Today’s Agenda
1) Housekeeping:
Topics for our group presentations will include:
1) The Life and Times of Mary Shelley
2) The Major Themes and Motifs of Frankenstein
3) The Life and Times of Charlotte Bronte
4) The Major Themes and Motifs of Jane Eyre
5) Mary Shelley’s England
6) Charlotte Bronte’s England
Other topics are possible, but they must be run by me first.
2) Journal:
I’d like to begin today by actually going back to something that we read for last time. At the beginning of volume 2 Chapter III, the monster tells us that he has a very difficult time remembering the origin of his being. What I want you to consider is how his story may be similar to, or different than, Frankenstein’s story. Remember how this book began with a few chapters on Frankenstein’s childhood? Remember how I said that one of the major advances in this book is its consideration of childhood? Well, let’s think about the monster’s “childhood” for a moment
Discussion
Journal:
“All of the events of that period appear confused and indistinct. A strange multiplicity of sensations sized me, and I saw, felt, heard, and smelt, at the same time: and it was, indeed, a long time before I began to distinguish between the operations of my various senses. By degrees, I remember a stronger light pressed upon my nerves, so that I was obliged to shut my eyes…”
The monster is essentially telling us about his very first memories, which I bet are different than your memories. Let’s begin by writing a journal entry today in which you describe to me your earliest memory: what is it, how would you describe it. And I want you to think about this, how do you think your description is reflective of your understanding and expertise with the English language?
3) Group Discussion of journal entries
4) Group discussion of reading.
Mini-lecture:
At the beginning of this semester, I told you that there were two essential world views that we would be dealing with: the wheel of fortune and humanism.
Both systems presuppose that you can consider something directly: you can consider God and learn from that, or you can consider other people and their lives and learn from that too.
However, last time, as we began to discuss language, I wanted you to become aware of a problem that we have not discussed yet.
If your language limits you, how might that challenge your ability to do either of these things.
So maybe we can’t begin with the presumption that everyone can simply consider these things. Maybe they can’t be considered directly. Maybe we need to first need to think about how our understanding of the world may impact what we SEE when we look at these subjects.
Let me put it another way, the reason why the Bible was supposed to be a Latin only document was because, if it was in Latin, you could presume that it would lead a person to know God and the world correctly – we still see this today, with the Latin in our science, there is a reason Science still uses Latin, and that is because of a very old tradition surrounding the supposed appropriateness of the language.
Frankenstein is a novel that, more than any other text we have read, calls our attention to how our personalities and environment can affect how we see the world.
Consider the landscapes Frankenstein moves through, and how his depression prevents him from engaging the beauty of the world. He is predisposed to depression and an obsession with the trauma of the monster’s birth, and that colors his world. This is a book about the way that trauma can impact your life.
Discussion
Homework for next time, the next 50 pages plus a blog post.
[...] Wednesday, March 18 [...]
Caleb Ashey
Eh241
Professor Adam Crowley
Blog Post
The end of the book Frankenstein finally takes responsibility for his Monster after all of his friends have been murdered. His rage and lust for revenge have filled him with hatred for this monster and have broken the monsters power over him. It is this trauma that has finally pushed Frankenstein over the edge. He is no longer running scared of him, and is in fact looking forward to the confrontation that awaits him when he finally catches the monster. Going along with what we talked about in class, trauma can also be used to turn a frightened person into a courageous person, a timid person into a person looking for conflict. Just like it did for Frankenstein, his trauma was losing all of his friends, and it changed the way he feared the monster into a person looking for vengeance. But when he is brought aboard the ship and they have vowed to turn around to go to England it finally hits home that he was responsible for the creature of his creation and that he was also responsible in making that creature happy. Just like any parent should think. He never forgave him, only saw the errors in his ways.
Also at the end of the book, the monster, comes to Victors corpse after he has died on the ship, and asks forgiveness. Because he now, also, has seen what he has truly done. He tells William that he will sacrifice himself, because there is no other purpose for which he can live for.
I believe that this is the Monsters trauma, he has nothing else to live for. His creator has perished, his creators friends have perished, and he believes that he has no other reason for living. He knows that he is not suppose to be a part of this world. So he will destroy himself so no other can study him and find out how to re-create something of his likeness. Trauma once again, changed someone, it turned a killing machine into someone filled with pity and remorse.
Stefanie Foutch
3/19/09
EH 241
Major British Writers
The End of Frankenstein
“Frankenstein” written by Mary Shelley, was an amazing book! As I mentioned earlier, when I started reading this book I had no idea what exactly I was in for. I knew the general idea of Frankenstein, however, I had never seen any of the movies, yet alone read one of the books. So reading this book was definitely interesting.
Frankenstein experienced a lot through out the book, but the ending was intense. The monster had promised Victor that he would be with him on his wedding night. Of course, since the monster said this I was expecting him to be there that night, so was Frankenstein. He guarded the house for most of the night and then sent Elizabeth off to bed. Now, the part that I found interesting was; why did he let her go to bed alone? When the monster made his promise to be there on the wedding night, the first thought that crossed my mind was; the monster is going to kill Elizabeth! Why did Frankenstein not think of this? He should have been there to protect her, unfortunately, he was there.
After Elizabeth was murdered, Frankenstein was furious. He swore that he wore that he would hunt the monster and kill him. He wanted to make swore that he would out live the creation. So, the hunt began. The monster would leave his tracks for Frankenstein to follow, or he would leave him a dead animal to eat. The monster made sure that Frankenstein would follow and keep up with him. The monster wanted to make Frankenstein suffer, just as much as he did. Frankenstein followed the monster’s tracks and kept up with him for quite a ways. It was interesting that; even though Frankenstein was so weak and exhausted, he followed the monster. He actually kept up with him, for the most part. I was surprised at how headstrong, or stubborn, Frankenstein actually was.
The other part that I found interesting was closer to the end of the book. The book told of how Frankenstein ended up on the boat with Walton. There, on the boat, Frankenstein eventually became so weak that he died. He died after telling his tale to Walton. Walton actually believed Frankenstein’s story. After Frankenstein passed away, the monster showed up on the boat, and he started talking to Walton. Walton was in complete shock, but the funny thing was; he did not run away form the creation in fear, he stayed and had a conversation with him. Not just any conversation, he got into a verbal argument with the creation. However, the part that surprised me the most, or the part that I found most interesting gin the end was; the monster actually felt sorry for the death of Frankenstein. Also, if I remember correctly, the monster admitted that he was the slave to Frankenstein, not the other way around. This I found shocking, in a way.
So in the end, a lot of events took place. Elizabeth was killed, and Frankenstein was “beaten” by the monster. I found the ending of the book packed with interesting things. Most of all I was surprised at how much I liked the book, and how well it was written.
Jason Stewart
Adam Crowley, Eh 241
19 March 2009
Mary Shelley stated that “nothing is so painful to the human mind as a great and sudden change” (200) near the ending of Frankenstein. By this point in the novel Victor Frankenstein had lost his brother, his very best friend and even his wife to the hands of the monster he created. These events had taken an obvious toll on not only Victor but his father as well, resulting in the elder Frankenstein dying in Victor’s arms. Shelley’s words ring true by turning the pacifist Victor to a revenge driven mad man who vowed to stop at nothing until his vengeance was exacted upon the monster who eluded him.
This story has a strong motif of vengeance that helps drive the plot and characters all over Europe. The monster, driven by rage and want for revenge on his neglectful creator, is compelled to learn to speak and put his hate to words, with horrifying proficiency. He also travels around Victor’s home of Geneva to torture Victor by killing those he loves. This bloodlust that drives the monster he learned from reading pieces by man, which could be an underlying theme that Shelley is trying to say. It is man’s want of violence and bloodshed that will eventually destroy all of our creations.
Another motif that is seen throughout the story of Frankenstein’s awful demise is that of solitude creating more problems than anything else. The monster states in the final passages of the novel that because he was left to his own devices that he grew to abhor his creator and want to destroy Victor and all he loves. While Victor was in solitude did he learn and desire to create something like the monster that would eventually take his life, indirectly. Both master and slave were driven to near insanity because of one another’s hate of solitude. This is another one of Shelley’s satirical remarks on the human condition. Seek out society and human interaction to be able to stay with in the limits of your own mind.
William Dow
Eh241.001
3/19/2009
The End of Frankenstein
The ending of the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelly is disappointing to me. The end of the Frankenstein seems a little anticlimactic in both ways. The point when we are brought from the story of Frankenstein to the return of the boat was a creative way to do it “I myself was about to sink under the accumulation of distress when I saw your vessel riding anchor (205)”. As shown, we are brought full circle back to the beginning of the story. The death of the good doctor is a little off putting but it does feel right in the story. The way he just fades away in to death just seemed to fit the story. Then the whole point with the monster standing over him in the very end and giving his part of the story about how he seemed to feel guilty for what he did. However, the story just did not go out with any force at all. The novel ended very much as Frankenstein did, just fades away with barely any closer. Victor chases the monster around what seems almost all of Europe. The whole chase section of the book seemed thin, Shelly could have add some more to this section. This could have been an interesting section but instead of more stories all, we get a vague overview of where Frankenstein had chased his monster and some of the cryptic messages that the monster leaves to taunt the doctor. However, as I think about it would not have really fit the story.
In conclusion, the ending seemed a little thin on information about Victor’s chase of his monster. Though it seemed a weak ending it did end the way I experienced the book a list of facts with good use of words.
The ending of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein matched my expectations of how it all would come to a close. The end was an agreeable in a sense that the monster loses his flame of vengeance once Victor perishes. Honestly I think Victor’s death was coming to him, he was so physically and mentally exhausted from the monster’s existence.
For some reason or another, I kept expecting this showdown between the monster and Victor. Of course it never occurred, but the motif was there throughout the entire ending. I think it was also brilliant though for Mary Shelley to not include a confrontation because then she would actually decide for us who deserves more credit or sympathy at the end. The way it is all arranged leaves the sole decision up to the reader, which is probably what Mary Shelley intended when she wrote this novel.
Another strange thing that happened during the ending was how Walton encountered the monster after Victor dies. At first I was really unsure of how to handle the meeting. The fact that the monster felt guilty for Victor’s death confused me a lot. How can this monster feel guilty for his creator after mentally breaking him down for so long?
Furthermore, the ending was full of various twists and turns that shocked and confused me at the same time. I found myself reading and re-reading so many parts to make sure the information I was taking in was actually valid. I kept expecting something different every single time and I think that’s why it all came as such a surprise.
Sarah Rackliffe
EH 241
Professor Crowley
March 20, 2009
Frankenstein ending
As we come to the ending of Frankenstein we see finally see Victor’s breaking point, now he wants revenge. He seeks revenge on this monster that tore his life apart by taking away the people that mattered most to him. This constant goal of revenge finally brings Victor to his death. Now it’s the monster’s turn to feel regret. After Victor’s death the monster is found in his room and appears to be upset by his death.
I believe that a huge theme in this story is regret. Frankenstein regrets creating this monster. I also believe that he regrets that he always kept putting off dealing with the monster and waiting until the monster took everything away from him. At the end of the story Frankenstein’s monster also feels regret. I believe that he is feeling this regret because he let revenge take over his life. He allowed this revenge to turn him into a killing machine and he never got to be his own person.
I feel that even though the monster loathed Frankenstein, he had a special connection with him. I find this interesting because the monster did everything he could to ruin Victor’s life and happiness and now that he is gone the monster is sad. One would think that he would be happy for this death. This is just another one of Shelly’s turn of events.
The way Mary Shelly tied the beginning of the story and the end of the story was another interesting thing I found. I was surprised on how well it all fell together. I like how Walton became such an important character in this story. Walton was the only Character who hears Frankenstein’s story and he then passes it on to his sister.
I thought this last reading was very interesting. One thing that really stuck out for me was Victors lessening grip on reality and his despair. For instance describing himself as “like the archangel who aspired to omnipotence, I am chained in eternal hell.” This quote was interesting because to me it seems egotistical, depressed, and a little insane all at the same time. I felt as though this quote almost captures Victor’s attitude and personality throughout the text.
Another thing I found interesting was the continued emphasis on the importance of childhood. Something which wasn’t found in any of our earlier readings but which Mary Shelly does very well. For instance when Victor is talking to Walton about how are friends from childhood are irreplaceable he says, “They know our infantile dispositions, which, however they may be afterwards modified, are never eradicated.” Mary Shelly really sums up very well the importance she places on child experience in this line.
I also agree very strongly with what she is saying here. I think it’s a very true and insightful statement. In my own life experience I have noticed that the people who really know you best are the ones who knew you as a child. Even after a long absence conversations with old friends are easily struck back up and they know when you’re full of crap or if something’s wrong.
I can’t decide if I like the ending of the book or not. On one hand it tied up a lot of loose ends and answers many of the questions I had wanted to know. It also revealed the monster to be what I would argue as very human. The monster was full of contradictions, frustrations, the need to be loved, and hatred which are all very human. Then monster may have a lot of issues and been murderous but that unfortunately isn’t very uncommon to find in humanity. However I found the ending to this story disappointing. The monster runs Victor around Europe and to the ends of the earth to let him waste away?
I was expecting a final confrontation, or for them to face there issues more directly. The ended did close up a lot of loose ends but I felt the Monster committing suicide although realistic was a bit disappointing. The Monster never really deals with his issues, which I guess makes sense but leaves the reader wanting more. It would be very interesting to find out if Mary Shelly ever continued this series or universe with the monster not going through with his plans.
Benjamin McGray
EH 241
Adam Crowley
March 19, 2009
This week we entered into the “home stretch” of Frankenstein, and it was an ending that brought the reader to ends of the world, literally. There were a lot of things that seemed to come together, and at the same time there were things that seemed to fall apart, that is to say questions were answered and answers were questioned. Will the monster actually show up on the wedding day? Yes. The monster is clearly pure evil and is void of all humanity. Or is he? Does Frankenstein finally confront the monster in a ferocious duel that sends them both out in a blaze of glory? No. Well, this means the monster has won. Or does it? With these questions and more, however, there is one that seems to leap off of the pages throughout the text; can this monster be considered human, and therefore worthy of pity?
Once it is learned that Elizabeth was murdered by the monster we are given a vision of the creature smiling as Frankenstein holds the lifeless body in his arms. Immediately this invokes feelings of anger and hatred not only in Frankenstein but in the reader as well. Personally I questioned the humanity of this being and wondered how such unremorseful evil could prevail in anything. However at the end of the story I experienced a complete reversal of these feelings when it is revealed what the monster was actually feeling while committing these acts of violence. It is learned that the remorse he feels is so intense that it becomes almost unbearable and seems to rip at the thing’s conscience. This then brings up the question, is the monster, who is apparently capable of such humane emotions, human? The answer to this is a definitive yes, and to go even further it could be asserted that the monster is every bit as human as Frankenstein. Coincidently, in a philosophy class, I have recently been exposed to a few interesting quotes from the philosopher Rousseau (who happens to be from Geneva) regarding some ideas on the human condition. Rousseau states, “There is no original perversity in the human heart”, this saying that we are not born with the burdens and problems that we later on develop (we are born with blissful ignorance). Now, I think of Frankenstein whose child hood was blissful and admittedly void of tragedy until it eventually degrades with adulthood and ambition. I also think of the monster, whose initial existence was also simple and happy until it, too, increasingly becomes more complex and eventually sorrowful. It appears that they both share this one human experience.
Another quote by the same philosopher says, “Man is naturally good, loving justice and order”, which once again can be applied to both parties concerned. In the early, happy days of Frankenstein his family is his institution and the source of his happiness and it is the loss of that family stability or order that eventually drives him to the brink of insanity. The monster specifically mentions at times the respect for human society which he has learned about through different books he has read concerning world history. This too disappears the more he is exposed to actual humans.
Finally the most helpful quote from Rousseau that seems to bind the monster and his creator together is, “Man was born free and everywhere he is chains”, this expresses that while we are technically free we become tethered by the inevitable obligations and responsibilities that life inflicts. This is a quote that once again expresses the idea that life is a slow degenerative process. This certainly applies to Frankenstein who was without responsibility early in life however in adulthood he was bound by the metaphorical chains of his obligations to the protection of his family, his conscience, and the monster. What shackles the monster is the awareness of his hideous appearance which prevents him from being a part of the much desired human society and also the experience of love.
Looking at these characteristics, and the insights of Rousseau, which I’m not saying are relevant but merely interesting points of reference, one starts to think that the monster is indeed deserving of being considered as human. This is due to the fact that it appears that he is afflicted by many common human conditions. This answer then leads to another question, are not Frankenstein and his monster actually similar if not identical in their human experiences? What if I were to say they are two representatives of the same existence? Crazy right? Or is it?
Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein was a novel like no other that we have read so far this semester. It was different in many ways. In the conclusion of the story, Victor’s friends were all killed. During the last class we discussed the responsibility that Frankenstein may have had for the monster that he created. Victor dies in result of wanting to get back at the fact that all of his friends died. As we got further into the book, I agree with many others when they say that Victor Frankenstein regrets creating the monster. He abandoned the monster and wants nothing to do with him anymore. When we began to read this story, both Victor and the monster he created felt regret throughout the story. Victor lets regret and the revenge he wants to have get the best of him. While Frankenstein neglected his creation, the monster feels that he has no purpose in life anymore. Overall, I think that Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein demonstrates many relatistic events or feelings that have to do with everyday life and literature as we know it today. Things such as regret, responsibility, use of language, love, hate, fascination and remorse are all shown in Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein.
Frankenstein was a very interesting read. I had not really expected the book to be written in the way it was and the story line was very shocking to me. In every adaptation of this book to film I have seen was almost completely different from the actual book. The monster never spoke, he never showed this great language he apparently had. The ending was very depressing and didn’t really leave me satisfied in the way other books have.
One thing I noticed throughout the book was that everything seemed to be driven by revenge. The emotion and want of revenge pushed both Victor and the monster to do horrible and selfish things. Victor refused to give in to the demands of the monster out of fear and what I construed to be spite. He destroyed the female monster directly in front of the male monster, that was spiteful in my opinion. This was a very bad decision on his part, insuring the destruction of himself and everyone he held dear to him. I did not really understand this, nor did I understand why he further put Elizabeth in to mortal danger. He knew, with certainty, that the monster was going to wreck havoc on his life and those surrounding him, he should have been more responsible. Victor should have distanced himself from everything and everyone he knew for their safety. He didn’t and everyone was hurt, everyone was killed. Even on his wedding night he left Elizabeth alone in a room by herself, he should have kept her close to protect her, he never should have let her leave his sight. I understand I must suspend belief to try to understand his motives but this move was almost infuriating to me. He also, selfishly, tries to push on the expedition northward even though there is a very high probability for the death of the crew members. He pushes them on and calls them weak just to try to gain his selfish revenge. In all actuality I viewed Victor Frankenstein to be a very selfish, spiteful and revengeful person.
But then again, can I really hold Victor responsible for his actions. Did he really know what he was getting himself into by creating this being, by giving tissue life. He was so blinded by the ambition of his cause he didn’t take into consideration what would have happened if the “child” he brought to life would by an abomination. He was further caught in circumstance when the monster awoke and he didn’t know how to handle it; a parent too soon. When people started to die around him his fall was unavoidable, there was no going back. He started to lose grip on reality and just wanted to try to live his life normally, but that didn’t happen. He made worse and worse decision as he slipped farther and farther away from reality and deeper into despair. All those deaths he was essentially responsible for weighed on his mind so he could not really see clearly. And for that I have pity for Victor as well as his monster.
Meghann Peterson
March 20, 2009
Professor Crowley
Response to Frankenstein
The end of Frankenstein leaves me feeling sad about humanity in general. None of the characters in the story really make any gains. Frankenstein dies without fulfilling his wish to kill the monster. The monster decides to die because the only motivation he had to live (his vengeance against Frankenstein) is gone. The monsters last speech shows his wasted eloquence and compassion. He says, “Once my fancy was soothed with the dreams of virtue, of fame, and of enjoyment. Once I falsely hoped to meet with beings who, pardoning my outward form, would love me for the excellent qualities which I was capable of unfolding”. All the monster wanted was to be accepted and loved by someone and he was not. He could not even find acceptance in his creator. To be shunned even by he who created him leaves the monster alone with no possibility of happiness. Frankenstein to me seems to be the more evil of the two men. He maliciously tears apart the monsters only prospect of happiness in front of him. He does not only deny the monsters request to make him a mate but he does it in a compassionless way. Even on Frankenstein’s death bed he refuses to take blame for his actions. He says that he is at fault for the deaths of William, Clerval, and Elizabeth but he feels he is responsible because he created the monster, not because he shunned and abandoned the monster. Frankenstein says, “During my last days I have been occupied in examining my past conduct; nor do I find it blamable. In a fit of enthusiastic madness I created a rational creature, and was bound towards him, to assure, as far as was in my power, his happiness and well being”. It is interesting that Frankenstein recognizes that he was responsible for the monsters happiness, but he did nothing to assure it. Frankenstein knows at some level that he did not try to make the monster happy but does not find himself “blamable” for the monsters conduct.
All of the talk about happiness in the end reminds me of Justine’s speech in which she tells Elizabeth to go out and “be happy and try to make others so”. Frankenstein does not try to make others happy; he is only concerned with his own happiness. This selfishness on his part is the cause of most of the suffering in the book. I am not sure why, but for some reason I really side with the monster in this story and find Frankenstein to be a mildly despicable character. But I still really liked this book
Kacey Beckwith
03/20/09
Professor Crowley
Frankenstein Response
The ending of Frankenstein surprised me. I was expecting an ending that was much more climatic. However, this ending was slightly boring. Victor Frankenstein dies without obtaining his revenge and the monster is left alone. I expected a sad ending, I just thought that it would come in a different way. I figured that Frankenstein and his monster would have met once more and worked out an ending together. Perhaps it would’ve been an ending where the two characters would fight or perhaps it would’ve been an ending where they are able to work something out in another way. However, the ending that I got wasn’t very climatic at all.
I didn’t have very many questions regarding the book after I reached the ending either. I simply took what I was given by the author. However, after thinking about it further, and after hearing comments from others, I see how the book leaves a very indecisive ending. We know that Frankenstein dies, however we do not know for sure what becomes of the monster and we don’t know what happens to Walton after he returns home, either. Furthermore, we do not know if the story that has been relayed to us is actually a true account of what happened. I think that, if we had heard the story from the monster’s point of view, we would have received many different aspects than what we got from Victor. Therefore, I now have many different questions and thoughts that have yet to be answered.