Hugo cabernet

            Hugo is perhaps a monumental piece of literature. While in our day and age we only see a new perspective to reading followed by a critically acclaimed feature film, Hugo shows promise of becoming one of the great literary works of our lifetime. Only time will tell if the idea of a graphic novel catches on, if it does Hugo will be remembered as an iconic work. On a personal note it is probably on of the most engaging books I have ever read. As a photographer I take pride in analyzing images, so each page was not just a picture, but another story. Upon diving into the novel, I had no idea what I would find inside, I had only heard of the movie. The daunting volume of the book was soon to be misleading.  Once I understood the story would be told only in part by words and mostly by pictures.  It was if we were looking at a movie slide by slide. Similar to the artist that played the movie Psycho a frame a second, Selznick breaks down a story frame by frame. Because of this we have a different and refreshing perspective into the novel.

             The entirety of the first half of the book is an establishing sequence that leaves the reader bound by curiosity. The automaton and the emotional mystery behind it were enthralling. As the story progressed the pieces of the puzzle were revealed, it began to seem as if the automaton was the linchpin of the story.  In many ways the story of reflects elements of Frankenstein and the monsters creation in the midst of adversity. Aside from being innovation Hugo also challenges different generations and draws them to board the Hugo Cabret train. While on a simple level this book appeals to the younger crowed with basic literature and a plethora of pictures. Just as Frankenstein was a somewhat simple story on the surface, Hugo is as well. However in both stories alike, if you take the core values portrayed and run with them, they can become fascinating and complex stories that are perplexing to adults and scholars.

            With Hugo making an enormous splash as a new type of reading, it would not be a surprise that this new literary style catches on. With a dynamic experience that can be interpreted by numerous different groups of readers, Hugo appeals to the masses. Just as Shelly birthed an extraordinary and revolutionary  novel, I believe that Selznick has done the same.

            

The Path Less Traveled - Frankenstein and Dante

            “The Path Less Traveled”

            Henry Eschricht

            Meehan English

            Spring 2012

            Upon reading Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, it is, at a glance, a simple tragedy of a monster and his creator. However, if you further indulge in the novel, numerous themes and emotions carry you far beyond the confinements of its simple text. In exploring these greater ideas, we realize that Shelly has given birth to her novel using parts of other great stories. Just as Victor used numerous human beings to create his monster, Shelly’s use of other stories breeds her Frankenstein to be a bastion of great literary works. Among the works reflected in Frankenstein lies a deep parallel to Dante’s Inferno. While there is only one cited reference to the tale of Dante’s Inferno, its themes and ideas are echoed throughout the novel. Dante’s journey through the different circles of hell closely shadow the monsters first endeavors on earth. Both characters start as naïve individuals and are stripped of their innocence as they gain insight into the “barbarity of man.” (Shelly 103)

            Before the great adventures that the two characters embark on they are both blind to realism of the human race. The monster just having been created, did not know how to function as a living being, let alone experience the wrath of human emotion. “A strange multiplicity of sensations seized me, and I saw, felt, heard, and smelt, at the same time.” (Shelly 95) While the monster was born with his innocence, Dante gained innocence by living life as a man and taking for granted what human interactions he experienced. Both the monster and Dante are incognizant of what they are about to experience; in this lies their innocence. As Dante enters the gates of hell he and Virgil pass an inscription that states, “Abandon hope, you who enter here” (Dante 7) Dante is on the verge of entering hell and the monster, while on earth is also on the verge of entering his own subjective hell. In entering hell each character goes through a process that eventually strips them of their innocence. Because of the similar experiences that these characters share, Dante’s Inferno is proven to be an inherent part of Shelly’s novel.

            Because the monster in Frankenstein is of the purest innocence when he is born, he essentially enters hell when he steps out into the world. He has not yet had any interaction with human beings aside from meeting his creator. While experiencing the elements and sensation of the natural world, the monster learns quickly of earth and her natural state. “I examined the materials of the fire, and to my joy found it to be composed of wood. I quickly collected some branches; but they were wet, and would not burn. I was pained at this, and sat still watching the operation of the fire. The wet wood which I had placed near the heat dried, and itself became inflamed.” (Shelly 97) Earths natural state is however the least of the monsters worries, as he will soon stumble upon his demise, not by mother earth herself, but by her inhabitants.

            Through the monsters interactions with people, he intern reflects back to both the reader and Victor the true barbarity of man.  Just as Dante literally enters hell to experience, the same side of humanity, the monster enters hell when he interacts with human beings. Through these interactions his innocence as well as eager approach to explore mankind both deteriorate. Simply looking for food one day, he enters a hut in which a man is preparing food. “He turned on hearing a noise; and, perceiving me, shrieked loudly, and, quitting the hut, ran across the fields with a speed of which his debilitated form hardly appeared capable.” (Shelly 98) As he tells the story to Victor he does not reflect on the fact that instance and continues to describe his fascination with the hut. After other experiences it is only then that he becomes keen to why mankind viewed him as a beast. He decides to test his theory with a blind man. “ I revolved many projects; but that on which I finally fixed was, to enter the dwelling when the blind old man should be alone. I had sagacity enough to discover that the unnatural hideousness of my person was the chief object of horror with those who had formerly beheld me. My voice, although harsh, had nothing terrible in it; I thought, therefore, that if, in the absence of his children, I could gain the good-will and mediation of the old De Lacey, I might, by his means, be tolerated by my younger protectors.” (Shelly 93) His experience with the man showed the monster that he himself was truly a kind sole. “I have good dispositions; my life has been hitherto harmless and in some degree beneficial; but a fatal prejudice clouds their eyes, and where they ought to see a feeling and kind friend, they behold only a detestable monster.” (Shelly)  Thus the irony of a monster being more human than any man is solidified. While the monster had lost all innocence and faith while discovering hell on earth Dante shadows his story by venturing through literal hell.

            Upon creating the monster Victor states, “I had gazed on him while unfinished he was ugly then; but when those muscles and joints were rendered capable of motion, it became a thing such as even Dante could not have conceived.” (Shelly ch. 5) Little did he know that his monster was less demonic than the Dante-esque hellions. When Dante embarks on his pure journey to join his wife in heaven he ends up at the gates of hell frightened by the beast that protect the gates. This would be the last time he would look at only animals as beasts. Travelling through the circles of hell Dante is, like the monster, taxed on his misconception of humans. In just the second ring of hell, Fire storms are cast upon those who lived lustfully, thus turning their memories of the past into a current nightmare. He even meets a pope who has once conspired against him. When entering the eighth pouch of hell he meets Ulysses, who is the hero of Homers epics. He has been given an eternal place in hell alongside his fellow religious criminals. In this instance, the great deviation between human heroism and true purity is best exemplified. Just as Victor asks himself how anyone (even Dante) could fathom the bestiality of his monster, Dante posses the same question, “Tante chi stipa nove travaglie e pene? (Who thought this stuff up?)” This solidifies his new reformed view on the impurity of man. At first he was blind to the severity of sin in the world around him, but now he saw.

            The monster and Dante also have similar stories in their escape from hell. Both are not directly religious, but the coincidences behind them are certainly biblical. While Dante is resurrected from hell on Easter morning, the monster creates his own resurrection from hell in leaving to die. Both of these instances are symbolic to escape from the unbearable scenes of hell. Because of the similarities between the monster and Dante, we are left without question why Shelly incorporated that single quotation. Reading Frankenstien with no frame of reference to Dantes Inferno gives you a monochromatic experience.  If you are however, aware of Dantes trials and tribulations while reading Shellys novel, her quote plants a seed inside the readers mind that forces the reader to essentially picture these two walking hand in hand through the gates of hell.

STOP>

( Having not been aware of Dantes Inferno while reading Frankenstein it did truly provide a limited experience. Once I familiarized myself with Dante’s Inferno, I went back and revisited Shellys novel. The experience I had essentially re reading most of Frankenstein was much more eye opening. It only leads me to wonder how the experience would be having known all the pieces on the list you gave us to compare Frankenstein with. )

Frankenstein glog 2

As, the book progresses even further, Shelley continues to give the beast unmistakable human features. He reflects on the treachery that has been his short time in existence. So betrayed, by something he doesn’t fully understand, he knows nothing but to end the life of the very man that would father his existence. This is ironic because in so many instances does media tell the same story. Troubled kid, goes on rampage, kills people, kills himself, etc. While the beast does this portrayed as a beast, he is really very human in voicing his frustration.

                   As you read on, you continue to feel the overwhelming need for attention and affection that the beast can just not harvest from people. Shelly personifies this desperation by making the reader feel as if the monster were a mere child, which immediately intensifies the readers personal sense of frustration.  Shelly righteously leads the reader down a path of sympathy for the beast even in his darkest times.

                  Throughout the book Shelly gives us various instances where the beast interacts with elements and experiences different feels like hunger and pain. One of the best instances of this is when the beast has his first encounter with fire. The beast comes across a small fire that has been left in the path of his crusade by the homeless sorts. He cannot fathom the concept of fire because his mind is simply still in its childish stage. He ends up injuring himself because of this fire showing the difference between the joy he gets from the warmth, and the pain he gets from touching the embers.  “In my joy I thrust my hand into the live embers, but quickly drew it out again with a cry of pain. How strange, I thought, that the same cause should produce such opposite affects,” (97). This shows that he is beginning to recognize not only the dangers of real world elements, but that one thing can be so seemingly appealing, yet as you get closer is absolutely horrible. Again Shelly leaves us with an irony; the monster is a complete opposite experience. He is seemingly grotesque, yet rather pleasing when you begin to see his character.   We see this event magnified yet again in the beast’s relationship the DeLuca family. He tries to become a part of the warmth that encompasses the idea of companionship. However, when he gets too close, their ignorant embers ultimately burn him.

Frankenstein and his challenge to mankind

Frankenstein Glog

Henry Eschricht

Meehan – English and Lit

February 2012

            Mary Shelley bestows Frankenstein’s monster upon us in order to subtly challenge every facet of mankind’s brittle morals. Through the synthetic beast, we see both the deepest fears and the most distant dreams of human beings come true. Shelly doesn’t just challenge one group however; she showers us with a spectrum of human morals and how they are reflected through their interaction with a quasi human. Shelly Begins here story with a series of letters from a sailor that open a window of curiosity for the reader.

            Through Frankenstein’s creation of the beast we see human beings undying need to become godlike. Frankenstein becomes divine when he creates another human being; he is a creator of mankind. “The sight of the awful and majestic in nature had indeed always the effect of solemnizing my mind, and causing me to forget the passing cares of life” (91).  He did not consider any of the repercussions that would entail is faux creation of a human being and instead narrow-mindedly focused on conquering divine abilities. When he becomes weary of this godlike rush, he falls into a deep pit of reality in realizing what he has done; he states, “A thing such as even Dante could not have conceived” (61).  This is ironic because he has, through action and quotation, been jettisoned from the divine to the satanic.

            Next we see the undeniable intolerance of human beings through the beast. While the beast is viewed as, well, beastly; at the same time he represents the pinnacle of human tolerance and moral fortitude. He understands human ignorance, saves lives, and desires the acquisition of knowledge. When he is seeking a human for advice, he already understand that almost all people will immediately see him for the beast that he is; so he, as a many inspirational story will repeat, goes to the literally (and figuratively) blind, who will appreciate him for what he is really worth. It is remarkable that he can understand this concept at such an immature point his understanding of mankind and their complex emotional system. The irony behind this is that, while the beast epitomizes a moral human being it is interesting to see that his innocence betrays him. Frankly (no pun intended) if the world was like the beast, it would be a better place, yet no one in this world accepts him; even when he beseeches a friend in a blind cabin occupant.

            In the following events of his betrayal of human emotion, he soon is educated as to the reason behind this mysterious excommunication he suffers. “Looked upon them as superior beings, who would be the arbiters of my future destiny” (105). The irony is so apparent it is slightly uncomfortable her, which is perhaps, what Shelly has intended to do here. What humans should be like emotionally has betrayed the visual standards of the species, while the visual standards of the species have betrayed the morals human beings should have. This raises the question if being a human is defined more by your emotions or your physical appearance? And if it is, what does that make Mr. Frankenstien? A god? A demon?

Brevity and the mind of Buzzy

An infatuation with brevity

While Birkerts is in his own right to argue that reading is the lynchpin for intellect, he is immature in his demeaning of media to something that is wholly lacking intellectual potential.

Learning to read

From day one of reading, I was always looking for ways around it, I liked being read to sure, but was not to crazy about reading. Focusing on understanding the words and grasping ideas did not leave room for my brain to wonder and imagine.

I was the first kid to learn to read in my class, well sort of. It was rather a brilliant scheme by my pre school self.  I picked a Sesame Street book that was available to me both at home and at school and every day for a few weeks I would have it read to me at home and once in a while at school. Eventually I had it memorized, so I proudly approached my teacher. I said, “I think I know how to read.”. She was ecstatic. She sat down and said pick a book and read it to me, so you can just guess which book I picked.  I read it flawlessly, or should I say I recited it flawlessly. I then read it to the class, and to my parents, who were actually a little suspicious, but none the less supportive.

Obviously one day I learned how to actually read, but the fact that this day is much more a happy memory just shows that reading really wasn’t my thing from day 1.

I can honestly say that I can count the number of books I have read from cover to cover on my two hands. I mean 150+ pages of meaty book. I Hope They Serve Beer in Hell, To Kill A Mockingbird, Life of Pi, just to name a few.

I take that back, I actually enjoy reading, but I have my limitations. I am a slow reader who enjoys conceptual ideas and short stories, short chapters and anything with breaks. 

This is because I am hindered in my speed-reading abilities. I have to read books aloud in my head as if the author were speaking to me, so a 200 page book is essentially a 200 page speech I am listening to from the author. I don’t have the patience even to listen to the most brilliant and intriguing people for that long, especially if the conversation is one sided.

As I have mentioned before, I am a visual learner and visual learning is my way of reading a 200-page book. I simply watch a documentary. A picture is worth a thousand words and a documentary is thousands of pictures, so its like reading a really like book and being able to grasp the concept.

I don’t usually read, but when I do, I read articles. Articles, photography books or books with really short chapters.

Buzzy in "Maryland Life"

http://www.marylandlife.com/articles/outdoor-school

Your main man buzzy featured in this article by writer Rafeal Alvarez who has done some pretty cool stuff including writing for the show "The Wire"

Mr. Birkerts and the fallacies of a closed mind

“Our greatest fear is not that we are inadequate,

but that we are powerful beyond measure.

It is our light, not our darkness, that frightens us.

We ask ourselves, Who am I to be brilliant,

gorgeous, handsome, talented and fabulous?....

….And, as we let our own light shine, we consciously give

other people permission to do the same.

As we are liberated from our fear,

our presence automatically liberates others.”

-Marianne Williamson

         Birkerts deepest fear is the light, the light that radiates from the age of technology. He fears that reading will exit its dark home of the book and shed light. The technology age is the monster that will do this; that will bring literature to light. In using words that connote the dichotomy between light and dark, we are shown his experience in the battle between book and e- book. In truth the e-book is not entirely correct in shedding light on its leather bound brother just as the book is somewhat selfish in keeping his touch screen brother in the dark.

Page v. Screen Chief Justice- Mr. Birkerts

: A page is a beautiful thing crafted by nature and passed to its Homo-Sapiens brother who will be able to run his sensitive fingertips along the page. “How can a piece of writing have simple ideas and still infect the reader with the exciting of its thinking?” (11) A page you can read, a page forces the mind to imagine, to create. When you read with a book in your hand you are being leisurely, relaxed, intellectual. You are an individual, you are alone, you can get lost in a book, and you can hide in a book. 

We prosecute the evil screen and technological device and its defacing of the society the page has created. You watch a screen, it comes to thy lazy self, it entertains thy self that doth not know how to be entertained. It is cowardly commercial, collective, and horribly social. It sheds light on simplicity and mass-produces shallow thinking.

Screen is sentenced to be diminished!

Case Closed (thud thud thud goes the Mr. Birkerts gavel)

My dear sir you are wrong. You are scared of the “Metamorphosis of the familiar.” (15) You have diminished technology to your Disney standards of, “mass-produced entertainment.” (29)

In reality, screen is a technology just as books were and are still today! Mr. Birkerts simply has the technology of books embedded as what he knows as his familiar. He does not take the technology generation into consideration. He is part of the book generation and finds a book familiar, just as any youth today finds technology to be familiar. We now live in a world where the horrors of being connected and social are and can be used to the utmost advantage. Today technology enables people to get any book in the world in the palm of their hand with a push of a button. Why is he so selfish to have a genuine hatred towards the collective sharing of what he holds so dear?

I am rather offended by Mr. Birkerts preaching’s, they are completely subjective. Yes there are certain nuances that give each technology and the classic their advantages, but why make them enemies? I am an overwhelmingly visual learner and hold documentaries so dear to myself. I can watch one documentary and retain more information than I would if I read 10 books. Does he dislike photography as well? “A picture is worth a thousand words.” - Napoleon Bonaparte. It is immature to say that new technological mediums of art are just as mindless as Disney movies and even to say that the works of Walt Disney himself are mindless. It is not to say that Birkerts does not have valid points in his expressions of the wonders of reading a written word on a page, but it can easily be said that he needs to open his mind and realize that shedding light on everything that he preaches can be a beautiful thing. It is the technology that we will pass on to the next generation and many generations to come, just as books have been passed on to many generations and continue to be passed on.


Just as Mr. Birkerts needs to be more open minded of the technology to come, the generation of the technology to come needs to be more openminded of technologies that served as a foundation for past generations.