They are under beds, hiding in the dark, and slithering in the sea. The word, “monster”, has a specific meaning to it that most associate with a big, frightening figure. However, use of the word monster has changed throughout time do to pagan influences and American slang. It is still associated with a beastly creature, but can be used to describe amazing feats and wonders as the old French word once did. The definition of Monster has stayed consistent due to storytelling, yet evolved from its humble beginnings.
Old French used the word, “mostre”, to describe a “prodigy or marvel” in the 12th century (OED 1). “Mostre” came directly from the Latin who used “monstrum” as a “divine omen” (“Monster.” Dictionary.com). In certain cultures, abnormal animals were a sign of impending doom for their villages and life. These abnormal animals have given way for the storybook monsters where the most common definition is found. The Oxford English Dictionary refers to the noun as:
A mythical creature which is part animal and part human, or combines elements of two or more animal forms, and is frequently of great size and ferocious appearance. Later, more generally: any imaginary creature that is large, ugly, and frightening. (def.1)
However, American slang has taken the original term and uses it as a way to represent something “remarkably good” (OED 7). The connotation of the word is a complete shift from this idea of a scary monster, but instead a description of success. This idea of an
Monsters are part of an imagination so they “ –exist only to be read.” (Monsters page 12) Second Thesis says “The monster always escapes.” In this case the monster gets away with it too but this monster damaged a lot of things that can’t be undone. So the monster escapes meaning it is never truly destroyed or defeated because there’s always something it left behind. They can never be caught but they can also return in a different form way to get back at those who tried to destroy them. Third Thesis basically explains that monsters cannot be categorized in the animals or people. As Cohen says “—they are disturbing hybrids whose externally incoherent bodies resist attempts to include them in any systematic structuration.” (Monsters page 14) Their physical and psychological characteristics just don’t fit in classification because they can be half human, half animal and may have some other deforms. Fourth Thesis explains the monster is an “outsider”, they are different so it depends on “cultural, political racial economic, sexual.” (Monsters page 16) Monsters have aspects. The monster will always
What defines a monster? Is it their grotesque, unnatural appearance that separates them from the rest of mankind, or is it their lack of remorse and compassion that makes them different? The word monster conjures up figures from gothic horror of exotic peoples with horrifyingly exaggerated features, and the kinds of impossible delusive beasts inhabiting the pages of medieval bestiaries. Well at first I thought exactly that. When I used to hear the word “monster”, my mind immediately pictured the petrifying beast that took residence under my bed for a substantial portion of my childhood. It had demonic beating red eyes, razor sharp teeth that glistened with fresh blood and amphibian like scales covering every inch of its enormous body. However, as I got older, I started to realize that there was no such thing as monsters and that it was all just a figment of my imagination. Accordingly, the fear of the monster under my bed slowly dissipated. Nevertheless, it wasn’t until after reading a quote by my favorite author, Steven King, that I was finally able to fully comprehend what the true definition of the word “monster” really was. “Monsters are real, ghosts are real too. They live inside us, and sometimes they win”. It had taken me awhile to truly grasp what King had meant, but then it clicked. Everyone has a monster inside them, dormant or not. That monster is the voice we hear in the back of our heads, urging us to cheat or to steal, and in some instances, worse. That monster
Monster by Sanyika Shakur yields a firsthand insight on gang warfare, prison, and redemption. “There are no gang experts except participants (xiii)” says Kody Scott aka. Monster. Monster vicariously explains the roots of the epidemic of South Central Los Angeles between the Crips and the Bloods that the world eventually witnessed on April 29, 1992. As readers we learn to not necessarily give gangs grace but do achieve a better understanding of their disposition to their distinct perception in life.
He gives more explanation of the pop culture refe rences, however, than he does of his more esoteric and academic precursors. This means that he expects that his audience is more familiar with the theory surrounding monsters than with m any of the pop icon monsters that have appeared throughout history. Cohen builds a strongly logica l argument that monsters are symbolic of the marginalized groups at the outer edges of c ulture, and in doing so he makes it clear that he feels his audience is well-rounded, academic , well educated and as interested in the theory of monsters as he is himself. Logos is not the only rhetorical device Cohen uses in this article, however. He also uses ethos to connect with his audience, and to differentiate bet
For the context of this paper, a monster is “something extraordinary or unnatural, any imaginary creature that is large, ugly, and frightening” (OED). A faun is described as,“one of a class of rural deities; at first represented like men with horns and the tail of a goat, afterwards with goats' legs like the Satyrs, to whom they were assimilated in lustful character” (OED). Another important term is a labyrinth. A labyrinth is defined as “ a structure formed by paths bordered by high hedges, typically as a feature in a garden” (OED).
Asma states, "Monsters can stand as symbols of human vulnerability and crisis, and as such they play imaginative foils for thinking about our own responses to menace.” This means that human weaknesses and fears are represented through monstrous figures, and these fictional situations provide perspective into how we react in fearful environments. In our current society we fear many things, including but not limited to failed or corrupt governmental systems, the afterlife, the unknown, and captivity, which makes this claim valid. Although we may not realize it, these fears are embodied by the horror monsters we see in popular culture. Society shares common fears, and often times the most prevailing fear is reflected in the most popular characters at any given time. Monsters are the fictional representations of society’s dark subconscious, exploring not only why the author’s statement is accurate but what we actually fear.
A little girl screams in fear for her parents as she envisions a green, three-eyed monster lurking under her bed, waiting to get her until she finally closes her eyes. A little boy scares fellow trick-or-treaters as he’s dressed as a vampire for Halloween brandishing his pointy teeth with blood dripping out of his mouth. Both of these examples of monsters focus on the physicality of a creature and undermine the weight which the word ‘monster’ actually carries. In Shakespeare’s play, The Tempest, and in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, there are characters that perfectly fit the description of a tangible monster. However, monsters are more than their somatic features. Monsters are created within based on circumstances, decisions that are
When monsters are thought of a very distinct picture comes to mind. An ugly creature that is out for blood, born into a life where causing misery is his driving force. Do these features really define what a monster is; works of literature like Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Shakespeare’s Othello tell quite a different story. Monsters are not born but made just as people are not born evil but can sometimes end up there. Othello and the Monster start of as good men looking to be part of society but were pushed out because of what others perceived them to be. This caused them to mentally and physically isolate themselves from everyone allowing hatred to take over. Iago and Frankenstein also helped to instill thoughts
When analyzed online many of the definitions you will find for the word monster include: a strange or horrible imaginary creature, one who deviates from normal or acceptable behavior, or an animal of strange and/or terrifying shape. (Merriam Webster) When observing the “Monster Theory” by Jeffrey Cohen and the 7 theses that he provides in this text, one can begin to somewhat disagree with these formal definitions and attempt to say that it has an even greater meaning. Monsters might scare us and frighten us because of their physical appearances but also can provide us with possible solutions to gaps and uncertainties in our mind that Sigmund Freud would label as “The Uncanny”. I can only but agree with
“As monstrous races faded from popularity, the increased focus on unnatural or monstrous individuals added new interest in the long-standing philosophical and theological debates about whether or not monsters could be human and where monsters fit within God’s ordered universe […] philosophers and theologians in both the medieval period and the Renaissance often interpreted these monstrous individuals as carrying a specific meaning for the community into which they were born (Wright 6).”
Oxford dictionary defines monster as, “Originally: a mythical creature which is part animal and part human, or combines elements of two or more animal forms, and is frequently of great size and ferocious appearance. Later, more generally: any imaginary creature that is large, ugly, and frightening. (Oxford English Dictionary)” This definition is basic in nature. What must be added is whether it is nature that makes the monster what it is or is it nurture that makes it what it is. In both Beowulf and Frankenstein the monster complex engages, complicates and has an effect on us. Beowulf has to battle Grendel, his mom, and the dragon to do his duty as a warrior, but the monsters only make it more difficult to tell
What is a monster, really? Is it really a Creature that has three eyes instead of two, with pus seeping out of every crevice in his face and an abnormally large form? Or is it someone with a mind so corrupt it rivals that of Satan? Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a story within a story that centers on the tale of a man with an immense thirst of knowledge and a fetish to imitate the Creator. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a lot like the Greek mythological tale of the Greek God, Prometheus, and his brother, Epimetheus, who were assigned the task of creating man. The story captivates the theme of monstrosity. Mary Shelley wrote the novel in a form so the reader’s opinions never stray far from sympathy for the monster and apathy for Victor
What is a monster? The word "monster" causes one to imagine a hideous, deformed or nonhuman creature that appears in horror movies and novels and terrifies everyone in its path. More importantly, however, the creature described generally behaves monstrously, doing things which harm society and acting with little consideration for the feelings and safety of others. "Thus, it is the behavior which primarily defines a monster, rather than its physical appearance"(Levine 13).
The definition of a monster is very arguable. A monster is typically seen as something inhuman and hideously scary. A human could also be a monster in that they could be extremely wicked or cruel. In the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, Victor Frankenstein, creator of the creature, is the real monster because he is a hypocrite, he created the monster and abandoned him, and he is extremely selfish.
Batman, Spiderman, Superman, or even the Hulk are just echoes of what would be recognized as folkloric-like epic heroes. Basically, a hero that is pictured as a “larger than life” character, who fights the forces of evil, usually pictured as a vicious, cruel, villain or gruesome fiend.