Zusak differentiates Death from our idea of death in several ways. First of all, he creates a period between a person dying, and Death taking him, which makes me think about a few things. If there is that period between death and Death taking you, does that mean you can be "not alive", but not be dead? Normally "not alive" and "dead" would be synonymous, but Zusak defies normal logic, as he does with most of his novel, and stimulates the reader's thoughts with the smallest of footnotes. Also, many people are under the impression that Death kills people, but Zusak plays with the idea that he is not malevolent, but a more emotionally complex character, who is, in a sense, just doing his job. I find it funny that I am using the term "just doing his job" talking about Death, because it seems only applicable to humans, but as I apply it in this situation I see how Zusak has played with the notion of a very humanized Death, although he is definitely not human.
Continuing with the idea of an emotionally layered and less evil Death, I think Zusak has made it clear to the reader that Death doesn't kill. I think he provides subtle hints that although Death may try to be tough, under his crusty exterior he really cares. Many people think that Death kills people, but he is only the harvester of their souls. This also supports the theory that Death does feel some remorse when taking the soles away. He mentions behavior of the "survivors" or, the ones left to cope with the Death he has just carried through. His behavior notations make me think that he doesn't want to be carrying out the job he is, and that he needs something to take his mind off the sorrow of the situation. Zusak created "the colors" for Death as a coping mechanism. If Death can observe the intricate "colors" he doesn't have to look at crying family members, shocked friends, and most of all, the corpse in question.
Overall, Zusak does what he does in most of his book: defies general thinking and normality, re-examines a complex character of lore. He makes Death magical, but at the same time, Zusak gives him human properties. He differentiates between Death, death, dying, and killing (not an easy task). On the whole, Death is a very, very interesting character, and I personally love Zusak's re-creation of an often visited character.
The link provided below is to The Book Thief website. There is a very captivating interview with Markus Zusak that I would encourage everyone to view, but for you extra interested readers, you should definitely explore the site and look at all the pages it has to offer. Enjoy!
Maybe it is just the length of this, but I am very confused at what your overall point is. Most of this stuff we went over in class already.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading that lengthy post I was expecting to be able to argue a point with you. :( The only point I understood from your post, that I feel like we can discuss is the fact that Death feels a superiority to humans. The way you describe it makes him seem arrogant or patronizing to humans. But he is far from that. He understands humans in a deeper and more perceptive way than anyone else. (coughcoughzackOMNISCIENT). Although he may feel he has a greater purpose in the world, I find he would want nothing more than to trade his existence with an ordinary being's, after all at a certain point immortality can no longer be a gift but a burden.
ReplyDeleteI actually agree with you. Maybe I wasn't clear, but I thought I mentioned him being complex and multilayered, with human qualities about him? and that he may say he things like "why do humans aspire for things when in the end I will take them?" (thats obviously not an actual quote but...). I do agree that he understands humans because of his omnisciency (thats totally not a word hehe), but what I meant to convey in my post is that his omnisciency is why he needs to be distracted by the colors, because he doesn't actually enjoy his job, but he genuinely feels remorse for what he must do.
ReplyDeleteYes, I think we all agree on that point though. I was just trying to find a way to discuss that. Since it's rather straight forward.
ReplyDeleteoh and to zack about the length: i was under the inpression it was supposed to be a page long. I could be wrong
ReplyDeleteOK I understand what you are trying to say. Though I thought we went over those points in class already. Either way I agree that he doesn't enjoy his job at all and that he needs distractions to keep him, but I dont think the colors are there to distract him. I think they are his way of observing the where and when of his "life takings"
ReplyDeleteI think another reason for Death's focus on colors is because the colors are the only things that change for him. From death's point of view, I would imagine that after a while, he would get bored of watching people die from the diseases and/or wounds. The colors would vary as death went from place to place. As everyone else has said, we've talked about this a lot in class, but Zack's point got me thinking about something else related to Death.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering if Death would be a bit more attached to people, such as Liesel, during human wars than during sometime where nobody is fighting a war, such as now. As mentioned on pages 14-15, Death carries arround the stories of others to prove that "human existance is worth it", and I thought that these may also be another form of distraction, designed to help him prove why he should do his job instead of try to escape from it.
1) I would like to disagree with your thought that death speaks in a tone different from humans. I think Zusak means to portray death as a human-like figure to make him more relateable to readers.
ReplyDelete2) I love that you brought up how death is different from dying and killing. Our class section has yett discuss this thoroughly. your thought is intruiging, but where is there evidence? Maybe I just read the entry to fast but I could find little suport to your insight.
3) Lastly, I also support your idea that death might have feelings or emotions. But, I still have conflicting feelings about my own feelings towards death and the perspective towards death in TBT.
ps read my post tonight, as I (coincidentally) wrote a similar one to Charlie's.
(I wrote mine last night before reading his, promise!)
I like Clay's idea that the colors are "the only thing that change for Death." Hadn't thought of that. As for Charlie's rather discursive post, I think that for Zusak to succeed with his narrator (in such a long novel), he needs to create someone sympathetic; someone whose voice, in all its various iterations, that we want to hear. And POSTS DO NOT HAVE TO BE LONG. Just thoughtful.
ReplyDeleteAbout Clay's post, I wonder if Death is trying to escape with colors. When many people think of Death, they think of gray, black, or other gloomy colors. For Death to be able to "vacation" in the other colors is probably a real break for him/her/it. Our Hawaii may be Death's lime green, etc. As we read in The Giver, experiencing color in a life without it is miraculous, and perhaps that exact feeling is what Death feels when he looks at the wonder of colors.
ReplyDeleteTo Alexandra's post - I think that Death has every right to see itself as superior to humans. If it wanted to, Death could sweep the world and rid it of all humans, and any other living things, for that matter. Death is far above our heads.