Team Victor or Team Monster???

Many readers debate over which character deserves sympathy, the monster or his creator, Victor. Neither of them deserve sympathy. They both committed horrid crimes; Victor by creating the monster and then rejecting him , and the monster by going on a revenge killing spree. Victor deserves no sympathy because he was so eager to animate the monster, then the second he awakens, Victor flees, leaving the poor creation to fend for itself. Victor should have known the implications his work would have and he should have faced the consequences of his actions like a man and not a scared little girl. Pathetic. The monster could have been considered worthy of sympathy had he not been blinded by revenge. He should have persevered and tried to overcome people's prejudices against him. I am glad they both died. They were a danger to those around them, in fact none of Frankenstein's family survived because of his creation. So, HA I say, that is what you get, Victor, for fighting the natural order of things!

It Really Is Les Miserables

I thought this was supposed to be a horror story? It ended up being more of a book about internal conflict; not very scary, or interesting. I felt the book was very anit-climactic, I didn't feel as though there was a real action- intense scene. I guess I was expecting the creation of the monster to be the climax, but instead that scene played only a minute part in the book. The book was more about human nature than ghost stories. I am slightly disappointed that there was not a lot of external conflict in the book, it would have made it more exciting. However, I am glad that Victor and the monster die in the end because it seems as if all has been brought to justice. They both got what they deserved; they both committed terrible crimes and paid the ultimate price.

Frankenstein 8 - Foil Characters

"Clerval occupied himself with the moral relations of things. The busy stage of life, the virtues of heros, and the actions of men were his theme; and his hope and his dream was to become one among those whose manes are recorded in story as the gallant and adventurous benefactors of our species" (Frankenstein 37)

Henry Clerval and Frankenstein serve as foil characters. Henry enjoys adventure and heroism, while Frankenstein relishes in science and philosophy. Henry's cheerful and adventurous personality contrasts Victor's brooding and studious personality. Henry's caring personality often highlights Victor's dark air. This is especially evident when Henry cares for Victor in Ingolstadt. Henry is kind and loving, yet Victor remains violent and gloomy. This lessens my sympathy for Victor; if he cannot return the kindness that his friend shows, then I cannot feel sympathetic towards him.

Les Miserables?

"Anguish and despair had penetrated into the core of my heart; I bore a hell within me which nothing could extinguish" (Frankenstein 84).

I have determined that Frankenstein is a crybaby. He complains and whines about everything. What did the doctor think was going to happen when he reanimated tissue. Did he think he was going to create some beautiful, handsome being?! He saw his creation before he gave it life, he had to have realized how ugly it was going to be when alive. It's not like the monster was suddenly going to become handsome when given life. Instead of thinking his plan through, Dr. Frankenstein creates this monster and then the moment it is given life he flees and wallows in self pity. He sits in his boat or goes on walks through the woods, and wails about his life even though the pain he is feeling is self-inflicted. I have know sympathy for Frankenstein, he acted rashly as a youth and is now paying for his stupid decision to mess with the supernatural sciences; serves him right. Plus all the scenes of Frankenstein crying make the book boring and frustrating. Who wants to listen to a grown man crying like a toddler?

Frankenstein 6 - Frame Story Cont'd

I have just discovered the drawbacks to the frame story technique. A frame story allows you a glimpse of the resolution of the story and offers a limited scope for the imagination. Specifically in Frankenstein the frame story structure lets the reader know that Dr. Frankenstein and the monster end up in the North Pole. With this knowledge, it is aggravating trying to imagine an end to the story. I have a hard time filling in the gaps between the inner frame story I know and the outer frame story that has not yet been completed. I wish I was able to imagine my own end to the story, instead I am going in circles trying to figure out what events unfold between the two stories I already know.

Frankenstein 5 - Allusions

"If this rule were always observed; if no man allowed any pursuit whatsoever to interfere with the tranquility of his domestic affections, Greece had not been enslaved, Caesar would have spared his country, America would have been discovered more gradually, and the empires of Mexico and Peru had not been destroyed" (Shelley 54).

This line is jam-packed with allusions. Shelley was obviously striving to make a point, but did she really achieve it by using allusions? She used too many allusions here, bogging the reader down, causing them to slow down and try to connect the allusions. I am not even sure what two of the allusions are referring two. I got so caught up trying to figure out what the allusions were that I missed the point Shelley was trying to make. I find that this is a trend in her writing. She focuses so much on extra details and flowery language that the reader loses focus of the story she is trying to convey. She stated in the preface of "Frankenstein" that the novel started off as a ghost story. Since when does a ghost story need fancy language and allusions to make it scary. I'm pretty sure no one will ever sit around a campfire and read "Frankenstein" in its entirety in efforts to scare people. Shelley also says in the author's note that she made style changes to "Frankenstein" and that the reader is viewing the revised copy. I wish she had stuck with the first draft, it was probably easier to read and more to the point, the way a good book should be.

Frankenstein 4 - Hubris

" A human being in perfection ought always to preserve a calm and peaceful mind and never allow passion or a transitory desire to disturb his tranquility". (Shelley 54).

Dr. Frankenstein's hubris is clearly his curiosity and his obsession with his work. In this passage he agknowledges that a human must be prudent in his pursuit of knowledge. He states that "passion must not disturb tranquility". Why does he not take his own advice. If he knows that he must slow down and rationalize, why doesn't he do it. He could have saved himself a lot of trouble later on if he had just listened to his own advice. His passion for knowledge is ultimately his downfall, leading him to create a monster that only causes him pain and grief.

Frankenstein 3 - Foreshadowing

"I had been the author of unalterable evils, and I lived in daily fear lest the monster whom I had created should perpetuate some new wickedness. I had an obscure feeling that all was not over and that he would still commit some signal crime, which by its enormity should almost efface the recollection of the past". (Shelley 87-88)

This is an obvious moment of foreshadowing. Dr. Frankenstein is blatant in his belief that the monster will wreak havoc, this plants a seed in the reader's thoughts, aligning them with the idea that dark events have yet to unfold in the story of Frankenstein. What frightening events are about to unfold in the tale? Will the monster begin planning pre-meditated murders or will he just go on a killing spree? The way these events play out could be essential to understanding the monster. If he plans murders it means that he has a thought process and is a resemblance of a human. But, if he goes on a killing spree, one could infer that he is only a monster, with no mental human qualities, and thus one could infer that Dr. Frankenstein's scientific study has been for naught, and his research cannot be used for beneficial activities.

Frankenstein 2 - Flat Character

"What may be expected in a country of eternal light? I may there discover the wondrous power which attracts the needle and may regulate a thousand celestial observations that require only this voyage to render their seeming eccentricities consistent forever." (Shelley 16)

Robert Walton appears to be a flat character. He is hellbent on making magnificent scientific discoveries in the North Pole. He craves knowledge; he must attain knowledge and power in order to put meaning into his life. He is very similar to Dr. Frankenstein, who also thirsted for knowledge and scientific discovery when he was younger. Dr. Frankenstein seems to have had a change of heart; it appears he has learned that knowledge is not all good. This leaves the reader wondering whether Robert Walton will learn from Dr. Frankenstein's mistake and give up his voyage before he ruins himself or at least proceed with prudence. Walton's hubris is clearly his curiosity and his mentality that he must discover something in order for his life to matter. Will he become a dynamic character in the end or will he remain a flat character and repeat Dr. Frankenstein's mistakes? The world may never know.

Frankenstein 1- Frame Story

Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein" is written in the form of a frame story, or a story within a story. "Frankenstein" begins in epistolary form; Robert Walton is writing letters to his sister telling her of his journey to the North Pole. Then Walton meets a starved man lost in the freezing wilderness. This man, later we find out he is Dr. Frankenstein, begins to tell Walton his life's tale and how he managed to end up half- dead in the arctic wilderness. Dr. Frankenstein's narrative is the story within a story; Walton's letters being the first story. Later in the novel another story develops. Now, we have a story within a story, within a story (Woah, CRAZY). Shelley was very clever to write "Frankenstein" in the form of a frame story. The technique allows the reader to see the big picture and get different points of view on Frankenstein's monster. Frame story is particularly useful in setting up the monster as a sympathetic character, because we get to see his point of view.
The use of a frame story makes the novel especially interesting to modern readers because most contemporary readers have already heard the legend of Frankenstein, or at least history's skewed version of Frankenstein. The frame story allows the reader to get the real version of Frankenstein, and it is engaging to learn Dr. Frankenstein's background and the story told from a bystander's perspective and also from the monster's point of view.

"Are you calling me darling? Are you calling me bird?"

Mr. Rochester rarely calls Jane by her name when they are having a more - "lovey-dovey" conversation. He will address her as Jane or Miss Eyre when they are having a normal conversation, but when when he tells Jane he loves her, Mr. Rochester comes up with the weirdest terms of endearment. Mr. Rochester often calls Jane a fairy or an elf. Elf doesn't exactly say, "I love you". As bad as "elf" sounds, Mr. Rochester's worst pet name was definitely when he called Jane a "mustard seed". Is that Victorian speak for "You're beautiful"? Somehow I doubt it - nothing screams beautiful like a mustard seed. It's almost insulting. Apparently she is not pretty enough to be compared to a flower or a graceful bird (you know the whole "roses are red" crap), nope, she's as pretty as a mustard seed -umm, eww- a mustard seed is small, awkward, and ugly. Maybe she is ugly, but there is no need to say it to her face. Spoiler Alert Mr. Rochester! -she knows she is ugly, she pretty much tells herself that everyday, no need to reiterate. Learn to tell a small white lie man! Tell her she is pretty. Personally, I would not be flattered if someone called me a mustard seed. I can't imagine Jane was too thrilled with the comparison either. But, she stayed with Rochester, so he must have some game. Rock on, Rochester.

"I miss the catch if they throw me the ball, I'm the last kid standing up against the wall"

It is stated on multiple occasions in "Jane Eyre" that Jane is a plain and homely character. If this is true why is she fairly attractive in most of the film adaptations? Consequently, why is Mr. Rochester handsome in most of the film adaptations? Isn't he supposed to be a rough, melancholy figure? I've come to the conclusion that either movie directors pick attractive actors in order to sell tickets, or Jane and Mr. Rochester are not as ugly as they believe they are, (the former option is probably the likely, but just humor me). I think that Jane is really a modestly attractive person. When she is a child she is called ugly, but it was said by people who hated her such as her cousin John Reed and Mr. Brocklehurst and her Aunt Reed. In her adult life she was never called ugly; it was noted that she dressed modestly, almost like a nun. When I picture Jane Eyre, I don't get the image of "the last kid standing up against the wall" (Ting Tings), instead I see a woman who doesn't recognize her own beauty and therefore mistakenly believes she isn't worthy of fine things or little indulgences. Jane was treated abominably as a child, and I believe it messed with her psyche as an adult. Her treatment at Lowood Institute distorted her image of herself, making her think that she was an unattractive person whose only purpose in life was to spread God's Good News, or at least Lowood's version of the Good News, and serve her superiors. I don't think I could survive as a female in Victorian era. I would abhor being inferior to the aristocracy and their skewed religious ideals. I admire Jane for her ability to persevere in a world where money apparently determines your human worth and beauty.

"Listen to me, oh no I never say anything at all But with nothing to consider they forget my name"

Charlotte Bronte did not paint a pretty picture of the aristocracy and middle class in Victorian society. Her aristocratic characters in "Jane Eyre" were always rude and arrogant Bible-huggers who believed that they were the ultimate authority on the issue of morality. Mrs. Reed and Mr. Brocklehurst both believed that Jane was a devil-child that needed punishment in order to save her soul. Mrs. Reed and Mr. Brocklehurst looked upon Jane is such a way simply because she was a poor orphan. Later in her life, Jane was again looked down upon for being poor. Lady Ingram openly insults Jane, stating that all governesses are foolish people who far less clever than the pupils they taught. Jane is forced to submit to this torment and say nothing at all in her own defense. All Jane wants is for someone to listen to her opinions and treat her as an equal. She wants someone to "remember her name". She is never called by her name, except by Mr. Rochester, by an aristocrat. The upper class always refer to her as "the governess" or "that person" or simply "her". To Jane this is extremely insulting. She is hurt that know one except Mr. Rochester will think of her as an equal. I would be furious if I was subjected to the manners of the upper class in Victorian society. I could never think of myself as inferior to someone simply because I was not born into a rich family. I feel deep sympathy for Jane because people are constantly disrespecting her by "forgetting her name", in other words, forgetting that she is a human being worthy of being respected as an equal.

"The call me quiet girl, But I'm a riot yeah!"

"I will be your neighbor, your nurse, your housekeeper. I find you lonely: I will be you companion- to read to you, walk with you, to sit with you, to wait on you, to be eyes and hands to you" (Jane Eyre, 385)

"The call me quiet girl, But I'm a riot yeah!"
Jane was certainly not a "quiet girl". Here, she is boldly proposing that she live with Mr. Rochester and be his nurse. In making this proposition Jane was defying societal norms. She was letting her heart guide her rather than masking her emotions behind a sense of propriety. Had Jane been a real person she would have definitely been a "riot". She was to marry her employer, someone of a higher social status, and when returning to Rochester, she decides to call the shots, instead of yielding to a male superior.

Jane Eyre 6- Imagery

"I turned in the direction of the sound, and there, amongst the romantic hills, whose changes and aspect I had ceased to note an hour ago, I saw a hamlet and a spire. All the valley at my right hand was full of pasture- fields, and corn fields, and wood; and a glittering stream ran zig-zag through the varied shades of green, the mellowing grain, the sombre woodland, the clear and lunny lea. Recalled by the rumbling of wheels to the road before me, I saw a heavily laden waggon labouring up the hill, and not far beyond were two cows and their drover." (Jane Eyre, 287)

Throughout "Jane Eyre", Charlotte Bronte makes extensive use of imagery; sometimes dedicating a page or more to sensory details. This use of imagery sets a clear scene for the reader, wrapping the reader in the story and including them in Jane's world, making them present in the story. This technique draws the reader in and heightens the suspense, forcing the reader to wait patiently for more scenes between Jane and Mr. Rochester.
The use of imagery is another way for the reader to get inside Jane's head. Through the imagery, the reader can observe exactly what she is seeing. Because of this the reader can align themselves with Jane, feeling, touching, seeing, smelling what she is experiencing. This can help the reader to empathize with Jane, to experience her emotions in regards to her surroundings.

Jane Eyre 5- Foil Characters

"I am a trite commonplace sinner..." (Bronte, 119)

In this assertion, Mr. Rochester pretty much sums up his character. He has had affairs, he conceals his marriage to Bertha, he often bosses around Jane, and he shows little concern for anyone's welfare but his own. Mr. Rochester's unruly and harsh personality is a stark contrast to Jane's quiet, reserved, and religious character. The two amplify each other's personalities. Mr. Rochester's harshness highlights Jane's tranquility, while Jane's complacency only maddens Mr. Rochester further. Jane is also a far better Christian than Mr. Rochester. Despite these glaring irregularities, Jane and Mr. Rochester discover that they complete each other (please excuse the cliche).

Jane Eyre 4 - Foreshadowing

"This was a demonic laugh- low, suppressed, and deep- uttered, as it seemed, at the very keyhole of my chamber door." (Bronte, 129)

This is not the first encounter Jane has had with things that go bump in the night. She has heard the laugh before, yet she always thinks up a logical explanation for the laugh or she blames it on the mysterious servant, Grace Poole. This dark and sinister laugh should have been a warning for Jane that her precious Mr. Rochester and Thornfield were not what they appeared. To the reader, these incidents in the night foreshadowed the unfortunate events that would befall Jane in the next few months. It is a shame that Jane didn't investigate these laughs and incidents; she could have saved herself a heap of heartache on her would-be wedding day.

Jane Eyre 3 - Irony

"Glad was I to get him out of the silk warehouse, and then out of a jeweller's shop: the more he bought me the more my cheek burned with a sense of annoyance and degradation." (Bronte, 236)

After Jane has agreed to marry Mr. Rochester, he showers her with lavish gifts. This is ironic because he claimed earlier to find no interest in pretty, rich girls who lacked intellect; however, the first thing he does with his quaker-like Jane is attempt to transform her into a fluffed up rich girl. This may be the only way Mr. Rochester knows how to express his love, but he should realize that Jane is not interested in material things. He should dote upon her intellect and treat her to afternoons of conversation, which she seems to enjoy.

Jane Eyre 2 - Interior Monologue

"How can she bear it so quietly- so firmly?' I asked myself' (Bronte, 43)

There are many instances of interior monologue in Jane Eyre. When the reader is allowed to see Jane's inner thoughts they form a bond with Jane, transforming Jane into a sympathetic character. Just as Jane's use of asides makes her character more personable, the series of interior monologues also give Jane a aura of reality. The reader feels as if they have know Jane for a long time; that she is an old friend.
The interior monologues are also the only source of information about other characters. Little would be know about Mr. Rochester, Adele, or Mrs. Fairfax if the reader was not able to share Jane's thoughts.

Jane Eyre 1 - Aside

"I have told you, reader, that I had learnt to love Mr. Rochester" (Bronte, 163)

In Jane Eyre, Jane makes extensive use of interior monologue; however, once in a while Jane addresses the reader directly through and aside. In these few asides Jane is usually professing her love for Mr. Rochester. While I cannot discern the reason for using and aside instead of interior monologue to discuss Mr. Rochester, I can say that the use of the asides captures the reader's attention, making them feel as though they are having a conversation with Miss Eyre. Personally, I enjoy feeling as though Jane is confiding in me when she addresses the "reader".