The third Annual Conference on Public Memory and Oral
History was organized on the 13th and 14th of November
2017 by the Oral History Association of India https://ohaindia.wordpress.com/ and the
Department of History, Gauhati University, Assam. This conference
was a significant gathering of esteemed historians, scholars, researchers and
students of history where there was free exchange of ideas as well as
discussions on various issues concerning oral history, its significance and the
challenges the discipline faces.
Oral history can be understood as “a method of conducting
historical research through recorded interviews between a narrator with
personal experience of historically significant events and a well-informed
interviewer, with the goal of adding to the historical record.” (Source: https://guides.library.ucsc.edu/oralhist).
The oral history association defines oral history as: “Oral history is a field
of study and a method of gathering, preserving and interpreting the voices and
memories of people, communities, and participants in past events.”
The practice of oral history is growing in India and its
role and importance increasing. The participation of delegates from across the
country reflected this at the conference. Inaugurating the conference, the Honorable
Vice Chancellor of Gauhati University, Dr. Mridul Hazarika, while elaborating
on the significance of oral history said, “oral history will take a central
position in history in the days to come. Oral history recognizes the role of
those people who appear to be least significant”. He also emphasized that the
privileged section of the society is a small component and it cannot write and
rewrite history without taking on board the underprivileged people’s history.
Similar sentiment was expressed in the presidential address
by Professor Meeta Deka, former head of the department of history, Guwahati
University and the President of OHAI.
She emphasized that “oral history is the repository of those not in
power”. She also pointed out that the history of ethnic communities across the
world is largely oral.
The founding member of OHAI and its ex-president Professor P
K Srivastava in his address at the conference said that, “history when started
was oral. Memory was history till the nineteenth century”. This fact has also
been highlighted in an article by Deshpande, Anirudh (2017) ‘Past, Present and
Oral History’ in Economic and Political Weekly, Vol LII No 29, pp 38-42. The
author states, “Till the 19th century, when the modern classroom and
the seminar emerged in European Universities, non-professional historians wrote
history”.
Further highlighting the significance of the discipline of
oral history, renowned oral historian Allessandro Portelli, also a professor of
Anglo-American literature at the University of Rome La Sapienza, narrated as
follows: “Oral history gains significance with the increasing mistrust of the
official history. Oral history is the history of the marginalized. Oral history
is respectful of people’s ability to speak, it respects the freedom of
expression, it is proud of people’s heritage and recognizes the ability of
people to be authors and creators”.
There were several interesting presentations by scholars who
have adopted the discipline of oral history to further their work, research and
to increase the knowledge of history. Their work showed that oral history not
only fills the gaps but brings in new knowledge and perspective to history. The power and the strength of oral history as
a discipline as well as its unique characteristics could be gauged from the following
presentations at the conference.
Professor Shiela Bora, senior historian who has taught at the
university of Gauhati and who has taught women’s history at Harvard University, talked of how little was known of Kanaklata Barua in spite
of being one of the youngest martyrs of the freedom movement of India.
Kanaklata fell to British bullets in the Quit India movement of 1942 while
trying to hoist the tricolor at Gohpur police station in Assam. Professor Bora
talked of almost complete absence of written documents or archives concerning
Kanaklata in spite of hers being a very brave and a unique struggle. She
narrated how it was the medium of oral history that allowed her to reconstruct
the account of Kanaklata’s courageous life in absence of other sources. This account is now published by National Book
Trust as part of its series on women pioneers of the country.
Similarly Professor Indira Chowdhury, senior and founding member of OHAI, presented her work of
oral history furthering the history of partition of India and Bangladesh.
Professor Chowdhury explained how oral history was important in the
reconstruction of not just the events but the impact of partition on
people and communities as there is very little known about this momentous event
in the country that impacted deeply the lives of large number of people.
Professor Fleur D’Souza who was the head of the department
of history, St. Xavier College, Mumbai, presented a paper titled ‘Oral History
as a pedagogical tool’. She narrated her own experience in getting students
interested in the subject of history through the use of oral history as a tool.
In different years, she selected different topics that were less explored and
encouraged students to increase their knowledge through oral history accounts
of the people. Some of the topics explored by her students included the history
of the Sindhi community in Mumbai, the forgotten history of the Mumbai riots
soon after the demolition of the Babri Masjid, etc. She also talked of the
responsibility of giving back to the community from where the oral source is
collected and the sense of responsibility that is generated among the students
towards the community through the discipline of oral history.
Besides this, there were several other papers that were
presented at the conference that highlighted oral history as an important tool
in the study of the past.
The presenters and the participants at the conference also
discussed the many concerns and challenges faced by oral history as a
discipline. One of the main concerns raised uniformly was that academic
historians in general disregard and do not recognize the method of oral history
as being professional, as having academic rigor and or as being reliable. In
fact, the founding member of OHAI, Professor P K Srivastava in his presentation
referred to history as ‘professional history’ as distinguished from ‘oral
history’. When asked as to why he makes this distinction he said, “This is
because historians do not consider oral history of significance”.
However Professor Deka stressed that “in the past few
decades public memory as a tool and a source has become very popular not only
in writing public history but also in the humanities, social sciences and the
term is used in disciplines like architecture, communication studies, gender
studies, English, history, philosophy, political science, religion and
sociology”.
The other issue that was discussed, although inconclusively
was about the need for standardizing the methodology of oral history particularly in the Indian context. Professor
Rena Laisram highlighted that although significant, “oral history methodology
has remained at the margins of social science research and one of the reasons
is the lack of a clear frame work”. Professor Rajib Handique presented a paper
on methodological issues of oral history and ways to institutionalize as well
as streamline oral history. But a consensus could not emerge about whether the
discipline of oral history requires institutionalizing a standard methodology and how.
Having worked in documenting the
oral history of the
struggle around the Sardar Sarovar Narmada Dam for the past ten years, I
feel
the need for both - to have some standardized approaches and practices
of oral
history, and at the same time maintain flexibility to cater to different
situations. Further, there is a need for developing oral history
practices and approaches
appropriate for the Indian context. Currently oral history has not been
duly recognized and given the professional status it deserves in India,
and this has
often led researchers, students and oral history scholars in India to
depend many times upon
the practices that have evolved and developed in the West.
For example in the west emphasis may be given to the quality of sound and it may
also be
recommended that the recording could be done in a studio. However in a
country
like India with its size and diversity, it may not always be possible
for an
oral historian to avail the facility of a studio while recording. Besides, ambient sound may be of significance
particularly in recording the history of certain communities. In my recordings
of the oral history of Adivasi leaders of the Narmada movement, which were done
in their own villages, the ambient sounds of farming operations, farm animals, chicken and hens,
etc. added a very different dimension.
 |
| Interview (Oral History) Recording of Shankerbhai Kagda, Senior Adivasi Leader of Narmada Bachao Andolan. Photo: Nandini Oza |
Some discussions were initiated at the conference to develop
a repository of the oral history that is being generated in the country, and this issue needs further thought and attention.
 |
| Senior Adivasi Leaders of Narmada Bachao Andolan listening to Oral History as Narrated by their own Community Leaders of the Struggle. Photo: Nandini Oza |
To conclude, the conference made a strong case for the
discipline of oral history to be given the place of importance and be recognized
as an important source of history. This is particularly true for a country like
India because otherwise Adivasi, Dalit, working class, women and the history of
the marginalized will remain incomplete.
End
