Reading Guide to "Of Mice and Mimesis"

Andreas Huyssen's "Of Mice and Mimesis" is an undeniably dense article, so take your time establishing what it is he argues, and be sure to summarize in your own words before Tuesday's class, as it will help you during class discussion as well as in understanding the overview I will provide during class.

First things first, in order to fully understand Huyssen's argument, we need to establish the concept of mimesis. Mimesis, from the Greek word meaning imitation, is a term used to describe the function of art in imitating (read: representing) the truth or reality of the world. All art is representation at its most fundamental level, and thus can be viewed as interpretations of the truth. The Holocaust is very often an event said to defy representation, as it exists outside the realm of human reason. For example, so many of the works we've read claim that their experiences are beyond human comprehension, and they often point out that their survival was based on luck. Upon viewing/reading representations, we task ourselves with comprehending a reality that isn't available even to the survivors.

All that being said, Huyssen contends that Maus is a successful example of an "image-text" (a narrative that combines the visual with the textual) because of its multifaceted approach to engaging mimesis. While comic books have largely been considered mainstream and mindless, and elevated forms of literature and poetry have always held an esteemed place opposite that of the mainstream comic book, Spiegelman succeeds in proving that a genre need not be wholly condemned, and that "mainstream" art can still invite a challenging, complicated interpretation.

To sum up Huyssen's argument about the success of Maus, note his statement on page 70:

"Rather than providing us with an enlightened moral or with a happy reconciliation between high and low, human and animal, trauma and memory, the aesthetic and emotional effect of Maus remains jarring throughout. This jarring, irritating effect on the reader results from a variety of pictorial and verbal strategies that have their common vanishing point in mimesis, both in its insidious and in its salutory aspects which, as Adorno would have it, can never be entirely separated from each other."

*******************************************************************************

Some questions to ponder as you read through the article:

What is at the root of Huyssen's praise for this image-text?

What examples does Huyssen provide to support his argument that the jarring effects of Maus are specifically tied to the concept of mimesis (both as he describes it and in the simplified explanation above)?

Since Huyssen claims that whether or not to represent the Holocaust is no longer a relevant question, what do you ascertain he means by the "how" of representation? (Note: The first page sets up the how/why argument, and his subsequent interpretations of specific scenes in Maus should help you understand how he views representing (through mimesis) the events of the Holocaust)