Phoenix

thumbnail
by Molly Brodak, Guernica

Leeuwenhoek was a draper with soft brown hair cut in two sloping planes like collie ears.

Close up he saw threads and then worldthreads and what was inside of that?

He held a rod of soda glass in flame until it pulled apart into whiskers.

The whisker tips tinked off into mini orbs, eyes and eyes upon his eye.

He saw kind rich men walking through the dark as if through a city.

Their silk ties lifting in wind. And tender underneath.

Phone wires bowing like sails. Skin smell and mush smell of roses.

A radio helplessly beaming horror whistles from Jupiter.

A girl holding a hair-threaded needle.  

Imagine what must be very far away, he thought,

very very far away!


Press here to play the MP3.


Molly Brodak is the author of A Little Middle of the Night (University of Iowa Press, 2010) and three chapbooks of poetry. She edits the poetry journal Aesthetix and teaches at Emory University.


Via  Guernica

Whispers of Love

thumbnail

One man’s quest to translate the great poetry of Persia.

Hafez, Iran’s ubiquitous poet, as depicted in 16th Century painting by Sultan Muhammad. Courtesy The Metropolitan Museum Of Art/President And Fellows Of Harvard College and The Daily Beast

by Brad Gooch, The Daily Beast

When Dick Davis, the preeminent translator of Persian poetry of our time, was a boy in Portsmouth, England, in the 1950s, he found on his parents’ bookshelf a copy of Edward FitzGerald’s swooning Victorian translations of The Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám. Its presence was not so unusual, as those verses (“A Jug of Wine, a Loaf of Bread—and Thou”) had set off a minor craze. If an English middle-class family owned just three books, along with the Bible and Shakespeare would be FitzGerald. “It was a kind of universal badge of culture,” Davis jokes. Yet he absorbed so much of what he later described as “the candied death-wish of FitzGerald” that he knew most by heart. Instead of anxiety of influence, he experienced an opiated hit of influence.

Teleport forward 60 years, and Dick Davis, white-haired, spectacled professor emeritus of Persian at the Ohio State University and fellow of the Royal Society of Literature, is still adding tile by colored tile to a busy mosaic of translation that former National Endowment for the Arts chairman Dana Gioia insists is the “most remarkable poetic translation project in the last 20 years.” He began with epics the equal of The Iliad in Persian civilization—the Shahnameh, or Book of Kings, and The Conference of the Birds, Attar’s flight of Sufi fancy about various birds in search of the eternally elusive Bird of Birds. Now Davis has succeeded at the enigmatic 14th-century poet Hafez, along with his contemporaries female poet Jahan Malek Khatun and dirty-minded Obayd, in Faces of Love: Hafez and the Poets of Shiraz. Hafez is so beloved in Iran that cabdrivers recite his lyrics by heart and families at holidays tell fortunes by opening to random lines of his poems—attesting to both their seductive beauty and their Sphinx-like ambiguity. Davis reminds us by folding in these two other court poets that Shiraz in Hafez’s lifetime was a poetry genius cluster.

Davis and his wife, Afkham Darbandi, met in Iran when he went to a hospital. Courtesy of Mage Publishers and The Daily Beast

Not only Davis’s career track, but his entire life, as he tells the tale, has a hint of FitzGerald’s kismet—“The Moving Finger writes: and, having writ,/Moves on”—until he found his way to Iran and its ancient language. The author of eight of his own books of poems (in unfashionable meter and rhyme), in “A Letter to Omar” he asks, “Was it for you I answered that advertisement?” The want ad, for an English instructor in Tehran, caught Davis’s eye after Cambridge, where as an undergrad he befriended the aged novelist E.M. Forster, who filled his head with the glories of Persia’s Mogul culture. In 1970, Davis arrived in Iran to teach at the University of Tehran. A year later, he met his wife, Afkham Darbandi, an Iranian who arranged for a blood transfusion when he arrived in a hospital emergency room. “A doctor said to me, ‘You see that nurse? She saved your life,’” recalls Davis. “That was worth following up.”

Since fleeing Iran in 1979, Davis has not returned for fear of spoiling his happy memories. Courtesy Abbas/Magnum and The Daily Beast

Eight years into his romance with both his wife and the Persian language, after living full time in Tehran, the Islamic Revolution of 1978–79 drew a bright red line between past and future. At first he and his wife “expected things to blow over,” says Davis. “It wasn’t nearly as dramatic as Argo. The revolutionary crowds were actually very sympathetic to Westerners. I went to demonstrations, and I never felt in any danger. They would say, ‘Tell your people what we are doing!’ This was before the hostages, and there was a kind of euphoria about it all.” Soon, though, Tehran was under martial law, the streets full of tanks, with shooting. As they lived in a third-floor apartment with big windows on Avenue Villa, a main boulevard, they moved in with Indian friends from England on a hidden narrow backstreet, and they devised an exit strategy.

By the time the Davises escaped Iran in November, shortly before the shah’s departure in January 1979, the tick of drama was much more Argo. One of Davis’s students worked at the airport and helped him get plane tickets. Another worked at the National Bank, where all their savings were frozen: “I mentioned this to my student, who said, ‘If you trust me, Mr. Davis, give me your money, and when you get to England, it will be in your bank.’ Indeed every cent of it was there.” While his wife returns every few years to visit family, Davis has not. “I am reluctant to go back,” he explains. “I had students who were killed in the revolution. I can remember faces of people I know were killed, so that gives me an extremely bitter feeling. I met my wife there and found my intellectual passion for the rest of my life. When my wife comes back, she cries for two weeks at the dreadful changes. I have this very positive image of Iran. I don’t want that spoiled.”

From Iran With Love

A selection of poems excerpted from ‘Faces of Love: Hafez and the Poets of Shiraz.’ 

My love’s for pretty faces,
     For heart-bewitching hair;
I’m crazy for good wine,
     A languorous, drunk stare ...

In love there’s no escaping
     The burning of desire;
I stand here like a candle –
     Don’t scare me with your fire.

I am a man from heaven,
     But on this path I see
My love of youth and beauty
     Have made a slave of me.

If Fate will help me, I
     Will take myself elsewhere –
My bed will be swept clean
     By some sweet houri’s hair.

Shiraz is like a mine
     Of ruby lips, a store
Of loveliness ... and I’m
     A jeweler who’s dirt-poor.

I’ve seen so many drunk
     Eyes in this town, I think
I’m drunk, although I swear
     I’ve had no wine to drink.

You asked me to explain
     Eternity for you –
Well certainly, when I
     Have downed a drink or two.

Hafez, my nature’s like
     A hopeful bride, but I
Lack mirrors to array
     Myself – that’s why I sigh.

—Hafez

How long will you be like
     A cypress tree,
And lean your lovely head
     Away from me?

Sorrow is all you’ve ever
     Brought to me;
I will not ask how long
     I am to be

The knocker on your door
     You do not see,
The iron ring you pass
     Obliviously.

My pillow’s made of absence –
     While you are free
To taste another’s love,
     Forgetting me.

If I could follow your
     Curls’ scent I’d see
A way to let their night
     Envelop me;

Since you have left me to
     This misery,
Tears, and a heart on fire
     Are all of me.

I don’t deserve you, but
    I long to see
The sunlight of your face
     Shine here, for me.

Although you’ve shown that you
     Don’t care for me,
My soul still wishes you
     Prosperity.


—Jahan Khatun

Your face’s absence leaves mine waxy-white,
                                             like a candle;
How long will my tears drip, blearing my sight,
                                             like a candle?
You sleep, and on your pillow I lie broken,
                                             self-consumed,
Awake and weeping till the morning light,
                                             like a candle.

—Jahan Khatun


I’m off to stroll through the bazaar – and there
I’ll see what can be flushed out from its lair;
I’ll lure a rent-boy home here, or a whore;
One of the two – either will do – I don’t care.

—Obayd-e Zakani


From Faces of Love: Hafez and the Poets of Shiraz, Mage Publishers. Copyright 2013 by Dick Davis.
 
Brad Gooch is a professor of english at William Paterson University in New Jersey. His latest book is Flannery: A Life of Flannery O'Connor

Via Brad Gooch

Call to Arms

thumbnail
Only you, O Iranian woman, have remained in bonds of wretchedness, misfortune, and cruelty; if you want these bonds broken, grasp the skirt of obstinacy - Forough Farrokhzad, Call to Arms

Mona Shomali and Haleh Jamali Explore Female Iranian Identity in a Joint Exhibition

by Joobin Bekhrad, REORIENT

Opening February 19th at Philadelphia’s Asian Arts Initiative is That Person Who is Your Creation, an exhibition of the works of two female Iranian artists, Mona Shomali, and Haleh Jamali. A collaboration between From the Mouth of the Lion, Sara Zia Ebrahimi’s US-based non-profit organisation dedicated to showcasing the works of emerging Iranian artists in the diaspora born on the cusp of the ’79 Islamic Revolution and artclvb, an online platform for contemporary Middle Eastern art, the exhibition will feature five paintings from Shomali’s Naked Folklore series, and two video installations by Jamali.

Taking its title from Call to Arms, a poem by the late Iranian poet (and director) Forough Farrokhzad (1935 – 1967), the exhibition explores the subject of female identity from the perspective of two Iranian women living in the West. Through the medium of painting and film, Shomali, an artist born and raised in the United States, and Scotland-based Jamali, curator of the Edinburgh Iranian Festival, examine what it means to be an Iranian woman, challenging both Eastern and Western perceptions and notions in the process.

Last week, I talked to Mona, Haleh, and Sara about some of the ideas and themes of the exhibition, the works on display, and naturally, the connection with Forough Farrokhzad.

Despite having passed away at an incredibly young age, leaving behind a relatively small body of work, Farrokhzad’s influence and impact on Iranian artists of all mediums – female artists in particular – has been immense. How, nearly 50 years after her death, has Farrokhzad inspired you as artists?

Mona: When I was a teenager, my mom talked quite a bit about how sexuality was different for women in America than it was for her in Iran. For example, she told me that no one ever said ‘vagina’ in front of her when she was younger, and she didn’t really know what the proper word was in Farsi, because it was so often referred to as ‘down there’. She made it seem as if Iranian women between the 50s and 70s were dispossessed of their own bodies. She was the first person to tell me about Farrokhzad. Her description of the poems was special, because she believed they were the first widely-read poems where an Iranian woman was talking about her own sensuality and sensual feelings in a way she saw fit for herself. Her excitement over Farrokhzad’s poetry was palpable, as if it were something rare and exotic, and she saw Farrokhzad as taking a stand and owning her sexuality in a way that hadn’t been done before. I continued to read Farrokhzad’s poetry in college when I took a Farsi class and studied with a Farsi tutor. I gained a deeper appreciation for her when I realised she was not just a pioneer when it came to sensuality, but also that her criticism of Iranian culture was very illuminating and truthful.

Haleh: I think that throughout her work she remained honest to her feelings, and her poems are very personal records of that. I believe her work is timeless; they’re not really particular to a certain era or period, and you feel like they could have been written yesterday. What is interesting about her poetry for me is her detailed focus on women’s struggles, and many of the issues they faced, and continue to face. You can really see the influence of her work in one of my video installations, Someone Who is Not Like Anyone Else, which again refers to another one of Farrokhzad’s poems.

Mona, a large body of your work deals with the identity issues you have faced as a female Iranian-American, as well as the preconceived notions surrounding Iranian women in the West. You were born in the States during the year of the Islamic Revolution, and grew up in a time of intense political hostility between your country of birth and your ancestral homeland, let alone experiencing the aftermath of 9/11 first-hand in New York City. How has being raised in America affected your Iranian identity and your self-perception as an Iranian woman? How have you been able to reconcile these two facets (i.e. Iranian and American) of your identity?

Mona: To begin with, I am happy to see that you have described Iranian-American identity as being very distinct from Iranian identity; this is not always recognised in the literature and art of the diaspora. There is a lot of artwork dealing with Iranian identity, but much less has been devoted to the identity of Iranians coming to age in the West. My artwork is very much about the inner conflicts, clashes, contrasts, hostilities, judgements, and juxtapositions of ‘being’ both cultures at once – both American and Iranian – and the inherent struggle that ensues when one ideology is pitted against another. As an artist, I try to explore the wounds that come from that inner battle within oneself – when these two cultures cannot see ‘eye-to-eye’.

It is important to distinguish the hybrid Iranian-American (or the Iranian-British, Iranian-Canadian, Iranian-French, etc.), because they have different concerns and issues than the ‘fish-out-of-water’ Iranian immigrant. The immigrant can distinguish which culture is of ‘origin’, and which is of ‘choice’, whereas the first-generation hybrid Iranian-American born outside Iran, or who left at a very young age has more difficulty distinguishing their country of origin and ancestry, on both a conscious and subconscious level. Both cultures are at once ‘natural’ and ‘unnatural’, ‘familiar’ and ‘unfamiliar’, causing them to inhabit a space in between.

Sometimes we don’t feel Iranian enough. Sometimes we don’t feel American enough. We have been raised in a situation where there are two models of identity – a dichotomy of two countries of origin that are often at a cultural war with each other. We try to find a comfortable place between the two paradigms. It can be hard to know with whom we feel we belong, especially when we have chosen (not always consciously) the parts of our Iranian identity we want to keep and hold on to, and the parts we want to discard. Sometimes we want to want to be a part of the Iranian family ‘tribe’, and sometimes, we don’t. Sometimes, we want to be sensual and fiercely independent, and pursue careers against the advice, wishes, and gossip of the old-fashioned ‘clan’. We exercise our American choice to go against certain social pressures, parameters, and formal rules, and suddenly, we feel we are betraying our ‘Iranianness’, as dictated by our community.

What was it like growing up in this space ‘in between’, as you put it?

Mona: My own Iranian-American friends and I affectionately talk about common things our parents and the community at large would try to artificially differentiate for us by way of discouragement, and by trying to keep us ‘in line’, saying things like, ‘you are being so American right now’, ‘no Iranian would ever do that’, or ‘Iranians would be ashamed of you if they know you did such-and-such’. The pioneer immigrant generation refuses to claim responsibility for the behaviour of Iranian-Americans doing things they don’t consider to be truly ‘Iranian’, based on a rigid categorisation and ideology of purity. The original Iranian immigrant community that came to the West assumed their children would take from American and Iranian culture the same things they themselves did, and that was just not realistic. If you grew up like I did – as a 10 year-old girl with hairy sideburns and eyebrows who took khoresht to school in Tupperware, and had her friends ask her what language her parents spoke – you can attest to the reality that we didn’t feel ‘American’, simply because we were somewhat removed from our parents’ experience of being Iranian.

Of course, not every Iranian-American sees eye-to-eye, and we don’t think like a single organism, largely because we have all taken different parts of our ‘mother culture’, and have matched them to elements of American culture in a way that is relevant, or that works for our own unique experiences. The thing is, those of us occupying this ‘space’ in between can recognise each other, because we are deciding for ourselves the how and what to be of each culture. We recognise each other because we are deciding and choosing how to make this work. It is very important for us to have our own narrative space where we can find self-love and self-acceptance, and claim the constructs of our own identities that we understand to be true and meaningful.

Stills from Haleh Jamali’s ‘Someone Who is Not Like Anyone’. Courtesy REORIENT

Haleh, while Mona’s works largely depict the nude female form, your video installations explore the role of clothing in the understanding of the Iranian female self. To what degree do clothing regulations and norms in Iran play in the constructed notion of the Iranian woman, both in Iran and in the West? As well, how would you say this has changed throughout Iranian history?

Haleh: Someone Who is Not Like Anyone explores the depth of female identity that is primarily based on their appearance, and their different types of clothing. I began this project in a quest for the understanding of the identity of immigrants in a multicultural society, based on the assumption that identity can be made ‘fluid’ by changes in clothing and lifestyle, especially in attempts to integrate into a new society.

What people in the West think about Iran is based on what they see in the media; they think, like in certain cases in Afghanistan and some Arab countries, that we walk around shrouded all the time. People continually ask me if, for instance, if Iranians have to wear the veil, which they don’t. Of course, before the Revolution, the situation was different, as you had a lot of foreigners living in and travelling to Iran, and naturally, they had a much clearer picture of things, and saw that a lot of us actually didn’t even wear the hejab, let alone the veil!

Your video installations deal with two particular pieces of clothing – the chador, and the hejab. What do they represent to you? How do you feel about the notion – often held by both Iranians and Westerners – that they are symbols of oppression and submission?

Haleh: I think any form of clothing can be a symbol of oppression if people are forced to wear it, but as long as the choice is personal, there’s no issue; it depends on the situation, really. For example, the veil exists in the West (in wedding ceremonies, for instance), although it is used in an entirely different way.


In Departure, I’ve explored the relationship between women and fabric, particularly the shapes and forms created by the chador and the invisible gaze of veiled women. Here, the performer uses fabric as a symbol to depict the struggles, and sometimes the frustrations of individuals whose identities have been disguised. The fabric can be anything – a fake persona, an ideology; it represents something that we want to rid ourselves of. The performer in the video tries to overcome her frustrations and ultimately, get rid of the fabric and reveal her true identity. I didn’t want to limit myself just to the use of the chador here, though. I showed the piece to a Colombian friend of mine recently, and she didn’t even make the Middle Eastern connection – she thought the woman was trying to escape a bubble.

Do you think Farrokhzad’s ‘call to arms’ is limited to an Iranian/Middle Eastern context, or is hers a universal declaration? What does she have to say to Western audiences? What, ultimately, is the ‘message’ of this exhibition?

Mona: Farrokhzad began to deconstruct gender expectations in Iran, and I think we can universally explore these much more than we have done so far. It appears that in every culture, there are certain prescribed ways of being a woman and a man. There are gender expectations that vary to the degree of how traditional or contemporary one chooses to interpret their culture of origin. The idea of struggling with gender expectations is a very contemporary issue, and we assume that Western culture has a different belief at its core, despite the similarities. I believe that we are all on a continuum of interpretation when it comes to spiritual/cultural mythologies and creation myths, and that it is less about the stories and ‘rules’ of culture, and more about how often we revisit and break down previously held expectations.

Sara: One of my hopes for audiences viewing this exhibition is to widen the spectrum of representation of what it means to be a woman of Iranian descent. White people in America are afforded a wide spectrum of representation. All of us, no matter what race we belong to, are trained by the media to believe that white people can be nerds, artists, engineers, rich, poor, shy, outgoing, etc. You get the idea. But the rest of us as marginalised groups are not given that range, and our representations are narrow, and as a result, often very stereotyped. The reality is that every racial group has the counter-culturists, the conservatives, and the various subctultures; there’s no one way to be ‘Latino’ or ‘Iranian’, even though the media tries to convince us otherwise, and many of us buy into that and recreate that in our communities. In the West, our reference points have been women in chadors and the ‘Persian Princesses’ of Los Angeles. I see this exhibition as part of a step in another direction. The issues that Haleh and Mona are exploring add dimension to otherwise flat representations of female Iranian artists in the diaspora.

That Person Who is Your Creation runs through April 26, 2013 at the Asian Arts Initiative

Via REORIENT

The tortured face of Iran

thumbnail
A banned novel by Iran’s greatest living writer and a collection of poetry from the country and its exiles give voice to the terrible cost of oppression. 


By Arlice Davenport, The Wichita Eagle


This is how the world ends.

An old man, drenched from relentless rain, having just buried his teenage daughter – who was tortured to death for distributing anti-government pamphlets – meditates on the horrid fate of his five children – three dead at the hands of successive, oppressive regimes; one driven mad in prison and now hiding in his father’s basement; one surviving through marriage to a profiteering sycophant, who props up whichever corrupt despot is in power.

At the same time, the old man reviews the shame and humiliation of his mortal sins – murder and military insubordination. He dons his dress uniform, stripped of its insignia, takes down the gleaming saber from his living-room wall – the saber he ran through the heart of his adulterous wife, then eviscerated her with – feels the edge of the blade, runs his thumb across his jugular vein, steps out into the courtyard, crowded by the specters of his past, and takes his own life.

His is the tragic face of Iran; his a story still untold in his birthplace, banned by the Islamic Republic censors.

He is the colonel, who believes that “the ancient tribal customs of our country still more or less obtain.” And yet:

I’m well aware that at every stage of history there have been crimes against humanity, and they couldn’t have happened without humans to commit them. The crimes that have been visited on my children have been committed, and still are being committed, by young people just like them, by people stirring up their delusions, giving them delusions of grandeur. So why do I imagine that people might improve?

Saluting ‘The Colonel’

There are two reliable ways to discover the character of another country; neither has anything to do with American politics or broadcast journalism, which tend to feed their audiences a steady diet of xenophobia.

The first and most successful way is what I call sustained independent travel. To travel well, you need to have the secure props of home kicked out from under you for as long as you can manage. You need to encounter disconcerting circumstances, unfamiliar customs and ideas, uncomfortable ways of being. You need to feel your way toward psychological safety, struggling to become, however temporarily, a fledgling local.

The second way is through the great gift of world literature. Here, you engage in an intimate exchange between one sensitive, creative mind (the writer) and another (you, the reader). This is how the commonalities of the human condition come to light: through the paradox of the truth of fiction. 

Now, consider Iran, the country in question. For most inveterate American travelers, it is not a destination of choice. We still associate it with terrorism, with the drive to produce unneeded nuclear weapons, with George W. Bush’s infamous “axis of evil.” We may never wholly shed these characterizations. But one path toward inward detente is to contemplate the glories of ancient Persia, the millennia-old motherland of modern-day Iran, to which the colonel still clings.

Indeed, Persian is the exalted, luxurious language of Iranian literature, reaching its pinnacle in the ecstatic poems of the 13th-century mystic Rumi. It is the key (through the inestimable gift of translation by such experts as Tom Patterdale and Sholeh Wolpe) that lets us unlock the hidden heart of an entire people.

It is the language of the harrowing novel “The Colonel” by Iran’s patriarch of fiction, Mahmoud Dowlatabadi, and it is the language of the lyricism and loss that haunt the works of contemporary poets in Iran and in exile around the world.

At 71, Dowlatabadi looms as the colossus of Iranian literature, a self-taught writer who revolutionized his country’s fiction, hardening its diction, coarsening it, infusing it with a street-wise poetry of everyday speech.

He is best known in Iran for “Kelidar,” a 10-book, 3,000-page saga about a nomadic Kurdish family, part of which he wrote during his two years in prison under the Shah’s dictatorship.

After his release, Dowlatabadi soon began framing “The Colonel,” a novel 25 years in the making, still banned by the Iranian censors, still unread in its native language.

At the time of the book’s conception – shortly after the 1979 Islamic Revolution that deposed the Shah and replaced him with the Ayatollah Khomeini – intellectuals in Iran were summarily executed, and Dowlatabadi was called in for questioning.

He hid his new novel from the eyes of the authorities, picking up the manuscript periodically to advance the narrative, refine the prose, and express the terrors of totalitarianism, whether secular or religious:

“But the putrescence [of our wounds] has gone far beyond any normal bounds, so they have to use scissors and kitchen knives and a bow saw to remove the rotting flesh from our bones and, since we are rotten to the marrow, they decide to amputate our bones and they cut off our hands, that his corrupt body might be dismembered and then, in a manner of their own prior devising, reassembled.”

Like a strong drink that leaves a sticky, dizzying taste on your tongue, “The Colonel” has aged into a psychological and political masterpiece of world literature.

You will want to drain it to the last drop.

Reviewers in Great Britain were among the first to gain access to the novel, which was released this spring in the United States by a small press, Melville House.

Such privilege apparently did little to enlighten the English critics. One labeled Dowlatabadi’s accomplishment “a fable”; others complained about the book’s confusing, fragmented narrative. But such lazy myopia simply sells the novel short.

Far from being a fable, “The Colonel” is a heightened, unflinching exploration of psychological realism. It is a mirror of the tortured soul of a nation, and its generations of victims.

All the book’s action takes place in one night and the following day. Historical flashbacks and stream-of-consciousness reveries fill out the narrative with layer after layer of political brutality and betrayal, all interpreted by the colonel as a travesty of the once-cherished majesty of his beloved Persia.

Only the most superficial, obtuse reading could fail to detect the way that Dowlatabadi succeeds at leaving clues to help the reader navigate the shifting points of view, the non-linear storyline, and the dense, Shakespearean monologues on Persian history and the characters’ personal failings.

Indeed, the novel reads like a grand, sustained final act of “King Lear.” Unrelenting rain embodies the inescapable misery and madness of a world tilting on its axis: “Laughing is counted as treason, mourning and lamentation are now the order of the day.”

What raises “The Colonel” to an even higher pitch of artistic excellence is Dowlatabadi’s expert handling of moral ambiguity. The colonel is guilty of unspeakable familial atrocities, yet he is also a clear-eyed witness to the cannibalism of Iran’s repressive regimes. His son, Amir, driven mad by the Shah’s secret police, feels strangely compelled to protect his interrogator once the military thug becomes the target of angry mobs seeking to hang their former executioners.

If the overall narrative sweep of “The Colonel” resounds as Shakespearean, then its psychological acuity is patently Dostoevskian: Here, the Underground Man strides triumphantly across the Earth, spreading his nihilistic gospel of spite and suspicion, humiliation and hate – the irrational will to power conquering all.
Yet Dowlatabadi’s aesthetic mastery in “The Colonel” is so self-assured that he lends even the grossest brutality a ghostly beauty:

I know this much, that young birds get lost in the wind, particularly in a west wind. It confuses them and makes them giddy, it ties them up in knots and they lose their sense of direction and in their struggle to find their way, they break their wings. And in a storm there is no shortage of hawks and vultures looking for prey.

Fruits of ‘The Forbidden’

One of the great values of Sholeh Wolpe’s introduction to “The Forbidden,” an anthology of poems by Iranians and exiles from the country, is that it clearly explains why “The Colonel” is banned in Iran, and why all Dowlatabadi’s other works – because they remain so wildly popular – still smack of subversion to the Islamic authorities.

“In a country like Iran, literature, particularly poetry, is like rain – it cannot be arrested,” Wolpe writes. “Indeed the first who recognize literature’s power are the tyrants themselves. ... [T]hey fear the poets, jail them, torture them and send them into exile, but they cannot silence their words.”

As such, “The Forbidden” looms as a monument to the poets’ heroism; it is a downpour of defiant, cleansing, nurturing rain.

Hellish beast!
In my sight, you are a dark tempest
that has suddenly seized a thousand youthful leaves.
Let the wailing of your prisoners
grow so loud that they cannot be contained.
Let the flood of people’s tears and blood flow
until the roses of revenge rise from the soil.

Though highly charged with the spirit of revolt, the political poems are not necessarily the most successful. They pale beside the gems of Apollonian control, of compact dramatic tension, of a fierce allegiance to poetic form.

Of course, the strength of an anthology also hides its Achilles heel: We hear a vast array of voices, but they are unequal in their achievement, divergent in their aesthetic aims.

Yet one voice rises above the rest: Simin Behbahani’s, whose poem “And Behold” “is so well known in Iran,” Wolpe tells us, “that it is often recited by heart.”
Listen to the poem’s beginning and end:

And behold the camel, how it was created:
 not from mud and water,
 but, as if from patience and a mirage.

. . . 

Patience spawns hatred and hatred the fatal wound:
behold with what vengeance the camel
bit through the arteries of its driver.
The mirage lost its patience.
And behold the camel.

And behold Dowlatabadi; for he, too, is the camel.

With both “The Colonel” and “The Forbidden” in hand, you will have a fuller portrait of contemporary Iran. Throw in “The Essential Rumi,” translated by Coleman Barks, and the three books may not change your politics, may not alter the way you view the nightly news, may not prod you to set foot in Iran, but they will – if read openly, intimately, one creative mind to another – release the relentless rain of literature from the hidden depths of Persian to slake your thirsty soul.

“The Colonel” by Mahmoud Dowlatabadi, translated by Tom Patterdale (Melville House Publishing, 256 pages)
“The Forbidden: Poems From Iran and Its Exiles,” edited by Sholeh Wolpe (Michigan State University Press, 182 pages) 

Via The Wichita Eagle

Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2012/08/05/v-print/2436759/the-tortured-face-of-iran.html#storylink=cpy

Rumi’s ‘The Elephant in the Dark’

thumbnail

or
‘Disagreeing over the Description and Shape of the Elephant’

An elephant was in a darkened hall –
            Hindus had brought it as a spectacle.
Into that darkness everybody passed
            to have a look at it, so many people.
Since seeing with the eye was not permitted,
            they felt it in the darkness with their hands.
The hand of one fell on the elephant’s trunk.
            This someone said, ‘This structure’s like a drainpipe’.
The hand of one reached to the creature’s ear –
            It seemed to him as though it were a fan.
When one hand felt its leg the person said,
            ‘To me the elephant’s shape is like a pillar!’
And one who put his hand upon its back
            remarked, ‘This elephant’s just like a sofa!’
Just as each one had touched whatever part,
            so people formed their view from what they’d heard.
Their statements differed as their point of view –
            one man would call it ‘chalk’, another ‘cheese’.
If each had held a candle in his hand,
            the disputes would have vanished from their speech.
The sensual eye is like the hand, that’s all –
            a hand can’t grasp an elephant entirely.
The Ocean’s eye is one thing, spray’s another.
            Give up the spray! Look with the Ocean’s eye.
Spray leaping from the Ocean day and night,
            you see the spray not Ocean – how surprising!

Translated by Alan Williams from the third book of Rumi’s Masnavi, ed. R.A. Nicholson III.1259-1271, (ed. M. Este‘lami III. 1260-1272).

Alan Williams is Professor of Iranian Studies and Comparative Religion at the University of Manchester, England, and the author of Rumi Spiritual Verses: The First Book of the Masnavi-ye Ma'navi, London and New York: Penguin Classics, 2006 and an audiobook, The Spiritual Verses, read by Anton Lesser, translated and abridged by Alan Williams, London: Naxos, 2007.


Missing

thumbnail
Agahi (Missing), a poem by Shafi’i Kadkani
Translated from Persian by Alan Williams

A child called Happiness has recently gone missing 
bright sparkling eyes
with flowing tresses and high hopes.
If anyone catches sight of her 
inform us 
this is our address:
Between the Persian Gulf 
and the Caspian Sea




One Born

thumbnail
Ein feste Burg ist unser Gott,
‘a mighty fortress is our God’,
But Christmas comes too often.
There’s not a single year forgotten
but that I think ‘Please fortify
my brain
with this campaign’.

I now announce
(in Christian spirit)
that Christmas comes too frequently,
theologically too plural!
I once was a duophysite
– two years between each one might well be fine –
but for a Trinitarian, three years is more divine.

Design the Church’s calendar
(society’s as well),
then once in three years
hit the pages with the news that Christ is born,
and fit to govern for a thousand more!
On Christly love and ethics,
the people all agree.

Our campaign slogan’s ‘One in Three!’ not ‘Three in One’.
Invent a reason,
colleagues, friends and retailers,
and manufacturers?
But no, it will not work.
For ‘Christmas is a yearly feast. We need it now. Beginning early.
In the autumn. Rejoice, then, now and later.’

But didn’t Meister Eckhart say
once, ‘Christ is born each minute
in my soul’?
So constant Christmases are more the thing
The laughter, giggles, whispering
And mysteries stored
Divinely in the word.

© Alan Williams 2011

Andrei Rublev, Trinity, 1411 or 1425-27, Tempera, 142 cm × 114 cm, Tretyakov Gallery, Moscow, Image courtesy Wikipedia 

Forbidden Peace

thumbnail
Foroutan, Aida. Forbidden Peace, A Long Poem in English, Published by Alfabet Maxima, Stockholm, Sweden
2003. - 79 s. ; 15 x 21 cm. ISBN 91-974418-4-8

Forbidden Peace is the story of the struggles, thoughts and perspectives of a child growing up in a climate of war: a child who, in spite of his own wishes, ideals and natural human desires, has to give in to the status quo. Yet he never for a moment stops believing in life and survival – in fact it makes him all the more determined to create a better world.

Forbidden Peace is a long poem written in a particular time frame. It opens in the voice of a mature man who has become exhausted by his struggles yet who still tries to continue his life journey, reflecting and speaking of his old dreams and the present reality. The narrator revisits his childhood, referring his questions to a ‘Mother’, who is someone who represents secure growth, pride and many other meanings. He tries to fathom out the words, and in doing so the very presence of the words, and other words which scarcely have any meaning left today, is juxtaposed with ‘Mother’ and ‘World Mother’. Having endured war and come to believe in death, he is determined to experience life – even though the conditions of life and survival are very hostile. He takes himself to another part of the world, and faces problems of a very different nature. The child has now come of age, yet he still continues with the questions of his childhood, even though he knows that there are no more answers to his questions. There are many words in many languages, for common concepts which are abandoned and deserted – a problem for all who are émigrés and in exile – and many words for what he has experienced, which have made him a weaker creature, in spite of his own strong being, because of his ignorance of those languages. He cannot blame anyone. He can only blame himself, realising that he has struggled in vain to create a world full of love and freedom. The final chapter addresses the future, in which the narrator paints a picture of the ideal world of his cherished beliefs, where his true home lies, a world beyond convention, where peace is not forbidden.