Henein, Eglal. “Male and Female Ugliness Thorough The Ages.” Merveilles & Contes vol.3 (May 1989): 45-56. JSTOR. Web. 21 April 2013.
The article “Male and Female Ugliness Through The Ages” by Eglal Henein talks about the ugliness portray both in men and women. He is saying that ugliness portrayed in these characters are just reflections of our culture. He makes the point of saying all these princess had to accept to marry these beast, and then they transformed into these gorgeous human beings. Basically saying that they had accept the physical side of love, because sex its not all. These beasts are always so powerful and wealthy. The salvation to these men always seems to be women. He describes women as monsters in the sense that were lustful monster, and we seduce to achieve what we want. He says, “ Female monsters can take in the appearance of dragons, fantastic and terrifying beasts related to serpents” (Henein, 47) we really don’t see or hear about such things in fairytales. Yes we know about the evil stepmother, but we don’t know her for her monstrous formation. The article sums up saying that both women and men always clash with their inner beast because we both want things. Our lust, greediness, sexual desires, etc. will take over us.
This article is more mythical based; he talked about gods and stuff I have never heard of. But it was informative in the sense that it did make sense when he was speaking about women. The routes they take to achieve what they want, that’s not necessarily a beast but its close enough. Not only men are beast.
Bottigheimer, Ruth B. “Cupid And Psyche vs. Beauty And The Beast: The Milesian And The Modern.” Merveilles & Contes vol.3 (May 1989): 4-14. JSTOR. Web. 21 April 2013.
The Article “Cupid And Psyche vs. Beauty And The Beast: The Milesian And The Modern” by Ruth Bottigheimer discusses both the stories of the Cupid and Psyche and Beauty and The Beast she compares and contrast the two tales. In the Cupid tale she talks about how the Cupid is not to be seen by his wife since he is ugly, yet at night he becomes beautiful; his wife cannot see. While in Beauty sees how the beast looks from the get go. She wins him over with her kindness and he does the same to her. However, he can be literally a beast to her by how he treats her. She talks about how in the story of Cupid the sisters of Psyche envy her and try to get her in trouble. Yet, she becomes a beast herself when she murders her sisters and goes in the search for Cupid. The Beauty and The Beast has a different approach, she gets to see him from the beginning and lives happily with him. When she realizes her sister are unhappy and live poor lives with their husbands she decides to stay with beast. She sacrifices herself so her father can be let go of. Though, she says she cares deeply about beast we don’t hear the word love, ever. Bottigheimer concludes saying that Cupid is more of a comical yet more real version while Beauty is more fairytale like.
This article was helpful and it did give me new insights on things I had not considered before. However, I’m not sure if her article was based on opinions or facts. She is a woman, so I would expect her to be a romantic person, I did not get that impression. Bottigheimer seems like a realistic and curios person to me. Her article was informative and it has significant statements.
King, John and Hall, Elton, “Man, Beast, and Philosophical Psychology.” The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science vol. 16, No.62 (Aug 1965): 81-101. JSTOR. 21 April 2013.
The article “ Man, Beast, And Philosophical Psychology” by John King and Elton Hall discusses the psychology behind being a beast. Both authors talk about how a beast and men are different. That “science must be aware of whittling away at cherished barriers between men and beast” (King & Elton, 81) basically saying that psychologist don’t believe in the beast per say. They are more about the facts and data. The article goes to discuss how men are different. Beast have to learn form men, that how they are thought. How a beast is stimulus by human. They don’t believe in those beasts in fairytales, they are more into the genetics, and why men could be called beasts. They have however found a link between men and beast. They seem to have the same stimulus, but we need to keep in the differences. They discuss how men could be called beast because of their actions, or by their inner thoughts. They are still short in certain data to be certain of other theories. Both contain high intelligence and can understand language. The article concludes with a doubtful question upon themselves.
This article was really factual, and didn’t really talk about how a man is seen as a beast in detail. It did touch upon the scientifically side of both a men and beast. This paper seemed to be written to answer the own writers question, more than to inform the public. I did enjoy it because it did give me an insightful look on the scientific side of my paper.
Harth, Erika, “ Exorcising the Beast: Attempts at Rationality in French Classicism.” PMLA vol.88, No. 1 (Jan 1973): 19-24. JSTOR. 21 April 2013
The article “Exorcising the Beast…” by Erica Harth discusses how men and beast are one. How they both need each other to a certain extent. We always tend to refer men to monsters and we always try to humanize the beast. She discusses the “element of mystery in the sinuous relationship between man and beast” (Harth, 19) here she implies that there has been question that both are connected. Weather it may be a beast or man both is one. She discusses an incident where patients (men) were being “therapeutic [lly] [treated]”(Harth, 20) these men acted like beast, they would behave violently, attack people. So they were treated like beasts fed, chained, and in locked rooms under surveillance. Harth discusses how the beast in men is an illusion we create. She says we see what we are thought. That is why many women call men beast; it may or may not be true.
This article was both factual and opinionate it. I did enjoy reading this article because it did relate the human man to a beast and not just in the fairytales. It made more sense when she was explaining her side of the argument, saying we say what we know. Which is true.
Urban, Hugh B, “The Beast with Two Backs: Aleister Crowley, Sex Magic and the Exhaustion of Modernity.” Nova Religio: The Journal of Alternative and Emergent Religions Vol. 7 No.3 (March, 2004): 7-25. JSTOR. 21 April 2013.
The article of “ The Beast with Two Backs…” by Hugh Urban discusses how a man named Aleister Crowley was a man who used is very influential in the Western Religious movement. Yet, he was heavily criticized for his “infamous drug use and extreme sexual practices and proclaiming himself the ‘Great Beast 666’” (Urban, 7) he used to refer to himself as the devil/beast because of the way he lived his life. People did not accept it, since he was supposed to be a religious example to people and he was not fitting the shoe. The author go into detail about why people besides himself called him a beast is because of his addiction to heroine and cocaine, when he was high of these two he was not recognizable; he became another person. He was also was referred as a beast because of his obsession with sex, he was always sex hungry. Men who are usually always sex hungry are considered beast, because they only get to satisfy themselves. He felt that sexual encounters are the best form of mental liberation. He would also “ [substitute] semen and menstrual fluid” (Urban, 13) to give to the priest to drink in mass. That is being as a sick person. Even though he died poor, alone and has an overdose; he does now have a big impact on the religious movement. His practices may have not been the best, but he did have good ideas and input in the religious world.
This article was very interesting, just because I could not imagine someone whom is very religious act in such a beast way. Urban’s article was very opening minded and factual. This brings forth a totally different type of beast. This was very informative, and helpful.