Monday, September 8, 2014

Anthropomorphic Maus

Both Ruth and Matthew bring up great, related points about Maus.  I thought I'd bring some more context into what is already a rich conversation.

One of the interesting bits of background about Spiegelman's text is that the mice were not originally drawn quite so cartoonishly.  Instead, Spiegelman drew them in a manner that was more realistic/ human-like, clearly based in part on the famous photographs of concentration camp survivors taken by photographers such as Margaret Bourke-White.

Original sketch for Maus

Bourke-White photo from LIFE magazine of liberated prisoners

With this in mind, it's interesting to speculate about just why Spiegelman chose to revise his original mice into something more cartoonish.  As Jennifer D. said in her response, does it have something to do with the icon and identification, as McCloud would have them?  Is his decision to portray the Jews as mice problematic because it fundamentally essentializes race and trades in stereotype?  Or, as we will see more clearly in Book II of Maus, is he trying to suggest something more subversive about race and national identity--and the combined ridiculousness and danger of racism?  Does Spiegelman's choice to use animals in Maus encourage or forestall identification, in your opinion? Would you have responded differently to the mice if they were drawn in the manner of the more realistic, anthropomorphic sketch above?

Another important aspect of the Jews-as-mice, Germans-as-cats, Poles-as-pigs metaphor, as many of you have noted, is its historical accuracy in terms of the stereotypes in currency before and during the war, as well as the preoccupation that many Germans had with whether the Jews were a race.

Beginning during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, roughly coterminous with the Enlightenment's investment in creating scientific and racial taxonomies, anxiety about Jewish racial difference came to center around the Jewish body. Many Europeans became obsessed with the idea that Jews were members of an inferior, non-white race. Part of this obsession centered around the idea that Jews had distinguishable physical characteristics that rendered them decidedly other.
Sadly, many stereotypes found their way into caricature.

 

Above, you can see early examples of Jewish caricature that focus on supposed physical differences of Jews, including large noses and ears, oversized feet, and talon-like nails.

Later Nazi caricature traded in similar stereotypes of Jewish physical difference. (see below)




During this period of anti-Semitic propaganda, as some of you have noted, Jews were often likened to vermin, particularly mice and rats.



The Nazi film, Der Ewige Jude (The Eternal, or Wandering, Jew), one of the most disturbing anti-Semitic propaganda pieces, featured scenes that juxtaposed "typical" wandering Jew with images of rats and mice overrunning various parts of the globe.  This image (a still of the rats can be seen below) suggested that, like vermin, Jews spread chaos and disease, literal and metaphorical, wherever they went.


For more on anti-Semitic stereotypes, you might check out resources such as Sander Gilman's work on The Jew's Body, this book on Racial Science in Hitler's New Europe, or this book on Nazi propaganda.

For more early sketches and background on the creation of Maus, take a look at Meta-Maus, Spiegelman's behind-the-scenes account of the creation of his work.

Sunday, September 7, 2014

Maus I (p 1-60)



Realism in a Surreal Setting

Anthropomorphic mice aren’t so hard to believe in lighthearted cartoons and children’s stories, but when these cute and cuddly animals start telling us of some of the most tragic stories in human history, it may be more difficult to suspend our disbelief. Spiegelman invests a lot of his narrative illustrating elaborate details of Vladek’s life and building  the relationship between father and son. Why does he invest so much of his story on little moments of spilled pill bottles, arguments, and tangents? How does this affect our impressions of a very surreal world of talking animals? Furthermore, how does this affect our impressions of the characters?

In Matthew’s blog post, he goes into greater detail on the discussion of the animal metaphor. I’d like to bring up for discussion the moments that contradict the setting’s own metaphor. What is significant about the moments that aren’t anthropomorphic? For example, what are the implications of Artie telling his father he wants his story to seem “human” or when Vladek complains of dry chicken? (are they really eating another animal??)

Is it significant that the characters seem unaware of their animal appearances?

Saturday, September 6, 2014

Art Spiegelman, Maus I p 1-60

So, the immediate first question of Maus is the usage of animal metaphors. Though the cat/mouse dynamic—which, conspicuously, was also used in the animated film of the same year, An American Tail—is fairly obvious, what about Polish gentile as swine? Also, is Spiegelman playing with the precedent of the animal cartoon within the comics medium? What effect does subverting this typical 'light-hearted talking animal' achieve?

Another interesting theme throughout the first assignment is the protective relationship of fathers to their sons, which seems to be rooted in the hopes of preventing the son's repetition of the father's past. Vladek describes his father's drastic efforts to prevent his sons from entering the army "...because when HE was young, he had then to go into the Russian Army" (47 in my copy, which i realize is a little off from the assignment). A similar pattern is later found in Vladek himself, starting with Richieu's reaction to the returning father's cold, military buttons—a loaded symbol in itself (68). Cut to the 'present' and Vladek is throwing away his second son's coat in exchange for something "warmer" (71).

What can we make of this, and how does it alter the reading of the father's advice in the preface of the comic?

Friday, September 5, 2014

Art Spiegelman and Maus



When Art Spiegelman published MAUS I in 1986, he transformed the medium of comics and greatly affected the American literary world. His work experimented with the traditional form of the comic strip at the same time that it altered forever the content associated with the medium. Spiegelman's choice to depict the Holocaust and its aftermath in a medium often associated (rightly or wrongly) with children, cartoons, and simple caricature changed both the landscape of the comic and that of Holocaust representation. Comics or "comix," as Spiegelman dubbed them, were suddenly taken much more seriously than ever before. MAUS I and II appealed to a broader audience than did the conventional comic strip. When MAUS won the Pulitzer Prize in 1992 (after the publication of the second volume in the series), Spiegelman's work drew even greater attention. Since the publication of this magnum opus, he has become one of the comix medium's greatest advocates, traveling the country with his Comix 101 presentation and arguing for the importance of the form.

Spiegelman was born in 1948 in Stockholm, Sweden. His parents, Anja and Vladek, who appear as central characters in MAUS, were refugees, survivors of the concentration camps and World War II. Using the medium of the comic and the figures of the cat and mouse to represent Nazi and Jew respectively, MAUS tells Spiegelman's parents' stories, as well as his own. After getting his start by editing and writing for the graphic magazine RAW, in which early drawings from MAUS were serialized, Spiegelman went on to draw covers for The New Yorker for a number of years, eventually falling out with the editors due to the political nature of many of his drawings.



How does Spiegelman's medium affect his message in MAUS? Is there something sacrilegious about his representation of the Holocaust? Do we read his work as straight memoir, fiction, or some hybrid in-between genre? Has he chosen the appropriate vehicle for telling this story?

Thursday, September 4, 2014

Blog Discussion #3: The Six Steps, A Word About Color, Putting it all Together

I’m sad that this is the end to McCloud’s Understanding Comics. It was a great educational book (especially because it was a comic book). McCloud’s explanations were clear and he made the “conversation” not always one sided. He broke the forth wall of his comic book world to address the reader and a few times interacted (placing the mask on the viewer then telling them to smile, and if the reader can hear the words he is saying that they might want to get their ears checked since they shouldn’t be able to hear him because he was in a comic). I will miss this read (I rented my book so it will be gone come the end of the semester).
I know that there are a few art students in this class and it’s always good to get a perspective from people that are not up close to the subject.
Is McCloud’s definition of art “any human activity which doesn’t grow out of either of our species two basic instincts: Survival and Reproduction!” (McCloud, 164, Panel 1) too broad, just right or not enough to explain the universe that is ART?

And…


McCloud uses the "Six Steps" as a "Circle of Life" for comics and any medium.Will skipping step of the “Six Steps” affect the quality of the work? Do you have to cover all “Six Steps” to create ANY work in ANY medium or can you skip steps?

Tuesday, September 2, 2014

More on comics from Charles Hatfield



Click here for a piece by Charles Hatfield on comics as an art of "tension"

Blog Discussion #2 Time Frames, Living in Line, Show & Tell


Hey guys, Megan here as the other facilitator for Blog #2.
In chapter four of “Understanding Comics” by Scott McCloud, he talks about how comics could have a frame that expand over time and could include gutters in between each moment. Our minds create the connection that a scene can take place over an amount of time depending on the frame. Since this was written in 1994, a lot about frame work has changed. People have used the internet as a source to expand their comics and a few have taken advantage of internet art. This new form of comic is call GIF Comics.
Here are some different examples:
Ava's Demon

GIFs can be used for small actions: exaggerating words, emphasizing actions and more. These comics use GIFs for part or for all of their comics.

Do you think GIF Comics are comics?



McCloud points out that lines are our visual cues and icons to activate our senses. Movie theaters have been adding sense to movies for the audience to become more involved with the show (3D and 4D). With the evolution of movies, is it possible for comics to adapt to these changes? Will it take way from the quality of what makes a comic book a comic book or will it create more experience for the reader? For example getting rid of “that ripe smell” wave lines (like the ones over the trash) for a scratch and sniff.