Globalized Dualism and its Effect on Mankind

Globalized Dualism and its Effect on Mankind
Stories are built upon the basis of conflict and resolution; when something is not right, it must be fixed. Thus the basis for modern storytelling and film is born. A story has no motion without conflict, which gives it the dynamics to make it pull at the emotions of its audience. Like the push and pull of the tides, a story progresses through the crests and troughs of the plot line until finally it climaxes, which is then generally followed by some sort of falling action. This entire act is made more drastic and given greater emphasis when considered with the idea of binary oppositions, or dualism. Seeing things in pairs of opposites can give the illusion of greater conflict with stark contrasts, leading to moments of dissonance within the plot line followed amelioration. The films No Man’s Land and Turtles Can Fly show these ideologies of binary oppositions within their own context, using similar themes to portray different storylines.
From the onset of the film No Man’s Land, the contrasts are thrust upon the viewer. In the middle of war, the two sides are watching over the small area that separates them, adding a physical element and explicit meaning to the underlying ideological divide. The two sides each think that they themselves are in the right and the other is completely and totally wrong, as is usually the case in almost any war. A viewer can take much more from this film than just those ideas drawn from the placing of the two sides. When the soldiers find themselves together in the trench, they at one point erupt into argument over which side started the war. This argument resurfaces multiple times, and each time the victor is the party who happens to be holding a gun at that moment.
Amy Corbin makes a very insightful point in her article saying, “When Ciki finds a gun and shoots Nino, Nino falls to the ground, filmed from a high-angle shot suggestive of Ciki’s point of view. (Tanovic often films from various subjective angles to underscore his point that wars always have multiple points of view, especially one with so many nations involved)” (Corbin 47). This is opposing to the general context of dualism, due to the fact that it bridges the gap between the two, showing that they are not so different from each other after all. With this the conflict shifts from primarily being between Nino and Ciki, the two soldiers from opposing sides, to being between them and everything that is outside of the trench. Their teamwork temporarily blurs the lines that divided them due to the innate need for survival. Bringing them closer together and thus bringing out one of the implicit meanings of the film in the universality of human-kind. This bond is formed over the course of the film, but it takes very little for it to digress back into the bitter animosity it once was. Thus, showing a feeling of reversion back to chaos, which through the eyes of the main U.N. soldier, shows a global attitude of hopelessness, both through his eyes and through those of the feuding sides.

Dualism plays a more subtle role in Turtles Can Fly, where the young and impoverished child followers of Satellite are seen as the opposite of the Americans who live in luxury with everything they could ever want. Satellite’s followers have almost a Marxist way about them. Since there really is no upper class other than Satellite himself, arguably, they take to a more communist approach to society, doing the tasks they are asked for the greater good of the group. Satellite takes the role of the bargaining capitalist, trying to get what he can for and/or from everyone. His counter-image, Henkov, an aloof boy with no arms who can predict the future creates an interesting conflict with Satellite in this film.

Set in the war-torn slums of Iran, the setting is one that shows of a history of war and hardship, with the children showing the brunt of the pain through their crippled and emaciated states. Yet, the viewer is not shown any fighting to speak of. Save a few instances, there is no actual hardship shown in relation to the war, with the exception of the obvious poverty of the area. Instead, the primary conflict lies within Satellite’s journey of taking care of the local children, his pursuit of Agrin, and his rivalry with Henkov. These ideas create a much more universal approach to the film, seeming to make the children in their horrific state seem normal, and share similar problems to children in other areas at times. This works in contrast with the ideas of dualism and how things must work in opposites. Yet the film does show instances of the divide between U.S. culture and Iranian culture through the human interactions, or lack thereof, between the two. The American troops are portrayed to be cold and distant, even though they bring humanitarian relief to the village. This shows a global perspective to the film, but a lack of globalization due to the perspective.
Returning to No Man’s Land, we see a similarity between the two films in perspectives on globalization. Within each film lies the awkward situation in which the outsider, the U.N. in the case of No Man’s Land and the U.S. in the case of Turtles Can Fly, comes in to better the situation, when in reality they paint a sour image of self-interest taking priority to helping those really in need. The scene of No Man’s Land where the soldier is left laying on the mine to die shows a dualism between reality and what we are shown. The reporters believe, or at least are told to make their viewers believe, that the soldier has been rescued, when in reality his life is determined less valuable than a slight smudge on the reputation of the U.N. This makes it seem as if globalization could be seen as a negative idea, and that the two sides should be left to settle their disputes on their own.
At the same time, it tugs on the emotions of the viewer, making them want the U.N. to do more even though in reality the soldier’s fate was sealed from early on in the film. It portrays this idea though its use of viewpoints. There is not one national point of view in this film (Corbin 46). The viewer has an omniscient viewpoint, knowing everything that is happening. This contributes to a global viewpoint by not weighting the film down with one cultural identity.
Personalities can be easily seen as opposites in Turtles Can Fly; Satellite always keep a positive attitude about himself, while Agrin battles deep seeded depression due to her past. This is seen throughout the film with her quiet and dark attitude, her lack of caring for her younger “brother,” who in reality turns out to be her son. Her struggle of how to deal with her son shows a position away from globalized ideals of a mother’s love. She does not want the child and tries several times to pawn off her responsibilities with him (Lane 93). As already mentioned, Satellite’s businessman mentality and extroversion give the viewer an impression of him as the leader who takes very little time to think introspectively. He works on how he feels at the moment rather than brooding over situations like Agrin does.
Binary oppositions present themselves throughout both films and are an essential tool in developing the conflict in both stories. Where there is not uniformity, there is the potential for conflict and thus tension is created. Where there is tension there is the potential for the conflict on which stories are developed, and films such as these provide an excellent medium for this. Each film uses dualism to portray its conflicts. Even though they may be different in content with regards to how these oppositions shape the story, the underlying ideas behind them are similar.