I found this really interesting interview with Nate Powell. It’s in 4 parts, but well worth the read. He discusses a vast number of topics from moving around the country to music, and eventually talks about Swallow Me Whole. Apparently he basically dreamt the entire concept in one night, which seemed really intense to me. He also mentions the movie Donnie Darko coming out right after his dream and having weird connections with that movie. Most prominent to me was his discussion of gender within the novel and how he went about critiquing that. He also talks a lot about working in the mental health and human services field, which gives him a lot of credibility in my mind. This interview really gives a great background to where Powell was coming from while writing Swallow Me Whole and brings up a lot of interesting issues and questions that I had not thought of previously.
Author: Emma
Weekly Round up – Exit Wounds
What I found most interesting about this week’s discussion of Rutu Modan’s Exit Wounds was how divided so many of us were on several aspects of the novel, from meanings to whether we enjoyed it or not. In particular, on Thursday we talked about what we thought about the ending of the book. I have to admit, I was not really a huge fan of the ending myself, I felt like it was really abrupt and left me no feeling of closure. However, some people didn’t agree with me and genuinely enjoyed the ambiguity of the final panels. There was also discussion this week on whether this story was a story about love, a story about war and politics or a story about family. To be honest, I think it was a story about all of these things, which is why the story may have seemed a bit jumpy like Michael mentioned in his blog. At times it really was a little difficult to follow. I think the interview with Modan on the blog where she talks about her inspiration for the book and her experience in Israel really helped to bring an understanding to combining the aspects of love, war, and family together though in this novel.
Maus II-
What I liked about Maus II so much was how much time Spiegelman spent on the “alternate” story line (himself and his father as well as his writing of Maus II). Especially in the beginning where he discussed the issues he went through with the media and his inability to write and draw after his father’s death. It added a deeper layer to the story but also to the characters within it. Making the writer a character within the story, and showing the trials of writing the book that is in my hands gives me a greater appreciation for Art Spiegelman. It also makes his character so much more real and reminds me yet again that what happens in this book is real.
Along with elaborating on his own character, Maus II really elaborated on Vladek’s character. This book especially emphasized his actions and feelings that exist because of what happened to him in the holocaust. I felt like I understood Art and Francoise’s frustration with Vladek, but also this sort of guilt for feeling so frustrated with him. Doing silly things like saving his wooden matches, leaving the gas on all day, or trying to return half eaten groceries frustrated me as a reader, but at the same time made me feel terrible for this man whose earlier days led him to act like this. Overall I think Spiegelman did an excellent job in the second half of this story of really making everything real for me. The characters were real, and I felt for them, even if they did look like mice 🙂
– Maus –
Reading through what people have posted on the blog, it is interesting to me how many of us knew of Maus or had read it before taking this class. Some people knew it from high school, others from previous college courses. I was required to read Maus in my Western Civilizations class. It kind of reminded me of Kyle Baker and how much he wanted Nat Turner to be used as an academic resource. It makes me wonder if Art Spiegelman had similar intentions when writing Maus, or if that thought came after its publication.
I would also like to comment on what seems to be the most popular topic, Spiegelman’s use of animals in the story. The first time I read Maus for my Western Civ class I read though and really appreciated the separation of race into something so simple as animals. I think it would have been much more difficult to show the differences between the Jews or Poles or Nazis if they all looks like normal human beings. That being said, I do not think that I ever saw the animals as humans in animal masks, more animals that acted like humans. I think that Spiegelman’s decision to make his characters animals not only helped me a reader differentiate between races, but really captured how important race really was at the time. I feel like the time of the holocaust really made race stand out and made people into “the other,” almost like another species such as cats or mice. It brings out this feeling of instant hostility based on appearance, like a cat would do to a mouse, or a Nazi would do to a Jew. At no point while reading Maus was I distracted or confused by the use of animals, and most importantly I never forgot that this was a real story that did not happen to animals, but happened to human beings.
Funny Man Gets Serious.
I found this interview with Kyle Baker. In it the interviewer brings up how funny all of his work had been before Nat Turner, his daughter following in his footsteps, critics’ reactions to his work, and making money as an artist.
He pointed out that when the first part of the book came out critics loved it (black babies dying? History, it’s okay), but when the second half came out (black men chopping of white children’s’ heads!? Outrage) critics used terms like “brutal.” I forget that when it was originally released it was not together in one book. I wonder what the reaction would have been if it had all come out together like how we have read it this week. I also really enjoyed his last comment about wanting Nat Turner to be used educationally in college classrooms. I’m glad he got his wish!