A huge difference in writing between Speigelman's and O'Brien's writing I noticed was the way their stories are told. O'Brien uses writing techniques such as repetition and contradiction in order to display a common theme or get a point across to the reader. Speigelman's writing is fluid and moves in a progressive manner, like a typical story. Speigleman also is not inserting personal opinion into his story, because it is not his story, it's his fathers. I think he does this because he wants his story to be as close to what actually happened as it could be; unlike O'Brien who cares more about what is being portrayed in his stories rather than its validity. I like Speigelman's writing style more, even though I am not the biggest fan of the comic book format. His story is more based on following an order of events that happened, its more of a narrative than O'Brien's stories.
A similarity I did notice between the two writing styles was the author's ability to make you feel like you are in the story, or stories. O'Brien's descriptive writing had me feel like I was walking down the same path of heavy jungle when Lemon took a wrong step and ended up in a tree. As well as Speigelman's writing, and comics, that made me feel like a fly on the wall following his father through his story.
I agree with your argument and how you’re saying that both Spiegelman and Obrien are able to use descriptive storytelling to be able to immerse the reader within the story. I also think that Maus is more entertaining than The Things They Carried, not only for being about the Second World War, which I find to be very interesting. But the way that the story is told by Spiegelman, as a narrative that begins from start to finish rather than Obrien who, like you said, doesn’t tell stories in sequence of events. Maus is told almost as a cartoon and graphic comic book, which I think adds to the emotional depth of the story.
ReplyDelete