Front Cover of Persepolis Source: https://www.amazon.ca/Persepolis-Story-Childhood-Marjane-Satrapi/dp/037571457X

Throughout last week, our ASTU class focused on studying the graphic narrative, Persepolis, by Iranian Author Marjane Satrapi. Set in Iran in the late 70s and Early 80s, the comic is based off of the author’s own childhood; it focuses on the experiences of a young girl named Marji who experienced the 1979 Islamic Revolution and the subsequent Iran-Iraq War first hand. The comic discusses her personal struggles with the new regime, such as being forced to don a veil or warped ideas of heroism being imposed ideologically, and how she deals with them while as portraying most Iranians as normal people like in any nation. Today, thes ideas discussed in Persepolis take center stage politically, in both the Middle Eastern**, where Islam is prevalent and in the West, where Islam’s prominence is rising. However, I will focus on a topics in particular which struck me: the stereotyping of Muslims as violent or terrorististic

With Western countries led by the United States interfering in Middle Eastern affairs during the late 20th Century, such as by participating in the 1975-1990 Lebanon War or arming radical Mujahideen fighters in Afghanistan to dismantle Soviet influence, the Middle East has seen a bloom of Islamist fundamentalism. Retrospectively, we can all judge that these political actions did not work out in their favour of neither Americans nor Middle Easterners as they eventually led up to the September 11 attacks in New York, perpetrated by Islamists and the subsequently negative portrayal of Muslims by Western media, academics, and politicians alike. The attacks were used as a justification for the United States’ rampage on the Middle East, dubbed the War on Terror, as well as the labelling of millions of people as enemies and terrorists, including designating Satrapi’s home country of Iran as part of an “Axis of Evil”. The memory of the attack lives on today and continues to influence people’s views on Muslims.

Persepolis itself was published under the post September 11 political climate in a Western Country and thus joins the enduring polemic on Islam’s place both in the Middle East and in the West. As a comic, many of Persepolis’s ideas are meant to challenge the likening of all Muslims to terrorists. Throughout the novel, Iranians are clearly shown to be normal people. They do many things that Westerners can relate with, for example there were scenes in which Marji’s parents would throw parties with alcohol, or scenes in which Marji attempted to keep up with fashion trends, like punk clothing or denim jackets, to gain social standing with her peers. All of these would be seen as normal by any Westerner and can challenge the post 9/11 stereotype of Iranians as backwards and evil.

At first, while reading the novel, I was wondering if the reason they threw these parties was because the revolution was still fresh and the conservative principles of the Regime’s elite had not yet seeped in to the population. I wondered if these things were simply leftovers from the Imperial government, which, under the last Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, sought to westernize the country. I came to conclude however that the temporal context of the parties or fashion was less relevant to the message that Westerners should not be so quick as to judge all muslims as terrorists or backward people as the focus of these parties and such was on the effect they had on the characters. Since the Persepolis was published recently, Satrapi makes it clear that her portrayal of Iranians as normal people still holds true today and that Western politicians would be wrong if they classified Iranians as anything but.

The White Man’s Burden Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/3f/%22The_White_Man%27s_Burden%22_Judge_1899.png

Another important stereotype that the novel challenges is that Muslims approve of and/or support radicals. This stereotype is related to muslims having a backwards society and has special political weighting today as it is used by many Western politicians as a justification for Western incursions into muslim majority countries; these politicians would claim a need to “civilize” the locals and teach them “western values”, which in my view is very similar to the colonialist concept of the “White Man’s Burden”. In Persepolis, Marji  is shown to revere both her Uncle, Anoosh, and Her father very much so and neither of whom are extremists. This challenges the the official narrative of Middle Eastern Countries are backwards and presents a relatable character to Western audiences, some of who may also idolize their family members.

Personally, I can relate to Satrapi and to Muslims and Middle Easterners who feel vilified by the West. One of my countries, Russia, has also undergone a similar defamation, in my point of view. Alongside Muslims, Russians have remained one of Hollywood’s go to villains and Western Media has constantly stereotyped Russians as violent, drunken, backwards, militaristic, secretive, cold-hearted, etc. etc. which has caused a great deal of frustration not just with me but with countless other Russians. This made me think: perhaps Satrapi was speaking also for other peoples or cultures vilified in western politics? Perhaps she was even sending a message to Iranians and other conservative Middle Eastern societies not to vilify Westerners or there pop culture as well? (Iran’s Government has referred to the United States as the “Great Satan” in some policy documents and in the comic, Marji was harassed for wearing a denim jacket with a Michael Jackson pin). Either way, I believe that Persepolis’s ideas against stereotyping are nonetheless universal and certainly resonate strongly in today’s political climate.

Iranians Mourn 9/11 Victims Source: http://www.irna.ir/en/News/83030328

The ideas in Persepolis discussed about stereotyping relates with the in class theme of culture and memory as often the stereotypes imposed on certain cultures probably are not how the people of said culture would remember themselves. In my personal case, I do not remember Russians or Russian culture as drunken or violent in the slightest and in Satrapi’s case, Iranians and Iranian culture are not remembered as terroristic or backwards. It also relates with how Americans’ degrading view of Middle Eastern nations, like Iran, are influenced their memory of the September 11 attacks as not only a tragedy but an insult to the US as a nation; because of these attacks, many Americans would wrongly assume that all Muslims support terror. This made me wonder, perhaps the overwhelming sadness associated with the event had hindered the ability of many Americans to think logically about this subject? However, that question is probably best left up to a psychologist

I also reflected back to my previous assignment to visit the “Arts of Resistance” exhibit about Latin America, a region where the US’s hand is also palpable. That there was a row of beautiful Mayan tunics, which like Persepolis, aims to break negative stereotypes associated with Central American countries by some Westerners (stereotypes such as drugs or crime). This all goes back to the idea of who should or can represent a culture. Can Western Media have the freedom to portray cultures and societies however they see them, or should it be left to the people from these societies to portray their culture as they see it? I myself may never have an answer to that question but I do hope that this post may generate some reflection on it.

Until Next time,

Aleksei Zhukov

**For the sake of this post Iran is included as a Middle Eastern Country since it has considerable political, economic and cultural influence there as of 2018.

During the 20th Century, Latin America became a battleground for clashes between leftwing and rightwing ideologies; it was a microcosm of the larger, contemporaneous struggle which engulfed the world as global powers tried their hands at influencing the region’s politics. Moving forward into the 21st Century, the effects of these clashes and of the older era of colonization are palpable as their memories are kept alive and well. Movements such as the Socialist Pink Tide continue to gain traction such as with the victory of the Leftist Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador in Mexico’s presidential election and the ensuring popularity of Socialist Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva in Brazil despite accusations of corruption. On the other hand, such leftist movements have met fierce reaction from actors like Peru’s brutal anti-communist Alberto Fujimori, who served as president from 1990 to 2000, Brazil’s far-right presidential candidate Jair Bolsonaro, and historically, the American Government. As anyone can see, Latin America’s politics are as fiery as their cuisine.

In 2018, the Museum of Anthropology on the University of British Columbia’s campus hosted an exhibit showcasing art born from these political struggles, entitled “Arts of Resistance”, which I visited with friends for a project in my ASTU class with the class topic of individual and collective memory in mind. Before going to the exhibit, I honestly expected much of the artwork to take on a pro-US, pro western stance due to the negative portrayal of Latin America’s anti-US socialists like Venezuela’s Nicolás Maduro, Cuba’s Castro Brothers, or Bolivia’s Evo Morales. Adding to that, the exhibit was hosted at a university in a western country closely allied with the United States. Perhaps it was my own personal biases but I had few reasons to believe that it would criticize western influence in Latin America. And I was wrong.

One of the most striking artworks which I encountered was a mural which depicted US onslaught against Peruvian farmers and peasants. This is the main artwork I will focus on for today. Perhaps the surprising aspect of the artwork was depicting that it was not just oppression at the hands of US soldiers but also at the hands of the Peruvian government, leading me to believe that the event depicted President Fujimori’s US-backed repression of the communist group, Shining Path which claimed 69,280 lives according to a post-Fujimori presidential commission. Seeing as the work was created in 2018, it is likely that the work was the manifestation of a memory of these events.

While I already saw this justification as a farce, this exhibition furthered my distrust of the American government and its claim as a protector of democracy. The Museum’s website explains that “communities in Latin America use traditional or historical art forms to express contemporary political realities”. In this case, the traditional artwork is mural and such a reality is that the United States contributes to and in many cases causes the socio-economic shortcomings experienced by Latin America’s lower classes, therefore constructing knowledge not usually accessible through Western Media.

Also, the artwork depicted the oppressed rallying behind communist guerrillas. While I had my own favourable biases towards these communist guerrillas, a part of me believed in claims made by the Western Media that these more radical leftist groups were unpopular with Latin America’s masses, usually drawing again to Venezuela as an example. However, the artwork made me question this narrative and whether or not Western media is as objective as its reputation claimed it to be as the artwork shows the political realities as contrary by depicting popular support for these groups.

The artwork also spoke to me on a personal level. My Uncle on my Mother’s side was part of a communist guerrilla in the Philippines and was tortured by forces loyal to the US-backed dictator, Ferdinand Marcos, while my Father and Grandfather had been a member of the Soviet Red Army, the largest communist force at its hight.

The whole experience made me recall the class topic of memory. In terms of the personal relation, it made me wonder whether my resentment of the US government was based at least partially on collective familial memory, that it was based on the fact that various family members of mine had been been part of anti-American military groups. I wondered and reflected on whether their memories of being part of these groups had been passed on to me to become a lens at which I first saw the United States.

In terms of the artwork itself, I wondered whether much of Latin America’s own resentment of the US derived from their memory of centuries of imperialist domination. First at the hands of Spain and Portugal (and to a smaller extent, France, the UK, and Germany), Latin America fell under the US’s weight soon after securing independence due to the adoption of the Monroe Doctrine in 1823. While the Doctrine was evoked more in the later part of the 19th century, it was nonetheless used as a justification for US incursions against their neighbours’ sovereignty. These made me believe that the Latin American art my friends and I saw was a means to protest and escape the political reality of foreign hegemony which plagues the region to this day by depicting it outright in a simple form, a mural.

This also drew me to a film that we watched in class called Stories We Tell directed by actress Sarah Polley. One of the main premises of the film was that personalities are but performance to other people which can differ depending on the situation. I contemplated whether on not this may be true for nations as well, that their actions may be situation based performances; the US may act as a defender of rights and democracy towards some countries such as NATO allies or rivals Russia and China as a way to gain political clout, but also behaves based on its imperial hubris towards countries it deems inferior or part of its own back yard, in this case Latin American nations.

Another, even more saddening artwork was a similar piece, this time set in El Salvador. What was most jarring about it was the fact that it was actually a drawing done by a child depicted US soldiers destroying a village and murdering the author’s compatriots. By using simplistic drawings of soldiers and blood, the artwork constructs knowledge that the American incursion in El Salvador was unethical as it caused children to be exposed to events unsuitable for a child. This is further emphasized the the use of crayon, highlighting a sense of innocence in the drawing. This begs the question: is it events like these which shape a national memory of distrust for nations or political entities? I definitely believe so.

Other important artworks were the various traditional Mayan tunics my friends and I were greeted proudly by upon entering the exhibition. One of the most immediate questions which came to my mind was whether or not it was ethical to transport these tunics out of Central America. I recalled that Britain did something similar by transporting treasures to the UK stolen from foreign lands through imperial conquests. I wondered whether this may enforce colonialist ideas about groups deemed as “others” by transporting them away from their homeland and studying them in an almost condescending manner.

This changed slightly, however. During class it was mentioned by our teacher, Professor Luger, that they were purchased and that the curator acquired them as ethically as she could. However, I was still left wondering on whether or not it is ever ethical to remove valued cultural artifacts from their homeland as it is a colonialistic action.

The experience at the museum was a very reflective experience on the political instability of colonization and hegemony, the scars they left behind on their victims’ memories, and how these memories affect their views and actions today. While much of what I talked about in today’s posted is focused on Latin America and her colonizers, I believe these ideas may be extrapolated to other communities with similar power relations as multiple communities have similar memories of imperial domination.

Until next time,

Aleksei Zhukov