A Study of Narrative Speed in Two Stories from Masnavi-i Ma’navi and Their Sources Based on Gerald Prince’s Theory of Narratology

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Professor of Persian Language and Literature, University of Shiraz

2 PhD Candidate in Persian Language and Literature, University of Shiraz

Abstract

This paper aims to study and compare the narrative speed of two stories in Masnavi-i Ma’navi and their sources based on Gerald Prince’s theory of narratology. The main objective of the article is to find the types of narrative speed used in these stories to present the events and situations that have created the world of the narrated events. In this case, comparison of the speed of Molavi’s narratives with their sources is accompanied by the description of the causes contributing to their narrative speed. The results suggest that all sources of Molavi’s narratives, especially prose narratives, are characterized by the low frequency of narrative statements and the high frequency of scene presentation and abstraction which act as a means of inclusion of the sheikhs’ remarks as well as the indirect teaching of moral and mystical lessons of such remarks. Therefore, their non-trimmed narratives have high, relatively high and medium speed of narration. However, Molavi directly draws on mysticism and thoughts rooted in the Islamic-Iranian approach as well as different types of narrative techniques such as implication to prepare each naked and rapidly narrated story for inclusion of five types of narrative speed as well as slow and very slow narrative speed. In this manner, the final narratives are aesthetically characterized by higher diversity, and more thoroughness and pleasure of reading than their sources. Therefore, this suggests that Molavi had a significantly better narratological grip than his predecessors and many of his successors.
 
Extended Abstract
 
1. Introduction
The present article aims to study and compare narrative speed in “The Story of Pir-e Changi Who at the Time of Omar Played Harp in the Graveyard for God” and “Sheikh Ahmad Khazruye’s Buying Halva for the Creditors” from Rumi’s Masnavi-i Ma’navi, based on Gerald Prince’s theory of narratology. The main objective of the article is to find the types of narrative speed used in these stories to present the events and situations that created the world of the narrated events. Also, the narrative speed of the stories are compared and the reasons for the difference between them are examined.
 
2. Theoretical Framework
Prince, by modifying and expanding Genet and Rimmon-Kennan’s theory (Safi, 2013, p. 42) about different states of narrative speed, has divided narrative speed into five categories: ellipsis, interruption, scene, abstract, and extension. The present article relies on the categorization of narrative space to compare the two stories in question in terms of their narrative speed.
 
3. Methodology
In this article, the comparative analysis method of narrative speed, based on Gerald Prince’s narratology theory, is used to analyze the above-mentioned stories from Masnavi-I Ma’navi and their sources, examine various instances of narrative speed in them, and identify similarities and difference between them, so that the reasons for the differences in narration speed of the stories from Masnavi-i Ma’navi and their sources are discovered.
 
4. Findings and Discussion
While the authors of the original sources used only a limited number of the five types of narrative speed, Rumi, by changing and developing each of these stories, made it possible for these stories to utilize more types of narration speed, making them aesthetically more diverse and complete than their original sources. The comparison made between different types of narration speed indicates that there is a clear difference between stories written in verse and prose with regard to narrative diversity and speed. Poets before Rumi used a fast speed in their narration of the story as, unlike Rumi’s stories, interruption is not employed in the narration. Also, Rumi, using ideas rooted in Iranian-Islamic discourse and different narrative techniques, adopts a slow narration speed in these two stories, making them even richer and more complicated.
 
5. Conclusion
The analysis of these two stories and their original sources showed that in the original sources less narrative propositions and faster speed of narration were employed. However, in the stories narrated by Rumi, concepts from Iranian-Islamic discourse and different narrative techniques have been used and different categories of narration speed are employed, all giving the stories more diversity and richness.
 

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

Ahmadi, B. 2009. Sakhtar va Ta’vil-e Matn. Tehran: Markaz.
Amini, M. R. 2011. “Andazeh-ye Sokhan va Payvand-e an ba Zaman va Faza dar Adabyat-e Fars”. New Persian Language and Literature Studies. No. 2. Pp. 87-102.
Atash, Soda. M. A. 2004. Ro’ya-ye Bidari. Fasa: Islamic Azad University of Fasa.
Attar, F. 2007. Mosibat-nameh, Introduction and Comments by S. Kadkani. Tehran: Sokhan.
_____.  2011. Tazkarat al-Owlia. Introduction and Comments by M. Este’lami. Tehran: Zawar.
Bahar, M. T. 2007. Sabkshenasi ya Tarikh Tatavor-e Nasr-e Farsi, Vol. 2. Tehran: Zawaar.
_____. 2009. Az Ostureh ta Tarikh. Tehran: Cheshmeh.
Bakherzai, A. Y. 2004. Urad al-Ahbab and Fusus al-Aadab, by Iraj Afshar. Tehran: Tehran University Press and Publishing Institute.
Bameshki, S. 2002. Revayatshenasi-e Dastanha-ye Masnavi, Tehran: Hermes.
Barthes, R., Todorov, T. & Prince, J. 2015. Daramadi Beh Revayashenasi. H. Rahnama (trans.). Tehran: Hermes.
Berger, A. A. 2001. Revayat dar Farhang-e Amyaneh, Resaneh va Zendegi-e Ruzmarreh, M. R. Liravi (trans.). Tehran: Markaz.
Dadjou, D. & Shiravani Shaaenai. 2005. “Barresi-e So’at-e Revayat dar Roman-e Khashm va Hayahu”. Literary criticism and Stylistics, No. 3. Pp. 81-106.
De Saussure, F. 1998. Dowreh-ye Zabanshenasi-e Omumi, Safavid, K. (trans.) Tehran: Hermes.
Dehghani, N. & Hesampour, S. 2003. “Barresi-e Avamel-e Mo’aser bar Shetab-e Revayat dar Roman-e Shazdeh Ehtejab”. Adabpajouhi: No. 26. Pp. 25-48.
Emadi, N. 2009. “Barresi-e Mafhum-e Sor’at-e Nasr va Ertebat-e an ba Ijaz and Etnab ba Negahi beh Marzbannameh”. Master’s Thesis, Shiraz University.
Foruzanfar, B. A. 1944. Ma’khaz-e Qesas va Tamsilat-e Masnavi, Tehran: Tehran University Press.
Freud, S. 2013. Ravesh-e Tabir-e Khab, M. Hejazi and M. Saatchi (trans.). Tehran: Jami.
Hasanali, K. & Dehghani, N. 2010. “Barresi-e Sor’at-e Revayat dar Roman-e Jay-e Khali-e Soluch” Journal of Persian Language and Literature. Pp. 37-63.
Kenan, R. 2002. “Mo’alefeha-ye Zaman dar Revayat”. A. Hori (trans.). Faslnameh-ye Honar: No. 53. pp. 8-27.
Khajuy-e Kermani, K. 1917. Al-Anwar Rowzah, Tehran: Bija.
Khanghani, A. 1985. Gozideh dar Akhlaq va Tasavvof, A. Afshar. Tehran: Elmi va Farhangi.
Lothe, J. 2009. Daramadi bar Revayat dar Adabyat va Sinama A. Nikfarjam (trans.). Tehran: Minouy-e Kherad.
Martin, W. 2010. Nazaryeha-ye Revayat. M. Shahba (trans.). Tehran: Hermes.
Mirsadeghi, C., & Mirsadeghi, C. 2009. Vajehnameh-ye Honar-e Dastan Nevisi. Tehran: Mahnaz.
Mirzayi, M. S. & Salehinia, M. 2005. “Tahlil-e Revayi-e Zaman dar Hekayati as Masnavi-e Mohit-e Azam-e Bidel Dehlavi, Motale’at-e Shebh-e Qareh: No. 22. pp. 107-134.
Monavar Mihani, M. 2009. Asrar al-Towhid fi Maqamat-e Sheikh abi Saeed, Introduction and Comments by S. Kadkani. Tehran: Agah.
Osman, M. 1966. Ferdows al-Merrishdiyya Faye Asarar al-Samiidah. A. Afshar (trans.), Tehran: Anjoman-e Asar-e Melli.
Osmani, M. 2009. Tarjomeh-ye Resaleh-ye Qeshriyeh, Introduction and Comments by B. Foruzanfar. Tehran: Elmi Farhangi.
Osturi, J. et al. 2009. “Danstanha-ye Ammehpasand”. Organun, No. 25. Tehran: Sazman-e Chap va Entesharat.
Parsanasab, M. 2011. “Ma’khazshenasi-e Tahlilie Hekayati az Masnavi”. Motale’at-e Erfani: No. 14. Pp. 31-54.
Payandeh, H. 2013. Goshudan-e Roman. Tehran: Morvarid.
Prince, J. 2016. Revayat-shenasi: Shekl va Karkard-e Revayat, M. Shahbah. Tehran: Minuy-e Kherad.
Rumi, J. 2006. Koliyat-e Masnavi Ma’navi. A. Nicholson. Tehran: Tolou.
Safa, H. 2005. Shenakhtgari dar Adabyat-e Dastani, Tehran: Siahrood.
Safa, Z. A. 2006. Tarikh-e Adabyat-e Farsi, Tehran: Ferdows.
Salehi P. 2005. “Negareshi Tahlili bar Sor’at-e Revayat dar Romnha-ye Jaye Khali-e Soluch va Mowsem al-Hijrah Ila-Shimal ba Takyeh bar Nazarye-yeh Revayat-shenasi-e Gerard Genet”. Literary Text Research: No. 66. pp. 37-64.
Shafiee Kadanki, M. R. 2009. Sovar-e Khiyal dar She’r-e Farsi, Tehran: Negah.
Shamisa S. 2003. Sabkshenasi-e She’r. Tehran: Ferdows.
_____. 2005. Sabkshenasi-e Nasr. Tehran: Mithra.
Tadayoni, M. 2009. Pasamodernism dar Adabyat-e Dastani-e Iran, Tehran: Elmi.
Talayi, M. & Esfahani, N. R. 2006. “Tahlil-e Amalkard-e Guneh-ye Revayat va Shetab-e Manfi dar Zaban Ghenayi”. Linguistic Dossiers: No. 7 (33). Pp. 119-148.
Tavakoli, H. R. 2010. Az Esharat-e Darya: Butiqa-ye Revayat dar Masnavi. Tehran: Morvarid.
Todorov, T. 2003. Butiqa-ye Sakhtargara. Nabavi, M. (trans.) Tehran: Agah.
ــــــــــــــــ. 2003. Nazaryeh-ye Adabyat: Matnha-yi az Formalistha-ye Rus, A. Tahayi (trans.). Tehran: Dat.
ــــــــــــــــ. 2009. Butiqa-ye Nasr: Pazhuhesh’hayi No Darbareh-ye Hekayat. A. Ganjipour (trans.). Tehran: Ney.
Toolan, M. 2009. Revayat-shenasi: Daramadi Zaban-shenakhti Enteqadi, Alawi and Nemati, F (trans.). Tehran: Organization for the Study and Compilation of Humanities Books of Universities (SAMT).
Unknown. 1965. Montakhab Rownaq al-Majalis and Bostan al-Arefin and Tohfat al-Morideen. Rajaee, A. A. Tehran: University of Tehran.
_____. 1966. Pand-e Piran, Matini, J. Tehran: Iran Cultural Foundation.
_____. Hezar Hekayat-e Sufiyan. Hatamipour, H. Tehran: Sokhan.
Vahdanifar, A., Sarfi, M. R. & Basiri M. S. (2006). “Barresi-e Sor’t-e Revayat dar Golestan bar Asas Nazaryeh-ye Gent”. Fonun-e Adabi: No. 4. Pp. 33-50.
Zamani, K. 2006. Sharh-e Jame’e Masnavi Ma’navi, vol.1. Tehran: Etela’at.
_____. 2006. Sharh-e Jame’e Masnavi Ma’navi, vol. 2. Tehran: Etela’at.
Literary Theory and Criticism
Volume 3, Issue 1 - Serial Number 5
Serial 5
February 2019
Pages 121-145

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics