Showing posts with label مقاله. Show all posts
Showing posts with label مقاله. Show all posts

Tuesday, 2 March 2010

In the colour of Judas Tree


‘In the colour of Judas tree’ (به رنگ ارغوان) is in cinemas right now. It was banned for five years and now the intelligence service recognised the film as not dangerous. But it came to my mind why they’ve waited for so long and released the film after the disputed election which activities and protests very resembles the protests and acts in the film. After coming out of the cinema with the deadly headache I had, trying to think. I didn’t know to be happy or sad, angry or smoothed.

Synopsis:

Hamid Farokh nezhad is one of agents of intelligent service in the country. He disguises as a university student in a forested northern town. His mission is to follow Khazar Masoomi, his classmate, whose father was one of the activisits before the Islamic Revolution in Iran. Now the Islamic dictatorship wants to capture him. In the mean time, the aware and active students are protesting against deforestation of government to build a highway. So the anti-government protests are the background of the main story. Hamid Farokh Nezhad by his updated equipments is getting nearer to Khazar Masoomi and trying to get more information. But love plays its game in the mean time. Hamid Farokh Nejad falls in love with his victim. And I won’t tell you the rest. Go and watch the film. How was my trailer?



Analysis:

The similarity is not definitely intended. But it gives you a very bad feeling, that maybe the government is showing the film not because it’s a film but because it’s an anti-government film. Seeing the censor of truth in the governmental media is driving us crazy and showing reverse news make us want to hang ourselves. But showing a copy of the same story in the cinema makes us feel we are FOOLED. We don’t know to be happy to see a story quite like what has happened to us in the name of religion and consider it as one of the dissident acts that are publicised or to be sad to see what has happened by the regime is so well known and recognised that becomes something routine and usual.
But I think we should be angry because this is a fake dissidence. The film is showing a dissident action but what comes at the end: failure. And this dissidence is in the system. So, it’s not weakening the regime but strengthening it.

The Idea of Veil:
Another resemblance that I’ve found in the film is between the disguise of Hamid Farokh Nejad and the veil that women must put on in the Islamic dictatorship. The agent has two sides in the film. One is a very timid and stupid student who doesn’t care about politics or anything and doesn’t understand anything. The other is the agent itself who is very clever, very quick and very foxy. These sides completely contradict each other and shows how much being dishonest and two-sided is disgraceful. Veil of women has the same theory behind it. The bloody clergies say that women should be protected in veils in the society and at home they’re free to do whatever they like. They cover themselves in the streets and show another personality, another voice, another face(with hair on it) which contradicts their inner reallity. The women are really pushed to be immasculated because in veils they are meant to act like men.

Sunday, 6 December 2009

Does “Forgetting” have a Structure?


این مقاله یک نقد ساختار گرایی است که روی رمان "از یاد رفتن" نوشته ی محمد حسین محمدی اعمال شده است


Forgetting is a novel by Mohammed Hossein Mohammedi published in 2008 in Iran. The language is Farsi Dari that is one of the dialects of Farsi. The novel is based on one day of the protagonist’s life. Started from morning till night. And the date is also clear: 2001-09-13 (two days after 9/11). The chapters of the book indicate the exact hours. For example chapter 1: ‘A quarter to six in the morning.’(P. 7) This way we are confronted with the flow of time that is chronological. Also, in each point in the novel we are reminded about the time by looking at the sky. The point of view is omniscient third-person which focuses on Sayed Mirak Sha Agha. The protagonist –Sayed Mirak Sha Agha- is concretised for us by making everything documented, even his going to bathroom twice is fully described, once at ‘a quarter to six in the morning’(P. 13) and the other at ‘eighteen to six in the afternoon’(P. 76) in front of the dormitories of Balkh University. The narrator just describes about the deserted and destroyed university. It’s so empty that he can use it as a private toilet.

As Ferdinand de Saussure has put it for us, not even language but everything has a structure that is fabricated by signs and binary oppositions. The binary oppositions are abound in the novel. The most prominent one is present/past. Despite his forgetfulness he remembers the far past and always compares it to the present time. The narrator shows us the opposition of past and present situations. The glorious past of Afghanistan versus the war and destruction of presence. At ‘eleven to nine’ in the morning on his way to city he went to Anvar Kerachi Van’s house. He wanted Anvar to collect his wheat, take it to mill and bring back the flour for him.

“He is walking beside the half-destryed walls trying to walk in the shadow of the walls. But they have been so much demolished and shortened that there’s no shade to walk in. He must get to the fallen part of the wall to enter Haji Barat’s garden. He used to say garden. Even now that there aren’t any trees. Even there are no weed.” (P. 32)

Another opposition contributing to the meaning of the novel is awareness versus ignorance. The whole journey of the day was to aquire batteries for his radio in order to listen to VOA Persian and BBC Persian Service. He wanted to be aware of what has happened in the last two days when his radio was out of order. Lots of things has happened in the world, but he was in complete ignorance and happiness. Maybe you object to my word of happiness. Ok. Let’s change it. What about relaxation? He was in complete ignorance and relaxation. His awareness is ironic! Because he wants to know what’s happening in the world and especially in Afghanistan. Are Talibs moving away? Have they been killed by a god-sent-angel. But he just serves as an inactive character in the scene. Just sitting and listening. His awareness is useless but he insists on being aware. Maybe that’s the way he wants to fight. Because physically he is not able to do anything and all the Afghans are limited, so he can just know and eat from the tree of knowledge. Another important factor in here is that his wife and daughter are in complete ignorance and neither he guide them to fight in his own way, nor they want to eat this forbidden apple.

Iran/Afghanistan: If there weren’t any Iran, then Afghans didn’t have to compare themselves with their neighbours and damn their lives one hundred times every day.

“In these dark years he made his daughter to go to the basement full of insects and told everyone she has gone to Iran with his brother.” (P. 15)

The other opposition is between the Talibs and the Afghan people. Talibs are Afghan and part of the Afghan population. But these two groups are really enemies. When they see a Talib, they just escape. In the morning at ‘eleven to nine’ when Seyed Mirak Sha Agh went out of the house and saw two Talibs, he was horrified:

“When he put his feet out of the yard, he saw three men under a fruit tree beside the stream. They get up and go behind the wall. The dog on the roof barkes at them. Seyed Mirak Sha Agha goes under the trees to check whether they left or not. When he sees they’ve gone far, he felt relieved. From their guns, he understands that they must be Talibs.” (P. 25-26)  

Or near the city people are afraid even to look at Talibs. Why is it so? Don’t they have the same culture and language? Don’t they have the same religion? Yeah, they have. Talibs tried hard to make the environment completely homogenous but through this novel we hear the suppressed words of the oppositions. But Talibs were also part of the community. They were not Americans or Africans! The novel doesn’t give us any information about Talibs and indirectly takes side with the other. Here the binary opposition of self/other appears. The Afghan people assume themselves apart from Taliban. And all the literature about Afghanistan advertises their hatred towards Taliban. But where’s a word of the other?  

The novel makes it possible for us to look through the grammatical eye of structuralism. You can find the six actants and six narratology relations of A. J. Greimas:

1. You may argue that the hero is Seyed Mirak Sha Agha, but he is too much for a hero. I even think we can’t say he is a subject in search of an object. He is the object himself. He is the representative of the whole Afghan nation who have been robbed and colonized throughout histry. Who have been killed and has been the object of various crucial deeds.

2. The hero is lacking in the story. You feel the void of a helper. Maybe that’s Allah. But where is he? Does he come to help? And does he try to unknot the plot and brings through a happy ending? Of course not.

3. The subject is quite absent as well. It’s hard to recognise it with his new disguised face in each chapter. I think it’s better to say that the subject, the villain and the opposer are one. This is neither Allah nor Talibs. It is certainly the destiny. The fate that people are far less powerful to change and to do something about that. It just deprives people of everything. Of all the ectasy that is hidden to be found. What a pity!

4. The order of events in the novel do seem chronological but the order of narration is full of flash backs. The duration of fiction is always less than the duration of real life. But in this novel I feel the pace of a day from morning till night is really slow.

5. The narrator is heterodiegetic that is external from the world of novel. It means that the narrator is not present in the novel and not part of the world of the novel. In all places you feel that the point of view is outside of the novel and the reader also feels being put outside. Maybe that’s the reason that we feel safe and doesn’t get involved in the story. And no identification occurs.

And to put the work in more fixed structures let’s look through Claude Bremond’s eye and summarise these almost 100 pages in three phrases:

A.   Virtualization: The early morning and his turning on the radio. The discovery that the radio is out of order.

B.    Actualization: His journey to the city to buy batteries.

C.    Realization: His return and turning on the radio. Listening to radio.

Aren’t you fed up with all this grammar? Ok. I know. Let’s turn back to the other oppositions and find the more hidden ones.

West/East: Actually in the time of the novel U.S. troops haven’t invaded Afghanistan yet, but at the end we have a foreshadow of their coming. At the beginnig of the novel at ‘fifteen to seven in the morning’ he is very much annoyed not having said prayers in the due time. But at the end at ‘fifteen to eight’ in the evening. He doesn’t care about his prayers. He just wanted to listen to VOA and not to BBC. So, what do you think? Is the anti-religion culture of west starting to influence this traditional country?

And the Americans are coming just for an excuse and not with bicycles and cars and motorcycles for transportation, but with tanks. They’re not bringing new sement benches for the urban parks. And they’re not making the fear fade away. This is the fate of the poor! You are doomed to SUFFER.


Monday, 24 November 2008

An Experience of Boredom

این مقاله یه تکلیف کلاسیه. قبل از خوندنش شعر مفاله ای در مورد انسان رو از الکساندر پوپ بخونید.

An Experience of Boredom


Abdolhamid Haery


At the end of the introduction-kind-of-thing in Alexander Pope’s An Essay on Man the persona is expressing his goal in attempting to write it the same as Milton’s.

But vindicate the ways of God to man. (1.16)

I.
We are informed of the Great Chain of Being and the fact that we are just limited to our own rank. No knowledge in obtainable from higher ranks. They’re ruling over us and we’re ruling over the below ranks. The rhetorical questions abound, asking for the audience just to agree!

Is the great chain that draws all to agree,
And drawn supports, upheld by God or thee? (1.33-34)


II.
The persona is inviting us to observe the nature and see that every creature is in its own rank and is neither stronger nor weaker.

Presumptuous man! the reason wouldst thou find,
Why form'd so weak, so little, and so blind?
First, if thou canst, the harder reason guess
Why form'd no weaker, blinder, and no less! (1.35-38)


Why is it so?
The answer is that it’s none of our business. God is perfect and we are imperfect. So, we won’t be able to understand. But, surely our place is just and proper.

Then in the scale of reas'ning life 'tis plain
There must be, somewhere, such a rank as Man:
And all the question (wrangle e'er so long)
Is only this,--if God has placed him wrong? (1.47-50)



III.
Why can’t we have any knowledge? Because we are blind to future. We don’t know our fate.

Heav'n from all creatures hides the book of Fate,
All but the page prescribed, their present state; (1.77-78)

We have a restricted knowledge only about the time that we are living in. It could be the reason that neo-classicalists told us that we should copy Greek poets. Because we can’t grasp the reality.
But this not-knowing has many benefits that are not known to us as well. But the persona secretly has found one of them.

O blindness to the future! kindly giv'n, (1.85)
Hope springs eternal in human breast: (1.95)


We’re always hopeful. Better things may come upon us. God is helping us all the time!

IV.
Hey Man-not Woman-Do you think with your limited knowledge you can judge. As the post-modernists believe we couldn’t judge. But the neo-classics think that we shouldn’t judge. It’s the deity’s duty. If you judge, thou will bring ruin upon thyself.

Rejudge his justice, be the god of God.
In pride, in reas'ning pride, our error lies; (1.122-123)


V.
And why we are tempted to reason? It’s just because of this damned PRIDE that doesn’t let us to follow the Golden Mean.

From pride, from pride, our very reas'ning springs; (1.161)

You may ask yourself why the persona is acting like a teacher. Why is he instructing all the time and telling us very valuable moralities? Because the neo-classic literature is art for humanity’s sake and the poet could be a deist preacher.

VI.
In this part it is implied that Man couldn’t have the physical strengths of lower ranks and the angelic perfections of the upper ranks. Idiot! You would have looked miserable if you had those qualities. You are in your proper rank.

The bliss of man (could pride that blessing find)
Is not to act or think beyond mankind;
No powers of body or of soul to share,
But what his nature and his state can bear. (1.189-192)


I wonder what was the reaction of these correct poets about the scientific developments. Have they called all of them devilish? But if as they think everything were correct, we wouldn’t have been told to work hard and gain. And there wouldn’t have been a great joy in finding.

VI. & VIII.
Again the persona is addressing us to observe the nature and to understand that The Great Chain of Being is correct and universal. As the Greeks believed in these rules. They are universal. All the time and everywhere.

And Nature tremble to the throne of God!
All this dread order break--for whom? for thee?
Vile worm!--O madness! pride! impiety! (1.256-258)


After all my instructs again you’re thinking that all these are for you. You’re nothing but a fool!
And if one single defect is seen in this correct system, the whole system would tear apart. Because they’re dependent on each other.

The least confusion but in one, not all
That system only, but the Whole must fall. (1.249-250)


IX.
We are parts of a whole. And this whole is unified, coherent, and correct.

All are but parts of one stupendous whole,
Whose body Nature is, and God the soul; (1.267-268)

X.
As we reach the conclusion, you can be happy that the boredom is going to finish soon. The persona invites Man to submit and to believe in correctness and order. Believe in your defects and your rank. And follow the rules from now on. God is taking care of everything. Don’t worry.

One truth is clear, Whatever is, is right. (1.294)

This optimism is really amazing. They were really happier that the aimless people in twentieth century. They knew the core of universe and were moving toward that. So, there wasn’t any need like modernists to try to find the truth and at last find nothing and think that there is no core in post-modernism.