Frankenstein essay

707 Words3 Pages
Frankenstein essay

The monster is called such because of his appearance; Frankenstein

could be judged a monster because of his actions. Who do you think is

most monstrous and why? Support your opinion with references to

Shelly’s book, Pullmans play and any other interpretations you have

seen.

To answer this question we must first define the term monster. There

are many ways a person can be a monster. If someone does not look good

they are defined as a monster, if someone kills people they are

defined as a monster, and if their beliefs are different to ours we

also call them a monster. Keeping all this in mind it is very hard to

label someone or something a monster, but in this essay I will try to

describe who is more monstrous- the creator Frankenstein or his

creation the monster.

Frankenstein could be called a monster because he is trying to play

god. He created the monster from the bodies of the dead so this makes

him a monster because he will be causing masses of emotional pain to

the relatives of the dead. However this could also be a strong proof

of his humanity because his experiments show the curious nature that

is in every human; he has just taken it one step further and decided

to act on his curiosity. Atheist’s who don’t believe in life after

death could even call him good hearted because he is recycling!

Another reason for Frankenstein being monstrous is that he decided to

try and play god a second time when he wanted to create the monster a

bride. However this was done at the monsters request so it could be

argued that this shows the humane side of Frankenstein because it

shows compassion for others. He realized the monster was lonely so

decided to create him a companion.

The monster could be called more monstrous than Frankenstein because

of two reasons. One he looks like a monster and as he is made from the

rotting flesh of dead he probably smells like one too. The second

reason is because he kills innocent people; this is portrayed in all

versions of the story that I have seen/read so far. Pullmans play

explains the murder by saying it was a revenge act against

Frankenstein who in abandoning him caused him lots of emotional pain.

The monster wanted to see him hurt. Most versions of the story agree

with this view but brook’s version explains the murder of the child as

an experiment. The monster had seen flowers can float so wanted to see

if humans could float as well.
Get Access