Golshiri; Fifteen Years Later

Fifteen years ago, on June 6, 2000, Houshang Golshiri, one of the prominent writers in Iranian literature, passed away due to meningitis at Iranmehr Hospital. Golshiri was one of the speakers at the 'Ten Nights at the Goethe Institute' and a member of the Iranian Writers' Association. On the anniversary of the death of the author of 'Shazdeh Ehtijab' and winner of the 'Peace Prize of Erich Maria Remarque' and 'Lillian Hellman' awards, we have a conversation with Behrouz Sheida, a critic and literary researcher, and Nasser Zarati, a storyteller and member of the Iranian Writers' Association. What significance do Houshang Golshiri's stories hold in Iranian storytelling? Nasser Zarati: After all these years, I believe everyone—both supporters and opponents of Houshang Golshiri—would agree that he is a reputable name in contemporary storytelling, especially in the realm of short stories, although he has also written good long stories. Moreover, due to the importance Golshiri placed on form and structure in storytelling, his works and opinions are significant. Unlike some of our writers, he valued how to say as much as what to say. He never sacrificed form for content. This attention to prose, language, and structure was evident from his earliest works, such as the short story collection 'Like Always' in the 1960s. Then there is the famous long story 'Shazdeh Ehtijab,' which many still associate with Golshiri. The importance of this story and the precision and skill involved in its writing cannot be overstated. Until his last works, all indicate that Golshiri was a writer of his time, who understood his society and people well, especially the characteristics of the urban middle class in contemporary Iranian society. After the revolution, we see how Golshiri quickly and sensitively reacted to social and political issues. If in poetry, we turn to Simin Behbahani to understand what has happened to us and this land over the past three decades, in the realm of storytelling, Golshiri is the first writer to turn to for a better understanding of society and contemporary history. Many criticize and reject him with the label of 'formalism,' but it should be noted that one of the important and valuable characteristics of this storyteller is the significance he places on the Persian language and, in general, 'language' in storytelling. Golshiri was always eager to learn. In every field, he wanted to learn. We know that his main profession since his youth was teaching, starting from teaching in remote village schools to high schools in Isfahan and then Tehran and the Faculty of Fine Arts, which he was eventually barred from teaching. He also held story reading sessions and workshops that he participated in alongside several generations of our storytellers until his death. He loved to learn and teach. Golshiri's writing style and prose have distinct features. He left behind good and successful experiences in storytelling as a legacy for us. Beyond all this, his unparalleled audacity in addressing and engaging with the issues and topics of life from various social and political perspectives is noteworthy. To avoid verbosity, I will just mention one example: the short story 'Fathnameh Moghān.' One point worth mentioning is a humorous remark I remember from him. Sometimes, when the complexity of the forms of his stories came up, he would say: 'The reader of my stories should at least have a diploma [later he would say a bachelor's degree, and if he were with us today, he might say a doctorate!] What aspects of Iranian society and history did Houshang Golshiri address in his storytelling? Behrouz Sheida: Houshang Golshiri writes the narrative of failures and collapses from the Constitutional Revolution to 'now'; the narrative of dreams that never came true; which seem to have been nothing but illusions; which seem to embody the entire history of 'thought' of the Iranian human. He narrates the intellectuals who seem to have opened the door to the utopia of their dreams on the devil and received nothing but destruction. Golshangi finds all the discourses of Iranian history from the Constitutional Revolution to 'now' as various images of a 'thought'; he finds them all responsible for the state of 'today.' Just to mention a few examples: The novel 'Shazdeh Ehtijab' aims to narrate the story of the bloody aristocratic thought of the Qajar dynasty, which continues to live in the minds of its survivors long after the victory of the Constitutional Revolution; it continues to live in the mind of the Iranian human. The short story 'To God, I Am Not a Prostitute' aims to narrate the lives of ruined intellectuals who, at a party in the 1970s, which itself symbolizes destruction, mourn the past of their hopeful selves; dreams that had been the refrain of the intellectual world before the coup of August 19, 1953. The short story 'Fathnameh Moghān' aims to narrate the story of the failure of those who pinned their hopes on the Islamic Revolution; they destroyed the wine houses and now have no choice but to be drunk with the 'drinks' that the guardians buried in the deserts with bloody hands. The novel 'Ainayeh Dar Dar' aims to narrate the existence of 'political forces' that fled from an exile they had a share in bringing about. The long story 'Shah-e Siyah-Pooshan' aims to narrate the conspiracy of the victim and the executioner; the story of a nineteen-year-old prisoner who shoots the heads of imprisoned girls in the Islamic Republic's prisons; he shoots a piece of his own existence; he darkens the entire history of a land. Houshang Golshiri wants to write a 'Jinnameh' that has cast shadows over Iranian history from the Constitutional Revolution to now; it seems to have swallowed Iranian intellectuals as well. How effective were Houshang Golshiri's political activities in introducing him to society? Nasser Zarati: Unfortunately, false information has become prevalent in recent years, especially when someone passes away, others start giving incorrect information. As a result, it is as Golshiri himself put it, 'superstitions' become widespread. The reality is that apart from the activity he had in his youth, which led to his arrest in connection with that 'Tehran organization,' Golshiri never had any political activity in the sense of being a member of an organization, group, or party. Here, it is necessary to emphasize that political or party activity is the right of every human being, including writers and artists, and the mere exercise of this human right is neither a virtue nor a vice. But the reality is that after that experience, which led to the writing of several stories, including the multiple stories of 'Masoom,' Golshiri did not engage in political activity in that sense. Even during the early days of the revolution, when political/party/organizational activity was very common and fashionable, in the sense that if someone was not a member or supporter of a political faction or group, life was difficult for them... as it had become common that as soon as you opened your mouth, they would say: 'First clarify your position!' Golshiri did not confine himself and his thoughts and activities to the framework of any party or organization. His activities from 1978 in the 'Iranian Writers' Association' until its closure in 1981 and later activities in forming those 'consultative meetings of the association...' if we consider them political activities, were the only type of political activity Golshiri had. It may not need explanation that in 1978, during the second period of the Iranian Writers' Association's activities, which led to the ten nights of poetry readings and speeches at the 'Goethe Institute,' Golshiri was one of the active speakers at the beginning of the sessions. In the following years, despite all the difficulties and pressures, Golshiri never ceased his efforts to keep the Iranian Writers' Association alive and thriving. He also paid a high price for this. Although he was fortunate not to be killed during that period of serial killings like his friends Mohammad Mokhtari and Mohammad Jafar Pouyandeh or Ghafar Hosseini and Mir Alai, I have no doubt that the same pressures and harassments were one of the reasons for his premature and unexpected death. Houshang Golshiri was a writer and intellectual who was a freedom seeker and justice seeker, honest and outspoken... he was not one to engage in tricks and pretentious intellectual posturing or false friendships. Many times, I feel his absence in the literary scene, the press, and also in the intellectual and freedom-seeking activities of today's Iranian society. Why is the novel 'Shazdeh Ehtijab' the most important or most popular book of Houshang Golshiri, and why is he often recognized by this novel? Behrouz Sheida: 'Shazdeh Ehtijab' marks the beginning of a kind of modernism in Persian narrative literature that defines itself as modernism. I underline the phrase 'defines itself as modernism' to say that before 'Shazdeh Ehtijab,' there were elements of modern narrative literature in the Persian language. In modernism, all the elements of the trick - the school of realism are surpassed. Time is no longer linear; the human no longer moves in time; time moves within the human. In modernism, linear time becomes a kind of inner discourse; a stream of consciousness; psychological monologues. In modernism, fixed objectivity does not exist; that is why various points of view appear in narrative literature; they narrate reality from their own perspective. In modernism, it seems that the story has no beginning or end; existence seems to be a circle; it seems to be a lament for a vision that has not been realized. And of course, let us not forget that traces of two other narrative tricks are also prominently visible in Golshiri's narrative world: the Quranic - Avestan trick; the trick of the French new novel. Based on the Quranic - Avestan trick, only a corner of a 'story' is referred to. It seems that the initial assumption of this type of reference is that the audience 'knows' the 'story.' This trick, on the one hand, preserves linear time, and on the other hand, turns 'reality' into scattered pieces that each reader only reads parts of. Based on the trick of the French new novel, not only is the role of the character in the narrative world undeniable, but the place of the narrative character is also occupied by another phenomenon: the object as a 'reality' that defines human relationships around it. The world of the French new novel is a world dominated by objects; it describes objects in a vague and sometimes exaggerated manner. 'Shazdeh Ehtijab' marks the beginning of Golshiri's modernism in Persian literature; it is a redefinition of narrative literature in a narrative world filled with 'realism.' And why do 'people' recognize Houshang Golshiri by 'Shazdeh Ehtijab'? The points are here. I tried to say. Let's leave the rest aside; there are many texts that overshadow their creator.