*how far individual reflexivity and responsibility in a narration will crumble the prejudices of historical * *frameworks? *
Saleem, >From my experience/thinking there are at least three levels at which we should consider this question. 1. Sympathetic listening. [ Unlike malayalam news anchors] one should be ready to accept the narration as it is , reserving one's own critical opinions for future [public] articulations. memorising being reliving, such a political solidarity is inevitable , I suppose. 2. Transcribing. This is a process wherein three dimentional record is transformed into two dimentional one. all the contextual details are lost. The question, 'who writes' is crucial here.In Nalini's instance what was remarkable was the narrative structure she herself visualised and brought in her stories. She being a documentary director and writer, deserve to be treated as an author. 3. All the questions regarding ' historical frameworks' remain to be addressed even after that. My only point is that though being an oral narration, her story deserve to be assigned the stature of written accounts. That doesn't mean that it is free of problems about the veracity of memory, transparency, narrative structures etc .. Hope I have made it more confused! --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Green Youth Movement" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/greenyouth?hl=en-GB -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
