Monster In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

The lens through which readers encounter monsters is often a skewed one. This lens could be that of the author, who seeks to embody a monster as a horrific, non-human entity that will cause havoc in an area. Similarly, this lens could be that of a character in a piece, one who witnesses the monster’s wrath and destruction firsthand and hopes to avoid the cruel savage being. Monster narratives rarely unfold from the perceptive of the monster, and, as such, audiences must rely on other sources as to the monster’s course of action. Such voices can carry a bias with them. As in the case of the author, the omniscient perspective provides descriptions of the monster without directly interacting the monster. This perspective could easily fail to report …show more content…
The monster, although it has acquired the name Frankenstein in popular culture, remains nameless throughout the novel, signifying its lack of acceptance in a human society. The monster’s rejection stems significantly from its appearance, ranging from its "yellow skin" (Shelley 42) and "dim-white sockets" (42) to its "straight black lips” (42) and a "shriveled complexion” (42). Shelley has clearly distinguished the monster, marking the first divide between monster and human. She has also established the initial trickling of the monster’s inability to associate with humans. In fact, the monster’s own creator, Victor Frankenstein, rejects it due to its appearance and refuses to interact with the hideous beast. The monster’s appearance prevents other characters from seriously interacting with the monster, as they form a prejudice against a non-human being. The fear of that which is non-human lingers throughout Shelley’s …show more content…
The desire for companionship grows so intensely within the non-human subspecies that the monster asks Victor Frankenstein for an outlandish favor: a female counterpart. Through a lover, the monster can display his inner love with a being that does not judge him. At the time when the monster acts for a love, he has yet to found any acceptance in the human society. Thus, a monster counterpart would provide the only outlet of affection for the monster. The monster’s wish for a partner exemplifies that the monster stereotype that literature and film have created are not as narrow as once thought. The desire for love can exist even in a non-human species, and love does not limit itself based on appearances or classifications. Victor Frankenstein, however, denies the monster a lover, believing that a race of monsters would spur from a second creation. The creature never indicates that he would terrorize the world if given a counterpart, and in fact would leave human society to spend him with his significant other (205). The monster’s hopes are benign, and Victor Frankenstein distorts and mystifies the monster’s intentions. Clearly, the monster in Frankenstein does not define itself through a series of checklists about “how to be a monster,” but rather breaks the boundaries of traditional monstrosities. This monster does not parade through the town trying to terrorize the people that it encounters; this