Mary Shelley writes a novel filled with a multitude of ubiquitous social and psychological problems. Her creation depicts a monster with harsh upbringings and savage motives. By devising a scary story with a plot line that engages the reader, she also put into the limelight a variation of social nuisances. Similar to how Victor Frankenstein creates an abomination that terrorizes society, Shelley creates a novel of controversies in the fields of discrimination, psychology, and family that shook the grounds of Romanticism to its core. Perhaps the most intriguing of the arguments proposed by the authors is on the grounds of psychology. The monster’s curious creation and its “childhood” of neglect spurred an avalanche of debate in the fields of …show more content…
“ Development refers to the physiological, behavioral, cognitive, and social changes that occur throughout human life, which are guided by both genetic predispositions (nature) and by environmental influences (nurture)” (Stagnor 285).This field is changing constantly and provides a good basis of evidence on how to raise a child. A hot topic of debate among developmental psychologists, as hinted on in the quote above, is that of nature versus nurture. Nature is a person’s physical traits as projected by their genotype. This is predetermined before birth as the chromosomes and DNA of a child don’t change. Nurture, on the other hand, is how a child is raised. The affection and food it receives can be put under this category. The debate part comes in when psychologists discuss which one is more important to who a person is or how they act. The consensus lies somewhere in the middle in that both have a huge impact in their own ways on a person. A child who is born with a birth defect will have their growth stunted, while a child who is neglected will grow up with social disorders. Both nature and nurture have to be present for one to reach their …show more content…
Before, people believed that proper nourishment was all that was needed to raise a fully functioning person. “As late as the 1930s, psychologists believed that children who were raised in institutions such as orphanages, and who received good physical care and proper nourishment, would develop normally, even if they had little interaction with their caretakers” (Stagnor 305). In 1958, Henry Harlow released his findings in an experiment involving monkeys and surrogate mothers. The monkeys were separated from their mother and placed in a lab with two “wire mothers” (Stagnor 305-306). One offered comfort while the other had food. The babies prefered the one that provided comfort, proving that not just nourishment was needed to raise a child. Even after the experiments, the monkeys that were removed suffered severe social problems and usually faced depression and shorter lifespans. This is clearly evident in Frankenstein, as the neglect the monster faces results in a psychotic personality. The monster tells of events “that impressed me with feelings which, from what I had been, have made me what I am” (Shelley 81). His encounters with De Lacey and his family as a bystander taught him the English language and a little bit more about life in general. After being attacked by those who he wanted friendship with, the monster underwent a psychological shift. “My
In a world full of novelty, guidance is essential to whether a being’s character progresses positively or negatively in society. Parents have a fundamental role in the development of their children. A parent’s devotion or negligence towards their child will foster a feeling of trust or mistrust in the latter. This feeling of mistrust due to the lack of guidance from a parental figure is represented in the relationship between Victor Frankenstein and his creation in Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein. The creature created by Frankenstein was shown hatred and disgust from the very beginning, which led to its indignant feelings toward his creator and his kind.
Are nature and nurture required when creating a person? In the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, the nature vs. nurture discussion is put to the test by the actions of the main character Dr. Frankenstein's creation: a monster. In the novel Dr. Frankenstein is enthralled with the scientific creation of life and creates what he thinks will be a human but actually turns out to have the makings of a monster. Dr. Frankenstein is terrified by his creation and abandons it by running away and leaving it locked up. The monster breaks out of Dr. Frankenstein's confines and goes into the world to explore in his surroundings and hates his creator for not caring for him. By looking at environmental effects on a child's intellectual ability to learn, and a child's inherent sense of direction it is apparent that at birth the human mind is a blank slate.
Mary W. Shelly’s classic book, Frankenstein, was written in the early nineteenth century. The setting that is taken place within the story has multiple locations. Amongst these multiple locations are Switzerland, Geneva, the home of Dr. Frankenstein, unknown villages/cottages, and the North Pole which was the exposition of the story to begin with. The style of the classic, Frankenstein, has a different style of writing due to not being written in the proper chronological nature. When Frankenstein, is adapted to motion picture film, the film focuses on the horror of Frankenstein’s monster, however the book is really about romanticism. Stephen Gould intertwines his opinion on the book Frankenstein. His opinion is
In the novel Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley, the main theme of the story was isolation. Both internal and external consequences were the cause of being isolated from society. Frankenstein began to feel depressed after the creation of the monster and decided to isolate himself from his friends and family. Frankenstein kept his creation a secret from everyone because he was afraid of the consequences. Ironically, Frankenstein was the main problem for all of his sufferings. He thought that he could keep everyone safe if he were to not tell them about the monster, however, everyone died because he wanted to keep everyone from the truth. The creature also suffered many consequences from being isolated. He wanted to be part of a family, and feel
Would a mother be responsible for his adult son’s misdeeds? In Mary Shelley 's book, “Frankenstein” Victor creates a creature who then kills numerous amount of people. Some may speculate that Victor is responsible for the murders, but the creature is the one to blame. Victor Frankenstein is not responsible for the actions of the Creature. The Creature has 100 percent control over his actions and has logical decision making. The one who does the crime, should also be the one who takes the responsibility of the crime.
Andrew Lustig proposed a great question to the readers of Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, “How far should we go in out efforts to alter nature, including human nature? As stewards of God’s creation what are our responsibilities?” (Lustig 1) This question results in theme of nature vs. nurture in the novel. The nature vs. nurture debate is an important topic in Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein. The two central characters, Victor Frankenstein and the creature that he creates; both, characters were raised differently. The nature and the nurture of their upbringing can be a cause of why they are, the way they are. Victor and his creature are subject to very different nurturing styles. Shelley also incorporates the representations of light and fire. This representation is key to the nature vs. nurture discussion in the novel.
American psychologist and well renowned author Jerome Kagan states “Genes and family may determine the foundation of the house, but time and place determine its form.” The topic of nature vs. nurture is highly known to the English literature community and is classified as a major aspect of gothic works. In the novel Frankenstein the author Mary Shelley uses the monster’s constant rejection from society to demonstrate that an individual’s traits are affected more by their environment and their surroundings than by nature.
Romantic writer Mary Shelley’s gothic novel Frankenstein does indeed do a lot more than simply tell story, and in this case, horrify and frighten the reader. Through her careful and deliberate construction of characters as representations of certain dominant beliefs, Shelley supports a value system and way of life that challenges those that prevailed in the late eighteenth century during the ‘Age of Reason’. Thus the novel can be said to be challenging prevailant ideologies, of which the dominant society was constructed, and endorsing many of the alternative views and thoughts of the society. Shelley can be said to be influenced by her mothers early feminist views, her father’s radical challenges to society’s structure and her own, and indeed her husband’s views as Romantics. By considering these vital influences on the text, we can see that in Shelley’s construction of the meaning in Frankenstein she encourages a life led as a challenge to dominant views.
Throughout Mary Shelley’s classic novel Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein pursues, with a passion lacking in other aspects of his life, his individual quest for knowledge and glory. He accepts the friendships and affections given him without reciprocating. The "creature," on the other hand, seems willing to return affections, bringing wood and clearing snow for the DeLaceys and desiring the love of others, but is unable to form human attachments. Neither the creature nor Victor fully understands the complex relationships between people and the expectations and responsibilities that accompany any relationship. The two "monsters" in this book, Victor Frankenstein and his creation, are the only characters without strong family ties; the creature because Frankenstein runs from him, and Victor because he runs from his family.
Peter Brooks' essay "What Is a Monster" tackles many complex ideas within Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and the main concept that is the title of the essay itself. What is the definition of a monster, or to be monstrous? Is a monster the classic representation we know, green skin, neck bolts, grunting and groaning? A cartoon wishing to deliver sugary cereal? or someone we dislike so greatly their qualities invade our language and affect our interpretation of their image and physical being? Brooks' essay approaches this question by using Shelley's narrative structure to examine how language, not nature, is mainly accountable for creating the idea of the monstrous body.
A predominant theme in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is that of child-rearing and/or parenting techniques. Specifically, the novel presents a theory concerning the negative impact on children from the absence of nurturing and motherly love. To demonstrate this theory, Shelly focuses on Victor Frankenstein’s experimenting with nature, which results in the life of his creature, or “child”. Because Frankenstein is displeased with the appearance of his offspring, he abandons him and disclaims all of his “parental” responsibility. Frankenstein’s poor “mothering” and abandonment of his “child” leads to the creation’s inevitable evilness. Victor was not predestined to failure, nor was his creation innately depraved. Rather, it was Victor’s poor “parenting” of his progeny that lead to his creation’s thirst for vindication of his unjust life, in turn leading to the ruin of Victor’s life.
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.
Like all works that have been taught in English classes, Frankenstein has been explicated and analyzed by students and teachers alike for much of the twentieth and all of the twenty-first century. Academia is correct for doing so because Frankenstein can appeal to the interests of students. Students, teachers and experts in the areas of medicine, psychology, and sociology can relevantly analyze Frankenstein in their respective fields. However, Peter Brooks explains in “Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts: Language and Monstrosity in Frankenstein” that Shelly had presented the problem of “Monsterism” through her language. According to Brooks, Monsterism is explicitly and implicitly addressed in Shelly’s language. While this may be correct, Brooks does it in such a way that requires vast knowledge of subjects that many readers may not be knowledgeable in. After summarizing and analyzing the positive and negative qualities of Brooks’ work, I will explain how the connection of many different fields of study in literature creates a better work.
Shelley, Mary. “Frankenstein.” In A Norton Critical Edition. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc. 1996.
Philosophers and scientists alike have debated for centuries whether a person’s character is the result of nature or nurture. In the writings of Thomas Hobbes, it is expressed that humans are endowed with character from birth, and that they are innately evil in nature. John Locke’s response to this theory is that everyone is born with a tabula rasa, or blank slate, and then develops character after a series of formative experiences. The idea that true character is the result of experiences and societal interaction is a theme deeply explored throughout Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Through different interactions with the monster, Shelley attempts to express that it is because of Victor’s failings as a parent and creator, because of the monster’s isolation, and because of society’s reaction to the monster that the monster has become evil. The monster’s character is a direct result of how he was nurtured, based on his experiences and circumstances, rather than his being innately evil from “birth.”