BELOVED

The slavery, oppression, lifestyle, and torment of the characters in Beloved is far over my head in terms of relation and comprehension. What these characters go through seems to be a roller coaster of emotions and the differences in the types of relationships and how they have come about is unfatheomable in my eyes.pg 156 the chapter is ended with, "Paul D's chest rose and fell, rose and fell under her hand." I see this quote not as the physical interpretation of the moment being spoken of, but in my stretched opinion, an interpretation of what the novel is and what the characters go through. Throughout the novel there is always a false sense of hope; something prosperous that could be just around the corner. In terms of my life and what I consider to be hope and prosperity, this novel does not relate to. Obviously not,because of the grim reality of the situation that these characters have gone through, and the truly horrid tribulations the characters have faced throughout their lives. Anyways, back to what I was saying about hope, or hope as far as this novel goes, it is always just around the corner. Whether it be the hope of Paul D and Sethe at the carnival of finally coming to happiness, and that hope being broken by Beloved; or the hope when Sethe and Paul D come frollicking home like little kids only to the dismay of Paul D, to be welcomed by his favorite obstacle, Beloved. My point being that hope seems to be an intangible throughout this novel. Whether it be the hope that Sethe is finally free, only to be found by schoolteacher, and questionably attempt to murder her children to save them; or the hope for Denver that Beloved is finally someone Denver can rely on in her life, only to realize that Beloved is completely intent on stealing every bit of Sethe's attention as possible. It is a grim outlook on this captivating story, yet very true in my mind when I look back on the novel. Hope is around every corner only to be shattered around every corner. Something I can only reflect on, but not relate to.

Beloved

I love books that I can start and absolutely can not put down. However, with Beloved, after the first 30 pages thats all I wanted to do was put the book down. I was utterly confused at the beginning of this novel, just because of the language and sensual confusing explanations of things and the ambiguity of setting, plot, and characters made for mass confusion for me anyways. This, much to my satisfaction, was just a hill that I needed to get over before the book started to uncover itself.
The way that pain and past are slowly uncovered continually adds new aspects to the relationships that are being formed throughout. It seems that hope is something that is always just around the corner but is slightly hindered by a new up and coming twist or revealed information about the past at Sweet Home. Paul D's arrival into Denver and Sethe's life seems to be something much needed for Sethe and her way of life. When they go to the carnival there seems to be hope, " They were not holding hands but their shadows were. Sethe looked to her left and all three of them were gliding over the dust holding hands. Maybe he was right. A life."(56) Maybe he was right; or was he? it seems that with the arrival of Beloved, she is beginning to act as a wedge between the two, at least in Paul D's mind, "i can't place it. It's a feeling in me."(80) This of course regarding his feelings towards Beloved. For me this quote acts as a foreshadowing of what is to come. With the spiritual ambiguity with the baby ghost and the mystery behind Beloved I can only attempt to forsee what Beloved is going to bring onto this household especially with her seemingly knowledgable questions regarding the past of Sethe and her tribulations at Sweet Home.
The color aspect of the home is something that I found to be most interesting and I believe it to be a motif that will appear later in the novel. This color that is described as dull and only being in two orange squares on the quilt, I feel is a represenation of the sadness that needs to be overcome by the cast of characters. Each character is dealing with their own colorless life, whether it be Denver's lonliness, Paul D's search for something more, or Sethe dealing with repressed memories and a life which she ultimately wishes to repress but obviously cannot. As far as I have read, Beloved seems to be somewhat of a color for Denver and somewhat of an outlet for Sether (an unbiased yet somehow extremely knowing listener). We shall see what Beloved has to offer and how these themes come into play later in this intriguing novel.

final project proposal

For my final project I am looking toward doing an extension of my Literary analysis paper. The paper I did for my analysis was regarding the text Dracula; for my paper I chose to explore the motif's of female sexuality along with the battle between past knowledge and present knowledge. However, for my final project I do not believe these motif's connect particularly well with a single other novel we have read thus far in this class, although there are hints of such motif's throughout in most all the novels we have read thus far. Therefore, for my final project I was planning on incorporating all of the villians or monsters read thus far into one sort of monster analysis. The characters that made the cut would be Frankenstein, Dracula, Monk?, Heathcliff (possibly not I don't really feel as if his character was dominant enough or as dynamic as the other characters throughout), Lestat & Louis as a duo, and possibly one of the characters from beloved which I have yet to indulge in.
In the analyis I will discuss motives, beliefs, causes, setting contribution towards advancing plot, human nature vs. monster nature, ultimate character downfalls, mistakes, plot possibilities. I will be trying to incorporate some of my original motifs from Dracula such as female sexuality and the battle for past and present, However as I said they just aren't apparent in a few of our stories. As a possiblity I would like to leave open I was thinking about maybe also, a spoof short story that although it would be based off of sarcasm; I believe I could incorporate character aspects in a very interesting piece with a humorous twist. I do not believe for this satire or whatever you would like to call it, that I could incorporate all of the characters but I do believe some of the characters have interesting parallels and very controversial and substantial differences (more so the latter) that could make for an in depth character analysis that would actually be somewhat interesting to read.

Too Far Rice..... Too Far

On page 262, Benefiel quite plainly states the elusiveness of the vampire character over its life by describing it as, " the figure of a vampire, so varying and adaptable in the hands of many authors, became a liminal, transgressive figure, a stage upon whome the fears and secret desires of society could be acted." From my brief introduction to the vampire character through this class as well as some main stream references i've obtained over my life; I completely agree with Benefiel in the sense that Rice's Interview with a Vampire, is a novel portraying the traditional mortal family with a vampiric twist. The mortal family is set up through vampiric notions; such is that of how the fathers are put into place, and also how Rice sets up Louis to almost be the maternal figure in the sense that Lestat trains her to kill and survive while Louis teaches her how to grow up and how to indulge in life around her. I enjoy Benefiel's ideas of the vampiric family as being dynamic especially through Rice's work; However I do not find this article to be ground breaking in the sense that this is exactly what our class has been discussing over the past week and a half while reading Interview.
The quote from pg 262 beggining this blog, explains in general terms exactly what I believe Rice's novel to be directed towards-that being exploring the secret desires of society as well as exploiting the idiocy within the perfect mortal American family. Not to say the perfect American family is not desirable; yet it is near impossible, and who is to say that dysfunctional families aren't perfectly functional? Rice's controversial choice to implement the vampiric child of Claudia into the world of dysfunctional bisexual fathers is interesting enough. I understand that from Benefiel's point of view about vampires, "most can be categorized, if anything, as bisexual,"(268) and also from our classes point of view that there is a much deeper meaning to the twisted reality of the sexual vampiric family-that being from what we've discussed, to portray the sick and twisted secret desires of our society? From personal opinion, i cannot wrap my head around this, due to the fact that I do not believe society to have these secret desires. Yes, indeed there are the sick and twisted roaming the earth; but to broadly state them as everyone's secret sexual desires I believe to be absurd. Interview with a Vampire makes for a very interesting novel, however I believe it digs and tries to expand the vampiric nature too far with its sexual inuendo's and explicit creepy sexuality. Such is that when Louis is describing his and Claudia's relationship he calls her and himself, "Father and Daughter. Lover and Lover."(Interview 90)
Rice definately trotted down new paths with her expansively creepy Vampire characters. The book as a whole is a very entertaining and brilliant read; However, when analyzing the text for what it is; it goes against every grain of my being-that being my straight, heterosexual, non-child molesting self.

Vampiric struggles?

The first hand account of Louis' life as a vampire gives way to this new sense of vampire that Anne Rice has created through her novel, Interview With a Vampire. I believe that with this novel a new age of vampires became apparent. A new age of vampires, or vampire, where his (Louis') shortcoming, doubts, and his fears all come into light with this interview style novel. Never before, or at least from what I have read, has human emotion been so deeply intertwined with vampiric passion, such is that within Louis.
"You must understand that what I felt for Babette now was a desire for communication, stronger than any other desire i then felt...except for the physical desire for.....blood."(67)Louis is a character in a constant struggle with his once incomplete human life to his now incomplete vampiric life. There is a constant struggle between the two; one which Rice wishes to display prominantly. He wishes so deeply for a connection with someone other than Lestat, while also seemingly wishing to keep his human reality in tact; although it is now non-existent; something Louis must come to terms with. This struggle between human and vampiric life comes more into focus for me with the addition to the squad-Claudia. She is a vampire women in a beautiful doll like child's body. To me this is the most abstract and confusing character in the novel. Her presence is uncanny to say the least. Her representation of womanly beauty through her seductive vampirisim and yet she often times falls back into a childlike needy role. Claudia as a character is one that seems to be so easily to break her basically non-existent human ties; or does she? Louis says on pg 99, "And then strange things began to happen, for though she said little and was the chubby, round-figured child still, I'd find her tucked in the arm of my chair reading the work of Aristotle or Boethius or a new novel just come over the Atlantic. Or pecking ou the music of Mozart we'd only heard the night before with an infallible ear." This of course he is speaking of Claudia who is beginning to dynamically grow up into a woman of the world. However, she most continually throughout the novels falls back into a child like state. Such is that on pg 138, when she is weeping over Louis' repulsion for her, "I foundher lying on my bed in the place where I often read, her knees drawn up, her whole frame shaking with her sobs. The sound of it was terrible. It was more heartfel, more awful than her mortal crying had even been."
Louis and Claudia as Rice's character for me represent a dynamic coming of a vampire unlike that of the stereotyped evil, bloodlusting, castle dwelling, vampire of prior. This new age vampire, mostly Louis, is one that seems to have an innate feeling of struggle between his human and vampiric nature. Of course his human nature is now non-existent; it is something that is most interesting to watch as his character develops and copes with his new way of life, ultimately becoming desentisized to his irrefutable blood lust.

blogging My blog for the bloggers (Bible of Hell)

Wowzer. Sandra Gilbert's, Emily Bronte's Bible of Hell opened my eyes to a lot of interesting parallels between the novel Wuthering Heights and for the most part the religious realm, but also between nature and culture.
First, I will begin with some of the more confusing aspects of this reading. Consistently, Susan makes parallels between Catherine and HeathCliff as characters. Often she ties in the fact that HeathCliff is "female in his monsrosity", to Catherine's feminine personality. For me anyways I always thought of HeathCliff as representing manhood and masculinity in this novel. Which also is confusing because they compare HeathCliff to Satan and Catherine to Eve; which makes sense and has a lot of validity, but when i envision satan I believe in a masculine empowerment, one that for me HeathCliff represents throughout Wuthering Heights. I have absolutely no reason to believe that HeathCliff shows any representation of femininity; He's rough, mean, manipulative(maybe female quality?hah), self-empowering, big in stature, dark, twisted; and overall just manly, probably even has a lot of chest hair to go along with his manliness.
When First reading this, she talks a lot about a Miltonic View; one which after researching and looking into makes a heck of a lot more sense. Milton's parallel to the bible portrays Satan with many heroic qualities when matter of factly in the end he of course does not turn out to be the hero, thus opening the parallel with our favorite man, HeathCliff. Satan/HealthCliff is the ruler of Hell/Wuthering Heights? While Thrusscross Grange seems to be heaven in a sense? These questions seem to me to make sense, however in Sandra's view she often complicates the two and if fact on pg. 389 when she is discussing the children looking into Thrusscross Grange and speculating that if they were inside, " we should have throught ourselves in heaven!" Then sandra goes on to say that, "once the children have experienced its Urizenic interior, they know that in their terms this heaven is hell. This for me was a confusing parallel, because in my eyes I liked at the two places although similiar in many aspects as basically heaven and hell, thrusscross grange and wuthering heights. However she then goes on to say that the hierarchy of being at the Grange signifies and represents a westernized heaven, whereas the chaotic and overbearing environment of the house and house itself, not to mention the owner, represent a satanic Hell.

Hell seems to be a near invevitable fate for all characters in the story. Thus, the difference of the two houses and seemingly between heaven and hell, in reality(of the book) have no difference at all. All characters run as far as they can as Sandra says, but only come closer to the fate which they are trying to escape.

Beginning Wuthering Heights

I am amazed at the complexitites of the character relations thus far in Wuthering Heights. From what i can tell the tale and the events surrounding wuthering heights seem to be very skewed through the different accounts from very different character bias'. So far Nelly seems to be the only truthful and reliable character, although their seems to be an air about her as well that as gone undected by me so far.
The most interesting character, or should I say the most conflicted character, in the story so far would be Mrs. Linton or Catherine. She is unbelievably selfish and childish in almost every scene she is in. She doesn't know what she wants yet still seems to be very protective over HeathCliff despite her marriage to Mr. Linton. At first i was indifferent about her character, but after reading further I have come to hate her. The way she throws her husband to the wolves(heathcliff) possibly in hopes of HeathCliff taking her as his own. That is the only conclusion I can draw; she seems still very much connected to him despite his evil being; most likely cause it ties so deeply with her inner evil, despite her ability to dress up and ultimately put on a cover to win over Mr. Linton. Mr. Linton seems to be very level headed and understanding of his wife's craziness but attempting to slightly befriend or at leat welcome HeathCliff into his home despite the knowledge he has of their previous relationship. When the reality of the situation should be and comes to be as Mr. Linton puts it on pg. 89, "This is insufferable!...It is disgraceful that she should own him for a friend, and force his company on me!......I have humoured her enough." He know's he has been wronged by his wife, and although I wish I were much further in the novel, he in my hopes will abondon the childish witch and see her for the same evils he see's within his adversary, Mr. HeathCliff. When Catherine is discussing her marriage to Linton earlier in the novel is goes to prove her arrogance and incompedence as a women. Also, it in my opinion foreshadowes the events coming between her wrongfully reasoned husband and true love; especially so when Catherine and Nelly are discussing when Nelly first states, "did it never strike you that if Heathcliff and I married, we should be beggars? whereas if I marry Linton, I can aid Heathcliff to rise, and place him out of my brother's power." Nelly replies on pg 64, "I think that's the worst motive you've given yet for being the wife of your Linton." Nelly seems to be, for the most part, level headed yet she still carries an obvious bias with her throughout her own accounts, where she continually and conveniently leaves out any part showing her own self in a bad light.
All of this conflict revolves around the estate of Wuthering Heights; how it is all connected i do not know. The appearance of the ghost earlier in the novel raises some huge questions about Catherine's existence as well as the accountability of Mr. Lockwood. The ghost appears to be real but he is in a half asleep state and cannot distinguish for himself. I am looking forward to discovering the ties between these convulted relationships.

I am torn between feelings of empathy for the creature's existence as well as believing the he is an abomination.
First, empathy. These were my initials feelings upon Victor's first reaction to the creation of such a wretched being. He is ugly beyond belief but yet a scientific marvel. He is but a baby in a man's world yet has a body that can dwarf any man on earth. I believe Victor in most circumstances got what he had coming to him. Responsibility out of Victor's seemingly many virtues is not something he seems to have been taught throughout his delightful childhood. He is the sole creator of this being and for that reason alone, must take responsibility for this BEAST BABY; to put it simply. All of Victor's glory seems to lie within this creation when he says, "No one can conceive the variety of feelings which bore me onwards, like a hurricane, in the first enthusiasm of success. Life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through, and pour a torrent of light into our dark world. A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and exellent natures would owe their being to me." (51) Well Vicor, your wish was the wretch's command; The monster owed his entire being to Victor and thus also his vast feelings of rage and abondenment. For this reason alone I feel empathy. Victor claims that the beast is eloquent in his speech and that you must not be persuaded by his intellectual arguments; however as eloquent of a speaker he is; his arguments are extremely logical. The wretch's alludes to this very fact by stating, "I am malicious because I am miserable....You, my creator, would tear me to pieces, and triumph; remember that, and tell my why I should pity man more than he pities me?"(173) The correct answer is: You shouldn't Mr. Wretch. 1 point for the wretch -- 0 for his God/Creator.
"None but those who experience them can conceive the enticements of science."(47) Well put Victor; now that you have created such a scientific marvel you can now reep the benefits of his benevolence;.... Oh my bad i mean maliciousness. He is alone and abondoned by every human he has come in contact with even the family which he grew to love; only to get his heart shattered by the prejudice of man. Is it then right to destroy Victor? Yes, and No. Human rights would suggest the latter, no where in the world is it alright to murder men and children, and frame the innocent. However, is the wretch human? and where does morality come into the equation? I believe personally the monster is indeed human with his his self consciousness, ability to feel vast emotion (love and hate), and also his ability to sympathize with those of his kind. Human morality would suggest no validation for such acts, in which case i would consider this monster an abomination. However, if you believe in, an eye for an eye; The wretch has got reason to damn Victor to misery. Humanely speaking i would like to award 0 points to the wretch and 0 points to Victor. Therefore settling the score in favor of 1-0 for the wretch! Bottom line Victor needed to man up and accept responsibility for his actions.
To sum things up, my feelings are empathetic. he deserves the right to humanity or at least the right for consolation from Victor his father, creator, and God.

Green Eggs Absurdity

Saying it very plainly; this book seems to be a mockery of most of which it employs. Religion seems to be poked at with every event, relationships seem brief and almost non-existent, and personal identity is nowhere to be found.
Religion is what is most deeply intertwined with nearly everything that The Monk comes across. In my opinion the Catholic religion of the time was absurd. Making people purchase pardons from the pope, as Jacintha claims she has done many a time (p. 277), and for the most part striking fear into the followers of God by role players such as the great Ambrosio. Jacintha's character seems to be a mockery of the extremity of possible fear evoked by the church's rules. Her testament to why the spirit of Elvira came about on page 279 is a prime example, "I never saw her do amiss, except on the Friday before her death. To be sure, I was then much scandalized by seeing her eat the wing of a chicken."...continued down the page, "I trembled to hear her utter such blasphemies, and expected every moment to see the ground open and swallow her up, chicken and all." Jacintha is so devote in her religion, she can barely leave the house; for me Lewis is putting these absurdities on a pedestal with such events. Also, I found very interesting that when The All Holy Ambrosio was about to rape the object of his obsession, it was done so in a room where the only light shed upon a statue of Saint as said on pg. 260, "A single lamp, burning before the statue of St Rosolia, shed a faint light through the room, and permitted him to examine all the charms of the lovely object before him." Lewis once again seems to literally shed a light on a mockery of catholicism. The introduction as well as the back of the novel, shows that Lewis was forced to make revisions to his first edition just to avoid charges of blastphemy. Obviously the book was in a time period of strict religious following, which makes it that much more of a mockery and that much more rebelious. That said, this book even by today's standards would most definately not please the church, or the religion which is so deeply rooted within. Lastly I will briefly mention what I thought to be the most humorous example of this mockery; the fabrications of a mere child to the holy nuns of the convent. When falsely dissproving the monks question towards the race of the people in denmark, Theodore responds on page 248, "By no means, reverend lady; they are of a delicate pea-green, with flame-coloured hair and whiskers." This is the most minute of the lies, as he goes on down the page, "it is neccesity to inform you, ladies, that this same Denmark is terribly infested by sorcerers, witches, and evil spirits." He goes on the next page to describe the, "Oak King", "Water King", "Fire King", and " Cloud King." For me all of this shows the gulibility of these innocent nuns. They so easily buy into a fabricated story from a supposed beggar, Theodore, as they have so easily bought into the rituals and religion which is made fun of throughout The Monk.

Relationships throughout are unbelievably impuslive and so quickly obsessive, not to mention often times brief. Lorenzo is infatuated with Antonia's innocent beauty, in fact the minute she has left his presence on pg. 28, he has a dream involving their matrimony; this after a church service in which she is also instantaneously loathing another man, that being Ambrosio. Ambrosio himself a man whose life has been spent in solitude and engulfed with religion and holyness, falls in love, however not so quickly as Lorenzo, and on pg. 61, "He awoke heated and unrefreshed.....Matilda stood before him in his dreams, and his eyes again dwelt upon her naked breast; she repeated her protestation of eternal love, threw her arms round his neck, and loaded him with kisses: he returned them; he clasped her passionately to his bossom." This of course being the most holy man in all of Madrid, having wet dreams over Rosario/Matilda, who he once loved as a son as said on pg. 41!! This all relating also back to the idea of personal identity. It seems Lewis has deemed all of his characters incapable of making a reasonable decision in any light. This of course makes for a twisting and explosive book of religious scrutiny, blundering relationships, and false identities flying all over the place out of left and right field.