The Politics of Publishing Oral Sources from the Mara Region, Tanzania

Abstract

The intense scholarly debate concerning the shift from orality to literacy has not often directly concerned African historians in spite of the fact that many work closely with oral sources. In the process of publishing a series of locally-written histories, I discovered that transforming oral tradition into written form is ultimately political. It raised a number of important ethical dilemmas for me as a scholar and brought to my attention the power relations inherent in these transactions. Oral knowledge and its transformation is not neutral or entirely benevolent. I found out that the change from an oral to a written knowledge base takes power out of the hands of community elders and puts it into the public domain, where literate men have the advantage and where community security may be vulnerable. As scholars we need to face our own involvement in these political processes, even if we cannot ultimately control them.

Who are the Luo? Oral tradition and disciplinary practices in anthropology and history

“…The longevity and salience of the 'Hamitic hypothesis' was noted, as was the use made of published ethnographies in Kenyan courts. Similarly, Shetler (2002) draws our attention to the recent spate of written 'tribal' histories in south central Tanzania that purport to tell the history of an 'ethnic' group. Shetler's account is a useful reminder of the pitfalls that confront academics, and his proposed solution is worth serious consideration.…”

The fourth and fifth generations of African scholars: A South African case study

“…Ingesting academic misrepresentations from their former supervisors completely is for them a way of attaining recognition and maintaining good reputations. As Mapaya (2012:131) Another inhibiting factor insofar as African scholarship is concerned is that the work of African academics has to go through white-owned publishing conduits to get published (Shetler 2013). The overwhelming majority of editors in journals and publishing houses are white scholars who generally espouse and/or are inclined to support a certain set of ideologies.…”

3. From Restitution to Redistribution of Ewe Heritage: Challenges and Prospects

“…The oral traditions that I collected are considered communal property, but knowledge of those traditions is controlled by the male elders and given out to those who should know. The knowledge is not their individual property and yet they choose when and how to share or to keep the knowledge secret (Shetler 2002). I specifically avoided and did not solicit information that the elders considered secret and sensitive material.…”