The study has two purposes. The first one is an overview of potential oral sources. The second is a practical application of the oral history methods and ways of analysis and interpretation of interview data facilitating subjectivity study. In the research, subjectivity is a set of beliefs, experiences, feelings, perceptions and preferences which are belong to the certain individual and form an opinion about of oneself and the environment. Subjectivity show itself as an attitude towards the city, society where a person lived and performed activities, as well as the events experienced. We used oral witness where the narrator told events from his point of view. This creates potential for study subjectivity via oral history methods which subject is perception of past phenomena and processes by an individual with his views and worldview. The materials obtained during the interview are first introduced into research. As the oral history method, we used depth targeted interview allowing to obtain detailed information on the respondent’s perceptions and feelings, his vision of the historical period when he makes his past based on life experience thereby demonstrating subjectivity. For the analysis of the oral sources, we used a narrative method. It based on the linguistic interpretation of a text which is embodied with highlighting semantic dominants, analysis of vocabulary, a way of pronunciation and construction of phrases. It allows you to identify the emotional assessment of the events broadcast by the narrator, as well as the feelings, moods and experiences associated with them. In the reconstructive cross-sectional analysis, we reveal new facts, their confirmation and detailing using oral evidence, combined with other types of sources. Thereby reconstructing the perception of events or phenomena. Finally, the citation method is based on the analysis of a set of statements devoted to a particular issue, which helps to elucidate the perception of the studied phenomenon from new angles. As a result, based on the potential of the considered methods which purpose are identifying and reconstruction subjectivity, the use of the oral sources for its study seems quite perspective.
oral history, oral sources, subjectivity, narrative method, citation method, reconstructive cross-sectional analysis, targeted depth interview
1. Artemenko N.A. Ustnaya istoriya i problema dostupa k travmaticheskomu opytu // Studia Culturae. 2019. Vyp. 2 (40). S. 128-138.
2. Berdinskih V.A. Russkoe krest'yanstvo i ustnaya istoriya // Voprosy istorii. 2022. № 4 (1). S. 264-268.
3. Zareckiy Yu.P. Ego-dokumenty sovetskogo vremeni: terminy, istoriografiya, metodologiya // Neprikosnovennyy zapas. Debaty o politike i kul'ture. 2021. T. 137. № 3. S. 184–199.
4. Korusenko S.N., Scheglova T.K. Istoricheskaya pamyat' v antropologii i ustnoy istorii // Vestnik Omskogo universiteta. Seriya «Istoricheskie nauki». 2023. № 4 (40). S. 196-200. 5. Popova O.D. Istoriya povsednevnosti cherez prizmu ustnoy istorii: vozmozhnosti i problemy // Vestnik Udmurtskogo universiteta. Seriya «Istoriya i filologiya». 2023. № 3. S. 639-645.
5. Pushkareva N.L., Zhidchenko A.V. Social'no-kul'turnoe i semeyno-bytovoe prostranstvo // Vestnik VolGU. Seriya 4. Istoriya. Regionovedenie. Mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya. 2025. T. 30. № 1. S. 114-126.
6. Rostovcev E.A. Rossiyskaya nauka ob ustnoy istorii // Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Istoriya. 2018. T. https://doi.org/10.21638/11701/spbu02.2018.213 63. Vyp. 2. S. 522-545.
7. Rafikova S.A. Povsednevnye praktiki solidarnosti v narrativah sibirskih gorozhan v poslestalinskiy period // Vestnik Altayskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. 2019. № 4 (41). S. 87–92.
8. Rafikova S.A. Zhivaya istoriya povsednevnosti: sibirskie gorozhane v 1960-e gody. Krasnoyarsk: SibGU im. M.F. Reshetneva, 2019. 484 s.
9. Fedorova D.A. Dosug zhiteley Tyumeni: 1964–1985 gody: dis. … kand. ist. nauk. Tyumen', 2016. 250 s.
10. Fedorova D.A. Formirovanie gorodskoy sub'ektivnosti tyumencev v 1964–1985 gg. (na primere dosugovyh praktik) // Vestnik Surgutskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. 2024. № 3 (90). S. 177-183. https://doi.org/10.69571/SSPU.2024.90.3.024.
11. Chernyavskaya V.E. Proshloe kak tekstovaya real'nost': metodologicheskie vozmozhnosti lingvisticheskogo analiza istoricheskogo narrativa // Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya. 2016. № 3 (41). S. 76-87. https://doi.org/10.17223/19986645/41/7.
12. Scheglova T.K. Materialy ustnoy istorii kak istoricheskiy istochnik i poiski im mesta v nauchnyh klassifikaciyah rossiyskogo istochnikovedeniya v XX–XXI stoletiyah // Vestnik Altayskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. 2019. № 4 (41). S. 93101.
13. Scheglova T.K. Ustnaya istoriya v rossiyskom istoriograficheskom prostranstve 19902010-h godov: vyzovy, dostizheniya i riski // Istoricheskiy kur'er. 2020. № 5 (13). S. 8-22. 15. Artemenko N.A. Oral History, Remembering Practices and the Problem of «Access» to the Traumatic Experience // Corpus Mundi. 2020. No. 4. pp. 14-33. https://doihttps://doi.org/10.46539/cmj.v1i4.30.
14. Brown S.R. Subjectivity in the human sciences // The Psychological Record. 69. 2019. Pp. 565-579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40732-019-00354-5.
15. J. Grele R. Movement without aim: methodological and theoretical problems in oral history // The oral history reader. Edited by R. Perks, A. Thomson. London, New York: Taylor & Francis eLibrary, 2003. Pp. 38-49.
16. Lundberg A., Fraschini N., Aliani R. What is subjectivity? Scholarly perspectives on the elephant in the room // Quality & Quantity. 57. 2023. Pp. 4509-4530. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135022-01565-9.
17. Pinsky A. Subjectivity after Stalin // Russian Studies in History. Vol. 58, nos. 2-3. 2019. Pp. 79-88. https://doi.org/10.1080/10611983.2019.1727714. 20. Thompson P. The voice of the past: oral history. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978. 257 p.
