"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: 3578
The latest
Most visited
Attack on Halabcheh narrated
With wet saliva, we are having the lunch which that loving Isfahani man gave us from the back of his van when he said goodbye in the city entrance. Adaspolo [lentils with rice] with yoghurt! We were just started having it when the plane dives, we go down and shelter behind the runnel, and a few moments later, when the plane raises up, we also raise our heads, and while eating, we see the high sides ...The Arab People Committee
Another event that happened in Khuzestan Province and I followed up was the Arab People Committee. One day, we were informed that the Arabs had set up a committee special for themselves. At that time, I had less information about the Arab People , but knew well that dividing the people into Arab and non-Arab was a harmful measure.Kak-e Khak
The book “Kak-e Khak” is the narration of Mohammad Reza Ahmadi (Haj Habib), a commander in Kurdistan fronts. It has been published by Sarv-e Sorkh Publications in 500 copies in spring of 1400 (2022) and in 574 pages. Fatemeh Ghanbari has edited the book and the interview was conducted with the cooperation of Hossein Zahmatkesh.Is oral history the words of people who have not been seen?
Some are of the view that oral history is useful because it is the words of people who have not been seen. It is meant by people who have not been seen, those who have not had any title or position. If we look at oral history from this point of view, it will be objected why the oral memories of famous people such as revolutionary leaders or war commanders are compiled.
