Elena Munk's Blog ASTU 100

Life narratives can be represented in many different ways and contain various aspects that reflect the genre or key point the author is attempting to convey. In Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis and Malala Yousafzai’s I am Malala they both share some similar features within their storytelling that helps the reader fully understand their situations and characters. Both life narratives introduce the concept of sharing parts of their country’s past within their own story. This history differs from their own because it is something they have not experienced, but have only heard about. In the simplest sense the historical information provides a background to each of their country’s government and society that is referenced, but in a way also showcases the sentiments of each author.

This decision portrays their agency as writers, but what is important to look at is why each writer makes this choice. Establishing a person’s own roots in a life narrative is common, but often it is done through a person’s childhood or ‘humble beginnings’, interestingly, Yousafzai and Satrapi in their stories are more or less still children. While Yousafzai does talk about her birth and younger years (Yousafzai 13, 19-20), both feel the need to share their broad history because it contributes to their own. “The Water Cell” for example, features Marji’s father explaining to her how the Shah came to power and that she is descended from the king in power before him (Satrapi 19). This is an important moment for her to establish her identity to the reader, but also in her own life, it appears to be a realization of sorts. Yousafzai on the other hand describes the area of land she is from and intertwines it with other information in her life (Yousafzai 14-19). She seems to use history to explain her background, which is not entirely essential except for setting up the mindset and culture of her people (14-19). Both women/girls seem proud of their past and therefore see it necessary for the reader to understand that aspect of their life. They appear to have a strong enough relationship with their country, through the history, culture, people, etc. that there is the need for inclusion in a story about their lives because this information contributes to their identity.

The purpose for including the history however, is not only to portray the author’s background or necessarily written for the author themselves, but also for the reader, as mentioned previously. The question is, why do Malala and Satrapi choose to share historical information with the reader that are events that they did not live through themselves and as life narratives what is the significance of this? In terms of autobiographical works, the purpose goes beyond simple clarification for events referenced in the text, but could also be seen as informing the ‘outsider’. Using Satrapi and somewhat Yousafzai, the history spoken about defines the way they were raised or experienced life. While they do not experience these events first hand, in comparison to many of the other events discussed, they are entirely relevant.  Why is the use of non-personal history effective for life narratives? It opens up a story to the audience that goes further than the personal story of the author. In regards to the choice of the author to include this information, it contributes to their sense of self.

Works Cited

Satrapi, Marjane. Persepolis. Trans, Mattias Ripa and Blake Ferris. New York, NY: Pantheon. 2003. Print

Yousafzai, Malala, and Christina Lamb. I am Malala: the girl who stood up for education and was shot by the Taliban. New York, NY: Little, Brown, & Company, 2013. pp. 3-9, 13-26, 154-164 . PDF.