Maus 2 Art Spiegelman

1109 Words3 Pages

In Maus I and Maus II, Art Spiegelman describes two interwoven “survivor” stories: how Vladek “survived” the Holocaust and how Art “survived” Vladek. At the beginning of Maus II, Chapter 2, readers learn that Art literally survived Vladek who “died of congestive heart failure on August 18, 1982” (II.41.1). Vladek’s passing leaves Art with no first-hand account of Vladek’s Holocaust “survivor” story. Thus, especially evident on page 69 of Maus II, Vladek’s death complicates the story by amplifying Art’s convoluted emotions regarding his father and forcing Art to imagine more of the story. Art Spiegelman showcases his struggle to talk about the Holocaust, which encompasses a variety of competing narratives: Vladek’s Holocaust story and Art’s …show more content…

The first half of page 69 revolves around Art’s strained relationship with Vladek, a narrative that mainly comes from Art. Art, who is still alive, is able to depend on his perspective to accurately portray the narrative. However, in the second half of page 69, the timeframe becomes choppy with rifts and Vladek’s long monologue takes over. This is when Vladek’s Holocaust story, which essentially comes from Vladek, becomes Art’s main narrative. As mentioned in the second paragraph, Art and Vladek’s difference in perspective causes an inability to truly understand each other. Therefore, Art’s perspective instinctively distorts Vladek’s story in Maus I and II, shown through the difference between the drawings and the cherry-picked words within the speech bubbles. In addition to this, as previously stated in the first paragraph, Vladek passed away during the creation of Maus II. Vladek’s passing leaves Art with no first-hand account of Vladek’s Holocaust “survivor” story, forcing Art to rely on less dependable third-hand accounts such as Art’s several-years-old memories of his father’s memories and the “tape” (II.47.I) recordings without reaffirmation from Vladek. For instance, Vladek confesses how he “was an EYEWITNESS” (II.69. IX) to the gas chambers yet proceeds to inform Art how he “HEARD” (II.69.XIII) about what …show more content…

Art, who had a distant relationship with Vladek, becomes slowly closer to his father to complete Maus I and II. After Vladek’s passing, emotions of guilt and duty consumes Art because he couldn’t fully understand his father yet he had the overbearing responsibility to portray Vladek’s Holocaust story. Therefore, in the second half of page 69, to make up for his lack of perception, Art purposely chose scenes that focused only on Vladek’s Holocaust story and cutting out unnecessary dialogue, such as the ones on the “tape” recorder, (II.47.I-IV) that plausibly transpired between the fifth and sixth frame. Thus, Art creates a concentrated version of Vladek’s Holocaust story, with no interruption from the “relationship” narrative. Still, in the fourth frame, Vladek releases a “SIGH” and complains about “an unnecessary suffering” (II.69.IV) in his life. The placement of Vladek’s speech bubble leaves readers to question whether Vladek’s complaint was a response to Mala’s incompetency explained in the previous frame or to Art’s seemingly inconsiderate question in the same frame. Despite of Art’s guilt and duty towards his father, Art validates his frustrations towards Vladek, due to the lack of understanding with Vladek, and does not abandon the “relationship” narrative by leaving it as an open answer. Therefore, Art’s emotions influence the prioritization of his

Open Document