I looked at the commonplace books of Lizzy and Dylan.

Lizzy:

I’ve noticed that your commonplace book entries that necessarily have a theme that can be grasped. If anything, your entries border on an artistic sense, however, you also focus on people within your quotes and explanations. These people, more often than not, are representations of marginalized groups. In your entries, I think you make the issues shown in each of the books we’ve read into a physical, artistic representation that summarizes what the authors were intending. In this entry in particular, you take the sexual taboos and desires and connect a heterosexual example (Dracula) to a homosexual example (Carmilla), effectively stating that these issues are universal.

Dylan:

*I was unable to leave a comment on your page* Your commonplace entries seem to focus on the “modernity” of the monsters we’ve discussed as well as their non-monstrous counterparts. An example that comes to mind is your photo of Rainbow Stag Beetle in which you discuss how works like The Beetle make organisms like this one into “monsters” that people come to fear. The exploitation of animals in these works, like bats/dogs in Dracula, and beetles in The Beetle have far reaching effects in terms of conserving species. To me, it seems like your entries really encompass your values and your sympathy towards creatures that have been “monster-fied”.