tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post4918035503889582972..comments2023-11-05T07:27:43.837-05:00Comments on Narrative and Technology: Prompt 1: Rhetoric, Lies and Contradictions in FrankensteinAdamhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-52630944463059106172014-01-26T14:36:23.627-05:002014-01-26T14:36:23.627-05:00My main concern with this argument is that you wil...My main concern with this argument is that you will end up focusing on Victor's actions (that is, his movement from creating to refusing to create) rather than his arguments (first against, then for, then against making a female monster). <br /><br />Your 2nd paragraph has things to say about the monster's argument and Victor's argument, as well as about what happens. Here's my question for you (I'm not totally clear on your stand): why does Victor change his mind? Does he want peace? Does he actually accept the monster's argument? Is he afraid (and therefore not really persuaded by the argument at all)? Note that you are really more focused on the monster's argument here than Victor's. That's understandable, but it's also not exactly what you set out to do.<br /><br />That next paragraph summarizes more than argues. You do actually argue to some extent, but your final position remains unclear to me. What are Victor's motivations? The most important point you make is that the difference between the two scenes is the absence of the monster himself. But does that mean only that Victor doesn't have the monster to *fear* at the moment, or does it mean that the presence of the monster would be likely to *persuade* him?<br /><br />Look back to the prompt. Are you really doing this "Note a contradiction, or change, or outright lie in that argument as it developers through the course of the novel, then analyze what that contradiction, change, or outright lie *means*."? I feel like you are *mostly* summarizing what happens at two well-chosen contradictory moment. Your primary focus isn't really on meaning here. Have Victor's ideas changed? What exactly changed them? If you revise, you want to focus less on recapitulating the plot and more on analyzing the *meaning* of Victor's shifting rhetoric (or the monster's - maybe the problem here is that you needed to focus more explicitly on what the monster says).<br /><br />Note that Alec says much the same as I do...Adamhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16302919444091859459noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8692381608294018617.post-36584671292772321272014-01-24T08:58:51.495-05:002014-01-24T08:58:51.495-05:00Becca,
You identified an argument directly related...Becca,<br />You identified an argument directly related to the prompt and explained it as it stands within the story. However, I feel like your essay missing the part of the prompt that asks what does this <i>mean</i> in the novel. You do a great job identifying and analyzing Victor's conflicting arguments about creating the second monster, but what does this really tell us about him? There is hinting at it in the sentence where you explain that he makes his second decision because the monster isn’t there to influence him but again what does this mean? I feel if you expanded from there this essay would propose a very powerful response to the prompt because of the argument you chose. If you were to revise this essay, I would start by asking some questions to yourself about what the argument you are discussing could mean. For instance:<br />Does this mean that Victor is very weak and easily persuaded or does this mean that the monster’s intellectual capabilities to influence people are beyond Victor’s? Or is it some of both?<br />Does it mean that Victor has become enlightened to the consequences of his actions and has learned a lesson from the creation of the first monster but thinks he can outsmart him?<br />Does it mean that Victor was lying to the monster about creating him a companion to buy himself more time to figure out a better solution to his problems?<br />Obviously the answers are opinion based and depend on how you read Victor and the monster in the book, but you should be able to defend your opinions with other parts of the novel. <br />-AlecAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16071575339711729266noreply@blogger.com