Julianna C’s Comments (group member since Oct 24, 2016)

Julianna C’s comments from the The Commendable Coterie group.

I think it's a really interesting comparison- They're different in almost every aspect. Liesel is a young girl, practices a "safe" religion, didn't leave her family by choice. Max is an adult male, a Jew, and was forced to leave his family for survival reasons- not necessarily his choice, but he knew what he had to do. However, they both have nightmares of their past, and feel comforted by one another when discussing them. Anyone have any thoughts on Max and Liesel's nightmares?

Max wrote his own story over Hitler's as a way of coping with his survivor's guilt, and to further his unique bond with Liesel. On page 208, Max says "To live. Living was living. The price was guilt and shame." Even so, he continues to read Mein Kampf, because he knows that Hitler is his superior. However, once he is shown empathy for this hidden guilt by Liesel, who asks him about his nightmares, he realizes that not all those superior to him are evil. As a way of standing up to the evil Standover man, Hitler, he writes over Mein Kampf as a way of teaching himself that his life isn't completely worthless with the help of Liesel.

Luke I think you meant to comment in response to my post!! I thought that first off by painting over the words of Mein Kampf was symbolic- that book was essentially the key to Max's safety. However, by painting over the words and writing his own story develops Max as a character searching for the meaning of his life within himself. I thought that his usage of white paint was symbolic because it could be looked at as a symbol of rebirth- after all, it was the color Death saw when he "retrieved" Liesel's brother in the beginning of the book, and now Max could be looked at as almost a reincarnation of a brotherly figure to her.

Emma wrote: "Julianna C wrote: "The first parallel I'd like to point out is the significance of the book Mein Kampf to Max and how his own story, The Standover Man, was written over those words. First, Max eras..." That makes so much sense... a brother like figure in the Hubermann household that she was originally supposed to have, but Death took away that chance. Liesel's brother was supposed to live with her in her foster home, but his white death was the reason why he couldn't- now a man who has cheated death is living with her and the Hubermann's and he does possess almost a brotherly relationship with Liesel, which he shows his gratitude for written over white pages. White = rebirth = brother????

Emma wrote: "Max's book "The Standover Man" is powerful in many ways. The book starts off as the man being corrupt, than transitions the "man" into Liesel, which is more of a safe haven. However i am confused a..." I posted my comment the exact same time as you did! I had the same question- I'd like to hear our group members' thoughts on it! I think that maybe Max was referring to Standover Men as people he thought were better than him throughout his life- but when he acknowledges Liesel he means to say that Liesel has a better heart than he'd ever known someone to be able to have?

Also, the title "The Standover Man" and its closing sentence, "the best standover man I've ever known was not a man at all..." carry so much weight. Does anyone have their own analysis of why Max uses the word 'standover'? I feel like at first he makes it seem negative, but when he refers to Liesel as a standover man, he makes it seem almost positive. Is a Standover Man a protector? A superior? A friend?

The first parallel I'd like to point out is the significance of the book Mein Kampf to Max and how his own story, The Standover Man, was written over those words. First, Max erased Mein Kampf's story by painting over the pages in white. I noticed that the color white was first introduced with the death of Liesel's brother- could the color be symbolic of a rebirth within Max? With the 'white death' of Liesel's brother, her life changed forever by being sent to live with the Hubermanns on her own. Now that Max is living in secrecy and safety with the Hubermanns, he composes an extremely meaningful story by painting over the book, or rather, prop, that saved his life with white paint. The story he writes speaks to the theme that I wrote about in another thread, survivor's guilt. Max has been looked down upon his whole life, yet he is the one who has been given the opportunity to survive- something he and Liesel have in common.

I think you meant the Fuhrer's bonfire Mckaela! I agree that that scene is an extremely symbolic part of the story. It's interesting that you pointed out that comparison between the surviving books with the surviving people- both are victims of the Nazi party. This is just an opinion question, but do you think Zusak chose to write about Nazi Germany from the point of view of Death as this reason? Since there were so little survivors, and the stories that those who survived have to tell are often very telling of the evils of humankind, isn't Death the perfect narrator for an epidemic such as the Holocaust?

Another example of how coldness connects to the storyline is how Max practically freezes to death sleeping in the basement, which leads to him being invited to sleep next to the fire during the night. Because of this, Liesel is able to hear the stories of his life when she stays up with him at night.

That's an interesting point Anna. Even if you don't look at the change of seasons, the book is predominantly set in winter and I see a huge connection to the weather and the overall mood of the story. Even coldness in general could be a symbolic element; it's always cold in the Mayor's house because Ilsa keeps all the windows open even in the dead of winter. Liesel pieces together that this may be due to the fact that Ilsa's son Johann died from freezing to death in the war, and she wants to feel close to him in that sense.

This isn't really symbolism, but the fact that he referred to the deceased pilot's open mouth that appeared to be smiling as "A final dirty joke. Another human punchline" to be extremely noteworthy. Those two phrases encompass so many of Death's apparent feelings towards, well, death. Looking back on this early chapter after progressing farther into the book has helped me to realize that Death does a lot of pitying, but can be pitied as well....the language Death uses in this chapter makes me almost feel bad for him. I feel that these phrases add a lot to the overall message of the book and Death's character, thoughts??

My favorite chapter so far in the book, The Eclipse, is rich in symbolism, probably it's one of the rare chapters consistently narrated through Death's own eyes. This chapter seems to stand on its own, almost a random addition but you can tell there are elements of foreshadowing and it was definitely included with the purpose to introduce Death's characteristics and affinity for colors. The chapter begins with him saying "Next is a signature black, to show the poles of my versatility, if you like." Zusak included this to contrast with Death's previous experience with the color white, but I also think he chose this chapter/death's color to be represented with black due to the sorrow and darkness it possesses. He speaks to the death of the pilot as an 'eclipse', which I noted in a previous thread seems to be a very symbolic choice of wording on Death's part. The use of heavy imagery in this chapter, with words like "metallic little bird", "the horizon was beginning to charcoal", "skeleton-colored skin", all add to the solemn and morbid tone of Death's viewpoint towards 'human error'-caused deaths, such as plane crashes.

Anna, I think your comment is a really great thought in response to my previous comment where I said Zusak portrays Death as more 'heavenly' than our stereotypical idea of death.

Luke wrote: "Responding to Julianna's post, I do not believe that Death is the victim, but rather war is the victim (in this scenario). Yes, death is unavoidable, and it is inevitable for all people. However, D..."
When you say war is the killer, isn't that exactly Death's point? He suffers over the evil caused by humankind, and war is the prime example of how his job is made even heavier by actions done by humans unto humans. Doesn't that make him a victim of human evils that literally lure him to take more lives? I agree with you on Death having an allegorical entity, though!!

I see an overall theme of survivors' guilt in this book- guilt exudes from Liesel, Max, and Death. When Liesel steals his first book from the Furher's bonfire, she can feel the guilt as heat from the book. Whether this heat was real or conceptual, Death notes that as she walks away from the scene of the crime so to speak, "beneath her shirt, a book was eating her up", an example of her guilt in addition to her nightmare-inducing guilt over her brothers' death. Max lives with the guilt of leaving his family behind when escaping the Nazis- beginning when he first walked out- "It tortured him. If only he'd turned around for one last look...perhaps then the guilt would not have been so heavy" (p 193). As for Death, he has a guilty existence. In the beginning of the book, he notes that he "will often catch an eclipse when a human dies...I've seen more eclipses than I care to remember". Why do you think Death chose to refer to the passing of a human as an eclipse? Death uses a lot of symbolic language to get speak meaningfully but quick- can you find any other examples???

Brigid wrote: "Julianna C wrote: "Like Death controls our own reality, he controls the storyline as well. This is seen repeatedly at the end of every chapter, when he closes with 3-5 short sentences that build su..."
As a character, I agree that Death can be viewed as a victim. He sometimes even seems persecuted by the lives of the humans he 'watches over'. As a concept however, I feel like since Death is an unavoidable fact of life, it is in control. Is Death a victim of human war? Yes. Is Death the taker of human lives plagued by circumstances such as sickness? Yes. I think Death is a victim and an aggressor in itself. I think the question is should we perceive Death as a concept or a being like Zusak portrays? It's interesting to think that after reading The Book Thief, Death could be perceived as having an almost "alter-ego" of a watchful entity with a conscience which people, in reality, would most likely associate with heaven.

Like Death controls our own reality, he controls the storyline as well. This is seen repeatedly at the end of every chapter, when he closes with 3-5 short sentences that build suspense regarding what's going to happen next. By doing so, Death reminds you that he knows everything that has happened, is happening, and is going to happen, without seeming malicious doing so. I think Zusak portrayed Death this way to remind us that Death is always looking for meaning in the lives of his victims. Do you agree? What are your thoughts on the way Death includes short sentences that have a way of hitting hard when you read them?

In response to Anna's question, I think Death in itself is a paradox; it/he sees both the evil and the beauty in humans. The opening lines of the book are "First the colors. Then the humans. That's usually how I see things. Or at least, how I try". On page 5, Death continues about his thoughts on colors, and mentions that he sometimes uses the colors as a distraction/vacation-a distraction from the survivors left to deal with the effects of his actions towards his victims. Death says "They're the ones I can't stand to look at," which reveals his raw emotion and genuine guilt for the job he must do on a daily basis. If Death finds it difficult to witness sorrow, grief, and broken heartedness, doesn't that show that despite his "evil" work, and the evil he sees humans commit on a daily basis, Death can be characterized as someone/something with an apologetic and sincere nature.

A major contrast is seen in Leisel's relationships with her foster Mama and Papa. Mrs. Hubermann is the sarcastic, foul-mouthed, disciplinarian of the household; Leisel respects, obeys, and loves her, but a strong emotional bond doesn't really exist. However, Leisel adores her Papa, who is her tender hearted, supportive caretaker. While Mrs. Hubermann lectures Leisel on responsibilities, Mr. Hubermann consoles her night terrors and teaches her to read despite his lack of education. Early on, Leisel sees this difference between her foster parents- when asked to call them Mama and Papa, she points out how she called her birth mother Mama, but expressed that she "would have no trouble calling him [Hans] Papa" (35). These different parental relationships, along with the fact that Leisel already has a "Mama" that she left behind, greatly influences Leisel's growth as a character throughout the book.