Yet, as always, the monster is killed at the end along with its enticing behaviors, allowing the reader to be safe from its temporary identification with the monster. Cohen presents the monster as a question to the reader. The monster asks the audience what they assume, how they perceive the culture, and why the monster was created. The story demonstrates Cohen’s fourth thesis by depicting a culture that justifies displacing/oppressing those who are different by villainizing them. Cohen’s fourth thesis claims that representing the outcasts of civilization “as monstrous justifies its displacement or extermination” (7).
Frankenstein’s Monster is not categorized as evil by his malicious behavior and is sympathized with due to his creator abandoning him and the role of nature versus nurture taken place II. Monster’s Nature and alienation A. Monster originally had an inquisitive nature yet gentle nature a. Information on the German family was “each interesting and wonderful to one so utterly inexperienced as [he] was” (105) B. With the rejection and alienation from society, the only interactions the monster experiences, he becomes full of hatred a. Rejected by De Lacey family by his looks and labeled a monster b. Tries to save a child but is shot by child’s father C. Reader may feel sympathy towards the Monster’s actions because the readers know that his true nature was not evil and he was misjudged III.
The creature's views were warped by all of this. Even when he learned to read, write, and speak, he learned to love others, but after all of this, he could not. If society learned to stop judging only appearance, the creature himself would have lived a better life. Not a life consumed by
Rhetorical Analysis of “Monsters and the Moral Imagination” Many people believe monsters are imaginary creatures that are seen in movies or even for others, it could be a serial killer that was heard about on the news. Stephen T. Asma wrote “Monsters and the Moral Imagination” which “first appeared in the Chronicle of Higher Education in October 2009” (Hoffman 61). Asma, who is a professor of philosophy, examines how different individual’s perceptions of a monster can be different depending on the era or even events happening around them. In “Monsters and the Moral Imagination,” Stephen T. Asma wrote a nonfiction, persuasive article for an educated and possibly specialized audience to examine how the idea of monsters have changed over time, what could be the motivation to create them, or even how life experiences could change an individual’s perceptions.
What comes to mind first when the name Frankenstein is said aloud? Is a monster described as a vile, horrendous, green creation from a mad scientist envisioned? Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, has had a great influence over the media and pop culture since its publishing back in 1818. From Halloween costumes to Hollywood movies, the monster from the book is constantly being referred to. Although the original monster from Mary Shelley’s work is not described as we imagine it today, and despite the monster in the novel not even being named Frankenstein, there is no denying that the face of this creature has swarmed the modern world.
The monster was a troublemaker. Nobody liked him and he was always damaging everybody’s property. He shook the ground every time he walked. The people were terrified of him. They trembled when they saw him coming towards them.
Frankenstein in our Generation Who would have known that the novel, Frankenstein, would have been so popular? We might not see much of it, but Frankenstein is all over the news. There are many scientists and doctors out there that are trying to achieve what Victor Frankenstein did, which was to create a monster from scratch. To create a human from scratch truly takes a genius., and there is a lot of research and years of planning involved in that creation. There is much of a surprise to the fact that Frankenstein is still being brought up to this day, but could potentially positively affect our future.
The monster depicts his otherness when he wonders: “Was I, then, a monster, a blot upon the earth, from which all men fled and whom all men disowned” (Shelley 85). The monster evidently remains in isolation and is dehumanized. The monster attempts to get integrated into his society but his appearance and lack of social skills hinder his success. The monster strives to be accepted but is incapable of acceptance. The monster reiterates this feeling of isolation as he says: “I felt as if I were placed under a ban- as if I had no right to claim their sympathies – as if never more might I enjoy companionship with them” (Shelley 108).
In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein brings his creation to life and has to endure the repercussions of his actions. While Victor is in fact human, the question of whether the creature or Victor is more human still stands. Humanity is demonstrated as compassionate in the book and monstrosity is the opposite. The creature is more human because of his developed personality and desire to be human. Victor, although born into a humane family, evolved into everything bad about humanity; he developed obsession, resentment, and manipulated life to conform to his idealities.
Since this class, I have seen monsters in a whole new light. I believe that not all monsters are created to be evil. Monsters have more depth to them and we view them just as a creature for our entertainment. In my essay’s over the semester, I have dug deeper into the emotional aspect of monsters. I believe monsters have feelings and they are more than what society depicts them as.
The seventh thesis “The Monster Stands at the Threshold…of Becoming” brings attention to the fact that we are the creators of monsters. They make us question why we have created them; how we perceive the world, how we have misinterpreted so that we can reevaluate cultural assumptions about the different race, gender, sexuality.
Would the creature have changed his ways if he had a companion? These are details we will never know the answer
Although he comes with friendly intentions, the Monster is treated violently and with contempt, essentially being forced into his alienation to survive and becoming the “monster” he is already thought of as a result. The Monster’s actions are a response to the treatment he has received from others, everyday villagers and Victor alike. With little known about his origins and no way to explain himself, there is no hope for the Monster to assimilate himself. This is present in other characters of the novel as well, for example, Richard Walton, who has self-alienated in order to gain distinction and knowledge. The Monsters origins and appearance develop these themes of alienation throughout the novel, themes that are further developed by other characters and play an important role in delivering the message of
The monster is said to be a replica of Frankenstein. The monster has no control over his aggression and continues to murder his master’s loved ones. Although, this aggression is spurred on from the rejection and sorrow that humanity has placed on him (Cantor 117). The creature’s ultimate sorrow is caused by the denial of a companion
Regardless of who we strive to be, or who we dare not to be, those who we respect and look up to will be the ones who leave an impression on our lives. To the Monster’s credit, it continued to pursue a life of good deeds until the people it idolized turn on it. Because of the influence made on it by its parental figures the Monster behaves like an outsider, and as an outsider it gains new role models and is governed by new emotions such as anger and hate. The monster should not be blamed for its malicious nature, rather, the people who taught it hate and the Doctor who created it without a true intent of being its
