I always enjoyed the first half of Persepolis. Told from Satrapi's perspective, it was a very relatable story about a young child who was swept up by the world events around her, and tried to rebel in very normal, child-like ways. It was very relatable in that abstract sense, even if most of us have not been through a violent revolution. (and even more violent subsequent war with a neighboring state)
The second half of Persepolis was much more difficult for me, and I never know how to feel about it. I think above all else Satrapi deserves a lot of credit for describing herself realistically rather than trying to paint herself as a good person. (not that she was a bad person, but that she didn't shy away from parts of the story that show her in a poor light) I have a lot of respect for her honesty in the second half of the story, however her time in exile in Europe seemed to be one of self-indulgence, meandering, and minor self-destruction. All of which are understandable for someone who has been through such a traumatic turn of events, however it was a bit sad that the young, rebellious child that was so likable did not seem to survive the conflict.
It seems like you're disappointed it wasn't a modern "noble savage" myth, that it was realistic instead of a fairy tale about a person coming from a bad place to a good place and being happy, wholesome, and free.
This kind of mythology is a pretty big problem in the western world right now as is the kneejerk reaction to it.
That’s a rather uncharitable take on what the poster you’re responding to wrote.
I read Persepolis a few years ago, and it’s hard not to come away with a similar impression. The first part often does resemble a fairy tale of sorts, while the second part is a pretty dark story of teenage alienation. The contrast is jarring, and it goes well beyond “duh nobody’s perfect”.
Both parts are excellent in their own right, and quite unlike any other book I’ve read, but there is indeed something strange going on in part 2. Most readers will remember this, I think.
What's jarring to many people is it isn't the three act hero's journey of a noble savage. The "something" going on is that it isn't a copy of just about the only narrative in western mythos:
1. Departure - from a humble background the subject leaves amid struggle
2. Growth and Initiation - the subject discovers who they are building themselves into the hero they'll become
3. Heroic Return - the now hero makes a return to their beginnings to great success
Instead, Persepolis is a much more realistic story and each act is around three very different kinds of strife experienced by our hero and only in the very end a kind of coda where things go well.
My criticism of the criticism is that Persepolis is tremendously more realistic than the hero's journey and people are jarred by it because it doesn't represent their imagination of what real world struggle is like, the fact that it upsets people is one of those deep core societal issues because of the wrongness of the lens people see the world through.
I think you make a fine analysis, but I would just offer that real life can be quite jarring and uncomfortable. So a story which paints a very real picture of life (rather than constructing a narrative) might just be unpleasant. I don't think her story is poorly written, and I think it is quite memorable.
For reference, I also really enjoyed the Catcher in the Rye, and there are some superficial similarities: a young person is scarred by events in their lives and succumbs to depression. (there are a myriad of differences between the two stories -- I'm not drawing an equivalence, just making one comparison)
Catcher in the Rye is probably best read as an angry teenager: you meet Holden Caufield and he's witty, cynical, funny, defiant, etc. You might fall in love with the character, but what you ultimately learn is that he's a miserable failure; he lost the battle with his depression and so many of the people he was cutting down were just normal, decent people trying to enjoy their lives.
Crucially, we never meet Holden when he is young, bright eyed, and innocent. The narrative structure shows us who he is right away, and we the reader learn that this is actually quite a bad thing throughout the course of the story.
Persepolis works a bit differently: we spend the first half of the book with innocent, bright-eyed Marjane and we fall in love with that character. The character we fall in love with is taken from us by the events of the story, by living unsupervised in exile, etc. It's nothing but sad. It's well-written, it's very memorable, but I don't think there's anything wrong with feeling unhappy about an unhappy turn of events.
> So a story which paints a very real picture of life (rather than constructing a narrative) might just be unpleasant.
May be, but to someone going through similar life experiences an honest story might give their internal emotions some validation. Art can do wonders in that "I am not the only one" aspect.
Persepolis absolutely DOES use the “hero’s journey” narrative archetype you’re claiming it avoids. The second part even ends by explicitly stating that she has grown into a different person, and is now ready to “face the world” when she leaves her family for the second time.
Indeed, the story is quite Western overall, which is perhaps unsurprising, given that the author had already been living in the West for over a decade when she wrote it.
I’ve always wondered how much of the second part is truth and how much is fiction. That a teenage girl from Iran, living by herself in Central Europe with essentially no local connections, would become a drug dealer to her classmates, and on top of that somehow be let off the hook for it by the headmaster, stretches credibility a little bit.
Idk, I didn’t read this book. But I lived a similar version of that reality in a conservative southern US town. My home life was challenging. I sold drugs and generally was a rebellious troublesome teenager. All the officials in my school and local law enforcement gave me kind slaps on the wrist compared to what they could/should have. I had to assume they were trying to get me to a point of adulthood without having life ruining consequences weighing me down. I straightened up by around 17-18 but there were certainly a few times between 14-17 I could have been charged for adult felony crimes and was let off the hook, never even spent a night in a juvenile detention facility but I was made to flush a lot of drugs down some toilets a time or two. I think it used to be more common to let kids figure things out for themselves. I don’t think the similar levels of leniency would occur, it’s all zero tolerance.
The lenience you enjoyed presumably resulted in problems or harm for others.
I got a few breaks as well as a kid too. I think teenage boys end up being a community investment and people are cleaning up broken windows, stolen cars, graffiti, and worse as we hope the kids grow up.
Has there been any study that analyses the frequency of natural death of one shortly after death of his/her partner. How different is that compared to what one would expect considering mortality curves based on age and health.
One of the most surprising things about the movie was how precisely it captured the artistic intent of the book. A serious achievement by those animators.
"Marjane Satrapi died of sadness a little over a year after the death of Mattias Ripa, her husband and the love of her life"
The simple humanity in this candid description brought a small tear to my eyes. I'd say that the classical approach to this is a dry, clinical description of a depression stage, or a description of a how and not a why. Very welcomed in the age of AI slop!
The graphic novel was very good, showing what Iran must have felt like to iranians before the revolution, and the sadness at having lost that way of life. I highly recommend reading it.
Did you ever notice you almost never read anything good about Iran?
This isn't a fringe conspiracy. There's substantial documentation and well-sourced evidence - verifiable institutional actors with control over media outlets, public figures, and politicians -pointing to a systematic, decades-long negative framing of Iran. 70+ years, traceable to the CIA/MI6 coup of 1953 that overthrew Iran's democratically elected government to protect Western oil interests.
The pattern is consistent: nuclear weapons, terrorists, bad regime, and so on. Iran has genuine human rights problems that deserve scrutiny. But so do Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt - US allies that receive a tiny fraction of the negative coverage Iran has received.
The asymmetry is the tell.
A quote from Marjane:
"The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk together and we understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you.
And our governments are very much the same."
Marjane opposed the Shah.
Marjane opposed the theocratic regime.
Marjane opposed what the West had done/was doing to Iran. Repeatedly, consistently.
I don't know what she would have said about this current war, I'm safely assuming she would almost certainly have opposed it. However I guess she would have been criticising both the Iranian government's conduct and the Western aggression driving it.
To me, that's a mark of someone who was actually telling the truth.
RIP
EDIT:
Marjane became inconvenient to both sides - this is what happens in our world when you don't uncritically and simplistically stick to one side bad or one side good, instead of using your brain to find the flaws, the hypocrisies, in both sides. This world has more than one "bad guy", and people really don't like hearing that.
Persepolis made her unwelcome in Iran for obvious reasons - she depicted the Islamic Republic honestly, including the repression, the executions, the hypocrisy of the ruling class. But she also became uncomfortable for Western audiences who wanted a clean "Iran bad, West good" narrative, because she didn't deliver that.
>Did you ever notice you almost never read anything good about Iran?
You can read plenty of good about Iran if you read something other than geopolitical news. It's a very interesting country with an incredibly interesting history and language. The news is a pretty poor source for much of anything except for "events are happening" or "politicians have an agenda in [area]" -- I don't mean to belittle those. Both of those matter, but really no one should consider the news to provide thorough treatment for any large topic.
Agreed, and there really is nothing positive to say about the modern-day Iranian government. The Persian culture has not been fully stamped out, though, and I think there is a lot of good there even if proper regime change may not be realistic.
I have had the privilege and pleasure to work with some great engineers and scientists from Iran. Same with Turkey, and of course India, and so many other places in the world. People are individuals, no matter where they are from.
I do recognize that the type of person who I might encounter in the workplace is an educated, accomplished, English-speaking person who has likely gone through cultural adjustments to operate in an American workplace. So there’s a filter there.
But when you get to know people, especially when they talk about their family and childhood, the idea that a nation is full of bad people full of hate is just laughable.
I believe there is a qualitative difference between the governing systems in the west and a place where there are seven official allowed haircuts for men, aside from other things.
I believe there is a qualitative difference between the governing systems in a country that tries to regulate personal appearances, and one that would shift it's military to the other side of the planet, bombing and murdering Iranian school children and civilians en-masse for no particular reason.
I also believe that your claim of seven "official allowed" haircuts is bs, as with almost everything I ever read about Iran.
Source: I see that Tehrani men have the same variety of haircuts and facial hair styles as in any other city on the planet.
> and one that would shift it's military to the other side of the planet to bomb and murder Iranian school children and civilians en-masse for no particular reason.
It didn't send its military for that reason, if that helps.
If you talked with actual Iranians or people who've been in Iran, they would corroborate what I said. The IRGC truly aims to control every aspect of people's lives - it's less pronounced in places like Tehran, but it's definitely there.
Hell, if you read Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis, you would find plenty of similar examples. The haircuts are just the cherry on top of that authoritarian cake.
Also, the west is not just the US. Trump failed to find anyone willing to join him in his military adventures.
And yet, you think that Tehrani's are somehow different in their haircut styles compared to other places in Iran?
I can tell you about nuances you won't read anywhere. Like, many Tehrani's obviously derive a lot of their fashion/styling sense from Shirazi's (whether they like to admit it or not). Indeed, I've spent more time in Shiraz than Tehran. So many good times in Esfahan, Yazd, Kashan, Tabriz, Zanjan, and countless others. I've travelled around the Kurdish region, to the Caspian Sea, and to the Persian Gulf. I honestly could not count the number of times I've visited, and each visit was between one and six months. Not working - just enjoying Iran and getting to know the place and it's people, over a period of more than a decade (up until recently).
I have a "VIP" card from a Mullah at Qom, who was present as a young man when Khomeini was giving pre-revolution speeches. I've been places almost zero (possibly zero) foreigners have been for many decades. I've been drunk inside speak-easies in small towns. I've been inside the tomb of Xerxes I - not even local professors get to do that, ever. I've had to organise access to specific sites with the IRGC. I've seen more of Iran than almost all Iranians. I've had my own apartment, and I have a reasonable level of Farsi.
Just think how many "actual iranians" I would need to have spoken with - in Iran - to make these things possible in my life. Not just passing conversations - dinners, family events, long cafe chats, I've even been invited on family vacations.
But, you read a book, spout disinformation about "official" haircuts, and now you double down it.
A few of my friends went there and I talked with a few Iranias whose families moved out. Yeah, the people are welcoming and you can have an amazing experience there, but it's still a theocratic regime. All the things you did happened because those who want to control everyone simply can't be everywhere at all times.
You don't see people in the west getting the death penalty for their political activity like you do in Iran.
My country also tried to interfere with people's private lives decades ago, but fortunately that system collapsed.
You can't make the argument that the common person enjoys the same freedom in Iran as they do in the west.
> EDIT: I have been shadowbanned, again, by HN. I check this by opening this thread in a private tab, not logged in, and notice my most recent comment is not visible.
> I wasn't personally insulting nor aggressive in any comment I have made. I didn't spread disinformation. This thread is inherently political by nature, and I have been objective.
> It just goes to show, even here on HN, if you don't stick to the "THIS SIDE GOOD THAT SIDE BAD" narrative, your voice WILL be restricted.
> Again, RIP Marjane, you taught me a lot about Iran and the world.
You're not shadow banned, but comments peddling objectively false conspiracy theories and whining about downvoting do not play well here.
> Born Nov. 22, 1969, in Rasht, Iran, and grew up in Tehran. Sent to live in Austria at 14 during the Iran-Iraq war. Returned to Iran after her high school years and attended art school in Tehran.
> Left Iran for Europe again at 24 and continued her art studies in Strasbourg, France.
> Now lives in Paris as a French citizen. Since publishing "Persepolis," has not been back to Iran.
There were two large exile groups subsequent to the Iranian revolution: France and Albania. MEK has a large presence in both. I don't know enough of the history to say whether France was chosen because there was _already_ an affinity or not, but interestingly "merci" is one of the common ways to say "thank you" in Persian.
I guess kind of like Gabriel Garcia and Mexico, though I don't think Columbians would like anyone to describe him as having been Mexican (ex as Mexican-Columbian) in any way though he lived there for the majority of his life and had become very well integrated into the elite circles of Mexico city -that said, he never renounced his Columbian citizenship and I think he also considered himself Columbian and not Mexican --which makes sense, he was not born there and none of his parents were from there.
France was historically very interested in the Near and Middle East, though colonially somewhat less successful than the UK; Napoleon sailed to Egypt in 1799, and later the French Republic protected Lebanese and Syrian Christians, up to some point in history. People from the Levant still like to study in France (incl. Nassim Nicholas Taleb). Hence, France is considered a strong and culturally developed country in the region.
And unlike the UK and US, they had no historic bad blood with Iran (Mossadegh et al.)
I always enjoyed the first half of Persepolis. Told from Satrapi's perspective, it was a very relatable story about a young child who was swept up by the world events around her, and tried to rebel in very normal, child-like ways. It was very relatable in that abstract sense, even if most of us have not been through a violent revolution. (and even more violent subsequent war with a neighboring state)
The second half of Persepolis was much more difficult for me, and I never know how to feel about it. I think above all else Satrapi deserves a lot of credit for describing herself realistically rather than trying to paint herself as a good person. (not that she was a bad person, but that she didn't shy away from parts of the story that show her in a poor light) I have a lot of respect for her honesty in the second half of the story, however her time in exile in Europe seemed to be one of self-indulgence, meandering, and minor self-destruction. All of which are understandable for someone who has been through such a traumatic turn of events, however it was a bit sad that the young, rebellious child that was so likable did not seem to survive the conflict.
Do all stories need to be of virtue and success?
It seems like you're disappointed it wasn't a modern "noble savage" myth, that it was realistic instead of a fairy tale about a person coming from a bad place to a good place and being happy, wholesome, and free.
This kind of mythology is a pretty big problem in the western world right now as is the kneejerk reaction to it.
That’s a rather uncharitable take on what the poster you’re responding to wrote.
I read Persepolis a few years ago, and it’s hard not to come away with a similar impression. The first part often does resemble a fairy tale of sorts, while the second part is a pretty dark story of teenage alienation. The contrast is jarring, and it goes well beyond “duh nobody’s perfect”.
Both parts are excellent in their own right, and quite unlike any other book I’ve read, but there is indeed something strange going on in part 2. Most readers will remember this, I think.
What's jarring to many people is it isn't the three act hero's journey of a noble savage. The "something" going on is that it isn't a copy of just about the only narrative in western mythos:
1. Departure - from a humble background the subject leaves amid struggle
2. Growth and Initiation - the subject discovers who they are building themselves into the hero they'll become
3. Heroic Return - the now hero makes a return to their beginnings to great success
Instead, Persepolis is a much more realistic story and each act is around three very different kinds of strife experienced by our hero and only in the very end a kind of coda where things go well.
My criticism of the criticism is that Persepolis is tremendously more realistic than the hero's journey and people are jarred by it because it doesn't represent their imagination of what real world struggle is like, the fact that it upsets people is one of those deep core societal issues because of the wrongness of the lens people see the world through.
I think you make a fine analysis, but I would just offer that real life can be quite jarring and uncomfortable. So a story which paints a very real picture of life (rather than constructing a narrative) might just be unpleasant. I don't think her story is poorly written, and I think it is quite memorable.
For reference, I also really enjoyed the Catcher in the Rye, and there are some superficial similarities: a young person is scarred by events in their lives and succumbs to depression. (there are a myriad of differences between the two stories -- I'm not drawing an equivalence, just making one comparison)
Catcher in the Rye is probably best read as an angry teenager: you meet Holden Caufield and he's witty, cynical, funny, defiant, etc. You might fall in love with the character, but what you ultimately learn is that he's a miserable failure; he lost the battle with his depression and so many of the people he was cutting down were just normal, decent people trying to enjoy their lives.
Crucially, we never meet Holden when he is young, bright eyed, and innocent. The narrative structure shows us who he is right away, and we the reader learn that this is actually quite a bad thing throughout the course of the story.
Persepolis works a bit differently: we spend the first half of the book with innocent, bright-eyed Marjane and we fall in love with that character. The character we fall in love with is taken from us by the events of the story, by living unsupervised in exile, etc. It's nothing but sad. It's well-written, it's very memorable, but I don't think there's anything wrong with feeling unhappy about an unhappy turn of events.
> So a story which paints a very real picture of life (rather than constructing a narrative) might just be unpleasant.
May be, but to someone going through similar life experiences an honest story might give their internal emotions some validation. Art can do wonders in that "I am not the only one" aspect.
Persepolis absolutely DOES use the “hero’s journey” narrative archetype you’re claiming it avoids. The second part even ends by explicitly stating that she has grown into a different person, and is now ready to “face the world” when she leaves her family for the second time.
Indeed, the story is quite Western overall, which is perhaps unsurprising, given that the author had already been living in the West for over a decade when she wrote it.
I’ve always wondered how much of the second part is truth and how much is fiction. That a teenage girl from Iran, living by herself in Central Europe with essentially no local connections, would become a drug dealer to her classmates, and on top of that somehow be let off the hook for it by the headmaster, stretches credibility a little bit.
Idk, I didn’t read this book. But I lived a similar version of that reality in a conservative southern US town. My home life was challenging. I sold drugs and generally was a rebellious troublesome teenager. All the officials in my school and local law enforcement gave me kind slaps on the wrist compared to what they could/should have. I had to assume they were trying to get me to a point of adulthood without having life ruining consequences weighing me down. I straightened up by around 17-18 but there were certainly a few times between 14-17 I could have been charged for adult felony crimes and was let off the hook, never even spent a night in a juvenile detention facility but I was made to flush a lot of drugs down some toilets a time or two. I think it used to be more common to let kids figure things out for themselves. I don’t think the similar levels of leniency would occur, it’s all zero tolerance.
The lenience you enjoyed presumably resulted in problems or harm for others.
I got a few breaks as well as a kid too. I think teenage boys end up being a community investment and people are cleaning up broken windows, stolen cars, graffiti, and worse as we hope the kids grow up.
I've personally encountered some stories that were pretty much exactly that.
Vulnerable young people becoming low level drug dealers (often for lack of other options) isn't exactly a rare story.
For some reason immigrant drug dealers in Europe doesn't really strain credulity very much.
This was a very different era, and the author belonged to the educated elite of Iran. Hardly comparable to whatever you’re referring to.
Has there been any study that analyses the frequency of natural death of one shortly after death of his/her partner. How different is that compared to what one would expect considering mortality curves based on age and health.
Does it say what happened?
Died of sadness did make me wonder about something self inflicted.
Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widowhood_effect
Died of "sadness" ... that's incredibly sad. I mean, I know it's possible, but it seems so surreal to hear.
It's incomplete without the rest of the sentence: "a little over a year after the death of Mattias Ripa, her husband and the love of her life"
Grief is not just metaphorical, severe bereavement can affect health in very real ways.
The movie was really beautifully done and I've wanted to read the book itself. Rest in peace.
I didn't realize there was a movie. Thanks for posting so I can check it out.
I will second, the graphic novel is excellent. Up there with Maus in terms of showing you a new perspective.
The book is beautiful too, I recommend it.
One of the most surprising things about the movie was how precisely it captured the artistic intent of the book. A serious achievement by those animators.
Persepolis was really good, read it a few years ago. really recommended
"Marjane Satrapi died of sadness a little over a year after the death of Mattias Ripa, her husband and the love of her life"
The simple humanity in this candid description brought a small tear to my eyes. I'd say that the classical approach to this is a dry, clinical description of a depression stage, or a description of a how and not a why. Very welcomed in the age of AI slop!
The graphic novel was very good, showing what Iran must have felt like to iranians before the revolution, and the sadness at having lost that way of life. I highly recommend reading it.
At least to the kind of Iranians who were sending their children to French schools, yes.
But of course the other kind of people very rarely have someone writing international bestsellers on their behalf, so this is all we’ll get.
Did you ever notice you almost never read anything good about Iran?
This isn't a fringe conspiracy. There's substantial documentation and well-sourced evidence - verifiable institutional actors with control over media outlets, public figures, and politicians -pointing to a systematic, decades-long negative framing of Iran. 70+ years, traceable to the CIA/MI6 coup of 1953 that overthrew Iran's democratically elected government to protect Western oil interests.
The pattern is consistent: nuclear weapons, terrorists, bad regime, and so on. Iran has genuine human rights problems that deserve scrutiny. But so do Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Egypt - US allies that receive a tiny fraction of the negative coverage Iran has received.
The asymmetry is the tell.
A quote from Marjane:
"The world is not divided between East and West. You are American, I am Iranian, we don't know each other, but we talk together and we understand each other perfectly. The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you.
And our governments are very much the same."
Marjane opposed the Shah.
Marjane opposed the theocratic regime.
Marjane opposed what the West had done/was doing to Iran. Repeatedly, consistently.
I don't know what she would have said about this current war, I'm safely assuming she would almost certainly have opposed it. However I guess she would have been criticising both the Iranian government's conduct and the Western aggression driving it.
To me, that's a mark of someone who was actually telling the truth.
RIP
EDIT:
Marjane became inconvenient to both sides - this is what happens in our world when you don't uncritically and simplistically stick to one side bad or one side good, instead of using your brain to find the flaws, the hypocrisies, in both sides. This world has more than one "bad guy", and people really don't like hearing that.
Persepolis made her unwelcome in Iran for obvious reasons - she depicted the Islamic Republic honestly, including the repression, the executions, the hypocrisy of the ruling class. But she also became uncomfortable for Western audiences who wanted a clean "Iran bad, West good" narrative, because she didn't deliver that.
>Did you ever notice you almost never read anything good about Iran?
You can read plenty of good about Iran if you read something other than geopolitical news. It's a very interesting country with an incredibly interesting history and language. The news is a pretty poor source for much of anything except for "events are happening" or "politicians have an agenda in [area]" -- I don't mean to belittle those. Both of those matter, but really no one should consider the news to provide thorough treatment for any large topic.
I have spent half of the last decade or so on the ground in Iran. You're right the "news" is a very poor source for much of anything about Iran.
I think this is talking about the hyper-oppressive, aggressive government of modern-day Iran, and not how it was pre-Islamic rule.
Agreed, and there really is nothing positive to say about the modern-day Iranian government. The Persian culture has not been fully stamped out, though, and I think there is a lot of good there even if proper regime change may not be realistic.
I'm part of a small forum that has a very world-wide audience.
It's always a joy to talk shop with a guy in England, a guy in Iran, and a guy in Poland in the same thread.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirrors_of_the_Unseen
> Mirrors of the Unseen: Journeys in Iran (2006) is a travel book written by British travel writer Jason Elliot.
And a fascinating history of mathematics as well.
I have had the privilege and pleasure to work with some great engineers and scientists from Iran. Same with Turkey, and of course India, and so many other places in the world. People are individuals, no matter where they are from.
I do recognize that the type of person who I might encounter in the workplace is an educated, accomplished, English-speaking person who has likely gone through cultural adjustments to operate in an American workplace. So there’s a filter there.
But when you get to know people, especially when they talk about their family and childhood, the idea that a nation is full of bad people full of hate is just laughable.
There have been fairly recent descriptions of the kinds of Iranian architecture that provide passive cooling in hot weather.
I believe there is a qualitative difference between the governing systems in the west and a place where there are seven official allowed haircuts for men, aside from other things.
I believe there is a qualitative difference between the governing systems in a country that tries to regulate personal appearances, and one that would shift it's military to the other side of the planet, bombing and murdering Iranian school children and civilians en-masse for no particular reason.
I also believe that your claim of seven "official allowed" haircuts is bs, as with almost everything I ever read about Iran.
Source: I see that Tehrani men have the same variety of haircuts and facial hair styles as in any other city on the planet.
> and one that would shift it's military to the other side of the planet to bomb and murder Iranian school children and civilians en-masse for no particular reason.
It didn't send its military for that reason, if that helps.
If you talked with actual Iranians or people who've been in Iran, they would corroborate what I said. The IRGC truly aims to control every aspect of people's lives - it's less pronounced in places like Tehran, but it's definitely there.
Hell, if you read Marjane Satrapi's Persepolis, you would find plenty of similar examples. The haircuts are just the cherry on top of that authoritarian cake.
Also, the west is not just the US. Trump failed to find anyone willing to join him in his military adventures.
Oh, so you read a book? That's wonderful.
And yet, you think that Tehrani's are somehow different in their haircut styles compared to other places in Iran?
I can tell you about nuances you won't read anywhere. Like, many Tehrani's obviously derive a lot of their fashion/styling sense from Shirazi's (whether they like to admit it or not). Indeed, I've spent more time in Shiraz than Tehran. So many good times in Esfahan, Yazd, Kashan, Tabriz, Zanjan, and countless others. I've travelled around the Kurdish region, to the Caspian Sea, and to the Persian Gulf. I honestly could not count the number of times I've visited, and each visit was between one and six months. Not working - just enjoying Iran and getting to know the place and it's people, over a period of more than a decade (up until recently).
I have a "VIP" card from a Mullah at Qom, who was present as a young man when Khomeini was giving pre-revolution speeches. I've been places almost zero (possibly zero) foreigners have been for many decades. I've been drunk inside speak-easies in small towns. I've been inside the tomb of Xerxes I - not even local professors get to do that, ever. I've had to organise access to specific sites with the IRGC. I've seen more of Iran than almost all Iranians. I've had my own apartment, and I have a reasonable level of Farsi.
Just think how many "actual iranians" I would need to have spoken with - in Iran - to make these things possible in my life. Not just passing conversations - dinners, family events, long cafe chats, I've even been invited on family vacations.
But, you read a book, spout disinformation about "official" haircuts, and now you double down it.
The haircuts were an official announcement from the Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance:
https://www.bbc.com/news/10527088
And it didn't stop here:
https://www.bbc.com/news/newsbeat-32587418
A few of my friends went there and I talked with a few Iranias whose families moved out. Yeah, the people are welcoming and you can have an amazing experience there, but it's still a theocratic regime. All the things you did happened because those who want to control everyone simply can't be everywhere at all times.
You don't see people in the west getting the death penalty for their political activity like you do in Iran.
My country also tried to interfere with people's private lives decades ago, but fortunately that system collapsed.
You can't make the argument that the common person enjoys the same freedom in Iran as they do in the west.
pff join the club
> EDIT: I have been shadowbanned, again, by HN. I check this by opening this thread in a private tab, not logged in, and notice my most recent comment is not visible.
> I wasn't personally insulting nor aggressive in any comment I have made. I didn't spread disinformation. This thread is inherently political by nature, and I have been objective.
> It just goes to show, even here on HN, if you don't stick to the "THIS SIDE GOOD THAT SIDE BAD" narrative, your voice WILL be restricted.
> Again, RIP Marjane, you taught me a lot about Iran and the world.
You're not shadow banned, but comments peddling objectively false conspiracy theories and whining about downvoting do not play well here.
I don't see you shadow banned.
But complaining about upvotes and moderation is bad decorum and will get you downvoted out.
What's the connection with France?
Even Khomeini was in exile in France until the shah was deposed.
> Born Nov. 22, 1969, in Rasht, Iran, and grew up in Tehran. Sent to live in Austria at 14 during the Iran-Iraq war. Returned to Iran after her high school years and attended art school in Tehran.
> Left Iran for Europe again at 24 and continued her art studies in Strasbourg, France.
> Now lives in Paris as a French citizen. Since publishing "Persepolis," has not been back to Iran.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/0...
There were two large exile groups subsequent to the Iranian revolution: France and Albania. MEK has a large presence in both. I don't know enough of the history to say whether France was chosen because there was _already_ an affinity or not, but interestingly "merci" is one of the common ways to say "thank you" in Persian.
That she's French-Iranian?
It says so right in the title so I may have misunderstood your question.
I guess kind of like Gabriel Garcia and Mexico, though I don't think Columbians would like anyone to describe him as having been Mexican (ex as Mexican-Columbian) in any way though he lived there for the majority of his life and had become very well integrated into the elite circles of Mexico city -that said, he never renounced his Columbian citizenship and I think he also considered himself Columbian and not Mexican --which makes sense, he was not born there and none of his parents were from there.
France was historically very interested in the Near and Middle East, though colonially somewhat less successful than the UK; Napoleon sailed to Egypt in 1799, and later the French Republic protected Lebanese and Syrian Christians, up to some point in history. People from the Levant still like to study in France (incl. Nassim Nicholas Taleb). Hence, France is considered a strong and culturally developed country in the region.
And unlike the UK and US, they had no historic bad blood with Iran (Mossadegh et al.)
And French is still language of educated class in some places in Levant, esp. Liban.
When I lived in Tehran in the late '70s people said "merci" to express thanks.
Armenia as well
yup. shnorhakalutyun is a bit of mouthful :)
They still do.
A more recent influence came from the Sykes-Picot Agreement [1].
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sykes%E2%80%93Picot_Agreement
Yes, but there are more. For example, French engineers built the Suez Canal.