In today’s discussion we briefly examined the concept of
family in Frankenstein, and
specifically the relationships between children and parents. The novel is filled with models of insufficient
or inadequate parenting. Nearly all of
the characters lost at least one parent when young and many were left
dangerously unprovided for (Caroline Beaufort, Elizabeth Lavenza, Justine
Moritz). Even when parents do live long
enough to raise their children they often appear irresponsible (Caroline’s father
lost the family fortune and retired from the world out of wounded pride),
repressive (Clerval’s father resists sending him to university), or outright
cruel (Justine’s mother, Safie’s father).
However, while children are vulnerable to parental abuse and
abandonment, parents are also damaged by the acts of their children. Felix De Lacey’s pursuit of Safie puts his
family in political danger.
Frankenstein’s ill-considered experiment leads to the deaths of several
family members including the premature and painful death of his father, just as
the creature’s murders lead to the premature and painful death of Frankenstein
himself.
In your post for this week, examine a passage from Volume
III that relates to families—to the responsibilities of those who create new
lives, to the perils of creating an independent being, etc.
You may choose to compare a familial scene in Volume II to earlier depictions of families.
You may choose to compare a familial scene in Volume II to earlier depictions of families.
As you read, enjoy an array of images from the numerous films that have imaged the creature or Frankenstein engaging with children or even having offspring of their own.
Happy reading,
Prof. M.
 |
| Universal's 1931 Frankenstein |
 |
| Son of Frankenstein (1939) starring Boris Karloff |
 |
| Mel Brooks' 1974 Young Frankenstein |
When Frankenstein's father visits his son in the Irish prison, he is responsible for nursing his son back to health and preventing him from committing suicide. Frankenstein Junior's despair prevents him from feeling affection for his family and his home, but he is ultimately roused to pull himself together and go home to Geneva in order to protect his remaining family.
ReplyDeleteAt the end of chapter twenty-one (in my edition), after the horrific murder of Clerical, Victor Frankenstein has lost his will to live. His father has to watch over him constantly to prevent his son from committing suicide or "committing some dreadful act of violence", much as a new father ensures that his baby doesn't hurt himself or others. Frankenstein Senior shows us that a father is responsible for defending the life of his child even well into adulthood.
Frankenstein Senior tries to cheer his son up by talking to him about his home and family, but Frankenstein Junior's personal anguish has overwhelmed his interest in family. He is too preoccupied with his own misery to think of the pain he is causing to his family.
What ultimately spurs Victor to go back to his family is not feelings of affection but of obligation. After the paragraph which begins "My father tried to awaken in me feelings of affection" comes one which begins with "Yet one duty remained to me". The duty Victor speaks of is his perceived responsibility to guard his family from the Creature's assassination attempts. We see here that personal grief can overwhelm feelings of familial affection, but obligations to one's family must triumph over personal emotions. The obligation to protect family goes both ways - parent to child and vice versa (at least in adulthood). Just as Frankenstein Junior watches over his son's life, Victor looks out for his family.
Typo in the last line - I meant Frankenstein Senior.
ReplyDeleteIn Victor's letter to Elizabeth in chapter V, he agrees to marry Elizabeth, but insists that he must first tell her of his "dreadful secret" (one of which readers are already aware). At this point, Victor clearly demonstrates a sense of responsibility for creating a new life, in more than one sense. On the one hand, he plans on beginning a new life with Elizabeth. On the other hand, has created a new living being. These two parts of his own life are at odds, as Elizabeth does not know about his creation, and his creation is intent upon killing Elizabeth.
ReplyDeleteVictor has not displayed a lasting sense of responsibility for his creation. He does, at least, understand that in beginning a new life with Elizabeth, he must be completely honest and open with her - and that means he must inform her of the created life that has taken over his own existing life, as well as threatens the lives of many others.
The flaw in Victor's renewed sense of responsibility: It applies only to his family, not the creation that calls for at least an equal amount. In his devotion to Elizabeth, he is finally willing to divulge this one, life-consuming secret... but he is not willing to do what it takes to eliminate its threat. Whether or not he is responsible to create a partner for the creature, he cannot simply let it wander off on its own until it causes another catastrophe. Nevertheless, that is exactly what Frankenstein does when he returns home to mary Elizabeth. He uses his responsibility toward family to ignore his responsibilities toward the creature, and in doing so, drives the creature to kill that very same family.
In the beginning of Chapter 3, Frankenstein deliberates over his decision to create a female. He muses that creating her would be an act of selfishness on his part: “Had I a right, for my own benefit, to inflict this curse upon everlasting generations?”. He realizes that though the creature promises to leave society upon receiving his wife, the female creature may surprise them both by having (gasp) a will of her own.
ReplyDeleteIn a way, this thought process indicates a serious development from volume I. When first creating the monster, Frankenstein gives absolutely no thought to the feelings of the creature he is creating. He doesn’t realize that it may have a will of its own; nor that he would have a responsibility to care for, educate and provide for it. He is so lost in his own glory, so self-absorbed, that he flees the second the monster is born – as soon as it’s clear that the creature is not as he desires. He gives no thought to how this leaves the creature – he cares only for his own disappointment.
It takes the creature’s story, as well as his actions, to impress upon Frankenstein the reality – that one is responsible for one’s creation. The tale also forces Frankenstein to recognize that the creature has a will of its own.
Thus, perhaps the fact that Frankenstein takes the time to think about the consequences of creating the female indicates progress. He is no longer selfish, no longer crushing others, no longer blind to the will of, and his responsibility for, his creations.
Yet here too, Frankenstein has not actually improved. He justifies his deed as “selfless,” yet truly his selfishness and blindness are still reigning supreme. He is once again refusing to provide for his creation. Furthermore, he is putting his whole family at stake – the creature promised to hurt them if he does not comply.
In addition, by assuming that the new creature will be evil, he is in effect denying his own part in making his first creature evil. His selfishness which made him abandon and abhor the creature caused the creature’s evil deeds. Yet Frankenstein refuses to admit that – he only blames himself for creating it in the first place. If he would admit his responsibility in turning the creature to evil, he would recognize that creating someone to love the creature – or even by loving the creature himself – he would actually rectify his sin. By continuing to cause the creature pain, he is just furthering his original crime. Additionally, if he recognized his part in turning the creature evil, he would know how to at least try and make the female virtuous - by loving her and caring for her.
Thus, by not creating the female, he is not only once again refusing to provide for his creation, but is once again refusing to admit his part in the creature’s misdeeds. It appears that as a father figure, or at least a creator, Frankenstein has not learned his lesson.
ReplyDeleteFor a novel that focuses so much on the desire for companionship, the characters’ relationship with family is oddly individualistic. In every case in which a character meditates over the expansion of family, the outcome is destructive. In Volume 3 Frankenstein needs to decide whether to allow the Monster his own family, and chooses to lose his own family rather than create one for the Monster. Ultimately by choosing not to create a partner for the Monster he, knowingly, condemns his family to death.
As discussed this in class, the mere fact that Frankenstein chose to create life this way when he had a perfectly good sister…I mean fiancé…waiting for him, demonstrates the corruption of the family by framing it as a highly individual endeavor. Whenever a character chooses to expand their family, it comes at a high cost. In the De Lacy story, Felix’s courting of Safi leads to his family’s impoverishment.
However, the other side of the coin doesn’t seem to pan out either. Purposefully keeping your family small doesn’t work out for Safi’s father who loses his daughter. Nor does it work for the De Lacy family who refuse to give the Monster a chance and as a result must leave their home and start over.
I think the common thread is the desire for retention or expansion of the family that stems from selfish reasons. Frankenstein starts by expanding his family only because of his desire to create life. He doesn’t even consider the after only the now. Felix doesn’t consider the consequences of his actions either; he is willing to risk his family for his Arabian beauty.
The characters do not consider how the expansion will affect others, because they think of family in terms of themselves and not as the unit it should be looked at as.
Perhaps this is a demonstration of the imposition on other seen throughout the novel. Frankenstein, his Monster, and other impose on the people the claim to love the most by not considering the outcome to their desire for expansion, but only how it will benefit them. The outcome? Nothing short of death and destruction.
I’d like to address the idea of Frankenstein creating an independent being, specifically, a mate for his original creature. On page 147 in my edition, the monster beseeches Frankenstein to create a female for him by saying “This you alone can do; and I demand it of you as a right which you must not refuse to concede.” The monster has spent a lot of time reading Paradise Lost, and so he views Frankenstein as God, himself as Adam, and now he wants an Eve. He feels that he is entitled to a mate, and demands one as a right.
ReplyDeleteThe monster also asserts that he is only malicious and murderous since he is miserable and lonely and shunned, and that should he be given a mate, he’d be content. Frankenstein, a bit of a loner himself, likely relates personally to this argument. Perhaps he created the original monster in the first place to be his mate, in the friend sense of the word.
So, when Victor acquiesces (albeit grudgingly) to create a mate for the monster, he is in a sense equating himself to God by setting store in his ability to create life.
When Victor actually begins creating the second creature, however, he is overwhelmed with dread and paranoia, and feels sickened. This is directly contrary to the way a creator usually lords over his creations, as God rules over mankind. Maybe Victor’s reflections on the past killings which resulted from his creation of the original monster lead to the “obscure forebodings of evil that made his heart sicken in his bosom” (169). The sickness and fear he feels indicate the lack of control he has over his creations; Victor is beginning to recognize that although he has been endowed with creative capacities, he is not God. On page 170, he realizes that this new creation may be evil, malicious, and murderous, and may even spurn the original monster. And if not, perhaps they’d propagate! Recognizing at last that he is not Godlike and cannot control or lord over his creations, Victor destroys his second monster.
The passage in which Frankenstein decides to leave his father's house to build a wife for his monster is a big indication of how Frankenstein relates to his family. Frankenstein references a "solemn promise" (157) that he must fulfill for his monster before he marries Elizabeth. I think that Frankenstein's choice of words here- solemn promise- is parallel with the vows and promises one makes under the marriage canopy. Frankenstein is essentially saying, before I marry you, Elizabeth, there is a more important, more so than marriage, promise that I have made and that I have to fulfill first.
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein's first dedication is to his monster, it always has been. He left his family in the first place to create it, then he let it kill his family and friends, then he left his family again to placate it. His first dedication always seems to be the monster, perhaps significant of his self-centered-ness and desire for knowledge that wins over his family in every instance.
And though one could argue that Frankenstein has no choice at this point to leave his family otherwise they will be killed, really, if he cares so much about his family and their safety, and human life, why would he toy with all of those in the first place? His initial decision to leave his family causes him to have to leave again, in volume III ch I, to build a wife for Frankenstein. The parallels are painfully obvious- he's rather build a wife for a monster than build a family of his own. Though he claims family is his priority and wished for nothing else other than finding his true happiness by marrying dear Elizabeth, his actions speak far louder than his words.