جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه « تاریخ گرایی نوین » در نشریات گروه « ادبیات و زبان ها »

Modern historicism is one of the theories in the field of literary criticism and one of the sub-branches of post-structural criticism, which was founded by Steven Greenblatt in the late seventies and early eighties. Contrary to traditional historicism, which speaks of the one-sided influence of history on literature, modern historicism believes in the two-sided influence of literature and history on each other. In this research, relying on library and documentary studies and with an analytical-descriptive approach, we have tried to examine the story of Qubad Pirouz in Ferdowsi's Shahnameh based on the criticism of modern historicism, identify and analyze its discourses, and finally get a new meaning from it. Based on the obtained results, it can be said that there are five discourses in Qabad's story, whose conflict with each other forms the basis of the narrative and moves it forward. The identified discourses are: Qabad, Blash, Sokhrai, Mazdak and Mobdan discourses. Each of these discourses gain power in a period of time and are placed in the center; But the amount of friction is such that they are pushed from the center to the margins again. All in all, in this research, an effort has been made to get a new understanding of the story by analyzing the relationships between the discourses and shedding light on the dark corners of the story.

The agency of literature is one of the keywords of New Historicism. New historicists believe that literature is not simply a product of history; it actively makes history. History, power discourses, marginalized parts of society, and the mutual relationship between literature and culture are central concerns in new historicism. Both Ferdowsi and Shakespeare, although from two diverse cultures and six centuries apart from each other, their works share similar characteristics seen from a historical and literary perspective. Ferdowsi was contemporary with the Sāmānids age of reviving the Persian language and culture after a long period of repression. Shakespeare also lived during the Renaissance age of change in beliefs, views, and worldviews. In addition, challenging the dominant discourses of power and cultural clichés, they created new outlooks towards women in their respective culture. Women who were so far voiceless and marginalized during the times, now get an active presence in their works. The passive, silent Persian woman, kept marginalized for centuries, has an active role and presence in the Shahnameh. Silent and obedient women considered sinful during Shakespeare’s era, have a voice and dynamic presence in his plays. This study tries to depict women’s dynamic personalities both in their contemporary societies and selected literary works. By examining the dominant discourses regarding women, reading their contemporary texts, and analyzing the role of women in their literary works, it is found that both writers in the selected works had different viewpoints towards women compared to the dominant discourses of their time.

Literary texts, in connection with the social conditions of their time, also show the complex relations of power. In Naser Khosrow's poems, the existing discourses in the society are represented in a way that mainly shows the poet's resistance against the construction of the power of the Sunni government of Ghaznavid religion. Nasser Khosrow's greatest intellectual challenges are the critique of power (hegemony, domination) and the political and religious discourses of the Ghaznavid era. Based on his religious and linguistic knowledge, the poet challenges the discourse hegemony of Ghaznavid rule. According to the poet, the structure of government in that period is a combination of political and religious authority and the way of exercising power is done by political interpretation of religion and knowledge of Shafi'i jurisprudence in order to legitimize the government. Nasser Khosrow, as a Shiite poet, tries to delegitimize the political rule of his time in the form of his poems. The issue of the present article is how Naser Khosrow reacts to the dominant Ghaznavid discourse in his poems and how his religious beliefs are crystallized in the construction of the discourse of legitimacy and reproduction? The method of the present study is Michel Foucault's discourse of power and modern historiography. The result of the research shows that Naser Khosrow's discourse in order to delegitimize the political and social system of his time, shows the conflict of power discourse between Sunni and Shiite political jurisprudence.

Abstract
Literary criticism is the analysis of the text's semantic layers based on theories that are mostly drawn from other fields of the humanities. The new historicism, which was established by Stephen Greenblatt in the late 1970s and early 1980s, is one of the most current theories in this area. Modern historicism holds that literature and history both have an impact on one another, in contrast to conventional historicism, which speaks of the one-sided influence of history on literature. Modern historians contend that literature does more than just reflect history; rather, the link between history and literature is dialectical rather than reflective. Based on current historicism, library, and document studies, and using a descriptive-analytical approach, this study has looked into and analyzed the story of Fereydoun and Zahak, and has offered a new interpretation of it. According to the study's findings, the conflict between the Iranian discourse and the non-Iranian discourse (Fereydoun and Kaveh) in this story is driven by power, which ultimately leads to the dominance of the Iranian discourse. The characters of this story are each representative of discourse in the story community. Iranian discourse is on the margins and out of power at first, while non-Iranian discourse is dominant and in power. However, by the end of the story, the situation has changed. The plot is driven by the conflict between Iranian and non-Iranian discourse on power.
The story in question was composed as a poem in one of the most sensitive historical situations, that is, the time when the Arab element thought itself superior to Iran and Iranians. The ideological pressures from the Arabic discourse have become more sophisticated throughout this time, and they now want to marginalize the Iranian discourse, which takes the shape of the Shu'ubiyya movement. The space for Shu'ubiyya's Iranian discourse has been constrained by these restrictions from the Baghdad-based authority and its close allies in Iran, notably the Ghaznavid empire. In such a circumstance, Ferdowsi uses the story of Fereydoun and Zahak, which is rich in elements of battle and resistance, to rekindle Iranians' spirit of battle and resistance against the notion of Arab superiority. This story reflects the struggle between Iranian discourse (Feryedoun and Kaveh) and non-Iranian discourse (Zahhak); the struggle that existed during Ferdowsi's period and the Shu’ubiyya movement has been in conflict with what was against Iran and Iranians. Freyedoun, an Iranian aristocrat, is related to Jamshid. Zahak pulled Jamshid down from the kingdom and killed him. Since then, Fereydoun and all other Jamshidis have lost their position in the society and privileges. Fereydon's fight against Zahak is motivated by three different reasons, considering the fact that Zahak also murdered his father Abtin and the Bermaye cow that Fereydon fed on as a child. The reasons were 1) national motivation (saving Iran from the oppressive non-Iranian element), 2) class motivation (restoring the social position and privileges of the Jamshidian class), and 3) personal motivation (taking revenge on Zahhak for murdering Abtin and Barmayeh cow). As a patriotic Iranian, Fereydoun finds Zahak's existence intolerable and feels it is his national responsibility to rebel against the foreign, alien, and oppressive forces that have imposed themselves on Iran.
In this study, an effort is made to analyze the Fereydoun and Zahhak battle story in Shahnameh using modern historicism and to provide a novel interpretation of it. The research is based on new theories and schools, text analysis, and criticism. By using library and documentary studies, as well as descriptive and analytical approaches, we have attempted to offer a novel interpretation of the text under discussion and respond to the following research questions: 1) What are the dominant (in power) and marginal (outside of power) discourses, and what is their connection to power? 2) Why did Ferdowsi favor a particular discourse? 3) What was the reason for it and how did this favoritism occur? 4) What is the relationship and similarity between the story of Fereydoun and Zahak with the history of Ferdowsi's time? 5) What genre and group are the target audience of the story? And 6) what is the intertextual relationship of this story with other Persian literary texts?
Research The study's findings demonstrate that the struggle between the Iranian discourse (represented by Fereydoun and Kaveh) and the non-Iranian discourse in this story is motivated by a desire for power which ultimately leads to the dominance of the Iranian discourse. The characters of this story are each representative of discourse in the story community. Other discourses are on the margins and outside of power, but Zahak's discourse is dominant and in power. The effort and struggle between these marginal discourses to gain power and the center gave rise to the story, and these conflicts between the marginal discourses and the dominant discourse (Zahak) serve as its driving force. The element of conflict in the story is represented through disobedience, rebellion, and war. As a poet, Ferdowsi has clearly taken the side of the marginal discourses centered on Fereydoun. Ferdowsi is inclined toward the usage of positive adjectives and phrases. He sets his supported discourses apart from other discourses in this way.
Discussion of Results and Instead of focusing on the characters' specific historical actions, this story attempts to explore the universal nature of man by narrating the behavior of the characters in a way that makes the reader think about the historical patterns of the members of their society or even the general nature of mankind. As a result, any autocratic, murderous, and cruel dictator may be likened to Zahhak, and every person fighting for liberation from tyranny can be compared to Kaveh. In addition, there are similarities between the characters in the story and historical figures from Ferdowsi's era that are worthy of consideration and come about as a result of how we interpret the story. For instance, Zahhak and the Abbasid caliphs are comparable in terms of race, autocracy, and animosity toward the Iranian race. In other words, the murder, repression, and brutality of the Abbasid caliphs have been demonstrated in the form of the myth of Zahhak. Additionally, there are similarities between Abu Mansour Abd al-Razzaq and Abtin in the Zahhak stories; both of them were murdered by Iranians and are of Iranian ancestry and royal descent. That is, Abtin was murdered by Zahhak Tazi and Abu Mansour by Abul Hasan Simjur of Arabic descent. Additionally, both of their children seek revenge; Fereydon rises against Zhahak, and Mansour, the son of Abu Mansour Abd al-Razzaq, rises against Simjurians and Samanians, and is murdered in this manner.

Literary criticism is the exploration of a text's semantic layers using theories and methodologies that are mostly drawn from other humanities disciplines. New Historicism, which Steven Greenblatt developed in the late 1970s and early 1980s, is one of these theories. Modern historicism holds that literature and history both have an impact on one another, in contrast to conventional historicism, which speaks of the one-sided influence of history on literature. In this study, we attempted to evaluate the tale of Rostam and Sohrab in relation to modern historicism, identify and analyze its discourses, and propose a novel interpretation from it. In this narrative, a variety of discourses have generally been depicted, and they develop the plot in conflict with another. These discourses include the Nirani discourse (Afrasiab), the official wrestling discourse (Rostam), the informal wrestling discourse (Sohrab), the women's discourse (Tahmina and Gerd Afrid), and the Shahriari discourse (Kikavos) (other Iranian and Nirani wrestlers).

Commonly, facing the works of art within a historical theme, we either expect the work to match exactly with history, or expect to see some kind of artist's point of view from that historical period. The former cannot be recreated or represented in the world of art. The latter, however, does not have the same application. Therefore, with sufficient knowledge of the author and the discourse conditions and power relations during his life period, his perspective on history in a historical work can be analyzed better. In this article, through a comparative and historical method, two plays Death of Yazdgerd written by Bahram Beyzai and Romulus the Great written by Friedrich Dürrenmatt were examined from the perspective of new historicism to show how two playwrights were affected by history in two different places and times, and consequently influenced the history of their time. This comparative research shows that choosing a specific period of history to write a play was purposeful. Also, writing about a historical period is affected by the period of the playwright's life and culture, and the reason for the difference in the power relations and the ending of the texts lies within the same context.

A work of art is the production of exchanges and interactions among creator, collective sources, simple and complex network of traditions, discourses and historical, social and political institutions. So, Hafiz’s Divan could be considered as an area for interactions and exchanges as well as discourses, traditions, political and social activities of Iranian society which transcends cultural and historical texts and boundaries with continuous dynamism. Modern historicism is a new approach in the study of historical and literary texts dating back to the second half of the nineteenth century. This neo-historicist approach is appropriate for the classical literary and historical works while it explains the various aspects and forms of collective sources, traditions and the system of domination in the reproduction of the system of power. To the extent that the creators are interacted with the political structure or system and power, they provide a clearer image of the complex layers and sources, traditions and the dominant historical and cultural discourses.Hafiz is a poet who interacts with authority and this issue can be traced in symbolic and general readings of his poems. Recognizing the relationship of the political discourses of the eighth century AH and Hafez's poetry as well as the exchanges, interactions and reproduction in his divan and the study of its aspect in his Divan, it is easy to understand the political discourses of the very period and to explain the role of these discourses in shaping the relationship between text and history meaning the effect and context of its production.

This study tends to examine social and political discourses of Hafiz’s era, interactions and reproductions of those discourses and the extent of its reinforcement and rejection in his Divan with a descriptive-analytic method using new historical approach.

One of the important issues of neo-historicism is the flow of discourses between the different texts. According to Foucault's point of view, any power system creates its own "truth regime", and the literary and cultural texts of any period are either influenced by this regime and consolidating it, or dream of changing it. In other words, either part of the "hegemonic" system is ruling or the other in opposition to it (Milani, 2001: 9). Hafiz had a huge interest in short and hasty period of Al-Inju's rule and its pleasant hegemony has extended the scope of ancient discourse of this dynasty to Hafez's poetry. Based on the ancient Iranian discourse of Al-Inju, Hafiz seeks for a wise and just king. Hafez's poetry does not concern with the asceticism and worship of the king, but what becomes relevant is the justice of the king. Hafiz showed special interest in the reproduction of the principles of the Abbasid Sharia-based discourse after the fall of Alainjo's government by Amir Mobarz al-Din Mozaffari (Shabankarei, 2002: 2/316). Hafiz was not happy about the assassination of his beloved Sultan, Shah Abu Ishaq, by Amirz Mobarez, as well as his strict actions in the matter of Sharia (Samarkandi, 1383: 293; Katabi, 1364: 64). As with the symbolic title of Muhtasib, which is a representation of the character of Amir Mobarez Mozaffari, Hafiz shows his opposition to his dogmatic discourse in various ways.  With the death of Amir Mobaraz al-Din Mozaffari, the intensity of his Shari'a-like discourse was adjusted by his son Shah Shoja 'and his sons, and they adopted a gentle and tolerant policy in this very regard. In Hafez's divan, there are signs of modification of this matter based on the reproduction of the discourse of the brave king and his children. With the weakness and decline of the Mozaffari dynasty and the continuation of bloody conflicts and social and economic disorders, their Shari'a discourse also declined and the focus turned to the discourse of the new and powerful power emerging from Transoxiana and represented by a person named Timur Lang. Towards the end of his life, Hafez, in despair of reproducing Mozaffari's Shari'a discourses and the emerging Turkic discourse in establishing security, again, in a general and implicit way, expressed his desire to fulfill Khosravi's discourse.

Hafez's Divan welcomes the Khosravi and Iranian discourse of Al-Inju and strengthens its discourse foundations by using elements, concepts and symbolic historical and literary symbols. With the overthrow of Khosravani Al-Inju's discourse by Amir Mobarzaldin Mozaffari and the creation of his dogmatic discourse, Hafez's court rises to conflict and confront it by producing the symbolic element of the preacher in a network of negative associations. However, with the modification of Mozaffari's Shari'a's discourse by the sons of Amir Mubarz al-Din, that is, the brave Shah and his sons, a text is provided for the exchange and proximity of Mozaffari's Sharia's discourse and Khosravi's discourse, and its scope is extended to Hafez's court. Subsequently, with the weakening and decline of Mozaffari's discourse, this discourse provides the arena for the reproduction of the Turkish-oriented discourse represented by Timur Lang. Finally, with Hafez's despair at the end of his life from the Turkic discourse, in organizing the turbulent and unsettled situation of the time, his desire to revive Khosravi's discourse, which oversees Hafez's youth, is reproduced.

After the victory of the October Revolution in 1917 and the establishment of the communist regime in the Soviet Union, this land became the utopia of many intellectuals. Among them André Gide, who was invited by the Union of Soviet Writers in 1936 to visit the land of his dreams. But what he saw and wrote in his return entitled Return from the U.S.S.R (1936) and Afterthoughts on the U.S.S.R. (1937) expressed his regret and despair for the realization of the great human aspirations of the twentieth century. This apparent disillusionment in Gide's text, however, is not simply achieved, but at the same time conveys the effects and factors that, according to Michel Foucault, shape the discourse of power in a particular period and influence the individual and collective choices of the author. In this article, we try to figure out the interaction of central discourses of power and their relation to the possibility of communism disillusionment by Gide, using the historical research methodology and relying on new historicism theories.

In the 1980s, after post-structural criticism, "New Historicism" appeared through the work of Stephen Greenblatt as a response to traditional historicism. A new historian believes that literary texts have been interwoven with other discourses and rhetoric structures and they constitute a part of the history that is being written. We gain knowledge about this period through works written at the end of the Salgoqian reign in Iraq nearly after one century and it demonstrates the power of historiography in the Saljoqian period. Social circumstances and daily life of people in that time are not clear due to the decay of historiography and limited sources; however, Mohammad Ghazali's letters are one of the significant works of the Saljoqian period which provides a report on discourses and political, social, and cultural issues of the same period and opens a window to the said historical period. New Historicism is seeking a link between literature and public culture of a period and in general, any cultural text. Taking advantage of this theory in rereading and interpreting Ghazali's letter can reveal the timepiece and uncover the latent discourses that are hidden under apparent discourse.

Narrativity is an essential feature to ‘history’. Narrative, with such features as being systematic and structured, has a cohesive and regulatory function, as it brings together selected facts from specific innumerable historical facts under specific structures and plots. The structure and cohesion of the narrative provide the ground for semantic and even structural signification, as well as for finding ideological contexts and the predominance of particular discourse systems (and consequentially the emergence of selections, omissions, and rejections). The sum of these issues, in addition to relying on sequence, causal relations, change of status, and having an ultimate goal, are all narrative and consequently non-historical components involved in reporting historical events and could ultimately construct a ‘story’ or forms of a story. On the other hand, discourses, ideologies, and power structures play an important role in constructing the historian's historical understanding and, subsequently, in his historical narration, just as “historical narrative” is constructed in the epistemological system and the dominant valuations of the historian's life span. Tarikh-e Bayhaqi like other historical texts, is a selected narrative from countless historical events of a particular era, and Bayhaqi as a subject in his era had been influenced by discourses, ideologies, and special identity origins in his historical narrative, more particularly when we see special encounters in discourse and identity in Bayhaqi's era. Accordingly, in this study based on New Historicism, we investigate the narrative construction in Tärikh-e Bayhaqi and Bayhaqi's encounter with influential discourses in his time; moreover, we examine its impact on the formation of Bayhaqi's “historical narrative” in order to further scrutinize the subjectivity of Bayhaqi in his era. The findings of this study show the inter-constructional encounter between historical and metahistorical aspects in Bayhaqi's historical narrative, which signals a significant relationship with the discoursive encounters prevailing in his time. Among such encounters is the Iranian-oriented-identity-seeking current against the court-supported-identity-seeking currents that plays a pivotal role in the formation of these inter-constructional encounters.

"Conceptual history" is a relatively new theory and method that is influenced by the tradition of continental philosophy and new historicism. This theory and method, with its critique of traditional historicalism, emphasis on the "concept" and through the study of creation, the evolution and conception of concepts, one can represent ideological conflicts in a political structure. In this essay, after defining conceptual history, it attempts to address the role and role of this theory in continental philosophy by emphasizing the views of Reinhart Koselleck, the most renowned researcher in the field. In his seminal project, The conceptual history, Koselleck explores the concept, its differentiation with the word, and how concepts influence political events. He believes that without concepts, society as well as the political arena of action will not exist, and he believes that every concept in the system of thought has anti-concepts that can overcome it by having a specific meaning . On this basis, Koselleck puts anti-concepts against concepts and speaks of semantic battel that can justify and explain the efforts of political forces and groups to overcome a particular discourse. Conceptual history as a method is also attempted to discover the meaning behind the accumulated layers of time, among the points discussed in this paper. Since this paper aims to introduce the theory and method of conceptual history, the method used is described and can be useful for researchers in humanities.

New Historicism is one of the new approaches in the field of cultural and literary studies, which mainly in the 1980s based on Green Blot's theories and other critics of new historicism. This new approach intends to delete the boundary between history and literature, and revision the relationship between them of new aspect, and thus provide a basis for criticism of the text. New historians quit the author when analyzing a text, and they know the writer is affected by discourse forces, and they pay attention to the tension relationship of discourses to analyze the meanings in the text. One of their main concerns is the power structures. Foucault, one of the most important theorists of this way of thinking, sees language as the field of power relations and the determinant of the dominant subject and Subordinate subject. The present article aims to analyze the relationship between power and language in the Bamboo Stalk Novel, by Kuwaiti novelist Saud Alsanousi, who by writing this novel, won the 6th Arabic Booker Award in 2013. The present research is going to identify with analytical and descriptive way the discourses which in this novel apply power and language through them, and mention to the facts in the text, silence and sometimes resistance, which seen from the Power objects versus the Power subject. The results of the research show that various discourses such as gender discourse, superstition discourse, lordship-servant discourse, upper class discourse and patriarchal discourse are present in this novel and each of these discourses somehow play a role in the power structures and cultural structure of the community.

Since no well-defined theoretical framework exists for Persian literary historiography, a scholar‘s reference to Western theoretical frameworks regarding this issue is inevitable. Although writing historical memorandums (known also as Tadhkirah) is an ingrained literary tradition in Persian literature, writing literary histories through a set of critical perspectives has rarely been practiced. However, in Western literatures, there have been copious attempts, especially in the 1980s, to offer new critical frameworks for writing literary history and literary historiography. In New Literary History, a series of considerable articles have been published regarding literary history and literary historiography. A statistical analysis of these articles can help the present study distinguish the dominant approaches and the durability of their critical success in proposing a critical framework for composing literary history and literary historiography. After reviewing and analyzing these articles, the study identifies a paradigm shift towards narrative constructivism and new historicism as new frameworks for composing literary history and literary historiography.

Interdiscipline studies and seeking help from theories of critical studies are the ways to make applicable the critical researches of literary texts. New historicism is one of the most novel methods of text analysis in the field of critical studies of literature which believes in historicism of the text and textuality of the history and renovates the mentality and worldview behind the next and understanding the relation between this mentality and structure of the power of its time. In the present paper, the life of Seyyed Ashraf Neyrizi, known as “Shahab” is first introduced and reviewed, and then his most important poem of praise written for Ahmad Shah Qajar in celebration of his return from abroad is analyzed. Shahab is one of the poets of the Qajar period whose poems should be considered as one of the unknown loops of “the return to classical poetry” in the time of constitutional revolution. He had been the Shekhul Islam of Neyriz in Fars province during the Qajar period and had a knack for love poems. Despite the statement of EmadFaqihKermani who says that one can’t be a Sheikhul Islam and at the same time be in love, Shahab was able to be both in love and in fond of saying poems and at the same time the Sheykhul Islam of the Neyriz city. In the present paper, the events and social situation of the period Shahab lived in and his poem of praise are first reviewed, and then the relation between the mentality in the text and the “power” of that time is analyzed based on New Historicism. As a result, rather than praising the Qajar Shah, the poem of praise written by Shahab indicates a secret and sometimes disclosed criticism of the hegemony of the ruling government. Poems of Shahab can be analyzed to achieve an exact image of and knowledge about the era of “return to classical poems” and the literature of the era of the constitutional revolution both in terms of form and meaning behind the text.

This paper tends to investigate discourse, power and language in Behrangi's "Olduz and crows" and "Olduz and talking doll" under the light of Foucauldian new historicism to demonstrate that multiple discourses of the selected texts are inseparable from the political, social, literary and cultural discourses of Behrangi's era. The study also illustrates that how Behrangi portrays the mutual relations between language and power by use of objects and animal characters in his stories. Language is doomed to silence by power (stepmother) when she deals with threatening situations.

Among contemporary playwrights, screenplay writers, and film directors, David Mamet is undoubtedly one of the best and most famous, especially in America. This study tries to analyze Glengarry Glen Ross, the best-known work of Mamet, which received Pulitzer Prize. We have chosen New Historicism as our main approach and we resort to Foucault's views and ideas in order to have a richer conceptual framework. The main concern of this paper is to analyze the concept of gender identity, the direct interrelation between power and sexuality, and the trace of this interrelation in social and business challenges. This study also discusses the traces of American capitalism as a circulating and dominant discourse and the way it exercises its power over different classes. Furthermore, it tries to give an account of David Mamet's attitude on gender roles. Finally, the paper deals with the question of language as a means of linking and signifying gender and power.