Faisal Kamil Megan Parry English 120 22 April 2015 The Upshot of Perfectionism We live in a world inhabited by Monsters. Monsters have been identified and represented in a myriad of ways since the birth of time and humanity. The intrusion of uniformity as we define it, the monster. Monsters have been depicted to frighten and agitate, to destruct and clout arguments, and to shape societies. In the chapter “Monster Culture (Seven Theses)”, Jeffrey Jerome Cohen argues with logic and reasoning to the way monsters have been interpreted far and near time. In everything we create, monsters are the by-products of our technology, the products of the things unconsidered. By inspecting our monsters, we divulge the intricacies of our culture, past and …show more content…
Throughout his chapter, Cohen proposes multiple points towards deciphering cultures through their monsters. Firstly in thesis one, Cohen asserts that “The monstrous body is pure culture…the monster exists only to be read…” (4). The main claim is that some monsters depict intimidating appearance; however, the reflection of their sincere personality might not be displayed through the monster’s look. Cohen suggests that the body of the monster exposes intriguing background of the monster’s culture and therefore it is hieroglyphic. Monsters have the positive attributes and temperaments of humans, regardless of their scary looks. Secondly in thesis two, Cohen expands on the various mysteries on the monsters left behind. The reason a monster is brought back to life, is to give a certain message. No matter how many times the monster vanishes, it will always reappear. Finally, Cohen’s last thesis contends that “the Monster Stands at the Threshold of Becoming” (20). According to Cohen, “Monsters are our children” and keeping that in mind, “they ask us why we have created them” (20). Children reflect us as we influence them. If one were to try to understand themselves, their culture and their social synergy, what better way is it than self-reflection in future off springs? Monsters’ way of life is influenced by humans; it is us that are the …show more content…
Nevertheless in a glimpse, he seems to be utterly examining the existence of monsters; however he is urging his readers and others to completely question everyone and everything. Cultural anxiety signs that prevail society and its behavior are scrutinized for example when Cohen metaphorically compares the monster’s body with the cultural body. We find our true belief as we are invited by those monsters to explore their minds. We are invoked by monsters to have our own culture examined. Cohen’s argument is compelling as he convinces the reader to want to be on his side by using one’s emotion and anxiety to rule over their reason. He creates the reality that everyone is a monster, and coaxes the reader to accept that. As the New York novelist Colson Whitehead once said, “We never see other people anyways, only the monsters we make of them.” Works Cited Bettini, Jessica Lynne. "The Rage of the Wolf: Metamorphosis and Identity in Medieval Werewolf Tales." Medievalists.net. Medievalists, 11 Apr. 2013. Web. 15 Mar. 2015. Cohen, Jeffry Jerome. Monster Theory: Reading Culture. Minnesota: Universty of Minnesota, 1997. Print. "Ready, Willing, and Sableye" Pokémon: Advanced. Cartoon Network. 2 May 2004. Television. Shelley, Mary
Michael Sandel is a distinguished political philosopher and a professor at Harvard University. Sandel is best known for his best known for his critique of John Rawls's A Theory of Justice. While he is an acclaimed professor if government, he has also delved deeply into the ethics of biotechnology. At Harvard, Sandel has taught a course called "Ethics, Biotechnology, and the Future of Human Nature" and from 2002 to 2005 he served on the President’s Council on Bioethics (Harvard University Department of Government, 2013). In 2007, Sandel published his book, The Case Against Perfection: Ethics in the Age of Genetic Engineering, in which he explains unethical implications biotechnology has and may have in the near future regarding genetic engineering.
...rs were and still are very active, but how we decide to define these monsters is changing. As our understanding of these monsters becomes clearer, our perception of the monsters will change. In his article and book chapter Monsters and the Moral Imagination and chapter 5 of On Monsters, Stephen Asma suggests that monstrosity, as we know it, is on the rise as humans progress and how we perceive monsters can often define monstrosities in itself, providing evidence of reasons why monster cultures are on the rise, and showing how human progress has evolved our perception of how we think on the topic that is monsters.
In the novels Grendel and Frankenstein, two characters are presented as one of, or the, isolated and alienated main character. Both experience rejection by the hands of man, and are pushed into roles by the actions of man. Their relation to man, or their state as man’s, “otherkin” magnifies their rejection, but again their status as being “other” justifies their rejection in spite of the harshly negative results. Their status in these novels reflects much of how contemporary authors write about monsters. Out of ignorance, humans rejected their otherkin, Grendel, and the creature from Frankenstein, and as a result the rejected became violent and wreaked retribution on humanity.
Jeffery Cohen's first thesis states “the monster's body is a cultural body”. Monsters give meaning to culture. A monsters characteristics come from a culture's most deep-seated fears and fantasies. Monsters are metaphors and pure representative allegories. What a society chooses to make monstrous says a lot about that society’s people. Monsters help us express and find our darkest places, deepest fears, or creepiest thoughts. Monsters that scare us,vampires, zombies, witches, help us cope with what we dread most in life. Fear of the monstrous has brought communities and cultures together. Society is made up of different beliefs, ideas, and cultural actions. Within society there are always outcasts, people that do not fit into the norm or do not follow the status quo. Those people that do not fit in become monsters that are feared almost unanimously by the people who stick to the status quo.
The concept of an individual type of monster can travel from place to place just like different human cultures are present in different geographical locations, for example, a foreigner moving into a new country. However, the problem the foreigner faces is whether to keep the beliefs of his homeland or to assimilate to the new surroundings. Monsters also have this issue. If the idea of a monster is borrowed by a culture for the creation of a new myth, should the creators of the myths also borrow the characteristics of the monster or come up with a new set of traits? Depending on the situation the creators of myths may choose to preserve the monsters original form or choose to mesh and mold it so that it fits the current mythology of the culture. Either way, monsters play an important part in society, not only do they show what other cultures they communicated with, but they also show the thoughts and...
The creature’s embodiment of the non-European, the outcast, the alien and the other stems from the incompleteness of the monster ability to engage in cretin perceptions of the world he was brought in. Unlike the Europeans, the monster was brought to life with no concept of value, or cultural norms. T...
Cohen states that, "When the monsters come back, they bring a fuller knowledge of our place, but they bear self-knowledge, human knowledge—and a disclosure all the more sacred as it arises from the Outside" (Cohen 20). As the monsters evolve, their intelligence and knowledge levels begin to surpass those of the humans. The monsters begin to question the humanity of humans by asking them, "How do they perceive the world, and how have they misrepresented what they have attempted to place" (Cohen 20). The monsters bring awareness to concerns and issues that exist in society. In one way, monsters appear to have been created to aid the "real humans", but the humans feel so threatened by the monsters that they fail to realize the positive influence they bring to society. Due to the poor treatment the "Other" receive, Cohen demands humans, "To reevaluate our cultural assumptions about race, gender, sexuality, perception of difference, and our tolerance toward its expansions" (Cohen 20). Ideologies that disparage or discriminate, such as evil lies behind homosexuality or that women play an inferior role in society, must be abandoned and left in the past. These mindsets are unsupportable, and it is counterproductive and simply wrong for any group to exclude others merely because of their
Peter Brooks' essay "What Is a Monster" tackles many complex ideas within Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and the main concept that is the title of the essay itself. What is the definition of a monster, or to be monstrous? Is a monster the classic representation we know, green skin, neck bolts, grunting and groaning? A cartoon wishing to deliver sugary cereal? or someone we dislike so greatly their qualities invade our language and affect our interpretation of their image and physical being? Brooks' essay approaches this question by using Shelley's narrative structure to examine how language, not nature, is mainly accountable for creating the idea of the monstrous body.
Lancaster, Ashley Craig. "From Frankenstein's Monster To Lester Ballard: The Evolving Gothic Monster." Midwest Quarterly 49.2 (2008): 132-148. Literary Reference Center. Web. 12 Mar. 2014.
A monster can be characterized by an extreme deviation from the normal standards of society including an internal or external wickedness. In the case of Mary Shelley’s Creature, his appearance overwhelms those who lay eyes upon him. A mere glance can send a villager running for the hills. It was not until the Creature caught a glance of his own reflection that he understood why villagers were so afraid of him. The realization of his ghastly appearance began the monster’s journey into hopelessness. In Peter Brooks’ article he writes, “Self recognition as the ‘filthy type’ completes the mirror stage of the Monsters development.” (Brooks 377). Seeing oneself as ugly and slovenly can cast shadows on even the most compassionate of hearts.
The definition of ‘monstrosity’ and what it means to be ‘monstrous’ can be understood to mean something that is visually unattractive, malformed and/or terrifying. However, monstrosity is not exclusively about something aesthetically ugly, it can also apply to what differs from what is considered ‘normality’. What is ‘normal’ versus what is ‘monstrous’ is closely linked when exploring ideas about the human condition. The representations of monstrosity in Frankenstein and in The Tempest reveal how what is monstrous and what is normal are often found side by side, challenging the idea that it is limited to outcasts who do not ‘fit-in’, and that deep down, a desire to be understood, accepted and included and to live life with meaning are central to the human condition and that monsters in society often reveal our deep seated fears and anxieties about our own existence.
Popular movies often reflect society’s real world fears; likewise in horror movies monsters reveal our true anxieties as well. The monster that I am going to be using as examples will show how they reflected society’s fears and anxieties during specific moments in history.
Brooks attempts to prove his thesis by first explaining how the language in parts of the book relates to how the Creature is monstrous. He alludes to how the descriptions of nature in Frankenstein are more fearful when the Creature is around. For instance, a terrible storm occurs during the Creature’s creation and the “cold gales” in the icy glaciers of Mont Blanc surround Frankenstein when he meets the Creature for the first time after its creation (Shelly 80). Also commenting on the Creature’s story, Brooks finds that his lack of spoken language and attempt to understand these languages allude to the Enlightenment’s noble savage (594). Brooks then associates the Creature with Satan and many top...
Frankenstein shows that what looks like a monster in appearance my not be and what looks normal on appearance may be a monster. While a scary ugly creature may look like a monster a true monster is formed from within and is scene through actions. Along with this knowledge is power and power has the ability to make monsters. The pursuit to know more is a never ending road that leads to lies, secretes, and monstrosity. “How much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow,” while knowledge is boundless and beautiful an excess of anything can create a monster.
What are monsters? Who are monsters? Clawed brutes, winged terrors, and giant robots are examples that fill popular fiction. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?, Philip K. Dick focuses on monsters that are not so easily identified. These monsters have human appearances but lack human feelings; they are defined and ruled by the technology around them, reduced to little more than cogs in the machine. The technology featured in Dick’s post-apocalyptic world is dichotomous and extrapolates from current trends in technology. Technology acts as a medium for connection between people, yet simultaneously isolates them. It is intended as a tool for empowerment, but is used instead for pacification. Through the topic of technology in Androids, Dick echoes bioethicist Leon Kass, who believes that the “technical conquest of his own nature would almost certainly leave mankind utterly enfeebled” (qtd. in Bostrom). In this paper, I will discuss how Philip K. Dick uses technology in Do Androids Dream Of Electric Sheep?, to warn of the danger of such “androidization”, the instrumentation of humans and the loss of individual will and expression.