By Darius KADIVAR
A screenplay by Ren A. Hakim © Ren A. Hakim
"Among all
this multitude of men, there was not one who,
for beauty and stature,
deserved more than Xerxes
himself to wield so vast a power."
~
Herodotus
"Love is
composed of a single soul inhabiting two bodies"
-Aristotle
Few true Love Stories in
History have determined a People's Destiny, tested Iron Wills or so positively
catalyzed a Nation's Identity so as to last centuries and fill in its most
glorious chapters as well as inspire artists, poets and writers through the
Ages…
What would Egypt
be today had Julius Caesar judged Cleopatra's nose as being too short? As for
Poland it would certainly not
exist today had Maria Leczinska, better known as Marie Walewska, wife of a
Polish nobleman, not seduced Napoleon Bonaparte and convinced the French Emperor
to create the vassal kingdom of Warsaw in 1807. Where would Winston Churchill or Charles De Gaulle find the necessary
strength and determination to resist Nazi invincibility was it not in the
affection and lasting love of their own spouses ? It is said that behind every
Great Man there is certainly a Great Women so often ignored in the
chapters of history. This statement has certainly never been more adequate than
when applied to the Biblical Love Story of Persian King Xerxes
1st with the Hebrew Slave Princess Esther turned Queen and
providential heroic icon for the Jewish and Persian nations. The Story of
Ahasuerus (as Xerxes is known as in the Torah and the Bible)
and Esther ( known as Hadassah in the Bible) was subject to
several Hollywood films. Already back in 1916
British director Maurice Elvey had pondered on the subject in a silent version
with Elisabeth Risdon playing Esther. Xerxes was also the subject of an Opera by Handel composed in 1738. A
1978 miniseries entitled The Greatest Heroes of the Bible starred
Victoria Principal as Esther, Robert Mandan as Xerxes, and Michael Ansara as
Haman. More recently a TV series was produced in 1999 with Thomas
Kretschmann in the role of Xerxes and Louise Lombard in that of the
Hebrew Princess which was overall quite accurate in depiction, sets and
costumes. It is however the Technicolor version of Esther and the King directed by
Hollywood veteran Raoul Walsh and Italian Mario
Bava that is best remembered starring the glamorous Joan Collins and strong
jawed Richard Egan in the title roles. Interestingly Hollywood may well
discover a new and interesting version of this legendary tale thanks to a script
written by a beautiful American actor/writer of Iraqi heritage: Ren A. Hakim.
All the more interesting is that Hakim's script is
titled Xerxes and tries to take a look at this story
from the perspective of the King whose reign saw the expansion of the Persian
Empire to its pinnacle and during which the Palace of Persepolis was to be
completed as an architectural Imperial legacy for future generations before its
fatal destruction and burning centuries later by Alexander the Great …
The Story of Esther & Xerxes (Ahasuerus) has been an Inspiration for many
great
European Artists such as Rembrandt, Theodore
Chasseriau, Valentin
Lefevre,
Jan Victor, Francesco Caucig, Pompeo Batoni to name a
few that are dispersed
in museums worldwide.
I had the privilege to speak to her
on this ambitious project that she hopes to bring to the Big Screen with a cast
that would include both Iranian and Hollywood actors. It is all the more remarkable
that this screenplay was written by an Iraqi lady fascinated by Persian Culture
and History all the more that the Persian Empire and particularly its
architectural legacy as we see it today at Persepolis or Pasargardae, was
greatly influenced by Babylonian and Assyrian craftsmanship and style. Both
Iran and Iraq were part
of this immense Empire that was ruled upon the ideals of its founding father
Cyrus the Great whose famous cylinder remains to this day as the first
known Declaration of Human Rights in the History of Mankind, a replica of
which, stands in the entrance hall of the United Nations headquarters in NY. To
maintain this ideal was not an easy task in an Ancient World that was not yet
introduced to the ideals of Democracy (other than in the shape of an imperfect
oligarchic Athenian model). The American or the French Revolution were yet to
come and shape the governments and institutions of most democratic states as we
know them today. The terms Empire or Kingship were not so
negatively associated to the totalitarian or dictatorial regimes that devastated
the 20th century and continue to shed a bad light on many Third World country regimes of this millennium. Iraq's
former Saddam Hussein, the disastrous American Debacle in Iraq and to a lesser
degree in Afghanistan or Iran's clerical theocracy and its henchmen are sad
reminders of tyrannical statesmanship's or Imperialistic policies that have
proved so destructive to the spirit of the Founding Fathers and Founding
Mother's of a region once known as A Cradle of
Civilizations…
The Love Story of Xerxes and
Esther is all the more remarkable in the light of historical knowledge that it
was also to resist to outside pressures be them court intrigues and religious
prejudice. If Paparazzi's and People Magazines had existed in Ancient
Times, Esther would most probably have been the Lady Diana of her times
and sadly enough the love story would have had a more tragic end with far more
destructive consequences. Fortunately this story has a happy ending that would
most probably be regarded by some snobbish French film critics (sic) of Les
Cahiers du Cinéma as too "Hollywoodien" were it not true. For in this
case Reality indeed surpasses Fiction …
So let's try and take a closer look
at this story and the reason's that motivated its author in writing her
interesting version.
Darius KADIVAR (DK): Could you tell
us more about yourself, your background and why you were particularly interested
in this very ancient love story ?
Ren A. Hakim (RAH): Where to
start...Well, I was born and raised in Michigan. I'm half Iraqi (ethnic Assyrian,
Chaldean sect), and my mom's heritage is Anglo-Saxon. I feel very blessed to be
part of a multi-cultural family. It's definitely influenced the way I view the
world, both in general and in the political arena. It also sparked my
fascination with ancient history, in every regard, from conception to art. While
some girls thought of Cinderella as the epitome of a fairytale princess, for me,
it was the tale-teller herself, Scheherazade.
Many years ago, I remember telling
my mother that I wanted to write a story set in the ancient Middle East, but it was only after reading the works of
Herodotus that I found my star -- Xerxes. You see, it wasn't the romance between
he and Esther which pulled me in, but rather, Xerxes himself. He has been, and
continues to be, egregiously misunderstood and misrepresented in popular
culture. He was not a tyrannical villain, seeking to enslave the world. Like
today, the ancient world had its share of propaganda, and remember the old
saying: history is written by the victors.
If one really did their research,
they would realize that Xerxes was the heir to an empire which was founded upon
the creed of "good thoughts, good words, good deeds"...a son, desperate
to follow his father's and grandfather's footsteps... a man, who recognized
that, like all men, he would not be defined by status, but by the fruit of his
works. Unlike larger than life figures, Cyrus and Darius, the title "the Great"
is not often tacked on to his name, but, like so many of us, he aspired to be.
That is what makes him so identifiable, his story so compelling: it's our
own...in more ways than one.
DK: What were your sources in
writing this screenplay ? How much of this Love Story as we know it today
is authentic and recorded in History books?
(RAH): When one writes a story based
in history, there is already an expectation of the final product being as
authentic as possible. I did a great deal of research, spending countless hours
reading the works of Herodotus, Ctesias, Aeschylus, Plutarch, Thucydides,
Justin, Diodorus, and Xenophon, among others, and seeing where they corroborated
one another. I also used actual palace inscriptions and, in doing so, was able
to not only create a character profile of just who Xerxes was, but those who
most greatly influenced his life, friend and foe alike. It was truly a
painstaking process. Again, I wanted everything to be as true to life as
possible.
There were a few, really minor
changes (for example, a cousin being instead referred to as a friend, or one
character being a composite of a couple of people) so as to make the story more
palatable for a contemporary audience. Of course, scenes and plot devices had to
be written to maintain continuity, as no one was there to document every little
thing that happened from point A to point B, but I think I accomplished a work
that is both entertaining, as well as educational. In fact, there is only one
part, which takes place during Thermopylae,
that is a blatant "Hollywoodism", and even that was done intentionally to
symbolize the struggle between two kingdoms.
The most difficult part of writing
this screenplay, however, was when Esther enters the picture. For example, the
Bible tells us why she was introduced to Xerxes, but what actually occurred
during that first meeting? What words were spoken? We're left to wonder, and I
found it profoundly difficult to make up my own dialogue when dealing with
something so sacred. I recently saw another film about Esther, and was dismayed
by how the writer added so many unnecessary factors to the story, like a
would-be boyfriend, and diverted from the Biblical account. There were many,
many historical inaccuracies regarding the Persians too, but that wasn't
surprising.
This sad trend is being continued in
a new Spartan-centric film about the Battle of Thermopylae ( Warner Bros 300 ), which is factually
flawed to the point of being downright offensive. The movie's logline claims it
retells the account of how three-hundred Spartan soldiers drew the line in the
sand, defending democracy against Xerxes' million-man army. The numbers are
laughable and the premise of the story is backwards. It implies that Xerxes was
attempting to enslave Greece under Persian tyranny. Wrong.
The war was initially sparked by what was viewed by the Persians as an
unprovoked attack against the empire, perpetrated by the Athenians. Furthermore,
according to Herodotus himself, the Persians supported democracies in the
northern Hellas, while the Spartans imposed
oligarchies.
In fact, I believe, had
Greece allied itself with
Persia, democracy might have
flourished faster, because the grueling Pelopponesian War, fought between
Sparta and Athens, would have been averted. Sadly, it
wasn't. The Spartans prevailed, overthrew the 'democratic' Athenian leadership
and replaced it with...that's right...an oligarchic regime.
Though I don't believe the creators
of the aforementioned film intended this, it screams, "Hey, look! Not only are
the Middle Easterners out to get us now -- they've always been after the
West!"
It is promoting disinformation,
which may very well fuel further racism, especially in light of the current
state of world affairs...and for what? Entertainment?
DK: Could you shortly outline the
plot and the major protagonists ?
(RAH): Why certainly! Xerxes is just
that -- an account of Xerxes' life, from his rise to power, to the second
Greco-Persian war, courtly intrigues, his union with Esther, his death...and
beyond. Along the way, we're introduced to a slew of famous and infamous
characters. Interestingly, with the exception of Haman, none of them are clearly
the "bad guy". These were real people, motivated by real beliefs and whether
their actions were right or wrong, everyone felt they were justified. Those that
stand out to me as being the central figures to this tale are Mardonius, supreme
commander of the Persian army, and the real architect behind the war; Artabanus,
Xerxes' Uncle and prime minister, who was helpless to stop the military
juggernaut; and the man who was truly Xerxes' greatest Greek adversary:
Themistocles of Athens.
Lithography by 19th century artist Gustave Doré
DK: As you mentioned this true tale
has was already brought to screen several times. The One, Swords and Sandals film buffs remember most, is Raoul
Walsh's Esther and the King with Joan Collins
and Richard Egan in the title Roles. How does your screenplay differ from this
Technicolor version ?
(RAH): The most obvious difference
is that this version is not Esther-centric. In fact, she doesn't really factor
into the story till over halfway in. Apart from that, Walsh's picture is yet
another example of disregard for historical authenticity. As you may recall, in
his film, the Greek threat is that "upstart Alexander", who we all know wouldn't
even be born for another hundred years!
Another key difference between my
version and those preceding it, is that I took a different approach to a major
element in the story: the timeline. Here's what I mean: We know that Xerxes was
married to Amestris, referred to as Vashti (which we may accept as an epithet)
in the Bible. The Book of Esther opens with Xerxes holding a lavish, six month
party to show the wealth of his empire in preparation for war. Following her
refusal to join him at a --different-- gathering, Amestris is deposed, and that
is what necessitates the search for a new queen, wherein Esther enters the
picture. The problem has been that this conflicts with Herodotus, who still
names Amestris as Xerxes' wife when he returns from Greece years
later.
So...how did I reconcile this
without disregarding either source? Interpretation -- Again, the Biblical
account begins with Xerxes' party for the princes and military officials, which
lasts for one-hundred-and- eighty days. It then goes on to say, "when these days
were over," before painting a picture of the party Amestris refuses to attend.
Most people take that line literally, assuming that the next party was
immediately proceeding this extravagant display of power, probably because the
six month figure is so specific. I, however, interpreted it as -- when these
days of WAR were over. By doing so, every piece of the puzzle fits
perfectly.
DK: How is Esther introduced to the
Persian King ? Is it love at first sight for both of them
?
(RAH): As the Bible explains, after
Amestris/Vashti is deposed as queen, a search for a new one is begun. Girls
across the empire are brought to the Persian capital of Susa, where they go
through purification rites, a process that takes up to twelve months to
complete. The candidates then wait for their night to be brought before the
king. It was in this manner that Esther was introduced to Xerxes. Again, we
don't know what took place after she entered the king's chamber, but we do know
that, whatever transpired, he loved her more than any of the others.
Was it love at first sight? I would
say, yes, but the real question is--were either one cognizant of it? Remember,
he was dealing with many terrible issues, and she was a young girl keeping a
pretty major secret. I think Xerxes was in a very troubled place at the time and
Esther was like the lone star in the darkest night sky.
DK: Since Cyrus the Great's
edict, Jews like all other minorities were put under the protection of Persian Kings and their was never any
type of hostility towards them. What changes this situation under Xerxes' rule
that puts them in danger of extermination or exodus ? Is Xerxes sensitive to
their plight ?
(RAH): In my opinion, the
combination of personal tragedy and a lingering obsession with
Greece had Xerxes completely
preoccupied. I think he was questioning his own ability to lead, and left it to
someone he thought he could trust to oversee internal affairs. Unfortunately,
that someone was Haman. Remember, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts
absolutely. With the king consumed by the past, Haman's deep seeded hatred was
left unchecked.
As for Xerxes being sensitive to the
Jewish cries for help...Again, I think the only cries he could hear at the time
were echoes of the past, still ringing in his head.
DK: How does Esther manage to
win the heart of the King to join the Jewish cause against the treacherous court
minister Haman ?
(RAH): Without
getting into the details, she defies imperial law. I also don't think it was a
matter of joining the "Jewish cause" for Xerxes -- it was a matter of protecting
his people, who, in this case, happened to be
Jewish.
DK: Esther's political struggle to
save her people is at the source of the Purim Festivities which is as
important as Christmas for Christians or Nowruz for Iranians. It
is celebrated by Jews around the world to this day. Could you develop for us the
rituals and traditions that are associated to this celebration
?
(RAH): As I understand it, the Book
of Esther, the Megillah, is read in the synagogues and there is a great deal of
audience participation. When Haman's name is read, the congregation roars with
hissing and booing, for example. People don costumes and masquerade as
characters from the story, gifts are given to the poor, and a Purim dinner is
prepared. One of the special treats served is called hamantaschen, triangular
cookies which are claimed to be made to resemble Haman's hat. Fasting is also
practiced by some Jews before and after Purim, in remembrance of Esther's three
days of fasting in preparation to go before the king.
This year, Purim begins at sundown,
March 3rd.
Iranian American actor Eric Etebari may walk in the footsteps of
previous
performers in the role of Xerxes such as Richard Egan and David
Farrar
©imdb.com
DK: Since the success of films like
Gladiator, and Troy in recent years, Swords and Sandals films have proved
their Box Office potential. The use of CGI also allows a cost effective creation
of sets and extra's that can then be duplicated efficiently for action
scenes.
At this stage have you found a
producer for your film ? Who will be directing it
?
(RAH): Film is ever-evolving, and
there are a lot of new exciting ways of bringing the page to the screen. We
currently have a little Xerxes team assembled, looking to obtain independent
finance for the film so as to maintain historical integrity. As far as directors
go, no one is currently in place, but there are a number of visionaries who
could create a bona fide epic masterpiece. All of the usual suspects come to
mind, of course, as does Persian writer/director Farhad Safinia (Apocalypto).
DK: You expressed your desire to see
an Iranian actor Eric
Etebari cast in the role of Xerxes. Who do you have in mind
for the other characters and particularly for Esther?
(RAH): I think Esther would be best
portrayed by an unknown who can play the balance between grace and strength with
a subtle eloquence, à la Sophie
Marceau. When I think Amestris, I tend to picture Catherine Zeta Jones. As far as other
prominent characters, throughout the writing process, I envisioned Kenneth Branagh as Xerxes' counterpart,
Themistocles. Mardonius is another, extremely important role. Rufus Sewell would undoubtedly be amazing
in the part. He seems to get typecast in these period pieces, as he's admitted,
but it's for good reason.
What's so wonderful about this
story, casting-wise, is that there is no shortage of juicy, dynamic roles to
play. I would love to see an internationally recognized cast, bringing in fan
bases from all over the world, because this story is not just a Persian tale, or
a Greek tale, or a Jewish tale. We all share this history and we can all benefit
from it.
Iraqi Jewish community representatives Naim and Renee
Dangoor (Right) being
received
by Iranian Ambassador and lady Avshar and their daughter at the
Persepolis Festivities held at the Savoy in London. October 1971
©dangoor.com Journal of Babylonian Jewry
(*)
DK: Iran and Iraq were at war for more than 8
years which cost more than 2 million lives in both countries. The Iraqi and
Iranian Diaspora share a common pain in that they could but only witness the
destruction of their mutual countries in a War that did not really concern them
nor was this conflict ever desired by any of the two. You yourself were born in
1979 that is barely before the Islamic
Revolution in Iran and hardly when the Iran-Iraq war even started. How do you see
the situation in both countries today and particularly what appears as an
American failure in bringing Peace and Democracy in Iraq
?
(RAH): Wow, what
an amazing question, and one which I find so difficult to answer for multiple
reasons. I suppose I should start by repeating what has seemingly come to be an
unspoken prerequisite when speaking of foreign policy: I am not anti-American. I
love my country, and my heart breaks when that for which it is supposed to stand
is manipulated, unthinkable actions justified, and dissent written off as
offensive or unpatriotic. I'm tired of it. I'm offended by those who would
silence what is so blatantly obvious -- the Middle
East is a mess and the West is partly to blame.
To be clear: that
does not justify "payback". It begs reconciliation on all fronts, by all
parties. There is so much I could say about this topic, so many quotes and facts
racing through my head. It's hard to know where to start, how much to impart.
The Iran-Iraq war
is one of the greatest disgraces in recent history. Two educated, beautiful
countries entrenched in a grisly war, fueled by paranoia and pride, and the West
sat back, supplying weapons and intelligence to both sides. Meanwhile, former
U.S. Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger, who's still embraced by Washington, has been
quoted as saying things like, "too bad they both can't lose," and, "I hope they
kill each other."
It's so sad.
Equally sad is that many people honestly believe the line, "they hate us for our
freedom." Again, I'm not justifying any terrorist action or hate speech. I'm
simply trying to say, listen, there are legitimate reasons we were not greeted
with flowers and candy, and legitimate reasons why the Iraqis aren't overcome
with thankfulness for our gift of "freedom".
Here in
America, we always say, "never
forget," about 9/11. Of course we won't, but if our feelings of loss are valid,
why are the Iraqis expected to simply forget the boasts of their country having
been bombed back to the "pre-industrial age," civilian infrastructure razed,
supplies to fix power plants and electrical grids restricted under sanctions so
devastating, the UN Humanitarian Coordinator in Baghdad, Denis Halliday,
resigned in protest, saying he didn't want to administer a program which
satisfied the definition of genocide. Some may lay the blame solely at Hussein's
feet, but that argument holds no water when it was clear that the sanctions were
only harming the civilian population.
When military
action in Iraq was initially being debated, there was an episode of Oprah in
which a soccer-mom type in the audience expressed her viewpoint, likening
herself to a momma bear protecting her cubs, and that if that meant waging war
against Iraq, so be it. I was stunned and reminded of Madeline Albright's
outrageous quote on 60 minutes. She had been told that over half a million Iraqi
children had died under sanctions, yet went on to respond that the "price was
worth it."
The crimes of
Saddam Hussein are often cited, but when I hear the term "mass graves", I also
think of the Iraqi soldiers buried alive in their trenches during the '91 war.
Weapons of mass destruction bring to mind depleted uranium munitions dumped
across Iraq and now
Afghanistan, munitions long suspected
of causing cancer. One could say a scene reminiscent of Halabja could be found
in Fallujah, where white phosphorus was used against rebels, but also claimed
the lives of many civilians. The mind simply reels...shock and awe, indeed.
It may be of
interest to note that, though I know I have the right to express these views, to
feel this way, a part of me remains wary of offending anyone. It's
bemusing...and telling. I do want to say that my heart goes out to the men and
women stationed overseas. I admit that I couldn't possibly know what life is
like for them. They, like the civilians they are charged with protecting,
sacrifice so much. Every day, the news is rife with harrowing reports.
Sometimes, I feel
like our leadership is living in a parallel universe. It's almost as if they
think the mayhem was worth it, because they got Saddam. Hussein's execution was disheartening. An
opportunity to show mercy, where so many claimed none had been shown, was
wasted. What a statement THAT would have made.
I could go on and
on. I haven't even touched upon the West's role in the ouster of Mossadegh. It is profoundly ironic that
the Middle East, its borders and governments have been so influenced by those
who probably couldn't even muster a "Hello, how do you do," in Arabic -- let
alone Farsi...but to summarize...
Those who claim to
be an example to the world, must lead BY that example. Some say that war is a
necessary evil, but I believe, as it is written in the Bible, that evil cannot
be overcome with evil. Evil must be overcome with good. For what shall it profit
a man to gain the whole world, but lose his soul?
I'm often reminded
of Matthew, Chapter 7, in the Bible when people try to justify the war and, in
particular, the following passage:
Many will say to
me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name
have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? And then will I
profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work
iniquity.
DK: What is your reaction to the
anti-Jewish rhetoric of Iran's President Ahmadinejad towards
Israel ? Is he a sad reincarnation of a new Haman ?
(RAH): I cannot understand why
anyone would waste a minute of time hating someone else, let alone an entire
people. It is written that God is love, to speak such hate is unbelievable. It's
sad and a case of true irony. To think, this was the Persia of Cyrus, who
released the Jews from captivity and is regarded by them as anointed by God; the
Persian empire, half of which Xerxes offered to
his Jewess bride. To think, to think, to think...
There's a great quote from Mark
Twain, wherein he muses that history does not repeat itself -- but it does
rhyme. Thankfully, I think we all recognize the tune and the machinations of
Haman will not come to pass.
DK: Do you think that the
majority of Iranians share their leaders resentment of Jews or
Israel
?
(RAH): Absolutely NOT! The past they
share has not been forgotten. Furthermore, I think the Iranian people are too
busy seeking peace and prosperity in their own lives, to brood on how to destroy
anothers. Peace, happiness and human respect are universal
desires.
DK: What would Xerxes do were he
living today ?
(RAH): I adore
this question, especially since I can let Xerxes answer that himself! Upholding
the teachings of his father, he had the following inscribed at Persepolis:
"I am a friend of
the right, of wrong I am not a friend. It is not my wish that the weak should
have harm done him by the strong, nor is it my wish that the strong should have
harm done him by the weak. The right, that is my desire."
So, what does this
mean? In my opinion, just what it says -- no matter who you may be, no matter
what wealth or might you may possess, you shall be held to the same standard,
judged by the same measure, as anyone else.
Top : Esther's Tomb in Hamadan. Below : Xerxes tomb at Nagsheh
Rostam.
DK: How do you explain that
countries like Iraq, which gave birth to Hamurabi's Laws, or Persia/Iran, where
Cyrus established the very first Human Rights decrees, have been
reduced to what has clumsily been dubbed as an Axis of Evil ?
(RAH): I think one
can answer this question quite simply: lack of knowledge.
There is such
emphasis put on how cultures differ, yet so little on how they
DON'T.
I have found that
events that have shaped the Middle East into
what it is today are either unknown or completely misunderstood. Xerxes' war
with Greece is a prime example. In fact,
some historians claim this event is what first set the cast the West as GOOD
and the East as EVIL.
That's why it is
increasingly important to speak when the opportunity to do so is presented. Wars
destroy, but education builds. That's why I felt it necessary to mention the
forthcoming Spartan
film. It's frustrating that the fallacy of a tyrannical
Persian empire is being perpetuated, yet again
-- at the worst possible time!
If anything good may come from it,
though, it is that it may spark interest in the subject. For example, after
seeing a teaser for the film, a Persian gentleman, understandably upset, was
compelled to do a little research on Xerxes. He found my website and emailed me to ask whether
or not the movie's depiction of Xerxes was true. Of course, I explained it
wasn't and cleared up the misconceptions. He's now resolved to tell others, and,
hopefully, they'll tell others and so on and so forth, so the truth may yet be
brought to light.
DK: Will your beautiful country
or Iran ever find peace and that
tolerant spirit that you so beautifully illustrate in your screenplay
Xerxes ?
(RAH): Iraq has sadly
become one, chaotic minefield. I don't know if it will ever know peace, but I do
know that it will never, ever be the same. There has been too much loss, too
much destruction. So many have fled, and who can blame them? I fail to remember
when the Iraqis volunteered their country to place host to the "war on terror"
-- and Chalabi doesn't count. Still, I will continue to hope and
pray.
Iran still has the chance to be, like
Esther, that bright star in darkened skies. There are so many ambitious,
well-educated citizens, who still hold dear the fundamental principle upon which
their lost empire was founded: good thoughts, good words, good deeds. All of
this may be lost, however, if, once again, paranoia and pride clash and consume
the country in war.
Iraq/Mesopotamia was the cradle of
civilization. If it wants, Iran could find its true purpose as
the sanctuary of hope.
DK: Thank you Ren, and I
sincerely hope that your screenplay will soon become the fantastic and exciting
movie you have been dreaming of.
Author Ren A.Hakim © Ren
A.Hakim
Author's
Notes:
(*) In 1971
Iran celebrated the 2500th anniversary of the Persian Empire
established by Cyrus the great to which all the heads of state were invited to
week long festivities. As Iran could not invite the president of Israel because
of Arab objections, and as it was considered unacceptable that the festivities
should pass without a Jewish presence, the Iranian ambassador in London on
Tehran's instructions, invited Iraqi personalities such as Naim and Renee Dangoor to lead a large
delegation of Babylonian Jews to the festivities that were held at the Savoy in
London, to which the Prime Minister and members of the diplomatic core were
invited.
Ren A.Hakim: Official
Website
Recommended Readings:
-
Persia? Ancient Persia's virtual absence in
Hollywood By Darius
KADIVAR
-
Swords and Sandals Films about Ancient Persia
By
Darius KADIVAR
-
Persian Golden Boys in Hollywood
by
Darius KADIVAR
-
Xerxes, the opera by Cyrus KADIVAR
(iranian.com)
-
He
is Awake: Close Up on Cyrus KAR by Darius
KADIVAR
-
The Persian Empire Strikes
Back by Darius KADIVAR
-
Esther's Children: A Portrait of Iranian Jews
by Houman SARSHAR
(amazon.com)
-
The Scribe:
Journal of Babylonian Jewry (Published in
London)
About the Author: Darius KADIVAR is a
Freelance Journalist, Film Historian, and Media Consultant.
