Do you think Mary Shelley wants readers to think that Victor is right or wrong for tearing apart the female creature he made? What specific evidence in the novel leads you to this conclusion?
Discuss whether you believe Victor has really changed by the end of the novel. You might consider the paradox we talked about a bit in class–in the beginning, Victor tells his story to “dash the cup” of immoral scientific ambition away from Walton, yet at the end he gives a stirring speech urging Walton’s men to continue on their mission. What’s going on here?
9 thoughts on “Tuesday, Sept. 28”
I think that this is a controversial idea. In the 1831 version of the Frankenstein publication, Mary Shelley gets the opportunity to explain some of the choices made in the novel in the introduction. She writes “As far as I can recollect, it was entirely written by him” (p, 251). Shelley explains how her husband chose to write the female monster off. I kept questioning her decision to destroy the female monster (besides the whole idea of protecting future ages from both monsters reproducing and destroying the world along with it). This makes the most sense to me. Shelley could also be trying to represent the dismissive attitudes towards women. Frankenstein is a man created by a man, the necessity of a female figure is absent. I’d like to believe that Shelley’s intentions are still underlying, even with her husband’s revisions and cuts. I’d love to hear what everyone thinks about this direct quote from Shelley about her not having a say in this seemingly anti-feminist scene.
Reading the novel, and seeing how much Victor Frankenstein goes through, I think Shelley intended for Victor Frankenstein to change by the end of the novel. Once we reach the end of the novel, and the frame opens up to Walton’s narration, we see Frankenstein encouraging Walton’s men to continue with their journey. I think Frankenstein told his story as a cautionary tale, and perhaps he alienated himself, by thinking he was so damned, and thought so well of Walton, that he believed that Walton’s journey could not succumb to the same madness that Frankenstein fell to. Perhaps he believes that now that Walton has heard his story, his academic and exploratory success will not become victim to the same mistakes that Frankenstein made. Perhaps Shelley intends to say in her novel that exploration and academic discovery and ambition are alright when pursued with rationality and not frenzied passion. Regardless, I don’t think that speech at the end was made without reason.
I do not have any kind of crazy take on this, I do sort of believe that the intent was to make Victor seem good for destroying the female creature, but not fully. Like, good for him he did the right thing by realizing he made a mistake and trying to make up for it somehow, but why was he creating creatures in the first place? He defied the laws of nature and the universe and/or God by creating life of some sort. I do think Mary Shelley wanted us to appreciate the fact that Victor learned about his wrongdoings towards the end, but I also think she wants the readers to see the other side and recognize that he was just downright wrong from the beginning.
I believe that Mary Shelley throughout the book is trying to tell us that what Victor did was wrong. Victor tampered with nature and corrupted life when he created the creature. A big and important thing in Frankenstein is nature and the natural. Mary Shelley writes long paragraphs about nature and describing Victor’s surroundings. Nature is seen as a clean and healing thing, like how when Victor is depressed and crazy, he goes out with Henry in nature and begins to feel better. Victor is quite literally punished for creating the creature. He punishes himself and the creature punishes him by killing people he loves. Mary shelley frames this entire experience as a tragedy and a cautionary tale from the beginning. By starting with Walton, who is in a similar place Victor was when he was creating his creature, she draws a parallel between them. Victor in the beginning warns Walton against doing what he did.
I think that Mary Shelley wanted readers to think Victor tearing apart the female creature was a good thing, but I think she also had Victor create and destroy the female creature to show how he was simply too late to fix things. Bringing the creatures hopes up just to throw in the huge disappointment of breaking the promise of making him a female creature was what threw Victor past the point of no return. He could’ve potentially tried to reason with the creature or something to prevent *as much* violence from happening as what did.
I think Victor did in fact change by the end of the novel because all the events with the creature really took a toll on his mentality. I don’t think he realized what he was doing when he was first making the creature and when it happened he realized he had made a mistake and handled it really poorly, leading to a series of unfortunate events. At the beginning of the novel he didn’t seem to have any, or at least very much, malicious intent, but by the end, he just came off as blatantly narcissistic, only wanting to do what he thought to be best for himself.
In my opinion, Victor Frankenstein did change by the end of the novel; however, not necessarily for the better. At the beginning of the novel, his attraction to science is innocent, and he meant no harm in creating his monster. However, after creating the monster, he panics and runs away. His behavior after his creation comes alive and his refusal to create the monster a companion or an “Eve” leads to the death of all his loved ones. Victor then hunts his creation and becomes ill before being able to destroy it. Although he understands that creating his monster was wrong, was he acting out of revenge or regret? He claims he regrets creating the monster but doesn’t seem to grasp why it was wrong truly but regrets those he lost because of it. Victor’s ambitions went against nature itself. Furthermore, he originally advises Walton to avoid ambition but then encourages him to continue his mission. This contradiction shows that he only cares about his ambitions, not the well-being of others.
I think Mary Shelley wants readers to think that Victor is right for tearing apart the female creature he made. Although later we realize that it is deeper than that. I believe Mary Shelley shows this when she writes about Victor imagining the monsters having a quote “race of devils… on the earth.” She explains his concern growing, and then when laying on the hideous monsters excitement through the window he destroys what work he had. Later, when this leads to more death and revenge we realize it might have been the wrong decision. He took away what could have helped to prevent the monster’s loneliness and human resent. Instead, it led to more hatred and ascertain. I do think this led to a good ending of the book though.
I think that Mary Shelley wanted readers to think that Victor was good for tearing apart the female monster, but I think the deeper meaning is that he was wrong. The the surface it seems like Victor is doing the right thing by destroying the female creature, and that he is learning from his actions. However, I think that if you examine what Victor did more closely you can see that in a way he was also wrong. By creating and destroying the female creature he took away the only hope for the creature that he created to live happily. If he would have done this then maybe the creature and victor could have gone on to live their own lives, but unfortunately they both have tragic endings instead.
I think Victor has changed in the novel from the start to the finish. I think he has because at the start he was normal and then became a psycho during the novel. When I mean he became a psycho, he literally ran away from Frankenstein and became paranoid that Frankenstein was going to kill him when after all he was going after Victor’s family to get back at the fact Victor left him all alone when he woke up. He also denied the request for Frankenstein to have a female companion called “eve” which made Frankenstein made and that’s why I think he went after Elizabeth.
I think when Victor tells Walton that he wants them to go on he means he wants them to live the life he could not do because of his creation (Frankenstein) and everything they went through. I would have hoped Walton and his crew did because of the fact they were wanting to find a trade route through the north pole.
I think that this is a controversial idea. In the 1831 version of the Frankenstein publication, Mary Shelley gets the opportunity to explain some of the choices made in the novel in the introduction. She writes “As far as I can recollect, it was entirely written by him” (p, 251). Shelley explains how her husband chose to write the female monster off. I kept questioning her decision to destroy the female monster (besides the whole idea of protecting future ages from both monsters reproducing and destroying the world along with it). This makes the most sense to me. Shelley could also be trying to represent the dismissive attitudes towards women. Frankenstein is a man created by a man, the necessity of a female figure is absent. I’d like to believe that Shelley’s intentions are still underlying, even with her husband’s revisions and cuts. I’d love to hear what everyone thinks about this direct quote from Shelley about her not having a say in this seemingly anti-feminist scene.
Reading the novel, and seeing how much Victor Frankenstein goes through, I think Shelley intended for Victor Frankenstein to change by the end of the novel. Once we reach the end of the novel, and the frame opens up to Walton’s narration, we see Frankenstein encouraging Walton’s men to continue with their journey. I think Frankenstein told his story as a cautionary tale, and perhaps he alienated himself, by thinking he was so damned, and thought so well of Walton, that he believed that Walton’s journey could not succumb to the same madness that Frankenstein fell to. Perhaps he believes that now that Walton has heard his story, his academic and exploratory success will not become victim to the same mistakes that Frankenstein made. Perhaps Shelley intends to say in her novel that exploration and academic discovery and ambition are alright when pursued with rationality and not frenzied passion. Regardless, I don’t think that speech at the end was made without reason.
I do not have any kind of crazy take on this, I do sort of believe that the intent was to make Victor seem good for destroying the female creature, but not fully. Like, good for him he did the right thing by realizing he made a mistake and trying to make up for it somehow, but why was he creating creatures in the first place? He defied the laws of nature and the universe and/or God by creating life of some sort. I do think Mary Shelley wanted us to appreciate the fact that Victor learned about his wrongdoings towards the end, but I also think she wants the readers to see the other side and recognize that he was just downright wrong from the beginning.
I believe that Mary Shelley throughout the book is trying to tell us that what Victor did was wrong. Victor tampered with nature and corrupted life when he created the creature. A big and important thing in Frankenstein is nature and the natural. Mary Shelley writes long paragraphs about nature and describing Victor’s surroundings. Nature is seen as a clean and healing thing, like how when Victor is depressed and crazy, he goes out with Henry in nature and begins to feel better. Victor is quite literally punished for creating the creature. He punishes himself and the creature punishes him by killing people he loves. Mary shelley frames this entire experience as a tragedy and a cautionary tale from the beginning. By starting with Walton, who is in a similar place Victor was when he was creating his creature, she draws a parallel between them. Victor in the beginning warns Walton against doing what he did.
I think that Mary Shelley wanted readers to think Victor tearing apart the female creature was a good thing, but I think she also had Victor create and destroy the female creature to show how he was simply too late to fix things. Bringing the creatures hopes up just to throw in the huge disappointment of breaking the promise of making him a female creature was what threw Victor past the point of no return. He could’ve potentially tried to reason with the creature or something to prevent *as much* violence from happening as what did.
I think Victor did in fact change by the end of the novel because all the events with the creature really took a toll on his mentality. I don’t think he realized what he was doing when he was first making the creature and when it happened he realized he had made a mistake and handled it really poorly, leading to a series of unfortunate events. At the beginning of the novel he didn’t seem to have any, or at least very much, malicious intent, but by the end, he just came off as blatantly narcissistic, only wanting to do what he thought to be best for himself.
In my opinion, Victor Frankenstein did change by the end of the novel; however, not necessarily for the better. At the beginning of the novel, his attraction to science is innocent, and he meant no harm in creating his monster. However, after creating the monster, he panics and runs away. His behavior after his creation comes alive and his refusal to create the monster a companion or an “Eve” leads to the death of all his loved ones. Victor then hunts his creation and becomes ill before being able to destroy it. Although he understands that creating his monster was wrong, was he acting out of revenge or regret? He claims he regrets creating the monster but doesn’t seem to grasp why it was wrong truly but regrets those he lost because of it. Victor’s ambitions went against nature itself. Furthermore, he originally advises Walton to avoid ambition but then encourages him to continue his mission. This contradiction shows that he only cares about his ambitions, not the well-being of others.
I think Mary Shelley wants readers to think that Victor is right for tearing apart the female creature he made. Although later we realize that it is deeper than that. I believe Mary Shelley shows this when she writes about Victor imagining the monsters having a quote “race of devils… on the earth.” She explains his concern growing, and then when laying on the hideous monsters excitement through the window he destroys what work he had. Later, when this leads to more death and revenge we realize it might have been the wrong decision. He took away what could have helped to prevent the monster’s loneliness and human resent. Instead, it led to more hatred and ascertain. I do think this led to a good ending of the book though.
I think that Mary Shelley wanted readers to think that Victor was good for tearing apart the female monster, but I think the deeper meaning is that he was wrong. The the surface it seems like Victor is doing the right thing by destroying the female creature, and that he is learning from his actions. However, I think that if you examine what Victor did more closely you can see that in a way he was also wrong. By creating and destroying the female creature he took away the only hope for the creature that he created to live happily. If he would have done this then maybe the creature and victor could have gone on to live their own lives, but unfortunately they both have tragic endings instead.
I think Victor has changed in the novel from the start to the finish. I think he has because at the start he was normal and then became a psycho during the novel. When I mean he became a psycho, he literally ran away from Frankenstein and became paranoid that Frankenstein was going to kill him when after all he was going after Victor’s family to get back at the fact Victor left him all alone when he woke up. He also denied the request for Frankenstein to have a female companion called “eve” which made Frankenstein made and that’s why I think he went after Elizabeth.
I think when Victor tells Walton that he wants them to go on he means he wants them to live the life he could not do because of his creation (Frankenstein) and everything they went through. I would have hoped Walton and his crew did because of the fact they were wanting to find a trade route through the north pole.