Nature Vs. Nurture In Frankenstein

1619 Words4 Pages

The debate of nature vs nurture, or whether genetic makeup or environmental impacts determine the thoughts and actions of a person, is a classic controversy that is also prevalent in Mary Shelley’s gothic novel Frankenstein. In the book, scientist Victor Frankenstein irresponsibly creates a man out of many body parts. He is appalled at the sight of the hideous creature with “yellow skin [that] scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath,” and abandons the monster, leaving it full of hate and a need for revenge (Shelley). Frankenstein’s monster was inclined to be murderous due to a lack of nurture from his creator as opposed to having a malevolent nature in his genes. The lesson to be learned in Frankenstein is that monsters are …show more content…

In research done by Eric Turkheimer for Through the Wormhole to study how genes and environment affect how successful a person will be in his or her career, researchers found that living conditions made more difference than a person’s genes or I.Q. According to Turkheimer, “their home environment was by far the most important factor. Their genes seemed to play almost no role at all” ("Nature or Nurture”). Children who grew up in harsh environments, even children with genes to be successful, rarely succeeded. Turkheimer found in his research that “It doesn’t matter what kind of genetic tendencies some of these kids may have had. If they’re raised in a bad enough environment, they’re not going to be able to express them” ("Nature or Nurture”). Other studies besides Turkheimer’s have proved the same thing. Sir Michael Rutter of the University of London states that “It doesn’t really matter whether the heritability of I.Q. is this particular figure or that one. Changing the environment can still make an enormous difference” (Kirp). In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the monster had no guidance or any contact from his creator after he was brought to life. The environment the monster was raised in mirrors the environment that the children in Turkheimer’s study grew up in. Lack of structure and support, harsh words, and emotional and physical violence all prevent children from growing up into prosperous adults and …show more content…

Not only did he feel contempt because of the way he was treated, but it was also compounded by the extreme feeling of isolation that he had. "Being lonely can produce hyper-reactivity to negative behaviors in other people,” says John Cacioppo, a psychologist who specifically studies the biological effects of loneliness, “so lonely people see those maltreatments as heavier” (Gammon). The monster was alone since the day he was created, so his mind and mental state were undoubtedly damaged, making him more prone to turning his negative feelings into something far worse, like murder. “But where were my friends and relations? No father had watched my infant days, no mother had blessed me with smiles and caresses,” laments the monster (Shelley). His lack of relationships made him socially inept, and made it hard for him to think rationally about how to react to negative comments. In the seventeenth chapter of Frankenstein, the monster returns to Victor after living alone in his cave for a while and asks Victor to create a female companion for him to ease his lonesomeness (Shelley). He begs Victor, using the argument that companionship will ease his pain and reduce the hatred he feels for humans: “If I have no ties and no affections, hatred and vice must be my portion; the love of another will destroy the cause of my crimes” (Shelley). According to John Cacioppo’s findings, the monster would be correct in

Open Document