" Everything is rhythm";
The same title "everything is rhythm", even in life.
When the life rhythm becomes slow or unbalanced, as an arrhythmia, the sad story of mass depression begins. That's why I love Milos Furman's work “Amadeus” so much and it's my favorite movie. The duration of the movie is three hours, and every time I play the movie to watch a part of it, I watch it till the end, Unconscious and uninterrupted.
Arjang, rhythm, and color made by one of the artists the Kamkar family artists (Hana), is about another artist (Arjang). The family that was always a question for me, was what kind of family they were. What is their father's relationship with art and family? How much has he contributed to the development of this artist family? How supportive was their mother? You know! Sometimes I think that in this family, the father has to play his instrument from morning to night, read poetry, watch movies, draw pictures, etc. and the mother does all these things in addition to housework so that the children have something to eat. In the meantime, the children have grown up. But the film doesn't tell you anything strange and explosive. Maybe he doesn't want to say it and simply organizes it. The film only introduces a large family, all of whom are art lovers, and does not make myths about parents. Parents are different and it should be like that, but like the other Kurdistan Region, they are simple and Pure. Without pretensions and artistic Sys. Without shouting what they have grown inside. Without flaunting what many aspire to. This is the pure simplicity that the world's greatest artists have. For example, see one of Hans Zimmer's recent concerts; Dressing, behaving, directing, etc, all of that are simple and pure.
The charm of the film is due to these curious wanderings. The same curiosities a few lines ago that I had about the Kamkar family and Arjang himself. For example, where and how did these artists live together? Or that Arjang's mother was the first buyer of one of his paintings. A place that is attractive to all of us. Even if we are on the bus and someone tells the story of his life to his friend, we imperceptibly sharpen our ears to hear and record the other person's biography in our heads. So, let me first say that the subject is more interesting than the structure of the film itself. I have only seen Hanna Kamkar playing music and acting. Maybe he made other movies too, but this work is not something strange and different in terms of structure and form. it's simple. Of course, not in a bad way. It is simple, like the main role of the movie, Arjang. like their family. Form and content match together. But one thing is missing, which I will get to later. Because before I get to this topic, I have to mention that in my opinion, no one but one from this family could have created a work about themselves. Someone must make a documentary of one of the Kamkars who has lived among them for years and knows them. So, in my opinion, no one but the producer herself, who gave herself the strength and courage to make this work and did the work, can make a documentary with the same depth.
But what was missing is that the name of the documentary is Rhythm and Color, music and rhythm are an integral part of Arjang's life, and a large part (if not all) of Arjang's paintings are owed to a rhythm.
It seemed that we should see a more rhythmic film, that brings us to a poetic documentary or at least close to it. Or maybe dedicating a part of the film to this rhythm or using rhythm and image (for example, something close to video clips) seemed more logical. I don't mean the first few seconds of the movie, because it's too short and it's not coherent. But Hana Kamkar didn't go this way because maybe she didn't want to make it too difficult. But we must know that we live in rhythm, and if we look at the best movies of our life, the ones that have been very attractive to us and have engaged our minds even after they are finished, are the ones that have the right rhythm. For example, in Furman's "Amadeus", in my opinion, he used the equivalence of film and music very accurately. This was my re-emphasis that "everything is rhythm" and Arjang was inspired by music and rhythm for painting too.
I said about the simplicity of the form and narration of this work and even its similarity to many other documentaries, but it's time to get to the interesting part of the story. It is the subject itself. Arjang is an inventor, a painter, a musician, a thinker, a reader of philosophy and a philosopher, a composer, and in one comprehensive word: a dreamer. An important example of this imagination is when on the way back from Kurdan, he hears the sound of his bag and painting tools calling his name (Arjang, Arjang, ...). A fantasy born of a common voice misunderstanding.
He made many of his tools for drawing by himself and his artistic thinking is the most interesting part of the subject of this film. to use any substrate to spray paint on it; This means that instead of canvas, for example, this can be carpet, wood, fabric, etc. Or use any tools for drawing, such as cloth, roller, slippers, etc. These are the mastery of tools that Arjang himself emphasizes in the film.
Arjang Kamkar used the word “tool” and it is not a wrong word. Even Khosro Sinai, who was one of the visitors to the Arjang exhibition, emphasizes the fact that the art itself is a tool. Arjang has so much to say that he takes little time to say it with this tool. He boldly and without fear declares that what drew him to paint was not painting itself because he sees painting as a tool. There is something else I will get to. Arjang's artistic thinking is the DNA of his life. where he says he thinks about what color is dying. Now let's add another thought to this thought: What sound do these spirits make when they rise, other than color? What do they look like? What is their figure, movement, and facial expression? Another example of Arjang's artistic thinking is that he spent years trying to understand what color the word "Ch" is. If it is the first word, what color is it, and if it comes somewhere else, what color will it be?
Arjang has no limits for this type of life, thinking, and working. He reveals his postmodern character many times in this documentary. where he is talking about a painting and talking about the constant movement between multiplicity and unity. Or where he talks about Arjang's reproduction and the use of the same etude in his works. It's as if he was influenced by the Matrix without knowing it, and he refers to the film and us to it. Or elsewhere when he talks about mixing newspapers with Moulinex and making materials to set up a work of art. From collages in the works, they can even be touched so that the audience can establish a closer relationship with them. This is what Arjang likes: using more and more dimensions for the viewer to deal more easily with a work. But the most important part of this postmodernity of Arjang is where we hear the music piece "Rah". An epic theme that is reminiscent of Vangelis' works, is the main melody of the work and the responses that are given to the melody within the song. How good are these answers and it shows pure postmodernism. All we hear in response are natural sounds. The sound of nature and animals does create a little comedy. Arjang's character and thinking are postmodern.
Perhaps it is for these reasons that in this film Arjang himself and the form and type of his thinking are more important than emphasizing more on his works. In addition, the audio and listening weight of the film, both in the narrative and in the overall output, is greater than its visual.
A very interesting point for me was the connection of this character with cinema. On the way of hearing and narrating how to become a painter and what to read, Arjang tells various things, for example, the books that Houshang Kamkar brought to him from America. But the body of all influences is one thing: nature. That is the nature of Kurdistan city. Just like the world's most important filmmakers who have been nourished by classic cinema, such as Kubrick, and even surrealist filmmakers such as Lynch. This body is so thick that it has no limit and this connection is so deep that it has no parallel. This is the link that separates the artist from his tools and shows the artist's relationship with his artistic tools in a metaphysical body.
Arjang has followed the path of many artists. Being lost somewhere along the way and confused about what to do. Imitating and staying in the Platonic and Aristotelian philosophical dilemma that Mimesis is the right thing or not. Is the artist's job an imitation or not? After that, he comes to Tehran, gets accepted to a university, studies, and gains experience, and maybe the path will be much smoother for him, especially after he gets married. Because it does not say anything about this wandering in that era.
A lot of effort and time has been spent to produce this documentary. This is clear from the appearance of Arjang, who in one scene in the film is very young and his beard and hair are not white at all, the use of their private archive, the speaks of his wife, Mahnaz, as well as the opening and recorded films during Arjang's first exhibition. In my opinion, his private life is also shown well.
But one thing remains an abstraction. My interest is in this type of art, and when Mahnaz, Arjang's wife, says that painting and music are intertwined in her husband and this has complicated his mind, it indicates how much fantasy and abstraction is in this artist. So if you, like me, like to enjoy a different and special experience, don't miss watching this documentary.
And in the end, I must say; Mr. Arjang Kamkar, among all the remaining works of yours that I could see in this documentary, none of them was more eye-catching for me than that red abstract painting, at the 2:53 minute of the movie.
Masoud Esmaeili