Mirror of Humanity: Society’s Guilt in Creating Frankenstein’s Monster
Frankenstein: A Critical Reflection on Knowledge, Morality, and the Nature of Monsters
“This blog is part of a Thinking Activity given by Megha Trivedi Ma'am on Marry shelley's Frankenstein. In it, I will reflect on a few key questions about the novel and attempt to answer them.”
This video is generated with the help of NotebookLm .
Q1. What are some major differences between the movie and the novel Frankenstein?
- Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is often viewed as a chilling story of a dreadful monster, yet beneath the surface lies a more profound question: Is the true monster Victor Frankenstein or the creature he brought to life? By blurring this boundary, Shelley challenges readers to rethink ideas of morality, responsibility, and what it truly means to be human.
-
Novel (1818): Mary Shelley presents Victor Frankenstein’s story as a deeply philosophical exploration of ambition, morality, and the consequences of unchecked knowledge.
-
Movies: Most films, especially James Whale’s Frankenstein (1931), reduce the narrative to horror spectacle. The philosophical weight is replaced with shock value and entertainment.
- As Mary Shelley writes: “Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge.”
2. Characterization of the Creature
-
Novel (1818): Mary Shelley presents Victor Frankenstein’s story as a deeply philosophical exploration of ambition, morality, and the consequences of unchecked knowledge.
-
Movies: Most films, especially James Whale’s Frankenstein (1931), reduce the narrative to horror spectacle. The philosophical weight is replaced with shock value and entertainment.
- As Mary Shelley writes: “Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge.”
-
In the novel, the Creature is articulate, sensitive, and intelligent. He reads Paradise Lost, admires nature, and longs for companionship.
-
In films, especially the early ones, he is often depicted as mute, clumsy, and violent—a distortion that oversimplifies Shelley’s nuanced creation.
Example: In Bride of Frankenstein (1935), the Creature is portrayed as more tragic but still stripped of the eloquence that defines him in the novel.
3. Characterization of the Creature
-
In the novel, the Creature is articulate, sensitive, and intelligent. He reads Paradise Lost, admires nature, and longs for companionship.
-
In films, especially the early ones, he is often depicted as mute, clumsy, and violent—a distortion that oversimplifies Shelley’s nuanced creation.
Example: In Bride of Frankenstein (1935), the Creature is portrayed as more tragic but still stripped of the eloquence that defines him in the novel.
-
In the novel, the Creature is articulate, sensitive, and intelligent. He reads Paradise Lost, admires nature, and longs for companionship.
-
In films, especially the early ones, he is often depicted as mute, clumsy, and violent—a distortion that oversimplifies Shelley’s nuanced creation.
- Example: In Bride of Frankenstein (1935), the Creature is portrayed as more tragic but still stripped of the eloquence that defines him in the novel.
4. Moral and Thematic Emphasis
-
In the novel, the Creature is articulate, sensitive, and intelligent. He reads Paradise Lost, admires nature, and longs for companionship.
-
In films, especially the early ones, he is often depicted as mute, clumsy, and violent—a distortion that oversimplifies Shelley’s nuanced creation.
- Example: In Bride of Frankenstein (1935), the Creature is portrayed as more tragic but still stripped of the eloquence that defines him in the novel.
Novel → Focus on responsibility, human ambition, alienation.
Movies → Focus on terror, fear, spectacle.
conclusion
Novel → Focus on responsibility, human ambition, alienation.
Movies → Focus on terror, fear, spectacle.
- Ultimately, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein goes beyond the surface of horror, delving into deeper questions of morality, responsibility, and the human condition. Yet, most adaptations reduce this complexity, turning the Creature into a mere symbol of terror rather than preserving his tragic depth and humanity.
Q2. Who do you think is a real monster?
- Ultimately, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein goes beyond the surface of horror, delving into deeper questions of morality, responsibility, and the human condition. Yet, most adaptations reduce this complexity, turning the Creature into a mere symbol of terror rather than preserving his tragic depth and humanity.
1 .Victor Frankenstein: The Monster of Ambition
Victor’s hubris drives him to “play God.”
-
He abandons his creation, failing in his responsibility as a “father.”
-
His actions directly lead to the deaths of William, Justine, Clerval, and Elizabeth.
“I had worked hard for nearly two years, for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body. But now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished."
- Victor’s cowardice and neglect reflect moral monstrosity.
-
Initially gentle and kind, helping villagers secretly (e.g., gathering wood for the De Lacey family).
-
Society’s rejection and cruelty push him toward violence.
-
His crimes (William’s murder, Elizabeth’s death) stem from loneliness and vengeance, not inherent evil.
Subpoint:
Shelley blurs the line: “I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel.”
The real “monster” is not defined by appearance but by moral failure.
- Victor dreams of creating life but never thinks about the consequences.
- The very moment the Creature comes alive, Victor flees in terror: “Breathless horror and disgust filled my heart.”
- This abandonment is monstrous because he leaves his “child” helpless, confused, and without guidance.
- Despite the catastrophic consequences, Victor still blames the Creature entirely.
He sees himself as the victim, not the cause: a sign of selfishness and lack of moral growth.
- Thus, Shelley presents him as more monstrous in spirit than his Creature.
- In Frankenstein, both Victor and his Creature share responsibility for monstrosity. Victor’s reckless ambition, neglect, and moral failure make him the root cause of the tragedy, while the Creature’s turn to violence and revenge deepens the horror. Shelley blurs the line between them, showing that true monstrosity lies not in appearance but in selfishness, irresponsibility, and the destructive choices of both creator and creation.
1. Obsession Leading to Blind Ambition
-
Victor’s thirst for knowledge becomes an obsession: he isolates himself, neglects family and friends, and sacrifices his health.
-
His focus is on mastering nature rather than understanding moral implications.
-
Example: He works tirelessly to create life without considering the consequences.
2. Ignoring Moral and Ethical Boundaries
-
Knowledge alone is not harmful, but using it irresponsibly is.
-
Victor crosses natural and ethical limits by trying to play God.
-
Shelley warns that unchecked ambition can turn discovery into destruction.
3. Consequences of Uncontrolled Curiosity
-
Victor’s creation of the Creature leads to death, suffering, and loss:
William, Justine, Clerval, Elizabeth, and Victor’s father all die.
-
His single-minded pursuit shows how knowledge, when pursued selfishly, can harm others.
4. Alienation and Personal Destruction
-
The search for knowledge isolates Victor from society, friends, and family.
-
He becomes consumed by guilt and fear, showing that the quest itself can destroy one’s peace and humanity.
- Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein shows that the search for knowledge can be dangerous and destructive when driven by obsession, ambition, or neglect of moral responsibility. True progress requires not only curiosity but also ethical awareness and accountability.
- In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the question of whether Victor Frankenstein’s creature is inherently evil or shaped into a monster by society is central. The creature begins as an innocent being, full of curiosity and a desire for companionship. However, his repeated rejection and mistreatment push him toward anger, violence, and revenge.
3. Loneliness and isolation
- The Creature’s greatest pain is not his appearance but his solitude. After repeated rejection, he declares: “I had feelings of affection, and they were requited by detestation and scorn.” (Vol. II, Ch. 2). He longs for companionship, someone to share his life and lessen his misery. This drives him to beg Victor for a female companion: “I demand a creature of another sex, but as hideous as myself: the gratification is small, but it is all that I can receive, and it shall content me.” (Vol. II, Ch. 8).
- The Creature’s violent acts arise after repeated mistreatment and abandonment. He kills William, Victor’s younger brother, but justifies it as striking back at the family who brought him into a world of misery: “I am malicious because I am miserable. Am I not shunned and hated by all mankind?” (Vol. II, Ch. 9). His later murders of Henry Clerval and Elizabeth are direct acts of vengeance against Victor for refusing to provide him a companion.
Conclusion
- The Creature was not born evil; his suffering, rejection, and loneliness turned him into a monster. Society’s cruelty and Victor’s neglect shaped his downfall, proving that misery—not nature—made him a fiend.
