Alongside Vladek’s recollections of the horrors of the Holocaust, one of the focal plot points of Maus is the oft-strained relationship Art, and virtually every character in the contemporary scenes, has with Vladek.

There is an important effect that takes place when changing between the two environments of Maus: The scenes in the present day take place from the vantage point of a removed, un-involved observer. However, when the reader is transported into the era of the Holocaust, there is a transition in narrative perspective, as Vladek becomes the sole communicator of the past.

From the removed, more objective perspective (in a literary sense) of the present day scenes, Vladek is characterized as an individual that is difficult to tolerate by those around him, owing to the possession of what is displayed to the reader as an overbearing and occasionally insensitive demeanor, and at times hypocritical nature. However, when the tenses shift and Vladek himself becomes the sole narrator, speaking in the first person, which (again in a literary sense) is a more subjective perspective, none of these aspects of his character show through. He instead appears quite resourceful and compassionate.

Something I wonder about, and the question I post to the Respondents, is this:

Do you think there is any (or strong enough) evidence to suggest that any of Vladek’s recollections may be colored by his own bias and subjective judgment? Or, being that Maus is largely concerned with how people come to cope with devastation and loss of control over their own lives, is it more likely that he has become the way he is at least in part as a result of the traumatic experiences he endured?

For what it’s worth, I think it’s possible that both situations apply.