Archive - Jul 17, 2009 - Article

The Left is Wrong

When a political groundswell like the Iranian presidential election of June 2009 and its aftermath happen, the excitement and drama of the moment expose not just our highest hopes but also our deepest fault lines, most troubling moral flaws, and the dangerous political precipice we face. Over the decades I have learned not to expect much from what passes for "the left" in North America and/or Western Europe when it comes to the politics of what their colonial ancestry has called "the Middle East". But I do expect much more when it comes to our own progressive intellectuals -- Arabs, Muslims, South Asians, Africans and Latin Americans. This is not a racial bifurcation, but a regional typology along the colonial divide>>>

And If Iran Doesn't Want To Talk?

Six weeks before Iran's descent into electoral chaos, the hardline Iranian cleric Ahmad Khatami rebuked the United States in his Friday sermon, stating, "You do not want talks!" Ayatollah Khatami (no relation to former president Mohammad Khatami) is clearly not a keen observer of the Washington scene. Given the persistence of American efforts to engage the Iranian regime in dialogue over the last 30 years, and the resilience of the Obama administration's own commitment to engagement, the one constant in American policy toward Iran seems to be that we do indeed want talks.>>>

قافیه‌ی باخته

پرسش بسیار ساده این است که وقتی در جامعه‌ای گروهی بیکار و تن‌پرور وجود دارد که به هیچ کس و نهادی نباید حساب پس دهد و تا آنجا که بخواهد کاردش می‌برد، و از آن چنان تشکیلات مستحکمی برخوردار است که بود و نبود حکومت‌های وقت را هم رقم می‌زند، چگونه همچنین گروهی می‌‌تواند پشتیبان مردمی باشد که خود در تحمیق همین مردم بیش از هر گروهی دیگر ذینفع است؛ حتا اگر سنجش زندگی فلاکت‌بار مردم را به عنوان سندی واقعی از نقش ویرانگر نیروهای سیاسی بانفوذ در آن برهه را نادیده بگیریم. تاریخ فعالیت‌ها و کارکردهای این قشر به ما می‌آموزد که هیچگاه روحانیت شیعه بدون محاسبه و یا از سر بخشندگی در جهت ارتقاء جامعه‌ی ایران به سوی دموکراسی و تمدن گامی برنداشته‌است>>>

The opposite sex

There is dualism in the portrayal of women in Hedayat’s psycho-fictions, on the one hand as an ideal, unattainable angel, on the other, as a harlot. This corresponds to the portrayal of men: the lonely, misplaced, misunderstood, well-meaning, honest, sincere and moral narrators and anti-heroes who fail in every aspect of their living; and the rabble, who succeed in every aspect of theirs. His critical realist fiction about the lives of ordinary townsfolk is different: both men and women are shown as they normally are, even though their vices often seem to outnumber their virtues.>>>

Cast a Spell

A thousand tender leaves
On branches drifting in the breeze
Their dance of intimate “surrender”
In a play of life’s splendor

A thousand whispers in a bird’s song
Whistling “your” symphony
Between each chirp there is “silence”
Their instinct is an insight
A mystical epiphany >>>