Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
frankenstein character analysis thesis
frankenstein the monster analysis
frankenstein the monster analysis
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: frankenstein character analysis thesis
“Introduction to Frankenstein”
The ethical debate concerning biotechnological exploration into genetic cloning has created a monster in itself. A multitude of ethical questions arises when considering the effect of creating a genetically engineered human being. Does man or science have the right to create life through unnatural means? Should morality dictate these technological advancements and their effects on society? The questions and concerns are infinite, but so to are the curiosities, which continue to perpetuate the advancement of biotechnological science. In order to contemplate the effects that science can have on our society we can look back in history and literature to uncover the potentiality of our future endeavors. From a historic perspective, the ethical concerns about atomic fusion serves as an important cautionary guide. In its conception the prospect was for the betterment of man however the result may eventually bring our demise with the eminent threat of nuclear warfare.
In literature, Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” serves as a bioethical exhortation for today’s technological advances in genetic cloning. Mary Shelly’s “Frankenstein” provides a clear distinction between the theoretical grandeur of man’s ability to scientifically produce life and the stark reality, which it encompasses. Mary prophetically illustrates some of the potential hazards of breaking through the barrier that separates man from God. Her insight allows the reader to trace these repercussions through Victor Frankenstein, the monster, and eventually society.
The character of Victor Frankenstein illustrates the path of destruction scientists can create when ignoring their moral community. Individuals, who possess good ambition for knowledge, power, self-perfection, and strength in one’s society, are vulnerable to their own delusions and instability, to corruption, fate, and nature. Victor was so impassioned with his life’s work that he had lost all soul or sensation but for this one pursuit (Shelley 32). Frankenstein’s blinding ambition prevented him from seeing the potential consequences of his actions until it was to late.
The first sign of Victor’s fatal flaw of egotism in that he has forgotten the bond he has with nature and to the people he loves. “A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me” (Shelley 32). His absence of moral judgments is the catalyst for what becomes the demise of the creature, society and ironically himself. It would be years before Victor fully realized that his neglect of moral obligation to the creature and society had unleashed a hideous monster that would eventually destroy his society as revenge for the monster’s sense of abandonment.
In January of 2010, the United States Supreme Court, in the spirit of free speech absolutism, issued its landmark Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision, marking a radical shift in campaign finance law. This ruling—or what some rightfully deem a display of judicial activism on the part of the Roberts Court and what President Obama warned would “open the floodgates for special interests—including foreign corporations—to spend without limit in…elections” —effectively and surreptitiously overturned Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce and portions of McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, struck down the corporate spending limits imposed by Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, and extended free speech rights to corporations. The purpose of this paper is to provide a brief historical overview of campaign finance law in the United States, outline the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling, and to examine the post-Citizens United political landscape.
Parties formed on the behalf of big businesses supporters never found a strong voice in politics. Instead of creating their own political power, businesses could influence politicians with their money. Contributions were made to campaigns of nonsocialist candidates in return for policies that would benefit businesses. Some candidates that were receiving contributions were running against Adolph Hitler (Turner 94).
When the novel “Frankenstein”, by Mary Shelley came out in 1831 the general public was introduced to the idea of man creating another man, scientifically without the use of reproduction. The disasters that followed, in the novel, demonstrated the horrid fact that creating humans was not natural. That was in 1831, when the knowledge of science had not yet evolved enough to act on such an idea. Now as the start of a new millenium approaches, having the capability to scientifically produce one human who is genetically identical to another, or cloning a human, has a lot of people questioning weather or not it is our moral right to do such a thing. It is a classic debate between principles of science and principles of religion.
Campaign finance reform has a broad history in America. In particular, campaign finance has developed extensively in the past forty years, as the courts have attempted to create federal elections that best sustain the ideals of a representative democracy. In the most recent Supreme Court decision concerning campaign finance, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the Court essentially decided to treat corporations like individuals by allowing corporations to spend money on federal elections through unlimited independent expenditures. In order to understand how the Supreme Court justified this decision, however, the history of campaign finance in regards to individuals must be examined. At the crux of these campaign finance laws is the balancing of two democratic ideals: the ability of individuals to exercise their right to free speech, and the avoidance of corrupt practices by contributors and candidates. An examination of these ideals, as well as the effectiveness of the current campaign finance system in upholding these ideas, will provide a basic framework for the decision of Citizens United v. FEC.
While an imbalance has always been prevalent in the classes of American society, recent decisions in the Supreme Court favoring less campaign finance control have disregarded the growing gap between the upper echelon and the lower class. The U.S. Supreme Court has fully given way to elitist rule, allowing the wealthy to wield their natural tenacities to grow dollar bills from rocks and plant them kindly into the pockets of political candidates that would support their hidden agendas of clandestine rule and continued hegemonification of the lower class. As recent as April 2, 2014 in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, the U.S. Supreme court released the contribution limits placed on the wealthy under the pretense of free speech as provided by the first amendment. In order to prevent further dissemination to the balance of equality amongst the classes within the United States, it is imperative for Congress to start the implementation of a detailed Constitutional Amendment defining strict regulations regarding funding towards political campaigns, as well as a clear definition to the inherent differences between an individual and a corporate entity or “faction.”
Ever since the earliest scientists, including the likes of Aristotle and Plato, the question of the morality of man's meddling in nature has been a prevalent issue. While science can provide boundless amounts of invaluable contributions to mankind, ultimately some scientific endeavors should never have been pursued. In Frankenstein, Mary Shelly explores the ethics involved in this query through the creation of a wonder of science, and its inevitable consequences. Much of the analysis of the consequences that the scientific perversion of nature harbors is manifested by the inner struggle within both Dr. Frankenstein and his monster. The tortured mind of the creator expresses the notion that one who plays God will be burdened by the excruciating pain of loneliness and uttermost guilt weighing down upon his mind and his creation.
As a tragic hero, Victor’s tragedies begin with his overly obsessive thirst for knowledge. Throughout his life, Victor has always been looking for new things to learn in the areas of science and philosophy. He goes so far with his knowledge that he ends up creating a living creature. Victor has extremely high expectations for his creation but is highly disappointed with the outcome. He says, “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 35). Frankenstein neglects the creature because of his horrifying looks, which spark the beginning of numerous conflicts and tragedies. At this point, the creature becomes a monster because of Victor’s neglect and irresponsibility. The monster is forced to learn to survive on his own, without anyone or anything to guide him along the way. Plus, the monster’s ugly looks cause society to turn against him, ad...
Kenneth Vogel’s Big Money explores the invasion of money into our political system. In the novel, Vogel explains one of the most important important events that is currently happening in today’s elections: donors. This, according to Vogel, has been brought on by a ruling in the case Citizens United vs. the Federal Election Commission. The result of this case destroyed finance restrictions, giving Corporations and Unions the same laws of freedom of speech as individual Americans. The novel opens in February of 2012 where Vogel sneaks into a donor banquet. As our current president, Barack Obama, gives his speech, Vogel makes a note of the President’s words. In particular, Vogel focuses on one line “You now have the potential
Upon first discovering how to make life, Victor is overwhelmed with excitement and pride, feeling as though he has unlocked the greatest power on earth. His imagination is “too much exalted” by this newfound ability, and thus determines there is no “animal as complex and wonderful as man” for him to attempt as his first creation (Shelley 43). Frankenstein does not contemplate how he will react to or interact with the human he gives life to, or that he has created an extremely twisted parent-child relationship by creating a human from dead bodies. His general lack of concern regarding the consequences of his remarkable yet dangerous power is the root of the rest of the conflict between him and his monster throughout the rest of the novel, and it exemplifies Shelley’s underlying theme that science should not be pushed past morally and psychologically safe boundaries.
With the advancement of technology and science, we are now able to genetically modify animals. Mary Shelley found a way to make science an epitome, and confirms what could happen if science is taken too far. In conclusion, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is considered to be a historical novel, based on scientific advancements. In this novel Shelley depicts her own definition of human nature, by showing the creature and the ways that humans react to him. The novel also showed the differences between morality and science.
Mary Shelley’s Sci-Fi horror known as Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus has become a classic novel in history. This dark tale touches on every subject of humanity. One of Shelley’s biggest themes is a big question in the science world we live in, nearly 200 years after publication of the book. That question being can science go too far, is there a line that shouldn’t be crossed? Shelley uses the plot of her story to serve as a warning to readers to be careful when dealing with this imaginary line. Shelley’s tale of a mad scientist and the repercussions he suffers from his experiment is a timeless story. As technology is being pushed to the brink of morality in the modern day, this question has become a huge part of the modern world of science we are living in.
In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley tests the motives and ethical uncertainties of the science in her time period. This is a consideration that has become more and more pertinent to our time, when we see modern scientists are venturing into what were previously unimaginable territories of science and nature, through the use of things like human cloning and genetic engineering. Through careful assessment, we can see how the novel illustrates both the potential dangers of these scientific advancements and the conflict between that and creationism.
The issue of campaign financing has been discussed for a long time. Running for office especially a higher office is not a cheap event. Candidates must spend much for hiring staff, renting office space, buying ads etc. Where does the money come from? It cannot officially come from corporations or national banks because that has been forbidden since 1907 by Congress. So if the candidate is not extremely rich himself the funding must come from donations from individuals, party committees, and PACs. PACs are political action committees, which raise funds from different sources and can be set up by corporations, labor unions or other organizations. In 1974, the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) requires full disclosure of any federal campaign contributions and expenditures and limits contributions to all federal candidates and political committees influencing federal elections. In 1976 the case Buckley v. Valeo upheld the contribution limits as a measure against bribery. But the Court did not rule against limits on independent expenditures, support which is not coordinated with the candidate. In the newest development, the McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission ruling from April 2014 the supreme court struck down the aggregate limits on the amount an individual may contribute during a two-year period to all federal candidates, parties and political action committees combined. Striking down the restrictions on campaign funding creates a shift in influence and power in politics and therefore endangers democracy. Unlimited campaign funding increases the influence of few rich people on election and politics. On the other side it diminishes the influence of the majority, ordinary (poor) people, the people.
To begin our analysis, I will look to how Mary Shelley positions Victor Frankenstein's motivations to create life against natural laws within the ideas of individualism, as Victor can correlate directly to the educated human at the center of Enlightenment, Industrialism, and Romanticism values. With the burgeoning interest in scientific discovery during the Industrial Revolution "transform[ing] British culture" and "changing the world"(Lipking 2065), many concepts of society were also changed, which Shelley looked to explore through Victor's actions. Rooted in the scientifically curious spirit of Industrial England, Victor's attempt to create life can show many examples of how an importance of the individual acquisition of knowledge and accomplishment can disrupt society. Victor's...
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a nineteenth century literary work that delves into the world of science and the plausible outcomes of morally insensitive technological research. Although the novel brings to the forefront several issues about knowledge and sublime nature, the novel mostly explores the psychological and physical journey of two complex characters. While each character exhibits several interesting traits that range from passive and contemplative to rash and impulsive, their most attractive quality is their monstrosity. Their monstrosities, however, differ in the way each of the character’s act and respond to their environment. Throughout Frankenstein, one assumes that Frankenstein’s creation is the true monster. While the creation’s actions are indeed monstrous, one must also realize that his creator, Victor Frankenstein is also a villain. His inconsiderate and selfish acts as well as his passion for science result in the death of his friend and family members and ultimately in his own demise.