Quotes from Frankenstein by Mary Shelley

There are some cases where differentiating between good and evil is a real challenge, specially because not everybody is a 100% good or a 100% evil. This is the case present in Frankenstein by Mary Shelly. For our argument paper for our ENGL106 class, we need to choose which character is the villain of the story. We have read only the first few chapter of the novel and at the moment I would say that the villain is Frankenstein, but still his intentions are not evil, unfortunately they have negative consequences.

At first Frankenstein’s actions are guided by extreme obsession and possessiveness, as we can see when he says: “All praises bestowed on her [Elizabeth] I received as made to a possession of my own” (Shelley 37). This possessiveness started when he was very little and he first met Elizabeth.

Another aspect of him that contributed to his misery is his temper as he describes on the following quote: “My temper was sometimes violent, and my passions vehement; but by some law in my temperature they were turned not towards childish pursuits but to an eager desire to learn, and not to learn all things indiscriminately” (39). It is clear that regarding his temper, he will not stop to study and inquire into something that catches his attention. Until, he feels entirely satisfied with his findings. This is the prelude of his misfortune.

Frankenstein is a very scientific person opposite to his father. To the extent that it appears that he does not believe in God, because he says: “Natural philosophy is the genius that has regulated my fate” (40). By that time the one who should regulate his fate should be God. But, he is becoming each time more and more obsessed with the idea of giving life. It boomed when he heard on lecture that, “They [philosophers] have acquired new and almost unlimited powers; they can command the thunders of heaven, mimic the earthquake, and even mock the invisible world with its own shadows” (49). This actions are exclusive for God, nobody else can make them without having terrible consequences, but Frankenstein’s temper did not stop him.

We can see this when Frankenstein says: ” [...] more, far more, I will achieve: treading in the steps already marked, I will pioneer a new way, explore unknown powers, and unfold to the world the deepest mysteries of creation.” (49). From this quote, I would say that he wants to feel what God felt during the creation.

Then, after the creation of the creature he shows his entirely human side, admitting that he made a mistake, “I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart” (58). But after this, he is showing another reference to God because he regrets the creation of his creature. “[...] fearing each sound as if it were to announce the approach of the demoniacal corpse to which I had so miserably given life” (59). He regrets giving life to his creature, just as God did, but Frankenstein does not have a good reasoned reason to do so, his only reason is that the monster is ugly.

At this point of the novel, it is difficult to tell if Frankenstein is the only evil character. But, he has experimented with things that have brought terrible consequences to him as he is not a responsible and right minded person.

Frankenstein Is Everywhere !

I took a look to the advertisements section of the blog inspired by Frankenstein called “Frankensteinia”. Here the author did a recompilation of ads that used Frankenstein as a base or inspiration. The ads which that captured my attention where: first, the one from Mint Vinetu bookstore and second, the Osteo Bi-Flex ad.

The ad from Mint Vinetu bookstore consists of a woman who is reading a book, and the cover of the book has a picture of Frankenstein’s monster that fits perfectly with her face. Also, the poster  says “Become someone else”. The intention of this ad is to encourage people to read. The try to appeal to the audience by using the well know character of Frankenstein’s creature which is very famous, and that has passed to history as an icon that everybody sympathizes with. The ad also appeals to the fact that as readers, we always identify ourselves with a character or at least with some characteristics of it making the book meaningful to us. That’s the reason why they use Frankenstein’s monster in the ad too, because he has been rejected and misunderstood and we all have been on our lives.

The second ad that caught my attention was the one of Osteo Bi-Flex. It is a video about how Osteo Bi-Flex changed Frankenstein’s creature flexibility. What I can tell from this ad is that they wanted to tell the audience, that if Osteo Bi-Flex was able to cure the creature’s aching joints, it can cure the aching joints of everybody else. Even if you feel you’re dying because of your joint’s pain, you can use this product to relief it, as the commercial states at the end saying “Put some life back in your joints.” which I think is a great comparison of Frankenstein’s monster and the aching joints of people. Because life can be putted back on the joints just as life was putted on the corpse Frankenstein created with his own hands.

Frankenstein Monster Icon

Before writing this blog, I was reading some reviews about the Frankenstein film from 1931, from sources such as Oh, the Horror and The Onion. The first review I read is titled “Frankenstein (DVD)” and it was written by Keith Phipps. In general, she states that the film has passed to history, because of Boris Karloff’s performance as Frankenstein’s Monster and the cast of the movie itself. The second review called “Frankenstein 1931″ by Brett Gallman talks about the general impact of the film cast, character and scene wise.

From the first blog I mentioned, I would like to point out the fact that, on the new DVD of the film there is a documentary about for placing Frankenstein in context. In fact, the context of 1931′s Frankenstein is the beginning of the depression era. But, why is this important? It is important because it gives us a better understanding of the movie. I did not realize the context of the movie until I read the blog. Now, the movie makes more sense for me. For example, the scene where the crowd is chasing the monster. The people did not really know what they were doing, they just followed their leaders but did not have a real or personal reason to chase the monster. They only new they had to get him death or alive, because as he was different he represented a hazard for them. With is the perfect portray of that time, where everybody was afraid and vulnerable, so they chased whatever they considered a threat, which unfortunately lead to WWII.

From the second review, there are three things that really called my attention. The first of them is when Gallman the author of the article writes: “This film [Frankenstein 1931] influenced my taste for years to come, as it proves that gore isn’t everything when it comes to horror; instead, atmosphere and tension can provide all the thrills and chills you need.” I absolutely agree with this, because as a director what you want is to create a reaction from your audience, in the case of horro to be scared and\or overwhelmed. As he states, making films full of blood does not make a horror movie good. That’s why nowadays, it’s very difficult to find a movie that is actually scary. I am a very big fan of films, and I have been searching for a long time a movie that actually scares me, but I’ve failed in the attempt. Obviously, 1931′s Frankenstein film did not scare me, because it does not fit the epoque we live in. But, I must say that it actually played with my emotions. Especially, the scene where the monster was shown for the first time, I felt overwhelmed. And, it was possible, because the scene was made so carefully to focus all our attention on the monster’s creepiness.

The second thing I want to point out is that according to Gallman: “Karloff’s portrayal of the Monster here makes the character one of the best in horror history; there are villains, and there are icons, and Frankenstein’s monster is definitely the latter.”  Gallman’s point is that Frankenstein’s monster is an icon, as now it is a part of popular culture, but not in a scary way. People feel certain kind of sympathy towards the monster. I really admire this fact from this movie, since having such a character that continues to be well known until these days is incredibly difficult. The only thing I can associate it to a modern character is to the doll Jigsaw used for his games on the SAW movie series. But, still it is not as well known as Frankenstein is.

The third and last thing from Gallman’s review that I want to discuss is when he states that: “The film is sometimes criticized for supposedly making Frankenstein’s creature more monstrous than human because he doesn’t speak (as was the case in Shelley’s original novel), but I feel that there’s a tragic and sympathetic element to Karloff’s portrayal despite this.” In other words Gallman believes that the intention of the film was not portraying the creature more monstrous, the intention was actually to make the audience feel sorry and sympathy for the creature, portraying it as a kid. I would say that if the monster did speak all the enchantment of the film would blur. Because for me, the success of this film, lays on the monster’s character, as it transmits all kinds of emotions without saying a single word.

The Most Iconic Representation of Death

I visited a blog called Frankensteinia, which is basically a blog where its author Pierre Fournier compiles everything that has something to do with Frankenstein in areas such as arts, media and pop culture. In his post titled “The Cemetery Skeleton” where he refers to the opening scene of the 1931 Frankenstein movie.

Fournier begins describing the scene, where the camera shows a line of bemoaners who are crying beside the grave and ends up with the figure of the skeleton wearing a hood. Then, he reminds us of the meaning of the skeleton, which is death. Also, he gives examples of the usage of the skeleton’s semiotics, such as that during the Middle Ages, a dancing skeleton meant scoffing at the ephemeral lifetime.

Later, he reports that after the mourners left, Frankenstein and his assistant began digging the grave for stealing the fresh body. In Fournier’s view “The cemetery skeleton is the first hint of frights to come, yet it is more than just a lugubrious prop.” In other words, he believes that the fact of using the symbol of the skeleton in this scene is the prelude of the entire film. Which is very comprehensible, as the main topic of the movie is death.

I agree with Fournier’s statement, because this kind of prelude or introduction happens in other movies as well. For example, in the well known movie “Psycho” by Alfred Hitchcock. There is a scene where Marion (one of the main characters) is in a room and the camera portrays her with a dissected crow pointing at her. This scene has the same exact meaning that the scene of the cemetery skeleton in Frankenstein. Both scenes let us know that death is going to be the main topic of the films even though the directors decided to use different representations for death.

After, explaining the significance of the skeleton. Fournier goes ahead and suggests that when Frankenstein throws dirt into the face of the skeleton. It is a symbolic way of  showing the disrespect he showed for the death. I totally agree with this because it is like punching death on its face.

Finally, Fournier points out that this scene of the skeleton appears on the sequel “Bride of Frankenstein” but he is not sure if it is meant to be a reference to the exact scene of the opening scene of Frankenstein.

Frankenstein Movie (1931)

Last week we watched the film Frankenstein (1931) during english class. After that, I read a blog post in classic-horror.com written by Nate Yapp and I will summarize it for you.

At the beginning of the post Nate states that few films from the last century have passed to history, and one of those films is Frankenstein by James Whale. Also, he brings out that  the description of the legendary Frankenstein that now is an icon of pop culture, did not come from the description of the monster on Mary Shelley’s book. I was a creation from this film, that has been imitated so many times.

Then, the author proceeds to summarize the plot of Frankenstein’s movie. Which is a story where a body made from body parts of multiple bodies is brought to life by using electricity. Yapp clearly loves Boris Karloff performance on the movie by saying that he is the one who provides the image of Frankenstein’s monster that we all know today, and without him the emotions that he transmitted would not be as passionate. Nate also expresses his admiration for the rest of the cast but he says it is not as god as Karloff’s performance.

Later on his post, he describes how was Frankenstein monster created for the movie. The authors of the make up were Pierce and Whale, they did studies in different fiels such as surgery, anatomy and criminology, between others. In addition to it they analyzed and sketched Karloff’s head. The result was that the make up was so good that Universal ended up copyrighting Frankenstein’s monster make up. For the author, this movie is done so carefully that makes it difficult to pick a favorite scene, but stil the scene where the monster is revealed is outstanding.

For closing, Nate does a strong recommendation to watch the movie, because it is classic horror that could be hardly overdone.

Remixing remixes

First of all, why is everything a remix? why is it so difficult to have your own original ideas that someone has never come out with? It is not impossible to have that kind of ideas, but certainly it is very difficult. This happens because whenever we have an idea it does not come out from no where, you must have had some sort of influence from something you’ve seen or heard. This does not necessarily mean that you’re copying someone else’s idea, you just used it for creating something new.

For example, the fact that I am writing this blog, I would not be able to write it if I haven’t had the influence or in other words a reference from the video and the class discussion. Now I’d like to talk about Narnia’s movies, which was made inspired on the books of C.S Lewis. I read the books, and as usual I think that the movies are terrible compared to the story on the books, which leads us to talk about the negative part of remixes. Which is that, it is also very difficult to do a good remix, because when you do so, you expect to have the same essence of the original idea, because it is what inspired you, so if you don’t keep the same essence, your audience is not going to be able to make the connection with the original idea, which is the main point of doing a remix, if not it just won’t be a remix it would be just a creative fail.

The problem with Narnia is that the movies are not directly connected to each other as happens on the books, they shouldn’t have skipped the books in between and especially the first book which gives meaning to the whole story. But not all remixes are bad, there are other examples such as the movies from Quentin Tarantino, he likes to use scenes from other movies and things that are spread on pop culture to build his films. For example, on his movie “Pulp Fiction” on the scene when Butch bumps into Wallace on the street crossing, it is making reference to the unforgettable movie “Psycho” from Alfred Hitchcock, this king of reference happens a lot throughout the movie and anyway Pulp Fiction right now is recognized as one of the best movies ever made

Something about me!

My name is Valeria. I am from Bogota, Colombia (with O not U as many people think!!). I studied on a school near Bogota, it is at a town called Chia, which is where I actually live. When I was little I lived in Bogota, but I had to wake up at 5 am in the morning everyday for going to school and I came back home at 4-5 pm and then I had to do homework. So, my parents decided to move to Chia for making my life a little easier.

Now that you know a little about me I’ll tell you about what I like. I love art and almost everything that has something to do with it. Maybe you will notice it this semester on my nails, love nail art and doing fun stuff on my nails. Also, I like photography and a big fan of the NatGeo photography sections, all their pics are so perfect!

The funny thing about this is that I am actually studying Mechanical Engineering here at Purdue and I want to do a minor on Art & Design.

Another thing that I love is New York City! I came there for the first time on summer 2010, and I didn’t know why everybody told me that NYC was amazing, I did not believe it. Until I actually went there, and I just got in love with that city, I feel that it is the place where I belong to. I realized it because when I was leaving the city, I did cried! I know it sounds exaggerated but I did…

Another thing that I would like to share is my future plans. On the future, I want to have my own car’s design company called VRM (I already have a nice logo for it ) if possible at NYC, because I also have a passion for cars, it might be the reason why I chose Mechanical Engineering over arts as a major. Also, I would love to learn as many languages as possible and visit all the countries that I can.Right now I feel pleased, because a year ago I would have included on my future plans list studying at any of the best universities at the US, and it is true at this moment. I must say that it’s an awesome sensation to know that at least one of your dreams has come true.