N Abioye's Online Journal

Compare the ways in which Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban are presented as victims of circumstance in Frankenstein and the tempest.

In both the texts, Frankenstein and The tempest, Characters are depicted as victims of circumstance. A victim of circumstance is an individual who suffers from consequences that are not the fault of the character I will be analysing how two specific characters are presented as victims of circumstances in both texts.  The texts have similarities in the way characters are shown to be victims of circumstance, I will be analysing how this is displayed through the use of language features, both structural and narrative. Both Mary Shelly and Shakespeare employ social parallels within the text, they include characters that are rejected by society, to fully decide whether a character is a victim of circumstance, I will have to evaluate whether they are victimised partly due to their own acts.

The tempest is a piece of literature developed by William Shakespeare in 1610. The text explores the theme of a victim of circumstance, through the character Caliban. Caliban is a native character to the island Prospero lands on. The book comes at a time where slaves were beginning to be come from foreign countries, and contains a viewpoint that the everyday man would have had on the imported slaves. This is important as it is important to maintain the idea that Caliban is different to other characters such as Prospero. The character Frankenstein’s monster, serves a similar purpose to the character Caliban, in the text. He is created in a time where scientific experiments were carried out, that questioned what she believed should be kept unknown. These tests were trying to find out the secrets to life. Mary Shelly had to show in detail how this is could have negative effects. She does this by incorporating a character that causes destruction from the characters. Both texts explore the characters and depict them in a negative light however the books are biased as they are produced with a view coming from opposing characters as the main views. For example, Frankenstein is written from the view of first Robert Walton, the victor Frankenstein and lastly the monster. This is a structural technique to show the story mostly from a biased point of view. This is also expressed within the tempest as Prospero is the protagonist; we are more likely to side with him rather than Caliban, who plays the antagonist. This also plays a part in the way that they are treated for example, the monster is treated as a victim due to his position in the book, he goes from a creature that Victor says “I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful!—Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of pearly whiteness”, to a character he deems so ugly he abandons it. This is also apparent in the tempest, it is displayed where there is a shift from where Caliban used to be treated as an equal where he states Prospero “woudst give me, water with berries in’t” to a slave because he tried to rape Miranda. It could be argued that Caliban is in the wrong for trying to rape Miranda however it is clear that Caliban is quite animalistic. To conclude on this, they are both shown as victims of circumstance through the use of them being antagonist in the plays, however Frankenstein’s monster is unjustly categorised as he played no part in the process of him being categorised unlike Caliban who actually preformed the act however we can infer it was not completely voluntary.

Both texts employ the language feature, imagery, as a means to depict the antagonists, as victims of circumstance. An example of where imagery is used in the Tempest to create a theme of Caliban being a victim of circumstance, is where Caliban explains the pain he suffers from. He says ‘For every trifle are they set upon me’ and ‘their pricks at my footfall’. This quotation shows the extremes of the hardships Caliban has to endure at every step he makes out of line. This shows that Caliban is powerless in his environment, and has no power. This shows the extent to which Caliban is a victim of circumstance, he is a slave. He is a victim of circumstance as the pain he is experiencing as a result of his master’s control and his near faultless actions. And if someone’s pain and life is not in his control, he is clearly a victim of circumstance. Frankenstein’s monster is also depicted as a victim of circumstance, it again is translated though the use of imagery. During the monsters monologue he states ‘I ought to be Adam but I am rather a fallen angel which drivest me from joy for no misdeed’. He is saying that he should be treated as a son, as Victor is his creator, but he is instead treated a devil. He states an important point depicting him as a victim of circumstance, he states that not even the devil was exiled from heaven for ‘no misdeed’, meaning that even the Devil did something wrong. This means that the creation is treated even worse than the devil. The use of the word fallings important as it shows the extent to which the creation feels alienated. The antagonists are both presented as victims of circumstance, they are both placed in a position that they cannot change. It is shown in this case through the use of imagery. In this example, Frankenstein’s creation is shown to be the larger victim of the two. His circumstance is clearly depicted as more severe due to his expression that he is punished for no reason.

Both Mary Shelly and Shakespeare use the structural feature of foreshadowing to present their antagonists as victims of circumstance. This is shown in Frankenstein where he states ‘the whole village was roused’, the use of the literary feature, the metaphor, shows the extent to which he is rejected by society because of his appearance. The use of the word village is used to represent society and how it was scared to accept differences. This means that he would be alienated and would never be able to gain companionship or love, this shows he is a victim of circumstance. There is also foreshadowing in the tempest. The title in itself is a form of foreshadowing; a tempest means a violent or wild thunderstorm, which usually leaves large amounts of destruction. In this case, as Caliban is the antagonist, he will be left with the largest amount of damage. This shows Caliban as a victim of circumstance as it shows that he will have endure forced hardships and in this specific case continue his life as a slave, this is shown in the tempest where he submits to Prospero towards the end of the text. To conclude both characters are depicted as victims as of circumstance, by using the same structural feature of foreshadowing. This may be a hint to how the victims may continue to be victims, this is important in both texts as we see the victims, as victims throughout the text.

Both texts explore the theme of rejection to portray the antagonists as victims of circumstance through the narrative. In both texts, both characters are rejected by society because of their appearance hence the reason for their roles as antagonists. For this reason we must contemplate whether they are treated unfairly because of their appearance, for example if Caliban was a normal human like Prospero, would he as against his attempt to reproduce with Miranda. His attempt to populate the island resulted in him becoming Prospero’s slave. Caliban being homeless exaggerates the fact that he is a victim of circumstance. During a monologue he expresses that the nature is his only home, he states “Be not afeard. The isle is full of noises, sounds, and sweet airs that give delight and hurt not. Sometimes a thousand twangling instruments will hum about mine ears”. This shows that Caliban is willing to accept the nature as his home, even though it has posed obvious danger to him. This shows the extent to which he has no other substitute for it through his denial. Frankenstein’s monster is also projected as a victim circumstance through the theme of rejection; this is hyperbolised as he is not given even a name. Frankenstein’s monster also spends his time homeless, living in a hovel while closely observing a family. A key quotation in the book is “Everywhere I see bliss, from which I alone am irrevocably excluded”, this portrays him as a victim of circumstance as he is not able to enjoy his life because of his exclusion. During this period, the creation the creation sees a reflection of him and comes to an understanding that his appearance is hideous to behold, this sparks a theme of self-hate within the monster, but despite this he continues to be benevolent. Percy Shelly had an interesting take on the book; he stated “The circumstances if his existence were so monstrous that his original goodness was gradually turned into fuel of an inextinguishable misanthropy and revenge”, hence making him a victim of circumstance.

In both texts, the Tempest and Frankenstein, similar features are employed to connote with similar themes. Shakespeare and Mary Shelly both use language features and the narrative to present their characters as victims of circumstance. I believe that the variances stem from the contextual differences within the time it was produced.  To conclude, Caliban is presented as a victim of circumstance through his appearance, his abandonment, homelessness, hyperbole, metaphors, imagery and foreshadowing, this is similar to Frankenstein as they use the same literary features and similar events to portray the characters as victims of circumstance. This helps me infer that both writes used similar themes to highlight their destiny.

Compare the ways in which Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban are presented as victims of circumstance in Frankenstein and the Tempest.

PLAN

P- point, E-evidence, A-analysis, C-comparison, C-context

INTRO

The author’s of the Tempest and Frankenstein have presented the characters Caliban and Frankenstein’s monster as victims of circumstance through the use of multiple language features, with the narrative and structural components.

PARA 1

PARA 2

PARA 3

PARA 4

PARA 5

CONCLUSION

It is clear through analysis that the authors have very much so intended to indicate to the readers that Caliban and the monster are victims but to an intellectual capacity. Where the language obviously does this in similar and different ways but so does the structural components. It seems to believe the structure of a story can have any effect on the themes and circumstances surrounding a character, but that it apparent in both texts. There is a range of both techniques so overall, the intention of both characters as victims is the same but there is not a clear similarity or difference overall and should be considered varied.

Paragraph 1

Topic Sentence: The authors of Frankenstein and The Tempest both employ imagery to depict the harsh reality that Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban face every day through no fault of their own.

F: image of a beautiful Adam which morphs into that of a fallen angel (a demon). Shows the pain of the monster not living up to Frankenstein’s expectations of him. This brings him great distress, yet it is through no fault of his own.

TT: image of Caliban feeling pain with every step he takes. Caliban says that every small mistake he makes is punished violently. Again, this imagery paints a violent and sad day-to-day life that Caliban has found himself in only because of poor luck (a victim of circumstance).

Paragraph 2

Topic Sentence: Both works employ hyperbole to evidence that Caliban and Frankenstein’s monster have had control over their lives and futures taken away from them, their lives being shaped solely by the circumstances others create for them.

F: Frankenstein was born so hideous that there is nothing he can do to redeem himself. Even Dante, who has walked through hell, could not stand to see him move. This hyperbole shows that his ugliness, which is completely out of his control, will control his life forever, as none will ever be able to see past it.

TT: Here Prospero states that Caliban is in his service, reinforces the idea of lifelong servitude again. The hyperbole refers to the groans of wolves that Caliban is said to have made when Prospero found him on the beach. This hyperbole makes Caliban out to be an animal. It has been said that what separates man from animal is that man has control over his future. By equating him with a wolf, Prospero implies that Caliban has no say over what will happen to him, and that Prospero guides his life as one would an animal’s.

Paragraph 3

Topic Sentence: In both works, the authors employ different literary devices to evidence the fact that both Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban have suffered horrible consequences from what those control them have done to them.

F: Using a rhetorical question emphasises the existence of a powerful creator, and the anger the monster has at how imperfectly he has been made. If the creator made him so hideous and violent, why would he then leave him with the ability to feel agony and remorse. Because of what his creator has done, he is filled with rage and agony.

TT: The use of parataxis (define in essay) in Caliban’s speech gives an impression of a paranoid, brainwashed, and scared man. The audience can clearly see that his master has taken over his life and thoughts. Prospero is thus in great part responsible for the poor state that Caliban is in.

Paragraph 4

Topic Sentence: Both works use foreshadowing to evidence that powerful God-like forces will impact their lives. In addition, the simple use of foreshadowing by the authors implies a certain sealed fate for these characters, further reinforcing the notion that their destinies are out of their control, and that they can do no more than suffer through whatever circumstances they are thrown into.

F: The fact that the monster was created by a maker foreshadows the fact that most of the difficulties and problems he will face in life will also have been created by this maker.

T: The title means a violent thunderstorm, at the end of which little remains unscathed. This foreshadows what will happen to Caliban, and suggest that forces more powerful than him have already pre-determined what will happen to him. Similar to a sailor caught in the middle of a storm, there is little he can do but wait and hope for the best.

Paragraph 5

Topic Sentence: Finally, the authors use different structural elements to show that the characters in both works have given up their autonomy to their masters, their fates subject to the desires of forces more powerful than themselves.

F: Frame story causes readers to experience the story of the monster through Victor’s narration. This emphasises the fact that his creator has complete control over his existence-as he can now paint the monster’s story exactly as he would like.

TT: The aside to the audience is a sign of defeat, with Caliban effortlessly accepting a new master to rule his fate, suggesting that his own destiny has been out of his control for so long that he is either no longer willing, or no longer able to control it himself, and is happy to hand it over to another powerful figure.

Auther miller uses a detailed description of the setting to create symbolic connections between the setting and traditional ideologies that are held to it for example “the narrow window” that streamed light through its “leaded panes”.  The use of a small window is important as it gives the room a feeling of simplicity. The use of the window is important in this case as it negates the need of the candle. A candle can be symbolic of religion representing light as good and the darkness as evil

In both the falling leaves and futility, there is an underlying theme of death. The theme runs its course through each poem. For example in the “The falling leaves”, “brown leaves dropping from their tree” is used as a metaphor for the soldiers dying. The metaphor is very important as it gives a sense of the time frame it was written in. During Autumn, trees shed their leaves. The tree is supposed to represent Britain and gives a portrayal of the amount of deaths and the affects of the warfare. The poem was written by Margaret Postgate Cole, this is important as it gives a view point of war but not on the battlefields as this wouldn’t have been possible in the 1940s. Margaret Postgate Cole was a pacifist and believe that this war was unnecessary.  This is similar to “Futility” which is a poem written based upon being in the front line of war. The poem is about trying to revive a dead soldier. For example “if anything might rouse him now” is used by Wilfred Owen to suggest that there is a chance the soldier might be alive, however the reader is aware the the person being carried is dead. The poem states that the sun might not “rouse” the corpse, this suggests that the the sun which was responsible for bringing life had abandoned humanity because of war.

The extent of war being an attrocity is explored during the falling leaves. As i previously stated, the leaves are used to represent the dying soldiers, but instead of the deaths being seen as individuals. The soldiers being grouped as one creates an absence of personality. This theme is quite popular in warfare, soldiers were often buried in long graves, containing multiple corpses. This is also present in Futility where the corpse is not referred to with a name however just words such as him, creating an absence of personality. This is quite powerful as objects aren’t referred to with names but instead terms such as it. This creates a feeling of absence of life

The Dream Chaser

The room was ripped apart and dragged towards the void. He swam, navigating his way through the wormhole, narrowly avoiding the book-shelf and the books that followed. A connected display of colours spread through the wormhole. The stars were shining brightly as he gazed upon the universe in all its beauty. The wormhole was everything and more than what he expected it to be……. But as he knew, all good things must come to an end as Joe plummeted into the wormhole.

Joe had always been an average guy, average job, average car and even an average wife. He never had any characteristics or traits that set him apart from the crowd, there just was nothing particularly special about Joe, he was neither handsome nor ugly, he had a standard head of hair, a natural blonde comb over, no gel, and day by day, he carried himself with no real meaning. I guess you could call him your average Joe, but the presence of mediocre qualities, made Joe all the more anxious to reach his goal of creating a medium to reach the dream world. Joe was what you would call a master builder, things just seemed to fit together in his hands, an important feature generally found in construction workers, but the difference with more was the fact that there was no restriction on his imagination, allowing him to create objects in search for innovation and the portal to the dream world was the perfect project to embark on. Of course Joe had already reached the dream world, in fact, Joe had reached it 7348 times in the 28 years he had spent in new York and 1003 times in the 4 early years of his life which he had spent in London, but a working portal would allow him to commute to and fro at will. So while Joe’s wife, Jane was at work, Joe continued on Project Morpheus V3.0, versions 1 and 2 had resulted in 1st degree burns, but to joe, this time was different, he approached with a “third time’s the charm” mentality, version 3.0 added strong blue cheese for increased productivity while asleep. Finally, with everything in place, Joe was ready to launch the alpha test for Project Morpheus 3.0, as he strapped and the augmented reality headset lowered, Joe could not help but feel anxious, but he knew, it was far too late to turn back as the fans powered on and the headset began the mandatory safety procedures, “BRACE YOURSELF, KEEP YOUR HEAD BACK, FACE FORWARD AND KEEP YOUR LEGS AND ARMS INSIDE THE VEHICLE AT ALL TIMES”, the safety procedures were an extract taken from an amusement park roller coaster but this would suffice for the alpha test. “3, 2 ,1, Go!Go!Go!”

The room was ripped apart and dragged towards the void. He swam, navigating his way through the wormhole, narrowly avoiding the book-shelf and the books that followed. A connected display of colours spread through the wormhole. The stars were shining brightly as he gazed upon the universe in all its beauty. The wormhole was everything and more than what he expected it to be……. But as he knew, all good things must come to an end as Joe plummeted into the wormhole. He woke in his room, with Project Morpheus strapped onto his head, he removed it and pinched his self.

Torture

Torture is a very controversial topic. When questioned, the vast majority of people believe there should be clear laws against the use of torture. However, over a third believe that torture can be justified in some cases to protect the public, but what is torture? Torture can be described as the action or practice of inflicting severe pain on someone as a punishment, or in order to force them to do or say something. The use of torture can be argued to be inhumane, however it has often been used for the “greater good” but does that justify it? I will be explaining why I believe it is necessary in some cases.

Torture has saved thousands of lives, regardless of whether it is ethical, it has been proven to be useful. On the 7th of July bombings, my mother was en route to take the line which was bombed. At this time I would have been 8 years old, and the effects of losing my mother would have been very devastating. What may sound like a story similar to a story found in a newspaper, is actually a personal experience of mine. When reflecting on this subject, I can only think of the extents I would go to to prevent the situation. I believe if the people who opposed torture in the previous statistic, were placed in a similar predicament as myself, they would soon align themselves with my own beliefs.

This is my reasoning for the strong beliefs that I hold concerning the use torture. Any method used in preventing the greater loss of live is necessary, even if it may be deemed unethical. When statistics are used, we tend to see this as a number, and forget that the victims have lives just as valuable as yours. With the case of torture, when I was personally affected by an experience like this, my opinion was re-enforced. Even when interrogating a suspect who is not yet condemned of the said conviction, torture is still right as its motive is to gain information, which would save lives if applicable. This makes me feel that people who are against the use of torture are weak-minded and believe in ideals which will never be attainable. This shows that the use of torture is a must and is justified because majority of the population believes it acceptable in all applicable circumstances.

Torture gains information, saves lives but it is only at the expense of one person. Torture is vital in the grand scheme of things and in the situations it is used in, is would be considered to be the lesser of two evils. A necessary evil when preventing the greater loss of life, for example if you were in a situation where you or family member could end up as part of collateral damage from a terrorist plot, you would probably give anything to evade the situation. I believe that people’s views on torture, stems from their belief on the possibility of it affecting them. I am sure that if this situation was more personal, the previous statistic would be higher.

Sam Harris produces an important view on torture, he provides a scenario where a known terrorist has planted a bomb in the heart of the city. The terrorist is finally in your custody, and he is gloating about a forthcoming explosion and the human suffering it will cause. Given this scenario I believe that torture is necessary in this hypothetical simulation as it is used for the greater good. A wrong act is done to achieve the greater good, making it the most ethically appropriate decision. If the terrorist, was allowed to initiate his plan without any repercussions, the loss of life would be more inhumane act. In this case, would it not be right to stop someone’s plot to take a large amount of lives? He comes in Gloating about his upcoming plans, and inhumane act. However, based upon my previous statistic, some would say it  would be inhumane to perform an act to prevent this. Calling torture inhumane is quite contradictory, as the most cruel and monstrous act would be the terrorist claiming innocent lives. Terrorists need to be reprimanded and punished.

If an innocent person is tortured, to try to obtain information that the person being mistreated does not have; it would still be less troubling than the possible damage of a bomb. This is an example of a greater amount of lives being saved, at the expense of a single individual. The main argument against torture is that the Geneva Convention states that torture must not be used. Torture is primarily used in warfare. Interrogating one man can help reveal even more information to prevent other possible plots. Regardless of whether one person is innocent and does not deserve to be punished, if you consider the possibility of many people dying; would it not be wrong for the interrogator, to not do everything in his power to prevent the situation? An important view for torture is the recognition that the use of torture is far more humane, than the person being tortured’s plans, and more than people by terrorist’s experiences. For example the recent beheadings of innocent civilians by the Islamic State militants. This is an injustice that chooses innocent civilians as its victims. People may disagree with my point as the use of torture is not permitted in the Geneva Convention, but those who abdicate the laws of war should not be entitled to the benefits of it. Nevertheless, terrorists aren’t seen as lawful combatants, they are seen as a grey area. They won’t have agreed to fight using the laws of war(so in theory, they should not benefit from the Geneva Convention). Even with these views, the use of torture is not intended to be used as a punishment but rather a means to protect the innocent.

Narrative Writing

I had worked there for years, and year after year the ploughs ran deeper. I remember the first time vividly. It was on a foggy winters morning, I was armed with a thick black jumper accompanied by light blue overalls so worn they appeared stone washed. It was early in the morning, and I began my work of labour in the farm. As I ploughed through the farm, I uncovered what I first believed was a stone. It was unusually shaped, oblong, with dents on the sides. I believed the stone was weathered. It was as pale as a ghost and discoloured. The stone circulated my mind for some time, I returned to the stone a few hours later, and again while sowing seeds in the ground.

I began foundling the stone which I placed in my pocket for some time. While working, the stone fell out of my pocket, and tumbled into the dirt. I decided to pick it up. I began by remove it from the surrounding soil. I leant over to unearth the relic left in the ground, pushing away the moist mud which found its way beneath my long finger nails. I uncovered the rest of the stone by moving the surrounding ground. I felt a chill move vertically across my spine, I had to come to terms with the realisation that the relic was instead the remains of  a hand. The field I had been working on was the venue of the battle of the Somme during the great war, the same war I had been informed of for years at school. I had been aware of this, but had not thought about this much as I had been very desperate for a job at the time. I remember myself feeling very cold as I made contact with the bone, but I began to feel this less and less as I uncovered more and more bones. The hands seemed like they were reaching back into the earth for reminders of what happened. An ectoplasmic chill hung over the fields, working there had never been the same.

I begun to become more and more fascinated in the battle, reading sources and speaking to archaeologists who possessed higher understanding. One day I stumbled upon a source which translated the extent of the bravery of the soldiers of the Somme, they stood outnumbered upon the fields I Used to plough, and were told to walk, not run into the woods and the machine guns which had been nesting inside them. The men marched with bravery and prided to their imminent deaths. This sparked a chain of thoughts in my head, which all had a familiar undertone. The theme of fate. Was it the fate of those soldiers to not avoid their deaths so future generations may learn, was it the fate of the soldiers finger to die in location in which I may find him, did I choose my life or did it choose me? I pursued the life that chose me and followed my new found love in archaeology.

Today, I returned to the site of my prior employer and uncovered a long grave with roughly around 20 broken skeletons. A grave not fitting for honourable soldiers. All the flesh and skin had left them, bones and their boots that had outlasted them. The skeletons were stopped mid-action, the skulls had their jaws wide open, like they were shouting and I could only imagine a visual image of the soldier’s heads being thrown back by the impact of the bullets. Almost ironic as they had lost their voices. The display of the bodies could almost be described as art, but together to create a greater image. A mosaic, made up of boots and bones, where all the soldiers who had saved this country had left for their-selves. The death of the honourable, 20 bodies in a grave with no headstone. Nothing to signify the bravery and sheer determination these people showed. All of this just for a flag.

Text Response

Dear Isabelle Kerr

I am writing to respond and give my opinion towards your article on slang. I agree with some aspects of your article, words like “Twerking, selfie and unlike” do not give an accurate representation of youth culture. These additions to the Oxford dictionary are social trends. The word selfie means “a photograph that one has taken of oneself, typically one taken with a smartphone or webcam and shared via social media”. The fact that they are typically taken with a smartphone, emphasizes the fact that they are just social trends. The advance in technology has allowed us to interact with it in new ways which were not available in the past. The fact that they are social trends consolidates the point that they should not be included in the Oxford dictionary. Older slang words such as “groovy” are not currently used and have been replaced with new slang words. However the use of the Online Oxford dictionary means that it can be edited and words do not become obsolete.

You address a few major issues some people generally have with slang. Many people believe that slang does not accurately portray youth culture and often makes them appear as “yobs”. Although, slang also has its positives that were not addressed in the first  article, slang is often used to caption social trends. You state in the article that you had to investigate why Miley Cyrus was said to have twerked at the MTV awards. This would not have been as efficiently translated if the headline was “ Miley Cyrus danced to popular music in a sexually provocative manner involving thrusting hip movements and a low squatting stance at the MTV video music awards”. In this case slang is used to define a very specific action, but this also has its negatives. As I stated, it captions trends.

I believe that there isn’t anything wrong with slang. During an interview of any type, people of all ages generally understand that the language used, must be formal, as with a change in audience, so does the language appropriate to use. Use of informal language could make the interviewee seem illiterate, however language is defined by the people that speak, so it can not be a defining factor in assessing ones intellect. This makes me question your levels of intellect, as you clearly have in your article.

Slang is in no way, shape or form detrimental to the English Language. In your article you state that “we are in a constant battle to prove whether we are all ASBO wielding yobs”, but the use of slang portrays an important aspect to the English language. An important point to take into account when talking about slang, is that it has a specific audience and it is only an addition to formal language. This can be substituted for a synonym or the definition itself e.g “that girl is a jezzy” can be said formally by saying “that girl is promiscuous”. Such synonyms helps the younger deal with the plasticity of language, which is generally good practice. Great writers such as Shakespeare also used slang terms such as ‘sanctimonious’ and ‘assassination’ in his plays. Writers such as condemned in their time for their use of slang, despite this, their words have earned their place in the dictionary and will be for future generations. So in theory, only time will tell if they are suitable words to be added to the dictionary. Using Shakespeare’s example, it took generations of people utilizing these words before they became acceptable. However text base slang terms should not be added to the dictionary, ‘Srsly’ is an abbreviation of the word ‘seriously’, it is only text based and made to be informal. The addition of slang terms being added to the dictionary is aimed at making slang terms formal however an abbreviation of a currently existing word could only be informal.

The use of slang can also be used as a literary device as it can be used to convey character and culture. Examples of slang terms used in “Of Mice and Men” are: ‘bindle’, meaning a bundle of bedding, and ‘cat house’, referring to a house of prostitution. These terms do not take away from the book but instead give the book a sense of context and culture at the point in time. These terms are included into one of the worlds greatest pieces of literature and are cleverly used to depict the time in which it was written.

To conclude, I believe that the use of slang is fine when used within the boundaries of social context. For example, when speaking with a friend, it is perfectly acceptable to use words you are both accustomed to which may entail slang. Slang is used as a literary device, therefore, who are you to scrutinise the work of great writers such as George Orwell, Shakespeare and Harper Lee. I think you are a literary “opp” (Opp meaning opposition).

Yours faithfully,

Nelson.