The Awakening: A Cop Out or The Only Way Out?

Give your opinion about the end of this novel. Is Edna’s behavior a cop out or does she experience an extreme moment of self-realization? Provide examples and support for your view.

Its All Your Fault Victor

Victor Frankenstein is the man responsible for the tragic events that occurred. All of the murders could have been avoided if Victor would have never created the Wretch or, upon creation, treated it with the same kindness that he was treated with as a child.

“No human being could have passed a happier childhood than myself. My parents were possessed by the very spirit of kindness and indulgence. We felt that they were not the tyrants to rule our lot according to their caprice, but the agents and creators of all the many delights we enjoyed.”

It is hard to understand how a man that was raised under so much kindness has nothing but hatred and disgust towards his creation. Had Victor forwarded the love that he received in his childhood towards the Wretch, it wouldn’t have gone on a killing spree looking for vengeance.
Some may say that the Wretch’s evil actions were a result of the hatred that the world showed him. However, the Wretch wasn’t looking for the entire world to love him. He really only needed the acceptance and kindness from his creator, Victor Frankenstein. But when the Wretch smiled and reached towards his benevolent master that brought him into existence, he found nothing but despair. Victor left the Wretch no other choice than to be angry and bloodthirsty. How would you feel if your parents abandoned you?
And even when the Wretch offers an alternate option so that he could gain happiness without having to be a part of Victor’s life, by creating him a companion, he is denied. Victor refuses to recognize the Wretch as a living being that has feelings. Plus, to excite the Wretch’s rage, Victor destroys his work in progress that would become a companion to his creation in the presence of the Wretch.

“The Wretch saw me destroy the creature on whose future existence he depended for happiness, and, with a howl of devilish despair and revenge, withdrew.”

Victor knew his actions would upset the already furious Wretch, and yet he proceeded with them. This only sent him to further his reign of terror. He ends everything in Victor’s life that he was denied to in his own. The Wretch was trying to cut off all venues for Victor’s happiness, which would then leave Victor to focus only his “hideous progeny”.
Frankenstein brought the terror of the Wretch upon himself and everything he loved.

Its All Your Fault Victor

Victor Frankenstein is the man responsible for the tragic events that occurred. All of the murders could have been avoided if Victor would have never created the Wretch or, upon creation, treated it with the same kindness that he was treated with as a child.

“No human being could have passed a happier childhood than myself. My parents were possessed by the very spirit of kindness and indulgence. We felt that they were not the tyrants to rule our lot according to their caprice, but the agents and creators of all the many delights we enjoyed.”

It is hard to understand how a man that was raised under so much kindness has nothing but hatred and disgust towards his creation. Had Victor forwarded the love that he received in his childhood towards the Wretch, it wouldn’t have gone on a killing spree looking for vengeance.
Some may say that the Wretch’s evil actions were a result of the hatred that the world showed him. However, the Wretch wasn’t looking for the entire world to love him. He really only needed the acceptance and kindness from his creator, Victor Frankenstein. But when the Wretch smiled and reached towards his benevolent master that brought him into existence, he found nothing but despair. Victor left the Wretch no other choice than to be angry and bloodthirsty. How would you feel if your parents abandoned you?
And even when the Wretch offers an alternate option so that he could gain happiness without having to be a part of Victor’s life, by creating him a companion, he is denied. Victor refuses to recognize the Wretch as a living being that has feelings. Plus, to excite the Wretch’s rage, Victor destroys his work in progress that would become a companion to his creation in the presence of the Wretch.

“The Wretch saw me destroy the creature on whose future existence he depended for happiness, and, with a howl of devilish despair and revenge, withdrew.”

Victor knew his actions would upset the already furious Wretch, and yet he proceeded with them. This only sent him to further his reign of terror. He ends everything in Victor’s life that he was denied to in his own. The Wretch was trying to cut off all venues for Victor’s happiness, which would then leave Victor to focus only his “hideous progeny”.
Frankenstein brought the terror of the Wretch upon himself and everything he loved.

I Blame Victor

Upon the tragic end of Mary Shelly's Frankenstein, the reader is left with a number of dead bodies and an obvious suspect. Though one can certainly blame the wretch for killing these people, it is Victor who is ultimately responsible for these deaths.

Following the death of William in the beginning of the novel, to the death of Victor's beloved, Elizabeth, towards the end, causes much grief upon Victor. He, however, has no one else to blame but himself for his misfortune. Victor proceeded to creating life, that is a human-like monster. Upon creating a new being comes many responsibilities, that Victor obviously didn't fulfill, which eventually began to ruin his life. Victor and his creature relationship resembles one of a mother and her new born. You would not plan to have a child unless you were ready to take on all the responsibilities that come with raising a baby. Therefore, Victor is responsible for the wretch's wrongdoing and indirectly participated in the killing of his loved ones. If Victor proceeded with the monster's request about creating a new female creature, or merely taken care of his creature, he could have prevented the deaths of his family and friends.

It is in the last few pages on the novel that the reader is provided with both Victor and the creature's view on who's to blame. I believe Victor is extremely selfish and only created the wretch to benefit him. Victor clearly states "...I have longed for a friend; I have sought on who would sympathize with and me. Behold, on these desert seas I have found such on; but I fear, I have gained him only to know his value, and lose him". Thus, though he longs for a friend, as does the wretch; when he discovers that the creature is too much to handle he abandoned it. The wretch's solitude comes solely as a direct result of being the only creature of his kind. He simply longs for love and companionship, that Victor is hesitant to provide him with. As he is neglected by his creator, Victor Frankenstein, he is forced to adapt to society on his own. Thus, i sympathize for the wretch for wanting to get revenge upon Victor. The wretch provides a valid point when he states “...when I discovered that he, the author at once of my existence and of its unspeakable torments, dared to hope for happiness; that while he accumulated wretchedness and despair upon me, he sought his own enjoyment in feelings and passions...of which I was forever barred”. While Victor caused much suffering upon the wretch, he selflessly found happiness with his own companion, Elizabeth, and was thinking about getting married. These feelings of love, care, and companionship that the wretch was inevitably denied filled him with a “..thirst for vengeance” towards Victor. As a result, I believe that Victor caused the “evil” monstrous creature that the wretch becomes in the end of the story. Therefore, he is undoubtedly the one to blame for the story's tragic ending because he created a monster he could not control.

Jesse Young - Frankenstein Post

First and foremost, please allow me to apologize for posting this blog entry so late--I certainly would have been more punctual, but just as I sat down and “had a little something going in the type writer,” in the word of Billy Collins, I was summoned to the Samoan village Lotofaga to defend the natives from a swarm of killer wasps. After coming home, eating dinner, and flexing my muscles for 20 minutes, I only had enough time to write the Government Essay and finish the Wiki article. Now that I have this block of time on the train on the way to Washington D.C.,I will get to the point and attempt to compensate my tardiness with terseness, because my name doesn’t happen to be Ebere ‘Chwukuebuka’ Clifford Anokute.
The question at hand of “Who is responsible for all the of the death and misery in the novel?” implores us not only to analyze Shelley’s carefully constructed characterization of Victor and the Wretch, but also to take a step back, and broaden our focus from one on the abstract themes and hidden motives of the characters to one on the objective facts: What caused the deaths of Henry Clerval, William, Justine, and Elizabeth? What was the root of Victor’s misery? Of the Wretch’s? Who had more and deeper reasons for misery, Victor or the Wretch? These are all questions that must be addressed in any attempt to ascribe definitive “guilt” to one character over the other.
With this being said, and risk of earning the scorn and disapproval of the entire class accepted, it is my [not so] humble opinion that the Wretch, not Victor, is directly responsible for every death and modicum of suffering inflicted throughout the novel. Before you balk to accept this pronunciation and deem me heartless or insincere, take a minute to recall the events of the novel for what they really are.
Aside from Victor’s initial disgust over the Wretch’s ugliness, and the horror Victor experiences upon realizing that he has accomplished the seemingly impossible task of bestowing life upon inanimate matter, all of the suffering and murder does not occur until after the Wretch runs away from Victor and as a result experiences countless rejections from an unforgiving, judgmental society. As Volume II reveals, people are so fixated on the Wretch’s verdigris, that even when he attempts to befriend the DeLaceys, stroll casually through town, and even rescue a drowning girl, he is met with resentment and violence. This failure to find acceptance in society leaves the Wretch with an extremely jaundiced view of mankind, and thrusts him to such a level of unparalleled isolation and misery that he is consumed by the idea of exacting revenge on his creator. The Wretch’s motive, therefore, in committing the myriad of atrocities, is to make Victor understand his abject solitude and misery.
Only once these basic facts are understood could we attempt to ascribe responsibility for the murders and suffering to one character. In doing so, many Wretch supporters attempt to argue that the suffering was Victor’s fault because he abandoned the Wretch, and therefore left him susceptible to the evil, judgmental of society. Wretch supports attempt to argue that Victor’s guardian role makes him responsible for every action the Wretch commits. I, however, challenge that assertion with all the vehemence my heart can muster--since when were parents directly responsible for the negative decisions their kids make? If, tomorrow, I were to break into an old woman’s home, murder her in cold blood, then purloin her jewelry, how many of you would reflect upon my actions thinking “What were Jesse’s parents thinking?! Jesse’s mother is definitely responsible for that old woman’s death, Jesse didn’t know any better.” I’ll venture to guess that no one in the room would think that--rather, most people would say that I am demented and evil, that I deserve to be incarcerated and that I must be held accountable. If my group of friends rejected my company week after week, failing to invite me to their social gatherings and thus making me feel miserable and alone, who here would assert that I would be justified in retaliating--exacting just revenge in the same manner the Wretch did--by, let’s say, taking a key to the side of one of their cars? I use these examples to illustrate two simple facts: though parents are expected to teach social graces, they can and should not be held directly responsible for their kids’ actions--all progeny, including the Wretch, have the free mind and spirit to make decisions on their own. The wretch made the choice to exact revenge Victor by murdering all of his closest loved ones, just as each and every one of us choose the behaviors we participate in everyday. We as human beings cannot dodge responsibility simply by blaming our behaviors on our parents or any influential loved ones--the same social axiom can be applied to the Wretch.
The Wretch’s direct responsibility in causing the murders and suffering throughout the novel is also made evident once we contemplate the true purpose of Shelley’s novel: to reveal aspects of human nature. When discussing Frankenstein, many people throw the phrase “Reveal human nature,” around as one of the most readily discernible themes of Frankenstein, but this discussion of responsibility tests, in my opinion, whether one really understands it or not. Through the triumphs and travails of the Wretch, Shelley is putting forth the argument that it is human nature to seek companionship and acceptance of society: “Shall each man…find a wife for his bosom, and each beast have his mate, and I be alone” the Wretch utters in Chapter III. With this quote, Shelley is asserting that all of us, no matter what color, size, or creed, long to be in the company of others, long to be accepted by a group, that all of us long for an intimate companion with whom we could exchange hugs, kisses, and stories, and that all of us desire--or should I say require---an intellectual companion with whom we could share all of our feelings, fantasies, whims, feedback, and emotions. All of us desire, in short, to be a part of something larger than ourselves, which for the Wretch, of course, is nearly impossible due to his ghastly disfigurement. By saying that it is human nature to have all these desires, however, Shelley is implying that no matter what circumstances the Wretch was forced to endure and regardless of whether Victor stood by his side or not, the Wretch would have experienced all the same exact longings and desires, for they are merely inherent parts of his human nature. Thus, even if Victor fulfilled all of his responsibilities as a parent and stood by the Wretch’s side, the Wretch still would have sought desperately to be accepted by society, still would have longed for an intellectual and romantic companion. Thus, the Wretch would have still ventured out into society in search of acceptance, would have still longed to observe the virtues and vices of men and women, and, most importantly, would have still been spurned and met with opposition with every attempt. Thus, we can deduce that even if Victor did stay by the Wretch’s side, the Wretch’s desires would have been the same-to be accepted by society-his actions would have been the same-to seek that acceptance-and the results would have been the same-rejection and a very, very unhappy wretch. Thus, Victor is fully removed from the realm of responsibility for the Wretch’s actions, for nothing he could have done would have prevented the Wretch’s misery and ensuing violence.
One final point I would like to make, and I promise this is a very quick one, is the tone that Shelley establishes in the closing pages of the novel. When The Wretch discovers Victor’s dead body aboard Walton’s ship, he offers the following apology: “That is also my victim!…Oh Frankenstein! Generous and self-devoted being! What does it avail that I now ask thee to pardon me?” This final point shows that in the closing scenes, the Wretch does claim responsibility for his actions, as he begs Victor, the man he once scorned for being the cause of his misery, for forgiveness.

Victor is to Blame

    Victor failed to take responsibility of the Wretch as a creator. He is the one to be held responsible for the death and
misery in the novel. Victor was to take care of the Wretch as a father would take care of his own son. Instead he feared and
 disregarded the Wretch, sometimes even forgetting his existence.
    When the Wretch first saw light he sought to grasp Victor "one hand stretched out, seemingly to detain me, but I escaped
and rushed downstairs." Victor was frightened by the Wretch although he reached out for Victors love and affection just
like a baby does when first born. Victor did not teach the Wretch the ways of life, he rather left him to figure the world
out himself. The Wretch attempted to communicate with people but they were terrified by his appearance. He observed
a family that lived in a cottage and learned feelings and "conjectured" the words of the family learning how to better
 his communication.
    Overtime he grew lonely and miserable realizing that the family had a father and spoke about what a mother was which
he never recalled having. He envied his creator for not caring for him. He also envied the fact that Victor was surrounded
by people whom shared love for one another. As a result, the Wretch acted out in rage murdering those dearest to Victor.
    Victor claimed "duties towards the beings of my own species had greater claims to my attention." For example he
had promised his parents to care for Elizabeth "to protect love and cherish." He complied with his promise but did not
comply with his responsibility of caring for the Wretch.

Who is to blame? Mr. Heartless Victor or the Wretch?

“But even if I were condemned to suffer on the scaffold for the same crimes, I would not change places with such a wretch…I, not in deed, but in effect, was the true murderer”(96)

I think Victor is the true murder and he even admits it, yet he still blames the wretch. It is reasonable to think that Victor cannot be blamed for the actions of the wretch, for it committed these crimes on its on. Also, it was clearly conscious of the crimes it committed,"“I gazed on my victim, and my heart swelled with exultation and hellish triumph; clapping my hands, I exclaimed,...and a thousand other miseries shall torment and destroy him”(Kathleen's quote)(144)." It knew exactly what it was doing but because of its rage and anger against Victor it committed these crimes. I completely agree that the Wretch committed these crimes and I can understand why people would take a stand against it. However, think about, would the wretch have committed the crimes it committed if Victor treated it with some respect and love. From the beginning itself Victor ignored the existence of the wretch when he ran away after creating it,"escaped, and rushed down stairs. I took refuge in the courtyard belonging to the house which I inhabited;." Victor chose to run away and hide from the mess he just created. As intelligent as he says he is, he couldn't even think about going back and fixing it. Instead he leaves and meets up with Henry Clerval. I believe if he had returned to the monster and fixed things, then he wouldn't have had to endure so much pain. Then again, if I came across a monstrous creature, I would have a ran away and pretended like it never happened. However, that is still no excuse for how he treated the wretch after it decided to come back to him to repent its sins and tell its story. After everything that had happened, the wretch still chose to come back but Victor, as arrogant has he is, didn't respect it,""Devil," I exclaimed, "do you dare approach me?... Begone, vile insect!..." This is his exact words when the wretch returned. The tone here is filled with disrespect, arrogance, disgust and hatred. I almost felt sympathy for the wretch because Victor treated it with so much hatred and it realized that this would be Victor's reaction just has everyone else's reaction,"I expected this reception," said the daemon. "All men hate the wretched; how, then, must I be hated, who am miserable beyond all living things!." Here is a guy who gave birth to a hideous creature and runs away from it merely because he didn't like its appearance, and then when the creature decided to come back pleading for love, he treats it with hatred and disgust. This shows the cold heart Victor possesses. This is exactly the opposite of what the biblical parable of the Prodigal's Son depicts. In the parable, we see a son returning to his father after committing sins and the father accepting the son with open hands. However, in this novel, the son-like figure returns but is denied acceptance and he casted out hatefully. No wonder why the wretch goes on a rampage murdering innocent victims, because everywhere he goes, he is rejected hatefully. He tried to approach the blind man but is shunned out by the man's children. He tried to help a young girl but is shot by her father. Finally, he tries to go back to the only person he hopes might love him, his creator, but he too rejects him. Think about it, he has no one in the world to be with or share companionship with,""Shall each man," cried he, "find a wife for his bosom, and each beast have his mate, and I be alone?."The fact that he cried while saying this should have evoked sympathy in Victor's heart, but the heartless man still refused to accept him or even respect him. Now who do you think should be blamed? Yes, the monster convicted sins but he came back to the only person he had trusted and pleaded for forgiveness. If your child killed someone but came to you crying and begging for your forgiveness, asking you to help him escape the mess he is in. Would you cast him out? or Would you with teary eyes and a forgiving heart comfort the child and help him get out of the mess he is in. Even if a stranger came to me telling his story and crying for forgiveness and asking me for my help, I would try my best to help the person. It is natural for humans to feel obliged in helping others. However, Victor didn't feel the same way and even in his death bed he cursed the wretch,"Let the cursed and hellish monster drink deep of agony; let him feel the despair that now torments me." Overall, I think Victor is responsible for the crimes the wretch committed and Victor should have felt responsible. If he had treated the wretch with respect, most of the miseries he suffered could have been avoided.

You Made The Wretch, Now Care For It!

Both characters can be faulted for different things. The Wretch is responsible for killing multiple people, but Victor is the person ultimately responsible for the Wretch. With this being said I sympathetically support the Wretch and blame Victor for the murders.

The typical argument is that Victor is responsible because he should have cared for the Wretch as a child and then the Wretch would be loving and not capable of murder. I completely agree with argument and I also think that if Victor would’ve never created the Wretch in the first place, than this would’ve all been entirely avoided.

The Wretch explains to Victor that he does feel guilty and somewhat responsible by saying: “I had begun life with benevolent intentions… Now all was blasted: …I was seized by remorse and the sense of guilt, which hurried me away to a hell of intense tortures.” This shows that the Wretch actually has a conscience and isn’t such a terrible creature. This is one of the many things that separate him from his creator, Victor is selfish and it takes a lot for Victor to finally feel guilt or take any sort of responsibility. These murders are all Victors fault, which the Wretch tells Victor when arguing. He explains that he most likely wouldn’t have committed these crimes, if only he was loved and cared for by his creator or at least had some feeling of companionship with him.

Lastly, the Wretch only killed these people in order to take revenge on Victor. If Victor wouldn’t have abandoned him, there would be no reason for any revenge. Victor is clearly responsible for all the deaths of his loved ones, including Justine’s death by default.

Stop Whining Victor and take responsibility!

In my honest opinion, Victor and the Wretch are both to blame. Victor had no intentions on owning up to his "mistake" and taking care of him. On the other hand, the wretch should not have taken revenge on Victor at the expense of innocent people. However, with this all in mind, the wretch is still justified in his feelings towards Victor 100%. Victor should have been there for the wretch to begin with, if he had, then most likely this book would be a lot less depressing.
At the beginning of the story, I sympathized for Victor when he spoke about how he longed for a compainion. However, all of my sympathy left once he created the wreetch and abandoned him to die. I began to hate him once he began searching for pity with simple lines like "the tortures of the accused did not equal mine." He was going insane and he was looking justification. How do I know he's going insane, you ask? Well here's a quote that clearly indicates his descent into insanity: "I slept, indeed, but I was disturbed by the wildest dreams. I thought I saw Elizabeth, in the bloom of health, walking in the streets of Ingolstadt. Delighted and surprised, I embraced her, but as I imprinted the first kiss on her lips, they became livid with the hue of death; her features appeared to change, and I thought that I held the corpse of my dead mother in my arms" ...I think that's indication enough. It's obvious that his take of the story will be biased, but I don't pity him. He should have taken care of the wretch, ugly or not.
The wretch has every right to feel betrayed and angry towards Victor. It's like a child who was brought into this world and then immediately rejected by its parents. It's not fair to the child just like it isn't fair to the wretch. He has every right to want to take revenge on Victor though I don't support the ways in which he did it. in the end he only wanted a companion. "My heart was fashioned to be susceptible of love and sympathy; and when wrenched by misery to vice and hatred, it did not endure the violence of the change, without torture such as you cannot imagine." He's not a bad person at heart, he wanted to be happpy just like any normal human being, but the selfish, cowardly acts of Victor made him into an ugly, evil giant who's filled with hatred.

Like the great Justin Beiber once said: He just needs somebody to love.

It was definitely William's fault for tempting the wretch!

In your humble opinion, who is responsible for all of the death and misery in the novel? Is it Victor? Is it the Wretch? Is it little William?

In my own humble opinion, i believe that Victor Frankenstein can be held responsible for all of the death and misery that presented itself in this novel. I'm not taking the Wretch's side out of pity and sympathy, i truly feel that Victor could have prevented all of the tragic events that occurred. He made the final decision on creating the Wretch, and once it had "awoken", he realized the mess that he had created. From that point on, Victor neglected the wretch, pretending that his experiment never happened. This decision was even worse than the prior. This negligence created an animosity between both the creator and the creation. The wretch was like Victor's baby, meaning he needed to be taken care of. Instead, he was left to die, and once the wretch realized that this was his intention, he wanted nothing more than to take revenge.
Victor was not justified in his reaction to his own creation. He had created the monster, of course hoping for positive data during the experiment, so why didn't he realize that his experiment may actually work, and that the body may indeed be filled with life again? He had no reason to fear the wretch. During his awakening, Shelley used imagery to illustrate that the wretch was not initially evil. She wrote,"His jaws opened, and he muttered some inarticulate sounds, while a grin wrinkled his cheeks. He might have spoken, but I did not hear; one hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain me"(59). This quote is important to the story because it not only proves that the Wretch was not inherently evil but was actually born with great admiration for his creator. So in reality, Victor had no reason to disown him. The Wretch showed Victor his appreciation for the gift of life by doing the kindness thing he knew how to do, which was smile. On the other hand, Victor showed the Wretch quite the opposite. He was ashamed of his creation and made it a point to let the daemon know. He showed the Wretch that he was not worthy of any affection in return, altering the creature's mindset completely.
Although the Wretch performed all of the wretched acts seen in the novel, they were provoked by Victor and the cruel towns people whom he was rarely in contact with. "My heart was fashioned to be susceptible of love and sympathy; and when wrenched by misery to vice and hatred, it did not endure the violence of the change, without torture such as you cannot even imagine"(224). The downfall of the Wretch's morality is similar to the training of vicious fighting dogs. You must beat them and hurt them until the only thing left in their minds is hatred. This is similar to the Wretch's situation. Negative event after negative event trained him to feel nothing more than hatred and resentment. So in the end, everything that happened was due to Victor's carelessness. He created the beast and refused to assume responsibility for him, leaving him to fend for himself in the harsh world. Victor tried to cover up his mistakes, but in the end was faced with the harsh reality of what he had done. All of his misery and grief could have easily been prevented, but instead of facing his problens, he ran away like a coward (literally). The devastation caused by the Wretch was ultimately due to Victor's fear and carelessness, relaying the blame from the Wretch back to Victor.

Victor or The Wretch?

I would have to say that I am fully on the Wretch's side. Considering the actions taken by the Wretch during this course of the novel, its no surprise as to why many people may be pro-Victor. However, I believe that the Wretch was completely justified in every action he took towards Victor.

Victor failed the Wretch as a parent/creator. Among the first things that a parent should do for their child, is to take care of them, Victor on the other hand left the Wretch immediately after his creation. "One hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain me, but I escaped, and rushed downstairs." In this scene, we are able to see the Wretch stretching out his hand towards Victor during the first moments of his life, we commonly see children doing this with their parents. Instead of taking responsibly for his creation, Victor fears it and flees the lab. Victor leaves the Wretch, thus forcing it to learn about the cruel world himself. As the story progresses, we come to find out that the Wretch's life was filled with nothing but "loathing despair" and hatred. Alone, angry, and full of despair, the Wretch learns of Victor's life and envies the fact that he has people to love and people to show compassion towards. This enrages him, forcing him to swear vengeance upon his creator. “I have devoted to my creator, the select specimen of all that is worthy of love and admirations among men, to misery.” The Wretch kills off Victor's loved ones in attempt to make Victor’s life just as wretched as his. The Wretch even admits to having feelings of “agony” and “remorse” after murdering his creator’s companions off, one by one. He had slaughtered the “helpless”, the “lovely”, and the “innocent” because of Victor.

Now, all of this murdering sounds pretty cruel, however, I believe that Victor had this coming. If he had only taken responsibility for his actions, none of this would have ever happened. Victor receives a second chance to make everything better, but it would require him to create a second wretch, for the original one. He accepts this requirement and starts his work, however, as time passes onwards; he begins to grow fearful of his creation and the horror of it all. As a result, he destroys the body of the second wretch and the Wretch strikes back in anger. With this, the Wretch tells Victor, “I shall be with you on your wedding-night.” After destroying the only possible companion the Wretch could have had, he goes on to have his own wedding. This absolutely enrages the Wretch, so he finally kills off Elizabeth, Victor’s wife. Even after the Wretch threatened him, he still continued to have his wedding foolishly.

Victor absolutely asks for everything that happens to him during the course of the novel. If he had only taken care of the monster he created, his life could have been normal, however, he feared the works of his own hands and ran away from it. As a result, the fiend he created became filled with hate, vice, and malice, thus killing everyone Victor had come to love.

Surprise!

Although many argue Victor, the creator, is at fault for all the deaths of his family members, it seems that a lot of people seem to overlook the fact that the wretch was the one who murdered these innocent people. Yes, Victor is his creator and if he had only given the love and care to this once naive being, he would be different, but one cannot place all the blame on this one person. It is like saying a parent is responsible for all the actions of her son. Are his parents truly at fault for everything he does? No, not everything because the son has a mind of his own; he has a choice to make in every situation he is in.

The wretch is guilty of the murder of Victor’s youngest brother. The monster kills this pristine child who is not at fault for anything that has happened to him. Many believe that he slaughtered the boy by accident, however, the creature says, “I gazed on my victim, and my heart swelled with exultation and hellish triumph; clapping my hands, I exclaimed, ‘I too can create desolation; my enemy is not invulnerable ; this death will carry despair to him, and a thousand other miseries shall torment and destroy him” (144). He clapped his hands, indicating his happiness and triumph. He killed this little boy not out of ignorance, but intent of pain. He knew what he was doing. The wretch had a choice to kill William.

At the end of this novel, the wretch gives a speech to Walton telling him how he murdered Victor’s friend. He says, “Think you that the groans of Clerval were music to my ears? My heart was fashioned to be susceptible of love and sympathy; and when wretched by misery to vice and hatred it did not endure the violence of the change, without torture such as you cannot even imagine” (222). The monster murdered Henry and yet he is saying he could barely stand to do so. If he did not want to commit the act, then why did he do it? It is just so hard to imagine that he had murder someone. No one told this beast to go on killing sprees. Is this really the innocent being that everyone sees him to have been? It seems the blood on his hands beg the differ. In fact he could have just looked for a life of loneliness or solitude, but he chose this life of carnage.

There is not only a responsibility of a parent to care for his child, which Victor fails to do, but there responsibility of an individual. The wretch is a creature of the world, even though he was not brought out naturally and was not treated right; he did not have to murder anyone. No one was forcing him to kill Elizabeth, Henry, or William. He chose this path in life. Victor could have possibly made a difference in this creature’s life, but what’s done is done. Victor could not change his role in the wretch’s life, it was too late. However, the wretch could have selected a different way of carrying out his revenge. He is to blame for all the deaths in this gothic novel.

-Kathleen :)

Gimme a W!

As you can all clearly see, the word "wretch" starts with a W. So does the word Winner. As does Winnipeg, Canada. The point is - I am 2000% TeamWretch. Not Team Edward, or Team Bella... Team Wretch. I am now going to explain why in as succinct a manner as I possibly can because my name does not happen to be Jesse Reed Young. Leggo.

So to recapitulate everything that the wretch did, of course we have to talk about all the murders. The wretch seemed to make it his mission to kill every person that Victor held near and dear, including, but no limited to, Elizabeth and Clerval for example. Although he would never kill Victor, he wanted to make him as miserable, and wretched as he was. Undoubtedly he succeeded in doing so, and filled Victor's life with despair, seeing as he was now completely alone.

Ok - the question is, whose fault is it that all those murders occurred? Obviously the blame automatically goes to the wretch (for whom I wish I had a name, because saying "the wretch" is getting annoying) since he's the one who committed the crimes. Right. Ok. BUT. If we take a deeper look at all of this, (and use examples from the text to corroborate our argument ;] ) we can see that in fact, it was VICTOR'S fault that all of these things occurred. Everything that happened stems from the idea that no one FORCED Victor to create the wretch. He did it out of his own passion and curiosity, and I will always stand by the idea that you must (political views coming soon) care for and protect anything you create. It was Victor's choice to create the wretch, and had he acted like a father figure to the monster, it would not have been so violent. The wretch says himself, on page 222, "My heart was fashioned to be susceptible of love and sympathy; and when wrenched by misery to vice and hatred, it did not endure the violence of the change, without torture such as you cannot even imagine." He himself admits that when he was first created, he had a caring, sympathetic nature. But when his attempts to be kind were shunned by society, undoubtedly due to the way he looked, he became angry and wretched.

Because Victor was never there for him, to provide him with a companion, the wretch wasn't able to discern what the right thing to do was in most situations, and his anger caused him to react violently. He says on page 172, "Shall each man find a wife for his bosom, and each best have his mate, and I be alone?" All he's ever wanted was companionship, something he's never had. All his life, beginning with his initial creation when "one hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain me" (59), he's been scorned for trying to show affection. So rather than continue to get his feelings hurt, he took the low road and started strangling everybody & their mother. (Figure of speech)

To bring this brief post to an end, the murders all happened as a result of el wretch-o's unrequited feelings of affection. Had Victor not attempted to spurn his advances, he would have been taught right from wrong, and he wouldn't have had such bottled up feelings that exploded from him uncontrollably.

So i really tried to be terse. Whatever. Intro...


Deuces.

Who Made This Mess? Due Wednesday 11/17 @ Midnight

Upon completion of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, there is always much debate over who bears the responsibility for the tragic events of the novel. And now, it is your turn to lend your voice to this timeless debate. In your humble opinion, who is responsible for all of the death and misery in the novel? Is it Victor? Is it the Wretch? Is it little William?

Pick a side and support your view with a MINIMUM of TWO CONCRETE examples from the novel. Be sure that your argument is convincing and contains the dreaded "textual evidence" as support!

The "most convincing" argument will earn and extra bonus (5 points) on the exam. Best of luck, my little wretches....

The Glass Menagerie: Full of False Hopes.

“[They suddenly bump into the table, and the glass piece on it falls to the floor. Jim stops the dance.]

Jim: What did we hit?

Laura: Table.

Jim: Did something fall off it? I think-

Laura: Yes

Jim: I hope that it wasn’t the little glass horse with the horn!

Laura: Yes [She stoops to pick it up.]”

The Glass Menagerie, Act VII pages 85-86

The Glass Menagerie is a short play, set in 1937, that revolves around Amanda Wingfield’s effort to get her daughter Laura married. She has her son, Tom, invite over one of his co-worker and friend, Jim, in hopes that he will be kind-hearted enough to over look Laura’s bad leg. Little do Amber and Tom know that Jim is superficial and newly engaged.

The passage above is taken from the final act of The Glass Menagerie, where readers expect Jim and Laura to somehow fall in love. The author Tennessee Williams has them share a some what intimate moment in which the two talk about life after high school and dance. Instead, this excerpt was installed by Williams to confuse his readers; he gives them a sense of false hope for Laura, knowing that she can never be loved by someone as superficial as Jim. The glass figure that breaks in the passage, serves as an ominous warning. Any chance of Laura finding happiness with Jim is lost when the main topic of their conversation, Laura’s glass unicorn, is broken.

After reading this passage in the play, I was extremely happy for Laura; I thought the glass unicorn breaking meant her shyness was lost, that she could finally find happiness with Jim as a secure adult. I was completely wrong, but after breaking the figure, Williams further confuses readers by having Jim kiss Laura. When Jim finally confesses that he is in love with another woman and will never see Laura again I was devastated. I felt bad for her, not only did she have a pushy mother, but now she was going to be alone.

Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe

The spell was broken by the head messenger. " Let me pass!" he ordered. "What do you want here?" "The white man whose power you know too well has ordered this meeting to stop." In a flash Okonkwo drew his machete. The messenger crouched to avoid the blow. It was useless. Okonkwo's machete decsended twice and the man's head la y beside his uniformed body. The waiting backcloth jumped into tumultuous life and the meeting was stopped. Okonwo stood looking at the dead man. He knew that Umofia would not go to war. He knew because they had let the other messengers escape. They had broken into tumult instead of action. He discerned fright in that tumult. He heard voices asking: Why did he do it?" He wiped his machete on the sand and went away.

Chapter 24, Page 188

Things Fall Apart by Chinua Achebe is a novel about how the spread of European Christianity and European Colonialism destroys the traditional African way of life. The novel focuses on the Ibo society in Niger. Achebe gives a deep insight into the way of life and the culture within the society by following the life of a strong village leader, Okonkwo. The story shows how Okonkwo rose to his greatness, how he began his demise, and later his attempted redemption that only led to his death. After showing the way of life in Ibo society, Achebe introduces the White settlers from Europe whom act peaceful and righteous while spreading their influence mainly through Christianity. And when the European settlers move into the Ibo society things begin to fall apart. The European colonists take over the Ibo society and destroy their way of life.

This scene is the climax of the most important part of the book. The European just recently disgraced the leaders of the village of Umofia by cutting off all of their beards and hair and now the people are having a meeting in order to discuss what they should do. As soon as the European District Commissioner heard about the meeting he sent his messengers to have it stopped. Okonkwo saw that if they continued to obey the European colonists, they would take full power of the nation. Okonkwo felt that the best way to resist this would be to have a war against the European colonists and force them elsewhere. However, when Okonkwo made the first strike to the enemy, none of his people supported him as they were expected to. He saw that the village of warrior people that he once knew and loved no longer existed. He then knew that there was no hope for his people; they were going to be overtaken by the White man. Okonkwo felt so shameful that he committed suicide, for he could not bear to see his dear village fall to the power of the European colonists.

This passage brought to light the way that the European colonist took over and devastated Africa. Previous to reading this book, I was confused on how it could be possible for the Europeans to walk in to Africa and just take it over as it was portrayed in most of the textbooks that i have studied from. But now I see and understand. The European colonist pacified the African people to the point in which they lost their fight. And those who retained their fight were so few that they could hardly make a difference. ( However, there are is one exception to this and that is in the case of Ethiopia [led by His Imperial Majesty Hailie Selassie I]which was the only African country not colonized by Europe. )

Personally, i was greatly saddened by this story simply because it was a sad part of the history of my people. And for such a proud and strong man to die in the manner that Okonkwo does is truly tragic.

JAHlil Over and Out

TV Tantrum

In the contemporary novel, One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, by Ken Kesey there is one essential passage that basically marks the whole turning point in the novel.

“McMurphy says again that he guesses it must be game time and he stands up … Nobody else stops work. … Everybody keeps on at what he’s doing, but they all watch out of the corners of their eyes while he drags his armchair out to in front of the TV set, then switches on the set and sits down. … ‘Hoo-wee! Man, all I need me now is a can of beer and red-hot’ –McMurphy …We can see the nurse’s face get red and her mouth work as she stares at him. … then she gets up and goes to the steel door where the controls are, and she flips a switch and the TV picture swirls back into the gray. … To tell the truth, he don’t even let on he knows the picture is turned off; he puts his cigarette between his teeth …and sits that way with his hands crossed behind his head and his feet stuck out in a chair … ‘I said, Mr. McMurphy, that you are supposed to be working during these hours.’ –Nurse Ratched …And we’re all sitting there lined up in front of that blank TV set. … If somebody’d of come in and took a look, men watching a blank TV, a fifty-year-old woman hollering and squealing at the back of their heads about discipline and order and recriminations, they’d of thought the whole bunch was crazy as loons.”

This scene creates one of the best changes among the characters in the novel. This is the first time that all the patients come together and stand up against the evil Nurse Ratched. Before this happened, they all requested to take a vote on weather or not their schedule should be change, so that they would be able to watch baseball and do their cleaning work at another time. This was a fair request, being that the facilities were cleaned every day and it wasn’t vital for the place to spotless. Also, baseball season only lasts for a short amount of time, therefore they could all go back to their normal routines once the season was over. When it came time to vote no one raised their hand because all the patients are terrified of Nurse Ratched, all except for McMurphy. He repeatedly expressed to the other patients that they need to stand up for themselves and not let Nurse Ratched control them. After the TV incident happened it gave them all further confidence and it brought them closer together as friends. The tone of this passage is a very humorous one and so is the rest of the novel, which is one of the main reasons it is greatly enjoyed.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

"It was on the moral side, and in my own person, that i learned to recognize the thorough and primitive duality of man; I saw that, of the two natures that contended in the field of my consciousness, even if I could rightly be said to be either, it was only because I was radically both"

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde pg 61.

This passage was written in Dr. Jekyll's letter which was later read by Mr. Utterson after Jekyll's death. In his letter he explains that he himself is Mr. Hyde. The passage is written when he tries to explain the experiment which led to the transformation. The importance of this passage is that it helps explain the theme of the duality of man. It talks about how everyone has two mindsets: good and evil.it also helps explain the character of Dr. Jekyll more because it explained his death was a result of his fight with Mr. Hyde, his evil side, for possession of the body they both shared. The battle was lost by both sides as Dr. Jekyll died.

I really liked this passage because it's true. Everyone has two sides to them: the good side and the bad side. This passage says that these two sides are what makes a human being, human. There is always a battle of good and evil happening in our minds. A battle between our conscience and our impure thoughts. I liked this passage because it explains the universal theory of the "duality of man." It is one of the few things that all people have in common. Their ability to be either good or bad and the fact that they have a choice. An example of this is if someone needs money they can either a) get a job: the moral choice, or b) rob a bank:the immoral choice. Dr. Jekyll separated the two parts and as a result ended up killing himself. This is why it is so amazing that we can have these two completely different mindsets and yet still have them live in harmony.

The Stranger

“As if that blind rage had washed me clean, rid me of hope; for the first time, in that night alive with signs and stars, I opened myself to the gentle indifference of the world. Finding it so much like myself—so like a brother, really—I felt that I had been happy and that I was happy again. For everything to be consummated, for me to feel less alone, I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate.” (pg: 123)

The Stranger, by Albert Camus

This quote is not only the most powerful quote in the novel; it’s also the only quote that truly establishes the theme of Camus’s work and the true nature of his character, Meursalt. Throughout the novel, Camus describes the life of the protagonist, Meursalt, who views himself has a rebel of modern society. The novel opens with the death of Meursalt’s mother; the tone he uses in the opening paragraph is of negligence because he doesn’t care about the death of his mother. This is the sort of personality Meursalt displays throughout the novel. The climax of the novel is when Meursalt shoots an Arab man for no reason and thus, he is convicted for it. After this scene, Meursalt is sentenced to death and send to prison, where he begins to realize that society is not rational and the world is indifferent of human existence. He is a man who is stoically unconcerned about anyone’s feelings or affections; he didn’t even care about the death of his own mother or the love of his girlfriend Maria. He believes that the world lacks rational order and purpose. He comes to this conclusion when he realizes that there is no avoiding death. He finds that it’s futile to have false hopes and chances of escape because he can’t avoid death. However, he discovers a new type of freedom in this; he believes that it is easier to live life without worrying about hopes and emotions, which are burdensome. This is ironic because at this point, whether he lives an easier or difficult life, doesn’t really matter due to the fact he is going to be put to death either way. This passage is influenced by the setting of the novel; his experiences in the prison led him to believe that there is no hope in survival and that he is doomed to death. He claims that “I had been happy and that I was happy again” because he no longer has to worry about emotions such as love, hope and regret in prison because he is about to die and these emotions will only waste the little time he has left. The isolation in prison brought him to the realization that he no longer has hope and that he should just live life with the little time he has, as free of emotions as he can. The prison also impacts his character in some ways because until he was send to prison he was careless about everyone’s feelings, including his own. He was confused about life and didn’t know what he wanted to do with his life. Also, he believed that he was like an outsider in society, a prisoner who didn’t fit in because he did not follow the ways of society. He was a rebel because he did not like the way society was functioning, and that is why he was known as an outsider or the “stranger”. However, towards the end of the book when he was in prison, he felt more happy and free than ever before because he didn’t have to worry about emotions. Yet it’s ironic how when he wasn’t in prison he felt like a prisoner and when he was in prison, he felt free. Also he began to feel less alone; he realized that the world he was in was unconcerned about the people in it; it still kept spinning and growing, just like him who didn’t care about anyone else. Therefore, he calls the world his “brother” because both are similar in their indifference of people, “I opened myself to the gentle indifference of the world. Finding it so much like myself—so like a brother”. He also stated,” For everything to be consummated, for me to feel less alone, I had only to wish that there be a large crowd of spectators the day of my execution and that they greet me with cries of hate.” This further supports the fact that he was indifferent about what people thought of him just like the world was indifferent about the creatures that lived on it. He wanted there to be spectators that greeted him with cries of hate so he wouldn’t be lonely. Overall, this passage defined the true nature of Meursalt’s character, illustrated the impact of the setting on the character and revealed the theme of indifference in this novel.
The reason I choose this passage is because it intrigued me due to several reasons. One of the reasons was that it reminded me of Howard Roark from Any Rand’s novel, Fountainhead. Roark and Meursalt have so much in common regarding their selfish beliefs; neither characters are concerned about the feeling and affection of others and both do what they believe is right. Another aspect I liked about the passage is that Meursalt was forceful in his assertion at the end; he had claimed that he no longer worried about emotions, yet this passage is filled with his emotions. It revealed the true emotions that were inside of him that he had never before exposed. In the beginning of the passage he mentions that he got rid of all his “hope”, yet at the end he was “hoping” that there be a large crowd of spectators to greet him with cries of hate. He also claims that he was “happier” than he was ever before because he was free now, thus indicating his emotions at work. It revealed the human nature that was truly inside of him that he tried to deny all throughout the novel. An ordinary prisoner sentenced to death would hope or wish for survival somehow; but Meursalt, on the other hand, accepted this inevitable fate and proceeded on with pride and confidence as if he was going to live an happier life than he has lived all this time. The passage illustrates the true nature of Meursalt’s character and it also contains the overall theme that was present in this novel.

During the summer I read the play  "Madea" by Michael Collier.
Throughout the play I came across a passage that  grasped my attention.

    "Nothing will undo my resolve to kill my children and escape- but it must be  quick.
If I hesitate now someone else will murder them more cruelly. There's no  way out.
They must die. And I who gave them life will take it(76)." This passage  reveals how nefarious Madea is.
She is filled with rage because her husband  Jason left her for another mistress. She is willing to go to the extremes to get  revenge on him, as far as to kill her own children.
Madea wishes to make him  suffer for the grief he caused her. 

    The use of language was powerful " And I who gave them life will take it" I  disagree with Madea killing her children just to acquire revenge.
She has no  right to decide when her children's lives come to an end. The children are not  to blame for what Jason has done. They are innocent and should come first in her  life.
But Madea thinks otherwise "For even if you kill your sons, you once loved  them dearly(76)." Madea does not care for her children and the thought of  killing them can bother her less.  
  
    Reading this passage portrayed Madea as a woman who was rather bazaar. 
Questions such as if she was mentally insane came to mind.
Perhaps she did not  intentionally mean to kill her children and developed a disorder that
lead her  to commit such a crime.

Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad

"Everything belonged to him--but that was a trifle. The thing to know was what he belonged to, how many powers of darkness claimed him for their own. That was the reflection that made you creepy all over. It was impossible--not good for one either--trying to imagine. He had taken a high seat amongst the devils of the land--I mean literally. You can't understand--how could you?"
- Part 2, Page 14

With this quote we see that Marlow, the main character; is commenting on Kurtz, the antagonist of the novella. This part is fairly important since it develops more of Kurtz's character and adds more detail. This one excerpt from the story is easily one of my favorites. One of the things I love about this passage is the way the author wrote it, the style in which this passage is written, truly convinces me that Kurtz is evil. The way it is written makes it seem as if the author himself is the one speaking and is dealing with this firsthand. Throughout the book, Kurtz is almost recognized as a god among the locals in the Congo, but with this, he is exposed for what he truly is. Foolishly blinded by greed and power, he threw himself up above all others. He was top rank among his peers at the Inner Station and was very powerful when it came to words. Among that talent, he had charisma and was able to lead groups of men with ease. With such skills, he was able to achieve a high status, but then he used his talent for his own evil deeds and needs. I believe that the Joseph Conrad captures the essence of Kurtz very well here.
Does the passage remind me of a situation I have lived as well?
Now, I have never been in such a situation like this, and I hope to never be. However, the passage does bring up a question: do people honestly get so lost within greed, that they forget what is right and what is wrong? It is nature when it comes to deciphering between the two.

I'd have to recommended this book, since i did enjoy it a bit. However, it was a pretty slow start and was a bit difficult to jump into.

Medea, by Euripides

“Stronger than lover's love is lover's hate

Incurable, in each, the wounds they make”.

- Lines 516-548, Pg.53

Throughout the plays rich use of dialogue and overall flourishing tragic drama that Euripides embodies within his work Medea, I found that this quote most fully grasped my attention and most importantly provides the overall message of the the play. As the play mainly reflects upon the love-hate relationship of Medea and Jason, one notices how the play takes a cynical view on love through a more destructive way. It is important to remember that the root to all Medea's anger is love. After her husband abandoned her for the daughter of Creon, Medea's hatred for Jason becomes so fierce that it drives her out of control. Thus, her plot for revenge begins as she plans to murder Creon, his daughter, and her two sons. It becomes quite ironic, however, when one notices the tremendous amount of hate that Medea has for Jason, yet makes no attempt to kill him. This is merely because she wants him to suffer more than she has; thus the only way to fulfill her plan of revenge is by murdering his children.

Hence, the quote stated above ultimately describes Medea's rage throughout the events that occur within the play. Love and hate(two very important themes in the play) are demonstrated in this quote as it describes how hate triumphs over love. The chorus seems to be saying whether your filled with love or hate towards someone the wounds that occur as result are incurable. Both become two very powerful feelings that inevitably lead to tragedy. Thus, the tone of the quote immediately gives the reader a sense of hostility and hate that allows for a better understanding of how Medea is feeling. That is, Medea's hatred for Jason that leads to his demise in the end. This scene becomes an essential part to the play because it is where Medea becomes angered with Jason for leaving her for another woman.. Medea feels betrayed by Jason because she was left by a man she gave up everything for; such as her country and her father. Now she is expected to be exiled and has no place or person to turn to because she threw away everything she knew for her husband. Jason then discusses his future goals for his family and says that Medea should view his “royal wedding” as a plan to help her and her children prosper. However, Medea believes nothing Jason is saying is genuine and does not want to acquire wealth the way he aspires to. It is along these lines that Euripides incorporates the scholarly and wise words of the chorus. Not only do they express the terrible things that are going on, but they also deviate from the drama as they break up some of the tension that is built up between each scene. Nevertheless, while it is blatant that Medea is furious with Jason – she is also infuriated with the whole society. All in all, one can distinctly conclude that Medea was passionately driven by her desire to get revenge.

P.S - This book was by far the best play I have ever read. It is filled with tons of drama, tragedy, and death that keep you involved and awake throughout the entire play. Although it is an extremely short book it is straight to the point and interesting. I personally loved it and would recommend it to anyone :)

Atlas Shrugged by the extremely beautiful Ayn Rand

"She looked at the crowd and she felt, simultaneously, astonishment that they should stare at her, when this event was so personally her own that no communication about it was possible, and a sense of fitness that they should be here, that they should want to see it, because the sight of an achievement was the greatest gift a human being could offer to others." (222)

This section stood out to me because I felt that it was the heart and soul of the message that Rand tries to convey in Atlas Shrugged. Throughtout the 1000 page book, Rand is always tying in a message in some way. One theme that is always evident throughout the story is self-achievement. Each character that Rand creates, not only in this novel, but in her other novel, The Fountainhead, she always makes the characters self-righteous and greedy for specific things. Each of her characters are extremely independent and have extreme, distorted, and unique views on how to live their lives. Dagny Taggert dealt with the skepticism from societ of the John Galt line not being able to run, but they didnt phase her. She was certain of her abilities and she was confident that the line would run and therefore she went for it. She had determination and strength that most people will never have in a lifetime. Ayn Rand made all of her characters have a sort of almost unrealistic strength. Her characters were always self-righteous and self-centered. Each normal human emotion was turned into a philisosphical idea. Up until this point, Rand made it her business to make it unclear of what Dagny wanted out of the creation of the John Galt line. Did she want to power? The money? The fame? But at this point, it becomes clear that nothing and no one is more important than achievement.
My personal reaction to the paragraph wasn't exactly positive. I felt that by saying that achievement was the greatest gift to offer was being sort of ignorant. Ayn Rand has very strong vivid view points on life but at some points I feel that she needs to learn a bit more. I feel that her viewpoints are very one-sided. She doesn't give a chance to to feel any other way about something...If that makes any sense. On the other hand, I was impressed by how she made me feel the passion that Dagny felt towards the John Galt line. She made me feel as though I had created it myself.

The book is long and very time consuming. But it'll change you as a reader.

Medea, The Woman You Never Should've Broken Up With

“My misery is my own heart, which will not relent.” (Page 49)

Medea by Euripides


Although this quotation is fairly short, it may not seem significant to those who have not read this play, but this line holds more power than an entire descriptive paragraph. I read the play Medea by Euripides, and within its thin binding was a story so outrageous, I could not believe that it was put together in a mere 42 pages. And yes, I know that it was a short read, but it was so full of detail and drama, I couldn’t help but become enthralled by its temerity.
This play was about a woman who abandoned by her husband, who ended up taking her rage out on him, his new family, and even her children. This quote sums up the play because it shows what was going on in Medea’s mind at the time. She was overwhelmed with grief and sadness and did not know how to cope. The only thing that seemed reasonable was revenge. This woman loved her husband and bore two sons for him, yet he still left her; so of course she was extremely hurt. Secondly, she was distressed because she knew in her heart that she did not want to hurt her ex-husband and her children, but at the time, she figured that murder was the only way to cure her pain. Medea struggled with these decisions, especially the one about killing her two sons, which I personally cannot blame her for. However, she went through with her original plans, killing her husband’s new lover, his lover’s father, and her two sons. Ironically, her husband Jason’s new lover happened to be the Princess of Corinth, her father then being the king. Medea murdered them all, except her ex-husband because she wanted him to suffer the way she did. The quote states that her pain and misery is her heart, her own fault, and it will not end. She wants the same pain forced upon Jason.
I believe that this quote is extremely important to the play because it shows the reader that Medea is not this cold hearted woman, but a woman who is hurt by her husband’s infidelity. She had to contemplate one of the most drastic decisions ever created, and it really weighed on her heart. She would be crazy(er) if she was completely okay with all of this murder. This quote shows the deeper intellect of the human mind. Medea knows that the problem lies within herself. She could have been a good wife and stayed at home and tended to the kids, but no; she reacted in a way that made her look like a real human being, instead of an irrational crazy lady.
All in all, I absolutely loved this play. It was so full of chaos and drama, it was nearly impossible to take a break from it. Although the story line seemed a little ridiculous, it was a great read. I recommend this book to absolutely everyone. No matter what kind of literature you enjoy, this play has it all.

East of Eden by John Steinbeck

My passage is a little on the long side, but I tried to shorten it and it was strange so I'll just type the whole thing.

"She gave him no chance to speak. 'I'm going away now'

'Cathy, what do you mean?'

'I told you before.'

'You didn't.'

'You didn't listen. It doesn't matter.'

' I don't believe you.'

Her voice was dead and metallic. 'I don't give a damn what you believe. I'm going.'

'The babies--'

'Throw them in one of your wells.'

He cried in panic, 'Cathy, your'e sick. You can't go--not from me-- not from me.'

'I can do anything to you. Any woman can do anything to you. You're a fool.'

The word got through his haze. Without warning, his hands reached for her shoulders and he thrust her backward. As she staggered he took the key from the inside of the door, slammed the door shut, and locked it.

He stood panting, his ear close to the panel, and a hysterical sickness poisoned him. He could hear her moving quietly about. A drawer was opened, and the thought leaped in him-- she's going to stay. And then there was a little click he could not place. His ear was almost touching the door.

Her voice came from so near that he jerked his head back. He heard richness in her voice. "Dear," she said softly "I didn't know you would take it so. I'm sorry, Adam."

His breath burst hoarsely out of his throat. His hand trembled trying to turn the key, and it fell on the floor after he had turned it. He pushed the door open. She stood three feet away. In her right hand she held his .44 Colt, and the black hole in the barrel pointed at him. He took a step toward her, saw that the hammer was back.

She shot him. The heavy slug struck him in the shoulder and flattened and tore out a piece of his shoulder blade...She tossed the pistol on the floor beside him and walked out of the house."

This passage certainly enforced what the reader already knew about Cathy, which was that she is a cold-hearted, manipulative soul who possesses, or lacks, some extra or inhuman trait, as Steinbeck mentions several times. In the beginning, Cathy was beaten up and left to die by a another man who she also manipulated . However, she used what little strength she had to crawl towards any form of help, which in this case happened to be two brothers living on a farm. They, particularly Adam (the gunshot victim), nursed her back to health for several long months. During these months. Cathy manipulated Adam into marrying her just so she would have money and stability in her life. After moving into a home of their own and bearing his children, she waited only a short amount of time before she decided she no longer needed Adam, who was, by this time, helplessly in love with her. When Adam made it difficult for her to leave, Cathy simply shot him without even thinking once about it, nor look back at Adam on her way out.

Prior to any of this, however, the reader gets a glimpse into Cathy's childhood. Here she is manipulative and evil as well, burning down her own house and making it look as thought she was in the fire. Everything about her plans is very precise and is almost always executed perfectly. She knows how to play on other's feelings and weaknesses in order to get what she wants very well.

What struck me most about this scene was how someone could be as evil and cold as Cathy was. Simply shooting someone like that, with no legitimate reason, seems like a feat only a crazy person or someone without a heart could do. Her words also added to her appalling behavior, such as when she told him to throw the children that she bore into a well. Losing a child seems like one of the most terrible things that can happen to a parent, and yet here she is, indifferent and detached from the fate of her children. Later in the book, she never even returns to see how they grow up.

I would recommend this book to only certain people. It is a long and rather descriptive story, which I know is not for some people. Personally, I liked it alot. It was not a difficult read but it was interesting and used descriptive language. The characters were extremely well developed. The reader was able to learn about every character in-depth beginning when they were a child, so the reader knew why characters did what they did or why they were the way they were, as opposed to when one reads a story and starts off when they're older. The reader even knew the background of their ancestors, who had little part in the book.

Dracula by Bram Stoker

One of the books that I had read over the summer was Dracula by Bram Stoker. Even though, it was not as intriguing and exciting as I had expected it to be, it had deep meaning. It occurs to me that maybe the book isn’t simply famous for its horrific concept of such a monster as Count Dracula— which captures those daring to read about the absurd. Several beliefs such as ridding the world of the unacceptable (in this case Dracula and the rest of his vampire companions), and placing one’s feelings aside in order to protect society and one’s self from something that is malignant to them is displayed in this science-fiction novel. Furthermore, this book suggests that as man becomes too powerful (and most likely deceived by his pride that he is invincible), he turns into a monster and is perceived as a threat to society. Count Dracula’s power and authority is apparent throughout the novel. He is very wealthy, owning a mansion isolated by a mountain in Transylvania, and he controls the wolves that linger around town. Moreover, he has power over the people of Transylvania; they fear him and yet do not mention any of the strange events that take place in the presence of Dracula. They carry out his commands without questioning his authority, and Dracula locks the gates on the protagonist, Jonathan Harker when Jonathan discovers that Dracula is an evil-being. Jonathan seeks to escape from the grasp of Dracula. Dracula has a confined set of rules for Jonathan to abide by while he stays at the mansion, and as Jonathan starts to associate his feelings to that of a prisoner in the castle, he attempts to leave the place. Dracula derives his power from those that are ignorant to and refuse to believe that vampires exist. Therefore, Dracula has fewer opponents to face than if others were aware of his existence and his gruesome acts. Still, Dracula remains partially blinded by his pride since he boasts of the long lasting power that his family has managed to maintain over centuries conquering other civilizations. This reveals his flaw of lack of realization of other possible outcomes.

One of the main characters, Van Helsing states:

…many a man who set forth to do such a task as mine, found at the last his heart fail him, and
then his nerve. So he delay, and delay, and delay, till the mere beauty and the fascination of the
wanton Un-dead have hypnotise him…Then the beautiful eyes of the fair woman open and look love, and the voluptuous mouth present to a kiss—and man is weak. And there remain one more victim in the Vampire fold; one more to swell the grim and grisly ranks of the Un-dead!...” (406)

This quote describes the difficult assignment the characters must take on throughout Stoker’s novel, Dracula. The tone of the quote is one in which Van Helsing is reflecting on the heaviness of an obligation he has to his friends and the rest of society. The quote makes the reader reflect about his own responsibilities and choices. Jonathan Harker, Arthur Holmwood, Van Helsing, Quincey Morris, and Johnathan Seward form a group to work together against the antagonist Dracula. As the men discover that Dracula is a vampire and try to defeat him, Dracula uses their women against them to prevent them from overpowering him. He bites Lucy Westenra, the wife of Arthur eventually killing her and turning her into a vampire. This causes much grief to Arthur and the rest of Lucy’s friends knowing that they have lost the one they love. In addition, they will have to kill her “Un-dead” body to prevent her from attacking other people and increasing Dracula’s army of vampires. They know that they must go through with this, in order to save the rest of mankind. At the beginning Arthur finds this hard to fathom, and he refuses to allow the annihilation of the only memory he has left of his wife—her deceased body. Moreover, it is decided that Arthur must be the one to kill the vampire that has consumed Lucy’s body and taken her form. Eventually, Arthur agrees to the heavy duty placed upon him, hoping that it would restore Lucy’s holiness, and allow her to finally rest in peace. He realizes that he doesn’t want any more monsters such as Dracula roaming the earth and dedicates himself to doing whatever it takes to conquer Count Dracula. Arthur must now think of Lucy’s “undead” body as a device being used by Dracula’s evil force, in order to prevent his feelings from interfering with the demolishing of Lucy’s remains. Arthur and Van Helsing whom are working with the others to defeat Dracula drive a stake through Lucy’s heart, and they fill her mouth with garlic after cutting off her head. They watch Lucy’s corpse disintegrate before their eyes, and even though they are sad about it, they gain a sense of hope for Lucy, and the rest of the human race. One day, the men discover that Dracula has bitten and sucked the blood of Harker’s wife, Mina as well. As they come face to face with three female vampires, they notice how lovely they look and their attraction to the women attempts to distract them. Although this scene serves as an insight to what they will have to do to Mina, they annihilate the female vampires. Again, the men are reminded of Mina’s soon to be fate when they try to put garlic on her forehead to guard her from Dracula’s visits. Instead of protecting her, the garlic burns her and leaves a scar on her head. In discussion, the men determine that Jonathan her husband, will kill Mina when she starts to worsen in appearance and action. Primarily Jonathan declines their notion, but he reluctantly accepts it.

Similarly in life, one must make decisions that are complex and tend to draw in his emotions. Sometimes, one might fear doing something absolutely necessary that will greatly affect him, and in doing so he delays the mission. However, this piece suggests that if one allows something that he is emotionally attached to manifest, though it be not good for him, it can become overwhelming and end up being destructive. The quote proposes that one learn to overcome his fears for a worthy cause. In the mist of uncertainty, one should not be discouraged by change but instead, view it as an opportunity for growth and maturity and establishing one’s self as an individual.

-I would not recommend this book to anyone to read, but I would recommend that if one read any part of this book, it would be the citation that I have listed above. It is significant not only to the theme of the book, but to life’s circumstances as well.

Julius Caesar, by William Shakespeare

“There is a tide in the affairs of men
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.” (84)

This quote was said by the protagonist, Brutus, during the fourth act of William Shakespeare’s play, “Julius Caesar.” Brutus and Cassius (both conspirators against Caesar) are in war with Antony and Octavius because of Caesar’s death. Antony and Octavius are motivated to avenge Caesar and keep Rome in their possession. Brutus says this quote to explain why they must go after Antony’s army instead of waiting for his military to come to them. This passage helps explain the theme of Fate vs. Free Will. Brutus is explaining to Cassius that if they miss this opportunity to show bravery and strength they are only hurting themselves because chances like this only come every so often. It is about recognizing when there are chances and taking advantage of them. If the army was to miss out on this opportunity it may not occur again and they would lose everything they have worked for. The murder would have just been in vain because they not only lost their lives, but Rome would still be ruled by a Caesar (Octavius). Brutus’ army is at their pinnacle right now and Antony’s army is only getting stronger, eventually they will be much stronger than them. They must act now before they are at a disadvantage. This reveals Brutus’s real character. He is a very righteous man. In fact Antony calls him the “the noblest of all Romans.” He is the only conspirator motivated to murder Caesar for the good of Rome. He still believes he is fighting for the Romans’ best interest and therefore wants to go after Antony’s forces. He thinks that Caesar is only after ambition; as a result he supported the killing of Julius Caesar and anyone who is going to follow in his footsteps. This speech is not only inspiring, it is convincing as well. Cassius cannot help but agree with Brutus. Cassius originally deemed it a more advantageous tactic to play a defensive war; however, it is neither as courageous nor bold as a war battled aggressively. Cassius seems to really trust Brutus’ opinion because he changed his mind about certain decisions quite a few times because of Brutus. It shows that Brutus is not only a more dominant character, but also a very persuasive one. He knows how to talk to not only the general public, but also to individuals. He also shows a lot of passion when talking about this war because he wants to put Rome in his possession. He truly loves Rome and his zeal for this state is what drives him to act throughout the entire play.

I originally decided to read this book because of this quote. I heard it on the show One Tree Hill and I didn’t really understand it; as a result, I decided to read the play hoping to comprehend this particular quote better. When I first read this extract, I got excited because I had finally gotten to the part I’ve been dying to read. Although it is not climax of the play, it leads the characters in that direction because it pushes for the war to actually take place. It still did not make much sense to me till I read the passage over. I love the way that Shakespeare compares the choice to a flood because of the actual picture that comes to mind. The high tide represents rare opportunity and it is a good comparison because high tide does not come very often. It has a beautiful meaning about not only fate, but human choice as well. Most plays, like Oedipus Rex, discuss the theme of fate, but only to mention free will because it does not exist. Everything is planned out and trying to prevent certain events from happening only cause them to happen. This passage from Julius Caesar gives off a different message about fate; humans have choices to their destiny. We all have the ability to decide what we want to do and this quote reinforces that precise idea. It is about keeping our eyes open so we can find that chance. Opportunities are rare and if they are not discovered and not acted upon then the prospect at becoming or gaining something new is gone. It is a life lesson: chances do not come every so often, so when they do, take advantage of them. This quote makes me want to live life to the fullest; meaning try everything and take each opportunity given.