More handpicked essays just for you.
Analysis Shelley's Frankenstein
3 binary oppositions within mary shelley's frankenstein
Frankenstein mary shelley analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Over time, the name “Frankenstein” has become a reference to the green-skinned, lumbering monster in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, rather than his creator Victor Frankenstein. However, this is not necessarily a careless mistake. Infact, if one were to define monstrosity as the voluntary separation of oneself from humanity through unnaturally evil behaviors, then the true monster of Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, would be Victor Frankenstein. Victor best fits this definition because, not only does he engage in malevolent behavior such as attempting to control nature, but the comparisons between him and his creation emphasize that he allowed his obsessions to strip him of his humanity. Also, Frankenstein and his creation had distinctly …show more content…
opposite paths into “monstrosity,” and these differing paths prove that Frankenstein was the real monster. The juxtaposition of Victor and the creature emphasizes that Victor’s separation from humanity was voluntarily acquired. Firstly, the monster acts like a “nineteenth-century gentleman”with a heart of gold, which portrays him as a “kindly neighbor...rather than a repulsive monster” (Evans, “Elements of the Grotesque in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”). The monster’s characterization as good-natured emphasizes that he is clearly undeserving of being a “poor, helpless, and miserable wretch” who can feel nothing but “pain [invading him] on all sides” (Shelley 84). Clearly, the only flaw which caused the monster’s separation from humanity was his physical appearance. In fact, he focused his efforts towards becoming assimilated with the humankind. Victor, however, does not receive nearly as much sympathy from the reader regarding his loneliness. Unlike the monster, Victor was born into a loving family and did not have to experience the pangs of hunger or thirst. However, he obsessed over his personal desires to the point where his “eyes were insensible to the charms of nature” and he “[forgot] those friends who were so many miles absent” (Shelley 39). Ultimately, the creature’s innocence cannot be blamed for causing his separation: Victor’s selfishness, on the other hand, can. Over the course of the novel, Shelley beings to lessen the contrast between the two characters, which proves that, unlike the creature, Frankenstein has naturally monstrous tendencies.
For example, after murdering William Frankenstein, the creature’s response is not that of “disgust or regret but fascination and even obsession” (Evans, “Elements of the Grotesque in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein”). The obsession which causes the monster to “gaze on [his] victim” with delight is the same obsession which had once caused Victor’s eyeballs to “[stare] from their sockets” at the evil work he was doing (Shelley 39, 123). However, although Victor and the creature are similarly obsessive, their obsession did not arise from the same source. It is easy to understand why the creature would become obsessed with inflicting pain on humankind: as humankind inflicted pain on him. However Victor never experienced the level of trauma that his creation did, so his obsession for intruding on universal knowledge could not have been fueled by an urge for revenge or a feeling of hopelessness. By process of elimination, the only possible source of Frankenstein’s monstrous tendencies is the monstrosity within …show more content…
himself. The fact that Victor Frankenstein meets and exceed the standards of a “mad scientist” solidifies his reputation as the true monster of Mary Shelley’s novel.
According to Mary Ellen Snodgrass, a mad scientist is someone with “evil curiosity, inhumanity, and dabblings in fearful concoctions” who “[intrudes] on universal knowledge” (“Mad Scientists in Gothic Literature”). Frankenstein definitely fits this criterion, since he “tortured the living animal” and “pursued nature to her hiding-places” (Shelley 39). However, M.G.H. Bishop claims that Frankenstein is so evil, he does not even deserve to be associated with the word “scientist.” According to Bishop, the medical profession is driven by a “love of whole humanity” This makes it “a world away” from Frankenstein, who “placed a human mind within a grotesque and ghastly cage” without even a “spurious” excuse (Bishop, "Victor Frankenstein Is Shelley's True Immortal Monster"). M.G.H. Bishop makes a valid argument because Frankenstein was clearly not motivated by a “love of whole humanity.” He was arguably bestowed with the perfect family; yet he voluntarily excluded them from his life. Ultimately, if Frankenstein did not have the will to love the best of humanity, there is no hope that he would have had honorable intentions such as the desire to help others. Frankenstein clearly fell victim to the “primary sin of the mad doctor,” which according to Mary Ellen Snodgrass is the “horror of hubris,” and this is what causes him to be
the true monster of Frankenstein (“Mad Scientists in Gothic Literature”). Some argue that the real monster in Frankenstein is the creature. After all, why would Frankenstein so readily refer to him as a “vile insect,” “demon,” and “abhorred monster”? (Shelley 81). Muriel Spark clearly defends this viewpoint, as she states that a monster is an “alternative Frankenstein” with similar “Promethean features” (Spark “The Shifting Roles of Frankenstein and His Monster”). As the title of the novel suggests, Frankenstein was indeed the “Modern Prometheus” since, similarly to Prometheus, Frankenstein exploited nature’s powers, committed evil deeds, and ultimately had to suffer as a consequence. The monster, however, had a polar opposite path to that of Frankenstein. He was born chained to a rock with vultures pecking at his liver, the situation that was to become Frankenstein’s fate. To escape his suffering, he indulged in the same evil which Frankenstein had committed towards the beginning of his lifespan. The fact that the creature traveled on a completely opposite path as his creator invalidates Spark’s claim that he was an “alternative Frankenstein.” Instead, it proves that he could not be held equally accountable as Victor, since the creature was born in a position which led him to commit evil deeds out of desperation. Ironically, Victor’s grotesque creation is not as monstrous as Victor himself. This is because, unlike his creation, Victor voluntarily engages in unethical behavior which catalyzes his separation from humanity. It is clear that Mary Shelley intentionally wanted Frankenstein to be portrayed as the true monster of the novel, since she characterized the creature as innocent in order to emphasize Victor’s unnaturally evil behavior. Her overall purpose in this was to warn her readers that their appearance as human did not render them incapable of monstrosity. This should not come as a surprise since Frankenstein was written in the historical context of the Romantic period, and Mary Shelley’s Romantic ideals most likely inspired her to caution those who meddled in the depths of knowledge.
Previously portrayed through Frankenstein’s letters as the sole cause of both his and society’s despair, the monster’s use of the word “abortion” instead demonstrates Victor’s individual contribution towards his creature’s destructive path. Since the definition of abortion serves as the premediated act of terminating life, Frankenstein’s deliberate decision to desert his artificial creature exhibits society’s lack of sympathy for those with uncontrollable differences such as the monster’s physical deformities. Nevertheless, the textual irony of the monster’s frustrations eventually becomes apparent when the creature exclaims “Was there no injustice to this?”. Setting off a chain reaction of several more questions, Shelly’s text further mirrors the monster’s bafflement with the careless actions of Victor Frankenstein. That is, although Frankenstein gave his creation the “gift” of life, the monster has been perpetually denied every chance to live happily because of mankind’s relentless and inescapable hatred. More so, explained as the abandonment or failure of a process, Frankenstein’s ultimate refusal to love his own creation typifies how the creator’s ironic choices remain accountable for failing both the monster and
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.
As Frankenstein is enroute to his pursuit of gaining more knowledge, he states, “I wished, as it were, to procrastinate all that related to my feelings of affection until the great object, which swallowed up every habit of my nature, should be completed” (Shelley 41). Frankenstein’s decision in allowing his intellectual ambitions to overpower everything else in his life leads him to be blinded to the dangers of creating life. He isolates himself from his society when creating the monster, letting himself be immersed in his creation while being driven by his passions, allowing nobody to be near him. The fact that he allows this creation of a monster to consume his total being reveals how blinded he is to the immorality of stepping outside the boundaries of science and defying nature. His goal in striving to achieve what wants to in placing man over nature makes him lose his sense of self as all he is focused on is the final product of his creation. He starts to realize his own faults as after he has created the monster, he becomes very ill and states, “The form of the monster on whom I had bestowed existence was forever before my eyes, and I raved incessantly concerning him” (48). His impulsive decision to make the monster leads him to abhorring it as it does not turn out to be what he has expected. Because he chooses to isolate himself in creating the
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.
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.
In today’s world of genetically engineered hearts and genetically altered glowing rats, the story of Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, seems as if it could be seen in the newspapers in our near future. The discoveries seen in modern science, as well as in the novel, often have controversy and negative consequences that follow them, the biggest of which being the responsibility the creator of life has to what has been created. Victor Frankenstein suffers from a variety of internal and external conflicts stemming from the creation of his monster, which in return also experiences similar problems. Shelley uses these tumultuous issues to portray the discrepancies between right and wrong, particularly through romanticism and the knowledge of science.
“Frankenstein” by Mary Shelly explores the concept of the body, life, ‘the self’ and most of importantly humanity, which is repeatedly questioned throughout the novel. The definition of humanity is the quality of being humane or in other words someone that can feel or possess compassion. Despite all the facts against the “monster” in “Frankenstein” he is indeed what one would consider being human. Humanity isn’t just about ones physical appearance but also includes intellect and emotion. Some people argue that the “monster” is not a human for he was not a creature that was born from “God” or from a human body. That being said, the “monster” is not only able to speak different languages, he can also show empathy - one of many distinct traits that set humans apart from the animals. Both the “monster” and his creator, Victor, hold anger and feel a sense of suffering throughout the novel. Victor is a good person with good intentions just like most individuals, but makes the mistake of getting swept up into his passion of science and without thinking of the consequences he creates a “monster”. After completing his science project, he attempts to move forward with his life, however his past – i.e., the “monster” continues to follow and someone haunt him. While one shouldn’t fault or place blame on Frankenstein for his mistakes, you also can’t help but feel somewhat sympathetic for the creature. Frankenstein just wants to feel accepted and loved, he can’t help the way he treats people for he’s only mimicking how people have treated him, which in most cases solely based on his appearance. Unlike most of the monsters we are exposed to in films past and present, the character of the “monster” ...
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.
Dr. Frankenstein, the so labeled decent, no-fault man, is actually irresponsible, stubborn, and extreme in his actions throughout the novel. From the very first encounter with Victor Frankenstein we get a hint if his insaneness when he asks R. Walton, "Do you share my madness?". That is the first thing that he says when he recovers from his illness. Right from the start we know that something is awry with Victor. Dr. Frankenstein's irresponsibility shows through many times in his feelings toward his creation. While he was in the process of shaping his creation, Frankenstein gets so caught up in his work and his yearning to be remembered for all time that he does not consider what will happen after life is breathed into his creation. He is so consumed by his work he does not sleep for days on end, go outside, eat meals, or write to his family. Frankenstein even admits that he could not control his obsession with his work, "For this I had deprived myself of rest and health". What sane person puts his work before his own health? After his cre...
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.
Victor Frankenstein is originally a happy character that loves to learn and read a large variety of books. He was a fiery individual who sought to understand all knowledge; regardless of how practical the information was. Evidence of this is when his father tells him not to worry about fictional writers like Cornelius Agrippa. Yet, Frankenstein states, “But here were books, and here were men who had penetrated deeper and knew more. I took their word for all that they averred, and I became their disciple” (21). Frankenstein embodies the movement in science to understand everything, and that is not necessarily a good thing (Storment 2). Frankenstein only understands that this train of thought is bad when he reaches the pinnacle of knowledge and produces the creature. The fruits of Frankenstein’s labor end up costing him the lives of his friends and family, as well as his own sanity. The feeling of guilt thrives in Frankenstein because he knows his work was the direct cause of the chaos in his life. In Frankenstein’s case, his goal of total enlightenment led to his pitiful demise. Frankenstein’s creature was not originally a monster. He is born with good intentions and is a gentle- although atrocious looking- being until he learns of the sins of the human race. The ultimate factor in the creature’s progression from harmless to
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.
Mary Shelley’s gothic novel Frankenstein is a novel narrated by Robert Walton about Victor Frankenstein and the Monster that he creates. Frankenstein grew up surrounding himself with what he loved most, science. He attended Ingolstadt University where he studied chemistry and natural philosophy, but being involved in academics was not enough for him. Frankenstein wanted to discover things, but did not think about the potential outcomes that could come with this decision. Frankenstein was astonished by the human frame and all living creatures, so he built the Monster out of various human and animal parts (Shelley, 52). At the time Frankenstein thought this creation was a great discovery, but as time went on the Monster turned out to be terrifying to anyone he came in contact with. So, taking his anger out on Frankenstein, the Monster causes chaos in a lot of people’s lives and the continuing battle goes on between the Monster and Frankenstein. Throughout this novel, it is hard to perceive who is pursuing whom as well as who ends up worse off until the book comes to a close.
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.