 In an influential essay, the Romantic scholar and critic Harold Bloom wrote that the reader's sympathy lies with the Creature, but in his book The Romantic Conflict (1963) Allan Rodway says the reader's sympathy lies with Victor Frankenstein. Who is right? Why?
Alice Eastwood
11/13/2019 04:11:46 pm
Harold Bloom is correct in his critique that the reader’s sympathy lies with the creature. Mary Shelley makes the creature out to be something that was left unwanted by its creator. In a few chapters, Shelley tells the creature’s story of how he was isolated and looked at with disgust from villagers. At first, she portrays the creature as an innocent thing with a horrid upbringing. When we learn about the creature’s killing spree, yes it is aggressive, but having that background of what the creature experienced on his own makes the reader understand where that rage is coming from. The reader’s sympathy doesn’t lie with Victor because he abandoned what he considered a masterpiece.
Marianne Jones
11/14/2019 04:30:30 pm
I agree with what you said one hundred percent. Victor literally high of knowledge decides to make the Creature, and considers it a masterpiece yet abandons him at the first sight of him. We want to be angry at the creature for his horrid killings, but is it fair to be mad at him if he wasn't raised right let alone raised at all? I think not. He is brutally attacked by all of humanity for his differences, and us as the reader can only feel bad for the poor monster that Victor Frankenstein made.
Sophie Germain
11/14/2019 07:35:35 pm
While I understand your point of view, I disagree. In the real world, parents abandon their children all the time leaving them lonely and unwanted. Do they turn out to be murderers? The creature has entire responsibility over his actions and unnecessary killings. Since readers know the creature’s back story it is easy to feel sympathetic toward him but would you feel sympathetic toward a murderer if you lacked context of the killings? Probably not. So why extend sympathy to the creature?
Vera Yestvafievna Popova
11/14/2019 07:54:35 pm
While I agree that Victor’s absenteeism was heartless and crucial part towards the Creature’s hatred for humans, isn't Victor’s fear toward the Monster a bit justified. I feel as though Victor felt hopeful during the creature-making process. It seems as though he thought the creature had some potential to be a son. One that he could teach the ways of life.
Katherine Foot
11/14/2019 11:33:02 pm
I like the fact that you mentioned how the creature felt "unwanted" which is definitely true. The creature's emotions play a big factor into having the readers feeling sympathy towards him. However, there are a few instances where some instances of sympathy could potentially lie within Victor, as he lived a rough childhood dealing with his mother's death, and often went through moments of depression as he felt extreme guilt over the deaths of his loved ones. For the most part, I feel that most of the sympathy lies within the creature, though I might be biased because it moved me emotionally more than I felt with Victor.
Zofia Torma
11/17/2019 03:48:20 pm
I completely agree with this. The creature reflects some characteristics that mirror one of a child essentially. By abandoning him in the beginning, Victor sparks the aggression in the monster, giving him a reason for his outbursts. Victor also created the creature in the first place and then is disgusted in his own creation, which once again transfers over to the creatures ultimate goal of vengeance.
Zsofia Torma
11/13/2019 05:30:50 pm
I believe that the reader's sympathy is for the creature. In "Frankenstein", readers can assume that either Victor or the creature play the role of the villain, but personally I think that Victor is more at blame for the monster's actions. Some that think that the creature deserves no sympathy may look at the fact that the monster killed people whom Victor cares about as an act of vengeance, but essentially these actions were due to Victor's ultimate decision to create the creature and also his absence during the early period of the monster's time alive. We see through the creature's description that he learned from observing others, similar to a child, so if Victor wasn't as disgusted from his own creation, than the creature may of gotten more guidance and a better upbringing. To rewind even further, if Victor hadn't decided to play God and create the creature in the first place, than none of these events would of even happened.
Alice Eastwood
11/14/2019 03:43:46 pm
I agree completely on the notion that if Victor didn’t try to play god and create this creature, none of the events that transpired between Victor’s loved ones and the creature wouldn’t have happened. When the creature was brought to life, Victor did a whole 360 from when he was creating it. Therefore, the creature had no guidance and had to learn from others. So yes, Victor is definitely the one to blame seeming that he caused the creature to plot revenge. The creature was enraged at the fact that he didn’t have his own creator helping him.
Sophie Germain
11/13/2019 06:44:30 pm
him playing God could be. He was very irresponsible with the creature, but he had no prior experience with anything like it so he did not know how to react. However, many people his age make terrible decisions his just had more consequences than others. While it was his fault for making the creature, learning a simple life lesson would have been enough, but he suffered greatly. Finally, Frankenstein was scared. He did not know what power he had and he abused his knowledge, but he learned from this as the audience can see when he does not make the creature a companion.
Alice Eastwood
11/14/2019 03:44:10 pm
I understand your point that Victor was irresponsible, however, after all those lectures from the professor about basically how god is supposed to be the one who commands/controls nature, Victor should have taken that into consideration. In my opinion, this is carelessness. He was so motivated by his mother’s death to bring back the dead that he was blinded by his ideas. The creature in turn received the consequences from his carelessness because he was not created by god and had to go about his life with no guidance from his own creator.
Marianne Jones
11/14/2019 04:37:54 pm
I didn't think of it like that. It makes a lot of sense when you explain it like that. Who could've really informed him that should he make this supernatural being that the consequences would be worse than he expected, and especially for him. He went into this blind; not sure what could happen, but excited to have been able to get this far. We really also can't forget his age because he is only 18/19 years of age doing this ; not thinking of the consequence, but the "importance" of his creation.
Jane Ellen Harrison
11/13/2019 07:58:53 pm
Harold Bloom is right that the reader’s sympathy lies with the Creature because Mary Shelley decided to give the Creature a chance to tell his own story. Mary Shelley could have not included those chapters and make it seem that Victor is innocent from what is happening with him. The story of the Creature makes a different perspective for the reader because the Creature’s story was sad and made the reader think that the Creature isn’t to blame for all his actions. Victor is to blame because he had played God and didn’t take care of the Creature when it became alive. The Creature felt alone, cold, and hungry in the world. The Creature had to find a way to keep warm and to feed himself. He feels angry that Victor wasn’t there to help him. Also when the Creature explains that he is too ugly that no one wants to even talk to him makes the reader feel sad because we have felt his pain. The Creature decided for Victor to experience loneliness, coldness, and hunger at the end of the story because the Creature feels hurt from his experience.
Zonia Baber
11/13/2019 08:55:05 pm
The setup of the novel allows the audience to develop some form of sympathy towards the creature due to all the unfortunate situations that he founds himself in. However, after much thought, I agree with Allen Rodway and truly believe the readers sympathy lies with Victor Frankenstein. Hear me out on this one :). Victor had this idea of creating a creature and possessing a power that only a superior being can hold which is the power to bring life. Victor was quite excited and eager to do the impossible, and now his plan didn't go as expected. Victor realized how "evil and dangerous" this creature was, and how he lost many of his family members due to the creature. Majority of readers can agree that Victor was naive and selfish to create something that shouldn't have been created. At the same time, readers can also feel sympathetic towards Victor for the mistake he made. I personally feel bad for Victor that he had to experience many casualties before realizing that certain things just aren't meant to be.
Zsofia Torma
11/17/2019 03:53:34 pm
I disagree due to the fact that instead of just searching for new knowledge on the creation of life, Victor was more power hungry rather than just wanting to advance his discoveries. This drive for power signals how Victor was selfish in wanting to be superior to society. I could see how we would sympathize with him if he was raised in a poor atmosphere and wanted some success in his life for the first time, but instead he grew up in a fortunate family and therefore it should not be justified to be power hungry.
Katherine clerk
11/13/2019 11:07:44 pm
The sympathy should lie with the creature because cruel abandonment and unpreparedness of society’s actions made the creature the way he is. If Frankenstein were to never make the creature out of selfish intentions the creature would have never been made and never have caused so much damage in society. We sympathize for him because he was just doing what he was taught and learned to do as he felt feelings of revenge toward victor. You don’t blame the creation you blame the creator that made all this evil happen.
Katherine Foot
11/14/2019 11:41:43 pm
I wouldn't consider Victor to be "selfish" for creating the creature because he was driven by his mother's death and his profound knowledge of natural philosophy. I do understand your point that the sympathy lies within the creature due to the treatment he received from the villagers and his ideas of the potential cruelty of mankind, leading to the spark of his inner hatred for humans and becoming a danger to society.
Katherine Foot
11/14/2019 11:42:45 pm
Word Count: 72
Zsofia Torma
11/17/2019 03:55:32 pm
I agree with the idea that Victor was partially driven by his mother's death, but he also wanted the power of creating life. This in a way is selfish due to him just essentially wanting the clout of creating new life.
Zsófia Torma
11/13/2019 11:51:04 pm
Popular to contrary belief, I sympathize more with Victor Frankenstein. The readers comprehend that Victor’s desire to create another being stems from his love for natural philosophy and his early experiences with death. Victor’s goal of creating his own being did not include creating a being that would terrorize society. Though I understand that the creature did not ask to be on the planet in which be resides on, nor did he ask to be as hideous as he is, we must also consider that Victor’s experiment did not go as planned. There have been many occasions in the novel where Victor tried to sympathize with the creature. One of the many examples would be taking the time to listen to the creature’s story. Shall I also mention that Victor took the blame for Justine and Will’s death. Perhaps Victor’s efforts at creating a companion for the creature is a notable example as well. Though Victor’s threats are quite crude, let me ask you this question: are you willing to sympathize with a creature who kills your loved ones?
Zonia Baber
11/14/2019 10:52:39 pm
I couldn't have stated this any better. It was never Victors intention to create a monster that will serve the purpose of destroying everything around it; especially if the destruction involves family. The main argument is that the creature is just doing what he was taught. However, if I'm not mistaken I don't remember the creature being taught how to kill in the novel, the creature learned that killing was a way to hurt Victor and he proceeded with the action. It's unfortunate that the creature went through various obstacles, but it's also unfortunate that Victor lost his family as well as his mental state during the whole process.
Zsófia Torma
11/13/2019 11:54:21 pm
Note..
Vera Yestvafievna Popova
11/13/2019 11:54:53 pm
Who is to blame for all the murder and misery? The Creature, for sure. He is the man (or “thing”) that had the capability to strangle. Although Frankenstein’s absenteeism is half of the problem, it was the monster that committed the act of murder-- not Frankenstein.
Zonia Baber
11/14/2019 11:06:03 pm
I agree with this statement. Victor had a great interest in science, and he wanted to explore even deeper by creating something that shouldn't have been created. Even though Victor created the creature it wasn't his intention to step up as a father, instead, he just wanted the title of a creator. Everyone makes mistakes, and Victor's mistake ended up costing him his close family members. If Victor knew the creature would turn out to be this evil he wouldn't have taken that risk, Victor was just eager to defy science and unfortunately, that plan didn't go as well. Sympathy should be directed even more towards Victor since his life was destroyed all because of one mistake that could've been avoided.
Marie Curie
11/16/2019 07:31:32 pm
I agree that the monster is to blame in this situation since he murdered Frankenstein's friends and family, however the question was not who was responsible for the most grief, but who's tale does our heart lie with. Frankenstein and the creature are both monsters but who do we feel sorry for more? The creature who is a product of his environment or the wanna-be god who sought fame and glory for a childlike dream
Katherine Foot
11/14/2019 01:41:44 am
My apologizes for responding so late.
Hélène Langevin-Joliot
11/14/2019 04:48:33 am
In my opinion the sympathy lies with the creature. He is not at fault for anything. He did not ask to be created he was a victim of someone’s dream. He was deserted instead of taken care of by his creator. He never asked to be created into a monstrosity. He did not deserve to be abandoned the way he was.
Vera Yestvafievna Popova
11/14/2019 08:53:58 pm
I think your take on this argument is interesting because it supports the notion that Victor Frankenstein and the Creature emulate Mary Shelley’s own married life. If Mary Shelley intended for Victor to be like her husband, Percy Bysshe Shelley, then it shows how callous he could been towards their child. For whatever reason, Percy may have felt distant from their child, and this entire novel could foreshadow the negative effects of a deadbeat father. Without a paternal figure in the child’s life, the young kid may attempt to emulate anyone who appears to have that fatherly aura. The person that may be emulated could be anyone, even teachers. As we saw with Victor’s teachers they were very distinct people. That difference in personality could either be of great value (ex. Waldman) or of great hindrance (ex. Krempe).
Marie Curie
11/14/2019 08:38:02 am
Harold Bloom's belief that the readers' sympathies lies with the monster than the creator. The creature's mannerism, storytelling and the emotions around him invoke so much emotions within the reader. It is next to impossible to feel compassion for such a wretched creature born of unfavorable conditions. At the very core of the story, we hear the creature's tale of woe and despair and focus on his struggle to become a member of society. Victor's selfish behavior doesn't invoke the same compassion or woe since he faces the consequence of his neglect
Moi
11/14/2019 10:55:58 am
blah, blah, blah!
Marianne Jones
11/14/2019 11:37:01 am
Harold Bloom is right in his opinion that the reader's sympathy lies with the Creature. From the minute the Creature is introduced to the story as the creation of Frankenstein as the reader I feel bad for the ugly duckling that is casted away from the pond by his own father. Frankenstein spends all this time making the "perfect being" to then abandon his own creation in a world that he had never experienced for himself. As he experiences this new world we as the readers are more and more appalled by how mankind treats one who is different from others; you can't do anything , but feel bad for him.
Sophie Germain
11/14/2019 07:25:21 pm
I can understand your take on this. The creature was ostracized and isolated from society with no guidance and it is hard to be completely heartless to the creatures dilemma, but at the same time it does not excuse his behavior. His behavior can make the audience lose sympathy for him though because even though he was isolated does that give him the right to murder Frankenstein’s family and friends? Does it give him the right to terrorize Frankenstein?
Jane Ellen Harrison
11/14/2019 07:41:20 pm
I agree with you because Mary Shelley makes the Creature evil at first making us sympathize with Victor. When the Creature tells his story of his upbringing it makes us feel sad for the Creature because we only heard one side of the story. By hearing the Creature’s side of the story it makes us sympathize with him because his upbringing to world made him the way he is and society as well. No one didn’t want him and even Victor his creator which makes us mad at Victor that he didn’t help him.
Zsófia Torma
11/14/2019 11:41:19 pm
How unfortunate it must be for Victor’s motivation to originate from the death of a loved one. Before the creature existed, the readers had to sympathize with Victor first because he lost his mother at a young age. I respect the fact that you included Shelley’s strategy of making the audience sympathize with the creature; opposers don't necessarily have to agree with the creature deserving the sympathy, but they can agree that Shelley writes in a way where we can learn to give at least a tiny portion of sympathy to the creature.
Zsófia Torma
11/14/2019 11:42:40 pm
Responding to Katherine Foot’s primary response. ^
Zsófia Torma
11/14/2019 11:57:10 pm
Responding to Hélène Langevin-Joliot’s primary response. Comments are closed.
|
Blog Post Rubric
Archives
February 2023
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed