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.