For Friday: Stevenson, “Olalla” (pp.101-138)

 

Julia Cameron, photo of Ellen Terry (1864)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: What does Olalla mean when she asks the narrator, “Is it me you love, friend? or the race that made me?...We speak of the soul, but the soul is in the race” (131). According to this speech, what is preventing her from accepting the narrator’s love? What does she fear he sees--or loves--instead of "her"?

Q2: How does the narrator use the term “race” throughout this story, and particularly in regards to the family? Though the family is from noble stock, why does he see himself as superior to them? Does it have something to do with his English identity?  

Q3: Why does the narrator fall so desperately (and foolishly?) in love with Olalla, a woman he only glimpses from a chance meeting, and has never spoken with? How might this resemble previous lovers in other stories, particularly in a sentence like this one: “Love burned in me like rage; tenderness waxed fierce; I hated, I adored, I pitied, I revered her with ecstasy” (126)?

Q4: The presence of the portrait in his room (as well as the portraits throughout the house) suggests the old Romantic argument of life vs. art as we read in Ode on a Grecian Urn. How does his comparison of the ‘dead’ family with the ‘living’ family influence his actions, and make him respond to the statement, “beauty is truth, truth beauty—that is all ye know on earth, and all ye need to know”?

Paper #2: Gothic Detection

“If he be Mr. Hyde...I shall be Mr. Seek” (Stevenson 14).

I: In 1890, the Metropolitan Police Service of London moved to a larger location to better meet the needs of growing crimes throughout the metropolis. They called this location New Scotland Yard, and “Scotland Yard” became synonymous with police activity in London (and still is). The late 19th century is an age of unspeakable crimes from the unsolved Whitehall Mystery to the murders of “Jack the Ripper.” Only by expanding their activity and changing how they understood the nature of “evil” could Scotland Yard hope to keep one step ahead of the criminal masterminds of London. What an exciting time to join the police force…which you have, by the way!

Q: Prove that Victor Frankenstein and Henry Jekyll are criminals through their “confessions” (the books) even though both have been exonerated of their crimes! Imagine that you are investigating two “cold cases,” that of Victor Frankenstein and Dr. Henry Jekyll. In both cases, the accused were exonerated: Frankenstein was killed by a “monster,” while Jekyll was murdered by one Mr. Hyde, also deceased. But after reading through their confessions (the books), you realize that the true criminals were never brought to justice. You know that Victor Frankenstein and Henry Jekyll are both murderers and evil geniuses of a high order, and you think you have enough evidence through their unreliable narration (and the narration of their accomplices, Walton, Utterson, Lanyon) to prove it. Use your close reading techniques to analyze and examine both cases to prove that both share the same ‘criminal mindset,’ and uncover the true nature of their crimes beneath a spider’s web of secrets and subterfuge. What crimes did they commit? When? Upon whom? How were the secrets kept?

R: A good police officer never goes it alone, so enlist some help in your cause. I want you to find at least TWO articles/documents that discuss either Frankenstein or Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde and use them in your paper as evidence. Imagine that these are other officers who have investigated the crime, and use their insights and evidence to help you underline the guilt of Victor and Henry. These must be either academic articles or primary source documents that you can quote in your paper as evidence against the accused. I will discuss how to find these documents and give you some suggestions in class.

• The report of your findings should be approximately 4-5 pages long, but more is acceptable
• You must discuss both works in your report, and make connections between the two; use one case to shed light on the other—Jekyll might be a ‘copycat killer’ after all
• Quote from the stories as evidence (close read) and use examples from the articles as well; document everything according to MLA format
• Due Friday, March 16^th by 5pm (last day before Spring Break!)

For Monday: Stevenson. Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (sorry for the late post!)

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: According to Dr. Jekyll, why did he have a “Mr. Hyde” inside him? Are all of us composed of good and evil selves, fighting for domination? Or is it more complicated than that? Why does he also write, “I hazard the guess that man will be ultimately known for a mere polity of multifarious, incongruous and independent denizens” (53)?

Q2: Though a short novella, Stevenson offers us a wealth of narrative perspectives including a traditional third person narration, Dr. Lanyon’s Narrative, Dr. Jekyll’s Full Statement of the Case, and several mini narrations, such as Mr. Enfield’s story of the door, etc. What is the effect of all these shifts in narration and multiple perspectives? How do they complicate the story or change how we understand it? Are all of them reliable? Are they meant to make us question one or the other?

Q3: When he first encounters Mr. Hyde, Enfield writes that “I had taken a loathing to the gentleman at first sight” (7), and Utterson agrees, writing that nothing “could explain the hitherto unknown disgust, loathing and fear with which [he] regarded [Mr. Hyde]” (15-16). What makes him so uncanny to both men, and indeed, to everyone else in the story? Other than being short and angry, what qualities seem to disturb those that cross his path?

Q4: Several times in this story, Utterfield (or someone else) says, “I would say nothing of this paper,” or “Let us make a bargain never to refer to this again.” Why is this story obsessed with secrecy? What do they fear is really at stake with Dr. Jekyll (before they learn about his experiment)? What does he—and the others, perhaps—have to lose?

An Interesting Link for Frankenstein (see below)

For those who can't get enough of Frankenstein, or simply like things laid out visually, here's an article from the UK's The Guardian that shows several facts about Shelley's life and the novel itself in charts and diagrams. Might help you on future papers! Click on the link below to read...

https://www.theguardian.com/books/gallery/2018/jan/13/mary-shelleys-frankenstein-in-charts 

For Monday: Shelley, Frankenstein, Vol. III

NOTE: The reading starts with the chapter, “Day after day, week after week” if you have a different edition.

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: When Victor bids farewell to Elizabeth (after planning to marry her), the 1831 text says that she “acquiesced; but she was filled with disquiet at the idea of my suffering, away from her, the inroads of misery and grief...she bade me a tearful, silent farewell.” However, the original 1818 version of the novel reads: “Elizabeth approved of the reasons of my departure, and only regretted that she had not the same opportunities of enlarging her experience, and cultivating her understanding...We all, said she, depend upon you; and if you are miserable, what must be our feelings?” What does the original text seem to communicate about Elizabeth’s experience that the 1831 version wipes away?

Q2: When Victor finds Elizabeth slain by the Creature, he “rushed toward her, and embraced her with ardour” (166). Her also spends quite some time in describing her body as left flung lifelessly across the bed. Does this scene mirror another scene with a ‘beautiful corpse’ in The Victim? How is Victor’s reaction to Elizabeth similar to the doctor’s? Is he more aroused by Elizabeth in death than in life?

Q3: After the death of Clerval, when Victor is languishing in an Irish prison, he reflects, “The whole series of my life appeared to be as a dream; I sometimes doubted if indeed it were all true, for it never presented itself to my mind with the force of reality” (149-150). How does Shelley complicate the matter of Victor’s innocence or guilt in the final chapters? Is their more evidence for his crimes—or the Creature’s existence?

Q4: Victor claims that his narrative is a warning for Walton, so that “the gratification of your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you, as mine has been” (17). However, the end of the novel seems to contradict his aim in telling his story—and Victor’s actions seem less than repentant than would first appear. What is his hope in telling Walton his story, and what advice does he leave the young Romantic with?

For Wednesday: Shelley, Frankenstein, Vol. II (pp.69-123 roughly)

NOTE: If you don’t have our text, try to finish at or around the chapter that begins, “The being finished speaking, and fixed his looks upon me in expectation of a reply.”

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: The Creature’s education is largely undertaken by reading a series of books, notably Paradise Lost, Plutarch’s Lives, and The Sorrows of Young Werther. Why these books in particular (since Shelley could have chosen any)? What does the Creature reveal about these books that adds something significant to his education and sense of himself? Additionally, how do we know that these might have been crucial for Shelley’s own inspiration in writing the book?

Q2: Many find the story of the De Lacys somewhat puzzling and out of place in the narrative. Why does Shelley include it? Though it seems hopelessly unrealistic, how might it, too, become a crucial part of the Creature’s education?

Q3: At what point does the Creature become a “monster”? While Victor might argue that it was always a monster, how does the Creature’s own narrative contradict this? At what point did he consciously make the decision to become the “demon” the world takes him for?

Q4: At the end of Volume 1, Victor claims that “I bore a hell within me, which nothing could extinguish” (68). Thinking of Monos and Daimonos (1830), is it possible to read the Creature as Victor’s doppleganger—a double that torments him and follows him because he is him? What clues or passages seem to support this reading (we can discuss problems with this reading in class).

For Monday: Shelley, Frankenstein, Book 1 (see below)

NOTE: Read pp.5-68 in the Oxford World’s Classics version: for other versions, read until the chapter that begins, “Nothing is more painful to the human mind...”
 
Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: Most first-time readers of Frankenstein are surprised to find that the novel begins with a frame narrative: that of Walton, the arctic explorer, who is writing home to his sister, Mrs. Saville. What purpose does this frame serve, especially since it could have all been narrated from Victor’s point of view? Also, why might Walton be a very ‘Gothic’ character in his own right?

Q2: According to the story of his early education that Victor gives to Walton, what set him on the path of creating new life? How did he go from an earnest, naive young man to a “modern Prometheus” who would “pour a torrent of light into our dark world” (36)?

Q3: Immediately after he creates his “monster,” Victor ends up falling asleep and has a nightmare of Elizabeth, where as soon as he kisses her, “her lips...became livid with the hue of death; her features appeared to change, and I thought that I held the corpse of my dead mother in my arms” (39). How does the dream relate to his creation, and why does he create a man but dream of (dead) women?

Q4: Where does Victor first encounter his Creature again after its dreadful birth? Why might this location be significant considering Shelley’s love of the Romantics and the sublime? Consider, too, Victor describes the Creature and why these words might hold Gothic significance.

Paper #1: Copycat Killers

INTRO: In their Introduction to The Vampyre and Other Tales of the Macabre, editors Morrison and Baldick write that, “In the frantically competitive world of the magazines in the 1820s and 1830s, imitation was not just the sincerest form of flattery but the surest route to commercial survival. It should not, then, surprise us to find some echoes of the successful Blackwood’s tradition in the productions of its monthly rivals” (xvii-xviii). While the stories in this volume were reading and responding to stories published in the first magazine of Gothic fiction, Blackwood’s, they were also responding to each other. For this reason, we find many stories that seem obsessed with the same themes and ideas (as well as plots).

PROMPT: So for your first paper, I want you choose two stories that seem to respond to or imitate each other in some important way. It doesn’t have to be literal, as in the plot of the characters (though it can), so consider larger issues such as similar themes, literary devices, or ways of telling the story. How do we know that one of the authors read the other, and decided to respond with his or her own story that develops, expands, further explains, or contradicts some element of the previous story? To do this, I want you to compare a short passage from one story with a short passage from the other. The passage should be relatively short—a few sentences to a paragraph, but no more. Examine the language of each passage closely and compare what they say—and how they say it—to show the influence that one story had on the other. Use the Chronology in the front of the book and/or the Notes in the back to figure out which story came out first (since a story from 1831 probably isn’t responding to a story from 1836). You can use one of the poems we discuss in class as well, but only to add context/ideas—not as one of your primary works.  

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

HINTS: What should your paper look like? Avoid a lengthy introduction that says, “Since the beginning of time, man has been writing Gothic stories...” OR “Webster’s dictionary defines Gothic as...” Instead, jump right into the paper by briefly introducing the first story and your intended passage. Don’t quote the entire passage in your paper. Instead, perform a close reading, which means quote a line or two and then explicate it—tell us what you think it means and how it relates to other parts of the story. This way, we can read along with you, and we’ll understand much better what the story means and how you read it. Then do the same for the second story, taking care to make connections back to the first passage. It might be helpful to examine short passages side by side to help us see the imitative themes and ideas.

When quoting a passage in your paper, do it like so: In Catherine Gore’s story, “The Red Man,” the twisted friar exclaims, “The soul of woman is the brightest emanation of the eternal fountain of light and life; but the smallest blemish upon its spotlessness, and corruption and darkness ensue” (Oxford 158). This is an important passage because... (Introduce the quote; quote accurately and cite; respond to the quote).

REQUIREMENTS: At least 4-5 pages, double spaced; quote all passages using MLA format (as shown above); make an attempt at proofreading—don’t turn in a paper full of sloppy errors; due Friday, February 9^th by 5pm

For Monday: Keats: Ode to a Nightingale, Ode on a Grecian Urn (handout)

NOTE: You can find these poems on the last pages of your “Christabel” handout. If you don’t have them for some reason, you can easily find these poems on-line. Each one is just over a page long, so you can read them quickly. However, each one is a quite subtle, so read more than once—and if possible, read them the first time aloud. Hear the music and consider how Keats wants you to read/experience it.

SECOND NOTE: These poems are “odes,” which are addresses to a specific person or object, usually in tribute to them. In the first, he is addressing his ode to a Nightingale singing in the woods, and he imagines flying along with the bird through the darkness of the imagination. In the second, he is examining a Grecian Urn in a museum, and walking around it trying to decipher the images and characters engraved upon it. In both poems, the living bird and the work of art bring to mind his own mortality, and how much more fortunate the bird and the urn are than him—though ironically, these things only live through him, the poet, as he writes about them.

Answer TWO of the following:

Q1: In the opening lines of “Ode to a Nightingale,” the poet cries that his “heart aches” and his senses are “as though of hemlock I had drunk” (hemlock is a poison). What seems to be ailing him in this poem, that he seeks the Nightingale’s help or assistance? Any clues in the opening stanzas of the poem?

Q2: In Stanza II of “Ode on a Grecian Urn,” he claims, “Heard melodies are sweet, but those unheard/Are sweeter.” Why could “unheard” melodies be sweeter than those we actually hear? And why does the musician on the urn play “spirit ditties of no tone”? Why does Keats prefer this type of music?

Q3: Examine Stanza VII of “Ode to a Nightingale”: why does Keats think the nightingale is an “immortal Bird” which is “not born for death”? How can a single bird live forever, and why does the poem obsesses about the nightingale’s ability to escape the clutches of death?

Q4: In the final stanza of “Ode on a Grecian Urn,” Keats reminds us that the urn will exist long after we have gone, just as it has survived countless generations. He ends this reflection with the famous lines, “ ‘Beauty is truth, truth beauty’—that is all/Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.” Why is the famous phrase quoted? Who is speaking these lines? And what is his response to them? Who is the you in this sentence?