Abstract

Individual and institutional memories tend to form hegemonic narratives that serve to create identity and meaning. If history is written by experts and not by professional historians, historical retrospectives and narratives are usually written by leading figures in a particular field. They try to use their idea of exclusive knowledge about certain events, backgrounds and motivations to shape these narratives. In order to question such narratives, a critical analysis of scientific memory and its cultural significance is required. This article reflects on the methodological challenges of oral history projects in medicine, using a project on psychiatric reform in the Federal Republic of Germany as an example. In particular, the interviewees’ claim to interpretatively dominate the marginalised co-actors is examined.