For week 7’s class, we cover Marjane Satrapi’s autobiographical series Persepolis, which centers around the Islamic revolution (otherwise known as the Iranian revolution). During the Iranian revolution from 1978 to 1979, the uprising occurred much like any other uprising in history. Before the revolution, the monarchy in power in Iran known as the Shah had been steadily accumulating power. The first cracks in the regime appeared when a group of scholars published open letters which were openly critical of the regime and protests against the Shah mounted up during its first year (Maloney and Razipour).
The cycle of violence that often springs forth from even peaceful protests can prompt further escalation of tensions between a ruling state and an oppressed people. Anyone who has remotely glanced at the history of the United States should be familiar with the Boston Massacre, a protest against British colonial rule which resulted in the deaths of protestors and spread popular opposition to colonial rule among the American people at the time.
Many of these events are central to popular revolutions. In an attempt to control the effects of protests, people are killed by the ruling government, and the atrocities result in further protests. This cycle creates a feedback look of ever-accumulating popular support until a state is overrun. Such a sequence of events exactly transpired in Iran during this revolution when students protesting the Shah were killed in early months of 1978 (Maloney and Razipour).
Unfortunately, contemporary conflicts in Iran have lead to the nation’s portrayal by Americans as a hotbed of terrorism and religious fundamentalism, and Marjane Satrapi addresses these perceptions from her perspective in the introduction of Persepolis. She writes: “since [the revolution], [Iran] has been discussed mostly in connection with fundamentalism, fanaticism, and terrorism. As an Iranian who has lived more than half of my life in Iran, I know that this image is far from the truth. That is why writing Persepolis was so important to me. I believe that an entire nation should not be judged by the wrongdoings of a few extremists” (Satrapi, Introduction).
Such a statement reinforces the idea that it is important to consult the people who lived through such an important and widely studied social shift. Instead of analyzing the results of the revolution from a western lens, we should instead view it in the context of the lived experience of someone who witnessed it and came of age during it. Without a diversity of voices surrounding an event, we are doomed to allow the victors to write the history books.
Sources:
Maloney, Suzanne, and Keian Razipour. “The Iranian Revolution-A Timeline of Events.” Brookings, Brookings, 7 Feb. 2019, www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/01/24/the-iranian-revolution-a-timeline-of-events/.
Satrapi, Marjane. Persepolis, Pantheon Books, 2004.
Katouzian, Homa. “The Iranian Revolution of February 1979.” Middle East Institute, 29 Jan. 2009, www.mei.edu/publications/iranian-revolution-february-1979.
This is very true in the biased stereotype that many give Iran in being a region of terrorism and upheaval. I even mentioned this in one of my peer question reviews in an earlier module in this class. In that discussion forum I mentioned how the news seems to give this certain persona of what things are like in an area (and this is not the case at all) and this is happening to the the the country of Iran. In my opinion it’s similar to someone from outside the U.S seeing a video of a protests or a violent act and therefore assuming the country is in complete chaos when it’s only a small sample of the entire US population. An event like that could also be reflected in a smaller setting such as what a political figure said or did and therefore casts a shadow of belief that this is what everyone is like or thinks.
I really liked your point here about outsider perspectives compared to insider perspectives. That is a good point to bring up and I think it can easily be tied to “single stories” because of the assumption by other people that one event or one outlook is the only explanation. Globally, we are not exposed to different cultures as we should be and we really do not know as much about others as we sometimes think we do so it is important to make sure we try to understand the full story rather than creating a “single story.” I also liked the ending of the presentation where it was brought to our attention that we should consider first-hand accounts instead of seeing what the news says, trusting social media, or interpreting things for ourselves because that one image is what leads to the “single story.” This is what I understood from the last part of the presentation, but did anyone else have another view on this? Do you agree or disagree? Great presentation!
Yes, absolutely. We see this in American textbooks with countless aspects of history being written by people who hold the power and privilege to share mistellings with no repercussions. I think it is important that you pointed out also that there is definitely an overgeneralization issue that occurs. So many people tend to know very little about Iran, or anyone outside of their community, and will make sweeping assumptions about all others on the basis of physical characteristics or other factors that they deem definable. I learned a lot from Persepolis, and I hope that it continues to be worked into curriculum. If children are living through this reality, I think it’s important that those of us who aren’t are at least learning about it before we reach adulthood.
Throughout history similar events have happened multiple times. The events that you just mentioned are similar to the BLM movement that happened less than a year ago. One of my high school history teachers said “history always repeats itself.” In history courses that I have taken, I have understood why this statement is true. Each event that happens because a group of people does not feel like they have been treated properly. This could be in any form, BLM movement was against police brutality, Boston Tea Party was to protest taxation on imported goods. With many years difference between the two events we can see how history repeats itself. And I know there are many other examples that have the same ideas that have happened in the past.
I am glad that you included Marjane Satrapi’s introduction. This is another example from our readings stressing the importance of people with lived experiences who are trying to counteract narratives from well-meaning or ill-intentioned people about their culture.
swinney.6 I defiantly agree with your comment and also am glad you included the introduction, it really does show the unique experiences along with important cultures and life changing events that took place in peoples lives. Cultures can have different meanings and understand the good and bad ones are important in a novel like this.
I wholly agree with your idea that we should “consult the people who lived through such an important and widely studied social shift” instead of “analyzing the results of the revolution from a western lens”. My reasoning for this is personal experience. One of my mother’s very close work friends is actually from Iran and grew up in the country during this time and has told me almost exactly what Satrapi states in the reading. That is, Iran, contrary to Western belief, is a very beautiful country with many, many great people, but due to the actions of minority extremists, its reputation in the Western world is incredibly skewed.
I loved how you included Satrapi’s introduction into your presentation post! Her message towards the skewed points of view that many hold for her nation of Iran goes right back to our previous discussion of “single stories” and how much impact those with the powers of the pen can have. By shaping narratives of Iranians as Islamic extremists, western writers have turned an entire people into “enemies” when the Iranians’ own stories of compassion and culture are not shared.