Thursday, September 15, 2011

Untrustworthy: Creation become his demise

     The difference accidents of life are not so changeable as the feelings of human nature. I had worked    
     hard for nearly two years, for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body. For this I had 
     deprived myself of rest and health. I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but 
     now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart. (Shelley 54)
     Victor originally describes his creation as beautiful and continues to obsess about all the positive features that portray the monster's body. After he has finally completed the development of the monster he changes his perception negatively. Victor immediately is horrified by his construction because he could not believe he had the ability to create life. The monster changes from being the most attractive creation to a disgusting and grotesque creature once he is fully evolved. Ultimately, his supposed finest accomplishment turns into his very demise.

    Victor Frankenstein is portrayed as a psychologically ill character who is untrustworthy. The novel continues to prove Victor's denial and how he does not take responsibility for his actions. He forgets about the monster and abandons him after working for two long years to create his prize possession. Victor's claims are erroneous through out the novel which shows that he is mentally ill and can not be trusted. Victor looses control of his creation and allows the monster to wander aimlessly potentially threatening the lives in his community. By disregarding the monster for two years, shows that Victor rejected his hard work and essentially had a mental breakdown.

   Frankenstein does not even trust himself because he immediately contradicts his beliefs once the monster comes to life. Victor is unable to prove his research and experiment by creating life and then abandoning the monster. He proceeds to justify his reasoning for leaving the monster to flee around aimlessly by thinking he's not guilty. He does not take any blame for separating himself from the monster. Instead of admitting that his actions are wrong he tries to talk around the issue and covers up his guilty conscious in a twisted convoluted way. He moves from a tortured analysis of his own fault to a more descriptive and knowledgeable test. He should have stayed at home in his laboratory and taught the monster his ways but instead left the monster on his own to figure out the characteristics of human beings independently. This goes to show Victor does not trust his own judgement because he lacks moral values.

     Victor attempts to be more powerful than he is capable of by threatening he is more mortal. He thinks he can enter superhuman and godly territory which proves he is an untrustworthy person. Frankenstein attempts to accomplish something that no human could achieve before. Victor knows he is going against his family, friends, and morals by still creating the monster. He is mixing the study of science with the study of natural philosophy.

1 comment:

  1. What you're writing about here seems to me to be more about how Victor is an untrustworthy (or bad) *person* as opposed to an untrustworthy or bad *narrator*. It's not the same thing at all. Walton, for instance, might be a great guy, but because he is infatuated with Victor, we need to think a little harder about everything he says about Victor. Similarly, Victor might be wonderful or terrible (you'd obviously argue that he's pretty terrible), but what does that have to do with how we interpret him as a narrator? When can we trust him? When can't we trust him? How can we figure out what's really going on, when we can't trust him?

    After rereading the prompt, I can see that the prompt itself is unclear. The discussion in class, and the reminder that the prompt concerns the narrative itself, was meant to help with that.

    In any case, there are problems with your reading. You focus on a single passage, but do not relate it to other passages - for instance, Victor does, in fact, blame himself extensively as the novel progresses for his behavior. And if you're evaluating his morality, then you make contradictory claims: is the problem what he did (created the monster) or didn't do (didn't raise it properly)? You take both positions, I think, in the last two paragraphs.

    In other words, your understanding of the prompt is understandable, that is say, my fault. But you needed, at least, to end up with a focused analysis of Frankenstein's character, that goes beyond the *obvious* ways in which he is untrustworthy.