May's "Guileless" Nature

Throughout Age of Innocence Archer's perspective of May is narrow in that he assumes she is unaware so that he could "take the bandage from her eyes and bid her to look forth on the world." Yet May doesn't require Archer's guidance to achieve her goals or craft her manipulation. Instead, May is more thinking and aware than Archer realizes. These charactarestics can be demonstrated in May because her eyes illustrate how she is a determined and more influential individual. Therefore, it is important to note that Archer underestimates May's acumen and guileless factor, in the sense that May is only ostentatiously innocent, but inherently mature. During the opening scene, one is introduced to May from Archer's persepctive. May is described as "a young girl in white" with "rosycheeks" and her hands "white-gloved finger tips" grasping lilies of the valley, flowers that are symbolic of chastity and fertility. However, this image of the 'innocent' girl is soon dissolved as Archer asks May to advance their wedding while he finds himself falling more and more in love with Ellen. May's eyes turn hard and are filled with such "despairing clearness" that illustrate she is fulling perceiving of the fact that Archer may be in love with somebody else. Even her words are spoken with "resolutely steadied lips" which juxtapose against the image of her "trembling lips" during the after ball following the Opera. However, despite the awareness of Archer's love for Ellen, May advances the wedding date so that they can become husband and wife faster, therefore making their marriage permenant and so no one else like Ellen can come inbetween them. May's cunning manipulativeness can also be illustrated when Archer announces that he must make a trip to Washington. Although May never directly confesses to Archer that she is aware he is going to Washington in order to meet Ellen, she does, however, look at Archer "straight in the eyes with a cloudless smile" illustrating that she is fully aware he is going to Washington not on buisness in the literal sense but to find Ellen. However, instead of directly confronting Archer on the subject May decides to use her Grandmother's stroke as a nexcuse in order to delay or possibly even cancel Archer's departure. Yet Archer still manages to meet with Ellen, so that the next time May sees him her eyes are described "so blue they shown with tears" clearly showing the fact that May feels sadddened by the fact that Archer is falling in love with Ellen. Yet soon after, May has a long talk with Ellen, and later on, it is evidenced that this scene is pivotal, though the secret isn't exposed until the later chapters of the book. Yet, even though the subject matter conversed between the two women isn't yet revealed at this point, one can realize the obvious change of charactar in May and in her spirits as she comes home with "eyes brimming with happy tears" and uncharactaristically, carresses her husband due to her sheer joy. Although not explicit, it is obvious that May is celebrating over some sort of victory. Even at the Opera, May's manipulativeness is evident when she decides to wear her wedding dress, even though she had seldom ever wore it during the past two years. By wearing the wedding dress, May serves as a constant reminder to Archer that she is ,indeed, his bride which causes Archer to feel a sense of guilt that he nearly confesses to May that he is in love with Ellen. Yet May astutely recognizes Archer's near point of confession so that she decides to promptly and opportunely reveal to Archer that Ellen is going back to Europe soon, therefore shattering the hope that Archer has for getting together with Ellen. Yet the greatest sense of accomplishment occurs during Ellen's farewell dinner when May's eyes are shown "glittering with victory." For May is now completely certain that Archer will never leave her, and she is right. Inevitably, when the dinner is over Archer does completely confess and states explicitly that he would like to be together with Ellen yet May smartly and craftily reveals that she's pregnant.

Sunday Morning (III) by Wallace Stevens

Jove in the clouds had his inhuman birth. No mother suckled him, no sweet land gave Large-mannered motions to his mythy mind. He moved among us, as a muttering king, Magnificent, would move among his hinds, Until our blood, commingling, virginal, With heaven, brought such requital to desire The very hinds discerned it, in a star. Shall our blood fail? Or shall it come to be The blood of paradise? And shall the earth Seem all of paradise that we shall know? The sky will be much friendlier then than now, A part of labor and a part of pain, And next in glory to enduring love, Not this dividing and indifferent blue. This poem is very sad to me through a numerous of aspects. Although it is not explicitly said, the speaker of the poem speaks of a child that nearly reminds me of Frankenstein’s Creation, in that his birth is characterized as an “inhuman” one. Likewise, the fact that he is born motherless, not only lends itself back to Frankenstein’s creation, but also to Ibsen’s A Doll House in that merely the fact of being born without a mother is nearly dehumanizing to the individual in that it impacts their respect by other members of society and also, levels them to an unequal footing with other members of society. Moreover, there is also a sense of isolation in this poem that speaks as it is written “No mother suckled him.” Hence in a sense, this poem reads to me another universal theme that we have encountered in Winesburg, Ohio—that people become grotesque after they possess a certain truth, which causes them from interacting with other members of society completely. Moreover, the child in this novel further reminds me of Nora in that both characters will be degraded by others due to some factor that is out of their control. There is also a sense of abandonment in the first two lines, and a feeling of loss. Furthermore, there is perpetual suffering for “no sweet land gave” as if the child was not blessed with nutrition or nurture, so that he is weak both physically and emotionally. Yet despite the negative associations of the child’s birth condition he is described as “a muttering king,/ Magnificent,” I thought that this juxtaposition between the hardships ensued and the place in society that the child has now evolved into and earned is very significant in that it’s unexpected, therefore creating the heroic archetype. This is the classic archetypical image of the underdog, and thus the reader is more attracted to the hero’s accomplishment, from transferring from victim to hero. Still further into the poem there is also a trend towards this talk of ‘paradise’ and whether it’s in our blood or “the earth,” perhaps even “the sky.” The speaker seems to be questioning the sky’s role, and ironically, it directly contrasts with that of Grendel’s perspective nearly word-for-word but the antithesis of the argument, the speaker writes, the sky is “Not this dividing and indifferent blue,” instead the speaker contends that there is value in our blood, in the sky, in the Earth, itself. To me, part three nearly infers that there is a greater dimension, possibly even a moral argument that can be used to center the point that there is something greater than simply birth or monarchy, such is illustrated in the phrase “With heaven, brought such requital to desire/ The very hinds discerned it, in a star.” There is nearly a religious undertone in this statement, again illustrating the stark contrast that divides Grendel and “Sunday Morning” in their beliefs. Thus through this poem, one can denote the fact that “Sunday Morning” possess Shaper tendencies that highly argue for the deeper morality argument of God, birth, and religion.

The Wolfe Collection

The Wolfe collection was created by the mid-1870’s after Catharine and John Wolfe commissioned pieces from Canabel, a man who had a great reputation due to his painting ability and portraits of aristocrats. One piece of his, in particular, reflects not only the character of May in The Age of Innocence but also Nora in A Doll’s House. His work, “The Birth of Venus” concerns a biblical figure portrait where a woman is seated in Paris wearing a white sating evening dress that was the height of French fashion so much so that viewers admired the subject’s long, elegant hands and her posture. The visual image of the woman in “The Birth of Venus” reminds me of when May is in her wedding attire at the Opera. Although it is noted that “it was the custom, in old New York, for brides to appear in this costly garment during the first year or two of marriage (211)” I thought that it was interesting how May didn’t decide to wear it until Archer and May enter the Opera, where we are first introduced to them. Moreover, I also wondered whether or not the wedding dress was used as a threat in order for May to remind Archer that they are in a relationship and therefore, he must be faithful to her even as he is falling for Countess Olenska. Yet is also symbolic how May tears her wedding dress when she walks out of the carriage and also spoils it by letting the dirt muddy it. Unlike the woman in “The Birth of Venus,” who is the romanticized image that the Wolfe collection wants one to believe, it is unreachable similarly to other conventionalities that can even lead up to what we currently know as the American Dream. These figures epitomize a society that is perfection filled with archetypal images that we strive to reach but are ultimately unattainable. Therefore, May’s torn wedding dress is illustrative of the fact that purity is unsustainable. It may last fleetingly but it is unable to last forever. Moreover, May’s name itself alludes to the concept of the seasons, nature, and flowers. Yet like all things, spring is not everlasting and flowers will eventually wilt or die. Moreover, flowers can also be prickled, thorny, sharp and edgy. Likewise, Nora also wears dresses often in A Doll’s House and similar to May, she uses it as a manipulative tool in order to remind her husband to keep faithful to her even when she has done something disloyal. In May’s case it is the fact that she lies to Archer about her pregnancy while for Nora it is the fact that she has committed forgery. Although the motives are different, in the end both women use this image of a dress for the same reasons. Nora wears the dress in order to emphasize her beauty, her physique so that she can ‘entertain’ her husband while May wears the dress as a safeguard to protect herself. Thus Wolfe’s “The Birth of Venus” is a falsified conception generated by society based on artificial archetypes that are meant to bolster an advertisement of the ideal woman when such a prototype is ultimately unattainable.

Such a Doll

Old New York is a society rooted in conventionality and the ‘norm.’ This can be illustrated in that Age of Innocence holds an intrinsic value that women can relate to in that it is a book which centers upon several widespread beliefs that although inhibited by societal pressure are part of the social code which helps asses the values and peculiarities that are regarded as ‘proper’ with those who deviate or act eccentrically suffering helplessly as society’s blameless yet falsified scapegoats. Therefore there is an implicit social code that helps relate which tenets are gossiped and barred for apparently ‘misbehaving’ when really no crime has been committed or anything scandalous has actually occurred. A clear example of such a claim can be illustrated by the juxtaposition of Archer’s wife May who appears to be sexually innocent, guileless, and completely “unknowing” though we get a sense that such is the fake byproduct created by the manufacturing plant of New York society and thoughtfully as well as dutifully pieced together by mothers that have for generations encouraged beauty and outer-appearance as more important than knowledge, virtue, and strength. Thus as a result, in The Age of Innocence, one looks at May and sees a child not a woman. Though she is, indeed, a woman her behaviors as well as her unsupported actions don’t match with the actions that are generally associated with that of a young adult. Like Nora in A Doll’s House both display some similar virtues in that they are both treated like ‘pets’ because of the fact that they are assumed and dictated by society’s standards as unknowledgeable and therefore require guidance, teaching, control by their husbands. Thus as a result, a male-domineering complex is created in that the women remains in the home, a haven for young mistresses that cannot survive in the outside, dangerous world of novelty and frenzied activity. Furthermore both Nora and May display other qualities including an unbalanced relationship with their husbands. Moreover, both Torvald and Archer also have some shared qualities, especially in that they both care for wives that are beautiful. Both May and Nora are described with ideal feminine traits such as rosy cheeks. Moreover, May is described as the white lilies-of-the-valley further emphasizing the ideal of a porcelain doll in that its skin is so white, white as snow. Likewise there’s also a sense of feigned intelligence but above all moral purity though in Nora’s case she is much more explicit and flirtatious both characters to a degree affect ignorance. However, for Torvald and Archer they do not have to ‘fake’ or ‘pretend’ or ‘act’ in any manner besides the masculine ideal. Thus in order to maintain such an image both characters are the breadwinners of their home and deeply concerned with their reputations. Perhaps most similarly, these two characters also feel a slightly fatherly duty to “instruct” their wives. Above all else, women are constantly submissive and dependent of men because of the society standards that are placed. This can be illustrated in A Doll’s House in that Ms. Linde got married not out of love but purely monetary gain so that she could pay for her sick family member and support her children, thus she has a very financial relationship with her husband, instead of a loving one.

The Road Not Taken by Robert Frost

Two roads diverged in a yellow wood, And sorry I could not travel both And be one traveler, long I stood And looked down one as far as I could To where it bent in the undergrowth; Then took the other, as just as fair, And having perhaps the better claim, Because it was grassy and wanted wear; Though as for that the passing there Had worn them really about the same, And both that morning equally lay In leaves no step had trodden black. Oh, I kept the first for another day! Yet knowing how way leads on to way, I doubted if I should ever come back. I shall be telling this with a sigh Somewhere ages and ages hence: Two roads diverged in a wood, and I- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference. I had read this poem back in elementary school, but I thought it was fitting to revisit now that I am a senior with new paths opened to me, similar to the speaker in the poem. There is a sense of ambivalence in the opening sentences of the first stanza when it reads “And sorry I could not travel both/ And be one traveler.” Here the speaker is presented with a decision, but of equal weight, and the speaker struggles to choose which path to take. He acknowledges there is only one of him but two roads that were nearly equal as is illustrated in the phrase “Then took the other, as just as fair” and therefore insinuating that the paths are equal. Though the speaker makes a concession saying that “perhaps the better claim/ Because it was grassy and wanted wear,” the speaker quickly corrects himself in saying that though they both, “had worn them really about the same.” As seniors in high school, the college decision process has been a fork in the road like the one the speaker of the poem encounters. Our yellow woods can be anything really that serve as either distractions, obstacles, or people and things that pull our decisions towards one road or another. Yet like the two paths that diverge, these yellow woods work to separate our decisions. And like the speaker realizes, he cannot take both paths without denying the other. Yet most importantly, the speaker acknowledges once one path is taken, there are no returns, second chances, retracing footsteps. Yet despite the many qualities that the paths share, so that the speaker even acknowledges “…passing there/ Had worn them really about the same,” the author still decides to travel the path that has less traveled upon, perhaps representing a denial against convention, societal norms, the general prototypical path to place one’s footsteps. Instead, it seems like rather than following the model of others, the speaker has decided to venture and discover his own purpose without abiding by the example set by others. Moreover, the speaker also highlights the difficulty of making choices and the consequences of them. Though this poem seems inspirational in the sense that there’s a degree of individuality and trust behind one’s decisions, this poem can also be viewed as the inability of humanity to avoid certain decisions or to make incorrect ones and thus suffer the vulnerability of moving through life carrying the burden of a decision that cannot be altered. The even greater aspect of this poem is that in accepting one path, one is therefore denying all the bounties and privileges another has the offer. Thus throughout Thanksgiving break, I was thinking to myself, what am I thankful for? All the things I’ve been given, all the wonderful people that have either stumbled into my life by mistake or I’ve accepted them through time, I’ve considered how much I value and respect these people, but yet while I was reflecting I also thought about the people who I no longer have relationships with, those that I dislike, those that I miss. In accepting others as my friends and families, I’ve also had to reject others in order to make time and sacrifice for these people, but what if I’m rejecting something say a person, a possession, a path, that could be beneficial to me? So over Thanksgiving, yes, I’ve learned to be thankful, but I’ve also learned to open my heart to other people that I haven’t met since summer, that I haven’t seen since three years ago. I’ve allowed these people to come back into my life, but at the same time I’ve missed seeing those from school, those at work. And again, I am presented with a similar parallel—when Thanksgiving Break is over, do I push those that I haven’t seen in years away again because I become absorbed in something else? Why are my paths always a fork in a road never capable of coming together? Perhaps there is a theme of doubles in nature. The rejection and expulsion of one, inevitably leads to the acceptance of another.

Intricacies

Little Lamb by William Blake Little Lamb who made thee Dost thou know who made thee Gave thee life & bid thee feed. By the stream & o'er the mead; Gave thee clothing of delight, Softest clothing wooly bright; Gave thee such a tender voice, Making all the vales rejoice! Little Lamb who made thee Dost thou know who made thee Little Lamb I'll tell thee, Little Lamb I'll tell thee! He is called by thy name, For he calls himself a Lamb: He is meek & he is mild, He became a little child: I a child & thou a lamb, We are called by his name. Little Lamb God bless thee. Little Lamb God bless thee. The connotation of the word ‘lamb’ has many meanings, but above all, it is symbolic of all the characteristics the animal itself possesses. A lamb is white and always dependent upon a shepherd to guide it. Moreover, a lamb is representative of a certain innocence, frailty, youth. Yet it can also be thought of as a sacrifice, and offering of sorts. In Blake’s poem, there is a constant emphasis on who the creator is and whether or not the little lamb knows who the creator is. This questioning signifies a deeper meaning that continuously fluctuates between whether or not the lamb knows of its own existence before answering whether or not it knows who made it. In the first stanza there is constant questioning, yet by the second stanza everything seems more resolute and steady. Yet between the transitions of the two stanzas there is more than simple questioning and answering. There is a shift in tone as well, for in the first stanza the lamb seems to be docile and guileless, though by the second stanza it is nearly corrupted with the knowledge that the lamb gains through experiences. Furthermore, there is also a religious allusion throughout the poem. With no specifics and shrouded ambiguity in the words ‘he’, ‘I’, or ‘you’ it is almost as if Blake is referring to the Trinity, the Holy Spirit. This further leads to more debatable though probably answers. Does God represent knowledge? And furthermore, is Jesus the shepherd or the lamb described? Yet even though these hypotheses remain uncertain, Blake says explicitly in the poem that ‘We are called by his name’ and ‘I a child & thou a lamb’ therefore claiming that both are synonymous and that we possess the same identity and are completely connected to our creator. In a sense, Grendel seems to represent the prototype of a pristine lamb gradually molded into a black sheep. In the beginning, Grendel is clueless as he lives with his mother in some cave that he literally defines as his world until, that is, he discovers the lake and the world outside. This also refers to the gradual evolution experienced by the character of Pluto’s cave as he is enlightened. Grendel, therefore, when he was an infant in his cave perceived a false reality, which he believed in with absolute faith and truthful entirety until the day he stepped out of his proximities. Yet as he evolved into humanity when discovering the human world, he also became more and more corrupted. This can be represented in the fact that Grendel began to notice certain things such as the fat on his mother. Suddenly, he realizes his mother is ugly, gross, disgusting. This recognition is, literally, Grendel’s enlightenment. He now notices the world. Yet the deeper significance also lies in the fact, that Grendel is enlightened four times: humanity, shaper, dragon, Beowulf, and in a fifth sense, almost by his mother but she is mute, therefore rendering her effectiveness. Thus like the lamb described by Blake, Grendel is also molded by multiple persons.

Beowulf's Physicality

The entire characterization of Beowulf confuses me as I read Grendel. He’s described with a “voice, though powerful was mild. Voice of a dead thing, calm as dry sticks and ice when the wind blows over them (153-154).” Looking into this quote specifically, there’s a sense that Beowulf seems almost mechanical for Grendel views all nature as dead due to their mindless, autonomic thoughts. Moreover, by describing Beowulf as calm it makes one almost feel as if he’s not easily disturbed or jostled by either the perils or the possibilities of the future. Additionally, when Beowulf’s voice is compared to sticks and ice, one can almost perceive a sound of cracking as stepping foot on either a tree branch or on top of a frozen lake there’s almost always that frightful Crack! that penetrates the air when one’s least unexpected. To say that Beowulf’s voice can produce such an effect seems to suggest that his words are caustic, audibly snapping at his adversary. Grendel’s attention then shifts from Beowulf’s voice to his countenance. Although no detailed features are recounted, Grendel does perceive the face as familiar as is illustrated by the following quote, “He had a strange face that, little by little, grew unsettling to me: it was a face, or so it seemed for an instant, from a dream I had almost forgotten. The eyes slanted downward, never blinking, unfeeling as a snake’s. He had no more beard than a fish.” The connotation of the word “strange” in this context doesn’t suggest that Beowulf’s face was disfigured or even unappealing, rather it suggests that Grendel can’t quite put his finger on where he’d seen the face from before. He considers whether or not it had been a fleeting moment from a dream that he had nearly forgotten. From this scenario alone, one cannot help but be drawn to the conclusion of Chapter 4 that nearly mirrors this dream-like stupor Grendel questions. His mind is described as “a blank” that “fell, sank away like a stone through earth and sea, toward the dragon (56).”Moreover, by describing Beowulf’s face with eyes that are slanted alludes to the Dragon whose eye “closed to a slit (63).” However, there is also a sense of cold that comes from the fact that Beowulf’s glance is perceived as unfriendly, unwelcoming. This again alludes to the juxtaposition of fire and ice. Ironically though Beowulf is portrayed as the defender of the people, in Grendel he is described with a more icy persona, while the Dragon despite his greed seems to be the much warmer individual, therefore suggesting one possible difference between the two characters. Yet Beowulf is also described to have no facial hair, like a fish which happens to be very coincidental considering the element of the zodiac sign in Chapter 11 is water. This is also significant in that this sounds like the travel that was made in order for Grendel to reach the Dragon’s cave in chapter 5. Although we don’t know if Grendel really swims in the ocean, lake, or whether the entirety is a product of his mind, we can be sure of the fact Grendel was descending since the connotation of “sank” leads to the image of Grendel either mentally sinking deeper into the thoughts of his mind, and that he has reached the Dragon subconsciously or metaphysically. To say that Beowulf therefore is a fish, means that perhaps, he has also been influenced by the Dragon, and therefore, also enlightened.

Chapters 11 and 12

Like chapter 5, chapters 11 and 12 of Grendel serve as a significant shift from the rest of the novel. Both chapters 5 and these last two chapters introduce new characters who radically cause Grendel to question his beliefs. After reading chapters 11 and 12, I have made some new analysis that I would like to question. And so, this blog post will largely be composed of my thoughts considering whether Beowulf’s influence on Grendel causes Grendel to modify his entire outlook before he dies. From the introduction of Chapter 11, Grendel shifts from the tedium apparent in its chapter predecessor and suddenly he’s ecstatic when the stranger arrives, before viewing it as “a whole new game (151).” Moreover, there is almost a religious overtone as Grendel honors the water, “kiss the ice…for by water they came (151)” which alludes to the fact that Jesus also walked on water. When people kiss the ground, there’s a sense of worship so why does Grendel kiss the water which Beowulf metaphorically walks upon in order to arrive at Hrothgar’s kingdom? Does this ‘bowing’ down by Grendel represent a servile quality or a sense of futility in that Grendel acknowledges defeat to Beowulf subconsciously? Moreover, could it be that Grendel simply is beginning to abide by Beowulf’s ‘theories’ and thus he is accepting them through such an act? Yet Grendel seems to still be part dragon for he “could feel them coming as I lay in the dark of my cave (151).” Such an ability to sense the strangers approaching shows that Grendel has been anxious for their arrival or expected them to show. Grendel described, himself, even to experience the same “strange sensation (151)” which led him as “the mind of the dragon did once.” This causes the reader to question, is there some sort of parallel between the dragon and Beowulf? Are they somehow related? Moreover, there is also the theme of footsteps that reoccur. In the prior chapter, footsteps precede the Shaper’s death. Ironically, in chapter 11 these footsteps foreshadow Grendel’s death, even though he waves it off as “nothing but the sound of my own heart (152).” Moreover, for the first time, Grendel’s mother does not try to prevent him from leaving, though just beforehand Grendel’s mother had tried to stop him from attending the Shaper’s funeral. Yet, I cannot help but question why does Grendel’s mother seem so indifferent and mechanical while Grendel is heightened and agitated by some strange new feeling? Even more so, why are the firesnakes also so similar to Grendel in his reaction? “They sense it too (152)” Grendel observes. And if the firesnakes perceive it does this mean that dragon realizes whatever ‘it’ is as well since he is also part reptile? Thus this entire section is confusing to me: Why does Grendel’s mother reveal no attempt to stop her son from meeting a perceived threat while she tries to stop Grendel from attending a dead, harmless man’s funeral? It makes no sense. Additionally, when Grendel finally does encounter Beowulf and his thanes he characterizes them “like trees, these strangers. Their leader was big as a mountain, moving with his forest (153).” Although, Grendel addresses the stature of Beowulf’s obvious size and strength, he nevertheless mocks him and his thanes derisively, rebuking them as inanimate, unthinking objects because he thinks of nature as “indifferent” in thought and sensitivity, but the irony is in how Gardner describes Beowulf’s army as trees and mountains. While Grendel mocks nature, he is further mocking religion. By mocking trees, Grendel is simultaneously deriding knowledge as symbolic of the apple tree from the Garden of Eden. Thus, Gardner presents a paradoxical duality to Grendel’s contemptuous scorn. Grendel mocks trees, but he claims that he is thinking so does that make him a hypocrite?

Romance

Romance, who loves to nod and sing With drowsy head and folded wing Among the green leaves as they shake Far down within some shadowy lake, To me a painted paroquet Hath been—most familiar bird— Taught me my alphabet to say, To lisp my very earliest word While in the wild wood I did lie, A child—with a most knowing eye. Of late, eternal condor years So shake the very Heaven on high With tumult as they thunder by, I have no time for idle cares Through gazing on the unquiet sky; And when an hour with calmer wings Its down upon my spirit flings, That little time with lyre and rhyme To while away—forbidden things— My heart would feel to be a crime Unless it trembled with the strings. Edgar Allen Poe's "Romance" contains vivid imagery that is illustrated through the first few lines which reflect some of Poe's famous horror tendencies that is characteristic of his work. However, "Romance" is very insightful and reflective at life--it constantly assesses its past as in the first verse Poe directs the reader towards an awareness about youth and childhood years.Moreover, the first verse illustrates how the child develops into an adult as he gradually matures--"While in the wild wood I did lie,/ A child-with a most knowing eye." This therefore illustrates how the child gains that insight that is only suggestive of higher-order thinking in an adult's mind. In the second stanza of the poem, the child has now officially entered adulthood. He seems displeased and the poem sets of a bitter tone to reflect the child's attitude--"I have no time for idle cares/ Through grazing on the unquiet sky." By suggesting that the child has no time for recreational activities or matters of 'unimportance' such as thoughtlessly viewing the sky that nearly seems disturbing to the adult suggests that the child has become aware of the pessimism that defines adulthood since usually children live in an encased protective mental barrier that prevents them from viewing reality from the lens of an adult's acumen and insight. Thus the child realizes how reality is harsh and disappointing in the world as he begins to realize that the forces around him are acting against him and indifferent to his needs. The threatening "late, eternal Condor years" also suggests that the child after transitioning into his adulthood is now entering into the later years of his life and fast approaching death, rather than leaning more towards the youth and excitement hallmark of more young, vibrant years. Other latent imagery hidden within "Romance" is visible when Poe describes "lyre and rhyme/ To while away--forbidden things!" These last two lines reflect the condition of Poe's heart which seems to be in an unstable condition. By using crime as an adjective, Poe illustrates the guilty nature of his heart that seems to be pulling at him through the description of strings. Moreover, there is also a sense of fright for his heart "trembles" suggesting that he is afraid of something that most likely has to do with age. The poem structure also adds to "Romance" as it uses rhyming couplets in its introductions while alternating rhyme schemes during the rest of the poem. The shift in rhyme structure and the use of hyphens are meant to contrast the imagery and the effects of realism that is associated with maturation from childhood to adulthood as well as the reflective and agitated feelings that often accompany the uncertainties that face us while developing throughout our later years in pastime. In all, Poe is shifting from the theme of romance and reality that often obfuscated as one struggles to make sense of emerging into adulthood from childhood. The first stanza illustrates how like the bird, "paroquet" there is a romance which characterizes his writing style in his youth whereas in the second stanza the speaker is unable to view the beautiful that becomes "forbidden things". Yet there are times when the author reflects and feels satisfaction and happiness which illustrates how despite one's inability to go back into gleeful, childhood times one can take pleasure in relishing his past--"And when an hour with calmer wings/ Its down upon my spirit flings/ That little time with lyre and rhyme/ To while away-forbidden things."

Grendel and Pluto's Allegory of the Cave

Plato’s Allegory of the Cave talks about how there humans are chained by their necks and shackled around their limbs so that they are trapped deep inside the cave of a physical world. These people have been fettered since they were born so their entire reality is simply whatever they can see in front of them since the chains around their necks prevent them from moving their heads. When they see straight the only thing they see in front of them are the shadows that are casted against the background of a fire that roars behind them. These shadows become their reality. However, one day a prisoner is unshackled and suddenly he is taken from outside the cave: all at once he is enlightened due to his exposure. Yet he is blinded at first since he is unable to look at the sun. First he looks at the shadows, then the reflection, and finally the sun itself, but when he is led back to the cave he is blinded once again because he is unable to see anything since his eyes have adjusted to the reality outside of the cave. He is mocked by his fellow peers when he is unable to see the shadows in front of him even though he knows that those aren’t really shadows and when he tries to explain he is ridiculed. Grendel’s journey in chapter two resembles the Allegory of the Cave since he leaves the “cave of ignorance” and enters the “world of sunlight.” This can be illustrated as Grendel “discovered the sunken door… came up, for the first time, to moonlight.” As he leaves his mother and the underground cave, he adventures up from the pool of “fire-snakes” and is exposed to the moonlight though later on, however, he “came out again, inevitably” and faced the sunlight. From there he begins to experiment with his new world and gain a profound sense of knowledge when he realizes the new parallels of reality that differed from those that he knows in his mother’s cave. Grendel views life in his mother’s cave as “the indifferent, burning eyes of the strangers…” yet when he is in the human world his encounters with the bull, the tree, and men he discovers how his mother is unable to hear in addition to how the bull “fought by instinct…blind mechanism ages old.” This illustrates how Grendel has arrived at his disgust for the unthinking or those who are inexpressible. Yet he also realizes how those who are thinking are dangerous—“suddenly I knew I was dealing with no dull mechanical bull but with thinking creatures, pattern makers, the most dangerous things I’d ever met…” When, however, he returns to his mother’s den is life is completely altered just like the prisoner from the Allegory of the Cave, suddenly there is no turning back. In addition to Plato’s Allegory of the Cave the zodiac symbol for chapter two of Grendel is Taurus the bull who illustrates the philosophy of Solipsism that explains how the only thing that anyone can be certain of is one’s self and self-perceptions. This reflects exactly what Grendel experiences after he has been enlightened by the outside world past his mother’s cave—“The world is all pointless accident…I exist, nothing else.”

Grendel

In Beowulf, Grendel is represented as the blood-hungry antagonist who is responsible for havoc in Heorot. He’s defeated by the epic hero Beowulf in a clash that results in brute force and strength. His death is lauded by everyone, but when reading Grendel, the reader is forced to empathize with Grendel from another perspective. Although Grendel is responsible for all the deaths of the thanes in Heorot for twelve years, one cannot help but understand Grendel’s wrath and anger for Grendel. Grendel is continually frustrated at the world and full of rage due to the lack of answers for the world’s mysteries. He views the dull-witted ram as a direct example of stupid creatures that exist but are unable to think, simply operating like mechanical creatures and existing with a mind like a blank slate, filled with no thoughts or emotions. Yet, Grendel contrasts himself with the ram and emphasizes how he’s thinking, how he’s filled with complicated emotions. Moreover, Grendel is also derisive in tone towards the calf who he’s afraid will kill him by the blow of his head, but Grendel then realizes that the ram is unable to injure him not because he’s struck too low, but because “he would always strike too low: he fought by instinct, blind mechanism ages old. He’d have fought the same way against a n earthquake or an eagle. (21)”Yet Grendel is not self-conceited—“Not that I fool myself with thoughts that I’m more noble (14)—he knows the foul deeds that he’s committed, the numerous murders his hands are stained with, but he’s also similar in many aspects to Frankenstein’s creation. Both Grendel and Frankenstein are born putrefied, unholy, desecrated. They are offered no chance of redemption while their fates are sealed by nature’s grasp. Fate is outside of the control of both creatures and thus they accept their roles. Yet the difference that lies between Grendel and Frankenstein is the characteristic indifference to mindless natural forces in one and the romanticism of heightened sensations that results from nature in the other. Grendel views the world as mindless, since he views it as unthinking, but also empty—“”the meaningless objectness of the world, the universal bruteness …the world is all a pointless accident (28)”he yells to the sky but it pays him no attention and he realizes that the Earth will not respond to him. Yet the Creation views nature as a comforting force for he flees to the Alps in order to escape and find refuge from humankind. Another apparent difference in how Grendel is a carnivore whereas Frankenstein’s Creation is a vegetarian even though both are responsible for the deaths of several persons, Grendel actually eats the blood and flesh of humankind perhaps this is due to the fact that he realizes humanity is hazardous because he was dealing “with thinking creatures, pattern makers, the most dangerous things I’d ever met. (27)” This represents how both the Creation and Grendel viewed humanity as a threat because of their ability to reason for themselves and as a result, kill forms of dangers that were embodied in Grendel and the Creation.

Eliot and Anderson

The Love Song of J.Alfred Prufrock and Winesburg, Ohio both illustrate the themes of isolation, alienation, and miscommunication. Both pieces of literature also feature a sense of fragmentation in the structure of their work in addition to conveying the expressionist, dreamlike modernist feelings at the turn of the twentieth century. Moreover, there is a direct relationship between teller and listener in both of these pieces. Winesburg is composes of 22 short stories with “The Book of Grotesques” serving as its introduction. Each story ties to the others as the reader learns of the struggles that a specific character in each story must overcome. Winesburg is considered a piece of Modernist literature because although everything in the novel occurs in one setting, the characters each have their own markedly different stories. A sense of fragmentation though paradoxically connects all of the grotesques in the novel because each is stuck in a static, isolationist state that parallels the short, split sections of the novel so that each character is forced to tell his or her individual story. Likewise, The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock can also be divided into several sections that convey the speaker’s difficulty in voicing his feelings and expressions. Line 60 to 61 state, “Then how should I begin/ To spit out all the butt-ends of my days and ways?” These phrases illustrate the thick-end of the handle, the unused and remaining portion that the speaker is unable to verbalize and communicate. Such difficulty of expression also mirrors in “Paper Pills” of Winesburg, Ohio as Dr. Reefy writes his thoughts on slips of paper that are never heard by the tall, dark girl who dies. However, this evokes another parallel between both works, for both are addressing women and seem to be searching for some sort of understanding in the women. Yet both pieces also refer to abandonment—In Winesburg, Ohio the twisted apples are unpicked and fallen on the ground, but they are the sweetest and most sensational. In The Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock there is a sense of abandonment, but also attachment for what one can’t return to. In lines 120 through 124 it is written, “I grow old…/I grow old…/I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled./ Shall I part my hair behind? Do I dare to eat a peach?/ I shall wear white flannel trousers…” In these lines, the speaker tone conveys a sense of nostalgia because he longs to return back to youth even though he is realistically are that he cannot return. By rolling the bottom of his trousers, he reverts back to a youthful ‘trend.’ When the speaker asks if he ought to eat the peach, he questions his innocence his youth because of the connotation of fruit not only with fertility but of young age, ripe and lively. In lines 127 and 128 it reads, “Combing the white hair of the waves blown black/ When the wind blows the water white and black,” the speaker characterizes his old age, by personifying the waves to illustrate the gradual peppering of his hair and the neutral, monochromatic colors of white and black to illustrate how old he is. These colors are then juxtaposed with the mermaids in the second to last line, “By sea-girls wreathed with seaweed red and brown.” The red and brown colors are associated with the connotations of youth and animation, while mermaids are evoked because they are also active and young. Through these inferences, it is likely that the speaker feels a sense of abandonment because he is no longer young. Likewise there is also a sense of abandonment in modern society that reveres following World War I. Although Anderson, himself, grew up in a small rural town, he alludes to the modernizing America that was arising. As a result, a major theme in Winesburg concerns forsaking dreams in order to face reality and development through growth, maturation, and relinquishing childlike naiveté.

Poetry in Hands

Throughout the context of “Hands,” Wing Bibblebaum is characterized both as a grotesque and a poet. He is also described as a fat little old man who walks nervously up and down. Wind Bibblebaum has also been the town mystery who is “submerged in a sea of doubts.” Yet, his identity doesn’t come from his appearance, but his hands. They are described as “the slender expressive fingers, forever active, forever striving to conceal themselves in his pockets or behind his back, came forth and became the piston rods of his machinery of expression.” And it is also because of these hands, that Wing Bibblebaum is not named the writer. Although, Wing Bibblebaum is reclusive and grotesque because of his failure to voice his beliefs, his hands are the outlets that allow Wing to express himself, his thoughts. Additionally, Wing’s hands are described as “his distinguishing feature, the source of his frame.” He can pick the highest number of strawberries because of them. He is able to teach his students and mold their minds so that he was able “to carry a dream into the young minds.” Yet, the hands also epitomize grotesqueness because they are feared. Wing’s hands aren’t loved, but hated for their dexterity and movement. Thus for that reason, Wing hides them. Likewise, it is because of these hands that Wing is thought of as a homosexual predator. Throughout the novel, homosexuality is looked down upon by the village where Wing once taught his pupils. Simple because Wing showed his passion by “the stroking of shoulders and the touching of the hair was a part of the schoolmaster’s effort to carry a dream into the young minds.” Wing therefore was “meant by nature to be a teacher of youth” because he wanted to craft ideas, establish truths in the minds of these individuals, but was mistaken and wrongly judged as a homosexual because of the activities his hands were associated with. As a result, Wing begins to fear his own hands and view them as dangerous. Even when he is with George, he is hesitant about his hands as “slowly they stole forth and lay upon George Willard’s shoulders.” Although Wing doesn’t know what crime he has committed, he realizes that the hands are guilty. Yet, it is strange that Wing refers to them as a separate entity, as if he doesn’t have any control—they seem to have a mind of their own. Therefore, Anderson is directly challenging society for chastising those that it doesn’t understand. He does this especially through the general description of Wing’s character—“the man, who was bald and whose nervous little hands fiddle about the bare white forehead as though arranging a mass of tangled locks.” In context, baldness symbolizes his loss of strength and virility. As a result Wing is portrayed as a delicate figure that is unable to realize his dream and as a result, remains lonely because of his hands which have caused him misunderstanding. Yet Wing is only grotesque because of confusion alone. He is not truly homosexual and therefore his grotesqueness does not derive itself from an issue of sexuality. Instead, it is his futility in life and his isolation. Thus by the conclusion when George fails to appear, Wing’s life illustrates how like all the other grotesques in the story his life becomes static and disillusioned, a prevailing theme among the early 1900s.

Hidden Parallels

"The sounding cataract/ Haunted me like a passion: the tall rock,/ The mountain, and the deep and gloomy wood,/ Their colours and their forms, were then to me/ An appetite: a feeling and a love, That had no need of a remoter charm, By thought supplied, or any interest/ Unborrowed from the eye." Shelley's incorporation of Romantic literature in Frankenstein has been influenced by not only her husband but Wordsworth and Coleridge who have shaped the ideas and thoughts of her literature as illustrated in their Preface--"The poet considers man and nature as essentially adapted to each other, and the mind of man as naturally a mirror of the fairest and most interesting properties of nature." Thus Shelley's admiration of nature can be characterized through her continuous usage of the sublime and supernatural forces that steer her character's emotions and thoughts. Throughout the Romantic period, Shelley and Wordsworth both used nature as an alleviating element that rejuvenates the spirits and as a restorative factor which alleviates pains or wounds. For Wordsworth, he reminisces about Tintern Abbey after he hasn't visited for several years. His recollection is filled with beautiful imagery concerning the landscape, the cliffs, the forests. Now, however, after residing in the city, he realizes how Tintern Abbey has influenced him into his adulthood and later years even as he moves away from further and further, he still holds pieces of Tintern Abbey in his heart. During Frankenstein, a similar reverence for nature is found as Shelley uses nature to contrast with Victor and the Creation's emotions and pains after experiencing something tragic such as a death. In the context of this quote, Shelley extracts lines 77 through 84 of Wordsworth's poem, Tintern Abbey, in order to illustrate nature's role in Frankenstein as it influences both Victor and the Creation. This quote is a lamentation by Victor, expressing his grief following his best friend, Henry Cleval yet the quote serves a double purpose as it represents not only Victor's anguish but also that of his Creation. Although Shelley doesn't focus on the actual abbey which Wordsworth describes, she invokes the imagery of nature and alludes to a higher reference of God as she capitalizes on the relationship between man and nature, man and God, that both Victor and his Creation face. In the context of the quote, Victor is referring to Cleval because of his love for nature, while referencing himself likewise for the guilt and sorrow that he feels for destroying it. Moreover, the tone of the quote from Tintern Abbey depicts an ominous portrayal of nature even as it is glorified. Despite the fact that the tall, threatening natural objects Shelley uses to heighten tension, she also uses these natural elements to forebode the soon upcoming death of Cleval through Victor's perspective. Despite the common theme of nature between Shelley and Wordsworth, isolation is yet again symbolized through the hermit figure that Wordsworth writes, "Or of some hermit's cave, where by his fire/ The hermit sits alone." Through this quote, one is reminded of Shelley's description of the Creation and his lonely, wandering lifestyle as well as his first encounter with fire. Representing the hermit figure in Tintern Abbey, the Creation who experiences fire during his creation also stays secluded, eschewed from the rest of society until his death--again, he is completely alone and he decides to die by incarcerating himself in flames.

Subserviant Mistresses

Throughout the passage of Frankenstein a key theme is portrayed that goes against the values of Mary Shelley. A strong proponent of feminist views and ideas, Shelley argues against the whole entity of passive women. Yet she consistently uses these figures in order to illustrate the aggressiveness and abuse they must suffer because of the faults of Victor and his Creation. None of the women in the book are heroines or heavy-duty, independent women. Instead each of them serves a particular purpose whether it be scapegoat or an exemplar of good, feminine virtue and wisdom. One could fairly argue that the female role during the course of the novel is to be obedient, subservient, and even as a sex object. Several connotations in nature construe also emphasize such ideas as illustrated by Victor’s exclamation—“I pursued nature to her hiding places.” The first theme of domestic women is described through Justine’s character. She epitomizes the idea of women as innocent and young, but also subjective to the torments and faults of men. She is a primary subject that also remains calm despite the fact that her death is soon approaching. She has an almost flippant attitude about her unjust death as described clearly—“I do not fear to die that pang is past. God raises my weaknesses, and gives me courage to endure the worst. I leave a sad and bitter world; and if you remember me, and think of me as of one unjustly condemned, I am resigned to the fate awaiting me. Learn from me, dear lady, to submit in [patience] to the will of Heaven (Shelley 59)!” Although this quote could possibly argued to exemplify Justine’s courage and strength, it more strongly renders the idea that Justine does not fight against her fate even if it means being put upon the morrow. Likewise, Elizabeth, although she is the most loved among all of the women Victor appraises in Frankenstein seems to be afraid of assuming an autonomous position. When Elizabeth decides to visit Justine in the jail, she must have Victor come with her because she’s afraid to go by herself—“I will go, although she is guilty; and you, Victor, shall accompany me: I cannot go alone.” Yet on the off chance that she is alone—even for a brief instance—she dies. Doesn’t that seem symbolic? It’s almost as Shelley is arguing that women can’t be alone because they rely upon men to keep them safe and to help them travail against the currents of societal circumstances. Moreover, Victor elucidates clearly that Elizabeth is his throughout the novel—“it was the prospect of the day when, enfranchised from my miserable slavery, I might [claim] Elizabeth, and forget the past in union with her (Shelley 111).” Even Agatha, still young and a child in Frankenstein, represents several characteristic qualities that are typically highlighted as feminine virtues from a young age in a patriarchal society. Filial to the elderly, respectful to the word of her brother, always courteous and polite. As engrained from a young age—she learns not to go against the word of her male superiors, obviously respectful of her place already determined by society.

Frankenstein and Vegetarianism

            Throughout Shelley’s prose, there is a common, reoccurring theme that underscores a general account through the monster’s perspective. As noted throughout the text, the Creature maintains a vegetarian diet that Shelley meticulously articulates—“The vegetables in the gardens, the milk and cheese that I saw placed at the windows of some of the cottages, allured my appetite (Shelley 73).”  Yet there are also several other characters who also resort to vegetarianism including the De Lacey family which Shelley also fastidiously details—“…and he showed her a large loath and a piece of cheese, [Agatha] seemed pleased, and went into the garden for some roots and plants (Shelley 76).” As noticed by now, the omission and lack of reference towards meat is evident in both the monster’s and the De Lacey’s description as the fiend’s narration of the De Lacey family goes to specify even further that none of the members of the De Lacey family hunt for food. However, many would challenge that vegetarianism was a last resort, since the fiend had not learned how to use fire prior to his discoveries of berries and roots, while the De Lacey family had penurious economic conditions, but what changes the entire validity of such a theory is that for the majority course of time, the Shelley family also abided by a strict, vegetarian diet. Moreover, Victor and his family were not in the same financial circumstances, and therefore, shows that vegetarianism wasn’t resorted to out of necessity, but out of self-obligation. Such a quality makes Frankenstein unique as well as notable because it is one of the few selected, renowned English novels that emphasizes with such tremendous detail the nourishment and intake each of its major characters in the novel consumes.   However, the principal reason that Shelley references vegetarianism is largely because of her husband Percy who practiced abstinence from meat consumption. Likewise, following a few years after Frankenstein was written and in development stage, Percy published his own reinterpretations of the Prometheus myth, suggesting that the significance of the titan’s carrying fire to earth was as a means of introducing flesh-eating to humanity and thus, from that point forward the pristine human civilization was ravaged by disease that was contracted from ingesting meat products due to the ability of fire to roast animals and creatures for satisfaction of appetite as it is written in context--"If the use of animal food be, in consequence, subversive to the peace of human society, how unwarrantable is the injustice and the barbarity which is exercised toward these miserable victims. They are called into existence by human artifice that they may drag out a short and miserable existence of slavery and disease, that their bodies may be mutilated, their social feelings outraged. It were much better that a sentient being should never have existed, than that it should have existed only to endure unmitigated misery"; "Never again may blood of bird or beast/ Stain with its venomous stream a human feast,/ To the pure skies in accusation steaming"; and "It is only by softening and disguising dead flesh by culinary preparation that it is rendered susceptible of mastication or digestion, and that the sight of its bloody juices and raw horror does not excite intolerable loathing and disgust." Likewise, he also alludes to this topic in his extended endnotes credited in his philosophical poem Queen Mab that was later reintroduced as a pamphlet called A Vindication of Natural Diet.

Hidden Parallels Between Frankenstein and the Bible

Throughout the novel Frankenstein, Victor consistently plays God through numerous recurring themes that can be demonstrated during several situations. Perhaps the most obvious context is when Victor insists on creating a new species, thus giving birth to the wretched fiend, and taking over God's greatest power—creation. The sheer similarity of the act performed and the exclamations that Victor voices in his dramatic monologues account for his distinct belief that he has received some sort of intellect of higher intelligence—“A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me. No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs (Shelley 32)”— as Shelley portrays quite visibly many of Victor’s aspirations were to role play God, follow in his footsteps, mirror his performance and actions, but above all, achieve the glory, recognition, fame, and respect from the ‘humans’ he sought to form.                                   There are also numerous illustrations that give insightful information about what Victor is thinking as he glorifies and prides himself in learning a science that no one else has mastered, which further perpetuates his belief that he can serve as God because he has access to surreptitious evidence—“It was the secrets of heaven and earth that I desired to learn; and whether it was the outward substance of things, or the inner spirit of nature and the mysterious soul of man that accompanied me, still my enquiries were directed to the metaphysical, or in its highest sense, the physical secrets of the world (Shelley 19).”                                                                                                                                       Perhaps, Victor even believed that he had a heaven-to-earth revelation because text evidence supports that he had an epiphany upon discovering some vital truth that only he was allowed to see—“a light so brilliant and wondrous, yet so simple, that while I became dizzy with the immensity of the prospect which is illustrated, I was surprised, that among so many men of genius who had directed their enquiries towards the same science, that I alone should be reserved to discover so astonishing a secret (Shelley 31).” Through such context, it almost seems as if Victor is envisioning that God has cast a beam of diving light at him and selected him as the ‘chosen’ one. As illustrated, Shelley again uses a religious connotation that is expressed through the imagery of light since oftentimes when a beam of light shines down from the clouds or even a rainbow, heavenly feats are associated with it.                                  Another character, Walton, also respectively aspires to become God, although not nearly as much as Victor does. Through simply the introduction of the first letter, his written dialogue vividly alludes and has connotations of association to a higher power—“These visions faded when I perused, for the first time, those poets whose effusions entranced my soul, and lifted it to heaven. I also became a poet, and for one year lived in a Paradise of my own creation; I imagine that I also might obtain a niche in the temple where the names of Homer and Shakespeare are consecrated. (Shelley 2)”—the numerous references to his own creation, Heaven, and ambitions for fame, clearly mirror desire that are in God’s holy, omnipotent image.                                                                                                                                                                     Moreover, simply Walton’s ambition to travel and find the North Pole seems to have many Biblical references. In the Bible, Jesus is able to walk on stormy seas. Likewise, Walton appears to be challenging God by proving that he too can overcome the forces of nature. Shelley illustrates this principal through numerous evidence of Romantic text as she has Walter expand on how the oceans must obey mankind, and how the seas are no match for man’s ship.