I saw a grotesque hybridization that lives in the middle of inconsistent logic. It is a stuffed toy modeled on the monster from Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein. This form of cross-referencing is quite perplexing. The scene in which the monster, a symbol of all kinds of social anxiety, and a stuffed toy, a symbol of all kinds of attachments, are hybridized seems the monster's own survival strategy. This strategy for achieving attachment and coexistence seems to be classified into two broad categories. One is 'fabricated cuteness' as a transgressing strategy for coexistence, and the other is 'symbolized monstrosity' as a hereditary strategy that retains the least archetype to signify otherness. The monster mutates to be cute to overshadow the ontological antagonism arising from his own otherness to disarm us. However, even though the monstrosity has been reduced, he has never stopped reminding us that his whole body is the representation of the otherness made up of the others. The survival strategy learned in the reductive nature of pop-culture is free to adopt mutative imageries - such as green skin, sutured wounds, screws on the neck, and so on. No matter how naive and cute these imageries are, they clearly keep preaching that his birth is different from ours. In this regard, the monster’s obsession with attachment and coexistence may have gone beyond the original. One thing is for sure: the image of the stuffed animals modeled on the monster plays with the dichotomy at the risk of all sorts of ontological paradoxes and deception. How to accept the hybridized monster who has become a transgressor for himself and a mediator for us is our choice.

This hybrid is a strategized otherness, leaving room for interpretation on whether to produce the logic of exclusion or the logic of coexistence for the condition of becoming unstable without boundaries. The mutation that the monster has gone through here can be read as a gesture of reconciliation, but given the degeneration of his own otherness, he has not always benefited from the present society. There must be some inevitable traits reducted, sacrificed, marketized during the process of such mutations. Through this hybrid, I am surveying the mechanism of projecting otherness and antagonism, along with the defects resulting from the language of binary oppositions.