tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post1519031384888967726..comments2023-11-05T07:27:43.837-05:00Comments on Narrative and Technology: A Monster with Human FeelingsAdamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-85811002554431192622014-01-19T18:56:01.214-05:002014-01-19T18:56:01.214-05:00I enjoyed the concepts that you were bringing up. ...I enjoyed the concepts that you were bringing up. When you mentioned that the creature has empathy for Victor. I agree with what you are saying about Adam feeling empathy proves that he was able to feel emotion.<br /><br />I appreciated that you attempted to relate the meaning to a current event, but I'm concerned that it doesn't add much to your thesis or to the prompt in general. Focus is important. Before writing your essay, you may want to have a rough plan of you intended points and be sure that each one is an attempt to strengthen your thesis.<br /><br />I do appreciate you writing. You seem to use good variation in sentence structure (i.e. simple, complex, compound etc.). If you improve your focus in future essays, they will likely be quite strong.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08148543095193137770noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-75410391870803095532014-01-18T16:30:00.403-05:002014-01-18T16:30:00.403-05:00Your first paragraph is long and messy. It's ...Your first paragraph is long and messy. It's not that any of the individual ideas are unworkable - it's that you don't focus on any of them. Focusing on the monster's identification with Adam (although he also identifies with Satan - who *isn't* human) is a clever approach, but if you're going to do it, do it. Don't get muddied by questions about the monster's physical origins (you aren't correct, incidentally, that he is assembled from body parts - this is a creation of the movies). Ending on a discussion of the monster's feelings seems weak. Animals have feelings too, at least up to a point, and it detracts from your more focused (although far from perfectly focused) discussion of Adam.<br /><br />The abortion thing seems like a distraction - I'm not clear what you're doing with it. You want to have one argument, not many, in an essay this short. <br /><br />Do you actually think that inhumane people are inhuman? Maybe you're trying to make that argument about Victor, or maybe you're just relying on the similarity of the words to make that argument for you. In any case, this is, once again, an example of a weak or wandering focus: maybe you could say *something* about the monster's humanity via Victor's inhumanity (if you can defend that claim), but you're not really doing that here...<br /><br />Overall: You lack focus throughout. If you want to argue that the monster is human because he is like the Biblical Adam (in reality? in his own eyes), that's a fine concept, but you need to do that in a focused and consistent manner, rather than sporadically.<br /><br />Note that most of my arguments at least parallel things which Tom is also saying. Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-35244672854290541412014-01-18T00:02:43.312-05:002014-01-18T00:02:43.312-05:00I liked the biblical parallels you connected for t... I liked the biblical parallels you connected for the monster and Frankenstein, and how, by Frankenstein's intention, the monster was to be a human, and nothing else. However, I feel like you could have elaborated on the emotions of the monster a bit more. One line (adding to the monster’s misery) does not justify a full argument, and there are many more instances from the selected passages that indicate the emotional maturity of the monster. The assertion that the monster “wanted a significant other, a sense of longing for something, further exploring his emotional canvas” is in no way backed up by the passage you cited. His emotional canvas, as explained by the essay, is only misery. So depth in this argument, in terms of specificity and in text citations, needs to be added. <br /><br /> The definition of a “human life” in terms of feeling pain seems more like a tangent than anything else. It does not help your argument about the humanity of the monster by including the introduction of feeling pain in human gestation. You already defined his emotions as a characteristic of humanity, so the fetus argument is lacking. Had you compared the monster’s development (language skills, fine motor control, complex thought) to that of a child, the comparison would make more sense, but bringing in pro-life vs pro-choice arguments for the characterization of humanity of a monster in a work of literature is seems misguided.<br /><br /> You seem to toss in the argument concerning the monster’s physical description at the end, as an afterthought, having never mentioned it before. Either expand on how the monster is or isn't a human by shape, or get rid of the statement.<br /><br /> Outside of that, the argument was very good, and I found myself agreeing with most of your contentions.<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04845210295365139528noreply@blogger.com