Lots of folks nowadays are comparing genetically modified foods (or ‘Frankenstein foods’) to Frankenstein’s creature and using the comparison of ‘well, look how that turned out.’ I think that is a foolhardy stance to take on the matter, seeing as GMO fruits and vegetables do not have the capacity to hunt down your loved ones and murder them. Even if they were to cause cancer or other illnesses like that, does it really matter? Everything causes cancer now- from the ninety-nine cent ramen noodles, to the chemicals in our water, to red meat, to the freaking sun. Living is dangerous. We might as well create foods so that we don’t take the environment down with us (not that we can even save it by now).
Our society consumes altogether too much produce, stripping the Earth bare like a swarm of locusts. If scientists create that produce then the Earth might have a chance to regrow. And really, if GMOs do cause cancer, I would view that as a good thing. There are way too many humans on our planet for our continued existence, and as talent is seemingly dying out, it seems unlikely that someone is going to find a way to colonise another planet before the inevitable destruction of our home and us.
The world is going down a despairingly slow downward slope, with no hope of redemption without a culling. Even with GMOs, we are still doomed. So we might as well at least try to make a dent in our wanton destruction so that the Earth has some hope of recovering after we are all dead. The only people who think that GMOs are comparable to ‘Frankenstein’ are self-centred, talentless purists who care neither for the world or hope, only themselves. And those who don’t care for hope are truly despicable and they and the rest of their ilk are worthy for the aforementioned culling.
So I do not think that genetically modified foods or anything like them are in any way comparable to Frankenstein’s monster, or the moral that the book presents.
I personally think that Victor is played up to being the more monstrous of the two altogether too much.
He created life- so what? His intentions were not evil and playing God is something that humans are pretty good at attempting- it’s only natural for the talented to push the boundaries and achieve more than normal humans can. The 99% of average people out there view Victor as the monster because he played God, something that they can never do due to their utter and complete lack of talent. It is a subconscious jealousy of the normal humans- he is not viewed as monstrous because he created life, but because they cannot.
Tangent aside, though- Victor’s only supposed crime was God-playing with good intentions. He never meant for things to turn out the way that they did. He chose attractive parts for the monster- it wasn’t like he purposely made him a hideous pariah. He even went along with the monster at first on the ‘Making A Mate’ project, only abandoning it when he weighed the reasonable cons against the pros. The monster murdered innocents whose only crimes were being related to Victor, including the young William, who truly did nothing. Even putting the murder aside, the fiend’s plan was to kidnap the child and force him to like him. Creepy, much? Choking Elizabeth out certainly wasn’t an acceptable way to deal with his own loneliness and it solved nothing. His actions only made Victor loathe him even more. He even went into a fit of white-hot rage and burned down the cottager’s house- when Victor imagined another of these creatures, one who might possibly not bond to the original monster, he reasonably acquitted the project. If the female had rejected him, might not the monster have unleashed Pandaemonium upon everyone and everything that he could, his loneliness having reached an intense boiling point as not even one of his own kind favoured his company? Safety first, kids.
I think Victor’s abandonment of the creature was kind of unintelligent, letting it wander off to Gods-know-where, but it is understandable. He thought that he was using his talents for the world’s hope, but when he laid eyes upon the beast for the first time, he realised that it brought him only despair. And that turned out to be the continued pattern- not just the monster’s visage brought despair, but its actions.
Overall, I think that the monster is the worse of the two and Victor’s ‘monstrousness’ is too much overplayed.
I would like to begin by saying that I watched one of the Frankenstein movies and it never said that Elizabeth was Victor’s adopted sibling. This entire time I thought that he was in love with his biological sister. Thank the Gods that that is not the case, though. They really should have cleared that up for me in the cinema.
Okay- onto the review of the book’s style.
It’s a very well-written book and I like that- unlike the movie- it gets to the whole ‘reanimating a corpse’ thing pretty quickly. It’s kind of old-style prose, but I’m used to reading that, so I can comprehend it easily. I always like the framing device of the letters and how it teases at what everything is leading to.
I’m incredibly eager to see how the book unfolds compared to the movie.
Welcome to your brand new blog at Grand Erie Network Sites.
To get started, simply log in, edit or delete this post and check out all the other options available to you.
For assistance, visit our comprehensive support site, check out our Edublogs User Guide guide or stop by The Edublogs Forums to chat with other edubloggers.
You can also subscribe to our brilliant free publication, The Edublogger, which is jammed with helpful tips, ideas and more.