The Role Of The Monster In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

Who is more to blame for a child's development: the parent(s) that raises it, or the society that fosters it? Shelly included a character who is very much like an infant but is a fully grown adult. This causes controversy as to whether this character can be so influenced by surroundings, or if it has its own mind. It is a challenge to determine who or what is more at fault when Frankenstein's monster transforms into that seemingly evil thing. There's a thin line between the everlasting effects caused by the hatred of the world versus the abandonment of one's creator. Perhaps it's neither and the only thing influencing Frankenstein's monster is its own mind.

Shelley’s main idea is that without society’s acceptance, things that exist in this world can not be loved at all. This lack of love is what causes residents to produce and display hate. If one is producing enough hate to make up for thousands of criticisms and repulsions, it is only necessary that that hate be relieved somehow. Unfortunately for those in the story,

Frankenstein’s fault. If he wouldn’t have abandoned his creation/child due to the scars on his face (another interjection of society’s impact on everyone) the Monster probably wouldn’t have learned that he is bad. Without proper time and acknowledgement being given, the Monster is left to fend for himself only knowing these negative things he’s just learned, and not being able to apply his natural kindness to his actions. If the doctor would have first shown his “child” love, care, and acceptance, the “child” would have gone into the world spreading those basic concepts. It’s all about initial information being coded into the brain. Even if the Doctor is primarily at fault, there are still bits of society that have been programmed into his mind. The fact that these bits so easily fit into the reasoning show how fine of a line there is between what’s to