Symphony of Loneliness, Snow, Cold, and Strangers

Payman Esmaeili is one of the most talented young storytellers in Iran. Born in 1977, he published his first collection of stories in 2005 titled "Search Your Rainy Pockets"; however, it was with his second collection, "Snow and Cloud Symphony" in 2008 that he gained recognition. That year, he received the most important independent literary awards in the country, from the Golshiri Award to the Mehrgan Adab Award, the Press Critics Award, and finally the literary award "Once Upon a Time". Payman Esmaeili published his third book in the form of a novel titled "The Guardian", which has been praised in numerous reviews. I invited Payman Esmaeili to this week's "Book Review" program - a distant view, a close view. The result is a conversation, part of which was previously broadcasted by Radio Farda, and here, the full text is available on the Radio Farda website. Additionally, in the audio version of this conversation, which is also accessible on this page, Payman Esmaeili reads part of the novel "The Guardian" for the listeners. Mr. Esmaeili, welcome to this week's "Book Review" program on Radio Farda / "Distant View, Close View". Let’s start by saying that in the novel "The Guardian", you gathered your experiences from previous collections, especially from "Snow and Cloud Symphony", and expanded them in this book. Can we say that this novel is an expanded form of your scattered ideas in the collection "Snow and Cloud Symphony"? I think if we look at this question from one aspect, the answer is yes. The reason is that I have interests in writing, and naturally, those interests have manifested in "Snow and Cloud Symphony" and also in the novel "The Guardian". However, almost all the motifs you encountered in "Snow and Cloud Symphony" have been significantly expanded in this novel. If I were to express these interests, it would be like saying there is a world where each short story in "Snow and Cloud Symphony" represents a city or country of that world. Now in the novel "The Guardian", you are faced with the world itself, with the worldview that exists in that world and with its expansiveness. Therefore, it can practically be said that yes, the stories of "Snow and Cloud Symphony" fit within the narrative world of "The Guardian". This is what has happened. However, in the novel "The Guardian", a dialogue has also been established with mythology, those motifs have been significantly expanded, and an essential worldview for writing a novel has been attempted to be presented. Those who follow today’s fiction literature think of Payman Esmaeili when they hear these elements, namely the atmosphere filled with loneliness, snow, cold, and strangers who face a new environment and enter a challenge, and so on... It seems these are elements that inspire you to construct your story or narratives that you have in mind. I have published two collections of stories so far, and the novel "The Guardian" was also my first published novel. The motifs you mentioned are especially common in "Snow and Cloud Symphony" and "The Guardian". The stories in my first collection differ somewhat. If you read my first collection, especially in the first few stories, they are completely different and follow another atmosphere and ambiance. Now I want to answer this question in another way. Some time ago, I read a very good interview that The Paris Review had with William Faulkner. In that interview, the interviewer asked Faulkner if he was a writer whose mind was filled with violence and what he had to say about this question. Faulkner replied that the question you are asking is similar to saying that a carpenter's mind is filled with a hammer. He then says that the hammer is simply one of the carpenter's tools; violence, loneliness, and the elements you mentioned are essentially one of the main tools I can use to shape a story based on motifs I like and that express my narrative world. Just as Faulkner said in that interview that a carpenter cannot work without a hammer, for me, these elements and motifs are the tools for building a story. Of course, I must say that those who are interested and follow the stories I have written will definitely see new experiences in my next work. But ultimately, all of these are the tools I have as a writer and use to create my world. While this answer is understandable and to a large extent convincing, the point that keeps me looking at this question is that there is a kind of difference in quality in various parts of the novel "The Guardian". That is, when you work in these familiar spaces, it seems that the quality of the work is high and has a strong energy; but as soon as you enter an urban space, all that ambiguity and mistiness and the coding of the text in terms of sensory aspects almost no longer have continuity and somewhat affect the quality of the work. Should we expect your storytelling strength more in these spaces, and in other words, do those specific non-urban situations inspire you more than other spaces and motifs? Well, I don’t know. If we could open the topic more precisely or based on a very clear example, it might be better. But ultimately, of course, I have interests as a writer. In the writing process, I personally prefer open spaces and environments that are not confined. Naturally, this has come through in my works. However, on the other hand, a writer whose elements are well perceived and accepted by readers may face challenges in introducing new elements into their work. I might not fully agree with you that you believe that space is weaker. Because in my opinion, that space is completely in service of what it should be. But if the question is framed in such a way that, after all, what is my taste as a writer, I must say that my taste ultimately is that the work or the worldview presented in the work should be well implemented in all sections and in all spaces based on the design the writer presents. If one section is better executed than others, it may be due to the writer's strength in that specific section. I cannot say that all scenes and spaces are all at the same power and level. But in any case, I believe that the overall narrative that drives the novel is in service of the story that the novel is supposed to tell. The collection "Snow and Cloud Symphony" was very successful and in the same year it was published, it received almost all possible awards, from the "Once Upon a Time" award to the "Mehrgan Adab" award, the "Golshiri" award, and the "Press Critics and Writers" award. I want to say that sometimes these successes may keep the writer in the same spaces where they have achieved success; I want to ask if this has happened to you as well? No, it is definitely not like that. If you mean that "The Guardian" is a repetition of "Snow and Cloud Symphony", I believe this has not happened. Certainly, the novel "The Guardian" has elevated the existing worldview several levels higher. Yes, there are some common motifs, just as when you want to cite Márquez, you see that a large part of the motifs he uses in his works have many similarities. Or even other writers like Kundera or others. A series of motifs are common, and those motifs have been used in the novel itself, and it has been attempted to shape the world of the novel based on them. But of course, my preference in my next work is to enter a new space and experience a new space, and we must wait for the new book to come out and see the result. How important do you consider form, independent of the story's appeal or having an attractive narrative? Form is very important to me. Because you cannot separate form from the work. This is an old discussion. All those things you say about this story are part of its form. Form is certainly one of the most important narrative elements. For me, the importance of form is very high, especially in writing short stories. In novels, it is also one of the main elements on which you must build the novel. Your character is shaped based on form. The atmosphere and ambiance of the story are also constructed based on form. This is an old and fundamental question for a writer... Look, one of the reasons I ask this question is that, for example, some critics or observers in the field of fiction literature believe that Iranian fiction literature does not have the ability to attract a wide audience in the public space and in the book market (even compared to translated fiction literature) because its engagement with the issue of form is a mistaken engagement. You mentioned Faulkner, Kundera, and Márquez. Their works, while having a very strong narrative, also have a very distinct and specific form. However, Iranian fiction literature often reduces itself to the element of "narrative" - which is only one of the important elements - or becomes so stuck in "form" that its storytelling ability, if it exists, remains hidden. Therefore, the issue of form and narrative seems to still be a completely debatable topic in Iranian fiction literature. That's right. What you said about Faulkner is completely correct. Because Faulkner is a writer with a broad worldview and extraordinary studies. But let’s not go to Faulkner and take closer examples. For instance, consider Murakami. We cannot relate Murakami to Faulkner on the same level. But he has managed to keep both his audience satisfied and critics happy. It could be said that Murakami has a more relaxed approach to form. The same thing happens with many other writers. In my opinion, this question is much deeper than why, for example, the general approach of global audiences or the general audience towards Iranian fiction literature is not very good, and that not only the global audience but also the domestic audience does not have much desire to read Iranian fiction literature. I believe we cannot reduce this to just the discussion of form or whether an Iranian writer's approach to form is correct or not. Although I believe form is certainly one of the main parameters since form encompasses many other things, but you cannot ignore many other discussions in between, such as language, worldview, professionalism. In today’s world, amateur writing, especially regarding novels, has no place. It is not that we can guerrilla train a series of novelists who can produce masterpieces at the level of the world’s outstanding novels, writers who are so caught up in daily life that they are just waiting for one or two hours of free time to attack that free time and write a few lines and then return to daily life. This type of writing and this type of working regarding novels does not work. Look at the way of life and existence of Iranian writers. What percentage of Iranian writers live with the lifestyle that a professional novelist needs? In my opinion, this is a very ongoing discussion and not a discussion that we can simply resolve by analyzing the approach of writers to form. We have a short time for two more questions. How much have you experienced self-censorship during the writing of this novel or the two previous collections? And if this self-censorship has occurred, in what areas has it been? Self-censorship, in my opinion, is the most important problem we are currently facing. Much bigger than the problem of external censorship, internal censorship is. In the novel "The Guardian", because I wanted to bring that character close to the limits of his moral and emotional boundaries to the point of melting, if there had been no self-censorship, I could have definitely achieved greater success. But this self-censorship has always been there. It is not something new. Perhaps since the beginning when Iranian writers started writing in its modern definition, this self-censorship has existed among them. I have certainly been involved in this issue like other Iranian writers. In what areas? In areas that are mainly referred to as traditional ethics? Yes. In the novel "The Guardian", the issue of self-censorship was more raised in the context of ethics, because the character is placed in a critical situation, a situation where all his ethical and emotional antennas are severely melted. In those situations, self-censorship definitely prevents the writer from approaching certain tendencies of the character, while he could have opened a new world for that character by approaching it. This inevitably happens. On the other hand, another phenomenon that occurs in the writing of many Iranian writers is that to express a subject, they often try to find many more ways and can approach it from various and different angles, even if they can express it directly. In this novel, wherever I felt that I could not approach an issue due to self-censorship, I tried to approach that issue from other angles and open it up. But the main part that is affected by this issue...