On this page we've placed some choice bits of writings about things literary by brothers bull and piddle. It's dedicated to those of you out there who never knew, or refused to accept the truth.
The characters of Iago in William Shakespeare's Othello (1603) and Victor Frankenstein in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1816) are creators who eventually become victims of their own creations. They are not artists in the typical sense, though a comparison can be drawn because artists' work is creating. However, an artist creates work, which is meant to be admired and respected by society. The creation of the artist is meant to be revered. The work of art must contribute to the society in a positive way. The creations Iago and Frankenstein unleash bring destruction and death. This makes both of them failed artists. Iago does not create something that is physically tangible to the senses: his creation cannot be seen, heard, touched, tasted or smelled. Instead, he paints an invisible pattern of deception, treachery, and mistrust which eventually leads to murder. His canvas is emotion, his paints are people, and his brush is his tongue. His artistic inspiration is his hatred of Othello, the Moor of Venice. This hatred was spurred because he was overlooked for a promotion to lieutenant in favor of Cassio. Instead of taking simple physical revenge against the Moor, however, Iago chooses to set up an elaborate plot of villainy against Othello by turning him against his beautiful bride, Desdemona. When alone, Iago makes a statement at the end of the first act: "I have't. It is engendered! Hell and night/ Must bring this monstrous birth to the world's light" (1.3.402-403). This means that he has been inspired to create, but the creation will be very evil. He is aware of what the result of his "art" will be, drawing allusions to darkness and hell, the home of the devil. Iago seeks to paradoxically destroy through creation. As with any legitimate artist, Iago also sees his creation as a kind of offspring. In this case, it is a child of darkness. Frankenstein actually creates a concrete object: a living, breathing, thinking creature composed of bits and pieces of dead humans. This work of art is a veritable collage that he believes will be a tribute to the advancement of human knowledge by conquering death. "Life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through, and pour a torrent of life into our dark world" (38-39). However, the seeming horror of his deed strikes Frankenstein as powerfully as did his initial inspiration after he views his creation once the spark of life has been injected. What Frankenstein has carefully selected to insure the creatures "features as beautiful" has instead turned out to be a "wretch." "[The] beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart" (42). He runs from his creation-its ugliness is what Frankenstein perceives as failure, but, as with Iago, the full ramifications of this failure are yet to be revealed. Unlike Iago, Frankenstein had noble, if obsessive, intentions. Destruction and murder were not what he'd planned. When a work of art is conceived, a "seed" must be planted, furthering the analogy of creation and birth. With Iago, the seed is simple: doubt. Iago begins his elaborate scheme by placing a seed of doubt in Othello about the faithfulness of Desdemona. He does this indirectly by informing her father, Brabantio, of Desdemona's elopement with Othello. He knows that a heated confrontation is therefore inevitable. A seeming reconciliation between Moor and senator eventually occurs, but not without a touch of poison: "Look to her, Moor, if thou hast eyes to see: / She has deceived her father, and may thee"
(1.3.293-4). Thus, Iago has planted doubt in Othello without implicating himself. Frankenstein is also compelled to plant a seed because of a parent: his mother, whose death. fills him with grief and great sorrow. Though he tries to fool himself into believing that he has overcome his grief, it is delusional. He is also devoted to science, and so he channels his sorrow into his studies. When his mentor, Mr. Waldman, reminds him: "The labours of men of genius, however erroneously directed, scarcely ever fail in ultimately turning to the solid advantage of mankind" (34). This statement, coupled with the loss of his mother, fills him with a morbid fascination in the mystery of life and death: "To examine the causes of life, we must have recourse to death" (36). His resolve is to create life from death and feels no hesitance at the very ethical principle involved because of Waldman's words. Iago is in love with his monstrous creation. Throughout the play, he demonstrates affection for the emotional havoc he has unleashed while keeping himself at a safe distance with his "honest" public image. To others he appears sharply witty, and his counsel is always sought because of his reputation for honesty. This also gives him the advantage of being able to observe others around him because of the trust they have for him. When Desdemona asks Cassio's opinion of Iago, Cassio replies: "He speaks home, madam…"
(2.1.165). This acknowledgement of Iago's honesty by a man who is central to his insidious plot is ironic. The irony is furthered when Cassio takes Desdemona's hand into his. This friendly gesture is noted by Iago, who says: "With as little a web as this I will ensnare a great a fly as Cassio" (2.1.168-9). Cassio is now a part of Iago's "work of art." Frankenstein loved the idea of his creation, but rejected the finished product. He is, as noted above, repulsed by its horrifying appearance. He sees the creation as nothing more than a beast, a mistake that must be disregarded and discarded. What Frankenstein did not realize, however, is that the creature has intelligence and a soul. The creature, after rejection by his creator, wanders about like a shunned child and vicariously shares in the joys of life when he takes refuge in a wood shed behind the house of a family while he learns to read by observing lessons. When he tries to reach out to the blind grandfather, he finds brief acceptance, but when family members return and see the creature's ghastly exterior, they drive him off. The creature, alone and feared, decides to strike out against his creator by killing Frankenstein's family. The creature tried to appeal to Frankenstein, and Frankenstein almost created a female companion for him, but the idea that this might breed a whole new species fills him with revulsion, and he destroys the mate before bringing it to life. This guarantees his fate of seeing his family and betrothed systematically murdered, with himself as the final victim. Iago never feels remorse for his plan, which does lead to the murder of Desdemona and the disgrace and suicide of Othello. Instead, his failure is when his wife, Emilia, whose devotion to Desdemona was perhaps greater than Iago had realized, exposes him. His miscalculation leads to his downfall as the pattern of his plot is revealed. Because his "artwork" is now on public display, he is not praised for his ingenuity, but damned. He is condemned to death by torture, a hell on earth until he dies in agony to meet eternal agonies for the mortal crimes for which he shows no remorse. As Lodovico, a nobleman and cousin to Desdemona tells him: Look on the tragic loading of this bed:/ This is thy work" (5.2.361-2). The creations are both successful, but the effects on the creators are not. In both cases intentions, good for Frankenstein and evil for Iago, combine with talent to create things which destroy others, and ultimately destroy them. Their talents are great-their creations are failures. As artists, so are Frankenstein and Iago. Works Cited Shakespeare, William. Othello (1603). E.A.J. Honigmann, editor. Walton-on-Thames: Thomas Nelson & Sons, 1997. Shelly, Mary. Frankenstein (1816). New York: Signet, 1996. Copyright 1999, stuff2000 Research **************************************************************************** Biographical Background & His Theoretical Foundation Philosophy for Dewey was a life-long preoccupation, and was his devotion to the field of education. He also had tremendous interest in psychology, a then-developing field, and sociology. Eventually, he combined all of his scholarly interests to develop a perspective on the pedagogical areas that has had lasting impact. Dewey moved from basic philosophical idealism to more ambitious experimentalism (or instrumentalism), where he could test his ideas. He believed that ideas which focused on actual human experience
were "testable plans or instruments for the improvement of human experience" (American Biography, 170). He shifted from the ideas of philosophers Kant and Hegel, which were essentially idealistic, "in favor of the evolutionary psychology of William James and the social behaviorism of his younger colleague, George Herbert Mead" (American Biography, 171). Like the other recognized thinkers of his era, Dewey saw the older philosophical tradition as sterile and too laden with ideas to make them practical. Speculation was replaced with action in the new Pragmatism movement (Philosophy Made Simple, 274, 275). William James, a former physician who turned to psychology and philosophy, was the "foremost advocate" of this new trend (Philosophy Made Simple, 275). Dewey put his ideas into action. "[From] 1894 t0 1904 Dewey began to work out the doctrines of experimentalism as they applied in various realms of thought and action" (American Biography, 171). This was while he worked at the University of Chicago, where he established and headed a separate Department of Education (and concurrently headed the Department of Philosophy). The foundation of his educational, philosophical, sociological and psychological ideals was set with the publication of The School and Society, though the action behind those ideals preceded this with the establishment of the Laboratory School in 1896. Admired as an educator and philosopher, his influence has not been "as widespread and enduring as he and others had initially hoped it would be" (Philip W. Jackson, Introduction, The School and Society and The Child and the Curriculum, p. x). Theories as to why this is so range from an expanding educational system which produced too much pressure to accommodate Dewey's notions, to the belief that the demands of his theories were too much for most teachers (Jackson, xi). Jackson himself speculates that the failure of Dewey's experimental school, which was central to "the fulfillment of his broader educational goals" (xi), led to his underacceptance. The problem is apparently not in the success ratio of the school themselves… "from the materialistic quantitative point of view it would appear as though Dewey's modest experiment, which began with only fifteen students, housed in rented space, has unquestionably flourished in the years since its founding" (xiii). However, Dewey's original concept of the laboratory school compared to what it has become today invalidates the term "laboratory." The modern laboratory schools are established and successful, with the majority of their 1400 students going on to colleges, including the most prestigious schools. Initial problems for the schools included an increasing expenditure, which went from between $1300 to 1400 per year to over $12,000 by its third. (Dollar value in turn-of-the-century terms). However, student cost was consistent, but the enrollment soared. Eventually, the University of Chicago assisted in the funding (after tuition increases), but Dewey would not allow changes in the class ratio of 9:1 to 10:1. Dewey justified the funding as part of a "scientific aim." "From the university standpoint, the most important part of [the school's] work is the scientific-the contribution it makes to the progress of educational thinking" (Dewey, The School and Society, p. 96). Another problem after Dewey's Laboratory School was established: the establishment of other schools at the University of Chicago. Another elementary school appeared, this one a training school for teacher that was meant to be a demonstration school. Two high schools followed this, one for manual training, the other geared for the college-bound. None of these fit into the Dewey design. This confirms that there "exists… probably a host of reasons why a university might choose to maintain an elementary or high school to its environs" (xviii-xix). By "laboratory," Dewey meant a school as "a laboratory of applied psychology" (School and Society, 96) by viewing the progress of children mentally and educationally in terms of modern psychology, while incorporating some practical sociological principles. The goal was to make the school "a working model of a unified education" (S & S, 93). The link between basic education and higher education demonstrated, according to Dewey, that there was "simply education" (S & S, 92), which was really a streamlined cognitive and pedagogical process. However, Dewey was
nevertheless at a disadvantage in that the field of psychology was at this time not yet a quarter-century old, and the new ideas and principles were generalized enough to be applicable to any teaching method, though refinement and specification of psychological principles and categories did develop over the years along with the school. Overall, Dewey regarded the Laboratory School as nothing more that a "feasibility study" which was a mere "working model… not… to be copied" (S & S, 94). As Jackson adds to this, "Once the harmonious establishment of the new view and the old goals has been achieved within a single school… it remains for others to develop their own set of practices to accomplish the same results" (xxv). The "solution" need not be copied, but the viability has been established. From there, the new technique can be applied to the many variations in school settings, adapting to circumstances, though "what is crucial is the range of conditions under which the recommended innovation might reasonably be expected to operate" (xxvii). Eventually, he had a falling out with William Rainey Harper over administration of the Laboratory School, and so Dewey left the University of Chicago, though the school continued to function. His name has always since been associated with it. In 1905 he began a life-long association with Columbia University. He was made faculty of the Philosophy Department and Teacher's College. It was during his tenure at Columbia that he achieved world recognition as "America's most distinguished and influential philosopher." He retired in 1939, and continued to write until his death in 1952. Dewey's Educational Philosophy-An Overview Dewey saw that education must adapt to a society, which was becoming increasingly complex. He pointed out that not long ago (in his era) the structure of society was mainly self-contained in almost all areas of industry, agriculture, and crafts. "[The household was practically the center in which were carried on, or about which were clustered, all the typical forms of industrial occupation" (S&S, 10). For example, the process of providing clothing for the family was carried out from the shearing of the sheep to the actual weaving. Killing the animal for food while using its fat to make candles provided illumination. And so it went for other necessities. What wasn't manufactured in the household was available from the community "in shops, which were constantly open to inspection and often centers of neighborhood congregation. Everyone in the household and the communities contributed to the work so that "The children, as they gained in strength and capacity, were gradually initiated into the mysteries of the several processes" which, he concludes, "was a matter of immediate and personal concern, even to the point of actual participation" (S&S, 10). Therefore, education was part of a "continuously operative" system. Because of the advent of an increasingly complex "concentration of industry and division of labor" the educative aspect of this system vanished. "It is radical conditions which have changed, and only an equally radical change in education suffices." Additionally, the structure of society it self has increased in complexity, which establishes a polemic: "how shall we retain these advantages, and yet introduce into the school… occupations which exact personal responsibilities and which train the child in relation to the physical realities of life?" (S&S, 12). Dewey believed that mere preparation for domestic and vocational skills and trades was "unnecessarily narrow" because they were "methods of living and learning, not… distinct studies" (S&S, 14). The ultimate goal "is the development of a spirit of social co-operation and community life [in which] discipline grow out of and be relative to such an aim (S&S, 16-17). Thus, the school is, in a sense, a social microcosm: "It gets a chance to be a miniature community, and embryonic society" (S&S, 18). Naturally, this mini-community is founded on the past social structure with its aims on social trends of the present, and the potential trends of the future. The educational process must not only teach students fundamental skills, but it must also train them to adapt, just as Dewey's model school adapted. The former is a relatively simple task; the latter, however, is exceedingly difficult because it transcends the traditional classroom setting and pedagogical techniques. Geography, according to Dewey, was "the unity of all sciences" (S&S, 18) because everything ultimately is derived from the earth: raw materials, food, shelter, society, philosophy, industry, science, etc. Through teaching of practical skills children can delve into the intricacies of these skills' roots, all stemming from geography. "You can concentrate the history of all mankind into the evolution of the flax, cotton, and wool fibers into clothing (S&S, 22). Dewey was also a realist. In response to those critical of an emphasis on trade and vocations in the schools as the foundations of greater knowledge, Dewey said, "The world in which most of us live is a world in which everyone has a calling and occupation, something to do. Some are managers and some are subordinates. But the great thing for one as for the other is that each shall have had the education which enables him to see within his daily work all there is in it of large and human significance" (S&S, 23-24). Dewey's ideal was that what the best and wisest wanted for their own children should reflect what the general community wanted for their children. A good education is a sound investment for anyone in any income or social bracket, and it is important not to skimp on this necessity. And many of the ideas put forth and carried out by Dewey are applicable today. Here are some ways I would put them to use: Personal Theoretical Applications I would use concrete elements in my teaching. When teaching a concept I would have the students experiment with the idea and provide opportunities for hands-on learning. For example, by going on field trips with the students to see first-hand some of the concepts they are learning, such as a local assembly or community board meeting. Nature hikes would assist Science, where the dirt itself leads to discussions and study of the flora and fauna, cell structure, and the concept of life itself. I would have students work on whatever topics best suits their interests and stimulates their cognitive development, and would encourage them to follow that path. This can only lead them to a higher path of knowledge. I believe that all students have the potential to reach greater levels of learning if they are provided the guidance they require. The one who does the work is the one who shall find meaning in it, and therefore in himself. I want to work with students at the elementary and secondary levels, and put the individualized approach to good, practical use. Spotting their talents and bringing them to their maximum potential in the right career path is essential, more so than before in today's competitive job market, so it is important to make them aware of their options early as possible. Dewey's views are similar to views which judge the students based on their abilities rather than arbitrary grades. I also would have students pursue individualized topics that reach scientific conclusions independently from the teacher (except for assistance in an advisor capacity). The goal is to aim high and practically and achieve well. John Dewey was a perceptive philosopher who was ahead of his time in a number of pedagogical issues and theories. Education has utilized these concepts to a limited extent, and only now is rediscovering these concepts because there are greater needs, which are not being met with sensible and practical techniques. The goal of education is not just to educate: it is also to recognize potentials in students and direct them to the right and easiest path. Copyright 1999, stuff2000 Research
Harumph, harumph! Don't hesitate to e-mail us your comments. Reader-response is definitely a blessing, and most welcome! © 1997 bullstuff@yahoo.com
John Dewey, noted philosopher and educator, was born 1859 in Burlington Vermont. The son of a grocer, Archibald Sprague Dewey, young John was encouraged by his father to peruse British literary classics, while his mother, to whom he was very close, instilled piety. In grammar school, John was a very bright but shy youth, but an above average student. (Dictionary of American Biography, Supplement 5, 169). He preferred independent reading as opposed to set lessons, and out door activities as opposed to set games. Even when he attended the University of Vermont as an undergraduate, Dewey found informal library pursuits more appealing than formal class work. Always a voracious reader because of his father's encouragement, Dewey delved into complex and avant-garde schools of thought by Darwin, Thomas Huxley, and others. After graduating in 1879, Dewey taught Latin, algebra, and science at Oil City High School in Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, he pursued his own philosophical interests, publishing his earliest articles on the subject in various journals. In 1881, he took a teaching position at a small academy in Charlotte, Vermont while continuing to publish philosophical articles. In 1884 he received his doctorate.
Get your own Free Home Page