In my view, I doubt whether we have misread McCullers’s concern with the deformed people, these “monstrous” characters. We could not explore the flourishing connotation of freakish figures through its correspondence with essence in existentialism. Nor could we simply validate these characters as the product of the exaggeration on loneliness and failure in gaining love. Because these interpretations seem to reduce the aesthetic distinction that McCullers creates. Furthermore, these interpretations “involve a certain sacrifice: they tend to lose humanity, becoming symbols rather than people” (Evans, 302). William Van O’Connor’s accounts for the grotesque in southern writing as a response to a world of violence and upheaval, is highly reasonable
Rot & Ruin is a fiction novel written by Jonathan Maberry, set in the post-zombie apocalypse. The novel was released in the United States September 2010. 14 years after the zombie outbreak, this book follows Benny Imura five months after he turns fifteen as he looks for a job so that his rations won’t be cut in half. This is a third-person narrative that follows the protagonist, Benny Imura. Benny is 15 years old pale, somewhat skinny, has brown hair, and dark green eyes. Benny needs a job to live in Mountainside, a town in the Sierra Nevadas in Central California, and reluctantly joins his half-brother, Tom Imura, in the zombie-hunting business and discovers the reality of the business.
It is scientifically proven, that people prefer attractive people. Appearances help millions of good-looking men and women across the country advance in their careers, get free drinks, and receive more opportunity. But, Mary Shelley juxtaposes the physical deterioration of Victor as her novel, Frankenstein, progresses and the creature ’s ugly physical appearance and the motif of clouds juxtapose with birds to argue that appearances may be deceptive. She argues through the juxtaposition of Victor and the creation’s death that ultimately it is through death, one of nature’s devices, that allows us to see the character of a person.
It is known by many that, in regards to literature coming out of the South, female characters traditionally do not receive as much attention or detail as their male counterparts. Harry Crews does not, as one might say, “stray far from the path” of male dominated prose. However, this is not to say that there are only few women present in his writing, in fact quite the contrary. Women are not only present in Crews’s work, they are vividly entwined with the experiences and fiery outcomes of his male protagonist’s journeys; and A Feast of Snakes is no different. In “Having a Hard Time of it: Women in the Novels of Harry Crews,” an essay written by Elise S. Lake, Lake examines that even though some may interpret Crews as using women strictly in disrespectful or obscene ways for the advancement of his male characters, that “sheer variety disputes the notion that Crews stereotypes women narrowly” (84). We see a multitude of angles and personalities in A Feast of Snakes alone, including: Lottie Mae and Beeder acting as an empathy release valve; the abused wife, Elfie; the ultimate cheerleader/ catalyst, Berenice; and finally the vicious sexual icons Hard Candy and Susan Gender.
Certain needs must be fulfilled for one to achieve a life of tranquility and fulfillment. As we see the relationship between Abraham Maslow’s hierarchy of needs with the treacherous creature from Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein”. There are many connections between the two as for the creature’s life of continuous hell from his outcast from human society and civilization due to his abandonment at birth from the creature’s creator, Victor Frankenstein. As we interpret and show the connections between the hierarch of needs and the creature, you will ultimately see the main reason for the creature’s terrible life, is the hideousness of his physical appearance. Human nature is shown to be one of evilness and misunderstanding due to the popular
It is hard to say that one is human and perfect at the same time. Human beings are not capable of achieving perfection; if that would be so, humans would stop being humans. By nature the human race is full of flaws, some appearing as early as in the womb. From defects in the body, to defects in the mind, to the mistakes that one makes in quotidian life, it is impossible to deny that human imperfection exists. To try to manipulate humans into perfection is not only impossible, but it takes away the very essence of being a human being. The short story “The Birthmark” by Nathaniel Hawthorn, illustrates this teaching through the character of Aylmer, an ambitious and devoted scientist who is appalled by his wife Georgiana’s birthmark, believing it to be a perceivable sign of her human flaws and eagerly waits to remove it from her cheek. This story raises riveting questions such as, what is humanity all about, can human beings ever achieve perfection through science, is Hawthorn attacking science or a wider issue, and more significantly, should science take the place of God. Through the use of symbolism in “The Birthmark”, Hawthorn indirectly implies that imperfection is an essential part of being human and that science should not interfere; thus he is hinting his personal views toward science and its limitations over nature.
Wherein lies the odd attraction and power of the freakish? Just as often as it introduces us to expressions of common human experience, study in the Humanities also introduces us to the decidedly uncommon--to writers, artists and thinkers who push conventional limits of language and narrative, vision and imagination, memory and history, or logic and rationality. For our Freaks of the Core colloquium, we explored the outer limits of human expression and experience. What, we asked, defines the abnormal or the outlandish? the fanatical or heretical? the illusory or the grotesque? Why are we commonly drawn to the very uncommon? "Nothing, indeed, is more revolting," wrote Thomas De Quincey in his famously freaky Confessions of an English Opium-Eater, "than the spectacle of a human being obtruding on our notice his moral ulcers or scars, and tearing away that 'decent drapery' which time, or indulgence to human frailty, may have drawn over them" (1).[1] But De Quincey chose to tear away that drapery in his Confessions nevertheless, believing that his outlandish experiences with addiction, poverty and illusion would teach his readers valuable lessons that outweighed any offense. "In that hope it is that I have drawn this up," wrote De Quincey, "and that must be my apology for breaking through that delicate and honorable reserve, which, for the most part, restrains us from the public exposure of our own infirmities" (1). The essays below also tear away the "decent drapery" which covers the sometimes unsightly extremes of human experience, and they do so with similar hopes and reasons.
One key archetype which is significantly highlighted by both writers is that of female beauty. One way in which this is explored is by presenting the female protagonists through the lens of ‘Male Gaze’ in order to articulate the way in which women are typically portrayed as objects, products or art to be desired due to the assumptions and perspectives of the heterosexual male. Claire McEwan therefore argues that Duffy’s poetry challenges “the masculinist representations of female identity that pervade history and literary discourse […] in order to reject the rendering of women as an aesthetic construction” , a view which corresponds well to Duffy’s poem “Pygmalion’s Bride”. Within which Pygmalion’s goal appears to be creating the ideal woman, with no concern paid towards her identity, rendering her as only aesthetically valuable. The narrator thus describes having her “stone cold lips” kissed, her “marbled eyes” thumbed and told “blunt endearments [of] what he’d do and how.” Yet when Pygmalion “let his fingers sink into [her] flesh” Galatea states that she “would not bruise” which can be seen as her refusal to conform to what he wants, instead she “played statue” refused to “shrink” and rejects the identity which has been constructed for her. Therefore as she transforms from “stone” to “stone cold”, a vision of beauty suspended, inanimate and susceptible to Pygmalion’s absolute power, into a woman who “screamed [her] head off”, Pygmalion’s attraction to his sculpture dissipates as his conceptualised image of her beauty becomes tarnished.
Baldick, Chris. In Frankenstein's Shadow: Myth, Monstrosity, and Nineteenth-Century Writing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1990. Print.
This paper seeks to address the literacy and stylistic issues presented in two texts. Specifically, an extract from Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Wilfred Owens’s Dulce ET Est. Decorum. Initially, the paper will outline the prevailing social and historical contexts associated with the two texts. The principal purpose of this work is to address the themes common to both texts. For this to be achieved, an initial investigation and critique of both authors use of language will also need to be looked at.
Howe, Irving. The Book of the Grotesque. Winesburg, Ohio Text and Criticism. Ed. John H. Ferres. New York : The Viking Press, 1966. 405-420.
Christopher Johnson McCandless, a.k.a Alexander Supertramp, “Master of his Own Destiny.” He was an intelligent young man who presented himself as alone but really he was never lonely. However, he believed that life was better lived alone, with nature, so he ventured off throughout western United States before setting off into Alaska’s wild unprepared where he died. Some may say he was naive to go off on such a mission without the proper food and equipment but he was living life the way he wanted to and during his travels he came across three people: Jan Burres, Ronald Franz, and Wayne Westerberg. McCandless befriended these people, it is believed that he made such a strong impression on them that their connection left them with strange feelings after finding out about McCandless’ death.
The Victorian freak show in Britain exhibited bearded ladies to dwarfs entertaining all classes of Victorian society. Furthermore, it encouraged the public to gaze at the ‘otherness ’ and to evaluate their meaning in relation to Victorian values and hierarchy. As Leslie Fielder argues the freak brings to life our most secret inner fears, ‘the freak challenges the conventional boundaries between man and female between human and animal’ . This essay will explore and analyze the treatment of racial freaks in nineteenth century British freaks shows, to demonstrate how they reflected a number of social, political and economical factors. Additionally, it will focus on women especially, because the foreign female promoted the idealization of the
The sheer frequency of revisions concerning the appearance and characteristics of the ghostly figure are staggering when compared to number of revisions made elsewhere in the poem. Perhaps the first thing one notices while examining Owen’s revisions is the long stretch during the figure’s speech in which there are very few marks of revision by the author. In contrast, the sections in which the figure is described, or in which he describes himself, are heavily revised. It appears, then, Owen’s primary difficulty with the first draft of his poem was not with the content of what the ghostly speaker said, but with how the character was portrayed.
The personification of the brutal objects conveys the brutality and hardships in which the slaves need to endure. The use of personification revolves around a negative tone: “No art, no care escapes the busy lash” (11). The author emphasizes that care does not escape from lash, but rather there to cause pain and harm. Being “busy” refers to the never ending pain the lash emits. “The lengthy cart-whip” (17) guards its master’s reign by abusing the slaves to show who have power over them. Freneau’s usage of “Scorched by a sun that has no mercy” (33) describes that even the sun in nature shows no mercy. The sun is beating down on the slaves, showing no mercy like the whips of the overseer. “Here nature’s plagues abound, to fret and tease,” (9) expresses how nature contributes to the torture of the slaves. The “snakes, scorpions, despots, lizards, [and] [centipedes]” (10) are parts of nature’s mockery. By giving harmful objects human actions or emotions, Freneau reflects the thoughts of the overseers.
The representation of monsters in mirrors has a venerable history, stretching back into antiquity with the legend of Medusa. In this myth, the hero, Perseus, uses the goddess Athena’s bronze shield to perceive the Gorgon as a reflection, allowing him to decapitate her and avoid being petrified by her unmediated gaze. The fable enacts the desire to gaze on the spectacle of the monstrous other even as it destroys that very spectacle in its climax. A vampire narrative such as Bram Stoker’s Dracula resurrects this fascination with monstrous revelation through reflection, but troubles this relationship by emphasising the monster’s absence in the mirror. This absence raises questions about the nature and location of monstrousness which can best be answered by a recourse to Psychoanalytic criticism. Lacan’s “Mirror Stage” applied to the ‘shaving scene’, both in the original novel and Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 film adaption, reveals the vampire not as a monstrous other, but as a spectral self, repressed by the meconnaisance that identification with the ideal-ego produces. The theory, applied to the novel, reveals an inherent doubling of Dracula and Jonathan as oppressor/oppressed – a doubling which the violent end of the book completes. This doubling also extends to the reader/viewer of Dracula, who stands an invisible spectator in front of the mirror. Where the reader of the novel must be content to analogously inhabit Jonathan’s position, the viewer of Coppola’s film uncomfortably takes a position of Dracula, the repressed self who lurks behind/within Johnathan. Ultimately, both texts reveal the unseen presence who haunts the Goth...