Help
Sign In
creation
March 2009 
My Thoughts on "Frankenstein"
Posted on Jan 12th, 2009
by 
Sora Ryu
Sora Ryu
One of the tragedies of Frankenstein is the refusal of other characters in the novel to
recognize the monster as a full human being. What qualities make us human? Which of the qualities does the monster have? Which does he not have?
The terrible physical and emotional isolation of the Frankenstein monster led to his
eventual moral downfall. His inability to function in a society that sought to blot out his existence pushed him to murder, and dictated his ultimate exile. Yet, should the tragedy of the creature's broken life rest on his personal decisions or in humanity's unwillingness to accept him? Was the creature "human enough" to be accepted? I am of the opinion that except for his horrid origins, the Frankenstein monster was indeed a human being, worthy of love, respect, and understanding.
One should not be stigmatized for one's origins or for the characteristics that are a part of who one is but not under one's control. Congenital physical or psychological characteristics should not define a person and should not give others the right to judge the moral character of a person solely on the basis of such characteristics. However, mankind has a long history of judging intelligence, and moral integrity off of congenital premises such as ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and appearance. Where one is born, to whom they are born, and even how one is born can be used by one's peers to define one's entire life. Prejudice, the inherent mistake, the common misconception, is a fault of the entire human race, a blot on the human condition, a reoccurring tragedy in the human experience. Why should the plight of the Frankenstein monster be any different?
The Frankenstein monster's tragedy is almost entirely the fault of his origins which entail his "birth", and the shameful, irresponsible rejection of Victor Frankenstein, the monster's creator and hence his psychological father. The monster's father did not think of the being he was bringing into the world as a sentient being but simply as an endeavor of science, a fun little experience. Victor succeeded, yet he was not ready for his success because he had seen the creation of the monster as the end of the journey, not the beginning of it. He wasn't ready to be a father, nor was he ready for the responsibility, the consequences. Victor was rash and failed to think things through. If his monster was such a failure he could have aborted his creation then and there instead of taking off like a father who isn't mature enough to settle down and raise children. However he was more concerned about escaping before his deeds were discovered, and the creature survived.
Just as the children of fatherless homes are forever left with an unconscious feeling of inadequacy and pain, the creature reeled from the impact of his father's betrayal and absence. His life was never the same. The monster, like the children mentioned earlier, probably asked himself "Why did my father reject me and run away from living a life with me? What makes me so horrible that even my father could not love me enough to stay?" This first act of prejudice on the part of Victor, was only a taste of what was in store for the monster in the outside world. When he walked into town, innocent, unaware of his appearance and what other people might think of him, people ran away from him. When he saved a young girl from drowning, the girl's father, unconcerned with the creature's heroics, and unwilling to find out the other side of the story, lashed out with a gun. A blind old man accepted the monster, because even though he could not see the creature's face, he could "see" the beauty of his soul in the words he spoke. Yet the old man's son, Felix, saw only the terrible visage, and in an cruel, uncivilized act, he beat the peaceful monster away. Who would not turn evil under such circumstances?
The Frankenstein monster was indeed a human being showing superior human intellect, kindness, and a natural longing for a companion. He learned to read and speak on his own. Alone he understood the meaning of Paradise Lost and analyzed it according to his life. His only request of Victor, his absentee father, was to make him a wife, someone who shared his faults and attributes, someone who would see beyond what humanity could not and love him for who he was. One can not argue that his face or appearance made the creature any less human. Babies
born in vitro are still humans. Firefighters whose faces were disfigured by horrible burns when they struggled to save the helpless are still human. So why should the monster not be considered a human? As a human being, the creature did not deserve the inhumane way humanity treated him.
- Ryu
recognize the monster as a full human being. What qualities make us human? Which of the qualities does the monster have? Which does he not have?
The terrible physical and emotional isolation of the Frankenstein monster led to his
eventual moral downfall. His inability to function in a society that sought to blot out his existence pushed him to murder, and dictated his ultimate exile. Yet, should the tragedy of the creature's broken life rest on his personal decisions or in humanity's unwillingness to accept him? Was the creature "human enough" to be accepted? I am of the opinion that except for his horrid origins, the Frankenstein monster was indeed a human being, worthy of love, respect, and understanding.
One should not be stigmatized for one's origins or for the characteristics that are a part of who one is but not under one's control. Congenital physical or psychological characteristics should not define a person and should not give others the right to judge the moral character of a person solely on the basis of such characteristics. However, mankind has a long history of judging intelligence, and moral integrity off of congenital premises such as ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation and appearance. Where one is born, to whom they are born, and even how one is born can be used by one's peers to define one's entire life. Prejudice, the inherent mistake, the common misconception, is a fault of the entire human race, a blot on the human condition, a reoccurring tragedy in the human experience. Why should the plight of the Frankenstein monster be any different?
The Frankenstein monster's tragedy is almost entirely the fault of his origins which entail his "birth", and the shameful, irresponsible rejection of Victor Frankenstein, the monster's creator and hence his psychological father. The monster's father did not think of the being he was bringing into the world as a sentient being but simply as an endeavor of science, a fun little experience. Victor succeeded, yet he was not ready for his success because he had seen the creation of the monster as the end of the journey, not the beginning of it. He wasn't ready to be a father, nor was he ready for the responsibility, the consequences. Victor was rash and failed to think things through. If his monster was such a failure he could have aborted his creation then and there instead of taking off like a father who isn't mature enough to settle down and raise children. However he was more concerned about escaping before his deeds were discovered, and the creature survived.
Just as the children of fatherless homes are forever left with an unconscious feeling of inadequacy and pain, the creature reeled from the impact of his father's betrayal and absence. His life was never the same. The monster, like the children mentioned earlier, probably asked himself "Why did my father reject me and run away from living a life with me? What makes me so horrible that even my father could not love me enough to stay?" This first act of prejudice on the part of Victor, was only a taste of what was in store for the monster in the outside world. When he walked into town, innocent, unaware of his appearance and what other people might think of him, people ran away from him. When he saved a young girl from drowning, the girl's father, unconcerned with the creature's heroics, and unwilling to find out the other side of the story, lashed out with a gun. A blind old man accepted the monster, because even though he could not see the creature's face, he could "see" the beauty of his soul in the words he spoke. Yet the old man's son, Felix, saw only the terrible visage, and in an cruel, uncivilized act, he beat the peaceful monster away. Who would not turn evil under such circumstances?
The Frankenstein monster was indeed a human being showing superior human intellect, kindness, and a natural longing for a companion. He learned to read and speak on his own. Alone he understood the meaning of Paradise Lost and analyzed it according to his life. His only request of Victor, his absentee father, was to make him a wife, someone who shared his faults and attributes, someone who would see beyond what humanity could not and love him for who he was. One can not argue that his face or appearance made the creature any less human. Babies
born in vitro are still humans. Firefighters whose faces were disfigured by horrible burns when they struggled to save the helpless are still human. So why should the monster not be considered a human? As a human being, the creature did not deserve the inhumane way humanity treated him.
- Ryu
Access: Public
