The Iranian national canon, whatever it means to different people, is primarily studied as a continuation of the “Persian literary canon” while Afghan and Tajik literatures are treated as a divergence, and consequently lose the Persian qualifier. Persian literary production outside of Iran is essentially treated as an exotic object in an uncharted terrain.
To participate in the discussion forum on the Introduction, Chapters 1 and 2, click here. To listen to the first live-streamed discussion, click here. Some Sunday reading news–Ajam Media Collective is…
“We create our own prisons.” Prashanth Kamalakanthan describes the works of Nuri Bilge Ceylan using his words, his images, and his work’s inspirations.
Writing “nation” on the body of Persian literature participates in the erasure of dynamic and ongoing conversations on genre, form, and style that have shaped the contours of this literary tradition across a vast geography that in the premodern world stretched from Anatolia to the Bay of Bengal. What does it mean to imagine Persian literature as a “national canon” even today?