My love affair with graphic novels really started when I was given Maus to read eight years ago. Growing up I loved Calvin and Hobbes as well as the occasional Archie comic, but Maus was given to me at a time when I was really starting to explore new mediums of art and literature. I can greatly credit Maus for engaging my interest in history (something I now minor in) and opening a window into so many things that I am fascinated with today. I have not really questioned until recently why Maus had that type of effect on me. What is it about the mixture of art and narrative that is so appealing to such a diverse group?
In my paratext assignment I explored Maus and its online reviews to try and get an answer to this question. The most common theme I found within the reviews was that Maus is relatable, even though it is telling a story that most of its readers can’t comprehend. It was unanimous among reviewers that Maus was also a more realistic and true depiction of the Holocaust (again encountering the idea of what is really truth). This all makes sense, after all, these are similar feelings I must have felt when I first read Maus, as it had such a lasting impression on me. I was determined to see if I could find something to offer insight into how Art Spiegelman felt about these sentiments towards his graphic life narrative. After falling down a rabbit hole of Art Spiegelman interviews on youtube, I stumbled upon this one. Unfortunately the interviewer isn’t that great, but Art eloquently touches on some of the questions that I had.
There are a few key ideas that Art touches on during the interview that I found very helpful. The first is his explanation as to why so many people are drawn to Maus– he describes how the comic format allows for historical information to be connected to the present in a way that is not possible without images. The ability for more information to be expressed through images gives the reader more accurate information. Art is able to depict such specific details such as what places looked like, what people were wearing. His example shows that even the detail of whether the camp victims wore socks or not was easily depicted, while in a non-graphic novel, details like that may be skipped in order to have an appropriate length story. As Art says, we are able to understand the past in the present because the illustration guides us towards a better understanding.
The second thing that I noticed is that instead of speaking about the idea of “the truth”, Art speaks of “a truth”. The sentiment implied is that one cannot expect to understand
the full truth of the Holocaust through one story. Art articulating that Maus is one small version of someone’s truth, allows the reader to connect and engage in the material in a way that is intimate. You can relate to the story in whatever way you want, and perhaps this invite from Art to participate and literally view his version of the truth is what allows for such a strong connection to the material.
Hey Jenny! Great post! Thanks for sharing your thoughts.
Your mentioning of Spiegelmen’s notion of “a truth” made me think of a quote from Laferrerier’s narrative, “The World Is Moving Around Me”, in which he connects one’s perception of events to the notion/question of truth: “ ‘No one can tell a story exactly as it happened. We piece it together. We try to find essential emotions. In the end, we fall into nostalgia. And of there’s one thing that’s far from truth, its nostalgia. So that’s not your story’,” (page 10). I feel that both Art’s resulted intimacy of “a truth,” like you mentioned, and Laferriere’s notion of “nostalgia rather than truth” share parallels; however, they also address yet another question of an autobiographer’s “truth.” Both narratives deal with overcoming trauma and both use “pieces” (like Laferriere mentions) of memorial recollections to form their perceptions of life events.
While I agree with your point on Art’s depiction of “a truth”, I’m going to play devil’s advocate here and take Laferriere’s side. Could Art’s take on recording his father’s experiences during the Holocaust potentially be considered as nostalgia? After all, Art does seem to demand Vladek’s memorial details for his own benefit.
Raffaella Caffo
Hi Jenny, that was a really thoughtful post! I enjoyed reading it. It’s interesting that you did your paratext paper on howrelatable Maus is to the mass public. I personally think that I would’ve found Maus more appealing if Spiegelman has used human faces instead of animal representations. However I understand that doing so creates a distancing effect and distancing allows the reader to look at the holocaust from a new perspective. Looking at human faces would’ve made Maus even more of a relatable experience for me.