Occidental Studies

Abstract Introduction This article aims to reconstruct the sociology of art through Georg Lukács's theory of the novel and present a critical reading of modern Western aesthetics. The main issue is to explain how art, particularly the literary form of the novel, can be analyzed sociologically not merely as a passive reflection of social content, but as a phenomenon with autonomous aesthetic forms that are simultaneously intertwined with socio-historical conditions. Contrasting purely empirical or formalistic approaches, this research seeks to offer a model, based on Lukács's thought, where the artistic "form" is the site of convergence and crystallization of "social reality." Thus, Lukács's theory of the novel is introduced as a realized paradigm and a methodological model for the sociology of art. Materials & Methods This article is written using a descriptive-analytical method, focusing on documentary research and theoretical content analysis. The primary materials are the works of Georg Lukács in aesthetics, the theory of the novel, and the sociology of art, especially "The Theory of the Novel," "Soul and Form," "The Historical Novel," and "Studies in European Realism." To delineate Lukács's intellectual background, the aesthetic theories of Immanuel Kant and G.W.F. Hegel are referenced, and for comparison and expansion, the views of sociologists such as Émile Durkheim, Theodor Adorno, and Howard Becker are cited. The method involves extracting and analyzing key aesthetic components of the novel from Lukács's perspective (such as human development, closure, character, and realism) and demonstrating the dialectical connection of these components to the socio-historical conditions of the modern era. Discussion & Result The present study shows that Lukács, by adopting the concept of "totality" from the Hegelian tradition and linking it with a material-historical analysis, historicizes and socializes aesthetics. From his perspective, the novel, as the paradigmatic literary form of modernity, emerges not from the artist's subjectivity alone, but from specific socio-historical relations characterized by human "alienation" and the loss of meaning-giving totality in modern society. Four key aesthetic aspects in Lukács's theory of the novel are analyzed: Human Development: The novel is the only artistic form capable of depicting the process of human becoming and development within time and in engagement with social structures. Closure (terminus ad quem): The beauty of a work depends on providing a logical and necessary closure that convincingly concludes all narrative details and character development. Character: The character in the novel is a social being who preserves and transforms their "core" through interaction and conflict with social obstacles and structures. Realism: Lukács's realism is not a superficial description of details but a dialectical representation of the "relation between individual and society" and the presentation of the "totality of objects" within a coherent artistic form.
The key finding of the article is that by focusing on these aesthetic components and linking them to objective conditions, Lukács effectively provides a "methodological model" for the sociology of art. In this model, the artistic form is understood not as a cover for content, but as the most objectified level of manifestation of social reality. Therefore, a Lukács-inspired sociology of art is a study that traces and analyzes the presence of social structures within the very aesthetic formation of artworks. Conclusion
This article argued that Georg Lukács's theory of the novel marks a turning point in the formation of the sociology of art in the precise sense. By synthesizing two intellectual traditions—namely, the formulation of "social fact" in Durkheimian sociology and the recognition of the "cognitive aspect" of art in Hegelian aesthetics—Lukács made possible the sociological analysis of artistic forms. His innovation was to show that a sociological analysis of art must focus on the form itself and its aesthetic components, not merely on the social themes or content of works. The theory of the novel serves as a concrete example, demonstrating how the form of the novel and components such as human development, characterization, and realism are directly rooted in the historical-social conditions of modernity (alienation, individualism, capitalist relations). Consequently, this research offers two practical suggestions: First, any future sociology of art research should focus on analyzing the connection between specific artistic forms and their relevant social reality. Second, Lukács's model can be applied to the sociological analysis of other artistic forms in different historical-cultural contexts (such as modern Persian poetry), provided that the inherent aesthetic aspects of that form are first extracted and then their connection to specific social conditions is demonstrated.

Abstract Introduction Diodorus composed his work in forty books. The Historical Library begins with an account of the creation of the world and concludes with a description of the Gallic Wars (58–51 BC) and the early years of the establishment of the Roman Empire. The work is divided into three parts. The first part deals with the mythical history of non-Greek peoples, including the Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Medes, Persians, Indians, Scythians (Saces), Arabs, and Africans. The second part covers the history of the Greek peoples, the Second Median/Persian War, the Peloponnesian Wars, and related events, and ends with the death of Alexander the Great. The third part comprises an account of the history of Alexander’s successors down to the beginning of the Gallic Wars led by Julius Caesar. Of these forty books, only fifteen have survived. These include the first five books, which deal with the history of the Egyptians, Assyrians, Medes, Indians, Greeks, and others, as well as Books Eleven through Twenty, which cover the history of the Greeks, Persians, Carthaginians, Sicilians, Macedonians, Indians, and other peoples. These books have survived almost in their entirety, while the remaining books have been lost, with only fragments preserved. Even these limited fragments, however, contain valuable and useful information about the ancient world of those times. Materials & Methods This study seeks, through a library-based methodology and by examining the literary and historical evidence found in classical texts, to address the questions raised regarding Diodorus’s writing style and his objectives in composing the Historical Library. Discussion & Result In composing the Historical Library, Diodorus consulted and made use of the books and writings of many historians. We are aware of the existence of some of these historians only through Diodorus’s own writings; in fact, his work preserves summaries of historical and literary writings by certain authors whose works have disappeared and been lost over time. He incorporated portions of these writings into his books with little to no alteration, critical assessment, or commentary. Diodorus is the only historian of world history writing in Greek whose work has survived in relatively substantial portions, such that fifteen out of his forty books have endured the passage of time and have reached us (Sangari, 2021: 112–113; Diodorus Siculus, 2005: 14). In reality, only a small number of historians before Diodorus can truly be considered historians of world history in the full sense of the term. Diodorus does not regard any of his predecessors as historians of “world history,” since all of them, in his view, fell short of his ideal; he explicitly states that his purpose in writing the Historical Library was to correct the errors of earlier historians. Although little information is available about Diodorus’s life, his intellectual life, worldview, and understanding of history as an ancient historian can be discerned from his writings. After completing his major work, Diodorus composed a general preface and placed it at the beginning of his first book. This preface is more illuminating than his other writings for understanding Diodorus’s intellectual foundations, as it articulates his ethical–philosophical approach to history and historiography. This preface may be regarded as “Diodorus’s philosophy of history”; however, it has provoked considerable debate among historians and scholars. Conclusion Although more than five centuries have passed since the emergence of the West’s romanticized or imaginary Orientalism, which appears to present a thoroughly distorted image of the real East, Occidentalism has yet to truly begin in the East, and in the more specific sense of the term, in Iran. It remains, as it were, in an embryonic state. Bringing an end to indifference toward Occidental studies in Iran is the only way to initiate forward movement in understanding the interaction and confrontation between these two civilizational entities, and the pervasive slogan of the “vague and dark West” must be set aside. In the preface to his work, Diodorus eloquently and clearly sets forth his purpose in writing the Historical Library, expressing his desire to employ the best and most flawless method of historiography in his work. What he states in this preface is, in its entirety, correct, rational, and the product of a genuine philosophical outlook. Like others, he seeks through the writing of history to render a great service to humankind; yet it is evident that this brilliant preface appears far superior to the work as a whole. It may be said that Diodorus’s thought, at the time he composed this preface, was strongly influenced by the intellectual currents of his age. Diodorus aspired to write the history of the entire world, recounting all historical events from the creation of the world down to his own time. In his view, the justification for this undertaking lay in the moral and political benefits that any reader could derive from reading such a work. Ultimately, although Diodorus’s Historical Library represents a fine example of the prose and literary style employed by the intellectuals and scholars of the late Hellenistic period, his prose cannot be placed on an equal footing with that of the great historians of the ancient world. In the Historical Library, one finds no trace of the elevated narrative style of Herodotus, the profound and penetrating perspective of Thucydides and Polybius, or the refined and dignified language of Xenophon.