Comparative Analysis of Form and Theme between the Movie "Where is the Friend's House?" And the Poem "Address" by Sohrab Sepehri

Abstract

Introduction

One of the most contemporary and significant areas of research in literature and the arts that has attracted significant attention of critics and researchers today is the field of "interdisciplinary" studies. In this research field, comparative literature studies within the American school are considered a subset. This field emphasizes that to better understand and comprehend literary productions and phenomena, it is necessary to establish connections between various forms of art and consider their relationships with social and cultural backgrounds. The fundamental principle is to move away from a biased view of literary texts and establish connections between branches of the humanities so that we no longer would witness the isolation of these sciences from artistic branches. Recent experiences and research have shown that a work of art can both influence and be influenced by other artistic branches. This theory is the result of the efforts of "Rene Wellek," a prominent theorist in the American school of Comparative Literature. In this research, in addition to the discussion of interaction between two branches of art, the discussion of "adaptation" is also our focus. Although most research on literary adaptation has been in the context of cinema adapting literary narratives, this field has broader implications. What is under scrutiny and examination in this article is the analysis of the function of "poetic words" adaptation in a mythological poetic work and its cinematic representation by a poet-director. Furthermore, we will examine the structure of the poetry and cinema of "Sohrab Sepehri" and "Abbas Kiarostami" in terms of external and internal levels of an artistic work, considering poetic and cinematic elements in both works for comparative analysis.
 

Methodology

The approach adopted in this research is a descriptive-analytical approach. The data from the two works under study have been examined in terms of form and content. It is natural that the interdisciplinary approach employed in this comparative study is grounded in the American school of Comparative Literature.
 

Discussion

It is necessary to juxtapose two works under examination to determine in which part of the cinematic film this adaptation and reception of words has manifested.
The language of poetry is a language that every reader or listener immediately perceives its structural and semantic differences with an ordinary language (everyday language) after reading it or listening to it. In other words, readers and listeners easily discern that both in terms of the words that reach to their ears and in terms of the thoughts and perspectives conveyed them differ from other discourses. This concept is clearly articulated by "Aristotle" in his discussion of the essence of poetry. He states, "Poetry is a craft that imitates through words (imitation of nature, mimesis). Now these words may be in prose or in verse." The understanding of words is the most important factor in understanding and interpreting a poetic work, and indeed, in any literary work. Because these words are essentially the products of the poet's mind that signify the intended meaning separately. The more diverse and rich the meanings of these selected words, the more diverse and beautiful the poet's imagination and thoughts.
Today, all theorists agree that cinema, like other arts, has its own language. This means that there are parameters and conventions that help us understand the intended meaning of a film. Some critics view the language of cinema as a collection of images of humans, places, and other subjects that essentially convey the sentences of the text and must be understood and interpreted alongside other sentences to decipher the meaning of the film. It should be noted here that although cinema is understood as a language, comparing it with the language of text (including words, sounds, and sentences, etc.) is a futile endeavor. Therefore, we should speak of "the language of images" for cinema. This visual language has succeeded over the past century in establishing a special place among humans. During this journey, cinema, as the seventh art, has successfully utilized this visual language and enamored humanity with its mode of expression on the Earth. Certainly, what concerns us regarding the "language of cinema" includes aspects such as image processing, scenes (editing), lighting, framing scenes, the relationship between sound and image, and so on. All of these are visual aspects of the "language of cinema." Of course, it is also important to note that other characteristics of this language are related to the narrative and the structural composition of the film.
Furthermore, the content is the inner aspect of any literary work, which can never be one-dimensional. Even if the creator of the work has created it for a single theme, readers and critics can extract different meanings from it, in line with their own perspectives. This behavior is more pronounced in the context of "literary adaptations." In the two works discussed in this research, Kiarostami, as a later creator, has freely adapted under the influence of Sepehri, an earlier creator. This adaptation can be compared with the words and concepts of Sepehri's poetry and reached a unified viewpoint. The concepts of "home," "friend," "passerby," "rider," and "love," which we have compared, form the foundation of both works.
In Sepehri's poetry, the content has a spiritual and elevated aspect that, with its specific symbols, steps into the realm of symbolism to indirectly interact with objects in the service of its abstraction. Kiarostami, on the other hand, creates a poetic, down-to-earth, and realistic theme that can present these two fundamental concepts, "love" and "friendship," in their most elementary form, in the form of two children, to the audience's gaze. Indeed, he has succeeded in this regard. Additionally, the concept that these two great men have left behind regarding the "tree" throughout this poetry and film is another content that attracts the audience. It is not easy to overlook Sepehri's mystical and mythological view of the tree, just as in Kiarostami's cinema, especially in the film "Where is the Friend's Home?"; "In Kiarostami's cinema, the tree evokes meanings of eternity, rejuvenation, and rebirth.
 
4.Conclusion
In this research, it becomes evident how Kiarostami, with precision and artistic skill, borrowed from the external and internal layers of Sohrab's poetry, transforming it into a visual and direct work with no ambiguity. This borrowing in the realm of cinematic "space-making" has been so successful that words such as "horizon, sky, light, tree, pause, rider, alley-garden, alley, fear, solitude, fountain, myths, flower branch, and transparency," along with the combination of "fluid intimacy of space," are all parts of Kiarostami's film, serving as cinematic vocabulary.
In the aspect of "form", Kiarostami has developed an internal structure that aligns with Sohrab's poetry. The initial and concluding symmetry of the film and the narrative journey between two essential points in the film are equivalent to the two key interrogative sentences in Sohrab's poetry, which are placed at the beginning and end of the poem. The main essence of the poem, with its narrative quality, flows through this interval, and all scenes and sequences are shaped based on Sohrab's poetic content.
Moreover, in the "narrator" aspect, both artists have utilized a knowledgeable and outward-speaking narrator. This knowledgeable narrator in Sohrab's poetry narrates the affairs and actions of the "rider," while in Kiarostami's film, it transforms into the camera, accompanying the main character (Ahmad) everywhere, ultimately becoming another narrator like music, evoking the mystical space of Sohrab's poetry.
Finally, the discussion revolves around the "theme" and "content." Kiarostami, with his earthly interpretation of Sohrab's spiritual and mystical poetry, interconnects the characters of the "rider" and the "passerby" from Sohrab's poetry through the motivating force of "love" in his film, arriving at the fundamental question of the poem, from his own perspective: "Where is the Friend's Home?" He also transforms elements such as the "tree," which in Sohrab's poetry has a mythological dimension, into a philosophical and humanistic concept.
This comprehensive approach illustrates Kiarostami's masterful adaptation of Sohrab's poetry into a cinematic masterpiece, shedding light on the intricate layers of meaning and artistic choices made in the process.