I am not sure when I first heard of Frankenstein. Perhaps it was looking at the costume provided in Party City’s Halloween Book. Perhaps it was from watching Alvin and the Chipmunks Meet Frankenstein or an episode of one of my favorite cartoons called, Scooby-Doo and the Frankenstein Monster. Regardless of my first introduction to Frankenstein, I have always known that Frankenstein was considered a monster. However, what I learned as a young child was that Frankenstein was often misunderstood; not possessing the same attributes that were typically associated with being a monster. Thus, I always pitied the monster for being brought into the human world but never truly being apart of it.
What I am struggling with while reading this novel is whether or not Frankie (well Frankenstein as a name, sounds really mean, and “it” sounds meaningless; honestly what name would you give?) is truly a monster. As I stated earlier, if Frankie is a monster, then he seems to be one that is misunderstood. Frankie has not committed mass murders in search of food or because of anger issues, nor does he growl, roar, or emit sounds and noises that would definitely identify him as a monster. If Frankie is not a monster then what should we identify him as? While monster, creature, etc. have been used, perhaps Frankie is human or, at the very least, part human. Of course, problems immediately stir from this theory because Frankie was not created in the same manner in which humans were. However, what makes Frankie part human is his actions; he does not eat meat and he is able to think; coming to conclusions about himself, particularly why he is feared.
I think that Frankie’s face, despite the grotesqueness associated with the watery eye and skin color, is also what makes him human. Although Victor believes that this is the one feature that is his flaw, the one thing that makes him appear as something that should be placed within the “other” category, this face could also be the link to being human. If Frankie’s body was not ridiculously large and the face was not flawed, then would Frankie finally be seen as a human? Also, without the speculation of a perfect creation, are humans not flawed in some way? Many humans, I am sure, that were bore doing this time as well, are born with undeveloped limbs, watery eyes, and physical problems. I think that I also can’t fully understand why Victor saw him as a monster due to this flaw.
Maybe the creator has the true flaws. I think it is even safe to claim that all humans are monsters when they see the physical flaws first; judging before knowing. Perhaps this was a message of Shelly.
I think that Frankie’s face, despite the grotesqueness associated with the watery eye and skin color, is also what makes him human. Although Victor believes that this is the one feature that is his flaw, the one thing that makes him appear as something that should be placed within the “other” category, this face could also be the link to being human. If Frankie’s body was not ridiculously large and the face was not flawed, then would Frankie finally be seen as a human? Also, without the speculation of a perfect creation, are humans not flawed in some way? Many humans, I am sure, that were bore doing this time as well, are born with undeveloped limbs, watery eyes, and physical problems. I think that I also can’t fully understand why Victor saw him as a monster due to this flaw.
Maybe the creator has the true flaws. I think it is even safe to claim that all humans are monsters when they see the physical flaws first; judging before knowing. Perhaps this was a message of Shelly.
I think in some ways, Frankie is a misunderstood creature. So you're right. But I do feel that he is a monster with human tendencies, and we see some of the more evil tendencies as we go through the novel (IE revenge). Still, Frankie isn't in the best position if we treat him as either human or monster. If he is a monster, we fear him and wish to kill him, as is our nature when humans come across something we don't understand or is completely and utterly new to us. If he is a human, he is a criminal, responsible for multiple acts of murder and the framing of such on other innocent victims. Maybe that should help us decide on how we should look at him?
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree with you in many respects, I noticed that you wanted to justify Frankie’s actions. We, myself included, want to project “humanness” onto him. (Perhaps this is a human quality.) Likewise, Frankie wishes to see himself as human in the many scenes where he emulates the family in the mountains. But this brings me to the question, “what is human?” Is it “human” when we run away from the unknown, like the family does? You state, “Maybe the creator has the true flaws.” Are these flaws not human? Is it human to ignore human flaws? Does to be human only mean the good qualities? Does this make us monsters by denying that we have flaws? I have no answers to these questions. However, Frankie’s existence, human or not, does problematize the nature of humanity.
ReplyDelete