A previous English teacher once told me: "We study fiction for two reasons: entertainment and understanding". In retrospect to this quote and the Lions, Lambs, Serpents, and Angels Activity, I learned that fictional characters embody these reasons. The more complex the character is, the more the reader will have to dig into his or her reasoning behind certain views.
On the spectrum of Lions, Lambs, Serpents, and Angels, I tentatively placed a dot that ended up sending me to the second quadrant group: Lambs and Angels. Speaking with other members, I realized that very few fictional characters fit into our group. This group was the smallest of the four, and my fellow "Lamels" and I could only conjure two representative characters: Elizabeth Lavenza from Frankenstein and PBS celebrity Barney the Dinosaur.
Why were these two so perfect? Until her swift demise, Elizabeth is very passive, and proves to be too dainty for violence during the mourning of William Frankenstein. As for Barney, when looking past his ancient ancestry, one can account how he constantly teaches honesty and nonviolent resolution to his viewers. On the surface, these characters aren't very complex. The words simple, sweet, and kind come to mind when I analyze them.
In fact, these characters can be just as easy to forget because of their simplicity. As a passive character, Elizabeth is overshadowed by the Monster's character development. After the Monster is created, she isn't considered in Victor's story until plot shifting events occur: William's death, Justine's trial, and her marriage to Victor. Barney the Dinosaur is made primarily to appeal to children under the age of twelve, so aside from those who grew up with his lessons, his popularity as a television persona has limits. This overshadow of benign characters suggests a passive view towards them. In literature and popular culture, Lamb and Angel characters fade in the background, while Serpents and Lions hold mass attention.
On the Lion, Lamb, Serpent, and Angel spectrum, characters that lean towards Serpent and Lion have a tendency to more complicated to analyze. The Monster of Frankenstein, for instance, gives detailed account of its life before it murders Victor's loved ones. Along with its staggering strength, the monster is very capable in learning, but it is constantly rejected by humans. In light of its revenge on Victor, the Monster ironically mourns his death. Was the murderous plot solely for revenge towards humanity, or was it planned for a chance at some form of interaction with the Monster's sole father figure? If Victor didn't abandon the Monster, would anyone accept its existence? The violence and honesty it takes part in gives the Monster more character dimensions, thus making his complex nature more comprehensible to readers. In other words, readers are more likely to examine characters like the Monster than they would characters who are like Barney.
Although the activity's spectrum does measure a large amount of fictional characters, there are certain characters that don't fit specifically on within the range that it provides. One example of such a character would be Humbert Humbert from Lolita. Humbert deceives everyone that he meets: he marries Charlotte Haze primarily to stay close to her daughter, Delores ("Lolita"), and he forces Delores to keep his affair with her a secret. He also displays his capacity for violence by attacking his first wife's lover before their divorce. However, once he meets Delores his violence dwindles the more that his character develops. From the beginning to the end of the story, Humbert is a dynamic character, so his nature keeps him from being pinpointed on the Lion, Lamb, Serpent, and Angel Spectrum.
Overall, I learned that mediums of expression, such as literature and popular culture, can teach an audience as well as entertain them with certain character types. Additionally, the activity taught me how I could pinpoint characters by their complexity.
Image courtesy of A2 Psychology
%20(250).jpg)