SO... I was thinking about the whole story-within-a-story bit and it reminded me (unfortunately) about the whole story-within-stories in Frankenstein. However, I think the two serve totally different purposes. In Frankenstein, I personally think that it was set up that way simply so that the reader could see the creature's reaction to Frankenstein's death, and give his agonizing 10-page monologue on how he has resolved to kill himself. However, in Maus, I think that Artie's story is just as important as Vladek's account, not matter how nearly non-existent it is.

Between Vladek's survivorship tale, we get little snippets of Artie's story, which are mostly about his awkward relationship with his father. Even the little into-comic before the first chapter tells us a little about their relationship: Vladek doesn't seem to really care that his son is crying, and asks him to hold the board tighter. He then teaches young Artie that the world is friendless, and that you can't put your trust in such "friends." Now that's what I call a healthy father-son bond.

Anyways, I think that Vladek is greatly neurotic towards Artie, as if as much as Artie succeeds it could never amount to all the Vladek had to endure (and I'm not saying that's not a bad thing), but also that anything Artie does, Vladek thinks that he can do it better. For example, he won't let him count his pills, being so stubborn that he does it himself saying, "You don't know counting pills...I'm an expert for this" (30). And then Vladek decides that Artie's jacket is just "Such an old shabby coat" and not to his tastes, and proceeds to throw it away. Vladek's controlling parenting screams for Artie to be able to break free from it, although he can only express himself through his relation to his father. Thus, this whole story-within-a-story is the only way that Artie can get his voice through, not just his father's controlling narrative.