• English Language & Literature Teaching
• /
• no.5
• /
• pp.259-272
• /
• 1999

The real nature of the west wind in Shelley's Ode to the West Wind is the divine providence which influences all things in this world- that is, whether they are on land, in the sky, or in the sea. The divine providence is the manifestation of something beyond the present and tangibel object. In the first stanza, the real nature of the west wind in this poem is the wild wind, the breath of Autumn's being, the unseen presence, the azure sister of the Spring, a Destroyer, a Preserver, the winged seed, a creator, a philosopher, a poet, Shelley, and the wild spirit moving everywhere. In the second stanza, the real nature of the west wind in this poem is cloud, the angel of rain and lightning, fierce Maenad, the approaching storm, the congregated might, the black rain, the fire, hail, solid atmosphere, the tremendous power of revolutionary change, and the power that influences all things in the sky. In the third stanza, the real nature of the west wind in this poem is the voice that makes the oozy woods which wear the sapless foliage of the Atlantic, and the power makes the blue Mediterranean wake from his summer dream. the fit medium of expression which Shelley's soul was seeking for, Shelley's passion, Shelley's partner, Shelley's co-worker, and a strong presence which influences in the sea. In the fourth stanza, the real nature of the west wind in this poem is the mightest presence, the power, the strength, the free presence, the uncontrollable, the wanderer over heaven, a vision, the tameless, the swift, the proud and the God who can save Shelley form the heavy weight of hours and lift Shelley as a wave a leaf, a cloud. In the fifth stanza, the real nature of the west wind in this poem is the mighty harmony, the fierce Spirit, Shelley's spirit, the impetuous spirit, incanation of this verse, spark, the trumpet of a prophecy, the Providence which can make the Winter depart and call Spring, and the prophet. To conclude, the real nature of the west wind in this poem is Shelley's accumulated insight that he visulize his impulse of revolutionary thought.

• English & American cultural studies
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.149-207
• /
• 2010

Written simultaneously with Prometheus Unbound, Shelley's "Julian & Maddalo" is a masterwork of dramatic poiesis, of doubling embedded in its couplets, dialogic debate on human nature and contrasted symbolic emblems. The emblems mirror each other and are themselves sites of generative paradox: the "heaven illumined" but "dreary tower" of the Maniac and the glorious sunsets on the "ever-shifting sand" of the Lido, a wasteland that is a place of self discovery but also of "abandonment" and barren mingling figured, inter alia, in its "amphibious weeds," a trope of the poem's personae. This essay also explores the poem's dramatic structure and various rhetorical devices, beginning with the Preface, a threshold of complex identity disguise that Shelley uses for veiled self-presentation, as in "Alastor," mirroring and literary references replete with nuanced ironies. I focus mainly on the complex figures of liminality Shelley uses to develop his own thoughts (as well as his ongoing debates with Byron) about man's potential for growth in thought, insight and empathy, in political reform and interpersonal and individual healing. Advancing Shelley's most optimistic ideas, Julian, escorted by Maddalo observes the Maniac, -- a living ruin whose pained eloquence reveals the link of eros to poiesis and the limits of the latter's ability to 'transform a world.' The Maniac is the core of muse-work (remembering, thinking and song) and Shelley presents him as its emblem. He also is prefigured in and reflects the quintessentially liminal Lido with its "barren embrace" of sea and land. Yet it is less the Maniac's feeling that his grief is "charactered in vain…on this unfeeling leaf" than Julian's rationales for leaving the site of pain that point to Shelley's final comment on poetry's transformative limits. As the primary haploids of the drama's meiosis re-combine and two of them, Maddalo and the maniac fall away, an analogy I briefly develop and embedded in the erotic dynamics of poiesis, Shelley suggests, as he did at the beginning of his poetic lyricism in "Alastor" and at its end in "the Triumph of Life"that images mislead and delude; that "the deep truth is imageless" and redemption is not in but beyond figuration.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.56 no.4
• /
• pp.667-690
• /
• 2010

This essay attempts to read Percy Bysshe Shelley s The Mask of Anarchy by attending to a political agenda that Shelley seeks to propose and embody in the poem. This poem was written as a response to an exceptional political event, the Peterloo Massacre, and thus it is evident that Shelley intended to engage in contemporary politics by writing this poem. As many critics have pointed out, however, the way in which this poem addresses social, plitical issues is ambivalent and even confusing, since it contains many elements that contradict each other, and sometimes its political visions are based on incoherent conceptions. For this reason, this poem has been considered to be a failure as an occasional poem which should provide the reader with a clear direction for political actions. Faced with this critical problem, this essay proposes that the ambivalence this poem reveals-e.g., the confrontation between moderate artistic fantasy and radical tenets-is not a retreat from political activism, as some critics suggested, but a result of its creation and embodiment of a public sphere which invites various social classes and their positions. The mode in which Shelley conceives this unified public sphere in the course of writing The Mask of Anarchy can be interpreted in terms of the following three features. First, this poem underscores the significance of thoughts in constituting a communal space between people, thus asking the reader to participate in this process of thinking on given issues. Second, this poem suggests that people should enlighten each other by engaging in communicative reciprocations. Lastly, the public sphere formulated by the previous two features should incorporate various socio-political agents beyond class boundaries (even oppressors themselves) into its own working field. After explaining how these three features are manifested in the poem, this essay argues that the unified public sphere thus formed in the poem is the very agenda that Shelley aims to propose for the contemporaneous politics and culture. As a conclusion, this essay highlights how Shelley s project of creating a unified public sphere finally failed in contemporary history through observing two contrasting receptions of Shelley s works.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.56 no.2
• /
• pp.255-276
• /
• 2010

Despite some critics' efforts to highlight Shelley's political fruitfulness, they tend to disregard meaningful differences that Shelley has from other Jacobin radicals of his times. Accordingly, the critics tackle his apparent incoherence revealed in A Philosophical View of Reform; the first two sections contain a keen insight into the socio-political injustice prevalent in Britain and the reasons behind it, while the third section withdraws from the previous radical position and settles with a moderate electorate reform. This paper argues that recent developments in post-structuralist and post-Marxist theory help to clearly assess Shelley's political position. Emphasizing that the Jacobin concept of revolution is incompatible with the plurality and opening which a radical democracy requires, post-marxists such as Ernest Laclau and Chantal Mouffee claim that a more viable form of political resistance is to expose repression and force involved in hegemonic articulations. For them, dislocation, a distabilization of a discourse that results from the emergence of events which cannot be domesticated, symbolized, or integrated within the discourse, opens up the possibility of freedom for agents. A Philosophical View of Reform is an attempt to dislocate the discourses of monarchy and paper money by exposing their social and historical constructiveness and their repressive exclusion of alternative discourses. The political goal of this essay is to awaken subjects within a hegemonic structure by decentering the structure and to make them act by stimulating new discoursive constructions.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.64 no.2
• /
• pp.203-217
• /
• 2018

Both in terms of frequency and importance, sympathy is one of the most central themes that Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1818) delves into. While not a few critics have written on the subject, one crucially important aspect has been overlooked in the previous discussions of sympathy in Frankenstein: Shelley's critical intervention in the term's long lasting association with the notion of one body from a single origin. Focusing on the novel's central theme of sympathy, my paper addresses this oversight in the existing Frankenstein scholarship. I argue that Shelley's main agenda regarding sympathy in the novel is to problematize the logic of self-reproduction implicit in the notion of sympathy as an essentially familial tie. The reading of the novel as a warning against human violation of nature has been prevalent both in academia and popular culture. Nonetheless, in terms of sympathy, this paper offers an alternative reading in which the novel questions, not valorizes, the naturalization of nature. Far from valorizing the inviolable sacredness of nature, I argue, Frankenstein is a literary project attempting to disassociate sympathy from the natural bond that one is born into, and instead, re-associate it with fellowship as a second-nature to be continuously reinvented and reeducated.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.58 no.2
• /
• pp.189-215
• /
• 2012

This paper reads Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1818) in light of the 18th-century understanding of 'sympathy' including those of Hume and Smith and also in light of what Michael Hardt in our century has called "affective labor." I argue that the imaginative capacity and "seeing" are crucial in understanding Smith's idea of 'sympathy.' By showing how the monster's ugliness precludes any human character from sympathizing with him, Mary Shelley exposes that Smith's idea of sympathy fails to maintain social harmony. Mary Shelley revises Smith's 'sympathy' and makes it more radical by suggesting that the active affective labor could bridge the epistemological distance lying between the agent concerned and the impartial spectator. I first read Smith's idea of sympathy as an imaginative capacity which is inevitably influenced by 'seeing' and visual perception. Then I analyze the scenes in which the creature in Frankenstein fails to acquire any human sympathy due to his ugliness, and show how the specular nature of 'sympathy' is disrupted when one party is visually ugly and deformed. I conclude that affective labor and active moral reflection on the part of the spectator need to be provided when the agent concerned is 'ugly' and thus challenges our habitual epistemological boundary. Shelley's re-evaluation of Smith's sympathy, thus, suggests that affective labor may not be something that women alone have to perform, but an ethical practice that concerns all human beings and that can transform the otherwise flawed human capacity for sympathy.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.54 no.4
• /
• pp.483-509
• /
• 2008

For the last decades, criticism on Frankenstein has tried to make a link between Victor's Creature and Rousseaurean "man in a state of nature." Like the Rousseaurean savage in a state of animal, the monster has only basic instincts least needed for his survival, i.e. self-preservation, but turns into a civilized man after learning language. Most critics argue that, despite the monster's acquisition of language, his failure in entry into a cultural and linguistic community is the outcome of a lack of sympathy for him by others, which displays the stark existence of epistemological barriers between them. That is to say, the monster imagines his being the same as others in the pre-linguistic stage but, in the linguistic stage, he realizes that he is different from others. Interpreting the Rousseaurean idea of language, which appears in his writings, as much more focused on emotion than many critics think, I read the dispute between Victor and his Creature as a variation of parent-offspring conflict. Shelley criticizes Rousseau's parental negligence in putting his children into a foundling hospital and leaving them dying there. The monster's revenge on uncaring Victor parallels the likely retaliation Rousseau's displaced children would perform against Rousseau, which Shelley imaginatively reproduces in her novel. The conflict between the monster and Victor is due to a disrupted attachment between parent and child in terms of Darwinian developmental psychology. Affective asynchrony between parent and child, which refers to a state of lack of mutual favorable feelings, accounts for numerous dysfunctional families. This paper shifts a focus from a semiotics-oriented perspective on the monster's social isolation to a Darwinian perspective, drawing attention to emotional problems transpiring in familial interactions. In doing so, it finds that language is a means of communicating one's internal emotions to others along with other means such as facial expressions and body movements. It also demonstrates that how to promote emotional well-being in either familial or social relationships entirely depends on the way in which one employs language that can entail either pleasure or anger on hearers' part.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.57 no.1
• /
• pp.51-72
• /
• 2011

This paper explores the issue of strangers and of hospitality in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, based on Kant's concept of hospitality as "the right of a stranger" and on Derrida's discussion of hospitality. It first examines the similarities between the domestic relations within the Frankenstein family and Frankenstein's relation to the monster: an effort to create unity out of a multiplicity of elements, and what can be called a "debt economy." Then, reading the animation scene of the monster as a version of the advent of a stranger, it deals with the question of hospitality. More specifically, the arrival of Clerval immediately follows the animation of the monster because it effectively dramatizes the paradox that there is no hospitality without hostility. The opposition and the apposition between hospitality and hostility are also seen in the De Lacey family's welcoming Safie and rejecting the monster. Frankenstein's failure and the De Lacey family's failure to welcome the monster show that hospitality as "right" exemplified by Kantian hospitality does not apply to a stranger like the monster who has neither name nor relation and who is categorized into what Derrida terms "an absolute other." This paper also looks at Safie's problematic subversion against her father, which loses its subversive charge in the context of racial relations between Turkish Mahometans and European Christians. Safie's father looms large in the context of the issue of hospitality because his episode suggests that the category of race causes hospitality to malfunction.

• Journal of English Language & Literature
• /
• v.58 no.1
• /
• pp.93-115
• /
• 2012

The decades after the French Revolution witnessed the prolific production and consumption of apocalyptic literature, tinged with the optimistic vision of political progress and human perfectibility. However, the Romantic writers were cautious to embrace the idea of the end of history, even though it promised an aesthetic space relieved of historical determinants. Mary Shelley's The Last Man joined this line of Romantic literature which skeptically questions the millenarian desires of political apocalypse by representing apocalypse without millenium. Using the theme of apocalypse as a tool to investigate the place of human beings in the universe and to test diverse political reform ideas to their fullest potential, the novel diagnoses the ideas of representative political subject as the most problematic aspect of political structure. The notion of subjecthood presupposes a political decision as to who can be counted as subject and this decision, according to the novel, assumed a subject that is "active, free, conscious and willful sovereign," which Raymond embodies in his exemplary body. Against the sovereignty of Raymond is juxtaposed the subaltern subject such as Sybil. The resistance of Sybil to Apollo, another exemplary subject, is the subtext of the novel, which guides the way out of the grim future of humanity. While the plague exemplifies the universalizing ideal with its principle of sovereignty, Sybil and her descendent Lionel practice the unconditional hospitality so that they can renew the community in a way to embrace singularities of individuals.

• Nutrition Research and Practice
• /
• v.4 no.6
• /
• pp.528-534
• /
• 2010

This study explores the influence of health behaviors and individual attributes on adolescent overweight and obesity using data from Wave II (Add Health). Structural equation model/ path analysis using maximum likelihood estimation was utilized to analyze the relationships of health behaviors and attributes with obesity. Results of the model reveal that the causal paths (adolescents' attributes and health behaviors) for overweight and obesity were different for African American and Caucasian adolescents. Generally, African Americans were more susceptible to overweight and obesity than Caucasians. Although increasing levels of vigorous physical activities lowers the risk for obesity among African American and Caucasian adolescents alike, low family SES and being sedentary were associated with overweight and obesity among Caucasians. No significant associations were found among African Americans. Increased hours of sleep at night relate positively with obesity among African Americans. These findings suggest important elements in the consideration of race in developing effective intervention and prevention approaches for curbing the obesity epidemic among U.S. adolescents.