In the same way that Gloria Anzaldúa uses a mix of languages to give her readers a feeling of linguistic and contextual exclusion, Marjane Satrapi uses her medium of images as an inclusive means of communicating to any reader. As we discussed last week in class, Borderlands/La Frontera in a way excludes readers who don’t speak either Spanish or English. This linguistic setup reflects the main theme of the text, the portrayal of a rupture between cultures (and the formation of a hybrid culture within).
In a similar manner, Satrapi’s Persepolis creates a completely opposite atmosphere; it represents transnational discourse because she appeals to an over-inclusive audience through her own unique form. By formatting her novel in the form of comics, she relates her story through two universal languages: imagery and humor. The three-hundred plus pages of comic strips begins as the narrator (Satrapi herself) is a strong-willed child. Any reader can relate to the humorous shenanigans that the young girl gets into as she grows up during a constantly-evolving period in history. Satrapi’s objective in her graphic novel is to translate the experience of coming of age during the Islamic Revolution to her readers. She manages to achieve this goal through the first-person narrative because the perspective of the child is so relatable.
Though the issues of the Islamic Revolution in the Middle East are distinctly unique and separate from most cultural phenomena in the West, Satrapi nonetheless makes the plot a universal concern by involving the readers as though they experience it themselves. The novel was originally printed in French, but the actual text of the book is not what best conveys the story; even without being able to understand each written word, the reader would understand Persepolis because of Satrapi’s masterful use of universal communication. Just like a viewer watching a foreign film will still gain a new perspective on issues abroad, readers of Persepolis can take away the terror, injustice, pride, patriotism, and even quotidian nuances of daily life in Iran during the Islamic Revolution. The author’s means of communication is transnational in that is so comprehensible by any audience, that its language transcends national borders.
While I think your contrast between the exclusivity and inclusivity of language in both Anzaldúa and Satrapi is valid when it comes to the mixing of languages in Borderlands/La frontera and visual language in Persepolis, I also think the notion of “universality” in anything can and should be problematized. Anzaldúa seeks to create tension through her use of multiple languages, while in Persepolis the author strives for accessibility, however I would not argue for universal but Western accessibility. Humor most definitely aids in creating an approachable and intelligible experience for Western readers, as does the all too familiar comic/graphic novel genre, however her specific use of humor and visual language excludes some non-Western audiences as well. Furthermore, by bridging a so-called “third world” bildungsroman with “first world” readers, it could be argued that she further emphasizes this problematic binary relationship, one that Shohat seeks to break down in her article.