This preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.
This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.View Full Document
Unformatted text preview: AN 101 23 February 2007 Oral History Micaela Di Leonardo raises two important issues about the methodology of reading and writing oral histories: the economic status of the interviewee and their social environment. She believes that those factors have a direct result on the trueness of her research because [her] research spanned class divisions, [she] could actually see the stark differences between the ways in which the working-class and wealthy informants approached [her] (Di Leonardo 9) These issues of economic status and social environment also hold true within the oral histories of the Japanese and Koreans before, during, and after World War II. Di Leonardo approached her research knowing individuals of different economic backgrounds would not have similar oral histories. Therefore [she] looked for Italian- American informants across a broad class range and in taking life histories tried to elicit information that would help [her] to understand how individuals lives were shaped by larger political economic contexts. (Di Leonardo 9) Before World War II, when the Japanese still had a great deal of control over the Koreans, a Koreans economic status was the deciding factor of how poorly they were treated. An example of this occurs in was the deciding factor of how poorly they were treated....
View Full Document
- Spring '07