Enmeshed Beings: A Comparative Study of Ahmad Mahmoud’s ‘A Familiar Tale’ and Woody Allen’s ‘The Kugelmass Episode’
Frankfurt School has introduced “critical theory” as the best way to challenge capitalist societies, and to question the conventional standards. Art and literature, in this respect, are convenient devices through which the true face of capitalism can be revealed. Capitalism has enthralled people to...
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Lasting Impressions Press
2019-03-01
|
| Series: | International Journal of English Language and Translation Studies |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.eltsjournal.org/archive/value7%20issue1/15-7-1-19.pdf |
| Summary: | Frankfurt School has introduced “critical theory” as the best way to challenge capitalist societies, and to question the conventional standards. Art and literature, in this respect, are convenient devices through which the true face of capitalism can be revealed. Capitalism has enthralled people to accept its rules as facts and it is the mission of art and literature to wake them up. However, Frankfurt School thinkers are not optimistic and think it is almost impossible to challenge capitalist notions and change the base effectively. This existentialist attitude is what is employed in both Ahmad Mahmoud’s “A Familiar Tale” (1991) and Woody Allen’s “The Kugelmass Episode” (1977). Although these writers are set in societies far apart, one in Iran and the other in USA, their characters, especially their protagonists share the same feelings and problems of modern life. At first glance, it seems the authors have portrayed modern man and his challenges of life objectively; however, a closer look at the texts reveals something else. Mahmoud and Allen have employed the same techniques in their texts to criticize capitalism, the very shadow of which clouds their societies. They have portrayed the plights of modern man in the modern world and have put the blame on the capitalist system.
In this respect, the parallelism drawn between these two short stories can be discussed in two ways; first, in the chosen style and second, in their depicted society and its influence on the characters. The writing techniques employed by both authors and the existing parallelism can be drawn in three respects: the choice of the medium of short story, third-limited viewpoint and open ending. These three techniques help the selected works to make the impact of their criticism significant. The second section clarifies how the two selected writers approach their aim through content. They criticize dehumanization of people in capitalist societies and its immediate consequences such as commodification and internalization.
|
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2308-5460 2308-5460 |