Primarily it is not Frankenstein who has to suffer the consequences of his creating life, it is the Creature. But for this suffering he makes Frankenstein notice the pain he has caused the Creature by taking revenge and killing the people Frankenstein most cares about. In Frankenstein, the neglect of duty never leads to anything good. Having abandoned his duty of care towards the Creature, Frankenstein then has to learn from his mistakes by suffering the consequences of this
As a result of this abandonment Lawrence Kohlberg’s theory of moral development cannot be completely applied to the story of Frankenstein, but there still remain certain connections. The first level of Kohlberg’s theory contains two stages. The first stage suggests that people behave according to the standards shown to them by an authority figure, such as a parent or teacher. Caused by Victor’s abandonment, the monster was never taught by his creator what was socially acceptable therefore being unable to differentiate between right and wrong. Without the guidance and teachings of his creator, the monster cannot advance to the second stage of level one, which states that accepting these standards can be in the person’s best interest.
If only Frankenstein had given his creation a chance, the unjust treatments would have never happened. Another reason to feel more sympathy for the monster is because of his lack of companionship. Frankenstein had his best friend, Henry Clerval, and his wife, Elizabeth. He also had his parents. Except the monster had no one.
The same quoted used above, demonstrates this point as well. Frankenstein could have watched the blossoms, and taken part in this delightful activity, but he decided to instead work on his creation, proving his very beliefs to be, in his definition, false. The above quote also demonstrates that Frankenstein’s decisions were a capital reason that destiny either changes constantly or doesn’t exist. Frankenstein’s thirst for knowledge is the key reason that destiny is alterable. In his narrative, Frankenstein says, “No one can conceive the variety of feelings which bore me onward like a hurricane, in the first enthusiasm of success.
While in the process of creating the monster, Frankenstein is both completely obsessed with his project, and, does not consider the consequences before it is alive. As soon as he becomes “capable of bestowing animation upon lifeless matter,” (53) Frankenstein explains how it “was the most gratifying consummation… to arrive at the summit of [his] desires” (53). Immediately, he begins work, and “[seemed] to have lost all [of his] soul or sensation but for this one pursuit” (55). Frankenstein “could not tear [his] thoughts from [his] employment” (56) and “pursued [his] undertaking with remitting ardor” (55). Even though Frankenstein feels that his “human nature [did] turn with loathing from [his] occupation” (55) as he is creating the being, he continues on with an “unnatural stimulus” (55).
He is rejected by the De Laceys and Frankenstein and ponders the question: ‘Am I not alone, miserably alone?’. The monster is represented as the dark side of Frankenstein. Shelley depicts Frankenstein as the real monster of the novel. Frankenstein appears to look like a nice person but Shelley creates him as a blasphemous person whose arrogance and obsessions with science end up costing him dearly. In contrast, the monster appears to be a nasty, unapproachable beast but actually appears to be well-educated and is knowledgeable about the world around him.
Frankenstein wanted to recreate his mother, but instead he made a creature comprised of the socially repressed elements of Frankenstein (the monster) and his wish for his mother. Frankenstein's creature comprises all of the unacceptable traits of humans, those we usually suppress. These traits may actually be a representation of those traits that Frankenstein wishes he had. Mary Shelley tries to humanize the position of the impossible monster to imagine what it would be like for a monster to sustain personhood when everybody around him treats him as an utterly outcast to society. Shelley is trying to show that the creature is not inherently monstrous, but
In the novel Frankenstein, author Marry Shelley depicts character Victor Frankenstein as a scientist with a strong passion for forbidden knowledge and finding the answers to life through science. Though his intentions are good this leads him to the creation of a monster. Throughout the novel Frankenstein is constantly encountered by obstacles that test his passions for science and responsibility for his creation. For Victor it seems that the choice to abandon the monster is the easier path, rather than taking care of his creation. In the beginning of the book, right after the creation of the monster, Victor fled his home to get away from the creature, only to return and find that it had escaped.
When I mingled with families, I distinctly discerned how peculiarly fortunate was, and gratitude assisted the development of filial love” (Shelley 35). There is little from the initial description of Frankenstein’s early years that would make us think that he may turn to evil. Neither did any tragic life-changing event take place in his early years that could influence him or make him seek power. If Mary Shelley had intended to portray Frankenstein as an evil character, would she not have given him a reason to be angry with the world and lash out at it by creating a monster? In fact, Frankenstein never created his monster with the intention to harm anyone or cause destruction.
Persuasive Essay In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Victor had a choice about whether he should play God and create life, or abandon natural philosophy and take a new path. Although some may argue that Victor had no idea that his monster would turn violent and murder everyone Victor loved, Victor is not a victim because he wantonly bestowed life on a creature that was physically more capable but emotionally less adept than he. Some readers may argue that Victor became a victim when his father led him down the wrong path by mindlessly dismissing his interests in Agrippa and Paracelsus without telling Victor why these were exploded philosophies. These readers might contend that it’s only natural to pursue “the forbidden fruit of knowledge.” It follows that once Victor’s mind was set on creating life and making a name for himself, he only thought of his scientific contributions; he wasn’t trying to create an abomination. People who feel sorry for Victor could argue that Victor had no idea how wrong or malicious his creature would turn out to be.