The Creature: Internal Conflict

After reading Frankenstein, a novel by Mary Shelley, the true murderer of William, Victor Frankenstein’s younger brother, is finally revealed. However, it turns out the murder was committed due to great internal conflict within the murderer, the creature. After being neglected and feared by his own creator and the DeLacey family, the creature decides that the only person on the planet who would not run in fear of him is a child. After coming across William, he reasons, “this little creature was unprejudiced, and had lived too short a time to have imbibed a horror of deformity,” (Shelley, 102). However, it turns out that the creature’s hopes are dashed. Not only is William terrified of the creature, he also brings up that he is the son of Frankenstein. This is then where the creature’s true internal conflict comes into play. Without realizing that William is Victor’s brother, not son, the creature believes that Victor has a family who he did not abandon. The idea that William was accepted and loved by Victor but he was ignored does not sit well with him, and the creature cannot take it. In the end, he unintentionally kills William, but it appears as though the same end might have been brought upon William at some point if the creature did not kill him then. Internal conflict plagues the creature all throughout the novel, and this instance is one time where the conflict gets the best of his temper.

Characterization of Safie

After reading Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, the characterization of Safie, an Arabian woman, helped the progression of the story. Within the novel, it is explained that Safie had come to live with the DeLacey’s, a family that Frankenstein’s creature had become attached to, after tragic and difficult events in her life. However, as the reader learns more and more about Safie, they learn more and more about the creature as well. Because Safie was Arabian and did not speak the language of the DeLacey’s, they taught her French so that she could communicate with them. Through this teaching, the creature was also able to learn to speak. In the novel, the creature states, “…she was endeavoring to learn their language; and the idea instantly occurred to me that I should make use of the same instructions to the same end,” (Shelley, 83). Furthermore, the novels and books that Safie was being taught from aided the creature, as he was able to learn history and manners and of governments and other civilizations. Safie’s character allowed Shelley to answer the questions of how the creature became such a fluent and eloquent speaker and why he knows so much. Safie’s character was also key in the interaction between the DeLacey’s and the creature. Although the family was not receptive of him and chased him away, the creature would have never been able to meet the family at all without the arrival of Safie.

Frankenstein: Hollywood vs. the Novel

Werewolf! Where wolf? There wolf! While reading Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, I began to notice some interesting differences between the monster of pop culture and Shelley’s real creation. The only Frankenstein-related movie I have seen is Young Frankenstein, which I know was intended to be comedic, but I still did not expect the film to differ from the book as much as it has so far. The classic creature from movies is usually depicted as a dead body brought back to life by Dr. Frankenstein, however in the novel, the creature is created under entirely different circumstances. Frankenstein is not the mad scientist we all expect, rather he is a young college student enamored with natural philosophy and chemistry. Furthermore, his creation is not one singular body stolen from a grave, but rather a patchwork of mismatched body parts that Victor Frankenstein somehow manages to bring to life. Also, although the monster from culture does cause destruction, death is not usually included in that destruction. In Shelley’s novel, the monster becomes responsible for the death of a small child, Frankenstein’s brother, which was entirely unexpected by me. After catching a glimpse of William’s murderer, Frankenstein claims, “A flash of lightening illuminated the object, and discovered its shape plainly to me; its gigantic stature, and the deformity of its aspect,” (Shelley, 50). It is at this point that Frankenstein realizes his own creation killed his own brother. This novel is the perfect example of how Hollywood can change the outcomes of books without anyone knowing otherwise. If I had never read this novel, I would have never known all of the misconceptions the movie I watched created.

Frankenstein! What Were You Thinking You Fool!

In Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, one theme that is very apparent is the death and destruction caused by Victor Frankenstein’s creation. This idea is incredibly ironic however, since Frankenstein created his monster in hopes of cheating death and preventing it from affecting anyone else. Yet, in just a few years after the creation was made, it had both directly and indirectly caused the deaths of two of Frankenstein’s close family members, his little brother William and Justine Moritz. Because of the great number of family members who Victor had seen perish and die or his loved ones has witnessed the death of, Victor used his talent and obsession with natural philosophy to try and find a way around the grief and pain caused by death. However, after he creates the monster, he immediately knows that he has made a major mistake. This mistake continues to haunt him as it takes out more close acquaintances and loved ones, and at one point he even considers suicide because of the damage he has indirectly caused. Victor states, “I listened to this discourse with the extremest agony. I, not in deed, but in effect, was the true murderer,” (Shelley, 63). Furthermore, the irony of this situation does in fact add an element of spookiness and horror to the novel. What was made with the hope of saving lives became a cause of destruction, and because this can happen in our world today, Shelley effectively creates an ominous tone.

Frankenstein and Walton: Fast Friendship

Robert Walton

After beginning to read Mary Shelley’s famous novel Frankenstein, similarities between Victor Frankenstein, the creator of the classic monster, and Robert Walton, a hopeful explorer, became apparent. The most obvious comparison is the two men’s obsession with attaining a goal that has never before been accomplished. While Frankenstein hoped to restore life to a dead body, Walton wishes to reach the North Pole. Although both of these goals are very dangerous and could have drastic consequences, neither man can let go of the obsession they have formed. Furthermore, both men neglect their relationships with their families in order to attain their dreams. When Frankenstein leaves for college, he does not return to his family for six years because of his creation of the monster. The time it takes to study and create the creature and then the time he loses when it goes missing prevents him from communicating with his loved ones. Walton also leaves family behind for his goal, as is noted by the multiple letters he mails to his sister. Quite comfortable with the idea that he might never see her again, Walton never ceases to remind his sister, Margaret Saville, that he might die during this voyage. He writes to his sister, “I love you very tenderly. Remember me with affection, should you never hear from me again,” (Shelley, 6). Although people do put themselves at risk on a daily basis, both Frankenstein and Walton walk into the face of danger, disregarding the opinions of their families and the effect their disappearance has on them.

Frankenstein's Crazy Characterization

Mary Shelley

In Frankenstein, a novel by Mary Shelley, characterization plays a major role. The process the author uses to allow the reader to learn more about each character is quite interesting, as she consistently launches into a page and a half description about each person she introduces. When I first began reading the book, I found this strange method both interesting and quite honestly, annoying. At the mention of a new character, I immediately began to realize that I would be reading about that person for the next few paragraphs at least. However, this method has also proved to be quite effective. I have found as I continue to read that I can still recognize and differentiate characters introduced chapters ago when their names once again pop up. Although Shelley’s method is tedious, it seems as though it works to help the reader recognize each character. By explaining their whole life story in one place rather than leaking certain pieces of information throughout the entirety of the novel, Shelley enables her readers to organize the happenings of each characters life without getting confused. For example, Victor Frankenstein’s childhood friend, Henry Clerval, is introduced after a large absence from the novel when Victor states, “Nothing could equal my delight on seeing Clerval; his presence brought back thoughts of my father, Elizabeth…” (Shelley, 37). Because of Shelley’s past detailed description, I not only recognized the name Clerval immediately and associated it with Frankenstein’s friend; I also recognized the name Elizabeth. Through her unique characterization method, Shelley effectively prevents her readers from losing touch with the novel’s various characters.

Frankenstein's Foil Characters

While reading Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, her use of foil characters became apparent when the main character of the novel, Victor Frankenstein, attends college. There, he is introduced to two professors, Krempe and Waldman, who were both well versed in natural philosophy and chemistry. However, these two characters acted as the contrast to the other. Krempe is condescending and unsupportive of Frankenstein’s devotion to philosophers such as Agrippa and Paracelsus, stating, “Every instant that you have wasted on those books is utterly and entirely lost. You have burdened your memory with exploded systems and useless names,” (Shelley, 26). Waldman acts the exact opposite. He is much more appreciative of Frankenstein’s devotion to the subject and interest in the history of it. Shelley than uses these two characters to introduce the creation of what the novel Frankenstein is really known for – the creature. Because of the mutual dislike between Krempe and Frankenstein, Victor begins to spend more time under the instruction of Waldman. Waldman’s interest in the subject is then what sparks Frankenstein’s desire to create such a monster. Because of her use of these two foil characters, Shelley was able to effectively set the path of the novel. Krempe and Waldman’s contrasting personalities were what led Frankenstein to choose a side, which in the end led to the creation of Frankenstein’s monster.

“APO 96225” by Larry Rottman

After reading Larry Rottman’s poem, “APO 96225,” the attitude of the American public toward the war in Vietnam was very clearly revealed. The letters sent home by the soldier in the poem are initially vague and pleasant, but when the mother instructs her son to finally send information on what is really happening, his statements shock his family. The brutality and inhumanity of what was actually happening in the war was not what the family wanted to hear, and the father responds to his son’s letter with the message, “Please don’t write such depressing letters. You’re upsetting your mother,” (Rottman, 846). This is the phrase that really represents the American view of Vietnam. During the war, most people did not want to hear the details of what was really happening; they wanted the information that had been combed through and toned down. The son in the poem shares trivial details about the weather and scenery with his family rather than the actual information because he knows they do not want to hear it. This is confirmed with the father’s response above. Through his poem, Rottman clearly portrays the American’s refusal to know the truth of what was happening during the war, as it was not what they wanted to hear. The son’s return to discussion of the weather in the last stanza of the poem proves that he was correct in his decision to not originally share any reality with his family.

“I felt a Funeral, in my Brain” by Emily Dickinson

In the poem, “I felt a Funeral, in my Brain,” by Emily Dickinson, a literary technique commonly utilized is imagery. In each stanza, Dickinson uses imagery to paint a picture of what is happening to her. She has created a scene of a funeral through and through, beginning with the procession and ending with the burial. All the while, she portrays herself as within the coffin. However the imagery she uses adds to the depressing tone and topic of the poem. The photograph of “mourners to and fro kept treading – treading…” creates the idea of gloominess (Dickinson, 776). Mourners of the dead are often upset and crying, and the word treading creates the image of a person moving along as though they are being held back by some resistance, in this case, the death of a loved one. Furthermore, the line, “and creak across my Soul,” creates the sense of finality the author was focusing on (Dickinson, 776). As the reader pictures the coffin burying the deceased person, it closes of their soul from the world. As Dickinson successfully portrayed, her soul was being cut off or separated from reality by some force; in the case of the poem, a coffin.

“Bartleby the Scrivener” by Herman Melville - A Degree of Autism

In the story, “Bartleby the Scrivener,” by Herman Melville, the idea that Bartleby might have some degree of autism is recognized. His personality and many of his actions imply this conclusion, in particular his struggle with social situations. As Bartleby is living in the lawyers office, he one day opens the door undressed and asks the lawyer to come back later. This is a strange way to act, as the office does in fact belong to the lawyer and Bartleby is simply being allowed to live there. Furthermore, Bartleby avoids responses to emotional stimuli. When the other office workers verbally attack him, Bartleby simply does not respond at all. This avoid of confrontation also leads to the conclusion that Bartleby might have autism. Another factor in this determination is Bartleby’s repetition of the phrase, “I would prefer not to,” (Melville, 649). Repetition of phrases and facts can often be linked to autism, further promoting this idea. Because he might not know how else to respond, Bartleby takes the easy way out by repeating a phrase he knows well and that prevents him from having to respond. Because of these reasons, there is a chance that Bartleby the scrivener has some degree of autism which could have lead to his peculiar character.

“Bartleby the Scrivener” by Herman Melville - An Unlikely Comparison

After reading “Bartleby the Scrivener,” a short story by Herman Melville, an unlikely comparison became apparent. Although unexpected, the narrator of the story, or the lawyer, turned out to share quite a few similarities with Bartleby. A few paragraphs into the tale, the lawyer states, “I am a man who from his youth upwards has been filled with a profound conviction that the easiest way of life is the best,” (Melville, 642). Because of this attitude, the lawyer has accepted a rather passive career dealing with the finances of the wealthy. This way, he avoided the confrontation and arguing that often comes with being a lawyer. Bartleby the scrivener is very similar in his passivity. All of the rude and insolent comments made towards Bartleby by the other workers, Turkey, Nippers, and Ginger Nut, were completely ignored by Bartleby. He simply responded to their attacks by saying nothing, further proving his non-confrontational and detached personality. Furthermore, the lawyer is appalled that Bartleby refuses to leave the office and rather stays inside permanently, yet he himself only ever leaves his work to go home for the evening or to go on a walk. Bartleby and the lawyer also share a similarity in the idea that both reveal nothing about their pasts. Bartleby denies the direct requests for personal information, while Melville crafts the character of the lawyer to be void of this information. Additionally, any time a detail regarding the lawyer is about to be revealed, Melville cuts off the response to exclude any personal information. Although it seems unlikely at first, Bartleby and the lawyer are similar to each other in more ways than one.

"Miss Brill" by Katherine Mansfield

After reading “Miss Brill,” a short story by Katherine Mansfield, the theme of isolation becomes very apparent. However, it is not revealed until the end of the story. Throughout the tale, Miss Brill, an old woman, and her daily actions are discussed. She is described as watching life go by as though it is a play and she is the audience, first hinting at the isolation theme. Although she seems to enjoy that idea, it does isolate her from the others. Her joy of people-watching and experiencing the lives of others sets her apart from her community, alienating her as the “strange one” or “oddball.” Furthermore, the story continues to the rude comments of a young man and his girlfriend. He states, “Why does she come here at all – who wants her?” (Mansfield, 186). This only further isolates Miss Brill from the rest of her society. It becomes apparent that she lives alone and has no friends or even acquaintances, and it separates her from the others, sparking the hurtful comments like those of the young man. Miss Brill, although no one really knows her, is seen as a nuisance because she is always in the background, always in the way. This attitude towards her drives Miss Brill to leave the common grounds and go home, where it seems as though she begins to cry due to her isolation.

"Death, be not proud" by John Donne

In the poem “Death, be not proud” by John Donne, the understanding that death does not deserve pride. Although death can end life, it is not the finale. Death is merely a portal to another world consisting of life after death, therefore taking away any pride from the personified Death of the poem. The poem states in regard to common perceptions of death, “Mighty and dreadful, for thou art not so,” (Donne, 971) in order to remind the reader that death is not the end for them. Although death kills the body, it does not kill the spirit, which will go on to live forever. The author states that if items such as poppies, a type of flower, can make us sleep the same as death accomplishes, then why is Death portrayed as a much more terrifying and ominous prospect. Flowers are not terrifying, yet they accomplish the same thing as death. Furthermore, the idea that death is only temporary darkness before eternal light comes into our lives discredits the horror stories and terror behind the event. Once we are granted eternal life in Heaven, death itself dies, as the pride of ending a life is overruled. This poem explains the importance of not giving death the upper hand, as eternal life will always put it in its place.

"That Time of Year" by William Shakespeare

In William Shakespeare’s poem, “That Time of Year,” three major images are introduced through the three quatrains in the poem. These images are the comparison age to the fading of autumn, the fading of the twilight, and the fading of a fire. Each of these images also further represents death or upcoming death. Stated in the first quatrain, “when yellow leaves, or none, or few, do hang,” (Shakespeare, 966) this quote represents the little life left in a person close to death. When one is nearing his end, there are few leaves left within him to keep him going. Furthermore, the empty, bare boughs described in the poem represent the little fight left within a person before death. The second quatrain focuses on the fading of the twilight as comparison to death. Death is commonly associated with the lights going out, and the disappearance of any light left from twilight represents a life extinguished. The sunset is slowly diminished by the darkness of the night, just as life is diminished by the darkness of death. The fading of the fire described in the third quatrain further extends this analogy. The only thing keeping the narrator alive are the “ashes of his youth,” and in the end, these ashes lead to the death just as eventually life leads to death.

"Crossing the Bar" by Alfred, Lord Tennyson

“Crossing the Bar,” a poem by Alfred, Lord Tennyson, creates two sets of figures within the poem. The first of these is “sunset and evening star,” and the second set is “twilight and evening bell.” Both of these sets are used to portray approaching death. The idea of the poem is crossing into another world after death, which is exemplified through Tennyson’s use of sea and sailor imagery. In the first set, the precise moment of death occurs when Tennyson states, “When I put out to sea,” (Tennyson, 886). Through this phrase, the author successfully portrays embarking on a journey; going out into the sea.  The moment of death in the second set occurs with the line, “When I embark,” (Tennyson, 886). This statement quite clearly explains the journey after life into another world. When one “embarks” from earth, their soul has moved on to another place, which Tennyson portrays through his poem. The narrator of the poem expresses a desire to see his pilot, and the capitalization of the word pilot and the prior knowledge that the poem involves death suggests that the Pilot is synonymous to God. Through these sets, Tennyson effectively portrays the journey to life after death.

"A Rose for Emily" by William Faulkner

The short story "A Rose for Emily," authored by William Faulkner, takes an interesting turn when a decomposed body was discovered in the house of the main character Emily. The man is presumed to be Homer Baron, a homosexual man who had previously been a possible husband for her, and this brings up the idea that Emily killed him. However, her reason for this never stated. It is likely though that Emily was motivated by her fear of change and her desire to preserve the past. Past events including Emily’s refusal to accept her father’s death and her refusal to both pay taxes and get a house number support this fear. By murdering Homer Baron, Emily ensured that he would never leave her, which because of his homosexuality he was considering. Emily even continued to live as though Homer was her husband, treating the corpse as though he was simple sleeping. The first person plural narrator mentions, “Then we noticed that in the second pillow was the indentation of a head,” (Faulkner, 289). Emily’s total detachment from the present day is reflected through these details. Terrified of being abandoned, she did everything in her power to avoid losing what she knew. Unfortunately, this included Homer Baron.

"The Lottery" by Shirley Jackson

“The Lottery,” a short story by author Shirley Jackson, focuses on a theme of great importance, what can happen when tradition is not questioned in society. The way something has always been done is not necessarily the most appropriate way with how times have changed, and this story is an example of this fault. The idea of “The Lottery” is that every year, one member of the community is stoned to death, simply because it is tradition. One of the characters, Old Man Warner, states in the story, “Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon,” (Jackson, 268). This quote was an old saying that the townspeople had used in the past as a reason for the barbaric lottery. They saw the lottery as some sort of ritual to bring in a bountiful harvest. However, during the present time of the story, this explanation is no longer applicable. It is even stated that many of the aspects of the ritual had been disregarded over the years, with only the stoning remaining. This proves that there really was no reason for the lottery other than tradition. Furthermore, many of the surrounding towns, the northern town specifically mentioned, had done away with the lottery, only further emphasizing the fact that it was not necessary. As the lottery was unjustly and barbarically killing an innocent person every year, the theme of the importance of questioning tradition is well explained.

The Glass Menagerie: Absent Amanda

After reading The Glass Menagerie, a play by Tennessee Williams, I noticed the presence of dramatic irony in the Scene Seven of the play. In the final encounter between Amanda and her son Tom, Amanda yells at him for once again avoiding the family and going to the movies. She yells, “You don’t know things anywhere! You live in a dream; you manufacture illusions!” (Williams, 1288). This statement is terribly ironic, as Amanda was the character who consistently created her own illusions throughout the entire play. Although Tom did write poetry and wish to escape his overbearing mother, he did not lose himself in the past like Amanda, who devoted her time to childhood memories. Tom wished to create a better future for himself, where he could make his own decisions and escape the ditch he was stuck in. Furthermore, Tom’s dream is proven to not be an illusion, as he does leave his mother and his sister in search of a better life. However, Amanda is still trying to live vicariously through her daughter Laura, dreaming up the gentlemen callers that flocked to her door during her youth. These flashbacks to the past prove that the character who is really living in a dream and manufacturing illusions is Amanda.

The Glass Menagerie: Ordinary O'Connor

In Scene Six of The Glass Menagerie, written by Tennessee Williams, the readers are finally introduced to the long awaited gentleman caller of the play, Jim O’Connor. In the character descriptions, Jim is characterized as “a nice, ordinary, young man,” (Williams, 1234). Furthermore, Tom, the narrator, continues to describe Jim as “the most realistic character in the play, being an emissary from a world of reality that we were somehow set apart from,” (Williams, 1236). When Jim does call on the Wingfield family, these characteristics shine through. Although Amanda is overbearing and showy, Jim proves his kind personality by laughing at her jokes and paying attention to her. Furthermore, although Laura is incredibly shy and awkward, Jim spends time with her and even encourages her to branch out and break through her introversion. Jim also has formed a friendship with Tom at the warehouse where they both work, even though Tom is considered strange by others because of his love for poetry. Although some people might be put off by the Wingfield family, Jim O’Connor embraces them. Unlike the Wingfields, Jim is also what one might call ordinary. He has a stable job that he works hard at, he is engaged to an equally ordinary girl, he is friendly, and most people like him. However, Jim is also described as the most realistic character. His realism shines through many of the characteristics with which he was described. While Amanda is lost in her past, Laura is lost within herself, and Tom is lost in his desire to escape, Jim is happy with the situation he is in and completes his daily tasks without complaint. The fact that Jim goes through an everyday schedule proves his realism, as most people today live their lives on a schedule. They go to work, do their errands, and have a family, and Jim embodies this person perfectly. His realism is contrasted with that of the Wingfields, where each family member lives in their own world on a day to day basis.

The Glass Menagerie: Shattered Sister

The title of Tennessee William’s play The Glass Menagerie holds great symbolism to one of the characters in the story. Laura, a shy and crippled girl, owns what is referred to in the play as a glass menagerie. However, these little glass pieces symbolize something much greater. Because of her crippled leg, Laura is so shy and separated from society that, as stated in the character descriptions, “she is like a piece of her own glass collection, too exquisitely fragile to move from the shelf,” (Williams, 1234). Every time one of her glass pieces breaks, it is like another piece of Laura shatters. In Scene Three, Tom, Laura’s brother, breaks several glass pieces, causing her to break down. Because the only thing Laura can relate to is her collection, each time a piece breaks it emotionally wounds her as well. Constantly exposed to the incessant arguing between Tom and her mother Amanda, Laura sits by and watches these scenes play out, just as her glass collection of the shelf. Portrayed as Laura’s favorite piece of glass, the little unicorn, symbolizes Laura more specifically than her collection as a whole. Nonexistent in the real world, the unicorn explains how Laura lives in her own world, separate from the realism most people face every day. Furthermore, as the unicorn is placed on a shelf with many glass horses, it describes how Laura is a unique character, living in a world of similar people. She stands out, and to her, that is a disappointment rather than something to take advantage of.