In recent decades, historians of Latin America have given increased attention to questions of memory, especially as it relates to recent (and ongoing) cases of armed conflict, political repression, and forced displacement. While memories of victims and perpetrators alike offer vital insight into historical events and historical reckonings, gathering and writing with both presents a challenge for historians at the methodological and personal level. This panel will discuss four examples of memory in the aftermath of violence in Latin America, as well as a discussion of how scholars can, and should, give full consideration of their own positionality in the research and writing of Latin American history. What is the role of the historian in seeking out and amplifying certain memories above others? What weight, if any, should be given to the recollections and views of perpetrators? Given that these research projects often rely on the goodwill of interviewees to share their deepest, and sometimes traumatic, memories, what are the various challenges and benefits to becoming close to one’s subject of research? How to write about the memories from individuals whose lives were shaped by violence and, in some cases, torture? What ethical and methodological considerations does the collection of oral histories under these circumstances present? As an exploration of positionality and authorial transparency, the papers in this session confront the role of historians themselves—is it time for scholars to discard the pretense of the third-person narrative and, even if just sparingly, to write themselves into their own narratives?