Self-Reflection

I decided to revise essay number 3, the one where we compared a movie to the novel. I chose this one because I felt I could elaborate on how Kenneth Branagh changed Victor’s character. I touched on that idea in my conclusion, but it left several unanswered questions. I tried to answer those questions by expanding on my conclusion. I also added support to my earlier arguments about the movie and the novel by adding quotes from the text.

I think I made this essay into one that is even stronger than it was originally. It was my strongest essay which meant there wasn’t much wrong with the surface argument. However, it could use the support and I could afford to go further into Branagh’s mucking about with Victor’s character rather than worrying about fixing a surface argument as well.

I still have problems with conclusions. I made some progress on changing them from the repeating the entire essay. I still feel that the conclusion still sound strange. I think I was able to get a narrow focus for the essays which is one of the main points of essay writing. However, I have some problems narrowing a focus for certain areas in different classes. That is something I need to work on. Overall, I believe I have strengthened my writing this semester and want to continue to my efforts on the essay’s focus and the conclusion in order to strengthen my writing even more.

Original: How Does Death Make You Feel?

There have been many ways of reading the novel Frankenstein just as there have been many ways to portray it on film. One of the more recent films of this novel is the 1994 Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein by Kenneth Branagh. This film takes the character of Victor Frankenstein and highlights the psychological issues he has with death, especially the death of a beloved woman in his life. This theme almost overcomes the film, hampering its impact with too many dramatics. There are two vivid scenes that bring this concept to life, so to speak. Through the death scene of Victor’s mother and the resurrection scene of Elizabeth, Kenneth Branagh’s film displays the psychological issues of Victor more obviously than the novel’s more subtle portrayal of them.

The entire basis of Victor’s research in both the film and the novel is the resurrection of human beings. He begins on this selfish quest because he cannot deal with the death of his mother and feels that he has to bring her back to him, egotistically deciding to play God. While Victor’s mother dies of sickness in the novel, she dies of childbirth in the film. This sparks the assumption that death is connected to birth and therefore, figures into the process of resurrection. The scene is created with complete dramatics. It is almost as if there is a big neon sign that screams, ‘Look, here is where Victor decides to pursue resurrection science. Here is where he starts on his path of insanity.’

There is no dialogue in this scene save for Victor screaming, “No!” as the camera slowly takes an aerial shot away from him standing over his dead mother’s body. He feels that there is no other way to express his grief, giving himself completely to the dramatics of the scene, while other people might have collapsed only to recover later on, as Elizabeth did. He takes it upon himself as a ‘holy’ mission to find a way to stop death since he feels his mother was taken away from him too soon. In his vision of the world, no one should have to die.

Aside from discovering his scientific mission, not much good comes from Victor’s desire to resurrect. Instead, murder and death follow Victor as the creature chases him back to his home. Victor does think that he would make great contributions to science if he figures out resurrection, but it instead brings pain. However, he decides to give the resurrection one more try once his love, Elizabeth, is killed by the monster. This is rather selfish of him since he refuses to resurrect Justine for the monster and refuses even to continue with his work after the monster is created. However, all these refusals to the creature mean nothing when it is Elizabeth who is dead. Victor cannot bear to have any of the women he loves die, not when he has finally discovered a way to bring them back. It is almost as if he is given a second chance, for his discovery was too late and too monstrous to save his mother, but it is not too late or too monstrous to save his wife. It shows how far over the edge he is pushed after Elizabeth’s death because if he had been reacting rationally, he would have remembered the horror of the first creature and would have wished to spare his wife the trial.

This reanimation scene is chaotic, parts being thrown on the floor and light flashing. She does not seem to understand what has happened to her at first. She acts like a child. The camera focuses on the faces of the two, the vacant look of Elizabeth and the crazed look of Victor. The camera also swirls as they dance, paralleling the confusion Elizabeth must be feeling. Victor tries to remind her of who she is, but once she does realize, she takes her reanimation badly.

The reanimation of Elizabeth after her death is a fabrication for the film. In the novel, the murder of Elizabeth sets Victor on a path to destroy the creature. In the film, Victor has always tried to destroy the creature. Elizabeth’s murder pushes his psychological issue over the edge to the point that he is actually crazed. In the novel, Victor never made it that far. Any issues he has are more understated, underlying problems that never fully surfaced. After creating the creature in the novel, Victor is ‘cured’ of his psychological issues, or at least, knows how to control them. Victor is able to refuse the creature when asked to make him a mate because he sees that his research is leading him into monstrosity. He is also able to resist the temptation of using his research to bring any other loved ones back from the dead. He sees that he was being selfish, that he was wrongly trying to play God.

Elizabeth’s reaction to being made into a being like the creature is parallel to the reaction Victor has in the novel once he actually succeeds in bring the creature to life. Victor never expects his experiment to work in the novel, though he does expect it to work in the film. He is horrified at what he has done, just as she is horrified at what she has become. He tries to destroy his creation, just as Elizabeth destroys herself once she fully realizes what Victor has done to her. Elizabeth has more success when it comes to destruction because she actually commits suicide while Victor is never able to catch up with his creature and destroy him. In fact, Victor is the first to be ‘destroyed’, to die, rather than the creature.

The Kenneth Branagh film expands on what could have happened in the novel if Victor’s personality had been stronger or if he had given his research a second try. The novel gives Victor as more passive demeanor, trusting the readers to infer his psychological issues and factor these ideas into the rest of the novel as they wish. Just as there are many ways to read the novel, there are many ways to create a film version of Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. Branagh just noticed the psychological issues when reading the novel and decided that they were an important theme to highlight in the film. The portrayal of the psychological issues end up hindering the film’s impact instead of heightening it because Victor comes off as too dramatic a character unlike the character in the novel to whom the reader could relate.

Final: How Does Death Make You Feel Expansion

There have been many ways of reading the novel, Frankenstein, just as there have been many ways to portray it on film. One of the more recent films of this novel is the 1994 Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein by Kenneth Branagh. This film takes the character of Victor Frankenstein and highlights the psychological issues he has with death, especially the death of a beloved woman in his life. This theme almost overcomes the film, hampering its impact with too many dramatics. There are two vivid scenes that bring this concept to life, so to speak. Through the death scene of Victor’s mother and the resurrection scene of Elizabeth, Kenneth Branagh’s film displays the psychological issues of Victor more obviously than the novel’s more subtle portrayal of them. The focus on the psychological issues of Victor changes his character in fundamental ways. It is as if the dramatics of his issues cause Victor himself to become a more dramatic character who acts differently than he would in the novel.

The entire basis of Victor’s research in both the film and the novel is the resurrection of human beings. He begins on this selfish quest because he cannot deal with the death of his mother and feels that he has to bring her back to him, egotistically deciding to play God. While Victor’s mother dies of sickness in the novel, she dies of childbirth in the film. This sparks the assumption that death is connected to birth and therefore, figures into the process of resurrection. The scene is created with complete dramatics. It is almost as if there is a big neon sign that screams, ‘Look, here is where Victor decides to pursue resurrection science. Here is where he starts on his path of insanity.’

There is no dialogue in this scene save for Victor screaming, “No!” as the camera slowly takes an aerial shot away from him standing over his dead mother’s body. He feels that there is no other way to express his grief, giving himself completely to the dramatics of the scene, while other people might have collapsed only to recover later on, as Elizabeth did. He takes it upon himself as a ‘holy’ mission to find a way to stop death, since he feels his mother was taken away from him too soon. In his vision of the world, no one should have to die. This overreaching display of grief is out of character with the Victor in Shelley’s novel. He keeps most of his grief quietly to himself. He feels he must be strong for Elizabeth, who in turn feels she must be strong for William. He says after her death, “My mother was dead, but we had still duties to perform” (Frankenstein, 50). The death scene in the movie gets a good five to ten minutes of airtime, while in the novel; his mother’s death gets about a page. Considering the detail the author puts in other parts of the novel, the fact that the death has a relatively small part mirrors the hiding of grief Victor does and that, while its important, it is one of many important details of Victor’s life. The reader must interpret it for his- or herself. The idea to find a way to resurrect the dead is his only overt sign of the psychological scars his mother’s death left on him.

There were also more factors within the novel that help Victor come to the conclusion that he could resurrect life. The outdated science books of Agrippa et al. send him down the path of alchemy-based science, which is encouraged by one of his teachers at school. The books and his teacher are touched on in the film, but they are used differently. Victor in the novel must use the knowledge he gained from the books he read to come up with his entire experiment. He also does not know the people from whom he stole the body parts. Victor in the film reads the books once, and then, once he gets to school, the experiment is already mostly complete, all he has to do is perfect it. The watcher sees the feverish Victor in the lab, but fails to see the more gruesome aspects such as Victor digging in the graveyard for all the body parts from the different people. The only stealing of body parts the watcher sees is when Victor takes his teacher’s brain. That gives the watcher a different Victor than Shelley intended, one who reaches for others’ ideas, one who becomes a defining example of the typical ‘mad’ scientist.

Aside from discovering his scientific mission, not much good comes from Victor’s desire to resurrect. Instead, murder and death follow Victor as the creature chases him back to his home. Victor does think that he would make great contributions to science if he figures out resurrection, but it brings pain instead. In the movie, however, he decides to give the resurrection one more try once his love, Elizabeth, is killed by the monster. This is rather selfish of him since he refuses to resurrect Justine for the monster and refuses even to continue with his work after the monster is created. However, all these refusals to the creature mean nothing when it is Elizabeth who is dead. Victor cannot bear to have any of the women he loves die, not when he has finally discovered a way to bring them back. It is almost as if he is given a second chance, for his discovery was too late and too monstrous to save his mother, but it is not too late or too monstrous to save his wife. The workshop in the attic of his home reflects this because the watcher sees the body parts of Justine and Elizabeth strewn over the floor, blood dripping on the tables. Earlier in the movie, he would have abhorred any of his family seeing this sight, much less be a part of it. He stopped Elizabeth from seeing his first experiment and now she has become his second. It shows how far over the edge Elizabeth’s death pushed him because if he had been reacting rationally, he would have remembered the horror of the first creature and would have wished to spare his wife the trial.

The reanimation scene is chaotic, parts being thrown on the floor and lights flashing. Once Elizabeth is awake after being remade, she does not seem to understand what has happened to her at first. She acts like a child. The camera focuses on the faces of the two, the vacant look of Elizabeth and the crazed look of Victor. The camera also swirls as they dance, paralleling the confusion Elizabeth must be feeling. Victor tries to remind her of who she is, but once she does realize, she takes her reanimation badly.

The reanimation of Elizabeth after her death is a fabrication for the film. In the novel, the murder of Elizabeth sets Victor on a path to destroy the creature. In the film, Victor has always tried to destroy the creature. Elizabeth’s murder pushes his psychological issue over the edge to the point that he is actually crazed. In the novel, Victor never made it that far. There are no dramatics about how love must live anew because he cannot live without it. Any issues he has are more understated, underlying problems that never fully surface. After creating the creature in the novel, Victor is ‘cured’ of his psychological issues, or at least, knows how to control them. He shows the change beginning when he talks of Clerval, how he sees “the image of [his] former self…inquisitive and anxious” in his friend (Frankenstein, 139). Victor is able to finally refuse the creature when asked to make him a mate because he sees that his research is leading him into monstrosity. He asks if he has “a right…to inflict this curse upon everlasting generations” meaning that he has stopped rationalizing the creation of a female creature (Frankenstein, 144). He is also able to resist the temptation of using his research to bring any other loved ones back from the dead. He sees that he was being selfish, that he was wrongly trying to play God. The Victor in the novel learned from his first experiment, the creature, whereas the movie Victor gives into his psychological scars, the driving force behind his decision to resurrect Elizabeth.

Elizabeth’s reaction to being made into a being like the creature is parallel to the reaction Victor has in the novel once he actually succeeds in bringing the creature to life. Victor never expects his experiment to work in the novel, though he does expect it to work in the film. He is horrified at what he has done, just as Elizabeth is horrified at what she has become. He tries to destroy his creation, just as Elizabeth destroys herself once she fully realizes what Victor has done to her. After telling Walton how he missed his friends and wishes to be with them again, he says, “I must pursue and destroy the being to whom I gave existence…and I may die” (Frankenstein, 181). His wife only sees herself as the monster and something that must be destroyed; she blames herself instead of Victor who made her that way. Elizabeth has more success when it comes to destruction because she actually commits suicide while Victor is never able to catch up with his creature and destroy him. In fact, Victor is the first to be ‘destroyed’, to die, rather than the creature.

The Kenneth Branagh film expands on what could have happened in the novel if Victor’s personality had been stronger or if he had given his research a second try. The novel gives Victor a more passive demeanor, trusting the readers to infer his psychological issues and factor these ideas into the rest of the novel as they wish. Just as there are many ways to read the novel, there are many ways to create a film version of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Branagh just noticed the psychological issues when reading the novel and decided that they were an important theme to highlight in the film. The portrayal of the psychological issues ends up hindering the film’s impact instead of heightening it; Victor comes off as too dramatic a character unlike the character in the novel to whom the reader could relate.

The film’s Victor brings to mind the overused phrase, drama queen. He overreacts to every event that happens in his life, though those events are abnormal at best. Shelley knew that no one would be able to relate to the events that happen to Victor, so she created a character to which people can relate. The novel Victor is the stereotypical ‘nerd’; he is a rather meek and quiet guy who is really only interested in science. He has his problems like everyone else though his may be a bit more extreme and he reacts to them with fear. That would be most peoples’ reaction. Branagh’s film version of Victor is one trying to be a dramatic hero, someone people read about, but they do not or can not relate to. His first reaction is to kill the creature and he does not have much fear toward it.

The fear Branagh’s Victor shows to the creature is only a mild feeling, one he shoves aside in order to actually do something about his creation. This Victor takes immediate action against the creature instead of waiting and hoping it dies on its own. In a way, Branagh’s Victor is a stronger character than Shelley’s Victor. Shelley’s Victor tells Walton, “I escaped, and rushed down the stairs…fearing each sound” (Frankenstein, 61). He is referring to when he beheld his creature alive, realizing it was wrong of him to create it. Branagh’s Victor comes to the same conclusion; however, when he sees his creature, he quickly takes the conveniently-placed ax from the wall and goes after his creation. He also takes more action at his school. Shelley’s Victor hides his interest in the alchemy-based sciences once he is attacked for that belief by a teacher. He only talks about it with his mentor-teacher. This Victor also keeps his idea of an experiment to himself. Branagh’s Victor brings it up in class in front of the other students, never backing down from his belief in that science. He brags about bringing someone to life with his mentor-teacher and Henry and then succeeds in doing so.

The dynamic of the novel is changed to fit with a focus on the psychological issues in the movie. It does not give the watcher as much room for interpretation that the reader has from Shelley’s novel. The beauty of the novel is the multiple ways it can be read with many themes. The movie shoves the psychological issues in the face of the watcher, pushing that as the only real focus, which changes Victor’s character. Only a reader focused on the psychological issues concerning death would think to have Victor resurrect Elizabeth when it is clear from other sections that the scientist would never play God again. The movie gives one person’s interpretation of the novel for the world to judge. The real question is: how would Mary Shelley take this narrow view of her novel on the big screen?

Final: Lost In Story or Lost In Form?

Patchwork Girl is a hypertext, a computer-based combination of text and images. Some more progressive people will say that a hypertext is the new novel, the next step in literary technology. However, can a hypertext be a novel if it does not follow the traditional ideals an actual print novel portrays? A print novel follows a linear style when telling its story; it has an easily followed chronological order. It is also what people are used to, the way reading has been performed for centuries. One usually forgets that he or she is reading a novel at all; the turning of the pages is basically automatic. With a hypertext, the medium in which it is presented is glaring the reader in face. There is no way to forget that one is reading a hypertext. This electronic form gives the reader a choice as to where the story goes. A traditional novel gives the reader no choice except for the choice to read or not read the novel. With the electronic medium, the reader has to be especially active, the opposite of passive pleasure reading, although akin to the close reading of novels. Patchwork Girl is not a novel; rather, it is a hypertext which achieves different ideals than a novel.

Patchwork Girl does not follow a linear chronological order. Instead it jumps between the female creature in America to Mary Shelley in London and other parts of the tale. There is a story with a linear line running through it contained within the text of Patchwork Girl. However, the line is not easily followed because the links do not follow a linear line themselves. Sven Birkerts, author of The Gutenberg Elegies, describes the need for chronological order in novels as related to history. “History as we all studied it in school depended not just on the idea of chronological sequence, but also on fixed coordinates of space and time,” he says in his epilogue (Birkerts, 214). In a way many novels are to be taken as histories, not of real battles or anything, but of the history of the main character. That involves a chronological sequence, even a need for it one could say. Even with the use of flashbacks or flash forwards, there is still a followable sequence. Even the most flexible books, the Choose Your Own Adventure books, have continuous chronological sequences. The path the reader takes follows a definite timeline whereas the path the reader takes in this hypertext could take them from London to America in a single click. Patchwork Girl has definite coordinates in space and time, but it does not follow a chronological sequence. There are important events that happen at each location or each point in space as well as at certain times. Those events will not change even if or when the chronological order changes.

Birkerts goes on to define the word duration as, “deep time, time experienced without the awareness of time passing” (Birkerts, 219). If someone gets into a book, time has no meaning anymore. There is no need for an outside idea of time, only the time frame within the novel matters. With Patchwork Girl, the clock of the computer is right there staring the reader in the face. That makes it hard to forget that any time is passing at all, since the reader cannot ignore the clock. It also is hard to get into, hard to get lost in, because there is no real story to get lost in. The reader can get lost, but gets lost trying to follow the links and find a linear story line. The linear line is there, but the reader has to search for it in order to follow the time sequence. Patchwork Girl works through general underlying themes set apart rather than blending them in with the linear storyline. With a novel, the reader is floating in his or her mind, his or her imagination, without having to figure out how to make it to that state of mind. The way a novel works is the reader is supposed to be able to lose themselves in the story, not in text patched together or links which many people do not understand how to use.

There is an unfamiliarity to the hypertext compared to the traditional novel. Birkerts says that he finds hypertexts to be “stylistically uninspired” (Birkerts, 151). A novel is tailored to get an emotional response from the reader; the characters are meant to be relatable. With Jackson’s hypertext, a reader maybe able to relate to the characters housed within the interface. However, the reader may find it hard to generate any sort of response besides confusion to the events that occur to the characters. The reader cannot respond to the situation because it is hard to tell what the situation even is when it comes to Patchwork Girl. The form itself of a hypertext lends itself to unfamiliarity as well. It is stark black text against a glowing screen which if looked at for too long hurts the eyes. The print of a novel is softer, easier to handle. It is also familiar to people which makes it more personal to the people who read it. This unfamiliarity adds to the fact that people cannot lose themselves in the hypertext of Patchwork Girl. People will only lose themselves when they feel safe enough to do so and the familiarity of the print novel promotes this.

The hypertext is promoting process over the product. Birkerts goes so far to say that it is the simple act of “writing on the computer [that] promotes process over product” (Birkerts, 158). The interface of Patchwork Girl is unfamiliar and glares at the reader. The reader must know the technology in order to use this medium, but with a book all the reader has to be able to do is read and turn a page. The electronic glow/lack of tangible page turning makes it obvious to the reader that they are dealing with something new. It makes it harder to get into the story, which in turn is made even harder because the ’story’ is more subjective/theme orientated. The traditional novel focuses on the text and story held within the text. The hypertext promotes the medium in which the text is written in over the actual text itself. Because of this promotion of the medium, the text falls by the wayside; it is just an addition to help promote the themes rather than the focus where the themes come from. Even though many people can use the advanced technology of today, Patchwork Girl has become outdated, only adding to the unfamiliarity. The reader must spend time figuring out how to get to the text before he or she can even think about losing time in the storyworld. Once he or she gets to the text, it is separated into short chunks which mean there is nothing to get lost in, just themes which one agrees or disagrees with but does not get lost in.

Novels used to be the status symbol among people. The more novels the person had, the more influential they were in their society, the richer they were. Technology is becoming the new status symbol among people. And the reasons it is becoming the status symbol are vastly different than the novels. Novels meant the person was educated which lended itself nicely to an influential post in society. Technology simply means the person has the money to spend on it, nothing more. As technology continues to rise, people may see a change in the definition of the novel.

Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber and Faber, Inc. 2006

Evaluation

I feel that my conclusion was good this time, not one of simply repeating what was already stated. I still feel that my voice comes through. I feel that I may not have used Birkerts enough in my essay, perhaps relayed on my own voice too much.

Paper 4: Second Draft (Still Rough)

Patchwork Girl is a hypertext, a computer-based combination of text and images. Some more progressive people will say that a hypertext is the new novel, the next step in literary technology. However, can a hypertext be a novel if it does not follow the traditional ideals an actual print novel portrays? A print novel follows a linear style when telling its story; it has an easily followed chronological order. It is also what people are used to, the way reading has been performed for centuries. One usually forgets that they are reading a novel at all; the turning of the pages is basically automatic. With a hypertext, the medium in which it is presented is glaring the reader in face. There is no way to forget that one is reading a hypertext. A hypertext gives the reader a choice in where the story goes. A traditional novel gives the reader no choice except for the choice to read or not read the novel. With a hypertext, the reader has to be especially active, the opposite of passive pleasure reading, though akin to the close reading of novels. Patchwork Girl is not a novel; rather, it is a hypertext which achieves different ideals than a novel.

Patchwork Girl does not follow a linear chronological order. Instead it jumps between the female creature in America to Mary Shelley in London and other parts of the tale. There is a story with a linear line running through it contained within the text of the hypertext. However, it is not easily followed because the links do not follow a linear line themselves. Sven Birkerts, author of The Gutenberg Elegies, describes the need for chronological order in novels as related to history. “History as we all studied it in school depended not just on the idea of chronological sequence, but also on fixed coordinates of space and time,” he says in his epilogue. In a way many novels are to be taken as histories, not of real battles or anything, but of the history of the main character. That involves a chronological sequence, even a need for it one could say. Even with the use of flashbacks or flash forwards, there is still a followable sequence. Even the most flexible books, the Choose Your Own Adventure books, have continuous chronological sequences. The path the reader takes follows a definite timeline whereas the path the reader takes in this hypertext could take them from London to America in a single click. Patchwork Girl has definite coordinates in space and time, but it doesn’t follow a chronological sequence. There are important events that happen at each location or each point in space as well as at certain times. Those events will not change even when the chronological order changes.

Birkerts goes on to define the word duration as, “deep time, time experienced without the awareness of time passing.”  If someone gets into a book, time has no meaning anymore. There is no need for an outside idea of time, only the time frame within the novel matters. With Patchwork Girl, the clock of the computer is right there staring the reader in the face. That makes it hard to forget that any time is passing at all, since the reader cannot ignore the clock. It also is hard to get into, hard to get lost in, because there is no real story to get lost in. The reader can get lost, but gets lost trying to follow the links and find a linear story line. The linear line is there, but the reader has to search for it in order to follow the time sequence. Patchwork Girl works through general underlying themes set apart rather than blending them in with the linear storyline. The way a novel works is the reader is supposed to be able to lose themselves in the story, not in text patched together or links which many people do not understand how to use.

There is an unfamiliarity to the hypertext compared to the traditional novel. A novel is tailored to get an emotional response from the reader; the characters are meant to be relatable. With Jackson’s hypertext, a reader maybe able to relate to the characters housed within the interface. However, the reader may find it hard to generate any sort of response besides confusion to the events that occur to the characters. The reader cannot respond to the situation because it is hard to tell what the situation even is when it comes to the hypertext. The form itself of a hypertext lends itself to unfamiliarity as well. It is stark black text against a glowing screen which if looked at for too long hurts the eyes. The print of a novel is softer, easier to handle. It is also familiar to people which makes it more personal to the people who read it. This unfamiliarity adds to the fact that people cannot lose themselves in the hypertext. People will only lose themselves when they feel safe enough to do so and the familiarity of the print novel promotes this.

The hypertext is promoting process over the product. The interface of the hypertext is unfamiliar and glares at the reader. The reader must know the technology in order to use a hypertext, but with a book all the reader has to be able to do is read and turn a page. The electronic glow/lack of tangible page turning makes it obvious to the reader that they are dealing with something new. It makes it harder to get into the story, which in turn is made even harder because the ’story’ is more subjective/theme orientated. The traditional novel focuses on the text and story held within the text. The hypertext promotes the medium in which the text is written in over the actual text itself. Because of this promotion of the medium, the text falls by the wayside; it is just an addition to help promote the themes rather than the focus where the themes come from. Even though many people can use the advanced technology of today, Patchwork Girl has become outdated, only adding to the unfamiliarity. The reader must spend time figuring out how to get to the text before he or she can even think about losing time in a storyworld. Once he or she gets to the text, it is separated which means there is nothing to get lost in, just themes which one agrees or disagrees with but does not get lost in.

Novels used to be the status symbol among people. The more novels the person had, the more influential they were in their society, the richer they were. Technology is becoming the new status symbol among people. And the reasons it is becoming the status symbol are vastly different than the novels. Novels meant the person was educated which lended itself nicely to an influential post in society. Technology simply means the person has the money to spend on it, nothing more. As technology continues to rise, people may see a change in the definition of the novel.

Paper 4 Draft (ROUGH)

Patchwork Girl is a hypertext, a computer-based combination of text and images. Some more progressive people will say that a hypertext is the new novel, the next step in literary technology. However, can a hypertext be a novel if it does not follow the traditional ideals an actual print novel portrays? A print novel follows a linear style when telling its story; it has an easily followed chronological order. It is also what people are used to, the way reading has been performed for centuries. One usually forgets that they are reading a novel at all, the turning of the pages is basically automatic. With a hypertext, the medium in which it is presented is glaring the reader in face. There is no way to forget that one is reading a hypertext. A hypertext gives the reader choice in where the story goes. A traditional novel gives the reader no choice except for the choice to read or not read the novel. With a hypertext, the reader has to be active which is the opposite of pleasure reading where the reader can be passive. Patchwork Girl is not a novel; rather, it is a hypertext which achieves different ideals than a novel.

Patchwork Girl does not follow a linear chronological order. Instead it jumps between the female creature in America to Mary Shelley in London and other parts of the tale. There is a story with a linear line running through it contained within the text of the hypertext. However, it is not easily followed because the links do not follow a linear line themselves. “History as we all studied it in school depended not just on the idea of chronological sequence, but also on fixed coordinates of space and time,” is how Birkerts describes the need for chronological order in novels. Patchwork Girl has definite coordinates in space and time, but it doesn’t follow a chronological sequence. In a way many novels are to be taken as histories, not of real battle or anything, but of the history of the main character. That involves a chronological sequence, even a need for it one could say. Even with the use of flashbacks or flash forwards, there is still a followable sequence. Even the most flexible books, the Choose Your Own Adventure books, have continuous chronological sequences. The path the reader takes follows a definite timeline whereas the path the reader takes in a hypertext could take them from London to America in a single click.

Birkert defines the word duration as, “deep time, time experienced without the awareness of time passing.”  If someone gets into a book, time has no meaning anymore. With Patchwork Girl, the clock of the computer is right there staring the reader in the face. That makes it hard to forget that any time is passing at all, since the reader cannot ignore the clock. It also is hard to get into, hard to get lost in, because there is no real story to get lost in. The reader can get lost, but the reader gets lost trying to follow the links and find a linear story line. The linear line is there, but the reader has to search for it in order to follow the time sequence. The way of novel works is the reader is supposed to be able to lose themselves in the story, not in text patched together or links which many people do not understand how to use.

The hypertext is promoting process over the product. The interface of the hypertext is unfamiliar and glares at the reader. The reader must know the technology in order to use a hypertext, but with a book all the reader has to be able to do is read and turn a page. The electronic glow/lack of tangible page turning makes it obvious to the reader that they are dealing with something new. It makes it harder to get into the story, which in turn is made even harder because the ’story’ is more subjective/theme orientated. The traditional novel focuses on the text and story held within the text. The hypertext promotes the medium in which the text is written in over the actual text itself. Because of this promotion of the medium, the text falls by the wayside; it is just an addition to help promote the themes rather than the focus where the themes come from.

One major part of Jackson’s hypertext, Patchwork Girl, involves taking quotes from other works and piecing them together to make new sentences. In a traditional novel, this would be frowned upon. The traditional novel is supposed to have original wording for whatever subject or theme the author chooses. Some traditional novels take inspiration from other works, but in the creation of prequels or sequels. Many novels take on the same subject or theme with only wording to differentiate between them. This hypertext is different, the opposite, in fact. Jackson uses another author’s words to promote her own combination of themes that has been patched together much as the text and images have been.

There is an impersonality to the hypertext compared to the traditional novel. A novel is tailored to get an emotional response from the reader; the characters are meant to be relatable. With Jackson’s hypertext, a reader maybe able to relate to the characters housed within the interface. However, the reader may find it hard to generate any sort of response besides confusion to the events that occur to the characters. The reader cannot respond to the situation because it is hard to tell what the situation even is when it comes to the hypertext. The form itself of a hypertext lends itself to impersonality as well. It is stark black text against a glowing screen which if looked at for too long hurts the eyes. The print of a novel is softer, easier to handle. It is also familiar to people which makes it more personal to the people who read it.

Novels used to be the status symbol among people. The more novels the person had, the more influential they were in their society, the richer they were. Technology is becoming the new status symbol among people. And the reasons it is becoming the status symbol are vastly different than the novels. Novels meant the person was educated which lended itself nicely to an influential post in society. Technology simply means the person has the money to spend on it, nothing more. As technology continues to rise, people may see a change in the definition of the novel.

Paper 4 Compost

What does Patchwork Girl achieve or not achieve as a novel?

-non linear which majority of novels are

-allows reader to pick and choose their path, almost like Choose Your Own Adventure, but those still have a linear line which PG doesn’t really have.

-borrows from other works which some novels do as inspiration or sequls/prequls. but this takes lines from different works and puts them together to form a new story with already published work.

-electronic glow/lack of tangable page turning makes it obvious you are dealing with something new. it makes it harder to get into the story, which in turn it made even harder because the ’story’ is more subjective/theme orientated.

-agree with Birkerts that it seems to promote the process over the product(story/novel aspect)

pg 214: “History as we all sutdied it in school depended not just on the idea of chronological sequence, but also on fixed coordinates of space and time.”       PG has definate coordinates in space and time, but it doesn’t follow a chronological sequence. In a way many novels are to be taken as histories, not of real battle or anything, but of the history of the main character. That involves a chronological sequence. Even with the use of flashbacks or flashforwards, there is still a followable sequence

pg 219: “Duration is deep time, time experienced without the awareness of time passing.”              If someone gets into a book, time has no meaning anymore. With PG, the clock of the computer is right three staring you in the face. It also is hard to get into, hard to get lost in, because there is no real story to get lost in. You can get lost, but you get lost trying to follow the links and find a linear story line.

The chapter where he talks about his experince with a hypertext. Chapter 11. pg 153: description of hypertext  pg158: promoting process over the product. one must know the technology in order to use a hypertext, but with a book all you have to be able to do is read and turn a page.

Birkerts (8-11)

-books represent pain?

-edited images using power?

-screen is where information/entertainment war will be

-period of overlap  but soon technology will win

-print=linear bound to logic by syntax, print=privacy +static, eletronic=opposite

-multitasking no more then onrushing stimuli

-what’s wrong with eletronic books?

-language erosion, flattening historical perspectives, waning of private self

-Icarus comparison

-how can he like audiobooks but not electronic texts?

-does admit some works cannot be audiobooked, goes into problems like controlling pace and tone and stuff

-reminded of the sound of literature, throwback to when stories were the spoken word

-he finds no connection to hypertexts

The language erosion thing may not be as much of a problem as he thinks, but it also can be worse. Words are getting shortened, even whole sentences are being reduced to three letters. That is really annoying and fits with the erosion idea. However, the technology has brought about some new words and will probably continue to bring in new words.

I like the Icarus comparison. The fact that our technology is getting too far out of our reach. That does seem to be a major theme in movies with robots taking over the world etc. However, if technology is Icarus, who is Daelaus? Is he the group of people that hate technology? Is he the people that can work with technology and still love the printed word? Are we going to crash and burn with technology like Icarus crashed with his wings? Or are we going to be like Daelus where we can work hand and hand with technology and the printed word?

And with the audiobooks, I agree that some can’t just be done. Not to mention, other books could be ruined with the wrong person reading it. It can throw off the reader’s idea of what the story is, how the characters are? It is similar to movies based off of books.

Birkerts lost me in chapter 11. I couldn’t get into it, it didn’t make much sense.

Patchwork Girl ClassNotes (10/31)

-confusion of having three authors

-text doubles back on itself a lot

-seems simple and thus confusing for the more technological advanced, but if it were updated, it might lose the ‘randomness’ or the nonlinear function of the text. would it be worth it to update it?

-still say the Oz metaphor is important

-she takes joy in living and is proud of herself. the creature is happy to be alive most of the time, though she may never take pleasure in her appearance.

-many of the people she and her compainons (even some of her companions) make fun of her. she laughs it off, but it does parallel the way people were horrified? disgusted? by the creature. her way of dealing with this was different, hiding herself rather then putting herself above them.

-Myst? Actually that is an interesting comparsion. There is not real explainion of what you are supposed to be doing. You have to figure it out as you go along. It might be the same with Patchwork Girl. You are supposed to travel around the worlds trying to piece the story together yourself. It might get frustrating, but it could also be a lot of fun. Myst was once you got over the shock of having no instructions. You could do what you wanted as long as you could get the features to work. The same with Patchwork Girl. The pictures lead you to text and text leads you to pictures or to more text. The Myst features lead you to different worlds which lead you back or to different worlds. Still there is confusion.

-the glass cat brings up a point that the girl will hate herself once she is alive. while this is true of frankenstein’s creature, mary’s creature doesn’t seem to hate herself. at least, not all the time. she finds pleasure in things, even if not in herself.

-and maybe I was wrong about finding all the text already. i found more text that is basically patching other people’s work together. guess I didn’t explore as far as I thought I had.

Patchwork Girl Notes (10/27-10/30)

Why does she jump around so far when the next button is hit instead of sticking to a more definite storyline?

Why use a web/tree as a table of contents rather than a more traditional model?

Is the fact that the author gives use so much freedom in reading her text making it more difficult/frustrating to read/understand?

I think I do understand why she uses a tree as a table of contents rather than a more traditional model. Everything that happens stems from something else that happens before it. The only way to logically follow this pattern is to use a tree. However, once you enter into one of the branches of the tree, the logical pattern falls apart. At least, it did for me. There may have been another pattern to follow, but I missed it. Or there was no pattern at all. It was supposed to just wander around that branch for that part of the story and the reader was supposed to make their own storyline in order to make sense of the text. There were times when the branches went onto leaves that made sense. An example is when she was on the ship pretending to be in mourning. Or when she took up residence in the ‘fortune-teller’s’ home. Those sequences went in an easily followed order. Sometimes when the reader only follows the next button, the story line falls apart. There were times when the reader is following the female creature’s adventure into America, but suddenly they are back in England with Mary Shelley. The order is somewhat random at first glance. It still seems random and quite frustrating to follow at the moment. What I read however was interesting. I would still prefer a more definite storyline to follow. The format was different then I expected. It was more basic programming than I expected, but then, it is an older ‘hypertext’. It seemed like something someone would write when first starting out in a computer science course. I did something similar in my computer science class. It would probably be a good idea to explore more then the text and the next button.

The pictures of the patchwork girl are in a sequence. They show her coming apart or you see her body parts as different entities as you go further into the hypertext chapters. I guess it is showing how her life may have began together but it is slowly falling apart. Her body does eventually come apart. In one story, her foot comes off and she gives it a burial near the church yard much to the priest’s dismay. At least there is something the reader can follow if they are looking for a logical storyline. Hidden links?

I wasn’t frustrated with the hypertext as much. It was more confusion. I found it easy to more around within the text, but the storyline had no easy to follow sequence which bothers me more. The snippets make you feel like you are doing something wrong or missed something important when you clicked forward. But then, I didn’t explore more than the snippets, the table of contents, and the next button. I was able to save my place at one point as well. I need to explore the toolbar more. That might add to the frustration. I guess I just need a structured storyline more than a structured format.

I like the fact that I’ve read The Patchwork Girl of Oz. It helps to understand the quote that was pulled from the book. It also adds another complex idea to think about when reading about the construction of the creature. Why shouldn’t the sewn lines be perfect and able to heal completely once removed? That is how most work: there is a small scar but it usually isn’t that noticable. Or the scars fade with time, so they are almost never really there. Then again, there are probably scars that never fade, never go away no matter what. That might be the case with the female creature. But if you go into the Patchwork girl idea, you question whether it was for vainity’s sake, to keep them close and wanting to be hidden. It was kind of like a parent being overprotective by disfiguring their child so they are embarassed to leave the house. But then again, it could also be completely unintentional. It just depends on how you want to look at it. It could also go back to the idea that olden day noble women needed to be schooled in sewing. It had to be so neat, so small that it seemed to be one solid line, it was supposed to be beautiful but not noticable as sewing. Interesting ideas in this section, but unsure where they are going.

There’s not much to say with this that already hasn’t been gone over. I can understand the references to The Patchwork Girl of Oz more then other references. I still have that bias against Frankenstein. The passages taken from that novel don’t seem to fit with the rest of the hypertext. It is a different voice then the three women, but then it would be since it was a male character. Although, Shelley wrote him and Shelley Jackson is taking on her persona at some points so you would think it might match up a bit more. But the relationship each creator had with their creature was so different that it doesn’t seem unlikely that they would each have their own distinct voice.

I guess my glog is going to sound rather confused and jumbled here because I am a little confused by the jumbled hyptertext that I read. Forgive my tendancy to jump around. When she was talking about holding herself together, it reminded me of what women used to do ( and probably still do) in the sake of beauty. Only it wasn’t a matter of beauty for her, it was a matter of survival. I think I made it through all the text in the hypertext. I might have found a bit of a pattern to keep it all together.

I like the idea of having backstories for the body parts. It might be a creepy but interesting notion of resurrection that people’s parts are reborn into other people. I don’t know.

I still prefer the Patchwork Girl of Oz connection.