"That fellow had it coming to him. He threw dust into your eyes just like he did in Daisy's but he was a tough one. He ran over Myrtle like you'd run over a dog and never even stopped his car. " (page 187)
I'm pretty sure that this is the last blog that I will ever do. Before I begin discussing theme, I just want to say that how excited I am about this! I can almost hear the Hallelujiah chorus. (Sigh) Wow! Words cannot express how happy I am! Okay, back to blogging. My understanding of The Great Gatsby is that many people have a dream for their lives. Many people want to live the American dream, and many books are written with people celebrating their own happily ever afters. Honestly, those are the books that I love the most because I enjoy living in an idealistic world filled with happiness, sunshine, and Disney princesses. However, as much as I hate to say this, life is not that way. The Great Gatsby gives us more of a realistic view as to how life really is. Infidelity is common in the American society and marriages fall apart. People are consumed in their egotism and only want to be the best. They want what is best for themselves, but they seldomly care about others. Look at the quote above. This is all about how Myrtle was killed tragically by a car and no one seemed to care. No one showed sympathy; they just all shoved the blame on someone else. I hate that Tom says that Gatsby deserved to die. Honestly, no one deserves to die. Dying should be in God's hands. However, in this novel, everyone has to take fate into their own hands. Even Gatsby just wanted to make a life for himself. Was he living to be charismatic and help the benefit of others, though? No. He brought on this new lifestyle to win over Daisy's affection. He knew that Daisy did not approve of his low status, so he made a name for himself. It is so sad that Daisy only loves him when he is wealthy. What is this world coming to? Money does not win happiness! Love and happiness are so much more than social status. Deceit, betrayal, and greed all lead up to everyone's downfall in this novel, and they all destroy the happily ever after that each character could have.
Monday, April 30, 2012
The Great Gatsby: Betrayal
"He was astounded. His mouth opened a little and he looked at Gatsby and then back at Daisy as if he had just recognized her as someone he knew a long time ago." (page 125)
The irony of this quote simply makes me laugh. Tom is so upset that Daisy would cheat on him. Who is he? Jesus? I don't think so! Why would he be upset when he is doing the same thing to his wife with Myrtle?! This just makes me angry, and honestly, it makes me annoyed. He, a man, is allowed to cheat on his woman whenever he feels it necessary. But his wife is not allowed to cheat on him because she must remain faithful to him. This is ridiculous! Tom is so egotistical it makes me sick. I mean, don't get me wrong, Daisy is not justified in her act at all. She is not exempt from the act of cheating in any way, but Tom needs to wake up and smell the coffee here. He needs to look in the mirror. I guess that he did not realize how hurtful it was to cheat on his wife until she did it to him. No one would have been in this mess at all, though, if Daisy would have remained faithful to Gatsby in the firstplace. If she would have remained faithful to her promise to him, then she would have married Gatsby and Tom would not have cheated on her. However, since she did not remain faithful to Gatsby, it almost gives her a taste of her own medicine when her husband does not remain faithful to her. Obviously, I feel bad for her because waiting for someone can seem hopeless, but still.
The irony of this quote simply makes me laugh. Tom is so upset that Daisy would cheat on him. Who is he? Jesus? I don't think so! Why would he be upset when he is doing the same thing to his wife with Myrtle?! This just makes me angry, and honestly, it makes me annoyed. He, a man, is allowed to cheat on his woman whenever he feels it necessary. But his wife is not allowed to cheat on him because she must remain faithful to him. This is ridiculous! Tom is so egotistical it makes me sick. I mean, don't get me wrong, Daisy is not justified in her act at all. She is not exempt from the act of cheating in any way, but Tom needs to wake up and smell the coffee here. He needs to look in the mirror. I guess that he did not realize how hurtful it was to cheat on his wife until she did it to him. No one would have been in this mess at all, though, if Daisy would have remained faithful to Gatsby in the firstplace. If she would have remained faithful to her promise to him, then she would have married Gatsby and Tom would not have cheated on her. However, since she did not remain faithful to Gatsby, it almost gives her a taste of her own medicine when her husband does not remain faithful to her. Obviously, I feel bad for her because waiting for someone can seem hopeless, but still.
The Great Gatsby: Death
"Myrtle Wilson's body wrapped in a blanket and then in another blanket as though she suffered from a chill in the hot night lay on a work table by the wall and Tom, with his back to us, was bending over it, motionless." (page 146)
I feel like I'm reading Shakespeare here. Everyone is dying. The saying, "Everything happens for a reason" really does relate to this book. Although I was sad about the deaths of Myrtle and Gatsby, it at least allowed the characters to look at themselves and realize that something is not right. Their entire system of being self-absorbed was not making them happy and they needed a slap in the face to get out of their false reality. I also enjoyed the symbolism of death in this book. Not only do the characters die, but some of their hopes and dreams die as well. Tom and Daisy's marriage died due to their infidelity toward each other. Gatsby's past died. Gatsby used to be a man who lived off of nothing and now he is a new man. He made a name for himself. He thought that prosperity would win him happiness. However, I think that this dream died as well. His dream of having Daisy died when she ran off with Tom when Gatsby went to war. Tom's love, Myrtle, tragically died by being hit by a car, and this burst his hopes and dreams of being with her. I almost wonder what would have happened if Tom and Daisy would have gotten a divorce. I know that divorces were not common in this era, but if Tom and Daisy would have broken up, would they have been happy? Would Daisy have been happy with Gatsby or would they just lose love like everyone else? What about Tom and Myrtle? If Myrtle would have lived, and Tom got a divorce, would they be happy together? I almost think not. Because they are all so consumed in materialism, their ability to communicate and show each other affection dwindled away. Love cannot live in this environment. Also, I think that Daisy's name is symbolic and ironic at the same time. The word "daisy" is all about spring and new beginnings. However, Daisy was a cynical character who hurt Gatsby and ruined her new beginning with him by choosing Tom. Tisk tisk.
I feel like I'm reading Shakespeare here. Everyone is dying. The saying, "Everything happens for a reason" really does relate to this book. Although I was sad about the deaths of Myrtle and Gatsby, it at least allowed the characters to look at themselves and realize that something is not right. Their entire system of being self-absorbed was not making them happy and they needed a slap in the face to get out of their false reality. I also enjoyed the symbolism of death in this book. Not only do the characters die, but some of their hopes and dreams die as well. Tom and Daisy's marriage died due to their infidelity toward each other. Gatsby's past died. Gatsby used to be a man who lived off of nothing and now he is a new man. He made a name for himself. He thought that prosperity would win him happiness. However, I think that this dream died as well. His dream of having Daisy died when she ran off with Tom when Gatsby went to war. Tom's love, Myrtle, tragically died by being hit by a car, and this burst his hopes and dreams of being with her. I almost wonder what would have happened if Tom and Daisy would have gotten a divorce. I know that divorces were not common in this era, but if Tom and Daisy would have broken up, would they have been happy? Would Daisy have been happy with Gatsby or would they just lose love like everyone else? What about Tom and Myrtle? If Myrtle would have lived, and Tom got a divorce, would they be happy together? I almost think not. Because they are all so consumed in materialism, their ability to communicate and show each other affection dwindled away. Love cannot live in this environment. Also, I think that Daisy's name is symbolic and ironic at the same time. The word "daisy" is all about spring and new beginnings. However, Daisy was a cynical character who hurt Gatsby and ruined her new beginning with him by choosing Tom. Tisk tisk.
The Great Gatsby: Secrecy
"James Gatz- that was really, or at least legally, his name. He had changed it at the age of seventeen and at the beginning of his career- when he saw Dan Cody's yacht drop anchor over the most insiduous flat on Lake Superior." (page 104)
Secrets, secrets are no fun. Secrets, secrets hurt someone. Ain't that the truth for this novel. Sheesh. I seriously wanted to make that my quote to start off this blog, but I knew that I had to stick to the novel. This entire book is centered around secrecy, which leads up to the deceit and the betrayal of all the characters. Let me get this straight: Gatsby's secret is that he used to be poor and that his real name is James Gatz. He goes by a different name in order to live as a different person. To me, it almost seems as if he is living a double life, like Hannah Montana or something. His separate identity allows him to be who he wants to be. Actually, this reminds me of The Devil in the White City. The main character in The Devil in the White City creates a separate identity for himself so that others will never know who he really is. I will post a trailer at the bottom of this blog to showcase more similarities between Gatsby and Holmes. Furthermore, secrecy might tear the characters apart in this book, but secrecy ties their storylines together. Daisy's secret is that she is in love with Gatsby. She also held a secret from Gatsby that she was engaged to Tom when Gatsby was off at war. That's confusing. Tom's secret is that he is having an affair with Myrtle. Holy cow! Everyone has secrets here! I guess, in real life, this holds true as well. I just love the irony of it all, though. On the outside, everyone is put-together, nice, young, and wealthy people. On the inside, they all feel desperate for love and want to be happy. Their material things don't make them happy, so they turn to other things. Every character in this book just keeps wanting more and more, and this greed leads them to selfish lives submersed in secrecy.
The Great Gatsby: Violence
"She never loved you, do you hear? She only married you because I was poor and she was tired of waiting for me. it was a terrible mistake, but in her heart she never loved anyone but me." (page 137)
In the second half of The Great Gatsby we witnessed the violence that is incorporated into the book by F. Scott Fitzgerald. The author incorporates violence in many ways, but he does it mainly from the syntax and the dialect in which people speak. In the quote above, Gatsby is being violent toward Tom with his words. Sometimes, at least sometimes in this novel, words can be more deceiving than anything. For example, knowledge of deceit and betrayal were what tore the families apart the most. Tom was so offended that Daisy would cheat on him, but he did the same thing to her. The betrayal was violent toward their relationship. Obviously, violence is what leads up to the death of many people in this book, but I am going to go into that in my next blog. The way in which the characters speak to each other is incredibly violent. Most of this rude dialect has to do with jealousy and egotism. In the quote above, Gatsby states that "in her heart she never loved anyone but me." This is what Gatsby has convinced himself of, but he cannot be entirely certain that Daisy did not love Tom at all. Perhaps Daisy said this to Gatsby because she could not look at Tom the same way when he began cheating on her. However, maybe Daisy did love Tom before Tom betrayed her. The violence escalates to the murder of Gatsby and the death of Myrtle. People's anger causes them to not only destroy relationships, but physically destroy human beings as well and lead to their tragic end.
In the second half of The Great Gatsby we witnessed the violence that is incorporated into the book by F. Scott Fitzgerald. The author incorporates violence in many ways, but he does it mainly from the syntax and the dialect in which people speak. In the quote above, Gatsby is being violent toward Tom with his words. Sometimes, at least sometimes in this novel, words can be more deceiving than anything. For example, knowledge of deceit and betrayal were what tore the families apart the most. Tom was so offended that Daisy would cheat on him, but he did the same thing to her. The betrayal was violent toward their relationship. Obviously, violence is what leads up to the death of many people in this book, but I am going to go into that in my next blog. The way in which the characters speak to each other is incredibly violent. Most of this rude dialect has to do with jealousy and egotism. In the quote above, Gatsby states that "in her heart she never loved anyone but me." This is what Gatsby has convinced himself of, but he cannot be entirely certain that Daisy did not love Tom at all. Perhaps Daisy said this to Gatsby because she could not look at Tom the same way when he began cheating on her. However, maybe Daisy did love Tom before Tom betrayed her. The violence escalates to the murder of Gatsby and the death of Myrtle. People's anger causes them to not only destroy relationships, but physically destroy human beings as well and lead to their tragic end.
Monday, April 23, 2012
The Great Gatsby: Theme (and movie clip from Something Borrowed)
" 'Doesn't her husband object?' 'Wilson? He thinks she goes to see her sister in New York. He's so dumb he doens't know he's alive.' " (page 30)
This book is centered around affairs and secrets. People are getting away with these affairs too. Tom is having an affair. Daisy is having an affair with Gatsby. It never ends. The novel is just one big cycle of forced love. It's kind of sad actually. However, I think that it all has something to do with one of the major themes of the book. In life itself, people have dreams. More importantly, many people want to live the American dream. They want to find the person they are meant to be with and have children and live happily ever after. However, the American dream is not always realistic. Infidelity is realistic though. Love fades and people change. This reminds me of one of my favorite movies, Something Borrowed. In this movie, infidelity is everywhere. The characters in the movie just want to be happy, but sometimes one's character can interfere with another person's relationship. Since human's a weak creatures, cheating occurs and people get hurt. If I had to predict how The Great Gatsby was going to end, I would predict it to go something like this movie. Here is a trailer from the movie to give someone a glimpse as to how the book is similar to this movie.
This book is centered around affairs and secrets. People are getting away with these affairs too. Tom is having an affair. Daisy is having an affair with Gatsby. It never ends. The novel is just one big cycle of forced love. It's kind of sad actually. However, I think that it all has something to do with one of the major themes of the book. In life itself, people have dreams. More importantly, many people want to live the American dream. They want to find the person they are meant to be with and have children and live happily ever after. However, the American dream is not always realistic. Infidelity is realistic though. Love fades and people change. This reminds me of one of my favorite movies, Something Borrowed. In this movie, infidelity is everywhere. The characters in the movie just want to be happy, but sometimes one's character can interfere with another person's relationship. Since human's a weak creatures, cheating occurs and people get hurt. If I had to predict how The Great Gatsby was going to end, I would predict it to go something like this movie. Here is a trailer from the movie to give someone a glimpse as to how the book is similar to this movie.
The Great Gatsby: It's Ranting Time
"He had one of those rare smiles with a quality of eternal reassurance in it that you may come across four or five times in life" (page 52).
I honestly look forward to this blog every week. I already finished my required three literary analysis blogs, so now I can just rant about my own personal thoughts about the book and speak my mind. I thoroughly enjoy stating my own opinion on things, so I don't object. Okay, thoughts so far.... Where to begin? Where to begin? Let's start with this new set-up of blogster. Um, I don't like it. I logged on to do my blogs and was very confused. It's nice, I guess. But it's all contemporary and makes me feel like I'm typing a blog for NASA or something. It's too futuresque for my taste. Not a fan.
Okay, okay. I should probably get to my ranting about the task at hand. But you have to admit: this new setup is weird. Back to writing my blog. I honestly kind of like this book. I really enjoy books that have been set in the 1920's. It really is interesting and even though it is set in this era, I believe that this book is timeless. Many people throughout time are caught up in material possessions. Honestly, I thought the era that I live in has been the most materialistic. We are constantly tuning out the world with our cell phones, facebooking, tweeting, and the like. We are living in the mindset where we truly care what others think of us. We dress a certain way, we speak a certain way, we act a certain way, etc. Why? Generally, to win the affections of others. Now, I'm being somewhat stereotypical of society because not everyone is like this, but for the most part, society is EXTREMELY materialistic. And it's only getting worse. Why is the world in so much debt? People want more. Houses are getting bigger, cars are getting nicer, and everything is getting more expensive. But nothing is stopping us. Absolutely nothing. This is so similar to the book. Tom and Daisy have an enormous home. Nick feels inadequate because his house is small, but Nick has what he needs. When Nick enters into the lives of Tom and Daisy, he loses sight of who he was. He used to care about what he needed. Now he cares about what he wants. Bleh. These people need to get over themselves and start looking at what truly matters in life. They might have nice things, but they're completely boring underneath their beautiful masks, their lifeless facades.
I honestly look forward to this blog every week. I already finished my required three literary analysis blogs, so now I can just rant about my own personal thoughts about the book and speak my mind. I thoroughly enjoy stating my own opinion on things, so I don't object. Okay, thoughts so far.... Where to begin? Where to begin? Let's start with this new set-up of blogster. Um, I don't like it. I logged on to do my blogs and was very confused. It's nice, I guess. But it's all contemporary and makes me feel like I'm typing a blog for NASA or something. It's too futuresque for my taste. Not a fan.
Okay, okay. I should probably get to my ranting about the task at hand. But you have to admit: this new setup is weird. Back to writing my blog. I honestly kind of like this book. I really enjoy books that have been set in the 1920's. It really is interesting and even though it is set in this era, I believe that this book is timeless. Many people throughout time are caught up in material possessions. Honestly, I thought the era that I live in has been the most materialistic. We are constantly tuning out the world with our cell phones, facebooking, tweeting, and the like. We are living in the mindset where we truly care what others think of us. We dress a certain way, we speak a certain way, we act a certain way, etc. Why? Generally, to win the affections of others. Now, I'm being somewhat stereotypical of society because not everyone is like this, but for the most part, society is EXTREMELY materialistic. And it's only getting worse. Why is the world in so much debt? People want more. Houses are getting bigger, cars are getting nicer, and everything is getting more expensive. But nothing is stopping us. Absolutely nothing. This is so similar to the book. Tom and Daisy have an enormous home. Nick feels inadequate because his house is small, but Nick has what he needs. When Nick enters into the lives of Tom and Daisy, he loses sight of who he was. He used to care about what he needed. Now he cares about what he wants. Bleh. These people need to get over themselves and start looking at what truly matters in life. They might have nice things, but they're completely boring underneath their beautiful masks, their lifeless facades.
The Great Gatsby: Technique
"I'm glad it's a girl. And I hope she'll be a fool- taht's the best thing a girl can be is a beautiful little fool" (page 21).
Technique is everywhere in this novel. For example, Fitzgerald has Nick speak with many sidenotes. This is to add more personality to Nick and to have him speak in a more personable level. Also, imagery is infused throughout. On page 9, Gatsby's mansion is described with imagery. "it was a factual imitation of some Hotel de Ville in Normandy, witha tower on one side, spanking new under a thin beard of raw ivy, and a marble smimming pool... " Fitzgerald uses imagery throughout the novel to explain the state of life the characters live in. Irony is also a technique that Fitzgerald uses. For example, on page 21, Fitzgerald scribes, "I'm glad it's a girl. And I hope she'll be a fool- that's the best thing a girl can be i s a beautiful little fool." This is ironic because Daisy is upset that her daughter was born and Tom is no where to be found. The reader can tell that Daisy is upset, but she sarcastically says, "I'm glad it's a girl." Finally, Fitzgerald uses foreshadowing in this novel. On page 26 Nick says, "When I looked once more for Gatsby he had vanished, and I once again was alone in the unquiet darkness." This is foreshadowing that Gatsby will not always be with Nick and Nick will be left alone in a world of darkness and emptiness. I can honestly figure out where this story is going...... Mwahaha
Technique is everywhere in this novel. For example, Fitzgerald has Nick speak with many sidenotes. This is to add more personality to Nick and to have him speak in a more personable level. Also, imagery is infused throughout. On page 9, Gatsby's mansion is described with imagery. "it was a factual imitation of some Hotel de Ville in Normandy, witha tower on one side, spanking new under a thin beard of raw ivy, and a marble smimming pool... " Fitzgerald uses imagery throughout the novel to explain the state of life the characters live in. Irony is also a technique that Fitzgerald uses. For example, on page 21, Fitzgerald scribes, "I'm glad it's a girl. And I hope she'll be a fool- that's the best thing a girl can be i s a beautiful little fool." This is ironic because Daisy is upset that her daughter was born and Tom is no where to be found. The reader can tell that Daisy is upset, but she sarcastically says, "I'm glad it's a girl." Finally, Fitzgerald uses foreshadowing in this novel. On page 26 Nick says, "When I looked once more for Gatsby he had vanished, and I once again was alone in the unquiet darkness." This is foreshadowing that Gatsby will not always be with Nick and Nick will be left alone in a world of darkness and emptiness. I can honestly figure out where this story is going...... Mwahaha
The Great Gatsby: Setting
"Their house was even more elaborate than I expected, a cheerful red and white Georgian Colonial mansion overlooking the bay." (page 11)
In this quote, the author is describing the setting of the story. However, the quote goes deeper than this. Yes, throughout the first chapters of the novel, Fitzgerald describes the setting of Nick's new town in great detail. However, the detail has much significance. For example, Nick describes his own house as "an eye-sore, but it was a small eye-sore and it had been overlooked..." (page 10). Nick later goes on to describe the Buchanon's home. I guess that it's not really a home; it's more like a mansion. These things are not just coincidental. There is reason behind it. Fitzgerald does this so the reader can be entranced by the status of the Buchanons. However, status is not everything. I'm getting the vibe that status is an important theme of the book. Everyone is so fascinated with their social status and how others view them. They care only about how much they spend to win others' affections. However, love does not come from money. Love comes from care. Themes in the book are paralleled by the settings in this story.
In this quote, the author is describing the setting of the story. However, the quote goes deeper than this. Yes, throughout the first chapters of the novel, Fitzgerald describes the setting of Nick's new town in great detail. However, the detail has much significance. For example, Nick describes his own house as "an eye-sore, but it was a small eye-sore and it had been overlooked..." (page 10). Nick later goes on to describe the Buchanon's home. I guess that it's not really a home; it's more like a mansion. These things are not just coincidental. There is reason behind it. Fitzgerald does this so the reader can be entranced by the status of the Buchanons. However, status is not everything. I'm getting the vibe that status is an important theme of the book. Everyone is so fascinated with their social status and how others view them. They care only about how much they spend to win others' affections. However, love does not come from money. Love comes from care. Themes in the book are paralleled by the settings in this story.
The Great Gatsby: Characterization
"Now he was a sturdy, straw haired man of thirty with a rather hard mouth and a supercilious manner." (page 11)
The above quote is a description of Tom Buchanon. It is direct characterization because Fitzgerald is stating exactly how Tom Buchanon is instead of allowing the reader to imply it. Characterization is all in this book. It's seriously everywhere. Perhaps this is because I am only supposed to read the first half of the book so far. In the beginnings of books, this is where characters are introduced. This allows the reader to figure out what is going on. However, I still feel incredibly immersed in the characterization of this novel. I also find it ironic how most of the characters are simply described explicitly. Characters such as Tom and Daisy are described to a T when it comes to who they are and their appearances. When it comes to Gatsby, the characterization is more implied. Yes, some of the characterization is described explicitly, but not all. I think that this is due to the characters and the stories themselves. For example, everyone in the story is kind of placed into the stereotype as to caring so much as to how they look. Yes, they are all easily distinguishable due to how they look, but their personalities don't really matter to each other. Everyone is so excessive with materialism that they have lost sight as to what truly matters. Gatsby, on the other hand, cares about material possessions, but he also shows sign as to caring about others' personalities. I realized this on page six when Nick said, "Only Gatsby, the man who gives his name to this book, was exempt from my reaction- Gatsby who represented everything for which I have an unaffected scorn." Gatsby is different, and this is evident through the way Fitzgerald characterizes him.
The above quote is a description of Tom Buchanon. It is direct characterization because Fitzgerald is stating exactly how Tom Buchanon is instead of allowing the reader to imply it. Characterization is all in this book. It's seriously everywhere. Perhaps this is because I am only supposed to read the first half of the book so far. In the beginnings of books, this is where characters are introduced. This allows the reader to figure out what is going on. However, I still feel incredibly immersed in the characterization of this novel. I also find it ironic how most of the characters are simply described explicitly. Characters such as Tom and Daisy are described to a T when it comes to who they are and their appearances. When it comes to Gatsby, the characterization is more implied. Yes, some of the characterization is described explicitly, but not all. I think that this is due to the characters and the stories themselves. For example, everyone in the story is kind of placed into the stereotype as to caring so much as to how they look. Yes, they are all easily distinguishable due to how they look, but their personalities don't really matter to each other. Everyone is so excessive with materialism that they have lost sight as to what truly matters. Gatsby, on the other hand, cares about material possessions, but he also shows sign as to caring about others' personalities. I realized this on page six when Nick said, "Only Gatsby, the man who gives his name to this book, was exempt from my reaction- Gatsby who represented everything for which I have an unaffected scorn." Gatsby is different, and this is evident through the way Fitzgerald characterizes him.
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Frankenstein: Parallelism
"I left the room, and locking the door, made a solemn vow in my own heart neer to resume my labours; and then, with trembling steps, I sought my own apartment, I was alone...." (page 121).
MWA-HAHA! My last Frankenstein blog! I'm actually kind of sad about that. I really enjoyed this book. Nevertheless, I saved my last Frankenstein blog to be about my favorite topic of this book: parallelism. This is seriously the most epic thing ever if one thinks about the connections between Frankenstein to the creature. I blows my mind! Where to start? Where to start? Okay, I'll start with the quote above. When Frankenstein is making another creature, he is all alone in his laboratory. I find this parallel to the creature because the creature is constantly left all alone. I also find parallelism in the fact that the creature and Frankenstein both yearn to be loved. Frankenstein wants to marry Elizabeth and the creature wants someone of his own kind to be happy with. They both just want that one mate to be with forever. Both would not want anything more. When Victor sees the state that his father is in when his father is dying, Victor says, "Cursed, cursed be the fiend that brought misery on grey hairs, and doomed him to waste in wretchedness.... What then became of me? I know not; I lost sensation and chains and darkness were the only objects that pressed upon me" (page 147) Here, Victor is showing similar traits to the creature. Both want revenge on those who cause them misery. Both lose their own feelings in states of rage and are overcome by darkness when their lives don't go their way. On page 150, Victor says, "I pursued him; and for many months this has been my task." This links back to when the creature was angry with Victor. The creature pursued Victor and wanted revenge. Now, it has come full circle and Victor is pursuing the creature. Victor and the creature are very similar beings. I talked about more in a previous blog last week, but I know that there are more similarities than this. I am just trying to make a point.
Here's where thing become even more mind-blowing. Not only are the creature and Victor similar creatures, but Victor and Walton are as well. This just blows. My. Mind. Okay, get this: on page 158, Walton is writing to his "beloved sister." He writes to his sister often because they are incredibly close. This is similar to Victor and Elizabeth. On page 160, Walton is in deep mourning because he "lost his friend." Victor lost many people in his life, especially those he held closest to him. Victor and the creature are similar beings, but Walton is the same character as Victor. That is why Victor even tells his tale to Walton in the first place. Epic. It all comes full circle in one parallel universe.
MWA-HAHA! My last Frankenstein blog! I'm actually kind of sad about that. I really enjoyed this book. Nevertheless, I saved my last Frankenstein blog to be about my favorite topic of this book: parallelism. This is seriously the most epic thing ever if one thinks about the connections between Frankenstein to the creature. I blows my mind! Where to start? Where to start? Okay, I'll start with the quote above. When Frankenstein is making another creature, he is all alone in his laboratory. I find this parallel to the creature because the creature is constantly left all alone. I also find parallelism in the fact that the creature and Frankenstein both yearn to be loved. Frankenstein wants to marry Elizabeth and the creature wants someone of his own kind to be happy with. They both just want that one mate to be with forever. Both would not want anything more. When Victor sees the state that his father is in when his father is dying, Victor says, "Cursed, cursed be the fiend that brought misery on grey hairs, and doomed him to waste in wretchedness.... What then became of me? I know not; I lost sensation and chains and darkness were the only objects that pressed upon me" (page 147) Here, Victor is showing similar traits to the creature. Both want revenge on those who cause them misery. Both lose their own feelings in states of rage and are overcome by darkness when their lives don't go their way. On page 150, Victor says, "I pursued him; and for many months this has been my task." This links back to when the creature was angry with Victor. The creature pursued Victor and wanted revenge. Now, it has come full circle and Victor is pursuing the creature. Victor and the creature are very similar beings. I talked about more in a previous blog last week, but I know that there are more similarities than this. I am just trying to make a point.
Here's where thing become even more mind-blowing. Not only are the creature and Victor similar creatures, but Victor and Walton are as well. This just blows. My. Mind. Okay, get this: on page 158, Walton is writing to his "beloved sister." He writes to his sister often because they are incredibly close. This is similar to Victor and Elizabeth. On page 160, Walton is in deep mourning because he "lost his friend." Victor lost many people in his life, especially those he held closest to him. Victor and the creature are similar beings, but Walton is the same character as Victor. That is why Victor even tells his tale to Walton in the first place. Epic. It all comes full circle in one parallel universe.
Frankenstein: Theme
" 'Are you mad, my friend' said he; 'or whither does your senseless curiosity lead you? Would you also create for yourself and the world a demoniacal enemy? Peace, peace! learn my miseries, and do not eseek to increase your own." (page 156)
I'm starting to notice a trend here. Ever since the beginning of the story, Victor has been warning Walton about the dangers of knowledge. It can be a very harmful thing. Ever since the beginning of time, mankind has gotten smarter and smarter. The search for knowledge in the story (on Victor's behalf) was innocent. He wanted to find cures for illnesses. As the story went on, he became immersed in getting to know how to recreate human beings. This led to him creating a monster. The monster became immersed in learning as well, and found out the meanings of life. It cried when it read certain novels. It found numerous things about how humans work and how many things came to be. It learned about hatred and violence from others, and all these things added to the intensity of the monster. So: what is the meaning behind all of this information? What is Mary Shelley trying to say?
Personally, I believe that Mary Shelley sees knowledge as the monster. Her message is this: humans are figuring out how to do things that should not be known to man. Recreating humans is in God's hands, and this is what led to Victor's downfall. Knowing too much information is not always a good thing. That's why Victor did not even tell Walton of the hidden secrets because he didn't want to ruin Walton's life as well. We should just leave things alone and stop using knowledge to destroy mankind instead of improving our own lifestyles. Society is going downhill and we need to stop our minds before it's too late. But is this possible? How can we stop our minds? Our minds control our thoughts; this might be impossible.....
I'm starting to notice a trend here. Ever since the beginning of the story, Victor has been warning Walton about the dangers of knowledge. It can be a very harmful thing. Ever since the beginning of time, mankind has gotten smarter and smarter. The search for knowledge in the story (on Victor's behalf) was innocent. He wanted to find cures for illnesses. As the story went on, he became immersed in getting to know how to recreate human beings. This led to him creating a monster. The monster became immersed in learning as well, and found out the meanings of life. It cried when it read certain novels. It found numerous things about how humans work and how many things came to be. It learned about hatred and violence from others, and all these things added to the intensity of the monster. So: what is the meaning behind all of this information? What is Mary Shelley trying to say?
Personally, I believe that Mary Shelley sees knowledge as the monster. Her message is this: humans are figuring out how to do things that should not be known to man. Recreating humans is in God's hands, and this is what led to Victor's downfall. Knowing too much information is not always a good thing. That's why Victor did not even tell Walton of the hidden secrets because he didn't want to ruin Walton's life as well. We should just leave things alone and stop using knowledge to destroy mankind instead of improving our own lifestyles. Society is going downhill and we need to stop our minds before it's too late. But is this possible? How can we stop our minds? Our minds control our thoughts; this might be impossible.....
Frankenstein: Is Frankenstein innocent?
"I feel myself justified in desiring the death of my adversary... nor do I find it blameable. I created a being to assure in my power his happiness and well-being." (page 161).
I find it funny the way that one will tell a story. Whoever is telling the story will put his own spin on things to make the listener (or the reader) side with him. When the creature was telling the story, I almost felt as if i could hear an orchestra playing really sad music in the background. No one was there for him, no one loved him, he was all alone, etc. I heard it all. And all of this was true. But from Frankenstein's perspective, the creature was the devil. The creature was ruining his life. Frankenstein felt innocent, but so did the creature. Both of them felt justified in their actions for how they were wronged by the other. So, who is right here? Who is really innocent in this case? In Frankenstein's defense, he made the creature because he was curious about how to animate a human frame. The creature was of enormous stature and scared the bajeebies out of him, so he naturally ran away from the unknown. He loved his family and Elizabeth, and the creature destroyed everything. Aw, poor Frankenstein.
However, in the creature's defense, no one took care of it. It was left ALL alone. It had to celebrate its birthdays by itself. It was ugly and scary-looking and everyone hated it because they got to know it. Victor destroyed its only potential mate. How sad! However, the creature was also not justified in its actions. As bad as I felt for the creature, it should have never killed off Frankenstein's family or Elizabeth. I guess that's just my perspective though. I wish that everyone could just get along and "do unto others as they would like to be treated." However, I just don't think that the characters in this book would ever understand that concept.
I find it funny the way that one will tell a story. Whoever is telling the story will put his own spin on things to make the listener (or the reader) side with him. When the creature was telling the story, I almost felt as if i could hear an orchestra playing really sad music in the background. No one was there for him, no one loved him, he was all alone, etc. I heard it all. And all of this was true. But from Frankenstein's perspective, the creature was the devil. The creature was ruining his life. Frankenstein felt innocent, but so did the creature. Both of them felt justified in their actions for how they were wronged by the other. So, who is right here? Who is really innocent in this case? In Frankenstein's defense, he made the creature because he was curious about how to animate a human frame. The creature was of enormous stature and scared the bajeebies out of him, so he naturally ran away from the unknown. He loved his family and Elizabeth, and the creature destroyed everything. Aw, poor Frankenstein.
However, in the creature's defense, no one took care of it. It was left ALL alone. It had to celebrate its birthdays by itself. It was ugly and scary-looking and everyone hated it because they got to know it. Victor destroyed its only potential mate. How sad! However, the creature was also not justified in its actions. As bad as I felt for the creature, it should have never killed off Frankenstein's family or Elizabeth. I guess that's just my perspective though. I wish that everyone could just get along and "do unto others as they would like to be treated." However, I just don't think that the characters in this book would ever understand that concept.
Frankenstein: prejudice
"He struggled violently. 'Let me go.' he cried; 'monster! ugly wretch! you wish to eat me and tear me to pieces- You are an ogre!" (page 102).
Prejudice is a very important theme of this novel. It seems to be everywhere in this book. For instance, in the first half, Victor was prejudice towards the creature after it was created. He was afraid of it, even though it was simply reaching out to Victor to be loved. Many elements in this novel are misconstrued because people simply do not take the time to get to know the creature. Felix is prejudice towards the creature because Felix thinks that the creature is a threat. However, the creature would never have harmed anyone ins the DeLacey home if they would have just listened to him. In the second half of the book, I noticed more and more forms of prejudice. When the creature finds out that William is in relation to Frankenstein, the creature says, "Frankenstein! you belong then to my enemy- to him towards who I have sworn eternal revenge; you shall be my first victim." (page 102). Here though, the creature is prejudice against William. The creature was incredibly offended when William called him ugly and that he was an ogre. This is because the creature thought that surely a child would not be judgmental towards him. Sure enough, though, the child was. I find it incredibly ironic with how the creature handles this, though. The creature is upset that William is prejudice against him for being a strange creature. However, the creature is prejudice as well. The creature is prejudice against William, thinking that he will be exactly like Victor. The creature did not even get the chance to get to really know William and kills him instantly. How sad! I feel sorry for the creature, but the creature also takes things just as far. It's kind of like little kids. If a little kid hits another child, I feel sorry for the one who was hit. However, if that child hits the other child back, then I don't feel sorry for either child because they are both doing things wrong. In the creature's defense, he cannot help it because no one has ever told him otherwise if things are right or wrong. He just learns from others, and the ways of prejudice are what he has learned.
I also noticed prejudice on page 165. The creature says, "Why do you not hate Felix, who drove his friend from the door with contumely? Why do you not execrate the rustic who sought to destroy the saviour of his child? Nay, these are virturous and immaculate beings! I, the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on. Even now my blood boils at the recollection of this injustice." This is SO true! Everyone here is wrong in the way they are treating the creature, and yet, the only one being hated is the creature. He has a horrible life and people simply make it worse. It reminds me of the Native Americans. People hated them and they did nothing wrong. They were simply living their own lives, trying to live in peace, and people made their lives miserable. Why did people hate the Native Americans? Why didn't they look at themselves and hate the people from Europe, killing them off? We need to open our eyes to realize what we are doing to people. The creature is miserable because of the way he is being treated. This just makes me so sad!
Prejudice is a very important theme of this novel. It seems to be everywhere in this book. For instance, in the first half, Victor was prejudice towards the creature after it was created. He was afraid of it, even though it was simply reaching out to Victor to be loved. Many elements in this novel are misconstrued because people simply do not take the time to get to know the creature. Felix is prejudice towards the creature because Felix thinks that the creature is a threat. However, the creature would never have harmed anyone ins the DeLacey home if they would have just listened to him. In the second half of the book, I noticed more and more forms of prejudice. When the creature finds out that William is in relation to Frankenstein, the creature says, "Frankenstein! you belong then to my enemy- to him towards who I have sworn eternal revenge; you shall be my first victim." (page 102). Here though, the creature is prejudice against William. The creature was incredibly offended when William called him ugly and that he was an ogre. This is because the creature thought that surely a child would not be judgmental towards him. Sure enough, though, the child was. I find it incredibly ironic with how the creature handles this, though. The creature is upset that William is prejudice against him for being a strange creature. However, the creature is prejudice as well. The creature is prejudice against William, thinking that he will be exactly like Victor. The creature did not even get the chance to get to really know William and kills him instantly. How sad! I feel sorry for the creature, but the creature also takes things just as far. It's kind of like little kids. If a little kid hits another child, I feel sorry for the one who was hit. However, if that child hits the other child back, then I don't feel sorry for either child because they are both doing things wrong. In the creature's defense, he cannot help it because no one has ever told him otherwise if things are right or wrong. He just learns from others, and the ways of prejudice are what he has learned.
I also noticed prejudice on page 165. The creature says, "Why do you not hate Felix, who drove his friend from the door with contumely? Why do you not execrate the rustic who sought to destroy the saviour of his child? Nay, these are virturous and immaculate beings! I, the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on. Even now my blood boils at the recollection of this injustice." This is SO true! Everyone here is wrong in the way they are treating the creature, and yet, the only one being hated is the creature. He has a horrible life and people simply make it worse. It reminds me of the Native Americans. People hated them and they did nothing wrong. They were simply living their own lives, trying to live in peace, and people made their lives miserable. Why did people hate the Native Americans? Why didn't they look at themselves and hate the people from Europe, killing them off? We need to open our eyes to realize what we are doing to people. The creature is miserable because of the way he is being treated. This just makes me so sad!
Frankenstein: sympathy
"There was none among the myriads of men that existed who would pity or assist me; and should I feel kindness towards my enemies? No: from that moment I declared ever-lasting war against the species, and more than all, against him who had formed me and sent me forth to this insupportable misery." (page 97).
After finishing this novel, I tried to figure out where I stood with each of the characters. Throughout the story, I have felt sorry for the creature. He was born deformed and so many people hated him. He was born good, so therefore, I believe that the creature has a heart. He cared for so many people, but they would turn against him. Sympathy is an integral part of the book and is located in many areas of the second half of the book. The creature seeks sympathy a lot, though, so I'm starting to think that this is an important part of the creature. The creature yearns for sympathy because the creature yearns to be loved in some way. On page 164, the creature says, "My heart was fashioned to be susceptible of love and sympathy; and when wrenched by misery to vice and hatred, it did not endure the violence of the change, without torture such as you cannot even imagine." Here, the creature is hoping to have someone feel sorry for him. However, Walton calls him out on it. Walton says, "If he whom you mourn still lived, still would he be the object, again would he become the prey of your accursed vengeance." (page 164). In short, I am recognizing that the creature is a very complex character. He wants sympathy from others, but he also did not give Frankenstein any sympathy at all. He is solely evil towards Frankenstein because Frankenstein failed to raise him. It's a lot to ponder that the creature can be someone I love and hate at the same time.
After finishing this novel, I tried to figure out where I stood with each of the characters. Throughout the story, I have felt sorry for the creature. He was born deformed and so many people hated him. He was born good, so therefore, I believe that the creature has a heart. He cared for so many people, but they would turn against him. Sympathy is an integral part of the book and is located in many areas of the second half of the book. The creature seeks sympathy a lot, though, so I'm starting to think that this is an important part of the creature. The creature yearns for sympathy because the creature yearns to be loved in some way. On page 164, the creature says, "My heart was fashioned to be susceptible of love and sympathy; and when wrenched by misery to vice and hatred, it did not endure the violence of the change, without torture such as you cannot even imagine." Here, the creature is hoping to have someone feel sorry for him. However, Walton calls him out on it. Walton says, "If he whom you mourn still lived, still would he be the object, again would he become the prey of your accursed vengeance." (page 164). In short, I am recognizing that the creature is a very complex character. He wants sympathy from others, but he also did not give Frankenstein any sympathy at all. He is solely evil towards Frankenstein because Frankenstein failed to raise him. It's a lot to ponder that the creature can be someone I love and hate at the same time.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Frankenstein: Nature vs. Nurture
"I was their plaything and their idol, and something better- their child, the innocent and helpless creature bestowed on them by Heaven, whom to bring up to good, and whose future lot it was in their hands to direct to happiness or misery, according as they fulfilled their duties towards me." (page 16).
I have saved this blog for last because I have more to say about this topic than any of the other four blogs I created previous to this one. I simply want to parallel the lives of Frankenstein and his creature. Frankenstein created the creature, hoping to make the creature like himself. I love this quote because it ties everything together. Frankenstein was raised by parents who idolized him when he was born. They showered him with love and his childhood was like one from the gods. He was raised with hopes and dreams and just wanted to make his parents proud because they did so much for him. The creature, however, wasn't raised at all. It was incredibly neglected and had to learn how to figure out its senses on its own. It is just sad. Also, I found the quote on page 69 to be very powerful as well. The creature says, "If the multitude of mankind knew of my existence, they would do as you do, and arm themselves for my destruction. Shall I not then hate them who abhor me? I will keep no terms with my enemies. I am miserable, and they shall share my wretchedness." The only the creature has been shown is hatred. It only makes sense that the creature would respond with hatred as well. It's similar to the issue of child soldiers. Children in many countries are being forced to fight. They are killing others with weapons. This is simply absurd. Why are we instilling the act of fighting into these kids' minds? The kids don't know any better. This is just like the creature. He doesn't know any better than to treat others with kindness. Everyone is afraid of him, so of course he would be like this. I found another parallel between Frankenstein and the creature. Frankenstein said, "My temper was sometimes violent and my passions vehement; but by some law in my temeperament they were turned not towards childish pursuits but to an eager desire to learn." (page 19) The creature is like this too. Even though the creature was raised in a different environment, their personality qualities are very similar. They way they act around humans is different, though, due to how they were raised. Both Frankenstein and the creature have issues with anger. However, both crave to learn more. The creature wants to learn how to communicate with others to allow others to love him. Frankenstein craves to learn how to find cures for illnesses. The parallels are everywhere, and honestly, even though I find Frankenstein and the creature to essentially be the same being, I love the creature more. The creature may be a savage, but he has a heart. Frankenstein is just a guy who is afraid of life itself and whines the whole time about how horrible his life is. His miseries are nothing in comparison to the creatures, in my opinion. Frankenstein kind of brought his miseries upon himself. If he would have cared for the creature like he should have, the complications in Frankenstein's life would be few. William would still be alive. Justine would still be alive. Frankenstein's life would be different if he just would have taken care of the innocent creature.
I have saved this blog for last because I have more to say about this topic than any of the other four blogs I created previous to this one. I simply want to parallel the lives of Frankenstein and his creature. Frankenstein created the creature, hoping to make the creature like himself. I love this quote because it ties everything together. Frankenstein was raised by parents who idolized him when he was born. They showered him with love and his childhood was like one from the gods. He was raised with hopes and dreams and just wanted to make his parents proud because they did so much for him. The creature, however, wasn't raised at all. It was incredibly neglected and had to learn how to figure out its senses on its own. It is just sad. Also, I found the quote on page 69 to be very powerful as well. The creature says, "If the multitude of mankind knew of my existence, they would do as you do, and arm themselves for my destruction. Shall I not then hate them who abhor me? I will keep no terms with my enemies. I am miserable, and they shall share my wretchedness." The only the creature has been shown is hatred. It only makes sense that the creature would respond with hatred as well. It's similar to the issue of child soldiers. Children in many countries are being forced to fight. They are killing others with weapons. This is simply absurd. Why are we instilling the act of fighting into these kids' minds? The kids don't know any better. This is just like the creature. He doesn't know any better than to treat others with kindness. Everyone is afraid of him, so of course he would be like this. I found another parallel between Frankenstein and the creature. Frankenstein said, "My temper was sometimes violent and my passions vehement; but by some law in my temeperament they were turned not towards childish pursuits but to an eager desire to learn." (page 19) The creature is like this too. Even though the creature was raised in a different environment, their personality qualities are very similar. They way they act around humans is different, though, due to how they were raised. Both Frankenstein and the creature have issues with anger. However, both crave to learn more. The creature wants to learn how to communicate with others to allow others to love him. Frankenstein craves to learn how to find cures for illnesses. The parallels are everywhere, and honestly, even though I find Frankenstein and the creature to essentially be the same being, I love the creature more. The creature may be a savage, but he has a heart. Frankenstein is just a guy who is afraid of life itself and whines the whole time about how horrible his life is. His miseries are nothing in comparison to the creatures, in my opinion. Frankenstein kind of brought his miseries upon himself. If he would have cared for the creature like he should have, the complications in Frankenstein's life would be few. William would still be alive. Justine would still be alive. Frankenstein's life would be different if he just would have taken care of the innocent creature.
Frankenstein: sympathy
"At first I started back, unable to believe that it was indeed I who was reflected in the mirror; and when I became fully convinced that I was in reality the moster that I am, I was filled with the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification. Alas! I did not yet entirely know the fatal effects of this miserable deformity." (page 80).
When many of us think of monsters or evil beings, the only thing that we want to do is hate them. However, I simply cannot hate this creature. I actually love the creature and everything about it. It is kind and gentle and has an amazing heart. Isn't the creature just like any one of us? The creature just wants one thing: to be loved. We all want that. The creature reaches out to Victor, its creator, the minute the creature is born. And what does Victor do? Victor runs away. The creature is rejected and wanders off on its own. The creature spent years by itself and no one cares for it at all. This is sad. I also find it heartbreaking that the creature cannot even live among the people. He finds and shed to hide in and lives in that. Are you kidding me?! This is just devastating. And does the creature complain? No. The creature shovels people's snow and brings them fire wood. The creature is an amazing being, and people only show it hatred. I honestly feel incredibly sorry for the creature and want it to change the town with its kindness and love. People need to look past people's differences and see people for who they are by their actions and by the motives of their hearts, not their appearances.
When many of us think of monsters or evil beings, the only thing that we want to do is hate them. However, I simply cannot hate this creature. I actually love the creature and everything about it. It is kind and gentle and has an amazing heart. Isn't the creature just like any one of us? The creature just wants one thing: to be loved. We all want that. The creature reaches out to Victor, its creator, the minute the creature is born. And what does Victor do? Victor runs away. The creature is rejected and wanders off on its own. The creature spent years by itself and no one cares for it at all. This is sad. I also find it heartbreaking that the creature cannot even live among the people. He finds and shed to hide in and lives in that. Are you kidding me?! This is just devastating. And does the creature complain? No. The creature shovels people's snow and brings them fire wood. The creature is an amazing being, and people only show it hatred. I honestly feel incredibly sorry for the creature and want it to change the town with its kindness and love. People need to look past people's differences and see people for who they are by their actions and by the motives of their hearts, not their appearances.
Frankenstein: characterization / detail
"His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful! -Great God! his yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion and straight black lips..." (page 35)
In the quote above, Victor describes the features of the creature in full detail. I could literally visualize exactly how this creature looked. I also find the way he describes the creature to be very ironic. Before the creature is created, Victor talks about how the creature would "bless him (Victor) as the creator and source." (page 32). I discussed this in the previous blog about how this all changed. When the creature is created, Victor selected his features as "beautiful," as stated in the quote above. However, when the creature comes to life, Frankenstein is horrified by what he had created, and he sees no beauty in the creature at all. Victor described the entire process of creating the creature in full detail. Actually, he describes his journeys, his encounters with others, his family, and basically everything in full detail. Everything is illustrated beautifully. I don't really see the point as to why Frankenstein went into so much detail. However, everything is so evenly interconnected. When Frankenstein began his story when the chapters begin in this novel, he starts with his family background. Again, Frankenstein goes back to his father and how his mother married. This leads to Victor being born and Victor's siblings becoming part of the family. This leads to Victor being excited about learning, which leads to his experiments, which leads to the creature being born. Yes, it all makes sense. However, Victor's background is that simple. The creature is not even born until Chapter V, though. There is so much fluff before the meat of the story really begins. As a reader, this is kind of aggravating, but that's okay. The detail is amazingly expressive and beautiful. I just would prefer that we would cut to the chase already.
In the quote above, Victor describes the features of the creature in full detail. I could literally visualize exactly how this creature looked. I also find the way he describes the creature to be very ironic. Before the creature is created, Victor talks about how the creature would "bless him (Victor) as the creator and source." (page 32). I discussed this in the previous blog about how this all changed. When the creature is created, Victor selected his features as "beautiful," as stated in the quote above. However, when the creature comes to life, Frankenstein is horrified by what he had created, and he sees no beauty in the creature at all. Victor described the entire process of creating the creature in full detail. Actually, he describes his journeys, his encounters with others, his family, and basically everything in full detail. Everything is illustrated beautifully. I don't really see the point as to why Frankenstein went into so much detail. However, everything is so evenly interconnected. When Frankenstein began his story when the chapters begin in this novel, he starts with his family background. Again, Frankenstein goes back to his father and how his mother married. This leads to Victor being born and Victor's siblings becoming part of the family. This leads to Victor being excited about learning, which leads to his experiments, which leads to the creature being born. Yes, it all makes sense. However, Victor's background is that simple. The creature is not even born until Chapter V, though. There is so much fluff before the meat of the story really begins. As a reader, this is kind of aggravating, but that's okay. The detail is amazingly expressive and beautiful. I just would prefer that we would cut to the chase already.
Frankenstein: irony
"No one can conceive the variety of feelings which bore me onwards, like a hurricane, in the first enthusiasm of success. Life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through and pour a torrent of light into our dark world. A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their beign to me. No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs. Pursuing these reflections, I thought, that if I could bestow animation upon lifeless matter, I might in process of time renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption." (page 32).
This quote simply made me laugh. I guess I missed the irony in this phrase when I read these chapters the first time. When I came back and reread the first half of the book, I noticed this and was astonished. I find it incredibly ironic that Frankenstein talks about how he would "be blessed as its creator source" if he made a body structure come to life. When Frankenstein really does create the creature, he is blind to the fact that he was blessed as its creator. However, without getting to know the creature, Frankenstein ran away from his creation and neglected it. I also found the line after that ironic. Mary Shelley scribes "many happy and excellent natures would owe their beign to me" (page 32). Later in the chapters, the creature brought upon destruction and made Frankenstein's life miserable. Frankenstein created the creature thinking that he would be happy and could save others' lives. However, the creature did anything but this. Continuing on with the quote above, Victor felt that the creature would "renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption." I find this ironic as well. Victor created the creature, hoping that the creature would bring about cures to illnesses to save people from dying. Victor did this because he was miserable when his mother died. However, the creature did not renew life. If the creature really is the murderer of William (and many others, I presume), then the creature is annihilating life and destroying it. In the creature's defense, he doesn't know any better. All in all, Victor created the creature in hope for happiness and cures, but things didn't exactly go the way he planned. Although the whole plot of recreating a human being is unrealistic, this theme is very realistic. Things don't always go the way we plan.............
This quote simply made me laugh. I guess I missed the irony in this phrase when I read these chapters the first time. When I came back and reread the first half of the book, I noticed this and was astonished. I find it incredibly ironic that Frankenstein talks about how he would "be blessed as its creator source" if he made a body structure come to life. When Frankenstein really does create the creature, he is blind to the fact that he was blessed as its creator. However, without getting to know the creature, Frankenstein ran away from his creation and neglected it. I also found the line after that ironic. Mary Shelley scribes "many happy and excellent natures would owe their beign to me" (page 32). Later in the chapters, the creature brought upon destruction and made Frankenstein's life miserable. Frankenstein created the creature thinking that he would be happy and could save others' lives. However, the creature did anything but this. Continuing on with the quote above, Victor felt that the creature would "renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption." I find this ironic as well. Victor created the creature, hoping that the creature would bring about cures to illnesses to save people from dying. Victor did this because he was miserable when his mother died. However, the creature did not renew life. If the creature really is the murderer of William (and many others, I presume), then the creature is annihilating life and destroying it. In the creature's defense, he doesn't know any better. All in all, Victor created the creature in hope for happiness and cures, but things didn't exactly go the way he planned. Although the whole plot of recreating a human being is unrealistic, this theme is very realistic. Things don't always go the way we plan.............
Frankenstein: foreshadowing
"My departure was therefore fixed at an early date; but, before the day resolved upon could arrive, the first misfortune of my life occurred- an omen, as it were, of my future misery." (page 23)
The novel Frankenstein contains many elements of foreshadowing upcoming events. Part of this could be due to the fact that the story is told as a frame story. Victor is telling the story, so it is only logical that Victor would know what is coming next. He has lived through these events. All of the elements of foreshadowing in this story have to deal with a negative connotation. In the quote above, the words "misfortune" "omen" and "misery" are used to describe Frankenstein's future. As a reader, I am afraid as to what is coming. Victor often uses this vocabulary when describing his future. This is probably why he is in such a horrible state when Robert Walton meets him. Frankenstein has lived a hard life; I just don't know what the creature is going to do to him. Victor has lost so much already. He has lost his mother and his brother and his sanity. If he lost anything more, I am worried that he is going to go insane. Maybe it's not the creature that is going to make Frankenstein miserable. Maybe it is Frankenstein himself who will bring on his own misery... But isn't the creature Victor in another form? Aren't they parallels of each other? So if the creature is going to make Victor miserable, isn't this essentially Victor making himself miserable since they are similar beings? It's something I have been thinking about, and I guess that only time will tell.
The novel Frankenstein contains many elements of foreshadowing upcoming events. Part of this could be due to the fact that the story is told as a frame story. Victor is telling the story, so it is only logical that Victor would know what is coming next. He has lived through these events. All of the elements of foreshadowing in this story have to deal with a negative connotation. In the quote above, the words "misfortune" "omen" and "misery" are used to describe Frankenstein's future. As a reader, I am afraid as to what is coming. Victor often uses this vocabulary when describing his future. This is probably why he is in such a horrible state when Robert Walton meets him. Frankenstein has lived a hard life; I just don't know what the creature is going to do to him. Victor has lost so much already. He has lost his mother and his brother and his sanity. If he lost anything more, I am worried that he is going to go insane. Maybe it's not the creature that is going to make Frankenstein miserable. Maybe it is Frankenstein himself who will bring on his own misery... But isn't the creature Victor in another form? Aren't they parallels of each other? So if the creature is going to make Victor miserable, isn't this essentially Victor making himself miserable since they are similar beings? It's something I have been thinking about, and I guess that only time will tell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)