Pari's Blog

Tarkovsky felt his task was to unveil relationships between images and events that were created by God in the universe, rather than imposing relationships upon an audience in order to manipulate them into a prescribed point of view. Tarkovsky was especially drawn to the internal logic of Japanese haiku, where three very different images are combined to form a whole much larger than the parts. Concerning this circuitous method of arriving at new perceptions, Tarkovsky wrote, “The birth and development of thought are subject to laws of their own, and sometimes demand forms of expression which are quite different from the patterns of logical speculation. In my view poetic reasoning is closer to the laws by which thought develops, and thus to life itself, than is the logic of traditional drama.”

- from “Andrei Tarkovsky: Master of the Cinematic Image” by Stuart C. Hancock

(director/producer: Andrei Tarkovsky, Russian, subtitled)

This is not just an art film – it is poetry. You’ll have to see it for yourself to see what I mean. The entire film is one continuous poem, and like a poem it is subject to whatever interpretation you like. Tarkovsky is a genius, and he should be ranked with all the great poets. Cinematography as it is supposed to be, an art, not just an “art film”.

I believe Stalker is an attempt to show us that our greatest loss (loss of spirituality) is in essence due to the triumph of our analytical intellect over art – art, which by nature of its unselfishness is the only beacon of light that can guide us our source. There was an age when works of wonder and beauty were those art forms that embodied the highest expression of Truth, later it just became just worldly art, … now what we talk of as art has been reduced to just “technological wonders”. The film laments on man’s loss of art form and preoccupation with the intellectual and technological progress of the human mind. True progress/evolution of an advanced civilization is measured by the advancement of art, literature, music, philosophy, and culture. In this regard some of the most modern nations can be the least advanced in terms of its people. There is a saying that if ever we find life elsewhere (on a different planet), and that life is an advanced civilization (of beauty, art, grace, peace, understanding, innocence, …), then it won’t last very long because we’d be there to destroy it (this has happened on our own planet – where so many native cultures and their wisdom has been displaced by market driven cultures).

It also reflects on mans inclination towards his natural goal – spirituality – and how we are chained down too much by our intellect instead of letting go and letting our beliefs and admirations guide us towards the essence (because we have the constant fear, where will it take us?). To overcome the fear and doubt, to temporarily relinquish the intellect, and follow your subconscious calling / intuition, is an art – and is known as the art of stalking [the spirit].

The human conflict between Art (Wonder, Beauty, Admiration, Creation), Intellect (Reason, Logic, Analysis, Doubt, Fear), and the Spiritual (Conscious, Awareness, Compassion, Synthesis) can be seen through the conflict between the three characters in the film, the trinity – The Writer, The Professor, and The Stalker (Tarkovsky keeps a level of symbolism throughout the film by not using any names). Everything in the film has meaning – even the minutest detail.

Whereas us humans want to take the direct path, the Stalker shows us there is no quick “moksha” pill; no direct laid out map with directions on it. He shows us the spiritual aspirant reaches his goal through a long and windy corridor with many obstacles, throughout which his endurance, faith, and perseverance will be put to test. The act of transcending suffering, through perseverance, slows down ones pace, opens up the heart, breaks even the most hardened intellect, making him humble and receiving, and then awakens him to his full potential of being.

The Stalker shows how this path is unpredictable (guided by fate – “which one creates”) – an allusion to the marker/nuts he throws to find out which way to go, and also serving to show that no one takes the same path. The Zone, is some sort of spiritual well, were the innermost wishes come true. Being spiritually inclined I believe that we are projections of a cosmic consciousness (having disconnected ourselves from the source by our ego), and in addition the visible universe is a projection of our own subconscious mind. At every instance the universe constantly restructures itself as our “state of mind” (not will) projects it to be (in affirmation of this are, quantum-cosmology’s anthropic principle, and the direct insight of saints and sages as summarized in the Vedanta and other works). The Zone is such a spiritual place, that it amplifies the subtlest state of our spiritual mind, such that in the Zone nothing you see is the way it is.

You’ll much appreciate Tarkvosky’s genius if you view the entire film like a big haiku. The sounds – everything has a meaning – the rail, the handcar on rails, breeze brushing through grass, the wild flowers, water dripping, the water falls, trickling water, running water, stagnant/still water, sounds of iron/metal, silence. The images – the house, the dog, the landscape, the rusting artifacts in the water, the well, the very slow panning of the camera across images. The dialogs – are deep, reflective (the Professor, the Writer, the Stalker, the Stalker’s wife).

Here is another view. Instead of viewing the trinity (the Professor, the Writer, and the Stalker) as the faces of human nature, one considers the entire film as the life and journey of one man. The travel to the Zone represents a spiritual journey of one man, and the mental torment and conflicts he experiences at each critical step in the journey are the conflicts within him between the doubting, questioning, scientific Intellect (which seeks to destroy) and the aspiring Artist (which seeks to create, take risks, the leap of faith); the Stalker being one’s natural subconscious (or rather higher conscious) urge to gravitate back to the source. Could this be what the director may have had in mind when he composed this visual poem?