In the following passage, Mary Shelly exemplifies the inherent inhumanity of humanity by indirectly juxtaposing Victor Frankenstein, representative of the Human race as a whole, and the Monster. In turn, Shelly portrays how the selfish desires of humans "take hold" of their being and blind them to the perfect beauty that blatantly stands before them. It is this stature of perfection which most humans earnestly wish to achieve. However, it is neigh too far for them to reach, because in order to obtain this perfection, they must first cease the nature of what it is to be human.[a]
In this scenario, Shelly plays the foil characters[b], Victor and the Monster, off of each other in order to show that the true "Monster" is humanity itself. Here, Shelly describes what it is to be a perfect being: "A human being in perfection ought always to preserve a calm and peaceful mind and never to allow passion or a transitory desire to disturb his tranquility." [c]The passions for which the Monster strives—compassion, love and to enjoy life with others—are inextricably intertwined with those of Victor—namely, the search for knowledge. It can be argued that the passion of the Monster is an essential part of life. One may say it is as important as food, water or shelter; you would die without it. Victor, on the other hand, strives for the selfish pursuit of knowledge, a non-essential part of life which is a detriment to his physical wellbeing and later on inadvertently leads to the demise of those dearest to him. At the end of Victors toils he creates a morally perfect being, a byproduct of his own flaws, which seems to contrast almost every aspect of himself. When consumed with his occupation of creating the monster, Victor "shunned [his] fellow creatures as if [he] had been guilty of a crime" and "caused [him] also to forget those friends who were so many miles absent." By contrast, the Monster only wished to be with others and very much disliked his isolation—which is the very thing Victor needed. Furthermore, the Monster very much wanted to experience love whilst Victor wished to "procrastinate all that related to [his] feelings." This dichotomy between the two helps to simplify the question that many ask themselves when done with reading Frankenstein: "Who was the real Monster, Victor or his creation?" However, this idea culminates not when their differences are compared, but their similarities. The sole feeling each endured when trying to pursue their goal was that of pain. Victor described his duties as "loathsome" and when on the eve of completing his endeavor, he was stricken with a fierce fever. These punishments which Victor suffered seem quite just when considering the selfish act he had committed. On the other hand, the Monster only wished to do good and his pursuit of compassion and friendship was a necessity which he couldn't possibly avoid. Although unjust, he is punished just as Victor, which paints him as a martyr character, and ultimately a fallen angel. The only reason he did end up falling from his heavenly pedestal was ironically due to Victor and the human race's lack of knowledge of what lie under the Monster's grotesque appearance. [d]
The symbol of light, often found throughout the novel, symbolizes knowledge. Light can help to illuminate, to clarify. However, light, just as knowledge, can be blinding. [e]In this passage, Shelly demonstrates how Victor's pursuit of knowledge blinds himself from the beauty of nature and by extension, how humanity is blinded from the beauty that is the Monster. As Victor fervently works away on his creation he becomes so utterly consumed that he is "insensible to the charms of nature." In this case, the "charms of nature" represent the true underlying good of the monster. Furthermore, the only point in which nature evokes any feeling at all in Victor is when it is in its most horrid state—fall. If one would compare the seasons to the cycle of life, spring would be birth, summer the peak of life, and autumn being death; hence the term "fall," signifying the deteriorating slope of health one experiences when approaching death. In Autumn, Victor shrieks due to the "fall of a leaf,", which shows the he is perceptible only to the ugliness of the Monster and not what lies beneath. In this passage nature serves a pivotal role. It serves as a direct comparison to the Monster, who is the epitome of unnaturalness and ugliness, Compared to nature, who is seen as all that is pure and forever beautiful. However, what is first seen is not always true. Just as nature has a side that is not so beautiful, the monster has a side that is as equally as beautiful as the most enchanting parts of nature. It is these similarities between the Monster and nature that shows that the Monster is of pure being and the only reason that he turned sour was due to him being tainted by the presence of humanity.
In this passage Shelly draws a clear line of what is and what isn't a Monster and by extension, how the Monster contradicts this rule below:
"If the study to which you apply yourself has a tendency to weaken your affections and to destroy your taste for those simple pleasures in which no alloy can possibly mix, then that study is certainly unlawful, that is to say, not befitting the human mind. If this rule were always observed; if no man allowed any pursuit whatsoever to interfere with the tranquility of his domestic affections, Greece had not been enslaved, Caesar would have spared his country, America would have been discovered more gradually, and the Empire of Mexico and Peru had not been destroyed."[f]
The keyword in this passage is "man," signifying that these terrible effects can only be produced by the monster of man. Mary Shelly describes the complete and total conversion of "man" to "monster" when she tells of Victor only being sustained by "the energy of [his] purpose," which is in direct reference to the rule above. The Monster and Victor are foil characters, therefore the transformation that Victor undergoes is intrinsically connected to that of the Monster. At first glance, it seems that Victor and the Monster did indeed go through the same transition from wholesome caring creature to selfless obsessed beast, and while this is true, it is at the end of this transformation in which their differences are shown. The examples of the global atrocities above, cause of the selfish nature of humans, are representative of Victor’s pursuit. In each of these examples, the perpetrators of these horrible events must have been aware of the crimes they were committing upon others, but were so consumed with their pursuit they did not care about the effects of their actions. However, near the end of the story the Monster feels remorse of what he has done, whereas Victor did not. He truly believed the Monster was the cause of all the evil and misfortunes that was destroying his life, when in actuality it was he who caused it.
In brief, Mary Shelly masterfully juxtaposes Victor and the Monster by pitting the most morally integral parts of their being against one another to show that the Monster was not the true "monster", but it was in fact Victor and the human race. It is these destructive passions that plague all of humanity which clouds the truth of what is before them. Therefore, in order to be free from these flaws which affects a human, one must transgress beyond of what it is to be human. Therefore, to be human is to be flawed, and it is these certain flaws Shelly uses to show what it is to be a monster.
[a]This is a really great thesis statement. This is your thesis statement, right? What was the prompt that you had to write about? Make sure you’re addressing the prompt in your argument.
[b]Great vocab here. Foils are a really sophisticated writer’s craft, we talked about them extensively in my AP Lit class senior year during the Hemingway unit. Did you come up with this yourself or was it necessary for the prompt that you use foils? Either way, great job.
[c]Are you expected to cite your quotations? If so, you may want to include a page number here. If not, no worries.
[d]This is a lot of great analysis! I don’t think you were over-analyzing at all. This interpretation is exactly the kind of stuff that teachers look for when reading over essays.
[e]Great comparison
[f]Does this need to be cited?
