Character Name
We get various testimonials as to who other people see Steve being as the prosecutor describes him as a monster, his teacher sees him as a gifted student and a gentle soul, etc. But, as always with the adolescent novel, the great task of this character is to determine for himself who he is.
Symbolism of name
- Does the name symbolise anything about the character or novel?
Yes the name ‘Monster’ symbolizes lots of things about the character and the novel because it is about a 16 year old boy called Steve who is arrested for apparently killing a shopkeeper during an armed robbery. The prosecutor is pushing for the death penalty. Steve has very harsh growing confusion about his own identity while being locked in the cell and having the experience of being in jail. The Prosecutor of the case had called him just that, ‘Monster’.
Speech
- Colloquial expressions, formal vs informal language, use of swearing (blasphemy), other.
This story involves deep feelings of what one another is going through particularly Steve while being locked in prison. The deep feelings express anger, sadness, frightningness and some feelings of no hope. They are expressed by sware words such as calling each other by a nasty name and using sware words in sentences. Some colloquial expressions in this story are words such as yo or pissed that make sense to us as we read them but may not make sense to others that read them such as maybe they’re from another culture. As Steve has written in this film, some of the words aren’t the proper english such as instead of ‘going to eat something’, it’s ‘gonna eat somethin.’
Appearance
- Clothing, mannerisms, disfigurations, age, sex.
The appearance of the characters vary depending on their position to do with the case. Steve describes his uniform that he has to wear in the cell. He also describes his suit that is laid out for him on the cot next to him which is a suit and a tie that he is to wear to court for the start of his trial. The story describes the prisoners when arriving to the trials they are hand cuffed. It describes how the lawyers and people of the jurees are dressed. For example, they describe Steve’s lawer, Kathy O’Brien is petite, red haired and freckled. Steve’s Lawer is all about the business.
Actions
- How do the characters react to each other?
The characters react to each other by playing their role they are given which is to what job they do. Such as the judge and juree people don’t interact with the prisoners because they have a high position where they only can do their job and can’t have any feelings involved with the prisoners. Steve’s lawer explains to Steve that when he is in court he is to sit there and pay attention. He is to let the jury know that he thinks the case is as serious as they do. He isn’t to turn and wave to any of his family or friends but it is alright to achknowledge his mother.
- What impact does this have on the narrative (story)?
The story is played and written very seriously. The case is to be treated as a very serious case and the prisoners must pay attention and let the jury know that the case is as serious as the jury think it is.
- How do the characters actions relate to the themes of the text ?(you need to list the page numbers where you have found your examples)
The characters, in each theme and text, relate to the themes of the text because it explains their feelings at the time and their thoughts of what is and has been happening.
-What kind of evidence for Steve is there? Steve seems to accept the prosecutor’s characterization when he names his film, “Monster,” and again when he writes the word over and over on his scratch pad, until his lawyer makes him stop and tells him, “You have to believe in yourself if we’re going to convince a jury that you’re innocent” (24). Interestingly, she doesn’t seem to believe him, either, since character is to determine for himself who he is. Interestingly, she doesn’t seem to believe him, either, since she never states that he is innocent during her summation, only that he should be found “not guilty,” and she shrinks back from his attempt to hug her after his acquittal.
- Steve’s brother Jerry admires him, and to Jerry, Steve says he would like to be Superman – but his motive is that as Superman, “I’d kick butt” (58). This scene comes not long after one in which he throws a rock and hits a tough guy, then runs away (42-43). Which is Steve’s true “secret identity” – the guy who runs away, or the butt-kicking Superman?
- In his journal, Steve writes: “I want to look like a good person. I want to feel like I’m a good person because I believe I am. But being in here with these guys makes it hard to think about yourself as being different. We look about the same, and even though I’m younger than they are, it’s hard not to notice that we are all pretty young.” (62) Steve has to deal with some strong prejudicial stereotypes that may affect jurors (and readers) – the fact that so many young black men are or have been in prison, for instance, may predispose some observers to conclude that they are all “monsters”; as Ms. O’Brien says, “You’re young, you’re black, and you’re on trial. What else do they need to know?” (79)
- Steve is in danger, here and elsewhere, of accepting the negative stereotype as his actual identity. At one point, he says that he feels like the word “Monster” has been stamped on his forehead. Steve’s sense of his self-identity is further strained when he realizes that his father is no longer sure of who he is. When Steve asks his father if he believes that Steve did nothing wrong, the father is unable to give him the reassurance he asks for, and instead tells him about his own aspirations for Steve, along with his failure ever to imagine visiting his son in prison (111-12).
OtherThe Question of Guilt or Innocense: We know that Steve was in the store on the day of the killing, and that he had discussed his role with James King. Steve says he did not signal the others; they say he did. We are never shown directly what happened when Steve emerged from the store. Steve’s own father and his defense attorney both seem to have doubts about his innocence. Under the law, if he conspired with others to commit a felony (the robbery), and someone dies in the course of that felony (no matter how the death occurs), all of the conspirators may be guilty of felony murder. So there are hints that he may be guilty.
On the other hand, we have ample testimony that he is basically a good kid – his teacher, his mother, his relationship with his little brother. We don’t see him actually agree to take part, just that he was present when the job was planned. If we believe that his job was to signal the others that the coast was clear, we have to accept a relatively far-fetched argument that “no signal” was the signal. And he never received his “taste” of the proceeds. Is this enough doubt to find him not guilty? If he is “not guilty,” is he also necessarily “innocent”?
Additionally, there is the question of proportionate punishment. Even though some may conclude that he is guilty under the law, life in prison seems a pretty stiff penalty for a first offense, when he himself wasn’t even present at the time the killing occurred.
The Author; Walter Dean Myers says that when he talks to young people about Monster, their responses are interesting: “When I ask them, ‘So what’s the story with Steve?’ they come up with various answers about his legal guilt, but eventually some kid does say that whether Steve’s legally guilty or innocent doesn’t make any difference; he is guilty. And to me, that’s the essence of the book. Apart from legal machinations, is he accepting his moral responsibility for what he’s done or is he just trying to avoid it?” (Rochman)The issue of the novel’s form: Myers uses the two types of narration – Steve’s journals and his film script – as a means of showing how people create distance between their sense of themselves and their actions. When Steve writes in the journal, we get an insight into how he feels; when he writes about his crime, he uses the film script to distance himself from this act
That, at any rate, is what the author tries to do. Does it work? We are accustomed to watching movies, and a film script – which provides cues as to closeup, long shot, and other details of scene that a play script cannot – is a bit closer to traditional narration as well in its ability to set the scene and mood. But it is still often more difficult to read a dramatic text, which is normally intended to be performed, than a typical narration. Here, Myers is writing what looks like a dramatic text, but what is intended to be read, not actually filmed. Does this create a degree of difficulty in our understanding the book?
Between journal entries and the film script, we get a number of shifts back and forth across time. This is not a simple narrative in chronological sequence. What effect does that have on our reading experience?
- Describe the stereotypical nature of the characters and how they relate to their peers or society.
Steve feels like a monster in the story. He doesn’t feel treated fairly and when writing this story he wanted to share and express his experience and feelings that he had gone through and felt. Steve (for some reason) felt safe inside the cells and in the prison because as much as people were very harsh and treated each other with hardly any respect, they all knew they were all in this prison together so they would get alomg well and helpfully when needed. Relating to peers and in society, it explains to everyone out there that no one is perfect, and when they are all in the prison together they must get along well as to the best of their ability even if they hate each other.
- What do you think about the characters and do you know anyone like them?
I think the characters are very good in the story and do their jobs well. Some of the characters were quite harsh against Steve but they all did their job and did what they thought was right in the end.
