Lyotard put it most eloquently when he simply states “thinking and suffering overlap” (Lyotard, 18). He states several examples of why this must be true, but the easiest example is through the development of Victor Frankenstein’s monster.
Lyotard presents his readers with difficult passages that often stray from the main points. One of the messages he was trying to relate was “will your thinking, your representing machines suffer?” (Lyotard, 19). This line directly translates to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein during the final conversations of the monster. Up until the daemon’s encounter with Walton, it was apparent that the creature enjoyed himself when he was berating Victor along their arduous journey and past dealings. Victor even notes “a grin was on the face of the monster; he seemed to jeer, as with his fiendish finger he pointed toward the corpse of my wife” (Shelley, 200). Even in the final conversation, the reader’s are supposed to feel no sympathy toward the monster, that is until Lyotard’s essay has been read. Upon further reading of Frankenstein it was evident that the creature was hurt more than he upset others. It is true that our “representing machines” can suffer. The later doings of the monster turn him onto a new suffering: guilt. He pleads with Walton that “my agony was still superior to thine” (Shelley, 225). He did not want to murder the innocent and helpless, but had no other choice since Victor lied to him and vowed that the creature will be forever alone. In conclusion, Lyotard’s argument on whether or not our machines will suffer dramatically changes how we perceive the devilish creature in his last moments.
Along these same points, Lyotard also advises us that “we need machines that suffer from the burden of their memory” (Lyotard, 20). I already argued that they can in fact suffer, but now Lyotard investigates the foundation of these sufferings. As Victor lay there cold and white, the monster realizes what he has done, but to him this is a new memory. The creation has never loved and lost and, up until this moment, never known what it feels like. Again, to Walton this comes off as the monster just trying for pity before he retreats to his ice grave. Walton even goes as far as to yell out “Hypocritical fiend! If he whom you mourn still lived, still would he be the object, again would he become the prey, of your accursed vengeance” (Shelley, 223). However, after reading Lyotard’s statement on the impact of past memories on the current and future thought, it is sympathy that I feel for the monster. As I said before, the monster has never had these memories so was unaware of the repercussions of his malevolent labors. Had he grown up and had his own memories, instead of those that are just “no more than letting a givable come towards you” (Lyotard, 18), the journeys of the two may have been changed for the greater. It is definitely unknown to whether or not memories of his own would have persuaded the monster to stop his vengeful journey, but after reading Lyotard it would have helped him realize the evil that he was doing.
The last argument of Lyotard that is relevant to Frankenstein is “the unthought hurts because we’re comfortable in what’s already thought. Thinking, which is accepting this discomfort, is also, to put it bluntly, an attempt to have done with it” (20). At first glance, it appears that Victor is demoralized because of his relations with the monster and all the suffering that he has gone through. He’s comfortable in “what’s already thought” and that is that “the task of destruction was mine” (Shelley, 220). Going back to this passage with the new knowledge Lyotard has bestowed upon me, I can see that he is remorseful because thinking is merely “accepting the discomfort” of all the anguish he has witnessed. When he is awake he can see, hear, and talk with the ‘ghosts’ of his beloved ones that perished at the hands of the daemon. During this time, he has to be thinking, which with each waking moment makes Victor realize the discomforts of the past. He looks forward to sleep, because “it was during sleep alone that I could taste joy” (Shelley, 207). I think that this last quote pertains to Lyotard because it is with sleep that Victor can hide from “the unthought.” In closing, it was “the unthought” that was making Victor continuously uncomfortable and caused his endless suffering.
Through the lessons of Lyotard, and the experiences of Victor and his daemon, it is obvious that “thinking and suffering overlap” (Lyotard, 18).
4 comments:
1st paragraph, unclear of what your argument exactly is. Examples of why thinking and suffering overlap? or that the easiest example is through the monster in Frankenstein? Just make sure you are very clear on your argument since your intro paragraph is so short.
2nd
you start the paragraph stating that line from lyotard which is good but the quote itself is confusing, i would first explain what it means to you then go and relate it to frankenstein. The sentence "even in the final conversation... until lyotards essay has been read" seems out of place. You don't talk anymore about where we realize there should be no sympathy for the monster. Also when stating that the creature was hurt more than he hurt others is a great spot for a quote or specific example from the book. The last sentene of that paragraph is very general because maybe not everyone feels that way. You could instead say that it should be logical that the readers feel this way and then say why, instead of saying it dramatically changes all of our views.
3rd
This paragraph starts off on a new topic which doesnt exactly relate to your thesis. This is a good topic that you discuss and i would keep it but I would change your thesis to include this idea because it is important to be clear of your specific argument. This is a very good and important paragraph just rework your thesis to include the idea of the foundation of suffering.
4th
again the same thing, make sure to include this in your thesis. THe original thesis you had is to general for the arguments you are making here. I like the points you make in the 3rd and 4th paragraphs and i would definitely keep them.
Lastly , I really like the ideas you use to convey your argument just be very clear on your thesis like i said before. You quote lyotard and shelly very well just make sure to avoid generalizations like at the end of the 1st paragraph other than that it was a good paper.
Sorry this is late I will make sure to have my revisions on time for now on it was a crazy weekend with the super bowl and everything. Are the revisions due Sunday night or saturday?
I think it's Saturday, but I'm fine with Sunday.
Lyotard put it most eloquently when he simply states “thinking and suffering overlap” (Lyotard, 18). He states several examples of why this must be true, but the easiest illustration of this quotes truth is through the development of Victor Frankenstein’s monster. There are three specific parts of Lyotard’s thesis that give readers the chance to alter our perception of the Daemon.
Lyotard presents his readers with difficult passages that often stray from the main points. One of the messages he was trying to relate was “will your thinking, your representing machines suffer?” (Lyotard, 19). I believe that Lyotard is merely asking if our machines will have feelings or if they will be composed of chips and metal like the machines of today. This line directly translates to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein during the final conversations of the monster. Up until the daemon’s encounter with Walton, it was apparent that the creature enjoyed himself when he was berating Victor along their arduous journey and past dealings. Victor even notes “a grin was on the face of the monster; he seemed to jeer, as with his fiendish finger he pointed toward the corpse of my wife” (Shelley, 200). Even in the final conversation between Walton and the monster, the reader’s are supposed to feel no sympathy toward the monster; that is until Lyotard’s essay has been read. Upon further reading of Frankenstein it was obvious that the creature was hurt more than he upset others. He even pleads with Walton that “my agony was still superior to thine” (Shelley, 225). It is definitely true that our “representing machines” can and will suffer. The later doings of the monster turn him onto a new suffering: guilt. He did not want to murder the innocent and helpless, but had no other choice since Victor lied to him and vowed that the creature will be forever alone. In conclusion, Lyotard’s argument on whether or not our machines will suffer allows us the opportunity to change how we perceive the devilish creature in his last moments.
Along these same points, Lyotard also advises us that “we need machines that suffer from the burden of their memory” (Lyotard, 20). I already argued that they can in fact suffer, but now Lyotard investigates the foundation of these sufferings. As Victor lay there cold and white, the monster realizes what he has done, but to him this is a new memory. The creation has never loved and lost and, up until this moment, never known what it feels like. Again, to Walton this comes off as the monster just trying for pity before he retreats to his ice grave. Walton even goes as far as to yell out “Hypocritical fiend! If he whom you mourn still lived, still would he be the object, again would he become the prey, of your accursed vengeance” (Shelley, 223). However, after reading Lyotard’s statement on the impact of past memories on the current and future thought, it is sympathy that I feel for the monster. As I said before, the monster has never had these memories so was unaware of the repercussions of his malevolent labors. Had he grown up and had his own memories, instead of those that are just “no more than letting a givable come towards you” (Lyotard, 18), the journeys of the two may have been changed for the greater. It is definitely unknown to whether or not memories of his own would have persuaded the monster to stop his vengeful journey, but after reading Lyotard it would have helped him realize the evil that he was doing.
The last argument of Lyotard that is relevant to Frankenstein is “the unthought hurts because we’re comfortable in what’s already thought. Thinking, which is accepting this discomfort, is also, to put it bluntly, an attempt to have done with it” (20). At first glance, it appears that Victor is demoralized because of his relations with the monster and all the suffering that he has gone through. He’s comfortable in “what’s already thought” and that is that “the task of destruction was mine” (Shelley, 220). Going back to this passage with the new knowledge Lyotard has bestowed upon me, I can see that he is remorseful because thinking is merely “accepting the discomfort” of all the anguish he has witnessed. When he is awake he can see, hear, and talk with the ‘ghosts’ of his beloved ones that perished at the hands of the daemon. During this time, he has to be thinking, which with each waking moment makes Victor realize the discomforts of the past. He looks forward to sleep, because “it was during sleep alone that I could taste joy” (Shelley, 207). I think that this last quote pertains to Lyotard because it is with sleep that Victor can hide from “the unthought.” In closing, it was “the unthought” that was making Victor continuously uncomfortable and caused his endless suffering.
Through the lessons of Lyotard, and the experiences of Victor and his daemon, it is obvious that “thinking and suffering overlap” (Lyotard, 18).
Brenda - Lots of good attention to detail, but more focus on the main argument would be nice. By that I mean: if you're unclear on the thesis, what would *you* have liked it to be?
Dan - The organization of this paper was perhaps overly loose. You set it up, more or less overtly, as three linked arguments, which are perhaps related to one another, but you don't make that relationship clear. This structure is really problematic, especially since any of your three points would have been well worth developing at full length.
As far as the individual arguments go, you have some good ideas re: how Lyotard helps us read Frankenstein - you're developing a visiion of the monster as a machine that suffers from the burden of its memory, becoming (post)human in the process. The ideas are interesting, but your reasoning is underdeveloped -- for instance, you claim that the reader isn't supposed to sympathize with the monster. Really? Not when he is born? Not when we heard the story of what Felix did to him? Which isn't to say that you're entirely wrong - that's an example of an idea that was underdeveloped because you were trying to do 3 things in a scattered way, rather than finding a narrower focus.
Post a Comment