This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It may contain errors or omissions, so always listen back to the original media to confirm content. You can search the text using Ctrl-F, and you can also play the audio by clicking on a desired timestamp.
Um well, my name is Julie. Um, um, the most important thing about myself, I think, is that I'm a lesbian. Um, so that's how I identify, um, in terms of our histories. Queer, transgender, lesbian gay. Um, I think we're just at the beginning. There's heaps of stuff that we can do. Um, and and there are heaps of resources. And we shouldn't be put off by comments from the straight world or any other world saying, [00:00:30] um, there's nothing or we don't exist. Or, you know, there isn't enough. Um, and so it's up to us to search out and find, um, our history and redefine histories, Um, which have been given a straight straight interpretation so we can look at the world and look at it from a queer view, A lesbian view, Gay view, transgender view, um, as we wish. Um, my history background. I have a history, background, [00:01:00] general history, background, and in terms of my research, um, I'm particularly interested in, um, taking, um, my interest, my lesbian view of, um, the events which have affected me, um, the events which affect all of us and, uh, trying to uncover more about how our communities have survived and lived and and still do. Um, so my I suppose one of my, um, [00:01:30] uh, what I think is an important piece of research was around the park and Hume murder. Um, case, uh, so I did that with, um, Alison Laurie. So we looked at that case from a lesbian perspective and tried to understand why the reaction and what was the impact of that case? Um, in particular on lesbians in New Zealand. Um, subsequently, I also did a, um, chronology a booklet called [00:02:00] Out Front, which was an attempt at, um noting, um, significant events, um, which we had been involved in, And, uh, it kind of as a trigger or kind of as an aid, um, to, um to show what can be done and, uh, hopefully inspire other people to fill in all the gaps of which there were many, um, And to extend, um, you know, and to start building up a big repository, [00:02:30] um, of our own histories. Um, and I'm currently working on another project. Been lingering on this for some time. Um, so yeah, I. I think there's there's heaps to do prior to the two pieces of research that you've talked about. Are you aware of other research in New Zealand that has looked at kind of queer histories prior to the prior to that? Um, I think, Yeah. [00:03:00] Uh, in the work of, um, for example. Um um um people who were active in changing the homosexual law or the the law relating to homosexuality in New Zealand. Um, also, um, I'm I'm just one of the line I have to say, Um uh, there were lesbians who were recording, um, and keeping, um, artefacts, um, and trying to write up, um, aspects of our our histories. [00:03:30] Um, some names. So Zoe and Windler who kept the waxing moon archives, Um, in her own private premises. Um, which were sort of lesbian artefacts from, um, from here and overseas as well. Um uh, there there are heaps of people, uh, who were sort of collecting and writing. Um, when I was at Auckland University, um, uh, uh, women were writing, um, in the broad broad [00:04:00] sheet, which was a feminist magazine. Um uh, stuff about lesbians and the gay world. And, um I mean, there have been a number of people across the the gay and lesbian communities who have recorded and tried to keep track of, um, you know, uh, the events events which have impacted our lives in in this country. When you're coming to do a research topic, how do you find those sources if they are just individuals keeping [00:04:30] documents themselves or private archives? Well, I think that it's difficult, I think, Um, as with any history, there's there's problems of, you know, digging up stuff, and, um, in the established sort of straight I suppose there are some, you know, obvious, um, venues there are obvious, um, resources. Um, we have access to the same resources. Um, but [00:05:00] in our case, it is often a matter of reinterpreting and reading between the lines of what's available. Um, in terms of people, um, you know, with with their own archives, sometimes it's luck. Sometimes it's chance. Uh, sometimes, um, I mean, you just have to, um, try and interview and follow leads. Um, in that sense, you're kind of like a detective. Yeah, um, so that's that is the same problem of any history, I think. [00:05:30] But we have particular, um, we have particular obstacles because, um, we have obstacles in the moment in the sense that, um I think as a general rule, society doesn't want us to exist. And therefore is, um, you know, not helpful. Um, and, uh, negative and obstacle. Um, and we have obstacles in the past as well and that, um, [00:06:00] our activities are not recorded for what they are, and we are not recorded as we are. And, um, I know that who has done considerable research, Um, in this area. Um, she noted once during a speech, um, that even in death, we are colonised. Um, uh, so that you know, the family often will destroy artefacts that belong to a homosexual [00:06:30] Or, you know, a gay or lesbian or transgender person. And, um, try and sanitise their lives in their death. Um, so there there are things like that that we, uh you know, that that could create greater difficulties for us. Um, there is the interpretation of our lives, so people will say, Oh, well, those two women who live together. Yeah, they were great friends. They lived together for 50 years and shared the same room. But, you know, that was great friends. [00:07:00] Um um, So we have to, um look and perhaps dig a little bit deeper. Talk to people who knew them. Um, try and find out more about their lives and how they lived it, Um, what was the You know, who did they relate to? Mostly, Where were the energies and so on? And, um, perhaps put forward different interpretations. Do you have some examples of obstacles that have been put up? Like like, do you Do you know of families that have thrown [00:07:30] out queer related material from a person's life? Yeah, I do. And I know of instances where, um, the person has died. And so there's been a, you know, a funeral where you know, where we have been allowed to be, and then they've had, you know, the the sanitised funeral with the family and is a separate event. So, um uh, yeah, I think there's there's quite I. I don't know how widespread, but there certainly are instances of that [00:08:00] you mentioned reading between the lines. What are you looking for? What? What are the things that kind of jump up as a flag? Ok, so things like, um, two men or two women living together or there's some circumstance in which, you know, there's, um, um evidence of, um, a kind of some kind of relationship. Um, frequently, um, especially, let's say, take the newspapers, say, 19th century newspapers, early 20th century, even just [00:08:30] just newspaper records. Um, often, um, our communities appear in there because of some criminal, you know, supposed some of, uh, criminal activities or criminal events or a murder. Or, um, you know, something which has drawn, um, those people or that person to the, um, attention of the authorities. Um, and then it's become, uh, visible. Um, because there's been a court case, or [00:09:00] someone was murdered or, um, a place was raided. And, you know, there's a description about what was going on in the place. Um, uh, so I think, um, that's an obvious. Those are obvious starting points. And then you start to dig into the background and see Well, hm? This murder happened, or, um, there was some fight. And what was it about? Who were the people and then go from there? So it's like you've got just [00:09:30] a little grip. There's a tiny little toe, hold on on on something, and, um and then to see if you can work it from there. Um, there may be other other records associated. So, um, so perhaps start with the newspaper record and then go to, um, other, um, police records. Are there records of, um, other government agencies who were involved in that kind of, um, you know, in that particular event, Um, are there other commentaries on that [00:10:00] case? So is there further commentary a few months later in the same newspaper or or other newspapers? And so you look at the the contemporary reports and, um uh, see if other sources have mentioned additional information, and so from there, you can start to build up, um, some kind of picture. Um, next step is or another. Another step, um, is to put it in the context. [00:10:30] So find out about what's going on in that place at that time. So is that, um, certainly in 1920 Auckland 19 thirties. What's going on there? What are the people doing? Um, what are the general sources that are talking about, um, life at that time and then perhaps weave some of that in as well? And there may be comment comments about, um, or information about what was going on at the time in the thirties. So, for example, depression. [00:11:00] Um, so there may be sources about the depression that, um, might illuminate something that you're looking at from another angle. Um, so you can piece together, um, bits, Uh, until you get more of a more of a picture. I mean, historians are doing that all the time anyway, because, you know, we weren't there, so we've got to make it up to some. I mean, obviously not. We're not making up a fantasy. Um, but it's we are imposing our minds and our thoughts and our interpretations [00:11:30] all the time on the world around us and the world as we, um, try and picture it in our minds from the things that we read about something that happened 200 years ago or, you know, 100 years ago. So we're making it up. Um, but but I mean, in our case, it's, um uh, it's it's a similar problem to say, Um, the records around working class as opposed to politicians and, um um, you know, the [00:12:00] rich and where there's a lot of documentation, um, around their activities and might be artefacts, um, houses They lived in things they owned objects they owned and so on. Um, but I think in our case there, there's also, um um you know, I mean, we I mean, basically, I see that we are, um, priest and we've been suppressed as communities, and, uh, we've been murdered. Um, we've been put into jail. [00:12:30] We've been, um, put into, uh, you know, given mental, uh, treatment. Um, um, you know, so So, uh, that's reflected in how things are recorded as well. So, um, I know for a fact, too, that in Wellington, um, in the seventies eighties, when I was here, um, we protested against, um, the Wellington buses because they wouldn't allow us to have ads. [00:13:00] Um, advertising, Um, some lesbian community, um, resources. And, um uh, and the newspaper wouldn't carry the word lesbian. So And prior to that, they sometimes they would put gay in quotes. So there are those kinds of things that sort of, you know, perhaps, um, make it harder because there are not so many. There are not as many resources as there might be, but again, we have to read between the lines, and I'm wondering, is there specific words that [00:13:30] you're looking for. Like I mean, you say that, you know, the newspaper wouldn't print the word lesbian look for words like, um, pervert or unnatural or, um, yeah, kind of derogatory terms, um, used for us. Um, very. Sometimes they'd use queer very, very early on. Um, newspapers would use queer, not as we use it, but but what kind of year? Uh, probably early 19th century. Uh, sorry. Early 20th century. Um, [00:14:00] it was a queer night, and but they don't necessarily mean, um, you know, as we would interpret that. Yeah. Um, yeah. So the other thing is, I think I said was looking at the relationships that are, um What what were the people doing and what? Why were they involved with each other? Why would these two women be, um, in a boarding house together? Um, with an assumed name, for example. Why would [00:14:30] two men be in a park late at night together, And, um and so you think Is it is it some criminal deal going on, or perhaps a gay men meeting up? Because there's nowhere else, um, or because that's what we want to do. Or, you know? Yeah, That's usually there are derogatory kinds of terms that might lead you to think, Um, there's something. Not quite. Um, it's not quite straightforward there. So [00:15:00] let's see what what else is happening. Yeah. Um, is for for women you might look to see, you know, uh, women who were friends for a long time or, um, that kind of diminishing, diminishing words that take away from what is it you know, could well be, um, a sexual relationship Or, um, you know, obviously a long term partnership. Um, uh, women dressed, um, or described as being [00:15:30] looking like men or dressed Manish. Or, you know, walking Manish. Or, um, there was a case of a woman in, um uh, around World War One in Wellington. And she was, um, described as, you know, dressing rather Manish. And she was actually interned on Somes Island because they thought she was a, um, potentially a spy for, you know, the for the Germans. And, um and and she had a, um she was not of English [00:16:00] extract. Um, and she was described as sort of working closely with, um, another woman who was a doctor, and, uh so immediately I think Perhaps they were in a relationship. And perhaps, um, there was more to that, um um, circumstance that meets the ice. So, yeah, things like that. But do you think that it would be easy to read too much into things? I'm thinking that maybe in a newspaper of that [00:16:30] time, they might be wanting to other the person in some respect. So how do you know that this is like a relationship, or how do you know it's just somebody trying to be other? Yeah, Um, in some cases, I don't think you can You can't know because you don't have enough information. And, um, I think, um, I think hopefully not erroneously. I think I'm a little bit more conservative in my, um, approach. And so I would, um um, [00:17:00] it it it is easy to go too far, I think, and make up and say this is what it was when you don't really know. But we can say Hm. I wonder whether this might have been the case because a straight historian looking at it might immediately say, Oh, well, these women were obviously blah, blah, and so I would say, Well, no, um, why do you make that assumption that they're heterosexual? Um, I might make an assumption. I'm coming [00:17:30] from a point of view. Well, it's possible that they're lesbian possible that those men are gay men. So, you know, that is, um perhaps it's equally valid. It's probably more valid, um, to wonder that where there's, um you know, other indicators, Um, such as we talked about, um, so I I would say, um, you can we can certainly raise the questions. And we can certainly start to, um, you know, as other others have said, queer our his queer, the history, the history is, [00:18:00] um, stultified and stratified. Um, and we need to queer it and say, Well, actually, it could be this. So why do you immediately say, Oh, that's a straight relationship? Mhm. So we can certainly do that. And, um, I think, um, you know, I'm always aware I'm talking about someone who actually lived and like, it's another person. We're talking about people. So if someone was looking at my life and saying stuff, they'll say a whole lot of things that I wouldn't say, or [00:18:30] I might say, um, and I might be happy with what they're saying or I might not. Um, but people can look and see and make their own conclusions. Um, and as a historian, I can look and see and make my own conclusions, but I can't say, Oh, I know that this is what that person thought because I'm not in their minds. Um, but I can say, Well, I wonder if this was not the case. And here are the things that lead me to think that And even if I have very limited information, I can still wonder because I want to have [00:19:00] a different perspective on the world. I come from this perspective, which is a lesbian one. And so a queer historian can say, Well, from a queer point of view, I would say this about the case as opposed to, um, you know, if I was straight, you know, straight story might say something different. We can certainly do that. So you've talked about, uh, newspapers as a kind of great starting point, and you've mentioned things like police records and other types of records. How easy is it to actually access things like police [00:19:30] records and or health records and and look at somebody's kind of sexuality. Yeah, it's, I think, Well, it can be difficult depending on the time. Um, because in some cases there is, uh, time periods. Um, um, and And you're not allowed to look at the records until after, you know, 50 years or 60 years or something like that. And, um so that means you can't do anything with those. You can't use those records. Um, unless you've got permission, Sometimes the permission has to be from [00:20:00] a family member. Um, sometimes you may not. There may not be a family member. Um, or you haven't identified a family or family member or you don't know who they might be or whether And even if you did, well, they give permission. Um, So, um yeah, there. There are difficulties around that, but that shouldn't stop us from trying. And, um, asking for access. Um, I've accessed defence records. Um, and sometimes the records don't exist. They've been destroyed. Um, I know in my own case, when research [00:20:30] this particular document, it's got a reference, and there it just has disappeared. It is not anywhere to be found. Um, but the reference is there. And, um, it's so frustrating because it is quite an important reference. Um, but what happened to it? God knows, Um, perhaps it's misfiled. Or perhaps it's been destroyed when the, uh, government departments have reorganised and, uh And when When stuff has been digitised, I worry [00:21:00] that things might be might drop, drop between the gaps. Things might be missed. Um, but yeah, I think there there are some difficulties. Um, but having said that, it is It is possible to request records and to see, for example, in the case, We were, um, given access to their prison records. Um, and we were able to view that we weren't able to take them away, but we were able to, um, sit and read, um, the prison records. [00:21:30] Um um, so that was really good. And this is even when the people concerned are still alive. Yeah. Yeah, that's right. So it just depends on what the rules are around a particular, um, archive or so. How does that? How does that work with the prison records? In that case, in what respect? Uh, in terms of how were you able to access material when the people were still alive? And did they have to give permission or No, they didn't. Uh, the records belong to the New Zealand government. Um, [00:22:00] and we were doing, uh, research at the time, and we had a grant to, um uh, this was prior to publication of our book. Um, we had a grant to look at the social impact, the impact of that case. Um, um, you know, in in this country, So we were recognised as, um it it was helpful to have those credentials behind us. Um, to say we we needed to, or we would like to see these records to fill in the picture. Um, I think if as [00:22:30] an in private individual, it's a little bit harder because, um, you know, they may not see you as, um, bona fide. And, um, it's probably a bit easier if you belong in an institution or, you know, you have that kind of an academic credential behind you, but I didn't think that's a total blocker, but maybe an easier. An easier path for you is to either partner with an organisation or or perhaps enrol in a programme or something, so that you know, there's controls [00:23:00] over it, and that may, um, take away some issues around, Um, your you know, your access to material. So in that situation, you were able to research the material, but then were you able to actually publish it? Were you able to do anything with that? Sometimes there are rules around the use of the material, and you have You should abide by those rules, whatever they are. Um, but, um uh, in that particular instance, I can't recall all the all the all the rules around it. Um, but we were [00:23:30] able to We were able to use the material. Um, sometimes you can't directly quote, but, um, at the very least, it gives you a picture. So, you know, you, um you can have that in your mind or as part of the background of the work without necessarily, um, quoting and going, you know, um, you know, invading someone's, um, um private, um, records or with the like, um, of course, [00:24:00] people are dead. It's a little bit easier, but but not that easy, either, because there are there are families involved. I think one of the issues we have to deal with is is also the families don't Some families don't necessarily want people to know that they, um their father, their mother, their sister, their brother, their child, their son, their daughter, um, is is transgender Is gay as lesbian as queer. And, um um and that's that [00:24:30] those, um those the homophobia and the, um, the restrictions of those people. Um, and so it's it can be hard to get through that. Um, you just have to work around it. And with it, maybe we should also just, um, briefly explain what the Parker Hume case was. Ok, Yes, it is. Um uh, the Parker Hume case refers to the, um, incident [00:25:00] in 1954 where Juliet Hume and Pauline Parker together, um, murdered, um, Pauline Parker's mother, um, in Christchurch. Uh, and they were the The case was totally sensational. Um, media from all around the world came came to New Zealand to cover the trial, and, um, it's the focus of, uh, it's been the focus of, um, plays novels. Um, it's in compendiums [00:25:30] of of, um, criminal cases, Um, the world's worst murderers, Uh, et cetera. Um, ever since, um, it was, uh, had great public attention here, and there was a lot of focus on the nature of the relationship between Juliet and Pauline Parker, which was, um, perceived as a lesbian one. And I mean, we we went through, um, Were they lesbian? Were they not? Um, And the point is, they were perceived as lesbian, [00:26:00] and so we focused on the fact that they were perceived as lesbian. Um meant that they were treated in a certain way. And there were certain impacts of that, um, on lesbians in New Zealand and on the general public. So, um, that was our, um, focus. And so was that lesbian angle part of the prosecution case or Yeah, yeah. The prosecution said that they were, um, dirty minded girls out for experience and that this relationship was part [00:26:30] of the badness of them, and the defence tried to say, um, well, no, they weren't bad. They were mad. And, uh, so they relied upon a spurious, spurious, um, psychological construct called, which said they were mad together separately. OK, but mad together. And this is how they came to, um um murder Pauline's mother. Um, they were found guilty. Um, which is probably better for them because they were put in [00:27:00] prison and not in a mental institution. Um, and they served 55 or six years. And then, um, Juliet Hume was released and, um on they were released on probation, and Juliet Hume went overseas to join her mother. And, um, Pauline Parker was on probation in New Zealand for a few and then eventually left New Zealand. Um, but it was quite an important. It was a significant case. Um, [00:27:30] for lesbians in New Zealand, for example. Um, one woman said we we interviewed quite a number of lesbians to say, Well, did that case impact on them? And how did it if it did? And one woman said that after the after the trial and the expose of the details around the lives of the two families and the girls and the relationship, um, that her mother, um, she came, she came into her mother's room and her mother had a novel on on on her, um, [00:28:00] you know, beside a bed that she was reading, which was about, um, this was some time later, um, a novel was written called Obsession, and it was about the trial in the case. And, um and and this is what this woman's mother was reading. And so, you know, in her mind, it was My mother isn't reading that. And I've just told her I'm a lesbian. And now my mother is reading a book about, you know, two girls who are perceived as lesbian, and they murdered the mother. So this is not very [00:28:30] good. Um, so yeah, it was It didn't really help in that respect. And so both the defence and the prosecution used lesbianism as a as an angle as an angle. That's true. Yeah, you're quite right. Um I mean, yes. Yeah, that's true. It was well, in the context of the legal system, um, you could be, um you're guilty. If you were the the the prosecution was saying, [00:29:00] Yes, they're guilty because they're bad. And the defence was saying, Well, no, they're not guilty because they're mad. And, um uh, and to to get off, they had to. One way to get off was to say, Well, they were insane, so therefore not responsible. So that's what the angle of the defence was, which should didn't really was not a flyer. When you were researching your book. Did you have access to the medical records? We had access [00:29:30] to, um, the prison records, which recorded, um, health and other factors. Um, we had access to the coroner's report. Um, which was, you know, obviously full. Um, we had access to, you know, all the the publicly available material. Obviously, um, we interviewed, um, people closely associated with the case. Uh, so the psychiatrist who proposed [00:30:00] the, um, concept, Um, so we actually interviewed him. That was Doctor, um, we interviewed, um a number of, uh, the legal people who were, uh, involved with the case as well. And And, you know, a number of others school friends, school girls. And at the time, was lesbianism seen as a mental illness, like like with homosexuality. Yeah, totally. Um, it, um [00:30:30] Well, homosexuality in general is regarded as a perversion and, um, total problem. Um, whether it was between men and women and a lot of people didn't you know, men were a little bit more? Um, um what's the word kind of talked about or recognised them? Say lesbians? Um, so there's more about male activity and papers. Lots. There's lots of, um, reporting in the paper of men being, um [00:31:00] prosecuted for having sex with other men because it was illegal. Um, and so therefore, it was in the cause of the New Zealand. Truth is a great source, because it it was a kind of a scandal like a scandal paper. So it had divorces and, you know, sex. Um, related cases. And so it's a really good resource for us. Um, but doesn't Wouldn't Wouldn't that give you, like, a a lopsided view of of history because you you're only looking at the crimes and the supposed crimes. [00:31:30] Well, I, I was saying, That's one way. That's one end to, um, our communities. There are other ins and yes, I agree. If you only did that, then all we seem to be as criminal. But again, you can look at that and say, Well, um, two men were convicted of having sex with each other. Well, the society at the time said it was a crime, and society at the time said we were you know, um, we had mental illness, which is totally not correct. So, um, [00:32:00] you can still look at those circumstances and say, Well, this is the kind of oppressive world that we inhabited. And how do people survive? Um in the South Island, for example, there was a place, um, out the back somewhere And the the the people there, um, the guys there had set up, um, a little early notification system of someone arriving, um, down a long driveway so they could, you know, um, be prepared. Um, And [00:32:30] it was a gay gay place. And, uh, so people had to go to extremes to just to live an ordinary kind of social life. Um, so, you know, we can make a lot out of even, you know, something that's presented as criminal and and so on. Um, there are other other sources. So in, um, sometimes people have left, um, like journals. Um, in novels, you can get novels by gay and lesbian writers. [00:33:00] There are, um, depictions of people. Um, uh, you know, and we can work with that and build from there. Um, some writers and artists left records and artefacts, um, again, their journals or their recordings or their writings. And we can have a glimpse into their world through their writings or through their journals or through their, um, you know, um, letters. Um um, [00:33:30] cards, um you know, um, things that they kept in their houses. And, um so I think there's there's other ways to, um, try and uncover the worlds that we lived and created. The Parker Hume case is really interesting, as you say, because it's been, uh, documented and written about and and and made films of in so many different ways. When you look at that, then and you [00:34:00] look at what you and Alison have done and when you look at some of the other, more kind of mainstream views of of the same things, what are the main differences? What are the things that, um, are different coming to it from a kind of a a lesbian viewpoint? Um, well, if I take the example of, say, Peter Jackson's film, um, it's kind of irritating because I still see it as it's still sort of focusing on weirdness. [00:34:30] And, um, you know, the fantasy world and and so on. And, um, I, I would look at that and say, Well, yeah, well, they were teenage girls, and so they did writings and, um, they played games and they made up things. Um, people do, um and it's kind of, um in the in the from a straight angle. It's kind of a there's this kind of unspoken or sometimes, [00:35:00] um, overtly stated, um, connection that this is some evidence of, you know, weirdo lesbianism. Um, and I would say, Well, I can separate. We can separate that out. There's there's adolescent behaviour. There's, um, female adolescent behaviour. Um, is that lesbian? Well, you know, I might think something different. Um, and I would be looking for something more. So, [00:35:30] um, from a lesbian. The other thing is, there's also, um, almost an implication of, um um, you know that there's something wrong and I come at it from the point of view of Well, lesbianism is totally normal. Being gay is totally normal. Transgender is totally normal. So, um, we might take away certain, um, nuances [00:36:00] or certain, um uh, insinuations. One of the things we haven't touched on is the idea that, um, the changing face of homosexuality, I guess. And And what? Actually, um, being gay, queer lesbian what it actually means. And I'm wondering when you're looking at historic documents, how do how do you try and put yourself back in that time to work out? [00:36:30] Is this a lesbian relationship? Or is it just two women living together? How do you How do you kind of walk that path? Well, I think that, um, uh, first thing is that, um what we write about the past and what we write about now is a construct of our minds. Um, it's it's not a fantasy. Otherwise, you know, we would be novelists, and then you can write whatever you like and make it up. Um, so distinguishing [00:37:00] between, um, what I see is a total makeup and an attempt at, um um, we're still making up history because it's come out of my mind. And from my perspective and from whatever knowledge I have or managed to, you know, pull together, um, and also from, you know, my own personality and from my own values and so on. So we're always, um, coming from that perspective, regardless of who we are. So that's always [00:37:30] an overlay on what we're seeing and doing, and we should recognise it. Um, I don't think we can be, um uh, you know, there, there there was a sort of, um, idea of, um, you know, a so called objective history. And so I would say Well, there isn't any objective, objective history because you are always in it. So you're always affecting what you're writing. You're always influencing, and you are always putting it from your point of view. So, um, so that's what we're [00:38:00] doing and we acknowledge it. So when I look at something from, say, 19th century, um, I, I might not use the word lesbian, or I might I might say, um from my perspective now, I would call that a lesbian relationship. Um, that, you know, may may not be a term that the people themselves use or even knew about, Um But, uh, as long as we make it clear as to where we're coming from and on what basis we're [00:38:30] making a statement, then I think it's OK. Um, but I don't We can't willingly just go in and say, 00, here's a Here's a case of two women who lived here. Oh, they're lesbian because that doesn't really do anything. I don't think, but we can certainly question as I said before, we can certainly go in and say, Well, why assume that they're straight? Why assume it was just a friendship? Why assume this or I want to assume some other things. Um, but I'm going to say that I'm assuming them, or I'm going to be explicit and say, [00:39:00] Well, I don't think that you can say that these people were, uh, living a straight life. Because what about these other things? And what do we make of that? Do you find that there is much explicit material from early on, say, the 19th century or or earlier which explicitly says about homosexual feelings acts? Sometimes there is. Yeah. And, um And where that's the case, then we can, you know, go a bit further, I think how How [00:39:30] rare is that? Hard to say. I think it depends on which area you're talking about. Um, I don't I can't really comment on, you know, the whole world. But, um I mean, we know, you know, like the writings of Edward Carpenter. And you know, there's Oscar Wilde and so on, Just for a name, a couple of, um, people, Um, we have, um, evidence from, um, 17th century England, um, of two women living together, and, uh, I just forget their names again, [00:40:00] but, um, so yeah, so there There are instances um, Molly houses in London in the 17th century. So, um, you know, I think we can, um, you know, there are There are things yet to be uncovered because there are we we know of some examples, and so there must be more. I'm wondering if you've encountered blocks in researching queer topics either [00:40:30] organisational blocks or individual blocks and actually getting to material that, you know, is there Yes. Yes, I have, um, in my current research, um, So I'm looking at, um, the case of a person who was, um, born female. Lived as a man. Um, I think had top surgery. Um was described as masquerading as a man, but he she [00:41:00] identified as male from very early on and, um, live, uh, died only in the 19 nineties. Um, was married a number of times. Um, and, um, his last wife, uh, was still alive. And, um, I think is still alive. Um, but went, um, but went, uh, allow me to interview her. And I've also found and tracked down his very first wife, and, [00:41:30] uh, she she doesn't want to talk to me either. Um, because it kind of implicates them. I suppose in a way. So that's really, um, difficult. Um, so I've in the first case written, um, to the people and asked, would they speak with me and in, uh, and I've followed up and spoke to them directly. Um, but they've said no. And I think that I have to respect that. So I can't [00:42:00] go further with those people. Um, I did ask if they would reconsider, but they said no. Um, so I have to work with, you know, with what's available to me. Um, I think this kind of, uh um, no history is complete. Do you know what I mean? I can't. You can't pretend. Oh, I've done all this research. And now I know everything about, you know, blah blah this person or this case or this event. It's never the case, because, um, [00:42:30] we weren't there the whole time with all the people, and we weren't all the people all the time. So, um, any any history is always just an approximation anyway. And, um, so you have to I think, um well, that's my personal. My personal value anyway, that I should not pursue that any further with those people because they've said clearly what they want. Um, but that, uh, at the same time, um um, it's a history. [00:43:00] And so I'm I think we we are allowed to write history. And, um, if we never wrote anything because someone will be upset if we didn't write because we stopped writing because someone would be upset then then we don't have history. So, um, we That's part of the profession of history. I think one of the one of the issues with it, It's a really interesting idea that, um when you're looking at an [00:43:30] individual and maybe the family around that individual and then the greater community and the right to privacy from the individual in the family and then the right for the community to say, Actually, we want to hold up, um, or demonstrate that we have been here and we are still here. Yes, That must be quite an interesting tension. The way I think about it is this My family doesn't own me. I own me. And so [00:44:00] the subject of if I'm researching someone they own themselves is people who have an interest in how they're presented in the same way. You know, when people do genealogy, and they find out that there's some There was someone who was a criminal in their background. They don't want to know about it. And then these days, often people do find that interesting. Um, but, you know, if you, um, history is not about hiding, it's about uncovering as I see it and, um or, [00:44:30] you know, trying to trying to draw, um, pictures of the past, um, pictures of the present as well. And and, you know, say, how does it influence the present? So, um, I think that we we must persist. Um, but we have responsibility for how we do our research and what claims we make. Um, And we have a responsibility to, um uh, you know, acknowledge, um, people acknowledge the sources say [00:45:00] when we don't have them say when we're making up or when we're speculating, we'll be clear about it. Um, and, uh um, or say, this is the approach that we're taking that you want to blur things. So it could be this. It could be that, Um, but as long as we are explicit about it, um, but I think we should not be deterred because, um, a family member or an ex partner or, um, the government or, um, an institution doesn't want [00:45:30] us to tell about something. I think we should just continue, you know, within, um uh you know, as long as we proceed with a good angle or with a with responsibility, let's say, what about in the situation where, um, say there's an anthology of gay writing, but yet in a state of an author doesn't want writing in the anthology because it's a gay anthology. [00:46:00] Do you have any thoughts on on that kind of thing? Where just, I suppose the context of where you're publishing stuff and how you're publishing stuff, it's highlighting this one particular aspect. If the person is gay and they've written gay stuff and it fits in the role of you know what your gay anthology is, then it should be. Yeah, definitely. Definitely. I think, um um I mean, just from just from my background, Um, I think it is important to be visible. Um, [00:46:30] and if an estate says, Oh, we don't want this writing to be in there even though the person was gay, Uh, I, I would wonder What are the reasons? What are the reasons for not wanting that to be included. Um, is there something we need to take into account? Um, but if it's merely they don't want people to know this person was gay, Um, then they put it in. I suppose it gets harder when it's possibly [00:47:00] just speculation that, uh, that they gay, I guess again we can come back to Well, what's what about the speculation that they're straight. So it is. Um it is often a speculation that the people are straight or it's often an assumption that the people are straight. And then it's a, um, injunction that they're straight when they may not be. So you know, as I said before, I think we have the right to say, um well, I wonder, [00:47:30] and I challenge the assumption that the person is immediately assumed to be straight. Have you had blocks from, say, institutions or other organisations on publishing material? Um not no, not, uh or I've, um we had the grant, as I said to do do research. And then we found a publisher and published a book. Um, my own book book published myself. [00:48:00] Um, so no, there was no block and my current research. Um, I haven't experience to block, um, other than what I've mentioned with individuals not wanting to contribute. Um, but from an institution? No, just the normal rules around. Um, I was wanting to access some, um, records from, um, mental institutions. And there are time limits on them. So I can't unless [00:48:30] I get, um, um, a family member to say, yes, that those records can be released. So I think that that's that's what I've encountered so far. What about in terms of you mentioned that outfront was self published? Would you consider that a block that you couldn't find a publisher, or was that purposely? You wanted to self publish something purposely. I did it because I didn't want to have to amend anything. I wanted to write what I wanted to write. And, [00:49:00] um, I just saw that as most efficient. Did you think that you would have to amend stuff if you went through? I thought it might be a problem. Uh, true. Yeah. So I suppose I self selected out. In a way, um, I thought I thought, um, it it's kind of hard to get published anyway, and I didn't want to be trapped into, um, having to fit into some publisher's view of what it should look like and how it should be. I just want a total control. Um, actually, [00:49:30] since you mentioned it, I do recall when we published Park and Hume, Um, we, um we're talking with a distributor and, um, through through our publisher, and our title was Parker and Hume a lesbian view because we wanted to be explicit about the angle we were coming from. So, you know, as I said before to be totally upfront. And, um, the distributor said, I don't think that will go because, you know, bookshops won't hold a book like that with the [00:50:00] word lesbian on it. And, um, we said, Well, no, that's what we want to call it. And would you rather that we had, Let's say L ESB IAN. Maybe we should put a what you really want is NOTH. I NGA nothing view. That's what that do. Um, so we sort of played with it for a bit and said, No, it was a lesbian view, and if if they didn't want, if if that would be a problem, then we'd go somewhere else. So we had to sort of be insistent there. And it [00:50:30] did go out as a lesbian view. And it did sell. So it was just rubbish. And what year was that? Yeah, I think I think it was first published. This I can't recall. So you have to look it up. It could be 1991 and 1993. I'm not exactly sure which. I always get them mixed up because it was it was published again in the United States. Um, I think in 1995 just with a pre preface, different preface. Still an attitude in the 19 nineties that having lesbian [00:51:00] on the front cover, which is just nonsense. I mean, every time we allow that kind of censorship to happen, then we're just diminishing ourselves, and we just you know, we'll never get there, so we just keep going. Can you talk a wee bit about the outfront publication? How did that come about? Um, I had quite a lot of, um, material. Um, I'd collected lesbian magazines, um, published here, um, [00:51:30] cartoons by women. Sharon Olson is the name I forgot before, Um, so she was a, um an artist. Um, and she did a lot of illustrations in early broadsheet magazine, Um, and depictions of lesbians and lesbians kissing and, um, which was really fantastic because that time early seventies, there was not much material available. And, of course, there's not, you know, no access to Internet, and, um, the mass communications we have now. So, um, those those, um, resources [00:52:00] were really, um, for me anyway. Really important. Um, there were articles in university magazines about, you know, gay and lesbian, And, um, at that time And, of course, the whole gay liberation movement was going at the time, so things were starting to to come out, but, um, so I had, um, in my own private in boxes in my house, There were magazines, um, newspaper articles, clippings, um, that I'd taken from events I'd been at or [00:52:30] heard about. And, um, I thought there there's a lot of information here. Um uh, records of, um, events, um, protests, um, feminist, lesbian, uh, all all sorts of stuff. And, um, I thought it was not accessible, and, um, one of the magazines was for lesbians only. So it was not You couldn't really, you know, take that and copy it and give it around. Um, but within that magazine was a Circle magazine, which was published in New Zealand. [00:53:00] Um, and, uh, I want I wanted to make that information more available and more accessible to more people. Um, so that was my initial motivation. Um, and and it was kind of like getting it in a form that would be, um, last longer. So I use those sources as inputs to to it in my own knowledge and information supplemented with, um, some newspaper reports, um, which I had collected as well. Um, [00:53:30] and you know, other research I've done. So do you find that it happens a lot in the queer community where it is individuals doing pockets of research or archiving I? I think people accumulate stuff. Um, just generally, Anyway, um, in New Zealand, there was until the seventies. A lot of, um um focus, I suppose, on political history. Um, [00:54:00] not news, not our own. Not at the history of this country. Um, And but since then, there's been an explosion. As you can see in the bookshops, if you go to the airport, you see stuff on New Zealand heaps of stuff. Um, and that's been kind of like a conscious effort by historians. Um, the Dictionary of New Zealand biography, for example, which is a great resource on, um, you know, masses of individuals. So it's biographies of individuals who lived in this country and who, [00:54:30] you know, did stuff did things across a range of, um, occupation, social class, um, gender and so on and race. And, um, so, uh, New Zealand history history focused on what? The events of this country and the people in this land, Um, has exploded, um, over the last 2030 years, I suppose, and I think the same is happening for us. And, [00:55:00] um, we we've got more resources now, So, you know, the the website that you're involved with, Um, we can bring in stuff from other parts of the world as well. Um, we've got access to more books. Um, and it's we we need to produce our own materials. Um, from what? What we've learned about our own communities here. So and I think it's quite important for each, um, place to do its own work and its own history. So we [00:55:30] can't assume that how things were in England or in Australia or in the US or in China is the same as how things are here. Um, So, um, so when you were putting together the outfront book, was it really important to go back to the original sources? So, like, you were saying you had newspaper clippings, you had magazines? Was all of this information that you were gathering like from firsthand sources? Of course, people will question that and say, um, what's a firsthand source, [00:56:00] Um or what's a, you know, primary source? Um, and we'll say, Well, that's also a construct because someone wrote a newspaper article, Um, someone took a picture, but they pictured this and they didn't picture the rest of the of the event. They just focused on one little thing. Um, so it's kind of a distorted, um, they are filtered, filtered sources regardless, but, um, they were at least, [00:56:30] um, records contemporaneous records of the events. And so that's a little bit closer. So yeah, I think that is quite important. Um, I found it important to, um, read, um, you know, the the account of a particular demonstration in Wellington, say and remember Oh, I was there. Oh, and that happened as well. Um oh, yes, that did happen. Um, [00:57:00] So, um, I think, you know, while you could question you can question everything, but you can. I mean, the fact is that something did happen. People did go and pick it outside. Um, you know, a bar that excluded kicked out gays and lesbians when they thought they saw us. Um And so we we picketed outside a particular bar and there was a picture of people there, And so, yes, that did happen. It did happen on that day, and that's what it was [00:57:30] about. Um, may not have been what it was all about, but that's at least some, You know, you're getting closer. Um, so yeah, it is to me, it is quite important. It's, um, good, too, if we can talk to people who were there at the time. Um, but I You just have to weigh up the different, um, the different angles on that same event, Um, and then come up with some You You always come up with some construct about it on the basis of what you've [00:58:00] what you've read and what you've talked about. Um, and it will be different from the people who were there on the day. So, um, but there are some things that you can say. Yeah, I. I don't think it's all totally open and totally, um, you know, malleable and fluid. I don't subscribe to that. When was the book produced? My booklet? Um, might have been 1993 at that time. Was it easy [00:58:30] to self publish? Um, well, I did it on my credit card, so but, um, I had no problem finding someone who would print it. Um, I, uh, had assistance from Jenny Rankin in Auckland who, um, allowed me to use her photo shop, uh, to lay it out. And, uh, she laid it out, actually, and and worked with me on it. And she [00:59:00] designed, um, uh designed it. So, um, so So that was really good to be able to, you know, have that, um, assistance And really pleased for it as well. And, uh, and then I just found a place that would print it, and that's it to publish. It's quite easy. You just, um you put the little copyright sign on your work, and you get an ISBN. Number So, um, you just get one allocated, and then you print put that [00:59:30] in. So in that respect, it was not as hard as I thought it would be. It's helped by, um I think around that time, Uh, Kay Dunford, who was an English lecturer at Auckland University, um, was going around and trying to was running courses to encourage, um, writing, uh, by people and to self publish. And I remember her saying how easy it was to actually self publish. And, um, so things like that help me, um, and people, women like that help me, [01:00:00] um, to to just do it. And how was it received in the community? Um, people. It was, uh I found it really great because people said it was really great to have to have, um, a resource like that. So that was worth it to me. We haven't talked about, um, cultural considerations, and I'm coming to it from a very kind of, um you know, here I am white male. Um, and I'm wondering, do you have any tips [01:00:30] or guidance in terms of researching other cultures? Well, we come to other cultures from our own culture. And so we've got the overlay. And in this country, we've got the overlay of our colonial past as well and our responsibilities there. Um and, uh, I truly think that, um each culture how whether it's defined by race or by, um, our sexuality or whatever, We, [01:01:00] um we do our own histories. Um, if someone else does our history, they come from the angle and it's a different. It will always be a different angle. So I will have a white female, um, Croatian background, um, view of, um, Maori history. And, uh, I can only come at it from that angle. Um, I? I might have a opinion, um, or a [01:01:30] stance on it. Um, but that's not the same as, um, um, Maori women doing their own history or Maori men doing their own histories histories, I should say, um, so, yeah, I think we can, um we just need to acknowledge, um, where we're coming from and therefore what our limitations are and what our angles will be. So one example I'm thinking of is on the Pride NZ website, where we've got [01:02:00] youth talking to youth and listening and getting really good responses. Now, if I was to try and interview, uh, somebody youthful. Um, I would get completely different responses. And I'm just wondering, have you have you encountered that same thing in terms of the kind of the queer or gender context? Um, well, what comes to mind is, um I am not transgender. And, um, I started my research on [01:02:30] the person I'm researching, uh, from a point of view, with a lesbian and or could they be seen to be lesbian? Or how do you interpret that life, You know, their life. And so a transgender historian will look at the case and see it in a different light. And I can't see that because I haven't had that experience. I might be able to imagine what it might be like, but I can't say that. Oh, yeah, I understand that. So I think, Yeah, that's something [01:03:00] I've sort of grappled with a bit. Um, I think, uh, you can only speak for yourself in your own experience, and, um, bring that to what? You You know, as I said, bring that to what you're looking at and acknowledge it, and therefore people can then make judgments on what you've said. They can say, Oh, well, he's older and interviewing a 1915 year old. So, [01:03:30] um, perhaps he's missed some things about what? The 15 year olds? You know what it is to be a 15 year old at this point in time. So if you were another 15 year old, you might have asked different questions, or you might, um, focus on different things. So, yeah, I think you know, as I said, we are. We're always working within constraints. And, you know, the constraints of our own lives basically, and our own experience and background knowledge. So, yeah, it will be different. So before [01:04:00] doing kind of any kind of research, Are you saying that you really do need to know your own where you stand, who you are? I think so. Yeah, definitely. Definitely. Because how can you know where you're treating you? You don't know what you're you're cheating on E. Even then we probably don't know. But, um, at least we've got a, you know, a start. Yeah. So, um, we can look at, um, say colonial [01:04:30] past from the angle of a white who's living in this country and say something about it, and that's the angle you're coming from. But if I did that, I wouldn't be coming from it from the point of view of, say, a Maori woman with an ancestry that goes back to confiscated lands or murdered relatives or, [01:05:00] um, you know, uh, some other kind of oppression and theft. And so, if II, I would have, you know, a different kind of attitude. Um, so that's not my experience. Um, in this country, I've got a different experience. So it's got to be different in terms of what I write, isn't it? So you have to acknowledge it. So I think yes, of course. We have to know [01:05:30] as much as we can, you know, about, um, we we've come to them and why we're doing it as well. Why are we doing the research that we're doing? Do you have any ideas for how to protect queer histories so they're not lost so that it's easier for somebody to find in future? Well, I think, um, digitization is one thing. So we've got access to the Internet, and, um, putting stuff on [01:06:00] Internet is really excellent, I think, um, because then it's available worldwide, and it's harder to get rid of, um, you can burn a collection. It's harder to get rid of, um, you know, something that lives on multiple servers across the world. So, um, I think that's one thing, And and I think, um, the other thing is just pro produce more. Um, um, proliferation proliferate channels, [01:06:30] um, works across all media across all kinds of the art. Um, t-shirts, uh, in in the past, people made you know, their T shirts with little slogans on them. Um, that, to me is part of history. Um, I'm thinking of, uh, this is a random association, but, um, in the Auckland Museum, I think there are Tongan war war clubs. And on those clubs are depicted events, um, that relate [01:07:00] to events, um, in, um, Captain Cook's journals. Um, so they can be verified or, you know, double Cross checked. Um, So you can see history in all sorts of artefacts in our buttons in our T shirts. And, um, our costumes, uh, and some of the artefacts that they are in leg ends, um, photograph albums with annotations, um, [01:07:30] little boxes made to depict, uh, certain things. Um And, um uh, so So I'm saying um, a proliferation of forms. Um, music, um, you know, a written book, which is a formal kind of history, Um, or a little booklet or, um, pictures, photographs, um, all sorts, um, that we proliferate and that we encourage more people to do more. Um, more research [01:08:00] and more writing and more productions, films, documentary, um, TV movie, all all kinds of stuff. Um, so the more we do, the more there is. Um and I think behind that, all of those things could be taken away as well. Um, so if we look at, like, the book burnings and Nazi Germany where they tried to get rid of all that, um, you know, wonderful material. Um uh, that, uh, underneath it all is a strong [01:08:30] and, um self-aware community or communities that, um, keep on going. So the more that we can say it's OK to be lesbian, it's OK to be gay. It's OK to be transgender. It's OK to um So we're queer. It's OK. And we will keep on doing it, and we'll keep on being it. Um, I think that's the underpinning of everything else. I guess. One of the things with, [01:09:00] for example, photographs is not only to have the photographs, but actually have them annotated with who's in them. I know. Do. Do you find that quite frustrating if you're looking back and you just seeing who are these people? You know, I look back at my own family photographs. And who are these people? So, Yes, it is. It is frustrating this. There's lots of photographs of people from, you know, like early settlers. And there's just photographs of them. You think Who is that [01:09:30] person? But there's nothing you can't tell. So yes. Yeah. And and I'm one of the, um um criminals who hasn't annotated photographs. Well, the thing that gets me about, um, some of those older photographs, especially things like, um, part of the Robert Gang Collection from from Masterton, where you've got people posing very close together and trying to work out the relationships between these people. You know, you look at the cover of mates and lovers. Yeah. [01:10:00] So, um yeah, two men sitting, you know, were quite close. So in one context, this is just a picture of two men in another context with queer eyes. Oh, perhaps there's something going on there. Can we talk for a minute about the, um the whole digitization of records. I think on the one hand, that gives us great, um, more easier access to information. [01:10:30] Um, at the same time, um, we could be limited by, um, you know how we're searching or how we're interacting with those records. You need to know what to search for. And, uh, sometimes it depends on how the records are stored and how you can access them, whether you need to use certain keywords or not. And therefore, you need to know what those keywords might be. Um, they may not be, um, keyword to the degree that we need for our purposes. Um, And so therefore, it might be harder, [01:11:00] in some respects to find the kinds of, um, information that would be of interest. Um, So I also, um, worry that, uh, in the digitization of, um, existing physical resources that those resources may be destroyed, or or, you know, they may be got rid of, because now people think Oh, they're digitised, so we don't need them anymore. Um, whereas I think, um, certainly for myself, it's quite exciting to see and to feel [01:11:30] the actual document with the actual signature that someone has actually touched or been, Um, you know, uh, been with, um And that you are now looking at that document that the person you're writing about or the people you're thinking about, um, that they were actually there. And, you know, with that piece of paper or that object, Um, and there's something different about it. I feel, um I think, um, the access that we have, the opportunities we [01:12:00] have with mass communications, uh, we should take advantage of, um and there are risks with it, But there's big advantages. So I guess one of the risks with, uh, the Internet and digitization is that if somebody searches on something and it doesn't come up in an online search, they might just assume that these things don't exist. Correct? Yeah, yeah, yeah. I think that's a risk. Um, and so I think we just have to, you know, be more aware and make people aware that it's not the It's not the only way. And, [01:12:30] um, we've got to look even harder. Um, and look at other other place. Look in other places as well. Some of the things we didn't mention before when we were talking about physical resources Where, um, things like cemetery records, um, medical records, perhaps. I think maybe we mentioned I don't know, but, um, you know, birth births, deaths and marriages. Um, those records, um, they all give indicators and they give contacts. Other associates, um, or the parent, the, [01:13:00] um, the person who signed the marriage register. Or, um And then from there, you can build a network and perhaps find someone living who is who can add more or who has, Um, some artefacts. Um, So, yeah, there's lots of, um, other avenues that can be explored as well, but we shouldn't think just because we've done a search and nothing comes up, but there's nothing. And do you think one of the benefits of actually, uh, going to an organisation and saying, Hey, can you digitise this record? [01:13:30] You're actually, uh, not only helping your own research, but I guess you're actually making sure that they are digitising queer related material. Yes, that's a good point. Um, I think that would be a very good thing to do. Yeah. Could you just bullet point a few things if you had to leave somebody with some, you know, bullet point ideas about, um, how to achieve success in researching queer topics. What? What would they be? Oh, boy. [01:14:00] Uh um How to achieve success? Well, it depends. On what? What is your What's your goal? So what What do you mean by your success? Um, if you wanted to, um, um, make say something written. Let's assume you're doing some written history or of some kind. Um well, I think the first thing is, get clear what it is that you get clear who you are. [01:14:30] Number one. And what's your perspective? Where are you coming from? What are your What do you think your blind spots are? As much as you can tell, At least know what your what your motivations are. And why are you doing it, then? Who are you doing it about or what are the people who are the people you are doing this about or what's the event and what's your interest in it? Why you're doing it And then, um, kind of brainstorm. What is it? Where could there be? Um, um, [01:15:00] either commentary or evidence that this happened and how it happened. Um uh, to think widely across all the kinds of sources. So, you know, some of the ones I mentioned, like official sources. Um, so there's government, um, the justice area defence area. Um, if that's relevant, um, new new local media, uh, international media. Um, these days, [01:15:30] um, you know, on the internet are their depictions are their video clips are there, uh, movies are their recordings of various natures. Um, uh, the personal records, personal artefacts, Um, about which you could make conclusions or from which you could draw a bigger picture. Um, and know that, um, no history is complete, and there are multiple histories of of, uh, you know, a single [01:16:00] event and different people have different views. Different angles. Um, you know, I, I think probably the best thing is self awareness. And then, um, thinking widely as to where you could find, um, an artefact of whatever kind, whether it be recording something written, something created. Um uh, you know, a piece of jewellery which had a certain meaning, for example, or, [01:16:30] uh, a a bystander, someone who was involved at the time, Um, someone who was involved near the time. Someone who's written something about the event. Um um, uh, creative works about the event novel. Um, poetry, email, Um, all sorts. So I guess thinking widely and then, um, trying to draw those things together, talking with lots of people about it as [01:17:00] well.
This page features computer generated text of the source audio. It may contain errors or omissions, so always listen back to the original media to confirm content.
Tags