SOME SUGGESTED PAPER TOPICS FOR THE SECOND LONGER CORE PAPER

(with my appreciation to other core faculty for suggestions)

Write a Marxist interpretation of Frankenstein. Possible themes: How might Shelley’s characters stand for elements in Marx’s theories? Is Marx’s theory of history at work in Shelley’s novel? Is it legitimate to give a Marxist interpretation of a work that was written before Marx’s time? Why/why not?

In the Preface to The Communist Manifesto (p. 6) Frederick Engels mentions the work of Charles Darwin and argues that the efforts of Karl Marx and himself will do for the study of history what the Englishmen’s had done for biology. Explore the similarities and differences between the writings of Marx and Engels on the one hand and Charles Darwin on the other. Since the subjects treated in their respective works are obviously not the same, you are advised to consider such things as the importance of individuals to the process of change, and the presence or absence of a sense of progress in the two world views (students doing this topic could ask for an extension on the due date).

We use words such as liberty and rights often. What do these words mean for one or two of these authors (from second semester, including one read from Kant through Frankenstein)? What authority are they appealing to to validate their views? In your opinion (building on, contrasting with, rejecting or so on) with these authors who (or what) does, or doesn’t, have rights, how you determine that, and what you do when rights collide (do liberal humanists have any business telling a totalitarian regime about the “rights” of its citizens? what reasons are abortion foes using when they weigh the “rights” of a woman against those of a fetus? are these guys even worried about such collisions?). Do animals, or sentient beings, or aliens have rights?

Examine the role of reason and/or imagination in one or more of the authors we’ve read so far this semester.

Examine the role of class (or gender or nationality or race) in one or more of the authors we’ve read so far this semester.

Family relationships, patriarchy, matriarchy, duties or exploitation of parents, siblings, children or civil/political society’s link to family keep coming up this semester. Considering the Communist Manifesto and/or Frankenstein and any other texts from earlier in the semester in terms of any of the following: are governments like families (and leaders like parents/patriarchs)? do families exist now for all classes? should “nuclear” families exist and how should they be formulated? do you owe your parents (leaders?) anything? would you stop growth/development of yourself (government/society) at a certain age and why? why do you think—in comparison or contrast to these texts—families begin or fall apart? Make this manageable by picking only enough questions and texts to make your points well. Quote and engage the texts AS WELL AS your own current thinking.

Examine the various responses to nature that we’ve seen so far this semester (e.g., compare the Romantic poets with Locke).

Compare the introspection in Sappho with that of the Romantic poets (you could also include references to Rousseau or Frankenstein if you like)..

In “Bright Star” and “Ode on Melancholy”, Keats presents a vision of what it means to be fully alive. What is this vision? Compare it to that implied or expressed by characters in Frankenstein.

Using the description of the enlightenment found in Kant’s essay “What is Enlightenment?” indicate whether Jean-Jacques Rousseau and Mary Shelley deserve to be labeled critics of the enlightenment. You are, of course, to show why they should or should not be so called.

Marx (and Engels, if you wish) and any other author/character from core debate a question or topic you give them. Give me the topic, a script of their dialogue (including a few direct quotes from the texts we read) and your response/evaluation of the debate as the judge.

You, one of the authors/characters from Kant through Frankenstein, and another person who shares the core texts (you can pick a famous figure and “pretend” he or she shares the texts, or a roommate, classmate, or other author/character from core or another course) are discussing one or more core texts from this semester. How would each “review” it and decide whether it belongs in Core next year? You could write this in novel style, as a script, as a letter/article or as you wish.

In what ways are Rousseau’s Discourse on the Origins of Inequality and Shelley’s Frankenstein criticisms of the Enlightenment?

In what ways are Rousseau’s Discourse on the Origins of Inequality and Shelley’s Frankenstein criticisms of the Enlightenment?

There are many possibilities for Frankenstein. These include:
-- What are the ethical responsibilities of scientists? E.g., why does Victor want to create life, should he, what are his responsibilities toward society, toward his creation?
-- What is Mary Shelley’s view of human nature?
-- Does is matter that Shelley is female? E.g., does her ambivalence toward her ``monstrous’’ creation matter? why are there all these dead mothers? does Victor go astray because he tries (recall Plato’s Symposium) to create without women?
-- Why does Shelley create this elaborate system of “doubles”? I.e., does Victor = Walton = the Creature = Shelley herself?
-- How would a Kantian respond to Frankenstein, e.g., to Victor’s decision to create or to the “personhood” of the Creature?

Is Shelley’s novel a commentary on the problem of evil for humankind, or is the evil depicted in Frankenstein of a more particular, personal nature? What might Rousseau think of the origins of evil in Frankenstein (or one think of Othello in this context)?

Choose a metaphor. Do birth metaphors (or metaphors for exploration, death, silence, absence, erotic love, nurturing or whatever you think is most important) figure prominently in Frankenstein? What point(s) might Shelley be making with this theme? Choose one other thinker for comparison: Is a similar metaphor operative in Rousseau’s (or Marx’s) work?