Originally I was going to comment on the quote, “ …I will glut the maw of death, till it be satiated with the. blood of your remaining friends,” because I think it is clear proof that his crimes were done with malice(intention to do evil). While this is true, I also think that this quote proves that he should be tried as an adult human because of his comprehensiveness. Here, he clearly and thoughtfully understands his own feelings and is still wanting to make others suffer. We you shouldn’t treat the monster as a child or as a being that does doesn’t know any better when he clearly is emotionally intelligent but still wishes the worst for others.
This is proof that the monster is guilty of murder. He is giving Frankenstein the choice to comply with the conditions that he made or else he will kill the people he cares most about. This is proof that the monster is guilty of murder and does not care for human life at the cost of getting whatever he wants.
The monster is making threats in this part of the text. Most likely showing premeditation in his murders
This is damning evidence against the monster and proves him guilty of murder. When talking to Victor regarding his crimes he threatens to kill more of Victor’s loved ones unless he meets his conditions. This shows that he did kill William intentionally to bring pain to Victor and that he will continue to intentionally kill until he gets his way. The cause of this behavior is clearly from his own mistreatment from men, but his actions can not be excused because of this.
This excerpt shows just how lonely and desperate the creature is to connect with his creator. While he has gained knowledge and experience, he is still young, and being neglected the guiding hand and affection of his creator has left him devastated and violent. It is obvious that his greatest desire is not to wreak havoc, but to have a companion and to be included in the happier affairs of mankind.
Victor admits that he ASSUMED the creature was the murderer, with no real evidence
This line here shows the Frankenstein wanted nothing to do with the monster as he could not co exist with the monster. This shows that Frankenstein wanted nothing to do with the monster and should not be held accountable to the actions of said monster. Frankenstein and his monster are two separate beings with their own thoughts and actions as proven here.
This sounds like the monster is trying to flip the tables on Victor. He is trying to make it seem like Victor would be committing murder himself if he killed his own creation. The monster is just trying to deflect the accusations that are thrown his way. The words “satisfied conscience” would make Victor think more on his own actions rather than the problem at hand which is the monster murdering people.
This dialogue proves that the creature has intelligence, and that he not only is alienated from human society, but he laments his own lot in life and blames Victor for not accepting him. Here, the creature is shifting the blame to mankind; if they don’t accept him, why should he try and accept them?
In this section of the book, it is shown that the monster does have a sense of intelligence seeing how he is able to speak very formally and seems to phrase each sentences perfectly. This could be used as a way to prove his innocence by giving understandable speeches in which he will be able to sound like all other human beings. Another thing that this demonstrates would be an actually connection between man and monster be in a hatred form but there is a connection.
These descriptive words show how different the monster is from humans and how Frankenstein can see the difference between his monster and a real person. Frankenstein thinks badly of his creation based on its appearance and he is not satisfied with it.
V2C2 The Monster understands the situation very well. He knows that he is hated by all of humanity and proposes that Victor, his creator, should do his job as his creator and caretaker otherwise he will kill Victor’s friends. Knowing that he is the monster, he uses that knowledge to force Victor to make his life better or have his loved ones suffer. This attempt to threaten shows how evil and guilty this monster truly is. It’s also shows how powerful he is, he could kill all of Victor’s friends on the spot but decides to pity him and give him a choice for his own benefit.
The creature explicitly stated, in a manner, a threat to Victor Frankenstein that if he can not gratify him through amends then Victor, his family, and many other individuals won’t be salvaged from “an evil” that can be recognized as the creature’s personified rage. It is clear that the creature has aggressive intentions and if Victor does not comply all lives are in jeopardy. It is not a confession, and it can be interpreted that the creature is capable of such doing. (Trial Annotation-Prosecution)
Trial Annotation (Victor Frankenstein)
Here the monster shows great intelligence. He speaks of revenge, threatening to bring death to everyone Frankenstein holds dear. His vocabulary and way of reasoning shows that the monster is intelligent, far beyond blaming Frankenstein for his wrongdoings. We can also infer that the creature’s previous killings were done out of the same vain he speaks of here, meaning he intended to cause harm and should be held guilty.
Whether Victor doesn’t want to face it or not, this monster is his creation. He will always be the “parent” and the creator to the monster. This is what came from the parts of his brain and what he created with his own two hands. The two are forever tied together because the monster is nothing less than an extension of Victor himself. Victor also abandoned his creation after he came to life, and left him to defend on his own…meaning that he had to learn how to act on his own. This makes for the actions of the monster to be not intentional.
despair - he has depressed spirits because even with opening up and listening the feeling of imminent death creeps closer
Despair - He feels betrayed by his creator’s rejection saying that he was created to be killed and to finish the job so to speak
I think that this section fits my group's theme of “escape” perfectly because he believes that his only way out of the situation is to kill the monster or die trying. He refuses to listen to the monster even though it’s presenting valuable insights to its point of view. He sees his solution on the other side of this problem and blindly works towards it, which is essentially what got him into this situation.
It’s also as if Frankenstein is trying to find escape from the situation as a whole. He wants to find a way to be rid of the responsibility of his creation. As your group discussed, he doesn’t wish to listen, but only continue to find a resolve however it may end. (Group 14).
Looking at nature lets Victor forget his troubles. He treats the view with reverence, an elevated sort of respect. “gave wings to the soul, and allowed it to soar”. That specific sentence stood out when talking about Biophilia( a desire to commune with nature).
Orion Del Rosario
Clarely Martinez Botello
The line demonstrates Mutability in how Victor's disposition towards his creation has changed. Prior to this chapter, Victor's natural reaction to his creation was abject fear and horror. However, in this scene where Victor's disposition has changed, he's more willing to hear his creation out.
Shyam Pandya, Alek Cabanes, Aaron Tonne, Ritik Patel
this sounds like a cry for help by the monster to Frankenstein to relieve himself of the misery this experiment has brought upon the monster in order to become one with society and flourish
It also helps prove the monster innocent by calling for help
This sentence displays an extreme form of rage that Frankenstein holds toward the monster. Even though Frankenstein expresses distaste toward his own creation, this specific sentence exhibits a feeling that “rage was without bounds.” This sentence holds imagery of what the feeling of such deep fury exerted on an individual may look like.
Through the lens of demons, this quote shows us that Frankenstein sees his creation as demon or "Wretched devil."
There is definitely a strong tie between nature and the sublime throughout the story.
He mentions that looking upon nature fills him with a “sublime” feeling that is echoed in nature. He can recognize the grandness in nature that encompasses the sublime and notes it as both awful and majestic.
Frankenstein won’t fully be able to be his true self until he accepts the “abomination” he created because he is an extension of him.
The monster is stating how he understands Frankenstein hates him because he is hideous, but he doesn’t understand how his creator could hate him because they are bound together. This connects to how Frankenstein doesn’t know who he truly is because he detests a part of himself, the monster.
The creature is to Frankenstein, as Adam & Eve are to God. The creature also has the innocence that Adam & Eve have when first created. However, through the creature’s own personal decision and actions, loses that innocence and abandons society. The seclusion of Adam & Eve is depicted as a paradise, while the seclusion of the creature is depicted as hell; one juxtaposition between both stories.
After spending so much time being melancholy and disconnected from nature, victor is finally able to reflect on the beauty around him, momentarily bringing back the joy he once knew.
Group 17 - Justice
Victor is ashamed of creating the monster. He wants justice for the people that were murdered. He thinks that he can write his wrongs for destroying him.
Breakout Room 18 - Evil
We believe this fits the lens of evil due to the fact that he is threatening them with death if they don’t comply with his conditions.
The creature and Victor have no faith in each other.
The creature still pleads to Victor to listen to his story. In a way, the creature has faith in Victor in this moment that there is a small chance that Victor will listen him at least.
Victor is ashamed of creating the monster. He think he can write his wrongs by destroying it.
Victor immediately perceives his creation as evil because of its form and actions and because of that, he does not give the creature a chance to prove itself or its worth
Breakout Room 20- Perception
Group 10 - It is especially interesting when you look at the ultimatum he makes between happiness and death. In his moment of joy, he reflects on how bad the rest of his life is.
Victor, in this sublime scene that is the icy sea, is momentarily distracted/ escaped from his misery caused by his creation and its consequences by the rush created by the beautiful and grand mountains and supernatural aura of the environment.
This is a very similar moment to when Lucifer and Adam and Eve are cast out of the garden in Paradise Lost and their connect with God is severed.
This moment also directly contrasts when the characters in Paradise Lost are cast down, as it creates a stark dichotomy between the two "sides" of the story. Victor's reaction to the monster constantly implies that there can be no coexistence between them, whereas the creature only seeks a connection with his creator.
Group 10 - In this moment, we see how Frankenstein stubbornly denies the benevolence and humanity of the monster. As such, he does not recognize the full extent of his culpability.
I agree with this. The monster even tries to reason with Frankenstein so that he can understand his perspective and the painful lessons he learned throughout his life so far, but Frankenstein makes no effort to try to listen to his own creation. The monster is also speaking in such an eloquent way.
Good connection to horror, because it is almost human but is not is what makes it horror
Lens: Horror (Breakout Room 21)
In this paragraph, Frankenstein reminds us that the creature is extremely different from humans. In the horror genre, things that are out of the ordinary and bodies/abilities that should be human but are not (are mutilated/mutated in some way) are viewed as grotesque. This is because the human brain does not like inconsistencies, especially within our own biology because that means something is wrong. It goes against instinct.
Group 7: This sentence shows the monster’s superhuman abilities because no mortal human could travel through caves of ice for days and survive. Since the monster has superhuman abilities, it can probably withstand the coldest temperatures, unlike humans.
While this is the most notable interpretation of superhumanity, it’s interesting to consider the other ways in which the monster displays signs of superhumanity. For example, one might consider the way in which the monster taught itself how to speak and the basics of fire to be superhuman abilities - especially considering the fact that there was no one around him to help him learn these concepts. (Group 4)
Montanvert was the common name at the time for Mer de Glacé, which lost 700 million cubic meters of ice from 1939 to 2001 and is now barely visible from below. Chamonix was becoming a popular tourist attraction in the early 1800s, and hosted the first Winter Olympics in 1924.
The creature had presented Victor with an ultimatum. It seems to be partly coming from the creature's own desire to have Victor sympathize with him. As long as he is heard then he is willing to let Victor kill him- to do whatever he wants with him. The creature is fully aware of Victor's hatred towards him. The creature wanting to be heard out is similar to Justine and her desire to have her love one's know she is innocent. However, considering the end of the story, Victor probably won't give him a chance.
This is a biblical reference in which the creation confronts Victor. Frankenstein played “God” in the sense that he created life; however, God was proud of his creation, Adam, and welcomed him to the world. Frankenstein on the other hand, immediately turned his creation away, disgusted in what he'd created. The “fallen angel” references Lucifer and how he was banished from God's kingdom. The creation describes himself in this way I because he was banished from his “God's” kingdom.
Dr. Frankenstein is disappointed with the creatures creation and wishes to kill him. However, if he hadn’t felt the need to go against the laws of nature and bring back the dead, Victor would never have had to deal with the death of his brother or any struggle that came along with the existence of the monster.
This excerpt shows how Victor has no control over Frankenstein and how he let the situation get out of control. Fits in with the theme of denial.
Here is it noted that Dr. Frankenstein takes responsibility for his actions in opposition to the distribution of blame readers have seen him previously partake in. A level of self-awareness exist as seen through the parenthetical sidebar where Frankenstein understands that he is now experiencing the consequences of his own actions.
Alienation can lead to a disconnect from society and emotional trauma that can end in drastic measures. In the book, Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, Frankenstein's monster is neglected out of fear from the beginning of his existence, and by everyone he meets. People that are smarter are typically withdrawn and lack the emotional connection with others. If people were to get advanced intelligence implemented, do you believe that they would turn out with the same neglect-leads to anger that the monster did?
I believe that prolonged alienation could potentially lead to madness. We can see this shown in Frankenstein, as the monster feels alienated from his creator. This leads to the monster becoming consumed with anguish as Victor Frankenstein condemns him to an existence with only itself to relate to. Connecting it with modern life, we can see a loose similarity to this relationship with the impersonalization of the modern work environment. The modernization of the workforce led to the creation of the factory job, an incredibly tedious and harsh line of work which provides both little social interaction and little care for one’s well being. Alienation in the real world can have incredibly negative effects on one’s mind, pushing some to depression or other demons. Moving forward, we can potentially see this impersonalization become normal with the increase of office work. Physical pain becomes monotony with the same pitfalls of mental torment.
“Human beings have always yearned to better themselves—to rise beyond nature’s lottery. We are so immersed in our modern enhancements that we are often oblivious to them. LASIK surgeries (or glasses, for that matter!), cochlear implants, plastic surgeries, and birth-control pills are all examples of things we do to overcome what we perceive as our natural limitations. But what gets people really wound up is the idea of genetic enhancement—improving traits by changing the genes inside of us.
“We can define genetic enhancement as the manipulation of one’s genome to modify a non-pathological feature. So if I take a gene or a set of genes known to make Usain Bolt the fastest man alive and add them to myself, I am genetically enhancing myself. However, in reality, enhancements are much more complicated than just replacing a few genes.”
Want to learn more about human enhancement and unintended consequences? Read the complete essay by Alireza Edraki, PhD candidate at the RNA Therapeutics Institute at the University of Massachusetts Medical School.
The creature understands his physical superiority to Victor as an artificial and designed being, but he defers to the social norms established and shared by humans, like the relationship between lord and vassal, each with their own duties. Biomedical devices, including eyewear, synthetic joints, and advanced prosthetics, have improved and enhanced human life for decades. But as these technologies begin delivering extended lifespans and vastly improved physical performance, societies will be challenged to evolve to accommodate changing notions of humanity.
Want to learn more about philosophical and ethical debates around human enhancement? Watch “Better Humans,” featuring commentary from Braden Allenby, an engineer, technology ethicist, and environmental attorney at Arizona State University, and Conor Walsh, a biomedical engineer at Harvard University.
Watch more episodes of our Reanimation! series on our Media page.
The concept of murder functions like a central litmus test here and throughout the novel. On the one hand, if you see Victor’s creation as a person, then Victor is countenancing murder as he seeks to destroy his creation. Indeed, it would become very difficult to make a moral distinction between Victor and the creature if this were the case. On the other hand, if the creature is a beast, a piece of property, or a daemon (as Victor often calls him), then it is not possible to murder him because he is not a person. During slavery, this question arose on a number of occasions. Could an owner be prosecuted for murdering a piece of property? The question was highly politicized because to charge an owner with murdering a slave would be to acknowledge the slave’s humanity and thus to call into question the entire institution of slavery. Even if the creature in Mary’s tale is not human, however, his destruction may still have moral implications for other reasons, but Victor would not be guilty of murder, and the creature would have committed a crime Victor was himself not guilty of. Mary appears to have anticipated by two centuries one of the central ethical concerns of robotics and artificial intelligence. How sophisticated would an artificial intelligence have to be before it could be murdered? If it can be murdered, do we then have to face the issue of its enslavement?
Though this work well predates such existential writers as Albert Camus (1913–1960) and John Paul Sartre (1905–1980), Mary’s narrative grapples with many of the same issues, including feelings of anguish and meaninglessness, especially in the face of suffering and human finitude. Much like the existentialists, who acknowledged the absurdity of making sense of life in a godless world, Victor’s creation lives a life full of anguish and isolation, and he has no creator to whom he can turn for answers or consolation. And yet the creation still sees life as “dear” and chooses to “defend it” in spite of this endless misery, a point echoed by the existentialists nearly a century later, who emphasized both the absurdity and the beauty in choosing to continue to live in the face of suffering. Mere existence, in this sense, becomes a form of resistance or rebellion against meaninglessness and our unyielding trajectory toward death. For more on existentialism, see Aho 2014.
Elizabeth attempts to console Victor with the thought of returning to live together in Geneva, unchanging and undisturbed in their peace and bliss. Mary borrows a verse from her husband, Percy, to remind us that this is a fool’s errand. Nostalgia for a past both perfect and peaceful is a product of willful forgetting. First, we must forget all those elements of the past that were not peaceful and perfect. Our memory of the past is edited to make it seem preferable to the uncertainties of the present and future. Second, we must make ourselves forget that we are part of a system governed by change in net linear direction. The long arc of history bends toward change, and it is not possible to remove from the world the science and technology we have already introduced and thus return the world to a peaceful but primeval state. It is, therefore, incumbent upon scientists and engineers to think about how their work is embodied in the world and how the world is changed as a result.
The idea that exposure to nature (or “scenery”) produces unique psychological and spiritual benefits was a common sentiment in romantic literary and artistic circles in the nineteenth century. Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803–1882) and Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862), both part of the tradition of American romanticism known as transcendentalism, celebrated in their writings the value of a life lived close to nature, especially its salutary effect on the poetic and moral imagination. This romantic notion of nature as “balm” would also influence the rise of the urban parks movement, most notably via the work of landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted (1822–1903) in the mid–nineteenth century. Olmsted’s plan for Manhattan’s Central Park, for example, was premised on the idea that contemplation of natural scenery had a therapeutic effect on city dwellers. (This view endures today in the concept of “biophilia,” the idea that humans are genetically predisposed to love nature and need regular contact with it to thrive.) The romantic understanding of the value of natural scenery was bound up with a pair of distinct aesthetic categories: the “sublime,” which referred to feelings of awe and even fear in the face of nature’s power and wildness, and the “picturesque,” which described the contemplative reaction to a more orderly and human-scaled natural landscape (e.g., the garden motif shaping Olmsted’s Central Park design). The notion of the sublime would play a major role in American wilderness appreciation (and eventually protection) throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, animating the work of a diverse community of artists, writers, and advocates, including Albert Bierstadt (1830–1902), John Muir (1838–1914), Ansel Adams (1902–1984), and David Brower (1912–2000).