Published online by Cambridge University Press: 01 January 2022
This article is a review of the afterlife, or Nachleben, of the romance Vis and Rāmin, one of the first representatives of its genre in New Persian literature. In addition to providing readers with an extensive bibliography of sources and research concerning the poem, it also analyzes these materials to put forward two basic arguments: one, that moral or religious antipathy to the poem’s contents may not have played as great a role in its fortunes as did aesthetic taste; and two, that V&R proved to be a more widely circulated and durable work than is commonly supposed, but on the level of fragments, not the entire text. In light of these arguments, it is proposed that studies structured around the comparison of fragments—themes, ideas, ethics, and motifs, rather than whole texts—may offer more purchase in constructing models of analysis that situate V&R, and Persian literature more broadly, within a literary oikumene in which it connects and interacts with neighboring traditions.
This article proved to be a greater enterprise than I had ever imagined it would be; like all rabbit holes, what seems to be the bottom turns out to be yet another tunnel to explore. Much of the digging would not have been possible without the aid of digital editions of Vis and Rāmin, particularly through Nosokhan (http://www.nosokhan.com/Library/Part/0IK) and the TITUS project (http://titus.uni-frankfurt.de/texte/etca/iran/niran/npers/visrp/visrp.htm).
My deep thanks and appreciation to Dick Davis and Michael Pifer, who read drafts of the manuscript and graciously shared their thoughts, comments, and feedback. Ali Gheissari was unbelievably supportive and helpful throughout this process, and even tracked down for me a few lingering references at the Tehran University library. Greater still is my gratitude to my anonymous reviewers, who took tremendous time and trouble to double-check my work, identified areas to be polished, suggested additional resources, corrected many mistakes, cleared up some questions that had puzzled me, and encouraged me to rethink my handling of the sources. This article has been infinitely improved thanks to their generous efforts; needless to say, any remaining errors or oversights are entirely my own.