Various Narrations and Interpretations in Oral History
Compiled by: Mahia Hafizi
Translated by: Fazel Shirzad
2024-10-30
In order to learn more about the problems and challenges of producing oral history works or memoirs, the oral history website has conducted conversations with some experts and activists in this field, which will be presented to the audience in the form of short notes.
In oral history, sometimes the memories of a person are narrated and the topic of discussion is that person; but sometimes, oral history expresses an event or a topic. In this regard, if the focus of oral history is on the "subject", the more narratives we have, the better and more accurate results will be obtained, and the more we will understand the essence of the case.
One of the main differences between oral history and written history is that in oral history, the spirit that governs the event is narrated. In other words, oral history expresses the spirit of the event rather than the body of the event. In oral history, the details of the issue are discussed, and everyone expresses these details from their own perspective. Observing the event from different angles may be due to the way people think about an event.
Some people, because they do not have a correct understanding of this matter, consider the difference of narrations as a defect for oral history. If it is used correctly, it is not only a defect, but it will be a good thing for oral history.
It is a bonus for oral history when the narratives are different but not contradictory. The words of different people about the same event are not necessarily contradictory but different. The beauty of oral history is this difference; but because they do not pay attention to this issue and the work is not done correctly, the good turns into a bad.
In this regard, the correct interpretation of the event is also important. The difference in people's accounts of an event may be due to the time difference in observing that event. The narration of the person who observed the event before its beginning until the end is different from the narration of the person who started observing the event from the middle of the event. The more the oral history researcher asks about the same subject from different people, the better the result will follow. However, if several people talk about a topic, it will be more difficult to compile it, but the result will be more accurate. The editor in oral history is to put together an event narrated from the perspective of different people. It is often said that the basis of oral history is the interview, and we neglect editing; If the wrong editing, it ruins the right interview.
As it was said, the difference between the narrations is different from the contradiction. The contradiction occurs when the narrators of the same event tell two conflicting stories from the same point of view. Here, it is the responsibility of the oral history researcher to determine the correct action and narration with different methods for verifying the narrations. Of course, it should be noted that verification is not always necessary and not always possible!
Number of Visits: 2246
Share
The latest
- Jasem Ghazbanpour's narration of the first day of the war in Khorramshahr
- Memoirs of Ali Fadaei
- The Relationship Between Oral History and Biography
- 100 Questions/48
- The Third Regiment: Memoirs of an Iraqi Prisoner of War - 48
- Seventh Theory: The evolutionary duality of document and narrative
- Memories of Davoud Molaei
- Preparing a report for Khorasan Radio and Television
Most visited
- Preparing a report for Khorasan Radio and Television
- The Third Regiment: Memoirs of an Iraqi Prisoner of War - 47
- 100 Questions/47
- The Third Regiment: Memoirs of an Iraqi Prisoner of War - 48
- Memories of Davoud Molaei
- Seventh Theory: The evolutionary duality of document and narrative
- 100 Questions/48
- The Relationship Between Oral History and Biography
100 Questions / 43
How can narrators and interviewers reach a common understanding?We asked several researchers and activists in the field of oral history to express their views on oral history questions. The names of each participant are listed at the beginning of their answers, and the text of all answers will be published on this portal by the end of the week.
Documentary Pathology of the US Embassy Documents
The Necessity of Scientific Rereading and Content Analysis of DocumentsMore than four decades have passed since the publication of the first collections of documents from the US Embassy in Tehran. However, despite the relatively easy access to this treasure trove of documents, systematic research exploitation of it has not been adequate. We still do not have a “comprehensive picture” of the content of these 11,000 documents.
100 Questions / 42
What is the importance of the narrator and interviewers shared understanding of the past in oral history?We asked several researchers and activists in the field of oral history to express their views on oral history questions. The names of each participant are listed at the beginning of their answers, and the text of all the answers will be published on this portal by the end of the week.
Validation: Challenges and Necessities
Where does truth stand in oral history? How can the correctness of a narrative be recognized? Does fact-checking matter? If there is exaggeration in the reporting of some accounts, how can it be detected? Is it possible to record an event accurately through the recording of a narrative? Readers and users of oral history works are often faced with these questions, and sometimes encounter doubts about some oral history works.
