Metaphors are not only a powerful way of allowing people to visualize a message that a person is trying to convey, but they are also a creative way of putting things that we see or think about every day into a new light. Speaking metaphorically isn't always very effortless and it certainly isn't easy for the listener to make the connection between what you are describing symbolically and what you are actually saying. Many writers use metaphors because they are a unique and creative way to express common ideas and they can also be very fun. Metaphors can be positive or negative depending upon which way the author would like to go.

In the articles on Science, we certainly were able to see several different metaphors used for various reasons. Particularly in the article, "The Body at War: Media Views of the Immune System" by Emily Martin we saw Martin draw a unique parallel between our bodies, (predominantly our immune systems), and larger issues concerning race, class and gender. This, like many metaphorical comparisons, might seem like an unlikely possibility for a connection, but once she begins to explain why she feels that the media's representation of our immune system is so closely related to other social issues we are forced to take a second look. The way in which Martin makes her comparisons, with her unique word choice and style, comes across as quite a powerful and convincing theory.

Mary Shelly also touched on some metaphorical language in her excerpt from her novel "Frankenstein." Although the power of language here is much more subtle there is clearly comparisons being made of what we would usually assume were completely unrelated topics. Shelly does a superb job of delicately interweaving metaphors about the power of human nature and the almost insatiable pursuit of knowledge that really call for the reader's earnest attention to the detail of her writing.

In Martin's article we see how she gradually begins to set up her comparison of differing anti-bodies that are present in our bodies to gender, class and race roles present in our society. Martin describes media representations of such things as AIDS awareness and immune system function short films as presenting parts of our body at war with the bacteria and disease that is constantly trying to invade our bodies. Our "self" is clearly the good guy and anything that tries to permeate our bodies without our body's direct consent is considered to be the bad guys. The "bad guys" that come from the external world are considered to be what she coins, the "nonself."

Martin goes on to describe why the "self and "nonself" that the media has created is such an important distinction. "The notion that the immune system maintains a clear boundary between self and nonself is often accompanied by a conception of the nonself world as foreign and hostile." (Pg. 290). This implies that the external world is what makes up the majority of the negative energy that we are constantly a part of and that the external world plays a huge role in influencing us in negative ways. If this is really the comparison that the media has set up than isn't it a little ironic that they virtually named themselves as the bad guys or is it possible that that was not what they were attempting to do with the analogy? Clearly, the media cannot assume that they are not part of the external world. The media acknowledges that dire, negative and shocking coverage is what gets people's attention. The question would then be if we asked for negative coverage because we enjoy it more than positive coverage or if so much negative coverage has, in turn, made us want more?

Martin poses questions of this nature throughout this article, which is the power of using metaphorical language. This type of language makes you think and, in the end, you could possibly end up with more questions than answers.

Martin goes on to make other comparisons between our bodies and gender roles. Martin describes T cells, which are dominant cells that kill by injecting foreign organisms with toxins. She describes macrophages as more inferior cells that are the "housekeepers of the body, cleaning up the dirt and the debris, including "dead bodies," both themselves and foreign cells." (Pg.292). Media descriptions of these cells often associate female pronouns with macrophages and male pronouns with the T cells representing a dominating hierarchy of gender that goes on even within our bodies.

Martin makes these gender comparisons to the cells in our bodies to highlight the way that the media chooses to describe things that we might, otherwise, overlook. The simple fact of using female related words while describing anything that is of an inferior status to something that is superior which is described through male related words reveals how deeply our stereotypes about gender are embedded into our culture, evident simply by the words that we use.

Martin goes on to add some differing theories as to why the media would constantly display gender roles in this way. Martin states, "Work in feminist theory suggests that there is a masculinist bias to views that divide the world into sharply opposed, hostile categories, such that the options are to conquer, be conquered, or magnanimously tolerate the other. The stance is one from which nature can be dominated and a separation from the world maintained." (Pg. 297). If something as trivial as the roles that your cells play in combating disease and bacteria, as displayed by the media, can be described in such a gender-biased way, than what other topics does the media present to us that have been shaded with these unnecessary word associations?

Martin's article is an excellent example of the use of metaphorical language and the essential need for the public to be aware of the associations made through words that can so easily go unnoticed. Words can, subconsciously, have an effect on the way we perceive things in society whether we always want them to or not.

In Shelly's article we see more metaphorical language used to compare ideas about power, control, greed and human nature. As Victor Frankenstein embarks upon his goal of creating a human life form with his bare hands we see how curiosity and the undoubting faith in oneself can lead to disappointment and even fear. Shelly does an exquisite job of using the monster that Frankenstein so desperately wants to create as the metaphor for the desire that has surpassed a healthy capacity and turned into the most desperate form of greed.

The monster is representative of the egocentric belief that we, as humans, are capable of any feat. The monster is emblematic in reminding us that we are all human and in no way capable of performing God-like actions. Shelly's use of language and style of writing are unique in bringing this common idea into a refreshing, new light. The more that Victor Frankenstein believed that he was incapable of failure, the more that his own destructive ambition began to come back to humble him in the most grandiose of ways.

Metaphorical language is such an integral part of our spoken and written words that we often take it's power for granted. Through this type of language we are constantly being painted new pictures about life and about ideas and thought that we reflect upon daily. Artists, writers, poets and many other creative forces have the capacity and ability to grab a hold of this language and use it to influence our thoughts and actions. When the use of metaphorical language is used in a positive way it can be extremely invigorating but we must also remember that it can be used in a way to influence our thought and actions negatively. As we discussed through the Martin article, metaphorical language can often be used to continue to foster ideas that promote stereotypes in our heads. In the story by Shelly we saw how metaphorical language can be used in a completely beautiful way for the purpose of telling a moral story so that it might have a lasting impact on us. Therefore, learn to recognize and use metaphorical speech for yourself and you will always be able to decide what you get out of the language.

Shelly, Mary. "Frankenstein." The Presence of Others. Ed. Marilyn Moller. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2000. 231-236.

Martin, Emily. "The Body at War: Media Views of the Immune System." The Presence of Others. Ed. Marilyn Moller. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin's, 2000. 286-302.