Character Battle

I am really so excited that I cam up with a new blog format to explore my literary interests. For each subsequent novel that we read, I hope to compare and contrast characters within the same text or across texts and decide which trumps the other based on some criteria. This week I am comparing Age of Innocence to A Doll's House  in preparation for the AP Lit final exam essays. This week in the battle dome are Nora form A Doll House and Ellen Olenska from Age of Innocence. Which character is the more noble and free woman? There is no doubt in my mind that Nora is the more noble and courageous of the two women. Both Nora and Ellen are victims of the high standards and strict traditions of society. Nora is trapped in the "doll house" construct just as Ellen is victimized by the American New York society. Both women in some manner escape form the influence of these societal structures. Nora leaves her husband and kids and venture to discover herself aside form her duties as a mother and a wife. Ellen moves back to Paris to escape from the temptations that Archer is and the hardship of trying to find a place in New York Society. However, I believe Nora's escape to be more noble.Unlike Nora, Ellen came to America from the "outside". In many ways, the small group of people who are a part of the new York society are the "doll house", constricted by social customs. Ellen is not a part of this society, coming from Europe and she does not fit in, she is very much an outsider from everyone. Even from other women, Archer recognizes how she is not naive or ignorant like all of the other women of society who concede to the desires of males. However, Nora is a part of the society she is trapped in. She is a wife and mother confined in the walls of this doll house. She comes to realize at the end of the novel that she has blinded herself in her marriage. She does not love her husband nor enjoy her role in motherhood and wifehood.  Nora is almost physically constrained by the walls of the house. This can be seen in the contrast between the outside and inside of the house. The outside is viewed as harsh and cold while inside the doll house is warmth and family. Thus, when Nora decides to leave the house for the unknown she not only sacrifices herself but also she demonstrates that she is not subjugated by the will of society for her to be a domestic figure. Just as a point of comparison between the women, although not as prominently as Ellen, Nora demonstrates a forbidden interest in another off limits man herself. Ellen is interested in ineligible Archer Welland and Nora has very strong flirtatious encounters with Krogstad hmmmm... these women are becoming more and more alike than I first thought.

Happy Birthday Jane Austen!

The End of the Age of Innocence

I am excited for the discussion next week about Age of Innocence. I now the ending will strike different cords with everyone. In my reading of the text, I primarily focused on the effects that strict social conventions have on the members of the society. The way in which Wharton criticizes superficial codes of society is through the character Newland Archer. He very much struggles between a recognition of his love for Ellen Olenska (which is quite taboo) and an obligation to marry May Welland. in this way, Archer is one of the only characters in the novel I feel that is not truly innocent. He doe snot purposefully blind himself to his feelings or position in society like women do. He hates how so many of the women in this upper echelon group of New Yorkers denounce recognition of their knowledge and potential for the sake of becoming some man's wife. They strive to become objectified which is almost inhumane. Every man solely desires to have the most desirable or beautiful woman on his arm and the women concede to the desires of men. Ellen Olenska is a sharp tangent to these women which is very much why Archer is intrigued by her. I have not yet gathered or determined for myself whether he truly loves her or just is enticed by her difference. In the last section of the novel, the book flash forward s to Archer in his fifties and it is quite sad that he never was able to pursue his dream. Throughout the novel, he dreams and fantasizes of what could be with he woman so much so that in out lit circle we were confident that his lust for her would result in a sexual affair. However, this is not what happens at all. He has grown old, had children, and May Welland has died. His current state portrays such rigid stagnation that it draws significant sympathy for the man on my part. To live life for so many years and dream of a life in which you are happy and to not achieve this happiness is the greatest failure in my opinion. However, this draws upon my central question for the end of the text: Who, if anyone, becomes free in the end? Honestly, I would have to argue that no one truly escapes from the judgement and influence of these people. When Archer goes to Europe with his son on business, he is too much a coward, too afraid of how he may be rejected by society to approach the woman himself and sends his son to the woman's door. Even though Countess Olenska moves to Paris, I still do not think she was free from the grips of society. I think she was running away from he true feelings as well towards Archer because she did not  want to disrupt the :social machine" To visualize my ideas about Archer and Ellen''s relationship, imagine two people running in opposite directions, one east and one west. In between them is the society which tries to literally destroy anything or anyone that interferes with its traditions.

Understanding Emily Dickinson

"Faith" is a fine invention

185

"Faith" is a fine invention
When Gentlemen can see—
But Microscopes are prudent
In an Emergency. 

Emily Dickinson

First off, the first line immediately reminds me of the statement in Grendel when the monster states, how religion is lunatic theory or something to that degree. I digress. Anyway, although this poem is very short, Dickinson conveys a significant message in such little text. I think Dickinson is commenting (possibly criticizing) briefly the hypocrisy of man and religion. In times of need when there is life or an outcome is certain, man does not call upon or practice in faith. Only in times of need, when the fear of uncertainty dons upon man and the future is out of his hands do they call upon a higher power to save them from their troubles. Dickinson uses metaphor to compare the treatment of faith by man as an invention, something that is manmade, a fallacy, or not concrete and true. When Dickinson calls faith an invention, she is describing how man do not display a devotion to their faith in time when they can "see" or in other words in times when their lives are pleasant and the future seems certain. However, Dickinson states that in emergencies. In modern times, I relate this to the idea of praying only when you need something. This is using God. If this is truly what Dickinson was trying to express, it speaks volumes about her thoughts about men in her society. The poem could state about man that once we become too great in our thinking and views of ourselves, our value of God decreases greatly. This includes places mortal desires and priorities over those of God. The microscopes represent the difficulty of sight.  Microscopes are optical instruments that have magnifying lens or a combination of lens for inspecting objects too small to be seen or too small to be seen directly and in detail by the unaided eye. Microscopes aid humans in their vision of things not distinguishable to the naked human eye. I think the microscopes are symbolic of the presence yet invisibility o f harmful things in life. Furthermore, the microscopes portray to me some kind o juxtaposition between the positions of humans as the small objects in which are magnified by God. Thus, since we are not able to see these things bring about considerable uncertainty. In these times of uncertainty, which I believe Dickinson characterizes as emergencies, man calls upon Go to help see what we mortals cannot see because God sees all. God is the microscope. He is an entity that, sees, hears, and watches all even when we cannot see things that are right in front of us. Dickinson could very p[possibly be criticizing the abuse of religion by man. Religion is not a seasonal or occasional devotion. It is one in which one’s life must be fully dedicated to the word and values of your faith. Finally, even the structure of the poem lends itself to the two main contrasting ideas I mentioned. The dash after the first line separates the two ideas structurally.

Cumming's Poetry

i carry your heart with me by E. E. Cummings

i carry your heart with me(i carry it in
my heart)i am never without it(anywhere
i go you go,my dear; and whatever is done
by only me is your doing,my darling)
i fear
no fate(for you are my fate,my sweet)i want
no world(for beautiful you are my world,my true)
and it's you are whatever a moon has always meant
and whatever a sun will always sing is you

here is the deepest secret nobody knows
(here is the root of the root and the bud of the bud
and the sky of the sky of a tree called life;which grows
higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide)
and this is the wonder that's keeping the stars apart

i carry your heart(i carry it in my heart)

The poem encompasses an exaggeration right from the start in that it is physically impossible to carry someone’s heart inside your own. This exaggeration though shows the powerful feelings love has brought into E.E. Cummings’ life.

The poem only has one major shift that can be identified and it occurs in the transition between stanza two and three. The entire poem is about the strong emotions that love makes you feel but in the third stanza, there are no real descriptions of the love that is felt like there is in the first and second stanza.

From the E.E. Cummings poems I have read, he always alters the physical structure of his stanzas in some way that is significant to the meaning of the poem. I will touch on this after I try to analyze Cumming's meaning benign the work. upon first reading the work strikes me as a profession of love  to some woman. This is not just any love however, this is a deep connection. He "carrries" her heart meaning this person is with him in physicality and spirit, an achievement only feasible through a deep romantic connection. The speaker states that he carries the other's heart inside of his own. Their hearts (representative of internal love and care) are one meaning that they have become one being, beating together in the name of love. This unity is expressed when the speaker states, "anywhere i go you go, my dear..." (line 2-3). 

In the second stanza, the speaker continues to pour his "heart" out to the person that he loves. However, I think that this love could be negative.  The love the speaker feels is blinding. He feels no fear of the future (or sense of it for that matter).

Also, I think Cumming's use of parentheses inside the poem represent how this object of the speakers affection is so close to them that they are inside of him. Like a part of the same being.

I think the theme of this poem is that love unites and prevails over all. The speaker reveals that the "deepest secret"  is that love is the meaning of life, The tree is symbolic of life and "here is the roost" which is love. This love is "higher than the soul can hope or mind can hide". Love is not an idea but an entity in this poem. Cumming's almost makes a devotion like love seem like a religious practice in his elevation of its effect on existence and spirit. 

*p.s. I just realized how I kind of made a huge assumption about the poem based on gender stereotypes. I assumed that the professor of love is a man. this is most likely because, stereotypically, men are the one who are the pursuers in a romantic relationship. 

Initial thoughts on Age of Innocence

     Our first Literature circle assignment was the first ten chapters of Age of Innocence and thus far, I cannot see past the blazing gender stereotypes that pervade almost every part of the novel. So far, Edith Wharton (if she truly wanted this to be a "muckraking-esque" piece) succeeds in making me annoyed by the blind neutrality to gender discrimination in this "elite" New York society. The story introduces us to Newland Archer whom I cannot tell so far if the man is characteristic of an antagonist or protagonist. He seems to float around the skirts of this high society men. However, there is a point of distinction in his self awareness (besides the mere fact that eh seems to be the only one who is self aware or introspective at all). He claims that he is different from these superficial men though, but I will just have to see as I read further into the novel. I have noticed a lot too that women are pretty much like objects. the first metaphor that comes to my mind is a Thanksgiving turkey (I am already in the holiday spirit). For instance, at the Opera, the women basically "dress" themselves up in their finest jewels and attire to attract the eye of these high society men. This objectification is so central to the livelihood of this society I believe. Women seem just to be another object to attain just as the newest garment or best decor.. Thus, the I think that further into the book there will be the persistence of men having dominance over women. The objectification of women not only is impressed upon men I feel but also ingrained into the conditioning of the young women. I can only presume that from childhood they are taught to be obedient, soft-spoken, and kind basically be submissive and don't speak your mind so that you might find a good husband. The funny thing is though that the women in this cult of domesticity appear to be perfectly contempt with their "bottom fo the ladder" social status. May Welland is perfectly oblivious to Archer's sly and well-hidden view of her as a child.
      Thus, I I cannot refrain from referencing the title of the text. The "age of innocence" I believe is the period in time in which Wharton lived in which the only thing that fed the continuance of such ignorant, elite living is the innocence of women. Maybe she is stressing the strength of women. It seems that they are pawns in the grand scheme of things but maybe they are really keeping everything together...more to come on this later.

Blake and Literature Connections

In the epigraph of Grendel, an excerpt is included from William Blake's poem "The Mental Traveler". When I researched the critical reception of this poem, many critics agreed that the poem expresses so many contradicting ideas that it is difficult for the reader to identify to anyone. Even this relates to Grendel in some ways. Grendel, a monster, is affected by his not human yet not entirely animal form. Thus, as he feels himself to possess a combination of both creatures, he also feels a combination of sadness and frustration at his isolation from humans and his angst towards the thoughtlessness of animals. Furthermore, the character Orc first is from Blake's poem. Orc is representative of rebellion yet he is a positive figure. Thus, as a breaker of tradition, this character is a metaphor towards Grendel's disruption of thane culture and system. "The Mental Traveller" and Grendel both address the cyclic nature of life. In Grendel this is representative by the zodiac signs and the seasons which mark cosmic rotations as a tracker of time. Grendel’s actions too have a cyclic nature. As a youth, Grendel experienced a tragic event that wounded him mentally and physically. When Grendel is stuck in the tree, he describes the shrieks and call for help. It can even be said that Grendel has been tortured his whole life. Thus, he continues a cycle of pain and torture towards others through his terrorizing of the thanes. By terrorizing them, Grendel attempts to interrupt the order of their society and in doing so he is trying to break out of his own cycle of torture. Blake's poem has been thought to portray the idea of liberty. In Grendel, this concept is reminiscent in Plato's allegory of the cave in which Grendel's venture from outside of the cave is him trying to gain his freedom. Furthermore, I think the image of the “woman old” is manifested in the book through Grendel’s mother. In the poem, this woman is a very painful figure for the boy. In the novel, I think Gardner parallels this woman to the frustration and pain that Grendel’s mother has caused Grendel. Progressively in the novel, Grendel becomes more and more critical and disgusted by his mother’s seemingly thoughtless and mechanical actions. He wishes not to be reduced to the likes of an animal yet his mother seems to be stuck in her role as a monster. When Grendel screams for his mother’s help she does not come even further distancing himself from her. I think that Grendel gradually outgrows his mother. He is enlightened simply by the fact that he decides to leave his cave to venture into the unknown. Thus, when she does not answer his calls, I feel this is because she cannot understand him anymore because she is not enlightened. At this point, I am not quite sure if Gardner‘s novel was entirely influenced by Blake’s poem; however, both works address similar and connected themes. My question really is: Is Grendel is more of an extension of Beowulf or “The Mental Traveler”?

Chapter 10-Nihil ex nihilo

The last sentence in Grendel  "nihil ex nihilo, I always" (Gardner).So, not being a premier authority on philosophy which I presume the statement correspond to I decided to do a little background research (I admit this included a brief reference to wikipedia). Translated to English the statement reads "nothing comes from nothing" (sounds so existentialist right,. Ill touch on that shortly). Apparently, this is a philosophical idea by Parmenides, a Greek philosopher who also wrote that reality (or "what is") is one, change is impossible, and existence is timeless, uniform, necessary and unchanging (contrasts to the dragon!). The Greek people also believed that things cannot vanish into nothingness and nothing is created from nothing it is transformed into another something. This all inclusive  (and exclusive for that matter) theory is a lot to contemplate along with existentialist ideals but I will take a crack at it. The webster dictionary defines the phrase as, "from nothing nothing is produced". What I get from this is more so that everything is connected than the meaninglessness of life. Every thing and being in existence is due to a transformation of being from something else. For instance, a really simple example is when a baby is born. This child comes from a man and a woman and not out of pure immaculate conception. The transform of energy from one thing to another is what connects everything. In existentialism (specifically nihilist theory), there is an emphasis that life has no meaning; however, for the individual nihilism presents the opportunity for them to create their own meaning of life. It also asserts the idea that "I am nothing". In the context of the book, Grendel struggles with finding his identity and identifying himself with his surroundings. He faces many different opposing views on existence and its purpose from the Shaper and the dragon that cause his internal conflict.

The Shaper in Anglosaxon society

So far in the text, there is a lot of focus on Grendel's internal conflict. he observes the world, takes in what he sees and often criticizes it. this is no exception when it comes to the Shaper. The Shaper appears in Grendel as a teller of the histories of the tribes and keeper of the memories of battles. The Shaper is the same figure to the scop in Beowulf. This figure is quintessential to the livelihood of the warrior culture and their longevity. His role in society is elaborated throughout the story.However, what was the exact role of this figure in Anglo Saxon culture and what was their role in society? Upon research, I was informed that in Anglo Saxon culture, poetry was at the heart of tribal life and was highly regarded as they valued many forms of the arts. The Shaper would play a harp as he told the stories like a song. He did not merely speak the histories of the people, he was the sole keeper, a record of all their achievements and failures, an authority on their ties and values. His responsibility was so central to the future of the tribes since stories were upheld through an oral tradition. This is why we see in Beowulf that boasting and being able to propel your status through an eloquent telling of your status and family ties is a large part of status in warrior society and respect from peers. From this we can see that Anglo-Saxon culture values spoken word and the art of story telling. Off on a tangent, this directly contrasted to what I thought Sherwood Anderson asserts in Winesburg, Ohio. throughout the novel there seems to be an emphasis on the lack of credibility and genuineness (not sure if this is a word or not ) of what people say versus what they truly are internally. In contrast to the Shaper, Grendel perceives that he crafts the stories out of thin air, disregarding the truth of the history of kings and thanes.The way in whichever he Shaper told the stories is most likely how it was to be remembered and dissipated i for future generations. Accordingly, the Shaper enjoyed high social status for their importance in tribal life. Warrior culture valued the idea of legacy and immortality through your deeds and thus the Shaper perpetuated these histories and tales. Also, the Shaper acted as a vessel to communicate the values of the warrior culture like variance, fame and courage. He  also inspired people to act and called them to action by inciting them through telling of past brave heroes. In context of the novel, Grendel feels to have conflicting feeling over this character, but why would he care is a question I keep asking myself. The Shaper tells of the history of warriors and kings, of people. He hails and praises their bravery in past wars and battles. However, Grendel feels as if he sensationalizes the past and distorts the truth, changing the future. Possibly, Grendel feels that because of this, the Shaper marginalizes himself as a thoughtless creature, no different than the intrepid goat he loathes.

The Origin of Zodiac Signs

The zodiac signs that we know today are actually quite modern. It is only in the early modern era that these signs were ascribed as symbols representing the twelve divisions of the ecliptic which has been around since the Hellenistic period. In its earliest origins, the zodiac symbols come from Babylonian astronomy. The zodiac symbols each are one of the twelve divisions of "celestial longitude". Celestial longitude is simply a system used to represent the locations of the planets and space matter in the Solar System.  Each sector was thirty degrees and could be used for predictions of the locations of the planets. However, Babylonian techniques were novice as the evolution of astronomy progressed. Thus, constellations began to be used . Each of them were given the current names we see today of the zodiac signs. The zodiac signs and representations we know today were developed by astronomer Ptolemy Each sign can be depicted by a figure, most of the time an animal. Throughout Grendel, each chapter is representative of one of these zodiac signs and helps crucially in understanding the novel as a whole. Gardner uses them as a "motif" in a sense. Each zodiac sign has a corresponding color, planet ,season, and element. The following is a comprehensive table of  the signs and their appropriate meanings for personal knowledge and to refer to as reference in my reading of Grendel.

Aries

• Element: fire, Planet: mars, Symbol: the ram
• acting first and thinking second, a child
• the heroic ideal is the cycle of life
• chapter: 1

Taurus

• Element: earth, Planet: Venus,Symbol: the bull
• strength, steadfastness, possession, dangerous,material security, acquiring wealth
• heroic ideal is care and love for living things
• chapter: 2

Gemini

• Element: air, Planet: mercury, Symbol: twins
• versatile, duality, rapidity
• heroic ideal is value in poetry and art
• chapter: 3

Cancer

• Element: water, Planet: the moon, Symbol: the crab
• tenacity, protection of vulnerabilities, hard exterior, soft interior
• heroic ideal is the home
• chapter: 4

Leo

• Element: fire, Planet: sun, Symbol: lion
• feline nature, strength
• heroic ideal is knowledge
• chapter: 5

Virgo

• Element: earth,Planet: mercury, Symbol: virgin
• harvest, prosperity
• heroic value is heroism
• chapter: 6

Libra

• Element: air, Planet: Venus,Symbol: scales
• balance, harmony
• heroic value is balance and marriage
• chapter: 7

Scorpio

• Element: water, Planets: mars, Pluto, Symbol: scorpion
• transformation, rebirth, consciousness
• heroic value is loyalty
• chapter: 8

Sagittarius

• Element: fire, Planet: Jupiter, Symbol: the centaur
• philosophy, paradox, duality,ambitions
• chapter: 9

Capricorn

• Element: earth, Planet: Saturn, Symbol: sea goat
• spiritual wisdom, no satisfaction of the individual ego
• chapter: 10

Aquarius

• Element: air, Planets: Saturn, Uranus, Symbol: the water bearer
• detachment, mental energy
• chapter: 11

Pisces

• Element: water, Planets: Jupiter, Neptune, Symbol: the two fishes
• intuition, knowledge, self-fulfillment and heroism, balance in struggle
• chapter: 12

The Life and Times of John Gardner

John C. Gardner was a poet, novelist, dramatist, translator, and teacher who died in 1982. Gardner was raised in New York state and  attended school through 11th grade. He wrote numerous novels, plays, transliterations of medieval texts, he also wrote three influential works on the art of writing including On Becoming a Novelist, The Art of Fiction, and On Moral Fiction. Many of his students, such as Raymond Carver and Charles Johnson became very successful writers. Additionally, he wrote children's stories such as "Dragon, Dragon" (possibly have anything to do with the dragon in chapter 5 of Grendel??? just a thought!) plays and "Days of Vengeance" and  composed operas, and paintings, and played the French horn (having studied music at the Eastman School of Music). As a youth, he attended public school and worked on his father's farm, where, in April 1945, his younger brother Gilbert was killed in an accident with a tractor. Gardner, who was driving the tractor felt enormous guilt for his brother's death. his deep guilt over this affair is speculated to have spurred the influence in some of his works. I think that the existentialism in Grendel could be a result of this. The strong bond between two brothers defines their period of growing up together during childhood. Thus, when a part of this bond is lost especially on account of the other, there could be a loss of identity. This parallels to the "I am nothing" ideal of existentialist thinkers. Gardner possibly felt that he did not deserve to live a life of meaning when he felt responsible for taking that of his own brother.In his short story "Redemption" written in 1977, Gardner reflects on this traumatic experience through a fictional account. Gardner is most acclaimed and well known for his novel Grendel which retells the Beowulf epic from the monster's point of view. In 1978, Gardner's book of literary criticism, On Moral Fiction, caused great controversy in the writer community. He criticizes other authors take on fiction. Some of these authors had praised Gardner for his own work. In Grendel, there are many isolated and strong willed characters. Each character represents a distinct point of view that the main antagonist (as I perceive him to be) struggles to comprehend and decide which he agrees with. John Gardner's life ended tragically in an accident on his motorcycle. in 1982 he passed away in Pennsylvania.  From reading a biography I was able to discover that he was lay to rest next to his younger brother which really touched me.Hopefully this put any guilt he may have had over the incident even in adulthood at rest. 

Prufrock and Winesburg

The most exhilarating thing about understanding literature is being able to make connections  between texts and the real world. This is no exception when it comes The Love Song of Alfred Prufrock and Winesburg, Ohio. Because they are both modernist texts it is clear to recognize their similarities.There is a similar use of symbolism in both texts. In , there is a constant present of windows. These windows serve multiple, meaningful functions including as a symbol of knowledge, understanding, and  truth. When characters like the old man wish to see out of windows they are searching for clarity and the ability to understand something greater. Similarly, there is mention of windows in Eliot’s poem. Eliot uses parts to represent a whole known as fragmentation. Anderson also uses this in . In Winesburg, Ohio , especially in the story”Hands”  and “Paper Pills” , there is discussion of hands and knuckles. Wing Biddlebaum’s hands serve a larger function in the context of his identity.In Eliot's poem, the speaker recognizes the people around him as eyes. These eyes are a part of the whole human but represent the judgment and watching that he feels people are around him. . Also, throughout the poem certain grounds of people are recognized as  by a part of their figure, women are identified by their fingers. Futhermore, Eliot touches on love in the poem much like in Winesburg, Ohio. It is hard to tell whether Prufrock is actually in love or not. This reminded me of George Williard and Helen White. After George's "sophistication" he expresses that with Helen he can feel his own growth into adulthood. They share a special bond , a romantic one you could say. However, whenever they give into lust they quickly back off from each other. In this way it is not clear whether the two are in love either. The most exciting connection I made between the two texts has to be that both texts explore a distrust or uselessness of words and verbal communication. When Prufrock states, "It is impossible to say just what I mean!" he is exclaiming the inadequacy of words themselves. I saw this same idea in "Paper Pills" in which Dr. Reefy and his wife can tell what each other are feeling by simply looking at each other which stressed to me inner conscious over outer appearance.I think that you can parallel the irony of the titles of the two works as well. This poem is described as a love song yet is not a conventional or typical one in any sense. Much like Winesburg, Ohio which I thought was not so much about the small, rural town itself as the lives of its residents.
My overall take away from the Prufrock poem was that this man is isolated in some shape or form (an idea that comes up frequently in Winesburg, Ohio). The imagery in the beginning of the poem portray a run down city of cheap hotels and dirty streets (this reminded me of Enoch for some reason).

Respect for "Respectability"

    All of the stories in Sherwood Anderson's piece Winesburg, Ohio do not shy from commentary on sex, gender discrimination, or society. The story "Respectability" is no exception. For some reason, I really got this text. I am not implying that my interpretation is golden and accurate but I was able to relate all the characters, weather, and scenery to some central theme that purveyed throughout Winesburg, Ohio. In the beginning of the story, an anonymous narrator describes a monkey. This monkey is a metaphor for the primal nature of man in society. The narrator states, "...women linger for a moment, trying to remember which one of her male acquaintances  in some faint way resembles" (Anderson 113). The image of women drawing parallels between men he know and his grotesque monkey directly relates he creature to men in society. Unbeknownst to the people, this monkey is a mirror of themselves. Looking at it, women see a parallel between men, reiterating Anderson's emphasis on man's primitively towards women In an "iron cage", the creature is trapped (Anderson 113). This is an allusion of the feelings of the main character Wash Williams. He is trapped by the stigma on men in his society. Men, in such a primal nature, succumb to the sexual temptation of the physical form of women. They are also tolerated to "possess" women in such non romantic objectifying manner. Wash Williams despises this characterization and is disused and disappointed that society marginalizes all men his way because he wants more than a relationship to satisfy society. He wants a relationship to satisfy his desire to actually have a connection with another aside from physical compatibility.  He sees George kissing Belle Carpenter enter even though he is not in love with her. He wants to warn George against his type of usurpation of love for sexual desire.

Wash Williams's view of men and women is quite ambiguous. Then narrator states, firs of all, he hated women. "Bitches," he called hem. His feeling toward men was somewhat different. He pitied them. "Does no  man  is life be managed for him by some bitch or any other?" (Anderson 114). I feel that Wash hates that women acquiesce to their degrading role in society. Women in a twentieth century society are meant to be submissive and to be at the hand of some man. They are viewed as objects to men and are sexualized by them. Also, they are vessels for prosperity and to carry he legacy of a man. Contrarily, Wash pities men for their weakness to the sexual temptation that women impose in order to fulfill their role in society as wives and mothers. Wash feels ha there is no living in this and he hates the fact that in his society, people live for society and not themselves and their true desires.

However, Wash is guilty of grotesque behavior as well. The same way that he views his peers as grotesque for abiding by the “truths” of social construct, he is a grotesque being (at last during his marriage) for insisting on the truth that women are all pure, beautiful, gentle, and honorable creatures. It is not until his wife corrupts this truth that he rejects all notions of the order of society at least in Winesburg, Ohio. He admits that he once did love stating,” ‘I loved her’ he said. ‘I don’t claim not to be a fool…’” (Anderson 118). The love he feels for his wife is indicative of his admiration for her purity and beauty. 

Sherwood Anderson: a literary....

          Sherwood Anderson is either a hypocrite or a failure or maybe both. Apologies for the direct introduction and for die-hard Sherwood fans .The Book of Grotesque introduces the idea of a grotesque being. In Anderson's portrayal through the old man, this entails someone who claims some "truth"  as his own and tries to live by it. However, outside of the text, is Anderson's role as an author not to express some universal truth?! This text is obviously of literary merit and from Perrine's definition of the characteristics of a piece of literary fiction, a text of literary merit attempts to "reveal some truth about it [life]"(Perrine 204). However, believing in some truth and even more trying to spread/express it is what makes someone a grotesque. This is so crazy to me! Maybe we cannot help but be a grotesque. Nobody is a perfect being and everyone believes in something at the least. Quite possibly this could have been Anderson's message (?). Futhermore, if you take a look at the story "The Strength of God", Reverend Hartman is portrayed as grotesque because he wishes to spread some truth of the gospel, the word of God. He hopes his that as he speaks the word of God it will be heard by many. This truth of God and the Bible is what makes him a grotesque. Even as I am writing this I am perplexed. Perhaps Anderson's book is about more than just this idea of grotesques. Maybe he is criticizing the fact that we as readers will take this idea of a grotesque as a truth and try to apply it to the text (whoa this just all came to me). And maybe, Anderson is emphasizing that people cannot help but be grotesques because even he is a grotesque himself. So i am even more confused as ever. Does this mean that the book is about nothing at all. how do we apply meaning without believing in some truth. If we find a meaning in life we have a perceived purpose to achieve to satisfy this meaning. This is our truth. Through writing this entry, i am even more intrigued by Winesburg,Ohio and even Sherwood Anderson himself. More to come on these thoughts later...

Literary Allusions: Tintern Abbey and Frankenstein

       There is no shortage of allusions to famous works in Mary Shelley's Gothic narrative Frankenstein. Specifically, I would like to hone in on one in particular. In the eighteenth chapter, Shelly includes an excerpt from romantic poet, William Wordsworth's piece "Lines Written a Few Miles Above Tintern Abbey, on Revisiting the Banks of the Wye During a Tour, July 13, 1798"  (quiet a mouthful!). The lines Shelley includes are:

 “The sounding cataract

Haunted me like a passion: the tall rock,

The mountain, and the deep gloomy wood,

Their colours and their forms, were then to me

And appetite; a feeling and a love,

That had no need of a remoter charm,

By thought supplied, nor any interest

Unborrow’d from the eye.”

In the context of the poem,Wordsworth recounts the sensations he felt as a youth passing through Tintern Abbey. He says he is unable to contemplate his former perceptions. As this younger version of himself, nature satisfies a desire within himself for all that is available in the landscape. The totality of nature provides an overwhelming contentment and fulfillment to him in no need of improvement. Likewise, the idea of a past and present self are manifested in Victor and Henry's characters. Victor is portrayed as an abuser of the dynamism of nature. He seeks solitude in the mountains of La Valais and banks of the Rhine while Henry's feels even more alive in all of the intricacies of the earth. Henry is not a solitary individual. It is made evident that he is a social being and enjoys the company of colleagues and peers. Thus, in contrast to Victor, his relationship with nature is not one in which solitude is desired. His experience with nature is mutualistsic in that he sees the beauty in nature and feels the harmony in it. Henry is an image of an ideal Victor. He doesn't desire and seek to reach beyond the sensations he gets from viewing the beautiful landscapes unlike Victor who misconstrues the power he feels from nature as fuel to possess and control it as he did in creating the creature.Throughout the context of Frankenstein, Shelley plays with the theme of man v. nature; however, qualifying Henry's role as Victor's foil, Henry represents  the symbiosis of man and nature.Thus, just as Wordsworth reflects on his past and present feelings in Tintern Abbey, Victor and Henry are two facets of a single being, one being of a more ignorant yet pure view of the world and one clouded by ambitions and desire to not just absorb by understand.

 In Tintern Abbey, along with a majestic and fantastic view of nature, there is also ominous attitude towards nature and its power over the conscious. Wordsworth uses words like "haunted", "gloomy", and "deep" to incur the ambiguity of nature. Appreciated and absorbed for all that it is, nature affords to human beings a sense of unity and clarity of thought unparalleled. However, these same beauties when corrupted,  taken advantage of, or thought to be something more than just appreciated lend to insurmountable pain and grief. Victor objectifies nature and its power while Henry elevates it to a spiritual status. Henry states, "Oh, surely, the spirit that inhabits and guards this place has a soul more in harmony with man than those of our own country" (Shelley 139). Shelley is distinguishing between man and nature. Nature is meant to be untaouchable and incomprehensible entirely to man. Victor is ignorant to this idea which provides for his demise.

Life's a Mother!

         

         After the death of Victor's own mother Caroline, the mourning he feels never really subdues and upon close analysis it can be noticed that he possibly transfers this lost love upon other characters in the Frankenstein.Could it be that Victor's plight and tragic death were ultimately due to his lack of a maternal figure? I think this is exactly what Shelley is trying to stress. Never, throughout the novel is there an emphasis on Victor’s parents in his actions yet this absence pouts emphasis on their role in his actions. It's really weird how each character in Shelley's narrative plays an entirely alternate familiar role to another character in the story. First, let’s explore some background on Frankenstein's mother before death. In Frankenstein, Victor's mother is rarely mentioned;however, she is made a relevant and significant character through her absence in the plot of the story. She could portray the emptiness and hollowness within Victor and could be one of the triggers to fill some void with careless, useless knowledge and a tragic desire to participate in creation. Whoa! I just had an Aha! moment right now!! Okay, so let me gather my thoughts. We see how quickly victor turns on the creature after it is brought to life. he despises the very site of the "fiendish" being he himself instilled life upon. Following, the monster's journey throughout the story, we see the human qualities surface and how despite an unnatural conception, the creature still yearns for the same type of nurture as human children do yet Victor refuses to draw parallels with his creature and act as this father figure. Now, here is where I begin to make my point. Back to the author, Mary Shelley was born to Mary Wollstonecraft, a feminist. As an advocate for women's right, Wollstonecraft wrote her most famous work A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. Now, back to Shelley. The author had to be influenced by her mother’s views on feminism and women’s roles in society. Thus, throughout the story, Mary Shelley could be commenting/stressing the significance of women in society, the nurture process, and in a person’s being. So, this likely explains Victor’s lack of tenderness, empathy, compassion, and common sense really. For Christ’s sake, he creates a creature that eventually metaphorically kills him! Could all this be because Victor was not under the influence of a female, maternal figure? Shelley is saying that women are essential in the healthy being and thoughtful existence of man and even survival. Shelley might be stressing the imbalance of human beings without appropriate maternal interference and also the intrepid nature of male counterparts. Now that I have established my former point, I think Victor displaces/transfers this ill directed love and longing towards Elizabeth, his cousin-sister type person…who he marries…kind of(??). Elizabeth very much takes over the maternal role that Frankenstein lost from his mother’s death. However, later in the development of the novel, Elizabeth’s death can be interpreted as revenge because it was her illness that Caroline was struck by. To be continued…

The Misidentification of Frankenstein

         Before I read Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, I had always envisioned that almost archetypal in itself green, big-headed, ogre-like creature that walked around like a zombie, hands stuck out in front of him. Movie Directors and creators have not done a good job at venturing beyond this portrayal either. The only pictures of Frankenstein I have seen are of a big green monster with corks coming out the side of his head in tattered clothing. A Halloween has not gone by where someone assumes the stereotypical Frankenstein character. Even I always pictured the mad scientist bringing a giant green monster to life named

Frankenstein. However, once I actually read Frankenstein, I realized that not only was I mistaken of Frankenstein's identity, but also about millions of other people out there. In actuality, everyone's wrongly naming this nameless monster as Frankenstein. So, how did this grand identification go on for so long? Now, I cannot even fathom in the future someone calling themselves "Frankenstein" without me saying "Well, you know Frankenstein was actuality the creator of the monster that you call yourself". This myriad of wrong ideas about the Frankenstein story is probably a conglomeration of bad plays and movies. It is amazing too me that more people don't know who Frankenstein actually is. The classic fictional story is about as popular and overdone as Cinderella

           I used to think of Frankenstein as a brain dead, zombie like creature but I totally disagree now that I have finished the book. In a way, Frankenstein is almost more human than his creator in his sensitivities. He has an appreciation for nature and the living things around him despite the lack of parallel that can be drawn between the natural realm and the artificial that he has been brought up into. He desires the same consumption of knowledge as fulfillment as his creator Victor. This could be noticed especially when he watched from afar, the practices of the DeLacey family. He wishes to learn the language of humans adn mimic their behaviours. Furthermore, he recognizes that Victor is his creator and supposed to be a father figure like that you would find in traditional human family roles. When Victor doesn't fulfill this role at all, the monster is left degenerate with the same feeling of rejection as an orphan who is mature enough to realize that they have been given up by their parents. Especially, in a world that feels so much to not be his own, he just wishes for connection to someone or something.

             As much as people think they know Frankenstein, it has become one of the most commonly mistaken characters of all time. Nevertheless, I find it very very ironic that  throughout the progression of the novel, the creature finds himself without an identity and yet throughout pop culture the character has been given the erroneous identity of his hated creator. It almost further elaborates upon Shelley's emphasis on the duality of their characters and their essence of the same being.

Who was Mary Shelley?

        In my opinion, it is unexpected that a female would be the creative spirit behind a gruesome, tragic tale of man and monster. So, who was Mary Shelley and what inspired her to write Frankenstein? Born in the latter years of the eighteenth century, Shelley was raised  by her English father, a political philosopher, and mother, a feminist. By looking into Shelley's childhood, some of the essential themes in Frankenstein come to light such as the role of parenting in birth and creation. Shelley's mother died shortly after her birth. From this point, she was raised by her father. When Shelley was of the tender age of seventeen, she became involved with one of her father's companions Percy Bysshe Shelley. They traveled together throughout Europe and eventually married in the year 1816. Diverging upon another point, I think that Mary Shelley probably was influenced a lot by her husband Percy Bysshe Shelley , a prominent Romantic poet. He kept close company with other key writers like Lord Byron, Leigh Hunt, and Thomas Love Peacock. His work includes undertones of “joyous ecstasy” and “brooding despair”. His major themes included rebellion against authority, relationships with nature, and the power of imagination. These themes are also present in some way or form in Shelley’s writings. We see that Victor and the creature share a peaceful retreat in the form of the natural world that surrounds theme. Also, Victor’s partaking in t the creature can be interpreted as a rebellion against the laws of nature and of divine entities. Thus, we can see the at Mary Shelley’s head was in many places when creating Frankenstein. The influences she may have had in writing this gothic piece are as far and many as the very themes that persist throughout the novel.

        Back o Mary Shelley’s life, after several failed attempts to have children, Mary and Percy gave birth to their single and only living child in 1818. Only a few years later, Percy Shelley drowned during a tragic storm leaving Mary Shelley widowed. Her last years alive, Shelley suffered tremendously from a brain tumor that ultimately took her life at the age of 53. Mary Shelley's own life can almost be viewed as a tragedy just as her character Victor Frankenstein. Even throughout her writing process, Shelley was faced with the suicide of a half-sister and Harriet Shelley, Percy Shelley's wife. With so much hurt in her life, it is no wonder Shelley's  most famous work Frankenstein was of the Gothic genre.The insurmountable experiences of death may have influenced the isolation and alienation that their character's Victor and the monster feel throughout the novel. Also, Shelley often commented on the theme of birth and creation. Upon researching the author, it seems to me that this reoccurring theme may have been influenced with her own tumultuous struggle with conception and birth. It is apparent that Shelley's personal had deep influences on her work. Even the them of rebellion could be tied to Mary and Percy's scandalous relationship. I think more is to be discovered about the ties between Frankenstein and Shelley's own life.