|
Monday * Blasphemy? In response to "Leila Pahlavi beh faarsiye saadeh" M Beheshti asks ["Bi ehsasi"] whether Hadi Khorsandi thinks he has mind-reading powers. Oddly enough he doesn't, nor did he make such a claim in the piece (as discerning readers will have noticed). Furthermore, M Beheshti implies that it's a blasphemy of sorts to write about sad events like the death of Leila Pahlavi in anything other than a chest-beating style and convincingly argues: "Agar shoma in ra nemifahmid, digar che bayad goft?" Perhaps M Beheshti would care to provide a list of "mozoos" that she/he thinks should be no-go areas for writers which we can all follow. In the meantime I'm sure Reza Pahlavi is touched by her/his concern. * Off the mark Dear Mr. Khorsandi, I read your poetry frequently and I think yours rank as high as Dehkhoda's prosaic satire. You are a brilliant and funny poet. Your poetry is sometimes memorized by various people I know. However, the same brilliance is not matched in your prose. The material you wrote before the revolution were tasteless, and your effort after the revolution has not fared a whole lot better. Your recent piece on Leila Pahlavi was senseless and brutal, and your Diana anlaogy also was completely off the mark. ["Gozaaresh", "Leila Pahlavi beh faarsiye saadeh"] Please write more poetry. Baa ehteraam va eraadat, * Coffin or no coffin? I read Hadi Khorsani's piece on the funeral of Leila Pahlavi with utmost surprise. ["Gozaaresh", "Leila Pahlavi beh faarsiye saadeh"] Apart the fact that his choice of subject in this case was totally disgusting, I wondered if he is showing new inclinations towards his Islamic roots. He was protesting to the fact that Leila's body was put inside a coffin. Even in his later apology or clarification ["Correction"], he confirmed his belief but forgave the family for using a cofin because they intend to take her body to Iran once that ill-fated land is free. And what is the grounds for his protest? Why does he thinks that the body of all Iranians should be buried without a coffin? I see this as the result of his Muslim upbringing that, in such moments of ignorance, shows itself clearly. I had rather expected to see this kind of protest from Ayatullah Mesbaah Yazdi. This incident clearly shows how the "intellectualism" of some of our writers and artists is fabricated, shallow and baseless. Doesn't he know that if, God forbid, he dies in the Western countries, no one would allow his family to bury his body without a coffin? There is a big health hazard in this act and the laws of these lands do not allow it; period. Hushand Mansurian * Taqbih In response to Hadi Khorsandi's "Leila Pahlavi beh faarsiye saadeh":
* Whitewash naameh Regarding the excerpt from Azar Ariyan-Pour's book ["Qesmat?"]: This is yet another "whitewash naameh", this time by a disgruntled wife of a former minister under the Shah, who is trying to recreate her husband for the benefit of those who know little or nothing about the behind-the-scene dealings and wheelings of the same period. These whitewash naamehs are often published as autobiographies, memoires, diaries, biographies or, as in the present case, by a proxy diarist such as the wife, son, daughter or other relatives and friends of the subject of the story. Some of these diaries or memoires, such as those of Assadollah Alam or Abolhassan Ebtehaj, although not entirely free from fiction, are indeed of historic value. Others are written partly to settle some of the old scores or are the consequence of the exile-driven boredom and publicity seeking nature of their authors. There is no point in scrutinizing every claim or denial made by the wife of Dr. Sheikholeslam-zadeh (dearly refered to as "Sheikh" by those close to him) unless you were closely involved with the events described in her book. But the undeniable part of the story, which is public knowledge, is that Dr Sheikh (I am using this nickname only for abbreviation and not because I was close to him) was a health minister in Hoveyda's cabinet and although all of his cabinet colleagues, who were captured by the Islamic regime, were later executed, his life was spared. And not only that - he was extended privileges and favors of unprecedented nature in the prisons of the Islamic regime. In simpler terms his period in jail bore all the hallmarks of an intimate collaboration with his jailers. Again I am not going to go through the suggestions that Dr Sheikh's family and political connections saved him from imminent death as these matters are beyond the scope of this writing. The point of interest, however, in this book, is the naive attemp by the writer to exonerate her husband from all sorts of accusations attributed to him before and after the Islamic revolution. What Mrs Sheikh (or any other whitewash writer) is trying to make us believe is this: "Although the Shah's regime was a despotic, corrupt, undemocratic, non-mertiocratic, and so on, my husband (or my father or brother for that matter), somehow miraculously, rose to high office (albeit reluctantly) without any connections, not because of 'who' he knew but because of 'what' he knew, unaware of all the alleged corruption and atrocities that were taking place around him. He (husband, father, brother etc) was constantly opposing the regime, protecting the oppressed, defending the faith and that we didn't enjoy any of the perks and privileges of power". As for justifying the events in the aftermath of the revolution, she is telling us that as there were no other skilled or experienced medics among the prisoners, with as unblemished a background as my husband's, his life was spared, he was put in charge of the jail dispensary, enjoyed respect and comfort and all that without any ties or connections with the mollas. Now if you can believe all of these, then you should be able to believe that Imam's face was engraved on the moon. * Vague policy In response to Leila's letter, "Typical Iranian mard-saalaari": I think this conflict is a result of editor's vague policy. Some of the readers of this magazine are looking for less junky stuff, they are looking for an Iranian Newsweek or Time in this web site. Some others don't know about these stuff. They like to use the web site to chat about their pornographic imaginations, never seen boyfriends, to date somebody, to complain about men , HARFE DEL!! etc. IRANIAN.COM wants to satisfy everybody and wants to a be a magazine for everybody, in any age group, with any taste, with any level of education and wisdom. It wants to be TIME and PLAYBOY and MSN MESSENGER all together. Consequently it puts itself subject to ridicule. No solution but to help the editor to rationalize his editorial policy and choose his audience. * Childish and idiotic This is in response to the letter from NN regarding Nooneh's stories ["Sexless Nooneh"]: People all over the world have sex, write about sex, talk about sex and fantasize about sex. Iranian women are no exception. Those who say they are, are lying through their pearly whites! If you don't like what Nooneh writes, don't read her stories. If you wish to critique her work, then stick to the subject. But to attack her work by calling her a whore is not only baseless but childish and idiotic. By looking at your style of writing and usage of the language, I assume you have been living outside Iran for some time. For you to say, and I quote, "no Iranian man will ever ever ever marry you" is pathetic and down right insulting to men and women! So... an Iranian man would not marry Nooneh because she has had sex??? So while we women are to remain pure and chaste, our Iranian men are to go out and make it their mission in life to screw anything with a pulse? Isn't it about time we let go of some of our double standards? You perpetuate the double standards that exist for men and women and the belief that women are less than equal to men. In case you don't know, women are capable of many great things and we do not need our husband's nationality to validate our existence or our self worth! If we do get married, it is because we have found someone who is capable of understanding, respecting, and supporting our choices. If an Iranian man is threatened by Nooneh's choice to be sexually active, that is NOT Nooneh's problem! I am by no means suggesting that sleeping around is a good thing. What I am saying is the consequences for sleeping around should be the same for both men and women. We should not call a woman a "whore" because she has had sexual encounters (or in this case, is writing about them) and turn around and pat the guy on the back and call him a "stud". (See editor's note) Regards, * All over the place I have stopped reading Nooneh's stories. I would read some of them but they seem awefully long and she would go all over the place. Somehow don't grab me as I read the few lines . Anyway, just FYI. I guess you read them all. If you come across one that's good, let me know I'll read it. Like the one today ["Xerxes"] ... should I read it? (See editor's note) FR * Read and learn! I love reading Nooneh's stories. For the first time ever, I have found an Iranian woman that can express her TRUE feelings!!! I think all those narrow minded Iranian men out there, should read her stories, and learn that women have feeling too. SEXUAL feelings. Women are also allowed to sleep with whomever they please, and have a one night stand if they want too, without being labeled, as Kharaab! Iranian women can also have orgasms (REAL ones).To all you narrow minded men out there.... Read and learn!!!! The truth is out there. Nooneh, I'll be looking forward to your next story. Will this be your last story? I hope not!!! * WTO neither fair nor free In his opinion piece "Share the blame", Dr. Sagafi-nejad makes the erroneous assumption that joining the World Trade Organization (WTO) will somehow be a 'good thing' for Iran. Without so much as a critical analysis of the WTO and its significant failure to uphold even its own loudly professed principles, we are expected to believe that exclusion from this super-rich bully club is somehow a 'shortcoming'. The claim that the "WTO's basic pillars are free trade and distortion free economic systems" is a fallacy. It cannot be supported because most of the countries included in this club break the agreements as and when it suits them. I hope that Dr. Sagafi-nejad is not going to ask us to believe that trade sanctions levied against countries (i.e. Iran and those who do business with Iran) for disagreeing with WTO members (i.e. the United States) are in someway promoting free/fair trade principles. They are not. True free/fair trade is an active policy of engagement in which the market is a tool for greater good (i.e. economic justice leads to other wider forms of social justice) >>> FULL TEXT * U.S. veto With all the due respect for the professor's article ["Share the blame"], that's exactly why Iran is eager to enter the WTO. However, the WTO rejections have not been due to internal policies and politics of Iran. Rather they have happened due to the influence of one member only, the United States. In fact, this was the first time since 1996 that the United States even permitted the application to be considered. United States Ambassador to the WTO, Linnet Deily, vetoed the approval of the application. The Malaysian envoy to the WTO objected to the US stance on behalf of "the emerging economies" and promised refreshing Iranian membership every month. I agree with the professor that a significant amount of house cleaning in Iran needs to take place. This is the main reason for joining the WTO, since becoming a member provides the opportunity to leaders (including Iran's) leverage to implement changes within their own countries. However, in my opinion, the professor should refrain from disseminating baseless information regarding the status of Iran's WTO membership. Regards, Masoud Neshat * Negative stereotype I was entertained by your short story ["Abroo kamoon"] and as an Iranian with a "unibrow" I should say that it struck home to my teenage years growing up among the mass of European-Americans in the suburbs. While your story is entertaining, and you write very well, I think it is unfortunate that you probably fail to present a very worthwhile message with your story. It is a reality that what WE consider beautiful is totally relevant to our cultural. For example, while a unibrow may be considered by the Euro Caucasian peoples to be an undesired or weird trait, among Iranians, as depicted in our miniature paintings and literature, is a sign of beauty. Take for example the difference in terminology. In Persian the trait you write about is called "abrooye payvasteh" which has a very positive connotation while in English it is the dreaded "unibrow" and associated with silly figures such as Bert on Sesame Street. And now you are planning to write about the hair on the upper lip? While it may be funny, I don't think there is anything positive that could come out of that because even though you may not mean it, it will probably only serve to perpetuate the negative stereotype of that feature among Iranian women. The reality is that Iranian women with their dark hair and light skin are among the most beautiful women in the world and any male (regardless of nationality) I've ever talked with tends to think so, and besides I don't see many Americans women writing articles about pale skin or large derrieres. If we were the dominant ethnicity, living in our own country, then we could use articles that made us laugh at our own looks, but coming from a position of weakness as minorities with different QUALITIES, what we require instead are articles that raise our pride and increase our self confidence. Payandeh iran, va irani. EDITOR'S NOTE: There seems to be a perception that Nooneh's stories have become "sexless" because of criticism from readers. Not so. Nooneh emailed all her 13 short stories (one more left) before publication. None have been altered. Iranian.com will publish more stories with adult subjects by other writers in the future. Start writing!
|
|
|
Web design by BTC Consultants
Internet server Global Publishing Group