The Monster’s Eyes

Victor finally giving life to his monster after two years of work and the resulting  panic he feels once the action is completed is something I found to be profound, especially considering that it is the monster’s eyes that truly horrify Victor.  In describing the monster Victor admits “[h]is yellow skin scarcely  covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous only black and flowing; his teeth pearly whiteness; but these luxuriance only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same color as the dun white sockets in which were set, his shriveled complexion and straight back lips.” (60) He describes the other features of the creature before the eyes, as though the eyes which eventually terrify him most, are not the first things about the monster that he notices. Instead he first sees the skin, hair and even skipping his way over the monsters eyes on the way to noticing the teeth. Only after that, does he notice the eyes.

There are numerous interesting things surrounding Victor’s assertion of the monster’s eyes. First, throughout time poets and people alike seem to have referred to the eyes as the window to the soul. The fear of eyes lead me to believe that the monster does not truly have a soul because he was created, not born and that is what Victor fears. The color of his eyes, or lack there of seemed to be further proof of that to me. The color of the monster’s eyes seemed to look match his “dun white sockets” meaning that his eyes have no color, they are just white, and white eyes is something that seems to be so unnatural, so soulless.

He finds the monster so grotesque that he believes “even Dante could not have conceived.” (61) In making this assertion Mary Shelley seems to be making the point through Victor that the monster is more terrible looking then even Satan. This is because in Dante’s Inferno Satan is the worst of all the characters in hell with his three heads and bat wings below each chin. He is in Inferno a giant beast, chewing on three different men. Dante’s Satan is truly a gross beast, but Shelley is gracefully and simply making the point that this beast is even worse.

The only thing that seems to be lacking in the grotesqueness of the monster that Dante did include is balance. Every evil in Dante had an equal or greater beauty throughout heaven. But here there is no beauty, just the ugly, terrifying image of the monster paired with Victor’s unparalleled terror. It is truly a hopeless scene at this point in the story. It made me wonder what Victor will do about the monster? He seems so hopeless and alone, will he find hope? Will he ever find happiness?

How much is too much?

Chapter eight is the first time I find myself sympathizing with Birkerts because, as a lover of books, he explains to the reader his first experiences with the realization that people we moving away from the printed word and into a generation of electronic technology. This would be terrifying, I would think to remember to vividly these first moments when this realization became tangible to Birkerts.

The ex professor explains to Birkerts that “the whole [book] profession has brought a lot of pain to me.” (118) In that moment, I felt deeply not only for Birkerts, but also for the ex professor. I know that Birkerts does not directly say it, but I could not help but find myself drawing parallels between the two men. They both dedicated their lives to books, and they have both found pain at times in it. What separates the  two however, is the fact that this man gave up what he had dedicated his life to, he gave up books in exchange for technology. While Birkerts has stayed strong, stayed with books and has now become of a write attempting to vindicate peoples grasp on technology. In both scenarios, though, I cannot help but feel bad for each man for opposite reasons. One gave up his passion in order to attempt to keep up with the times, while the refused to give up his love of books and instead seems to be cause great pain by others devotion to technology instead of the written word.

It is true what Birkerts says, though, technology, one could surmise is a progression as in Greece when ” the dominate oral culture was overtaken by the written technology.” (118) Or when “in the late fifteenth century after Gutenburg invented movable type.” (118) For Birerts, these two events symbolize two of greatest and most intense shifts in the telling of stories. It makes me wonder, however, were these shifts truly for the better, were we, as people, better off exchanging stories face to face in a deeply personal manner from memory? I would think that with Birkerts inclination to believe that reading is a private matter, he would say no to that. But then the question is when does it become to much? Where is the line drawn for him, for all of us? Where is it all taken just a little to far? And more importantly how do we stop that?

Reading Alone

In conjunction with Birkerts theory that reading is a private matter, I similarly believe that at the core of true reading lies the reader alone, and therefore the experience should be private.

Since my childhood, I have reveled in the ability to escape into a book. The act of reading, in my mind, is an action that at times can grow to become more of a reality than the one in which I currently thrive. Over the years, books have allowed me to grow by allowing me to expand not only my knowledge, but also my imagination. Each book I can ever remember reading has a vibrant and personal memory connected to it that can only and will only ever belong to me. In this way, reading is unique to each person because no matter how many people read a book, the memory or images acquired from each piece of penmanship is beautiful in its distinction to each reader.

For this reason, my assertion lies strongest with my own memories and is glorified through my own travels into Dante’s The Divine Comedy.

I remember it was sunny outside, which was strange for the south western coast of Ireland at that time of year. And if a close my eyes tight enough, taking a deep breathe in I can still smell the salt coming in off the ocean, still see the Atlantic, still feel the the cool breeze whipping through my windbreaker and the sand beneath me. I had retreated across the street from that small cafe where my family and I had had lunch and sat beneath the sun with the undulating, green hills off to the left in the distance. Pulling out my rugged copy of the Purgatorio, I began to engage in Dante the pilgrim’s journey through Purgatory, having already progressed through hell.

Reading, in my mind, cannot exist properly without equal and careful reflection on behalf of the reader. But to me, no reader will come to the same conclusions or reflections about any book. This is why reading must be private in order to be proper, to be intimate, and to be true.

Therefore, as I began to fall into the abyss created by Dante hundreds of years ago, I could not help but contrast the scenery around me with that of the moment Dante again sees Beatrice after more then ten years, the women he loved and who died prematurely. In imagining the beauty that surrounded Beatrice and the majesty that surrounded me, I could have sworn a little piece of Dante was alive within my soul. I followed Dante, the pilgrim in his journey through Purgatory on that vacation through Ireland, and in a lot of ways Dante, the pilgrim followed me through the Irish countryside.

For this reason, I must fervently insist on the independent nature of literature to be read by oneself. In the process of reading, something happens to me and its complicated to explain and at times even harder to understand. But, I have the ability to stretch beyond my own skin and into that of another’s by following the story of someone or something foreign to me.

I remember reading The Great Gatsby in this way, by losing myself so completely in the story that Gatsby, himself became a part of me. Now, I know that may sound odd actually losing yourself so deeply, so intensely in a character and I believe that it is an experience unfamiliar to most readers. But in order to truly read a story, you must give your full self to the dedication of a novel and connect on a deeper level to the characters of the story. For me, there was no way not to fall completely in love with Gatsby.

I felt Gatsby’s pain when he was standing at the end of his pier looking out into the distance, across the water at Daisy’s pier and knowing that he was so in love with her and yet he could not have her. Each person’s feelings about The Great Gatsby will be different and in order for me to fall in love with Gatsby I needed to read the actual story alone so that I would not allow the opinions of others impact or change my feelings. I remember reading his story in english class my junior year of high school and feeling sorry for Gatsby’s loneliness, while at the same time falling in love with his infinity capacity for hope, the same infinite capacity for hope that I have.

In a lot of ways, I think thats what makes me leave my own skin, finding common ground with a complete and fictional stranger because when I open the pages of a book, the distinct smell of words on paper meets my nostrils and I know that within those bound pages I can, for a time, become anyone I want to be. I find hope in that, I find a sense of who I am, because I feel that only in expanding my perception of others can I fully understand and be comfortable with myself.

The fear of mass produced entertainment

In chapter one, Birkerts begins expanding about his daughter and his and her own experiences with technology, which in this case revolves around Disney. In Birkert’s mind Disney has seized his family and he “fear”s that there might be no way out. (29)

To dive into Disney, as a person who appreciated Disney, and grew up in the Disney days, I cannot help but think that Birkerts does not understand young girl’s dreams. Through Disney a little girl can be a princess who lives or obtains a life of wealth and finds her prince. Disney allows young girls to have the ability to imagine that they can have the perfect life and fairy tale. Disney expands their knowledge with books to read, allows their imaginations to thrive through stories and movies, and through songs Disney opens girl’s dreams of becoming singers of their own lives.

I can comprehend Birkerts fear of “the highly seductive glitter of mass-produced entertainment” because I share in that same fear.(29) But in exploring his passage about the fear of Disney all I really want to do is throw my hands up and say ‘come on, really’. Disney is not going to take over the world, worry about the other types of  ”mass produced entertainment”. Because Disney does add “glitter” to every girls life, and shouldn’t people be teaching their children to always have dreams anyway. You know, the whole reach for the stars. Go for the best. Dream big. Use your imagination to the fullest.

I remember always being taught all of these things from both my mother and my father growing up and, to be honest, it has without a doubt fueled my own ambition. Birkerts should not be cringing at the thought of Disney while allowing it, in order to not disappoint his daughter. Instead, he should understand that Disney, as technology in general, is a part of young girls lives in today’s society and frankly, I believe, that by encouraging Disney you can encourage the use of imagination and dreams. Because, in reality, how can Birkerts expect his young daughter to really understand the importance of literature at such a young age. She could very well enjoy reading, but she is still learning the process of reading at such a young age. How can he expect her to want to explore the complexities of reading and writing at such a young age?

Birkert’s fear about the “mass-produced entertainment” should be about the violence and sex involved in today’s major motion picture industry. He should be worrying about his daughter turning on the television and stumbling upon something truly fearful. Why is he not afraid about shows like the Simpsons or South Park being air on television for all to see? His daughter could be trying to see the new violent movie “three, four, five times” instead of the new Disney movie. (29) I think he should be kissing the ground the Disney writers walk on because they hold his daughter in a world of innocence and fairy tales – a harmless world without crime or violent, where no one gets hurt, and dreams really do come true.

Birkerts Own Blindness

Throughout Birkerts introduction, he successfully interprets his own fears about the last four decades of America’s technological advancements. He does this bluntly and with quite a bit of force, deferring all blame for this process to the other people around him. While also offensively claiming that all people who refuse to accept todays superior technologies as a crisis are unable to “pry themselves free from their synchronic worldview.” (5) As a writer discussing writing and later critiquing it, his natural inclination to believe that the refusal of people to be in linear mind frame to his own assertions of technology makes him appear quite closed minded.

He openly admits that he has “come to inhabit [his] assumptions like a comfortable room.” (4) But he seems within the same breath to overlook his own word choice, “assumptions”, which is in this case so intensely connected with his close-mindedness in blaming others.  His assertions are just that – assumptions, with by definition becomes the act of taking to or upon oneself. He is shouldering the responsibility of informing the world about his fears of technology. This is his battle to fight therefore, one would think, that he would comprehend that others would not always share his same beliefs. In his commitment to combat the evolution of technology, he seems to passionately call for societies disengagement in it.  It seems as though everyone should see the way Birkerts does or he assumes they are stuck in their “synchronic worldview.” In reality, it could be leaving Birkerts blind to other aspects good or bad about technology that come from others not sharing the same view, and in his blindness he could be missing so many other important aspects of humanities technological advancements.

He feels as though literary works crafted on paper are so meaningful that we cannot subject ourselves solely to technology to learn. As technology expands people are becoming less in touch with the pages of paperback books and instead are turning to technology to provide their answers for them. This idea to Birkerts is “electronic communications assert[ing] dominance”. (6) The problem, however, seems that electronic communications are not asserting themselves, but instead it is the people behind the electronics professions that Birkects really needs to get at.