Knowing that some of our class members (myself included) did not get to read Persepolis in its entirety changes the way I now view the novel. I know that Part II is much more graphic and controversial. However, I have only read Part I and so that is the section this question refers to. That being said, I think one of the central themes in Persepolis is the pull between fighting for your country or leaving your country in search of a better life. People all over the world must make this choice every day. What do you feel you would do if you had to choose between staying in your increasingly dangerous country, protesting and fighting for your rights, or leaving in hopes of a better life somewhere else? What kinds of things would factor into your decision? Is one choice more honorable or noble? Why or why not?
I feel this is a hard question to wholly answer because no one truly knows what they are likely to do in a crisis situation until they are faced with the actual fears and threats of the situation. Speaking for right now I can say I feel I would likely choose to leave the dangerous situation if the few people closest to me could also leave with me in search of a better life else where. The most significant factors for me would be leaving loved ones and friends. I don't think I could ever leave my mother the way Marjane did, no matter what the circumstance. It would also be difficult to leave where I am from because I have such a strong connection to my sense of place-I would miss it terribly. It is hard to say if one choice is more honorable or nobel because it depends on the situation in the country and also what you plan to do if you are able to escape. Will you fight for freedom from the people of your country or human rights efforts or will you deny your roots and experiences? Personal conduct is central to the ideas of nobility and being honorable in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteStaying, protesting, and trying to make changes that address injustices are indeed noble acts but when people begin to die for these noble acts the scenario completely changes. Running then often becomes the only option. Staying alive (but not forgetting your roots and the suffering that is taking place in your homeland) could potentially lead to opportunities to make changes from afar. If a refugee seeks to find ways to do this, that is a noble act as well.
ReplyDeleteIf I was in that situation, especially if I had a family and a child, I would leave. There is no reason to raise a child in that type of environment. Some people would argue that staying and fighting would be more noble, but what about the ones you are supposed to protect? It just wouldn't be worth it. You can always bring your traditions with you where ever you go. Although if my family was not able to come with me.... then I don't know if I could or would be able to leave them.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a tough question to answer, because part of me would want to stay and fight for what I believe in, but in order to protect my family I would want to leave. It may be more noble to stay and fight, but I think most people would want to go so that their child could have a better life and future. As a parent, your strongest instinct is to protect your child and want what is best for them. How can your beliefs and traditions live on if you and your family are dead?
ReplyDelete