Psychological studies conducted in the last fifty years have found that social isolation has a profound negative affect on people. This is because humans by nature are social creatures, who need and thrive of off physical and emotional connections. This is one reason that that isolation is used by prisons and in torture as the separation is expected to make the person more likely to conform to expectation. Many people who have been socially isolated for long periods of time begin to experience negative effects such as, hallucinations, high blood pressure, increase in illness, verbal and rational reasoning skills are compromised, and many people start experiencing dementia like symptoms (BBC et, al). This paper will look at the part social isolation played in the actions of Frankenstein’s creature.
In Frankenstein the creature was rejected as soon as it was “born” by his creator Victor Frankenstein. “He might have spoken, but I did not hear; one hand was stretched out, seemingly to detain me, but I escaped and rushed downstairs listening attentively, catching and fearing each sound as if it were to announce the approach of the demoniacal corpse to which I had so miserably given life” (Shelley et, al. 90). After Victor ran away and left the creature to fend for himself with absolutely no information about himself or the skills needed to survive. He attempted to make his way into the world. Soon however, he realized that the world would not accept him. This he learned when he went into the village and after opening the door to someone’s home had rocks thrown at him as the villagers screamed and chased him. Afterwards the creature “befriended” the DeLacey family only to be rejected once again. This time the rejection has a more profound effect because the creature truly seeks to belong to this family. He also learns about the concept of language and decides that if he is able to tell the blind old man about himself that the family may accept him. He chooses to reveal himself to the old man because the creature knows that since that old man is blind he would be the only one to actually listen and possibly sympathize with his story. The creature’s perception of human behavior was correct because the old man was listening and sympathizing with the creature and his ordeals. Nevertheless, this attempt is soon thwarted when the old man’s children return and begin beating the creature. Thus once again the creature is denied human connection. He then returns to Victor and asks him to make him a companion so that he could have someone to love and that would love him. This was not necessarily a request for a sexual partner, but a request for “family”. The creature sought another that could identify with him and provide the emotional connection that he craved. Victor imaging the creature and the female creature having offspring denies him his request. This results in the creature killing everyone that is dear to Victor.
The reaction of the creature is understandable from a psychological aspect, especially in regards to rejection and social isolation. This is because if we look at the creature in much the same way as one would look at a child. We know that psychologists have said that the first five years of a child’s life are the most crucial for learning and obtaining motor and physical skills. It is also during this time that a child learns to connect with the world on a social and emotional level. However, the creature is denied this connection, even though he actively seeks it throughout the novel. At first this is done by Victor shunning him at “birth”. By doing this Victor was severely harming the creature’s ability to connect with others.
Despite the creature’s early desire to find companionship amongst the people. The continual rejection and subsequent isolation from the community that he is subjected to causes the annihilation of his desire to connect and his acceptance of being a “monster” (Bernatchez 1). In this one can see that the creature’s identity much like that of a child’s is formed as a result of their community. As the community and Victor were responsible for the creature’s isolation. They were then responsible for the horrible actions of the creature upon the community. This is because while his innate nature was towards kindness and benevolence. That part of his psyche was not nurtured, but destroyed. Therefore, both Victor and the community as his “destroyers” are responsible for the outcome.
The creature had attempted to make friends but because of his looks and his inability to communicate he was shunned. So he hid and the shadows learning how to read and educate himself, while also helping a young girl and her family. The creature does this because he knows that there is something wrong with him and he feels that obtaining knowledge and language will allow him the opportunity to connect with others. This is because he thinks that if he can show that he is intelligent and harmless that society will look pass his hideousness. Finally, one day the creature felt that he could reveal himself to the family. This resulted in the villagers throwing rocks at him and attempting to burn him with fire. The reaction of the family and villagers was unkind and they sought to destroy the creature because they only saw his outside appearance and refused to acknowledge his intellect or who he was trying to be.
After he revealed himself to the girl and her family he lost the only social connection that he had. Thus both sources of potential “nurturing” were denied to him. After Victor denied his request he realized that he was truly alone in the world. He was destined to live a life being ostracized and shunned on the edges of society. He also realized that any opportunity he had to obtain companionship ended with Victor’s refusal to create him a partner.
The creature was like a child in that he became a reflection of his own reality. He was rejected by his “father” and “mother” Victor and later by the old man and his family, who had provided much of his academic and logical nurturing (unbeknownst to them). The creature was able to gain knowledge, but was denied compassion and understanding. The creature soon understood that he would not be able to find companionship from “normal” society and he sought to have Victor create him a partner. Victor refused because he did not want to create another abomination. It is this refusal along with the rejection that the creature has experienced that causes him to lash out against Victor by killing his family and friends. The logic is simply if he cannot have anyone, then Victor will be denied the same.
In conclusion, it is also necessary to see that the creature while arguing logic as being the reason for his actions was in fact ruled by emotions. This is seen in the scenes that he has with Victor, the first being where he asks Victor to create him a companion and the other being where he uses literature to justify the actions that he took against Victor for not giving him a companion in which he tells him “I have love in me the likes of which you can scarcely imagine and rage the likes of which you would not believe. If I cannot satisfy the one, I will indulge the other” (Shelley et, al. 116). The problem is, he has never had this part of his psyche rightly nurtured. The only emotional nurturing that he has received is that of being beaten, shunned and feared. Realizing that this is the only way that humans will ever react to him and the fact that he will never know anyone else like him that he could relate to or who could understand him. The creature declares all humans his enemies and vows to destroy any he comes across.
Works Cited
BBC, and Michael Bond. “How extreme isolation warps the mind.” BBC. 14 May 2014. Web. 16 June 2016
Bernatchez, Josh. “Monstrosity, Suffering, Subjectivity, and Sympathetic Community in Frankenstein and "the Structure of Torture"”. Science Fiction Studies 36.2 (2009): 205–216. Web.
Bissonette, Melissa Bloom. “Teaching the Monster: Frankenstein and Critical Thinking.” College Literature 37.3 (2010): 106–120. Web.
Shelly, Mary Woolstonecraft, Paul J Hunter. Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, the 1818 Text: Contexts, Nineteenth-Century Responses, Modern Criticism. New York: Norton, W. W. & Company, 1996. Print.
