The present study employs Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis method to examine and analyze the critical discourse embedded in the works of Jalal Al-e-Ahmad. The primary focus is on two of his seminal texts Gharbzadegi (1962) and On the Service and Betrayal of Intellectuals (1963) which are, in many ways, complementary to one another. Data analysis was conducted across three levels: textual analysis (description), discursive practice (interpretation), and social practice (explanation). The analyses revealed that Al-e-Ahmad’s formulation of the discourse of Gharbzadegi, significantly shaped by the undeniable influence of his book Gharbzadegi, became prominent and noteworthy in Iran’s sociopolitical transformations from the 1960s onward, with its impact still traceable today. Although Al-e-Ahmad’s discourse of Gharbzadegi ostensibly positions the East in opposition to the West, this “East” is swiftly reduced to the Iranian domain, characterized by a hybrid national-religious (Iranian-Islamic) identity. Simultaneously, the “West” is reduced to the concept of the machine. Al-e-Ahmad rigorously pursued discursive and social practices to construct the Gharbzadegi discourse; however, the disproportionate dominance of certain discursive forms over others led to a philosophical fragility within his framework. This imbalance later manifested in various social realities, revealing philosophical voids and an incomplete understanding of the West from the perspective of the East.
Keywords: Critical Discourse Analysis, Literature, Jalal Al-e-Ahmad, West, Orientalism, Iran.
Introduction
Modernity, as a Western phenomenon, has historically relied on constructing “otherness” in opposition to tradition. This binary logic—rational vs. irrational, civilized vs. barbaric—has permeated various domains including literature, politics, and education. Iran’s encounter with modernity began during the Qajar era through imperial military aggression. This confrontation positioned Islamic discourse against Western civilization, with thinkers like Jamal al-Din al-Afghani and Rashid Rida advocating for Islamic reform and resisting Western dominance. In Iran, intellectuals such as Jalal Al-e Ahmad critically engaged with the discourse of Westoxification, aiming to redefine Iranian cultural identity. Influenced by Ahmad Fardid, Al-e Ahmad viewed the West as a rootless mode of thought and criticized its ideological hegemony. He sought to unite clerics and intellectuals as a strategy to resist authoritarianism.
Materials & Methods
This study employs critical discourse analysis to examine Al-e Ahmad’s written works. The data consists of textual materials collected through archival and library research. The unit of analysis extends beyond words to include sentences, paragraphs, and thematic sections. The discourse is analyzed through four linguistic structures: naming, nominalization, passive vs. active voice, and syntactic patterns. The objective is to identify dominant discursive formations, ideological foundations, and naturalized power structures within Al-e Ahmad’s texts. This analysis aims to expose the mechanisms of ideological naturalization in the discourse of Westoxification and highlight Al-e Ahmad’s critical intervention against it.
Discussion & Result
The discourse of Westoxification forms the core of Jalal Al-e Ahmad’s thought and stands as one of the earliest postcolonial Iranian texts. It critically challenges Western cultural dominance and instrumental rationality by positioning Iranian national identity against liberal and capitalist hegemony. Through colloquial language and dramatic structure, Al-e Ahmad mobilizes diverse discursive communities within Iranian society toward reflection and resistance. Critical discourse analysis of his works reveals an intentional synthesis of religious, intellectual, and nationalist elements aimed at constructing a unified counter-discourse. His approach engages a broad audience and seeks to liberate Iranian thought from Western subjugation. Jalal Al-e Ahmad identifies religious upbringing as a foundational influence on his intellectual formation. He positions reformed Shi’a Islam against colonial Christianity and critiques the dominant religious discourse in Iran as passive, conservative, and withdrawn. Al-e Ahmad condemns the clergy’s silence in the face of oppression and Western encroachment, advocating for deep reform in religious thought and active social engagement. He strategically invokes messianic themes and the concept of awaiting salvation to mobilize public consciousness. His vision seeks to transform the clergy from guardians of tradition into agents of change, urging them to confront injustice and reclaim their societal role. Jalal Al-e Ahmad anchors his nationalist discourse in a deep sense of patriotism and attachment to his homeland. He situates Iran within the geography of the impoverished—rich in resources yet exploited by colonial powers. Reframing the East-West dichotomy through economic logic, he integrates nationalist elements into his critique of Westoxification. Al-e Ahmad attributes Iran’s stagnation to tribal governance and the adoption of a secondhand Ottoman modernity. At the level of social practice, he views language as a tool for reconstructing discursive order and awakening national consciousness. Intellectuals, in his view, bear the responsibility of preserving cultural identity against machinism and the erosion of Eastern character. Drawing inspiration from Gandhi and India, he advocates for a revival of Iranian independence and identity. Al-e Ahmad regards the clergy as the only social force that resisted Western cultural imperialism, positioning them as guardians of authenticity and agents of ideological resistance.
Conclusion
Jalal Al-e Ahmad’s discourse of Westoxification reflects a critical effort to reconstruct Iranian identity against Western cultural and technological dominance. By blending religious, nationalist, and intellectual discourses, he formulates a counter-structure where the East, as a subdued subject, requires awakening and redefinition. Critical analysis of his works reveals that colloquial language, intertextual religious and national references, and critiques of power structures serve as tools to challenge Western discourse. Despite his emphasis on the clergy, Al-e Ahmad failed to offer a deep philosophical synthesis between tradition and modernity. Nevertheless, his discourse laid the groundwork for ideological and social mobilization in Iran.