بررسی تذکره الأولیا و مثنوی های عطار براساس نظریه بیش متنیت ژنت (مقاله علمی وزارت علوم)
درجه علمی: نشریه علمی (وزارت علوم)
آرشیو
چکیده
تبیین مسئله: تذکر ه الأولیا مهم ترین اثر منثور عطار و از بزرگ ترین متون منثور عرفانی است. تذکر ه الأولیا این امکان را دارد که مناسبات بینامتنی موجود در آن با آثار عارفان دیگر و حتی با مثنوی های خود عطار بررسی شود. روش هدف این پژوهش نشان دادن ارتباط متنی پنجاه و یک حکایت مشترک تذکر ه الأولیا و مثنوی های عطار با رویکرد بیش متنیت یکی از ارکان پنجگانه نظریه ترامتنیت «ژرار ژنت» است که با روش توصیفی تطبیقی به انجام رسید. یافته ها و نتایج: یافته های پژوهش بیانگر ارتباط گسترده تذکر ه الأولیا و مثنوی های عطار است. هر دو نوع بیش متنیت (همانگونگی و تراگونگی) در این آثار مشاهده می شود. این ارتباط بیشتر از نوع تراگونگی است. از میان مثنوی های عطار، بیشترین درصد حکایت های مشترک با تذکر ه الأولیا به ترتیب در منطق الطیر ، الهی نامه ، مصیبت نامه و اسرارنامه مشاهده شد.A Study of Attar's Tazkereh al-Awliya and Mathnawis based on Genet's Hypertext Theory
Tazkereh al-Awliya , which is the most important work of Attar's prose and one of the greatest texts of mystical prose, has great potential for intertextual comparisons with other mystical works as well as Attar’s Masnavis. This descriptive-comparative study aims to show the textual relationship of 51 joint anecdotes of Tazkereh-al-Awliya and Attar's Masnavis with the hypertext approach, one of the five pillars of Gérard Genette’s theory of transtextuality. The results of the research show a broad relationship between Tazkereh Al-Awliya and Attar’s Masnavis. Both types of hypertext (i.e. homogeneity and tragedy) are observed in these works. This connection is more than the type of tragedy, and among Attar's Masnavis, Al-Tair , Elahinameh , Misibatnameh, and Asrarnameh , respectively, have the highest percentage of common anecdotes with Tazkereh al-Awliya. Introduction The term intertextuality was first coined in the 1960s by Julia Kristeva, a Bulgarian-French post-structuralist theorist. The concept was further discussed and developed by other famous literary critics including Roland Barthes, Jacques Derrida, Claude Levi-Strauss, Philippe Sollers, Michel Foucault, Jacques Lacan, and Julien Greimas. Finally, Gérard Genette proposed the term transtextuality to refer to all the relationships between two texts. Concerning this term, he writes in his Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree : “Today, I would like to say that, in general, it is the issue of transtextuality or textual transcendence that I have previously defined generally as the fact that any hidden or obvious thing can put the text in a relationship with other texts” (Namvar Motlagh, 2007, p. 86). Genette divides transtextuality into five subtypes: intertextuality, paratextuality, metatextuality, architextuality, and hypertextuality. “Attar-e Neishaboori is a well-known mystical figure who made extensive use of stories and anecdotes in his works. He would combine all his mystical or moral issues with anecdotes to leave a greater impression on the audience’s mind. This is why the analysis of the components of his anecdotes is important” (Ashrafzadeh, 1994, p. 31). Tazkirat al-Awliya is one of the most outstanding works of Persian mystical literature that has great potential for intertextual comparisons with other mystical works as well as Attar’s Masnavis. Attar sometimes repeats one of the anecdotes of Tazkirat al-Awliya in his Masnavis only thematically without mentioning proper names. Conversely, he sometimes takes a very brief and ambiguous anecdote from Tazkirat al-Awliya and expands it in his Masnavis. “Like intertextuality, hypertextuality also refers to the relationship between two literary or artistic texts; but the hypertextual relationship, in contrast, is based on adaptation rather than co-presence. In other words, hypertextuality deals with the effect of one text on the other instead of its presence. Of course, it can be easily imagined that there is an effect in every presence and a presence in every effect. In hypertextuality, however, a broader and deeper effect is emphasized. More clearly, intertextuality focuses on giving presence whereas hypertextuality focuses on the general impression and inspiration” (Namvar Motlagh, 2007, p. 94-95). Materials and Methods By looking at Tazkirat al-Awliya as a hypertext and Attar’s Masnavis as hypotexts, this study attempts to investigate the relationship between these works through the framework of hypertextuality and a descriptive-comparative method. Finally, the differences, similarities, and changes in the anecdotes that are in common between Tazkirat al-Awliya and the Masnavis are explained. 3 . Results 1. Similar Anecdotes of Attar’s Tazkirat al-Awliya and Masnavis Name of Masnavi Number of anecdotes Number of anecdotes in common with Tazkirat al-Awliya Percentage of similar anecdotes Mosibat-nameh 356 18 5% Elahi-nameh 251 17 8.6% Mantiq al-Tayr 185 13 7% Asrar-nameh 97 3 3% 3.1.1. Hypertextuality Genette defines hypertextuality as, “any relationship uniting a text to an earlier text upon which it is grafted in a manner that is not that of commentary” (Genette, 1977, p. 5). In other words, hypertextuality refers to any relationship that unites text B with text A. Therefore, “hypertext is a text that has been derived from an earlier text through a transformative process” (Namva Motlagh, 2007, p. 95). Genette divides hypertextuality into two general types: homogeneity (imitation), and transformation (change). The highest percentage of character homogeneity was 83.3% and the highest percentage of place homogeneity was 33.3%, both belonging to the similar anecdotes of Tazkirat al-Awliya and Mosibat - nameh . After Mosibat-nameh , the anecdotes of Elahi-nameh have the highest frequency in terms of homogeneity with the anecdotes of Tazkirat al-Awliya , although the anecdotes of Mantiq al-Tayr have the highest place homogeneity with Tazkirat al-Awliya . It seems that place is not of importance in mystical anecdotes due to its abstract nature. The third work with the highest homogeneity with Tazkirat al-Awliya is Mantiq al-Tayr and the fourth one is Asrar-nameh . It should be noted that place is mentioned in none of the similar anecdotes of Tazkirat al-Awliya and Asrar-nameh , and this indicates the low importance of the notion of place. 3.1.1.1. Transformation (Change) Changes to a hypertext can be small or extensive. “Transformation can be of different types. In fact, changing a text to create another text can result in different types. This transformation can be viewed through different lenses and with different criteria in mind, based on which the different types of transformation can be distinguished” (Namvar Motlagh, 2007, p. 97). Transformation has been classified from quantitative and content-related perspectives. The former refers to reduction and addition, and the latter refers to substitution. 3.1.1.2. Substitution The intertextual relationships between Attar’s Tazkirat al-Awliya and his Masnavis have been well maintained in terms of events and thematic content. The most prominent substitution in this process is the conversion from poetry to prose or vice versa. The substitutions occurring between Tazkirat al-Awliya and the Masnavis can be analyzed in terms of characters, places, wordings, and sentence types. 3.1.1.3. Reduction From among 51 similar anecdotes, 42 anecdotes show a reduction in the Masnavis in comparison with Tazkirat al-Awliya . In 12 anecdotes (anecdotes 2, 3, 4, 14, and 15 from Elahi-nameh , anecdote 5 from Mantiq al-Tayr , and anecdotes 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, and 15 from Mosibat-nameh ), only the versions in Tazkirat al-Awliya begin with the phrase “it has been said that”, but the anecdotes in the Masnavis repeat the content without this phrase. 3.1.1.4. Addition Given the nature of poetry, many of the anecdotes in Attar’s Masnavis include additions in comparison with Tazkirat al-Awliya . Discussion and Conclusion Overall, there are 51 anecdotes in common between Attar’s Tazkirat al-Awliya and his Masnavis. To put it exactly, Tazkirat al-Awliya has 17 anecdotes in common with Elahi-nameh , three anecdotes in common with Asrar-nameh , 13 anecdotes in common with Mantiq al-Tayr , and 18 anecdotes in common with Mosibat-nameh . Among Genette’s five types of textual relationships, intertextualiy and hypertextuality are more tangible and concrete. Assuming Tazkirat al-Awliya as the hypotext and Attar’s Masnavis as the hypertext, we studied these works through the framework of hypertextuality. Attar has made use of both types of intertextuality (i.e. homogeneity and transformation), which consist of substitution, reduction, and addition in the textual relationships of Tazkirat al-Awliya and his Masnavis. In the similar anecdotes of Tazkirat al-Awliya and the Masnavis, it seems that Attar has not deliberately created fundamental changes and the majority of these changes are due to the inherent stylistic differences between prose and verse. In prose, for example, creating atmosphere is more sophisticated and resembles dramatic literature, but Attar’s adherence in his Masnavis to literary devices and the poetic as well as the limitations of rhythm and rhyme prevents him from paying due attention to atmosphere. Additions in the works of verse, or indeed reductions in Tazkirat al-Awliya , are sometimes exaggerated in poetic descriptive elements such as adverbs and adjectives. Although not too frequent, the frequency of such additions is higher in Masnavis, which is quite natural. On the other hand, the poet is sometimes compelled to use redundancy or even words that are not mentioned in the original anecdote, thereby creating a longer version than the prose text. Given the nature of the poem that is based on imagination or, according to Nezami, based on the belief that “the most beautiful poem is the most untruthful one”, Attar does not emphasize realism in his Masnavis. In Tazkirat al-Awliya , however, which is based upon verisimilitude, he tries as much as possible to verify the authenticity of the anecdote. This is why phrases such as “it has been reported that...” are quite common additions in this text. In both the Masnavis and Tazkirat al-Awliya , Attar gives priority to the thematic content. In all the similar anecdotes in these works, therefore, the events and themes are identically repeated. Nevertheless, for certain reasons, he sometimes changes characters, times, or places that appear to be unimportant or even mentions them only ambiguously. It seems that, except for certain cases such as characters and places or phrases like “it has been said that” that is specific to prose as well as descriptions, exaggerations, and verbosity in some Masnavis, the anecdotes have not been fundamentally transformed during the transition between prose and poetry and their thematic content has been transferred almost completely. In fact, Attar does not intend to create purposeful changes, at least in these common anecdotes. For example, some proper nouns from the Masnavis are mentioned indefinitely in Tazkirat al-Awliya (e.g. “a mystic”, “a person”, “a place”), and vice versa. The highest percentage of character homogeneity is 83.3% and the highest percentage of place homogeneity is 33.3%, both belong to the anecdotes of Mosibat-nameh . Next are Elahi-nameh , Mantiq al-Tayr , and Asrar-nameh . The greatest amount of substitution has occurred between Tazkirat al-Awliya and Asrar-nameh . The highest percentage of word substitution is 47% that has occurred in the similar anecdotes of Elahi-nameh and Tazkirat al-Awliya . Next are Mantiq al-Tayr with 23% and Mosibat-nameh with 11%. No occurrence of word substitution was observed in the similar anecdotes of Asrar-nameh and Tazkirat al-Awliya . From among the four mentioned types of substitution, the highest percentage belongs to character substitution. The findings of the study suggest that the transformation occurs less frequent than homogeneity in the anecdotes that are in common between Attar’s Tazkirat al-Awliya and Masnavis. Furthermore, Mosibat-nameh has the most points of commonality with Tazkirat al-Awliya .
تبلیغات
