The narrator in the book "Persepolis" is obviously Marji as the first person because the subject who explained the information of the development on the story often begins from "I" and "my". However, I think the readers can obtain many information from many characters who appeared through the story, not just from Marji. This means that the author make characters the vehicle on her purpose as if they dare explain any information to let us know it in detail. For example, Siamaki Jari and Mohsen Shakiba explained about the conseqence of torture against their other friend was in the jail like that "Ahmadi... Ahmadi was assassinated. As a member of the guerillas, he suffered hell. He always had cyanide on him in case he was arrested, but he was taken by surprise and unfortunatelly he never had a chance to use it... So he suffered the worst torture..."(p.51). The readers would be able to them the third person.
The reason why the third person often explained the information would be the idea that the readers can retain the point of view and the sence of value about Marji as young child. When she narrated every information not only any inpressions through her eyes but also the details which are hard to find them for her, the readers would not be able to share her experiences as a child, but just the main character. In terms of this reason, the way that the author use not the first narrator but the third narrator simultaneously into the story must be often useful methods for the development.
Booth also said that "It is true that choice of the first person is sometimes unduly limiting; if the "I" has inadequate access to necessary information, the author may be led into improbabilities"(p.150). In the "Persepolis" case, I can consider that Marji (the first narrator) should not explain the difficult information and special knowledge unlike children speak because of the fact that she is still child (unduty limiting), even though she could get them from the books (p.12 and p.32). Because she is learning many knowledge in the sociey which is including much complex principle, the third person is required necessarily as the narrators.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's true that through most of the beginning of Persepolis, Marji is using a combined first and third person narrative. I strongly agree that this is necessary when she is a younger character. The two different narratives compliment each other to fill in some gaps that Marji alone could not fill. However later in the story, it appears that the two different narrative "persons" actually become the same.
ReplyDeleteFor example on page 169, Marji returns to her room and finds Lucia drying her hair. The third person narrator says, "When I got back, I found Lucia. Still faithful to her post." This could have easily been in a thought bubble. That must be what going on through her head, which is supported by the facial expression she wears.
The two narrators slowly grow together as Marji gets older which helps us relate more to the character. We slowly learn with Marji, while not being totally left in the dark. Eventually when the two are one in the same, we, as the audience, feel like we are finally part of the growing story and we are more invested into the character of Marji. You even feel her pain when she watches her saddened father carry her mother, who has just fainted, away from the airport (p. 153).
Throughout Persepolis, the merging of child and author Marji occurs. The idea that the book chronicles the meshing of young and old or immature and mature is displayed through the text, narration style, and illustration quite well. Almost all aspects that Satrapi uses in Persepolis help illuminate the changes happening in not just the character but who readers perceive Marji to be.
ReplyDeletePersepolis ends with an illustration of sadness. As Joshua noted, "You… feel...[Marji's] pain". However, the picture he describes does not revolve around the book’s main character, but her mother and father (153). The pain they feel and display parallels the maturation of Marji. She, the child, must now watch her parents go and she is unable to do anything about it (153). Although this may seem to put her in a childlike position, Marji must deal with the situation as an adult.
The last few pages of Persepolis depict Marji’s growth. The girl in the last picture on 153 is not the main character Marji we have come to know, but the reasoning voice who has stepped in periodically throughout the book to give us insight. She sees her parents and understands what they are doing but she is unable to help or even have contact with them (at this moment). She knows that they, like Iran, have become a part of her past; but also like Iran, will probably continue to live in her future.
Marji is no longer under the protection of her supportive father and mother. On an even harsher level, she now sees the frailty of her parents. Worse yet, she is feeling the sorrow of loss as well. However, Marji takes control of herself. Although she takes one last look back, she is aware that the she will have to “just go” (153).
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree Cola's opinion strongly. She said that "Marji is no longer under the protection of her supportive father and mother". In spite of the fact that Marji did not explain her feeling in detail, the reader, probably, would be easy to guess her states in the last sight like as the above quote. Because she uses the narration of the third person effectively for the supplement, I think the reader can sympathize with two of her position both a child and an adult.
ReplyDeleteOn the narration as the point of the third person's view, Marji is always trying to explain the sober facts that she had experienced in Iran through the whole of the book. In other words, she never exaggerates to describe the feeling that she felt when she was a child in Iran. She always expresses her mind when she is the first person of the narrator as a child, and she also always explain the fact without any exaggeration when she is the third person of the narrator as the author. For instance, she said that "I was all wrong about dad. He loved his country as much I did"(p.84). Although young Marji does not say anything but presses herself against her father, the readers can understand that she was all wrong about farther because of the third person as the narrator. This would mean that she could not figure out the fact in childhood.
As I said before, one of the reasons why she uses the two types of the narration is in order not to break Marji's point of view as a child. Furthermore, I think there is another reasons and the effect.
Because of using the two types of the narration such as the first person who expresses her mind obediently as a child and the third person who explain the fact without any exaggeration, the readers can go back the point of children's view. Then the readers would be easy to sympathize and guess Marji's feeling as a child at that time without any unnecessary intentional explanation. To make the readers go back the point of children's view, I think Marji uses the combined narration.