The other apartments relate to Jeffries and Lisa in an interesting way. One can see it as a reflection of Lisa’s heart. For example: Miss Torso exemplifies Lisa’s young wild heart yearning for Jeffries. Although, the display of interaction is somewhat off. Think about it, both are young and both are looking for love. Miss Lonely Heart symbolizes Lisa’s frustration and sadness when it comes to getting Jeffries’ attention. Throughout the film she unsuccessfully tries to convince him she wants to be in a steady relationship with him. She goes as far as trying to pack “light” for an evening. However, her desperation isn’t in the same vein as Miss Lonely Heart, but as Lisa becomes frustrated she delves herself into Jeffries work… Whether he likes it or not.

As for Jeffries; the composer and the Thorwalds are the neighbors he can compared to. Him and the composer are nearly identical. Both are incredibly dedicated to their jobs and yet being so heavily affects their social lives. As corny as it may sound, both men want their work to have value. Not monetary value, mind you, but rather someone. AS for the Thorwalds, the parallels between them and Jeffries and Lisa are apparent. One is frustrated and tired of the other due to their nagging and arguing.

As for the other neighbors, one can gather that Jeffries is wary of the outcome of being with Lisa and that the neighbors are a reflection of that. First off is the newlywed couple. Although in the honeymoon phase the two are eventually on camera once more, but it is show that the relationship is deteriorating. This is the one aspect Jeffries is afraid of. He does not want to be dragged down from settling down. The middle-aged couple with the dog also terrifies Jeffries. The mundane lifestyle is something he does not want from being a photographer who was always on the road.

It wasn’t until the climax and conclusion that Jeffries succumbed to the idea of settling down with Lisa. Although one can say he grew tired of watching a play from his window and finally chooses to
leave his theatre (the rear window) to live life again. As it may be that he and Lisa may become just like the neighbors in the apartment complex, he still has the time and option to avoid all of the outcomes. The complex and its inhabitants are an embodiment of all the fears and other emotions within him and Lisa regarding their relationship.

Glengarry Glen Ross

It would be easy to agree with the misogynistic side and go with it, but I want to try to go the other way. From how I see it, the women in the play hold all the cards (their influence). They give the boys in the office the illusion that they’re in control. Think about it; Mrs. Lingk (although not in the scene with Mr. Lingk and Roma) lets her husband have the impression of “wearing the pants” in their relationship, but ultimately orders her husband to head back and back out of the sale the very next day. He begins to plead and panic while in the office just so his wife can have her way (by extension this can be seen as though Mr. Lingk has no free will of his own). This can also be seen as the leverage Roma uses to go through with the deal since he has no personal input and solely relying on his wife’s. By taking a good look at Mr. Lingk’s mannerisms it can be safe to confirm the fact that his wife has complete control over him (even more evident when watching the film adaptation).

Even if Levene’s daughter isn’t real, he still knows how to play the cards. Since women control everything who says you can’t use that to your advantage when you’re a guy? We men would be complete losses if it weren’t for women. As it would seem to be an exploit of women… Levene pulling the “Daughter” card allows him to pull the strings to get better leads out of Williamson. However, this momentary advantage eventually backfires and leads to Levene’s eventual downfall.

When it comes to Levene’s “big sale” with the Nyborgs… Who says the Nyborgs’s crazy act of signing contracts they have no intention of paying for wasn’t Harriet Nybog’s idea? It is Levene’s own fault for not carefully doing his job. I do believe karma comes into play here. Not just him, but everyone in the office who desperately attempts to sell property in illegal manners will one day reap what he has sown. In this case, Levene got what he deserved after misleading person after person.

As the chain of events picks up speed I would be bold to say that Williamson, in a sense, is a woman who pulls the strings and catches Levene. I only say this because of Roma’s previous rant peaking when he called Williamson a “C***”. Picking up where Roma left off, Levene boasts that he knew Williamson lied was the one thing needed to ensnare the older gentleman. No fabrication about his daughter can gain the sympathy of his co-workers or the authorities this time; Shelley Levene was dealt a poor hand.

Persepolis

Top frame on page 102. The young boys dying with the “keys to Paradise” around their necks. So, so sad to see children die for a cause they did not understand. With war going on, the financially poor children did not know what to believe in anymore. This was taken advantage of as mentioned in the panels before it. This single large frame just shows how easily some are so willing to drag others into a conflict. Not a care in the world for the well-being of others. Nearly impoverished, the boys were willing to accept those lies fed to them in the shape of a key because anything was better than what they had then; virtually nothing. Also, it could also be seen as a form of ordered genocide. Well, the most of Iran the media pumps out is nothing in direct relation to the war back in the 1980s. All we see is political conflict and not… militarized conflict. Without researching we have no choice, but to accept Satrapi’s memoir as a historical record. Not to say it’s inaccurate or misleading. She remembers this event as a twelve-year old would then. If she were an adult then the perhaps this memoir would have been different. Generally speaking, a child is more innocent and less biased. So, it can be said that this depiction is accurate and instead of confirming or dispelling my preconceived notions about the conflict (considering I had none to begin with) it gives me one for a change.

Panels 2 through 4 on page 142. The significance can only be told through a sequence like this. Where Satrapi and her mother see the bracelet still attached to… Well, I’d rather not say. Their neighbor Neda.. Her death. Death is a very devastating thing. When I saw these panels I felt like I could rally connect. Everyone experiences the death of friends… Family… But it really doesn’t really hit you when you imagine the loss that comes with it. If America was war torn and neighborhoods were being destroyed the fear of the ones you love consumes you. Satrapi, I think, wants the readers to realize the natural occurrence of death is circumstantial. It really hit me hard when I let my imagination run wild and think if my family, my friends, or anyone I knew died from a missile attack. I had to stop reading for a good 30 minutes due to the scenario being not only scary, but traumatizing. Not to sound too political or anything of the sort, but safety within a country is taken for granted here. But “freedom” is too in a sense. America has enough artillery to glass the planet several times over (70 times last time I heard). I personally think we need to pull out and rely on our artillery to counter ICBMs. We need to focus on our internal affairs instead. Now I feel like I contradicted myself… Hrmm… oh well. Working on this at 5 am isn't a smart idea after all.

Throughout the novel it is unknown to what exactly Binx's search was. While there are hints here and there about the religious stage in Kierkegaard's Christian Existentialism, the ambiguity of an absolute answer seemed more like the theme itself. I say this because Binx's search was more like a midlife crisis than anything else. It was paradoxical of him to say he does not want to fall victim of "everydayness" malaise since he went with the motions of "everydayness" pretty often. This is close-minded denial at its best. It wasn't until part four that I've felt like I had a faint grasp to a single portion of his so-called "search".

When he arrived in Chicago with Kate, Binx mentions he was there before with his father and Scott. What seems like an impromptu trip to Chicago felt more like him attempting to get closure on a part of his life; in turn, a portion of his search. As it may seem like a stretch for me to claim it as seeking closure, Binx only came to Chicago once before and he wasn't even five-years old then. He was unable to see the city for what it actually is and leave the lingering sentiments to move on--to end. Another way to look at it is the "escape" from the malaise. The spur-of-the-moment trip to Chicago also held the underlying "living in the moment" concept. Quite possibly due to the influence of movie-going Binx does, I felt that this decision to go to Chicago was to re-live a similar plot (or subplot) of a film he had seen. Just like any narrative, life needs a plot twist, even if the reasoning is not understood.

At first I disliked the novel in its entirety, however, I couldn't understand why. It wasn't until our first day discussing it I found that I am quite similar to Binx. And just like him, I am on a "search". As a branch of his main objective ("the search") aside from the aforementioned closure, acceptance from the stages of grief seems plausible. The excerpt of Kierkegaard before the book started says, "... the specific character of despair is precisely this: it is unaware of being despair.". As the novel progresses Binx goes from being unaware of his "everydayness" and the trip to Chicago appears to support the idea he is now aware of it. With that in mind, the epilogue shows with his marriage to Kate he decided to accept the malaise and settle for all that comes with.

So, has Binx completed his "search" regardless of failure or success? By going back to the ambiguity of his search, the statement, "As for my search, I have not the inclination to say much on the subject." leaves the answer open once more, if not more so. Perhaps he found some answers to life-long questions that weren't directly a part of the "search", but were instrumental to help him define it. So, in that strict sense, he has not failed or succeeded in the "search". However, without any definite indication, the "search" could still be on-going. Life will present more questions to him (as it will to us all) and he will continue to search for the answers.