DJ Kenobi
08-04-2008, 02:05 PM
CBC: Maus 1&2
Perhaps no comic book has done more to defeat the mainstream stereotype that comics are only children’s literature than Art Spiegelman’s Maus. In the 1990s, Maus was hailed as a literary achievement--especially after winning the Pulitzer Prize in 1992--and was used as an example of how comics could be literature too. Now, in the 2000s, Maus is often cited as an example of how comics are neither literature nor filmic; instead, they are a unique visual-verbal blend. The comic book medium can do things that neither a solely text-based book nor a film nor a piece of fine art can accomplish.
Topic 1: Maus as a comic book.
How does Maus take advantage of the visual-verbal blend that makes comics unique?
To get the ball rolling… I find Spiegelman’s use of repetition to create links between the past and present as an area where the potential of the comic book form is clearly capitalized upon. This is something Spiegelman does throughout Maus. For example, on page 59 of Volume II, Vladek is describing the Belgian boy that had the bunk above him in Auschwitz. As Vladek says, “He had maybe a rash, and they wrote his number… Any time they could take him. All night he cried and screamed.” The panel accompanying the scream portrays the scream as “AAWOOWWAH!” The Belgian boy is so unsure of what the future holds and the fear of being taken at any time causes the boy to scream out, “AAWOOWWAH!” At the end of the same chapter, Art and Francoise are on the porch of Vladek’s bungalow and Vladek begins to moan from inside (II.74). For Art, Vladek has always moaned in his sleep. Vladek moans, “AAWOOWWAH!” The same exact phoneticized spelling and the same font as the earlier moan symbolizing both Vladek’s inability to escape his memories of the Holocaust, but also a reflection of his current situation in life. Vladek is also unsure of his future. Mala has left him, Art has no desire to stay in the Catskills with him all summer, and his health is not particularly great. In a film, the sound of the moans would differ with the character and the moans realistically could not be identical, also they would be fleeting. In a novel, actually spelling out the moan goes against convention and would not likely occur. Instead it would merely say, “He moaned.” But in Maus the moan is represented visually and uses typological cues to make the connection between the two instances of the moan. Furthermore, the comic book medium allows the reader more control over the pace in which the story is read/viewed/processed and lends itself toward flipping back to find the repetition.
Examples of this use of repetition can be found throughout Maus. Example: in the same chapter, the Nazi use of Zyklon B, a pesticide, to kill Jews and then pages later Art’s use of bug spray, a pesticide, to kill mosquitoes. This begs the question, why make this connection? What is Spiegelman pointing out here?
So again I ask, how does Maus take advantage of the visual-verbal blend that makes comics unique?
Topic 2: The animal aspect.
Harvey Pekar has stated that he is troubled by Spiegelman’s decision to make each ethnic group a different species of animal--and reflect the simplistic characteristics of these species as ethnic differences. Is the depiction of species/ethnicity in Maus really deterministic? Did the Jews not fight back because mice don’t fight back against cats? Is it more natural--and less horrifying--for cats to kill mice than vice versa? Does it make a difference that the Nazis believed that they were fighting a war against another species instead of other humans? (This is indicated in Volume One’s epigraph, which is a quote from Hitler.)
Then again, is Spiegelman’s use of different animal species the only way to portray the unthinkable? We are so far removed from the reality of the Holocaust and its horrors that one might question whether any artistic creation can truly represent the Holocaust, even if the characters are represented as humans rather than different types of animals. Perhaps by constantly reminding the reader that this is an illustrated account--not the real thing--Spiegelman is saying that he cannot truly represent the Holocaust. But does this ultimately soften the horror for the reader (such as the soldiers killing children against walls, I.108, or Auschwitz, II.72)? Does the use of animals remove the atrocities from the realm of human experience?
Topic 3: The Ending
Does the end of Volume II of Maus give us a cathartic moment? In Bedford/St. Martin’s Glossary of Literary Terms, catharsis is described this way:
Meaning "purgation," catharsis describes the release of the emotions of pity and fear by the audience at the end of a tragedy. In his Poetics, Aristotle discusses the importance of catharsis. The audience faces the misfortunes of the protagonist, which elicit pity and compassion. Simultaneously, the audience also confronts the failure of the protagonist, thus receiving a frightening reminder of human limitations and frailties. Ultimately, however, both these negative emotions are purged, because the tragic protagonist’s suffering is an affirmation of human values rather than a despairing denial of them.
On the last page of Volume II, we see Vladek reunited in his story with Anya. Vladek says, “More I don’t need to tell you. We were both very happy, and lived happy, happy ever after.” This would seem like the trademark cathartic ending. However, we know by this point that they did not live happily ever after. Further complicating this is that Vladek’s storybook ending is quickly followed by his mistaking of Art for Richieu and then his and Anya’s gravestone.
Does this ending give us a catharsis? Should there be a catharsis for the reader? Should we be allowed to walk away from a tale of the Holocaust with any feeling of happiness, relief, or hope?
These are three possible starting points for our discussion of Maus. If you have topics that you would like to bring up during our two week discussion of Maus, please feel welcome to do so.
CBC guidelines (http://www.penciljack.com/forum/showpost.php?p=928573&postcount=1)
Reminder: Two weeks from now we will start our second book in PJ:CBC on August 18th. The book will be City of Glass by Paul Auster, Paul Karasik, and David Mazzucchelli.
http://www.amazon.com/City-Glass-Graphic-Paul-Auster/dp/0312423608/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217880213&sr=8-2
Perhaps no comic book has done more to defeat the mainstream stereotype that comics are only children’s literature than Art Spiegelman’s Maus. In the 1990s, Maus was hailed as a literary achievement--especially after winning the Pulitzer Prize in 1992--and was used as an example of how comics could be literature too. Now, in the 2000s, Maus is often cited as an example of how comics are neither literature nor filmic; instead, they are a unique visual-verbal blend. The comic book medium can do things that neither a solely text-based book nor a film nor a piece of fine art can accomplish.
Topic 1: Maus as a comic book.
How does Maus take advantage of the visual-verbal blend that makes comics unique?
To get the ball rolling… I find Spiegelman’s use of repetition to create links between the past and present as an area where the potential of the comic book form is clearly capitalized upon. This is something Spiegelman does throughout Maus. For example, on page 59 of Volume II, Vladek is describing the Belgian boy that had the bunk above him in Auschwitz. As Vladek says, “He had maybe a rash, and they wrote his number… Any time they could take him. All night he cried and screamed.” The panel accompanying the scream portrays the scream as “AAWOOWWAH!” The Belgian boy is so unsure of what the future holds and the fear of being taken at any time causes the boy to scream out, “AAWOOWWAH!” At the end of the same chapter, Art and Francoise are on the porch of Vladek’s bungalow and Vladek begins to moan from inside (II.74). For Art, Vladek has always moaned in his sleep. Vladek moans, “AAWOOWWAH!” The same exact phoneticized spelling and the same font as the earlier moan symbolizing both Vladek’s inability to escape his memories of the Holocaust, but also a reflection of his current situation in life. Vladek is also unsure of his future. Mala has left him, Art has no desire to stay in the Catskills with him all summer, and his health is not particularly great. In a film, the sound of the moans would differ with the character and the moans realistically could not be identical, also they would be fleeting. In a novel, actually spelling out the moan goes against convention and would not likely occur. Instead it would merely say, “He moaned.” But in Maus the moan is represented visually and uses typological cues to make the connection between the two instances of the moan. Furthermore, the comic book medium allows the reader more control over the pace in which the story is read/viewed/processed and lends itself toward flipping back to find the repetition.
Examples of this use of repetition can be found throughout Maus. Example: in the same chapter, the Nazi use of Zyklon B, a pesticide, to kill Jews and then pages later Art’s use of bug spray, a pesticide, to kill mosquitoes. This begs the question, why make this connection? What is Spiegelman pointing out here?
So again I ask, how does Maus take advantage of the visual-verbal blend that makes comics unique?
Topic 2: The animal aspect.
Harvey Pekar has stated that he is troubled by Spiegelman’s decision to make each ethnic group a different species of animal--and reflect the simplistic characteristics of these species as ethnic differences. Is the depiction of species/ethnicity in Maus really deterministic? Did the Jews not fight back because mice don’t fight back against cats? Is it more natural--and less horrifying--for cats to kill mice than vice versa? Does it make a difference that the Nazis believed that they were fighting a war against another species instead of other humans? (This is indicated in Volume One’s epigraph, which is a quote from Hitler.)
Then again, is Spiegelman’s use of different animal species the only way to portray the unthinkable? We are so far removed from the reality of the Holocaust and its horrors that one might question whether any artistic creation can truly represent the Holocaust, even if the characters are represented as humans rather than different types of animals. Perhaps by constantly reminding the reader that this is an illustrated account--not the real thing--Spiegelman is saying that he cannot truly represent the Holocaust. But does this ultimately soften the horror for the reader (such as the soldiers killing children against walls, I.108, or Auschwitz, II.72)? Does the use of animals remove the atrocities from the realm of human experience?
Topic 3: The Ending
Does the end of Volume II of Maus give us a cathartic moment? In Bedford/St. Martin’s Glossary of Literary Terms, catharsis is described this way:
Meaning "purgation," catharsis describes the release of the emotions of pity and fear by the audience at the end of a tragedy. In his Poetics, Aristotle discusses the importance of catharsis. The audience faces the misfortunes of the protagonist, which elicit pity and compassion. Simultaneously, the audience also confronts the failure of the protagonist, thus receiving a frightening reminder of human limitations and frailties. Ultimately, however, both these negative emotions are purged, because the tragic protagonist’s suffering is an affirmation of human values rather than a despairing denial of them.
On the last page of Volume II, we see Vladek reunited in his story with Anya. Vladek says, “More I don’t need to tell you. We were both very happy, and lived happy, happy ever after.” This would seem like the trademark cathartic ending. However, we know by this point that they did not live happily ever after. Further complicating this is that Vladek’s storybook ending is quickly followed by his mistaking of Art for Richieu and then his and Anya’s gravestone.
Does this ending give us a catharsis? Should there be a catharsis for the reader? Should we be allowed to walk away from a tale of the Holocaust with any feeling of happiness, relief, or hope?
These are three possible starting points for our discussion of Maus. If you have topics that you would like to bring up during our two week discussion of Maus, please feel welcome to do so.
CBC guidelines (http://www.penciljack.com/forum/showpost.php?p=928573&postcount=1)
Reminder: Two weeks from now we will start our second book in PJ:CBC on August 18th. The book will be City of Glass by Paul Auster, Paul Karasik, and David Mazzucchelli.
http://www.amazon.com/City-Glass-Graphic-Paul-Auster/dp/0312423608/ref=pd_bbs_sr_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1217880213&sr=8-2