دیالکتیک ذهن و عین نقدی تحلیلی بر رمان آینه های دردار گلشیری

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی.

نویسنده

دانشگاه شهیدباهنر کرمان

چکیده

دیالکتیک ذهن و عین، یعنی به رسمیت شناختن توأمان متافیزیک و واقعیت؛ بدین­صورت که هر معرفتی ناشی از مبادلۀ دو جریان ذهن و تجربه است. این دیدگاه فلسفی که قابل توجه فیلسوفان غربی و شرقی بوده، به عرصۀ نظریه­پردازی در حوزۀ نقد ادبی وارد شده و مکتب ساختگرا را درگیر خود نموده است. گاستون باشلار از نظریه­پردازان ساختگرا، بحث ذهن و عین را به روش‌های نقد ادبی متون توسع داده است. بر اساس نظریۀ او می‌توان از طریق عناصر تقابلی متنوع متن، به تحلیل ذهن مؤلف رمان و تطبیق آن در عینیت نوشتار دست یافت. حاصل این روش نقد، حتی ممکن است از ذهنیت مؤلف فراتر رفته و محصولی تولید کند که مفهوم گسترده‌تری را به معنای متن بیفزاید. رمان آینه ‌های دردار، یکی از رمان ‌های مدرن با تمی اجتماعی و درامی با نگرش فلسفی است که در تنظیم ساختار آگاهانه‌ اش، تقابلی زیربنایی تعبیه شده است. روش بررسی مبتنی بر دیالکتیک ذهن و عین باشلار در راستای معنی بخشیدن به این تقابل‌ها که مبتنی بر تعلیقی روانکاوانه و در پاره ‌ای از موارد هستی شناسانه هستند، کارساز به نظر می‌رسد. مقالۀ حاضر می‌کوشد تا به کمک این نظریه به تحلیل متفاوتی از اثر هوشنگ گلشیری دست یابد.

کلیدواژه‌ها


عنوان مقاله [English]

Dialectic of subject and object on the sign relations of text in the novel "Ayenehaye Dar dar” Golshiri

نویسنده [English]

  • Sedigheh Alipoor
shahid bahonar - kerman
چکیده [English]

Introduction

The dialectic of mind and object means the recognition of both metaphysics and reality, such that any knowledge is the result of the exchange of two streams of mind and experience. This philosophical perspective, which was of interest to Western and Oriental philosophers, has entered the area of theorizing in the field of literary criticism and has embraced the constructivist school. Gaston Bachlelard, a constructivist theorist, has developed a discussion of mind and object in literary criticism of texts.
In “Dialectic of Mind and Object”, Bachelard acknowledges that mind and object can create a dialectic in which everything is formed by confrontation, and we go beyond those forms to analyze their position. Modern novels such as Ayenehaye Dardar (آینه‌های دردار) have a psycho-philosophical position because of their emphasis on subjectivism and the reflection of thought through the flow of the mind. Thus, the analysis of such novels, based on Bachelard’s dialectical method of the mind and the object, enters into the textual and hyper-textual layers of the literary work and extracts its esoteric meanings to distract readers from the apparent confusion of the modern text and relate them closely into the novel.

Review of Literature

According to Bachelard's fictional reading theory, the critical reader can achieve analysis and recognition of the text based on his/her own intuitive perception of the text through the mind. Regarding this theory several researches have been conducted, such as: works by Namvar Motlagh (2007) that analyzes and investigates Bachelard’s theory of fictional criticism. Tahvildari (2008) also worked on the analysis and criticism model from the point of views of Bachelard and other scholars. There are other studies investigating the practical criticism, including Hashemi and Kohanmoei (2013) that focus on the role of conflicting elements of the world in the psychoanalysis of literary works. The following articles have also studied the practical criticism: “The semiotics of narratice elements in Bijan & Manijeh” with Illustration approach by writer (2018) and “The two concepts of water and fire in “Hamnavei Shabaneye Orkester Choubha” by Sadat Hashemi and Kohanmoei (2013) and other similar works that focus on the role of conflicting elements of the world in the psychoanalysis of literary work.
But, there is no specific work regarding Bachelard’s “dialectic of mind and object” theory that pays special attention to the psycho-philosophical meaning of the text at the border between reality and the mind. This study tries to provide a practical criticism of “Ayenehaye Dardar” by Houshang Golshiri based on this approach.

Method

This study, using descriptive analysis, attempts first to extract and analyze the textual codes and attributes through structural oppositions and then to analyze the psycho-philosophical meanings of the modern novel of Ayenehaye Dardar using Bacheard’s dialectic of mind and object.

Results and Discussion

The story is about a human that, under the circumstances, is separated from its past and suspended between its two human halves in the present and in the past. This suspense relates to a personal and social memory of the author's past that made him psychologically incoherent and to find coherence, he needs a transformation. Having a journey is the most effective way to do this: a mental journey to myths and legends; a stage in which human perfection is introduced and an objective journey to various countries in search of a lost one that will bring this perfection to fruition.
Given its psycho-philosophical approach and its sophistication and wandering modernity, the novel has a favorable context for conceptualization and analysis through objectifying the subject. The novel is based on reciprocal relationship dualities Inductive mind/objective rupture, confusion and distress of mind/objective confusion, confusion of mind/objective confusion, impaired life of mind/objective image of broken gate mirror and half mirror image, exemplary and subjective love/true love, and subjective philosophy/objective life are among the contradictions dualities discussed in this article.
To express his uneasy mind about modernity, Golshiri (2010) explores the duality of industry (modernity) and nature (tradition), while explaining old-new values; with this regard, he makes use of the concepts of myth and fable. In this context, he analyzes codes such as demythologizing as a result of social modernity repression, de-symbolizing the absolute love in modern times and shedding light on his own and his generation’s shattered mind. Golshiri also explores old/new values while exploring the old / new values while also exploring popular culture, especially the category of myth, in order to visualize his uneasy mind about modernity. And the myth takes refuge. In this context, he analyzes codes such as the myth of the repression of social modernity, the demolition of absolute love in modern times, and the explanation of him and his generation’s shattered mind.

Conclusion

The novel is made up of the author's mental imagery and thoughts about the devastating effects of events, phenomena, and objective matters of life in his time. The mirror is a symbol of the contemporary failed human being, a man involved in the events of industrialization, modernization, and at the same time bustle, war and destruction. The main mirror in this narrative is a mirror with a broken door. The fragments of this man's existence are hidden in it, and reveals throughout the narrative, bit by bit. This clarity is caused by the duality relations between the subjective and the objective elements.
It can also be said that this story is a narrative allegory of two types of persons with dual opposites in face, belief and behavior. One is destructive characters that are in some way dependent on power, modernity, and the West, and the other are devastated characters, both of whom have finally fallen into despair and regrets.
In the end, the general objection to the novel can be to the fact that the author, in spite of his attention to the delusional course of modern writing, sets his mind so free in some parts and He write his text freely and disorder so that confuses the audience as far as they lose track of the story.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • subject and object
  • structuralism
  • Bachelard
  • Ayenehaye Dar dar
استریناتی، دومینیک. (1388). مقدمه‌ای بر نظریه‌های فرهنگ عامه، ترجمۀ ثریا پاک نظر. تهران: گام نو.
بارت، رولان. (1388). تحلیل متن بنیاد: والدمار، نوشتۀ آدگار آلن پو، گزیدۀ مقالات روایت. ترجمۀ فتاح محمدی. تهران: مینوی خرد. 213-202.
باشلار، گاستون. (1392). بوطیقای فضا. ترجمۀ مریم کمالی و محمد شیربچه. تهران: روشنگران و مطالعات زنان.
باشلار، گاستون. (1388). دیالکتیک برون و درون. ترجمۀ امیر مازیار. تهران: فرهنگستان هنر.
. باشلار، گاستون. (1377). شعله شمع. ترجمۀ جلال ستاری. تهران: توس.
تسلیمی، علی. (1388). گزاره‌هایی در ادبیات معاصر ایران (داستان). چاپ دوم. تهران: کتاب آمه.
چامسکی، نوآم. (1382). زبانشناسی دکارتی، فصلی از تاریخ تفکر عقلگرا. ترجمۀ احمد طاهریان. چاپ دوم. تهران: هرمس.
چایلدز، پیتر. (1386). مدرنیسم. ترجمۀ رضا رضایی. تهران: انتشارات ماهی.
حقوقی، محمد. (1389). مروری بر تاریخ ادب و ادبیات امروز ایران. چاپ هفتم. تهران: قطره.
دستغیب، عبدالعلی. (1386). از دریچۀ نقد (گفتارها و جستارهای انتقادی ادبی). جلد اوّل. تهران: خانۀ کتاب.
ریتزر، جورج. (1379). نظریه‌های جامعه‌شناسی دوران معاصر. ترجمۀ محسن ثلاثی. تهران: علمی.
علیپور، پوران (صدیقه). (1394). «واکاوی نشانه‌های فرهنگ بومی در افسانۀ سگ پیرزال و پس پادشاه». مجلۀ مطالعات ایرانی. سال چهاردهم. شمارۀ بیست و هشتم. صص 190- 173.
صرفی، محمدرضا و اکبر جور، نجمه. (1391). «معانی نمادین ماه در اسطوره‌ها و ایران باستان و بازتاب آن در اندیشۀ مولانا». مجلۀ مطالعات ایرانی. سال یازدهم. شمارۀ بیست و دوم. صص 153- 127.
فولیکه، پل. (1370) فلسفۀ عمومی. ترجمۀ دکتر یحیی مهدوی. چاپ چهارم. تهران: چاپ و انتشارات دانشگاه تهران.
کالر، جاناتان. (1388). در جستجوی نشانه‌ها. ترجمۀ لیلا صادقی و تینا امراللهی. ویرایش فرزان سجودی. تهران: علم.
گلشیری، هوشنگ (1380). آینه‌های دردار. تهران: نیلوفر.
لوکاچ، جورج. (1381). نظریه‌ رمان. ترجمۀ حسن مرتضوی. تهران. نشر قصه.
مکاریک، ایرناریما. (1388). دانش‌نامۀ نظریه‌های ادبی معاصر. ترجمۀ مهران مهاجر و محمد نبوی. چاپ سوم. تهران: آگه.
میرعابدینی، حسن. (1387). صدسال داستان‌نویسی ایران. چاپ پنجم. تهران: چشمه.
نامور مطلق، بهمن. (1386). باشلار بنیانگذار نقد تخیلی. «نشریۀ هنر و معماری». پژوهشنامۀ فرهنگستان هنر. شماره 3.
Roston, Murray. (2000). Modernist Patterns. London: macmillan press.