A contract with fifty gilded pages on the cover[1]
Jalal Tehrani
When Radi writes "Hamlet with Seasonal Salad" he makes us realize that he is capable of writing plays such as "Hamlet with Seasonal Salad"; But when he doesn't do it, we know he doesn't want to. But we can't help but think that this method could have been perfected in his later works and one day become a masterpiece, a proof of the dignity and worth of what we already know of the master. And in another way, to make possible that what the simultaneous experience of the concept, the theme, the language, and the point of view of the author of this time is supposed to be depended more on Radi, who just needs to also add a little "Hamlet with seasonal salad" to all that has been said and all that he is. Otherwise, right now, as others say already, we have Shakespeare, and as we always say, we have Hafez, we have Nima, we also say we have Radi. However, this last one is sometimes associated with Hamlet like hesitation, which always ends up with, how many Radi do we have? And this question always silence us.
On the other side, we see a playwright of the same generation as the master(Radi) who has graduated from a university and has spent thirty years of his sweet life abroad, who brings to us a copy of what exists abroad (don't look for who it is, he is not famous at all) and with his small intellectual capital translates Arthur Rimbaud’s poems, is strangely also a poet. And again we got worried, and we start criticizing our Radi. Which is not an easy task. Because the master can only be compared with himself, unless he himself has chosen someone to compare with. And I use this "Hamlet with seasonal salad" as an example, not that I consider it as the best work of Radi; which is not. Rather because I don't see any traces of a genius, like Chekhov, in it. And because I can't forget that what Chekhov gave to his era is what we want from the master today, and he doesn't give it. Although he writes like Chekhov well and sometimes even more Radi like than Chekhov.
Radi also writes like Ibsen well. Especially if we don't compare the accidental ending of his works with Ibsen's calculated puzzle. Because although in the meaning of the end of Radi's works, is the most realistic and intelligent result possible for the conditions he describes, but often, it is not the real result of their dialectical process. "Hamlet with Seasonal Salad" is the story of "The Nose" which was written in 1977. And the Nose is a confused intellectual who is surrounded by his relatives and turns out to be such a good, cute and well-behaved boy that at the end, one wonders why he is the victim.
The Nose, who is supposed to become the son-in-law of the family, simply limits his studies to newspaper reading, accepts a ridiculous job offer, goes on a seven-year honeymoon. He becomes a toy, they play with him and hang him after their stupid fights and that's it.
For now, it is better for us not to compare this Hamlet with Shakespeare's Hamlet. Because we would prefer that this naming do not be due at all to the even humorous plot of Shakespeare's Hamlet in this season, and that it was just an irrelevant name, which is very good; And we are not going to interfere in the opinions of the author. But since it is useful for us, I have to point out that according to Radi, intellectuals have two types of manners, Hamlet like and Don Quixote like. "Don Quixote, who needs epic action because he doesn't have the tools to understand this world, goes astray. And now the Hamlet like. These people who have thoughts are doomed to failure due to traditional taboos and many legal prohibitions that have tied their hands and feet like a spider and blinded their internal, mental conflict. And it is only a rare concentration of the balanced potion of these two types that has delivered to the world lovers of good deeds, great artists and national leaders”. But The Master has missed the point that one of the reasons for Hamlet's hesitation is that he knows very well that no one is going to accept the responsibility for his actions except himself. Therefore, he before passing on to action, he has to verify if it is what is correct to do. And now, if this doubt reaches a conclusion, let me use the master’s permission, that Hamlet's doubt is more like a disciple than psychosis. "And the disciple is a sinus wound that slowly eats the flesh and destroys the face. With all this, “disciple” suits some people. And Hamlet is one of these disciple intellectuals, and it is a mistake to think of him as a confused person who doesn't do anything. When he does, especially when he is supposed to be the center of a play. And that's why we start worrying about his life at the end of the show. Because Shakespeare knows that even the thoughtlessness of his central character is not going to cast a shadow over his entire play. Rather, his identification with the characters of his plays is of a different kind than we know. And these considerations are also in the works of others. Even Colonel Strindberg, who in the conflict with his wife Laura, we see as very driven, unstable and humiliated, stays in the play till the end. And what a good thing. And the fact that we don’t see the slightest amount of hope for the nose or anyone else to lead to a change (which happened to be happening at the time of the preparation of this play and as I said it is not related to us and the author is free to write as he sees and vice versa) to remain. There is no worrying sign for the destiny of the nose during the whole play. And let's remember Strindberg's first dialogues about the illegitimate child of that soldier.
But here, apparently, the author's hatred is the sort of hatred that has harmed his work. It seems that Radi, drowning in emotions, has forgotten that "one hundred times more than the wise hates the ignorant, the ignorant fears the wise" and instead of seeing him as a spectator and a powerful observer of the people of the story and aware of events, we see him as stuck in a pit and involved with personal emotions and emotionless people of the story. And when he has to point out the dramatic weaknesses of his characters and take playwriting advantage of them, he is satisfied with making fun of their stomachs, chests and mustaches. And as a result, in spite of all the ignorance and incompetence of that family, which he describes masterfully, he also leaves aside their invincibility, which is also not related to us, this characteristic empties the whole work from the basic conflict which this one does concern us, and we should go further with this subject. But I have to say some other irrelevant thing, that when we are supposed to deal with a period of society's history in a symbolic way, and then choose from many shortcuts that we have in the real world only two confusing ones, which we probably don't like. The rest would be some amateurs complementing, obviously the result of our work will be "Hamlet with seasonal salad". Which in itself is not a bad work, since Radi knows what he does. But let me use this protest; When the two vectors of such a work, one is the absolute ruler and the other is the absolute condemn, to the point that he is hanged without it serving the play, there is no room left for drama. So, we have to make funny caricatures of people to create suspense and entertain the audience for one or two hours by making fun of them, and in the end, we ourselves would feel relieved, which is what happens.
On the other hand, we are not going to compare this work with the rules of classical and realistic works, as if to fall in the black hole of the protagonist, antagonist, and other terms. But we should also be aware that in the works of the 20th century, where the experience in the theater is presented in the modern sense, the main dramatic excuse of an author is his cunning, and this one, with the intelligence that we know Radi has, if is only used in a superficial way, it will reduce the play’s theatrical value. Let's use an example to make it more clear:
Let’s begin; The famous General Scott, who was supposed to be the first explorer of the pole, did not succeed for some reasons. That is, when he reached the pole, others before him had planted their flags. And he, who was disappointed, froze on the way back. Of course, with all his companions. Well, this is a tragedy, which is Shakespeare had written it, he would have explained and described the reason for the freezing to be the presence of a Hamartia in the general and the betrayal of one of his companions. But how Brecht would have written it? He would probably use social class differences as a criterion. That is, General Scott, who is an aristocrat, thinks it is not good for him to be seen by common people on a sled, that is pulled by dogs. Therefore, instead of a dog, he probably had bought a few horses or a small pony which costs too much and therefore not enough money was left to buy other travel necessities and that’s why he froze on the way due to the lack of provisions and equipment. And Beckett probably would have started the tragedy from the point where the general and his companions are stuck in an ice shelf and shout, but there is no response except the echo of their own voices. And if Dürrenmatt had written this tragedy, maybe we would have seen the general and his companions buying travel supplies in a cold storage where they want to buy meat, and suddenly the cold storage closes due to a stupid mistake and everyone freezes. With the difference that this time people have passed by them in a close distance. And it would be much better if we heard from Radi himself how he would write it. But since we said what would others write, instead of them, let's guess what the master would write as well.
First of all, Rudy's general is probably a bald man with his ribs showing and a hanging belly, and a big nose on his face that hides the other parts of his face. He wakes up one morning, drinks his tea and leaves the house with one of his companions who have elephant ears and walks towards one of the poles... and on the way they talk about a society that we understand is facing a value crisis and dealing with all kinds of paradoxes does not manage well In the next scene, we see the general walking with his companion and one or two other companions, one of whom has a slightly shorter right leg and the second one has a slightly longer left leg, and they say things that we find out about the unkindness and bullying of their world. And in the second scene of the third act, General Scott and his companions are walking in the pole, and there are busy debating which makes us understand, "the society is not doing well" and in the last scene, when they have said all they had to say, they fall down and die. They may die first and then fall. However, we find out that it was General Scott, and he freezes.
But let's say, and this time, with The Master’s words in a play, the curve of action can be a broken line that divides the main crisis into small crises with low intensities, and as a result, psychological exchanges are broken, the intensity of the show is low, and character development is slow, and the theme never takes the form of a central conflict, so that it expands and peaks in a way that ultimately causes the release of emotions and psychological comfort. As it is in Chekhov's works. So it can be said that The Master will never use The General's tragedy unless he wants to use its title in an irrelevant way. As he did with Hamlet!
But on the other hand, we see that instead, Radi lets his imagination run free. And with what elegance. Have his "staircase" play in mind. But Radi's storytelling is completely different from Chekhov's storytelling. Chekhov's people live their own lives and are not aware that Chekhov sees them. While Radi’s people are constantly consulted and guided by the author. So much so that sometimes one of them gets mad and pulls away, and the author takes over his role for a few minutes and makes him understand that this is what talking means, and this is the place for this sort of action, not what you thought of. And as a result, although people are well separated in terms of age, literacy, and gender, they always follow Radi’s line of thought. And this is not bad on its own, and with Radi's poetic language, profound knowledge and emotions unique emotions we get to a humorous and lovely literary work. As long as we consider Radi as a poet, there is no one who does not appreciate his universe of red roses and love. But it is The Master's poetry that sometimes does not serve his plays. For example, an excellency, whose dialogues are like "oh you little troublemaker" and "You were so mischievous" and "You are such a cutesy golden-tongued" etc. "... When it comes to haunting he says "when his blood, that flowing liquid strikes the wall, oh, it has a charm that polishes the heart." And this is one of those cases where His Excellency has gotten angry and does not speak and has raised a corner of his mouth and Radi speaks for him. And how beautiful he does.
Radi has reached more than what he wanted in the field of language. He is now the masters of a language that is "explosive, resilient, that has bitterness, liveliness and impact, and it is a rough, intense language, whose strong texture is not made in a creative way from the "magical" dictionary, but from what he has found in the street." Radi says that he has read the dialogues of his plays line by line for hours, played them attentively, sitting, standing, walking, whispering, counting, with anger, the right amount, imploringly... and then He has removed a conjunction or moved an adverb back and forth. That passionate play with words is worthy of appreciation and praise. And such an obsession where the aesthetic aspect is more important than the "construction network" and brings difficulties for the people performing has been mentioned and will be mentioned. For the time being, it is more important to ask and go on, that the structure of the language which on its own can include the whole structure of a poem, what part of the structure of the play does it bear? How much do we know about the structure of Chekhov's language? How much do we know about the quality of Shakespeare's poems? It is enough to gather the work of the best translators of "Hamlet" and compare their interpretations to find the contribution of language in the lasting of a play for the next decades. Which I did not say is not enough. And I said the play. But Radi emphasizes that for him, language is "a pen of space, a design, a character, and what plays a role in a creative process." And he says, "Every time I have reached this distilled language, in fact I have reached a mathematical visualization of space, design, character, and in one word, have mastered that moving flow of communication, which you call the "network of construction"" and now following what we have said and heard of the style and course of Radi I will mention some exemples in the text; Until the arrival of "Your Excellency", Radi repels the emotional aspect of the writing with such mastery and skill that one can boldly count those fifty pages as fifty golden pages in his collection of works. But with "excellency" enterance, as if the emotional load of the writing has suddenly overflowed, its effects contamines characters of the play from time to time. To the extent that sometimes that poor "excellence" himself has to make a fool of himself. "We graze and graze (stroking his belly) you see: we are making progress. It means we are expanding in the meaning ". And somewhere he describes his mole like this, "For example, this hazel mole of mine! What do we know, uncle? No! Imagine, suddenly it did not hesitate and said: your excellency! Was there no other place for a pure and huge piece of meat, for it to grow in the middle of your head? It is not clear if it would be wrong if the nose had said that in the form of this type of neural network. And a little later, the work of irregular secretions leads to the point where "Pari bolande" breaks the fourth wall as soon as he enters ignoring The Master's "construction network" and in a sort of announcement introduces himself, similar to a two-three-page monologue and also talks about the situation of his society, and he brings up the need to deal with Amir Arslan in the play, and he tells the story of his grandmother, and of course, his grandfather, and he also talks about the fact that they are giving away the country, and he also says where he comes from and why he has come there and what he wants to do, and then he asks for permission from the audience and returns to the corner of the fourth wall with the sentence you found yourself an audience". Of course, “Pari bolande” here makes the work easier for The Master. And in another place, "excellency", which in this show expression of inappropriate emotions runs wild, inevitably conveys the author's economic manifesto. And of course, economic, moral, social, etc. For this reason and not because of citation, which is not necessary, to say the last words and so that this text choses more of The Master style, I will share a part, and so that the tasks are not confused, the" Excellency "says these phrases:
Yes, yes. And so, I let the time pass on and smoke, and check things out of the window of my office and keep an eye on everything, I see only a row of clean and well-shaved heads, lined up till infinity. (While walking) Yes, dear friends! Let me summarize: this is how the flag of justice and fairness is flying over our huge fake assembly and with the support of your pretended contribution, Mr. Dr. Mouse, democratic economy or economic democracy - it doesn't matter - at all levels, from technical and exclusive to moral and social and so on and so on, it all is achieving an outburst. And again, this is how all those I rule, from the sheep’s to wolves, coexist in a harmonic way.
Dr. Mouse: And nobody complains either, uncle.
If The Master does not find out what to do with these flock of sheep’s, I shall do so. And if we skip all these things, we will reach the same unplanned end. That is, the two last dialogues of the play, in the description of the scene suddenly a rope hangs over the head of the nose and that's it. It is enough to assume that if at least the possibility of this sacrifice was gradually planned from the beginning and would add up as play continues, the suspense and authority of this work would have reached another level. And to finish with one word, the network of making this work, despite the beauty of its language, and in my opinion, because of the beauty of its language does not function.
Akbar Radi is a writer who armed himself with the idioms of the times during the forties and fifties and has his own unique style. And on year 1357 of solar calendar (1978) with the publication of “hamlet with seasonal salad” had promised such freshness and dynamism in playwriting which has not yet happened, and it has reached the point where twenty years later we had to face Aiz Qalamdoni at an even lower writing level than "degradation". And of course "degradation" is almost on the same level of Radi’s other works.
THE END.
[1] Sahne magazine, number 3