Iran, Contradiction and The Taste of Cherry
It didn’t surprise me when I read that Neda Agha-Soltan, the woman shot dead in the protests on the streets of Tehran last week, was dressed in a pair of jeans and sneakers under the black cloak. It summed up the contradiction that is Iran. A contradiction that flummoxes the most astute observers of the Persian state. And, maybe, a contradiction that helps explain that old bogey that we raise about quality cinema in India – “how can the Iranians do it with such limited means and the apparent restrictions on their freedom?” After all, what’s great storytelling if not a play between the perceived and the real.
The thing about the protests on the streets of Iran over the last two weeks is not about regime change; it’s about the anger at being taken for a ride. The Persians are a proud race. Justifiably. The Persian civilization was one of the greatest seen by the world with significant contribution to arts, culture, science and mathematics (unlike what ‘300’ or ‘Alexander’ would lead us to believe). They chose the theocracy that governs their everyday life in the revolution thirty years back that deposed the Shah. It was perhaps one of the few mass uprising in history where the people looked at their past as the ideal vision of their state than the future. It’s a choice they made and have lived with. No matter how much it riles the liberal outlook of the Western world. But along with that choice, they also created a structure of political democracy, however limited, that would allow them to choose their leaders. That’s a choice that has been made a mockery of in these elections. The contradiction of a theocracy and democracy living cheek-by-jowl isn’t difficult for them to live with. But deceit on any one of them isn’t acceptable.
Iranian cinema has found this fragile equilibrium a fertile ground for its unique narrative driven format that skirts delicately over contentious (and potentially censor prone issues) of religion and sexuality yet makes its point on social structure, class struggles, individual rights and religion. Nowhere is this better demonstrated than Kiarostami’s 1997 Palme d’Or winner ‘The Taste of Cherry’. In the story of a middle-aged protagonist (Badii) who wants to end his life by overdosing on sleeping pills and seeking an accomplice who would give him a decent burial if he succeeds or rescue him if he fails, Kiarostami beautifully contrasts the forbidden religious dogma about ending one’s life with the human right to be the arbiter one’s life. It’s theocracy and democracy again. Set amidst the arid desert landscape of Tehran suburbs, Kiarostami takes us on Badii’s Range Rover into a journey of introspection. Firstly, Badii picks up a Kurdish soldier, an interesting choice of character by Kiarostami, considering the Kurds have been at the receiving end of the history in the hands of Turkey, Britain, Iraq and Iran. The young soldier flees but not before ensuring we understand that a history of victimhood doesn’t erode basic human values. The second potential accomplice is an Afghan seminary student, a refugee from a land that has historically been a pawn at the hands of great powers playing the great game. There’s little hope in his struggle in an alien land, yet he perseveres on the strength of his faith alone. He can’t comprehend Badii’s state or his urge to end his life. It’s a gift of God that a mere mortal has no right over. There’s an interesting conversation drawn from Quran between him and Badii after which he turns down his offer despite a huge sum of money that lay in balance. Finally, Badii meets a Turk taxidermist, driven by his own tragedy of tending to a terminally ill child and in desperate need for money. This is the most riveting part of the film as the conversation on life, its bitter sweet nature (like the taste of cherry) and the nature of burden that each of us carry are perhaps some of the most philosophical discussion I have ever seen on screen. Kiarostami never reveals the motive behind Baddi’s decision to end his life, nor does he gives us a view on whether he eventually goes ahead with his plans. Eventually, they are immaterial to the subject that the master wants us to meditate on.
‘The Taste of Cherry’ comes to mind as I watch events unfold in Iran this week. The genius of a filmmaker isn’t restricted to his craft alone; it’s about his ability to make sense of the context in which we live and, possibly, foretell, where we are going. There are many Iranian films which teem with small time family arguments, hear rending stories of children or minor triumphs of the underdogs – there’s a common thread in them about a society and how it sees itself. Kiarostami, the master among them, possibly summed it up in that single masterpiece of his.
We often ask how Iran manages to churn out world class cinema year after year. I think our commercial success is partly to blame. It is interesting to note that commercial cinema in Iran and India owe their provenance to a common source. The first Persian talkie Dokhtar-e-Lor was shot and produced in Bombay by producer and director Abdolhossein Sepanta with close support and help from Ardeshir Irani, the man who made our first talkie ‘Alam Ara’. The cast was primarily from the Parsi studios in Bombay and the Ruhangiz became the first female star in Iran. Sepanta later went to Calcutta and made a few films there before he made his final film Laili-o-Majnoon and retired in Iran. Our paths have diverged quite significantly since then! And, I guess it all comes back to how we exploit our contradictions. Iranians, in some sense, are blessed with contradictions on a platter. We have to work hard to find them. When we do, we make really good cinema. But it’s rare. It’s strange because the greatest contradiction lies in front of our eyes – the escapist cinema that we peddle and the reality that faces us everyday.
Tags: Iran, Kiarostami, The Taste of Cherry, World Cinema
Anurag Kashyap
Abhay Deol
Dibakar Banerjee
Hansal Mehta
Khalid Mohamed
Kundan Shah
Anish Kuruvilla
Jaideep Verma
Manish Gupta
Navdeep Singh
Bhavani Iyer
D. Santosh
Onir
Ashvin Kumar
Ramu Ramanathan
Sudhir Mishra
Pankaj Advani
Revathy
Saurabh Shukla
Shilpa Shukla
Sujoy Ghosh
Suparn Verma
Santosh Sivan
Shashank Ghosh
Shivajee
Pavan Kaul
Partho Sen-Gupta
Prroshant Naryannan
Sam Langoria
Satish Kasetty
nice post subrat. i saw this movie on World Cinema and liked it a lot….thanks to world cinema, we are able to lot iranian movies
Great post, one of my all time favourites.Infact i go bonkers for Iranian women they are so beautifully potrayed in there movies.
They have got contradictions and we have got them too.
They have got exploitation and we have got that one at multiple level too. A sample of our literature alone is sufficient to tell us the striations, struggles and prejudices!
They have got restrictions and we have too – on multiple levels here too – from VHPs, Jamats, politicians to street thugs to IAS officers – so many have to be pleased to get a film released here.
I think the difference is that they are more aware of what is happening around them, while our awareness is at a rather high level – a few intellectuals alone care – at the middle class and lower class level, there is a distinct escapism, ‘not my problem’, ‘I dont want to think about it’, ‘ It is too heavy for me’.
In short Iranians are men and women, general Indians are chickens to have stomach to see and observe issues analyzed threadbare without getting offended or getting a panic attack.
Nice juxtaposition of a current issue with a film and that too a topical one!! Was waiting for your next and my prayers answered today!!
“The Persians are a proud race”…and may I say so, possibly the most beautiful and good looking as well….
Beauty..good dope.Regular persian sounds like poetry.Its sing-a-song.
“The thing about the protests on the streets of Iran over the last two weeks is not about regime change;”
It is weird but not the first time in history that this has happened. Incidents like poll rigging or greased bullets awakens the masses which has been sleeping on its ass for decades to a much larger cause. Your right when you say its not about Ahmedinejad or Mousavi any more.
Dare i say we may see a 1970s style revolution which might change things and get it right this time.
Thanks for the reco looks a good one.
The Iranians have one identity ,one language and one culture and religion to cater to, we on the other hand have a million of each and yes you will find more contraditions in India than anywhere else on Earth.
As far as escapism in India is concerned most of the people here go to Cinema just to have a good time, dunno about other places.
It’s strange because the greatest contradiction lies in front of our eyes – the escapist cinema that we peddle and the reality that faces us everyday.
You have nailed it Subrat. But, to me, this escapist fare shall prevail till the time we are able to narrow the gap between the reality and the glossy. People flock to look at the other end of the spectrum – always. The life at the other end. The haves versus the have nots. The have nots do not fight it, rather they are interested onlookers. Therefore, our films.
Iran does not have much trouble about the other end. The uni dimensional society does not allow too much class distinctions there. This is what is good about a theocratic society. You drink water from the same wells, go to the same mosques, pray to the same Allah, eat from the same basket, no matter who you are.
We have a democracy that is still coming to terms with its polity. It will be sometime before cultural visions fall into place.
” The uni dimensional society does not allow too much class distinctions there”
Not too sure of that, right now the protests in Iran have taken on a class war. Most of the people supporting Mousavi, are the educated, urban, well off upper and middle classes, while those supporting Ahmedinajad are the lower working classes, who are more socially conservative.
Again the movies of Kiroastami are patronized more by the upper class, while Iran has its own brand of escapist cinema, which the lower class patronizes. Also one more interesting thing i observe, dictatorial regimes and despotic leaders often justify everything they do in the name of “interest of the masses”.
Subrat, Iran, like any other country, is full of contradictions. The contradiction in both the reel and the reality could also be found in the brilliant Once Upon A Time In Cinema. There are people out there in the streets but for the first time in my life I’ve found it the most difficult to take a side — the side of the people — the protestors.
@Vineet – Not sure if you’re right about Iran’s homogeneous culture and language. There’s Baloochis, Kurds, Pashtun, Kurds, Turkmen and others besides the Persians.
a very topical post…
the roots of our peddling to escapism lie in our mythology or rather in our interpretations of it over the years.
gr8 post buddy!