The ability to have reason is a fundamental aspect of having humanity, as it allows for justifiable decision-making to occur. Frankenstein by Mary Shelley and The Castle of Otranto by Horace Walpole, are two texts that demonstrate how reason is what separates a human from becoming a monstrous individual. Primarily, Shelley produces a character, Victor Frankenstein, whose impulsive and self-indulgent nature, creates harmful situations to those surrounding him. Likewise, Walpole’s character of Manfred is greatly affected by pride and ego when making decisions; focusing on only what will benefit him rather than fix the situation. Moreover, where Frankenstein depicts a monster whose culpability is too overwhelming for him to confront the problems …show more content…
I argue that Victor Frankenstein is the true monster of the novel, Frankenstein, rather than the manmade creature he brings to life. Frankenstein is responsible for much of the suffering that occurs and takes little to no responsibility for his actions until they start to have dramatic effects on those he loves. Although he physically does not commit murder, his silence and blindness to reason is destructive and influences the creature to act violently. Frankenstein’s thoughtlessness stems from basing his decisions on fleeting passions, rather than logically deliberating the pros and cons of his choices. The increasing desire to create a being, shifts from doubts about his capabilities, to a “…variety of feelings which bore [him] onwards, like a hurricane, in the first enthusiasm of success” (Shelley 33). This delineates Frankenstein’s true feelings about this task; he is not driven by pure intentions, but rather by succumbing to pleasures of the mysterious process of creation. Creation, for this character, is not an innocent exploration of social and scientific limits, but about the uncontrollable desires he feels, and the inability to suppress his