Was Aydin a good man?

I have to watch this in segments and, so far, I have to say that I too am surprised by some of the hostile critiques of the character. I'm aware that he may be out of touch with the economic struggles of his tenants and perhaps lacking compassion a bit, but shall have to watch the entire film to make a sound assessment.

I agree, I thought he was a solid guy and everyone was reflecting their issues on him. There were no bad intentions on his part, he was just going about his business- and writing a book on a noble subject. I too was surprised to read that most people found him "self involved". My guess is some famous reviewer said that and people just repeat it because they don't know what to think. It's definitely a complex film with no easy answers.

Also, incredible acting all around, the stand out being the guy that played Hamdi. He brought a lot to that character.

I think as the movie builds we get more and more acquainted to Aydin's character and not in a good way. at first he seems like a reasonable and overall a decent person. he says maybe he's tenants dont pay him cause he's too soft. he doesnt make a fuss about the rock the kid throws at the car. just asks for it to be repaid. he is quite friendly to his guests, speaks genuinely with the biker about his own experiences as a youth.

But little by little the flaws in his personality start to creep in.

The first indication of vanity comes when he reads the letter about the teacher expressing her praise for his writing and asking him for money. is she really so enchanted by his writing? I dont think so. as we learn later by his sister his writing is not that spectacular. Nihal's reaction says it all. she says to him there are people far more in need. there are children wearing gloves in class because of the cold. she understands that his sudden altruistic drive comes from the boost his ego recieved.

Later on when we find out Nihal has organized the donation and discluded him we first symphatize with him feeling like the outsider in his own home. but later as their conflict evolves the sympathy and identification starts to move towards Nihal and away from Aydin. its becoming clearer and clearer why she did what she did and what a living hell it must have been for her living with a man like Aydin. being captive by his golden bars. too young, too week and too endulged to have the courage to walk away. his behavior becomes more and more erratic as he takes all her papers to his study room for absolutely no good reason(totally indifferent to her fragile state of mind at the time) just to return them a minute later saying he's too lazy to check them and anyway he lives for istanbul tomarrow(?), donating a large sum after having said the whole thing is a fraud, changing his mind about leaving for istanbul and instead goes to confront the teacher he wrongfully accuses for being devious and manipulative.

All this actions indicate a narssistic, unstable, vain personality. I think the words that define his character in the most accurate way are when Nihal says to him that all his constant emphasis about high morals, respect, modesty, simplicity etc, are all tools which he uses to suffocate people. He will always find an argument to contradict a certain way of life. in his core he thrives on pawer and hate towards people.

But after having said that I also think that nothing is black and white. not in this movie and not in life. Aydin has some real good in him too. its just hidden and he is afraid to show it (his own words). the best example of the good hidden in him is in the beautiful scene where he realeses the wild horse. this is his one true altruistic pure good deed in the movie. and he does it alone in the dark where no one can see him. and in the end when we here his voice, saying what he truly feels for Nihal, but we discover its not what he is writing. he is starting to write that book of his. that letter to Nihal he keeps locked in.

I think he was a decent man who was only a touch rough around the edges.

Aydin, along with every other character in the movie, including Ismail, have "good" in them.

Their downfall is their pride. It's so easy to point out someone else's flaws and play the victim, which essentially is what happens in nearly every interaction between the major characters. With Aydin, his sister and Ismail, there is at least a self-awareness of this pride, which makes them more sympathetic albeit still moderately disagreeable characters.

Nihal, steadfast in her sanctimony, lacks the cognizance shared by the others and wallows in her self-pity till the cows come home. This made her the least sympathetic, in spite of the efforts of Melisa Sözen.

Aydin mentiones he worked hard all his life - even though he is privileged, he has the sense that he deserves his wealth; on the surface, that is. He hides his guilt, as he sees his place as part of a system. We judge Aydin harshly, and he judges others harshly - only difference is that Aydin has material wealth, so with that, he has responsibilities for the world around him. With wealth and position comes an automatic, moral responsibility in other words. Aydin is trapped, not unwillingly, in this situation, and his life is created around his priviledge - his relation to everyone around him is based on wealth - that's why he admires the young motorcrosser (and perhaps likes to talk to the turists) - they're the only ones around him that are free - and even they have a monetaru relationship to him.

I think it's too easy to just blame Aydin as a character - Aydin is a symbol of what wealth and priviledge means. No doubt, when in power, when having money, one has to be careful, cause most contact with other people has motivations that might not be clear. Also Aydin is cultivated. His resentment towards the world is a combination of aesthetic sense/taste, valueing high culture and morals - in Ayden's mind he has created and deserves these - he believes anyone could adapt a sense of properness and orderly values to their lives "if I had three olives I would arrange them nicely on the plate". "Why is their garden so messy" etc. He, in other words, doesn't understand despair that is based on poverty. He sees himself as deserving his wealth, as someone who build this fortune.

I don't think we should underestimate the scenes where he pukes in that scene near the end - after his sarcastic, la-la-joke, his selfresentment actually gets spewed out and becomes physical - he makes himself sick, literally.

In the end, he gives up, and surrenders to his wife - he knows he's an idiot. He might just think that everyone is though, but that it's easier to get away with it, when you're broke.

I think Aydin is a Rumpelstiltskin type character, cold, calculating, pragmatic, and possessed of a moral superiority and arrogant vanity. These things don't really make him a bad person though. He is even-tempered, somewhat cultivated, and well mannered. He seems at least somewhat aware of his flaws, and he tells his wife that he is not perfect. Still, I do understand the wife's frustrations with him because his characteristics are not those which generate love and compassion. A person whom would be happy with a man like him really is just one whom wants him for materialistic well-being. He's the type of man a woman would "settle" for, but not really love - some women who have a similar nature to him might love him in a particular way, such as for partnership - but he doesn't really give much emotionally. He's pretty closed off, so I think if someone loves him, it's more for the lifestyle they can have with him, rather than the man himself. So I don't really think Aydin is a "good" person especially nor really bad - as he said himself, he is a simple man, and he mostly just goes about his business without too much fanfare. This movie really reminds me of Anna Karenina with respect to the relationship between husband and wife.