Voices in Silence: Reflections on the Social Position of the Subalterns in Kamal-aldin Behzad's Preparation for a Banquet Based on the Theories of Ranajit Guha and Gayatri Spivak

This study critically re-examines the social status of the subalterns in Kamal-aldin Behzad’s miniature, Preparation for a Banquet. The Timurid era, renowned for its rich artistic creations with profound social content, provides a valuable foundation for analyzing the power relations and social hierarchies. Behzad’s miniatures, with their unique focus on daily life and lower societal strata, offer an exceptional opportunity to explore social structures and the representation of marginalized groups within related historical contexts. We adopt the theoretical framework of Subaltern Studies, utilizing key concepts from Ranajit Guha and Gayatri Spivak. Specifically, the concepts of agency, visibility, and Spivak's notion of the subaltern Other serve as analytical tools for understanding how the subaltern is represented in the miniature and examining the intricate interplay between power dynamics and social identity. These frameworks facilitate an in-depth analysis of the social narratives embedded within the artistic and cultural dimensions of Behzad’s work. The research methodology relies on a detailed examination of the miniature, emphasizing symbolic elements such as clothing, gestures, and interactions among characters. These elements are critically analyzed within the broader socio-political and cultural framework of the Timurid period. By deconstructing these representations, the study explores the extent to which the miniature both reflects and perpetuates the social structure of its time. The findings reveal that despite the miniature’s apparent focus on the roles of subaltern figures in preparing the banquet, it ultimately reinforces the prevailing class structures of the Timurid era. The subaltern figures are portrayed not as independent but as court laborers devoid of individual agency. Their roles are framed within a social order that underscores their subjugation. Moreover, the miniature’s portrayal of these figures as essential yet subservient highlights the intricate relationship between art, power, and social stratification. A striking visual dichotomy in clothing reinforces class distinctions: the workers wear minimal, practical garments symbolizing their low status, while supervisors wear elaborate courtly attire, underlining their elite position. The miniature’s focus on the preparation phase rather than the banquet itself foregrounds the labor and toil of the subaltern, yet this focus does not amplify their voices, but reflects and perpetuates Timurid power structures, aligning with Spivak’s notion of subaltern silence. The miniature reflects the entrenched systems of domination and societal control. The study emphasizes that art during the Timurid era was not merely a reflection of reality but a tool for reproducing social norms and legitimizing power structures. Behzad’s choices, while innovative in their focus on the marginalized, align with broader political and economic influences that shaped the thematic underpinnings of Timurid art. These insights provide fresh perspectives into how artistic representations of the subaltern can illuminate broader social and political dynamics. In conclusion, the study highlights the dual role of art in reflecting and shaping societal norms, emphasizing its potential as both a vehicle for social critique and a means of perpetuating hegemonic ideologies. This duality underlines the importance of revisiting historical artworks to uncover the nuanced narratives of marginalized groups and the socio-political forces that shape their representation.