Related Keywords

No Related Keywords

Register NowHow It Works Need Essay Need Essay
The Unjust Isolation of Frankenstein's Creation and Other Reasons to Never Become a Model: Societal Prejudices in Shelley's Frankenstein A Swiss Proverb once enlightened, "When one shuts one eye, one does not hear everything". Sadly, vision is the primary sense of mankind and often the solitary basis of judgment. Without human's limitations of the shapes, colors and textures of our overall outward appearances, the world would be a place that emphasizes morals, justice and intelligence rather than bravado, cuteness, and sexual attraction. For if there were no predetermined ideal models defining the beautiful possibilities of the human body's variation, one would never suffer isolation due to one's disability, unattractiveness, or unusual physical attribute. Mary Shelley's novel, Frankenstein, sheds light on the eternal illusory and importance of appearance through the tale of an unwanted creation that is never given a chance. Ironically, the supposed beast was initially much more compassionate and thoughtful than his creator, until his romantic and innocent view of the human race was diminished by the cruelty and injustice he unduly bore. Not only does the creature suffer the prejudice of an appearance-based society, but other situations and characters in the novel force the reader to reflect their own hasty crimes of judgment in an intelligent and adult fashion. The semi- gothic novel includes several instances of societal prejudice that include the isolation and outcast of Frankenstein's creation, the creature's biased opinion of the cottagers, and the unbalanced and inappropriate classification of Victor. Throughout the course of the creature's isolated and pathetic journey, he is never given the opportunity to participate in human interaction, as he so deeply deserves. Upon his creation, the reaction of Victor, his maker, is so vividly appalling; one forgets that this is actually the birth of a human being. His 'father', Victor, is so selfish and has such a lack of responsibility and foresight, that he creates a human being for the simple purpose of recreation, intellectual stimulation, and the thrill of 'the chase'. Frankenstein himself refers to his own creation as, ""¦the life which I had so thoughtlessly bestowed" 88; ch.1; vol. 2. Victor is solely interested in the beneficial aspects on the surface of creating, just as his interest in the exterior 'monster' is superficial. Not only is Victor's quest selfish, but his goal is frivolous as well. Victor's initial opinion of his creature is that of disappointment, although he succeeds in his destination to create a living being from inanimate pieces. The disappointment is not only irrational, but also shows his further jaded ideal of perfection in the fact that he considers ugliness a weakness. If that were true, ugliness would be the creature's only weakness, as the story goes on to tell of the selfless acts of kindness the creature administers. Victor describes his supposed miserable failure as a deformed monster when he says "His yellow skin scarcely covered the work of muscles and arteries beneath; his hair was of lustrous black, and flowing his teeth of pearly whiteness; but these luxuriances only form a more horrid contrast with his watery eyes, that seemed almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set, his shriveled complexion and straight black lips" 56; ch.5; vol.1. Later, Victor sees the creature after a long period of his aimless roaming, and he "trembled with rage and horror" 95; ch. 3; vol .2. Victor wished to engage in mortal combat because he had a faint premonition the creature might have possibly killed his son. The senseless idea was formed simply because of the creature's physical features, and that he may have been in the vicinity. Even though the monster was shunned, hated, labeled prematurely as a killer, and cursed by his very own maker, he sees the goodness of the human heart and desires to learn more about the human race. As the supposed monster journeys onward, he is delighted and allured by the moon and sun, and other peaceful, natural and romantic settings. He describes a community as, "miraculous" 102; ch. 3; vol. 2, and sacrifices his own hunger by refusing to steal from poverty-stricken cottagers. Contrary to the creature's serene emotions, the villagers react in an absurd frenzy: "the children shrieked, and one of the women fainted" 102; ch. 3; vol. 2. The creature's deformity even took a profound effect on his own state of mind. The creature reflects, " Alas! I did not entirely know the fatal effects of this miserable infirmity" 110; ch. 4; vol. 2, and ponders, "Was I, then, a monster, a blot upon the earth, from which all men fled and whom all woman disowned?" 117; ch. 5; vol. 2. The reader wonders if the creature has fell into the unfeeling void of prejudice and believes he is an outsider to mankind that deserves his bleak fate. Finally upon hearing the creature's story Victor expresses a hint of pity for the creature, "I compassioned him and sometimes felt a wish to console him"¦" 142; ch. 9; vol. 2, although Victor goes on to say, " But when I saw the filthy mass that moved and talked, my heart sickened and my feelings were altered to those of horror and hatred" 142; ch. 9; vol. 2. At the conclusion of the novel, Victor refuses to create another, and end the creature's miserable asylum due to the simple belief that beasts cannot nor should live peacefully in the comfort of love and kinship. The cottagers also display a contrast of truth and appearance. The creature almost falls in love with the family from a distance. He thinks they exude natural innocence and kinship by simply viewing them from afar. Without actually interacting physically or emotionally with the group, the monster incessantly passes discernment while safely camouflaging himself in the background and daydreaming. Although the monster notices the differences of age and varying body forms, he nonetheless gives the cottagers decent and moral roles with no intelligent basis. The creature remarks, "One was old, with silver hairs and a countenance beaming with benevolence and love: the younger was slight and graceful in his figure, and his features were molded in the finest symmetry" 105; ch. 3; vol. 2. Merely due to the disparity of the creatures physical attributes and the cottagers, the creature looks upon them as, "superior beings" 111; ch. 3; vol. 2, and believes "that they would be disgusted by my gentle demeanour and conciliating words " Satirically, the gentle and soothing words of the cottagers would be natural and fitting, as the 'monster's' appears repelling. Alas, the creature discovers the true souls of these treasured humans whom he has so greatly bestowed the hope of equality. When the younger cottagers invade the comrades' peaceful discussion, their horror and consternation is indescribable to the articulate being. The blind man slightly penetrates the inhibitions of appearance when he says, "there is something in your words which persuades me that you are sincere" 130; ch. 7; vol. 2. Although even he falters the evil test of true equipollence when he utters, "I am blind and cannot judge of your countenance" If the blind man only knew the error of his words, the creature may have found a true home. The untimely assessment of Victor as an inoffensive and harmless existence symbolizes the generous leniency one gives to another that through appearance is viewed as a reflection of oneself. Victor has several nervous breakdowns and becomes reclusive at times. His unusual behavior goes unnoticed by his family and friends due to his seemingly safe and passive physical stature. Victor reflects on the grievances of his beloved Elizabeth and father. He sheds light on the disagreement between his image of innocence and the true broken shell of a man he inhabits: "Frankenstein, your son, your kinsman, your early, much-loved friend; he who would spend each vital drop of blood for your sakes- who has no thought nor sense of joy, except as it is mirrored also in your dear countenance" 86; ch. 8; vol. 1. After several episodes of intense worry and emotional drain, Victor descends into another world of physical and emotional pain that proceeds to affect the emotional states of his family and friends. Victor's guilt is expressed when he says, "My father's care and attentions were indefatigable; but he did not know the origin of my sufferings" 179; ch. 5; vol. 3. Even when Victor avoids society and is in a state of utter despair, his father refuses to acknowledge that this normal, pleasing-looking, blood-related, and seemingly sane human is indirectly responsible for such horrendous acts of malice. Victor, like his creation, was the victim of hasty opinions regarding the nature of their personal inner countenances. The semi- gothic novel includes several instances of societal prejudice that include the isolation and outcast of Frankenstein's creation, the creature's biased opinion of the cottagers, and the unbalanced and inappropriate classification of Victor. The universal quest for acceptance has led many humans to irrevocable and indecent acts. No one truly desires for their own brethren to lead a life of eternal heartache and hardship, yet we allow it to happen everyday. The simple meaninglessness of a person's appearance can cause isolation no human should have to endure. The flashes of airbrushed and plastic beauty that are copied and pasted on every media outlet in today's information age give usually intelligent and morally-intent human beings short attention spans for anything other than our own selfish well-being. For the small duration of time we do think about anything beside ourselves, we are bombarded with pity cases for the specifically cute and child-victims. In the meantime, the not-so-cute and older victims are left to fend for themselves and most human beings go on pretending the confidant and assertiveness that come with knowledge and modern civilization rule society. Meanwhile, people of all ages, sexes, and races continually binge and purge, starve and isolate themselves, and become depressed or angry. We incessantly turn a blind eye to the superfluous suffering of our brothers and sisters, and even condone the labeling of Victor's benevolent 'child' as 'monster'. Had the image-obsessed society paused for one moment to introspect the personality that they feared, a multitude of lives could have been saved.
0 User(s) Rated!
Words: 1721 Views: 287 Comments: 0
The Unjust Isolation of Frankenstein's Creation and Other Reasons to Never Become a Model: Societal Prejudices in Shelley's Frankenstein A Swiss Proverb once enlightened, "When one shuts one eye, one does not hear everything". Sadly, vision is the primary sense of mankind and often the solitary basis of judgment. Without human's limitations of the shapes, colors and textures of our overall outward appearances, the world would be a place that emphasizes morals, justice and intelligence rather than bravado, cuteness, and sexual attraction. For if there were no predetermined ideal models defining the beautiful possibilities of the human body's variation,...
and older victims are left to fend for themselves and most human beings go on pretending the confidant and assertiveness that come with knowledge and modern civilization rule society. Meanwhile, people of all ages, sexes, and races continually binge and purge, starve and isolate themselves, and become depressed or angry. We incessantly turn a blind eye to the superfluous suffering of our brothers and sisters, and even condone the labeling of Victor's benevolent 'child' as 'monster'. Had the image-obsessed society paused for one moment to introspect the personality that they feared, a multitude of lives could have been saved.
Become A Member Become a member to continue reading this essay orLoginLogin
View Comments Add Comment

After his first experience on a...After his first experience on a jury about a manslaughter case, Reginald Rose expressed his insights in his timeless play- Twelve Angry Men. The play focuses on twelve randomly selected citizen who are assigned with the civil duty of determining the fate of a nineteen year old boy accused of murdering his father. The jury is suppose to be the most impartial system of securing justice yet this is not always reached in practice. Factors such as emotions and prejudices can often affect the decision of each juror. However, Rose also examines one individual's struggle against other individuals to ensure "justice for all." Although the play has been remade and reworked several times, it is Rose's characters and their dialogue that capture the audience as Claire Devlin states: "¦.the razor sharp script demand intelligence from the audience as we realise that the final verdict is not as important as what we learn fro each of these characters and ourselves as a result. Juror Eight, the protagonist of the play was the first to vote the "not guilty" verdict. He was firstly affected by the thought that he and eleven men were to decide whether to "end this boy's life which was just beginning" in what appeared to be an "open and shut case." One of his most noticeable strengths was his courage to stand alone and fight for what he believed in. Although he was a quiet, thoughtful gentleman, he was not afraid to voice his opinions. He knew everyone would not be happy with his decision but he insisted on cross examining all the evidence and "facts" before coming to his decision: It's not so easy for me to raise my hand and send a boy off to die without talking about it first. Posing questions like "could it be possible?" and "could he be wrong?" he reminded others that in our justice system, innocence is knowing there is a reasonable doubt to believe a person is not guilty. Indeed, he admitted that he didn't know whether the boy was guilty or not, but he believed that everyone deserved justice and a "fair trial." Unlike most of the others, he was not governed by personal prejudices and rash decisions. Being an architect in the workforce, Juror Eight reflected his analytical and logical qualities in the jury room. He even reacted the old man running approximately forty-five metes and disproved the man's fifteen seconds claim in court. Other "facts" which he raised a reasonable doubt included the woman's testimony, the boy's alibi, the knife and wound. Despite Juror Three, Seven and Ten's constant aggressive arguments against him, he remained calm, firm and logical in his responses, more to their annoyance. He rarely showed his temper except when others steered off the topic. His sympathy and understanding has perhaps saved an innocent man from death. A similar character to Juror Eight is Juror Four. Juror Four was recognised to be a calm person right from the beginning of the play. Despite the heat, he didn't remove his jacket and presented himself well at all times. He was a stockbroker and appeared to be a man of wealth and position but wasn't coloured by prejudice or bitterness like Juror Three and Ten. Instead, he honestly believed that the facts showed that the boy was guilty but was prepared to change his decision when evidence was in doubt. He was a very practical an as symbolised by his glasses but mainly his dialogue: If we're going to discuss the case, let's discuss the facts. He was well organised, precise and logical and give much attention to details. Disliking jokes and fights, he was more appalled by Juror Ten's behaviour: "¦.don't open your filthy mouth again. In complete contrast to Juror Eight, the antagonist- Juror Three claimed that the defendant was certainly guilty and his reasons for thinking so were completely prejudiced. He believed that he was a good father but had a renegade son and therefore assumed that all young people were a menace and disrespectful. He had walked into the jury with only thoughts of anger, resentment and revenge rather than justice: That goddam rotten kid. I know him. Boasting that "everyone deserves a fair trial" he contradicted himself later by expecting it to be an "open and shut case" and that lawyers are a waste of time. However, it is his belligerent and sadistic behaviour which upsets the other jurors: For this kid? You bet I'd like to pull the switch. Owning a messenger service called "The Beck and Call Company" of thirty-seven employees, Juror Three believed that he too was superior in the room. He would bully the other jurors if they didn't share his views which he referred to as "old ladies" and could become loud and aggressive especially towards Juror Eight. He even had to be restrained on a number of occasions as he hypocritically outbursted: Shut up, you on a bitch! Let me go! I'll kill him! I'll kill him! The other jurors become even more frustrated when he was proven wrong and didn't give reasons. Juror Ten was a similar character to Juror Three. He too was prejudice of the defendant but in a different way. The boy came from a slum background which Juror Ten immediately stereotyped their people are "born liars" and "ignorant slobs." This bigot considered himself superior to the accused and his community. All his rude behaviour by deliberately yawning, coughing and sneezing during discussions indicate his ignorance and apathy towards the accused. In his eyes, the teenager was worthless and as long as his community don't have a place in the society, he would always be superior. Indeed, he lacked moral integrity and was frightened of slum people: I say get him before his kind gets us. His prejudice made him insensitive to others in particular his dealings with Juror Five who has "been a slum all his life." The reader can easily imagine this overbearing impatient middle-aged man with an ignorant and arrogant attitude. This blustering, loud-mouthed know-it-all is another bully in the play. Anyone who dared to contradict him or tell him that he was wrong would be dumbfounded with a mouthful: You're a pretty smart fellow, aren't you? Juror Ten used a lot of sarcasm when he was explaining his views or proving someone wrong. Jurors would become embarrassed by his remarks and in front of eleven other people, it could really lower their self-esteem. This peer pressure can even lower them to a point to obscure the truth. Even calm, cool Juror Four had to finally order him to: We've heard enough. Sit down. And don't open your filthy mouth again. "This better be fast. I got tickets to the ball game." This quote directly sums up Juror Seven's poor sense of values and attitudes in discussing the case. This is particularly evident when he changes his vote to "not guilty" because others were starting to change their votes. He had not understood Juror Eight's otives at all: What are ya getting out of it- kicks? When bored, he often cracked jokes out of serious issues, played tic-tac-toe and walked out of the room while others were talking when he should be seriously discussing the evidence. Hi insensitivity towards the case also extended towards the treatment of foreigners. His ingrained racism was mainly expressed to Juror Eleven- a foreigner: I'll knock his goddam European head off. Although not dominate figure, the other unmentioned jurors were still influential in the play. Juror Nine was an old, quiet man was supportive of Juror Eight's motives: I'm willing to put in an hour. Without Juror Nine's initial "not guilty" vote, Juror Eight wouldn't have the opportunity to express his views. He was easily intimidated at first, but near the end he had the courage to question the woman's eyesight- the evidence which changed Juror Four's vote. Juror Eleven, although a foreigner was not afraid to voice his opinions. From injustices suffered in the past, he supported the democratic jury system thereby willing to accept both sides of the argument: I don't believe I have to be loyal to one side or the other. Juror Five and Six were avid listeners. Although convinced that the boy was guilty at first, through the discussions, they began to develop an open mind. Their honesty and friendliness illustrated the correct approach in discussing the case rather than Juror Three or Ten's. The foreman Juror One had the duty of organising the votes and set up of the room. He started of discussing about the case, but became disinterested when attacked by Juror Ten over his duties. However, he did return in discussing the case.   

After his first experience on a jury about a manslaughter case, Reginald Rose expressed his insights in his timeless play- Twelve Angry Men. The play focuses on twelve randomly selected citizen who are assigned with the civil duty of determining the fate of a nineteen year old boy accused of...

Words: 1469 View(s): 169 Comment(s): 0