Talk:Reza Abbasi

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale. [FAQ] Please rate the article and, if you wish, leave comments here regarding your assessment or the strengths and weaknesses of the article.

This was pulled from the article for lack of relevance: "Reza is also a name for mentally challange people. But, of course, being called a Reza is an insult." Haiduc 19:42, 16 January 2006 (UTC)

Personal opinions don't belong here and yours should be removed. Taliesin1 02:04, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

"Many of his surviving works depict handsome youths, often in the role of saqi, or "wine pourer." Frequently the youth are the focus of the admiring gaze of an older man - a manifestation of the Persian tradition of appreciating youthful male beauty - an esthetic sensibility that was raised to the level of spiritual ecstasy in the Sufi teachings of the time."

No sources

And no proof that he was this "pederast"

Thanks for pointing out the lack of references. They have been provided. Let me know if you have any other objections. Haiduc 04:29, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Yes I do. You write "appreciating youthful male beauty" - how do you connect this to "pederasty"? The link and category should be removed. Taliesin1 04:49, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

The chaste (and sometimes not so chaste) pederastic tradition in the Middle East is something discussed by many historians, not just the two mentioned here. It is also part of a long discourse in Islamic thought. I am surprised you are unfamiliar with the material. See, among others,

• Abu 'Abdur-Rahman as-Sulami. Early Sufi Women, Dhikr an-niswa al-muta'abbidat as-sufiyyat. Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999, pp. 78-79
• Homosexuality and Civilization, by Louis Crompton; Belknap, Harvard, 2003. ISBN 067401197X
• Philip F. Kennedy. The Wine Song in Classical Arabic Poetry: Abu Nuwas and the Literary Tradition. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997. ISBN 0198263929
• Khaled El-Rouayheb. The Love of Boys in Arabic Poetry of the Early Ottoman Period, 1500 - 1800. Middle Eastern Literatures; January 2005, vol.8, no.1.
• Khaled El-Rouayheb. Before Homosexuality in the Arab-Islamic World, 1500 - 1800. Chicago; January 2005. ISBN 0226729885
• Lacey, E.A. (Trans.) The Delight of Hearts: Or, What You Will Not Find in Any Book. Gay Sunshine Press, 1988.
• Emilio Garcia Gomez. (Ed.) In Praise of Boys: Moorish Poems from Al-Andalus Translated from the Spanish by Erskine Lane. Gay Sunshine Press, 1975.
• Ritter, Hellmut. Das Meer der Seele, 1955 (English translation The Ocean of the Soul, 2003). (Chapters 24, 25 ,26).
• Stephen O. Murray and Will Roscoe, et al. Islamic Homosexualities: Culture, History, and Literature. New York: New York University Press, 1997. ISBN 0814774687
• Peter Lambourn Wilson. Contemplation of the Unbearded - The Rubaiyyat of Awhadoddin Kermani. Paidika, Vol.3, No.4 (1995).
• Yoginder Sikand. A Martyr for Love - Hazrat Sayed Sarmad, a Sufi gay mystic. Perversions, Vol.1, No.4. Spring 1995.
• Maarten Schild. The Irresistible Beauty of Boys - Middle Eastern attitudes about boy-love. Paidika, Vol.1, No.3.
• Norman Roth. "The Care and Feeding of Gazelles" - medieval Hebrew and Arabic Love Poetry. Poetics of Love in the Middle Ages, 1989.
• Roth, Norman. Fawn of My Delights - boy-love in Hebrew and Arabic Verse. Sex in the Middle Ages. 1991.
• Norman Roth. Boy-love in Medieval Arabic Verse. Paidika, Vol.3, No.3, 1994.
• Casey R. Williamson. Where did that boy go? - the missing boy-beloved in post-colonial Persian literature.
• J. Wright & Everett Rowson. Homoeroticism in Classical Arabic Literature. 1998.
• 'Homosexuality' & other articles in the Encyclopædia Iranica

The existence of pederastic practices in particular in Reza's time, in Isfahan, have been documented also by western observers. Thomas Herbert, the twenty one year old secretary to the English ambassador to Persia, later reported that at Abbas' court (some time between 1627 and 1629) he saw, "Ganymede boys in vests of gold, rich bespangled turbans, and choice sandals, their curled hair dangling about their shoulders, with rolling eyes and vermilion cheeks." This was also a time when male houses of prostitution amrad khaneh, "houses of the beardless," were legally recognized and paid taxes. Regarding this trade, John Chardin, traveling through Persia at the time, reported that he had found "numerous houses of male prostitution, but none offering females." John Fryer, who traveled to Persia in the late seventeenth century, was of the opinion that "The Persians, when they let go their modesty.. covet boys as much as women." The notoriety of the Persians for boyish pleasures was such that in the late nineteenth century Richard Francis Burton referred to Central Asian pederasty as "the Persian vice." Haiduc 04:59, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

Excuse me but we are talking about Abbasi here and "appreciating youthful male beauty" - you want to link that to homoeroticism, is one thing. But "pederasty" this is not. Two very different things - one is about art, other is about a perversion. Also, where is written that Abbasi was this "pederast"? Taliesin1 05:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

His involvement is with the art. His personal feelings are officially unknown, but are not important. Your own opinion about pederasty being a perversion makes perverts out of most of the major Persian poets, and many of the Arabs. Hafiz, Jami, Khayyam, Nuwas. Come on. And you neglect the fact that for many the pederasty was held to be of a chaste nature. Not mere enjoyment - passion, desire, ecstasy. But I guess all the Sufis were perverts too. Haiduc 15:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

I must disagree. Look at Michaelangelo - no mention of "pederasty" or category of "pederast". You say yourself we know nothing of what he was. And you write "appreciating youthful male beauty" - that is not "pederasty". It is "homoeroticism". No evidence that any Persian artist (or for many European artist like Michaelangelo) was ever a "pederast". "homoerotic" art is common theme and you can link "appreciating youthful male beauty" to that, and remove the category. There is no proof. You see my point? Taliesin1 00:05, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

And as for Sufi, I say again that for "pederasty" there is no proof - but there is "homoerotic" Sufi poetry, I agree. In Sufi spiritual ways there is many times no distinction between genders since "spirit" is not linked to gender, so this is not unusual. If you read about some gnostic groups they also had similar concept and some even promoted same-sex love as more spiritual. But this usually has nothing to do with "pederasty". I cannot agree with that. Taliesin1 00:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

Michelangelo is a bad example, it appears he liked older youths, not beardless ones. Look instead at Leonardo da Vinci, he is a better example, more in keeping with Classical and Eastern traditions. As for the pederasty, it is not Reza's tastes that matter, but the fact that his art is reflective of the pederastic ethos discussed by the Persians then and the historians now. Yes, this is homoerotic, but it is a specific kind of homoerotism, it is pederastic, not because I say so but because all the scholars say so. As for the Sufi practice of gazing upon beardless boys, I must request that you read the studies done and the poems written. Here is a brief synopsis: "In Islamic Persia, where, as Louis Crompton claims, "boy love flourished spectacularly," art and literature also made frequent use of the pederastic topos, often referred to as "Baccheh bazi," (the boy game). Omar Khayyám's (d. 1123) quatrains, Attar (d. 1220), Rumi (d. 1273), Sa'adi (d. 1291) in his Rose Garden, Hafez Shirazi (d. 1389) in his ghazals, Jami (d. 1492), and even Iraj Mirza (d. 1926) wrote works "replete with homoerotic allusions, as well as explicit references to beautiful young boys and to the practice of pederasty," as Janet Afary explains in her Foucault and the Iranian Revolution: Gender and the Seductions of Islam." Haiduc 02:00, 3 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] El-Rouayheb

I've removed the reference to the above writer unless he is saying something specifically about Abbasi and/or his art. SouthernComfort 22:25, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Persian pederasty and Reza Abbasi

Do I have to point out that your "defense" of Reza is off the mark, and just another straw man argument? No one, certainly not I, ever implied that Reza was a pederast (his art argues for that, but that is not for me to declare). It is his art that is pederastic. Why are we even debating this, as if Persian pederasty was some kind of uncertain thing? It is not. It has been discussed in Europe as well as in Persia for the past 2500 years. Why the coverup that this art is not indicative of desire and erotic feelings? All these sheikhs ogling those teenage boys - who'll believe that they were passionless? Not even an eunuch. Give it up - we are not dishonoring anyone here, these are all chaste images. You know, there is a pattern I have detected here in my work to "call a spade a spade". First I open the discussion with a modest mention that such and such is of a pederastic nature. Then editors such as you jump on me with both feet claiming lack of sufficient proof. That forces me to contribute more and more material. Then they concur that it is indeed the case, but they complain that now there is too much material and it is out of proportion to the rest of the article. Where do you want to go with this? Haiduc 23:20, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

I've already stated the obvious - that the sources you have provided do not say anything about the man being a "pederast" and no other sources (and I've checked) say anything either. This is not about defending the man or whatever - it's about getting down to what the sources actually say about him, and they don't say anything about pederasty or even homosexuality. But despite this you consistently want to add the "pederasty" category and the second source which says absolutely nothing about Abbasi or his art for that matter. Why can you not leave the issue of the man's sexuality ambiguous, since obviously not a whole lot is known about it? Be reasonable. SouthernComfort 00:24, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Isn't the whole irony here that we each think we are being reasonable and the other not? Let me explain where I am coming from. I am building up an academic resource for the study of same sex-sexuality in general and age-structured sexuality in particular. Thus my my criterion is "Is this article something that a person studying age-structured sexuality is going to want to see?" Because if it is, it should appear in the category pages related to "Pederasty" so that they can serve as a reference for all the materials in the encyclopaedia related to the topic. Reza's work is an example of the best Persian work at a time when pederasty flourished, both at the court and among the populace - by all accounts - and its representation in art is not of my own making, as I am sure you are aware. Thus his art belongs in that category group, even assuming that he as a person does not. And really, how can you keep on dragging out this tired point about his personal proclivities when I have already pointed out that it is a straw man argument and not of the essence? Haiduc 00:41, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I think it is very ironic as well, but this is WP after all. I understand your viewpoint concerning his art, that it is potentially indicative of pederasty - this is, of course, assuming not a single thing about his own sexuality. For all we know he was simply following the Safavid mores. So thank you for clarifying your position and I have a better understanding of what you are trying to accomplish here. I would prefer, however, if we could create a new category for Pederastic art rather than just include this article in the more general Pederasty. What are your thoughts? SouthernComfort 00:57, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Your point is well taken, and I would have no objection to your classifying the article in that fashion. Haiduc 01:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Done. SouthernComfort 01:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

BTW, from a cursory examination, it seems that the pederasty category could use a breakdown into two or three more subcategories, i.e. Pederastic poetry, for instance. SouthernComfort 00:58, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Idem. I have been mulling it over and have simply not gotten around to it. Haiduc 01:05, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

I have started an additional cat for "poetry" and updated several articles accordingly. Hope that is fine, but feel free to revert those edits which were incorrect. SouthernComfort 01:29, 17 March 2006 (UTC)