Art Spiegelman’s graphic novel Maus: A Survivor’s Tale is one of the most critically-acclaimed and academically recognized comic books in the history of the medium. The tale of artist Art Spiegelman and his conversations with his father Vladek about his experiences in the Nazi Holocaust, Maus’s visual style includes the various characters all being represented by animals – the people are anthropomorphic, and they wear clothes just as regular people do, but their faces are all that of various animals. The animal representations of Maus serve several purposes – first, to clearly express the stereotypes and perceptions of the races that were being portrayed; secondly, to point out the overall themes of identity that the work provides; and lastly, to contrast the atrocities and harsh, bittersweet world of Spiegelman’s work with the cuteness of animal faces to provide additional pathos. With each different type of people being shown as a particular type of animal, Spiegelman wishes to clearly show the differences and prejudices that many of the characters feel towards others not of their own race.
The Jews throughout the book are presented as mice, as evidenced in the book’s title (Maus). The choice of animal in this particular circumstance is very apt, both thematically and narratively – mice are typically small and numerous, and are drawn in a cute, simplistic fashion. The goal of this is to provide greater empathy for the Jews during the events of the book, as images of the mouse’s triangular mouth, curled open in a scream, recur as the Jews are beaten, hanged and otherwise tortured. Furthermore, the Jews were often referred to as “vermin” by the Nazis during the Holocaust, Spiegelman’s use of the animal here reflecting the Nazi’s perception of them. By using this loaded image of the mouse both as a small, cute, vulnerable animal and vermin that need to be exterminated, Spiegelman challenges readers’ perception of how they are meant to look at the Jews, and whether or not their own distinctions are much different than the Nazis.
The second-most prominent race shown in the book are the Poles, who are presented as pigs. Nazis often referred to the Poles as ‘swine,’ so the same predatory and insulting basis for this personification is clear. Apart from that, the selection of pigs as Poles is relatively more arbitrary, but only serves to further Spiegelman’s metaphor of the absurdity of creating such vague barriers between people. Poles have a much more ambivalent role in the story, as there are both sympathetic Poles and others who ally with the Nazis, making the use of swine as a third element in the cat and mouse relationship all the clearer – the Poles themselves had to decide as individuals where their loyalties lied.
One of the most fascinating elements of the use of animals in the book are the instances when Vladek (and others) need to disguise themselves as Poles; in these scenes, Jews pretending to be Poles are drawn has having pig masks held on to the back with string. Naturally, the real people in these situations could not pull on a mask, but the use of masks here shows just how thoroughly they were able to blend in to stay safe. Furthering Spiegelman’s idea that these racial differences are socially constructed, he shows people being able to easily pass for someone else as long as they claim to be.
The Germans, whether Nazi or not, are represented as cats. As the Jews are mice, the metaphor is fairly clear here, as cats are natural predators of mice. However, just as there are good Jews and bad Jews, good Poles and bad Poles, there are good Germans and bad Germans as well. Many of the good Germans (at least comparatively) are people like the later Germans who help Vladek hide out after escaping Auschwitz; by showing cats and mice getting along, even reluctantly, Spiegelman furthers the idea of the arbitrary nature of racial lines.
The Americans are shown as dogs, with big, floppy ears and happy faces. Again, this plays to another interesting stereotype – dogs are similar to cats in terms of the hierarchy of animals, equating them to the Germans in terms of power. However, the dogs are always shown as having happy expressions and big, cute ears, making them much more lovable and sympathetic. They are also loud and abrasive, which falls into some stereotypes of Americans from abroad. Of course, even subtle changes to that personification can chance characters’ perceptions of them - in one scene, Art’s wife Francoise picks up an African-American hitchhiker and drives him back home; he is the only black person in the book, and is presented as a stark-black dog (almost in silhouette). Throughout the entire car ride, Vladek refers to him using racist epithets: “A hitch-hiker? And – oy – it’s a colored guy, a Shvartser! Push quick the gas!It’s not even to compare, the Shvartsers and the Jews!” (Spiegelman 258). frets that the man was going to steal things out of the car; this scene showcases the hypocrisy of judging people by their race, as Vladek looks down on blacks just as the Nazis looked down on Jews.
Other races are shown with the same eye to stereotype and perception. The French are shown as frogs, following the typical slur used against French people. Spiegelman discusses this in one scene with his French wife, Francoise, about how he should portray her; she replies that she should just be a mouse, since after all she converted to Judaism: “But if you’re a mouse, I ought to be a mouse, too. I converted, didn’t I?” (Spiegelman 171). Hence, she is always drawn as a mouse – the fact that she can change her appearance through conversion (and hence have a whole other set of assumptions laid on her) is further evidence of Spiegelman’s argument as to the useless nature of labels. The Swedish, in one pivotal part of the book, are presented as stags with large antlers, likening them to the large animals their nation is known for. A gypsy is shown as a butterfly, playing into stereotypes of the flighty, nomadic and ethereal people they are thought to be. All of these things and more showcase a world where fundamental characteristics are placed on you depending on what race or nationality you are.
In the beginning of Book II, we actually see a further layer of reality peeled back, and we see Art Spiegelman as a human, curly Jewish hair and all, with a mouse mask over his face. All the other characters in this section are still full animals, but not him – in this section, Spiegelman expresses the frustration and identity issues he feels as the author of a deeply personal book that people suddenly want to monetize. In this way, his mask becomes something he hides behind, as we cannot ever see his face. He feels a bit guilty about exposing so much of himself and his father through the first half of Maus, and so he hides who he is behind the mouse mask (and people see him as the mouse mask as well). Here, the mask becomes not just racial or ethnic, but personal – as the author, he is still a character in the book, even though he is drawing and representing himself. At various points, Spiegelman even points out how silly the use of the animal metaphor is in his own book: “His place is overrun with stray dogs and catsCan I mention this, or does it completely louse up my metaphor?” (Spiegelman 203).
In conclusion, the animal representations in Maus are an important part of the narrative. They represent Art’s attempt to understand and comprehend the amazing and terrible things his father tells him about the Holocaust, as well as points out the culture of racial and cultural difference that was more pronounced during that era. During the 1940s, Europe saw people treating each other like animals, and Maus successfully addresses that particular bit of barbarity by exposing this level of violence against one’s fellow man as something base and primitive. All the various animals represent different stereotypes of these races, also playing with power relationships between dogs and cats to show that these distinctions don’t really mean anything in the end. The only things holding up the differences between people are social norms, argues Spiegelman, and we should not have to hide behind masks anymore.
Works Cited
Ewert, Jeanne C. "Reading Visual Narrative: Art Spiegelman's" Maus"."Narrative 8.1 (2000):
87-103.
Spiegelman, Art. The Complete Maus. Pantheon, 2011. Print.
Young, James E. "The Holocaust as Vicarious Past: Art Spiegelman's" Maus" and the
Afterimages of History." Critical Inquiry 24.3 (1998): 666-699.
