When Marjane Satrapi died a few weeks ago, I was asked to give an interview about it. I should point out that I didn't know her at all: I guess I was approached for comment because I was known to have done some cultural work involving women in Western Asia. The interview consisted of the journalist sending me written questions, to which I wrote my replies. The published version was made to look like there had been a conversation - a few snippets were quoted. There were comments that suggested I was saying Marjane supported the oppression of women in Iran, when nothing could be further from the truth! So I thought I would like to publish the full piece here.
What was the impact of Marjane Satrapi’s work?
When Persepolis came out, almost a quarter of a century ago now, it was a revelation. In its stark, clear imagery, its direct language and its alternation between episodes of comedy and pathos, this graphic auto-fiction found a completely new way to bring a global readership into direct relationship with this warm, wry and penetratingly intelligent Iranian woman. That overturned a lot of lazy, stereotypical, prejudiced thinking. Europeans and Americans like to construct the woman as victim, and the institutional oppression of women under regimes like the Taliban, Daesh and the Islamic Republic can easily compound that, leading to people talking about Islam as inherently sexist (which it is not), and about Western Asia as a “backward” or “barbaric” place, about people “living in the Middle Ages”. When you hear the voices of women who have lived under those regimes, and recognise their profound commitment to their people, their cultures and their sisters, the sheer depth of their humanity, the articulacy with which they express their ideas - then you start to understand that they are not being oppressed by anything culturally inherent in their societies, but by yet another right-wing patriarchal power grab.
President Macron said that Marjane Satrapi “turned an Iranian childhood into a universal tale”. On one level that seems nonsensical: her storytelling was very specifically rooted in a set of historical circumstances. But on another level he was kind of right: what she managed to do was to open up the Iranian context so that people who hadn’t experienced it could relate to it emotionally. On a human level.
Why is her loss a tragedy for Iran?
She was way too young to pass away. Only 56. And, as her family said, she died of sadness. Someone who had dealt with sorrow throughout her life had found love and happiness, and when the person she loved passed on, that was more than she could bear. That’s not only a tragedy for just one nation - it’s the tragic nature of humanity exemplified by one of its most beautiful, feeling voices.
Iran is dealing with tragedy on many levels at the moment. The regime that Marjane Satrapi so strongly opposed is still very much in place, and the illegal invasion by Israel and the United States is causing great suffering to the Iranian people. I find it astonishing that even after the Syrian refugee crisis, even after the Gaza genocide, there is still an over-riding narrative that the US and Israel are the good guys, and that they are closer to “us” in terms of values like democracy and freedom. Marjane Satrapi was one of the very rare people who had a platform from which to debunk that. One thing she said in an interview which really resonates with me was when she was asked for a message to the American people, and she emphasised that we should not mentally be dividing the world into countries, into cultures, into East and West. “The difference between you and your government is much bigger than the difference between you and me. And the difference between me and my government is much bigger than the difference between me and you. And our governments are very much the same.” The current moment is only showing us how true that is.
What is her legacy and what were her hopes for her country?
Her legacy is her life - not just as it was lived but as it was articulated, as it was drawn, dramatised and communicated. The way she moulded her life into a beautiful offering for the world. And through that, I hope she leaves a legacy of understanding. I hope people will revisit her writing and drawing and film-making now that she has left us, and feel close to her through what she has expressed. That way we can come closer to other Iranians too.
In terms of her hopes for her country - I think the phrase “Woman, Life, Freedom” encapsulates it pretty well. It’s striking that this phrase works so well in English - look at how “woman” and “freedom” half rhyme, echoing one another so that “life” cuts harshly through the centre with that intense individual “I”, like “knife” and “strife”. Last year I was working on a new play with another brilliant female Iranian artist, Sanam Naderi, who lives in Italy. I asked her to improvise a speech at a political rally, and she did most of it in a fearsome Persian, before suddenly switching to English and declaiming “Woman, Life, Freedom”. So this phrase is consciously addressed to a global audience, in the same way that the theatre of apartheid South Africa or the Civil Rights movement deliberately sought out international spaces. The Iranian regime won’t change because of the current illegal aggression, and it’s unlikely to change positively through a further revolution on the ground. What’s needed is a longer-term cultural shift, rooted in a public discourse, and that requires international dialogue. That’s something only the artists and the storytellers can do.












