Frankenstein the novel and the film
Mary Shelley's Frankenstein: Myth for Modern Man How can we think of Frankenstein and ignore the film classic of 1931-who can forget the remarkable appearance of Boris Karloff as the unnamed monster? Yet the celebrated film does not follow the novel by Mary Shelley. Although the scene of a futuristic laboratory entrances movie audiences with the mad Dr. Frankenstein and his faithful assistant Igor, the scene is derived from twentieth century imaginations and interests, not the novel itself. In the novel, however, Dr. Frankenstein's goal is to create a new kind of person: a sovereign self, in control of its environment, and its own biology and mind, that will be eternally grateful to him.Mary Shelley's monster continues to repel and to appeal to a wide audience. Rapt audiences still regard dramatic interpretations of the novel, Frankenstein as some of the most innovative film pieces of their time. Yet film interpretations distort the novel. For good reason, the novelist chose not to begin her story with the chilling event of the dreary night in November. Instead of a major event, the book opens with a series of letters from Robert Walton. It is not his zeal for the voyage of discovery, but his obsession with fame, a metap
Frankenstein wildly exults, "It's alive! It's alive!" when actually, the horror of the creature prompts Victor to remain unwell for months. The book questions the morality of Frankenstein's attempt to cheat death, one that our society can easily identify with. Slowly, reader sympathy shifts from antagonism toward the "fiend" to recognition of its deplorable state, abandoned and unprepared for any role in the world. In Shelley's work Victor advises Captain Walton to "Learn from me, if not by my precepts, at least by my example, how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge, and how much happier that man who believes his native town to be the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow" (39). In the novel the reader's sympathy shifts for the monster when he confronts Victor with a demand for reasons for his abandonment and hatred. Did he have a right to create and abandon the creature? In her novel, Mary Shelley anticipated the problem of a destructive force created by man, a force with no genuine means of control. In the novel the necessity of focusing on death itself forms an important part of Victor's study--he believes that only by examining death can he re-create life, and in doing so overcome the human condition. Until a big-budget film is made from the monster's point of view, modern audiences will forever be inclined to consider the monster to be a murderous beast with bad brains, and Dr. The creature had committed no crime, yet his creator shunned him. The reader discovers the dangers inherent in defying the natural order, while the movie audience watches a droll ugly thing lumbering about the countryside. The monster of the novel is a victim of human arrogance and denial, while the monster in the film hates his state of being and the people who reject him. Although her story served as a springboard to a host of horror movies, the dramatic presentations omit the basic intelligence of the creature, its initial benevolent impulse, and its ability to recognize good or evil. Similarly, Victor Frankenstein is drawn to the mysteries of experiments with the unknown. The articulate figure challenges his maker: Both reader and Frankenstein recognize the justice of the creature's demands. Mary Shelley does not leave the monster's murderous nature to a simple error in brain selection; instead it is the result of his neglect.
Common topics in this essay:
Remove Walton,
Mary Shelley,
Victor Frankenstein,
Frankenstein Victor,
Dr Frankenstein,
Mary Shelley's,
Robert Walton,
God Bibliography,
Walton Learn,
Dr Frankenstein's,
novel frankenstein,
mary shelley's,
mary shelley,
mad dr frankenstein,
futuristic laboratory,
dr frankenstein,
mad dr,
twentieth century,
novel mary,
sympathy shifts,
it's alive,
novel mary shelley,
|
Acceptance Essays
