Territorialization and Deterritorialization in Contemporary Poetry: A Deleuzian Perspective

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Assistant Professor of Persian Language and Literature, University of Gonbad Kavus, Gonbad Kavus, Iran

Abstract

Deterritorialization and territorialization, key dichotomies in the thought of Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, have emerged from within their philosophy of immanence. Deterritorialization is an escape from the territory with a body of fixed and definite principles, and it rejects any ideological and predetermined contracts. Territorialization, on the other hand, has a transcendental character that always desires “being.” Relying on the theory of deterritorialization, the present paper seeks to answer the question whether contemporary Persian poetry as the deterritorialization of classical poetry is still deterritorial in its approach to fundamental binary oppositions. The study of contemporary poetry shows that the deterritorialization of classical poetry is absolute and positive, and the internal divisions of modern poetry indicate its fertility and dynamism. Nevertheless, it has a territorialist approach in some political and social traditions that have reciprocated in the historical process. Nima Yushij territorially prefers the countryside to the city and poetry to philosophy. Akhavan Sales and Naderpour prefer the Persians to the Arabs. In a transcendental manner, these oppositions tend to maintain territory in a definite direction because centrifugal lines and deterritorial processes have remained closed to conceptual reconfiguration in the works of these poets.
 
Extended Abstract
1.Introduction
Territory can be defined as a space with specific borders under specific ownership. Grosz believes that “territory frames chaos provisionally, and in the process produces extractable qualities, which become the materials and formal structures of art.” According to Deleuze, territorialization, both as physical and intellectual concepts, leads to monopolization and stagnation, while deterritorialization rejects any ideological and predetermined contracts.
 
2.Theoretical Framework
Theoretically, the present article revolves around territorialization and deterritorialization as key concepts in Deleuzian philosophy. Deterritorialization occurs when a subject or phenomenon escapes from its territory. The two notions of movement and escape are among the main elements of Delueze and Guattari’s deterritorialization. The present study draws on the theory of deterritorialization to find out whether contemporary poetry, as the deterritorialization of ancient poetry, is still deterritorial in its approach to binary oppositions.
 
3.Methodology
The present article has adopted a descriptive-analytical methodology. Data has been collected using the library research method. First, territorialization and deterritorialization have been explained based on Deleuze’s philosophical theories. Then, contemporary poetry has been analyzed based on the concepts of territorialization and deterritorialization.
 
4.Discussion and Analysis
NimaYushij deterritorializes classical Persian poetry by introducing she'r-e noe (i.e., “new poetry”). His poetry, as poetry deterritorialized of classical poetry, leads to movements in Persian literature that are based on principles of movement and connection. Although he tried to break free of all the constraints of classical poetry, at times he had to follow some traditions in Persian classical poetry. His criticism of philosophy is an example of his territorial method, resulting in his finding literature superior to philosophy.
 
5.Conclusion
In its totality, she'r-e noe can be explained through the absolute deterritorialization of classical Persian poetry. This is because this kind of poetry never returned to classical poetry and developed no similarities to it. Dynamism and change are among the main components of contemporary Persian poetry, making it possible for different forms of contemporary poetry to develop. Despite the deterritorial quality of contemporary poetry, traces of territorialization can be seen in some political, intellectual and social positions taken in contemporary poetry. Attaching more importance to the countryside rather than the city, and poetry rather than philosophy in NimaYushij’s poetry are instances of territorialization.
 
Select Bibliography
Akhavan Sales, M. 1356 [1977]. Az in Avesta. Tehran: Morvarid.
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. B. Massumi (trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 1994. What is Philosophy? H. Tomlinson and G. Burrchel (trans.). New York: Columbia University Press.
Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. 2000. Anti Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. R. Hurley et al. (trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Grosz, E. 2008. Chaos, Territory, Art: Deleuze and the Framing of the Earth. New York: Columbia University Press.
Grosz, E. 2000. Deleuze and the Political. London: Routledge.
Patton, P. 2010.The Deleuze Dictionary. A. Parr (ed.). Edinburgh:  Edinburgh University Press.
Tambling, J. 2010. Allegory. London: Routledge
Yushij, N. 1393 [2014]. Majmou’eh-ye Kamel-e Asha’ar. S. Tahbaz (ed.). Tehran: Negah.
Yushij, N. 1398 [2019]. Darbareh-ye Honar-e She’r va Sha’eri. S. Tahbaz (ed.). Tehran: Negah.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

آخوندزاده، فتحعلی .2016. مکتوبات کمال الدوله، به اهتمام علی‌اصغر حقدار، تهران: بنگاه ادبیات.
آدمیت، فریدون.1357. اندیشه‌های میرزاآقاخان کرمانی، تهران: پیام.
اخوان­ثالث، مهدی.1360. از این اوستا، تهران: مروارید.
اسکیلاس، اوله مارتین. 1387. درآمدی بر فلسفه و ادبیات، ترجمه مرتضی نادری دره‌شوری. تهران: اختران.
بلوندل سعد، جویا.1382. عرب‌ستیزی در ادبیات معاصر ایران، ترجمه فرناز حائری. تهران: کارنگ.
پاشایی، عسکری. 1382. نام همه شعرهای تو، ج2. تهران: ثالث.
جهانبگلو، رامین.1387. ایران و مدرنیته؛ گفت‌و گوهای رامین جهانبگلو، تهران: قطره.
دامادی، محمد. 1374. ابوسعیدنامه، تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
دلوز، ژیل. 1393. تجربه‌گرایی و سوبژکتیویته، ترجمه عادل مشایخی. تهران: نی.
رامین­نیا، مریم.1394. «رویکرد ریزوماتیک و درختی: دو شیوه متفاوت در آفرینش و خوانش اثر ادبی». ادب‌پژوهی، (32): 31-61.
روزن، استنلی. 1398. ستیز فلسفه و شعر، ترجمه غلامرضا اصفهانی. تهران: شب‌خیز.
رویایی، یدالله.1390ب. مجموعه اشعار، تهران: نگاه.
رویایی، یدالله.1390 الف. هلاک عقل به وقت اندیشیدن، تهران: نگاه.
رویایی، یدالله.1391. از سکوی سرخ، تهران: نگاه.
شاملو، احمد. 1354. از مهتابی به کوچه، تهران: توس.
طباطبایی، جواد. 1395. تأملی درباره ایران، ج1. تهران: مینوی خرد.
ضیاءابراهیمی، رضا. 1396. پیدایش ناسیونالیسم ایرانی، ترجمه حسن افشار. تهران: مرکز.
کرمانی، میرزاآقاخان. 2000. سه مکتوب، به کوشش و ویرایش بهرام چوبینه. آلمان: نیما کتاب.
کولبروک، کلر.1387. ژیل دولوز، ترجمه رضا سیروان. تهران: مرکز.
گونزل، استفان. 1388. «قلمروزدایی و درون ماندگاری؛ درباره فلسفه دلوز-گاتاری». ترجمه رضا سیروان. کتاب ماه فلسفه، (20): 36-39.
مولوی، جلال­الدین. 1350. مثنوی معنوی، تهران: امیر کبیر.
نادرپور، نادر. 1384. در طلسم شعر، تهران: سخن.
نوری علا، اسماعیل. 1348. صور و اسباب در شعر امروز ایران، تهران: بامداد.
یوشیج، نیما. 1393. مجموعه کامل اشعار، گردآوری و تدوین سیروس طاهباز. تهران: نگاه.
یوشیج، نیما. 1398. درباره هنر شعر و شاعری، تدوین سیروس طاهباز. تهران: نگاه.
Badiou, Alain. 1994. “Gilles Deleuze, The Fold: Leibniz and the Baroque”. Gilles Deleuze and the Theatre of Philosophy, Eds.Constantine Boundas and Dorothy Olkowski. London: Routledge. 51–69.
Colebrook, Claire. 2002. Gilles Deleuze, London and New York: Routledge.
Deleuze, Gilles & Guattari, Félix. 1987. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. Brian Massumi, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Deleuze, Gilles & Guattari, Félix. 1994. What is philosophy?, Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burrchell. New York: Columbia University Press.
Deleuze, Gilles & Guattari, Félix. 1994. What is philosophy?, Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Graham Burrchell. New York: Columbia University Press.
Deleuze, Gilles & Guattari, Félix .2000. Anti Oedipus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, vol. 1. Trans. Robert Hurley, Mark Seem and Helen R. Lane. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
Due, Reidar. 2007. Deleuze, Cambridge: Polity Press.
Grosz, E.2008. Chaos, Territory, Art: Deleuze and the Framing of the Earth, New York: Columbia University Press.
Hillmann, Michael. C .1982. “The Modernist Trend in Persian Literature and Its Social Impact”. Iranian Studies, (15): 7-29.
Brains, Paul. 2003. “SUBJECTLESS SUBJECTIVITIES”. A Shock to Tought: Expression after Deleuze and Guattari, Ed. Brain Massumi. London and New York: Routledge. 101-116.
Parr, Adrian. 2010. “Deterritorialisation/ Reterritorialisation”. The Deleuze Dictionary, Ed. Adrian Parr. Great Britain: Edinburgh University Press. 69-71.
Patton, Paul. 1996. “Introduction”. Deleuze: A Critical Reader, Ed. Paul Patton. Cambridge: Blackwell. 1-17.
Patton, Paul. 2000. Deleuze and the Political, London: Routledge.
Patton, Paul. 2010. “Deterritorialisation+ Politics”. The Deleuze Dictionary, Ed. Adrian Parr. Great Britain: Edinburgh University Press. 72-74.
Patton, Paul and Protev, John. 2003. Between Deleuze and Derrida, London: Continuum Press.
Porter, Robert. 2009. Deleuze and Guattari: Aesthetics and Politics, Cardiff: University of Wales Press.
Tambling, Jeremy. 2010. Allegory, London: Routledge.
Williams, James. 2004. Gilles Deleuze's Difference and Repetition:  A Critical Introduction and Guide, Great Britain: Edinburgh University Press.
Literary Theory and Criticism
Volume 7, Issue 1 - Serial Number 13
Serial 13
May 2022
Pages 259-282

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics