Author Information
Reza Tavakoliabandansari, Sapienza University of Rome, ItalyAbstract
This paper examines the significant interpretive polarization that currently characterizes scholarly discourse over Iranian government murals. The majority of existing literature reveals a dominant Culture-Centric perspective that decodes such paintings through Shi'i iconography and themes of sacrifice, viewing them as genuine cultural phenomena that promote national-religious identity. Consequently, mainstream academic discourse often relies on internal cultural semantics, creating a blind spot regarding the murals' ideological undertones. Conversely, the marginal Power-Centric/Critical paradigm analyzes these artworks as active mechanisms of state power and visual ideology. This interpretive divide is illustrated through two key case studies: first, child-soldier imagery, which the dominant discourse frames as heroic patriotism, whereas critical scholarship identifies it as a mechanism that normalizes violence, obscures state responsibility, and aligns with coercive mobilization; second, leader portraits, which are hailed in the Culture-Centric approach as icons of spiritual leadership, but viewed in critical literature as manifestations of a cult of personality and visual authoritarianism. Ultimately, this research demonstrates how the hegemony of the Culture-Centric discourse obstructs academia's potential to address issues of power, state agency, and human rights. To overcome both cultural relativism and political reductionism, the paper argues for a more integrative analytical framework that conceptualizes Iranian state murals as a “hegemonic tension space” one that bridges local cultural specificity with the political mechanics of public visibility.
Comments
Powered by WP LinkPress