The main difference between Spiegelman's writing and O'Brien's writing is that Spiegelman makes the reader feel as if they are a part of the story, while O'Brien alienates the reader and informs the reader that they will never understand the soldier's experiences. It is a great choice of Spiegelman not to separate the reader from the story because it allows the reader to connect with the characters on a deeper level. O'Brien does not allow for that connection to take place nor does he want it to. And while this distance does serve a higher purpose in his writing in order to present examples of PTSD, I find that Spiegelman's writing is more universal.
I also find Spiegelman's simplistic stylization a genius choice alongside his comics. The images like a film very much speak for themselves. His word choice becomes more selective and therefore, he is able to shed more depth. Many of his sentences contain such definitive wisdom. For example after Art falls down from playing with his friends and they refuse to help him, his father, Vladeck reflects, "Friends? Your friends? If you lock them together in a room with no food for a week then you could see what it is, friends!" (Spiegelman 6). This line is filled with so much memory and emotion of a Holocaust survivor that the reader is left awed before the book has even begun.
I really like that you point out the way that O'Brien alienates the reader where as Spiegelman puts an effort integrating the reader.This is a really good observation, I wish I would have noticed it. Spiegelman is incredibly creative in the way that draws the reader in through pictures and easy to understand narrative.
ReplyDelete