The characters in Turtles can Fly
differed greatly when they were
diasporic peoples versus residents. Satellite lived in the
village boarding the city, and was well-known and well liked. It was
his town. He was the guy everyone, old and young, sought out to set
up the tvs and to translate the English-spoken news. He helped the
village children find work. He was their beloved leader. Because he
had a home to come from, he didn't have the same perspective as the
diasporic trio of young girl, her amputated brother, and her bastard
blind son. She had to ask for things to get by – ask for rope, ask
for good water, etc. She was not spoken-to directly, though spoken
about by the home-town villagers. She and her little family were
outsiders with no home to return to because their home had been
brutalized by soldiers. Even though the amputated brother was helpful
to the village children in finding minds, he still was the underdog
who couldn't be trusted at first as Satellite ostracizes him from the
group. When the girl is pursued by Satellite, she goes home to ask
her brother when they can leave. After being raped, she seems to
resent male attention and definitely resents her role as caregiver to
her bastard child. Had she been like Satellite who had a home, she
may have had more help for this child she didn't ask for, but she
couldn't bear it and winds up jumping off a cliff after leaving her
son in a mine field. An obvious distinction is that the diasporic
peoples try to make do with what they have, but ultimately are left
with such a tragic life that some cannot bear it.
As an American viewing this film, my
reactions were intense. While I could certainly empathize with the
characters, I couldn't relate directly as I don't think of myself as
a diasporic person. The first time the film shows Satellites best
friend as having a deformed leg from a mine explosion is shocking and
unexpected. The boy is so capable, so happy, as we see him kiss the
cheeks and laugh with the blind son of the diasporic girl. Seeing all
of the children working on the fields but remaining happy proved to
me that, sadly, this is just the way of life they're use to. It isn't
strange to them they are working at such young ages, but it wrenched
my heart. Ghobadi seemed to want to portray the message of what it is
like to live in pre-war conditions in an under-developed country.
Beyond that, I believe Ghobadi's films portrayed universal themes of
struggle, playfulness, depression, violence, and so much more of the
human condition, so the film, while focusing on this particular
village of Iraq is something a global audience can understand.
I completely agree that the lessons learned from this film are universal and ones we can use in our everyday life. Now next time you are about to be upset because the line is too long to get Starbucks before class or you text someone and they don't get back to you right away - remember there is way worse things in life. We are blessed to live the way we do.
ReplyDeleteAnother reason I enjoyed this film is because it evoked emotion. I felt the same sense of surprise when the boys leg was revealed. Although many people would not admit to saying this, but I am sure plenty of people thought to themselves, "Wow - I thought he was "normal" simply because of the way he acted, always so happy and full of life.
I can completely understand your point about them accepting the lifestyle that they now have. They do seem to have a routine on a daily basis that shows they accept this permanent change. I too noticed how easily Satellites friend was able to maneuver himself around to do some pretty difficult tasks. Even his younger friend who cried a lot took on more responsibility than anyone his age should have to. It does not seem to faze him though.
ReplyDeleteReally terrific post, Jessica. You capture Agrin's plight so thoughtfully, and you make me really think about how different the little boy's reality would have been had he been Satellite's son (with no mother in the picture)...
ReplyDeleteSpring