Tuesday, September 15, 2009

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.

1 comment:

  1. You write that Marji’s father’s statement “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.” You go on to state that you believe Marji’s father should have differentiated between sentiments and religion. I completely agree. Marji’s uncle states that the religious always make bad rulers. I disagree with this. I think the religious often make excellent rulers. There is a vast difference, however, between a religious person ruling and a person ruling in the form of religion, as is the case in Persepolis. When a leader tries to push his singular religion onto his people, he fails as a leader. This is the exact circumstance when religion and politics simply do not mix.

    But going back to the first part of what you said, instead of ruling in the form of religion, a leader should make his laws for the protection of his people and for their protection only. When the government begins to expand its power beyond the protection of the people into their personal lives and decisions is when a government becomes oppressive and the people revolt.

    I’m not sure I organized my thoughts very clearly. Hopefully they are somewhat understandable. :-)

    ReplyDelete