|
Dos and Don’ts in Writing Oral History
 |
Oral history is one of a new science resource in writing history by which become manifest in the begging of Islamic Revolution in Iran. But, oral history by its own definition is a categorical research that pays to gathering and keeping historical data derived by personal private and social group experiences regarding with gaining the benefit from the technical and special tools.
These historical data have derived through a specific and an accepted cultural-bed and also through interaction and adaption between the interviewee and the queried interviewer. There should be mentioned that the role of dynamic interviewer is so more effective condignly in guiding and stating the clarified recollections. However, there should be a design before posing questions based on research subject or main pilot topic depend on one’s recollection.
Naturally, it should not be forgotten that recollections of a person or a group are so unique and each person or each group tells the story by his/her own remembrance. However, the interviewer should keep his/her own situation and possibility to make a successful interview, nevertheless there have to bear in mind the writer’s role in gathering data by making interviews.
Now, it should be considered that writer who plays the role as a historian, should be pay attention to what the necessaries and avoid to what the possibilities, and also consider to what tools and measures are applying in writing the work in particular when one as a writer is not an interviewer or a collector of oral history data, because his/her work will be twofold, especially when the interviewer is not predominate on the subject of interview. On the other hand, it might the interview be under mischief and issues such as interviewee’s expediency, forgetfulness and self-centeredness etc. which make the writing difficult.
Additionally, if there were not being considered such issues and problems, so oral history writing could move to writing chorology. In such case, writer should be review the history and make critic in all levels of work. S/he should differentiate the gathering data which have said or heard and also review one’s recollection stated.
In the other hand, it might be needed to get done the interview once more or sort out a completive one to evaluate and accomplish the main subject from narrative to reason and critic for making documentary, in addition, to apply it as an authentic source for future. Therefore, there could be posed some questions as follow to express the real role, situation and writing task in oral history:
1- Which issue and mischief will be faced with a writer in oral history?
2- What measures and tools in oral history are that a writer should be benefit from?
3- In the levels of work in oral history, is it the writer who make interview and collect the completive data or there is the historian who records the steps of chronicles writing?
4- What is the situation of interviewer’s role and sensation beside writer in steps of writing the work in oral history?
To reply the above questions, there could be providing a number of debates as the following framework:
A. Writing aim and the approach toward outputs,
B. Discriminating the interview mischief regarding with writing approach,
C. Writing measures and tools in oral history,
D. Organizing the situation of documents and photos to completing the stated recollections and making the rate of its documentation and certification.
It is hoped to bring the light in the path through considering the mentioned subject and oral history output either in the case study or in the general via replying the posed questions.
By : Abdolfattâh Mo′men
Translated by : Farah Jafarkhan (Adipen)
Source: faramarzi.blogfa.com
|
