Individual oral sample: Persepolis and Boris Johnson

opinion column
The first text that I selected for this IO is Persepolis, which is a graphic novel written by
Marjane Satrapi. It’s also a memoir of her childhood during the Iranian Revolution, and the
selected chapter ‘The Veil’ is at the very beginning of the book and starts with the
consequences of the revolution, particularly how it affected Marjane personally. The second
text is an extract from Boris Johnson’s opinion column for The Telegraph, which is a right-
wing newspaper, and this article is his response to the recent burqa ban in Denmark. Both
texts address the global issue of gender equality, with a focus on the objectification and
dehumanization of women. Persepolis does so through the motif of the veil, which connects
to Johnson’s article as he reinforces its flaws. (0:49)

As Persepolis is a memoir written by Marjane herself, we get to see the story from her
perspective, which is why the reader understands that the veil is a motif for oppression
rather than its common interpretation as a symbol of modesty and religion. The first panel
introduces us to Marjane and sets the tone for the rest of the chapter. Through her facial
expressions, we can tell that she is unhappy, which is the only noticeable thing about her as
the veil obscures the rest of her features. This panel is positioned next to an image of her
classmates who are all presented in the same manner and the same sad expression. The
repeated pattern of the black veil and the white shirt represents the lack of individualism
that is generated by the veil. Additionally, it’s important to note that Marjane places herself
separate from her classmates, even going as far as to cut herself off from the second panel.
This implies that she feels detached from society despite the fact that she blends in. This is
contradictory to the symbol of the veil which is meant to represent conformity as Marjane
proves that even with it she stands out. (1:53)

Next, I’d like to look at the juxtaposition between the second panel on the first page and the
second panel on the second page. On the first page, we see Marjane’s class after the
revolution and on the second we see what it was like before. This juxtaposition allows the
reader to visually understand the extent of change caused by the revolution. On the second
page, before the revolution, we can see that everyone was an individual. They all seem to be
wearing similar clothing, however they each have identifying features which make them
unique. Also, we can tell that Marjane previously attended the co-educational school,
meaning she would have received the same education as her male counterparts. So after
the revolution, not only were the females segregated from the boys, but they were also
forced to wear the veil while the boys’ appearances remained unchanged. This is shown by
their absence in the second panel on the first page as this panel symbolises a loss of
individuality: something the boys had the privilege to avoid. Additionally, the veil presents a
physical boundary between the two genders as it represents the figurative obstacles women
must overcome in order to reach the same level as men. So by juxtaposing these two panels
Marjane is showing the reader quite effectively the literal gaps in gender equality. (3:22)

The last panel at the bottom of the first page is particularly powerful due to its relative size
in comparison to the others and because it puts an emphasis on the innocence of the
children. By drawing the girls playing with the veil as if it were a toy, Marjane conveys to the

© Angela Stancar Johnson and Colin Pierce 2021 Page 1 of 3

reader that they are rather naive as they don’t understand the true purpose of the veil, yet
Marjane is aware enough to understand that it isn’t something that she wants. This is
further reinforced by the white background of the veil as white is the colour commonly
associated with innocence. Furthermore, the white background makes the veil stand out
quite a bit, which draws the reader’s attention to it, once again reminding us of its
importance. (4:13)

Lastly, the panel in the bottom left-hand corner of the second page has an authority figure
as the central point. This panel follows the rule of three as we see the figure in the centre
with the boys standing as a physical barrier between the boys on the left and the girls on the
right. Therefore, the panel is split into three sections. We can tell by doing so that gender
segregation was a very strict rule that was going to be properly executed. Moreover, the
figure seems to be pointing an accusatory finger in the direction of the girls, which
represents how the rules are always a lot more restrictive for the girls and how easily people
go around blaming women as Marjane and her classmates didn’t do anything to warrant the
oppression. (5:06)

The second extract, Boris Johnson’s opinion column, presents the global issue in an
everyday context. Firstly, Johnson states that women who wear the burqa go around
looking like letterboxes on line 2. This is a rather crude simile as the comparison to an
inanimate object is an entire basis for objectification, which is seriously denigrating of
Muslim women. What makes this comment worse is the entitled tone Johnson maintains
throughout the article as it shows that he believes that he has the right to say such a thing
as he is a man. Johnson makes a further provocative comment, once again by using a simile
when he compares Muslim women to bank robbers on line 10. So this time Johnson is
equating women to criminals, which not only is incredibly unfair but also offensive to the
Islamic community who are currently battling a lot of Islamophobia given the recent
terrorist attacks. So by using these two similes Johnson is effectively demonstrating why
Marjane viewed the veil as a symbol of oppression. However, Johnson shows that it’s not
the veil that is the issue, but it’s rather the people who treat the women badly for wearing
it. (6:21)

Next, Johnson makes a reference to British politician Jack Straw, who asked women visiting
his constituency to consider uncovering their noses and mouths to allow for better
communication. This direct mention implies that Johnson views Straw as a role model of
sorts, particularly as they share similar opinions about the burqa. This is further enhanced
by the historical context as Straw himself was Foreign Secretary from 2001 to 2006, which
shows that Johnson seems to be following in his footsteps. So the very fact that these two
prominent members of Parliament share such dogmatic attitudes justifies Marjane’s fear of
the consequences of wearing the veil as these two men are asserting their dominance over
women simply for wearing odd bits of headgear, as described by Johnson on line 28. As
previously mentioned, Johnson maintains an entitled tone throughout the article, which is
really emphasized when he states, ‘It’s how we work’ on line 14. In this sentence, he takes
on a very matter-of-fact tone, which expresses his belief that he knows all. Furthermore, the
short syntax of the sentence reflects that there is little room for argument as Johnson is
simply stating the facts. It seems that in both Persepolis and Johnson’s article men are
portrayed in a bad light, which is to say they are presented as controlling and egoistic. (7:55)

© Angela Stancar Johnson and Colin Pierce 2021 Page 2 of 3

To conclude, both texts complement each other nicely as they offer different perspectives
on how gender inequality is created by the veil. Marjane, as a woman, demonstrates how
the veil objectifies women by taking away her personality and what makes her unique, and
Johnson does so by showing how people will objectify women simply for wearing the veil. So
in Persepolis the veil is vilified and made to seem as the source of female dehumanization;
however, it is also implied that society is at fault for attributing such power to the veil.
Johnson’s article is a testimony to this as he demonstrates exactly the sort of criticism
women receive from society for wearing the veil. Essentially, the central idea of these two
texts is that things only get as bad as you’re willing to let them, in this context it being that
gender inequality is only as extreme as a society allows it to be. (8:59)

© Angela Stancar Johnson and Colin Pierce 2021 Page 3 of 3