Advertisements
Advertisements
Question
Write a short essay (250-300 words) on the following:
Examine the strengths and limitations of oral history. How have oral-history techniques furthered our understanding of Partition?
Solution
Oral history techniques help historians to write experiences of people during the time of partition. In fact, history of partition has been reconstructed with the help of oral narratives. It is not possible to extract such kind of information from government records. Government would not provide such information which paint them in bad colour. It will also not tell about the daily development of the events during the partition. Moreover, Government was involved in negotiation. Documents of government deal with policy matters and throw light on efforts of major political parties.
But the oral history tells the day to day account. It is told by the people who have actually gone through the trauma and pains of the partition.But the oral data is not free from limitations. Oral data lacks concrete details. It does not have the chronological order. Oral accounts are concerned with tangential issues and that small individual experiences are irrelevant to the unfolding of the larger canvas of history. In oral history people may not talk their personal aspects. They can hide even their fault or fault of their community as a whole. Many people may not remember all events. People tend to forget also. Accuracy of narration can also be questioned.
APPEARS IN
RELATED QUESTIONS
Which of the following is not one of the advantages of oral history?
Consider the following statements regarding the events of the National Movement.
- Oral testimonies serve as a better source of information than the official documents regarding the political aspects.
- Oral history has a wider scope to acquaint us with any historic or general event.
- Oral history gives wider access to the experiences of the people who have been considered as the common masses in history.
Which of the following statement (s) is/are correct?
Assertion (A): Oral data on Partition are not automatically or easily available.
Reason (R): The oral historian faces the daunting task of having to sift the “actual” experiences of Partition from a web of “constructed” memories.
In which of the following year the name 'Pakistan' was coined?
Read the following source carefully and answer the questions that follow:
|
“The British element is gone, but they have left the mischief behind”. Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel said: It is no use saying that we ask for separate electorates, because it is good for us. We have heard it long enough. We have heard it for years, and as a result of this agitation we are now a separate nation … Can you show me one free country where there are separate electorates? If so, I shall be prepared to accept it. But in this unfortunate country if this separate electorate is going to be persisted in, even after the division of the country, woe betide the country; it is not worth living in. Therefore, I say, it is not for my good alone, it is for your own good that I say it, forget the past. One day, we may be united … The British element is gone, but they have left the mischief behind. We do not want to perpetuate that mischief. (Hear, hear). When the British introduced this element, they had not expected that they will have to go so soon. They wanted it for their easy administration. That is all right. But they have left the legacy behind. Are we to get out of it or not? |
- ‘They have left a legacy behind “who is referred as’ They’ in this statement.
- What do you infer from the statement ‘they have left the legacy behind Are we to get out of it or not?
- Identify the ultimate message stressed by Sardar Valla Bhai Patel in his speech.
