Narges as a Synecdoche
The story of Kalhor family sadly resembles today’s Iranian society
A few years ago, the Iranian TV broadcasted a foreign animation series which narrated the story of a family that shipwrecked and trapped in an uncharted island, united to stand against the threats and find their way back to the civilized world. The message was clear for teenagers: in the hardest times of life, and against unknown threats, peace can be achieved if we live peacefully with each other.
These days, news about an Iranian official’s family are making hot headlines. If a few months ago, senile cleric Abolqasem Khaz’ali pleaded to God from his son’s weblog posts and called him a disciple of Satan, or if a few years ago former Revolutionary Guards Commander Mohsen Rezaee tried to distance himself from his son who had sought asylum in Western countries, today, Ahmadinejad’s media advisor Mehdi Kalhor does not try to hide her daughter’s refuge to Europe, but claims that it is a sign of her freedom to make personal decisions.
He has tried to shift the responsibility however by claiming that he has divorced from his wife and does not live with his daughter. However, the lengthy, astonishing letter his wife Masumeh Taheri sent to a news agency gave new twist to the story, heavily contradicting Kalhor’s remarks.
Narges Kalhor is not the first artist who travels to Europe and seeks asylum. She is not also the first controversial figure after the revolution whose family ties with a well-known official reveal the latent paradoxes of the Iranian society. However, she was the first person whose asylum application has raised two big questions: which version of the story is true, Mehdi Kalhor’s or his Masumeh Taheri’s? And does Taheri’s denial of Kalhor’s claims undermine other remarks of Ahmadinejad’s media advisor? The second question concerns asylum application of the children of the ruling elite. If immigration is a personal issue, asylum application is a political act, and a reaction to the socio-political circumstances of one’s homeland.
Refugees or political activists are either dissident with the political developments of their country or pursued by the regime. Narges Kalhor is definitely from second group. Her family background attracted her to art and directing, but there were other factors which forced her to choose immigration as the best option and leave the country. Narges may be a typical case for analysis of the status quo. If this article names her and her parents, no offense is intended. She and her family are the exemplar of Iran’s today society with all its socio-political fissures.
The contemporary Iran is not a balanced society, neither with respect to cultural and economic development, nor to political inclinations, so it demonstrates unanticipated behaviors. With the way Kalhor family have depicted themselves, they are not a traditional, homogenous family. For Mehdi Kalhor, this is an evidence that freedom exists in Iran, but may be career restrictions have stopped him short of calling it diversity or an antipathy towards unity. Kalhor’s perception of her daughter’s asylum application (a sign of individual freedom) brings another question to mind: isn’t what Kalhor calls freedom a kind of rupture? It seems that Kalhor is trying to impose his governmental interpretation on the definition of asylum.
The contradictory versions of Narges’ story are somehow similar to the story of today’s Iranian society. As the head of the family, Kalhor says that his daughter’s action is proof to the existence of freedom in Iran, and he was not that close to her due to family problems. On the other hand, her mother says that she is still the legal wife of Mehdi Kalhor and has no political differences with her. Now look at Iranian politics: hardliners blame the other camp, regarding them not as competitors but as subversives. The reformists, however, want to stay within the political system and insist that all the problems are rooted in hardliners authoritarian behavior. The society is divided between these two camps. Supporters of the ruling camp believe that they are the absolute winners, while the other camp has never stopped protesting. Isolation, immigration and seeking asylum have been the society’s response to these fissures.
Kalhor’s narrative tries to whitewash the gap inside the family, and metonymically the entire Iranians society. The alignment within the family unwontedly resembles political segregations in Iranian politics. No feel-good interpretations and strategies can allay its bitterness. The first question now becomes less important, and what comes to fore is the second question: what drives the children of Iranian officials to seek asylum in Western countries?
These days, news about an Iranian official’s family are making hot headlines. If a few months ago, senile cleric Abolqasem Khaz’ali pleaded to God from his son’s weblog posts and called him a disciple of Satan, or if a few years ago former Revolutionary Guards Commander Mohsen Rezaee tried to distance himself from his son who had sought asylum in Western countries, today, Ahmadinejad’s media advisor Mehdi Kalhor does not try to hide her daughter’s refuge to Europe, but claims that it is a sign of her freedom to make personal decisions.
He has tried to shift the responsibility however by claiming that he has divorced from his wife and does not live with his daughter. However, the lengthy, astonishing letter his wife Masumeh Taheri sent to a news agency gave new twist to the story, heavily contradicting Kalhor’s remarks.
Narges Kalhor is not the first artist who travels to Europe and seeks asylum. She is not also the first controversial figure after the revolution whose family ties with a well-known official reveal the latent paradoxes of the Iranian society. However, she was the first person whose asylum application has raised two big questions: which version of the story is true, Mehdi Kalhor’s or his Masumeh Taheri’s? And does Taheri’s denial of Kalhor’s claims undermine other remarks of Ahmadinejad’s media advisor? The second question concerns asylum application of the children of the ruling elite. If immigration is a personal issue, asylum application is a political act, and a reaction to the socio-political circumstances of one’s homeland.
Refugees or political activists are either dissident with the political developments of their country or pursued by the regime. Narges Kalhor is definitely from second group. Her family background attracted her to art and directing, but there were other factors which forced her to choose immigration as the best option and leave the country. Narges may be a typical case for analysis of the status quo. If this article names her and her parents, no offense is intended. She and her family are the exemplar of Iran’s today society with all its socio-political fissures.
The contemporary Iran is not a balanced society, neither with respect to cultural and economic development, nor to political inclinations, so it demonstrates unanticipated behaviors. With the way Kalhor family have depicted themselves, they are not a traditional, homogenous family. For Mehdi Kalhor, this is an evidence that freedom exists in Iran, but may be career restrictions have stopped him short of calling it diversity or an antipathy towards unity. Kalhor’s perception of her daughter’s asylum application (a sign of individual freedom) brings another question to mind: isn’t what Kalhor calls freedom a kind of rupture? It seems that Kalhor is trying to impose his governmental interpretation on the definition of asylum.
The contradictory versions of Narges’ story are somehow similar to the story of today’s Iranian society. As the head of the family, Kalhor says that his daughter’s action is proof to the existence of freedom in Iran, and he was not that close to her due to family problems. On the other hand, her mother says that she is still the legal wife of Mehdi Kalhor and has no political differences with her. Now look at Iranian politics: hardliners blame the other camp, regarding them not as competitors but as subversives. The reformists, however, want to stay within the political system and insist that all the problems are rooted in hardliners authoritarian behavior. The society is divided between these two camps. Supporters of the ruling camp believe that they are the absolute winners, while the other camp has never stopped protesting. Isolation, immigration and seeking asylum have been the society’s response to these fissures.
Kalhor’s narrative tries to whitewash the gap inside the family, and metonymically the entire Iranians society. The alignment within the family unwontedly resembles political segregations in Iranian politics. No feel-good interpretations and strategies can allay its bitterness. The first question now becomes less important, and what comes to fore is the second question: what drives the children of Iranian officials to seek asylum in Western countries?