The Session "Reflection in Oral History"(IV)

The capacity of oral history may not be available in other media

Maryam Rajabi
Translated by: Fazel Shirzad

2019-4-30

Note: According to Iranian oral history website, the first session titled "Reflection in Oral History" held at Dr. Parham Hall in National Library and Archives of Iran on Wednesday's evening, 27 February 2019. In the first part of the session, you read the words of Mohsen Kazemi, an oral history researcher and memoirs of Islamic Revolution, Mahmoud Sadat, a member of the faculty of Imam Khomeini's Research Center, and Gholamreza Azizi, director of the Institute of Iranian National Library and Documents, and in the second part, you read the words of Abolfazl Hassanabadi, Director of Documents and Press Center of Astan Quds Razavi and Davood Zameni, the deputy director of the cultural and artistic affairs of the general directorate of provinces’ affairs and art council, and in third part you read the words of Mohammad Reza Roozbehani, professor of Farhangian University, Mohammad Ghasemipour, director of the Office of Culture and Sustainability Studies of Art Center's, Provinces Affairs and Majid Tafreshi, scholar and documents researcher.

Oral history should not be distinguished from history

In following first gathering of session "Reflection in Oral History", Shafigheh Niknafs, head of the Oral History Department of the National Library and Archives of Iran, said about Mohsen Kazemi's notes about why the sound of oral history comes from everywhere:" "I think there are two points in this question. First, there is a critical and denial mood why the oral history sound comes from everywhere; it needs a sociological survey. There is a problem in our community that everyone wants to do oral history work. Nowadays everyone come and want to take training course in oral history. People who are not in the field of oral history come and show their interest.

I think that we have at least two very important developments in our history; the first was revolution that changed the social and economic foundations of society. In order to know what it was before the revolution, or some people tend to oral history to prove their nature and legitimacy. Oral history gives you an opportunity to speak and this capacity may not be available in any other media. The oral history of very good, and we should look at it psychologically partly. The second was war taken place in Iran, and the war itself had many problems and results. One is that those who are involved in the war want to tell us what we did for the war; they want to have a positive attitude; it is a matter of identity and proving it.  

But in the field of transition, and it is clear why oral history is in this model, and that is, there are many problems and some ones are not familiar with methods, because people who entered the field  of oral history were not historian. I have a general opinion that it is we should first separate oral works from oral history and think that it is a real history and we want to do historical research. If we know the methods of research in history, then we can provide a good oral history work. Oral history should not be distinguished from history. The problem is that we do not know the methods of historical research. I have asked question in lots of gathering who has read the story. Actually there are few people who have studied in history and who are familiar with historical research methods and know what first-hand and second-hand source is and how to access historical resources.

The second issue, that I think I can raise in this field, is that oral history was defined as a task in government or government-depended systems. There are many institutions in the field of sacred defense. I think that if it is a task for them to work on historiography, they should not do this task without knowledge. Of course, a sacred defense institution has several branches and each branch has several staffs; each of these staffs want to turn interviews and interviews into memories or oral histories; it become a common process, and we do not know the methods."

The Association of Iranian Oral History outcasts!

Then, Nusratullah Mahmudzadeh, the author of sacred defense, said: " those who are working everywhere, actually they are doing their duty, and we should blame ourselves because we pass our weakness on older and last historians. The name of this meeting put me in the silent passage of history, that is, the main feature of reflection is that it returns to narrator, and when someone's sound impacts on mountain, s/he is right to know it beautiful, but is the beauty all aspect of a narration? Although he a thunderbolt also impacts mountain, but it make a gap on it. When we were kids and went to bathroom we enjoyed our voice. We thought we had a fair voice, but it took time to understand that that sound reflection was no longer a deception. Now, we must be aware not to be beguiled by sound reflection. Because many experts have sworn on their expertise, they don’t give up to keep their science up-to-date. The knowers know experts aliens; they don’t say their heart's feelings. The third group also wants to record history in their favor, and you will do the same if you are in their position. So, do not criticize in them! This kind of hyetography is a rousing business.

You, oral history experts, need to think about yourself. It is need we go and visit Islamic Revolutionary museum and sacred defense museum; how many findings of oral history are properly designed in this museum? They believe that thinking is formed in the form of a conversation and where are the oral history thinkers? We should think in conversation to be beguiled. Why are we looking for cajolery in history? Why don’t we go for those who are silent? Where do we have our problem in? Why can't we talk about the silent people of revolution and war history? We stay outside and criticize; our professional knowledge has made us proud. We need to cross somewhere, and look at past a lot caused some problems I feel that we face a distortion in our history that have been made in Safavid and Qajar history. I'm worrying about this because there is no way but to get into understanding. You and I are members of organization and party called "Ertesha". We have been working on this party and association for some years, but we are not aware. The Ertesha is Association of Iranian Oral History outcasts. It has been edited in Qajar, and we are continuing to do it and we constantly complain and criticize. What's it to do with us how Harvard gain money? Association of Iranian Oral History only sees these sound reflection. Because they want oral history not to be worked; they deliberately rumble for public community to show that it works, and you should stop; you stop working in this field and you are only complaining."

In the following of first session titled "Reflection in Oral History", Ali Reza Kamari, author and researcher of sacred defense history and Literature, and the director of research center of Center for Studies and Research on Sustainable Culture and Literature, summed up the points raised at the meeting, also mentioned his views from these points. Kamari said that he is going to put forward his views on the issues at the meeting; he also emphasized that the most important and essential task of institutions that produce memories is to pay attention on difference between writing memory and memorigraphy and the distinction between these two in oral history. He added that this requires the acceptance and fortune of these institutions for a scientific and methodological critique of published books and an effort to produce and publish their "style sheets".

The Session "Reflection in Oral History"(I)/ A talk on the real voice of oral history

The Session "Reflection in Oral History"(II)/ The position of oral history in the world and Iran

The Session "Reflection in Oral History"(III)/ Let us take critique seriously and be vulnerable!