Frankenstein Narrative Form
On the topic of credibility, I would like to analyze the verdict about the Monster made by Frankenstein. First of all, it needs to be pointed out that Frankenstein as part of the story, is an unreliable judge and more importantly narrator, hence manipulates Walton’s insight and ability to reconstruct the events about the monster. The main question remains whether the monster is blameworthy of turning out the way he is or is it rather the burden of Frankenstein and the society who abandoned the monster without giving him a purpose. In my opinion, labelling the Monster either as a Good or Evil creature would be a mistake. If we take Jacques Derrida’s philosophical method of Decontructism, we may see that the monster cannot be judged through binary opposition just how Walton and Frankenstein did. The creature is not inherently evil nor good. It did attempt fitting into a society, by reading and educating himself, that did not want to accept it, although committed horrible deeds after it was rejected but developed his own sense-making process and eloquence that is regarded as a grey zone in this question.
In conclusion, we can conclude that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein employs the multi-leveled structure to tell a story but takes the method a step further by creating the inassimilable by crashing viewpoints of their characters and ultimately not giving a final answer to the issues but letting the reader develop a critical view of the stories told and their interpretation as well as motivations in them.
Az Ön neve:
Adja meg az e-mail-címet, amelyen meg szeretné kapni a linket:
A dokumentumra mutató link: