بیان «آیرونیک» یا طنزآمیز در دیوان ناصرخسرو و آثار برادران شلگل

نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی

نویسندگان

1 دانشگاه آزاد تهران مرکز. ایران. تهران

2 ادبیات فارسی، دانشکده ادبیات و علوم اجتماعی، آزاد تهران مرکز، تهران، ایران

10.22103/jcl.2020.13568.2821

چکیده

ایران و آلمان دو کشوری هستند که تاریخ و سنت‌های فکری و ادبی پرباری دارند. هر‌دو در دوران شکوفایی مکاتب فکری؛ خواه دینی و خواه فلسفی، ادبا و متفکران برجسته‌ای را در دامان خود پرورانده‌اند. مطالعة تطبیقی آثار اندیشمندان این دو کشور می‌تواند ابعاد مختلفی از شباهت‌ها و تفاوت‌های این دو فرهنگ را نشان دهد. به‌این منظور دو اندیشمند و ادیب برای مطالعۀ تطبیقی انتخاب شدند: ناصرِخسرو (394 -481 ه.ق) و فردریش شلگل (1772-1829م). اما از آنجایی که عموماً نام برادران شلگل به‌عنوان همکار و همفکر با‌هم می‌آید، آگوست ویلهلم ( 1767- 1845م) هم به‌این پژوهش اضافه شد. شیوۀ بیانی ناصرخسرو در طنزآوری با روش فردریش در کتاب «قطعات» شباهت‌هایی دارد اما بیان آگوست ویلهلم به‌گونه‌ای دیگر است. این پژوهش در پی آن بوده که با مطالعه و قیاس آثار شاخص آنان، چگونگی استفادۀ آنها از بیان آیرونیک و طنزآمیز در برابر مخالفان و نیز مصادیق آن را در آثارشان نشان دهد. آیرونی(irony) نوعی بیان غیرمستقیم و طنزآلود است که مؤلف می‌کوشد به ‌وسیلۀ آن، دو یا چند وجه گوناگونِ یک امر را بنمایاند. قیاس آثار ناصرخسرو و برادران شلگل نشان می‌دهد که جهان بینی آنها که متأثّر از مکاتب فکریشان بوده، تا چه حد بر روش بیان آنها در طنزپردازی تأثیر داشته‌است. این پژوهش با مطالعۀ کتابخانه‌ای، فیش برداری و به‌صورت توصیفی- تحلیلی انجام شده‌است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Ironic remarks in Divan of Naser Khosrow and works of schlegel brothers

نویسندگان [English]

  • Ehsan Koosha 1
  • Aliasghar Halabi 2
  • Ahmad Hasani ranjbar hormozabadi 2
1 Center azad university. Tehran.iran
2 Litarature, Centersl Azad university, tehran, iran
چکیده [English]

1.Introduction
Iran and Germany are two countries with fruitful history and traditions in literature and philosophy, but there are not enough works in the field of comparative study between the works of their thinkers and poets. In this study, some works of Naser Khosrow (394-481 A.H) and the Schlegel brothers Friedrich Schlegel (1772-1829 A.D) and A.W Schlegel (1767-1845 A.D) as some representatives of these two countries are studied in an especial field: Irony. This research intends to show how they use this figure of speech in their works and also compare their uses. Irony is a satirical figure of speech which Naser Khosrow and The Schlegel brothers liked and used. There is a variety of definitions for irony. This figure of speech shows the paradoxical aspects of the things: Paradoxes between the world of matter and the world of mind, between the world of word and the world of act or etc. A thinker may build an ideal world in his mind therefore he would see some defects in the real world, so he can use the ironic expression to show those defects. The comparative study of the works of Naser Khosrow and The Schlegel brothers shows why and how they use irony, and how their worldviews affect their use of irony. 
 
2.Methodology
This research is descriptive, analytic and comparative and the data were collected thorough a library study by taking notes. First, various definitions of irony were collected thorough the creditable sources. Second, the ironic remarks of Naser Khosrow and the Schlegel brothers were extracted from these books: Fragmets of Friedrich Schlegel, A course of lectures on dramatic art and literature of A.w Schlegel, Divane Ash'ar and Vaj'he deen of Naser khosrow. Third the extracted data were classified and analyzed based on the laws of comparative study of literature.
 
3.Discussion
What is Irony? Irony which is a humorous and indirect expression is used by an author attempting to show up two or more aspects of an object or a thought. Friedrich Schlegel said our world is paradoxical and only irony can show its paradox. This figure of speech should introduce a mixture of pain and laugh. In fact an ironist hides his or her grief behind a happy word and when the readers or audiences recognize that the author's goal was opposite of what he or she said, experiences a disdainful defeat. By using irony we say something and mean something else which is opposite of it.
It seems that Naser Khosrow is a serious and starchy poet, often disdaining his opposites who love the material world. But there is also a kind of paradox in his poem. He beautifully describes the beauties of the nature and suddenly says that is not important to love the nature, and everybody who loves these things is a donkey! But why? Because according to his belief, paying attention to the material world can get the man away from the spiritual world. Human is human but lives as a donkey because he sees the World like an animal, and it is an ironic situation! Naser Khosrow criticizes the manner of some clergymen. He says they are men of religion but sometimes, some of them give the orders against the religion. One can get some orders from one clergyman and some from another one and up to these, there is no especial religious order, and this is an irony. He as a follower of religion of Esma'eeli, says that we should interpret the orders of our religion because they have meanings which we must know. And we must also know the soul of them. He believes that there is a distance and then a difference between the word and the meaning, such a paradox can be a basis to see the World ironic.      
Romanticism was born in eighteenth century and the romanticists said that Determinism could not explain and interpret the World. Romanticism was against the Determinism because it saw the World as a mechanical system based on mathematical laws. The romanticist said that the World has a soul and they wanted to know and express it by art, wit and irony. Friedrich Schlegel as a member of new movement used irony so much. A.W Schlegel sees the irony as a balance between the reality and the fantasy in Drama. 
The philosophical irony is a common point of view in the poems of Naser Khosrow and the fragments of Friedrich Schlegel, because they use irony to a confession: disability of the understanding the truth! This introduces a painful laugh, so they don't use this figure of speech to say banal things. Friedrich Schlegel once said Philosophy is the real place of irony.
Our world is paradoxical but how can we go out of this paradoxical situation? Friedrich Schlegel says that irony shows the essential paradoxes in the nature of the World. We cannot explain the truth but we must do this! We should simultaneously be aware of the impossibility and the necessity of the expressing the truth: the World has an unlimited anarchy and the way which we should go to get out of this situation is the awareness. But the way of Naser Khosrow is different. He believes in his religion and says only animals don't believe in the religion. He wants to stay away from the essential anarchy of the nature of the World by accepting the unlimited power of God which is represented in religion.
Poetry is an appropriate atmosphere for irony, because it is not necessary for poet to be rational. Poem is based on imagination and fantasy, and it means that poetry does not need the laws like mathematics, so paradoxes can be putting in the same place. Poet can mix wit, thought and feeling. Naser Khosrow could do this mixture well. He brought in a poem the philosophical ideas with the literary beauties. Through this, he could use feeling and thought without leaving any of them. Thus he could introduce his ironies in the poetic texture. Friedrich Schlegel admitted that the irony can be the base of a new aesthetic by which we can mix the philosophy and the poem. Nevertheless he used the Fragment, because he wanted to use the facilities of both of them: poem and prose.
Socratic irony is a kind of irony based on the question. In Fragments we see many Socratic ironies because the Schlegel brothers like the style of Socrates in philosophical irony. Naser Khosrow also used this method to represent the paradoxes in the thought of his opponents.
A point that we must emphasize it, is that these thinkers had an ideal world in their minds and compared the things of the real world with it, so they saw some paradoxes, and chose ironic expression to show the paradoxes which they saw.
 
4.Conclusion
Man wants to know the secrets of the existence but he cannot do it, because of the limitation of the human's mind: so a point of view based on the doubt and protestation is introduced. This is the basis of irony, when this point of view is mixed with a satirical expression, irony is born. Irony can be used to show the paradoxes between the word and the practice or between what really exists and what is acclaimed exist. This figure of speech can be also used as an arm against the opponents, as Naser Khosrow and The Schlegel brothers do so. They show the paradoxical aspects of the thinks of their opponents and say that the think of their opponents is paradoxical and so is satirical and ironic. In this ground the ideas of Naser Khosrow and the Schlegel brothers about irony are similar but there is an important difference between them. Naser Khosrow is a follower of Esma'eeli religion and the Schlegel brothers are two founders of the Romanticism. The think of Naser Khosrow is in the circle of religion so his worldview is religious therefore his ironies are in this field. The Schlegel brothers are romanticists and see the World through the window of art, criticism and philosophy so their ironies are in the field of art, criticism and Philosophy.
 
Keywords :Divan of Naser Khosrow, Schlegel brothers, Comparative research, Irony, satirical.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • "Divan of naser khosro"
  • "Schlegel brothers"
  • "Comparative reaserch"
  • "Irony"
  • "satirical"
کتابنامه
الف. منابع فارسی
- ارسطو. (؟) اخلاق نیکوماخس. ترجمه محمدحسن لطفی(1389). چاپ سوم، تهران: طرح نو.
- اصفهانی، غلامرضا. (1392). «آیرونی در مقامات ابوسعید ابوالخیر». پژوهش های ادبی و بلاغی. شماره 4، صص 126-143.
- پاینده، حسین. (1388). نقدادبی و دموکراسی. چاپ دوم، تهران: نیلوفر.
- جعفری جزی، مسعود. (1378). سیر رمانتیسم در اروپا. چاپ اول، تهران: نشر مرکز.
- جوادی، حسن. (1365). «آیرونی». مجله آینده. سال دوازدهم، شماره 4-6، تیر و شهریور، صص 195-204.
- حلبی، علی­اصغر. (1377).طنز و شوخ­طبعی در ایران و جهان اسلام. تهران: بهبهانی.
- زرین­کوب، عبدالحسین. (1361). نقدادبی (ج2). تهران: انتشارات امیرکبیر.
- غلامحسین زاده، غلامحسین و لرستانی، زهرا. (1388). «آیرونی در مقالات شمس». مطالعات عرفانی. شماره 9، صص 69-98.
- فلوطین(؟) دوره آثار فلوطین. ترجمه محمدحسن لطفی (1389). چاپ دوم، تهران: انتشارات خوارزمی.
- قاسم زاده، سیدعلی و حاتمی، سعید و محمودی اشکوری، احمد. (1391). «آیرونی و کارکرد آن در دستگاه فکری ناصرخسرو». فصلنامه تخصصی سبک شناسی نظم و نثر فارسی (بهار ادب). شماره 2 (پیاپی 16)، صص 316-332.
- کالین موکه، داگلاس. (1970م).آیرونی. ترجمة حسن افشار (1389). چاپ اول. تهران: مرکز.
- کیرکگور، سورن. (1395). مفهوم آیرونی با ارجاع مدام به سقراط، ترجمه صالح نجفی، تهران: نشر مرکز.
- لوکاچ، (1951م) گئورگ. «درباب فلسفۀ رمانتیک زندگی؛ نوالیس». ترجمه مراد فرهادپور (1373). ارغنون. سال اول، شماره 2، صص 11-37.
- لوئیس، برنارد.(؟)تاریخ اسماعیلیان، ترجمه فریدون بدره ای (1362). تهران: انتشارات توس.
- مشرف، مریم. (1387). «طعن یا آیرونی در آثار مهدی اخون ثالث».مجله دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی مشهد. شماره 160.صص 149-166.
- مقدادی، بهرام. (1393). دانش نامه نقدادبی از افلاتون تا به امروز. بهرام مقدادی، چاپ اول، تهران: نشر چشمه.
- ناصر خسرو قبادیانی. (1384). دیوان­اشعار (به تصحیح مجتبی مینوی و مهدی محقق). چاپ ششم، تهران: دانشگاه تهران.
- ولک، رنه. (1955م). تاریخ نقد جدید( ج 2)، ترجمة سعید ارباب شیرانی (1373). چاپ اول. تهران: نیلوفر.
- هادی، روح الله و ترکی، محمدرضا و گلچین، میترا و رحمانی فر، سیما. (1398). «آیرونی در ذهن و زبان ناصرخسرو». نقدادبی. شماره 40، صص 141-166.
- هیث، دانکن. (2005م). رمانتیسم. ترجمة کامران سپهران(1383). چاپ اول.  تهران: شیرازه.
-ناصرخسرو قبادیانی. (1382). وجه دین. (به تصحیح ت.ارانی). چاپ اول تهران: اساطیر.
ب. منابع انگلیسی
- Schlegel, August  Wilhelm. (?). A course of lectures on dramatic art and literature. translated by John Black & A.J.Morrison. (1846) London: Henry G Bohn.
-Schlegel, Friedrich von.(1799)Lucinda and the Fragments. Translated by Peter Firchow. (1971) Minnesota: university of Minnesota.