in der dritten Lektion habe ich einen Essay auf deutsch geschrieben und direkt übersetzt
Von Beginn an wird der Kampf zwischen der analytischen Betrachtungsweise der Wissenschaft und den als Aberglauben diffamierten Urängsten als Thema des Buches vorgestellt. Schon die Form des Buches und versetzt den Leser selbst in die Rolle eines Forschenden, der sich durch versiedene Berichte, Briefe und Nachrichten ein eigenes Bild machen soll. Wissenschaft ist in diesem Zusammenhang eine Methode um den Grad der Unsicherheit zu veringern. Aberglaube drückt dagegen Ängste aus vor Dingen die offenbar nicht in unserer Macht stehen. Die Vorstellung von Ursache und Wirkung scheint dieser Unwägsamkeit zunächst eine Handlungsmöglichkeit hinzufügen, falls nur genügend Fakten bekannt seien.
Gleichzeitig scheint es eine Art Unbehagen darüber zu geben, daß vieles was bisher als Wissen gelten konnte plötzlich nicht mehr in Betracht kommt. Was wenn unser wissenschaftliches Denken nur zu unausgereift ist um die Sinnhaftigkeit dieses überkommenen Wissens zu erkennen? Dracula ist die Personifizierung des Grauens vor den Schatten die entstehen wenn man eine Lampe anmacht. Obwohl vieles klarer hervortritt und auf beruhigende Weise kenntlich wird bleibt notwendigerweise anderes in um so tieferen Schatten verborgen.
Der Roman spiegelt das Lebensgefühl einer Zeit wieder, in der die Anwendung von Technik einer Geistigen Elite das Gefühl vermittelte über die Natur zu triumphieren. Und so sind es am Ende die Methoden der wissenschaftlichen Analyse und Kombination von Fakten welche die Protagonisten zum Erfolg verhelfen. Allerdings nicht ohne sich darüber klar zu werden, daß sie auf ihre Weise nicht weniger besessen sind als das gejagte Übel.
Science Fiction ist eine Fantasiewelt die auf der Projektion wissenschaftlichen Fortschritts beruht.
dies ist der Versuch einer möglichst direkten Übersetzung
Theme of the book is right from the beginning the fight between the analytical viewpoint of science and the primal fears, defamed as superstitions. In fact the very structure of the book itself shifting the reader into a researchers role, reading through different Letters, Journals and Notes to seemingly build up his own mind. In this context science is a method to minimize uncertainness. In spite of that superstitions reflecting the fear from things which obviously are beyond our powers. This uncertainty seems to be reduced by the idea of cause and effect for it adds an opportunity of action, if only sufficient known facts are available.
At once there seem to exist an unease about leaving now former knowledge out of any questions to valid statements. What if our scientific reasoning is just not sufficient developed for the insight of this overcome knowledge at this time? The figure of Dracula is an impersonation of that dread from the shadows, casted by your own Lamp. Although many things get much more clear with the light and knowable in a comfortable way, other things fell necessarily all the more in darkness.
The novel is reflecting the attitude of a century which convince a clerisy to (at least once) prevail over Nature by using science and technology. Consequently the methods of scientific analysis and deduction of facts leading the protagonists to success. If not without realizing themselves being not less addicted to their own ways as the hunted evil.
In a more general meaning and set in context to science fiction this leads me to the assumption, that any (or at least pretty much) great science fiction literature may be driven by this eager conflict of human emotions and his reasoning mind because its projection into a technological developed future makes this fictional future in fact more convinceable.
The opening paragraph promised more than the essay was able to deliver. An examination of the opposition of science and superstition needed to be substantiated in the subsequent paragraphs. The thesis was effective, but it needed to be supported from the text. The sentence structure was better in the opening paragraph than in subsequent paragraphs. The supporting paragraphs needed specific examples to verify the assertions of the first paragraph. The opening sentence of the second paragraph was unclear. Several other sentences also made the argument difficult to follow because of errors in syntax.
The essay clearly had potential that the supporting paragraphs were unable to fulfill. The reference to Dracula casting shadows through his own lamp was not clear as was the comment that the protagonists were addicted to their ways. Needed to specify characters and their actions to make the argument clear. The conclusion references science fiction, but this novel doesn’t fit that genre. Evidence would have to be brought to make such a claim. The essay needed to explain more exactly the opposition between science and superstition mentioned in the opening paragraph. Need so much more support.
Analysis presented in a good format. Ideas presented in a neat and sequantielly so that the reader can understand it clearly. Nice choice of words and term. Glad to read it.
Yes, these student really understand the novel and be able to make apropriate conclusions. He also offers an analysis that provides new insights and make us better able to understand the overal content of this novel.
is well expressed the idea on which the trial takes place, the language is accessible and easy to understand.
It’s a dilemma that occurs in most science fiction novels, so is one part of science and one part fiction, reality versus unreality
Sometimes your phrasing is difficult to understand. The points you began to raise about „cause and effect“ and „former knowledge“ were potentially interesting, but they were lost in the phrasing you used. I would try to use shorter sentences in your next submission. Make a single statement about the point you’re trying to convey. Then – in your next sentence – attempt to back up the claim you’ve made. There are some really interesting thoughts here; some of them verge on the profoundly deep and insightful & I think it’s a shame that the „form“ has prevented them from being delivered at times.
Your argument that Dracula uses the role of science in debunking myths and allaying fear is really strong. And you also allude to the way we feel exposed to even greater terror when science falls short. I think you’re right in that the Count is defeated by the group’s adherence to reason & their sharing of knowledge – although they do display remarkable, almost spiritual, „faith“ in their cause. I’d have also liked a reference to the juxtaposition of Van Helsing’s transfusions (however scientifically inaccurate they were!) against the Count’s draining of his victims. The idea that the „vampire hunters“ are as dogmatic in their beliefs & pursuits as the Count is excellent, and I also the way you see the readers of the novel as „researchers“. Not sure that great science fiction is necessarily about the conflict between emotion and reason, but certainly much of it can be.