Authority, Class consciousness and Gender- Kiarostami’s cinemas of Resistance

- Aive

“I film normal-life subjects in natural settings that some people would consider uncinematic. But what I want to show is nature itself, as the truth of life.”

And what is cinema? For Kiarostami, it is portraying people in their natural habitat, dealing with their lives and trying their best to make it better with simplicity, without any extravaganza. Operating under the limitations of censorship and socio-political sensitivities, Kiarostami crafted a distinctive cinematic language that subtly addressed social issues, such as class inequality, patriarchal systems, institutional injustice, and cultural disconnection. His movies are frequently characterized as poetic rather than conventional stories, employing silent reflection and philosophical conversations to delve into the intricacies of human existence and the splendour of nature. Kiarostami excelled in nuanced observation, employing poetic techniques to delve into sensitive themes such as love, loss, war, and human dignity within the confines of the Iranian regime. His movies subtly questioned the cultural and political seclusion of the Islamic Republic. A key theme is the challenge of people living according to their own choices, a perspective frequently emphasized through his employment of non-professional actors in countryside, documentary-like environments.

Kiarostami’s Close-Up depicts Hossain Sabzian’s trial for impersonating filmmaker Mohsen Makhmalbaf, blurring the lines between documentary and fiction. It explores class inequality and the psychological impacts of social marginalization. Sabzian’s act illustrates societal disparities where cultural capital dictates one’s worth. Kiarostami’s portrayal critiques the structures that make such desperate performances both essential and tragic, highlighting the interplay of deception and social reality. Where Is the Friend’s House? serves as a parable on moral responsibility in the face of rigid authority. A young boy's quest to return a friend's notebook critiques the Iranian education system, emphasizing that genuine ethical action may necessitate defying unjust structures, a recurring theme in Kiarostami’s work. Compassion outweighs mere obedience. And Life Goes On, set after the 1990 Manjil–Rudbar earthquake, follows a filmmaker seeking child actors from Where Is the Friend’s House? in devastated villages. It highlights human resilience while critiquing rural neglect and structural disparities. Kiarostami contrasts outsider views with local survivors, emphasizing representation ethics and the media's limitations in reflecting lived experiences. Kiarostami's Ten features ten conversations within a car between a female driver and her primarily female passengers, highlighting Iranian women's constraints imposed by legal, familial, and religious systems. It addresses crucial issues like divorce, child custody, sexual repression, and domestic subjugation, significantly featuring female voices in an often-silenced society while maintaining an observational style. 

The Wind Will Carry Us (1999): Set in a secluded Kurdish village, this cinematic work chronicles the experiences of outsiders—be they filmmakers or journalists—who await the passing of an elderly woman to capture the essence of traditional mourning customs. What ensues is a reflection on cultural commodification, voyeuristic tendencies, and the disparities between urban and rural lifestyles. The central character, emblematic of the educated urban elite, experiences persistent vexation due to the lethargy and opacity inherent in village existence. Kiarostami deftly critiques the application of contemporary, extractive principles onto traditional communities, probing the notion of whether mere observation devoid of comprehension constitutes a form of violence.

Kiarostami's strength lies in his ability to address insidious social issues not with slogans, but through stories. His films do not preach or moralize. Instead, they observe, interrogate, and encourage empathy. In doing so, they ask us to recognize the invisible forces that shape lives: the forces of poverty, patriarchy, and societal negligence. Kiarostami's films are not heavy-handed; they do not often have clear villains or speeches. They offer moral settings, ethical dilemmas, and spaces for reflection. The social ills exposed in his films- inequality, patriarchy, invisibility, systemic violence- often act gently, through collective norms, through negligence, and through the slow loss of dignity. His films also insist that the personal is political, not through explicit activism, but through the fabric of daily life. The student facing a consequence, the rural woman managing her daily responsibilities, the mother working through divorce laws, and the "imposter" seeking validation; these are the places where broader social inequities are made visible.

In a nation where censorship requires finesse, Kiarostami created a cinema of defiance through empathy, ambiguity, and quietude. His movies serve as eternal reminders that the strongest critiques are frequently the subtlest.