Name Summer Blog Assignment
A.P. English
Frankenstein
1. .
You should begin your reading with Frankenstein, as it was written first and several of the issues will arise again in 1984, written nearly 150 years later. Before beginning the narrative, you should carefully read Mary Shelley's introduction and preface. She reveals several interesting facts about the story's genesis, as well as the late/post-enlightenment ideas that influenced her story. I want you to do a bit of research and thinking about these influences and try to tie together their significance with the narrative, particularly for the character of Victor Frankenstein.
First is the now famous anecdote of the story's origin and composition. Mary Shelley was married to one of literature's most famous and respected romantic poets, Percy Blythe Shelley, with whom she was vacationing during 1816-1817 alongside another equally famous and influential poet, Lord Byron. The story she tells is of the three agreeing to a contest to write the best "ghost story". It's safe to assume that she won.
First is the now famous anecdote of the story's origin and composition. Mary Shelley was married to one of literature's most famous and respected romantic poets, Percy Blythe Shelley, with whom she was vacationing during 1816-1817 alongside another equally famous and influential poet, Lord Byron. The story she tells is of the three agreeing to a contest to write the best "ghost story". It's safe to assume that she won.
The most interesting segment of the introduction is Shelley's description of the dream which produced the image upon which the novel is built. She writes "I saw the pale student of unhallowed arts kneeling beside the thing he had put together. I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then, on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life, and stir with an uneasy, half vital motion...for supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavor to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world".
Her last line introduces one of the major themes of the novel: Man(Victor Frankenstein) becomes the creator of life; in essence, man usurps power from the Gods. At the time(late 1700's-1800s) this idea that life could be breathed into inanimate vessels wasn't necessarily adrift from the thinking and studies of some members of the science community. The debate over whether Science can or will someday conquer nature is central to the novel and certainly still exists in our present world. Shelley references several "scientists"/alchemists whom I'd like you to look up and read a bit about, keeping in mind the theme of Science versus nature: Cornelius Agrippa, Albertus Magnus, Paracelsus, and Erastus Darwin. After researching each, I'd like you to philosophize a bit about this question: should man pursue science to its limits, even to the point where man can create life from non-life, essentially becoming a god? Or should man fear the powers of science and the reach of his own intellect? How does morality factor into these decisions? (**you may wish to look up some modern world parallels such as stem cell research, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence**)
Her last line introduces one of the major themes of the novel: Man(Victor Frankenstein) becomes the creator of life; in essence, man usurps power from the Gods. At the time(late 1700's-1800s) this idea that life could be breathed into inanimate vessels wasn't necessarily adrift from the thinking and studies of some members of the science community. The debate over whether Science can or will someday conquer nature is central to the novel and certainly still exists in our present world. Shelley references several "scientists"/alchemists whom I'd like you to look up and read a bit about, keeping in mind the theme of Science versus nature: Cornelius Agrippa, Albertus Magnus, Paracelsus, and Erastus Darwin. After researching each, I'd like you to philosophize a bit about this question: should man pursue science to its limits, even to the point where man can create life from non-life, essentially becoming a god? Or should man fear the powers of science and the reach of his own intellect? How does morality factor into these decisions? (**you may wish to look up some modern world parallels such as stem cell research, nanotechnology, and artificial intelligence**)
2.
1. Mary Shelley gave the novel a subtitle: "The Modern Prometheus". Since I didn't have any of you for your freshmen year of English, I'm not sure any of you are familiar with the Greek and Roman myth of "Prometheus". I'd like you to look up the myth of Prometheus. As a disclaimer, as with many stories from Greek and Roman days, Prometheus's myth evolved and changed over time. Be sure you understand each element of the Promethean myth.
After researching Prometheus, I'd like you to consider this question: How is Victor Frankenstein a classic "Promethean character"? Mary Shelley clearly wished her story to be a modern retelling. What qualities make Victor "Promethean"? Pay particular attention to his actions and motivation in chapters 3, 4, and 5 as his becomes consumed with the pursuit of knowledge and ultimately, the secret of life and the creation of the creature. Lastly, if you've gotten far enough in the book, how is Victor tormented as Prometheus was for attaining his "knowledge/discovery"?
2. The 2nd myth I'd like you to research is the story of Dr. Faustus. Faustus has been retold by several authors, Christopher Marlowe and Goethe most famously. As you did with Prometheus, consider the similarities between Faustus and Victor Frankenstein. By the end of this blog post, you should discover a similar theme to one we examined in Macbeth: the dangers of all-consuming ambition.
After researching Prometheus, I'd like you to consider this question: How is Victor Frankenstein a classic "Promethean character"? Mary Shelley clearly wished her story to be a modern retelling. What qualities make Victor "Promethean"? Pay particular attention to his actions and motivation in chapters 3, 4, and 5 as his becomes consumed with the pursuit of knowledge and ultimately, the secret of life and the creation of the creature. Lastly, if you've gotten far enough in the book, how is Victor tormented as Prometheus was for attaining his "knowledge/discovery"?
2. The 2nd myth I'd like you to research is the story of Dr. Faustus. Faustus has been retold by several authors, Christopher Marlowe and Goethe most famously. As you did with Prometheus, consider the similarities between Faustus and Victor Frankenstein. By the end of this blog post, you should discover a similar theme to one we examined in Macbeth: the dangers of all-consuming ambition.
3.
Victor Frankenstein’s moral ambiguity is one of the more fascinating aspects of the novel. Early in the novel, as he is completes his university studies, he completely detaches himself from family, friends, and truthfully, from society. One may argue that Frankenstein loses himself so totally into his studies and his obsession with knowledge, that he loses touch with his humanity also. In fact, after hearing the creature's point of view late in the novel and considering the creature’s actions and motives throughout, you could argue that the creature is a more moral being, indeed, more "human", than Victor Frankenstein.
I'd like you to analyze Victor Frankenstein's culpability and moral blindness; particularly whether he shares the guilt in the creature's crimes. For instance, while traveling home after the murder of his young brother William, Victor witnesses the creature for the first time since the night of his creation. Immediately, Victor realizes that the monster is William's murderer. Yet, when he arrives home, he learns that his father's servant girl Justine has been charged with the murder and is standing trial. Victor is certain of her innocence-he even attends the trial-yet he reveals and confesses none of his suspicions as to the true murderer: the monster. After Justine is found guilty and sentenced to death, Victor says "the torture of the accused did not equal mine; she was sustained by innocence, but the fangs of remorse tore my bosom, and would not forego their hold". What has he to feel remorseful about? Think about it, if you knew an innocent girl was about to be sentenced to death and you were certain you knew the true murderer, would you remain silent? Yet, Victor says nothing. Further, he wants us to believe he's overcome with agony and remorse, but do you believe him? Do you trust him or can we trust him after this episode?
Later in the novel, the monster threatens to visit Victor on his wedding night withElizabeth Elizabeth
Further, and perhaps most interestingly, do you think that perhaps, deep down, Victor desires her death? Are Victor and the monster, the same? Think for a moment of this idea: the monster may be considered Victor's "doppelganger", a word which means his double. Victor and the monster are not literally doubles of each other, but might we consider the monster as a physical manifestation, a symbol, of Victor's deepest, darkest, subliminal desires? Thinking of the "heart of darkness" theme, does the monster not become a living representation of Victor Frankenstein's "heart of darkness"?
I'd like you to analyze Victor Frankenstein's culpability and moral blindness; particularly whether he shares the guilt in the creature's crimes. For instance, while traveling home after the murder of his young brother William, Victor witnesses the creature for the first time since the night of his creation. Immediately, Victor realizes that the monster is William's murderer. Yet, when he arrives home, he learns that his father's servant girl Justine has been charged with the murder and is standing trial. Victor is certain of her innocence-he even attends the trial-yet he reveals and confesses none of his suspicions as to the true murderer: the monster. After Justine is found guilty and sentenced to death, Victor says "the torture of the accused did not equal mine; she was sustained by innocence, but the fangs of remorse tore my bosom, and would not forego their hold". What has he to feel remorseful about? Think about it, if you knew an innocent girl was about to be sentenced to death and you were certain you knew the true murderer, would you remain silent? Yet, Victor says nothing. Further, he wants us to believe he's overcome with agony and remorse, but do you believe him? Do you trust him or can we trust him after this episode?
Later in the novel, the monster threatens to visit Victor on his wedding night with
Further, and perhaps most interestingly, do you think that perhaps, deep down, Victor desires her death? Are Victor and the monster, the same? Think for a moment of this idea: the monster may be considered Victor's "doppelganger", a word which means his double. Victor and the monster are not literally doubles of each other, but might we consider the monster as a physical manifestation, a symbol, of Victor's deepest, darkest, subliminal desires? Thinking of the "heart of darkness" theme, does the monster not become a living representation of Victor Frankenstein's "heart of darkness"?
4.
I hope you're done or nearly done with Frankenstein. The most interesting parts of the novel for me are when the monster speaks. Particularly when he relates the story of his life and how he came to knowledge. One interesting puzzle to consider: is the monster evil? Or is he the product of bad parenting?(or in the monster's case, no parenting). Are individuals born naturally wicked or do environmental factors most influence who we are? Or do you think it is a combination of factors that contribute? You may wish to review what the monster tells Victor about his early life and how he believes he became what he is.
5.
In the final few pages of the novel, Robert Walton finds the creature mourning over the deceased body of Frankenstein. Reread the creature's words again carefully. This question may seem simple, but in reality, it's complicated: do you feel pity for him? Why or why not? Is he a villain or is the ending more of a tragedy?
Here are the questions I'd like you to blog about for 1984 during the month of August. You should find this novel is far different than Frankenstein.
1. After completing the novel, be sure to read the fascinating afterword by Erich Fromm. In the afterword, the Fromm describes 1984 as "a warning." Throughout the text, Orwell plants both subtle and overt warnings to the reader. Of what is he warning? Looking at our modern society, have we heeded his caution?
2. Early on in the novel, we learn of Winston's belief in the “proles” as a source for hope and future liberation. Who are the “proles”? What do they represent on a metaphorical and symbolic level? Why does Winston unite his faith to the proles? What are some of the characteristics of the proles that, in Winston's eyes, make them the ultimate means for overthrowing Big Brother?
3. Of the philosophical tenants held by Ingsoc, the doctrine of “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past” seems the most fundamental for the preservation of power. Is the past shaped by the present? Are historical “facts” truth or can history be reshaped by myths and lies, with lies ultimately becoming reality? Can or does historical reality exist? How is power, authority, and control linked to all this?
4. Personally, the party’s success at separating individuality and freedom from the individual is the most terrifying aspect of 1984. Why does Orwell include the love affair between Winston and Julie? What does he hope to suggest? Of what necessity is individuality and freedom to being “human”? If stripped of liberty and emotions, are we also stripped of humanity? If so, what then do we become?
5. Something astounding to ponder: Orwell wrote this novel in 1949! In the final analysis, how accurate was Orwell in his vision of the future? In what ways does our contemporary society compare to his idea of society in 1984? Are there examples in which he was correct? What is most opposite? Do you see a potential for aspects of Orwell's "vision" to come true? Or have they already become reality?
1. After completing the novel, be sure to read the fascinating afterword by Erich Fromm. In the afterword, the Fromm describes 1984 as "a warning." Throughout the text, Orwell plants both subtle and overt warnings to the reader. Of what is he warning? Looking at our modern society, have we heeded his caution?
2. Early on in the novel, we learn of Winston's belief in the “proles” as a source for hope and future liberation. Who are the “proles”? What do they represent on a metaphorical and symbolic level? Why does Winston unite his faith to the proles? What are some of the characteristics of the proles that, in Winston's eyes, make them the ultimate means for overthrowing Big Brother?
3. Of the philosophical tenants held by Ingsoc, the doctrine of “Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past” seems the most fundamental for the preservation of power. Is the past shaped by the present? Are historical “facts” truth or can history be reshaped by myths and lies, with lies ultimately becoming reality? Can or does historical reality exist? How is power, authority, and control linked to all this?
4. Personally, the party’s success at separating individuality and freedom from the individual is the most terrifying aspect of 1984. Why does Orwell include the love affair between Winston and Julie? What does he hope to suggest? Of what necessity is individuality and freedom to being “human”? If stripped of liberty and emotions, are we also stripped of humanity? If so, what then do we become?
5. Something astounding to ponder: Orwell wrote this novel in 1949! In the final analysis, how accurate was Orwell in his vision of the future? In what ways does our contemporary society compare to his idea of society in 1984? Are there examples in which he was correct? What is most opposite? Do you see a potential for aspects of Orwell's "vision" to come true? Or have they already become reality?
