Revised version of final project

Melanie Mavins

March 19, 2010

Professor Meehan

“A Theory of Re-creation within Thyself”

You see this man trapping his victims and killing them in brutal and what seems as unjustified ways. What you may not recognize is that this film of “Saw II” maybe seen as a simple plot of gruesome killings, but this movie has more insight to offer. This movie is a theory of a psychological re-creation within these victims.  This same theory of creation has a connection to the same theory of creation as Victor did in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein.”  John Kramer (Jigsaw) puts individuals in his traps to represent their immoral flaws in life.  Through these traps, Jigsaw wants his victims to gain a “psychological transformation” and correct these flaws in order to pass on the “lesson” of understanding and appreciating the meaning of life.  In “Saw II” the second movie of this series, Jigsaw’s traps are actually a representation of him doing an internal killing of a monster inside of his victims as Victor created a monster physically.  Jigsaw’s recreation of his victims in “Saw II,” in my view, is a hidden “Frankenstein” plot.  This is represented by him “internally” re-creating his victims based on their immoral flaws.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a plot of Victor, a scientist, physically creating a person and “perform[ing] miracles” through science (Shelley 53).  His love for science leads him to this path of creation of his own monster.  Victor uses technology and scientific application to bring his monster alive.  These same types of elements of creation can be found within this movie “Saw II.”  While Victor creates a person physically, jigsaw has his own form of a mental creation within his victims, this can be known as a psychological transformation.  Jigsaw is trying to change the flaws of his victims through his traps in order for them to understand and appreciate life.  The final scene of “Saw II” can represent this transformation.   At the end of the movie, this transformation is shown by the “test” of detective Matthew’s patience and becoming a better dad/cop (Bousman 2005).  His test was his son, Daniel, in a house with seven strangers. This detective had a simple choice to stay in the same room with jigsaw and just have a simple conversation about his flaws until the end of the game.  With that conversation in that time limit, he would get a reward of a reunion with his son.   Matthews decided to not listen to Jigsaw and goes to the house where he believes that his son is, but instead is a trap of containment for the rest of his life.    This is a representation of the consequences of Matthews failing his “test,” thus failing to allow a new psychological transformation within himself and learning how to perfect his immorals.  This represents Matthews failing this transformation stage of gaining new values and fixing his flaws.  For example, in Frankenstein’s creation scene, he has a lot gadgets and methods that he uses to bring his monster alive.  Well, with jigsaw these strangers in this house are the gadgets and methods that he uses to bring alive the new person he wants inside of Matthews.

This final scene has many elements which add to this theory of creation just like the Frankenstein creation scene with Victor.  First, this scene actually has two elements of “Frankenstein” in one.  It has flashbacks of the gruesome killings of the victims that were in the house as they failed to pass their test of that psychological transformation.  Blood everywhere death around every corner, and to think that those victims were there because of detective Matthews and the “monster” living within himself.  These flashbacks represent not only the creation scene of Victor’s monster but also the death scene of his wife, Elizabeth.  Both of these scenes directly represent the transformation that jigsaw wants from his victims because in this final scene of “Saw II” death is being demonstrated by these victims dying while there is a creation of Matthews  trying to take place.  This is shown by his decision to disobey jigsaw’s commands (failing his transformation process).  This can relate to the death scene of Victor’s wife because first, Victor and jigsaw has the same emotional response of sorrow to their deaths.  Victor is upset that his creation killed his wife while jigsaw is upset that his victim did not go through his metaphoric creation of a new person.   Also, another element in this correlation between these scenes is theme of birth and death.  In this movie Jigsaw says “You must meet death in order to be reborn” (Bousman 2005).  This element relates to “Frankenstein” because after his monster brutally kills his new wife Elizabeth, Victor tries to bring her back (rebirth).  He tries to reconstruct her new birth as jigsaw tries to reconstruct a new birth within his victim (Matthews).

Towards the beginning of the scene there is dark lighting and as the plot is being revealed the lighting gets brighter.  This is actually a review process of the test that Matthews is going through.  This scene is in connection with Victor’s creation scene because it has scientific application involved and the technique of using machines.  Victor creates his monster with technical machines while jigsaw kills his monster with a “psychological machine” of using these victims to represent his flaws.  Each and every one of these victims where in the house because they had some connection to Matthews and his flaws.  These victims are being used as a machine, the same way Victor used machines to create his monster.  These victims are being used to transform Matthews by forcing him to learn a lesson of his flaws.  The difference between these two creation scenes are the physical and mental realities of them.  Victor’s monster is being physically created from head to toe while Jigsaw monster (victim) is being transformed on a more mental level and have a change of values and views.   Both of these scenes have a connection to applying scientific application to “human nature” (Shelley 59).

The element of fear and sacrifice relates “Frankenstein” and “Saw II.”  In this final scene of “Saw II” the elements of fear and sacrifice are represented with the flashbacks of Matthews’ test.  Fear is shown as the victims went through there test and sacrifice is shown as one by one these victims lost their lives.  Jigsaw is demonstrating a somewhat beneficial sacrifice of others for a greater cause of good.    The traps that Jigsaw put all these victims in, to test Matthews are a direct correlation to their external fears (phobias).  Jigsaw uses these phobias against these victims because they are making immoral decisions.  So, these people are not really victims because they put themselves in this situation of becoming part of this sacrifice.  These tests are not only for Matthews but are sub-tests for the seven people in the house to recognize their flaws as well.  Jigsaw wants these people to change for the better, so he wants them to have an internal fear of staying immoral and less humane.

In Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” the close reading of the text suggests the elements of fear and sacrifice.   Fear is represented from Victor when the monster threatens him with saying “…I will cause fear…” (Shelley 129), and Victor replies, “I intend… to reason…” (Shelley 129).  This demonstrates that by the monster threatening Victor, he has no choice but to comply with his demands (because of his fear).  Sacrifice is demonstrated in this scene by Victor stating to the monster before he refused to make another companion, “…you may torture me, but I will never consent” (Shelley 128).  From this quote Victor is sacrificing everything he cares for (Elizabeth) by not taking his monster’s threats seriously.  The monster is willing to sacrifice his exploration of the world for the need and love of a companion, “I swear to you, by the earth which I inhabit…with the companion you bestow….” (Shelley 130).  His monster is willing to sacrifice roaming around earth in order to have a companion, but Victor does not fall for it. Victor has suffered a lot from this creation, which shows that there are consequences with playing the role of God. Just like how the victims of Jigsaw did not gain their new lesson of life that he wanted them to learn (through their traps).

The different aspect of the film demonstrates fear and sacrifice to the viewers. In “Saw II,” the final scene, the audience understands the fear of the victims by there being a tremendous amount of blood.   During the flashbacks in this final scene, Matthews and the other seven victims had blood on them as the scene only shows a short clip of each of the seven victims.  This 5-10 second clip with blood present on their body suggests their fear of going through this “transformation” of becoming a new person.  Blood is one of the main elements that suggests fear to the audience because it represents death itself or near death experiences.  Matthews of course is shown with the most blood because this plot is all about his transformation.  He is the reason why all of the victims are there (also with their sub-Transformations).  This leads to sacrifice, the camera angles of this final scene leads to dark lighting.  This dark lighting in the final scene suggests the fact that the victims are sacrificing themselves to the “Transformation” process of Matthews. Victims being attacked or sacrificed by the monster or killer usually represent dark lighting. Between that 5-10 second time intervals the victims have blood on them with a dark lighting, which now you know means that they fear going into their own Transformation process and they are being sacrificed in order for Matthews to have his.

In comparison with each other, both Victor and Jigsaw, in the end, is disappointed with their creation of “new life.”  Victor’s monster goes off and kills his lovely bride and has his “beauty of [his] dream vanished.”(Shelley 61). Victor wants his creation to disappear from his life because his dream from the beginning of that creature was now vanished.  Jigsaw’s dream of his re-creation of his victim (Matthews) was also vanished.  It was vanished not because his monster harmed his lifestyle or took something or someone away from him, but because he did not pass the test of gaining new values and a new self.  So, by Matthews not passing the test, he failed the creation process and transformation of a new self within in him.  This can be similar to when Victor realized that he was disappointed in his actions of creating his own monster, because of the responsibility of being that monster’s father.  If the values and goals of these two creators are compared then Jigsaw values his attempts of re-creation within in victims while Victor soon regrets it.  Both these creators have the same goal of applying the scientific method to reaching miracles but one supports it while the author disgraces it.  Also, what connects these two creators is the twisted “Father-Son” element of these stories.  Victor is the father of his monster while Jigsaw is the father of his victim by showing his victim a new way of life and appreciating it.  “Saw II” can be represented as another “Frankenstein” plot not by there just being science used in the movie, but the significance and consequences of “creation” being shown (Shelley 54).  Jigsaw uses these horror traps to create a theory of “rebirth” inside of his victims as Victor uses his machines to create an actual living person.  “Saw II” is a hidden “Frankenstein” story because he has the same goal of wanting to be a creator of changing human nature and controlling it.  Elements like fear and sacrifice bring these two together in comparison with each other.  From my personal experience I never would have thought that these two different pieces would have a connection to each other, but by finding these elements, they are alike. This represents that readers cannot just view this movie plot as a gruesome non-meaning horror scene.  It can be viewed as a psychological movie that has a lot of “Frankenstein” elements that requires deeper thinking than just being terrified by the movie.

Reflect:  I feel this essay will be my best work yet.  My skills of analysis has gotten better and my syntax also.  What I feel I need to work on is my grammar and my word choice.

Honor Code: I pledge my word of honor that I have abided by the Washington College Honor Code while completing this assignment. M.M.

Bibliography

1.)   Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 2nd ed. Boston, New York: Bedford/St. Martin, 2000. 40-70. Print.

2.)   “Saw II,” Darren Lynn Bousman. Twisted Pictures. Lion Gate Films. 2005.

Original version of final project

Melanie Mavins

March 19, 2010

Professor Meehan

“A Theory of Re-creation within Thyself”

You see this man trapping his victims and killing them in brutal and what seems as unjustified ways. What you may not recognize is that this film of “Saw II” maybe seen as a simple plot of gruesome killings, but this movie has more insight to offer. This movie is a theory of a psychological re-creation within these victims.  This same theory of creation has a connection to the same theory of creation as Victor did in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein.”  John Kramer (Jigsaw) puts individuals in his traps to represent their immoral flaws in life.  Through these traps, Jigsaw wants his victims to gain a “psychological transformation” and correct these flaws in order to pass on the “lesson” of understanding and appreciating the meaning of life.  In “Saw II” the second movie of this series, Jigsaw’s traps are actually a representation of him doing an internal killing of a monster inside of his victims as Victor created a monster physically.  Jigsaw’s recreation of his victims in “Saw II,” in my view, is a hidden “Frankenstein” plot.  This is represented by him “internally” re-creating his victims based on their immoral flaws.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a plot of Victor, a scientist, physically creating a person and “perform[ing] miracles” (Shelley, 53) through science.  His love for science leads him to this path of creation of his own monster.  Victor uses technology and scientific application to bring his monster alive.  These same types of elements of creation can be found within this movie “Saw II.”  While Victor creates a person physically, jigsaw has his own form of a mental creation within his victims, this can be known as a psychological transformation.  Jigsaw is trying to change the flaws of his victims through his traps in order for them to understand and appreciate life.  This transformation can be represented by the final scene of “Saw II.”   At the end of the movie, this transformation is shown by the “test” of detective Matthew’s patience and becoming a better dad/cop (Bousman, 2005).  His test was his son, Daniel, in a house with seven strangers. This detective had a simple choice to stay in the same room with jigsaw and just have a simple conversation about his flaws until the end of the game.  With that conversation in that time limit, he would get a reward of a reunion with his son.   Matthews decided to not listen to Jigsaw and goes to the house where he believes that his son is, but instead is a trap of containment for the rest of his life.    This is a representation of the consequences of Matthews failing his “test,” thus failing to allow a new psychological transformation within himself and learning how to perfect his immorals.  This represents Matthews failing this transformation stage of gaining new values and fixing his flaws.  For example, in Frankenstein’s creation scene, he has a lot gadgets and methods that he uses to bring his monster alive.  Well, with jigsaw these strangers in this house are the gadgets and methods that he uses to bring alive the new person he wants inside of Matthews.

This final scene has many elements which add to this theory of creation just like the Frankenstein creation scene with Victor.  First, this scene actually has two elements of “Frankenstein” in one.  It has flashbacks of the gruesome killings of the victims that were in the house as they failed to pass their test of that psychological transformation.  Blood everywhere death around every corner, and to think that those victims were there because of detective Matthews and the “monster” living within himself.  These flashbacks represent not only the creation scene of Victor’s monster but also the death scene of his wife, Elizabeth.  Both of these scenes directly represent the transformation that jigsaw wants from his victims because in this final scene of “Saw II” death is being demonstrated by these victims dying while there is a creation of Matthews  trying to take place.  This is shown by his decision to disobey jigsaw’s commands (failing his transformation process).  This can relate to the death scene of Victor’s wife because first, Victor and jigsaw has the same emotional response of sorrow to their deaths.  Victor is upset that his creation killed his wife while jigsaw is upset that his victim did not go through his metaphoric creation of a new person.   Also, another element in this correlation between these scenes is theme of birth and death.  In this movie Jigsaw says “You must meet death in order to be reborn” (Bousman, 2005).  This element relates to “Frankenstein” because after his monster brutally kills his new wife Elizabeth, Victor tries to bring her back (rebirth).  He tries to reconstruct her new birth as jigsaw tries to reconstruct a new birth within his victim (Matthews).

Towards the beginning of the scene there is dark lighting and as the plot is being revealed the lighting gets brighter.  This is actually a review process of the test that Matthews is going through.  This scene is in connection with Victor’s creation scene because it has scientific application involved and the technique of using machines.  Victor creates his monster with technical machines while jigsaw kills his monster with a “psychological machine” of using these victims to represent his flaws.  Each and every one of these victims where in the house because they had some connection to Matthews and his flaws.  These victims are being used as a machine, the same way Victor used machines to create his monster.  These victims are being used to transform Matthews by forcing him to learn a lesson of his flaws.  The difference between these two creation scenes are the physical and mental realities of them.  Victor’s monster is being physically created from head to toe while Jigsaw monster (victim) is being transformed on a more mental level and have a change of values and views.   Both of these scenes have a connection to applying scientific application to “human nature” (Shelley, 59).

In comparison with each other, both Victor and Jigsaw, in the end, is disappointed with their creation of “new life.”  Victor’s monster goes off and kills his lovely bride and has his “beauty of [his] dream vanished.”(Shelley, 61). Victor wants his creation to disappear from his life because his dream from the beginning of that creature was now vanished.  Jigsaw’s dream of his re-creation of his victim (Matthews) was also vanished.  It was vanished not because his monster harmed his lifestyle or took something or someone away from him, but because he did not pass the test of gaining new values and a new self.  So, by Matthews not passing the test, he failed the creation process and transformation of a new self within in him.  This can be similar to when Victor realized that he was disappointed in his actions of creating his own monster, because of the responsibility of being that monster’s father.  If the values and goals of these two creators are compared then Jigsaw values his attempts of re-creation within in victims while Victor soon regrets it.  Both these creators have the same goal of applying the scientific method to reaching miracles but one supports it while the author disgraces it.  Also, what connects these two creators is the twisted “Father-Son” element of these stories.  Victor is the father of his monster while Jigsaw is the father of his victim by showing his victim a new way of life and appreciating it.  “Saw II” can be represented as another “Frankenstein” plot not by there just being science used in the movie, but the significance and consequences of “creation” (54) being shown.  Jigsaw uses these horror traps to create a theory of “rebirth” inside of his victims as Victor uses his machines to create an actual living person.  “Saw II” is a hidden “Frankenstein” story because he has the same goal of wanting to be a creator of changing human nature and controlling it.  This represents that readers cannot just view this movie plot as a gruesome non meaning horror scene.  It can be viewed as a psychological movie that has a lot of “Frankenstein” elements that requires deeper thinking than just being terrified by the movie.

Reflect:  I feel this essay will be my best work yet.  My skills of analysis has gotten better and my syntax also.  What I feel I need to work on is my grammar and my word choice.

Honor Code: I pledge my word of honor that I have abided by the Washington College Honor Code while completing this assignment. M.M.

Bibliography

1.)   Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 2nd ed. Boston, New York: Bedford/St. Martin, 2000. 40-70. Print.

2.)   “Saw II,” Darren Lynn Bousman. Twisted Pictures. Lion Gate Films. 2005.

Self-Reflection

A New Door Opened to Writing/Reading

Starting my freshman year at Washington College as a biology major and a dance minor, writing courses were never my specialty.  I just saw them as courses that I had to complete in order to move to the next grade level, never really taking them seriously or with much thought.  Stepping into Professor Meehan’s English 101 took a toll on me and changed my perspective when it came to writing and reading.  In the very first week of his course he asked us “How in the past have we learned the structure of an essay?”  I never thought about my own personal writing style, I only wrote down what came to mine.  Then he asked us to complete a “To-Do” list, which was a list of things that we needed to improve on in this course when it came to writing.

I never thought of improving my writing because I just thought it was just thoughts that literally came out of your head to a paper or a computer.  On my list I wrote some things such as analysis, thesis statements, quotes, as the things that I felt I needed to work on with my writing.  This course started off with us having to complete an autobiography about basically what is significant reading and writing to us and what experiences have shaped that significance.  This piece that I had to write opened my eyes to love of writing papers.  This professor took his time with me and help me understand my style of writing and that contributed to this love that I felt for writing as of right now.  As this course went on, more papers were written and my grades got higher, higher than I could ever imagine.  By the end of this course everything that I needed to work on from my “To-Do” list was improved because I finally understood the purpose of writing that I never understood through  my whole high school career.

Now that English 101 is over and I am stepping into a higher course of English I am ready to challenge myself here at Washington College with my new set of writing skills and my new “To-Do” list.  This particular piece in this portfolio was one of my best works as a writer in English 101.  I chose to revise it to add more depth to this essay.  This essay is a demonstration of how my ability to construct anaylysis, make a clear thesis statement, and intergrate quotes has improved from my “To-Do” list.  For example, here is a thesis statement that took me 1 week to perfect.  In “Saw II” the second movie of this series, Jigsaw’s traps are actually a representation of him doing an internal killing of a monster inside of his victims as Victor created a monster physically.  Jigsaw’s recreation of his victims in “Saw II,” in my view, is a hidden “Frankenstein” plot.  This is represented by him “internally” re-creating his victims based on their immoral flaws.  Over this week with the help of my professor, it took me a lot of revisions to make this thesis statement more concise and straight to the point.  During this process I had to take out words or phrases that did not help my reader understand the point of my essay.   This paper is called “A Theory of Re-Creation within Thyself,” which is a comparison of how the movie Saw II is really an undercover Frankenstein remake from the past. Enjoy!

You Tube: Friend or Foe? (Final version)

Melanie Mavins

April 10, 2010

Professor Meehan

You Tube: Friend or Foe?

You are sitting surfing the web on a computer and you come across a website where you can watch videos, have a social connection to people, and find educational information on various topics.  This site that is new to you is called You Tube; you view it as just a social network, but in actuality it has more complexity to offer than that.  Sven Birkerts, the author of “The Gutenberg Elegies,” may view this site as a non-literary medium and an anti- educational medium.  However, the ability to find educational information on any topic is the key factor that contributes to this digital medium and its legitimacy as a text.  You Tube is educational because a user can find not only videos about any informative topic from cultures to nuclear physics, but also a user can read comments about the videos that can add depth and background to the video.   Other users responding to the comments make You Tube a social network. I disagree with Birkert’s theory that all electronic mediums cannot be an educational tool because You Tube is a prime example that some can be just as beneficial as a printed source could be to a student.

Birkerts has a firm argument that this world is undergoing an unchangeable process/ metamorphosis of transforming from “print orientation and [into] that of electronic systems” (Birkerts 121). He claims this as a negative change as he refers to the electronic mediums as “the devil…” (Birkerts 211) that took away his old private world and changed it by “booting up, flaming, [and] and commanding vast systems and networks….” (Birkerts 211).  This makes him fear for the future students because these electronic mediums distract the younger generation.  Birkerts believes that the electronic world is too public.  You Tube fits into this category because of the multiple videos, cyber chatting, and hypertext that this site has to offer.  Everyday people around the world focus less and less on the use of a “print medium[s]” (Birkerts 123), and focuses more on the electronic age of using computers, blogging, communicating through computers, hyper texting, etc.

I disagree with Birkerts; this electronic/digital medium opens portals and opportunities for everyone in the world to educational factors.  Watching videos on You Tube is like a different language.  This language allows users different pathways to move around the site and to get connected with different people, and expose them to different education lessons of their choice. You Tube has “NONLINEAR structures” (Hayles 37) that Katherine Hayles, author of “Writing Machines,” would argue makes You Tube uniquely different from printed books but which offers the same literary information.  Books are linear because readers can go from the top of the page “down the page” (Birkerts 122), page after page.  In contrast on You Tube the user can have the opportunity of accessing information in no particular order and the user can click on a link that takes you to a complete different path.  This is a new generation of students who are used to reading a computer screen rather than the linear structure of a book.  This age has accommodated too change in the same way that the world had a similar change years back from using  “….pencil[s] [and] pen[s]…[to]…typewriter[s]…” (Birkerts 156-157).  This society has clearly adapted to that change in the past (so what is the different between then and now?), change is evolution. For example, in an article called, “Is Google Making Us Stupid?,” Nicholas Carr   discusses the effects that electronic mediums are having on students.  Students’ skim not read full out anymore and that lead them to be lazy towards printed works.   I disagree; my generation is socialized to using these electronic mediums for all aspects of life. In my college classes today most of our assignments require us use to computers to find information and prepare our papers.  Like Birkerts said, this is an ongoing “process” (Birkerts 153), so why try to fight it? We might as well accommodate it.  You Tube is one of the answers to that.  With You Tube videos, students can watch, for example, movies or history channel episodes on the same authors that Birkerts lists (Henry James, Shakespeare, and Ellison) that students should read in order to understand old literature filled with “diction and syntax” (Birkerts 19).   I am  not saying that we should get rid of the physical readings of novels and other literature . be we should understand that sites like You Tube can enhance the reading.  When you view a clip on You Tube about for example, Shakespeare or Ellison, you can have access to people’s comments about the subject that can create a social environment of allowing you to gain more information of that subject.

Electronic mediums are an upcoming change from privacy to being public.  For this point, Birkerts possibly could be right.  Maybe this new generation will not be able to handle You Tube because of it being too public with postings of videos, music, anything on the web.  Even though You Tube has educational facts that can be offered on it about any subject, maybe students will be distracted by these videos or music and not pay attention to the educational aspects of this digital medium.  For example, there have been times where I have been on You Tube looking for topic X and end up on topic z.  Some would say that this new generation no longer takes the time to read these “slow works” and have an physical intake of information, this new generation is on the go and interested in receiving the information at a fast pace.     For example, it is true that lots of students access spark notes online because it is fast and quick to find the information that you want.  People like the author of “Is Google Making Us Stupid,” claim that electronic mediums such as You Tube gains information from us (history or background) more than it gives information to us.  For example, going back to the article “Is Google Making Us Stupid?”  “The idea that our minds is not only built into the workings of the Internet, the more links we click and pages we view—the more opportunities Google and other companies gain to collect information about us and to feed us advertisements”(Carr). So for my argument stating that You Tube can be literature, it is true, that You Tube can be literary; it is just the possibility of students taking this opportunity or not.     So, Maybe Brikerts has a point to be afraid of this new electronic world. So electronic mediums such as You Tube can be a flawed as a learning tool to students.  This leads to the question whether You Tube is a friend or a Foe?

To answer this question, You Tube and also other electronic mediums are our friends.  It is true that digital mediums such as You Tube is attached with multiple flaws that can lead people to have the opinion that the new electronic age is a negative affect when it comes to education and gaining information for students of today.  In reality, You Tube is a helping hand to students when it comes to education, gaining information, and being a social network.  You Tube can be a distraction in some cases with its “NONLINEAR structures ” (Hayles 37) and features like the videos, pictures, and music.  What about the literature books with pictures or other distracting features that leads their readers away from the main point of the text.  For example, once I read this book that had jokes at the bottom of every page with pictures that distracted me from understanding the point of the book.  So why say electronic mediums can be a distraction where as printed works can have distractions also, there is no difference between the two.  Electronic mediums such as You Tube are adapted to the new generation of students in this time period.  Of course, this generation has a fast pace of gaining information and not taking the time to “slow down” like the pace of reading printed works.  Students want to get straight to the point and find the main idea; they do not have the patience anymore like their parents or grandparents to grasp the beginning of a story or the plot.  This is not necessarily a negative aspect; for example, when it comes to researching you have to be able to gain huge amounts of information in a short amount of time to write papers or to give an report for education.  When you create an account on You Tube or any other electronic mediums, the website “remembers” who you are.  It tracks your interest of music or type of videos you like.  This also cannot be necessarily bad.  This makes it easier for you to search for things or easier to find information about things that you like.  For example, on You Tube, it “remembers” that I am interested in videos about anatomy and Langston Hughes.  This factor of electronic mediums in general brings students closer to education and makes it easier for them to go through the gaining information process.

You Tube and also other electronic mediums are our friends. “Research that once required days in the stacks or periodical rooms of libraries can now be done in minutes” (Carr).  Access is the key to learning about different subjects, gaining information, and searching the world.  You Tube and other digital mediums are this access that people need as a friend to gain educational information.  This is the key and purpose of printed books, “Gaining educational information across from one person to another.”  This is the theory that Birkerts and Hayles are trying to explain, the traditional method of people getting information (reading books) has been processed and changed into them receiving  this information in a totally different new way ( digital mediums).  You Tube fits into this theory of this “Transmission” (Birkerts 159) from this traditional world to a new because on You Tube, you can gain information on authors, poetry, history, geography etc., the same information that you can get from all the books in the world.  The only contrast is that instead of traveling from place to place or from country to country, you can do this entire sitting right in front of a computer screen with one place of access, You Tube.

Reflection: I think that this essay is really argument and will really make the reader think about this argument over electronic vs. printed works.  This is a strong essay and the analysis part needs to be worked on a little.

I pledge my word of honor that I have abided by the Washington College Honor Code while completing this assignment. M.M.

References

1.)    Birkerts, Sven. The Gutenberg Elegies. New York: Faber and Faber Inc., 1999. 37-170. Print.

2.)   Carr, Nicholas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?.” Atlantic Magazine July.2008: n. page. Web. 25 Apr 2010. <http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2008/07/is-google-making-us-stupid/6868/>.

3.)   Hayles, N. Katherine. Writing Machines. Cambridge and London: MIT Press, 2002. 20-50. Print.

You Tube: Friend or Foe?

Your sitting surfing the web and you come across a site where you can watch videos, connect to people and find information on various topics.  This site that you are new to is called You Tube; you view it as just a social network, but actuality it has more to offer than that.  An author named Sven Birkerts of the novel “The Gutenburg Elegies,” may view this site as an non literary  medium that is to public for this “transformation” (120) into the electronic age for the new student generation.  However, what was mentioned earlier about you tube being able to find information on any topic is the key fact that contributes that this digital medium, not fitting into Birkerts category  of being non literary and disagreeing with his assumptions that all electronic mediums are useless but actually some like  You Tube  are useful educational wise to students.  I  have disagreement to Birkerts theory to all electronic mediums being unhelpful educational wise because You Tube is my prime example that some can be just as beneficial as a printed source could be to a student.

Birkerts view electronic mediums as “the devil…” (211) that took away his old private world and changed it by “booting up, flaming, commanding…” (211) , this makes him fear for the future students in the new generation. He sees that these electronic mediums as distracting to the younger generation.  Electronic mediums are an upcoming change from privacy to being public.  For this point, Birkerts possibly could be right.  Maybe this new generation will not be able to handle You Tube because of it being to public with postings of videos, music, anything on the web.  Even though You Tube has educational facts that can be offered on it about any subject, maybe students will be distracted by these videos or music and not pay attention to the educational aspects of this digital medium.  So for my argument stating that You Tube can be literature, it is true, that You Tube can be literary; it is just the possibility of students  taking this opportunity or not.

Social Networks

These upcoming social networks of  today, for example, facebook, myspace, twitter, you tube, etc.; proves Birkerts theory of this world transforming from “print orientation and [into] that of electronic systems” (121).  Everyday people around the world focus less and less on the use of a “print medium[s]” (123), and focuses more on the electronic age of using computers, blogging, communicating through computers, hypertexting, y0u name it. You Tube, in my opinion, is the main example of evidence that demonstrates Birkerts discussion of “Transmission” (159) from this  print world to electronic in his two chapters.

This electronic/digital medium opens portals and opportunities for everyone in the world to communicate with one another.  This language that is trying to get across has different pathways to move around the site and to get connected with different people, almost like a hypertext.  Matter of fact, I would argue that you tube as an digital medium is a sort of hypertext.  I would argue this because of the “NONLINEAR structures” (37) that Hayles would say  makes you tube uniquely different from printed books.  This website not only has language on it that could be read in different ways, up and down, side ways, etc., but also, this website has videos and music that can connect people also rather than just  the text.

On this website people can actually see each other or send a track of music back and forth to one another giving information across that medium.  Wait, but isn’t this the purpose of books, facebook, twitter, etc., “Getting information across to another person or multiple people.”  This is the theory that Birkerts and Hayles is trying to explain, the traditional method of people getting information (reading books) has been processed and changed into them receiving  this information in a totally different new way ( digital mediums).  You Tube fits into this theory of this “Transmission” (159) from this traditional world to a new because on You Tube, you can gain information on authors, poetry, history, geographic etc., the same information that you can get from all the books in the world.  The only difference is that instead of traveling from place to place or from country to country, you can do all this  sitting right in front of a computer screen with one place of access You Tube.

A theory of re-creation within thyself (Complete version)

Melanie Mavins

March 19, 2010

Professor Meehan

“A Theory of Re-creation within Thyself”

You see this man trapping his victims and killing them in brutal and what seems as unjustified ways. What you may not recognize is that this film of “Saw II” maybe seen as a simple plot of gruesome killings, but this movie has more insight to offer. This movie is a theory of a psychological re-creation within these victims.  This same theory of creation has a connection to the same theory of creation as Victor did in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein.”  John Kramer (Jigsaw) puts individuals in his traps to represent their immoral flaws in life.  Through these traps, Jigsaw wants his victims to gain a “psychological transformation” and correct these flaws in order to pass on the “lesson” of understanding and appreciating the meaning of life.  In “Saw II” the second movie of this series, Jigsaw’s traps are actually a representation of him doing an internal killing of a monster inside of his victims as Victor created a monster physically.  Jigsaw’s recreation of his victims in “Saw II,” in my view, is a hidden “Frankenstein” plot.  This is represented by him “internally” re-creating his victims based on their immoral flaws.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a plot of Victor, a scientist, physically creating a person and “perform[ing] miracles” (Shelley, 53) through science.  His love for science leads him to this path of creation of his own monster.  Victor uses technology and scientific application to bring his monster alive.  These same types of elements of creation can be found within this movie “Saw II.”  While Victor creates a person physically, jigsaw has his own form of a mental creation within his victims, this can be known as a psychological transformation.  Jigsaw is trying to change the flaws of his victims through his traps in order for them to understand and appreciate life.  This transformation can be represented by the final scene of “Saw II.”   At the end of the movie, this transformation is shown by the “test” of detective Matthew’s patience and becoming a better dad/cop (Bousman, 2005).  His test was his son, Daniel, in a house with seven strangers. This detective had a simple choice to stay in the same room with jigsaw and just have a simple conversation about his flaws until the end of the game.  With that conversation in that time limit, he would get a reward of a reunion with his son.   Matthews decided to not listen to Jigsaw and goes to the house where he believes that his son is, but instead is a trap of containment for the rest of his life.    This is a representation of the consequences of Matthews failing his “test,” thus failing to allow a new psychological transformation within himself and learning how to perfect his immorals.  This represents Matthews failing this transformation stage of gaining new values and fixing his flaws.  For example, in Frankenstein’s creation scene, he has a lot gadgets and methods that he uses to bring his monster alive.  Well, with jigsaw these strangers in this house are the gadgets and methods that he uses to bring alive the new person he wants inside of Matthews.

This final scene has many elements which add to this theory of creation just like the Frankenstein creation scene with Victor.  First, this scene actually has two elements of “Frankenstein” in one.  It has flashbacks of the gruesome killings of the victims that were in the house as they failed to pass their test of that psychological transformation.  Blood everywhere death around every corner, and to think that those victims were there because of detective Matthews and the “monster” living within himself.  These flashbacks represent not only the creation scene of Victor’s monster but also the death scene of his wife, Elizabeth.  Both of these scenes directly represent the transformation that jigsaw wants from his victims because in this final scene of “Saw II” death is being demonstrated by these victims dying while there is a creation of Matthews  trying to take place.  This is shown by his decision to disobey jigsaw’s commands (failing his transformation process).  This can relate to the death scene of Victor’s wife because first, Victor and jigsaw has the same emotional response of sorrow to their deaths.  Victor is upset that his creation killed his wife while jigsaw is upset that his victim did not go through his metaphoric creation of a new person.   Also, another element in this correlation between these scenes is theme of birth and death.  In this movie Jigsaw says “You must meet death in order to be reborn” (Bousman, 2005).  This element relates to “Frankenstein” because after his monster brutally kills his new wife Elizabeth, Victor tries to bring her back (rebirth).  He tries to reconstruct her new birth as jigsaw tries to reconstruct a new birth within his victim (Matthews).

Towards the beginning of the scene there is dark lighting and as the plot is being revealed the lighting gets brighter.  This is actually a review process of the test that Matthews is going through.  This scene is in connection with Victor’s creation scene because it has scientific application involved and the technique of using machines.  Victor creates his monster with technical machines while jigsaw kills his monster with a “psychological machine” of using these victims to represent his flaws.  Each and every one of these victims where in the house because they had some connection to Matthews and his flaws.  These victims are being used as a machine, the same way Victor used machines to create his monster.  These victims are being used to transform Matthews by forcing him to learn a lesson of his flaws.  The difference between these two creation scenes are the physical and mental realities of them.  Victor’s monster is being physically created from head to toe while Jigsaw monster (victim) is being transformed on a more mental level and have a change of values and views.   Both of these scenes have a connection to applying scientific application to “human nature” (Shelley, 59).

In comparison with each other, both Victor and Jigsaw, in the end, is disappointed with their creation of “new life.”  Victor’s monster goes off and kills his lovely bride and has his “beauty of [his] dream vanished.”(Shelley, 61). Victor wants his creation to disappear from his life because his dream from the beginning of that creature was now vanished.  Jigsaw’s dream of his re-creation of his victim (Matthews) was also vanished.  It was vanished not because his monster harmed his lifestyle or took something or someone away from him, but because he did not pass the test of gaining new values and a new self.  So, by Matthews not passing the test, he failed the creation process and transformation of a new self within in him.  This can be similar to when Victor realized that he was disappointed in his actions of creating his own monster, because of the responsibility of being that monster’s father.  If the values and goals of these two creators are compared then Jigsaw values his attempts of re-creation within in victims while Victor soon regrets it.  Both these creators have the same goal of applying the scientific method to reaching miracles but one supports it while the author disgraces it.  Also, what connects these two creators is the twisted “Father-Son” element of these stories.  Victor is the father of his monster while Jigsaw is the father of his victim by showing his victim a new way of life and appreciating it.  “Saw II” can be represented as another “Frankenstein” plot not by there just being science used in the movie, but the significance and consequences of “creation” (54) being shown.  Jigsaw uses these horror traps to create a theory of “rebirth” inside of his victims as Victor uses his machines to create an actual living person.  “Saw II” is a hidden “Frankenstein” story because he has the same goal of wanting to be a creator of changing human nature and controlling it.  This represents that readers cannot just view this movie plot as a gruesome non meaning horror scene.  It can be viewed as a psychological movie that has a lot of “Frankenstein” elements that requires deeper thinking than just being terrified by the movie.

Reflect:  I feel this essay will be my best work yet.  My skills of analysis has gotten better and my syntax also.  What I feel I need to work on is my grammar and my word choice.

Honor Code: I pledge my word of honor that I have abided by the Washington College Honor Code while completing this assignment. M.M.

Bibliography

1.)    Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 2nd ed. Boston, New York: Bedford/St. Martin, 2000. 40-70. Print.

2.)    “Saw II,” Darren Lynn Bousman. Twisted Pictures. Lion Gate Films. 2005.

A theory of re-creation within thyself

Many horror movie lovers would view the “Saw” movie series as a simple story about a man killing his victums in weird and spontanteous traps, but this  theory of re-creation that this man puts forth actually  has a connection to the same theory of creation as Victor did in Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstien.”  Jigsaw as they would call him, puts individuals in traps that would represent a flaw in their live style and represents a “lesson” that they have to learn.  In “Saw II” the second movie of this series, Jigsaw shows this representation of this creation within individuals as each individual go through their trap and has the choice within their self  of succeding or failing.  These scenes of these individuals going through their traps demonstrates the same type of creation within each person that Victor shows with his creation of his monster.  The Jigsaw series is really another Frankenstein by Jigsaw trying to re-create or change his victums through his traps that he personally set up for them based on their non moral ideal flaws.

The  scene that I would focus on for this writing project would be the scene where Jigsaw reveals the plot and the purpose of the whole movie to it being about the “test” of one police detective (Matthews).   A police man is called to the scene after a message is found on the wall directed at him. Later, he follows a SWAT team to an abandoned steel factory, where they find John Kramer( Jigsaw, who is heavily weakened from his cancer. Computer monitors in John’s lair show that eight people are trapped in an abandoned house: among them are Matthews’ son, who Eric previously argued with, and Amanda Young, ( Jigsaw’s only known survivor. The eight victims have two hours before the nerve gas filling the house kills them, but John promises Matthews that he’ll see his son in a “safe, secure state” if he simply talks with John for a while. Reluctantly, Matthews agrees to the conditions in order to buy time for the tech team to arrive and trace the video signal. Matthews disobeys Jigsaws rules and goes to the house where he believe he will find his son but instead ends up in a trap himself.  I would focus on this ending scene of matthews going in the house because towards the end, the movie reveals everything from why the eight victums are there to how this all connects to matthews and his son daniel.  This scene is very full and actually shows that matthews trap was actually his son being in the house with the other seven victums and the movie was about his test of  his flaws of being impaciente and an unfair cop.

This can represent “Frankenstein” by one element that Jigsaw always put in his traps.  The element of re-creation; he believes that each and everyone of his victims can make it through his traps thus learning their “lesson” and becoming a new person.  If they become a new person within their self, then that means they think differently, act differently, have a different mindset and attitude,  and the old them is completely dead.  Well, this can relate to Jigsaw being like Victor and creating his own monster; but it would not be a monster for worst but it would be a monster the better.  Jigsaw is having that same act of using technology, machines, and “the hidden law of science” (44).  The only difference between Jigsaw creating a new person or correcting their flaws to Victor creating his monster, is that Jigsaw wants to help people and not just experiment  for the love of science.

Project # 2

Melanie Mavins

February 22, 2010

Professor Meehan

“For Nothing Grows Without a Seed”

Though many readers have viewed Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein,” as a simple story about the creation of a monster, an intertextual connection to Paracelsus, emphasizes that there is a greater value of old science that people have lost with the emergence of the modern day science.  This lost value is demonstrated through the main character, Victor.  His conversations with his professors and his opinions of old science lead to the creation of Frankenstein and reveal that older science has worth. Shelley is demonstrating to her readers through an intertexual connection for example Paracelsus, that not only this novel is about a creation of a monster, but it is about how this monster’s master created him through the influence of the works of older science that discusses about miracles and making individual discoveries.

Victor has a heart gripping passion and love for science.  He starts this passion off with trying to understand the laws of nature. This passion leads him to stumbling across the works of Cornelius Agrippa (A German physician and occultist).  He enjoyed these works so much that he decided that pursuing science was his “fate” (46).  Shelley adds this discovery of Cornelius Agrippa to demonstrate how the works of older science influenced Victor to further his education.  To readers this intertexual reference show that it was the basics of science that brought insight and a “new light” (46) to Victor and what he wanted to do with his life.  He then enlightened his mind with more works of old science studies as well as Paracelsus and Albert Magnus.  Victor viewed these works of old science as giving him “the secrets of nature” (47).  Shelley puts this information of his love for these old sciences to show that older science has worth compared to modern day science.  It was the “seed” (204) of the field of science that encouraged him to make these discoveries.  Modern day science now is viewed as investigating and solving problems, but old science is the “root and soil” (204) of making discoveries.  Towards the end Victor creates his own monster based on his encouragement of old science, not the modern day science of his time.  Paracelsus directly discusses about creation, so Shelley reveals that Victor came across his idea of “perform[ing] miracles” from these works of old science.  In my view, Shelley has this metaphoric window of this intertexual reference to Paracelsus of revealing that older science inspired Victor to create Frankenstein.

When Victor continues his education at Ingolstadt he meets two professors that answer his questions about science.  While he was having a conversation with one of his professors, professor M.Krempe, a professor of natural philosophy, he discusses his love for the ancient science, but instead of getting encouragement for studying these works, his professor spites him.  His professor doubts that this old science has any significance to learn from because it was “entirely exploded” (46), and the modern science “possessed greater powers…”(46).  This professor thought of this ancient science as “exploded systems and useless names” (52).  Shelley uses this professor as a metaphor about the views of the old science compared to the new modern day science.  But, how can this knowledge of the old science be “useless” if it is the foundation of modern science.  Old scientists that made extraordinary discoveries and that answered a lot of questions about the earth cannot just be forgotten.  Those scientists in the past that dedicated their life to science have to be acknowledged and continued on to be remembered.  Their works are the “heart … [and] fruits” (204) of this field, according to Paracelsus.

Paracelsus argues that there cannot be a middle or an ending without a beginning.  The “seed” (204) determines if the fruit will grow or become rotten.  Relating this back to the value of older science, older science is the beginning that brought upon the great successes of modern science.  Older science created the initial discoveries that emerged science as a field in general. Shelley did not put background information on Victor’s love of science or how he came across it to entertain or inform the readers about how Frankenstein was created but; rather she put it there to make a statement. This statement was about how people of today value the works of new discoveries and solved problems but simply forget the works of the past when it comes to science.  Yes, old scientists like Cornelius Agrippa are in the textbook in order to respect their contributions to science, but what is being in a textbook compared to having companies named after them or even statue models built for them?  In this novel Shelley is quietly taking a stand against this lost value and is making a note of it through her novel.  She wants her readers to understand that professors like M. Krempe cannot discourage students like Victor of the right to let the works of old science influence their life. Shelley shows that Victor is influenced by old science by showing that he created Frankenstein as a reaction to the readings of old science.

After listening to Professor M. Krempe, Victor refused to take account of his opinion of this ancient science.  Victor sought for something to let him know that this science was not useless and for someone who agreed to the significance of this ancient science.  Professor M. Waldman was the hope that Victor was looking for.  In one of his lectures he explained the importantance of tracking down the discoveries that made today’s modern science possible.  This history of science “performed miracles” (53), and opened a door for what is known today about the world.  Paracelsus would agree with this professor’s view that, “elementary [science]” (53), is the reason why modern science is so successful today.   Science had to start somewhere from scratch in order to turn something from simple to complex.  This reassuring lecture from this professor opened Victor’s eyes to his own “Frankenstein” of a new creation within himself.  A creation of taking his knowledge and applying it to being successful.  Shelley wants readers to understand that “nothing grows without a seed, nothing is born without a seed, nothing multiplies without a seed, and in all fruits of the earth the seed is the most precious” (204).  This is a revelation that Shelley wants her readers to see about old science.  Forgetting old science is like forgetting where a person originated from, a person’s struggles and triumphs that directly makes them who they are today.  Old science is the key that created this “Frankenstein” of modern day science.

In this novel by Mary Shelley by intertexual connection to the works of old science like Paracelsus and Cornelius Agrippa, she wants her readers to view her novel as a window to understanding the lost value of old science compared to modern day science.  This author wants her readers to recognize the appreciation of old science from her novel.  People cannot cut off the root of old science because as long as people cherish the new modern day science they are actually cherishing old science because the root is the key that interconnects all of the discoveries of old science versus modern day science as one.

Reflection:  I think that in this essay I progress more with my argument and getting my point across.  I think this essay is a representation of me advancing on my To Do List and showing that I am following it.  For the next project I should work more on my quote integration.

I pledge my word of honor that I have abided by the Washington College Honor Code while completing this assignment. M.M.

Bibliography

1.)         Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. 2nd-edition. Boston, New York: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. 44-211. Print.

Frankenstein Equals Confusion

In this complicated novel there are many twists and turns when it comes to the creation of this old tale of Frankenstein.  This author, Mary Shelley, puts together different letters, characters, and references to other works in order to make this novel seem worthy to  be read, but did she put too much effort towards it?  A novel do not have to consist of complexed spelling words, multiple references to different works, or lengthy chapters in order to get a point and story across.  Reading is a task that is suppose to be enjoyable and inspiring.  I think  Gerald Graff would agree to this opinion as well, no one gains any type of lesson from literature that is  boring to them.  Reading is suppose to be interesting and straight to the point.

This novel begins with an introduction from the author then to letters from Walton to his sister about a story of Victor Frankenstein and his path to creating his monster.  After Walton tells his sister about this creature then the creature becomes the narrator and tells his side of the story.   With each letter there is a story that has a whole different view point and plot inside of it.  The format of the novel is too complex for its meaning.  Yes, the author is trying to portray a story through literature of an old tale but why should it be a puzzle to understand?  Why should readers have to flip the page back and forth and try to understand the for example, “paradise Lost” is a refrence that she is trying to put in the story.

Another point in this novel  where the author is trying to make the plot of the novel critical is  Victor Frankestein’s monster in general.  This monster is looked as a horrifying creature, but in this novel Shelley makes this monster have not only feelings for how people are scared of him but somewhat “educated.”  For example, in chapter 10 the monster is arguing  with Victor about “how [he] must be hated” (93) amongst the people.  This author turns this tale of this creature into a tale of a creature that recognizes not only what people think of him but also efficient syntax and grammer.

In conclusion, Shelley produced too much critical perspective into this novel in order to make it contemporary.  If the novel was less complex it would of had more of the exploration to the point  she was trying to reach.