Conflict in Satrapi's "Persepolis" and Miller's "A View from the Bridge"

Written under test conditions in class, IB SL English Literature

‘Persepolis’ by Marjane Satrapi is a memoir in the form of a graphic novel that details her childhood under an oppressive Iranian regime. ‘A View from the Bridge’ by Arthur Miller is a play modelled after a Greek tragedy in which Eddie Carbone’s love for his niece is exposed as being excessive when his wife’s cousins emigrate from Italy to find work.

Conflict is a fundamental feature in each of these works, but its importance to the story is distinct. That is, in ‘Persepolis’, the conflict is a backdrop to the story. A key theme in the book is the way that childhoods are destroyed in the context of war, as children have to grow up at an accelerated pace, else their naivety will be taken advantage of – as when young boys, predominantly lower class, were given a key, which they were told would enable them to get into paradise should they die at war.

Whilst, then, the conflict is crucial to this story a and s the context in which the focus of the book (Marjane’s childhood years), it is itself the central focus of ‘A View from the Bridge’. In this play, Alfieri – a narrator who is also a character – tells us of Eddie Carbone that he had never expected to have a fate. Rather, he had suspected that he would simply work look after his family and go bowling, till the day he died. In this counterfactual, there is of course, no story. It is the arrival of Beatrice’s cousins, Marco and Rodolpho, and the relationship that blossoms between the latter and Eddie’s niece, Catherine, that triggers the events depicted. 

Arguably, such a counterfactual is not possible, because conflict is a part of human nature. The reason that a story might not be possible without conflict is that it is inevitable in all walks of life – it is first a question of scale and of happenstance.

For example, in ‘A View from the Bridge’, even before the cousins arrive, we see seeds of conflict being sewn. In one of the very first scenes of the play, Eddie chastises Catherine for the length of her skirt, appearing to be fiercely protective of her, and not wanting her to be ogled by men. In his words, she is ‘walkin’ wavy’ – he places the blame on her for allowing, in Eddie’s view, herself to be looked upon by men. This interaction shows how conflict is indelibly a part of the human condition. Eddie, who has raised Catherine, has a set of preferences about how she should act that are at odds with her own views. The situation is exacerbated when she reveals she has been offered a job as a stenographer, and he is reluctant to let her take it, and immediately guilt trips her upon acquiescing, anticipating her withdrawal from his life, and the slow but sure dwindling of the frequency of her visits when she leaves home. Hence, in the play, Miller does an excellent job of showing how natural and inevitable interpersonal conflicts are, and hence demonstrates that a story needs conflict.

The origin of the conflict depicted in Persepolis, by contrast, is fundamentally political rather than interpersonal. It is the top-down, authoritarian imposition of rules that are at odds with the values of many citizens that is objectionable. For instance, a key theme in the novel is the veil, which the Shah demands all women must wear. It is a source of confusion to Satrapi and her classmates however, who initially treat it with irreverence, and as a plaything. Hence the story shows the transition from such ignorance and naivety to a hastily matured adolescence, with all the perils and new conflicts that such change brings. Another distinction that is later drawn is between the ‘Traditional’ and the ‘Modern’ woman. The former keeps her appearance in strict accordance with the wants of the regime, whilst the latter engages in small acts of rebellion, tiny enough not to land her in trouble, but enough to exhibit her contempt. Throughout the book it transpires that Satrapi’s neighbours would often fit in with the former mould, seemingly out of conviction rather than fear. This draws divides in society, as Satrapi’s mother and others try to be free when they can, and paying the price for it from time to time, as when a police officer traumatises her mother by assaulting her and throwing profanity at her. Hence in Persepolis, political conflict causes understanding, autonomous individuals to choose their allegiances, thus instantiating the large-scale conflict in their own microcosms. Perhaps children alone are immune to this, but even they must grow and succumb to that pressure.

It should be stressed that this is not too dissimilar from Miller’s ‘A View from the Bridge’, thought it has been presented as a contrast. When Eddie’s incestuous impulses for Catherine become apparent as his overprotective turns to raging jealousy over her relationship with Rodolpho, Alfieri warns him that even those who take his side (over his accusations that Rodolpho ‘ain’t right’ – an implicit allegation of his homosexuality) will never speak to him. He has no recourse in the law, he is told, and so he calls the Immigration Bureau as a last resort, to get Marco and Rodolpho deported; and this represents the culmination of a conflict between Eddie and Marco, on a larger scale than anything else in this play. This conflict had been brewing, as Act 1 (of two) ends with Marco triumphantly lifting a heavy chair over Eddie’s head, that he had failed to lift off the floor. When the cousins are picked up by the authorities, therefore, Marco spits on Eddie in front of a crowd of spectators, accusing him of snitching, and so killing his children (for whom Marco had immigrated, to work and send them money). Herewith, the result is that just as in Persepolis, characters are forced to choose sides, breeding further conflicts and tensions. Beatrice is torn between Eddie’s refusal to let her see Catherine get married to Rodolpho, and her love for Catherine.

Again, this aspect of a high-level conflict that causes others to ‘take sides’, such that the conflict is played out in other scenarios, shows how conflict is necessary in telling a story. The story can now focus on the high-level conflict itself, as in ‘A View from the Bridge’, as outlined above, or its low-level instantiation, as in ‘Persepolis’, though both texts contain elements of both.

We might, however, try to make the case that although both stories have conflict, it is not necessary – perhaps it makes  a story more entertaining, but it is an incidental feature of literature.

Parts of Persepolis may lend themselves to such an argument. Although we must note that the conflict that is unfurling politically has a psychological impact on Marjane that is crucial, it may nonetheless be read as a ‘coming of age’ story, and thus could remain compelling even in the absence of the political troubles. For example, the cigarette is an important symbol in this book, as Marjane smoking it signifies that she is growing up beyond her years; and yet equally, may be seen as an immature sign of childish rebellion, which suggests that she is actually not ready to grow up. The way this is shown thematically is a demonstration of the juxtaposed inclinations of a child who cannot afford to be a child. And yet, one might argue, this sort of rebellion, a desire to be rid of childhood and old beyond one’s years, the irony of the childishness such actions betray; this is familiar even without conflict, and this key element of the story could be present, and persuasive, and compelling, and relatable regardless of surrounding. The account is autobiographical and so the conflict is an incidental matter-of-fact.

We might equivalently make the same argument with reference to ‘A View from the Bridge’. One might say that Marco’s struggle to find the money to feed his family, and his need to leave them for years to provide for them – representative of the struggle of many immigrants perhaps, is a compelling story with no need for conflict.

And yet this view misses the point in some important ways. In the first place, the latter example is intrinsically characterised by the conflict of the illegal immigrant and the immigration authorities. Second, conflict is a broad term: it is not overextending the term to note that the difficulty is brought about by a conflict with poverty and one’s (Marco’s) environment and job market. More broadly the statement that is the subject of this essay is about ‘stories’, rather than mere ‘accounts’.

The latter may simply articulate a series of causes and effects. It may culminate in ‘displacement’, but this should be contrasted with true ‘change’. A journal is not a story (at least, not inherently), though events happen. To be a story, there must be a notable change, in character or environment, and the origin of these changes should be protreptic. Hence, a story imparts wisdom, and can teach us how we should or should not be. Literature holds templates on how we ought to conduct ourselves, and because it is narrative rather than propositional, can be intuitive and pedagogical.

We might then reflect on the nature of change, particularly in ‘Persepolis’ and ‘A View from the Bridge’. When a situation is in ‘steady-state’, so to speak, there are always tensions beneath the surface. There is, perhaps, a ‘potential violence’ term which needs to be accounted for, and conflict is the most likely catalyst that actualises that potential, as shown in the political turmoil in Iran that lead to the oppressive regime in ‘Persepolis’; or in the conflict between Eddie and Catherine, and later the cousins. As well as the catalyst, more conflict is also the resultant product (if chemical analogies may be tolerated). The nature of a story is that after a steady-state situation is changed, and underlying conflicts are exposed, we learn something of the human condition; then for a story to conclude, the conflict must be resolved for better or worse – as in ‘Persepolis’, when Satrapi flees Iran, or with Eddie’s death in ‘A View from the Bridge’.

Hence, conflict and conflict-resolution is indeed necessary in a story. The conclusion of this essay is that these works allow show it is true that you cannot write a story without conflict: a story contains conflict, in both senses of the word ‘contain’.

Result

Mark: 29/30