Category: Communication

Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban are represented as victims of circumstance throughout both texts using language and narration. Mary Shelly and Shakespeare do this through several language features such imagery and rhetorical questions. The characters are both victimised and seen as evil by the people around them and this leaves them alienated, as an outsider to the world. However, why this is, is beyond their control. They are both victims of circumstances with are beyond their changing, situations they can do nothing about. These include, physical appearance; lack of intelligence; lack of a home and parents too. I will go into these points during this essay and I will be drawing the parallels and highlighting the similarities between both texts and characters alike.

By being abandoned at birth and losing their parent figure, both characters become a victim and inevitably result to a life of evil. When Frankenstein’s ‘monster’ is born, his only parent who had created him ran away. ‘Unable to endure every aspect of the being I created, I rushed out of the room’. Victor Frankenstein says this at the birth of his creation and feels that he cannot be in the same room of his creation. By writing this in first person the reader is able to get the most accurate account of how Victor Frankenstein is feeling. As it is not an account of what happened from someone else, there is no chance of his feelings being inaccurately portrayed to the reader. This allows the reader to better understand how Frankenstein was feeling and exactly what happened that night. Not being able to endure ‘every aspect’ of his creation, Victor flees. By using an adjective, Victor empathies what he wants to say. However, I think in this case he was hyperbolising as he just cannot know every aspect of his creation. The main aspect beyond his appearance was his naturally benevolent nature which we discover later in the book. Victor doesn’t get to see this as he runs. As the ‘monster’ wasn’t taught the rights and wrongs in the early stages of his life, he becomes lost and feels unloved. He runs away and begins his life on a bad path, this continues and he becomes more evil.

This is also the case for Caliban in The Tempest. Caliban loses his mother Syncorax at an early age and Prospero begins to be a father figure to Caliban. However, after Caliban has taught Prospero the island and everything he knows, he is betrayed and he loses the father figure he desperately craves and needs. ‘I say, by sorcery he got this isle; From me he got it.’ This gives us an account of how Caliban feels he has been betrayed by his ‘Father’. Caliban is not sure exactly how Prospero got the isle from him as he expresses through ‘sorcery’. He feels betrayed as he doesn’t know why or how Prospero did this to him. Caliban loses all his love for him, and becomes lost. He turns evil after finding out he has been betrayed by what’s closet to a father for him. He starts to plot against Prospero and he wants revenge.

The lack of a home leads the characters to being evil and victimised. Frankenstein’s ‘monster’ does not have a home and is on the run, seeking on during the book. For example the ‘monster’ runs and ‘I […] fearfully took refuge in a low hovel’ Mary Shelly uses specific language like ‘refuge’ to show underlying emotions. In this case, tasking refuge infers the monster is seeking safety, he hasn’t got anywhere he feels safe and is searching for it. He doesn’t belong anywhere and this leads him to evil traits as he cannot feel safe. He takes refuge in a ‘low hovel’ which isn’t a place we would associate with safety too. He finds a small shed and he can’t possibly feel 100% safe there. This underlies another emotion of desperateness. He can’t be fully safe, but he is just desperate to feel safer and less fearless then he does by looking for ‘home’.

Similarly, in The Tempest Caliban lost his home when Prospero overcame the land. He now lives under Prospero as a slave and not having his own home, he becomes angered and plots to kill Prospero. “Thou mayst brain him … or with a log batter his skull, or paunch him with a stake, or cut his wezand with they knife” Caliban is not sure what to do and it’s for this reason that I feel he isn’t fully in control of his actions, he is just angry. The use of punctuation infers that Caliban is list ways to kill Prospero and reclaim his land. All of these ideas however are impractical and Caliban is just listing them in anger rather than harm. These evil thoughts have been brought on by Prospero overthrowing him and taking his home.

Both characters also have no control of their appearance and this causes them to become victimised. Frankinstein’s ‘monster’ is exiled by his creator and community due to his appearance. People describe him with a ‘face too wrinkled for human eyes to behold’ this is said in hyperbole to add emphasis to the ‘monster’s’ hideous appearance. Their eyes have beheld the sight of the ‘monster’ yet they describe him like this to better express to someone else the appearance of the monster. By basing all their views of the monster they do not take any consideration to his personality and his benevolent nature. As people victimise him, he begins to make bad decisions as he loses hope and begins to doubt all the good he has tried to show.

In comparison, when Stephano & Trinculo first see Caliban in The Tempest they plan to keep him and take him back to Naples as a gift. They judge him as a freak and call him a ‘mooncalf’. By using specific language, Shakespeare allows the user to draw their own parallels. This word can act as imagery as we consider his skin colour. This deformity is what he is first judged upon by Stephano and Trinculo. Trinculo also uses rhetorical questions to judge Caliban’s appearance ‘a man or fish?’ This empathises Trinculo’s disbelief and uncertainty in Caliban’s humanity. He doesn’t know what to make of Caliban and instead judges him based on his appearance. Before they have even met Caliban, they see him as a prize for an emperor, not as another person. They treat him as a victim because his appearance is peculiar and different, like they also do with Frankenstein’s monster.

The characters are also both equally seen to be lacking in intelligence, but actually this isn’t the case. In Frankenstein, the monster learns to read ‘I also learned the science of letters’ he says. By using first person, the monster shows us that he went away and learnt the language on his own. He had no teaching but instead listened to what was going on around him and applied those words to a book. This clearly shows how intelligent he is. In addition, he looks at English as a ‘science’, this unique view on the language tells us how different his learning style is. It’s completely solo and this expresses how important it is to him and how intelligent he is but he is still not listened to by society around him. This is the same in the Tempest, Caliban knows the island better than anyone ‘I’ll show thee every fertile inch o’ th’ island;’. This is what Caliban tells Trinculo, telling him his knowledge but Trinculo still ignores him and treats him like a freak. By using ‘every’ Caliban says he knows all the island but this is still ignored due to Trinculo’s prejudice. As both characters are ignored, no one is able to teach them right and wrong, no one is there to show them their mistakes. In addition, when no one listens to them, they begin to feel like there is no hope. Their self-esteem shrinks and they begin to feel everything is pointless. This becomes particularly apparent when Frankenstein’s monster looks into the water and gives up on life. As they are mistreated as victims as people disregard there intelligence they sway to bad tendencies as no one is there for either of them.

Both characters are never given the chance to express themselves. I think that they were both naturally benevolent, but were never given the chance to show it. Instead, they have wrongs committed against them and they lose what they originally had. In Frankenstein, the monster is shot when he was trying to do the right thing, save the girl. After that experience Frankenstein’s monster says this ‘For the first time the feelings of revenge and hatred filled my bosom’. Using the word hatred, the monster expresses how deep his feelings are as ‘hate’ is such a strong word. He also says its the first time these feeling have over come him. He has tired his up most best to be benevolent, but after people commit these wrongs, he gives up hope. Caliban is not given the chance to express good feelings either as he is deemed a slave by Prospero and was not given the chance to do anything but what he says. Both characters were not given the opportunity to show how they truly feel and do what they really want to. They are treated as victims from the get go, so there feelings are not ever given the opportunity to shine through. They are made to do bad things as these feeling overcome them, they feel succumbed to these feelings and eventually give in.

In conclusion, both characters are made to look evil and represented as victims of circumstance throughout both texts using language and narration. The factors are beyond their control and they include: abandonment at birth; lack of a home; appearance; peoples prejudice and the way they are unable to express themselves. By showing the parallels we can see how common the two extracts are, how the writers use the same techniques and how both characters are treated as victims of circumstance.

By setting the scene, the reader is shown an aspect of symbolism of the ideology of Salem at the time. ‘There is a narrow window at the left. Through the lead plains’ the description of this window allows the reader to understand what Salem was like. The small window shows how the room is cut-off from light, deprived and mostly filled with dark. As we go on to find, Betty lying inert shows the dark side of the town. The lead plains connote a prison cell, you can see out but you cannot go. You are locked in by your own wrong doings. The towns wrong doings or the people in it have forced them to live locked in the darl, possibly where the ‘witches’ could lay low…

Futility is engaged in the poems through language, structure and form.

Imagery is used in both poems to show themes of futility. Imagery is used throughout ‘Futility’ to enhance futility. ‘Fields half-sown’ links to before war broke out, creating the memories of happier, easier times. Through imagery the poet can clearly get a memory or view across and it creates a picture in the readers head of the events he is describing. although it is all pointless in the end. Not sure about this paragraph.

The use of a metaphor expresses futility in both poems also. In ‘Futility’ the metaphor is the sun, it is the key image and when it has gone, the who poem begins to give up and draws to a close. The same effect can be noted in ‘At the boarder’, the main metaphor is the boarder. Futility is shown in it as there is no certainty on where it stays

Both poems use structure and a change of stanza to forward futile emotions. ‘Futility’ is written in 14 lines like a sonnet, but is not set out like one. The two-stanza structure shows the poem’s change in tone, from hope to worry. The poem begins positive with the sun. However, the second stanza is in completely different tone referring to the sun as a dead star, through oxymoron. The sun then becomes the object of the poet’s anger as it was the last piece of hope he was counting on. This is also done in ‘At the boarder’. The change in stanza shows a differing viewpoint to the boarder, seeing it from a child’s perspective; a guards; a mothers etc. It is used along with bathos for example ‘Dozens of families waited in the rain’. This effect empathises the changes allowing the reader to follow more easily and fully understand the poems.

Both poems use form to express unpredictability and futility. ‘Futility’ features both half and full rhyme. Full rhyme towards the end of stanzas and half rhyme throughout for example ‘sun’ and ‘sown’. This jumping between rhythmic techniques creates a sense of unpredictability and pointlessness,  like it was for the men on the frontline during the war and like what they . ‘At the boarder’ however, uses a lack of form to express this. The lack of a set form brings to the light the unfixed and unpredictability of a boarder. This man-made ‘thing’ doesn’t need to exist and can in-fact move, the enjambement and unequal length used in the poem also hint this.

POET:

Wilfred Owen

STRUCTURE:

The poem opens by directly connecting and talking with the reader. ‘Move him’ is a command telling the reader what they or someone has to do, its an imperative.  This statement implies that ‘him’ is unable to move himself, that they are emotionally/physically impaired and that they can’t move themselves. This is followed by contradictory lines which tell of safety at home. Imagery, including natural imagery, is used greatly in the poem too.

POETIC FORM:

This poem features both half and full rhyme. Full rhyme towards the end of stanzas and half rhyme throughout for example ‘sun’ and ‘sown’. This jumping between rhythmic techniques creates a sense of unpredictability, like it was for the men on the frontline during the war.

LANGUAGE: 

Imagery is used throughout the poem to set mood. ‘Fields half-sown’ links to before war broke out, creating the memories of happier, easier times. Through imagery the poet can clearly get a memory or view across and it creates a picture in the readers head of the events he is describing. The use of natural imagery too sets the scene for the reader but its the imagery which often creates contrast in the poem. From snow to sun and from the happy fields to the frontline.

Owen also uses personification to emphasise importance. ‘Kind old sun’ Gives the Sun a humane characteristic of friendliness, someone in which we can always rely. Who we contrast as it has been around so long that its age has blossomed wisdom. It is later described to be futile as it has also given up.

Rhetorical questions are often used throughout the poem to reinstate the readers importance. No man could hide from war, and having the reader so directly linked expresses that it cold be any man.

KEY QUOTATION:

‘If anything might rouse him now’

EXPLAINATION:

Tone is expressed through language linked back to the war. ‘If anything might rouse him now’ mimics the recruitment campaigns during the man to get men out to the trenches. Tis creates a change in tone as it acts as a reminder of life before war, and how quickly it was able to be forgotten. It infers that all hope is lost, which many linked to fighting in the war and to the memories before it.

Bees

The three most distinctive noises to our ears must be the scraping on chalk of a blackboard; a baby’s cry and the buzzing of bees! However despite how annoying these sounds may be, without them being known to man, man itself would not be known. We strive from education, reproduce and live on through our children and stay alive due to bees. Yes, bees. A man’s fundamental is a yellow and black flying insect. Biodiversity is the web of life. It is the term used to describe all the Earth’s natural process; ecosystems; genetic/cultural diversities and the connection between all species. We rely on other ecosystems for food, water, shelter, drugs and even the moderation of floods and droughts too. It is this web upon which we are an intrinsic cardinal part and on which we as a race are dependent yet, we as a race are putting all others at great risk. Consider it to be a threaded carpet; if one of the threads holding the carpet together is pulled through, the whole carpet falls apart. Currently we are pulling on several threads in the ‘carpet of life’. Bees are one of the main links us ‘humans’ are breaking.

Bees are vital pollinators to our world. They are responsible for 1/3 of all the food we seek growth in each day. There are other pollinators in the world such as birds; bats, and we could even pollinate crops ourselves. However, this would be an expensive and virtually ineffective process. We simply can’t rely on other pollinators, bees do too much. We are a growing population and we need all the pollinated food we can get. What’s more? They also happen to be the only insect that produces food eaten directly by man. Who doesn’t love honey?

There are currently 25 species of Bee in the UK, however, there used to be double this number. So why are bees dying? We first discovered the problem through Colony Collapse Disorder; climate change; pollution; habitat loss. I’m noticing a pattern, this is harm we are doing! To tackle the problem the government needs to look into the impacts this could have in the future and discover further, what we could do on a wider scale to help them. On a local front, we can all start simply by spreading the word! Most are blissfully oblivious to the doings we are doing to the bees and more importantly the catastrophic doing people are doing to themselves in return. By planting trees/plants bees love, they will live on. They will find habitats and create new life. Plants like this include: cornflowers; poppies; lavender and other shrubs, all of which will also colour your garden. Win, win? You could even consider keeping bees which is an interesting and rewarding hobby for all ages, which throws in the bonus of honey. Bees do not sting as it kills them, so when going to kill a bee…don’t. Let the bees be.

POET:

John Agard

STRUCTURE:

The poem begins with a rhetorical question, which is repeated throughout the first 4 verses, asking the reader what they can see. He follows this question up by answering it with he same reply ‘its just a piece of cloth’. This answers all the questions despite them differing in nouns ie. tent and field. In the sestet of he poem, which i think is only the last verse, the reader asks another rhetorical question but instead using a personal pronoun (I). He doesn’t answer with the usual response but uses instead the world ‘flag’ and enjambment is also used frequently in this poem.

POETIC FORM:

The rhythmic structure of the poem creates a happy and uplifting mood as it reminds the reader of nursery rhythms when they were happy as children. The rhythm scheme is: ABA CDC EFE GHI JKK.

LANGUAGE: 

The rhetorical questions create suspense; a cliffhanger; a sense of unknown which eaves the reader in anticipation. This anticipation is most when all initial feelings are diminished through the use of the following sentence.

The cloth and flag are both metaphors, the flag creates that sense of belonging, but the cloth degrades that. People often burn flags as a symbolic act to insult or prove points, here the metaphor of the cloth does the same, it belittles it…just without the fire!

The final sentence closes the poem features personification and connotes war and conflict. it infers that people do things for there flag/country that they wouldn’t usually dream of doing – war.

KEY QUOTATION:

‘It’s just a piece of cloth’

EXPLAINATION:

The repeated phase ‘It’s just a piece if cloth’ uses a modifier ‘just’ to degrade the metaphoric ‘cloth’s’ importance. It also draws further attention and significance as an adjective, where it is then contradicted by the following line. The importance is on the cloth as it is a metaphor for flag which links to the title of the poem. Being from Guyana, Agard possibly linked the poem with the invasion of the French to take over the country and make it what we now know today as the French Guyana.

Torture

Dear CHRIS FLOYD,

My name is George Davis and I am writing to you in response to the article you recently published on torture. Although I think torture is horrific, I feel at times it cannot be avoided. The act of torture involves deliberately inflicting physical or mental pain on a person or persons. This includes threats to family members and loved ones. Your loved ones being abused for the greater good, is that something you would accept authorities doing and what if you loved one was innocent? We place our trust in these authorities and that would destroy the link I have with them.

Regarding your scenario where a terrorist plots against London and the suspect refuses to talk, I do appreciate that ‘No Comments’ are utterly useless. So do you feel it is right then that the police resort to more drastic methods of torture? I feel that would be morally wrong. Since the middle of the last century torture has generally been regarded as wrong, so wrong in fact that the UN Convention Against Torture allows no exceptions, even in circumstances such as war or while fighting terrorism.

A poll in 2006 showed that 72% of Britons were opposed to torture under any circumstances – even where it is used to save lives. I feel it treats people as a means rather than an ends and I don’t feel it would be fully effective anyway. Surely someone sinister, much like the person in your scenario, is more likely to co-operate in a more comfortable environment. I know I would, wouldn’t you? The reality is that torture would be pointless. Evidence obtained through torture is not admissible in British courts. However, it is a necessity for police or security forces to act on information obtained by torture. They would have no choice to ignore a claim of a criminal offence, regardless of its origins.

Governments have used torture to keep themselves in power; to enforce their particular political philosophy; to remove opposition and to implement particular policies in the past. For example China’s one child policy. If a woman was to have more than one child, she would be indirectly tortured; benefits completely cut; cut access to healthcare. Let us marvel at how the government’s backing from it’s people grew dramatically after this policy. This was horrific in my opinion. Yes, the policy set out to do what was intended to but there were certainly better ways around it. Much like how there are different ways of discovering the truth by not inflicting torture.

Mr Floyd, you argue that torture, while wrong, could be the ‘lesser of two evils’, and that it should be allowed if it is the only way to prevent a ‘greater wrong’. For example, it might be ‘tolerable’ to torture a person to get information that would enable authorities to prevent a bombing. I argue that torture is a ‘moral absolute’ that it is always wrong, and so can never be justified by any form of ethical ‘cost-benefit analysis’. Using the British police and their struggle to correctly handle torture responsibly as an example, I feel that the responsibility to torture is overwhelming and the temptation is too difficult to contain, considering the rare occasions where it is successful.

You and I will both have differing opinions on what torture actually is and it’s for that reason that I think it is partially unavoidable. In your article you have been very selective on what you portray as torture. You have expressed the use of violence in terrorism as the only form of torture, is that truly the case? Depriving a Mother from her child, that’s torture for both them in my opinion. Yet when a woman is arrested for a crime she needs to pay for, the baby can’t go with her, baby will ultimately end up out of her arms. Is that not torture for that woman or her child? I ask you. This kind of scenario is more common than the plot for a huge terrorist attack in which the police have no leads as you showed. That is why I think ‘torture’ is unavoidable.

Regards,

George.

Final draft.

‘We will shortly be arriving at Honolulla. Please ensure you have all your personal bags and articles safely stored in the overhead lockers or under the seat in front of you. Please fasten your seatbelts, before assisting someone else and make sure your seat is also in the upright position. Turn all electronically active devices off now. Cabin crew are making their way through the aircraft to check all landing precautions have been correctly carried out. Thank you for flying with us today.’

The announcement strangely echoed merrily throughout the small gangway of the aircraft, an unusual tone for a cabin stewardesses with the stress of a long haul flight. Nonetheless, it heightened Jo’s mood dramatically and after paying attention attentively to the announcement she quickly buckled up. Alan returned to his seat beside her and she assisted Alan in fastening up too as she just couldn’t wait to land. Despite Alan not being at his wife’s side for most, the majority of the flight, it was still pleasant for the both of them and they soon landed.

Jo had, for the first time managed to get Alan to take this break away with her. Getting him to leap from his rather humble ladder, home, and come away with her this once. After getting off the plane, Alan did have his regrets but undeterred, they both made their way to rather small looking terminal like every other passenger from the plane. The terminal contained a passenger desk; alongside a security desk; which ran parallel to the check in desk; which was attached to the unmanned information desk. The terminal on the whole was immaculately clean, had great staff, a modern image but just too minuscule.

As passengers fought to reunite themselves with their bags, Alan popped off following the air crew to duty free whilst Jo hung back patiently waiting for their bags to become visible. Their bags did, being the only 2 left. Alan returned even happier, despite his hands being empty from all the joys of duty free and they both hopped into the taxi waving good-bye to the building that would soon end their holiday and went to sleep when they got to their hotel.

In the early hours of the morning, Alan’s phone rang, though he didn’t answer it. He stirred and put the phone down, despite expecting the call. He slowly opened his bag beside him, and drew a blade 5 inches in length. Jo bustled in her sleep but Alan put an abrupt end to her movements, forcing the knife quickly between her ribs. Jo’s eyes opened and blankly and stared at Alan, she continuously gasped. He pushed the knife deeper until the hilt hit bone. Alan pulled the knife out, blood dripping from his hands and phoned for medics.

‘She’s been stabbed! Help this lady! Come to the Harrow Hotel room 13. HURRY!’

Alan ended the call, throwing his mobile and the knife from the balcony to their place of discovery later that day. The sirens and lights of the approaching ambulances and police cars soon overpowered the dim light roads and the crashing of waves against the beach. The hotel was beginning to flood with emergency personnel. Whist they were making their way to Jo, Alan sprinted down the hallway of the hotel to a fire exit. Hearing the sirens ringing constantly in his head, Alan reconsidered, was this a mistake? Had he risked it all for nothing? As Alan opened the fire exit’s door, a car was waiting. The engine revved and the identity of a grown man was no more.

Frankenstein and Tempest Plan.

Theory: Both characters developed their monstrosity quickly though rejection and self disbelief.

Intro: Explain my theory and how it will be explored during the essay.

Para1: Outline why I think both of them are actually monsters to clarify it to the reader allowing them to understand why I am using those 2 characters in particular using examples.

Para2: Show how quickly both of the developed as monsters throughout the book and compare how each of them did. Show how the books panned out and how they compare.

Para3: Show that they both became to be from bad choices in life like rapping Miranda and killing that lady (sort that out!). Compare these.

Para4: Show that through rejection from the fatherly figure they became monstrous. Caliban = Prospero & Frankenstein = Victor. Use examples.

Para5: show how both characters didn’t think they were worth living. Ie. Looks and outsider. Show that/how their surroundings and communities have rejected them. Use examples.

Con: Round up all points and finalise.

Dear Elizabeth ,

In todays world, the use of slangs i dominant, whether that be when texting or talking between old and predominantly young people. Is the slang used by young people of today such a bad thing? I will highlight both sides to this argument.

Some people fear that slang is a preventative in our world of today and that because someone uses it they are not as smart as someone who does not. This is not necessarily true. Using slang is not always rude words like ‘cool’ or ‘nice’ used by the older generations as well as the young are not rude, or do not make some appear less smart. It is better to use formal language in an interview for example but it should be able to change depending on the situation. As long as people are able to separate social life with business life through adapting and restricting the use of slang in a professional situation there is no harm. I would like to believe that everyone have their own way of talking to their friends and families, and that they use slang as and when.

People have the right to be unique and this should also come own to the idiolect too. We all strive to be unique and this should be no different in the way we speak or choice of words, much like our appearance.

A lot of people use slang without knowing and this is no different to William Shakespeare. William Shakespeare was a man that used a lot of slang in his plays, words such as nervy, puke and assassination were included, nevertheless he was not seen as a man that could not communicate, but a man that had a talent for it. It is used in everyday life and we cannot escape from it as we have been brought up around it, it is a part of us that is inevitable.

Others disagree as they think that it can impair peoples lives greatly like when getting a job. People want to hire potential employers that are able to communicate unmistakably. How is that going to be possible when slang only prevents young people from conversing clearly and making them ill-equipped for the future? It is going to be hard for young adults that use slang to face the real world, because slang is not prohibited in today’s work setting. It is the contrary, it is obligatory to speak in correct grammar in order to keep a job. The understandings of slang words are so different in every city that it is going to be impossible for them to take care of themselves, unless they decide to stay where they are forever.

Some think it affects childrens schooling too they think students perform poorly in formal language tests because they’re out of practice when it comes to using. Saying ‘yeah’ in lieu of ‘yes’ is a common problem and one which is never tolerated in the classroom or in tests/exams. Some slang words are new and older persons may not know them. Using these words can inhibit conversation greatly. Sometimes a language gap resulting from slang usage can manifest a language block between people of different generations.

I think that slang is appropriate in certain informal circumstances but it is not only you idiolect that changes, it is your appearance, facial expressions, it all does. This is when I think slang that has been built into your accent and idiolect is appropriate.