Maus: Further abstraction [On character/environment dichotomy]

In Reading Maus I've come to relate the work to The Arrival, by Sean Tan. There's an interesting parallel between these two graphic novels in respect to the nature of the abstraction within either work. In The Arrival, as I previously stated, the environment was the element of abstraction whilst the characters provided the humanist relation to reality. In Maus the characters are treated abstractly as anthropomorphic rats, and cats and so forth, while the environment reflects the reality of forever resonating historical circumstances.

The dichotomy between abstraction in Maus works in the opposite manner, when compared to The Arrival. Art Speigleman's treatment of the varying "people" provide a clear dialogue for, perhaps not so clear event in reality. The division of people into varying animals, the jews themselves presented as rats—a lower species—and the Nazi's as Cats—the predators—, personifies and showcases the false notions of "race" and superiority that were brought about by the Nazi regime.

Speigleman's treatment is as much a parable as Tan's own subjective menagerie. Metaphors for the emotional aspects of segregation and the actuality of attempting to classify jews as a lower species has incredible weight for any audience.

This methodology of abstracting elements in a graphic narrative relates personally to some concept work I have been personally producing.



As of now, the narrative I've wished to illustrate has focused primarily on the environment. An abstracted one much in the manner of Tan. Though, unlike him, I have no fleshed out main character—no humanist quality of person to tie things back to reality and make the work of relevance to an audience. It is the goal, no? To make the work relevant rather than simply aesthetically pleasing or , rather, "nice to look at"?

I could Argue that I'm focusing on the environment/character interaction: a man vs nature rather than man vs psyche or man vs man sort of abstraction. The nature of the character need not extend past the narrative, need not be self-evident but rather, be self-contained.

Despite the latter argument concept work on designing and refining an actual character remains necessary for a strong narrative. Rather than some placeholder shadow which holds little to no relevance to a reader, I must develop the humanist touch which is lacking.

It has to be self evident. Surely, if it were to be a true graphic narrative I won't be present to explain any of the works visuals. If explaining is absolutely necessary, then perhaps it can be said, (not on all occasion mind you) that I have failed in my attempted endeavor.

The same principle relates to Design. If it must be explained it bad design. Though, this as well has it's exceptions. ( The German's WWII Tiger tanks were complex machines that needed special training to operate, but DAMN were they efficient at destroying America's sherman tanks..)

As of now, it's also a silent work, devoid of words....

Here's the link to a sampling of some of the narrative panels: LINK