Review of Persepolis (the Movie)
Category: Uncategorized
Having read Marjane Satrapi’s memoirs, Persepolis and Persepolis 2, I was excited to see the movie last week. Written as comic books (or, to be more specific, graphic novels), Persepolis and Persepolis II describe Satrapi’s childhood and adolescence as an Iranian girl whose life changes course dramatically as a result of the Islamic Revolution.
The movie is the best kind of adaptation. It hews closely to the visual and written details of the book, while adding layers of intensity through the sound, motion and scale of film.Not only is the movie artistically gripping, but it has a message that matters. As Roger Ebert notes in his review:
I attended the Tehran Film Festival in 1972 and was invited to the home of my guide and translator to meet her parents and family. Over tea and elegant pastries, they explained proudly that Iran was a “modern” country, that they were devout Muslims but did not embrace the extremes of other Islamic nations, that their nation represented a new way. Whenever I read another story about the clerical rule that now grips Iran, I think of those people, and millions of other Iranians like them, who do not agree with the rigid restrictions they live under, particularly the women. Iranians are no more monolithic than we are, a truth not grasped by our own zealous leader.
Persepolis gives American viewers a glimpse into the lives of ordinary Iranians during the revolution. Satrapi’s young self is feisty, headstrong, and longing for freedom, in a country where those qualities have become dangerous. Satrapi makes that young self — as well as her friends and family members — real to readers through a distinctive narrative voice and visual presentation.
The previews for the movie capture some of its spark and they’re available on YouTube.
Update 1/27/08: In the comments, Umm Zaid opened my eyes to significant problems with the above quotation from Ebert, leading me to recognize that I should have been more careful in selecting this quotation. I apologize for the error in judgment; my intention was to emphasize Ebert’s point that Iranians cannot be viewed monolithically.
Zaid also includes an article by Shabana Mir about understanding and supporting in appropriate ways the efforts of Muslim women to advance women’s rights.
January 25th, 2008 16:13
… via e-mail…
//they explained proudly that Iran was a “modern” country, that they were devout Muslims but did not embrace the extremes of other Islamic nations, that their nation represented a new way//
Was the ‘modern’ and ‘new’ way of this family’s Iran the fact that hundreds of thousands of Iranians were tortured and murdered by the West-loving Shah?
I wonder what were the “extremes” of other “Islamic” nations seeing as how no less than 5 Muslim majority nations at the time were run by Socialist governments that had progressive policies regarding education, women, land distribution, and so forth (not including those under the thumb of the Soviet Union). Of course, the Persian snub-nose towards their Arab neighbors — the thousands of years or rivalry and dislike between these two cultural groups — wouldn’t have anything to do with the comment. And one can’t expect someone like Ebert (or most people in the US, let’s be honest) to investigate when we’d rather use the words of those we deem to be “good Muslims” against those we deem to be “bad Mozlems.”
People just say these things and regurgitate it. It has no meaning for those of us on this side of the world living this life, whose history is this history, whose reality is this reality. There are many true stories from pre-Revolutionary Iran — not just M. Satrapi’s or this family’s. But somehow, the stories of people from South Tehran, or from Shiraz, or some village off in the mountains — those stories don’t get told (in English, in the US, at any rate).
Iranian women are admired by women in the Middle East for many reasons. The high rate of education, the fact that they sit in Parliament and in the Cabinet, their full participation in the arts there, their pioneering stance in the field of sports for Muslim women. You say “extreme repression,” and we see 69% of the PhDs there being women. BTW, what percentage of American PhDs are women?
Here is some good reading: http://religiondispatches.org/Gui/Content.aspx?Page=BL&Id=26
Sorry for taking up so much space.
January 26th, 2008 12:47
Shelby, I hope you’ll go nominate some of your best posts for the blog awards! You have had some great ones and I would hate for them to go un-highlighted. :)
January 27th, 2008 14:03
Umm Zaid,
Thank you for this comment. I should have been more careful in reprinting Ebert’s quotation, and examined more carefully the claims his friends were making in the historical context of 1972.
The reason I choose this quotation is because Ebert makes the connection that many Americans see Iranians as a monolithic group with little interest in democracy, and that Persepolis chips away at that perception somewhat by presenting the individual stories of a segment of the Iranian population before and during the revolution. My intention was not to demonize people living in other Middle Eastern countries at that time, although you are right in noting that the quotation could be taken as reinforcement of a good Muslim/bad Muslim dichotomy.
You are also right in noting that one story by one woman cannot be treated as comprehensive, particularly when it only explores in a limited degree the human rights violations that took place under the Shah.