Takva

I would like to mention a different side of the movie that sheds light on Sufi or Mevlevi orders in Turkish and Islamic history.

Why Muharrem is selected for this task to perform financial affairs of the order? The answer is related with the stages of knowledge or purity that one has to qualify to become a "Perfect Human Being" or "insan-i kamil" in Turkish. This concept or ideology is rooted with Islamic tradition. Many Sufi or Mevlevi order has this process for their dervishes which may take a lifetime to achieve this goal or even never be able to reach that level of "perfection".

Different than being nun or monk which requires leaving mainstream society and living in the monastery with prayers, last step of this difficult and lengthy process of purifying one's soul from earthly desires, is to be able to return to the real world after so many years lived in contemplation and yet not being disturbed with its appeal to commit sin. I believe in the last few minutes head of the order explains this a little bit. And apparently Muharrem failed to accomplish last stage before achieving "perfection".

Takva attempts to achieve two things; It is a philosophical drama, and also a quasi-documentary. Putting the main character in a low-profile religious order, and in a ethical conundrum, the movie makers hit two birds with one reel.

Religious orders and their role in the growing politicization of Islam in Turkey is a sensitive subject. The movie refrains from saying much politically, or the characters do not have lines that can be interpreted in such a manner. However, 'Takva the documentary' speaks volumes.

Takva has good actors such as Erkan Can (the lead), a straightforward but engaging story, and a lot to learn from.

the movie and it's consistency with,the reality of such kind of religion originated community, is marvelous since you feel familiar most of the stages with the man you recognize which is rigidly religious.It is rare and very difficult to create such kind of complicated film especially for a director which had directed only moderate TV series in Turkey.He surpassed the expectation thanks to his talent and observation.Besides director, the casting and performance of the actors is impressive since they really overcame the difficulty of the performing the characters who are rare in community and which differs from society by small details.The way pilot flows is satisfactory but on the other hand,the simplicity of some parts of the movie, especially in final minutes,does not meet the expectation of the audience which expects the ultimate end.The issue director criticize is imagined untouchable for the conservative parts of society.according to me we should congratulate the courageous and objective view of director.it is a good film for whom are open minded and opposing.

I think it goes much to far to call this excellent film a documentary about the life of a Muslim sect or a critique of political Islam or even the role of the religious orders in Turkish economic life. Rather I would like to claim that it gives just an impression of the life Turkish religious orders, society and the mind of a devout religious man who previously led a uncritical life without real challenges and without deep thoughts about practical life and religion. Therefor he's unprepared for both of it.

I would guess that one could find his "state of mind" also with a range of uncritical believers of many religions who, although ardently believe stay shallow in their intellectual penetration of their believe and worldly life. They stay rather caught in conservative dogmas, which where made to control man and are far away from a healthy human experience.

Not everything shown in Film should be taken at face value. The depiction of the ritual life gives an impression of the ecstatic quality of such gatherings but is exaggerated in their frenetic appearance. There may have been reasons for this depiction but one should rather try not to confuse it with the an authentic account; this account one should rather get in contact with real orders.

The protagonist has high values which he fails to satisfy. This puts him in a moral dilemma which is very instructively set in contrast on one hand to worldly every day people and merchants with their cheating and accommodation with an imperfect world. On the other there is a religious order, which although is directed towards spirituality is of course also involved in worldly enterprises and has of course it financial interests. Nothing gets euphemised but the problems of both - profane and spiritual - get expounded in a way that a psychological profile of shallow but devote believer meets social criticism (not only hitting the Turkish Islamic milieu of its setting but also similar ones in other regions and religions).

Saw Takva last night at The Sydney Film Festival 2007, utterly compelling, driven by Erkan Can's fine performance as Muharrem, a devout Muslim in contemporary Istanbul. Previous posts outline more.

I was fascinated by the way Takva engages with contemporary Turkey, a notionally democratic and secular society since the 1920s. Yes, Muharrem has an existential crisis, also familiar to audiences of Shrek 3 in another way ... dare I mention it, by profane comparison.

I suspect Takva has a satirical streak, once you imagine the dervishs's lodge could be the current government of Turkey.

Am I right? Responses from Turkish members most welcome.