What Does the Oral History Method Effect on "Changing the Narrative" of War?

Mohammad Doroudian
Translated by: Zahra Hosseinian

2021-6-29


The present remark is written on the assumption that the narrative of the Iran-Iraq war is changing. As it is obvious, written history also has an effect on changing the narrative of war according to the mentioned premise, but the subject of study is the effect of the oral history method will be mentioned in the following. Based on the above assumption, the question is: What does the use of the oral history method effect on changing the narrative of war? To answer this question, the rationale behind changing the narrative of war will be explained by emphasizing the impact of oral history.

The subject of the narrative of the war is the events, because the theme of the narrative is the events which forms the outline of its beginning, continuation and end. Historical events are studied in research works based on documents and using arguments, whereas in the oral history, events are narrated on the basis of historical memory, or written manuscripts; with the important difference that the narrator focuses her/his observations or role in the event and turns a blind eyes on other factors and actors; but, the historian use historical documents and data, aiming to research in order to reveal historical facts.

Since "oral narration" of events is a matter of expression and discourse, so tastes, intentions and dominant discourse play a crucial role in determining the trajectory of the narrative and the ups and downs, as well as drawing how it begins and ends. In such conditions, despite the passage of time, the narrator emphasizes issues and events which may not have received much attention at the time of the occurrence or its significance has not been understood and emphasized as it is now. As result, changing the discourse and in other words, dominant discourse plays a key role in reviewing historical narratives; and this is more visible in oral history than in written one. In written and documented history, previous narrations cannot be supplemented or revised without citing data and using argument, while in oral history, this is easily done because of "narrator-orientation".

This remark reveals the place of oral history in changing the narrative of war and the path of change in war narratives can be studied by reviewing the oral history of war.

June 02, 2021



 
Number of Visits: 4643


Comments

 
Full Name:
Email:
Comment:
 

Clarifying the Current Situation; Perspectives of the Oral History Website

The definition of a “journalist” and the profession of “journalism” is not limited to simply “gathering,” “editing,” and “publishing breaking news.” Such an approach aligns more with the work done in news agencies and news websites. But now, after years of working in the field of books for various news agencies, newspapers, and magazines, when I look back, I realize that producing and compiling content for ...

Oral History’s Deadlocks

Today, oral history is regarded as one of the research tools attracting the attention of contemporary historians and even interdisciplinary studies. Just as these sources can be trusted, the opposite is also true. Oral history researchers face challenges during their investigations that sometimes lead to dead-ends in analyzing events. Although some oral historians, after years of interviewing, do not consider oral history data alone as fully accepted, they strive to present ...
700 Issues, 15 Years of Narrative

A Statistical Glance at the Oral History Archive of Iran

The Oral History Weekly, an electronic periodical that commenced its regular publication in November 2010, now stands on the threshold of releasing its 700th issue. Published every Wednesday, the newsletter consolidates all content posted on the Oral History website over the preceding week and circulates it to more than 850 subscribers via email. This report—drawing upon statistical data from content published on ...