I'm really impressed with the thoughtfulness and quality of the responses you have gotten, littlekaykat.

I have been doing oral histories for nearly thirty years. I started before I knew what they were but it was something I enjoyed doing so I did it. When I went to transcribe them, I was really worried about losing the flavor of the speaker's presentation. I did what you did and kept the editing to a minimum. I think I was right.

I do think that Frankham's suggestion of putting in the questions (if you had some) is a good idea for, just as he says, breaking up lots of text. It also helps focus the reader on where the conversation is going.

I use a lot of footnotes. When an unfamiliar place is mentioned, or let's say the interviewee mentions Harding's election, I would footnote when that was. If he mentions travelling to Leadville, then I would want to know how far it was from where he started, something about the route he faced(especially since it involves a huge climb out of the Valley of the Arkansas) and enough about Leadville to pique my interest about what I was going to learn when he gets there.) The footnotes, which in my interviews often begins to look more like a concordance, can be both helpful and interesting in themselves. They certainly give perspective to the stories and I have learned many things while preparing them that have helped me to understand the oral history far better.

It is very slow work so don't be surprised. I figure on about 45 minutes a page just for the editing. (This is after the transcriber has given me the word-for-word transcript.) The researching takes additional time, of course but that part is the most fun (next to doing the recordings).

If you are doing the trasncribing yourself, get as good equipment as you can afford. If the original tapes are on cassette, make copies and use them for the transcribing. The wear on tapes "to-ing and fro-ing" is considerable and you don't want to subject your main asset to the strain.

Radio Shack sells a foot control that plugs into the remote microphone jack on most cassette recorders. I think it costs considerably less that ten dollars. This can be a big help. Also, if you can get access to a tape recorder with a pitch control, use it. You can slow down the tape by 10% or more. Although GL Hudson's voice will drop several tones and his words will be stretched out, it will make transcription easier since you will be able to keep up, longer, with the spoken word.

Make sure that when you are done with your w-f-w transcript that you play it through again listening to the tape as you review your work. This way you won't find yourself having to dig out the original tape so often to see whether or not the interviewee really said some particular thing or whether that was a mis-trascription.

The suggestion to read Studs Terkel is a fine one. You can never go wrong reading him. His interviews are wonderful but they may be better examples of how to do a good interview than how to edit an oral history. They will however convince you (not that you need it) of the value of listening.

I would like to have the name and author of the book by the faculty member at USD about oral histories. I have read some books but they were so general and basic that all they did was give me the feeling that yes, I could do this and even charge money for it. However, I would like to get some idea of what it is I don't know, and I am sure that is a great deal. I hope the book title will be posted here.

Lkkl, I wish you well. You have talked on and of about your grandfather and he sounds like the kind of person I like to discover and interview as I travel around the US. (I think I've already told you about my interview of May Wing in Victor, Colorado and her childhood in the gold camp there at in Cripple Creek, as well as Teddy Roosevelt's visit, the gunbattles, the dances, etc. If I didn't, perhaps I will a bit later.)

Good luck to you. Pick out the advice that makes sense to you but the most important thing is to do it!

Sourdough