A comparison between the structure of Hamidiâs Maqamat and Saâdiâs Golestan

• Main Authors: Esmaeil Shafagh, Ali Asmand jonghani
• Format: Article
• Language: fas
• Published: University of Isfahan 2015-03-01
• Series: Literary Arts
• Online Access: http://liar.ui.ac.ir/article_19734_edcb59fc5b30ad3b1268e71545eb2436.pdf

Abstract Maqamat are successive stories in which the hero is the same in all of them. The hero does strange things or in other words stunts and in the end disappears and no one knows his conclusion and again in another story appears in a new character. Maqame can be considered as the highest grade of Picaresque stories that was customary in Spain in the sixtheenth century. Picaresque derived from the Spanish word Picaro which means janus-faced, sly and cunning and Picaresque was the attribute for romances that proceed to Picarosâ actions.   The main Maqame in Farsi, is Hamidiâs Maqamat composed by judge Hamid od-Din Balkhi (d. 559 AH) who was chief justice of Balkh that wrote it in (551 AH) following Maqamat of Badiâ oz-Zaman Hamedani and Hariri. In discussing about structure of the story, elements such as subject, theme, characterization, plot, point of view, setting, language, time and place are considered as main topics.    Hamidiâs Maqamat imitating of Arabic Maqamat, in most cases has used Arabic words and compounds and did not welcome to Persian style statements as much. That is the reason it is full of complex and difficult words and idioms. Saadi's profound knowledge of Persian-language capabilities, understanding people's alive and vibrant slang and proficiency in fusion power of Persian-language, more use of prefix and simple verbs, utilization of metonyms, observance the brevity and briefness, abstaining from difficult words, avoiding of hyperbaton and formality, accuracy in selecting the words, all are effective factors at his innovative work which is Golestan.   In some of Golestan stories, Saâdi himself is the hero and the main character. In some he plays an important role and in some others plays the minor role or is only a spectator and event viewer. The characters are static in Hamidiâs Maqamat. That means at the end of the story, the characters are the same they have been at the beginning. Story events have low impact on them and do not change them. The space and scene of the story in Maqamat, because Balkhi has tendency to periphrasis description, transmits to reader with more details while Saadi's descriptions are very brief and he quickly passes through the atmosphere and the scene of the story.    Plot of Hamidiâs Maqamat in comparison with Golestan, is more consistent and somewhat follows the logic. But the plot of lots of Golestan stories is not more than a joke or sketch, and those stories that involve advice has been written without any sketch.    Most of the Maqamat stories narrate from the exterior view perspective and the narrator as omniscient leads the story characters. But in Golestan the view perspective is fisrt person and the author is a storyteller. From the characterization perspective, story characters in both Magahamat and Golestan do not change. In lots of Golestan stories, the omniscient narrator (author) or third person narrator and other characters have tangible presence. Sometimes Saâdi himself is the hero of the story whole in Hamidiâs Maqamat the main character as the hero of the story even does not have a specified name.     Intense interest of Hamid od-Din Balkhi in word prolongation to describe time and space has caused the time and space factors are not interesting and clear to the reader. Sometimes also in Golestan the time and space factors are vague, concise and unknown. In Hamidiâs Maqamat all of the stories bring up from the view of unlimited omniscient, but Ghazi Balkhi as says ''narrated me my friend who â¦'' yet tries to express events as if he had been the looker on and supervisor himself by being in one of the story heroes show