Why does Death want more humanity?

[Cole Powers]

The author introduced the character of Death in a way that took all of the emotion out of it.  Humans always try to give meaning to death.  Religion says that life is just a journey to death, that after death awaits a "better place".  Those who favor a scientific view of things insist that everything is a cycle, that, as we were born, we must die again.  At first meeting the character Death, he seems to take all these comforting excuses away.  He says, no, death is not some magical place, not the completion of some holy cycle.  He says that death is simple and short.  But he asks the question, is death really as bad as we make it out to be.  He does all this in, to quote the Time review on the back of the book jacket, "the same way Kurt Vonnegut did in Slaughterhouse Five: with grim, darkly consoling humor".  During the first few pages I thought, what a wonderfully unique world war II book to view death in this way.  However, a couple pages in, it seemed that Zusak was trying to change his message, trying to sneak meaning back into this story.  When talking about the colors, he says, "It helps me cope"(Zusak).  Why would the ruthless, caring-less Death need to cope with taking lives?  Later, on page 15, Death tries "to prove (that) your human existence, are worth it"(Zusac).  Why would the voice that so recently stated with such conviction, "I'm nothing if not fair"(Zusak) need to justify his taking of human life.  Death seems to be less of a narrator and more of a character with a very interesting conflict going on.  Why does death have this double personality?  Is Zusak on the fence about what death means to him?

[Annie Potter]

When you mention Death as "ruthless" and "caring-less" personally, I disagree with you. I think that Zusak intentionally chose Death as the narrator because he knew that most people thought of death as "ruthless" and "caring-less." However, he wanted to mold readers opinions throughout the book, into his idea that Death has emotions and empathy toward the lives he takes. Zusak gives readers a glimpse on what goes on in Deaths mind when he takes a soul. "He does something to me, that boy. Every time. It's his only detriment. He steps on my heart. He makes me cry" (Zusak 531). In this passage, Death is being portrayed against popular belief as a soulless being who doesn't care about the lives he takes, but rather as someone who has regrets and shows sympathy and feels. You also mentioned that Death is less of a narrator and more of a character in the book and I think this is because Zusak wants readers to feel more connected with him and understand the connection between Liesel and Death. Rather than merely seeing Death as the distant narrator of a book with little importance.

[Cole Powers]

I can see it going that way too. I definitely agree with the last part about making Death more of a human character to show that this is how it effected Liesel. Maybe I used the wrong words in my last post. Maybe instead of "ruthless" and "caring-less", meaningless is a better word. So now there is the question, do most people view death as meaningful or meaningless. And what do I mean by these words. Meaningful in an existential, literal sense, in a superficial, people find meaning in it sort of way, or just that it effects us as it does Liesel, that it meaningfully effects our lives.