“Abhorred monster!” screams out Victor, In Frankenstein by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, passionately as he is confronted by the most detestable thing in his entire existence (Chapter 10). Thurston analytically states “A monster of vaguely anthropoid outline, but with an octopus-like head” while looking at a sculpture of Cthulhu. The word monster is used in both the above quotes, yet one is used as an insult about evilness, and the other is used as a descriptive word about the physical appearance. The same word is used two different times with different definitions bringing up the question of what makes something monstrous. Both Shelley’s Frankenstein and the Lovecraft stories feature monsters and help the reader better understand what a monster truly is. In some aspects, these authors’ definition of monster is the same, and in other ways the definition diverges. Though Shelley and Lovecraft’s monsters are characterized by their physical appearance, the outer appearances of their monsters do not determine the monstrosity of their characters. The true monster of the stories is the character that does ugly actions regardless of if their exterior is ugly. While Frankenstein’s creation is described by Victor as “hideous” (chapter 5), and the creation is referred to as a monster multiply times, he himself is not the true monster of Shelley’s novel. Victor, who is responsible for the wickedness of his creation, is the true monster of the story. By creating a hideous individual and shunning him, he forces the creation to survive on his own with a forced handicap; Victor becomes evil. This evilness is equivalent to breaking someone’s legs in the middle of the forest, with no way of getting home, and then leaving them alone. Victor creates ... ... middle of paper ... ...; the giant monster in “The Dunwich Horror” was invisible, despite modern science stating that invisibility is impossible, and the fish people in “The Shadow over Innsmouth” were bred by combining a human and a fish, despite the ridiculousness of this idea. Lovecraft’s monsters are not only impossible, they are vague and unexplainable. This contrast with Shelley’s Frankenstein in which science, rather than disproving the possibility of the creatures, is the reason for the creature. Though the reader never finds out how the creature is made, we are led to believe that Victor’s scientific mind is the cause of his creation; he labored for years studying the sciences required to revive life. Both Lovecraft and Shelley are influenced by the time period they’re in, but Lovecraft’s definition of monster is shaped by the modern era while Shelley’s is shaped by Romanticism.
The gothic novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley highlights the idea that the real monsters of the world are humans and society, and that most traits that most humans despise are actually within all of us. Frankenstein shows that any human can be so corrupt as to be a “monster”, and that beings society considers repulsive and evil can be human at heart. Shelley exposes human faults such as hubris and irresponsibility through the main character of the novel Victor Frankenstein, who creates a living being and refuses to care for it, sending it into the unwelcoming hands of society. Victors irresponsible actions lead to many deaths and events. As the novel progresses, Dr. Victor Frankenstein and the Monster he creates become more and more similar
Mary Shelley was a big fan of Romanticism. So the creature is evident of Gods work. A monster is not characterized only by its physical appearance but by its actions and attitude. That’s the reason that Frankenstein’s creation is not the true monster in this novel. Even though it may express many monstrous qualities throughout the story it has many more human ones. The creature’s humane characteristics greatly outnumber the monstrous ones and should be recognized by the reader. It is truly amazing how a creature with so much hatred and despair can have so many humane qualities.
Throughout the novel, Shelley investigates the idea of monstrosity. She makes the point that a monster does not have to be genuinely evil in order to be considered monstrous. Shelley presents two characteristics of mankind in order to prove her case. The first example is Frankenstein’s creation. Upon first being introduced to his creation, the reader initially labels him as a monster because of his physical appearance. He is portrayed as a man with “…yellow skin scarcely cover[ing] the work of muscles and arteries beneath…watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set…shrivelled complexion and straight black lips” (Shelley 58). Not only does the reader view him as...
Peter Brooks' essay "What Is a Monster" tackles many complex ideas within Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and the main concept that is the title of the essay itself. What is the definition of a monster, or to be monstrous? Is a monster the classic representation we know, green skin, neck bolts, grunting and groaning? A cartoon wishing to deliver sugary cereal? or someone we dislike so greatly their qualities invade our language and affect our interpretation of their image and physical being? Brooks' essay approaches this question by using Shelley's narrative structure to examine how language, not nature, is mainly accountable for creating the idea of the monstrous body.
In the novel, Frankenstein, a doctor named Victor Frankenstein created a monster. Victor’s monster was created using old human parts, chemicals, and a “spark.” Victor wanted to create this monster in order to benefit mankind, and for the purpose of playing God. Victor thought his creation would turn out great, but in all actuality, his monster ended up terribly wrong (Shelley, 145). The monster was a deformed man, standing eight feet tall, with yellow eyes, black hair, black lips, and skin that did not conceal his internal features (Shelley, 144-145). Even though the monster was very grown, he had the mind of a newborn child, and he was very kind and gentle (Shelley, 327). The monster’s appearance terrified Victor, and he immediately abandoned it. Dr. Victor Frankenstein also never named his creation because he disliked it that much. The monster was longing for love, and since no one loved him, he became very violent. He ended up killing Victor’s brother and best friend out of pure revenge (Shelley, 193). Anytime the monster tried to help people, he was bea...
We as humans want to be with each other. We actively pursue this goal be finding friends and significant others. While a moderate amount of solitude can be good we crave togetherness with others. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein isolation is a key theme in the novel. The creature created by Victor Frankenstein is driven into isolation from society based on people’s fear of him. Both the creature and Victor experience first hand the effects that isolation have on the creature's actions. Thus Frankenstein shows very clearly how lifelong isolation keeps someone from developing a moral compass and in turn makes them do wrongful deeds.
Frankenstein has become a symbol in contemporary society. Upon hearing the name, one might imagine a tall, muscular green man with short black hair, a flat head, and two bolts pierced on both sides of his neck. Although that is the Frankenstein present now, the modern Frankenstein is only an adaptation of Mary Shelley’s original creature. Shelley’s Frankenstein, 1818, is a gothic novel in which she tells the tale of a man creating life. This creation of Victor Frankenstein’s monster eventually hurt the people he held dear. Following the popularity of the book, James Whale directed Frankenstein, in 1931, which started the movement of Frankenstein’s contemporary image. While in comparison to the novel’s questionable identity of the monster, Whale’s adaptation addresses the creation as the true monster. Whale is able to accomplish his reanimated version of the original creation through a series of drastically different aspects involving both personality and appearance in his cinematic production. Whale’s monster lacks the human appeal of Shelley’s creation through his motivation of his transgressions, lack of speech and physical appearance.
The monster of the novel is often misattributed with the name, “Frankenstein.” However, Victor Frankenstein can ultimately be considered the true monster of this tale. His obsession would lead to the corruption of his soul and the creation of two monsters—one himself, and the other, the creature. In attempting to take on the role of God, nature would become a monster to Victor and destroy his life. These elements of monstrosity in Frankenstein drive the meaning of its story.
Even as language plays a huge part in the definition of human, as taken from the OED, the narration, and thus language, in Frankenstein also helps to define the terms ‘monstrous’ and ‘human’. As the monster discovered, language is intertwined with culture (Brooks 594). He is on the side of nature, a deformed creature of appearance, and upon catching sight of his reflection understands not to show himself to the cottagers, of whom he yearns to win the love of, for fear of them fleeing (595). He is ‘excluded but learning the means, by which to be included’ (595) with language. It is the novels stark definition of monstrosity through physical appearance not through acquisition of language that starts the catalyst for corruption of the Monster spiritually and mentally.
Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein centers around a creator who rejects his own creation. The plot thickens as Victor Frankenstein turns his back on his creation out of fear and regret. The monster is cast out alone to figure out the world and as a result of a life with no love, he turns evil. Shelley seems to urge the reader to try a relate with this monster and avoid just seeing him as an evil being beyond repentance. There is no doubt that the monster is in fact evil; however, the monster’s evilness stems from rejection from his creator.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein has undoubtedly withstood the test of time. Frankenstein’s direct association with fundamental Gothic literature is extremely renowned. However, the novel’s originality is derived from the foundational thematic values found within the relationship (or lack there of) between Victor Frankenstein and the monster he had created, in combination with a fascinatingly captivating plot. Understandably, Frankenstein can often be associated with a multitude of concepts; however, in this particular instance, the circumstances in the book seemed remarkably coherent with Shelley’s Romantic beliefs in preserving the natural world, and one’s natural existence. These values present themselves as metaphorical symbols that represented Shelley’s Romantic beliefs. The allusions suggesting that pushing the boundaries of knowledge leading to consequential repercussions is extremely fundamental for the comprehension of this essay, especially when it contrasts cohesively with Shelley’s lucid references to “the sublime.” Over-reliance on scientific information and progression, eventually leads to environmental diminishment. During the period of time when Shelley was writing this piece, she would’ve been exposed to the consequential factors of the Industrial Revolution in England. Modernization was resulting in the destruction of the natural world the Romantics favoured so heavily. These allusions suggesting the environmental destruction in Shelley’s Frankenstein is represented most thoroughly using: the thematic importance of stretching science’s boundaries, the passionate representations of the sublime, and the direct association with the beliefs of the Victorian Romantics, of whom Shelley was at the forefront of.
Creating a “monster” is one thing knowing what to do with it is another story. The same “vile amalgamation” is a concoction of this whimsical imagination bought up as a singularity for no true purpose other the fact of whether it will succeed or fail. Although, one can speculate that creating such “Monstrosity” is but a blasphemy until, one shows up and rattles the very core within its maker. This was illustrated ,when Victor finally created his “Masterpiece” and consequently the beginning of his demise.” 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 selected his features a beautiful…Unable to endure the aspect of the being I had created, I rushed out of the room” ( Shelley 35-6 ).
In Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, many similarities can be seen between the creature and his creator, Victor Frankenstein. While Victor and the creature are similar, there are a few binary oppositions throughout the book that make them different. The binary oppositions in the novel serve as thematic contrast; and some of the most illustrative oppositions between the two characters are on the focus of family, parenthood, isolation and association with others.
Victor Frankenstein and his creation are alike in several ways, one of them being their appreciation of nature. Victor embraces the nature for the quick moment that he escapes the creature as it “filled me with a sublime ecstasy that gave wings to the soul and allowed it to soar from the obscure world to light and joy” (Shelley 84). Vict...
Frankenstein shows that what looks like a monster in appearance my not be and what looks normal on appearance may be a monster. While a scary ugly creature may look like a monster a true monster is formed from within and is scene through actions. Along with this knowledge is power and power has the ability to make monsters. The pursuit to know more is a never ending road that leads to lies, secretes, and monstrosity. “How much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow,” while knowledge is boundless and beautiful an excess of anything can create a monster.