Individual.

Tarkovsky presents the viewer with the genuine possibility of entertaining a new notion of what we regard as understanding. His method is striking: we are not introduced to beings from another world who will enlighten us with some new truth. Tarkovsky does not care to entertain us with aliens and the fright that comes from another dimension. It is our relationship to ourselves, individually and spiritually, that Tarkovsky explores. What if, he seems to suggest, the understanding of human existence that we possess is not only limited but also lacking in some fundamental clarity? What seems to be at stake on the Solaris station is an imprinting of our memories in a universal, cosmic mind that we only realize exists when we arrive at that point in our development. Fanciful? Perhaps.

Chris’ rebuttal is essentially the main point of the film: “Questioning means a desire to know. But to preserve basic truth, we need mysteries. The mysteries of happiness … death … love.”http://archive.sensesofcinema.com/contents/08/49/tarkovsky-ortega-y-gasset.html

“The tone of Solaris is particularly significant. Solaris ought to be a tragedy, a dramatic retelling of the story of Orpheus and Eurydice. Le Fanu finds that the most substantial difference between Lem’s novel and the film is that Tarkovsky foregrounds “human sorrow, which has only a minor place in the book.” But where do we see such sorrow in the film? In moments like this: “What profound melancholy and suffering is implied in Hari’s inexpressive subtle gaze.” Although this is a dramatic situation, to say the least, Tarkovsky has deliberately avoided theatrical forms of drama. “Inexpressiveness,” indeed, becomes a keynote.

What Solaris gives us as a model is a different way of understanding and feeling the relationship of cinematic absence and presence. Instead of psychoanalytic identification, Solaris emphasizes existential solitude. Instead of tragic loss, Solaris emphasizes “” and waiting.”  http://www.utexas.edu/utpress/excerpts/exdilsol.html

• Chris Kelvin working on him self through all the film. Tarkovsky mixing conscious and unconscious mind of the main character.
• Being professional psychologist, Chris can’t ignore  Freud and his psychoanalysis theory.
• Tarkovsky working around the person and relationship between interior world (dreams, fears, memories, guilt)  and exterior (homeland, parents house, wife) of human life. This is Chris and his monologue with him self, but also with God.
• Viewer sees the individuals through the other dimension, from inside out, and them dealing with the situation and making decisions.
• It is dramatic scenes, but Tarkovsky making it silent and not theatrical.
• Perhaps Solaris exist in every human mind, but appears to our understanding only when we are spiritually grown enough to realise this.
• Solaris is metaphorical symbol of our shame and spirit, our judge,- our conscience.

Advertisement