The Place Of Orality In Our History

In the summer of 2007, I took a trip back to my homeland of Syria. It was my first trip back in twenty years almost to the date. Although I had ambitions of site seeing and visiting various regions and neighboring countries, I found myself, except for a couple trips to Damascus, staying in my town of Daraa and absorbing all I can from its rich history and its people as well as my family. My grandfather, who I got to really know, told me some stories that dated back to the 1930's, through World War II, post war Syria, the Arab/Israeli conflict, and other accounts of everyday life and how it changed throughout the decades. It was truly a remarkable experience and what was even more remarkable is the way he told me the stories. He told them with such enthusiasm and attention that even the most minute detail was not even missed. I felt that I was in the middle of a history lesson. Better yet, some of his accounts contradicted some of the things I have learned in history books.

What does all this have to do with anything?

Two things. One, history is written by those who have something to gain by depicting it their way and is completely biased. And second, the importance of orality and oral culture is as vital in understanding our past as any written document or text.

In their essays, Robert Darton and Lawrence W. Levine, give an insight into the lives of French peasants and North American slaves by studying their respective oral cultures. The tales examined by Darton and Levine are not quite the same type of stories or accounts my grandfather shared with me. The two essays dealt more with folk tales that depicted everyday life, the construction of the world, and ways of coping with it. Darton refers to the "staying power" of such tales asserting that, "folktales are historical documents. They have evolved over many centuries and have taken different turns in different cultural traditions." Any attempt to dismiss the value these tales as insignificant in historical value takes away from the historical significance of those oppressed. Although history is written by those who have means and power to write it, a history that does not include the story of all people everywhere is not a complete history.

On one level or another, I think it's easier to view history as a written record. Therefore, oral traditions and oral cultures can be dismissed as primitive and inarticulate simply because they are not written down. Even though the tales are subject to modification and changes as they are transferred from culture to culture throughout centuries, the main idea is still there. And that idea is that there was a struggle for survival amongst those who told and retold the tales. Telling these tales served as a coping mechanism as well as provided hope for a better life. Even more, these tales told of their story, and that is just as an important part of history as any.