A Parallel Reading of the Pluralistic Nature of Modernity in Houshang Golshiri’s The Lost Lamb of Rai

Informed by “hiatus” and “continuity,” the transition from the old world to the new world marked the creation of two grand narratives. For hiatus, the new world was one of rationalisation which moved beyond tradition; however, it produced incompatible waves, such as Romanticism, Nostalgia, and Nihilism, all of which had a tendency to regress and glorify the continuity of the old world. Continuity, on the other hand, highlighted the continuation and the expansion of divine and cultural traditions in modernity. By dialogically paralleling the two concepts, one can better understand the pluralistic nature of modernity and its paradoxical experiences. Although one can identify such internal contradictions in Iranian modernity, a thorough analysis of their representations in Persian storytelling is less recurrent. In his The Lost Lamb of Rai, Houshang Golshiri moves away from the dichotomous traditionalist approach of the 60s and 70s and presents an unprecedented representation of the changing perception of modernity in the 70s. He moves beyond praising or negating the two worlds and presents a critical and intellectual narrative of the attraction/repulsion dialectics regarding the past and the present.
 
Extended Abstract
1.Introduction
Modernity still maintains its momentum as a concept. One can define different cultural, political, and philosophical waves in accordance with their orientation toward modernity, which necessitate the study of modernity and its different and, at times, paradoxical aspects. This study criticises the continuous and dominant narrative of modernity, and highlights different experiences, contradictions, and polyphonies of the Modern. Although one can identify such internal contradictions in Iranian modernity, a thorough analysis of their representations in Persian storytelling is less recurrent. In his The Lost Lamb of Rai, Houshang Golshiri moves away from the dichotomous traditionalist approach of the 60s and 70s and presents an unprecedented representation of the changing perception of modernity in the 70s.
2. Methodology
The present study adopts a formalist approach. It regards the literary form as a unified, non-conceptual, and concrete system, which connects to the social structure through an infinite chain of visible and invisible strings. The social structure is a historical, pluralistic, and dynamic structure which entails thoughts and experiences. This study adopts the literary form as a system of ideological society-oriented signifiers. This article investigates wholeness and its superiority. Abstract definitions reproduce concrete subjects, and the method moves from the abstract to the concrete.
3. Theoretical Framework
Informed by “hiatus” and “continuity,” the present article investigates modernity and traditionality. In light of hiatus, the classic worldview regards modernity as the rationalisation of and disenchantment from the new world. We have argued how hiatus produces incompatible waves, such as Romanticism, Nostalgia, and Nihilism, all of which tend to regress and glorify the continuity of the old world. On the other hand, we highlighted the continuation and the expansion of divine and cultural traditions in modernity. By dialogically paralleling the two concepts, we clarified the understanding of the pluralistic nature of modernity and its paradoxical experiences.
4. Discussion and Analysis
Informed by the sociology of literature, which views the novel as a concrete whole with inner ties to the societal structure, this study aims to answer the following question: Up to the Islamic Revolution, has there ever been a novel which presented the pluralistic and asynchronous qualities of modernity without falling into hiatus essentialism? To answer the question, the study concludes that Golshiri writes The Lost Lamb of Rai in accordance with the principles of the Modern.
5. Conclusion
The absence of a single unifying idea in The Lost Lamb of Rai is in no case a disadvantage; far from it, it is an advantage which represents the parallelism of its form with the pluralistic and paradoxical Iranian modernity of the 60s and 70s. Though this novel possesses Romantic, Nostalgic, and Nihilistic overtones, it is not reduced to a narrative of hiatus. It is neither an appraisal nor a negation of the past or the new world. It is a critical and intellectual narrative of the attraction/repulsion dialectics regarding the past and the present. In The Lost Lamb of Rai, Golshiri commingles the past and the present and rejects their stasis. Rai is on a never-ending quest for freedom and must endure the whirlpool of contradiction, ambiguity, and pain.
Bibliography 
Abazari, Y. 1377 [1998]. Kherad-e Jame-eh Shenasi. Tehran: No. [In Persian].
Berlin, I. 1385 [2006]. Risheh-ha-e Romanticism. Abdollah, K (trans.). Tehran: Mahi.    [The Roots of Romanticism]    [In Persian].       
Berman, M. 1386 [2007]. Tajrobeh-e Moderniteh. Morad, F.P (trans.). Tehran: No.  [All that is Solid Melts Into Air: The Experience of Modernity] [In Persian].
Gillespie, M. 1398 [2019]. Risheh-ha-e Elahiyati-e Moderniteh. Zaniyar, E (trans.). Tehran: Pegah-e Roozegar. [The Theological Origins of Modernity] [In Persian].           
Golshiri, H. 1356 [1977]. The Lost Lamb of Rai. Tehran: Ketab-e Zaman. [In Persian].
Golshiri, H. 1369 [1990]. “Negahi be Ha’yat-e Khod,” Ham-khani-e Ka’teban. Hossein, S (ed.). Tehran: Digar. [In Persian].
Lukács, G. 1392 [2013]. Nazariyeh-e Roman. Hassan, M (trans.). Tehran: Ashiyan.  [The Theory of the Novel] [In Persian].         
Mannheim, K. 1386 [2007]. Democratic Shodan-e Farhang. Parviz, E (trans.). Tehran: Ney.   [Essays On The Sociology Of Culture]  [In Persian].        
Nisbet, R. 1397 [2018]. Sonnat-e Jame-eh Shenasi. Saeid, H. N. and Farid, H. M (trans.). Tehran: University of Tehran. [The Sociological Tradition] [In Persian].
Strauss, L. 1398 [2019]. Risheh-ha-e Almani. Shervin, M (trans.). Tehran: Pegah-e Roozegar.   [Early Writings] [In Persian].