Like always, please write about anything that particularly interested you in the reading–the last few chapters of Frankenstein.
Here are some questions you might consider:
- How much do you think Victor has really changed by the end of the novel? Is he still seeking vengeance? Why does he deliver a stirring speech on p. 159, urging Walton’s men to continue their journey northward when he began telling his story in the first place in order to “dash this cup” (of god-like ambition, scientific overreach, science divorced from morality?) from Walton’s mouth?
- You should feel free to continue our class discussion of whether you believe Victor was right or wrong to tear up the female creature after he made her. What view do you think Mary Shelley wants us to take? Does that coincide with the view you do take?
- Discuss what happens on Victor’s wedding night. How is this foreshadowed in the novel? Why does Victor misunderstand the Creature’s words (“I’ll be with you on your wedding night…”)? How does this scene fit into the themes of the larger novel?
- I know we’ve been somewhat rushed in our discussion of Frankenstein. Is there something we haven’t yet talked about in class that you’d like to focus on?
I believe that Victor was wrong about tearing up the female creature. If he did not want to create another being he should not have promised to. Victor should have taken responsibility surrounding the creature, even if it was to get it it’s only wish of having a companion. As we talked in class, if he was worried about them reproducing, he could have made the female creature without reproductive organs. It is also made aware that the creature is not invincible as he suffers a bullet wound so if the couple did wreak havoc, it would not have been unstoppable. I think Shelley wanted us to pity the creature and wish that Victor would have just completed his experiment. However, I can also see victor’s side in only wanted to create one atrocity and deal with the repercussions of that. Though for such a smart man I think it was later very narrow-minded of him to think that creature would only harm Victor and not Elizabeth, especially after killing both William and Henry at this point.
I think Victor has changed by finally understanding how nature and science are intertwined, but he still refuses to take any hand in nurturing the Creature. He still abandons him and refuses to take care of him, which leads to the demise of all his loved ones. If Victor gets to have loved ones, why cannot the Creature? Victor suddenly stops hearing himself as he reaches the end, overcome by science once more, and they reach closer to the Creature and unexplored land. When he reaches this overwhelming passion, this eventually leads to his demise, as the Creature had warned you three times, but after the fourth, he dies. I do believe that Victor was in the wrong of tearing up the Creature. He creates a being and gives it life, and once the Creature does not live up to his appeal, he punishes the Creature for something out of his control. I do not know how to explain this thought adequately, but when thinking about the creation of the female Creature, it almost mirrors Victor receiving Elizabeth from his mother to the Creature wanting to receive his female counterpart. On Victor’s wedding night, he believes that he is the one to die, but it is only revealed that it was Elizabeth to die. It shows how Victor only focuses on himself instead of valuing Elizabeth and realizing that she is more than a possession to Victor.
I think that Victor was right to tear up the second creature. While I do share in the creature’s despair over this choice, the potential outcomes of what could have happened. Firstly, Victor recognized the damage that the original creature caused and knew that a second creature could bring an added layer to that damage- only worsening it. Along with that, there is the question of what could happen if the two creatures were able to reproduce and a new race was created. In creating the creature, Victor already proved that he was capable of replicating God’s creation once, if he was able to do it again, and it resulted in a new race, he would essentially become God (in the creator sense at least). I think that Shelley does want us to sympathize with the creature, as she builds a sense of otherness and loneliness through the entire novel.
I think the tragedy on Victor’s wedding night is both obvious and foreshadowed. I think since Victor killed the creature’s partner, it only makes sense that the creature would do the same to Victor by killing Elizabeth. It’s interesting that Victor assumes he will be the primary victim. His assumption furthers the books theme in showing that Victor fails again and again because he does not understand “nature” or the feminine, as discussed in class. Because he did not respect, in a way, the natural order, which the creature presents to him from the bible, that everything on earth has a mate, Victor loses his mate. I think it also makes sense that after Henry is murdered, Elizabeth would be next, since I feel like they come as a pair in the story. They are Victor’s two best friends and attachments to the emotional. Henry’s death foreshadows Elizabeth’s. From a feminist lens, the tragedy on their wedding night is very symbolic, especially because this is a story primarily about birth and a wedding night is when a child would be conceived. Elizabeth also is heavily connected to nature, and therefore the “feminine,” in the book, seen through her ability to lift and metaphorically give life to those around her by raising their spirits with her goodness and in her romantic view of nature. If we interpret the book as a corruption of the feminine and nature, it makes sense that one of the climaxes would be Elizabeth’s death, because she strongly embodies that. Her death on her wedding night also shows the paradox of life and death together. Just as Victor’s lab is a place of life and death, the creature also holds both, and in its life it kills Elizabeth and prevents her from assumably becoming a mother on a typical wedding night. It is also a parallel that this story would begin with the “conception” and birth of the monster and end with the monster destroying the future child of Elizabeth and Victor.
I found the role of nature and science to be really interesting in this novel. Shelley both subverts and conforms to typical Romantic ideas in her presentation of these two ideas in her treatment of her characters. For example, Victor is noticeably healthier when he is with his family and friends, studying humanities, and generally not connected to science, but later when he seeks the sublime through hiking Mont Blanc, he encounters the creature rather than a divine connection to nature, playing on typical Romantic tropes. She seems to both warn against becoming too involved in science and while also criticizing the unrealistic nature of Romanticism. The greater proportion of deaths of those related to innocence, femininity, nature, and goodness could reflect fears of an increasingly scientific society and what could happen without an appreciation of art and nature to balance it. At the same time, however, Shelley seems to speak to fears of motherhood and give a voice to those not connecting with a typical social order or ideas of nature. Regardless of what Shelley did or did not mean to say, I wish we could have explored more with the tension between nature and science, especially with added context from the time period. It is clear that this was a contentious topic of the Romantic period, and is something that we still discuss today, something that really speaks to the timelessness of the novel.
After reading Elizabeth’s letter on page 138, Victor reflects on a memory that is uncovered. He describes a promise made by the daemon to be “with him on his wedding night.” He reveals the daemons plan to be there on his wedding night and engage Victor in a deadly battle. Death is the only way for Victor to escape, whether it be from the daemon or guilt itself, is purposely vague. In my opinion, the creature is just a manifestation of his guilt. Victor is completely overtaken by feelings of needing to suffer, so much so that even if the daemon is defeated by Victor, he still doesn’t consider himself completely free. The guilt will still follow him.
Furthermore, he questions whether or not postponing his wedding will prolong his life. If the daemon plans to meet him on his wedding night, and no sooner, he questions if he is safe until that exact night or if it’s too dangerous to postpone, in case the daemon decides to change the deal. He eventually decides to go forth with the wedding as planned because he wants to make Elizabeth and his father happy. Considering he knows that his wedding night could end in his death, he is either more interested in preserving his family’s happiness over protecting his own life, or it’s possible that Victor, although scared of death, wishes to be free from the guilt and suffering.
I am going to combine multiple questions within this post. I think that a big, even arguably significant, part of the story is Victor’s selfishness. A few examples of this fatal trait that I can think of are: he creates his creature out of want for glory, insults Professor Krempe thinking that his (Victor’s) ancient ways of thinking are superior (this also shows one of the main themes which is the danger of disconnecting from reality), thinks of Elizabeth as his rather than her own being, and destroys his creature’s promised partner. The part about Elizabeth perhaps explains why he misinterpreted the creature’s warnings about being with him on his wedding night. I would say that Victor could even see himself as a savior; through dying, he saves Elizabeth, which is the ending he would have wanted. Regarding the tearing up of the creature’s promised partner, it could be argued as an act of selfishness once again because he believes he is saving humanity, once again, a god-like mentality. Even though, I believe he was right in tearing apart the creature’s partner. There were so many world-ending possibilities that could have come from giving his “Adam” an “Eve,” such as the creature’s partner rejecting him and making him angrier, wanting to reproduce, etc. Even though throughout the novel, the reader can see that Victor’s regret and guilt eat away at him, it is still not an excuse for the selfishness he embodied to get to the point of feeling guilt for what occurred in his life.
I believe Victor views the situation as a sort of trolley problem. His view of the creatures not betraying them is an act of betrayal toward humanity. Of course, with the constant comparison of the creature to Satan, he also believes that this betrayal of humanity would only result in revolt against humanity. He’s afraid of what he’s done. He’s certainly in the wrong for choosing to break the promise (chap 20), though I don’t think it should’ve been made to begin with. This specific conflict of empathy relating to the creatures that is intertwined so deep into the novel reminds me of the conflict of Blade Runner regarding the replicants and their capacity for humanity. The story immediately reminds me because they share such common fundamentals regarding these intelligent creations of humanity, with the protagonists harming them deeply and feeling unsettled by their later realizations based on their interactions with antagonistic forces of these creations. Whereas Deckard changed, Victor never truly changed. He entered new circumstances that brought out a far more demented and unsettling side to his character, but I believe when comparing him to the beginning and putting that character through the same circumstances, nothing much would change. He did not change by the end. A proof of this is his broken promise to the creature. He murders her because he considers his own attitude to be the attitude of humanity toward them. In some ways, he’s wrong mostly just because it’s been proven throughout the novel that the creatures were loathed and people saw them with disgust. I believe Shelley would’ve wanted us to see the situation with nuance, while lambasting Victor’s actions and criticizng the situation to begin with. All of it is a product of his own ego rather than his ambition toward a brighter future. Even if he himself believes in that brighter future, his inability to separate himself as the star of it should prove just how little he changed.
I think Victor was right to tear up the second creature. In the grand scheme of things, if Victor were to have let the second creature continue to be a companion to the original creature, despite the emotional benefits, this could have led to the two possibly reproducing and creating a new race of these destructive creatures that at this point Victor already regretted bringing to life. Either way, both sides of the situation would cause immense emotional distress, but I believe that at least temporarily this allowed Victor to feel like he did something to stop the mess he started. Even though he did still end his own life at the end of the book due to his guilt over what his creation had done and how he inadvertently (or directly) ruined his own life, I think this at least extended his life as I believe he would have attempted suicide much sooner if he were to have kept the second creature alive. However- morally, he is at a crossroads. On one hand, he mitigated a dangerous future and brought something catastrophic into the world without regulations, but on the other hand he betrayed the creature’s trust and broke a promise.
I want to take this as an opportunity to continue our discussion on Victor Frankenstein‘s decision to tear up the female creation. This is at least my third time reading the book, and I’ve never really had much of a thought for how complex this issue is. Given this, I can certainly see arguments for the other side, as obviously Victor is being forced to create another being, and his fears for the repercussions that this will have. If we read Victor as attempting to be a “masculine mother,” then the idea of being forced into “giving birth” is probably not the best thing in the world to condone. However, I think that the violence of the scene displays too strong an argument against Victor’s actions. I believe that Mary Shelley wants us to disagree with Victor‘s decision. First off, given that we as readers do have a fair amount of sympathy for the creature we can view his desire for companionship is a natural “human” one. I think that Victor’s decision further can be seen as a display of man’s power over women’s bodies. First off, not only has he been able to subvert the natural order of having a female mother give birth in his masculine creation of life, but he also has free reign over this feminine creature‘s body. He is able to create and destroy and control it as he sees fit. When thinking of this, I cannot help but think of the way that our current political system displays a continuation of man’s tendencies to try to control women’s bodies.
I think that it was wrong for Victor to tear up the female creature because it was extremely hypocritical. I understand that he did it because he had learned from his mistakes and knew he couldn’t let this happen again or continue to happen but it was no different from what he had done. I think Mary Shelley wanted the readers to see the consequences of taking such actions but it also shows how women were treated in this time period as well as in gothic novels. It showed how women were valued with such little regard and that women were not treated as human the same way men were. Mary Shelley’s take is similar to mine because I understand the reasonings behind why he destroyed the female monster because he had now learned from past mistakes and was not going to allowed them to be repeated. I still don’t think it was fair for him to do that but I do see why. I think that Victor could have certainly handled the situation better before he acted on feelings of his own doings because it seemed very quick and rushed when he acted.
As I said in class, I think that Victor destroying the female creature right after creating her, I can understand why he did so. The possibility that the female creature creates a sense of fear because the female creature might be as dangerous and destructive as his first is understandable. Victor was consumed that the two might reproduce and then where does that leave him? A race of creatures? His actions were definitely driven by fear and almost with a sense of preventative measures and unknown. It reflects his inability to take responsibility for what he has already done. By destroying the female creature, Victor is stripping away her existence before she has a chance to destroy and or a chance to live. I believe that Mary Shelley seems to want readers to dive into this very topic and critique the decision Victor has made. We see the creature’s heartbreak and it makes one reflect how the decision by Victor is rooted in selfishness and fear rather than empathy and understanding. Mary Shelley also seems to convey the idea that Victor hasn’t yet learned from his mistakes and there are consequences Victor has to face from “playing God”. Victor’s choice ultimately shows the unhealthy cycle of vengeance that drives the story, showing how fear can lead to destructive consequences.