Akbar Zanjanpour: Society Has Become Commercialized / I Have Come to Protest

Akbar Zanjanpour is currently staging the play "Island" by Athol Fugard, in which he performs alongside Saeed Dakh.

Akbar Zanjanpour does not like passivity. At the age of 80, he still appears on stage with a fresh mind and energy. He does not follow a prescription for anyone and always pays attention to the needs of the society in his artistic choices.

These days, Zanjanpour is performing the play "Jazeera" written by Athol Fugard. He plays a role in this show along with Saeed Dakh.

What you have in front of you is Ambassador Arjan's conversation with this veteran artist:

If you agree, let's talk about choosing the text first. You have mostly focused on performing plays by Chekhov or Miller, but what made you choose a play by Athol Fugard for your new performance?

Every choice has issues. It's not like I sit in my house and decide to stage a play. A series of events leads us to perform a certain play. Before Corona, I decided to perform the play "Poetry" by Eugene O'Neill, but the number of actors was too many. I also wanted the main hall, not to show off, but for the actors to have space to work, but it was not agreed to give a hall. For example, they said to come in 4 years and the result was that I didn't work during that entire period, but then I saw that by not working, I was betraying myself. Therefore, I requested to perform at Chaharso Hall, which was also left unanswered, and finally, two years ago, I performed the "Acting" show at Iranshahr Theater. It was a three-pronged work. Anyway, I agreed to perform plays with little characters so that I could at least have a theater to perform in, and I thought that if that didn't work, I would have to go to a shop and work somewhere. This is how I was drawn to work like this. But choosing the play "Jazeera" was not forced, because the concern of performing this play was with me since the late 50s.

And now you answered this concern.

Anyway, the light our friends had lit guided us to find the "Island". I had read it since the same years when this play was translated, in the same years 58, 59 we rehearsed it for a day or two, but other things came up and finally, during this period, the name of "Island" was drawn. I need to explain about the name of the show. An island means a place in the middle of water. In the black holes of the prison that exists in our play, a figure like Nelson Mandela has been imprisoned for years, which means, in a way, it can be said that it is a place of discovery and human intuition like him. During discovery and intuition, a person finds things in himself that exist in nature. All this made me see "The Island" as a gift for the stage. Some viewers compare the tension of this play with my previous plays. By the way, this work is very long. However, all its tension is internal and it has nothing outside. It is like a hero like Muhammad Ali Kelly, without taking the form of a hero, is sitting somewhere like an ordinary person. If you don't know who he is, what you want to discover in him, there is no discovery.

- The story of the show "Jazeera" is about two prisoners and the issue of prison is discussed in it...

Yes, but here the actor and the director also have an inner prison that they have to set in motion in order to understand the pain of that prison that is written in the play, otherwise it will not be possible to present a proper performance. For example, a stereotyped thing is to handcuff the prisoners so that they cannot move or to put a bar in front of them, but none of these is the correct view of the category of being a prisoner. Of course, I mean the inner prison of every human being, not a prison in the philosophical sense. But prison in the sense that, for example, in my life, I have been trying to do many things since I was a child, but none of them have been done, and all these failures put me behind bars. It means that I am also a prisoner and one of the reasons I chose to perform "Jazirah" was first to discover my inner prison and then to discover the prison inside the characters of the play. We all have a series of prisons that must meet to create art. This means that the character of the play and the real actor of the work come close to each other in the process of training and transformation takes place. It is as if a baby is born who is no longer an actor or a character. That is, a third character is created; A new prisoner who now has to see what his pain is and share it with the audience who also has his own inner prison and they collide and an incident occurs which is again internal and not external.

- The play "Jazeera" is one of the works that bring Iran to the audience today. How much do you pay attention to the needs of the society in choosing the play?

My choices have always been based on the needs of society; It means that I have never done anything without paying attention to the needs of the time and society. In "Worly Gorilla" the issue of human transformation within itself is raised. We were in a situation where people saw themselves in the wall instead of seeing themselves in the mirror. These metamorphoses made me go to the "woolly gorilla". In that period and in the same way in other periods, all the works were formed based on the needs of the time and were never made without reason or arbitrarily.

- And of course, the grace of this work is that you do not show addressing the needs of the society in a very clear and slogan way in your works so that the audience rejects it.

When art shows off and flaunts itself, the audience distances itself from it. We Iranians have a proverb: "First prove your brotherhood, then claim your inheritance." We must first prove our brotherhood with the audience; First, we have to show our sympathy to him so that he also says: "I also sympathize with you." This must happen.

- By performing this show, you returned to acting again, while you had been away from this profession for some time.

I have never distanced myself from anything. For example, there were four films that I didn't like to act in and I didn't; But this does not mean that I distance myself from cinema. I have not distanced myself from anything; But it did not happen. However, if I am invited to work and it is the right job, why not?

Perhaps part of the reason for your distance from acting is that those you used to collaborate with are no longer present in our artistic space.

This is definitely it. Unfortunately, our theater directors, who had something to say, have often passed away and we only hesitate because they are not there. If they were, our situation would be better; Maybe our acting situation was better. For example, Bahram Baizai, who was present in both cinema and theater, Nasser Taqvai and Dariush Mehrjooi; These were the great directors of Iranian cinema, none of them are anymore. On the other hand, now the cinema is in a situation where the director has to seek the producer's satisfaction only. In such a situation, he can come and say I have something to say, this is my word and this is my film?

If something is to be done for the benefit of the art of this country and for the benefit of each and every one of its people, it is necessary for the authorities to have a new look at the issue of film production and theater production; What does producer mean? The producer himself must have relevant education. Not that he is someone who, for example, has a company and money in the business of cleaning carpets and rugs. He is not to blame; As an official, I should not tell a carpet buff to become a producer. In all parts of the world that have proper cinema, the producers have a university education and have studied the field of production. In such a chaotic situation, how can a human being be given meaning in a work of art? If there was no artistic taste, not even a shot of a movie like "The Godfather" would have been taken. Everything needs order and law and must be accounted for.

Unfortunately, this confused situation has entered the theater as well, and in this field too, money has become the determining factor and criterion for many things.

In several interviews, I have discussed what money can mean for an artist. Money should be to the extent that it makes a person unnecessary; But if it exceeds the need, it makes a person a beggar. Yes, it means that a person is constantly looking for money and he doesn't care how he gets that money anymore; He just wants to make money. That's when it comes to money laundering. Who is running the theater now? private theaters whose duties are clear; They have come to earn their money. In contrast, a handful of poor actresses have to work because they have to pay for the house and there is nothing else they can afford to do. This situation is sad, but if we didn't have these problems, we could now talk about Chekhov's existential philosophy. Or what Maxim Gorky and Shakespeare say, or what Sophocles said three thousand years ago that still has buyers. We should talk about these, not about the producers, but now we are talking about them and this is a disaster.

Antigone is also mentioned in the play "The Island" and this play is still used in our lives today.

Human pain always has a meaning throughout history and geography. As long as there is humanity, there is oppression, oppression, imprisonment and misery. Look, all the people whose lives are tied with pain and have no other choice, their fate is the same everywhere in the world. But the rich are not alike; For example, one gets rich through crime, another through cannibalism, but the looted people, who make up the whole of human society, are all the same and they die in the same way.

- One of the subjects that engages the viewer's mind after watching "The Island" is that the character of the prisoner who is going to be released in three months and is counting the days for this freedom, does he know how to live in the open space after being released from prison?

He knows but he can't, he has given his life for the freedom of himself and others, but when he comes out, in this free life, the first thing he faces is bad history; Because he was in prison, he cannot work and has thousands of other stigmas and labels. So freedom basically does not exist. That's why I considered this character sad in the performance. From the moment he realizes that he is going to be free, he wants to be free, but it is only then that he understands his new condition and is destroyed. He must experience all this. Even his friend says that your freedom stinks and he suspects that he sold himself or someone else, but it is clear that he did not sell human beings. However, he never laughs again. Before, when he was a prisoner, he used to laugh. That happiness will never happen again and cannot happen. Now, if we look at the performance superficially, when he comes in front of his friend, he should smile and break the women, saying I am freed, but he comes in silence; He is afraid, he is afraid of everything. This freedom can be shown with joy and happiness, and then the two prisoners end the story by fighting, but it is unrealistic. The reality is that the one who comes out, his prison is just beginning.

And this is the human suffering that continues and you are showing the suffering of a part of the people by performing this act.

yes I have not come to talk about them secretly and sneakily; I have come to protest. My objection is: Why does this situation exist? Let me also say that I am not offering any prescriptions for what to do. It means that here we have tried to define freedom; This means that the audience is free to like or dislike this performance. Whatever decision he makes is up to him. We don't light a match to point somewhere and say get out of here. This performance has absolutely none of that. The audience decides.

- You work in very difficult conditions, we have many social and economic problems. In recent years, we have sometimes been faced with the idea that it is better not to work in this situation, but I ask for the young generation, which is somehow confused and surprised, what function do you think theater can have in this situation?

Anyone is free not to see or perform theater. We cannot make everyone become a director or an actor by injecting money or vitamins because everyone has a capacity. In the whole world and in the whole history, everyone has his own capacity. Besides, everyone has an opinion. The good condition is that everyone does his work with his own point of view, without harming others. For example, among writers, we have Tolstoy at the top of Russia, Maxim Gorky at the bottom, and Chekhov in the middle. These three have three different views. Tolstoy is a pious, pious and very precise person, and he is also a genius. Chekhov writes about human loneliness, both individually and collectively. Gurki is also a revolutionary. These three have three different views and their views are not close to each other at all, but they love each other passionately. That is, at that time, when there was no plane or anything else, Gorky traveled from the bottom of the country for several months to reach Tolstoy, where they could see each other and talk to each other for a week. But if you read their writings, they have nothing to do with each other. However, they all know that everyone's thoughts are valuable for themselves; For this reason, they can live together with different views.

We see each other's game here and we hate each other why it plays like this. Our problem is not a cultural problem; It is a matter of eating and being raised. We are not looking for a philosophical view of life. If we were, we would be good together. But they love each other with three different worlds. For this reason, they can be Tolstoy, Gorky or Chekhov.

But sometimes they criticize and reject the lack of knowledge of our greatest authors. In our same performance, one person said that he was an unprofessional spectator and said that he was upset with this work because it is wrong. He can not like the work, but he cannot judge that it is wrong without knowledge. The question is why non-expert opinions are allowed to be published. This is dangerous for the country's culture. While in this culture of ours, Saadi says: "How nice Ferdowsi Pakzad said / may mercy be on that pure turbat". That is, several centuries after Ferdowsi, he praises him. This is why we have Ferdowsi, Saadi, Hafez and Molavi. But after them, why don't we have such faces anymore? From somewhere in history, every few hundred years, a Maulvi suddenly appears. But why not? Because society does not demand; The society has become a businessman.

Professor, you work in a situation where many directors give up on many of their ideas, for example, in the design of sets and clothes, etc., in order to save money. Did the same happen to your work? Especially when you use video projection, which of course is woven into the whole work and does not have an ornamental aspect. But did you have the idea of ​​using video projection from the beginning?

Yes, this was the idea from the beginning, but we brought it to the stage with claws and teeth. It means that we did not have good financial conditions at all, but what is on the stage is what we wanted. That is, we did not ignore anything. That is, there is only a thin blanket on our beds, we wanted it ourselves. Even these two beds are too many and it is only because the audience can understand the condition of these two prisoners. This show should pass in nothing. Anyway, we implemented this work, but we were facing very, very, very serious financial problems, and we are and will be.

- At the beginning of our conversation, you mentioned the regrets that imprison us. You are an artist who has done great things since you were young, one of the famous examples of which is playing the role of Alfred Ill in the show "Meeting the Old Lady" where you played a role that was 20 years older than your actual age. You have cooperated with the great directors of the country, from Mr. Thargyan to Baizaei and Rafiei. But if you look back, what were the roles that you didn't get the chance to play and became regretful for you, and on the other hand, what were the roles you had in the theater?

Everything I have done in the theater has been successful because the audience liked it and that is good. But I always wanted to play these two roles, but I didn't get the chance; Lotf Ali Khan Zand, whom I loved to play in my youth, and Agha Mohammad Khan Qajar.

Yes, one is good and the other is bad, but in a play we can discuss what good and bad are and which of these characters has worked for the benefit of history. I like both of these characters very much, but I am not young enough to play the role of Lotf Ali Khan, and Agha Mohammad Khan, who...

Is there a play that you really want to direct but haven't had the chance yet?

Yes, but I don't have the energy to direct anymore, not that I don't work. I will definitely work. Sometimes there is the energy to go out and work in the middle of the field and sometimes not. If I want to plan a text performance, one of these plays is Akbar Radi's "Saviour on a Humid Morning" and another is "Poetry" by Eugene O'Neill. I never got to act in one of Rudy's plays and he complained about it. Our relationship was very deep and friendly; Of course, he is a professor and I am a junior. I really like his work.

They have the mood of Chekhov's works.

He became a writer under the influence of Chekhov. Through Shahin Sarksian, after reading the play "Seagull" by Chekhov, he wrote the play "Blue Hole". Shahin Sarkisian died during the performance of this work, and the "blue hole" was placed in his coffin as a symbol of his failure.

- And as a final question, during the many years of your activity, you have experienced many hardships, from coups to revolutions and wars, etc., but what gives you the energy to continue to come on stage with a fresh mind and high energy? For example, you say that I don't have the ability to direct, but I definitely work. What keeps your engine running?