Politics, sexuality, representation (Critical Analysis of Visuality of Sexuality in Naseri`s period)

Sexuality is not a natural given, rather is a socio-cultural issue and a phenomenal effect on the sex which must be studied in its historical context and in the different periods. On the other hand, the type of the attitude toward this subject has undergone the epistemic and psychological limitations in every society. In the other words, sexuality is that kind of atmosphere which surrounds bodies and minds through the field of sex and forms and constructs them. Representation of sexuality, in the photographic frames, can objectify these limitations, and this objectification can re-frame the sexuality and construct the subject. This interaction redoubles the significance of this issue. In this paper, we are facing photo as a text for studying sexuality and author is using other sources and written documents just in the photo’s attachment. Therefore, it may be questioned what was the correlation between the photographic representation of sexuality and epistemic system of Iranians in Naseri`s period; in addition, what socio- psychological norms determined the type of the attitude toward the sexuality, and consequently its representation. In other words, the aim of this study is to know through which visuality the representation of sexuality was formed and how it was limited and finally how the power relation controlled it. Visuality is parallel with discourse, not in the field of speech and writing which is discussed in the Critical Discourse Analysis, but in the field of vision and image. Therefore, we can regard Visuality as a visionary synonym for Discourse. To achieve above goals, Michel Foucault`s notions about subject and power besides Sigmund Freud`s and Jacques Lacan`s ideas concerning subject`s mind and psych can provide a suitable theoretical framework and methodology in order to find out more about this issue. What is different is the subject in this paper is not individual subject as Lacan and Freud considered but it is collective one in Iran society. In author`s opinion, different methodologies can support different points of view, and consequently, lead to different analytic results. The significance of this study is due to a research gap that there is in this field; therefore, it must be filled accordingly. Actually there is a few qualitative and critical researches in field of sexuality in history of Iranian`s photography so paying attention to it is necessitated. The results suggest that the sexuality was articulated and represented in a “Political Visuality”. However, the politics was considered in its traditional meaning. Power and sexuality, in their traditional meaning and in the traditional society, were symbolically engaged with each other and the camera was not only as a representational instrument of this engagement but also as a passage in order to fix this kind of engagement or even more important, to change it. The engagement was due to a “symbolic order”. This symbolic order was constituted in the traditional society. The power relations and the sexual order can be considered in symbolic and imaginary order of the Iranian society`s collective unconscious. Two orders which Lacan discussed psychoanalytically.