تحلیل جامعه شناختی قصه «خیشخانه هرات» از تاریخ بیهقی (براساس نظریه «کنش متقابل نمادین») (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
تاریخ بیهقی یکی از متون تاریخی است که ابوالفضل بیهقی آن را نوشته است. این کتاب دربردارنده اطلاعات دقیق و درستی از دوره غزنویان است. «خیشخانه هرات» یکی از حکایت های موجود در این کتاب است که به چگونگی ارتباط سلطان محمود با فرزندش مسعود می پردازد. کاربست نظریه «کنش متقابل نمادین» در این حکایت موجب می شود تا با بررسی ارتباطات کلامی و غیرکلامی میان شخصیت ها، شناخت و درک دقیق تری از اوضاع و احوال دربار غزنوی و زندگی روزمره آنها، در اختیار مخاطب قرار گیرد. نظریه «کنش متقابل نمادین» با تأکید بر موضوع نمایش و تظاهر، ظرفیت های جدیدی را در حوزه تعاملات و ارتباطات انسانی معرفی می کند. پیش فرض این است که وجود متغیرهایی مانند «نمایش دروغین»، «ایدئال سازی»، «رازآمیزی»، «تبانی تیمی»، «تزویر»، «چندخویشی»، «حفظ کنترل نمایشی»، «کنش و واکنش» در حکایت یادشده، کاربست نظریه «کنش متقابل نمادین» را باورپذیر می کند. تحلیل این متغیرهای جزوی در «خیشخانه هرات» می تواند نمادی از یک واقعیت فراگیر و کلان جامعه شناختی تلقی شود که نشان دهنده فضای ناپایدار فرهنگی و اجتماعی و همچنین پنهان کاری و رازآمیزی، تفتیش، تظاهر، بی انسجامی و بی اعتمادی بسیار در دوره و دربار غزنویان است. در این مقاله با تحلیل کیفی و توصیفی تلاش می شود تا نشانه های جامعه شناختی موجود در این حکایت بررسی شود.Sociological Analysis of the Story Khishkhaneh Herat from Tarikh Beyhaqi Based on the Theory of Symbolic Interaction
Tarikh Beyhaqi contains accurate information about the Ghaznavid period. ‘Khishkhaneh Herat’ is one of the anecdotes in this book, which deals with how Sultan Mahmud relates to his son Masood. The application of the theory of symbolic interaction to the verbal and non-verbal connections between the characters provides a more accurate understanding of the situation of the Ghaznavid court and their daily lives. The premise is that variables such as false representation, idealization, mystery, team collusion, hypocrisy, multi-kinship, maintaining dramatic control, and action and reaction in this anecdote make the application of the theory of symbolic interaction convincing. The analysis of these partial variables in Khishkhaneh Herat indicates an all-encompassing and macro-sociological reality and shows the unstable cultural atmosphere as well as secrecy, inspection, pretense, incoherence, and extreme distrust in the period.
Introduction
Tarikh Beyhaqi is one of the history books written by Abulfazl Beyhaqi. This book contains accurate information about the Ghaznavid period. Beyhaqi has been very careful in his history writing and has always tried to depict the public and court atmosphere of the Ghaznavids in the best possible way. This history book has general sociological and psychological points, and the accuracy of its anecdotes and stories will familiarize the reader with the public and social environment of that period. The story of ‘Khishkhaneh Herat’ is one of the readable parts of Beyhaqi History , which takes the reader along with beautiful pictures and performances. This tale has many linguistic capacities and dramatic talents that can provide the audience with the culture and the hidden bio-community of the period as well as the court of Ghaznavids in a vivid and alive way. Analyzing and re-evaluating the story of Khishkhaneh Herat with the application of analytical and interpretative sociological theories (not quantitative and field theories) can provide the reader with more social, cultural, and sociological awareness and features so that the reader can have a mental image of the public life of that time in his mind.
Materials and Methods
In the present study, using the qualitative and descriptive analysis, an attempt is made to investigate the sociological signs in the Khishkhaneh Herat story. The theory of symbolic interaction introduces new capacities in the field of human interactions by emphasizing the subject of representation and pretense.
Results
The story of Khishkhaneh Herat is the culmination of a small and partial show that indicates a macro cultural and social behavior. It is a representation of symbolic interactions that can be generalized to the whole culture in the Ghaznavid period. This shows that the court and the public space in the Ghaznavid period were often associated with hidden work and pretense. The pretense was the result of the conservative and cautious actions of people at the high levels of social management and represents the control, investigation, and hidden work of the main actors in the court. The fear of social punishment and supervisory isolation drives Amir Massoud to pretend as the result of his father's control and interference in his personal affairs. The story of Khishkhaneh shows that, during the Ghaznavid period, the personal and private circumstances of individuals were important in acquiring resources and distributing social benefits; therefore, the vertical and horizontal mobility of individuals requires the display and the implementation of values. Activists of this period turn the court into a scene of mistrust, play, and false show.
Dramatic confrontation and conflict in the court and at the level of main activists such as Amir Mahmood and Amir Massoud forced Hasham and Khadam into two opposing groups. This story shows that it is not possible to live in other than two mutual groups. Also, it is not possible for other actors to play independent and different roles. In these hostages and court confrontations, the individuality and independence of people are destroyed and people are exploited in groups and symbolic confrontations, and at the same time, among helpless and mislead pathologists and sociologists. The social aspects, creativity, and innovation of other activists are also limited. In this story, Abulfazl Beyhaqi has been able to show the hypocrisy and pretense of the Ghaznavid court. Emphasizing dramatizing the actions of the actors, he ignores himself as a narrator and minimizes his role as a mediator. It is as if he is well acquainted with the principles of the show. In the process of dramatizing the story, he conveys well the ambiguity, secrecy, polygamy, hidden work, distrust, etc. in the Ghaznavid court to the general reader. Bayhaqi seeks to present a popular show; a show that can introduce the public to the hidden and covered the reality of the Ghaznavid court. For this reason, it can be said that the application of the theory of symbolic interaction not only shows how the actors communicate and interact individually in the story of Khishkhaneh, but it can also correctly reveal the values, norms, macro, and dominant structures of collective relations.
Conclusion
The story of Khishkhaneh Herat is a short and symbolic performance that indicates a big and vast reality called the social culture of the Ghaznavid era. A collective culture that is based more than anything on false shows, control, idealization, concealment, lies, espionage, team collusion, investigation, and interference in people's private lifestyles.
تبلیغات
