Add new comment

Infantile, definitely! You also write "innately and naturally wild". To connect back to my previous post and take this one step further, why not say that the monster is inherently unknowable.

Identity then becomes a futile attempt at forcing a more or less static (reductive) label on this continuous falling out of balance.


This very much becomes a discussion of humanism at some point, doesn't it?


I'd personally rather not call the monster an angel, although I see what you mean. I'd rather sidestep that discussion into Stirner, as critic_of_critics touches on in their post.

A way to walk this particular tightrope without having to balance a load of religious baggage, perhaps.

(but other baggage may be required)