Goli or Farhad, Farhad or Goli

After watching What’s the time in your world? For the first time, the amount of time we see the two main characters (Goli and Farhad) in separate paths, draws the attention. Goli (Leila Hatami) either strolls in the dooryard wearing his dad’s clothes, or she visits her mother’s grave, or she visits the restaurant which she has memories about from the past, or she goes looking for her mother’s old car, or she visits the man who has been in love with her mother once, or the man who has been in love with herself once. During many of these incidents, Farhad (Ali Mosaffa) is being mentioned (but usually no more than an interesting periphery) and sometimes, he isn’t even being mentioned. Until the quarrel in the park takes place and the relationship completely falls apart and the only connection point that is remained, is the telephone calls by Goli and her presence in front of Farhad’s closed shop for apologizing. And yet, between these telephone calls and that presence in front of the shop, she is still occupied by her occupations. This situation extends so far that when Goli, by leaving a message on the answering machine apologizes to Farhad and at the end of the massage –as if she hasn’t had a choice but to do this- says “that’s all”, Farhad also, with an expression between reprehension and regret, repeats “that’s all”. Farhad is not on Goli’s mind. Farhad’s “knowledge” also, more than making Goli closer to him, relates Goli to her past; the past that from the moment of returning, she is constantly occupied with. The difference between Farhad and this past is that, if this past has become forgotten, Farhad hasn’t been seen so that he becomes forgotten. And in contrary, the totality of Farhad’s presence almost confines to this, that he sees, he doesn’t forget; but this doesn’t mean that he doesn’t care about not being seen and becoming forgotten; his sentence to Goli’s mother when he is telling the story of lending his jacket to Ali Yaghutie (“that really angered me”!), his nightmare which revolves around Mr. Antoine, the presence of his childhood film among Golli’s mother’s old family films or the presence of something that belongs to him among the stuff that once belonged to Golli in the suitcase, all and all shows his longing “to be seen”. And now the action that he takes, a person who longs “to be seen”, becomes seeing Goli (more tender than everyone else) and not forgetting her, while Goli is not even aware of his existence. And after 20 years, from the moment that Goli arrives, repeatedly he appears, reveals a fountain from his “knowledge” and goes –knowing that Goli is arriving and her home address- reveals a fountain and goes –the drawing and the street musician- reveals a fountain and goes –Futty or Golly, Golly or Futty. And that is why the “quarrel in the park” scene stands out. Where not only he doesn’t get the result he expected from his actions, rather –for the first time in his life- he is even being smacked for them. Much as he calls “hey miss, tell them that we know each other” it generates no result. And it is after this point that Farhad retreats; he doesn’t answer Goli’s phone calls, he says “that’s all” after this point and also imagines the Mr. Antoine nightmare from here on.
Much as it is specific and clear about Farhad that what he wants, what he does and how he does it, the film stutters a little during the encounter with Goli, and part of the obligation of fitting the pieces together, is overweighting on the audience’s shoulder. From the moment of returning, Goli is occupied with the past, while in the last twenty years, she hasn’t been back not even for her mother’s funeral and this one matter, frequently is being mentioned during the film. And right at the beginning of the film, we realize that she has left everything and came suddenly. Why? The pang of conscience hadn’t left her alone or she has seen herself subjected to the same disaster (oblivion) that the past has encountered? Does she get mad from the information of Hamid’s death -that accompanied by Farhad’s laugh in the moment of mentioning it (!)- also for the same reason? What is the story of Mr. Antoine? Why every time someone mentioning it she ignores it? or why when Farhad, after the information of Hamid’s death, asks about Mr. Antoine: “is he still around?” she gets mad in such way? Is it the problem that Mr. Antoine is not her husband? Mainly, why she went to Paris twenty years ago? Is it the issue of “to be seen” that also interferes here? And now, twenty years after leaving, hasn’t got what she wanted with Mr. Antoine (who Farhad wonders about him “still” being around) and because of that, mentioning the subject of monsieur Anton and her not having kids offends her and she even punishes Farhad for saying “still”. And she wears the father’s clothes –transforms in to the father- and becomes the subject of the father’s admirations in her childhood, coming from her mouth “king doesn’t have a daughter of such kind, minister doesn’t have a daughter of such kind, member of the parliament doesn’t have a daughter of such kind”. And this is the place in Goli’s heart that belongs to the father: a reviver for the bygone dreams. The dream of a child who has been seeing a world in front of herself, like a princess. And now, after bygone years, she is a middle age woman, who hasn’t gotten to the dream, and to breathe a new life into that dream, has gotten back to the home/stronghold, which in it, the dream had been brought to life. She has gotten back among the people that it is possible “to be seen” among them. And they are so far away from the dream and so unimportant, that in the last twenty years she has not gotten back among them once. This forgotten group of people. But by her arriving, she receives the information of Hamid’s suicide who had emigrated to another country (Finland) the same as her. They remind her of Mr. Antoine “still” being there, in her face. She sees her olden friends with several kids versus herself without kids and… and they keep it alive for her that “she hasn’t gotten to the dream”. And among this group of people, frequently they remind her of the mother. The most important part of this forgotten past. There is a moment in the film after the quarrel in the park, that Goli’s mother and Farhad are watching the family films. Which they see Goli’s childhood, and camera pauses on the face of Goli’s mother for a considerable amount of time. It seems like the mother is gazing Goli’s image. Telephone rings and the voice of Goli, who has called to apologize to Farhad, plays. The pause on the face of Goli’s mother, cuts to the image of family films and Farhad, who follows the voice of Goli, stands in front of the projector and the past joins the present and the absence of Goli’s mother stands out and her presence defines by Farhad and the relation of each one to Goli, resembles each other. And Goli still says “that’s all”. She says “that’s all” as if she hasn’t had a choice but to do this. And then Mr. Najdi asks Goli to meet, and reveals to her that once he was in love with her mother, that he also hadn’t been seen so that he becomes forgotten. Like the steam from Goli’s breath on the window glass of Farhad’s store. And then Goli returns. And on the way back, behind the red light of the traffic light, among all that population that none of them neither sees goli, nor the other drivers, and basically nobody sees nobody, Mr. Mehraban sees Goli and recognizes her and among all that moving population, stops and waves to her. And Goli waves back, in response. And her waving has a sad stagnation quality. and then she laughs and in that traffic, looks around. And by arriving to this moment of the film, plenty of time has been passed from the last time we’ve seen Goli and Farhad in communication; that suddenly Farhad, turns up upside down!
This is the going through of this path that gives the moment of Farhad’s unconsciousness centrality. Apart from revealing such an important matter that has been hidden by far (that the beginning of Farhad’s story goes back to Goli and Farhad’s childhood), it is Goli being the listener of Farhad that stands out. Somewhere in the film Goli’s mother tells Farhad: “three month ago, I would have asked you why didn’t tell her? now I understand; You enjoyed that you knew and she didn’t”. Farhad had wanted to see while he is unseen. Like if there would be someone to see and not forget the unaware from everything Goli, that would cause him, who has the issue of “to be seen” to cheer up. But this vicious circle arrives at the issue of “to be seen” again. And now, after twenty years, with the return of Goli he unveils himself and every time he reveals a fountain from his “knowledge”, But keeps the main fountain hidden. Because if he reveals that, there would be nothing unseen left for him; which then, by revealing this fountain, his mechanism of cheering himself up (to see while he is unseen) would collapse. But again, what is he supposes to do with the issue of “to be seen”? That is how when he has realized, the central moment of the film, this last, most principal and oddest fountain, which we had seen the effect of its oldness and childish purity on Goli’s mother (“your story about making clouds was fantastic” while Farhad, with his back toward the camera, wiping his tears), was no more than a dream that he has had when he has been unconscious, asks: “just now in the yard, on the ground, did I speak?” which the answer is: “not really, just some French. It was amusing, and a bit frightening” and then when Farhad, a few seconds later says: “to tell you the truth, anything that I remember about myself, you’ve also always been present in it” and at first, Goli consider it humor but then, when it seems like Farhad’s attention has drawn away and she asks: “what did you say a few seconds ago?” Farhad says: “I didn’t say anything… swear to God I didn’t say anything”, it isn’t exactly clarified that he had said those sentences unconsciously or terribly regrets that he said them! And later, by the opening of the suitcase (the suitcase of fountains), Farhad draws Goli’s attention by making Goli stunned that “why did you keep these things all this time?” that separation in the paths of these two person from the beginning, is over, because Goli is attentive towards Farhad. After all these years and this trip, it is not feasible to be inattentive toward Farhad. And Farhad, while is not revealing the last fountain, achieves part of his obsession (remember his childish triumphant laughter!). Which makes a leap of time for us to the night and to the rain (Varesh), cause when the relation that Farhad has been wanting has been established, it’s not important anymore that how the time passes; the important matter is, not running out of the opportunity of experiencing this relation. So it cuts to the place where no more than a few words have been left for Farhad. That with those words running out, when he announces his departure but he doesn’t get satisfied to leave, (quoting from him) he “falls” on the empty table in the corner of the room to relieve his exhaustion! and after exchanging a few words he says “it was worth it” and before him falling asleep, the picture closes down. And the narrator has no alternative choice but to ends with such an ending. It is not possible to survive with such little cheers the whole life. When to be forgotten and not to be seen absolutely (death) is being felt close (in youth or old age), fear reveals itself; the matter that almost doesn’t exist in this film. And that is when saying “let the light rest” instead of saying “turn the light off” and strolling while holding a framed picture of young age does not cure anything. But it seems like the narrator is not deceitful in this approximate deletion (deletion of fear); like it’s hero, who has spent a lifetime (thirty, forty, fifty years?) without getting beat up, the narrator is pitiable like a child and only now the time has come for him to face fear. Remember Goli’s meeting with Mr. Najdi that Mr. Najdi says: “he is missed” and Goli asks: “who?” and Mr. Najdi replies: “everyone; all the departed”. And then side by side, they pass the windows which opens to a beautiful woodland; and Goli opens the windows one by one. If the intention was to see the woodland, then it was also enough to open a window. But when the windows must be opened repetitively, the intention is opening and being in constant and repetitive subjection of these reminders of life and being alive. And the openings are quite and repetitive, not in a hurry and intense. Like it says “it’s so good for us to change the subject and make a distance”… and what must be said about this shot is that this way of expression cannot and must not be left alone. Because in Cinema we have time and character. As a result, on the first place, before and after (the process) matters and consistency and variations of characters over time. Which it has been observed about Farhad but apparently the inobservance of it about Goli, caused the stutter and the incommensurability.
What’s the time in your world? Is an important film. The thing that it reveals pitilessly –probably like any other piece of art- is the selfishness of Farhad; the struggle of Farhad in it and the dead-end of it. The dead-end which if it wasn’t, he wouldn’t have seen Goli much different. But the narrator is powerless in rebelling against that. Maybe the powerlessness of an undiscerning minor; maybe… and maybe because he doesn’t have a replacement for this selfishness. He replaces the rebel with a vicious circle and inevitably, instead of finishing the film cuts it off; at the end of one circle -and the beginning of another circle- closes the eyes and falls asleep. What will he do when he wakes up? May it be that Farhad rebels… may it be that Farhad maturate…