A Separation: An Aristotelian Drama

The level and type of emotion evoked by a work of art hinges upon the combination of multiple parts working in unison to produce a single force. In storytelling, as Aristotle defines in his essay Poetics, the plot is described as “an arrangement of incidents” that are “constructed dramatically, round a single piece of action, whole and complete in itself… so that like a living organism it may produce its own form of peculiar pleasure” (Aristotle). In the events that unfold in A Separation, a 2011 film directed by Asghar Farhadi, there is a similar certain pleasure exuded by the film that is achieved through precise plotting. Engaging the framework of Aristotle’s notion of tragedy with the narrative arrangement of A Separation, I argue that, following the idea of narrative unity, achievement of emotional effects, and the role of causation, A Separation’s macrostructure functions as an Aristotelian drama.

            

In the Aristotelian method, an essential determinant to a drama’s ability to emotionally affect the audience is dependent upon changes to the status quo and the uncovering of new information. Using the term “reversal,” Aristotle defines such an instance as “a change by which the action veers round to its opposite, subject always to our rule of probability or necessity” (Aristotle). Furthermore, Aristotle, specifies the importance of individual reversals or discoveries by characterizing them with certain degrees of “magnitude,” or how big of a swing occurs from good fortune to bad fortune (Aristotle). Viewing the events of A Separation through this lens, much of the action unfolding in the story space employs reversals to facilitate emotional effect. In the film, Razieh, the caretaker of Nader’s father, is introduced as a convenient assistance for Nader since his wife, Simin, has moved out. When Nader returns home one day to find his father tied to his bedpost, while lying on the ground unconscious, there occurs the first severe reversal. Over the course of the remainder of the film, two other strong reversals occur, with the accusation of Nader causing Razieh’s miscarriage, and with Razieh’s admission of being hit by a car one day prior to her fight with Nader. The presence of these reversals is central to the acute emotions of distress evoked by the film, and their nature runs parallel to the arguments put forth by Aristotle.

            

It must be known that the effects of reversals are heightened when working in tandem with the use of discoveries. Describing the function of reversals and discoveries together, Aristotle states, “A Complex action is one in which the change is accompanied by such Reversal, or by Recognition, or by both” (Aristotle). When occurring simultaneously, the surprise and sentimental response is greater than it would be if a reversal or discovery were communicated in isolation. This “recognition” is made when information unbeknownst to the viewer is revealed. Much of the visceral reactions coming from the plot in A Separation are built by discovery. More interesting though, I argue, is that the most pivotal reversals of the film could all equally be defined as discoveries. With this knowledge, there is also arguably a case to call for an adjustment of terminology to be made, for I would foresee a pattern in many other cases of storytelling in which such reversals in the status quo are achieved through the unveiling of new information.

            

Discovery acts in further ways in the film, however. The daughter being emotionally torn asunder during the Nader’s and Simin’s tumultuous relationship, Termer, is a hub of discovery within the plot. Acting as a source of hidden information, Termeh announcements are critical to the viewer’s perception of Nader’s potential guilt and the future well being of their family. It is via Termeh’s communication with her father that the viewer is informed of two crucial pieces of information: Nader’s knowledge of Razieh’s pregnancy before the incident and Simin’s intentions to move back home. With these acts, I argue Termeh is the most Aristotelian character in A Separation. As a source recognition and reversal in the story, and for other reasons mentioned later, Termeh is a common medium through which Farhadi creates an Aristotelian drama.

            

The events of an Aristotelian drama, perhaps interrelated with the phenomenon of discovery and reversal, follow the assertions of Aristotle that a story does not contain a sequence in which the events hold no causal relevance to one another. Instead, as Seymour Chatman describes in his essay Story and Discourse, the sequence is “radically correlative, enchaining, entailing” (Chatman 45). Not only do the events carry a strong bond to each other, but Aristotle further asserts that, these connections should be related well enough that the basic cohesion of the story depends on their alignment. “The component incidents must be so arranged that if one of them be transposed or removed, the unity of the whole is dislocated and destroyed” (Aristotle). Although challenging to fully prove, I argue that the camerawork, gestures, and dialogue used in the film are highly instrumental to the effect the film has as a unified piece of art. Juxtaposed to other viewed films I argue to be more non-Aristotelian, such as Oslo, August 31^st, the comprehension of A Separations events are much more reliant on the presence of previous developments. For example, if the shot of Razieh running into the street to stop Nader’s father from leaving the house were absent from the film, Razieh’s confession that a car hit her would be received with great confusion. Furthermore, in more abstract form, the use of windows as dividing forces of the characters exhibited in the camerawork seek to metaphorically express the barriers of tension and frustration felt between Nader, Simin, and Termeh. Analyzing the degree interrelatedness across the plot, as well as the meaningful use of such symbolic barriers, Farhadi is both implicitly and explicitly constructing a strong Aristotelian plot.

            

As previously mentioned, causality is crucial to the forward movement of the plot. In dissecting the inner workings of the plots motivations, I find Seymour Chatman to have a noteworthy addition to Aristotle’s theory. Chatman argues for a more encompassing theoretical framework, in which the term “contingency” is employed rather than “causality.” For a stories plot to hinge on contingency, Chatman states the characters and plot depend on something not yet certain (Chatman 47). I find this theoretical lens to be a valid extension of Aristotle’s causation, finding profound pertinence to the narrative of A Separation. Much of the dramatic tension riddled throughout the story space is communicated via the uncertainty of future events. The plausibility that Simin and Nader will remain separated, the legitimacy of Nader’s guilt, and the true cause of the miscarriage, all generate room for internal debate for the viewer. On a more micro scale, the viewer is plagued with uncertainty by the volatility of Hodjat, Razieh’s husband, whose threats to Nader put the safety of the family in jeopardy. I assert that this duty granted to the viewer to act as the judge of the events, with its associated anxiety, is a highly Aristotelian quality. Through the contingency created by the plot’s events and the manifestation of unpredictability, A Separation exemplifies a plot structure representative of Aristotelian narrative theory.

            

Coexistent with the role of contingency present in A Separation are the developments of complication and denouement. As a significant factor of the theory of Aristotelian narrative macrostructure, complication is “all that which extends from the beginning of the action to the part which marks the turning point to good or bad fortune” (Aristotle). I make the case that the focal point of the plot, which marks the end of the complication is the scene in which Razieh first admits to Simin that she had been hit by a car. Up until this point, the tumultuous nature of the plot continuously builds, creating the entanglement defined by Aristotle. Until this moment, Nader’s innocence cannot go unchallenged. It is once Razieh divulges this information that we, as viewers, perceive a notable swing from unfortunate to fortunate circumstances. The magnitude of this swing it the greatest in the film. The denouement, for Aristotle, is less strict in definition, only marking the “beginning of the change to the end” (Aristotle). Nonetheless, there is a distinct mounting of tension that leads up to the discovery of the miscarriage’s true cause. Through the formation of this Aristotelian complication, A Separation lays the ground for a peak in the plot and sets the stage for an emotional necessity for narrative closure.

            

The sense of unity Aristotle calls for in narrative structure is incomplete without the presence of closure. Juxtaposed to the convention of closure in the classical system, the conclusion of A Separation may appear to be less comprehensive in its ability to “wrap things up,” as they say. However, I contend that the denouement of A Separation falls neatly within the theoretical framework of Aristotle, acting as an undeniably cogent example of narrative closure. In his essay Narrative Closure, Noel Carroll outlines Aristotle’s concept of unity, stating that his idea of completeness “is a representation of an action where the representation itself excites the apprehension of closure” (Carroll 3). Clearly, the previous delineated theories regarding complication, discovery and reversal, as well as contingency, contribute together to produce an emotional reaction. By achieving this reaction Farhadi created a key narrative structure in Aristotelian theory. “Once the irrational has been introduced and an air of likelihood imparted to it, we must accept it in spite of its absurdity” (Aristotle). At its most complex, the plot of A Separation reaches a state of ridiculousness in which the repercussions for the incident explode beyond prediction. Yet, the predicament is strong in its believability, a triumph as an Aristotelian drama. Carroll points out, Aristotle views a story of successful narrative closure to be one in which the audience is willingly anticipating the culmination of events. Through its organization, A Separation forges entanglement and evokes uncertainty in a compelling fashion, which causes this described phenomenon; the viewer needs and asks to be enlightened by how the actions will conclude

             

Some theorists may argue that the plot structure of A Separation exhibits more of a non-Aristotelian form. The source of one main argument could be the evidence that the narrative does not follow one story line, but that the film diverges into the space of two separate narratives. The story of Nader and Simin’s separation carries narrative consequences throughout the film as does the narrative between Razieh and Nader concerning the accusations that Nader caused her miscarriage. Certainly, both cases present looming repercussions in the film, but I refute that the two narratives, holding events consequential to one another, form one intertwined story space. The well being of the couples’ marriage in the film is placed in limbo from the upstart. However, the emotional stress placed on Nader and Simin from Razieh’s miscarriage is directly essential to the outcome of the narrative of their relationship, and vice versa. The event causes Simin to challenge Nader’s honesty and for Nader to attempt to place blame on Simin for hiring Razieh. Although possible to claim the narrative as split, the direction the separation of Nader and Simin takes is at the mercy of how Nader’s court case unfolds.

            

Arguably the most central aspect of the Aristotelian drama is the presence and development of the film’s protagonist. This alone could also, in the eyes of some theorists, place A Separations ability to act as an Aristotelian drama at risk. Despite the strong presence and focalization of multiple characters in the film, Termeh is the centerpiece of A Separation. Her character’s actions carry direct influence on many of the film’s developments and the actions of others are essential in the well being of her character. Although not explicitly expressed as classical Hollywood films, Termeh has a heroic dilemma: save her parents from a pending divorce and happily reunite their family. Her efforts are to thwart her parents’ separation are, at times, more clear, such as when she pleads for her father to let her mother come home. Nonetheless, in the end, her attempts are fruitless. Under the six types of Aristotelian heroes described by Chatman, one keenly describes the role of Termeh as “the noble hero” who “fails through miscalculation, which arouses our fear and pity.” Amid all the chaos created by the plot, there is a common emotion the viewer is aware of: the hope for Nader and Simin to reunite, ending Termeh of her suffering.  As Termeh stands before the judge in the film’s closing seconds, her pain is a testament to her heroic actions. With the establishment of Termeh as the film’s protagonist, A Separation acts as a complete example for the Aristotelian drama.

           

           

 Works Cited

Aristotle. Poetics. N.p.: The Project Gutenberg, 2008. N. pag. Print.

Carroll, Noel. "Narrative Closure." Philosophical Studies 135.1 (2007): 1-15. Print.

Chatman, Seymour. Story and Discourse: Narrative Structure in Fiction. Ithaca:             Cornell University Press, 1978. 1-138. Print.

Film Grade: Flat 9