English Literature

Kurt Vonnegut Jr.s Mother Night is a masterpiece of Black Humor. Mother Night, is presented as the work of one Howard W. Campbell, Jr. who is a prisoner awaiting trial in Israel for Nazi war crimes, with Vonnegut as the editor of the work. Unlike many of Vonneguts other works, the story is not concerned with the future, it is set in present day settings with Howard reminiscing about his past. Howard dedicates his recollections to Mata Hari, a Dutch exotic dancer who was executed by the French on the charge of spying for Germany. Campbell identifies himself with Mata Hari, who, if the charges against her are to be believed, allowed French government officials to violate her, in order to gain information for Germany. Campbell too feels thoroughly and completely used and violated.

I closed my eyes windingly.What is it they say in the Chicago Stockyards about what they do to a pig
I dont know, said Wirtanen.

They boast that they find a use for everything about a pig but his squeal, I said.
So said Wirtanen.

Thats how I feel right now   I said, Take a pig thats been taken apart, whos had experts find a use for every part. By God  I think they even found a use for my squeal The part of me that wanted to tell the truth got turned into an expert liar The lover in me got turned into a pornographer The artist in me got turned into ugliness such as the world has rarely seen before.

Even my most cherished memories have now been converted into cat food, glue and liverwurst I said (Vonnegut Jr.).

In the introduction, Vonnegut rededicates the text that he has edited to Campbell himself, a man who served evil too openly and good too secretly, the crime of his time (Vonnegut Jr.). In his introduction to his edited text Vonnegut ascribes a moral to the story We are what we pretend to be, so we must be careful about what we pretend to be (Vonnegut Jr.). The story Campbell recounts in his cell is this Before the Second World War, Howard W. Campbell was an American writer living in Germany. He was married to a German woman, Helga and deeply in love with her. At the start of the war Campbell was approached by American intelligence and agreed to become a secret agent. He took up a job as a Nazi radio host and propagandist. He broadcasted secret messages out of Germany coded in his racist propaganda broadcasts. Campbell was extremely good as a Nazi propagandist, as his father-in-law, a Nazi police official notes you could never have served the enemy as well as you served us (Vonnegut Jr.). The Germans were deceived into thinking that he really was an enthusiastic American supporter of Nazism, even his wife believed him. Because of the Nazi propaganda he had to spread in order to maintain his cover, Campbell believes and admits to committing high treason, crimes against humanity, and crimes against his own conscience before the Israeli court (Vonnegut Jr.).

The Russians want Campbell in order to use him to show how America shelters fascist war criminals and to prove that the American government collaborated with the Nazis at the start of the Nazi regime. The Israelis know him only as a Nazi propagandist and want to hang him for war crimes. There are those to whom he is a hero. An extreme right-wing group of American white supremacists considers him a saint and a martyr in the holy Nazi cause (Vonnegut Jr.) they feel that they are indebted to him with a debt with a debt of gratitude that they will never be able to repay For having the courage to tell the truth during the war,  when everybody else was telling lies (Vonnegut Jr.). One of the persistent characters in the novel, Bernard B. OHare, an American Legion post Americanism chairman, named after Vonneguts real life war buddy and also depicted in Slaughterhouse-Five (Allen and Vonnegut Jr.), is Campbells  nemesis, his own personal Fury (Vonnegut Jr.). He has dedicated his life to destroying Campbell. The leader of Campbells racist fans is Lionel Jason David Jones, publisher of The White Christian Minutemen, a scabrous, illiterate, anti-Semitic, anti-Negro, and anti-Catholic hate sheet (Vonnegut Jr.). Campbell calls him a race-baiter who is ignorant and insane (Vonnegut Jr.), Campbell contrasts himself with Jones and says I am neither ignorant nor insane (Vonnegut Jr.).

Despite his assertion that he is not insane, Campbell is meant to be a schizophrenic character. In an interview with Charles Reilly Vonnegut says that the idea for the novel came to him from his conversation with a retired Naval Intelligence officer at a cocktail party, who told him that all undercover spies have to be schizophrenics otherwise they would either blow their cover of die of fright (Allen and Vonnegut Jr.).
Schizophrenia would explain the way Campbell immerses him in his cover job as a Nazi propagandist and does far more than he is required to do. One of the characteristics of Schizophrenics is that they are able to hold two mutually exclusive beliefs at the same time. Campbell says But Ive always known what I did. Ive always been able to live with what I did. How Through that simple and widespread boon to modern mankind  schizophrenia (Vonnegut Jr.). Schizophrenia would also mean that Campbell is innocent of the charge of committing war crimes because schizophrenics are not in control of their own actions.

Self-preservation is a humans most basic instinct. Humans, in their right mind usually prefer life to death. Campbell however, appears to prefer death to life, this is in itself evidence of insanity. Campbell spent thirteen years obsessing over his dead wife Helga.

And so, with my Helga presumed dead, I became a death-worshiper, as content as any narrow-minded religious nut anywhere. Always alone, I drank toasts to her, said good morning to her, said good night to her, played music for her, and didnt give a damn for one thing else (Vonnegut Jr.).

Campbell is unconcerned with making attempts to save himself from conviction he looks upon his lawyers efforts to save him with contempt.

My Israeli lawyer, Mr. Alvin Dobrowitz, has had all my New York mail forwarded here, hoping unreasonably to find in that mail some proof of my innocence. Hi ho (Vonnegut Jr.).

The novel has an excessively grim ending. The American Intelligence agent who recruited Campbell appears like a guardian angel and the charges against him are dropped. But having escaped execution and gained his freedom Howard Campbell Jr. decides to commit suicide

I find the prospect nauseating. I think that tonight is the night I will hang Howard Campbell Jr. for crimes against himself (Vonnegut Jr.).

One of the numerous painful realities of life, death is one such reality which evokes intense emotions in human beings. Although all human beings accept the fact that death is inevitable, most of the people fear death and seek ways to cheat it. People harbor different attitudes while looking at death and it is these attitudes that shape their reactions when they face death. Numerous literary works depict death as their themes and one such work which stands among them is the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare. The play focuses on the reaction of   Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark upon knowing the secret that his father was killed by his uncle.

The theme of death runs throughout the play, as Hamlet views death from various perspectives after the tragic death of his father. The same theme of death is presented in the movies Sunshine directed by Danny Boyle and No Country for Old Men directed by Joel and Ethan Coen. Although death is a prominent theme in both these movies, the attitudes presented in the movie regarding death are completely different from each other. The play Hamlet and the movies Sunshine and No Country for Old Men bring forth the varying perspectives of the characters regarding death and also point towards the influence of the circumstances, in which the characters face death, on their attitudes towards death.

Hamlet
In the play Hamlet, Hamlet is deeply affected by his fathers death and begins to view death from various perspectives. He thinks about death from the spiritual perspective and also as a way of escape from the sufferings of life.  The thought that death can bring an end to his sufferings makes Hamlet to contemplate suicide. As Hamlet is overwhelmed by the sorrows in his life, he comes to regard death as solution to his hardships. Thoppressors wrong, the proud mans contumely, The pangs of disprized love, the laws delay, The insolence of office, and the spurns. (Shakespeare 60). These are the sorrows of life that are disturbing Hamlet and prompting him to think about suicide. Hamlet desires to end his life, as he is unable to bear the sorrows in his life following the death of his father and the consequent marriage of his mother with his uncle.

Hamlet considers suicide, especially in his soliloquy To Be or Not To Be, and often his behavior seems suicidal as he constantly ignores the royal orders of his uncle. (DiGaetani 166). He thinks it is better to die than to lead a life which is full of sorrows and hardships. But he is not even firm about his decision of suicide he fears what may happen after his death  Would death solve his problems or he would have to face unknown problems The thought about the torments that he would have to face after his death, avert him for committing suicide. And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of (Shakespeare 61). He explains that fear of unknown suffering after death makes one to bear the miseries of life. And this fear is experienced by Hamlet also.

The confusion which Hamlet is experiencing regarding his decision whether to live or die is evident when he utters, To be, or not to be that is the question. (Shakespeare 60). This line sums up the whole dilemma of Hamlet and his views regarding life and death. Although Hamlet thinks that life is full of suffering and death is peaceful, he is hesitant to end his life owing to his fear of the life he would have to face after his death.  The circumstance, in which Hamlet is thinking about death, influences his attitudes towards death. After the death of his father and his mothers immediate marriage with his uncle, Hamlet suffers from depression and therefore
regards death as a solution to his problems. His mothers conduct, the aspect of the world, his fathers death,-all made Hamlet impatient of life, which would not take the shape of his desires, but persisted in having one of its own. (Heraud 51). Instead of tackling the problems in his life, Hamlet wishes for death so that he can be freed from those problems. But as his religious beliefs contradict his desire to kill himself and he fears the unknown life after death, he decides to live.

Hamlets perspectives regarding death keep changing, as his philosophical outlook towards death turns into a desire to die after the death of his father. Later when Hamlet visits a graveyard and finds the skull of Yorick, a person whom he knew during his childhood, Hamlet comprehends the fact that all men turn into dust after their death. He accepts the fact that death is unavoidable and so instead of thinking about death, he decides to act on his desire to avenge his fathers murder.

Sunshine
The movie Sunshine also depicts the theme of death but from a different perspective than that presented in the play Hamlet. The movie follows the story of a group of astronauts who embark on a mission to reignite the Sun, as there is depletion in the amount of sunlight reaching their planet, the Earth. Set in the future, the movie depicts the theme of death as an act of sacrifice and courage. In course of their efforts to save the lives of the people on their planet, these astronauts decide to risk their life and accept to be the crew members of a spacecraft which will take them to Sun. Their mission is to reignite the Sun with the aid of a gigantic stellar bomb. But owing to the negligence of one of the crew members, these astronauts find themselves in
fatal circumstances. Although the astronauts are aware of the impending death, they persist in their efforts to succeed in their mission. Death fails to evoke any kind of fear in the minds of these astronauts, as they are more concerned about the success of their mission than their own survival. Facing death bravely, they are prepared to sacrifice their lives for saving the lives of the people on their planet. They view death as an act of sacrifice, through which they ensure that their efforts are successful in spite of their death. In the end, all the crew members die but the mission ends in success, as the Sun is reignited and Earth is once again illuminated with sunlight.

The movie opens with an account of the first mission, which is undertaken by human beings, in their effort to reignite a Sun, whose light is dying out slowly. A spacecraft named Icarus I, under the charge of Captain Pinbacker, is send to the Sun. But this mission fails, as the spacecraft disappears without carrying out the task for which it has been send to the Sun.  After a gap of seven years, another spacecraft, Icarus II is launched to reignite the Sun. The crew members of Icarus locate Icarus I on the Mercury on their way to the Sun. On the advice of physicist Robert Capa, the direction of the spacecraft is changed and turned towards Icarus I, so that the payload on Icarus is recovered and taken along with them on their mission. But owing to a mistake committed by Trey, the navigator of the spacecraft, a part of the spacecraft remains unprotected from the extreme heat emanating from the Sun. When the Captain of the spacecraft, Kaneda and Capa undertake the work of repairing the damaged part of the spacecraft, a technical problem results in a situation where Capa and Kaneda are exposed to the fatal heat of the Sun. Realizing the significance of survival of Capa for the success of the mission, Kaneda decides to carry out the repairs of the spacecraft alone while sending back Capa to the Spacecraft.

Kaneda is prepared sacrifice his life and embrace death for the sake of the success of the mission. The same kind of attitude towards death is displayed by other crew members when the mission runs into numerous problems, which threaten the lives of the crew members. While discussing the course of action that needs to be taken, the space crew members strive to save the lives of those members who are necessary for the success of the mission at the cost of their own lives. As the mission starts to go awry, the crew is forced to debate how to proceed in terse, well-written arguments. Soon, even those debates seem like a luxury in the face of lethal repair missions, a diminishing oxygen supply, and the unexpected. (Morris). Owing to the sacrifices of the crew members, Capa remains alive in spite of the numerous technical problems that occur in the functioning of the spacecraft and attacks made by Pinbacker on him. Although all the crew members die during the mission, they succeed in accomplishing the task for which they have sacrificed their lives. The movie presents the theme of death in a perspective which is different from Hamlet, for most of the characters in the movie face death bravely and views it as an act of sacrifice done for the sake of saving the lives of people on their planet. The influence of the circumstances in which the crew members face their death is evident in their attitudes towards death. In contrast to Hamlet, these characters remain undisturbed in the face of problems and strive to solve their problems instead of running away from them. Hamlet views death as an end to the sufferings of his life whereas the characters in the movie think of death as an act of sacrifice made by them in course of the fulfillment of their duties.    

No Country for Old Men
The theme of death in the movie No Country for Old Men is depicted through the violent killings and the attitude of the characters regarding death. The movie explores the relation between death and fate through its plot revolving around a killer chasing his intended victim. The movie presents the story of a vet, Llewelyn Moss who finds a satchel containing two million dollars of cash during a hunting trip. Moss finds this satchel near the dead bodies of men, who are killed during a dispute regarding a drug deal. Realizing the chances of being chased for the money he found near the dead bodies, Moss takes the money along with him and goes to stay in a motel in another region. It is in the air vent of his room in the motel that Moss puts his money, thinking that it would be a perfect hiding place for keeping the money. But Moss is unaware of the fact that the satchel contains a tracking device, which is aiding Anton Chigurh, a hitman whose services are being utilized for recovering the money, to locate the place where the money is kept. Another person who is chasing Moss and the money is Carson Wells, who is also hired for finding the money. The Sheriff of the town, Tom Bell seeks to save Moss from being killed by Chigurh, and so pursues both of them. The attitudes of Moss and Chigurh, and other characters in the movie bring forth the contrasting views of humans regarding death.

Even after escaping with the money belonging to the gangsters, Moss thinks that he can elude death by moving on from one place to another. His attempts to save himself from being killed by Chigurh bring forth his attitude that death can be cheated by human beings. He fails to comprehend the fact it is the fate of an individual which decides the time of the death and humans cannot change their fates. He is fated to die in course of his struggle to keep the money with him and his efforts fail to alter his fate. The character of Chigurh comes across as cold-blooded killer who kills people without the least hesitation or guilt. His decision whether to kill a particular person or not is influenced by the toss of a coin. He is a terminator, armed with a pressurised air canister and hose with which he knocks out the locks of doors he wants to get
through - or the brains of the hapless people he meets on his travels, and whose fates hinge, literally, on the toss of his coin. (Sandhu). The movie brings forth the notion that death can strike anyone at anytime and this is most evident in the manner Moss and Wells die. The innocent people, who are killed by Chirgurh, are also unaware of the approaching death when they are facing him. The movie highlights the relation between the fate of a person and hisher death. Through the death of Moss and Wells, the movie shows that an individual cannot escape death if heshe is fated to die at a particular time. The thoughts of Moss and Wells regarding death differ from those of Hamlet, the protagonist in the play Hamlet. Hamlet accepts his fate and deters from committing suicide whereas Moss and Wells attempt to keep the money with them and at the same time save themselves from being killed by Chirgurh. Along with the inevitability of death, the movies also emphasizes on the inevitable hold of fate on the life and death of a person.

Conclusion 
Death is viewed from different perspectives by Hamlet, the protagonist in the play Hamlet and the characters in the movies Sunshine and No Country for Old Men. The influence of the circumstances in which these characters face death is evident in their attitudes towards death. Hamlet thinks of death as an end to the sufferings of his life whereas most of the crew members of the spacecraft Icarus II in the movie Sunshine regard death as an act of sacrifice. The characters of Moss and Wells in the movie No Country for Old Men seek to escape their fate by seeking to fulfill their desire of keeping the money with them and at the same time eluding death. Through the deaths of Moss and Wells, the movie brings forth the notion that a person cannot escape hisher death if heshe is fated to die at that particular time.  

Poetry is probably the most used and loved form of literature. Compared to short stories or even novels, poems touch all the senses of a person most especially with the senses of sight and sound, even if this happens in the hypothetical sense. After all, for poetry to be understood and most especially to be appreciated, it has to be sights and sounds. The sights would naturally pertain to the images and pictures evoked in the minds eyes while the sounds would be reflected in the rhymes and rhythm of a poem.

With poetry having been written as early as William Shakespeares time until today, and with modern times supposedly more technologically-focused environment, it is no doubt that it is well loved, well-received, and well-appreciatedShakespeares sonnets and the Hallmark cards can attest to that. However, even if poetry is liked well enough, it does not mean that everyone can understand them, for unlike a short story or a novel, a poem has to be brief enough to convey a meaning or a story while evoking emotions within a person in a certain depth. Thus, a poem explication or interpretation would be very challenging as a critic would find different meanings from a poem compared to another critic interpreting the same poem. Nevertheless, there would be certain clues which a critic and a reader can use to fully grasp the meaning of the poem, usually achieved through a careful analysis of metaphorical, figurative, and literary use of words and sometimes, even words that are not written or appearing in the poem. In this case, an explication would be written regarding one of the sonnets of the great playwright, William Shakespeare, as well as one of the poems of another great literary figure in the person of Andrew Marvell. Shakespeare has written many plays and sonnets and among them is Sonnet 130 which cleverly uses a distinct style that renders the emotions behind the poem its due impact. On the other hand, Marvells To His Coy Mistress, is a playful poem that could have angered a modern female but which depicts devoted emotions of the persona towards the addressee.

As with all sonnets, Sonnet 130 is a fourteen-line poem that tells about the feelings and most especially, the perception of the person towards the addressee or she. The entire poem describes the addressee and because of the lines, readers and critics would be able to fully understand what her characteristics are and what role does she play in the personas life.

My mistress eyes are nothing like the sun (Shakespeare, 2009, line 1). The lady in the poem is revered by the persona and she is the personas mistress. Throughout the poem, she is described and more and more taken into great heights of flattery ...her lips red  I love to hear her speak  I grant I never saw a goddess go (Shakespeare, 2009, lines 2, 9, 11). By the time the poem ends, it is understood that the mistress is the personas great love as what the lines, And yet, by heaven, I think my love as rare  As any she belied with false compare (Shakespeare, 2009, lines 13-14) would show. Because of this, the poems theme is quite obviousloveand yet, this love, as with any love that a person experiences, is complicated. This complication transpires because the persona does not flatter the mistress in the common way of affection but instead slightly points out her flaws but not to the point of insult Shakespeare clearly intends the couplet to undo the potential damage done to his readers faith that he indeed loves his dusky mistress by the ostensibly denigrating remarks in the... lines (Steele, 2004, 133). In Shakespeares depiction of the theme of love, he uses an unusual style in its portrayal and yet, it still comes out as the same feel-good emotion. In fact, Shakespeare can be even judged as being playful with the composition and structure of his poem, and the fact that he negates any flattering comment about the mistress while at the same time flattering her makes the theme surface more and makes the love that the persona has for the mistress all the more believable and compelling, making Shakespeare (and the persona) stand out as a creative, poetic talent.

In an analysis of the poem, Shakespeares sonnet seems to be an answer or reply to a previously written sonnet as the persona negates all the good and admirable attributes of the mistress. Throughout the poem, the persona keeps taking back positive comments that could have been given by another person towards his mistress. For example, the lines I have seen roses damaskd, red and white  But no such roses see I in her cheeks (Shakespeare, 2009, lines 5-6) could just mean that someone (a poet or another person) has referred to the mistress as having rose-colored cheeks. However, the persona (which is Shakespeare as well) does not approve of this comment and instead states that the mistress has no such roses...in her cheeks that could just mean that the mistress is wan and pale. Nevertheless, the conclusion that the poem is an answer to a previously written poem can be an over-reading or an over-analysis of the sonnet which can sometimes be a bad thing, since over-reading or over-analysis can also lead to wrong interpretation. In this case though, another critic supports this claim as what Steele (2004) states by writing, The peculiar use of she in the final couplet of Sonnet 130 might hint at a direct link between Shakespeares poem and that of another sonneteer (p. 133). Steele (2004) points out that Shakespeare may have composed Sonnet 130 as a reply to a previous poem, but although this premise may never be proven, it is undeniable that Shakespeare wrote the sonnet as a mockery or juxtaposition to the usual theme of the Petrarchan Sonnet

Traditional readings of Shakespeares Sonnet 130 argue that Shakespeare employs Petrarchan imagery while deliberately undermining it. In the fourteen lines of Sonnet 130, Shakespeare seems to undo, discount, or invalidate nearly every Petrarchan conceit about feminine beauty employed by his fellow English sonneteers. (Steele, 2004, pp. 132-133)

The premise is that Shakespeare (the pioneer of the only other form of sonnet known as the English or Shakespearean sonnet) wrote Sonnet 130 as a juxtaposition to a Petrarchan sonnet not because of the structural meter of the poem but because of the poems content. Petrarchan sonnets are known to have themes that are centered on love, most especially that of love that can never be reciprocated nor fulfilled by the other person (Scaglione, 1997). Petrarchan sonnets use much embellishment on the positive traits of the person addressed to the point of being too flowery, too affectionate, and too goodly. In fact, Petrarchan sonnets can be taken under the wings of courtly love as both concepts portray the same thingthe communication of love when the love is absolutely known to be non-reciprocated to the point that there is pleasure in the idea of a frustrated love as what Scaglione (1997) has been pointing out in his critical paper, Petrarchan Love and the Pleasures of Frustration. On the other hand, Shakespeare uses such cunning figurative and metaphorical words in trying to create the concept that a loved one need not be too beautiful to the point of being goddess-perfect, but she can be beautiful because the person is in love. In simple words, it is the love of the person which renders the addressee as goddess-perfect.

Andrew Marvells poem, To His Coy Mistress, has the same theme and same style as that of William Shakespeares Sonnet 130. Though To His Coy Mistress is in a different poetic form and uses more lewd words such as to adore each breast or long preservd virginity (Marvell, 1999, lines 15, 28), it can be discovered later on that each word that Marvell uses in the poem is actually essential to the overall theme of the poem, even if a readers innocence is sacrificed for it.

The poem by Marvell is playful in style and yet as creative and beautifully composed as that of Shakespeares Sonnet 130. Both poems regard the addressee as their mistress and yet, in Marvels case, the mistress is known to be coy or that of being hesitant. The whole poem zeroes in this hesitancy and Marvell (or the persona) explains in detail why the mistress should not hesitate anymore. Because of this, Marvel uses logic and rhetoric to prove that he is correct. As what Roll-Hansen and Sokol (1990) write in their critical paper To His Coy Mistress has long been recognized as fitting a logical pattern... its form helps reveal a very witty play of logic and illogic in the poem, an interplay which heightens feeling (p. 244). This logicalness and illogicalness can be explained by the notion that Marvel points out that this is the situation with something and this is the non-situation of that somethingwhich one would the mistress choose However, this notion can be regarded as absolutely absurd in logic and yet, as what Roll-Hansen and Sokol (1990) point out, Marvell is able to put possibility in the illogicalness of the situation. This illogicalness is delivered by Marvell in his appropriate and selective use of words. An example would be the lines that the persona uses to convince the mistress that if she does not make use of her beauty and virginity, then it would just crumble or be left for the worms to feast on.

Thy beauty shall no more be found, Nor, in thy marble vault, shall sound My echoing song then worms shall try That long preservd virginity. (Marvell, 1999, lines 25-28)

What Marvell did is the same as what Shakespeare did in Sonnet 130negating comments while encouraging something. If Shakespeare professes his love by the mockery of the mistress plainness, then Marvell is trying to convince the mistress by his mockery of what would happen if she does not give in.

To conclude, both the poems of Shakespeare and Marvell are the same, but aside from the fact that both use a distinct style in the poem composition, what makes both poems similar is the fact that they center on one theme that seems almost universal to alllove and the idea that anyone would be capable of doing everything in the name of love, even to the point of composing poems.

Frankenstein, also referred to as The Modern Prometheus is a novel which was written by Mary Shelley. Moreover, this novel speaks of a scientist, victor Frankenstein, who creates an monster with human characteristics but with larger than life attributes. In Germany, Frankenstein literally refers to stone of the Franks, which represents a region or a town. At university, victors interest in sciences urges him to research on how life decays. After creating the monster, he not only hates its features but also gets afraid of it and escapes. The first paradox which portrays itself is the fact that the scientist knowingly creates an object but at the end, he fears and abandons it. The creature experiences rejection and hostility from the humans. The second case of paradox occurs where victor fails to show responsibility to its creation although his parents cared for him when he was a child (Henry, 1992). He neglects his duties as a parent and his role as an adult which turns the creature into a vicious killer. The author tries to emphasize on importance of love which if not provided can change the personality of a person.
               
A theme which is predominant is that of loneliness. Both victor and his creation go through long spells of isolation. We see that his adventure detaches him from his relatives and he says that his only consolation was solitude. The monster on the other hand grew so lonely that he asked Victor to create another female monster.  

In the novel, we meet with the aspect of paradox as a rhetorical genre that is used to create an outcast of thematic expression of the anthology. By and large, paradox in the novel is used as a tool that aims at signifying the primary ideals in the essence of humanity without providing for the causal realization of what the same concept of humanity should uphold. Human life in this anthology is thus brought out as a form of paradox from the multiple contravening subjects that it is propagated through. Elsewhere, the novel is written in an alliteration form where scenic overviews tend to change in regard to the different settings of the novel (Henry, 1992). For instance, we hardly see at the very beginning of the novel that the important character, monster, is basically to provide and fend for himself using all the possible tactics and ways it may deploy.
Surprisingly, the same dogmatic scenario of the monster tends to abruptly change and lends him into personal writing and learning walking and talking. Either, observing the family of delacey, he finds himself obviously obligated in helping it maneuver from the agony of the hard life that it fetches from the hard way of living.

Rhetorical focus may also be underlined to the precept of verbal irony where, different characters express the ironic presumptions in a more verbal manner. For example, Frankenstein expresses is verbal ideology of ether been in deep love with the minister or wanting to kill it as an expression of total hatred (Henry, 1992). This imagination basically comes out to show his deepest concern with the role of the monster as it plays to him and the society as a whole.