For our purposes, though, it's the other mad genius of the novel -- Captain Walton -- with his obsession with the polar regions, and with the discovery of the fabled "Open Polar Sea," who commands our attention:
I try in vain to be persuaded that the pole is the seat of frost and desolation; it ever presents itself to my imagination as the region of beauty and delight. There, Margaret, the sun is for ever visible; its broad disk just skirting the horizon, and diffusing a perpetual splendour. There — for with your leave, my sister, I will put some trust in preceding navigators — there snow and frost are banished; and, sailing over a calm sea, we may be wafted to a land surpassing in wonders and in beauty every region hitherto discovered on the habitable globe. Its productions and features may be without example, as the phaenomena of the heavenly bodies undoubtedly are in those undiscovered solitudes. What may not be expected in a country of eternal light?This surely alludes to the then-current notion of there being an "Open Polar Sea," a body of warmer water imagined as being just behind the "ice barrier." The idea has a long history stretching back to Dutch navigators in the seventeenth century; by 1818 it had been revived, due in part to reports by the whaling captain William Scoresby that the ice near Greenland was unusually scarce the year before. Captain Walton's fervent belief in a thing he cannot see -- along with his conviction that finding it will be of inestimable value to humanity, parallel Victor's notions about creating human life.
Walton never does get to see it -- but Victor witnesses his creation, though his first act is to abandon it. When the two finally meet again in Chapter III of Book II, the Creature tells his own story; unlike the grunting, flat-headed figures of most Frankenstein films, this creature is as eloquent, as sensitive, as impassioned as his Creator. He narrates his own accidental discovery of the horror his appearance instills in humans, along with his discovery of those texts which he will make his own: Milton's Paradise Lost, the Lives of the Noble Greeks and Romans by Plutarch, and the Sorrows of Young Werther by Goethe. Added to this condensed store of knowledge, in time, will be Volney's Ruins of Empire (used as a schoolbook in the cottage) and the crumpled notes which the Creature himself unthinkingly brought with him from the scene of his creation, which later reveal Victor's name.
Our two parables run alongside one another, withe the Creature explaining his wretched history, and Frankenstein -- after a brief bout of cooperation -- once more fleeing him. It's the third book which will bring their tales back together -- and unite the realm of human subcreation with that of the exploration of the remotest regions of earth.
Victor Frankenstein is repeatedly shown to be most at peace in the natural world. Even as he is at his most despondent, he cherishes the landscape of his native Switzerland, speaking of “These sublime and magnificent scenes [that] afforded [him] the greatest consolation that [he] was capable of receiving” (111). Repeatedly he is shown to be reinvigorated by nature, and at different times in his narrative admits that he is inspired by it, being one of the many connections that he shares with the ship captain at the beginning of the novel. Of Captain Walton, it is a similar motivation he attributes to the sea as opposed to the alpine terrain, recalling in himself “a love for the marvellous, a belief in the marvellous… which hurries me out of the common pathways of men” (17). Based on the reaction Frankenstein has at the realization that Walton suffers the same delusions of purpose that Frankenstein has suffered through, it is suggested by the raw emotion of his reaction to Walton that deeper than the interest they share in the natural world, they both are fully inspired by its possibilities. Experiencing so fully the power of nature, they are ironically inspired and invigorated by it even to the delusion that they can somehow control it and bind it to their will.
ReplyDelete-Grothaus
- Isabella Santoro
ReplyDeleteI am very keen on the emotional capacity of Frankenstein's creation. In Dr. Potter's post, he discusses the various well known images of the creation. As a kid who loved animation as well as a good scare, I became highly familiar with the versions portraying a giant green man who stumbles around. That is not at all how he is portrayed in the book! The way that Frankenstein's creation is growing intellectually warms my heart. I think of all the adaptations where people have made him into a scary being by taking away all of his human attributes Mary Shelley originally gave him, and wonder why his image became so distorted. Having a man made living creature that can do all the same things as a natural human being is terrifying! Seeing something vastly different than what I am used to strike up conversations about his society, his personal emotions, and the images around him is truly terrifying and is also what makes him as a creation stand out in the original work.
ReplyDeleteIsabella brings up a great point above as well that Frankensteins creation is connected to nature, which we see in the woods. Popular images of creatures that are connected to nature bring to mind positive notes. Think of the success of Pixie Hollow! I would love to see Frankenstein's creation be seen as a part of nature and connected deeply with the Earth. The current image of him in the media is bland and lacks any of his introspection as well as his abilities to take care of the land around him. It is a huge lesson that many humans need to take in, and not shy away from in the same manner they are doing to the creation himself.
- K Ferragamo
Apologies for not posting earlier since I wasn't sure this was the way, but I had a few thoughts about Frankenstein during class today.
ReplyDeleteFirst, I think the core theme of the story is passion. Victor's passions drive and control him throughout the whole story, and he's galvanised from a directionless state by the speech his professor gives about the limitless potential of science, as well as the idea of not simply becoming competent in a field, but surpassing his predecessors, which provides his drive originally. Later, he's instead driven by a lust for revenge against the creature, and he's controlled by this desire even as he uses his story as a warning to the captain against following his path.
And at the very end, when giving the impassioned speech to the disillusioned crew, in fact he's only using them to further his own goals of chasing his creation, in contradiction to his advice to the captain to give up on his dreams. Yet this speech is clearly not given simply as a lie - despite his words, Victor still seems to believe in that drive for exploration, for going where nobody has before, deep down, regardless of the consequences.
I find it interesting how Frankenstein's monster is one of those monsters that can be looked at as sympathetic even though he looks monstrous. He reminds me of a few other horror movie monsters, like Bub from Day of the Dead or Leatherface from Texas Chainsaw. Both are perceived as monsters, yet at their cores, they are simply mislead and misunderstood. It's sad that the monster is constantly abandoned by his creator simply because he looks monstrous. I also find it ironic that when the Europeans traveled to the Arctic Circle, they assumed there to be a warm place past all the ice. It made me laugh knowing that they were in for a real shock.
ReplyDeleteHello, sorry for not posting earlier. Was trying to figure out how to post on the website. Frankenstein is one of my favorite reads because of how many different ways his character can be depicted. On the surface we know him as this scary monster but in reality, he's truly misunderstood. He means well and isn't the monster he looks like on the outside. I think he's the perfect example of don't judge a book by its cover because his own creator would reject him because he was scared of his own creation and that it would be a monster because of the way he looked on the outside, but he was truly so smart and kind. His connection with nature is adamant and he comes off as a soft creature instead of this beast he's portrayed as. When you picture him in the wilderness you would picture this angry aggressive beast but thats not what the book described him as.
ReplyDelete- Mirna Soto
I truly enjoyed reading the different dynamics of Victor and Frankenstein's relationship. It was a relationship that required little mending, just some understanding and compassion. Thankfully we’re given Book II so that we are able to understand Frankenstein’s beautiful personality which provides an opposite portraylor than that of Victors.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Victor doesn’t allow Frankenstien a chance and that he arubtly responds to his own creation as his fellow human kind did, with quick disregard and harsh judgement. The beauty of Frankenstiens pure heart to only desire the things of human nature are honest and Victor denied him of these rights. It’s unfair to create a being that has capabilities of intellect, feeling, and emotion and reject him from society, no matter the outwardly appearance. I was reminded continiously throughout Book II how as humans we continue to encounter situations with a prejudgement. Frankenstien speaks of how hopeful he was once to Victor in Chapter VII when he believed that the cottagers he watched would , “become acquainted with my admiration of their virtues, they would compassionate me, and overlook my personal deformity”, (pg. 95). The world we live in and the humans that occupy it seem to feel superior to things that don’t relate to them, even if it can provide a different aspect of beauty and it shows time and time again with poor Frankenstein.
- Hannah