Experts Answer to Oral History Questions

100 Questions/ 34

To what extent are we allowed to use narrative techniques (however simple) in compiling an oral history text?

Translated by Mandana Karimi

2026-6-15

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. The goal of this project is to open new doors to an issue and promote scientific discussions in the field of oral history.

In this project, a question is asked every Saturday, and we ask experts to present their views in the form of a short text (about 100 words) by the end of the week. All answers will be published together so that the audience can compare and analyze the views.

The content is the opinions of the senders and does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Oral History website. Although the answers are supposed to be based on about 100 words, in order to be polite and not to leave the discussion incomplete, in some cases, answers longer than that are also accepted.

The experts are asked to submit their answers by Sunday night so that all answers can be published on Tuesday.

From the interweaving of these responses, using AI, we have arrived at theories about oral history that will be published in the near future.

Question 34

To what extent are we allowed to use narrative techniques (however simple) in compiling an oral history text?

***

Answers to question 34:

Gholamreza Azari Khakestar

Narrative writing in oral history means that the compiler describes and analyzes the narrative and writes down their mental imaginations. It seems that in works that are produced solely in the field of oral history, narrative writing is not very desirable; because the compiler feels responsible for loyalty to the original text and any tampering with the narrative is considered a kind of distortion in history. Therefore, in such works, due to the presentation of historical documents, less narrative writing is done. So, depending on the functions of oral history, narrative writing also differs. However, in works that are compiled on the basis and content of oral history in the form of stories and are not considered documentary works, the compiler does narrative writing; although such works do not have a place for reference from an academic point of view.

Hassan Beheshtipour

In oral history, the use of narrative techniques is not only permissible, but also necessary to increase the readability and attractiveness of the work; provided that it does not lead to a distortion of reality. The researcher can organize the memories in a coherent and chronological structure, eliminate repetitive or unimportant parts, reflect direct quotes while maintaining the narrator's tone and language, and provide concise and clear descriptions of people, time, and place based on the available evidence. Also, characterization should be based only on the narrator's own statements and experiences. Of course, some boundaries should not be violated: shifting or falsifying events, adding imaginary details, reconstructing conversations that are not documented, imposing story patterns that are incompatible with the narrative, and changing the narrator's voice. The basic principle is that narrative should not replace reality and only serve to make the memory clearer and more attractive.

Mohammad Mehdi Abdollahzade

It has been said: The goal of history is to achieve the truth. Publishing the transcript of an interview without editing in most cases defeats the purpose in some ways. Therefore, to maintain the authenticity of the text, it is necessary to observe several principles; any change made to the text must be in such a way that the reader hears the voice of the interviewee, so "observing the narrator's tone" is essential. Also, the text should not be altered to the extent that it is considered rewritten or literary reconstruction. Moving material to clarify and easily understand the text is permissible, but it should not be in such a way that it interferes with the expression of the truth. Explanation using footnotes is necessary to some extent, but it should not be inductive or to the extent that it marginalizes the text. And finally, the text should be edited in standard Persian with the minimum necessary changes, and in this case, it is also necessary to preserve the literature and spoken culture of the narrator.

Abolfat’h Mo’men

Editing is very important as a stage of converting oral history text into a book before publication. Scientific and methodical editing multiplies the value and credibility of the narrative, although some custodians and departments have specific goals and seek temporary audience attraction or mirage-like encouragement. Oral history, whether for archives or for publication, differs from memoirs and stories in terms of structure, content, and purpose; therefore, not every method can be used in narration and editing. Imagination is an added value in stories, but in oral history it is fatal and causes the truth to go astray, because oral history moves towards reality based on historical research and targeted questions. Reconstructing emotions around an event should not lead to fantasy and distance from the truth. In editing, we are not allowed to use any method, and if narrative is used to some extent, the text must not be marginalized, the editor's narration must not take the place of the narrator, loyalty to the text and terminology must be maintained, and the final product must be a historical and scientific text. The compilation of a style guide by scientific centers is useful, but the multiplicity of custodians and differences in purpose and method make the task difficult.

Jafar Golshan Roghani

If we accept that the interview text is a historical work and a written document obtained directly from one of the micro or macro actors of history, it seems that it is appropriate to present it without any interference so that the interested reader or researcher can benefit from its content with complete confidence and assurance. But apparently, in practice, this is not possible. First, due to the presence of non-professional and specifically non-historical (non-academic) interviewers and editors who do not fully understand and are not aware of the importance and validity of the integrity of historical texts. Second, due to the taste of the audience of oral history and memoirs, who prefer the attractiveness and readability of texts created from oral history to anything else.

Seyyed Mohammad Sadegh Feyz

I consider narrative to be the same as storytelling, and this is not the same as documentary, but using this method can sometimes change the monotony and boredom of the text in the void of subtle points that the narrator has avoided or does not express. It is not without its merits and demerits, but it should not change the direction of the narrative from reality to imagination and the reader should not doubt its essence and subtext in the middle of the reading. In addition, oral history texts are cited in historical sources and should not be mixed with fiction and imagination.

Shafigheh Niknafs

Any interference with the oral history text to enrich it or make it more interesting and effective will damage its authenticity. Narrative-making introduces the editor's personal taste, feelings, opinions, and judgment into the text. In this way, the meaning intended by the interviewee changes. Also, meaningful features are changed or removed. It should be understood that the interview is the interviewee's performance stage, and its text should be an unadulterated reflection of that stage. However, if the plan is to turn oral history narratives into fiction, the standard oral history interview text can be made available in the archive for researchers and historians to research and reference as a historical document.

Abolfazl Hasssanabadi

Narrative in oral history means how to transform the narrator's speech into a coherent, readable, and meaningful narrative. Without the editor making any changes to the original recorded text while respecting the originality of the content. Although making the text readable and understandable is one of the editor's duties, it does not mean that they can make any changes to the content structure of the interview, such as the order of events or the narrator's lived experience. In summary, it should be said that narrative in oral history is necessary for reasons such as the dispersion and repetition of the content; but it must be done within a specific framework and in a defined standard format appropriate to the goals.

AI

In the compilation of oral history texts, the use of simple narrative techniques (such as linear plot[1], characterization, or setting of twists and turns) is permissible to the extent that it does not harm the authenticity and accuracy of the events. The main goal is to convey the lived experience of the narrator, not to tell a story. Narrative is possible provided that: the narrator is central, the chronological order is not subordinated, and any distortion or imagination is avoided. In other words, one can be innovative in the arrangement and attractive presentation of the material, but not in the content.