What do you think?
Rate this book
Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books
Every Thursday morning for two years in the Islamic Republic of Iran, a bold and inspired teacher named Azar Nafisi secretly gathered seven of her most committed female students to read forbidden Western classics. As Islamic morality squads staged arbitrary raids in Tehran, fundamentalists seized hold of the universities, and a blind censor stifled artistic expression, the girls in Azar Nafisi's living room risked removing their veils and immersed themselves in the worlds of Jane Austen, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Henry James, and Vladimir Nabokov. In this extraordinary memoir, their stories become intertwined with the ones they are reading. Reading Lolita in Tehran is a remarkable exploration of resilience in the face of tyranny and a celebration of the liberating power of literature.
356 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2003
About the author
Azar Nafisi
17 books2,559 followersAzar Nafisi, Ph.D. (Persian: آذر نفیسی) (born December 1955) is an Iranian professor and writer who currently resides in the United States.
Nafisi's bestselling book Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books has gained a great deal of public attention and been translated into 32 languages.
Nafisi's bestselling book Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books has gained a great deal of public attention and been translated into 32 languages.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 9,105 reviews
January 13, 2018
This book failed for me on a number of levels. The premise of it sounded interesting to me--a glimpse at the lives of women and academics under the totalitarian regime in Iran, arranged around a series of bookclub meetings and analyses of various famous books. But for such a promising concept, and for a book which deals with so many serious and complex topics, it's facile and cliched. Almost alarmingly so, in fact.
The tone was the biggest failing for me. It's smug and self-important. For me, it was as if the author was making the same mistake as the Iranian ayatollahs: just as they confuse personal thoughts for political intent, so Nafisi seems to confuse the personal, therapeutic action of a private social event with something that automatically has major external political significance. Perhaps the story of these meetings--which were, undoubtedly, risky for all involved--would have had more impact if she had dug deeper into their meaning, their context, instead of settling for a relatively shallow assessment. Nafisi's analysis of the works of Nabokov, Austen, etc, was similarly shallow--it felt at times as if I were reading a poor collection of Cliff Notes. Especially in the case of Austen--how novel to point out that there is a satirical and sarcastic element to her work.
On a more technical level, the structure of the work is confusing and disjointed. Many of the people who feature are indistinguishable from one another, and some of them--Nafisi's husband, her children, her parents--are conspicuous by how little they are mentioned. The style is lyrical, but empty and frustrating.
Overall, enough to interest me enough to seek out other books on a similar topic, but not enough to make me return to it.
The tone was the biggest failing for me. It's smug and self-important. For me, it was as if the author was making the same mistake as the Iranian ayatollahs: just as they confuse personal thoughts for political intent, so Nafisi seems to confuse the personal, therapeutic action of a private social event with something that automatically has major external political significance. Perhaps the story of these meetings--which were, undoubtedly, risky for all involved--would have had more impact if she had dug deeper into their meaning, their context, instead of settling for a relatively shallow assessment. Nafisi's analysis of the works of Nabokov, Austen, etc, was similarly shallow--it felt at times as if I were reading a poor collection of Cliff Notes. Especially in the case of Austen--how novel to point out that there is a satirical and sarcastic element to her work.
On a more technical level, the structure of the work is confusing and disjointed. Many of the people who feature are indistinguishable from one another, and some of them--Nafisi's husband, her children, her parents--are conspicuous by how little they are mentioned. The style is lyrical, but empty and frustrating.
Overall, enough to interest me enough to seek out other books on a similar topic, but not enough to make me return to it.
Read
August 17, 2007I'm not sure I can finish this book. It's just so boring and self-important. And poorly written. My eyes keep crossing. It makes me angry because I think this COULD really be a good book. It has a good premise, a lot of potential, and it's about a topic I'm actually very interested in and would like to know more about. But instead it's dry as hell and doesn't follow any cohesive pattern--it just feels like a lot of random moments in the life of Azar Nafisi strung together by some run-of-the-mill literary criticism. And maybe worst of all, it doesn't make me feel any more empathetic to the Iranian people than I already did and it doesn't give me any additional insight into Islamic culture that I haven't already gotten from Western media sources.
Why did this get such good reviews? Do people never read books and judge them for themselves? Or do they just say what they think they're supposed to say because they were told this is a terribly important book about a terribly important topic by a terribly important person? *sigh*
Why did this get such good reviews? Do people never read books and judge them for themselves? Or do they just say what they think they're supposed to say because they were told this is a terribly important book about a terribly important topic by a terribly important person? *sigh*
June 9, 2024
من هي لوليتا؟وما علاقة لوليتا بطهران؟
لوليتا هي رواية للكاتب الروسي نابوكوف.. طفلة في الثانية عشر من عمرها وتعرضت للأغتصاب والاستغلال علي يد عجوز قذر يسمي هومبرت...
الرواية فيها إسقاط مباشر و ربط لقصة لوليتا بالثورة الإيرانية الإسلامية..
لوليتا هي رمز للشعب الإيراني عموماً وللمرأة الإيرانية خصوصاً..و هومبرت هو آية الله الخميني الذي أراد أن يحول هذا الشعب إلي نماذج من صنع خياله..أراد أن تتحول كل أمرأة من إنسانة حية إلي مخلوق ساكن ومستسلم!
الكاتبة ألقت الضوء علي المعاناة اليومية للشعب الإيراني بسبب القوانين الجديدة والتعليمات التي كان من ضمنها فرض الحجاب ،خفض سن الزواج من ١٨ سنة إلي ٩ سنوات! الرجم العلني كعقوبة لجريمة الزنا بجانب إغلاق العديد من الصحف وصولاً للأعدامات العلنية وقتل السجناء السياسين بل وقتل أيضاً بعض الكُتاب والمفكرين!!!
الكتاب عبارة عن مذكرات شخصية للكاتبة آذر نفيسي وهي أستاذة جامعية في الأدب الإنجليزي و يتضمن تفاصيل بسيطة عن حياتها الشخصية وتفاصيل كثيرة لتلميذاتها وحياتهم اللي مكانش ليها أي فايدة بالنسبة لي إلي جانب جزء كبير جداً من الكتاب عن تحليل الكثير من الكتب الأدبية اللي أنا مقريتش منها أي حاجة و بالتالي كانت غير ممتعة بالمرة..
يعني أقدر أقول انه ٣ كتب في كتاب واحد..تعبني جداً في قراءته وحسيت بتشتت خلال القراءة ومش عشان حجمه الكبير... ولكن هو تناول الكثير من المواضيع و مكتوب بطريقة غير ممتعة بالنسبة لي و لا يوجد به أي نوع من الدفء أو الحميمية..
الكتاب مش وحش أكيد ،الترجمة رائعة .. وطلعت منه بمعلومات كتير جداً عن إيران اللي نفسي أقرأ عنها أكتر كمان..
في نهاية الكتاب سوف تتسائل هل من حق الدول أن تستخدم الدين كأداة لتعزيز السلطة؟ ولو ده حصل..إزاي ممكن إي إنسان يعترض أو يجادل مع ممثل الله علي الأرض؟!
معتقدش أنه ينفع..السكوت والخضوع حيكون أحسن في هذه الحالة وأظن هو دة المطلوب...و مش بس في إيران😏
لوليتا هي رواية للكاتب الروسي نابوكوف.. طفلة في الثانية عشر من عمرها وتعرضت للأغتصاب والاستغلال علي يد عجوز قذر يسمي هومبرت...
الرواية فيها إسقاط مباشر و ربط لقصة لوليتا بالثورة الإيرانية الإسلامية..
لوليتا هي رمز للشعب الإيراني عموماً وللمرأة الإيرانية خصوصاً..و هومبرت هو آية الله الخميني الذي أراد أن يحول هذا الشعب إلي نماذج من صنع خياله..أراد أن تتحول كل أمرأة من إنسانة حية إلي مخلوق ساكن ومستسلم!
الكاتبة ألقت الضوء علي المعاناة اليومية للشعب الإيراني بسبب القوانين الجديدة والتعليمات التي كان من ضمنها فرض الحجاب ،خفض سن الزواج من ١٨ سنة إلي ٩ سنوات! الرجم العلني كعقوبة لجريمة الزنا بجانب إغلاق العديد من الصحف وصولاً للأعدامات العلنية وقتل السجناء السياسين بل وقتل أيضاً بعض الكُتاب والمفكرين!!!
الكتاب عبارة عن مذكرات شخصية للكاتبة آذر نفيسي وهي أستاذة جامعية في الأدب الإنجليزي و يتضمن تفاصيل بسيطة عن حياتها الشخصية وتفاصيل كثيرة لتلميذاتها وحياتهم اللي مكانش ليها أي فايدة بالنسبة لي إلي جانب جزء كبير جداً من الكتاب عن تحليل الكثير من الكتب الأدبية اللي أنا مقريتش منها أي حاجة و بالتالي كانت غير ممتعة بالمرة..
يعني أقدر أقول انه ٣ كتب في كتاب واحد..تعبني جداً في قراءته وحسيت بتشتت خلال القراءة ومش عشان حجمه الكبير... ولكن هو تناول الكثير من المواضيع و مكتوب بطريقة غير ممتعة بالنسبة لي و لا يوجد به أي نوع من الدفء أو الحميمية..
الكتاب مش وحش أكيد ،الترجمة رائعة .. وطلعت منه بمعلومات كتير جداً عن إيران اللي نفسي أقرأ عنها أكتر كمان..
في نهاية الكتاب سوف تتسائل هل من حق الدول أن تستخدم الدين كأداة لتعزيز السلطة؟ ولو ده حصل..إزاي ممكن إي إنسان يعترض أو يجادل مع ممثل الله علي الأرض؟!
معتقدش أنه ينفع..السكوت والخضوع حيكون أحسن في هذه الحالة وأظن هو دة المطلوب...و مش بس في إيران😏
September 4, 2021
Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books, Azar Nafisi
Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books is a book by Iranian author and professor Azar Nafisi. Published in 2003, it was on the New York Times bestseller list for over one hundred weeks and has been translated into 32 languages.
The book consists of a memoir of the author's experiences about returning to Iran during the revolution (1978–1981) and living under the Islamic Republic of Iran government until her departure in 1997.
It narrates her teaching at the University of Tehran after 1979, her refusal to submit to the rule to wear the veil and her subsequent expulsion from the University, life during the Iran–Iraq War, her return to teaching at the University of Allameh Tabatabei (1981), her resignation (1987), the formation of her book club (1995–97), and her decision to emigrate.
Events are interlaced with the stories of book club members consisting of seven of her female students who met weekly at Nafisi's house to discuss works of Western literature, including the controversial Lolita, and the texts are interpreted through the books they read. The book is divided into four sections: "Lolita", "Gatsby", "James", and "Austen".
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز سی و یکم ماه می سال 2005میلادی
عنوان: لولیتا خوانی در تهران؛ در 347ص، به زبان: انگلیسی؛ لندن، فورث استیت، 1383، شابک 0007178484؛ موضوع داستانهای نویسندگان ایرانی تبار ایالات متحده آمریکا - سده 20م
کتاب «لولیتاخوانی» در تهران، چهار بخش است؛
بخش نخست: «لولیتا (پرسوناژ رمان لولیتا اثر ولادیمیر نابوکوف)»؛
بخش دوم: «گتسبی (پرسوناژ رمان گتسبی بزرگ اثر اسکات فیتزجرالد)»؛
بخش سوم: «جیمز (هنری جیمز، نویسنده مشهور آمریکایی)»؛
بخش چهارم: «آستن (جین آستن، نویسنده مشهور انگلیسی)».؛
موضوع اصلی کتاب، شرح و واگویی یادمانهای بانو «آذر نفیسی»، از روزهای «انقلاب فرهنگی» در «ایران» است؛ ایشان با تعطیلی کلاس درسش، با بازخوانی رمانهای مشهور، به دانشجویان پیشین خویش، خصوصی تدریس میکنند
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 04/07/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 12/06/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books is a book by Iranian author and professor Azar Nafisi. Published in 2003, it was on the New York Times bestseller list for over one hundred weeks and has been translated into 32 languages.
The book consists of a memoir of the author's experiences about returning to Iran during the revolution (1978–1981) and living under the Islamic Republic of Iran government until her departure in 1997.
It narrates her teaching at the University of Tehran after 1979, her refusal to submit to the rule to wear the veil and her subsequent expulsion from the University, life during the Iran–Iraq War, her return to teaching at the University of Allameh Tabatabei (1981), her resignation (1987), the formation of her book club (1995–97), and her decision to emigrate.
Events are interlaced with the stories of book club members consisting of seven of her female students who met weekly at Nafisi's house to discuss works of Western literature, including the controversial Lolita, and the texts are interpreted through the books they read. The book is divided into four sections: "Lolita", "Gatsby", "James", and "Austen".
تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز سی و یکم ماه می سال 2005میلادی
عنوان: لولیتا خوانی در تهران؛ در 347ص، به زبان: انگلیسی؛ لندن، فورث استیت، 1383، شابک 0007178484؛ موضوع داستانهای نویسندگان ایرانی تبار ایالات متحده آمریکا - سده 20م
کتاب «لولیتاخوانی» در تهران، چهار بخش است؛
بخش نخست: «لولیتا (پرسوناژ رمان لولیتا اثر ولادیمیر نابوکوف)»؛
بخش دوم: «گتسبی (پرسوناژ رمان گتسبی بزرگ اثر اسکات فیتزجرالد)»؛
بخش سوم: «جیمز (هنری جیمز، نویسنده مشهور آمریکایی)»؛
بخش چهارم: «آستن (جین آستن، نویسنده مشهور انگلیسی)».؛
موضوع اصلی کتاب، شرح و واگویی یادمانهای بانو «آذر نفیسی»، از روزهای «انقلاب فرهنگی» در «ایران» است؛ ایشان با تعطیلی کلاس درسش، با بازخوانی رمانهای مشهور، به دانشجویان پیشین خویش، خصوصی تدریس میکنند
تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 04/07/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 12/06/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی
August 1, 2017
ثمة أمر غير مفهوم في منع هذه الرواية، ولكنني أعتقد بأن مزاج الرقيب غير منطقي مجملاً، وقد اعتدنا تلون الموقف الرسمي من الثقافة وممارسة مزيد من المنع والإقصاء لاسترضاء ورشوة ومغازلة أطراف أصولية. الحمد لله على نعمة الانترنت، وقد قرأت الكتاب بضمير مرتاح جدا، ومتأكدة بأن آذر نفيسي لن تمانع.
ما أريد قوله هو أن هذا كتاب عظيم، إنه كتاب عن الأدب وقابليته لإيواء الإنسان وتحصين إنسانيته المسحوقة تحت وطأة الحذاء الثقيل للديموقراطيات الدينية المزعومة، والتي نعرف كلنا بأنها مجرد ديكتاتوريات بمكياج مبتذل.
هذا الكتاب وباختصار شديد: ضرورة وجودية وإنسانية وجمالية وإضافة حقيقية لكل مكتبة.
ملاحظة: تم شراء نسخة ورقية قانونية لاحقًا حفظًا للحقوق.
ما أريد قوله هو أن هذا كتاب عظيم، إنه كتاب عن الأدب وقابليته لإيواء الإنسان وتحصين إنسانيته المسحوقة تحت وطأة الحذاء الثقيل للديموقراطيات الدينية المزعومة، والتي نعرف كلنا بأنها مجرد ديكتاتوريات بمكياج مبتذل.
هذا الكتاب وباختصار شديد: ضرورة وجودية وإنسانية وجمالية وإضافة حقيقية لكل مكتبة.
ملاحظة: تم شراء نسخة ورقية قانونية لاحقًا حفظًا للحقوق.
August 28, 2009
I feel like I showed up for class without reading the required assignment. This book should come with a prerequisite reading list: Lolita, Invitation to a Beheading, The Great Gatsby, Daisy Miller, and Pride and Prejudice or at least a warning for spoilers: . If I would have known Nafisi was going to delve into these literary pieces like she would one of her class discussions, I would have wanted to read them before hand. It would have been nice to have them in my mind to go through the symbolism with her instead of being lectured at.
Reading this book, I pondered this question: can someone become too educated, too intellectual to write a good book? It becomes too analytic and not enough heart. This story about living through the Iranian tyranny of the last century could have been fascinating, but it becomes more about analyzing it to death than about the movement and people of the country. I mention this intellectual question because one of the underlying themes of the book is intellectual liberals vs religious conservatives. While I find the pursuit of education extremely important (and maybe I worship intellectualism too much), why is it always one or the other? Why does the spiritual lost in the educational realm? Can't we have both?
Surprisingly enough, the story of Iran told from this very liberal anti-Revolutionist made me sympathize with these Muslim extremist more than any other media has done so far. Not that I agree with their methods (I full-heartedly agree that forcing morals on people makes them resent them, not embrace them), but I found myself seeing the world through their eyes, especially where Nafisi condemns them the most. I can see them so caught up in their spiritual transformation that they want the world around them to be as pure. They see their country falling to the leftist extreme and they want to save it. We see our country falling into moral decay and we say "don't judge and don't preach." We fall on the other extreme and while freedom of choice is always preferable, I don't know that a social rejection of morality and religion is the answer either. Just for the record, I think the revolution was deplorable and I would have hated and feared to live through it. The backwards control of these men over women riles me. I'm just saying, I could see intention on both sides, and maybe a glimmer or redemption for some, but I don't think that was Nafisi's intention. I think I saw it to spite her because I wanted her to appreciate morality more and I wanted to counteract her bitterness.
My favorite part of the book was in the Gatsby chapter when the students put The Great Gatsby on trial to see if it was worthy to read in an Islamic country. (I find it amusing that they take no issue with Lolita but Austen is too much.) I loved this section because it discussed the purpose of literature, to learn and grow and not merely to be a window of morality. I often find that I learn more and feel more for a book that is not happy and clean, but one that tackles difficult issues, that makes me consider moral issues, not by showing me morality but by examining it and the lack of it. It strengthens my morality instead of deface it. Nafisi said: "A great novel heightens your senses and sensitivity to the complexities of life and of individuals, and prevents you from the self righteousness that sees morality in fixed formulas about good and evil." I loved the concept of reading books from your frame of reference, that the women of Iran were comparing the themes of these books to their own lives, to the restrictions of marriage, to the laws about wearing veils, so that the books not only become a picture of this other world, but help them understand their own as well.
There are some very thought-provoking sections in the book and some beautiful illusions, but Nafisi tries to hard to drive in metaphors, to give us the sense of the surroundings, to make us understand her thought process, to pound the theme "Reading Lolita in Tehran" in just about every other paragraph, that the richness of the story is often lost in details about who ordered what kind of coffee and where people sat in her classroom and what the weather was like. There is a good story in there, but it got lost in the literature.
Reading this book, I pondered this question: can someone become too educated, too intellectual to write a good book? It becomes too analytic and not enough heart. This story about living through the Iranian tyranny of the last century could have been fascinating, but it becomes more about analyzing it to death than about the movement and people of the country. I mention this intellectual question because one of the underlying themes of the book is intellectual liberals vs religious conservatives. While I find the pursuit of education extremely important (and maybe I worship intellectualism too much), why is it always one or the other? Why does the spiritual lost in the educational realm? Can't we have both?
Surprisingly enough, the story of Iran told from this very liberal anti-Revolutionist made me sympathize with these Muslim extremist more than any other media has done so far. Not that I agree with their methods (I full-heartedly agree that forcing morals on people makes them resent them, not embrace them), but I found myself seeing the world through their eyes, especially where Nafisi condemns them the most. I can see them so caught up in their spiritual transformation that they want the world around them to be as pure. They see their country falling to the leftist extreme and they want to save it. We see our country falling into moral decay and we say "don't judge and don't preach." We fall on the other extreme and while freedom of choice is always preferable, I don't know that a social rejection of morality and religion is the answer either. Just for the record, I think the revolution was deplorable and I would have hated and feared to live through it. The backwards control of these men over women riles me. I'm just saying, I could see intention on both sides, and maybe a glimmer or redemption for some, but I don't think that was Nafisi's intention. I think I saw it to spite her because I wanted her to appreciate morality more and I wanted to counteract her bitterness.
My favorite part of the book was in the Gatsby chapter when the students put The Great Gatsby on trial to see if it was worthy to read in an Islamic country. (I find it amusing that they take no issue with Lolita but Austen is too much.) I loved this section because it discussed the purpose of literature, to learn and grow and not merely to be a window of morality. I often find that I learn more and feel more for a book that is not happy and clean, but one that tackles difficult issues, that makes me consider moral issues, not by showing me morality but by examining it and the lack of it. It strengthens my morality instead of deface it. Nafisi said: "A great novel heightens your senses and sensitivity to the complexities of life and of individuals, and prevents you from the self righteousness that sees morality in fixed formulas about good and evil." I loved the concept of reading books from your frame of reference, that the women of Iran were comparing the themes of these books to their own lives, to the restrictions of marriage, to the laws about wearing veils, so that the books not only become a picture of this other world, but help them understand their own as well.
There are some very thought-provoking sections in the book and some beautiful illusions, but Nafisi tries to hard to drive in metaphors, to give us the sense of the surroundings, to make us understand her thought process, to pound the theme "Reading Lolita in Tehran" in just about every other paragraph, that the richness of the story is often lost in details about who ordered what kind of coffee and where people sat in her classroom and what the weather was like. There is a good story in there, but it got lost in the literature.
August 1, 2018
In case you don't know about this book yet (though, honestly, how could you not know about this book yet?), it is an absolutely amazing memoir by an Iranian woman who was a professor of English & Persian literature at the University of Tehran before, during, and after the revolution and war with Iraq. Once wearing the veil became mandatory and she refused to wear one, she was forced to quit teaching, and one way she came up with to fill her time was to gather several of her most dedicated students for a once-weekly literature class. In it, they discussed books like The Great Gatsby, Pride and Prejudice, Lolita (duh), etc.
This book is triple-layered. The first layer is Nafisi's memoir of the tumultuous times she lived in in Tehran, which she watched go from one of the most progressive, intellectual cities in the world to one of the most restrictive and repressive. You can see many of her friends and relatives here, and learn about the different ways people dealt with everything -- from withdrawing completely from society to picking sides and becoming more vocal and fervent about religion, politics, nationalism, etc.
The second layer is Nafisi's memoirs of being a professor of literature in such times, including one astonishing episode where her class actually puts The Great Gatsby on trial to determine whether it is decadent, Western poison or a work of high art. Not to mention the memories of the women in her literature class, how they coped with the readings, one another, and their lives in Iran.
The third layer, which for me catapults this book into a work of absolute genius, is Nafisi's theories on and explications of the books themselves, including how they relate to the struggles and culture of both of the above layers. Nafisi's brilliant theories about literature, her clear, inviting voice, and the much-needed internal perspective she gives us (Americans) on a country and culture that we are essentially taught to loathe all combine to make this one of the most incredible books I've ever read. Three times.
This book is triple-layered. The first layer is Nafisi's memoir of the tumultuous times she lived in in Tehran, which she watched go from one of the most progressive, intellectual cities in the world to one of the most restrictive and repressive. You can see many of her friends and relatives here, and learn about the different ways people dealt with everything -- from withdrawing completely from society to picking sides and becoming more vocal and fervent about religion, politics, nationalism, etc.
The second layer is Nafisi's memoirs of being a professor of literature in such times, including one astonishing episode where her class actually puts The Great Gatsby on trial to determine whether it is decadent, Western poison or a work of high art. Not to mention the memories of the women in her literature class, how they coped with the readings, one another, and their lives in Iran.
The third layer, which for me catapults this book into a work of absolute genius, is Nafisi's theories on and explications of the books themselves, including how they relate to the struggles and culture of both of the above layers. Nafisi's brilliant theories about literature, her clear, inviting voice, and the much-needed internal perspective she gives us (Americans) on a country and culture that we are essentially taught to loathe all combine to make this one of the most incredible books I've ever read. Three times.
February 12, 2023
People with courage and character have my greatest admiration and respect.
May 16, 2012
أن تقرأ لوليتا في طهران
تخيل أيها القارئ ( عبارة ستصطدم بها كثيرا في هذا الكتاب تأتيك كصفعة أحيانا خصوصا حين تكون معارضا للنفيسي) تخيل أنك تجلس على مكتبك و أمامك كتب أدبية منتقاة بعناية فائقة و كتاب واحد سياسي يتحدث عن الثورة الاسلامية الايرانية و شذرات من أوراق حياة أستاذة جامعية ..تخيل نفسك تقرأ من هذا و ذاك مستمتعا بهذا و رافضا ذاك..فتتداخل الأفكار في عقلك ووجدانك مسببة فوضى و صداع و أحيانا صراعات قد تنتهي بقرارات قد ترضيك و قد لا ترضيك ..تخيل اذن لو جمعت كل تلك الفوضى أمامك في كتاب واحد هو أن تقرأ لوليتا في طهران..
تخيل أن تحمل هذا الكتاب و تعبر به نفق مظلم و في يدك شمعة تنطفئ أحيانا تحت سطوة نسمة عابرة مجبرة اياك أن تحيا في ظلمة قصيرة تفكر في بعض ما جاء في الكتاب و باحثا في ذات الوقت عن عود ثقاب لتشعل تلك الشمعة مجددا و تكمل المسير ..هذا ما قد يحصل لك كما حصل معي أثناء قرائتي لهذا الكتب.
فلنتوقف قليلا عند العنوان" أن تقرأ لوليتا في طهران' لما أختارت النفيسي هذا الكتاب دون غيره عنوانا رغم انها ذكرت كتبا أخرى كغاتسبي العظيم و اعمال جين اوستن..وجدت أن اختيارها قد يكون نابع من سببين أولها ربط الثورة الايرانية بالثورة الروسية و ثانيهما و هو الأقرب في نظري الصدمة التي قد يحدثها العنوان كنوع من الدعاية للكتاب لهذا أنصح الراغبين في قراءة هذا الكتاب ان يعرجوا قليلا على أعمال نابكوف خاصة لوليتا لتتضح له الرؤية فالنفيسي أرادت ان تضع نفسها بجانب ناباكوف و هي المغرمة بهذا الكاتب لحد الجنون أرادت أن تربط بين غضبها و رفضها للثورة الاسلامية و رفض ناباكوف للثورة الروسية ...
فلنعد الآن للمضمون..سيرة النفيسي تعالج فترة جد مهمة من تاريخ ايران قد ابالغ ان قلت تعالج فالمعالجة السياسية بالتأكيد تحتاج الى خبرة أكثر و حيادية أعم لم نجدهما في هذا الكتاب لأنها تحكي وجهة نظر شخصية حتى لو استغلت حكايا تلميذاتها أو بناتها كما تناديهن..فلنستبدل كلمة معالجة و نقول الكتاب يشير الى فترة ما بين 1979-1997
بين اندلاع الثورة الايرانية و خروجها من ايران متجهة نحو امريكا الهروب من الضد نحو الضد ..يا للمصادفة
أعترف أني لم أكن حيادية أحيانا في القراءة و وجدت نفسي مضطرة أن اهمس للنفيسي متفقة معك تماما .. فالثورة الاسلامية الايرانية لها من الأخطاء ما يكون عادة لكل الثورات فليست الثورة منزهة و تكفي نظرة واحدة لواقعنا المعاصر لنتأكد من الأمر..و لم أمنع نفسي من الضحك الأسود الغاضب و النفيسي تقتبس عن كتاب الخميني" المباديء السياسية والفلسفية والاجتماعية والدينية" يقول : إذا مارس رجل الجنس مع دجاجة فهل يجوز له أكلها بعد ذلك؟ الإجابة : كلا لا هو ولا أي أحد من أفراد أسرته الأقربين ولا الجار القريب يجوز له أن يأكل من لحم تلك الدجاجة، ولكن لا بأس مع الجار الذي يسكن على بعد بابين ..
بالله عليكم ...فلنصمت و نعود للكتاب قلت ساندتها أحيانا..لكني رفضت نظرتها الشخصية- و يجب التأكيد على هذا الأمر الشخصية- لمسألة الحجاب كما استهجنت أيضا أريحيتها في الـتأكيد على حبها للحم الهام "لحم الخنزير " و كأن ايران تخلو من لحم غيره و أضف لهذا الخمر بكل انواعها هذا كله كان موجودا في ايران تحت حكم الخميني ...غريب هذا الربط الحتمي بين المثقف و المفكر و بين كل ما يحرمه الدين فهل الخمر و التدخين و لحم الخنزير و أن اعري كتفي و صدري يجعل مني مثقفة و مفكرة منطق غريب على العموم النقاش حول مسالة الحجاب هل هو مفروض أم غير مفروض يبقى جدل بيزنطي لن يخرج بنتيجة فالأمور واضحة و المرأة المسلمة لا تحتاج لمن يدافع عنها و عن اختياراتها خصوصا من كتب تنشر من خارج الدول الاسلامية من بلاد تنتظرأية فرصة لضرب الاسلام فهذا شيء غير مقبول بتاتا...
على العموم فقراءة النفيسي لايران تحت الحكم الثيوقراطي لم يستهويني جدا بل ما دفعني لأتمم هذا الكتاب هو قراءتها لعدة كتب أدبية و هي قراءة بالتأكيد على درجة كبيرة من الخبرة الاكاديمية تحسب للنفيسي..قراءة جعلتني أغير بعض من أحكامي السابقة على كتب قرأتها أو أهملتها لكني الآن بالتأكيد سأعود اليها بحماس أكثر و رؤية جديدة لا يسعني الا أن أشكر النفيسي على هذا الأمر..الحديث عن الروايات و النقاشات التي تمت في الحرم الجامعي بين النفيسي و الطلبة و بينها و بين طالباتها في الصف الخاص شيء مثير ذكرني بنا نحن رواد هذا الموقع فالنقاش بالتأكيد يثري جدا فلكل منا أسلوبه الخاص في القراءة و مبادئه التي تعكسها ملاحظاته و تعليقاته و نظرته للحياة عموما و هو شيء أجده حيوي و مشجع فكم من كتاب لم أكن لأقرأه لولا تشجيع البعض و كم من فكرة خاطئة أعتبرتها من المسلمات فأجد من يعارضني فيها و يأتي بضدها فاعيد التفكير من جديد ..النفيسي في كتابها هذا بغض النظر عن المسألة الايرانية تدعونا الى اعمال الفكر حين نقرأ و أن لا نكون مجرد عبيد للكلمة نبكي حين تفرح البطلة بل أن نسأل ما سبب الفرح و ما الغاية منه ...لهذا السبب أشكر النفيسي على هذا الكتاب...و أدعوها الى قراءة الاسلام بين الغرب و الشرق لعزت بيغوفيتش ( فهو الكتاب الوحيد الذي يخطر ببالي الآن ومن يجد غيره فليخبرنا به لتعم الفائدة) ادعوها أن تقرأه لتفهم الفرق بين الثقافة و الحضارة فالاسلام ابدا لم يكن دين يجمد الفكر بل على العكس تماما ..و لنا عودة في الموضوع
قراءة ممتعة
نسيت أمرا مهما تحية للمترجمة ريم قيس كبة
تخيل أيها القارئ ( عبارة ستصطدم بها كثيرا في هذا الكتاب تأتيك كصفعة أحيانا خصوصا حين تكون معارضا للنفيسي) تخيل أنك تجلس على مكتبك و أمامك كتب أدبية منتقاة بعناية فائقة و كتاب واحد سياسي يتحدث عن الثورة الاسلامية الايرانية و شذرات من أوراق حياة أستاذة جامعية ..تخيل نفسك تقرأ من هذا و ذاك مستمتعا بهذا و رافضا ذاك..فتتداخل الأفكار في عقلك ووجدانك مسببة فوضى و صداع و أحيانا صراعات قد تنتهي بقرارات قد ترضيك و قد لا ترضيك ..تخيل اذن لو جمعت كل تلك الفوضى أمامك في كتاب واحد هو أن تقرأ لوليتا في طهران..
تخيل أن تحمل هذا الكتاب و تعبر به نفق مظلم و في يدك شمعة تنطفئ أحيانا تحت سطوة نسمة عابرة مجبرة اياك أن تحيا في ظلمة قصيرة تفكر في بعض ما جاء في الكتاب و باحثا في ذات الوقت عن عود ثقاب لتشعل تلك الشمعة مجددا و تكمل المسير ..هذا ما قد يحصل لك كما حصل معي أثناء قرائتي لهذا الكتب.
فلنتوقف قليلا عند العنوان" أن تقرأ لوليتا في طهران' لما أختارت النفيسي هذا الكتاب دون غيره عنوانا رغم انها ذكرت كتبا أخرى كغاتسبي العظيم و اعمال جين اوستن..وجدت أن اختيارها قد يكون نابع من سببين أولها ربط الثورة الايرانية بالثورة الروسية و ثانيهما و هو الأقرب في نظري الصدمة التي قد يحدثها العنوان كنوع من الدعاية للكتاب لهذا أنصح الراغبين في قراءة هذا الكتاب ان يعرجوا قليلا على أعمال نابكوف خاصة لوليتا لتتضح له الرؤية فالنفيسي أرادت ان تضع نفسها بجانب ناباكوف و هي المغرمة بهذا الكاتب لحد الجنون أرادت أن تربط بين غضبها و رفضها للثورة الاسلامية و رفض ناباكوف للثورة الروسية ...
فلنعد الآن للمضمون..سيرة النفيسي تعالج فترة جد مهمة من تاريخ ايران قد ابالغ ان قلت تعالج فالمعالجة السياسية بالتأكيد تحتاج الى خبرة أكثر و حيادية أعم لم نجدهما في هذا الكتاب لأنها تحكي وجهة نظر شخصية حتى لو استغلت حكايا تلميذاتها أو بناتها كما تناديهن..فلنستبدل كلمة معالجة و نقول الكتاب يشير الى فترة ما بين 1979-1997
بين اندلاع الثورة الايرانية و خروجها من ايران متجهة نحو امريكا الهروب من الضد نحو الضد ..يا للمصادفة
أعترف أني لم أكن حيادية أحيانا في القراءة و وجدت نفسي مضطرة أن اهمس للنفيسي متفقة معك تماما .. فالثورة الاسلامية الايرانية لها من الأخطاء ما يكون عادة لكل الثورات فليست الثورة منزهة و تكفي نظرة واحدة لواقعنا المعاصر لنتأكد من الأمر..و لم أمنع نفسي من الضحك الأسود الغاضب و النفيسي تقتبس عن كتاب الخميني" المباديء السياسية والفلسفية والاجتماعية والدينية" يقول : إذا مارس رجل الجنس مع دجاجة فهل يجوز له أكلها بعد ذلك؟ الإجابة : كلا لا هو ولا أي أحد من أفراد أسرته الأقربين ولا الجار القريب يجوز له أن يأكل من لحم تلك الدجاجة، ولكن لا بأس مع الجار الذي يسكن على بعد بابين ..
بالله عليكم ...فلنصمت و نعود للكتاب قلت ساندتها أحيانا..لكني رفضت نظرتها الشخصية- و يجب التأكيد على هذا الأمر الشخصية- لمسألة الحجاب كما استهجنت أيضا أريحيتها في الـتأكيد على حبها للحم الهام "لحم الخنزير " و كأن ايران تخلو من لحم غيره و أضف لهذا الخمر بكل انواعها هذا كله كان موجودا في ايران تحت حكم الخميني ...غريب هذا الربط الحتمي بين المثقف و المفكر و بين كل ما يحرمه الدين فهل الخمر و التدخين و لحم الخنزير و أن اعري كتفي و صدري يجعل مني مثقفة و مفكرة منطق غريب على العموم النقاش حول مسالة الحجاب هل هو مفروض أم غير مفروض يبقى جدل بيزنطي لن يخرج بنتيجة فالأمور واضحة و المرأة المسلمة لا تحتاج لمن يدافع عنها و عن اختياراتها خصوصا من كتب تنشر من خارج الدول الاسلامية من بلاد تنتظرأية فرصة لضرب الاسلام فهذا شيء غير مقبول بتاتا...
على العموم فقراءة النفيسي لايران تحت الحكم الثيوقراطي لم يستهويني جدا بل ما دفعني لأتمم هذا الكتاب هو قراءتها لعدة كتب أدبية و هي قراءة بالتأكيد على درجة كبيرة من الخبرة الاكاديمية تحسب للنفيسي..قراءة جعلتني أغير بعض من أحكامي السابقة على كتب قرأتها أو أهملتها لكني الآن بالتأكيد سأعود اليها بحماس أكثر و رؤية جديدة لا يسعني الا أن أشكر النفيسي على هذا الأمر..الحديث عن الروايات و النقاشات التي تمت في الحرم الجامعي بين النفيسي و الطلبة و بينها و بين طالباتها في الصف الخاص شيء مثير ذكرني بنا نحن رواد هذا الموقع فالنقاش بالتأكيد يثري جدا فلكل منا أسلوبه الخاص في القراءة و مبادئه التي تعكسها ملاحظاته و تعليقاته و نظرته للحياة عموما و هو شيء أجده حيوي و مشجع فكم من كتاب لم أكن لأقرأه لولا تشجيع البعض و كم من فكرة خاطئة أعتبرتها من المسلمات فأجد من يعارضني فيها و يأتي بضدها فاعيد التفكير من جديد ..النفيسي في كتابها هذا بغض النظر عن المسألة الايرانية تدعونا الى اعمال الفكر حين نقرأ و أن لا نكون مجرد عبيد للكلمة نبكي حين تفرح البطلة بل أن نسأل ما سبب الفرح و ما الغاية منه ...لهذا السبب أشكر النفيسي على هذا الكتاب...و أدعوها الى قراءة الاسلام بين الغرب و الشرق لعزت بيغوفيتش ( فهو الكتاب الوحيد الذي يخطر ببالي الآن ومن يجد غيره فليخبرنا به لتعم الفائدة) ادعوها أن تقرأه لتفهم الفرق بين الثقافة و الحضارة فالاسلام ابدا لم يكن دين يجمد الفكر بل على العكس تماما ..و لنا عودة في الموضوع
قراءة ممتعة
نسيت أمرا مهما تحية للمترجمة ريم قيس كبة
March 29, 2020
"Para tener una vida completa, hemos de tener la posibilidad de formar y expresar públicamente mundos, sueños, pensamientos y deseos privados, de tener acceso continuo a un diálogo entre los mundos público y privado. ¿De qué otra manera podemos saber que hemos existido, sentido, deseado y temido?"
Este libro habla de la censura, de la vida en un régimen totalitario, de la ausencia total de libertades que se van perdiendo una a una en un espacio tan breve que resulta casi ciencia ficción, habla de la vida en Irán desde los años 70 hasta finales de los 90, del fanatismo, de los encarcelamientos, las torturas, los asesinatos... Pero también es un libro que habla de la belleza de la libertad, del arte y de la literatura.
Son las memorias de la autora, y por eso, es una historia que no será del gusto de todos. Resulta a veces algo densa por el estilo literario (he leído muchas reseñas que la tildan de ególatra o intelectualoide pero no puedo estar de acuerdo), a mi me resultó una narración lírica y me atrapó desde la primera página.
El libro comienza con un seminario que Nafisi desarrolla en su propia casa, tras haber dejado de dar clases en la univeridad. Ha seleccionado algunas de sus mejores alumnas, y en ese pequeño refugio sus alumnas pueden quitarse el velo, mostrarse como son y dar sus opiniones sobre libros prohibidos en la República Islámica.
¡Ojalá haber sido alumna de Nafisi! Pero al menos nos quedan sus escritos. Cada uno de los análisis que hace de las novelas sobre las que da clase me resultaron auténticas perlas, especialmente los que hace de la controvertida 'Lolita'. Y para los que tienen tanto pánico al spoiler, por favor, tened en cuenta que en este libro se analiza 'Lolita', 'El gran Gatsby', 'Orgullo y prejuicio' y varias novelas de Henry James. Para mi resultó tan delicioso leer sobre las obras que ya conocía como las que no, y de hecho me he quedado con unas ganas enormes de leer 'Daisy Miller' entre otras.
El caso es que vemos la vida de Nafisi a lo largo de dos décadas, de sus inicios como profesora, de la Revolución, la guerra con Irak, y de cómo esa falta de libertades cada vez más angustiosa fue cercándola cada vez más hasta llevarla al exilio.
Es una obra muy personal, unas memorias valientes y sinceras, que te ayudan a comprender la vida en un lugar donde las mujeres no tienen cabida.
La historia de Nafisi y especialmente la de alguna de sus alumnas como Nassrin se han quedado conmigo, me ha hecho emocionarme, llorar, reír y aprender un poco más sobre este mundo y las luces y sombras del ser humano.
Este libro habla de la censura, de la vida en un régimen totalitario, de la ausencia total de libertades que se van perdiendo una a una en un espacio tan breve que resulta casi ciencia ficción, habla de la vida en Irán desde los años 70 hasta finales de los 90, del fanatismo, de los encarcelamientos, las torturas, los asesinatos... Pero también es un libro que habla de la belleza de la libertad, del arte y de la literatura.
Son las memorias de la autora, y por eso, es una historia que no será del gusto de todos. Resulta a veces algo densa por el estilo literario (he leído muchas reseñas que la tildan de ególatra o intelectualoide pero no puedo estar de acuerdo), a mi me resultó una narración lírica y me atrapó desde la primera página.
El libro comienza con un seminario que Nafisi desarrolla en su propia casa, tras haber dejado de dar clases en la univeridad. Ha seleccionado algunas de sus mejores alumnas, y en ese pequeño refugio sus alumnas pueden quitarse el velo, mostrarse como son y dar sus opiniones sobre libros prohibidos en la República Islámica.
¡Ojalá haber sido alumna de Nafisi! Pero al menos nos quedan sus escritos. Cada uno de los análisis que hace de las novelas sobre las que da clase me resultaron auténticas perlas, especialmente los que hace de la controvertida 'Lolita'. Y para los que tienen tanto pánico al spoiler, por favor, tened en cuenta que en este libro se analiza 'Lolita', 'El gran Gatsby', 'Orgullo y prejuicio' y varias novelas de Henry James. Para mi resultó tan delicioso leer sobre las obras que ya conocía como las que no, y de hecho me he quedado con unas ganas enormes de leer 'Daisy Miller' entre otras.
El caso es que vemos la vida de Nafisi a lo largo de dos décadas, de sus inicios como profesora, de la Revolución, la guerra con Irak, y de cómo esa falta de libertades cada vez más angustiosa fue cercándola cada vez más hasta llevarla al exilio.
Es una obra muy personal, unas memorias valientes y sinceras, que te ayudan a comprender la vida en un lugar donde las mujeres no tienen cabida.
La historia de Nafisi y especialmente la de alguna de sus alumnas como Nassrin se han quedado conmigo, me ha hecho emocionarme, llorar, reír y aprender un poco más sobre este mundo y las luces y sombras del ser humano.
Currently reading
November 10, 2018“What we search for in fiction is not so much reality but the epiphany of truth.”
This book isn’t a fast read. I’ve started reading this memoir 24 October, and I only finished part 1 so far -77 pages of 347- and that already took me a while! Maybe I’m in a reading slump, but I doubt that, because I’m eager enough to read. Some other reviewers complained that the book is tedious, disjointed and all over the place, and that the author’s tone is smug and self-important. Except from the fact that when the author refers to the girls who come to her private reading class, she always talks about ‘My girls’, which for some reason I find irritating, I’m not sure yet if I share these criticisms. For me, it’s just such a book that’s interesting enough, but not really absorbing, so I just plough on through it, in search of those ’epiphanies of truth’ in Western literature for Iranian veiled women.
I haven’t read any of the novels that are being discussed in this book, but I don’t consider this to be an obstacle for being able to understand the references to these well-known works. Even so, someone who read those classics, will probably benefit from it while reading this book.
(5 November 2018).
Part I - Lolita
“Yet I suppose that if I were to go against my own recommendation and choose a work of fiction that would most resonate with our lives in the Islamic Republic of Iran, it would not be The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie or even 1984 but perhaps Nabokov’s Invitation to a Beheading or better yet, Lolita.”
“What Nabokov creates for us in Invitation to a Beheading is not the actual pain and torture of a totalitarian regime but the nightmarish quality of living in an atmosphere of perpetual dread. ...
Unlike in other utopian novels, the forces of evil here are not omnipotent ; Nabokov shows us their frailty as well. They are ridiculous and they can be defeated, and this does not lessen the tragedy—the waste. Invitation to a Beheading is written from the point of view of the victim, one who ultimately sees the absurd sham of his persecutors and who must retreat into himself in order to survive.
Those of us living in the Islamic Republic of Iran grasped both the tragedy and absurdity of the cruelty to which we were subjected. We had to poke fun at our own misery in order to survive. We also instinctively recognized poshlust—not just in others, but in ourselves. This was one reason that art and literature became so essential to our lives : they were not a luxury but a necessity. What Nabokov captured was the texture of life in a totalitarian society, where you are completely alone in an illusory world full of false promises, where you can no longer differentiate between your savior and your executioner.”
“In most of Nabokov’s novels—Invitation to a Beheading, Bend Sinister, Ada, Pnin—there was always the shadow of another world, one that was only attainable through fiction. It is this world that prevents his heroes and heroines from utter despair, that becomes their refuge in a life that is constantly brutal.
Take Lolita. This was the story of a twelve-year-old girl who had nowhere to go. Humbert had tried to turn her into his fantasy , into his dead love, and he had destroyed her. The desperate truth of Lolita’s story is not the rape of a twelve-year-old by a dirty old man but the confiscation of one individual’s life by another. We don’t know what Lolita would have become if Humbert had not engulfed her. Yet the novel, the finished work, is hopeful, beautiful even, a defense not just of beauty but of life, ordinary everyday life, all the normal pleasures that Lolita, like Yassi, was deprived of.
... in fact Nabokov had taken revenge against our own solipsizers ; he had taken revenge on the Ayatollah Khomeini, on Yassi’s last suitor, on the dough-faced teacher for that matter. They had tried to shape others according to their own dreams and desires, but Nabokov, through his portrayal of Humbert, had exposed all solipsists who take over other people’s lives.”
“At some point, the truth of Iran’s past became as immaterial to those who appropriated it as the truth of Lolita’s is to Humbert. It became immaterial in the same way that Lolita’s truth, her desires and life, must lose color before Humbert’s one obsession, his desire to turn a twelve-year-old unruly child into his mistress.
When I think of Lolita, I think of that half-alive butterfly pinned to the wall. The butterfly is not an obvious symbol, but it does suggest that Humbert fixes Lolita in the same manner that the butterfly is fixed ; he wants her, a living breathing human being, to become stationary, to give up her life for the still life he offers her in return. Lolita’s image is forever associated in the minds of her readers with that of her jailer. Lolita on her own has no meaning ; she can only come to life through her prison bars.
This is how I read Lolita. Again and again as we discussed Lolita in that class, our discussions were colored by my students’ hidden personal sorrows and joys. Like tearstains on a letter, these forays into the hidden and the personal shaded all our discussions of Nabokov. And more and more I thought of that butterfly; what linked us so closely was this perverse intimacy of victim and jailer.”
“Like the best defense attorneys, who dazzle with their rhetoric and appeal to our higher sense of morality, Humbert exonerates himself by implicating his victim—a method we were quite familiar with in the Islamic Republic of Iran. (“We are not against cinema,” Ayatollah Khomeini had declared as his henchmen set fire to the movie houses, “we are against prostitution!”)
“Again we skipped back and forth between our lives and novels: was it surprising that we so appreciated Invitation to a Beheading? We were all victims of the arbitrary nature of a totalitarian regime that constantly intruded into the most private corners of our lives and imposed its relentless fictions on us. Was this the rule of Islam? What memories were we creating for our children? This constant assault, this persistent lack of kindness, was what frightened me most.”
“I had asked my students if they remember the dance scene in Invitation to a Beheading: the jailer invites Cincinnatus to a dance. They begin a waltz and move out into the hall. In a corner they run into a guard: “They described a circle near him and glided back into the cell, and now Cincinnatus regretted that the swoon’s friendly embrace had been so brief.” This movement in circles is the main movement of the novel. As long as he accepts the sham world the jailers impose upon him, Cincinnatus will remain their prisoner and will move within the circles of their creation. The worst crime committed by totalitarian mind-sets is that they force their citizens, including their victims, to become complicit in their crimes. Dancing with your jailer, participating in your own execution, that is an act of utmost brutality. My students witnessed it in show trials on television and enacted it every time they went out into the streets dressed as they were told to dress. They had not become part of the crowd who watched the executions, but they did not have the power to protest them, either.
The only way to leave the circle, to stop dancing with the jailer, is to find a way to preserve one’s individuality, that unique quality which evades description but differentiates one human being from the other. That is why, in their world, rituals—empty rituals —become so central. There was not much difference between our jailers and Cincinnatus’s executioners. They invaded all private spaces and tried to shape every gesture, to force us to become one of them, and that in itself was another form of execution.”
This book isn’t a fast read. I’ve started reading this memoir 24 October, and I only finished part 1 so far -77 pages of 347- and that already took me a while! Maybe I’m in a reading slump, but I doubt that, because I’m eager enough to read. Some other reviewers complained that the book is tedious, disjointed and all over the place, and that the author’s tone is smug and self-important. Except from the fact that when the author refers to the girls who come to her private reading class, she always talks about ‘My girls’, which for some reason I find irritating, I’m not sure yet if I share these criticisms. For me, it’s just such a book that’s interesting enough, but not really absorbing, so I just plough on through it, in search of those ’epiphanies of truth’ in Western literature for Iranian veiled women.
I haven’t read any of the novels that are being discussed in this book, but I don’t consider this to be an obstacle for being able to understand the references to these well-known works. Even so, someone who read those classics, will probably benefit from it while reading this book.
(5 November 2018).
Part I - Lolita
“Yet I suppose that if I were to go against my own recommendation and choose a work of fiction that would most resonate with our lives in the Islamic Republic of Iran, it would not be The Prime of Miss Jean Brodie or even 1984 but perhaps Nabokov’s Invitation to a Beheading or better yet, Lolita.”
“What Nabokov creates for us in Invitation to a Beheading is not the actual pain and torture of a totalitarian regime but the nightmarish quality of living in an atmosphere of perpetual dread. ...
Unlike in other utopian novels, the forces of evil here are not omnipotent ; Nabokov shows us their frailty as well. They are ridiculous and they can be defeated, and this does not lessen the tragedy—the waste. Invitation to a Beheading is written from the point of view of the victim, one who ultimately sees the absurd sham of his persecutors and who must retreat into himself in order to survive.
Those of us living in the Islamic Republic of Iran grasped both the tragedy and absurdity of the cruelty to which we were subjected. We had to poke fun at our own misery in order to survive. We also instinctively recognized poshlust—not just in others, but in ourselves. This was one reason that art and literature became so essential to our lives : they were not a luxury but a necessity. What Nabokov captured was the texture of life in a totalitarian society, where you are completely alone in an illusory world full of false promises, where you can no longer differentiate between your savior and your executioner.”
“In most of Nabokov’s novels—Invitation to a Beheading, Bend Sinister, Ada, Pnin—there was always the shadow of another world, one that was only attainable through fiction. It is this world that prevents his heroes and heroines from utter despair, that becomes their refuge in a life that is constantly brutal.
Take Lolita. This was the story of a twelve-year-old girl who had nowhere to go. Humbert had tried to turn her into his fantasy , into his dead love, and he had destroyed her. The desperate truth of Lolita’s story is not the rape of a twelve-year-old by a dirty old man but the confiscation of one individual’s life by another. We don’t know what Lolita would have become if Humbert had not engulfed her. Yet the novel, the finished work, is hopeful, beautiful even, a defense not just of beauty but of life, ordinary everyday life, all the normal pleasures that Lolita, like Yassi, was deprived of.
... in fact Nabokov had taken revenge against our own solipsizers ; he had taken revenge on the Ayatollah Khomeini, on Yassi’s last suitor, on the dough-faced teacher for that matter. They had tried to shape others according to their own dreams and desires, but Nabokov, through his portrayal of Humbert, had exposed all solipsists who take over other people’s lives.”
“At some point, the truth of Iran’s past became as immaterial to those who appropriated it as the truth of Lolita’s is to Humbert. It became immaterial in the same way that Lolita’s truth, her desires and life, must lose color before Humbert’s one obsession, his desire to turn a twelve-year-old unruly child into his mistress.
When I think of Lolita, I think of that half-alive butterfly pinned to the wall. The butterfly is not an obvious symbol, but it does suggest that Humbert fixes Lolita in the same manner that the butterfly is fixed ; he wants her, a living breathing human being, to become stationary, to give up her life for the still life he offers her in return. Lolita’s image is forever associated in the minds of her readers with that of her jailer. Lolita on her own has no meaning ; she can only come to life through her prison bars.
This is how I read Lolita. Again and again as we discussed Lolita in that class, our discussions were colored by my students’ hidden personal sorrows and joys. Like tearstains on a letter, these forays into the hidden and the personal shaded all our discussions of Nabokov. And more and more I thought of that butterfly; what linked us so closely was this perverse intimacy of victim and jailer.”
“Like the best defense attorneys, who dazzle with their rhetoric and appeal to our higher sense of morality, Humbert exonerates himself by implicating his victim—a method we were quite familiar with in the Islamic Republic of Iran. (“We are not against cinema,” Ayatollah Khomeini had declared as his henchmen set fire to the movie houses, “we are against prostitution!”)
“Again we skipped back and forth between our lives and novels: was it surprising that we so appreciated Invitation to a Beheading? We were all victims of the arbitrary nature of a totalitarian regime that constantly intruded into the most private corners of our lives and imposed its relentless fictions on us. Was this the rule of Islam? What memories were we creating for our children? This constant assault, this persistent lack of kindness, was what frightened me most.”
“I had asked my students if they remember the dance scene in Invitation to a Beheading: the jailer invites Cincinnatus to a dance. They begin a waltz and move out into the hall. In a corner they run into a guard: “They described a circle near him and glided back into the cell, and now Cincinnatus regretted that the swoon’s friendly embrace had been so brief.” This movement in circles is the main movement of the novel. As long as he accepts the sham world the jailers impose upon him, Cincinnatus will remain their prisoner and will move within the circles of their creation. The worst crime committed by totalitarian mind-sets is that they force their citizens, including their victims, to become complicit in their crimes. Dancing with your jailer, participating in your own execution, that is an act of utmost brutality. My students witnessed it in show trials on television and enacted it every time they went out into the streets dressed as they were told to dress. They had not become part of the crowd who watched the executions, but they did not have the power to protest them, either.
The only way to leave the circle, to stop dancing with the jailer, is to find a way to preserve one’s individuality, that unique quality which evades description but differentiates one human being from the other. That is why, in their world, rituals—empty rituals —become so central. There was not much difference between our jailers and Cincinnatus’s executioners. They invaded all private spaces and tried to shape every gesture, to force us to become one of them, and that in itself was another form of execution.”
June 16, 2016
أن تقرأ لوليتا في طهران
مرة أخرى، نحن في طهران، ولكننا لا نتتبع في هذه المرة قصة حب خفية، ولا تتقحم سردنا مشاهد مستعادة من (ألف ليلة وليلة)، بل نحن مع دكتورة متخصصة في الأدب الإنجليزي وطالباتها، اللواتي قررن إنشاء ما يشبه نادي كتاب، يؤين إليه في كل خميس، هناك حيث يمكن للنقاش أن يمتد بحرية، بعدما تقلصت مساحة الحرية في إيران الثورة الإسلامية.
عنوان الكتاب مغري جداً، وخاصة للقارئ الغربي، فلوليتا – رواية نابوكوف الشهيرة – رمز غربي لجرأة الأفكار، وقدرتها على مصادمة القارئ، فأن تقرأ هذه الرواية الإشكالية، وأين؟ في طهران؟ فهذا ما يبدو محاولة للتحرر من إسار الوصاية بجميع أشكالها، ولكن هناك معنى آخر متضمن في العنوان، نفهمه عندما نقرأ رؤية آذار نفيسي لرواية لوليتا ولشخصية (هومبرت)، فشخصية هومبرت التي تتسيد السرد في رواية (لوليتا)، وتبدو لامعة، تعيد نفيسي قراءتها بطريقة بارعة، لتظهر وجهها الآخر، فهومبرت ليس إلا عجوزاً قذراً، يسيطر على لوليتا المسكينة ويغتصبها، ولوليتا ليست كما يظنها الآخرون تلك المرأة اللعوب، لا، إنها مجرد طفلة منتهكة، تنجو في النهاية من جلادها، وتفر بحياتها، فلذا هي بطلة مظلومة.
من هنا يمكننا قراءة العنوان بوجه آخر، بحيث يصبح هومبرت هنا هو الثورة الإسلامية في إيران التي تصنع نموذجاً ترى أنه هو المرأة، كما فعل هومبرت مع لوليتا، والمرأة الإيرانية هي لوليتا المسكينة التي تعاني تحت ممارسات هومبرت وسلبه لحريتها وسعادتها ليطفئ من خلالها صورته هو عن المرأة، وكيف يجب أن تكون.
لا يغيب عنا أن مفهوم الحرية لدى نفيسي غربي بامتياز، فهي لا تكتفي بمعارضة الحجاب المفروض على النساء الإيرانيات، بل حتى منع الخمور ولحم الخنزير !! والذي نجدها تتلذذ بأكله في أحد فصول الكتاب !!
القيمة الحقيقية للكتاب لدي، هي في تفاعل نفيسي وطالباتها مع الكتب، مع نابوكوف وأوستن وفيتزجيرالد وهنري جيمس، كيف يمكن قراءة الكتاب وربطه بحياة الإنسان، كيف يمكن ربطه بالعنف، بالوصاية، بالحرب - العراقية الإيرانية -، كيف يمكن الفرار إلى الكتب، إلى المؤلفين البعيدين ورؤاهم وأفكارهم.
كما أننا نشهد كيف انقلب المجتمع بعد الثورة، وصارت الكتب وشخصياتها تحاكم في قاعات الدرس، وكيف صارت نفيسي تحاول التعامل مع طلابها المتعصبين الراغبين في تجريم الأدب الغربي واعتباره جزءً لا يتجزأ من الغرب الاستعماري.
من أجمل - وأقسى برأيي – ما أشارت إليه نفيسي في حياتها في إيران، هو عندما تذهب إلى المكتبة الوحيدة المتبقية في طهران التي تبيع الأدب الغربي، حيث يحثها البائع على أن تأخذ كل ما تقدر عليه، فكل هذه الكتب ستتم مصادرتها قريباً، مجرد تخيل مشهدها وهي تأخذ بعض الكتب، وتعيد أخرى، وتحسب كم معها من المال؟ محزن جداً لأي قارئ يعرف لذة الحصول على الكتب، وقسوة الحرمان منها.
وكذا علاقتها بمن كانت تدعوه (ساحرها)، وهو أديب إيراني كانت تقضي معه أوقات أدبية وفكرية بامتياز، وكانت تعتد بآرائه ومشورته، وهي علاقة نادرة، يصعب الحصول عليها حد الحسد.
الكتاب مثير، وخاصة في فكرة الارتباط بالكتب، ومحاولة قراءتها بطريقة عاطفية ترتبط بحياتنا.
مرة أخرى، نحن في طهران، ولكننا لا نتتبع في هذه المرة قصة حب خفية، ولا تتقحم سردنا مشاهد مستعادة من (ألف ليلة وليلة)، بل نحن مع دكتورة متخصصة في الأدب الإنجليزي وطالباتها، اللواتي قررن إنشاء ما يشبه نادي كتاب، يؤين إليه في كل خميس، هناك حيث يمكن للنقاش أن يمتد بحرية، بعدما تقلصت مساحة الحرية في إيران الثورة الإسلامية.
عنوان الكتاب مغري جداً، وخاصة للقارئ الغربي، فلوليتا – رواية نابوكوف الشهيرة – رمز غربي لجرأة الأفكار، وقدرتها على مصادمة القارئ، فأن تقرأ هذه الرواية الإشكالية، وأين؟ في طهران؟ فهذا ما يبدو محاولة للتحرر من إسار الوصاية بجميع أشكالها، ولكن هناك معنى آخر متضمن في العنوان، نفهمه عندما نقرأ رؤية آذار نفيسي لرواية لوليتا ولشخصية (هومبرت)، فشخصية هومبرت التي تتسيد السرد في رواية (لوليتا)، وتبدو لامعة، تعيد نفيسي قراءتها بطريقة بارعة، لتظهر وجهها الآخر، فهومبرت ليس إلا عجوزاً قذراً، يسيطر على لوليتا المسكينة ويغتصبها، ولوليتا ليست كما يظنها الآخرون تلك المرأة اللعوب، لا، إنها مجرد طفلة منتهكة، تنجو في النهاية من جلادها، وتفر بحياتها، فلذا هي بطلة مظلومة.
من هنا يمكننا قراءة العنوان بوجه آخر، بحيث يصبح هومبرت هنا هو الثورة الإسلامية في إيران التي تصنع نموذجاً ترى أنه هو المرأة، كما فعل هومبرت مع لوليتا، والمرأة الإيرانية هي لوليتا المسكينة التي تعاني تحت ممارسات هومبرت وسلبه لحريتها وسعادتها ليطفئ من خلالها صورته هو عن المرأة، وكيف يجب أن تكون.
لا يغيب عنا أن مفهوم الحرية لدى نفيسي غربي بامتياز، فهي لا تكتفي بمعارضة الحجاب المفروض على النساء الإيرانيات، بل حتى منع الخمور ولحم الخنزير !! والذي نجدها تتلذذ بأكله في أحد فصول الكتاب !!
القيمة الحقيقية للكتاب لدي، هي في تفاعل نفيسي وطالباتها مع الكتب، مع نابوكوف وأوستن وفيتزجيرالد وهنري جيمس، كيف يمكن قراءة الكتاب وربطه بحياة الإنسان، كيف يمكن ربطه بالعنف، بالوصاية، بالحرب - العراقية الإيرانية -، كيف يمكن الفرار إلى الكتب، إلى المؤلفين البعيدين ورؤاهم وأفكارهم.
كما أننا نشهد كيف انقلب المجتمع بعد الثورة، وصارت الكتب وشخصياتها تحاكم في قاعات الدرس، وكيف صارت نفيسي تحاول التعامل مع طلابها المتعصبين الراغبين في تجريم الأدب الغربي واعتباره جزءً لا يتجزأ من الغرب الاستعماري.
من أجمل - وأقسى برأيي – ما أشارت إليه نفيسي في حياتها في إيران، هو عندما تذهب إلى المكتبة الوحيدة المتبقية في طهران التي تبيع الأدب الغربي، حيث يحثها البائع على أن تأخذ كل ما تقدر عليه، فكل هذه الكتب ستتم مصادرتها قريباً، مجرد تخيل مشهدها وهي تأخذ بعض الكتب، وتعيد أخرى، وتحسب كم معها من المال؟ محزن جداً لأي قارئ يعرف لذة الحصول على الكتب، وقسوة الحرمان منها.
وكذا علاقتها بمن كانت تدعوه (ساحرها)، وهو أديب إيراني كانت تقضي معه أوقات أدبية وفكرية بامتياز، وكانت تعتد بآرائه ومشورته، وهي علاقة نادرة، يصعب الحصول عليها حد الحسد.
الكتاب مثير، وخاصة في فكرة الارتباط بالكتب، ومحاولة قراءتها بطريقة عاطفية ترتبط بحياتنا.
July 5, 2021
In un mondo grigio, così come la Rivoluzione islamica impone, Azar Nafisi, docente di Letteratura, ormai fuoriuscita dal sistema accademico, organizza un seminario a casa sua.
Tema del seminario e il rapporto tra realtà e finzione letteraria.
La realtà è quella di un Iran stravolto e travolto dall’integralismo le cui leggi soffocano ogni individualità ed in particolare quella femminile.
Avvolte in ampie vesti nere e veli, le donne assumono sguardi e comportamenti apatici che cercano di non destare sospetti, pena la morte per lapidazione.
Nafisi sfoglia il libro della memoria raccontandoci di questi incontri ma anche del suo passato da studentessa americana, prima, e del suo ritorno, poi, in una nazione che assume forme sempre più tragiche fino a capitolare.
L’amore sincero e profondo per la Letteratura è la nicchia, il rifugio in cui poter esprimere la propria ribellione come donne e cittadine.
Così leggendo ed analizzando “Lolita” tra le mura protette del proprio soggiorno, si sfugge a quello che accade fuori.
L’immaginazione letteraria diventa un’arma silente con cui colorare il sogno di una realtà diversa.
Quello che c’è al di là dei vetri di una finestra è solo negazione.
La Repubblica Islamica è colpevole ed è in debito con le donne a cui è impedito tutto, come ad esempio:
”... mangiare un gelato o ridere in pubblico, innamorarsi, tenersi per mano, mettere il rossetto, leggere Lolita a Teheran.”
Attraverso Nabokov, Fitzgerald, James e Jane Austen, si fa strada un grido di rivolta.
Contro la spasmodica fame di morte, si oppone l’esaltazione della vita.
“Lolita” non come mera storia di un pedofilo ma come ” denuncia dell’essenza stessa di ogni totalitarismo.”
“Il grande Gatsby” non semplicemente un romanzo sul tradimento ma sulla complessità della vita dove l’ossessione che guida la realizzazione di un sogno diventa un moto distruttivo.
Così la Letteratura diventa spazio di resistenza.
Una lettura che mi ha appassionata molto e mi ha regalato non solo tanti spunti di lettura ma occhi nuovi per attraversare il magico mondo della letteratura.
” Ogni fiaba offre la possibilità di trascendere i limiti del presente e dunque, in un certo senso, ci permette alcune libertà che la vita ci nega. Tutte le grandi opere di narrativa, per quanto cupa sia la realtà che descrivono, hanno in sé il nocciolo di una rivolta, l’affermazione della vita contro la sua stessa precarietà. Ma è nel modo in cui l’autore riracconta la realtà, e ne acquisisce il controllo dando origine a un mondo nuovo, che questa rivolta prende forza: tutte le grandi opere d’arte, avrei dichiarato con solennità, celebrano l’insubordinazione contro i tradimenti, gli orrori e i tranelli della vita. La perfezione e la bellezza del linguaggio si ribellano alla mediocrità e allo squallore di ciò che descrivono.”
Tema del seminario e il rapporto tra realtà e finzione letteraria.
La realtà è quella di un Iran stravolto e travolto dall’integralismo le cui leggi soffocano ogni individualità ed in particolare quella femminile.
Avvolte in ampie vesti nere e veli, le donne assumono sguardi e comportamenti apatici che cercano di non destare sospetti, pena la morte per lapidazione.
Nafisi sfoglia il libro della memoria raccontandoci di questi incontri ma anche del suo passato da studentessa americana, prima, e del suo ritorno, poi, in una nazione che assume forme sempre più tragiche fino a capitolare.
L’amore sincero e profondo per la Letteratura è la nicchia, il rifugio in cui poter esprimere la propria ribellione come donne e cittadine.
Così leggendo ed analizzando “Lolita” tra le mura protette del proprio soggiorno, si sfugge a quello che accade fuori.
L’immaginazione letteraria diventa un’arma silente con cui colorare il sogno di una realtà diversa.
Quello che c’è al di là dei vetri di una finestra è solo negazione.
La Repubblica Islamica è colpevole ed è in debito con le donne a cui è impedito tutto, come ad esempio:
”... mangiare un gelato o ridere in pubblico, innamorarsi, tenersi per mano, mettere il rossetto, leggere Lolita a Teheran.”
Attraverso Nabokov, Fitzgerald, James e Jane Austen, si fa strada un grido di rivolta.
Contro la spasmodica fame di morte, si oppone l’esaltazione della vita.
“Lolita” non come mera storia di un pedofilo ma come ” denuncia dell’essenza stessa di ogni totalitarismo.”
“Il grande Gatsby” non semplicemente un romanzo sul tradimento ma sulla complessità della vita dove l’ossessione che guida la realizzazione di un sogno diventa un moto distruttivo.
Così la Letteratura diventa spazio di resistenza.
Una lettura che mi ha appassionata molto e mi ha regalato non solo tanti spunti di lettura ma occhi nuovi per attraversare il magico mondo della letteratura.
” Ogni fiaba offre la possibilità di trascendere i limiti del presente e dunque, in un certo senso, ci permette alcune libertà che la vita ci nega. Tutte le grandi opere di narrativa, per quanto cupa sia la realtà che descrivono, hanno in sé il nocciolo di una rivolta, l’affermazione della vita contro la sua stessa precarietà. Ma è nel modo in cui l’autore riracconta la realtà, e ne acquisisce il controllo dando origine a un mondo nuovo, che questa rivolta prende forza: tutte le grandi opere d’arte, avrei dichiarato con solennità, celebrano l’insubordinazione contro i tradimenti, gli orrori e i tranelli della vita. La perfezione e la bellezza del linguaggio si ribellano alla mediocrità e allo squallore di ciò che descrivono.”
March 19, 2017
هیچ انقلابی را نمی شود عظیم تلقی کرد مگر آن که زنان یک کشور و نحوه ی زندگیشان را دگرگون کند - گاندی
اگر این جمله گاندی رو معیار قرار بدیم، انقلاب ما بدون شک بویی از عظمت نبرده. لغو قوانین حمایت از خانواده، پایین آوردن سن ازدواج دختران، حجاب اجباری، مجاز نمودن چند همسری، پدیده ازدواج موقت و ... همه و همه زن ایرانی رو در حد یک کالا پایین آورد. کالایی که بزرگترین هدفش ارضای نیاز های جنس مخالف شده. و به اصطلاح این جهاد اکبرش هست.و اگر فکر می کنید مشکلات و گرفتاری های زنان ایرانی که در کتاب خانوم نفیسی می خونید مربوط به اوایل انقلابه و الان اوضاع بهتر شده، ارجاعتون می دم به سخنرانی های چند وقت پیش یکی از ائمه جمعه که گفته بود زنی از دید اسلام خوبه که گوشه خونه باشه و کسی نبینتش، ارجاعتون میدم به گشت ارشاد و یا اسید پاشی های اصفهان.
کتاب زندگی خانوم نفیسی و تعدادی از دانشجویان دخترش رو از اوایل انقلاب تا اواخر ریاست جمهوری رفسنجانی در بر می گیره، ینی زمانی که دیگه خانوم نفیسی تصمیم گرفتن از ایران برای همیشه برن. کتاب خوبیه برای این که از جزییات انقلاب ما آگاه بشید، خصوصا از لحاظ تاثیراتی که بر زندگی زنان داشت . تنها ایرادی که میشه به کتاب گرفت نقد های ادبی گاه و بیگاهش بود. هر فصل به نام یک نویسنده یا اثر ادبی مشهور نامگذاری شده و بخش هایی از هر فصل به نقد اون آثار اون نویسنده تخصیص داده می شه که خوندنش برای من غالبا ملال آور بود.
در جایی از کتاب در واکنش به این که دانشجویان به اصطلاح خط امامی سر کلاس ها به آثاری که مورد تدریس قرار داده میشه انگ امپریالیستی و مروج فساد و گمراه کننده بودن می زنن، خانوم نفیسی به درستی اشاره می کنه که اصلا از این مساله شگفت زده نیست. چون امثال این آدم ها به هر چیزی که نمی فهمن حمله می کنن. این دانشجو ها حتی کتاب رو نمی خوندن اما باهاش مخالفت می کردن! به نظرم ایران آینده کمتر به مستر بحری ها، مستر قمی ها و مستر نیازی ها و بیشتر به نیما ها و آذین ها و نسرین ها نیاز داره.ایران آینده جوان هایی رو می خواد که بخونن، بفهمن و تحلیل کنن و تحمل شنیدن آرای مخالف رو داشته باشند. نه جوان هایی که از هر چیزی که نمی فهمند و با عقاید و ایمان آن ها سازگار نیست می ترسند و به اون حمله می کنند.
March 7, 2018
The title itself is a rather catchy one, however, I must add that it is an important book. There are so many aspects of this memoir that I value a lot.
For me it is less about totalitarian Regimes and Iran, it is more about courage and integrity in times of crisis particularly when one is not allowed to do something as harmless as reading, and therefore one stands up against the bullies. When I read this book, I l felt like I were in a literature class with Ms. Nafisi her students. Reading forbidden books, discussing writers and then using imaginations to combat the world around; or shall I say, one reads to remain sane inside and not let any regressive forces break the human will and intelligence, and that's what these Iranians do.
Very often such narratives are often understood or read in regard to one set of people, one country, one people, the moment we fall in such a trap the very purpose of the book is defeated. The critique in the book is the critique of power, how freedoms are curtailed if one does not pay attention when we ignore and look away. While it is most definitely a book about Iran, but it should not only be read as a portrayal of regressive Iran and the superior west. I guess writers like Nabokov, Fitzgerald, Lawrence are read and claimed in Iran or in other countries for the same reasons they are read in the west. When these writers are banned and their books are burnt in Iran, it is exactly for the same reasons these same writers were once banned in the west.
Of course, one feels quite suffocated when one reads the kind of restrictions that are imposed, particularly, on women in Iran. As a reader, I was aghast to read that women have to be in 'hijab' even in a classroom. But the book also tells that it is the new regime that has imposed these laws, Iran before the revolution has been radically different.
Looking at the contemporary world, it seems absurd now that Muslim women are now policed and shamed in the same way, but for different reasons, not only in Iran but also in the most advanced nations of the world. Personally, I think that the whole politics of 'Hijab' whether of the Mullahs or the Trumpists mirror each other.
I am sure someone like Ms. Nafisi who wrote such an exemplary book concerning the situation in Iran in the days of revolution must have now, being a US resident, a lot to do in the US.
For me it is less about totalitarian Regimes and Iran, it is more about courage and integrity in times of crisis particularly when one is not allowed to do something as harmless as reading, and therefore one stands up against the bullies. When I read this book, I l felt like I were in a literature class with Ms. Nafisi her students. Reading forbidden books, discussing writers and then using imaginations to combat the world around; or shall I say, one reads to remain sane inside and not let any regressive forces break the human will and intelligence, and that's what these Iranians do.
Very often such narratives are often understood or read in regard to one set of people, one country, one people, the moment we fall in such a trap the very purpose of the book is defeated. The critique in the book is the critique of power, how freedoms are curtailed if one does not pay attention when we ignore and look away. While it is most definitely a book about Iran, but it should not only be read as a portrayal of regressive Iran and the superior west. I guess writers like Nabokov, Fitzgerald, Lawrence are read and claimed in Iran or in other countries for the same reasons they are read in the west. When these writers are banned and their books are burnt in Iran, it is exactly for the same reasons these same writers were once banned in the west.
Of course, one feels quite suffocated when one reads the kind of restrictions that are imposed, particularly, on women in Iran. As a reader, I was aghast to read that women have to be in 'hijab' even in a classroom. But the book also tells that it is the new regime that has imposed these laws, Iran before the revolution has been radically different.
Looking at the contemporary world, it seems absurd now that Muslim women are now policed and shamed in the same way, but for different reasons, not only in Iran but also in the most advanced nations of the world. Personally, I think that the whole politics of 'Hijab' whether of the Mullahs or the Trumpists mirror each other.
I am sure someone like Ms. Nafisi who wrote such an exemplary book concerning the situation in Iran in the days of revolution must have now, being a US resident, a lot to do in the US.
April 24, 2023
This book was the perfect opportunity for me to learn things and witness insights about a country and a culture I don't know much and for that I am truly grateful.
It is a beautiful story, sensible and educative and definitely very touchy.
It is a beautiful story, sensible and educative and definitely very touchy.
November 10, 2023
I have tried twice. I tried reading Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books and ended up putting it down. Then I tried listening to it on audiobook and I always prefer audiobooks when the author narrates. But I can't finish it. It is going back to the DNF pile. I may try it again in 2024.
What I like about the book:
* I am a huge fan of Azra Nafisi and consider her book, Read Dangerously: The Subversive Power of Literature in Troubled Times, as one of the top books I have read.
* I like women who buck societal norms and I cheer them on!
* I love literature as a way to teach different ideas, instill rebellion, and create change.
What I didn't like about the book:
* I haven't read Lolita and feel that if I had read it, perhaps I would better understand Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books. Perhaps it should be a prerequisite.
* The information and references seemed repetitive.
* The pace was too slow to keep me engaged.
What I like about the book:
* I am a huge fan of Azra Nafisi and consider her book, Read Dangerously: The Subversive Power of Literature in Troubled Times, as one of the top books I have read.
* I like women who buck societal norms and I cheer them on!
* I love literature as a way to teach different ideas, instill rebellion, and create change.
What I didn't like about the book:
* I haven't read Lolita and feel that if I had read it, perhaps I would better understand Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books. Perhaps it should be a prerequisite.
* The information and references seemed repetitive.
* The pace was too slow to keep me engaged.
February 10, 2017
I read this book while I was down with the flu, which added a dimention to my reading as I was isolated in my room for a couple of days. I read some of the reviews for this book on Good Reads and I must say my experience of this book is quite different from what some other people have reported. Azar's opening two chapters were enough to suck me into her world and engross me. Her reading of Lolita was wonderful and I like the way she able to bring her reading of this book, her reflections on Humbolt into the context of her own experiences in Tehran. One of the criticisms of this book that I read on Good Reads is that her reading material is too western centric - i.e. that she gives too much praise to the literature of America and therefore might give the American reader the impression that their lit is 'better' than Islamic or Iranian literature. I didn't read her book choices in this way. In a way, because America became such a central focus of hatred for the regime in Iran during the revolution she picked this material to demonstrate how biased and myopic this focus was, and how it failed to see the complexity of American life - i.e. that books like Lolita or the Great Gatsby were not recieved with one interpretation in America and that many of the criticisms leveled at those books in the Iranian context were also been discussed in America - i.e. that they were immoral or had flawed heros.
She talks quite considerably about the difficulty of becoming as she calls it 'irrelevant' in her own country. She describes the constant scrutiny that women get on the streets if they are seen to be too alluring or if they wear 'pink socks' or let their nails grow or have a strand of hair fall out from under her head covering. I was thinking of this in the light of my own 'Australian' context. Obviously my life is not as restricted in terms of what I wear or how I choose to adorn or comport myself in public. In fact, these choices are fairly banal and mundane. Yet, for Azar this restriction caused her to examine aspects of herself and her society to work out what really mattered. Because the system made socks important, choosing to wear pink or striped socks became a subversive act. Beyond the immediate existential questions of how an individual is able to deal with having their public and private lives so micro managed, I also enjoyed her questioning of the effects of these policies on society as a whole and especially her understanding of the role of literature in allowing a person to understand complexity in life as a whole.
I must say, when I read her passage about the 'trial' of the novel 'the great Gatsby' in her class, I experienced a different book than I had read. She managed to inject me with a wonderful sense of excitement and a desire to reread Gatsby with new eyes.
She talks quite considerably about the difficulty of becoming as she calls it 'irrelevant' in her own country. She describes the constant scrutiny that women get on the streets if they are seen to be too alluring or if they wear 'pink socks' or let their nails grow or have a strand of hair fall out from under her head covering. I was thinking of this in the light of my own 'Australian' context. Obviously my life is not as restricted in terms of what I wear or how I choose to adorn or comport myself in public. In fact, these choices are fairly banal and mundane. Yet, for Azar this restriction caused her to examine aspects of herself and her society to work out what really mattered. Because the system made socks important, choosing to wear pink or striped socks became a subversive act. Beyond the immediate existential questions of how an individual is able to deal with having their public and private lives so micro managed, I also enjoyed her questioning of the effects of these policies on society as a whole and especially her understanding of the role of literature in allowing a person to understand complexity in life as a whole.
I must say, when I read her passage about the 'trial' of the novel 'the great Gatsby' in her class, I experienced a different book than I had read. She managed to inject me with a wonderful sense of excitement and a desire to reread Gatsby with new eyes.
June 2, 2021
“إن أسوأ الجرائم التي يمكن أن ترتكبها عقول الأنظمة الشمولية هي أن تجعل مواطنيها وبضمنها ضحاياها شركاء في جرائمها. فحينما ترقص مع جلادك، وتشارك بنفسك في حكم الإعدام على نفسك، فإن ذلك الفعل هو أقصى درجات الوحشية”.
آذر نفيسي.
آذر نفيسي.
December 9, 2018
I'm utterly and absolutely in love with this book. It is a contemporary masterpiece, the kind that deserves to be called a classic upon publication. Reading Lolita in Tehran is such a rare mix of extraordinary philosophical writing, academic literature essays, national history and personal memoir, that it deserves to be called 'one of a kind'. Truth be told, I can think of a similar novel by one Croatian professor of literature (you wouldn't have heard of him), who has been just as successful in merging philosophy, literary criticism and memoir in his novel Tara, yet his story is obviously different because it is told from a point of view of a woman, a lady academic. “Do not, under any circumstances, belittle a work of fiction by trying to turn it into a carbon copy of real life; what we search for in fiction is not so much reality but the epiphany of truth.”
― Azar Nafisi, Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books
Speaking of literary critics and professors, have you ever noticed how only a few literature professors become writers themselves? There are exceptions, but studying and teaching literature at an university level is a demanding job. It is the kind of job where you spend a lot of creative energy. As Orwell said, it is hard to imagine someone teaching all day then sitting down to work on a book. Teaching is one of the most creative jobs out there (if you do it right). You constantly have to reinvent yourself, update your teaching methods and adjust your classes to your student's needs. Speaking of teachers, I did find Nafisi's teaching recollections fascinating.
This book works quite well as a mixed genre. I feel like the only review that would be worthy of such a novel would be a book itself, preferably one as intelligently and poetically written as Reading Lollita in Tehran. It was hard to tell what I found more fascinating about this book, the modern political history of Iran, the moral dilemma of wearing a veil or being forced to abandon teaching, the nearly impossible challenge of keeping high academic standards in a militant Islamic Republic, amazing literary essays or Nafisi's personal memories( and within them hidden the tales of her students and family members). Nafisi tells her tale from a distinctly female point of view. Most of the characters in the book are Iranian women, and I feel that this book is first and foremost about them, about what it means to be a women in Iran. There are some important male characters that feature in Nafisi's novel as well, such as the magician and her husband, but I think the author intended to give the voice to all the Iranian women, a voice that has been taken from them.
I wondered about how Iranian women must have felt a number of times. This book gave me some answers. They are not easy answers, but they deserve to be heard. Many of us who have seen the photographs of Iran from the seventies and the eighties find it heard to connect them with present day Iran. The photographs of beautiful young woman walking in perfectly maintained parks wearing flare jeans, mini skirts and T-shirts. What it was like for those women to see their daughters and granddaughter publicly beaten and lashed because a strain of hair escaped their veil?
“These students of mine, like the rest of their generation, were different from mine in one fundamental aspect. My generation complained of a loss, the void in our lives that was created when our past was stolen from us, making us exile in our own country. Yet we had a past to compare with the present; we had memories and images of what had been taken away. But my girls spoke constantly of stolen kisses, films they had never seen and the wind they had never felt on their skin. This generation had no past. Their memory was of a half-articulated desire, something they had never had. It was this lack, their sense of longing for the ordinary, taken-for-granted aspects of life, that gave their words a certain luminous quality akin to poetry.”
― Azar Nafisi, Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books
There is only one thing in which I disagree with Nafisi. When she says: " It is only through literature that one can put oneself in someone else's shoes and understand the other's different and contradictory sides and refrain from becoming too ruthless. Outside the sphere of literature only one aspect of individuals is revealed. But if you understand their different dimensions you cannot easily murder them." I wouldn't agree that it is not only through literature that one can learn to emphasize with others. There are other ways, not necessarily connected with reading. Art exists in many mediums, and literature is not the only way to express the complexities of our human hearts. Nevertheless, Nafisi is right in pinpointing the reason why totalitarian regimes hate good literature. Moreover, she is absolutely correct in describing the power of literature. No wonder that the totalitarian regimes hate literature so much. Good literature has the potential of making us better individuals. In that sense, books are truly magic.
Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books.
If you examine the full title of this book carefully, you can get an idea of what this book is about. It's indeed a book about the reading experience in Tehran. It is about studying, reading and teaching Nabokov, Fitzgerald, James and etc under the totalitarian regime. It's about reading in general and what it means to be a reader. It is a memoir in books, because books are an essential part of it. But it is also so much more. A book about what it is to be human, that answers the question about why do we need art and literature in the first place. It is as educating as it is touching. I don't remember when I have last been so deeply touched by a novel. It's absolutely a masterpiece. A must read for lovers of literature.
― Azar Nafisi, Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books
Speaking of literary critics and professors, have you ever noticed how only a few literature professors become writers themselves? There are exceptions, but studying and teaching literature at an university level is a demanding job. It is the kind of job where you spend a lot of creative energy. As Orwell said, it is hard to imagine someone teaching all day then sitting down to work on a book. Teaching is one of the most creative jobs out there (if you do it right). You constantly have to reinvent yourself, update your teaching methods and adjust your classes to your student's needs. Speaking of teachers, I did find Nafisi's teaching recollections fascinating.
This book works quite well as a mixed genre. I feel like the only review that would be worthy of such a novel would be a book itself, preferably one as intelligently and poetically written as Reading Lollita in Tehran. It was hard to tell what I found more fascinating about this book, the modern political history of Iran, the moral dilemma of wearing a veil or being forced to abandon teaching, the nearly impossible challenge of keeping high academic standards in a militant Islamic Republic, amazing literary essays or Nafisi's personal memories( and within them hidden the tales of her students and family members). Nafisi tells her tale from a distinctly female point of view. Most of the characters in the book are Iranian women, and I feel that this book is first and foremost about them, about what it means to be a women in Iran. There are some important male characters that feature in Nafisi's novel as well, such as the magician and her husband, but I think the author intended to give the voice to all the Iranian women, a voice that has been taken from them.
I wondered about how Iranian women must have felt a number of times. This book gave me some answers. They are not easy answers, but they deserve to be heard. Many of us who have seen the photographs of Iran from the seventies and the eighties find it heard to connect them with present day Iran. The photographs of beautiful young woman walking in perfectly maintained parks wearing flare jeans, mini skirts and T-shirts. What it was like for those women to see their daughters and granddaughter publicly beaten and lashed because a strain of hair escaped their veil?
“These students of mine, like the rest of their generation, were different from mine in one fundamental aspect. My generation complained of a loss, the void in our lives that was created when our past was stolen from us, making us exile in our own country. Yet we had a past to compare with the present; we had memories and images of what had been taken away. But my girls spoke constantly of stolen kisses, films they had never seen and the wind they had never felt on their skin. This generation had no past. Their memory was of a half-articulated desire, something they had never had. It was this lack, their sense of longing for the ordinary, taken-for-granted aspects of life, that gave their words a certain luminous quality akin to poetry.”
― Azar Nafisi, Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books
There is only one thing in which I disagree with Nafisi. When she says: " It is only through literature that one can put oneself in someone else's shoes and understand the other's different and contradictory sides and refrain from becoming too ruthless. Outside the sphere of literature only one aspect of individuals is revealed. But if you understand their different dimensions you cannot easily murder them." I wouldn't agree that it is not only through literature that one can learn to emphasize with others. There are other ways, not necessarily connected with reading. Art exists in many mediums, and literature is not the only way to express the complexities of our human hearts. Nevertheless, Nafisi is right in pinpointing the reason why totalitarian regimes hate good literature. Moreover, she is absolutely correct in describing the power of literature. No wonder that the totalitarian regimes hate literature so much. Good literature has the potential of making us better individuals. In that sense, books are truly magic.
Reading Lolita in Tehran: A Memoir in Books.
If you examine the full title of this book carefully, you can get an idea of what this book is about. It's indeed a book about the reading experience in Tehran. It is about studying, reading and teaching Nabokov, Fitzgerald, James and etc under the totalitarian regime. It's about reading in general and what it means to be a reader. It is a memoir in books, because books are an essential part of it. But it is also so much more. A book about what it is to be human, that answers the question about why do we need art and literature in the first place. It is as educating as it is touching. I don't remember when I have last been so deeply touched by a novel. It's absolutely a masterpiece. A must read for lovers of literature.
January 19, 2021
Lezioni di vita
La professoressa Azar Nafisi, in piena rivoluzione islamica racconta il suo percorso emotivo, didattico e morale nella Teheran degli anni ‘80. Khomeini è salito al potere dopo lo scià e moltissime cose sono cambiate. Le donne sono le prime a subire i cambiamenti di questa “rivoluzione”, che non è solo politica chiaramente. Portare il velo, accompagnarsi per strada solo con fratello o padre, perquisizioni, restrizioni non solo fisiche ma anche morali e mentali. La Nafisi insegna all’università e cerca di dare un taglio europeo alle sue lezioni, non per una volontà di occidentalizzare, ma perché gli uomini del suo paese che lei forma, possano un giorno avere la possibilità di saper scegliere. Comincia così un seminario per sette giovani studentesse, che ogni giovedì mattina riunisce a casa sua con cui elabora, confronta, scava testi, caratteri, personaggi.
Prendono vita così Nabokov con la sua Lolita, processi a Gatsby e al suo essere frivolo, crociate contro la Daisy Miller di James e dibattiti accesi su Jane Austen. Ma non c’è solo questo. C’è la guerra, ci sono i bombardamenti, gli allarmi, le morti. Ci sono le vite e i sentimenti delle sette giovani e del loro mentore che si scoprono, che si confrontano, che capiscono cosa vogliono e fanno di tutto per prenderselo. C’è la volontà e la forza delle donne. La Nafisi vive con loro questi avvenimenti, neanche la guerra la allontana dal suo paese. Saranno le restrizioni e l’impossibilità di potersi esprimere come vuole, di insegnare come può, a doverle dolorosamente farle scegliere di allontanarsi, perdendo gli amici più cari, compagni di patimenti e dolori ma anche di soddisfazioni letterarie.
Quando ho cominciato a leggere questo libro mi aspettavo un taglio molto diverso. Invece mi sono ritrovata davanti ad una prosa che magistralmente si snodava pagina dopo pagina, intensa e profondamente consapevole.
C’è un’immagine bellissima all’inizio del libro ed è quella che mi è rimasta più impressa: sette ragazze con il loro velo scuro immortalate su una foto con dietro un muro bianco e subito dopo le stesse ragazze senza velo. Colori, capelli ricci, sorrisi. Sono sempre le stesse ragazze?
La professoressa Azar Nafisi, in piena rivoluzione islamica racconta il suo percorso emotivo, didattico e morale nella Teheran degli anni ‘80. Khomeini è salito al potere dopo lo scià e moltissime cose sono cambiate. Le donne sono le prime a subire i cambiamenti di questa “rivoluzione”, che non è solo politica chiaramente. Portare il velo, accompagnarsi per strada solo con fratello o padre, perquisizioni, restrizioni non solo fisiche ma anche morali e mentali. La Nafisi insegna all’università e cerca di dare un taglio europeo alle sue lezioni, non per una volontà di occidentalizzare, ma perché gli uomini del suo paese che lei forma, possano un giorno avere la possibilità di saper scegliere. Comincia così un seminario per sette giovani studentesse, che ogni giovedì mattina riunisce a casa sua con cui elabora, confronta, scava testi, caratteri, personaggi.
Prendono vita così Nabokov con la sua Lolita, processi a Gatsby e al suo essere frivolo, crociate contro la Daisy Miller di James e dibattiti accesi su Jane Austen. Ma non c’è solo questo. C’è la guerra, ci sono i bombardamenti, gli allarmi, le morti. Ci sono le vite e i sentimenti delle sette giovani e del loro mentore che si scoprono, che si confrontano, che capiscono cosa vogliono e fanno di tutto per prenderselo. C’è la volontà e la forza delle donne. La Nafisi vive con loro questi avvenimenti, neanche la guerra la allontana dal suo paese. Saranno le restrizioni e l’impossibilità di potersi esprimere come vuole, di insegnare come può, a doverle dolorosamente farle scegliere di allontanarsi, perdendo gli amici più cari, compagni di patimenti e dolori ma anche di soddisfazioni letterarie.
Quando ho cominciato a leggere questo libro mi aspettavo un taglio molto diverso. Invece mi sono ritrovata davanti ad una prosa che magistralmente si snodava pagina dopo pagina, intensa e profondamente consapevole.
C’è un’immagine bellissima all’inizio del libro ed è quella che mi è rimasta più impressa: sette ragazze con il loro velo scuro immortalate su una foto con dietro un muro bianco e subito dopo le stesse ragazze senza velo. Colori, capelli ricci, sorrisi. Sono sempre le stesse ragazze?
October 19, 2007
This was a tough read. I suppose I would have appreciated it more if I had read all the books that were referenced in this one. And if I studied literature, studied the meaning of every scene, every characterization, every image from the books, I might have appreciated it.
Unfortunately this was much too deep and a serious study of literature. I enjoyed her accounts of life in Tehran and the characters in her book. I enjoyed her personal accounts and her life stories. Unfortunately true life was weaved into the fiction from novels i've never read, so I couldn't appreciate her insights and found her writing high-brow and much too seriously intellectual for me to read it without zoning out every so often.
The middle parts of the book go into depth about her background and her life experiences which I found the most interesting. The beginning and end delve far too much into the literary world. I suppose if you're a serious student of literature this book is a gold. But me being a casual reader, it was hard to swallow.
Unfortunately this was much too deep and a serious study of literature. I enjoyed her accounts of life in Tehran and the characters in her book. I enjoyed her personal accounts and her life stories. Unfortunately true life was weaved into the fiction from novels i've never read, so I couldn't appreciate her insights and found her writing high-brow and much too seriously intellectual for me to read it without zoning out every so often.
The middle parts of the book go into depth about her background and her life experiences which I found the most interesting. The beginning and end delve far too much into the literary world. I suppose if you're a serious student of literature this book is a gold. But me being a casual reader, it was hard to swallow.
April 23, 2008
I am a lover of books. I am a lover of history. I am a lover of cultures. Consequently, I expected to love this book. Sadly, I found my dissappointment growing with each page I turned. The premise of the novel was certainly interesting- exploring times, the way that they were viewed, the oppression of women, religious fanaticism and political regimes that adopted Sharia, family, and the overall way that a country grew dissillusioned with iteself through novels was certainly an interesting one. Yet, the novel failed to fulfill its promise. I was very hopeful at the beginning, I quite enjoyed the section on Lolita, and I feel I would have even had I not read Nabokov previously. However, then, as we turned to Gatsby, that initial love died. Now, don't get me wrong, it had nothing to do with Gatsby itself. I adore The Great Gatsby and F.Scott Fitzgerald. But there was such an abrupt shift in time and place, and even in character- I lost all connection I had to the girls I had grown attached to, and I no longer felt any attachment to the author herself. Suddenly, she started to become very self-centered. Some of her complaints seemed too petty, after all there are problems within every nation, but more than that, it was not that she sought refuge in her books, but that she expected others to do the same that annoyed me. I enjoyed the actual analysis on Gatsby, but I the author grew more and more conceited as it went on. It just continued from there on. The novel continued to offer disconnected snapshots of life, that while powerful, never allowed me to truly emphasize because as quickly as they came they faded. Always there was a fleeing to books. And while I could see how the books connected, none seemed to resonate with the actual problems in the country as much as Lolita had. Gatsby and the failed dream I could understand- by Daisy Miller I was lost. Now, admittedly, I have never much enjoyed James, but I found that besides the point, asI also disliked other sections dealing with books I enjoyed. I was truly hoping for the book to redeem itself with an intelligent and relevant discussion of Pride and Prejudice. It failed utterly. I found the end dissatisfying, less connected than anything previously, and it had even lost what had made it charming to begin with- no longer was there an insightful discussion of novels, nor did I feel anything for the author or even the students much at this point. They were completely removed from me, I saw them through a lens, as studies not as actual people. Since this is a memoir, and these people are all real, this is a great failing. They are people who are supposed to come alive, and I felt as they were besotted with themselves, their own pretension, particularly Nafisi's, was unbearable. There were some positive aspects of the book- it gave me a great insight, if often tinged- I felt Nafisi was too biased, I understand why, but I thought that she regarded all of the revolutionaries as inferior beings, not intellectual in the least simply because they had different ideals- into the Iranian revolution and the culture there, and gave me new insights into some of my favorite novels. I am only saddened that the clear bias and narcissism of the author ruined this experience for me. It could have been a great intellectual and cultural study. As it was, it was merely decent, and while the subject material was engaging, I was wishing for it to end.
June 21, 2023
A very slow-paced memoir that uses literary analysis as a guide through the author's history as an educator. I loved the book discussion, but the format made the timeline hard to follow.
Click here to hear more of my thoughts on this book over on my Booktube channel, abookolive.
Click here to hear more of my thoughts on this book over on my Booktube channel, abookolive.
April 27, 2018
La bellezza e l'inferno
[commento a fine lettura]
Se Azar Nafisi, nel 1997, non avesse lasciato definitivamente l'Iran alla volte degli Stati Uniti, probabilmente avremmo sentito parlare anche di lei da Roberto Saviano in quella bellissima puntata speciale di Che Tempo fa andata in onda a novembre; ed è per questo che gli rubo il titolo di un suo libro per quello del mio commento, perché la sua denuncia merita comunque di iscriverla in quella categoria di autori nonostante, e fortunatamente, non abbia pagato con la propria vita o con l'isolamento il suo coraggio: anche se già l'esilio volontario mi sembra una violenza sufficiente.
Potrebbe rientrare a pieno titolo nell'elenco di quegli scrittori e di quei giornalisti, testimoni del proprio tempo, che hanno deciso di mettere la propria sensibilità e la propria capacità di comunicare al servizio della società.
Azar Nafisi, professoressa di Letteratura inglese all'Università di Teheran, decide di farlo attraverso il suo lavoro e la sua passione: l'insegnamento della letteratura inglese e americana, in un'epoca, quella a cavallo con la Rivoluzione islamica nel 1979, in cui invece l'obiettivo degli integralisti è quello di censurare e demonizzare tutto quello che proviene dall'occidente.
Il compito che si prefigge la Nafisi, che organizza un seminario con alcune delle sue migliori allieve tra le mura della sua abitazione, al riparo dagli occhi vigili dei repressori e dei censori, è quello di lasciare alle sue ragazze "una finestra aperta sul mondo".
Lo studio di Nabokov, Austen, Fitzgerald e James e delle loro opere, permetterà più che di "sognare" la libertà di costumi e di pensiero dell'occidente, di analizzare, quasi di sezionare, il carattere e lo spirito interiore dei personaggi che le popolano.
Devo essere sincera, in un testo di tale portata emotiva, perché è innegabile fare un raffronto continuo con le nostre opportunità e le nostre continue possibilità di scelta in ogni campo o attività, non mi interessa il valore letterario dell'opera o la capacità stilistica dell'autrice; questo non è un romanzo, è un documento, è storia viva e come tale deve essere valutato e giudicato: è un libro capace di scatenare emozioni, ragionamenti e valutazioni e che offre diversi livelli di lettura e angolazioni da osservare gli eventi.
Quello storico, perché narra la storia di un popolo vicinissimo a noi, densa di avvenimenti e di capovolgimenti di fronte (è incredibile quando l'autrice raffronta l'adolescenza della sua generazione con quella delle sue allieve, paradossalmente più libera e spensierata: chi riesce a pensare ad un Iran dove le donne passeggiano senza velo, parlano liberamente di cinema e letteratura, ma soprattutto lo fanno con chi vogliono, quando vogliono e dove vogliono?) eppure così lontano da noi e da quella culla della civiltà che è stato con i Persiani.
Quello letterario, perché, seppur a volte un po' pedanti, tutte le sue riflessioni su Vladimir Nabokov, Jane Austen, Henry James e Francis Scott Fitzgerald, sono piene di ardore e di passione, di dedizione e di rinnovato stupore e non fanno altro che rinverdire i ricordi delle nostre letture o di stimolarne di nuove.
Quello emotivo ma, soprattutto quello femminile: perché è la donna che in Iran è quotidianamente violentata sotto tutti i punti di vista, e forse (quando ciò avviene), quello fisico è solo l'aspetto esteriore della violenza subita: la punta dell'iceberg.
Il tentativo di annientamento psicologico delle donne, da parte degli integralisti, è qualcosa di demoniaco, da far gridare al sacrilegio: eppure è camuffato da religione. L'empatia e l'immedesimazione sono istintive: da donna a donna.
La privazione di tutto, soprattutto dei sogni e del futuro, sono quello che le autorità iraniane impongono giorno dopo giorno ai danni delle donne in maniera particolare, ma anche a tutta una generazione alla quale, poco alla volta, credono di riuscire a far dimenticare cosa volesse dire essere liberi.
Doveva essere bello leggere Lolita a Teheran, ma anche Orgoglio e Pregiudizio, oppure Daisy Miller, oppure Il Grande Gatsby guardando le montagne innevate, o in quelle piccole sale da tè mangiando un dolcetto ricoperto di miele.
Doveva essere bello leggere Lolita a Teheran con il vento che scompigliava i capelli.
Grazie a Azar Nafisi e alle donne come lei è ancora possibile ricordarlo.
[commento in corso di lettura]
Dentro un libro la storia: la storia intorno a noi.
Leggere "Leggere Lolita a Teheran" e sentirsi dentro la storia.
È di oggi la notizia di nuovi scontri all'Università di Teheran.
Mentre leggo il romanzo biografico di Azar Nafisi, che narra della rivoluzione islamica e degli scontri all'Università di Teheran dei primissimi anni '80, mi accorgo che tutto cambia e tutto si trasforma, tranne qualcosa: ci sono popoli che sembrano aver perso per sempre il proprio diritto alla vita e alla "normalità".
[commento a fine lettura]
Se Azar Nafisi, nel 1997, non avesse lasciato definitivamente l'Iran alla volte degli Stati Uniti, probabilmente avremmo sentito parlare anche di lei da Roberto Saviano in quella bellissima puntata speciale di Che Tempo fa andata in onda a novembre; ed è per questo che gli rubo il titolo di un suo libro per quello del mio commento, perché la sua denuncia merita comunque di iscriverla in quella categoria di autori nonostante, e fortunatamente, non abbia pagato con la propria vita o con l'isolamento il suo coraggio: anche se già l'esilio volontario mi sembra una violenza sufficiente.
Potrebbe rientrare a pieno titolo nell'elenco di quegli scrittori e di quei giornalisti, testimoni del proprio tempo, che hanno deciso di mettere la propria sensibilità e la propria capacità di comunicare al servizio della società.
Azar Nafisi, professoressa di Letteratura inglese all'Università di Teheran, decide di farlo attraverso il suo lavoro e la sua passione: l'insegnamento della letteratura inglese e americana, in un'epoca, quella a cavallo con la Rivoluzione islamica nel 1979, in cui invece l'obiettivo degli integralisti è quello di censurare e demonizzare tutto quello che proviene dall'occidente.
Il compito che si prefigge la Nafisi, che organizza un seminario con alcune delle sue migliori allieve tra le mura della sua abitazione, al riparo dagli occhi vigili dei repressori e dei censori, è quello di lasciare alle sue ragazze "una finestra aperta sul mondo".
Lo studio di Nabokov, Austen, Fitzgerald e James e delle loro opere, permetterà più che di "sognare" la libertà di costumi e di pensiero dell'occidente, di analizzare, quasi di sezionare, il carattere e lo spirito interiore dei personaggi che le popolano.
Devo essere sincera, in un testo di tale portata emotiva, perché è innegabile fare un raffronto continuo con le nostre opportunità e le nostre continue possibilità di scelta in ogni campo o attività, non mi interessa il valore letterario dell'opera o la capacità stilistica dell'autrice; questo non è un romanzo, è un documento, è storia viva e come tale deve essere valutato e giudicato: è un libro capace di scatenare emozioni, ragionamenti e valutazioni e che offre diversi livelli di lettura e angolazioni da osservare gli eventi.
Quello storico, perché narra la storia di un popolo vicinissimo a noi, densa di avvenimenti e di capovolgimenti di fronte (è incredibile quando l'autrice raffronta l'adolescenza della sua generazione con quella delle sue allieve, paradossalmente più libera e spensierata: chi riesce a pensare ad un Iran dove le donne passeggiano senza velo, parlano liberamente di cinema e letteratura, ma soprattutto lo fanno con chi vogliono, quando vogliono e dove vogliono?) eppure così lontano da noi e da quella culla della civiltà che è stato con i Persiani.
Quello letterario, perché, seppur a volte un po' pedanti, tutte le sue riflessioni su Vladimir Nabokov, Jane Austen, Henry James e Francis Scott Fitzgerald, sono piene di ardore e di passione, di dedizione e di rinnovato stupore e non fanno altro che rinverdire i ricordi delle nostre letture o di stimolarne di nuove.
Quello emotivo ma, soprattutto quello femminile: perché è la donna che in Iran è quotidianamente violentata sotto tutti i punti di vista, e forse (quando ciò avviene), quello fisico è solo l'aspetto esteriore della violenza subita: la punta dell'iceberg.
Il tentativo di annientamento psicologico delle donne, da parte degli integralisti, è qualcosa di demoniaco, da far gridare al sacrilegio: eppure è camuffato da religione. L'empatia e l'immedesimazione sono istintive: da donna a donna.
La privazione di tutto, soprattutto dei sogni e del futuro, sono quello che le autorità iraniane impongono giorno dopo giorno ai danni delle donne in maniera particolare, ma anche a tutta una generazione alla quale, poco alla volta, credono di riuscire a far dimenticare cosa volesse dire essere liberi.
Doveva essere bello leggere Lolita a Teheran, ma anche Orgoglio e Pregiudizio, oppure Daisy Miller, oppure Il Grande Gatsby guardando le montagne innevate, o in quelle piccole sale da tè mangiando un dolcetto ricoperto di miele.
Doveva essere bello leggere Lolita a Teheran con il vento che scompigliava i capelli.
Grazie a Azar Nafisi e alle donne come lei è ancora possibile ricordarlo.
[commento in corso di lettura]
Dentro un libro la storia: la storia intorno a noi.
Leggere "Leggere Lolita a Teheran" e sentirsi dentro la storia.
È di oggi la notizia di nuovi scontri all'Università di Teheran.
Mentre leggo il romanzo biografico di Azar Nafisi, che narra della rivoluzione islamica e degli scontri all'Università di Teheran dei primissimi anni '80, mi accorgo che tutto cambia e tutto si trasforma, tranne qualcosa: ci sono popoli che sembrano aver perso per sempre il proprio diritto alla vita e alla "normalità".
April 10, 2019
این کتاب آذر نفیسی را به دو دلیل دوست دارم. مثل هر کتابش به چندین کتاب دیگه اشاره کرده و کاملا مشخصه نویسنده، خواننده حرفه ای هم هست. دلیل دوم اینکه این قصه قصه ی هوایی ست که من درش نفس کشیدم و با این دختران همذات پنداری میکنم. نقد من به این کتاب هم به همین دلیله. یادم نمیاد کتابهای جین آستین و نوباکوف هیچ وقت در ایران ممنوع بوده. یا دلیلی نمیدیدم که این دختران یک جای امن و مخفی ��ا برای جلسات کتابخوانی پیدا کنند. به راحتی در یک فضای عمومی میشد جلسه کتابخوانی برای کتابهایی که ممنوع نبودند برگزار کرد. من هیچ و هیچ زمان نمیگم وضعیت عالی بود که صد البته نبود و خاطرات تلخ آنروزها را هیچ زمان از یاد نمیبرم ولی انصافا کتابهای جین آستین همیشه در قفسه کتاب فروشی ها موجود بود. نکته دیگه اینکه چرا نفیسی در هیچ کدام از کتابهایش از نویسنده های ایرانی نامی نبرده؟ چندین جمله از نویسنده های خارجی نوشته که نویسنده های ایرانی بسیار زیباتر توصیف کرده اند. نمیتوانم باور کنم کسی که از بهترین کتابخوانهای ایرانیه از این متون بی اطلاع باشه. همه حرف من اینه که ��یلی غم انگیزه اگر این کتاب را در قفسه “کتابهایی که برای رضایت مخاطب غربی نوشته شده.” بگذارم. پر فروش بودن عجیب این کتاب هم این سئوال را پررنگتر میکنه.
May 22, 2014
المستحيلات أربع لا ثلاث: الغول والعنقاء والخل الوفي .. وأن تقرأ لوليتا في طهران.
ففي إيران ما بعد الثورة أصبح كل شيء ممنوعًا ومصادرًا وغير مسموحٍ بتداوله فضلاً عن قراءته.
فرقيب السلطة هو وحده من يقرر ما على الشعب أن يقرأه أو لا يقرأه، وهو الوحيد المخوّل بتحديد الخيارات المتاحة أمام القراء (وهي خيارات تتراوح في طبيعتها بين السيء إلى الأكثر سوءًا).
أما القارئ/المواطن العادي فلا يمكنه أن يناقش الرقيب، أو يعترض عليه، أو حتى من باب أضعف الإيمان أن يبدي رأيه في الموضوع. وإلا كان مصيره الدخول في حربٍ خاسرة مع نظام لا يتورع عن تصفية خصومه بأبشع الطرق والوسائل!
وهذا ما حصل مع أستاذة الأدب الإنجليزي آذر نفيسي، حيث دُفعت إلى خوض سجالات في قلب جامعة طهران حيث كانت تدرّس، انتهت بهزيمتها أمام تيار ظلامي لا يرحم، فطُردت من الجامعة شرّ طردة.
ولأن كلّ ممنوعٍ يصبح بشكلٍ تلقائي مرغوبًا، ويكتسب إغراءً لا يقاوم، تقوم نفيسي بإنشاء ورشة دراسية حرة -بعيدًا عن عين الرقيب- في بيتها لسبع من طالباتها المميزات، فيمضين بحرية كاملة بدراسة السرد الأدبي بوصفه عالماً موازياً لعالم الواقع، ورغم أن هدف الورشة كان عقد حوارات مفتوحة حول روايات ممنوعة كلوليتا لفلاديمير نابوكوف وغاتسبي العظيم لفيتزجيرالد وغيرها، إلا أن الأصداء الخارجية سرعان ما تسللت إلى تلك الحلقة الضيقة حتى طغت عليها، وتحولت الورشة من حلقة لدراسة الروايات إلى منصة لمناقشة وتحليل الأوضاع السياسية في إيران في الفترة ما بين ١٩٨٠ إلى ١٩٩٧ وهو العام الذي غادرت فيه نفيسي إيران نهائيًا إلى أمريكا حيث كرست وقتها لتدوين هذه السيرة الروائية!
ففي إيران ما بعد الثورة أصبح كل شيء ممنوعًا ومصادرًا وغير مسموحٍ بتداوله فضلاً عن قراءته.
فرقيب السلطة هو وحده من يقرر ما على الشعب أن يقرأه أو لا يقرأه، وهو الوحيد المخوّل بتحديد الخيارات المتاحة أمام القراء (وهي خيارات تتراوح في طبيعتها بين السيء إلى الأكثر سوءًا).
أما القارئ/المواطن العادي فلا يمكنه أن يناقش الرقيب، أو يعترض عليه، أو حتى من باب أضعف الإيمان أن يبدي رأيه في الموضوع. وإلا كان مصيره الدخول في حربٍ خاسرة مع نظام لا يتورع عن تصفية خصومه بأبشع الطرق والوسائل!
وهذا ما حصل مع أستاذة الأدب الإنجليزي آذر نفيسي، حيث دُفعت إلى خوض سجالات في قلب جامعة طهران حيث كانت تدرّس، انتهت بهزيمتها أمام تيار ظلامي لا يرحم، فطُردت من الجامعة شرّ طردة.
ولأن كلّ ممنوعٍ يصبح بشكلٍ تلقائي مرغوبًا، ويكتسب إغراءً لا يقاوم، تقوم نفيسي بإنشاء ورشة دراسية حرة -بعيدًا عن عين الرقيب- في بيتها لسبع من طالباتها المميزات، فيمضين بحرية كاملة بدراسة السرد الأدبي بوصفه عالماً موازياً لعالم الواقع، ورغم أن هدف الورشة كان عقد حوارات مفتوحة حول روايات ممنوعة كلوليتا لفلاديمير نابوكوف وغاتسبي العظيم لفيتزجيرالد وغيرها، إلا أن الأصداء الخارجية سرعان ما تسللت إلى تلك الحلقة الضيقة حتى طغت عليها، وتحولت الورشة من حلقة لدراسة الروايات إلى منصة لمناقشة وتحليل الأوضاع السياسية في إيران في الفترة ما بين ١٩٨٠ إلى ١٩٩٧ وهو العام الذي غادرت فيه نفيسي إيران نهائيًا إلى أمريكا حيث كرست وقتها لتدوين هذه السيرة الروائية!
July 29, 2023
Reading forbidden books in post-revolutionary Iran might seem counterintuitive, or even dangerous; reading a novel like Vladimir Nabokov’s Lolita (1955), with its notoriously difficult and controversial subject matter, might seem almost suicidal. Yet Azar Nafisi, an Iranian-born and American-trained professor of modern literature, led a group of her students, young Iranian women, in quietly defying Iran’s Islamist regime by reading Lolita and other forbidden or challenged books, as she chronicled in her 2003 book Reading Lolita in Tehran.
Nafisi, who came from a socially prominent and politically active Tehran family, spent much of her early life in Great Britain, Switzerland, and the United States of America, where she finished her doctoral work in English at the University of Oklahoma. Her return to Iran in 1979 coincided with the Iranian Revolution that deposed the Shah Reza Pahlavi, who had terrorized Iran for decades with his feared SAVAK secret police. Ordinary Iranians of the time might not have anticipated that the Islamists who took power in the country would impose a regime just as cruel and just as dictatorial as that of the shah. The only difference was that, rather than trying for a modernist approach to restoring the classical glories of the Persian Empire, as the shah had done, the Islamists would apply their tyranny on the basis of a twisted fundamentalist interpretation of the Muslim faith.
The early passages of Reading Lolita in Tehran show how the Islamist regime, once it has taken power, became ever more oppressive, particularly in terms of the restrictions it imposed against women – and ever more willing to use violence in order to enforce its laws and rules. The University of Tehran, where Nafisi was teaching at the time, was no “ivory tower” shielded from the regime’s cruelties. The atmosphere of revolutionary fervor only intensified after militants’ seizure of the U.S. Embassy in November of 1979 – a time at which Nafisi happened to be teaching F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby. Nafisi recalls that “I was taking some risks in teaching such a book at such a time, when certain books had been banned as morally harmful” (108) – and indeed, she came to find that class discussions became more and more likely to be interrupted by Islamist students who found a book, or the way a book was being taught, “counter-revolutionary” or “un-Islamic.”
Against that backdrop, Nafisi organized a quietly revolutionary movement of her own. She organized a secret class, held in her home, where a group of women students with particularly strong interest in modern literature would gather and read books that the regime had banned or might ban. The students – Azin, Mahshid, Manna, Mitra, Nassrin, Sanaz, Yassi – differ in many things: their cultural background, their socioeconomic status, their attitudes toward the Islamic Republic and the Muslim faith. What they share is a love of literature and a need to share their ideas about literature in an atmosphere that is free of fear.
The book is divided into four sections – “Lolita,” “Gatsby,” “James,” and “Austen” – and in each section, Nafisi and her students draw intriguing parallels between the literature that they are reading and the reality of their lives in revolutionary Iran.
In the “Lolita” section, Nafisi recalls the cruel and perverse attempts by the novel’s narrator, Humbert Humbert, to possess a 12-year-old girl with whom he is obsessed, and links those features of the novel with the Iranian regime’s attempts to achieve total control over the lives of ordinary citizens, particularly women. We learn that one of Nafisi’s students, Sanaz, had gone to the Caspian Sea with some girlfriends for a beach holiday; the girls were arrested by “morality squads” of the Revolutionary Guards, and were held incommunicado, subjected to virginity tests, made to sign false confessions, and sentenced to 25 lashes each – even though they had not violated any of the laws of the regime: no alcoholic beverages, no forbidden tapes or CD’s. From the regime’s perspective, it had to be found that these arrested women had done something; Revolutionary Guards and morality police could not be embarrassed by being found to have unjustly arrested a group of women.
Nafisi sees the parallel between Lolita on the one hand, and the ordeal of Sanaz and her friends on the other, in the way that in both “an act of violence has been committed” – one that “goes beyond the bars, revealing the victim’s proximity and intimacy with [the] jailer” (p. 75). She suggests that “The only way to leave the circle, to stop dancing with the jailer, is to find a way to preserve one’s individuality” (p. 77) – just as Nafisi and her students do with their forbidden-books class in Nafisi’s home.
The ”Gatsby” section, as mentioned above, does address the ironies of teaching a book that is widely considered to be the Great American Novel, at a time when “Death to America!” is the most popular slogan being shouted on the streets of revolutionary Tehran. Beyond that, however, Nafisi once again draws parallels between situations from an important novel and realities of life in the ayatollah’s Iran, noting with sadness
…how similar our own fate was becoming to Gatsby’s. He wanted to fulfill his dream by repeating the past, and in the end he discovered that the past was dead, the present a sham, and there was no future. Was this not similar to our revolution, which had come in the name of our collective past and had wrecked our lives in the name of a dream? (p.144).
In the case of The Great Gatsby, the constant disruptions of Nafisi’s class by a noisy minority of students who oppose her teaching of the novel lead Nafisi to the inspired expedient of putting the novel itself on trial, with students in the class as judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, and jury. These passages are a highlight of Reading Lolita in Tehran, and any reader who values the freedom to read and think for oneself is likely to appreciate the full-throated defense of Gatsby offered by some very bright and very brave students.
By the time of the book’s third section, “James,” it is September of 1980, and the Iran-Iraq War has broken out. History tells us that the war killed more than a million soldiers and more than 100,000 civilians on both sides, and resulted in nothing more than a stalemate that strengthened the position of dictators and tyrants in both countries. Nafisi gives us the grim tableaux of life during wartime – the fear of awaiting the next missile strike, the heartbreak of seeing child soldiers sent to walk through minefields with “keys to paradise” hung round their necks – and once again invokes literary parallels. In those times of war, with groups of revolutionaries roaming the streets on motorcycles to stamp out any activities that might seem anti-war – including any act of mourning for the war’s many dead – Nafisi and her students look at Henry James novels like Daisy Miller and Washington Square.
Nafisi suggests that in the seemingly quiet and decorous world of James’s novels, “There are different kinds of courage”. Nassrin points out that the character of Daisy Miller, in the novel that bears her name, tells another character “not to be afraid. She means not to be afraid of conventions and traditions – that is one kind of courage.” And Mahshid adds that the character of Catherine from Washington Square “is shy and retreating, not like Daisy, yet she stands up to all these characters, who are much more outgoing than her, and she faces up to them at a great cost. She has a different kind of courage from Daisy, but it is still courage” (p. 248). This section of the book emphasizes the quiet acts of courage through which Nafisi and her students resist the regime’s attempts to dominate not only their lives but also their very thinking.
And the “Austen” section – as it focuses on Jane Austen’s novels about women for whom securing a good marriage is a matter not just of finding love but also of securing some chance of social and economic survival in a world where women have virtually no other options for doing so – looks at questions of marriage in the lives of Nafisi’s students. Nafisi describes well what has made Austen’s protagonists heroes for women, and men, for more than 200 years now:
These women, genteel and beautiful, are the rebels who say no to the choices made by silly mothers, incompetent fathers (there are seldom any wise fathers in Austen’s novels), and the rigidly orthodox society. They risk ostracism and poverty to gain love and companionship, and to embrace that elusive goal at the heart of democracy: the right to choose. (p. 307)
The ”Austen” section of Reading Lolita in Tehran shows how the young women who constitute Nafisi’s “secret class” face a variety of marriage-related issues in their lives, in a manner not unlike what Elizabeth Bennet faces in Pride and Prejudice, or Elinor Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility. Some of the women are being pressured to marry men they don’t love, or not to marry men they do love, for reasons relating to family name, or tradition, or economic prospects. For some of the women, marrying the man of their choice may involve leaving Iran, when they might want to stay; for others, a marriage might mean staying in Iran, even if they want to leave. Even Nafisi, as she considers the possibility of leaving revolutionary Iran and relocating to the West, finds that her marriage is affected, as she and her husband quarrel in ways they never have before. The choices are difficult, and the future is uncertain.
Reading Lolita in Tehran is more than A Memoir in Books (the book’s subtitle). It provides an inside perspective on revolutionary and post-revolutionary Iran, and it shows a very brave group of women fighting to maintain their dignity, their personhood, and their intellectual freedom in the face of a regime that seeks to take all those things away from half the population of a country of 85 million people.
Nafisi, who came from a socially prominent and politically active Tehran family, spent much of her early life in Great Britain, Switzerland, and the United States of America, where she finished her doctoral work in English at the University of Oklahoma. Her return to Iran in 1979 coincided with the Iranian Revolution that deposed the Shah Reza Pahlavi, who had terrorized Iran for decades with his feared SAVAK secret police. Ordinary Iranians of the time might not have anticipated that the Islamists who took power in the country would impose a regime just as cruel and just as dictatorial as that of the shah. The only difference was that, rather than trying for a modernist approach to restoring the classical glories of the Persian Empire, as the shah had done, the Islamists would apply their tyranny on the basis of a twisted fundamentalist interpretation of the Muslim faith.
The early passages of Reading Lolita in Tehran show how the Islamist regime, once it has taken power, became ever more oppressive, particularly in terms of the restrictions it imposed against women – and ever more willing to use violence in order to enforce its laws and rules. The University of Tehran, where Nafisi was teaching at the time, was no “ivory tower” shielded from the regime’s cruelties. The atmosphere of revolutionary fervor only intensified after militants’ seizure of the U.S. Embassy in November of 1979 – a time at which Nafisi happened to be teaching F. Scott Fitzgerald’s novel The Great Gatsby. Nafisi recalls that “I was taking some risks in teaching such a book at such a time, when certain books had been banned as morally harmful” (108) – and indeed, she came to find that class discussions became more and more likely to be interrupted by Islamist students who found a book, or the way a book was being taught, “counter-revolutionary” or “un-Islamic.”
Against that backdrop, Nafisi organized a quietly revolutionary movement of her own. She organized a secret class, held in her home, where a group of women students with particularly strong interest in modern literature would gather and read books that the regime had banned or might ban. The students – Azin, Mahshid, Manna, Mitra, Nassrin, Sanaz, Yassi – differ in many things: their cultural background, their socioeconomic status, their attitudes toward the Islamic Republic and the Muslim faith. What they share is a love of literature and a need to share their ideas about literature in an atmosphere that is free of fear.
The book is divided into four sections – “Lolita,” “Gatsby,” “James,” and “Austen” – and in each section, Nafisi and her students draw intriguing parallels between the literature that they are reading and the reality of their lives in revolutionary Iran.
In the “Lolita” section, Nafisi recalls the cruel and perverse attempts by the novel’s narrator, Humbert Humbert, to possess a 12-year-old girl with whom he is obsessed, and links those features of the novel with the Iranian regime’s attempts to achieve total control over the lives of ordinary citizens, particularly women. We learn that one of Nafisi’s students, Sanaz, had gone to the Caspian Sea with some girlfriends for a beach holiday; the girls were arrested by “morality squads” of the Revolutionary Guards, and were held incommunicado, subjected to virginity tests, made to sign false confessions, and sentenced to 25 lashes each – even though they had not violated any of the laws of the regime: no alcoholic beverages, no forbidden tapes or CD’s. From the regime’s perspective, it had to be found that these arrested women had done something; Revolutionary Guards and morality police could not be embarrassed by being found to have unjustly arrested a group of women.
Nafisi sees the parallel between Lolita on the one hand, and the ordeal of Sanaz and her friends on the other, in the way that in both “an act of violence has been committed” – one that “goes beyond the bars, revealing the victim’s proximity and intimacy with [the] jailer” (p. 75). She suggests that “The only way to leave the circle, to stop dancing with the jailer, is to find a way to preserve one’s individuality” (p. 77) – just as Nafisi and her students do with their forbidden-books class in Nafisi’s home.
The ”Gatsby” section, as mentioned above, does address the ironies of teaching a book that is widely considered to be the Great American Novel, at a time when “Death to America!” is the most popular slogan being shouted on the streets of revolutionary Tehran. Beyond that, however, Nafisi once again draws parallels between situations from an important novel and realities of life in the ayatollah’s Iran, noting with sadness
…how similar our own fate was becoming to Gatsby’s. He wanted to fulfill his dream by repeating the past, and in the end he discovered that the past was dead, the present a sham, and there was no future. Was this not similar to our revolution, which had come in the name of our collective past and had wrecked our lives in the name of a dream? (p.144).
In the case of The Great Gatsby, the constant disruptions of Nafisi’s class by a noisy minority of students who oppose her teaching of the novel lead Nafisi to the inspired expedient of putting the novel itself on trial, with students in the class as judge, prosecutor, defense attorney, and jury. These passages are a highlight of Reading Lolita in Tehran, and any reader who values the freedom to read and think for oneself is likely to appreciate the full-throated defense of Gatsby offered by some very bright and very brave students.
By the time of the book’s third section, “James,” it is September of 1980, and the Iran-Iraq War has broken out. History tells us that the war killed more than a million soldiers and more than 100,000 civilians on both sides, and resulted in nothing more than a stalemate that strengthened the position of dictators and tyrants in both countries. Nafisi gives us the grim tableaux of life during wartime – the fear of awaiting the next missile strike, the heartbreak of seeing child soldiers sent to walk through minefields with “keys to paradise” hung round their necks – and once again invokes literary parallels. In those times of war, with groups of revolutionaries roaming the streets on motorcycles to stamp out any activities that might seem anti-war – including any act of mourning for the war’s many dead – Nafisi and her students look at Henry James novels like Daisy Miller and Washington Square.
Nafisi suggests that in the seemingly quiet and decorous world of James’s novels, “There are different kinds of courage”. Nassrin points out that the character of Daisy Miller, in the novel that bears her name, tells another character “not to be afraid. She means not to be afraid of conventions and traditions – that is one kind of courage.” And Mahshid adds that the character of Catherine from Washington Square “is shy and retreating, not like Daisy, yet she stands up to all these characters, who are much more outgoing than her, and she faces up to them at a great cost. She has a different kind of courage from Daisy, but it is still courage” (p. 248). This section of the book emphasizes the quiet acts of courage through which Nafisi and her students resist the regime’s attempts to dominate not only their lives but also their very thinking.
And the “Austen” section – as it focuses on Jane Austen’s novels about women for whom securing a good marriage is a matter not just of finding love but also of securing some chance of social and economic survival in a world where women have virtually no other options for doing so – looks at questions of marriage in the lives of Nafisi’s students. Nafisi describes well what has made Austen’s protagonists heroes for women, and men, for more than 200 years now:
These women, genteel and beautiful, are the rebels who say no to the choices made by silly mothers, incompetent fathers (there are seldom any wise fathers in Austen’s novels), and the rigidly orthodox society. They risk ostracism and poverty to gain love and companionship, and to embrace that elusive goal at the heart of democracy: the right to choose. (p. 307)
The ”Austen” section of Reading Lolita in Tehran shows how the young women who constitute Nafisi’s “secret class” face a variety of marriage-related issues in their lives, in a manner not unlike what Elizabeth Bennet faces in Pride and Prejudice, or Elinor Dashwood in Sense and Sensibility. Some of the women are being pressured to marry men they don’t love, or not to marry men they do love, for reasons relating to family name, or tradition, or economic prospects. For some of the women, marrying the man of their choice may involve leaving Iran, when they might want to stay; for others, a marriage might mean staying in Iran, even if they want to leave. Even Nafisi, as she considers the possibility of leaving revolutionary Iran and relocating to the West, finds that her marriage is affected, as she and her husband quarrel in ways they never have before. The choices are difficult, and the future is uncertain.
Reading Lolita in Tehran is more than A Memoir in Books (the book’s subtitle). It provides an inside perspective on revolutionary and post-revolutionary Iran, and it shows a very brave group of women fighting to maintain their dignity, their personhood, and their intellectual freedom in the face of a regime that seeks to take all those things away from half the population of a country of 85 million people.
May 30, 2014
حسنًا إذًا .. انتهيت منه .. اخيرًا
تتزاحم الأفكار في رأسي فعلاً لكتابة "تقرير" عن هذا الكتاب غير العادي .. بالتأكيد:
ماذا أرادت منه المؤلفة؟!
ما الرسائل التي تبثها من خلاله بشكل ضمني أو واضح؟!
لمن توجه هذه الرسائل تحديدًا؟!
كيف يستفيد قارئ هذا الكتاب الاستفادة القصوى منه، إن كان ثمة استفادة قصوى؟!!
.
طالت مدة مكوث هذا الكتاب بين يديَّ لأسباب متباينة، بل وقاطعته بغيره، وتركته ثم عدت إليه، فما كان كل ذلك؟!
تضع آذار النفيسي في الجزء الرابع من الكتاب وفي بداية الفصل الثالث منه يدها على أكبر مشكلات الكتاب ـ فيما أرى ـ بطريقة اعترافية واضحة، سلكتها في أغلب فصول الكتاب وبين ثناياه، إذ تقول:
بدو أنني أكاديمية أكثر مما يجب، لقد كتبت العديد من البحوث والمقالات لكي أستطيع التعبير عن أفكاري وتجاربي بطريقة سردية محكية، لكنني مع هذا لم أحقق غايتي المنشودة .على الرغم أن ذلك هو هدفي: أن أحكي وأسرد وأن أعيد اكتشافي مع كل هؤلاء الآخرين، لأنني ما إن ابتدئ كتابة حتى يفتح الطريق أمامي فأرى الإنسان الزائف وقد استعاد جوهره، وأرى الأسد وهو ��ستعيد شجاعته، ولكن ليس هذا فقط، وليست هذه قصتي، فأنا أسير على طريق مختلف لا أستطيع أن أرى نهايته، ولا أدري إلى أين يمضي بي ......
.
هكذا إذًا تسير آذار في ثلاث مسارات متوازية متقاطعة، بين قراءة نصوص أدبية بعينها ومناقشتها، وبين نقد الثورة الإسلامية الإيرانية ووصفها لحالاتها بشكل يبدو عابرًا ولكنه مؤثر وفارق، وبين عرض قصتها/سيرتها الذاتية، وحكايات طالباتها ..
وهي في كل مسار لو أخلصت فيه لخرجنا بكتاب عظيم، ولكنها شتت الذهن ـ في ظني ـ بين كل هذه الأشياء دفعة واحدة، فخرجنا بـ أن تقرأ ... في طهران!
لم أستسغ تصدير "لوليتا" بطلة نابوكوف في اسم الكتاب، لاسيما أنه احتوى قراءات لعدة روايات أخرى ولكتاب آخرين، ولكن لاشك أن "لوليتا" تحمل رسالة أخرى لمجتمع آخر، أرى أن السيدة آذار نفيسي قصدت أن توجه له هذه الرسالة وتوضح له الصورة التي ربما تعجبه عن ثورة إسلامية قامت في إيـران ... ألا وهو المجتمع الأمريكي بالتأكيد !
فكرة نقد المرأة/ أو الرجل بالمناسبة لتصرفات المجتمعات العربية معها وذكر "القمع" وغياب الحريات بشتى أنواعها يتطرق لها العديد من الكتاب والروائيين سواء قامت ثورات أو لم تقم، وبطريقة خفية أحيانًا وفجة في أحايين كثيرة، ويواجه الأمر تارة بالمصادرة وتارات بالترحيب والحفاوة،، لا أريد أن أخرج عن سياق الحديث عن الكتاب، ولكن يكفي أن أشير إلا أن العالم قد تغيَّر وأن ما فعله غازي القصيبي ذات كتابة في "شقة الحرية" تجاوزته بنت الصانع في "بنات الرياض" ..
.
بعيدًا عن هذا كله يطرح الكتاب، أجمل ما فيه، فكرة مناقشة الأعمال الأدبية بشكل نقدي بسيط، ويستفز القارئ ـ لا سيما من حالفه الحظ فقرأ الأعمال التي تتحدث الكاتبة عنها ـ إلى التوقف دومًا خلال ما يقرأ على مواطن الجمال والقبح في النص، وكيف يشكِّل الكاتب عالمه، وكيف يسبغ على شخوصه من نفسياته، ومن رؤيته لأبطاله وللخير والشر، لقد أقامت "النفيسي" الدنيا وأقعدتها على "هيمبرت" (والطريف أني كنت قد نسيت اسمه أًصلاً) بطل "لوليتا" الذي بدا للقارئ رجلاً مغلوبًا على أمره أغوته فتاة لعوب هي "لوليتا" وكيف أن نابوكوف تآمر مع البطل /الرجل هذا لكي يجعل "لوليتا" في عرف القارئ، وبالتالي المجتمع امرأة ـ وهي الفتاة التي لم تتجاوز العاشرة من عمرها ـ يجعل منها مغوية ليتحول الرجل وبالتالي المجتمع لضحية مسكينة لتلك الفتاة الشيطانة ...
في ظنِّي لو أن النفيسي اقتصرت على هذه الرواية، وعمَّقت تحليلها ونقدها، بل وعرضتها للمحاكمة كما فعلت مع روايات أخرى لكانت قد وفرت على نفسها وعلى القارئ الكثير،، هذه هي المرأة في نموذجها الألماني/الغربي .. مدعو التحرر إذًا ، فلا غرابة أن يراها مدعو الفضيلة والإسلاميين شيطانًا كذلك، ولكن النفيسي خرجت لعوالم أخرى، ربما لم تتعمق فيها بالقدر الكافي ـ فيما أرى ـ مثل رواية غاتسبي العظيم، وما تمثله من قيم أخلاقية وجمالية، وبطلات جين أوستن كذلك ..
..
ولكن البساط ينسحب تدريجيًا ويتغيَّر العالم بالتأكيد ويبقى التركيز الجمالي على ملكة الخيال وموهبة الأدب، تلك التي تبدو بين ثنايا الكتاب في كل مرة، تداعب أحلام النفيسي، ولكنها لا توفيها حقها، هي أديبة ضلت الطريق ربما، لأن دراستها الأكاديمية ـ كما قالت ـ شغلتها عن الاستغراق في الخيال وكتابة نص أدبي كامل
ربما تفعل ذلك "نسرين" ، ربما فعلته "مانا" التي بدأت تكتب الشعر فعلا وتقول لأستاذتها:
(خمس سنوات مرت منذ بدأت القصة في غرفةِ أضاءتها الغيوم، حيث قرأنا "مدام بوفاري" وتناولنا الشوكولاته من طبقٍ بلون النبيذ الأحمر في صباحات الخميس، لم يتغيَّر شيء في الرتابة المتواصلة في حياتنا اليومية. بيد أنني في مكانِ ما من روحي أحس بأنني تغيرت ، ففي كل صباح ومع إشراقة الشمس الروتينية، وأنا أفيق من نومي وأضع حجابي أمام المرآة لكي أخرج من بيتي فأغدو جزءًا مما نسميه الواقع، أعلم كذلك بأنه ثمة "أنا" أخرى أصبحت عارية على صفحات كتابٍ من عالم آخر هو عالم الخيال، وأعلم أنني غدوت ثابتة خالدة .. وزلذا فإنني سأبقى حاضرة طالما أبقيتني نصب عينيك .. عزيزي القارئ"
..
لقد وصلت رسالةآذار كاملة إلى طالباتها، وشعرن فعلاً بأنه لا حدود لعالمهم الأدبي الخيالي، وأنه لايمكن لأحد مهما بلغت قوته وجبروته أن يفرض وصاية على الروح .. وفي ظني مرة أخرى أنها لو كانت قصرت الكتاب على سيرة طالباتها وحكاياتهم، لكان كتابًا رائعًا، لكنها شاءت أن تجمع بين هذا كله ..
.
شكرًا للنفيسي على كل حال
.
.
نسيت أمرًا هامًا جدًا
وهو أن أشكر المترجمة ريم قيس .. لأن الترجمة احترافية جدًا .. أنا تقريبًا نسيت إن الكتاب مترجم :)
للتحميل
نسخة معدلة
http://t.co/XobBGN1yqw
تتزاحم الأفكار في رأسي فعلاً لكتابة "تقرير" عن هذا الكتاب غير العادي .. بالتأكيد:
ماذا أرادت منه المؤلفة؟!
ما الرسائل التي تبثها من خلاله بشكل ضمني أو واضح؟!
لمن توجه هذه الرسائل تحديدًا؟!
كيف يستفيد قارئ هذا الكتاب الاستفادة القصوى منه، إن كان ثمة استفادة قصوى؟!!
.
طالت مدة مكوث هذا الكتاب بين يديَّ لأسباب متباينة، بل وقاطعته بغيره، وتركته ثم عدت إليه، فما كان كل ذلك؟!
تضع آذار النفيسي في الجزء الرابع من الكتاب وفي بداية الفصل الثالث منه يدها على أكبر مشكلات الكتاب ـ فيما أرى ـ بطريقة اعترافية واضحة، سلكتها في أغلب فصول الكتاب وبين ثناياه، إذ تقول:
بدو أنني أكاديمية أكثر مما يجب، لقد كتبت العديد من البحوث والمقالات لكي أستطيع التعبير عن أفكاري وتجاربي بطريقة سردية محكية، لكنني مع هذا لم أحقق غايتي المنشودة .على الرغم أن ذلك هو هدفي: أن أحكي وأسرد وأن أعيد اكتشافي مع كل هؤلاء الآخرين، لأنني ما إن ابتدئ كتابة حتى يفتح الطريق أمامي فأرى الإنسان الزائف وقد استعاد جوهره، وأرى الأسد وهو ��ستعيد شجاعته، ولكن ليس هذا فقط، وليست هذه قصتي، فأنا أسير على طريق مختلف لا أستطيع أن أرى نهايته، ولا أدري إلى أين يمضي بي ......
.
هكذا إذًا تسير آذار في ثلاث مسارات متوازية متقاطعة، بين قراءة نصوص أدبية بعينها ومناقشتها، وبين نقد الثورة الإسلامية الإيرانية ووصفها لحالاتها بشكل يبدو عابرًا ولكنه مؤثر وفارق، وبين عرض قصتها/سيرتها الذاتية، وحكايات طالباتها ..
وهي في كل مسار لو أخلصت فيه لخرجنا بكتاب عظيم، ولكنها شتت الذهن ـ في ظني ـ بين كل هذه الأشياء دفعة واحدة، فخرجنا بـ أن تقرأ ... في طهران!
لم أستسغ تصدير "لوليتا" بطلة نابوكوف في اسم الكتاب، لاسيما أنه احتوى قراءات لعدة روايات أخرى ولكتاب آخرين، ولكن لاشك أن "لوليتا" تحمل رسالة أخرى لمجتمع آخر، أرى أن السيدة آذار نفيسي قصدت أن توجه له هذه الرسالة وتوضح له الصورة التي ربما تعجبه عن ثورة إسلامية قامت في إيـران ... ألا وهو المجتمع الأمريكي بالتأكيد !
فكرة نقد المرأة/ أو الرجل بالمناسبة لتصرفات المجتمعات العربية معها وذكر "القمع" وغياب الحريات بشتى أنواعها يتطرق لها العديد من الكتاب والروائيين سواء قامت ثورات أو لم تقم، وبطريقة خفية أحيانًا وفجة في أحايين كثيرة، ويواجه الأمر تارة بالمصادرة وتارات بالترحيب والحفاوة،، لا أريد أن أخرج عن سياق الحديث عن الكتاب، ولكن يكفي أن أشير إلا أن العالم قد تغيَّر وأن ما فعله غازي القصيبي ذات كتابة في "شقة الحرية" تجاوزته بنت الصانع في "بنات الرياض" ..
.
بعيدًا عن هذا كله يطرح الكتاب، أجمل ما فيه، فكرة مناقشة الأعمال الأدبية بشكل نقدي بسيط، ويستفز القارئ ـ لا سيما من حالفه الحظ فقرأ الأعمال التي تتحدث الكاتبة عنها ـ إلى التوقف دومًا خلال ما يقرأ على مواطن الجمال والقبح في النص، وكيف يشكِّل الكاتب عالمه، وكيف يسبغ على شخوصه من نفسياته، ومن رؤيته لأبطاله وللخير والشر، لقد أقامت "النفيسي" الدنيا وأقعدتها على "هيمبرت" (والطريف أني كنت قد نسيت اسمه أًصلاً) بطل "لوليتا" الذي بدا للقارئ رجلاً مغلوبًا على أمره أغوته فتاة لعوب هي "لوليتا" وكيف أن نابوكوف تآمر مع البطل /الرجل هذا لكي يجعل "لوليتا" في عرف القارئ، وبالتالي المجتمع امرأة ـ وهي الفتاة التي لم تتجاوز العاشرة من عمرها ـ يجعل منها مغوية ليتحول الرجل وبالتالي المجتمع لضحية مسكينة لتلك الفتاة الشيطانة ...
في ظنِّي لو أن النفيسي اقتصرت على هذه الرواية، وعمَّقت تحليلها ونقدها، بل وعرضتها للمحاكمة كما فعلت مع روايات أخرى لكانت قد وفرت على نفسها وعلى القارئ الكثير،، هذه هي المرأة في نموذجها الألماني/الغربي .. مدعو التحرر إذًا ، فلا غرابة أن يراها مدعو الفضيلة والإسلاميين شيطانًا كذلك، ولكن النفيسي خرجت لعوالم أخرى، ربما لم تتعمق فيها بالقدر الكافي ـ فيما أرى ـ مثل رواية غاتسبي العظيم، وما تمثله من قيم أخلاقية وجمالية، وبطلات جين أوستن كذلك ..
..
ولكن البساط ينسحب تدريجيًا ويتغيَّر العالم بالتأكيد ويبقى التركيز الجمالي على ملكة الخيال وموهبة الأدب، تلك التي تبدو بين ثنايا الكتاب في كل مرة، تداعب أحلام النفيسي، ولكنها لا توفيها حقها، هي أديبة ضلت الطريق ربما، لأن دراستها الأكاديمية ـ كما قالت ـ شغلتها عن الاستغراق في الخيال وكتابة نص أدبي كامل
ربما تفعل ذلك "نسرين" ، ربما فعلته "مانا" التي بدأت تكتب الشعر فعلا وتقول لأستاذتها:
(خمس سنوات مرت منذ بدأت القصة في غرفةِ أضاءتها الغيوم، حيث قرأنا "مدام بوفاري" وتناولنا الشوكولاته من طبقٍ بلون النبيذ الأحمر في صباحات الخميس، لم يتغيَّر شيء في الرتابة المتواصلة في حياتنا اليومية. بيد أنني في مكانِ ما من روحي أحس بأنني تغيرت ، ففي كل صباح ومع إشراقة الشمس الروتينية، وأنا أفيق من نومي وأضع حجابي أمام المرآة لكي أخرج من بيتي فأغدو جزءًا مما نسميه الواقع، أعلم كذلك بأنه ثمة "أنا" أخرى أصبحت عارية على صفحات كتابٍ من عالم آخر هو عالم الخيال، وأعلم أنني غدوت ثابتة خالدة .. وزلذا فإنني سأبقى حاضرة طالما أبقيتني نصب عينيك .. عزيزي القارئ"
..
لقد وصلت رسالةآذار كاملة إلى طالباتها، وشعرن فعلاً بأنه لا حدود لعالمهم الأدبي الخيالي، وأنه لايمكن لأحد مهما بلغت قوته وجبروته أن يفرض وصاية على الروح .. وفي ظني مرة أخرى أنها لو كانت قصرت الكتاب على سيرة طالباتها وحكاياتهم، لكان كتابًا رائعًا، لكنها شاءت أن تجمع بين هذا كله ..
.
شكرًا للنفيسي على كل حال
.
.
نسيت أمرًا هامًا جدًا
وهو أن أشكر المترجمة ريم قيس .. لأن الترجمة احترافية جدًا .. أنا تقريبًا نسيت إن الكتاب مترجم :)
للتحميل
نسخة معدلة
http://t.co/XobBGN1yqw
May 3, 2017
To read a book about women who read Lolita in Tehran is to open the window to a world of dismay, in which even an act so pure and simple as enjoying fiction is considered treason, punishable by the wrongly proclaimed authorities in your life. I am constantly on the lookout for books which challenge my view of the world, or who have the power to paint a picture of another way of life, that I have been fortunate enough to never experience. "Reading Lolita in Tehran" is one of those books.
By no means am I stating that this is a perfect book. Far from it. A five star rating does not excuse shabby writing or clichee moments; it rather includes them. A good writer must, beyond everything else, convey a message by way of building a world. Azar Nafisi is a good writer.
This work forces you to take your clothes off at the door, just as her students did their chadors when they entered her Thursday classes in her house. You cannot walk through it if you are clothed in all of your opinions, beliefs and thoughts as if they were an armor. This is not the place to stand up and voice your point of view - this is the place to sit down and listen attentively as someone else teaches you about their way of life.
The timeline of this work encapsulates most of Nafisi's life as a liberal literature teacher in Tehran, living under constant pressure and threat because of the audacity she had to teach works of fiction that didn't support a political agenda: Nabokov, Austen, James, Fitzgerald, the list goes on. She encouraged her students to discuss the works of fiction not as if they were supposed to have real ties to the world, but as if they were only an exercise of imagination, directed at making us better people by increasing our ability to empathize with others. Nafisi was lucky - although here, as she says, the concept of fortune receives a very weird meaning - because she kept her life and integrity in a time when so many lost theirs. She paints a picture for the reader of the life she led, as well as the different lives of her female students who ended up following her in her home after she gave up formal teaching. In that room with a mirror in which the reflection of the mountains was hanged like a painting, they drank coffee, ate pastry and discussed their situation by discussing the characters in all of the books that had been denied by the regime.
I've read some reviews on the book and many readers were put off by the 'tone' which Nafisi uses, giving herself more importance than maybe she had, speaking of her acts as if they were revolutionary. Yes, she does. Because yes, they were. In a world where reading fiction can get you killed, reading fiction becomes a revolution in itself. I only read and felt the voice of a woman who, without thinking about the consequences, tried to keep as much of her integrity as possible, whilst pursuing her passion: teaching. Her situation had been different than the other girls', and she had been more fortunate in growing up in a liberal family. But the courage to act in a repressive system does not base itself on who you were in the past: it has everything to do with who you choose to be in this very second. A good teacher must show you what you yourself can be capable of. Nafisi was a good teacher.
I'm confident that this should be read by women all across the world, especially in the times that we live in. For someone who has a better-than-average knowledge of the social and cultural system of Islam in relation to women, I still found it a wonderfully eye-opening read.
By no means am I stating that this is a perfect book. Far from it. A five star rating does not excuse shabby writing or clichee moments; it rather includes them. A good writer must, beyond everything else, convey a message by way of building a world. Azar Nafisi is a good writer.
This work forces you to take your clothes off at the door, just as her students did their chadors when they entered her Thursday classes in her house. You cannot walk through it if you are clothed in all of your opinions, beliefs and thoughts as if they were an armor. This is not the place to stand up and voice your point of view - this is the place to sit down and listen attentively as someone else teaches you about their way of life.
The timeline of this work encapsulates most of Nafisi's life as a liberal literature teacher in Tehran, living under constant pressure and threat because of the audacity she had to teach works of fiction that didn't support a political agenda: Nabokov, Austen, James, Fitzgerald, the list goes on. She encouraged her students to discuss the works of fiction not as if they were supposed to have real ties to the world, but as if they were only an exercise of imagination, directed at making us better people by increasing our ability to empathize with others. Nafisi was lucky - although here, as she says, the concept of fortune receives a very weird meaning - because she kept her life and integrity in a time when so many lost theirs. She paints a picture for the reader of the life she led, as well as the different lives of her female students who ended up following her in her home after she gave up formal teaching. In that room with a mirror in which the reflection of the mountains was hanged like a painting, they drank coffee, ate pastry and discussed their situation by discussing the characters in all of the books that had been denied by the regime.
I've read some reviews on the book and many readers were put off by the 'tone' which Nafisi uses, giving herself more importance than maybe she had, speaking of her acts as if they were revolutionary. Yes, she does. Because yes, they were. In a world where reading fiction can get you killed, reading fiction becomes a revolution in itself. I only read and felt the voice of a woman who, without thinking about the consequences, tried to keep as much of her integrity as possible, whilst pursuing her passion: teaching. Her situation had been different than the other girls', and she had been more fortunate in growing up in a liberal family. But the courage to act in a repressive system does not base itself on who you were in the past: it has everything to do with who you choose to be in this very second. A good teacher must show you what you yourself can be capable of. Nafisi was a good teacher.
I'm confident that this should be read by women all across the world, especially in the times that we live in. For someone who has a better-than-average knowledge of the social and cultural system of Islam in relation to women, I still found it a wonderfully eye-opening read.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 9,105 reviews