Frankenstein has become the monster What relevance does this statement have for us in the 21st
Most people have heard the word ‘Frankenstein’. Many have not read the book or seen the film and therefore associate the name with the monster and so the fiend of the story could, in theory, be Victor. This essay seeks to explore whether Frankenstein has any relevance or not in the 21st Century or whether the notion of monsters is now outdated. ... Victor Frankenstein was a scientist. ... This monster was just a tool for him to fulfil his ambition. While Victor is building up to the creation of the monster, his work consumes him and his health deteriorates, as well as his shaky mental condition. He views the monster as being “Beautiful. ... ” VICTOR As soon as the monster is alive, however, his views change radically. ... ” VICTOR At this point, the creature becomes a monster. First of all, there are a number of reasons why we can say that Frankenstein is a monster within himself. To begin with, he created the monster from death; something considered, in our world, to be something wrong. ... The fact that the eyes are watery tells us that, either his soul is tainted from his creation, or maybe he has no soul. The way the monster is described sounds horrible - even evil - and what sort of a man could create such a thing? ... One has to imagine the monster as being an innocent being, to phrase it bluntly, an 8-foot tall baby. It sounds strange, but he has not been taught anything. He does not know right from wrong, he does not know the constraints of society and he does not even know himself. ... The monster desperately wanted to be accepted and demanded that Victor created a mate for him. ... To this end, he begins to create a companion but, tragically for the monster, destroys her. The monster saw what happened and this would have been a terrible trauma. ... ” VICTOR In the film version, Frankenstein actually brings Elizabeth back to life, again, something that could be seen as a spiteful revenge. Indeed, it could be said that the whole novel is Frankenstein’s fault. To begin with, he created the monster, who in turn, created all of the damage. ... All of the reasons above are for Victor actually being the monster of the book, but maybe the monster is meant to be Frankenstein’s doppelgänger. ... The two are very alike in many ways, for example, the creature/monster debate can be applied to both beings and Victor has referred to the monster in many ways: “Daemon. ... ” “Monster. ... ” VICTOR Naming the monster “a creature of fine sensations” can be compared to Victor’s opinion of the monster at the beginning of the novel. ... Since then, he turned his creation into a monster. When the monster is telling him his story, Victor’s mind changes drastically from viewing him as being a “daemon” to “a creature of fine sensations”. Even though the monster has only just learned speech and language from a book and the teachings of Safie by the DeLaceys, he and Victor speak in a very similar manner. ... In the same way, Victor’s physical and mental deterioration is reflected in the monster. Both characters state, in some term, “No creature has ever been as miserable as I.” VICTOR The use of knowledge in Victor’s character is magnified in the monster – they need to know more and have a thirst to succeed. ... The monster, however, as explained in a quote above, has the physical appearance of being ugly, inhuman and beastly, certainly a quality common in an evil doppelgänger. Victor seems to be, from his narrative, arrogant, selfish and antisocial, whereas the monster is selfless with a want to be sociable. For this reason, it could be possible to presume Victor as the monster’s doppelgänger instead of the other way around.