Frankenstein-value for modern readers
Mary Shelley’s text, Frankenstein is a text, which is highly regarded in today’s society for its outstanding literary worth. However, the text as it was seen during the time of Shelley and its appearance and appeal today, most certainly differ. The most significant difference is that over a hundred years ago, the text was seen as a popular text, our modern day Simpsons, if you like. Conversely, today it appeals to the cannon of high culture. Its gradual change over time has been based on a number of deciding factors.
Frankenstein’s immediate audience was that of a popular audience. Such an audience purely relied on a story, which would indulge them with exhilaration or apprehension. In the case of Frankenstein the audience was introduced to the horror thesis. The story told delved piquantly into the tragic ordeals of Victor as his fiend wreaked destruction and devastation to all those, who were close to Victor. This story line is symptomatic of a popular audience, as they craved a story, which would invigorate passion and tragedy.
Vast arrays of appropriations have sprung from Shelley’s text, which influence as to why the text still remains today. The main source of today’s appropriations has been drawn directly from the figure of the monster itself. As, technology advanced and the idea of the stage was subjugated with the growing trend towards cinema, the figure of the original idea of the monster diminished. The figure slowly morphed into a hideous being, possessing green, stitched skin with bolts in the side of the head (lacking the original parallels to Adam). Unfortunately, the birth of cinema and its immediate success led to the demise of the philosophies and principles, which were initially at the crux of Shelley’s Frankenstein. A modern day appropriation of Frankenstein is The Rocky Horror Show, which draws directly from the creation of a monster, yet puts it in a satirical context, once again abating the traditional philosophies. The birth of the horror theme was partly due to Shelley’s text and though the horror theme is carried through today, it differs greatly as society now expects a different form of horror.
Shelley envisioned a strong sense of humanity in her novel. She encapsulated the quintessence of the period in which she lived by expressing ideologies, such as humanity’s relationship with God and the hypothesis of nature versus nurture. The relationship with God was vividly changed during the industrial era.
Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein is impressive, entertaining, and fascinating so is it no surprise there have been so many films and artworks influenced by her novel. Many of which have put their own spin to the horror novel, especially the character of the creature that remains one of the most recognized icons in horror fiction. However, there have been critics whom argue modern versions and variations have lost the horror and passion that is an essential to the creature. The start of the Creature is bound to one book. However, public impression of the Creature has changed severely since the publication of the original novel, leading to diverse styles and plot lines in its diverse film adaptations. People’s impression of the Creature have become so twisted and turned by time and decades of false film posters and article titles that most use the name “Frankenstein” to refer to the Creature itself, rather than the scientist who created him! It’s a shame! An understanding of literary history is a necessity to comprehend the truth of the Creature’s tragic history and how decades of film adaptations changed him into the hulking beast most people know him as today.
Many authors have different ways of building characters and how they look. It is up to the reader to build their perspective from the descriptions given by the author in order to understand books. Mary Shelley, the author of Frankenstein, sculpts the readers’ perspective of her monster through powerful diction and emotional syntax. After Dr. Frankenstein finally accomplishes his goal of re-animating a lifeless human, Shelley uses her strong word choice to fully express the extent of horror that Frankenstein had felt, describing his monster as a “demonical corpse to which I had so miserably given life.” (Shelley 45). Frankenstein’s horror is shared with the reader simply from a well descripted sentence. The detail Shelley put into Victor Frankenstein’s perspective is gradually shaping our own, as the reader’s, perspective. Furthermore, the diction being used adds a more definitive appearance to the monster. It helps us imagine what the monster looks like and additionally, how Frankenstein feels about his success.
Like all works that have been taught in English classes, Frankenstein has been explicated and analyzed by students and teachers alike for much of the twentieth and all of the twenty-first century. Academia is correct for doing so because Frankenstein can appeal to the interests of students. Students, teachers and experts in the areas of medicine, psychology, and sociology can relevantly analyze Frankenstein in their respective fields. However, Peter Brooks explains in “Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts: Language and Monstrosity in Frankenstein” that Shelly had presented the problem of “Monsterism” through her language. According to Brooks, Monsterism is explicitly and implicitly addressed in Shelly’s language. While this may be correct, Brooks does it in such a way that requires vast knowledge of subjects that many readers may not be knowledgeable in. After summarizing and analyzing the positive and negative qualities of Brooks’ work, I will explain how the connection of many different fields of study in literature creates a better work.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: A Norton Critical Edition. Ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York: W. W.
...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. He was unjustly shunned by society because of his physical appearance. On the other hand, the reader realizes that like Frankenstein, the creation can not be sympathized with entirely. He too exhibits traits that make him appear villainous. It is the duality of these two characters that make Frankenstein and his creation two of the most appealing characters of the nineteenth century.
Since its publication in 1818, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein has grown to become a name associated with horror and science fiction. To fully understand the importance and origin of this novel, we must look at both the tragedies of Mary Shelley's background and her own origins. Only then can we begin to examine what the icon "Frankenstein" has become in today's society.
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.
Using gothic conventions Frankenstein explores Mary Shelley’s personal views on the scientific developments, moral and economical issues that occurred during the 19th century and Shelley’s personal emotions and questions regarding her life. As an educated person, Mary Shelley had an interest in the development of the world such as political and moral issues and she challenged these issues in the novel.
Mary Shelley in her book Frankenstein addresses numerous themes relevant to the current trends in society during that period. However, the novel has received criticism from numerous authors. This paper discusses Walter Scott’s critical analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in his Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine Review of Frankenstein (1818).
The role of the imagination in Mary Shelley’s 1818 novel, Frankenstein is a vital when defining the work as Romantic. Though Shelley incorporates aspects that resemble the Enlightenment period, she relies on the imagination. The power of the imagination is exemplified in the novel through both Victor and the Creature as each embarks to accomplish their separate goals of scientific fame and accomplishing human relationships. The origin of the tale also emphasizes the role of the imagination as Shelley describes it in her “Introduction to Frankenstein, Third Edition (1831)”. Imagination in the text is also relatable to other iconic works of the Romantic Period such as S. T. Coleridge’s Biographia Literaria in which he defines Primary and Secondary imagination. The story as a whole is completely Romantic in that it is filled with impossibilities that seem to have come from a fairy tale. The imaginative quality of the plot itself is a far cry from the stiff subject matter of the Enlightenment period. Frankenstein is wholly a work of Romanticism both from the outside of the tale and within the plot. Shelley created the story in a moment of Primary imagination filling it with impossibilities that can only be called fantastical. Imagining notoriety leads Victor to forge the creature; the creature imagines the joy of having human relationships. The driving factor of the tale is the imagination: imagining fame, imagining relationships and imagining the satisfaction of revenge. Shelley’s use of the imagination is a direct contradiction to the themes of logic and reason that ruled the Enlightenment Period.
In John Milton’s epic, Paradise Lost, the author establishes Satan as the most complex and thought-provoking character in the tale through his depiction of Satan’s competing desires. Throughout the first four books of Paradise Lost, Satan repeatedly reveals his yearning both for recognition from God and, simultaneously, independence from God. The paradox that prevents Satan from achieving his desires may be interpreted as a suggestion of Milton’s establishment of a sympathetic reading for this character, as he cannot truly find happiness. In actuality, the construction of Satan’s rivaling aspirations evince Satan’s repulsive depravity to Milton’s audience and encourage readers to condemn his character.
There have been many different interpretations of John Milton's epic, Paradise Lost. Milton's purpose in writing the epic was to explain the biblical story of Adam and Eve. Although the epic is similar to the Bible story in many ways, Milton's character structure differs from that of the Bible's version. Through-out the epic Milton describes the characters in the way he believes they are. In book II of Paradise Lost, Milton portrays Satan as a rebel who exhibits certain heroic qualities, but who turns out not to be a hero.
Even though Adam and Eve did not encounter evil until the fall, they still had the potential for evil intrinsically within themselves. Likewise, although Lucifer was not wholly evil at the time of his formation, his pride and thus capacity to sin was part of his identity. If all of these characters developed the evil within them even though they were made good, one could question whether God is the creator of evil and is thus partly evil himself. Milton himself says that God “created evil, for evil only good / Where all life dies, death lives” (2.623-624). This seems in conflict with the earlier claim that God is omnibenevolent and free of
Cell phones could be a life-saver in the case of an emergency. In New York, a violent incident has taken place. Fortunately, timely communication from a student using a cell phone saved a man who desperately needed medical attention ("Cell Phones in the Classroom”). Another student has assisted the police to arrest the suspect by giving timely updates of the criminal scene using a cell phone in the school lockdown. In fact, many school districts have decided to lift the ban on the use of cell phones in school because of “the role cell phones have played in some emergency situations” ("Cell Phones in the Classroom” ). Moreover, parents could be easily in touch with their children, know their whereabouts through mobile communication, and therefore it would allay parents’ concerns (Cohen). For instance, lots of parents have claimed that they have to stay in touch with their children ...
Ever since incidents such as 9/11 and Columbine, high schools have started implementing new rules regarding cellphones. Cellphones regard the attention of building managers, teachers, parents, and students. Although teachers see them as a distraction and a way to cheat, they can be quite helpful to students. School districts should permit students to use cellular devices in school for purposes of improving their education and providing themselves a sense of security.