A Comparative Analysis of the Novels "The School Principal" by Jalal Al-Ahmad and "The Thief and the Sword" by Najib Mahfouz based on Critical Realism

The primary objective of this research is to examine the role of critical realism in shaping the portrayal of reality and to demonstrate how society is critiqued in the novels “The School Principal” by Jala Al-Ahmad and “The Thief and the Sword” by Najib Mahfouz. The objectives of this research are to identify and analyze critical realism in these two works. The researchers aim to explain the social criticisms presented by the two authors within the contexts of Iranian and Egyptian societies through this literary approach. This research is based on the description, analysis, and comparison of the texts of two novels, focusing on the elements of critical realism. It compares characteristics such as the reflection of reality, social totality, the relationship between the individual and society, typification, and aspects of popular literature in these works. The results indicate that both works fully embody the characteristics of Lukács's critical realism. In each, the protagonist conflicts with the ruling structures, and both authors employ moral and psychological traits alongside social typifications. However, an examination of the other two components reveals that Mahfouz portrays a broader social totality and gives greater prominence to popular literature within the novel.
Introduction
Among the prominent writers of fiction in Iran and Egypt are Jalal Al-e Ahmad (1902–1969) and Najib Mahfouz (1911–2006). Al-e Ahmad is a significant figure in contemporary Iranian culture and literature, known not only as a fiction writer but also as a critic and a political and social theorist. Najib Mahfouz also played a significant role in Arabic fiction, having received the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1988. By depicting the realities of everyday life, he invites readers to reflect on structures of power and individual responsibility, thereby demonstrating his influential role in expanding the concept of committed literature in the Arab world.
Georg Lukács (1885–1971) was a Hungarian Marxist philosopher and literary critic whose aesthetic theory was grounded in social relations and interactions. He developed the theory of critical realism as a method for interpreting literary works. This theory addresses dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs and the effort to transform it. In fact, works of critical realism possess a revolutionary nature and stem from the view that: “If the sins and shortcomings of human beings or the characters in a story result from deficiencies in their environment, circumstances, and social structure, then society is primarily to blame; therefore, the social structure that generates evil in people’s lives must be abolished at any cost.” Thus, the realist system manifested its negating and revolutionary nature in the mid-nineteenth century (Karimi-Motahar & Akbarzadeh, 2013, p. 67). Critical realism, which centers on dissatisfaction with the existing state of affairs and the effort to transform it, pursues two main objectives: first, to raise awareness of the prevailing conditions and the oppression stemming from social relations; and second, to instill a revolutionary spirit in people and dismantle the existing societal framework (Sachkov, 1983, p. 302).
Methodology:
This study employs a library-based documentary research method, focusing on the description, analysis, and comparison of the texts of two novels. It examines components of critical realism by comparing indicators such as the reflection of reality, social totality, the relationship between the individual and society, typification, and elements of popular literature in both works.
 
Discussion:
Social Totality in the Narrative Structure of the Two Works
According to the theory of totality, the whole always takes precedence over the part. Moreover, the part should be interpreted in the light and shadow of the whole (Lukács, 1998, p. 55). This concept of social totality is a key component of novels written by authors inclined toward critical realism. In "School Principal," although Al-e Ahmad narrates the lives of members within an educational environment (the principal, vice principal, teacher, and school servant) in a remote school, he precisely portrays, in accordance with Lukács’s definition of social totality, the condition of this small educational setting as influenced by the broader societal system. It is clear that the author’s purpose was not merely to depict a single part in isolation. A study of "The Thief and the Sword" reveals that Mahfouz also aims to reflect societal conditions through the portrayal of Saeed Mehran’s life and experiences. What matters to him is the social context of his era (the whole), rather than just the individual story of Saeed Mehran.
Typification Rather Than Pure Individuality:
In "School Principal," typification is evident. The protagonist, a school principal, is presented not merely as a representative of teachers and principals but, more broadly, as a representative of the educated middle class in society. In “The Thief and the Sword,” Najib Mahfouz employs typification to construct the protagonist, thereby providing a clear representation of Egyptian society. Although Saeed Mehran ostensibly seeks revenge against his unfaithful wife and friend and ultimately fails, Mahfouz attributes to him the characteristics of a revolutionary rebel, portraying him as a fighter against oppression and despotism. In this work, Saeed Mehran is a typical character because his concerns are primarily social rather than personal.
The Relationship Between the Individual and Society:
In "School Principal," the principal, as a cultural figure, is in sharp conflict with popular attitudes and expresses severe criticism of the students’ parents and their approach to making decisions about their children’s future. Similarly, in "The Thief and the Sword," the protagonist is marginalized and ultimately eliminated in his struggle against society. Through the depiction of the protagonist’s relationship with society, Mahfouz aims to reveal the gap between revolutionary justice and societal reality.
 
The Popular Character of the Work:
Another characteristic of critical realism is that the writer goes beyond merely describing ordinary events and reveals the profound pain and suffering experienced by people in society. Throughout the text, Al-e Ahmad portrays the guilty or culpable individual as a helpless person who is also a victim of circumstances. He traces the roots of the individual’s deep suffering to the conditions and social structures of the time, aiming to create literature that resonates with the public. Mahfouz also links the protagonist’s sorrow to the collective sorrow of the people. In this work, Mahfouz’s popular literature extends beyond Egyptian society and the social conditions of the period he depicts; instead, it represents a universal form of popular literature.
Conclusion
The comparative analysis of Al-e Ahmad’s “School Principal” and Najib Mahfouz’s “The Thief and the Sword” reveals that both authors employ the revolutionary and negating aspects of critical realism. According to Lukács’s theory of critical realism, the protagonist in each novel embodies a specific historical and social context. Both writers portray the events and conditions of their respective eras through the lives of their protagonists; however, Mahfouz’s protagonist exhibits a more pronounced social consciousness. Mahfouz situates the protagonist’s personal life within the broader social transformations and prevailing political climate of Egypt, using Cairo as a microcosm to reflect the comprehensive political and security structures of the country. Overall, both works reflect the realities of society and reveal the contradictions and discrepancies between the goals of the ruling system and the actual conditions of society. Both authors trace the roots of the protagonists’ problems to the social structure.
In both works, the individual stands in direct opposition to the societal structures and resorts to personal actions in an attempt to effect reform. In Al-e Ahmad’s story, the protagonist initially seeks to improve conditions through the government; when his efforts prove futile, he ultimately resigns. This work portrays the relationship between the individual and society as one of complete conflict. In "The Thief and the Sword," unlike in "School Principal," the protagonist does not appeal to the government or ruling authorities to bring about reform; instead, he distrusts the power structure from the outset. Consequently, he adopts a more intense opposition to society and, despite failing to achieve his objectives, continues to confront the government until the end of the story. He never becomes willing to place his trust in the ruling authorities or the judicial system. At the same time, however, he is deeply aligned with and sympathetic toward the people, particularly the deprived classes. The authors of both novels present their fictional characters as social types. Moreover, based on the principles of critical realism, both works represent forms of popular literature. Although this characteristic is less pronounced in "School Principal," Al-e Ahmad views the roots of society’s moral abnormalities as concealed and suppressed sufferings, and he attempts to address the profound pain experienced by errant individuals. Consequently, to some extent, traces of popular literature can be identified in this work. The representation of popular literature is more pronounced in "The Thief and the Sword," as Mahfouz not only connects the protagonist’s suffering with that of the Egyptian people but also extends this popular literature beyond Egyptian society to create a universal form. Overall, these two works can be regarded as prominent examples of critical realism in the fictional literature of Iran and Egypt.