Self Reflection!
Coming into this English Class, I hated analyzing what I read. I thought of it as taking away the true part of imagination in reading. After having fun first semester here a WAC I have read many hypertexts. One being patchwork girl. And I loved it. After re- writing my first essay for my final, I was very surprised to see how many careless errors I made. I was also very surprised my opinion on analyzing changed. While reading a novel by Sven Birkerts, I thought he was crazy, but then after analyzing his text, he actually had a strong support to his belief of technology. I have learned a lot from this college class, and I hope to learn much more in my other college courses!
Thanks Prof. Meehan, to a awesome semester!
Add a comment December 15, 2009
Final Paperr!!
Changing Jory’s View of reading??
It was a cool summers evening; the summer between 11th and 12th grade of high school. Jory was all alone at her house, waiting for her mom to get home from work. She could smell the corn and hear the loud combine out her window. “What to do to pass time?”, she thought. Then she picked up the book, which her sister had told her, “Once you start reading it, you will never want to put it down and it will make you cry.” “Now,” thought Jory, “a book that makes you cry, and a book that you can’t put down? Get real!” Jory hated to read; she sometimes couldn’t even stand just reading a magazine. She thought it was just boring. She blamed it on school, because she had to read for school, like it was her job. So she thought “Well I don’t have anything else to do, so I will prove my sister wrong.” She picked up the book that her sister recommended and read the title. “My Sisters Keeper by Jodi Picolott.” She opened the first page and started reading, in hopes she would prove to her sister that everyone is NOT the same.
What is reading? Everyone has their own definition of it. I remember my mom reading to me, when I was a little girl, until I fell asleep. I remember in every grade level we had to either read a book for English class, or we were read to. But, the big question is, why? Why was reading so important? Did it help us learn better? What was the big reasoning? When I was in middle school we had to read a different chapter book every year, and I hated it. We would read a chapter one night, and then the next day a teacher would pick that chapter apart, until there was nothing left to pick at. How do you call that reading? How do you enjoy a book, when you never really get the opportunity to enjoy it in the first place? Sure, when I was a kid, I loved to read teen magazines, and Cosmo Girl, what teen doesn’t?, but when it came to sitting down and reading a book, I just thought it was boring. I could never get into it. I felt like I was being forced into reading. I solely believe that the reason I felt this way, was because when I was in school, we would be made to read, and when I did, I had to analyze everything, and never really just got to enjoy the reading and think my thoughts to myself. As Birkerts says, 1“Wisdom has nothing to do with the gathering or organizing of facts – this is basic. Wisdom is seeing through facts…” Reading a book shouldn’t have anything to do with wisdom; reading a book should just be seeing through facts, and reading what you love to read. Reading should be placing your self in your own world, imagining things, dreaming of things, and most of all, just enjoying your self.
When Jory started to read, she could barely hear anything because of the loud combine noise out back. She went upstairs to her bedroom, thinking maybe that would help, and it did. So she started reading. She got through the fifth chapter by the time her mom had gotten home. Jory had realized, her sister was right!! Jory had gotten into the book so much, she did not want to put it down. She continued reading all night, until bedtime. She finished the book in three days. Jory told her sister that she was right, and she should never of doubted her. It was not until that summer before her senior year of high school, that she actually understood reading. Jory did not hate reading. It was certain types of reading she preferred over others.
In chapter one of Birkerts he talks about how he taught an undergraduate college class, and made the assignment of reading the book “The Sleepy Hollow”. To his surprise, none of the kids liked the book; they found it boring. He was puzzled about this surprise, and decided to ask questions about why they didn’t like it; whether it was the language, or the meaning. The kids just stated, “the whole thing”. See, Birkerts doesn’t understand that everyone has their own view/style of reading. Everyone likes to read something different from everyone else. The book “The Sleepy Hollow” is basically “old fashion” for kids in today’s society. We don’t find it interesting. We don’t want to read it. We just can’t relate to it.
That summer Jory learned her definition of reading. It was not just because of a class obligation, but for her to go into her own world, and imagine. Jory thought reading a book meant getting lost in it, with her views of whatever she was reading. Jory learned that she liked to read, but she still did not like to analyze. She felt analyzing everything that you read would take away from the imagination that you experienced. As Birkerts states in Chapter 7, 2“In any case, when we read we bring the life- ultimately our life- to the words.” This statement proved true. When Jory read she put her self in the character’s position. She brought her life to the book. Thus, Jory felt reading is a way to escape everything else, to forget about what is going on outside the reading world. She forgot all about that she was home alone, and tuned out the loud combine noise, and just read. She went into her own world.
After Jory graduated from high school, it was time she moved onto bigger and better things…college. She decided to attend Washington College in Chestertown, Md. Her first semester she took English. When she started taking this class, she was asked to write an essay about what she thought of as reading or writing. She wrote about the time she read the book “My Sister’s Keeper” and how it changed her view of reading. She also wrote about how she still hated when teachers picked apart stories. D,However, during her semester in English class, that would soon change.
Jory read different novels, and hypertext, one being, “Patchwork Girl”. “Patchwork Girl” was based on a story, but she got to analyze it, and make the story up her self. And she actually enjoyed it. Another novel she had to read was Birkets’ “Gutenburg Eligies”. She was again assigned to analyze it and get a deeper look into the reading. Once again, Jory actually enjoyed it. Jory learned that when you analyze text, you can find out so much more to what is behind the text such as the true views that the author is really trying to say.
Jory had experiences that changed her views of reading and writing, and she could have many more. She found out what she liked to read, and how she liked to analyze reading, as well as many other things. This all was Jory’s experience; anyone could have an experience that could change their viewing of reading. Everyone has their own views of reading, and you have to respect that because not everyone is the same.
1Birkets, pg. 75
2Birkets, pg. 113
Add a comment December 15, 2009
“Hands On” (final draft)
Shelley Jackson’s Patchwork Girl is a hypertext that is composed of many different images as well as different pieces of text. These different works of text are placed in one of the five different sections in this piece of work. Patchwork Girl is known for evoking unpleasant and frustrating feelings from the reader. This hypertext does not provide the reader with the traditional beginning-to-end story arch. The reader is able to make their own decisions in the order in which they read the text, unlike in a book, where the author composes the text in the order he or she wants the reader to read. “I am buried here. You can resurrect me, but only piecemeal. If you want to see the whole, you will have to sew me together yourself.” Writing a novel is not always easy, and it may be even more difficult when the story line is up to ones fingertips. Shelly Jackson’s novels are one of the many novels to be electronic. Technology plays a big role in today’s society, which is noticeable in Patchwork Girl. There are many forms of technology that have affected written text of literature, for example Internet, e-texts, cell phones, and ipods. Shelly’s patchwork girl is a new style of reading, which has taken away from the traditional style of reading. Patchwork Girl has been both a success and a failure as a novel; the text of Patchwork Girl makes it easy for the reader to be lost which takes away from the idea that Birkets emphasizes that reading is “hands on”.
When I received Jackson’s “Patchwork Girl” I was a little confused when I received a CD instead of a novel. I was really expecting a novel, which I could turn the pages of, or underline quotes that stood out to me. The look, feel, and overall appearance of the novel however were changed when I began using the Patchwork Girl hypertext. I was unsure of what to expect, but then a picture of a girl that was put together like a ‘crazy quilt’ came up and I became very interested. I started clicking around the menu, unsure of where I wanted to go. Jackson made it very easy for the reader to get lost in Patchwork Girl. I decided to start with the graveyard section. In the graveyard section, the reader is provided with different text boxes labeled with different titles. The next section I wanted to view was the crazy quilt section, and it was very crazy. There are thirty different boxes with many different colors, as if the novel here isn’t a novel at all, but rather a form of art work. As I was clicking around, I assumed the novel could be read anyway, but in the title was actually a sequence as to how the web should be read. It was up to the reader to bridge the gap of the unknown sequence within the story of Patchwork Girl.
Shelly Jackson emphasizes with the storyline of Patchwork Girl by spreading out the story with a web of several different topics and titles. “What is true of art is true of serious reading as well. Fewer and fewer people, it seems, have the leisure or the inclination to undertake it. And true reading is hard. Unless we are practiced, we do not just crack the covers and slip into an alternate world.”As Birkerts discusses his opinion on the work of reading, it is very relevant to the hypertext of Patchwork Girl. For some people, reading is a struggle for several reasons. Reading a novel forces us to actually hold the novel in our hands, and to turn the page, and read the text that is in front of us. In Jackson’s Patchwork Girl, a reader can pick what he/she wants to read. With the help of technology it is easy to get by with reading very little. When reading a novel the sequence of pages explains the story, but with the hypertext of Patchwork Girl the story is up to the reader to decide what they want/need to know next. The hypertext of this CD allows the reader to outline the story line of Patchwork Girl in their way, learning what they wish to know about the story of her.
After viewing Patchwork Girl it is very interesting to think about what the future holds for us. E-texts and hypertext are our new form of literature in today’s society. In the upcoming years very few novels may be printed, and it is possible for all literature to be available on CD format. Without technology our society would not be constantly changing as common as it has in these past years. Birkerts enforces his idea in how he views new technology as “a steady displacement of old by new, a generational pressure that escalates its momentum gathering as the members of the old dispensation age and die off.” (214) Birkerts is scared that new technology is going to override the need for books completely. What Birkerts fails to realize is how society is constantly changing. Society is now at the point where we are able to enjoy novels and hypertexts. Novels are never going to just disappear forever, because the ideas of e-texts and hypertext come from many novels in the first place, like in Patchwork Girl, Jackson uses many ideas from Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein novel. The new technology is becoming well-known, and our society, including Birkerts should not go against this change.
Birkerts assigns a story to be read by his undergraduate class, that he is teaching at a time. His student’s generalization of the theme in the novel they were reading portrayed his “impatience with their imprecision.” (18) Birkerts believes that readers should not generalize while reading novels. Instead, Birkerts wishes that readers spend a lot of time with a novel and really focus on the overall messages and themes the novel withholds. If Birkerts took the time to view Patchwork Girl, he would see, a reader must spend a lot of time with it, to get the “overall message and theme” of the novel. Birkerts would like society to have an appreciation for novels and to devote the same amount of time to them like he does. His failure in developing an appreciation for this new technology is where he, in my opinion, is wrong. If Birkerts took time to try out the new technology being offered, he too may develop an appreciation for it.
Although Jackson has been successful with Patchwork Girl, opinions will be formed, and other authors will critique the bad reasoning for her work. It is important for all people to be open to new forms of literature and technology. Reading Patchwork Girl has been very stressful piecing the story together, and then having Birkerts critiquing this new form of literature. Jackson has made it possible that not only is literature no longer hands but interactive, which could help the reader be more engaged in the novel. The understanding of Patchwork Girl is slowly becoming more successful as readers and others become more immune to the hypertext. The world should be more aware of this sort of literature, as it may replace the hands on feeling of a book.
Add a comment December 4, 2009
“Hands On”
Writing Project #4 Draft
Shelley Jackson’s Patchwork Girl is a hypertext that is composed of many different images as well as different pieces of text. These different works of text are placed in one of the five different sections in this piece of work. Patchwork Girl is known for evoking unpleasant and frustrating feelings from the reader. This hypertext does not provide the reader with the traditional beginning-to-end story arch. The reader is able to make their own decisions in the order in which they read the text, unlike in a book, where the author composes the text in the order he or she wants the reader to read. “I am buried here. You can resurrect me, but only piecemeal. If you want to see the whole, you will have to sew me together yourself.” Writing a novel is not always easy, and it may be even more difficult when the story line is up to ones fingertips. Shelly Jackson’s novels are one of the many novels to be electronic. Technology plays a big role in today’s society, which is noticeable in Patchwork Girl. There are many forms of technology that have affected written text of literature, for example internet, cell phones, and ipods. Shelly’s patchwork girl is a new style of reading, which has taken away from the traditional style of reading. Patchwork Girl has been both a success and a failure as a novel; the text of Patchwork Girl makes it easy for the reader to be lost which takes away from the idea that Birkets emphasizes that reading is “hands on”.
When I received Jackson’s “Patchwork Girl” I was a little confused when I received a CD instead of a novel. I was really expecting a novel, which I could turn the pages of, or underline quotes that stood out to me. The look, feel, and overall appearance of the novel however were changed when I began using the Patchwork Girl hypertext. I was unsure of what to expect, but then a picture of a girl that was put together like a ‘crazy quilt’ I became very interested. I started clicking around the menu, unsure of where I wanted to go. Jackson made it very easy for the reader to get lost in Patchwork Girl. I decided to start with the graveyard section. In the graveyard section, the reader is provided with different text boxes labeled with different textboxes. The next section I wanted to view was the crazy quilt section, and it was very crazy. There are thirty different boxes with many different colors, as if the novel here isn’t a novel at all, but rather a form of art work. As I was clicking around, I assumed the novel could be read anyway, but in the title was actually a sequence as to how the web should be read. It was up to the reader to bridge the gap of the unknown sequence within the story of Patchwork Girl.
Shelly Jackson emphasizes with the storyline of Patchwork Girl by spreading out the story with a web of several different topics and titles. “What is true of art is true of serious reading as well. Fewer and fewer people, it seems, have the leisure or the inclination to undertake it. And true reading is hard. Unless we are practiced, we do not just crack the covers and slip into an alternate world.” As Birkerts discusses his opinion on the work of reading, it is very relevant to the hypertext of Patchwork Girl. For some people, reading is a struggle for several reasons. Reading a novel forces us to actually hold the novel in our hands, and to turn the page, and read the text that is in front of us. In Jacksons Patchwork Girl, a reader can pick what he/she wants to read. With the help of technology it is easy to get by with reading very little. When reading a novel the sequence of pages explains the story, but with the hypertext of Patchwork Girl the story is up to the reader to decide what they want/need to know next. The hypertext of this CD allows the reader to outline the story line of Patchwork Girl in their way, learning what they wish to know about the story of her.
After viewing Patchwork Girl it is very interesting to think about what the future holds for us. E-texts and hypertext are our new form of literature in today’s society. In the upcoming years very few novels may be printed, and it is possible for all literature to be available on CD format. Without technology our society would not be constantly changing as common as it has in these past years. Birkerts enforces his idea in how he views new technology as “a steady displacement of old by new, a generational pressure that escalates its momentum gathering as the members of the old dispensation age and die off.” (214) Birkerts is scared that new technology is going to override the need for books completely. What Birkerts fails to realize is how society is constantly changing. Now society is at the point where we are able to enjoy novels and hypertexts. Novels are never going to just disappear forever, because the ideas of e-texts and hypertext come from many novels in the first place, like in Patchwork Girl, Jackson uses many ideas from Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein novel. The new technology is becoming well-known, and our society, including Birkerts should not go against this change.
Birkerts assigns a story to be read by his undergraduate class, that he is teaching at a time. His student’s generalization of the theme in the novel they were reading portrayed his “impatience with their imprecision.” (18) Birkerts believes that readers should not generalize while reading novels. Instead, Birkerts wishes that readers spend a lot of time with a novel and really focus on the overall messages and themes the novel withholds. If Birkerts took the time to view Patchwork Girl, he would see, a reader must spend a lot of time with it, to get the “overall message and theme” of the novel. Birkerts would like society to have an appreciation for novels and to devote the same amount of time to them like he does. His failure in developing an appreciation for this new technology is where he, in my opinion, is wrong. If Birkerts took time to try out the new technology being offered, he too may develop an appreciation for it.
Although Jackson has been successful with Patchwork Girl, opinions will be formed, and other authors will critique the bad reasoning for her work. It is important for all people to be open to new forms of literature and technology. Reading Patchwork Girl has been very stressful piecing the story together, and then having Birkerts critiquing this new form of literature. Jackson has made it possible that not only is literature no longer hands but interactive, which could help the reader be more engaged in the novel. The failure of Patchwork Girl is slowly becoming more successful as readers and others become more immune to the hypertext. The world should be more aware of this sort of literature, as it may replace the hands on feeling of a book.
Add a comment December 2, 2009
Birkets “Hypertext” Blog
“it is more difficult for us to imagine how people ever got along before fax, e-mail, mobile phones, computer networks, ect.”
Birkerts states this in his Chapter 11 and I think this strongly goes against his whole beliefs on technology. In this quote he is simply saying “it is diffucult for us to imagine how people ever got along before fax, e-mail, mobile phones, computer networks, ect”, In this whole book isn’t his thesis trying to tell his readers that technology is horrible. Thus, I truely believe if Birkerts took a look at P.G. the ‘imagine’ part of his quote would come to life.
It actually IS very hard for us to imagine where we would be in life today without technology, but also isn’t it true he could say…without technology, could we even imagine anything, because technology has taught us so much in todays life.
In P.G. you have to have a huge imagination for clicking on all parts of her.
1 comment November 13, 2009
Jackson’s Patchwork Girl
When I recieved Jackson’s “Patchwork Girl” I was a little confused when I recieved a CD instead of a book. I even asked my friend that was in the class, if she received the same thing as I did. When I inserted the CD I was unsure of what to expect, but then a picture of a girl that was put together like a ‘crazy quilt’ I became very intrested. I started clicking around the menu, unsure of where I wanted to go.
I decided to start with the graveyard, and I found this most intresting. Patchwork girl seemed more healthy, with top of the line parts. Her lungs are so healthy, that anyone standing near her may loose their breath, feeling like they are “looking down from a great height”. However I was very shocked to see where Jackson got Patchwork girl’s right arm from. It comes from a theif, which brings a negative past to her body. The clicking around of Patchwork Girl is very intesting to me, and makes me wander even more about her life, and the story behind her body, brain, and creation.
Add a comment November 6, 2009
Actions speak louder then words
“Actions speak louder then words”
Through film a novel can be portrayed in several different ways. Film has the ability to create a visual form of literature. Film can be exactly what the reader was expecting, or it could be the complete opposite. This is what makes film unique. When reading a novel opinions are formed, predictions are made; the readers create visuals for characters, and try to determine the setting and other details in the novel. Verifying the old cliché “Actions speak louder then words”. Mary Shelly wrote her book “Frankenstein” in. 1814. From that time forward there have been many different renditions of the novel “Frankenstein”. The version that best follows Shelly’s original story line is Kenneth Branagh’s 1994 “Frankenstein” film.
Branagh utilizes film by creating a visual form of literature. The graphic scene where Victor Frankenstein’s mother bleeds to death, while giving birth, exemplifies where a reader can only relate to words and imagination, versus a viewer can witness the words and action on the screen. On an extremely stormy night Frankenstein’s mother bled to death while giving birth to Victor’s little brother Willie. The camera depicts the gory and horrid setting involving the birth. Where then, Victor hears his mother’s blood curdling scream, and goes running. The visual presence of that is stronger then what Shelly can detail in her writing. In comparison the author describes a blood curdling scream during child birth, that ultimately results in the death of Frankenstein’s mother while giving birth, which no way compares to hearing, seeing and witnessing the act.
On a “dreary night” in Frankenstein’s lab he creates life like God. On the last step of his experiment in hopes his creature would live, he shots out “LIVE, LIVE, LIVE”. This is an emotional part in the film for Victor, because he has created the impossible. The film shows his eagerness to help the creature learn to walk. Even after investing all his time, and energy to create this creature, and took the chance of losing his love of his life, a few moments after the creature came to life Victor stated in amazement with a shocked look on his face “what have I done”? The intensity of this scene in film
is suspenseful then that of the novel can show. Being able to visualize the action in the film has more of an impact on the viewer then the reader, because the reader is no longer imagining its character, the characters appear real for the viewer.
In watching the 1994 Branagh’s film of “Frankenstein” the creature interacts with the DeLacey family showing his true emotions. One day while getting the courage to present himself to the blind man, he ends up receiving the acceptance he longed for. The blind man asked him to come and sit by the warm fire, and asks “Why do you hide in the woods, why do you not show your self, do you not have no friends” the creature replies “have some, but they not know me, I am scared they will think I am ugly and hideous”. Abruptly, the blind mans son barges into the room, physically assaults the creature, and forces him into the woods, where he then howls and weeps. A person can identify, and physically see the emotions rather then reading the words. The visualization of seeing the creature in pain and the sadness exhibited quantifies that actions do speak louder then words.
When a novel is turned into a film, it is helpful to see the perceptions and opinions of others. Film can be portrayed in several different ways, like “Frankenstein”. Comparing Branagh’s film, and Mary Shelly’s novel makes it easier for the reader and viewer to grab a hold of the appearance, and emotion of the characters. Watching Branagh’s film of “Frankenstein” it is helpful to see a visual form of Shelly’s novel. Verifying the old cliché ‘Actions DO speak louder then words’.
Add a comment October 30, 2009
Mary Shelly’s Film vs Novel
What can Mary Shelly show in her film that she can not show in her novel?
Film can portray a novel in many different ways. Film brings the visual form of literature.
The scene that I want to talk about is when the monster finally shows himself to the DeLacey family. The creature helps the blind grandfather, and the grandfather finally relizes he is the “spirit of the forest” and ask him why he never showed him face, and the creature says because everyone runs from him, because he is ugly.
How this shows his true emotions, and the true “himan being” in himself.
In the book Shelly can not show the true emotion that the creature shows in the film.
How he weeps in the woods shows he really does have emoition, he just never taught how to use it.
In Mary Shellys novel she spends a great deal talking about the DeLacey family, when in the film it hardely spends anytime, but I get more emotion out of watching the scene in the film rather then the movie.
Add a comment October 26, 2009
Who is the real ‘Monster’?
Who is the real ‘Monster’?
Mary Shelly subtitled her novel “The Modern Prometheus.” According to the Greeks, Prometheus stole fire from the gods, and created life from clay figures. As punishment, he was chained to a rock, where an eagle each day plucked at his liver. Haughty Prometheus sought fire for human betterment to make tools and warm hearts. Similarly, Mary Shelley’s arrogant scientist, Victor Frankenstein, claimed “benevolent intentions, and thirsted for the moment when I [he] should put them in practice” In Shelly’s book, who is she referring to as exactly the real ‘Prometheus’? Why did Shelly use the name ‘monster’ to identify Frankenstein’s creature? Although the creature does show monstrosity its humane characteristics must not be disregarded. I believe Victor Frankenstein is the real Prometheus in this story, in the sense that both Victor and Prometheus selfishly steal ‘life’ in one way or another.
On a “Dreary night” Frankenstein creates life like god. Frankenstein “selected his features as beautiful” (pg.60), however when the creature came to life he described it as “The miserable monster whom I created (pg. 61). In Chapter 5, Frankenstein narrates his perspective on the creature, and does not let the reader empathize with the creature. Frankenstein himself believes that he has created “a thing such as even Dante could not have conceived” (pg. 61). The reader’s impression of the creature is already biased at this point. The reader may think that the creature is the ‘Prometheus’. Frankenstein states that the creature may be something ‘Dante’ could not conceive, would make the reader think the creature is a sin of god, or a horrible creature on earth.
One example of how Frankenstein’s creature does not show monstrosity is when Frankensteins creature first opened his eyes, Frankenstein ran away from it, thinking that it was going to strangle him, or kill him. The reader automatically thinks that the creature is a horrible monster, but if you take a step back and look at it in another perspective, the monster really is not showing monstrosity at all. In the novel Frankenstein states, “One hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain…while a grin cross his face” (pg. 61). To me, the monster acts like a new born baby, who needs his mother; the creature needs its creator. This does not show monstrosity to me, just a baby needing his mother. When Frankenstein flees’ from the creature, that is his way of stealing hope for the monster to live, learn, and love. Now, with no one able to help the creature, he is by himself, with no help from anyone. Frankenstein is stealing ‘life’ from the monster.
After the creature is created and he becomes the narrator; we get a better sense of his ideas, and feelings. He describes him self as a poor, miserable wretch, and recognizes his hideousness. The fact that it sat down and wept indicates its human nature. It is “overcome with joy’ when it experiences warmth from a nearby fire and howls with ‘pain’ as it ‘thrust [its] hands into the live embers” (pg. 97). It appreciates beauty in nature. The creature’s relationship with nature is incredibly similar to one of a child and its parents. It discovers life through its interaction with Mother Nature. It utilizes nature to acquire new skills and regards it as benevolent towards it.
Soon, all the creature wanted was to be loved, and wanted attention, and to not be steadily rejected. He wanted a companion, so in hopes that Frankenstein would create another companion for the creature he seeks out to find him. On the way there, the creature was so mad because Frankenstein had stolen this chance to understand life, that when he met up with some of Frankenstein’s family members, he killed one, and set up another to look like she killed him. When the creature finally met up with Frankenstein, Frankenstein promised to make him a companion. However, Frankenstein soon backed out on his promise. The creature wanted pay back. He was tired of feeling alone and useless; he wanted revenge on Frankenstein, “The modern Prometheus”.
Frankenstein rejected his creature from the minute he opened his eyes. He never looked back, and never wanted anything more to do with it. So why did Shelly use the name such as ‘monster’ to describe Frankenstein’s creation? Isn’t it true that Frankenstein could be described as the real ‘monster’ or the real ‘Prometheus’? It was really Frankenstein that motivated the creature to kill his own family, because he created life as in the creature, but never wanted anything more to do with it. So the creature was never really put into society the right way, how was he to know killing was a bad thing?
In my opinion, the true monster in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is Victor Frankenstein. Firstly, pretending to be God, Frankenstein has caused the chaos presented in this novel. The novel’s subtitle is The Modern Prometheus, which is relevant to the story and very significant to the outcome. Frankenstein ambitiously created a being using parts from dead bodies, just like Prometheus created life from clay figures. Both Frankenstein and Prometheus were punished for their actions, although in different ways. Frankenstein lost almost every member of his family because of his selfishness and ignorance towards other beings. Prometheus was punished by being tied onto a rock and having his liver eaten by an eagle every day. Prometheus was physically punished, while Frankenstein was mentally punished for his actions.
Add a comment October 9, 2009
Who is the real called ‘Monster’? (Ideas for project #2)
Mary Shelley subtitled her novel “The Modern Prometheus.” According to the Greeks, Prometheus stole fire from the gods. As punishment, he was chained to a rock, where an eagle each day plucked at his liver. Haughty Prometheus sought fire for human betterment–to make tools and warm hearts. Similarly, Mary Shelley’s arrogant scientist, Victor Frankenstein, claimed “benevolent intentions, and thirsted for the moment when I should put them in practice.”
Why does Mary Shelly use the name such a ‘monster’ to identify Victor Frankenstein’s creation. Although the Monster does show monstrosity, the human characteristics must not be invisible to the reader. I believe Victor Frankstein is the real ‘ Prometheus’ in the story, and I have many reasons why.
Before the creature came to life, Frankenstein “selected his features as beautiful” (pg .60). However when the creature came to life Frankenstein created it as ” The miserable monster whom I created. (pg.61)
“One hand was streatched out, seemingly to detain…while a grin cross his face” (pg.61) To me, the monster is acting like a new born baby, needing his mother, the creature needs its creator. This does not show monorosity to me, just a baby needing his mother.
The monster was steady getting rejected, which led him to be mentally crazy, (which I believe is not his fault), however if Frankenstein never rejected him in the first place, then he wouldn’t be crazy, and have a heart like we saw in one chapter where he relizes the De Lacey family needed food and fire wood, and he went got it for them. So I believe the creature really is a good guy, but because Frankenstein created him, then left him for rejection, Frankenstein is suffering, because the creature is just trying to get back at him, and trying to make him feel, what he feels.
1 comment October 2, 2009
