Perhaps one of the most influential stories in the 20th century was Mary Wollstonecraft
Shelley’s Frankenstein, which was published in 1818. This book was considered by many to be one of the forerunners of the science fiction genre. It tells the story of a scientist named Victor Frankenstein and how he unlocked the secret to creating life. Thus, he created an artificial being that he abandoned later on. This abandonment, along with other events that transpired, has caused the creature to turn evil and devoted in destroying his creator.
There are many themes and issues that can be derived from the central theme of the story. One of these themes concerns the nature of morality and ethics, especially when it comes to the premise of guilt. Guilt is defined by the Cambridge English Dictionary as an unhappy feeling resulting from doing an act which is considered morally wrong. Generally, the two main characters—Victor Frankenstein and the creature—both experienced guilt albeit in different manners. For one, Victor has feelings of guilt over the facts that he created a creature which he considers to be an abomination of nature who would later turn out to be destructive. On the other hand, the creature shows remorse for the murders and other actions he committed for the sake of revenge. One important point of contention regarding the nature of guilt is who should feel an even greater amount of guilt. Based from the actions and intentions of both characters, it can be said that Victor Frankenstein should be the guiltier between the two. There are a number of reasons by which this case can be supported upon. For one, his reasons are comparably less justifiable, the creature has no sense of morality to begin with, and the intentions behind the creature’s actions—at least the initial ones—are relatively pure.
Morality and Guilt: Philosopher’s Theories
One of the ways in which the two characters can be compared is in terms of the justification for their actions. A character can be considered guilty for his or her actions of he or she expresses remorse over the actions he or she has undertaken. In other words, there is something inside that person that what he or she did is morally wrong; it is not in accordance with what is considered right. The basis of morality, however, is up for debate. How can one consider if their actions are morally justified or not?
One way to analyze their actions is by analyzing whether the motives behind their actions are morally justifiable. Even the actions are considered to be not to be morally unrighteous, if the motive is less than ethical, then it can be said that it is immoral overall. On the other hand, is an action can be viewed as morally questionable, then it has some justifications when the motive behind these actions are noble to begin with (Rosati).
Also, it is important to consider the preexisting laws of morality that govern the characters’ actions. A character’s personal moral values are largely shaped by the environment he or she grew up with, which in turn is determined by a universal law of morality and the culture of the people in question.
These approaches regarding morality can be used to analyze the intentions and the actions between the two main characters, Frankenstein and the creature. The motives for their actions and the reasoning of their guilt can be explored, and their sense of morality can be analyzed as well.
Comparison of the Intentions between Frankenstein and the Creature
Both Victor and the creature have their justifications concerning their actions that they have committed in the book. One way to determine who is guiltier between the two is analyzing if their reasons have justifications that are to an extent based on laws regarding morality.
The first primary action in the book is the creation of the creature itself. Victor Frankenstein claimed that he had created the creature for the betterment of mankind, but it is implied that he did the act in his desire to become like God, at least in the matter of creating life and mastering it. Therefore, Victor’s foremost motive of his actions was curiosity, which is in itself a neutral topic in the sense that it cannot be considered morally right or wrong. However, the desire to become like God is a transgression of a natural law, so generally the act of creating life and imitating God can be considered an immoral act. Since it is against the prescribed laws of morality, Victor should feel guilty for this action. This is also the reason why he left the creature to his own devices. His guilt for doing something that is against what he perceives as natural law, as well as his regard for the creature as an abomination, prompts him to leave and provides him the justification for his later action to not create something that is like the creature later on, reasoning that they could potentially breed and create more abominations.
The creature, on the other hand, should feel guilty for his violent actions like killing the Frankenstein’s bride and friends. His primary sentiment was revenge, which can be considered morally ambiguous, but given that he did it because of his bitterness towards his creator and humankind in general, it can be considered more justifiable than Victor’s actions. He also is indirectly responsible for causing the death of Victor’s father due to grief.
While these actions can be traced to the creature because he is the one that performed the killings, they can, in extension, be attributed to Victor as well because he is, after all, the creator of the creature himself. What is noticeable is that even though he is responsible for the creature’s actions as well as his own, he exonerates himself from the latter’s murders. The creature at least has the audacity to admit that he is at least partially guilty from the actions that he have caused.
The creature’s initial intentions, like saving a young girl from a lake and befriending an old man, shows support that the creature, even though he cannot be considered as a human being strictly, shows some signs of humanity after all and thus it can be said that his actions are driven by a sense of duty to be compassionate towards others, and with good intentions. These actions can be considered as moral acts based from the definition earlier. This, along with the fact that the creature can feel guilt, gives a human side to the otherwise inhumane character.
Victor and the Creature: Inherent Sense of Morality
Another point of consideration is how these characters judge morality, and by extension, guilt, from their own points of view. Victor, as a human, has a preconceived sense of morality, which is shaped by his environment and society. Morality, after all, is ultimately shaped by what the environment prescribes and views as useful to keep the society running smoothly. Therefore, his actions are dictated by the law of morality he follows himself. For one, this law is the one that helps him reach his conclusion that what he created is an abomination of nature, because it is the source of the idea that life should be conceived by natural means. Therefore, his guilt is more justified because he has an existing code that he should follow and consequently deviates from.
The creature, on the other hand, has no sense of morality from the start and is only dictated by what he considers to be his primal needs. He learned to communicate by learning indirectly from a teacher; he was not taught by the basics of human society from the start by his creator. He had to learn about the cruelty of humans by the hard way by people despising him for his outward appearance. This is because these people, like Victor Frankenstein above, are also guided by a preexisting law of morality, in which they regard things that are not in their natural state such as the creature as horrifying objects and thus should be treated with revile. Because of this rude behavior, his sense of morality has become twisted and partly fueled by his bitterness and revenge.
Conclusion
Shelley’s Frankenstein can give an insight regarding the guilt between Victor Frankenstein and the creature. Based from their actions and intentions, Victor Frankenstein is clearly the guiltier out of the two, as his intentions regarding his actions were not justifiable compared to the creature, Moreover, he has a preconceived sense of morality which he violated but the creature has to find one of his own. However, both characters were guilty in different ways, and how these characters are driven by their motivation and guilt is what makes the latter part of the story, and the ending, so interesting.
Works Cited
“Guilt”. Def. 1. Cambridge Dictionaries Online, Cambridge English Dictionary, n.d. Web. 28 May 2016.
Nobes, Patrick, and Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. Frankenstein. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. Print.
Rosati, Connie S. “Moral Motivation”. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The Metaphysics Research Lab, 19 Oct. 2006. Web. 28 May 2016.
