تحلیل تطبیقی «دیگری هژمونیک» در نمایشنامه‌های جزیره از آثول فوگارد و پرواربندان از غلامحسین ساعدی

 
 

Introduction

One of the functions of American school in Comparative Literature is the possibility to equalize literary works from different geographic regions that do not share any historical grounds. In fact, this school gives us a platform to go beyond the limits of the French school as a condition of historical confrontation. This study uses this cross-border thought approach to conduct a comparative analysis of two literary works by Athol Fugard and Gholam-Hossein Sa’edi, both of whom compete over the concept of other. In fact, both authors seek to focus on the binary interactions existing in society regarding the idea of other. On the other hand, colonization has changed, and it does not appear as a direct governing system or a puppet ruler as it once did. Instead, in today’s world, it appears with a different approach and as silent domination. The plays The Island and Parvarbandan attempted to react to the social and cultural change and conflict they were faced with accordingly. This common ground makes these works worthy of comparative analysis. Therefore, with regards to the textual capacity and the atmosphere of both plays that portray domination and hegemony, their consequences on characters, and the reaction of the oppressed other and using the comparative approach, this study attempts a postcolonial reading of the plays. In fact, this study seeks to analyze these texts in cultural and deconstructive frameworks as well as the characters’ reactions and the narrative direction of the plays.
A historical examination of postcolonial studies' roots reveals the traces of one of the field's pioneering thinkers, who first defined the notion of “the other” in the conflict between colonialists and colonized. Frantz Fanon addressed the question of “the other,” particularly in the case of blacks, by using the theoretical potentials of Hegel's discussions in phenomenology as well as Adler's theory on individual psychology. Inspired by Hegel's key theories on master-slave dialectic, he regarded the colonized as an” other” who could not embrace the role of “self.” In his paper, “Racism and Culture,” Franz Fanon defines race as the issue of “the other,” for example, superior/inferior racial relationships, in the context of the struggle between indigenous and colonial cultures. Racism, according to Fanon, follows a solid and immutable logic. A living nation, in his perspective, gets its essence from the exploitation of other people and, as a result, reduces those people to inferiors (see Fanon, 1972: 63).
The representation of “the other” as an imperfect “self” in Bhabha's discourse implies not just the colonists' oppressive or proprietorial characteristics but also a more complex desire. In this case, the colonizer is subjected to these forms of representation in the same way that the colonized is, and he or she is simply caught up in the game of desire and fantasy established by the colonial context (see Mills, 2003: 159). In his book, The Colonizer and the Colonized (French: Portrait du colonisé, précédé par Portrait du colonisateur), Albert Memmi delves deeply into the mimicry-based relationship between the colonizer and the colonized. He argues that placing oneself in the shoes of another is an unconscious deed made by colonized people in an attempt to better their status. When a colonizer receives all advantages, profits, and credits and possesses wealth, honor, authority, or technical facilities, even though he has violated the colonized people's rights and has held them in servitude, he is seen as a unique role model for the colonized. The colonized imitates this role model to such an extent that his identity becomes entwined with that of the colonists, and he, therefore, ignores his true self. However, over time, the colonized understands that colonial culture had consistently put him in the position of a humiliated colonizer and that by accepting colonial values, he had actually signed his own conviction. Such a person not only does not benefit from the advantages of colonial society but his identity is gradually resolved in the relations of such a society. The colonizer gives in to his role model's demands and praises him, but the colonizer also finds a way to humiliate him, and that is ridiculing the colonizer's clumsy imitations. This is the point at which the colonized revolt against the "other" and his acts, hoping to get rid of him as quickly as possible; so, he rejects the colonizer, and the roles are reversed. The colonized people’s earlier desire for the colonizer and self-rejection turns into the colonizer's rejection and return to the actual self, their infatuation changes into extreme hatred of the outsiders, and they pursue self-detection. According to Memmi, the colonized cannot avoid this multi-stage colonial relation, as though each step is a prerequisite for the colonized to go to the next level and, eventually, achieve his freedom and deliverance (see Memmi, 1972: 155-158).
 

Methodology

 This study was conducted using a comparative analytical method, and its data were collected through a desk research approach. Through a postcolonial and cultural studies lens, we examine Gholam-Hossein Sa’edi's play, Parvarbnadan (cattle fatteners, Fatteningly ), and Athol Fugard's drama, The Island, to conduct a comparative study of the concept of "the other" in both literary works.
 

Discussion

 The Island is a manifesto in which two men are sent to Robben Island for opposing apartheid and its brutal policies. This play, however, is also a statement on theater, asking, "What is the point of drama in a society founded on antagonism and repression?"  According to the play, humanity will continue to suffer in the most inhumane ways unless they can find a meaning for their suffering and express it (see Walder, 1984: 76). Sa’edi's play, on the other hand, is a prod against an indifferent society, and the playwright used the metaphor "lamb" to portray the indifference of such a society and describe the current hegemony. Here, the author is a concerned person who, like the repressed characters of an island, must remain in exile and lose his identity and humanity, a point that Fugard also accentuates in his work. The main characters in both plays are oppressed and imprisoned for fighting against the government and for having resistant morale.  In The Island, two black prisoners, John and Winston, are detained in the notorious Robben Island prison off the coast of Cape Town, South Africa, for their political stances against the government. On the flip side of this study is Fatteningly, whose protagonist (Meem) is a well-known activist and writer now serving a temporary prison sentence awaiting trial. Here, it is necessary to examine the discursive and ideological forms of the two plays. This enables us to determine how colonialism establishes its subject positions via representation. In this respect, Steven Sloman presents a diagram in his article "The Struggle for Postcolonialism" that is beneficial for comprehending the complexities of this issue:
 
Diagram 1. The Semiotic Field
The diagram above depicts colonialism as a system of power and dominance from left to right. The line “A” symbolizes the numerous beliefs regarding how colonial oppression is carried out via direct political and economic control. The lines “BC” and "DE" indicate several notions connected to the ideological regulation of colonial people or subjection through establishing consent. Theories that highlight colonialism's efficiency, which we observe moving along the line A, are fundamentally "direct political" theories or theories based on colonialism's "brutal coercion." In other words, these theories deny the fundamental assumption of resolving social conflict via the intentional development of concepts about the "self" and their internalization or "actualization" by subordinated subjects. On the other hand, theories that depict colonial power primarily along line BC - which embodies the ideological stance of economic colonialism along with line A - highlight the structural strength of state apparatuses in the formation of colonial relations. In his play, Fatteningly, Sa’edi uses lamb fattening as a metaphor and narrates the same sequence. This structure adheres to line "BC," according to which controlling ideology promotes instinctive desires so that colonized people may focus only on these things while neglecting current political-ideological concerns. As a result of such a policy, a society in which everyone thinks alike is formed. On the other hand, these herds are uninformed that cattle fatteners' ultimate focus in fattening ignorant animals is to transport them to the slaughterhouse. Totalitarian regimes do this by slaughtering and eradicating the personality or identity of human herds. On the other hand, this connection may be seen as suggesting that the government, by duping the masses and legitimizing racial discrimination, sends dissidents like John and Winston to a secluded island to live as enslaved people doing subordinate labor.
The crucial point is that the process of otherness is characterized by intricate representational power processes; power is essentially oppressive. It deals with human subjugation and seduction via a variety of, at times contradictory, images. Another character in this drama is a lady who uses lures and cooks fatty meals to fatten and castrate Meem.
In The Island, government authorities attempt to assign tasks to two convicts in order to transform them into animals or to remove the last traces of humanity from them. Furthermore, this task serves as both a shield and a sword for both prisoners. In other words, this task may be used for both self-defense and action and warfare against the colonizers (i.e., the state). Theater, in fact, is the instrument that these two characters use to avoid alienation.
The body serves a particular purpose in both plays. In The Island, the human body narrates the anguish of oppressed individuals who have been banished because of their protest and whose body endures unending oppression in the process of "becoming other," which has pushed them to perform meaningless and dreadful tasks. The island evokes the setting for a tragic play in a tiny, lonely place, which is a metaphor for the country's terrible situation. People are condemned to the worst penalties in this country, and the state humiliates the spirits and bodies of the people by forcing convicts to do complex and meaningless actions, punishing them or turning them into obedient slaves.  If we consider locations such as the small world of postcolonial society, we observe how characters are treated and how they are compelled to live a passive, submissive life. All of the activities performed against Meem's character in Fatteningly are performed in order to transform him into an obedient character. As a result, actions such as edacity, castration, and physical punishment are examples of behaviors that are applied to the body, and governments use these activities to accomplish colonial aims in the process of "otherness."
 
4-Conclusion
  One objective of the comparative literature approach is to investigate the conceptual and methodological biases in various territories without considering the historical context of the relationships between these territories. Based on comparative literature methodology, we first evaluated the similarities of the concepts of " the other" in two dramas (Fatteningly and The Island) and then attempted to analyze the dualities in these works through analyzing the dual system of "the self" and "the other." In the next stage, we tried to compare these works. As Fugard grew up in a colonial territory, he became interested in structures that arose from dual racial conflicts, such as white/black, which were finally internalized by the society. The issue of race and the problem of inferiority, implemented through white hegemony against people of color, is one of the most prominent keywords in Fugard's works. Most of Fugard's focus in his work was linked to this colonial theme. In terms of the typology of "the other,” since Sa’edi lives in a different culture than Fugard and has no experience living in the colony, he highlights the subject of autocracy in many of his plays rather than colonialism, which accelerates people's otherness process as a consequence of its hegemony. In fact, the hegemonic forces in these two works take a stand against the characters because they want these characters to go through a process of alienation during which the characters first get alienated but eventually resist and take an aggressive approach against colonialists or dictatorial powers.