Us versus the Monsters

“These monsters ask us how we perceive the world, and how we have misrepresented what we have attempted to place.  They ask us to reevaluate our cultural assumptions about race, gender, and sexuality, our perception of difference, our tolerance towards its expression.  They ask us why we have created them.”(Cohen 20)

The creature in Frankenstein asks Victor why he created him.  What was Victor’s purpose in doing so and what message or lesson is this supposed to instill in us as the reader and society? Does the creature serve to remind us that in having these assumptions and intolerance, that it makes us into monsters ourselves?

Image Source: https://www.thoughtco.com/hernan-cortes-conquest-of-aztecs-timeline-2136533

He's Gone Mad

"I know not by what chain of thought the idea presented itself, but it instantly darted into my mind that the murderer had come to mock at my misery, and taunt me with the death of Clerval, as a new incitement for me to comply with his hellish desires. I put my hand before my eyes, and cried out in agony - 'Oh! Take him away! I cannot see him; for God's sake, do not let him enter!'" (153)

This quote was especially important to me and my understanding of the text, as it was the first point in which I actually began to sympathize with Frankenstein and understand the true impact that the creation had on him. For the first half of the text, I really identified with the creature and just kept thinking, "Frankenstein turned him into a monster, he wasn't one to begin with," and while I still believe that to be true, I also now see the mental influence that this creature really had on its creator. The gradual decline to insanity reminded me of Taxi Driver and The Shining - I feel like it's a pretty classic trope that you see in a lot of films and novels (those are just the first ones I thought of at the moment).

My question is, what do you think is more provoking: Frankenstein turning the creature into a monster, or the creature's effect on Frankenstein's mental condition?

Crazy and Hairy Frankenstein - Taken from Gris Grimly's Blog

Overcome by fear

"When I looked upon him, when I saw the filthy mass that moved and talked, my heart sickened. I tried to stifle these sensations..." (117).

I have personally written and read many comments of others that the creature is someone to pity due to how society treats him based off his appearance; however, I have to question that if, in reality, we would be able to be sympathetic to the creature? I would like to believe that I could see beyond his overpowering, in-human appearance. But sadly, I think that something so out of the norm would be startling and out of uncertainly usually stems fear. I think Grimly's remix makes this story an accessible text to younger audiences due to the pictorial use--not because the pictures inherently make it childish, but the metaphor of the blind man was more easily translated: he is the only one able to "see" the sincerity of the creature because he is not "blinded" by his appearance. So my main question is what examples of the creature exist in our own society? And how do we overcome our misplaced fears to see what is truly in front of us and teach younger generations to not have that fear in the first place? 

To Reappear Someplace Else

"We see the damage that the monster wreaks, the material remains, ...but the monster itself turns immaterial and vanishes, to reappear someplace else.... No matter how many times King Arthur killed the ogre of Mount Saint Michael, the monster reappeared in another heroic chronicle, bequeathing the Middle Ages an abundance of morte d'Arthurs" (4).

This quote seems especially relevant for our class.  Through the lens of Grimley's Frankenstein, it's obvious that the creation from Shelly's original has returned in a new form.  We can also point to several film adaptations, cartoon references, and Halloween costumes.  But what about monsters in texts that haven't been remixed?  If we pretend that Shelly's Frankenstein was the first and last appearance of this sort of monster, how can we imagine his return?  Assuming he fulfills his promise to end his life, ould he continue to exist in-universe through Walton's retelling of the tale?  Would he live on through "new" monsters that may have taken some influence from Shelly?

Gris Grimly

Elizabeth recovering from scarlet fever, page 40

"She had, at first, yielded to our entreaties; but when she heard that her favorite was recovering, she could no longer debar herself, and entered her chamber long before the danger of infection was past".

Wow, this is amazing

"It is with considerable difficulty that I remember the original area of my being. I saw, felt, heard, and smelt, at the same time; and it was, indeed, a long time before I learned to distinguish between the operations of my various sense. It was dark when I awoke..." (86)

When I read Frankenstein, this section of the novel was by far my favorite. I loved hearing about the Monster's story of experiencing life and finding the cabin and watching the family. I didnt think it could be done in any other way, but when I read the graphic version of this section, I was astonished by the way Grimly portrayed this section. I absolutely loved the way he made only a few words here and there appear in the text; this was such a beautiful way of showing Frankenstein's growing understanding of language. My question is, if you have read the original novel, what was your favorite translation in the Grimly graphic novel?

The Vibe of the Illustrations in this Book Define "Steampunk"

I've noticed that a lot of folks have already commented on the main plot point of this novel that I had been excited to talk about as well--what defines something or someone a monster, where do the lines begin to blur between good versus evil? I think this is excellent and is why in any format, Frankenstein has always been a compelling story. However, to make my post (hopefully) slightly different than others, I'll ask about how the formatting of Gris Grimley's Frankenstein particularly contributed to the story.

This book wasn't a pure definition of comic-book, but also wasn't purely an illustration book either. This remix of Frankenstein added a childlike wonder in the illustrations for me, so I will ask:

Did this remix of Frankenstein make the story more digestible and accessible for younger audiences to enjoy? Was it just the illustrations or something else in the formatting of the story? Do comic books or books with illustrations automatically correlate to being for children in your eyes?

Trying to identify the everyday monsters in 2020 be like

Increased Creepiness :)

One of the things I most enjoyed about Gris Grimly's Frankenstein is that the illustrations allow the reader to see past Victor Frankenstein's limited perspective. It removes us from the mind of the first person narrator and gives us the chance to look at and assess his story from more of an outsider's point of view while simultaneously reading his take of events. The first moment this stood out to me was the irony on page 40 when Shelley describes baby William as "the most beautiful little fellow in the world" while Grimly gives us a cute but mildly repulsive blob of flesh to represent the character. Another was on page 55 because there was a distinct difference in what the two authors conveyed: Shelley described the extent Frankenstein's obsession had taken over his mind while Grimly gruesomely portrays what that obsession looked like in action. The two components work well together to grant the reader a fuller picture (ha) of the moment. It is certainly a more unique reading experience.

How do the images change the tone of the original text? Is it different than what you expected? How much would the reading experience change if Grimly had approached the project with a different artistic style? (Even his flowers have skulls on them. I love the detail, but it certainly sets the creep-factor in stone.)

Uhhhhhhhh.......

Boris Karloff does not approve.

Why does nobody have any issue with Mrs. Frankenstein trying to set her son up with his first cousin, Elizabeth?

Lydia Bennet: a Whole New Character

Quote: Lydia: Jane and Lizzie are too worried about "propriety" and "letting things take their own time" and "not over-using air quotes" to get anything done at all. 

Question: How did the Lizzie Bennet Dairies change people's perceptions of the original Pride and Prejudice characters? Did you like certain characters more? Less? What changed? 

Follow up: Personally TLBD changed how I view Lydia Bennet. In my pervious experience with P&P, I always found her beyond annoying and struggled to find redeemable qualities in her; however, TLBD changed my view. When her character was remixed, I saw how young she is and needing attention not just for the sake of attention but to feel she had value in the Bennet family. Her older sisters are in many ways "perfect" and extremely close with one another. In comparison, Lydia always seems to fall short. One element that is lost is Mrs. Bennet's adoration for her youngest daughter. While you can see hints of it in TLBD (Lydia getting away with almost anything), without Mrs. Bennet actually in the story some of that relationship is lost. 

Darcy in the Lizzie Bennet Diaries

I forget the exact episode of the Lizzie Bennett Diaries that discusses what would presume to be the first instance of Darcy showing interest in Lizzie.  The night of the presumed to be bad dinner party, Lizzie and the gang go out for drinks and arcade games.  From Lizzie's perspective, we learn Darcy was in the corner with Caroline.  From Charlotte and Jane, we learn that Darcy seemed to be focused on Lizzie and did not seem to know how to show his interest in a socially acceptable way.  In the novel, we as the readers do not really see Darcy's interest till he proposes and it seems out of line.  In watching these videos, Darcy comes across as kind of awkward and socially inept, but not necessarily out of line in his behavior.  We see Lizzie's judgment of him first.  My question is, what can we gleam from this series about Darcy and how this speak to the human condition?

Image source: https://www.shmoop.com/study-guides/literature/pride-and-prejudice/fitzwilliam-darcy

To (Let Viewers) See Anything Other than My First Impression

In the 99^th episode of The Lizzie Bennet Diaries, Darcy, in discussing his prior views of Jane, tells us, “it just took a while for me to see the similarities; to see anything other than my first impression.”  

Although the character is only speaking from his own point of view, and about one other person specifically, this line could have come from any number of characters in the series.  Lizzie is obviously neither innocent of prejudice in the novel nor the adaptation.  Since much like the novel, the YouTube series is presented from her perspective, her first impressions tend to be our only impressions – especially when it takes considerable time for her to move past them.  Whether holding onto her first impression of Wickham as handsome and personable (although the series does a great job at portraying his low intelligence), or of Darcy as stuck-up and self-centered, Lizzy never allows viewers a new perspective on people.  The rare instances where Charlotte or Jane stand up for an absent character are quickly brought to an end by our protagonist.

Money money money

One thing I really appreciate about the series "The Lizzie Bennet Diaries" is the way that the economics translated into contemporary times. The role of money in relationships is (obviously) still important; despite that we pretend that we're past socio-economic status playing a role in choosing a partner, it is still a huge factor. If anything, the novel was more honest than we are today. But that got me wondering: which of Lizzie's biases (in both the book and the series) are influenced by her perceptions of wealth? It's easy to see the ways in which Darcy is influenced by economic biases, but what about Lizzie? How much of her biases against the wealthy are more difficult to extract because most of the viewers (and readers) were much closer to her status than to Darcy's?

Please Stop Yelling at Me

Lizzie and Darcy - found on Pinterest

Okay, so at first I really was not feeling "The Lizzie Bennet Diaries." I mainly felt this way because I was kind of just overwhelmed with the fact that everyone was screaming and there was just so much overdramatic acting, but then I realized... That's what is so charming about it. It honestly wasn't until around episode 43 that I really started getting into it, but once I did, I was happy I watched it. The cool thing about watching is probably the obvious - we know all of the nods to Austen and can see the differences between the novel and the series, as opposed to some viewers who only watched the videos and had never read the book. One of the things I really liked was the discussion about Pemberley Digital in episode 83:

Lizzie: "Let's start with the name. What does 'Pemberley' mean?"
Darcy: "Oh, uh... Pemberley is the name of the place my father's family comes from in England."

I had a feeling they had to discuss the name somehow, and I think they did a pretty decent job of tying it into the original text. One of the other modernizations I really liked was the fact that Mr. Collins didn't propose to Lizzie for her hand in marriage, but her hand in partnership. The one thing I did have some issues with was the fact that she didn't really change the character of Mrs. Bennet to match the rest of the series... She didn't seem to be very modernized like everything else was.

After I looked past the original shock of being screamed at by the cast of the web series, I was able to see the intelligence and thought that went into creating it, and I actually really enjoyed it (until the end when it got RIDICULOUSLY corny, but that's a blog post for another day, I guess).

My main question would be: should the character of Mrs. Bennet have been modernized like the rest of the storyline, or was it "okay" that she wasn't really changed much to match the new narrative?

truth hurts

In my opinion, when you're proposing to someone, it's probably best not to do it by saying how the person you're proposing to is not nearly the best choice out there, and how they are socially inferior in just about every way. But no! I've fallen for you despite all of this! So will you marry me?

Elizabeth is understandably frustrated when Darcy proposes to her in such a manner, on top of the fact that tensions had already been pretty high between them because of Elizabeth's prejudices against him.

It's a well known fact that Darcy prides himself for his honesty, but I just have to ask: where is the line? Yeah, the title of the novel is Pride and Prejudice, but still. I just wonder, how would this scene have played out had he not gone ahead and said the things he did?

Pish Posh, etc

While reading Pride and Prejudice I caught myself stumbling on words and phrases and getting lost in the language. The way Jane Austen writes is high class but drawn out. It seems like she aims to exhausts as much description and wordiness as possible at times. I personally do not dislike the story, but I am not fond of the way its is written, it is just not my style. While reading, I marked some times where this wordiness and excessive writing was portrayed, here is an example: "Her teeth are tolerable, but not out of the common way; and as for her eyes, which have sometimes been called so fine, I never could perceive any thing extraordinary in them." (Austen 184). I guess my main take-away or question from this observation is, do we think this story would hold the same value had it been written in a more simple/short style, or does the style of the writing have too much to do with the importance the novel has gained over the years since it was published? 

Omniscient Benefits

“Mrs. Collins did not think it right to press the subject, from the danger of raising expectations which might only end in disappointment; for in her opinion it admitted not of a doubt, that all her friend’s dislike would vanish, if she could suppose him to be in her power” (132, in my edition). 

The first and only time that I had read through the original text was five years ago in my freshman year of high school, and I don’t remember much from the experience other than having a difficult time understanding what was happening. Since then, I’ve become familiar with the text by consuming several P&P remixes. Besides spending the entire novel mentally noting which scenes were most dramatized in different versions, one of the most enjoyable parts of re-reading Pride and Prejudice was the insights from the secondary characters like Mrs. Collins here before Mr. Darcy’s proposal in Kent and the Gardiners during Lizzie and Darcy’s reunion Derbyshire. In film especially, we miss out on a lot of that, and I enjoy having those different perspectives as a reader because it demonstrates just how narrow Elizabeth’s understanding of a situation can be.  Those other characters don't necessarily have a more accurate understanding, but their perspective offers the reader a better scope of the scene. 

Darcy's Inner Struggles: https://www.pinterest.com/pin/107101297364631424/ 

My Favorite Pride and Prejudice Quote

“It is a truth universally acknowledged, that a single man in possession of a good fortune, must be in want of a wife.” (first page, first sentence)

This quote really speaks to me. Standards of a quality life have changed from the past to present. In current times, men with money do not always want to settle down. This goes for old or young. There are also a lot of women who are not looking to be a wife.

what is love?

"No," said Darcy, "I have made no such pretension. I have faults enough, but they are not, I hope, of understanding. My temper I dare not vouch for. It is, I believe, too little yielding--certainly too little for the convenience of the world. I cannot forget the follies and vices of others so soon as I ought, nor their offenses against myself. My feelings are not puffed about with every attempt to move them. My temper would perhaps be called resentful. My good opinion once lost, is lost forever."

(I LOVE Matthew Rhys lol)

I love this quote because it addresses the biggest issue of the novel (obviously) which is misunderstandings. It becomes clear that Darcy had good intentions and Elizabeth misunderstood him greatly. Their relationship is deep because of this. My question is, does it take a rift or misunderstanding for a relationship to be 'valid'? As in, is the impulsive passionate love between Romeo and Juliet just as valid as the long and flourishing love of Elizabeth and Darcy? 

We Stan Men Putting Aside Their Pride!!!!!

"'In vain I have struggled. It will not do. My feelings will not be repressed. You must allow me to tell you how ardently I admire and love you.' Elizabeth's astonishment was beyond expression. She stared, coloured, doubted, and was silent. This he considered sufficient encouragement, and the avowal of all that he felt and had long felt for her, immediately followed. He spoke well, but there were feelings besides those of the heart to be detailed, and he was not more eloquent on the subject of tenderness than of pride. He sensed her inferiority--of its being a degradation--of the family obstacles which judgement had always opposed to inclination, were dwelt on with a warmth which seemed due to the consequence he was wounding, but was very unlikely to recommend his suit." (131)

Mr. Darcy's suddenness here of his first proposal to Elizabeth was a significant point in the novel--for the first time Mr. Darcy is setting aside his pride to admit what he really wants--it's the first sign that he is willing to better himself for her. This act of love shocks Elizabeth, and intrigues her. This is one of the moments that always stands out the most to me--and I'm intrigued, especially by the male members of the class, what everyone thinks of this moment? Was he overstepping? Was it too much? Was this a sign of sincerity or his first sign of maturity? Because for me, this novel was filled with a lot of romantic gestures that made my heart swell, and this was really the first one of them. I love that both Elizabeth and Mr. Darcy bettered themselves for one another!!