startNewsMessage1 According to Ashura News, quoting Mehr reporter, "Tina Chaharsoqi-Amin," a linguist, researcher, and university lecturer, addressed the role of the hero in the central signifier of resistance discourse in a note that you can read below.
In Laclau and Mouffe's discourse theory, the overall articulation of discourse is composed of and around the central signifier, which is called the "nodal point" or "discourse package." The central signifier has a very important task; it must achieve an established relationship between itself and its signified in order to integrate the rest of the discourse signifiers around its axis. In fact, it must be able to accurately formulate the articulation of the discourse and the identity of the discourse around its own concept.
In my opinion, the resistance discourse, which can have many signifiers from a geopolitical and ideological perspective, one of its central and very fundamental signifiers is the signifier "hero." The hero gives meaning to the resistance discourse, legitimizes it, establishes a discourse, and can play an important role in reproducing the internal concepts of the discourse. The hero signifier can be examined from different perspectives in the tools of the humanities; that is, the meaning of the activism of the hero signifier can be examined from different perspectives, but the lens and angle of my entry into this discussion is linguistic.
I have previously discussed this issue in detail, so I do not want to enter into this discussion in this article. The result of the discussions presented is that Haj Qasim, with his consistent practical logic, with his willingness to change and acceptance of change, with his non-will and with his consideration of expediency, was able to have a very high level of verbal persuasion among all members of society and different strata. This level of verbal communication full of love that he shows in his loyalty to the nation, this level of rationality and logical element that correctly defines himself as a soldier and a child of the spirit of God, can be analyzed and examined from the perspective of classical rhetoric, which I have discussed. In this article, I will discuss it from the perspective of conceptual metaphor.
Conceptual metaphor is another rhetorical-discursive tool that is very useful in discourse to make abstract and intangible concepts completely tangible and familiar. Metaphors, in addition to being a literary embellishment of speech; they determine the mental and cognitive lens of individuals. From the amount and type of metaphors that individuals use in their speech, we can achieve discourse formation and understand from what perspective they see the world and interpret and determine it. From this perspective, cognitive metaphors and conceptual metaphors are very important to us. Metaphors help us examine the importance of concepts; they help us recognize the semantic networks within which we live. The more tangible and familiar these semantic networks are to us, the greater the degree of verbal persuasion we can have, and the greater our verbal persuasion, the better we can ultimately determine conceptual hegemony.
We organize our way of life under conceptual hegemony and borrow from it, patterns, and directions, and it also helps us in giving meaning, legitimizing, stabilizing, and reproducing concepts within discourse. The fact that we want to examine the personality of Sardar Hajj Qasem from the perspective of conceptual metaphors is precisely because of the same emphasis and reminder that the Supreme Leader gave. The fact that we try to avoid transcendental characteristics in introducing the personality of Hajj Qasem is also in this direction.
When we use and examine tangible conceptual metaphors that are current in language, we can properly analyze the mental lens of individuals on concepts and we avoid transcendental interpretations and analyses. On the other hand, a heroic figure needs not to be sanctified. When a hero is sanctified, he becomes unattainable and people cannot take a proper role model from him. The heroic figure certainly has a theological characteristic, but in order to be able to take a role model from them on earth, we need to prevent sanctification and examine them precisely in the vernacular.
The best context for examining the general's speech is the speeches he gave in the service of the public at martyrs' memorials and operations, because his audience was a wide range of people and he spoke at a general level, using metaphors that ordinary people could understand. His audience was not only diplomats, military commanders, and people who are politically active at the international or domestic level, but all people. This model of the general's speeches can be a very useful place for discussion and examination. When we refer to this series of speeches by the general, which have been given over the years, one of the metaphors he repeatedly used was the imposed war as a treasure, meaning he repeatedly mentioned that our war was a treasure, for this reason I call him the "Treasure Hero."
So far, metaphors such as "Commander of Hearts" and "Man of the Field" have been used about General Soleimani, but the metaphor of "Treasure Hero" is new and is borrowed precisely from his own statements; but why treasure? When a semantic mapping is made between the two semantic domains of "war" and "treasure," these domains are intertwined and the concepts become identical to each other.
The domain of war is violent, ruthless, full of blood and bloodshed, a domain from which everyone is fleeing and, according to General Soleimani, it is a domain in which cultural work has no meaning, but our perception of the imposed war is a cultural perception and impact. When the field of war becomes subversive and deconstructive, even the word is turned upside down and becomes "treasure." It refers precisely to the conceptual field that we should not consume.
They do not consume the treasure, but rather preserve and multiply it as a legacy, showing it to others so that they can use it as a spiritual reserve. This was what the general wanted to multiply from the war, to cultivate a model of war among the people of society. They also had the same view of the resistance discourse in Gaza and Lebanon. They saw this model of resistance as a kind of treasure whose presence could produce a spiritual reserve. In this regard, they said that command in our war was not guidance but leadership, and they made a difference between guidance and leadership. They said that the commander who leads says: Go! He himself remains and leads alone and says: You go! But the commander who leads goes to the heart of the battle himself and says: You come too! They say that the commanders of our Sacred Defense were people who led in their own management model. The martyrs of Kharrazi, Bakiri, Hemmat, Mutawassalian, Ahmad Kazemi, and others had an Imamate-like command model, and it is in this Imamate-like command model that the pilgrims' circumambulation of the Holy Mosque was inferior. This is where they refer to the message of the Hajj of Imam Khomeini (RA), where the Imam says: O you who sit in front of the House of God, pray for those who stand against the enemies of God, meaning pray for their lives. In this message, the Imam (RA) attributed "those who stand against the enemies of God" to the warriors. In all his speeches, the commander repeatedly described the warriors, the model of war and activism in the field of war as the art of the children of the revolution. This phrase can be seen frequently in his speeches. It is important that you can manage the field of war, challenge, and difficult action so artistically. The art of the children of the revolution is that they say exactly as they themselves do, they unite and represent the discourse of jihad, the discourse of martyrdom, and the discourse of resistance, which are the three main discourses of the Islamic movement of the Imam (may Allah have mercy on him). They use the metaphor of the “peak” and “range” and say that one of the factors for the victory of the children of the revolution in the war is looking at the peak, and we are the people who are on the range. They always have this metaphor in their speeches; peak and range.
They consider the “peak” to be the Supreme Leader, they consider him the founder and leader. Neither a peak without a range has meaning, nor a range without a peak. This same metaphor shows how difficult it is for us to move towards this peak, except that the path of the mountain can be a simple, easy, and comfortable path. The metaphor shows that we who are on the range; First, let's not lose sight of the goal and the peak. In many cases, this incident that happens to us and in many cases, the path to the peak is difficult, this metaphor is hidden in itself.
Experts consider religion, piety, and sincerity to be one of the important factors in the victory of the Islamic Revolution. These factors made them call each other brothers. The commanders often said that the ranks on my shoulders are the cloths on my shoulders. They use this metaphor themselves. See how much sincerity you must have. They often used it in different years after the war when giving speeches; from the 70s to the 90s, this metaphor never faded in their minds. Due to the strong factor of religion and sincerity, they called each other brothers without using any of the titles of general, doctor, professor, or lieutenant general. Being a brother and continuity convey sincerity.
Another metaphor that General Soleimani used many times was "the leader as the physician of society." Confidence in the wisdom of leadership in planning, diagnosing, treating, and healing the society. They say that leadership is the physician of our society. This view of leadership is something that may be overlooked. Someone whose mental formation of the leader is a physician, will definitely have confidence in the wisdom of his planning in all areas.
Post a comment