Take a photo of a barcode or cover
3.76 AVERAGE
3.76 AVERAGE
ادبیات فارسي حوزه‌ای نیست که بتونم خیلي دقیق راجع بهش نظر بدم چون آثار تالیفی زیادی نخوندم. درنتیجه راحت ترین شیوه‌ای که میتونم نظرم رو راجع به “بوف کور” بیان کنم مقایسه‌ش با آثار ادبیات جهانه.
بوف کور به شدت به من حس و حال رمان‌های ژان پل سارتر رو میداد: این گم گشتگی عجیب که نه راوی میدونه چه خبره نه خواننده. همه چیز تو یک چرخه بی پایان ادامه داره و دژاوو پررنگه.
از حیث غریبگی موضوع، مخصوصاً بخش اول و آخر داستان، با کارهای ادگار آلن پو برابری می‌کرد: این تصمیمات عجیب که در کمتر از یک پاراگراف شخصیت اصلی یکی رو تکه تکه میکنه میره بحث بعدی.
حزن انگیزی راوی شبیه آثار اوسامو دازای بود: متنفرم که این رو میگم چون از اوسامو به عنوان یک نویسنده متنفرم و نمیتونم با زن ستیزی غیرقابل تحمل آثارش کنار بیام، اما (متاسفانه) وایب یکسانی از بوف کور و no longer human یا the setting sun میشد گرفت.
به طورکلی به نظرم جزو آثار بسیار موفق ادبیات حزن‌انگیزه و بخش زیادی از داستان out of context هم قدرتمندی خودش رو داره. شروع و پایان بسیار گیراست و جایی افت شدید نداره.
جایی خوندم که میگفت تنها علت شهرت این اثر اینه که سال ۱۳۱۵ نوشته شده، وگرنه اگر امروزه نوشته میشد به این شهرت نمیرسید. و خب، نکته هم همینه، نه؟ امروزه ادبیات داره سمت داستانهایی میره که شخصیتها همگی از بیماری روحی، بی ثباتی، خداناباوری و اختلالات روانی رنج میبرن. (همه‌ی این آثار هم نیویورک تایمز بست سلر میشن :)) نکته اینجاست که صادق هدایت در ۱۳۱۵ تونست اینقدر خوب چنین داستانی رو بنویسه.
تقریباً درهمون بازه ژان پل سارتر “تهوع” و چندین سال بعد آلبر کامو “بیگانه” رو نوشت. خالی از لطف نیست “بوف کور” رو بغل دست این عزیزان قرار بدیم.
خلاصه که قطعاً در ادامه‌ی سال سراغ بقیه آثار هدایت میرم.
بوف کور به شدت به من حس و حال رمان‌های ژان پل سارتر رو میداد: این گم گشتگی عجیب که نه راوی میدونه چه خبره نه خواننده. همه چیز تو یک چرخه بی پایان ادامه داره و دژاوو پررنگه.
از حیث غریبگی موضوع، مخصوصاً بخش اول و آخر داستان، با کارهای ادگار آلن پو برابری می‌کرد: این تصمیمات عجیب که در کمتر از یک پاراگراف شخصیت اصلی یکی رو تکه تکه میکنه میره بحث بعدی.
حزن انگیزی راوی شبیه آثار اوسامو دازای بود: متنفرم که این رو میگم چون از اوسامو به عنوان یک نویسنده متنفرم و نمیتونم با زن ستیزی غیرقابل تحمل آثارش کنار بیام، اما (متاسفانه) وایب یکسانی از بوف کور و no longer human یا the setting sun میشد گرفت.
به طورکلی به نظرم جزو آثار بسیار موفق ادبیات حزن‌انگیزه و بخش زیادی از داستان out of context هم قدرتمندی خودش رو داره. شروع و پایان بسیار گیراست و جایی افت شدید نداره.
جایی خوندم که میگفت تنها علت شهرت این اثر اینه که سال ۱۳۱۵ نوشته شده، وگرنه اگر امروزه نوشته میشد به این شهرت نمیرسید. و خب، نکته هم همینه، نه؟ امروزه ادبیات داره سمت داستانهایی میره که شخصیتها همگی از بیماری روحی، بی ثباتی، خداناباوری و اختلالات روانی رنج میبرن. (همه‌ی این آثار هم نیویورک تایمز بست سلر میشن :)) نکته اینجاست که صادق هدایت در ۱۳۱۵ تونست اینقدر خوب چنین داستانی رو بنویسه.
تقریباً درهمون بازه ژان پل سارتر “تهوع” و چندین سال بعد آلبر کامو “بیگانه” رو نوشت. خالی از لطف نیست “بوف کور” رو بغل دست این عزیزان قرار بدیم.
خلاصه که قطعاً در ادامه‌ی سال سراغ بقیه آثار هدایت میرم.
"In life there are wounds that like termites, slowly bore into and eat away at the isolated soul."
Thus begins The Blind Owl, a novel that defies traditional storytelling and plunges the reader into a hypnotic nightmare. Written by Sadeq Hedayat and first published in 1937, this Iran an literary masterpiece is as much a psychological horror as it is an existential meditation. The novel is not merely read—it is experienced, leaving the reader trapped in its feverish, claustrophobic atmosphere long after its final page.
At its core, The Blind Owl is a novel about suffering, isolation, and the fractured nature of identity. It follows an unnamed narrator, a painter of pen cases, who becomes obsessed with a mysterious woman. As his grip on reality disintegrates, the narrative collapses into a dreamlike, disorienting journey filled with grotesque figures, cryptic symbols, and haunting visions. The narrator is tormented by his own thoughts, spiraling into madness as he attempts to make sense of his fractured world.
The novel is divided into two sections that mirror and distort one another. The first half is poetic, surreal, and drenched in hallucinatory imagery. The narrator speaks in a hushed, confessional tone, as though whispering a terrible secret to his own shadow. The second half, while initially appearing more grounded, only deepens the sense of confusion. It offers glimpses of explanation but ultimately refuses to cohere into a clear reality. The repetition of images—the enigmatic woman, the looming presence of the old man, the ever-present owl—reinforces the narrator’s psychological torment, trapping both him and the reader in an inescapable loop of despair.
One of The Blind Owl’s most compelling themes is the inescapability of suffering. Hedayat presents life as an existential prison, a nightmarish cycle where past and present blur, and time itself becomes meaningless. The narrator seeks truth but finds only emptiness, reinforcing the novel’s deeply nihilistic perspective. The imagery of decay, disease, and death pervades the text, suggesting that existence itself is a sickness—one with no cure.
Duality is another key theme: life and death, desire and revulsion, reality and hallucination. The narrator’s perception of the world is fragmented, much like his own psyche. His obsession with the mysterious woman reflects his inner turmoil—she is at once a symbol of beauty and decay, of love and unattainability. This paradox permeates the novel, making it impossible to find a single, stable truth.
Hedayat’s prose is hypnotic, lyrical, and suffused with an eerie, almost supernatural quality. His writing is filled with repetition, heightening the novel’s suffocating sense of déjà vu. Sentences loop back on themselves, phrases reappear like echoes, and certain symbols—eyes, shadows, bodies in decay—linger with an almost incantatory power. The effect is unsettling, as though the novel itself is alive, whispering dark truths in the reader’s ear.
The structure of The Blind Owl enhances its dreamlike quality. The narrative does not unfold in a linear fashion but rather in fragmented, circular patterns. The two halves of the novel reflect and distort one another, making it impossible to determine which events, if any, are real. The reader, like the narrator, becomes lost in a labyrinth of memory and hallucination.
Despite its psychological depth, The Blind Owl is not a character-driven novel in the traditional sense. The narrator is unreliable, his identity constantly shifting. He is trapped in his own mind, unable to escape his obsessions or find solace in reality. His descent into madness is not a gradual unraveling but an ongoing state—he has always been lost.
The mysterious woman, whom the narrator simultaneously adores and despises, is less a character than a symbol. She exists in an ethereal, dreamlike state, never fully present, never entirely absent. She embodies the narrator’s deepest desires and fears, appearing angelic one moment and corpse-like the next. Her unattainability is central to the novel’s sense of longing and despair.
The old man, grotesque and ever-present, is another haunting figure. He looms over the narrator’s psyche, serving as a reminder of decay, time, and perhaps even fate itself. His presence, like everything else in the novel, is ambiguous—he could be a real figure, a hallucination, or a manifestation of the narrator’s subconscious.
The Blind Owl’s greatest strength is its ability to immerse the reader in a deeply disturbed mind. Hedayat does not simply describe madness—he makes the reader feel it. His use of poetic language, repetition, and surreal imagery creates an atmosphere that is at once intoxicating and suffocating. Few novels capture the experience of existential dread as viscerally as this one.
However, these same qualities can also make the novel a challenging read. Its deliberate vagueness, cyclical structure, and refusal to offer clear answers can be frustrating for readers seeking a more traditional narrative. The novel’s depressive themes are unrelenting, offering no hope or catharsis. Additionally, the narrator’s misogynistic perspective—while thematically relevant—can be unsettling for modern readers.
Despite these challenges, The Blind Owl remains a landmark of existential and surrealist literature. It is a novel that lingers in the mind, its haunting images resurfacing long after the final page is turned.
Reading The Blind Owl is not a passive experience—it is an act of surrender. Hedayat does not guide the reader gently into his world; he drags us into its depths, forcing us to confront the same shadows that torment his narrator. The novel does not offer resolution, only a lingering sense of unease, as though we, too, have become ensnared in its endless loop.
Would I recommend it? Absolutely, though with a caveat. This is not a book for casual reading. It is dense, unsettling, and demands patience. But for those who appreciate existential literature, surrealism, or psychological horror, The Blind Owl is an unforgettable masterpiece. It is a novel that seeps into the soul, whispering its dark truths long after the last word has been read.
Perhaps the best way to describe it is with the narrator’s own words:
"I only write for my own shadow who sits on the wall against the light. I have to introduce myself to him."
And that is precisely how The Blind Owl makes the reader feel—as if we, too, are trapped in its haunting shadow.
dark
reflective
tense
medium-paced
dark
tense
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Full review soon?
I honestly still can't wrap my head around this book. It's grim, unsettling, and full of dark, recursive imagery that pulls and disorients you into a psychological descent alongside the narrator. For now, all I can say is this book doesn't merely show, it also consumes.
---
I honestly still can't wrap my head around this book. It's grim, unsettling, and full of dark, recursive imagery that pulls and disorients you into a psychological descent alongside the narrator. For now, all I can say is this book doesn't merely show, it also consumes.
---
“The presence of death annihilates all superstitions. We are the children of death and it is death that rescues us from the deceptions of life. In the midst of life he calls us and summons us to him. At an age when we have not yet learnt the language of men, if at times we pause in our play it is that we may listen to the voice of death…”
Ever read a book that plunges you into an unsettling psychotic and opium-like break that you have to take a deep breath, pace around your room for a few minutes, and question your life decisions on why you chose a book that seems like a portal to madness? Such is The Blind Owl by Sadegh Hedayat, a fever dream of a book dipped in despair and served with a side of existential dread.
Considered as an important work in modern Iranian literature, The Blind Owl is a work of profound psychological horror and existential exploration. The narrative unfolds in two distinct parts, each a descent into the unnamed narrator's fractured psyche. The first section, a feverish, opium-fueled vision, introduces us to the narrator's obsession with a mysterious woman, whose image is glimpsed through a hole in his wall. This figure is a symbol that becomes the focal point of his tormented existence. The second part, seemingly a continuation or perhaps a distorted reflection of the first, delves further into the narrator's past, revealing a cycle of violence, betrayal, and self-destruction. Hedayat masterfully manipulates time and space, blurring the lines between reality and hallucination.
“My heart had always been at odds not only with my body but with my mind, and there was absolutely no compatibility between them. I had always been in a state of decomposition and gradual disintegration.”
Hedayat crafts a narrative that mirrors the narrator's fragmented mental state. The story is told through a series of non-linear, often surreal passages, blurring the lines between dream and reality. We're plunged into the narrator's internal world, forced to grapple with his distorted perceptions and unsettling visions. I noticed that repetition is a key literary device used throughout the novel. Certain images, phrases, and motifs recur, creating a sense of obsessive fixation and reinforcing the narrator's descent into madness. The constant return to the image of the woman and the old man, the recurring descriptions of death and decay, and the cyclical nature of the narrative itself all contribute to a sense of inescapable torment. The repetition of phrases like "I saw..." or "I remember..." underscores the narrator's unreliable memory and his struggle to distinguish between reality and unreality.
This book is not for casual consumption. And definitely not something one should read during the brink of emotional instability. Full of bleak and unrelenting prose, I did struggle to finish The Blind Owl. It was for me, too disorienting. Too claustrophobic. However, the narrator's psychological disintegration is both mesmerizing and deeply disturbing that I found myself constantly questioning the nature of reality and the human capacity for despair. I have no idea what draws me to books like this. Is it the satisfaction of witnessing a man's psyche unravel under the toils of isolation and self-destruction? Or is it the unflinching exploration of the dark recesses of the human mind that borders on madness and obsession? Anyhow, this book brings a different kind of horror, a horror of existential dread and psychological claustrophobia.
challenging
dark
mysterious
sad
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
took me some time to read and it says some of the same stuff a few times which caused me some confusion since I didn’t read it in one go but I don’t think I’ll read this again unless by another translator or in Farsi itself
تو اون سن و سالى كه خوندم چیزی از این کتاب نفهمیدم... شايد يه روزى دوباره خوندمش
challenging
dark
mysterious
sad
fast-paced
dark
mysterious
tense
slow-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
No
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
Complicated
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
dark
inspiring
mysterious
fast-paced
Plot or Character Driven:
Character
Strong character development:
Complicated
Loveable characters:
No
Diverse cast of characters:
No
Flaws of characters a main focus:
Yes
Content Warnings
Minor: Alcoholism, Death, Sexual violence, Suicidal thoughts, Violence, Blood, Grief