First and foremost, please allow me to apologize for posting this blog entry so late--I certainly would have been more punctual, but just as I sat down and “had a little something going in the type writer,” in the word of Billy Collins, I was summoned to the Samoan village Lotofaga to defend the natives from a swarm of killer wasps. After coming home, eating dinner, and flexing my muscles for 20 minutes, I only had enough time to write the Government Essay and finish the Wiki article. Now that I have this block of time on the train on the way to Washington D.C.,I will get to the point and attempt to compensate my tardiness with terseness, because my name doesn’t happen to be Ebere ‘Chwukuebuka’ Clifford Anokute.
The question at hand of “Who is responsible for all the of the death and misery in the novel?” implores us not only to analyze Shelley’s carefully constructed characterization of Victor and the Wretch, but also to take a step back, and broaden our focus from one on the abstract themes and hidden motives of the characters to one on the objective facts: What caused the deaths of Henry Clerval, William, Justine, and Elizabeth? What was the root of Victor’s misery? Of the Wretch’s? Who had more and deeper reasons for misery, Victor or the Wretch? These are all questions that must be addressed in any attempt to ascribe definitive “guilt” to one character over the other.
With this being said, and risk of earning the scorn and disapproval of the entire class accepted, it is my [not so] humble opinion that the Wretch, not Victor, is directly responsible for every death and modicum of suffering inflicted throughout the novel. Before you balk to accept this pronunciation and deem me heartless or insincere, take a minute to recall the events of the novel for what they really are.
Aside from Victor’s initial disgust over the Wretch’s ugliness, and the horror Victor experiences upon realizing that he has accomplished the seemingly impossible task of bestowing life upon inanimate matter, all of the suffering and murder does not occur until after the Wretch runs away from Victor and as a result experiences countless rejections from an unforgiving, judgmental society. As Volume II reveals, people are so fixated on the Wretch’s verdigris, that even when he attempts to befriend the DeLaceys, stroll casually through town, and even rescue a drowning girl, he is met with resentment and violence. This failure to find acceptance in society leaves the Wretch with an extremely jaundiced view of mankind, and thrusts him to such a level of unparalleled isolation and misery that he is consumed by the idea of exacting revenge on his creator. The Wretch’s motive, therefore, in committing the myriad of atrocities, is to make Victor understand his abject solitude and misery.
Only once these basic facts are understood could we attempt to ascribe responsibility for the murders and suffering to one character. In doing so, many Wretch supporters attempt to argue that the suffering was Victor’s fault because he abandoned the Wretch, and therefore left him susceptible to the evil, judgmental of society. Wretch supports attempt to argue that Victor’s guardian role makes him responsible for every action the Wretch commits. I, however, challenge that assertion with all the vehemence my heart can muster--since when were parents directly responsible for the negative decisions their kids make? If, tomorrow, I were to break into an old woman’s home, murder her in cold blood, then purloin her jewelry, how many of you would reflect upon my actions thinking “What were Jesse’s parents thinking?! Jesse’s mother is definitely responsible for that old woman’s death, Jesse didn’t know any better.” I’ll venture to guess that no one in the room would think that--rather, most people would say that I am demented and evil, that I deserve to be incarcerated and that I must be held accountable. If my group of friends rejected my company week after week, failing to invite me to their social gatherings and thus making me feel miserable and alone, who here would assert that I would be justified in retaliating--exacting just revenge in the same manner the Wretch did--by, let’s say, taking a key to the side of one of their cars? I use these examples to illustrate two simple facts: though parents are expected to teach social graces, they can and should not be held directly responsible for their kids’ actions--all progeny, including the Wretch, have the free mind and spirit to make decisions on their own. The wretch made the choice to exact revenge Victor by murdering all of his closest loved ones, just as each and every one of us choose the behaviors we participate in everyday. We as human beings cannot dodge responsibility simply by blaming our behaviors on our parents or any influential loved ones--the same social axiom can be applied to the Wretch.
The Wretch’s direct responsibility in causing the murders and suffering throughout the novel is also made evident once we contemplate the true purpose of Shelley’s novel: to reveal aspects of human nature. When discussing Frankenstein, many people throw the phrase “Reveal human nature,” around as one of the most readily discernible themes of Frankenstein, but this discussion of responsibility tests, in my opinion, whether one really understands it or not. Through the triumphs and travails of the Wretch, Shelley is putting forth the argument that it is human nature to seek companionship and acceptance of society: “Shall each man…find a wife for his bosom, and each beast have his mate, and I be alone” the Wretch utters in Chapter III. With this quote, Shelley is asserting that all of us, no matter what color, size, or creed, long to be in the company of others, long to be accepted by a group, that all of us long for an intimate companion with whom we could exchange hugs, kisses, and stories, and that all of us desire--or should I say require---an intellectual companion with whom we could share all of our feelings, fantasies, whims, feedback, and emotions. All of us desire, in short, to be a part of something larger than ourselves, which for the Wretch, of course, is nearly impossible due to his ghastly disfigurement. By saying that it is human nature to have all these desires, however, Shelley is implying that no matter what circumstances the Wretch was forced to endure and regardless of whether Victor stood by his side or not, the Wretch would have experienced all the same exact longings and desires, for they are merely inherent parts of his human nature. Thus, even if Victor fulfilled all of his responsibilities as a parent and stood by the Wretch’s side, the Wretch still would have sought desperately to be accepted by society, still would have longed for an intellectual and romantic companion. Thus, the Wretch would have still ventured out into society in search of acceptance, would have still longed to observe the virtues and vices of men and women, and, most importantly, would have still been spurned and met with opposition with every attempt. Thus, we can deduce that even if Victor did stay by the Wretch’s side, the Wretch’s desires would have been the same-to be accepted by society-his actions would have been the same-to seek that acceptance-and the results would have been the same-rejection and a very, very unhappy wretch. Thus, Victor is fully removed from the realm of responsibility for the Wretch’s actions, for nothing he could have done would have prevented the Wretch’s misery and ensuing violence.
One final point I would like to make, and I promise this is a very quick one, is the tone that Shelley establishes in the closing pages of the novel. When The Wretch discovers Victor’s dead body aboard Walton’s ship, he offers the following apology: “That is also my victim!…Oh Frankenstein! Generous and self-devoted being! What does it avail that I now ask thee to pardon me?” This final point shows that in the closing scenes, the Wretch does claim responsibility for his actions, as he begs Victor, the man he once scorned for being the cause of his misery, for forgiveness.
No comments:
Post a Comment