Stuff that's too good for the shoutbox but not enough for its own thread

[Zichao]

Okay, I would have done this stuff in the shoutbox as it's trivial and stupid, but mindful of Psyche's request, here it is in the form of a thread.

One of our lessons for this year is "simulation and resolution of conflicts". I came to it in a pretty hostile frame of mind not only because they're making us come in on Saturdays and spend a whole day pretending to have a conflict, but because I disagree with the central premise of the lesson. As far as I'm concerned other people's conflicts are none of my business, unless I can extract some advantage from them. If two tribes somewhere off in Africa want to massacre each other, well I'll respect that decision. They're grown-ups, no doubt they know what they're doing.

We've been informed that we are allowed to express any opinions (even non-PC ones) during the lessons, but the exercises that have been set are consturcted on a basis that very effectively prevents this from happening - things like "reconstructing Kurdistan" and "how to grant amnesty/forgive/forget". You can't exactly respond to "reconstructing Kurdistan" with "bugger Kurdistan, France should be concentrating on its ties with sub-Saharan Africa". Obviously there are neutral titles too, but we are quite well aware of what is expected of us by now.

Given that the emblem of the university is a fox and a lion, the whole thing seems antithetical to the spirit of the thing, but then on the other hand the vast majority of the people in my masters programme want to work for charity, so clearly we're looking at an issue of supply and demand.

I'm not sure why this particular incidence of enforced intellectual submission has irritated me so much, as I subject myself to far worse in the course of my social life.

Meh, it's not really important in the great scheme of things.

[Zichao]

Okay, so this is a tangent to the thread about modernism and anti-rationalism in the 19th century, as represented by the gothic movement and spiritualism.

Question: is Frankenstein a gothic novel?

Arguing nerdishly over whether a particular work is gothic or not is a favourite hobby of experts on the subject (Hamlet, Justine, A Rebours...), but Frankenstein always gets a pass, which is pretty odd, when you think about it.

Not only is the heroine a pretty minor character (which is unusual in the genre), but the supernatural element that is usually required is replaced with science. Looked at objectively it's a lot closer to Jules Verne or Conan Doyle's fantasy/SF stories. All it's got to connect it to the rest of the gothic world is its atmosphere.

So is it part of the rationalist or the anti-rationalist tradition?

Seems obvious going from what I've put down here that it must be from the former, but actually I don't think it is. For one thing it was written in 1818 (Verne was writing mostly in the last quarter of the 19th century, Conan Doyle across the C19th/20th border), which makes it totally incongruous. Modernism hadn't even been invented then. You could suggest that Frankenstein was the first modernist novel and a precursor to all the others, but I've got a counter argument for that too. Late C19th SF is all about discovery. At the end of the book the mysteries will generally have been solved through the heroic application of Western civilisation, and we can all sleep soundly in our beds. Frankenstein leaves the darkness intact - the monster heads off mysteriously into the ice, rather than being taken to London zoo for a concerted scientific study as would have happened had a rationalist author been writing it.

So for me Frankenstein is part of the anti-rationalist gothic tradition, and the use of science rather than magic is a coincidence rather than a prefiguration of later trends.

[Benjamin]

The movie versions of Frakenstein are certainly Gothic, but I admit to not being on good enough terms with the novel to judge there...

[Benjamin]

Okay, I would have done this stuff in the shoutbox as it's trivial and stupid, but mindful of Psyche's request, here it is in the form of a thread.

One of our lessons for this year is "simulation and resolution of conflicts". I came to it in a pretty hostile frame of mind not only because they're making us come in on Saturdays and spend a whole day pretending to have a conflict, but because I disagree with the central premise of the lesson. As far as I'm concerned other people's conflicts are none of my business, unless I can extract some advantage from them. If two tribes somewhere off in Africa want to massacre each other, well I'll respect that decision. They're grown-ups, no doubt they know what they're doing.

We've been informed that we are allowed to express any opinions (even non-PC ones) during the lessons, but the exercises that have been set are consturcted on a basis that very effectively prevents this from happening - things like "reconstructing Kurdistan" and "how to grant amnesty/forgive/forget". You can't exactly respond to "reconstructing Kurdistan" with "bugger Kurdistan, France should be concentrating on its ties with sub-Saharan Africa". Obviously there are neutral titles too, but we are quite well aware of what is expected of us by now.

Given that the emblem of the university is a fox and a lion, the whole thing seems antithetical to the spirit of the thing, but then on the other hand the vast majority of the people in my masters programme want to work for charity, so clearly we're looking at an issue of supply and demand.

I'm not sure why this particular incidence of enforced intellectual submission has irritated me so much, as I subject myself to far worse in the course of my social life.

Meh, it's not really important in the great scheme of things.

Just accept that you are pondering how one might reconstruct Kurdistan, ASSUMING one had a good self-interested reaon of state to do so.....

[Benjamin]

On the subject of 'Gotham City' archetecture, I think the New Chicigo Public Library, which postdates the Tim Burton Batman, was actually influenced by it:

Detail of roof ornament:



View of building (yes, it is all-new construction--well, over 20 years old now...):

[Zichao]

Just occurred to me - Goethe's Faust is another gothic piece that uses science (in the episode with the creation of the homunculus), but I think it's less bothersome there as it's set in a 15th century context where magic and science are more or less indistinguishable. Also, it's mainly swamped by the episodes involving genuine supernatural influences.

[Zichao]

Is that pic taken with a special lens? I have to say I'm not especially taken with the roof in that context. I think you might be able to get away with it on something that had more classical proportions to start with, but it looks out of place to me. I like the close up, though.

[Benjamin]

The Library roof stuff seems overdone to me, though attractive in isolation as you note. Stole pic, don't know about lens.

[contracycle]

The Londond Underground HQ building 55 Broadway, at which I once worked, has a few art deco gargoyles:




These are "Night" and "Northwind" respectively.

I have certainly seen Frankenstien presented as a work of SF, and I remember it being classsified as part of the Romantic movement.

The thing you can extract from other people's problems is principles which are applicable to your own. Simulation is a powerful tool.

[Benjamin]

The BBC works a perennial angle--surly service in Paris:

In Paris, the customer is not always right

The revolution of 1789 has burned the notion of equality deep into the French psyche and a proud Parisian finds it abhorrently degrading to act subserviently.

I was quite fascinated about how the Doctor's staff was friendly, except when on duty....