| چکیده انگلیسی مقاله |
Transformation of myths occurs under the influence of intra-textual and extra-textual factors within the narrative context, with one of the most significant being the shift in literary schools. The transition from lyrical literature to Romanticism has led to significant transformations in myths, including the myth of Simorgh. In this evolution, Simorgh, depicted in the Shahnameh as an intermediary between heaven and earth and celebrated in Mantiq al-Tayr as the sovereign of birds, metamorphoses into figures such as the owl, phoenix, and swan in contemporary Romantic texts. Losing power and severing its connection with the celestial realm, it becomes incapable of realizing individual ideals, leading towards annihilation. The central question of this research is how the shift from lyrical to Romantic literature influences the transformation of the Simorgh myth and what new characteristics it engenders. To this end, this study employs a descriptive-analytical approach, based on library research, to examine the changes in the Simorgh myth through the lens of five narrative elements: characterization, discourse, action, time, and space. The results indicate that in the transition from lyrical literature to Romanticism, myths diminish in size, are restricted in action, discourse, and time, and are spatially distanced from the heavens. Introduction Simorgh is one of the most frequently recurring myths in Persian literature, appearing with different functions in classical works such as the Shahnameh and Manṭiq al-Ṭayr. In these texts, Simorgh sometimes serves as an intermediary between nature and the supernatural, and at other times is portrayed as the deity of birds. However, the life of this myth is not confined to ancient texts; rather, in the contemporary era—alongside new literary movements—it has undergone a transformation. Within the framework of transformation, it has been reimagined in The Blind Owl under the new name and image of the "Owl," in Nima’s poetry as the "Phoenix," and in Hamidi Shirazi’s poetry as the smaller "Swan." It appears that the Romantic school, characterized by features such as individualism, melancholy, and an emphasis on personal emotions, has played a significant role in this transformation. The myth of Simorgh, which in classical texts held a sacred and symbolic status, has undergone a form of demystification in contemporary Romantic literature. Since myths are timeless and sacred constructs rooted in collective archetypes, these transformations indicate the phenomenon of "myth deconstruction" in modern Romantic texts. Given the importance of this subject, this study seeks to answer the following questions: 1. How has the transition from lyrical literature to Romanticism influenced the transformation of the Simorgh myth in contemporary texts? In what ways do the myths of Simorgh, Owl, Phoenix, and Swan differ from and resemble their classical counterparts? Research methodology The research method employed in this study is descriptive-analytical, and the data were collected through library research and note-taking. This study examines and analyzes the transformation of Simorgh in five works, including Ferdowsi's Shahnameh, Attar's Mantiq al-Tayr, Sadegh Hedayat's The Blind Owl, Nima Yushij's poem "Phoenix," and Mehdi Hamidi's "The Death of the Swan." Discussion Ferdowsi’s Simorgh, as a sovereign bird (Ferdowsi, 1987: 240; 266), bears similarities to Attar’s Simorgh but also possesses a more worldly aspect, acting as Zal’s nurse. The other three birds exhibit specific and limited attributes: the owl in reading, the phoenix in singing, and the swan in beauty. "Romanticism, instead of classical ideal figures, introduces individuals with unique and specific lives who are influenced by their environment and era. Therefore, the Romantic artist portrays their hero with private, distinctive, and singular descriptions" (Seyed Hosseini, 2008: 186). Ferdowsi’s Simorgh is recognized through dialogue with other characters, whereas Attar’s Simorgh transcends external senses, allowing communication beyond speech. The phoenix lacks the ability to speak, and its voice can only be perceived by entering its mental realm. The swan and the owl do not possess even the capacity for thought, and the narrator speaks on their behalf. This distinction underscores the prominent presence of the writer and poet in Romantic texts compared to lyrical works, where mythical figures experience a reduction in their agency. Attar’s Simorgh serves as the driving force behind the movement and effort of other characters. Ferdowsi’s Simorgh advances the narrative by resolving its complexities through action. In contrast, the phoenix and the swan conclude the narrative, revealing the futility of their existence. Hedayat’s owl neither initiates nor concludes the narrative and remains inconsequential to its progression. Among the birds, the hierarchy of narrative agency is as follows: Simorgh, phoenix, swan, and owl. This hierarchy highlights the greater power and influence of lyrical birds within the poetic world. Two temporal aspects are significant in analyzing the narratives: the lifespan of the myths and whether their stories unfold during the day or night. In terms of lifespan, the order is as follows: Attar’s Simorgh, Ferdowsi’s Simorgh, the phoenix, and the swan. Hedayat’s owl, akin to its narrator, exists in a liminal space between life and death. Regarding time of day, Simorghs are not bound to either day or night, whereas Romantic myths—the phoenix, swan, and owl—are depicted within a dark, nocturnal atmosphere. "Iranian Romantics favor night as the temporal setting and autumn and winter as the seasonal backdrop" (Fotouhi, 2010: 133). Conclusion In this article, the trajectory of the transformation of the lyrical myth of Simorgh in Romantic texts was examined from five aspects: characterization, discourse, action, time, and narrative space, and the following results were obtained: Characterization: As the birds distance themselves from the sky, their stature diminishes, and their abilities become more limited. Attar's Simorgh lacks worldly attributes and is introduced as the "Sultan of Birds." Ferdowsi's Simorgh, in terms of being a sovereign bird, is similar to Attar's bird, but also possesses a worldly aspect and serves as Zal's nurse, with a portion of its life spent among humans. The other three birds have specific and limited worldly characteristics; the owl in reading, the phoenix in singing, and the swan in beauty. Discourse: As the birds distance themselves from the sky and become more Romantic, they become less capable of speech. Attar's Simorgh, due to its position, is not limited by the power of speech and addresses and hears without sound. Ferdowsi's Simorgh engages in dialogue with characters to guide them. The phoenix is incapable of speech, and only its feelings pass through its mind. Hedayat's owl is merely an observer, and the swan does not speak and only seeks to end its life. In the narrative of the three Romantic myths, the owl, the phoenix, and the swan, the narrator's words are heard. Action: As the birds approach the earth, their actions become more limited. Attar's Simorgh is the creator of creation and the reason for the actions of other beings. Ferdowsi's Simorgh resolves narrative knots with its presence and advances the narrative flow; however, the phoenix and the swan conclude the narrative. The phoenix flies to find a place to self-immolate, and the swan swims to die in a specific place. Hedayat's owl, which has a non-existent existence, is the most passive bird. Time: Attar's Simorgh is associated with eternity and is not limited by time. Ferdowsi's Simorgh, due to its worldly aspect, dies in the seven trials of Esfandiyar. In the poem "Phoenix," we only witness the final moments of the thousand-year-old phoenix as it prepares for death. The poem "The Death of the Swan" begins with the swan's death. Hedayat's owl also has a gray and semi-living presence throughout the narrative. Space: Attar's Simorgh is present in a place that is neither visible nor comprehensible. Ferdowsi's Simorgh lives in a sovereign palace on the summit of Mount Alborz, which is neither visible nor imaginable. The phoenix is located on a bamboo branch and then in a lower place. The phoenix is a few steps lower than Ferdowsi's Simorgh and wanders between earth and sky. The swan is on the surface of the earth and has a lower position than the previous birds. Hedayat's owl lives in a coffin-like corner of Hedayat's room. As the narratives become more Romantic, these birds approach the earth. References Attar Neyshabouri, M. I. (2014). Mantiq al-Tayr, edited by M. Shafii Kadkani, Tehran: Sokhan. Dehghan, A., & Mohammadi, D. (2012). “The evolution of the myth of Simorgh in the transition from epic to mysticism: Based on Shahnameh and Mantiq al-Tayr”. Adab va Erfan, Vol. 3, No. pp. 19, 51–66. Farbood, F., & Soheili-Rad, F. (2003). “A comparative study of Simorgh in literary, epic, and mystical texts”, Honar, No. 56, pp. 23–43. Ferdowsi, A. (1987). Shahnameh, edited by J. Khaleghi Motlaq, introduction by E. Yarshater, New York. Fotouhi, M. (2010). The Rhetoric of Imagery, Tehran: Sokhan. Hamidi, M. (1957). Tears of the beloved, Tehran: Amir Kabir. Hatami, H. (2012). “Simorgh in the works of Molana”. Adab va Erfan, Vol. 4, No. 13, pp. 47–62. Hedayat, S. (1972). The blind owl, edited by A. Khanji, Tehran: Sepehr. Hosseini, S., Zabihi, R., & Shohani, A. (2020). “An analysis of the poetics of Simorgh and Phoenix in the transition from epic and mysticism to modern Persian poetry: Focusing on Nima Youshij’s ‘Phoenix’”. Pajouhesh-e Zaban va Adab-e Farsi, No. 59, pp. 19–47. Jafari, M. (2007). The course of romanticism in Iran: From the constitutional era to Nima, Tehran: Markaz. Khajat, B. (2012). Iranian romanticism: A study of the romantic movement in contemporary Persian poetry, Tehran: Bamdad-e No. Koushki, I. (2015). A comparison of classical and romantic schools in European and Persian poetry, Tehran: Mahvareh. Mashkoor, M. (1977). “Simorgh and its role in Iranian mysticism”. Honar va Mardom, No. 177–178, pp. 86–90. Mohammadi Haji Abadi, F., & Pourmand, H. (2011). “A comparative study of Simorgh based on Avesta, Shahnameh, and Mantiq al-Tayr”. Naghshe-Maye, Vol. 4, No. 8, pp. 57–64. Rastegar, M. (2004). Metamorphosis in mythology, Tehran: Institute for Humanities and Cultural Studies. Seyed Hosseini, R. (2008). literary Schools, Tehran: Negah. Shamisa, S. (2008). A dictionary of references in Persian literature (myths, traditions, customs, beliefs, sciences...), Tehran: Mitra. Taslimi, A. (2022). Propositions in contemporary Iranian literature: Poetry, Tehran: Akhtaran. Yahaghi, M. (2012). Dictionary of myths and narrative motifs in Persian literature, Tehran: Farhang Moaser. Youshij, N. (1983). My poetry, Tehran: Amir Kabir. |