Thank you to the friend who mentioned me in this Instagram post from the Ketab Baz page, and thank you to Mr Masoud Farasati for raising the error concerning the so-called Dostoevsky letters and making it possible for the mistake to be corrected.

The only point I would like to add as the author of these letters is that during the past year, through the Telegram channel, YouTube and the Farzanesh and Philosophy website, I have tried—alongside seminars and lectures concerning Transcendental Existentialism and Depth Psychology—to use art as a means of establishing a wider connection with Persian-speaking audiences.

The “Dostoevsky letters” in six scenes were written with the aim of presenting the depth of the philosophical concepts in Dostoevsky's writings in the form of a short biography spoken in the writer's voice, so that the life and philosophy of this great Russian author could be brought together within a concise and coherent text. I have produced similar work concerning Kierkegaard's philosophy and, in a different context, William Garrison, founder of the American abolitionist movement and a figure who is less well known in Iran.

Publishing this material over the past year and a half through social media has made it possible for me to connect with thousands of Persian-speaking compatriots around the world. Yet the primary aim of the effort has been to articulate a form of philosophy that leaves a purely theoretical space and enters into closer contact with our everyday lives.

Part of my work concerns archetypes, their analysis within stories and works of art, the interpretation of narrative structure in terms of its constituent archetypes, and their examination through philosophy and the depth psychology of Jung and Hillman. This can, in a focused way, help readers interested in understanding the psychological structure of such works.

I imagine that what drew Mr Farasati's attention and positive response to the Dostoevsky letters was perhaps, first of all, his interest in philosophy, archetypal structures and the message contained in the piece. The reason it was discussed across several programmes may also be that its message can establish a connection with all of us. Although perhaps, if the letters were worth interpreting, it might also have been good to invite their actual author to interpret what he had written.

Once again, my thanks to Mr Farasati for correcting the error, which in a way helped these letters reach a wider audience.

With thanks,
Aydin Areta
@massoud_farassati

https://www.instagram.com/p/B2gwXjhnLiI/