Abstract

Purpose and Introduction: Throughout history, literary criticism has consistently been shaped by the cultural, social, and ideological surroundings of the critics. The examination of literary characters from many viewpoints is contingent upon the critics' intellectual orientations and personal preferences. Abu Nuwas, the renowned Abbasid poet, has been extensively critiqued and analyzed by several scholars throughout the history of Arabic literature. Prominent critics Taha Hussein and Abbas Mahmoud Al-Aqqad have offered divergent analyses of this character, influenced by their cultural contexts and methodological frameworks. Taha Hussein, a progressive intellectual motivated by skeptical philosophy, offered a critique grounded in historical and social analysis, scrutinizing Abu Nuwas’s character within the cultural framework of the Abbasid period. Conversely, Abbas Mahmoud Al-Aqqad offered a psychiatric assessment, depicting Abu Nuwas as a narcissistic figure afflicted by psychological complexes, grounded in the poet's personal and psychological characteristics. The disparities in viewpoints stem from essential divergences in their critical methodologies and conceptual foundations. This study aims to conduct a comparative examination of the perspectives of these two critics concerning the character of Abu Nuwas, utilizing Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis framework. This study seeks to demonstrate how literary criticism mirrors the intellectual, social, and cultural contexts of the reviewers, examining their language and writing style, as well as the mechanisms via which certain ideologies are reproduced in their critiques. This study aims to demonstrate that literary criticism reflects not just the personal ideas of critics but is also shaped by power structures, cultural traditions, and contemporary intellectual movements.
Methodology: This research employed Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis methodology, comprising three phases: description, interpretation, and explanation. The language characteristics in the critiques of Taha Hussein and Al-Aqqad were examined at the description stage. The interpretation stage involved an examination of the link between language and its conceptual foundations. Ultimately, the explanation phase examined how various discourses are reproduced through these critiques. The research material encompasses the essential writings of these two critics on Abu Nuwas, including analyses of their vocabulary, rhetorical style, and arguments. The study highlights that both critics, influenced by their cultural and social contexts, examined the works of Abu Nuwas through their distinct perspectives. Discourse analysis elucidates how language and lexical selections function as instruments to express and perpetuate various ideologies, hence examining their effects on disparate communities and cultures.
Results: The examination of the essential texts revealed that Taha Hussein used scientific terminology and a rational rhetorical approach, with his critiques exhibiting an analytical and coherent structure. He depicts Abu Nuwas as an emblem of a socio-cultural movement, examining his character within a historical and social context. Conversely, Al-Aqqad employs emotive, evaluative, and psychological diction, centering his analysis on the personal characteristics and psychological complexities of Abu Nuwas. Al-Aqqad's style features concise, straightforward phrases that prioritize ethical considerations and character evaluation. This study demonstrated that the critical viewpoints of these two critics were shaped by distinct cultural and social discourses, which were evident in their language and style. The disparities in analytical and linguistic methodologies reveal significant divergences in their philosophical and social perspectives on literary and cultural matters. Taha Hussein provides a scientific and analytical analysis of Abu Nuwas’s writings by emphasizing social and historical themes, whereas Al-Aqqad explores the poet’s character through individual and psychological characteristics. These disparities illustrate the influence of social and individual factors on literary interpretation and criticism.
Discussion and Conclusion: This study's results indicate that critical discourse analysis enhances comprehension of the impact of cultural and social contexts on literary criticism. Taha Hussein employs a rational and historical lens to evaluate Abu Nuwas, examining his character in relation to historical circumstances and cultural norms. Conversely, Abbas Mahmoud Al-Aqqad, by emphasizing psychological dimensions, portrays Abu Nuwas as an autonomous and narcissistic figure. The disparities in perspectives illustrate the influence of intellectual and cultural backgrounds on the critics' evaluations. According to Fairclough, critical discourses are influenced by both language and the prevailing social and ideological frameworks. This study demonstrates that variations in the language and writing style of critics stem from their respective places within distinct cultural discourses, with one inclined towards modernization and social analysis, while the other prefers conservatism and individualistic analysis.