Considerations about Criticizing Sacred Defense Poetry

In a Lonely Field There are many meanings mentioned for the word “Naghd”? (It means criticism in Persian. It is originally an Arabic word) in Persian language. As for some of these meanings, we can refer to “Currency”?, “Paying in cash rather than credit transaction”?, “Choosing the right thing and the good thing”?, “Evaluating”?, “To test by a touchstone”?, “Showing the quality of being good or bad about something”? and “Choosing the best thing”?.

News ID: ۱۸۹۷۴۷

پنجشنبه - ۱۲ فروردين ۲۰۰۹ / 2009 12 January

The word “Enteghad”? (It also means criticism in Persian) is sometimes used as a synonym of the word “Naghd”? (Criticism); but as the common linguistic function of this word, “Enteghad”? (Criticism) is commonly used as “Expressing shortages of something”? and also “Finding fault with some body or a phenomenon”?.
But “Naghd”? is used as “Evaluating”? and even judging art works, ideas, cultural works and even scientific and political affairs and works.
“Naaghed”? (It means critic in Persian) or “Montaghed”? (It also means critic in Persian) is usually told to a person that criticizes.
But “Montaghed”? is not told to the person who criticizes in its common meaning and merely mentioned shortages and faults by partial look at the issue. Literary criticism is one of the subtitles of artistic criticism. Artistic criticism is a kind of interpreting, analyzing and valuing a particular art work in order that this particular art works is deeply understood and its aesthetic aesthetical essence is understood. Hence, we might not find any signs of enmity, opposition and fighting in literary criticism; but this fact does not prevent pathology of literary works by literary criticism.
By making efforts to find the answers to the following questions, literary criticism actually changes into an intra field action and gets help from different fields of sociology, politics, psychology, philosophy and even other artistic fields such as music, cinema and theatre, etc.

What is a literary work?
What does a literary work do?
What is the value of a literary work?
The subject of literary criticism can be a particular literary work, a group of literary works created by a poet or writer, a group of literary works created by a group of poets and writers, the whole literary works created by a poet or writer, a group of literary works with one single subject, a group of literary works with a single style and method, a group of literary works created in a particular period of time or any other types of literary works or group of works.
What is sacred defense poetry?
What does sacred defense poetry do?
What is the value of sacred defense poetry?
What is “the essence of sacred defense poetry”?? To answer this question, we should focus on poetic essence, status of technique, types of poetry creating techniques, its different style or styles, status of the subject and other specifications that totally form the aesthetical existence of sacred defense poetry. Within this process, fluency, coordination and brightness of sacred defense poetry as a literary work are studied.
How “the effect of sacred defense poetry”? is created on audience and based on what mechanism is it created on audience?
Apart from different fields that exist outside the text, we should see with which of the following methods sacred defense works. Does it work with the expression method of intra-textual, pre-textual and the most important expression method that is inner-textual?
But the “Value of sacred defense poetry”? can be estimated in two fields; one of these two fields is totality of the contemporary poetry. In this field, the status of sacred defense poetry in the evolution process of contemporary poetry is studied. Within this research, moving towards and improvement, stability and even regressive movement of Persian poetry resulted from the influence of sacred defense poetry will be studied.
But the other field of evaluating and valuing sacred defense poetry is formed in the field outside the literature. If we accept that in addition to literary commitments, the poet has other responsibilities as a human (Apart from his/her literary characteristic), his/her poem should be an artistic and creative result of his/her literary responsibilities from one side and from the other side his/her social, political and even ideological commitments. Hence, in this research article we study the fact if the sacred defense poet has been able to give a role to his/her poem in social and political scenes during sacred defense years and after war years? Which group of audiences has been targeted by this poet? Has this poet been able to say poem in the balanced framework of form and concept? Or has this poet said mottos rather than poems in order to attract more diverse and wider groups of audiences?

The question is if critics of contemporary poetry have seriously criticized sacred defense poetry after passing approximately three decades since the forming of sacred defense poetry? Can we distinguish a movement under the title of “Criticizing sacred defense poetry”? in the field of contemporary poetry? Has the nature of this poetry been identified exactly as an independent literary identity? Or has its dependence been proved to a particular poetic movement? Is the evolution and change process of this poetry during these three decades move upwards, downwards or without change? Has the process of evaluating and classifying audiences of sacred defense poetry carried out properly during these three decades? Has the relationship between this poetry with other poetry movements which were formed simultaneously with this poetry were seriously studied as far as form and concept were concerned?
Has the role of sacred defense poetry –as one of the cultural and artistic products- in political and social movements during sacred defense and postwar years been appropriately evaluated?
***
I believe that even if the answer to these questions is positive –that is not positive- lack of movement of influential criticism is not the problem of sacred defense poetry; but it is the problem of Persian contemporary poetry.
First let’s focus on the number of influential and even hard working critics of contemporary poetry. Compared to the number of poems and collections of poems which are published this number is so few that expecting creation of a criticism movement concurrent with poetic movements of this era seems unreasonable.
Secondly, let’s review the number of books which have been influential in the contemporary poetry! The number of these books is even more deplorable than the number of critics. How many scientific and serious criticisms about the contemporary poetry we have had during the past 50 years; the criticism that sees all movements without any considerations and has not omitted a movement due to technical or content disharmony with the favorable form in his/her mind; the criticism that not only sees all movements but also writes about all of them without consideration?
Thirdly, let’s watch the movement of producing thought and philosophy in this country. This watching will not absolutely and certainly have a good result. If there were no translations and commentaries on thoughts of philosophers in past, the hands of literary culture and criticism would be emptier than today; but we should however accept that the current situation can not draw a brilliant perspective for producing a powerful movement of literary criticism.
If we do not separate sacred defense poetry from the contemporary poetry – that we never want and are able to separate it from contemporary poetry- and pay attention to its lifetime which have not yet reached to three decades, we should not necessarily consider lack of the widespread movement of criticizing the sacred defense poetry as a disaster or consider all its dimensions are the result of literary plots of Iran and the world.
***
Is sacred defense poetry still considered as a live phenomenon? If it is live at the present time, will it continue its life?
Poetry was did not begin with war poetry; but it was formed following sense of responsibility of the poet before the history and society as a human being. These responsibilities affected the literary responsibility of the poet in that particular period of time and this way the poems with the subjects of epic and emotional were said at the beginning of the war that were mostly stopped in the surface of poetic phenomena, objects and characters despite adding rules which were not very new in the form and linguistic appearances. In this situation, the side of “Audience”? in the artistic triangle of “Artist- Art Work- Audience”? becomes larger than other sides.
During passing of time and become far from the beginning of the war, poets gradually take their literary responsibility serious in addition to their historical and social responsibilities. Hence, they gradually become close to more complicated and artistic structure. And finally when the enthusiastic years of war finishes, poets become far from journalistic excitements and move towards the depth of phenomena, objects and characters rather than their surface. Linguistic forms instead of simple linguistic form related games, going into details rather than speaking generally, realistic look rather than apparent conceptual look, running away from ideals and concepts (Delay of concept) instead of saying mottos gives poets the opportunity to start an accelerated movement towards establishing an independent genre. The sacred defense poetry has been really born now; the birth that lasted many years and the action that will live more years; the movement that is along with new poetic movements that are revived or formed during time and join each other and become updated.
By expansion of concepts and paying attention to the concept of resistance in a wider level from the battle fields of 8 years of war between Iran and Iraq, this poetry has now eyed to new perspectives and borders.
From the other side, following becoming far from war years, the sacred defense poet has a more realistic look at war and its side effects without considerations that he/she had during war years. Sacred defense poet has been released from absolute views and takes a multidimensional look at war in order to picture the pure humanitarian moments of war while recording and recreating ugliness and beauty of war next to each other.
Finally, we should confess that actual and touchable side effects and results of war can be still observed with non- armed eyes. These side effects are physical mortar shells of war which are still painful and bleeding. Saying poems about them is still saying poems about sacred defense. These considerations and many other considerations which can be discussed and studied in another time remind us that sacred defense poetry is still live and moves towards improvement. Naturally, complete criticism of the poetry which is still growing and developing is not possible. Although criticizing the written pomes in the field of sacred defense and also pathology of this poetic movement contributes to growth and development of this type of poetry, we still can not and should not predict that the general for of sacred defense can be drawn and based on this fact, the comprehensive and final criticism is presented.
In this point of view, sacred defense poetry is not in critical situation. Critic of sacred defense poetry still faces many challenges in order to work on this type of poetry. But all these facts do not prevent us to finish this type of criticism. Criticizing the poems which have been said by now and working out the pathologic points of sacred defense poetry – as it was mentioned- can be influential in development of this type of poetry and accelerate its movement.
Is there a thorough vacuum of this criticism and pathology? Despite what we mentioned in the above lines about lack of powerful movement of criticism not only in the field of sacred defense but also in totality of contemporary poetry, it is unfair to pass indifferently from the great sea of criticisms in the press which were flourished during past decades concurrent with considerable expansion of publications, magazines, specialized and semi specialized pages of poetry in the press.
It is right that journalistic criticisms usually lack sources and references and they consequently lack scientific and literary originality in contrary to academic books of criticism. But there is no doubt that we can hunt large number of pearls from this sea. It is right that there are many ups and downs in literary criticisms and researches in quarterly, monthly, weekly and even every day publications due to necessities of journalism; but we should not ignore ups for the fault of downs.
I have no doubt that if we conduct a precise research and collect and compile the criticisms which are written in different field of sacred defense poetry, we come to the result that –not completely- but to a large extent there is no poverty in this field; the poverty that seems very much annoying due to existence of merely few books such as the three volume book of “Criticizing and Studying the Poetry Literature of Sacred Defense”? written by Dr Mohammad Reza Sangari, the Book “Comparative Study of Resistance Related Subjects”? written by Abdol Jabbar Kakaee and “A Hand on Fire”? written by Dr. Gholam Reza Kaafi.
***
As a literary activity, criticism of poetry is not only less valuable than poetry and saying poems, but also it is more important and sometimes has a higher and more glorious position compared to poetry.
Criticism of poetry started in Iran since the years before the “Constitutional Movement”? and was formed in the middle of endless conflicts between modernists and traditionalists. But criticism of poetry as a scientific and continuous movement was formed since the 1340 decade (1960’s). It was the period of time in which modernization and fighting with traditions in all aspects and field including poetry –even without paying attention to the old history of this type of literature in Iran- was itself considered as a value. And it was due to many reasons.
Therefore, since that time developing literary theories and starting poetic movements relying on imported theories became common and was flourished. Although mentioned movements did not last for a long time but it made fundamental the custom of criticizing and literary theory developing in the field of Iranian literature in this period of time.
This situation led the poetry from public to closed gatherings of open mind people; the societies in which the ruling thought atmosphere were not a religious atmosphere in most of times. And despite now and then conflicts with the government of Pahlavi Regime (The regime that ruled Iran before Islamic Revolution) and participating in activities of Islamic Revolution in February 1979 in an acceptable way, this society did not see the new government conformed to its revolutionary wills. And it was due to ideological nature of revolution and the Islamic system risen from this revolution. Hence, they either became indifferent or kept silence or even they joined opposition (strong or weak opposition).
Well known literary critics of Iran were from the same mentioned society. Those who did not feel sympathy with the result of revolution –it means Islamic Republic System- how could they take a natural and merely scientific and literary position among the poetry of revolution and after that the poetry of sacred defense?
Therefore, they either ignored Islamic Revolution and sacred defense poetry or they saw this type of poetry and sufficed to mentioning grudgingly the sentences that were short, general, imprecise and not based on documents. This way of criticizing was more offensive that the other group that had ignored such poems.
Some of these critics were basically formalist critics and had no literature except silence regarding the events out of literary texts such as social and political events. Islamic Revolution caused a temporary silence for this group of critics. They continued keeping silence for years at least till the late 1360’s. (1980’s); the silence that naturally continued in front of poetry of Islamic Revolution and sacred defense with those great events that occurred out of texts.
From the other side, happening of Islamic Revolution and the imposed war –due to the reasons that will be mentioned- changed the modern style ruling on the poetry of Iran to a classic style. This change in the style of poetry caused revitalization of classic forms of poetry in Persian literature.
The reasons of this change in the style of Persian poetry can be mentioned as follows:
- During the years before happening of the Islamic Revolution, Iranian society was involved in unrestrained movement of surface modernism which was imitative and fought with traditions. This movement was destroying the accepted and old foundations such as “Family”? without paying attention to the religious- traditional society of Iran. In fact, Islamic Revolution researched for changes in controlling this unrestrained movement. And in this way, it ended to reviving the tradition among almost all sectors of the society and in all dimensions. Due to special radicalism nature of Islamic Revolution, Persian poetry showed a renewed tendency to classic forms and styles. As a matter of fact, it accepted dominance of traditional style and put the modern style in a side.
- This change in style was also considered as a neutral and of course exaggerated reaction to the indifference of major part of modern poetry of that age regarding important political and social events that occurred, especially political and social movements with religious roots. It seemed that many of these poets –consciously or unconsciously- found the fault with new styles in this negligence. And because of this reasons, even some of the poets who said poems with modern styles in that era started to say poems with the classic style.
Among all the classic poetry styles, ode, mathnavi (A long poem consisted of many couplets), chahar pareh (Four pieces), quatrain and couplets were more welcomed by poets.
- Islamic Revolution and sacred defense poets were mostly young people. These young poets were not very familiar with new poetry which was common in poetry sessions of open mind people before Islamic Revolution. They were more familiar with classic Persian poetry. And it was due to the fact that such young people had not participated in sessions of open mind poets before Islamic Revolution. As a matter of fact, the study reference for these poets was usually the traditional poetry of Iran. This fact caused most of these poets to have tendency to classic forms and styles.
- The attention of Islamic Revolution and sacred defense poets to expanding the rate of common audiences and the easy relationship of this rate of audiences with the traditions poetry was influential on renew flourishing of these styles of poetry; the audiences that had limited relationships with poetry and it was merely in the field of classic poetry.
- And finally the silence of movements and poetic waves rooted in literary theories about vastness of such a great and widespread event as Islamic Revolution provided the opportunity for poets who said traditional poems to own the field of Iranian poetry. And it was due to the literature of silence of the other group who had silenced about outside events.
The reaction of well known critics -who were mostly open mind critics of Persian poetry- about the change of modern poetry of Iran into the traditional poetry, was silence and ignoring this newly born movement; because they imagined the traditional styles and forms as dead styles and forms.
It seemed that poets of past eras had appeared again after the dust of many years on their poems. And it seemed that they intended to imitate and say the old poems again without having any creativity in creating new artistic works. After a short time, Islamic Revolution and sacred defense poets caused a wonderful change in these styles and forms by discovering undiscovered capacities of traditional forms of Persian poetry. They caused a great change in the poetic language and expression in the same traditional style. Discussing about quantity and quality of this change requires another chance.
***
Sacred Defense Poetry Is Not Sacred!

Although this rule is obvious and evident among people involved in literature and poetry; but it is impossible among politicians. Value –or at least the whole value- of a poem is not briefed in its subject. The undeniable connection between form and concept in a poem make these two elements dependent to each other while evaluating a poem. Meanwhile, we should accept that criticizing one of these two elements does not mean denying the other element; but has this issue been clarified and accepted by the people responsible for producing and presenting sacred defense poetry?
Some centers which are –either appropriately or inappropriately- responsible for managing art works committed to Islamic Revolution and sacred defense completely disagree with the multidimensional view of the artist.
In the point of view of these centers, the subject and message of the poem forms the totality of the poem and form is attached the second priority. Since con- cultural considerations are attached priority in making decision in such center, then in absence of the artistic view, criticizing the poetry is meant as criticizing the subject of the poetry.
The opinion and decision of these centers about playing the supporting role in producing and presenting artistic works unfortunately cause the spirit of self- censorship among some artists. Their opinions and decisions also eliminate the chance and dare for criticizing the published works.
As it was mentioned, the writers who write works related to sacred defense have left their conceptual and idealistic transparency and reflect a realistic relativity which is not liked and accepted by cultural officials very much. Naturally, the criticism that is written in line with this relativity can not be recommended by these officials.
Generally speaking, any type of change in old form and concept of sacred defense which has been caused along with special political and social considerations is considered as a kind of being far from values. And in one word, any type of independence of artist from the body of the government is considered as an opposing action. And naturally the criticism on such changes is not supported.
During the past years, there have been however positive changes in the view of such centers to art and freedom of artist which is appreciable; but there is a long way ahead till reaching to the favorable point and situation.

***
Why academic criticism has been far from studying and criticizing the movement of sacred defense poetry –and generally Islamic Revolution poetry- during the past three decades? There are however few criticism books that were previously mentioned in the article. These books are the result of efforts made by young university students and teachers; but we can not pass over the total inattentiveness of university literature to the poetry of Islamic Revolution and sacred defense by sufficing to these limited numbers of books.
A part of this inattentiveness is basically rooted in the inattentiveness of university literature to the contemporary poetry. And another part of this inattentiveness goes back to the fact that literary faces of universities who tend to the contemporary poetry are related or interested in poetic societies of open mind poets. And their position on the poetry of Islamic Revolution and sacred defense was elaborated in previous sections of the article.
I hope that in the near future, young university students and professors compensate shortages of academic criticism in this field by firstly having a scientific view about the contemporary poetry and secondly having an impartial look to the poetry of Islamic Revolution and sacred defense.
Writer: Hamid Reza Shekarsari