عنوان مقاله [English]
Some critics believe that for analyzing a text we should rely only on the text and there is no need to go far from it to the social conditions and historical events. But Michel Foucault, the French philosopher, is the agent of those who consider the text as a result of social powers. Critical discourse analysis is a method by which we can conceive social and ideological aspects of texts of all types that never can be understood in other ways. The “Discursive order” or the “orders of discourse” is a critical term presented by Norman Fairclough, meaning the contiguity of different discourses even opposed or paradoxical. Discursive order embodies different discourses in similar fields. The theory of critical discourse analysis (CDA) is based on Michel Foucault. He believed that there is a relationship between power and ideology with language and it can be found even in advertisements, essays, clinical case studies and artistic texts like poems, stories and literature as a whole. Fairclough expanded this idea and established a practical and systematic framework based on linguistic, by which we can understand the juncture between power and ideological analogy with language. In this essay, we have chosen an Iranian play named “Death of Yazdgerd” written by Bahram Beizaee for analysis by this method. This play is about Yazdgerd, the king from the Sassani dynasty, who escapes because of the Arabian assaults and seeks refuge at a mill and is ultimately killed by the miller. This is the historical narration about Yazdgerd, but we see many different possibilities about the end of Yazdgerd in the play. The miller, his wife and his daughter play different stories about the king but we cannot distinguish which one is true. The idea about the splendid history of the Iranian kings and also the opposite opinion which is about the injustices of those kings configure two discourses: the discourse of royalty and majesty of the past history of kings and the discourse of opposition with the past and welcoming the new changes. The play is written in 1987 which is simultaneous with the Islamic revolution in Iran. We compare the most dominant discourses of the play with the political and social situation of the time in which the play has been written and focus on the “change” which is seen both in the play and in 1987 and the descent of the kings in both periods. The reason of this similarity between the two different historical periods is the huge gap between people and the kings. So we first explain Fairclough’s theory in CDA and his frameworks, then we choose the most important questions of this framework about the play and try to answer them relying on facts in the play. To find the most dominant discourses in the text which is called order of discourses and interpreting the relationships between those discourses and the main discourses in the society which are determined by the ideology and power, is our next attempt.