Growing up, I was aware of the story, but I still pictured
the monster being Frankenstein. When I
heard the name that is exactly what I thought.
Originally before thinking more critically, I would think that this
judgment was incorrect, but now I think differently. While the creature is named the monster, I
believe that the true monster of the story is Dr. Frankenstein. So by placing my original childhood thought
into that context, I wasn’t necessarily wrong, more like making an early
connection.
I feel like the story of Frankenstein exploits a key thing in human nature. We all go against what isn’t the norm. Look at the story. When the monster was created, he was a masterpiece to the master behind the plan, Dr. Frankenstein. Once the public found out of this creation, there was a huge uproar. The public ended up being terrified of the creature. Due to this, they acted out in such a way that just terrified the monster. They came after him as a mob; attacking him with fire and pitchforks. All of this was because they were afraid of him and his differences. They did not understand the monster. All they saw was someone, rather something that was a threat to their society. All that the monster wanted was to be treated equally. He wasn’t trying to cause any trouble.
I feel like the story of Frankenstein exploits a key thing in human nature. We all go against what isn’t the norm. Look at the story. When the monster was created, he was a masterpiece to the master behind the plan, Dr. Frankenstein. Once the public found out of this creation, there was a huge uproar. The public ended up being terrified of the creature. Due to this, they acted out in such a way that just terrified the monster. They came after him as a mob; attacking him with fire and pitchforks. All of this was because they were afraid of him and his differences. They did not understand the monster. All they saw was someone, rather something that was a threat to their society. All that the monster wanted was to be treated equally. He wasn’t trying to cause any trouble.
Things like this do not just happen in story telling. This also happens in real life. Back
in the day, slavery was bases on the fact that colored people were not the norm
to our society. Even after slavery was
abolished, these themes were still found.
Even today traces are noticeable.
In my earlier post, I talked about how the monster could actually be perceived as the romantic hero because of the characteristics it possesses. While on this same note, it is my opinion that Victor is the true villain of the story, however he might not be fully aware of it.
ReplyDeleteEven though the monster commits acts of such violence, it is not my opinion that he is the true villain of the story, but in fact I find it rather easy to pity him. Throughout the book I was constantly thinking to myself, “why does Victor not just give in and accept his guilt? Why doesn’t he just give the monster his demands?” It was actually quite frustrating because Victor kept blaming himself for the deaths of his family members throughout the entire book, yet he did nothing to atone for any of them. He destroyed his only shot at redemption by destroying the monster’s companion and this in turn, caused the death of Elizabeth. It was Victor’s failure to act which caused his family grief, just like it was his fault to put his desires before his family.
The desire for knowledge and the inability to atone for his actions ultimately led to the deaths of his loved ones, and for this he is in my opinion, the villain of the novel. You did however, bring up some good points in your post in regards to the way society drove Victor’s creation to the title of “monster”.
Do you think that Frankenstein meant for his creature to be rejected by the rest of humanity, or did he think that people would recognize his creature as his masterpiece?
ReplyDelete