Kirakosyan 1
Davit Kirakosyan
Tsoleen Feghali
English 102
10/26/2025
Animal Symbolism
In Art Spiegelman’s groundbreaking graphic novel, Maus, the fusion of image and text is
critical to how the story is experienced and understood. Spiegelman’s decision to personify his
characters as animals instead of humans is one of the text’s most important and innovative
choices, deeply affecting not only the reader’s perception and emotional engagement but also
shaping the thematic undercurrents of identity, dehumanization, and memory. By layering
meaning through both visual metaphor and narrative, Spiegelman challenges readers to question
how history is told and who gets to own their story. The use of animal imagery goes beyond
surface symbolism; it operates at the core of the novel’s message. This essay will examine
Spiegelman’s rationale for depicting characters as animals, closely analyze three specific frames
that highlight the deeper meaning behind this creative choice, and explore how the interplay of
the graphic novel form and animal allegory illuminate Maus’s significant message.
Spiegelman’s use of animal allegories in Maus is not a mere stylistic device but an
intentional strategy that deepens the narrative’s impact; specific frames revealing facial
confusion, blurred boundaries of identity, and predator-prey dynamics all illustrate how the
animal representations amplify themes of dehumanization, survival, and intergenerational
Kirakosyan 2
trauma—an effect that would be diminished or lost if humans were depicted instead. Together,
the hybrid of graphic storytelling and animal allegory forces readers to confront the constructed
layers of Holocaust memory and meaning.
Early on, readers may be tempted to interpret Spiegelman’s use of animals as a simple,
almost child-like visual device: Jews are mice, Nazis are cats, Poles are pigs, and so forth.
However, this choice is far from simplistic. In an interview, Spiegelman himself said he was
inspired by Nazi propaganda, which frequently depicted Jews as vermin or disease (Spiegelman
1992). By visually literalizing this grotesque stereotype, Spiegelman does not reinforce the
dehumanization of Jews; instead, he exposes it, forcing the reader to confront how lethal such
reductive thinking can be. Additionally, animal faces both distance and universalize the
characters, allowing the trauma of Vladek and his generation to become a story not just of
individuals but of entire peoples marked by persistent othering (Ewert 1995). Many scholars
argue that casting characters as animals creates immediate, visceral associations for the reader,
encouraging critical reflection on the process of stereotyping (Chute 2008).
One of the most illuminating frames occurs late in the first volume, as Vladek attempts to
pass as a non-Jew in Nazi-occupied Poland. In this frame, Art shows characters wearing crudely
stitched-on pig masks over their mouse faces. The masks’ visible straps and awkward fit suggest
both the desperate necessity and ultimate futility of hiding one’s true identity (Spiegelman 150).
Here, the image is inseparable from the text: Vladek’s explanation (“We had to wear these masks
to go outside”) collides with the uncomfortable sight of the mask slipping, ears poking through
holes. The interplay between text and image creates a powerful ambiguity—what is authentic,
what is performance, and who controls the narrative? The animal masks make the readers
constantly aware of the socially constructed nature of racial categories. Unlike a novel featuring
Kirakosyan 3
human faces, this frame’s tension is heightened by the exaggerated artifice: everyone is always
already in disguise, navigating relentless suspicion.
Another vital sequence is the depiction of Nazi roundups and hunts. In one memorable
frame, a group of helmeted cats—grim, methodical, and menacing—herd terrified mice at
gunpoint into boxcars (Spiegelman 88). The visual simplicity conceals psychological complexity.
The cats are not cartoonish villains, but chillingly ordinary in their obedience to power. Mice, so
often reviled as pests or prey, are shown with wide stare and hunched posture, their bodies
radiating fear and powerlessness. Through the use of animal imagery, Spiegelman collapses vast
historical complexity into a single, arresting tableau. The symbolism is not only familiar, it is
loaded—with centuries of prejudice and genetic memory, both animalistic and human. The
cat-mouse dynamic is not just about who is predator and who is prey; it’s about how identities
are forcibly assigned and lived through imposed lenses of hatred. Here, animalization does not
reduce meaning, but radically enhances it: the reader is never allowed to relax into forgetting this
is a constructed, mediated reality. If humans were depicted instead, the emotional shock and the
allegorical distance—necessary to process such trauma—would be lost. The horror would risk
becoming either overwhelming or sanitized.
The third critical frame comes from the meta-narrative of the present-day father-son
relationship. On several occasions, Art is shown as a mouse, but his mask momentarily slides as
he grapples with his father’s stories, his own guilt, and the burden of representation (Spiegelman
198). In one panel, Art is depicted slumped at his drawing table, surrounded by the ghosts of
mice, skeletons, and photographs—the mouse features now ambiguous, melting into something
more human (Spiegelman 201). Here, the animal imagery comes to symbolize not just ethnic
identity but psychological inheritance. The mouse mask is both a marker and a prison, an
Kirakosyan 4
inheritance and a wound. By keeping characters animalized even in moments of great
vulnerability, Spiegelman illustrates the persistence of trauma across generations, and the
difficulty of speaking for—and through—a family’s unspeakable past. The blending of animal
and human features in this frame underscores the impossibility of perfect empathy or total
translation. Only the hybrid language of comics—part image, part text, part animal mask—can
begin to contain such complexity.
Imagining Maus with human characters requires us to consider what would be gained,
and what irretrievably lost. On one hand, viewers might be forced to contend directly with more
realistic depictions of violence and suffering. The distance afforded by animal allegory is,
paradoxically, what allows for readers’ engagement without overwhelm. It is not a trivial
softening but a strategy for emotional survival—the same way humor or art are often used to
manage trauma (Baetens 2011). Human faces might also lock the reader into the particulars of
individual experience, preventing the work from achieving the universality that animal allegory
invokes. Spiegelman’s approach allows for a critique not just of the Holocaust, but of all
attempts to categorize, stereotype, and annihilate the “other” through reductive imagery. The
animal masks make explicit the surreal horror of such thinking—an impact that mere human
portraiture, however skillful, could not fully achieve.
Furthermore, graphic novels rely upon the short-circuit between seen and read, drawing
the reader actively into the construction of meaning. The animal masks become visual
metaphors, shaping every reader’s encounter and interpretation, refusing to let any character
remain simply a victim or a villain. If Spiegelman had used only human faces, the graphic novel
would lose this layered, self-critical force, and with it the ability to both haunt and teach.
Kirakosyan 5
Maus stands as a unique testament to the power of graphic narrative and visual metaphor.
The use of animals is not superficial, nor does it operate in isolation. The melding of image, text,
and allegory creates a space in which history can be both preserved and questioned, identified
with and doubted. In making his characters both more and less than human, Spiegelman exposes
the ways in which all identity is fragile, constructed, and haunted by memory. The animal masks,
specific frames, and the very format of the graphic novel combine to offer a powerful form of
bearing witness—at once distant and intimate, absurd and devastating.
Kirakosyan 6
Works Cited
Baetens, Jan. “The Graphic Novel as a Medium for Holocaust Narratives.” Journal of Comics
and Culture, vol. 4, no. 1, 2011, pp. 40–59.
Chute, Hillary L. Graphic Women: Life Narrative and Contemporary Comics. Columbia UP,
2010.
Ewert, Jeanne C. “Reading Visual Narrative: Art Spiegelman’s Maus.” Narrative, vol. 3, no. 1,
1995, pp. 87–103.
Spiegelman, Art. Maus: A Survivor’s Tale. Pantheon Books, 1992.