Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol.

17 (2): (23-37)

Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its Postmodern

Reflections

Mohammad Jafar Yousefian Kenari 1, Mostafa Mokhtabad 2

Received: 10/5/2009 Accepted: 18/4/2010

Abstract:
Kiarostami’s unfinished cinema emphasizes the importance of audiences’ involvement
in a movie by using postmodern images. Some essential points of critically reading his,
so-called half-created cinema, could be summarized as self-reflexive style,
diagrammatical perspectives, in-between narratives,and Individual minimalism. The
main postmodern achievement of this cinema is focusing on the process of creating
meaning through the experience of film. Furthermore, the close-ups function as
separate independent units that are constantly generating their implicit affections. In
this respect, Kiarostami’s unusual works are interpretable by Deleuze’ some
neologism like affection-image. The films are some affective micro-dramas formed in a
gap between the audiences’ receptions and the close-ups. Despite their postmodern
reflections, unfinished movies have no strict disciplines that may limit the process of
creating meaning. This paper attempts to present a new approach of reading
Kiarostami as an increasing global interest.

Keywords: Kiarostami, Unfinished Cinema, Postmodernism, Critical Reading

1. PhD Candidate of Dramatic Art Studies, Faculty of Arts, Tarbiat Modares University, Iran, Tehran.
2. Corresponding Author is Associate Professor of Faculty of Arts, Tarbiat Modares University, Iran, Tehran.
Email: [email protected]

23
Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its … Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

Introduction dramatic minimalism are among the most

Iranian cinema, after 1979 revolution, has found remarkable parameters.
a good chance to express itself in a global Employing a descriptive methodology, we
discourse by making use of its national factors. will then analyze Kiarostami’s recent films such
Abbas Kiarostami has played a great role in this as Ten (2002) and Shirin (2007) by using
expression during the period. His simple Deleuze’s postmodern reading of the close-ups.
realistic films attracted viewers and provided an We will explore a kind of Deluzian affection-
opportunity for Iranian cinema to show itself as image in his latest works. The research will be
the most significant art in the coming decades. concluded after depicting new horizons of
Unfinished Cinema, a project that Kiarostami’s unfinished cinema and
Kiarostami setup as an approaching vision of highlighting the audiences’ challenge to get a
cinema, is still in its primary stages. This study unique place inside the project.
attempts to present a different outlook to the
project by describing its particularity and Historical Considerations
studying its typical elements. Appling Any historical approach to Iranian cinema,
postmodern strategies, this type of cinema limited to its socio-political backgrounds,
focuses on a progressive role of filmgoers’ ignores the role of films in making or changing
participation in the process of re-producing the history.1979 was a historical point for Iranian
final purpose of a movie. The research begins culture to go beyond the geo-political
its enquiry with some historical considerations boundaries and find a global response. The new
respecting the role of Iranian new wave and the wave that started in the late 1960s, as a counter
place of Kiarostami in the world cinema. movement to Persian mainstream called Film-e-
Exploring the influential aspect of film, as a Farsi, revitalized itself after the revolution. The
cultural medium involved in the socio-political historical moment was not simply a political but
changes of Iran, provides a basic background to a cultural at the same time. Iranian movies
discuss on the concept of unfinished cinema. reflected political images of current history.
Studying the area leads us to reach the factors, The pioneer filmmakers shared many common
which recalls postmodern backgrounds of techniques including the use of poetic dialogue
western literature and arts; puzzle-like and allegorical storytelling dealing with
narratives, self-reflexive style, diagrammatical political and philosophical issues. Despite all
perspective of visual sphere and finally, instabilities, the movies restored cultural
effects. In his article about Iranian new wave,

24
Yousefian Kenari M. J., Mokhtabad M. Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

David Bordwell focused on this face of making Iran by ‘Where is the Friend’s Home?’ The
history by movies not politics: “budgets are film was a first of series which completed
bare-bones by Western standards, and by using through the next decade including ‘And Life
nonfactor and locations, filmmakers have Goes on’ (1992) and‘Through the Olive
presented post-shah Iranian culture to a world Trees’(1994),called in the West as the ‘Koker
1
that knew little of it” (Bordwell,2008,p.161). Trilogy’ because all three films feature the
Underlining the importance of cultural movies, village of Koker in north of Iran. Kiarostami,
Godfrey Cheshire also believes Iranian cinema however, resists the designation, noting that the
deserved to be considered respectfully against films put together only by the accident of place.
Hollywood authority: He has suggested it might be more appropriate
“For Americans who want to look beyond to consider as a trilogy the latter two titles
the reductive image of Iran presented by the US and‘Taste of Cherry’(1997), since these, he
media, Iran's cinema offers an alternative that says, connected by a theme: the preciousness of
is fascinating, even astonishing, for its artistic life3(Kiarostami, 2006). A worldwide reading of
sophistication and passionate humanism. At a Kiarostami’s artworks established since then.
time when Hollywood has put many national Most intellectual circles noticed him as a
cinemas virtually out of business, and unique cultural measure of approaching Iran at
Hollywood itself is dominated by flashy, special the turn of the century. His simple images of
effects-laden fantasies, Iran's filmmakers experiencing life in itself and new interpretation
continue to impress world audiences with their of reality led critics to the postmodern
distinctive formal ingenuity and dedication to reflections of Iranian movies. For instance,
real-life people and Cheshire believes “in Kiarostami's universe, it
2
problems.” (Cheshire,2008) might be said; there are No-things, only
Abbas Kiarostami, today acclaimed as an relations between things. Likewise, in his
international filmmaker, is indeed a post cinema: No films, only relations between films-
revolution effect of Iranian cinema. In 1987,
Kiarostami began to gain recognition outside

1. David Bordwell, “The Art Cinema as a Mode of Film 3. Abbas Kiarostami, “ on Taste of Cherry”,Interview by
Practice”, in ‘Poetics of Cinema’, (New York: Routledge, Jamsheed Akrami,and also in Godfrey Cheshire, The
2008), 161. Criterion Collection: Taste of Cherry by Abbas
2. Godfrey Cheshire, “ The Iranian Cinema”, Beyond the Kiarostami,
Veil, Firouzan Film, 2008 Error! Main Document Only. http://www.criterion.com/asp/release.asp/feature/2007/02/
(accessed Sep 22,2008) 23 (accessed July 2006)

25
Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its … Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

- and within them; and between them and artifice but also compelled to bear witness to
us”1(Cheshire,2008). the lives of ordinary people. Who in the West
Compared to some intercontinental have predicated that a great cinema, at once
filmmakers such as Satiajit Ray, Vittorio de humanist and formalist, would have come from
Sica, Eric Rohmer and Jacques Tati, he often Iran?”4(Bordwell,2008,p.162)
employs techniques of his own invention the Acclaimed directors such as Martin Scorsese
so-called Kiarostami’s style2 have commented, "Kiarostami represents the
(Kiarostami,2002).In 2006, The Guardian's highest level of artistry in the
5
panel of critics also ranked Kiarostami as the cinema." (Jeffrie,2005) However, his best
best non- American film director.3 Bordwell praise delivered by Jean-Luc Godard who said
thought that his cinema was a remarkable that Film began with D.W. Griffith and ended
instance.Its low budget film industry, neorealist with Kiarostami.6(Boni,2008)
themes and characters as well as its natural
extreme long shots at the background of Unfinished Project of Cinema
ordinary life made Iran as a central point of Unfinished project of modern cinema is the first
intellectual studies: Kiarostami’s official reaction against author–
“Kiarostami himself - superb screenwriter, based approaches that considered a huge gap
director of exemplary documentaries and between the filmmaker and the audience. After
fiction films, and experimenter with portable two decades of filmmaking as well as
video and Warholian recording (Ten, 2002; experiencing different styles, he reached
Five Dedicated to Ozu, 2003) – stands as an particular functions of filmgoers’ relation to
emblem of a culture in love with cinematic film, in absence of filmmaker. His personal
perception is strongly associated with the
1. Godfrey Cheshire, “Taste of Cherry”, The Creterion
Collection, Firouzan Film 2008,
http://firouzanfilm.com/articles &essays/taste of
cherry/godfrey cheshire.html (accessed Sep 22,2008) 4. David Bordwell, Poetics of Cinema, p. 162
2. "Abbas Kiarostami: Biography". Zeitgeist, the spirit of 5. Stuart Jeffrie (Jeffries 2005)s, "Abbas Kiarostami - Not
the time, A Martyr", The Guardian,
http://www.zeitgeistfilm.com/directors/akiarostami http://www.countercurrent.org/arts-jefferies250405.htm
(accessed Feb 23,2002) (accessed April 26,2005)
3. Panel of critics, "The world's 40 best directors", The 6. Francesco Boni, “Biography for Abbas Kiarostami”,
Guardian, IMDB Mini Biography,
http://www.film.gaurdian.co.uk/features/page/0,11425,108 http://www.imdb.com/AbbasKiarostami/biography.htm
2823,00htm. (accessed Feb 25,2006) (accessed Sep15,2008)

26
Yousefian Kenari M. J., Mokhtabad M. Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

“reader-response theory”1( Guerin,2005,pp.35- world through the wealth of their own

361)of modern literature and the “Unfinished experiences. As a filmmaker, he relies on this
2
project of Modernity,” philosophically. (Best creative intervention for, otherwise, the film
and Kellner,1991,p.234). It must be said that and the audience will die together. Well-made
Kiarostami’s reading is, of course, an intuitive stories, he stated, have one major defect:
judgment rather than considering the facts or “They work too well to allow the audience
presuppositions.“Unfinished cinema” or “half- to intervene. It is a fact that films without a
created cinema” is indeed his first practical story are not very popular with audiences, yet a
attempt to depict ambiguous limits of a post- story also requires gaps, empty spaces like in a
modern way of watching and reading the crossword puzzle, voids that it is up to the
images. The audience is considered as a focal audience to fill in; or, like a private detective in
point of this uncompleted cinema. It is the main a thriller to discover. I believe in a type of
factor of constructing narrative sequences and cinema that gives greater possibilities and time
discovering its own closed or open endings. to its audience; a half-created cinema, an
The designation, unfinished cinema, was unfinished cinema that attains completion
first claimed at Paris Odeon Theatre in through the creative spirit of the audience, so
Kiarostami’s text for centenary of cinema on resulting in hundreds of films. It belongs to the
December 1995. He hoped to achieve a new members of that audience and corresponds to
cinematic vision by which the directors would their own world. The world of each work, of
be reflected through the mirror of audiences’ each film recounts a new truth. In the darkened
interventions.3(Kiarostami,2008).It means when theatre, we give everyone the chance to dream
we reveal a film’s imaginary world to the and to express his dream
4
audience, they each try to create their own freely.” (Kiarostami,1995)
th Some essential characteristics of this type of
1. Wilfred I. Guerin…, 5 ed, A Handbook of Critical
Approaches to Literature (Oxford, 2005), 10:[350-361]. cinema are therefore as follows:
2. Steven Best and Douglas Kellner, “Postmodern Self-reflexive style) Unfinished film is an
Theory; Critical Interrogations,” (London, The McMillan art form reflecting its preceding images
Press, 1991) 7:234.
dialectically. Stephen Bransford contends that
3. Abbas Kiarostami, ‘An Unfinished Cinema’, Text
Written for the Centenary of Cinema, distributed at Odon Kiarostami's films do not contain references to
Theatre,paris,1995;also could be found in New Yorkers the work of other directors, but do include a
film official selection, May 2008. myriad of references to his own work.
http://newyorkersfilm.com/wind_pk.pdf (accessed May
26,2008) 4. Abbas Kiarostami, ‘An Unfinished Cinema’,1995.

27
Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its … Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

Bransford believes his films are often fashioned In-between narratives)The work of these
into an ongoing dialectic: one film reflecting on films is found in an ambiguity, an 'in-
and partially demystifying an earlier betweeness' that avoids superficial endings and
film.1(Bransford, 2003) Dialectical modes of calls upon the viewer to consider what he or she
his style seem to be a result of conceptualizing is seeing – a cinema of idea that stimulates and,
the nature within an eternal cycle of reflecting indeed, demands thoughts rather than directly
the life on the death and vice versa. expressing it.4(Martin, 2008) Unfinished film is
Kiarostami's images are hence entirely in fact the product of juxtaposing sub-narratives
suspended between fiction and real life, that call audience to participate in the process of
opening film to new formal creating multiple meaning. Jamsheed Akrami
horizons.2(Perez,2005) explains the notion of Kiarostami's films as
Diagrammatical perspectives)The visual remaining 'half-finished', the viewer being
sphere of this type of cinema is regularly called upon to finish the film in his or her mind,
associated with geometric forms. The critic, to answer the questions that it poses with the
Adrian Martin, underlines Kiarostami's direct result that each film is a different film for each
perception of the world, identifying his cinema different viewer.5(Akrami,2008)
as being "diagrammatical". Literal "diagrams" Individual minimalism)This type of
inscribed in the landscape, such as the famous cinema often employs minimal effects of
zigzagging pathway in the Koker Trilogy, sounds and images. In recent years, Kiarostami
indicates“geometry of forces of life and of the has increasingly trimmed down the size of his
world.” For Martin, these forces are neither films that reduces the film making experience
complete order, nor complete chaos but rather from a collective endeavor to a purer, more
3
what lies between these poles. (Le Cain,2003) basic form of artistic

1. Stephen Bransford, "Days in the Country:

Representations of Rural Space ...", Sense of Cinema, Living’, by Pat Collins and Fergus Dally,filmIrland,2003,
http://www.sensesofcinema.com http://filmirland.com /reviews/08/28/fdoc.html (accessed
/contents/03/29/kiarostami_rural_space_and_place.html Aug 28,2008)
(accessed Mar 29,2003) (Fergus 2003) (Kiarostami 1995) 4. Adrian Martin, “kiarostami: the Art of Living”,
2. Gilberto Perez, “where is the Director?”, Sight &Sound, reviewed by Maximillian Le Cain, 2008.
May 5,2005 5. Jamsheed Akrami, "Cooling Down a 'Hot Medium'",
http://www.bfi.org.uk/sightandsound/issue/2005/05/05 Iran Heritage Foundation, (Next page)…
3. Maximillian Le Cain, “Kiarostami: The Art of Living,” …http://iranharitage.com/kiarostamiconference/abstracts_
review of documentary film ‘Kiarostami:the Art of full.html (accessed Sep 22,2008)

28
Yousefian Kenari M. J., Mokhtabad M. Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

expression.1(Akrami,2003) Kiarostami himself supposed to be aimed to the audience, he or she

quoted in relation to his individual style of often aims to find simply traditional surface
minimalism: meaning inside the film.
“My films have been progressing towards a
certain kind of minimalism, even though it was Postmodern Reflections
never intended. Elements, which can be Unfinished cinema is a project being created
eliminated, have been eliminated. Somebody constantly. Although Kiarostami is inclined to
who referred to the paintings of Rembrandt and direct experience of objectivity in time and
his use of light pointed this out to me: some space, like Bazin’s perception of
elements are highlighted while others are reality3(Bazin,1972), but his audience is a
obscured or even pushed back into the dark. creator, not a created. Expressing non-located
Moreover, it's something that we do - we bring face of the meaning, this type of cinema shows
out elements that we want to emphasize. I'm not postmodern reflections. The most important of
claiming or denying that I have done such a these reflections could be reviewed in the
thing but I do believe in [Robert] Bresson's audiences’ role during the visual experience of
method of creation through omission, not films. A film of this type is not actually
through addition.”2(Nancy,1999,p.82) produced by the filmmaker, but by the
Considerable disapproval may yet enter this audience. Cinematic time and space of each
cinematic approach. In spite of desire to natural film strongly depends on viewers’ position and
evolution, unfinished cinema is a particular type their historical moment of watching it. They are
which adapting itself to hardly key elements of the spectators, who re-create the defined yet
postmodernism. It is obvious that Kiarostami’s unfinished sphere and show resistance to any
practical method of reading the world through definite conclusion. The most important
the movies needs to be first improved more postmodern achievement of this cinema is
theoretically by him before experimentally by focusing on the process of creating meaning
the audience. The audience has in fact an ironic through the experience of film. Entering into
role in this type of cinema. While any thing is the imaginary world, the audiences change the

1. Jamsheed Akrami, ‘Kiarostami: The Art of Living’,

film by Collins and Fergus,2003 3. Andre Bazin (Bazin 1967 &1972), ‘What is Cinema?’,
2. Jean-Luc (Nancy 1999) (Guerin 2005) Nancy, "On selected and trans. Hugh Gray, 2 vols., (Berkeley, Los
Evidence: Life and Nothing More, by Abbas Kiarostami", Angeles and London: University of California Press, 1967
Discourse21.1 (1999), p.82. &1972).

29
Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its … Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

conditions of interpretation and greatly expression is resistant to critical

influence common practice of reading a movie. analysis.2(Saeed-Vafa and
In a sense, an unfinished movie is needless Rosenbaum,2003,pp.13-14).
of critics or theoreticians, but always committed Kiarostami and Deleuze) Our postmodern
to an interactive dialogue between the audience reading of Kiarostami’s works are deeply
and the artwork, with or without any critic or inspired by Gilles Deleuz’s thesis on movement
even the filmmaker. That is why Kiarostami’s and his second commentary on Bergson in
films are sometimes difficult to grasp. Some ‘Cinema1’.3 Re-reading Bergson’s Matter and
critics like Jonathan Rosenbaum tried to Memory (1911), He argued that we find
explain the issue saying, "there’s no getting ourselves, in our cinematic perception mode,
around the fact that the movies of Abbas faced with the exposition of a world where
Kiarostami divide audiences—in this country, image is equal to movement. The sets of what
in his native Iran, and everywhere else they're appears, he called, cinematic image. We cannot
shown."1(Rosenbaum,2006). Rosenbaum argues say that one image acts on other or reacts to
that disagreements and controversy over another. There is nothing moved which is
Kiarostami's movies have arisen from his style distinct from executed or received movement.
of filmmaking because what in Hollywood Every thing, that is to say every image is
would count as essential narrative information indistinguishable from its actions and reactions;
is frequently missing from his films. Camera this is universal variation. Every image is
placement, likewise, often defies standard merely a road by which pass, in every direction,
audience expectations. In the closing sequences the modifications disseminated throughout the
of Life and Nothing More (1992) and Through immensity of the universe. Every cinematic
the Olive Trees (1994), the audience is forced to image acts on others and reacts to others, on all
imagine missing scenes. In Homework (1989) their facets at once and by all their elements.4
and Close-Up (1990), parts of the sound track In his surprising micro-analysis of
have been masked, or drop in and out. In fact, postmodern subject, Deleuze employs a
the subtlety of Kiarostami's form of cinematic
2. Mehrnaz Saeed-Vafa and Jonathan Rosenbaum,‘Abbas
Kiarostami’, (Urbana and Chicago:university of Illinois
1. Jonathan Rosenbaum, "Fill In The Blanks", Chicago press,2003),pp13-14.
Reader, 3. Gilles Deleuze, ‘ Cinema 1’,ed., trans.Hugh Tamlinson
http:// and Barbara Habberjam, ( London: Continuum,2005) 58-
www.chicagoreaders,com/movies/archives/1998/0598.htm 68.
(accessed May 05,2006) 4. Gilles Deleuze, ‘Cinema 1’,ed.,2005, p.60.

30
Yousefian Kenari M. J., Mokhtabad M. Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

philosophical apparatus which could be traced assembled micro-organs. Montage has a key
back in some avant-garde views such as Mark role in systematizing the whole and linking the
Rothko, Samuel Beckett, Jean Luc Godard. In units. The close-ups provide reasonable
his distinctive view, everything functions at the opportunities, regardless their contents, to
time, but along with pauses and ruptures, reconstruct a particular (non) narrative in a
breakdowns and failures, halting and short cinematic time and space. In a sense, the nature
circuits, distances and fragmentations, within an of structure in unfinished cinema is deeply
entire that never succeeds in bringing its related to the close-ups assemblage.
various parts together so as to form a whole. This unusual kind of applying the close-ups
That is why, for Kiarostami’ readers, the breaks somewhat reminds us a Deleuz’s reading of
in the process of image making are so much their affective polarities (power and quality) in
productive. The event could be only the Griffith’s and Eisenstein’s cinema. Eisenstein
category of multiplicity, in Deleuzian term, suggested that the close-up was not merely one
used as a substantive and going beyond the One type of image among others, but gave an
and Many, an affirmation that is irreducible to affective reading of the whole film. Deleuze
any sort of unity.1 thought that this was true of the affection-
The postmodern reflections of unfinished image2;“the affection-image is the close-up, and
cinema are partly seen in the close-ups. In fact, the close-up is the face…”3
the focal point of these reflections in (Deleuze,2005,p.89). It is both a type of image
Kiarostami’s works is the close-up. Ten (2002) and a component of all images, but that is not
and Shirin (2007) are the most remarkable all there is to it. He tried then to explain in what
examples among his latest films. Both sense the close-up is identical to the whole
employing a huge series of close-ups, they have affection-image. In search of extracting poles,
created some narratives that are really bizarre which can guide the readers, Deleuze traced the
but affective. In Kiarostami’s unfinished affection-image from the magnified faces:
cinema, the close-ups function as separate “Let us start from an example which is not a
independent units that are constantly generating face; a clock which is presented to us in close-
their implicit affections. Each film, in this up several times. Such an image does indeed
respect, works like an organism consist of huge
2. That which occupies the gap between an action and
1. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, ‘Anti-Oedipus’, ed., reaction, that which absorbs an external action and reacts
trans. Robert Hurley,Mark Seem and Helen R.Lane, on the inside.
(London: continuum, 2004) 45 3. Gilles Deleuze, ‘Cinema 1’, 7th ed.,2005, p89.

31
Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its … Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

two poles. On the one hand, it has hands moved version of three minutes short film called
by micro-movements, at least virtual ones, even Romeo (2006). We are facing here with more
if we are shown it once, or several times at long than a hundred women’s reactions to the
intervals: the hands necessarily form part of an romantic scenes of Zeffirelli’s Romeo and Juliet
Intensive series, which marks an ascent (1968). Kiarostami attempts to use the sounds
towards…or tends towards a critical instant, and visual effects separately, each as an
prepares a paroxysm. On the other hand, it has independent artwork. This is a developed idea
a face receptive immobile surface, receptive of cutting the sounds in an imaginary
plate of inscription, impassive suspense; it is a perspective that first invented by Godard and
reflecting and reflected New Wave filmmakers in 1960s. Shirin’s
unity.1(Deleuze,2005.p.89) images are a repeating series of the close-ups
It is the combination of a reflecting, which are being applied in (non) narrative
immobile unity and of intensive expressive sphere as the long (visual) reactions to the long
movements,which constitutes the affect. Each (sound) actions. The film in fact is a huge
time we discover these two poles in something- composition of images, pictures, music, and
reflecting surface and intensive micro- sounds. Their reflexive mode expresses a pure
movements- we can say that this thing has been affective quality of Deleuze’s micro-narratives
treated as a face; it has been envisaged, and in and close-ups.
turn it stares at us, it looks at us even if it does Kiarostami has long practiced a ‘micro’ (or
not resemble a face. Hence, the close-up of the minimal) mode of cinema, in resistance to the
clock does in the same way. As for the face Hollywood model and its imitators. He is
itself, we will not say that the close-up deals indeed the creator of some affective micro-
with it or subjects it to some kind of treatment; dramas that have been formed in a gap between
there is no close-up of the face, the face is in the audiences’ receptions and the close-ups.
itself close-up, the close-up is by itself face and Multiple readings of these films are, in a sense,
2
both are affect, affection-image. (Deleuze,2005, the results of a rupture between the action and
p.90) the reaction occupied by the affection-image. In
The unusual close-ups of Iranian actresses in Deleuze’s view, moreover, everything functions
Shirin(2007) somehow function as the same at the time, but along with pauses and ruptures,
way of Deleuze’s reading. Shirin is a long breakdowns and failures, halting and short
circuits, distances and fragmentations, within an
1. Gilles Deleuze, ‘Cinema 1’, 7th ed.,2005, p89.
entire that never succeeds in bringing its
2. Gilles Deleuze, ‘Cinema 1’,7th ed.,2005, p.90.

32
Yousefian Kenari M. J., Mokhtabad M. Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

various parts together to form a whole. That is assume a more interactive role. The audience
because, perhaps, the breaks in the process of need to backtrack, to revisit material, to identify
image making for Kiarostami’ readers are so repetitions and points of difference, establishes
much productive. It could be only the category a very different dynamic, a structure similar to a
of multiplicity, in Deleuzian term, used as a spiral in which the effects of nuances are
substantive and going beyond the One and explored rather than a linear narrative that
Many, an affirmation that is irreducible to any offers a single movement towards
sort of unity.1(Deleuze and Guattari,2004, p.45) resolution.3(King,2005, p.97) In this respect,
Ten (2002), for instance, is a film which Kiarostami has long practiced a ‘micro’oriental
resists simple definition. In Kiarostami’s Ten, a mode of half-created cinema, in resistance to
micro-narrative structure is revealed where the Hollywood model and its imitators. In fact,
“[he] is not afraid to let a scene wander off in he uses cine-conceptual installations that their
an unexpected, seemingly random direction, to patterns are open to subtle manipulation and
let each scene become a self-enclosed mini- transformation. Ten(2002) is such a film
2
story of its own.” (Rapfogal,2001) However, assembled from ten separate ‘modules’ of
Ten is not merely an evolution of this (episodic) cinematic time. Each module is internally
tendency, but in fact, exhibits a far more radical composed by cutting between the two fixed
and self-conscious narrative structure. In Ten, angles supplied by dashboard-cam. Thus, in
Kiarostami adopts a serial narrative structure, Ten, compositional principles of repetition and
one composed of ten discrete units, which count variation are evident at both the macro-scale
backwards in inter-titles rendered as (digital) (the order, duration and repetition of story
film-leader graphics. Ten is an exercise in serial modules) and micro-scale (variation of film
narration where the feature film represents an language within a single module). The shape of
accumulation of micro-narratives – ten car trips Ten is a deceptively complex one, beyond a
through a series of deleuzian close-ups. This simple linearity, implied by its serial structure.
mode of narration demands an audience to In 2003, Kiarostami also directed Five:
Dedicated to Ozu, a poetic feature which
1. Gilles Deleuze and Felix Guattari, ‘Anti-Oedipus’, ed.,
contained no dialogue or characterization
trans. Robert Hurley,Mark Seem and Helen R.Lane,
(London: continuum, 2004) 45. whatsoever. It consists of five long shots of the
2. Rapfogel, J.,“A Mirror Facing a Mirror” in Senses of natural landscape, which are single-take
Cinema no. 17 (Nov-Dec. 2001)
http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/01/17/close_up. 3. King, G., American Independent Cinema,( London: I.B.
html, Accessed September 12, 2006 Tauris & Co Ltd, 2005): 97.

33
Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its … Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

sequences along the shores of the Caspian Sea. These all are the problems that their
Although the film lacks a clear storyline, Geoff responses will make clear the future of
Andrew argues that the film is more than just Kiarostami’s unfinished cinema. In 21st century,
pretty pictures: we are facing with a new generation of
"Assembled in order, they comprise a kind of digitalized audiences that love their experience
abstract or emotional narrative arc, which of virtual realities in a cinematic labyrinth such
moves evocatively from separation and solitude as Matrix (2001). The general audiences of
to community, from motion to rest, near-silence future cinema are looking for their own favorite
to sound and song, light to darkness and back meanings in a complex web of the
to light again, ending on a note of rebirth and computerized interactive paths. Their expected
regeneration."1(Andrew,2005,pp.73-4) dramatic world is indeed a world full of
computer game actions. The visual literacy of
Kiarostami and Future Audience these audiences seems to help them being
In sum, Abbas Kiarostami and his unfinished actively engaged the game, but passively
cinema project are facing a lot of challenge. displaces the reception. They no longer pass
The risk of audiences’ overcompensating for time on deep thinking- unless they pass game
their absence by mediating too much in the stages by a password or move forward in an
project is still a main concern of this cinema. adventurous, risky way.
This danger itself causes another discussion Realistically, it is necessary to declare that
about the filmgoers’ commitment or non- Kiarostami’s position will be remained unique
commitment to the experimental regulations of and different in new era. While his unfinished
unfinished films. Answering to these aesthetic cinema attempts to involve the general
questions is unavoidable: Where is the limit of audiences but it always receives an alternative
participating in artwork? Is the sensible response, sometimes so much praising it or
relativity in the nature of these films, reliable or even blaming it. Ironically, the next generation
dependable? How must we grasp the multiple of audiences will decide on the future of
meanings of unfinished cinema in a postmodern unfinished cinema, like Kiarostami’s prediction,
condition? Is there any stability? How should not the critics or even filmmakers. Again, the
we separate the surface or deep readings of playful computerized films of Hollywood’s new
unusual films such as Shirin, Five and Ten? mainstream will reduce the deep readings of the
work to the superficial pleasures. The next
1. Geoff Andrew, Ten, (London: BFI Publishing, 2005),
audiences of cinema will be the current
pp. 73–4.

34
Yousefian Kenari M. J., Mokhtabad M. Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

teenagers who need an ongoing entertainment. readers to have their own possible reception, or
The final question is that if the unfinished at least intervention. The active role of audience
cinema, basically, needs to locate exact place of in reproducing different meanings of an
the audience, or it will become accustomed to unfinished film never means as a natural
the playmates as the next audiences. disorder or an interpretive confusion, but it
In spite of all these problems, Kiarostami’s indicates a particular vision of Kiarostami to his
unfinished cinema is certainly worth a study audiences. The readers of unfinished cinema
because of its implicit effects of postmodernism hence are those who are changing the
even if Kiarostami’s respects to the future interpretive disciplines of current movies. In
audiences never find a respectful response, this view, Kiarostami and his unusual films
mutually. His text for the centenary of cinema such as Shirin and Ten, are at least the first
is concluded as follows: steps of using national images in the same
“In cinema’s next century, respect of the direction of global expectations. That is why
audience as an intelligent and constructive the global vision of unfinished cinema is so
element is inevitable. To attain this, one must important for its inventor.
perhaps move away from the concept of the On the other hand, it is necessary not to
audience as the absolute master. The director forget that the project is still shaping itself and
must also be the audience of his own film. For needs to be regulated optimistically. Some
one hundred years, cinema has belonged to the concerns of this cinema turn to the limits of
filmmaker. Let us hope that now the time has audiences’ share in reading the meaning. It is
come for us to implicate the audience in its obvious that universal visual culture
second century.”1(Kiarostami,1995) continuously is changing and a new spectator is
emerging now, with an alternative mode of
Conclusion cinematic reaction. A natural progression of this
Kiarostami’s unfinished cinema has great project completely depends on its tolerance for
ability to enter an interactive dialogue with the the audiences today called digital playmates.
global audiences. A part of its accessible ability Despite all these implications and, of course,
is the direct result of Kiarostami’s postmodern postmodern reflections of unfinished cinema,
reading of the absolute objectivity and the Kiarostami is still a prominent portrait of
nature of image. His low budget, non- Iranian culture and arts. Even if the future
conventional style of filmmaking provides the audiences do not simply approve his half-

1. Abbas Kiarostami, ‘An Unfinished Cinema’, 1995.

35
Kiarostami’s Unfinished Cinema and its … Intl. J. Humanities (2010) Vol. 17 (2)

created films as another objects of knowledge, [8] Jeffries, Stuart.(2005). "Abbas Kiarostami-
but the plan must go on alternatively. Not A Martyr." The Guardian.
[9] Kellner, Steven Best and Duglas.
References: (1991).Postmodern Theory. London:
[1] Andrew, Geoff.(2005). Ten. London: BFI McMillan.
Publishing. [10] Kiarostami, Abbas.(1995). An Unfinished
[2] Bazin, Andre.(1972). What is Cinema. Los Cinema. Text Written for the Centenary of
Angeles and London: Berkeley, 1967 Cinema, Paris: New Yorkers film Offical
&1972. Selection.
[3] Bordwell, David.(2008). Poetics of [11] King, G. (2005).American Independent
Cinema; The Art Cinema as a Mode of Film Cinema. London: I.B. Tarris & Co Ltd.
Practice. New York: Routledge. [12] Nancy, Jean-Claude.(1999) "On Evidence:
[4] Deleuze, Gilles.(2005). Cinema 1. 7th. Life and Nothing More, by Abbas
Translated by Hugh Tamlinson and Barbara Kiarostami." Discource 21, no. 1 (1999): 82.
Haberjam. Vol. 1. 2 vols. London: [13] Rapfogel, J.,“A Mirror Facing a Mirror” in
Continuum. Senses of Cinema no. 17 (Nov-Dec.2001)
[5] Collins.(2003).Kiarostami: the Art of HYPERLINK
Living. Directed by Collins and Fergus. "http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/0
2003. 1/17/close_up.html" \t "_blank"
[6] Guattari, Gilles Deleuze and Felix.(2004). http://www.sensesofcinema.com/contents/0
Anti-Odipus. 5. Translated by Robert Hurley 1/17/close_up.html , Accessed September
and Mark Seem. London: Continuum. 12, 2006
[7] Guerin, Wilfred I.(2005). A Handbook of [14] Rosenbaum, Mehrnaz Saeed-Vafaa and
Critical Approaches to Literature. 5. Jonathan.(2003) Abbas Kiarostami. Urbana
London: Oxford. and Chicago: University of Illinoise press.

36
 ‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎي ﻧﺎﺗﻤﺎم ﻛﻴﺎرﺳﺘﻤﻲ و ﺑﺎزﺗﺎبﻫﺎي ﭘﺴﺎﻣﺪرن آن‬

‫‪2‬‬
‫ﻣﺤﻤﺪﺟﻌﻔﺮ ﻳﻮﺳﻔﻴﺎن ﻛﻨﺎري‪ ،1‬ﺳﻴﺪ ﻣﺼﻄﻔﻲ ﻣﺨﺘﺎﺑﺎد اﻣﺮﺋﻲ‬

‫ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ ﭘﺬﻳﺮش‪1389 /1/29 :‬‬ ‫ﺗﺎرﻳﺦ درﻳﺎﻓﺖ‪1388/2/20 :‬‬

‫ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎي ﻛﻴﺎرﺳﺘﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺑﻪ ﻣﺜﺎﺑﺔ ﻧﻤﻮﻧﺔ ﺑﺎرزي از ﻇﺮﻓﻴﺖ ﺟﻬﺎﻧﻲ ﺷﺪن ﻓﺮﻫﻨـﮓ ﻧﻤﺎﻳـﺸﻲ اﻳـﺮان و ﺑـﺎ‬
‫ﺗﺄﻛﻴﺪ ﺧﺎص ﺑﺮ ﻧﻘﺶ ﻣﺸﺎرﻛﺖ ﺗﻤﺎﺷـﺎﮔﺮان در ﻓﺮاﻳﻨـﺪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳـﺎزي ﻓـﻴﻠﻢ‪ ،‬ﺗـﺄﻣﻼﺗﻲ ﭘـﺴﺎﻣﺪرن را‬
‫ﺑﺮﻣﻲاﻧﮕﻴﺰد‪ .‬ﺑﺮﺧﻲ ازﻣﻬﻢﺗﺮﻳﻦ وﺟﻮه ﺧﺎص اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮع ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎي ﻧﻴﻤﻪ‪-‬ﺑﺮﺳﺎﺧﺘﻪ ﻋﺒﺎرﺗﻨـﺪ از‪ :‬ﺳـﺒﻚ‬
‫ﺧﻮد‪-‬ﺑﺎزﺗﺎﺑﻨـﺪه ‪ ،‬ﺑﻌـﺪﻧﻤﺎﻳﻲﻫـﺎي ﻧﻤﻮدارﮔﻮﻧـﻪ‪ ،‬رواﻳـﺖﻫـﺎي ﺑﻴﻨـﺎ ﺑـﻴﻦ و ﻛﻤﻴﻨـﻪﮔﺮاﻳـﻲ ﻓـﺮدي‪.‬‬
‫ارزﺷﻤﻨﺪﺗﺮﻳﻦ دﺳﺘﺎورد ﭘﺴﺎﻣﺪرن اﻳﻦ ﻧﻮع ﺳـﻴﻨﻤﺎ‪ ،‬ﺑﺮﺟـﺴﺘﻪ ﺳـﺎزي ﻓﺮاﻳﻨـﺪ ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳـﺎزي در ﺣـﻴﻦ‬
‫ﺗﺠﺮﺑﻪ ﺑﻲواﺳﻄﻪ ﻓﻴﻠﻢ اﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﺑﻪﻋﻼوه‪ ،‬ﻧﻤﺎﻫﺎي ﻧﺰدﻳـﻚ ﻓـﻴﻠﻢﻫـﺎي اﺧﻴـﺮ او‪ ،‬واﺣـﺪﻫﺎي ﻣﻌﻨﺎﺳـﺎز‬
‫ﻣﺴﺘﻘﻠﻲ ﻫﺴﺘﻨﺪ ﻛﻪ ﺑﻪ ﻧﺤﻮي ﻓﺰاﻳﻨﺪه ﻋﺎﻣﻞ ﺗﻜﺜﻴﺮ و ﺗﻮﻟﻴﺪ ﺑﻲوﻗﻔـﻪ اﺣـﺴﺎس و ﻋﺎﻃﻔـﻪاي ﺷـﺮﻗﻲ‬
‫اﺳﺖ‪ .‬از اﻳﻦ ﺣﻴﺚ‪ ،‬ﺳﺒﻚ ﺧﻼﻗﺎﻧﺔ ﻛﻴﺎرﺳﺘﻤﻲ ﻗﺎﺑﻞ ﺗﻔﺴﻴﺮ و ﺗﻄﺒﻴﻖ ﺑﺎ ﺑﺮﺧـﻲ از ﻣﻬـﻢﺗـﺮﻳﻦ آراي‬
‫ﻣﺘﻔﻜﺮان ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎي ﭘﺴﺎﻣﺪرن ﻧﻈﻴﺮ ژﻳﻞ دﻟﻮز اﺳﺖ‪ .‬ﻓﻴﻠﻢﻫﺎي اﺧﻴﺮ او‪ ،‬در ﺣﻘﻴﻘﺖ‪ ،‬ﺑﺎ ﺑﻬﺮهﮔﻴـﺮي از‬
‫ﺟﻠﻮهﻫﺎﻳﻲ واﻗﻌﮕﺮا وﻋﻨﺎﺻﺮي ﺑﻮﻣﻲ‪ ،‬رواﻳﺘﮕﺮ ﻣﻴﻜﺮو درامﻫﺎي ﻧﻮﻳﻨﻲ اﺳﺖ ﻛﻪ در ﺑﻴﻨﺎ ﺑﻴﻦ ﺷﻜﺎف‬
‫ﻣﻴﺎن ﻧﻤﺎﻫﺎي ﻧﺰدﻳﻚ و درﻳﺎﻓﺖ ﻓﻌﺎل ﻣﺨﺎﻃﺒﺎن ﺧﻮد ﺷﻜﻞ ﻣﻲﮔﻴﺮد‪.‬‬

‫واژﮔﺎن ﻛﻠﻴﺪي‪ :‬ﻛﻴﺎرﺳﺘﻤﻲ‪ ،‬ﺳﻴﻨﻤﺎي ﻧﺎﺗﻤﺎم‪ ،‬ﭘﺴﺎﻣﺪرﻧﻴﺴﻢ‪ ،‬ژﻳﻞ د‪‬ﻟﻮز‪ ،‬ﻧﻘﺪ و ﻧﻈﺮﻳﻪ‬

‫‪ .1‬داﻧﺸﺠﻮي دﻛﺘﺮي‪ ،‬داﻧﺸﻜﺪه ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻣﺪرس‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮان‬

‫‪ .2‬داﻧﺸﻴﺎر‪ ،‬داﻧﺸﻜﺪه ﻫﻨﺮ‪ ،‬داﻧﺸﮕﺎه ﺗﺮﺑﻴﺖ ﻣﺪرس‪ ،‬ﺗﻬﺮان‬

‫‪37‬‬