Thinking of the book as a graphic text, with a focus on word and image as devices for storytelling:
- Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
- How would you describe the style of Satrapi’s drawings? How does this style contribute to the story that she tells? How does this style limit the way the story is told?
- What particular incidents in the story do you think are conveyed more effectively in pictures than they could have been in words alone?
ReplyDeleteLili Lomas- question #1- Comic book format allows readers to see child's perspective
I think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images because it is allows her to be more informal in her account of these serious events. The comic book format reflects childrens’ simplistic perspective of the world. The pictures allow her to display the emotions that young Marji feel and the images that she remembers from this difficult time in her childhood and in her country. Additionally, the short sentences, speech bubbles, and thought bubbles in each frame allow her to summarize the events in a simplistic way and through a child’s eyes. “That was my last meeting with my beloved Anoosh” (Satrapi 70) Satrapi follows with an image of her uncle on a newspaper saying that he is dead with the bread duck sitting on it. This combination of words and the image help readers understand her feelings about an event. Apart from displaying the images she remembers from childhood, through the images, Satrapi is also able to take readers into Marji’s imagination and feelings. For example, in “The Sheep” in the frame after she tells God to get out of her life, Satrapi is able to show us how Marji feels as she floats alone in space. The combination of words and images allows readers to both see the events of the revolution and its effects on her family through a young child’s eyes and also to explain the events to allow for more comprehensive reading. This is similar to how in the TV show “Sherlock”, Sherlock Holmes’ deductions appear on the screen for viewers to see inside of his thought process. Though the pictures are an important method to convey the narrator’s viewpoint, if the story was told through just pictures, readers may not understand the events and effects of the revolution as much as they do through images and words. Because this is a topic that many people do not know much about, the words allow Satrapi to explain them to readers as a part of the story. Though the storytelling through a comic format is effective because of this, does this informal format take away from the content’s effect on readers?
Great connection to Sherlock, Lili. The images do allow an insight to her thinking that words alone could not achieve. I would argue the informal format actually ADDS to the effect.
DeleteI agree with your perspective because through her simplistic style of art, she is able to convey what she felt as a child easier to the readers. I also read in a lot of her interviews that she did not really study art before or during her process of writing Persepolis, which explains why her style is so simple. An interviewer asked her if she would like to change her style now if possible, but she replied that she would not, because she personally feels that the style itself tells a lot to the reader. But similar to Mr. Orlopp, I would like to disagree and say that the informal format adds to the effect of showing Marjane's perspective. Also I would disagree on that text is necessary because I think if we truly understood and knew the Revolution, we can read this book with less words. The words serve a more explanatory purpose while Satrapi's drawings serve a emotional purpose. There are only a few panels that have no words or text to go along with it and one example is in page 39 when Marji's mother hits Mehri's, the maid, and Marji's face. Although these panels do not have words, we can see through the drawing that both Marji and Mehri were very surprised and emotionally hurt that they were hit.
DeleteQuestion 1 - Satrapi's use of words and images
ReplyDeleteThroughout Satrapi's novel, Persepolis, the use of both images and words are vital to the way the story is being told to her audience. With the visual representations, the reader is given an opportunity to experience the tragedies Satrapi and her family were subjected to during her time in Iran. Coupled with words, the graphics are shaped to how Satrapi wants the readers to interpret the images she provided to ensure they are seeing her perspective during this challenging time in her life. When put together, not only do the images and words create an intriguing graphic novel that draws the reader's attention, but form a coherent story that can educate readers on a difficult topics in a more informal format. Because most authors limit themselves to writing novels with only words, they must hope that the reader views the story in the same manner they are trying to convey it. However, by making it into the form of a graphic novel, Satrapi can express emotions and feeling that may otherwise be confusing or unimportant to the reader. For example, on the rightmost panel in the middle of page 14, Satrapi states how the police forbade people from helping those who were locked inside. However, when looking at the photo, we see the police drawn twice as large as the people to show how they felt overtaken by them and their power. Without one or the other, the story would lack vital information that would shape the reader's mind to how the author felt about this horrific experience. Overall, Satrapi's use of both images and words are essential to her telling of this story. Her use of images and words influence the reader's mind and produce the intriguing story that is Persepolis.
I also think that using images instead of only words makes the graphic novel more interesting and easier to relate to, as we live in a time where pictures are more often used to tell stories. I believe that the images can also be limiting the extent to which the story could be told, as there may be parts taken out to fit the images. To what extent do you think Marjane Satrapi's usage of images limits her ability to convey thoughts?
DeleteI agree with you that the author used both images and words are vital to the way the story is being told to her audience through visual representation so that they can experience the tragedies Satrapi and her family were subjected to during her time in Iran. I agree that Satrapi shaped the novel so that the readers can see through the same perspective as her during the Iranian Revolution. I also agree that if it was written in any other way than the style of a graphic novel, so that Satrapi can express emotions and feeling that may otherwise be confusing or unimportant to the reader.
Delete2) I would describe Satrapi’s style to be childish and simple. Although her style does not perfectly fit the heavy and gloomy theme of her memoir, it adds a hint of humor, making her story a dark comedy. By using a simplistic style, the story is delivered easily to the readers. The readers can understand Satrapi’s message better. Because although simple, her style is very metaphorical yet direct, so it is easy to understand her emotions. For example, in ‘The Sheep’ (page 62 -71), Marjane expresses her despair and sadness when she loses her uncle by showing herself denying God and aimlessly floating in space. She uses text to describe her emotion, “I was lost, without any bearings” (Satrapi 71), but her simple drawing of herself as a child floating in space allows the readers to connect better with her because we all know the feeling of being lost. Also, due to her style, the text is very helpful to understand the situation in Iran. Since her style is very simple, it does not distract the readers from the text. This style perhaps limits the true grotesque situations of the war and the severity of it. But I personally think that Satrapi’s style adds to the story than limit it. This is because it was her intention to show the war through a young child’s eyes, nonetheless very mature. But I do wonder how different the delivery of the story would be if Satrapi had used a more realistic style. Would I be able to connect to it as well as I can now? Would it be better at delivering her message, or would it take away the purpose of the text? Although I wonder this, I know that Marjane Satrapi has accepted this style to be “fit” for Persepolis. I read in some of her interviews that she didn’t learn how to draw realistically when she wrote Persepolis and that’s why the drawing is so childlike. But she also mentioned how she liked how she drew because she thought it helped deliver her message better. Although her simplistic style was not intentional, Satrapi has accepted it to be satisfactory for her.
ReplyDeleteI find it incredibly interesting how Marjane never learned to draw properly. I believe that if she had learned to draw the human body in a realistic manner, it would have taken something away from the story. When we first meet Marji, she is a prepubescent teenager with a very simple and innocent outlook on life. This is reflected especially poignantly in Persepolis's drawings. We see Marji trying to wrap her mind around the things that she sees every day and the world that she lives in. Her simplistic shapes and color schemes encapsulates her fairly one dimentional views on life, justice, and revolution.
DeleteJade Njo #3- A picture is worth a thousand words
ReplyDeleteThe graphic style Marjane Satrapi writes her memoir in is highly effective in conveying incidents that words may fall short to describe. Such instances are sprinkled throughout the book. One instance is in "The Sheep" on page 71 where young Marji is floating through dark space. This image actually parallels with the middle right panel on page 71 where she is laying on her bed with her arms and legs laid out. She is illustrating how lost she feels, "without any bearings...what could be worse than that?" (Satrapi 71). The bottom of the image reads "It was the beginning of the war," (Satrapi 71), which I think is very powerful when paired with the image because it foreshadows how far astray Marji will be led later in the book. Overall, I think this image speaks louder than words because it's easy to just say "I'm lost," however, Satrapi's choice to illustrate it in this fashion conveys how truly disconnected she feels from her world. Another instance where her situation is conveyed more effectively is in "The Vegetable," the bottom panel on page 194. In this image, past illustrations that Marji has drawn for situations in the novel are collaged into one. It is a mixture of defining moments and more colloquial moments, all coming together to show what Marji is thinking of. This is more effective than words because it conveys a mixture of different emotions running through Marji's head. I wonder what your opinion is on Satrapi's use of illustration as a form of communicating big ideas.
I do agree with you, as I stated in my response, the pictures enhance the readers ability to understand exactly how the person/character is feeling at that moment. The text can convey the action, the image can convey the thought, they work in harmony to create a balance like none other.
DeleteI definitely agree that Satrapi’s images add something to the story that words alone are unable to convey. Your connection to the images where she is showing her growth is one of my favorites and I think that was one of the most notable instances in which images enhanced the words that were said in the novel. Had there been no pictures to show her physical changes, it would have been much more difficult for the reader to see how much she changed in her time away from her parents and would have made the part where she reunites with her parents less powerful.
DeleteLisette Hotz
DeleteI like how you see the deep value in the illustrations that Satrapi provided, but I think that their use could be liked to the fact that Marji's life story is very long, and providing images can help her to quickly show what she is feeling and going through. I think that words are very powerful and when used precisely and intentionally and can soetimes depict what someone is feeling or experiencing better that images.
Maya Garg
ReplyDelete2-
Satrapi’s style in both her drawings and writing is incredibly simplistic and innocent in it’s appearance, but further evolves into a much more profound message past surface level analysis. For example, through her use of only black and white, and minimalist simplistic drawings that are not life like, but are more cartoon style, she is able to convey her ideas of young innocence and the simplicity of wants basic rights and freedom. It also emphasizes the supposed simplicity of the life that Marji wanted, rather than the life that she got. The simple language only helps to intensify all of these characteristics. When she says “And I was so lost..” (Satrapi, 71), it resonates deeper with the reader because not only is it a very short phrase, but the large simple photo makes the situation seem so simplistic, while after understanding the words it is evident that it is not.
This simplicity adds an unseen amount of depth to the emotional delivery of the novel. By this simplicity and almost childlike narration, the reader develops both a more sympathetic and empathetic connection to Marji and her story. This also however, takes away some important elements from what the story could have been. A lot of the time, we don’t get the reflective nature of the memoir. She speaks about everything so quickly and soon moves on the the next topic in a fleeting manner, so we never truly get her insightful depth into a situation. We also don’t get to see her feelings about these events as an adult looking back, because it is all told from her perspective as she was growing up. Do you believe that this is a superior mode of storytelling, or does it only work in this particular circumstance? I can connect this mode of writing to a comic book, they are very childlike on the surface but if you analyze them and delve into them you can find a more mature, deeper meaning and moral to the story.
Dheemant Dammanna - Question 3: What particular incidents in the story do you think are conveyed more effectively in pictures than they could have been in words alone?
ReplyDeleteI think that the most important descriptions that Satrapi effectively used pictures for are those of the physical appearance of the characters. In particular, the book shows changes in culture and relates them to things like dress, which shows the changes that are occurring to Marji. In particular, the part of the book where Marji “tried a few new haircuts” (Satrapi 190) only can convey so much of a change via words, but when Satrapi adds the images of Marji’s new style (@Daniel Lee) to show the change in her personality as well as the way that she failed to fit in. The pictures show that the physical change did not correspond with a change in the way that she felt. She still felt left out, which is evident in her facial expressions. Her facial expression remains a frown, indicating the sadness that is within her. Marji always struggles with fitting in, so the juxtaposition of her looks with her personality shows the changes that she faces and how she clings to what she deems is herself. An important question to understand would be, how do the images of Marji remain similar or different throughout the book? I think that the images of Marji fit into different categories where she begins with very happy expressions that change to sadness when she goes to Austria. She feels left out, which becomes evident with the images of her perpetual sadness. Additionally, another important question to answer would be to what extent do the images reflect the changes in Marji’s personality?
Frank Zhang Question 1
ReplyDeleteWhy use imagery when you can have the images? Why should the pictures speak when the words themselves are present? Each part is far more effective in making up for potential flaws in the other and in the case of a memoir, where there are experiences that are difficult to describe in words only, the usage of art is fascinating both in that it gets rid of the need for imagery and that Marji's art is in essense a reflection of how she grew up as it is the style she developed to be uniquely hers even if it may be inspired by that of others. In addition comic books or in this case graphic novels have their roots in describing something that people can only imagine and as Marjane is writing about her experiences in Iran that the western person can only imagine and hears of from others, the roots of the text type itself is perfect. As words and images are blended, other options open up as the words themselves can be written in specific ways beyond just being in all caps to express a multitude of emotions that usually cannot be normally seen on the pages of a book while words give specific explanation to perhaps any sort of meaning to images that make them far more accessible. And as seen in many of the panels such as the one from the Spanish Vacation (77) where although Marjane includes text at the top to give the image context, there is plenty of symbolism that the reader can and likely should determine on their own with the boundaries put in place by the text there.
Frank, I completely agree with your point, as often times images are able to more adequately express abstract concepts since they don't attempt to constrict the theme by placing it in simple terms for the reader. Instead, by creating imagery, Marjane Satrapi is able to allow the audience some level of independence in interpreting her work while still effectively emphasizing her unique style.
DeleteLisette Hotz
DeleteI agree that a lot of symbolism can be found in the small details of the illustrations, and I think that paired with how the style in which the novel is written, the illustrations allow Marji to tell her story quickly and switch between space and time without causing too much confusion. However, I think that the illustrations almost make the events of Marji's life seem less legitimate because it is all written in a cartoon, and sometimes her emotions feels oversimplified by simply being expressed by a smile or frown on a simple black and white character. I think it causes the story to lack some humanity and emotional expression through words.
Victor Kalev (Question #2):
ReplyDeleteWith any work of art, the creator has complete freedom in utilizing any style or strategy in order to convey their central theme. Graphic novels are no different, and the tone and voice of the author denotes a lot about their work and their personality or views as an individual. Through Marjane Satrapi’s Persepolis, it seems as though an apparent contrast exists between the events of the story and the actions and beliefs of the main character. Particularly, Satrapi’s drawings can be considered black-and-white, minimalistic depictions of depressing circumstances, yet the story still manages to infuse irony and comedy simultaneously through the incorporation of text above the images. This intricate interplay between writing and drawing can be clearly seen during the scene in which the students begin to mock the rituals of the school as Marjane states that “every situation offered an opportunity for laughs.” (Satrapi 97) Evidently, the situation at hand is not comedic in anyway – hence the dark imagery of self-harm in the previous panels. However, the surrounding text and subsequent panels of laughter in the face of such adversity seem to further emphasize her rebellious nature and highlight her stance towards the harmful events that took place during and after the Iranian Revolution. Although the images are useful tools in portraying the underlying sadness of the situations, there seems to be an apparent disconnect between the audience and Marjane. Specifically, the limited amount of text almost serves as a barrier in the complete understanding of Marjane’s character, as a lot is left to the audience to analyze for themselves based on the facial expressions and content of the images within the panels. In this way, the story almost reminds me of films, since if not enough camera time is spent delving into the internal perceptions of the main character and instead are solely focused on narrating, the viewer is unable to establish an emotional connection. Considering that Persepolis is a memoir, there should be plenty of detail regarding the feelings and thoughts of the narrator in order for the reader to be completely submersed within their story. Despite the fact that images abstractly and metaphorically portray these concepts, it can be difficult to completely determine with full accuracy the underlying meaning of particular panels. Why do you think that Marjane Satrapi chose a graphic novel as her preferred text type? Would it have been more effective to take the classic route of a first person novel in order to more clearly understand the thoughts and development of the main character? Is it morally acceptable to incorporate comedic aspects when discussing tragic topics?
3. What parts are particularly effectively conveyed in images?
ReplyDeleteI believe that the parts of the graphic novel which most benefit from their visual as opposed to purely textual format are the parts where Satrapi's own biases or judgements come into play. By this I mean when she is portraying certain characters as good, bad, oppressive, in conflict, etc.
An example of Satrapi conveying a character as good is in the scenes where Marjane is talking to God as a child. In these scenes, the background and Marjane herself are usually in darkness while God is a pure shining light, capturing the frame(Satrapi 12-13). On other occasions it is clear that Satrapi wants to portray some government or religious official as evil or oppressive, in which case she makes their clothing black, and draws them looming over Marjane oppressively to cement the picture of aggressive dominance in our minds. A specific example of this is when the guardians of the revolution interrupt Marjane as she is walking in her denim jacket to scold her for imitating western culture and her apparent decadence for wearing those clothes(Satrapi 137). In this scene, the guardians are often drawn without any limbs visible and bending towards Marjane from above, giving them a serpentine type of look to them, something humans have evolved to fear, and clearly successfully as snakes have been used as the epitome of evil in many texts, notably in the bible.
These examples show us that visual elements can be effective at conveying messages indirectly to the audience even when the format is as simplistic as in Persepolis, it doesn't get much more plain than black and white cartoons with minimal text after all. This type of visual implementation is actually quite rare, because even cartoons tend to attempt to convey as much as possible explicitly through colors, text, and movement, as those stories tend to be more about battles or comedy than complex ideas unfolding slowly over a character's life, in the real world.
Sharon Shaji. Efficacy.
ReplyDelete2. Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
Perhaps Satrapi wants her to be a younger one. The abundant imagery and limited number of words make it easier for younger children to read, which is why the audience of many graphic novels consists of younger kids. Satrapi might have chosen the graphic novel as her medium because she wanted young children to read her story and understand what she went through at their age.
The counter “evidence” for this, however, is that there is some explicit material in her book, so perhaps not. Either way, pictures and words make it easy for the complex message to come off fluidly.
Another reason why she may have written her story in words and images is that she studied graphic art and design (as demonstrated in the book) and didn’t want to waste her skills there. She exercised lots of risk taking when studying art and design, so it would not make sense for her to go to France and write a long novella about her life story. Words alone would be inefficient, as would images without context. She would, and should, reasonably use her acquired skills to her benefit.
Also, when looking at the literary techniques that are espoused in graphic novels, Marjane is able to easily conveying the emotional aspects of objective reality. For example, on page 79, the words “What!” are placed in special “shock” bubbles. When you look behind that bubble, you see the surprised faces of Marjane’s family. Narration alongside imagery provides an accurate representation of Marjane’s view point. Had she written the shocking discontentment of her parents using adjectives, we as readers would all have held a different image of the scene. However, through the graphic novel, we all see the same scene, and our interpretation of the scene is not influenced by the varying images we subconsciously put in our minds.
I agree with how you described that the platform of her story being a graphic novel might reach out to an audience of younger kids. I feel that her explicit material might show that her true audience could be teens, since usually during one's teens they try to find themselves as a person and that is what Satrapi was doing through her journey. I never considered that it could be due to her studying graphic design, that's a good point.
DeleteGrace Hao Reply:
DeleteHey Sharon! I think your perspective behind the motive of Satrapi's pictures (makes it easier for younger kids to read) was a very interesting and different interpretation. I had never thought of the pictures in that way before. I agree with your comment about how she depicts things in pictures because of her background in graphic design and art. This is especially evident as Marjane's art education plays a big role in her character development. I really like how you analyze the picture itself to draw conclusions. Do you think Satrapi could have done just as good of a job telling her story if she did not use pictures?
Sharon Shaji. Reply to Grace Hao. She might have been able to, but it would have been inefficient and most likely not have reached the broader she intended to. It would have been less intriguing, as we would not experience the rollercoaster alongside her in a personal way.
DeleteSally Kyong
DeleteI agree with how she could have used words and images to make it clear for the children to understand the story better. I think that picture gives more incite in what the author is trying to show or tell through the novel, which makes it easier for the audience or the reader to understand the story better. Although there is explicit material in her book that might be inappropriate for kids, I think it was a necessary part for her story because she was trying to show the audience or the reader about what exactly happened. I agree with how pictures enhance the message of the novel and what she is trying to convey.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteZawad Quazi - Question 1.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Satrapi choses to use pictures and text in ther story in order to give the best visualization and explanation to her readers, so they can fully understand the how the Iranain revolution affect the domestic civilians’ lives. It was used to provide a different perspective on how the implementation of religion in government dramatically changed Iranian society in the late 1970’s. That idea was too complicated to be expressed with only words, and it was too subjective and simultaneously vague when expressed with only illustrations. Thus, Satrapi’s use of pictures can show visually how the scene happened, and reserved text for context or dialogue to give the reader more of an understanding. The use of imagery was also noted in the novel Persepolis, as in many cases the characters were drawn a certain way and said certain things to show how Marjane’s life was changed during the Islamic revolution. This was shown in the first page of Persepolis, when the readers saw the “class photo” (Satrapi, 1). In the top right panel, the girls are drawn with different facial expressions to show that the majority of the students dislike the veil, and the drawings had a underlying message that the veil made the children look the same (as shown in that panel, as well as the very bottom panel), which shows how the veil suppresses their expression of emotion. Along with the images in the first page, there is text to explain the panels, so the reader would not be confused, and there is historical context as well. This is like many blogs I have read in fantasy game lore. Especially in the beginning of the story, the game lore presents pictures of the setting and the characters, as well as text for context, for the reader (such as myself) to understand the history in the lore and well as the story itself. This begs the question, in was circumstance would an author just use text, or just pictures to prove a point? Along with the previous question, which method would be better in conveying information to the reader, information presented in text or in pictures?
Grace Hao Reply:
DeleteHi Zawad!! I agree that some ideas in this story were simply too complicated to be expressed with only words. I think it's interesting how you raised the point of pictures providing a new perspective, since I had not considered that before. I like how you are able to draw conclusions and note underlying messages from the images. To answer your question, I think it depends of the author. and story. If the author thinks the story could be best told through words only, then they should not use pictures. If an author thinks that the story would be more complete with pictures, then I think pictures should be included. Information can be conveyed in many ways- none of which I think are superior to the other. What is your opinion on using pictures to convey meanings?
Prajna Vootukuri: Question 1
ReplyDeleteI believe that Satrapi chose to tell her story using a combination of words and images rather than solely words or solely images to get her story across clearer. Only using words would leave too much room for imagination as each reader might have their own depiction. A personal example I have of this experience is when I was reading Wuthering Heights last month, the book’s setting was unfamiliar to me so I had to use some imagination mixed with the details the writing gave me to picture the scenery and characters. With the assistance of pictures, I feel I would’ve been able to picture the story better. On the other hand, using only pictures would leave out too many details and aspects that would be better understood using text. For example, younger Satrapi had many conversations with God, as she felt “God came to see [her] from time to time” (Satrapi 17). In these panels, Satrapi shows her perception of how she felt God’s presence as being similar to a comforting friend giving her advice. Without both components of the panels, it would be difficult for the readers to understand her story. The style Satrapi uses in her comic book fashion story shows the story from her own eyes aiding the reader in better understanding how Satrapi saw the world and the reasons behind the actions she took. Satrapi’s childlike drawings displayed her mental growth as she matured through her bumpy journey of life. Which brings me to question: Did Satrapi aim to appeal to a younger reading audience in writing her emotional story through a comic book fashion? Did she wish for them to gain an understanding through her own personal growth and hardships?
I agree with a lot of the statements you made and your analysis of how Satrapi used a combination of both words and pictures. In regard to the question you posed, I think that the main goal of writing her novel in a comic book fashion was indeed to appeal to a younger audience because she was a child for the first half of the story, probably the same age or slightly younger than many of the readers. This could show what exactly she was going through when she was younger than us, which provides us with a new perspective and connecting with the author.
DeleteAndrew Clarke - Prajna I agree with you that Satrapi's use of pictures alongside words helps to further convey her message and depicts her viewpoint throughout her life, however when you say that words alone leave too much for the imagination and would not get the original story across clear enough, is leaving too much to the imagination of the reader necessarily a bad thing? I completely agree that pictures further enhance the story when they accompany words, but I don't necessarily believe that the freedom presented with words alone makes it inferior to words and pictures. Rather, the imagination is one of the key components that we use in creating and interpreting a story, and sometimes it may make the story unique to a single reader. So, again, is this necessarily a bad thing that imagination is set loose in novels with only words?
DeleteAmish Dara-
DeleteAmish Dara Reply:
Prajna, I agree with your point regarding the comic book style of Perspolis being benefical but I disagree with appealing to the younger population as one of Satrapi's reasons to incorporate images. While, true, the graphic novel style of books does appeal to the youth, I personally believe the themes and central ideas of the graphic novel don’t align with books for children. I believe that Marjane Satrapi instead used her comic book style of Persepolis to give her readers a deeper understanding and enhance their comprehension of her novel.
Grace Hao #3
ReplyDeleteI think that a lot of the emotion and emotional occurrences in the story were conveyed more effectively with pictures than in words. In the picture above, Marji is displayed with other Iranian women. However, it is evident that Marji stands out with her “punk is not ded” jacket/sweater. In regards to this specific panel, and the book as a whole, I think that there is no better way to convey Marji’s rebellion than with an image comparing her clothing with the traditional clothing. I think in the slides given above, images were the best way to convey emotion and give an overview of the big picture. This can also be seen in one of the panels when Marji says “November 1984. I am in Austria. I had come here with the idea of leaving a religious Iran for an open and secular Europe and that Zozo, my mother’s best friend, would love me like her own daughter” (Satrapi 155). This quote alone does not express the big picture idea, where Marji feels alone, confused, and unwanted. However, these implicit feelings are shown through the image/picture as Marji is depicted laying in a bed with a frown. Her bed sheets are covered in swirls, further emphasizing her confusion and feelings of being out of place. Many deeper meanings can be expressed with pictures. This can be further connected to anyone who has felt out of place, such as foreigners moving to a new country or even families moving to new states/cities. Do you guys think that the quote “a picture is worth 1,000 words” is justified for all cases?
I do think that a picture is worth a thousand words at least if context is provided and the artist knows what they are doing, like Satrapi clearly does as expressed by your analysis on the scene where Marji is laying in the bed in Austria. In general, I do like your analysis, though I think that though the words don't add that much on their own, they are given a lot more meaning by the images, meaning they cooperate a lot. I guess I'm trying to say that a picture with a good caption is worth a thousand words, but just the picture or just the caption are both significantly less.
DeleteI agree with your point in that the picture of Marji in bed showed more than words could explain her feelings at that situation. I feel that the quote "a picture is worth 1,000 words" is justified to a certain extent for all cases in that each picture has it's own backstrory and a story in itself.
DeleteHi Grace! I hadn't even thought about how the visual aspect provided by the novel contributed towards truly representing the rebellious attitude that Marji has as a teen in the novel. I think that you are definitely right in that she wanted to reveal her personal feelings through multiple artistic forms, but I think another view that hasn't been considered heavily is related to her purpose for writing the book.. Satrapi wanted to educate people with regard to the true character of Iran and its people. In cases where Satrapi showed the differences between the types of men and women in society and how she wanted to stand out with her punk fashion, I firmly believe that pictures created the strongest understandings for me. However, while I didn't note many examples in this book, sometimes the words do provide the necessary context to describe something that a picture might not necessarily do justice for (feelings, thoughts, etc.).
DeleteSharon Shaji.
DeleteAnd in response to Tanmay about how words do provide the context to describe something a picture itself might not have been able to: I felt that some of the pictures in the book were far too open-ended to the point I couldn’t interpret them, even with their captions. One example was in the panel where Marjane was stating that her family was both religious and modern. The panel entails Marjane in the center with the background halved into two decorative pieces. Which side represents which? (religiosity versus modernness).
V Prasad, Question 2
ReplyDeleteSatrapi’s drawing style is more childlike and innocent as she was growing up throughout the novel. Although this was may not seem like the best way to present such a serious, gloomy topic, it made sense. It helps the reader understand her story better as everyone can feel a sense of comfort and empathy with the childlike drawings. As the novel continues, Marjane grows up, but her drawings never develop. This is symbolic of how her childhood in Iran still affected her wherever she went. Overall, her style makes it easier to understand her emotions that she went through as children are brutally open and honest about how they feel. For example, in ‘The Sheep’ (pages 62-71), Marjane learns about the death of her Uncle Anoosh. When losing a loved one, people usually feel lost which Satrapi successfully displays as she says, “And so I was lost, without any bearings… What could be worse than that?” (Satrapi, 71) with a large image of herself floating in space. The drawing on this specific page is much larger than the text as the emotions of Marjane are passed to the reader just by simply looking at it. Satrapi conveys her emotions by showing herself floating through space without any goal, allowing the reader to understand the feeling of being lost. The style of the novel may limit the way the story is told by not fully being able to display the seriousness of the situation. Although Satrapi lives through the Iranian Revolution, she is not able to understand everything going on around her at such an age. With that being said, I wonder if I would be able to understand her emotions as well if Satrapi wrote this novel in a more mature manner. Do you think it would have been more effective for Satrapi to convey her story in a more mature manner? Why?
Rishi Lekkala (Reply #2)
DeleteV,
I disagree that the style of the novel limits the way the story is told because I don't believe the book is about the Iranian Revolution. Clearly it's centered around it, and the event shapes many of the events throughout the book, however, it's important to note that this book is about how the Iranian Revolution shaped Marjane Satrapi's childhood, and, more importantly, her life. It is told through a lens of a child, yet no ordinary child. Satrapi's caricature of herself at a young age describes her young self reading Marx and discussing complicated economic and political patterns with her family, members of the revolution, etc. It is also very relatable through the lens of an innocent. It allows the reader to empathize, as you said, but also to sympathize with the child that doesn't have complete understanding of her world.
This is Zawad. I agree with the idea that the drawings show Marjane's innocence in her childhood, and it does result to drawing empathy from reader. The childlike appearance allows the reader to understand and connect to the illustrations better. As for your questions, I believe that not using a mature matter was a better move on Satrapi's part, as it provided an interesting perspective on a mature revolution that involved complicated factors such as religion, politics, society, and more.
DeleteAnitta Nitto
Delete(Reply #1)
I think part of the reason the drawings are included is to convey the gravity of the situation, but through a personal standpoint. While I was looking through the book for a quote, the all black page with Satrapi floating that you mentioned caught my attention, and I think you are right in that part of the purpose is to convey how desolate she is feeling by making her a small part of the page (positive and negative space). I was able to connect with the novel through the drawings since I am a visual person and like to see things outright. However, I think portraying the story in a formal manner would detract from the organic connection that Satrapi makes with the audience.
Tanmay Karandikar reply:
DeletePersonally, I believe that the simplicity of the drawings is part of what is able to draw in the audience even closer. We know the earnestness of the author and their true intentions as she reveals the darkest times in her life to even some of her happiest. I do agree that at many points Satrapi masterfully symbolizes her ideas to help the audience connect with a feeling that they probably haven't felt on nearly the same scope (such as the floating in space panel). Moreover the fact that it all follows one style shows her reflection from a single point of view, despite the fact that at those times she was developing her own thoughts on the world. We could easily see what Marjane thought was important about her physical characteristics or what values/beliefs were most influential at any given point in her life.
Saige C Reply
DeleteI agree with what you said about the illustrations. I enjoyed watching them develop over Marjane's life and experience with the revolution. I enjoyed Marjane's juxtaposition to the elements of the serious revolution. I found as a reader, that we sort of matured with Marjane in knowledge and experience during the revolution. Rather than stepping into the book as a knowledgable and mature character, we develop with her. The illustrations also depict this idea, growing in complexity and maturity as they continue. They serve a purpose in conveying concepts that go beyond the words of the author.
Yutika Ineni reply
DeleteI think that i understood more of what was happening in Marjane's head because it was written from a childish immature point of view. If this was taken away in favor of a more mature perspective, I think we would lose this, but instead we would learn more about her surroundings and the political state. However, i think that Satrapi favored the immature perspective because we already have so much information on the actual political state of Iran at the time, but what we don't have is perspectives from individuals living at that time.
I think her childish nature of the drawings helps convey her story even better. She was so little and was forced to grow up so quickly, and we can see that by the books she reads when she is little, her will to protest, her having to leave her mother and father when she was 12 and live in a country where she did not speak the language or know anyone there. So this kind of pulls at the reader's heartstrings because it convey's how quickly a person grows up during a war, which is what I think Satrapi was trying to convey more than the actual effects of the war.
DeleteAnitta Nitto
ReplyDeleteQ #1
Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images rather than one or the other is to convey exactly what she was experiencing through her perspective. When we as individuals read a book we formulate a picture in our own minds of how the events, people, places, etc. appear and behave. By providing drawings alongside the words, Satrapi allows the reader to see into her own world rather than an abstract concept created in the reader’s mind. Furthermore, the drawings make the story seem more realistic and as something that really occurred rather than fiction. However, does providing the drawings detract from the imaginative element? The drawings supplement the first person narrative style to show how she looked at certain points in her life and how her surroundings complemented that. Furthermore, with a story that has so many people and events, it can be easy to get confused with the only word whereas the graphics clearly depict exactly what is going on in a straightforward manner. In particular, the event of the torture of Mohsen who was “whipped with thick electric cables” and subjected to other forms of torture is greatly enhanced by the addition of images to portray exactly what went on (Satrapi 54). Personally, I oftentimes have many ideas or thoughts that I simply can not put into words, and it is one of the most frustrating things ever. What are other ways outside of drawing that these ambiguous and hard-to-explain thoughts can be conveyed most precisely? How can you make them unique to you? Being able to convey those thoughts and ideas in forms of drawing is why I believe Satrapi chose two mediums.
Tanmay Karandikar Reply:
DeleteAs I was rereading this book, I felt myself often skimming certain sections, not simply because I have a general idea of what occurred, but also because the pictures seemed to provide most of the information for me. At certain points in the novel, it felt like either the sentences themselves were supporting the images or vice versa. Regarding the torture scene, I felt worse having the words describing the torture running through my head, allowing my imagination to run to horrific ends rather than from looking at the pictures provided. And in the opposite form, seeing the souls escaping the burning theatre with the flames created a powerful effect. Satrapi made her voice unique, not only literally, but also figuratively through her art style, that made each image on each page feel extremely personal and gripping.
Amish Dara Reply:
DeleteAnitta, your point regarding the potential drawback of using images in a novel piques my interest. While images in any form of graphic novel are used to supplement the text, they eliminate an imaginative touch to the book based on the readers interpretation. While this could be percieved as a drawback, I believe this is actually very beneficial to the reader and author. In my past experiences of reading novels, I would often ponder what the author meant when he/she wrote something, but with images it essencially eliminates this gap in comprehension. This is also especially benficial for the author in that the author is able to better explicate his/her ideas. Also ,for example, in a book series, keeping the story compelling is significant for the later books in the series. A big factor of interest in readers is of how much they comprehend and understand the series and images help bolster reader comprehension. Thus, this increases book sales and proves to be of a financial benefit for the author. So this brings up the question to what extent is having images in a novel beneficial for the author and readers?
Sally Kyong
ReplyDeleteQuestion #3
Marjane and God
I think the two incidents that are conveyed more effectively in pictures than in words alone are when Marjane is talking to the God, and when it shows a comparison of how Marjane has different identities in two different settings. In the novel, The Complete Persepolis, by Marjane Satrapi, there is a part where Marjane talks about how “God came to see [her] from time to time,” but then God disappears and doesn’t appear in front of her when she is upset about not being able to demonstrate on the street (Satrapi 13). She asks, “God, where are you?” , but he doesn’t come to see her (Satrapi 17). When God came to see Marjane, it shows a picture of how she interacts with him and what her depiction of God looks like. This shows how although God has no body and no gender, Marjane had her own image of what God might look like. In the other scene, where she is crying after talking to her parents about how she wants to participate in the revolution, it shows how God is not there with her. I think that these two different scenes show the importance of the use of pictures than just words alone. The reason for this is that when God is there with her, things seem to be full; but when he is not with her, it shows emptiness. Without the pictures, it might be hard to understand what it is like when God is there and when he is not there. If the pictures weren’t there, then we wouldn’t understand what Marjane’s image of God is like and how she felt alone when he was not there with her when she was upset. This reminds me of the English language-idiom, “A picture is worth a thousand words,” originally quoted by Fred R. Barnard. This quote shows how the picture is an important component when something needs to be conveyed to the audience. In conclusion, I think that in the novel, The Complete Persepolis, pictures give a better idea of how things were viewed from Marjane’s perspective. This makes me wonder about what other people think about this quote. Hence, I want to ask the question, what the quote, “A picture is worth a thousand words,” mean to them, and what is their interpretation of this quote?
Sally, I think this is a really insightful take on instances where incidents in Persepolis were displayed more effectively in pictures than words alone. In your example, we can see how Marjane looks empty without God and without being able to talk to him during the night. She even calls out for him in times of need with a helpless expression plastered on her face. To answer your question, the quote “A picture is worth a thousand words,” means that you can capture the author’s intent and emotion through the picture alone. For example, after Marjane’s uncle is executed, we see her floating in space feeling lost. This shows us how she is aimlessly going about life now without her beloved uncle. Just from the picture alone, we can understand the feeling of pain of losing someone.
DeleteSally, I liked how you compared two scenes in order to show how pictures can have a significant effect in the novel. The examples you chose really emphasize the importance of drawings in this context, as they allow the reader to have a glimpse into the author's mind in a seamless way, which may have been more difficult to achieve using only words. I believe that "a picture is worth a thousand words" means that meaning can be conveyed through an image alone. However, I wonder how this impacts the reader's overall interpretation of the novel. Because many of the panels have very little explanation, they depend on the reader's understanding of the drawings in order to fully convey their meaning. In this way, the author leaves more up to the interpretation of the reader in cases where the meaning may not be straightforward.
Delete1. I think the visual component is an important factor in eliciting an emotional response from the reader. Sometimes, words alone cannot adequately depict the gravity of a situation, and pictures help overcome this issue. Seeing the facial expressions of the main characters gives us more insight into how their struggles affected them physically and emotionally. This is evidenced when Satrapi refers to the abrupt cultural revolution that took place, and how this created a significant alteration in the Iranians' lives. She describes this in words, stating that "And then suddenly in 1980... All bilingual schools must be closed down. They are symbols of capitalism. Of decadence. And that was that" (Satrapi 2). From the words, the reader can understand that there was an abrupt change that occurred via the cultural revolution, but it is difficult to grasp the manner in which this was enforced without the visual aids. Looking at the man's face, his eyebrows form a frown, and his eyes and prominent beard indicate an authority that couldn't be opposed. In other words, the picture helps us understand that the cultural revolution was imposed upon certain people, and while it appealed to some, others had to suffer, such as Satrapi noting that "we found ourselves veiled and separated from our friends" (Satrapi 2). This element gives an added dimension that enables the reader to better visualize the situation. The pictures also give a tangible form to Satrapi, enabling us to picture her and empathize with her. In this situation, we are not forced to imagine how she looked and how she was affected by the revolution. This concept is something that is also prevalent in many movies. Oftentimes, the movies are able to effectively elicit an emotional response (such as crying) from the theater audience because the movie gives the characters a face. The audience gets to actually see, for example, an innocent child's face and how he/she has to suffer, causing them to feel for the kid and have an emotional connection. This makes me wonder, does the quality of the pictures in the novel improve our emotional response to the story? Are we able to better empathize with characters who look more realistic, or do cartoon drawings suffice?
ReplyDeleteI do believe that the photos being the primary part of the story does help elicit a more emotional response from the reader. I liked the point you made about how pictures better show the silent suffering of the westernized people in Iran. I agree with you on how the audience can learn a lot more about the emotions and thoughts of a person from their expressions than their speech in such a tense and emotional event. With the oppression of expression against the rule, the pictures are far more telling of what people have to say and think. I think the pictures look real enough for the audience to perceive them as real people and empathize with them.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMurtaza Neemuchwala
ReplyDeleteQuestion 3: What particular incidents in the story do you think are conveyed more effectively in pictures than they could have been in words alone?
Satrapi utilizes images and the comic style very efficiently to make the reader experience a life rather than read a story. The use of comics is especially effective when she is showing the upheaval of her old life as she knew it. Pictures and the lack of words are really significant here as they make the reader experience the oppression and harsh rule felt by those who were in the previously Westernized Iranian society. This lack of speech is best exemplified when the Islamists come into power and make Marjane's previously "French non-religious school" and change it so the girls found themselves "veiled and separated from their friends" (Satrapi 3). The use of pictures here and the lack of text is symbolic of how the oppressive Islamic society did not let any opposition speak and suppressed all opposing beliefs to conservative Islamists. Furthermore, the little text allowed in a comic strip in thought bubbles also shows the suppression of thought. The people in society are so paranoid about following the rules and not breaking the conservative laws that they are unable to think freely and formulate thoughts diverging from the norm in society. The suppression of thought is also expressed well by Satrapi especially when the society is being converted. After Marjane's school is converted, the only thought Marjane expresses is "and that was that" with her arms up in resignation (Satrapi 3). Marjane is unable to think much of the new society and form opinions against it as she feels she has no choice but to just adapt. Not only is her willingness to speak up suppressed but also her ability to think divergently. Stimulating Questions: How do the Islamists use stricter social rule to try and assert their power in government and further legitimize their rule? If the younger kids are all of a sudden forced to follow new rules and traditions, how will this affect their development of independent thought and rational thinking?
Syed Farris Ali
DeleteI found it interesting that you thought the use of pictures here and the lack of text is symbolic of how the oppressive Islamic society. Now that think about it there were many instances during a conflict were the picture took over most of the panel and there was not that much text surrounding it.
Andrew Clarke - To answer your questions Murtaza, the Islamists in the story use the stricter social rules to assert their own dominance and put others below their control. We see this with the teacher of her French school and with the nun that eventually kicked her out. Also, if younger kids are now forced to follow these new rules and traditions and only those, then as they grow up and are exposed to other traditions and ways of life, they may react negatively or may be uncomfortable towards them because they've only known one way.
DeleteYutika Ineni
ReplyDelete#2
Satrapi’s style in Persepolis is very simplistic and minimalistic with only black and white as it’s primary colors. This simple method of drawing contributes greatly to the story that she paints since the readers can see the transition of simple, yet messy, drawings in the beginning to more complicated and detailed, yet still simple drawings towards the end. It goes hand in hand with Marjane’s transition from a young girl who has not yet seen the effects of war and death, nor has she experienced yet being a foreigner separated from her family. She is still a naive child playing silly games with her friends. The style of Satrapi’s drawings clearly reflect this on multiple occasions, such as when she depicts the revolution in a simple, yet humorous manner, showing her justified ignorance of what is happening around her (Satrapi 14). Another example is when Marjane finds out her grandpa was a prince. Her drawing of what she thinks his life was like as a prince, again shows her repeated ignorance for things she hasn’t experienced (Satrapi 26). Towards the end of the novel, Marjane is evidently more mature and she has faced more difficult situations, which reflects in the style of Satrapi’s drawings. She depicts harsher pictures and she uses more mature words. This begs the question, how was Satrapi able to narrate from her younger self’s perspective after she has already been through so much?
Yutika, I liked how you analyzed how the author's style of drawing changed throughout the novel, and how this is a reflection of her experiences and mental state at the time. I think the her drawing of her grandfather as a prince is especially significant because it not only emphasized her childlike innocence and imagination, but also shows that Marjane was at least partially aware of the troubles the leaders of Iran were facing, as both the sun and the lion in the panel have expressions that signify malicious intent. So even in her younger years, when she was naive and innocent, she was still conscious of the evils lurking in Iran.
DeleteHey Yutika, I really liked how you analyzed the change in her drawing style to depict her age throughout the novel. I think it must have been pretty difficult for Satrapi to narrate her childhood years after they had happened, with all the experiences she has. However, the specific styles that she uses to draw her childhood indicate that she is looking back on her life, displaying how she did not completely forget her experiences beyond childhood.
DeleteThe way that you related Marjane's visual style with her naivete in the face of such tragedy was very thoughtful. I agree that her visual style works very well in this regard, but I personally think that her visuals fail to mature as the story matures. However, this is pretty much the only limitation of the style that I could find, so I'm curious if there are any others.
DeleteSimran Sethi
ReplyDeleteQuestion #1
Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
- I believe that Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and in images for multiple reasons. To begin images always create a much clearer image and setting for the reader, it creates a sense of emotion and visual imagery that words sometimes cannot create on their own. Some may say that book should be written with just words, and that pictures are solely for movies, but I disagree. Pictures help many readers be more attracted to the act of reading itself and Satrapi may be using the pictures in her book to attract more readers. Another reason why she might be choosing the include these pictures in her novel could be to lighten the mood and the topic at hand in the novel. In instanced in the novel where Satrapi discusses very graphic topics about the revolution and what kinds of things would happen to people who fought in the revolution and how they would be "burned [with] an iron" (Satrapi, 55) or even how in the end their "bodies were cut to pieces" (Satrapi, 56). The images of the man being burned by an iron and the cut up a body in the next page create a sense of trauma and horror for the readers. However while creating this emotion in the reader the way the pictures are drawn also affects how the readers view the story. As the panels are not as vivid or realistic it brings allows the reader to bear the fact of the horror that the people are going through during the revolution, allowing them to continue to read. Some things that I wondered while reading the comic book was would it really have changed the story or how the story was presented in the pictures on the panels were drawn in a different way? What kind of audience do you believe that the author is trying to appeal to because personally, I thought it could appeal to various different audiences because the drawings are a bit cartoon-like but the story is so heavy that it makes it more of a young adult read opinions?
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteI really liked the point you made about the pictures and a comic format being more inviting to young readers. I do believe that the book is aimed for kids and young adults as it is written through the lens of a westernized child. I feel the cartoon like nature of the drawings is juxtaposed with the very grave nature of the Iranian revolution in order to make the young readers feel more comfortable with the topic. Also, like you mentioned the images in some instances give more context and seriousness to some matter in order to help young readers understand and empathize with the horror witnessed by Marjane, a fellow child.
DeleteSimran, I agree with the points you made. The use of a graphic novel to tell her life made her book more inviting to read. Most books that are made in "comic" style tend to be target towards kids; however, I think that the use of images can also invite older audiences if they want to see images that align with reality. Even though this book is inviting young audiences, books such as comic books and mangas invite older audiences because they cover more mature topics.
DeleteSimran, I agree with your ideas as to why Satrapi used both images and text to tell her story. Going off of the question you put forward, I think it would have drastically changed the story if it was presented any other way. The comic panels provide a childlike essence in the text and show how even when she grew into a young adult, her childhood still affected her in multiple ways. With the way it is written, I believe Satrapi could be trying to appeal of an audience of various ages as the comic aspect could attract a younger audience while the seriousness of the topic could attract an older audience. The heaviness of the topic is something I believe mainly young adults would be interested in and would understand more in depth than younger children.
DeleteHey I also agree with your views on how the pictures really help the readers grasp waht she is trying to say. I think for me, when I read this book, I was directly able to understand waht Strapi wanted the readers to know because not much was left to the immagination as she drew out everything for us. When we read words, many of us take this story into our own imaginatin which is never the same for two peoepl no matter how well the author may create imagry througth words. This is why I think Strapi connects well with all of her readers because they can all see the similar views and ideas that she is brewing through her story without having much room for interpretation.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSim,
DeleteI like the idea that the graphics of the book help to attract more readers, because I think that many people (admittedly myself included, prior to reading the book) are ignorant of the events that take place in Persepolis, such as the Islamic Revolution. Perhaps using images to tell the story helps to enlighten a greater audience of a life many Americans aren't privy to and make more people more culturally aware. I know for me, as a reader, I was able to attain a better understanding of a historical event by reading it in text accompanied by visuals.
- Courtney Chen
Graphic Text
ReplyDeleteQuestion #1: Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
Words, books, and documents are a key to access the past, the lives of other people, and experience different cultures. To a degree some words can explain what one can not with images, videos, or even paintings; but at the same time, images or any visual enhancement is able to express more than words. Throughout history, written documents have allowed historians to understand what occured in the past; however, painting and photographs have allowed people to have a closer glimpse of what actually happened, and how everything looked like at the time when it happened. This is one of the reasons why I believe Marjane Satrapi decided to create a graphic novel to recall her life in Iran and thein in Europe. Using words in combination with images, or in this case drawings, allowed Satrapi to enable the reader to have a look at how she saw the events instead of forcing the reader to imagine the events happening in their head if the book were to have been purely text. Although words and picture in combination allowed the reader to have a closer connection to the plot of a book, sometimes images by themselves explain an event better than words. An example of this is how Satrapi used only drawings to explain the death of one of her friends during a party when the Revolutionary Guards found out that they were partying. The women were sent to a van, while the guard were following a man who ran to the roof of the building, he then started to jump from building to building until he accidentally fell to his death (Satrapi 153-155). In a sense, the images give a greater context than words in this event because it adds a sense of suspense, fear, and anxiety, the use of no words creates confusion in the audience, similar feelings the audience had at the time. In a personal level, movies are an example of how sometimes visual images can have a greater connection with the audience. One of my favorite movies of all time, Marley and Me, shows how images can say more than just text. The relationship the dog and his owner had with one another would be really hard to explain without visuals. This brings me to question, to what extent can one expresses oneself with only words? To what degree do images allow to tell more than just words.
Sally Kyong:
DeleteHey Elieser! I agree with you on how words, books, and documents are important in learning about the lives of others and different cultures. I also agree with how some words cannot show the full meaning of what it is trying to say without images. I think it is really interesting how you are connecting this with how the historians learn from the written documents to understand and know about what happened in the past, and how paintings and photographs help with better understanding the documents.
I really like how you relate Persepolis to other modes of storytelling such as movies, and I feel like you really explore the advantages of purely visual storytelling as well as the ways that visuals can augment textual storytelling. However, I feel like you do not adequately analyse the advantages of purely textual storytelling. How does text augment the storytelling ability of visuals?
DeleteLisette Hotz, Answering Question #1:
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
Do you think that Satrapis use of both words and images was more for the readers sake or her own sake?
Are there any images in the book that you think could stand alone without any words?
I think that Satrapi chose to tell her story in the form of words and images for a few reasons. First off, I think that she did it for entertainment purposes. The novel includes a lot of dialog and small events that took place in Satrapi's life, so pairing the images with the dialog makes the sequence of events a bit more engaging to look at and understand. One example of this is in the chapter The Trip on page 72 where Satrapi's parents are discussing current events. If you were to read the dialog on its own without looking at the images you would lose the understanding of who is speaking and the contributions of the facial expressions and body language of the characters. Secondly, I think that as a writer it would be difficult to relive and recount the events that were seemingly traumatizing to Satrapi as a child. By illustrating the events in a cartoonist style, Satrapi is able to simplify the images of death, destruction, anger, and sadness that she witnessed and make them more bearable. In my opinion, words are more powerful and poignant that a simple drawing, so I think that she might heavily depend on the cartoons to carry the emotional intensity and trauma that came along with her experiences. An example of this is on page 52 where she illustrates a man cut in pieces. If she were to use imagery and words to describe it, it probably would have been a lot more gory and horrific. I have done this myself by explaining difficult events in my life to others in a generic, oversimplified manner so that I don't have to go into the detail of the emotional pain or turmoil. I think that together, the words and images allow the reader to quickly understand what is happening in the fast paced novel, as well as experience the emotion and body language of the characters.
That's a very interesting perspective! I agree that the use of cartoons as opposed to more realistic drawings could make it easier for Satrapi to recount such difficult times, as well as prevent the novel from becoming overly grotesque.
DeleteLisette, I think your insight on this question is very unique and interesting. I just read Tanmay's post, which highlighted the way language can be restricting and how some complex ideas could be better expressed by the images that Satrapi used in certain situations. I think that it is interesting how there are different perspectives on this topic, as you think that language is much more complex and that the images are used, in fact, to do the opposite, to simplify a message. Both of you took a relatively emotional event in the story and took almost opposite perspectives on it, which I think is very cool and indicative of unique and individual ideas!
DeleteLisette, I agree that the use of drawings helped readers understand their emotions better. Personally I feel like showing emotions on the characters' faces really helped put their feelings into context. Usually when we tend to read, we take in all the information at face value. We analyze the overall situation, but never really go into too much detail about the specific feelings of a character. I feel like including images didn't help Satrapi to just make her point, but the inclusion of emotion also allowed the readers to "see" exactly what the characters felt at certain parts of the novel.
DeleteI also agree with this statement. Maybe she wanted to add these images in her novel to help other readers digest the tragidies of this time in her life? The drawisngs can maybe be seen as her outlet to portray information that she could not otherwise state. It also helps the readers visualise what was going on in her life during the Revolution because many of us can not imagine a time like this. The cartoons really also bring out the creative side to the book which I think is very cool and unique.
DeleteLisette, when I first read the novel, I perceived Marjane Satrapi’s use of images as a means by which to reach a broader, more universal audience. She proved to her readers that the Middle East is not a culturally homogeneous, sometimes violent region (as the media often portrays it to be). I loved your unique perspective about using images to simplify abstract or complex ideas! They definitely helped when learning the Shah’s history for the first time.
DeleteLisette,
DeleteI agree that a reason for the inclusion of pictures was for entertainment purposes however I never thought about how she would use images to simplify her life for herself and make it more tolerable to write about. That's very interesting insight, thank you for bringing it up! I personally prefer visuals to help understand things better and I think that the oversimplification of the pictures is definitely a reason that she would have included them.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTanmay Karandikar #3: Visceral Emotions from Visual Stimuli
ReplyDeleteConveying ideas and stories effectively has been an ever-present part of the human experience, which we constantly seek to improve through innovations in publishing, photography, and filmography. At numerous points in the story, the presentation of specific pictures served to perfectly express ideas that otherwise might not have been received as well in purely a text format. Satrapi recounts numerous times in this memoir, some lighthearted and others tragic. One of the simpler moments in the story appears early on, with the little girls playing with the scarves on the playground (Satrapi 3). This presentation shows the childhood innocence perfectly, also displaying the imagination of the children, presenting a sharp contrast to what one normally would expect upon simply hearing the word Iran.
The black and white style is often considered rather simplistic, but using these two opposing colors, numerous vibrant panels with a lot of symbolism gave the reader insight into Marjane’s life and her perspective as a small child. As Marjane simply lies on her bed with her arms spread open, one understands how she observes the darkness in the world around her and the purity of her emotions, as she tries to convince herself “everything will be alright” (Satrapi 70). One memory seared into my mind was that of the kids who “exploded on the minefields with their keys around their necks” (Satrapi 102). The silhouettes were haunting meeting the force of the mines and with the keys seemingly lifting them further into the air. Satrapi understood that sometimes the burden of words can hold back the feelings of the reader, evident by the time when her friends were involved in a rooftop chase with the police (Satrapi 309). The author didn’t put any words on this page and let the reader infer the meaning of her panels and tie their own emotions directly to the story without bombarding them with her own perspective. The extent to which these images left an extremely vivid presentation of the events in her life makes me wonder if there is a context where words might not be needed at all for a story, even one that spans a long life like that of Marjane’s. Does our language sometimes hold us back, be it by being too broad or even too constricted?
Tanmay, the last question that you offered is very interesting. I agree with you and your given examples of the significance of Satrapi's methods of conveying certain messages, especially those intended to provoke intense emotional responses. In my opinion, language definitely can be restricting, as sometimes there are not words in a language to express the exact message trying to be conveyed. I have experienced this first hand as a bilingual speaker, and as how I could express something perfectly in Japanese when I struggled to find the words to do so in English, or vice versa. Although this is not related to the novel, the overall theme remains the same, that language can sometimes hold us back, sometimes by being too broad or constricted, but sometimes even by lacking the very words to express a specific moment or idea.
DeleteYo Tanmay,
DeleteI really liked your analysis on the symbolism of the pictures used by Satrapi to depict the Iranian Revolution. In response to your question, I think language does have barriers. As we learnt in ToK, language shapes a person's view of reality. For example, there are many ways to say sadness in German but only a few in English. This causes the German speaker to distinguish many variations of sadness and gives him/her the ability to express their sadness more clearly and in ways that English speakers could not understand.
Like Yue, I too am a bilingual speaker and I can relate to the struggles of translating between languages (many times, I couldn't express my exact thoughts in English though I could have expressed them better in Tamil, and vice versa). So, yes, I think language does limit/embolden ideas and how they are expressed.
~ Harsha Jagannathan
Teja Devanaboyina, #2, Satrapi’s Style
ReplyDeleteThe style of Satrapi’s drawing have aspects to them that are both generic and unique. The generic parts include the use of black and white graphics that are a common feature of most comic books. The layout of the panels is also quite typical with most comic books. But what sets Satrapi’s drawing style apart from the styles of other graphic artists is her use light and dark imagery. Her use of such a style helps the reader understand the emotion in or the significance of a situation. I first noticed this when a man told Marji and her classmates that her school must be segregated between male and female because “They are symbols of capitalism of decadence.” (Satrapi 4). The man’s face is completely encompassed in darkness , so much that his mouth is not even visible, and his eyebrows are tightly drawn together. This depiction along with the words effectively underscore the gravity of the situation. This style contributes to the story Satrapi tells because her topic deals with themes such as war, feminism, freedom, religion, politics, and fear. Thus, her style of careful color placement is important in order to portray the siernous and magnitude of a situation. Furthermore, this black and white style helps Satrapi keep her reader’s attention on the story itself. But what would the benefit of a story in color be? However, Satrapi’s style can also limit the way the story is told because her lack of a color scheme may not be able to convey every aspects of Marji’s life. For example, Marji’s relationship with god in two colors doesn't convey all her feeling. if the panel where she says, “the only place I felt safe was in the arms of my friend” was in color, I felt as if I would be able to truly understand how Marji feels about god (Satrapi 56). If Satrapi had done some panels in color and other in black and white, could the story have been conveyed better? For example in the graphic novel Pashmina, author Nidhi CHanani uses both black and white and color panels to highlight the difference between the present and the imagination of the main character. Thus, she creates a distinction that explains the story better to the reader.
Teja, I agree with you on the symbolism and meaning behind the black and white schemes of the entire novel, as these two colors are often used to highlight the stark differences between two topics or groups. I like how you included the example of the man telling the children they had to be segregated and how you said that the darkness of that particular panel helped in depicting the gravity of the situation. I wonder if the darkness could also signify any ominous or malicious intents that the man, or the ideologies he represented, as darker colors often represent evil, especially contrasted against white, or other lighter colors. For the novel as a whole, I wonder if the general lack of color could symbolize the suppression of any individualistic expression of personality or ideas, which might be represented by a more colorful scheme as they may be more unique and therefore not limited to being expressed by two colors.
DeleteI completely agree with your statement that the black and white style that Satrapi uses has the purpose of highlighting the story instead of the illustrations. The balance between the actually story and the interpretation of the illustrations is really important because it composes the nature of the story. Using this perspective, I would answer the question you ask towards the end of your response with a no. I think the story with only the black and white is sufficient because if there was splashes of color, certain parts of the story would be too highlighted. This is not correct as all parts of Satrapi's story is valuable to her purpose of writing the book.
DeleteTeja, I thought it was interesting how you brought up how Satrapi uses light and dark imagery as a tool to subtly communicate to her audience. However, I disagree that the lack of a color scheme may not be able to convey Satrapi's life to its fullest extent. I think that a part of the reason why she decided to keep the drawings in black and white is because then, the reader's attention would be focused on the drawings and the intent behind them, whereas color may have distracted the reader.
DeleteTeja, I disagree with your idea about the novel’s lack of color being a hindrance. I thought it was more of an asset, mainly because the color scheme fosters a universal appeal. It becomes harder for the audience to find any reason to discriminate against Marjane, her family, and her people. Moreover, it forces the reader to focus on the intent of the image instead of its mere aesthetic or quality.
DeleteQUESTION 2:
ReplyDeleteI think that Strapi’s drawings are a little lifeless and dull with very good intent behind them. She is telling a sort of sad coming of age story and because of this, her drawings represent that story in a subtle way. The drawings are black and white as well as the front cover being in simply black, white, and blue. Would having colored drawings take away from the essence of the story, or would they enhance it? The drawings are simple and not too intricate because I think they help the readers understand the message, so that they do not focus too much on the drawings. Also so that they can meet in the middle and understand the drawings as well as the text without too much focus on one. Even in the most complex of situations, such as her cutting her hair to conform to the western world, Strapi simply depicts a small image of Marjane cutting some hair, although there is a much deeper analysis to that side of the story. “In short I was in an ugly stage seemingly without end.” (Strapi 190). In this time there are only a few images that Strapi draws in the book, but they show rebellion, coming of age, change, growth, and cultural assimilation. Marjane cuts her hair to make herself look “more beautiful” because she believes that she is in an ugly stage of life. Strapi characterises puberty as an ugly stage, can we all to a degree connect to this comment? After this haircut she makes many friends by also helping them cut their own hair, and then she gets into smoking which will later alter herlife more than she may realize that the time. This may limit the way the story is told because some readers may not really look into the way she has depicted her book. Some of the images really give clarity and visual representations of what she is talking about, so they help readers, that may not like to read books, understand the revolution more. I personally like to read more books with only words, so this story was a bit of a struggle for me to like. I really liked the fact that she didn't over do the pictures so that I still got a sense of the text, as the images simply enhanced my understanding of the text.
Hey Neha,
DeleteTo answer the question you posed in the beginning of your response, I think colored drawings would limit Satrapi from telling her story. In an interview, she talks about how she chose pictures to tell a bigger picture. A picture can represent more when there is no color in a picture.. This lets a reader to have more interpretation about what is going on in the picture and associate more perspectives and "words" with the picture. I can prove this by even using your analysis. You took the picture of Marjane cutting her hair and you were able to extrapolate her phases of rebellion and change. Perhaps if the picture had more details you may have not come to this conclusion. The question I would like to pose is why might Satrapi have left out color and detail to emphasis simplicity?
Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
ReplyDeleteI believe Satrapi used words and images to convey her message because more often than not, the combination of words and images transports readers into the intended dimension rather easily. While talking about extremely cultural and political matters, it gets increasingly hard to visualize the gravity of the situation without a visual aid or direction. And since many of the topics covered in the story are actually pretty controversial, the use of images can facilitate the communication of her story.
Furthermore, since graphic novels’ intended audience is usually kids and teenagers, by using a comic-like structure for her novel, Satrapi is trying to convey darker themes in a lighter way.
Had Satrapi only used images to tell her story, she wouldn’t have been able to establish her point very well. Although Satrapi has done a very good job with the drawings, they do tend to fall short in terms of coherency and logical flow. When I look at the images by themselves, the overall story seems very vague. Also, the whole point of a graphic novel is to facilitate the expression of ideas through the use of images, so displaying just the images wouldn’t really make sense.
Also, in many cases, using just words would also prove very confusing to the reader. Since there are a lot of dialogues/conversations involved in the novel, presenting a visual aid will help the reader keep track of what is being said and who is saying it more easily, instead of having to go back and re-read the phrases for a better understanding. For example, on page 72 where Satrapi's parents are talking about certain current events, if readers where to read the dialogue as a stand alone/without a visual aid, understanding who is speaking would have become very difficult. Additionally the small illustrations on characters’ faces that supposedly show emotion greatly help in understanding the situation/conversation
Images can be interpreted in many different ways. So, why is it that Satrapi occasionally choses to use images for panels that convey a fact that shouldn’t be interpreted in more than one way?
^^Aishwarya Adiki
Delete1. A distinct advantage with the use of words and images as opposed to sticking to a purely text based work is to determine a perspective for the audience to take that wouldn’t diverge from what Satrapi was originally intending. One of the advantages or disadvantages of reading pure text based works is the amount of inference that is made in terms of setting and emotion. The tone of the dialogue or narration is at time insufficient in conveying the complete message (complete with an inclusion the emotions that were associated with the event rather than just the substance of the event itself), which not only provides an element of understanding from the reader, but a connection between author and reader based on empathy, with the author’s understanding of certain life occurrences being in direct relation to what the reader sees in the author’s work. An example of this is seen when Marji overhears her parents speaking about the burning of the Rex Cinema (Satrapi 19). From what she hears, there were over 400 victims to an event which Marji believes the Shah perpetrated. Although the magnitude of the event itself can be represented by the sheer number of victims alone, the emotional response as well as how Marji as a child imagined the event give insight as to how vivid her imagination is. In the scene of the fire, it appears as if ghosts are floating upwards and people on fire (as indicated by the flames and the people being white in the panel) are rushing to escape. Her perception becomes the reader’s reality in that her guess as to how the scene played out becomes a story element that the reader treats as valid due to the function of the panel within the context of the story (where the image itself is just as “real” as the events Marji herself experience). Many of the occurences in Persepolis are a result of Satrapi herself performing a personal recollection of her childhood. Other authors also attempt autobiographies through purely text based medium, which can be problematic in a sense that it may lack the perspective that Satrapi provides. Events themselves can be seen as more exciting based upon who experiences them and his or her degree of experience (firsthand or through stories). This compels me to ask how much of a role perspective has in creating biographical text that can be enjoyed by others. Is Persepolis enjoyable as a result of its content or the way in which it is told and the person who tells it?
ReplyDeleteHey Brian, I agree with your contention that purely-text based works are oftentimes misunderstood and having images to fully convey an author's intents can be beneficial to the reader. This ambiguous nature of text can be seen in Shakespeare's Hamlet, because an argument can be made for both sides in that the ghost of the late king Hamlet is real and that the ghost is just a figment of Hamlet Jr.'s imagination.
Delete-Rudransh Dikshit
Sahana
ReplyDeleteQuestion 2
Satrapi’s drawings are multifaceted when seen in the framework of detail. There are times when her drawings can have a great amount of detail while other times when the drawings lack detail. Her style is the middle ground between child illustrations and symbolism. Many believe that illustrations and graphic novels are there to tell the story and support the captions, but the panels in Persepolis are so much more than that. A reader can only understand Satrapi’s story if they look beyond the characters and their actions within the illustration. The attention to detail is one of the ways that the reader can experience her story fully. The movie Hoodwinked is an example of movie that tells a story, where the more an individual watches the story the more they understand. There has a major twist at the end of the story, which could have been deciphered if the audience had paid attention to the small details. Why does Satrapi sometimes add lots of detail but sometimes chooses to not? It may show what Satrapi is signifying and what Satrapi is keeping open to interpretation. Her choice to make her biography a comic book shows she wants a space for readers to get their own interpretation of some parts of her story. An example where the importance of details is highlighted is in the second panel where the caption is “And this is a class photo. I’m sitting on the far left so you don’t see me, from left to right...” (Satrapi 1) The way that she left herself outside of the photo and the emotions of the girls explains many concepts. She is trying to convey that everyone has different emotions but none of them are happy. Each girl has their own reason for that emotion. Highlighting other girls instead of herself is a contrasting concept that screams this novel is more than just a biography.
Andrew Clarke question #3 Pictures Over Words ================
ReplyDeleteSome instances that I believe were conveyed more effectively using pictures rather than just words alone mostly had to do with emotions or with representing concepts in a visual manner that wouldn’t have been interpreted the same if there were only words used to describe them. For instance, when Marjane rejects her faith and loses touch with her religion, the emotional process behind it is conveyed better when she’s drawn with tears on her face and strong emotions such as anger and sadness. When she tells God, “I never want to see you again!” (Satrapi, 70), nearly everything around her is black and there is a decreasing amount of white in each panel as it goes on, symbolizing and emphasizing the fact that she’s losing her religion, or as seen by some people to be one’s morality or purity. Another instance of an event being enhanced by the presence of a visual reference would be the numerous times that Marjane Satrapi depicted violence and gore. Although these instances can be described using descriptive and detailed sentences, but for some instances of violence we cannot feel the actual gravity of the violence unless we witness it or some form of visual reference. The same goes for reading about a school shooting in the news as opposed to actually being a part of that school shooting. Being in the situation or as close to it as possible has the potential to transform our overall attitude toward certain subjects because first-hand experience will give a more personal connection to the event taking place, that’s why it’s called first-hand experience. Marjane Satrapi uses this connection that we make with visual references to embody the pain, suffering, and struggle of the people of Iran and bring this to the audience’s attention more effectively than she would’ve with just words.
Also some questions that might come to mind here is that according to my logic on the topic of stronger connections with experiences closer to first-hand experience, do you think the animated movie might have been even more effective at this than the graphic novel was? Do you believe that the form that this book is presented in would be more or less effective in learning about history/personal experiences than most textbooks or novels?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Delete3. Ruben Mikaelyan
ReplyDeleteWhat particular incidents in the story do you think are conveyed more effectively in pictures than they could have been in words alone?
There were several incidents throughout the book, predominately those that were related to emotions were more relevant in the context of this question. "The day he left, the country had the biggest celebration of its entire history" (Satrapi 42), this quote is paired up with an interesting photo. There is a lot of people all celebrating and being happy. The entire page is filled up with people. It would have been not as efficient to portray this photo with words because none of the people in the photo are doing anything notable and none of the characters are notable. They are all generic characters. This shows a general happiness and enthusiasm that otherwise could not be as accurately captured through the use of dialogue or other forms of textual representation. Due to this, I prefer a combination of artistic and poetic symbolisms to convey imagery such as seen on page 42. This ideology continues and is once again seen when Satrapi says “Luckily, one day they told me about my uncle Anoosh” (Satrapi 54). This is an image depicting Satrapi’s uncle Anoosh with a giant sun behind him and other imagery. This symbolizes how the author wishes the reader the view the character Anoosh as if he is a hero. The sun shows bravery and Anoosh’s hair is slightly blowing, all in all, showing him to be a magnificent human being and character. This would have been odd to convey in words as it would have taken a lot of words to express the same idea. Overall, the images are useful as they more seamlessly convey express the emotions the author wants the reader to feel
I agree with Ruben. I think that Strapi also understood that somethings were better if left to be drawn and thus made many of her depcitions when she had minimal words in the text box. I also think that in the areas where she allows us to get into her imagination and see what she means, is better depicted than written out. It really allows the readers to see what she as a child is thinking and then later on when she grows up, how these pictures transform into more mature thoughts.
DeleteQuestion: If the book was written with all words instead of pictures, would this change the tone of the book unintentionally?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteJenna Hussain #1 -I think that Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images rather than only one of the two as neither are sufficient enough alone to truly describe the details of her life. The pictures supplement the text as they depict emotion and visualize the scene for the reader, so that they don't have to. An example of this is when the fundamental women and modern women are compared (Satrapi 75). In this picture, the differences between the two types of women can be seen and are explained further in the text. Even differences that are not written can be seen through the cartoon drawings. Furthermore, the emotions behind the characters are typically not implied through the text, but rather the pictures. For example, the way that the girls feel about the funeral marches and their rituals in which they had to "beat their breasts" is not explicitly said, however the illustration includes a plethora of frowns and worried faces that cannot be inferred from the text only (Satrapi 95). This reminds me specifically of a piece of artwork I saw in the Warehouse in Dallas — “Double” by Marlene Dumas. In this portrait there was a woman who appeared to be standing in a mirror, however it was unclear as after looking for a while I noticed the many differences that could be seen between the two woman portrayed. I thought of this when I saw the illustration of all the young girls at the funeral marche as they all appeared to be the same with the same expression on their faces all dressed with the same scarves, however they were not: some looked more worried than others, some had hair sticking out of their scarves, and some looked more confused than sad. The detail of this illustration, although not obvious, could not be achieved through something as simple as words. This makes me wonder - to what extent do pictures really paint a thousand words? And to what extent do we rely on visual concepts more than using our own imaginations?
ReplyDeletei completely agree with you Jenna, as I believe that if Satrapi had only written her story rather than include illustrations, the story would be insufficient in depicting her true emotions. The Illustrations do add another layer to the story, allowing for emotions to be expressed that wouldn't otherwise been. I like how you truly analyzed one of the panels, deducing that even though the illustrations show how all the women are meant to be the same, because Satrapi included illustrations, readers are able to see the true underlying emotions of the characters. I think that Satrapi's images do truly encompass the "pictures are worth a thousand words," as there are so many emotions that she would be unable to convey if not for the strategic illustrations.
DeleteI agree with you Jenna. I wrote a similar response on my post. Are you familiar with the motion picture of the book. Do say that due to the images in the book, it makes it easier to express emotions that Marjane Satrapi was trying to convey. If we continue this, could you say that the motion picture was even more able to convey messages of the book since it is made out of entirely of images?
DeleteRudransh Dikshit
ReplyDeleteQuestion 3: What particular incidents in the story do you think are conveyed more effectively in pictures than they could have been in words alone?
Satrapi is able to tell the audience her life-story in much fewer words with the graphic novel, Persepolis, than if she were to write a full-fledged novel. This occurs in the novel as her graphics to convey emotion as well as tell a story, such as in the case of this panel: https://imgur.com/a/WgWGldE (Satrapi, 150). This panel depicts Marjane’s mother, maid, and Marjane all consoling one another after the maid’s son had been given a key to the afterlife, both figuratively and literally, as it is a symbol of the ‘beautiful’ death on the battlefield in the war against Iraq. As we look more closely into the graphics, in just the first frame, it’s evident that something bad has happened - as shown by the sunken eyebrows of the women. Furthermore, both of the adult women have with their hair down and not in a burkha, which may be symbolic of the fact that they are going to ‘open up’ and be honest with each other. Over the next several frames, the drawings exemplify the maid’s distress after she realizes that her son is going to be sent to the front lines of the war to fight for their nation and potentially die as a martyr. The key also serves as a visual symbol for the class difference evident in Iranian society, as the lower class has to sacrifice their children to the war in exchange for a meaningless key. With just these five panels, Satrapi is able to express the environment in the household, the feelings of the women, Marjane’s response, and the meaning of the key. If Satrapi had chose to write her experiences in a traditional novel rather than a graphic novel, this same scene could have played out over several pages of description and thus this format of presentation is more readily accessible to a greater number of people because of the ease of reading for the common audience. This simplification of Satrapi’s story of the Iranian revolution into easier reading is similar to George Orwell’s Animal Farm because rather than giving their perspectives upfront, both authors use graphics and allegory, respectively, to relay their message. Using this comparison, how would the novel’s audience vary if it were formatted as an allegorical novel or a true novel rather than a graphic novel?
Heba Ahmed - Question 3
ReplyDeleteOne particular incident that is conveyed better in pictures that it ever could have been in words, is when Marjane returns from Vienna and goes out in war-torn Iran for the first time (254). The towering buildings, the large posters with the mother and her martyr son, the streets, and the skulls are all shown as the dominating force in all the pictures, and this conveys how all of these events weigh on her and she says ‘the road to readjustment seems very long to me’ (Satrapi, 253). Even though she managed to escape it, as well as the guilt she feels in this moment because of the times where she tried not to be Irani in a different country, she cannot escape it mentally because it is still her country. Additionally, through this pictures we see her as an Iranian at the core, despite her effort to change herself when she is in Vienna, because of the guilt she feels when she walk in the streets, which we can see this based on the way her emotions and facial expressions are depicted when she is confronted with all of this at once. Another instance is when she describes the political turmoil during the reign of the Shah. The particular instance she describes is the incident with the locked movie theater (18). Through pictures she manages to convey the brutality of the police and their attitude when this was occurring. She also manages to convey the destruction and the amount of deaths through the use of one picture. It is important to remember that it is from her perspective, so some factors are added in. Based on that, do you think that, on page 18, the fires in the middle panel in the second row look like doves? Is it intentional or coincidental?
That is interesting! I like how there is a large representation of everything in the city throughout the examples that you gave. Do you think that on the contrary there might be a part of the book where it might have been better to convey with words rather than pictures, and if that is the case, where throughout the book is there a relatively larger concentration of descriptions and text in relation to the rest of the book? Why is that?
DeleteNeha Yerramreddy
ReplyDeleteQuestion 1
The use of both words and images allows Satrapi to do many things, namely set the tone for the novel, and also subtly communicate things to her audience by using symbolism. The use of drawings to accompany text in this instance allows Satrapi to lighten the otherwise serious subject matter. For example, when Marjane first meets her roomate in Vienna,neither of them speak the same language as the other, and are therefore hardly able to communicate. The drawing the author includes of the two staring at each other nervously from across the room (Satrapi, 161) has a humorous connotation, and adds some relief to the story (as up until now Marjane has been forced to leave her home alone and go to a foreign country where she did not speak the language). This addition of humor also gives the reader an insight into Marjane’s personality and mindset at the time. The ideas she conveys are also enhanced with the use of pictures, such as when Marjane describes herself as feeling lost and without bearings after the death of her uncle, Anoosh. She is depicted as floating in space, with a blank expression on her face (Satrapi, 75). This drawing further emphasizes what Marjane has already stated - that she feels lost and confused - but acts as a symbol for the aimlessness she feels. The full gravity of the situation and Marjane’s mindset at the beginning of the war is only completely conveyed with the use of both text and images. However, I also wondered, since the drawings in the novel are relatively simplistic, would more detailed drawings take away or add to the story?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
ReplyDeleteI think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images because there are things that she might not have been able to convey through words alone. In the beginning of the book, we see that it is from a child’s eyes with a child’s perspective at the world. Some images in this book convey things that words cannot. For example, there is a very clear depiction of god in the book, however, with words alone, we may not have interpreted the image of god the same way Satrapi wanted to. I think one of the other reasons that Satrapi may have used images as well to tell her story is to clearly show us what she saw in her life. The drawing style itself can have a meaning on its own as the drawing is not very intricate or detailed. It is a drawing that is very much like a child’s drawing. I believe that the book’s setting starting from Satrapi’s beginning shows us how she as a person developed and how her thoughts transformed over time. I believe the drawings gave a feeling that we as readers are close to her. The images make in my opinion help us make it feel like we are watching something akin to a vlog of Satrapi’s life, a very insider look to her life. I think the combination of words and images allows us to see a clear picture of what Satrapi wants to show and the addition of words does not leave us with an abstract looking picture book. I believe both elements of the book combined provide us with a rather straightforward book. Words alone may not have been able to convey Satrapi’s emotions and perspective and images alone would not be able to convey the clearest message either.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteNicole Do #1
ReplyDeleteI believe one of the reasons for Satrapi choosing to utilize both words and images is because she wanted to illustrate the story for her readers herself, rather than leaving it up to their own imagination. Satrapi knows that nearly all of her readers have not experienced Iran the way that she has experienced it, which is why illustrating the book herself would give her a way to truly convey her emotions and experiences as she grew up in Iran. The images make her story unique to her and makes sure that her ideas do not get stuck in translation, which would most likely happen if she was to have written with only words. Also the common saying, “A picture is worth a thousand words,” truly comes into play as Satrapi includes minimal words and uses images to supplement everything she has to say. Creating a graphic novel allowed Satrapi to truly illustrate her childhood and express her experiences in ways that people of all ages would be able to understand. Writing a graphic novel also allowed Satrapi to express emotions that would have been difficult to express if she was writing a normal novel. Emotions such as anger, fear and sadness are more difficult to express in writing without extensive details, but by including images with her story, Satrapi can easily convey emotions through different fonts, characters’ facial expressions, and actions. This can be clearly seen in the beginning panels of the chapter, Hide and Seek, when Doctor Keller’s dog leaves Marjane a surprise in her bed. On this page, Marjane arrives in her room to see the dog pooping on her bed, and you can immediately tell she is angered as steam starts radiating from her head and how she runs down the stairs yelling, “DOCTOR HELLER!” (Satrapi, 207). Even the speech bubble is changed from a normal bubble to a burst, to further emphasize anger. Although the readers probably would have been able to deduce that Marjane was upset without images, in this situation, the panels illustrate the emotion without any confusion and also gets the message through without extensive reasonings. The combination of both words and images also allow for Satrapi to write in ways that a normal story would not allow. Now that she is using illustrations, she has to take into consideration the meaning of every color she uses. This opens the door for so much symbolism, that would not have been possible without panels. With every single panel, Satrapi specifically chooses a white or black in order to symbolize hope, sadness, and many other emotions. Illustrations all in all give the reader a way to further their imagination, without losing the message Satrapi is trying to convey. While reading this novel and reflecting on it, one of the biggest questions that has lingered in the back of my head is, “If it is known to Satrapi that her illustrations are meant to further provide insight on her emotions, why did she not include more detailed illustrations to express even more insight on her story?
Good point Nicole! Did you also notice the differences in colors throughout the book? I saw that you mentioned the colors black and white in order to symbolize hope, sadness, and many other emotions, but what about other colors involved such as the light blue and the over 50 shades of grey on the front covers of the book. Do you think there might be more of a deeper meaning for the more colorful cover of the book rather than just ascetic appeal? Perhaps, Marjane is implying with the cover of her book that before you read her story, you may think it is nicer than what it really is like? Could the only black and white colors of the pages throughout the book supposed to ironically mock the societal ideology of the time that Iran was all black and white and someone was either completely religious and extreme or a rebel?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAmish Dara- Question 1: Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
ReplyDeleteAuthors choose among images, words, or both as means of displaying their works of art, based on which type best allows them to depict the themes/central idea of their novel. A work of art that is comprised solely of images may better illustrate a central idea of suffering from a war than a novel of just text and on the other hand a novel that explicates philosophical matter may be best portrayed when limited to solely text. Ultimately, while there are certain types of art that are more inclined towards certain types of representation, an author's unique perspective on his/her's work dictates the type of text used. In Persepolis, Marjane Satrapi chooses to compose her graphic novel using images and words. The underling reason for this can be seen by the major themes of Persepolis which include women, religion, family, warfare, and politics. All of these themes could be illustrated with just images in that they all rely on imagery to describe themselves. Also these themes could all also be represented and described with text due to the fact that Satrapi can portray these with reasoning and heavy descriptions. Satrapi, however, chooses a combination of these types of representations to best illustrate her themes with images but also describe them with text. For example, when Satrapi explicated on how her mom's photo "was published in all the new European newspapers" (Satrapi 3), she not only says it as a part of the dialogue in the novel but also shows the photo to engage the readers further. She uses the best of both words in that instead of using imagery and description to describe Persepolis's environment, Satrapi relies on images and instead of using images to describe the current situation, Satrapi used words and text. This “best of both worlds” approach to writing sounds extraordinarily good and methodical and causes me to wonder why more authors don’t incorporate images into their novels. Authors choose text, images, or both based on what best suits the theme/central idea of their novel. What aspect of the themes unique to Persepolis and contrary to the common themes of all text novels cause Satrapi to use images and words in her graphic novel?
I think authors tend to rely less on images due to the images themselves seeming to make their work more elementary. In this way, the author might place high emphasis on prestige as opposed to substance, with text based works appearing as being more intellectual. This issue can also be seen in film producers' lack of support for animated works, feeling as if animation would not be able to portray subject matter with the same gravity as a live action portrayal.
DeleteCourtney Chen
ReplyDelete2. How Satrapi’s drawing style contributes to Persepolis
I think that Marjane Satrapi's drawing style, which can best be described as basic and naive, is used to contrast the innocence of youth with the stringency of the regime. When reading Persepolis, the reader immediately takes note of the fact that the hues in her drawings are limited to black and white. I feel that the limited palette is representative of the restriction of freedom the protagonist faces throughout the novel. Like how Marji the Character's expressional freedoms are confined to veils and conservative clothing, Marjane the Author's palette is confined to a sharp black and white, with no shades in between. The basic color scheme also punctuates the darkness of Marjane's experiences, and I think it'd almost be contradictory for Satrapi to use every color of the rainbow to illustrate such grim concepts as war, execution, starvation, etc. Satrapi’s depictions are also characterized by their naiveness––as seen by her lack of realism and detail, rounded, simple lines, and exaggerated features––as if to visually depict that she was too young to be stripped of her freedoms and to juxtapose her confusion and loss growing up with the assertive command of the Iranian government. This is seen when the veils are first implemented, and Marjane explains that she and her classmates “didn’t really like to wear the veil, especially since [they] didn’t understand why [they] had to” (Satrapi 3). The depiction that follows shows she and her classmates using the veil for various utilitarian purposes beyond their intentions, such as a jump rope or costume. Her perceived confusion and disliking for the veil, despite not quite knowing their true meaning, reveals a sense of undeservingness.
The style also adds humorous and entertaining qualities to the story, as it’s clear she, as a child, perceived many of the policies to be so outlandish that they were a joke. This could have also been a coping mechanism for Marjane. I relate Marjane’s initially humorous perspective on the veil or the executions (where she pretends to kill her classmates during recess) to much of America’s reaction when it was first rumored that Trump was running to President. I also view the humorous and lighthearted way that Satrapi visually narrates her stories as some sort of comic relief. However rather than alleviating the tension of the plot in humorous interludes, she does so with the comical images. I connect Satrapi’s inclusion of humor in midst of somber scenes to how authors such as Shakespeare or Edgar Allen Poe use comic relief or satire in grave stories such as Romeo and Juliet or the Tell Tale Heart.
While the color scheme and drawing style are primarily helpful in the way Satrapi narrates her story, there are also limitations. The childish drawing style that Marjane uses to provide humor and innocence to her story arguably also undermines to the gravity of the situations she faces and fails to accurately portray her struggles in a serious and real context. The murders, bombings, etc. in the novel are thus not as brutal in her depictions as they were in real life as details such as blood and ash are skewed. This makes me wonder, do Satrapi’s childish depictions more strongly support or undermine the gravity of Persepolis? How can initially viewing something as a joke increase or decrease its impact when it becomes a reality?
Hi Courtney, this is Sneha. I agreed with your analysis of Satrapi's art style and its impact on the readers' perception of her story. I find that her black and white images conveyed a sense of uniformity that paralleled the effect that the veils had on Iranian women and their individuality. Did you find that the evocative nature of Satrapi's images, as they displayed poignant scenes of death and more lighthearted panels of humour, made the novel more enjoyable to you? Or would you have preferred that she had written a more serious account of the revolution?
DeleteHarsha Jagannathan
ReplyDelete1. Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
I think Satrapi chose to tell her story with words and images in order to help readers remove their negative connotation toward Iran and Islam. Due to the Islamic revolution, many westerners feared that Iranians might promote war in their countries. Many thought that if they mingled with Iranians, they too might get suppressed from their freedom and start wearing veils. Due to these social stigmas, there was a lot of negative connotation associated with Islam. Satrapi intended to change this perception through her book.
After all, seeing is believing right? It is human nature to start believing in things we see. And this is what Satrapi wanted to do with her book: she wanted her audience to SEE that not all iranians were in favor of the veil, she wanted her audience to SEE the oppression in Iran, and she wanted her audience to SEE the rich culture present in Iran. This is why she incorporated images in her book.
Words allow the author to direct the audience’s attention to certain aspects of the images. Words allow the author to The combination of words and images allow the author to convey the intended message with the intended effect on the reader. For example, the comic strips in 295-296 have numerous characters, each having a personality. This highlights the human nature in Iranian men and women and shows to the western viewer that they are just like them. Overall, the combination of pictures and words allow the reader to gain a greater understanding of the ins and outs of Iran, be it politically, religiously, or socially.
...continued
DeleteI can relate to this through art. I had once visited a museum where there was an art piece which had a person smiling. At first glance, I thought this must have been some great artist’s recreational piece, done as a way to pass time. But after my tour guide started talking about the piece, my perception of the art piece changed. The piece was done after some great King in order to depict the emotion he felt after he had won some battle. The guide also talked a lot about the background and the symbolism behind it and it changed my perception of the art. I started viewing the art piece the way the tour guide was viewing the piece. This is the same with the Persepolis. By using words to support her pictures, Satrapi is able to cause the reader to look at the Iranian revolution through her lens. This allows the author to convey specific, directed messages that she wouldn’t have been able to do so had she not incorporated the combination of words and pictures.
Some questions I would like to pose are stated below:
Why does the author make it a graphic novel? Why not make it like a book with some pictures in it (for example, why not make it like diary of a wimpy kid?)
Why does the author use profanity in her novel?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTwo particular incidents stood out to me that I thought were conveyed very effectively using pictures. The first was the execution of Anoosh - his execution wasn't explicitly state in the narrated writing, but was communicated instead with an image of a newspaper clipping covering the death of a "Russian spy", with a photo of Anoosh. This page hit me extremely hard - more than a description would have, I believe. The way in which we discover Anoosh's death is exactly how Marjane most like discovered it - through a newspaper clipping. Instead of being told Anoosh died, we are shown; brutally and unsympathetically. This is a great example of how the visual style of Persepolis adds another dimension to the story Marjane is telling. I was reminded of a scene I witnessed in the movie "Mockingjay", when a character is killed in a explosion. We never see her dead body or are told explicitly she died - we only watch this exchange occur through the eyes of her sister, who sees fire in one moment and wakes up in a hospital next. No words are required - the mere visual compilation leading up and following her sister's death are potent by itself. Sometimes words are less effective than pictures because the action or event is narrated to us, versus having us directly experience it. Another example of particularly effective visual storytelling is when Marjane recounts her difficult experiences living on the streets in Europe after her breakup with her boyfriend and leaving her apartment. Panel 3 of page 238 is a strong example as well - the illustration is simplistic, and shows a bus roaming in the dark on a swirl of lines meant to represent its route. There is minimal detail in the panel but you are inclined to perfectly understand her state of mind and the position she was in at that time - aimless and lost, belonging nowhere and with nowhere to go, "letting [herself] be carried across Vienna by sleep and the tramway" (Satrapi, 283). While she could have explained her feeling and situation with words, I feel that the image accompanying her narration completes the atmosphere and untranslatable feeling she is experiencing in that moment.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: I genuinely want to know, to what extent was this unspoken show vs tell technique an intentional choice, compared to a byproduct of a graphic novel? And I also want to ask - how can we differentiate between metaphorical visual representations (such as the loops the bus travels on meant to symbolize her sense of loss and disbelonging or her conversations with God) and real events?
Sudeep Reddy - Question 1
ReplyDeleteSatrapi uses a combination of words and images in her story to paint a better depiction of her story. The images allow Satrapi to accurately give her story emotion. This is best shown in the facial expressions she gives the characters in her book. Each facial expression allows us to connect with different characters in unique ways that allow us to understand this story better. We can also better understand how each character responds to a certain situation by seeing their emotional response. If we were just given words then we would mainly only analyze their actions because this would be the primary thing that a writer would describe. However as long we have the character in the picture, then the reader can see their response to all of the actions that are going on in that scene. Readers can then form a better connection with those characters and analyze more thoroughly because they can see much more of them if they were given pictures. Satrapi also use the combination of words and images to create a better picture inside the reader’s head. The writer not only has to imagine what the reader is talking about, but the writer can see what the reader is thinking about to create an accurate picture of the story. This makes sure that readers can more accurately understand what the reader is trying to convey. These reasons add a lot to the story making it more effective in allowing readers to connect to eh characters and better understand the story.
Good thoughts here, young thinkers.
ReplyDeleteHarshi D.
ReplyDeleteWhy do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
Satrapi’s images are in a form that isn’t seen in traditional high school literature. It's a comic and the book has pictures that don’t have many details. Also, the dialogue is very short, because that is the way that comic books tend to be written. However, she still manages to achieve a certain level of depth in her book through the use of exaggeration and emotive words. Satrapi is also looking to target a certain age of people as her audience. It is most likely high schoolers. Older people, who already have a set view of the world, and watch more media, tend to not be as easy to persuade to see the other side of Iran as teenagers are. Her pictures tend to exaggerate certain details and certain things are not so detailed. They also appear to help support what she is saying since most of it is dialogue and short. An example of this is when Satrapi talks about how a communist was captured and then executed. She shows an image of the young girl on her knees with a blindfold covering her eyes which helps emphasize to the readers the situation and the horrible things that occurred there and foreshadowing what is coming up in the book. Also, since she is targeting a younger audience, she knows that audience most likely hasn’t had a situation like this and so she wants to make it easier for them to understand what is going on which she does by using her panels. This, to me, makes the situation seem less realistic, and also more readable in a way.
Yes, I agree with your point. Older people tend to be more stubborn about change and progressiveness because everything was better when they were younger. Also, America has not had a very good relationship with Iran and one example of this would be the Iran hostage crisis in which 52 American diplomats were held hostage by an Iranian revolutionary group. Failed rescue attempts by the American military resulted in the death of American military men. In 2000, as America was opening up to modern liberalism, while it was in its early stages, releasing a book about Iran was probably difficult. However, many Americans liked the book since Satrapi managed to break past traditional influences and embrace a more progressive mindset as a result. This makes me wonder if America solely liked the book because of the element of progressive ideals it contained and not for the emotions it portrayed?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSneha Korlakunta
ReplyDelete1. Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
Satrapi's use of a graphic novel enabled her to influence the audience's perceptions of her novel and the ideas she wanted to convey to a greater degree than she would otherwise have been able to using a traditional novel format. This fits her purpose better, since she wanted to change people's thoughts about Iran and its situation, and by providing both visual and textual information, she limits how much readers can misinterpret her perspective. For instance, her portrayal of the children playing with their veils and misunderstanding their purpose on the bottom panel on page 1 of the novel highlights the lack of oppression on the younger populations despite the change in regime. A novel composed entirely of text wouldn’t be able to fully capture the innocence of this time, and may allow for misapprehension regarding the enforcement of new regulations. Additionally, elements present only in a graphic novel, such as the images and the gutters, allowed for another layer for readers to garner meaning from and analyse. However, a traditional novel also has its merits. Satrapi would have been able to convey a longer and more detailed story with greater nuance within the text, had she chosen to make a fully textual novel instead. But the trade-off between content and images may have made the story less poignant, as the images add a more childlike and personal perspective to the novel. Conversely, her novel provides her point of view alone, perhaps ignoring the valuable insights that may have been gained through a traditional novel, in which a variety of perspectives could have been examined. Do you think that having just Satrapi’s perspective is sufficient for this novel, or would a diversity of perspectives have been preferable? Would you be willing to have that diversity at the expense of the simplicity of the novel and its accessibility to people of all ages?
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete2.
ReplyDeleteI find the style of her drawings to be generally quite simple; the coloration is monochrome, and light and texture are generally neglected. The purpose of the story is to provide the reader with an adequate understanding of the scene, not to show amazing artwork. The monochrome, however, does improve the overall mood of the book as a whole, which is one of intense drama and polarization between two opposing sides, whether it be the West and Iran, men and women, or police and civilians. It limits the variety of the situation in Iran, and shows it to be very polar with no in between, but it does exaggerate Marjane’s feelings. - Stephen Liang
Karvi Bhatnagar (!)
ReplyDeleteI believe that Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images to create a certain specificity to her story. In other words, she wants the audience to see what she wants to show them with minimal room for interpretation. For example, Satrapi discussed how "every border town was targeted by bombers" and that " most of the people living in those areas had to flee northward" to avoid getting bombed (Satrapi 89). Though she personally was not involved in that event, she felt that mentioning it would be useful in portraying the urgency of the situation. To portray this, she illustrated an image that appears to be cars rushing towards the top of the panel away from what appears to be massive flames. To enhance this message of urgency, which in this panel unlike others she is not directly involved in the event, Satrapi utilizes fire to symbolize it. Because she has little personal connection to this particular section in the novel, she would be unable to convey "urgency" with just words. However, the image is abstract enough that without context, it would seem out of place. Because of moments like these in the novel, in which she is presenting some kind of background information that is not reflective yet is still deemed as important enough for inclusion, Satrapi uses words and pictures. Perhaps another reason she chose to tell her story as a graphic novel rather than a regular novel is because she herself is an artist. Maybe, she simply wasn't good with words but better with pictures, so she felt that doing it this way makes more sense.
1. I think she chose to tell her store in a combination of both words and images, with both going hand in hand with each other. In the sample image, Marjane is displayed in stark contrast with other women as a consequence of her attire. Her jacket with the punk slogan is supposed to serve both as a reference to her pro-Western views (punk was very relevant and popular in the early 1980s), as well as to show her rebellion against the traditional Islamist standards of clothing. While words can tell a story alone, they won’t enhance the detail of the image in the mind of the viewer, something critical for describing something as detailed the intricate emotions of Marjane. This is similar to a lot of children’s books that use images in a combination with words in order to create a more concrete point of view for readers, as opposed to the abstractions of a word soup.- stephen liang
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with your last sentence. Satrapi seeks to provide a more explicit means of describing her emotions. A book wouldn't do that since it invokes imagination as the reader seeks to picture certain images in his/her head. The pictured image would be influenced by the context of the reader's life, the author of a book would most of the time could never ensure that the reader perceives the image in his/her head in the way that the author views it. Satrapi, on the other hand, wishes for the reader to accurately view her emotions, it is not something up to the reader to imagine. Satrapi’s intricate childhood emotions cannot simply be imagined by the reader, the emotions must be received and perceived in a certain way, so that the reader can understand the feelings of a child during an age of trials and tribulations. This way, the reader can have no questions since he/she is forced to think in the way Satrapi what him/her to think. Also, I really liked the examples you gave to prove your point. Her punk jacket was shown as an image but so much concrete detail can be derived from it as you listed in your post. Going off my post, I talked about Hugo, an amazing story told through the use of only words. Why is it that Hugo does a decent job of conveying Hugo’s emotions( regarding his father’s death, stealing food, fear of the security guard) like Persepolis?
DeleteSolomon Mathew #1.
ReplyDeleteSatrapi chose to tell her story in words and images since it would best depict what she is trying to portray. Her intended goal was not to describe the 1970 Iranian Revolution or the events revolving around it; it was more of a description of her feelings of those events as she grew up. A book would have been much better to help expand on specific details of the revolution, but a graphic novel helps the reader picture images in his/her head than a book. One reason as to why she wrote her story as a graphic novel and not a book is because a book invokes the reader to picture different images in his/her head; more specifically, it invokes imagination. Satrapi, however, does not want to deal with imagination. She has a set story that she wants to tell, imagination need not play a part, since she already imagined about events herself. “Every night I had a big discussion with God.” (Satrapi 6). This panel proves the above mentioned point. If Satrapi had written a book, then the reader would have had to picture what God looked like in their heads. But by using a graphic novel, Satrapi saves the reader trouble of imagining, rather she doesn’t want them to imagine what he looked like. Satrapi already imagined him in a certain way and that is way her readers will see him too. If Satrapi had written her story only with images, the reader would have been confused as to what was going on. This wouldn’t be as great of a problem to Satrapi, her biggest problem would be that the reader wouldn’t understand how she felt. The simplicity of the drawings would not provide a great way for readers to derive what emotions she experienced. Hugo (one of my favorite books) did this well. Without the use of much words and only pictures, a great story was presented. This makes me wonder, If Hugo could evoke such emotion in me, if I could understand the story and implicitly understand the emotions he felt, why couldn’t Persepolis be done in that same way? I think that since Persepolis required more depth into a certain topic, words were involved. Also, I think words helped Satrapi portray her detest to certain religious events etc.
I agree with what you said. I think that the use of pictures provides a definite picture to the reader, leaving no room for interpretation. By using both picture and text she shows the readers a little glimpse into what her life was or what she portrayed her adolescence to be. Without the use of pictures combined with the text complete emotion cannot be conveyed to the reader.
DeleteSaige C (2) Satrapi’s written style as well as illustration style is profoundly simplistic to the eye and mind at first glance, but develops in complexity with proper analysis and consideration. I found it ironic initially that such a serious and heavy topic was chosen to be written about in such an underwhelming way, however after diving deeper into the story and completing research about Satrapi herself, it became more clear to me as to just what her purpose for writing the novel was and what motivated this style. I quickly took note of the colors used: black and white. i personally think it is symbolic of Satrapi's "black and white" beliefs with concrete opinions. Moreover, I think the colors black/white and usage of cartoon like characters are representative of Marji's ideas of young innocence and the simple desires for unalienable rights and freedom.. Finally, I think Satrapi also could have picked this color scheme to display strong forms of comparisons and contrasts in themes throughout the novel such as good vs evil and dynamic differences between cultures.
ReplyDeleteThe simple language only helps to intensify all of these characteristics as well as balance the tone of the book. Using short phrases takes away abstractness and imagination behind her words, steering the reader follow her in thought while simultaneously guiding them through the story. What is not inferred by pictures is clarified by these concise sentences. By this simplicity and almost childlike narration, the reader develops both a more sympathetic and empathetic connection to Marji, enhancing her personality and allowing us to connect with it. The minimal style, however, takes away some crucial details from what the story could have been. The novel is very quick paced and requires the reader patience and wisdom to see the underlying meanings of her work which may be misinterpreted or not caught. The quick pace of her growth also took me by surprise as well. We lost many pieces of her life that could have held great importance, but being a memoir she had to keep the style at a fleeting pace. While I do feel overall that this graphic text worked in the author's favor I do feel like it was just in this particular instance and not ideal for all memoirs. I wonder - had the illustrations of the comic had been more advanced would that have distracted from the naive telling of the story or amplified its specifics in a more informal light.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletePranay Boppana Question 1
ReplyDeleteI think that her choice to use words and images provides a comical aspect to the comic that would be lost if chose to write a traditional narrative type essay. She wanted to portray her childhood and her experiences in 1970's and this was best accomplished by using a style of writing that best reflected her childhood, comic. Without the inclusion of the pictures and the text throughout her book it would be hard to interpret what exactly is trying to be said or how it is being expressed. If she were to talk about the Iranian Revolution as a whole the use of this type of writing would not be appropriate. She is describing her adolescence, which was best done by showing the different drawing and the dialogue within the pictures. Comparing this style to either only pictures or only text shows that Satrapi wanted the readers to know about everything that was going during that time period in her life, she did not want leave anything up to the readers interpretation. It is said that a picture is worth a thousand words, this is applied to how she wants to use these illustrations to both show the humorous side to her childhood and to provide more detail to her story overall. As her family was very liberal there were many experiences that she experienced that other children in Iran at the time that were facing many different things. The use of comics and the text show how her childhood was and how there were some humorous aspects sprinkled in between the somewhat serious tone.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete1) Why do you think Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images? What does the combination make possible that words or images alone would not?
ReplyDeleteAns: Satrapi chose to tell her story in words and images instead of just a single text because words and images speaks a lot more louder than just words. For Example, in the novel the characters' emotions and attitude towards a particular situation is clearly understandable to the readers through clear visual pictures. If we also see the backgrounds of the texts, we will see that the background changes according to the situation, for example, when when the main character gets to know that the king is not chosen by god, the background changes since the character is enlightened with new information which she knew before and gets to know that the information is totally wrong. We can see that Marjane provides enough visual information for the readers to understand the real emotions of a character so that the readers feels more into towards the situation and the context.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEvan Dobbs Q2: Perhaps the most unique part of Satrapi’s storytelling is the style of her illustrations. She has said that her style was largely influenced by comics, and she mentioned multiple times that her primary source of knowledge on world affairs was books, typically in the form of comic books such as the one she had over socialism. It is odd then that she has such a unique visual style considering how heavily she must have been influenced by the comics that she read. Whereas most graphic novels utilize a very serious style, Satrapi’s books are characterized by childlike illustrations in only black and white, refusing to even use traditional greyscale. In my opinion, this is perhaps the element that contributes most to her success. Satrapi presents complex, challenging issues that adults fiercely debate from a child’s perspective, and often juxtaposes the horrific atrocities and violence that result from this fierce adult debate with a very innocent, childlike voice and illustrations. Perhaps one of the most notable examples, and also one of the reasons that the book was briefly banned in Chicago public schools, was the scene regarding Ahmadi’s torture. Still maintaining her childlike visual style and tone of speaking, Satrapi demonstrates the torture that Ahmadi endured at the hands of his captors in the Iranian government. Notably, the only words in the panels demonstrating this are exclamations from the guard torturing him. This further emphasizes the need for the reader to understand and interpret the visuals presented to them, as the visuals in these panels are surprisingly graphic, showing nudity and extreme violence, ending with a panel of Ahmadi’s body cut apart at the appendages and waist, with the simple caption: “In the end he was cut to pieces.” (Satrapi 55) While this style is of great use to Satrapi, and is perhaps one of the most creative and innovative parts of her novel, it also greatly limits her storytelling ability in the second book. At this point, Marjane is a teenager, and the second book follows her through her years as a young adult. Her tone evolves to reflect her increasing maturity, but her visual style remains largely the same, attempting to portray a young adult’s problems in an adult world through a young adult’s perspective with childlike illustrations. While the simplicity of these illustration did perhaps symbolize and reflect the simplicity of a child’s view of the world, they cannot accurately reflect the more complex lens of a young adult or even a teenager.
ReplyDelete