Term papers writing service


The lessons in the novel frankenstein by mary shelley

The Harsh Lessons of “Frankenstein”

The two have met on Montanvert. Both have a score to settle. Victor feels nothing but rage, because the wretch as he calls him has murdered his little brother.

By the end of the story, Monster will have killed everyone Victor loves: Moments after being brought to life, his creator rejects him and leaves the laboratory. Monster smiles and reaches out. Victor flees the apartment, leaving his creation once more, this time to wander out alone into the Swiss countryside.

Monster is confused, helpless, and in pain. He sits by a stream and weeps. What he wants more than anything is human connection, but when people encounter him, they run away or resort to physical attack.

And therein lies the central psychological question of Frankenstein: Who is the real monster? To grapple with this question, we must sort our baggage.

  • If Shelley had thoughts of morality, they were surely of a different variety than what we think of today;
  • Monster represents depth without morality and feeling without responsibility;
  • By the end of the story, Monster will have killed everyone Victor loves;
  • What if the monsters rampage around the Earth killing people?
  • Timeless Lessons for Modern Man An Essay by Julie Van Wagner Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, embodies all the required elements of a science fiction novel - its science was plausible for the time in which it was written, the extrapolation of that science was believable, and it had a moral.

The monster from the novel is both far worse and far better than popular imagination conceived: His aforementioned skin covers only a portion of his muscles and arteries; he is much larger and more agile than the average man, scaling mountainsides in mere minutes, enduring cold, harsh climates on less food than his human counterparts.

If Shelley had thoughts of morality, they were surely of a different variety than what we think of today. She wrote the novel as a warning: Allow creative beauty to retain its mystery.

Nearly 200 years later, the debate about whether beauty can be measured continues, but not with Frankenstein. Today, popular and academic interpretations coalesce largely around Victor as the abandoning parent — and Monster as the faultless, traumatized child — a naked clue to our Freudian heritage and its parent-blaming spinoffs. Pushed further, a contemporary reading of the novel inflames our dread in the postcolonial era, the understanding that heinous acts are produced, reproduced, and catching; that trauma lives on, and responsibility, we tell ourselves, flows back through time.

Now, an adult-child, Monster confronts Victor on Montanvert.

Monster believes — as we all have in desperate moments — that a bargain with his offender might heal old wounds.

A beloved, of course. Victor agrees and begins creating the female monster but grows increasingly tormented by moral questions: What if the monsters rampage around the Earth killing people? In a chilling fit of trepidation, Victor rips she-Monster to pieces.

By Dorothy Reno

In his own words: Whence did I come? What was my destination? Monster represents depth without morality and feeling without responsibility. The answer is simple: Victor, a learned man who never learns the right lessons even as he accepts the weight of his mistakesrepresents intelligence without depth, morality without feeling, and ambition without foresight.

Monster sacrifices his fine nature to have the full attention of Victor, who in turn vows to hunt Monster to the ends of the Earth in order to destroy him.

This obsessive pursuit makes Victor into a better and more complete companion than Monster could have ever envisioned. She lives in Tbilisi, former republic of Georgia. She would love to hear your thoughts on Frankenstein in the comments section of this article.

Please join Dorothy in reading Moby-Dick, which will be the subject of her next column. Like what we do? Click here to support the nonprofit Independent!