A Monster Can Be Hard To Define. Describing A Monster Can

First Thesis pretty much says that monsters always are symbols and representations of culture. “The monster is born only at this metaphoric crossroads, as an embodiment of a certain cultural moment of a time, a feeling and a place.”(Monsters

John Gardner’s Grendel and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein both include characters who are labeled as monsters. Grendel and the Monster share common characteristics such as being ugly, strong, large, and they kill others. They are both insecure about their appearance and how society portrays them. Grendel and the Monster use violence to try and cope with their insecurities. In the literary works Grendel and Frankenstein, both the monster’s physical appearance and their interactions with others cause them to become an outcast from society. This leads to rejection of themselves, low self-esteem, and ultimately they create havoc within their communities.

He gives more explanation of the pop culture refe rences, however, than he does of his more esoteric and academic precursors. This means that he expects that his audience is more familiar with the theory surrounding monsters than with m any of the pop icon monsters that have appeared throughout history. Cohen builds a strongly logica l argument that monsters are symbolic of the marginalized groups at the outer edges of c ulture, and in doing so he makes it clear that he feels his audience is well-rounded, academic , well educated and as interested in the theory of monsters as he is himself. Logos is not the only rhetorical device Cohen uses in this article, however. He also uses ethos to connect with his audience, and to differentiate bet

Oxford dictionary defines monster as, “Originally: a mythical creature which is part animal and part human, or combines elements of two or more animal forms, and is frequently of great size and ferocious appearance. Later, more generally: any imaginary creature that is large, ugly, and frightening. (Oxford English Dictionary)” This definition is basic in nature. What must be added is whether it is nature that makes the monster what it is or is it nurture that makes it what it is. In both Beowulf and Frankenstein the monster complex engages, complicates and has an effect on us. Beowulf has to battle Grendel, his mom, and the dragon to do his duty as a warrior, but the monsters only make it more difficult to tell

Asma states, "Monsters can stand as symbols of human vulnerability and crisis, and as such they play imaginative foils for thinking about our own responses to menace.” This means that human weaknesses and fears are represented through monstrous figures, and these fictional situations provide perspective into how we react in fearful environments. In our current society we fear many things, including but not limited to failed or corrupt governmental systems, the afterlife, the unknown, and captivity, which makes this claim valid. Although we may not realize it, these fears are embodied by the horror monsters we see in popular culture. Society shares common fears, and often times the most prevailing fear is reflected in the most popular characters at any given time. Monsters are the fictional representations of society’s dark subconscious, exploring not only why the author’s statement is accurate but what we actually fear.

Throughout history we see monsters taking many different shapes and sizes. Whether it be a ghoul in the midst of a cold nightly stroll or a mass genocide, monsters are lurking everywhere and our perception of what monsters truly are, is enhancing their growth as a force with which to be reckoned. Fear of the unknown is seen throughout time, but as humans progress we are finding that things we once were afraid of we are less frightening than they once were. Monsters can evoke fear in their targeted victims rather than physically harm their victims. For instance, every year a new horror film is released with the next scary beast, but why do we call something a monster even if we know it is not real? Even certain people and creatures are

The monster recounted,”...but I had hardly placed my foot within the door before the children shrieked, and one of the women fainted. The whole village was aroused: some fled, some attacked me, until, grievously bruised by stones and many other kinds of missile weapons”(Shelley 103). This reaction is natural in humans since they have instincts to judge by appearance rather than personality. As the monster stood in their village, they had never seen such a monstrosity, so they reacted with fear. Prejudice towards the monster is strong in that humans create stereotypical judgments about appearances of humanity. The monster’s appearance is one who is eight feet, and could be from a horror movie which suggests a being that could endanger the lives of people. Later in the book, the monster witnesses a girl crashing into a river and struggles to save her, but neglects to notice a man beside her. The man fires at the monster as a result of believing he is harming

A common concept used throughout literature is monsters that are based solely off of the differences characters are able to identify between themselves and another character. This relates to the fourth thesis in Jeffrey Jerome Cohen’s essay titled Monster Culture, where he states that monsters are based on differences. These differences can include “cultural, political, racial, economic, and sexual” (Cohen 7) differences, just to name a few. This thesis is exemplified in many medieval poems, including Bisclavret, by Marie de France, and Beowulf. Bisclavret and Beowulf both exemplify Cohen’s idea of monsters lying at the point of difference by showing that people discriminate and create stereotypes based on these differences.

When monsters are thought of a very distinct picture comes to mind. An ugly creature that is out for blood, born into a life where causing misery is his driving force. Do these features really define what a monster is; works of literature like Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Shakespeare’s Othello tell quite a different story. Monsters are not born but made just as people are not born evil but can sometimes end up there. Othello and the Monster start of as good men looking to be part of society but were pushed out because of what others perceived them to be. This caused them to mentally and physically isolate themselves from everyone allowing hatred to take over. Iago and Frankenstein also helped to instill thoughts

A little girl screams in fear for her parents as she envisions a green, three-eyed monster lurking under her bed, waiting to get her until she finally closes her eyes. A little boy scares fellow trick-or-treaters as he’s dressed as a vampire for Halloween brandishing his pointy teeth with blood dripping out of his mouth. Both of these examples of monsters focus on the physicality of a creature and undermine the weight which the word ‘monster’ actually carries. In Shakespeare’s play, The Tempest, and in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, there are characters that perfectly fit the description of a tangible monster. However, monsters are more than their somatic features. Monsters are created within based on circumstances, decisions that are

In this essay I will examine how the monster’s looks and actions reflect the predominant cultural feelings that those who look different are bad, evil or incapable of normal feelings. That somehow because one may look different from the rest of us there must be something emotionally as well as physically wrong with them.

What is a monster? The word "monster" causes one to imagine a hideous, deformed or nonhuman creature that appears in horror movies and novels and terrifies everyone in its path. More importantly, however, the creature described generally behaves monstrously, doing things which harm society and acting with little consideration for the feelings and safety of others. "Thus, it is the behavior which primarily defines a monster, rather than its physical appearance"(Levine 13).

Monsters have proven to be more than just the fiendish appearance or the evil within such creatures – their monstrosity symbolizes, more or less, the characteristics that define mankind and/or our innermost fears. Prior to this Exploration of the Humanities course, I have interpreted monsters for what they are: heartless and destructive creatures that generate fear. However, I never bothered what the true cause of such fear is – only associating the gruesome presence with a psychological reaction of horror. But taking this class allowed me to broaden my perspective on monsters and monstrosity: humans fear the “Other” because we as individuals have an “Other” within us (subconsciously) that we are not willing to show to those in our

Greek Mythology has influenced many “monsters” we reference in various works of current literature. Anywhere from 3 headed dogs to women with snakes for locks of hair, all of these deformed common things originated from Mythology. Not only do we still reference the monsters themselves in all forms of art today but also we implement the qualities the monsters posses unto characters in our stories.

They may image a mythical creature and say “monster” but when we start to distinguish the differences in them such as a mythical creature they are known by people to be considered medusa or cyclopes. A mythical creature usually is imagined as someone that is either half human/half animal or half human/half god. When imagining a half human/half god mythical monster society may imagine someone or something that is beyond the reach of a living soul. A monster such as human is considered anything that can bring harm to someone. The person that can walk into a house and stab a family of four with no remorse is what people think when thinking about a monster such as Stephen King said in Why we Crave Horror Movies “If we are all insane, then sanity becomes a matter of degree.” since a person that is heartless enough to go into a house and “scare” and “hurt” someone is