Art/O'Brien

  The writings of Maus by art Speigelman and Tim O'Brien's The Things They Carried have many similarities and differences in how these two war time stories are told. To start they are taken from two different points of view and the basic way they are told. In O'Brien's book even though it is supposedly his personnel experiences, it has fictional elements and many parts that many stretch the truth to enhance the dramatic effect. He also digresses throughout the book where he tells the stories of other soldiers and their experiences but makes it feels more like a collection of stories than a war biography. In Maus its from a real straight forward biographical view where it gives in detail in a chronological order of a man named Vladek, the authors father, and his experiences leading up to and during World War II and the Holocaust. O'Brien only gives certain stores and distinct memories of the war in Vietnam while Maus is able to produce a much more in depth emotional feel about how someone's whole family and life can be taken apart by war and genocide.  Though they are different types of stories there are similarities like the common view of both about military drafts. In Maus his father explains how his won father made him terribly sick so that he would not have to go into the army and fight, but eventually once called on again he faces his fears and lives up to the terrifying idea of being in war. O'Brien has is own draft difficulties in the story "On the Rainy River" where he forced to make the life changing decision of going to war or not. He, like in maus, makes the decision to finally go and feels proud for the choice he made, but it brings up the idea that draft dodging was nothing new. there is a common theme of fear in these books and its the natural fear of war itself. Whether it was WWII or Vietnam most young men never want to got to war and in both stories both are forced to face war and the effects it has on their lives. Each book is great for telling in depth war stories but for pure entertainment O'Brien's is able to show real war emotion but with the immature humor and feelings to keep it lighter. Maus though is a better story with in depth characters and enough background information and emotion to really connect with the characters and feel the story almost through their eyes.

Art of storytelling

While I don't think that Maus and The Things They Carried  are similar books, I think that they are equally valuable. What one lacks in imagery, they make up for with actual art.  Tim O'Brien uses a lot of the environment and foliage of Vietnam to have the reader feel apart of the story, and like they know what life is like. Similar to that, Art Spieglam uses the contrast of cat and mice to really give the reading a contemporary feeling of what it's like to be in their situation. So while they both are attempting to place the reader in the story, their methods are far different. I also think that O'Brien wrote his story collection in sort of a rant format, while Spieglam when into writing his graphic novel with full intentions of having illustrations

On a different train of thought, I think that Spieglam using cats and mice for his artwork is absolutely brilliant. While there have been other mass genocides just as tragic, such as the Rwandan genocide, none are as famous as the holocaust. Because of this, it is hard for people who live in a pretty peaceful country to understand what it was like to be Jewish. Something that most people can understand is the relationship between a cat and a mouse. By portraying the Nazis as cats and the Jewish people as mice, it is easier for people to understand the relationships of Nazis hunting the Jewish people.

Art vs. Tim

         I enjoyed reading Maus, more specifically I think because of the way in which the book itself was setup. I've never encountered that before with and I think that before actually delving more into the story caught my attention first. It's actually pretty ironic because both O'Brien and Spiegelmen tell both of their stories in ways that aren't thought of as orthodox story telling. Where Spiegelmen uses a comic book style formatted with illustrations to account for every scene, O'Brien tells his story in multiple short stories that aren't in a time sequence necessarily.
      More importantly what I noticed between the authors was the way in which both wrote their novels. From O'Brien we get what we're supposed to consider his personal account and his memories of story telling from Vietnam and the days leading to the war. O'Brien gives the allusion of both reality yet its skewed because at times as the reader you don't know if O'Brien is making up things to simply entice the reader for dramatics  Yet, in Spiegelmen's work I think it's more concrete. He uses his father's experience from the eras pre, during, and post war. He in no way tries to put his own personal imprint on his writing. He documents his father's memories and gives the reader the setting in which he is getting the information. I'm eager to continue with Spiegelmen's work. This is not to say I did not enjoy O'Brien's work as well. I just feel more sure about the specifics I'm given from Spiegelmen's work thus far. There seems to be more of a stringent realness to Spiegelmen's writing versus that of O'Brien and his not always sure recollection of events in Vietnam. But I honestly could be biased after hearing rumor that his actual platoon that he was stationed with never had to really experience the gravity of war while in Vietnam, and the majority of his stories are only from stories he heard from older soldiers. But hey, I'll need to do my own research on that specifically.

Comparison

These two authors have some pretty different approaches to the way they tell their respective stories obviously. Tim O'Brien takes the more traditional route, which includes just words basically. Art Spiegleman stands out because he uses animals to portray his story. It was very interesting, to say the least, to read Maus.
I preferred reading O'Brien's short stories more than Spiegleman's stories mainly because it was easier, for me, to read. The way Maus was organized and the font of the text were not very easy to read for me. I commend his creativity and it did not go unnoticed, but, in my opinion, it was a bit much.
The main differences in the story telling is that Spiegleman is mainly telling his story and not speculating on other people's lives, at least in the excerpt that I read. In O'Brien's stories, he speaks on the lives of many other people and many times he leaves the reading speculating what happened to certain characters.
Spielgeman's work is not visually gratifying for me, however I think it is a great style of writing and if the font was better I would be very pleased with reading the book!

Speigelman Vs. O'Brien

Speigelman's style is distinctive and unique compared to most authors. He presents his father's narrative in a way that is playful and fun, something a child would want to read. However, the story he tells is quite the opposite: despairing and tragically historic. his story telling is to-the-point and very amusing, it is very evident he and his father are the main characters in his stories.

O'Brien on the other hand, is not very up-front about what his messages are and what his intentions are for writing his stories. Because his stories are not illustrated, his words must be and are descriptive. Most of O'Brien's stories take place on the battlefield whereas Speigelman's takes place at home in Poland (so far). Finally, O'Brien does not depict Vietnamese soldiers are enemies whereas Speigelman views Nazis as the main antagonists of his narrative.

Similarly of course, they are authors of war stories, and their purpose is to expose the reality of wars and the consequences of it. Within these stories, both authors also include small doses of humor to temporarily stray the audience away from the harsh realities of war.

Although I find both authors entertaining, I prefer to read O'Brien because his stories are challenging for me to read -- there are so many hidden messages and symbolism. The more times I read his short stories, the more I unveil and discover. With so many characters in The Things They Carried, the stories allow his readers, such as myself, to see the many points of views. While Speigelman only talks about his father's experience after the war. O'Brien has more than one short story, all of which are different from the next. As I read further on in the story, I am hoping to appreciate all that Speigelman has to offer in his first and second books.

Realism in Cartoon: Heavy Drama in Maus

In Spiegelman's Maus, he discusses his father's experience from the start of World War II through his internment at a concentration camp. The thing that makes the novel super interesting and worthy of praise is Spiegelman's use of cartoon - Maus is a graphic novel - to portray the story. We typically associate comic books and graphic novels with funny or heroic storytelling. However, Maus is very different. The book is incredibly sad - it deals with the Holocaust! The Jewish characters are portrayed as mice, the Nazis as cats, and others as pigs. This personification of animals lends itself really well to the situation of the time, namely how the Nazis viewed themselves as higher on the food chain than the lowly Jews. Maus expertly incorporates this surrealistic element into a very heavily dramatic story to create a new genre of gritty realism that is unlike anything ever seen before. It's absolutely brilliant, and I could not put the book down. The fact that it was a graphic novel also made the books a much faster read than a traditional novel would have, despite the fact that it dealt with such a dense subject. I could not get enough, and I cannot wait to read the sequel.

Storytelling Comparison

Speigelman's storytelling is almost the exact opposite of O'Brien's. Both of their stories are very imagery heavy and vivid but they achieve this in different ways. O'Brien is extremely blunt and curt at times to emphasize certain parts of his stories. This to-the-point style really drives home the dark and sometimes graphic nature of a lot of O'Brien's stories. On the other hand, Speigelman gives his stories lots of context and tries to make sure everything is clarified and easily comprehended. Speigelman also spends much more time introducing his characters and the setting. He also describes the process of him writing Maus within the book, giving the reader a view into his creative process.

I like both styles of writing, but I prefer O'Brien. I think his curtness and "no fluff" approach does the war stories he's telling justice. This is not to say that O'Brien's stories are lacking in content or length, he simply doesn't waste any words.