In Maus, I noticed a large amount of culturistic touch. Art Spiegelman involved a few things from several cultures and little specifics that he could not simply know. I wonder how he researched all of those things. Reading and seeing all of these flourishes forces me to ask, do all of these touches help or hurt the reader's ability to relate to the novel?
The atrocities of the holocaust are unspeakable. Many of the crimes were shown and described in Maus I and II. Do you think that the Nazi's genocidal wrongs were brought into a different light because of these books? If so, what difference do you now see?
Evan S.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
For #2, isn't Spiegelman's very act of showing what the Nazis did in the camps an original contribution to Holocaust literature?
Post a Comment