Category: QCQ (Page 1 of 2)

Quotation: “With his left hand he held both Mrs. Harker’s hands, keeping them away with her arms at full tension. His right hand gripped her by the back of the neck, forcing her face down on his bosom. Her white night-dress was smeared with blood, and a thin stream trickled down the man’s bare chest which was shown by his torn-open dress. The attitude of the two had a terrible resemblance to a child forcing a kitten’s nose into a saucer of milk to compel it to drink. As we burst into the room, the Count turned his face, and the hellish look that I had heard described seemed to leap into it. His eyes flamed red with devilish passion. The great nostrils of the white aquiline nose opened wide and quivered at the edge, and the white sharp teeth, behind the full lips of the blood dripping mouth, clamped together like those of a wild beast.” (Stoker, Chapter 21)

Comment: This scene has a very aggressive, sexual undertone to it. In a disturbing way, it makes me feel as though Stoker wanted to depict a scene in which the Count “sexually assaults” Mrs. Harker. Of course, there isn’t anything explicitly sexual during this scene, but as we’ve discussed, vamprism has inherent connections to sexuality. While Mrs. Harker is clearly going through a very traumatic event akin to rape/sexual assault, it feels as though the Count isn’t motivated by a lust for Mina. In Victorian times, sexual assault of a woman was unfortunately seen as more devastating to the woman’s male partner, as it would “demasculate” him. As Harker is sleeping right next to the Count and Mina, he is completely unaware yet present during this scene. Perhaps the Count is using Mina to assert a type of dominance over Harker himself. 

Question: How has “monster literature” changed how readers view/read scenes depicting sexual assault? Has it allowed us to be able to freely talk about these issues without being “monstrous”?

Quote: “I was afraid to raise my eyelids, but looked out and saw perfectly under the lashes. The girl went on her knees, and bent over me, simply gloating. There was a deliberate voluptuousness which was both thrilling and repulsive, and as she arched her neck, she actually licked her lips like an animal. . . . Lower and lower went her head as the lips went below the range of my mouth and chin and seemed about to fasten on my throat. . . . I closed my eyes in a languorous ecstasy and waited—waited with beating heart.” (Stoker, Chapter 3)

Comment: This quote comes from chapter 3 where the “weird sisters” are about to feed on Harker while in Dracula’s castle. The passage indicates a desire from Harker, as the lines between sexual acts and vampirism are blurred. Harker, seemingly enjoying his predicament, reminds me of Cohen’s thesis regarding the desire of the monstrous. Harker is drawn to these monsters because of the blurred distinctions between feeding and pleasure. Despite the fact that Harker is unaware of their condition, he states that one of the women “licked her lips like an animal”, which could mean that Harker doesn’t mind the fact that he’s being “hunted”. This sexual “kink” could be a form of taboo desire that Harker would have needed to repress from Victorian society.

Question: Do the vampires represent other taboos from Victorian society other than a sexual desire?

Quote: “On the right was the majestic seated figure of a goddess. Her hands were crossed upon her knees, and she was naked from her waist upwards.I fancied it was meant for Isis. On her brow was perched agaily-apparelled beetle–that ubiquitous beetle!–forming a bright spot of colour against her coppery skin,–it was an exact reproduction of the creatures which were imaged on the carpet. In front of the idol wasan enormous fiery furnace. In the very heart of the flames was an altar. On the altar was a naked white woman being burned alive. There could be no doubt as to her being alive, for she was secured by chains in such a fashion that she was permitted a certain amount of freedom,of which she was availing herself to contort and twist her body into shapes which were horribly suggestive of the agony which she was enduring,–the artist, indeed, seemed to have exhausted his powers in his efforts to convey a vivid impression of the pains which were tormenting her.” (Marsh, Chapter 31)

Comment: This scene is when Marjorie stumbles upon an image of a human sacrifice to Isis. While the subject of this scene is only a painting, it troubles Marjorie because of the gruesome content. This passage jumped out to me because of the cultural implications. As shown in the painting, Isis is worshiped through human sacrifices, particularly of white women. In our present day mindset, we know that the act of human sacrifices were not regularly practiced in ancient Egypt. The only thing close to this was the act of retainer sacrifices in which some servants of a dead pharaoh or noble would be executed so that they could serve their masters in the afterlife. Even then, this wasn’t seen as human sacrifice and rather as a “duty” to their masters. This passage, therefore, shows a cultural bias that was present in Victorian England. Of course, we can look at this through a critical lens, as information wasn’t widely available during this time period and the idea of being politically correct wasn’t as big of an idea as it is today. I think that the inclusion of  blatantly incorrect historical information shows the disconnect between individuals in Victorian society to the rest of the world. The majority of white men, like Marsh, took advantage of the “otherness” and “exoticness” of different cultures to make them into (no pun intended) Victorian monsters. Showing a human sacrifice, particularly of a white woman, indicates a feeling that Egyptians are “savages” in English minds. 

Question: I wonder how our understanding of cultural insensitivity would change if the roles were reversed. Perhaps, if the main characters of this novel were Egyptian and the English were performing sacrifices on behalf of the queen, how might the vilified society respond?

Quotation: “So far, in the room itself there had not been a sound. When the clock had struck ten, as it seemed to me, years ago, there came a rustling noise, from the direction of the bed. Feet stepped upon the floor,— moving towards where I was lying. It was, of course, now broad day, and I, presently, perceived that a figure, clad in some queer coloured garment, was standing at my side, looking down at me. It stooped, then knelt. My only covering was unceremoniously thrown from off me, so that I lay there in my nakedness. Fingers prodded me then and there, as if I had been some beast ready for the butcher’s stall. A face looked into mine, and, in front of me, were those dreadful eyes. Then, whether I was dead or living, I said to myself that this could be nothing human,— nothing fashioned in God’s image could wear such a shape as that. Fingers were pressed into my cheeks, they were thrust into my mouth, they touched my staring eyes, shut my eyelids, then opened them again, and— horror of horrors!— the blubber lips were pressed to mine— the soul of something evil entered into me in the guise of a kiss.” (Marsh, Chapter 4)

Connection: This section during chapter four reminded me of Cohen’s fourth thesis: The Monster is a kind of desire. This passage has a very intimate tone from the monster, ending in a kiss. As Cohen’s theses describe monsters as a desire, especially in sexual terms, this passage could continue the trend of a sort of “sexual deviancy” from the narrator.

Question: I wonder how monsters have changed in terms of Cohen’s fourth thesis throughout the years, especially since social norms and acceptability have evolved.

Quotation: “You look exactly the same wonderful boy who, day after day, used to come down to my studio to sit for his picture. But you were simple, natural, and affectionate then. You were the most unspoiled creature in the whole world. Now, I don’t know what had come over you. You talk as if you had no heart, no pity in you. It is all Harry’s influence, I see that.” (Wilde, 122)

Comment: This quote comes from chapter 9 by Basil. He speaks to Dorian, who has undergone many changes in personality ever since he realized that his portrait would grow old instead of his physical body. This quotation made me think of Basil’s relationship with Dorian. The two start as friends, Basil stating that Dorian would make a wonderful model for a portrait. Through this, the two become closer and it seems that through painting his portrait, Basil has come to know Dorian better than he knows himself. While the sins and moral decline of Dorian are of his own accord, I can’t help but think of the saying “you can’t separate the art from the artist” or vice versa. If the first statement is true, that one can’t separate art from the artist, what does this mean for Basil and Harry? We, as readers, are led to believe that Basil is the “moral” one, almost like the angel on Dorian’s shoulder, while Harry acts as the devil on his shoulder. If Basil is the artist of Dorian’s portrait, his most innocent and moral version of himself, then does this mean that Harry is the artist of Dorian’s soul? Basil has captured the good in Dorian through the portrait, but shouldn’t that mean that the portrait would remain the same? I think originally this was the case, but once Harry began “painting” Dorian’s moral decline, the portrait changed to reflect not only Dorian (the art), but Harry (the artist) as well. 

Question: I’m curious as to what would happen if Harry, the “evil” influence in Dorian’s life, was the one who painted the portrait and Basil, the “good” influence, was the one who spent more time with Dorian. Would the portrait stay the same while Dorian aged and showed his sins?

Quotation: “The most racking pangs succeeded: a grinding in the bones, deadly nausea, and a horror of the spirit that cannot be exceeded at the hour of birth or death. Then these agonies began swiftly to subside, and I came to myself as if out of a great sickness. There was something strange in my sensations, something indescribably sweet. I felt younger, lighter, happier in body; within I was conscious of a heady recklessness, a current of disordered sensual images running like a millrace in my fancy, a solution of the bonds of obligation, an unknown but innocent freedom of the soul. I knew myself, at the first breath of this new life, to be more wicked, tenfold more wicked, sold a slave to my original evil and the thought, in that moment, braced and delighted me like wine.” (Stevenson, Chapter 10)

Comment/Connection: This passage is taken from chapter ten during one of Jekyll’s transformations. Jekyll describes how he felt as he turns into Hyde, specifically how he felt the burdens of morality lift from his shoulders. This narration, personally, makes me think that Hyde isn’t a different person as much as the novel insinuates he is. Jekyll, I feel, almost creates Hyde as a scapegoat to justify his newfound feelings of immorality. Hyde represents Jekyll’s innermost desires to go against the social order and morals. Jekyll realizes that he can’t act immorally as himself because he still fears social rejection, which brings about the “creation” of Hyde. Hyde is Jekyll’s outlet to act in the way he truly wants to. 

Questions: I wonder how the story would be affected if Hyde wasn’t introduced as part of an experiment. What would happen if Hyde was kept as a secret until close to the end of the book?

Quotation: “Do you think I am an automaton? — a machine without feelings? and can bear to have my morsel of bread snatched from my lips, and my drop of living water dashed from my cup? Do you think, because I am poor, obscure, plain, and little, I am soulless and heartless? You think wrong! — I have as much soul as you — and full as much heart! And if God had gifted me with some beauty and much wealth, I should have made it as hard for you to leave me, as it is now for me to leave you. I am not talking to you now through the medium of custom, conventionalities, nor even of mortal flesh: it is my spirit that addresses your spirit; just as if both had passed through the grave, and we stood at God’s feet, equal — as we are!”-(Bronte, chapter 23)
Comment/Connection: This quote from Jane hit incredibly hard. It is at this point within the narrative that Jane seems to, as she says, “talk without conventionalities” and truly speaks from the heart. The things she says within this piece of dialogue speak to the hundreds upon thousands of women during the 1800s who felt as though their voice could never be heard properly or at all.
Jane, in this moment, encompassed the thoughts and feelings of a united womanhood and spoke it loud and true for a predominantly male audience. The sentiment that she expresses, specifically regarding her worth though she may not be beautiful or rich, can be described as a cultural shift
within Victorian society. Most individuals during this time held worth in gender and place in society rather than the inherent worth and respect that all people are born with. To say this as a woman, as a woman to a man in high society, is groundbreaking and I can see how Jane Eyre startled and offended many because of this. I also believe that this quote encapsulates the theme of Jane Eyre quite well, as it is the climax of the feminist themes within the novel.
Questions: I wonder how society, women specifically, reacted to the release of Jane Eyre. Was there any pushback against the traditional normalities held during the Victorian era?

Quotation: “Fearful and ghastly to me–oh sir, I never saw a face like it! It was a discolored face–it was a savage face. I wish I could forget the roll of the red eyes and the fearful blackened inflation of the lineaments!” (Bronte, 332)
Comment/Connection: This quote comes directly from Jane when she is describing the “ghost” she saw. Her description made me think of Cohen’s theses once more, specifically Thesis I. Thesis I states that the monster is a cultural body, one that is typically a minority or underserved population of people. The language that Jane uses indicates a type of ‘otherness’ from herself and Mr. Rochester, both of whom are white, middle/upper class citizens. Jane uses terms like “savage” and “discolored” to describe this ghost as something abhorrent and different, while also indicating that she and Mr. Rochester are superior to the “savage ghost”. The language and time period in which this novel was published indicate that Jane most likely saw a person of color and believed that she was a “ghost”. While Jane wholeheartedly believes that what she saw was a ghost, she still uses derogatory terms to describe her. People of
color during the 1800s (and onward, unfortunately) were barely given the rights that were extended to their white counterparts. As a minority group, people of color seem to be fitting of the misunderstood “monster” category.
Questions: Did Bronte intentionally use a person of color to play the monster to raise awareness for this minority group or do you think that Bronte was drawn to the “savage” and “discolored” description of a “monster”?

Sites Visited:

Response: Both Kim and Marley had questions different from my own. While Kim and Marley focused on character, I focused on Bronte’s craft and her own interpretations of her work. Marley’s post was about Mr. Rochester and how, despite everything that Mr. Rochester is, Jane still finds herself enamored by him. Kim’s post was about how Jane is involved in both upper and working class women, as well as how Jane seems to avoid serious consequences for her actions. These posts don’t necessarily go in a different direction from my own, as I can see Bronte’s craft choices upon reflecting on the questions posed by Marley and Kim. I think in regards to my own questions, I need to look closer at the specifics of Jane’s character within the overall story in order to answer my questions about how Bronte and others felt about women during that time period.

Quotation: “It is in vain to say human beings ought to be satisfied with tranquility: They must have action; and they will make it if they cannot find it. Millions are condemned to a stiller doom than mine, and millions are in silent revolt against their lot. Nobody knows how many rebellions besides political rebellions ferment in the masses of life which people earth. Women are supposed to be very calm generally: but women feel just as men feel; they need exercise for their faculties, and a field for their efforts, as much as their brothers do; they suffer from too rigid a restraint, too absolute a stagnation, precisely as men would suffer; and it is narrow-minded in their more privileged fellow creatures to say that they ought to confine themselves to making puddings and knitting stockings, to playing on the piano and embroidering bags. It is thoughtless to condemn them, or laugh at them, if they seek to do more or learn more then custom has pronounced necessary for their sex” (Bronte, 124).

Comment/Connection: This quotation made me think of how far society has come in regards to women’s rights. Jane Eyre was published in 1847, a time period in which women certainly did not have the same rights as men did. Most women were only seen to be wives, mothers, and housekeepers, whereas men had the rights to work, travel, and be anything they wanted to be. This gender inequality is shown especially within Jane Eyre, the passage above being a prime example of how many women, Jane included, felt during this time period. I think that this quotation really serves as a prime example of how women truly felt, as they could rarely voice their opinions in a serious setting. 

Once again, this makes me think of how far society has come since 1847. Women have rights to vote, act in government, and participate in any kind of job market they desire. However, this equality doesn’t extend to all parts of the world. This lack of worldwide equality makes me believe that this quotation from Jane still has ramifications today. Of course, there are still some who believe that men are superior to women and would react poorly to this quotation, just like how many in Bronte’s time thought of her work as ‘vulgar’ and ‘disrespectful’. 

Questions: I wonder how Bronte’s relatives reacted to this quotation, or just the whole of Jane Eyre. One question I have is whether Bronte would consider her female characters to be closely related to ‘monsters’, as they are typically outcasts of society and seen as an ‘other’ in comparison to men.