Throughout Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Prospero and Frankenstein either have power or want it. The power they attempt to and succeed in acquiring superhuman, divine power. Though it seems that they use this power in similar ways, which would lead one to expect similar consequences, Frankenstein has a tragic ending, whereas The Tempest ends more positively. Frankenstein assumes the role of God while Prospero tries to carry out God’s will using limited magic, making Frankenstein a cautionary tale and The Tempest a guide for divinely inspired leadership.
Prospero’s ability to conduct magic and his absent co-creator or partner makes him unlike any other human character in the play. Though his magical abilities are
…show more content…
Sarah Denman write that Prospero is like the Church in that he is a messenger of God and has limited “life power.” This interpretation of Prospero is reminiscent of the Divine Right of Kings, which was first mention in England under the reign of James I (1603-1625). It is certainly possible that Shakespeare’s had the concept of the Divine Right of Kings in mind when he wrote The Tempest.
H.K Jones and Mrs. Sarah Denman also write that “when the government of this planet is taken from the powers above and put into the hands of man, then comes destruction.” This comment is a reference to Antonio, Trinculo, and Stephano, which are referred to as “natural” men, but it is also applicable to Frankenstein, who tries to assume power without connecting it to religion. The source states that “natural man” indulges in desires and is destined for destruction. Likewise, Frankenstein has a selfish desire for power and faces destruction as a result.
Frankenstein’s story is a manifestation of the idea that “absolute power corrupts absolutely.” Frankenstein’s total assumption of the God-like power to create life, juxtaposed to Prospero’s limited superhuman abilities, leads him to be responsible for the death of every significant person in his life through his