Understanding Morality and Sympathy in ‘Frankenstein’ Mary Shelley

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Click Here To Order Now!

Understanding Morality and Sympathy in ‘Frankenstein’ Mary Shelley

Ethical Relativism and “Frankenstein”

Ethical or moral relativism is a theory that is used to describe the way of thinking that morality is relative to the norms of one’s culture, meaning that action is wrong or right depending on the moral norms of the society it is being practiced (Santa Clara University). Though this is a common belief, many disagree and say there should be no overlapping between right and wrong.

In Chapter 16 of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the monster murders his creator’s youngest brother as a result of prolonged rage, and many readers are conflicted with this situation, as some people sympathize with him and justify his actions. This tells us a lot about humanity’s moral intuitions. It is common that we tend to sympathize with others and mold our decisions in a way to satisfy both our feelings and morals, often placing our emotions above others. How does Frankenstein help us understand our perception of wrong and right? In this research paper, I will explore this topic adequately. To do this, I will navigate through Mary Shelley’s thought process in Frankenstein, as well as draw knowledge from other books and articles.

Intuitive Judgments and Their Implications

Intuitions are instinctive. We have our intuitions on everything almost immediately; say we hear a woman fatally injured a man and instinctively condemn her as a bad person in our head. If later we hear it was done in self-defense, we eventually deliberate on the case and ‘understand’ her situation better. So, intuitions are just quick judgments, in essence. Drawing from that, many people who have never read Frankenstein still know of this creature since it is one of the most famous monsters in literal history. However, many adaptations have contributed to the misinterpretation of the monster as a frightening being.

The Complexity of Frankenstein’s Monster

In the original novel, the monster is much more complex than you may think at first glance. I am not going to justify his actions but explain why I think it is understandable to sympathize with him. He is responsible for many violent actions throughout the novel, even going outside the chapters we discussed in class. At the same time, he goes through a lot of rejection and struggles with loneliness. He wants to be accepted but is alienated by basically everyone he meets. This explains his violent actions and makes him a sympathetic character in the novel.

Humanity Beyond Physical Appearance

When the monster is first introduced in the novel, he is described as something hard to look at, saying he had “flowing black hair and white teeth juxtaposed with his shriveled face and straight black lips” (Chapter 5, Shelley 1818). Victor was not the only one terrified of the monster on sight. When the monster encounters Felix, he beats him with a stick, Safie runs away, and Agatha faints. As you can tell, he did not have a good beginning with any other character in the novel. The characters, though, are not wrong for being scared of the monster; his size and grotesque nature are enough to throw anyone off. At the same time, when the monster narrates the story from perspective, the readers see a whole new side.

From the beginning of his life, he had no one to help him and was alone in the forest. While in the forest alone, the monster appreciates the beauty of nature and lives a rather humble life living off the fruits around him. In addition, he observed the De Lacey family and tried to learn from them and mirror their kind nature. When he realizes he was contributing to their poverty by shortening their ration of food unknowingly, he says, “I abstained [from taking their food] and satisfied myself with berries, nuts, and roots” and assisted their labor by “bringing brought home firing sufficient for the consumption of several days”. In addition to his natural kindness, he also is intellectually capable of learning their language and reading books.

Although the monster has a human side and is seemingly good, people cannot look at him past his physical nature. He is rejected by everyone he meets. The monster craves the love of other human beings as well as his creator, who betrays him by failing to create a female companion for him. All his negative emotions drive him to kill those closest to his creator just so Frankenstein can feel how he is feeling. The monster wanted Frankenstein to know what it’s like to be all alone in the world. Again, these killings cannot be defended, but his perspective allows us to know what led him to it.

References:

Santa Clara University. “Ethical Relativism.” Philosophy and Ethics.
Shelley, Mary. “Frankenstein.” 1818. Project Gutenberg.
Bicknell, Jeanette. “Moral Intuitions and Philosophical Ethics.” Oxford Scholarship Online.
Fischer, John Martin. “Frankenstein: 10 possible meanings.” The British Library.
Gubar, Susan. “The Monster’s Human Nature.” The New York Times.
Johnson, Ross. “The Misunderstood Monster | Alan Cumming & Ross Johnson | TEDxNatick.” TEDx Talks.