Le parricide, du fantasme à la réalité Étude de deux exemples: Kélidar de Mahmoud Dowlatâbâdi et La Terre d Emile Zola

Patricide as to seize his power and position is a notion that many scholars have focused on, in the different eras of the history of the literature from the beginning up to now. Analysis of this act in the novel La Terre shows that the naturalistic approach and in a greater extent the realism of Zola has caused this action to seem justifiable. However, the natural flow of history and chronology and sequences of events make the father and the son tend to be in a constant struggle of survival. Killing the father, no matter how tragic and painful it is, yet the motive is understandable. But Dowlatabadi takes another way in Kaleidar: hesitancy and uncertainty about the future rural life results in a situation that none of the narrator, characters, and the reader to be able to find an explanation or justification for the patricide. And leaves this question on all minds that if killing the father would not pave the way to take his place; then why to kill him? But it does not mean that children are not living with the phantasm of patricide, and this is how the phantasm in Kaleidar switches to reality in La Terre. This article is an attempt to draw attention to the comparative analysis of these two approaches in order to deal with the differences and similarities of patricide in these two different literary cultures.