Evan Kelly
1/19/09
Topic #3
The adjective evil, has a variety of definitions with a pretty constant overall theme. Anything that is morally wrong, harmful, or injurious is defined as evil by the dictionary. As an excited student striving to produce a work that had been basically unimaginable, Victor Frankenstein was a zealous scientist. For nearly two years he fanatically toiled on the monster that would soon become his mortal enemy and while I do not believe this to be morally wrong, my feelings changed when upon the monster’s first breath, Frankenstein turned and ran in horror from his creation. The ultimate reason for Frankenstein’s evil nature was his guilt.
Frankenstein is not evil in the same way that I would describe a cold-hearted killer. His evil comes from the internal struggle that he is tortured by. His first sign of evil is present when he hides in disgust from the monster that he had created. “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.” This is the beginning of many guilty feelings for Frankenstein. In this case he feels guilt because he took the creation of life into his own hands, but instead created what he often refers to as a wretch. He felt guilty that the being that he had imagined as beautiful and world renowned, was in reality hideous. Frankenstein abandoned his “child” and left him unprotected in a brutal world.
All who came into contact with the monster were instantly frightened and violent. Even when the monster saved a child from the river, he was rejected and attacked. “This was then the reward of my benevolence! I had saved a human being from destruction, and as a recompense I now writhed under the miserable pain of a wound that shattered the flesh and bone.” There is no wonder, as the monster stated, that his emotions were turned to violence and rage. And these feelings were the indirect outcome of the overpowering guilt that compelled Frankenstein to abandon his creation.
While Frankenstein appears to be innocent and victimized throughout the narration, the reader must keep in mind that this account is told by Walton who viewed Frankenstein in not only a sage like, but also a loving manner. He described to Margaret, the “lustrous eyes” of Frankenstein. He remembered when Frankenstein had told him not to believe the monster’s persuasive words, but when he finally did meet the monster, there was no bloodshed. Instead the monster left to find himself a peaceful deathbed in the Arctic. While Frankenstein appeared innocent in many ways during the story, it is very possible that Walton portrayed him in a much brighter light, than he was in reality.
We see Frankenstein’s guilt overwhelm him in two separate cases. Each sends him into a feverish coma. The first time that he suffers is when he realizes that the sole purpose of his life for the past two years was to unleash a monster on the world. The second time is when the monster murders Clerval. Frankenstein’s fever is brought on by the enormous weight of guilt that is placed on his shoulders. If he had not ignored the monster’s demands Henry would have still been alive. Instead, Frankenstein decided not only to stop building the second monster, but also to tear it apart in front of his enemy’s eyes. “As I looked on him, his countenance expressed the utmost extent of malice and treachery. I thought with a sensation of madness on my promise of creating another like to him, and trembling with passion, tore to pieces the thing on which I was engaged. “ This action was the most selfish act that Frankenstein committed in the entire story. He had heard the beast tell him his story, and knew that while the monster had hurt people, there had been a reason. Frankenstein tore apart the second monster just because of his disgust in the appearance of the first. I become miserable when I am left alone for a few days, but even during this time I can go out in public without being attacked and ran from. The misery that the monster is forced to endure was brought on by Frankenstein. When Frankenstein decided not to help, he became the only one to blame for the following series of events.
Frankenstein’s selfishness is seen throughout the entire book. He had too much pride to warn anybody about the monster until it was too late. If he had told Henry at the beginning of the story, then it is very possible that the whole tragedy could have been avoided. The monster was basically powerless when he was created. He did not know how to control his body, nor did he know anything of the outside world. He could have just as easily become a crime fighter as he became a killer, if he had mentors. After William was killed, for Frankenstein not to explain that the monster was the culprit, was harmful and morally wrong. Because of his silence, Justine was killed. Guilt overcame him once again, but he still endured in solitude. Only after his wife was murdered and his father died in grief did Frankenstein announce the existence of his monster. Maybe it was because he was scared that his family would reject him, that Frankenstein remained silent. But, it wasn’t until after all of his connections to the world were extinguished that he decided to come forward. Frankenstein was the indirect culprit for each and every one of the monster’s kills. In appearance the monster was the fiend, but Frankenstein had the real heart of darkness.
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
This was a good essay. You made your personal opinion quite apparent while providing sufficient textual evidence; you picked out the perfect quotes to support your ideas. I can honestly say I enjoyed reading this after a long, hard day!
That being said, I feel that several improvements can be made. I’ll start with your first paragraph. The last two sentences present two different ideas. You state that your opinion of Victor Frankenstein’s moral standing changed when he “ran in horror” from his creation, suggesting that you view his abandonment of his creation as the moment at which he becomes “evil.” However, in the very next sentence (and throughout the remainder of the essay), you assert that his evilness can be attributed to his “guilt.” So while I perfectly understand your position that Victor Frankenstein is indeed evil, I am not clear as to why you believe so. You might possibly feel that his initial abandonment and the subsequent feelings of guilt are both to blame for his evilness. If so, that is not terribly evident.
The second paragraph also seems to have this divide. Once again, you describe his “internal struggle” to be the source of his evilness, yet you discuss his initial feelings of disgust after having seen his creation. I don’t really understand why you feel that his reaction to the monster can be equated to feeling guilty for having created it. Maybe you could possibly elaborate a bit on this and discuss exactly WHY you feel this way.
I don’t quite see the purpose of the third paragraph. You’re simply stating facts that seem to have no connection to Victor’s guilt at all. I feel like you could continue on after that sentence to explain WHY you feel that the examples you provided were results of Victor Frankenstein’s guilt. I guess I’m looking for more of YOUR opinion in all of this. The last sentence simply stated an opinion, but gave no justification or explanation of the opinion. You’re telling me how you feel, but more importantly I would like to know WHY you feel the way you feel.
Similar to the third paragraph, I also fail to see the role of the fourth paragraph. It doesn’t really support your argument. It tells me how I, as a reader, could possibly form an incorrect opinion of Victor Frankenstein’s character due to the narrator. However, that’s not what I’m interested in. I’m interested in knowing how YOU feel about the guy.
I liked the fifth paragraph. I think that the quote you used was good. However, it can be shortened and integrated better. Also, I was confused just a little with a couple of sentences: “I become miserable when I am left alone for a few days, but even during this time I can go out in public without being attacked and ran from.” Is that a quote that you just forgot to put in quote marks? Or are you stating something personal? Either way, I don’t understand its function within the paragraph.
Your final paragraph is well-written. I think this is where you present your best ideas and this drives your opinion home. I particularly like the last sentence and the fact that your essay is titled after it. The last sentence is what sticks with the reader (particularly in a short essay) and I thought it was clever.
So to sum up all of my comments, you did a great job of telling me your opinion and personal feelings. But what I would really like to know is WHY you feel this way. Again, this is a good essay. Hope this helps!
Evan Kelly
1/19/09
Topic #3
The adjective evil, has a variety of definitions with a pretty constant overall theme. Anything that is morally wrong, harmful, or injurious is defined as evil by the dictionary. As an excited student striving to produce a work that had been basically unimaginable, Victor Frankenstein was a zealous scientist. For nearly two years he fanatically toiled on the monster that would soon become his mortal enemy and while I do not believe this to be morally wrong, my feelings changed when upon the monster’s first breath, Frankenstein turned and ran in horror from his creation. At this moment, he felt the guilt of two years of tireless work hit him. The being that he had dedicated himself too, finally existed, but for the first time Victor saw the creature for who he was, A grotesque giant with pale skin and rancid yellow eyes. Victor then went into a feverish coma from the thought of having introduced such a vicious being into the world. The ultimate reason for Frankenstein’s evil nature was his guilt.
Frankenstein is not evil in the same way that I would describe a cold-hearted killer. His first sign of evil is present when he hides in disgust from the monster that he had created. “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.” This is the beginning of many guilty feelings for Frankenstein. In this case he feels guilt because he took the creation of life into his own hands, but instead created what he often refers to as a wretch. He felt guilty that the being that he had imagined as beautiful and world renowned, was in reality hideous. Frankenstein abandoned his “child” and left him unprotected in a brutal world. The reason for Frankentein’s guilt after William’s death is the internal struggle that Victor is plagued by. He fears that if he admits to the creation of William’s murderer, his family will abandon him. Instead, he carries on in ignorance and defies the monster, even after each person that is close to him, is murdered.
All who came into contact with the monster were instantly frightened and violent. Even when the monster saved a child from the river, he was rejected and attacked. “This was then the reward of my benevolence! I had saved a human being from destruction, and as a recompense I now writhed under the miserable pain of a wound that shattered the flesh and bone.” There is no wonder, as the monster stated, that his emotions were turned to violence and rage. And these feelings were the indirect outcome of the overpowering guilt that compelled Frankenstein to abandon his creation. Had Frankenstein provided a role model for his creation, the monster could have become civilly educated, and encouraged to do good. His heart would be filled with passion towards his mentor and eventually could have probably been introduced to the townspeople. Unfortunately, the first emotion that the monster witnesses, is a cry of disgust from his father.
While Frankenstein appears to be innocent and victimized throughout the narration, the reader must keep in mind that this account is told by Walton who viewed Frankenstein in not only a sage like, but also a loving manner. He described to Margaret, the “lustrous eyes” of Frankenstein. He remembered when Frankenstein had told him not to believe the monster’s persuasive words, but when he finally did meet the monster, there was no bloodshed. Instead the monster left to find himself a peaceful deathbed in the Arctic. While Frankenstein appeared innocent in many ways during the story, I believe that it is apparent that Walton portrayed him in a much brighter light, than he was in reality.
We see Frankenstein’s guilt overwhelm him in two separate cases. Each sends him into a feverish coma. The first time that he suffers is when he realizes that the sole purpose of his life for the past two years was to unleash a monster on the world. The second time is when the monster murders Clerval. Frankenstein’s fever is brought on by the enormous weight of guilt that is placed on his shoulders. If he had not ignored the monster’s demands Henry would have still been alive. Instead, Frankenstein decided not only to stop building the second monster, but also to tear it apart in front of his enemy’s eyes. “As I looked on him, his countenance expressed the utmost extent of malice and treachery. I thought with a sensation of madness on my promise of creating another like to him, and trembling with passion, tore to pieces the thing on which I was engaged. “ This action was the most selfish act that Frankenstein committed in the entire story. He had heard the beast tell him his story, and knew that while the monster had hurt people, there had been a reason. Frankenstein tore apart the second monster just because of his disgust in the appearance of the first. Personally, I become miserable when I am left alone for a few days, but even during this time I can go out in public without being attacked and ran from. Most humans could not bear life long solitude. I would describe it as being similar to spending life in solitary confinement. The misery that the monster is forced to endure was brought on by Frankenstein. When Frankenstein decided not to help, he became the only one to blame for the following series of events.
Frankenstein’s selfishness is seen throughout the entire book. He had too much pride to warn anybody about the monster until it was too late. If he had told Henry at the beginning of the story, then it is very possible that the whole tragedy could have been avoided. The monster was basically powerless when he was created. He did not know how to control his body, nor did he know anything of the outside world. He could have just as easily become a crime fighter as he became a killer, if he had mentors. After William was killed, for Frankenstein not to explain that the monster was the culprit, was harmful and morally wrong. Because of his silence, Justine was killed. Guilt overcame him once again, but he still endured in solitude. Only after his wife was murdered and his father died in grief did Frankenstein announce the existence of his monster. Maybe it was because he was scared that his family would reject him, that Frankenstein remained silent. But, it wasn’t until after all of his connections to the world were extinguished that he decided to come forward. Frankenstein was the indirect culprit for each and every one of the monster’s kills. In appearance the monster was the fiend, but Frankenstein had the real heart of darkness.
Anthony - this was an excellent response.
Evan - I think that I'm struggling in some of the same ways as Anthony did - there needs to be some elaboration close to the beginning about your understanding of how his guilt (and do you mean that he is guilty, or that he feels guilty, or both?) makes him evil.
Now, you do a pretty good job of exploring various aspects of Victor's guilt through your paper. All of your readings were at least interesting and worthwhile, regardless of any details which I might nitpick at. You have strong opinions and a generally strong textual basis for them, as Anthony says. Yet, also like Anthony says, sometimes the details of your reasoning aren't clear - Victor claims that he destroys the female monster for the sake of humanity; your belief that he does it simply based on the monster's appearance may be right, but it could have used more detail.
That's an aside, though. My real main point is that your paper isn't as clearly structured as it could be - a more detailed thesis, laying out the relationship between evil and guilt (both more clearly defined) in the novel would have been great.
This paper has some very real strengths; you should take the fact that I want a more complex thesis as a good sign.
Post a Comment