It was a pleasant surprise to me to find Persepolis in my local library. I didn't know much about it at the time; I just remembered that it was recommended very highly at a teacher's conference I attended and was accompanied by the always enticing, "Oh, and it's been banned" remark. Apparently, at the time that I heard about it, there was a bit of a controversy going on in the Chicago Public Schools regarding the book. It was initially meant to be pulled from all classrooms and libraries, but the order was rescinded. There was also what seems to be an unofficial challenge at a school in Oregon where there was a heated argument at a school board meeting, but I found no further action in this district. Besides these two cases in the United States, the book is banned in Iran. Not surprising considering the content of the book and what little I know about Iran. The CIA Factbook lists Iran as a "theocratic republic" and I found a number of interesting charts online that are meant to explain the power structure of the country. I had, however, always understood the country to be essentially a dictatorship. This, combined with the information about the government from the book, make it pretty clear that freedom of speech is not acknowledged in this country.
It makes sense to me that a country would want to ban a book that so clearly shows how the citizens of their nation not only see through their attempted misdirection such as making them alter their own textbooks after the revolution, but that the common citizens and even children saw through it. Certainly some of the knowledge from the books comes from the adult author as opposed to the child narrator- something I teach my students is a hallmark of a memoir- but it requires a certain amount of awareness and observation in the child to be able to draw those conclusions and parallels as an adult. The insult of making the people themselves recreate and rewrite history is just another way of telling them, "See, there's nothing you can do. You can't prove life has been any different." A nice parallel with 1984 where Winston's job is to literally rewrite history.
For a country to ban a book because it speaks out against their faults makes me think of Katniss Everdeen- "It must be a fragile system if it can be brought down by a few berries." What the governments that ban books realize is the immense power that words have. What they miss, however, is that humans are intrigued by what is banned from us. In 120 Banned Books the authors often note the dramatic rise in sales that books enjoy after a book becomes controversial. For governments to instead allow free speech and essentially ignore the claims made by the authors would perhaps be a more difficult thing to do- humans also like to defend themselves- but would not lend so much credence and importance to those negative and/ or inflammatory comments. For instance, would The Interview have garnered such success and attention had North Korea not allegedly hacked into Sony and made threats against its release? The answer is almost certainly no. Now, not only is it almost a point of pride and a patriotic thing to show or watch the movie, but it will go down in American history, not just entertainment history.
