The nature versus nurture debate dates back to 1869 with Francis Galton arguing nature and John Locke arguing nurture. The concept of this debate is to determine what shapes a man's personality. Are we born with all of our characteristics and our personalities, with little room to change or does our environment shape our personalities? Many philosophers have grappled with this debate, as well as authors. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, she consistently explains that the creature's behavior is due to nurture - or lack thereof. She argues that the way he is rejected time and time again has made him bitter. This is a reoccurring theme throughout the entire book, and it is not limited to the explanation of only the creature’s behavior, but Victor Frankenstein's behavior as well. From the very beginning of his existence, the creature has been alone. Victor Frankenstein had found the creature so hideous after bringing him to life that he could not even bear to return to the place he had last seen …show more content…
The creature has already killed those who are important to Victor, and is now explaining to Victor that he is not hurting Victor and these people because he wants to, but he is doing it because he feels he has no choice. In order for him to be happy again, he wants a companion whether it be a female version of him or Victor, and he is just trying to get the attention of Victor so that he can do that. Once a companion is granted to him, he has no intentions of hurting anyone again. “I am malicious because I am miserable,” (75). Shelley is really showing that the lack of nurture and sense of belonging of the creature is what has caused him to turn to murder, and it is what makes him vengeful. He is lonely, and doesn't know how else to catch the attention of Victor to help him, thus he “turns”