"I think Maus I is better than Maus II. The standard here is whether or not it's as good as a great book of prose literature and by that standard, no, it's not that great"

In the quote by Ted Rall, he expresses a nuanced opinion about Art Spiegelman's graphic books "Maus I" and "Maus II". Rall begins by preferring "Maus I" over "Maus II," which recommends that, in his view, the very first installment in the series might have made a stronger effect, either in its storytelling, creative accomplishment, or emotional engagement. This choice sets the phase for a more comprehensive critique that thinks about these works beyond the scope of graphic books alone.

Rall presents a relative standard-- judging these graphic novels as if they were prose literature. This is an appealing method, as it implies that he sees an intrinsic value in aligning graphic books with the standard literary canon. Rall's usage of "excellent book of prose literature" as a benchmark suggests an expectation for graphic books to accomplish a similar depth, complexity, and narrative power that is frequently attributed to acknowledged work of arts of written literature.

By stating "by that requirement, no, it's not that great," Rall indicates that "Maus II" does not rather reach the heights anticipated of it when put along with time-honored works of prose. This could be analyzed as a review not simply of "Maus II," however of the restrictions he perceives in graphic books being lauded to the extent of traditional literary works. It discreetly raises concerns about the requirements by which various types of storytelling are judged and valued.

However, by engaging with the graphic books on this level, Rall acknowledges their significant cultural effect and artistic aspirations. In spite of not fulfilling his high standard, the very act of comparison raises "Maus" and its place within the wider context of literature, highlighting its role in pressing the boundaries of what is typically thought about literature.

Eventually, Ted Rall's commentary invites reflection on the progressing dialogue in between various media and the evolving requirements by which they are assessed.