Comparing Age of Innocence and Doll House

When relating Doll House and The Age of innocence, one can extrapolate many similarities. First, let us start with the most obvious similarity- that is, the fact that we read these plays through a gender lens. When analyzing both characters of May and Nora, we view them in a child-like way. This is because, in the 19th century, women were seen as subordinate and uneducated, relying on their husbands for help and to suffice their needs. Nonetheless, both May and Nora rely on their respective husbands to take care of them, making them seem so dependent, as children.  Although women were "young," they attainted the morals of a women. In fact, they were framed as the heart of the home; the women would take care of the children, the husband, and the house, to provide peace, tranquility, and sacredness. In Doll House, this action is evident through Nora, who provides a calm household by saving the family from lies and "the ugly" that Helmer Torvald hates. In a way, she preserves happiness in the house, by shouldering burdens and burdens of lies. Although this may seem opposite to the "sacredness" that the women during the 19th century had to have, it still proved how she was responsible for joy and "the beautiful." Note that both in the Doll House and The Age of innocence, they implicitly highlight societies values too; in other words, the novel, thus far, has provided a story that scrutinizes society through the lens of the aristocrats, those of upper class. It is important to note that many of the themes I have extrapolated from the text revolve around the gender theory lens and the historical theory lens. Prevalent through the reading, were the motifs of: the innocent vs. the flawed, the hidden reality, internal truth vs. societal truth, and past and future. More importantly, both the texts imply that not only was society overly judgmental, but also lacked the internal thinking needed to understand someone. For example, In Age of Innocence, society doesn't take the time to understand Ellen and the fact that her problems were not instigated solely by her, but also by her husband. In Doll House,  Helmer refuses to see Nora as something other than a martial object. In both ways, society is depicted as being superficial and cruel.  Another important aspect we seen in both texts is the female shift from childhood to adulthood, youth to grown, naive to worldly. In Age of Innocence, we slowly and finally see a shift in May from one that is nave and lacks the ability to see her husband's betrayal to one that is purposefully ignoring their relationship in order to save herself from society. May is smart in telling Ellen that that she is pregnant as it still maintains her “innocence”, Diana like posture, but from the audience point of view, is very devious. In Doll House, Nora gains realization that the truth of her loan from Krogstad will eventually come out, showing a shift from hidden and playful to finally out in the open, worldly. In both texts, there are many similarities, ranging from gender roles, to historical references, to dramatic irony, to themes of love, sin, and shift. 

Almost the end of the semester, so time to reflect!

Before writing my timed-writing reflection, I thought I would take a moment to blog about my goals, my intentions, and my work thus far as an AP Literature student. So here I begin.

Coming into AP Literature, as an AP Language Composition student, my primary goal was to switch focus from rhetoric based writing to in-depth analysis. AP Literature consists of 3 main types of essays, including: prose, poetry, and open ended, that all revolve around the same question- what is the meaning? To switch my writing styles from listing devices and its usages, I had to learn the importance of close reading, background inference, and most importantly finding denotation and connotations of vocabulary throughout the paragraph and apply all these aspects into meaning, a theme. Such teachings have translated into many strengths; therefore, I somewhat met my first semester goal.  For example: understanding the prompt and extracting a question to answer, identifying examples, quotes, and textual support that aid my ability to defend the question I am answering, and create a thesis based on my ideas I put forth. Although, my weaknesses arise when developing a thesis. I know exactly what I want to discuss in my paper, but I lack the ability to create a clear and concise argument with a "so-what." My other weaknesses seen through my papers are:  adding good points that do not tie back to my thesis, using vague wordings, circulating around a point in hopes that it proves my point, and not connecting back to the thesis.

It's funny to realize that as a former AP Language student, I was very superficial about the way in which i wrote- concentrating more on defining and finding the literary devices rather than actually relating how that adds meaning to the text. I think that's what i focused a lot on this year- connecting the literary devices and making sense out of them, extracting a true meaning. I remember at the beginning of the year, the first words my AP Literature teacher told me- " defining and summarizing is death"...not going to lie, this was very true. Although in AP Language it worked, in AP Literature it wasn't about the actually content of the text, rather what the content told us. In a way, AP Literature was like a mind game- extract the hidden meaning..it's like a puzzle! Nonetheless, through the timed writings and take home essays, I learned to conquer this puzzle by one main thing- close reading and in depth analysis. Pretty much, I ripped up the paragraph and found a meaning that I thought I could support. Oh,  but you know what was so special about this meaning? It was never correct nor wrong! As long as you proved it to be correct, it worked! It was all about convincing the reader that you were right by supporting your meaning or analysis with all the illusions, connotations, denotations, and supporting text you could find.

Therefore, through my journey in AP Literature, I learned that writing an essay was a debate- you not only had to state the facts (aka relate to the text) but show what the evidence/facts meant in the grand scheme of things. What was the over all take? It wasn't what the author was trying to protray, it was what you could extrapolate from the given. 

May...you are one devious little girl, perhaps a "Diana" and Newland..perhaps a broken Cupid?

Throughout the novel, May has always been viewed as the “innocent” and “child-like” character with a clean and naive mind. Although, this framing of May was due to the fact that we didn’t get information of her feelings, of her motives, her actions, and most importantly her life with Archer. Was there any intimacy? Was she really in love with him? By the end of the novel, we realize that May in fact, was not naive, she was well aware of her surroundings- Archer and Ellens love affair. Although, Edith Wharton hides this realization till the end of the novel when may is pregnant, there was a reason behind that. Her inner devious and true Diana comes out when she tells Archer that: “I wasn¹t sure then, but I told her I was." This reason is realizing that May figuratively represents the goddess Diana and Archer represents a broken cupid.

When doing some research, I found that Diana represented the goddess of wild animals and hunting, goddess of maiden dance and song, goddess of child delivery, and nursing infants. this parallel that Wharton drew between May and Diana is quite interesting because it is not really a parallel, more so a foil. May, we see as innocent and not devious, while on the contrary Diana is devious and very animalistic. Note that externally, May is very lady like and lacks any male qualities, but by the end of the novel when she tells Archer that she is pregnant, she suddenly gains this animalistic feel. Why? Well, out of all people, Ellen was the first to know about the pregnancy, and she didn’t do this to gain congratulations, but to warn and hint at Ellen that she has already conquered Archer and that he is hers forever. Like wise, May at the end of the novel is animalistic in that she is feisty over having Archer, but does it in a devious way.

Next, through these ending chapters, we see that Archer still lies about his Affair with Ellen, but gains a feel for destiny. In chapter 21, the fate and destiny motif is seen when he is by the sea looking for Ellen. Archer switches from lies to this sudden belief in destiny and signs. That if the boat passes the rock and she looks back at him, it means love. Why has Archer gained a sudden feel for destiny? This reliance on destiny shows how Newland is no longer the “cupid” in the story. He no longer proceeds to go up to women, rather he waits for their hints. Such shows that Archer is like a broken cupid, unable to get the love he wants with that bow and arrow. In fact, Archer and May switch rolls, She is the one with the bow and arrow, while Archer suffers with confusion.

Edith Wharton...you confused me.

Edith Wharton, I commend you for your story that contains a multitude of ironic symbols and a story that makes me think and wonder. I have a question for you: are Ellen and Archer not marrying for the happiness of May? More so, why are they so concerned for the May's happiness?

Here is my own answer:

First of all, we must attempt to understand Ellen and Archers feelings for each other. Even though it has been more than a year since May and Archer have been married, Newland still has feelings for Ellen. When he goes to goes to Boston, he describes May in such a dull way. “She had a grey silk sunshade over her head” (194). Somehow the color grey extrapolates on Ellen’s unhappiness. Right now, we are confused on the roots of her unhappiness. Is it because she still didn't get a divorce and refused to take the money back? or is it because she is away from Newland. Either way, the separate, respected marriages that Ellen and Archer are in, hinder their dismissal of unhappiness. Newland and Ellen have thus far, been quiet around each other, making it seem almost difficult to converse due to their inability to outwardly love each, but chapter twenty four, finally has them talking- but mostly Ellen. Ellen seems almost like an angel or even a sacrificer. She sacrificed her life for May. Even though she is unhappy, she thanks Archer for her realization of truth (the difference between rude and delicate). In essence, Archer has taught her about society and and that “under the dullness there are things so fine and sensitive and delicate that even those I most cared for in my other life look cheap in comparison” (203). Loving her, is nonetheless true when not joined and love is heightened when distance is as well. The difficulties of not being together heighten their love for each other, but they suffer and sacrifice for the happiness of an innocent individual, May. Perhaps, they want to save May from losing her innocence. If this is not the case, why are Ellen and Archer not confessing their love for each other? Why are they so keen on protecting May from unhappiness? Is loss of innocence like a disease? In a way, I think it is. May so far, has gotten no commentary from society, besides that of her wedding. No negative remarks or hatred from her environment and this may be because she hasn't done anything..nothing scandalous at least. Unlike both Archer and Ellen who have had multiple affairs and drama in their lives, May lacks any of this. Even though this makes her life seem dumb, she is a women untouched, non-flawed, and very happy. I feel like Ellen and Archer both see this perfection in May, and want her to remain happy for the rest of her life, hence they do what ever it takes for her to feel protected and comfortable, even if this means sacrificing their love. Technically this sacrifice is not completely seen by the characters, it's a hidden gesture, coming from within. Somewhere in the back of their heads, they see that their lives are miserable, and feel sorry for them selves. Perhaps, even more importantly, they regret their past, and hence want to save May from the same mistakes too.

Living in the Paradox: Connecting William Blake to Grendel

Often times, as human beings, we confuse our self intentionally. Why? Perhaps it is to understand the world, perhaps it is to find meaning in the things we do, and comprehend the evolution of our minds. Technically, we live in this "paradox" of thoughts, just to realize why we are here. Similarly, is the non-human Character of Grendel. Well let me rephrase that, he is a figurative human. He thinks like we do, more so, he confuses him self just like we do. Our main problem within our lives, is who do we listen to? Do we listen to the liars who try and shape the world to cover the flaws, portray them as good (the shaper), or do we listen to our inner conscience that guides us in the path of destiny and existentialism- you are here, just go with the flow, and everything will lay its path (the dragon)? hmm. But, but, but...WHO are we? Are we the creators? If not, who creates us? Is it the same person that creates the older people around us? And now we bring in the poems of William Blake. William Blake's poems are full of paradoxes, depicting the evolution of man as one of innocence to one of knowledge; note that this is not just a superficial definition of man's changing purpose, to be naive then enlighten themselves, rather it is to show that as one ages, it is less likely for one to be pure. We gain knowledge, bad knowledge. Well, okay. Not necessarily bad knowledge, but the knowledge is what causes unhappiness in our life. We are living with so much information, we do things in order for purpose rather for the pure enjoyment- we loose a sense of youthfulness.

Let's take a look at the Songs of Innocence and Experience:

"And all must love the human form,/ In heathen, trunk, or jew;/Where Mercy, Love and Pity dwell/ There God is dwelling too"

This stanza is from the song of innocence. It is interesting that here, God is the creator, the destructor, and the savior. God is mercy, pity, peace, and love, and he is man, too. Man defines the root of the Cycle- the cycle being that of life, in other words, something must be destroyed for something to be created. Hence, referring back to the questioning of our existence, is that fact that we live in order to carry on the cycle. We are our own creators. We start our as little lambs (reference to The Lamb poem by William Blake) then transform into Tigers.

Now for a little more Blake (from the song of Experience):

"The Gods of earth and sea, /Sought nature's to find this Tree/ But their search was all in vain:/There grows one in the Human Brain"

This stanza exemplifies the vulnerability for knowledge, that soon turns into a mistake. Grendel, is restless for knowledge as he fights to know his existence, yet once this knowledge is gained, he regrets it. Such trend of regretting a higher understanding, gaining enlightenment, is the path in the Hero's journey. An "hero" will find the light, and try to return back, but is only rejected, yet again, but tries to become a teacher. Nonetheless, it seems as if a person evolves and becomes "smarter" not for the sake of themselves, but for the sake of others. In such a way, destiny takes its toll. We do not plan the future outcome, we follow the path that is "laid out" for us- the typical "dragon" saying. 

In conclusion, William Blake extrapolates on the fact that life is hindered by knowledge, as a part of man's evolution, causing freight and self doubt. More so, knowledge is a burden that takes away our happiness.

Beginning The Age of Innocence...and liking it so far!

"Though there was already talk of the erection, in the remote metropolitan distances "above the Forties," of a new opera house which should compete in costliness and splendor with those of the great European capitals, the world of fashion was till content to reassemble every old Academy" (1). 

Opening the novel to chapter one and reading the first lines of Edith Wharton's novel made me chuckle. So much drama, well not really, but the descriptions and the people explicitly foreshadow  a novel full of exaggeration, drama, and juicy text. It's like Gossip Girl of the 1900's- can't wait to keep reading on! Perhaps it was because the whole of chapter one revolved around this idea of construction, beauty, fashion, and social aristocracy...my mind was nostalgic...back to the summer days of junior year when I use to watch Gossip Girl, and here the same exact problem the revolved around New York city. It's funny to see that even back then, New York was home to some of the most wealthy, arrogant, egoistic, lustful individuals (such as the one seen in this novel- the Newland Archer). New York was a whole other realm, that was impossible to survive in without the social hierarchy, the poise, and especially insight on the latest drama. Infact, the lives of New Yokers was quite dramatic (they made the smallest things a big deal)...Newland Archer was probably one of these dramatic New Yorkers...and why do I say that? Take a look at page two, the description of why he was late to the opera, he had two reasons. Firstly, New York was a metropolis area and it was not acceptable to arrive early and secondly, he had personally problems- "he dawdled over his cigar." Note, that these reasons today would be considered a mere description for gaining attention, hence the aristocrat life revolved around the level of attention gained and popularity presented. Oh...and did I mention how attending an Oprah performance was the "it" party of the week..it wasn't even fun, even the Archer says this himself, he was dilettante- he cultivated areas of interest without really understand the significance nor understanding the true beauty of an Oprah. He simplify visited the Oprah as a social norm, jumping the bandwagon in order to preserve his popularity...and to see his lady! His lady...a virgin ofcourse! A lovely virgin girl named May. May to me, is symbolic of innocence: her facial expression when she looks at Newland flowers, makes her blush- how cute. But what is sad, is that he has had a sexual past, yet he finds her attractive no cause of personality, but because of her virginity, as she has had a clean past. This some what disgusts me. Why does a women deserve a man who looks for innocence when he himself does not fulfill his own wanting? And so my judging of the New York aristocrat society is shrewd...OH wait! not to mention everyone seems snotty. Take a look at Lawrence lefferts, the biggest hypocrites in the world...and Fullerton Jackson. A bunch of gossipers. I wonder where this is to go. I shall end this blog with a perfect quote from the first chapter, the somewhat sums my views of the dramatic scenes that are about to occur:

"How this miracle of fire and ice was to be created, and to sustain itself in a harsh world, he had never taken the time to think out,but he was content to hold his views without analyzing it,since he knew it was that of all the carefully brushed, white-waist-coated, buttonhole-flowered gentlemen who succeeded each other in the box....on the circle of ladies who were the product of the system" (7).
P.S....women= product of the system!? LAME. Glad I'm not too much of a feminist...or else I would be hating this book right now! 

Sonnet 138: When my love swears that she is made of truth By: William Shakespeare

When my love swears that she is made of truth 

I do believe her, though I know she lies, 

That she might think me some untutored youth, 

Unlearnèd in the world's false subtleties. 

Thus vainly thinking that she thinks me young, 

Although she knows my days are past the best, 

Simply I credit her false-speaking tongue; 

On both sides thus is simple truth suppressed. 

But wherefore says she not she is unjust? 

And wherefore say not I that I am old? 

O, love's best habit is in seeming trust, 

And age in love, loves not to have years told. 

Therefore I lie with her, and she with me, 

And in our faults by lies we flattered be

The starting of this poem, lines one through three characterizes a  women as blind. Clearly, the women in Shakespeare's poem can not see that the he knows the truth, the truth being betrayal, and dishonesty. This mans that the women takes men for guaranteed, nonetheless, she fails to recognize a man's feelings, but these lines also portray a man's stagnation in the youth phase of life. He states that " she might think of some untutored youth;" a youth is still naive and oblivious to action around them and because of this, she is able to use men for her pleasure disregarding their emotions. This aspect of youth is important because it frames men and women into stereotypes. I think that Shakespeare, through this poem, expands on how society was viewed and sectored in the past- men were youthful and ignorant, while women were playful and arrogant. Furthermore, he frames women in a negative light- saying that they are immoral humans who lack the ability to understand emotions. Note that even though the women fails to be cognizant of his emotions, he falls in her trap. Why? Love has the ability to hide the truth. It is an illusion, more so a covering of the vain beliefs and the negativity n a relationship. Love is a healing and consoling power. What is seen in the poem is mutual deception- both know that they are lying, yet fail to come out of their bubble and tell each other the truth. Why, the question once again? Perhaps it could be the fact that they are stuck in love, blinded by it. They don't see that love is not just keeping the truth from each other, but also falsely telling ones self that they can ignore the dishonesty because they are blinded. Lines nine through ten begin to question this unjust and unfaithful relationship they have. In a sense, Shakespeare asks these questions in order to gain self understanding as to why he is this relationship in the first place. Could it because he is desperate? More so, I think he is restless and greedy for love and for a women in his life. It is weird that even after all this lying they are still together, in their old age. This makes me view this poem in a whole new light. Shakespeare is describing an old couple who has been together for a long time, maybe through their youth, and even though they may have ups and downs in their relationship, they will forever be together.  If a couple has been together for so long, there is no point in separation; they are old, they need someone to hang on to, why leave your youth love? Their love is inevitable, and regard age as just a number. Even though they are old, and should be together, they want to preserve the wildness and rebel sense of youth and live life to the fullest with no disagreement, arguments, or displeasure, hence he chooses to block the dishonesty and carry along as if nothing has happened. Also, these lies help them burry their faults and flaws, making their relationship seem more light and lively.  

Grendel and Plato's Allegory- They relate oh so well

Firstly, before I go on a rant about the relationship between Grendel and the Allegory, I'd like to take a moment and explain my take away from this capturing story. I came to a conclusion, more so an hypothesis that Plato was trying to emphasize man's ability to make his own realty based on a hero's journey. None the less, everything at the start of one's life is a blurry, more so, incomprehensible jumble of thoughts. This is merely because one does not acquire the knowledge to grab the true meaning of an object, rather, they have not developed their own perceptions to transform a blur into reality. An individual must live life as a journey to find existence and reveal their capabilities of object permanence and internal investigation (why am I here? what is my duty upon earth? Am I to jump the bandwagon or make life for myself? Who is my creator, perhaps a higher being?) Furthermore, being isolated or "chained" (as stated in Plato's allegory), hinder the release of perspective- is life outside the  real? What is reality? Now in reference to Grendel, this reality, or truth is the disbelief in a higher being, that is, one makes a world for him self. In fact, Grendel even states: "I create this universe blink by blink." By this, it can be inferred he views reality not based on the stereotypical views of the world around him, but on how you frame the world and predict it to be- the way you live it. Again in relation to Plato's allegory, I feel like Grendel is represented as the prisoner who is stuck in the cave and because the prisoner are "chained," there is emphasis on isolation (exactly what Grendel is facing at this point). Note that Grendel suffers from this isolation, he is envious of the men (seen in chapter 4 and 5) that have reliance and dependence from another, a source of love (which his mother fails to provide him with). I also think that Grendel is reaching a point of enlightenment as he ascends into the real world- this action gives him a sense of "awareness." The shadow and the cave imagery are highly used in order to extrapolate on the action of capture. He become en-lighted when he realized that he is a life, he is not part of anyone. This sense of realization occurs when his mother blinded him and hugged him (almost smashing him toward her bossom...she smelled like a pig). Note here that Grendel puts his mother in the animistic realm, different from his human like perception. And another interesting fact is that Grendel can not go back to his mother and tell her about his interaction with the outside world- now a real sense of divergence. Fundamentally, Plato's allegory and Grendel form a question of enlightenment- whether it is evil or good? Positive or negative? Is the decent back down, even worth it? 

Prufrock and Winesberg- Oh so similar!

Throughout "The love song of J. Alfred Prufrock," are many similarities to the novel Winesberg, Ohio. First let us start by discussing the theme of this poem that our group came up with; our so what: "through experience, it is reveled that life isn't necessarily all wonderful- it's complicated and sometimes ugly resulting in disillusionment." The meaning of disillusionment is a feeling of disappointment when someone realizes that they could have done more, achieved higher, or are missing out on something through a duration of their life; nonetheless, this definition was the basis of Winesberg Ohio, emphasizing that one should take precautions in life in order to decrease the chance of regret. A similar view is seen through Prufrock; especially in last section when he states "We have lingered n the chambers of the sea/ By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown/Till human voices wake us, and we drown." This excerpt emphasizes frustration and none the less the regret he feels for not preserving his youth, hence this feeling of disillusionment. Speaking of youth... this is yet another similarly we see. "Though I have seen my head [grown slightly bald] brought in upon a platter/ I am no prophet-  and here's no great matter." This quote eludes to the motif of aging- the loss of childhood. This aging, or youthfulness plays a big role in both the poem and the novel as it is a symbol for death. Through both, Prufrock and the old man mourn for death as they find it to be a place of serenity and peace. In fact, first they start of with the feelings of sleep and how it makes one so peaceful (line 75 of Prufrock) and later states that he is "Lazarus". Sleep is a state of stagnation, but temporary...because in the story, Lazarus was dead until Jesus brought him back to life. So in essence, this sense of death, is mostly a state of REM sleep- dreaming, perhaps a lucid dream. Note the dreams can not be controlled- hence his feelings for death. Also dreams provide one with a sense of silence- a time for introspection away from society. In both Prufrock and Winesberg we sense this feeling of isolation and withdrawal from society in order to conjure the reality- they want to face reality through dreams, to make it seem better, more lively (all leading back to the symbol of youth). 

Now we are going to scroll out of the meaning and analysis of the text, and take a look at the bigger picture...organization! One would never think that organization of a text can display so much information about the general theme or motif of a novel...but it clearly can. In both Whinesberg, Ohio and Prufrock, the text fragmented. In Winesberg, it is different stories that peace together, while in Prufrock it is different experience. This fragmentation of the texts, provides a different image throughout the novel. Nonetheless, the fragmentation aids in meaning of life- emphasizing that there are so many part to the universe that one can not piece together the complete meaning of life. In both texts we see the difficulty of piecing together a meaning of life, of what reality is. 

The Book of the Grotesque- who knew it was so complicated?

With the multitude of definitions, of new meanings, of new perspectives, it is highly impossible to define the words of Sherwood Anderson, more so, extract a clear definition of what makes a person "grotesque." My senses tell me that the prologue and "The Book of the Grotesque" hiddenly define a grotesque person as one that holds the absolute truth. Do we know this absolute truth? Is it one specific, clearly defined, truth, that all men hold? Who knows? ... Let's take a look at the beginning of "The Book of the Grotesque"- the writer, with a white mustache wants his bed up high in order to look through the windows, but had "forgotten" the reason to (22). What possible plan could the writer have that was "ludicrous?" The word ludicrous is the first direction definition of grotesque that is noticed. Now let's find the connotations of ludicrous: amusing, foolish, ridiculous, weird, idiotic, sometimes humorous. It's weird how this definition characterizes the writers thoughts in the next paragraph which extrapolates on his heart's desire for youth and life, through the thoughts of death. Firstly, he views death in a nonchalant way as he states that the :thoughts did not alarm him" (thought being that fact that he might die sometime unexpectedly). Nonetheless, it is quite weird that he views death in such a relaxed way; the normal human being, would fear death, as the coming of death is usually accompanied by suffering or adversity. Note, that the old man does not suffer nor does he feel pain, he feels a "special thing." Secondly, he states that as he lays lying in bed, something "rather young" was bothering him- a women wearing a coast of mail. Now here is the real ridiculousness: the juxtaposition of female and male attributes. There was a feminine figure who was metaphysically characterized as a male due to the clothing. This could be an allusion to a fairy tale, the knight and horse relationship. The knight is strong and brave, yet subtle and boring, while the horse is wild and outgoing, full of youth. This allusion is a parallel to old age vs. youthfulness; in this case he judges a male as lifeless until an internal spark joy and youthfulness arises (aka, a femininity of some sort). I could go on about this allusion as it truelove highlights the bizarre thinking, but I shall move on. We see another illusion- of dreams. As the old man got sleepier, "figures began to appear before his eyes" (23), and there figures were all grotesque. Voila, this is the first time Anderson uses the word grotesque. Note that the writer builds this story in order to define a grotesque characters, perhaps showing us the absolute truth, then tells us that he never published the book in which he tells of all the truths that comprise of a grotesque. He somewhat tells us "all of them" (24): truth of virginity, truth of passion, truth of wealth, profligacy, abandon...but too many for him to list that were supposedly all "beautiful." So there we go, it were these truths that made people grotesque! But wait a minute, previously, we defined grotesque with a negative connotation, now we are saying that the weirdness of these grotesques doesn't really compute to the definition at all, rather it is the simple truths. He states that "the moment one of the people took one of the truths to himself, called it truths, and tried to live his life by it, he has come a grotesque." Therefore, if a man enforces a truth on himself as a path of life, it was falsehood, dishonesty, and was the main characteristic of being "grotesque." In other words, the fact commits a sin (losing virginity, abusing wealth, etc) and tires to hide it by reinforcing the past to hide his mistakes, makes him grotesque. This may not be the definition, after all, in literature there are multiple meanings to work, but in correlation to the novel as a whole, it sure seems that Anderson uses the definition of grotesque to highlight mans lust for hidings ones sins. 

Thou Blind Man’s Mark

Thou Blind Man's Mark by Sir Philip Sidney 

(1554-1586)

Thou blind man's mark, thou fool's self-chosen snare, 

Fond fancy's scum, and dregs of scattered thought ; 

Band of all evils, cradle of causeless care ; 

Thou web of will, whose end is never wrought ; 

Desire, desire ! I have too dearly bought, 

With price of mangled mind, thy worthless ware ; 

Too long, too long, asleep thou hast me brought, 

Who shouldst my mind to higher things prepare. 

But yet in vain thou hast my ruin sought ; 

In vain thou madest me to vain things aspire ; 

In vain thou kindlest all thy smoky fire ; 

For virtue hath this better lesson taught,— 

Within myself to seek my only hire, 

Desiring naught but how to kill desire.

The Poem, "Thou Blind Man's Mark, by Sir Philip Sidney, illustrates the effect of desires on man's ability to live life in happiness. When analyzing this poem, it is important to denote the title. Sidney uses the word "blind" which connotates to a lack of vision, sightless, lack of awareness  or physically blind, but the word blind does not imply a physical connotation, more so, one of emotions. The Man is blind,  not by sight, but by thoughts. The desires he has are blocking his ability to think of "higher things" (line 8). Also in the title is the word "mark;" it is likely that the mark is once again not a physical print, but an emotional mark- his desires are these "marks" that linger his in mind, blocking his true, materialist emotions which enable peace and happiness. Note that the author uses the word mark instead of a more harsh word like scar or stamp. This word choice shows that these desires aren't permanent like a scar, but is removable with effort. Therefore, the first line states that these marks of desires are what makes a man a fool, as they choose a physical attribute to account for their happiness. 

The authors views these desires as a force of evil which inhibits the mind- almost like a parasite that harms the body. In this case the desires are the parasite that inhibits a mans ability to think with "will" (line 4), and this will is what keeps the internal joys alive. Nonetheless, desires force vain on a man. Line 5 is vital to understanding the poem as it implies that desires are easy to hold- he says they are "dearly brought." In essence  desires are natural to man; they are easily wanted, therefore, hard to get rid of. The meaning of lines 5 though 7 is that desires have the ability to ruin ones though process- change it from that is in healthy state to one that is sick with unnatural thoughts. This once again highlights the parasite parallel. The poem shifts focus and tone in the thrid to last line when the author states that "virtue hath his better lesson taught;" Virtue, are his morals, the natural state of mind and these morals are the only things that can save him from being in "vain." The overall theme of this poem is to emphasize how desires are man's inner evil that stops one from attaining internal peace. At the end of the poem, the author explains his problem- his struggle to kill desire. Meaning that desire is not easy to rid of, it take effort, and introspection, that is the thoughts "within himself," in order to cure. 

Found it! Tintern Abbey in Frankenstein!

The sounding cataract
Haunted him like a passion: the tall rock,
The mountain, and the deep and gloomy wood,
Their colors and their forms, were then to him
An appetite; a feeling, and a love,
That had no need for a remoter charm
By thought supplied, or any interest
Unborrow'd from the eye
-Page 139 (Chapter 18 of Frankenstein)

Mary Shelly quotes Tintern Abbey when Frankenstein and Clerval are crossing the English channel, and are sailing to London. The excerpt is primarily used to illustrate Clerval's character, that is, he is full of compassion towards nature and adores what nature has given to man- the beautiful views and sites. Thanks to Clerval's "ardent affections" and imagination," Victor gains some motivation. In essence, he acts as Victors source of morality and drive to imagine and introspect. This is important for Victor as he needs to discover the divine truth of his creation, his true intentions, as well as rid of his guilt towards creating the monster. Frankenstein, on this trip, is going through a dilemma; he is worries, scared, an sorrowful for the deed he has already done- he feels as if his past is haunting him (his past being giving life to an inanimate creature)...but thanks to Henry's optimism and intellectual thinking, he feels a sense of relief. He even says: "these ineffectual words are but a light tribute to the unexampled worth of Henry, but they soothe my heart, overflowing with the anguish which his remembrance creates"( Frankenstein 140).
Relating back to this excerpt from Tintern Abbey, is an allusion, of an eye, that depicts the true value of the sense vision- to appreciate nature, nonetheless, to appreciate the beauties God has created. Let's start with the first line of the stanza, the word cataract. The definition of the word cataract is a "cloudy lens inside the eye;" this definition when placed through human perspective has a negative connotation, almost saying that the human's eye is shielded and lacks the capabilities to correctly see nature and all it has done for us. Pretty much highlighting human ignore (as they say...ignorance is bliss). Although, some select few individuals like Clerval are gifted with the ability to see natures beauties as a gift from god, and these few individuals devour sharing their love for nature in order to bring happiness to others- a truly selfless act. The fact that Clerval is indirectly helping Victor through his emotional instability makes me wonder, is Victor jealous of the fact that he can not understand nature in Henry's depth? Does Victor feel an obligation to love nature and explore nature now that he has become a "creator?" Why does he even Henry's deep admiration for journey's and introspection? I think he is jealous!
Now let's take a look at the fifth line of the passage and the word "appetite." The word appetite here brings a restless connotation to the poem as it illustrates eagerness. Victor describes Henry as being eager to frame the world as a place of discovery and ultimate happiness...which is something that Frankenstein dreams to have.
Lastly, the phrase "Unborrow'd from the eye." This last line was a puzzle for me and still is. What could he mean by Unborrow'd...was it perhaps the functions of the eye? That some people have the capabilities to turn the banal, superficial scenes of nature into a thought process of finding ones self and the fact that this gift could not be borrowed? I could be way off, but did it mean that his heart was pure and could see through the "cataract" that blocks every human beings vision and perception. My gut tells me that the Victor wants us to realize that all human beings have a blocked vision in which they can only view the superficial aspects of nature, that is providing them food, shelter, and life, but fail to recognize the mental happiness it gives us as well. 

What does it mean to be Human?

What does it mean to be Human? ...hmm, what does it mean to be a Homo Sapien? Wait one second before answering this question. What was different from the first sentence compared to the second? The word Homo Sapien vs. Human. As a casual reader, the difference between the world Human and Homo Sapien can not be differed, but as an analytic reader, there is a clear difference between the two; that is, the biological connotation. The noun "Human" does not hold a biological rather definition, rather a philosophical or ethical connotation contrary to the noun "Homo Sapien" which has an organic connotation. This slight difference is wording contributes to a large part of understanding the aspects of the verb "to be a Human."
Seen through the work of Frankenstein, is Mary Shelly's search for such a question. Through the character of the creature/ the monster, Shelly defines a Human as a form of life that has emotions and feelings for not only himself, but for the world, nonetheless, society as a whole. The term humanistic perspective of life, often deals with collectivist and the external locus of thinking- the views of society being superior to that of one's self.This definition clearly fits the creature- this is because he holds the ability to introspect and feel for him and his surroundings/ environment. This can clearly be seen following the creation of the monster, when he is found roaming the forest, and sees a cabin- the De Lacey house hold. This is his first step in understanding emotion-as he is observing the family through the peep in his wall, he becomes immune to the feelings of poverty and sorrow (over all sadness). In fact, his ability to relate to Felix proves that he is truly Human. Even though the monster has not yet experienced the emotions of reuniting and love, he is able to comprehend true love when Felix reunites with Safie. At this moment, the monster reaches a state of introspection, stating: "of my creator, I was absolutely ignorant, but I knew that I possessed no money, no friends  no property. I was not even of the same nature. Seen in this excerpt is the ability for the monster to comprehend the meaning of life, essential to what a human's goal is. Later on in the novel, we see that the monster really characterizes himself as human when he talks to victor in anger and sorrow about his betrayal; he says: "God in pity made man beautiful and alluring, after his own image; but my form is a filthy type of yours" (154). The fact that he considers him self to be a form of Victor, indicates that perceives himself as human and regards Humans through an emotional sense. He believes that a Human is not one that is given birth by a mother, but one that is created and has the ability to feel for the world. 

An Adam without Eve

An Adam without  Eve
Have you ever wondered about the saying "A man's right hand is his lady," or "A man is incomplete without a women," or "A man's best quality comes from his companion?"  I can't say that I have completely thought about these saying either, but after closely analyzing Frankenstein, I can say, that either of those sayings are quite universal and literal. How so? The story of Adam and Eve. Perhaps before I get into the symbolic relationship of Adam and Eve and Frankenstein, I should explain my brainstorming. First, let me tell you first about the prevalent, thematic theme of the Overreacher that is so highly emphasized through the novel. Victor Frankenstein is known to be the creator of Frankenstein, the one that brought life to the dead. In essence, Victor serves to the be the Sire of the text. In his lust and pursuit for knowledge comes the title of a higher human being. His affection for intelligence, a new discovery, for life, has made him a "creator," perhaps somewhat, God like.  But is this true? Does Victor fit the true definition of an overreacher just for his creation of a male monster? In my thoughts...no. The true definition of an overreacher is one that creates for the happniess of other, for society- their acts are purely selfless. Although, Victor is quite the contrary; though it may seem that he is made this creation in order to give society a glimpse of where knowledge can take you, this is not the case. The novel reveals that Victor created this monster simply for pride- he wanted to be named a creator, an overreacher..but in reality, he does not deserve such a title. This is purely because he did not complete his task of an overreacher; the tasks being: to create, to comfort, to aid. He created...but did he comfort, did he aid the life of the monster? No. In fact, the true overreacher, known to be God, created a creature providing him with comfort and aid- firstly, he gave Adam comfort by presenting him Eve (a companion that he can befriend and love) and with that he gave them nature, the world, in order for them to live. Similar, if Victor gave the monster an "Eve," which he desired to have, he could have been named a true creator, an overreacher. Due to such a fact, Victor can be known as an unjust creator. Take a look at page 117, as the monster says: "...But it was all a dream; no Eve soothed my sorrows, nor shared my thoughts; I was alone. i remembered Adam's supplication to his Creator. But where was mine? he had abandoned me: and, in the bitterness of my heart, I cursed him." This excerpt proves that Victor could only be named a creator, if he had provided the monster with his eve, someone to console and comfort him through his time, but because of a failure to do so, his efforts are only seen as greed. 

The thoughts of my summer, a sneak peak into the lessons of my reading...
Look out a window, stare at the sky; the clouds moving slowly, the trees swaying at ease to the wind, the birds soaring at great heights- a view of peace, a view of serenity. Take a deep breath, and listen to the sound of your inhalation and exaltation; the sound of ocean waves, washing against the shore, the sound of a waterfall-the sound of purity and cleanse. Take a sip of hot honey, ginseng tea; the warmth moving through the the esophagus into the stomach- the feeling of comfort. Hug your fleece blanket from your childhood days; the softness, the childhood memories, the nostalgia that replays- the feeling of adolescence, of security. Take a wiff of the fresh laundry or of a flower in the garden; a sent of sweetness, of freshness- the feeling of a new day, a new start. The senses...these 5 innate gifts from god, from heaven, from where ever you believe they emerged, hold the power to lead ones life out of adversity. It has the power of healing. It has the power to help introspection.
Throughout the days of my high-school career and the multiple literature or language and composition classes I have taken, I have learned the beauty of our senses; not only does it aid the analysis of a poem we are reading in class, or a novel that we must dissect and write about, but also in life. Only a few may take the time to look so deeply into the functions of our senses, more so, analyzing what they do, but I may be one of the few who care to do so.
Over the summer, as I was reading multiple novels, of different authors (The Namesake by Jhumpa Lahari, Three Point Someone by Chetan Bhagat, and Frankenstein by Mary Shelly), I noticed that all authors...okay not all, but most, use the senses as the basis of their writing. Whether it came to expressing the emotions that flowed through a characters mind or to engaging a reader in order to feel a characters pain and sorrow, the senses were used to do so. In fact, Frankenstein by Mary Shelly, was a true representation of the beauty of our senses- the essence of life- the understanding of how nature can be our best friend.
It may seem a bit odd, that I would think so deeply of such a forgotten though, but if it is one thing that I have learned from my reading this summer, it is the power of our senses.