The famous autobiographical text, Persepolis by Marjane Satrapi continues popular, yet controversial arguments regarding feminism, fundamentalism during Revolution, and identity. This graphic narrative particularly takes places during the 1979 Iranian Revolution with Marji (the protagonist, also Satrapi’s childhood character) and her family holding central importance. The ongoing struggle between the public history and private memory is therein shown forth through minimalistic black and white images to portray her childhood experience of a ‘loss of innocence’ in a simple, yet effective manner.
To say that I wasn’t intrigued by her story and her portrayal of it, would be an absolute lie and to say that I was, would be an understatement. Naturally, one thing leading to another, I found myself researching and reading through more of Marjane Satrapi’s texts, when I found a Vogue interview between actress and active feminist, Emma Watson and Satrapi. After watching the interview, I gathered bits and pieces of knowledge which I found relevant to our class and CAP discussions on the grounds of feminism and the power of external influences on society.
By definition, rebellion or being rebellious, is simply an act of ‘opposition to one in authority or dominance’ (Merriam Webster). In the interview between Satrapi and Watson, numerous acts of ‘rebellion’ such as going to school as a woman, wearing a hijab, and forgiving other individuals for hate-crimes were argued. Are these really rebellious acts or are they simply individual rights and reactions [their] society disvalued?
To elaborate one by one, Satrapi’s central position on the importance of women’s education stood out the most. Education was disregarded as equally important when more conservative, fundamentalist stances were encouraged. As she delicately summarized, “Education is the first step towards democracy, while the enemy of democracy is patriarchal culture.” This is completely justified. Using her own logic along with mine, when a woman is financially stable, she automatically becomes freer. However, due to the culture and historical events (not only) in the Middle East, this is sometimes difficult to fathom. Therefore, the act of seeking education for a woman is an act of rebellion, or doing something outside of norm. Today, 70% of students in Iran are girls. This is beyond incredible. Using a very twisted version of reverse psychology, when a woman is stopped from getting a higher education, she only wants it more.
This is just the first example.
Through articles read in class and the Vogue interview, the importance of the hijab and its controversies were also dictated clearly. The hijab, or ‘veil’, is a symbol of the Islamic faith and represents modesty and commitment, however in the Western world, it is also frowned upon and judged as symbols of terrorism and often perceived as a radical statement. Through a particular article read in class, ‘My Hijab Doesn’t Oppress me, it Empowers me’ by Amber Rehman, they are seen in a different light. They are seen as yet another act of rebellion. As a strong suit for feminism, covering the body means objectification is reduced and men no longer have the power to “use their creative paintbrush to objectify and sexualize women.” That’s reasonable. Wearing the veil empowers some women from the Islamic faith, while it humiliates others. When things are forced upon an individual, they no longer hold the same value. Satrapi connoted the same when she spoke about the hijab in her interview. She states that it turned a symbol she saw as repressive into a symbol of uprising. Given her own life, she moved to France and became the “Arab in the West” but going home, she was now “French”. The dramatic culture shock and differences between the two made her an individual of two places, where identity is either lost or found, often through religion. Wearing the hijab gave Rehman power through her transition to Canada even if it wasn’t perceived and understood the way she did. Not wearing one, gave Satrapi the same power.
Satrapi also claimed that one could never really blame an ignorant person, but they could always ridicule one that knew something was wrong, but continued anyway. Through the common theme of Morality versus Humanity, she brought forward the point where morality will never rule a proper, sane state, but humanity improves social conditions, and thus improves the overall atmosphere of a country. She examples this through the provocative and contentious example of prostitution during her conversation with Emma Watson. Prostitution, whether good or bad, has always been there, and always will be regardless of ones’ morals agreeing or disagreeing with it. Rather than ridiculing the profession, house it. Contain it, take care of the women, and give them a safe place to do their job.
We examine this in our political environment today. In the United States, conservative President Trump, is almost entirely anti-abortion and ridicules it again and again. It is against HIS morals. What does that have to do with another individual? House it; contain it; take care of the women who need it. How is it that “locker-room banter” is any more acceptable? These questions come up when a strong feminist voice speaks up.
Marjane Satrapi did more than tell her story in Persepolis; in the process of recognizing her own childhood during the Iranian Revolution, she also brought out arguments that seem so obvious, yet have remained unanswered. Her feminist take on a dictatorship with strong fundamentalist values really spoke out to me, and grabbed my attention to research more on the topic in the future.
Sources:
Transcript of Interview between Emma Watson and Marjane Satrapi
https://www.vogue.com/article/emma-watson-interviews-marjane-satrapi
Rehman, Amber. “My Hijab Doesn’t Oppress Me, It Empowers Me.” HuffPost Canada, HuffPost, 5 May 2013, www.huffingtonpost.ca/amber-rehman/feminism-hijab-canada_b_2808850.html.