Both Mary Shelley and Graham Greene develop terrifying images of a monster. In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley portrays a grotesque, deformed demon that wreaks havoc on the common populace, and Graham Greene’s Brighton Rock depicts Pinkie, a blood-thirsty teenage mobster. Both are made evil by their horrific past circumstances: while the monster is constructed in a laboratory, Pinkie lives in poverty. Societal prejudices then amplify their evil desires. Despite their similar circumstances, the monster and Pinkie have differing feelings about companionship and express different levels of guilt, attitudes which reveal that the monster is more pitiable than Pinkie.
Tragic family backgrounds propel the monster and Pinkie toward their future evil actions. Because the monster was created from human corpses, his creator views him with disgust. The monster’s deformities “forever barred” him from experiencing the sensations a normal man would enjoy (Shelley 217). This isolation renders the monster incapable of developing proper relationships with man, leaving the monster “miserable” (144). The monster’s virtues, left unrecognized, succumb to abhorrence for the human race. Likewise, an improper upbringing in impoverished Nelson Place cripples Pinkie. Pinkie’s parents prematurely expose him to sexual intercourse, and in order to escape this horror, Pinkie is willing “to commit any crime” and kills his parents (Greene 156). After these experiences, Pinkie loses the ability to feel emotion. A deep-seated animosity toward society fills the void of happiness in Pinkie’s life. Plagued by their childhoods, both the monster and Pinkie enter lives of struggle and evil.
Society’s prejudices create similar struggles for the monster and Pinkie and inte...
... middle of paper ...
...so he continues his evil pursuit (Greene 198). Pinkie, aware of his amoral actions, persists in his evil ways. While the monster attempts to combat his own wretchedness, Pinkie fosters his malice, and these responses display the amount of humanity left in each after their misfortunes.
Although both endure similar adversities of bad family backgrounds and society’s prejudices, the monster’s and Pinkie’s different views on companionship and guilt set them apart. Through their inhumane acts, the monster and Pinkie are metaphorically bloodless. Because of this lack of blood, each monster thirsts for the blood of his enemies. However, their thirst for blood may have been a mechanism to express their desire for a possibility of redemption. The monster, more deserving of pity and redemption than Pinkie, receives it in the end by setting himself on fire in the arctic.
At first, The Monster is very kind and sympathetic. He has a good heart, as shown when he collected firewood for the family on the brink of poverty. Like every other human creation, he was not born a murderer. All the Monster wanted was to be accepted and loved by Victor Frankenstein and the other humans but instead he was judged by his appearance and considered to be dangerous. The Monster says, “like Adam, I was created apparently united by no link to any other being in existence…many times I considered Satan as the fitter emblem of my condition; for often, like him, when I viewed the bliss of my protectors, the bitter gall of envy rose within me” (page 105). This line is an important part of the novel because the Monster lets it be known how like Adam he was created into this world completely abandoned and like Satan he is angry with those people who have found contentment and satisfaction in their lives. The rejection and unwelcome feeling he is faced with, is the main reason the Monster becomes a killer. Watching another family show love towards each other made the Monster realize how alienated he truly was. He did not know how to deal with his pain and emotions so he murders as
In this essay I am going to answer ‘how and why does Mary Shelley make the reader sympathise with the character of the monster in her novel Frankenstein’.
She makes the reasons for his evilness. very clear through these personas. Bitterness and anger towards the world is only natural if the world shunned him. So although the monster is ‘unnatural’ his responses and feelings are those of any. a ‘real’ person faced with the conflict he has had to face.
Frankenstein is the story of an eccentric scientist whose masterful creation, a monster composed of sown together appendages of dead bodies, escapes and is now loose in the country. In Frankenstein, Mary Shelly’s diction enhances fear-provoking imagery in order to induce apprehension and suspense on the reader. Throughout this horrifying account, the reader is almost ‘told’ how to feel – generally a feeling of uneasiness or fright. The author’s diction makes the images throughout the story more vivid and dramatic, so dramatic that it can almost make you shudder.
In most novel and movies monsters are known to be evil, committing numerous crimes against humanity and are normally the ones that we don’t sympathize with. However, this novel carefully shows the reader that monsters can be good creatures, with a decent heart and act based on the actions of others. The novel shows how the monster should be pitied, rather than criticised. Mary Shelley's “Frankenstein” manages to create sympathy for the creature through speech, actions and mistreatment the creature suffers.
The monster portrays more humanistic qualities than his creator as he portrays his compassion, intelligence and feelings throughout the novel. Instead of wreaking havoc on his neighbors, ambushing them for food and shelter, the monster decides to live in secrecy in the De Laceys’ shadow to observe their ways. The monster demonstrates compassion as he refrains from stealing the De Lacey’s food when he realizes that the family suffers from poverty. In this sense, he sacrifices an easy dinner to scavenge for himself. He also expresses intellectual thought in his strategy to advance his knowledge of the English language by observing Felix’s lessons to his Arabian lover, Safie. The monster recalls to Dr. Frankenstein that, “… I found, by the frequent recurrence of some sound which the stranger repeated after them, th...
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.
Can you imagine losing all of your loved ones to an evil beast? Or being abandoned by everyone you came in contact with? Mary Shelley portrays numerous emotions in Frankenstein. Sympathy and hatred are two that are constantly shown throughout novel. Mary Shelley enlists sympathy and hatred towards Victor and the monster by presenting them in different viewpoints. The views of sympathy and hatred towards the main characters change as the narration changes in the novel Frankenstein.
The creature’s moral ambiguity characteristic was a vile ingredient to the construction of this novel Frankenstein because it made the reader 's sympathies with him even after the audience knows he had committed murder because the readers had seen the truth this creature had to face. That he had tried everything within his power to peacefully live with them, to interact, communicate, and befriend them “these thoughts exhilarated me and led me to apply with fresh ardour to the acquiring the art of language”, that even though he was seen as a monster because of the looks he was created with, something he had no control over, he still had hope to be seen as equals, ”My organs were indeed harsh, but supple; and although my voice was very unlike the soft music of their tones, yet I pronounced such words as I understood with tolerable ease. It was as the ass and the lap-dog; yet surely the gentle ass whose intentions were affectionate, although his manners were rude, deserved better treatment than blows and execration;” this hope of his was utterly crushed, and can only set him up for utter disappointment(12.18). Because in the end he only received hates, scorns, violence, and prejudice from his good will. So in the end of the story, Mary Shelley’s forces the readers to see within the creature’s heart and for
Romantic writer Mary Shelley’s gothic novel Frankenstein does indeed do a lot more than simply tell story, and in this case, horrify and frighten the reader. Through her careful and deliberate construction of characters as representations of certain dominant beliefs, Shelley supports a value system and way of life that challenges those that prevailed in the late eighteenth century during the ‘Age of Reason’. Thus the novel can be said to be challenging prevailant ideologies, of which the dominant society was constructed, and endorsing many of the alternative views and thoughts of the society. Shelley can be said to be influenced by her mothers early feminist views, her father’s radical challenges to society’s structure and her own, and indeed her husband’s views as Romantics. By considering these vital influences on the text, we can see that in Shelley’s construction of the meaning in Frankenstein she encourages a life led as a challenge to dominant views.
The fact that Frankenstein’s creation turns on him and murders innocent people is never overlooked; it has been the subject of virtually every popularization of the novel. What is not often acknowledged is the fact that Frankenstein himself embodies some of the worst traits of humankind. He is self-centered, with little real love for those who care about him; he is prejudiced, inflexible and cannot forgive, even in death. While some of these traits could be forgivable, to own and flaunt them all should be enough to remind a careful reader that there are two "monsters" in Frankenstein.
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.
Tragedy shows no discrimination and often strikes down on those undeserving of such turmoil. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, a creature more repulsive than one can imagine is brought to life by a young scientist. Although this creature is horrifying in sight, he is gentle by nature. Unfortunately, the softer side of the creature is repeatedly overlooked and the so called “monster” is driven to a breaking point. Even though the Creature committed many crimes, Mary Shelley’s Creature was the tragic hero of this story because of his efforts rescue the life of a young girl and helping destitute cottagers.
middle of paper ... ... Generally in the novel, most readers tend to sympathize with Frankenstein because of the way in which he is mentally and physically harmed by his creation. However, one must also realize that while Frankenstein is a victim in the novel, he also exhibits features that make him a monster. These monstrous qualities, however, stem from his passion for science and his desire to create life. Not only does the reader criticize and pity Frankenstein, but the reader also empathizes with Frankenstein’s creation.
The Monster’s confusion about the world and his inability to understand why he cannot simply be accepted in society drives his actions. Dutoit elaborates on the not so apparent truth that The Monster goes to great lengths to assimilate by acquiring language, understanding mannerisms and participating in customs. The Monster grows fond of a family, at first he watches them carefully, paying close attention to the details of their life and even steals food, unaware of their poverty. Supporting evidence which allows for the conclusion that he is innately good and simply longing for domesticity is shown by The Monsters willingness to help the family with chores, in secret of course. Nevertheless, he is universally shunned by everyone he encounters, except for the old blind man who was willing to have a social connection with him, until his family returned home and in fear rebelled against The Monster. This constant exile only leads to a greater alienation from the social world he deeply longs to be a part of. Unfortunately, due to his outward appearance, his good intentions are ill received by the people he