CONTEXT
I have been teaching a course titled "People and Cultures
of the Middle East." Standard readings for such a course
are several books dealing with sociology, history, and cultures
of the region. Since the region is vast, containing numerous ethnic
groups, languages, cultures, religions, and countries, inevitably
the instructor has to focus on few aspects of the society and
culture or specific countries in the area. One of the major challenges
in selecting materials for the course is to adopt readings that
convey the information, provide critical analysis, and make a
feeling of the texture of social and cultural life available to
students.
This last Fall I adopted My Uncle Napoleon as a part of readings for this course. My purpose was to choose an interesting fiction that would show various aspects of social life in a light but lively manner. This novel was a perfect choice because it had a touching story filled with hilarious antics, gave a picture of life in a specific period of Iranian history, critically exposed various characters on the Iranian social scene, and juxtaposed many aspects of social life and societal norms and values. It did so in a satirical way by showing the most funny, contradictory, and humorous aspects of social life in the pre-WW II Iran. While the rich context of the novel provided an excellent ground for sociological analysis of some aspects of Iranian history, psychology, and sociology, its farcical format reduced the risk of boredom and distraction from reading about an unfamiliar culture. In what follows I will briefly present several ways in which the novel works for teaching about Iran and the Middle East.
The novel was assigned to students as a supplemental reading.
Having read history of the twentieth century Middle East and discussed
a host of major sociological and historical issues relevant to
the region, students were asked to read the novel and react to
it in the context of class readings and discussions. More specifically,
students were to look for the situations and examples of patriarchy,
conspiracy, extended family, classism, nationalism, colonialism,
reverse Orientalism, social hierarchy, sexual taboos, and social,
political, and cultural oppressions. Discussing the cultural context
of the novel and explaining some of quips and equivocal expressions,
I warned students that however much sociological context this
fiction may provide, its genre is satire and thus its scenarios
must be viewed with a grain of salt and not read as suggestive
that Iranian people are spiteful and delusional. This warning
was heeded by students who generally liked the novel and reacted
to it positively, although with reservations and concerns about
various issues which will be discussed further.
THE
STORY
The events in this novel takes place on the estate
of an extended family and involve the patriarch of the family
and his relatives. The narrator is a young boy in love with his
same age cousin and playmate Layli, whom he desires to marry but
social traditions prevent it because he is considered too young
for marriage. Layli has another suitor, a different cousin, Aka
Puri, whom is favored by Layli's father too. In his attempt to
prevent Layli from marrying Puri, the narrator must first settle
a deep-seated dispute between Dear Uncle (Layli's father) and
his brother-in-law (narrator's father). The two are in a constant
war with each other. With the help of his sex driven uncle, Assadollah
Mirza, and Mash Qasem, the servant to Dear Uncle, the narrator
often manages to resolve some of these disputes. However, these
minor successes are always short lived as every peaceful moment
is quickly followed by mayhem. The various disputes revolve around
maintaining family honor despite incidents such as infidelity,
unmarried pregnancy, status conflicts, and blatant insanity. A
major theme of the novel is the idea held by Dear Uncle, known
as Uncle Napoleon, that the British are out to destroy him at
any cost because of his nationalistic attitudes and his imagined
successes in a minor skirmish during Mohammad Ali Shah's reign
(1907-1909). He is convinced that every problem in his family
is rooted in some British plot to unravel his family. No one is
spared suspicion. Even the immediate members of his family are
suspected of spying for the British. The unending skirmishes between
Dear Uncle and the narrator's father, compounded by Dear Uncle's
increasing delusionary fear of British conspiracies, leads to
his eventual nervous breakdown and heart attack. To the narrator's
dismay, Layli was eventually married off to Puri against her wishes
and other members of the family each went their own way.
On another level, the novel is a satirical critique of restrictive norms and social relationships in Iran. It is full of happenings shaped by honor and status, religious values, obsession with and secrecy of sex, conspiracy, authoritarianism, sexism, and patriarchal family structure. Each character is the embodiment of some aspects of the Iranian culture and society, albeit in an exaggerated and farcical way.
2. As a pedagogical tool, the novel proves very useful. On the surface, the novel is the scene of a family feud in which the characters throttle their energies with all the gusto into their socially defined roles. The story of an aristocratic family whose frustrated old retired patriarch identifies himself with Napoleon and sees a similarity between all aspects of his life and that of Napoleon offers a superb example of delusionary nationalism and dislocated identity. It is quite interesting that this nationalist aristocrat must call on a foreign character for creating an identity that allows him to fight his foreign enemies. In another episode, he puts all his hopes of salvation from the wrath of British in Hitler to whom he writes a letter asking for protection.
Uncle Napoleon's paranoia about the British involvement in all the problems within his domain and in encounter with his immediate family members is a reflection of the socio-historical reality of the Iranian obsession with foreigners and their interference in the Iranian affairs. Though not uniquely Iranian, this paranoia has been a major feature of the Iranian political culture in the twentieth century. In My Uncle Napoleon, this paranoia is so embedded in the mind and psyche of Dear Uncle that it carries him to bizarre behaviors and scenes -- the stuff of the farce for the author. The novel becomes a testimony to absurdity of this belief when taken to the extreme. Using an article by Ervand Abrahamian, "The Paranoid Style in Iranian Politics,"* along with this novel one can demonstrate the real and imagined dimensions of the belief in conspiracy theory as a feature of the Middle Eastern politics.
3. More than anything else, this novel demonstrates the nature and structure of a Middle Eastern family and its role in the life of individual. The focus yields itself to a better understanding of the advantages and disadvantages of an extended family. In the Middle East, families live close together, support and take care of each other, and have strong influence over the lives of their members. Family is the most important social institution and individual status is dependent on the family status. Family looks after its individual members until the death but at the expense of their autonomy. It is the bastion of honor and source of pride. Individual honor is derived from family honor. Without family pride, it becomes extremely difficult for the individual to feather his/her nest in the society. Extended families are supportive nets extending protection and affection to each member while requiring obedience and loyalty. Individual desires are subordinated to the welfare of the family. The decisions made by patriarchs of the family are non-negotiable and have very serious consequences for those affected. In My Uncle Napoleon, men are generally at the helm of the family and they say the last word, especially the elder men like Dear Uncle. Children are at the bottom of family hierarchy. They have no say in events and are told when and how to do things with less of a consideration for their own desires. While class and status are two major determinations of individual status in society, age and sex act as two major determinations of individual position within the family.
4. The story provides an excellent case for demonstrating the dialectical balance between the agency and social structure. While it shows masterfully how traditions frame situations, limit individual aspirations, suppress personal desires, and mold characters, it also shows how individuals are capable of creativity and innovation, of writing the scripts of their own life with limited resources and support, of manipulating the most formal aspects of social structure, and of weaving the threads of their personal desires into the web of the social rules and taboos. Some girls have affairs prior to marriage, even though there are extremely negative consequences for such a behavior. Iranians drink alcohol despite the Islamic ban on such a behavior. Sex out of marriage is desired and pursued in spite of strong cultural and religious sanctions and constant supervision of female behavior in the society. Religious and traditional rituals are adhered to not only for their intrinsic value but also for their extrinsic utility for promotion of the individual self-interests within the family and community. All these are examples of how rules are interpreted and situationally appropriated by individuals whose identities are well defined by gender, social class, religious affiliation, age hierarchy, and social status system. Despite the well-defined positions of each individual within the family and society, characters in My Uncle Napoleon are constantly negotiating and renegotiating their claims to status and authority. Behind the facade of integrity and respectability, each character is engaged in transgressions of the very parameters of such an integrity and respectability.
5. This fiction also serves as an excellent antithesis to the prevailing stereotypical images of Iran and Iranian people in the West. First of all, it shows how vivacious, rich, and animated the Iranian culture can be. It challenges the view of Iran as an ultra conservative country of religious fanatics who only know how to mourn and beat themselves in the chest. Second, it serves as a valuable witness against the stereotypical depiction of the Iranian men and women. The multitudes of colorful characters in this novel defy the Western stereotypes of the Iranian people. For instance, Western images of Iranian women are often uniformly indiscriminate and negative. The novel offers examples of diverse female characters none of whom resemble the full image of a powerless, oppressed, and passive woman bundled up in a veil. There is the dominant character of shrewish Aziz al-Saltaneh who, while very conscious of her personal and social interests and capable of scaring off not only her husband but also many other members of her family, is extremely vulnerable to the oppressive social constraints and expectations of the society. There is narrator's mother who comes closest to a typical Iranian woman who sacrifices most of her life for her children and husband and often feels forced to choose between varying demands placed on her by society and religion, her conjugal and blood families, her husband and children, her personal desires and her families' survival. There is Shir Ali's wife, Tahereh, who is poor but attractive, full of lust and capable of fulfilling her desires under the most difficult circumstances of a watchful traditional society and an uneducated and ardently protective husband who is religiously sensitive to inviolability of her chastity. There is the busybody Farrokh Laqa who is often rumbling, gossiping, and moving from a scene to another in search of a gain. There is young Layli whose innocence, love, and desires are burdened by family traditions and social constraints. Finally, there is Qamar, a half-wit who often speaks gibberish and causes much grief within the family but ends up with a happy life in the United States.
Two American students of Italian decent had milder but similar reactions. Coming from Italian families, they found it easy to relate to complexities and the intensity of family life in the Iranian society. While these students had a better appreciation for the concept of "respect" found in the Iranian society and demonstrated in the interaction of characters in the novel, they were amazed at the fragility of such a reputation and the pettiness by which they were constructed.
White American students who had never traveled outside of the United States had different but somewhat uniform reactions. The more knowledgeable about the Middle East, the more comfortable with this reading. The less knowledgeable students enjoyed the novel but had to struggle deciphering the meanings and implications of the text, contexts, and subtexts. They all were amused and amazed at the colorful language Iranians use for sex and at their mastery in creative description. Rich and powerful imageries uttered even by uneducated Mash Qasem, the faithful servant of Dear Uncle, the animated curses of Aziz al-Saltaneh, and dynamic imageries evoked by the author are hard to find in ordinary, even farcical, speech in America. The embedded symbolism of Iranian language, demonstrated in extensive use of adjectives and expressions, is something quite unknown to American students whose language is much more direct and forthright. Some students complained about the "subversion and indirectness" of the language and gestures. The downright hilarious verbal circling and skirting of culturally sensitive issues such as sex and bodily parts were found to be "ridiculous exaggerations" that add silliness to every situation. To these students, if it is meant and said, why not say it straight? Why so much symbolism and sophistication in even the most mundane utterances?
Students were also amazed at the prevailing hypocrisy in the society. How could members of this family manifest so many contradictory attitudes toward each other? How could they show so much love and affection toward one another while they resented each other so bitterly. How could the society overlook the sexual escapades of Asadollah Mirza, Dustali, and the other male members of the family but demand chastity and virginity from Layli? Here is a student's reaction:
"I enjoyed this book a great deal and found myself laughing out loud throughout. However, what puzzled me was the contradictions that lie within this family. For example, Mash Qasem begins every statement with 'why should I lie?', yet throughout the book he is constantly telling lies. Society looks down upon nonmarital sex, but the smartest and most respected character is the sex crazy Assadollah Mirza. Adultery is forbidden and sinful. Yet, more than anything this book suggests that by going to San Francisco you can't go wrong, unless you are Dustali Khan!"
Another surprise for some of the students was the non-rational elements of social interaction within this family. Living and grown up in the most rationalized society, some students had difficulty understanding the way in which Iranians go about solving their social and personal problems. The existence of so many arguments, disputes, quarrels, feuds, and rivalries within a family and attempting to solve them without resorting to courts, counselors, doctors, lawyers, and experts looked very puzzling to these students. They have never lived in a traditional family of a semi-feudal society. Living continually with tension and disputes, without seeking expert help and wishing for fateful resolution of intractable conflicts, seem irrational and unimaginable. One student described members of the family depicted in this novel as "individuals who are constantly playing each other in a heated game of backgammon. There is a war of all against all without any hope for peace!"
Finally, the strong references to the genitalia took few female students by surprise and offended those with stronger religious background' One found this so racy that predicted that the book would soon find itself on the list of banned books in the United States! These students were confused by the discretion used in Persian colloquial reference to sex. Euphemistic references to "going to San Francisco," "noble members," "the fifth limb" and "the faucet on samovar" are strange metaphors for American students. They are puzzled by the remoteness of the references and indirectness of the language.
Interestingly, some other students were surprised at the total lack of sex in the narrator's relationship with Layli. Given the ever-present references to sex and sexual organs in this novel, this was especially incredible. Also, while understandable in the context of culture and these lovers' ages, the heavenly love is an alien concept to a generation of young who has grown up with MTV and Hollywood movies.
As satire, the novel has a better chance of attracting students and maintaining their interest in learning about Iran. As a cultural product, it serves as a case study in the moods and manners of a family type within the context of the Iranian society on the brink of the Allied invasion. As a translation, it is a lucid text and an enjoyable piece of literature. Davis' "preface" provides an excellent background for the reader by explaining various contexts within which the novel was written, the story was grounded, and the book has to be placed.
Satire is not easy to translate especially when there is a wide gap between the cultures through which a book travels. However, Dick Davis has done a masterful job in translating this difficult text to English He captures the true essence of the author's humor while remaining loyal to the original text. He is, as Ehsan Yarshater has mentioned, "the ablest living translator of Persian literature into English." Pezeshkzad should be happy to have found the best translator for his literary journey in the English-speaking world.