Discourse, Reality, Potency in the First Chapter of Marzbanname in Michel Foucault’s Roof Approach

Throughout the first chapter of Marzbaname, a tense discourse takes place between Malekzadeh and Dastoor with the aim of discovering the truth and the support of a different kind of power. Each of them seeks to remove the other from the field by pressuring him and by influencing Malek, to establish his own position. Dastoor enters the discourse from a position of political power with clear and sophistic expressions and in a rhetoric and power-oriented mood so as to defend the present status. Malekzadeh, relying on the support of a specific social class, uses ironic language and allegory to raise the existing problems and bottlenecks that have caused the crisis in society and tries to give Malek the motivation to change them. Consequently, two discourses are formed on the addressed topic and each of them is a reflection of truth and power. This chapter has been described and analyzed in a documentary and library manner and using the approach of Michel Foucault, has established a strong and coherent link between discourse, truth, and power in various works. The style of speech, the type of argument, and the discursive position of each party are in a way that they impress the audience, arouse their emotions, and attract their attention to their position. Malekzadeh's strategy in his style of speech and discursive position causes the audience to lean towards him and see him as on the side of truth and, as a result, the owner of real power. 
Introduction:
Foucault finds the power in the complex comunication fluently which is originated in different layers on social contractions and language concepts. It is also signified in the receptacle discourse and can be shown via language. To Foucault, reality of discourse is a rhetoric strategy not only for his expression, emotions, and intrinsic thoughts of a person, but also a bystander of many social occurnces. One of the discourse functions is the rethinking concepts related to litrary tipe according to social relationships. This is because reflexing the different forms during sundry times has the connection between author and reader with unequal dispensation of power in societies which can make mutation and challenge. Hence, he is well-aware that the reality on discourse ascertains the insight structures which signify that the accuracy fairness of discourse has the critical function during its history. Furthermore, current truth teller should have the individual character and a special moral and social status that dedicates this assest of utterance. Truth teller should have all the features such as endangering himself and his points with telling the truth. Since he speaks about subgugation and dominance and their endless functions and enters the conflicts and strength intractions on to power relations. In other words, truth has the deep source in power organisms and it is the harvest of it. It should be heeded to search the truth for discourse process.
In the first chapter of Marzbanname, the enterpriseing reality that is inclusive between reality and power is entirely observable. The Prince is not pleased with the circumstances of the society, however, dosen’t coalesce with his objectors that are his brothers and is going to emigrate to avoid the scuffle. Elder statesman suggested to write the aphoristic and wise book in order to help them and also the people. He accepts to write the aphoristic book on behalf of the great people and them. He takes the consent and shares his idea with The King about his emigration and writing the aphoristic book. He shared the discussed idea with the Prime minister.  Prime minister lets him emigrate but refused to write the book. Because he belives the writer to debate etiquette of kingdom so that compare his knowledge with etiquette of kingdom in a way. People judge them. To emerge the Prince work and find the reality. He proffers the debate. The Prince and Prime minister debated. The basic choices of discourse between them expressing the truth, resistance at that and defend of power.
This discourse is based on contrast between present situation and its changes all the way to the past. The Prince signifies a great deal of contrast with the present situation and would like to refer to the past situation. But it rationalizaes the fatal consequences of this politic dominance.
In fact, they are pursuing the same goal; Dastoor wants to cast a spell on Malekzadeh’s seemingly benevolent intentions and prevent him from writing his book in order to maintain his power. Furthermore, Malekzadeh tries to control Dastoor’s power and eliminate its possible effects through the power of speech. Therefore, each of them presents their words in the space of truth-like discourses.
Malekzadeh begins his speech by emphasizing on two points: “rational morality” and “wastefulness in the property of others.” Then, he expresses his view on the state of the country using concepts related to his discourse. In his opinion, “this method is far from the style of our ancestors and not al all worthy of the pure and noble principle and the noble character.” In addition to listing the reasons for his silence, he refers to the “rights of brotherhood.” He begins his speech with gentleness and points to Malekzadeh’s good intentions in expressing his words. He considers his statehood to be the implementation of the words of his predecessors; to justify his actions and violence against the people, he cites the words of Ardashir Babak and the categories of his wisdom, he appeals to the verse of Qisas, he considers the temperament of the people of the time to be corrupt, and he does not consider leadership and commanding to be the work of every fool. They each refer to the king's position and importance in people's lives in some way and create discourse with their own specific speech acts.
There exists a significant divergence between their speech acts and the subject matter of their speeches. The argumentative order speaks of abnormalities that need to be normalized, and his method of normalization is violent. Malekzadeh uses the expressive method of allegory. In his allegories, he points out the results, effects, and areas of power without considering the forms and organizations of power. His first allegory is the story of “Hanbu with Zahhak,” which focuses on the status of the family and brotherly relations within it. In this allegory, carrying an inverted manner, Malekzadeh sends a message to Malek who has carelessly turned his back on the family (or what in Barthes’s terms is called; political father) and this neglection has caused corruption in power.
By using the term family, he does not mean an original family, but a political lineage that once sat on the throne of power, had strong and solid traditions, had their own values ​​and counter-values, and did not generate dissatisfaction among the people. By narrating the story of “Khorenama with Bahram-e-Gur,” he considers the king’s excessive cruelty to be the cause of the division among the people. He considers observing justice to be the cause of the development of the country and the relationship between the king and the people to be like the relationship between head and body. One of the duties of the king is to appoint honest and upright officials. He recalls his view on upholding the tradition of the ancestors; he cites the story of “The Singing Wolf and the Shepherd” as an example of leaving the ancestral ritual.
The discourse is designed as a scene for eschanging the strategic elements, and the three categories of discourse, truth, and power are interconnected in this regard. Two statecraft rituals emerge from their discourse. The first ritual that overlooks the discourse of those in power, the components that they observe in this way of kingship, and the order is its representative. The other ritual that oversees the mutual relationship between the king and the people. In this dialogue, two different discourses about power are formed that are referred to as power in the sense of creating prohibitions and power in the sense of creating discipline, order, and ritual. The main theme of the first chapter is the statement of truth, because the order considers itself to be right, but Malekzadeh considers himself to be something beyond right. He sifnifies responsibility to show the disorders and the distorted relationship between the people and the king, which requires courage to state the truth.