Class notes on Frankenstein:- Shelley was 19 when she wrote this novel!
- The monster could represent art, AND it could represent that, if you bring up children properly, you'll be helping to make a better world.
- Thomas Day - novelist; adopted 2 children (to train as the perfect wife - he got two so he had one back-up girl); he didn't teach them anything, he wanted them to learn everything for themselves so they wouldn't have prejudices. Ex: he let them stick their hands in fire. His two girls grew up to be schizophrenic!
- William Goldwin: pointed out that peasants had grown up taught by aristocrats, who taught that rulers ruled through killing. They were badly taught, in essence.
- (And then we danced... oh, the mortification... of dancing... in front of classmates.. to Rihanna).
- Victor's leaving Frankenstein, and the violence the monster is subjected to, are two forms of incorrect teaching. (Comparison to Columbine tragedy made).
- Does the monster make a moral choice? Morals are taught mostly by parents and other sources of authority - without either, can one have a moral compass?
- Do parents use their children to prove something? (To each other, to other people, etc). What are motivations for parents to do things like enroll their kids in violin classes, clubs, sports, etc.? Using that ultimate, unconditional love parents have for their kids as a compass, parents would want to provide everything for them. They see genius and absolute beauty in their offspring, and they want to encourage its growth. Parents like doing things for their kids that make them happy - impressing or pleasing a child is gratifying. It is also a way to keep kids occupied, so the parent does not have to deal with them as much. Some parents really don't know what to do with their kids when left alone with them for an extended period of time. Almost as bad is the parent who pushes the child to excel at something he or she failed at in childhood - finding success in the subsequent generation, and being able to say, "I got her/him involved in that club, I got the star of that team where he/she is now." Parents are still human.
- What happens if a children is made to live out his/her parent's wishes, or made to prove something? You get a really confused child. You get a child who has to put extra work into figuring out what he or she enjoys and wants to do with her or his life. That child looks towards the parents for approval on everything, instead of building up a sense of success and failure within themselves. The kid also runs the chance of growing up to be neurotic, weak-willed, and dependent.
- He kills William, knowing him to be Victor's brother, and he frames Justine, proving that he knows something of right and wrong - how much is this like a child trying to get attention from his/her parents? He does it just to get Victor's attention.
- Does a creator owe its creation happiness? I think a creator owes its creation the means to be happy - how to be happy, how to go about making yourself happy, given the proper restraints and constructs.
- Deterministic - nurture, not nature - argues that a child doesn't have any morals or personality for itself.
BELOW: Gene Kelly dancing with Jerry the Mouse. My point being: we did NOT look like that, unfortunately!
No comments:
Post a Comment