A Study and Analysis on the Discourse Disciplinary Techniques of Strength and a Child’s Resistance Practices (methods) in Saedi’s Drama, Dikteh (Dictation)

One of the items effective on children’s living conditions in each era and society is the consideration and expectation which is expected from children by adults. Among adults, on one hand, governors and governments and on the other hand intellectuals have undeniable effects on both child and childhood. Each of them can move a child between an obedient, passive one or a rebel, active one by means of their position and the bases they own. Knowing a child and the childhood era and paying attention to this issue, which had been started since the Nasseri era, in 1340 (Solar Hijri) (1960s) became more important by settling and establishing children’s organizations and institutes. Establishing Children’s Book Council (1341 S.H, 1962 A.D), an NGO, along with two governmental institutes, i.e. Educational Publications (1341 S.H, 1962 A.D) and Children and Teens’ Intellectual Development Center (1344 S.H, 1965 A.D), shows children’s identity gaining and more attention to children’s issue than before. These institutes and organizations rise up, with those activities and attempts performed by authors and intellectuals, either right-wing or left-wing, under the predominance of discourses and ideologies, caused a novel, different – in some ways, and even conflicting definitions about children and childhood to be created. By the time of Reza Shah’s government coup, paying attention to the childhood was kept on. Reza Shah’s militarism had led to a disciplined and punctuated army from one side, and from another side, to establishing military-like schools with the same style, discipline and arrangement. This kind of disciplinary technique took all army, corps to other organizations and institutes under its predominance. Although establishing school s in the form of the modern ones was one of the elements of progress and development promising a change in the attitudes towards children and new era entry, it would be carrying uniformity, silence and declutter and being obedient as the heritage of the past as if they were promising the schools for training future’s obedient soldiers in the age of dictatorship.In 1340s (1960s), a variety of intellectual mainstreams appeared and thus, various voices could be heard through this; left-wing intellectuals are one of the most impressive intellectual mainstreams in that era, however. The effect of this group on the type of look over children and childhood period is undeniable.Studying the discourse of resistance – which was advertised and followed by these intellectuals – from one side, and the discourse of strength and traditions from another side, is necessary to find today’s children’s descent. The intention point of this study is the confrontation point of these two discourses regarding the children and childhood, their method of confrontation, sociability, and their education. Gholam Hossein Saedi is one of the style-owner, left-wing intellectual artists of the 1340s era. Since his adolescence, he expressed his enthusiasm in politics – or literally, escaping from incuriosity – when he joined the Toodeh party (Communist party in Iran), wrote articles and published different reviews. DIKTEH in 1340s and after that he was paid lots of attention and received lots of criticism by critics; however, there has been no research and studies with the present research approach on this drama. In this study, the disciplinary techniques as well as children’s method of resistance against that shall be investigated and reviewed by means of the inductive qualitative context method and employing Michel Foucault’s opinions. The current study has been trying to find an answer to these questions: What disciplinary and criticism techniques are seen in this drama? What is its result? How does the child resist against it? Does the confrontation and line-up of these two thoughts and mentality seen in this drama release the child from the adults’ subduing string?Studying the connection between the subject and strength is one of Foucault’s main discussions. Foucault has been trying to show that applying strength will be possible by means of a mechanism which can be checked and classified as the disciplinary and its techniques and Foucault believes that the strength acts and moves on by marginalization, rejection, encouragement and punishment, permanent care and observation, and a pyramid hierarchal way. In DIKTEH drama, these points can be seen as well. It shows a part of a student’s life who is supposed to be apparently assessed via an exam by teachers and schoolmaster for his literacy, science acquisition while in fact, he is examined for his/her obedience. But the child / student does not obey and do whatever they order him/her to do. In traditional discourse obedience was the survival condition in the society; if someone started to disobey, rejection was the least consequence. To persuade a child to be obedient and subdue him/her different techniques were used. In an overall view, the dialogues in this drama show two intellectual mainstreams which are developed based on the marginalization between the two concepts of the good student and the bad student. The destiny of such a confrontation can be found in both traditional and strength discourses. In these discourses, the child must be obedient to his/her teachers and older people and even to the punishment as well and keep silent. Obedience considered essential and vital for the student’s success in these two discourses. In DIKTEH drama, these two mentalities and thoughts about the childhood are lining up and glowing. The first one, is the representative of the not-released-from-tradition strength discourse and the lateral is risen up from the left-wing intellectual discourse. In this confrontation, the strength discourse enjoys disciplinary techniques like marginalization, frightening from the bad consequence and rejection, threatening, and encouragement to make the child obey and on the other hand there is a child against the strength who is endorsed by the intellectual mainstream and attempts to insecure the authority of the strength side by resisting. On this path, he/she uses ways like silence and disobedience, questioning and rebellion, laughing and ridiculing.In this drama, Saedi tries to consider them superior one to another by creating two mutual images. In these images, the rebel and disobedient child is superior to the obedient child. Although this image shows a perceptible distance from the traditional thought which means that the child has moved from margin to the context and is no more obedient as he/she used to be, he/she is collapsed into the encrypted ideologies of the day. Therefore, it can be concluded that Saedi’s represented child has not gotten rid of the adults’ string yet.