The idea of false consciousness was first formally introduced to me a week ago in both my Political Science and Sociology classes. Subsequently I have read Persepolis (2003), written and illustrated by Marjane Satrapi. It is a personal account of her childhood; growing up in Iran at the time of the Islamic Revolution.  After class discussions with fellow peers and personal reflection, I have chosen to highlight the idea of False Consciousness prevalent in Satrapi’s graphic novel, Persepolis. To define this concept, I have chosen a definition from “Introduction to Politics Canadian Edition” (2013). False Consciousness is, “A belief or perspective that prevents someone from assessing the true nature of a situation. The concept reflects the Marxist idea that capitalism makes it impossible for most people living within the system to see the true nature of their exploitation.” (455)

Leading up to the Revolution, Islamic Fundamentalism became an increasingly (not by choice of the people) important facet in Iran. Prayer was enforced as a central aspect of daily living. There was a change in acceptable attire for woman and men. Women had to be properly veiled and could be arrested if they did not adhere to conservative and fundamental customs. Teachers were portrayed as largely influencing the youth’s opinions and ideas on religion and politics.

Marx believed that religion served society as a distraction, misleading people from seeing and understanding the repressive nature of Capitalism. Marx equated religion to drugs, saying it is, “the opium of the people” (1843). Those who believe in a religion have drugged themselves. Their religion has created their views on social issues to be distorted and inaccurate.

In Persepolis, various aspects of the Islam religion are explicitly portrayed. However, most shocking to me was the scene when Marji’s family maid, Mehridia, shows Mrs. Satrapi the plastic, golden painted key given to her son at school. She explained that “They told the boys, that if they went to war and were lucky enough to die, this key would get them into heaven” (99). In addition, “They told them that in paradise there will be plenty of food, women and houses made of gold and diamonds” (100). Mehridia represented the working class; the masses of Iran at the time. False consciousness requires large portions of the population to believe in certain ideals. The elites in power targeted the poorer and less educated. Thousands of young kids were recruited and sent out into battle with plastic keys around their necks, under the pretense that they were headed for an afterlife, “even better than Disney Land” (101).

Reading “The Role of Interpretive Communities in Remembering and Learning” (Shahzad, 2011) proved to be thought provoking and confusing. Perhaps shocking to you; prior to reading this study, never had it occurred to me that the concept of an interpretive community (Fish, 1976) might have existed. Shahzad describes an interpretive community as, “A collectivity of significant others, (who) play an influential role in the consumption and negotiation of knowledge” (2011).

In this particular study Shahzad is extending Wertsch’s (2002) theory focusing on textual resources and how they “shape the speaking and thinking of individuals to such a degree that they can be viewed as serving as ‘co-authors’ when reflecting on the past”. His study suggests a process of mediation occurs between Human Agents and Technologies of Memory.  However, in Shahzad’s further findings, she includes interpretive communities (2011) as being another main force influencing how students learn and remember.

What intrigues me about interpretive communities (Shahzad, 2011) is their intricacy. If interpretive communities exist, every individual forms part of a variety. These interpretive communities act as filter systems for the information we receive, but more importantly how we receive it. With these interpretations, our opinions on information are formed. However, we are not part of one single interpretive community, but rather multiple. If individuals are products of these multiple interpretive communities that would mean that we are both affected by interpretive communities but we also have an effect on them.

This leads me to question the concept and significance of interpretive communities. In an increasingly globalized world, the composition of our interpretive communities is becoming more diverse. Individuals are continuously moving in and out of various interpretive communities, carrying with them their own interpretations of knowledge. An interpretive community cannot interpret information as a whole; it requires individuals. Individuals individually interpret information. Therefore, how significant is the “collectivity of significant others” (Shahzad, 2011), and really how remarkable is it that vast groups which we are coming in contact with are interpreting the information we receive, when we too are interpreting information for others.