‘Instructor’s Name’
The Frankenstein Application Essay
Mencius, a Chinese scholar who lived between 372—289 B.C.E., argues that human beings are innately good natured, and this nature can either be allowed to flower through education and self-discipline or dissipated by negative influences. Another example from ancient Asian tradition includes Valmiki, the author of the great Hindu epic Ramayana, who was a thief by profession, but was transformed through his experiences and went on to become a great thinker of his times. These examples raise an age old question - nature or nurture, which one shapes the personality of a human being. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein offers an answer to this timeless question through the story of a monster, who was created with a mind clean as a slate, but was later pushed into doing horrific deeds because of the rejection handed out to him by the society. The treatment meted out to him in every stage of his life makes the creature the monster he is, and thus, Shelley emphasizes that the environment and education of a person determine the way a person conducts his life, more than his personality traits.
The novel Frankenstein and the character of the monster, in particular, delineate the damage wrought when a person lacks nurturing guidance or paternal love. Since its creation, the creature did not get love or nurture from its creator, Victor Frankenstein. Before infusing life on a corpse, Victor did not really plan what he would do with his ‘creation’. Horrified by the sight of what he created, Victor was quick to abandon it. There was no guiding force in the life of the creature, and he was left to self-educate himself. Before educating himself, the creature did behave like a brute and his actions created fear in the minds of people around him. This proves the importance of the need for parental care and education for a child to develop his personality.
“I am thy creature, and I will be even mild and docile to my natural lord and king if thou wilt also perform thy part, the which thou owest me.”
Through this story, Shelley stresses on the significance of parental bonding with the children, and she showcases the ill-effects of parents brutalizing or, even worse, ignoring, the children.
McWhir opines that Frankenstein’s monster is a parodic version of Rousseau's child of nature, whose education in the ways of society can either make or break him. Shelley believes that the degradation of a person’s character and his misery are caused by socialization. The De Laceys, whom the creature perceives to be the perfect family, represent to him a social state of which he could never be a part of. He is a child of nature, who is considered perverse because of his appearance and who yearns to be a part of society.
“The gentle words of Agatha and the animated smiles of the charming Arabian were not for me. The mild exhortations of the old man and the lively conversation of the loved Felix were not for me. Miserable, unhappy wretch!”
He tries to make himself acceptable by self-educating himself and trying to live up to the values, which he thought, the De Laceys stood for. Unfortunately, when he comes in contact with the family, to whom he has helped a lot, they couldn’t see past his monstrous appearance to his true self. The story clearly explicates how outward appearances of a person shape the society’s perceptions about him.
Harold Bloom, in his book Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, states that, Shelley through her book conveys that achievements or lack of it of an individual should be attributed more to the environment rather than a person’s innate intelligence. In this story, we see that the monster makes repeated efforts to be loved and belong to the society. Though he was created out of a corpse and had demonic features, his education, obtained both through the books read by him and by observing the De Laceys, cultivated in him good values. He genuinely reached out to people, and he helped the suffering De Lacey family. However, when the members of the family, to which he had grown much attached, attacked him, he became resentful and violent. His creator’s rejection further fuelled this hatred, and he became the monster the society saw him to be. It was the lack of love and guidance that turned the creature into a monster, and he was not born with monstrous traits.
Stripling argues that Shelley’s book urges its readers to reject the puritanical belief, widely prevalent in those times, that man’s sufferings are caused by original sin, and not by his actions or his environment. The novel answers the question - what part of a person is genetic and what is created by his surroundings. Are human beings created as a blank state or do we have genetically coded traits, which cannot be modified/erased by our upbringing and education? Shelley undoubtedly believes that no person is born evil; it is his surroundings that thrust him towards horrendous deeds.
The nameless monster created by Shelley two decades ago, can be considered an allusion to contemporary subjects, like cloned animals/persons, orphaned children, children growing devoid of parental care, and children in the third world countries who are subjected to constant hate propaganda and are recruited as child soldiers/ terrorists. Shelley’s message to the world at large is simple – treat a person bad he would turn wicked, show him compassion and love he can be molded into a person with high morals.
Works Cited
Bloom, Harold. Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. New York: Infobase Publishing, 2007. Print.
McWhir, Anne. "Teaching the Monster to Read: Mary Shelley, Education and Frankenstein." Willinsky, John. The Educational Legacy of Romanticism. Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier Univ. Press, 1990. 73-93. Print.
Richey, Jeffrey. Mencius (c. 372—289 B.C.E.). 2014. Web. <http://www.iep.utm.edu/mencius/>. 26 June 2014.
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein. Oxford University, 1823. Print.
Stripling, Mahala Yates. Bioethics and Medical Issues in Literature. Westport: Greenwood Publishing Group, 2005. Print.
