Full text
| |
| Author(s): |
Ricardo Santhiago Corrêa
Total Authors: 1
|
| Document type: | Doctoral Thesis |
| Press: | São Paulo. |
| Institution: | Universidade de São Paulo (USP). Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas (FFLCH/SBD) |
| Defense date: | 2013-08-23 |
| Examining board members: |
Sara Albieri;
Eclea Bosi;
Marieta de Moraes Ferreira;
Daphne Patai;
Wagner Rodrigues Valente
|
| Advisor: | Sara Albieri; Daphne Patai |
| Abstract | |
This thesis documents and analyzes the intellectual and institutional trajectories of oral history in Brazil, from the 1950s to the present. It draws on existing writings on oral history in Brazil, as well as on several dozen interviews conducted with leading figures in this field. The interpretive model set forth is based on four matrices that shaped methodological debates in the area, deriving from sociology, social psychology, public history, and the archival model originating in the United States. These are explained in detail in Part 1, \"Multidisciplinary Matrices of Oral History in Brazil,\" with chapters exploring and appraising the different contributions - technical, methodological, theoretical and political - of the first generation of professionals whose work expressed an interest in oral narratives, stemming from their own areas of research. In the second part, \"A Method in Search of a Field,\" the focus shifts to the work of the subsequent generation. In the 1980s and 1990s, oral history expanded greatly, becoming a terrain enjoying considerable structural autonomy. New researchers absorbed, transformed and organized the contributions offered by each of the four matrices. From that starting point, they undertook an extensive dissemination of oral history as a method, ranging from efforts to establish research norms to institutionalizing pedagogical practices, with the aim of creating a coherent body of knowledge capable of transmission. Unavoidably, dilemmas and conflicts emerged in this process, involving issues such as the hardening of methodological principles into dogma, the imposition of broad rules, and the uneasy balance between the need for technical training and the creative freedom of individual researchers and groups. In the final part of the study, \"The Institutional Face of Oral History,\" the process of institutionalization of the field is explored and problematized. Concentrating first on the creation of a professional oral history association in 1994 and the events and specialized publications surrounding these efforts, this part concludes by focusing on how the field of oral history in Brazil took its place on the international scene, intellectually as well as politically. (AU) | |