As a person who loves to draw, I’m really
fascinated by the art style of Persepolis.
It’s simplistic, sacrificing a lot details for a more abstract but at the
same time straightforward depiction of scenes. The art is relatively clean: no
fancy color schemes (actually about as far from that as you can get), not much
shading or texture. And yet, everything is distinct and bold enough that you
can distinguish different characters with relative ease. So how does this
artistic style translate over to something such as blood and gore?
In class we’ve already gone over
some of the “violent” imagery in Persepolis. Main thing that comes to mind
being the POW being tortured. Iron on the back, whipping, with the “highlight”,
though I hesitate to use that word, being the dismembered body of the poor
fellow. It’s a far cry from your Sunday Garfield comic. But at the same time, I’m
not sure if we can really call it graphic either in the realm of graphic novels.
Anyone who’s read the Walking Dead comics
or Marvel Zombies for example will
know what I’m getting at. That stuff
is almost infinitely more detailed in its carnage: full color guts and
everything, going into the nitty-gritty details of every drop of blood and
whatnot.
And yet, something about Persepolis’
simplicity actually seems to amplify the message of what the pictures are
trying to depict. It really cuts into the “fear” motif that the book is trying
to convey, almost like such a gruesome image can’t fully be comprehended by a
child as young as Marjane so her brain is trying its best to make an image to
fit. Since that portion of the story is coming from 10-year-old Marji, it would
be a little bit odd to be depicted a fully “fleshed out” mutilated body, pun actually
not intended. No, Marji just shows what almost looks like a yet to be assembled
mannequin, but the message and the undertone of gruesomeness gets across fine.
Interesting to note as a person who has always liked drawing every single
detail I see, maybe it’s more effective to take the simpler route sometimes.
It definitely makes sense that her depiction of violence is simplified because she is a child. It will be interesting to see if as she matures, her depiction of violence becomes more intense also.
ReplyDeleteI agree that this book is not very gory compared to a lot of other things despite the violence that reoccurs, and I have to remind myself that in this story, I am seeing the world through Marji’s eyes. I often forget that Marji’s is young because of her maturity, but she’s still a kid, and like you said, to her, these images may be the most gruesome way she can depict these scenes.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed reading your post, you brought an interesting outlook talking about the artistic style of the drawings. I do agree that the simplicity of the drawings actually do amplify the message of what the pictures are trying to depict.
ReplyDeleteI think there's some point in the simplification of drawings where you stop seeing things as trying to depict things accurately so much as represent things accurately. When Marjane's drawings are so conspicuously abstract, you're almost forced to read into it more carefully than if you just got a face full of dripping gore. Less is more, and all that. And the amount of work you have to put in to understand the implications just adds to how invested you are in the psychological effects, or something.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree with you on this one! Marji's trying to get across the concept of using household items to use as torture -- not how the skin fries up and shrivels. Besides, she didn't see the torture (thank the lord) herself, so it wouldn't make any sense for her to show how the guts were spewing out when he was dismembered -- in fact, I'd go so far to say that's lying.
ReplyDelete