"Interview for interview" is not authentic
Hamid Ghazvini
Translated by: Fazel Shirzad
2019-1-29
The development of mass media and the rise of what is called public literacy has led everyone to tend towards writing. It's not important for writers to know whether someone reads their writings or not; they are satisfied with opportunity and possibility to express their insights and individuality.
Along with the large amount of writings, there are also lots of interviews. These days, the 40th anniversary of the Islamic Revolution and the 30th anniversary of the end of sacred defense, Sometimes, because of the anniversary of these two important historical events, and sometimes with the claim of answering some doubts and questions in the context of society, we are encountered with the publications in the field of oral history or reminiscence that there are no new points and contents from the beginning to the end of it; they are like a promotional and topical works.
Sometimes a book or magazine (written or cyber one), with its headlines and attractive titles, is kind of oratory and play with words. Indeed, these writings try to show themselves in a good way, but in reality they are not. It seems that its purpose is simply to increase production statistics.
Because hearsay is an independent and clear narration from the different people in a single subject, which, despite some differences, can have a large overlap. While some interviews are basically not an independent narrative, nor a truth finder. Indeed, why should a readers in such case receive a low value and worthless things?
"What is the benefit of interviewing with so-and-so?" A while ago, I asked to a respectable colleague. "This person is a prominent figure; Interviewing with him is important in itself, it's enough for us that he accepted to be interviewed!" He replied with a proudly look.
That is, some people consider the interview to be authentic on their own, and such interviews are kind of "interview for interview", just as a group believes in "art for art". The art is a great and supreme issue and is authentic, whereas the interview does not have such a position. If there is authentic for Interviews, it is a methodological one. That is, because it is a method for discovering the truth, it can be authentic, and it is for this reason that the interview and its authentic should be considered in the methodology of research.
Number of Visits: 5675
Share
The latest
- Family History; A Legacy for Future Generations
- Oral History News for August 23rd – September 22nd 2026
- Report of the Third Meeting of the Specialized Roundtable on Oral History of the Country
- 100 Questions/50
- The Third Regiment: Memoirs of an Iraqi Prisoner of War - 50
- Narrative and the "War of Narratives" in the Era of Resistance and Imposed Wars
- Memories of Mohammad Boloori
- Call for Fundamental Questions in the Field of Oral History
Most visited
- The Third Regiment: Memoirs of an Iraqi Prisoner of War - 49
- 100 Questions/49
- Narrative and the "War of Narratives" in the Era of Resistance and Imposed Wars
- Call for Fundamental Questions in the Field of Oral History
- Memories of Mohammad Boloori
- The Third Regiment: Memoirs of an Iraqi Prisoner of War - 50
- Report of the Third Meeting of the Specialized Roundtable on Oral History of the Country
- 100 Questions/50
100 Questions / 43
How can narrators and interviewers reach a common understanding?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.
Documentary Pathology of the US Embassy Documents
The Necessity of Scientific Rereading and Content Analysis of DocumentsMore than four decades have passed since the publication of the first collections of documents from the US Embassy in Tehran. However, despite the relatively easy access to this treasure trove of documents, systematic research exploitation of it has not been adequate. We still do not have a “comprehensive picture” of the content of these 11,000 documents.
100 Questions / 42
What is the importance of the narrator and interviewers shared understanding of the past in oral history?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 the answers will be published on this portal by the end of the week.
Validation: Challenges and Necessities
Where does truth stand in oral history? How can the correctness of a narrative be recognized? Does fact-checking matter? If there is exaggeration in the reporting of some accounts, how can it be detected? Is it possible to record an event accurately through the recording of a narrative? Readers and users of oral history works are often faced with these questions, and sometimes encounter doubts about some oral history works.
