Interpretation of Lit

Robert Smith

Autobiography of a Reader 1/22/07

As a reader I’ve had ample opportunity to experience an array of texts, some through school sanctioned coercion, and others through sheer curiosity and desire. From each textual experience an opinion is formed, an opinion beyond good/ bad, exciting/boring, and so on. When someone reads lots of books, the reader forms opinions from an in depth analysis based on personal beliefs and morals developed through previous textual experiences. These factors develop a reader’s identity which in turn develops a reader’s textual tastes. In the instance of my literary saga I find Aldous

Huxley’s, Brave New World captivating and fruitful, truly an ingenious piece of literary work. Meanwhile, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein does nothing more than bore me, confound me, and dissuade any motivation I have toward reading the novel.

Although Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World is an extreme exaggeration of our societal mishaps and misfortunes I find his creation of the World State in the novel extraordinary. Coming into the novel Huxley sets the reader up to view the World State as a utopian society, the society so strived for today. Rather as the novel progresses the reader finds that the World State is in fact a dystopian society full of fallacies which

Huxley samples from our own societal issues such as consumerism, sex, drugs, and religion. Not only does Huxley write Brave New World well, but he engages the reader through subtle quirks concerning present day society; quirks such as individuals disregarding the intimate element of sex and rather doing it just to do it, a standard issue with younger people in society or the arch community songster, a shot at over zealous religious figures, Archbishop of Canterbury. Furthermore, Huxley allows the reader to witness the transformation of the World State from its predetermined utopian to its dystopian. Slowly, but understandably Huxley reveals the fallacies of perfection and society through the course of the novel capturing readers.

Conversely, through two feeble attempts, I have failed to understand fully the novel that is Frankenstein. The concept Shelley attempts to convey with the

Frankenstein monster interests me. As a history buff, I see the connection between the novels conception, The French Revolution, and the industrial revolution. Shelley’s connects Viktor’s apparent knowledge and notion to play God with that of the Frenchman throughout the course of France’s revolution. Unfortunately, the text and Shelley’s writing style do not appeal to me. The constant textual interrupts of letters, poems, and other short works irritates me as it, to me, makes following the novel difficult because of a lack of overall continuity which is further compounded by inadequate character introductions. As a reader I value extensive knowledge of characters, especially supporting characters and their direct and indirect connections to the protagonist and antagonist. By understanding the aforementioned, character relationships, novels are much easier to follow, character’s actions in relation to one and other are quite simply more understandable which assists in the overall comprehension of the text.

Psychologically, Frankenstein is emotionally draining and bleak. As an individual interested in the pursuit of happiness, life, and overall success, Frankenstein disembodies the three previously mentioned as it basically chronicles death, rejection, and loneliness, three situations I wish on no one. Quite simply, as a reader I enjoy blissful situations in which characters thrive, learn, survive, and become successful. Moreover, the attachment of historically significant text and events further my interest in a text. For me it’s plain to understand my keen interest in Brave New World, a story full of historical significance and present day connection while Frankenstein, although full of historical significant situations, bores me due to its choppiness and infatuation with death and destruction.