The True Message Behind Frankenstein

"Mary Shelley was not writing about the evils of science and progress...but suffering and loss and pain, the feeling of being ostracized-" (Whitty)
I do agree with Whitty's opinion. Of course, Frankenstein was a tremendous horror story, containing bone shivering events, and other outrageous instances. The novel was unique and written very well. However, what was the true message behind Frankenstein? There, in fact, was an underlying message, and Mr. Whitty nailed it on the head.
Victor's creation was born into isolation. Mankind would not accept the 'monster' for who he was, and thus, was cast into leprosy. "Increase of knowledge only discovered to me more clearly what a wretched outcast I was. I cherished hope, it is true, but it vanished when I beheld my person reflected in water or my shadow in the moonshine, even as that frail image and that inconstant shade," (Shelley, 119).
The creation tried hard to be accepted. His first attempt was to try to get along with the De Lacey family. He confronted the old blind man in the cottage, but was soon chased out when the rest of the family. Failure. The creature then confronted Victor, manipulating him into creating a companion. Unfortunately, this also did not work.
All of the actions the monster was making was for a single idea; acceptance. He yearned for some kind of companion; someone he could communicate and relate to. Mr. Whitty explains how children on the set of a Frankenstein movie could "see through the makeup, and relate to his confusion. They were able to recognize that the creature was the victim, not the perpetrator." I think that we all can relate to the feelings of the creature. Everyone, at one point in their lives, has had the desire to be well-liked and accepted. "There's a little of the monster in all of us." (Whitty)

Reaction to Frankenstein

Mary Shelley's novel, Frankenstein, ranks near the top of my favorite books read thus far in high school. I enjoy reading it because there are so many different facets in the story, and the book becomes harder and harder to put down. The beginning of the novel focused on Victor's mental struggle after creating the monster. "I had worked hard for nearly two years, for the sole purpose of infusing life into an inanimate body. For this I had deprived myself of rest and health. I had desired it with an ardour that far exceeded moderation; but now that I had finished, the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust filled my heart," (Shelley 43). I, personally, was bewildered by Victor's response. Why would he poor his heart and soul into a project, and then be disgusted by it? Another controversial topic in this novel, as discovered through an intense class debate, was whether or not Victor should create a companion for the creature. Both sides have valid arguments. Contrary to what I proclaimed in class, I do not think Victor should create another monster. He should actually dispose of the present creation, and save man from further destruction.
In the early 1800's people were intrigued by the possibility of creating life from an inanimate object. To be more specific, bringing the dead back to life. This practice was called Galvanism, and was extremely popular. "In March 1815, Mary Shelley dreamed of her dead infant daughter held before a fire, rubbed vigorously, and restored to life. At the time, scientists would not have wholly dismissed such a possibility," (http://www.nlm.nih.gov/hmd/frankenstein/frank_birth.html). Mary Shelley's life was full of tragedy, which could have been the basis for her novel, Frankenstein.