It seems stupid to ask, "What is the significance of history in Maus?" The question seems stupid, because the story is history. But, on the other hand, mice do not (that I know of) discriminate against each other because of race, gender or stereotypes. From what I know, mice do not have varying ideas on morality, and they do not keep track of their own histories. The balance between narration and history in Maus is key to understanding its literary importance.
In Hayden White's article that we read, he seems to go back and forth between whether or not narrating history lends it more or less significance/credibility. On page 3 he states that, "Real events should simply be; they can very well serve as the referents of a discourse, can be spoken about, but they should not pose as the subjects of a narrative." But later on page 5, he paraphrases Kant in saying that "historical analyses without narrative are blind." It is as if there is an either/or situation at stake here. I personally do not believe this is the case. I think the fact that Speigelman's Maus is given its literary importance not because it is simply a narrative, and not only because it is history, but because it is both. The fact that it is a true experience of real events, allows readers and extra layer of sentiment towards the characters. We hurt a little extra as we imagine these events happening in our families, even as we imagine some of the effects of history living on in our family. Maybe our father finds something we wrote that we never wanted him to see, and we are saddened and dismayed. Maybe he constantly judges our appearance or lifestyles but then frustrates us when he asks for our help. We are more deeply affected by the story because it is true.
We are also more affected because it is a narrative. To hear the word "Nazi" stirs up ideas in our minds, of Germany, World War II, concentration camps, swastikas. But to bring these ideas down to a personal level, another human's story, we relate. We learn how to experience history. It does not matter that his characters are mice, pigs, and cats. We get it. We know history well enough to know what happened, and the animals allow for readers to access the story differently. Instead of our already built-up mosaic of thoughts on what it would have been like to be a Jew in Germany at this time, the narration and characterization allow us to let down guards that a textbook wouldn't. History does not stop; the narration does. Therefore, narrating pieces of history does not grant all of history the same significance. Maus offers insight to one experience, in order that that experience can be better understood by a greater audience.
