A Reflection on the Relationship between Oral History and Art- 1

Compiled by: Hamid Qazvini
Translated by: Fazel Shirzad

2024-8-14

Oral history is a collection of words and sentences with a specific purpose, which must have thematic, literary and content discipline in order to meet the needs of the audience. What does such a phenomenon have to do with art? If there is a relationship, is it only in formal aspects or in the content as well?

Previously, in a note on this media base, the brief relationship between these two concepts was discussed; but this time, more details are taken into consideration.

To clarify the issue, one must first have a clear definition of art.

Usually, art is considered as a collection of works or processes that are formed to affect human emotions or to convey a specific concept and are associated with human initiative, capability, taste and taste in creating all kinds of beauty. Of course, the audience of the work of art is human and his character and understanding, which provides the basis for the production and growth of art and artist.

Now there are several questions:

 Does oral history affect the emotions of the addresses? Does it record and convey concepts? Is it related to the creativity, skills and tastes of the interviewer and editor? Is a interesting work produced in terms of appearance and content? To what extent does the appearance of oral history rely on aesthetic criteria? What should be the appearance of oral history works to impress and attract the audience? What characteristics should the narrative form of oral history have? To what extent is the writer's pen allowed to capture the text and literary and taste ups and downs? Does the way of reflecting the feelings of the narrator have anything to do with the talent and taste of the author and editor of the work? Does the variety of methods indicate the ability and talent of people? If so, to what extent can it be considered a work of art?

The answers to these questions can be considered as the beginning of drawing a picture of the relationship between oral history and art, which will be discussed in the following notes.

In the end, it is useful to remember this point; Oral history is not a food made of several different ingredients cooked on a stove with constant heat and able to satisfy all the hungry and have a common taste. Oral history is the product of human action and humans are different from each other. This is where their talents and art emerge. When the addressees holding a work says that it is hard to fall in love with it and says about another work, it did not attract me; the art of the creators of these two works has been tested.