Your Status: Logged out Log in

Evaluate the arguments for and against oral history as an historical method.  

Member rating: 2 out of 10 stars (1 vote) | Words: | Submitted: Sun Dec 15 2002

Page Preview
Preview
Previous 1 of 3 Next

On the left is an image preview of every page of this document, and below are the first 150 words with formatting removed:

Evaluate the arguments for and against oral history as an historical method. In order to respond adequately to this topic you should (a) examine a number of arguments made for and against oral history, and (b) examine a work of history that makes substantial use of oral history. Some examples: ABC, Voices from a Vanishing Australia Bowden, Being Aboriginal Gilbert, Living Black Huggins, Auntie Rita Lowenstein, Weevils in the Flour Lowenstein and Loh, The Immigrants Tatz, Black Viewpoints York, Speaking of Us Oral history is commonly referred to as an unreliable source of information for historical use due to it's single minded approach, however when the term history is examined, discovering exactley who, how, and why 'history' is created, oral testimony seems as reliable as any source of historical evidence. Among the arguments for and against oral history, the most important issue is to remember the purpose of oral history. It is not to be taken as a...

Get instant access



  • Instant, unlimited access to our documents in full
  • Swap your work for free access, or pay £4.99
  • To see the full version of this document and 149,430 others
Register Now

 

User Reviews:

1 out of 5 stars Reviewed by: PinkVamp, 2007-10-13

"lots of spelling mistakes , made up words and bad grammar ! Surely students should use SPELL CHECK !!!"

Was this review helpful to you?