"Though Frankenstein is a tale of terror, the original philosophical themes that actually make it terrifying have been forgotten. Insipid terror has largely replaced intellectual terror, and thus has Mary Shelley’s avant-garde masterpiece been reduced to a banal monster piece."
Because I have read and studied Frankenstein, I would choose this particular line and develop an argument about how the literary work has been minimalized into a simple "monster piece". I would develop and thesis and argue my point that this work is an avant-garde masterpeice.
You have not yet read this novel. Fitzpatrick tells you in this article about all of the very important topics that are contained in its pages. Choose one. Talk about it. Develop and argument about it. NO REPEATS. There are plenty for everyone, if you read it carefully.
The author of this interesting article, Sean Fitzpatrick, had plenty of strong opinions to say about Frankenstein, which of many I agreed. He created many arguments throughout the article which included the womb being a tomb for babies, Victor Frankenstein representing a creature of rebellion, how monsters are created in the image and likeness of their creators, art being the opposite of science, and how man is the child of a divine love whereas monsters are the child of human pride. These are just the few that stuck out to me as I was reading through the article.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most profound arguments I thought Fitzpatrick made was how a monster is made in the image and likeness of his creator. Fitzpatrick was able to lead this in so many interesting areas to inform us of themes that would be present in the book. He says, "Victor Frankenstein is both rebel and victim of rebellion, as he turns his back on the order of things, forging into territory reserved for gods, only to be beset by the monstrous offspring of his sin." He adds, "While man is the child of divine love, the monster is the child of human pride." No person, besides God, has the divine power to create genuine human life. Victor Frankenstein was rebellious, crazy, careless, and seemed to only act on selfish terms. This must be all of the traits the monster was inherited, but even worse. Because of all of his terrible actions, the monster became them in the flesh. Frankenstein should not have been dabbling in the work only God has the power to conduct. Based on the description of Victor Frankenstein in this article, he may not have been creating the monster out of genuine love like God had when he created man. No one has that power because we do not fully know that type of love here on earth. When Victor created the monster, it was not an act of God. Fitzpatrick continued to add on to this argument throughout the article. To explain this rational he says, "Frankenstein is an imperfect creator and the implications of this run very deep." This relates back to what he said about the creature being "made in the image and likeness of his creator." The insane and selfish mind Frankenstein had was instilled in the monster he created. I felt the end of Fitzpatrick's article was beautifully executed to wrap up a central theme for the book. His end his argument with a comparison of a compassionate God and the human race he created. Fitzpatrick says, "If it were not for the infinite goodness and compassion of our Creator, mankind would be nothing more than a race of monsters whose universal cry would storm heaven with the words of Frankenstein's monster." The difference of our Creator and the monster's creator is that we were not abandoned by our creator and Frankenstein was.
Bobbi I was very interested in your take on his argument. I shared the same belief in certain aspects. Good blog
DeleteYes, you did a lovely job on this weeks blog! I liked your approach and you brought up some very nice points! Keep up the good work!
DeleteI agree with you, Bobbi! Great job!
DeleteThe article written by Sean Fitzpatrick gives us a look into the book we are going to read very soon. He develops arguments throughout his essay and gives way to new perspectives on subjects we only thought to look at one way and not the other, such as comparing a tomb to a mothers womb when she is having a child, or how art and science are two completely different aspects to each other. These are only two out of many, Fitzpatrick also goes on to say that a monster can be in the image and likeness of it's creator, as well as how masterpieces (humans) were made by the divine entity but monsters were made by the human pride and selfishness. All of these very interesting articles but one catches my eye more than the others. This article was written by a catholic so we can only assume that by divine being Fitzpatrick meant his own Lord pertaining to his faith and religious beliefs. If you have noticed earlier in my blog instead of using the word Divine Lord I used entity, this was to not slander what you or someone believes in I simply did not want to discriminate against all religions who believe mankind was made by their higher religious power. As we all know mankind was made by something, wether it be Buddha, Zeus, or God we are now living and loved unconditionally. Mankind has its flaws and the argument that monsters can be created by humans such as how Frankenstein created the monster can be very true. I feel that each if not every person creates a monster within themselves of their own flaws and hatred toward others, I can see this being compared toward the monster in Mary Shellys book. We often see quotes about how demons dwell inside our minds or how we are held back by a monster of some sort, what if that was no demon sent from Satan or an evil power, or a monster that was hiding under our bed and in our closets. What if those demons monsters were creations of our own fears, our own selfish pride, and our own hatred for ourselves or others. Monsters aren't made by the devil or a evil presence but they are made by mankinds greatest weaknesses, selfishness, pride, and hatred.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the argument of Fitzgerald article seemed to take one side, I appreciate your approach to not single out the possible belief in other religions. In your own words it is something people can feel personalized to.
DeleteI'm glad you approach the existence of other faiths and focused on some very interesting aspects of his argument. I also agree with your flawed humanity statement. Nicely done
DeleteSean Fitzpatrick argues several valid statements throughout the duration of his publication. As a side note, I really enjoyed his writing style from the start. It felt dark and slightly macabre from the opening paragraph, which is appropriate when discussing a horror novel. However, I digress. The one argument that stood out most to me was his paragraph concerning the power Victor granted himself over the creature. He states "Frankenstein assumed too much power in an act of cadaverous creation, while failing to assume the compassion and responsibility that creation demands. Frankenstein is an imperfect creator and the implications of this run very deep, giving traitorous birth to a traitorous child that eventually destroys his true family." We all know how the story of Frankenstein and his monster goes, and this statement is factual. Frankenstein brings life to his monster, only to have him chained up and locked away to be tortured by his assistant, Igor. Most people, including myself, believe they are created to be loved, whether it comes from a divine being or the people that surround us. The monster wasn't even truly loved by its own "father," he was just created for the sake of being an achievement of pseudoscience. We see people Ike this everywhere, especially in these types of literature and film. Another perfect example that displays humanity's inability to try value one another is the Saw movies. In these films, a man known as the Jigsaw killer kidnaps people who have been abusing their lives and the lives of others. He gives them a chance at redemption by creating elaborate death traps that the victims must try to escape from. They must either suffer unspeakable pain or die. I feel this relates very well to what Fitzpatrick is saying (albeit in a much more violent and disturbing way). We don't truly value one another, we only care about ourselves and or achievements. Another aspect I took from this is the importance of children. The monster would've been no different from a deformed baby if Frankenstein had truly valued its existence and treated it like a human being. He believes he made a human, but he made a monster because of the way he treated the creature.
ReplyDeleteNick I like how you refer to other sources in your essay to back up the points. Keep up the good work.
DeleteI'm always interested to hear your opinion! This time, I'm not angry about it! Great observations.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSean Fitzpatrick's article on "Frankenstein by Mary Shelley" has given me a profound sense of understanding of the novel before I physically open the book and started to read. His aspects of the article focused on that of importance between something/someone and it's creator, whether that is Frankenstein and it's monster to human and our God. Although that is the most prominent claim, he extends more into the distinction of the "mirror image humanity’s relation to the supernatural." Without brining religion into this argument completely, it is said that human is not as diverse from monster than society believes (in certain terms). We are both created by something higher than we can imagine, someone who has the power and divinity to distinguish our existence. The most shocking statement I come to reckon with is, "while man is the child of divine love (God), the monster is the child of human pride." The powerful essence that statement gives is more than one human being can think about without extending the possibility of this statement. It has been proven that man has been created in the image and likeness of our creator, God. Although the monster is slightly differentiated from the created existence of man, monster is a generated being of ourselves and that of pride. Religion is not the only way people question and think about the compatibility with something like monster and man. For this is just fiction, literature creates a profound uproar of topic consideration and understanding that monster is an offspring of human (figuratively of course). To end Fitzpatrick's article of the simplicity of the monster to human, his explanation of the time he states, "Creator, mankind would be nothing more than a race of monsters whose universal cry would storm heaven with the words of Frankenstein’s monster: “I was alone. I remembered Adam’s supplication to his Creator, but where was mine? He had abandoned me, and, in the bitterness of my heart, I cursed him." There is no better ending to this article that could impact readers as much as this has. The replication of dialog between the creator, monster, and the identification of man to monster has created his argument. Although this sounds like the main point, I believe his main argument is the inability to look in he mirror and have man unable to see the monster. We look in the mirror and see what we want to see, sometimes what we see isn't what we expect or desire to except as Fitzpatrick exclaimed.
ReplyDeleteI really like the quotes you chose. Your analysis was deep and pretty well versed. Nice job
DeleteGreat job Emily!!! I love all of the points you made in this blog and it was very well written.
DeleteThis article written by Sean Fitzpatrick was a very difficult blog to read. As I was reading the article about darkness and the world I tried to dig deeper and discover what the author was truly trying to say. In my opinion, the article is about darkness and no matter who you are, no matter your age and no matter where you are there will always be bad people and darkness. I just recently went on vacation to Mexico. Our tour guide was talking about Mexico and the culture of the beautiful city. Many people think that Mexico City is a dangerous place all the people that live there are horrible people. Our guide concluded with "I have news for you, there are bad people everywhere you go". My mind goes to this moment in my life instantly when I read this article because it relates to darkness. "Babies are buried in their warm mothers' girth" "bodies are dead and buried in their cold Mother Earth". I had to read this at least three times to get anything out of it.i believe that his main argument is that people always have a monster within them. It was hard at first to understand but now looking deeper I realize that no matter how hold you are there will be darkness. When a baby is not yet born, they are protected by the warmth of their mother but there are still things that are harmful to them. If their mothers fall on their stomach or is they smoke and drink. There is always dangers! Sad to say, everyone has sadness in their life and a monster within them. No matter how old or wise people are there will never be someone who is truthfully completely happy.
ReplyDeleteNichole, I like your overall interpretation of the article. The whole idea of yin and yang (or lack there of) seems to be seasoned over the work.
DeleteThe arguments Sean Fitzpatrick made are listed in chronological order:
ReplyDeleteIn the 2nd paragraph, Fitzpatrick argues that Frankenstein is the modern day Prometheus by comparing the characteristics of their lives.
In the 3rd paragraph, he starts reasoning for how Frankenstein is a rebel and a victim of rebellion be describing his controversial actions.
In Fitzpatrick's 4th paragraph, he asserts that art and science are polar opposites, stating "As art can perfect nature, so science can pervert nature."
His 5th paragraph, he claims how unnatural and wrong it is for Frankenstein to create his monster, citing the Psalms for reason.
Fitzpatrick's sixth paragraph argues that Frankenstein's lack of feelings for his monster is why he became what he became. As well as insisting that "Frankenstein is an imperfect creator" and such a characteristic is deeply rooted in his life.
The seventh paragraph argues how the original emotions created in the story of Frankenstein are lost within the Hollywood movie of it.
In the tenth paragraph, Fitzpatrick asserts how there is ONLY difference between a human and a monster is "the difference between happiness and misery."
The argument that I will build off of is number one. Prometheus was a Greek Titan who was the supposed creator of mankind. He received punishment for stealing fire off of Mount Olympus and giving it to the humans. His actions are comparable to that of Frankenstein, because Frankenstein did the unthinkable and created life. But this life wasn't the same as Prometheus's humans, it was a monstrous creation.
"As a perfect Maker created man, so an imperfect maker created a monster," stated Sean Fitzpatrick. This is a quote that stuck out to me as I read this extremely interesting article about Frankenstein. When I read this I immediately thought about the first commandment which is, "I am the LORD your God: you shall not have strange Gods before me." When we as humans try and break this commandment we will always fail. Which is what Sean Fitzpatrick argued in the article.
ReplyDeleteIn this quote "M" was capitalized in "Maker", therefore I knew that Fitzpatrick was talking about God. God is perfect and everything He does is also perfect. Although, man is imperfect and there will always be imperfections in our actions. This is why the maker created a monster. The maker took the place of God and attempted to make a perfect man, but of course that did not work because it is impossible to create something perfect from imperfections.
Fitzpatrick also used this quote from Psalms to describe the relationship between creator and creation. “Thy steadfast love, O Lord, endures for ever. Do not forsake the work of thy hands.” In the mouth of Frankenstein’s fiend, this becomes, “Thy steadfast hatred, O slave, endures till death. You have forsaken the work of thy hands.” The Psalmist sings, “For thou didst form my inward parts… I praise thee for thou art fearful and wonderful. Wonderful are thy works!” The Antipsalmist screams, “For thou didst form my inward parts… I curse thee for thou art foolish and wicked. Wicked are thy works!” This quote from Psalms is a perfect reference of what happens when one does not obey God. God has a perfect plan for us, and when we do not follow that plan we will not be able to live a life of joy. Instead, one will be enslaved to hatred and fear.