Frankenstein: Hatred vs. Compassion

                I personally believe that one of the most intriguing concepts and themes to consider when reading Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is the constant battle between hatred and compassion in the character’s actions. The book is largely focused on the detrimental impact which hatred had on each of the characters and the specific influence that this had on their actions. For example, the creature began as an inherently good-natured being; he felt no natural inclination towards murder or even the infliction of harm upon others; rather, he was kind, gentle, and merely desirous of companionship. However, when the only responses that the creature received in response to his kind intentions were horrified rejection, he was driven to the point of rage and malignancy. The two most potent examples of this lie in his rejection by the cottagers, whom he loved dearly, and the man who shot the creature in the woods after the creature saved his companion. After experiences numerous acts of hatred such as these, the concept of nature vs. nurture came into play as the creature’s good-natured demeanor transformed into that of anger and a hunger for revenge. Therefore, within the first half of the novel, Shelley seems to encourage the idea that hatred is much more prevalent a response among all members of mankind; regardless of race, gender, or nationality, Shelley appears to imply that rejection in the face of fear or difference is the natural tendency of all people.

                However, while the first half of the book (and essentially the entire novel for that matter) is highly saturated with acts of hatred, she also appears to suggest within the second half of the novel that compassion and love are much more powerful entities that hatred. When requesting of Victor that he create for him a woman of the same species, the creature states that, “If any being felt emotions of benevolence towards me, I should return them an hundred and an hundredfold; for that one creature’s sake, I would make peace with the whole kind” (Shelley, 105)! With this statement, the creature proves that, despite the innumerable instances in which he faced hatred, he would readily forsake all inclination toward anger and hatred if he could simply be shown love by just one individual. In fact, he supports that the compassion and acceptance of just one human being would outweigh hatred from hundreds of others. He also implies by saying that he would return the benevolence a hundredfold that he would much prefer to love than hate. Therefore, Shelley brings the struggle between hatred and compassion full circle in the second half of the novel by juxtaposing the two entities and comparing their prevalence and strength within mankind.

Frankenstein: Round Characters

                One of the most remarkable qualities of Mary Shelley’s writing style in Frankenstein is her ability to create such complex characters with intricate personalities and circumstances which makes labeling or stereotyping them quite a challenge for the reader. In fact, Shelley’s development of the round characters of Victor Frankenstein and the creature are perhaps the most compelling aspect of the entire novel. To begin with, Victor Frankenstein is certainly a round character due to the fact that his intentions and actions seem to contradict one another. On one hand, Victor can be seen as the protagonist, for he began work on the creature with nothing but good intentions; furthermore, he certainly never intended for the product of his experimentations to lead to the death and destruction of so many lives. In reality, the reader is likely to feel a great deal of sympathy for Victor’s character. After all, he worked obsessively for two years to create something which he was passionate about and hoped would induce wonderful discoveries in the scientific field which would prevent death; ultimately, however, he detested his creation from the moment of its first breath, and the life of his creation eventually led to the destruction of his own. On the other hand, however, Victor can be seen as an antagonist in the sense that many of his passive and indifferent actions actually led to the demise of his family and friends. While Victor never directly intended for any of his family or friends to die, he certainly could have taken more proactive measures to ensure their health and safety. For example, rather than fleeing from his creation after his initial repulsion to it, Victor should have remained to care for his creature. In such circumstances, the creature would have been much more likely to have maintained his inherently good nature and not reverted to evil and malicious actions.  When considering all these facts, determining whether Victor is a purely good or somewhat irresponsible character is nearly impossible, thus making him a multidimensional, round character.

                The creature’s thoughts and actions make him an even more complex and round character than Victor Frankenstein is. Upon hearing of the first two years of the creature’s life, in which he was rejected by every single human he came into contact with, including the cottagers whom he loved so dearly, the reader is sure to feel a great deal of sympathy for the creature. After all, he initially displayed nothing but a good-natured and generous demeanor throughout the entirety of his life and wanted nothing more than companionship. However, the creature also fostered an uncontrollable rage which overtook his good intentions and drove him to the point of murdering a number of innocent individuals in an act of revenge. The fact that the creature often expressed joy and pleasure in these murders makes his character repulsive and presumably evil. However, at the conclusion of the novel, after he has effectively watched Victor and every single one of his family members and friends die (with the exception of Ernest), the creature then expresses genuine remorse to Robert Walton, causing the reader to again feel a certain amount of sympathy for the creature. He tells Walton, “But it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered the lovely and the helpless… you hate me; but your abhorrence cannot equal that with which I regard myself” (Shelley, 165). Thus, Shelley clearly mastered the manipulation of round characters in her novel.

Frankenstein: Irony

                After reading the conclusion of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, I have come to realize the various types of irony which Shelley utilizes in her novel, as well as the purpose the contribute to the novel’s plotline. To begin with, numerous examples of situational irony are present throughout the second half of the novel. For example, Victor’s relationship with the creature in and of itself is an example of situational irony. Frankenstein worked so vigorously and passionately for two years to create his being that the reader would expect him to have an inherent adoration of its life and accomplishments; contrary to what would be appropriate and suspected, however, Victor fears and loathes his creation form the moment it comes to life. In fact, Victor’s detestation of the creature becomes so complete by the end of the novel that he ultimately dies in the effort to kill that which we worked so tirelessly to produce. Additionally, the fact that the creature goes to great lengths to inflict as much pain and suffering as possible on his creator would cause the reader to belief that he took pleasure in seeking this revenge. Despite this, the creature confesses at the end of the novel that, “For while I destroyed his hopes, I did not satisfy my own desires” (Shelley, 165) and ultimately resolves to end his own life. This, therefore, is also an example of situational irony. Victor’s inclination towards solitude is a third representation of this situational irony, for the fact that Victor’s creation was largely for the purpose of finding a way to potentially end death. In creating the creature, Victor entertained the possibility of prolonging the lives of his loved ones; unfortunately, however, the life of his creation is ultimately what led to the deaths of his loved ones. Evidently, Shelley keenly manipulated situational irony throughout the second half of the novel in order to contribute to the progression of the plotline and highlight the intricate relationship between Victor and his creature.

                Dramatic irony is also present in one particularly significant place in the second of half of the novel when Victor misinterprets the creatures promise that he would be with Victor his wedding night. Victor immediately made a false assumption in believing that “That then was the period fixed for the fulfillment of my destiny. In that hour I should die, and at once satisfy and extinguish his malice” (Shelley, 123). While Victor interpreted the creature’s warning in this way, however, the reader understands that the creature is in reality referring to his intent to murder Elizabeth on their wedding night. The reader’s understanding of this warning in contrast to Victor’s misunderstanding therefore builds suspense which contributes to the plotline of the novel. Such use of irony is a vital component of Shelley’s writing style.

Frankenstein: Internal Conflict

          

Mary Shelley certainly seems to enjoy playing with the reader’s sympathies as they read Frankenstein. On one hand, the reader pities the miserable and lonely creature and criticizes Victor’s heartless rejection of his own creation; on the other hand, the reader sympathizes with Victor as he gradually loses every family member and friend in his life and loathes the horrendous acts committed by the creature himself. However, while pitying Victor’s miserable life is certainly not a challenge, one must consider how many of Victor’s misfortunes are entirely because of his own doing. While it may be true that Victor may have never foreseen his experimentations with the production of life taking the form of such a hideous and capable creature, his actions towards the creature after its creation were certainly potent factors in bringing about his own unhappiness. From the creature’s experiences in the first two years of his life, the reader can clearly ascertain that he originated as an inherently good being. Rather than displaying rage, malignancy, and violent tendencies, the creature was instead kind, generous, and merely desirous of companionship. Had Victor not fled in horror from his initial encounter with the creature, he may have quickly learned this about his creation and have been able to produce a happy life for the being. Furthermore, had Victor shown more kindness, acceptance, or even civility to the creature when they met atop of the mountain in chapter 10, the creature may have reverted back to his kind nature and never have come to the point of murdering Henry or Elizabeth. Despite this, Victor’s instinctual rejection of his creation and refusal to comply with any of his requests, as well as his tendency to flee from his problems, is certainly what I believe to be the largest factor in determining his miserable fate. Because his own actions remain largely responsible for his misfortune, I find it somewhat difficult to feel great amounts of pity or sympathy for Victor.

                On the other hand, the reader must consider the morality of Victor’s actions and the internal conflict which took place in his heart during chapters 17 and 20 as Victor pondered whether or not to create a female being for Victor. On one hand, Victor felt compelled to create the horrendous being so as to forever terminate his interactions with the creature and banish him to a remote island where he could no longer disturb mankind. On the other hand, Victor rationalized that the results of the creation of a second creature were highly unpredictable and could in fact effect even more destruction than the creation of the first creature had. In reflecting on the fact that the woman creature could possibly be even more evil and commit treacherous acts purely out of enjoyment, Victor admitted that, “…for the first time, the wickedness of my promise burst upon me; I shuddered to think that future ages might curse me as their pest, whose selfishness had not hesitated to buy its own peace at the price, perhaps, of the existence of the whole human race” (Shelley, 121). While Victor’s actions in destroying the woman creature ultimately led to the deaths of Henry, Elizabeth, and his father, he certainly never intended for this to be the case; on the contrary, he was actually attempting to save society as a whole from the potential wrath of his creations. Therefore, Shelley utilizes the internal conflict taking place within Victor’s heart as a tool for creating both sympathy and resentment for Victor’s actions.

Frankenstein: Isolation

                As Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein progresses, Victor seems to willingly isolate himself from all others more and more, leading me question what motivation lies in his desire for solitude. I admit that, at times, his wish to be alone is actually reasonable, such as when he began to undertake the task of creating a female companion for the creature. Victor explains that conducting the assembly a woman creature in the confines of his house would become extremely dangerous, for the possibility of his family’s discovery of his disturbing work would greatly increase. Victor possessed a great aversion to his family ascertaining the products of his work, for they may be overcome with fear or disgust. He also did not want them to be troubled by the sickly and morose mood he would be likely to foster while working on the project. Therefore, in circumstances such as these, Victor’s longing for solitude is certainly understandable; however, I cannot help but notice his tendency to seek solitude even in times of loss and sorrow when most people would tend to seek the company of their friends and family even more often than usual.

Perhaps the most potent example of Victor’s tendency towards isolation is the fact that, even after Clerval is murdered and Victor is wrongly detained in prison for a number of months, he still detests the company of others even in his freedom. In determining why Victor is so hesitant to place himself in the presence of others, one must consider the circumstances of the past few years of his life. Perhaps the fact that Victor’s actions in creating the creature has already led to a number of murders has traumatized him to such an extent that the sight of man merely reminds him of the horrendous results of his work. This notion is supported by Victor’s comment while in Paris that, “I abhorred the face of man. Oh, not abhorred! They were my brethren, my fellow being, and I felt attracted even to the most repulsive among them… but I felt that I had no right to share their intercourse” (Shelley, 136). While this justification certainly sounds plausible, however, Victor’s reaction still seems somewhat strange to me. I find it ironic that he was so obsessed with the idea of producing life and preventing death that he passionately pursued the creation of life for two years, yet this creation ultimately separated him emotionally from all mankind for the rest of his life. In creating one life, Victor destroyed his own , and in manufacturing a companion, he inadvertently isolated himself from everyone he knew. Unlike the creature’s forced solitude, however, Victor’s was essentially by choice. This causes the reader to consider the diverse causes of isolation and the impact of this critical theme in Frankenstein on the characters of the novel.

Frankenstein Blog 5

While reading Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, I have come to discover the important role that Shelley’s characterization of both Victor Frankenstein and his creation have played in contributing to the thematic topic of solitude and companionship. One on hand, Victor’s character embodies one who accepts and even desires solitude as a way of life, whereas the creature represents those who are forced into solitude as a result of the rejection of society. While Victor may not be a hermit, he certainly expresses little desire or need for companionship throughout his life. In reality, his fervent passion for intellect and discovery and his conviction to create life in inanimate objects took precedence over all the relationships in his life. Frankenstein neglected all communications with his family and loved ones despite their constant entreaties for even the shortest of letters, and he locked himself up within the confines of his small living quarters for days on end in order to dedicate himself more fully to the work of his creation of life. In other words, while Victor may not necessarily reject or dislike companionship, he apparently never deemed it an essential aspect of his life nor expressed a strong desire for relationships. In fact, after being plagued by the intense guilt of the deaths of William Frankenstein and Justine Moritz, Victor even expressed that solitude was often the only form of solace he could seek. He lamented, “Thus not the tenderness of friendship… could redeem my soul from woe. The very accents of love were ineffectual” (Shelley, 64). Despite the fact that his family and loved ones constantly implored Victor to have a greater presence in their lives and communicate with them more frequently, Victor often favored a life of solitude.

In direct contrast to this, Victor’s creation seems to express a strong desire for human companionship; unfortunately, the sheer repulsiveness of his deformities and nature of existence prevent him from obtaining this. Because the creature is a very frightening sight to behold, all humans that he has had direct contact with thus far have actively rejected him. For example, Victor fled him immediately, the shepherd inside his small hut escaped the creature in terror, and the village into which the creature stumbled harmed and terrorized him. Because the creature learned through such experiences that he was unlikely to be blessed with any warm receptions from the human race, he was left with no choice but to live in solitude in the hovel of a poor family and observe them from afar. Despite this, the creature greatly desired to develop a healthy relationship with the family, admitting, “I imagined that they would be disgusted, until, by my gentle demeanor and conciliating words, I should first win their favor, and afterwards their love” (Shelley, 81). Therefore, I believe that through the characterization of both Frankenstein and his creature, Shelley cleverly presents the two realities of solitude: solitude by choice, which is the case of Frankenstein, or undesired solitude as a result of rejection, which is the case of the creature.

Frankenstein Blog 4

                Because Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is essentially told from the point of view of Victor Frankenstein himself, the reader is swayed to believe up to this point in the story that Victor’s creation is a loathsome monster with nothing but cruel and selfish motives. However, I believe Shelley may actually be utilizing this limited point of view to mislead the reader; while I am actually unfamiliar with the story of Frankenstein and cannot remember exactly how it ends, I have a strong feeling the story will ultimately portray Victor’s creation as a decent being and humankind as the savage entity. Although Frankenstein has portrayed his creation as vicious and vile thus far, little evidence has actually been proven to substantiate this claim up until this point. After creating such an ugly being and fearing it, Frankenstein himself was the one who rejected and fled his creation. While he awoke from slumber to find his creation at his bedside reaching out “seeming to detain me” (Shelley, 35), he has no proof that the creature was in fact attempting to capture him. Furthermore, while Victor assumes that his creation was the one who murdered William merely because he found Frankenstein at the site of the murder, no substantial evidence exists which proves this theory. As far as the reader knows, Victor’s creation may simply have been looming at the site of the murder because he believed he might find Victor there and was hoping to speak to him.

                On the other hand, while no evidence yet exists which proves the cruel nature of Victor’s creation, the creature’s story in explanation of the first two years of his life actually do provide evidence to prove that he is inherently a good and decent being. While living in the hovel of a destitute family, the creature came to observe the family very carefully and expressed a desire to make himself known to them and share in their companionship. Upon discovering their poverty, he desired to help them from no longer eating their food and anonymously performing small acts of kindness for them, such as gathering wood and clearing snowy paths for them. Furthermore, he shared that he felt sadness and pain with the family did yet sympathized with their joy. On the other hand, humans have been shown to exhibit nothing but hostility towards the creature as a direct result of their fear. After all, Victor’s fear of his creation was the main motivation behind his flight from the creature. Moreover, when the creature naively stumbled into a small village looking for food, “the whole village was roused; some fled, some attacked me, until, grievously bruised by stones and many other kinds of missile weapons, I escaped to the open country…” (Shelley, 74). Considering all of these facts, I am led to believe that Shelley is cleverly manipulating point of view in order to misguide the reader in believing that Frankenstein’s creature is a detestable and inherently evil being when, in reality, humanity is in fact the savage and uncivilized entity.

Frankenstein Blog 3

                As Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein progresses, the significance of the theme of death in the novel becomes increasingly apparent. The reader quickly perceives the many roles and influences which death has inflicted on Frankenstein’s life. To begin with, the death of Frankenstein’s grandmother was the direct event in his parents’ life which led to his existence: were it not for the death of his grandmother, Frankenstein’s parents may never have met, fallen in love, and brought Victor into the world. Furthermore, the death of the parents of Victor’s “cousin” Elizabeth was the event which indirectly led to Elizabeth becoming a member of the Frankenstein family. Furthermore, death was one of the single most important factors in leading Victor to begin the process of infusing inanimate objects with life. Victor was incredibly fond of his mother and was therefore greatly saddened by her death. After briefly describing his grieving process, however, he explained that, “My mother was dead, but we had still duties which we ought to perform; we must continue our course with the rest, and learn to think ourselves fortunate, while one remains whom the spoiler has not seized” (Shelley, 24). Thus, with this resolution, Victor combined the influence of the death of his mother with his inclination towards natural philosophy in order to create life within inanimate objects. By means of discovering such a revolutionary concept, Victor in more or less admitted that he hoped to possibly preserve life or prevent death. Clearly, death perhaps played a more influential role in his young life and ultimate creation of his monster than any other occurrence.

                Even after the “birth” of his creature, however, Frankenstein continued to be plagued by death. Roughly two years after the success of his experiments and the disappearance of his creature, Victor’s little brother William was found dead in the woods of Plainpalais with the marks of his murdered impressed upon his neck. Upon encountering his creature at the very vicinity in which William was murdered, Frankenstein immediately assumes that his creature was solely responsible for William’s death; furthermore, because Justine Moritz was widely believed to be the boy’s murderer, she was condemned and executed in Geneva for her crimes about a month later. Although Victor was not directly responsible for either of these deaths, nor did he ever intend for his actions to indirectly cause them, he nevertheless experienced the overwhelming burden of insatiable guilt as a result of the loss of these loved ones. Because he believed with absolute surety that the creature had murdered William, he concluded that he was, in essence, the sole reason for the deaths of both of his loved ones and the unending grief of his remaining family members. Consequently, the reader can easily ascertain that death has already played a significant role in the story thus far and will undoubtedly continue to have a powerful impact on the motives of Victor and his creatures as the story continues.

Frankenstein Blog 2

              As Frankenstein describes his young life prior to the creation of his creature to Robert Walton in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, he seemingly discusses the concept of destiny a great deal. Rather than presenting his actions in manufacturing the creature as a direct result of his years of tireless work and fervent study, he seems to ascribe them to destiny. After describing the day during which he met M. Waldman and began his studies in chemistry which facilitated his creation of the creature. In reflecting on the day’s events, Frankenstein remarks, “Thus ended a day memorable to me: it decided my future destiny” (Shelley, 29). While I do not necessarily disagree with the concept of destiny, I do feel as though Frankenstein has attributed too many of the misfortunes of his life to destiny rather than taking ownership of his choices and mistakes. The fact that a number of factors in Frankenstein’s life truly did drive him towards the creation of his creature is undeniable. For example, his ardor for natural philosophy and other sciences in general, such as chemistry and mathematics, provided him with the intellectual ability to create such a being. Additionally, his insatiable desire to discover something no one had ever done before, as well as his inclination to benefit society, gave him the motivation necessary to complete such a monumental task. However, I tend to think that Frankenstein prefers to use the concept of destiny as somewhat of an excuse for his actions rather than admitting some of his own mistakes. Destiny may certainly play a significant role in determining one’s path through life; however, one’s individual choices and actions must also be acknowledged as being equally if not even greater a factor. A love for natural sciences may have been what encouraged Frankenstein’s dream of creating a living being from the body parts of deceased humans, yet the decision to dedicate two years of life to this task was entirely that of Frankenstein himself. Moreover, destiny may have been what allowed Frankenstein to be successful in his attempts at instilling life in inanimate objects, but it was Frankenstein’s cowardly decision to ignore and flee his creation that allowed the creature to thrive and become so learned and adept. Also, he may argue that destiny was what led his little brother William and dear friend Justine Moritz to be murdered, yet Frankenstein still could have done everything in his power to convince the court of the existence of the monster he created, even if this was highly improbably of succeeding. Ultimately, I am not intending to detract from Frankenstein’s theme of destiny. However, I do believe that Frankenstein utilizes his belief in this destiny as a defense mechanism in order to relieve himself for some of the guilt of the unspeakable horrors which occurred as a result of his actions. I only wish Frankenstein would take more responsibility for his actions rather than seemingly attribute all the blame to the unavoidable realities of his destiny.

Frankenstein Blog 1

               The first four letters included at the beginning of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein establish the fact that the novel utilizes the literary technique of a frame story. The novel begins with a series of letters written by the unrelentingly ambitious Robert Walton to his sister providing the details of his journey to be the first in history to discover the glorious mysteries of the North Pole. In the process of reaching the North Pole, however, Walton and his crew venture into icy waters where they are temporarily frozen into immobility. While waiting for the ice to thaw so as to continue their travels, Walton’s crew observes Frankenstein’s creature evidently fleeing something at great speed; one day later, they save Victor Frankenstein from the icy waters by bringing him aboard the ship. After Frankenstein and Walton immediately strike up a friendly rapport, Frankenstein decides to relay the details of his perilous past with Walton, and the remainder of the novel proceeds to tell the story of Victor Frankenstein and the inconceivable being which he created. In his letter to his sister, Walton vows that, “I have resolved every night, when I am not imperatively occupied by my duties, to record, as nearly as possible in his own words, what he has related during the day” (Shelley, 13-14). Consequently, the reader perceives that Robert Walton’s adventure to the North Pole and coincidental encounter with Victor Frankenstein becomes the frame story which provides the context in which the real story of Frankenstein’s creature will be told.

                While the fact that Frankenstein is a frame story is certain, the relevance and significance of this stylistic choice by Mary Shelley remains unclear to me. However, one critical observation is important to determining its purpose: the reader can clearly detect that many similarities exist between the characters of Walton and Frankenstein. Both men have developed strong intellectual interests and a passionate desire to discover or accomplish something which no man has ever done before. Furthermore, both men allow these convictions to take precedence over all other aspects of their lives, including relationships. The reader can therefore infer that Frankenstein chose to confide his story in Walton despite his resolution to never tell the story to anyone because he too detected these similarities between himself and Walton and wished to prevent Walton from stumbling down the same miserable path that he took. Aside from this fact, however, the true reason for Mary Shelley’s use of a frame story remains unclear to me. Shelley certainly did not require the use of a frame story in order to write the novel; therefore, the fact that she chose to use this technique implies that it has an important function of the story. Thus far, the frame story has involved a great deal of foreshadowing; for example, the reader knows because of this frame story that both Frankenstein and his creature will survive. Also, Frankenstein repetitively laments the misfortunes of his life, indicating that the novel will not have a pleasant ending. While I strongly believe that the use of frame story may have an even more important function later on in the novel, I am unsure as to what this purpose would be. As Frankenstein progresses, determining the function of the utilization of the frame story should prove to be very interesting.

"APO 96225"

                I found this poem to be one of the most intriguing works in the entire unit, for it addresses the fact that the experience of traumatic or excessively gruesome events can often alienate someone from their family, friends, and peers. When one experiences something very violent, evil, or graphic in their lives, the memory and recollection of this horrific event is a permanent entity which will never abandon that individual. Unfortunately, such events can sometimes be so unpleasant that they forever alter the attitude and persona exhibited by the victim of such haunting thoughts. As a direct result of the corruption such victims face, they are unable to relate to the loved ones which they could once share freely. While the loved ones cannot help the fact that they simply cannot comprehend the pain which the individual experienced or the horror of the haunting memories, attempting to express such sadness to loved ones can become so futile that victims simply give up altogether. As a result, these people quickly become isolate and alienated due solely to the fact that they experienced something so dreadful in their lives.

                In Larry Rottman’s “APO 96225,” Rottman describes a son who tries desperately to avoid discussion of the horrors of war with his mother by instead writing letters about the climate, scenery, etc. While the mother urged the son to feel free to express his genuine feelings towards the war in which he was participating, the son displayed great reservation when it came to relaying the true events of his day to his mother. The son was clearly worried that, by sharing the deepest and darkest aspects of his life to his mother, he would drive the loving affection of his mother off and be left even more emotionally alone than he already felt physically. However, the mother insisted that she could bear the horrific news, so the son finally replied, “Today I killed a man. Yesterday, I helped drop napalm on women and children” (Rottman, 846). Despite the mother’s plea for her child to relate to her and provide her with genuine details of his life, when he shared this, she truly was unable to bear the horror of the matter and immediately withdrew from him. In fact, the mother was so emotionally disturbed that she could not even reply to the son. “APO 96225” ultimately simply proves that, at times, the horror which one experiences in life not only leaves them permanently scarred, but also alienates them forever from the rest of society, who wishes so strongly to dwell purely in the presence of happy experiences.

"Much Madness is divinest Sense"

                Though the poem is very brief, Emily Dickinson’s “Much Madness is divinest Sense” seems to serve as a quick overview of psychology. Certainly most, if not all, people would agree that “sane” is an adjective which describes people who devise reasonable, logical, and rational solutions to everyday problems. On the other hand, those who ascribed as being “mad” are those who plot highly unusual or unconventional schemes in order to overcome difficulties in their lives. However, in this poem, Dickinson challenges the idea that sanity is in fact sane and that madness is in fact crazy, or “wrong.” The line in the poem which I personally found to be the most powerful was Dickinson’s remark that “In this, as All, prevail—“ (Dickinson, 830). Despite the fact that his passage is very short, the intent of Dickinson’s jab is clear—whether right or wrong, accurate or inaccurate, the general idea, principle, or approach which is adopted by a greater majority of people is the method which is described as being “right.” Rather than simply accepting that all people are capable of developing their own personal responses to challenges, successes, and general experiences of life, humans seem to have a tendency to reproach and condemn any opinions or actions which differ from the norm. However, with this brief poem, Dickinson makes the argument that determining the sanity or insanity of an argument or conviction based solely on the number of people who believe the idea is not sufficient enough. Rather, Dickinson argues, perhaps those whose ideas appear to be the maddest are in fact among the very few sane people of the world; likewise, those who are typically seen as sane might truly being the ones who are insane in the judgment of a “discerning eye” (Dickinson, 830).

                With the last line of the poem, Dickinson even goes as far as to hint that those who are viewed as insane and who differ with the majority opinion are, in some regards, forced to wear a metaphorical chain. In other words, those whose convictions differ from others’ are bound and limited by these differences rather than allowed to excel. Therefore, Dickinson’s poem transforms from a simple lament to a challenge to the reader to question whether or not their ideas and beliefs are truly sane or mad and if the fear of advocating ideas different than those of the majority prevents one from supporting the convictions which are most important to them. When others are forced to either abandon their ideals in order to feel included or be isolated because of their beliefs, the gruesome task of alienation is successfully completed.

"I Felt a Funeral, in My Brain"

                Emily Dickinson makes brilliant use of imagery in order to convey her theme regarding death and alienation in her poem “I felt a Funeral, in my Brain.” The poem walks the reader through the stages of the speaker’s “death.” The speaker initially merely envisions the beginning of a funeral in her head; however, as the funeral progresses within her mind, pieces of her body and being slowly begin to fade, in the order that someone who was dying might expect to fade. For example, the speaker’s mind is the closest to go, followed by soul, and then their whole existence. Dickinson’s precise diction is very critical to these descriptions, as well, for she very purposely uses somewhat violent words, such as “treading”,” “beating,” creaking,” and “broke.” With this selection of words, Dickinson implies that the oncoming stages of death did not come upon her gradually or gracefully; rather they seemed to overtake her as though she could already experience her very own funeral before her death had even occurred. The imagery of boxes being lifted from creaking souls greatly contributes to the conveyance of this theme.

                The most potent phrase in the poem is when Dickinson remarks, “As all the Heavens were a Bell, and Being, but an Ear, And I, and Silence, some strange Race wrecked, solitary, here—“ (Dickinson, 776). With this phrase, I was quickly reminded that the poem was focused on alienation rather than death. However, in many ways, I believe that Dickinson is actually intending to compare isolation to a kind of death within the story. As Heaven, or the source of all happiness in the afterlife, is personified by one beautiful bell sound, while life itself is embodied by an Ear with which  to hear this bell sound, the reader desperately explains how she must race against the formidable entity of Silence. In such a symbolic description, Dickinson suggests the idea that, in death, Emily threatened to suffer isolation from all those who remained alive by the fact that her words, thoughts, and feelings would be silenced. Ultimately, just as “Bartleby, the Scrivener” proved the reader how powerful an impact passivity could have the development of alienation, “I felt a Funeral, in my Brain’ proves how silence or the lack of communication is also vitally important to creating a sense of alienation for most people.

"Bartleby, the Scrivener"

Herman Melville describes a number of factors that can contribute to the growth of alienation in his short story “Bartleby, the Scrivener,” and this is best seen through the indirect characterization of the Lawyer. Although the Lawyer is the narrator of the story, he actually offers very little personal information about himself. For example, the reader never learns the Lawyer’s name, family situation, etc., and he makes no effort to acquaint the reader with the personal aspects of his life. The one intuitive piece of information which the Lawyer offers about himself is the fact that he was “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). By considering this statement along with analyzing the Lawyer’s thoughts and actions throughout the book, the reader quickly discovers that the Lawyer himself was not so different than Bartleby. Bartleby was the victim to an incurable case of passivity and unending acceptance. Because of this, Bartleby appears to be the constant victim of unhappiness and dullness. In a similar fashion, the reader learns directly through indirect characterization that the Lawyer tends to accept every set of circumstances thrown in his path without questioning or challenging it. ]

Like Bartleby, the Lawyer is eventually depicted as being very similar to Bartleby in fact that both men lacked ambition and drive and instead left all their happiness to rest of the stoic behavior of others. In this regard, “Bartleby, the Scrivener” draws many correlations to the story “The Lottery.” In both “Bartleby, the Scrivener,” both Bartleby and the Lawyer create relatively dull lives for themselves simply because they lake the ambition to question their current lifestyle to take any action of alter it. Likewise, in “The Lottery,” no villagers ventured to abolish the practice of the lottery despite its harmful impact on the community simply because challenging the validity of the practice took more courage and energy than anyone seemed willing to put forth. Ultimately, therefore, the reader discovers through the stoic mannerisms of the Lawyer revealed through indirect characterization that passivity can be one of the single greatest factors contributing to isolation from society.

Miss Brill

                In my own personal opinion, Katherine Mansfield’s “Miss Brill” best epitomizes the reality of alienation more vividly than any other story in the unit. The reader quickly begins to understand the extent of Miss Brill’s isolation with the phrase “she had become really quite expert, she thought, at listening as though she didn’t listen, at sitting in other people’s lives just for a minute while they talked around her” (Mansfield, 183). The unfortunate reality is that, rather than acknowledging her extreme isolation, Miss Brill actually fins enjoyment in observing others as thought they were in a play and does not realize the fact that she is merely a spectator. This idea best embodies the separation with reality which those who are entirely isolated may be likely to experience. For those who have no true friends or companions with which to share the adventures of life, they are left with no option but to live vicariously through the joys and struggles of others. While the people Miss Brill observes are in fact living their actual lives, Miss Brill feels as though they are merely actors because she has placed herself in a permanent role of spectatorship. While acting as a bystander throughout her life may seem to bring her happiness, the illusion of her inclusion in this role-playing is shattered when the woman in the ermine toque ridicules her fur. Ultimately, the theme of the novel is revealed in the symbolism of the fur that Miss Brill proudly adorns her shoulders with. By wearing such a fur, it is as though Miss Brill is putting on a costume in order to play the same character that she has always played in the scene involving the park every Sunday. However, at the very end of the story, “She unclasped the necklet quickly; quickly, without looking, laid it inside” (Mansfield, 186). By removing this vital piece of her costume, Miss Brill seems to be coming to the understanding that, if she truly wishes to find happiness in life and overcome the horrid loneliness which accompanies alienation, she must forsake the notion that she is merely a character in a frequently performed scene and begin writing her own story. Therefore, by employment of the symbolism of the fur as her costume, the theme of alienation is exemplified in “Miss Brill.”

"Death, be not proud"

“Death, be not proud” is truly intriguing due to the fact that its author, John Donne, proposes a view of death that does not typically seem to be taken in most poems. Generally, a majority of the poems that I have ever read concerning death regard death as though it were a powerful and almighty entity. Death in and of itself was so powerful that no man was capable of escaping it, regardless of race, social status, religion, etc. Because death is an inescapable experience which all humans must face, death is typically viewed and described in poems to be a very formidable and powerful reality. However, through the use of critical diction and apostrophe, Donne greatly demeans death, detracting from its glorified image as an unavoidable and fearsome experience. For starters, employing apostrophe and addressing death directly greatly takes away from the perceived greatness of death. Rather than regarding death as something so powerful (if not sacred) that it cannot be addressed, Donne confronts death with a direct attack that death has little superiority for which to be boastful. Furthermore, Donne’s utilization of critical diction provides further support for his belief that death has little to take pride in. For example, Donne refers to death as “poor” death, indicated that it is something to be pitied rather than feared. Furthermore, Donne remarks that, “Thou are slave to fate, chance, kings, and desperate men” (Donne, 971). Death is typically described in poems as a very potent entity which no man can escape, which promotes anxiety in the reader regarding death; however, by personifying death as a slave in this piece of the passage, Donne portrays death to be an entity of limited power or influence. Because slaves were seen as inferior to their owners, the fact that death would be a slave to even the most desperate of mean greatly detracts from its influence over mankind. Donne demeans death most effectively when, in the last line of the poem, he asserts, “Death, thou shalt die” (Donne, 972). The idea that death itself could actually be overcome and “die” is a mind-boggling concept which very few people have presumably considered before. However, the fact that death could actually be vanquished by dying is very significant to detracting from the perception that death is formidable. Because death is portrayed as being so weak that it could be diminished by the very thing that made it powerful, Donne effectively proves in “Death, be not proud” that death does not in fact have any logical reasons to be feared.

"That time of year"

                William Shakespeare beautifully employs imagery to characterize the progression of life into death in the short poem “That time of year.” In the first quatrain of the poem, Shakespeare describes the time of year, autumn, in which the abundance of flourishing life which is seen in summer gradually ages and begins to die. Shakespeare embodies this transformation by describing in detail a large tree. While in the summer, the branches of the tree were surely saturated with green leaves and chirping birds, Shakespeare describes a tree in autumn where the leaves are withering and the birds dispersing. Similarly, within the second quatrain of the poem, Shakespeare explains that the arrival of twilight can be seen within in him. The peak of his life, or the daytime, is apparently drawing to a close, and the darkness of night is lurking on the edges of the twilight present within him, ready to overtake the faint light of the evening. Lastly, Shakespeare compares his fading life to a glowing fire. His youthfulness and vibrant life are personified as ashes, indicating that time has forced these ideal stages of life to disintegrate, and the ashes themselves become his youth’s deathbed. By creating this very detailed and intricate imagery, Shakespeare effectively pinpoints the subtlety and beauty of the gradual progression of life from youthful bounty to age, barrenness, and eventual death. The fact that the poem is titled “That time of year” is significant in that it draws attention to the fact that Shakespeare described autumn rather than winter. The focus of Shakespeare’s poem was on the upcoming arrival of death, not death itself; therefore, he describes the withering autumn rather than winter, twilight rather than nighttime, and the glowing of a fire than a raging fire which consumes everything surrounding it.

                The most intriguing aspect of this poem, however, is the final couplet in which Shakespeare writes, “This thou perceivest, which makes thy love more strong, to love that well which thou must leave ere long” (Shakespeare, 967). Before reading this final couplet of the poem, the reader may assume the poem’s purpose is merely to discuss the withering away of vibrancy and the gradual arrival of old age and death. Nevertheless, by addressing another person in the final couplet and indicating that this person loves him, Shakespeare includes a romantic element into “That time of year.” The purpose of the final of couplet is to note that one who is willing to love another unconditionally despite the fact that he or she is nearing death is both admirable and brave. Loving something which is destined to depart from them is very difficult for many people, so with this final couplet, Shakespeare commends those who are willing to give their hearts to someone despite the fact that their death is not a long way off. In fact, Shakespeare even goes so far as to say that loving someone in spite of their upcoming death makes the love itself even stronger.

"Crossing the Bar"

“Crossing the Bar” by Alfred, Lord Tennyson utilizes a great deal of personification and symbolism in order to convey its themes of the continual, persistent journey of life and the peaceful conclusion death brings. To begin with, Lord Tennyson personifies the evening and twilight by saying, “sunset and evening star” and “twilight and evening bell” (Tennyson, 886). This ties in to the poem’s symbolism, for the constant progression from day to dusk to evening to twilight represents how each person gradually yet perpetually progresses through the stages of their life. As the poem unwinds, oncoming of the night is revealed as well. This reinforces the idea that the pace of life is unyielding, and death is always approaching. Symbolism can also be seen in the tide described by Lord Tennyson. Tennyson describes the tide as being “too full for sound and foam” (Tennyson, 886). I believe that the bountiful tide which has swollen so tremendously that it cannot even support sound or foam represents the fact that life can sometimes become overflowing with an abundance of activities and blessings. However, just as the ship turns again home atop of the smooth and graceful tide, so must one’s life eventually begin to regress somewhat. Just as tides ebb and flow, lives progress through stages which follow a pattern very similar to ebbing and flowing. Therefore, through his detailed descriptions of nature, Lord Tennyson symbolizes life itself.

                Lord Tennyson certainly seems to treat death as though it were a peaceful and pleasant end to a beautiful journey rather than as a gruesome entity to be feared. Rather than personifying death as a decomposed body as it is in Faulkner’s “A Rose for Emily,” Tennyson portrays death as a mere crossing of the bar, a ship’s return home. Rather than express fear or anxiety about the eventual end of his life, Tennyson expresses a desire for his crossing of the bar to be without moaning or the sadness of farewells with loved ones. Rather, he seems perfectly content to greet death as the appropriate conclusion to the adventure of his life, as long as he is able to me the “pilot” or God, when this death comes. In comparison to other poems in the unit, “Crossing the Bar” describes death in a much more favorable light.

I SEE DEAD PEOPLE-- A Rose for Emily

                Faulkner once comment that “A Rose for Emily” was similar to a ghost story, and, in many respects, this comparison is certainly very understandable. A mysterious and aloof woman who lives in a dilapidated house, presumably kills a man, and stores a decaying body in her bed for approximately forty years certainly reflects characters, settings, and scenarios which are may be likely to appear in ghost stories. If one is able to look past these morbid aspects, however, the fact that “A Rose for Emily” amounts to much more than a ghost story is evident. Because the central character, Emily, is dead from the very start of the story, all description of her personality comes through indirect characterization. Although the reader is forced to make several assumptions about Emily because the narrator cannot factually support any of their knowledge about Emily, one can assume that Emily was a very lonely individual. She appeared to only live with her father, who drove all gentleman callers away, and she spent a majority of her life in isolation. Furthermore, the one man who might have given her an opportunity at happiness in life, Homer Barron, was unmarriageable. However, the thought that Emily killed Barron greatly darkens her character. The climax of the story lies at the very end when the gray hair and indentation in the pillow is discovered next to Homer’s decomposed body. Wit this revelation that Emily has been laying beside the body for forty years, the reader begins to fully understand that Emily, who became delusional, attempted to preserve all aspects of her life and was incapable of grasping change. For example, Emily insisted, “’See Colonel Sartoris. I have no taxes in Jefferson’” (Faulkner, 283) despite the fact that she truly did need to pay her taxes and Colonel Sartoris had been dead for ten years. The understanding that Emily kept a decayed corpse for nearly forty years dramatizes the idea that desperately clinging to things that have past while refusing to change is both dangerous and detrimental. Therefore, by teaching this lesson, “A Rose for Emily” becomes much more than a ghost story.

The Lottery

The “lottery” that is portrayed by Jackson in this story is certainly a gruesome and unnecessary ritual’ however, the most interesting and even most disturbing aspect of “The Lottery” is the reactions and attitudes of the villagers towards this maniacal lottery. The very establishment of an annual ritual in which a member of the town is stoned to death in the hopes that performing such a sacrifice would usher in a bountiful harvest seems inhumane. Because that the tradition has existed for at least seventy-seven years, however, one must consider that, at the time of its creation, the lottery may have seemed like a reasonable solution to the villagers’ problems. The acknowledgement of this fact perhaps yields the initiation of the practice to be justifiable. On the other hand, the fact that many surrounding towns are eradicating the lottery, and yet the town discussed in this story adamantly insists on continuing such a horrific lottery is inexcusable. The apathy with which all citizens of the town seem to meet the lottery is genuinely appalling; certainly no one wants to become a human sacrifice and endure a painful death at the hands of one’s own family and friends, yet nobody has the courage to defy such a practice. Mr. and Mrs. Adams, for example, discuss the fact that other towns have chosen to discontinue the event. Perhaps this was their timid way of subtly proposing the fact that their own town abolish the lottery; nevertheless, they fail to suggest such an idea with enough temerity to gain any attention, so the practice continues. Furthermore, some villagers even exceed the limits of indifference by supporting the ritual. For example, Old Man Warner insists, “Used to be a saying that, ‘Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon.’ Firth thing you know, we’d all be eating stewed chickweed and acorns” (Jackson, 268). Mrs. Delacroix also seems to be a proponent of the lottery, considering that she was described as selecting a stone “so large she had to pick it up with both hands” (Jackson, 271).

                The reactions of the Hutchinson family perhaps personify the strange attitudes of the villagers more adequately than anyone else. Mrs. Hutchinson seems regard the lottery with very little concern- that is, until her family was the one in danger. Regardless, she still seemed to only fear for her own life rather than that of her family; in fact, she even tried to include her married daughter in her family’s drawing so as to lessen the chances of her own death. Moreover, the Hutchison children seemed to express nothing but relief upon discovering that they were not the ones to be stoned rather than displaying fear or grief that their mother was about to be murdered in front of their very eyes. The startling apathy of all citizens towards the lottery ritual is significant, however, because it contributes to one of the major themes of the novel that traditions, if not carefully revised for their purpose, can become so distorted that they actually take away from their purpose itself. Writing the novel from Tessie’s point of view enhances this aspect as well.

Glass Menagerie Blog 5

                Similarly to A Raisin in the Sun, Tennessee Williams’ The Glass Menagerie incorporates a great deal of irony into its plot in order to enrich the drama and entertainment of the play. Perhaps the most evident example of irony which can be detected in the context of the play is the dramatic irony in the dilemma concerning the electricity bill. While Amanda is toiling away in the kitchen, Tom secretly confers with Jim and confides in him his secret that he is planning to leave his mother and sister behind in pursuit of a more adventurous lifestyle, just as his father did many years previously. Tom’s first bold step in abandoning his family was to use his paycheck from the warehouse to purchase his membership to the Union of Merchant Seaman rather than pay the electricity bill for the apartment. Because the reader has witnessed this conversation, he understands that Tom has intentionally chosen not to pay the bills in exchange for following his own dreams and desires. Dramatic irony occurs, however, because Amanda is unaware of the fact that Tom has disregarded the bill for these specific reasons and is instead under the impression that Tom simply forgot to pay the bill out of pure irresponsible negligence. This sample of dramatic irony is surprisingly significant to the play, for it illuminates characterization of both Amanda and Tom and also elicits symbolism. To begin with, the fact that Amanda was willing to believe that Tom merely forgot to pay the bill due to a distracted or whimsical mind rather than ascertain the true reason for his negligence- his selfish plans to abandon the family in a time of great need- reveals to the reader that Amanda has a genuine heart underneath her delusional and overbearing personality. While Amanda may have been somewhat uncompassionate in regard to Tom’s dreams and ambitions, and insensitive to Laura’s shyness, this dramatic irony reveals to the reader that fact that her intentions for her children genuinely were for the obtainment of their happiness. Amanda may have appeared to have been a little strict on her children, but the reader can now understands that she acted in this manner purely out of her strong desire to prevent her children from making the same mistakes that she and their father made in the past. While Amanda certainly nagged Tom about his habit of escaping to the movies on a regular basis, the dramatic irony present in this scene proves that she never truly doubted his dedication to the family of his commitment to the well-being of the family. Unfortunately, the reader understands long before Amanda does that Tom places his own selfish desires above the prosperity of his family.

                In addition to helping characterize Amanda as genuine and trusting and Tom as selfish, this instance of dramatic irony serves a second purpose of revealing symbolism to the audience. Tom’s choice to allow his own personal ambitions to transcend the needs of his mother and sister literally sent the family into plunging darkness; after all, his failure to pay the electricity bill resulted in the entire apartment shuddering in the darkness of the night. However, the fact that Tom’s negligence also drove Amanda and Laura into a kind of metaphorical darkness is also true. When Tom leaves his family, Amanda, who is elderly and delusional, and Laura, who is painfully shy and crippled, will be left to make money for themselves. Their ability to sustain themselves will be highly questionably, and the likelihood of Laura finding a husband to marry dramatically decreases. Consequently, Tom’s choice to pursue his own dreams essentially dooms his mother and sister to a life of poverty and unhappiness; therefore, Tom is, in a sense, sentencing his family to metaphorical darkness. As the power in the house flickers out, Amanda laments that they have been “plunged…into everlasting darkness” (Williams, 1272). While this comment may be literally somewhat melodramatic, I could not help but be struck by this comment when reading the play, for I realized that, with such a vile act, Tom genuinely had, in fact, forced his mother and sister into unending difficulty.

Glass Menagerie Blog 4

                Similarly to A Raisin in the Sun, Tennessee Williams’ The Glass Menagerie incorporates a great deal of irony into its plot in order to enrich the drama and entertainment of the play. Perhaps the most evident example of irony which can be detected in the context of the play is the dramatic irony in the dilemma concerning the electricity bill. While Amanda is toiling away in the kitchen, Tom secretly confers with Jim and confides in him his secret that he is planning to leave his mother and sister behind in pursuit of a more adventurous lifestyle, just as his father did many years previously. Tom’s first bold step in abandoning his family was to use his paycheck from the warehouse to purchase his membership to the Union of Merchant Seaman rather than pay the electricity bill for the apartment. Because the reader has witnessed this conversation, he or she understands that Tom has intentionally chosen not to pay the bills in exchange for following his own dreams and desires. Dramatic irony occurs, however, because Amanda is unaware of the fact that Tom has disregarded the bill for these specific reasons and is instead under the impression that Tom simply forgot to pay the bill out of pure irresponsible negligence. This sample of dramatic irony is surprisingly significant to the play, for it illuminates characterization of both Amanda and Tom and also elicits symbolism. To begin with, the fact that Amanda was willing to believe that Tom merely forgot to pay the bill due to a distracted or whimsical mind rather than ascertain the true reason for his negligence- his selfish plans to abandon the family in a time of great need- reveals to the reader that Amanda has a genuine heart underneath her delusional and overbearing personality. While Amanda may have been somewhat uncompassionate in regard to Tom’s dreams and ambitions, and insensitive to Laura’s shyness, this dramatic irony reveals to the reader that fact that her intentions for her children genuinely were for the obtainment of their happiness. Amanda may have appeared to have been a little strict on her children, but the reader can now understands that she acted in this manner purely out of her strong desire to prevent her children from making the same mistakes that she and their father made in the past. While Amanda certainly nagged Tom about his habit of escaping to the movies on a regular basis, the dramatic irony present in this scene proves that she never truly doubted his dedication to the family of his commitment to the well-being of the family. Unfortunately, the reader understands long before Amanda does that Tom places his own selfish desires above the prosperity of his family.

                In addition to helping characterize Amanda as genuine and trusting and Tom as selfish, this instance of dramatic irony serves a second purpose of revealing symbolism to the audience. Tom’s choice to allow his own personal ambitions to transcend the needs of his mother and sister literally sent the family into plunging darkness; after all, his failure to pay the electricity bill resulted in the entire apartment shuddering in the darkness of the night. However, the fact that Tom’s negligence also drove Amanda and Laura into a kind of metaphorical darkness is also true. When Tom leaves his family, Amanda, who is elderly and delusional, and Laura, who is painfully shy and crippled, will be left to make money for themselves. Their ability to sustain themselves will be highly questionably, and the likelihood of Laura finding a husband to marry dramatically decreases. Consequently, Tom’s choice to pursue his own dreams essentially dooms his mother and sister to a life of poverty and unhappiness; therefore, Tom is, in a sense, sentencing his family to metaphorical darkness. As the power in the house flickers out, Amanda laments that they have been “plunged…into everlasting darkness” (Williams, 1272). While this comment may be literally somewhat melodramatic, I could not help but be struck by this comment when reading the play, for I realized that, with such a vile act, Tom genuinely had, in fact, forced his mother and sister into unending difficulty.

Glass Menagerie Blog 3

                Tennessee Williams’ emphasis on memory throughout The Glass Menagerie not only served the purpose of examining the impact of such memories on reality, but also the purpose of observing the tendencies of humankind to dwell on the past. This concept is exhibited most prominently in the character of Amanda Wingfield. As the play progresses, the fact that Amanda desires so incurably to relive the “glory” days of her youth is manifested in her frequent flashbacks and elaborate tales. For example, when discussing the need for Laura to receive some gentleman callers, she pours out her heart recounting how popular and vibrant she was a young woman, as well as how frequently she was graced by the presence of pining gentleman callers. Amanda’s obsession with reminiscing incessantly calls to question her motives in doing so. Because Amanda chose to marry a heartless man who abandoned his family for purely selfish reasons rather than marry any of the other more respectable bachelors from Blue Mountain, one may imagine that she recalls the more pleasant aspects of her past as a mechanism to ignore the unfortunate reality of her poor choice. Regardless, Amanda’s obsession has clearly caused her to become delusional at times, permanently impacting her present life.

                Williams models through the character of Amanda how living in the past rather than the present may quickly become a harmful practice. Amanda has harbored her memories for such an extent of time that she has ripped herself out of touch with reality and sentenced herself to a life of delusion. Amanda’s loss of reality is made evident when she dresses herself in a hideous dress from her youth and claims that “styles haven’t changed so much after all” (Williams, 1263)! Despite the fact that the styles had obviously changed quite dramatically, Amanda’s perceptions of her own memories led her to ignore this fact. Amanda warns Tom not to dwell in his past, yet she becomes the worst offender of her own principles throughout the course of the play by doing the exact act she tried to protect her children from performing. Therefore, Williams establishes Amanda as a character who best embodies the unfortunate mistake of allowing the past to overtake the present.  

Glass Menagerie Blog 2

In The Glass Menagerie, Tennessee Williams employs both the literary techniques of hyperbole and simile at critical moments so as to facilitate the characterization of Laura and underscore major themes of the play. When discussing her brief enrollment at Rubicam’s business college, Laura employs a hyperbole when remarking that she was so humiliated that she wished to locate a hole in the ground and hide within it forever. Obviously Laura did not really wish to hide forever, but her overly dramatic statement conveys the notion that Laura suffered from great self-consciousness and humiliation. Furthermore, when Laura reminisces with Jim about their high school days, she admits to feeling great embarrassment at the loud noises her leg brace produced. She uses a simile when lamenting to Jim, “To me it sounded like thunder” (Williams, 1276)! Through the utilization of these hyperboles and similes, Williams effectively characterizes Laura as having an intense case of shyness and self-consciousness. Rather than having Tom simply remark during his narration that Laura developed a tendency to be humiliated very easily, Williams intentionally reveals this aspect of her personality through direct comments made by Laura herself. By enhancing her confession with dramatic literary techniques, Williams allows these attributes to become even more evident.

                Furthermore, these two hyperboles and similes aid Williams in illuminating one of the major themes of the book: the impact of memory on an individual. Although Laura recalls the thuds of her leg brace sounding as loud as thunder, Jim insists that he remembers no such noise whatsoever. He insisted that her memory of the clumping was “magnified thousands of times by imagination” (Williams, 1280). This remark brings to light the human tendency to enhance horrors within the mind when recalling particularly unpleasant memories, a theme which is fairly evident throughout the play. Moreover, Jim asserts that this amplification of terror in Laura’s mind prevented her from overcoming limitation and accomplishing her dreams. Through this realization of Jim, Williams reveals the theme of the novel that is the peculiar manner in which memories can influence an individual’s thoughts, feelings, and action in the present. Consequently, Williams’ utilization of this simile comparing Laura’s clumping to thunder proves itself to be a highly significant literary technique in the play.

Glass Menagerie Blog 1

               Tennessee Williams utilizes a plethora of complex symbols in his play The Glass Menagerie; however, Williams employs this symbolism in a slightly different manner than many other authors use the technique. Rather than leave the symbolic aspects of the play for the reader to ascertain, Williams notifies the reader directly of these symbols and their precise meanings within the context of the story. With this in mind, the analysis of Williams’ placement of these symbols within the plot becomes all the more critical to understanding their full contribution to the story.

                The fire escape by which the Wingfields enter and exit their home is certainly not the normal means by which a family gains access to their home. While a fire escape typically carries the connotation of being a lifesaving device, Williams discusses within the stage directions the fact that, in these circumstances, the fire escape actually symbolizes the means by which the characters enter the metaphorical fire of desperation flaming within their mediocre apartment. The stage directions describe the fire escape as being “a structure whose name is a touch of accidental poetic truth, for all of these huge buildings are always burning with the slow and implacable fires of human desperation” (Williams, 1235). The importance of the placement of this symbol in the story can be seen when Laura scrambles up the fire escape to retrieve butter for Amanda, slips, and quickly scampers back down the escape into the confines of the house. The fact that Laura retreated down the fire escape and back in to the metaphorical fires of desperation reflects her desire to escape the monotony of the home yet overwhelming fear of any foreign concept. Amanda was very accurate in describing Laura: “You couldn’t be satisfied with just sitting home, and yet whenever I try to arrange something for you, you seem to resist it” (Williams, 1263). Laura’s fear of adventure is therefore reflected in her feeble attempt to escape her desperation and her pathetic retreat after the smallest sign of adversity.

                The symbolism of Laura’s glass animals are also tremendously significant to the play because the fragility of the little glass ornaments reflects Laura’s immense physical fragility and emotional weakness. The unicorn in particular represents Laura, for Laura singles out the unicorn as being her favorite because its physical properties differentiate it from all the rest. The placement of this symbolism during Laura’s conversations with Jim is incredibly important in that, in the very instance that Laura finally shrugs aside her inhibitions and dances as an able-bodied woman would, the glass unicorn falls to the floor, and the horn is broken off. As Laura overcomes her inferiority complex and allows herself to be “normal,” the animal’s fragility is compromised, and it, too, becomes like all the others. In this manner, Williams again employs symbolism at the precise moment at which it will elicit the most emotion and significance.

"Those Winter Sundays" by Robert Hayden

                Even within the two short stanzas of “Those Winter Sundays” by Robert Hayden, Hayden is incredibly successful in effectively conveying both a sense of appreciation, love, and respect for this father as well as a sense the loneliness which his father was forced to bear. In my initial reading of the poem, I focused only on the actions of the father and therefore determined that the central theme of the poem was the father’s dedication to his family. However, upon reading the poem a second and third time and analyzing the imagery more thoroughly, I came to form an understanding of how Hayden incorporated this imagery into the poem in order to express his father’s loneliness. For example, the imagery of the father getting dressed in the blueblack cold appeals to both the senses of sight and touch and implies that the father was left in utter loneliness at all the time, with nothing to keep him company but the stark cold and darkness of a winter night. As the poem progresses, the reader comes to understand through the imagery of the father’s cracked and worn hands that he was an diligent and dutiful worker who worked ceaselessly for the benefit of his family despite the physical toll it took on his body. However, the ultimate reality of the father’s loneliness is made evident in the boy’s reflection that “No one ever thanked him” (Hayden, 781) and by ultimately asking the rhetorical question, “…what did I know of love’s austere and lonely offices” (Hayden, 782).The poem’s title “Those Winter Sundays” also contributes greatly to this notion of the father’s loneliness; after all, coldness and winter are frequently associated with loneliness, illness, death, etc. Furthermore, Sundays are a day of rest in which every member of the family would spend at home; therefore, the fact that the father performed all of this work in solitude on a day when he should be with his family reinforces the idea even further that he suffered at the hands of “lonely offices.”

                While the imagery of the cracked hands and blueblack darkness certainly contribute greatly to the idea of hardship and loneliness, the imagery of the crackling fire stands in stark contrast to these images and presents a notion opposite that of loneliness: love and companionship. While the father is alone in the darkness as he prepares the fire for the rest of those in the family, the light and warmth emanating from the fire ultimately draws the son out of bed and presumably will have the same effect on any other family members. Although the speaker expressed a fear of the “chronic angers” of the house, he also refers to his father as the man who drove the coldness from the house. With this description, Hayden creates a bit of irony within his poem. While the father seems to be very lonely and solitary, his hard work and sacrifice seems to be what allows the other members of the family to enjoy warmth, relaxation, and freedom from worry or anxiety. The fact that the father seems apparently willing to endure a variety of unpleasant realities for the sake of his family, however, speaks volumes towards the quality of his character. Consequently, the reader is ultimately able to draw messages not only concerning loneliness, but also messages conveying the importance of making sacrifices for family members and loving others with limitation or the expectation of a reward. Ultimately, Hayden’s implementation of vivid imagery in the poem enables the reader to draw a plethora of themes and morals from the poem which are easily related to.

"The Joy of Cooking" by Elaine Magarrell

In her poem “The Joy of Cooking,” Elaine Magarrell masterfully embodies the complicated relationship between a brother and sister through the employment of a very sarcastic tone and the manipulation of words which very closely resembles metonymy. While the fact that the brother did not literally cut out his sister’s tongue and convert it into a tasty dish, nor did the sister transform her brother’s heart into a meal, Magarrell’s vivid descriptions certainly arrested my attention throughout the duration of the poem. In analyzing the author’s very unique choice in what method to implement in order to convey a brother and sister’s relentless bickering, I found that the Magarrell’s detailed description of the sister’s tongue and brother’s heart to be very similar to metonymy. Although Magarrell never fully refers to the sister as though she were a tongue nor the brother as though he were a heart, she does conduct all of her characterization of the two siblings through their representative body parts; therefore, the author is utilizing a technique very similar to metonymy by revealing very critical aspects of each character through something very closely associated with them—their body parts themselves. Magarrell actually proves that this is a very effective form of representation. Although the actions committed by the brother and sister agitate one another so severely are never described, the reader can form a general understanding of the aspects of each sibling which annoy the other simply through this very unique representation by body parts. For example, because the brother wishes to cut out his sister’s tongue, the inference can be made that the sister must have gravely offended or hurt the brother by means of something which she said. After all, cutting out one’s tongue and preparing it in a dish is not the first form of retaliation that I would conjure up for a good-humored prank that my sister pulled on me! Furthermore, the fact that the sister explains in great detail how she would prepare her brother’s heart indicates that she finds his heart to be lacking such honorable qualities as compassion or perhaps even forgiveness. By commenting that his heart “needs an apple-onion stuffing to make it interesting at all” (Magarrell) and also adding that “Although beef heart serves six my brother’s heart barely feeds two (Magarrell), the sister points to the fact that she finds her brother’s heart to be small and empty. For good measure, the sister finds it necessary to add at the very end that she might potentially serve his heart in sour sauce, adding the last offensive remark hinting that her brother is excessively bitter. Therefore, in this manner, Magarrell is able to accomplish a great deal of characterization without even directly stating anything about the characters’ appearances, personalities, actions, words, relationships, etc.; rather, she is able to accomplish all of her characterization solely through her descriptions of their maimed body parts being transformed into food.

                Lastly, Magarrell’s employment of an incredibly sarcastic (and humorous) tone contributes greatly to the essence of the poem and points to the central theme. While the two siblings are clearly very agitated with another and obviously possess qualities which are found to be greatly repulsive to one another, the very sarcastic tone with which the author writes seemingly implies that the two siblings do not truly despise one another. Even the title, “The Joy of Cooking” carries a sense of humor and sarcasm in the fact that the two siblings would actually find pleasure in injuring or killing one another for the sake of a meal. The sarcastic tone has a double function of both conveying the siblings’ rivalry and frustration while also making the poem humorous and contributing to its entertaining tone.

"The Worn Path" by Eudora Welty

While reading “The Worn Path” by Eudora Welty, I was immediately reminded of Cantos I and II of Dante’s Inferno, which I was required to read for world literature during my sophomore year. In Cantos I and II, Dante talks at great length about a metaphorical journey which he takes through the woods. Cantos I and II serve as an extensive allegory, drawing very precise correlations between one’s moral path in life and the path which the speaker was taking through woods. As the speaker in Inferno climbs trudges through dark woods and marches dutifully up steep hills, the reader also understands that Dante is referring to difficult and challenging periods in one’s life in which his or her character and quality are challenged. In a similar manner, the old woman also encounters many obstacles along her path to retrieve the medicine. For example, the old woman reaches a large incline and remarks, “Seems like there is chains about my feet, time I get this far… Something always take a hold of me on this hill—pleads I should stay” (Welty, 224). In reading this, the reader is able to unearth a nearly identical symbolism to that in Inferno- that is, a steep hill in one’s literal journey through woods is metaphorically referring to difficult and troublesome times in one’s life, regardless of the cause of this struggle. Furthermore, just as Dante encounters gruesome beasts along his journey which symbolism detrimental qualities such as avarice and greed. The old lady encounters fearsome obstacles along her course as well, such as a cruel huntsmen who points his gun right at her face. Nevertheless, the old lady’s determination to retrieve the medicine for her grandson transcends her intimidation just as Dante’s determination to seek the “right path” overpowers his fear of the beasts he meets along the road.

Perhaps the most potent similarity I drew between “The Worn Path” and Dante’s Inferno lies in the comparison of Dante and the old lady’s motivation in making the trek on their foreboding paths. Dante encounters the poet Virgil in the story, and Virgil notifies him that he was sent as a guide to Dante on behalf of a woman named Beatrice, who was Dante’s love. Therefore, Dante’s love for Beatrice serves as his means of guidance and motivation as he faces the challenges of escaping the woods and traveling through Hell. Ultimately, this piece of the allegory symbolizes how those a person loves often act as motivation to bear suffering and struggle through overwhelming challenges. In the same manner, the old lady in “The Worn Path” also stumbles persistently along her path for the sake the one individual in the world whom she loves the most: her grandson. In fact, if the grandson was truly dead, the stories would become even more similar in that both characters were enduring the long trek in the honor of a loved one who was deceased. Ultimately, both stories’ implementation of powerful symbolism allows their respective authors to convey the central themes of the story effectively.

"Once Upon a Time" by Nadine Gordimer

                The most intriguing and significant literary technique which Nadine Gordimer employs in her short story “Once Upon a Time” is her utilization of the frame story technique. By framing the story of the perfect family living happily ever after in their dream home within the context of the writer telling herself a bedtime story after fearing for her life underscores the central theme of the story. The “fairytale” itself addresses an average family with a nice home in a presumably wealthy neighborhood with all the luxuries that a stereotypical American family would be assumed to possess, such as a dog, a cat, and a swimming pool. However, when many dangerous individuals began to loiter within their neighborhood, robbing homes and begging for work on a regular basis, the mother and father took heed to the warning of the “witch” (the father’s mother) to never accommodate any of these men off of the street. Ultimately, took such drastic measures to ensure their security as to install a very gruesome contraption of metal atop a very high fence along the perimeter of their home, and, while at play, their young boy accidentally entrapped himself within the security system and was murdered. The moral of the story lies in the fact that the family’s insatiable fear of any danger whatsoever befalling the family was what ultimately led to their demise. While fear is an inevitable aspect of life, and concern for the safety of one’s family is certainly an honorable notion, Gordimer sought to convey through her story the criticality of not going so far to protect oneself as to prevent oneself from actually living life. The fact that the boy died while adventurously reenacting a fairytale and impersonating a prince saving his damsel in distress by becoming entrapped in the security system is symbolic of the fact that the boy’s enthusiasm for life was choked by the parents’ unconquerable fear of danger. This central theme was also embodied by other neighbors of the parents. All families within the neighborhood were so cautious as to avoid burglary that they installed burglar alarms within their home; however, the systems were faulty. Oftentimes, burglars would in fact take advantage of the system’s malfunctions and burglarize a home while the systems were sounding unnecessarily so as to have the opportunity to ransack the home when they could not be heard over the blaring alarms. By use of these examples, Gordimer was clearly intending to reinforce the idea that obsessive fear and precautionary actions can actually produce more harm that benefits.

                In addition to conveying the theme of the importance of being wary to not be too cautious in life, Gordimer also instilled the notion within her readers that the horrors people fear most frequently are often worsened by fear itself. Gordimer implements the use of the frame story technique to express this theme. Irony is evident within the “fairytale” in the sense that all the families in the novel feared the ominous beggars and burglars outside their homes when, ultimately, their own actions caused their own demise. The mother and father installed a security gate, and their son died; likewise, neighbors established security alarms, and they were robbed under the cover of the noise of the faulty alarms. The things which the characters in the fairytale actually feared would have caused them no harm had they been left alone, but the family’s own precautions should have been what they feared. Gordimer intentionally reflects this theme by using a frame story to discuss how she feared the noises outside her bedroom while falling asleep. Gordimer admits to suspecting a murderer looming outside her door while she was “reading every faintest sound, identifying and classifying its possible threat” (Gordimer, 232), yet she quickly discovered that the noise was coming from underneath her house where miners were busy at work. Gordimer should have been afraid the lack of sturdiness in the structure of her house, yet she focuses her energy on fearing a nonexistent entity. In this manner, Gordimer employed the use of a frame story for extra emphasis on the theme of not allowing fear to overcome one so much that the fear itself actually becomes the true threat.