As humans, we belong to many communities, varying in size and our involvement in them. On a very local scale we are part of our family, as well as our communities (i.e. school, social groups), and cities. On a more global scale, we are part of our culture and our countries, as well as a part of an all-encompassing community: humanity. As members of the human race, it is generally part of our nature to empathize with other members of the human race. We support each other physically and mentally in times of need. We care about each other’s well being. We are very good at this on a local scale, but when it comes to being empathetic about issues on a global scale, we sometimes turn a blind eye to avoid discomfort.

It can be argued that in order to stay sane and not be swallowed by all the negativity in the world, one must turn their back on difficult social issues and focus on positivity and normality. In Persepolis, Marji does this frequently. She is fortunate enough to have grown up in a higher social class that allows her to have certain freedoms and privileges, enabling her to remove herself from the violence that is happening in her country. Marji goes to parties (p. 102), goes on vacation (p. 77), and engages in normal rebellious teenager right-of-passage activities such as smoking cigarettes (p. 117). As was discussed in Hillary Chute’s essay “The Texture of Retracing in Marjane Satrapi’s “Persepolis”” as well as in class, Satrapi juxtaposes images of Marji partaking in normal childhood/teenage activities with images of violence. This normality of violence leaves little room for Marji to spend much time reflecting on the horrific and unjust events happening around her, as she has to fit in a childhood as well. This visual juxtaposition of the extreme good and bad aspects of Marji’s life represents the actual disparity between these two worlds a child would have to navigate and try and connect.

Chute also discusses how Satrapi’s use of graphics  personalizes her narrative and gives the reader explicit insight into her experience that wouldn’t be possible if the novel was written in only words. As humans, we need personalization to associate and empathize with a situation. When we are just given facts about issues that are effecting large communities of people, we have a hard time feeling anything for them, but when we are made to feel like we know an individual who is effected personally, we are more empathetic to their situation. In Persepolis, Marji doesn’t really take the violence in her country seriously until something extreme happens that effects her directly. This happens twice: once when her Uncle Anoosh is killed (p. 70) and once when her neighbor and friend perishes when her house is bombed (p.142). Marji changes drastically both times; when Anoosh dies she pushes God out of her life and when her neighbor dies she becomes extremely rebellious, to the point that her parents send her our of the country for her own safety. It takes something close to home for her to realize that the violence that is happening around her is not ok and should not be normal.

Another example of this can be drawn from my previous blog post in which I discussed an article on the torture and death of a women’s rights activist in Syria. As westerners, far from the violence in Syria, we know that there are injustices being done to women there, but not until a specific case arises and is focused on, we are able to fully empathize. We need lower-level details of a story or situation to begin to care about higher-level issues. Our privileged lives go on until something stands out to us and makes us uncomfortable enough to pay attention. Usually we have to be able to imagine such a thing happening to us or to someone we love for this discomfort to occur, and this requires personal stories. We like to think we are able to empathize with humanity as a whole, but realistically, the smaller the community, the better our ability to be empathetic.