بازنمایی نیروهای قدرت در ادبیات نمایشی دهۀ 1340: مطالعۀ موردی نمایشنامه‌ها‏ی «آی بی‌کلاه، آی ‌باکلاه» و «دیکته»

Analyzing and investigating the dramatic contexts considering the effective conditions under which they have been formed provide a better vision and a more accurate attitude towards the interior atmosphere of drama. Definitely, significant factors play roles in creating a drama ranging from the lexical-linguistic elements to the social-political conditions, particularly the power relations and the effectiveness of the dominant ideology on the author’s mentality. How to represent the forces of power is an issue which has been dealt with the researchers in various fields, in particular, in critical discourse analysis. This study aims to investigate the representation in the works of one of the most well-known Iranian authors as a sample of the left political discourse which has been dominant on the intellectuals after August 1941. From the works of this era, the plays “A-ye bi Kolah, A-ye ba Kolah” [Capital A, Small A] and “Dikteh” [Dictation] by Gholam-Hossein Sa'edi have been chosen since some of the most important concerns of Gholam-Hossein Sa'edi as an intellectual were notifying people of the present ignorance and superstitions and also releasing them from the conspiracies of foreign colonialism and internal tyranny. Specifically, this paper tries to represent the forces of power and to determine the way of their confrontation by the use of the mentioned method. Upon adopting Fairclough’s approach to critical discourse analysis, it was revealed that in the literal-political field in Iran during the 1960s and 1970s, the element of power played a distinguished and important role in dominating a discourse among the present discourses. 
Extended Abstract
The analysis of dramatic texts through various methods, evaluating both their formal and content aspects, as well as studying the relationships between these texts and factors such as language, power, and ideology, is a matter worth attention. Certainly, in the creation of a play, several important factors play a role, from lexical and linguistic elements to socio-political conditions, especially the dynamics of power and the influence of the prevailing ideology on the writer’s mindset. Our lack of understanding of the factors that shape the prevailing ideology in a playwright’s thought, along with neglecting the dominant and opposing discourses of any given era, will prevent us from fully grasping the relationship between power and dominant discourses as we should. This study aims to examine how the forces of power are represented in the works of one of the most well-known Iranian writers, Gholamhossein Sa'edi, as a sample of the left-wing political discourse, which was the dominant political discourse among intellectuals after the 1953 coup.
The term 'discourse' has gained popularity in different fields of humanities, such as sociology and philosophy, as well as linguistics and social sciences. The definition provided by Michel Foucault on discourse is that: "A general and broad range of all statements can be considered discourse." This means that all writings or statements that are meaningful and have an effect on the real world around them are considered discourse. Foucault sees the concept of power not merely as belonging to a specific group or individuals but as something embedded within social practices, a generative network that flows throughout society. In fact, power is considered both responsible for creating the social world around us and for shaping it in particular ways.
Among the works from the 1960s, the plays “Dictation” and “Capital A, Small A” by Gholamhossein Sa'edi were selected. This is because one of Sa'edi’s main concerns, as an intellectual, was to awaken the public to the ignorance and superstition prevalent in society and to free them from the yoke of internal dictatorship and foreign colonialism. If we leave aside other Iranian playwrights from that period and focus on the trio of Beyzaie, Radi, and Sa'edi, we will see that the flourishing of their works began in the 1960s, which is also true for Sa'edi. Although, from the perspective of press freedom and party activities, this decade faced more restrictions than the 1940s. It was also a time when culture and literature were flourishing. During this time, the groundwork for growth had been established in the previous decades, and various trials and errors had been conducted on it, leading to a qualitative and quantitative rise in novel writing and literary criticism.
At the beginning of the 1960s, the Shah, through the White Revolution, aimed to prevent a revolution from below and considered the implementation of some reforms as mandatory under the name "The King and People’s Revolution." It is in this political turmoil that a protesting intellectual like Gholamhossein Sa'edi, having reached the limit of endurance in this volatile situation, produced some of his most influential narrative and dramatic works, just like many other writers of that era. Sa'edi's writings are not focused on analyzing the current class system in terms of economics and finance, but rather on protesting against domination and exploitation, The lack of awareness is manifested in the unequal distribution of opportunities and the deep penetration of power into every layer of society, particularly in the intellectual realm.
It should be noted that discourse analysis is not a single, unified approach, but rather a collection of interdisciplinary approaches through which extensive studies and research can be conducted in various social fields. Critical discourse analysis examines the power behind words, addressing issues such as inequality, social problems, domination, and global concerns. The relationships between different discourses are one of the components of relationships between different individuals. These discourses may complement one another, compete with each other, dominate others, or exhibit similar dynamics.
In explaining Fairclough’s method, it must be pointed out that he initially examines the identified texts from the perspective of grammatical rules, lexical choices, and linguistic features, and then, by identifying the discourses observed in the text, studies their connection with historical, sociological, social, power-related factors, and so on. This study, using Fairclough’s components—such as semantic relations, the mechanisms of metaphor and irony, attention to experiential and relational values—will demonstrate how the dominant discourses in the underlying dialogues of the play affect the world of the text and how they organize power relations. These factors not only influence the world of the text, but also open a new window for us to better understand the intellectual space of Gholamhossein Sa'edi.
Experiential value provides a trace or clue about the way the text producer’s experience of the natural or social world is represented. Experiential value deals with content, knowledge, and beliefs. Specifically, the objective of this research is to represent the forces of power and determine their interaction through the aforementioned method. The results from the analysis of the works, within the framework of Fairclough's critical discourse analysis approach, reveal that in the literary-political space of 1960s Iran, the element of power plays an important and prominent role in dominating a discourse among the present discourses.