Talk:Persian literature

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
WikiProject Afghanistan Persian literature is within the scope of WikiProject Afghanistan, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Afghanistan-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Good articles Persian literature has been listed as a good article under the good-article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do.
If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a review.
Former FA This article is a former featured article candidate. Please view its sub-page to see why the nomination failed. For older candidates, please check the archive.
Peer review Persian literature has had a peer review by Wikipedia editors which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.
WikiProject Iran Persian literature is part of WikiProject Iran, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Iran-related topics. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of objectives.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the Project's quality scale.
Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the Project's importance scale.
After rating the article, please provide a short summary on the article's ratings summary page to explain your ratings and/or identify the strengths and weaknesses.
Persian literature is part of WikiProject Central Asia, a project to improve all Central Asia-related articles. This includes but is not limited to Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Mongolia, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Xinjiang, Tibet and Central Asian portions of Iran and Russia, region-specific topics, and anything else related to Central Asia. If you would like to help improve this and other Central Asia-related articles, please join the project. All interested editors are welcome.

This article is currently being copyedited by the League of Copyeditors. If you have any thoughts or concerns, please post them to the discussion page for review by League members.

Contents

[edit] GA Promotion

Persian literature was recently nominated to be promoted to good article status, and has passed! Congratulations and keep up the great editting! Highway 20:57, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Discussion

Roozbeh, even thought you are right that my omission of "poet" for Rumi was unintentional, I am now thinking it is perhaps better if we do not categorize them as such on this page. My reasons are the following:

  • Many of the poets were also writers and to categorize them as poets would hide or diminish the fact that they also produced major prose.
  • Since poetry has been used in Persian extensively, even many historians of the past centuries dabbled in poetry, we would have a list of 90% "poets" here if the list grows (and hopefully it will grow to accomodate all the major figures of the persian literature).

What do you think? --K1 12:34, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

I believe we should provide the information on one being a poet or something else. If Sa'di, for example, also has written other important stuff, we can always mention "poet and writer", or whatever. I believe there are many cases that someone's writings in non-poem form have not survived or have no value of any kind. These will be the pure poets. -Roozbeh 13:41, 19 Jun 2004 (UTC)

Unbalanced expression

"Persian literature has excelled to become the most beautiful."

Well , I love Persian literature but it is not acceptable for an article here to claim it "the most beautiful".

"Unfortunatley one must know farsi to fully appreciate the beauty of its literture ..."

There is nothing unfortunate about this as it is the case with every language , a more balanced form of expression would be to say "the beauty of Persian literature is greatly dependant on its form and music".

"The language in which the poetry has been created is Farsi"

This one is quite wrong , there are forms of poetry even in the languages of the primitive tribes. It is appropriate to say "Farsi has contributed largely to the world poetry"

There were also errors and phrases like "...in comparison the English of shakespear is different from the English of today" which were quite meaningless in an article on Persian literature.

"as words can be easily created at will for use in poetry, for instance if a poet wants to use the word hair in one poem he or she has over 7 choices for use"

Of course it was not meant that one can "create" 7 words for hair , the writer mixes two different issues.Besides that the existance of 7 words for hair in Persian is not the most important feature of Persian literature to be mentioned in a short introduction to the subject.

I edited these phrases and deleted some words , I didnt actualy like doing so but I think what I deleted was realy of no value , I ask those who are interested to contribute to this article and hopefuly shall add some more useful information to the extent that my knowledge allows , I think some information about non-poetic aspects of Persian Literature is particularly necasary.Pasha Abd 06:05, 14 October 2005 (UTC)

[edit] page needed

There should be a page created that lists the most famous works of literature in Persian history. Like Manteq al-Tayr, Bustan, Golestan, Shahnama, DFivan Hafez, etc etc...--Zereshk 20:04, 8 November 2005 (UTC)

You are right.Actually this article needs a lot of work.Pasha 23:20, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

I'm putting up the cleanup tag because this article is a mess. The authors list needs to be separated by chronology. And there are a LOT of people missing. I'll try to see if I can fix it in the next few weeks myself. But I invite people to help out as much as possible.--Zereshk 21:34, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

I agree. I also suggest not to differenciate between "Persian poets" and "Afghan poets", because Afghan poets are also Persian poets. Afghanistani, Tajikistani and Irani writesr and poets should be listed in the same list. Information about their nationality should be added, however, it makes no sense to have difefrent lists for people who write in the same language. -213.39.200.25 01:53, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
I agree. I'll change the headers.--Zereshk 02:14, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] A self glorifying article

The Persian literature is perhaps one of the best in the world, but the article has a test of self glorification. It seems to have been writen but an enthusiastic Persian Nationalist. I think that the article will greatly benfit from adopting a more NPOV--Khalid hassani 20:17, 25 December 2005 (UTC)


Specifically which section are you referring to? Please specify so we can work on it.--Zereshk 10:30, 26 December 2005 (UTC)

I just rewrote the introductory section, removing hyperbole and adding a few dates and facts. It just won't do to say that Persian is uniquely suited to be the language of poetry. I've read enthusiasts for various languages saying that about their native tongue. Wikipedia can't take sides on "the best language for poetry". However, longevity and influence can be described without partiality.

The article still needs a great deal of work. Zora 07:45, 5 January 2006 (UTC)

Persian language is a superior language indeed for poetry and romanticism compared to many other languages. There is a reason why it was the language of choice for the elite in numerous royal courts that were not even Persian.

And the metric is? Superiority is measured how? All you're really saying is that you like Persian. If you can find a quote from some reputable scholar stating that, we can add it as one POV. Then I'll find numerous quotes from scholars condemning linguistic chauvinism. Until then, we can drop the subject entirely. Zora 07:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
Drop it? By whos authority? It's not your call. Why did you delete that section? There was no claim there that wasnt substantiated by a reference or a source. Accusing sources of being POV or "chauvinist" is illegal on WP. It's not your call. And you deleted referenced text. Youre free to add any quote by any scholar that claims that Persian is not as great as is claimed by others.--Zereshk 09:50, 14 January 2006 (UTC)


However the introductory paragraph sounded way too amateurish and was full of praise without saying exactly how.

I'll write something up in the next couple of days for the intro. The section titled "Modern Persian Poetry" also needs to change. It doesnt say what exactly is modern persian poetry. It just names some protagonists.--Zereshk 03:04, 7 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Revisions on Western influence section

I rewrote the section entirely, with names, dates, and titles rather than generalities, and dropped all the smarmy praise. The bit re "Omar Khayyam more quoted than the Bible and Shakespeare" was just NUTS. I know English; I know English literature. The Bible would be the largest influence, then Shakespeare, then, way down the list, Khayyam. Of course, the Bible's influence is so diffuse that it's often there as a phrase or a cliche rather than a complete quotation. Also, how many Bible quotations you see depends on what kind of literature you read. There are a great many more Bible quotations in Charlotte Yonge than there are in Dickens.

It's also a bit strange to have "Western literature" so prominently featured, given that the classical Persian poets are read from Morocco to Indonesia, in many Muslim-majority countries, and have had a huge influence on various literatures. Are the Westerners the most important people in the world? Is it more important that Matthew Arnold wrote a poem about Rustam and Sohrab than it is that Sufi music from Morocco to Indonesia uses Persian-inspired lyrics?

Facts rather than hyperbole are the best way to convey the importance of the subject.

Still lots of work needed on the whole article. Zora 07:54, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Rumi not Bahlki

The battle between Turks and Persians over who should "own" Rumi is silly. It is particularly silly to try to "win" this battle by giving Rumi a new cognomen, Bahlki. He is known throughout the world as Rumi. The WP article on Rumi uses Rumi. He's not "Turkish", true, but neither is he totally "Persian". I think he would have been the first to laugh at the nationalists squabbling over his bones. Zora 11:05, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

I partially agree. But here is a page for persian literature. If you ask an Iranian "who is Rumi ?" , most of Iranian do not know who you are talking about. Yes Rumi is known in the west by this name just because the name is easy to pronounce and also due to a huge number of advertisements carried out by Turkish government. Most of the wikipedia articles related to Rumi are written pro-Turkish. We just want to have it neutral. The word Rumi is not neutral. Iranians call him molana, neither Rumi nor Balkhi. Joe Dynue
That's true. We (Iranians) call him "Molavi", to be more exact. "Mowlana" is his title (something like "Sir").--Zereshk 06:47, 17 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Reorganization

The article was quite disorganized, so I devoted some time to sorting it into ancient, medieval, and modern periods. I drastically cut down the material on the literature of Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India. That should perhaps be in other articles, and linked. It was overshadowing the main part of the article.

I kept the organization by genre, but I don't like it. It would be MUCH BETTER to sort the various writers into more finely defined periods, giving birth and death dates, if known, and then listing their works, with the genre attached to the work. I would like to hear from other editors re this reorganization.

I put all the "influence on other literatures/countries" in one huge section. There's a huge chunk missing, which is Persian influence on Sufi poetry and music. Through the Sufi orders, Persian poetry influenced poetry in every part of the Islamic world.

I also removed all the repetitive language of praise. Wikipedia can comment on importance but not on literary worth. Who are we to judge? Once that was gone, it was apparent that we really need some more context for the various periods. All that was left was lists of names.

Please also note a comment I made on the talk page for Persian literature in the West, suggesting that that article be used as a collection point for lists of translations into various Western languages. Seems to me that comprehensive lists of literature in translation would be a great help for foreigners wishing to explore further. Zora 19:40, 15 January 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Pre-Islamic Persian literature, etc.

In this context using 'Zend-Avesta' works, but it is a misleading term in itself, and does not include the Pahlavi scriptures, which though being compiled and redacted c. the 9th century CE are oral transmissions much older in origin (being compiled in large part to protect their religious heritage). In addition are a miscellany of other such texts, but this is of little relevance to this article I'll concede. The national collective memory seemed to have influenced Ferdowsi far more than actual Zoroastrianism, though like Catholics turned old gods into saints, he did turn the old angels, demons, and pre-Zoroastrian gods into kings and the like - anyone with knowledge of the 'old' religion would be blind not to see the connections, however oblique the cultural recension may have been. What would be useful though, is more technical information on Persian Poetry. I'm more familiar with Urdu poetry, but by no means competent to remark on its subtleties. All I know is that there are many styles in Urdu poetry just as different as the sonnet, limerick, or even haiku in their metre, subject matter, and tradition. Is this just a uniquely Urdu thing then? ... In any case I did change the colonial spelling 'Parsee' to the more standard 'Parsi'. Khiradtalk 06:52, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

oops, what I mean by the styles, to clarify, is besides the historical information, what makes them different from each other. I suppose this can be found out on the Ghazal page or whatnot, I just thought it was an idea to show a clean list with their properties and country/area of origin. And oh yeah Vis o Ramin could maybe be put in the pre-Islamic area. Khiradtalk 07:03, 10 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] A Plea for improvement, this article is horrible!

This article is far from good. The following problems immediately come to mind: 1- Why words like "allameh", "master" and so are used in this article? Is that to sell these guys? 2- Why is it claimed that Persian lit is "real all over the world"? I love Persian lit, but it is not true. 3- Some sections in the article, including "Pre-Islamic Iranian Literature", is a bunch of claims: it has been done or it has been collected or so. Evidences are missing. 4- "Contemporary Persian Literature" is very short: we know only one novelist?! 5- "Literary criticism" is a very vague cetegory. I moved "Golshiri" there, since he is a critic. 6- On Persian's influence on English literature, Nezami is missing. On the other hand, not every translation can be called an influence, I suppose. Mtdashti 15:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Jenab e Dashti,
The page has come a very long way to where it is now. It is still incomplete, obviously, and needs lots of work. The reason it looks so messy is that it was entirely reformatted by user Zora. To avoid an edit war, I agreed to use her format and try and fill up the page. Wherever there is text, I mostly wrote. So what I am saying is that taghseer e ooneh, na man. Your help of course in completing the page would be appreciated. Still, in answer to your queries:
  1. I think it is obvious that people like Rudaki need no "selling" to state their iconic status in Persian literature. Rudaki was a panegyrist master indeed and I'm sure you realize Rudaki is a giant of Persian poetry in history. The word "master" hence is very well deserved as far as Rudaki and amsalohom goes. As for Allameh Dehkhoda:
    1. "Allameh Dehkhoda" is a widely used title for Dehkhoda. That is why we have libraries and institutes with that exact name: [1][2]
    2. It is widely accepted and used in all newspapers and media: [3][4] [5]
    3. Even Tehran University uses the title: [6]
    4. The National committee for Persian Language Expansion (شوراي گسترش زبان ادبيات فارسي) uses the title in referring to him:[7]
    5. And as you know, the khedmat he did for Persian literature is by far deserving and monumental. Out of respect, all Iranians refer to him as Allameh Dehkhoda. We're not selling anything. The man is a true giant of Persian language and literature.[8]
  2. I cannot find where you are referring to there. I see no such quote in the article.
  3. That section is only 4 sentences long. I suggest you help us expand it. That section should be at least 4 paragraphs long. Same for the other sections you are mentioning.
  4. same as above.
  5. same as above.
  6. Many works have been translated. Not all have been influencing. I only mentioned the cream of the crop, and those I have come across. I personally know of no major influence Nezami had, in the league of Rumi and Khayam and Attar. If you think you can provide evidence, please go ahead and add it. che behtar.
These articles are never complete. That's why we need any help we can get.--Zereshk 06:00, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for you attention... I agree with what you said. I was not trying to point to a culprit for this article's flaws, as it is an open content encyclopedia and we are all as responsible. I enjoyed you style of combining Persian and English in your reply as well :) Again I'd like to mention a few of my concerns regarding this article:

1- I believe it is not appropriate for an article here to reflect the author's emotions. Some of these titles like "master", "with huge impact", "Allameh" and so are our (Iranians') feelings or regards for someone. Of course if I ever meet Dehkhoda I shall be polite and call him "Ostad", but in the article, I'm not sure if it is necessary. Moreover, it is not a question whether Rudaki, e.g., deserves a "master" or not, the question is then how it can be "verified", as is required by Wikipedia. Of course, what "verifiable" means can be debated to no end.

2- Persian translations for names of people or books or so is not necessary, I believe. First, because, it is an article in en.wikipedia and not in fa.wikipedia, and second because if you are not browsing with a Persian-enabled browser, as is the case with me, the Persian texts look horribly bad. It then gives no information even to those who read Persian. A good cross-referencing would be links to fa.wiki in related en.wiki pages.

3- Clearly this article is not complete and will never become so. But the point is to make it intelligible, so that you can sit and read it in one go. Now the article is like disconnected jots. It is not pleasant to read. So my plea also refers to the structure and presentation of this article. I will do what I can to improve it.

Thanks and Zat Ziad Mtdashti 12:27, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Dear friend, I read your comments. About the word Allameh, I agree with Zereshk. A reader in English will consider this word as a neutral name , like the guy's name. About emotions, look at the following from Shakespeare:

... his work became increasingly celebrated after his death and has been adulated by numerous prominent cultural figures through the centuries.[1] Shakespeare now has a reputation as the greatest writer in the English language, as well as one of the greatest in Western literature, and the world's pre-eminent dramatist ...

using words like. highly celebrated, prominent, one of the greatest, pre-eminent and so on are quite common in wikipedia. It is important to show the difference between Firdowsi and Rudaki and a minor poet. I recommend you to go and search for the word master in pages like Chinese literature and Japanese literature. About Persian translation, I think we should keep them. The problem with browser, is not a good reason for deleting these translations. Todays PC and Macs have all equipped with at least arabic fonts. There may be some problem in developing countries, but we should think of future as well. About the quality of the article, I should say that the article was nothing but a list of poets a few months ago when I first saw it. It took a long time to come to this situation. A lot of people put effort to it (above all Zereshk himself). --Mina Kalhor|Mina Kalhor15:32, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


Thanks for your attention. It's a shame that my comments are taken as an onslaught on people who have written this article. As the title implies it is a "plea" not a "complaint" or "war", however it is not meant to be a "complement" as well.

Regarding your answers: Of course I didn't mean that words like "master" or "celebrated" has to be purged from wiki's vocabulary, what I meant is simply translated to your argument as : they name Shakespeare as a celebrated dramatist, but call him "William Shakespeare" and not "master Shakespeare" or even worse "Allameh Shakespeare", in a hope that others don't know the meaning of Allameh. If Japanese people keep on using "master" as an epithet for their forgotten heroes, maybe we should reconsider using it in Persian pages, as it is perhaps an eastern trait, which is improperly used here. Now that you base your arguments on comparison with Chinese literature page, how do you feel if this pages is filled with all Chinese characters crawling on your monitor? You would say: I wanted to read a review on their damn literature and I have to see all these unfamiliar things." The same with an Italian reading Persian lit page. The fact that a Mac or PC could have Persian fonts enabled does not necessarily mean that they have it. I am not living in a yet-to-be-developed country, I can't afford buying MS windows for the sake of fun and I am using a Linux machine, which does not render beautiful Persian fonts. Any how I don't see what would be gained by adding Persian translations in en.wiki pages.


After all, I am quite aware that all these depend on people's tastes and this polemic can be indefinitely continued, practically with no results. Mtdashti 19:52, 17 March 2006 (UTC)


Jenab e Dashti,
Doroud bar shoma,
You are correct about the "disconnected jots". And Mina Kalhor was right. The article was a mere list. I put in a preliminary text. Zora deleted it under the pretext that it was self-praising and "nationalist". So she re-formatted the entire article in her own liking. Thus I was left with the job of patching the remnant pieces and seaming them into one comprehensive layout. I never finished the job. It is very time consuming. The article Persian literature in the West was also born from putting together the discarded pieces of text that Zora forceably flushed out of the main article during the re-format (for the same bahaaneh of being too self-praising).
At this point, I think we could omit the Allameh in Dehkhoda because the phrase only appears once in the article. But I would personally vote and prefer not to do so. Having titles in names is a routine occurence. For example all these people have the title "cardianl" integrated into their names, or all these people have the title "pope" in the names.
But then again, I implore you both to help out with this article. Pedaram dar oomad taa be eenjaa resoondamesh.
And once again, Mtdashti and Mina Kalhor|Mina Kalhor, I am sepaasgozaar to you both. Zendeh Basheed.--Zereshk 07:24, 18 March 2006 (UTC)


So yes, I understand that it's a tedious job, but isn't it because

basically most of us don't have the knowledge and resources to contribute to the content? I mean I can write a couple of words about modern Persian poetry, it started with whom and went on with boom and then reached doom, but it won't be anything worth... It boils down to the problem of knowledge, we need to study for these things. So one can easily borrow a book on poetry from a lib, read it and fill the gap, at least that would perfectly serve as a starter... people can also bring improvements perhaps in English and presentation. Finally fyi:

  • Nezami is known to the West with his 'seven beauties' (haft peykar),

as in for instance [9]

  • Pope (or cardinal) is different from Allameh or master in the sense

that there is an authority that officially grants people with these titles. That authority might be corrupted (im)partial Bolshevik or what ever, but it is there. Who decides who is master or allameh and who is not? but I decided to withdraw my propositions, there are more important things for now.

Thanks for your attention Mtdashti 18:46, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Now that I read it again, it sounds bitter and nagging. That's not what I wanted, please read it over with a grain of friendship :)

[edit] Haiduc's edits

While some of them were an improvement, some of them were pure gush (unencyclopedic) and some of them reflect his obsession with homosexuality in art and literature. Homosexuality is NOT the main theme of Persian literature. If no one else cleans out that stuff, I'll get to it later. Zora 17:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Be careful lest others point out your obsession with imposing Victorian prudery on your ancestors:
Regarding the tradition of Persian love poetry, Persian historian Ehsan Yarshater notes that "As a rule, the beloved is not a woman, but a young man. In the early centuries of Islam, the raids into Central Asia produced many young slaves. Slaves were also bought or received as gifts. They were made to serve as pages at court or in the households of the affluent, or as soldiers and body-guards. Young men, slaves or not, also, served wine at banquets and receptions, and the more gifted among them could play music and maintain a cultivated conversation. It was love toward young pages, soldiers, or novices in trades and professions which was the subject of lyrical introductions to panegyrics from the beginning of Persian poetry, and of the ghazal." (Yar-Shater, Ehsan. 1986. Persian Poetry in the Timurid and Safavid Periods, Cambridge History of Iran. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.973-974. 1986)
and
Janet Afary makes the case that the current regime in the Islamic Republic of Iran is stifling a tradition of homosexual culture that is more than a thousand years old. For example, she writes that “Classical Persian literature — like the poems of Attar (died 1220), Rumi (d. 1273), Sa’di (d. 1291), Hafez (d. 1389), Jami (d. 1492), and even those of the 20th century Iraj Mirza (d. 1926)—are replete with homoerotic allusions, as well as explicit references to beautiful young boys and to the practice of pederasty...
Some of the famous love relationships celebrated by classical poets were between kings and male slaves. The beloved could also be the slave of another more powerful person… Outside the royal court, homosexuality and homoerotic expressions were tolerated in numerous public places, from monasteries and seminaries to taverns, military camps, bathhouses and coffee houses. In the early Safavid era (1501-1723), male houses of prostitution (amard khaneh) were legally recognized and paid taxes.”
But under the rule of both the Pahlevi family monarchy and the Islamic Republic in Iran, Afary explained in an interview, professors of literature have been forced to teach that these extraordinarily beautiful gay love poems aren’t really gay at all and that their very explicit references to same-sex love are really heterosexual.
It is one thing to fix the clunky English in which many of these pages are written. It is quite another to fight off the host of editors trying to impose a colonial mentality on a culture that has never been colonized. Haiduc 18:04, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Haiduc, I'm not disputing that there's a long tradition of poetry praising lovely young boys -- though it might be argued that a great deal of it was Sufi poetry which used the intoxication of wine and boy-love as a metaphor for the soul's intoxication with God. But that is hardly the main thing about Persian literature. You have a monomania. A bee in your bonnet. It's your hammer, and everything else is a nail. It's not censorship to ask for balance. Zora 18:41, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

What do you make of the fact that the material I am quoting here comes from Iranian sources? The bee in my bonnet comes from having grown up in a totalitarian state and tasting what censorship means firsthand, as a child. Now I have no stomach for it. I do not mind if you work the material in some other way, but we are obviously facing a very serious problem here, which is neither of my making nor of yours. Haiduc 18:51, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

I could quote, from USAian sources, material that would make it sound as if all Americans were raving white supremacist loonies. The fact that you can give examples doesn't mean that those examples are typical. Zora 19:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

The Americans' problems are their own, and you are not far off the mark. But what does that have to do with the love of boys being a topos in much Persian poetry, and the modern attempt to cover that up. Few sources? Come on, why belabor the obvious? I could serve up a lot more. You'd think that a modern, free Persian would have the nerve to say, "Yes, of course our ancestors loved boys, and developed an ethic which raised that love to the level of spiritual attainment. Put that in you materialistic pipe, you prudish Westerners." But no, they all run around trying to be more Christian than the Christians, castrating their own art and spirituality to please . . . to please whom? Haiduc 20:22, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

You may be right Haiduc. Even in institutionalized islamic infested Iran today, those themes are still sported popularly. You should see the jokes people in Iran make about Qazvinis. Example: The caption on this picture reads: "Exhibition of local produce in Qazvin". Other examples: [10] [11]

But then again, that being said, I wouldnt use the word "obsession".--Zereshk 09:08, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Modern Persian Poetry

We certainly need a few paragraphs on Modern Persian Poetry and its different branches (Shamlou poetry, Sepid Poetry of Jalali, Nima Poetry and the new style developed by Simin Behbahani). We also need a short review of what A.H. Zarrinkoub (arguably father of modern persian literature) and Shahrokh Meskoob contributed to comparative persian literature and literary criticism. Does any one have expertise on these issues ? --Joe Dynue11:54, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


The quality of this section is poor, since, first, it has copyrighted material from Kianoush's intro to Persian poetry, which should go away. Second, what is this "sepid poetry" business? what is "according to Behbahani"? where she has said so? where is Forough Farrokhzad's seat? Who contends that A. H. Zarrinkoub is the "father of modern Persian literature"? this section seems very much disconnected and hypothetical to me. Mtdashti 09:17, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

Hey guy! Why do you use a confrontational tone ?!! Here is my reply:
  • Yes! The quality is poor. This is some thing that I've already mentioned it myself on Zereshk talk page. Instead of comlpaining, help to make it better.
  • Where ever I used some ones work, I cited it.
  • It seems that you are not familiar with modern poetry at all. Otherwise you would be familiar with white poetry.
  • About what Behbahani said about Jalali, I have read it in BBC a few weeks ago. I printed the interview. I should search in BBC webpage to find it again.
  • About Forough Farrokhzad! Please provide her a seat!! I did not know this is MY duty !! I just did not have enough time. There is also no seat for Akhavan e Sales!
  • I did not call Zarrinkoub as "father of modern Persian literature". !!! I have just mentioned this in the TALK PAGE !!!! I was in his funeral at Tehran University and Pars Hospital. There, it has been anounced that he recieved this title. I mentioned it here just to emphasize the importance of his works on Comparative literature and literary criticism. Zarrinkoub did much more to Persian literature than many other names in this page. Being famous and popular has nothing to do with the guy's significance. For example Moshiri, Sepehri, Farrokhzad etc are very popular and at the same time important figures. However people like Natel Khanlari, Zarrinkoub, Tafazzoli, Meskoob, Forouzanfar contributed much more to Persian literature. Yes, they are not popular out of academia. Please do not forget that literary criticism is the heart of any modern literature.

Finally, I think we need some people who ARE FAMILIAR with modern Persian literature for editing this section. I have sent messages to many, but recieved no reply. That's why I myself started the section. Please feel free to add and delete... --Joe Dynue11:34, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lots of new material -- and it looks like copyvio

I haven't gone through the diffs to find out who was putting up all the new material, but it reads like copyvio. Furthermore, it's just full of literary judgements that an encyclopedia should not be making. We can say "A says X about this work" but we can't say X, if it's a judgment on the quality of the work.

Someone has already spotted the source for some of the copyvio. Is the rest of it from the same work? Zora 19:24, 29 March 2006 (UTC)

I believe User:Joe Dynue made the additions. You may wanna direct your querry to him regarding the possibility of copyrights. Thanks.--Zereshk 01:41, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
There is no copivio. I MYSELF added all references. User:Amir85 kindly edited their format. About judgments, I agree with Zora. This is clearly a work in progress. I've already spent a LONG time on that. I knew that It needs more. That's why I invited Zereshk, Amir and a few others to come and help. The problem is that this part was missing for a long time just because no body was familiar with modern literature. I just tried to make a framework for it. Many people do not know that main issues in modern litrature are comparative literature and literary criticism. --Joe Dynue11:48, 30 March 2006 (UTC)
There is also another point here:

Contemporary persian literature is not equivalent to Modern Persian literature. It contains both modern and classical literature. --Joe Dynue11:53, 30 March 2006 (UTC)


[edit] Improvement

Right now the article is good but not great, it has problems whcih will ultimately kill the article at feature article nomination stage (some were recommended by User:HighwayCello):

  • The introduction could use minor tweaking, but it's still good.
  • The usage of word "we" in in the article.
  • Article's length, We have to summaries some sections and add more materials in those section that are seems depleted, specially in "Persian literature of the medieval" and "pre-modern periods and Pre-Islamic Iranian literature".
  • The article in general doesn't seem to follow a specific pattern therefore making it quite difficult to digest. We have to "remold" the article thoroughly.
  • The majority of article's refernces are online exteranl links rather than publication (a negative point).

I have to thank User:Joe Dynue and User:Mtdashti for spending alot of time expanding this challenging article. So far so good guys. I try my best to improve this great article. -- Amir85 20:49, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Here are a few review articles on Contemporary Persian literature. I have not used these academic sources in this article, as I was not aware of their existence. They might be very useful.

and the following book:

  • An Anthology of Modern Persian Poetry By Ahmad Karimi-Hakkak.

Please feel free to add or delete or rewrite my edits. Thanks.--Joe Dynue09:16, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

It would be also great to have a short section on the influence of Persian literature on Turkish literature. Here is a review: Influence of Iranian literature on Turkish literature -- Joe Dynue09:22, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Here is another source that we can also use: [12] --Zereshk 07:46, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia heading style

Wikipedia doesn't cap all the words in headings and titles. Thus this article is Persian literature, not Persian Literature. Various editors have been creating section titles in all caps. Please, keep this article in the standard style. Zora 01:34, 6 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Missing ...

Maybe I am mistaken, but The Book of One Thousand and One Nights is not included in the text. Could someone please integrate it into this article? Thx Tājik 10:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

indeed.--Zereshk 01:35, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
I added a section for that. Sangak 19:55, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

howcome there is not one reference to homoeroticism and pederastic tradition in a Persian Literature article? i would very much hope to see a more objective and scientific approach, and less of a 'cover-up', in the Wikipedia articles.

[edit] Persian Phrases section - misprints and mistranslations

  • Thousands of friends are far too few, an enemy is too much. *

Hezaaraan dust kam and, Iek doshman ziaad ast.

  • The wise enemy is better than the ignorant friend. *

Doshman daanaa behtar az dust e naadaan ast.

  • The wise enemy rises you, the ignorant friend falls you. *

Doshman e daanaaa bolandat mikonad. Bar zaminat mizanad naadaan e dust.

"Iek doshman" - in the non-serif font of the quote, the capital "I" looks like a lower case "ell", i.e. "lek". it would look clearer as "yek" (or "jek" in IPA-style).

"The wise enemy rises you" should be "raises you (up)" "the ignorant friend falls you" should be "the ignorant friend casts you down" or maybe "strikes you down". The uncorrected English is using intransitive verbs where the Farsi requires transitive verbs. Jakob37 15:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Copy editing: Please Help

Contemporary Persian literature section is in progress. Please help if you have expertise in this field. Thanks a lot. --Joe Dynue12:05, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I removed the paragraphs containing "author argues" and "author contends". These do not suit an encyclopedia, even if they have not been copy-pasted originally. I hope it also counts as a contribution ;-) Mtdashti 15:07, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Any helps are very welcome. It's a very time consuming job. Take care. --Joe Dynue15:17, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I've only done a partial, rough once-over of the contemporary literature section. Here's what I've done so far:

  • I've hidden a couple of sections in the Sadeq Hedayat section because I feel they are excessive and slightly off-topic, i.e. they talk about Goethe, Auerbach, and Said's thoughts on universal literature.
  • I've also put in a question about the source of some quotations. It wasn't clear where the quoted material came from.
  • While I really don't want to offend anyone, I changed the style of some of the dates so that the Western year is shown before the AH year. I realize that this topic is about an Islamic country, I think that AH dates will confuse the English-speaking readers of this English-language article.--RedPen 15:09, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
That's fine. Sangak 15:40, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Persian versification

"So strong is the Persian aptitude for versifying everyday expressions that one can encounter poetry in almost every classical work"-- but there is no description on the page of how verse in Persian works. What is its meter? what are its forms?--Gheuf 17:04, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

ghazal, ghaseedeh, and the other traditional examples of course.--Zereshk 18:53, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/e/r/Talk%7EPersian_literature_6910.html"