بازنمايي چالش‌هاي روشنفكر طبقه متوسط شهري در سينماي پايان دهه 1360 ايران

I R A N I A N C I N E M A R E P R E S E N T I N G T H E I N T E L L E C T U A LC H A L L E N G E S O F M I D D L E C L A S S S O C I E T Y

فيلم‌ها در هر دوره تاريخي تا حدود زيادي تحت تاثير شرايط اجتماعي حاكم، به بازنمايي ايديولوژي طبقه مسلط پرداخته و هريك به نحوي به استيضاح مخاطبان و برساخت سوژه مي‌پردازند. فيلم هامون كه در پايان دهه 1360 شمسي ساخته شد و با استقبال بسياري نيز مواجه گرديد، از جمله اين فيلم هاست كه متاثر از بافت تاريخي و اجتماعيِ عصري كه در آن قرار گرفته با بازنمايي چالش‌هاي روشنفكر طبقه متوسط شهري‌ با مناسبات حاكم بر خود زندگي در جهت استيضاح مخاطبان موفق عمل كرده است. در اين مقاله هدف اصلي واكاوي رمزگان فيلم هامون، در جهت فهم چگونگي بازنمايي چالش‌هاي روشنفكر طبقه متوسط شهري در سينماي پايان دهه 1360 ايران است. در اين راه، به نشانه‌شناسي دو سكانس ابتدايي و انتهايي اين فيلم پرداخته‌ايم و رمزگان اين سكانس‌ها را در جهت پاسخ به اين سوال كليدي كه چرا شخصيت اول فيلم كه نمونه روشنفكر طبقه متوسط شهري است، در انتهاي حيات پرچالش‌اش به اين نتيجه مي‌رسد كه بايد خود را نابود ‌كند، به كار گرفته‌ايم. با استفاده از مفاهيم ايديولوژي از لويي آلتوسر، دلالت‌هاي ثانويه اسطوره زمان حاضر از رولن بارت و روشنفكر از آنتونيو گرامشي و چارچوب روش‌شناختي متاثر از نشانه‌شناسي جان فيسك به اين نتيجه مي رسيم كه روشنفكر طبقه متوسط شهري در مواجهه با طبقه بالا به سوژه بودن خود پي‌برده است و حاضر به توضيح وضع موجود نيست، بنابراين درصدد بر مي‌آيد با خودكشي، خود را از مناسبات حاكم بر حيات اجتماعي برهاند.

Throughout history, films have always been influenced by the social conditions of the societies in which they were made, often, representing the ideology of their middle class, probing their audience, and presenting new themes. Hamoon is the name of a feature film made at the end of 1980s which won great acclaim. It was influenced by historical and social fabric of its time and was successful in representing challenges facing middle class intellectuals as well as relations in everyday life. The main goal of this paper is to explain the reasons behind the success of that film. The main question of this study, which results from the tragic end of the movie, is why Hamid should be perished in Hamoon? Death, or in other words, salvation of Hamoon as a result of suicide at the end of the film has been explained in various critiques as a symbol of confrontation between tradition and modernity and representation of failed intellectuals…. The issue that has been seldom mentioned in those critiques and is the main subject of this study is why the result of challenging life of Hamoon cannot be anything but suicide? The fact that Hamoon should commit suicide in order to inspire the audience with a sense of salvation will get us close to the true meaning of ideology as represented in this film. Banking on theories of Louis Althusser on ideology, Roland Barthes on secondary indications of contemporary myths, and Antonio Gramsci on intellectuals and by taking advantage of John Fiske’s methodological framework, we will try to answer the main question which is why the leading character should die? After explaining semiology of the opening and closing sequences of the film, we have concluded that in the sequence when Hamoon meets Mahshid, we are faced with a traditional intellectual figure who is trying to be assimilated by the higher class. That assimilation is apparently due to Hamoon’s 90-percent love for Mahshid and the commitment of an intellectual figure for enlightening the masses. Our analysis, however, would reveal that bourgeoisie which is filled with instrumental rationality is looking for a means to realize class congruity and this is why it accepts Hamoon. However, in the closing sequence and due to what has happened to Hamoon in the course of the film, he tries to prove his individuality by calling that class corrupt. He finds out about his social statues and turns his back to all symbols of the higher class, including is arts, by declining from becoming a tool. Bourgeoisie charges Hamoon as being a carefree man in order to convince the audience by resorting to a mediocre excuse. However, the main reason behind the separation between the intellectual man and the higher class is his effort to refrain from being used as a subject and is not ready to give in to class rules in order to justify the status quo. Therefore, he decides to get rid of the relationship governing social life by committing suicide.