Joan W. Scott’s the evidence of experience explains the relationship between evidence and (hidden aspect of) history in a critical way. Delany’s reaction to a bathhouse scene as described by Scott is significant with the sense of ‘visibility’ he experiences. Scott points out that seeing enables him to ‘comprehend his personal activities (particularly as a gay man) and politics’ (revealing the hidden in the society) (Scott, 398). Scoot further claimed that ‘seeing is the origin of knowing, writing is the reproduction, transmission and communication of knowledge gained through (visual, visceral) experience’ (Scott, 398). This is applicable to all individuals—we make sense of the world we are in and note our feelings and emotions and reactions to various events with language, written or spoken. When experiences rise to a collective level, such accounts usually serve as the ‘bedrock of evidence on which explanation (of differences) is built’ (Scott, 399). This has, however, failed to shed light on the nature and production of exclusion in the first place. What I like most about this critique is that Scott points out that the often seemingly orthodox history is subject to much personal intervention, rendering them unreliable. Instead of being the most uncontestable account, human experience itself is already a selective interpretation of his/her surroundings. On the second layer, manipulation is possible when such experience is reinterpreted in language as in recording.
Relating to the inadequacy of treating evidenced as the basis for history or explanation for the ‘difference’ in particular, it is interesting to note the several translation and representation in Persepolis and its role in ‘representing the hidden’.
As an autobiographic film, Persepolis has several characteristics that challenge how true it is a complete account of the past. The fact that Marjane’s family was privileged might explain her identification with revolutionist’s disappointment and exile (her uncle in particular), but it also exclude to a large extent the real living condition of the general public at war times. In addition, Marjane’s inclination to French (language, real life production and funding) also undermines the reliability of the film as a record of history, when considering the relationship between experience and history. It seems weird to me that on one hand Marjane is dedicating this film to the Iranians; on the other hand she allows the permeation western influence, both within and without the movie. To a certain extent I find Persepolis too much an embellishment of the reality. The point of view of a young girl might have fostered this impression for the most part, but the abstract black and white animation and the over-simplified plot has reproduced the stereotypical Iran (ethnic country) under western impression instead of presenting the real world of it. Hence though the film at times touch on issues as genders, politics and justice etc, I find little sense of her going on a ‘rescue mission’ or to speak for the hidden or suppressed, women or the mass. The association with other media—television, film and music are at most times ambiguous. It seems to suggest that western culture has empower Marjane to stand up and challenge the authoritative figure (teacher and nuns for instance), but at the same time these media challenges her own national identity.
http://www.timburtoncollective.com/bigfish.html
The idea of the unreliability of personal accounts reminds me of another movie, Tim Burton’s Big Fish (2003), in which a dying man deliberately intervene his childhood memory, embellishing it from failure and nightmares to fantastically joyful episodes, which he told as stories to his son. In the film, although the events themselves are twisted, the emotional truths in them are very much more the authentic. in this light, I might say that Persepolis seems to be an evident supporting Scott’s claim that experience do not represent History, particularly for the ‘difference’, but then to a certain extent its artistic achievement address human feelings, which might be more important than mere historical facts.
I personally find the film "Persepolis" to be a reflection of your final two sentences. I think that Satrapi and Parannoud's work supports Scott's claims of experience by expressing the intrinsic connectivity of human feelings to history itself. The film juxtaposes the sociopolitical context of the era with the complex human elements of feelings and messy memories that cannot be separated from experience. While the film does not document stark historical facts, it does reflect how we experience history, and how it impacts the memory and psyche of an individual.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your statement that Persepolis seems to go on a ‘rescue mission’. Also, your consideration of Marjane as trying to be empowered by western culture seems certain to me. As we discuss in class, she is negotiating her identity. It looks as if she is trying to decide or chose aspects from both cultures that would finally configure her identity. Finally, your distinction about History and art is really relevant. Persepolis is in fact a recount of a life experience, and trying to find an objective Iranian history is pointless. For instance, the different portrays and characters’ details according to the relationship they had with Marjane reinforce the idea that rescuing of the memory comes directly from her interpretation of the past.
ReplyDelete