A monster bit me

A deep dive into the Frankenstein by Mary Shelley to figure out the real monster.

I am not ashamed to admit that I am one of the people who find the antiheroes more fascinating. Be it Satan from Paradise lost, Joker from Batman or even Thanos in the Avengers.

What started this fascination was truly when I read Frankenstein by Mary Shelly. I did not agree with the creature being called monster when the lines between human and the monster, as is perceived by all, are blurred in the novel. And you are forced to question who the evil one is. Or whether both of them are the victims of circumstances and humane in their actions?

But for this, we have to understand what these terms mean.

Humans Vs Monsters

Humans are supposed to be the rational beings with feelings that bind them to their loved ones. While on the other hand, the monsters are seen as irrational beings, with no sense of control and incapable of feelings.

But what I read in the novel is something entirely different from the established notions. When Frankenstein’s creation comes to life, his reaction is not only irrational but also lacks sympathy to the point that it seems cruel.

And in contrast to this, we see the compassion of creature in saving the girl child and helping the cottagers while his logical capacity was evident from the fact that he managed to survive in the world even after being abandoned by his creator.

Monster or a child?

Humans were not judging the monster on what he did or could do but on the mere fact of him being different to them. They did not take in account his actions but his appearance which they deemed as monstrous whereas he was just like a human child who learns everything with an innocent curiosity. The only difference is that he had to learn everything to survive because he did not have anyone to depend upon who would teach him the ways of life.

It is admirable how quickly he learned everything and was eager and able to lean more. He was able to make parallels with Satan and himself and how he was wronged by his creator. The books did not only help him improve his language but also grow his understanding of how the human world functions.

What did humans teach him?

He also realized clearly what a ‘wretched outcast’ he was. Living with humans and learning prejudiced notions, he thought of himself as a monster when he looked at himself in the transparent pool and saw himself to be different from them. Humans also taught him mischief which resulted in Janine’s being blamed for a murder he committed.

Yet, it cannot be ignored that the creature was not innocent in the whole ordeal. He sets fire to the cottage, kills three innocent people and conspires to blame another person for a murder done by him. But it was living in the human world, learning about them and living their ways that shaped him to behave like this.

But was he really a monster?

The creature could physically harm Victor and his loved ones. And Frankenstein was the only one who could provide the creature with a mate. Thus they both had the opportunity to harm each other.

And although it is ultimately the creature that breaks Victor down mentally, it cannot be ignored that he himself was living a life of misery.

Humans require companionship to live a content life, someone they can talk to. This is evident in the fact that Frankenstein was driven mad when he lost his loved ones by the hand of his creation. Losing a person and the sense of loneliness that comes with it was enough to drive him mad. His creation also felt the same need for companionship. Forced to live a lonely life, rejected by his supposed father figure, and then being driven away by everyone that he tried to come in contact with, his loneliness is pitiable. He feels the pain of being alone and takes various steps to gain company of other beings.

How can a living being with such strong emotions be termed as a monster?

Who was the monster then?

It makes me wonder who suffered most out of the whole ordeal. Frankenstein for losing his loved ones or the creature for not ever having any?

It was Victor who created someone and then abandoned the living being. And when he came back to ask for his happiness, he denied him that too.

The creature unknowingly killed his youngest brother and consciously killed his friend and wife in rage. But while Victor showed no remorse of his doings and was only mad at his creation for being what he was, the creature was actually guilty of his actions.

The situation of creature was pitiable from the start. He did not ask to be born. Nor did he ask to be shunned from the society. Even a simple request about a companion for him was not met. His point was valid when he says, “Why should I pity man more than he pities me?” He was forced to resort to the wrong side of his understanding of the world because of the injustice done to him.

Add to this the fact that we read the story from the side of Victor with his problems and grief. We read the creature’s side of story less than him. A lot of emotions of creature and his misery are lost on us but that does not mean that we cannot perceive the difficulties he must have gone through because of the selfish endeavors of a scientist who abandoned his project without thinking of the consequences.

I came to the conclusion that though the lines are blurred between the man and ‘monster’ with them behaving more like what is expected from each other, ultimately both are behaving humanly.

But it cannot be ignored that the creature was only seen as a monster because of his appearance and was doing what he learned from the humans. He still felt guilty for his wrongdoings. While on the other hand, Victor showed no remorse for his wrong actions thus making him the monster in my eye who could have handled this situation a lot better.

I am sure it is apparent that I favor the monster.

I would love to hear whom you favor and what you think about the anti-heroes in general.

---