rssN 0895-9439
V o l u m el 3 l
ShortStoru
Critieisrn
Criticismof the
Worksof ShortFiction Writers
Jelena Krstovid
Project Editor
*,'' i , , , G A L E
C E N G A G EL e a r n i n g
D e t r o i t ' N e w Y o r k. s a n F r a n c i s c o
. N e w H a v e n ,C o n n . w a t e r v i l l e ,M a i n e . L o n d o n
t
&
GALE
Learning
CENGAGE
Short Story Criticism. Vol. 131
Project Editor: Jelena O. Krstovia
E d i t o r i a l : D a n a R a m e l B a r n e s ,S a r a
Constantakis, Kathy D. Darrow Kristen
A. Dorsch, Dana Ferguson, JeffreY W.
H u n t e r , M i c h e l l e K a z e n s k y ,M i c h e l l e
Lee, Marie Toft, Lawrence J. Trudeau
Content Conversion: Katrina D. Coach,
Gwen Tucker
Indexing Services:Factiva@,a Dow Jones
a n d R e u t e r sC o m P a n Y
R i g h t s a n d A c q u i s i t i o n s :M a r g a r e t
C h a m b e r l a i n - G a s t o nK
, e l l YQ u i n n ,
T r a c i eR i c h a r d s o n
C o m p o s i t i o n a n d E l e c t r o n i cC a p t u r e : G a r y
Leach
M a n u f a c t u r i n g : C Y n d eB i s h o P
Product Manager: Janet Witalec
@ 2010 Gale,Cengage Learning
No part of this work covered by the copyright herein
ALL RIGHTSRESERVED.
may be reproduced, transmitted, stored, or used in any form or by any
m e a n s g r a p h i c , e l e c t r o n i c ,o r m e c h a n i c a l ,i n c l u d i n g b u t n o t l i m i t e d t o
p h o t o c o p y i n g , r e c o r d i n g , s c a n n i n g ,d i g i t i z i n g , t a p i n g , W e b d i s t r i b u t i o n '
information networks, or information storage and retrieval systems, except
a s p e r m i t t e d u n d e r S e c t i o n 1 0 7 o r 1 0 8 o f t h e 1 9 7 6 U n i t e d S t a t e sC o p y r i g h t
Act, without the prior written permission of the publisher'
T h i s p u b l i c a t i o n i s a c r e a t i v ew o r k f u l l y p r o t e c t e d b y a l l a p p l i c a b l e c o p y r i g h t
laws, as well as by misappropriation, trade secret, unfair competition, and
other applicable laws. The authors and editors of this work have added
value to the underlying factual material herein through one or more of the
f o l l o w i n g : u n i q u e a n d o r i g i n a l s e l e c t i o n ,c o o r d i n a t i o n , e x p r e s s i o n ,
a r r a n g e m e n t , a n d c l a s s i f i c a t i o no f t h e i n f o r m a t i o n .
For product information and technology assistance,contact us at
Gale Customer Support, 1-800-877-4253.
F o r p e r m i s s i o nt o u s e m a t e r i a l f r o m t h i s t e x t o r p r o d u c t ,
submit all requests online at www.cengage.com/permissions'
F u r t h e r p e r m i s s i o n sq u e s t i o n s c a n b e e m a i l e d t o
permission request@cengage.com
While every effort has been made to ensurethe reliabilityof the
i n f o r m a t i o n p r e s e n t e di n t h i s p u b l i c a t i o n ,G a l e , a p a r t o f C e n g a g e L e a r n i n g ,
d o e s n o t g u a r a n t e e t h e a c c u r a c yo f t h e d a t a c o n t a i n e d h e r e i n . G a l e a c c e p t s
n o p a y m e n t f o r l i s t i n g ; a n d i n c l u s i o ni n t h e p u b l i c a t i o n o f a n y o r g a n i z a t i o n ,
agency, institution, publication, service, or individual does not imply
endorsement of the editors or publisher. Errors brought to the attention of
t h e p u b l i s h e r a n d v e r i f i e d t o t h e s a t i s f a c t i o no f t h e p u b l i s h e r w i l l b e
correctedin future editions.
Gale
27500 Drake Rd.
F a r m i n g t o nH i l l s ,M l , 4 8 3 3 1 - 3 5 3 5
SA T A L O GC A R DN U M B E R8 8 - 6 4 1 0 1 4
L I B R A R YO F C O N G R E SC
ISBN-13: 978-1-4144-4210-5
ISBN-10:1 -4144-4210-6
rssN0895-9439
Printedin the United Statesof America
l 2 ? 4 5 6 1 1 41 31 2 l l l 0
Contents
Prefacevrr
A c k n o w l c d g m c n txsi
LiteraryCriticisrnSericsAdvisory Board xiii
C h i n g i zA i t m a t o v 1 9 2 8 - 2 0 0 8
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . I. . .
Ru.ssian
short.fiction w,riter,novelist,scriptu:ritct',playw,right,transltttttr,
essa.l,r.r/,
.journalist, ond editor
Georglluchner 1813-1837
Germon novella writer and playwright
Enlr.t,dewttedto lhe novello L.ent.( 18.19)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. .7. .
S a d e qH e d a y a t1 9 0 3 - 1 9 5 .1. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .1. .3. .7.
Ironian short storl urul novella n'riter, noveli.st,ltlavvtright, essafist,
critic, .folkktrist,urd tran:;lotur
t93
Leo Tolstoy ........
Rttssiuttnovelist, ,short strtr\t uul ttrtt,ella w'riter, cssa.\,i.st,
pkt.ywright, und
c ritic
[,itcraryCriticisnrScriesCurnulativcAuthor Indcx 373
l.itcraryCriticisnrSericsCunrulativeTopic lndex 4tl7
. S S CC u r n u l a t i v N
e a t i o n a l i t yI n d c x5 0 3
S . S C - l 3T
l i t l e I n d c x5 0 7
SHORT STORY CRITICISM
HEDAYAT
metaphors with which we attempt to describe cultural
phenomena are limited; whenever we look closely at
his work we are likely to find unpredictable cultural
precedents.Hedayat's repugnance for the Arab heritage of Persianculture did not prevent him liom wrir
ing in a language balanced and cottnterweightedwith
Arabic loan words, and real parallelscan be drawn between the lnorbidity of his personal thematics and the
r n a r t y r o l o g y o f S h i ' i s m . T h e o n t n i p r e s e n c eo f h i s
Western reading as a shaping force is beyond dispute.
I wondcr in fact if we have not taken from Hedayat's
career the wrong lesson.At a time when Iranian culture is widely dispersedthroughout the globe, and extraterritoriality is the fate of still another generationof
l r a n i a n i n t e l l e c t u a l s ,i t m a y b e l e s s u s e f u l f o r u s t o
point out his vision of a pttre [ran, free of various antiI r a n i a n c r . l n t a n r i n a n t st h, a n t o e x a t n i n e t h e o p e n n e s s
and receptivity that ntade his writing possible. Instead
of uncornpromisingpurity, we rnight fbcus on his radit n d h i s w i l l i n g n e s st o i m p r o v i s e .
c a l e c l e c t i c i s na
ll. Translatcd by H. D. G. Law in LiJe artd Letters
6 3 / 1 4 8 ( 1 9 4 9 ) : 2 5 5 - 5 9 , w i t h m i n o r c h a n g e si n
transcriptitln.
1 2 . S o b h i ( F ' .M o h t a d i ) , A f s u r u h c T ' y ek c t t u t n , 6 t h e d ,
( T c h r a n ,1 9 6 3 ) ,v o l . l , 3 6 - 4 - 5 .
1 3 . S c e A l - c A h n r a d ' s " H e d a y a t - cB u l - c k u r , " 8 3 ,E n '
g l i s h t r a n s l a t i o n3, l ; M . M o h a n d c s s i ," H e d d y a t
and Rilke," CompurutiveI'itenfiure 2313(Summer
lgll): 209-16. Mohandessi'sstudy is reprintedin
shortencd lirrm in Heddyat's "BLind OwL" Forty
YeursAlier l18-24.
f 4 . D . S . K o r n i s s a r o v ,S A d e k K h e d A y a t : Z h i z n ' i
tvorclrcstvo(Moscow, I967), -511.
Ilibliographv
F o r t r a n s l a t i o n so l ' H c d a y a t ' s w t l r k s , s c c l Y a r s h a t e r ,
l9t3t3
| p. -514.
l . F - o ra c o r r t p l c t cb i b l i o g r a p h y t l l ' H c d a y a t s c c H .
Kamshad, Mttdertt Persiatt Prose Lileruture
(Cambridgc, 1966),202-t\,and M. Golbort, Ketubs h e n c T s i - \S
' ed d c q H c d d v u t ( A b i b l i o g r a p h y o l '
S . H . , T c h r a n , 1 9 7 6 ) .S e c a l s o p . 2 9 6 n . l 0 a n d p .
-5l4 in IYarshatcr,Ehsan.Persiun I'iteruture. Ncw
Y r r k : B i b l i o t h c c aP c r s i c a ,l 9 t t t l l .
Thcrc arc thrcc major tl'sutnlcntstll'Hcdayat's hiogra'
p h y : V . M o n t c i l , S a d e q H e d d v u t ( T c h r a n , 1 9 5 2 ) ,t h e
c o n c l u d i n g c h a p t e r o l ' H . K a m s h a t l ,M o d e n t P e r s i a n
P n t s e , a n d D . S . K o m i s s a r t l v ' s v c r y t h t l r t l u g hs t u d y ,
Sadek Khcddvut: Zhiut' i tvon'hestlo (Moscow, 1967).
All thrcc ol'thesc books, as wcll as Hedivat's "The
Blintt Owl" F-ort.,-Yaurs A.l'ter includc lirll bibliograp h i c s o l ' H e d a y a t ' sw o r k s . T h c r c i s , i n a d d i t i o n ,u n e x cmplary bibliography ol' works by and about Hcdlyat,
which hrings togcthcrfirr thc first tirnc thc oxtraordi'
, nd attacks
n a r y m u l t i p l i c i t y < l l 'a n a l y s c s ,t c s t i m o n i a l s a
availablc in Pcrsian: KetubshcttasiyeSadeq-eHedayat,
c d . M . ( i o l b o n ( T c h r a n ,1 9 7 6 ) .
2. Translatcdby (i. KapLrscinskiand M. Hanrl-rlyas
"Thc Pilgriln" in Sutleq Hedarut: An AnthoLogv-,
e d . I r . Y a r s h a t c (r D c l n r a r ,N . Y . , l 9 t i 2 ) , l - 4 0 .
Iraj liashiri (essay date 1984)
Notes
f Pubfished lirst in E. Yarshater ed., Sudeq Heduyut: An
Antholog,y.(Modern Persian l-iterature Serics, no. 2),
W e s t v i e w ,B o u l d e q C o l o . , 1 9 7 9 . 1
3. Trans. G. M. Wiekcns as Hryi Aqu. tlte Portrait oJ
Marr (Austin, Tcx., 1979).
un Iruritut Cotr.fitlertce
4. Trans. H. S. G. Darke in E. Yarshatcr,cd., ArtthoL'
ogv, 173-78.
5 . T r a n s .B . S p o o n c r ,i b i d . , l l 9 - 2 6 .
6. Trans.D. P. Costelkl(Lorldon, 1957;Ncw York,
r 9-57).
7. Trans. by P. Mcad in E. Yarshatcr,ed., Antlnlog,l,
1 0 3 -I t i .
YeursAJier 21-42.
1 0 . S e e H . D a r a g a h i ," T h c S h a p i n g o l ' t h c M o d e r n
'Prelacc' to Yeki
PersianShort Story: Jarnalzada's
Butl, Yeki Nabutl," The Lirerurt' Review ltJ/l (Fall
19141 18-31.
It is ha
he doe
pline: v
Hedaya
ing to
from tl
of Hed
are wri
others
cerns.
Blood,
not wr
to wri
ttDash
Juan,
heni's
is mol
is con
In wh
Alive,
and 7
chain
ment
while
autho
schen
Baral
sitior
Chao
the a
perfe
dicta
ofa
way
In
SOUI{CE: Bashiri, Ira.j."l-iterary Tochniques."ln The
F'it'tiorr oJ Satleq Heduvttt, pp. 92-10-5.Lexington, Ky.:
M a z d a P u b l i s h c r s ,l 9 f t 4 .
the evolution of
lltt the essoy below,,Bushiri disc'usse.s
Heduyut's st,-le.from his .short stories to The Blind Owl
ruul ussertstlutt he is a regiorrul writer despite his ex'
perinrcntal slyle.l
In his analysis of Hedayat's works Reza Baraheni
states:
tJ. Kanrshad,Modent Persian Prose, l3l-201.
9 . Translatcd in Hedul'ut's "'l'he Blind Owl" Forty
SHORT
lacksthc vcrythingthatNima
In certaincascsHedayat
l Y u s h iIj p o s s e s s c d - h el a c k s a r t i s t i c d i s c i p l i n e
(enzebul-e
futnuri).. . . Whilc on suchstoriesas Tfte
Rlind Owl, "Dash Akol" and"'fhe Stray Dog" hc has
masterandhascreated
imposed
thiskindoi discipline
pieces,hc hasfailcdto imposca similarailisticdisciplinc on "Buried Alive," "Three Drops of Blood,"
',tru)
Huji Aqu.l
"MadameAlaviyeh"
t'
youl
doc
imP
phiz
pois
ttBu
whc
he
stor
and
ofz
poe
wt
ing
Be
ma
ani
l1
SIIORTSTORYCRITICISM VoI. 131
,rs
in
It is hard to agree or disagree with Baraheni because
hedoesnot explain what he means by artistic discipline:what kind of artistic discipline does or does not
possess?What are the precise criteria accordHedayat
i n gt o w h i c h B a r a h e n i d i s t i n g u i s h e st h e s t o r i e s o n e
fromthe other? This author finds Baraheni's two sets
of Hedayatstories often similar. It is true that some
arewrittenwith specific literary values in rnind while
othersare written to satisfy social or political concerns.Certainly "Buried Alive," "Three Drops of
Blood," The Blind Owl, and "The Stray Dog" are
notwritten with the same motives that move Hedayat
to write Haii Aqa and "Madame Alaviyeh." Bltt
ttThe Don
"DashAkolt' compares ntuch ntore with
Juanof Karaj" than with any of the stories in lJaraheni'sfirst group. Sirnilarly, "'l'hree Drops of Blood"
is morecomparableto The Blind Owl than the latler
is comparableto "Dash Akol."
Persian literatureconfronts a prose realist. This analyst
puts himself and his characterthrorrghdifficult yet real
ordeals so as credibly to portray the pressuresof coping with a continuotts urge to destroy oneself. By the
by our author learnsthat the rnost credible portrayal of
an event is one in which the character and the author
experience the event together. Tlris lras great consequence for Hedayat's fitture and bccomes the hallmark
of his fiction. Baraheni slttrtsit up by saying that "Hedayat's greatest literary characteristic (kht'sise uz.
n o z . a r - eh o n a r - c n a v i s o n d e g i )i s h i s a b i l i t y t o t r a n s form us into himself."'
I n w h a t f o l l o w s w e s h a l l d e m o n s t r a t et h a t " [ f u r i e d
ttThe Requicm,"
Alive,ttttThree Drops of Rloodr"
andThe Blind Owl form the unbreakable links in a
charnleading to "The Stray f)og" and the enhancementof the shoft story genre. We will show also that
w h i l es u p e r f i c i a l l yt h e s e s t o r i e s l a c k s t r u c t u r e ,t h e i r
authorhas kept in mind a pcrfect and well worked-otrt
The differcnce between our point of view and
scheme.
therefbre, is that we can .iustify the irnpoBaraheni's,
sitionof chaos on a work that tnltst rcflect clraos.
Chaos,in other words, has a strttctureof its own, and
theartist must be ablc to reproduce that structttre to
perfection.
Surely the discipline to capture the unpred i c t a b l ea n d s e t i t d o w n d o e s n o t d i r n i n i s h t h e v a l L r e
of a work of art, though it rnay require fionr trs a new
wayof seeing this work.
The object of the experitnent is ttl itssessthe ilnpact of
p r e d e s t i n a t i o na n d f r e c w i l l o n t h c p h y s i c a l a n d t n e n t a l l a c u l t i e sa s w e l l a s t o e x a n l i n c t h e r e l a t i o n s h i po f
l n d e x i s t e n t i a lp h e n o m c n a t o s t t i these supernaturaa
c
o
t
n m i t s t r i c i d e b e c a r t s cs u i c i d e i s a
cide. Docs one
part ol one's nature and destiny, or does one have tlrc
a b i l i t y a n c l t h e w i l l t o s t t r v i v c s t r i c i d a lt e n d e n c i e sa s
one wor-rldsurvive a disease?It sccnrs' from all indic a t i o n s ,t h a t t h e a t r t h o rh i n t s e r l kf n o w s t h e e x p e r i m e n t ,
but that he has carried it only to a clcsiredpoint. The
c h a r a c t e ra b o u t w h o t n h e w r i t e s , l t o w e v e r , c o n c l u d e s
the experintent.
:d.
inrct
ler
in
rty
I
rahe
an
ly,
7).
'he
:a)xot,
tiks
at,
'he
v.:
of
wl
tx-
rni
HEDAYAT
I n r u s t d i s a g r e c ,h o w e v e r , w h e n B a r a h e n i s a y s , " i t i s
Hedayat who, in most of his stories, attempts to comnrit suicide. or to become insane or to bc btrried alive.
not we,"' because,as Dastgheyb correctly points out'
Hedayat portrays society and, hence, trs. Wc cannot
shirk responsibility.We, too, suft-erthese conlpulsions.
Thrce factors influencc "Iluried Alive," the story that
b e g a n t h e s p e c u l a t i o t ot n H e d a y a t ' s i n s a n i t y a n d p o s s i b l e a d d i c t i o n t o n a r c o l i c sa n d a l c o h o l . T h e f i r s t ' o f
course,is Hedayat'sdexterity in producing works
w h i c h q u i c k l y d r a w t h e r e a d e ri n . I n t h i s h e f b l l o w e d
the literary trends of the West. The next is Hcdayat's
w i l l i n g n e s st o t t n d e r g os t r c h p h y s i c a l a n d p s y c h o l o g i c a l p u n i s h m e n t a s a c t r - r a l l yt o f e c l t h e a p p r o a c h o f
death and then to docttment strch l'celings.The third is
h i s r e s e a r c hi n t o s i m i l a r c a s e s . w h i c l r t h r o u g h g r e a t
e r r r p l t h yb e c i t t n cl t i s o w n c x p e r i e t t t ' c .
In "Buried Alive" Hedayat wrote about a suicidal
y o u n gI r a n i a n i n P a r i s . H e s h o w e d h o w t h e y o u t h
d o c u m e n t e dh i s f e e l i n g s a s h e u n d e r w e n t h i s s e l f imposedordeetl.And he dcscribed how, while philosophizingand documenting his actions and thoughts, the
poisonsworked themselvesinto his systeln.
"Buried Alive" is a report on the emotions of a man
whois facing the unknown. He does not know whether
hewill lose or win the game he has begun. In this
$ory Hedayat uses his knowledge of lranian culture
andsocial and religious life to present a vivid picture
of a youth coping with a difllcult situation.There is no
poetryand no ronlancc.
/ e d a y a th i m s e l f
H o w d o w e k n o w t h a t a l l t h i s i s t r L r e 'H
e x h o r l s a n a r : t h o rt o i n v o l v e h i r r l s e l fi n t h e s u b j e c t so f
h i s s t u d y a n d t o d o c u n t e n t h i s e x p e r i e n c e sa s a c c u rately as possible.'The following passageofien quoted
in relation to Hedayat's own stticidal tendenciesstates
s o m e t h i n gl i k e a n o r g a n i z i n g p r i n c i p l e f o r " B u r i e d
Alive":
No onc sirlply rnrkcstrp his rrlindto conlnritsuicide.
Suicidcis only ltrr certainpcoplc.It is in th.'irnaturcandtheycannotshirkit ol1"It is dcsandconstitution
tiny thatdirt:ctshut,lt lhc samctinle.it is I who hnvc
its rrrip.
I cattno longet'cscapc
rnyorvnclcstiny.
shuped
Why is "Ifuried Alive" important to the understanding of modern Persian fiction? The reason is obvious.
BeforeJamalzadeh and Hedayat, literature was the domainof the poet. The poet alone had the authority to
a n a l y z ep e o p l e ' s e m o t i o n s . N o w , f o r t h e l i r s t t i m e ,
I cannot llce liont ntvsell'.s
l6-s
HEDAYAT
SHORT STORYCRITICISM VoI.131
Hedayat analyzes the thoughts of the character quite
credibly. Experience with drugs and with materials on
suicide could have assistedthis analysis, but Hedayat
can credibly-artfully-reproduce
similarly anxious
moments in a totally difl-erent setting. "Three Drops
of Blood" is a case in point.
so as to give time and place in the story an illusory
quality. This incoherence,typical of the lunatic, both
distorts the story and lends it credibility.
How does Hedayat manipulate these sequences?The
reader is told. for instance. that Mirza Ahmad Khan
'Abbas
learns a song from
ofter his commitment, but
the same song becomesa determining factor in thede.
cision to commit him (almost a year later). Similarly,
the suggestion of the screech owl as the source of the
three drops of blood under the pine tree comes fron
the supervisor,i.e., from a person who in a "conect"
sequence of events should appear a.fter his commit
ment; but this piece of infonnation, too, is influential
in committing the narrator to the asylum.
Having establishedthat the author's total immersion in
his character is paramount, Hedayat attempts another
experiment. This time he portrays the disintegrating,
chaotic life of an inmate in an asylum. The protagonist
in "Se Qatre Khun" ("Three Drops of Blood") is
Mirza Ahmad Khan, a lunatic. He explains the circ u m s t a n c e su n d e r w h i c h h e w a s r e c o g n i z e d a s s i c k
and was confined. He talks about his friend Siavosh,
about the asylum supervisorand about the newly committed patient,'Abbas.
sHof
nether
Heday
his usi
tial ref
of ubic
is inei
Ttre cl
as the
the ng
ment ti
er's sd
He avl
els."t
i
This tn
we al€
The distortion of the locations in which these events
take place is also noteworthy,becausea lunatic'ssense
of location rrray differ fronr that of a rational indi.
vidual. Thus the reader finds more than a similarity
among the narrator's home, his friend's horne, andthe
s u p e r v i s o r ' sp l a c e . T h e y a r e a l l t h e s a m e p l a c e ,t h e
asylum in which Mirza Ahmad Khan is confined.
About a year before the writing of his story, says Mirza
Ahmad Khan, he had a close friend called Siavosh.
Siavosh becomesill and is confined to his house which
sharesa wall with Mirza Ahmad Khan's house. Mirza
Ahmad Khan cannot see his fiiend for a while.
This manipulation of tirne and space is accompanied
by manipulation of the charactersthemselvessuchthat
Mirza Ahmad Khan and Siavosh ancl. later. Mirza Ah.
mad Khan and 'Abbas become confused. Then, too,
the lunatic thinks that the girl who has come to visit
'Abbas
is really in love with him, Mirza Ahrnad Khan.
Then one day at least a year ago he hears a gunfire
n e x t d o o r . S i a v o s l r ,h e s o o n f i n d s o u t , h a s f i r e d t h e
gun at an imaginary cat. Siavoshthen invites Mirza
Ahmad Khan to his room where he shows him a gun
telling how he has killed his own cat and how the
cries of the victim's mate bother hirn at night. He also
informs Mirza Ahmad Khan that he has seen three
drops of the murdered cat's blood under the pine tree
in his yard.
This kind of madness had not been openly discussd
i n l r a n . O n l y t h o s e d e a l i n g w i t h t h e s e p a t i c n t sw e r e
aware of their world. Hedayat's portrayal of this world,
however, fufihered suspicion that he hirnself was sin.
g r " r l a ra n d p o s s i b l y d e r a n g e d . W h a t h e h a d a c t u a l l y
done, of course, was to present a vivid and life-like
portrait of people confined to one place, the lran of
the 1930s.
Carrying a bouquet of flowers, Rokhsare, the protagon i s t ' s f i a n c 6 e .a n d h e r m o t h e r n o w e n t e r f o r a v i s i t .
Even though Rokhsare is Mirza Ahmad Khan's fianc6e, Siavosh introduces Mirza to the ladies and asks
him to testify that he has seen three drops of blood
under the pine tree. Mirza Ahmad Khan testifies. He
disagrees with Siavosh, however, in that he believes
the drops of blood could belong to the screechowl or
to a slain cat who had stolen the neighbor's canary;
they may even have been destined to be there. To illustrate the latter point he begins to sing a song composed by 'Abbas.
Both these works, to my mind, are well structured,
They differ from the normally structured in that they
r e f l e c t a s e e n r i n g l y u n s t r u c t u r e ( lp h e n o m e n o n i n a
structured, well thought-out manner. As such both
contribute to Persian literature in departing from the
traditional models of Mosta'an, HejazJ, and others.
They inaugurate, as it were, an inspection of society
as it lives at a given time."
Hearing Mirza Ahmad Khan's incoherent explanation
of the three drops of blood leading to his song, the ladies pronounce Mirza Ahmad Khan "mad" and leave
him one after the other, taking Siavosh with them.
In both "Buried Alive" and "Three Drops of Blood"
we are confronted with events that take place in the
real world. A slight distortion of reality and a litth
manipulation of time and space provide the meansto
make the stories real and credible. "Afarinegan"
("The Requiem") is another story to establish netl
literary techniques; here Hedayat allows time and
s p a c e t o e v a p o r a t e .L e a v i n g t h e e a r t h p l a n e f o r t h e
In "Buried Aliver" as we have seen, the protagonist
assumeda role he created for himself, losing his objective sense of reality. Here Hedayat adds another dimension,consciouslyconfusing the sequenceof events
166
form t
and sF
As cat
'Thrrc(
herald
Heday
acter h
acter s
and pil
familif
Khayyl
beforel
theme I
tyrannl
better I
I
Due tq
analyz
t"t Wl
work t
tions {
Blood,l
see H(
rcader
must b
work li
TrreBl
narratc
cumsta
ings wl
pendir
IEnnea
Ird
the
Phl
While l
about-
of Thel
HEDAYAT
T. I3I
SHORT
STORYCRITICISM Vol.I3I
rusory
regions,a souljoins other soulsin the hereafter.
nether
accountof this passagerobs the readerof
Hedayat's
usual
sense
of time as well as of distanceand spahis
From this disorientation
resulta number
tialreference.
characterswho can interactin a way that
ofubiquitous
by the criteriaof nonnalhumansenses.
isinexplicable
actionsremaincredibleonly as long
lle characters'
asthereaderknows that he is dealingwith beingsin
ftenetherregions.Consider,for instance,this state"l know a paintment
by Rashn,one of the characters:
c/ssoulwhich has assumedthe body of a butterfly.
Heavoidspeopleand spendshis time with wildflow-
, both
? The
Khan
tt, but
re deilarly,
of the
from
rrgct"
nmitLential
)vents
sense
indilarity
rd the
e, the
anied
h that
a Ah, too,
visit
Khan.
ussed
were
rorld,
r sinually
>-like
an of
ured.
they
i n a
both
n the
hers.
ciety
oodtt
n the
little
ns to
0n."7
of soulsis credibleonly as long as
thistransmigration
wearedealingwith beingswho do not have to conworld of time. matter.
form
to our multidimensional
andspace.
Ascanbe seen.there is much in "Buried Alive,"
{hree Drops of Blood," and "'l'he Requiem" that
the approachof The Blirtd Owl. By the time
heralds
knowshow to placehirnselfinsideany charHedayat
he wishesand to narratethe eventsas that character
seesthem.he is ableto criticizethe socialscene
acter
without elaboration,being
rndpinpointshortcornings
alreadywith the works of and about Ornar
familiar
Zoroaster,
and the Buddha.What he needs,
Khayyam,
embarkingon The Blind Owl is a theme, a
before
and
thatcan excmplify the depthof repression
fteme
in the lran of the 1930s.What thcme would
tyranny
htterillustratelack of freedonrthan freedomitsel['?
Ilut I. I who was devoid of talcnt and who was poor, a
painterol'pcncasecovcrs,what could I do'/ With these
dry, glisteningand lil'elcsspicturcs.all ol' which were
the samc,as models,what could I paint that would hecome a mastcrpiccc'/e
The novella, however, has more in common
with
"Three Drops of Blood" than it has with "Buried
Alive." The first and most striking sirnilarity is the arbitrary disposition of time and space.The narrator
who lives in contemporary Ray, after he finishes his
own stories, views the life of another painter in that
painter's creation-a jar. That painter had lived in the
c i t y o 1 'R a y b e f o r e t h e i n v a s i o n o f t h a t c i t y b y t h e
M o n g o l s s o r n es e v e nc e n l l r r i e sa g ( ) .
There is also a general confusion about thc characters.
At times the whore's real mother and the nanny are
difficult to tell apart.The many ubiquitousold rnen
who pop in and out are also dillicult to place. But perhaps the most confusing is the narrator, "1." Hc talks
for himself as well as for the ancient painter from
Ray. In other words, the man who sees the ethereal
'Abdol 'Azim
is
being and who is brought to Shah
one "1" and the man who lives with the whore and
kills hcr is a different "1." Yet they are indiscriminately ref'erredto as "1." The man who is enchanted
by the etherealbeing, sitting at his opir-rmdisplay after
he acquires the jar, sees the lil'c story of the ancient
p a i n t e r i n t h a t p a i n t e r ' sd e p i c t i o n c l f t h o s e e y e s . I t i s
the study of those eyes, painted by the ancient painter,
that gives the doomed painter sornehope.About his
own depiction of the eyes, inspired by the ancient
painter, he says:
Dueto thecomplexityof The Blind Owl, we shall not
the literaryinrportof that novellain this chapmalyze
hr.Whatwe shall discussare those aspectsof the
workwhichdraw on and add to the literary innovaachievedin "Buried Aliver" "Three Drops of
tions
and "The Requiem." This will enableus to
Blood,"
Hedayat's
achievementwithout burdeningthe
see
with the structuralanalysisand comparisonthat
nader
be usedto reachthe philosophicalrnessageol' a
must
worklike The Blind OwL
ol' hcr cycson papcr.llcr hody.a
I had thc essence
to nourishing
bodythatwascondcmncd
to dostruction,
the wornrsand ratsthatdwcll undcrthc ground,was
no longerof any uscto lnc.Fromnow on shewasundcr my control,I wus no longcl hcr vassal.Every
I couldlookat hercycs."'
minutcthatI so desired,
TheBlind Orvl resembles"Buried Alive" in that its
feelscompelledaccuratelyto reportthe cirnarrator
in which he lives and to expresshis feelormstances
withoutinhibition.Indeedthe samesenseof imings
pending
death that characterizes"Buried Alive"
The Blind Owl:
Frmeates
Had Hedayat used "he" for the actions of the "1" in
the second part of the novella, the story line would be
clearer.But the rich complexity of the work would be
lessened.
I mustwrite aboutall theseevcntst() assurcmysell'that
theyare not figmentsof my imagination.I must explainthcrnto my shadowwhich is caston the wall."
There is a particular reason why the characters in The
Blind Owl tend to melt into each other. as was the
case in '6Three Drops of Blood." At bottom all these
characters are emanations of the same protagonist's
v a r i o u s m e n t a l a n d e m o t i o n a l c a p a c i t i e s .T h e y a r e
placed in a womb-dungeon to fight the many manifes-
Santt
new
and
r the
seen the successfnl conclusion of someone else's battle
with dcsire and is aware of the qualifications needed
for winning that battle. But he himself lacks those
qualifications:
the protagonistin "Buried Alive" is unsure
While
theresult of his battle with destiny,the narrator
rbout
ofTheBlind OwI is quite sureof the or:tcome.He has
t0/
SHORT STORYCRITICISM, Vol.
HEDAYAT
t a t i o n s o f d e s i r e . E a r t h l i k e q u a l i t i e s a r e a s s i g n e dt o
these so that we can follow their interactions. They
are, however, still related to an uneafthly life.
ants, and its beautiful green meadows.The re
confronting
hardly facesthe stark surroundings
characlers
of the earlierslories.
The battle between desire and self is won by the
former in part one and by the latter in part two. The
jar painteg thus, rather than being bom into a world of
sull-eringand rebirth, joins the realm of the unborn.
In the story a dog of Scottishbreedlives but is not
home in the villageof Varamin.The narrator's
The Blind Owl has a lot in common with "The Requiem" as well. To begin with, they share the same
locale of action, the nether regions. The Blind Owl,
however, does not intirnate this setting as readily as
does "The Requiem." They both have ubiquitous
characters. The old carriage driver in The Blind Owl
travels from place to place in quite the same way that
the spirits in "The Requiem" do. While the setting
for "The Requiem" is scant-it is a well in a dakhme
where bodies are discarded-the setting of The Blind
Owl is quite like those on the carthplane.It is true that
one often loses his way in the alleys and byways, but
the city accommodatesits citizens adequately.
Hedayat did not intend The Blind Owl to be a fantasy.
Rather he wanted it to be a grim reminder of the reality of his time. The everlasting battle between desire
and self here can reflect the everlasting battle of the
I r a n i a n n a t i o n a g a i n s t f e t r d a l i s m ,t h e m o n a r c h y , i m posed religious beliefs, and denial of human rights. He
made The Blind Owl his battle cry against aggrcssion.
oppression,and the denial of liberty in the Iran of the
I 930s.
I have stated elsewhere that The Blind (7wl was a
long tinre in the making before its publication in 1937.
I did not mean that it took Hedayat a decadeto write it
n o v e l l a o f s i x t y p a g e s .W h a t I m e a n t i s t h a t w i t h o u t
ttThree Drops of Blood,tt and ttThe
"Buried Aliver"
Requiem," Hedayat could not have written The Blind
0wl.
While the stories we have so far describedinclude the
elements of artificiality and of experimentation with
the techniques of short story writing, "The Stray Dog"
does not attempt such. Rather it embodies Hedayat's
knowledge of those experienceswithout allowing such
knowledge to take the form of a repoft by an eye witness.Indeed. in this seriesof stories that can be called
"the artist as the exemplary sufferer," "The Stray
Dog" stands alone in that it is the description of a life
different from the narrator's. This, however, does not
mean that Pat feels any less vulnerable to the encroachmentof destiny or is less confused in his world
than the inmates of an asylum. He, too, like the narrator of The Blind Owl, has to make a hard choice." All
these concerns, however, are well woven into the fabric of the story, its miserable setting, its cruel inhabit-
of view is that of the dog, who can describe bul
r a t i o n a l i z eh i s s i t u a t i o n .
Pat, the stray dog, is brought up by a Westernfamily
living in lran. Apparently,Pat is still a puppy
the family departs the West for lran, leaving Pat
mother and pup brother behind. A new friend, the
ter's son. fills the vacuum. In Iran Pat lives a
life until the adventof his rut compels him to run
is not allowed.Thenone
This compulsion
bitches.
Pat is allowed to accompany his master and a couple
of his colleagueswho are travcling to an archaeologi'
cal site near Varamin. They drive to the Varamin
square,walking liom there to the site. Along this
Pat picks up the scent of a bitch, goes crazy and
his master.He finds the bitch in a garden, reaching
t h r o u g h a s l u i c e . H e s t a y sw i t h t h e b i t c h l o n g
to rniss his master'sreturn.Soon he is evictedfrom
the sarden.
Unableto find his master,Pat becomesa straymuz'
zling the trash pile and salivating before the shops
Everyone in the squaret
thc baker and the br-rtcher.
him roughly.
One day, however, a lnan arrives in a car Iike his mas'
ter's. Ile strokes Pat, f'eedshim, takes hirn to the ruins
that his master had corne to see and returns him to the
square.There the man gets into the car to leave; Patis
afraid to get in with him. He watches as the car begins
t o m o v e a w a y . U n w i l l i n g t o l o s e t h i s n e w m a n ,P a t
follows the car. He runs until he can run no longet
Then he drags himself into a ditch where, watchedby
crows,he slowly dies.
"The Stray Dog" depicts animal and human life as
man and beast proceed through birth, infancy, child'
hood, youth, old age, and death. In either case it ap'
pears that the earlier years of life are the more memo'
rable ones; they are cherished and relished as the
individual sinks more deeply into old age. This is be'
cause those years are blessedwith a sense of security
and permeatedwith unsolicited love, all amid an abun'
dance of which the source is as yet unknown to
child. As childhood gives way to youth. security
thin, and lust replaces love. The individual feels
and increasingly insecure. Looking for love, he
s e c u r e a s a i n : b u t a c o n s t a n ti n v a s i o n o f h i s d e
less security alarms him. Eventually an otttcast,y
ends in old age when the sense of insecurity
new heights.He desperatelyseeksto reestablish
168
srroRr s
with his y
proves im
love beco
tranquillit'
The pligh
stricted to
It affects i
in the live
Pat's case
of a misP
that beck
despair th
and woulr
in Varami
The ques
Stray Dt
dog and
are many
them is I
dog finds
unclean I
erners, tc
dogs can
least. Mr
during H
with the
hanced t
more fro
Might nt
tion deel
Living a
sever tie
great so
like Pat
viate tht
life and
tion and
rather a
quite sa
overwhe
E. E. Bt
interpre
person .
cosmic
to embl
difficult
rule, Pe
tegrate.
the pos
Rather,
of aliel
viduals
. I3T
:ader
; the
lot at
point
t not
mily
vhen
Pat's
masappy
after
> day
ruple
rlogiamin
,Valk,
)aves
g her
ough
from
muzps of
;reats
masruins
o the
)at is
lgins
, Pat
nger.
dbv
[e as
hildt ap9moi the
s beurity
bun) the
vears
lost
feels
)nserouth
phes
r ties
HBDAYAT
STORYCRITICISM Vol. I-ll
SHORT
withhis youth and, especially,his childhood. The task
impossible. Finally despair replaces lust and
proves
lovebecomesa distant memory, the only source of
ranquillityin a world of confusion.
Theplight depicted in "The Stray Dog" is not reto man, dogs, the poor, or the disadvantaged.
stricted
all who fall within its orbit. Its manifestation
Itaffects
inthelives of the alllicted varies from being to being.
Pat'scase,for instance,appearsexceptional,the case
of a misplacedcanine. In reality, however, it is love
thatbeckonsPat, it is lust that deceives him and it is
that does him in. These fbrces know no bounds
despair
andwould have done the same in Scotland as they did
inVaramin.
Thequestionthat comes to mind after reading "The
StrayDog" is: Why did Hedayat choose a Western
d o ga n d p l a c e h i m i n a M u s l i m e n v i r o n m e n t ?T h e r e
aremany answers to this question. Prominent alnong
themis the uniqueness of the situation in which the
dogfindshimsell'.Dogs, as is well-known, are deenled
by thc Muslirns and must be shunned.Westunclean
too, are recognizedas kfiur (inlidel). Secondly,
emers,
dogscannotcomntunicate with hutnans, not subtly at
least.Most Westerners traveling irr the Middle East
Hedayat'stirne also did not know how to speak
during
withthe inhabitants.This inability to conmlrnicutc cntheir image as infidels, segregatingtherl still
hanced
morefrom the general public.
Mightnot there be tbr this story a level of interpretationdeeperthan one concernedwith fbreignersin lran?
Livingamong strangers,especially fbr those unable to
s e v etri e s w i t h t h e i r n a t i v e l a n d , h a s a l w a y s b e e n a
greatsourceof grief and drsappointment.And many
likePathave lbund in self'-destructiona means to alleviatethe pain of separation.ls this mundane view of
lifeand its relation to its past the Sufi idea of separationand subsequentannihilation'/ No. Here the past is
a burden that weighs heavily on some and not
rather
quiteso heavily on others. For Pat, for instance, its
weight drives him to self'-destruction'
overwhelming
E,E. Bertels suggeststhat "The Stray Dog" might be
as a story depicting the lif'e of a simple
interpreted
person
in Persia.''This view, however, while apt in a
and philosophical sense,cannot be generalized
cosmic
to embracethe entire lranian lower class. Indeed, as
as it was to live under Reza Shah's dictatorial
difficult
rule,peasantsolidarity and social unity did not disinIf anything held society together at all, it was
tegrate.
thepositiveattitude of this segment of the population.
the story rnay be interpreted to reflect the life
Rather,
of alienatedintellectuals like Hedayat himself, individualslike Sharif. the narrator of The Blind Owl' the
protagonists in "The Dark House" and "The Patriot." These individuals were then, as they are today,
outcastsin their own society. The government, the
clergy, the literati, and the ignorant masses-all treated
and still treat them roughlY.
In "The Stray Dog" Hedayat uses the reverse of the
techniquesthat he used in his previous stories in this
series-he uses normal temporal and spatial dirnens i o n s a n d e n h a n c e sh i s d i c t i o n w i t h a r e a l i s t i c p o r trayal of everyday happenings.Since everyone at sonre
p o i n t i n h i s o r h e r l i f e h a s b e e n s u b j e c t e dt o a l i e n ation, Pat's case commands a universal appeal.
"'lhe Stray Dog" appears logically in the wake of
The Btind Owl. lt deals with the alienation of att e r n p t e d l i b e r a t i o n i n a n e n v i r o n m e n t s u l T u s e dw i t h
prejudice, fanaticisnt, and oppression.The narrator of
The Btind Orvl clescribesthe encounter of a liberated
indiviclual and the inhabitantsof Ray as follows:
thlough
I passcd
destination
Withoutanypredcternrirrcd
n r a n ys t r c o t sa n d d i s t r a u g h t lwy a l k e db y t h e r a b b l c
who,with glecdylaccs,werein pursuitol'Irloncyand
lust. In lact. I did ntlt nced to sce thenl to know thcllli
'l'hcy
wcrc all
one was cntlugh lo rcprcsent thc rest.
likc onc hig ntouth running to a wad tll guts, lcl'tnitrating in a sexual otgan.r'
The other major stories in The Stray Dog collection,
namely, "The Dead llnd" and "The f)on Juan of
Karajr" are enhanccd similarly and reflect the same
i n a b i l i t y o f t h e i r p r o t a g o n i s t st o f i t i n t o s o c i e t y . H e tlayat explains this lack of social harmony about Sharif
t h u s : " L i f ' e ' s b i t t e r e x p e r i e n c e sh a d i n s t i l l e d i n h i n l a n
aversiol.tand contempt for pcople and, itt his dealings
with therrt,he put on a reservedface in self'-defense."'n
Havingthusbriefly.J;
lu eu.utt"ni'sassertions
about Hedayat's lack of artistic discipline,we can
summarize the treatnrentof tirne, space,and character
in Hedayat's fiction. This summary, needlessto say, is,
like the treatment of the other techniques' not exhaustive. Further analytical probing into individual stories
is needed befbre a fuller picture enrerges.
As we have seen,time and spaceplay a special role in
the strttcture of solne of Hedayat's stories, while in
others they merely hold the narratives together. Hedayat's use of them conditions three kinds of stories:
those in which time and space are deliberatelydistorted to create special effects (they might confuse the
reacler,for instance), those in which time and space
help the reader to infer a meaningful sequence of
events and those in which the writer, out of contempt,
d i s r e g a r d s t h e c h r o n o l o g i c a l s e q u e n c eo f h i s t o r i c a l
events.
169
SHORT STORYCRITICISM VoLISl
SHO
this?Is this Hedayat'sdoing,or is this how thingsre'
A closerlook at the purgatorymight
solvethemselves'l
providesolneanswers.
Shat
thinl
a tra
worl
burs
Doe
the
Kar
HEDAYAT
Stories like "Buried Alive," "Three Drops of Blood,"
"The Requiemr" and The Blind Owl, as we have seen,
belong to the first category. The order of events in
these stories fails to correspond to a logical progression of events, i.e., the sequencethat the reader expects is not the sequence of the story. Early in the
s t o r y , t h e r e f o r e , a s e n s e o f i n c o m p r e h e n s i b i l i t ya n d
confusion creeps in and stays with the reader throughout. The use of unclearly describedlocationsand chara c t e r s h e i g h t e n st h i s s e n s e o f c o n f u s i o n . I n " T h r e e
Drops of Blood" this techniqueprovides a convincing
and accurate portrayal of the thought processesof lunatics.
Most of Hedayat's stories fall into the second category. These stories reflect tirne and spacein a normal
way. Wherever its need arises,a flashback illuntinates
areas that would otherwise remain obscure. "The
Dead Endr" "The Apparitionr" "The f)ark House"
and "The Stray Dog" are such pieces.
The third category includes stories written during the
very last years when a despondentHedayat pays little
attention to clarity. "Tomorrow" and The Peurl Cunnon ltt this category. The reader of "Tomorrow," tbr
instance,rnust struggle with the text and decipher thc
a p p r o p r i a t e a n t e c e d e n t sf o r r n o s t p r o n o u n s a t a s k
that ofien discomfits the reader, fbrcing hirn either to
reread a passage or to analyze a situation befbre he
c a n u n d e r s t a n d a g i v e n s e n t e n c e .T h i s d e c i p h e r i n g
may prove diflicult becausePersiandoes not lbrmally
distinguish gender.ln The I'eurl (\nrutrt all the rules,
including those governing logical time seqttences,historical events,and authoritativestatenrentsby prophets
and learnedmen of the past, are summarily dismissed.
Here Sadeq Hedayat, under the pseudonyrn Hadi
Sedaqat,dispenseshis own verses fiom the Qur'un.
his own etymology tbr words, and his own interpretative authority; he createshis own brand of orderly
chaos.
A review of the lives of Hedayat's charactersshows
that, as a whole, they are a new breed and that their
introduction into Persian literature is welcome. Never
before had Persian authors scrutinized the society st-l
closely and studied the individuals inhabiting its various strata so carefully. In this respect Hedayat is, to
quote Lazard, a precursor.
Hedayat portrays the lranian society quite realistically;
but he has a peculiar view of this society-he identifies it with a kind of "purgatory" in which workers,
hazaaris, employers, dervishes, louts, rnuLluft.r-even
cats and dogs-are trapped. And he shows that each
patiently bears what is dished out. What is puzzling is
that almost all crumble under life's burden. Why is
Shadow and light in their rnost generic sense-reality
versus fantasy, knowledge versus ignorance, the after'
lif'e versus here below-dominate the rnoralistic and
spiritual as well as the concrete aspectsof the livesof
Hedayat's characters.When, in the end, every charac'
ter is judged and released from purgatory, very few
make it to "paradise." Ironically, however, even though
every character gets his or her deserts, none is bur'
dened with sentencesthey abhor. You could say they
receive what is coming to them, what they desire.
However, what they desire is in conflict with what
they should have striven fbr. And that is why we find
them, like defective merchandise, returned to "hell"
for more time.
Consider the pencase-covcrpainter in The Blind Owl
fbr instance. He desires intensely to possessthe eyes
of the ethereal girl and thercby he destineshimselfto
'Abdol 'Azim. But, at Shah 'Abdol 'Azim, he
Shah
not only has lris own creation of those eyes-he is
given a r.noreenchatrtingpair painted on the side of a
Raq jar. The painter of those cycs, on the other hand,
s t r i v e s t o b c c o m e a n o d d s - a n d - e n d sr n a n ; h e , t o o ,
reachesthe statushe seeks.
The protagonist in "Buried Alive" tests late by trying
to beat what the cards have in store fbr hirn. But he
finds that out. Alaviych, Haji Aqa, Haji Morad, the
characterof "The Dark House" and Ahtnadak in "The
Water of l,ife": they all reach their desired ends.This
end spells out a reality different fbr each character,a
reality congrucnt with his or her choicc. Cornpare,fot
instance,Ahrnadak's achievenrentof lieedont for himself and filr the massesliving in ignorance in Glittering Gold and Shining Moon with Alaviyeh's achievement, the restorationof her relationshipwith Yuzbashi.
Hedayat allows his charactersnot only to make
choices, but also to sufl'er the consequcncesof their
actions. The protagonist in "Iluried Alive" is hardly
different froln a test pilot, a sky-diver or a ntan who
takes on the oceans of the world single-handedly.He
choosesto experintcnt. The setting of the experiment,
the sky or the ocean versus the confined quartersof a
fbreign student in Paris of the 1920s, must not blind
us to the substanceof the eflbrt.
Abji Khanom is a sad case. She misdirccts her efforts
from the beginning. And each step willy-nilly brings
h e r c l o s e r t o d o o m . L i k e t h e p e n c a s e - c o v e rp a i n t e r ,
she follows her fantasy-a husband in this world and
a blessed lif-e in the other. Her fantasy, however, proves
lethal.
170
As
curr
darc
our!
cho
que
can
whi
him
Thr
pre
pre
ces
cha
his
of
to
chi
onl
rar
"le
sat
So
ter
w
dr:
mi
po
of
ev
en
v€
lil
Pr
th
at
dl
te
A
t€
al
h
h
tt
13I
SHORT
STORYCRITICISM. Vol. I3l
i re-
Sharilin 6'The Dead End," choosessimilarly. He
ftinksthatby suppressingthe pasthe can gain himself
present.But, as Hedayatshows,his fantastic
atranqurl
lastsonly two magicalweeks.Then the bubble
world
bursts
andSharif is returnedto face the reality of life.
Doesn't
this remind us of Dash Akol in the story of
thesamename and of Hassanin "The Don Juan of
Karaj"?
ight
rlity
fuerand
sof
racfew
ugh
)urhey
ire.
'hat
frnd
ell"
)wl,
yes
Fto
he
:is
lfa
rd,
oo'
ing
he
the
fhe
his
fra
for
imlerverhi.
rke
reir
dlv
rho
He
)nt,
fa
ind
frts
lgs
€f'
rnd
/es
HEDAYAT
Asreaders
and critics we tend to judge events,circumstances,
and charactersaccordingto our own stanBut the author'sview rnight be differentfrorn
dards.
Pat,the eulogizedcaninein "The Stray Dogr"
ours.
chooses
to follow his fantasyand to pay the consequences
by sufferingwhat torturethe nriserablesquare
canoffer.Wouldhe not be happyto suft-erin the square
which
affordshim recourseto meadowsthat remind
himof his childhood?
Theuseof originaland innovativedevicesfbr the expression
of inner scntirnentsbelongsto tlre Opl and
ye-Owlperiodwhen Hedayatdrew on the deepestreof his creativemind to project multi-f'aceted
cesses
In later lif'e, when he opted for reportage,
characters.
hischaracters
suffered.ConsiderMonadi al-Haqq,one
ofthelastfictionalpersonalities
in Hedayat'sfiction
lovoicehis opinionaboutthe Iran of the 1940s.This
character,
as Kamshadcorrectlystates,is clearly no
onebut Hedayathirnselfwho, incensedat the ignorance
of the people and the opportunismof a f'ew
"leaders"
like Haji Aqa, replaceswit with rancorand
with abuse.Only Alaviyeh Khanomand Saheb
satire
canrnatchthe vehemence
Soltan
of this flilnsy character,a caricature
of the Haji.
When,
linally,the well of Hedayat'screativityruns
dry,he reachesout to the West for inspiration."Tomorrowr"althougha poignantpiece from a sociopliticalvantagepoint,is a poor exampleof the stream
ofconsciousness
technique.It fails to conncctthe
meaningfully,its demandson lhe readerare
events
and it cannotclaim clarity of diction-the
enormous,
verythingsfor which the earlier works of Hedayat
like"The Stray Dog" are famous.In this respectT'he
PearlCunrutnis even worse though,as we shall see,
thisworkis praiseworthyfbr non-technical
consider(see[Bashiri, Iraj. In The Fiction oJ'SudeqHeations
KY: MazdaPublishers,19841Chapdayat.Lexington,
hrssixandseven).
national attention. Scholars from throughout the world
since then have broached Persian, both the classical
and the modern, for ideas, methods and scope. Hedayat added Persian fiction to the body of permanent
world literature.And he did it by innovating methods
to explore an old but unexplored way of life.
Note.s
l . R e z a B a r a h e n i , Q e s s eN e v i s i , ( T e h r a n :A s h r a t i
Publications,1969),pp. 4-55-456.
2 . l b i d . ,p . 4 5 7 .
3. Ibid.,p. 45tt.
4. Cl., lbr instance,Hedayat's "Tarh-c kolli bara-ye
Kavosh-elblklor-c yck Mantaqch" ("A Plan lirr
I n v c s t i g a t . i n gt h c F o l k l o r e o f a R c g i o n " ) , i n
Neveshteha-ye
Puntkandc,Qa' cmian, cd. pp. 455483.
5. Cf. Cartcr Bryant, trans., "Buricd Alivc," He'The
dayat's
Blind Owl' Forty Yeur.sAJicr, Michael
H i l l m a n n , c d . [ A u s t i n : U n i v c r s i t yo f T c x a s P r c s s ,
19781,p. 44.
6 . C f . l A b d o l A l i l D a s t g h c y b p, . 9 9 .
7. Hcdayat, Chiarost'uro,p. l13.
[i. Hcdayat,The Blind Owl, p. lO.
9. ll'tid., p. 27.
10. lbid., p. 29.
Il. Frlr rnrlre inlirrmation see this author's "Thc Concept of Judgcnrcntin Thrcc W<lrksol' Sadcq Hcdayat," Studiesin Islam (lorthcorning).
| 2 . K a n t s h a , J ,M o d e r n I t e r s i u r t P r o s e L i t e r o t u r e ,
( C a m b r i d g c :C a m b r i d g eU n i v e r s i t y P r c s s , 1 9 6 6 ) ,
p. ltt-5.
13. Hedayat,Tlrc Blind OwL,p. 611.
14. Ci. Guity Nashat, ct al., "Dead F.nd," Literuture
East and West,Yol. XX, ( 1976), p. -5I .
Michael Beard (essay date 1990)
SOURCE: Beard, Michacl. "Nationalist Poeticsand lrs
Shadows."ln Hedoyot's Blind Owl os a WesternNovel,
p p . 3 - 4 1 . P r i n c c t o n ,N . J . : P r i n c c t o n U n i v c r s i t y P r e s s ,
l 990.
lltt the .followirtg essay,Beanl exantines Hetlayat's noveLlalrom the poirtt of view of lrunian rmtional literature and in the ('ontext ofhis biography.l
Although
an innovatorand an experimentalistas f'aras
techniques
are concerned,Hedayatremainsa regional
His devices,new for Persianliterature,are old
ruthor.
hatin world literatureof that time. Nevertheless
he
has
madehis own lastingcontributionto world litera[tre.Hisrefreshingapproachto Persianattractedinter-
By authorship, language,and setting Sadeq Hedayat's
shoft narrative called Buf-e kur (The Blind Owl, 1936)
is a Persian novel. But it is a novel so profoundly int - ||