I think that one of Mary Shelley’s main purposes with Frankenstein was to reflect how evil is not something that is inherent among certain humans, but that it is bred by society itself. She uses the monster to represent all those who are rejected and isolated by society, and thus turn against it.
When the monster is created he is far from being a wretched creature. He is innocent and naïve—a “blank slate”. However, every single human he meets treats him with cruelty. He is especially hurt when the French family, which he grows so attached to, also treats him like a disdainful creature. Even when he still has hope and saves a little girl from being drowned, his generosity is just paid back with spitefulness. Society’s rejection of the monster is what kindles hate within his soul. If he had not felt isolated and abandoned he probably would have been a benevolent creature.
One of reasons why I believe that this was one of Shelley’s main objectives with Frankenstein is because it fits in well with what Gothic novelists aspired to do. They wrote in response to the ideas in the Enlightenment, which predominated in England and France in the 18th century. The Enlightenment emphasized the power of the human find and promoted faith in humanity. Enlightenment thinkers were inspired by the progress that they observed during the French Revolution and the Industrial Revolution, but Gothic novelists in the early 19th century aimed to portray that dark side of humanity that accompanied its progress. In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley shows her readers that humans are not perfect. In fact, because of their flaws and prejudices they bring out cruelty in others and plague society with evil.
If I had to identify the most important theme in Hamlet, I would probably point to death. Not only is it one of the main drivers of the plot (for Hamlet’s urge for revenge stems at his father’s death), but it is also at the heart of one of the main philosophical questions that Shakespeare explores in Hamlet: the nature of death. Through Hamlet’s fascination with death, Shakespeare deals with both the physical and the ambiguous spiritual aspect of it.
What does it mean to die? Even though this question repeatedly pops up throughout the entire play, Shakespeare deals with it directly in the graveyard scene of Act V. When Hamlet finds Yorrick’s skull, he delivers a powerful soliloquy in which he grotesquely describes the physical aspect of death. Hamlet talks about death as if it were nothing more than a process of decomposition. He emphasizes that absolutely everyone, from kings to beggars, ends up as dust. He illustrates this idea when he says, “To what base uses we may return, Horatio! Why may not imagination trace the noble dust of Alexander till ‘a find it stopping a bunghole?” (V,i,175).
However, Shakespeare doesn’t limit himself to only the physical side of death-- he takes it much further and also addresses the spiritual aspect, showing that the mystery surrounding death is much more complicated than simply physical decomposition. King Hamlet’s ghost plays an important role here, since with it Shakespeare indicates that there is indeed an afterlife. However, Hamlet exposes the uncertainty of it, and thus explains why humans are so afraid of death. According to Hamlet, people fear death out of ignorance, because we are afraid of what we might encounter.
Hamlet is a character fascinated by death, which indicates that Shakespeare probably was too. Throughout the play Hamlet, Shakespeare tries to explain the significance of death and the role that it plays in human existence. However, in my opinion, what is even more significant is his attempt at explaining how our limited knowledge of death affects the how we live our lives.
Few written works meet the requirements for canonization. The texts that are part of a literary canon must not only be representative of their genre or time period, but they must also have something that proves their suitableness for admiration and study. Usually, this boils down to whether the text is still relevant today—what will students and scholars gain from reading and analyzing it? However, some books are canonized because they have a strong historical value. When Beowulf was rediscovered in the 19th century, scholars thought that the poem’s value lay in the historical insights it provided. Personally, I consider that Beowulf should be canonized, but not because of what it tells us about Scandinavian history. I think that Beowulf should be canonized because it is a very early work that deals with human struggles that we all still face today, such as questions surrounding destiny and the definition of heroism.
Even though Beowulf does contain some true historical facts, such as Hygelac’s death during a war against the Frisians, most of the story is fictional. Beowulf himself is most likely an invented character, as are Grendel, his mother, the dragon and all other monsters. The poem does provide some very unique insights into Scandinavian culture during this time period, but a major weakness that cannot be ignored is the ambiguous and confusing role that Christianity plays in the story. Since the epic was originally pagan but was transcribed by a Christian, it is often difficult to distinguish the pagan concept of god from what the transcriber added and tweaked 500 years later.
Even though I believe that Beowulf’s historical background is not enough to get it canonized, I do think that some of the issues it deals with make the book memorable and worth studying. I find it fascinating how there are certain questions that follow humankind through the centuries. For example, Beowulf deals with the issue of what it means to be a true hero. Can someone be acting selfishly but still be heroic? I often encounter this same question in my daily life. Pressured by the college applications process, my friends and I have found that many times our primary motivation for doing some type of community service is how it will look in an application, rather than just a desire to help others. Does this diminish the value of the service itself? Is there room for self-interest when it comes to heroism? I don’t know the answer to these questions, and Beowulf doesn’t answer them either, but I think that a strong sign of Beowulf’s literary value is how many of the issues it explores are still extremely relevant today.
