Welcome to Roses without Thorns

Is a rose still a rose without her thorns?

Granted it's been a little while since I was philosophical, but this question has been bothering me for nonsensical reasons.

Roses are known for their beautiful flowers, delicate fragrance, and nasty thorns. Giving a bouquet of roses is often done between lovers - especially if the color of the roses is dark or deep red. In magic, roses are used to attract love (of many different varieties) and occasionally lust.

They are the flowers of Aphrodite and Venus, goddesses of love, and can convey messages without words (if one were to learn the language of flowers - yes this is a real thing, no I don't feel like getting into it now). They are the preferred flowers for weddings and represent the month of June (which is the month for weddings).

I happen to love the  smell of roses and often have some rose oil around for my hands. I'm also fond of it's fragrance in candles and delicate dried petals in tea blends.

I grew up with roses growing all around me. My grandfather had a rose bush which grew over the front porch of this house. Occasionally the roses would grow too low and it was scary ducking under them to reach the front door. My hair got caught a couple of times in the vines and thorns and had to be carefully removed.

I remember my other grandparents had a huge rose bush in the back yard. If I remember right, it had lovely light pink blossoms that took up a small area of the fence near the back door. I remember once or twice reaching my hand in to pick one of the blossoms and accidentally hitting one of the thorns. I learned quickly not to try to pick the roses without a adult around to help.

Because despite the delicate beauty of the rose blooms, the stems are strong and the thorns sharp. All are meant to defend the plant from animals that might otherwise harm it, like us humans.

Roses may be fragile, but they can defend themselves. Which brings me back to my previous question: is a rose still a rose without her thorns?

Many times when I go to the flower shop, the roses have had their thorns filed down to the point of nonexistence. It makes a bouquet easier to handle and there's no damage to the blossoms or fragrance. The loss of the thorns shouldn't bother me, but it does.

We focus so much on the beauty of the rose, that I feel a loss when it's thorns have been removed.

Most pop culture references are in regards to the beauty and attractiveness of the rose. The famous words uttered by Juliet, "a rose by any other name would smell as sweet", might be talking about who Romeo is, but the love symbolism isn't lost on the audience. Then there's the visual symbolism found in American Beauty, with deep red rose petals symbolizing the sexual fantasies of a middle aged man towards an under-aged teenager. Honestly I found that comparison incredibly creepy.

And I can't talk about roses without mentioning Beauty and the Beast, where the rose is meant to symbolize both inner and outer beauty. I think in the Disney version, the rose does indeed have thorns, but the blossom itself is the focus of the story. Because the Beast will remain a beast forever once all of the beautiful petals are gone and only the prickly thorns remain (okay I added that last part, but I think it's implied symbolism).

The references to a rose's thorns, though, aren't as frequent, but when they do pop up, they show another side to that beauty. There is the famous Poison song "Every Rose has It's Thorn" and I will forever love Tuxedo Mask from Sailor Moon throwing a rose with thorns as an awesome weapon. Speaking of anime, in Yu Yu Hakusho the character Kurama has a rose whip that slices and dices people with the rose's thorns built into the wipe. The character even compares himself to Tuxedo Mask at one point in the manga (fun fact: the manga writer of Sailor Moon and the manga writer of Yu Yu Hakusho were married).

One particular instance of roses and their thorns being important to a story's symbolism is in the book Like Water for Chocolate. The main character, Tita, is given a bouquet of white roses by her sweetheart (who also happens to be married to her older sister for a variety of reasons I won't go into here). Tita clutches the roses so tight to her chest that the thorns pierce her skin and her blood turns the roses deep red. She then uses the roses in a chicken recipe (I found this to be a little *cough* lot *cough* on the gross side), which then causes her oldest sister - the one not married to the sweetheart - to burst into pink flames, run naked across a field, and hop on to a horse with a guy to ride off into the night (how I wish this book were about the oldest sister, but I digress).

My favorite part of that book would not have happened if roses didn't have their thorns.

We want our roses to be pretty delicate blooms, easy to handle with a lovely fragrance. We don't want the thorns.

But a rose's thorns are a part of the rose. Taking away the thorns leaves the rose defenseless and sometimes not treated with the same careful respect a rose with thorns might receive.

So I leave you readers with my first question: is a rose still a rose without her thorns?

Until next week!

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or, leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.

Welcome to Monsters: A Quick Intro

I'm betting everyone reading this blog can name at least five different monsters off the top of their head. These monsters might be cute and cuddly, like Sully from Monster's Inc, or blood sucking creeps, like Dracula. I'm sure there's at least one reader who has all of the classic movie monster's memorized (I'm personally quite fond of the 1941 Wolf Man myself).

Monsters are a staple of our popular culture.

From ghosts to vampires to serial killers, monsters can take many forms. Most of the time, they are seen as creatures to strike terror into the hearts of humans (or just eat the humans). Sometimes the they are misunderstood and just need a hug. Other times they sparkle (though I've heard this trend is slowly dying out - fingers crossed).

Why do we love monsters so much? Monsters aren't real, right?

The Manga "Monster"

Monsters aren't usually seen as human. Mythological creatures such as dragons or manticores are well known for causing humans great harm and being super mysterious. Today we see this example with Godzilla or the Jersey Devil. Often these creatures are seen as evil and require a brave hero to be vanquish. It is easy to see who is good (the human hero) and who is bad (the dragon) in these stories.

Then there are the monsters who used to be human, but aren't anymore. They are the fallen who can no longer empathize with the human experience. Zombies, vampires, and werewolves usually started out as humans, but were turned into their respective creatures against their will. These types of stories usually still have good versus evil narrative, but with a more tragic undertone or questions about what it means to be human.

There are a lot of unknown elements to these monsters. We don't always know how they came to exist (or where "patient zero" is) or why they exist. We just know they want to cause us to suffer. We, the humans, are prey against a large unknown entity.

I think monsters were created to help us rationalize our fears, especially of the unknown. Why else would maps have a "here there be monsters" section of uncharted regions?

Children tend to be the group most affected by monsters. Who doesn't remember asking their parents to check under the bed or in the closet late at night to see if there was something hiding there? There's a lot of media out there featuring monsters that is directed at kids.

I clearly remember growing up with Aaahh!!! Real Monsters, Goosebumps, and my personal favorite The House that Drac Built. Each book and TV show had a different take on what made monsters monsters. Aaahh!! Real Monsters treated monsters like goofy kids who were taught to scare humans (I feel I should make a Monsters U joke, but I haven't seen the movie). The House that Drac Built show cased all of the classic movie monsters being helped by children on Halloween. 

Then there was Goosebumps. I used to read the books and watch the show. Honestly I always felt the books were a lot scarier. The TV show was cool, but the special effects were nothing compared to the images my mind would conjure up while reading the stories (or listening to them on cassette). My mom, sister, and I still can't look at garden gnomes without shuddering. 

Eventually I found that I was consuming more and more stories featuring different types of monsters. There were still the stories where the monster was definitely the bad guy. I think the TV show Supernatural has created an entire fandom around the idea.

Then there are the stories that teach us that looks are deceiving when it comes to monsters. Some people or creatures are identified as monsters by the people around them, but in actuality are just unfortunate beings. The real monsters in these stories are those who put them in the terrible situation to be judged by society. The opening lyrics from Disney's Hunchback of Notre Dame ask us "who is the monster and who is the man?" and Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (though I haven't read the book and therefore can't make a good statement on it) raise these questions. I would also argue that the entire message in Disney's Beauty and the Beast also highlights this idea, since by the end of the movie, Gaston is declared the real monster by Belle. 

What makes a monster a monster? Is it physical appearance or the lust to consume human flesh? What about the monsters who look like everyday people? Is there a need for conscious malice for someone or something to be a monster? Can machines be monsters (I'm looking at you HAL from 2001 Space Odyssey).

In the upcoming weeks (as I seem to have nothing better to write about), I want to take a look several different categories of monsters. These categories are entirely of my creation and discretion. Though if it feels like I'm missing something, feel free to let me know. 

• Monsters that are just monsters - these creatures evil, threatening to humans, and there's not much else to them. 
• The misunderstood monster - these are the monsters who aren't evil, society just thinks they are. These monsters usually need a hug and therapy...lots and lots of therapy.
• The good monster - these monsters aren't actually scary. In fact, most of them are nice and even helpful. They might even have their own society that humans know nothing about.
• Tech monsters OF THE FUTURE!!! - yes, the all caps are completely necessary because we all know the age of machines is coming, but will humans survive if we are declared obsolete?
• The monster next door - these monsters look just like everyday people, but looks are completely deceiving. They also might just pop up in real life...

These are just how I generally categorize the monster's I come across in popular media. They can be broken down further (in fact that first bullet point has a ton of nuance to it, that I might not cover everything the first time). There's also a ton of cross over potential for each category. Some stories that start out as a simple good versus evil narrative have taken a sudden left turn towards moral ambiguity when it comes to identifying the monsters (I recommend checking out the anime Shiki on Hulu for a good example of this situation).

I hope you guys enjoy my take on monsters.

Until next week.

If you enjoyed this post (or it really pissed you off) please like, share, and/or leave a comment. I love hearing from my readers and I hope you guys like hearing from me.