Film Review: The White Meadows

Share/Save/Bookmark

Film Review: The White Meadows
by hamsade ghadimi
23-Jan-2011
 

The other day I saw Mohammad Rasoulof’s The White Meadows (Keshtzaarhaay Sepid), the first installment of the Iranian Film Festival at the Freer and Sackler Gallery of Art in Washington DC. The promotional material sounded like another slow-paced Iranian movie that would bore me to tears (not that I don’t enjoy watching Iranian movies). However, I found The White Meadows to be the gutsiest and most visually artistic Iranian movie that I’ve seen. The movie is a powerful indictment of the power structure of the Islamic Republic of Iran. Through allegory, it shows how the current regime uses superstition and religious rituals to oppress the populace, and through the suppression of freedoms, perpetuate its own power. A couple of warnings before you read on: 1) if you don’t want to know what happens in the movie just read the movie reviews included in the links at the end of this blog; 2) I’m not a professional critic, so please excuse my amateurish analysis and feel free to add to it or criticize my take. At first, I was going to just search for reviews of the movie and include it in a blog and give my recommendation; however, I did not find a movie review by an Iranian and I think that much of the symbolism in the movie may have been lost by the non-Iranian movie critic.

The movie starts with Rahmat rowing his boat on a salty sea (probably shot on Lake Oorumieh) to different islands with unusual salt formations to perform various duties, notably collecting tears of the superstitious inhabitants of each island.  He is meticulous in his responsibility of tear collection, cleaning each of the intricate vials used for the collection of tears and at one point admitting that each tear drop is important to him and that in his job of tear collection in 30 years, this ritual feels as important and noble as the first time he did it.  When he arrives at the first island, the inhabitants are waiting for him to take the dead body of a young beautiful woman to a cemetery as the hard salty ground is not conducive to burial.  An elder on the island laments the beautiful dead woman and confesses that it was best that she died as her beauty was distracting all the men on the island.  He even mused that if she was to be buried on the island, the men may dig her up.  It was left to the viewer to imagine what those men would have done to her dead body.

Prior to leaving the island, Rahmat collects the tears of the mourners and carefully funnels the tears into a jar. It turns out that the men, in fact, did not put her body on Rahmat’s boat but instead put a 15-year-old boy covered with a white shroud.  The boy lay motionless in the boat in hopes that Rahmat would take him to his shepherd father who had left the family when he was a child.  Enticed by seeing the beauty of the dead woman, Rahmat uncovers the shroud to discover the boy.  He agrees to take the boy with him if he acts as if he’s mute and deaf.  At this point, I see the contradiction in Rahmat’s character.  He confides to the boy that his relationship with the people is based on trust, but his decision not to turn over the boy to the inhabitants of the island and get the dead body contradicts his earlier statement.  In fact our understanding of Rahmat’s sense of duty shifts throughout the film until we see him at the end as part of the oppressive apparatus.   On the first island, we see how women are objectified as dangerous seductresses and how this belief relieves men of accountability for sexual exploitation of women.  On the second island, Shiite Islam is invoked as a means of justifying the sad and hopeless lives of the islanders.  Upon arriving at the island, Rahmat hears of an islander’s fear that the “fairy” (pari) is in a well (reminiscent of Mahdi hiding in a well) and since it had inhabited the well, the sea had become saltier.  Rahmat learns that the islanders are waiting for the fairy to emerge from the well so that it will rain and the sea will become less salty.  To accomplish the re-emergence of the fairy, people whisper their anguish in a glass jar and seal it with a lid.  After they are done with the ritual of sealing their heartache into the jar, they cry, and Rahmat collects their tears.  Then they turn over the jar to the man who is in charge of the ritual and then the next person is called to come forward.  After all inhabitants perform their duty and Rahmat collects the tears, a dwarf named Khojasteh (auspicious) is called in to carry all the jars on his back to the bottom of the well.  The dwarf is afraid that he will not survive this task and will fall to his death.  The dwarf is let down with a rope into the well by the townspeople who have gathered around the well.  Invoking the muslim first prayer of the morning, they yell “go” and “faster” to encourage Khojasteh to deliver the jars before the sun rises.  Unfortunately for Khojasteh, the sun rises before he’s made it to the bottom of the well and the man in charge of the ritual cuts Khojasteh’s rope with a knife.  You can hear Khojasteh falling to the bottom of the well and the jars breaking while his wife wails at the top of the well.  Khojasteh’s failure to resurrect the fairy hidden in the well shows how religious belief can be used and amplified through mob mentality to keep the powers of the religious leaders intact.  The rituals in play on the third island amplify how women are commodities for powerful men while younger men who challenge the power structure are banished or killed.  The inhabitants of the third island are awaiting Rahmat to collect the tears of an underaged and unwilling bride.  Later, Rahmat also collects the tears of the bride’s mother.  The 15-year-old boy from the first island who is accompanying Rahmat is smitten by the beautiful girl, who is sitting in front of Rahmat in a tent in the finest dress that befits a bride.  The girl is dragged away from the tent and put on a raft while she pleads to Rahmat to intervene.  She slowly disappears into the endless sea.  While Rahmat is looking for the 15-year-old boy, the inhabitants inform him that the boy has gone to rescue the girl, but they have sent a couple of men to retrieve him.  After they retrieve the boy, the island’s elder ties him to a pier footing so the men and stone him to death.  The shore contains many of these tall wooden footings sticking upright from the ground.  Rahmat tells the boy not to say a word and may this event be a lesson for him.  Rahmat only picks one small stone from the tray of the stones that is being offered to the stone throwers.  The boy’s head is covered by a metal pot and the men hiding behind the piers throw the sharp-edged stones at him.  The boy cannot withstand the stoning and cries loudly, telling the men to stop.  At this point, Rahmat intervenes and tells the men it’s a miracle that his boy has started to talk.  The men stop and Rahmat loads up the half-dead boy onto his boat and rows to the next island. On the fourth island, a painter is buried up to his neck for the sin of coloring the sea red in his paintings.  He asks Rahmat for water to which the tear gatherer complies.  The painter is then dug out of the salt and tortured in various ways for his error of not seeing the sea as blue.  He’s dunked into the sea, made to go up a ladder and look at the sun directly, and at one point held down while one of the men pours monkey’s urine in his eyes, all attempts to correct his vision.  They even beg him to just admit the sea is blue even if he doesn’t see it that way.  The painter says that he can still see despite various attempts at making him blind.  Rahmat then loads up the painter, along with the semi-conscious boy, and rows to the fifth island.  At this point, Rahmat who may have at first been viewed as a compassionate and unwilling participant in people’s misery, is seen as complicit in making people prisoners of a nebulous power.    

The fifth and last island is a prison where Rahmat delivers the artist and the half-dead boy.  An old man, the islands only inhabitant, convinces Rahmat to stay the night so that for at least one night he won’t be lonely.  During the night, the old man confides to Rahmat that he misses his old life and his sheep (hinting that he’s the boy’s lost father).  In the morning, they find the boy dead (invoking the father-son tragedy of Rostam and Sohrab) and carry him off to the sea, where they weigh him down with buckets of stones attached to an empty tin can that bobs out of water.  This is an eerie scene in which a countless number of tin cans bobbing in the water, suggesting markers for the thousands of prisoners who had perished while in captivity.  The scene ends with the old warden submitting the artist to pointless exertion, shouting repeatedly, “What color is the sea?  It’s blue.”

At the end of the film, Rahmat makes his way to a land without salt meadows; it is  full of trees and garden groves.  He’s let in the gates by a leery watchman while another picks fruit from the garden.  Rahmat sits in the middle of a room and takes out his full bottle of tears and waits.  An old man in a wheelchair is pushed into the room by the young bride who was sent out to the sea from the third island.  There’s a painting on the wall which depicts an island in a red sea.  Rahmat dutifully puts a tub under the frail feet of the old man in the wheelchair and carefully washes his feet with the tears from the bottle.  The old man, symbolic of Iran’s spiritual leader, has access to all that has been deemed taboo or sacrificed in the name of religion.  After the young bride pushes the old man in the wheelchair out of the room, Rahmat carefully pours the excess tears back into the bottle.  In the last scene, Rahmat pours the excess tears from the bottle into the sea, making the sea even saltier.

I’ve scratched the surface of ways to interpret the allegory presented in The White Meadows and would like to hear from others who have seen the film.  For me, watching the film was a powerful experience.  It is not surprising that both Mohammad Rasoulof and Jafar Panahi (the editor of the movie) were given six-year jail sentences in December, 2010, even though no anti-government sentiment is explicitly stated by any of the characters in the film.  Ironically, by accusing the filmmakers of making an anti-government film, the regime admits its own guilt.  

Barry Byrne’s review: //www.screendaily.com/5005967.article John Lichman’s review: //www.filmthreat.com/reviews/21760/

Share/Save/Bookmark

Recently by hamsade ghadimiCommentsDate
Start Your Own Organization
5
Nov 07, 2011
National Anthem
-
Feb 06, 2011
The Story of Charshanbeh Soori
1
Mar 15, 2010
more from hamsade ghadimi
 
vildemose

Thank you Hamsade jan. As

by vildemose on

Thank you Hamsade jan. As always enjoyed your insight.


hamsade ghadimi

vildemose,

by hamsade ghadimi on

vildemose, i think so.  you showed with your link that the film must've been shot inlake oorumieh.  the picture in your link looks just like a scene from the movie.  i don't know how those who made the film got around the censors.  did the gov't find out about the meaning of the movie after it was approved?  or they never approved it and it was snuck out.  one thing i'm sure: the film was never shown inside iran.


vildemose

Hamseda jan: Was this movie

by vildemose on


hamsade ghadimi

ردواین جان،

hamsade ghadimi


ردواین جان، خیلی‌ ممنون از لطفت که سری به بلاگ ناقابل ما زدی.  شرمنده‌ام که به کلا تمام ایمیل‌هایم را از حسابی‌ که برای ایرانیان دات کام باز کرده‌ام پاک کردم.  این حساب اصلی‌ من نیست و هر دو هفته یک بار تمام ایمیل‌هایم را در این حساب پاک می‌کنم.  معمولا جز ایمیل از خود ایرانیان دات کام، موًسسهٔ نیاک و کسان دیگر که ایمیل من را برای مکاتبات تجاری از ایرانیان دات کام میقاپن چیز دیگری نیست.  بدین ترتیب ایمیل جنابعالی هم اشتباها پاک شده.  لطف کنید و دوباره این ایمیل را برای من بفرستید.


Red Wine

...

by Red Wine on

همساده جان عزیز .

مدتی‌ بود که مطلبی از شما نمیخواندیم، (به خصوص که ما اصلا مطلبی که به فرنگی‌ نوشته شده را کفر و مکروه دانسته و تنها مطالب دوستان عزیز را میخوانیم.) لذت بردیم از این پانوشتی که در مورد این فیلم دادید.

فعلا که آنقدر گرفتار کار و علاف زمانه هستیم که در حسرت دیدن یک فیلم خوب !

چند وقت پیش یک عدد نامه به رعد پیک شما نوشته ایم که هنوز جواب نگرفته ایم،امیدواریم که آن نامه به دستتان رسیده باشد.

همیشه سالم و همیشه خوش دل‌ باشید.

ارادتمند..

شراب قرمز.

 


Esfand Aashena

I didn't say the Government does not perpetuate.

by Esfand Aashena on

I meant the fact that Government perpetuates was not addressed (cloaked) one way or another.  It just focused on the people.  Presumably this would happen under any Government.

I agree that the film's message was about how we're in shackles in Iran. 

Everything is sacred


hamsade ghadimi

admin, ari, esfand, cop

by hamsade ghadimi on

admin, i even tried esfand's suggestion (again!) by using notepad to break up the long paragraph (see my first comment) and couldn't break it up to four paragraphs.  can you help?

ari, after leaving the theatre which seemed to have about 250 viewers, there seemed to be an eerie silence.  there was no the usual chatter that follows a symbolic movie where everyone is comparing notes with his neighbor on the interpretation of the movie.  it seemed everyone understood.  we just need to have more reviews of iranian films by iranians.  the film reviews that i read were professional and described the artistic elements much better than i ever can.

esfand, i tried your remedy for the second time and it still didn't work! i strongly disagree that the government does not perpetuate these supersitions.  in fact, they've instutionalized these supersititions in iran.  the crazy scene where the rope is cut, to me, is simply the inner wish of people for mahdi to appear and once and for all get rid of velayat faghih who is torturing the people in his name.  the mullahs are scared shitless if mahdi appears (which they know he won't since he's a made up phenomenon and the basis of their power).  if khojasteh would've made it down and back up again, they would have known that there is no fairy at the bottom of the well and their pointless superstition of whispering their anguish into the jars was all bogus.

c.o.p., you missed a good one.  i will definitely want to see the next film.  my eyebrows will be intact.  i will also wear a black jacket so that, for sure, you won't miss me.


Cost-of-Progress

Hamsadeh jon, thanks

by Cost-of-Progress on

for the review.

I missed this weekend's movies as it was a rather busy one, but will start my film pilgrimage this coming weekend.

Meanwhile, please do not trim your eyebrows as I'd like to spot you while I'm there...(he he )

____________

IRAN FIRST

____________


Esfand Aashena

Hamsade jaan most abstract movies are like that.

by Esfand Aashena on

Many of the abstract Iranian movies that we see are made in a way to get passed the censors.  They tell their stories this way as "art" and the dumb censors in order not to be accused of not understanding art give them permission or in other cases just don't let them to be shown on screen and only in DVDs or outside Iran.

Offside 2006 by Panahi was one such movie which would have been an Oscar nominee (the international juries tried hard to get the film shown on screen for at least a week, the minimum requirement) but it didn't get screening permit in Iran.

Anyway this White Meadows film was a bit better than extra-abstract movies but it still had some crazy scenes like cutting the rope and sending the girl to the sea which of course happens in Iran but it also showed the people's superstitions and not how the Government makes those things legal and encourage them.

I thought it was Lake Oroomiyeh (Rezaiyeh) too but they also talked about "marshes" and I thought marshes were in the south, so I didn't understand that part.

One other thing about abstract movies is that what they lack in story line and off the wall assumptions, they make up for in cinematography and camera frames, angles, lightings, etc.  and this movie had some very nice scenes, shots.

As for your formatting I gave some recommendation in COP's Assateague blog, did you try it?  

Everything is sacred


Ari Siletz

Beautiful review!

by Ari Siletz on

 Many thanks HG. You say, 

"I think that much of the symbolism in the movie may have been lost by the non-Iranian movie critic."

This is very much the case with the best Iranian movies where anyone unfamilar with our language or culture may as well be trying to review a Hafez ghazal. Your interpretation of this poetic work is superb.

 


hamsade ghadimi

ali jan

by hamsade ghadimi on

ali jan, i tried for half an hour (using different tricks) to put breaks between the paragraphs and couldn't.  i asked admin for help (see below).  they featured it, hopefully they'll see my comment and fix it.  it'll take them a few seconds.  thanks for trying to read it. :)


Ali P.

Hamsadeh jaan

by Ali P. on

For those of us who were tricked by Devil and failed to be the masters of our domains in our youth, and as a result lost our eye sight, your article is too hard to read.

Fix it and we'll be all over it, and we'll even add comments.


hamsade ghadimi

Admin: help on the formatting

by hamsade ghadimi on

The long paragraph should be four separate paragraphs starting with 1) Prior to..., 2) On the first island,..., 3) The rituals in play..., and 4) On the fourth island, ...

thanks for the help