The structure of Patch Work Girl is extremely hard to navigate through. When you begin to read Jackson’s story you get lost after clicking into further readings, there is no way to get back into the main page as easily as it is to go back to the index of a book. When you look at the set up of the “front page” of Jackson’s novel you notice a type of family web, which is close to resembling chapters.  The structure is frustrating because you create your own beginning and end to the story. In this sense I was able to relate to Shelly Jackson’s style of writing because when I was younger I would try to make up alternate endings for the books I was reading at the time.  People are usually guided with everything they do in today’s world; this new way of reading is hard for us to understand. With our generation, Berkert’s feels as though we are being corrupted with the world of technology. We are relying on it, a book is so simple and lacks the technology that patchwork has. Jackson’s was giving us an eye-opener that she thought we needed, which is exactly how Berkerts felt. “The child needs to know the range of pleasures. There is room for beauty and the beast a la Disney, but only when the field includes the best has been imagined and written through the ages” (31).  Our human natural instinct is not to think about were we should be going next in a novel, but to turn a page.  In Jackson’s story she makes us find our way around in creating a story, that maybe she wasn’t trying to tell. This makes the reader frustrated and confused at the same time.

            In Birkerts chapter, “Hypertext”, he focuses on the belief that the technological world is slowing us down mentally, while we are relying so much on material objects to solve our problems. This neglects our survival traits that we were brought up to use as humans. “The transformation of the media of communication maps a larger transformation of consciousness—maps it, but also speeds it along; it changes the terms of our experience and our ways of offering response,”(153). The lack of technology as a child might have had a negative effect on children in the long run. When a child is regulated to a certain amount of something that appeals to them, they appreciate it more when they obtain it. It is a good thing to introduce technology more at a younger age, in moderation. Birkerts discusses in this chapter the author, Ted Nelson, who has seemed to try to construct a similar novel to Shelly Jackson.  He describes this way of reading to be foreign to readers, and as complicated as it already is, Jackson makes it even more with her choice of navigation selection. In Jackson’s book everything is linked to one another, although a book has a similar set up Birkerts points out that a book is in sequential order, where as Jackson’s is most definitely not. Reading is a natural and fluent thing, which we have full control over. One of the reasons it is so aggravating to read Shelley Jackson’s piece is because clicking a link leads you to a loss of direction.

            The need and use of books for research has become apparently scarce. Our generation relies on typing one word into Google and the Internet will direct you to your exact answer. No research or strenuous searching in the library is needed to find any of your sources now a day. In some ways our history that is being recorded is opened into a whole new world of views, persuasions, and emotions. In the past there were few books taking different sides talking about specific topics.  Although it is more work to find resources in the library it is definitely a better source of information. Even though we use the Internet and cite our information, how do we know everything we are taking form the site is true. “The text can be programmed to accommodate branching departures or to incorporate visual elements and documents.”(160) Shelley Jackson’s text is so complex that it requires the reader to encode its undermining meaning. “Once a reader is enable to collaborate, participate, or in any way engage the text as an empowered player who has some say in the outcome of the game.” (163) This is exactly how the reader feels when he or she is trying to read through Jackson’s novel, it is so unorganized it is almost a game that she wants us to play.

Even though both authors, Jackson and Berkerts, believe in some sense that the growth in technology is growing at an uncontrollable speed, which in some aspects of corrupting the youth there is some good. Jackson uses her novel to some extent mock Berkert’s argument about technology. Her complex reading is teaching us that someday our world will be using this sort of researching style of the complex world of the Internet, and we will need to be able to comprehend the style or art of her kind of reading. When a child is regulated to a certain amount of something that appeals to them, they appreciate it more when they obtain it. This is something that I think Jackson was also trying to force upon us. “It is easy enough in retrospect to see a book as a screen, a shield, an escape, but at the time there was just magic—the startling and renewable discovery that a page covered with black markings could, with a slight mental exertion, be converted into an environment, an inward depth population with characters and animated by diverse excitements”(35)

She wanted all her readers to be intrigued by her new was of writing a story, and the audience she was trying to reach out to was that of the younger generation. As much as some parents feel as though the internet and television time should be limited, Shelley Jackson took it upon herself to make a new was for kids to enjoy being on the computer while doing something productive that their parents will approve of.

            This advanced path that Shelley Jackson took with writing was one that clearly intrigued Birkerts. In the chapter that we focused on he relates all of his points to exactly what Patch Work Girl was representing. Berkerts shows through his chapter of “Hypertext” he mocks Jackson’s writing and acknowledges that it is more complicated to follow then anything anyone has ever experienced before. The never-ending novel is not something that people are used to, although Birkerts feels as though our generation will soon be accustomed to that style of reading.

            Reading a book is not a puzzle to solve, but a guided world of wonder and curiosity of what is to come next.  We today are accustomed to a linear format of a book. When we open a book we see chapters that guide us to specific places in the novel.  Unlike in Patchwork Girl there seems to be no end, or beginning. As people, we have a hard time comprehending anything that has no ending or beginning because it doesn’t seem real, just like the atmosphere. Shelley Jackson tries to create a novel on tape. In our reading of Birkerts we are forced to recognize that our generation is slowly being corrupted with the technologically advanced world, as we know it.

            The structure of Patch Work Girl is extremely hard to navigate. When you begin to read Jackson’s story you get lost after clicking into further readings, there is no way to get back into the main page as easily as it is to go back to the index of a book. When you look at the set up of the “front page” of Jackson’s novel you notice a type of family web, which is close to resembling chapters.  The structure is frustrating because you create your own beginning and end to the story. People are usually guided with everything they do in today’s world; this new way of reading is hard for us to understand. With our generation, Berkert’s feels as though we are being corrupted with the world of technology. We are relying on it, a book is so simple and lacks the technology that patchwork has. A book seems to make the book much simpler to read. Our human natural instinct is not to think about were we should be going next in a novel, but to turn a page.  In Jackson’s story she makes us find our way around in creating a story, that maybe she wasn’t trying to tell. This makes the reader frustrated and confused at the same time.

            In Birkerts chapter, Hypertext, he focuses on the belief that the technological world is slowing us down mentally, while we are relying so much on material objects to solve our problems. This neglects our survival traits that we were brought up to use as humans. “The transformation of the media of communication maps a larger transformation of consciousness—maps it, but also speeds it along; it changes the terms of our experience and our ways of offering response,”(153,Birkerts). Birkerts discusses in this chapter the author, Ted Nelson, who has seemed to try to construct a similar novel to Shelly Jackson.  He describes this way of reading to be foreign to readers, and as complicated as it already is, Jackson makes it even more with her choice of navigation selection. In Jackson’s book everything is linked to one another, although a book has a similar set up Birkerts points out that a book is in sequential order, where as Jackson’s is most definitely not. Reading is a natural and fluent thing, which we have full control over. One of the reasons it is so aggravating to read Shelley Jackson’s piece is because clicking a link leads you to a loss of direction.

            The need and use of books for research has become apparently scarce. Our generation relies on typing one word into Google and the Internet will direct you to your exact answer. No research or strenuous searching in the library is needed to find any of your sources now a day. In some ways our history that is being recorded is opened into a whole new world of views, persuasions, and emotions. In the past there were few books taking different sides talking about specific topics.  Although it is more work to find resources in the library it is definitely a better source of information. Even though we use the Internet and cite our information, how do we know everything we are taking form the site is true. “The text can be programmed to accommodate branching departures or to incorporate visual elements and documents.”(160) Shelley Jackson’s text is so complex that it requires the reader to encode its undermining meaning. “Once a reader is enable to collaborate, participate, or in any way engage the text as an empowered player who has some say in the outcome of the game.” (163) This is exactly how the reader feels when he or she is trying to read through Jackson’s novel, it is so unorganized it is almost a game that she wants us to play.

            This advanced path that Shelley Jackson took with writing was one that clearly intrigued Birkerts. In the chapter that we focused on he relates all of his points to exactly what Patch Work Girl was representing. The never-ending novel is not something that people are used to, although Birkerts feels as though our generation will soon be accustomed to that style of reading.

            This new way of looking at a book is extremely interesting. Mary Shelly has a strange mind but also wanted to make a statement by showing her story in such a bold way. He novel relates so directly to Frankenstein that it almost seems like another version, especially in the chapter “the journal”.

English

October 31, 2009

More Human Then You Think

The remediation of Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein in the movie Blade Runner highlights the similarities between the two stories. Dr. Eldon Tyrell is the master-mind in the film, who plays a similar role to Frankenstein. However, Tyrell’s creations were known as replicants, or robots. These replicants are more humanlike to the eye compared to the monster in Frankenstein, but they demonstrate the same emotional aspects. The monster from the novel Frankenstein and the replicants from the movie Blade Runner are more human than they appear through their expression of the emotions love, anger, and fear.

            The replicants that the doctor created were used for dangerous jobs or slave work in the world. Due to their threat to society the blade runner Rick was chosen to hunt down the harmful replcants. Although throughout his mission he began to fall in love with one of the replicants. He meets Rachel when he visits the doctor and tests her to figure out whether she is human or a robot. He finds out she is a replicant, but throughout the movie they slowly fall in love. Rick does not kill her and they run away together. Both Roy and the monster share the quality of love and desire. When Roy’s girlfriend gets shot his strong attachment for her shows in the scene when he tears up and kisses her. This is similar to when Frankenstein realizes that his creation was lonely and desired a significant other, his attempt failed. As much suffering Frankenstein put his monster through he still loved his master.  “ I have devoted my creator, the select specimen of all that is worthy of love and admiration among men, to misery; I have pursued him even to that irremediable ruin. There he lies, white and cold in death,” (188). The monster stands over his creator’s body and morns his death.

         The monster felt both sorrow and anger when his master died, which shows that he has human feelings. In the movie Blade Runner one of the replicants, Roy became overly emotional about his girlfriends death that he punched through a wall to release anger. Both doctors form each story did not create their beasts expecting them to such human like emotions. The doctor form Blade Runner gave the robots four years to live so that they were unable to adapt emotions and strive to gain independence from their creators. Although, each robot demonstrated cases of being more human then they appeared. The monster in Frankenstein, like the replicants, committed crimes. When these creations came to life neither creators knew what to expect. Roy, a replicant, killed the doctor in Blade runner because he wanted to live longer, when the doctor declines Roy kisses his master’s head and crushes his skull. Roy demonstrates true affection for his creator by kissing him before he commits the crime of killing his master, even though he did a monster-like act. At the end of the book the monster shows that he is truly a human stuck in a body of a beast by admitting to his wrong doings and weeping over his master’s dead body.

         The monster in Frankenstein did not want to go through life alone, and therefore feared that he would never have a significant there. Although his master tried to create another monster, he failed and the creature had to live life alone. In blade runner the replicants were also lonely. Their masters made their life span up to four years. The replicants all feared Rick whose mission was to kill the replicants before they did harm to society.

The comparison I make between Blade Runner the movie and Frankenstein the novel are quite obvious. The main focus was the creations were both more human then their creators were meaning for them to be. They shared emotions of love, anger, and fear showing that they adapted to the human culture.

Creating a Beast

In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the main character, Victor, symbolizes our present day idea of ‘god’ and how one has the capability of creating and ending life. Dr. Frankenstein used this gift to transform once dead tissues into an alive, frightening, and humanlike creation, known as the ‘monster’ in this story. However, immediately after the creature opens its yellow eyes for the first time, Victor spirals into a tornado of regret and can’t help but abandon the creation he now sees as a monster.“…But now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart. Unable to endure the aspect of the being I had created, I rushed out of the room,” (Shelley, 61). As the story continues to unfold, the reader comes to realize that the monster was not a monster at all, but a caring and heart-filled human trapped inside the skin of beast.

Today, when people think of God, and his powers and strengths, they think of an endless and unlimited sky of possibilities. Victor strived to touch this level of unimaginable power by attempting to bring back something God had already taken away. “Oh! No mortal could support the horror of that countenance…it became a thing such as even Dante could not have conceived.”(61) From this we learn that the thing Victor put together was so ungodly that it was even too horrific for the Devil to take credit for. Satin, seen as the opposite and opponent of the Lord throughout time, is a symbol that defines Victor’s actions as inhuman. Thus, because he chose to play with the highest power we as a species have come to recognize, Victor is forced to face the consequences of his actions. Amongst these many consequences lays a continuous series of death and sorrow. In the book, William, Victor’s younger brother is murdered and Justine Moritz, the kindhearted girl adopted by the Frankenstein family, is accused, tried, and convicted of the murder. However, in reality, the monster is responsible for Victor’s brother’s death, and thus is also responsible for Justine’s. Later, Victor further enrages the monster by destroying his hopes of having an equally horrific and shunned partner to live out his days with. The creature murders Victor’s dear friend Henry in a rage, resulting in Victor being accused of the crime, falling extremely ill, and then eventually being set free. However, the consequences of playing God do not end there for poor Victor. The monster ends up following through with his threat, and slaughters his beloved wife on their wedding night. Last but not least, Dr. Frankenstein’s father passes away, too grief stricken from all the death surrounding him.

Filled with more anger and remorse than ever, Victor decides to hunt

his creation down. However, while doing so he falls terribly ill and dies.

This is when the reader’s compassion for the monster reaches its height.

Despite all the loneliness and sorrow his master has forced upon him, the

creature is still overwhelmingly grief stricken when the man who gave him

the gift of life passes away. It is clear that the monster is not a monster at

all, but again, a human trapped inside the body of a beast. The creation

recognizes his actions against Victor as evil and shows his true human form

at the end of the book. “But it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered

the lovely and the helpless; I have strangled the innocent as they slept, and

gasped to death his throat who never injured me or any other living thing. I

have devoted my creator, the select specimen of all that is worthy of love

and admiration among men, to misery; I have pursued him even to that

irremediable ruin. There he lies, white and cold in death,” (188). Here, the

monster is looking over Victor’s lifeless body, and is displaying his human-

like emotions in the form of grief and sadness.

Thus, Victor Frankenstein played with God, was punished, and the creation he put together turns out to be more human than at first perceived. Shelley made the monster appear to be the more insane character when in reality Victor was the one who played with God and got bitten.

For my next assignment on the novel we are reading Frankenstein. I am planning on incorporating the idea that Victor is a symbol of God and he is the creator. As he begins to bring a dead human back to life, he shows that he can create mankind. Doing so he succeeds, but realizes that he has created a monster. Victor soon looses control with the monster. I will also focus on the question “who really is the monster Victor or Frankenstein?” A specific quote that I have found in the reading that will back up my argument is

“Begone! I do not break my promise; never will I create another like yourself, equal in deformity and wickedned.”

Slave, I have reasoned with you but you have proved yourself unworthy of my condescension. Remember that I have power; you believe yourself miserable, but I can make you so wretched that the light of day will be hateful to you. You are my creator, but I am your master;–obey!”

Shelly makes the reader question whom they should sympathize with, the monster or victor this question connects back to the idea of who is the monster in the novel (and does it change?) I may also relate my paper to someone having the power to do something so extreme and in the long run backfire on them.

            I never understood what was so intriguing about a book. Like every other kid in my neighborhood, my interests were involved with television and playing outside. I soon learned that reading would begin to play a huge role in my life. Birkerts and I share one thing in common, secrets. While he kept his reading from his parents, I was pretending to read in front of my parents. Reading and writing to me are two separate tasks that are extremely different.

            “I worry not only that the world will become increasingly alien and inhospitable to me but also that I will gradually coerced into living against my natural grain”(28). Birkerts uses technology as an excuse of being forced or pressured into something that he is greatly against. This seems to be similar to the way I think of reading. The many people who feel that reading is relaxing and peaceful puzzle me. I wonder still what is so fascinating about reading? Why not watch the movie and get the same story with motion pictures! “The child needs to know the range of pleasures. There is room for beauty and the beast a la Disney, but only when the field includes the best has been imagined and written through the ages” (31). 

I was never forced to read as a child, only to express and use my imagination. Television was not much of an option for my brother or me; sometimes I feel the lack of television as a child might have had a negative effect on me in the long run. When a child is regulated to a certain amount of something that appeals to them, they appreciate it more when they obtain it. This then is true with my love of watching television. As I read about Birkerts’ passion for reading, his descriptions in some ways remind me of the way I feel about movies and television. Birkerts continues to focus on the negative effects that technology has on children. It is a good thing to introduce technology more at a younger age, in moderation. I get excited for my favorite shows to come on television and new movies to come out, similar to when new books or series are released.

In school I was forced to read books that did not interest me. As I proceeded into the second grade I remember our monthly reading assignments. Mrs. Edie would have us read a chapter book of our choice once a month. Our reading would then be followed up with a summary and poster or some kind of display. As you can probably imagine my summaries were not the best in the bunch, but I gained most of my points in my creative displays. These second grade monthly reading assignments were and still are probably my worst reading experiences. It was in second grade that I soon discovered that the books I was reading usually had a movie that went along with it. During this discovery I soon realized that movies were more interesting to me then books.

            My secret slowly leaked out and my parents began to realize that I did not enjoy reading. They figured the lack of pressure that was put on my to read as a child was now having it’s effect on me.  As I read the book The Gutenberg Elegies, I wonder how one person can have so much passion towards reading, as Birkerts does.

“It is easy enough in retrospect to see a book as a screen, a shield, an escape, but at the time there was just magic—the startling and renewable discovery that a page covered with black markings could, with a slight mental exertion, be converted into an environment, an inward depth population with characters and animated by diverse excitements”(35)

Analytical and comprehensive writing is what is most challenging partially due to the way I feel about reading. Although writing has always been an assignment, when I took a risk and stepped outside my comfort zone into a Creative writing class. This class changed my prospective on writing, it wasn’t so forceful unlike my other English classes seemed. Creative writing soon became something that was simple for me. This class made me relate back to memories and made me use my imagination more that an analytical piece for and English class. What I enjoyed was the feeling of not being pressured to write something about a specific topic. When Birkerts forced himself to write, the outcome was a failure.

            I try to keep an open mind about reading.  More then so the way Birkerts feels about technology and other advances that somehow take away from the basics of learning for the younger generations. Reading never became a problem for me until my second grade monthly assignments, which made me despise reading. My writing began to advance when I took a Creative Writing course. The way I feel towards reading has yet to change, even though I am more motivated to try. The Gutenberg Elegies has made me see reading from someone who truly enjoys it. In many ways it makes me wonder why I do not feel the same.