Criticism In Mary Shelley's Myth And Frankenstein

1627 Words7 Pages
He developed a deep love for the noble, albeit impoverished, family. Seeking some kind of human relationship, to be more accurate, just any kind of contact, he first tried to talk to the oldest family member as he was blind and the monster knew that his hideous physiognomy, excites not only disgust but more so fear. However, the other members of the family returned unexpectedly, and drove him with stones from the cottage. Upon this, the monsters sorrow increased, and he cursed his creator and his own hideousness. Thus, his thirst for revenge on Victor, whose whereabouts he had discovered from the laboratory notebooks. Upon his arrival in Geneva, the creature encountered William, he did not plan to kill the boy but he was enraged when he found out that William, who was cruel to him, was also a…show more content…
However, the Romantics saw a hero in Prometheus. A figure who does not give up, and helps mankind, even with the knowledge of having to face consequences. The relationship between the myth and Frankenstein however, is ambivalent. Certainly, just like the myth it can be read as a tale of caution, like Mary Shelley already said in her ‘waking dream’ Frankenstein’s creation would be horrifying because “supremely frightful would be the effect of any human endeavor to mock the stupendous mechanism of the Creator of the world.” As far as Victor Frankenstein is regarded, he certainly is punished for his actions, he witnesses the murder of his family and friends, which shortly after is followed by his own tragic death. The mentioned ambivalent relation, is for example put into play when Frankenstein is read as celebration of ambition and

More about Criticism In Mary Shelley's Myth And Frankenstein

Open Document