Reconceptualising Justice and Authority: Interpretive Conflicts in The Sultan’s Dilemma by Tawfiq Al-Hakim

This research paper seeks to explore the disruption of conventional schemas of authority and justice in Tawfiq Al-Hakim’s The Sultan’s Dilemma. The study applies Peter Stockwell’s Cognitive Poetics, particularly Schema Theory in order to revisit and reconstruct the already existing schemas related to law, authority, and religion. This research argues that the conscious disruption of already set notions enhances the irony and philosophical depth of the narrative. The core tension emerges when the Sultan, once an enslaved person, finds himself coerced to seek legal authorization for his actions. This scenario creates disruption in the minds of readers, compelling them to reshape their notions of justice, not something rigid, but flexible, constructed by society, and rich in diverse interpretations. The research uses qualitative research methodology grounded in close reading and textual analysis and divulges how the language and structure of the play challenge the readers’ anticipations, forcing them to consider the multiple layered meanings. The pre-existing schemas are disrupted by adding the new information, wich become the source of their reconfiguration. This study concludes that schema disruptions in The Sultan’s Dilemma interrogate fixed conceptions of authority and justice, making readers to critically reassess societal norms through irony and cognitive reflection.