Persepolis

At one point in the book Persepolis, Marji's father tells her that "politics and sentiment don't mix," and yet much of the book's power comes from precisely that combination--on the one hand, there are the horrible realities of the revolution and the war; and on the other hand, there is the example of Satrapi's family, whose strength and love really do become a means of survival for Marji. How do you react to the father's statement? Do you think that Marji herself believes that "politics and sentiment don't mix"? Do you think the women in her family--her mother and grandmother--would agree with the statement?

In Persepolis, Marji's father tells her that "politics and sentiment don't mix.” This could be interpreted in two different ways. First, it could mean that we should not base our political agendas on emotions and feelings. Laws, rules, and regulations should be in place to protect the citizens of Iran. They should not pander to the fears and beliefs of a few. Instead, they should serve to benefit all and conceived on sound judgment, not fear-mongering propaganda. Secondly, it could mean that politics and sentiment don’t mix because of the potential for emotional damage. In the midst of chaos, if Marji is able to distance herself from the horrors inflicted by the Islamic regime, she would have any easier time going on with her day to day life and following the rules. However, politics and sentiment are forever going hand in hand in the book. Politics and sentiment should not be mixed, but they are. They are tangled, entwined together eternally. What Marji’s father ought to be saying is politics and religion doesn’t mix. But since it has been thrown into the tangled mess, it can’t be removed without tearing everything apart. For better or worse, sentiment and religion are a big part of politics for Marji and Iran.

Sentimentality, when faced with an extreme, oppressive government, a rebellion, and a war, is practically a requirement. If you do not have strong emotional pull under the strain of constant loss and fear, you are either a strong-willed individual, capable of barring emotion from strangling the life out of you, or else a heartless one. Marji and her family keep their emotions and their outrage. To keep strong, they lean on one another.

I think that Marji believes that politics and sentiment should not mix. She knows that they do mix, though. She holds out for an ideal government and an ideal society. I do not think she has ever found that idealized thing. In the movie, she gets so distraught and disillusioned by society and the government of Vienna, Austria that she goes back to oppressive Iran. In Vienna, she is constantly betrayed by people she cares about and by people who are out to “help” her. She is passed from house to house, and after her boyfriend cheats on her, she lives on the street. She almost dies. Hating her new country, she goes back to Iran. Iran is a godsend after her trials abroad. However, she is quickly disillusioned again by the backwardness of the politics and social aspects of Iran. She marries, divorces, and again moves away.

Marji’s mother and grandmother seem to have a similar viewpoint on politics and sentiment as Marji and her father. They know that the two absolutely do mix but probably should not. They do, however, have differences. Marji’s mother seems to be more outspoken on the political side, while her grandmother is more inclined to push for sentimentality and integrity. Her mother was a fervent protester of the Shah’s regime and used her sentimentality and outrage to battle to get him ousted. Marji’s grandmother scolds her for not upholding her integrity when she accuses a man of harassing her with lewd remarks to get out of trouble for wearing lipstick. Grandmother wishes Marji would have channeled her sentiment. She thinks she should have been apprehended herself, rather than letting an “innocent” man get in trouble.

The characters in Persepolis and I agree that “politics and sentiment don’t mix,” but also that they do mix. That is, they shouldn’t be involved together, but regardless, they are involved forever.

The Great Gatsby

I believe that Nick’s story in The Great Gatsby is resolved in a positive manner, even with so many sad and negative events looming over the end of the novel. Nick never seemed quite like he thought he was a part of the events involving him and his acquaintances. While he was fond of his friends, he was not as devastated by the separation as Tom, Gatsby, Daisy, or even Jordan. He was conveniently an outsider and was able to cope with all of the loss. Instead of the grief Gatsby was stricken with at the end, Nick was enamored with a longing remembrance of the good fun he had at Gatsby’s parties. Those “gleaming, dazzling parties...were with me so vividly that I could still hear the music.”

After Daisy ran over Myrtle, Nick, speaking of Daisy and Tom, said to Gatsby, “They’re a rotten crowd. You’re worth the whole damn bunch put together.” Nick narrated, “It was the only compliment I ever gave him.” He saw that Gatsby, though he had great wealth, had character of more worth than all of his other close acquaintances combined. Daisy, Jordan, and Tom were all caught up in the “careless” lifestyle that comes with money, the manner of thought that allows you to believe that you are the most important person; and any mess you might make will be cleaned up by another. Gatsby certainly had flaws. Nick said, “I disapproved of him from beginning to end.” But, he was still able to give him a solitary compliment, whether he meant it or not. It shows that Nick was able to honestly survey his friends’ moral fibers and personalities and determine whose was best. He seemed to be taking Gatsby’s side, rather than Daisy’s or Tom’s. This was partially due to the fact that Daisy and Tom fled town after Gatsby was killed. I believe Nick was disgusted by that fact. He described them as being excessively careless, ruining the lives of others. Gatsby, in turn, stayed behind and was punished; Wilson shot and killed him. I think that was part of the reason Nick stayed with Gatsby so loyally in the end. He was aware that his carelessness was markedly less than the others. All of this interpretation of Gatsby’s character by Nick was still coming from an honest and sensible man. He had held on to his foundation and had grown into a wiser individual. For example, Jordan said, “I thought you were rather an honest, straightforward person. I thought it was your secret source of pride.” Nick responded, “I’m thirty. I’m five years too old to lie to myself and call it honor.

Nick Carraway definitely turned out all right in the end. He did so because he was able to associate with upper class individuals with loose morals and loose wallets, like Daisy and Tom, and come out with a better understanding of life, rather than being caught up in the mess. While his dreams may elude him now, “tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther…And one fine morning,” everything will be alright.