Tiffany Trent wrote this a while ago, but as I was digging through old e-mails, I thought IÕd comment
 on this, since it deals with my project somewhat...
 
Tiff:	In rereading Rose, I was quite interested of his ideas about the 'Monster' theme of speculative fiction.
He discusses at length the idea that "manÓ characteristically distrusts himself..., and this form of
alienation also plays a significant form of science fiction." (176)  Rose goes on to postulate about
the nature of self-alienation, how it often deals with the notion of a hidden or buried self, and
generally plays out in speculative fiction novels in the thematic guise of metamorphosis.  I tried
to think about this in terms of Merril's story, which really gave me the complete willies.
I am wondering, though, if "That Only a Mother" really deals with self-alienation or if it deals with
"alien confrontation."

	It probably deals with both, but as I have found in my research, the concept has been compared to
FreudÕs Id and Superego theories of human thought.  The main point of it all being that the alien,
monster, etc. usually is the extension of the Id - where the primal fears, needs and desires become
uncoupled from human ethics, morals and conditions.  How that deals with a metamorphosis concept is
another intriguing idea, but too big for my project as it stands...

Tiff:	Obviously, we know this mother is wacked out.  She doesn't even realize that something is wrong with her
baby.  Neither does the reader really, although we realize that we're getting strange hints throughout
the story that something isn't quite right here.  I find it interesting that Maggie (the mother) mentions
the nurse who's "obsessed with mutations, can't seem to talk about anything else." (68)  What I want
to know is -does the mother not realize that her baby is deformed because she is alienated from herself
(i.e. her sanity)  or because it is an alien confrontation that her brain simply can't handle?

	Ahhhhh.... There is an interesting question to ask.  Is any creator that certain of what his creation is
capable of?  Did God really think Adam and Eve would commit Original Sin?  Is it possible that the creator
is blinded by his/her own achievement?  Did Frankenstein truly think his success would be great, despite
being told that his ideas were dangerous, perverse and forbidden?  And do creators truly regret their
achievements?  Would Einstein and Oppenheimer have destroyed their work before the first atomic bomb
was detonated if they knew of the next 50 years of terror people would know of because of the bombs

Tiff:	How does reality fit in to the notions of  self-alienation and alien confrontation?  I'm really not sure.
And I'm not entirely sure which one of these ideas this story pursues.  I feel the key is really in the format,
in its epistulary nature.  The story is more like a conversation, which has to do with notions of the self
and interiority, but then the "real-time" parts of the story are told from an omniscient narrator's point
of view.  In light of that, I tend to think we're talking about 'Monster' in terms of self-alienation, in
terms of "the transformation of man into something less than...human." (178)  What do you guys think?

	Is the monster Òless than human?Ó  A semester ago, I would have said yes, but now, having read all I have on
monsters, and their demonstration of human characterisitcs, I would say that the term Òless than humanÓ would
not justify the horror of the monster concept, especially since their purpose is to reflect a hidden part of
manÕs soul(s), in fact, a monster gains more strength in literature, the more we can understand and identify
with its motives and behaviors.