Oral History Weekly and a look at 100 issues

The 100th issue of Iranian Oral History Weekly was published on 2nd of January 2013 with notes and articles by Alireza Kamari, Writer and Researcher; Saeed Alamian, Sacred Defense Writer and Journalist; Morteza Dehghan Nejad (PhD), associate professor of history, Isfahan University; Morteza Rasoulipour, Director of Oral History Department at Iranian Contemporary History Studies Institute; Abolfat’h Mo’men, Writer and Researcher; Ali Tatari (PhD), Director of Document Center of Islamic Consultative Assembly; Seyyed Abolfazl Razavi (PhD), Associate Professor of Khawrazmi University; Abolfazl Hassanabadi (PhD), Director of Documentation and Press Affairs of Astan-e Qods Razavi; Seyed Vali Hashemi, Head of Literature and Research Department of Art Center in Mazandaran Province; Seyedeh Mitra Hashemi, Scientific Editor of Kashan Culture Foundation;Three Short Notes from US, Argentina and UKand  and Polls Results.

Alireza Kamari emphasized that: “Right now, among the subjects and the goals of this weekly, the news section is more notable than other parts but there is an essential need for researching articles critiques and ideas exchange and particularly training or educational matters. However, there are some emotional literary ideas and texts that occasionally fill the place of historical researches!”

Abolfazl HassanAbadi belives: “…over 80 percent of your subjects and articles are about the war and revolution. You should explain why it is so.”

Morteza Dehghan Nezhad wrote: “To begin with, let me express my most sincere gratitude as a member of the academia toward organizers of this magnificent cause, in view of the fact that oral history gives all Iranians space for expression of their emotions, concerns and memories nowhere else they would be able to do so. The Oral History website and weekly give oral history activists freedom to act and transmit their findings to their interested audience without destroying forests (without using paper).”

Mortez Rasoulipour believes: “Provided that the outlook of oral history activities and their objectives are properly addressed in the weekly, publication of controversial issues and their juxtaposition would lead us to better results. Such an approach has been overlooked in the weekly since its establishment and interviews are ignored to some extent, leading to publication of monotonous content. One useful way to step out of this monotony and exerting more effect on readers is developing questionnaires and placing them online for the public to respond and asking scholars for their opinions about key topics of the field.”

Seyyed Abolfazl razavi wrote: “Now that the oral history weekly has published its issue 100, I seize the opportunity to first wish for the success of active colleagues in this area, and then call on the researchers and experts of history to provide the grounds for increasing such research references as this website especially the weekly by paying more attention to more essential issues in the area of history studies particularly what has contributed to restriction and institutionalization of oral history especially its historiography.”

Ali Tatari believed: “A need is felt for the managers of the site to reconsider their methods of activity at least in every 30 or 50 numbers, how the weekly is sent, its weak points, and …. I mean the site should be checked and problems found out. This can be done through dialogues or periodical meetings. Problems of any field should be found out. Even those centers on the first ratings have a look at their past occasionally and successful workshops have a monthly regular operation check too.”

Saeed Alamian said: “Then, he added “the place of scholarly criticism is empty; a two-way criticism, that is, a critic who dialogues with author about the published works or the works of another author. Even this can also be done for foreign works. This leads to the production of documents for the topics and the works.”

Abolfat’h Mo’men wrote: “In any new discussion and subject some theoretical basis, principles and rules should be defined and presented. The above mentioned weekly has not been so successful in this field, because new attitude to oral history, which sometimes memory writing, memory recording, memory unfolding, etc, are considered among them, gradually transforms into an industry with numerous custodians who just care about the numbers. This is a very serious defect for the live and intact source of oral history.”

Seyyedeh Mitra Hashemi wrote: “What is the most desirable to read for the writer about the journal content and is proceeding toward not only its republish but also the production of Persian content, is the materials that are translated from other languages and informs the Persian reader on the latest news on the field of oral history and the comments of the experts. I hope that in the future numbers the contents of this section would be followed more regularly and purposefully and be selected and translated with great care.”

Seyyed Vali Hashemi believes: “What matters and is important to know is that journal of Iranian Oral History has reached to its 100th issue. Although the journal has a long way for getting professional but it has taken positive steps forward till now.”

In the note received from US, Argentina and UK, Ronand J.  Grele, Former Director of Columbia University Oral History Research Office, Pablo Pozzi, Director of the Oral History Program, Universidad de Buenos Aires, and Siobhan Warrington, Editor of News from Abroad section of the OHS Journal wrote: “…I do think that you are providing me a very useful service in keeping me informed of oral history efforts in Iran; …Not only is it academically sound, but in contributes significantly to the exchange and knowledge within the academic community. In addition, it is important because it contributes to break the Western media censorship on Iran, its Revolution, its culture and people and its contributions to history;… I am impressed with the ongoing dedication to compiling and sharing your oral history newsletter. One several occasions I have found out about projects that I am interested in, that I didn't know about through any other means.”

The poll’s results showed that 51% of the readers evaluate the activity of Oral History Weekly “Good” and 46% of them believe the website and weekly have been able to get close to a professional media. 32% have liked the historical articles and 51% have considered the English page and excellent one and 44% believe the graphic design and colors used for the weekly and website are good.

You can read the articles in 100th issue here.