oral History," Oral History at Arrow- head, Proceedings of the First National Colloquium on Oral History, Oral History Association, Los Angeles, 1967, p. 37. 19 one never can be quite certain of the extent and quality of the deposits until after considerable investment has been made to tap the sources. Some wells are unexpectedly dry while others unaccountably bring in rich gushers. A major oral history program of broad scope must go through a continual process of evaluation and redefinition. But it is necessary to begin somewhere, even if it is only to have a plan from which the practical inquiry can proceed and which can form the basis for changes and modifications as the program develops. THE USES OF AN ADVISORY COUNCIL It may be useful for an oral history program to have an advisory council in the early stages of its development. In fact, a sponsoring institution or a foundation providing the funds for a program may re- quire such a supervisory body to make certain that the program is solidly and wisely launched. The council ought to outlive its useful- ness rapidly as a program develops its own standards and momentum, and the advisers should be disbanded as soon as it is apparent that the program is doing well. The advisers may be useful in working out the common under- standings of what the program is expected to accomplish, and they may be invaluable in lending professional staff the authority and legiti- macy often required to gain access to interviewees and to induce their cooperation. The group of advisers should be small, but it should combine a number of talents and resources that would be useful to the program. There should be someone on the council who has the confidence and trust of the principal figure or institution that is the subject of the program's inquiry. In addition, people with legal and historical expertise are most helpful. Someone with experience in fund-raising, obtaining grants and managing research program re- sources may also be helpful, and at least one person intimately famil- iar with the people and events to be investigated, a potential inter- viewee himself, should round out the group to suggest the breadth and scope of people and subjects for inquiry. A number of questions having to do with the shape and character of the program will be answered in the early days, and should be con- sidered carefully with the advice of a council. 1. Is the program to be undertaken as an integral part of a given institution such as a university library, to be staffed and administered by the institution and to take from it both authority and scholarly direction? Should the program be contracted out to another institution, with the interviews to be deposited elsewhere? Is the program to be run as an independent effort without institutional ties? If so, what 20 happens to the interviews? Where should they be deposited, and under what terms and conditions? 2. How should the program proceed? What approach or com- bination of approaches, and in what order, will serve the program's objectives best? Who are to be the interviewers and interviewees? What kind of staff is wanted and who shall hire them? 3. What kinds of controls should be set up to govern the conduct of the program and the disbursement of funds? Who should be chosen to direct the program? What authority and latitude should the director have in selecting a staff and running and developing the program? What should be the relationships between the director, the advisory council and the institution? 4. What may be anticipated in the way of costs of the program in its initial phase? How is it to be funded? What office facilities, depository facilities and staff will be required at each stage of devel- opment? 5. What is to be the legal status of the interviews given to the program? Who is to own them? Who is to control access? Who may use them and for what purposes? What sort of instrument of transfer is required to clarify all ownership rights? 6. What kinds of assurances should be established to protect interviewees' candid remarks from unauthorized or mischievous use, from libel and slander, and from subpoena action? 7. What steps are needed to lend the program the necessary prestige and authority required to gain access to interviewees? What is needed to obtain staff access to private papers and other sensitive material required for the research that goes into interview prepara- tion? The above list suggests the kinds of questions that will need answers and that will be critical in shaping the program that will do the job required. Advisers may make some positive contributions, but they may also be obstacles to progress. The relationship between advisory council and the program staff, particularly the director, is a delicate one. The advisers should always remember that they are appointed to advise and facilitate, not to direct or obstruct. It is easy for an advisory council to have review responsibilities that may easily lead to indirect control of matters over which the program director should have independent authority. Should an advisory council begin to enter into the direct control of a program it is a clear indication that the relationship between them and the director has failed in some manner, and it is time to consider a change. An advisory council of intelligent people will recognize when their function has become super- fluous and when the program director is functioning on a solid base of a sound program with its own momentum. They will recognize that 21 this is the time to fade quietly away with reassurances that they are available if needed but will no longer be looking over the director's shoulder. A director who allows an advisory council to assume such a proprietary interest in the program that his own functions are usurped is asking for trouble. He will never satisfy himself or his principals, and he may very well produce an indifferent collection of interviews. DEFINING THE SUBJECT Allan Nevins once remarked that large programs in oral history would probably become involved in what he termed a "shotgun" ap- proach to history, in which many subject areas would be "hit" in broadly ranging inquiries. He noted that most traditional historians were in the habit of boring in on narrowly defined targets in a "rifle" approach.* The experience of the Kennedy Library oral history pro- gram in many ways supports this prediction. Presidential oral history presents a great range of targets. From the baffling peculiarities of California politics to stubborn questions of jurisdiction in labor dis- putes; from complex calculations of cost-benefit ratios in water power projects to international monetary liquidity; from the relative strength of local political bosses to questions of nuclear parity; from the senti- mental tales of childhood to power struggles in political conventions and wârfare in distant lands; and from private rationalizations of minor decision-makers to the drafting of major documents of state, the breadth of potential subject matter is formidable. To proceed in a systematic manner across the whole spectrum of modern government and politics is awesome enough. To undertake the inquiry for the benefit of future scholars, whose requirements may be only dimly perceived and vaguely appreciated, borders on rash presumption. There is an additional urgency, too, from historians and others who want the record to be completed quickly, and therefore there is a compulsion to cover as much territory as possible in a relatively brief span of time. On the other hand, we also found that there are occasions when it is necessary to narrow the target as opportunities arise to take advantage of promising sources and to make the most effective use of available staff experience and talent. An interviewer, because of special training or special access to sources, may for a time specialize in interviewing people and inquiring into events associated with re- search and development in the Department of Defense, while another will specialize in the special relationship and concern by the Kennedy *Nevins, op. cit., p. 38. 22 family with respect to mental retardation. These narrowed, temporary efforts have often approached the scale of program sub-projects, closer to Nevins's "rifle" than his "shotgun" metaphor, but seldom accomplishing an exhaustive or definitive study as would a profes- sional historian writing a book on the same subject. Planning for a major program is likely to shift back and forth from a broad to a narrow focus, depending in part on the interests and expertise of staff members, and in part on who is available to be interviewed. Just where the priorities of concentration should go is constantly being reviewed and reconstructed by the staff. For example, there is no ready answer to the question how far the program should stray from the central subjects of the President and the major events of his administration. It is easy to understand the significance of interviews that seek to record the character of deliberations in the National Security Council. It may be less easy to justify an interview with an ambassador to an obscure and insignificant country. It is tempting in this age of large and eclectic historical appetites to try to cover the whole ethos in which a man and his career happened to exist. It is not out of place to argue that interviews should be conducted in selected communities to assess the impact of federal programs in local areas, although it is not so clear that this may be a legitimate concern of the program of a Presidential library. There are practical limitations to prevent a program from ranging too freely and too dis- tantly from its central focus, but the conceptual limitations are more difficult to determine and more difficult to enforce. Some general guidelines should be set up at the start of a pro- gram to set the flavor, direction and pace of the program's develop- ment. These guidelines should at a minimum provide a list of issues, subjects and events for interviewers to use in planning their research and inquiries. The list should be worked out by advisers to the pro- gram or by the program staff members most knowledgeable about the subjects of inquiry. In the early stages of the Kennedy Library pro- gram, for instance, former members and consultants to the Kennedy Administration (some of whom were historians and political scientists) blocked out two broad areas for interviewing: John F. Kennedy's pre- Presidential life and career, and the events and issues of his Presi- dency. It is clear from the breakdown of these broad areas into sub- topics that the early planners placed heavy emphasis on subjects relevant to the Presidency-it was divided into 51 general topics and further subdivided into 936 subtopics, whereas the pre-Presidential topics numbered only 14, without a specialized breakdown into sub- topics. From such a list as the one provided by the Kennedy Library oral history program planners, the program staff can develop rational interviewing plans that proceed in a systematic manner to cover the 23 topics and subtopics, further dividing them into smaller and smaller portions for research and interviewing. The program staff can then identify individuals who might be useful commentators on one or a variety of subjects, and cross-reference names to subjects and vice versa. Within the general guidelines that define content, however, there should be considerable freedom for interviewers to depart from guide- lines where they feel there is a chance for some useful information that was previously unanticipated or neglected. In the course of inter- viewing a former official of the Department of Defense, one of our interviewers happened to discover a man in the outer office who had been a principal U.S. adviser in Vietnam about the time of the coup against Ngo Dinh Diem. Since he had known and worked with a high- ranking Vietnamese who was also killed in the coup by a jealous and perhaps over-zealous opponent, we felt it an opportunity not to be missed, despite the fact that nowhere had we planned to interview the man or to narrow our sights so finely. While the Vietnam situation was certainly on the list of topics, it was originally conceived in terms of broad policy and as a reflection of world forces engaged on the Asian littoral in the struggles of insurgency and counter-guerrilla warfare. Only the later developments and the extensive controversy surrounding American involvement in Vietnam would have justified the interview we conducted. It would be a great deal more difficult to justify the interviewing of a U.S. deputy chief of mission in Togo at the time of the assassination of President Olympio, although a spare tape and idle time might be so spent at no great injury to the program's integrity of purpose. One way of approaching the mass of subjects confronting any major program is to divide them up, chronologically or topically, and concentrate on interviewing about each subject or episode in succession at different times in the life of the program. Another way, as pre- viously suggested, is for the program interviewers to divide topics among themselves and specialize in one subject area or one period of time. In the Kennedy Library program, and one would suspect in many large programs, these divisions and specializations are often rather ad hoc assignments as interviewers are available or express particular interests. It is therefore productive for there to be much give and take among the staff interviewers so that when the need arises one or another can do interviews outside his particular area of special- ization with some confidence and command of the subject. The inter- views and the resulting collection should be much enriched by this kind of cross-fertilization of experience and ideas. Flexibility rather than hard and fast limiting assignments should be the rule. 24 WHO SHOULD BE INTERVIEWED Closely allied to the question of subject content, and greatly dependent upon it, is the question who should be interviewed. It is seldom desirable and rarely practical to interview the entire popula- tion of potential interviewees on any given subject. Some deliberate sampling criteria must be applied in order to get even minimal con- trol over the course of interviewing. Just as the starting point for subjects is a topical listing of events and subjects, so the starting point for interviewing is a list of people who might reasonably be ex- pected to have useful contributions to make. Initially this list may be drawn from already published sources and from a small group of people already familiar with the principal subject focus of the inter- viewing program. In the Kennedy Library program such a list was initially supplied by the planners of the program, who themselves knew many of the "cast of characters." As time went by names were added to the first list by staff members who consulted published mate- rial such as books and newspapers, basic references such as the Government Organization Manual and the Congressional Staff Directory, and (of great importance) oral history interviews already recorded. Eventually there was a card file of about 2,000 names. Each card contained brief descriptions of a person's role or position, and the latest known address and telephone number. From this file and the subject list, a parallel card file of names by probable subject area was constructed. From these resources interviewers can easily dis- cover the basic information of who needs to be interviewed about what. While the potential population of interviewees may (in the case of a Presidential program) reach some three or four thousand names, this large view is rapidly cut down by practical limitations and com- mon sense. In prospect, at least, not only the chief officials of the U.S. government in all three branches and the family and friends of a President, but also scores of foreign heads of state; ministers and ambassadors; American businessmen; labor leaders: national, state and local politicians; journalists, scholars, and many, many people who merely observed the man in action or were affected by the pro- grams of his administration are all potential sources of some kind of information that may be of interest to future scholars. The first step in narrowing the population of interviewees is to identify a few people most likely to provide the most and best informa- tion about each of the subjects of study. There will be some obvious overlapping and redundancy, and the resulting list of names should be well within manageable limits. In doing this there should be careful attention to the relative priorities among interviewees, although the priority assignments should not be hard and fast. They are useful as guidelines for interviewer planning, and they have a limited use in 25 evaluating program progress and assignment of resources. The fol- lowing model was developed by the staff of the Kennedy Library, and although the specific examples shown are keyed to a Presidential oral history program, it should be easy to interpolate for any other large program by substituting other roles and subjects. GROUP 1. People without whose contributions the oral history collection would be glaringly deficient, even to the casual observer; people whom the interviewing staff should make every effort to record extensively. For example, Cabinet Secretaries, members of the im- mediate family, members of the immediate staff, leading Senators and Congressmen, close personal friends, certain heads of state, and various leading national politicians, businessmen and labor leaders. GROUP 2. People who would make unique and significant but rather specialized contributions to the collection, whose interviews would be welcomed by more specialized and more advanced scholars; people who should be interviewed in the interests of creating a truly useful and comprehensive collection. For example, federal govern- ment officials down to the bureau level who developed or executed programs of the administration, U.S. ambassadors to foreign countries, key Senators, Congressmen and legislative staff members charged with crucial roles in getting legislation passed, and people who may have been prominent briefly but critically in selected events. GROUP 3. People who would make marginal but interesting contributions of rather narrow but perhaps crucial significance to a particular aspect of history, people who should be interviewed if the opportunity arises. For example, minor ambassadors or other offi- cials who played contributory roles in major events, party officials who helped engineer local and state primary victories, members of Presidential commissions. GROUP 4. People who may be suggested as potential interviewees, but whose contributory value is probably low or unknown, who may be interviewed if they volunteer and if the staff time and resources per- mit, but who should not be sought out by the staff. Even with the most rational scheme in the world, however, it will be found that other factors play a large role in who will actually be interviewed and who will not. Chance plays a most exasperating role. One former ambassador whom we were to interview had a stroke the morning we were to do the taping, and he died soon after- ward. Conversely, we have had people virtually walk in off the street with something worth recording on their minds. Geographic dispersal 26 of people after a change in administration, and the assumption of new roles with new and demanding commitments, often make scheduling of interviews very difficult. It is not unusual for appointments to be cancelled repeatedly due to the press of other business, or for inter- views to be put off until three or four people in a distant city agree to be in the same locality for two or three days in a row. Because of the uncertainty there should be quite a bit of flexibility in the pro- gram planning for people to be interviewed. There should be alternate interviewees if principals refuse to be interviewed or simply are not available. Similarly, if a particular subject area seems to be well covered, planners should begin to recognize a point of diminishing return and leave that subject for a later time. New names will be added to the lists, old names may be dropped or set aside, and the composition of the population of interviewees may change considerably over time. Planners and interviewers alike should recognize this, and while they should expect the changes to be kept within manageable bounds, they should not expect the final collection to be in a one-to- one relationship with the initial plans. WHO SHOULD DO THE INTERVIEWS The presumption throughout this book, based on the current oper- ation of the Kennedy oral history program, is that the interviewers will be permanent, professional staff members of the sponsoring insti- tution. For control and continuity this is probably the most desirable situation. Interviewers can be hired with a view to their particular expertise and background, and intensive experience on the job can build up a good, solid capability of the staff to handle a variety of general and specialized interviews. There are, however, alternatives to be considered. In the early days of the Kennedy oral history program the interviewing was done by many volunteers. Friends, family members, and government offi- cials interviewed each other, or were interviewed by people thought to have special knowledge and privileged access to significant people in the Kennedy story. U.S. Information Service officers from em- bassies abroad collected brief oral statements from heads of state and foreign ministers, and one or two people actually "interviewed" themselves by taping monologues. Several hundred interviews were produced by these volunteers, and a wide range of subjects from the recollections of the White House domestic staff to the sober reflections of highly placed foreign policy advisers were recorded. The results of this volunteer effort were mixed, and they offer some guidance for future programs. The best and most useful interviews are those in which both interviewer and interviewee fully understood the historical 27 significance of what they were doing and tried to probe beyond the surface for meaning and causes. Some, unfortunately, are but eulo- gistic memorials to a departed friend, rival or hero, filled with plati- tudes that were often borrowed from the popular journals. Some of the more disappointing are those in which two potentially interesting people simply failed to "click" and covered only a portion of the mate- rial or covered a great deal of subjects superficially. The task of controlling such a massive volunteer effort was formidable. The mechanics of scheduling and keeping track of what interviews were being done was enormous, to say nothing of trying to establish some sort of quality control and feedback, which was virtually impossible. It is amazing, under the circumstances, that so many of the interviews from the volunteer effort are of high quality and make very useful contributions to the collection. The primary lesson from this experience is that such a massive effort may be useful and necessary to capture as many immediate recollections as possible before time dims memories and blurs the sharpness of events. The other side of the coin is that the results are apt to be uneven in quality, and that such an effort really requires a strong administrative and transcribing staff to back up the volunteers, handle correspondence, coordinate schedules and take the responsi- bility of soothing ruffled feathers. The use of a full-time staff of interviewers, on the other hand, tends to produce a more even quality of interview. Furthermore, the time available to a permanent staff for a thorough examination and reexamination of background materials often adds a compulsion to put things in perspective and analyze per- sonalities and events from a longer and more accurate view. The emotional impact of the moment that could be captured by a crash volunteer program is, of course, lost or blunted by an overlay of time and rationalization, but what is often left is a frank and sympathetic recounting of the earlier time, together with a retrospective commen- tary that weighs the historical significance of people and events and ideas. The crash program use of volunteers and the continuing pro- gram use of staff interviewers can be made to complement each other if properly handled. The crash program should indeed be aimed to capture fresh impressions and the easy dialogue between colleagues who deeply understand the events and issues. (Some understand each other so well that they forget the third party, the listening ear of history, and they leave out connecting bits of logic or mutually understood details, resulting in a mystifying record for the future scholar to puzzle over.) Such interviews should be frankly impres- sionistic, and should range freely over subjects, events and person- alities in search of feelings and reactions. The staff interviewers can later come back to the same people and attempt the more careful, deliberate and searching analytic inquiries that go into minute detail. 28 Two other possibilities should be mentioned, although we have had little experience with either in the Kennedy oral history program. Some programs hire interviewers on an interview-by-interview basis, or contract interviews out to graduate students, journalists, or scholars interested in doing particular subjects or people. The Oral History Office at Columbia University has used this approach for some time with distinct success. An unexpected source for oral history inter- views has also sprung up in recent years. Many people working on doctoral dissertations or books are using the tape recorder to inter- view the principal actors in specific subject areas. Frequently, such researchers can be talked into depositing their raw tapes and tran- scripts in an archives or library having a special interest in the sub- ject area of their research. CHOICES OF HISTORICAL APPROACH It has been said that a principal virtue of oral history is that it can offer an opportunity to fill in the lacunae in documentary history. It is not quite that simple, however, as our experience showed in try- ing to do oral history from what seemed to be the missing pieces in our files. As an experiment I once chose a particular set of documents, and after a good deal of reading and rereading and checking the open sources, I selected those documents that seemed to mark turning points in events or that seemed to provide interesting perspectives on the events. I then decided to interview three people who had origi- nated the documents or who had had responsibilities that covered the subjects of the documents. In the first instance I did not take the documents with me into the interview, but had notes of certain key items to which I referred. In the other two, we went through the files together, stopping at the documents I had particularly marked for comment. The response of the first interviewee was usually a faulty memory and a desire to see the document before commenting. In the two other interviews my carefully conceived questions seldom provoked responses more informative than, "Well, this is very interesting," or, "The document really speaks for itself." Undoubtedly there was much going on in the interviewee's head that formed links between the evident ideas, but the presence of the document seemed to inhibit getting this deeper train of thought out onto the tape. Perhaps this was because I had introduced reading into what should have been a dialogue, and changed the thought pattern of the interviewee. Perhaps the linkages between notions occur so rapidly in reading that they are only half-conscious and cannot be readily vocalized. The resulting tape was, of course, very difficult to transcribe, and it is even harder 29 to read. The task of collating the transcript with the documents is an additional problem. More often than not the lacunae are covered not so much in specific terms as indirectly, as a by-product of the "shotgun" approach. Interviewers may be able to bore in on specific issues and events with some particularity, but the most useful information is often in a dialogue that the question provokes rather than in the immediate answer. It is therefore most useful for interviewers to have access to the pri- mary documents as well as secondary sources, and to read both thoroughly for a rich understanding and feel for the characters and events, and to produce from this research chronologies of events and lists of people and issues about which the interviewee may have useful information. The effect is invariably one of showing the interviewee that you have gone to a great deal of trouble for his interview. This is flattering in the best sense, and it encourages respect for the depth of research the program requires; further, it encourages the inter- viewee to take the interview task seriously himself. It also prompts a limited kind of "in the know" rapport between interviewer and inter- viewee that is conducive to both candor and enthusiasm on the part of both participants. A rule of thumb might be that when the inter- viewer has done his research thoroughly and covers his outline thoroughly with the interviewee, the chances of filling in the lacunae are strengthened considerably. Programs may also use what might be called a survey approach, particularly with people who fall into Group 3 and Group 4 in the scale of priorities. In this method, a set of standard questions on a given subject is asked to a group of several different interviewees, getting in return sets of responses that can be compared by historians. This method is most useful where there is a fairly large population of inter- viewees to be recorded in a fairly brief span of time. The deeper conversational and confidential probing is foregone in favor of collect- ing as many different opinions as possible in a wide sample. The danger is that it can degenerate into a kind of public opinion sampling, particularly if the interviewers have not supplemented their familiarity with the questions by doing extensive research that would enable them to take advantage of unexpected opportunities for in-depth questioning. Another problem with this kind of interviewing is that it is difficult to keep the inquiry fresh and exciting for each interviewee. Varying the order of questions may help, as will devising additional unique questions for each interviewee. Another set of choices for program managers lies between focusing on the biographic study of selected people and a concentration on selected topical areas to be explored with each interviewee. In the first, the issues, events and personalities emerge as a by-product of an intensive investigation into an interviewee's own life and career. 30 In the latter the topics and issues become the primary concern and the interviewee's own role is used to illustrate hypotheses and conclu- sions. For a major program with a large population of interviewees, the latter approach is usually more practical. To have explored the lives of all the interviewees of the Kennedy program may have produced a most interesting set of documents from which to study the leaders of mid-twentieth-century America, but such an approach would have required more time that could reasonably have been afforded either by the program or by the interviewees. A few selected persons close to the central figure of a program's focus, or prominent in the chief events being recorded, may be interviewed in the intensive-biographic manner, but most large programs will devote much of their energy to the extensive-topical approach. 31 CHAPTER TECHNIQUES FOR INTERVIEWING Oral history interviewing for a major study such as a Presi- dential library oral history program requires a focusing of several perspectives and scholarly disciplines in one coordinated effort. The principal focus may be, at least superficially, a biographic history, centering on the life of a historic figure and perhaps on the lives of immediate family and friends. It is much more than a biographic study, however. It is also institutional and political history, an inquiry into the major events and the people and institutions having roles in their development. Nor are the sociological and psychological aspects neglected, since the focus is also on the interaction of social groups and on human motivation at critical and often very personal moments of decision. The inquiry may even be said to extend to folklore after a fashion. Hearsay, often repeated and commonly accepted, rapidly becomes "conventional wisdom" or a kind of folklore in modern Amer- ican politics, and recording it and tracing its origins is also a part of a major oral history effort. It follows that those who interview for a major program should bring to the inquiry training and scholarly habits that are eclectic rather than overly specialized. While the chief experience ought to be in either history or political science, an interviewer who reads widely in other areas has a distinct advantage over one who does not. PLANNING AND SCHEDULING INTERVIEWS Following the general guidelines of the program planners with respect to the program's approach, a program director and his inter- viewers ought to arrive at some common understandings of the manner in which interviewing assignments are to be apportioned as individual 32 responsibilities. As previously noted, we found that division of effort in a natural and common-sense breakdown of the subject: the Pres- ident's life and family; his pre-Presidential career; the 1960 campaign and election; the domestic programs of the administration; the foreign policy and national defense policy of the administration, and so on. It was then left up to the individual interviewers to develop specific interviewing plans within the broad assignment areas. There should, however, be flexibility in the assignments in order to take advantage of opportunities along the way. An interviewer who is scheduled to take a trip to a distant city to interview a couple of ambassadors and an Assistant Secretary of State should also be prepared to interview some others in the same city, perhaps officials of the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, or prominent labor leaders, or a prom- inent mayor, in the interests of making the most economical use of the program's budget. In such circumstances there should be careful coordination between the interviewer and whichever of his colleagues normally cover the unfamiliar subjects. Once the interviewer has his broad area assigned, he should read extensively in the secondary sources to chronicle the significant events in his area and to identify the chief participants and the groups involved. He should then be prepared to list the people who should be interviewed and the general topics that the interviews for each should cover. By using the program's list of potential interviewees and topics and comparing these with his own conclusions from his reading, the interviewer should be able to frame a fairly comprehensive outline of interviews. By sorting the potential interviewees by their addresses he can begin to block out possible interview trips, including those in the immediate vicinity of the program office, and to schedule his interviewing and research time for the coming months. The next task for the interviewer is to obtain commitments and appointments for interviews with a select group of people in one sub- ject area and one geographic area. For instance, he might select all former officials of the Department of the Interior currently living or working in the vicinity of Washington, D.C. Letters to this select group should explain the program's purpose and procedure in some detail and should specifically solicit the interviewee's participation in the program, inquiring about the possibility of an appointment in the near future. In the Kennedy Library program we include a pre- pared program statement (see Appendix B) with the letter of solicita- tion so that the interviewee will be under no illusions or misunder- standings about the purpose and conduct of the program. Some replies to the solicitations will be prompt, positive and enthusiastic. We have been most fortunate in the Kennedy Library to have an overwhelmingly positive response to these inquiries. A very few have refused outright. Another small group have required considerable convincing before 33 any interviewing could be done. One or two have, by attaching difficult conditions to their agreements to be interviewed, made it almost im- possible to conduct a useful interview. And one or two, it must be admitted, have asked that their tapes and transcripts be returned to them after having second thoughts about the whole idea. Most, how- ever, were only too happy to make a contribution, and have entered into the program with great enthusiasm and a sense of responsibility to history. To those who have written a negative response to our inquiries, we have replied that we understand their reservations and will respect their wishes, but that we hope they will permit us to re- open the question at some later date. Where the reply to our letter of solicitation is an ambiguous one, or where there seems to be some reservation on the part of the potential interviewee, we normally make a phone call to try to resolve the questions. In extreme cases we may even make a preliminary call on the potential interviewee, and in a face-to-face discussion go over the program's purpose and the manner in which we intend to proceed with the interviews. With a group of positive responses in hand, the interviewer then makes telephone calls to various interviewees, setting up future interviewing appointments. These should be set far enough in advance to permit the interviewer to do research in the sources. It may not be necessary in a relatively homogeneous and professional staff to file preliminary interviewing plans in a formal report, but it is only common courtesy and good administrative practice to keep the pro- gram director and colleagues on the staff informed about immediate interviewing prospects. Once interview appointments are firm and the interviewer has done his preparatory work, he can then move on to the business of the interview itself. Interviewers and program directors should be warned that all may not proceed according to plan, particularly when they are dealing with interviewees who are busily engaged in public affairs. On one memorable occasion I found myself in San Francisco, having set interviews with eight people-four in San Francisco, two in Honolulu, one in Los Angeles, and one in San Diego. All but three of the appoint- ments fell through, and these were one each in San Francisco, Los Angeles and San Diego, spread over a ten-day period. Phone calls to some lower-priority interviewees did not produce any more appoint- ments. I enjoyed my stay in San Francisco, but I suspect it will be some time before we risk so expensive a trip again. Interviewers must be prepared to spend a good deal of time on the telephone with prospective interviewees, scheduling and rescheduling interviews, trying to make the most effective use of time, money and prepara- tion. 34 PREPARING INTERVIEWS When an interviewer is engaged by a major program to do inter- views with prominent people whose time is valuable, he has a respon- sibility to be soundly and thoroughly prepared. Good preparation can- not be neglected without imperiling the interview and the reputation of the program. It is almost too obvious a point to make that inter- viewers should read widely in historiography and basic social science methodology and keep up with current developments through reading the established scholarly journals. If an interviewer is engaged in the collection of raw material on the major personalities, issues and events, he must be aware of the kinds of questions that scholars are asking, even if he need not be proficient in all the techniques or fully conversant with all the theories. What is important is the depth and breadth of understanding and an alertness to the cutting edge of schol- arly inquiry that can be gained from keeping up with "the state of the art." Each new perspective that an interviewer can bring to his work produces a broader and a deeper capacity to seize upon opportunities for enlightenment in interview situations where many snap decisions have to be made. In one sense no interviewer is ever really prepared for any interview because each is unique. The good interviewer, however, develops a sixth sense for the right questions, and he also senses when his research peaks, like an athlete in training, to the point where he can conduct an interview with full confidence in his subject. The interviewer who can respond quickly and perceptively to opportunities in an articulate manner, drawing on an extensive reservoir of knowl- edge and understanding, has an excellent chance of producing a good interview, even with a difficult interviewee. Any competent researcher or interviewer should already be acquainted with many sources, and he should use them well in his preparation. In addition, the give and take of a healthy, collegial pro- gram staff should contribute much in the way of new sources and the challenge of new perspectives. Primary documents are, of course, an invaluable source for interview preparation. One interviewee I recall in particular was initially rather condescending in his responses, tending to lecture a bit, until it gradually dawned on him that I must have read a great many of his memoranda and was perhaps more immediately familiar with the details than he himself after a lapse of several years. He warmed up immediately and became much more candid and expansive in his responses. Published accounts of events, whether in books or newspapers, are also excellent sources. The testimony of an interviewee in disputing or confirming a published account of an issue or episode is often very informative. 35 From his research into primary and secondary sources an inter- viewer should have a good idea of where any given interviewee fits into the overall picture. From this research should come a rather detailed outline of events, personalities and issues or concepts that can be further refined into specific questions for the interview itself. This outline should be quite detailed, particularly in the early stages of a series of interviews on the same general subject area. An inter- viewer should always try to lead from strength, knowing his subject well and thoroughly. A thoroughly prepared interviewer can bring to the dialogue a familiarity with the essential points that will keep an interviewee honest, that will engage his respect, and that will make for a good contribution to the collection of historical material from which researchers will one day write analytical accounts. Newcomers to oral history often ask for an interview structure, a model or methodology that will ensure or at least maximize the prospects for a successful product, a useful oral history interview. Those who have practiced the technique frequently meet such requests with a knowing smile and a response that "interviewers are born, not made," or that there is no guarantee for a good interview, that too much depends on the dynamic interaction of the participants and that any attempt at model building is essentially futile. These reflections have some merit. It is not likely that any one model will satisfy the demands of all researchers or be able to cope with the full range of possible situations. However, the following suggestions may prove useful in provoking further thought about the possibilities of structured lines in inquiry if they are critically tested rather than slavishly followed. On the theory that more useful information is produced by going over the same body of information from different perspectives, an interviewer should not only interview several different participants in the same event, but he should perhaps lead each interviewee through several different kinds of treatment of the material. Each of these "cuts" through the body of material should yield a different cross section from which impressions and facts can be compared by re- searchers. The first and most obvious "cut" is the interviewee's own biog- raphy, leading up to and going through the events on which the pro- gram's interviews chiefly focus. Who is the interviewee and what did he do? What was there about the interviewee that made it likely that he would become involved in the events, and what skills, attitudes and interests did he bring to the scene? What were his own precon- ceptions, biases, standards and goals? How did he fare in the give and take? What were his successes and failures? A second cut should be to get the interviewee's impression of other actors in the events. This may be done by going down a list of 36 the people involved and asking the interviewee to talk about their characters and performance, and their roles and activities. The op- portunity for illustrative anecdotes should be obvious here, and the interviewer should pursue it. Similarly, the interviewer should get the interviewee's impres- sions of the organizations, offices, institutions, and groups involved in the events being considered. Of particular interest should be the interviewee's own group. What were its objectives? How was it organized? What were its procedures? What obstacles were encoun- tered? How did the group cooperate with or oppose other groups? What were the successes and failures? A fourth cut may be to take the interviewee through a chronology of the events, asking him to concentrate on recounting the details of events in sequence as he remembers them. The interviewer should have his own detailed chronology before him, and he should prod the interviewee wherever memory fails. Still another perspective on the subject may be obtained by asking the interviewee for comment on concepts and on the purposes and objectives of various people and groups in the events, and by seeking the interviewee's impressions of their value and effect on what tran- spired. The interaction between individual and group actors with respect to ideological and practical abstractions about the world in which they operate can be very revealing. It may be useful in some cases, too, to take a different kind of cut at the material by having the interviewee read and comment on a number of specific exemplary documents that were produced at the time. His comments on the circumstances of the document, its origin and development, the consequences of its contents, and his retrospec- tive view of its importance may add to a later researcher's understand- ing of its significance in the context of a whole collection of papers. Having said all this in the interests of opening possibilities for organizing material for interviews, I must add that this "model" may be more useful to interviewers in preparing for interviews than in conducting them. The interviewer who has himself privately been through the exercise of looking at his material from these per- spectives can carry them into the interview situation without making the structure so apparent that it dominates the interview and puzzles the interviewee. An overly structured interview that intrudes upon the easy dialogue of an interview with good momentum and excitement can kill the interest of both interviewer and interviewee in what they are doing. It is also possible that such models may be useful in post- collection analysis and critiques of interviews already recorded and on file for research use. They may help people to judge whether a given interview covered all the ground it should have. 37 CONSIDERING THE INTERVIEWEE Whatever the preparation of the interviewer, and whatever his skill, it is still the interviewee who must provide the sum and sub- stance of a useful record. Some interviewees will be extremely cooper- ative and will take the initiative, entering into the interview with enthusiasm and a conscientious effort to serve history. Others will be extremely reluctant to talk, whether from natural reticence or from force of circumstances that encourage them to be circumspect. The interaction between the interviewer and interviewee will to a large measure determine the success of the interview. If an interviewer must work very hard at drawing out an interviewee it may be advisable to seek an alternative means of recording the interviewee's contribu- tion. Another interviewer, more congenial to the interviewee, may do the trick. Cutting off the tape and discussing frankly the purpose of the interview may be useful in breaking down the barriers. On rare occasions both interviewer and interviewee should frankly recognize that they are not getting anywhere and give up the job (although it takes rare humility and courage to admit failure). In such a case it is necessary to record interviews with those who were close associ- ates of the interviewee in order to fill in the places where he felt unable to comment or to be candid. Many people will have strong restraints inhibiting their free and candid participation in oral history documentation. They may themselves still be politically active, with public lives still ahead of them. They are not likely to commit their candor easily to the record, despite all assurances of confidentiality and security that the program can offer. This may be true particularly with people involved in con- troversy or who have reason to be apprehensive that scandalmongers and gossip mongers may be interested in their off-the-record com- mentary for future historical research. Some people may feel that the exploration of personal relationships and the candid revelation of the weaknesses or strengths in themselves and their colleagues are not quite fit and proper subjects for historians and other researchers, no matter how well-intentioned or objective they may be. One inter- viewee frankly said that he believed there were some things historians should have to guess at, things that were and should be "obscene"- off the scene of history. Some people may have very decided opinions about what is im- portant and what may be passed off as commonplace. It is extremely difficult to convince a man who has spent twenty years in public life that something he has relegated to the dustbin of insignificance can possibly be of interest or useful in writing a history of the period. There is also a kind of gentleman's code of mutual respect that inter- viewees may take refuge in to avoid candidly assessing their colleagues, 38 at least for the record. There is always, of course, the exception to the rule who has an axe to grind and who will speak at great length on the foibles of others in order to vindicate his own position. All, how- ever, without exception, will wax eloquent on general principles, vague generalities, and the rationale that was routinely developed for publicly justifying actions and programs. Personal danger, a sense of propriety, a desire for accuracy and the concurrent awareness of personal limitations may all inhibit the interviewee and frustrate the best efforts of an interviewer. The interviewer must woo, cajole, and sometimes gently bully the reluctant interviewee, always sensing when he reaches a point at which his pres- sure will become counter-productive and immediately changing the pace or the subject of inquiry. The interviewer really has no threat that is powerful enough to extort information from interviewees; unless there is already present an unusual preoccupation with "history" or "image," the threat of how one may look to future generations is probably not significant to one who has spent many waking hours jus- tifying himself in public. The voluntary cooperation of the interviewee and the preparation and tact of the interviewer are the primary in- gredients of a good interview. No less difficult than lack of enthusiasm for the interview may be too much enthusiasm and redundance on the part of the interviewee. An interviewee may have an exaggerated sense of his own importance, and may dwell at length on his own activities, neglecting or distorting the contributions of others. The interviewer must present such a person with counter-arguments and counter-examples in a patient and careful attempt to bring him back to reality. If nothing more, this careful handling by the interviewer may document more firmly the peculiar biases of the speaker and may help in evaluating his contribution at a later date. With a particularly opinionated interviewee, the interviewer may find it necessary to attribute the counter- formulations to unidentified sources or to use the expressions "I have heard it argued that" and "I am sure you are familiar with the oppos- ing argument from some people that," in order to appear neutral and to avoid being unnecessarily argumentative. In any case, the inter- viewer seldom escapes from these long-winded accounts without tap- ing much that is irrelevant, redundant or simply foolish. While even this is the stuff of which history may be made, good sense and econ- omy argue that a saturation point can be reached at which it should be obvious that no further time should be wasted in the interview. One thing that many interviewers agree on is that there is seldom deliberate lying in oral history. In the first place, the inter- viewer who has done his homework should be able to identify outright falsehoods as they occur and move immediately to give the inter- viewee an opportunity to correct his misstatement. In the second 39 place, the interviewee generally knows that his colleagues are also being interviewed and that blatant untruths will probably stick out like sore thumbs. On the other hand there is a great deal of convenient forgetfulness. It is extremely difficult to get a useful comment out of a person who tells you that he cannot remember facts, people, events, or sequences of events. He may or may not be avoiding the issue, but there is little the interviewer can do about it. More often there is a kind of subtle interpretive rationalization that an interviewee has indulged in to permit himself to be comfortable with events and achievements that have not lived up to his expectations. It may be quite sincere and nearly an unconscious thing, or it may proceed from a dogmatic view of the world that the interviewee long since found is a useful answer for an interpretation of reality. Seldom does it pay for an interviewer to challenge or pick apart such proposi- tions directly, for this would require undoing the work of a lifetime and will probably offend the interviewee. What the interviewer can do that is most useful is to identify the bias by offering a wide variety of opportunities for commentary, and by offering ideas for discussion that modify or reformulate the interviewee's stated position. From this information, later researchers can usually discern the bias and take it into account. Some interviewees may have moved quite rapidly up the ladder of success from job to job, and they may not remember the details of past experiences with any great clarity. Some may have deliberately chosen to forget because of past embarrassment, but most have found that the demands of new responsibilities require that they must simply wipe out past considerations in order to have an uncluttered mind and undivided attention for their present tasks. Not even a recital of the facts on the record will evoke from such people much more than a vague acknowledgement of the events, people and issues. Others will remember things in incredible detail, perhaps because the experiences under discussion were the high points of their own careers and personal commitment and interest. Some public officials have been called upon to state their views so often that they find it impossible to be candid and spontaneous. They will have prepared answers on every possible subject and will know how to sound knowledgeable without saying anything at all, or their observations and insights may have been repeated so often that they seem hackneyed even when sound. The best efforts of a good interviewer may seldom get behind these shopworn phrases, sentences and even paragraphs. However, when an interviewee has agreed to be interviewed it is usually with some sense of obligation and perhaps a little vanity if not enthusiasm, and he usually tries to be cooperative. Such a commitment, when coupled with an understanding of the task, a good memory, a prepared and articulate interviewer, and a shared enthu- siasm for the interview will produce good and worthwhile interviews. CONDUCTING THE INTERVIEW Armed with his outline, specific questions and the background knowledge and understanding that they represent, an interviewer should be ready to make the most of an interview situation. In informal con- versation prior to turning on the tape recorder it is generally wise to make sure that the interviewee fully understands the purpose and procedures of the program and what the interviewer is after in the way of information. The interviewer should be careful not to let this preliminary discussion run away with him, or he may find that the interviewee will cover things that really should be on the tape and when the time comes to actually tape them the recorded material may be flat and uninteresting. It has been our experience that submitting a list of prepared questions to an interviewee beforehand seldom pro- duces a good interview, although the interviewee should be made aware in advance of the general topical areas that will be covered. Busy people seldom have the time or the inclination to go over a detailed list of questions, and sometimes when they do the interviewer has really lost the initiative. It is all too easy for an interviewee to read the list of questions and declare thatthere is no need to take them one by one because the general thrust is thus and SO and the answer is easily put into one sentence. The interviewee then thinks he has done his job, and the interviewer must work very hard to get back into the kind of detail and mood that he really wanted to develop in the interview. The interviewee should be encouraged, in preliminary discussion, to be as candid as his conscience will permit, and he should be assured that his confidences have every protection that the program can pro- vide. Usually a statement that he can place any restrictions whatso- ever upon the use of the tape and transcript is sufficient to reassure the interviewee. One of the first things that an interviewer should establish is just how much of an interviewee's personal history is pertinent to the primary focus of the program's inquiry. Some indication of this will have been discovered from the interviewer's research, and leads from that research should be followed up to get the story in the interviewee's own words of the convergence of his career with the main lines of the *An earlier version of the above discussion appears in Selec- tions from the Fifth and Sixth National Colloquia on Oral History, Oral History Association, New York, pp. 80-84. 41 program's research. This can be overdone, it is true. So many of the early interviews for the Kennedy Library program begin with the question "when did you first meet John F. Kennedy" that in recent years we have rebelled against this gambit. On some occasions, it is true, this opening produced unlooked-for insights into the early life and career of the man, but more frequently it produced little of sub- stance. Sometimes such an initial inquiry into the background of the interviewee may set off a long monologue that suggests the interviewee may see his own life as more fascinating than that of the principal subject. Though in rare cases he may be right, this is at best a digres- sion from the central purpose and should be indulged with caution. Following an opening that brings the identity of the interviewee and the principal subject into rough conjunction, the interviewer then needs to begin questioning on the basis of his outlined research topics. It is usually best not to read the questions from a piece of paper since what is desired is the rapid development of a dialogue between two knowledgeable persons. The outline and questions may be used as a checklist, but the good interviewer is one who can steer the conversa- tion along the lines of his outline without appearing to do so. Events and people generally provide the ingredients of a good checklist of what to cover in the interview, and often these will provide all that is necessary, particularly after a couple of interviews have already been done on the same general subject. What follows from the checklist should be a more penetrating discussion of concepts, motives, the sequence and structure of actions, the obstacles and frustrations, and the dynamics of the world as the interviewee remembers it. An inter- viewer should look particularly for the relationships between the significant actors in the events and should test the theories of con- ventional wisdom against the opinion and memory of each participant. Where were the strengths and weaknesses? Who provided significant decisions at critical moments? What characterized the general thrust of activity? Who was responsible for that direction and why? What were the reasons things were done as they were done, and how might they have been handled differently and with what effects? An interviewer should intuitively use a good mix of question types. Open-ended questions are good for opening a subject area or for eliciting reflective and interpretive answers. Specific, direct questions, on the other hand, are useful for quick, definitive replies. Probes or provocative questions often reveal illuminating reactions, but they must be used with care and must be justified responsibly in the context of the interview. Sometimes there should be some pre- liminary questions that set the stage for difficult areas, so as to lead up gradually to what one hopes will be candor. Rephrasing of questions and answers to suggest other shades of meaning may often yield a cross-check or confirmation of a vague and ambiguous point, helping to pin down meaning and intent. 42 One of the most useful and difficult techniques that an interviewer can employ is silence. Many interviews are ineffective because an interviewer feels compelled to fill the inevitable silences with prodding comments that lead the interviewee astray. In some cases this may inhibit the interviewee or preempt his train of thought so as to lose valuable commentary. There are occasions, too, when the interviewer may become aware that the interviewee does not want to answer a question, and the silence may become heavy indeed. Yet with a certain amount of patience the interviewer can outwait the interviewee and get some kind of statement. On one memorable occasion I asked an inter- viewee a question, and in the midst of my sentence I noticed that he suddenly sat quite still, with a little tight smile on his face, shaking his head from side to side in a clear and unmistakable negative. He certainly did not want to answer. I completed the question and waited. While I doubt that the actual time of the ensuing silence exceeded ten seconds, it seemed like an eternity to me. He finally came through with a carefully counterbalanced statement of the pros and cons. It was clearly all I was going to get, but it was a good deal more than he had originally intended to give me. At such times a decision must be made either to let the statement stand or to pursue the matter at the risk of irritating the interviewee. "Pursuit" is the term used by the trial lawyer to characterize that form of questioning in which he follows up on suggested leads in a witness's answers and tries to obtain responses on a subject from every possible angle, hoping to force admissions and opinions from the respondent that he would otherwise be unwilling or unable to pro- vide in the search for truth. It takes great skill and experience to use this technique successfully, and the question how aggressively to press an interviewee about a subject is always in doubt. Some interviewers, unfortunately, press relentlessly after the fashion of a badgering news reporter. There is no doubt that this kind of question- ing gets responses, but the results may not be appropriate for the in- terview's historical purpose. A very colorful and quotable statement made in the heat of the moment may reveal depths of feeling and in- sight and it may be enjoyed for the moment, but it may also serve to cloud and obscure a more thoughtful response that might have been brought out by gentler persuasion. Aggressive questioning may also destroy the rapport between the interviewer and interviewee that is required to delve into other subjects. The interviewer who risks the brief time he has to get the story and who uses a bullying question may well find himself out the door without an answer and without the chance to finish the rest of his questions. If such a confrontation point seems to be developing it may be best to reserve it for the end of the interview, and for the interviewer to move the conversation away from the danger area for a time until things cool off a bit. 43 On the other hand, some interviewers tend to be overly cautious regarding subjects that may threaten the composure of the interviewee. It is tempting to back away too rapidly from a subject that seems to be giving the interviewee some trouble. In part this may be a fear of destroying rapport or of scaring the interviewee. The interviewer may feel himself unequipped to control an emotional situation, and may himself flee from the impending clash. If he does he may have missed a rare opportunity to get beneath the surface and bring true feelings to light. This difficult dichotomy between pressing too hard and being too timid is not a light matter easily resolved by glib an- swers. It involves human dignity as much as it involves historical purpose, and the interviewer who can preserve the integrity of both is the one who gets the most useful record over the long haul. Many interviewers are not careful listeners and they do not know how to engage in the "pursuit" of openings that the interview situation offers. Many times upon rereading an interview transcript one is struck by the enormous number of missed opportunities for follow-up questions that could either nail down ambiguous meaning or open new areas of interest. The interviewer should bring to the inquiry a compulsion to search for the answers to the basic questions of any inquiry: who, what, when, where, how and why. This must, of course, be enlarged upon in the context of the subject of the inter- view, but these specifics are the stuff of which good pursuit in question- ing is made. Who were the people? What were they like ? What did they do? How did they do it? How were they motivated and why? What were the issues and how did the struggles over them develop? What were the causes and effects of actions and events? What were the goals and the means used to pursue them? What was the character of the system or process in which people acted? How did it work? What were the mistakes? What were the exceptions to the rules? What succeeded? Why? What were the personal, social and institu- tional restraints on action? How did people deal with them? What were the preconceptions, the premises, the presumptions, the precon- ditions, and how did these change or persist in the face of unfolding activity? A thirst for answers to questions such as these can provide even a relatively unprepared interviewer with rich rewards and can, when coupled with sound preparation and a cooperative interviewee, produce material of exceptional quality. The interviewer should always remember that it is the answers he is after, not the questions, even though they may have their place. I had always counted myself a reasonably good interviewer until one day I was brought up short by a new perspective on my questioning. I encountered the response, "That's an interesting question No, the question's not very interesting, but the answer is." And that is the whole point of oral history, after all. 44 While it has been suggested that the physical surroundings in which an interview is conducted may be a factor affecting the quality of an interview, this should not be an invitation to create modular formulas for improvising good and bad interview settings. We have found that interviews can be conducted successfully almost anywhere, from a formal office setting to speeding down the highway in a car (provided that the tape recorder has a noninterference device to pre- vent sparkplug noise from being recorded). The rule of thumb is that the most congenial or convenient surroundings and circumstances for the interviewee generally produce the best interviews. A certain security and familiarity, a stable environment in which the interviewee can relax and be candid and reflective, is very desirable. However, the interviewer should avoid the trap of making the interviewee too secure. Facing an industrial manager across his desk with its impos- ing array of status symbols and communications equipment puts the interviewer at a distinct psychological disadvantage in trying to pull out the candor and spontaneity that can be more easily developed in a conversation between equals. An interviewer should also know when and how to end an inter- view. He must recognize when the subject at hand has been exhausted profitably, and he must communicate this to the interviewee. In most cases, this is easily identified and mutually recognized, and frequently a previously understood time limit will determine the conclusion. But occasionally the interviewer must take charge and terminate an interview as gracefully as possible when it is clear that nothing pro- ductive is likely to come from further dialogue. It is always prudent to ask the interviewee if you may return to do more interviewing at some future date, when new material has come to light that requires his expertise and special insight. There is a sense in which no inter- view is ever complete, and the program staff should make it a practice never to close doors too tightly behind them, always leaving opportun- ities for more interviewing as circumstances indicate. In summary, then, the ingredients of good interviews are not so much analytical models as a combination of sound and thorough prep- aration, tactful relations, skilled questioning, and cooperative inter- viewees. Just as no two interviewees are alike, SO no two interviewers are alike, and success depends to a great extent on the capability and interest of the people involved rather than on structured application of designed questions. (For an excellent discussion of interviewing techniques, see Paul H. Gebhard, "Securing Sensitive Personal Informa- tion by Interviews," delivered at the Sixth National Colloquium on Oral History, Selections from the Fifth and Sixth National Colloquia on Oral History, Oral History Association, New York, 1972, pp.63-79.) 45 CHAPTER 5 PROCESSING INTERVIEWS Once an interview has been taped it must be prepared for pre- sentation to the research public in a usable form. Since most research continues to be oriented toward the visual habits of readers rather than the aural habits of listeners and since the magnetic indexing of tapes is beyond the technical capability of most programs, taped inter- views must be typed out in transcripts and indexed in order to be of maximum value to scholars. Processing, therefore, is important to the success of any oral history program. Processing is more easily subject to assembly line controls of production rates and quality than is interviewing, and it can be accomplished by people with more limited academic training, although familiarity and understanding of the subject contents are important. Not all programs will need to employ all of the processing steps discussed below. Some will institute other steps or variations to suit their own needs, but what follows is at least an example from which some choices can be made. In the Kennedy Library oral history pro- gram there are seven major processing steps: tape identification and registration; transcription; staff review of draft transcripts; inter- viewee review of draft transcripts; negotiation and preparation of the legal agreement; final typing; and accession, preservation and prepara- tion of copies for research use. Each stage is described in some de- tail in the succeeding paragraphs. TAPE IDENTIFICATION AND REGISTRATION It is essential that each tape be properly identified from the beginning; therefore, interviewers should be required to deposit fully identified tapes with the program staff as soon as possible after an 46 interview session has taken place. The interviewer should enter identifying information directly on the tape box, and it should always e set down in the same order. Such information should include: Interviewee's Name and Interview Session Number Date of Interview Session Length of Interview Session (in hours) Number of Tracks and Reels of Tape Tape Recording Speed Name of Interviewer Sub-project Title (if any) When an interviewer returns to the program office with a tape and this information, the tape is registered in a log of completed inter- view sessions. The date of receipt, name of interviewee, interview session number, name of interviewer, length of interview session, and the number of reels of tape are entered in the log, which is kept by date of receipt of the tape. When filled out, the log should look something like that shown in Sample 1. The basic form of the log may be adapted to include a record of progress in any of the processing steps. The simple addition of another column to show pages of draft or final transcript will suffice for this purpose. After the tape is logged in, a label is typed up for the thin edge of the tape box, showing the interviewee's name, session number and date of session, so that the tape box may be filed vertically with the thin edge visible for easy identification and retrieval. A processing worksheet and master control sheet are then pre- pared for the interview session. The worksheet is a comprehensive record of processing actions and accompanies the interview-session SAMPLE 1 Log for Tape Registration Name of Date of Name of Session Inter- Action Interviewee Number viewer Length Reels 5-25-68 J. R. Smallgood 4 R. P. Adams 1 hr 1 5-26-68 A.G.Marx 1 G. Mathews 2.5 hrs 2 7- 3-68 L.Q.Lamar 3 O. Jones 0.5 hr 1 12-24-68 O. V. Theyre 2 M. Murphy 1 hr 1 47 record throughout the process. The master control sheet is a dupli- cate of the worksheet and is kept by the processing supervisor. With the master control sheet, the processing supervisor should be able to locate any interview session at any stage of processing. The work- sheet and master control sheet used in the Kennedy Library is shown in Sample 2. The person responsible for each processing step enters the prescribed information as the step is begun and completed, making sure that the same information is also entered on the master control sheet, which is filed alphabetically by name of interviewee. When cassettes have been used to record the interview, it may be necessary to transfer the recording to a reel of tape for transcrib- ing and preservation. Cassette tapes are of uncertain life and the equipment for transcribing from them is an unnecessary additional ex- pense. It is relatively simple to use a patch cord from the cassette machine to a reel machine and to transfer the recording from cassette to reel. When all of the foregoing has been done, the tape is stored in a file of untranscribed tapes, arranged chronologically by date of SAMPLE 2 Master Control Sheet and Worksheet Interviewee Interview Date Interviewer Session Number Tape Received Speed Time Reels Transcribed by Begun Completed Pages Reviewed By Begun Completed Second Reading By Begun Completed Sent to Interviewee Returned Reminder Sent to Interviewee Read for Final Typing By Completed Final Typing By Begun Completed Proofread By Begun Completed Questionnaire Sent Returned Legal Agreement Sent Returned Legal Agreement Countersigned Final Transcript Copy to Interviewee Legal Agreement Copy to Interviewee Accessioned Accession Number Notes: (space for remarks, observations, problems, etc.) 48 interview session. The worksheet remains with the processing super- visor until actual transcription begins. It may be advisable to take advantage of this period of storage between receipt and transcription to prepare a duplicate tape for transcription and research use, re- taining the original as a master copy. TRANSCRIPTION Transcribing is a very important step in the chain of events that transfers unique information from the memory of an interviewee to its eventual use as historical source material for a scholar. For this reason a detailed manual for transcribers is appended to this book (see Appendix A). One of the guidelines of the Oral History Associa- tion is the goal of accurate and faithful representation in typescript of the dialogue that is recorded on tape. This is not nearly so easy as it might first appear. Rules of spelling, punctuation, grammar and composition were devised for written communications long after writing was used merely to represent speech, and they are not easily applied to transcribing conversations. Interview circumstances may compound a problem that is by its nature already difficult. Group interviews in which several people engage in conversation, or in which a new voice is suddenly heard, are terribly hard to transcribe. Voice qualities and speech peculiari- ties may give some real problems, as when a voice trails off in volume at the ends of sentences, or turns into mumbling at the ends of phrases, or when the voice begins a new sentence with an explosive bark that distorts the words painfully in the straining ear of a transcriber. These lapses and distortions may have been perfectly understood by the interviewer, but it is difficult to recapture them merely by listening. Dialects and the use of arcane jargon also give transcribers difficulty. There are also the inescapable background noises. Air conditioners are particularly insidious because the interviewer seldom realizes or "hears" the noise in the actual interview situation, but on the tape a steady burring hum in the background can be most annoying to a transcriber trying to listen carefully to an hour or two of conversation. All programs will experience some kind of background interference, from the roar of jet planes to the scream of fire sirens to the tinkle of ice in highballs. In one memorable interview we captured the regular sounds of a creaky rocking chair and the loud ticking of a grandfather clock, punctuated at irregular intervals by the more frequent barking of a large dog and the squawks of a raucous parrot. In two rather un- usual situations the electrical systems of buildings acted as trans- mission lines for the patter and music of a nearby radio station's disk jockey show and the automatic Morse radio signal of a teletype 49 transmitter next door. These extraneous sounds all but overrode the interviews and caused us to spend a great deal of time in very careful listening to transcribe them accurately. It is understandable, then, that even faithful transcription of a tape recorded interview is at best only an approximation, an imperfect reflection of what is on the tape, just as the tape is itself an imperfect record of the actual interview. We have tried to strike some com- promises between literal accuracy and faithful representation that is readable and useful to a researcher. Common verbal lapses such as. the dropping of the "g" sound at the ends of words ending in "-ing" or the absence of the "a" and "d" sounds that produces "n" for "and" are typed in their proper written form. We have changed our minds several times about the representation of the spoken affirmative. Most people unconsciously say "yeah" instead of "yes." However, from our reading habits we often associate "yeah" with a cynical or tough attitude that may not be an accurate characterization of the speaker's intent. On the other hand, the formal "yes" often looks too stilted for the easy discourse of most dialogues. Habits and usage that serve to identify the interviewee and his regional or social origins should be represented when possible. Incorrect grammar should not be corrected by the transcriber, although particularly long convoluted sentences in which verb antecedents are lost in speech may require some cleaning up so as to be readable. A good rule of thumb is to make sure that everything that is meaningful in the context of the interview is reflected in the transcript, and that the transcript reads smoothly and easily for the interested scholar. It is therefore important that draft transcripts be typed with generous margins and double spacing so that both staff reviewers and the interviewees can make necessary changes and corrections. It is equally important that a standard format for drafts and final copy be adhered to consistently throughout the program. Transcribers should have ready access to a good standard style manual, and should be thoroughly familiar with the special instructions of the particular program. To begin transcription, a transcriber takes from the file of un- transcribed tapes the oldest available interview session. If more recent interviews demand a higher priority, then the processing super- visor has the responsibility for making this known to the transcribers. The transcriber then gets the worksheet for that particular interview session from the processing supervisor and enters the appropriate information on it, while the processing supervisor copies the data onto the master control sheet. Before actually transcribing, a transcriber should become gener- ally familiar with the interview. A brief discussion with the inter- viewer and processing supervisor should provide the background needed 50 to appreciate the context. The interviewer, in particular, may have useful notes or an outline of the topics covered that will be useful to transcriber. The transcriber should listen to some of the tape with- at doing any typing, so as to become familiar with the idiosyncracies of the speakers as well as the subject matter of the discussion. Follow- ing this, the transcriber types out a verbatim copy of what is heard on the tape, according to the program's standard rules and format. In the early days of the Kennedy program we also typed out a carbon copy at the same time, but since the availability of high-speed copying machines we have dispensed with the carbon copies and have made duplicate copies only after the staff review and correction stage, thus eliminating the step of correcting a second copy. In the course of typing a transcript, transcribers are responsible for making a list of all proper names that occur in the text, and for properly identifying them and verifying the spelling. The list is ar- ranged in the order of first appearance in the text, and the page number on which the name first appears is listed together with the role or official position of the person or organization. This list is later used by staff reviewers to make certain that all names are correctly pre- sented in the typescript, and it may be further used to develop the program's file of proper names on which to base a name index for the collection. Once an interview is completely transcribed a notation is made on the worksheet and the master control sheet. Then the transcript, vorksheet, name list and tape are filed in a drawer of interview ses- sions awaiting review. These, like the file of untranscribed tapes, should be filed in chronological order of interview sessions, with the most recent item at the back of the file. Although each program soon develops its own norms for rates of progress, it may be useful for purposes of comparison to note that the transcribers of the Kennedy program averaged about 4 pages of typescript per hour of work, and that one hour's taped interview re- quires from ten to fifteen hours of transcribing and produces from 35 to 45 pages of generously margined, double-spaced draft copy. There are some marked differences in this norm depending on the speed at which the interviewer and interviewee speak, the number of pauses, false starts, interruptions, and so forth. STAFF REVIEW OF DRAFT TRANSCRIPTS The purpose of staff review of draft transcripts is to make cer- tain that the transcript is a faithful reflection of the interview on the tape and that all punctuation, spelling and format conform to the pro- gram's standards. Reviewers listen to the tape while following a draft 51 transcript to check it out word by word. They do not change or re- phrase content but they may make very minor corrections, such as paragraphing, eliminating false starts, correcting spelling, that im- prove readability without changing the literal substance of the dialogue. Long and rambling sentences with many verb changes and forgotten antecedents may require very skillful punctuation and "editing" to make them at once readable and faithful to the original. Those who have both transcribed and reviewed draft transcripts contend that the job of "auditing" the transcript is much the more tedious of the two. There is therefore a very good argument for not requiring that one person spend full time at the task of reviewing. Many programs use the interviewer as reviewer for the interviews he produced. They argue, quite logically, that his familiarity with the interview leads to prompt recognition of ambiguous portions and, quite practically, that this is cheaper than hiring extra personnel to do the job. In the Kennedy Library we have kept the functions of interviewing and reviewing largely separate. We have found that the widely roving and inquiring imagination of the interviewers does not lend itself readily to the more punctilious and pedantic tasks of enforcing the rules of punctuation and format. Indeed, on rare occasions when interviewers have performed the review function their reviews have tended to be rather superficial and have had to be done again by a more conscientious "editor." We have found that a fresh mind, free from the preconcep- tions about the interview that an interviewer naturally develops, may often hear things more critically than one who participated in the inter- view itself. The interviewer should always be on tap, of course, to advise reviewers and to assist them in listening to particularly diffi- cult passages. Reviewing a transcript that represents an hour of taped interview (35-45 draft pages) may take from seven to ten hours if the review is properly and carefully done, and if there are few problems in hearing the tape clearly. While we have had reviewers work at this task for full eight-hour days for five days a week, it is regarded as cruel and unusual punishment and our more recent practice has been to leaven the job by requiring reviewing for two-to-four-hour stretches in be- tween other assignments. We find that the per capita weekly production rate remains roughly the same as that for full-time reviewing. One of the collateral duties of a reviewer is to maintain and make additions to the program's file of names that occur in the texts of interviews. The reviewer checks the list of names provided by the transcriber against the text of the interview to make sure that all have been listed, and then against the program's master file of 3-by-5-inch name cards that are arranged alphabetically by name of the person mentioned. New additions are verified by checking standard reference books. A new card is made up for each new name, and the full name 52 and identification are listed together with other helpful information such as most recent address, telephone number, nicknames, and other bosts held. Nicknames are cross-referenced when there is ambiguity. For instance, "Ted" Clifton's first name is neither Theodore nor Edward, but Chester. Therefore, a card headed "Clifton, Ted" will have a cross-reference to the primary card headed "Clifton, Chester V." Reviewers take the oldest interview session available in the drawer of interview sessions to be reviewed, but may be directed to more recent sessions as priorities require. Appropriate notations are made on the worksheet and master control sheet at the beginning and end of the review. All corrections and proofreading marks should be made in black lead pencil, and they should be neatly and carefully entered so that they can be read without difficulty by the interviewee and by the person who types up the final copy. Some listening to the interview session tape beforehand is useful to reviewers, as it is to transcribers, to gain familiarity with the contents. When the transcript has been completely reviewed by one staff member it should be given to a second staff member for a second reading, without the tape, to see if it is indeed readable and as a double- check on all aspects of the draft. While interviewers may not make very good first reviewers, we have found that it is very useful to have them perform the second reading. They can often discover points that should be rechecked against the tape because context and meaning do not quite ring true. After the second reading, the draft transcript /ith its corrections is copied and notations are made on the worksheet and master control sheet. The tape is then sent to the vault for stor- age. This storage time offers a second opportunity for the tape to be duplicated for preservation. Master tapes ought to be filed in date order as they are received, and research tapes should be filed as whole interviews alphabetically by name of interviewee. The copy of the draft transcript is then placed in a file of interview sessions that are "out for interviewee review." The worksheet is filed by the processing supervisor in a special binder, chronologically arranged, that is used to monitor and control items that are out for interviewee review. By checking this binder the supervisor can note transcripts that are long delinquent and can write reminders to the interviewees in an attempt to recover the transcripts. INTERVIEWEE REVIEW OF DRAFT TRANSCRIPTS The interviewee is given the opportunity to review his draft transcript to make absolutely certain that the interview is what he is content to leave on the record for posterity and to make a last effort at correcting any errors of fact or opinion that may have 53 occurred. While the interviewee is permitted to make additions to the text, or even to take exception to earlier remarks by writing addi- tional comments, deletions and outright changes are discouraged. Interviewees are encouraged to preserve the candor and spontaneity of the original recording, and they are informed of what is wanted in the way of a review in covering letters that accompany draft tran- scripts. Normally interviews are not sent out to the interviewee until all sessions with that person have been taped, transcribed and reviewed by the staff. It may be more practical for long interviews of many sessions, or for interviews whose sessions are widely separated in time, to send the session drafts out piecemeal. If so, very careful records should be kept of what has and has not been sent out. The interviews are mailed in thick, padded book mailers to avoid damage in transit. If they are particularly important or unusually sensitive they should be sent via registered mail with a return receipt requested. Enclosing a return mailer that is self-addressed and stamped is an additional courtesy that may prompt speedier returns of the interview drafts. In addition to the draft transcript, each interviewee is sent a preliminary questionnaire soliciting his wishes with respect to the future preservation and use of the interview. (See Appendix E for a sample of the questionnaire used by the Kennedy Library.) The ques- tionnaire offers a series of options regarding opening, closing, literary property rights, copying, interlibrary loan, and so forth-not so much to dictate choices as to open the range of possibilities and to acquaint the interviewee with some of the possible implications of making his interview available for research. Few interviewees understand, for instance, that an interview once open in a Presidential library is open to all comers, not just to "serious scholars," and they are vulnerable to exploitive and mischievous quotation out of context in the public press. Some of the understanding should already be implicit from conversations between the interviewer and the interviewee, but the questionnaire offers the first opportunity for explicit definition of the interviewee's wishes with respect to the terms and conditions of the use of his interview. The questionnaire, when properly filled out, becomes the reference for further negotiation and drawing up the text of a legal agreement governing access to and use of the interview tran- script and tape. Delinquent returns of transcripts out for interviewee review is a problem that seems to plague every oral history program that sends out transcripts (and not all programs do). It frequently happens that an interviewee is simply too busy to take the time to sit down and spend the two to ten hours necessary to go over his interview carefully. This is especially true where the interview is an important or lengthy 54 one. It sometimes happens that an interviewee is so overwhelmed by the bulk of the transcript and the apparent enormity and serious- ness of the review that he may delay the job indefinitely. A few people have also wanted to wait until their own published accounts come out before returning the transcripts. Much delicate and persistent negotia- tion by letter and telephone may be necessary to get the reviewed draft back to the program office for final typing. Final accessioning should, after all, not take place until the other steps in the process have been accomplished. In extreme cases it may be necessary to press the issue rather strongly. Some programs take the ultimate step of serving notice to the interviewee that unless the draft is returned it will be assumed that the interviewee is content with the draft as it stands, and that it will be accessioned and made available at the dis- cretion of the program director. In the Kennedy Library we usually wait six months before sending the interviewee a rather gentle re- minder. If this does not produce results a more lengthy but still sym- pathetic letter is sent. A phone call is the next step in trying to pin the interviewee down to a target date for getting the draft back in corrected form. This method has had a fair amount of success, parti- cularly when we offer a second copy in case the first has been mislaid or is not readily available. But we still have found no way to coerce a reluctant interviewee into actually doing the review and returning the draft when he really doesn't want to. We have been very fortunate that only three persons have been so discouraged at what they produced that they have asked for their transcripts and tapes to be returned to them so that they might with- draw completely from the program, and in each case we have complied readily with the wishes of the interviewee after having ascertained that we cannot and should not change his mind. Only mutual under- standing and a commonly shared commitment can make the system work. When the draft interview is returned by the interviewee notations are again made on the worksheet and the master control sheet, the corrected draft is read to be sure that all notations are readable and understood, and the draft is filed chronologically in order of its return date for final typing. NEGOTIATION AND PREPARATION OF THE LEGAL AGREEMENT Like many oral history programs, the Kennedy Library uses a legal agreement to formalize the understandings between the inter- viewee and the Library, and to clarify for future users the legal title and rights to the interview. In some programs this formality is not 55 considered necessary and the programs rely on implied consent derived from the fact of the interview itself. According to this position, an interviewee by consenting to record his statements for a research institution has thereby abandoned his rights, title and interest. While this may suffice in some cases, it is not adequate to cover all possible situations, and some explicit statement is a good guard against later trouble. Some programs get this explicit statement on the tape itself, with a simple acknowledgment of gift as the last conversational exchange between interviewer and interviewee. In most programs, however, the legal agreement serves as both a deed of title and interests and as a kind of contract. Both aspects of the agreement should be carefully spelled out in the language of the document, which is signed by the interviewee and the legal representa- tive of the collecting institution. In most cases the "gift" of the inter- view is made subject to the fulfillment of certain terms and conditions, restrictions and limitations imposed by the interviewee, before the interview can be made available for public research. Beyond being the instrument of gift and agreement, the document is the tangible and visible representation of the mutual trust and under- standing that must exist between the interviewee and the program staff. The agreement is dependent on many understandings, expressed or inferred, that occur between the interviewee and members of the program staff, particularly the interviewer, at any and all stages of the process. There should be as much direct contact as possible with the interviewee in regard to negotiating the terms of the agreement. The program staff may offer advice in response to queries from the interviewee, and should always inform the interviewee of the range of options and possible consequences of any facet of the agreement; but the final decision on terms must be the interviewee's, and no ambi- guity of language should cloud the understanding or intent of the agree- ment. When the preliminary questionnaire has been returned and when the staff believe they have a good grasp of what the interviewee's requirements are (gained from phone calls to clarify questionnaire responses if necessary), the legal agreement is then drafted for con- sideration by the interviewee. On some occasions interviewees will ignore the preliminary questionnaire and will either write their own prose statements or will simply write back that they wish to attach no restrictions whatever. Whatever the particular case, the inter- viewee's wishes are formalized in simple declarative sentences in a standard format. In the form used in the Kennedy Library there are six functional parts to each and every legal agreement: 1. identification of the parties to the agreement 2. identification of the object of the agreement 56 3. an operative clause transferring rights, title and interest to the collecting institution (or, in rare cases, providing for a period of interim custody before the actual transfer is effected) 4. the terms and conditions to which the agreement and transfer are made subject 5. a clause offering the opportunity to renegotiate the agreement upon the initiative of either party 6. execution of the agreement by the dated signatures of the parties to the agreement. If the interviewee accepts the agreement as drafted he will sign it and return it to the program office. If he does not accept it, usually a phone call or perhaps a letter will be required to work out the prob- lem and hammer the language into acceptable form. Once accepted by the interviewee, the agreement is countersigned on behalf of the collecting institution. A copy is made and sent to the interviewee, and the original is filed in the program's correspondence file for that inter- viewee. A hypothetical legal agreement, presenting some of the more common conditions, is shown in Sample 3. FINAL TYPING A final copy, in the format noted in the appended transcribing manual (Appendix A), is prepared from the corrected draft as soon as possible after the draft is returned by the interviewee. The pro- duction of a final copy is speedier than the transcription or review, but it should be done with care. It has been our experience that a final transcript representing one hour of taped interview may be typed in three or four hours and will produce from 18 to 24 single-spaced typewritten pages. This final copy is the master copy from which microfilm or photocopy reproductions are made for research use, and it should be flawlessly typed from a clean carbon ribbon so that reproduction by photocopy will be clear and legible. A copy is also sent to the interviewee for his files. Some programs do not retype the draft interview, arguing that omission of final typing is cheaper and is a more accurate reflection of reality than a retyped copy that deletes original words and the changes thereto. The argument is a compelling one, particularly if the tape has not been saved. However, it can also be argued that the historical document is really in two parts, the tape and the transcript. The tran- script is the more likely to be used intensively by most researchers, and for that reason it should represent the interviewee's considered judgment of what he wants to leave on the record for the future, mindful 57 SAMPLE 3 Legal Agreement I, Joseph S. Interviewee, of Disputanta, Virginia, do hereby give to the John F. Kennedy Library, for use and administra- tion therein, all my rights, title and interest, except as here- inafter provided, to the tape recording and transcript of the interview conducted in Washington, D.C., on March 4, 1967, for the John F. Kennedy Library. The gift of this material is made subject to the following terms and conditions: 1. The interview tape and transcript may not be made avail- able to anyone without my express permission until January 1, 1975, after which it may be made available freely to general research. 2. I retain to myself all literary property rights to the inter- view until January 1, 1975, at which time literary property right shall be assigned to the United States Government. 3. Persons who have access to the transcript may listen to the tape, for background use only, and they may not cite, para- phrase or quote therefrom. This agreement may be revised or amended by mutual consent of the parties undersigned. Joseph S. Interviewee Archivist of the United States Month, Day, Year Month, Day, Year that it ought to be as close to the candor and spontaneity of the tape as possible. The tape is preserved as a resource for background use for those scholars who wish to probe more deeply into the interview itself by comparing the tape with the transcript. Some programs erase the tape once the transcript has been accepted. The arguments for this practice are that few researchers have ever bothered to use the tape as a research source, and that tapes can be reused to save money. But rapid changes in technology, particularly in the area of electronic information storage and retrieval make it likely that aural tapes may one day be more easily used, and it seems a waste to throw away the taped voice of a historical figure. It would indeed be foolish to practice oral history and then destroy the "oral" evidence. The cost of tape is a relatively small portion of the program budget and it is doubtful that the proportionate savings 58 accretion from tape reuse can purchase anything of significant value more important than the recorded voices of history. ACCESSIONING The final step in processing is a relatively simple one. The act of accessioning is merely a formal recording of a document among the inventory of holdings of a collecting institution. In the Kennedy Library we assign an "OH" accession number to each new interview acquired during a calendar year. "OH 71-8" is the number assigned to the eighth oral history interview accessioned in the calendar year 1971. The number is logged in the accession register after all other phases of work on the interview have been completed and the documents (tape and transcript) have been released to the collecting institution by the interviewee. At this point a final notation is made on the master control sheet, which is filed in the interviewee's correspondence file together with the original copy of the legal agreement and the pre- liminary questionnaire. A FINAL NOTE ABOUT PROCESSING Processing frequently is the point of most stubborn backlogs in the flow of information from interviewee to researcher. Transcribing and reviewing take a great deal of time compared to the actual hours of interview they represent. The ratio of cumulative hours of transcrib- ing, reviewing, second reading and final typing (exclusive of interviewee review, etc.) to the actual interview hours may be on the order of twenty-five or thirty to one. In addition it is estimated that interviewer preparation may vary from ten to twenty hours per hour of interview. Therefore, the total "cost" of an interview (exclusive of general plan- ning, administrative controls, negotiating legal agreements, interviewee review, etc.) may be forty to fifty hours of staff work for one hour of interview. When there is relatively high interview session productivity on the part of the interviewers, backlogs can accumulate rapidly in the processing unit. Long delays in interviewee review, over which the program staff has only modest control at best, can further exacerbate the problem. It has not been unusual for several years to pass between an initial interview and accessioning. It is not economical to maintain large processing staffs in order to meet the very irregular peaks of interview session production, or peaks of interviews returning from interviewee review. Therefore, a principal challenge to a program director, aside from maintaining the scholarly integrity of his product, 59 is to accomplish thoroughly all the interviewing necessary to build a solid and useful source of information, accomplish it at a rate that the processing unit can handle, and maintain a processing unit that can cope with the output of interviewing. 60 CHAPTER 6 RESEARCH USE OF ORAL HISTORY TAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS The purpose of all the interviewing and processing is, of course, to make information available to scholars. Once the collection is done, there is still a responsibility for the collecting institution to see that the information is presented to the interested public in a usable form as soon as interviewee restrictions permit. The ribbon copy of the final transcript should be preserved as the collection master copy, and duplicate or microfilm copies should be made for research use. The tape should be duplicated so that one copy can be kept as a master and the other used for research. The master tape should be carefully rewound so that wear is minimized, and it should be stored in a tem- perature and humidity controlled room. Master copies may be filed by accession number or by date of interview session. Research copies should be filed alphabetically by name of interviewee. SCREENING Interviews to which no restrictions are attached may be opened to research as soon as research copies are prepared and the institution announces their availability. However, closed transcripts and tapes must be kept track of in a manner that will ensure prompt action once the restrictions expire. A simple card file of closed interviews, ar- ranged by date of restriction expirations, is useful for this purpose. Periodically the file should be reviewed and those interviews whose restrictions are about to expire should be selected for screening. The legal agreement for each must be checked carefully to make cer- tain that all terms and conditions are satisfied. The correspondence file should be checked to see that all aspects of the case are fully understood. Once it has been determined that all stated conditions are fully satisfied, the interview should be read carefully by the staff. 61 The interviewee should be contacted to make certain that he under- stands fully the implications of opening the interview to the public and accepts full responsibility for the public use and possible publication of everything he has said in the interview. The interviewee is informed that once opened to research in a public institution he has virtually lost all control of when, where and how he may be quoted, by scholars and journalists alike, and that he should give due consideration to the possibility of irresponsible use of his opinions. If, given this last and conscientious effort on the part of the staff, the interviewee still wishes to open the interview, it should be opened without further ado. However, if the interviewee has second thoughts and wishes to modify or extend his restrictions, an amendment to the legal agreement should be pre- pared to cover the new points. FINDING AIDS Research use of oral history interviews is still too new to provide the experience needed for developing really useful finding aids. Col- lection and simple availability of interviews is obviously not the whole job. In order for the interviews to be most usefully researched, some system of finding aids must be developed, particularly in a collection that covers diverse subjects and contains many hundreds of interviews. The simplest sort of finding aid is a list of interviews, arranged al- phabetically by the name of each interviewee. The list should identify the interviewee in such a way as to give the researcher his official title, or his role or relationship to the central focus of the program's subjects. The length of the interview in number of pages or hours of tape and the status of the interview should also be included. A researcher should be able to look at the list and know which interviews are fully open, which ones closed, which partially closed, and which require permission of the interviewee. By scanning such a list, a researcher ought to be able to select for reading or listening those interviews most likely to add something to his research. A more useful finding aid in the long run is a name and subject index to all interviews in the collection. It would be decidedly unfair to interviewees and misleading to researchers to index interviews that are closed, so only open interviews should be indexed at first. Indexing is therefore a continuous process, with new entries being added as new interviews are opened. For this reason, we have found it most convenient to use a 3-by-5-inch card file, arranged alphabet- ically by index entry. At present the index is used chiefly by staff members in steering researchers to interviews that may be useful. Eventually we hope that it will be developed to a point where research- ers themselves can use the index as one would use a card catalog in a library as the first point of inquiry. 62 Some programs list a table of contents for each interview tran- script. This is particularly useful where subjects are extremely diverse and there is no central thematic focus to the collection. The tables could perhaps be compiled at some point into a general finding aid for the whole collection. Another kind of finding aid that may be developed if automatic data processing becomes more available to archives and oral history collections is a computer look-up system. It is possible for transcripts to be typed while simultaneously creating a punched paper tape, similar to that found in teletype operations. This tape records each letter and each word in the transcript. The paper tape can then be converted into magnetic tape for computer storage and retrieval through key word look-up programs. The chief advantage of this method would be speed and comprehensive scanning of the whole collection. Its disadvantage would be that of accurate communication. The words being sought by the researcher may be limited, and it may not occur to a researcher to look up all synonyms or near-synonyms in his search for a particular kind of information. Thus, some information may simply stay in the computer because the key word wasn't used as an access means. Also, through the use of a key word a researcher will get all and every mention of his subject, whether it is significant or trivial. A researcher studying the life of Senator Ribicoff, for instance, would get every mention of the man's name even if it were only mentioned in passing in an insignificant context. This production of chaff equally with the whole grain of in- formation creates a large task of gleaning for the researcher that he might better have spent reading the whole transcripts. While research use of tapes is still quite limited, it is likely that researchers will want to listen to limited, specific portions of the tapes rather than whole interviews. To facilitate locating specific portions of the tape it is useful to place marginal notes in the tran- script indicating 2.5 minute intervals of the interview tape. The de- velopment of this kind of finding aid for a collection already well- developed is very time-consuming, and program planners are advised to do this from the beginning or not at all. There will perhaps come a time when it is practical to index tapes by the attachment of magnetic "tags" at selected points or at regular intervals on the tape itself; however, that kind of sophistication is out of the present reach of most programs. 63 CHAPTER 7 PROCESSING RECORDS Processing records, the files and logs that record the steps in a program's work, are extremely important for the day-to-day and long-term control of a major oral history program involving numerous interviews and diverse subjects. Each program must to some extent develop those controls most useful to its purpose. The system de- scribed below has proven most useful to the purposes of the Kennedy program. CORRESPONDENCE FILE The heart of the program records is in the correspondence file. This is an alphabetic file of all records of the program's relations with each and every interviewee, potential interviewee, other oral history programs, and people otherwise interested in the program. Within each folder, titled with the name of the correspondent, items are ar- ranged chronologically from back to front, the most recent item being visible upon opening the folder. Not only formal correspondence, but also interviewer memoranda of telephone calls and other contacts, incidental information (such as a person's intent to donate papers or other items to the collecting institution), news clippings, obituaries, changes of address, phone numbers, and so forth, should go into this file. A copy of the preliminary questionnaire on legal agreement preparation, a copy of the completed legal agreement, and the master control sheet from the processing of the interview should also go into this file when processing is completed. A review of the correspondence file should give a complete history of the participation of any given interviewee in the program. 64 INTERVIEWER LOGS AND FILES Interviewers, in the course of their research and planning, will accumulate material that must be arranged and rearranged almost daily if it is to serve their needs. Collecting all the relevant informa- tion for a series of interviews on natural resources policy may require files of material in several different subject areas. Preparing an interview with a particular person, however, will require a selection of information from some of the collected items and not from others. When a subsequent interview is prepared a new arrangement, perhaps using much of the material for the previous interview, will be required. Since there is much functional overlapping in most official government roles, pieces of a generally coherent body of information may be pulled out for interviews in other areas. For instance, information on the U.S.-Mexican dispute over the tolerable level of salinity of Colorado River water that passes from the United States into Mexico is a sub- ject of inquiry for officials of both the Interior and State Departments. The result of all the shuffling and reshuffling is a records manager's nightmare. It must remain flexible to the varying demands of the interviewer, but at some point order must be brought to these files after interviewing has been completed if they are to be useful in helping future scholars delve into the methods and procedures that produced the interviews so as to better evaluate the product. Lists of potential interviewees and potential subjects for inter- viewing are also a part of the interviewer's daily working files. Since these are constantly developing, each interviewer may find it useful to keep a kind of personal "scorecard" on which he notes progress in developing his interviewing plans and in conducting the interviews. Initial contact with the interviewee, positive and negative responses, dates of interview sessions and the like can be noted so that the inter- viewer will always know where he stands with respect to any given subject area or any given interviewee. This should be a personal record of the interviewer and need not be filed as part of the program records. Some interviewers also keep a daily log or diary of their activi- ties, noting in such a journal the material being worked up for inter- views, interesting questions that occur in the course of research, contacts with interviewees, problems that arise, phone numbers, ad- dresses, and so on. Each interviewer usually develops the informa- tion system he finds most congenial to his own style of work and the methods he finds most useful. 65 FILES OF INTERVIEW TAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS BY PROCESSING STAGE Tapes and transcripts should be filed in an orderly manner according to their respective stages of processing. There should be file drawers specifically set aside for the following: 1. untranscribed tapes of interview sessions 2. draft transcripts and tapes of interview sessions awaiting staff review and audit 3. copies of draft transcripts which have been sent out for interviewee review 4. draft transcripts, back from interviewee review, awaiting final typing 5. transcripts awaiting completion of legal agreement 6. accessioned transcripts awaiting opening 7. tapes of interviews that have been processed 8. extra files for the overnight, temporary storage of material being worked on by each member of the processing staff Each of these files should be arranged so that the oldest item is in the front of the drawer and the newest in the back. If backlogs develop, additional drawers should be set aside for transcripts await- ing second reading by the interviewer, finally typed transcripts await- ing proofreading, and so forth. WORKSHEETS AND MASTER CONTROL SHEETS The worksheet and master control sheet (see Sample 2 on page 48) is the principal control mechanism of processing interviews. On it are recorded all actions taken with respect to a given interview session, the dates of the actions, their duration, and the people re- sponsible. From the file of master control sheets, arranged alphabeti- cally and updated as work progresses, the processing supervisor should be able to locate within a matter of minutes any given interview session tape or transcript and answer any questions about its processing. When filed chronologically by the date that drafts were sent out to inter- viewees, the worksheet further serves as a control mechanism for identifying delinquent returns of drafts from interviewees. As noted above, when the processing is completed, the master control sheet is first checked against the worksheet to make sure that all information tallies and is then filed in the correspondence file. At this point the worksheet can be destroyed. 66 STATUS LOGS If a program is required to present statistical reports on pro- gress, it is also useful to keep status logs from which figures can be compiled cumulatively and periodically for each processing stage. A sample of the log that can be used for each of several processing stages is shown on page 47. The logs, in column form, can be referred to periodically to discern progress or backlogs at any stage, and to report it in quantified terms which may be translated into work-hours needed to eliminate the work to be done. Since the format of the log is the same for each stage of processing, the data may be processed cumulatively. PERIODIC PROGRESS REPORTS In the Kennedy program we are required to file quarterly progress reports of oral history interviewing and processing activity. The form used is shown in Sample 4. The data presented are based on previous reports and figures compiled from the status reports men- tioned above. Note that the measures used are hours of interview, pages of interview (draft or final), and people interviewed. Since the data for certain blocks of the form would be virtually meaningless, these blocks are marked out and require no entries. NAME LIST The name list, as has been mentioned previously, is used to re- cord the name of each person appearing at least once in each interview. It is best kept in columnar form, with the name to the left, a second column for a brief identifying notation, a third column for the source book from which correct spelling and identification were obtained or verified, and a fourth column for the number of the page of draft tran- script on which the person's name first appears. NAME FILE The name file, also mentioned previously, is a 3-by-5-inch card file recording the name of every person mentioned in any oral history interview for the Kennedy Library. It is arranged alphabetically and is expanded as new names appear. The person's name is listed on the top line, and identifying information appears below. The card should list nicknames and positions held and any other information pertinent 67 SAMPLE 4 Quarterly Report Form Hours Pages People Activity This Quarter Interviews Taped * Transcribing Completed * Transcribing Backlog * Reviewing Completed * Reviewing Backlog * Sent Out to Interviewees * Returned from Interviewees * Interviewee Review Backlog * Final Typing Completed * Final Typing Backlog * Interviews Accessioned Cumulative Holdings Interviews Taped Interviews Accessioned Interviews Open *Numbers not meaningful in these categories. to establishing the person's role or relationship to the people and events on which the program is focused. The source for the spelling and principal identification should also be noted. The interviews in which the name is mentioned should appear on the card as an aid in the later indexing of oral history transcripts in the collection. 68 CHAPTER STAFFING AND EQUIPPING A MAJOR PROGRAM It would be irresponsible not to let readers know that the staffing and equipping of a major program can be a most expensive proposi- tion. The size of the staff and the kind of processing that is set up will determine just how much the initial investment and the later operating costs will be. Salaries may vary from region to region and from program to program. There are costs that can be cut with some small cost in the final product. The final typing step can be eliminated, for instance, leaving as the record copy the marked-up version re- viewed by the interviewee. It is sometimes less expensive to contract out interviewing to graduate students and to scholars doing work in subjects of interest to the program. These are decisions that should be made at the beginning of a program and adhered to throughout, for changes are both expensive and result in a messy appearance to the whole program operations and collection. It is difficult to set up a model staff, since each program's requirements differ. It is still harder to evaluate it in hard dollar terms. What is offered here is not so much a model as it is a choice of possibilities, from which pro- gram planners may select what is most appropriate to their own needs and to their own budgets. What follows is descriptive of the staffing pattern of the Kennedy Library program, in which there was a considerable degree of special- ization. While there was some upward mobility from transcriber to draft reviewer and an even rarer transition from reviewer to inter- viewer, most new staff members were hired from the outside. The first program director was hired from the Truman Library oral history program, the second from the administrative side of the Na- tional Archives, and the next two from the ranks of the interviewers. The professional staff has, generally, been a young one, most inter- viewers being in their late twenties or early thirties and the tran- scribers and draft transcript reviewers being in college or recent 69 graduates. While most interviewers have been male and most tran- scribers have been female we have also had two women as interviewers and several men as transcribers and draft transcript reviewers. (In the text of this book the repeated references to "he" when describing the work of the various staff positions reflect the egocentrism of the author and the lack of a suitable bisexual pronoun, not a bias of the program.) It has been our experience that transcribing is a skill (or perhaps a talent) that requires some knowledge of the subject matter, that reviewing draft transcripts is a skill requiring a professional background, and that interviewing is a technique requiring professional application. THE PROGRAM DIRECTOR First among several necessary functions is the overall direction of the program, which should be entrusted to a single individual. This person should have the primary authority and responsibility for the conduct of the program in all its phases, under the broad guidelines of the program's planners. In addition to a keen appreciation for and an understanding of the criteria of historical scholarship, the director must have a demonstrated competence for and an interest in the ad- ministration of the program. He should be able to apply these skills, capabilities and understandings to planning, management, development, and critical review of the program, as well as day-to-day control of all phases of its activity. Within the broad guidelines provided him, the director should supervise and assist in developing lists of inter- viewees and subject areas, in the assignment of interviewing priorities, in the establishment of processing procedures (and their modification as circumstances require), and in general should set a model of excellence for the conduct of the program. A director should also do some of the interviewing from time to time in order to keep his hand in and to be intimately aware of the problems and prospects of his program. While the question of loyalty is a difficult one to assess without raising more spectres than is necessary, it is safe to say that when loyalty to both the scholarly discipline and to the program pur- pose exists, there is no problem. Loyalty can help to protect a pro- gram from mischief, but it should proceed from a creative and mutual interdependence and shared values rather than be set as a condition of employment. When loyalty exists, neither scholarly discipline nor professional relations are jeopardized. Only when unreasonable expectations on one side or the other require proofs and reassurance is there a significant problem. The director should have the wit and good sense to realize this and to run his program accordingly. 70 INTERVIEWERS Interviewing is the heart of the program's activity. Program scope and pace will determine how many interviewers are needed. At its height, the Kennedy Library program employed four full-time interviewers, and the processing supervisor also pitched in from time to time with interviews as appropriate and needed. It is not easy to describe the qualities of a good interviewer, and it is still harder to spot them in people who are being considered for the position of interviewer. There is almost no formula for an- swering the basic question, Will people open up and talk candidly with this person? Part of the answer may be intuitively grasped in conversation with a candidate, particularly when someone with wide experience as an interviewer conducts the conversation. Credentials as a scholar in the social sciences may indicate potential, but much more is required. Perhaps the single most important characteristic of a good oral history interviewer, beyond being articulate and a good listener, is an insatiable and abiding curiosity about his subject. He must bring to the task of interviewing a well-established scholarly discipline that will one day be applied by others to the results of the inquiry. He must possess in good measure the basic equipment of rational inquiry: perception, identification and description, definition, association, comparison, deduction, generalization, and all the other tools of rational analysis. A good memory is very important, and the ability to absorb and retain information at a rapid rate is signif- icantly an advantage. He should have a good knowledge of and ready access to the available sources of information on his subject, and he must be able to immerse himself in the data until its recollection and significance are second nature to him. Experience alone, however, does not make a good interviewer. The good interviewer must also be able to free himself from his own preconceptions and treat each interview as a new learning experience while at the same time bringing to bear all the facts he has absorbed and all the rigorous critical judgment his discipline can provide. He must possess both tact and persistence. He must be a person who is at once sensitive to mood and accurate in his adjust- ments to it, so as to gain the maximum benefit from an interview situation. He should have an engaging personality that induces inter- viewees to relax and be candid, but he must also have a tough inner core of critical judgment that also induces respect and keeps the interviewee conscious that he must be honest and frank. He must be a good listener and a perceptive questioner who is able to understand and sympathize with the interviewee's presentation but also able to offer counter-propositions in a polite and respectful manner so as to encourage further conversation. He must be open and candid himself 71 with the interviewee, but he must also show that he is protecting the confidences of other interviewees. It is often tempting and frequently useful to have close associates or friends interview each other. However, unless both are fully com- mitted to and understand the purpose of the interview and its final use as a research source, the result may be very exasperating to a reader or listener. Such interviews often do not provide the necessary objec- tive and insightful inquiry. In easy dialogue between friends they may assume that the unseen audience is as aware as they are of the details, background and connnecting logic between their spoken assumptions and conclusions, leaving out much that would be of importance to some- one trying to study the subjects. They may also have their personal relationships at stake, and may not be willing to press too keenly on sensitive matters, or probe for suspected weaknesses and suppressed evidence. An interviewer for a major program, particularly one dealing with sensitive political subjects, should be willing to forego the short- term gain of writing for publication from the data accumulated in interviewing. This would betray the long-term purpose of the program, for such revelations would discourage future interviewees from being as candid as the program requires. This kind of commitment is es- sential, and should be a natural and easy part of an interviewer's qualifications. Like loyalty, it should proceed from shared values and common purpose rather than from conditions placed upon employ- ment. TRANSCRIBERS As has been noted before, one of the key steps in processing recorded interviews is the transcription of the tapes into typescript. The transcriber must listen to the tapes while simultaneously typing out a verbatim transcript in a standard form. He must have a good command of English, a good ear for speech patterns and accents, good typing skills and a general familiarity with the subject matter of the interviews. A transcriber should also have a great deal of patience and be able to apply a constant attention to detail in order to produce transcripts that are as error-free as possible. While the number of transcribers required will vary with the productivity of the interviewing staff, planners should figure on at least one full-time transcriber for each full-time interviewer on the staff. This is a minimal figure for a rate of interviewing of about two and one-half hours of interview production per week. Planners should reckon on at least one additional full-time transcriber for each two to three hours of interview production per week. It is 72 important to keep transcribing as current as possible, despite the fact that it is a slow and cumbersome operation. It is the first of several bottlenecks that can produce processing delays, and delays at the transcribing stage are often compounded in later processing steps. The fresher an interview is in the minds of interviewer and interviewee when the time comes to review the transcript, the more readily both will be able to conclude the review speedily and accurately. Excessive delays between taping and review can require interviewers to recon- struct both a frame of mind and a structure of facts that originally took many hours to construct, and they will often signal to the inter- viewee that there is no need to rush the transcript back to the program office for final action. We have discovered on more than one occasion the extreme difficulty of transcribing and reviewing an interview long after the interviewer had left the program or the interviewee had more than half forgotten the circumstances of the interview. CLERICAL SUPPORT During its peak the Kennedy Library's oral history program had two full-time clerk-typists who were kept busy with support tasks such as typing of correspondence, record-keeping, filing, routine travel arrangements, ordering of office supplies, and typing final transcripts. This does not, however, indicate the quantity of work actually done in the general area of clerical support, since there were many occasions on which transcribers and reviewers or research assistants were pressed into service for these tasks. The volume of work was quite heavy, and another clerk-typist would have done much to relieve the steady backlog of draft transcripts awaiting final typing. The advice that this experience suggests is that there should be at least three clerk-typists for every four interviewers. REVIEWERS OR TAPE AUDITORS In the Kennedy Library oral history program we kept two or three people constantly busy reviewing draft transcripts against the original tape of the interview, but they were not enough to keep abreast of production during peak periods of interview and transcription out- put. There really should be at least one reviewer for each interviewer on the staff. The reviewer, like the transcriber, requires a very good ear for voices, intonations, inflections, and accents. He needs a good knowledge of the relevant subjects, but more important to the job is a good understanding of the possibilities of various forms of written 73 expression and the use of punctuation, spelling, and grammar to trans- late spoken words into accurate written forms. Phrasing makes a great deal of difference between an accurate transcript and a bad one, and the location of a comma or a period may change the entire mean- ing of a sentence. Distinguishing between true and false starts, know- ing when statements are parenthetical and when they become long digressions, and the ability to reflect these accurately on the printed page, are all talents that come only with training and experience. It is helpful if reviewers have had some prior transcribing experience, although we have not found it absolutely essential. THE PROCESSING SUPERVISOR It was found advantageous in the Kennedy Library oral history program to designate a processing supervisor to assign work priorities among the transcribers, draft transcript reviewers and clerical per- sonnel, to train new transcribers and reviewers, and to oversee the progress and quality of the processing unit's production. This freed the program director and the interviewers to concentrate their full attention on interviewing and the research needed to support it. The processing supervisor can handle many of the routine personnel, time-keeping, budgeting and other chores that require so much time and attention in any carefully administered office. He may also act as a senior editor and thereby be the arbiter of matters of style and format in the transcribing and reviewing of transcripts, and may, on occasion, develop into a part-time interviewer. The processing super- visor should therefore have a good sense of organization and office management and the language skills necessary to keep program pro- ducts up to high standards. A knowledge of the subject matter is less important unless the supervisor is also going to do interviewing on the side. RESEARCH ASSISTANCE From time to time we have had the benefit of part-time research assistance that has proved useful to the interviewers of the Kennedy Library program. In some cases the transcribers, reviewers or clerical staff have been used to make up lists of events, to construct chronologies from open sources, or to do research in the periodical literature about a specific interviewee or subject. On occasion we were able to use archival trainees and summer interns for this pur- pose. Research support of this kind is admittedly a luxury and does not suit the purposes of every program, but oral history projects 74 located on college campuses or in areas where volunteer help is avail- able should be able to enjoy it at relatively low cost. INVESTING IN EQUIPMENT The tape recorder is the principal piece of equipment around which oral history revolves, and a major program requires consider- able investment in machines for interviewing, transcribing, and review- ing. Since the equipment will receive hard and continuous use it is not to the advantage of a program to economize by purchasing cheap material. There is too much difference of opinion among oral history practitioners to offer anything definitive with respect to manufacturers or models; it would seem that with tape recorders, as with automobiles, preferences depend on individual taste. TAPE RECORDERS FOR INTERVIEWING A relatively light, portable, but long-wearing tape recorder is needed for interviewing. Interviewers must travel about a good deal, and each added pound is an added problem as the miles go by. Two general classes of tape recorders fill the bill, portable reel recorders and cassette recorders. A good portable reel recorder that is no bigger than about 11- by-9 by-4 inches and weighs no more than can be comfortably carried for a dozen or so city blocks is desirable for interviewing. If the machine can fit into a briefcase or attaché case, so much the better. It is preferable to have a machine that works on both alternating cur- rent and on batteries, but the former should be used whenever possible to avoid the chance of power failure from worn batteries. External adapter paraphernalia (AC/DC adapter boxes or battery pack re- chargers) come with some models, and these may be of some incon- venience. Other models have adapter features built in to the recorder chassis. Since the recorder is likely to be used to tape fairly long inter- view sessions it is advisable to have the maximum playing time per reel of tape and to avoid frequent and unnecessary interruptions for changing reels. For this reason it is preferable to have a two-track machine that can record on both "sides" of a reel of two-track tape, that will take reels of at least 5 inches in diameter, and that is capable of recording at a speed of 3 3/4 inches of tape per second. We have found it most convenient to use 1.5 mil (thickness) tape and to record at a speed of 1 7/8 inches per second, yielding about one hour of interview per "side." 75 Good tone quality is important, and a machine that can discrim- inate against background noises is an added advantage. Similarly, a machine that has both an internal and an external microphone so that interviewer and interviewee can sit apart from each other is also quite convenient. The newer cassette recorders are very useful when a number of interviews are scheduled for a long trip. The lighter weight and ease of carrying both machine and tapes may be much appreciated after several days on the road. It is important to obtain a good machine, however. Experienced interviewers have had some difficulties with even the best machines, and there are many inferior ones on the market. If there is one thing an interviewer does not need it is tape breakage, or to have the tape suddenly run out of the cassette and on to the floor in the middle of the interview. The cassette machine, like the reel recorder, should be a two-track one, capable of playing tapes up to about one hour on each side, and it should have a built-in end-of-tape warning device since it is not easy to see the progress of the tape inside the cassette when the machine is running. Some models come with such devices that emit a rather rude "Bronx cheer" kind of sound close to the end of the tape. They usually startle the interviewee, and some explanation may be necessary, but this is preferable to having the tape stop unnoticed while the interview continues unrecorded. TAPES In the interests of preservation it is preferable to use 1.5 mil mylar or polyester tape for oral history interviewing. Acetate tape should be avoided since it may grow brittle with age and may be sub- ject to changes with variation in humidity and temperature. Since most cassette tapes are extremely thin and liable to break with re- peated use, they should be duplicated on to reel tape as soon as possible after interviewing. TAPE RECORDERS FOR TRANSCRIBING AND REVIEWING Both transcribing and reviewing require larger and even more durable table-model machines capable of sustained use day in and day out for hours at a time. They should have at least the same range of speeds as the interview recorders, although greater flexibility may be required to handle tapes that may be provided by outside sources (such as 7-inch tapes recorded at higher or lower speeds than those normally used by the program). Some machines still have the old 76 7 1/2 inches per second speed, and a few of the newer ones even have a very slow speed of 15/16 inches per second. The machines for transcribing and reviewing should be equipped with foot-pedal controls for forward and reverse action so that stop-and-go listening necessary to transcribing can be done easily. The machines should be equipped with earphones that are comfortable for long wear. Earphones tend to be very personal things, and what suits one transcriber may be a nuisance to another. Only trial and error will establish which is best. Usually light-weight earphones that cover the entire ear are preferred. TYPEWRITERS As with tape recorders, it is necessary to have typewriters that are capable of long and continuous use to transcribe the hundreds of hours and thousands of pages of interview. Electric typewriters of the large desk variety are preferable to manual ones as they tend to produce more uniform copy at greater speeds. The expense of purchasing these large electric machines may seem high, but they are easily the most suitable and should give long and reliable service. MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR One area that should not be neglected by program planners is machine breakdown and repair. We have found it necessary to have at least one back-up machine for every three machines in service, whether it be tape recorders or typewriters. Hard and sustained use wear on even the best machines, and some part of a program budget should be allocated for regular repair service. The program can usually contract for regular service by a local firm and get some reduction in the cost of repairs. A FINAL NOTE ABOUT OFFICE SPACE Oral history programs operate out of all kinds of office spaces, from little warrens in archives buildings to spacious lofts and modern offices. Since much of the program work requires continuous typing, other work requires careful listening and still other work requires patient research and collegial interchange of ideas it is desirable that the interviewing staff, the transcribing staff and the reviewing staff be placed in separate areas with sufficient sound-proofing be- tween them so that disturbance is minimized. At the same time there should be free and easy access from one space to the other to facilitate communication among members of the staff. 77 APPENDIX A TRANSCRIBING MANUAL This guide for transcribers is prepared as a basic reference for the use of staff members of the John F. Kennedy Library in the preparation of transcripts for research use. Transcribers must become familiar with its contents if they are to produce transcripts that meet the high standards of the Library. While not all the prob- lems encountered in transcribing will be solved by reference to this guide, it does help with most of the more common questions of format, style, punctuation, grammar and spelling. In cases of doubt, always consult the senior members of the staff and the processing supervisor. The manual is written in the format of the draft and final copy versions of oral history interview transcripts in the Kennedy Library. Changes in subject or thought are set down as if they were spoken by an interviewer and interviewee respectively, although not in question and answer form. 78 Oral History Interview with JOSEPH S. INTERVIEWEE date place By John J. Interviewer For the John F. Kennedy Library INTERVIEWER: This is a sample of the first page of a draft tran- script of an interview session. All lines in the title are centered and all are double-spaced except the date and place. The title line begins on the twelfth line from the top edge of the page. The text begins four lines below the last line of the heading. INTERVIEWEE: If this is not the first interview with a person, in- dicate the number of the interview session in the title line, for example: "Third Oral History Inter- view with JOSEPH S. INTERVIEWEE." INTERVIEWER: Number the first page at the bottom, four lines below the last line of text and centered. INTERVIEWEE: If the interview was done for a sub-project, sub- stitute "For the X Sub-project of the John F. Ken- nedy Library" for the last line of the heading. INTERVIEWER: The date in the heading should be entered in the conventional way as in "October 23, 1966." The place should be the town or city and state (or country) in which the interview took place. 79 INTERVIEWEE: On all pages the left margin is one inch wide. The right margin is set at one and one-half inches, but may be allowed to vary slightly. The bottom mar- gin is from one and one-half to two inches wide. On non-title pages-that is, on continuation pages- the page number is placed at the right margin, four lines below the top edge of the paper. The text on continuation pages begins eight lines below the top edge of the paper. A sample margin guide is provided at the end of this manual, and may be duplicated for use in transcribing. INTERVIEWER: The last names of the interviewer and interviewee are entered in capital letters flush with the left margin. The dialogue margin is set three spaces to the right of the colon following the longest name appearing as a participant in the interview session. INTERVIEWEE: Each new passage of speech by a different person from the one previously speaking is begun at the dialogue margin, but paragraphing is permitted if the passage of speech is very long or there are logical points of thought or emphasis. Such as is about to occur in this sample. Transcribing is the most important single step in the processing of an oral history interview. It is essential to the successful future research use of an interview that it be accurately and neatly transcribed. A good, clear, error-free transcript means that staff time is not wasted in lengthy re- view and correction. An initial transcription error may be compounded many times by the cost of staff 80 time and effort necessary to correct it. Further- more, all transcripts are sent back to the inter- viewees for review before being finally typed for deposit in the Kennedy Library. An interviewee faced with a typescript that is heavily scarred with proofreader's marks is likely to be less than en- thusiastic about doing a prompt and careful job of reviewing the text. He is also likely to have a rather low opinion of the Library's care and treat- ment of his interview. INTERVIEWER: While there is no technique that will guarantee the speedy and accurate transcription of the spoken word, a good ear, careful listening, good typing skills, and a broad knowledge of many kinds of subjects will all help. Transcribers should read widely in the subjects of the interviews they are working on. The goal is good clean copy that is accurate and neatly typed in accordance with the general and specific instructions in this manual. It may not be possible in all cases to produce an entirely error- free page, but the primary objective of a faithful transcription should never be sacrificed. Speed and neatness are highly desirable, but accuracy is the most important goal. INTERVIEWEE: Before transcribing a particular interview session you should familiarize yourself with the interview. Find out who the interviewee is and what his role was. Talk things over with the interviewer when- ever possible to get insights into the interview 81 content, the interviewee's speaking habits, and the interview circumstances. The interviewer may have his interview notes available which may be very helpful in following the structure of the inter- view and in recognizing some of the more obscure proper names. INTERVIEWER: The next step is to listen to the tape without at- tempting to transcribe. Listen to enough of the tape so that you begin to get the "feel" of the in- terview, to catch the lilt and rhythm of the accents, the patterns of speech and the mannerisms, and begin to appreciate the subject matter. Even under good transcribing conditions it is useful to listen ahead a few sentences as you transcribe, so that you can anticipate sentence endings and realize when speakers are merely pausing for breath in mid-thought. Where it is extremely difficult to understand what is being said on the tape, call upon your fellow transcribers, the interviewer, and other staff members for aid. Do not hesitate to ask for help when you need it. It is not unusual to see three or four heads bent over a tape recorder, listening intently to hear what has been obscured on the tape by the sudden thump of an interviewee's fist on the table as he emphasizes a point. Do not be surprised if even the interviewer remains mystified. INTERVIEWEE: Although you are supposed to transcribe everything you hear, there are some rules that you must follow in the interests of readability. Common verbal 82 lapses, such as the dropping of the "g" sound in "-ing" endings, or the omission of the "a" and "d" sounds in "and," should not be written in their vulgar form. Always correct them to the proper written form. Reviewers will later "clean up" the tran- script by choosing to omit certain redundancies. For instance, many speakers have the habit of repeating a meaningless word or phrase again and again as a kind of thought pause that has be- come a mannerism of which they are not aware. Many sentences will begin with "so," "now," "and," or "but." The meaningless gutteral sound "uh" should not even be transcribed unless it in- dicates some sort of emotion or real quandary on the part of the interviewee. A speaker may re- peatedly say "I mean," or "y' know," or "don' cha know" without any real meaning in the context. Reviewers will retain enough of these mannerisms to show examples to future researchers, but many may be excised as extraneous to the content pur- pose of the interview. Reviewers may also delete many of the false starts that characterize speech. They should be removed only when they are clearly redundant and without meaning. False starts that suggest a change of mind or intent by the interviewee in mid-thought or mid-sentence should be retained. All should, of course, be transcribed, and the decision to delete is left up to the reviewers. 83 INTERVIEWER: Transcribing names is also a serious concern. You are responsible for both spelling and identifying proper names, and for compiling an accurate list of those that appear in the interview session you are transcribing. The first time a proper name appears in the text it must be set down in its full and official form in the transcript. If the speaker says the full name then there is no need for aug- menting the text. Simply verify the name as used. Many proper names are, however, abbreviated in speech or referred to by nicknames or acronyms. When this occurs you must enter in brackets the full and formal version the first time the abbrevi- ated form appears. The spoken name "Ted Soren- sen" should be written "[ Theodore c.] Ted Sorensen" the first time it appears in text. Note that the expansion precedes the spoken nickname and is placed in brackets. Similarly the first reference to "Nixon" should be expanded to [ Richard M.] Nixon." The first appearance of "Bobby"-meaning the Attorney General and brother of President Kennedy-should be rendered "Bobby Robert F. Kennedy] when first spoken in the interview. On the other hand there is no need to fill in a middle initial when full surname and given name are spoken. "George McGovern" remains "George McGovern" and should not be changed to "George [S.] McGovern." (Unless, of course there happen to be two of them with different middle initials.) 84 INTERVIEWEE: In some cases, even when the name has been spelled out previously, the fuller expansion in brackets is necessary to clear up an ambiguity that did not bother the participants in the interview situation but that might prove very confusing to a reader. The entirely hypothetical and highly improbable sentence below, using the nickname "Ted" -which applies not only to the President's brother but also to three former White House staff members-is illustrative of this problem. "I spoke to Ted [Reardon] and he told me that Ted Sorensen] had passed the word to Ted [ Clifton] that Ted [ Kennedy] was to be there." INTERVIEWER: Remember to use a married woman's first name rather than her husband's name in these expansions. "Mrs. Heller" should be expanded to "Mrs. [Elinor] Heller." When the woman's maiden name is sig- nificant in the context of the interview or when she has a rightful place of her own in the story, it is advisable to include the maiden surname as well, as in "Mrs. [ Ethel Skakel] Kennedy." INTERVIEWEE: When identifying abbreviated names of corporations you should not break up the expansion to fit around, in and among the words the speaker has used, but enter it after the spoken abbreviation. For instance, the spoken words "New Haven Railroad" should be written as "New Haven Railroad [New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad Company] " and not "[ New York, ] New Haven [ and Hartford] Railroad [ Company] 85 Acronyms and other references to agencies or corporations by their initials should be followed by a full expansion in brackets the first time they appear. Note that the initials are not usually sepa- rated by periods, for instance: CIA [ Central Intelligence Agency], or NAACP [ National Associa- tion for the Advancement of Colored People]. However, the very common abbreviations for the United States of America or the United Nations Organization are written "U.S." and "U.N." re- spectively, with periods and without full expansions. INTERVIEWER: In some cases, initials may be used to name a position, role or function. "SecDef" should be written "SecDef [ Secretary of Defense] :" The ini- tials "AA" and "LA" are used frequently to mean "Administrative Assistant" and "Legislative Assis- tant" rather than "Alcoholics Anonymous" or "Los Angeles," and the ambiguity must be clarified by expansion in brackets. INTERVIEWEE: There is also a whole series of rules for the writing of numerals in transcripts. Some should be written as numerals and others written out alphabetically. As always, the general rule is ease in understanding on the part of a reader. Numbers one through one hundred, and large round numbers, should be written out alphabetically, as should fractions. Large complex numbers should be written numerically, as should numbers in series, percentages, ratios and times. The word "percent" should be used rather than the symbol %. A hyphen 86 should be used to indicate ratios, as in "the vote split, 52-48." When representing time, represent the whole hour as "o'clock" and other times entirely in numerals. Use the notations "A.M." and "P.M." when there is any ambiguity, even when the speaker does not specify morning or afternoon. The days of the month are written numerically as are years and series of years except for such expressions as "the fifties," or "the roaring twenties." Follow the expression of the speaker for "May 1," "1 May," May 1st," or "the 1st of May." The general rule for numbers should be fol- lowed for expressions of money. Write "three hundred dollars," but "$495." If the speaker says "five-seventy-four" write it as "$5.74," but "three and a quarter" is acceptable. INTERVIEWER: Most punctuation is dictated by conventional usage, but some special rules are needed to indicate spoken language variations from written patterns. When a speaker fails to complete a sentence, this is indicated by four dots separated by spaces, the first dot being flush with the last letter of the last word spoken, as in "Well, you see, there was nothing more I could. To indicate interrup- tions, however, use three dots separated by spaces and separated from the last word by a space. These dots are called ellipses. When a speaker interrupts himself in mid- sentence to add a supplementary or clarifying 87 remark-a strong parenthetical digression-the remark is set off by dashes as shown in this sen- tence, with the dashes flush with the preceding and following words. (On the typewriter, use two short dashes at each end.) Weaker parenthetical ex- pressions may be set off by commas. More distinct interruptions, such as for tele- phone calls or for moments when the tape recorder is turned off, should be identified by adding in brackets the word " [Interruption]" after the last dot in an ellipsis. For instance, a passage might read, "He made a remark [Interruption] Now, where were we? Oh, yes, the remark he made about the floor fight." INTERVIEWEE: Also, indicate the beginning of a new side of tape or a new reel by skipping two lines and typing "BEGIN SIDE II TAPE I" (or whatever is appro- priate). Then skip two more lines and continue the interview as before. INTERVIEWER: There will always be some mistakes made in any transcript. When you catch yourself making an error in a word or two, use commercial chalk tape to erase the errors. If there are numerous errors not discovered until after a page has been completed, it must be typed over again. Under no circumstances should you mark out words using the "x" letter or other overstrike method. It is better to get the thing right the first time, even if you have to type more slowly than is your normal habit. 88 INTERVIEWEE: The manual continues on the following pages, with a discussion of spelling and the use of proofreading marks by reviewers. The format is that of the final copy of a transcript, ready for researcher use. 89 Oral History Interview with JOSEPH S. INTERVIEWEE date place By John J. Interviewer For the John F. Kennedy Library INTERVIEWER: This is a sample of the first page of a final copy of a transcript of an interview session. The heading is identical to that of a draft tran- script, and the margins and pagination rules are the same. However, you will note that the text is single- spaced, and after the fourth line of text for a given speaker the dialogue margin moves over to the full left margin. This is some- what flexible, because a passage with only five lines of text would look rather foolish if only one of its lines were set to the left. Usually, the rule of shifting to the left margin is reserved for cases where there are six or more lines of text per passage. Paragraphing requires a minor change in the rules for draft transcripts. As you see from this sample, a new paragraph begins at the dialogue margin and is separated from the paragraph above by a double space. Otherwise, the rules are much the same. INTERVIEWEE: Transcribers are expected to spell English words correctly. Yet there are words that occur in oral history transcripts-jargon, foreign words and phrases, obscure names, and dialectical variants- that may require some careful checking to be sure they are prop- erly spelled. Unfortunately, we have also found that there are a number of English words and phrases that people very frequently misspell. Some of the common spelling errors that we have en- countered in the Kennedy program are listed at the end of this 90 manual. Other common errors arise from the confusion of two perfectly good words. One speaks of a capital city or a capital crime, or a capital letter; but, capitols are buildings in which legislatures meet, or are the crowns of classical columns on Greek and Roman temples. A gorilla is an animal; but, a guer- rilla is one who fights unconventional warfare, usually against an established government. One exorcises ghosts and devils; but, to be exercised about something is to be excited and angry about it. Principal means the first in importance, such as the principal of a school or the principal speech, while principles are rules or maxims. In a more parochial sense, with specific reference to the Kennedy program, the Esso building was the place the Kennedy campaign headquarters was located in Washington, D.C., in 1960. Many transcribers have mistakenly written down "the S.O. build- ing." This should not be confused with the "old S.O.B." which is the "Old Senate Office Building." Other proper names that have given a bit of trouble include the improper writing of McGeorge Bundy's nickname as "McBundy" instead of "MacBundy," and Byron R.] Whizzer White's nick- name as "Wizard" White. It has taken our transcribers a long time to realize that Hyannis Port and Glen Ora are both two words. INTERVIEWER: The names of books, magazines, newspapers, airplanes (e.g.: Air Force One, the Caroline, the Spirit of St. Louis), and foreign words and phrases not commonly used in English are un- derlined. The names of plays, movies, and television programs are not underlined but put in quotation marks. INTERVIEWEE: After the transcript has been drafted by a transcriber, it is reviewed by another staff member who uses a lead pencil and standard proofreader's marks to indicate changes that are to be made for final typing after the transcript has been re- turned by the interviewee. The following is a sample of a pas- sage of draft transcript with the reviewer's markings, and a copy of the same passage as it would appear in final form. 91 INTERVIEWEE: While working in the Administration he spent @ sometime in Japan talking as Kennedys unofficall Y representative there. When ambassadore cap Reischauer saw the president, he spoke to him about this situastion. While working in the administration he spent some time in Japan as Kennedy's unofficial representative there. When ambassador Rei- schauer saw the President, he spoke to him about this situation. 92 Correct or Preferred Spellings of Words Frequently Used Correct Incorrect or Not Preferred accidentally accidently accommodate accomodate allright alright argument arguement assassination assasination Belgians Belgiums by and large by in large commitment committment decision-making decisionmaking or decision making describe discribe desirable desireable diplomatic corps diplomatic core fund-raising (adj.) fundraising fund raising (verb) fund-raising insofar as in so far as judgment judgement liaison liason marshal marshall naive, naivete niave, niavete okay O.K. protocol protocal publicly publically speechwriter speech writer traveled travelled Vietnam Viet Nam ward-heeler ward heeler or wardheeler 93 MARGIN GUIDE FOR TYPING TRANSCRIPTS p.# (4 lines from top) Top Margin for Continuation Pages (8 lines from top edge) First Line of Interview Title (12 lines from top edge) Left Margin [one inch] Page Center Line Right Margin [one and one-half inches] Best Bottom Margin (two inches) Acceptable Bottom Margin (one and one-half inches) 94 APPENDIX B PROGRAM STATEMENT OF THE JOHN F. KENNEDY LIBRARY ORAL HISTORY PROGRAM I. Goals of the Program The John F. Kennedy Library oral history program, begun in January of 1964, records and preserves interviews with people who have valu- able recollections of events and personalities of interest to researchers who will use the Kennedy Library. As a part of the Library's collection of historical research materials, the oral history transcripts and tapes will be used in conjunction with President Kennedy's personal papers and White House files, the papers of the President's friends and associates, books and articles pertaining to public issues of the mid-20th century, and microfilm copies of many important official U.S. government records of the Kennedy administration. The interviews are not being conducted for publication or as memorials to President Kennedy, but to contribute to a more complete under- standing of his career, administration and of major public events of his time. People interviewed for this program include prominent public figures, such as members of Congress and the administration; leaders in state and local politics and in business and labor: journalists; and officials of foreign governments. Others are less prominent but no less im- portant as sources of information, such as officials of federal agencies who helped develop and carry out the programs of the Kennedy admin- istration. People who opposed President Kennedy's policies are being interviewed as well as those who supported them. Over 1,000 people have been interviewed by the program, and interviewing will continue so long as there is additional material of value to be collected. II. Administration of the Program The oral history program is administered by the John F. Kennedy Library of the National Archives and Records Service, U.S. General Services Administration. Policy guidance for the program is provided by the Director of the John F. Kennedy Library and the Assistant 95 Archivist for Presidential Libraries, National Archives and Records Service. III. Procedures Those who agree to be interviewed are contacted by a member of the program staff to determine when and where the interviewing can begin and what background material, if any, may be needed by the person being interviewed. Questions as to details of the interviewing are answered at this time. Normally, interviews are conducted in the home or office of the inter- viewee, although any mutually convenient place may be selected. Inter- view sessions usually last from one to two hours, but the number of sessions required will vary considerably depending on the nature and degree of the involvement of the interviewee in the events of President Kennedy's career and administration. After the interview has been recorded, a typewritten verbatim tran- script is prepared and is sent to the person interviewed for his re- view and approval. He may make additional comments on the draft, and he may edit the transcript as he sees fit, although it is preferable that deletions be kept to a minimum in order to preserve the sponta- neity and candor of the original recording. A final copy, incorporating all of these changes, is prepared upon return of the draft, and a dupli- cate is sent to the interviewee for his personal files. The final copy is deposited in the oral history collection of the Kennedy Library. The tape of the interview is preserved unless the interviewee explicitly requires that it be erased, but the tape is used for background informa- tion only and may not be quoted from. Each person interviewed is asked to stipulate any conditions he wishes to attach to the use of the tape and transcript of his interview. These conditions are incorporated into a legal agreement and are scrupulously followed. IV. Content of the Interviews Oral history is valuable to the extent that people are willing to speak openly and frankly. This can be accomplished if it is continually kept in mind that the interviews are for the benefit of future scholars and that the use of the tapes and transcripts may be restricted for as long as the donor wishes. 96 In the broadest sense, these interviews should include everything that will one day be of interest to scholars. A few general guidelines are useful: A. The interviews should summarize the dominant considerations surrounding important decisions in the career of John F. Kennedy. They should attempt to explain the process by which a certain decision was made or course of action was selected, as well as narrate the details of each event. B. The interviews should identify the contributions that various people made to important decisions and actions in President Kennedy's career. C. The interviews should focus not only on the President him- self but also on the problems encountered in planning, developing, coordinating and implementing the various programs of his adminis- tration. D. The interviews should include, as accurately as possible, accounts of extended conversations with President Kennedy about major national and international events. E. The interviews should assist in correcting any erroneous accounts of events that have been published and any misconceptions commonly held about the President's career and the careers of those close to him. F. The interviews should provide some of the clues needed by scholars in dealing with the mass of published and unpublished docu- mentation that will eventually be available. While the interviews by themselves are not a substitute for contemporaneous written records, they can frequently lead researchers to particular documents of im- portance. G. The interviews should provide anecdotal material illustrative of various aspects of John F. Kennedy's personality. They should contain accounts of both light and serious incidents that might be of value to biographers. V. Conclusion It is a part of the program's long-range plan that some people will be reinterviewed in the future, should careful examination of the original interviews reveal that important matters were not covered, or not covered in such depth as to gain the fullest potential value for history. As a result of the oral history program, a large quantity of significant information that was to be found only in the memories of people who knew President Kennedy is being gathered. This store of historical material will become a valuable resource for scholars studying the Kennedy years. 97 APPENDIX C GOALS AND GUIDELINES OF THE ORAL HISTORY ASSOCIATION The Oral History Association recognizes Oral History for what it is-a method of gathering a body of historical information in oral form usually on tape. Because the scholarly community is involved in both the production and use of oral history, the Association rec- ognizes an opportunity and an obligation on the part of all concerned to make this type of historical source as authentic and as useful as possible. Guidelines for the Interviewee 1. The person who is being interviewed should be selected care- fully and his wishes must govern the conduct of the interview. 2. Before undertaking a taped interview for the purpose stated above, the interviewee (or narrator) should be clear in his mind re- garding mutual rights with respect to tapes and transcripts made from them. This includes such things as: seal privileges, literary rights, prior use, fiduciary relationships, the right to edit the tape tran- scriptions, and the right to determine whether the tape is to be disposed of or preserved. 3. It is important that the interviewee fully understand the proj- ect, and that in view of the costs and effort involved he assumes a willingness to give useful information on the subject being pursued. Guidelines for the Interviewer 1. It should be the objective of the interviewer to gather informa- tion that will be of scholarly usefulness in the present and in the future. The interviewer who is collecting oral history materials for his own individual research should always bear in mind this broader objective. 2. In order to obtain a tape of maximum worth as a historical document, it is incumbent upon the interviewer to be thoroughly Unanimously adopted by the Oral History Association, November 25, 1968. 98 grounded in the background and experiences of the person being inter- viewed, and, where appropriate and if at all feasible, to review the papers of the interviewee before conducting the interview. In conduct- ing the interview an effort should be made to provide enough informa- tion to the interviewee to assist his recall. 3. It is important that all interviews be conducted in a spirit of objectivity and scholarly integrity and in accordance with stipula- tions agreed upon. Guidelines for Sponsoring Institutions Subject to meeting the conditions as prescribed by interviewees it will be the obligation of sponsoring institutions to prepare easily usable tapes and/or accurate typed transcriptions, and properly to identify, index, and preserve such oral history records for use by the scholarly community, and to state clearly the provisions that govern their use. 99 APPENDIX D OUTLINE OF PROCESSING STEPS I. INTERVIEW SESSION II. TAPE RECEIPT a. [Cassette-to-reel transfer as needed] b. Note interview session data on log of new sessions C. Prepare worksheet and master control sheet d. Label tape box e. Place tape of interview session in file of tapes to be tran- scribed III. TRANSCRIPTION a. Take oldest tape from file b. Get worksheet from supervisor C. Note beginning of transcription phase on worksheet and master control sheet d. Check with interviewer for background of interview subjects e. Listen to tape to get feel for pace and language f. Transcribe tape, consulting as necessary with colleagues and interviewer g. Create name list of proper names appearing in interview session, and verify them by checking name file and stan- dard sources h. Note completion of transcription on worksheet and master control sheet i. File draft transcript, worksheet, name list and tape in file of interview sessions to be reviewed and audited IV. STAFF REVIEW a. First Reading 1. Take oldest interview session draft transcript, etc., from file 2. Note beginning of review on worksheet and master control sheet 3. Listening to tape, check draft transcript for accuracy, punctuation, spelling, etc., and correct as necessary 100 4. Check all names for accuracy and make new cards for name file 5. Note completion on worksheet and master control sheet 6. Deliver draft, name list and worksheet to processing super- visor; tape to vault b. Second Reading 1. Deliver draft, name list and worksheet to interviewer 2. Interviewer reads drafts for semantic flow and content errors 3. Note beginning and end of second reading on worksheet and master control sheet C. Make a duplicate copy of reviewed draft and file alphabetically in file of transcripts out for interviewee review; include name list V. INTERVIEWEE REVIEW a. Prepare and mail draft transcripts of interview 1. Draft letter instructing interviewee in fundamentals of review and purpose of preliminary questionnaire on terms and conditions to be incorporated into legal agreement 2. Enclose preliminary questionnaire 3. Package interview transcript drafts in padded mailing envelope 4. Register package if necessary 5. Note date sent out on worksheet and on master control sheet b. File worksheet chronologically for use as control on drafts out for interviewee review c. Check worksheet file periodically and contact interviewee as necessary to remind him to review and return transcripts VI. LEGAL AGREEMENT PREPARATION a. Upon receipt of preliminary questionnaire with answers from interviewee, prepare draft legal agreement b. Mail draft to interviewee for approval and signature C. Renegotiate terms, if necessary, by phone, mail or in person d. When approved and signed by interviewee, have agreement countersigned by legal officer of collecting institution e. Note completion of legal agreement on worksheet and master control sheet 101 VII. FINAL TYPING a. Upon receipt of corrected draft transcript from interviewee, note receipt on worksheet and master control sheet b. Read corrected draft carefully to make certain all corrections are understood and neatly indicated c. File transcript in file of interviews to be typed (chrono- logical by date of receipt) d. Typist takes oldest transcript from file e. Note beginning of final typing on worksheet and master control sheet f. Type smooth copy from corrected transcript g. Proofread final copy against corrected draft h. Note completion of final typing and proofreading on master control sheet and worksheet i. Deliver final transcript and draft to processing supervisor VIII. ACCESSIONING a. Check to see that all work has been done and legal agree- ment signed; if legal agreement has not been signed, place transcripts in file awaiting legal agreement b. If all work has been done, assign interview an accession number, and note the number in the accession register and on the master control sheet C. Make two duplicate copies of final transcripts d. File original in vault, and one copy in file for staff use e. Send interviewee one copy and a copy of legal agreement, using registered mail as before, if circumstances warrant f. File legal agreement and master control sheet in corre- spondence file g. Deliver name list to staff members working on oral history collection index h. Destroy all previous copies of draft transcript IX. SCREENING a. Check correspondence file, including legal agreement to see if terms and conditions of understanding and gift are fully satisfied; if term of restrictions has not expired, take no further action b. If terms and conditions have been fully satisfied, read transcripts to make certain that release to public will not injure or damage living persons or national security, or embarrass or harass living persons gratuitously 102 c. If all conditions are satisfied, prepare duplicate copy of interview transcripts and duplicate copies of tapes for research use d. Add interview to announcement of holdings open to research 103 APPENDIX E PRELIMINARY QUESTIONNAIRE TO DETERMINE TERMS OF USE OF ORAL HISTORY TAPES AND TRANSCRIPTS Introduction Clear and precise instructions by the interviewee are necessary to ensure that everyone understands the terms and conditions of use of tapes and transcripts of oral history interviews acquired by the John F. Kennedy Library. In order to arrive at mutually acceptable wording of a statement of agreement on use and terms of gift between the interviewee and the Archivist of the United States, we request that you carefully consider the options available in the following question- naire and that you indicate those that are in accordance with your wishes. The options set forth below are provided for the convenience of the interviewee and should not be regarded as exclusive. The inter- viewee may add others as he sees fit, or may change the wording to suit his purposes. I. Access and Restrictions A. Do you wish to make the interview transcript available on an unrestricted basis to anyone applying to use the resources of the John F. Kennedy Library? (This includes journalists and undergraduate students as well as advanced scholars.) If you wish to attach any restrictions whatsoever, you should check "NO." YES NO B. If the interview is to be restricted, may researchers who first obtain your permission in writing have access to it? YES NO C. If you wish to restrict the use of the transcript or portions thereof* for a specified period of time, please indicate which of the options below are in accordance with your wishes. *If you prefer to restrict only portions of the interview, please specify the portions to be closed by page-line reference notes on a 104 I desire that the transcript of my interview be closed for a period of years. closed for a period of years or until my death, whichever is the later. closed until my death. closed until my death and for a period of years thereafter. closed until the following events occur: (please specify) open to researchers at the discretion of the Director of the John F. Kennedy Library; his decision to be based on such considerations as potential embarrassment to living persons or their immediate successors, the interests of national security, or potential prejudice to the friendly relations between the United States and foreign nations. D. With respect to the tape(s) of the interview: Researchers who have access to the transcript may listen to the tape(s). This is to be for background use only, and researchers may not cite, paraphrase or quote therefrom. Researchers may not listen to the tape(s) until Note: Although we prefer that you not direct that the tape of your interview be destroyed, you also have that option. II. Publication and Quotation: Literary Property Rights Two alternatives are offered with respect to literary property rights to material in the oral history interviews: A. The literary property rights may be retained by the interviewee until such time as he deems it appropriate to assign them to the John F. Kennedy Library (i.e., to the U.S. Government); or, B. The literary property rights may be assigned imme- diately to the Kennedy Library. In the former case, no one may publish the transcript in whole or in part, nor may anyone quote from it without explicit separate sheet of paper, and indicate the time period during which each portion is to be closed. 105 permission from the interviewee. Interviewees who choose to retain literary property rights may permit brief quotations without explicit written permission in each case so as to avoid being bothered by numerous requests from researchers. When literary property rights are assigned to the Kennedy Library, permission of the interviewee to quote from or to publish excerpts from the interview is not required. In this case, it is the policy of the Kennedy Library to permit brief quotations essential to a complete work but not to permit publication of the entire interview. Retention of literary property rights does not, by itself, affect access to transcripts, nor does it prohibit researchers from para- phrasing or citing transcripts as the sources of ideas. I wish to retain literary property rights to the interview for a period of years, or until my death, whichever is the later, at which time the literary property rights shall be assigned to the United States Government. I do not choose to retain literary property rights to the inter- view, and I wish to assign them immediately to the United States Government. For so long as I retain literary property rights to the inter- view, readers may make brief quotations from it without my permission. Extensive quotations may not be made without my permission. III. Copying and Dissemination In the absence of interviewee restrictions to the contrary it is the practice of the Kennedy Library to provide copies of open oral history interviews to any researcher upon request, either at cost or through inter-library loan. You may concur in or take exception to this practice. Please check the statement(s) most nearly reflecting your wishes with respect to dissemination of the interview transcript. Copies of the interview transcript may be provided upon request to any researcher. Copies of the interview transcript may, upon request, be deposited for use in other institutions (such as university libraries, public libraries or other presidential libraries). Copying of the interview transcript or portions thereof, except as needed to maintain an adequate number of research copies available in the Kennedy Library, is expressly pro- hibited, and copies may not be disseminated outside the Library. 106 Copies of the interview transcript may be provided only to researchers actually presenting themselves at the Kennedy Library. The limitation (if any) to copying and dissemination shall be in effect until , at which time current library practice shall prevail. 107 GLOSSARY OF ORAL HISTORY TERMS Accession To make an interview an official part of an oral history collection. Accession Number A two-part, alpha-numeric identification of an accessioned interview, consisting of the letters "OH" (Oral History) followed by the last two digits of the calendar year in which accessioning took place, a dash and a serial number. For example, "OH 65-24" is the accession number for the 24th interview accessioned in 1965. Closed An interview is said to be "closed" when it has been restricted by an interviewee so that re- searchers may not use it for a stated period of time. In some cases, but not all, a closed inter- view may be read or listened to with the written permission of the interviewee. Interview The complete product (tape and/or transcript) of recorded conversations with any given inter- viewee, which may consist of one or more interview sessions. Sometimes loosely used to refer to individual interview sessions. Some- times called a "memoir." Interviewee The person being interviewed for the record. Sometimes called the "subject," the "respon- dent," or the "memoirist," but "interviewee" is most commonly used. Interviewer The person who conducts an oral history inter- view, who asks questions for an on-the-record response from an interviewee. Interview Hour A unit of measurement of interview production. The time, in hours and fractions of hours, elapsed during any interview or interview ses- sion. Interview Session Any portion of a complete interview that was not recorded at roughly the same time as any 108 other portion of the same interview. One inter- view may consist of several sessions that were taped days, months or years apart. Open An interview is said to be "open" when it is available to researchers at the express consent of the interviewee. Some interviews may be only partially open, with some portions closed pending the expiration of interviewee restric- tions. Review The process of checking the draft transcript against the interview tape to see that it is ac- curate. Sometimes called "editing," "auditing," or "proofreading." Tape The magnetic audio tape upon which the inter- view is recorded. Transcriber The person who, listening to the tape, simul- taneously types a verbatim transcript. Transcript The typewritten record of an entire interview, consisting of the transcripts of several interview sessions. 109 ABOUT THE AUTHOR WILLIAM W. MOSS is Senior Archivist for National Security and Foreign Affairs at the John F. Kennedy Library in Waltham, Massa- chusetts. From 1969 to 1972 he served first as an interviewer and then as Chief of the Oral History Program for the Kennedy Library. From 1964 to 1969 he was an intelligence research analyst for the National Security Agency of the Department of Defense. Mr. Moss holds a B.A. from Haverford College and an M.A. from Columbia University, where he was a National Defense Education Act fellow in Chinese (Mandarin).

nara / coll_wjc-fl / doc

Proposal for a Clinton Oral History Project [binder]

ID: 286412772
Type: document

Citation Image

Metadata

id	286412772
sourceUrl	https://catalog.archives.gov/id/286412772
contentType	document
collections	Records of the First Lady's Office (Clinton Administration) Alison (Lissa) Muscatine's Press Office Files
iiifBase	https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-fl/18558021/Batch0001/18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023.pdf
thumbnailUrl	https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-fl/18558021/Batch0001/18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023.pdf
largeImageUrl	https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/clinton/wjc-fl/18558021/Batch0001/18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023.pdf
imageCount	1
hasImages	yes
source	import

Additional Source Fields

url	https://catalog.archives.gov/id/286412772
naId	286412772
levelOfDescription	fileUnit
otherTitles	18558021-20150275S-091-006-2023 Subject Files
recordType	description
ocrSource	nara-archive

Pages

Page 1 OCR

Survos folio item chat

Ask the Scholar

Scholar Source Context