بررسي تقابل‌هاي دوگانه در آثار هوشنگ مرادي‌كرماني و رولد دال

A Study of Binary Oppositions in the Works by Houshang Moradi Kermani and Roald Dahl

تنها از راه تقابل است كه روايت ايجاد مي‌شود و از همين‌رو بايد شخصيت‌ها و كنش‌هاي آنان را در تقابل‌هاي دوتايي بررسي كرد تا بتوان هدف از روايت را دريافت. ساختارهاي دوگانه و تقابلي, اعم از تقابل‌هاي خير و شر، نيك و بد و...، ساختارهاي مفهومي هستند كه در كل گفتمان ادبيات فارسي مشاهده مي‌شود. يكي از اين ساختارهاي مفهومي دوگانه، تقابل زندگي فقير و غني است كه در آثار هوشنگ مرادي كرماني و رولد دال به‌عنوان بن‌مايه‌اي مشترك خود را به‌خوبي نشان مي‌دهد و بيانگر اين مسئله هستند كه طبقه‌ي فقير با ديدن وضع رفاه طبقه‌ي ثروتمند، براي رهايي خود از فقر و تهيدستي تلاش مي‌كند، اما درنهايت چندان موفق به تغيير شرايط زندگي خود نمي‌شود. از ديگر ويژگي‌هاي مشترك اين دو نويسنده، اِعمال زور، خشونت و لحن توهين‌آميز طبقه‌ي ثروتمند و مظلوم‌ماندن طبقه‌ي تهي‌دست جامعه است. بررسي تقابل‌ها و تحليل رابطه‌ي آن‌ها در داستان‌هاي مرادي كرماني و رولد دال نشان مي‌دهد كه پيامد مشترك فقر در ايران و جامعه‌ي انگلستان، كار اجباري كودكان و روبروشدن آن‌ها با واقعيت‌هاي زندگي است. پژوهش پيشِ‌رو بر آن است تا با استفاده از روش توصيفي‌تحليلي و با بهره‌گيري از منابع اِسنادي‌كتابخانه‌اي، ساختارهاي مفهومي تقابل‌هاي دوگانه را در سه اثر هوشنگ مرادي كرماني (قصه‌هاي مجيد، بچه‌هاي قاليباف‌خانه و شما كه غريبه نيستيد) و سه اثر رولد دال (چارلي و كارخانه‌ي شكلات‌سازي، آقاي روباه شگفت‌انگيز و دني؛ قهرمان جهان) استخراج كند و سپس به مقابله‌ي اين آثار بپردازد.

Extended Abstract Authors: Neda Nourpisheh Ghadimi - Ph.D. Student, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Islamic Azad University, Firoozabad, Iran Ahmad Tahan - Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Islamic Azad University, Firoozabad, Iran Farzaneh Mozafarian - Assistant Professor, Department of Persian Language and Literature, Islamic Azad University, Firoozabad, Iran Introduction A narrative is created only through oppositions hence, the characters and their actions must be studied in terms of binary oppositions in it. The conceptual structures in this study are binary oppositional ones, including the confrontations of good and evil, which can be seen in the whole discourse of Persian literature. In general, one of the most fundamental issues in explaining the similarities and differences between the works of Iranian and non-Iranian authors is the comparison of their conceptual structures, including ‘binary’ and ‘oppositional’ structures. Literary structuralism is a method of analyzing literary texts that are rooted in linguistic studies. Structuralism and its general orientation are based on the analysis of binary oppositions and the relationship between them, and structuralism itself origins from the linguistic studies of Ferdinand de Saussure, and the structuralists have been significantly influenced by his thoughts. Method, background, and purpose of research The method in this research is theoretical, which is either descriptive or analytical. First, books on binary oppositions by structuralist authors have been studied and from which notes have been taken. and then, the biographies of both authors have been reviewed to obtain information about their social, cultural, and political status for analysis. The purpose of this study is to explain the similarities and differences between the binary oppositions in the works of an Iranian and a non-Iranian author basically to find out which oppositions can be universal. There has been no independent research on binary oppositions in children’s and adolescent literature. However, research has been done on binary oppositions in other areas of literature, some of which include: The binary oppositions of war and reconciliation and love and hatred in Ferdowsi's Shahnameh (Razmjooei, Tahan 2016) and the result of this research is that although love and reconciliation are superior to war, its superiority is not ‘absolute’. A study of binary oppositions in Nima Yushij’s ‘Sarivili house’ collection of poems (Mohseni 2014) This study shows that Nima has used binary oppositions to express the most important differences, similarities, and conflicts of his thoughts against those in power. Discussion Binary opposition is an English term. Binary in English means dual. Stars that are placed next to each other in pairs are called binary stars. Of course, the understanding of binary oppositions as the basis of linguistic knowledge was discussed much earlier in the views of Plato and Aristotle. However discussing essence, accident, form, etc. goes back to Aristotle's ideas who himself was the founder of a dualistic view of human knowledge and later influenced literature and other areas. The term was first coined by phonologist Nikolai Trobetsky when he introduced it as the main foundation of a value rooted in cultural history. This term is one of the key concepts in the field of linguistics theories, semiotics, and literary criticism. Roland Barthes believes that semiotics is based on binary oppositions. In literary criticism, this term is one of the fundamental concepts of structuralism and post-structuralism (deconstruction). Jacobson believed that children learn these oppositions in the first place. In his view, the speech’s concentration is generally on binary oppositions, and the difference between consonant and vowel is the most fundamental element of phonology. Structuralism and its general orientation are based on the analysis of binary oppositions and the relationship between them, and structuralism itself is rooted in the linguistic studies of Ferdinand de Saussure, and the structuralists have been significantly influenced by his thoughts. Each text is a set of contrasts that encompass confrontations of good and evil, rich and poor, black and white. Conclusion Examining the oppositions and analyzing their relationship in the stories by Houshang Moradi Kermani and Roald Dahl, shows that the common consequence of poverty in Iran and British society is children’s forced labor and also, their confrontation with the realities of life. A child, at an age when he should be enjoying his childhood, is struggling with economic problems, illness, and hunger. In the works of both writers, these poor children’s neighbors or classmates are from the rich class of society. and that creates problems; the children either escape or start to protest against the wealthy class. The use of force, violence and insults by the wealthy is another issue addressed by these two authors. The poor class’s captivity and slavery are among other common themes employed by both authors. There are differences between the binary oppositions in the works by these two authors; In Moradi Kermani's, the poor adults mainly believe in fatalism and superstitions, and the poor children are realistic. While, in Roald Dahl's, the poor adults and children are both realistic. In Moradi Kermani's, the poor are harmless, while in Roald Dahl's, the poor cause harassment. In Moradi Kermani's, the poor are not advocated by the people, while, in Roald Dahl's, the poor have supporters such as doctors or priests.