The guy who wants to throw me in the ocean!

Below, a facebook comment from someone who objects to my never-changing position on Iranian sanctions, which is: "if you don't want a cold-war in the middle east, then stop threatening nations like Iran, while empowering states like Israel, with a track record of breaking the international law."

My comment was in response to Alan Ayre, the persian speaking spokesperson for the White House, who was surveying opinions whether Iranians blame the economic hardship they are suffering on the sanctions or on the regime.

So the gentleman brings up a lot of good ideas, of what Iran could have done and been, if it was not mismanaged by a bunch of idiots, as it is now. But I don't like the part that he wants to throw guys like me in the ocean; it sounds fascistic!

Here's his comment:

Dear Alan, do you see this guy Naj? He is the type that keeps the brutal Islamic State in power, supports the raping of the male and female political prisoners, advocates the narcotic trafficking and the vast prostitution, the rampant economical and the social corruptions and more across Iran. He is the true enemy of the Iranian people. He lines up with the Islamic State against Israel and the West and deeply supports Russians who had betrayed Iran throughout our history. This nimrod has never asked himself what Israel ever done to Iran, other than defending its nation against Hamas and Hezbollah who proxy for Iran? He repugnantly defies the world against Tehran’s nuclear ambition but he doesn’t take a moment to ask, why Islamic State should spend so endlessly on its nuclear project where vast majority of Iranian live below poverty line, 4 year old children are begging for food or money at every major intersections of Tehran till wee hours of the night? He is so incapable of figuring out that if someday (god knows when) the Bushehr nuclear power plant begins to operate, it will ONLY deliver 1500 MW of the overall 75000 MW demand, not mentioning that his favorite country Russia has robbed Iranians of fortune for this power plant over the past 25 years and haven’t delivered a thing. With the money his favorite regime has spent on the nuclear project, we could have built several oil refinery so we wouldn’t have to import oil from foreign countries, we could have created so many jobs where our educated young people could go to work, we could have build sufficient metro rail system that would solve our public transportation problem in the major cities, and to eliminate the horrific air pollution that has captured our lounges, killing several thousand people annually. We could have built enough highways with proper standards to respond to our ever growing needs, so during the major holidays our travelers don’t have to spend 15 hours to get to Caspian Sea shores from Tehran which is only 140 km away. If we could throw guys like Naj in the ocean perhaps our transition to freedom will be much smoother.

Iranian Rappers and Persian Porn

When I bought the book I expected to read one of those annoying upper middle class tales of nagging about freedom (there lack of) and fundamentalism and the kind of self promotional bourgeois-autography for which the publishers seem to have a palate.

But, this turned to be a surprise; a hilarious one.

A poor British backpacker, with a couple of thousand dollars of saving, quits his job and hitchhikes to Iran. This book is about his adventures.

Luckily for Jamie Maslin (and his readers), he is shielded from the upper-class Tehrani society (about whom we often read) for most of his trip (although he meets and spends enough time with them to give us a sense of what they are like, too). As such, his book is full of real Iranians, the other 50 million, who come in all shapes and shades and present him with the paradoxical complexity of the Iranian life and culture. Succinct, but his recounts are full of details, simply but lucidly written facts about all things he encounters.

This book took me home, to scents and scenes of Iran, and made me laugh, laugh really hard!

I won't spoil it for you. Treat yourself to 17 dollars of fun!

Followup: Accidental Heroism of Golshifteh Farahani

My previous post got plenty of comments; I was surprised. But, from the comments, I got a sense that some were not focusing on the crux of the problem I was trying to address (which was the de-contextualization of an actor's professional choices and attributing them into political activism)

Here's a recap:

Just as the Golden Globe victory of an Iranian Film, "A Separation" by Asghar Farhadi, shifted the 'media' attention from war-mongering attitude towards Iran, into the Iranian Cinema (which after capturing Erupean's attention for the past two decades has finally made its way to the mainstream American film industry) Le Figaro published a photo series called "L'Espoire 2012, Generation Spontanee". The series was back and white body portraits of several young french actors, shot by the famous fashion photographer Jean-Baptiste Mondino. One of the photos belonged to an Iranian actress, Golshifteh Farahani, who has been exiled from Iran for a few years, because she had played in a Hollywood film and had not obeyed the dress-code imposed by the IRI on its citizens in her red-carpet appearances.

Farahani, 29, is a young actor, who is raised in an acting family. Because she has been featured in films such as Body of Lies (next to Leo Di Caprio) and in Poulet Aux Prunes, by the Oscar nominated Iranian-French filmmaker Marjan Satrapi (Perspolis, 2007), she may have the attention of the cinema world and serves as an aspiration to many kids of her generation.

Within minutes, her photograph, and another video by the same artist entitled Revelation 2012 (again advertising the future hopes of French Cinema, nominees of Cesar award) showing her dropping her shirt and revealing her breast, generated a massive response in the Iranian cyber-communities.

Within hours, the event polarized the Iranian community. This photo was taken out of its cinematic/aesthetic/French context, and turned into a political/moral phenomeno, at the center of which Farahani was portrayed either as a hero or as a whore. To this individual response was added frustration by the Iranian-Cinema fans who were angered by distraction from the possibility that the global success of A Separation would ease the Iranian independent filmmakers out of recent pressure from fundamentalists.

I have been reacting strongly to the media-naivitee of the Iranian community who had decontextualized this event, and were giving it dimensions grander than it called for. My argument was against those who politicized this gesture as a step towards "democracy"--and I argued that this was first and foremost a personal career choice, a step up on the ladder of show business, nothing more, nothing less.

I argued that just because an Iranian was the subject of the photo, she was not the actor of the art; the designer of the concept, and as such, she deserved no credit for her political savvy--although I admire any persons who are brave to underss themselves before others; it takes self confidence. I argued that if she was a political actor, then she should/could have produced such video independently, with an explicit message tying her act to the cause of "emancipation" or any other case she wanted to promote.

Ever since, I have been reading what people and women have to say. Clearly, the nude body of a cinema star has opened many an infected scars and all sorts of puss is oozing out of the bruised psychology of us Iranians.

I focus on reactions from women. I believe men should have no business supporting/calling for a woman's nudity or 'hijab'. They are qualified to talk about their own sexual emblems [I mean penis], issues and desires--and indeed this is what many have been doing by judging the size of the cup and whether they liked her best covered or revealed. Some have also been 'championing' progressiveness by embracing or standing tall before her naked body (as if she needed men't approval to drop her shirt). So the men's opinions need to be discussed by men; I do not have access to their psych or subjectivity. The female opinions, however, speak of psychological, sociological and political concerns that I, as an Iranian woman am familiar with.

On the one hand, this 'image' has inspired a lot of sentimental romanticist outbursts of females. Some liken Farahani into the Marianne of France (contradicting themselves immediately, because Marianne is a symbol of FRENCH liberty, not of Iranian liberty.), Some others liken her to Tahere Ghorat-ol-Eyn (an educated woman, a poet, who burst into men's assembly, 196 years ago, dropping her veil, and getting herself killed by offending the religious and the patriarchic sensitivity of the men's world). Some liken her to Forough Farokhzad (our taboo-breaking poet, who pulled the curtains from her body as a mother and as a lover through large volumes of poems--her writings focused on what it meant to be a female human.)

On the other hand, this image has dragged a lot of moralist (sexophobes) out of closet. Among the moralists, are those in an 'ethical uproar calling her a whore. Not all of such moralists are Islamists or IRI supporters. Iranians, by culture, are sexually very uptight and hold strange and strict views about "classy" female demeanor.

Another group of these moralists try to be 'apologetic', turning their eyes from the boobs and focus on the "innocent" eyes, chastising those who have been focusing on the breast and blaming them for being 'narrow minded and dirty' to have missed the eyes!

And then another group who doesn't take moralist position but supposedly feminist ones. I think those who are politicizing and glorifying the courage of Farahani's action are another kind of moralists. To them, naked female body is a sin; a source of sin UNLESS it has "higher" abstract and sacred objectives tied to the nation or collective causes. Ironically, the so called sociological excitement of many of these women stems from a shy acknowledgement of their own oppressed sexuality. Now in Golshifteh, they have a role-model to take pride in and thus she immediately turns into a Pride of Persia and gives these women a cause to fight for. The cause of 'supporting Golshifteh" allows them to express what they themselves have never had the courage to express before. The irony is that while acknowledging their PERSONAL lack of courage, they sill manage to blame the society for limiting them by flightening them of possible judgements.

Sadly, it is this group of self-diagnosed intellectuals who is creating an accidental-hero; carving a totem out of a PERSON, who herself was a PROP (and nothing more) in the mise-en-scene of an advertisement for the French Cinema. And because these people have tribunes and audiences, they run the risk of creating yet another superficial 'cult' without thinking it through.

But what part of this picture is wrong?

For me, the wrong originates from making the nude-female-body the sight of political action. To give power to a nude body is the same as if disempower a covered body. Politics that stem from covering or uncovering female body are both objectifying the female gender, by butting it in a sexual box. What makes it wronger to me is that it takes a cinema-actor's body to trigger courage in this group. Here is why:

Bodies that are aesthetised through lighting, and choreography of a video artist are not REAL bodies; they are actor bodies; and they are selected and put before our eyes because we as humans are 'programed' to respond to beauty in a (re)creational way. This is why sex sells, be it in movies, in computers, in books, or in politics. The artistically refined from of sex is eroticism, but the bottomline is the same, they are both FLESH, one is the big steak grilled on a super BBQ, the other one is a filet mignon prepared to perfection in a little cozy Bistro and served with creamy sauce and blanched greens. They are both nutritious, and have a right to exist and be sold for the consumption of people who choose one or the other based on their refinement and capital. Directors chose the subjects of their photo/cinematography in line with stories they want to tell. Or, if they are confined to a certain set of subjects, then they modify other aspects of photoshoot to create their story.

Advertisement videos are propaganda videos. It is the formalist nature of the production that necessitates loading and condensing a lot of messages within a short time slot. Advertisement videos are supposed to capture our thoughts and imaginations well beyond the time they are before our eyes. This is how successful video artists become successful, by holding us beyond the screen. And this is what the Revelation 2012 video does.

Let's look at it from a Non-Iranian's perspective. We see, in black and white, 31 film actors appear one after the other and talk about how they undress their soul and body before our gaze; some undress out of their top and some don't. The only one whose breasts are exposed to the camera is Farahani; the only one who doesn't speak herself, but whose voiceover suggests her "otherness" (why else would she give an image to your imagination?) is Farahani. The casting of Farahani as the ONLY one who reveals herself, as a muslim from Iran who is already banned from going back to her country for having shown her hair in public, is part of the directors's plot. It is to PROVOKE (as he successfully did, and I admire his work of art--it is clever). And he has chosen a perfect PROP for it. That is what actors are for directors. They are part of the mise-en-scene, and their success depends on how well they fulfill their role within the scenario. Then, if there is credit due for political activism, it is due to Cesar Academie who hired JB Mondino and nominated Farahani as part of the 31, not to Farahani. All the did was to say "yes", and as her body is NOT syndicated by the Iranian cinema community, she didn't necessarily need to give a damn about what her actions would have brought the Iranian cinema. This was an opportunity for her, and it would have been unfortunate if she had let fear stand before her and her chance to stardom.

So, discarding the notion that this was Farahani's political act (and settling for its professional motivation), a valid question to ask is, why the video and photos were released right after Golden Globe? The logical answer is that this is the big-award season, the media is buzzing with cinema's famous and fortunate and there is nothing so big to read from this. Fair! That is what the Cesar did; and in fact they have hidden the video from public access. But, Le Figaro is the one that raises suspicion: why did they select only 7/31 actor's photos for Le Figaro? Why did they remove Farahani's photo immediately? Was this part of her contract? What was the content of her contract? And what was the background of publishing the photos concurrent with the shining of Iranian Cinema, for the first time, in the American industry? A sleptic may ask, do the French, as the first explorers who discovered the Iranian Cinema, own the right to define it? What this a gesture to define the genre of Iranian Cinema that is in bed with France (of which Marjan Satrapi & Farahni are the "future hopes" now?) Irrespective of what the answer may be, none of this is related to Iran as much as it is related to how the French see/romanticize/theorize Iran.

Some Iranian intellectuals have gotten all excited that we are, by the evidence of an Iranian-Boob-on screen, one step closer to "westernization" and thus the inevitable liberation from our oriental limitations, shyness and gender hierachies that make us concede to patriarchic dictatorships! However, these 'progressive' views are disregarding that the female body, in the liberal democracies, more than being the site of politics, is the sight of economics. If anything, the "democratization" of female body has generated women who are suffering all sorts of stress-related disorders because they are forced to compete on equal grounds with men, while being fulltime women as well. The Iranian intellectuals, many of which are ardent women-right activists write florally about the flower (Gol) of the Sifteh (enchanted), generating a "political" role model from a cinematic BEAUTY, in a society whose women are increasingly vain (If you don't believe me watch an interesting documentary by Mehrdad Oskoui, Nose, Iranian Style, illustrating the cultural vanity of a generation whose young men and women subject themselves to expensive and painful plastic surgery in order to get "western" noses.) I wish these intellectuals, instead of taking pride and identifying themselves with Farahani, took their own shirts off, before a normal lens, and a non-professional, and allowed their bodies speak with all their perfections and imperfections, sending clear messages, like the Ghoratoleyn of Persia, or Aalia of Egypt, and not the Marianne of France, giving an image to their imagination, thanks to the vision of French Cinema.

A POLITICAL act by an actor (one drawing attention to a cause) could take the form of:

- taking clothes off to protest war, and explicitly saying so

- taking clothes off to protest Iranian regime preventing the imprisoned lawyer Nasrin Sotoudeh see her family because she refused to wear the prison's coverall veil, and explicitly saying so

- taking clothes off to protest the lashing of the women who are in line to be stoned for adultery, and explicitly saying so

- taking off clothes and staring to the camera and addressing, in PERSIAN, Iranian men who meddle in what their women wear

- taking off clothes and instead of hiding behind the 'cause' of "breaking taboos", stare directly into a Journalist's camera and saying: THIS IS MY BODY, and I have the right to sell it as an actor, as a surrogate mother, as a prostitute, as someone who nourishes dreams and desires. It is none of anyone's concern what a woman or man does to her/his body. (Now that WILL break several taboos simultaneously... a revolutionary act that would deserve respect.)

I still don't know what taboo Farahani has broken. What is so special about an Iranian-boob showing off to a French cinema? It is not like she has shown off her breasts in a Paris-produced film by Makhmalbaf or Kiarostami. It is not like she has acted in the role of an Iranian woman in a story told by a master narrator like Farhadi. There is NOTHING Iranian in the video Revelation, other than the passport and the genetic pool of the actress.

Ms Farahani has not exhibited ANY political wisdom ... she has been an actor, just a simple actor, not even taking a risk, au contraire taking the safe and logical step towards her career development. The RISK would have been to shoot these photos on her own, independent of the French-Cinema institutions ... She is just an actress, not a political leader--until she starts running for some kind of Iranian office/vote. And this is her personal business to appear before any camera she wants, it is not my national one.

United for Peace: meet the Iranian faces of America

Staged 'activism' of Golshifteh Farahani or Media Opportunism of the 'spontaneous generation'?

Golshifteh Farahani, the 29 year old Iranian actress has appeared (together with 31 other young actors) before the camera of the fashion photographer and video artist Jean-Baptiste Mondino.

Mondino's commissioned work for the Cesar Academy takes two forms:

- A photo series called Espoirs 2012, Génération Spontanée that was published in Le Figaro's Madam section, featuring 7 of these actors (including Golshifteh Farahani) [post-script: her picture was removed within hours].

- A "propaganda/publicity" video, called "Revelation 2012, Corps et Ames. On the surface, the video pretends to destigmatize the images of body, across cultures and borders. Actors are mostly French (judged by names) and there are a handful of Middle Easterners. They all speak French on camera, except Golshifteh, whose voice is edited over her picture while dropping her shirt exposing her right breast.

The on-camera lines (and Farhani's voiceover) of Mondino's video 'promote' freedom of body and soul, in nudity, in unity with oneself, decidedly entering chaos and controversy, to exercise a right ... but the main objective of this advertisement is to introduce the acting "hopes" of the French Cinema in 2012, a point that is also made explicitly on the video.

Revelation 2012 is NOT a political video (although all video-ads are guided by the cinematic rules of propaganda that provides them a political potential as well). However, many Iranians have jumped to praise or chastise Golshifteh for the suggested politics of this ad (which is riding the waves generated by the 'post-Alia breastologists'!).

As all things Iranian, it takes only a few "Persian genes" to make any individual's act into a political one. As such, the nude presence of Golshifteh Frahani has been pulled out of its proper context and turned into a sociopolitical cause for cyber-uproar (and anti-uproar, by those who are drawing attention to the increasing pressure from the regime on activists and researchers in the wake of the parliametry election in Iran).

The sexually oppressed and depressed Iranian community is jumping on their pontification horses as I am writing:

- some are praising the "innocence" of this "courageous" representative of "Iranian women" in contrast to the 'dirtiness' of those who observe the Islamic Hijab

- some are raving about her taboo-breaking exercise

- some are in awe of her controversial bravery and, like spectators of a bull fight, are betting over some Islamic fundamentalist outrage

- some are scolding her tarnishing the image of the Iranian Woman (who is supposedly modest and mysterious and asexual)

- some are making jokes and parodies and predicting some of Iran's fundamentalist filmmakers will soon appear naked on a publicity video

- some are discussing the aesthetics and are drooling over the fact that a famous photographer has depicted her, HENCE, they claim, this must be a Michelangelian work of art!

- some are loathing her opportunism, and calling her act "business as usual in the show industry"

- some are silently WORRIED about the Iranian Cinema and concerned (and angry) about the ramifications of this publicity stunt for the independent filmmakers of Iran.

I fall in the last two categories. In what follows, I will explain why I am disappointed with her 'choice'; and next I explain why I do not consider her act one out of political conscience.

Golshifteh Frahani is a beautiful girl. She embodies the "classical" Persian beauty; and as such she owes her opportunities to her God-given gift of beauty more than to her talent as an actor, singer, or artist (even when she sings, she sounds mediocre to me). Of course, to have come from a family of theater/cinema artists (France-educated father, mother and sister) and to have been set in the path of learning music since early age, helps anyone in the show business.

Her first screen-break came with (cinema master) Mehrjui's 'The Pear Tree'. In this film, the 15 year old Golshifteh plays the role of a teenager tomboy, who appears in the memory flashbacks of a middle aged man who has returned from abroad to revisit his family and his past.

Somehow, this image of slightly "dreamy" tomboy beautiful young girl is a formula for success in Iranian cinema (it is a projection of liberty and equality which Iranian girls seek in the society) and Golshifteh has had her share of luck by embodying this image by appearing in several notable films.

The reason why I am frustrated by the controversy over her pseudo-nude picture comes from tracing her active attention-seeking traits in the past few year.

One of the (internationally) notable films of Farahani is "About Elly (2009)" by the 2012-Golden Globe winner of the best foreign film (A Separation), Asghar Farhadi. "About Elly" is a psychological thriller about a group of friends on a weekend retreat in the Northern coast of Iran. The film was a narrative breakthrough in the Iranian Cinema, as it departed from the political/poetic neorealist Iranian genre. About Elly put Farhadi on the radar of international cinephiles. The film won him the Silver Bear of the Berlin Film Festival for best director and was lauded at NYC's Tribeca. However, because of Miss Farahani, the Iranian regime banned the film from appearing in Iran's 27th Fajr Film Festival--a festival that despite all political skepticism can launch a director's national career, or at least help their film producers recuperate their investment in the local box office.

The reason for banning About Elly was that the lead actress, Golshifteh Farahani, was contracted by Hollywood to appear against Leonardo diCaprio in the Body of Lies. To join Hollywood is a deliberate affront to the Islamic Regime's ministry of guidance, and a guarantee that the actor or actress will lose all legitimacy in the face of the Iranian censors. For her 'disobedience', About Elly was also to be punished (a decision that was later reversed and gained Farhadi sweeping success in the Fajr Festival), Farahani's passport was confiscated (mainly to prevent her from appearing n another blockbuster, Prince of Persia). Banning About Elly and preventing Farahani from leaving Iran gave the young actress sufficient publicity to launch her asylum-case and acting career abroad. Soon, the controversies about her travel ban died out and she emerged in Hollywood as an artist in exile!

That Farahani's new (read nude) "fame" coincides with Farhadi's Golden Globe victory is ironic! It is ironic because the Iranian cinema community were hoping that the international fame of Farhadi will put pressure on the Iranian regime to lift sanctions and pressure they have recently imposed on Iranian cinematographer (e.g. by closing the House of Cinema--a case about which Farhadi has publicly spoken). This hope, is now vanished, thanks to the lovely French whose progressivism, be it Foucault or Figaro, don't seem to leave us Iranians alone!

The reason why I focus on the case of Farhadi/Farahani is that in this age of "media persuasion" is it critically important to be aware of how different media-devices interact with each other. If contextualized as such, then acts and images of actors extend beyond the private realm and become political. Once things become political, time is of the primary essence. It is the 'timing' of Farahani's nudity vis a vis Farhadi's Hollywood success that frustrates me. [Note that Farhadi's been successful in the eyes of the world even before Hollywood nodded at him, he IS a good filmmaker, with or without Hollywood paying attention.]. Farahani's breasts have stolen the spotlight from A Separation! [post-script: until some White House official congratulated Farhadi for getting short-listed for an Oscar nomination!! What the hell do politicians have to do with artistic cinema of Iran TOTALLY baffles me!]

The other (and related) point to pay attention to is that Golshifteh Farahani's act is NOT a political one by her design or 'activist' wisdom. In such publicity affairs, it is more likely that Farahani is "selected" or "promoted by her managers" to appear in a video for Cesar et Chaumet (the French equivalent of Oscar's). What Iranians who are jumping the 'intellectual and feminist' horses need to know is that she has not initiated the video, she has not directed it, she has not written the script. She is just one eye-candy out of 31; selected by the merits of her beautiful face, her public presence in internationally released films such as Body of Lies and Poulet Aux Prunes and her exotic 'foreignness' that considering the content of the video promises the French Cinema in 2012 to be provocative, agitating Islamic sensitivities (tied to an actress who is banished by the IRI for showing her hair).

If I were a cineast, I would be dumb to not take advantage of Golshifteh in this age of cinematic Iranophilia. (A recent example is a new book The Directory of World Cienma: Iran, which has the picture of Farahani on the cover--without her meriting a significant place in the Iranian Cinema.) It seems, someone has done a market research, has looked at the hit-statistics on internet and has come to a conclusion that Farahani's image gets attention and sells!

Within this context, if I were Farahani, I should have exercised a LOT of restraint, and POLITICAL AWARENESS to have said NO to such a lucrative offer. She was given a golden opportunity, and she took it without the slightest concern about the ramifications of her decision for the Iranian Cinema, INSIDE Iran. She didn't have to. We don't live our lives for others. But I try to explain why she SHOULD have given a damn!

A few months ago, several Iranian female actors wrote an angry open letter in response to one of those ugly (anti)cultural official filmmakers (Farajollah Salahshoor) who had said: The Iranian cinema is full of female whores, we don't need to recruit Angelina Jollie to be profitable. Clearly, the image of women on screen, which has been a major player in forming the post-patriarchic psychology of the Iranian society is under assault these days. The choice of Golshifteh to appear nude with certainly be fanning the flames of censorship in Iran. It will inevitably BURN many a female figures on the silver screen.

You might say that the Iranian regime is a worthless entity that must be challenged and toppled. The problem, however, is that it is not only the draconiamn Iranian regime (who is going ahead with execution a Canadian Iranian man on allegations of having set up a porno website) that has an issue with a nude Iranian on screen. Unfortunately, many Iranians, even opponents of the IRI, are sexually uptight and consider a nude female a cultural affront to the figure of Persian Women who is supposedly 'pious' and 'pure'.

Funnily, MANY people who were trying to 'defend' Farahani's choice were drawing attention to her 'innocent and pure eyes' [as opposed to her 'dirty' breasts ?!?]. What made it funny was that these people were willfully overlooking the sensual gaze of Farahani and the deeply enunciated voiceover: "I embody your dreams", which puts to rest any doubt that she (and the French cinema industry] IS (and will be) cashing on her sex-appeal. Such comments from Iranians, even the proponents of Farahani's choice and the Anti-regime folks, reflect how uncomfortable Iranians are with any sexual discourse.

Now in such anti-cinematic political environment inside Iran and within the realm of Iran's sexual psychology, taking a shirt off on a video will inevitably generate a political discourse that will hit the cinema without making a dent in the century's old national psychology. Whether Farhani's right breast is a good thing for the future of female-emancipation (assuming Iranian women need such emancipation) is debatable (but this is not where I want to debate it). However, many Iranian cinephiles are holding their breath awaiting the damage that this act of Farahani will exact on the already fragile body of Iranian Cinema.

I belong to this group of concerned cinema lovers who think this choice was a self-serving practice that lacked collective conscience. Although, as a woman, I respect the rights of anyone who wish to be nude at whatever level of sexual or sensual exhibitionism. I do not believe in 'purity' of anti-sexualism.

If Farahani issues a statement that she has appeared before the camera as an individual WITHOUT claiming any national-ambassadorship or political agenda, I will respect her. But, in a connected world, as a member of a film-family, as someone who owes her fame and fortune to this resilient and beautiful family that the Iranian Cinema community is, she has done something highly undemocratic and self-serving, without discussing or putting to vote her intentions.

Part of democratic exercise is that we move collectively, for common political goals. I consider her choice a deviation from that principle, and as such I would personally cast her aside from the Iranian Cinema community.

It is ironic, in the few films that I have seen of her, she is playing the role of a slightly 'off', impressionable yet stubborn little kid who falls in circumstantial trouble, following an 'impulse' or in reaction to some form of pressure. It is perhaps not a coincidence that Le Figaro publishes her photo among a series of "Generation Spontanee" ... I consider her act a spontaneously impulsive case of opportunism, and a reactionary one as far as political readings are concerned.

P.S. In a facebook note, someone noted that it is only Golshifteh who exposes her breast, and that even when 'utilized' as a provocative prop by the french photographer, se is treated with the 'tender' discrimination extended to the "exotic" other ... what a SHARP observation.

Raising death toll: the nuclear physicist victims

Today, another physicist is blasted up, by a magnetic car bomb.

This makes the number of science victims to 5. Here's a list, in chronological order.

1. Wednesday 11 Jan 2012, car bomb kills Mostafa Ahmadi Roshan, 32, and the director for commecial affairs at the Natanz enrichment facility. According to Huffington post, yesterday, Israeli military chief Gen Benny Gantz was quoted saying to a parliamentry panel that "2012 would be a "critical year" for Iran – in part because of "things that happen to it unnaturally."
2. 24 July 2011, biker assassins gunned down Dariush Rezai, 35, and injured his wife. Confusion remains whether the target of the killing was the 35 years old PhD candidate, or the 46 year old professor; Haaretz reports.
3. Jan 12 2010, car bomb kills Masoud AliMohammadi, 50, A senior Physics professor; apparently an opponent of the government. Controversies over the Mossad link remain unresolved.
4. 29 Nov 2010, car bomb kills Majid Shahriari (Accoridng to Huffington Post and NYT, this attack came a day after the release of internal U.S. State Department memos by the whistle-blower website WikiLeaks, including several that vividly detail Arab fears over Iran's nuclear program. A concurrent attempt on the life of Fereydoon Abbasi was unsuccessful.
5. 15 Jan 2007, Ardeshir Hosseinpour, nuclear scientist dies from suspicious gas poisoning

I find it interesting that three of thse assassinations have happened in 15, 12 and 11th of January.

The latest attack (Jan 2012) comes five days after Iran officially announced intention to resume negotiations with the group of 6 over its nuclear program.

The Ballad of Tara (چریکه تارا)

The Ballad of Tara is made by the Iranian Master, Bahram Beyzai. It was made in the year of the revolution, 1979, and banned as soon as the Islamic Republic took place!

The film features one of Iran's best female theater actors, Sousan Taslimi, who was forced off of screen and stage, after the revolution, because "her face and beauty transpired too much charisma and force"[see this interview with BBC Persian]. After memorable performances in several of Baizai's films (best known to the outsiders, Bashu the Little Stranger), under pressure from the censors, she migrated to Sweden in 1989 to become a leading artist in her new home.

The Ballad of Tara is a metaphoric depiction of women as the guardian of the goodness, the courage and the historical continuity. Tara doesn't know that only she can be the guardian of the historic sword. Unaware of the significance of the sword, Tara hands it in to one of her male neighbors. But, he returns it in fury and cries that the sword invited haunting ghosts to his house; ruining his calm and peace. Tara, 'instrumentalizes' the historical heritage, using the sword to harvest, to defend her children from a mad dog and fierce ghosts, and finally fighting the almighty waves of the sea to claim her historic lover, the ghost warrior, back.

Beyzai's films are almost invariably centered on a strong female lead, for he believes:

It is in a patriarchal society that the lack of presence of a man in the leading role invokes critical attention ... the greatest disaster of patriarchy, where grownups decide for children and men for women and the government for the real people and the intellectual for the imaginary ones, is that it is the women and children who suffer the consequences of the men’s decisions. The victims of patriarchal self-centeredness are not only the women and children, but also many a man. These people are my subjects. Against a masculine tyranny, the children build up a hatred that will make them the martyrs or the tyrants of the future. The women, on the other hand, have their internal defense mechanism and a subtle wisdom that balances them against the violence of the world. [source: Iran Chamber Society]

Minimalist in conversation and rich in texture and cinematography, the film is recently made available on YouTube, with French subtitles.

Enjoy!

Persian Translation of Avec Le Temps (Leo Ferre Lyrics & Patricia Kaas Performance)

با زمان
با زمان، همه چیز میگذرد
چهره را فراموش میکنیم و صدا را هم
قلبی که نطپد، زحمت رفتن نمیکشد
فراتر نمیجوید، رها میکند و اینچنین بهتر است

با زمان
با زمان همه چیز میگذرد

دیگری را که دوست میداشتیم، که زیر باران می جستیم
دیگری را که ازیک نگاه میخواندیم
در میان کلمات و خطوط و زیر نقاب
پیمانی آراسته که در خواب میشود
با زمان، همه چیز ناپدید میشود

با زمان،
با زمان همه چیز میگذرد
حتی دوست داشتنی ترین یادگارها از چشم می افتند
وقتی که زیر نوری مرده آنها را جستجو میکنیم
در شنبه شب هایی که مهربانی تنها میماند

با زمان همه چیز میگذرد
کسی که رویش حساب میکردیم، برای یک سرما خوردگی ساده، برای یک هیچ
کسی که به او از هوا میبخشیدیم تا جواهر
کسی که برایش روحمان را میفروختیم به یک سکه پول
کسی که به دنبالش پادو میزدیم مثل یک سگ
با زمان، میرود،
همه چیز درست می شود

با زمان
با زمان همه چیز میگذرد
گرمای محبت را فراموش میکنیم و آوای صدا را هم
که چون بیچارگان نجوا میکرد
'دیر نکن، سرما هم نخور'.

با زمان
با زمان همه چیز میگذرد
و احساس میکنیم چو اسبیم از پا افتاده
و احساس میکنیم که منجمدیم در بستر حادثه
و احساس میکنیم که بی کسیم هر چند بی خیال
و احساس میکنیم که فریب خورده ایم در همه سالهای رفته
اما در واقع
با زمان
دیگر عشق نمی ورزیم

ترجمه شده از متن فرانسه شاعر و خواننده لئو فره

مترجم: Naj of Neoresistance
لطفا اگر استفاده میکنید، منبع را ذکر کنید

Avec le temps...
Avec le temps, va, tout s'en va
On oublie le visage et l'on oublie la voix
Le coeur, quand ça bat plus, c'est pas la peine d'aller
Chercher plus loin, faut laisser faire et c'est très bien

Avec le temps...
Avec le temps, va, tout s'en va

L'autre qu'on adorait, qu'on cherchait sous la pluie
L'autre qu'on devinait au détour d'un regard
Entre les mots, entre les lignes et sous le fard
D'un serment maquillé qui s'en va faire sa nuit
Avec le temps tout s'évanouit

Avec le temps...
Avec le temps, va, tout s'en va
Mêm' les plus chouett's souv'nirs ça t'as un' de ces gueules
A la Gal'rie j'farfouille dans les rayons d'la mort
Le samedi soir quand la tendresse s'en va tout seule

Avec le temps...
Avec le temps, va, tout s'en va

L'autre à qui l'on croyait pour un rhume, pour un rien
L'autre à qui l'on donnait du vent et des bijoux
Pour qui l'on eût vendu son âme pour quelques sous
Devant quoi l'on s'traînait comme traînent les chiens
Avec le temps, va, tout va bien

Avec le temps...
Avec le temps, va, tout s'en va
On oublie les passions et l'on oublie les voix
Qui vous disaient tout bas les mots des pauvres gens
Ne rentre pas trop tard, surtout ne prends pas froid

Avec le temps...
Avec le temps, va, tout s'en va

Et l'on se sent blanchi comme un cheval fourbu
Et l'on se sent glacé dans un lit de hasard
Et l'on se sent tout seul peut-être mais peinard
Et l'on se sent floué par les années perdues
Alors vraiment
Avec le temps on n'aime plus.

Léo Ferré

(source)

Golden Quince and its ruby Jam

How do you go from the yellow fruit to it red jam?
A pictorial instruction on the facebook page.




Summary: wash well, chop well, and simmer for 4 hours; and don't spill your sugar!

Who is the real terrorist?

Here, there is enough said about the rumors that Mossad and the terrorist opposition to Iranian regime, MEK, are congratulating themselves about successful sabotage of Iranian military base. I recommend this post by Richard Silverstein.

Because the Iranian officials are denying possibility of sabotage, I am not going to comment or speculate. We are in war-times and like a good citizen, I will stick by the military command of my country.

However, this song, The Seven Devils, by Florence + The machine, really resonates with me on this occasion:

Holy water cannot help you now
A thousand armies couldn't keep me out
I don't want your money
I don't want your crowd
See I have to burn
Your kingdom down

Holy water cannot help you now
See I've had to burn your kingdom down
And no rivers and no lakes, can put the fire out
I'm gonna raise the stakes; I'm gonna smoke you out

Seven devils all around you
Seven devils in my house
See they were there when I woke up this morning
I'll be dead before the day is done

Seven devils all around you
Seven devils in your house
See I was dead when I woke up this morning,
And I'll be dead before the day is done
Before the day is done
[ Lyrics from: http://www.lyricsmode.com/lyrics/f/florence_and_the_machine/seven_devils.html ]
And now all your love will be exorcised
And we will find you saying it's to be harmonized.
And it's an even sum
It's a melody
It's a battle cry
It's a symphony

Seven devils all around you
Seven devils in my house
See, they were there when I woke up this morning
And I'll be dead before the day is done

Seven devils all around you
Seven devils in your house
See I was dead when I woke up this morning,
And I'll be dead before the day is done
Before the day is done
Before the day is done
Before the day is done

They can keep me alive
'Til I tear the walls
'Til I slave your hearts
And they take your souls
And what have we done?
Can it be undone?
In the evil's heart
In the evil's soul

Seven devils all around you
Seven devils in your house
See I was dead when I woke up this morning
I'll be dead before the day is done
Before the day is done

120 Iranian Writers and Professors warn against attacking Iran

The list speaks for itself.

These individuals have a strong record of opposing the draconian ways of the Iranian regime: they are philosophers, historians, political activists, women right activists, journalists and etc .

However, they have all signed a petition to oppose not only the dictatorship of Iran, but dictating the 'New Middle East" project.

"Humanitarian help doesn't come through the tanks"!

Some of the signatories are (I will complete the list the moment I have some time):

• Ervand Abrahamian; professor and teh author of "Khomeinism"
• Shoja Azari
• Sirus Aryanpour
• Dariush Ashuri professor, historian, translator
• Hamid Ahmadi
• Reza Afshari, professor, historian, human rights
• Mehran Adib
• Abolfazl Ordukhani
• Zinat Esmailzadeh
• Reza Aghnami
• Babak Amir Khosravi
• Noushabeh Amiri: journalist, Roozonline.
• Ebrahim Khalife
• Fariba Amini
• Mehdi Amini
• Mohammad Amini
• Abdolali Bazargan, son of the first post-revolution prime minister; writer and activst
• Manijeh Baradaran
• Mohamad Borghei
• Nasrin Basiri
• Reza Bourghani
• Behrouz Bayat
• Hamid Beheshti
• Farzaneh Bazrpour
• Golbarg BashiWomen rights activist academic
• Kourosh Parsa
• Siyavash Parsanejad
• Shahrnoush Parsipour Writer, feminist, one of the earliest writers to suffer IRI prisons
• Akram Pedramniya
• Ali Porsan
• Amir Pishdad
• Shahram Tehrani
• Asadollah Tyurchi
• Ramin Jahanbeglu Philosopher, arrested on charges of espionage and put in jail in 2006-7 in Iran.
• Bahram Chubineh
• Reza Haji
• Houshang Hasanyari Professor, Royal Military college, Canada
• Fatemeh Haghighatju Reformist member of parliament (in exile)
• Hamid Hamidi
• Mohsen Heydarian
• Mehdi Khanbaba Tehrani (Old communist)
• Parviz Dastmalchi
• Hamid Dabashi ("A leading cultural observer")
• Mehran Rad
• Mostafa Rokhsefat
• Mohsen Rezvani
• Ali rezayee
• Saeed Rahnema
• Mohammad Rahbar
• Mina Zand
• Mandana Zandian
• Hamid Zangeneh
• Hamid Salek
• Hamid Salek
• Behrooz Setoodeh
• Faraj Sarkouhi (Writer who fled chain murder of Iranian writer/intellectuals)
• Mohammad Sahimi (regular contributer to PBS frontline Tehran Bureau)
• Jalal Sar afraz
• Ali Shakeri
• Ahmad Shakeri
• Masoumeh Shafii
• Parviz Shokat
• Mohammad Saber
• Shahla Salehpour
• Farhad Soufi
• Ashkbous Talebi
• Reza Alijani
• Noreddin Gheravu
• Reza Fani Yazdi
• Hossein Foruzin
• Parastu Forouhar (artist and the daughter of Parvaneh and Dariuch Forouhar, leaders of a nationalist political party, who were murdered in their home by the IRI)
• Puyan Fakhrayy
• Mansour Farhang professor of foreign relations
• Kambiz Ghaem-magham
• Mohsen Ghaem Magham
• Hossein Ghazian
• Frous Ghoreishi
• Mostafa Ghahremani
• Sam Ghandchi
• Morteza Kazemian (Journalist in exile)
• Abdee Kalantari (author and editor of Nilgoon)
• Mehrangiz Kar Lawyer, women/human rights activist, whose journalist husband committed suicide since the IRI did not allow him to leave Iran for treatment and visit with his family.
• Aziz Kramlu
• Ali Keshtgar
• Hossein Kamali
• Hamid Kosari
• Azadeh Kiyan Political scientist, Paris U.
• Taghi Kimiyai
• Mehdi Gerami
• Iraj Gorgin Journalist
• Akbar Ganji Journalist who survived an 80 day hunger strike due to being illegally detained by the IRI judiciary.
• Reza Goharzad
• Abdolkarim Lahiji Human rights lawyer
• Bahman Mobasheri
• Malihe Mohamadi
• Morteza Mohit
• Farkhondeh Modaresi
• Abas Ma'roufi Novelist who is sent on exile and has turned into publisher
• Reza Moini
• Hassan Makaremi
• Aliakbar Mahdi
• Hayedeh Mogheysi
• MohammadAli Mehrasa
• Homayun mehmanesh
• Ziba Mir Hosseini
• Yaser Mirdamadi
• Reza Nafe'i
• Shirin Neshat Photographer and director of Women without Men
• Asghar Nosrati
• Mehdi nourbakhsh
• Mohammadreza Nikfar, Philosopher and contributer to opposition Radio Zamaneh
• Bahman Niroomand
• Soheyla Vahdati
• Parvin Vafayee
• Nader Hashemi
• Ata Hodashtina
• Hossein houshmand
• Yusef Yazdi

یرواند آبراهامیان، شجاع آذری، سیروس آرین پور، داریوش آشوری، حمید احمدی،رضا افشاری، مهران ادیب، ابوالفضل اردوخانی، زینت اسماعیل زاده ، رضا اغنمی، محمد جواد اکبرین، بابک امیر خسروی، نوشابه امیری، ابراهیم خلیفه سلطانی، فریبا امینی ، محمد امینی، مهدی امینی ، عبدالعلی بازرگان، گلبرگ باشی، منیره برادران، محمد برقعی ، نسرین بصیری، رضا بورقانی، بهروز بیات، فرزانه بذرپور،حمید بهشتی،کورش پارسا، سیاوش پارسانژاد، شهرنوش پارسی پور، اکرم پدرام نیا،علی پرسان، امیر پیشداد، شهرام تهرانی، اسدالله تیورچی، محمد جلالی، رامین جهانبگلو، بهرام چوبینه، رضا حاجی، هوشنگ حسن یاری، فاطمه حقیقت‌جو، حمید حمیدی، محسن حیدریان، مهدی خانبابا تهرانی، حمید دباشی، پرویز دستمالچی،مهران راد، مصطفی رخ صفت، محسن رضوانی،علی رضایی، سعید رهنما، محمد رهبر، مینا زند ، ماندانا زندیان، حمید زنگنه،حمید سالک، بهروز ستوده، فرج سرکوهی، محمد سهیمی، جلال سرفراز،علی شاکری، احمد شاکری، معصومه شفیعی، پرویز شوکت،محمد صابر،شهلا صالح پور، احمد صدری، محمود صدری، فرهاد صوفی، اشکبوس طالبی، رضا علیجانی، نورالدین غروی، رضا فانی یزدی، حسین فروزین، پرستو فروهر، منصور فرهنگ ، پویان فخرایی، کامبیز قائم مقام، محسن قائم مقام، حسین قاضیان، فیروز قریشی، مصطفی قهرمانی، سام قندچی، مرتضی کاظمیان، عبدی کلانتری، مهرانگیز کار، عزیز کراملو، علی کشتگر، علی کشگر، حسین کمالی، حمید کوثری، آزاده کیان، تقی کیمیایی اسدی، مهدی گرامی، ایرج گرگین، اکبر گنجی، رضا گوهرزاد، عبدالکریم لاهیجی، بهمن مبشری، ملیحه محمدی، مرتضی محیط ، فرخنده مدرسی، عباس معروفی، رضا معینی، حسن مکارمی، علی اکبر مهدی،هایده مغیثی، محمد علی مهرآسا، همایون مهمنش، زیبا میر حسینی، یاسر میردامادی،رضا نافعی، شیرین نشاط، اصغر نصرتی، مهدی نوربخش، محمد رضا نیکفر، بهمن نیرومند، سهیلا وحدتی، پروین وفایی،نادر هاشمی، عطا هودشتیان، حسین هوشمند و یوسف یزدی

Akbar Ganji: Another look at Israel's bombing of Iran

Akbar Ganji is known to all who know about Iranian politics. He was an insider; a member of the IRGC; who published a damning book about the system of terror and assassination of the Iranian intellectuals, that was guided from the supreme leader's office. For this, he suffered jail and torture; and went to the brink of death with an 80-day hunger strike.

He is now a political refugee; in the US of A.

He has published the following outline of WHY an Israeli bombing of Iran should outrage the citizens of the 'free' world.

Here's my translation of his text in Persian, published on BBC Persian.

----

These days, the possibility of Israel's attack on Iranian nuclear facilities has again become the news headline. According to these reports, Israel's Right wing prime minister and the minister of defense are seriously campaigning to get the support of the rest of the cabinet to attack Iran. However, the heads of the Israeli army and Mossad are against it. Israel has tested a long-range missile aimed for Iran, and according to a poll, 41% of Israelis want a military attack against Iran's nuclear facilities. What is the problem?

The Israeli government claims dangers of a nuclear Iran. Two points must be noted:

First: Iran has been a member of the International atomic energy agency (IAEA), since its establishment in 1956. In 1970, Iran became a signatory to Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). In 1972, Iran has been under IAEA's inspections. However, Israel is neither a member of IAEA, nor a signatory to NPT, and no international organization ever inspects Israel's nuclear facilities.

Secondly, it is said that Israel does own about 200 nuclear warheads; while the American and Israeli authorities say that Iran "might" reach nuclear capacity in the future. If, despite all sanctions, Iran can acheive such deed, it will at most have one 80-Kg bomb with which it cannot go against Israel's 200.

Then, so far, it is Israel who doesn't recognize the international community and bullies all. How?

Israel says that all Middle Eastern countries have to be a member of and under strict surveillance of IAEA; but that they are an exception. Israel says that they have the right to owning hundreds of nuclear bombs, but other regional governments are not entitled to even enriching uranium, Where has this "discrimination" and "special right" come from? Is it not because the USA is behing Israeli's bullying of the hundreds of millions of the people in the region?

Israel and its fanatic supporters create this special right with a claim. The claim is that it is only Israel that faces threat, and not other regional governments; therefore, Israel should have access to deterrents. However a few points must be noted with regards to this claim:

One: Military Aggression and Occupation

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

In the 20th century, Iran has not launched any military attack against any nations; rather it has itself been the victim of military attacks by the regional countries which has led to more than a million death and more than 1000 billion dollars of damages.

However, Israel has come to exist after occupying the palestinian territory in 1948. The Israeli government has dislocated the Palestinians out of their homes and has denied them their basic rights.

Israel claims that it is a government. A modern government is defined by national borders. Question is, where are Israeli borders? Israel does not accept any international borders.

According to the UN resolution 181, official recognition of Israeli government, 45% of Palestine belongs to Palestinians, 54% to Israel and 1% is the international zone. Israel does not accept this resolution. To deny this resolution is to deny the existence of Israel; for it was with this resolution that Israel would be internationally recognized.

The Israeli government has shrunk the Palestinian territory to 22% (from 45) after the 1967 war. That is, so far, it has occupied 78% of the palestinian territory. In later steps, in other occupied territories it has begun settlement construction for Jewish citizens. On the other hand, 2-3 million palestinians who live in the occupied territories are not considered citizens, i.e. they have no passport and no other citizen rights.

According to an agreement between the US, Russia, EU and the UN, an independent Palestinian government must be formed. However, Israel does not concede and is buying time so that the problem of the occupied territories would be forgotten with the passing of the first generation.

The Israeli government has bombed the nuclear facilities of Irag and Syria. In fact, it is Israel who attacks other countries on a whim, with various excuses.

If owning nuclear facilities is illegal, Israel owns uncontrolled ones. If seeking nuclear weapons is illegal, Israel owns hundreds.

Of course, the governments of the US, Israel and Iran have formed military groups in other countries and use them against this or that. Iran does such actions in Lebanon (Hizbollah), Palestine, Iraq and Afghanistan. But here too, all governments should be condemned for such violation of international law.

Two: Committing War Crime

++++++++++++++++++++++

The Iranian government has not yet been accused or convicted of "war crime" or "crime against humanity". However, the UN has condemned Israel for "war crime" in Gaza.

Three: The Problem of Terrorism

+++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Iranian government has killed hundreds of the Iranian opposition, assassinating them inside or outside Iran. The Israeli government too has assassinated many Palestinians inside or outside Palestine and around the globe. One example is the injection of poison to Khaled Mash'al in 1997; that according to Paul McGeough [Kill Khalid], called for Bill Clinton's intervention pressuring Israel to provide the antidote.

Another example is the terror in Qatar on EU passport, which angered the Europeans about counterfeiting their passports. The British Foreign Minister expelled an Israeli diplomat for counterfeiting 12 passports to kill a Hamas leader.

As such, Israel is a government that is formed by occupation and has carried on with "terror" and "war crime"; that doesn't accept the EU/US/UN/Russia agreements to allow the owners of the land have a small share of their territory; and is seeking a war with Iran on false excuses.

Four: National Security and Interests

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The "nuclear grandiosity" project of Ayatollah Khamenei is not supported by all Iranians. At least we know that many political parties are opposed to it. Basically, Khamenei is not seeking people's approval for this.

But, do other countries, even the Western democracies, hold or have held a referendum when attempting it? Moreover, which one of the Wester democracies that already owns nuclear bombs has sought the "satisfaction" of the people?

Governments that own the bomb justify it under pretense of "National Security" of "National Interest". So does Israel. Now the question is" Shouldn't "national security" or "national interest" compel Iran and other regional governments to seek nuclear weapons too?"

Five: Democratization of the Middle East

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

If the Arab Spring leads to democratization, it will harm Israel, because the authoritarian and corrupt regimes that do not have popular support inside their countries, and are under support of the Us or other European countries, obey the dictated policies of the West.

If these countries start having political and democratic structures, they have to answer to their people. The public opinion of the people of the region will no longer stand for discrimination and injustice. The people of the region will demand their governments to consider their "national security" and "national interest".

If Israel owns nuclear weapons, the "democratic governments" of the region will have to seek them to guarantee their national "security and interest". Therefore, and for other reasons, Israel is against democratization of the Middle East. Israel was the only government defending Husni Mubarak to the last day. This support cost Mubarak dearly.

Six: Israeli and Iranian governments, true friends

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

The Right-Windgers of Israel want that Ali Khamenei and Mahmud Ahmadinejad to hold the wheel of power in Iran so that they can justify their invasive policies in the Western world.

The Islamic Republic is also using the threat of Israel to justify many of its oppressive acts, especially the ruthless crackdown on the opposition.

These two governments strongly need eachother.

However, Iranians are fighting for a peaceful transition from the "despotic supreme leadership" to a "democratic system based on freedom and human rights", which won't be anti-Western either.

Israel knows that such a system is not to their advantage; for if there is a democratic government in Iran, it will certainly seek the "national security and interest" of Iranians, without opposition to the West; and thus Israel will no longer have a boogieman to scare the Western powers with.

Seven: All or None

++++++++++++++

In supporting democracy and human rights, you can't have a two tear system. You can't say that the national security and interests of Israel are important, but those of Iran are not. If Israel, and Pakistan and India and Kazakhstan and ... own nuclear weapons, the future democratic government of Iran will also seek them. This means throwing the region in a nuclear proliferation race.

The best policy is to destroy all weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East. This is an all or none policy. Either no country should have them, or if one does, the rest will seek them too.

Instead of unequivocal support of the unilateral and aggressive policies of Israel, the United States should work with all governments and the UN towards nuclear disarmament. In his 2009 4th of June speech in Cairo's Al-Zahra University, Obama said:

I understand those who protest that some countries have weapons that others do not. No single nation should pick and choose which nations hold nuclear weapons. That is why I strongly reaffirmed America's commitment to seek a world in which no nations hold nuclear weapons. And any nation – including Iran – should have the right to access peaceful nuclear power if it complies with its responsibilities under the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.

It is possible, and a must, that with a collective security agreement, guarantee the security of all including Israel. But, defending discrimination and special rights is against the values of democracy and human rights. The middle east has a young population. This generation that doesn't withstand the local despots, will not stand for the foreign ones either.

It is true that true independence comes from a national government with the actual votes of each citizen. However, the foreign aggressors cannot beat on the head of a nation with the excuse that the local despot is beating them.

P.S. Sorry I have not read this and it is perhaps full of typos and etc; but judging from the mushroom explosion of the text in the facebook, I thought it is important to provide the world with "another look". I now have to eat breakfast and earn a living, so please forgive errors and point them out to me for correction. (Naj)

Image of a dream: translated lyrics of Dariush's song "تصویر رویا"

Dariush is our king of pop! His songs and his voice made me cry throughout my teen years. I stopped listening to him when I "grew up" and became a 'tough' girl who needed to kill Iran in her in order to succeed "abroad". I heard a version of this song on the facebook; and it made me cry. I just share it with a translation of the lyrics. Let me know if you like the music. I am curious.



Moonlight floods the night شب از مهتاب سر میره
The moon full in water تمام ماه تو ابه
like the image of a dream شبیه عکس یک رویاست

When you sleep, the world sleeps تو خوابیدی جهان خوابه
Earth goes around you زمین دور تو میگرده
Time is in your hands زمان دست تو افتاده

Look تماشا کن
Your silence has deepened the night سکوت تو عجب عمقی به شب داده
In sleep, you are like a sketch تو خواب انگار طرحی از
of a flower, the moon and a smile گل و مهتاب و لبخندی

The night begins from شب از جای شروع میشه
where you close your eyes که تو چشماتو میبندی
I hold you تورا اغوش میگیرم
my body fills with dream تنم سریز رویا شه
the world, the size of a lullaby جهان قد یه لالایی
that fits in my arms توی اغوش من جاشه

I hold you تورا اغوش میگیرم
It becomes darker هوا تاریک تر میشه
God comes closer than your hands خدا از دست های تو به من نزدیکتر میشه

The earth goes around you زمین دور تو میگرده
The time is in your hand زمان دست تو افتاده
Look تماشا کن
how your silence has deepened the night سکوت تو عجب عمقی به شب داده

The house fills تمام خونه پر میشه
of this dreamy image از این تصویر رویایی
look تماشا کن
look تماشا کن
how cruelly beautiful you are چه بی رحمانه زیبایی

Digging photos

I am homesick ... my family has all left my end of the world, they are all in Iran; and I am digging photos. And putting them on the facebook page of my blog.

Something about facebook is soothing to my short temper of these days and my short attention span.

I want to go home ... to go to Iran; and smell something familiar ... my mother.

What have I to say any more ... what have I to say about Iran? ...

Bam, the rubbled heritage ...

Earthquakes ...

Up close and personal ...

Neoresistance is joining facebook.

I am in a stage of my life that I think many matters do not deserve more than a line to say about. I am making a facebook page for Neo Resistance to do that--occasionaly.

And I keep this blog for writing in detail about what inspires me.

Here's the page:

Circumstance (2011, Maryam Keshavarz): Daring and Interesting but failing

Circumstance will be getting plenty of attention.

Circumstance will be loved by people who take pleasure from watching its gorgeous Iranian girls dance, flirt, perform erotics on eachother, half naked, half dreaming, half asleep, half awake.

Circumstance will be talked about as the first Iranian film about 'Lesbians'.

Circumstance will likely offend the sensitivities of some fundamentalist here or there for desecrating Qoran recitations and breaking Iranian-Screen taboos.

Circumstance will be known as one of the first (the increasingly emerging) "autobiographical" tales of "underground" Iran; one of those that reinforce the illusion of those who see and know Iran through such autobiographical "documentaries" by the upper/middle class westerner-than-Westerners Iranians (often second generation immigrants like Keshavarz).

One film buff would give the film credit for cinematography and edit; describe its extreme close ups of red lips and red satin sheets and 1001-night mise-en-scenes; perhaps paying hommage to Bergman's Sonata, Woody Allen's Bourgeois swank, Kar Wai's oriental moods and Fassbinder's (homo-)sensualism.

A critic would criticize it for crude performance and the poorly written and performed dialogues, many of which do not make any sense nor suggest anything sensible. Another would praise it for the abundance of political 'points' it makes about corruption, repression, depression and etc.

As a first it deserves applause: it is an interesting film, it is courageous and uncompromising. It is also beautifully shot, coloured, lit, and framed. As such, Circumstance succeeds in being a general-pleaser, a departure from the Iranian new wave cinema; thus winning Sundance's audience-choice award.

Circumstance entertained me; reminded me of how it was to be young and naughty under the surveillance of the "Big Sisters" in school; it made me chuckle a couple of times over the accent of the American-Iranian boy who wanted to change Iran by dubbing Milk, and immitating Sean Penn's "gay" voice!

Overall, I liked the film, it wasn't a waste of my time--although I did look at my watch a few times, impatient to get to my supper instead of suffering political/romantic cliche.

I am used to watching slow films, without dialogue or stories, without a blink. And I am familiar with all the pedantic film-school elements that were packed in the film to make it gorgeous. Clearly, this film was made by a brilliant NYU film-student.

But as a whole, the film failed.

It failed to impress because it aimed too high. Simply, there was too much in the film; too much of the many little things that would have been good on their own, but too cluttered and confused to enjoy in one film. Had she been advised that "less is more", this would have become an art-film.

What distracted me from the "goodness" of the film was its politically judgmental edge. From the get-go, it set the stage for the brother to be a "loser": a musician turned addict turned fundamentalist muslim, turned extortionist until his Islamist opportunism made him fortunes and got him fake love!

The film would have been just as good had it avoided cliches such as making the parents of the gorgeous Lesbian Shireen into politically-killed university professors, whose death haunted their daughter into marrying the loser/opportunist/fundamentalist brother!

The film would have been better without the dialogue of Atefeh and her father on the mountain. The ill-executed conversation about how she was suffering the revolutionary sins of the father! These cliches are too cheap and too common to be effective any more.

This film was about Circumstance (شرایط) that defined people of the film into becoming something else to survive or thrive. To weigh the responsibility of all that people become on "Politics" made the film light on developing characters and persona who carried the weight of their choices.

It took Keshavarz 5 years and 40 edits to finalize this film. I hope in her next film she lets go of the "protest banner", for when it comes to lasting political films "less is more".

P.S. I wrote this post first, and then decided to see what other people have been saying. I added the links, where they corresponded to what I had guessed would be said about the film.

Self Protrait

Iranian Judiciary Lashing the Head-Bald Actresses?

These days, the incredible sentence given to the theater actress Marziyeh Vafamehr, one year of imprisonment and 90 lashes for appearing without head dress in an Iranian-Australian PhD-dissertation film by the Iranian Poet, and recently film scholar, Granaz Mousavi, has shocked the theater and cinema community into action.

How can it be? After all, appearing without a scarf and with a shaved head in post-revolutionary Iranian films is not new. Here's a list of precedents:

The fist (controversial) bald appearance on screen was by Farimah Farjami، in Masoud Kimiaii's thriller Lead in 1988 (سرب، مسعود کیمیایی). The film was about a couple of Iranian jews who wished to migrate to Israel in the 1940s, but witnessing the assassination of their Anti-Zionist uncle by a paramilitary group HAGANAH (that later became Israel's defense ministry), makes them a target and forces them into hide and seek exile. [*]

The second notable instance of a bald actress was in Abbas Kiarostami's critically acclaimed 2002 film Ten; where a heart-broken girl who rides with the main protagonist, encounters her for the second time with a shaved head; losing her hair to deal with the loss of her lover.

The third, is Women's Prison (2002), a unique film in the history of Iranian cinema, by Manijeh Hekmat, depicting the lives of three generations of women prisoners: convicted killers, political prisoners and delinquent teenagers. Here, Mitra (Roya No-Nahali) appears with a shaved head, a punishment for her disobedience in the Prison.

The credit for the following list goes to a "fundamentalist" blogger whose post was WARNING the "prostitution" in Iranian cinema (yes, if you do not have complete Hijab, in their view you are a prostitute) manifesting itself in the form of bald actresses!

Quarantine, 2008, (قرنطینه): By Manouchehr Hadi, a love story that begins with a car accident, when the rich boy falls in love with the poor girl, but cannot marry due to class difference. The woman suffers Cancer and begins chemotherapy --hence the shaven head. However, this film also arose complaints from the clergy (the pro-green ones, actually) for allowing a woman onscreen without headdress!

Bad Kids, 2001 (بچه های بد)، A film by Alireza Davoodnejad, about a chance encounter of a couple of Iranian guys with a runaway girl who survives suicide, and confesses to murder. The film did not receive enough box office attention to alert the moral-police; however according to a couple of reviews, it was an artistically successful film (I have not seen it myself.)

The Four-Finger, 2006 (چهار انگشتی), film by Said Soheili, and action film--presumably government funded and moralistic, with good guys and bad guys and a femme fatale; and from what I gather, full of cinematic "excess" but a box office flop. I could only find one picture of the "bald" actress from the fundamentalist's site.

Scent of Paradise, 2001; (بوی بهشت), by Hamid Reza Mohseni, about a broke pop star heads to a getaway in the North, and falls in love with a runaway girl who pretends to be a 'deaf and dumb' boy--hence the shaved head.

I don't understand Vafamehr's sentence! I don't understand why this film My Tehran for Sale, that according to the director was filmed with a permit, would be a candidate for such harsh treatment. If anything, the film is in line with the moral judgment of the IRI: "that the pro-western youth are a disillusioned bunch."

In a sequence of the film, a group of young men and women arrested in a mix party are sitting in prison, awaiting their turn, as they listen to the dreadful sound of lashes and screams of their friends breaking the silence of the cold room.

Has the IRI theater become so macabre, to make a fiction film come to reality, by lashing its delicate actress, before the eyes of the world? I hope to be proven wrong.

* حکایت جلال معیریان