The word “monster”, and its noun-based ancestor, “monstrosity”, have extensive amounts of meanings in any given context. When one hears the term “monster”, hideous, disgusting creatures are often thought of. Supernatural beings, and abnormal biological occurrences frequently go hand in hand when “monstrosity” is said, or “monster” is used in descriptive context. Despite this, however, the root of the word “monster” provides proof of a contrary definition. The word derives from the latin term “monere” which in definition means to warn, or to instruct. Therefore, in Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, the theme of monstrosity is pertinent in both the creature and Victor Frankenstein himself, primarily to emphasise the fact that one should not test the divine boundaries established by god himself. Shelley …show more content…
provides source that monstrosity is evidently created by the desire for revenge, seclusion from the outside world and the lack of the “nurture” aspect of development, and the dangerous yearning of knowledge. Frankenstein and his creature exemplify the theme of monstrosity by means of revenge in many instances. It is shown that revenge, or the desire to get back at another for a previous wrong-doing, actually brings about more vengeance, which hence initiates concurrent moods of insanity and monstrosity both in Victor and the creature. For example, and as stated by Victor Frankenstein, “That cannot be; but all that I can say will be of little avail. My revenge is of no moment to you; yet, while I allow it to be a vice, I confess that it is the devouring and only passion of my soul. My rage is unspeakable when I reflect that the murderer, whom I have turned loose upon society, still exists. You refuse my just demand: I have but one resource; and I devote myself, either in my life or death, to his destruction” (Shelley, 26). This shows, and proves that in the desire for revenge, in Victor’s case, he in turn became mad and became a “monster. He made the decision to play with god and create the creature (Earl), and in turn he became a monster himself. The creature himself, although already having the characteristics of a typical monster, progresses into an internal monster through the yearning of vengeance throughout the novel.
For example, and as stated by the creature, "Cursed, cursed creator! Why did I live? Why, in that instant, did I not extinguish the spark of existence which you had so wantonly bestowed? I know not; despair had not yet taken possession of me; my feelings were those of rage and revenge. I could with pleasure have destroyed the cottage and its inhabitants, and have glutted myself with their shrieks and misery” (Shelley, 123). This quote provides evidence to the argument that revenge may have collateral damage, thus making the creature all the more “monstrous”. The creature initially was enraged towards Victor for creating him, but in frustration turned to violence and monstrosity in burning down the cottage. Monstrosity triggered by the desire for vengeance is most prevalent by the creature, who initially and progressively portrayed characteristics of a human. For example, “Yet you, my creator, detest and spurn me, thy creature, to whom thou art bound by ties only dissoluble by the annihilation of one of us. You purpose to
kill me. How dare you sport thus with life? Do your duty towards me, and I will do mine towards you and the rest of mankind. If you will comply with my conditions, I will leave them and you at peace; but if you refuse, I will glut the maw of death, until it be satiated with the blood of your remaining friends” (Shelley, 86). The creature provides Victor with a dilemma in that if he were to make a female creature as a companion for him, then in turn he will leave mankind alone and suffer in peace. Yet, he also says that if Victor were not to comply with his terms offered, then in the form of vengeance, he will become monstrous and “glut the maw of death, until it be satiated with the blood of your remaining friends”. He will torment Victor until his life permits, in the form of horrific murder and revenge. By means of revenge, and the challenging of the divine realm of god, monstrosity is indefinitely created, but “monsters”, in every sense of the word, are also created due to immense amounts of seclusion. Throughout the novel, both the creature and Victor Frankenstein himself manifest seclusion from the rest of society, either deliberately or unintentionally. Already provoked by the yearn for revenge on one another, the creature and Frankenstein are further formed into monsters due to their loneliness, which catalyzes the effects their actions have on them. Though many argue the monster is more “monstrous” in the sense that he is a ravaged murderer throughout the novel, monstrosity inside Victor himself is in face unparalleled due to his decision of solitude being voluntary, whereas the creature could not help himself from being shunned. The creature’s natural instincts to befriend mankind were rejected due to his horrendous looks, but Victor remained secluded from the like of man for two years while creating his monster. Shelley provided an underlying, pertinent message throughout the novel, that monstrosity is not birthed within, but it is in fact acquired by means of segregation and growing madness. Because of the creature and Frankenstein’s isolation from the likes of society, they were steered clear of the outside influences that may have helped them to come to their senses throughout the novel. Again, and as stated previously, due to the creature’s monstrosity having formed due to his birthed appearance, and Victor’s having formed due to his decided isolation from society and choiced creation of the monster, it is shown that monstrosity arises due to man's’ challenge of god’s boundaries. Frankenstein is consumed by his desire for knowledge for the better part of the novel. He spends countless days and hours in textbooks, and isolated from the rest of society in search for greater knowledge of life and its hidden realms. Yearning for knowledge is often a liked characteristic of a person, but in the book Shelley uses Victor’s character to provide evidence that immense amounts of curiosity and abnormal yearning for knowledge simply creates the essence of monstrosity. Victor Frankenstein spends day in and day out acquiring knowledge of creation, challenging god once again, and in turn develops into a monster himself. Everlasting curiosity yielded an even larger monster inside Victor. Natural order established by god was defied, as a living “person” was created by the deceased, which eventually led to Victor’s destruction both mentally and physically. As Shelley progressed her characters in Frankenstein, it is portrayed that monstrosity is not an intrinsic characteristic, but one that is acquired by the desire for hostile revenge, isolation from society’s influences, and all-too dangerous curiosity, in Victor’s case. Shelley, in the novel, shows that monstrosity not only is prominent in the creature by means of murder and a hideous appearance, but in Victor in the form of malicious intentions. Shelley informs the reader, as the novel progresses and eventually comes to an end, that challenging the divine boundaries of god only leads to destruction of one’s self and others, and makes one truly “monstrous”.
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.
In Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, she addresses the challenges that arise in both the creation and life of a dead creature that has been brought back to life in hideous forms. The
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is ‘one of the pioneering works of modern science fiction’, and is also a frightening story that speaks to the ‘mysterious fears of our nature’. Mary Shelley mocks the idea of “playing God”, the idea that came from the Greek myth of Prometheus, of the Greek titan who stole Zeus’ gift of life. Both the story of Frankenstein and Prometheus reveal the dark side of human nature and the dangerous effects of creating artificial life. Frankenstein reveals the shocking reality of the consequences to prejudging someone. The creature’s first-person narration reveals to us his humanity, and his want to be accepted by others even though he is different. We are shown that this ‘monster’ is a ‘creature’ and more of a human than we think.
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.
When we are created into this world it’s not by the choice of our own. However, we are created most times out of love from our creator. Like a baby just newly born into this world needs to feel its mothers touch, scent, and security. The bonding makes you feel a connection to your maker of the world and without it a person may feel lost, abandoned, and unloved. From the beginning we hope to build our self-esteem through the love of our creator. Sadly, most people are not loved or accepted by their creator. This leads to a person lashing out in a number of ways that society views unconventional due to the lack of understanding that person suffers through abandonment alone. In the novel Frankenstein, Mary Shelley illustrates the theme of monstrosity
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.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a nineteenth century literary work that delves into the world of science and the plausible outcomes of morally insensitive technological research. Although the novel brings to the forefront several issues about knowledge and sublime nature, the novel mostly explores the psychological and physical journey of two complex characters. While each character exhibits several interesting traits that range from passive and contemplative to rash and impulsive, their most attractive quality is their monstrosity. Their monstrosities, however, differ in the way each of the character’s act and respond to their environment. Throughout Frankenstein, one assumes that Frankenstein’s creation is the true monster. While the creation’s actions are indeed monstrous, one must also realize that his creator, Victor Frankenstein is also a villain. His inconsiderate and selfish acts as well as his passion for science result in the death of his friend and family members and ultimately in his own demise.
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.
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.
The definition of ‘monstrosity’ and what it means to be ‘monstrous’ can be understood to mean something that is visually unattractive, malformed and/or terrifying. However, monstrosity is not exclusively about something aesthetically ugly, it can also apply to what differs from what is considered ‘normality’. What is ‘normal’ versus what is ‘monstrous’ is closely linked when exploring ideas about the human condition. The representations of monstrosity in Frankenstein and in The Tempest reveal how what is monstrous and what is normal are often found side by side, challenging the idea that it is limited to outcasts who do not ‘fit-in’, and that deep down, a desire to be understood, accepted and included and to live life with meaning are central to the human condition and that monsters in society often reveal our deep seated fears and anxieties about our own existence.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus, explores the monstrous and destructive affects of obsession, guilt, fate, and man’s attempt to control nature. Victor Frankenstein, the novel’s protagonist and antihero, attempts to transcend the barriers of scientific knowledge and application in creating a life. His determination in bringing to life a dead body consequently renders him ill, both mentally and physically. His endeavors alone consume all his time and effort until he becomes fixated on his success. The reason for his success is perhaps to be considered the greatest scientist ever known, but in his obsessive toil, he loses sight of the ethical motivation of science. His production would ultimately grieve him throughout his life, and the consequences of his undertaking would prove disastrous and deadly. Frankenstein illustrates the creation of a monster both literally and figuratively, and sheds light on the dangers of man’s desire to play God.
Mary Shelley and William Shakespeare both portray their characters, Macbeth and Victor Frankenstein, to have human flaws. These weaknesses develop throughout the books. These flaws have a lasting impact on both characters. This leads to the initial downfall for them both.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or; The Modern Prometheus, published in 1818, is a product of its time. Written in a world of social, political, scientific and economic upheaval it highlights human desire to uncover the scientific secrets of our universe, yet also confirms the importance of emotions and individual relationships that define us as human, in contrast to the monstrous. Here we question what is meant by the terms ‘human’ and ‘monstrous’ as defined by the novel. Yet to fully understand how Frankenstein defines these terms we must look to the etymology of them. The novel however, defines the terms through its main characters, through the themes of language, nature versus nurture, forbidden knowledge, and the doppelganger motif. Shelley also shows us, in Frankenstein, that although juxtaposing terms, the monstrous being everything human is not, they are also intertwined, in that you can not have one without the other. There is also an overwhelming desire to know the monstrous, if only temporarily and this calls into question the influence the monstrous has on the human definition.
In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley uses the motif of monstrosity to convey the theme that a person’s outward appearance is not what makes them a monster but rather their actions or inactions that classify true monstrosity. Despite the fact that the monster Victor Frankenstein creates is a literal example of monstrosity in the novel there are many parts that give meaning to monstrosity within character’s actions. Although Victor appears normal, since he is human his ambitions, secrets, selfishness, and inaction makes him a monster himself. Along with monstrous characters the pursuit of knowledge that is seen in Victor, his monster, and Walton in Frankenstein prove that knowledge can be a monstrosity. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is created using the life stories of different characters in the novel. The novel itself could be seen as a monster created similarly to Victor’s monster.
The definition of ‘man’ has always been related to human beings, though some etymologists link it to the root word ‘-men’, which means ‘to think’. In contrast to this, the word monster, derived from the Latin ‘monstrum’, can be taken to mean either ‘object of dread’, ‘awful deed’, or ‘abnormal’. If we are to consider the etymology of these two words when classifying monsters and men, the definition becomes more complicated than the conventional bipolar explanations of men being ‘good’ and monsters being ‘evil’. If a man is considered to be ‘one who thinks’, and a monster is considered abnormal (i.e. unable to think), it can be concluded that monsters are simply those incapable of making a clear judgement regarding good and evil. This difficulty in classifying monsters and men is explored in Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’, Angela Carter’s ‘The Bloody Chamber Collection’, and in Charle’s Schug’s article, ‘The Romantic Form of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’. In addition to looking at the difficulty in defining these groups, this essay also explores the fluid nature of good and evil, how evil can be considered inescapable, the concept of monsters as a social construct, and how both ‘good’ and ‘evil’ can exist in monsters and men alike.