Riches

The word I chose for this paper was "riches," and I chose it mostly because we go to the school that we go to. PCDS is full of rich kids who don't know how rich they are, so I thought it would be interesting to write a paper about riches. I also think it is interesting to think about what has been considered to be currency, or what's it's meant to be rich, in the past. Salt used to be currency, and now it's $2.00 at the store. There are many aspects about the word riches that helped to shape society and I'm excited to research them.

The Stiletto

    

The "Stiletto" was first developed in Italy and dates back as early as the 1400s. The Stiletto is said to be a variation on the "Rondel Dagger," which is a needle-pointed, narrow blade who's primary use was theorized to be thrusting. The blade was formed with a hammer into a "dense rod with a narrow, triangular cross section, without any sharpened edges." Although the triangular shape was the most popular, but there were also some instances with square, round, or diamond cross sections. The Stiletto get's its name from the Latin word "stilus" which was a thin pointed Roman tool used to engrave onto wax or clay tablets. It started to gain it's popularity during the Middle Ages when it became regularly used as a secondary weapon by the knights of the time. Since the blade was so thin, it easily made its way through the small openings in the armor of the wielder's opponents. The stiletto was originally meant to be used purely for offensive purposes, but it proved most useful to finish off enemies after being previously wounded. 

Eradication

            As the celebration in the mead hall continued, there was a certain excitment, or contentment—I couldn’t quite tell which—about the air, that I could not help my feeling uneasy about. I knew Grendel was coming, but I was not sure that Beowulf, the Geat, was actually the man he claimed to be. The stories were all well and good, but I saw no proof of his greatness. So, as the time grew nearer to midnight, I began to feel more anxious. As Beowulf and Unferth argued through their petty squabble, no one seemed to pay any mind to the fact that many fine, strong men’s lives were potentially going to be spent. Our fine new queen, Wealtheow, poured mead into my good kinsmen’s cups, and the entire hall carried on in their festivities. I glanced around the room and saw Unferth, the weak man that he was, struggling to hold back his tears as he stormed out of the hall. Our king, Hrothgar, speaks to our new stranger about something that I could not bother to concern myself with. After some time, the merriments, slowly as it may have been, seemed to die down. Most of the men diffused to their respective residences, not worrying themselves with the encroaching horrors the even had the potential to present.

            Most of the men, at this point, were asleep, and I knew the time was growing nye. Then, taking me almost by surprise, the beast burst through the gargantuan mead-hall door. It appeared as though the beast was toying with us. I noticed Beowulf watch Grendel as he took a table cloth, tied it around his impenetrable neck, and ate one of my kinsmen. The jovial manner in which this colossal carried out the cold-blooded murder of an innocent man confused and infuriated me. Fortunately for me, and quite unfortunately for the beast, the next person he tried to prey upon was Beowulf. I stood in horror, appreciation, and amazement as Beowulf twisted Grendel’s arm around in its socket. I knew the battle was not yet won, but I had faith in the man in which our fate was trusted in. Just then, Grendel fell to the ground, having slipped on a puddle of blood. This gave Beowulf the upper hand, and my expectations for the outcome of this night, cautiously of course, grew with each blow the Geat hurled at Grendel. There was some dialogue between the beast and his conqueror, but I paid no mind; as, battle was no time for conversation of any sort. Finally, after Beowulf threw his lesser around the hall in a quite ostentatious manner, he finally tore the hairy, evil arm from our torturer’s torso. The beast had finally realized his defeat, so, certain of his death, Grendel sulked out of our mead hall. Our misfortune had finally been eradicated. 

William I

William I was the first Norman Kind of English, but he first went by the title William the II when he was only the Duke of Normandy. He was descendant from the Viking raiders and had been the Duke of Normandy since 1035, until, on October 14, 1066, he had successfully conquered England at the Battle of Hastings. The Battle of Hastings was the event that most characterized his life—he now had control of England, and was about to change the language of the government of the country. With him to battle he took 5,000 infantry and 3,000 knights, while his opponent, Harold, had over 8,000 men total. Even though William was outnumbered, he still lead his men to victory. This victory awarded him not only a new country under his control, but also his most popular nickname, William the Conqueror. With England under his rule, he commanded the English language, that of which was spoke by the entire country before his arrival, to the lower class and the peasants. This left an apparent divide in the cultures of the area, but as generations passed, marriages brought families together, and business deals were conducted, the cultures slowly started to merge together. Eventually there was little to no distinction between the two peoples, which greatly influenced the English language and helped mold it into the language we speak today. 

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/MEDwilliam1.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_the_Conqueror 

Jonathan Bate: "Frankenstein and the State of Nature"

The three main keys that really resinated with me after reading Jonathan Bate's criticism of Mary Shelly's Frankenstein were as follows:

         -First, was the fact that Bate drew a connection between Frankenstein's creature, and the novel's narrator, Robert Walton. Bate says that Walton will always be a "wonderer" or an "alien,"and the monster obviously has the same afflictions. This was a new connection that I hadn't thought to make, and I found that very interesting.

         -Another observation Bate made was that the first sighting of both the creature and Dr. Frankenstein himself were made by Robert Walton. This allowed for an interesting juxtaposition. Walton and his crew first saw the beast, who was large and brute-like. Frankenstein on the other hand, from first glance even, seemed sophisticated and educated. This set up the whole premise for the book-Frankenstein versus the beast.

          - Finally, Bate basically says that Frankenstein's beast has no chance of success from his creation. He says that the evolution of human institutions goes as such: "first the forests, after that the huts, then the villages, next the cities, and finally the academies'." Since, though, the beast was born as the creation of Frankenstein and the academies', the creature has nowhere to go but down. The monster never had a chance.

     The criticism that Jonathan Bate lays out made me think of the book from many new angles that I hadn't before. He made me see the monster in a new light. I still do not feel any sympathy for Frankenstein's creation, but I see how he was set up for failure. I also see how Dr. Frankenstein committed transgressions against the monster and the human condition. The original sin from the novel was committed by Frankenstein himself, and that was his trying to "cheat death through knowledge instead of intercourse."

Dr. Frankenstein's Moral Complexities

            Mary Shelly, even early on in the book, establishes Dr. Frankenstein as a complex character, with many-different-faceted motives, questionable ethics, and different identities. The two passages chosen on pages 32-33 embody Dr. Frankenstein’s moral dilemmas and contradictions in a remarkably full way. The beginning of the passages starts out explaining the morally admirable aspects of Frankenstein’s experiment. Mary Shelly writes about how the honorable doctor wants to enlighten the scientific community with his new discoveries: “pour a torrent of light into our dark world.” Very quickly, though, Mary Shelly moves into the more selfish and ethically questionable motives for Frankenstein’s obsession. Shelly explains that a driving force behind the doctor’s passion was the fact that Frankenstein wanted a “race” of people that owed their whole being to him. He would be some what of a god to the people he built, and that absolute power very much attracted him.

            In the second part of the passage, Mary Shelly goes on to describe the effect Frankenstein’s obsession has had on him, and how mad he really is. First off, she tells the reader about Frankenstein’s appearance: he was pale and sickly looking because of the stress he is under and the amount of work he presents to himself. As if this weren’t enough, he doesn’t even let himself sleep because of the amount of work he wishes to get done in a very short period of time. As any good scientist would know, lack of sleep can be disastrous, because on no sleep, the mind cannot work to its full capacity. This would obviously affect the success of Frankenstein’s experiment. Yet, because Frankenstein is a man obsessed, and also one who lets his feelings drive his work life, he lets himself carry on in this way. And finally, his work station is atrocious. Mary Shelly walks us through Frankenstein’s work station. It is messy, lacking any organization whatsoever, and with almost no regard for sanitation. Mary Shelly leaves the decision up to the reader. Is Dr. Frankenstein worthy of commendation because of his attempted contributions to the scientific work, disapproval because of his less-than-stellar ethic motivations and total lack of regard for the scientific process, or some combination of the two. 

Dr. Frankenstein

     The character that I had the strongest reaction to was Dr. Frankenstein, himself. I felt as though he was overly dramatic in his reactions to most circumstances. For example, he fell into a depressive state for many months after he saw his monster. Granted, the monster was an abomination, I don't think it warranted that sort of reaction. I feel as though the book could have been stronger, if its main character were a more stable person. Mary Shelly spends, in my opinion, too much time explaining the manic state that Frankenstein was in, rather than establishing other characters, the plot, or the depth of the book further. Even though my opinion on Dr. Frankenstein was negative, his character had the biggest impact on me.