When Karl shares his story in Chapter 9, no white space is used. Contrarily, when Hitler becomes chancellor, plenty of white space is used (pp 164-179). What do you think these narrative approaches are meant to express?
I saw the lack of white space as Karl’s need to blurt out his story without stopping because he might never to be able to start again.
I saw the vast white white space later as the death knell of freedom. The white of oppression and impending doom.
1 Like
Becky_Haase, I think that is a great explanation.
I would add that the lack of white space for Karl made me anxious and feeling that this would never end. It increased my empathy for Karl, and I appreciated how the author was using not only words by spacing to assist with the messaging.
In contrast, the spacing for the Hitler section made me feel uncertainty. It was if the public didn’t know what was going to happen next and Hitler had a blank page to decide the direction.
It was such a smart writing/printing decision. I appreciated how it made me as a reader, slow down and take a moment to think…well done!
1 Like
When Karl shares, it feels like it pouring out from his heart. It all just rushes out.
I found pages 164-179 to be very powerful! It really showed the importance of each step of him becoming chancellor and the pure fear that was arising.
1 Like
That was a powerful, highly effective technique employed by the author. I agree with the thoughts expressed thus far by other readers.
As he told his story, Karl expressed myriad emotions – terror, revulsion, shame, hopelessness, worthlessness, judgment, etc. The writing style made the telling absolutely horrifying and chilling, but riveting. His pain was palpable, his voice distinct. He had never told anyone what he had suffered and I strongly suspect he never told the story again. Just telling it once was so draining, exhausting, and challenging that the pacing felt as thought he tried to purge himself in some way by giving voice to all he had endured. But that, of course, would be a futile effort.
In contrast, as noted by others, the takeover of the German government and stripping away of fundamental rights was a calculated, methodical scheme, depicted with great impact by the paragraphs describing each step with plenty of space surrounding them. The presentation heightened the dramatic tension in an entirely different manner, driving home the lesson to be learned by giving readers a moment to pause, consider, and contemplate the result of each step that ultimately resulted in the total collapse of the German government and descent into fascism.
If I had the chance to interview the author I’d love to know who came up with the idea for the formatting. It was very effective.
1 Like
The author uses the shape of the text to help the reader feel what the characters are feeling.
When Karl tells his story, it’s written in one long block without breaks. This style feels heavy, intense, and hard to read. Karl describes something painful and traumatic about surviving Dachau. His story is overwhelming. The writing style makes the reader feel trapped, like there’s no relief or space to breathe. Karl’s section is emotionally overwhelming. It is written as one breathless paragraph. The style for Karl is claustrophobic.
When Hitler becomes chancellor, the text has a lot of white space. The paragraphs are short, and there’s space between ideas. This is a significant moment in history. Everything is changing. The white space gives the feeling that time is slowing down. It’s like the world is in disbelief at what’s happening. It also creates a sense of dread. Hitler’s section is historically shocking. It is written with space to absorb each moment. The style for Hitler creates suspense.