This is a dedicated blog site for Dr. Renzi's Fall 2013 Course, ENG 462 Victorian Writing.
Sunday, December 8, 2013
Innocence and Monstrosity
Throughout all of the texts we have read over the course of the semester it has been interesting to see the way innocence as a theme plays out. In each of the stories, innocence can be seen as a segue to monstrosity. For instance, in Frankenstein, he is "born" innocent and he learns bitterness towards society. In Dracula, Lucy is protected and not taken seriously enough because she is too innocent to really know what is going on, and in turn is bitten numerous times. In Lois the Witch, Lois is so innocent and so good that the people assume she is a witch and kill her. Also, in The Turn of the Screw the children are "innocent" characters and are actually terrifying because they may or may not interact with ghosts. Although there are many other examples, the idea of innocence as a segue to monstrosity is manifested in "The Bloody Chamber." In the beginning of the story the text is plagued with references to her innocence, like the white dress, her hair still kinky from braids, her childish figure, etc. Her husband also talks down to her like one would speak to a child, and if you've missed the other clues, her sheets are bloodied after they've done the deed. It all builds up to childish innocence and curiosity which led the girl to expose the monstrosity that was in her new home and her new husband. It's almost as if she is seen as so innocent and timid that she couldn't possibly be curious enough to open the room, so once again her innocence and someone else's view of said innocence is monstrous for what it brings about. Do any of you think that it is possible for someone to be innocent and not have it lead to monstrous things? Can you think of any examples from our texts?
3 comments:
I think it is possible for someone to be innocent and still avoid monstrosity, but only in certain instances. I think it relates to how our talk about excess in class. All of those characters have been excessively innocent, in a sense, because that has essentially come to define them. Since it defines them, it's easier to undermine/challenge that idea.
If in this sense innocence is a precursor to monstrosity, then what does that mean for monstrosity itself?
If in this sense innocence is a precursor to monstrosity, then what does that mean for monstrosity itself?
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.