Category: ENG 420 (Page 2 of 3)

SOURCE IDEAS:

“To paint with very broad brush strokes, this stand of literature diversified in the nineteenth Century into a variety of forms such as the ‘Newgate Novel,’ the ‘novel of sensation,” and horror stories, ghost stories and science fiction. Like Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein at the start of the nineteenth Century, Stevenson’s Jekyll and Hyde at its end is therefore concerned not only with the modern theme of interior subjectivity and psychological responsibility, or with medically or socially determinist accounts of criminality such as those dominant Dickens’ later work, but also with an older theme of ‘hellish’ evil, or ‘the slime of the pit’ appearing on earth”(115).

“Like defendants relying on states of absence of mind, double consciousness or possession by the devil, Jeckyll seeks to displace not only his desire but his responsibility onto Hyde, whom he himself then diagnoses as suffering from ‘moral insanity’. But the story also makes swingering moral evaluation…Jekyll describes Hyde as ‘wicked’ and ‘evil,’ as ‘the slime of the pit…that insurgent horror…Hyde resides within Jekyll — and hence represents the ultimate crisis of judgment: the unitary subject split asunder, negating a straightforward attribution of ‘factual’ responsibility; that split also undermines the older discourse of evaluation of character by representing character, too, as ambivalent and as split”(126)

SYNTHESIZING COMMENT/ANALYSIS:

I think these two passages are really interesting, considering some of our lingering questions at the end of the novel and what we should do about the facts of ‘the case’ and make a judgment. I was interested in the first excerpt as it provides some grounding to the novel in general and spoke to some of my thinking around the discourses of the end of the century and looking back on the novels we have read from Shelleys at the beginning of the era to now Stevenson and soon to be Wilde at the end. I thought back to ENG 229, and we looked at what the novel was supposed to achieve, whether it be a moral, didactic model for public consumption or this idea of a sensational, enthralling entertainment where the reader decides what to take from it. We see this shift in the Gothic novel to the interiority of people and a reflection of the advancements of the times, whether scientifically or medically; it starts to complicate this question of what makes a monster or someone ‘hellish.’To continue in the article and look at the idea of criminal responsibility embedded within this Gothic novel, it feels representative of all the confusion surrounding the end of the century and what to make of the ‘progress’ within society when applied to complexities of older judgments of character. We also talked in class about the splitting of responsibility Jekyll makes between himself and Hyde and how difficult it would be for Victorian readers to recognize this criminal responsibility.

QUESTION:

What do we think some of the connections are in our other novels in terms of criminal responsibility or the ability for society to distinguish criminality that perhaps feels more straightforward than in Stevenson’s case, where we see complexities with science, psychology, etc. that people at the time were not sure what to make of. Thinking of our own judgments of criminal behavior or ‘characters’ in past novels like Frankenstein or Jane Eyre, would we have the same uncertainties of judgment that we do here?

Novel III. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde by Robert Louis Stevenson (1886)

• From the Novel:

“My two natures had memory in common, but all other faculties were most unequally shared between them. Jekyll (who was composite) now with the most sensitive apprehensions, now with a greedy gusto, projected and sharede in the pleasures and adventures of Hyde…To cast in my lot with Jekyll, was to die to those appetites which I had long secretly indulged and had of late begun to pamper”(Stevenson 86).

Stevenson, Robert Louis. Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde. Edited by Martin A. Danahay, Broadview Editions, 2015.

• Critical Commentary:

“These characters fear being exposed both for the secret vices they indulge and for their decision to avoid any public scandal by conducting a double life hidden from the inquisitioners of the contemporary public and condemnation of the laws”.

Sanna, Antonio. “Silent homosexuality in oscar wilde’s “telemy” & “The picture of dorian gray” and robert louis stevenson’s “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. hyde”. Law and literature, 24. 21-29. 2013

• Historical Context:

“This web of habits and appetites, of lusts and feats, is not, perhaps, the ultimate manifestation of what in truth we are. It is the cloak which our rude forefathers have worn themselves against the cosmic storm; but we are already learning to shift and refashion it as our gentler weather needs, and if perchance it slip from us in the sunshine then something more ancient and more glorious is for a moment guessed within”(203).

Meyers, F.H. “Multiplex personality, “The Nineteenth century, november 1886.

• Visual:

“The Transformation: Great God! Can it be!” https://www.loc.gov/resource/ds.04518/

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde – Digital File from Original – Library of Congress, www.loc.gov/resource/ds.04518/. Accessed 6 Dec. 2023.

SOURCE IDEAS:

“Mr. Hyde was pale and dwarfish, he gave an impression of deformity without any nameable malformation, he had a displeasing smile, he had borne himself to the lawyers with a sort of murderous mixture of timidity and boldness, and he spoke with a husky, whispering and somewhat broken voice; all these were points against him, but not all of these together could explain the hitherto unknown disgust, loathing and fear with which Mr. Utterson regarded him”(41-2)

“Rather, as there was something abnormal and misbegotten in the very essence of the creature that now faced me — something seizing, surprising and revolting — this fresh disparity seemed but to fit in with and to reinforce it; so that to my interest in the man’s nature and character, there was added a curiosity as to his origins, his life, his fortune and status in the world”(74-5).

SYNTHESIZING COMMENT/ANALYSIS:

Both of these excerpts come from the novel, and the first is from the first instance where Mr. Utterson sees Hyde — I thought that this quote really picks up on the themes we are discussing and could bring back to orient us with Cohen’s theories of the monster as a mixture and uncategorizable. For instance, we see Hyde described with conflicting descriptors such as “timid” and “bold” — but also this idea of a hidden deformity, an unsettling feeling that something is missing. I think we got the monster’s external/physical characteristics in Frankenstein, then shifted to a more inward representation in Jane Eyre. Still, here, it seems to take on the outward physicality again.Yet, I find it interesting that the one example in Cohen of a monster is its enormity, which is reversed here where Hyde is continuously described as small and even, sometimes animal-like, with a quickness. Continuing with the second passage later in the novel, the story’s unfolding has brought even more suspicion to Hyde, and these keywords reminded me of Frankenstein’s

creature when he described the reaction people had to him that he couldn’t understand why. Here, it is almost from the townspeople’s point of view, represented by Mr. Utterson as he observes how he reacts to Hyde’s “essence,” which he finds revolting and surprising. We could discuss the elements here of mystery and these conflictual representations of Hyde in terms of Cohen’s monster theory but also take what we learned from Jane Eyre and maybe connect these descriptions with a less literal notion of what Hyde represents and think about his actions more than just the emphasis on his physical characteristics.

QUESTION:

Keeping in mind what we just explored with Bertha and Jane in Jane Eyre as this mirroring effect and looking into how they are linked — how might we look at the relationship between Mr. Jeckyll and Mr. Hyde? It seems like there could be a similarity here between the two character’s contrasts and this idea of the inwardness of one and the showcasing outwardly in the other.

2QSQ #6 Discovering Primary Resources

Example #1: Mental Health Search within Wellcome’s Catalogue

There were a variety of artifacts under this search, such as mental health of twins, patient certificates and admission forms, private accounts, medical journals/weekly statements, case records of various date intervals, report & general statements of accounts, annual accounts/report & accounts, and out letters. Most of the artifacts came from either the Ticehurst House Hospital, which was opened by Samuel Newington in 1792 as a psychiatric hospital, and then the Mental After Care Association, which was founded in 1879 by Reverend Henry Hawkins – originally called the “After Care Association for Poor & Friendless Female Convulensencts on Leaving Asylums for the Insane.” For my artifact, I selected the “Patients’ Bills & House Account Settlements,” which came from Ticehurst House Hospital between 1811 and 1819. The images showcased a small book – looked a bit like a ledger – with first an alphabetical/address book type of format listing the names of individuals I assume to be patients and/or their guardians. These pages generally included names with an accompanying number corresponding to their bill/balance on the right side of the book. After about 30 pages in shifts, a detailed account of what each patient was billed for and that accompanying cost tallied up to a total sum. For instance, some contents included “new suit clothes…5.2”, “mending clothes…6” and so on with the name of the service or good and its cost. Another example listed items such as tobacco and wine, but also services like shaving. These accounts are organized under the name of an individual patient on the top, the year and date on the left side of the page, and the right-hand side is the cost of each item with a total on the bottom left. 

As to the context, I picked this artifact because it is within some of the time frame of Brontë’s novel Jane Eyre that we have been discussing, which would have taken place within the narrative from around 1808-1820s and correlates to the period where Bertha might have been institutionalized. I also thought that the bills and accounts would provide detailed information on the living conditions within this psychiatric hospital from what they were being charged for. I feel this artifact can also speak to questions about what the conditions of other hospitals/mental institutions were like compared to this one, which seemed to have a very detailed and involved account of what was being billed. I also think we could look into who exactly was billed – was it from the money or account of the actual patient, or did they have guardianship status of other people such as family? I think this document would be important in discussions of Victorian class/social status and poverty concerning who had access to these institutions and what we can infer about the type of care corresponding to class. In the context of our novel, Rochester implies that the kind of institution he could have placed Bertha in was much worse than locking her in his own home with a personal attendant – knowing what we do about his wealth, how could this influence our discussion of this artifact and the type of care it implies.

Example #2: Retreat Archive 

The introduction to this archive discusses how pivotal and influential the role of The Retreat was in the development and care of the mentally ill in Victorian England and that their work soon became a study case for the “typical” type of institution and though it kept its high reputation it was also able to become a more standard middle/class institution (this maybe ties into my questions in the previous artifact). The introduction also mentions that the archive is usually very complete, with well-documented detailed accounts of administration, finances, staff, estate, and patient records. For my artifact under this archive collection, I chose the “Admission Papers” from April 12th, 1842, to June 22nd, 1849, which again is part of The Retreat Archive. This artifact looks to be a printed leaflet with information regarding the admissions of patients into their care, a very detailed list of 29 questions in the style of an intake form, and an official signed document to admit the patient. This questionnaire contains information such as name, age, place of birth, last residence, marital status, children, occupation (previous), and any connection to the institution. I thought it was interesting that there was a section on this idea of a family history of mental illness, and it made me wonder whether or not that was actually a part of medical findings at this point. There was also a section of the questionnaire that focused on the details of their illness, hoping to gain information on their early afflictions, literacy, education, disposition, changes in temperament, fits, violence, and if any prior medications or treatments were given. Again, at the end of each form was a signed document of “The Medical Certificate,” which was signed and dated for the patient’s admission. 

I think this artifact is important to discuss as, again, it is relevant to the time period of our current discussions surrounding Brontë’s writing, and I think it would be interesting to see what questions/information was needed to determine if someone was eligible to be admitted to an institution. This context makes me want to raise follow-up questions regarding what treatments and conditions these patients were in before this step of institutionalization was taken. Like in Jane Eyre, Rochester took notice of Bertha’s changes in attitude and behaviors, and much like this intake form suggests, he had an official diagnosis from a medical standpoint that found her to have a mental illness. It makes me wonder what was beneficial or how it became normalized to take these next steps medically – did this allow for more treatment other than institutions? I would consider this artifact important within the context of medical diagnosing in the Victorian era and the roles of guardianship and consent as we can start to question more within the artifact itself, such as who was filling out the forms on behalf of the patient, etc. The artifact can also raise our discussions to the context of class status again, as the information given would give us a glimpse into issues such as occupation, education levels, and marriage dictated heavily by social norms and class.

2QSQ #5 – 10:2:23

PART 1: PREPARING FOR DISCUSSION

SOURCE IDEAS:

“Do you think because I am poor, obscure, plain, and little, I am soulless and heartless? —You think wrong! — I have just as much soul as you, — and full as much heart! And if God had gifted me with some beauty, and much wealth, I should have made it as hard for you to leave me, as it is now for me to leave you. I am, not talking to you now through the medium of custom, conventionalities, nor even mortal flesh: it is my spirit that addresses your spirit; just as both had passed through the grave, and we stood at Gods feet, equal, — as we are!” (338).

“As regards the author’s chief object, however, it is a failure — that namely, of making a plain, odd woman, destitute of all the conventional features of feminine attraction, interesting in our sight. We deny that he has succeeded in this. Jane Eyre, in spite of some good things about her, is a being totally uncongenial to our feelings from beginning to end”.(592) — Rigby’s Quarterly Review, 1848.

SYNTHESIZING COMMENT/ANALYSIS:

With these two passages, I am thinking about how we might look into the public perception of Jane as both this beacon of feminist thinking of her time, full of questions and revolutionary thinking regarding social/class structures of England, and then this idea of her “unnatural” unearthly” connotations throughout the novel. This quote from chapter 23 is so poignant that I can’t pass it by without acknowledging it and just the sheer power it brings through the page. Not only is this an example of one of her moments where she truly speaks her mind, forgoing this ‘doctrine of endurance’ and is unashamedly bold, but think of the social conventions she alludes to that a poor, plain governess could speak in such a way to a wealthy, high-standing man. Looking at the argument Rigby makes in this review, they acknowledge how popular this book is — but immediately jump into naming all the reasons why it is dangerous. I am thinking of how this brings in our discussion of monster theory and the idea that there is such a lack of categorization implied within Jane and why these reviewers would feel she is just totally not relatable — shunned, so to speak, from the ‘conventional features of feminine attraction”. She is poor, an orphan, a woman — this is what is supposed to define her. Yet, she is the rightful inheritor of decent wealth, intelligent, and caught the attention of a conventionally superior man. She subverts so many of these boxes that gave the Victorian culture its order, and perhaps this could play into further discussion of Brontë’s choices to craft the novel in such a way where the interior of a person cannot fit in with this constructed society.

QUESTION:

Why do we think the public responded so greatly to Jane’s character and perhaps found these moments of rebellious thinking and redefining femininity so relatable, yet reviewers think her so unappealing? What might this say about this genre’s ability to generate a desire to live through this mysterious, thrilling, adventurous but not truly wishing to participate in its reality?

O’Hara 2QSQ #4

PART 1: PREPARING FOR DISCUSSION

SOURCE IDEAS:

“All John Reed’s violent tyrannies, all his sisters’ proud indifference, all his mother’s aversions, all the servents’ partiality, turned up in my disturbed mind like a dark deposit in a turbid well. Why was I always suffering, always brow-beaten, always accused, for ever condemned? Why could I never please? Why was it useless to try to win anyone’s favour?” (Brontë 72).

“…this is a sad, a melancholy occasion; for it becomes my duty to warn you, that this girl, who might be one of God’s own lambs, is a little castaway: not a member of the true flock, but evidently am interloper and an alien. You must be on your guard against her; you must shun her example: if necessary, avoid her company, exclude her from your sports, and shut her out from your converse” (Brontë 129).

SYNTHESIZING COMMENT/ANALYSIS:

I found these two passages interesting as they can connect with the idea of how children could be seen as monstrous and also recognize the effect of Brontë’s choice of first-person narrative from the child themselves on how these outside forces of neglect and abuse affect her view of the world. Adhering to some of the characteristics of a monster from Cohen and Six & Tompson, we see themes surrounding neglect, being shunned from normative society, and even this idea of hierarchy and categorical confusion within the monster. However, the fact that these monstrous traits and reactions now relate to children feels quite different from our discussions of monsters within Frankenstein. Children within Shelley’s work were depicted with this angelic/purity, especially Victor’s youngest sibling, William. Then look to Brontë’s Jane Eyre, where we see Jane become aware of her differences and this almost uncontrollable effect she seems to have on those around her, adhering to some of our discussions of monsters. She feels isolated from the comforts of her society, with no companions or parental figures to love and guide her. Even within her home, she is repeatedly told that she does not have access to any of it. In this first quote, we see her grapple with ideas not so far off from the Creature as she cannot seem to understand why she invokes

such repulsion. Then, following Mr. Brocklehurst’s speech, where he publicly shuns Jane from her peers and any hopes of being accepted within her environment, it solidifies this connection of her being pushed into the ‘other’ within her world.

QUESTION:

Knowing a bit about Victorian gender roles and social hierarchy, I’m wondering to what extent we can bring these aspects of gender and class into themes of monsters. Being an orphan, Jane already doesn’t fit into the well-structured categories of Victorian families and social hierarchies — she is an outsider or a variable society now has to deal with. As a young girl, she continues to face even more pressure from society to adhere to those expectations — we see her being told to be more useful and pleasant, etc. Nonetheless, she is outspoken, resists these strict categories, and is an orphan. On top of these traits, perhaps we could connect them to the idea that monsters are dangerous because they are unpredictable; they do not fall into our well-ordered society — they defy classification.

O’Hara 2QSQ 9:18:23

1.) “If a good seed falls into a man, it grows from him, since this man is its field, his heart is its tree, and his works are its fruits. Cannot a field that bears weeds be weeded and cleaned of this bad fruit, so that another, good seed can be planted in it…Every man is like a field, neither entirely good nor entirely bad, but of an uncertain kind…If a good seed falls into the field, and the soil receives it, it grows to be good. If a bad seed falls into the field and is received, it grows to be bad. Therefore it is not the soil of the field that decides the matter; it is neither good nor bad. It is like a body of water, coloured by the colours that falls on the water”(206).

Paracelsus, Writings on creation(1531-1538)

2.) “Evil thenceforth became my good. Urged thus far, I had no choice but to adapt my nature to an element which I had willingly chosen. The completion of my demoniacal design became an insatiable passion. And now it is ended; there is my last victim!”(186).

SYNTHESIZING COMMENT/ANALYSIS:

The first quote I chose is from Part II of our book “Frankenstein in Cultural Context,” under the selected excerpt from Paracelsus, Writings on Creation, which follows up on a novel by Wollstonecraft alluding to the importance of parenting, especially a mother figure, but also this idea that an individual is shaped by the evils that surround them in society and without guidance or love, evil penetrates. While Victor is considered the ‘parent’ of his Creature, Wollstonecraft, in her novel Maria and this excerpt from Paracelsus, both would point to that being one of the errors of Victor’s obsession with playing God. It was not considered natural for this type of creation, more in this era than perhaps today, where we adhere to less rigid definitions of parents. Still, I want to focus on the idea that these two passages highlight, which is the innate goodness of humankind that is just waiting to be received and cultivated. Adhering to some of the major themes explored in Frankenstein — compassion, connection/friendship, and perhaps family — showcases what disastrous and monstrous turns can arise. Frankenstein’s Creature has recognized and is capable of inner reflection of his past good self and the outside forces that pulled him down to where he even makes the connection that “the fallen angel becomes a malignant devil”(187). Like the field in the first source, the monster was this blank slate, awaiting the good seed that would then cultivate his goodness, yet all that awaited him was neglect, horror, and evil wrongdoings.

QUESTION:

Knowing that Victor has recounted in the early phases of his life the impeccable goodness and kindness of his parents, I wonder if we could bring this aspect of family and harmony with the rest of the world into play. Victor had the best of “good seeds” that shaped him into a genuinely good person. Yet, his mother’s death seems to play a role in his fall into the obsession/madness that resulted in his creation and disregard for the natural harmony between humans and nature. In other novels, such as the cultural context from Wollstonecraft’s novel and Paracelsus, the loneliness and neglect of his monster might be represented in a child growing up in abusive settings that make a point of their aptitude for later evil lifestyles. However, Shelley’s choice of a monster brings out a very different response as we get into ideas Cohen raised, such as the uncomfortable and suspense of not knowing how to feel about this uncategorizable figure.

PART 2: IN-CLASS WRITING RESPONSE (NAME:__________________)

Novel I. Frankenstein; Or, The Modern Prometheus by Mary Shelley (1818)

• From the Novel:

“There is something at work within my soul, which I do not understand. I am practically industrious – pains-taking; – a workman to execute with perseverance and labour: but besides this, there is a love for the marvelous …”(Shelley 32)

Shelley, mary, and Johanna M. Smith. Frankenstein. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000.

• Critical Commentary:

“To conclude his essay, Smith returns to the subject of his first paragraph, namely, that the high respected critics who do not take a postcolonial apparoch, whose work does not foreground the issue of race and slavery…Smith maintains that “there is no evidence of such deeper dives in Frankenstein.” Although Frankenstein is responsible for the actions of his Creature, just as a slave-holder would be held responsible for the actions of his slaves”(p. 565)

Shelley, mary, and Johanna M. Smith. Frankenstein. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000.

• Historical Context:

“Treat a person ill, and he wil become wicked…It is impossible to read this dialogue – and indeed many other situations of a somewhat similar character – without feeling the heart suspend its palpitations with wonder, and the tears stream down the cheeks! – Athenaum Magazine, 1832

Shelley, Percy Bysshe. “ON FRANKENSTEIN; OR, THE MODERN PROMETHEUS.” University of Pennsylvania , knarf.english.upenn.edu/PShelley/frankrev.html. Accessed 6 Dec. 2023.

• Visual: