Answer TWO of the
following...
Q1: What arguments does
Victor give Walton for destroying the Creature’s incomplete mate? He was
earlier moved by the Creature’s loneliness, and also agreed that the Creature’s
arguments were sound. Why, at the very end, does he decide not to go through
with his “engagement”? Are his reasons equally sound?
Q2: Earlier in class, we
discussed the possibility that the Creature is Victor’s doppleganger,
his other half which he has psychically divorced from himself. Whether or not
this works, are there passages in the last few chapters that seem to support
this? Or, are their passages that would change significantly if we read the
Creature this way?
Q3: Is Victor a reliable
narrator? Do we trust his version of events (in greater or lesser ways)?
Consider passages such as, “He is eloquent and persuasive...but trust him not.
His soul is as hellish as his form, full of treachery and fiendlike malice.”
Related to this, is Walton’s narrative meant the story—or is he equally
suspect?
Q4: In The Rime of the
Ancient Mariner, the Wedding Guest is changed, becoming a “sadder and a
wiser man.” What effect does Victor have on Walton? Is he changed? Redeemed? Or
doomed? How closely does Shelley follow Coleridge’s example in her own work?
1.) Considering Victor started almost all of the problems he had to deal with (aside from his mother's death), his reasons are not sound and he is hard to trust. While it is understandable that he should worry about the demeanor of a new Creature, he destroys it without even giving the first Creature he created a fair chance. Throughout the book, I could not seem to understand Victor's reasoning for doing anything that he did (i.e. Why on earth did he leave Elizabeth alone in the inn instead of just staying there? He did not seem to think the Creature's threat through for a second). His inability to be logical on almost any level dates to the time that to book started (his fascination with the supernatural and alchemy) to the point that the book ends (suggesting that Walton put his men in danger). So, I completely disagree with his reasoning on not creating another Creature to help alleviate the madness.
ReplyDelete3.) Victor is not a reliable narrator. He is entirely biased in his feelings, which could lead to discrepancies in the way the story is told. He had a tendency to take his worst characteristics and put them off on the Creature as well. He has an inability to realize that he is almost entirely at fault and uses persuasion to spin the story of the Creature in his favor. Walton, on the other hand, is a bit more trustworthy. While Victor argued against the crews desire to go home and not chance the journey, Walton understood that the men did not feel safe and immediately took their thoughts and demands into consideration. He did not force people to do what they did not wish to do, and he felt no remorse in those actions aside from the sadness from not continuing the expedition.
Q1: Victor says he did not know how the new creature would react to the world, and feared she may reject her mate and be even more murderous than he is. He also worried that if the pairing was successful, "a race of devils would be propagated upon the earth". While these fears do make some sense, the Creature has shown he is capable of affection and would likely raise his mate in a more loving environment than he was afforded. On a personal psychological level, the destruction of the creature's mate may be indicative of Victor's own anxiety concerning his upcoming marriage to Elizabeth.
ReplyDeleteQ2: For me, it is nearly impossible NOT to interpret the Creature as Victor's "evil" impulses and unconscious fears. At the very least, the Creature is made in Victor's own image, a perverse Adam denied an Eve. The ending is one of the strongest indicators that the Creature is Victor's doppelganger. He feels compelled to die now that Victor is dead, suggesting he cannot continue to exist without him as though he was only a portion of Victor himself.
Q1: Victor did feel a connection with his creation, but ultimately could not accept him as a fellow human being. He explains to Walton that " my duties to my fellow creatures had greater claims to my attention." (156). Victor was concerned with the Creature's desire for vengeance and his selfish qualities. Ironically, Victor has been selfish throughout the entire story. For example, he created a living being and rejected it because he didn't find it beautiful. He said he loved Elizabeth, but never chose to give her his time. Clearly, Victor was wrong to disregard the Creature's humanity, because he is the very person who took it away.
ReplyDeleteQ4: Victor's story affects Walton and moves him to change his ways. After Victor tells Walton he plans to end his life after ending the Creature's, Walton is disturbed. Victor also condemns Walton for valuing new friendships over the ones he already has: "...but when you speak of new ties...think you any can replace those who are gone?" (153). Immediately after this conversation, Walton's next letter to Mrs. Saville is addressed to "My Beloved Sister." The letter laments the idea of not returning home alive, not simply because Walton will lose his life, but because of what will happen to his sister. In fact, Walton says his sister's "heart felt expectations are, in prospect, more terrible to [him] than [his] own death" (153). He learned from Victor's mistakes.
Ashley Bean
ReplyDelete1. Victor claimed that he didn’t want to put the entire human race in danger, which could happen if the second creature rejected the first one, or if they both went on a rampage against humans. He said he could bear putting just himself in danger, but not have the entire human race’s blood on his hands. This argument of his doesn’t come up until he is working on the creature already, so truly I think he was just disgusted by his work and came up with reasons to stop. They are somewhat sound, but did he really think that the creature would only hurt him? What’s to stop him from going after all of humankind?
3. I do not trust Victor as a narrator completely. His reliability goes into whether the creature actually existed or not, and there are several moments where it suggests that he isn’t. I think he really tries to put all hideousness on the creature, when really it is in himself. The creature does not have the “hellish” thing he believes it is, and in fact, I don’t think he even believes it. If the creature is indeed real, which I like the think it is, Victor is just embarrassed that he didn’t turn out as well as he had hoped. He probably had hopes of bringing back his mother, or preventing future deaths, but he can’t bear to imagine creating something in the image of those he loves and it turning out like his first creature.
Karlyn Hedges
ReplyDeleteQ1. He doesn't want to destroy the human race. He doesn't want to create a "race of devils." However, Victor is almost done making the second creature by the time he decides this. I don't think his reasoning is sound. If he had gone through with the creation of another creature, the first creature would no longer have reason to destroy the things Victor loves. I think he just wanted the creature all to himself. It was a game to him, a sick game. He wanted to play God and find out all the ways in which he could manipulate his creature.
Q3. I don't think Victor is a reliable narrator at all. He projects himself onto the creature in such a way that it is almost hard to differentiate the two sometimes. His unreliableness is what leads to the theory that perhaps the creature is actually him. Victor wants himself to look good and in order to do that he must make the creature seem horrible.
Elyse Marquardt
ReplyDeleteQ1: Victor's reasoning behind destroying the mate is that he doesn't want a race of devils to inhabit the earth and potentially threaten mankind. I don't believe this reasoning is sound. I know we discussed in class that one belief is that Victor doesn't want his reputation besmirched by being held responsible for that new population. He is short-sighted and selfish and he projects his own thought processes into the mind of the creature: Victor would definitely go against his own word, so he suspects that the creature would do so as well. In reality, I believe the creature would have stuck by his word and would have taken his mate to a secret place, content to live with her in solitude forever. But Victor can't imagine such a life, so he thinks the creature is only lying to get what he wants and then will break his word - as Victor would do. So he panics and changes his mind.
Q3: Victor is definitely not a reliable narrator. Everything he says is formulated to make us see him as a victim and the creature as the villain, even though it was Victor who created the "villain" in the first place. Even when he relays his conversations with the creature, we can see the creature's sensitivity and intellect shining through in such a way that we can't help but believe he must have been meant for greater things than what Victor has subjected him to. But Victor tries his hardest to make us think the creature is the bad guy - which he is, after Victor has turned him into one. Walton's narrative probably isn't reliable either, since (as we pointed out in class) Victor got ahold of it and edited it heavily before it was sent to Walton's recipient.
Elyse Marquardt
Q3: Victor is not a reliable narrator because of his need to be a "benefactor of society". He wants people to respect and revere him. He would tell us the story in a way that made himself look as good and respectable as possible. If he told us all the dirty details of what really happened with the creature, with the murders, the legacy he left behind might not be a very flattering one.
ReplyDeleteQ4: I think Victor has a strange effect on Walton. Walton seems to be more focused on glory after Victor dies, but he still has some common sense and hasn't become obsessed with it. We know this because he says, "I have consented to return, if we are not destroyed. Thus are my hopes blasted by cowardice and indecision" (155). If he were as obsessed with glory and leaving his mark on the human race as Victor was, he would have never consented to return home, and would have gladly let his men, and himself, die at sea. But we see the longing in knowing such glory as he could have achieved when he says that by wanting to turn back his men are cowardly. In fact, that is exactly something Victor would say. He is definitely changed. Hopefully once he gets home, he and his sister will work on shaking off Victor's influence. Mary Shelley followed very closely to the cautionary tale form set by Coleridge, the only difference is how the one listening and taking away the story, the wedding guest and Walton, reacted. The wedding guest went away sad and confused but Walton went away looking up to Frankenstein and learning nothing but a lust of glory from the tale. I think that the story is left on an edge that could be interpreted as Frankenstein's legacy living on through Walton.
2. I absolutely could believe that the Creature is Victor’s other half. Especially the part when Elizabeth is killed. It is crazy that nobody else seems to see the creature outside the window watching. There were no traces of him either. This confuses us because we want to believe Victor is the good guy. When all these deaths happen around him, we notice that the creature is only ever seen by Victor. This makes me question what kind of psychological issues Victor is having.
ReplyDelete3. I think Victor is completely unreliable. We see that his events had been gone through and changed, but only just a little. This makes me feel like his story was fabricated. Maybe not completely false, but it gives me more ammunition to believe that the Creature is actually Victor on the inside. Also, why would Shelley want us to know that his soul was hellish if she did not want us to see the unreliableness of his characters. I think everything is very intentional. Shelley wants us to incorporate our own thoughts into this story. Or perhaps, she wants us to take into account her life.
I’m late…super late but I still wanted to participate.
ReplyDeleteQ1. I think he decides he can’t create a second monster because he thinks they will take over man-kind. At first I thought this meant that the creatures would literally just keep killing and end up enslaving men or something but from class I realized that Victor probably was afraid of reproduction of the creatures, which is not a valid argument since they’re dead. He could’ve also just taken the female creature’s reproductive organs out so I assume he just acted out of impulse when he destroyed her.
Q2. I hadn’t thought about it at all until it was pointed out in class, but it’s totally possible that the Creature is Victor’s other half. He refers to his science-vacation as an engagement—without his actual future wife. That’s strange to me because he has literally spent his entire life knowing he’d be marrying her but he didn’t bring her with him when he left. He just left her. So in the manner of a physical partner, I think the Creature is Victor’s first pick but I also think there’s a chance that the Creature is Victor because aside from Victor’s narration, we don’t know of anyone else who sees the Creature.