Frankenstein Duality Essay

In Frankenstein the monster remarks, “There is love in me the likes of which you've never seen. There is rage in me the likes of which should never escape. If I am not satisfied in the one, I will indulge the other” (154). The duality presented by the monster showcases the complexity of its nature, and the human nature inside of him. Although established over one hundred years after her death, Shelley develops Frankenstein’s monster, though not inherently human, parallel to Maslow’s hierarchy of needs. This suggests that monster developed psychologically similar to how modern research suggests humans develop, with human nature supplying his needs and Victor’s rejection nurturing his violence. Shelley also portrays the monster as a conscious

being with possible remnants of its past life, and the true good within him.
In Frankenstein Shelley develops the monster as a character with needs and desires very similar to that of humans. Maslow developed his five-stage hierarchy of needs (in order from bottom to top: physiological, safety, love/belonging, esteem, and self-actualization) (qtd. in Myers 369). This clashes with Shelley, who in the preface of the novel states she wrote the story that would become Frankenstein during a ghost story writing competition while on holiday with her husband and friends in the summer of 1816 (4). The question then arises of whether Shelley predicted Maslow’s hierarchy or if The answer lies somewhere in the middle. While the publishing of Maslow’s theory was truly revolutionary, he merely collected information that had existed throughout all human history. That means that Shelley would not have been entirely out of place in creating the evolution of Frankenstein’s monster. For example, the monster explains that immediately after his creation, he sought out food and water in order to fulfill his physiological needs of hunger and thirst (111). This represents the first time his human nature kicked in and he focused first on his physical needs before focusing on his safety, and displaying the first need (physiological) on Maslow’s hierarchy. The monster then explains that after fulfilling his physical needs, he moved into the cottage to avoid the wrath of the weather and to ensure his own safety (113). He realized that he could not survive much longer in the harsh elements and sought safety, the second step in Maslow’s hierarchy. Around this time, the monster also begins to feel the need to belong as he observes the De Lacey family from his cabin, and he longs for their acceptance and to belong to their family (115-121). This shows Maslow’s third need, belonging, appearing, as he so desires their acceptance that he stops stealing their food and chops wood, leaving it at their doorstep, in order to help them survive. Upon his rejection, the monster explains that he sought revenge against Victor as a way to gain respect (153). Like most humans, he wishes to be taken seriously, as a true human being, not the freak that Victor made him. He kills William not out of anger, but out of a need for respect, showcasing his Maslowian need for respect. As the monster finishes telling his story to Victor, he asks Victor for a mate, in order to achieve his highest potential (158). His recognition of his need to fulfill his potential represents Maslow’s fifth step in his hierarchy, self-actualization. Having read the works of writers such as Dante and Milton, the monster realizes that he could not reach his full potential as a being without someone to accompany him. The monster has possesses the same needs and desires as humans, and developed very similar to them.
When considering the monster as a person, the monster can best be viewed as a blank slate in which the world acts upon. According to Dr. David Myers, psychology professor at Hope College, the foremost question in developmental psychology is how much does human nature versus human experience (nurture) in the development of a child (454). In the context of Frankenstein, these questions become whether the monster was inherently evil or if Victor nurtured its violence with his rejection. The answer therein lies in the monsters upbringing. According to Ronald Britton, former president of the British Psychoanalytical Society states, “the monster’s abandonment by Victor is similar to that of a mother rejecting her baby” (1). The monster’s lack of a true parent harbors his violent upbringing, as he has no one to explain right from wrong to him. Instead, takes extreme actions upon rejection such as burning the De Lacey cottage and killing almost everyone Victor loves. Had he had someone to nurture him properly and teach him morals, maybe the monster would not have gone down this path. As according to Harry Harlow, the most important predictor of future success is contact comfort as as infant, as he experimented through monkeys and the replacement of their mothers with blankets (qtd. Myers 463). Without anyone to hold him, the monster instead became attached to the De Lacey family, who in turn did not love him (115-121). This one-sided obsession led him to violence. Their rejection drove him to burn down their cottage and turn his sights towards his creator, Victor. He resented his creator for bringing him into the world and subsequently abandoning him. The monster tells Victor he resents him for making his own creation so ugly that it could not be assimilated into the world (108). He only wishes for Victor to create someone or him to love (158). He does not wish to take over the world with his companion, only to love her. But alas, Victor again rejects his creation’s wishes, thus inciting its violent tendencies. The monster again strikes back by killing Elizabeth, not because he simply had a blood lust caused by his nature, but because he had been driven to because of his creator’s rejection (201). Like a child abandoned by his parents, the monster cannot be held entirely responsible for his actions. While condemnable, his actions partially lie upon Victor as well, because Victor never took the time to teach his creation right from wrong. The monster’s violent tendencies cannot be pinned solely on him and also must reflect upon Victor.
Frankenstein’s monster is, quite literally, greater than the sum of its parts.

Victor assembles his creation from the remains of deceased humans, with the end result being an eight-foot tall, yellow-skinned monstrosity (58). The monster, however, had gained consciousness and become alive. Encyclopaedia Britannica roughly defines consciousness as the “mental stuff” that makes up the person (“Consciousness”). The combination of both human body parts and human mind would make the monster seemingly human, yet he is different. German psychologist Kurt Koffka pioneered the Gestalt school of psychological thought, in which he preached “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts” (qtd. Myers 245). The monster is more than just the bones, organs, and brain Victor assembled. He resides as being capable thought and emotion, similar to humans. Therein also lies some evidence of the monster’s past life had come into play. The monster adapts to the world much quicker than any human child could in the same timespan, even explaining to Victor how he had learned read the works of Dante and Milton (110). This reading would be far too advanced for any child in the same developmental age as the monster, leaving evidence for his past life. Myers describes this phenomenon in humans as priming, the ability of people to respond more easily to stimuli they have seen before, whether they remember or not (454). The monster, on a subconscious level, had read before, and therefore could learn more quickly. This is not to say the monster had a completely full subconscious beforehand. While Shelley does not go into detail about how Victor obtained the body parts necessary to erect his creation, it can be assumed that Victor obtained the body parts from the dead around the university (54). This meant that the people in that area would be more likely educated than other places in the country. This indicates that Victor more likely “gathered” the brain of an educated person.

With the brain of an educated person, the monster’s accelerated learning ability became more likely. Now, the monster’s ability to learn to read and speak without any formal training the question arises: why didn’t he respond to any other known stimuli like the cold or fire? Well, people spend more time reading and speaking than they do thinking about the heat of fire or the wintery cold. The heavier presence of reading and speaking in a person’s mind subverts these other more, “common” pieces of knowledge to a lower subconscious track, to be retrieved when triggered. This allowed the monster to quickly adapt to his environment and learn how to interact with the world. Further evidence for the remnants of human consciousness in the monster resides in his ability to express remorse for his actions. Claudia Rozas Gomez, professor of Sociology at Auckland University, states “Unlike Victor, the monster’s pursuit of knowledge allowed him to develop, empathy” (367). Whereas Victor pursued knowledge for his own gain, the Monster used it to try and connect with others. And since Victor did not teach his creation empathy, it developed the feelings itself, within its own natural pursuit. This shows when the monster expresses remorse for his actions over Victor’s dead body aboard Walton’s ship (240). Whereas Victor sought revenge on the monster until the day he died, the monster sought to make things right with his creator in the end (230-240). The monster never truly wanted to be apart from Victor the way that Victor wanted to be away from him The monster’s empathy foils Victor’s lack of it, and as a result, the true goodness of the monster’s nature comes to light.
Throughout Frankenstein, Shelley physically details the monster’s hideous look, yet the monster has more in common with the people that fear him than they realize. He possesses the same needs and desires, yet his rejection by Victor caused him to go on a downward spiral of violence from which his reputation could not recover. The monster did, however, possess innate human nature that Victor, his creator did not. The supposed monster had more good in his heart than the human who abandoned him did, he was not able to make use of it due to his maker’s rejection.