IBNA, Mohammad Kazem Mazinani – storywriter: Literature of the Revolution has not been internalized yet as it should and the writers have not dealt with it professionally. This is the same with our Literature of the Holy Defence, although the writers gradually applied modern techniques and methods of story writing. 

As for the Literature of the Revolution in recent years it could be said that most writers create their work in response to festival call and the stories are not spontaneously erupting from the writers' hearts. As long as this does not occur we cannot find unalloyed works and what remains is rather cliché. 

I do not mean that writers should only write in approval of the revolution; they can even have critical views of war. Yet writing about these subjects entails clear analytical view of the revolution and distinct perspective to it and as long as this is not achieved, we could not face revolution within the Literature of Revolution. 

During the last two rounds of Literature of the Revolution festivals I judged works that were much behind the festival standards. In fact, the stories should first of all be real fiction encompassing all the elements of suspense, attraction, and readability. This only happens when the subject bubbles out of the writer's chest. Otherwise the story will be bland no matter how well-structured it might seem to be – especially when it is written for young audiences. Unfortunately now there are no dashing stories of the Revolution written for the new generation. 

When writing about War and the Revolution, we should keep in mind that apart from its latent messages the story is entertainment and should be magnetic enough, whereas this kind of 'plaisir' is missing in the Literature of War and Revolution and this can be its biggest defect. Obviously it is not a big job to produce thousands of books with tens of good messages within a year notwithstanding their intangibility and lack of proper audiences. 

A writer should make use of a variety of tricks to make the atmosphere look more attractive, especially when dealing with subjects of war and revolution that are difficult subjects per se. these subjects should be first internalized by the writer. Yet we see that now the writers are strangers to their subjects and always keep the distance. They have usually depleted the phenomenon of the revolution to street demonstrations, SAVAK, torture and partisan wars, whereas the revolution should be first sought within the homes and hearts of individuals. 

The writer should have a deepened look at the Revolution, especially in the novel where it is necessary to portray revolutionary forces, actions and interactions, internal characteristics, family conditions in 1979 and their beliefs and ideologies. 

The writer should pay particular attention to the heart of the matter of events and not merely to the cliché atmospheres. This means a new view of the happenings and dissection of the individuals' inner thoughts, a deeper look at the revolution after 32 years and avoidance of cliché repetitions.