Although the Monster can be considered a bad character due to murdering people, the creature has good traits as well. The Monster is described as ugly and strong but at the same time, inexperienced. Firstly, Frankenstein’s creature is described as “its gigantic structure and the deformity of its aspect … instantly informed me that it was the wretch” (Shelley). Despite his ugly and terrifying appearance, the subject did not have the intention to kill people. The creature can be compared to a baby who tries to examine the world it lives in, and its actions are just contractions to the cruelty of the world. Frankenstein’s monster is not a real monster; it just seeks love and attention that the world cannot give him. The creature’s emotionalism is a positive feature as it allows it to understand people’s feelings and share them.
The “Gothic” elements of the novel include supernatural motives, the architecture from the Middle Ages, and the spiritual aspects of human nature. Other “Gothic” elements consist of the strive for knowledge, the Monster, and the probable moral fall of men. I like that genre because I like looking at diverse issues from various perspectives. This novel allows me to look at the actions of Victor Frankenstein and the Monster and understand their motives and feelings. I also appreciate novels that aim to show moral aspects of society with the utilization of different symbols, such as the Monster.
Mary Shelley’s husband believed that inappropriate social relationships are the result of people becoming evil. To make people bad, other representatives of society should reject them and make them feel useless or bad. I agree with this opinion, as people’s intentions are generally based on their experience of social interactions. If society treats people as if they were misconducts, there is no reason to try to be good or fit in.
I believe that one of the integral themes of the novel is loneliness. The Monster aimed to integrate into society; however, people met him with disgust, fear, hatred, and all the spectrum of negative emotions. Hence, the creature turned to evil because of the feeling of loneliness. Nowadays, society often tries to isolate individuals who do not view the world the same as most people do. This feature often leads to the feeling of being lost and lonely.
Work Cited
Shelley, Mary. “Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley: Frankenstein of the Modern Prometheus.” The Literature Page. Web.
The novel Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus, written by Mary Shelley, touches upon the topic of the power of scientific thought, challenging nature. The novel includes many symbolic elements throughout the narration, helping to understand the implicit ideas of the author. One of such symbols is a fire which is addressed in particular plot events and through the title of the novel. The fire symbolizes the ambivalent nature of the creation: one the one hand, it grants rebirth and creates life, one the other mercilessly punishes people.
The fire in the novel is the ultimate power regulating the creation process. The monster which Victor creates is revived thanks to the spark (Shelley, 1818). However, Victor realizes that this creature is a dangerous monster. This mistake causes the burning of the cottage of Felix and Agatha (Shelley, 1818). Thus, the anger of the creature, unable to understand the aim of his existence, is represented through the destructive force of fire. This symbol’s duality can also be considered from the perspective of the monster. The creature hates fire due to its duplicitous nature. Seeking a source of warmth, the monster stumbles upon the fire. Without realizing the danger, he touches the fire and burns his hand (Shelley, 1818). This moment characterizes the nature of human relationships and life in general. Philosophically treating, everything that seems attractive one day can hurt people. This is the logic of creation and human life with which the monster cannot accept.
Therefore, the fire symbol is used by the author of the novel to show that life and creation always include warmth and pain. These two aspects make life valuable due to experiencing happiness and despair. The warmth of the fire can help people to live happily. However, they are hurt when they cross over the line trying to understand something they are not supposed to. In this meaning, the fire philosophically parallels the creation process.
Reference
Shelley, M. (1818). Frankenstein; or, the modern Prometheus. Lackington, Hughes, Harding, Mavor & Jones.
Galvanism is the scientific method of bringing dead life forms back to life through exposure to controlled electrical sparks. Throughout Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, she depicts the theme of getting life back from the dead. Most researchers concur that electricity has become the wellspring of life in the contemporary world. Galvanism, a hypothesis proposed by Luigi Galvani, is the concept of recreating life by exposing a recently dead life form to electric sparks. Victor Frankenstein’s fixation with resurrecting a human corpse reveals Mary Shelley’s beliefs in science. Galvanism is the sole inspiration for Frankenstein’s novel by Shelly and a vital discovery for the human species.
Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein is based on galvanism. According to Shelley, galvanism has a significant overall impact on her storyline. The concept is exemplified by her central protagonist, Victor Frankenstein, whose inquisitive curiosity leads him to become fixated on returning a deceased person into existence. His curiosity and research passion drive him to abandon his personal life and family. Frankkesiten begins when a lightning bolt strikes an oak tree, leaving it as “thin ribands of wood” (Shelley 26). The natural disaster piques Frankenstein’s interest even further to discern the reason behind the phenomena. He instantly starts working on his goal of resurrecting a cadaver. He “infuses a spark of existence into a dead creature lying at his feet,” bringing it to existence (Shelley 43). Frankenstein applies a similar approach as Luigi Galvani, who restored mobility to the frog legs. However, since the Frankenstein-created person “lacks consciousness and is driven by electricity,” it lacks people’s skills and abilities. The creation experiences a tough time expressing and comprehending what others around him are feeling or saying. Most people, therefore, shun the creature because of his hideous physique, so he never has the opportunity to sit, listen, and learn about the human species.
Because galvanism is a critical scientific discovery, it is still commonly utilized today. Electrophysiological is a clinical study of the electrical characteristics of living tissues and organs that records the electrical charge that travels on a broad range of scales from a solitary ion channel to complete tissues (Ball & Featherstone, 2019). Electrophysiology is essential in studying electrical impulses in the heart and other critical organs. Galvanism research delves into neurons’ electrical impulses and potential cell and tissue activity. Galvanism aid in deep brain experiments and other treatments that help patients with motor or cognitive issues. However, the most noteworthy applications of galvanism-derived innovation are defibrillators. Defibrillators are often used to resuscitate the heart of a freshly deceased human. Resuscitating a deceased person is accomplished by delivering high-voltage electrical pulses to their chest (Ball & Featherstone, 2019). If the process is successful, the individual has a possibility of regaining consciousness and living ordinarily. Galvanism is currently included in biological and social research involving human beings. It has laid the groundwork for various scientific and clinical advances today.
Galvanism is the technique of resurrecting a corpse and advancing Luigi Galvani’s research on using electricity to advance and extend life. After Luigi Galvani brought this concept to the scientific world, electricity became recognized as the symbol of life. In her book Frankenstein, Mary Shelley effectively demonstrates the notion of galvanism through his fictional character Frankenstein. Victor Frankenstein’s fascination with resurrecting a human corpse reflects some of the possibilities that electricity can apply to the betterment of human life.
References
Ball, C. M., & Featherstone, P. J. (2019). Medical galvanism – a prelude to defibrillation. Web.
Shelley, M. (1994). Frankenstein. Courier Corporation.
Frankenstein is a gothic science-fiction novel written by an English author Mary Shelley in 1818. The story follows a young scientist Victor Frankenstein obsessed with discovering the secret of life. Ultimately producing a sapient creature, the scientist was horrified by the result and resented his creation. The novel’s main conflict revolves around negligence of responsibility in the name of ambition and the consequences of such actions.
The main plot starts as a story Victor tells a captain who happened to save his life. Victor strived for knowledge and studied hard in university, ignoring his family and friends. He manages to uncover the secret of creating life by utilizing his skills in chemistry. There, he combines old body parts, creating an organism that terrifies Victor as soon as it comes to life (Shelley 86). Refusing to take responsibility for producing a monster, the scientist loses his loved ones at the hands of his creation. However, he was almost convinced by the monster’s saddening speech about loneliness to repeat his success and produce a companion (Shelley 129). Victor then realizes how dangerous the prospect of two demons can be and discards his work. In revenge, his creation murders the scientist’s friend and fiancée.
After losing his father to grief, Victor begins the quest of stopping the monster. Here, the narrative switches to present events, yet he is unable to recover from the sickness that forced him to rely on the ship’s captain. The captain sees the weeping monster in the room with Victor’s cold body, full of suffering and hatred (Shelley 240). Despite that, the creature is convinced that he can now meet his end just like his creator, departing to the never-ending ice.
Work Cited
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. United States, Barnes & Noble Classics, 2003.
Naomi Hetherington is a brilliant and well-respected scholar in various fields, including religious studies, women’s literature, and literary criticism. She received a Distinguished Teaching and Scholarship Award for her work as an educator at the University of London. The author has taught at the London Metropolitan and University of Hertfordshire. The scholar holds a Bachelor of Arts, Master of Arts, and a Ph.D., and she has published research papers like ‘The New Woman’ and other fiction works. Hetherington’s “The Creator and Created Review of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein” demonstrates that Shelley’s religious views and lifestyle influence Frankenstein and that Mary’s modernity may be replicated in chronicles to comprehend their meaning.
Hetherington’s Critiques
Hetherington dismantles her critique of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein into three distinct pieces in her essay. She contrasts Shelley’s conception of God as the Over-Reacher with the conventional Christian picture of God (Hetherington 2). This is followed by a discussion of Mary’s presentation of creation myths compared to the Christian interpretation. As the last point, she discusses how the human situation affects both the creators and the formed in various ways. Hetherington has a well-argued and substantiated critique of Shelley’s Frankenstein based on her religious beliefs.
The over-reacher image, a depiction of god, is shown by Shelly in Frankenstein. Supposedly, god is located in a solitary laboratory at the end of the stairs, and as for Shelley’s over-reaching, Hetherington disagrees. For her, Christianity and the church have a striking likeness with the divine being (Hetherington 12). Even though there are socially acceptable types of evil, like Milton’s Satan, as per Hetherington’s perception, Shelley’s interpretation of the over-reacher leads to a stalemate of ideas.
In her critique of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Hetherington sees moral anger in the mythology of creation. According to this author, if readers want to relish Shelley’s work, they should share her religious values (Hetherington 20). In order to grasp the notion of creation myths, readers not sharing Shelley’s religious beliefs may be unable to do so. As far as Hetherington is concerned, nature must be represented when relying on external power sources. On the contrary, Shelley feels that nature is active and embraces whole elements, and it does not require any external authority. The scholar acknowledges that Shelley’s mythology represents an independent-regulating realm of fantasy. She thinks Shelley disregards conventional Christian faith and perceptions, which substantially creates moral and intellectual inconsistencies.
Criticizing Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Hetherington focuses on the human situation, which she refers to as “the human condition” (Hetherington 22). In order to understand the existence of human beings, one has to look to Frankenstein. Humanity’s creator is not mentioned, and there lacks any external source of strength (Shelley n.p). Furthermore, Shelley demonstrates that evil stems from people by indicating that they exist. According to her, the Christian notion of God the Father is at odds with this lack of acknowledgment of a creator. Confusion is a common reaction to Shelley’s depiction of the maker and the created as linked creatures.
Similarly, Sherry Ginn’s essay on Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein significantly criticizes it. As a science fiction novel, Sherry’s prose concentrates on describing Frankenstein. Unlike Shelley’s Frankenstein, Hetherington’s “The Creator and Created” focuses on her religious beliefs. Throughout the novel, Ginn provides proof of futurism and how it works. Shelley’s Frankenstein is clearly defined as a scientific odyssey by Ginn, as seen by the title of her novel (Shelley & Ginn n.p). In order to prove that Frankenstein is a skiffy work, Ginn provides evidence on how to categorize science fiction. New empirical ideas may be seen as futurism in the recurring theme of discovery.
Conclusion
There is no evidence to substantiate the criticism of Hetherington’s religious views that Ginn has written. Her article depicts Shelley’s Frankenstein as a science fiction novel, unlike Hetherington’s essay, which is religiously motivated. Because I believe that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is best portrayed as a saintly tale, I favor Hetherington’s writing; however, Ginn’s science fiction evidence cannot be disputed. As Hetherington argues, Shelley’s devout viewpoints play a role in the authoring of Frankenstein.
Works Cited
Hetherington, Naomi. “Creator and Created in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” The Keats-Shelley Review 11.1 (1997): 1-39.
Shelley, Mary. “Frankenstein [1818].” New York: Oxford (2001).
Shelley, Mary. “Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein: Science, Science Fiction, or Autobiography.” Conference Paper in Proceeding. 2003 The 20th International Literature and Psychology Conference. Edited by Ginn, Sherry, 2017.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a notable piece of literature that explores and unfolds the true meaning of humanity. By opposing the monster created by a scientist and the creator, Victor Frankenstein, the author alludes to the true meaning of being a human beyond the mere form of existence but rather living by virtues. In her book, Mary Shelley poses an argument about the essence of being a human by creating a seemingly dehumanized monster character who ultimately reveals his human traits. Thus, in this essay, it is claimed that the monster designed by Victor Frankenstein is more human than its creator due to the ability to love, longing to have relationships, and living with kindness and compassion.
When discussing the issues of human nature, one should clarify the concept of humanism as a set of values that define purposeful and fulfilling existence with no harm to others. In the novel, a scientist curious about human existence creates a monster, artificially bringing life into the lifeless body (Shelley 51). Despite being an unnatural creature, the monster exerts important humane features that predetermine the value of character. Indeed, since its creation, the monster longs for companionship and social support, which is essential for normal human existence (Chen 114). Without the interactions with others and being neglected in its relationship with Victor Frankenstein, the monster seeks compassion. On the other hand, Victor pursues an isolated dwelling rejecting human interaction, which ultimately affects his personality. He states the following: “I took refuge in the most perfect solitude; I passed whole days on the lake alone in a little boat” (Shelley 172). Thus, the longing for others and the valuing of meaningful relationships in the monster is an important human feature that differs it from Frankenstein.
Moreover, the monster is capable of kindness, love, and compassion, while Frankenstein is cruel, self-absorbed, and focused on power exertion. Indeed, in a conflict with Victor, the monster’s response to threats refers to rationality and compassion. Confronted by Frankenstein, the monster states: “remember, thou hast made me more powerful than thyself; my height is superior to thine; […] but I will not be tempted to set myself in opposition to thee” (Shelley 124). The monster cherishes human life and does not threaten to kill and express power over others, unlike Frankenstein, whose primary value is being superior to others without respect for their existence. Its wrongdoings are accompanied by remorse and a search for peace of mind. However, Frankenstein is unable to show similar human values since he ignores the feelings of other people and his creature. In this regard, the monster has a more solid perspective expressed in its utterance “you accuse me of murder; and yet you would, with a satisfied conscience, destroy your own creature” (Shelley 90). Thus, since Frankenstein lacks pivotal human features present in the monster, he is less human than his creature.
In conclusion, the analysis of the main characters of Mary Shelley’s novel has demonstrated that the monster is more human than Frankenstein. Indeed, the monster longs for companionship and relationships with others while Victor prioritizes solitude. The monster acts rationally and based on values, while Victor blindly exerts power without considering the feelings of others. Lastly, the monster is capable of mercy and compassion, which is lacking in Frankenstein. Therefore, these comparisons demonstrate that the monster is more human than the scientist who created it.
Works Cited
Chen, Lei. “Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, an Examination of Human Relationships.” International Journal of Education and Management, vol. 6, no. 4, 2021, pp. 114 – 116.
In his poem On first looking into Chapman’s Homer, Keats reacts with delight to a translation of the ancient Greek epics. Because Chapman was roughly a contemporary of Shakespeare, his version is tough to understand for modern readers. It is, indeed, however, lively and poetic. This feeling of being transported by the book is deeply familiar to anyone trying to read a great work of literature. He offers a fine argument for reading writing from all times and cultures.
If, as it seems from his poem, Keats had previously only tried to translate Homer himself, it is understandable that Chapman was a joyous revelation. Keats shows how he is transported by Homer in a way he never anticipated by using vivid examples of other new and unexpected items.
He compares the sensation of finding a strange celestial body or discovering a new ocean. These are both images that suggest that there is still more to learn and find in Homer, as in a new planet or a new body of water. That is the way that science fiction affects some people, and indeed the way that the fully imagined fantasy worlds of Tolkien and Rowling affect younger readers.
Keats demonstrates a feeling that anyone who has tried to struggle through a great work in its original language can recognize. For someone who is studying in a second language, this happens often. A good translation is a great gift, if not a necessity, although reading in the original, as Keats must-have, is also helpful.
A good translation is a great gift, if not a necessity, although reading in the original, as Keats must-have, is also helpful.
Giving readers the sense of being immersed in the world of the Greeks and the Trojans, or in the world of any fine literature, is a goal for many writers. The experience of another time and place through the author’s words is one of the most compelling reasons for sharing great works across nations and times. If readers are experiencing each other’s current lives and history through their reading, then there is perhaps a higher chance of keeping the peace with one another.
Keats shows the reader, in this poem of appreciation, just how important reading is to him. His imagery makes a powerful case for reading across national, linguistic, and temporal boundaries.
Frankenstein: A Modern Prometheus presents the 21st-century reader with many challenges. Although many people may think that they know the story in its significant outlines, actually reading it opens up some surprising and disturbing insights on the plot, the nature of society in the early 1800s, and holds up a mirror to contemporary society as well.
One of the most striking features, to a modern reader, of Frankenstein: A Modern Prometheus is that the action that is focused on so heavily by film adaptations occupies only a few lines of the novel.
The story of Frankenstein’s creation is embedded in and surrounded by several other stories; the story of Elizabeth’s joining of the family, the story of Justine, and the story of Arctic exploration that frames the tale. These are all almost as important as the scientific achievement of the Frankenstein, or the odyssey of the created being himself. This makes reading the novel a matter of locating the familiar amongst all the rest of the story.
In addition, the modern reader may find themselves horrified by the superficial attitude towards others that is revealed in so many of the characters. The poor creation of Frankenstein is rejected and allowed to leave the apartment with no further investigation, entirely because he is ugly. Furthermore, Justine is fostered by Frankenstein’s family largely because she is pretty. Modern readers may deplore the laser focus in appearance that is shown in the current media, but it seems that this is nothing new.
Furthermore, the method of determining Justine’s guilt or innocence portrayed in the novel is terrifyingly imprecise and seems deeply unjust. This situation makes Frankenstein’s silence all the more horrifying and deplorable. A modern view would suggest that he could have found a way to point the finger of guilt in the correct direction without going into all the details of his creation’s origins Frankenstein looks truly like a coward or worse, and certainly not a hero. It suggests that the ‘monster’ is more appropriately the hero of the tale.
Reading this in its original pre-movie form offers a useful window into the life and thought in the 19th century. It reveals a complex and more nuanced story that forces the reader to examine current attitudes as well.
Heroism generally has been associated with qualities such as courage, determination, self-sacrifice, and risks taking. Heroes are known to have qualities beyond human capabilities; hence are seen as superhuman: someone between God and human always referred to as a demigod.
Moreover, a hero is most of the time seen as reflecting the ideals of the community or a country and as a person who has performed a thing that other people have not achieved, but they wish they had. Mostly, heroes are known to engage in extraordinary and unique actions.
Heroes may be noticed while still alive or long after they have passed away. The way they conduct themselves is always perceived as a source of moral teachings or even institutional legends. However, it is recognized that heroism lies in the eyes of the beholder, meaning that one person may view someone as a hero, yet in the eyes of another, that person may not be a hero.
On the other hand, a villain is usually a character in a novel, film, or in real life who is usually devoted to causing wickedness and heinous crimes in a novel, film, or in the society. Some villains may have powers beyond human comprehension, but they use them to cause havoc in the society; hence very few, if any, would wish to emulate their wicked tendencies.
Thus even though they may engage in extraordinary and unique actions, the only thing that villains can inspire in the people in society is to rise up and defeat such characters. Villains are like heroes, they may be alive or dead, but their deeds are still noticed and institutionalized.
Frankenstein’s Ambiguous Personality
Due to the thin line that separates a hero and a villain, many characters in the society and even in films or novels may be considered something in between. This is because their actions do not qualify as heroic or heinous. In Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus by Mary Shelley, Doctor Victor Frankenstein stands out as neither a hero nor a villain; he is something in between.
Some actions of Doctor Victor Frankenstein are heroic, while some of his deeds are heinous. Even though he sets out to find and destroy the monster that he created, he knows that the challenge he is facing is much great. This is because the beast he created murdered his own brother William.
It calls for the courage that is only seen in heroes for a man like him to face such a creature so huge and that he confesses frightful (Mary, 180 – 190). However, all this rage, confusion, and fear of the monster would not have occurred if he had not abandoned the beast he created.
The heroic courage that Doctor Frankenstein shows in his futile attempt to destroy the monster in greatly driven to exert revenge for the death of his brother. The courage that epitomizes heroes is not driven by feelings but is inborn. This is why heroes are born courageous if not, the courage builds in them not from the urge to exert revenge but from the urge to defend the society from the evil, which makes them villains.
The heroic determination, self-sacrifice, and risk-taking of the doctor can be quite inspiring to many. Still, understanding the reasons behind such a show of heroism, one would conclude that Frankenstein is no hero but just a man out to correct the mistakes he made in his quest to form something unique.
He studied and achieved his childhood dream while at the university. This is where he achieved his childhood dream of making a natural wonder by developing a secret technique to fill lifeless bodies with life. When he finally achieved this, the resulting creature became his worst enemy killing people close to him like his brother William, his wife Elizabeth Clerval, his brother’s nanny, Justine, and his father.
After all the grief that his creation gives him, he vows to pursue the monster until one of them finishes the other. He is determined and risks his own life by facing a monster that the first time they met for a duel defeated his hands down. He even decides to stay outside and wait for the monster while his wife Elizabeth sleeps remains safe in the house. This shows how determined he was to kill the monster (Mary, 145 – 200).
However, all show of heroism is driven by the urge to correct his mistakes earlier. Heroes’ determination, self-sacrifice, and risk-taking tendencies are not driven by the urge to correct their mistakes but to protect society. Hence, he is just trying heroically to defend himself and the society at large from his monster.
Conclusion
All in all, Doctor Frankenstein may pass as a hero or a villain for that matter, depending on the observer since the definition of a hero is ambiguous. It depends on each and every critic of the life and times of the doctor. Indeed the manner in which he tried correcting his mistakes was heroic; he showed superhuman courage, determination, and self-sacrifice character that ought to be emulated by many.
However, the motive behind his actions was not born of a hero, but of a man being remorseful for the mistakes he made by first creating a monster and then abandoning it. Moreover, the fact that he could fathom the idea of making a phantom, an extraordinary creature for no apparent reason, makes him a villain.
Work Cited
Mary, Shelley. Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus: The 1818 Text (Oxford World’s Classics). New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.
It is evident that many individuals consider Frankenstein, or, the Modern Prometheus by Mary Shelley as a horror, dim-witted, piece of writing that reveals a monster with fissures and bolts attached to the skull. Apparently, the monster’s slurred voice and terror inflicted actions depict a destructive and evil creature. Beneath this gothic surface, this book depicts a multi-faceted piece of writing filled with representations crucial to Shelley’s feminist concerns (Shelley 1).
The author ingeniously illustrates the feminine role of women victims and the evil role of the creature in both the book and in the society. Shelley develops the theme of feminism in the course of the book by revealing the evil attributes of the creature and how the women fall victim of the creature.
Main body
This book introduces submissive women characters who go through pain and suffering in the entire story (Shelley 1). Every woman depicted in the book play subservient and compliant roles in all the chapters. For instance, Elizabeth, who is in love with Frankenstein, loses her life after an attack by the monster as she waits for Frankenstein to liberate her (Shelley 2). It is evident that Elizabeth cannot free herself without the assistance of a man. She does not move hoping that Frankenstein will save her and finally loses her life by a long shot. Another example is Justine who faces execution for a murder that Frankenstein caused.
Justine lacks the ability to stand up for herself and justify her innocence in opposition to her accusers and loses her life for the charges of murder (Shelley 3). Justine stands up in court but then confesses under the priest’s pressure. This is significant to Shelley’s depiction of how women’s attempts to defend themselves are overpowered by men. Justine is not submissive at first. She is compelled to confess false guilt by dominant males. However, her submissive role sets her powerless. This is when she attempts to form her individual fate with the intention of standing up against the wrong allegation.
In Contrast to these characters, Shelley’s mother, Mary Wollstonecraft, was powerful in campaigning for the rights of women. In the 19th century in the Genevan culture, where Shelley wrote the book, males subjugated the societal and rational subject entirely whereas females dominated the domestic subjects (Shelley 3).In addition, mentioning the author’s feminist upbringing as a daughter of Wollstonecraft reveals the objectives underlying every female character in Frankenstein. Elizabeth and Justine lost their lives at the beginning of the book. The author puts emphasis on the subjective roles of women characters in the story.
It is arguable that the author manages to reveal the depressing features of the invariable women roles. This is by killing the women characters who suit these roles. Linking the subjective women with depressing deaths puts emphasis on the off-putting results of their actions (Shelley 4). For instance, the “tragically beautiful” portrait of Catherine Beaufort, Victor’s mother is mentioned at the time of William’s death. This shows that women’s suffering is an “appealing” subject for a painting. This, therefore, fosters distinctive feminist morals that ought to have helped the women save their lives.
The theme of feminism is apparent beyond the female characters of the book. In the 19th century Genevan way of life, everyone considered males as people with high brainpower and inventors whereas society viewed women as sentimental beings (Shelley 4). Consequently, with the extremely harsh disconnection between males and females, society viewed emotion as lacking brainpower and brainpower as lacking emotion. The author unravels the depressing truths of lacking the ability to combine emotion and reasoning power via the advancement of affiliation flanked by Frankenstein and the monster. While Frankenstein puts life into dead bodies, he attempts to remove the single strength of females significantly embraced in the community, to bring things to life (Shelley 5).
Conversely, Frankenstein as a male character does not create any positive nurturing. He feels horror, anger and an obsessive dedication to his quest. Subsequent to fruitfully managing to give life to the monster, he sees it as ghastly and forsakes it at once. He neither feels any affection for the creature nor accepts any accountability for it. This is a significant cause of the problems of all that he adores. In case he had a chance to decipher the values of the society and blend affection and emotion with his job and brainpower, his test ought to be fruitful. Conversely, his male role in the Genevan culture is dominant. Therefore, he fails to put into consideration this aspect.
He lacks affection for the monster and still fails to accept accountability for the monster as a living creature. In the end run, this makes the book take an unfortunate direction and leads to the absolute end of Frankenstein (Shelley 5). This is evident when the Monster puts others in danger, creates hatred and an obsessive desire for revenge. Finally, it turns Victor into a monster. This monster is evil given that it kills without mercy and its desire for power makes it deformed.
It is clear that the only constructive theme of feminism in the book is the contrast of feminism to the natural world. The natural world and feminism are related to the extent of societal influence. In the entire book, minor themes of idealism are blended in with the grotesque representations of the monster. Conversely, the natural world does not form part of anything possessive or submissive. However, it forms part of powerful and animated things in life.
It is as well constructive that female features are evident in Frankenstein’s illustrations with the natural world. This is given that men can find pleasure in women similar to nature as much as they can destroy nature and punish women. It is, therefore, apparent that Frankenstein depicts the natural world as womanly and constructive. This is evident when initially the monster wakes up and rushes to the forest. It is true that the natural world offers everything that Frankenstein denied the monster when he left it without provisions or any training on how to stay alive on earth. Via the passionate themes on the natural world, the author puts emphasis on the constructive attributes of women and subjectivity that the 19th-century Genevan culture presented to women.
Regardless of publishing the book in the year 1818, the entire story of the monster keeps adapting to varying storylines, songs, films and plays. Conversely, things keep changing as societies advance with time. It is evident that western countries embrace modern roles of women which entail participating in activities that give them dignity and high regard. Patriarchal oppression is diminishing as women acquire opportunities of taking part in the formal activities of brainpower that had initially been left for men. It is evident that the book reveals the extent that science can leave out women of society.
By depicting Frankenstein, “creates” a monster in two ways—he physically makes the creature but then also makes the creature into a monster through lack of nurture and makes himself into a monster through his destructive interaction with the creature. This indicates clearly that, men can as well be the cause of major problems. This is in opposition to the notion that women are the sole basis for many problems.
Works Cited
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein, or, the Modern Prometheus. Ware, United Kingdom: Wordsworth Editions Limited. 1993. 1-5 Print.
People often try to find their place in the society. Some feel comfortable when they achieve this and some tend to escape from people and live out of the society (or maybe beyond). People may have different reasons to avoid or long for the society. Some tend to live in the orderly manner with specific rules that help them be successful. Others may try to escape from rules and conventions as they are against such limitations of individual freedoms. It has been acknowledged that literary works are reflection of the reality. Therefore, it can be interesting to consider three famous literary characters, Frankenstein, Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, who had quite specific views on the society, and who can be seen as some archetypes that also exist in the real world.
It is possible to start the analysis with Dr. Jekyll who pertained to the first group, the group of those who are eager to adhere to societal norms. The doctor had numerous friends, he was “their familiar guest and entertainer” and “he had always been known for charities” (Stevenson 22). Clearly, the doctor strived for being a part of the society. He paid specific attention to his “honour” as he did not want to expose his secret (Stevenson 36). He shared values of people he lived with. He was an exemplary citizen who earned respect and even admiration.
Remarkably, his desire to fit in made him carry out an experiment that made him an outlaw. He “stood already committed to a profound duplicity of life” and he decided to remove all the veils from his character so that he was a perfect member of the perfect society (Stevenson 42). In other words, he truly shared values of the society he lived in and tried to conform to conventions based on the values. At the same time, some part of his personality was against certain rules and deemed they were unnatural. The doctor found the way to divide his personality but the result was unexpected and, instead of a perfectly moral citizen, he created an immoral outlaw.
Mr. Hyde, who was the newly created member of the society, seemed to be against all possible rules and found specific pleasure in breaking them in the most vicious manner. This character is described as a person, who “alone in the ranks of mankind, was pure evil” (Stevenson 45). Mr. Hyde was not eager to become a part of the community and he tended to avoid communication with members of the society he lived in.
He wanted to be a part of the other world where societal conventions did not work. It is clear that the evil is his nature and Mr. Hyde committed numerous crimes for his own “good pleasure” (Stevenson 46). Admittedly, this character did not share values of the society and he developed his own conventions. He chose to break laws rather than to follow them. It is also noteworthy that Mr. Hyde did not escape from the society and he kept enjoying comforts of the civilized society. However, this was his only connection with that society and he tried to communicate with only a few members of that part of his life.
It is possible to note that Frankenstein’s view on the world can be regarded as a mixture of views of the characters mentioned above with specific worldview based on his arrogance. Frankenstein was a talented scientists and he admired nature. The young scientist wanted to reveal its secrets and his arrogance made him think he could do that. He wanted to fit in but he did not want to become a part of the society.
His aim was much more arrogant. He wanted to make all people admire him. In other words, he wanted to be beyond the society. Notably, his arrogance changed his attitude towards the society. He was focused on his experiments and one of the experiments made him a recluse. Frankenstein “abhorred society” and preferred communication with nature of books rather than with people (Shelley 184). He repulsed himself and he was ready to “suffer on the scaffold” for the crimes his monster had committed (Shelley 120). Thus, initially, he thought he was too good to be a mere part of the society and, at the end of his life, he felt he was unworthy living in the society.
In conclusion, it is possible to note that the three literary characters shed light on ways people see themselves and the society as well as themselves in the society. In the majority of cases, people are ready to be a part of the society. However, sometimes this desire leads to unexpected results and people become outlaws or simply recluses. At the same time, some people think they are too good to conform to societal rules or they simply do not share values existing in the society. Such individuals become outcasts and outlaws. Clearly, people should always remember the stories of the three characters to be able to make the right choice and live a good life.
Works Cited
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Orchard Park, NY: Broadview Press, 1999. Print.
Stevenson, Robert Louis. Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde with the Merry Men and Other Stories. London, UK: Wordsworth Editions, 1999. Print.