As I am getting ready for my appointment with {Massoud Bakhshi}, I’m quite nervous and anxious. I’m not sure we’ll have enough to talk about and I’m not sure I have prepared enough. Alongside my anxiety there is a wonderful sense of excitement as I’m hoping that he will be able to answer all my questions, all my ‘whys’ about Tehran, this city which I love so dearly and yet which, manages to break my heart on a daily basis. I want him to have an answer to all my frustrations about all the unfulfilled potentials of this neurotic city.  I’m thinking that if he’s been able to so masterfully portray all the many quirks and contradictions of this city in Tehran has no More Pomegranates, then he must also have solutions and he must, must be able to answer me.  If he’s able to vocalize his criticisms so well without being condescending, then he must be able to answer my questions.  He portrays in this documentary, Tehran in all its bustling and exploding glory for a ‘Tehrani’ audience.  He dissects us and reveals all our different complex levels, and the many different levels of this predictably unpredictable city. This is done with the reoccurring face and words of Jaffar Agha; an almost stranger in his own country, who makes you heave with laughter and somehow manages to make you cry as well.

I met or rather saw Massoud for the first time during the Canadian premiere of his documentary Tehran has no More Pomegranates.  I was so mesmerized by the fact that there were only a few rows separating me from Tehran, that even if the director had been the most uncharismatic guy I would have loved him regardless; I would have been quite easily impressed by whoever had made it.  After the screening, Bakhshi was called up to the stage to talk a little about his documentary and answer some questions.  As he was walking up to the stage the first thing that caught my attention was the unruly mass of curly hair bobbing about, and he proved to be charismatic. Throughout this question and answer period, two traits shone through the most: his sense of humor, in much the same way it had for the 67 minutes of the documentary, and a surprisingly non-Iranian trait of being able to laugh at oneself.  At one point he joked that he may want to give up his current job to become a taxi-driver in Tehran solely for the purpose of having more human interactions.  The second time I saw him, well, then, I actually met him, was at another HotDocs event, a panel discussion with all the invited Iranian directors and a mediator/translator.  The discussion as a whole was quite disastrous as there were many problems with the translation and as everything with Iran goes the discussion was overshadowed by politics.  Bakhshi, again with his sense of humor and calmness, tried to save the discussion by steering it towards the right direction. I was waiting for him outside the theater at the end, hoping to get an appointment to talk to him while he was in the city.  I quickly told him about TehranAvenue which he was quite familiar with and got his email address. I met him again during a small screening of Tehran has no More Pomegranates in Tehran, during which, in his same hassle-free manner he tactfully answered the many questions his viewers had for him.

On the day of my appointment, I was greeted in that same relaxed and hassle-free manner as before.  The electricity being cut off at the exact time that we were starting helped in alleviating my sense of anxiety and made for quite an intriguing discussion:

TehranAvenue (Shirin Haghgou): Let’s start with some personal information, age, education, whether you’re a born and bred ‘Tehrani’ or not?

Masoud Bakhshi (MB): I’m a born and bred Tehrani. I’m 36 years old.  Alongside taking photography and cinema classes, I got my bachelor degree in Agricultural Engineering. Later I spent a period in Rome studying cinema in the New School for Cinema and Television….

TA: I know you’ve said many times, that you made Tehran has no More Pomegranates for a ‘Tehrani’ audience, but did you ever think it would be able to attract such an international audience?

MB: Film is an art, which has to attract people. It shouldn’t act as a personal form of expression; I mean it can act solely on that level, but it’s only with an audience that it can truly have meaning. For me one of the main attractions of ‘cinema’ is being able to watch it in a full auditorium alongside others.  So obviously, I did think that it would attract a wider audience, that’s one of the main reasons I decided to shoot it in 35mm… to be able to showcase it in a theater. The meaning of a movie can only come to life with an audience.

TA: I know that I am overly sensitive about Iran and more specifically Tehran. I was sitting in between two non-Iranian women the first time I watched this documentary…most of the time they were laughing at the same things we (Iranians) were. But at times, I felt like their laughs weren’t in good humor but more condescending and patronizing. For example, the part where you say “Tehran is a clean and modern city…” and the backdrop to this narration is over-flowing sewage in the streets.  Does it bother you that this may be the only image some people may have of Tehran?

MB: When I make my movies, I don’t really think about this.  It’s the overall aspect of it which is important…the details all work themselves out...  So, if you mean that I make a movie keeping in mind whether Iranians or others will like it or not…then that’s not the case.  This goes back to your previous question, it’s the collective aspect of it all which primarily has to be correct, people’s preferences are not my main concern.  Never.  It has to be correct from an artistic perspective, this is the important issue. First of all it has to satisfy me as an artist and then, my audience. It’s interesting that you said some people laughed in this way,  I also got a lot of positive feedback from people… because they didn’t think that Tehran would be as modern as this, or that it had this modern ways of commuting or many of the other positive aspects which we see in Tehran has no More Pomegranates.  Either way I have a sharp and critical perspective in this documentary, and it shows certain levels of the city and the society which may not even be pleasant for us as Iranians to see, let alone a foreigner.  The approach which I took was to make a social documentary and this type of documentary, there has to be a critical perspective, so it had to reveal on different levels.   The winner at this year’s HotDocs in which I was one of the jurors, was a documentary titled ‘Junior’, which took a look at the behind the scenes of National League Hockey in Quebec.  It showed what a harsh, money and power orientated business it really is. Now, many Canadians or Quebecois may not have liked it because they felt like Quebec had much more to offer than this, that there are many more positive and beautiful aspects to it.  But that’s not the point…you can’t criticize a movie because of this. The goal of such documentaries are different, it’s portraying something different.

TA: You show your views about Tehran through your documentary and you point out the problems.  I think that over fifty-percent of the problems of this city are its inhabitants.  Why do you think we’ve become this way? Why are people so indifferent to some things, why is garbage such an issue, why don’t we abide by some of the rules? Why is it that when you tell your neighbor not to waste water by washing the street, their response is ‘I have money, I’ll pay for it?”  Why? Do you think people were like this before, and if they were not, why have they become so?

MB: This phenomenon which is city dwelling and urbanism…is a sub-category of modernism, or a modern culture.  But what has happened in Tehran is modernization not modernity. There’s never been a modern way of thought and its repercussions are what you see in different corners of my movie.  What a city-dweller and the city itself are comprised of today, is incorrect. There is a contradiction here, because the concept of a city and a city-dweller, before it was established as an outcome of modernity, existed in a traditional form in our culture. We had cities like Shiraz, Isfahan…and even before Christianity, we had Persepolis which was in and by itself a perfect model.  But the city, in a modern sense is something that came about after the Renaissance period, and after the industrial revolution, where this concept started to benefit its inhabitants…that is the period where we encountered contradictions….Because, modernization occurred instead of modernity. And we don’t understand the basis of that change.  By not fully understanding a ‘modern’ culture, we become consumers; exclusive consumers of products made elsewhere; made by those whose way of thought is completely different from us and have a different goal.  We see the repercussions of this misunderstanding in all different corners of our city and in all its citizens. From its architecture where it’s impossible to find two houses that look the same, to its psychotic traffic, to the behaviors of our citizens towards each other where sometimes there is so much unnecessary love and affection  and sometimes they want to kill  with knives…there is no logic.  This is extended to other issues such as air quality, water and sewage, public transport, etc… These are all some small examples of the misconception that we have of modernity.  We can talk for hours about the issue of modernity in Tehran, but our main problem can be summed up in a specific way of thought, where we’re telling the past ‘no, we don’t want you anymore’ and we’re telling the future ‘it’s too early to get to you’.  We’re stuck in this limbo.

TA: Last night I was reading an interview that you had done while you were in Toronto titled “Still in Motion”. There were certain parts of it that were very interesting for me.  In one part you had said that all these changes and expansions, “It’s a destruction of memory. That’s a horrible thing…”  It’s inevitable that things, places and people have to change.  And we can definitely say that Tehran and its people have. The city’s expanded, architecture, and its people have changed alongside that. But this doesn’t necessarily mean that we’ve moved forward, that these changes have brought about improvement. So in a way this ‘destruction of memory’ is inevitable, whether change is for the better or worse, right?  There’s no way to stop this?

MB: The issue here is to keep the best things from the past and from our traditions, and then enter into the ‘modern’.  I think one of the few places that can be used, as a good example is Japan.  Japan has been able to cultivate the best things from its history and pass it on through generations and yet its one of the most modern countries in the world, the most modern in terms of its technology, and without a doubt the strongest country in Asia. Without any hold backs they’ve kept many of their traditions throughout history and then became modern. Of course Japan, compared to Iran, had many advantages in its history, as it had never been exploited. Whereas Iran has been in a location that has been under the constant suppression of powerful western nations in order to exploit its resources (although the level of suppression can not be compared to that of countries like India and northern Africa). Regardless…these suppressions have had their effects. And there’s the fact that Iran was a crossroad for East and West in the Silk Road. As a result, Iran has always had many different cultures flowing into it, and in a way influencing it.  This is one important point. The second important point is that, Iran has had around 3,000 documented wars in its history, which I think is a unique trait, as it has affected the Iranian mentality to be inspired by it, either with fright or the happy thought of conquering or dreaming about peace. The truth is the unprecedented speed with which Western culture has and is continuing to enter ours; this is where that destruction happens.  It erases everything we have, and imposes itself on us.  A vivid and recent example is what happened in Brazil a couple of weeks ago, while we were there.  A village was found in an untouched and undiscovered location.  It had not yet come in contact with our modern world of today. They still lived in tribes and hunted with spears.  When they’re brought to the big and modern city, and when they come in contact with the reality of today, not only are they faced with a change, but also I think rather with a cultural crisis. After living a lifetime with the most basic tools and primitive conditions, they are faced with the most modern our world has to offer today, and they have no choice but to adapt to this way of life.  Something like this has happened to us, not just us as Iranians, but countries in South America, Africa and Asia, and it’s continuing.  The only way we can stop this ongoing destruction of memory is if people are able to learn about themselves and find themselves, especially in younger generations.  If they are not able to find themselves…to find their past, to educate themselves about their history…then this destruction will in fact be inevitable.  I mean, something else does come out of an uneducated encounter with modernity…and that is change, but exactly as you said in your question, it’s not necessarily better. Coming back here after ten years, you’ll see changes, but that doesn’t mean that things have become better, they’ve just changed. It’s new, but does new always mean better?

TA: In another section in that same interview you’ve mentioned that while you were in Italy, when people asked you about the main differences between Iranian and Italian life, you replied by “…in Iran, we are usually thinking about deeper problems about life and there, they’re thinking about buying a new car and where they will go on vacation.”  It’s interesting, because I feel that every year when I come back, and I socialize with people of my own age, within a certain level of society where they don’t have any financial issues and they have whatever they need, people are becoming more and more shallow and superficial as the years go by. In my opinion, my generation of Tehranis think more and put more emphasis on what car to buy or where to go on vacation.  I feel like there is a dividing line in Tehran, where mentalities, worries and needs change.  Do you think this is the way it’s always been, or this is how we’ve become?

MB: This is very much related to your other question; Becoming superficial in the course of keeping up with the times. Let’s substitute ‘keeping up with the times’ for modernization; meaning…we’re reaping the fruits of, or the results of modernity without really understanding it, without a modern way of thought. This is what causes people to become superficial.  As in, accepting a mechanical, fast and easy way of life. What separates us as humans from animals is our ability to think, but the superficiality which comes with the incorrect understanding of modernity has reached a point where we even seek to find meaning in packaged goods. 

What has occurred in the 20th century is ‘death of the novel’;  first novels turned into short stories, which then turned into minimalist essays…unable to connect to the reader the same way a novel could.  After the Renaissance period, the novel was a replacement for religion in terms of connecting people to the spiritual world.  In our period the novel dies as everything turns into packaged goods; easily understood and digested, like fast food; our mentality turns into a similar concept.  That’s why it’s said that a modern world is one of reductions.  And naturally this occurs on a much larger scale here, because over their, they adhere to reductionism with the experience of modernity. They’ve had philosophical giants like Nietzsche, Freud and Marx, explain modernity to them as a way of life…they fully understand it. Here, however our concept of modernity is only in acting as consumers of products which have been made by those with a modern ideology; we solely consume it without understanding this concept. There is a certain feeling of disorientation for the citizen of a city trying to become westernized.  When you ask why and how the inevitable can become evitable…in my opinion there is only one way.  Let’s consider a certain way of thought as a new garment of clothing…we insist on wearing it even though it does not suit us and goes against our instincts. Let’s consider it first, or at least not throw out our old clothing, let’s keep it and for certain occasions let’s wear it.  To live in between the two…in-between our old world and our new one, that’s the only way.

TA: Okay, so this kind of leads me to my next question.  In Tehran has no More Pomegranates you point to many of the problems which this city has. Problems which every single ‘Tehrani’ realizes. But what are your solutions? Are you saying the only solution is to not fully immerse ourselves in this misunderstood version of modernity?

MB: Exactly. There is no way but this.  The documentary itself is quite bitter and dark, as it ends with an earthquake. But maybe that earthquake isn’t an actual physical one, but instead an earthquake in our minds and in our way of thought. I think all works of art, have to leave your mind open to interpretation, they have to enable you to choose what you think is correct…it shouldn’t dictate. There can be as many different interpretations of one film, as the number of people sitting in a movie theater, and each and every one of them creates a different world between him or herself and that movie.  A world that you saw was most definitely different from the world that others saw.

TA: There’s something that you’ve mentioned here and you also talked about at one of the screening of Tehran has no More Pomegranates in Tehran.  You said that before the revolution, modernity was being enforced on people by the government, and that didn’t work and people rose up against that force. But now…

MB: Now, I think that if there was that resistance against modernization, it wouldn’t work.  It’s only in complete freedom which that resistance can be effective. You need to have your own personal example in your head, or have full liberty in choosing amongst the existing examples of how to live.  You can’t be forced… I mean, obviously you can be forced, but your mind should still know what is best for you.  And that’s why before, with the culture that they had from their past, people were able to say no to that force, and its result was the Islamic Revolution of 1979.  And now, no one can force you think in a certain way.  Iranian people have showed, throughout history that they have intrapersonal freedom…freedom in a spiritual way.  Many people don’t know this in the West, but the relationship that Iranians have with God goes much further back than the birth of Islam.  3000-5000 years before Islam there was the Zoroastrian way of thought, an in fact monotheistic religion a main point of commonality with Islam. This…the liberty of having choices and being able to choose, this is the essence, and finding it is the solution to the complexity and contradictions of today.  To be able to find that essence which we once had and have now lost….

TA: Then, do you think that, before the revolution, it was an internal force imposing modernity, but now it’s global, it’s….

MB: Exactly. It’s globalization itself.  There’s the issue of language.  Europe has established the European Union, but its emphasis on language is very strong in order to maintain each nations’ individuality. After the modern era, as Lichtenstein says, “all identity is language”….our individuality and identity are in language, and the task is to maintain that.  In China for example, over the past decade something close to 200 new words and terms have entered the language, words that a grandfather won’t understand if they’re spoken to him. In Tehran, there are words on the street, like ‘khafan’, you can’t find the meaning of these words in any book…they’re created by the youth. And these new additions…regardless of whether they’re good or bad…enforce a language to change.  But when a language is strong, it can maintain itself.

In my opinion there are two identities…a global identity (using the same tools and gadgets, wearing the same clothes as everyone else in the world)…and a personal identity.  In this personal form of it, our mentalities are different, and that is what has to be maintained…these differences. A mentality which determines our path in life and our preferences.  If this is lost, then the disaster of globalization will fully occur.  But if it’s maintained….why shouldn’t it be? Why should all that exists in some parts of the world, only be exported in the form of bombs and tanks? Why shouldn’t that wealth reach Somalia for example, in a different form? I mean, all this tension which exists between the East and West…it can be abolished; if and only if that essence is in the hands of those who are cultured.

TA: Okay, so let’s talk a little about the local screenings of Tehran has no More Pomegranates. I was under the impression that it didn’t have permission to be screened…

MB: Where you saw Tehran has no More Pomegranates in Tehran, was a small screening, and it has had a couple of those. But, if you’re talking about it being distributed and screened at theatres, it hasn’t been…

TA: As in, it’s not allowed to be or…

MB: Mainly yes. But we’re trying on getting it on the big screen on a larger scale. I think that at the beginning, ‘Tehran has no More…’, seems quite controversial, but once it’s viewed by a larger audience and the connection which they are able to make with it is seen, I think that then the situation will change.

TA: A question which I’m not sure there’s an answer to.  As an Iranian director, how does it make you feel when on an international level, everything you make, regardless of what it’s about, gets overshadowed by politics? I was thinking today, why does it happen so much to Iranians, since clearly there are many other nations whose citizens are unhappy with their government, or have other sorts of political issues. Why doesn’t an American director’s work get overshadowed by the incorrect policies of his or her president?

MB: It’s mainly because of our geographical location.  The area which Iran is located in, the Middle East is a very controversial area. And it’s not just now, it has always been throughout history…as I mentioned before, its location in the Silk-Road, and in the 20^th century its natural resources such as oil, and in much more recent times, these political issues which are occurring.  They all come together and like a cloud overshadow all the things which comprise our lives. They say even the air we breathe smells like politics.

TA: I think these are all the questions I had in mind to ask you….

MB: What else did you think about that interview with Ms. Cohen?

TA: I really enjoyed it. The things you said felt close to my heart. Her comments were also quite interesting, and her opinion of her own country’s (USA) policies….

MB: Yes, her comments were quite intriguing…

TA: In another part of that interview you had said, “History is so cruel”. I don’t know how to put it…there are some things that you never want to change, you want them to stay the same forever…but it’s not possible.  I don’t know…I guess it goes back to that ‘destruction of memory’ comment….