This is an interesting perspective on the killings, placing the murder on a fit of "romantic jealousy". It also provides a theory on the sexual orientation of smith and hitchcock...
Capote discusses again about his new genre of writing that he pioneered. He talks about how to blur the lines of reality and fiction without sacrificing key facts.
As late as 1962, Capote was still sticking to his original script - in public, at least. "My book isn't a crime story," he told Newsweek. "It's the story of a town." By then, however, he knew the two murderers were central to the story he wanted to tell, that they would give it texture, urgency and shape.
As late as 1962, Capote was still sticking to his original script - in public, at least. "My book isn't a crime story," he told Newsweek. "It's the story of a town." By then, however, he knew the two murderers were central to the story he wanted to tell, that they would give it texture, urgency and shape.
Gives an overview of Capote's life and the struggles he had to face growing up as a child. His life seems to end up a fairytale with him becoming a literary and social icon.
I can't copy and paste direct quotes, but the article talks about the irony in the journey they are embarking on, including how the burial is being thought of as a "quest", while there is no ultimate prize nor joy in what they are doing.
Mary Shelley used science as a metaphor for any kind of irresponsible action and what she really was concerned with was the politics of the era and the way the monarchy was operating in the interest of relatively few people.
What is unique about Frankenstein is that it represents and almost foreshadows the romantic disillusionment with the established order. After the French Revolution, liberalism and nationalism were at all time highs. But with the response by the monarchies (e.g., the wars of 1848), romantic ideals were spurned. The effect this had was an increase in disillusionment among romantics. The possibility of a society transformed by individuals seemed less believable
The divide between romanticism and realism during the period that the novel was published.
There is ample evidence in the novel that the creature functions as the scientist's baser self. Frankenstein's epithets for him consistently connote evil: devil, fiend, daemon, horror, wretch, monster, monstrous image, vile insect, abhorred entity, detested form, hideous phantasm, odious companion, and demoniacal corpse. Neutral terms like creature and being are comparatively rare. Most important, there is Frankenstein's thinking of him as "my own vampire, my own spirit let loose from the grave, and forced to destroy all that was dear to me" (�7). And after each murder Frankenstein acknowledges his complicity: "I not in deed, but in effect, was the true murderer"
Mary Shelley's perceptions of science and the dangerous power it potentially holds are intuitive. Modern day science deals daily with the exact issues of which Shelley was apparently keenly aware. She introduces ethics to the study of science, even gives science a conscious. As the monster acts on Frankenstein's conscious, some would say that Mary Shelley writes literature to act as science's conscious. It was as if she acknowledged that the future of science, if uncontrolled, could be disastrous.
science and the negative effects. shelley is trying to point out the danger of community too controlled by science
Through the sequence of events Shelley constructs, she clearly represents her beliefs on parental responsibility and the side effects that can ensue when this necessity is denied. In having Victor play the role of the rejecting father, and treating his creation with repulsion and disgust, one can see how Shelley makes her reader aware of the moral evil involved in parental neglect.
lots of other quotes and links to other sources inside here, pretty much touches on every moral outrage shelley brings up
