Tag Archives: movies

SnowPiercer- Reflection!

01 Monday Sep 2014

Posted by in Articles

≈ 3 Comments

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

SnowPiercer is a move with a great production reflecting on our current social dilemmas. It is a movie about social location, social inequality and social justice.

Today is Labour day that we recognize the importance of the labour movement in promoting social justice and equality. I think this movie offers us alternative possibilities to end the current social injustice and inequality.

We are all born into per-existing places in society based on our race, age, intellect, culture and ethnicity, class, sexuality and (dis) ability. The social locations of each individual are not decided by individuals but by structural systems established for centuries. The notion of social location is like the ‘cast system’. It is the subtle disguised version of the cast system. Remember! the cast system used to be an acceptable system in old empires such as Rome, Persia, and also it is currently, somewhat, practiced in India.

The movie, Snowpiercer, illustrates the destructive impact of social locations on people’s life very vividly. It also reveals the invisible long- lasting collaboration between the leaders of oppositions (shoes and heads). It shows how the leaders of oppositions plan and decide for citizens; when and how citizens should be treated, when and how the population needs to be reduced or increased and so forth.  The sad part is that the both leaders (shoes and heads) create and plan wars among citizens. The leaders of shoes and heads work for the maintenance of the social/ power structure and inequality. Their mission is to maintain the power!

Interestingly enough, as the leaders of shoes and heads are aged, they realize that to maintain the social (dis) order and inequality, they need to find a replacement who is committed to the money- making machine, who has greed for power and who maintains the statues quo. Who would they pass the torch onto?  Of course, a person  from the middle class is chosen; a person who has seen and experienced poverty and who has shown enough intellects to climb up the ladder of power.

The dialogue between the leader of heads and the new leader is the best part of the movie.  In that dialogue, the new leader discovers deceits, lies, and games of killing that lead to people’s suffering.

The new realizations give him courage and new set of responsibilities. He becomes the leader of a new movement.  A movement to end the normalized social locations/social inequality/social injustice. He has a dream! a vision and hope for people.  His new movement aims to flatten social hierarchies and all its associated practices. His actions and intentions are to bring back freedom, liberty and justice to people. How? There is no more choices left but to stop the train, the machine, and the social power structure. And that is how the new life is promised; a life in harmony with nature and other species…

I enjoyed the movie very much.  Like many, I yearn for the return of equality and social justice to people’s life.  Who knows maybe by 2031, we will have ended all man-made wars. Who knows maybe by 2031, we will have become more conscious of the impact of what we do to one another. Who knows maybe by 2031, we will have put a stop into any forms of social inequality, social hierarchy and social injustice!

Happy Labour Day!

Happy Possibilities!

Tahereh Barati

 

 

Reflection- Billy Elliot!

20 Sunday Jul 2014

Posted by in Articles, Reflection

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Billy Elliot is a great movie and a great story that got me thinking about the challenges we face when our purpose/ desire doesn’t fit with what the dominant culture of masculinity.  A talented young boy becomes torn between his unexpected love of dance, the cultural pressures,  and the disintegration of his family.

The movie takes place in County Durham, during the endless, violent 1984 strike against the Thatcher closure of British coal mines. Billy lives in a family where his mom passed away, his father and brother rules the household and his grandmother suffers from mental deterioration. Under these conditions, Billy sneaks to the girls- only- attended ballet class to learn dancing.  Only one schoolmate, closet-gay Michael, encourages Billy’s desire, aroused by the teacher, who judged him talented enough for private lesson, to train and try out for the world-renowned Royal Ballet audition. Billy through dancing frees himself and ignites his inner electricity in his own life and others’.

There are many scenes in the movie that brought emotions to audience. Moments such as when Billy re-reads, by heart, his mom’s letter; when Billy dances with anger against the social norm; when Billy’s father, who is emotionally distraught,  is torn between supporting the union or supporting his older son’s beliefs; when Billy’s father breaks the piano to warm up their house in winter; when Billy’s father cries out his loneliness at the Christmas night, and so on…

Watching the movie brought the following questions to mind:

  • What do we do to help our boys form their identity?
  • What struggles do our boys have in developing their destiny/identity today?
  • What are the current social stigmas against boys?
  • What challenges do we all face today while intentionally wanting to form our non-conformist identity?

Any ideas? Looking forward to hearing from your!

Happy possibilities,

Tahereh Barati

Reflection on Philomena!

04 Tuesday Mar 2014

Posted by in Articles, Reflection

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I saw Philomena the other day. Like you, I enjoyed the depth of emotions presented in the movie. Such a fresh great story. If you haven’t seen this movie, it is highly recommended!

As I was watching it,  many questions were developing in my mind. Questions like these: Why did she decide to forgive the church? What contributed to her ability to forgive? Did her personal religious beliefs make the forgiveness possible to her? Did her son’s political positions influence her decision to forgive? What made her have a strong determination not to be like those who practice ‘anger’?  Does she see forgiveness a response/solution to conflicts?…

As i was overwhelmed by these questions, the placement of the journalist – Martin Sixsmith- became more visible to me. He wasn’t an average Joe; he was a journalist, a so-called expert investigating a story about a lost child.  Martin’s particular position got my attention; he was actively participating in unpacking and unfolding the untold well-kept story.

Questions were pouring to my consciousness; for instance, what is his role in re- storing Philomena’s experience? He was invited to help with investigation but there was no explicit or implicit permission given to him to take on the job alone; as It was very clear throughout the movie.  How did he restrain himself not to go beyond what Philomena asked?  If he was given permission to take on the leading role in retelling the story, could he add his own views, attitudes towards Church in this story? Could he influence the process of storytelling? What stopped him from not intruding and re-authoring Philomena’s story for Philomena?

I was amazed and pleased with the way he was positioned in this movie. He followed ethics that have been overlooked in our professional world! What he did could be called as ‘relational ethics’ in storytelling.

The way we, helping professionals , conduct ourselves, regulate our emotions, and hold on to our beliefs is critical to how stories are narrated and re-told. We, as a witness to people’s stories, need to be mindful of our responsibilities to those who consult with us. We need to be reminded of not adding our own resentment, anger or assumptions to their stories. We need to constantly re-pace ourselves to be in sync with our clients, not oppress their voices and not re-write their experiences of hardship and trauma. We need to be cognizant of putting pieces of stories into its own contexts, time and place and not evaluate them according to our today’s standards. These actions are what i call as ‘relational ethics’.

I believe having ‘relational ethics’ allows us to prevent conflicts from reshaping our life. ‘Relational Ethics’ allows us to be able to develop close deep understanding of the past events. It supports stories to remain fresh, effective, alive and influential throughout the human history!

Happy Possibilities!

Tahereh Barati

Reflection on ‘Blood Pressure’!

04 Thursday Apr 2013

Posted by in Articles, Reflection

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

I went to a theater to see the movie, Blood Pressure, the other day. The theater was full. I don’t usually read the film reviews prior to seeing a movie; I read them after; just for comparing my thoughts with other interpretations …

It is an intriguing and beautifully filmed movie.  It is about a woman, named Nicole (played by Michelle Giroux), who lives with her husband (Mike), who has no time for vacation, and her two children who boss her around. Nicole receives letters from an anonymous person who encourages her to enjoy her life and taking care of herself.  This new relationship has some positive impact on Nicole. She gains confidence and becomes more participant in her home/ work life. Other people in Nicole’s life notice and get surprised by the positive change in her life.

As a result of the positive changes in her life, her husband (played by Judah Katz) becomes more interested in repairing their marital relationship and her children become more interested in learning and respecting more about their mother. The movie continues and takes you to a very unexpected pathway…

The movie got me thinking about the way ’empowerment’ is defined and portrayed in the movie and in our society; it seems violence and aggression are signs of ’empowerment’. It felt as if women need to become violent and aggressive to be known as a strong person.

There is a social discourse that ‘women are not strong unless they practice violence and aggression’. This makes me wonder why violence and aggression has been glorified in our society?  Why do you think ‘being strong’ is equivalent with the practice of violence or aggression in relationship with others?  Why is it that other forms of strengths are overlooked, unrecognized and deliberately denied in our society?

When we look at the history of humankind, there were many strong women who didn’t need to learn any methods of violence and aggression to be called and known as ‘strong women’.  Why is it that practice of violence and guns are promoted so greatly? Who do you think defines ‘strength’ and ’empowerment’ for men and women?

What would happen if our definitions of ‘strengths and empowerment’ for women and men change? Would our next generations become peacemakers/ negotiators or soldiers/ fighters? What would we want to see our sons and daughters doing in years to come?

It seems that ‘culture of guns and violence’ is promoted globally. We need to revise our definitions of ‘strengths, empowerment and power’ and step out of individualistic definitions of these concepts.

Happy Possibilities!

Tahereh Barati, M.A, RMFT