Rural lifestyle change in Iran (1)

Abstract

Although the population of the village and village life includes a quarter of Iran's population now, in all of history, this life style has been the dominant form of our lives, and “we Iranian have been familiar with the settled and nomadic system for a long time (khosravi, 48: 1335) even according to archaeological studies " oldest village of the world that has been found ever by borers is in the Middle East. Two villages in the "Jarmo" and "Sarabin hill" located in modern-day Iran and Iraq have shown that sedentary has started by formation of rural communities at least 10,000 years ago "(Nik Khalq, 34: 1384).
This history undoubtedly cannot be overstated in the formation of Iranian culture and civilization as a whole.
The author of this paper described the classic difference between rural and urban lifestyles in rural or urban scale to express the way they influence the urbanization of rural life from the perspective of style life. It seems this is the first time that in Iran's Villages studies, rural lifestyle concept has been noticed, because lifestyle concept has been used to clarify and describe the modern urban life. In fact, classical urban sociology studies, urban life is defined as a way of living in contrast to the rural lifestyle.
Part of this opposition and difference of theme is stylization of urban life style and condition of being "without style" in rural life. Based on lifestyle concept or theory, it can be said that rural life in past in its traditional sense differs in these dimensions from urban life:
* Rural life has been organized based on "production" while urban life is "consumer" oriented.
* Rural life is based on the concept of "work" and in this concept, pleasure literally makes no sense, but urban life is based on "work and leisure".
* Rural life is based on "practical value" of commodities, while urban life is based on "practical and symbolic value".
Rural life is based on "continuity of traditions and repeating the past", while urban life is based on "innovation culture".
* The villagers mainly distribute the power through kinship structures and traditions, but in city, the distribution of power is generally based on specialization, division of labor and class features.
* Each village has a unique culture and the culture creates a unified whole, and this integrated culture determines all the characteristics of people's lives. However, the city has a heterogeneous culture and owns different languages and cultural, racial and ethnic diversity:
* Rural life is based on the pattern of "consistent with the requirements of nature", but urban life is based on cultural pattern, modifying, manipulating and dominating and exploiting the environment.
These features and other features of the rural lifestyle previous periods did not allow the phenomenon of lifestyle to be seen in the sense that is seen in the town, but with the growth of urbanization process, and it is more accurate to say by "urbanization", in villages lifestyle is getting formed as well. Sociologists now report of "urban rural" and "urban villages" in large cities, like Bethnal Green in the central region of London and area of the West End and Boston. "Urban villagers are groups of people who reside in cities and extensive kinship ties and strong links exist between them" (Savoj and Wared, 142: 1380).
Simmel, in his famous article entitled "intellectual life and metropolis" does not speak of the conflict between towns and villages, but he introduces metropolises of contemporary ages as a form of modernism and modernity culture that is in contrast with small towns of early periods of history, especially in ancient times. Simmel did not speak of cultural differences in urban and rural areas because he had found out through the experience that in the new world, the metropolis’ influence is flowing and active in the entire community, including regional and rural areas (Savoj, and Wared the 158: 1380).
The influence of cities on rural areas, less than half a century later was seen clearly in much of the world. George Foster, anthropologist, who has done field study in many villages in Africa and Latin America as well as North America, writes about this influence in 1960:
In fact, the rural community is an example of pre-industrial civilizations with complex economic and social classification, specific business and professions. Innovation source for these communities are towns, and city and central government determines their political, economic, and religious conditions (Foster, 54: 1378).
Of course this rural community change was not only based on demand and willingness of villagers and also positive attitude of local leaders, but benefited international protection as well. According to Foster, "since the end of World War II up to now traditional communities felt the need to change and recognized that change is inevitable and unavoidable. This led to broad international efforts to give or receive technical assistance "(Foster, 11: 1378).
One of the Iranian sociologists writes according to Iranian villagers experience in this field:
"Basically, the rural urbanization and being urban among villagers is seen as a social value and is desire and wish of the people. Perhaps we can say that a group of villagers due to the humiliations in the past that was imposed on them from city and large landowners, have found a sense of dissatisfaction about the social and rural life’s position and are skeptical and dismissive about their group. Pessimism, feelings of inferiority and alienation are the factors that make people to run away from rural life and come to the city"(Nik Khalq 110: 1384).
This trend towards urbanization is a process that started with beginning of the formation of the modern nation-state since the first Pahlavi with the formation of new institutions such as the military and school. But perhaps we could say that agrarian reform was a turning point in this field. Lempton in the book of “owner and farmer” writes about the effects of land reforming in Iran’s villages: "In countless villages where land reform has been implemented in the first or second level, villagers have built better homes for themselves. Such construction activities imply the improvement of their economic and social conditions, although farmers’ level of life is not limited just to improvement of house building. In total, in rural areas with land reform, the peasants eat better and are dressed better and have more furniture than before the land reform, and in addition, the amount of peasants’ debt has been reduced. Self-sell of products and debt which are the characteristics of rural society of Iran before the land reform significantly reduced, and it would not be possible without the co-operatives "(as quoted by, Azkia 75: 1365).
"People who are entering adolescence, young people who are married, usually leave their parental homes and due to the economic problems that pushed them and their family life, they are forced to leave their lands and go to cities to generate income and jobs. Thus, the problem of migration of villagers is mostly emphasized on young people of the rural community. Studies done in the field of rural migrants’ age confirms this matter "(Nik Khalq, 106: 1384).
“In rural youth’s mind that for a long time only had this impression that they have to follow their parents to work, with having literacy and increasing their social awareness about the values of society and their low social base, are trying to escape from their villages, and leave the lands and be engaged in any other occupation other than agriculture "(Nik Khalegh, 107: 1384).
Now, villages are a broad, extraordinary and deep scope for understanding modernity, because in them, the contrast between old and new, tradition and modernity can be observed directly and clearly in the lives of the villagers. I think what Marshall Berman described about the nature of street life as the field of modernity culture representing with its privileges and problems can be said about the streets of villages as well, small streets of a small world for modern life and an arena for the fight against public space.
Despite the urbanization of rural areas, it should be considered in mind that this process does not mean the complete destruction of the rural lifestyle and the elimination of differences between urban and rural areas. Dupuit writes properly in this regard: "Our concept of rural society is a social group that is relatively independent and self-sufficient in rural environment, and it has specific organization and the value of its own and production system, and is function of international community, but does not uptake it "(Dupuit, 241: 1385). What matters in rural life style now is urbanization and not yet completely being absorbed in this process.
Iranian villages during the past half century in terms of lifestyle and cultural-basic values have undergone significant changes. It cannot be understood with classical approaches that used to see the village as headquarter of tradition and city as headquarter of modernity. In the villages of Iran "rural Iranian modernity" has arisen in a way. For example, consumer -based values or symbolic values of goods can also be seen in rural areas. That traditional assumption that village was considered as the birthplace and home of "folk" or "folklore" now is gone, and in villages as well as cities, we can rarely observe folklore poetry, language, and music, and instead the media products or popular culture is substituted. Even traditional rural crafts such as carpet weaving, Gilim weaving, pottery and so on are being destroyed and other rural young girls prefer to learn new skills.
In the result of rural culture becoming media and structural changes, social values are declining and individualistic values are developed. This leads to fundamental differences between adult generations (grandparents) with their children and grandchildren. This issue more than anything is expressed in the way of dress, makeup, practices and behavior of young people in rural. We cannot see obvious cultural differences between rural and urban youth, however, these two are different in certain fields yet.
1-Methodology and theoretical framework
In terms of methodology, this study is based on theoretical analysis, secondary analysis of statistical data "as well as instant ethnography" through open interviews with a number of villagers of "Mosleh Abad Village" and study in fieldwork and participant observation. The author in addition to living 18 years of life in the studied village, to conduct this study has traveled several times to the villages where the field study was conducted. Field study was conducted in the fall and winter of 1385 and a part of the interview was done in spring of 1386. So, this is an analysis of self-ethnography based on the experience of relatively long life in author’s hometown.
In this analysis, the author has been trying to study modernity in Iranian villages relying on the experience of developments and condition of the mentioned village. The experience of modernity means analysis of changes in lifestyle, behavior patterns, norms, feelings, emotions, values and material aspects of the villagers have experienced in their daily lives since the Shah of Iran during the modern period to the present day. To understand the modern experience in the daily life of the villagers, one way is a comparative study of rural life before the modern period with lifestyle after this period. The author has tried to use a comparative approach for comparing differences between what was and what is now. It should be noted that whatever is said about this surveyed village cannot be extended to all villages in Iran. On the other hand we cannot see what is in the village as a unique phenomenon and limited to one village. Certainly a large part of Iran's villages during the modernization programs, including the development of schools, the use of agricultural technology, development of health and social services, development of mass media like radio and television, development of consumption and in general development of the modern lifestyle which have been shaped in them, more or less have experienced the same experience of modernity of rural villages that Mosleh Abadi’s people have experienced.
2. Overview of the discourse of the Iranian Rural Studies
Rural studies in Iran's with rural studies discourse were mostly focused on considering the village as an economic and material issue. From this perspective, rural man is an economic man. Some believe that even in the economic analysis, these studies have been restricted only to some of the economic rural aspects which have had importance of politics. For example, Azkia, one of the country's leading experts on Iran, writes in his analysis studies: "Most studies on rural issues that had been done in Iran over the past decade were mostly for analyzing the socio-economic effects of land reform in 1341's" (Azkia, 71: 1365). Although these studies even in the same realm of understanding and discussing the issue of land reform and various aspects of economic life as Azkia says: " the analysis of social structures and the impact of land reform on the rural Iran have failed" (Azkia, 72: 1365).
But the most important criticism that can be found on this approach is not its failure to explain the rural economy, but more than anything, is that this process restricts the rural life and community to the economic life, dimensions and the issues of populations (like immigration to cities and population statistics), the development programs (that the programs have also focused on the economic and demographic aspects). These rural studies focus on different aspects of economic, demographic and financial aspects of the village which is due to the fact that urban and rural studies in Iran have been made from the perspective of urban people and from the sight of relationships that village and rural people have with city and political system. These relations mainly have been based on the axis of agriculture economy and animal husbandry and functioning of the rural areas as a supplier of food and labor (mainly as unskilled people such as construction workers and service personnel) for urban people or political problems that they made for the government. But we must bear in mind that "although villagers are mostly farmers, their diagnostic criteria as rural is social relations not employment standards" (Foster, 54: 1387). Also, conception of relations of the village with the city in Iran based on facts of economic relations is not logical. Khosro Khosravi, of the great pioneers of rural studies in Iran, writes correctly on this issue: "The relationship between cities and rural areas is not based solely on socio-economic exchange, but also social fields have been included. Governmental manpower supplying during the war and the use of labor of rural migrants in cities for the crew or other productive activities is considered as the relations of urban people with the peasants. On the other hand, preserving national culture and social institutions, especially language in foreign ethnic domination that sometimes lasted for centuries in Iran and preserving traditions have been largely a responsibility for the villagers specially the peasants "(khosravi (b), 5 1358).
Rural studies of Iran have also focused on rural culture, but the dominant view in analyzing village cultures is mainly based on an economic approach that explain and describe the village from the perspective of theories like the theory of modernization and economic development driven by concepts such as understanding the components and features of " peasant subculture ".The most important issue is recognizing economy of rural culture from the perspective of obstacles that are made in the way of economic development and its transition from the traditional to the modern position. The researchers say: "To understand how the traditional rural society of Iran to a modern society, we have used the theory of modernization… traditional views about “life”, “lack of motivation "," lack of morale of investors ", “the spirit of fatalism " etc. as obstacles to development in the countries, the followers of this school believe: these elements can be eliminated by creating a culture in society "(Azkia, 72: 1365).
Behnam and Rasekh, of prominent sociologists of Iran, have dedicated one of the chapters of the book "Introduction to the Sociology of Iran" (1348) that is now considered of classic works of sociology of Iran to understand Iranian village and in describing the rural culture of Iran, write "in short, we can say about rural culture that conservatism that is specific to them, they have maintained their dwellers, traditions, customs and beliefs better than city people have and if someone wants to research about the old beliefs and rituals, or occasionally, wants to investigate the old vocabulary and accents, better than anywhere, he can achieve his purpose in the in the study of villagers. As science and technology have not penetrated rural areas as cities, we can relearn a set of superstition and magical thinking and actions from the peasants, and as the rural not only is close to external promise but also is closer to whatever human nature is, thus in Folklore poetry and literature, we can easier find the expression and manifestations of human instincts and natural and inappropriate reactions of them against the world"(the name of the firm, 283: 1348).
This perception of rural culture can be known as the dominant discourse in Iran’s rural studies and partly in rural sociology at the global level. In particular, this notion is based on the theory that was presented by Rogers about villages and called it as "peasant subculture". According to Rogers ten key elements "in peasant culture" are:
1. Lack of mutual trust in personal relationships.
2. The lack of innovation.
3. Fatalism.
4. The low aspirations and desires.
5. Inability to ignore the immediate interests for the sake of future benefits.
6. The low importance of the time factor.
7. family-orientation
8. Dependence on government power.
9. Localism.
10. Lack of empathy (Azkia, 56: 1364).
Although, in front of the critical and pessimistic view, an optimistic approach has always been about the village that sees it as a safe and calm environment and a very healthy and natural place- which exists in folklore literature and culture of Iran. Saadi in Golestan has a phrase that says: "village-born scientist became the king’s minister". This phrase is a guide for Ibrahim Parizi, famous literary historian, for providing a host of ancient historical evidence based on the fact that "throughout the history, these small villages have offered great men of politics and science and literature to cities and the fact is that if these small villages did not exist, we would not have many of these great men. our several thousand years of culture and civilization is born and bred in air and open space of the same villages "(Bastani Parizi, 101: 1357). Parizi relying on the default and approach writes about the civilizing role of villages in Iran: "Of all the thousands of years of history, these villages gave our civilization and culture’s candle hand in hand- from the stone age to the atomic century and just like the Olympians, if a group was tired, he gave the candle to other group, and kept it on so that it arrived to our time. In all the days of civility, intellectual and spiritual nourishment of cities, as it was explained, was more done by those who raised from rural areas and this may be the clear air and free space of village and the free spirit of villagers which are the source of large brains and a breeding ground for great thoughts"(Bastani Parizi, 151: 1357).
This sweet and pleasant impression of rural life "has a long history that any of a number of times, it has been under such titles as: the beauty legendary of farming life, the legendary of Simple living and respecting the Sweet Wilds " (Foster 46: 1378). Benedict Anderson argues in the book "imagined community" (1983): "All the human grouping larger than the first villages that had face to face communication with each other have been imagined communities" (Pitt and Hartwick, 194: 1384). The author in this article tries to provide a descriptive report in Farahan of Arak to show developments and different dimensions of culture and lived experience of everyday life in it. The aim of the author of the report is not representing the village as a lost paradise as it is in the discourse of "ideal shepherd" and it is not also what is in the theory of "peasant subculture" of the villages, but above all, it reflects modern processes in this village by taking a set of constructive or destructive outcomes into consideration. Here, individual interests or experiences may also affect the writer in describing and explaining issues, but as far as it is related to conscious of the author, the effort has been based on avoidance of sociological stereotype in studies of the rural studies of Iran.
2. The "Mosleh Abad" and modernization process
Mosleh Abad is a suburb of Farahan, city of Arak. The village has a history of nearly four centuries and in a recent half century has witnessed vast changes in social, economic and cultural dimensions. Historically, social and economic developments of Mosleh Abad can be explained in three pre-modern, modern and contemporary eras. The purpose of the pre-modern period is from the beginning of village foundation to the first decade of present century. Mosleh Abad Like other villages of Iran has an economy based on agriculture and animal husbandry and has a population of 483 people. Traditionally, this village lacks landlords and its lands have small owners that in the implementation of the land reform program, landowners’ property was divided among the peasants as well. Mosleh Abad slong with the emergence of modern nation-state at the time of RezA Khan began its changes with the establishment of a primary school in 1312, and then by deploying young boys to serve conscription, the process of migrations and familiarity of villager with the cities and their link with the central government began. As a result of the massive migration of youth to urban areas, that mainly were dispatched for military recruitment and service work to Tehran and Arak, the village faced with a major population decline. Also, due to the destruction of fields, loss of youth and the lack of agricultural technology, agricultural economy of this village went to collapse. After the 1357 revolution, Mosleh Abad observed a different cultural, social and economic experience of all its history.