PIctures, Facts, and Fictions.

I agree with Bryan and Christina’s analysis of the Satrapi’s panels; however, I did not notice anyone specifically mention the significance of the author’s use of images over the traditional method of words to tell a story.  In my opinion, the graphic and visual representations of her memory, in combination with a few simple sentences were much more effective than words alone.  They showed her point of view, which helped us to feel like we were a part of it, and therefore, served to greatly intensify the novels impact.  Although her memories may not be completely accurate, they are still true because they represent what she has felt, what she saw, and most importantly they are the way she remembers them.  She shows us which moments had the greatest impact on her by the size and layout of the panels.  In some ways, if it only had the facts, it would almost have had the same dulled effect as a news report, another impersonal sad story.  In this way, her heart-wrenching story becomes more universal because most of us have shared some of the same feelings or emotions in our lives.  Perhaps it was as children, lost and confused, simply following our parent’s ideals and protecting them as if they were our own.  Or even the contrary as we question everything and would fight everything our parents say regardless of the fact that we probably have absolutely no idea what they are talking about.  I also think it makes a considerable difference that the book is a rendition of Marji’s own childhood and her memories because we can all relate to her and her childhood in some way or another.  This personal account allows us to see the human side of the Iranian revolution and reminds us that it is not just a bunch of robots behind the guns or fictional characters living through this hell.