Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T19:46:09.007Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The “Westoxication” of Iran: Depictions and Reactions of Behrangi, Āl-e Ahmad, and Shariʿati

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 January 2009

Brad Hanson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Samad Behrangi (1939–1968), Jalāl Āl-e Ahmad (1923–1969), and ⊂Ali Shari⊂ati (1933–1977) were perhaps the three most influential lay Iranian intellectuals among dissatisfied, anti-regime Iranians during the 1960s and the 1970s. Each hailed from a different province of Iran: Behrangi from Azerbaijan, Āl-e Ahmad from Tehran, and Shari⊂ati from Khorasan. Each developed loyal followings during his lifetime. Each became a “martyr” to his devotees and developed a wider popularity after death than he had enjoyed in his lifetime. And each formulated an extensive societal critique fortifying, inspiring, and galvanizing adherents for the final assault on the shah's regime.

Type
Articles
Information
International Journal of Middle East Studies , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , February 1983 , pp. 1 - 23
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

NOTES

1 “Westoxication” as an English translation of the Persian gharhzadegi seeks to convey both intoxication—the infatuation with the West—and infection—the poisoning of westernization of an indigenous culture. These are the two senses the popularizer of the term, Āl-e Ahmad, probably had in mind. Other English renderings of it are the more literal “Weststruckness,” and “Westomania,” “Westernitis,” “Westamination,” and “Blighted by the West.” The transliteration system employed here for Persian is simple: a, e, and o for the short vowels; ā, i, and u for the long; au and ai for the diphthongs; and no diacriticals for the different consonants pronounced alike.

2 By Behrangi I utilized Kand o kāv dar masā⊃el-e tarbiati-ye Irān, several of his essays appearing in Majmu⊂ah-ye maqālehhā, and several of his short stories, including most prominently, “Māhi-ye siyāh-e kuchulu”: by Āl-e Ahmad. Gharbzadegi. Modir-e madraseh, and Khasi dar miqāt; by Shari⊂ati, Mas'uliat-e Shi⊂eh budan, Agar Pāp va Mārks nabudand, the parts of Eslāmshenāsi translated by Sachedina and Algar, the translation by Campbell, and parts of other works noted below. Other recently published analyses and translations of works by these three Iranian social critics include: For Behrangi: Sabri-Tabrizi, G. R., “Human Values in the Works of Two Persian Writers,” Correspondance d'Orient, 11 (1970), 411–18;Google ScholarRicks, Thomas, “Samad Behrangi and Contemporary Iran: The Artist in Revolutionary Struggle,” in The Little Black Fish and Other Modern Persian Stories, Mary, and Hooglund, Eric, trans. (Washington, D.C.: Three Continents Press, 1976), 95–126;Google Scholar and Michael, C. Hillmann, ed., Literature East and West. “Major Voices in Contemporary Persian Literature,” vol. 20 (1976, but published 06 1980).Google Scholar For Āl-e Ahmad: Michael, C. Hillmann, “Al-e Ahmad's Fictional Legacy,” Iranian Studies, 9, 4 (Autumn, 1976), 248–265;Google Scholar Sabri-Tabrizi, “Human Values”; and Hillmann, Literature East and West. For Shari⊂ati: Hamid Algar's introductions in two translations of Shari⊂ati's essays in On the Sociology of Islam, Algar, Hamid, trans. (Berkeley, Calif.: Mizan Press, 1979)Google Scholar and Marxism and Other Western Fallacies: An Islamic Critique, Campbell, R., trans. (Berkeley, Calif.: Mizan Press, 1980);Google Scholar and two articles by Mangol, Bayat-Philipp, “Shi⊃ism in Contemporary Iranian Politics: The Case of Ali Shari⊂ati” in Kedourie, Elie and Sylvia, G. Haim, eds., Towards a Modern Iran (London: Frank Cass, 1980), pp. 155–168Google Scholar and “Islam in Pahlavi and Post-Pahlavi Iran: A Cultural Revolution?” in John, L. Esposito, ed., Islam and Development:Religion and Sociopolitical Change (Syracuse. N.Y.: Syracuse University Press, 1980). pp. 87–106.Google Scholar

Recently published histories of Pahlavi Iran devoting attention to one or more of the three figures include: Akhavi, Shahrough, Religion and Politics in Contemporary Iran: Clergy-State Relations in the Pahlavi Period (Albany: SUNY Press, 1980);Google ScholarMichael, M. J. Fischer, Iran: From Religious Dispute to Revolution (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1980):Google Scholar and Keddie, Nikki, Iran: Roots of Revolution (New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1981), especially the chapter by Yann Richard.Google Scholar

3 Behrangi, Samad. quoted in Ricks, “Samad Behrangi,” p. 124,Google Scholar who in turn quoted from the introduction to The Little Black Fish and Other Stories by Samad Behrangi, Iranian Students Association, trans. (California, 1972), p. ii.Google Scholar

4 Behrangi, Samad, “⊂Arusak-e sokhangu,” p. 64,Google Scholar quoted by Gholam, Hosain Farnur in “Mo⊂allem-e mardom,” Āresh, no. 18 (1347/ 1968), p. 60.Google Scholar

5 Gholam, Hosaim Sā⊂edi, “Shab hast, āri hast,” Āresh, no. 18 (1347/1968), pp. 106–107.Google Scholar

6 Jalāl, Āl-e Ahmad, “Samad va afsāneh-ye ⊂avām,” Āresh, no. 18 (1347/1968), p. 12.Google Scholar Although Behrangi dearly loved his native language, Azeri Turkish, and wrote and translated in it, he also was convinced of the necessity of Azerbaijani children learning Persian. However, he believed Azeri Turkish speakers should not be taught Persian in the same way as native Persian speakers. Instead, Behrangi made quite a detailed proposal to teach Persian to Azeri Turkish speakers in a carefully planned way, acknowledging the linguistic differences of the two languages and building on the children's knowledge of Azeri Turkish vocabulary shared with Persian (see Kand o kāv, pp. 87–100).Google Scholar

7 Sā⊂edi, , “Shab hast,” p. 106.Google Scholar Sā⊂edi, himself of Azerbaijani origin, also remarks that after Behrangi had collected Azeri folk tales he was surprised that he was not allowed to publish them in his mother tongue. It was then that he decided to make Persian translations for publication (Sā⊂edi, , op. cit., p. 16).Google Scholar

8 No comprehensive account of the Pahlavi censorship apparatus and its widely varying degree of suppression of regime-challenging publications exists, although Amin Banani touches on the issue in “The Role of the Mass Media” in Ehsan, Yar-Shater, ed., Iran Faces the Seventies (New York: Praeger, 1971). Obviously, Behrangi, Āl-e Ahmad, and Shari⊂ati each had to confront the problem of possible censorship of their writings. Each did, using different techniques.Google Scholar

9 In a review of The Little Black Fish and Other Modern Persian Stories Ahmad, Karimi-Hakkak states: “Hidden layers of meaning and covert turns of phrase designed to fool the government censors while at the same time convey their true meaning to an audience who seeks political statement in the heart of any literary work, makes his fiction all but untranslatable.” Iranian Studies, 10, 3 (Summer 1977). 221.Google Scholar

10 Ricks, , “Samad Behrangi,” p. 123.Google Scholar

11 Mary, and Hooglund, Eric, Translator's Note, in The Little Black Fish and Other Modern Persian Stories. p. xix.Google Scholar

12 Briefly, Āl-e Ahmad and Shari⊂ati are believed by some either to have died of simple heart attacks or of a SAVAK-administered injection of air into the bloodstream in the case of Āl-e Ahmad, or of some unexplained SAVAK-engineered means in the case of Shari⊂ati. Both Michael Hillmann (in Introduction and Notes to Jalal, Al Ahmad, The School Principal, John, R. Newton, tr. [Minneapolis and Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamica. 1974], p. 27Google Scholar and again in Literature East and West, p. 64)Google Scholar and Ehsan, Yar-Shater in his article in Iran Faces the Seventies, (p. 308)Google Scholar affirm the heart-attack version for Āl-e Ahmad. Memorial volumes in honor of Shari⊂ati soon after his death cite a wide variety of circumstantial evidence to negate the plausibility of a natural death. Ervand Abrahamian (personal letter to the author, July 24, 1979) retracted his statement that SAVAK killed Shari⊂ati (“Iran in Revolution: The Opposition Forces,” MERIP, no. 75/76 [03/04 1979], p. 6), stating that British doctors seemed to have verified a heart attack and that Shari⊂ati's family, who took custody of the body, produced no medical evidence to prove “foul play.” However, the argument can still be made that, inter alia, the constant harassment, uncertain livelihood, and problems with censorship caused such undue strains and tensions as to bring about their premature deaths, at least indirectly attributable to the regime.Google Scholar

Behrangi's death is more problematic. See Āl-e Ahmad, Sā⊂edi, Eslām Kāzemieh, and others' refutations in the memorial issue of Āresh of the regime's version of his death: Drowning while crossing the Aras River, which forms part of the boundary between Iranian Azerbaijan and Soviet Azerbaijan, either as a suicide or in a desperate attempt to cross over into the Soviet Union.

13 Michael, C. Hillmann, in Literature East and West, p. 197.Google Scholar

14 Āl-e, Ahmad, Āresh, p. 8.Google Scholar

15 Behrangi, Samad, Kand o kāv dar masā'el-e tarbiati-ye Irān (Tabriz: Chāpkhāneh-ye Mohammadiye ⊂Elmieh 1344/1965), p. 123.Google Scholar

16 Ibid., pp. 123–124.

17 Ibid., p. 124.

18 Ibid., pp. 124–125.

19 Ibid., pp. 125–126.

20 Ibid., p. 126.

21 Ibid., p. 127.

22 Ibid., p. 129.

23 Ibid., p. 130.

24 Ibid., pp. 3–22.

25 Ibid., p. 10.

26 Behrangi explains that since most Iranian teachers of English do not even know what a “hot dog” is, they explain to their students that since Americans are Christians and therefore infidels, they eat pork, donkey, and even dogs! Likewise, very few Iranian teachers of English understand the game of “baseball” (ibid., pp. 83–84).

27 Ibid., pp. 57–58.

28 Behrangi, Samad, Majmu⊂ah-ye maqālehhā (Tabriz: Enteshārāt-e shams, Tir 1348/1969). p. 27.Google Scholar

29 Āl-e Ahmad states that “sickle” and “distinction of one culture and one language” (left ambiguous—Behrangi's attachment to Azeri Turkish culture and language or to socialism?) are as holy to Behrangi as Medina is to his older brothers (Āresh, p. 12).Google Scholar

30 Kand o kāv, pp. 128–129.Google Scholar

31 Ibid., p. 112.

32 Hooglunds, , Little Black Fish, p. xii.Google Scholar

33 Jalāl, Āl-e Ahmad, Khasi dar miqār (Tebran: Enteshārāt-e ravaq, Shahrivar 2536/ 1977), p. 40.Google Scholar

34 Hillmann, , in Literature East and West, p. 62.Google Scholar

35 Āl-e Ahmad once remarked that no Iranian writer during his lifetime had ever been able to support himself by writing alone. Āl-e Ahmad himself was no exception. Prolific and popular writer that he was, Āl-e Ahmad was forced to teach occasionally for a salary.

36 Jalāl, Āl-e Ahmad, Arzyāabi-ye shetābzadeh (Tabriz: Ibn Sinā, 1965), pp. 93–100,Google Scholar quoted in Hillmann, Introduction and Notes to Ahmad, Al, School Principal, p. 30, n. 8.Google Scholar

37 Michael C. Hillmann, Introduction and Notes to Ahmad, Al, School Principal, p. 24.Google Scholar

38 Professor Amin Banani informed me in a conversation that he had met Shari⊂ati at a daureh at Āl-e Ahmad's home in Tehran in 1965.

39 Āl-e Ahmad acknowledges the term was borrowed from Farid, Ahmad in Gharbzadegi (Tehran: Āzād, 1341/1962). p. 5. See note I above for alternative translations of the term.Google Scholar

40 Such a classic of modern Persian prose literature has Gharbzadegi become that UNESCO commissioned an English translation of it for inclusion in its Persian Heritage Series.

41 Gharbzadegi, p. 6.Google Scholar

42 Āl-e Ahmad is clearly playing on the word senzadegi, the affliction of wheat by an aphidlike pest quite common in Iran.

43 The Persian title signifies a fateful appointment with strong religious connotations, as miqāt is the technical term for the rendezvous place or time for pilgrims departing on the hajj.

44 Khasi dar miqāt. pp. 46–48, 74.Google Scholar

45 Ibid., pp. 28, 79.

46 Ibid., pp. 87–88.

47 Ibid pp. 61–62.

48 Ibid., pp. 64–65.

49 Ibid., p. 141.

50 Gharbzadegi, pp. 17–18.Google Scholar

51 Ibid., p. 40.

52 Ibid., pp. 41–42.

53 Ibid., p. 44.

54 Ibid., p. 49.

55 Ibid., pp. 71–76.

56 Ibid., p. 94. Although Āl-e Ahmad did not use the term “diploma disease,” which was popularized by Dore, Ronald in The Diploma Disease: Education, Qualification, and Development (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1976), he depicted the same phenomenon in an Iranian context some fourteen years before Dore's more comprehensive, global analysis.Google Scholar

57 Ibid., pp. 96–97.

58 Ibid., p. 98; translation by Hillmann in Introduction and Notes to Ahmad, Al, School Principal, p. 16.Google Scholar

59 Gharbzadegi, pp. 98–99.Google Scholar

60 Ibid., p. 99; translation by Hillmann in Introduction and Notes to Ahmad, Al, School Principal, p. 18.Google Scholar

61 Gharbzadegi, pp. 59–61.Google Scholar

62 Ibid., p. 35.

63 Ibid., p. 37.

64 Ibid., p. 39.

65 Ibid., pp. 52–53.

66 Mirahmadi, Maryam, “Ta'sir va nofuz-e mazhab dar asār-e Jalāl Āl-e Ahmad,” Sokhan, 26, 10 (Āzār/Dey 1357–11/12 1978), 1079.Google Scholar

67 Khasi dar miqāt, p. 90.Google Scholar

68 Mirahmadi, “Ta'sir va nofuz-e mazhab,” p. 1081.Google Scholar

69 The revived Hosainieh-ye Ershād in Tehran is currently publishing an “authoritative” series of Shari⊂ati's collected works.

70 ⊂Ali, Shari⊂ati, “Letter to His Son, Ehsan,” 24 Aban 1351 (15 11 1972), in Haft Nāmeh az Mojāhed Shahid Doktor ⊂Ali Shari⊂asi (Seven Letters from Valiant Struggler Dr. Ali Shariati) (Tehran: Abuzar Publications, 1977), U.S. Joint Publications and Research Service, trans., no. 73760 (06 13 1979), p. 39.Google Scholar

71 ⊂Ali, Shari⊂ati, Mas'uliat-e Shi⊂eh budan (Tehran: Sāzmān-e enteshārāt-e Hosainieh-ye Ershād, 1350/1971), p. 11.Google Scholar

72 For example, Shari⊂ati, in Mas'uliat-e Shi⊂eh budan (p. 11) lampoons Queen Gauhārshād, who intended to honor Islam without understanding its central tenets by constructing a monumental mosque complex in Mashhad. The real attack, however, was the shah and shahbanu's phony religiosity manifested by their donation of gold doors, crystal Czechoslovakian chandeliers, silver guardrails, etc., to the Shrine of Imam Rezā in Mashhad, given great play in the controlled press.Google Scholar

73 Farhang, Mansur, “Resisting the Pharaohs: Ali Shariati on Oppression,” Race and Class, 25, 1 (Summer 1979), 32.Google Scholar

74 Shari⊂ati had been arrested and imprisoned at least once before, in 1964 at the Turkish border upon his return from France, presumably for his oppositional activities as a student in Paris.

75 ⊂Ali, Shari⊂ati, Reflections of a Concerned Muslim: On the Plight of Oppressed Peoples, Ali, A. Behzadnia and Denny, Najpa, trans. (Houston, Tex.: Free Islamic Literatures, Inc., 1979), pp. 9–10.Google Scholar

76 See Mangol, Bayat-Philipp, “Shi⊂sm,” pp. 165–166.Google Scholar

77 See Shari⊂ati, , “Letter to His Son, Eshan,” p. 43.Google Scholar

78 ⊂Ali, Shari⊂ati, Ummat va Imāmat (Tehran: Sāzmān-e enteshārāt-e ershād, 1350/1972), pp. 52–53.Google Scholar

79 For Shari⊂atis employment of Hegelian dialectics see Simā-ye Mohammad bā tarjomeh-ye Englisi, Abdulaziz, Abdulhosein Sachedina, trans. (Tehran: Sherkat-e sahāmi-ye enteshār for Hosainieh-ye Ershād, 1350/ 1971), pp. 54–56 and 61–63,Google Scholar on the superiority of Islam over other world religions; and On the Sociology of Islam, Algar, Hamid, trans. (Berkeley, Calif.: Mizan Press, 1979), pp. 88–96,Google Scholar on the dual nature of man, i.e., the divine and the earthly. For Shari⊂ati's employment of linguistic phenomenology to demonstrate the inherent dynamism of Islam, see Mas'uliyat-e Shi⊂eh budan, p. 16.Google Scholar

80 Shari⊂ati, , On she Sociology of Islam, p. 60.Google Scholar

81 ⊂Ali, Shari⊂ati, Agar Pāp va Mārks nabudand (n.p.: nd.), pp. 9–10.Google Scholar

82 Ibid., p. 10.

83 Ibid., pp. 10–11.

84 ⊂Ali, Shari⊂ati, Marxism and Other Western Fallacies: An Islamic Critique, Campbell, R., trans. (Berkeley, Calif.: Mizan Press, 1980), p. 49.Google Scholar

85 Ibid., p. 108.

86 Ibid., p. 52.

87 Ibid., pp. 64–65.

88 Ibid., p. 70.

89 Ibid., p. 116.

90 Ibid., p. 116.

91 Ibid., p. 117.

92 Ibid., p. 84.

93 Ibid., p. 73.

94 Ibid., p. 122.

95 Shari⊂ati, , On the Sociology of Islam, pp. 112–116.Google Scholar

96 Ibid., pp. 98–99.

97 Ibid., p. 107.

98 Shari⊂ati, , Mas'uliyat, p. 37.Google Scholar

99 Ibid., pp. 27–28.

100 ⊂Ali, Shari⊂ati, Tashaiyo⊂-e ⊂Alavi va tashaiyo⊂-e Safavi (Tehran: Sāzmān-e enteshārāt-e Hosainieh-ye Ershād, 1350/1971), p. 141.Google Scholar

101 Shari⊂ati, , Mas'uliyas, pp. 24–25.Google Scholar

102 Farhang, , p. 31.Google Scholar

103 See Introduction to Hafi Nāmeh, p. 3.Google Scholar