POETRY

BDM you are absolutely on target

Once she (Forough) is assigned a moral position of pioneer in women's imancipation and liberty, all sorts of moral issues become relevant.

Ms. Shahegh by saying that one should not look at a poets life from a moral perspective (which I agree with).  Negates the fact that she (Ms. Shahegh) has already by the virtue of her statement which you have bolded has entered the discussion into the moral realm.    

Ps.  Why was BDM's comment deleted?  

Ari,

Forough is not my territory, and it is great that her poetry appeals so much to men too. All great poets appeal to both sexes.

thank you all for your comments

Azadeh jaan, I, totaly, agree with you that we should not make a moral judgment. You answered for me.

Anahid jaan, yes, I can or may be I should continue my research in this regard into Forough's other poems.

Afsaneh jaan, very well said and explained. That was my exact feeling when writing this piece.

Thank you all very much.

Anahid

The idea is to demonstrate that men too feel addressed by Forough, contrary to the suggestion of Ms. Shahegh's thought provoking article. Neither gender has specific claim to this artist's genius.

Apologies for seeming to tread on your territory; what we notice or take away from a poem is of course a matter of individual perception and capacity.

violent vs. vengeful

Mahvash jan: Thank you for the subtlety of observation. My take would be that "Violent" has less of an emotional connotation - "Vengeful" has a stronger emotional undercurrent, a history. That's the most basic difference between the two terms, to me

As for the excerpt - my personal take

گنه کردم گناهی پر ز لذّت
در آغوشی که گرم و آتشین بود
گنه کردم میان بازوانی
که داغ و کینه جوی و آهنین بود

In the 4 lines - you sense both the man and the woman being in another emotional place,  while physically enjoying being together, too. She: is feeling, or mocking guilt. He: is feeling or giving off the sense of  vengeance

Physical pleasure is consummated without the equivalent emotional pleasure between these two - being drowned in the justified/unjustified guilt and the hovering  vengeance

It read sadly to me,  that the woman isn't accessing the pleasure of emotional intimacy - with the "guilt" and "vengeance" references hovering in between the lines - while achieving the physical pleasure she feels free to express. 

Thanks for the post.

Ari jan, are you an expert

about what Forough gives us access to in her poem? as a woman, i think I have about as much insight as you if not more into Forough's poetry.

Ari, From two lines that you quoted, it appears that she was.

Anahid, poem stands on its own

kine joo is the perfect word to describe the rapaciousness of intense love making. Seeking to assign a specific person or relationship to the poem is fine, but not so far as to undermine how Forough so generously gives us access to the primordial. By the way, can you tell who was on top when she had the orgasm? Another "sin:" female aggressiveness during sex.

Mahvash jan, as far as main point(s) of the article

I have to say that sometimes it is hard to interpret what a poet exactly meant.   What Forough wrote in one poem cannot always be interpreted as something that she definitely believed in unless we can use evidence of her other poems and her life. Did she really think that men are vengeful? Why did she use the word vengeful when writing about being in someone's arms? did she mean the person she wrote about was vengeful of her? what if she imagined making love to someone and as a married woman, the only way she assumed other men would make love to a married woman would be if they were vengeful towards her husband?

I was about to write this comment first time I read your blog but then I thought maybe she really thought a man could be vengeful towards her and she would be making love to him? but how are we going to know that? we cannot claim that we know exactly what went on in Forough' s mind as she wrote her lines. To complicate the matter, more than four decades after she wrote her poem, we are interpreting it and we are burdened with everything that has happened in between regarding relationships between men and women.

Mahvash jan, I think you have started a valuable discussion but to make it more meaningful, you need to do more research into Forough' s other poems. then you will find out whether she really thought men were vengeful towards her and not only that but to find evidence that she would be willing to make love to a man who was vengeful towards her. As far as other main point of your blog which is bringing to attention the fact that men translate Forough's poems differently, we are given limited evidence of it in your article. Also, each person brings their own take to a translation of poem. I do agree with you that vengeful is better word to use than violent.

Dear Mahvash

Sorry for having commented outside the main point of the article. I thought answering to BDM's preoccupation would help him (and others like him) look at Forough's poetry (and its translations) beyond morality issues.

Cheers,

Azadeh

gonah=orgasm

تن من در ميان بستر نرم
بروي سينه اش مستانه لرزيد

Over-emphasis on the marital status of either party pulls toward soap opera, and Forough invariably transcends that. Why did orgasm have the shame of a sin for this Iranian woman? The question pulls toward the self-view imposed by our society on women, which makes Forough poetry politically relevant today. Beyond that, why is sexuality intertwined with negative emotions--shame, jealousy, deceit..." The question speaks to human psychology/biology, which will probably keep Forough relevant beyond today's issues.

valuable info.

Thank you so much, Dr. Saadat Noury for your valuable information on Jahan Khatoon.

baa eraadat va ehteraam-e faraavaan.

Anahid jaan, thanks for your nice comment and pay attention to the main point of the article which is the translation rather than other side points;-(((

For Bitter Divorced Man

You say, 

"her sexuality included having an affair with a married man."

Yes, and? What are you trying to say, Bitter Man? That it is wrong for a woman to have an affair with a married man? You are being moralistic and if there is anything wrong, it is a moralistic, and consequently religious, approach to life and relationships. Nothing is sacred, not family and not husband-wife relationship. One needs to analyse every situation separately. The world is not black and white, and as Mash Ghasem puts it "Life is complicated."

What Forough felt and what she wrote about her feelings in her poetry would have been the same if Golestan were not married. These two people lived their lives beyond petit moralities that you defend; hence their greatness.

Cheers,

Azadeh

Thanks Souri jan for your coment and thanks Mahvash for the blog

I would like to thank Mahvash for her thought provoking blog regarding Forough's use of word "vengeful".  I enjoyed reading the blog and thanks all friends who are adding to the discussion with their comments on the thread.

The speculation of an empty mind :))

(az taravoshat yek maghz e khaali :))

Anahid jon: About the poem Gonah, from what I have heard, I've got the feeling that it was about her affair with Shamloo, while she was still married to Shapour.

Do we know she wrote sin as she was having relationship with ...

with Golestan. I have to check the timeline. For all I know right now, her sin poem can be a flight of imagination not something she was engaged at the moment in. Later she had affair with a married man but did she write about that? I have to research more. As I remmeber (I may be wrong), her poetry became less about love poems as became older. Any one know the time lines here.

جهان خاتون

Notable Iranian Female Poets

//www.irandokht.com/editorial/print.php?area=pro&sectionID=8&editorialID=2237
جهان ملک خاتون
شاعری از قبیله ی جسارت
//www.rozanehmagazine.com/Rozanehweb/Jahanmalekkhatoon.htm

آیا شاخ نبات و معشوق حافظ همین جهان ملک خاتون است //forum.behtarin.com/showthread.php?t=15421

جَهان ملک خاتون دختر جلال الدین مسعودشاه بن شرف الدین محمودشاه اینجو

//fa.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D8%AC%D9%87%D8%A7%D9%86%E2%80%8C%D9%85%D9%84%DA%A9_%D8%AE%D8%A7%D8%AA%D9%88%D9%86
xx

Souri

You are right ....... Forough has thought us many things ....

She has though the Iranian women that there is no shame in being a woman.  

A woman with her needs and her desires. 

Mehraban

Poetry is not a jukebox that someone just put a few coins in it and it gets to play its favorite music ...

Poetry is not really an art that can be learned  ....

Poetry is a feeling .... an honest and deep feeling that comes form within

If it was not because of her love for the other man she could have never ever produced such a beautiful poetry  .... I mean at least for the poems that she wrote expressing her desires, her longing and her love ......

Not exactly Mehrban

Taking a lesson from one person, one story or one other thing, is something personal. I, personally think that I learned a lot from Frough's way of expression, in my youth (and I'm forever grateful to her)

As you may have noticed, many ( I mean many many) other women think the same way as I do. So if this is not your case, good for you, but you can't generalize it to all the people and saying: There's no lesson in Frough!!

There's no lesson in Frough, for you, maybe! This is not the case for many other women including myself.

There is no lesson in Forough but

great POETRY.  To diminish her amazing literary strength by soft issues of bravery, honesty (only) is a huge disservice to her.

When you make her about anything else but poetry, then questions like the one posed by BDM become relevant.  

BDM

The lesson that Frough gave us, is about the courage and breaking the rules! She is not being admired for her courage to have an affair with a (or more) married man, but only for her courage to say it to the world, when she did it!

I was about to write a long comment on this, when I saw Soosan Khanoum's comment which says it all.

I support what she said in that comment.

Mash ghasem jaan

..... however politicising Forough as the champion of Iranian women's liberation is also a bit (putting words in her mouth).  When she says In Fatheh Baagh

همه میترسیدند

همه میترسیدند اما من و تو 

به چراغ و آب و آینه پیوستییم

و نترسیدییم

..........

Forough was not the only woman among Iranian women to have a love affair. She was the only woman who did not afraid of expressing herself in the most beautiful possible way that she ever could and that is through her poetry. I truly admire her for her honesty and her bravery. 

Love poems come from heart and a true poet should not be shy in expressing herself ....... 

Thinking that Iranian women are exceptions to the rules is like saying there is no gay in Iran .....  

مرثیه‌های خاک

به جُستجوی تو
بر درگاهِ کوه می‌گریم،
در آستانه‌ی دریا و علف.

به جُستجوی تو
در معبرِ بادها می‌گریم
در چارراهِ فصول،
در چارچوبِ شکسته‌ی پنجره‌یی
که آسمانِ ابرآلوده را
قابی کهنه می‌گیرد.
. . . . . . . . . .

به انتظارِ تصویرِ تو
این دفترِ خالی
تا چند
تا چند
ورق خواهد خورد؟

□

جریانِ باد را پذیرفتن
و عشق را
که خواهرِ مرگ است. ــ

و جاودانگی
رازش را
با تو در میان نهاد.

پس به هیأتِ گنجی درآمدی:
بایسته و آزانگیز
گنجی از آن‌دست
که تملکِ خاک را و دیاران را
از اینسان
دلپذیر کرده است!

□

نامت سپیده‌دمی‌ست که بر پیشانی‌ِ آسمان می‌گذرد
ــ متبرک باد نامِ تو! ــ

و ما همچنان
دوره می‌کنیم
شب را و روز را
هنوز را...

//www.shamlou.org/index.php?q=node/508

BDM, Forough and her sensitivities are simply beyond you ken

Mr.Golestan and her had a love affair, unseen in entire Iranian history. How you keep repeating one phrase, like a khoroos be mahl, is an indication of your sensitivites or lack of.

We all see and understand different things in different lives, some refer to it as : aesthetics of perception.

When it is said that,,,

.

When it is said that Forough's poetry speaks of her sexuality; her sexuality included having an affair with a married man, did it not?  They had sex, did they not?  So then, it is unfair to say she is a pioneer in Iranian woman liberation but at the same time exclude her personal behavior from her life's achievements, is it not? 

lost in posting

I just wanted to add that I had finished my article with this master quote of John Stuart Mill in the book of "The Subjection of Women" who says:

 "شاید بتوانیم به درستی ادّعا کنیم آنچه که مردان در بارۀ زنان می دانند یا فکر می کنند که می دانند، به نحوتاسّف آوری نا کامل و سطحی بوده و خواهد بود تا زمانی که زنان آنچه را که

باید گفته شود ، خود بگویند. "

 which was lost in posting

...

Thank you BDM for the info: from another DM (dear brother nothing is worth bitterness, just spit it out and enjoy life!) cheers

Ms. Shahegh I don't have too many sources on her either. Can't find anything on the web, need to pull out some of journals and stuff. It'll take a day or two. Will post it here, thanks again for the article.

Ebrahim Golestan is also a photogrpher

.

Ebrahim Golestan, among other things, a photogrpher, source: //mubi.com/cast_members/22041

not of my interest

Dear BDM

When I am talking of Forough, I am talking about her poems and the style of her poetry. I am not interested in her private and personal life or how many men she had slept with.  It is not my domain of interst & research.

Mash Ghasem, unfortunately, I am not familiar with Jahan Khatoon. Would you please provide me with some more info. on her. Thank you in advance.