نشریه زبان و ادب فارسی
پیاپی 226 (پاییز و زمستان 1391)

The Nefrin-e Zamin (The Curse of theLand) is a novel which tells the reader about the dispute between tradition and modernity as well as the intellectual and the rulers. It may also be regarded as a document testifying the defeat of the intellectualism and the tradition. This novel was written by Al-e Ahmad to perform his responsibility as an intellectual. In this novel, he tries to oppose modernity and the revival of past religions in some intellectual and political circles and also bourgeoisie economy. From this point of view, in some parts, the novel acts as a political statement and sometimes realities are ignored as if the author does not want to see them. Therefore, his views and social theories fail to be generalized. In the present work an attempt has been made to investigate the responsibility of the intellectual and the concept of modernity from his/her point of view. His social theory is also compared with some of the famous models of explanation in social science and then by reviewing the contrast between tradition and modernity, brought up in the novel, the plan of his ideal society is provided. The result of the present study is that this social theory may not be explained according to just one single model and in order to explain it more than one model should be used. All his views are not valid and suffer from some weak points. More than he has intention to offer theories and solutions, he opposes the present situation as an intellectual.

The Story of "Lion and Cow" in Kalile and Damna has a lot of literary beauties; and by applying different literary criticisms and various meaningful readings in the context of this story one can determine its aesthetic factors and their effects on the readers. One of the most efficient literary criticisms in this regard is the mythical criticism. This study tries to analyze the story of "Lion and Cow" according to the theory of Jung regarding Archetypes and Symbols, and also integrate it with the Northrop Frye Theory about the mythos forming a literary work. To do this, after explaining the theoretical framework and the methods of this study, the symbols and archetypes of different parts of it would be analyzed; then their relations with mythos forming that part would be expressed.

In this paper attempting has been done for showing the “Dialogue” as one of the important elements of the story in the history of Beyhaqi, in which by associating the vertical and horizontal axis of language it could carry the burden of objection and also by ornamenting the language the author tries to show the conspiracies and abetments of Masoud’s court.Dialogue as a device has been used by Beyhaqi for a specific purpose to show characters’ relationships. By using repetitive sentences Beyhaqi tries to show the reliable and unreliable. He tries to demonstrate the atmosphere of mistrust of the court by using of selective quotations of the characters’ dialogues. Beyhaqi attempts to show his objection by using the oblique words of the characters and by this means he tries to keep himself away from hurts. He usually conceals his criticism under the mask of the dialogues of the others and through their speeches he reveals subtly and indirectly most of the false policies of the Qaznavids and also of Masud.

The attitude of Attar Neishabouri to "Love" is mysticalā and non-intellectual. He considers the "Reason" ineffective at the love arena, and believes that for achieving love, one should pass from his/her intellect. But in contrast, Suhrawardi reckons love as the offspring of intellect and also believes that achieving the wellness is impossible unless through cognition and knowledge. From viewpoint of these two sages, love is alive in the universe and every creature, whether material or immaterial, enjoys its benefits. Indeed, love is the relation between creatures of the world. From standpoints of these two sages, the extreme goal of love is the annihilation at the beloved and introduction to love is the “Demand”, from viewpoint of Attar, and "wisdom" and "Kindness", from viewpoint of Suhrawardi. In the mystic attitude of these two sages, renouncing the self, fighting with passion and also unification are assumed as the effects and results of love. This paper deals with a comparative study about love from the point of view of these wise mystics.

Myth, as a sort of ideology, has root in the depth of the human mind. The formation of such attitude takes place during the time and passing years. That is why the myths have a great connection with ethical culture. Such connection makes myths to be reproduced during the history. One of the most important places of such reproduction is literary and artistic works. In these works, the reproductions sometimes are consciously and sometimes unconsciously, sometimes direct or in its original form and sometimes with modification and adjustment or in different shapes and forms. Faced with history, the myths, in order to remain alive, sometimes takes refuge to deeper layers of the literary texts. This research aims to indicate that how and why the myth of Anahita in Khosrow-o Shirin of Nezami was reproduced. It seems that Anahita has manifested in the characters of Shirin and Shak(k)ar through folk literature and is continuing its life in a new body.

Khamseh/Quintet composing is one of the long-standing traditions of Persian literature. This literary tradition was founded by Nezami Ganjavi in 6th/12th century and continued to 14th/20th century in Iran and its cultural realm. During these 8 centuries, many Iranian, Indian and Turkish poets imitated Nezami’s Khamseh. This literary tradition is the most popular tradition in Persian literature, after Shahnameh composing; but extensive research has not been done on it, and a lot of quintets have remained unexplained, and the detailed list of them is not available. This article introduces and criticizes the major researches done in this field and notes the deficiencies of these studies. Finally it offers some recommendations for research into this field.