The scholarly source that I have selected is about the origin of cyborgs and their characteristics in Italian science fiction.  It has integral information towards the identification of women and technology that plays into the objectification of women and the history behind it all.  Ross declares that technology has been given genders and erotic qualities that reflect secondary narcissism, and that this originated in many different Italian texts.  She uses Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein to extend her argument that science fiction narratives tend to use Lombroso’s misogynistic ideas that portray women as machines and deny their bodies, while making the rational, creator beings male.  I plan on relating this article to support my views that technology has become seriously debilitating in human interaction and identity, especially in the portrayal of women as objects.  This can relate to Gary Shteyngart’s Super Sad True Love Story, in how Eunice is described in relation to a robot. The description of Eunice is dehumanizing, and makes her detachment from society seem like it is ideal.  She, along with the rest of their society, is absorbed into the encompassing world of the apparat.  The continuous flow of data and information is controlling and strips lives down to a monotone nature, because everything is accessible.  They don’t have to have actual conversations to get to know someone or find out their deepest, darkest secrets.  This provides a sense of technological detachment and creates isolation between individuals.  I would also like to bring in points from Ross’s article about objects, such as cars, being portrayed as female, which relates to the objectification of women.  As Ross points out, cyborgs and technology are given female traits and deemed as inferior is frequently found in science fiction texts.  I believe that this would be a very interesting topic to research more, and to relate to our current society.

http://www.jstor.org.proxy.library.emory.edu/stable/27669002?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=Shelley’s&searchText=%22Frankenstein%22&searchText=%22objectification%20of%20women%22&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DShelley%2527s%2B%2522Frankenstein%2522%2B%2522objectification%2Bof%2Bwomen%2522%26amp%3Bprq%3DShelley%2B%2522Frankenstein%2522%2Bcriticism%252C%2B%2522objectification%2Bof%2Bwomen%2522%26amp%3Bgroup%3Dnone%26amp%3Bacc%3Don%26amp%3Bwc%3Don%26amp%3Bfc%3Doff%26amp%3Bso%3Drel%26amp%3Bhp%3D25&seq=1#references_tab_contents

I have chosen to write about Gary Shteyngart’s Super Sad True Love Story in my final paper. Since Super Sad True Love Story was published relatively recently, in 2010, there isn’t an excess of literary commentary about it. However, some common topics that have been discussed about Shteyngart’s novel throughout scholarly journals include age, credit scores, identity, and dystopian societies. One article that I have found to be particularly interesting is titled “Ending Aging in the Shteyngart of Eden: Biogerontological discourse in a Super Sad True Love Story” written by Ulla Kriebernegg, and can be found at the following link: http://www.sciencedirect.com.proxy.library.emory.edu/science/article/pii/S0890406512000758. Kriebernegg discusses biogerontology, the subfield of gerontology that discusses why and how we age and how to slow the process, how the novel presents old age as a curable disease, and how the novel depicts age as both a uniting and dividing factor between Lenny and Eunice. In the introduction, Kriebernegg uses an argument from a New York Times article written by M. Kakutani, “every toxic development already at large in America to farcical extremes” to extend her own arguments about the dystopia in which Super Sad True Love Story takes place. This article presents an interesting argument that may help me develop an angle for my paper as well. Aging is not the primary concern of the novel’s plot, but age is always taken into consideration, and is very important at the end of the day. I would be interested in looking for another underlying aspect of the plot that isn’t obvious in every journal entry or email but is vital to the storyline nonetheless, and influential to the characters’ actions and motives.

http://www.jstor.org.proxy.library.emory.edu/stable/30225415?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=frankenstein&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3Dfrankenstein%26amp%3Bprq%3Dfrankenstien%26amp%3Bgroup%3Dnone%26amp%3Bacc%3Don%26amp%3Bfc%3Doff%26amp%3Bso%3Drel%26amp%3Bhp%3D25%26amp%3Bwc%3Don&seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

The main argument the author is making is that Frankenstein intended to create a creature like himself but the creature does not turn out how he had envisioned. Instead Frankenstein’s monster reflects the author, Mary Shelly, and the society in which she lived. One of the big themes she analyzes is how femininity is displayed in the novel and how it impacts the monster. She then goes on to show more examples on how the creature reflects Shelly’s character and personality.

I am not quite sure that I want to focus on this topic for my paper but I think the subject is interesting. I would prefer to do my paper on the movie Her but I had difficulty finding sources to go with it. I think the film displays our class themes effectively and explores a very interesting topic. I would like to further analyze if it is possible to fall in love with a computer and what makes something living. But if I can not find the sources to support my topic I would like to explore this topic in Frankenstein. I think it is interesting how Shelly is represented in her creature and am excited to continue exploring it.

Cite:

“Frankenstein” and Dis(re)membered Identity

Eleanor Salotto

The Journal of Narrative Technique 
Vol. 24, No. 3 (Fall, 1994) , pp. 190-211

Published by: Department of English Language and Literature, Eastern Michigan University

Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/30225415

Maps of the World in Its Becoming: Post-Apocalyptic Naming in Cormac McCarthy’s The Road (https://muse.jhu.edu/journals/journal_of_modern_literature/v033/33.1.kunsa.pdf)

In this paper, Ashley Kunsa takes an optimistic approach to a seemingly abysmal and infinitely bleak novel by Cormac McCarthy “The Road”. Here Kunsa suggests a possibility for redemption of mankind as she believes “we discover the seeds of the works unexpectedly optimistic worldview”. She seem to argue that the Father and the Boy’s act of abstaining barbarism and cannibalism is a major salvation for mankind and an uncontroversial evidence that even in a lawless world, man’s conscious still lives.

Kunsa quotes many other scholars who studied this novel and both extends beyond their point or refute their claims. “Chabon is wrong in claiming that “the quest here feels random, empty at its core” (117). The “maps and mazes” at The Road’s end point toward something essential at the center of the journey, and tellingly, the novel closes not with the intersection of arbitrary and nonsensical lines, but with the patterns on the backs of the trout, “maps of the world in its becoming,” forms that suggest an inherent order and underlying purpose yet undiscovered”

(Example paragraph of using her article to help angle my argument)

Man’s all compelling need for survival is evident in the development of the main characters, the boy and the man, in The Road. Some critics argue that McCarthy suggests the possibility for redemption of mankind. This is indeed how Ashley Kunsa views the portrayal of these characters as she believes, “we discover the seeds of the works unexpectedly optimistic worldview.” However, this is a contention with which I vehemently disagree. The Father and the boy, who are described metaphorically as those who are “carrying the fire” and “the good guys” appear to be moral characters who do not succumb to barbaric acts such as cannibalism. Yet, the impressive moral standard of the father and the boy simply provide a false illusion to the reader that there are those who can triumph in McCarthy’s truest test for optimism.

The author of this piece goes into great detail discussing the multi-faceted identity that Lenny Abramov exhibits. The author discusses to what extent Lenny identifies with his American-Jewish heritage and they examine the roles that jewish characters have within the novel. After this they look into Lenny’s Russian heritage and his inner confusion surrounding his own cultural background. The author concludes that at the end of the novel, Lenny has returned to his Jewish roots, in doing so made a pact with god, and left his Russian heritage behind.

The author uses an argument made by Michiko Kakutani to bolster their own essay. The argument is a brief description of Super Sad True Love Story, that describes it as a novel with a dark future yet deeply sweet love story. The author then shows this throughout their writing. They display how the book relays this dismal future. Where America is “on the brink of fiscal collapse” and the government is falling apart around the main characters. Yet they also discuss the sweetness of Lenny and Eunice’s relationship, and even if the two characters are undeniably flawed the love story portrayed is seen to be all the more real for it.

I think that I am going to look into the nature of modern dating as portrayed by Super Sad True Love Story. To do that i’m going to have to discuss the mixed backgrounds and identities of all the books characters. So i might use this essay to help discuss both Lenny and Eunice’s conflicted personalities.

link

https://web-a-ebscohost-com.proxy.library.emory.edu/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=57b0955c-8d79-41a7-8780-083cd43dbb56%40sessionmgr4002&vid=13&hid=4214

The article I chose was Technology and Impotence in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein written by Thomas Vargish. I picked this article because it was relevant to my topic about how humanity overcomes the abused technology. In this article, Vargish refers to plenty of science fiction works from different fields in order to demonstrate audiences how people nowadays excessively emphasize the importance of keep the development of technology under control. Vargish points out that a majority of science fiction works nowadays tends to create a monstrous creature for horrifying elements. However, this approach also fosters the fear from audiences towards technology. In Vargish’s article, he suggests that people should not view technology as a value that is equivalent to love, passion and intelligence. Instead, people should apply technology as an aid to extend those values and further develop humanity. The author proposes to analyze the text with a well-known neurologist, Sigmund Freud’s idea of the “self as composed of ego, superego, and id”. By using the theory Freud discovered, the author is able to identify the relationship between Frankenstein, Elizabeth and the monster as “ego, superego, and id” respectively. Freud’s idea fused with Vargish’s argument perfectly and thus strengthen his thesis of using technology, in this case, the monster as a tool to express one’s own feelings and extend those feelings to an extreme level. Vargish does not clearly state whether he agrees with Freud’s idea or not, but he introduces Freud’s idea in order to support his major arguments.

This article drags my attention because it is significantly unique and innovative. The approach that the author manages to take is totally different from any other critic’s. He does not focus on how human beings should be careful with technology. On the other hand, he analyzes the issues aroused by technology through a different path. Not only his methodic structure, but also his idea inspires me thoroughly. I feel my idea is also not a traditional one, and Vargish’s article enables me to expand my idea without worrying about any traditional expectation. Furthermore, Vargish’s main argument states that people should not blame the overdeveloped technology for destructions and thus fearing science. This argument supports my idea of humanity overcomes excessive technology since we both suggest that people can eventually manipulate and control technology through humanity.

In “The Monster in a Dark Room: Frankenstein, Feminism, and Philosophy”, author Nancy Yousef argues that prior philosophies on individuality are addressed and revised in the novel, as the monster’s growth and early experiences that influence his character reveals the restraints of such philosophies. Using classic examples of Locke and Rousseau, Yousef shows how the monster adopts some of their ideas and rebuts others. The monster is driven from nature to society by natural means (hunger) and gains his education by observing an Italian family. The creature, observing he has no history due to his lonely upbringing, adopts human sympathy, language, and identity. Overall, however, because he is not human in appearance, he is distinctly separate and does not carry the burden of human history.

Yousef addressed the critics Marshall and Lipking and their claims of the monster’s connection to Rousseau. Both critics argue that the monster inherently acts and personifies Rousseau’s philosophy: that a creature brought into nature is alone and unique. Yousef refutes this claim, saying that the creature develops this thoughts at the peak of his education, developing the self-aware quality that is unlike Rousseau’s philosophy.

This article would be useful in clarifying a basis for identity in Frankenstein and how the natural world pushes the creature of no species towards humanity, allowing it to develop human qualities and differ from humans only in history, juxtaposing it with its creator. Whereas Frankenstein grows up fascinated by necromancy and electricity, the creature grows up in hiding and observation. Pursuing science devolves Frankenstein, while nature and watching humanizes the monster.

The Monster in a Dark Room: Frankenstein, Feminism, and Philosophy

http://muse.jhu.edu.proxy.library.emory.edu/journals/modern_language_quarterly/v063/63.2yousef.html

Through our readings, we analyzed the effects that technology has upon individuals. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, one can notice a great schism in the relationships between Victor and his Monster. As Victor utilizes his own knowledge to create something outside of human imagination, he is scared off by what his technology allowed him to do. However, as the two meet for the first time, the only way in which they come to be on the same level, on the human level, is when the monster utilizes his verbal eloquence as a way to make Victor feel compassionate about him. In Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts: Language and Monstrosity in Frankenstein by Peter Brooks, the author argues that the language spoken by the monstrous (Frankenstein’s monster) will never be able to “arrive at meaning”. Because the monster is “monstrous”, he can only employ language as a medium to “pass on the desire and the curse of meaning”, rather than meaning itself. In saying this, Brooks thinks that though the Monster can speak and request for his desires to come true, his words will never allow him to obtain what he wants (just because he is a monster). In his argument, he references psychoanalysts such as Freud and Lacant to expand upon his notion that language through monsterism does not provide direct meaning to one’s wants. Ultimately, I believe that his research topic can allow me to view at past readings with a new set of eyes. The importance of language in literature is reflected through its power to establish meaningful connections that could relate to the identity of characters. For instance, in saying that language does not allow the Monster to convey his wishes, one can argue that the monster is emotionally repressed and unable to show love to its surroundings because they are realistically cruel.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/468457?seq=14#page_scan_tab_contents

In the first part of the article (it is rather long so I will focus on this portion) “Sibling Revelry in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein” by Leila Silvana May, the author argues that the monster in Frankenstein represents the feminine desire, specifically that of a sister. May points out that the sister in Frankenstein is seen as an object that her brother loves, desires, and wants to protect. However, the sister is seen in a passive way, eliciting a mirror effect for the brother to reflect upon and show himself through her, as she displays the qualities of those around her. If the sister breaks this passive attitude, she therefore becomes not ideal, monstrous, as May puts it. May argues that Victor tried to create the monster as a portrayal of the passiveness of his sister, however when the monster actually becomes alive, he becomes dangerous and terrifying to Victor.

May incorporates Mary Poovey’s statement that the creature is “the victim of both the symbolic and the literal . . . it is doubly (and vehicle for) someone else’s desire, yet exposed (and excited) as the deadly essence of passion itself.” May uses this perspective to support her argument that the monster represents the sororal desire. I think this article is interesting, however I do not want to pursue exactly the same topic as Leila Silvana May. I think the portrayal of women as passive and “ideal” nineteenth century women is interesting, so I would like to further explore the way they are objectified through the novel. I do not necessarily agree with May’s argument, but I do think she raises and interesting point about the way that women are seen as unattractive once they break out of the passive and caretaking role, so this is something I would potentially like to explore for my research paper.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/450759?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

In “Myths, Monsters, and Morality: Understanding ‘Antiscience’ and the Media Message”, Dr. Helen Haste argues that the only way to understand the public images of science and the dispute between science and anti-science is to understand the role that myths and metaphors play in the context of the concepts. Haste explains how while science fiction genres typically touch upon the benefits and dangers of scientific advancements, science fiction also is useful for seeing how a culture perceives science and its common understanding of science. For instance, most of what is considered as science was at first against the common knowledge of the culture. In the same manner, myths and metaphors are used to explain what is seen as typically not common. Metaphors and science have the same function in that it extends our understanding with the known to the unknown. Throughout the paper, science and commonsense were explained to both have a moral influence on the culture in different, yet substantial ways.

In Haste’s paper, she states that Lewis Wolpert argues “that scientific knowledge is counterintuitive and requires us to go against the obvious, the commonsensical. Haste uses this claim to further support her idea of making metaphors and science similar in that they are both involved in the search for the truth. Haste also uses quotes of other pro-science individuals in order to build upon her argument.

In the past, my research papers have lacked fluidity with the quotes I use and my response to the quotes, and this paper would be a good resource to go to in order improve my technique. I also like the connection that Haste made with metaphors and science as a way to understand its effect in one’s culture. I want to be able to create something new out of something that is normally undervalued or under appreciated. I originally chose this article because the title included morality which was something that I wanted to investigate, but unfortunately, it did not mention anything directly about the morality of Frankenstein’s monster. It goes to sure the inaccuracies of titles, and it makes me more aware of how deeply I will have to search in order to find the information that I really need.

Article: http://www.maneyonline.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1179/isr.1997.22.2.114