To get started on synthesizing your own thoughts on Frankenstein, and to prepare for discussion at our next two sessions, please select ONE of the questions below and in a paragraph, suggest how you would develop your response.
This does NOT require providing an answer to the question. Instead, consider what you find in the text that could indicate a direction, and what KIND of answer you find satisfying. Considering the questions within parentheses should help. For example, an answer that addresses what you know about Frankenstein's psychological character would be very different from one that sees the book as a philosophical statement. You might try free writing -- write about the question without pausing to remove pen from paper (or fingers from keys); don't allow yourself to stop, but transcribe what's going through your head until you feel you've run out of steam.
This exercise is intended to prompt thinking about what you see as the ground of interpretation--what kind of response to a critical question seems to you like a relevant and satisfactory response?
You do NOT need to select the question you'll write on for February 10 now.
1) Why does Victor Frankenstein create his creature? (What do we learn from his own account—including things he does as well as says? What can we infer from what Walton, his teachers, his family and others say of him, and from what he reveals about himself? Do you understand his ambition more as a desire to extend knowledge, or as an unfulfilled personal need?)
2) Is the creature Frankenstein creates a human being? (What view do you think the author takes? Are there any characteristics or qualities definitive of humanity—according to the book’s view or your own? Is it important to consider how he differs from human beings? What does the Creature himself seem to think?)
3) Why does Frankenstein’s creature want a mate? Why does Frankenstein decide not to provide one? (What is the role of sex and reproduction in the story? Are Frankenstein’s motivations clear and reasonable or obscure and suspect? What would happen if Frankenstein followed through? What wouldn’t happen?)
4) What is the source of the enmity between Frankenstein and his creation? (Why does Frankenstein abandon the creature? How does the creature respond? What lesson or principle does each of them infer from this? Is the book offering an allegory or lesson in this central conflict?)
Why does Frankenstein’s creature want a mate? Why does Frankenstein decided to not provide him one?
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein’s creature wants a mate because he feels lonely. Since humans view him as ugly and don’t want anything to do with him he would like to be able to spend his time with someone who is just like him. He admires the emotion and love between two people and wants that for himself. “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 (146).” Frankenstein goes back and fourth deciding whether or not to create a mate for his creature. When denying the creature, Frankenstein fears that from both the creature and his mate living away from humans will come back and come after people. He fears that he will come after Elizabeth and others he cares about. “You will return and again seek their kindness, and you will meet with their detestation; your evil passions will be renewed, and you will then have a companion to aid you in the task of destruction (149).” Not to mention what if they create children, and have an army of creatures to come after people he cares about. Frankenstein wants to be free of the promise he once made. To not be a slave to the creature he created. In the end he decides to not create a mate and dispose of the parts that he was going to use to make her.
Free Writing On Whether Or Not The Creature Is Human
ReplyDeleteFor me, the question that is sparking the greatest interest from me is whether or not the creature is a human being. I’ve read the book a couple times before but this time I had a new reaction. I couldn’t help but feeling constant sympathy for the creature. I’m interested in seeing a timeline so I can formulate my thoughts better, but I keep coming back to the idea that the creature is really an infant as far as years go. He’s a massive, 8 foot infant, lashing out at a world he was let loose in with absolutely no guidance. My current thought is that the creature is not a human but it’s damn close. It can’t be a real human because man can’t supply that unknown element, the thing that adds a spark to the eye and avoids the uncanny valley. But the creature was clearly showing complex human emotions from the moment it awoke. Maybe I think it’s human but not as human? Still contemplating. So I know murder is wrong and bad but in the context of this novel I equate the creature’s murders to a child in a high chair flinging a bowl of cereal against the wall because mom wouldn’t add sugar to it. Did dad ever tell him murder was wrong? Did anybody ever tell him anything? One of the first books he reads is The Sorrows of Young Werther about a privileged romantic who commits suicide because he doesn’t get what he wants (a girl, Charlotte). He finds Werther’s irrational and warped perspective beautiful. Sure he’s part savage. A beast. Beasts kill. They kill for food or because they are angry. And they don’t know any better. Yes the creature knows it’s wrong but on a base, inexperienced level. As for Victor Frankenstein, there is very little in the book to endear the reader to him. He seems selfish, anti-social, somewhat elitist, and definitely preoccupied with the idea of a scientific breakthrough gaining him fame. His affections for his family even seem somewhat forced, particularly toward Elizabeth, who he is to marry in some sort of arranged inter-family marriage. It’s clear that he didn’t think of what it would mean to create a living creature capable of human emotion. He doesn’t think of it until he hears it from the creature’s mouth. This realization should have caused him immense anguish, but his reaction was the equivalent of “hmm, I guess you have a point.” I believe that while Mary Shelley may not have had the same perspective as I do, these were some of the issues and questions she was hoping to trigger with her writing. If she had wanted to write a basic good vs. evil, hero vs. villain story, she would have left out volume II in which the creature tells his side of the story. In Frankenstein, we are able to have a debate about who the hero is and who the villain is. They’re both so incredibly flawed. That’s part of what’s so great about it. Okay, I’m still working this stuff out, not 100% settled on an interpretation.
First of all, I just want to say how incredible is this book. I don’t remember reading a fiction book which presents such relevant and fresh topics like, life, after life, creation, evil, family, death, in a very systematic way. I definitely will join all the other critics who praised Marry Shelley’s book for her great insight on many topics.
ReplyDeleteMy reflections while reading this book is pretty much based on the desire we humans have to fully understand the mystery of life. Obviously, I’m writing based on Victor’s desire to create a living being. Shelley portrayed a faithful picture of a man from that time she wrote the book, who definitely had a wide knowledge in the science, and who I honestly think most of us relate to.
I believe that we all have knowledge, at least the basics, of how we were created. Some people can’t see that well, some people see well, and some people see that different, but we all have our beliefs about how we were created. So for me, the creation/creator topics from the story are of incredible value in this fiction.
I value the creation/creator because besides my religion, I not only understand myself as a being who was created by a superior deity, but I see myself as a creation who complain about being created and difficulties of life.
By reading the novel, I not only immersed my self in Victor life- sure of my capacity to create anything. Even giving life to a creature- but I also seeing Shelley emerging with a creature that I closely relate. I am talking about the creature who apparently showed kindness to others, whom appreciated the “creator,” but who in other times cursed his creator.
Frankenstein relationship with his creature question who I am, talking about identity. I can defend my beliefs according to what I think that is right, but action is what matter in most cases. The creature wanted Victor attention, and wanted him to be serious about his himself. This make me see a Victor who created, who gave life, but who had no idea of how to educate his creation.
This is another topic, but an addition to of the same topic I’ve mentioned before: We humans want to know from where we came from and to where we will go after we die, but one thing is, we lack in a very bad way, about how to live together as humans. There are tons of examples of problem in Victor’s family and even with his friends. I conclude my reflection thinking about not only what I can create or who created me, but in how I can cultivate these two elements with others as community.
Why does Victor Frankenstein create his creature?
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein creates his creature for his own benefit. He creates his creature because he wants to be able to control what he considers the ultimate power.He puts little thought into the consequences of creating life, or what will happen after his creature is alive. Maybe he didn't expect it to actually work? Frankenstein wants to leave behind a legacy by creating life. He creation as the ultimate power, and believes that holding this power would make him godlike. He wants to become a god. He is fascinated by pseudo sciences, such as alchemy, which seek to achieve the impossible such as creating gold. Frankenstein is discouraged until he learns that modern science can achieve things just as fantastic as alchemy. Electricity is a power that comes from the heavens, and I think it plays an important role in the story, even though it is not directly revealed as the method for the monster's creation it is implied. After his creation actually comes to life, he completely rejects it, realizing his mistake. He is reluctant to take responsibility for the creature, or any of its actions. He even refers to its creation as a product of fate, rather than one of his free will.
What is the source of the enmity between Frankenstein and his creation?
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein shunned his own creation, blinded by his mania he overlooks the grotesque thing he was piecing together. Interestingly, his first reaction on seeing the monster is a foreshadowing of how mankind will treat the monster afterwards save for one individual who's sight is lost. The maker of the beast, his hand in every part didn't recognize the terrible appearance of his 'golem' during it's construction. Without pity, & reacting out of the basest fear he runs away. Frankenstein saw the monster as an absolute failure, & worse, the living, breathing result of that misguided attempt to produce a miracle. Based on the beings appearance & the briefest observance of its mannerisms he immediately attributes it's character as sinister. After his initial reaction and flight, Frankenstein reenters his home afraid to find the creature still there, inspecting the laboratory with the fear of its discovery he refers to his own creation as "my enemy". To transfer his emotion from dedication to loathing, the author describes Frankenstein's change in regarding his creation as wholly emotional. So then one is asked to judge whether our mental faculties are truly capable of over ruling our first reactions. Or rather, could an educated, highly intelligent man overcome his emotions, it appears at least in the text that he could not.
I very much appreciate your comments. Here are some perspectives I'm hearing:
ReplyDelete1) Frankenstein is driven by ambition, and ambition is first of all a drive for power. His fascination with electricity gives physical form to his desire for power. Frankenstein does not prepare for the success of his experiment because that's all it is to him: an experiment. He has not considered what will happen when the Creature is endowed with life, and that one factor leads to all the actions in the story. He never learns this truth; he keeps ignoring his responsibility and blaming everything on destiny.
2) It's possible to consider degrees of humanity, by distinguishing the elements we identify with humanity. In this respect, the Creature gives us a chance to consider what might be missing from his humanity.
It has emotional responses; it can feel rejection and longing. But is it missing the reciprocal relations with other humans that also define humanity? And if they are missing, is it only because they have been denied to him?
Is there undefinable quantum of humanity that humans recognize in each other--particularly in their eyes? Is the Creature missing a *soul*?
3) The Creature wants the comforts of social bonds that he's seen among humans. Frankenstein fears that the Creature, being strengthened by a mate and society, will destroy just those bonds--destroy him and humanity.
Is this tantamount to saying that if the Creature becomes more human, Frankenstein's humanity is threatened?
4) Frankenstein reacts to his Creature with disgust--and he never moves beyond that disgust. A man of science, he allows his emotions--even his physical response of revulsion--to completely control his actions. He sees the Creature only in the light of his own visceral response.
(By implication, Frankenstein diminishes the Creature by reacting to it only with loathing--and so do other humans. The Creature's enmity is therefore a kind of mirror image of the humans' disgust. The Creature becomes what the humans see in it.)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteXohalmá
ReplyDeleteWhy does Victor Frankenstein create his creature?
He created his creature in the image of, and an example of his ideal humankind.
I feel that this was done mostly out of arrogance and his sense of ego.
For example, he states that he would be renowned as the "Creator", somewhat in the same likeliness of what "God" is to many already.
However, his experiment subsequently worked in an adverse manner as he was taken aback by the consequences of his actions and ego. Ultimately, he was unhappy with his creature and describes its "ugliness" and how different it turned out from what he once viewed as the perfect mold.
Why does Victor Frankenstein create his creature?
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein’s initial intension of creating the creature was because he felt alone within society. However, as the novel progressed, an aspect of his obsession with modern science and morality begin to take over this intention. Did Frankenstein abandoned his creature due to thinking he had fulfilled his scientific ambitions? As the story of Frankenstein progresses, I begin to wonder if Frankenstein and his creature are more similar then Frankenstein thought, because in the end, they both want a mate due to their isolation in the world. Frankenstein creates the creature, but yet keeps him private, making the creature as lonely as him, does his impact why we believe Frankenstein created this creature in the first place? Frankenstein creates the creature, but then doesn’t really know what to do with him, as he starts to kill, Frankenstein begins to feel guilty and will therefore begin to question these intentions. This could also be the starting point foe us to see the progression of Frankenstein guilty throughout the novel.
Is the creature Frankenstein creates a human being?
ReplyDeleteWhat defines humanity? The creature acts more "human" than Victor Frankenstein in my opinion. Victor has less emotions than the creature. The creature desires love and acceptance but Victor keeps it away by not creating a mate for it. He, himself does not provide any love and refuses to create it. Victor's actions seemed forced to me, and almost as it was a hassle to have to interact with anyone else. Anyone the creature encounters is afraid of the creature as well and they all hate it. The creature only became destructive and dangerous because of how people treated it. It became as ugly as the humans treated it. It became the physical manifestation of hatred. This response to me is more human than the monstrous actions of the people it encountered.