Quo Vadis, Wartime Oral History?
Time: 2025-09-17 09:00 - 11:00
Location: Large Hall B at Auditorium Maximum
Chairman: Gelinada Grinchenko
Events within this Session
Oral History as History of the Self: Design Solutions for Wartime Interviewing and Archiving Projects
Type: session | Language: English
Time: 09:00 - 11:00
Abstract
Documentation of people’s experiences during the war is often grounded in emergency concerns. This paper suggests taking a pause and thinking about the peculiarities of methodology of such archiving with regard to the core principles of oral history work. While wartime documenting tends to focus on experiences, in this paper I ask what it means to take the self who is going through these experiences seriously? What kind of consequences does that imply for interview and project design overall? Based on my experience of conducting oral history projects with adults and children during two phases of the Russo-Ukrainian war, I will talk about practical solutions to these questions.
Speakers
When and How Testimonies Become History: the Possibilities and Limitations of Data Collection in the Context of Events
Type: session | Language: English
Time: 09:00 - 11:00
Abstract
The start of Russian aggression against Ukraine in 2014 and the start of the full-scale Russian invasion in 2022 shifted the focus of a significant part of both Ukrainian and non-Ukrainian researchers to collecting data on what was happening. The complexity of studying societies in a state of war or experiencing authoritarianism limits researchers in their data collection methods and theoretical interpretation. This provokes a number of discussions about how we can combine the findings of closely related humanitarian and social sciences, about the advantages and disadvantages of interdisciplinarity, and about the specifics of the researcher’s interaction with the research field, represented not only by facts, but also by real people who are going through the painful experience of war. The discussion about interdisciplinarity involves not only searching for points of intersection, but also forces us to rethink disciplinary boundaries. The latter is necessary for a clearer understanding of what type of product the researcher is creating and whether it has the potential to become knowledge, fact or document.
Speakers
Visualizing Narratives: Making Interviews Public in Times of Ongoing War
Type: session | Language: English
Time: 09:00 - 11:00
Abstract
Today, we Ukrainians live in difficult times, times when the issues of loss, physical and moral destruction, worry, grief and trauma have become everyday life, and the risk of physical destruction has become the norm. Nevertheless, we do not give up and try to keep going, to live in war, to teach and learn. The purpose of this paper is to present my own experience of working with students in the context of covering the topic of the Second World War and the Holocaust. The research questions in this context are: how to visualize the trauma of war? How to talk about the Holocaust with the youth of Kharkiv, after Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine? What methods should be used to depict the trauma? Is it possible to involve students in the creation of visual content when working with traumatic memories? Today, young people are increasingly interested in short tik-tok videos, reading mangas and comics, and demanding quick information, so we have to respond to the audience and provide them with relevant materials. How to combine oral history and art. How to create a graphic novel about the war and carefully publish an interview, and this is what my story will be about.
Speakers
Wartime Oral History in Ukraine: On Testimony Production and the Challenges of Representation
Type: session | Language: English
Time: 09:00 - 11:00
Abstract
Abstract text
Speakers
Narrating the Wars: WWII and Contemporary Russian-Ukrainian War in Witness Testimonies
Type: session | Language: English
Time: 09:00 - 11:00
Abstract
Any recollection of significant past events is gradually constructed into a specific narrative. This narrative subsequently shapes the transformation and evolution of memory: events that do not fit within the framework of the narrative are marginalized or diminished. At the same time, those that align with it are reinforced. Such processes of memory construction do not necessarily involve fabrication but rather the shifting of emphases. In the context of war or genocide trauma, a considerable portion of events is also repressed or replaced by less traumatic memories that do not accurately reflect historical reality (screen memories). This paper will focus on the particularities of narrative construction among Holocaust survivors and the local Ukrainian population regarding the events of Nazi violence in Ukraine during the Second World War. What factors influenced the formation of wartime narratives within these ethnic groups after the war? How did wartime experiences shape divergent memories? In what ways are these memories of the war similar, and in what ways do they differ? These questions will be addressed in the first part of this presentation. Narratives of the past are not static; they undergo continuous transformation under the influence of contemporary events. In the case of Ukrainian eyewitnesses to the Second World War, the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war has played a significant role in shaping their recollections. Both personal experiences and media discourses contribute to the formation of narratives concerning both past and present conflicts (the Second World War and the Russian-Ukrainian war). When describing war, eyewitnesses often rely on the topos of the most recent major war they either personally remember or know through postmemory (Marianne Hirsch). At the same time, their immediate and visceral experiences of the current conflict lead to hyperbolic framing, wherein the present war tends to overshadow the memory of the past one (in this case, the Second World War). Consequently, in the recollections of Ukrainian witnesses of the ongoing Russian-Ukrainian war, frequent comparisons are made with events from the Second World War — the last major war to take place in Europe and Ukraine. This dynamic has generated popular narratives such as calls for a “Nuremberg trial for Russia,” the characterization of “Russian fascism” that must suffer a definitive and irreversible defeat through the unconditional capitulation of the Kremlin, and the depiction of the actions of the Russian army in occupied territories as a “Holocaust/genocide/mass crimes.” These narratives are further reinforced by Russian media discourses, which heavily emphasize the heroism of the victory over Nazism and simultaneously accuse Ukraine of “fascism.” When Ukrainian witnesses of the current war draw parallels between Russian aggression and the Second World War, they often employ metaphors that hyperbolize the actions of the Russian military — it is not uncommon to hear statements that Russian soldiers are “worse than the Germans.” Thus, the construction of narratives in the testimonies of eyewitnesses to the Russian-Ukrainian war occurs under the strong influence of pre-existing narratives about the Second World War and the ongoing Ukrainian and Russian media discourses. Not only is the still-developing narrative of Russian aggression shaped by established narratives of the Second World War, but the reverse process is also observable. The experience of living through the current conflict prompts a reframing of memories related to the Second World War. As a result, narratives of both wars are undergoing significant mutual transformations, driven by contemporary experiences