Frankenstein (1818 Book) Research Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

Frankenstein (1818 Book) - Research Paper Example Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein effectively renders the audience horrified at the chief thought that humans themselves can create life from the dead. Through science, the epistemological capacity of Shelley’s work reflects the possibility to explore the yet unknown so that by fiction, it is able to promote varied concepts whose substance may impress upon a range of perceptions from being a magical wonder to an object of fright. The ensuing madness in Victor as a science student who has severely detached himself from the norms of the living to defy human limits potentially makes a horrifying attribute to the story where one could well associate mental derangement with crime or a series of morbid acts to follow scheming beyond sanity. Frankenstein, hence, is psychologically addressed in the light of this context. As a tool of suspense, similarly, the laboratory settings where Frankenstein conducts crude experimentation all the more appear to intensify the creepy effect of sce narios in which one is led to anticipate the horrible triumph of reconstructing life from the patches of grave-buried fleshes. Shelly manages to stir anxiety into audience sensation by directing the theme to be understood in the nature of ancient alchemy blended with some futuristic science as portrayed via the notion that high volts of electricity would ignite reflexes to the initially lifeless man-made creature. The monstrous appearance of Victor’s creation as well as the serial killings that follow upon the creature’s escape from his workplace further constitutes the elements to gothic mystery and horror. The author gradually relieves the story from this stage in pursuit of demonstrating the capacity of the creature to separate beastly instincts from its recognition of moral values. In the novel, the creature is said to have attained self-realization by guiding himself to obtain knowledge through literature, as by reading Milton’s ‘Paradise Lost’ . On the contrary, while he remains speechless with only grunting or growling to express, the 1931 film agrees to indicate development of rational qualities as the creature observes the cottagers to figure how humans communicate to share sensible concerns through emotions and use of intellect or reasoning. From these circumstances, he weaves and even struggles to acquire concept of himself in relation to humanity and the affinity of human beings to values based on spiritual beliefs. Shelley alludes in her story that although the brutish entity possesses a culprit’s brain, a portion of his nature still tends to innocent quest for self-identity and yearning to earn society’s approval. If one asks who the actual monster is in Frankenstein, by meditation of each principal character, the question may adequately draw response from the story’s ontological approach when the monster finds himself wandering with delight as he randomly explores with knowledge of human expe rience and spiritual faith or conviction. The burden of guilt may not be readily designated upon a brute who is amoral prior to self-awareness of which Shelley’s justification adequately provides evidence. Apparently, it is Victor Frankenstein who should receive the blame for following his instincts of mechanically forming life without paying regard to sound logic and the appalling consequences of his irrational endeavor. He deliberately neglects moral thought and this is the primary ground for the loss of his loved ones, so in effect,