Yesterday, June 1st during a pre-election campaign of Hassan Rouhani, his mainly young supporters shouted “Honour to Mousavi, Wellcome to Rouhani”. The meeting took place in Tehran’s Jamaran district. Rouhani urged all his supporters to attend the presidental elections. He demands the release of all political prisoners and the end of the securitized atmosphere. He called for a free, prosperous and peaceful Iran. The Rouhani campaign’s head of youth affairs was detained at this event.

It is good to see that the Bavarian Television placed its microphone right in front of Mr. Rouhani. So we will hopefully get all information first hand.

Ghazal dear, the following reply to a post of Bahmani I could have never written without experiencing the tightness of the relationship between you and your family and feeling how much a resistance this provides against any potential intruder (like myself).

In Iran, the frequently expressed demand to do something for the community/society is a compensatory reflex to the traditional 150% focus on familial relation as the only important ones. Neither the Shahs aristocratic wealth nor the religious dogma of Shia islam could provide any common framework for all Iranians. The aristocracy was always considered corrupt and only interested in rising the power and wealth of their own dynasty, and the islamic religion was from its very beginning alian and hostile towards the historic Persian values of the Archemenidian, Sassanidian and Parthians empires and their culture and faith.
So over centuries, the Iranians converted to their very own family worlds, which provided a sort of constant values, safety, and system of trust, pride, and historic continuity. But the rise of modern societies in the 19th and 20th century required a new social “contract”, and even though in both the capitalist and the socialist countries the economic models were so much different, in both cases the masses “sacrificed” their privat life to the socio-economic requirements. Japans rise to such a economic superpower would have been unthinkable without the devotion of the people to finally commit their whole life for the prosperity of their employer (or formerly to the prosperity of the shogun). In Europe the mostly benevolent dynasties had a similar function, or the republic values in France. All of these provide values systems to the individual, which could easily be transformed into the requirements of modern, anonymous, industrial societies.
But in a society where the main social relationships and values are provided by an extended family clan, this transformation is much more difficult. Because you can easily get rid of your faith (like in Russia) or loosen your devotion to the royal dynasty (like in England, where the Windsors became more or less decorative and cultural institutions), but you can never get rid of your parents, your grandparents and uncles and aunts. Everybody of us has them, and of course they will always try to keep the children, grandchildren, nices and nephrews as close as possible and as obidient as possible. And this in reality made any consense on a national or society scale very difficult. And because people deep inside are very aware of this, they invent the narratives of the hero who devotes his whole life for the sake of the society. These narratives are pure sublementations for the complex of lacking a minimal social responsibility. The second narrative that is reproduced again and again to satisfy this desire for a devotion of the individuum to the socium is the Shia victim mythology. Wunderful and so atractive to please god, if some martyres loos their life not to defend the family, but to spread the religion. These are the prototype of social workers: Giving their own life for the sake of a “higher” institution. But (thanks god) these cult of Shia islamic martyrdom could not supersede in primary family values in Iranian society neither. I was always fascinated by the observation that even though Shia islam has this dogma of the martyrdom, there were never suicide terrorists coming from the Iranian society. My guess would be that these very tight family relationships in which each person is imbedded, the idea to commit one family member to be sent out to give its life away for a “higher purpose” is extremely difficult to justify. The palestinians are always happy to do this, and the Iraqies and the Pakistany are always willing to do this. Iranians not. So they love these fantastic stories of Rustam or of Ali and Hussein, but the verve and absoluteness of this love says much more about their deep-down feeling that they lack such “higher purposes” in daily life.

regards, Michael

I would be curious to hear what you think. Buble is only a bit elder than you, so no excuse to say that his music is from another generation.

Dear Michael,

It is no secret that many Iranian woman do not value their impressive, arian noses very high. In contrast, they tend to follow a very questionable beauty picture that more and more seems to be coined by the Japanese manga figures. For them, a nose is merely anything more than a small ridge to hide the nostrils.
The historical form of Iranian noses, however, is impressive, and if an ancient myth is true that the nose is the main site of human character, than Iranians must have a lot of it (which I believe many of them will agree).

The more I regret that low self-esteem of Iranians when it comes to the shape of their facial “center of gravity”. Iranian woman try to raise their competetiveness in hunting for a good match on the vanity fair, and the men, beeing either the driving force behind this or the obidient donkey, quickly got trapped by this.

Here I will explaine to you (based on what I feel as a young woman and what I learned as a young geneticist) the short and the long term consequences of this:

1) In the short term, there will be a constant drop of beauty among Iranian woman, because more and more of them afford a “Nose Job”. So very soon, you will see less and less Iranian ladies whom their strong and proud character is clearly located in an equally strong, sharp and expressive nose. We might be confused soon, that Iranians with strong self-esteem decline to western beauty standard, have their face irreversibly damaged only to fill the pockets of those medics, who as all their colleagues from other disciplines agree, are the least qualified ones to distinguish between health and disease, let alone to cure any real sick patient.

The Iranian woman who had this attribute of an ancient, devine beauty surgically removed, will in fact increase her chances to catch a husband and have more children. That is what we know from natural selection of the fittest, which if we like it or not, becomes the natural selection for the most attractive in the human population.

But, thanks to genetic laws, there is not only hope in sight, as I will explaine in the following, but in the long term these “Iranian Nose Jobs” even have the potential to rescue the Iranian Nose from becomming extinct by natural selection.

2)  Because on the long term,  of course, no plastic surgery can change the genetic code, which over hundreds of generations turned Iranians, considered to represent the original Arians, as representatives of the niceest, sharp, impressive noses. No ordinary medic, let alone the half-educted plastic surgeons, have any clue where in the Iranian genome the key for nose shape is hidden, or how this could be manipulated. So with the current genetic knowledge and the status-quo of molecular technologies, the real treasure of the Iranian nose is still hidden and safely deposited deep in our genome.  So even if all Iranians have their “noses done”, the next and all following generations still carry the fertile seeds to grow proper Iranian noses again.

But this is only half of the truths, the real excitement comes here:  Without plastic surgery, large Iranian noses could in fact become extinct due to genetic admixture from (Iranian x Non-Iranian) partnerships (introgressing the Small-Nose-Gene-Variant from East-Asian or US or Latin-Americans) followed by preferential marriages between the descendents inheriting the Small-Nose-Genes (and consequently growing these dwarf nose variants reminiscent of a Hobbit face). Over just a few generations, there would indeed take place a natural selection for the Small-Nose-Gene-Variants, resulting in irreversible loss of the Iranian Large Noses.  But this, in fact, does not happen, thanks to the plastic surgeons and their messing up with the natural link between beauty, genes, and attractiveness, thus interfering with genetic evolution.  By virtually “hiding” the real (heritable) Iranian Nose variant behind a fake, non-heritable small nose, natural selection is fooled. Therefore, nose jobs to Iranian woman will guarantee that in the long term the precious Iranian nose shape with its distinct and impressive sharpness will always comes back in every new generation.

Dear Michael, you wrote some articles here at your blog and at Iranian.com about the modern Iranian cinematography. I’d like to add a movie by the young Iranian filmmaker Maryam Kesharvarz onto your list , called “Circumstances” (“Sharayet” in its persian original).

I saw it recently with friends who got it on DVD, since it is not yet shown in the movie-theaters in Sweden. The movie is about two girls who go to University and are like sisters in mind. The parents of Shirin, the more quiet of the two, were obviously killed by the regime for participating in political opposition. The family of Atafeh, however, is very well situated and rich, although not conformist. A brother of Atafeh, in the past supposed to start a career as musician, returns from a long absence and makes a completely brain-washed impression. Still loved by his mother and dad, he is depressed and drug addicted and finally only sees a way out his mental problems by devoting his life to Allah and becoming a servant of the regime.
The main person of the movie, however, are the two girls Shirin and Atafeh, who are both full of dreams of a career as singers, in a liberal and free society. This clashes with both the opressive political regime in Iran, with the dogmatic situation at the college, but brings them also in conflict with Atafehs well positioned family. In one scene of the movie, during a family celebration where usually everybody contributes a song on the piano, Atafehs brother insist that the girls should not perform any more, since he considers this as anti-islamic. Trying to avoid any conflict, her family declines to the brothers hypocrism and recommends their daughter to stay silent.
Atafeh and Shirin look for freedom of thoughts and more wild experiences by joining the Tehran party scene. When one of these illegal parties is raided by the regimes Basidj thugs, they both get arrested. Whereas Atafehs parents manage to bribe some of the police officers to get their daughter out, Shirin is kept for longer in custody and she is mentally tortured there. Atafehs depressive brother suddenly appears to work for the police. When he finds Shirin he offers her to work for her release, but only if she agrees to marry her.
Throughout the entire film, however, it is obvious that Shirin and Atafeh are more than just friends, they are connected by a deep, mutual love. This love between the two girls is the source of all their strength, of their endless confidence that a better and free life will come and they will start a great music career together somewhere abroad.
The film finishes undecided, without happy end. At one moment, Shirin declines to the possessory claims by her husband, Shirins brother. But it is clear that she is only suffering here.
The unconditional love between the two girls serves as the big contrast to a society which is driven by anxiety, lies and hate. When Shirin and Atafeh are together, their honesty and love is like a glance into a better future of the country.

And this is what I red in the UK newspaper Guardian about this marvellous movie:

“Circumstance’s strength is in the exuberance of Atafeh and Shireen, filled with adolescent fantasies of escape (and cringeworthy lad’s mag-style fantasies of each other: all matching underwear and high heels) and their rebellious rush to dance, drink and break rules. At times the sensuous hair-flicking and the way the camera lingers on their beauty feels overdone and their interest in liberalism seems to extend only to their right to party.
But the film frames their insistence on following their desires, whatever the consequences, as a powerful form of dissent; Atafeh tells a friend: “Here anything illegal becomes politically subversive.”
Set immediately before the protests of the Green movement swept through Iran, the film aims to show where the anger behind the demonstrations came from. “In Iran where the state controls your behaviour … they want you to dress a certain way, and not speak to people of the opposite sex in the street – of course the personal is political,” explains Keshavarz, “in a more explicit way than anywhere else.”“

Marina Keegan, still a Yale student in her last term, 22 years old, on track to become a writer for “The New Yorker”, wrote this essay “The Opposite of Loneliness“, that became her emotional legacy. Shortly after publishing her text in Yale Universities “Cross Campus”, Marina Keegan died in a car accident.

Throughout her essay she expresses a very clear, rational view on the conflict between our destiny as members of a complex, more and more annonymous society and our archaic desire to find a safe place in a community. She knows about the impossibility to harmonize these two forces, but she does not end in despair.

Dearest Ghazal,
Before the 2012 Oscar will be awarded on February 26th to the different categories of cinematography, I would like to say something about the state of the Iranian Cinema. This year, the highly acclaimed masterpiece “Nader and Simin – A separation” by the prominent Iranian film-maker Asghar Farhadi is nominated as the best non-english movie and for the best script.

“Nader and Simin” was not the only Iranian film which made it to the western screens during the last years. We were mesmerized by Ali Samadi Ahadis “Green Wave” and “Salami Aleikum“, by Shirin Neshats “Zanan-e bedun-e mardan (Woman without Men)” and by the magic realism of Marjam Satrapis “Persepolis” and “Chicken with Plums“.
Movies by Iranian directors who have the chance to work abroad (like Marjan Satrapi or Ali Samadi Ahadi) are extraordinary masterpieces, carrying a very unique handwriting of their directors. And they breath the spirit of freedom and of unlimited creativity. But because they are produced in the west, they attract much less media attention. The media and critics in the west too often judge a movie more by the circumstances under which it has been produced, and therefore grant a movie that has been produced inside the country an extra bonus for “braveness”. And for this extra bonus there seem to be a consensus that Iranian movies which are a domestic production (like those by Jafar Panahi, Abbas Kiarostami, Asghar Fahadi or Mohammad Rasoulof) might lack the free-spirit and the very personal and experimental techniques and tough expressions, which are characteristic for movies like “Green Wave” or “Salami Alaikum” by Ali Samadi Ahadi, “Woman without Men” by Shirin Neshat or “Chicken with Plum” by Marijam Satrapi. How is it possible, that although anything else than happy ending soft-stories, these four movies leave the audience with a feeling of hope, with the confidence that even the biggest tragedy will find a solution, or at least a meaning ? Is it because each tragedy will lose its horror if it can be openly narrated, if a movie-director can show and say everything he/she wants to say, using the words and pictures he/she feels are appropriate in this very moment ? This way even the saddest and tragic stories like in “Green Wave” or in “Chicken with Plum” can be presented with the greatest of ease. Here, the movie will be a relieve for the director, for the actors and finally for the audience. Because the emotionally strong stories were transformed into movies with all possible and all neccessary cinematografic elements, the audience feels a strong satisfaction and happiness.
In contrast, the movies produced at home in Iran (like “Darbareye Elly” or “Nader and Simin – A divorce” by Fahadi or “Offside” by Jafar Panahi) can not make us forget that censorship is the dominating condition under which artists have to live and work. Each single word in a dialogue, every character, every scenery has to be considered under the threat of censoreship. The so-called “scissors in your own head” might help the director to finally produce a movie that passes the ideological watch-dogs of the regime, and therefore wont suffer too much from beeing “trimmed” by some uneducated beaurocrats. But the movie itself, even if it fullfills the highest standard of movie-arts and creativity, innovation and honesty, can not make us forget that it was produced under conditions of unfreedom. You still can smell the sweat of the film-makers from the fear of loosing the battle against the beaurocrats, you can feel the many frustrating moments they had when another brilliant idea had to be put aside, for the sake to get the whole project through the machinery. One feels that they had to carefully select their words and their pictures, and this leaves a feeling in the audience that not everything what should have been said and shown in the movie became real.
I still advocate the Oscar beeing awarded to Asghar Fahadi, I think the battle he fought against the dump and dogmatic Iranian censoreship and the excellent team work he set up with great artists such as Sareh Bayat, Leila Hatami, Peyman Hatami and many others should be honoured. I think that none of the directors that left Iran would have had enough mental energy to fight through all these odds as Fahadi did, always beeing aware of the risk to end up in prison or beeing sentenced with a ban to work, as his colleague Jafar Panahi has experienced it. For sure, neither Ali Samadi Ahadi, nor Marijam Satrapi or Shirin Neshat would have had the stand and the courage (and maybe other qualities as well) to go through all the husles and restrictions to produce their movies at home in Iran – but maybe under conditions of relative freedom they are the more innovative and creative art-directors. A case where an Iranian film-maker probably tried to get “the best of both worlds” was Bahman Gobadis “Kasi az gorbehaye irani khabar nadareh (No one knows about persian cats)” According to IMBD, “.. during filming, Ghobadi and his actors were arrested twice but released after giving presents to the authorities and lying about the real subject of the film.” This way Bahman Gobadi found a half legal, half underground style to get a movie approved by the Iranian authorities, although it was full of satyrical episodes and signs showing that a way-out of the misery requires the abolution of the dogmatic islamic laws of the mullahs regime. But this film must be considered a singular event.

In general, Iranian movies must be judged either by their political braveness (if they are produced inside Iran) or by the high cinematographic standard (when they are produced abroad). At the current political situation and the degree of oppression of intellectuals and arts-people under the islamic regime I think it is legitimate to honour with the Oscar award the movies who are the result of a brave political fight. But in history books of Iranian movie arts, I believe, the films of the exiled directors Ali Samadi Ahadi, Marjam Satrapi or Shirin Neshat might be considered more innovative and of longer-lasting value.

Hi Michael, when I woke up this morning the view from the window brought a big surprise: suddenly the green around our house had turned white and the roofs and the trees all were covered with a thick layer of fluffy snow. This is the definite sign that a very long autumn is over now, and Yalda and Christmas days are waiting. Winter time in Stockholm is actually not the most pleasant time. It can be wet and chilly and a hopeless battle against the dirty mud that soon spreads all around the streets and buildings. Occasionally large blocks of snow fall down from roofs, and hence there are signs warning from these life-threatening roof-avalanches. My mom and Shava, who both grow up in Tehran associate snow with something different: for them going skiing to the nearby Elburs mountains in the 1970s was something extraordinary, a very rare and very special kind of entertainment. They told me that spending a day out at the skiing ressort of Dizin was like jumping for some hours into the world of the glossy swiss tóurist brochures. It was not simply the gorgeous nature with the snow-covered peak Sichal and wooden chalets and deep forests in the valley that made these trips so unique, but it was also a feeling of freedom and joy beyond the boundaries of an otherwise very traditional society. Shava said it was not impossible to meet on the ski-slopes members of the Shahs family. Have a look at the youtube video below: Farah Diba Pahlevi, the Shahbanoo, is there and making random aquaintance with two americans.

This was in 1978

take care
/ghazal

Ghazal my Dear,
This video reminds me of the few days we spend up at the Zugspitze peak in 2010. Isn”t it funny, that winter time in the snow-covered mountains looks so similar after more than 30 years and at places more than 3ooo km apart ? The alps, however, have not seen much snow this year yet. It is still very green up there. I guess they will need a lot of snow machines to prepare the slopes for this years season.

Take Care, Michael

Amir Parviz (for a secular Monarchy in Iran)

———————————————————–

Reply by Radius

————————————————————

Radius, that is another point of mine (Amir Parveniz)

————————————————————
Monarchy or Parlamentary Democracy (Radius)