"Billy and the rest wandered out onto the shady street. The trees were leafing out. There was nothing going on out there, no traffic of any kind. There was only one vehicle, an abandoned wagon drawn by two horses. The wagon was green and coffin-shaped. Birds were talking. One bird said to Billy Pilgrim, 'Poo-tee-weet?' "
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 215
Okay, time for an overall blog about Slaughterhouse-Five.
I really liked the book. It was very interesting - I've never read a book that combined time travel, war, and alien abduction - and it wasn't tedious to read. I really found myself enjoying it throughout even though we were supposed to analyze it. The structure was frustrating at times, especially in the beginning when it was hard to grasp the order and concepts, but it really added some unique qualities to the novel. I'm gonna be honest though, I still don't really know what the plot was; it seemed to be more of a memoir than a book with a clear purpose and climax.
I think that was what I struggled with the most while reading - it didn't seem like there was any point to the book. I mean, it was entertaining, but what was changed or achieved in the end? I don't think I've ever read something where the main character didn't want to attain something or fix a problem. It was just... different.
The ending also particularly frustrated me. There's a lot of action and a lot of things we ascertain from the bombing of Dresden in the last two chapters - and then it just ends? What the heck?? I guess that follows the structure of the book though; it's choppy and sporadic. I just thought there may be an "aha" moment at the end where everything clicked and made sense. That dissatisfaction and lack of resolution is really frustrating. But then again, what was there to resolve? I don't know.
Well, that was a pretty good book. Goodbye, blog readers! Enjoy your summer and have a lovely life hereafter.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Say I'm A Bird... (Repetition) - Novel Blog 9 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"Birds were talking. One bird said to Billy Pilgrim, "Poo-tee-weet?"
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 215
This reminded me of another lovely book I read a couple years ago - The Notebook!
So both of these books contain a technique that I find particularly effective. Both use the repetition of a phrase or moment in the novel (repeated as the last line in the book) to convey some sort of message.
In Slaughterhouse-Five, the line "poo-tee-weet" is repeated to emphasize the senselessness of death and massacre - it takes that catharsis Billy just experienced and proves that the actions causing that were totally pointless and in no way beneficial.
In The Notebook, the first line of a preceding scene are repeated (sorry, I can't remember the exact phrase) to convey the miraculous power of love and the perseverance in the relationship between the two protagonists, Allie and Noah, despite current struggles of Alzheimer's disease.
Undoubtedly, I was very excited when I read the end of the book to discover the connection between these two novels. Thematically, the books are extremely different, but this technique is present in both.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 215
This reminded me of another lovely book I read a couple years ago - The Notebook!
So both of these books contain a technique that I find particularly effective. Both use the repetition of a phrase or moment in the novel (repeated as the last line in the book) to convey some sort of message.
In Slaughterhouse-Five, the line "poo-tee-weet" is repeated to emphasize the senselessness of death and massacre - it takes that catharsis Billy just experienced and proves that the actions causing that were totally pointless and in no way beneficial.
In The Notebook, the first line of a preceding scene are repeated (sorry, I can't remember the exact phrase) to convey the miraculous power of love and the perseverance in the relationship between the two protagonists, Allie and Noah, despite current struggles of Alzheimer's disease.
Undoubtedly, I was very excited when I read the end of the book to discover the connection between these two novels. Thematically, the books are extremely different, but this technique is present in both.
Express, Don't Repress - Novel Blog 8 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"The barbershop quartet sang again. Billy was emotionally racked again. The experience was definitely associated with those four men and not what they sang... Billy was pulled apart inside."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 175
So Billy has a major emotional breakdown during this chapter - the singing quartet reminds him of the bombing in Dresden, which is a very traumatic experience for Billy. This scene actually contradicts what I thought had been a theme in the beginning of the book and some theories on which I had speculated. At first, I thought that the book was about veterans being affected by war, but so that they were completely apathetic to death and destruction and depressing matters. Actually, the message is completely the opposite - veterans are the most sensitive to death and violence. They have actually experienced it and it negatively affects their mentalities for the rest of their lives. They know first-hand how much harm the violence causes, and they see the innocent civilians hurt by other people's arguments. The concept isn't apathy, but suppression of emotion or unhealthy methods of coping with negative memories and experiences.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 175
So Billy has a major emotional breakdown during this chapter - the singing quartet reminds him of the bombing in Dresden, which is a very traumatic experience for Billy. This scene actually contradicts what I thought had been a theme in the beginning of the book and some theories on which I had speculated. At first, I thought that the book was about veterans being affected by war, but so that they were completely apathetic to death and destruction and depressing matters. Actually, the message is completely the opposite - veterans are the most sensitive to death and violence. They have actually experienced it and it negatively affects their mentalities for the rest of their lives. They know first-hand how much harm the violence causes, and they see the innocent civilians hurt by other people's arguments. The concept isn't apathy, but suppression of emotion or unhealthy methods of coping with negative memories and experiences.
Playing God (Analogy) - Novel Blog 7 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"Billy cried very little, though he often saw things worth crying about, and in that respect, at least, he resembled the Christ of the carol: The cattle are lowing, The Baby awakes. But the little Lord Jesus No crying he makes."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 197
There are a lot of religious references and symbols in this book. Billy is often compared to Jesus, like in this passage. He witnesses a lot of sin and bad in the world, and he carries that on his shoulders throughout his life, a little like Jesus bearing the sins of humanity to save us. Both Jesus and Billy knew how they would die and accepted it gracefully. The only thing I can't connect is purpose - Jesus died to save our sins, and the whole Catholic religion is based on that act and trying to be a better person to attain salvation, however, Billy represents the exact opposite of that - he is just drifting through life with seemingly no purpose whatsoever but to be.
The other religious analogy I found was in Kilgore Trout's novel The Big Board. The aliens on the planet, the people in the zoo, and the plot are obviously based on Billy's life and his abduction, but I think the aliens also represent God in the story. They control all the conditions under which the humans live and can manipulate their moods and pretty much anything about their lives. It gets to the point where the humans actually pray to the aliens - they play God throughout the book. Because The Big Board represents Billy's alien experience, I think that the Tralfamadorians also are analogous to God; Billy adapts their ideals and perspectives on life, and he is subject to their care while he lives on their planet with Montana. I'm not saying 100 percent that they control his time-traveling, but obviously he is connected to them in a special way since no one but Billy and the Tralfamadorians can experience life out of chronological order. I kind of have a theory that the Tralfamadorians are controlling Billy's sporadic time travel; they play God in that sense. They also have an omniscience, especially because they can view the universe in four dimensions and understand much more about, well, everything.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 197
There are a lot of religious references and symbols in this book. Billy is often compared to Jesus, like in this passage. He witnesses a lot of sin and bad in the world, and he carries that on his shoulders throughout his life, a little like Jesus bearing the sins of humanity to save us. Both Jesus and Billy knew how they would die and accepted it gracefully. The only thing I can't connect is purpose - Jesus died to save our sins, and the whole Catholic religion is based on that act and trying to be a better person to attain salvation, however, Billy represents the exact opposite of that - he is just drifting through life with seemingly no purpose whatsoever but to be.
The other religious analogy I found was in Kilgore Trout's novel The Big Board. The aliens on the planet, the people in the zoo, and the plot are obviously based on Billy's life and his abduction, but I think the aliens also represent God in the story. They control all the conditions under which the humans live and can manipulate their moods and pretty much anything about their lives. It gets to the point where the humans actually pray to the aliens - they play God throughout the book. Because The Big Board represents Billy's alien experience, I think that the Tralfamadorians also are analogous to God; Billy adapts their ideals and perspectives on life, and he is subject to their care while he lives on their planet with Montana. I'm not saying 100 percent that they control his time-traveling, but obviously he is connected to them in a special way since no one but Billy and the Tralfamadorians can experience life out of chronological order. I kind of have a theory that the Tralfamadorians are controlling Billy's sporadic time travel; they play God in that sense. They also have an omniscience, especially because they can view the universe in four dimensions and understand much more about, well, everything.
Dramatic Irony - Novel Blog 6 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"You needn't worry about bombs, by the way. Dresden is an open city. It is undefended, and contains no war industries or troop concentrations of any importance."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 145
Ooohh.... this is awkward. We are dealing with some major dramatic irony in this situation here. Both the reader and Billy Pilgrim know that Dresden is bombed (that's where a lot of Billy's mental instability originates), but the other soldiers don't know. This creates suspense for the reader throughout the rest of the book, especially at the end when Dresden actually is bombed. Actually, I thought the bombing was somewhat anti-climactic, but that's besides the point. This scene kind of gives the reader a sense of how Billy feels throughout his life - he knows just about everything that's going to happen, and he just has to sit and listen to other people's speculations and comments even if they are completely wrong. Like this one. So we get to empathize with Billy a bit more and understand his helpless condition - we sort of watch his life play out along with him.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 145
Ooohh.... this is awkward. We are dealing with some major dramatic irony in this situation here. Both the reader and Billy Pilgrim know that Dresden is bombed (that's where a lot of Billy's mental instability originates), but the other soldiers don't know. This creates suspense for the reader throughout the rest of the book, especially at the end when Dresden actually is bombed. Actually, I thought the bombing was somewhat anti-climactic, but that's besides the point. This scene kind of gives the reader a sense of how Billy feels throughout his life - he knows just about everything that's going to happen, and he just has to sit and listen to other people's speculations and comments even if they are completely wrong. Like this one. So we get to empathize with Billy a bit more and understand his helpless condition - we sort of watch his life play out along with him.
Monday, April 23, 2012
Change - Novel Blog 5 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"Billy is spastic in time, has no control over where he is going next, and the trips aren't necessarily fun. He is in a constant state of stage fright, he says, because he never knows what part of his life he is going to have to act in next."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 23
Okay, so I know that Billy has no way to stick himself back in time, but it seems like he isn't doing anything to try to provoke any change at all. He says he has to act in whatever part of his life he is in, but does he really? This is my question. Is Billy limited to a certain, predestined life that he must live a particular way, or could he change his actions? What if he did something completely drastic during the war that changed the whole course of his future? Is that going to be a plot later in the book? He has a mediocre life, but could he have done something differently to make it better? He could at least make it interesting, even if the repercussions were severe and negative. I don't know. I just think his lack of resistance is unsettling. I want him to do something different.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 23
Okay, so I know that Billy has no way to stick himself back in time, but it seems like he isn't doing anything to try to provoke any change at all. He says he has to act in whatever part of his life he is in, but does he really? This is my question. Is Billy limited to a certain, predestined life that he must live a particular way, or could he change his actions? What if he did something completely drastic during the war that changed the whole course of his future? Is that going to be a plot later in the book? He has a mediocre life, but could he have done something differently to make it better? He could at least make it interesting, even if the repercussions were severe and negative. I don't know. I just think his lack of resistance is unsettling. I want him to do something different.
Chaos. Confusion. No Chronological Order Whatsoever - Novel Blog 4 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"Listen: Billy Pilgrim has come unstuck in time."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 23
Prepare for my rant blog. *
Can we please read just one book or poem or short story or some other piece of literature that's chronological? Is it that hard to find a novel with literary merit that follows a secure timeline and progresses naturally? It's not even that the book is out of order that bothers me so much - I can handle that. It's the fact that you think you are reading something important and then you are completely thrown into a different time that is wholly unrelated. And let me tell you, it has been just peachy filling out my setting section of note taking. I'm just wondering if there is even a point to the order of the events or if they are random. Probably the latter. At this point in my senior year, I just want a simple, shallow book that takes a limited amount of brain cells to understand and analyze. Unfortunately, I don't think that's an option in this class....
*If you are a student reading this for our discussion class, just save yourself the trouble and skip this blog.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 23
Prepare for my rant blog. *
Can we please read just one book or poem or short story or some other piece of literature that's chronological? Is it that hard to find a novel with literary merit that follows a secure timeline and progresses naturally? It's not even that the book is out of order that bothers me so much - I can handle that. It's the fact that you think you are reading something important and then you are completely thrown into a different time that is wholly unrelated. And let me tell you, it has been just peachy filling out my setting section of note taking. I'm just wondering if there is even a point to the order of the events or if they are random. Probably the latter. At this point in my senior year, I just want a simple, shallow book that takes a limited amount of brain cells to understand and analyze. Unfortunately, I don't think that's an option in this class....
*If you are a student reading this for our discussion class, just save yourself the trouble and skip this blog.
So It Goes. (Mantra) - Novel Blog 3 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"So it goes."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, just about every other page in the book
When novels have mantras, it's pretty clear that the author is hinting at some kind of theme or main point. The mantra in Slaughterhouse-Five is "so it goes," and you can find that quote on just about any page in the book.
The quote is found after every time something unfortunate happens, usually a death. One may think that it is really ironic, and I guess in a way it is, but the message behind it is completely serious.
Throughout the book, I've been picking up a mood of resignation and acceptance of the inevitable. I think that that may be a theme. Billy is so accepting of all the crap that's happened to him. I mean if I were abducted by aliens and kept jumping around in time, I would probably have questions, if not some concerns.
But anyway, the mantra represents this theme because it's simple, straightforward nature mirrors that of the perspective that "death is something I and everybody else cannot control; that is how the world works and the sooner we can deal with that, the sooner we can live the life we possess at the moment." It's a little harsh, but given the conditions Billy is under where he never knows who he will be with next or even what year it will be, it makes sense in context.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, just about every other page in the book
When novels have mantras, it's pretty clear that the author is hinting at some kind of theme or main point. The mantra in Slaughterhouse-Five is "so it goes," and you can find that quote on just about any page in the book.
The quote is found after every time something unfortunate happens, usually a death. One may think that it is really ironic, and I guess in a way it is, but the message behind it is completely serious.
Throughout the book, I've been picking up a mood of resignation and acceptance of the inevitable. I think that that may be a theme. Billy is so accepting of all the crap that's happened to him. I mean if I were abducted by aliens and kept jumping around in time, I would probably have questions, if not some concerns.
But anyway, the mantra represents this theme because it's simple, straightforward nature mirrors that of the perspective that "death is something I and everybody else cannot control; that is how the world works and the sooner we can deal with that, the sooner we can live the life we possess at the moment." It's a little harsh, but given the conditions Billy is under where he never knows who he will be with next or even what year it will be, it makes sense in context.
Lost Innocence (Situational Irony) - Novel Blog 2 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"But, lying on the black ice there, Billy stared into the patina of the corporal's boots, saw Adam and Eve in the golden depths. They were naked. They were so innocent, so vulnerable, so eager to behave decently. Billy Pilgrim loved them."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 53
So throughout the book, the idea of innocence is prevalent, especially regarding war. Even in the quote above, Billy longs to find innocence in the midst of battle. Earlier in the book, Billy visits his friend whose wife points out some situational irony. She says that when the men go to war, they are only babies themselves; this provokes Billy to name his book The Children's Crusade. I think the irony here is that war is supposed to be a strictly adult topic - we rate our war movies R for violence, we can't join the military until we are legal adults, and we try to instill pacifist (to an extent) ideals in our children. But what I really think is the difference between "child" and "adult" is maturity. It can take a lot to rid people of their naivety, and war is one of those. While the men didn't go in as children, they went in with innocence. When they came out, that was shattered. And even adults preserve innocence well into the latter years of their lives. It reminds me of that poem we read last semester about the people not wanting the details of war - they know that no one should experience that and they don't want to hear about it. War is such a touchy subject because it has the power to turn a child into an adult, no matter his/her age.
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 53
So throughout the book, the idea of innocence is prevalent, especially regarding war. Even in the quote above, Billy longs to find innocence in the midst of battle. Earlier in the book, Billy visits his friend whose wife points out some situational irony. She says that when the men go to war, they are only babies themselves; this provokes Billy to name his book The Children's Crusade. I think the irony here is that war is supposed to be a strictly adult topic - we rate our war movies R for violence, we can't join the military until we are legal adults, and we try to instill pacifist (to an extent) ideals in our children. But what I really think is the difference between "child" and "adult" is maturity. It can take a lot to rid people of their naivety, and war is one of those. While the men didn't go in as children, they went in with innocence. When they came out, that was shattered. And even adults preserve innocence well into the latter years of their lives. It reminds me of that poem we read last semester about the people not wanting the details of war - they know that no one should experience that and they don't want to hear about it. War is such a touchy subject because it has the power to turn a child into an adult, no matter his/her age.
Parallels - Novel Blog 1 (Slaughterhouse-Five)
"Billy answered. There was a drunk on the other end. Billy could almost smell his breath - mustard gas and roses. It was a wrong number. Billy hung up."
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 73
Okay, so this book is a little difficult (I have a hard enough time when it's in chronological order), but here's a stab at some analysis.
There are so many different recurring events in the novel, but I'm pretty sure there's a particularly significant parallel here. At the beginning, Billy first was confronted by Barbara about his article in the paper, and she was really upset because, well, naturally people get upset when they think their parents are crazy. Billy was talking about all the time travel he had done and the Tralmafadorians. Billy had also been in the war and is clearly suffering (at least during some parts of the novel) from PTSD (that's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, people). I think there is a link between the war and the time travel (shocker, right?). Barbara is so upset by this time travel thing, but Billy just accepts it completely like the Tralmafadorians do. There's a quote in the book and I'm not sure what page it is, but it talks about freewill and how the aliens had never heard of it until they met humans. Billy is not only subject totally to the time travel, but also to his PTSD and war experiences. The reason Billy is so open to the abduction and being "unstuck from time" is because he has already used to dealing with unpleasant things that he feels he cannot change; he succumbs to the idea rather than rebelling against it. I'm not really sure if any of this is important, but that was a parallel I found in the book!
~ Slaughterhouse-Five, page 73
Okay, so this book is a little difficult (I have a hard enough time when it's in chronological order), but here's a stab at some analysis.
There are so many different recurring events in the novel, but I'm pretty sure there's a particularly significant parallel here. At the beginning, Billy first was confronted by Barbara about his article in the paper, and she was really upset because, well, naturally people get upset when they think their parents are crazy. Billy was talking about all the time travel he had done and the Tralmafadorians. Billy had also been in the war and is clearly suffering (at least during some parts of the novel) from PTSD (that's Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, people). I think there is a link between the war and the time travel (shocker, right?). Barbara is so upset by this time travel thing, but Billy just accepts it completely like the Tralmafadorians do. There's a quote in the book and I'm not sure what page it is, but it talks about freewill and how the aliens had never heard of it until they met humans. Billy is not only subject totally to the time travel, but also to his PTSD and war experiences. The reason Billy is so open to the abduction and being "unstuck from time" is because he has already used to dealing with unpleasant things that he feels he cannot change; he succumbs to the idea rather than rebelling against it. I'm not really sure if any of this is important, but that was a parallel I found in the book!
Wednesday, April 11, 2012
Learn to be Lonely - Novel Blog 10 (Frankenstein)
"Here then I retreated, and lay down happy to have found a shelter, however miserable, from the inclemency of the season, and still more from the barbarity of man."
~ Frankenstein, page 74
Time for a fun blog. Now I was thinking about Frankenstein's creature and I realized that Wicked isn't the only musical that relates to him - also, one of my favorites, The Phantom of the Opera is wonderfully applicable in this situation.
Basically, this man was born with an infection that disfigured his face, so he was sold into a traveling circus for show and publicly beaten. Eventually, he got sick of it and strangled his captor. The only witnesses were a couple spectators, one of whom was a ballet student at Paris' Opera Populaire, and she helped him escape the crime scene and hid him in the dungeons of the Opera house. When he got older, he started giving a ballerina in the corps vocal lessons, she steps in for the absent lead soprano, he tries to cultivate her career, she falls in love with her childhood sweetheart, he gets ridiculously jealous because he's in love with her (but he's also like a father figure? It's pretty sick) and all chaos ensues. Anyway, this song won't make much sense in context, but there are some lyrics that you can pick out and they exactly match the creature in Frankenstein.
This is actually from the movie, but it's still good. Here are some lyrics:
"Why, you ask,Was I bound and chainedIn this cold and dismal place?Not for any mortal sinBut the wickedness of my abhorrent face!"
"Hounded out by everyoneMet with hatred everywhereNo kind words from anyoneNo compassion anywhere"
"The tears I might have shedFor your dark fate,Grow cold and turn to tears of hate!"
This one is another that relates really well to the creature's situation
"Child of the wildernessborn into emptinesslearn to be lonelylearn to find your way in darkness
who will be there for youcomfort and care for youlearn to be lonely learn to be your one companion
never dreamt out in the worldthere are arms to hold youyou've always known your heart was on its own
so laugh in your lonelinesschild of the wildernesslearn to be lonelylearn how to love life that is lived alone
learn to be lonelylife can be lived, life can be loved alone"
Well, that's pretty depressing, but there it is. Phantom = Creature. Here's some more POTO fun.
It's got Gerard Butler. How can you go wrong??
~ Frankenstein, page 74
Time for a fun blog. Now I was thinking about Frankenstein's creature and I realized that Wicked isn't the only musical that relates to him - also, one of my favorites, The Phantom of the Opera is wonderfully applicable in this situation.
Basically, this man was born with an infection that disfigured his face, so he was sold into a traveling circus for show and publicly beaten. Eventually, he got sick of it and strangled his captor. The only witnesses were a couple spectators, one of whom was a ballet student at Paris' Opera Populaire, and she helped him escape the crime scene and hid him in the dungeons of the Opera house. When he got older, he started giving a ballerina in the corps vocal lessons, she steps in for the absent lead soprano, he tries to cultivate her career, she falls in love with her childhood sweetheart, he gets ridiculously jealous because he's in love with her (but he's also like a father figure? It's pretty sick) and all chaos ensues. Anyway, this song won't make much sense in context, but there are some lyrics that you can pick out and they exactly match the creature in Frankenstein.
This is actually from the movie, but it's still good. Here are some lyrics:
"Hounded out by everyoneMet with hatred everywhereNo kind words from anyoneNo compassion anywhere"
"The tears I might have shedFor your dark fate,Grow cold and turn to tears of hate!"
This one is another that relates really well to the creature's situation
"Child of the wildernessborn into emptinesslearn to be lonelylearn to find your way in darkness
who will be there for youcomfort and care for youlearn to be lonely learn to be your one companion
never dreamt out in the worldthere are arms to hold youyou've always known your heart was on its own
so laugh in your lonelinesschild of the wildernesslearn to be lonelylearn how to love life that is lived alone
learn to be lonelylife can be lived, life can be loved alone"
Well, that's pretty depressing, but there it is. Phantom = Creature. Here's some more POTO fun.
It's got Gerard Butler. How can you go wrong??
Nature vs. Nurture - Novel Blog 9 (Frankenstein)
"I was benevolent and good; misery made me a fiend. Make me happy, and I shall again be virtuous."
~ Frankenstein, page 69
One of the thematic elements of this novel is "nature vs. nurture" - are people born a certain way, or does society make them what they are? Obviously, Victor and his creature disagree on that matter, and we see that from the start. Victor always thinks that people are who they are, and that can't be changed, which is why he immediately rejects his creation. The creature thinks that environment determines personality and disposition, which is his excuse for acting horribly towards humans. However, this isn't just an opinion - the idea translates into each person as a whole. I don't necessarily think one is right, but I think that both ideas ended up being true because of how much the characters believed them.
Victor is so adamant on how the creature can't change - while Victor was moved by his story, he still thought the creature was an evil Satan thing. He always thinks the creature is out to get him (and he is toward the middle-end), so he freaks out and gets sick all the time. He doesn't give himself the chance to accept other people, but that also means he doesn't get the chance to change himself. Think about it - how does Victor change during the story? He doesn't. His lack of progress is reflected in his "nature" perspective.
Throughout the novel, the creature says that he was really good, but because of the wretched ways he was treated, he became bitter, lonely, and malicious. The creature goes through extreme emotional oscillations and actually makes some progress at the end of the novel - he understands his faults and experiences that guilt that reflects personal growth. He definitely flip flops for a while, and I think it's because of his "nurture" views.
~ Frankenstein, page 69
One of the thematic elements of this novel is "nature vs. nurture" - are people born a certain way, or does society make them what they are? Obviously, Victor and his creature disagree on that matter, and we see that from the start. Victor always thinks that people are who they are, and that can't be changed, which is why he immediately rejects his creation. The creature thinks that environment determines personality and disposition, which is his excuse for acting horribly towards humans. However, this isn't just an opinion - the idea translates into each person as a whole. I don't necessarily think one is right, but I think that both ideas ended up being true because of how much the characters believed them.
Victor is so adamant on how the creature can't change - while Victor was moved by his story, he still thought the creature was an evil Satan thing. He always thinks the creature is out to get him (and he is toward the middle-end), so he freaks out and gets sick all the time. He doesn't give himself the chance to accept other people, but that also means he doesn't get the chance to change himself. Think about it - how does Victor change during the story? He doesn't. His lack of progress is reflected in his "nature" perspective.
Throughout the novel, the creature says that he was really good, but because of the wretched ways he was treated, he became bitter, lonely, and malicious. The creature goes through extreme emotional oscillations and actually makes some progress at the end of the novel - he understands his faults and experiences that guilt that reflects personal growth. He definitely flip flops for a while, and I think it's because of his "nurture" views.
Dramatic Irony - Novel Blog 8 (Frankenstein)
"I should regard the threatened fate as unavoidable. But death was no evil to me, if the loss of Elizabeth were balanced with it; and I therefore, with a contented and even cheerful countenance, agreed with my father, that if my cousin would consent, the ceremony should take place in ten days, and thus put, as I imagined, the seal to my fate."
~ Frankenstein, page 141
Oh Victor, you naive man. Talk about dramatic irony. When the creature repeatedly says "I shall be with you on your wedding night," and he has told you many times before that he's going after all your friends and relatives, wouldn't you assume that he is aiming for your wife? Yeah, killing Victor would suck because, well, he would be dead. But it's so much worse to watch all the people you love in your life die around you and know you can't do anything about it. I just don't know how Victor didn't catch this one. I think what makes it really bad is that on their wedding night, he tells her to go to bed and goes downstairs of all places. In that moment, I wanted to scream at him - it was probably the most suspenseful moment in the book, because everyone knew what was going to happen (well, except Victor). I feel horrible for Elizabeth too, because the whole time Victor is all moody and anxious, and a wedding is supposed to be really happy. She probably thinks he doesn't want to marry her or he would rather be with someone else, when in actuality, there's an eight-foot monster that may or may not pop in the window and kill them. And then she bites the dust. What a bitter end. I just think Victor should have been able to see it.
~ Frankenstein, page 141
Oh Victor, you naive man. Talk about dramatic irony. When the creature repeatedly says "I shall be with you on your wedding night," and he has told you many times before that he's going after all your friends and relatives, wouldn't you assume that he is aiming for your wife? Yeah, killing Victor would suck because, well, he would be dead. But it's so much worse to watch all the people you love in your life die around you and know you can't do anything about it. I just don't know how Victor didn't catch this one. I think what makes it really bad is that on their wedding night, he tells her to go to bed and goes downstairs of all places. In that moment, I wanted to scream at him - it was probably the most suspenseful moment in the book, because everyone knew what was going to happen (well, except Victor). I feel horrible for Elizabeth too, because the whole time Victor is all moody and anxious, and a wedding is supposed to be really happy. She probably thinks he doesn't want to marry her or he would rather be with someone else, when in actuality, there's an eight-foot monster that may or may not pop in the window and kill them. And then she bites the dust. What a bitter end. I just think Victor should have been able to see it.
Love-Hate Relationships - Novel Blog 7 (Frankenstein)
"For while I destroyed his hopes, I did not satisfy my own desires. They were forever ardent and craving; still I desired love and fellowship, and I was still spurned. Was there no injustice in this? Am I to be thought the only criminal, when all human kind sinned against me?"
~ Frankenstein, page 165
Throughout the novel, all the people give the creature crap about being a hideous, horrid beast. Which is true. However, if you think about it, the creature is the only character (or at least one of the only characters) who shows emotional depth and multiple sides of his personality. He is by far the most round character in the whole novel. When he does his narrative, we see how he feels; his emotions are very, very extreme, and we witness a gamut. We see pain when he is abused by the villagers for his appearance, sadness when he weeps with Safie for the Native Americans, anger when he sets the De Lacey's house on fire, hope and excitement when Victor first agrees to creating the female, remorse after Victor dies and he realizes how horribly he has sinned, and sadistic pleasure when he sees Victor mourning the wife he just murdered. His complex character creates confusion for the readers; we hear about how he was beaten for being ugly, but then he murders several innocent people and gets sick pleasure out of it? It's really hard to tell if you even like him or not. But honestly, he's the most realistic character in the whole novel. Victor shows little emotion but fear and anguish, and he can't even get over the fact that the creature is unattractive; he's incapable of change. Elizabeth represents beauty, compassion, and innocence the whole novel; she doesn't show any other traits. Clerval is the supportive friend. Alphonse Frankenstein is the loving father that everyone wants.
It's really funny that the creature is supposed to be this terrible, demonic monster, but he has the most human character - the one-sided people in the book are more like artificial beings programmed with limited emotion and personality. Real people have both good and bad in them, and that's what makes this book so difficult. We don't want to like Victor because he is so flat, even though he doesn't do anything wrong. We love the creature because he is so genuine, but it's that genuineness that requires him to do bad things and experience painful emotions - which makes us simultaneously hate him. That, friends, is the great paradox of this novel. And of life in general.
~ Frankenstein, page 165
Throughout the novel, all the people give the creature crap about being a hideous, horrid beast. Which is true. However, if you think about it, the creature is the only character (or at least one of the only characters) who shows emotional depth and multiple sides of his personality. He is by far the most round character in the whole novel. When he does his narrative, we see how he feels; his emotions are very, very extreme, and we witness a gamut. We see pain when he is abused by the villagers for his appearance, sadness when he weeps with Safie for the Native Americans, anger when he sets the De Lacey's house on fire, hope and excitement when Victor first agrees to creating the female, remorse after Victor dies and he realizes how horribly he has sinned, and sadistic pleasure when he sees Victor mourning the wife he just murdered. His complex character creates confusion for the readers; we hear about how he was beaten for being ugly, but then he murders several innocent people and gets sick pleasure out of it? It's really hard to tell if you even like him or not. But honestly, he's the most realistic character in the whole novel. Victor shows little emotion but fear and anguish, and he can't even get over the fact that the creature is unattractive; he's incapable of change. Elizabeth represents beauty, compassion, and innocence the whole novel; she doesn't show any other traits. Clerval is the supportive friend. Alphonse Frankenstein is the loving father that everyone wants.
It's really funny that the creature is supposed to be this terrible, demonic monster, but he has the most human character - the one-sided people in the book are more like artificial beings programmed with limited emotion and personality. Real people have both good and bad in them, and that's what makes this book so difficult. We don't want to like Victor because he is so flat, even though he doesn't do anything wrong. We love the creature because he is so genuine, but it's that genuineness that requires him to do bad things and experience painful emotions - which makes us simultaneously hate him. That, friends, is the great paradox of this novel. And of life in general.
Baby Imma Be Your Motivation - Novel Blog 6 (Frankenstein)
"Why had I not followed him, and closed with him in mortal strife? I shuddered to think who might be the next victim sacrificed to his insatiate revenge."
~ Frankenstein, page 123
So is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that Victor doesn't actually do anything in this novel? He just kind of sits there and thinks about the creature (who is no longer Cornelius because he's a jerk) and wonders who will die next and gets sick. I'm pretty sure he isn't healthy the entire book. Victor has two tasks that he completes during the novel:
1) create the monster.
2) chase the monster.
Other than those, the creature is the one who actually drives the plot. We would be absolutely nowhere if he just disappeared into the wild after Victor ran from him. Let's think about it: the creature tried to befriend the De Lacey's, killed William, framed Justine, threatened Victor (which led him to create the female monster - a task he still didn't even complete), threatened Victor again, killed Henry, killed Elizabeth, and motivated Victor to keep chasing him. Yes, the monster is a totally horrible being, but at least he's doing something. Victor literally just sits there and whines about how anxious he is and how sick he is and worried about everyone else he is. Then why don't you get the heck up and stop it, Victor? What a pansy.
~ Frankenstein, page 123
So is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that Victor doesn't actually do anything in this novel? He just kind of sits there and thinks about the creature (who is no longer Cornelius because he's a jerk) and wonders who will die next and gets sick. I'm pretty sure he isn't healthy the entire book. Victor has two tasks that he completes during the novel:
1) create the monster.
2) chase the monster.
Other than those, the creature is the one who actually drives the plot. We would be absolutely nowhere if he just disappeared into the wild after Victor ran from him. Let's think about it: the creature tried to befriend the De Lacey's, killed William, framed Justine, threatened Victor (which led him to create the female monster - a task he still didn't even complete), threatened Victor again, killed Henry, killed Elizabeth, and motivated Victor to keep chasing him. Yes, the monster is a totally horrible being, but at least he's doing something. Victor literally just sits there and whines about how anxious he is and how sick he is and worried about everyone else he is. Then why don't you get the heck up and stop it, Victor? What a pansy.
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
No One Mourns the Wicked - Novel Blog 5 (Frankenstein)
"How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavored to form?"
~ Frankenstein, page 35
While I was reading this passage, I thought a lot about life and relationships and such. Who wouldn't love something they created? Isn't that like a parent not loving their child? That doesn't really make much sense to me. But then I thought of somewhere else I had seen that - the fantastic spin off of The Wizard of Oz, the musical Wicked. Cornelius and Elphaba are kind of the same person. In Wicked, Glinda tells the story of the recently deceased Witch of the West Elphaba, who like Cornelius, was rejected by her father for being ugly (green-skinned). There are other similarities too - both Elphaba and Cornelius are particularly smart and kind, and both are outcasted by society for their appearances. Both befriend (or at least associate with) an ambitious, hard-working peer - Glinda for Elphaba and Victor for Cornelius. (The relationships don't directly parallel each other, but they are pretty close.) Wicked is pretty awesome, so once I realized how close the two stories are, I gained a lot of hope for Frankenstein.
Elphaba's story starts at about 4.30. There's a lot of overture and intro before that.
This is just the whole song "No One Mourns The Wicked"
This is the most famous song from the musical, "Defying Gravity"
~ Frankenstein, page 35
While I was reading this passage, I thought a lot about life and relationships and such. Who wouldn't love something they created? Isn't that like a parent not loving their child? That doesn't really make much sense to me. But then I thought of somewhere else I had seen that - the fantastic spin off of The Wizard of Oz, the musical Wicked. Cornelius and Elphaba are kind of the same person. In Wicked, Glinda tells the story of the recently deceased Witch of the West Elphaba, who like Cornelius, was rejected by her father for being ugly (green-skinned). There are other similarities too - both Elphaba and Cornelius are particularly smart and kind, and both are outcasted by society for their appearances. Both befriend (or at least associate with) an ambitious, hard-working peer - Glinda for Elphaba and Victor for Cornelius. (The relationships don't directly parallel each other, but they are pretty close.) Wicked is pretty awesome, so once I realized how close the two stories are, I gained a lot of hope for Frankenstein.
Elphaba's story starts at about 4.30. There's a lot of overture and intro before that.
This is just the whole song "No One Mourns The Wicked"
This is the most famous song from the musical, "Defying Gravity"
One Is the Loneliest Number, But Two's Not Much Better - Novel Blog 4 (Frankenstein)
"Like one, on a lonesome road who, Doth walk in fear and dread, And, having once truned round, walks on, And turns no more his head; Because he knows a frightful fiend Doth close behind him tread."
~ Frankenstein, page 36 (Coleridge, Ancient Mariner)
So once again, I found myself looking in the themes section for what to write about, and I had a minor epiphany. Well, maybe not so much an epiphany, but just some observations about the alienation/solitude theme. I realized that not only is Cornelius pretty much in solitude the whole time, but every time Victor is caught up with him, he is dragged into that alienation. When Robert Walton finds them in the Antarctic (or wherever they are), they are completely alone. Except for the dogs. When Victor is first creating Cornelius, he neglects his family and practically everybody else because he is so devoted to that endeavor. Even the idea of Cornelius just running around in the wild makes Victor crazy and distances him from his family and peers. Cornelius is the epitome of lonely and misunderstood, which is kind of a shame, because he seems like a pretty nice person monster thing, so when Victor associates with him, he therefore is dragged into that isolation. It's like in high school when you move into another clique and then certain people avoid you because of it. Only this time, those certain people are, you know, everybody.
~ Frankenstein, page 36 (Coleridge, Ancient Mariner)
So once again, I found myself looking in the themes section for what to write about, and I had a minor epiphany. Well, maybe not so much an epiphany, but just some observations about the alienation/solitude theme. I realized that not only is Cornelius pretty much in solitude the whole time, but every time Victor is caught up with him, he is dragged into that alienation. When Robert Walton finds them in the Antarctic (or wherever they are), they are completely alone. Except for the dogs. When Victor is first creating Cornelius, he neglects his family and practically everybody else because he is so devoted to that endeavor. Even the idea of Cornelius just running around in the wild makes Victor crazy and distances him from his family and peers. Cornelius is the epitome of lonely and misunderstood, which is kind of a shame, because he seems like a pretty nice person monster thing, so when Victor associates with him, he therefore is dragged into that isolation. It's like in high school when you move into another clique and then certain people avoid you because of it. Only this time, those certain people are, you know, everybody.
Don't Judge a Book by Its Cover - Novel Blog 3 (Frankenstein)
"I had admired the perfect forms of my cottagers - their grace, beauty, and delicate complexions: but how was I terrified, when I viewed myself in a transparent pool! 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 monster that I am, I was filled with the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification."
~ Frankenstein, page 80
When I was looking at the list of themes in the packet we got for the book, I was really surprised that appearance wasn't one of them. I think that the relationship between physical appearance and personality is something that comes up often. First is when Victor creates Cornelius. He is so appalled by his abhorrent looks that he runs away from him multiple times and assumes that he is some kind of monster. When we get to read chapters 11 and 12, we know that Cornelius isn't actually a bad thing; he has a full gamut of emotion and even tries to work for a family that he admires from afar. He feels sympathy and wants to make other people happy (which is a lot more than can be said for most humans). Victor didn't even try to learn about him. He feared what he didn't understand simply because he looks ugly. It's like all Disney movies - you can easily tell who is good and who is evil based on appearance; the good people are always beautiful, the bad are always fat or ugly. That's what's wrong with our society - we teach children from a very young age how to spot a bad person - does he look nice? Real life is a little more complicated than that.
The other example is quite the opposite - Elizabeth. Victor's mother picked her up off the street because she was a beautiful "celestial" - looking child. While Elizabeth possesses both beauty and a compassionate personality (unlike Cornelius whose personality and appearance was incongruous), her character still represents the idea that looks are equivalent to disposition or intentions. This whole Disney notion is what drives the plot of Frankenstein and is ultimately what motivates Cornelius to do the horrible acts he does; the people cannot get past his appearance and judge him accordingly. (Okay, all these are assumptions made from previous foreshadowing in the novel and things we have kind of talked about in class; I'm not actually sure what happens.)
~ Frankenstein, page 80
When I was looking at the list of themes in the packet we got for the book, I was really surprised that appearance wasn't one of them. I think that the relationship between physical appearance and personality is something that comes up often. First is when Victor creates Cornelius. He is so appalled by his abhorrent looks that he runs away from him multiple times and assumes that he is some kind of monster. When we get to read chapters 11 and 12, we know that Cornelius isn't actually a bad thing; he has a full gamut of emotion and even tries to work for a family that he admires from afar. He feels sympathy and wants to make other people happy (which is a lot more than can be said for most humans). Victor didn't even try to learn about him. He feared what he didn't understand simply because he looks ugly. It's like all Disney movies - you can easily tell who is good and who is evil based on appearance; the good people are always beautiful, the bad are always fat or ugly. That's what's wrong with our society - we teach children from a very young age how to spot a bad person - does he look nice? Real life is a little more complicated than that.
 |
| Seriously. Pick one and tell me he/she is not hideous. |
Foreshadowing - Novel Blog 2 (Frankenstein)
"I had determined, at one time, that the memory of theses evils should die with me, but you have won me to alter my determination. You seek knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been."
Frankenstein, page 13
Foreshadowing occurs several times in the novel. The first is in the quote above, before Victor dives into the real story of how he created Cornelius. He warns Robert Walton that knowledge and wisdom can lead to destruction and misery as his did. This lets us readers know that something went wrong with the creation, which will be totally clear in the next couple of chapters. Another instance of foreshadowing is when Victor has just created Cornelius and he goes to sleep, only to dream of Elizabeth. He imagines her dying a horribly just like his mother had recently; this foreshadows her imminent death (well, I'm not completely sure; it hasn't happened yet, but it seems likely). The third instance is when Cornelius is narrating and he says that he isn't going to tolerate the actions of his enemies. This is warning us of what happens when he comes in contact with people later and the destruction he causes. These are only three times foreshadowing occurs in the novel, but I'm sure they won't be the last times before it ends.
Frankenstein, page 13
Foreshadowing occurs several times in the novel. The first is in the quote above, before Victor dives into the real story of how he created Cornelius. He warns Robert Walton that knowledge and wisdom can lead to destruction and misery as his did. This lets us readers know that something went wrong with the creation, which will be totally clear in the next couple of chapters. Another instance of foreshadowing is when Victor has just created Cornelius and he goes to sleep, only to dream of Elizabeth. He imagines her dying a horribly just like his mother had recently; this foreshadows her imminent death (well, I'm not completely sure; it hasn't happened yet, but it seems likely). The third instance is when Cornelius is narrating and he says that he isn't going to tolerate the actions of his enemies. This is warning us of what happens when he comes in contact with people later and the destruction he causes. These are only three times foreshadowing occurs in the novel, but I'm sure they won't be the last times before it ends.
Discovery - Novel Blog 1 (Frankenstein)
"I shall satiate my ardent curiosity with the sight of a part of the world never before visited, and may tread a land never before imprinted by the foot of man."
~ Frankenstein, page 1
Frankenstein was originally published in 1831, so Mary Shelley obviously had some big ideas for the book. (Really, how does an 18 year old girl come up with this??) People didn't have the technology we do today, but the idea of creating life (from nothing, not procreation) has been with us for a while. I think a big part of the novel is discovery and exploration - not only with Robert Walton's letters about his escapades at the start, but throughout the book as well. Victor's incessant desire for education and knowledge reflects this, as does the monster who is product of his ambition (who shall now be called Cornelius). During chapters 11 and 12, Cornelius describes his experiences discovering the world around him after his birth. It's human nature to want to learn more about how everything functions - and one day, we may create life from nothing. The speed at which technology is advancing suggests that that day is probably closer than expected; think about how much we have progressed in the last 100 years. Although our first attempts at playing God may not yeild super humans who have perfect grammar (I imagine them more like the Stewie and Brian clones on Family Guy), it could happen soon. I believe that our inclination to learn, explore, and discover will lead us to do the great things that Mary Shelley wrote about in the 19th century.
~ Frankenstein, page 1
Frankenstein was originally published in 1831, so Mary Shelley obviously had some big ideas for the book. (Really, how does an 18 year old girl come up with this??) People didn't have the technology we do today, but the idea of creating life (from nothing, not procreation) has been with us for a while. I think a big part of the novel is discovery and exploration - not only with Robert Walton's letters about his escapades at the start, but throughout the book as well. Victor's incessant desire for education and knowledge reflects this, as does the monster who is product of his ambition (who shall now be called Cornelius). During chapters 11 and 12, Cornelius describes his experiences discovering the world around him after his birth. It's human nature to want to learn more about how everything functions - and one day, we may create life from nothing. The speed at which technology is advancing suggests that that day is probably closer than expected; think about how much we have progressed in the last 100 years. Although our first attempts at playing God may not yeild super humans who have perfect grammar (I imagine them more like the Stewie and Brian clones on Family Guy), it could happen soon. I believe that our inclination to learn, explore, and discover will lead us to do the great things that Mary Shelley wrote about in the 19th century.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)