Category: Frankenstein

Introduction

Mary Shelley is the second born daughter of a great feminist, Mary Wollstonecraft, who is perhaps the earliest proponent of the feminist wave. Mary Wollstonecraft expressly makes her stand known in advocating for the rights of the women in her novel, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, but her daughter is a bit reluctant to curve a niche about women in Frankenstein; The Modern Prometheus.

Did Mary Wollstonecraft have any influence on her daughter’s writing Frankenstein, The Modern Prometheus? Does Mary Shelley have the same zeal as her mother regarding the rights of women in the novel? “Men, in general, seem to employ their reason to justify prejudices, (Wollstonecraft pp. 7)” Her mother’s advocacy of feminism is outright.

Feminism is regarded as women having equal rights and equating to men in social status, economic, financially, just to mention a few and shining attention to the thesis that Frankenstein, The Modern Prometheus is not a feminist novel.

Female Characters in Frankenstein

Practical analysis of the theme of feminism in the novel requires the study of the female characters and the role they play or how they are portrayed in the novel. We meet Victor Frankenstein’s mother, who died, and her death affected Frankenstein to the extent that Frankenstein sought to come up with a creation that would defy nature’s laws, for instance, death.

Justine is accused of the murder of William, and she accepts the accusations placed on her for William’s death, and this leads to her death. She does not prove that she did not kill William, and this portrays her to the reader as very weak. Elizabeth, on the other hand, is murdered by the monster, and she does not defend herself as she was waiting on victor to protect her from the monster.

This is a pointer that, in the context of the novel, women did not have much of the rights, and they depended on men portraying a very patriarchal culture. Elizabeth’s act of waiting for Victor to save her from the monster shows the position of the woman in the society such that Elizabeth only sees Victor as her savior, and there was nothing she did to defend herself from the monster.

Another way in which the theme of feminism comes out is through the way Frankenstein destroys the female companion whom he had agreed to create for the monster. This further indicates the passiveness of women in the novel or rather in society as a whole, as if women have no rights in society.

To further support my point, Frankenstein easily destroys the female companion even before he brought life to her, yet he is unable to destroy the monster as easily as the female one even after the monster had killed everybody he loved (Shelley 42).
“I pursued nature to her hiding place.” (Shelley 60) In the novel, nature has been likened to women, and the qualities that women possess are the same ones that nature possesses. The woman is portrayed as beautiful, and Frankenstein used to find consolation in the natural world.

Frankenstein runs away from the monster, and what is a better place than the heart of nature, the forest, to relax and reflect on what he has done? Mother Nature also provides the monster with food, water, and the basics that the monster required to survive. It is also in the forest that the monster self educates himself. This is a pointer that women are caring just like nature itself.

Though Victor Frankenstein created the monster (Shelley 56), he is unable to cater to the monster just the way a woman natures her infant from birth to the time the infant grows to be self-independent. Mary Shelley passed her point across that even if science is to take away that right and feeling that a woman has of giving birth, it is only the woman who has motherly instincts for science does not possess these motherly instincts.

The monster’s demands on his creator to have a female companion also indicate that women are compassionate and loving, for the monster wanted a female companion so that it would disappear from humankind.

Here one can see that women were taken as companions to men, and maybe the act of Frankenstein destroying the monster’s female companion was Shelley’s way of refuting societal commonly held norms that women can only become companions to men.

Victor expresses genuine pain when his friend Clerval is murdered by the monster, but when the monster also kills Elizabeth and Justine, Frankenstein’s emotions are not easily deciphered, and this shows the position of women in the society through his reaction (Shelley 45).
Frankenstein; The Modern Prometheus is not really a feminist novel. My conclusion is drawn from the fact that Mary Shelley does not explicitly advocate for women’s equality to men.

For instance, her mother stands out as a great feminist even at an age when women were naturally taken to be inferior, so when we compare the work of Mary Shelley to the work of her mother, she does not stand out as advocating for women to be equal to men. One can justify that through the way, her female characters are passive in the novel and die even before the story ends.

There is no strong indication that she is for the rights of women to be of equal standing to the men and only uses her characters to show the position of women in the 18th-century society. If Frankenstein, the Modern Prometheus, was a feminist novel, we would expect Mary Shelley to make her stand through her female characters, which is not the case in the novel.

Even the story itself starts with the death of Victor’s mother (Shelley 3), giving us a hint that she does not dwell so much on the characters of women. In short, she does not have a clear and definite stand on the equality of men and women.

Mary Wollstonecraft’s advocacy for feminism is very outstanding in her work as compared to her daughter’s. For instance, one does not have to critically analyze her work to know that she was advocating for women to be accorded the same rights as men; the theme is evident even to a layman.

For Mary Shelley, to write in narrative form is symbolic of a society where women are passive, where no woman in the novel speaks directly or openly. Shelley wanted to show that women were to stroll behind the shadows of men and that they had no say in the 18th-century society.

Women in the novel do not speak openly through the narrative, and this further illustrates their submissiveness in society and a great contribution to feminism concerns in the book.

Women didn’t have the same rights as the male counterparts, and this is clear through the way Shelley clearly introduces her main characters in the narrative and leaves the women in the novel out of the narrative even Margaret to whom the letters are addressed to. In the novel, women are portrayed as if they would not exist if not for the men in their lives.

Even the way a monster female companion only comes into question when the monster demands to have her from his creator (Shelley 37) is a further illustration of feminism concerns in the novel, Frankenstein; The Modern Prometheus.
Another reason why Mary Shelley is not seen as a great feminist in comparison to her mother is the use of narrative in the novel. It does not convey the writers’ point rather than it gives the reader the freedom to interpret the novel in their own views.

Feminism as Frankenstein’s Theme

The theme of feminism as portrayed in the novel leaves a lot in the minds of the reader; it leaves the reader with questions such as whether Mary Shelley really wanted women to be equated to men in her novel and which message she wanted to pass by partially ignoring the female characters in the novel.

Was she really trying to bring out the feminism theme? The use of narrative in conveying the feminism theme leaves a lot to be answered by the reader, and it is only through careful explication of the novel that one can bring out the theme of feminism in the novel.

Through narration, it is clear that the female characters do not have a say in society to the extent that men are the only ones who can narrate the story to the audience. The female characters have the privilege of being the main characters, a further indication that women were subordinate to men.

This is a pointer as to the obscurity of women in the society for why Mary Shelley would not discuss the female characters in the novel, and yet they formed a significant part of the story?

Why would an author omit some characters in the novel, specifically the female characters, if not to show their submissiveness/oppression in the society? The use of narration clearly shows the surrounding environment that Mary Shelley was brought up in.

An environment where women were oppressed is perhaps the reason why Shelley chooses to use Captain Walton and Frankenstein in narrating her story. Men were heard more than the women for were women of equal standing to men, Mary Shelley’s narrator would have also been a woman, for instance, Margate to whom the letters were addressed to.
But women were taken to be unreliable and hence their implied characters in the novel.
“I collected bones from charnel – houses and disturbed, with profane fingers, the tremendous secrets of the human frame….” (Shelley 12). Frankenstein used science to create a monster and therefore defied the natural process through which a woman gives birth to a baby.

Through this act, Frankenstein is having no respect for women, for it is a woman’s pride when she gives birth to a baby.
Frankenstein shows us that women have no value in the society in which he is living through his creation to the extent that he takes away the pleasure of women in giving birth through science. He believes that he can also possess the same powers that are possessed by women when they give birth to young ones. It further illustrates how women were degraded in the 18th century.

Feminism is among the many themes in the novel, Frankenstein; The Modern Prometheus though not that explicit as other themes like a quest for dangerous knowledge. Did Mary Wollstonecraft’s experiences have an impact on her daughter’s view of feminism?

Wollstonecraft’s background tells us something that relates to her being regarded as perhaps the earliest known feminism proponent.
Shelley’s mother grew up in a society that was dominated by men, and women were very submissive. However, Wollstonecraft defied the societal norms and became an outright activist of women’s rights that women are not inferior to men and only need equal chances in education that are accorded to men in her book, A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.

“What acquirement exalts one being above another?” (Wollstonecraft pp. 3). We would expect that Mary Shelley being the daughter of a great feminist, would voice the same concerns as her mother, but this is not the case as all her female characters are passive.

On the contrary, through the use of science, Mary Shelley is advocating that women’s problems in reproduction can be eradicated. For instance, through science, women who are known not to give birth can get solutions to their problems. I think Mary Shelley advocates for science in solving women’s reproduction problems because of what her mother went through when she was giving birth to her.

Perhaps Shelley, through Frankenstein’s creation of a creature (the monster) that would defy natural laws, was seeking a solution to women’s problems during birth, for instance, the way her mother died few days after giving birth to her due to some complications with the placenta.

We can also draw the conclusion that through the destruction of the female companion for the monster, Shelley wanted to show that nature could not allow a creature that was brought forth through science to procreate and populate the world, this can be a strong indication that society cannot do without women, that women are important and that men do not have the right to take away the pride of women in giving birth.

The women suffer at the hands of the monster. But from literary analysis, Mary Shelley’s negative perception of female characters through their passiveness maybe was to emphasize that women ought to be strong and not to only rely on men, for when they rely on men, they end up suffering. She wanted to illustrate the way women in society are weak as compared to men and often rely on men to solve their problems.

Conclusion

Shelley wanted to put the point across that women ought to stop that habit of conforming to societal norms of viewing men as the only ones who can solve problems, for were it not for their view of men, the characters that are Justine and Elizabeth would have survived.

Elizabeth would have fought the monster, and Justine would have defended herself that she did not kill William, bringing us to the conclusion that Mary Shelley wanted to caution women on their over-reliance on men and that women too are at the forefront in perpetuating the patriarchal dominance in the society.

Works Cited

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein; the Modern Prometheus. 1816. London. Oxford University Press. 1971.

Wollstonecraft, Mary. A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.

Introduction

In any piece of literature, it is necessary to facilitate the interest and intrinsic involvement of readers. Therefore, the author must be able to bring out the significances of a story. This is important when one bears in mind that it limits ambiguities in the interpretation of results.
This paper takes a critical look at the inclusion of chapter 18 in the publication entitled ‘Frankenstein’ by Mary Shelley and its significance in enabling a better understanding of the drama in the chapter.

Frankenstein’s Chapter 18: Summary & Analysis

Different readers have debated the inclusion of the events in chapter 18 as having departed from the main story. This can be since, despite the clear flow assimilated in the story, it lacks comprehensiveness of the details that happened in the previous chapters.

Besides, the key problem of interest revolves around Victor and how he dealt with the monster from the glacier since it was the most critical issue. However, the latter has been ignored in the chapter. As such, when the significance of the story is put into consideration, one would agree that this chapter fails to accomplish the ability to bring out the significance of the events that took place.

Besides, even though introducing the issue of the chapter and the possible contribution to Victor’s family involvement may be considered to be generating a sense of purpose. Nonetheless, the same consideration may not always be sufficient.
It is worth noting that chapter 18 in the story ‘Frankenstein’ by Mary Shelley plays an important role that Victor plays in creating the second monster.

The chapter effectively communicates the developments that happen within Victor’s scientific community. In this case, the relationship with his father, the strong desire to travel to London as a masquerade of the true identity of his work, and the pending penalties to his family should he fail to honor his promises to the monster are clearly reflected in his thoughts throughout the chapter.

Indeed, Shelley had done an extremely difficult task in reviewing the events that happened when victor had a fateful meeting with his initial monster and Elizabeth alongside the new female creature, as portrayed in the chapter. Every part of this publication is an indication of possible missing links and also provides a flow of events, time, and characters involved.

The latter has been attained in spite of the fact that it lacks the careful support of previous chapters. Every concept of impenetrable solitude of Victor suffering the possibilities of romantic happiness of marriage to Elizabeth is brought out in such a creative way that the chapter becomes an important building block that seeks to take it to a higher level altogether.

Conclusion

It is evident that the key strengths of chapter 18 lie in the presentation and succinctness of different ideologies. The foreshadowing of Victor’s impending doom, as well as the attitude he possesses towards marriage, is quite holistic. Hence, it offers the necessary insight into the rest of the events discussed in the book. Besides, the romanticized personality of Clerval further presents a key theme in terms of the time of occurrence of events and individuals involved.

It is notable that the presented sources of conflict in Victor’s life are intrinsically analyzed in the conversation with his father. This facilitates a greater understanding of the logic behind the decisions assimilated by Victor. It is worth noting that the style employed in this chapter is highly particularistic and simplified without departing from the main story.

The novel Frankenstein written by Mary Shelly impressed me by the mere fact of its creation. It takes some believing, but Shelly wrote this novel in the age of 18. Nowadays Frankenstein, which had been written as a sort of literary competition, gave birth to the new literary style. The name of the main character of the novel, who has created the living monster from the insentient substance, became a special sign that in a course of time widened its meaning. Having read the history of this novel creation, I was surprised how such a young girl could create such a grotesque character full of the mystic horror and at the same time exciting pity by its dramatic destiny.

One of the stylistic means used by the author to make her novel sound more realistic is the specific form of narration. The novel is written in the form of letters of its main characters. Moreover, such stylistic mean as miseen abyme is also used.

The given extract is rich in description of the beautiful Alpine nature affected by the impression of the authors journey to Switzerland. Reading these particular parts of the novel, I was surprised in a certain manner. The protagonist describes such terrible event as the death of his relative, admiring the beauty of nature at the same time. I must admit that the descriptions of the nature make this novel imaginative, but to my opinion, being used in the letters of the main characters these descriptions make them in a certain manner insincere.

While reading this text, I was impressed by the Victors anxiety for knowledge. On the one hand, his eager desire to study the unexplored spheres of the science may be explained by the research interest. On the other hand, even without knowing the future events, it is possible to foresee that his attempts to enliven the dead substance will lead to the dreadful circumstances. Moreover, it is a great sin from the religious point of view, and from the point of view of the universal human values. Victor was eager to make the perfect creature, instead he received a monster.

His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only formed a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set, his shrivelled complexion and straight black lips. (Shelley, 1994, p.51 ).

This description of the created monster is rather natural and vivid. This very scene of the monster creation reminds me our contemporary scientists who in their researches, which are rather senseless sometimes, try to change the natural laws.

However, frankly speaking, I was shocked by another fact. After the experiment, having seen what he had done, Victor Frankenstein runs away in horror. He is conscious that he has created the new living being. He knows nothing about the character and the intentions of the monster. At the same time, Victor feels relief when he finds out that the monster has disappeared. Victor does not worry about the fact, that this monster may constitute a threat for the society. As well as he does not worry about the creature, for whom he is responsible.

Reference List

Shelley, M. (1994). Frankenstein. New York: Dover Publications.

The book by Mary Shelley “Frankenstein”, as a truly extraordinary piece of writing, touches upon miscellaneous crucial topics like love and hate with the transformative powers they produce, beauty and ugliness and those prejudices which surround these matters, innocence and guilt both real and imagined, compassion and hard-heartedness of mankind. It is a remarkable piece of literary work which explores people’s values and needs, their weaknesses and fears, temptations and prejudices they face, problems they have to overcome and human nature as a whole. Besides, it integrates the following ideas as family and friend relationships, knowledge, intelligence, sensitivity, vulnerability, murder, and many more into an intertwined tale of a man, his creation, and the outcome of that creation. As the book relates to the Romantic era, it is more concerned with sensibility and feelings. It is rather ironical that sometimes the books of fiction by genre can present a truth of life better than the other stock of true life stories and quotations. It is most likely to happen so, as the fiction writers are not inhibited by reality, therefore they are more free in a sense, to explore people thoughts and feelings freely. Considering the book “Frankenstein”, one might say, that it presents the outcasts of the community or people who failed to be accepted by others, just like the main character of the novel. That allows people to bring the characters and the conflicts, which they find in the book into correlation with themselves. Besides, it highlights specifically why it happens, that the people, who come in contact with an outcast fail to see the good in his creation, which is obviously inside of him. The truth of this very story puts its reader up to the fact that the human beings are often irrationally scared of things that seem to be unaccustomed and different to them.

In the first place, the creator of the monster, Victor Frankenstein, who sought mutability, made a scientifically set experiment, which turned out to be a scientific breakthrough. A grotesque monster appeared as an incredible result of this experiment. The creature was so ugly, that even its creator abandoned it when he saw it for the first time “flash of lightning illuminated the object and discovered its shape plainly to me; its gigantic stature, and the deformity of its aspect, more hideous than belongs to humanity, instantly informed me that it was the wretch, the filthy demon to whom [he] had given life.” (Shelley, p. 60) People are afraid of something they can not control or do not know how to control it. It is the same principle our ancestors faced, while observing the nature phenomena. Rather than take it as a matter of course, they came up with different superstitious assumptions. The case with the monster appearance is a similar example of a man, facing something, which is beyond his cognition. And when people are scared, they can act in a very cruel way. Starting from the point of his birth, the monster becomes an outcast for the rest of the society, the one to be hated and made different suppositions around. Man by nature, judge about a person going by his or her appearance. If one is pleasant looking, then the attitude towards this person is good, if not, then the attitude is corresponding to his or her external looks. Frankenstein appears as an ugly and cosmetically deformed creature, as an abortion and an anomaly which has a frightful look. That is why everybody, starting from children and ending with adults, are afraid of him and consider him to be an extremely dangerous thing. Though the true nature of the Monster is virtuous and kind, he is treated like a beast, like a devil and even his creator addresses to him as to “it” “For this I had deprived myself of rest and health. I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart.” (Shelley, p. 42) The monster has to grasp the cruel reality of life, that nobody will accept his internal qualities, as he is too different. Nobody accepts him to be an equal creature. He is abandoned and hated for being not even slightly alike to the rest of people. But as the monster meets a blind man, who is not capable to see his disgusting appearance, he meets a person, who supports him. These two are both the outcasts of the society and probably it is a moment of inspiration for the monster.

In the second place, monster faces the common for the society prejudice that if one is not like everybody else than there is something wrong with this. In the time of Frankenstein’s society, just like today, if one does not fall under the pattern or the established standard, then he or she is a square peg in a round hole. Unfortunately, it happens to be, that people’s acceptance and understanding can not go beyond the limited capability of their minds. The narrowness and uniformity of thinking is a characteristic of a man. Thus, everything and everyone unlike appear to be left to his own resources. The monster recognizes it and strives to have a friend as ugly as he is not to be rejected “I am alone and miserable: man will not associate with me; but one as deformed and horrible as myself would not deny herself to me. My companion must be of the same species and have the same defects. This being you must create.’” (Shelley, p. 129)

Therefore, it is obvious that the lines from Percy Shelley’s poem are truly significant for the novel of Mary Shelley’s book. Seeking for further progress and mutability in life, people face something unknown and new for them, sometimes it might be something unacceptable, beyond their understanding. But something which appears to be beyond a human understanding means to fall under the prejudice to be not right. From here a question arises if a man should seek something new. Victor Frankenstein answers this question definitely, saying “Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge and how much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow.” (Shelley, p. 8)

Works Cited

Mary Shelley: Frankenstein. 2005. Web.

As a piece of fiction, “Frankenstein” is undoubtedly one of the most artistic and comprehensive works. This novel presents a compelling argument for itself as a source of intense emotion in which the basic emotions of the human brain are on display (Shelley 225). The feelings conveyed in the book are incredibly gentle and pure, and the depictions of family life are of the most affable and straightforward, with a father who is alluring and deep. The direct moral of the story might be the most significant and applicable issue that can be taught by a specific example. Undoubtedly, the being in “Frankenstein” is a magnificent creature. It was inconceivable that he should have averted the treatment from men that resulted in the implications of his social nature.

There has never been a wilder story imagined. Yet, like numerous modern fiction, it has an aspect of realism since it is connected to the popular undertakings and interests of the times. In the story, the creature created by Frankenstein is born with an intrinsic human empathy that is honed by his education, which includes reading Volney’s “The Ruins of Empires” one of the masterpieces in the radical canon (Shelley 240). He only becomes perverted to violence when mistreated and misjudged by unjust, uneducated people.In Victorian culture, the term “Frankenstein” has evolved into a cliché and a handy description for individuals who are resistant to change. “Frankenstein” is a metaphor for misdirected ambition, for innovations developed with the best intentions but ultimately too big for their creators. The novel portrays a typical blend of respect and admiration for high ambitions, mistrust, and fear for individuals who pursue them.

Work Cited

Shelley, Mary. “Frankenstein.” The 1818 text context critical, vol. 2, 1831, pp. 1–661.

Introduction

Mary Shelley is one of the most timeless novelists ever to grace the fields of writing. Her works looked into the future and the problems that science might bring upon humanity. She was born Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin in 1797 to two parents who were also renowned authors.

Unfortunately, she grew up motherless as her mother died immediately after her birth. In 1816, she married Percy Shelley, who she had earlier eloped with. Frankenstein was initially released without her name as she did not want people to credit her husband with a work that she considered to be of juvenile standard (Esaka 7).

Science & Knowledge as the Themes of Frankenstein

Frankenstein belongs to the same movement as the works by Coleridge, Wordsworth, and Percy. This movement, identified as Romanticism, required “active participation of the reader who must pay close attention to how the persona’s mind controls the work of art” (Schug 17). Frankenstein highlights how Victor Frankenstein assembles an artificial man from human, remain gathered from a grave. Frankenstein can infuse life into his creation through the use of science.

The results are disastrous. The creation becomes an enraged monster trapped in a human body set about destroying anything that looks human. The book, other than focusing on the relationship between parents and their children, also highlights the dangers of uncontrolled science. This paper explains Shelley’s theory that the pursuit of limitless knowledge will be the ultimate end of humanity.

Mary Shelley’s focus on the dangers of science is marvelous. It focuses on the life story of Victor Frankenstein, a scientist who defies nature and wants to create a human being from a lifeless being. Shelley, in this novel, portrays 19th-century scientists as “men who penetrate the recesses of nature, and show how she works in her hiding-places” (Shelley, 27).

This shows how the 19th century Europe was still gender-biased against the woman by highlights how the author uses the word men to portray scientists as only men. At that time, humanity was still very religious, viewed God as a male, therefore the use of the word men. Shelley considers scientists as men equal in power with God as they can create put life in a lifeless thing. Her assertion is that science is equal to power, the power to create.

Frankenstein, however, does not view science in the positive light as it is viewed today. Her main character Frankenstein embarks on a project to create a human being from the remains of dead people. When he finishes his creation, he is so excited with his prowess and exclaimed that the new creation “would bless [him] as its creator and source…

No father could claim the gratitude of his child more completely as [he] should deserve theirs” (32). In this assertion, Frankenstein’s pride in his newfound ability to create is portrayed as he equates himself to God, who has the power to create. This proves that scientists in the 19th century were power-hungry males, with no regard for any morals. They were only interested in gaining prestige and fame at the expense of the consequences of their actions.

Despite all this showmanship by the character Frankenstein, the novel shows the awesome power that exists in science. Science may actually hold more power than people think. Power is a dangerous thing when it gets into the head of those who possess it. Upon realizing the power science possesses, the monster tells its creator that “I have the power…You are my creator, but I am your master…” (122).

Science has created a powerful maters in today’s world. Countries that are scientifically advanced have become so dominant in world politics, while some controversial world leaders have used science to chat their own immoral intentions. It is clear how science influences power, and if this power is not checked, then science proves to be disastrous.

Shelley does not spare any chance to explain the dangers of science. She portrays science as a hazardous lot. Scientists are only interested in knowledge and would go to any length just to acquire it thus: “Frightful must it be, for supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavor to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world” (3).

Some scientists like Frankenstein, think that human power is limitless and therefore set to test the limits with little or no regard for the consequences of their actions. But as Shelley explains, human beings actually do have a limit in understanding the workings of nature. This is exemplified in the fact that Frankenstein did not have the knowledge necessary to control the monster when it went berserk.

The effect of Frankenstein’s scientific misadventure is the uncontrollable monster that goes on killing sprees. By creating this monster, it proves that Frankenstein is an even greater monster who is capable of doing much more harm than the monster he created; thus: “Justine died; she rested, and I was alive. The (monsters) blood flowed freely in my veins” (59). This monster is an example of today’s hazardous scientific discoveries that have the potential to wipe out life.

It is now common knowledge about what nuclear science can do. We should have gone on and heeded Shelley’s advise against science thus: “Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge and how much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow” (31). Her precept here is that it is not knowledge that is bad but the acquisition of that knowledge.

Conclusion

In conclusion, the nineteenth century experienced a scientific implosion never seen before. This is the time that electricity is discovered and has gone on to change people’s lives forever. It is not debatable that science has had a profound positive effect on humanity. This is not Shelley’s contention, however.

Her arguments are quite, on the contrary, that science needs to be checked. The uncontrolled pursuit of knowledge will lead to the creation of hazardous monsters that humans cannot control. Frankenstein reads like a warning to the modern world about the dangers of science.

Shelley seems to have foreshadowed what might result if the pursuit of knowledge is not controlled. Had we heeded her warning 200 years ago, the world would be a safer place to be. However, science continues to evolve and put the world into more hazards. Scientific creations such as chemicals and industrial waste have altered the environment so much that we are now living with uncertainties of how the future would be. Shelley was a messiah who we never listened to.

Works Cited

Essaka, Joshua. Mary Shelley: ‘Frankenstein.’ Penrith: Humanities e-books. 2007. Print.

Schug, Charles. “The Romantic Form of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Studies in English Literature, 1500-1900.” 1977. Web.

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: Crown Publishers, 1977. Print.

Frankenstein, a ground-breaking novel by Mary Shelley published in 1818, raises important questions about what it means to be human. Mary Shelley was inspired to write the book in response to the questions arising from growing interactions between indigenous groups and European colonialists and explorers. While the native people the Europeans encountered exhibited human characteristics, the Europeans generally viewed them as inferior and less intelligent. Therefore, at that time, there was an unending debate about whether non-European ethnicities belonged to the same species as Europeans. The contestation was largely influenced by the Enlightenment led by the philosopher David Hume, who argued that there were different species of people and non-European species were “naturally inferior to the whites” (Lee 265). As a result, the native people were positioned beneath the line dividing humans from animals. This essentially meant they would only be subjects of slavery and oppression. However, Shelly’s Frankenstein runs counter to this theory and challenges the rigid notion of being a human based on a synthetic creature made of dead bodies. The book reveals what it means to be human through the creature’s actions.

When Frankenstein was released, many people were mesmerized by stories of “wild” native tribes in distant lands. Lee (267) states that during that time, the native people were judged only based on their appearance and way of life. However, going by Shelly’s progressive and broader definition, anyone would qualify to be called a human being in their own right. Shelly’s illustration even included the “savages” that her contemporaries looked down upon. Shelly uses the classic example of a creature that could survive on a vegetarian diet and climb mountains relatively easily. Her depiction of the creature through Victor Frankenstein shows that he is innately tied to the natural world (Shelley 85). However, the horrific responses he receives from others, including his creator, causes him to live in exile away from the European culture and dwell in the woods.

Furthermore, the creature’s looks make it obvious that it is not European. It stands at “nearly eight feet tall,” is far taller than the average European, and has “yellow skin” and “straight black lips” (Shelley 59). Even though a European developed him, his physical distinctiveness “the work of muscles and arteries beneath” set him apart from others (Shelley 59). Because he has been cast out of society due to his appearance, the creature is not a party to the social contract of the Enlightenment, a tacit agreement between all members of a country to protect each other’s basic rights. When the creature meets others, they fail in their duty to protect his human rights as a group, and later in the book, he murders in retaliation. The pervasive Enlightenment conception of the social contract generates an abstract divide between “civilized man” and “natural man” (Lee 275). The contract allows man to transition out of his “state of nature” and into modern society. That is why most Europeans, the moment Frankenstein was published, would not have understood how deeply connected to nature the creature or many indigenous peoples were.

Notwithstanding the deep connection to nature, the creature is human and characterized by an emotional and often compassionate personality. Despite his young age, he is almost as emotional and just as eloquent as his creator. When Felix, a young farmer whose home he stays in for a while, attacks him, he refrains from retaliation and saves a young girl only from being shot by her male companion. He frequently exhibits more moral “human” behavior than those he meets (Shelley 130). In both instances, he exhibits kindness and mercy and is unjustly assaulted by humans who misjudge him. At one time, the creature gets confronted, causing an aggressive, malicious, and vengeful reaction. However, the creature exemplifies intense guilt at the novel’s conclusion, which characterizes humanity. The creature’s depiction as physically non-European, self-educated, and yet unquestionably human can be applied to the indigenous people in nations like South America that European explorers frequently encountered. The indigenous people were characterized by their lifestyle and appearance rather than their inherent intelligence or upbringing. They can only exist in the natural world because they are not mostly allowed to live in European culture.

In conclusion, Shelley used her book, Frankenstein, to show what it means to be human through the creature’s actions. She broadens the definition of humanity by creating a progressive vision that enables those deemed less human to be regarded as completely human. The creature’s actions, when confronted, act as a caution against the risks of treating other people with indignity. Shelley’s story urges the reader to allow everyone to prove themselves before judging them based on their appearance. She advocates for fair treatment by drawing comparisons between the creature and its existence in nature and indigenous peoples worldwide, both forms of the “other.” As shown by the creature’s actions, anyone could end up becoming what is unfairly expected of them if they are not given an equal chance because of the psychological harm caused by the way they have been treated. In the end, the discovery that both the indigenous and the creature are human but are not perceived as such in civilization exposes the flaws in the prejudiced yet obscured view of humanity held by the Enlightenment.

Works Cited

Lee, Seogkwang. “Humanity in Monstrous Form: Reading Mary Shelley Frankenstein.” The Journal of East-West Comparative Literature, vol. 49, 2019, pp. 261–85, Web.

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein, or, the Modern Prometheus. Legend Press, 2018.

‌

Introduction

Deconstruction works in a way based on the assumption that the meaning of a text occurs following some intended displacements and contradictions coupled with the presumption that writers use deferments. Through criticism, playwrights identify and dissolve oppositions to manifest the slippery and often elusive underlying meanings of the book.

‘Frankenstein’ by Mary Shelley is not a difficult novel to understand, as many critics may want readers to believe. This follows the fact that some of the critics try to dig out meanings not even intended by the writer of the novel (Bressler 240); nevertheless, such observations enrich literature altogether.

The relationship between Frankenstein and his monster, as brought out in the novel, is a complicated one as far as the connections between the two are concerned. There are many complexities involved in their relationship, as evidenced by different cases to be exposited in this paper. In trying to figure out meanings in literary works such as this one, Jacques Derrida’s theory of deconstruction provides a foundation for the critic of seemingly complex works by exposing the binary opposites that exist in them and finally inverts within them.

This paper aims at applying a deconstructive approach to explore the relationship between the monster and Frankenstein through analysis of the binaries presented in Shelley’s work. Among the binaries under study is the creator vs. the created where Shelley presents the relationship between the two, as pointed out by Frankenstein and the Monster.

Creator/Created Binary

As the story unfolds, there is a notable creator-created relationship between Frankenstein and the monster. In the story, Frankenstein assumes the position of the creator while the monster is the created being. When creating the monster, the glory that the work would bring on Frankenstein was the root source of his motivation. This would give him the glory as of the creator as he puts it. He says, “A new species would bless me as a creator and its source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me” (Shelley 57).

In the process, Frankenstein creates a being that is stronger than he is, thus making it hard to subdue the creature and exercise control over it. This makes the relationship between him and the creature that he has created to take a new turn. Because Frankenstein is the creator of this being, he is responsible for the happiness and the orientation process that will see his creature fit into the world well and live happily.

Montag states that Frankenstein, however, abandons this responsibility following the realization that the creature he had created was hideously ugly, and he did not want to be associated with it (32). The creature’s welfare remains unattended as it is the responsibility of the creator to be concerned, and so it has to fend for itself. In this, the creator forgets that he has the opportunity to modify its features and make it impressive, he does not consider this, for he simply stands guided by the urge to see his project succeed.

The rejection that the creature faces from humans leads to its turning into evil; in fact, it murders Frankenstein’s brother to get the chance to meet Frankenstein. The monster reads its creator’s journal only to realize that he started blaming it soon after the creation. Since it is not its intention to face the availed treatment, it swears to revenge this by making the life of its creator a lonely and miserable one.

The monster laments, “And what was I…I was ignorant, but I knew that I possessed no money, no friends, and no kind of property…I saw and heard of none like me. Was I, then, a monster, a blot upon the earth, from which all men fled and whom all men disowned?” (Shelley 115). The case follows because even its creator has run away from it.
Frankenstein is to blame for any murder and evil deed that the monster does since it was not the monster’s intention to become such a creation that leads to its rejection and live a life of misery.

As a creator who is ready to sail in the glory that his work will bring him, Frankenstein should also be ready for the results of his work and being the “mother” to the monster, he needs to guide it through life and avoid the evil that comes forth because of this. Also, Shelley succeeds in pointing out good vs. evil relationship through Frankenstein and the monster.

Good/Evil Binary

In exploring the relationship between the monster and its creator, Frankenstein, the binaries of good/ evil form a key foundation because one can only unravel the meanings attached therein in relation to the other.

Frankenstein has bad motives considering the way he maliciously alters the physical appearance of the monster he has created. The monster has been hideously ugly. “Great God His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of a lustrous black, and flowing; his teeth of a pearly whiteness” (Shelley 60).

Considering that his creation is inspired by the figures of humans that he sees around him and by himself, Frankenstein shows signs of jealousy, which result in other evils perpetrated by the monster. Because of the physical appearance of the monster, it faces rejection from other humans despite it having good intentions of helping them. That brings forth the loneliness that triggers the atrocities that were committed later by the monster.

When the monster approaches Frankenstein during his journey to the mountains to get some peace of mind, it bears a good intention of settling the disputes and ensuring that everyone else lives happily ever after.

Its grievances receive no honor in that Frankenstein destroys the female counterpart he is making for the monster, which results in its fury and the vow to revenge against all humans. That is eviler because Frankenstein himself wants a wedding only a few days after destroying the monster’s female companion.

In its revenge, it is clear that the monster does not intend to hurt Frankenstein but only wants to kill the people who he holds dear and whom he can call the family to ensure that they face the same circumstances of being lonely and miserable.

The claim stands out clearly when the monster tells Frankenstein that it will be with him on the night of his wedding. This means that it wants to kill his bride and not him. The heated revenge that fuels more evil deeds emanate from Frankenstein’s failure to honor the requests of a being that considers him the absolute good.

Apart from Frankenstein, the other characters in Shelley’s book that suffer the wrath of the monster face this innocently. Irony following Frankenstein’s actions, he is the one supposed to guilty, yet other people die as a result.

The real motive behind the re-animation that finds the coming up of the monster is because of selfish personal glory, the root of all the evil that the monster perpetrates. Frankenstein, as a result, cannot achieve the status of God, who they consider the key “good” even when his creation is a success.

The monster says, “Like Adam, I was apparently united by no link to any other being in existence; but his state was far different from mine in every other respect…when I viewed the bliss of my protectors, the bitter gall of envy rose within me. (Shelley, 124) in these lines, the monster tries to compare Frankenstein’s state to that of Adam and Satan in “Paradise Lost.” Like Adam, he suffers loneliness while, like Satan, he is envious of the others’ happiness he sees.

With the death of Frankenstein, the monster is also sure to face a subsequent demise with the restoration of the initial tranquility. This scenario underscores the fact that goodwill prevails over evil at the end of the day. The author, too, addresses the relationship as portrayed by a slave and his/her master. Frankenstein and the monster strategically drive this home.

Master/Slave Binary

Being the creator, Dr. Frankenstein takes a position of authority over the creature that he has created. However, the creature is physically stronger compared to the creator, thereby altering the relationship.

Frankenstein wants to be glorious with his invention of life, but the venture results in slavery in his whole life. The monster, while trying to reason with his creator, tells him, “All men hate the wretched; how then must I be hated, who am miserable beyond all living things! I will leave them and you at peace; but if you refuse, I will glut the maw of death until it is satiated with the blood of your remaining friends…” (Shelley 130).

This clearly indicates that the “slave” has taken power in that the creature is the one now issuing grievances that people have to adhere to strictly, including the master. The monster comes into power and starts enslaving its master, Dr. Frankenstein.

During the subjugation of Frankenstein, the creature tells him, “Slave, I before reasoned with you, but you have proved yourself unworthy of my condescension. Remember I have power; you believe yourself miserable, but I can make you so wretched that the light of day will be hateful to you. You are my creator, but I am your master -obey!” (Shelley 145) this gives the implication that the monster is aware of the creator’s misery and capitalizes upon it to ensure that people, including the master, honor the grievances that he raises to the latter.

The supposed master, at this point, lives at the mercy of the rebellious slave who has seized his being. At the end of Mary Shelley’s novel, it is the supposed slave, the monster, who ends up killing the master. However, the death of the master entails also the death of the slave, which restores the initial balance in the master/ slave binary. The issue of life and death still has its share in Shelley’s masterwork, where he strategically depicts the relationship between the two using Frankenstein and the monster.

Life/Death Binary

All humans appreciate the concept of life, the key construct that the playwright often portrays in the novel by the use of characters mourning their dead counterparts. Frankenstein makes the monster from dead bodies. The creation of the monster is a clear manifestation of Frankenstein’s ability to deal with his feelings, such as the devastating issue by his mother’s death. Frankenstein admits his guilt, considering that he has to leave home a few days after his mother dies.

Confirming the claim, he says, “…it appeared to me sacrilege so soon to leave the repose, akin to death, of the house mourning, and to rush into the thick of life” (Shelley 50). To replace this lost life, Frankenstein works tirelessly to ensure that his project of creating life worked. This happens purposely following the most targeted effort of bridging the gap created by the death of his mother.

As a result, people consider the monster the bridge between life and death. It is this creation of life by Frankenstein, which leads him to his death. The monster becomes less vulnerable to death than its maker does. This stands out clearly when the monster pursues Frankenstein to the North Pole with the aim of killing him. He suffers from pneumonia following his exposure to adversely cold temperatures that result in his demise.

On the other hand, the monster survives the cold weather and then vows to go to the north most point and burn itself. However, the author leaves the reader with the question concerning the events after this step. Whether it burns itself or not, the reader cannot tell, but if it did, its death must bring back the awaited calmness restoring the ever-usual balance between life and death. Shelley further seeks to address the acceptance-alienation binary as revealed by the monster and Frankenstein.

Acceptance/Alienation Binary

The conflict that develops between the monster and the creator is mostly a result of the coexistence between the two. Being the “mother” to the monster, Frankenstein is supposed to teach the basics that would enable the society to absorb and live with it like one among its people without depicting any signs of alienation.

However, Frankenstein does not honor his responsibilities, as the story unveils, a case that results in the monster striving by itself to learn what it can base on what it can grasp from its day-to-day interaction with the society. Despite its efforts, this endeavor is not enough because it still faces harshness from people and even its maker. If Frankenstein could have attempted to embrace the work of his hands, it would have been a different scenario all together since the evils that the monster results in doing are a result of the feeling of alienation.

Funny enough, even the creator disorients his own creation. Dr. Frankenstein has instead alienated his own creation and starts running away from the work of his very hands. The monster attempts to claim its acceptance into society; however, this acceptance remains elusive considering the fact that the monster is so different from other humans.

For instance, the first level into this acceptance has failed when the person who has created him flees after he discovers that he has created him being hideously ugly. As Dussinger puts it, the monster suffers a good deal of condemnation to live as a parasite that has no host (135). The monster evokes great sympathy from the audience, following the fact that he was thrown into the world without a sufficient guide to direct him.

This makes the monster experience more acceptance by the audience than it does with Frankenstein. Also, the creator is subject to be blamed all the time for every line of atrocities that the monster is involved in. For instance, the manner that Frankenstein reveals the story to the alienated sailor Walton at the North Pole shifts the acceptance from the monster to him, which makes even the sailor vow to hunt down the monster and kill it.

Conclusion

Through the dissolution of the binaries that shape the relationship between Frankenstein and his monster, the process of deconstruction ensures that what seems a singular case is uncovered and the elusive, underlying truth, which is slippery in most cases, is discovered.
Shelly deconstructs binaries between the creator and the created, the master and the slave, the good and the evil, acceptance, and alienation, and life and death to mention but a few as a reflection to understand the relationship between Frankenstein and his monster (Collings 280).

Consequently, the author succeeds in driving home several highlights through the story in his quest to define the relationship between the monster and its creator. In broader language, Shelley seeks to picture the relationship depicted between two classes of people or issues.

Works Cited

Bressler, Charles. Literary Criticism: An Introduction to Theory and Practice. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 2003.

Collings, David. The Monster and the Maternal Thing: Mary Shelley’s Critique of Ideology. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2003.

Dussinger, John “Kinship and Guilt in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Studies in The Novel 8.1 (1976): 38-56.

Montag, Warren. The Workshop of Filthy Creation in Frankenstein or the Modern New York: Bedford Books of St. Martin’s Press, 1992

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus. New York: Signet, 1963.

The introduction: the fundamentals of Shelley’s novel

While comparing and contrasting Victor Frankenstein and his creature, I would like to disclose some fundamentals of a popular novel. First of all, I would like to point out that Mary Shelley’s novel was first published in 1817. This novel is recognized to be one of the earliest productions of science fiction genre. Generally, the novel combines the features of the Gothic novel and Romanticism.

It is related to science knowledge and reflects some elements of classical myth. The main characters of the novel are Victor Frankenstein, the Monster, Robert Walton, Elizabeth Lavenza, Henry Clerval, and the DeLacey family.

In my opinion, the most common themes the novel represents are horror and terror, social responsibility, parental neglect, obsessive behavior, revenge, injustice, physical deformity, parental love and responsibility. Of course, all the themes are vividly reflected in Mary Shelley’s work, but I suppose that the key theme is still considered to be good vs. evil.

Another important point I would like to highlight is the history of the novel. To my mind, the most interesting fact is that the story was not created by chance. On the contrary, it appeared on the basis of competition. Mary Shelley and other writers decided to create the best ghost story.

In other words, “the novel was the result of a dream she had after a challenge that she, Lord Byron, Percy Shelley, and a doctor friend of theirs each write a ghost story” (“Frankenstein by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, 1797 – 1851 – LSC-Kingwood” par. 2). So, I suppose that the novel Frankenstein written by Shelley, won.

The thesis statement

Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein represents numerous interesting themes. The novel discloses people’s attitudes towards superficial issues as well as really important ones. A science fiction genre reflects public mood and inhumanity of the contemporary world.

The body: Victor Frankenstein vs. his creature: some similarities and differences between the main characters

While discussing the main characters, one is to keep in mind that the creator of the monster Victor Frankenstein and his creature are the principal figures of the novel.

According to Shelley’s work Victor was fond of chemistry and science. He received his education at the University of Ingolstadt. The main aim of the investigations made by Victor was to disclose the secret of life. However, the main character’s researches led to the creature appearance. In my opinion, Victor’s interest in science is closely related to the knowledge of the Renaissance period and Middle Ages.

I suppose that the most obvious distinctive feature between the creator and his creature is the state of mind of both characters. While analyzing the characters’ behavior, one is to make a conclusion that Victor’s mind seems to be unstable; while the monster he created is more balanced.

To my mind, Victor’s nature is mostly associated with a psychological disease, namely obsessive-compulsive disorder; while his creature becomes cruel because of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. Thus, the creature says: “Believe me, Frankenstein: I was benevolent; my soul glowed with love and humanity: but am I not alone, miserably alone?” (Shelley 85).

I think this quotation confirms an affirmation that originally, the creature created by Victor wasn’t a monster. On the contrary, the creature wanted to be accepted by people; however, it is appearance, which is considered to be much more important than a person’s inner world. Of course, the monster realizes his lameness and can’t stand people’s mockery anymore.

The creature Frankenstein tried to find friends; however, later he realized that there were no human beings who could love him or accept his horrible appearance. So, he says: “Unfeeling, heartless creator! You had endowed me with perceptions and passions and then cast me abroad an object for the scorn and horror of mankind” (Shelley 118). Taking into account the quotation, one can state that the creature experienced enough pain, before it was transformed into a real monster and started to kill people.

On the other hand, I think there is also a need to tell a few words about the creator of the monster. It is evident, that Victor understands what causes his experiments lead to. For instance, he says: “I was seized by remorse and the sense of guilt, which hurried me away to a hell of intense tortures, such as no language can describe” (Shelley 76).

The creature, in its turn, realizes that there is no its fault that people can’t accept it. While experiencing joy, Frankenstein (the creature) can’t share the feeling with others. On the contrary, the main character is recognized to be a social outcast.

In my opinion, there are not so many common features, which both characters possess. This seems to be really strange, as the monster Frankenstein was created by a scientist; so, both characters had to have numerous common traits. To my mind, the only thing both characters have in common is coherence of reasoning. In other words, Victor Frankenstein and his creature express rational thoughts; however, relying on the first impression, it seems that the affirmation is to be wrong.

By the way, I have to point out that my suggestion about Victor’s unstable mind is not at variance with the present conclusion. I mean that the statement about rational thoughts both characters possess and the creator’s unstable mind are to be regarded differently. I suppose that Victor’s unstable mind is mostly related to his desire to study alchemy and discover the secret of life. So, rational thoughts do not contradict previous conclusion.

In my opinion, the author depicts the main character from the negative side mostly. Mary discovers his selfishness. On the other hand, “Victor Frankenstein was, in some ways, reflective of the consistently growing and changing field of medicine in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries” (“A Cultural History of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein” par. 9).

I suppose this position explains Victor’s interest in death. Moreover, the creator wanted to resolve various contradictions concerning medicine. However, his experiments were not successful, unfortunately.

The conclusion: it is through no fault of the creature…

So, what general conclusion concerning the similarities and certain differences between two characters can be made? I think the so-called interdependence between the characters can be neglected. In spite of the fact, that both figures had to possess the same traits of character as well as viewpoints, people’s attitude towards moral issues and their dependence on the external things changes the situation and leads to catastrophic consequences.

Finally, in my opinion, it is not the monster’s fault that it kills people. On the contrary, people’s cruelty and indifference cause the tragic events. “Soft tears again bedewed my cheeks, and I even raised my humid eyes with thankfulness towards the blessed sun, which bestowed such joy upon me” (Shelley 119).

Works Cited

“A Cultural History of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Mount Holyoke College. Web.

“Frankenstein by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, 1797 – 1851 – LSC-Kingwood.” Lone Star College System. Web.

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein Or, the Modern Prometheus. New York: Collier Books, 1961. Questia. Web.

Introduction

In analyzing the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, it is difficult to determine which is more monstrous, Dr. Frankenstein or his creature as these characters fall into the realms of evil. Both Dr. Frankenstein and the monster he creates begin their existence in a state of goodness and innocence, yet both can be considered a monster. The American Heritage Dictionary defines the word ‘monster’ as “a creature having a strange or frightening appearance” and also as “one who inspires horror or disgust” (2003). Within her novel, Shelley suggests both of these definitions hold true, but suggests the appearance may apply to behavior as much as outer aspect, either of which might inspire horror. She does this by employing the first definition as it applies to the monster, but then employs the second definition to apply to the doctor, suggesting that the hidden monster is far worse than the apparent one.

Main body

The monster Dr. Frankenstein creates is given little chance to do anything but inspire disgust and horror on first sight. Despite Frankenstein’s rejection of it, the monster awakens with a gentle spirit and desire to love. Gaining an education from eavesdropping on the DeLacey family, the monster tells Frankenstein, “my spirits were elevated by the enchanting appearance of nature; the past was blotted from my memory, the present was tranquil, and the future gilded by bright rays of hope and anticipations of joy” (119). However, his monstrous appearance causes him to be chased from this loving home and he becomes convinced that there is no where and no place for him to be happy among normal humans. His only option, he reasons, is for Frankenstein to create a companion for him, with whom the monster plans to disappear into the wilderness far from human civilization. However, he finds he must resort to violence to get Frankenstein to even listen to him. It is only when Frankenstein refuses to create this companion that the monster fully dedicates himself completely to Frankenstein’s destruction. In the end, the creature tells Walton, ”I had cast off all feeling, subdued all anguish, to riot in the excess of my despair. Evil thenceforth became my good. Urged thus far, I had no choice but to adapt my nature to an element which I had willingly chosen” (239). Although he appears to be a monster on the outside, Shelley makes it clear that this creature never fully became a monster on the inside, driven to violence out of desperation rather than inclination.

Dr. Frankenstein, on the other hand, has received a number of warnings regarding his unnatural studies but crosses into the monstrous as he continues forward with his experiments beyond the point of no return. His studies “forced [him] to spend days and nights in vaults and charnel-houses. My attention was fixed upon every object the most insupportable to the delicacy of the human feelings” (45) while “my eyes were insensible to the charms of nature” (49). This behavior is horrific and repulsive in itself, yet the idea that the doctor recognizes its unnaturalness and still chooses to pursue this course of study suggests a far more frightening inner appearance. Despite the warnings Frankenstein had been given about his study and his willful flaunting of the natural world, the doctor continues to work on the creature he had started until the living monster stood facing him. Only at that point does he recognize the monster as hideous and then rejects it in every possible way, monstrously forcing an innocent creature into an unforgiving world. Frankenstein, having created something so hideous he can’t bear himself to look upon it, abandons his creation and allows it to enter the world unprotected, uncared for and misunderstood at every turn, proving himself the greater monster.

Comparing these two characters, one can see how both can fit within the common understanding of the term ‘monster’ – the doctor creation as the physical embodiment while the doctor represents the psychological element. In telling her story, Shelley suggests that the psychological monster is the more evil because it is more likely to bring evil into the world. The monster simply looks evil, frightening others by its appearance but perfectly willing to exile itself to prevent this fear if it can just have some companionship. In contrast, Dr. Frankenstein forces the monster to commit acts of violence before he will agree to talk with it. This inner nature that would treat another living creature so heartlessly, eventually forcing it to act so against its own inner nature just to meet its basic needs paints Frankenstein as the more hideous of the monsters in the book.

Works Cited

“Monster.” The American Heritage Dictionary. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 2003.

Shelley, Mary. The Essential Frankenstein. Leonard Wolf (Ed.). New York: Simon & Schuester, 2004.