Get help from the best in academic writing.

Misconceptions of Society in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

Misconceptions of Society in Frankenstein

Societies have a tendency to classify everything relative to local “norms”, and lables are generously applied. Typical lables are: good or bad, rich or poor, normal or aberrant. Although some of these classifications may be accurate, many of them are based upon misconception or misunderstanding. This is precisely the case in the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley.

In Frankenstein, this act of erring by society is extremely evident. One example of this judgment is the way the family is looked upon. They are seen by society as the lower-class. They work every day on their garden to make food for meals because they do not have enough money to be able to buy food. They are viewed as poor and unfortunate, but are actually rich — in spirit. They are good people. They do not complain with the status quo but enjoy what they have, which is an admirable trait for people in any standing. The old blind man sings songs to the others, plays a musical instrument, and adds a sense of experience and content to the family. The children do their daily work without griping as well. Just because they are looked down upon by society, it does not stop them from enjoying what has been provided for them.

Society itself, which is supposed to be good, is actually ignorant. They wrongly treat the oversized creation on the assumption that he is a monster. They scorn, attack, and shun him just because of his outward appearance. This is not justified by anything except his demeanor. They are also afraid of him because they are afraid of things about which they know nothing. Society also unjustly kills Justine be…

… middle of paper …

…n the forest. This concern for human life, in addition to his feelings of love toward the family, is evidence to his kindheartedness. He does not even mean to kill the boy at first. If any character in this tale should be labeled as a monster, it is not this one.

Society has the most influence in a person’s point of view on a given point. Mostly society causes misconceptions about people based on appearance and the unknown. This is especially evident in the novel Frankenstein, where labels placed on the main characters by society are skewed.

You did a wonderful job of using the plot to support your argument without simply giving a summary. There are just a few grammatical and structural errors. It might help to review the paper again or have a friend go over it with you.

Free Essays on Frankenstein: Morality and Responsibility in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein

Morality in Frankenstein

With the cloning of life forms and genetic engineering now commonplace, the question of the morality of the actions of Dr. Frankenstein is now more important than ever. Perhaps the novel Frankenstein contains lessons that can be applied in today’s technologically advanced world. It was Dr. Victor Frankenstein’s opinion that it was morally acceptable to give life to his creation. Frankenstein’s creation then needed a companion. Knowing that his first creation was evil, should the doctor make a second? Even with the knowledge at hand Dr. Frankenstein decides that it is not at all morally correct to bring another monster into the world.

***Generally, try to avoid using questions in a formal paper.

Looking at this problem with his family in mind, the doctor begins his work on the second monster. The first monster threatened Frankenstein and even his family. The monster angrily said to Frankenstein, “I can make you so wretched” (162). Trying to scare Frankenstein for not creating his mate, the monster resorted to threats. If the good doctor does create a companion for his first creation, he may be endangering others. Victor looks at his work and calls it “the miserable monster whom I had created” (152). If there is another monster, there will be twice the power and possibly twice the evil, which could hurt or kill his family. When and if Frankenstein commits the moral sin of creating another monster, he may be rid of both monsters forever. “With the companion you bestow I will quit the neighbourhood of man,” (142) promises the morally corrupt monster to the doctor upon the completion of his partner. There is a chance that the monsters will not keep their promise and stay in Europe, evoking fear into the townsfolk.

***This paragraph is a little bit hard to follow. I think the problem is with the “if” statements. It would help to reword them as definite statements, because in the novel they already happened. Also, the last sentence doesn’t seem to fit into the flow of the paragraph.

The good doctor, trying to act morally, destroys the monster for the good of the world. The monsters can potentially take over whatever they please. “A race of devils would be propagated,”(163) thinks Frankenstein to himself in his study. The monsters, if powerful enough, could possibly take over Europe. Frankenstein realizes that he can not possibly doom the world to benefit himself.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published.