Victor or his Monster: who is the Real Monster in Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’?
This essay about the real monster in Mary Shelley’s *Frankenstein* examines whether the true monstrosity is embodied by Victor Frankenstein or his creation. It discusses Victor’s initial sympathetic portrayal and his descent into moral ambiguity driven by his obsessive quest to conquer death. Victor’s abandonment of his creation leads to catastrophic consequences, showcasing his ethical failings. Conversely, the creature, despite his monstrous appearance, begins life with innocence and a longing for companionship, only turning to violence after experiencing relentless rejection and cruelty. The essay argues that Victor’s lack of responsibility and ethical consideration makes him more monstrous than the creature. It highlights how the creature’s actions, though violent, stem from societal and parental neglect, suggesting that monsters are made through mistreatment and isolation. The narrative concludes that true monstrosity lies in actions and moral choices rather than appearances, challenging the reader to reconsider traditional notions of evil and accountability.
How it works
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein presents a profound inquiry that echoes throughout its narrative: Who truly embodies monstrosity? Is it the grotesque amalgamation brought to life by Victor Frankenstein, or is it Victor himself, whose unchecked aspirations set forth a tragic cascade of events? This discourse delves into the moral and ethical complexities of this inquiry, offering a nuanced examination of the personas of Victor Frankenstein and his progeny.
Initially depicted as a compassionate and ambitious scientist, Victor Frankenstein is portrayed as driven by an altruistic ambition to conquer mortality and infirmity.
Nonetheless, as the tale unfolds, his fixation on bestowing life unveils a darker facet. Victor's reluctance to acknowledge his role in the creation's existence and his subsequent abandonment of it could be construed as monstrous. He embarks on a pursuit of knowledge devoid of ethical contemplation, forsaking his creation without guidance or concern. This dereliction directly precipitates the creature's resentment and thirst for retribution, laying bare Victor's moral deficiencies and myopic outlook.
Conversely, the creature commences its existence as a guileless entity, entering the world with an innocent curiosity and yearning for affection. Yet, it is swiftly met with revulsion, rejection, and brutality from the denizens it encounters, including its own progenitor. Despite its monstrous countenance, the creature exhibits cognitive faculties, emotional depth, and moral reflection that rival those of any human character in the narrative. It articulates its solitude and despondency, and its violent deeds, though abhorrent, stem from a profound sense of desertion and societal alienation. These elements compel readers to scrutinize the essence of monstrosity and question whether it is appearance or conduct that defines it.
The metamorphosis of the creature from innocence to malevolence engenders ethical inquiries regarding the influence of society and parental guidance on an individual's disposition. Victor's creation is not inherently malevolent; its transformation into a monster is precipitated solely by its experiences and the maltreatment it endures. This transition arguably constitutes Shelley's critique of societal and parental accountability, intimating that monsters are shaped, not born. Victor's initial abdication of his responsibilities as a creator parallels society's rejection of the creature, engendering a cycle of animosity and brutality that underscores the theme of communal obligation.
Furthermore, Victor's belated acknowledgment of his culpability arrives too late, culminating in the loss of his cherished kinfolk and his own agonized pursuit of the creature across the Arctic expanse. The tragic denouement of their saga serves as a testament to the calamitous ramifications of unbounded ambition and the disregard for ethical obligations. It necessitates a reevaluation of who truly embodies monstrosity — the progenitor or the progeny.
In summation, Mary Shelley's Frankenstein challenges readers to reassess their initial perceptions of monstrosity through the intricate delineations of Victor and his creation. While the creature manifests monstrous attributes in its appearance and actions, it is Victor's moral blindness and dereliction of duty that unleash genuine terror upon the world. Shelley articulates a persuasive argument that monstrosity is not contingent upon exterior attributes but rather upon actions and ethical decisions. By obfuscating the boundaries between heroism and villainy, Shelley impels us to contemplate the deeper wellsprings of malevolence within her narrative, ultimately intimating that humanity itself may embody the most monstrous force of all.
Victor or his Monster: Who is the Real Monster in Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein'?. (2024, Apr 29). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/victor-or-his-monster-who-is-the-real-monster-in-mary-shelleys-frankenstein/
