Exploring Death in Markus Zusak's The Book Thief, Lecture notes of Literature

Download Exploring Death in Markus Zusak's The Book Thief and more Lecture notes Literature in PDF only on Docsity!

English Studies – Literary Option Bachelor 15 Credits Spring semester – 2021 Martin Cathcart Fröden

Narrative Space: Exploring Death in

Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief

Ellen Rönn

Table of Contents

• 1. Introduction
• 2. Background
• 3. Theory and Method
  • 3.1. Focalization, Time, and Unusual Narration
  • 3.2. Death as a Concept and Powerful Being in Fiction
• 4. Analysis................................................................................................................................
  • 4.1. Death as a Narrator
  • 4.2. The Space of Death in The Book Thief
  • 4.3. Death’s Narrative Space and How it is Perceived.........................................................
• 5. Conclusion
• Works Cited

comparing The Book Thief to the film adaptation or other novels by Zusak; instead, I am looking at Death’s narrative space in the novel. Narration is mainly analysed in the context of focalization, time, and unusual narration. In this context, unusual narration refers to narration that appears to be extreme, strange, or different. In addition, the space of Death is analysed in the framework of how death—both as a concept and as a powerful being—is portrayed in literature. This research aims to look at how Death uses his narrative space to alleviate the story’s tragedy.

2. Background

The Book Thief is a popular novel. In an article in The Guardian , it was described as: “a number one New York Times bestseller, The Book Thief has been marketed as an older children’s book in some countries and as an adult novel in others. It could and - dare I say? - should certainly be read by both” (Ardagh). The novel brings up many significant themes, for instance, dehumanization, powerlessness, and family. The story is set in the historical context of World War II and is noticeably tragic because it takes place during the Holocaust and Hitler era. Despite being about a heavy matter, the novel is particularly suited to young adults. In the novel, Liesel faces multiple grievous moments; she watches her brother die, her mother leaves, the little town in Germany where she lives gets bombed and her foster family and best friend die. Death as a narrator is specifically relevant in this context as the space he is given provides the story with a different perspective of World War II. Previous research has analysed the novel in different contexts. In “Shaking Words: Memoir as Confrontation in Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief ,” Domínguez-Rué analyses the role of words in relation to those whose stories are silenced, the theme of trauma, and its impact on young adults as a Holocaust text. Furthermore, in “Bibliophilia, Bibliomania or Bibliokleptomania? Liesel’s Passionate Love Affair with Books in Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief, ” Vernay explores the effect of books and how Liesel relates to them. In terms of narration, Almeida de Oliveira and Maggio have, in “The Deadly Perception of the Witness: Focalization in Markus Zusak’s The Book Thief ,” analysed how focalization helped create the atmosphere and meaning of the text. They focused on the characters and the importance of acknowledging focalization to understand a given narrative. However, I intend to explore the narration of Death in the context of his narrative space and its effect on the tragic story.

is focalization. Rimmon-Kenan writes that focalization “has both a subject and an object. The subject (the ‘focalizer’) is the agent whose perception orients the presentation, whereas the object (the ‘focalized’) is what the focalizer perceives” (75). This concept entails that— within narration—the focalizer’s point of view controls the given narrative and the focalized. When examining focalization, it adds a layer to the analysis of the perspective of the narrator. In this sense, there is a deeper understanding of the narrator and the story being told. According to Rimmon-Kenan, focalization can be external or internal; referred to as “narrator-focalizer” or “character-focalizer” (75). This means that a story is either close to the narrator or to the character. In The Book Thief , the story is close to Death as a narrator since he is telling the story of Liesel Meminger. Focalization is substantial for analysing narration; specifically, to tell from what perspective the narrator is looking at the story. Time is another concept within narration, specifically, analepsis and prolepsis. They refer to past events and future events (Rimmon-Kenan 46). An example from Narrative Fiction is: “again like analepses, they can cover either a period beyond the end of the first narrative (external), or a period anterior to it but posterior to the point at which it is narrated (internal), or combine both (mixed)” (Rimmon-Kenan 49). Here, Rimmon-Kenan explains the difference between prolepses and analepses. These concepts provide further analysis of narratives as it is possible to declare if a narrator is external or internal. In relation to Death in The Book Thief , the ability to jump in time as an external narrator—specifically to future events—removes suspension to the novel as he reveals the fate of the story and its characters. Focalization and time are both applicable concepts when looking at Death’s narration of The Book Thief. Specifically, they provide an understanding of Death’s narrative space and how it is used to convey the story’s tragedy in a light-hearted way. To be able to analyse how Death uses his narrative space in The Book Thief , it is essential to look at unusual narration. This provides a profound insight into Death as a

narrator. An example of extreme narration is what Richardson argues in the chapter “Three Extreme Forms of Narration.” He writes, “we may identify and bring together the varieties of posthumanist narrators and voices that have superseded the traditional figure of the narrator as a person who is telling a story and who is subject to the normal abilities and limitations of a human being or humanlike narrating agent” (Richardson 103). Here, he talks about narrators that have left the traditional structure of a narrator. These narrators are beings that cannot be bound to the rules of reality. Death as a narrator in The Book Thief is non- traditional and is not subject to the normal abilities of a human. In fact, no narrator is, since they are made up—Death, however, is very far from being seen as something close to the abilities of a human. When looking at strange narration, Landais offers a perspective of narration in fantastic fiction in which she talks about metalepsis in Patrick Senécal’s novel Aliss. Landais writes, “the last confusion of the narrative and diegetic levels induced by the authorial metalepsis in Aliss happens when the narratee is encouraged to follow the narrator into the story, as if they were at the same level as the characters: ‘Aliss is here, in that car… Let’s go with her!’” (241). Here, Landais claims there to be confusion between levels, and it results in an uncanny feeling with the reader (241). This uncanny feeling can be detected in Death as a narrator in The Book Thief in that he invites the reader into the story. These different levels of narration are noteworthy as they can disclose the narrator’s intention in a story. For example, the intention of leaving the reader with a very strange feeling. Death often positions himself at the same level as the characters, where his intention could be to make the reader feel uneasy. However, it can also induce a feeling of comfort as the reader might feel closer to Death as a character, making him appear less scary. The notion of Death appearing less frightening can also be found when looking at a different kind of narration and what Cohn calls “narrated monologue.” In placing her own

Brennan analyses how death, as a concept, is portrayed in literature and introduces a theorist’s perspective: “Blanchot argues that humans are preoccupied by dying ‘because when we die, we leave behind not only the world but also death.’ This leaving behind of death constitutes a profound paradox. ‘Death works with us in the world: it is a power that humanizes nature, that raises existence to being, and it is within each one of us as our most human quality’” (103). Here, Brennan—with Blanchot’s argument—explains the power of death; it exists within us and is a reminder that we are alive. Consequently, in fiction, death is a power that exists in every character as the most human quality. This relates to Death in The Book Thief as he often reflects on characters’ thoughts and feelings; he uses his space to exist within them. Furthermore, Saghafi also analyses French writer and literary theorist Blanchot’s perspective of the space of death—in relation to power—in literature. He writes, “explicitly distinguishing ‘death’ from ‘dying,’ Blanchot, in the later fragments of the text, goes on to associate the former with ‘power [pouvoir],’ ‘force [puissance],’ and with ‘the limited,’ whereas the latter is linked to ‘non-power’ and the crossing of boundaries” (Saghafi 9). This means that death is linked to power and force and dying is connected to not having power and crossing the boundary from living to being dead. This can be interpreted as Death having power and humans having none because they are mortal; how Death in The Book Thief uses that power will be discussed further. Additionally, in “Words, Silence, Experiences: Derrida’s Unheimlich Responsibility” by Scott, he presents a perspective of the power of death. Scott writes, “my guiding hypotheses are that death, words, silence, and lives in their happenings exceed the laws that function with them and that none of their happenings is sovereign” (21). Here, he suggests that the happenings of death, words, silence, and lives are not unlimited such as something

having ultimate power. In fiction, it can then be discussed if death holds that power or not; this will be examined in relation to Death as the narrator in The Book Thief. By exploring Brennan, Saghafi, and Scott’s theories on the space of Death in fiction further, a foundation can be established to analyse Death in The Book Thief and identify how he uses his narrative space to alleviate a tragic story.

4 .1. Death as a Narrator In the novel, Death as the narrator jumps in time on several occasions throughout the story. Rimmon-Kenan writes, “a prolepsis is a narration of a story-event at a point before earlier events have been mentioned. The narration, as it were, takes an excursion into the future of the story” (46). Very often, Death reveals the course of the story. For instance, letting the reader know the fate of the story he is about to tell: “the small German town had been flung apart one more time. Snowflakes of ash fell so lovelily you were tempted to stretch out your tongue to catch them, taste them. Only, they would have scorched your lips. They would have cooked your mouth” (Zusak 23). Here, Death has given away that the German town in which the story takes place will be bombed. This ability to jump in time and tell the story however Death pleases is interesting in that an author does not usually give away the ending so early in the story. Death even admits to spoiling the ending, “of course, I’m being rude. I’m spoiling the ending, not only of the entire book, but of this particular piece of it” (Zusak 247). Doing this takes away a lot of the suspension in the novel. The reader knows how the story will end, already in the beginning. Consequently, it also alleviates the discomfort of not knowing what will happen next. In addition, time can be connected to focalization. Rimmon-Kenan writes, “an external focalizer has at his disposal all the temporal dimensions of the story (past, present and future)” (79). Death as an external narrator can navigate through temporal dimensions. For example, “for now, though, let’s let him enjoy it. We’ll give him seven months. Then we come for him. And, oh, how we come” (Zusak 133). Here, Death predicts the future by revealing the fate of a character. Furthermore, Death as an external focalizer knows everything—if there is something he does not tell the reader, it is because he does not want to. Rimmon-Kenan writes, “the external focalizer (or narrator-focalizer) knows everything about the represented world, and when he restricts his knowledge, he does so out of rhetorical

considerations” (80). Additionally, the external focalizer can pass through into the focalized’s consciousness (Rimmon-Kenan 82). Death does this all the time as he presents the characters’ thoughts. For instance, “as she started painting, Liesel thought about Max Vandenburg fighting the Führer, exactly as he’d explained it” (Zusak 260). Death possesses knowledge of events and characters and chooses what to tell the reader. When presenting characters’ thoughts, he provides the information he believes is necessary. For example, when a frightening event occurs, Death does not always portray the characters’ fear of it. Zusak writes, “at just after eleven p.m. that same night, Max Vandenburg walked up Himmel Street with a suitcase full of food and warm clothes. German air was in his lungs. The yellow stars were on fire. When he made it to Frau Diller’s, he looked back one last time to number thirty- three. He could not see the figure in the kitchen window, but she could see him” (392). This describes the moment Max, the Jew hiding in the Hubermann’s basement, must leave the only safe place he has ever known. It is a frightening moment for Max as he is left helpless into the dangerous unknown. Yet, Death does not detail any fear Max might supposedly feel about such an event. In this sense, he uses his narrative space to control information about events and characters to ease the tragic plot. In addition to telling the reader the characters’ thoughts and feelings, Death frequently comments on the characters with an impersonal tone, resulting in sympathy. Cohn writes, “but no matter how ‘impersonal’ the tone of the text that surrounds them, narrated monologues themselves tend to commit the narrator to attitudes of sympathy or irony” (504). Death’s comments on the characters’ situations can make him appear less scary as he is occasionally adding sympathetic features. For example, “you could argue that Liesel Meminger had it easy. She did have it easy compared to Max Vandenburg. Certainly, her brother practically died in her arms. Her mother abandoned her. But anything was better than being a Jew” (Zusak 165). Here, Death compares Liesel and Max with a sympathetic tone

consequence of this is that I’m always finding humans at their best and worst. I see their ugliness and their beauty, and I wonder how the same thing can be both. Still, they have one thing that I envy. Humans, if nothing else, have the good sense to die” (Zusak 481). Here, Death describes his jealousy of humans’ ability to die. Resultantly, Death’s confession of his interpretation of humans implies that we have an advantage that Death does not. Consequently, feeling like you somehow have leverage over Death can result in a calm feeling. Even though his envy is primarily positioned in our mortality, it still makes the reader feel good to be superior. Additionally, he portrays dying to be something desirable. Correspondingly, to die becomes less terrifying; it evolves into something that just is. Our mortality is a part of us, and to Death, it is the humans’ best quality. Death is a supernatural being, something obvious in the narrative space he takes in the novel. Richardson analyses this type of extreme narrator; someone who goes away from the normal abilities of a human. He writes, “we should have a place for shifting, depersonalized, multivoiced texts that transcend or traduce the sensibility of a single narrator, a composite figure we may refer to as the ‘incommensurate narrator’” (Richardson 86). In Richardson’s opinion, an unusual narrator who is not of this world is needed in fiction. He claims that it could benefit “a certain minimal discursive consistency” (Richardson 86). Accordingly, having a narrator like Death could be useful to tell a coherent and meaningful story. Furthermore, Death’s narration entails a feeling of strangeness—removing seriousness. He acts as a fantastic being and uses his abilities to come closer to the reader. Landais writes, “the feeling of the uncanny taken in its Freudian understanding is thus essential to fantastic fiction. Such a feeling can notably rise from specific character representations, such as ghosts or vampires. These characters often have in common the fact that they transgress some kind of boundaries, like the one between life and death” (237). This very strange feeling rises from Death—he often goes beyond the bounds of life and death.

For example, “it suffices to say that at some point in time, I will be standing over you, as genially as possible. Your soul will be in my arms. A colour will be perched on my shoulder. I will carry you gently away” (Zusak 14). This description of how Death will come for you when you die leaves a peculiar feeling. Even though it is intimidating in that he describes your death, he says it in a comforting way. This makes the story special because the reader gets invited into it. Feeling a part of the story you read is strange, especially when Death is the one who speaks to you. Nonetheless, this eccentricity can be perceived as relaxed because it takes away the seriousness of the actual storyline. Landais continues the discussion of boundaries and writes about the distinction between story level and narration level—relating it to erasing the difference separating the narrator and the story (238). This means that a boundary can be crossed. When Death invites the reader into the story, the distinction between the universe of Death’s narration and the story is removed. He transgresses a boundary where he positions himself at the same level as the reader. For instance, “does this worry you? I urge you—don’t be afraid. I’m nothing if not fair” (Zusak 13). Death invites the reader into the story by asking if you are worried and then tells you not to be afraid. This creates a feeling of comfort as well as something uneasy. It is comforting in that he speaks to the reader and is attentive towards the reader’s feelings. However, it still raises a feeling of something very strange because it is unusual. Either way, it still alleviates the tragic story as both these feelings take away the seriousness of the plot. Another example is: “I said it to the book thief and I say it now to you. A last note from your narrator. I am haunted by humans” (Zusak 538). These are the last words from Death in the novel. When ending the story, Death makes sure to include the reader in his last message. It is both strange and encouraging to be included. As a fantastic being, Death narrates the story with unusual features that provide it with a light-hearted feeling.

becomes easier to understand him and the burdens he carries. In fact, just because Death must collect dead souls, does not mean he enjoys it. Furthermore, Brennan continues, “‘the representation of death is not the representation of a presence, an object of perception or intuition—we cannot draw a likeness of death, a portrait, a still life … Thus, representations of death are misinterpretations , or rather they are representations of an absence’” (103). In The Book Thief , the representation of Death is a misinterpretation in that he is a fantastic being, he does not obey the rules of reality. However, he is not absent from the story since he is telling it. When he is telling the story, he delivers messages to the reader as well as putting himself into the story. “Her shop was obliterated, the counter landing across the road, and her framed photo of Hitler was taken from the wall and thrown to the floor. The man was positively mugged and beaten to a glass- shattering pulp. I stepped on him on my way out” (Zusak 519). Here, Death steps on a photo of Hitler. In this account, he delivers a message to the reader which works as a kind of statement against Hitler. Additionally, he places himself in the story as he steps on the photo. Zusak acknowledges Death’s views on Hitler a few times throughout the story. For instance, “no person was able to serve the Führer as loyally as me. A human doesn’t have a heart like mine. The human heart is a line, whereas my own is a circle, and I have the endless ability to be in the right place at the right time” (Zusak 481). Here, Death explains his loyalty to Hitler. Death claims that his heart provides him with the ability to serve Hitler in a way a human cannot. If Death as the worst possible being serves Hitler best, it suggests that Hitler too is the worst. This portrayal of Hitler enables the reader to comprehend the amount of tragedy he caused. Death makes the story less frightening when making ironic comments on its historical context. Temin and Dahl analyses historical injustices in relation to narration and writes, “as a source of social and political critique, irony functions as a counter-narrative—a narrative

countering dominant regimes of historical truth. It can loosen the grip of romantic, tragic, and comic plots, which potentially distort our understandings of historical injustice and the notions of responsibility we derive from them” (911). Death uses ironic comments on the historical context to alleviate its tragedy. In this way, our understanding of the Hitler era and the tragedy it caused does not become as agitated. While Death conveys the tragedy of the historical context, he manages to remove some of its seriousness. For instance, Death says, “their fingernails had scratched at the wood and in some cases were nailed into it by the sheer force of desperation, and their spirits came towards me, into my arms. We climbed out of those shower facilities, onto the roof and up, into eternity’s certain breadth. They just kept feeding me. Minute after minute. Shower after shower” (Zusak 346). Here, Death describes how he collects Jews. Instead of portraying a factual picture of a gas chamber, Death details how he was fed with souls. He tells this historical event contrary to what might be predicted by the reader. Accordingly, he loosens the grip of the tragic plot to alter the way the historical context is perceived. Death still manages to present the horror of the situation, but he does it by changing the way he tells it. In this way, his unexpected comments on the historical context alleviate the story. Additionally, Death as a powerful being does not have to apply to the rules of reality and uses his abilities to control the course of the story. It can be discussed if he has ultimate power—superior to all else—or not. Scott talks about the effect of words and discusses if death, words, silence, and lives have ultimate power. He writes, “the limiting effects and distances of reflection (and grammar) are wonderful. They allow us to play in thoughts and words, to deviate, invent, and create, to shift meanings and valences, to overcome the barriers of senses and rules, to move beyond the inertia that is installed by those limiting effects” (Scott 22). In relation to The Book Thief , the use of thoughts and words concerning Death surmount rules and limits. Death contains the power to decide the course of events. Zusak