As we discussed in class this book is framed in a way to tell a story from the characters perspectives and each character only tells what they feel will sway the other person to pity them. With Victor it is clear that he does this throughout his story of what happened when he brought the monster to life. I felt the overall experience was so quickly discussed that the minute he realized the monster had left the problem was over for him. Clearly, we come to find it has not, due to turn of events but he is so relieved to go back to his laboratory and not find the ugly monstrous figure he himself  rose from the dead. You do pity Victor for for a moment when he becomes ill but in truth he just did it to himself. He justifies digging up dead bodies for science because well its for science and the person is no longer mobile. He has no sympathy or respect for the bodies that he steals limbs from and put them together like a hideous puzzle piece. I realize being that this is a gothic piece that they would go into detail of the figure but I don’t feel that truly gave the moment justice because it was too short to understand what was really going on. There were too many questions left in my mind to how he pulled it off. I understand the uncanny is meant to be something familiar being twisted into an abnormal occurrence but I wish Shelley placed more emphasis on the point of the monsters creation.
-
Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- marvi krifca on Response 5
- marvi krifca on Response 6
- marvi krifca on Young Goodman Brown
- marvi krifca on Response 9
- Daniella Martinez on Response 9 (Malcolm)
Archives
Categories
Meta
I don’t think the actual creation of the creature is much to be discussed. You see a big thing in Gothic literature is diving intervention. Basically it’s a way to simplify and wrap up the story (and since people from back then were extremely religious, these plots were easily accepted). Victor used his “talent” and in a way the power of God to create his monster and that was considered an acceptable explanation. It’s the same with all of the divine intervention in The Castle of Otranto (which includes but isn’t limited to the haunting throughout the story and the appearance of those who died).
I enjoyed reading your post. I agree with your sentiments that the book swiftly and briefly describes some subjects such as the Monster, but I feel it is done this way because unlike the old horror movies of Frankenstein, we are supposed to focus mainly on Victor. And since this story is a retelling of events in Victor’s perspective, to make himself look justified, he wouldn’t WANT to go into detail of all those things. When he is telling Walton about these events, he wanted to come off as understandable, and justified for his reasons. Though it would be really cool to read more details on these events, I can understand why it was written the way it was, even if I don’t agree. I agree with you, the details would have made the story better overall, I think.