Volume 14, Issue 55 (2021)
LCQ 2021, 14(55): 101-139 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
molooodi F. The Relationship of Mythical and Modern Iranian Story: A Philosophical Perspective. LCQ 2021; 14 (55) :101-139
URL: http://lcq.modares.ac.ir/article-29-49951-en.html
URL: http://lcq.modares.ac.ir/article-29-49951-en.html
professor of Persian language and literature, The research and development institute of Assistant humanities (samt) , f_molowdi@yahoo.com
Abstract: (1664 Views)
Abstract
In the present study, we have set out to depict the relationship of mythical and modern Iranian stories from the perspective of the philosophy of Art. Hegel, in his idealistic formation of the history of philosophy of Art, showed that in the primary stages of civilization, Art was the outcome of the connection of “absolute” and “essence.” As a result, Art has failed to show absolute unity with “absolute.” Along the same line, Heidegger and Lukács considered the distance between Art and “essence” as a sign of decline. Meanwhile, the members of the Frankfurt School, put forward new ideas in the Hegelian context of the time; they demonstrated that modern Art and literature, are moving away from reality and attempted to approach “essence,” “universal,” and “unity.” In modernist stories, employing myth is one way to establish a relationship between “unity” and “universal” and so we experience deformation and disintegration of the contemporary world, we witness a flashback, a mythical unity in the shape of formal avant-gardism. From the same perspective, Hedayat and Golshiri are main representatives of two fundamental breaks in modern Iranian stories from 1300 to 1357. Along with modern deformation of the contemporaneous forms, they included flashbacks and Iranian myths, in the form of transformation and deconstruction, in their stories. The results indicated that these two authors, in a dialectical fashion, depicted both the spirit of modernity and the need for historical rereading and representation.
Extended Abstract
Hegel's dissatisfaction with the art of his time reflects, on the one hand, the idealistic aspect of his philosophy and, on the other hand, its opposition to modern optimism. Hegel predicted that modernity leads to ultimate rationalization and the absolute soul will come to terms with itself. Although Hegel himself did not address this contradiction, his art theories led some of the twentieth-century thinkers to adopt newer formulations of the relationship between contemporary art and philosophy. The members of the "Frankfurt School" known as the advocates of "critical theory" have the most complex relation to Hegel's philosophy of art. Their literary and artistic views are on the one hand in a Hegelian tradition, and they were completely sympathetic to Hegel in that the mission of art is to discover essence, existence, and truth. However, they did not accept the impasse of modern art, and in a multifaceted effort sought to show in the works of art of their time the relation of critical modern art to genuine essence and consciousness. The Frankfurt School found that writers such as Joyce in the process of shaping the modern form, progressed dialectically. At the same time, inventing new fictional structures that disintegrated the modern world and the ever-changing world of the twentieth century, showed that the united and mythical world of the past has also been summoned in various ways in their modernist work. In the works of these authors, from the heart of the opposition of the modern and the absolute, and their apparent contradiction, a general unity is achieved, and through this unity it can be seen that the duality of form and content - which is the dominant basis of literary analysis, does not exist in the essence of art. This rereading of Hegel by the Frankfurters is one of their richest lesser-known achievements. If we look at the Persian modernist fiction from the perspective of the Frankfurt school and its relation to myth (from 1300 to 1357), we can say that Sadegh Hedayat and Houshang Golshiri are the main representatives of the two main breaks in Persian story.
The analysis of Hedayat's "Blind Owl" and Golshiri's "Innocents" revealed to us that these texts possess many of the brilliant aspects that the Frankfurters considered for modern art: the incoherence and disintegration of the modern in the form of the disintegration of the fiction form, the meaninglessness of the duality of form and content. Formal avant-garde and mythical recurrence, which are two opposing aspects, have been used simultaneously in the text, and from their contradiction, a dialectic has been formed that guarantees the general unity of the work. The representation of the unifying and mythical matter - regardless of its function - has created a "aura" for these texts and this aura has linked the text to a historical and mythical tradition and has summoned the spaces of the past to the present. The mythical nature of these texts has made them difficult, misunderstood, and obscure, and has led to the rebellion of the text against the simplification of the contemporary cultural industry. Rereading the past has helped critics of the present, and both are used to understand future possibilities. In the close connection between the past and the present, and the continuous and simultaneous rotation between the two, the originality of these texts and their openness has been realized. These texts constantly revolve around essences and absolutes that are beyond the reach of everyday reality and instrumental rationality. Pure moments are depicted in the text through which the reader can reach genuine ontological experiences.These texts escape easy access and have found a place in the discourse of the specificity of modernist texts. The combination of the above-mentioned aesthetic features - all of which derive from the dialectic of the forward and avant-garde form of movement, and its mythical backward movement - has enabled the two authors to make a connection between Iranian society and modernity. In other words, Hedayat and Golshiri are turning points that have shown the transformation of mythical foundations in contemporary Iranian society and have outlined the way we Iranians deal with these foundations. Rereading, rethinking and deconstructing these mythical foundations are the main features of the avant-garde of these two authors.
In the present study, we have set out to depict the relationship of mythical and modern Iranian stories from the perspective of the philosophy of Art. Hegel, in his idealistic formation of the history of philosophy of Art, showed that in the primary stages of civilization, Art was the outcome of the connection of “absolute” and “essence.” As a result, Art has failed to show absolute unity with “absolute.” Along the same line, Heidegger and Lukács considered the distance between Art and “essence” as a sign of decline. Meanwhile, the members of the Frankfurt School, put forward new ideas in the Hegelian context of the time; they demonstrated that modern Art and literature, are moving away from reality and attempted to approach “essence,” “universal,” and “unity.” In modernist stories, employing myth is one way to establish a relationship between “unity” and “universal” and so we experience deformation and disintegration of the contemporary world, we witness a flashback, a mythical unity in the shape of formal avant-gardism. From the same perspective, Hedayat and Golshiri are main representatives of two fundamental breaks in modern Iranian stories from 1300 to 1357. Along with modern deformation of the contemporaneous forms, they included flashbacks and Iranian myths, in the form of transformation and deconstruction, in their stories. The results indicated that these two authors, in a dialectical fashion, depicted both the spirit of modernity and the need for historical rereading and representation.
Extended Abstract
Hegel's dissatisfaction with the art of his time reflects, on the one hand, the idealistic aspect of his philosophy and, on the other hand, its opposition to modern optimism. Hegel predicted that modernity leads to ultimate rationalization and the absolute soul will come to terms with itself. Although Hegel himself did not address this contradiction, his art theories led some of the twentieth-century thinkers to adopt newer formulations of the relationship between contemporary art and philosophy. The members of the "Frankfurt School" known as the advocates of "critical theory" have the most complex relation to Hegel's philosophy of art. Their literary and artistic views are on the one hand in a Hegelian tradition, and they were completely sympathetic to Hegel in that the mission of art is to discover essence, existence, and truth. However, they did not accept the impasse of modern art, and in a multifaceted effort sought to show in the works of art of their time the relation of critical modern art to genuine essence and consciousness. The Frankfurt School found that writers such as Joyce in the process of shaping the modern form, progressed dialectically. At the same time, inventing new fictional structures that disintegrated the modern world and the ever-changing world of the twentieth century, showed that the united and mythical world of the past has also been summoned in various ways in their modernist work. In the works of these authors, from the heart of the opposition of the modern and the absolute, and their apparent contradiction, a general unity is achieved, and through this unity it can be seen that the duality of form and content - which is the dominant basis of literary analysis, does not exist in the essence of art. This rereading of Hegel by the Frankfurters is one of their richest lesser-known achievements. If we look at the Persian modernist fiction from the perspective of the Frankfurt school and its relation to myth (from 1300 to 1357), we can say that Sadegh Hedayat and Houshang Golshiri are the main representatives of the two main breaks in Persian story.
The analysis of Hedayat's "Blind Owl" and Golshiri's "Innocents" revealed to us that these texts possess many of the brilliant aspects that the Frankfurters considered for modern art: the incoherence and disintegration of the modern in the form of the disintegration of the fiction form, the meaninglessness of the duality of form and content. Formal avant-garde and mythical recurrence, which are two opposing aspects, have been used simultaneously in the text, and from their contradiction, a dialectic has been formed that guarantees the general unity of the work. The representation of the unifying and mythical matter - regardless of its function - has created a "aura" for these texts and this aura has linked the text to a historical and mythical tradition and has summoned the spaces of the past to the present. The mythical nature of these texts has made them difficult, misunderstood, and obscure, and has led to the rebellion of the text against the simplification of the contemporary cultural industry. Rereading the past has helped critics of the present, and both are used to understand future possibilities. In the close connection between the past and the present, and the continuous and simultaneous rotation between the two, the originality of these texts and their openness has been realized. These texts constantly revolve around essences and absolutes that are beyond the reach of everyday reality and instrumental rationality. Pure moments are depicted in the text through which the reader can reach genuine ontological experiences.These texts escape easy access and have found a place in the discourse of the specificity of modernist texts. The combination of the above-mentioned aesthetic features - all of which derive from the dialectic of the forward and avant-garde form of movement, and its mythical backward movement - has enabled the two authors to make a connection between Iranian society and modernity. In other words, Hedayat and Golshiri are turning points that have shown the transformation of mythical foundations in contemporary Iranian society and have outlined the way we Iranians deal with these foundations. Rereading, rethinking and deconstructing these mythical foundations are the main features of the avant-garde of these two authors.
Article Type: Original Research |
Subject:
Philosophy and Literature
Received: 2021/02/7 | Accepted: 2021/10/2 | Published: 2021/10/2
Received: 2021/02/7 | Accepted: 2021/10/2 | Published: 2021/10/2
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |