By: Tejas Vir Singh

Abstract

The Islamic Republic of Iran is seen as one of the most conservative regimes in the world, often adopting extreme measures to ensure its rule remains stable in the country. One way to see the change the regime brought into the lives of ordinary Iranians is through cinema. Not only has it served as a powerful audio-visual tool for the common people to express their feelings and the changes around them it has also been used by the autocratic regime to further its own agendas. Analysing the various films can bring out the historical realities that were at play in Iran at the time of the Islamic Revolution, especially those dealing with women’s rights.

1953 was a tumultuous time for Iran; the popularly elected government of Mohammed Mosaddegh was overthrown in a coup aided by the intelligence agencies of the United States (via the CIA) and the United Kingdom (via the MI6) amid Cold War politics. A root cause was the decision of Mosaddegh to nationalize the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, in which the British had an unfair trade advantage and had access to most profits made by the company; according to Kinzer, author of ‘All the Shah’s Men: American Coup and the Roots of Middle Eastern Terror’, the company gave Iran only 7 million Pounds out of the 40 million Pounds profits made in 1947. After removing Mosaddegh, the US and UK installed a puppet regime friendly to it, under Mohammed Reza Pahlavi, the Shah of Iran. Under the Shah, cinema went through modernization and largely consisted of state propaganda that projected Iran as a modern nation. The censorship code of 1959 disallowed any show of poverty, backwardness, and anything that ruined the state’s prestige. An example is The Cow by Mehrju’i, which portrays the life of a poor person whose only fortune is his cow, was banned until a statement was released by the filmmaker that the events took place before the Pahlavi dynasty took over. This concept of control over the cinema and its censorship of parts seen as problematic to the image and stability of the regime was then copied by the clergy after they took over Iran in 1979.

During the chaos that ensued after the Islamic Revolution, the clergy with its anti-cinema views burnt down and destroyed as many as 180 cinemas, renamed many remaining cinemas to remove the Western names and even stopped the flow of foreign cinema into Iran, most notably from India, USA and Turkey. Filmmakers, constantly sparring with the authorities for their films, were seen with suspicion and distrust, and many had to seek exile; despite this, along with lesser cinemas, filmmaking in Iran has become more diversified, having spread across both government and private sectors. At first, the Islamic Republic denounced the concept of cinema as a Western one, but then legitimized it when Ayatollah Khomeini, the leader of the Revolution, called for cinema to be a medium to educate people and thus be put in service of Islam, like the other arts that are regulated in Islam. Films were then used as a medium to spread state ideology through ‘religious’ films that were supposed to show mysticism, an example being Nasuh’s Repentance by Makhmalbaf, which talked about the problems associated with pursuing a materialistic lifestyle and of pursuing material wealth. Zeydabadi-Nejad, the author of ‘The Politics of Iranian Cinema: Film and Society in the Islamic Republic’, mentions that most of these mystic films did not attract a huge audience, for physical beauty was not allowed in the films, be it good-looking actresses or even chandeliers; instead, the concept of inner beauty was supported, something not many people are interested in when it comes to entertainment.

In contrast to the state-controlled cinema, films that focused on social issues were blooming in Iran. Many ended up in controversy with the clergy, as they tended to go against the state’s ideology and beliefs. The most prominent social issue was of visibility of women in cinema. The clergy took away many rights from women by imposing upon them their version of Shari’a; wearing the hijab was compulsory to veil women from the male gaze, sexual relations outside marriage were forbidden, the age of maturity was set to 9 years of age, and unilateral divorce rights were given to men. Women were thus restricted from the public sphere and had no equal rights. Given this situation, filmmakers ignored women altogether in their films to stay away from any complications with the state. This issue is also discussed by Abbas Kiarostami, a prominent Iranian filmmaker who explains that realist representations of women was impossible in films given the state regulations, as it reduced them to the role of devoted mothers or seductresses. This is not to say that there were no realistic films; Kiarostami himself made a film called 10, which revolves around the main character, Mania, a divorced woman who picks up other women in her car and they discuss various problems they have faced as women, such as a prostitute she picks up, who discusses themes of sexuality and relationships openly, and a young lady at the shrine who fell in love with a man, only to realize he loves someone else and thus, takes her veil off to reveal her shaved head. Mania also expresses her troubles, such as her rights being stifled by her misogynist ex-husband who did not let her pursue the career of painting. This is then contested by her son, Amin, who appears in a few sequences, and can be said to represent the patriarchal backlash against Mania’s statements; a sort of a miniature male chauvinist, such as complaints of her working outside for long hours, him having to eat leftovers and housework not being done.  Kiarostami here explores the themes of women’s issues, sexuality, and patriarchy quite boldly in a regime that is highly allergic to the discussion of these topics.

Another film that discusses women’s issues is Fifth Reaction, directed by one of Iran’s well-known female directors, Tahmineh Milani. The movie is about a widow, Fereshteh, who is forced by her father-in-law, Haji, to give up custody of her children to Haji. The only solution is to marry his other son, Majid, as it is socially unacceptable for her to be living in the same house as the unmarried son. She refuses and is kicked out of the house, without her children. She is unable to do much legally; a detail that represents the discrimination faced by women in Iran because of the clergy’s religious views. Fereshteh then decides to flee Iran with her children, and plots various escape plans with her friends, all women who face issues with their husbands; one is abusive, another has changed after the war, and another’s does not love her. Given Haji’s networks as a truck driver, her plans keep failing. In the end, Haji catches Fereshteh and in the final scene, Fereshteh is on the floor of a jail cell, pleading Haji to let her keep her children. A matriarchal character, Zeyrmadineh, voices the concerns of women in the film with regards to the discriminatory laws that disadvantage women, such as custody laws which were written by men, and disregard of women’s point of view. The film was met with a lot of backlash by conservatives. When the director was asked if all men committed suicide, will she stop making films on such topics, she boldly replied that women make up half the population of Iran, and if she has a story about them, she will make a film about it. The movie went through censorship too; Zeyrmadineh’s scene about the discriminatory laws was removed. It is interesting to note that even though the two movies, 10 and Fifth Reaction focus on women’s issues that one can even see in a country like ours, it is the confidence of the directors to release these films in a state-controlled by patriarchal religious values that makes these films’ messages louder, as they can face severe retaliation from the clergy dominated state.

Cinema in Iran has had a rocky history, and can be said to have two sides, one is the state-controlled, repeatedly monitored genre of cinema, which is a remnant of the Pahlavi idea of protecting the state’s image, now taken up by the clergy to produce films more in line with their Shi’ite thought and reprimanding those who stray away from it, while another side of Iranian cinema, of social films, has boldly countered the state. Films like The Cow showed the issue of poverty under the Shah, and those like 10 and Fifth Reaction discussing women’s issues under the Islamic Republic fearlessly, show the dichotomy of Iranian cinema. These social films being more popular in Iran with a higher viewership than the religious propaganda shows the intensity of the dissent against the current regime, especially in terms of women’s rights. Cinema is a form of art that is used to express human emotions; curtailing it is not as easy as one thinks, even if they hold supreme power at the state level.

About the Author

Tejas Vir Singh is a second-year student at O.P. Jindal University currently pursuing a bachelor’s degree in law.