A Study and Analysis on the Discourse Disciplinary Techniques of Power and a Child’s Resistance Practices in Saedi’s Drama, Dikteh (Dictation)

A Study and Analysis on the Discourse Disciplinary Techniques of Power and a Child’s Resistance Practices in Saedi’s Drama, Dikteh (Dictation)
Sara Matoori
Phd Student in Persian Language and Literature,
 University of Hormozgan, saramatoori1981@gmail.com
Faramarz Khojasteh
Associate of Persian Language and Literature,
University of Hormozgan faramarz.khojasteh@gmail.com
Mostafa Sedighi
 Associate of Persian Language and Literature,
University of Hormozgan, navisa_man@yahoo.com
 
Introduction
One of the effective items on children’s living conditions in each era and society is the adults’ expectations from children. Officials and governments, on the one hand, and intellectuals, on the other hand, have undeniable effects on both the child and the concept of childhood. Each of them can lead a child to become obedient and passive or rebellious and active by means of their position and the means they own.
Since the Nasseri era, in 1340 (Solar Hijri) (1960s), more attention was paid to studying children and the childhood era. This attention is reflected in the establishment of several children’s organizations and institutes. Establishing Children’s Book Council (1341 S.H, 1962 A.D), an NGO, along with two governmental institutes, i.e. Educational Publications (1341 S.H, 1962 A.D) and Children and Teens’ Intellectual Development Center (1344 S.H, 1965 A.D), shows that more attention was being paid to children’s identities and issues. These institutes and organizations, along with activities of authors and intellectuals, either right-wing or left-wing, under the predominance of discourses and ideologies, created a novel, different and even conflicting definitions of children and childhood.
By the time of Reza Shah’s government coup, paying attention to children continued. Reza Shah’s militarism had led to a disciplined and punctuated army from one side, and from another side, to establishing military-like schools with the same style, discipline and arrangement. This kind of disciplinary technique took all army, corps to other organizations and institutes under its predominance. The establishment of schools in the form of the modern ones was one of the elements of progress and development, promising a change in the attitudes towards children and new era; however, they fostered uniformity, silence and obedience as the heritage of the past. It was as if schools were established to train obedient soldiers for the future in the age of dictatorship.
In 1340s (1960s), a variety of intellectual mainstreams appeared and thus, various voices could be heard through this. Left-wing intellectuals are one of the most impressive intellectual mainstreams in that era. The effect of this group on the outlook toward children and childhood is undeniable.
 
Methodology, Review of Literature and Purpose
Studying the discourse of resistance –which was advertised and followed by these intellectuals –from one side, and the discourse of strength and traditions from another side, is necessary to find today’s children’s descent. The purpose of this study is the confrontation point of these two discourses regarding children and childhood, their method of confrontation, sociability, and their education.
Gholam Hossein Saedi is one of the left-wing intellectual artists of the 1340s era. Since his adolescence, he expressed his enthusiasm in politics –or literally, escaping from incuriosity– when he joined the Toodeh party (Communist party in Iran), wrote articles and published different reviews. He wrote Dikteh in 1340s which brought him a lot of attention and received lots of criticism; however, there has been no research with the present research approach on this drama.
In this study, the disciplinary techniques as well as children’s method of resistance against it shall be investigated and reviewed by means of the inductive qualitative context method and Michel Foucault’s opinions. The current study tries to find an answer to these questions: What disciplinary and criticism techniques are seen in this drama? What are their results? How does the child resist it? Does the confrontation and line-up of these two thoughts and mentalities seen in this drama release the child from the adults’ subduing string?
 
Discussion
Studying the connection between the subject and power is one of Foucault’s main discussions. Foucault tries to show that applying strength will be possible by means of a mechanism which can be checked and classified as the disciplinary and its techniques. Foucault believes that power acts and moves on by marginalization, rejection, encouragement and punishment, permanent care and observation, and a pyramid hierarchal way. In Dikteh, these points can be seen as well. It shows a part of a student’s life who is supposed to be apparently assessed via an exam by teachers and schoolmaster for his literacy and science acquisition, while in fact, he is examined for his/her obedience. But the child / student does not obey and does not do whatever they order him/her to do.
In traditional discourse, obedience was the survival condition in the society; if someone started to disobey, rejection was the least consequence. Different techniques were used to persuade a child to be obedient and subdued. In an overall view, the dialogues in this drama show two intellectual mainstreams which are developed based on the marginalization between the two concepts of the good student and the bad student. The destiny of such a confrontation can be found in both traditional and power discourses. In these discourses, the child must be obedient to his/her teachers and older people and even to the punishment as well and keep silent. Obedience is considered essential and vital for the student’s success in these two discourses.
 
Conclusion
In Dikteh, these two mentalities and thoughts about childhood are juxtaposed with each other. The first one is the representative of the not-released-from-tradition power discourse and the latter is risen up from the left-wing intellectual discourse. In this confrontation, the strength discourse enjoys disciplinary techniques like marginalization, frightening from the bad consequence and rejection, threatening, and encouragement to make the child obey; and on the other hand, there is a child against power who is endorsed by the intellectual mainstream and attempts to insecure the authority of the strength side by resisting. On this path, he/she uses ways like silence and disobedience, questioning and rebellion, laughing and ridiculing.
In this play, Saedi tries to consider one of them superior to the other by creating two confronting images. In these images, the rebel and disobedient child is superior to the obedient child. This image shows a perceptible distancing from the traditional thought, which means that the child has moved from margin to the center and is no more obedient as he/she used to be; however, he/she is grasped by the encrypted ideologies of the day. Therefore, it can be concluded that Saedi’s represented child has not gotten rid of the adults’ strings yet.
 
References
Ahmadi, B. (2014). The question of modernity. Markaz.
Althusser, L. (2016). Ideology and ideological state apparatuses (R. Sadrara, Trans.). Cheshmeh.
A’lam, M. (1948). The power of faith. A collection of lectures, music pieces and dramas for the education of the minds. Education of the Mind Organization.
Aminirad, K. (2018). A study of Gholamhossein Saedi’s plays based on political symbolism. M.A. Thesis, Tabriz University.
Amn-khani, E. & Khoujeh, A. (2016). Children’s literature and the contemporary ideologies. Studies in Persian Language and Literature, 14 (42), pp. 139-166.
Arafinezhad, S. (2015). Semiotics of place in plays Dictation and Golduneh-khanom. Azma, No. 110, pp. 38-40.
Bashirieh, H. (2018). Social background of revolution in Iran (A. Ardestani, Trans.). Negahe Moaser.
Behrangi, S. (1970). An investigation in the educational issues of Iran. Bamdad.
Beizaei, B. (2008). Theater in Iran. Roshangaran and Motaleate Zanan.
Bigdelo, R. & Shahidani, S. (2017). An analysis of the renovation of education system in Iran in the decades of 40 and 50, with an emphasis on the educational revolution conference in Ramsar. Iranian History, 10 (3), 25-44.
Binazir, N. (2018). Power discourse and the mechanisms of disciplinary technology: A case study: Majid’s tales. Journal of Children’s Literature Studies, 9 (17), pp. 21-48.
Burr, V. (2019). Social constructivism (A. Salehi, Trans.). Ney.
Daftari, M. (1938). The education of the minds. A collection of lectures, music pieces and dramas for the education of the minds. Education of the Mind Organization.
Daftari, M. (1939). General report on the education of the minds. A collection of lectures, music pieces and dramas for the education of the minds. Education of the Mind Organization.
Dastgheib, A. (1992). Paradoxical tendencies in contemporary Iranian literature. Khonya.
Davari-Ardakani, R. (2011). On education. Sokhan.
Dreyfus, H. & Rabinow, P. (2013). Michel Foucault: Beyond structuralism and hermeneutics (H. Bashirieh, Trans.). Ney.
Foucault, M. (1999). Discipline and punishment: Birth of the clinic (N. Sarkhosh & A. Jahandideh, Trans.). Ney.
Foucault, M. (2010). Theater of philosophy (N. Sarkhosh & A. Jahandideh, Trans.). Ney.
Foucault, M. (2010). Will to knowledge (N. Sarkhosh & A. Jahandideh, Trans.). Ney.
Javadi, A. (2014). Piece before becoming piece. Afraz.
Sa’di (2004). Selected Gulistan: A skirt full of flower (G. Yousefi, Ed.). Sokhan.
Sa’di (2004). Selected Bustan: Searching for goodness and beauty (G. Yousefi, Ed.). Sokhan.
Saedi, G. (1970). Parvarbandan. Nil.
Saedi, G. (1973). Five plays from Constitutional Revolution. Amir-Kabir.
Saedi, G. (1976). Pantomimes. Payam.
Saedi, G. (2014). Dictation and angle. Negah.
Saedi, G. (2016). Club-holders of Varzil. Negah.
San’ati, M. (2001). Dialogue about intellectualism. Bokhara, No. 71, pp. 227-260.
Sediq, E. (1938). What do we want from school? A collection of lectures, music pieces and dramas for the education of the minds. Education of the Mind Organization.
Shahri, J. (1992). The old Tehran. Moein.
Tabrizi, M. (2014). Qualitative content analysis from the perspective of deductive and inductive approaches. Social Sciences, 21 (64), pp. 105-138.
Tajbar, N. (2011). Theory of humor based on remarkable texts of Persian humor. Mehrvista.
Zokaei, M. S. & Imani-Khoshkhou, M. (2018). Weapon or relief: Cyber-ethnography of political laughter in the presidential election of 2016. New Media Studies, 5 (20), 1-36.
Zarqani, S. M. (2011). Perspectives of contemporary Iranian poetry: Understanding the trends of Iranian poetry in the 20^th century. Sales.
Zohri, I. (1969). Dictation and angle: whatever is obvious does not need expressing. Negin, No. 45, pp. 4-5.