Dracula and the Frankenstein monster

Frankenstein and Dracula both deal with the issues of death and resurrection, creation and transgression, and the blurring of the boundaries between life and death. This common linkage with death and resurrection increased with time. James Whale emphasizes the significance of digging in a Christian cemetery in his Frankenstein (1931). The pronounced crucifix and an image of the Grim Reaper reinforce the taboos associated with violating sacrosanct burial grounds. These are recurring elements in the vampire original and modern myth but they are only suggested in Shelley’s work.
In Dracula, the necessity of ridding the world of the monster is even greater than in Frankenstein, and dominates more of the textual space. By the end of both novels, the threats that the monsters pose have been overcome. But they live on in myth and in metaphor because the issues of so-called monstrosity that they address are still relevant in the post-tech world.
This raises the question of whether any links be found between the two texts. There is little doubt that Stoker had read Frankenstein by the time he wrote Dracula. After his death in 1912 his library, which was auctioned at Sotheby’s, included a copy of Mary Shelley’s novel. Indeed, in a letter to her son soon after the publication of his masterpiece, his mother said, “No book since Mrs. Shelley’s Frankenstein ... has come near yours in originality, or terror.”
Stoker’s novel contains numerous resonances of Frankenstein, for they both draw upon a common stock of narrative and thematic conventions.
Both monsters attempt to invade the intellectual space of the “civilized” world. The Monster in Frankenstein reads Western literary texts (Plutarch, Goethe and Milton) in order to understand us, while Count Dracula studies English magazines to assist in the process of assimilation. Both texts use geographically identifiable landscapes for symbolic purposes. Shelley’s land of ice and snow is a counterpart to the iciness of abandonment and rejection.
Both Frankenstein and Dracula contain references to Coleridge’s famous Gothic poem “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.” It is not surprising to find allusions to the poem in Frankenstein, for Mary Shelley heard Coleridge read it when she was a child. However, there are numerous parallels: layers of narrative, compulsive telling of tales, Promethean journeys, images of ice and snow, the torture of isolation and the question of guilt. Direct allusions include a stanza from the poem (58). As he runs away from the Monster he has created, Victor Frankenstein recalls:
My heart palpitated in the sickness of fear; and I hurried on with irregular steps, not daring to look about me:
Like one who, on a lonely road,Doth walk in fear and dread,And, having once turned round, walks on,And turns no more his head;Because he knows a frightful fiendDoth close behind him tread. (59)
Scholars point to a “family resemblance” which includes a link to historical figures (Vlad the Impaler, the alchemist Dippel). Radu Florescu draws attention to a fortuitous historical “connection” between Frankenstein and Dracula. The burial ground of the Evangelical Church in the Transylvanian city of Sibiu contains a number of ancient crypts, including that of Vlad Tepes’ son Mihnea, who was assassinated in 1510. Not too far away, he states, lies the crypt of a Saxon nobleman whose name was “Baron Frank von Frankenstein” (In Search of Frankenstein, 16).
We may add also a concern with transcending the limits of what is scientifically possible (the boundaries between life and death), a portrayal of the monsters as both dignified and pitiable, a suspenseful final chase, and the structure of multiple narrations. Like dark twins, they embody “the war between science and superstition -- Apollo and Dionysus at the Saturday matinee” ( David Skal, The Monster Show, 351).

On the surface, both works are horror novels which revolve around the necessity of destroying a monster. A closer examination shows that many of the qualities which define the monsters are a consequence of the way in which their stories have been passed on to us. Both authors filter their antagonist’s stories through the narratives of characters whose biases are readily apparent.
Frankenstein is constructed from three different narrations. Victor’s story includes the Monster’s narrative, while both of these viewpoints are enclosed in Walton’s letters to Margaret. The most important consequence of this textual appropriation is that, with the exception of the closing remarks over Victor’s corpse, the Monster’s story is embedded in Victor’s text. Thus, Victor asserts his authority over the Monster’s side of the story.
But there are also major differences that set apart each work and associated monster.
While Victor’s text comes to us through Walton, there are crucial differences in how their stories are filtered. Victor has editorial authority over Walton’s notes. At one point, he “asked to see them, and then himself corrected and augmented them in many places” (175). A second major difference is that Victor is speaking to a kindred spirit who has embraced him as friend and who shares a similar Promethean ambition. In contrast, Victor is a reluctant listener to the Monster’s tale, and has formed various conclusions about the speaker before hearing his story. Victor also attempts to control Walton’s response to the Monster’s text, for he clearly wants Walton (and ultimately, us) to repudiate the Monster. Walton’s momentary sympathy for the creature is overshadowed by Victor’s warnings about its powers of eloquence and persuasion. The deck is stacked. In spite of his professions of remorse, Victor never abandons his conviction that he has acted nobly. He continues to justify his right, not only to create but to destroy what he has created. In addition, his refusal to share the secret of his creation is a major cause of the catastrophes that befall his loved ones.
In addition to posing a sexual threat, Dracula is also the supernatural Other, the undesirable challenge to educated, rational Englishmen who privilege science over medieval, pre-Enlightenment irrationality. Dracula is a destroyer rather than a preserver of text; unlike Shelley’s Monster who keeps Victor’s notebook, Dracula destroys any records he finds. This reinforces his image as the antithesis of civilized Western European culture -- the cultural, social, racial, and biological Other. On the other hand, Frankenstein is a product of our Society, Science and Culture; even if he can be considered as a failure, a freak, he is the son of his time contrarily to Dracula who comes from a distant past.

The Death of Gothicism

Mary Shelley's classic defies strict categorization as either Gothic, Romantic or Science Fiction. While containing elements of each, it moves beyond these genres and transcend time. Despite being very much rooted in the Nineteenth Century, it is thoroughly applicable to our current Twenty first Century. Frankenstein: or, the Modern Prometheus has inspired other literary works which typify the genre more closely such as H.G. Wells' The Island of Dr. Moreau and The Invisible Man. More popularly, Shelley's novel has inspired robotics sci-fi books and films such as The Terminator.
The 18th century became known as the Age of Reason. The belief developed that humanity could grasp its destiny and build a better world. The idealistic American and French revolutions broke out. The Industrial Revolution led to mass production and faster travel, at the same time that it darkened the urban atmosphere and forced millions to work under severe conditions. In reaction to the forward-looking Age of Reason, the gothic novel developed, set in medieval castles and featuring seemingly supernatural plotlines.
The possibility of a society transformed by individuals seemed less believable. Mary Shelley suffered from this disillusionment, but for different reasons. In his essay on Frankenstein, George Levine discusses the dream Godwin had which inspired the book: "The dreams emerge from the complex experiences that placed young Mary Shelley, both personally and intellectually, at a point of crisis in our modern culture, where idealism, faith in human perfectibility, and revolutionary energy were counterbalanced by the moral egotism of her radical father, the potential infidelity of her husband, the cynical diabolism of Byron, the felt reality of her own pregnancy, and a great deal more" (Levine). The overwhelming reality of Mary’s life was similar to the harsh reality going on in Europe's political events.

Mary Shelley's classic defies strict categorization as either Gothic, Romantic or Science Fiction. While containing elements of each, it moves beyond these genres and transcend time. Despite being very much rooted in the Nineteenth Century, it is thoroughly applicable to our current Twenty first Century. Frankenstein: or, the Modern Prometheus has inspired other literary works which typify the genre more closely such as H.G. Wells' The Island of Dr. Moreau and The Invisible Man. More popularly, Shelley's novel has inspired robotics sci-fi books and films such as The Terminator.
The 18th century became known as the Age of Reason. The belief developed that humanity could grasp its destiny and build a better world. The idealistic American and French revolutions broke out. The Industrial Revolution led to mass production and faster travel, at the same time that it darkened the urban atmosphere and forced millions to work under severe conditions. In reaction to the forward-looking Age of Reason, the gothic novel developed, set in medieval castles and featuring seemingly supernatural plotlines.
The possibility of a society transformed by individuals seemed less believable. Mary Shelley suffered from this disillusionment, but for different reasons. In his essay on Frankenstein, George Levine discusses the dream Godwin had which inspired the book: "The dreams emerge from the complex experiences that placed young Mary Shelley, both personally and intellectually, at a point of crisis in our modern culture, where idealism, faith in human perfectibility, and revolutionary energy were counterbalanced by the moral egotism of her radical father, the potential infidelity of her husband, the cynical diabolism of Byron, the felt reality of her own pregnancy, and a great deal more" (Levine). The overwhelming reality of Mary’s life was similar to the harsh reality going on in Europe's political events.
In his study Creature and Creator: Mythmaking and English Romanticism, Paul Cantor claims that Frankenstein and the monster capture “the complex duality of the Romantic soul, the dark as well as the bright side, the violent as well as the benevolent impulses, the destructive as well as the creative urges”.
In common with classic Gothic tales,Frankenstein makes use of the correspondence between theme, character and setting. But the haunted castles and medieval trappings of the classical gothic tales are missing, replaced by experimental science and rationality. Frankenstein transcended Gothic by combining science with the supernatural. Maurice Hindle pretends that Frankenstein is no gothic hero, because he has only assumption and pride. The Monk of Lewis is very similar to Dr Frankenstein, they areboth negative heroes because their passion got the better of them
Like other gothic heroes, Victor Frankenstein is a descendant of Cain, Satan, and Prometheus, heroic in their rebellion but pathetic in their destiny. Their pain and suffering exalt them above the collective and enshrine them in their excruciating settings. Frankenstein’s project can be seen as the ultimate test of the Romantic’s denial of the limits on human creative power. Justifying his efforts to create life in his laboratory, Victor Frankenstein states, “A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me. No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs”.

In common with classic Gothic tales, Frankenstein makes use of the correspondence between theme, character and setting. But the haunted castles and medieval trappings of the classical gothic tales are missing, replaced by experimental science and rationality. Frankenstein transcended Gothic by combining science with the supernatural. Maurice Hindle pretends that Frankenstein is no gothic hero, because he has only assumption and pride. The Monk of Lewis is very similar to Dr Frankenstein, they areboth negative heroes because their passion got the better of them.
Like other gothic heroes, Victor Frankenstein is a descendant of Cain, Satan, and Prometheus, heroic in their rebellion but pathetic in their destiny. Their pain and suffering exalt them above the collective and enshrine them in their excruciating settings. Frankenstein’s project can be seen as the ultimate test of the Romantic’s denial of the limits on human creative power. Justifying his efforts to create life in his laboratory, Victor Frankenstein states, “A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me. No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs” (55).

Frankenstein Psycholoy

As depicted by Shelley, the creature is a sensitive, emotional creature whose only aim is to share his life with another sentient being like himself. The novel portrays him as immensely intelligent and literate, having read Paradise Lost, Plutarch's Lives, and The Sorrows of Young Werther. He is driven by despair and loneliness to acts of cruelty and murder.
From the beginning the monster is rejected by everyone he meets. He realizes from the moment of his "birth" that even his own creator could not be around him; this is obvious when Frankenstein says "…one hand was stretched out, seeming to detain me, but I escaped…" (Shelley,43). The creature tries to forget about this and move on, but everyone who sees him run away in fear. Upon seeing his own reflection, he realizes that he too cannot stand to see himself. By the end of the novel, he is overcome by loneliness and resentment, swearing revenge on his creator and renouncing all of mankind.

In the 1931 film adaptation, the creature is depicted as mute and bestial. In the subsequent sequel, Bride of Frankenstein, the creature learns to speak and discover his feelings, although his intelligence and capacity of speech remains limited. In the second sequel, Son of Frankenstein, the creature is again rendered inarticulate. Following a brain transplant in the third sequel The Ghost of Frankenstein, the Monster speaks with the voice and personality of the brain donor. This was continued after a fashion in the scripting for the fourth sequel Frankenstein Meets The Wolf Man, but the dialogue was famously excised before release. The Monster was effectively mute in later sequels, though he is heard to refer to Dracula as his 'Master' in Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein.
Modern popular culture has not stopped this decay. The Monster has grown into a representation for science run amok, black-and-white monster movies, and lumbering brutes with their hands stretched out, among other things, and is now one of the most famous movie characters in history, perhaps the most famous and visually memorable of the Universal Monsters. The Monster's face has become very well known, especially for the electrodes sticking out of his neck and the square head. He has starred in numerous films, book spin-offs, games, and has appeared on shirts, laptops and lunchboxes.

Frankenstein

Were would i be without out put this one i am putting all the rest of the black arts ones so why not this one Enjoy :)

Frankenstein has enjoyed an afterlife in numerous stage productions and movie adaptations that have reshaped the monster of the original story. Indeed the monster has taken the name of his creator and his archetypal image is still influenced by the 1931 movie poster and movie starring Boris Karloff as a green skinned giant with bolts in his neck.

Frankenstein Description



User Rating: / 12 PoorBest
Written by Administrator
Friday, 06 November 2009 17:23
Frankenstein has enjoyed an afterlife in numerous stage productions and movie adaptations that have reshaped the monster of the original story. Indeed the monster has taken the name of his creator and his archetypal image is still influenced by the 1931 movie poster and movie starring Boris Karloff as a green skinned giant with bolts in his neck.
The creature in Shelley's 1818 novel is hardly the grunting, green-skinned behemoth familiar to generations of movie fans. Stitched together from body parts and brought back to life by Swiss scientist Victor Frankenstein, he develops into an articulate, sensitive being who ponders the meaning of life while suffering his miserable existence abandoned and alone.
At the moment he animates his patchwork of flesh he recoils in horror. "How can I describe my emotions at this catastrophe, or how delineate the wretch whom with such infinite pains and care I had endeavoured to form? His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful!-Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath: his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriences only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion and straight black lips" (57).I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and a convulsive motion agitated its limbs.His limbs were in proportion, and I had selected his features as beautiful. Beautiful! -- Great God! His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion, and straight black lips.I beheld the wretch -- the miserable monster whom I had created. He held up the curtain of the bed; and his eyes, if eyes they may be called, were fixed on me. His jaws opened, and he muttered some inarticulate sounds, while a grin wrinkled his cheeks. He might have spoken, but I did not hear; one hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain me, but I escaped and rushed downstairs. He approached; his countenance bespoke bitter anguish, combined with disdain and malignity, while its unearthly ugliness rendered it almost too horrible for human eyes.A fiendish rage animated him as he said this; his face was wrinkled into contortions too horrible for human eyes to behold; but presently he calmed himself and proceeded.A ghastly grin wrinkled his lips as he gazed on me, where I sat fulfilling the task which he had allotted to me.As I looked on him, his countenance expressed the utmost extent of malice and treachery. I thought with a sensation of madness on my promise of creating another like him, and trembling with passion, tore to pieces the thing on which I was engaged. The wretch saw me destroy the creature on whose future existence he depended for his happiness, and, with a howl of devilish despair and revenge, withdrew. The shutters had been thrown back; and, with a sensation of horror not to be described, I saw at the open window a figure most hideous and abhorred. A grin was on the face of the monster; he seemed to jeer, as with his fiendish finger he pointed towards the corpse of my wife.I entered the cabin where lay the remains of my ill-fated and admirable friend. Over him hung a form which I cannot find words to describe: gigantic in stature, yet uncouth and distorted in its proportions. As he hung over the coffin, his face was concealed by long locks of ragged hair; but one vast hand was extended, in colour and apparent texture like that of a mummy. when he heard the sound of my approach, he ceased to utter exclamations of grief and horror, and sprung towards the window. Never did I behold a vision so horrible as his face, of such loathsome, yet appalling hideousness. I shut my eyes, involuntarily, and endeavoured to recollect what were my duties with regard to this destroyer. I called on him to stay.

Darconology

A friend wrote a few things about dragons for me here they are :)

Draconology or dracology is a pseudo science that refers to the study of dragons and related creatures. People who study dragons sometimes call themselves draconologists or dragonologists.
There are no evidences that there has ever been people lucky enough to be in close contact with dragons and survive. The present knowledge about dragons is mainly speculation and invention but we hope you will find in these pages some true facts.

What is a Dragon

drag.on \'drag-en\ n dracon-,draco serpent,dragon, [fr.GK drakon;akin to OE torht bright,Gk derkesthai to see,look at]
archaic: a huge serpent
a fabulous animal usually represented as a monstrous winged and scaly serpent or saurian with a crested head and enormous claws.

Dragon Etymology

Tormont Illustrated Encyclopedia
drag'en n.
1. a. A fabulous monster, represented usually as a gigantic reptile breathing fire and having a lion's claws, the tail of a serpent, wings and scaly skin.
b. A figure or other representation of this creature.
2. Archaic. A large snake or serpent [Middle English drago(u)n, from Old French dragon, from Latin draco (stem dracon-), dragon, serpent, from Greek drakon, serpent]

The English word "dragon" derives from Greek δράκων (drákōn), "dragon, serpent of huge size, water-snake", which probably comes from the verb δρακεῖν (drakeîn) "to see clearly".
In Ancient Greece the first mention of a "dragon" is derived from the Iliad where Agamemnon is described as having a blue dragon motif on his sword belt and a three-headed dragon emblem on his breast plate; however, the Greek word used (δράκων drákōn, genitive δράκοντοϛ drákontos) could also mean "snake".
δράκων drákōn is a form of the aorist participle active of Greek δέρκομαι dérkomai = "I see", derkeîn = "to see", and originally likely meant "that which sees", or "that which flashes or gleams" (perhaps referring to reflective scales).

The Complete Oxford Dictionary
dragon 1. A huge serpent or snake; a python. Obs. (exc. in etymol. use).2. a. A mythical monster, represented as a huge and terrible reptile, usually combining ophidian and crocodilian structure, with strong claws, like a beast or bird of prey, and a scaly skin; it is generally represented with wings, and sometimes as breathing out fire. The heraldic dragon combines reptillian and mammalian form with the addition of wings. b. Hence frequent allusions to ancient and medieval tales of dragons, as those which watchfully guarded the Gardens of the Hesperides, those which drew the chariot of Cynthia or the moon, those fought and slain by Beowulf, St. George, and other champions. c. like a dragon: fiercely, violently.3. In the Bible versions reproducing draco of the Vulgate and Spakwv of the Septuagint, where the Hebrew has (a) tannin a great sea- or water-monster, a whale, shark, or crocodile, also a large serpent; or (b) tan a desert mammalian animal, now understood to be a jackal, and so rendered in the Revised Version.4. a. An appellation of Satan, the 'Old Serpent'. b. transf. A devilish person; a 'fiend'. c. An evil power embodied. rare.5. An appellation of Death. arch.6. A fierce violent person; esp. a fiercely or agressively watchful woman; a duenna.7. a. A representation or figure of the mythical creature. b. An ensign or standard, having the figure of a dragon. Obs. c. dragon china, a kind of porcelain decorated with designs of dragons. d. to chase the dragon (slang): to take heroin by inhalation (see quot. 1961).8. Astron. a. A northern constellation, Draco. b. The part of the moon's path which lies south of the ecliptic: see DRAGON'S HEAD, TAIL. Obs. c. Applied to a shooting star with a luminous train. Obs. Cf. DRAKE1 2.9. A paper kite. [Ger. drache.] Sc.10. a. An early fire-arm; = DRAGOON 1. Obs. b. A soldier armed with this; = DRAGOON 2. Obs. c. A very powerful armoured tractor.11. Zool. A lizard of the genus Draco, having on each flank a broad wing-like membrane, which enables it to leap some distance in the air.12. Ichthyol. (Also dragon-fish.) a. =DRAGONET 2. b. The ANGLER, Lophius (obs.).13. A fancy variety of pigeon; = DRAGOON sb. 3.14. (Also green dragon.) The plant Dracunculus vulgaris (formerly Arum Dracunculus); =DRAGONS; DRAGONWORT. Also applied to species of Dracontium.15. A disease of the eye of the horse; see quots.16. (Also dragon cane): see quot.17. slang. A sovereign: from the device of St. George and the Dragon.18. attrib. or as adj. Of or as of a dragon, of the nature of a dragon; dragon-like, dragonish. dragon boat = DRAKE1 5.19. General Combs.: a. attributive, as dragon-bought, -coil, -face, -feet, -hame (covering), -hole, -killer, -kind, -legend, -mail, -race, -scale, -seed, tooth (see 21 b), -whelp, -womb,; b. similative, as dragon-green adj.; c. instrumental, as dragon guarded, -ridden, -wardered adjs.; d. parasynthetic, as dragon-eyed, -mouthed, -penned, -winged, adjs.; also dragon-like adj and adv

Definition of witchcraft

Definition
witch:1. a person believed to have magic power: sorceress2. an ugly old woman: hag3. a charming or alluring girl or woman
The Merriam Webster Dictionary
According to sixteenth-century English lawyer William West:
“ A witch or a hag is she which being deluded by a league made with the devil through his persuasion, inspiration or juggling, thinketh she can design what manner or evil things soever, either by thought or imprecation, as to shake the air with lightnings and thunder, to cause hail and tempests, to remove green corn or trees to another place, to be carried of her familiar (which hath taken upon him the deceitful shape of a goat, swine, or calf, etc.) into some mountain far distant, in a wonderful short space of time, and sometime to fly upon a staff or fork, or some other instrument, and to show a thousand such monstrous mockeries.”



Ethymology
"Witch" comes from the Anglo-Saxon wicce (meaning witch), which in turn derives from an Indo-European root word meaning to bend or change or do magic/religion (making it related to "wicker," "wiggle," and even "vicar"). It is possibly also related to the Old Norse vitki (meaning wizard), derived from root words meaning "wise one" or "seer." "Warlock" (rarely used, for male Witches) is from the Old Norse varðlokkur, "spirit song" (not "oath-breaker").

"When shall we three meet again? In thunder, lightning, or in rain?When the hurly-burly's done. When the battle's lost and won.That will be ere the set of sun...Fair is foul, and foul is fairHover through the fog and filthy air." Macbeth, Act I, Scene I



Translations and other names

hexe, häxen, hexse, hess, hächse, hezze (german)
hag (english)
heks (dutch)
sorciere (french)
stregha, erbaria (italian)
bruja (spanish)
bruxa (portugese)
larva, malefica, lamia, venefica, striga, masca, maga (latin)

Jealous

one thing before u read on a friend of mine wrote this for me form a mans points of view i have seen to many people that are Jealous ........ and some of them is people i know that know that and one or tow of my friend are still with them....

Okay, Mr. Midlife Bachelor – you just finished fantasizing about dating a nymphomaniac, and how wonderful and glorious that must be … even if fleeting. Now you can come crashing back to reality with an image that is all too often total reality … that of a jealous woman. Almost all women are jealous to some extent – some more than others. Some women are so jealous that it overwhelmingly defines their personality, and their behavior toward you. Women can be jealous of other women, or the potential of other women possibly wanting to be with you. Or they can be jealous of EVERYTHING that takes your attention away from them. They can be jealous of your friends, your family, your job, and your hobbies. So jealousy is not just limited to your interactions or potential interactions with other women – it can possibly encompass many things.
Dealing with jealousy is often painful. You may be a jealous person yourself and thus unwittingly foster, magnify, or amplify the situation. Jealously is always rooted in feelings of insecurity – so keep that in mind. Sometimes women are jealous because of things that have happened to them in their past, or (more likely) in the recent past … such as having had their last boyfriend cheat on them. The fact is - the more secure you can make a woman feel, the more likely you are to potentially minimize her jealous feelings and actions. I say “potentially” because I have seen some crazy women who were so jealous that it didn’t matter what a guy did – they were always crazy-jealous. And wow – are those the tough ones to deal with. Sometimes you have to make the call that it is not worth continuing.
Okay – now for some examples. The first comes from my own past, a woman named Regina who I loved dearly, who I had the best and most glorious sex with, and who lived with me. [I also wrote about Regina and some of her episodes in the crazy woman section entitled, “Crazy Woman Example – She is Always Upset with You”, and also “Crazy Woman Example – She Hates Your Friends”.] Regina was kind of a fireball Latina who I met at work during a sales conference. She worked in customer service, and I was one of the Southern California sales staff. To be honest, in the five years or so prior to dating Regina, I had made my rounds through her department … and had earned the reputation of being a guerrilla dater (hit and run). When I met Regina, and we spent some time together – I thought that she was the perfect woman for me in every way … she was beautiful, seemed to have a great attitude, wanted children, and had just come out of a bad marriage where her husband had cheated on her. Things were great – for a while … and then over time, as always, a person’s true inner persona gradually appears.
Regina believed that I was cheating on her left and right. The reality is that I never did cheat on her at all. Yes – I spoke to other women (oh nooooo – not that), but there was really no basis for her to think I was out scamming on other women. I was even engaged to Regina, and that did not calm her down. Now I did tend to perhaps drink a little more than I should have during that time period – and Regina was certainly no fan of me coming home drunk … but being drunk and cheating are two entirely different things. The reality of that time period was that Regina was always on me … she was constantly asking me where I had been, who I had met up with, where I was going, what time would I be back. Granted – these questions might not seem entirely strange to someone reading this right now … but at the time, I was constantly being hammered with this stuff. Even if I was going to work, I got the third degree – and it got old in a hurry. Now things got really political if Regina saw me actually talking to another woman – holy cow! I remember one time in particular, I was trying to be extra nice to one of my friend’s wife (in front of my friend, of course), and Regina thought that I was paying way too much attention to her … and she made such a fuss that it was embarrassing. It was almost child-like.
After Regina moved in with me, I thought that things would calm down. Surely she would see that I am not out cheating on her. In fact, I’m normally kind of a home-body type … I like hanging around my home, watching TV, doing yard work, washing my cars, doing home improvement projects, etc. I have to admit that before Regina moved in with me – knowing that she was extremely jealous, I went through my entire home, garage, storage, everything … and got rid of absolutely ANYTHING from any previous girlfriends or women. I did this JUST IN CASE Regina might stumble upon something, and have a fit. Well guess what – while I was at work each day, sure enough Regina was going through literally EVERYTHING … looking for even the slightest evidence of me cheating. Well you know what is coming, right? Yes – she found something. Not a love letter, not a photo nor a gift or anything like that. No – she looked in the one place that it honestly never occurred to me to sanitize … my email! Now today, one would think that email is so common that this would be the first place to clean out. This however was back in 1998, and although email was used, to me it was not a mainstay in terms of communication (like it is today). What I’m saying here is that there wasn’t much if anything for me to clean out in my email. But if someone is looking, really looking, for something – they ARE going to find it … and what she found was one email thread between me and a Persian girlfriend that I had parted ways with prior to meeting Regina. I read the email after Regina pointed it out to me, and it was fairly incriminating … but it all was before I met Regina. So my response at the time was,
“Look – I’m sorry you read this … but it was before I knew you, and you really had no business whatsoever going through my private email.”
All of this actually pissed me off enormously because I realized how hard she must have been looking to find that one email out of many hundreds … plus it also tipped me off that she had probably gone through everything else in my house, too. As all of this registered in my head, I got angry – I remember adding to my previous statement something to the effect of,
“SOMEONE has a little too much time on their hands. If you spent as much time and energy looking for a fucking job as you have going through my stuff, then you’d be employed right now and we wouldn’t be having this conversation.”
Well you know what is coming next. She moved out – and my heart was broken. I felt both responsible for it happening, and also not responsible. I mean – I blew my top when I found out she was going through all of my stuff and my email … but I also knew that she definitely had a real problem with jealousy for her to go to those extreme lengths. I loved her so much though. I never really got over her.
Another great example of jealousy has to do with my good buddy, Greg, and his wife, Tiffany. Tiffany has appeared throughout this site in various examples. She is the very attractive blonde who is extremely insecure about her looks … and who is so jealous of anything or anyone that takes the attention of my buddy, Greg, away from her – that she forces that person or thing out of my friend’s life by making it such a major issue. I have previously described Tiffany as a crazy woman who hates Greg’s friends, and also as a woman who is never happy. She actually shares these traits with my former love, Regina – but Tiffany takes it way past anything or anyone else I’ve ever seen. Greg and I were the best of friends before he met Tiffany. We were such good friends that we used to refer to ourselves as “The Gregs”. Each of the Gregs could always tell what the other would say in a given situation – we thought about stuff exactly the same. The Gregs were a couple of happy friends who hung around a lot, and had a lot of fun playing pool, barbequing, going jet skiing, going to dinner, etc. We were best buddies. And then Tiffany showed up, and started dating my buddy, Greg. After a year or so (when people typically start letting their true colors show), Tiffany began getting more and more critical of me. She didn’t really enjoy my sense of humor, and used it against me by telling Greg that she didn’t like my jokes or my sarcasm … and that she didn’t want me around them. And that was fine. Actually, as it turned out – I was just the first to go. Greg’s father was next – as Tiffany decided that Greg enjoyed being around his Dad just a little too much, so she got Greg to think that his father took advantage of him financially, and that his father drank too much, etc. So Greg’s father was banned – at least for a while. To make a long story short, it became very obvious over a six-month period or so that anything that took Greg’s attention away from Tiffany was going to cause a problem. Getting Greg to recognize this was somewhat of a chore. He married Tiffany, and because he is a Christian believed that nothing should interfere with a man’s relationship with his wife. For a time, Greg even told me that he and I could not be friends – and man did that ever piss me off. Over time, Greg realized that what he really had on his hands was a crazy wife – and that he needed his friends and his family in his life to help him cope with her craziness. There is no happy end to this particular story – Greg is still married to Tiffany, and she continues to make his life difficult.
Just about all of us have had a crazy jealous girlfriend of some sort in our past. The extreme examples of Regina and Tiffany are good lessons – just in case you have not had a REALLY jealous girlfriend before. They are out there – and they are evil, even though they don’t realize it. These two women are really good-looking – so the insecurity behind their jealousy is unrelated to anything physical, rather it is all mental on their part. When faced with a jealous girlfriend, you the midlife bachelor have got to make a conscious decision as to whether the woman is worth the mental pain and anguish she is causing you. If the sex is great, then that may mask your ability to think clearly … but sooner or later you will see the light, and know whether you did the right thing by staying with the woman. Don’t try to cure jealousy – that is what mental health professionals (and years of therapy) are for. As a midlife bachelor, you don’t have that kind of time on your hands – you’ve got other places to go, other women to meet!