Monster To Steve Harmon Essay

He has check marks next to all three components that define personhood, and thus must be defined as a person with certain unalienable rights. One of the strongest counter arguments, even after this justification, may be that the Monster does several things that could be considered inhuman. However, persons do acts of inhumanity every single day–be they arson, murder, theft, or even genocide. The argument that the Monster is a primitive creature that acts out of anger is invalid, for he does no worse crimes than the general society. He may be considered a Monster on the basis of his unique origins and physical appearance, but as has been shown, he deserves the equal treatment and justice as any other person would be

To be accused of both “child” neglect and abuse towards the monster is unjustifiable for Victor Frankenstein. Victor Frankenstein is not guilty for the “child” neglect and abuse of the monster because the monster is not a child, he was made up of many adult human body parts, Victor only created the monster, Victor did not teach the monster to kill and because the monster is responsible for its own actions. As the one of Victor Frankenstein’s defense attorney I believe that Victor Frankenstein should be declared innocent.

The story of a madly driven scientist who becomes afflicted by the life he produced from the dead, from which he discerns he is the true monster. In Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein she captures how society forms this cliché of how appearance is a large factor of being accepted and loved. Shelly’s story was brought to film by Kenneth Branagh where there were a few similarities and numerous distortions.

If you were blamed for a crime you didn’t do, would you let that accusation go and let it tarnish your reputation? Would you let it fly by and have others judge from every angle? No, right? Normally people who get accused of crimes demand justice as they know they did not commit the crime and only justice can give them the freedom they deserve. But let’s look at Steve Harmon, the main character from the book Monster by Walter Dean Myers who was on trial for murder. The book ended ambiguously and left the reader to question whether or not Steve was truly innocent. Because of the numerous questionable scenes/parts in the novel, I believe that Steve Harmon is guilty of being a participant in the crime that led to death of Mr. Nesbitt.

The definition of a “monster” is a threatening force. In Walter Dean Myers’ Monster, Steve Harmon the defendant in the trial is being charged for felony murder. The monster in him is the struggle between his innocence and guilt. Steve’s judgment of his actions is similar to a pendulum swinging. Although Steve believes within himself that he is innocent, of the important people around him, make him insecure as to the degree of his innocence and turn to others for confirmation.

Although in Frankenstein the monster’s actions are horrific,we understand his justification for doing so. Even in his attempt to be good and integrate himself into society ,society rewards him with beatings; “... I arrived at a village. How miraculous did this appear! The huts, the near cottages, and stately houses engaged my admiration … I hardly placed my foot within the door. The whole village was roused; some fled, some attacked me,until, grievously bruised by stones and many other kinds of missile weapons, I escaped to the open country ad fearfully took refuge in a low hovel.” Some may find it easy to identify with the monster, because he is a misunderstood being, led to live in isolation. This is not necessarily the case for many of the antagonists in Gothic novels such as Count Dracula and Mr Hyde, as they choose to live in isolation, however similarly with the monster in Frankenstein they live in isolation because of their unique appearances and the mere fact that they are supernatural beings but also the fact that they are capable of committing a treachery in public.

I agree with your statement. I believe that people become monsters when they experience terrible things. For example in Grendel, he gets attacked by King Hrothgar and his men, this turning point of events is what makes Grendel a revenge seeking, blood lusting monster. People and not even monsters are born with the intention of becoming one. People that tend to let anger, sadness, etc. build-up they often take it out on others, especially the ones they love the most. They might not notice they are being a monster and hurting others when they really are because they are so used to getting hurt or used to the terrible things that have been done to them or witnessed happen to others they love. Being a monster is just the way they choose to deal

In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein brings his creation to life and has to endure the repercussions of his actions. While Victor is in fact human, the question of whether the creature or Victor is more human still stands. Humanity is demonstrated as compassionate in the book and monstrosity is the opposite. The creature is more human because of his developed personality and desire to be human. Victor, although born into a humane family, evolved into everything bad about humanity; he developed obsession, resentment, and manipulated life to conform to his idealities. Therefore, Victor is the real monster.

People are not born with the mentality to kill—or are they? Human ambition and desires vary from one another, but for the most part, humans do not seek to commit atrocities. If they do, then who is to blame, the murderer or the ones who raised the murderer? In Mary Shelley’s novel, the main character, Dr. Victor Frankenstein, stitched body parts together to create a beyond hideous, vile-looking creature which caused Frankenstein to abandon him at sight. When the monster ends up killing Frankenstein’s beloved brother due to resentment, one can argue that the creature’s actions are justified (55). The murders and immoral actions of Frankenstein’s monster are justified because he did not have a parental figure, was neglected by the general public,

The monster is directly responsible for killing all those people, he committed those crimes. Frankenstein however, created the monster and is indirectly responsible for the murders his creation committed. While reading the story, you realise, that the creature is actually good at heart. It's the way that he is treated which makes him a monster. He was never loved by his creator, and was feared and despised by everyone who met him. If only one person had loved him, he wouldn't have killed all those people. If you look at it this way, you'll come to the conclusion that Frankenstein and the other people that met him were to blame for the monster's

In Frankenstein, the Monster, is created by Victor Frankenstein. Victor creates the Monster and hates him, because of this the Monster only sees hate and learns to hate. Victor has moral corruption as well because he has a very mundane outlook on life and this dictates how he reacts to the Monsters plot for revenge. Both characters in Frankenstein are infected by moral corruption and are controlled by there moral values. In this paper I will use Aristotle and Augustine to explain how moral corruption is corrupted by a persons environment and how they are treated in their environment.

Webster's Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary defines a monster as "a person of unnatural or extreme ugliness, deformity, wickedness, or cruelty." The being is unnatural right from the very beginning; his "birth." He was not carried in his mother's womb and delivered as normal babies are. The being is solely a construction of random corpses' bodily parts sewn together and brought to life. In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, society continually regards Victor's creation as a monster, both physically and psychologically. Though the being has the physical characteristics of a monster, it is only after he is repeatedly rejected by society that he adopts the personality and behavior of a monster. With that being said, society plays a large role in shaping

Each year grade eleven students at Monsignor Doyle read Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein even though there is a multitude of other classical books that could be read. [Pause] Many students and even some parents feel like Frankenstein shouldn’t be read because it’s boring and the grammar is difficult to understand. However, students should continue to read Frankenstein because there is a strong emphasis on being misunderstood and judging someone before you get to know them. This is something that many teens do to other steens and this book allows them to see how the outcome of that judgment affects that person.

What makes a kind, compassionate, moral human being? On the flip side, what makes a monster? A​ ​prevalent​ ​theme​ ​in​ ​the​ YA ​novel​ ​“Monster”​ ​by​ ​Walter Dean Myers​ ​is​ ​​image​,​ ​or​ ​how​ ​one​ views themselves​ ​and​ ​how​ ​they​ ​want,​ ​or​ ​​need​,​ ​in​ ​the​ ​case​ ​of​ ​Steve​ ​Harmon,​ ​others​ ​to​ ​view​ ​them. ​The reader is presumably dropped into New York of the late nighties, in time to watch 16-year-old​ ​Steve​ ​on trial​ ​for​ ​a​ ​crime​ ​he might​ ​or​ ​might​ ​not​ ​have​ ​committed,​ ​despite​ ​the​ ​dearth​ ​of​ ​evidence.​ ​The​ ​story​ alternates between a 3rd-person screenplay and diary format as Steve resolves to take up his pen and document his experience. The narrative ​follows​ ​his view​ ​of​ ​life​

An individual is taught how to behave by their rewards or punishments for their actions. The monster, in his seemingly youthful state, is inherently good. When a young girl nearly drowns, the monster saves her, but what he receives is a shot to the shoulder. This immediately teaches him that his altruistic acts will not be met equally. Being punished for an action the monster believed was an act of kindness teaches him simply to not act kindly, as it will only bring pain, physical and mental. This lesson that the monster learns contributes to his natural production. By being shown that altruism and kindness are of no use to him, there are only two other options, neutrality or malice.