Good points, Peter & Kevin.   Isn't it also true that along with other types
of eye-witness evidence, oral history needs to be weighed as to it's value;
e.g. three different people witnessing an auto accident may report three
different versions of what happened.  The accident investigator looks for
other types of evidence to verify the truth.

By the way, I find it amusing --and a bit scary-- that so many people on
this list have read the same emails and interpreted them differently.  I
don't think anyone said oral tradition or oral history was without value.

--Tom



On Mon, Oct 6, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Peter J. Lysy <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> A distinction needs to be made between the way academics use the specific
> term oral history (a recorded interview with someone who participated in or
> witnessed something in his or her past) and more general terms like oral
> tradition, family history, or folklore (information passed verbally from
> generation to generation). Oral history is first hand information, oral
> tradition is second hand information. Someone being interviewed for an oral
> history might include oral tradition in what he or she says, but that does
> nothing to elevate the second hand information to eye-witness evidence.
>
> Peter Lysy
> Senior Archivist
> University of Notre Dame
>
> -----------------
>
> At 12:00 AM 10/5/2008, you wrote:
>
>> Date:    Sat, 4 Oct 2008 16:54:38 -0400
>> From:    [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: oral history
>>
>> =3E Oral history ain=27t worth the paper it is written on=2E
>> =3E =A0
>> =3E J=2E South
>>
>>
>> List members interested in seeing some of the ways oral history has been=
>>  and can continue to be helpful should examine some of the 100+ websites=
>>  with substantial oral history components recommended by the =22History =
>> Matters=22 crew at George Mason University=2E No historian would endorse=
>>  the blanket dismissal of oral history by J=2E South (above)=2E =
>>
>>
>> We all know that oral testimony and histories sometimes contain errors=2E=
>>  Like all other forms of evidence=2C they need to be scrutinized careful=
>> ly and=2C wherever possible=2C confirmed by other sources of information=
>> =2EThe fact that oral accounts can be mistaken hardly warrants the concl=
>> usion that all of them are worthless=2C or nearly so=2E
>>
>> See=3A http=3A//historymatters=2Egmu=2Eedu/search=2Ephp=3Ffunction=3Dfin=
>> d
>>
>> Doug Deal
>> History/SUNY Oswego
>>
>
> ______________________________________
> To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
> http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html
>

______________________________________
To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html