A Critical Look at Pioneers of the Valley of Light

Gholam-Reza Azizy, retired faculty member & oral history researcher
Translated by Kianoush Borzouei

2026-01-28

■ Pioneers of the Valley of Light: The Oral History of Veteran Combatant Mr. Fathollah Ghahreman
■ Interview and compilation: Maryam Ezzati
■ Editor: Najmeh Khadem-Zaban
■ Publisher: Mersad (affiliated with the General Directorate for the Preservation of the Works and Values of the Sacred Defense, Kermanshah Province), 128 pages
■ First edition: 2024–2025
■ Print run: 10,000 copies
■ Price: 150,000 tomans

In some cases, it has been observed that the introduction is among the least attended components of oral history books. If we understand the introduction as comprising the explanatory remarks of the compiler or interviewer (or any other individual), in which the process through which the book came into being is described, then an important question arises: what expectations should a reader have of the introduction to an oral history interview book published using a session-based method?^[1]

 

Thematic significance.
The first expectation concerns the reasoning behind the choice of subject—namely, why the topic of the book is considered significant. In particular, it is essential to address which themes are covered by the interviewer’s observations and what undiscovered or overlooked issues are revealed through their interpretation of events.

It should not be forgotten that such significance may also be examined from other perspectives. For instance, in cases where a historically entrenched misconception is corrected following the publication of an interview; where previously ambiguous information is clarified; or where established narratives are called into question. In this regard, it would even be appropriate for the introduction to specify which portions of the interview the interviewer regards as important or innovative. Did the interviewee address neglected issues in contemporary history? What was the interviewee’s standpoint, and why does it matter? And other similar considerations.

 

Methodology.
In addition, the compiler must provide information regarding the research methodology. Such information can broadly be discussed under two headings: the conduct of the interview and the method of compilation.

Conduct of the interview.The introduction should outline the “interview specifications.” In other words, it is necessary to state who conducted the interview.^[2] In this context, it is even preferable for the interviewer to be briefly introduced to the reader.

Subsequently, it should be clarified how many sessions the interviews comprised in total, where they were conducted, and how long they lasted. One might even go beyond these basics through individual initiative—for example, by describing the general condition of the interviewee at the time of the interviews.

Some interview-based books that have been organized, edited, and published according to the session-based method include certain core interview details in the opening footnotes of each chapter. For example:

“The first session of the oral history interview with Brigadier General Morteza Ghorbani was held at 11:00 a.m. on Sunday, July 19, 2009, at the Office of the Sacred Defense Museum located in Shahid Nazaran Garrison in Heshmatiyeh, Tehran. During this session, Mr. Morteza Taj, a fellow combatant of General Ghorbani, was also present.”

Why is it necessary to provide such details? These pieces of information must be stated in order to preserve the documentary validity and authenticity of the interview. It should be borne in mind that producers of oral history projects—since they are both the executors and the users of the interviews (whether for archival preservation or for book publication)—may be exposed to accusations of bias in the execution of such projects. Any ambiguity or obscurity can worsen this vulnerability.

 

Method of compilation.
Another matter that the compiler should explain in the introduction is the method chosen for editing and compiling the work. This becomes particularly important when, for whatever reason, the compiler has not remained faithful to the form, flow, or progression of the interview and has“intervened in the text.”

On the one hand, the lack of consensus among practitioners of oral history regarding editing practices and the extent to which interviews may be altered prior to publication, and on the other hand, the use of styles and methods bearing only relative similarities to one another, have rendered the compilation and editing of oral history–based works both challenging and somewhat heterogeneous.

The author of these lines has previously outlined four general modes of preparing oral history interviews for publication:

1. Documentary transcription: or the word-for-word presentation of the interview. This is the most basic (and in fact the most readily accessible) method of organizing and publishing oral history interviews. In this approach, the compiler, without any substantive excision or modification of the transcribed text, endeavors to publish the interview in a manner as close as possible to its original course—virtually verbatim, or with only minimal changes limited to punctuation and formal conventions.
2. Rewriting: In the second method, the compiler seeks to rewrite the interview while observing the chronological sequence of events.
3. Rearrangement: In the third method, although the compiler remains faithful to the interview text and its initial chronological divisions, thematic chapterization is also introduced as a secondary organizing principle. In this approach, the disruption of the chronological order of chapters is conceivable when it serves the purpose of presenting an issue comprehensively—from beginning to end—within a single chapter.
4. Re-creation: A fourth method has also been observed, in which the interview text is entirely reorganized and rewritten. This can itself be divided into two types: literary re-creation of the interview (influenced by memoir writing, fiction, or biography), and textual re-creation supplemented by historical sources. (It should be noted that in the second and third methods, depending on the extent of omissions—very limited, limited, or extensive—additional sub-classifications may also be proposed.)

When a compiler has drawn upon one of these four general methods (or other possible variants) in publishing an interview-based book, it is incumbent upon them to explain their chosen approach in the introduction. This allows the reader to become aware of the extent and nature of the alterations made to the interview and, in effect, helps to safeguard its authenticity.

In addition to the foregoing, other supplementary information may also be appended to the text, which in formal terms might be categorized as part of the preface. Such elements include an explanation of the structure of the work, the difficulties encountered by the interviewer during the process of compiling the book, and expressions of gratitude to those who accompanied or collaborated with the compiler along the way.

■

Having briefly discussed the principles of introduction writing in oral history interview books, it is now appropriate to return to an examination of Pioneers of the Valley of Light: The Oral History of Veteran Combatant Mr. “Fathollah Ghahreman.” For the sake of analytical clarity, the book will be reviewed across three domains: content, methodology, and editing.

 

Content.
The first point worth noting is that, in the pre-publication cataloging data, the title of the book appears as Pioneers of the Valley of Light: The Oral History of Colonel Haj Agha Fathollah Ghahreman, which apparently was altered on the book cover at the final stages prior to publication.

In the view of the author of these lines, neither title seems entirely precise or fitting. Since the book is in fact a fragment of the larger or puzzle of the history of the Sacred Defense—elicited through a biographical oral history method from Mr. Ghahreman in the course of an active interview—it would appear that titles such as The Oral History of the Sacred Defense: An Interview with Veteran Combatant Fathollah Ghahreman, An Oral History Interview with Veteran Combatant Fathollah Ghahreman, or The Oral History of the Sacred Defense: The Narrative of Fathollah Ghahreman would be more accurate than the current title.

The book begins with a foreword and an author’s note, is organized into four chapters, and includes a number of photographs as appendices. The foreword consists of a text written by the interviewee. Following the foreword is a note by the interviewer and compiler, entitled “Author’s Note,” which effectively occupies the position of the introduction.

In this capacity, however, the “Author’s Note” is incomplete when measured against the criteria previously outlined for an introduction. For instance, the “interview specifications” are not adequately or accurately presented. Although it is stated that “the first interview session was held in May–June 2023 at the office of the Foundation for the Preservation of Works in Kermanshah Province,” it remains unclear how many interview sessions were conducted in total; over what period of time and in which locations they took place; and whether any individuals other than the interviewer and interviewee were present during the sessions or exerted influence upon them in any way.

Moreover, the compiler provides no account of how they became acquainted with the interviewee, the rationale for selecting him as a subject, or the manner in which the project was designed and implemented. Ultimately, the method and process by which the transcribed interview text was edited have also not been clearly articulated.

Following the “Author’s Note,” the four chapters of the book commence. While the chapterization appears to be generally aligned with the text, the degree to which it corresponds to the actual flow and progression of the interviews remains unclear, in light of the aforementioned omissions.

The interviewer, in the opening question, asks the interviewee to “state your motivation for recording an oral history.” In response, the narrator describes his motivation as demonstrating “instances of divine assistance awarded to the combatants” (p. 13). However, this does not appear to fall within the realm of the supernatural or the divine in any rigorous sense—that is, within matters typically addressed by historical research grounded in documents, evidence, and sources. Moreover, aside from a few dreams and dream interpretations, and certain occurrences that in everyday life are commonly described as matters of chance or luck, it remains unclear what the respected interviewee precisely means by “divine assistance.”

Some portions of the narrative appear in a sequence that diverges from the logical flow of the text. For example, in Chapter Two, the issue of “redeployment to the front after marriage” is introduced with the statement: “Two or three days after the wedding, I returned to the front” (p. 40), even though up to that point the exact timing of the deployment to the front has not been specified. In fact, on page 59 reference is made to obtaining parental consent to go to the front, and on page 60 the date of the first deployment is mentioned.

When discussing schooling, we learn that the interviewee traveled from Kermanshah to Masjed Soleyman to pursue his education (p. 17). Some of the interviewer’s questions are leading—for instance: “Why did you choose an industrial high school?” (p. 20). At that stage, however, the interviewee has not yet stated whether enrollment in the industrial school was his own choice, the result of others’ guidance, or even due to paternal compulsion.

On page 41, the narrator refers to his father’s tenants, yet the text does not clarify whether, after selling the first house, the father purchased more than one property; or whether he owned a single house whose rooms were rented out to several tenants; or whether the mentioned tenants rented the house successively over time. This point—although minor—should not be left ambiguous if included in the text.

An excessive use of the expression “Hijri Shamsi” (after stating the month and year) is noticeable throughout the book, such as “Farvardin 1358 Hijri Shamsi” (pp. 26–27). In constructions like “Farvardin 1358” or “Shahrivar 1359,” it is already entirely clear that reference is being made to the Solar Hijri calendar. Especially given that no Gregorian dates are mentioned in the text, a single initial clarification that the dates follow the Solar Hijri calendar would suffice, as there is no real possibility of reader confusion thereafter.

On page 97, the 81st Armored Division is incorrectly identified as an organizational unit of FARAJA, rather than NEZAJA. The date of establishment of the Javanrud border market (p. 54) is not specified. The meaning of “round-the-clock gashte juleh” (p. 71) is unclear; it appears that “juleh” may have been mistakenly used instead of “jukheh” (squad).

The book concludes with the end of Operation Mersad, whereas a reader’s expectation of a “biographical oral history” would be that it extend up to the time of the interview itself.

 

Methodological considerations.
As noted earlier, no information is provided regarding the method of transcription and compilation of the interviews.

The book lacks an index.

Explanatory notes and clarifications are sporadic and lack references. Furthermore, the authorship of footnotes is not indicated. In some cases, the footnote text appears to be a continuation of the interviewee’s speech, but in other instances it is impossible to determine whether the clarification is an excerpt from the narrator’s words or an addition by the interviewer. It is also unclear on what principles the compiler based the decision to provide explanations for certain terms while neglecting others.

For example, numerous individuals are mentioned without any accompanying identification or explanation, such as Amir Noei (p. 42), Majid Zarei (p. 49), Ayat Sha‘bani, Mehdi Taqi-Khani (p. 50), and Ardeshir Handamini (p. 65). In some cases, even at their first appearance, individuals are referred to only by their surnames, such as Polaki and Karami-Rad (p. 27), Mr. Bayat (p. 28), Mr. Amiri and his friends (p. 49), and Mr. Sepehr (p. 50).

This lack of attention to clarification extends to geographical locations as well—for instance, the village of Fashi (or Fash?), Godin (p. 48), Nosud, Doab (p. 60), and Nowsheh (p. 64). At minimum, a single line of information could have situated these places for the reader.

Subjects and events have likewise not been spared from insufficient clarification. For example, when referring to Imam Khomeini’s directive^[3] to soldiers to “evacuate the barracks” (p. 24), the date and text of the Imam’s statement could have been provided in a footnote, particularly since shortly thereafter the interviewer themselves raises the question of whether the narrator left the barracks several days before the victory of the Islamic Revolution.

The term “tak” on page 64 is glossed as “final coordination after the start of the operation,” which does not appear to be accurate. In military terminology, tak means an attack; it refers to an offensive action carried out to accomplish an assigned mission. In other words, in military usage, tak denotes any decisive and rapid offensive operation that employs fire and maneuver to seize a specific objective.

 

Editorial considerations.
Despite the overall fluency of the text, the relatively sound editing, and the limited number of typographical and stylistic errors, certain issues become apparent during reading. For example:

– Failure to use proper spacing, such as be‘ellat (“because of,” p. 13) and darkol (“overall,” p. 15).
– Mimak misspelled as mi-mak (p. 71); emorat instead of omur (“affairs,” p. 88); akhlaqi va mazhab instead of akhlaqi va mazhabi (“ethical and religious,” p. 89).
– “Az zed-e enghelab alude shode bud” (“had been contaminated by counterrevolutionaries,” p. 38) instead of “be zed-e enghelab…”; “doshman baraye ashub kardan-e keshvar” (“the enemy to cause unrest in the country,” p. 26) instead of “baraye be ashub keshidan-e keshvar”; and “shab ghabl az amaliat man khab didam” (“the night before the operation I dreamed,” p. 66) instead of “khab dide budam” (“I had dreamed”).

The issues noted above, though minor in comparison to the considerable effort invested by the interviewer and especially the interviewee in producing this work, have been recorded here in the hope that, should a second edition be published, the formal and structural quality of the book may be further enhanced. That said, given the stated print run of 10,000 copies for the first edition, it does not appear likely that a second printing will be issued in the near future.

 

 
Number of Visits: 18

---

http://oral-history.ir/?page=post&id=13044

---