Surely, I thought, the critically
acclaimed Argo would be an intelligent
film. Directed by noted progressive Ben Affleck, I
had high hopes that the film would tackle complex
subject matter in a responsible and nuanced way.
But while well-intentioned, Argo failed to
deliver, falling into the common Hollywood trap of
making Muslims into a monolithic Green Menace.
The film, which tells the story of how six
Americans who escaped the 1979 hostage crisis at
the US Embassy in Tehran were rescued, begins well
enough, providing a brief overview of the events
that preceded the Iranian revolution and even
featuring Central Intelligence Agency officers
musing on the brutality of the deposed Shah.
However, the overview is quite short considering
how many major events precipitated the revolt and
how little
attention this period has
received in American media.
Indeed, Argo
reduces a century of Western antagonism of Iran -
from exploiting its oil to overthrowing its
democratic regime and supporting a tyrannical
leader - to a few minutes at the most. It does
note that the US-backed Shah’s regime routinely
tortured dissidents, but it uses cartoons to
illustrate this, dampening the effect
substantially. More troublingly, by juxtaposing
mentions of the Shah’s attempts to “Westernize”
Iran (minus freedom, rights, and democracy, of
course) with shots of irate protesters outside the
American embassy in Tehran, Argo gives the
impression that the protestors were there because
the Shah wanted to force them to wear blue jeans-
not because of torture, dictatorship, repression,
or widespread inequality and poverty. This is
massively misleading, feeding into a cultural
explanation for the revolution that ignores the
obvious political dimensions.
Moreover,
nearly every Iranian featured in the film is
angry, screaming, or in a mob. It reduces a
diverse revolutionary coalition - which included
liberal, secular, and Marxist elements alongside
Islamists - into a monolithic group of fanatics
who become enraged anytime they come across
anything or anyone Western - even Canadians! In
reality, by the time the embassy was seized, power
jockeying among revolutionary factions was in full
effect, with Khomeini’s Islamists violently
sidelining their rivals. Argo instead leads
the casual viewer to think that the seemingly
fanatic crowd outside the embassy was
representative of Iran overall, which it most
certainly was not. The only Iranians in the movie
who do not seem to be from Khomeini’s faction are
incompetent bureaucrats.
It may seem
unfair to expect Argo, which supposedly concerns
itself with a narrower search-and-rescue story, to
address more complex political realities. But the
sense of urgency underpinning this storyline
relies in no small part on the film’s
near-monolithic (and unsubtle) portrayal of
Iranians as angry religious fanatics. By the end,
you have no recollection of the limited
introductory context explaining the Iranian anger
against America. You are simply cheering for the
Americans over the evil Iranians.
Hollywood does injustice to many minority
groups, but how many of those groups are we
currently bombing? How many of those groups are
constant targets for future wars? The Argo
narrative is particularly dangerous considering
the current debate over Iran. Most experts believe
Iran is nowhere near developing nuclear weapons
and hasn’t even decided to begin, yet US media
portrayals routinely obscure this fact. This
suggests that identity - which determines whether
Americans think they can trust or understand Iran
- will undoubtedly play a key role in whether the
public backs an attack on Iran.
The
mainstream press has done a woeful job explaining
the history between Iran and the United States -
not surprising, given its propensity to
disproportionately air radical anti-Muslim views.
At a time when Islamophobia is thriving, cultural
diplomacy is critical - not necessarily to
advocate positions, but simply provide facts and
context. There are dangerous downstream
consequences of failing to do so, such as the rise
in hate crimes against Muslims, including a recent
brutal attack on a 72 year-old.
Movies
like Argo have a great opportunity to fill
some of this gap, at least by differentiating
between Iranians and their government. They could
make Americans think more seriously about starting
a war against a people who have not been in
control of their government since the early 1950s,
especially if Americans are made to understand
that their own government has played no small part
in this fact. But by making Iranians into a
monolithic group of angry religious fanatics - in
effect, easy villains- Argot fails
abjectly.
Fouad Pervez is a
contributor to Foreign Policy in Focus, where he
writes on US foreign policy and security issues in
South Asia.
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
