The start of Robert Walton and the monster’s final conversation, this paragraph near the end of Mary Shelly’s novel Frankenstein uncovers the untold perspective of Victor Frankenstein’s creation. Revealing to Robert that Frankenstein’s misery was not the only casualty of the novel, Shelly’s utilization of the monster’s pain illustrates mankind’s hatred and abandonment of the artificial being. Moreover, directing spiteful words towards Victor Frankenstein, Felix De Lacey, and even himself, the monster’s narration reflects the being’s unresolved emotions that have emerged because of society’s cruelty. Although science fiction, the narrative of Frankenstein’s monster exemplifies the literary reproduction of England’s monarchy deserting its own …show more content…
people during Mary Shelley’s lifetime. Ultimately critiquing the social construction of what it means to be a “monster,” Shelly leaves Walton’s character questioning whether the creature remains the only monster in Frankenstein’s letters. Beginning by addressing mankind’s crimes against a misunderstood being, the monster’s monologue emphasizes the novel’s dual meanings of abandonment.
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 …show more content…
mankind. Furthermore, the monster’s painful recollections of Frankenstein and the De Lacey family’s abandonment likewise explores the creature’s unresolved emotions of envy and desperation.
The result of society’s resentment, Shelly’s cynical text unmasks the fact that Frankenstein’s creation was not produced as innately monstrous but instead learned to become a monster over time. Once again utilizing the literary element of irony, the monster’s exclamation “Nay, these are virtuous and immaculate being!”, demonstrates the monster’s resentment towards not only humans but also himself. Realizing biological inferiority to be the cause of his misfortune, the monster’s frustrations underline the novel’s central paradox of the natural versus the artificial. That is, because human beings exist within the natural order of society and therefore control the law, characters such as Victor, Felix, and even Walton’s carelessness remain protected. Meanwhile, Frankenstein’s creation, an artificial production, exists as mankind’s ostracized enemy regardless of the being’s emotional or intellectual superiority. Beyond envy, the monster’s monologue additionally reflects a sense of desperation. Utilizing the repetition of the word “injustice,” Shelly’s literary choice solidifies the perpetual denial of societies crimes against Frankenstein’s monster. Concluding his speech with the word “injustice”, Frankenstein’s monster testimony signifies the unavoidable truth the being’s presence never caused
mankind’s misery. Instead, Shelly’s passage through the monster’s eyes scrutinizes a world far eviler even before Frankenstein’s creation. Still, just as the monster’s overall emotions in Shelly’s passage remain abstract, so too does the definition of a “monster”. Transcending fictional limitations, Marry Shelly’s novel Frankenstein exposes the monarchial monsters of 19th Century England. Paralleling Frankenstein’s abandoned creature to that of the English masses, the creature’s unheard perspective exemplifies how a “monsters” definition remains outside the biological binary. Neither natural nor artificial, Shelly’s monsters have the capacity to take any form, behavior, or even a political entity. In retrospect, the monologue of Frankenstein’s creation serves to prove the government’s historical abortion of England’s starving and freezing people. Moreover, Shelly’s passage once more explains the destructive causalities, “monsters”, which arise because of the mistakes of those with power. Overall, while monsters such as Frankenstein’s being or the masses exist, there also remains the possibility that the creators themselves are the true monsters.
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.
A predominant theme in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is that of child-rearing and/or parenting techniques. Specifically, the novel presents a theory concerning the negative impact on children from the absence of nurturing and motherly love. To demonstrate this theory, Shelly focuses on Victor Frankenstein’s experimenting with nature, which results in the life of his creature, or “child”. Because Frankenstein is displeased with the appearance of his offspring, he abandons him and disclaims all of his “parental” responsibility. Frankenstein’s poor “mothering” and abandonment of his “child” leads to the creation’s inevitable evilness. Victor was not predestined to failure, nor was his creation innately depraved. Rather, it was Victor’s poor “parenting” of his progeny that lead to his creation’s thirst for vindication of his unjust life, in turn leading to the ruin of Victor’s life.
“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 uses irony in the development of Frankenstein and the creature in order to create more dynamic and complex characters who are foils of one another.
People are always found to be in some category of conflict that prevents them from achieving their goals. During the course of the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, Victor Frankenstein is often found in this situation. Victor is found to have many similar goals to Robert Walton in the novel throughout their letters to each other through loneliness, being consumed by their goals, and their failure to achieve their goals. This relationship is portrayed through the letters they exchange among one another. Their letters to one another, in a way, control their actions due to their commonness with each other. Victor’s actions are taken due to his vision of a failure of a creation of a monster through his doubts and morality of his actions and the choices he makes. The monster’s development as a being in society is not very respectable because of its treatment from Victor and its isolation from everyone else in the settlement. Victor, not realizing the actions he takes and the treatment of his creation, leads to ultimately his downfall because of his failure to achieve his utmost important goal as a man of knowledge.
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.
Although “Frankenstein” is the story of Victor and his monster, Walton is the most reliable narrator throughout the novel. However, like most narrator’s, even his retelling of Victor’s story is skewed by prejudice and favoritism of the scientist’s point of view. Yet this could be attributed to the only view points he ever gets to truly hear are from Victor himself and not the monster that he only gets to meet after he comes to mourn his fallen master.
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, the moral identity of the Creature is ambiguous to the reader because of the contrast between how Victor portrays him and he views himself. The Creature’s voice is absent in the first volume, leaving his moral character to be described by Victor as evil and monstrous (Shelley, 83-84). In the second Volume, the Creature becomes the narrator of the text and portrays himself as a curious and friendly being (Shelley, 119). It is the presence of the Creature’s voice that allows him to be seen as a new born full of benevolence who is longing for companionship (Shelley, 157). The Creature’s transition from benevolent to heinous occurs through a series of failed attempts at assimilating into human society. The characters
Often, things are not always what they seem. In Mary Shelley’s morally questionable novel, Frankenstein, Shelley employs ambiguity in its characters thoughts and actions, allowing the reader to overlook many socially and ethically problematic situations that might otherwise provoke concern. Victor Frankenstein’s creation is morally ambiguous, as seen through conflicting sides of the monster’s character: one of innocent sincerity and one of confused violence. Together, these conflicting sides portray Victor’s creation as morally ambiguous.
Frankenstein and the monster are complex beings with a multitude of flaws that drive their motivations and actions, but ultimately, the monster is the more deserving candidate for sympathy due to a variety of inconsiderate and inequitable behavior aimed at him throughout the book; the monster’s journey and his concluding fate stands as an example of the harmful effects of crossing ethical boundaries in the long-term pursuit of scientific advancement. The monster stands as an hapless victim of Victor’s selfish endeavors and decisions to fulfil his own objectives.
The novel Frankenstein, written by Mary Shelley, details the dynamics within a relationship between man and monster. Yet both Victor Frankenstein and his Creation display aspects of each divisive role interchangeably, with neither the “man” nor the “monster” being decidedly more so one than the other. While such moral ambiguity within the two characters does not make for an exultant tale, it does create an effective mode for commentary regarding the imperfections of mankind as a whole. With said mode, Shelley—through the actions of both man and the Monster—depicts the superficiality in which society is often founded upon, and the dangers that are prevalent when powerful knowledge falls into the hands of those ill-fitted to possess it. However
In other words, Frankenstein scrutinizes human nature and Shelley insinuates that it is our actions that define us and make us virtuous or malicious. Frankenstein’s arrogance and gluttony for praise guides him to cast off his virtuousness. Ultimately, he is not the creature’s horrible nature that Frankenstein loathed, but his own letdown to create a good-looking, flawless human being. Victor detested his failure to become God. However, Victor never acknowledges his recklessness, notwithstanding the death of his loved ones. The creature is compelled to cast off his uprightness because of the detestation he felt when humans hurt him. In the end, he becomes just as corrupt as the humans who wounded him. The creature, unlike Frankenstein, acknowledges his error. Unlike Victor Frankenstein society as a whole should act and be prepared for the consequences of our curiosity. The acceptance of these contentions introduced in the content play a significant role in the public eye today have brought about the novel to standout amongst the most concentrated of writings in
In Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, Victor Frankenstein creates a creature that murders Victor’s younger brother, William, then frames Justine Moritz for the crime. Justine and Victor in addition to the creature believe that they are responsible for the death. Credible literary critics have written critical reviews of the case surrounding the murder from social, spiritual, feminist, and political perspectives. The perspectives characterize Victor, Justine, and the creature in terms of the theme of responsibility along with their impacts on the internal and external conflicts in the novel. The theme of responsibility shows that Victor is the character who is culpable for William’s murder and Justine’s execution because he unjustly uses his power.
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).