Monstrosity In The Monster

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, a monster is described as “part animal and part human”, “ferocious”, “ugly”, and “frightening”. Yet at the same time, a monster can be “amazing” and “extraordinary” . From these characteristics alone, a monster can essentially be anything. In the literal sense, a monster is perceived to be large and physically grotesque, however inner qualities of monstrosity can be easily masked, and are therefore often overlooked. Three 19th century novels, Frankenstein, Sherlock Holmes: The Sign of Four, and The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde reveal both physical and mental qualities of monstrosity through the characters and demonstrate how these qualities relate to one another.

The characteristics of different monsters from various places and eras, can easily be compared to cultural boundaries among humans being broken, established, accepted, and rejected. The article goes on to discuss the relationship between monsters and cultural lines that in the eyes of many cannot be traversed. Monsters can be considered beings with two purposes, their story, and their function or impact in historical culture (21). Difference, in the world, is often viewed as unacceptable, even at times a form of contamination. Monsters seems to fall right into that topic category when discussing cultural differences and similarities that are often found established. Boundaries such a sexual purity, gender norms, and other lifestyle implications often are crossed by monsters and their roles they take on in media, literature and other forms of entertainment. They are hiding in personal identities, cultural norms, and hidden desires from within. With that being said, perhaps it is necessary to take into account whether monsters not only symbolize differences and boundary crossing in old and existing cultures across the world, but if they also represent the desire behind those differences that influence

Like all words, “monster” has multiple definitions, and more than just these two. But what monsters really are are tools that society uses. Monsters are a storytelling tool used so we can reflect on ourselves, others, and society, without directly comparing specific living people or cultures. By using monsters to reflect on ourselves, we can analyze our own actions, decisions, and morality. How would someone act when getting attacked by a monster?

The next thesis proposed by Cohen is that a monster is the harbinger of category crisis. In order to feel comfortable about places, people, and things in the word, we tend to group things into categories. All of these are placed in categories typically by physical appearance and certain traits that tend to stick out. Well, what’s scary about monsters is that they tend to be unnatural and not just fit into one category, but rather many different categories. One of the most common characters described by this thesis is Count Dracula, a monster that is neither dead nor alive. When one cannot be distinguished into a basic category this tends to frighten us because it goes against one of our common norms. He breaks our human-made laws of nature. Along with the violations of our norm groups, monsters also tend as an act to forewarn our cultures of crisis. The creator of Frankenstein can be seen as an act to

The idea of what a monster is and how it pertains to modern day society has fascinated readers and writers for decades. Before taking this class, I was aware of what a monster is and the function it served in today’s society. Furthermore, after taking this class, I am now aware of what a monster truly is, and what really separates a monster from a regular person. The piece of text that I mainly chose to focus on and elaborate closely to demonstrate the aspects of a monster is appropriately named, Monster, by Walter Dean Myers. The reason I chose this piece of literature is because, Monster thoroughly elaborates what a monster is in todays society and how it functions in the modern day world. In this essay I will elaborate on

When people hear the word monster, they usually picture in their minds images of vampires, zombies, demons, ghouls, or other physical supernatural beings. However, today's society contains its own modern monsters contained in minds of people or in systems in society, as opposed to some type of physical entity. Examples for modern monsters of today can be pressure and apathy, but caring too much has more effect and negative results rather than apathy’s effect of caring too little.

“As monstrous races faded from popularity, the increased focus on unnatural or monstrous individuals added new interest in the long-standing philosophical and theological debates about whether or not monsters could be human and where monsters fit within God’s ordered universe […] philosophers and theologians in both the medieval period and the Renaissance often interpreted these monstrous individuals as carrying a specific meaning for the community into which they were born (Wright 6).”

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.

The more we begin to understand a monstrosity, the less we fear the monster itself, however, we fear the actions of the creature itself. Perhaps it is this fear that draws us closer to the unknown and the monsters thrive upon this fear we have. Asma discusses how this fear allows for individuals to play out scenarios in their minds; we then use the events to ultimately ask ourselves, “what will I do in a situation like that (Asma)?” Dating back to the early days of Christ in a biblical era, we see monsters have always been on the rise.

What defines a monster? Is it their grotesque, unnatural appearance that separates them from the rest of mankind, or is it their lack of remorse and compassion that makes them different? The word monster conjures up figures from gothic horror of exotic peoples with horrifyingly exaggerated features, and the kinds of impossible delusive beasts inhabiting the pages of medieval bestiaries. Well at first I thought exactly that. When I used to hear the word “monster”, my mind immediately pictured the petrifying beast that took residence under my bed for a substantial portion of my childhood. It had demonic beating red eyes, razor sharp teeth that glistened with fresh blood and amphibian like scales covering every inch of its enormous body. However, as I got older, I started to realize that there was no such thing as monsters and that it was all just a figment of my imagination. Accordingly, the fear of the monster under my bed slowly dissipated. Nevertheless, it wasn’t until after reading a quote by my favorite author, Steven King, that I was finally able to fully comprehend what the true definition of the word “monster” really was. “Monsters are real, ghosts are real too. They live inside us, and sometimes they win”. It had taken me awhile to truly grasp what King had meant, but then it clicked. Everyone has a monster inside them, dormant or not. That monster is the voice we hear in the back of our heads, urging us to cheat or to steal, and in some instances, worse. That monster

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

In mythology, monsters provide a challenge that humans must overcome. Heroes try to gain fame by defeating them and townspeople are afraid of them. Monsters spread fear for men to conquer. They give the opportunity for heroes to prove themselves. According to Mr. Thomas Bullfinch, “monsters are unnatural in proportions and parts and are employed for the injury and annoyance of men (Bullfinch 1).” Monsters do have strange parts and a common purpose. In Greek mythology, monsters have striking similarities. They fall into distinct categories based on form and duty. Monsters may be part snake, lion, or human. Some have multiple heads. Most monsters’ duties include guarding something for another being. Other monsters have no responsibilities

Stories of monsters have captivated readers attention since the very beginning even though the definition of what a monster is perceived to be is complex and vague. The word monster and its meaning in today’s culture is very opinionated. Most people think of monsters in an evil sense because of what todays pop-culture has depicted a monster out to be. Shelley’s and Wilde’s intentions for monsters were not to be taken out of context from how they originated. Shelly and Wilde saw monsters in the people and in the world surrounding them. Upon viewing this they recognized the true fear of determining one's identity. Once they viewed this event through the eyes of the people, they deemed necessary that they should provide a lesson by writing Frankenstein and The Picture of Dorian Gray. The lesson of the two books are that if the creator can not handle the responsibilities of the creation process, then the creation will fail. If the creation fails, then ultimately the creator fails and the true colors of mankind are shown.

The concept of the monstrous is such a fearful one in literature due to its unfamiliarity, but also due to its ambiguity. Elizabeth Grosz gives a modern definition of the monstrous as “an ambiguous being whose existence imperils categories and oppositions dominant in social life.” Grosz discusses this in terms of the opposition of binary terms such as “male/female” and “man/demon.” Hybridity and ambiguity often carry grotesque connotations, and therefore are rejected by society. This is why monsters are often feared in literature; their otherness is foreign, and therefore must be evil. Arising from this ambiguous definition are “anxieties about fragmentation, about the disruption or destruction of any narcissistically informed sense of personal stability, body integrity, immortal individuality” (Palmer 152). Although critic Paulina Palmer uses this in her discussion of border-crossing and queer theory, I believe that this same definition of monstrosity can be used when discussing racial identities. At the very nature of ambiguity is the concept that it cannot be defined. Appiah rejects the concept of race and any binary system in his essay, saying there is no single definition to satisfy any one racial claim (Appiah 65). However, the monstrous can go so far as to eliminate all racial identities as well. Racial identities, while more ambiguous than binary systems or race itself, still uphold a level of ascription and identification that the monstrous can eliminate. Appiah concludes his essay by claiming that ascription is not upheld by all, and at times one cannot choose their own identity. Therefore, Appiah says that to truly eliminate racism, one must move past racial identities as well. Instead, the focus should be on respecting an individual person before respecting any of their identities (Appiah 135). By applying Grosz’s definition of the monstrous, not only does the insertion of a monster eliminate Othello’s racial identity in the play, it has the ability to eliminate racial identities altogether.