نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی
1 دانش آموخته ی دکتری زبان و ادبیات عرب، دانشگاه شهید بهشتی، مدرس دانشگاه فرهنگیان (پردیس شهید مفتح)
2 استادیار گروه زبان و ادبیات، دانشگاه فرهنگیان تهران، ایران
عنوان مقاله [English]
Introduction: Defamiliarization involves infinite techniques that distinguish literary language from colloquial and ordinary language. Sometimes these tricks and arrangements lose their ability to induce concepts due to their frequent and repetitive application, and the artist's job is to activate the art of disabled structures through new systematization and personal rhetoric. One of these works of art is image, which, rhetorically formed, distinguishes literary language from ordinary and everyday language. Image is one of the most widely used terms in literary criticism, it has long been used in rhetoric, and it is one of the most important topics in contemporary literary criticism. The Arabic poetry has many capacities in this field, and poets have always used this capacity to enrich their poetry. But the quality of the image differs from classical to modern poetry. The classical poet depicted exactly the same objects in his poetry and did not try to decipher these images, while the contemporary poet is able to break away from the traditions of depicting the ancient Arabic poetry and sometimes create surprising similes using surrealist techniques. The surrealists who sought it were taught by Burton. He went to the depths of the human mind that he was unaware of. Ezedin Ismail is one of the famous Egyptian critics who has examined the image of new poetry in the form of issues and artistic aspects.
Methodology: Accordingly, the present study seeks to extract his views in this field by a descriptive-analytical method and a critical approach. The questions to answer regard Ezedin's view of poetic images as compared to the image of arts such as painting, music and cinema. The questions are ‘what are the commonalities and differences of poetic and ordinary images?’ and ‘what are the functional differences between the artistic images in ancient poetry and contemporary poetry?’
Results and Discussion: The title "Theory and adaptation" can be applied to his method of criticism in this field. In the first part, he presents his opinion and then applies the corresponding theories to sample works. His studies in this field are remarkable. Inspired by surrealist views in literary criticism, he has expressed the characteristics of the poetic image and compared it with the image of other arts. He has also examined the difference between the functions of images in classical and modern poetry.
The main purpose of writing the present research is to introduce this great critic to the scientific community and researchers of literature. The critical views in this respect can provide favorable conditions for comparative critical research. Another importance of this research relates to new literary theories in the field of poetic imagery and critical views of Ezedin. Considering the emergence of different schools and their treatment of various arts such as painting, cinema and sculpture, and the sharing of these arts with poetry in the image, contemporary critics believe that it is important to study the image.
Conclusion: The results of this research show that a poetic image is distinguished from other artistic images in terms of spatio-temporal, sensory and expressive characteristics. Also, new poetic images differ from classical poetic images. The psychological approach is the main approach of literary criticism in all the works and critical subjects of Ezedin. It seems that his attitude towards the poetic image is a combination of psychological and aesthetic approaches, which and can be called "theory and adaptation". One of the most important issues that Ezedin Ismail stated under the influence of surrealist ideas about poetic imagery is that the poetic imagery simultaneously has a spatial-temporal structure that does not fit into the logic of time and natural space; it has distinctions from other art images. In his view, the images in classical poetry and modern poetry are different. The image in classical poetry shows the object directly and its distinctive feature is clarity and explicitness, but, in the image of new poetry, the poet gives time and place a special mental structure that is compatible with the emotional state of the poet and is the result of his dreams, desires and thoughts. Also, in his opinion, classical poetry as much as modern poetry has not been able to create a single spatial and temporal coherence between distant images, and new poetic images, based on classical poetry, are based on a kind of heterogeneity, contradiction, contradiction and fantasy. The contemporary poet does not regulate the experience of others nor his consciousness and the content of his intellect and memory, but depicts inner revolutions and uncontrollable emotions. The results of such situations are strange similes and metaphors and unknown images, the components of which cannot be found in the form of similes and metaphors.