Why keep going?

‘Who would fardels bear to grunt and sweat under a weary life’ (shakespeare circa.1600)
This is the question Shakespeare tries to answer in his brilliant soliloquy that starts with the
famous words ‘to be or not to be’. Ms Satrapi tries to answer a very similar question in her
graphic novel Persepolis but fails miserably as her lack of creativity in this medium hinders
not only my understanding of the text furthermore it takes away my compassion with
Marjane’s personal journey and many hardships.
How does Satrapi try to answer the question: if everything is incredibly hard why go on?
She shows us Marjane’s journey through life and through her many hardships and
difficulties. Part of these are caused by being a teen and her hormonal changes but many
are caused by the strange situations around her like the revolution and her time in austria.
This last one makes it incredibly clear where her pain and problems lie so allow me to start
off by examining that one first before moving on to her other problems and comparing this
book with other examinations of the topic.

Marjane’s time in Austria was incredibly hard and painful for her. Being very far away from
your family in the horrible situations she ends up in is absolutely devastating and can cause
severe trauma in a child's life. This is however also the part in the book where my problems
with Satrapi’s style begin to really arise. The artstyle through the whole book is quite
simplistic but more importantly the whole book is exclusively in black and white. Whether
that was done to press printing costs or because this was a stylistic choice I can only guess.
If it was a stylistic goal however I think it was a very poor one as this allows for no nuance in
the art style. If the novel would have been drawn in colour Satrapi could have changed
colour scheme depending on the type of situation Marjane was in. For example our main
character was in a very poor place in her life when she entered Austria and found out she
was not welcomed as warmly as she expected when she left her home country. The author
could have played with colour more depending on the mood and tone of the scene we where
in and while doing that added an extra layer.
Alternatively she could have changed her style from simplistically while Marjane was still a
little child to more distinct and complex when she understood more of the world around her.
This would have further enhanced the aspect of growing up which is definitely a prominent
part of the story.

But what makes Marjane pull through this extremely difficult part of her life? Well she almost
doesn’t. At the end she returns to Iran heart-broken and disillusioned by a European dream
that turned out to be a nightmare. She would rather give back her liberties and personal
freedoms that she gained in Austria then remain an outsider whose friends were smoking
weed on the weekends. What does that tell us about the society we live in? We revel in all
the personal freedoms we have gained and the liberty that goes along with it. America is
completely built around the ideal of absolute personal freedom. But is that the best way to
live? Might it be more liberating to live under an oppressive regime like the Iranian or
Chinese? Well it would make life a lot easier if you don’t have to think about what you think,
if you do not have to constantly have to ask yourself if what you hear is the truth.
I personally think that we, in the west, overestimate the importance and, more importantly,
the applicability and importance of democracy and personal freedoms. For too long Europe
has acted over confidently in the ways and possibility of spreading democracy throughout
the whole world. Who are we to judge what is the best way to lead a country? China has
been ruled by an emperor for millenia and is on their way to become the new hegemonic
state, Russia has always been ruled by a despotic leader and, although it has gone wrong
with the Ukrainian war, their country has been one to be reckoned with for the last century.
Is it not the case that the revolution in Iran was, indirectly, caused by American interference
in the region? Our perception of Iran has been shaped by the last 50 years of war and chaos
in the region but Iran and the Persian empire has flourished for nearly 4000 years. For
context, the European continent began to civilise with the Roman empire around 2500 years
ago. Would it then be wise to put a people whose perception of a country or topic could
change like lightning in charge of government? I think not, we see in the United States of
America that public perception changes fast and that hard needed policy changes do not
come through because of it and the frequent change in administration here, in the
Netherlands, leads to a lack of long-term vision and policy. This while China with its stable
and strong government was able to take charge of the world's economy in less than two
decades.

Back to our main topic, why does Marjane go on with life after all her hardships? The answer
can be found in her last phone call with her parents before she leaves for home again. She
experiences so much love from them that she refinds hope. Satrapi’s answer to the question
is love. People go on because of love. In the beginning I started with a question that was
posed by one William Shakespeare. We saw what Satrapi’s answer was but what was his
own? He starts by posing the question: to be or not to be? And then answers that question
after a whole lot of imagery and metaphors which range from comparing life to a dream all
the way to painting life as a burden. But before the end he comes up with the answer which
according to him is that whatever comes next could be so terrible that even life is more
bearable and that us being conscious of this fact makes us cowards. It is a very depressing
and cynical view upon the world and living but then Hamlet was quite depressed at this point
in the story.

So which one is the answer? It is hard to say really as it is so very personal to each and
every one of us. Similarly as to how life is different depending on our situation. Personally I
would rather believe in Satrapi’s hope and message that love is the reason to keep going. It
gives the world more colour and vibrancy, which I would have liked to see from the novel.
But Shakespeare, brilliant as he is, made a very strong argument as well. Life can be, and
often is, very hard on us while it makes us suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous
fortune. The only thing we can do is make the best of it and hope that whatever comes next
has mercy upon us and shows us kindness.
Appendix
Soliloquy from Hamlet: act 2, scene 2

To be, or not to be, that is the question:

Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles
And by opposing end them. To die—to sleep,
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks
That flesh is heir to: 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep, perchance to dream—ay, there's the rub:
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come,
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil,
Must give us pause—there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life.
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
Th'oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of dispriz'd love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th'unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? Who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscovere'd country, from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will,
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of?
Thus conscience doth make cowards of us all,
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action.
W. Shakespeare circa. 1600