Please finish reading the novel and compose a four paragraph blog response using ALL FOUR of the questions in your response.
1. Mary Shelley is careful to outline the progression of the Monster's awareness, beginning with his earliest sense impressions, and this progression seems to duplicate the stages of infant, child, and general human development. Does this account tell us anything important about what it means to be human?
2. Frankenstein may seem to endorse the common modem sociological premise that antisocial or criminal behavior is conditioned by rage, which in turn is induced by society's rejection of its marginal members. Does the novel give clear support to this sociological premise?
3. After Frankenstein's decision not to create a female mate for the Monster, the latter vows to avenge himself on Frankenstein on his wedding day. Through all the long months during which Frankenstein broods over this threat, it never occurs to him that Elizabeth, and not he himself may be the intended victim. What do you make of his rather incredible lapse of imagination?
4. Even though the monster seems to learn compassion and reason from the cottagers, he still--in the end--vows to make humans suffer. Why? What prevents the monster from developing a sense of ethics?
Throughout the story the Creation learns about his senses, and interacts with the world. He seems to be curious about the world around him. At one point in the book he experiences the warmth from a fire, but his childlike curiosity and naivety leads him to put his hand in the embers. As time goes on he grows more intelligent with his experiences. The Creation shows that to be truly human, you must have an innate curiosity, and a desire to learn. In that regard, the Creation is relatable to Victor and Robert, in the sense that they all have a desire for discovery.
ReplyDeleteThe reason why the Creation is angry at humanity is because of how people treated him. He was originally kind, he had a calm demeanor, and was just in search of knowledge. Whenever the Creation was seen, he was met with anger and hatred. He would be attacked just for existing. At one point he saved a child from a river, and despite his heroic action he was shot in the shoulder. By being treated like a monster, he eventually became the monster everyone saw him as because of his rage. When the Creation met Victor’s brother, he thought that since the boy was young he was uncorrupted. The Creation thought he could teach the boy kindness. The boy calls him an ogre, and reveals himself as Victor’s brother. Because of the Creation’s anger towards Victor, the Monster kills the boy. The Monster is enraged because he could never be accepted into humanity because of the cruelty of humankind.
I don’t know how Victor didn’t see that coming. The Monster wanted to bring despair into Victor’s life, just how Victor did to him. Since Victor didn’t make the Monster a female mate that he could love, and be loved by, the perfect revenge would be to kill the one that Victor loves most. How Victor didn’t recognize what the Monster’s motives were is beyond me.
Humanity never accepted the Creation. The Creation tried to be compassionate towards others, but no matter how hard he tried everyone still hated him. To be excluded from humanity, and only to be hated on made him furious. What would be the point of compassion if nobody would accept it, and in turn hurt him just for existing.
-Trevor Albano
1) progression and development in terms of a human life is usual in conjunction with the transition from first being pure and ignorant at birth, to growing older, and adopting biases through learned and applied prejudices. This is the case for Frankenstein's Monster, however his awareness with time comes in an inverted world, where he is looking at everything from one step back; being locked out of humanity by his hideous looks and massive build. From his arrival on Earth, though yes he was oblivious to the world around himself, he started, with knowledge that the world did not welcome him, nor want him. This distancing characteristic, whether it be through a monster in this case, or a young child in real life, can/will be the source of life long depravity in obtaining a philosophically stable mind, and a normal outlook on the world as a whole. As to the book however, this way of thinking manifests into murderous acts of revenge in the lifetime of the monster, as he believes if he was created to be hideous, he should act as he is seen to be. Though Shelley purposely shows the Monster as very conscious in regards to appreciating his own character and ideals on life, he ultimately regrets his presence on Earth as others don't feel his self worth as he does. Shelley is driving home here the idea that the progression of any conscious being on Earth isn't so much affected by their own ideologies on the World, but rather, their perceptions on how the world perceives them, and how that way of thinking greatly controls their thoughts and actions.
ReplyDeleteI like how you mentioned that if a child had the same experiences as the Monster did, they'd experience a similar outcome. It further reinforces the idea of how human the Monster is.
Delete2) I believe I covered this In the first response indirectly, however it is very true. The reason behind why the monster murdered so many people and acted as he did, rooted not by a malice driven nature he possessed, yet from the rejection from the world and people around him. This hated of the monster wherever he went, made him grow tired of trying to be nice to it as he had originally. A prime example of this comes from chapter 16, where after trying to be nice to the world, In an attempt for people to realize his tender and innocent internal character, as well as in the true benevolence of his nature, he saves a girl after tripping into a running stream. He is rewarded for his act of kindness by a marksman shooting him in his shoulder as he was assumed to be attacking the girl due to his exterior characteristics. The Monster states "The feelings of kindness and gentleness which I had entertained but a few moments before gave place to hellish rage and gnashing of teeth." He in essence is telling that if it weren't for societies rejection of himself, he would be his true kind self.
ReplyDelete3) The Monster's intentions of killing Elizabeth instead of Frankenstein himself are very evident in his threats; especially through his passage in chapter 20, where he questions, “Shall each man,...find a wife for his bosom, and each beast have his mate, and I be alone?...Your hours will pass in dread and misery, and soon the bolt will fall which must ravish from you your happiness forever." Despite this however, Frankenstein firmly believes that the monster will be after himself, and not his love. He thinks so for two primary reasons. First, Frankenstein is psychologically ready for death, in a very twisted and tired sense. What I mean by this is that Frankenstein has lived to create a horror in his mind that he cannot take away, and that it has also killed many dear to his heart. He cannot live with himself for creating it, nor for the creation itself, so his mind controls his self to believe in such a way of thinking, so that in the end, the solution will satisfies one of his two problems. Either way, the cause of the destruction will perish and his psychological conflict be no more. Secondly, In also a severely exaggerated and convoluted way of thinking, Frankenstein believes that his monster is ready to directly kill Himself, instead of slowly killing those around Frankenstein in an attempt to slowly kill him emotionally. Frankenstein believes the Monster wants to Directly kill him, as the Monster has grown tired of indirectly trying to ruin Frankenstein's life to little prevail by killing his close ones. His beliefs that The Monster wants to directly kill his person shows through his thoughts, "That, then, was the period fixed for the fulfillment of my destiny. In that hour I should die and at once satisfy and extinguish his malice." Frankenstein's blind eye in all results from the psychological turn that he has burdened himself with by creating the monster, and his perpetual lust to rid it of it's existence.
ReplyDelete4) If the Stanford Prison Experiment of 1971 have taught us anything, it is that ethics of good and kind people never remain those same pure ethics when in the presence of a societal atmosphere who suppress and alienate them. In other words, It is not a character which dictates a life, but rather a life which dictates a character. The perpetual rejection due to the external prejudices the world has on the monster never prompts the ability to grow a kind relationship with the world. As a result, he doesn't feel his actions mean anything for the world will not, and has not seen or cared for them as they look straight through them.
ReplyDeleteWhy fight for a world that has always been fighting against you
The SPE is a good example of ethics gone wrong. However, some of the people involved made that mean character all on their own, with those exact intentions to hurt etc. So with the creation, he, instead of being conditioned with rationale and inside a lab, he was conditioned with rage that he felt within him of outside pressures. I think the SPE was less so about morally okay people as it was just placing people in a role of authority. The goal wasn't to supress a group, it was to see if "normal" people are placed in a position of authority how would it affect another group. Like Zimbardo, Frankenstein unintentionally did this.So much so that the events seem as if they are indirectly related.
Delete1) Through the progression of the creature, Mary Shelley is showing the importance of an individual’s childhood. The creature’s “childhood” is most likely while he was living near the cottage. Like a child, the creature spent his time learning how to read and speak, which are extremely important. A human’s childhood is also influential because it affects someone’s perspective of others and the world. So, when the family he observed rejected him, there is a permanent shift in the creature’s perception of humans. Before he introduced himself to his neighbors, the monster was hopeful and believed that they may accept him. After he fled the cottage, “[his] feelings were those of rage and revenge. [He] could with pleasure have destroyed the cottage and its inhabitants, and have glutted [himself] with their shrieks and misery”(97). His anger was directed towards all humans after this event. Shelley’s book demonstrates how the environment of an individual can affect their opinions.
ReplyDelete2) The novel does support this idea through the creature’s actions. When the monster is on his own and in the hovel, he does not have any evil intentions. The creature is curious of others and wants to interact with humans. He was taught “with high thoughts of honour and devotion”(165). However, due to his appearance, everyone he has met fears him. The monster was rejected by his creator and society. In isolation, the creature despises humanity for his treatment. So, although he was “benevolent and good; misery made [him] a fiend”(69). There was no innate hatred within the creature, but his alienation turned him to crime and anger.
3)It is surprising that Frankenstein never considered Elizabeth the next victim of the creature. So far, the monster has killed only the friends and relatives of Frankenstein, so it would be logical that it would go after Elizabeth. Personally, I believe this idea did not occur to Frankenstein because he was extremely paranoid and self-centered. Ever since he created the monster, Frankenstein was in a constant state of worry. After the monster threatened him, Victor’s apprehension only intensified. He might have been unable to think properly. Furthermore, Frankenstein has the habit of solely thinking about himself. He only worries about how the monster will hurt him. Only when his brother and Justine are killed does he think about how harmful the creature might be. He thinks too much about his own mistakes to understand that the creature might have a different victim in mind.
4) While living in the hovel, the creature observes the interactions of his neighbors. As he watches them, he not only learns how to speak but also emotions like kindness and compassion. Despite these teachings, the monster swears to only bring human suffering. The creature seeks revenge on humans because they have treated him horribly. There has been no individual to show him the kindness that he learned and wanted. Even his own creator, Frankenstein, considers him a monster and a fiend. With no one to show him anything but malice, the creature is conditioned to despise all humans.
ReplyDelete1.
In this book the creature is portrayed as an infant and in my opinion he is an infant in the sense that the creature doesn’t know anything about humans and is very new to the world. This creature practically embodies what it means to be human because he was feeling emotions that everyone human goes through at least once in their lives. The creature feels loneliness, wants companionship, feels hatred and also wants to be accepted by everyone. This book also tells us that we as society are responsible for the monsters we create and instead of shunning people based on their outside appearance we should judge them based on their personality, because the creature had a heart of gold and helped people until he was shunned by the deLaceys because they thought that the creature was trying to kill the girl but in reality the creature was trying to save her.
2.
No, the novel is actually trying to tell us not to reject people because they are different and although the novel portrays this situation with the creature the novel is trying to tell us not to do this (atleast in my opinion).
3.
I think that the reason he doesn’t realise that the creature might be going for elizabeth is that Victor believes that in destroying his second creation he has destroyed the creatures chance at happiness and hence all the wrath of the creature will only fall on him.
4.
I think that the reason the creature chooses to despise human is because although the creature tries to appease everyone to he is always met with contempt and hatred for his actions, his gestures of kindness were mistaken as actions with murderous intent and even his creator doesn’t want him. These actions made by the society is what probably pushed the creature to hate humans as a whole.
- Aadith Arasu
It tells us how much of a person and their identity, their actions are shaped by their environment. The monster had to learn how the world works and about people all about himself, neglected. He learned about human interaction by watching people interact, he learned how the world works by reading books. Through those experiences he formed a world view that he would never be accepted and the only way not to be lonely was to have a companion. It is similar to humans, children learn from the people around them, they speak like the people around them, their world views are influenced by their parents. Mary Shelley is saying that nurture is influential in a human. People are shaped by their environment, it is not only your genetics that decide who what kind of a person someone is.
ReplyDeleteIt is defentity strongly suggested that Frankenstein’s monster committed all of the horrible acts because he did not fit it. It goes with the previous answer, because Frankenstein learned that he did not fit in with people he became angry. All of the horrible acts that he committed where to hurt Victor because Victor hurt him. He also hurt Justine because she was what he was not, a beautiful person that people accepted. He was angry about not being part of his society. One of his final acts, killing Elizabeth was because Victor ruined any chance of giving Frankenstein a friend. Ironically, if Frankenstein had not killed anyone he probably would have a friend so he responded by killing more people. Although, at the end he cries when he sees that Victor is dead, maybe that means that he now has zero chance of another like him but Victor was his only contact with other people. The monster only killed because people did not respond positively to his appearance.
It almost seems like a plot hole, how would it not occur to Victor that other people may get hurt. Throughout the novel he has been very secluded and cut off. Nobody knew about the monster, he always worked by himself. Yet the monster had hurt other people before and it takes two people to get married. Victor is obviously a smart person so it seems that although he is self involved that he would think of the monster hurting Elizabeth. It should be clear that the monster does not want to kill him, the monster had many opportunities to kill Victor, Victor is the contact the monster has and the only hope that the monster will get a friend. It just makes sense that the monster would kill Elizabeth, Victor took away the monster’s mate so the monster takes away Victor’s wife. It almost seems like Mary Shelley thought that it would be better if it was a complete surprise to Victor she just wrote it that way.
The monster is not in a place to develop ethics. While he watches the other people, those same people reject him based on his appearance . All Frankenstein wants is for people to accept him and when he is not accepted, he lashes out to hurt those who hurt him. It is similar to if someone punched another person in the face, would it be unethical to punch them back? Although it may be somewhat understandable for Frankenstein to lash back obviously killing people is morally unethical but if Frankenstein had been accepted and given a friend he probably would not be violent at all and there would be no conversation about his morals. The monster does not have ethics because nobody cared about him and showed him how to be nice so he never learned how to be nice and ethical. Similar to the first question, he did not learn to be ethical, so he was not ethical.
1. This metaphor for human nature expressed through the monster shows us that being human is not an outward facing trait, but rather a complex internal development shaped by others. At first the monster is afraid and confused by his surroundings and feelings, but then he discovers the things in life that feel good and the ones that feel bad which is reflective of the infant stage. After the infant stage there isn't a very well-defined human development staged to accompany his own development, instead of that the monster undergoes a fluid process to become more and more human as he continues through his life. He starts out wanting social interaction, then wants knowledge, and then finally power. As a result of all of these changes occurring in an inhuman creature, the reader can infer that either the human form is superfluous to human nature or that human nature is something deeper than we currently understand.
ReplyDelete2. Yes, it does. The entire novel is basically centered around the monster's rejection by and growing anger of society. All of that rejection drives him to seek revenge on those who have hurt him even if they had nothing to do with it directly simply because they are of the same species. We see this on a daily basis when minority groups get marginalized or worse treatment they start to resent (for good reason) those who have marginalized them in the first place, and more than occasionally misdirect that anger. More often than not that retaliation leads to even further marginalization because it validates those who treated them differently in the first place (as "different" or "violent" as a collective). Some experiments were done by university researchers called "ball toss" or "cyberball" in which a group of three people threw a ball around with two of them being in on the experiment and after a minute of tossing the ball around fairly completely excluded the third person. This led to feelings of "anger and sadness" by the third party with no effect shown by prior self-esteem or other factors.
3. I think the reason for it lies in Frankenstein's selfish and individualistic view of the world around him. Victor hates social interaction and would rather brood alone or tinker with his scientific projects than talk to others, so he is completely inept at empathizing with others, including a creature of his own creation. He also destroys the monster's only chance at being happy, and his future family's only chance of not being hunted by the monster for the rest of his life out of fear that the monster might be lying about his intent to go into a jungle with his companion and live out the rest of his days in solitude and out of disregard for the monster's glaring expressed humanity that might make his children less violent in the future. Instead, Victor believes that as soon as he makes this second creature they will both immediately go kill and pillage everything around them which causes him to destroy the almost finished creature before considering the consequences.
4. The monster never fully developed empathy for humans after his negative interactions with them. The compassion he felt was always half-formed before people became afraid of him and fled. Therefore, his feelings are almost superficial, as if he wants to be nice and empathetic and know what it means to be that way, but still has never successfully implemented it. The monster also never had anyone to guide him in the right direction because he was alone since his creation, so any sense of moral code he would have had to develop himself.
-Yuvak
*Yuval
Delete1. This account shows that a person's behavior and identity is shaped by how they grow up and by how they are treated. The monster was "born" into a world without someone to take care of him so he had to find out how the world works without someone to help him. This leads to him having to find out how the world works on his own and he only is treated with hate and fear, leading to himself having hate and fear. This idea is also true in the real world because if a child is not properly taken care of or disciplined then they will develop a distorted view on the world and other people.
ReplyDelete2. This novel heavily supports the fact that outsiders are treated differently in all aspects of life, either in humans or in animals. I think that Mary Shelley wrote this whole book to show how an outsider is treated differently and not given a far chance in society. This unjust treatment will eventually effect a person's view on the world and on other people and even on themselves. We see this happen to the creation as he begins to believe that all he is is a monster from all the poor treatment from everyone he meets.
3. This was one of the only parts of this book that I didn't really like. It felt like Mary Shelly got lazy and purposefully made Victor have a strange lapse in judgment. He has been very smart and knowledgeable throughout the whole book but this one time he doesn't realize the obvious. I can kind of understand his thinking in a way because his fear clouded his judgement of the situation. He was scared that the creation was going to go after him and this fear made him think of only himself as the intended target.
4. He cannot develop ethics because he has never been shown any ethics besides anger and hate towards him, leaving him unaware of feeling nice and kind hearted. This kind of lack in ethics can also happen in the real world with animals or kids when they are mistreated or abused at a young age. This leaves a scar for a long time and it is hard for them to develop other emotions besides fear and hate because that is all they have been exposed to. I also think that the creature is unable to develop ethics is because he saw them in books and in a very small sample of people. The books gave him an inaccurate portrayal of what happens and he assumes these are real and not made up by someone who is writing the story.
Evan Arhelger
(1)Throughout the book, as we become acquainted with Frankenstein and his monster, we see that the progression of the Monster’s awareness is similar to human development. Like children, the monster is very impressionable, he learns how to interact with others by observing those around him. His actions are thoughts are influenced by the De Lacey family and other humans he interacts with. By reading, he learns about the world and gains new vocabulary like young children do. The monster develops a thought process for himself - this embodies what it means to be human. Like humans, the monster was not created to be inherently evil. In fact, at the beginning, the monster was mostly curious and pure. Through human interactions, he gains new personality traits because of how people treat him. What Mary Shelley is trying to say is that humans are not the person they are by nature, but instead by nurture. Like the monster, people are shaped by the environment and those around them.
ReplyDelete(2) The monster’s looks sparked fear and judgement upon everyone he interacted with, thus leading him him to be antisocial though not by choice. Throughout the novel, the monster acts out in moments of loneliness and rejection. He places the blame onto Victor Frankenstein, and upon learning that William, the little boy that he had found in Geneva was related to Victor he states “Frankenstein! You belong to my enemy - to him towards whom I have sworn eternal revenge; you shall be my first victim.” He acted out and murdered Victor’s brother because he hated Victor for rejecting him. Rejection is something that nobody enjoys, and as the monster faces rejection everytime he interacts with a human being, he turns his rage and anger onto those who caused him pain.
(3) I find it incredibly senseless that Frankenstein didn’t stop to think that the monster wasn’t going to kill him. He should’ve realized that the monsters goal was not for Frankenstein to die,
But for him to suffer like he did. He knows that the way that he could hurt Frankenstein is by hurting his family. This is shown when he killed William and placed the blame upon Justine. Their deaths racked Frankenstein with guilt, knowing that something he created had taken the innocent lives of those he loved. Frankenstein spent so much time isolated and alone that he’s extremely paranoid and self absorbed. Throughout the novel, Frankenstein is obsessed with the monster; first with creating him, then with worry about how the monster would hurt humankind. Frankenstein was not thinking with a clear head - he was so paranoid and consumed with fear that he didn’t stop to try to understand the monster’s thought process. If he did, he would’ve realize that the monster did not want him dead. Instead, the monster wanted his creator to understand the pain that he's gone through after being brought into a world that rejects him.
(4) The lack of a sense of ethics in the monster is rooted in his pride. Although the monster learned compassion from the De Lacey family, when he tried to build relations with them, they rejected him. He believed that these people - outcasts, like him - would accept him because they accept each other. So when they ultimately rejected him, this is a blow on his ego. Although he is compassionate and seems to understand right from wrong, his vow for revenge overrides his compassion. The monster doesn’t have a reason to treat humanity with sympathy, because humanity has never shown him any sympathy.
I think this shows us that no human is born completely ready to be independent and self supporting every human needs a mother to raise them and we literally couldn't live without a guardian at the very least. It was unfair for the monster to be thrown into a damned and dark world all alone and with no one but himself.”We reap what we sow”
ReplyDeleteI believe it does give clear support the beginning part of our life is the most influential it defines who we are and for the monster he was born into a world of anger and hate making it only nature for this to manifest inside of him. I like to think the quality that I have as a person are only part of me because how my parents raised me any different and I'd be a completely different person. Frankenstein is clearly not aware of the fact that his actions can and did endanger everyone he knows and loves. Frankenstein had only one goal of building a ideal creature but he chased this goal however he never gave thought to the potential consequences of this progress. the reason the monster never develops ethics is cause he feels like a failure to his creator which could really destroy the monsters moral compass making it hellbent to take vengeance against all of humankind. -Brodie
1) The creation over all had to take huge leaps in terms of basic human developments. Going straight from the ignorance and innocence of a infant, then child to having the knowledge of an adult so much knowledge ,in fact, that he wanted to wreck havoc and chaos in the life of another. However if we look at what basic human development is now, in comparison to what it was then we can see an enormous gap. specifically for the creation himself. Some of the thing he lacks are from the Hierarchy Pyramid Of Needs made by Abraham Maslow. Of course this was written nearly a century after this book was published I still think it applies. The hierarchy of needs maps out the basic necessities, in life to make it to your fullest potential as a human; mean self-actualization. This pyramid starts with a person's physical needs food, clothes, shelter. For the creation, these right off the bat were made, thanks to the consistent rejection from others. Thus leading into the next part of the pyramid-safety. The creation for the same reason as listed above was never given a sense of security. It was only until he is makes his own home by the French family, that he is even allowed to feel safe. Then there is Love/ Esteem, ( Two different categories often counted as one) which the creation was never allowed to feel. His ugliness caused constant discrimination and displeasure with the normal people of society, thus raising his awareness of himself and his anger. Then finally self actualization. Since the creations more basic needs were never met, he was never in a place to reach the last stage of development.
ReplyDelete2) I feel as though I touched on this briefly while talking about the hierarchy of needs specifically the last part about Love/Esteem. Due to the his deformities and his “ the other” status, he was never allowed to feel loved( not even by his creator) or gain good self-esteem. Thus leading him to feel anger towards the Frankenstein family. However I do not think it warrants murder or any criminal behavior. I also think that gives the creation too much slack. It’s as if is an excuse, for killing. However at the same time, I feel bad for the creation and feel as though if he was taught what was right and wrong. Frankenstein wouldn’t have lost so much.
3) Frankenstein, seems to almost be in denial in someway about the creation’s ability to do the things that he threatens in chapter 20. He vows to make him alone, very openly by saying “Shall each man,...each beast have his mate, and I be alone?...Your hours will pass in dread and misery...will fall...from your happiness forever." And even this doesn’t sway Frankenstein and makes him believe further that the monster is after him and not his beloved wife. I also think in some sense that Frankenstein was terrified of death himself , and intended to fight it off for as long as he could. I think that becomes for evident as he begins to brood over the thought of dying by the creatures hand, thus while ‘trying to protect’ Elizabeth she ends up dying the in the process. But like the others in his life.
4) Much like love, anger can be blinding. It can make the kindest people become cruel; It can turn sometimes the most innocent children( pretty sure we’ve all read Lord of the Flies) into monsters.. And through this we can see the creations transition from ( somewhat) innocent and morally stable, to anger and rage. As touched on previously, I think that if the creation was taught right from wrong, things would have been different. However it wasn’t until he learned about rage that he even realized his own feelings of anger.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteQuestions:
ReplyDelete1. Mary Shelley’s interpretation on human nature is seen when the creation develops awareness throughout the novel. Shelley’s way of having people perceive the creation as a hideous monster in the early stages of the creation’s development leads the creation to follow the conflict and put out some of the anger that he has coped on people. This indirectly is not the creations fault it is simply the human nature of the development of the creation that lead to these unfortunate actions. Mary Shelley is trying to explain that humans need to treat indifferent less different no matter what you look like.
2. I agree with the sociological premise and I believe that Mary Shelley does too because of how she touches upon how criminal behavior is conditioned by early on conflicts and rage. Many people in the book including the creator cannot stand even being in the same room as him, so how can anyone or simply anything can learn without the perception of others in their life? I do believe the creation had morals that he learned, although he had not much experience with how committing a criminal actions such as homicide is that bad and of course it didn’t help the fact that he had fears of the humans trying to kill him making it think that it’s okay to kill somebody which blinds his morals.
3. When the Creation threatens Victor with vengeance during his wedding, and Victor does not think that the creation may kill Elizabeth because the creation is more unpredictable than that as we can see from past events. The reason for the creation to kill his wife is because he knows Victor won’t create a wife for him. Victor’s act of selfishness shows that since the creation was produced, he has been blinded by his own fear.
4. I don’t believe it was just one thing that created the creation into a monster, but one of the major reasons is the monster never got any support when he was in his early stages of psychological development. Leading him to not have a very widen spectrum on good and evil even though he had some experiences of compassion and reasoning along the way but not enough to have a widen spectrum. Also the monster was created to originally from a person who was selfish and arrogant and also never really had a thought how violent the creation was going to be.
1. Mary Shelley is careful to show the development in the creature in Frankenstein. In the beginning, he didn't have much knowledge of the world and his surroundings so he lived in isolation. But they he learned how to speak and read and he started understanding everything more. I could see how far he had come when he didn't understand why there was so much bloodshed in the world. This reminds me of when you explain bad things that happen in the world to children and they don't understand why that happens. Its because all of that stuff is learned, you aren't born with hate and prejudice.
ReplyDelete2. The book does a really good job of explaining the creatures anger towards people rejecting him. The book has concentrated greatly on how people don't accept the creature because he looks different. It explains that people who are different in any way are treated differently when they just need a chance to actually prove they aren't actually that different.
3. I kind of saw this coming to be honest. The monster was always angry at the creator, but always killed people around to him. I didn't think that he was going to actually kill Victor because he is the reason that he is alive. I believe that Victor was too focused on the thought of seeing the creation again and disturbing his wedding, that he didnt think of who he would kill when he got the chance.
4. I think that he still wants to make humans suffer because that all he knows what to do. I believe that he would not do that but all people do when they see him is they are feared and don't want to go near him and so he is very defensive. He didn't meet anyone that was genuine to him, therefore, he doesn't know what that is and doesn't know how to act that way.
(1) As one reaps what one sows, the stages of learning and the Creature’s development into the being he becomes stems from the experiences he acquires; his failures, his observations, his successes (if any), etc. This account by Shelley describes the essence to be human; that we humans, are biologically made as social beings, and therefore must feel acceptance from others around us. There also stems the idea that as social beings, humans make sense of the world through social learning; (i.e Crows. Crows learn through others as one individual is merely an arm or an eye senses for suspecting sensory aspects or potential dangers.) There is a scripture which reads, “Even so the body is not made up of one part but of many…” “If they were all one part, where would the body be?” “As it is, there are many parts, but one body. The eye cannot say to the hand, “I don’t need you!” And the head cannot say to the feet, “I don’t need you!” “On the contrary, those parts of the body that seem to be weaker are indispensable, and the parts that we think are less honorable we treat with special honor. And the parts that are unpresentable are treated with special modesty, while our presentable parts need no special treatment.” (1st Corinthians 12: v. 12-24). Upon reading this, it is understood the role of each part of a body; that although separate, it is the unity of said body that reaps what they sow.
ReplyDelete(2) The idea that with antisocial or criminal behavior is followed by rage must stem from the internal bottling up of frustration (from the lack of being accepted/feeling as a part of a collective or the lack of resources in which to seek help). It is Shelley’s view on the idea that a monster is purely a monster because it harbors “evil intent” (through the conditioning of rage), leads a society to respond in a way that deems said being as a liability. It is this liability that leads society to reject said being, rather than trying to understand where the outpouring of rage originates from.
(3) The idea that the Creature could strike at any moments notice(!) or lack thereof, and the fact that Frankenstein of all people lacked the considerable observation to realise this considerable threat, seriously rubs me the wrong way. Again, the idea that along with great ambition, comes great creation, and along with great creation comes tragedy, the belief that like a child, “If we went 'round the moon or round and round the garden like a teddy bear” (BBC’s Sherlock Holmes, Benedict Cumberbatch), it wouldn't make any difference if the goal is to evade the Creature altogether. The Creature was going to find Frankenstein regardless, so running away from his (Frankenstein’s) problems along with the rather incredible lapse of imagination following his wedding, the fact he left his soon to be wife/fiancé is absolutely frustrating.
(4) The limiting reactant/or factor in this case is the Creature’s isolation and although the Creature could be argued as learning his own sense of ethics and morals, he undoubtedly does not learn the morals or ethics that would make (any) said being personified with human-esque traits. What prevents him to the development of a sense of ethics can stem from two traits of the Creature; one being the lack of reciprocal acceptance at the hands of others and two, being the appearance of the Creature, as that is what everyone sees upon first impression and thus reject him straightaway (all merely through his appearance).
1.) The progression of the creation as it “grew” up and developed through different life stages goes to show that humans and creations alike are not born inherently evil but rather develop through life experiences to be bad or good. The creation formed a grown, speaking model of what humans are. He was an explanation of human development that was able to understand and communicate why he turned out the way he did. After the creation was born, during his infantile stage, he began to learn what humanity was like when Frankenstein abandoned him. While immediately after being created he wasn’t malicious, he did start to become colder and harder from abandonment. Then during his “childhood” years, he was continuously rejected by society, deepening his distaste for the world. His development exemplifies the idea that to be human is to be shaped by the world around you and molded to the way you are treated.
ReplyDelete2.) While this book is fictional and completely based on ifs, it does support the premise that society's rejection of its outcasts leads to society inadvertently creating ‘monsters’. The creation was angry at the world and its inhabitants for rejecting him based purely on his appearance, even when he did acts of good for them (collecting firewood for family, saving the girl from drowning). Society had conditioned the people in the novel to fear disfigurements and anyone who seemed too different from them. This isolation led the creation to commit his atrocities. His lack of human contact and therefore not being able to learn human manners as well as he could have also was a factor in his murders, especially Williams as he didn’t know how to control his anger.
3.) Frankenstein seems to have a complex of sorts that made him the center of the universe. In his mind the creation was his and he could only imagine an epic showdown that would end with either him or the creation dead. He never imagined a world where the creation would be intelligent and cruel enough to target Elizabeth. Frankenstein was the lead in his own story and all the people in his life just seemed to be side characters to him. To the creation Frankenstein was the antagonist of his story and all the people involved with Frankenstein were plot devices to be used and manipulated.
4.)The creation saw humans being kind to one another but he himself was never treated with kindness. While he witnessed kindness, it was always through a lens that made it seem separate from him. If he had been treated one on one with kindness or human interaction he may have been able to understand what it truly meant to be human and to be compassionate. Suffering is all he had ever known. Cruel is the only way he had ever been treated. His lack of experience with the full range of human emotions led to his affinity for cruelty.
1. The progression of the creation over time is well portrayed in the book. You have to remember that this creation is much like a child when he brought into the world, therefore Victor should be his parent. Honestly, I feel like this story best portrays the effects of neglecting a child and forcing complete independence on them to learn about life. Without a proper "childhood" the creation views the world much differently than he could have. Because the creation is so intelligent he had the capability to have been very successful and happy with his life, however due to abandonment he is caught in a mentality of depression and views the world as miserable. In a nutshell the outcome of the creations mind when reunited with Victor Is spot on with the outcome of poorly parented children.
ReplyDelete2. I feel like this novel doesn't completely support that premise, but almost supports the reverse. I don't believe that anti-social people are isolated because of rage, I think that those who observe more frequently than participate have a better understanding of the world and even social aspects than those who socialize more. However, when people are forced into isolation by rejection from society and become anti-social unwillingly they are filled with an anger for those who label and outcast them. Criminal behavior begins when a person feels like there is no other option, no other way to get people to understand how they are feeling. People will always act out when they feel they are not being heard/accepted, because the squeaky wheel gets the oil. Rage is not what creates anti-social and criminal behavior, it is the rejection of society that creates the behavior which in turn creates rage because someone who is forced into a life of isolation doesn't want to live that way.
3. Frankenstien is just an extremely self-centered person and thinks the world revolves around him. When he thinks about situations he immediately thinks about how the situation affects him and involves him, not others. For example, when you are upset and someone else always assumes they did something wrong they just don't understand that not everything Is about them. Also, it could be well assumed that the creation would go after Elizabeth because he feels alone. He wants a companion to spend his life with and connect with, but is denied that by Victor and forced to live a life of loneliness and isolation. Therefore, the creation will kill off everything he loves leaving him alone to feel the way he does. First of all, if you will not make me a companion I will take yours away and second of all, if you will not give me someone who can connect with my misery I will make you connect with me. If you want something done, do it yourself right?
4. The way that the creation learns to interact with people is comparable to the way younger siblings first learn to interact with other friends. If their older siblings are mean to them then they assume that Is how you are supposed to treat people because that is all they know. It is also very hard to change a learned behavior without a reciprocated change in lifestyle. If humans had Began to accept the creation and treat him more kindly, he would have more easily made a change to his behavior. However, what is the point in changing how you treat others if they will not change the way they treat you?
1.Shelley outlines the progression of the monster’s awareness to show that he has the same emotions, feelings, and development as a regular human being. He may be a “monster,” in the fact that he is a product of various human parts and organs, but he was also “born.” He grows both physical (by being built by the hands of Victor) and emotionally (through his time in the woods, through observation of other humans, and his readings). By giving the monster the same development progress as all humans experience, Shelley demonstrates that the monster is more like the reader and not a hideous monster that should be feared.
ReplyDelete2.The novel “Frankenstein” give clear support to the sociological premise that criminal behavior is conditioned by rage. The monster is clearly rejected by society, even though he desperately wants to be part of and accepted by humanity. The monster struggles to connected to other humans, but due to his grotesque appearance, he is feared and shunned. The monster does try to socialize: he helps the family in the village, he learns language, and reads to learn more about human kind. Yet despite his efforts, he is never accepted. Furthermore, it is how society reacts to the monster that causes him to be filled with such rage.
3.Frankenstein, the character, is very self-involved. From the beginning of the text, he shows no interested in anything except for himself and his own bizarre interests. Therefore, it is not shocking to think that is would not occur to him that the monster would consider harming anyone else but Frankenstein. Frankenstein makes everything about him. He is very self-absorbed man who runs away from life (which is ironic because his creation, the monster, longs to be fully engaged in life).
4. Unlike his creator, the monster has a strong sense of compassion. He wants to be accepted and part of human-kind; however, due to his appearance, he is rejected by society. Due to his constant feelings of rejection, he vows to make humans suffer. He does this because he is hurt because the person who was supposed to love him and care for him the most – Victor Frankenstein – is biggest rejector of them all. Due to this, the monster cannot overcome his feelings of rage towards human kind.