Wednesday, August 29, 2012

Modern Criticism of Frankenstein- Spivak

1. Shelley believed that an engineered society should not be based purely on one idea. It should involve "natural philosophy", "practical reason", and "aesthetic judgment" together to function properly (Spivak 264). Unfortunately, Frankenstein made his creation only out of natural philosophy while not including the other disciplines. This fact sheds a new light on the story. The monster never really had a chance to function properly in society. Besides his ghastly appearance, he did not have the knowledge of crucial principles in everyday life. Maybe this lack of understanding led him to feel the need for revenge.

2. Mary Shelley's parents were anti-evangelicals. This small fact about Shelley explains a lot about her story. She incorporates many religious aspects into the story. Spivak touches upon the human family the monster observes and the Arabian woman whose father was a Muslim but whose mother was a Christian. This whole section of the book, as Spivak explains, brings up many common views of the time about Muslims and Christians and makes a statement about the biased views of religion during this time period. Shelley intertwines religion throughout the whole book. She makes Victor a sort of "god-like" creator of life who possesses abilities that no mortal man has. She also discusses how Victor, although he thinks at first he has done something great, is actually an almost "anti-Christ" because of the destruction he has brought to the world in creating such a beast. This information about Shelley's past explains a lot about the whole story and many individual parts within it.

3. Spivak makes an interesting point in explaining how the monster is extremely complex; he is a monster on the outside, but really has many human qualities on the inside. He wants to be able to be a human, to be a functioning member of society. Frankenstein also tries to "humanize" him by telling his story to the magistrate and asking him to take action to bring him to justice. There are therefore many conflicts throughout the story about what the monster actually is. Clearly he wants to be human and at some points his creator even assists in making him seem so, but he can never fit into society. This view adds a new level of complexity to the monster. He is not just a monster, he possesses the ability to be so much more (at least in his own mind). This makes me sympathize a little more with his situation because it really is not his fault that he is not a human being and was created the way that he was.

2 comments:

  1. I like your philosophy ideas and the inner workings of the monster compared to human and your idea about Shelly's parents and then how that relates to the story. Just great work Melanie!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Very Thoreau! I particularly like your third point. I thought that point in the essay was interesting as well. Keep up the good work!

    ReplyDelete