MAUS Pigs Admittedly Derogatory Geis

Considering Maus: Approaches to Art Spiegelman’s “Survivor’s Tale” of the Holocaust, by Deborah R. Geis (Editor), Haig A. Bosmajian (Contributor), Michael G. Levine (Contributor), Bradley Alan Katz (Contributor),(Contributor), Alan C. Rosen (Contributor), Michael Rothberg (Contributor), Arlene Fish Wilner (Contributor) , David Mikics (Goodreads Author) (Contributor). 2010

Academese Dissection of MAUS: Ironic to Poles=Pigs Racism, Antisemites Once Called Jews Pigs

This book is rather abstract in its text. Let us focus on relevant, practical matters:

IMPLICATIONS OF THE USE OF ANIMALS IN MAUS

The authors of this book simply repeat the canned explanation for Spiegelman’s choices of characters without so much as a glimmer of criticism. Here are the facts:

Art Spiegelman has admitted that his use of pigs for Poles was done intentionally in order to cast aspersions on Poles. [See p. 122 of METAMAUS]. The fact that “his father saw it that way” is merely a deflection.

As for public consumption, Art Spiegelman would have people believe that the portrayal of Poles as pigs is innocuous, because, after all, Germans are cats and Jews are mice. Art Spiegelman is a little disingenuous. The pig has an intense and emotional abominable connotation, in Jewish thinking and history, in a way that other TREYF (non-kosher) animals, such as the cat and mouse, and even the horse and camel, do not. Please see THE ESSENTIAL TALMUD. [In fact, according to the Talmud (BABA KAMA 82b), a Jew is cursed merely for breeding pigs!]

Now go beyond Jewish religion and consider everyday life. As everyone with the most elementary knowledge of English knows, “You pig!” is incomparably more pejorative than “You cat!” or “You mouse!” Don’t believe me? Ask any child.

IRONICALLY, PIGS WERE ONCE USED AS A VULGAR ANTI-SEMITIC PUTDOWN OF JEWS

Author David Mikics quips, “…Jewish prohibition of pork has traditionally been explained in anti-Semitic lore by identifying Jews, too, as pigs, who were reluctant to eat their own kin.” (p. 21). So there you have it. Pigs are inescapably derogatory when said of Jews, but it is perfectly fine with the Jew Spiegelman to characterize Poles as pigs.

BUT SPIEGELMAN IS MERELY COPYING NAZI MOTIFS FOR HIS COMIC

In fact, the Nazis had no singular, fixed image for any particular group that they despised. They often portrayed Jews AND Poles as vermin. Moreover, the vermin did not have to be mice, or even rodents at all. Vermin could also be insect pests. Nazi Germans also portrayed Jews as poison mushrooms [e. g, the infamous, widely-used DER GIFTPILZ, which was used to instill anti-Semitism in German children in Nazi Germany]. The Nazis seldom, if ever, portrayed themselves as cats. (Did they EVER?). Conclusion: Spiegelman is merely cherry-picking Nazi themes in accordance with his agenda, which is the promotion of the standard meme of the ever-victim Jew and the villainous Catholic Pole.

As if the foregoing was not enough, author David Mikics makes these truly amazing assertions, “Nazi doctrine privileged Poles over Jews, but the Poles’ purpose, like that of pigs in pork-loving Germany, was to feed the Reich.” (p. 22). Obviously, Mikics has NO CLUE about real history. Poles were not privileged in any way, shape, or form by the Germans. Not only Poles but also Jews were exploited for forced labor and the confiscation of belongings. Poles no less than Jews experienced genocide (the Polokaust or Polonocaust): The only difference between Poles and Jews was that of timing of murderous events in accordance with German policies.

BUT MAUS IS ONLY SEMI-FICTION AND BIOGRAPHY

So what? Malicious fiction is still malicious. People tend to form their opinions according to what they read, regardless of its genre. The Polonophobic falsifications in MAUS, make it unacceptable in the classroom–especially in view of the impressionable children and teenagers, and even low-information adults. Distinctions between “biography” and “what really happened” are generally lost on non-specialist readers. [The PROTOCOLS OF THE ELDERS OF ZION is fiction, as almost everyone realizes, but this does not prevent it from creating negative images of Jews in the public imagination. For this reason–and rightly so–Jews object to it.]

Merely the fact that MAUS is “about the Jews” does not entitle Spiegelman to so grossly falsify the history of other peoples (Poles in this case), especially in view of the low-information of most of his readers. He evidently does not realize it, but not only Jews matter. Other peoples’ reputations matter too.

In his MAUS, Spiegelman shows Poles hanging a surviving Jew for coming to reclaim his property. The reader is misled to believe that this was something normative. It was not. The reader is not told that this happened to a small fraction of 1% of Jewish returnees, or that Poles were in crushing poverty and in a desperate housing shortage situation, during and immediately after WWII. Nor is the reader told that, during this same time, a civil war was going on in Poland. During this time, in which several hundred Jews were being killed by Poles out of various motives, Jews collaborating with the Soviets were murdering tens of thousands of Poles.

MAUS IN THE CONTEXT OF HOLOCAUST SUPREMACISM

The statements of author Michael P. Rothberg are instructive, “In the United States today, for Jews to speak out against the policies of the state of Israel or to question the uses to which the Holocaust has been put almost guarantees them unofficial excommunication from the Jewish community.” (p. 152).

A VARIANT OF THE “POLISH DEATH CAMP” FALSEHOOD

Subtle, Orwellian language is evident. Michael P. Rothberg, in referring to a drawing from MAUS I, comments, “…before a backdrop of Jews hung by the Germans in a Polish ghetto.” (p. 142). Here we go again.

For the readers’, and Rothberg’s, information, the Poles never put Jews into ghettos: The German conquerors and rulers did. Moreover, before WWII, Jews were not forced by the Polish authorities into residential segregation. Instead, Jews, with few exceptions, had long chosen to live in self-segregation.

The reader seriously interested in Holocaust cartoons deserves better. He/she should consider the following proposed cartoon that I made up:

———

MUNGO, a Factual Animal-Character Holocaust Tale, and “Counterbalance” to the Factually-Challenged MAUS

THE PLOT:

Snakes overrun a territory, and are being fought and killed by mongooses. The snakes kill many mongooses. The snakes begin to hunt for rats. Dark rats emerge, helping the snakes find and eat the white rats. Eventually, the snakes also start to eat the dark rats. Bears come along, and the mongooses join in to help the bears destroy the snakes. The bears turn against the mongooses. Then some dark and white rats emerge, and help the bears attack the mongooses. The end.

LIST OF CHARACTERS:

Snakes—the Germans

Mongooses—the Poles

Dark Rats—Jewish Collaborators (JUDENRAETE) With the Germans

White Rats—Innocent Jews

Bears—the Soviets