Blogging, as a new way of writing through technology, has changed the mentality of many when it comes to being intellectually unique. It not only helps many communicate among friends and family, but also communicates our sense of literature. Writing brings out our innate love of writing, even though it may be public. Blogging has shown many that there is a reason to love writing and to not be afraid of it, especially me.

N. Katherine Hayles believes that there is great achievement in writing. She believes that writing has transformed into an electronic text that can be read in many different possible ways. Essays that are electronically “written” are still considered to be “informative, meditative, and/or journalistic (Electronic Literature Collection Volume One).” Facebook and WordPress are examples of this. These sources are not just social networking sites; they allow users to collectively show their interests for writing in their own unique style. They also let many people write in any form they want and allows for them to become intellectual by reading and writing in their own way. Hayles speaks by saying:

“At this time in the early 1980s, modular programming was a new idea, and she thought it had much in common with the composition techniques she used in her writing classes. Paragraphs were like modules; transitions were like comments and annotations; structure and organization were like flowcharts (p.35).”

Hayles believes that writing in one’s own unique way helps one to create a new kind of genuine way of writing. Using the phrase “modular programming” suggests that there is a movement arising in the world of writing. People are creating and inventing something new every day that they can share with others. Everyone can read this material, which is less private and more out in the open for the world to see. This helps everyone become more creative through the world of technology allowing the writing to be more graphic and more artistic in the perspective of the writer. The reader becomes more attuned into the reading by having the imagination work the story line. This enables the reader to be more in-depth in the reading and possibly help him/her to understand it better.

When Hayles experienced the world of technology, “she realized that everything important to her met in the nexus of this material-semiotic object. It called forth the questions that continued to fascinate her about scientific research: what does it mean? Why is it important? It confronted her with the materiality of the physical world and its mediation through technological apparatus (p. 15).” Blogging helps create a new type of research by looking material up. It allows the reader to be more conscious and concentrate more on the thesis with different graphics and a new persona in the writing. Instead of having to figure things out and flip through pages all one would have to do is scroll up and down to find the answer.

Birkerts would also agree that reading is not private anymore. It is out in the open and for everyone to see in the public domain. Birkerts thinks that reading in private is more appropriate than out in the public. He suggests that there is no reason for blogging or any electronic source, for that matter, to help an individual with reading. Reading privately helps one to become more intellectual and it helps them embrace the true nature of the story. Reading, according to Birkerts, should not be a way to communicate, but to bring the story to life in the mind without using graphics or any source of electronic dialect. To him, reading is a way to bring relief from the outside world. To reinforce his ideas, Sven Birkerts says:

“The reading I did in late boyhood and early adolescence was passionate and private, carried on at high seat. When I went to my room and opened a book, it was to seal myself off as fully as possible in another place. I was not reading, as now, with only one part of the self. I was there body and soul, living vicariously…But what I have not lost is a churning anxiety, an almost intolerable sensation that sometimes has me drawing breaths to steady myself. There is something about the reading act that cuts through the sheath of distractedness that usually envelops me. It is as if I suddenly feel the pure flow of time behind the stationary letters (37).”

Birkerts, here, believes that the new millennium, full of new innovations for writing, is a disgrace to society. He thinks that it is making society stupid and not allowing them to make reading a more private time. He also prefers paperback sources to the new electronic text. He believes that an electronic source is taking away the true story and no solid purpose for the electronic text to be in society. With that said, Birkerts would agree that just picking up a book or magazine allows a more in-depth way of reading. Society has changed and Birkerts does not agree with it, unlike my views.

For me, blogging has encouraged me to be more sociable with my own unique style of writing. It has forced me to go out of my realm of writing and bring forth new material that I am comfortable to show to anyone in the general public on the internet. I am not saying blogs are replacing books, but I feel it is another tool to expand the mind with new ideas. Personally, I believe blogging has helped me to achieve many ways of writing.  Everyone can critique or show me appreciation for my writing not just in the classroom, but through blogging.

Blogging can bring more imagination to the work produced through the instrument of typing at the computer to publishing the work on the site with the majority of your work or portfolio. Using Facebook and WordPress are good examples for me. Showing my work to the public, by using the internet, has helped me to be more comfortable with my method and approach to writing. It has been a great resource and has allowed me to be the writer that I want to be. Creating my own stories and publishing it with my own designs shows how different I want to be with my writing compared to others using electronic sources.

I am not saying Birkerts is wrong about the new technological age with reading and writing, but it seems to be only his views and argument alone on the subject. He does not include outsider opinions or facts. Many do not believe blogging is a reliable source when it comes to being public because there can be intruders on the internet. It also may be distracting to the person who is working on a piece of writing through blogging. With that in mind, not everyone may believe in Birkerts or my ideals. It is just how you may feel as a person and whether you want to be private or public and how you want to express yourself in your own intellectual way through a paged book or on the internet.

Clearly, it is apparent that blogging goes hand-in-hand with the way people communicate now-a-days in an intellectual way. People can now use electronic devices to portray their own sense of writing in an exceptional style of literature no matter who appreciates it or not. For me, Facebook and WordPress help me to not be afraid of the style of writing I want others to read and comment on. Technology, during this day in age, has become a new form of literature and many people will always have views on this factor. With that in mind, Hayles suggests that technology has helped many, like me; embrace their literature side, unlike the beliefs of Birkerts.

 Works Cited

“Contents by Keyword.” Electronic Literature Collection Volume One. N.p., n.d.

Web. 19 Apr 2010.<http://collection.eliterature.org/1/aux/keywords.html>.

Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber & Faber, Inc., 1994.

214-215. Print.

Hayles, N. Katherine. Writing Machines. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2002. 35.

The Views on Hayles  and Birkerts and the New Meaning of an Electronic Source: Blogging

Blogging, as a new way of writing through technology, has changed the mentality of many when it comes to being intellectually unique. It not only helps many communicate among friends and family, but also communicates our sense of literature. Writing brings out what may be our distinctive sense of love of writing in our own way even though it may be public. Blogging has showed many that there is a reason to love writing and to not be afraid of it.

N. Katherine Hayles believes that there is great achievement in writing. She believes that writing has transformed to an electronic text that can be read in many different possible ways. Essays that are electronically “written” are still considered to be “informative, meditative, and/or journalistic (Electronic Literature Collection Volume One).” Facebook and WordPress.com are examples of this. They show that not only do people connect socially, but that many can collectively show interest in writing in their own unique style. It also lets many people write in any form they want and to become intellectual through reading and writing in their own way. Hayles says that:

“At this time in the early 1980s, modular programming was a new idea, and she thought it had much in common with the composition techniques she used in her writing classes. Paragraphs were like modules; transitions were like comments and annotations; structure and organization were like flowcharts (p.35).”

Hayles believes that writing in your own unique way helps one to create a new kind of authentic way of writing. Using the phrase “modular programming” suggests that there is a movement arising from the world of writing. People are creating and inventing something new everyday that is allowing everyone to read material that is less private and more out in the open for the world to see. This helps those become more creative through the world of technology allowing the writing to be more graphic and more artistic through the eyes of the writer. This enables the reader to be more in-depth in the reading and possibly help him/her to understand it better. Blogging helps create a new type of research by looking material up. It allows the reader to be more conscious and concentrate more on the thesis with different graphics and a new persona in the writing. The reader becomes more attuned into the reading by having the imagination work the story line. Instead of having to figure things out and flip through pages all one would have to do is scroll up and down to find the answer.

Another perspective that Hayles would believe to be true is that reading is not private anymore. It is out in the open and for everyone to see. It is more public and allows the reader to look more in detail with the words that the author of the blog bestowed for everyone to see. Reading a blog helps everyone communicate with a story and possibly the author as well. This allows people to be more intellectual through reading. It also broadens the horizons of every individual with the help of others. Birkerts thinks that reading in private is more appropriate than out in the public. He suggests that there is no reason for blogging or any electronic source, for that matter, to help an individual with reading. Reading privately helps one to become more intellectual and to help them embrace the true nature of the story. Reading, to him, should not be a way to communicate, but to bring the story to life in the mind without using graphics or any source of electronic dialect. To him, reading is a way to bring someone relief from the outside world.

To reinforce his ideas, Sven Birkerts says:

“I would draw the line, imprecisely, somewhere in the 1950s. That was when television worked its way into the fabric of American life, when he grew accustomed to the idea of parallel realities-one that we lived in, the other that we stepped into whenever we wanted a break from our living. People born after the mid-1950s are the carriers of the new; they make up the force that will push us out of our already-fading rural/small-town/urban understanding of social organization. The momentum of change has already made those designations all but meaningless. Any many think it is a good thing (p. 214-215).”

Birkerts, here, believes that the new millennium, full of new innovations for writing, is a disgrace to society. He thinks that it is making society stupid and not allowing them to make reading a more private time. He does not prefer electronic text to a paperback source also. He believes that an electronic source is taking away the true story and that there is no reason for an upgrade in society. With that said, Birkerts would agree that an electronic source is a more detrimental way of being more intellectual then just picking up a book or magazine that allows a more in-depth way of reading. Society has changed and Birkerts does not agree with it.

Clearly, it is apparent that blogging goes hand-in-hand with the way people communicate now-a-days in an intellectual way. With that in mind, people can use electronic devices to portray their own sense of writing in an exceptional style of literature no matter who appreciates it or not. For me, Facebook and WordPress help me to not be afraid of the style of writing I want others to read and comment on. Technology, during this day in age, has become the new age of literature and many people will always have views on this factor. With that in mind, Hayles suggests that technology has helped many embrace their literal side unlike Birkerts.

 Works Cited

“Contents by Keyword.” Electronic Literature Collection Volume One. N.p., n.d.

Web. 19 Apr 2010.<http://collection.eliterature.org/1/aux/keywords.html>.

 Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber & Faber, Inc., 1994.

214-215. Print.

 Hayles, N. Katherine. Writing Machines. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2002. 35. 

Reflection

            For the revision of the Final Project, I brought more of Birkerts views on the new technological era for writing, specifically blogging. I brought the sense of privacy into the picture and made sure to back up Birkerts’ view by using a quote from his novel The Gutenberg Elegies. After, I brought more of my opinions on blogging, how I feel about it and how it has helped me with my writing. I didn’t necessarily say that Birkerts was wrong, but pointed out that it was more of his opinions and views on the subject that he was explaining to the reader. I revised my essay this way because I wanted to show that there are many different opinions about blogging and how it can change someone’s way of reading and writing. With that in mind, this paper has showed me how to make a clear counter argument and to back it up with quotes to bring more emphasis to the piece of writing.

            As a writer, I have learned to not just put quotes in random places and to bring it in a paragraph in a smoother way that explains the writing. Writing with examples has been more helpful to make my arguments more clear. I have learned how to bring my thesis through my whole paper and to make my conclusion sound similar to my introduction so it does not sound like the body part of the paper. These examples have made me become a more successful writer that has helped me achieve my goals of writing literature during my first year at Washington College. During my next three years at school, I want to keep in mind my “To Do List” so that I do not forget my skills that I learned in the classroom of spring semester.

N. Katherine Hayles believes that there is great achievement in writing. She believes that writing has transformed to an electronic text that can be read in many different possible ways. Essays that are electronically “written” are still considered to be “informative, meditative, and/or journalistic (Electronic Literature Collection Volume One).” Facebook and WordPress.com are examples of this. They show that not only do people connect socially, but that many can collectively show interest in writing in their own unique style. It also lets many people write in any form they want and to become intellectual through reading and writing in their own way. Hayles says that:

“At this time in the early 1980s, modular programming was a new idea, and she thought it had much in common with the composition techniques she used in her writing classes. Paragraphs were like modules; transitions were like comments and annotations; structure and organization were like flowcharts (p.35).”

Hayles believes that writing in your own unique way helps one to create a new kind of authentic way of writing. Using the phrase “modular programming” suggests that there is a movement arising from the world of writing. People are creating and inventing something new everyday that is allowing everyone to read material that is less private and more out in the open for the world to see. This helps those become more creative through the world of technology allowing the writing to be more graphic and more artistic through the eyes of the writer. This enables the reader to be more in-depth in the reading and possibly help him/her to understand it better. Blogging helps create a new type of research by looking material up. It allows the reader to be more conscious and concentrate more on the thesis with different graphics and a new persona in the writing. The reader becomes more attuned into the reading by having the imagination work the story line. Instead of having to figure things out and flip through pages all one would have to do is scroll up and down to find the answer.

Another perspective that Hayles would believe to be true is that reading is not private anymore. It is out in the open and for everyone to see. It is more public and allows the reader to look more in detail with the words that the author of the blog bestowed for everyone to see. Reading a blog helps everyone communicate with a story and possibly the author as well. This allows people to be more intellectual through reading. It also broadens the horizons of every individual with the help of others. Birkerts thinks that reading in private is more appropriate than out in the public. He suggests that there is no reason for blogging or any electronic source, for that matter, to help an individual with reading. Reading privately helps one to become more intellectual and to help them embrace the true nature of the story. Reading, to him, should not be a way to communicate, but to bring the story to life in the mind without using graphics or any source of electronic dialect. To him, reading is a way to bring someone relief from the outside world.

To reinforce his ideas, Sven Birkerts says:

“I would draw the line, imprecisely, somewhere in the 1950s. That was when television worked its way into the fabric of American life, when he grew accustomed to the idea of parallel realities-one that we lived in, the other that we stepped into whenever we wanted a break from our living. People born after the mid-1950s are the carriers of the new; they make up the force that will push us out of our already-fading rural/small-town/urban understanding of social organization. The momentum of change has already made those designations all but meaningless. Any many think it is a good thing (p. 214-215).”

Birkerts, here, believes that the new millennium, full of new innovations for writing, is a disgrace to society. He thinks that it is making society stupid and not allowing them to make reading a more private time. He does not prefer electronic text to a paperback source also. He believes that an electronic source is taking away the true story and that there is no reason for an upgrade in society. With that said, Birkerts would agree that an electronic source is a more detrimental way of being more intellectual then just picking up a book or magazine that allows a more in-depth way of reading. Society has changed and Birkerts does not agree with it.

Clearly, it is apparent that blogging goes hand-in-hand with the way people communicate now-a-days in an intellectual way. With that in mind, people can use electronic devices to portray their own sense of writing in an exceptional style of literature no matter who appreciates it or not. For me, Facebook and WordPress help me to not be afraid of the style of writing I want others to read and comment on. Technology, during this day in age, has become the new age of literature and many people will always have views on this factor. With that in mind, Hayles suggests that technology has helped many embrace their literal side unlike Birkerts.

Works Cited

“Contents by Keyword.” Electronic Literature Collection Volume One. N.p., n.d.

Web. 19 Apr 2010.<http://collection.eliterature.org/1/aux/keywords.html>.

Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber & Faber, Inc., 1994.

214-215. Print.

Hayles, N. Katherine. Writing Machines. Cambridge: The MIT Press, 2002. 35.

My thesis will be: N. Katherine Hayles believes that there is great achievement in writing and how it has transformed to an electronic text that can be read in many different ways possible. Essays that are electronically “written” are still considered to be “informative, meditative, and/or journalistic (Electronic Literature Collection Volume One).” Facebook is an example of this. It shows that not only do people connect socially, but that many can collectively show interest in writing in their own unique style. It also lets many people to write in any form they want and to become intellectual through reading and writing in their own way.

A quote that I am using to support this is, given by Hayles: “At this time in the early 1980s, modular programming was a new idea, and she thought it had much in common with the composition techniques she used in her writing classes. Paragraphs were like modules; transitions were like comments and annotations; structure and organization were like flowcharts (p. 35).”

One objection to my argument is made by Birkets and this quote: “I would draw the line, imprecisely, somewhere in the 1950s. That was when television worked its way into the fabric of American life, when we grew accustomed to the idea of parallel realities-one that we lived in, the other that we stepped into whenever we wanted a break from our living.People born after the mid-1950s are the carriers of the new; they make up the force that will push us out of our already-fading rural/small-town/urban understanding of social organization. The momentum of change has already made those designations all but meaningless. And many think it is a good thing (p.214-215).”

“At this time in the early 1980s, modular programming was a new idea, and she thought it had much in common with the composition techniques she used in her writing classes. Paragraphs were like modules; transitions were like comments and annotations; structure and organization were like flowcharts (p 35).”

N. Katherine Hayles believes that there is great achievement in writing and how it has transformed to an electronic text that can be read in many different ways possible. Essays that are electronically “written” are still considered to be “informative, meditative, and/or journalistic (Electronic Literature Collection Volume One).” Facebook is an example of this. It shows that not only do people connect socially, but that many can collectively show interest in writing in their own unique style. It also lets many people to write in any form they want and to become intellectual through reading and writing in their own way.

Facebook, as a blog, shows that there are many different ways to educate those around us. On Facebook, there is a social option called “Groups.” This allows those to be taught about many different things about people, restaurants, and many others once one is to join the social option. This brings short essays into the picture of electronic text. Each “Group” describes the subject being posted. It is written in any form allowing the person posting the social option to be as descriptive or as broad as they want. The “Group” is designed to show interest to the public who belong to the Facebook by telling the history or story or someone or something.

On the other hand, Sven Birkerts believes in which is why he does not prefer electronic text over a paperback source. He believes that an electronic source is taking away the true story and that there is no reason for an upgrade in society. With that said, Birkerts would agree that an electronic source is a more detrimental way of being more intellectual then just picking up a book or magazine that allows a more in depth way of reading then making it easier on oneself to go on the internet to look something up. Society has changed and Birkerts does not agree with it.

In the movie, Van Helsing, which was viewed in theaters in 2004, Gabriel Van Helsing, the main character, is considered to be the “Vampire Slayer.” Unfortunately for him, a curse was placed upon him that caused him not to remember his past. While searching for it, he is led to a land called Transylvania where there are dark creatures that were created and controlled by Count Dracula. The latter is known to be an evil vampire that cannot be killed by anyone because of his insurmountable strength. Van Helsing wants to kill the Count for good because of the curse that he had placed on many people. Van Helsing believes that he cannot do it alone and needs someone to help him vanquish Count Dracula for good.

Another main character is Anna Valerious. She also is a vampire hunter. She is part of the royal family who once lived in Transylvania until Count Dracula transformed them all into creatures. Anna wanted to help Van Helsing destroy the evil monster so that she could bring her family back to life. Count Dracula tried to interfere with their plan by sending the Wolf Man and Frankenstein’s Monster after them. He wanted them destroyed. Van Helsing and Valerious came to realize that it will take more than just weapons to kill off the vampire.

The scenes described in the previous page, show similarity to the novel Frankenstein because, like the creature, there are monsters throughout the movie. In the novel, there was little to no compassion towards the monster. This is shown throughout the movie of Van Helsing especially towards the Wolf Man who did not choose the life he was given by the Count Dracula. Everyone believes that he is a monster by choice and should be destroyed just like Frankenstein. In the movie, the Wolf Man is Anna Valerious’ brother. When he sees her in the middle of the night, he transforms into a wolf. They were once very close until this misfortune was bestowed upon him. He did not want Valerious to know about his transformation because he did not want her to be scared of him. The Wolf Man did not choose the life of horror where he transforms into a hideous wolf during every full moon and hurts others. He did not want people to look at him when he was a wolf and be judged by his appearance. He also did not want to be remembered as the dangerous Wolf Man that he was when he transformed back to a human being. He did want people to think of him as a bad person. He wanted to keep his second, darker, life hidden from everyone.

Just like the Wolf Man, the monster in Frankenstein did not want to be judged as a monster because he did not choose that life. The creature was given that life by Dr. Frankenstein who wanted to create a life no one else could. Both Frankenstein and Count Dracula were selfish because they were only trying to satisfy themselves by hurting others without even thinking of the consequences.

Count Dracula and Frankenstein were both creating something they thought would help enrich their own lives. Count Dracula put a curse on the Wolf Man so that the Wolf Man could harm those that were trying to hurt Count Dracula. Count Dracula used him as a shield so that he did not have to deal with the killing of innocent people himself. He did not care about the Wolf Man’s feelings or how his transformation would affect his life. The Wolf Man did not believe that having a double life would be fulfilling. He did not want the world to remember him as the Wolf Man. Count Dracula did not bother with what the Wolf Man thought as long as he was hurting or murdering the innocent in the night. Van Helsing and Valerious did end up killing Count Dracula which shows that you cannot trust anyone to fight your own battles.

Frankenstein, on the other hand, man-made the creature to show that he could create something from nothing. He did not think the creature would harm anyone. He did not believe that his reasoning for producing him would be a problem. However, the creature wanted a wife and a family. Frankenstein did not think it would be safe to have monsters lurking around. Frankenstein soon realized that his idea of creating a monster as a scientific project was ill fated. It was not before long that Frankenstein realized his success was a tragedy.

The novel Frankenstein and the movie Van Helsing have similar themes through the reasoning of why they were created and how they were treated, and the emotional effect this had on them. The creator of Van Helsing is compelling in bringing Mary Shelley’s ideas to life again. This reflects the ethical dilemma that has been lurking for many years. With that in mind, Mary Shelley’s ideas and knowledge is here to flourish for generations to come.

In the movie, Van Helsing, that was broadcasted in theaters in 2004, Gabriel Van Helsing is the main character who is considered as the “Vampire Slayer.” Unfortunately for him, he was given a curse that led him to not remember his past. When searching for his past, he is led to a land called Transylvania where there are dark creatures that was driven and produced by Count Dracula. Count Dracula is known to be an evil vampire that is known to not be killed by anyone. With that in mind, Van Helsing wants to kill him for good because of the curse that he had put on many people.

Another main character is Anna Valerious. She is also a vampire hunter. She is part of the royal family who once lived on the land until Count Dracula demolished them all. Anna wanted to help Van Helsing destroy the evil monster so that she could bring her family back to life due to the curse that was bestowed upon her, her family, and her friends. Along their way to destroying Count Dracula, the Wolf Man and Frankenstein’s Monster try to stop them.

These scenes in the movie show similarity to the novel Frankenstein because, like the creature, there are monsters throughout the movie. In the novel, there was much fear towards the monster and little compassion for him too. This is shown throughout the movie of Van Helsing especially towards the Wolf Man who did not choose the life that he was given by the Count Dracula. In that case, everyone believes that he is a monster by choice and should be destroyed just like Frankenstein.

Frankenstein was never given a proper home full of compassion. Like the Wolf Man, he was told to destroy Van Helsing and Valerious. Count Dracula did not think that they should no longer be alive because he thought that they would ruin everything that he had worked for by destroying everything in his path so that Transylvania could be his.

The novel Frankenstein and the movie Van Helsing have similar themes through feelings and the physical reenactment of how both monsters were in a sense of how they were built and how they were treated. Both stories show a compelling stand point on how an author for a movie brings Mary Shelley’s ideas to life again. It shows the interest that has been around for many years. With that in mind, Mary Shelley’s ideas and knowledge is here to flourish for generations to come.

“How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful!- Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same coulour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shriveled complexion and straight black lips” (p. 60).

            Mary Shelley brought much of the Genesis story to the limelight in her novel Frankenstein. The Creation Story was the major point of the novel. Shelley describes how the creature was created and made to appear as some sort of monster that everyone would be scared of. In the book of Genesis, God was the Creator of Adam and Eve who also symbolized his greatest work of art. Victor is described as the Creator of the creature. He had control of the monster’s appearance and was portrayed as being the ultimate creator just as was God. He was the one who took complete control of this project and knew it was going to be a great masterpiece.

            In chapter seventeen, Frankenstein tells the doctor that he wants him to create someone of the opposite of sex so that he can have a wife. He did not think Frankenstein was going to want to married another monster like him as his future bride. Just like in the Creation Story, God did not think that Adam and Eve were going to bring sin into the world by eating the apple that the serpent enticed them to eat. This is another correlation with the Genesis story of the creation of Adam and Eve. Victor stated that:

“His words had a strange effect on me. I compassioned him, and sometimes felt a wish to console him; but then I looked upon him, when I saw the filthy mass that moved and talked, my heart sickened, and my feelings were altered to those of horror and hatred. I tried to stifle these sensations; I thought, that I could not sympathise with him, I had no right to withhold from him the small portion of happiness which was yet in my power to bestow” (130).

The creature wanted someone to love. He wanted to share some compassion with someone he would love. Victor was empathetic towards the creature and knew that he wanted someone to love him like any other human being would want to be loved. In the book of Genesis, God wanted Adam and Eve to love each other. He knew he would still love them even though they had both brought sin to the world. He did not shun them unlike Victor who shunned the creature. The creature knew that he was not being given the proper love God gave Adam and Eve.

            In conclusion, it is evident Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was closely founded on the book of Genesis. Her creativity allowed her to make close associations with religion. Readers can look at her novel from different perspectives. No matter what point of view they have, one thing is for sure, Frankenstein keeps discussions alive.

“How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful!- Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same coulour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shriveled complexion and straight black lips” (p. 60).

            Mary Shelley brought much of the Genesis story to the spotlight in her novel Frankenstein. The Creation Story was the key point in the novel. Shelley describes how Frankenstein was created and the way he appeared. In the book of Genesis, God was the Creator of Adam and Eve. Victor in the novel is described as the Creator of the monster. He had control of the monsters appearance and how to act just like God.

 In chapter seventeen, Frankenstein tells the doctor that he wants someone the opposite of sex so that he can have a wife. This is another connection to the Genesis story because Adam and Eve were created. Victor stated that, “his words had a strange effect on me. I compassioned him, and sometimes felt a wish to console him; but then I looked upon him, when I saw the filthy mass that moved and talked, my heart sickened, and my feelings were altered to those of horror and hatred. I tried to stifle these sensations; I thought, that I could not sympathise with him, I had no right to withhold from him the small portion of happiness which was yet in my power to bestow” (130). Victor was empathetic towards Frankenstein and knew that he wanted someone to love him like any other human being would want to be loved. In the book of Genesis, God wanted Adam and Eve to love each other.

            All-in-all Mary Shelley brought much connection to the First Testament of the Bible into the novel. It allowed her to be more creative and to make some association of religion and atheism into it. People can look at it in many different ways, but it shows that Mary Shelley was trying to be imaginative in her own way.

“Be calm! I entreat you to hear me, before you give vent to youre hatred on my devoted head. Have I not suffered enough, but you seek to increase my misery? Life, although it may only be accumulation of anguish, is dear to me, and I will defend it. Remember, thou hast made me more powerful than thyself; my height is superior to thine; my points mroe supple. But I will not be tempted to set myself in opposition to thee. I am thy creature, and I will be even mild and docile in my natural lord and king, if thou wilt also perform thy part, the whih thou owest me. Oh, Frankenstein, be not equitable to every other, and trample upon me alone, to whom thy justice, and even thy clemency and affection, is most due. Remember, that I am thy creature; I ought to be thy Adam; but I am rather the fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy for no misdeed. Every where I see bliss, from which I alone am irrevocably excluded. I was benevolent and good; misery made me a fiend. Made me happy, and I shall again be virtuous” (p. 93-94).

Mary Shelly grew up in a time that was not equal in rights when it came to women and men. Women were a prize to men to show off. Women were to stay at home with children while men were to bring the income to the household. Shelley was married to Percey Shelly. They both lived in a somewhat very mysterious life together. Mary loved Percey very much and thought they were meant to be together for the rest of their lives. Percey ended up committing suicide and left Mary speechless and heartbroken. Frankstein is a book for of her emotions that she went through in her life. Frankstein represents Mary in her life. She wants to show people how she felt growing up in her life with her parents and her one true love, Percey. Not only that, she shows how having a luxurious lifestyle did not show always show the many hidden problems within a family. An example of this would be in Frankenstein:

“The name of the old man was De Lacey. He was descended from a good family in France, where he had lived for many years in affluence respected by his superiors, and beloved by his equals. His son was bred in the service of his country, and Agatha had ranked with aldied of the highest distinction. A few months before my arrival, they had lived in a larege adn luxurious city, called Paris, surrounded by friends, and possessed of every enjoyment with virture, refinement of intellect, or taste, accompanied by a moderate fortuen, could afford” (p. 110-111).

Mary seemed to have wanted to be heard by many through the novel. It shows that she could not bear the thought of being alone anymore. Her one true love left her and now there was nothing for her anymore than to write about her life. She did not believe that money brought happiness because this book shows many clues within that living in a certain lifestyle can bring many problems to a family. She grew up wanting to work hard like her parents did. She knew it was the only way to survive and live a life of enjoyment. She did not think that hiding secrets was the best way to live life. Not everything is meant to be hidden “in the closet.” She thought life should be lived as a one time deal and to just enjoy it with those around you and those you love.

The Kite Runner, was very captivating. I could not put the book down. I had to keep reading it until I was completely finished. This book illustrated the life in the slums of Afghanistan. It brought to life a true story as seen through the eyes of the writer. It dealt with the pain and struggles of a much oppressed people during the emergence of the Taliban. I was thrilled when my teacher decided to make this book a project due in the beginning of the year in high school. The project involved illustrating the thesis of a theme which was love, at times foreign to the reader, found within the story. The project allowed me to broaden my thoughts and leave my comfort zone to discover more creative ways to share both the author’s theme and my feeling about the book and its storyline.

Like Graff said, one must be interested in a subject to create a perfect argument in something you enjoy no matter the circumstance. He believed that it was better to be “street smart” than school smart. “Street smart” is when one is smart outside of academics in their field of interest. With that in mind, I realized my teacher in high school wanted her students to be reading things that were of interest to them. She chose a wide array of books that dealt with different subjects to allow for a diversity of interests. The books chosen came from an assortment of genre from science fiction to autobiographies and everything in between. I chose the Kite Runner by Khaled Hosseini.

The Kite Runner helped me bring my point across for the theme I chose because I was allowed to do a project about something I personally enjoyed reading the most in high school. The class was encouraged to ask questions at the end of the presentation regarding the book and its theme. I knew I would be able to project the essence of “my book” with great confidence. The author was successful at reeling the reader into the depth of the story. The reader “felt” the emotions felt by the main characters of the story. Thanks to my teacher who allowed our class to bring “street smart” into the class by reading a novel we enjoyed and presenting our interest to an audience of our peers, we were all able to share our admiration of our liking in books.

            The Diary of Anne Frank is an autobiography about Anne Frank through her diaries. Her story is about how she lived her life hiding from the Nazis because she was Jewish. She had to hide in a closet behind a bookcase and was never found and captured. She knew her enjoyment of writing was the only thing that could keep her alive. This novel helped me grasp her feelings as a young child hiding herself from others with her family and friends in her town.

            The novel about Anne Frank brought much interest to me due to the background and the compelling story about a young girl who was my age, at the time, going through struggles about her religion. I definitely could not put the book down because to these reasons. Due to the descriptiveness, it allowed me to understand Frank’s feelings and see how she felt during this period in her life, which contributed to my interest in this novel. My curiosity of this novel brought me to think more in depth about the history of that time. I researched many different stories that were written during the time of the Holocaust and the capture of the Jews by the Nazis. Soon after, I was told that I was to do a book report and I chose to do it about The Diary of Anne Frank. I made sure I brought a lot of history into the report because I was also learning about it in my history class. I knew I wanted to give it some more detail because I was very interested in this subject. I wanted to bring a point across that I enjoyed this book. I wanted to make sure that my teacher would let the class do more projects like this in the near future.

            With the wise words of Graff and his opinions on finding interests, reading can be found outside of the classroom. Schools cannot force students to be fond of something through their teachings. Students must find what they enjoy through anything that strikes their eye. It can be found in many ways and forms through magazines, newspapers, and/or a small book. With that in mind, everyone has different interests in the way they read or the type of subject to read. The only way for someone to really enjoy what they are reading ties into how engaged one is through feelings and engagement of the book. This allows everyone to be educated to strike up a conversation and to make an argument. Without reading something one is interested in, no one will be able to bring up a discussion and there will not be many different types of interests.