Ethical and moral grounds Essay

From a moral point of view, the truth of the preceding(prenominal) statement seems so convincing that it would be actu everyy difficult to pass on an argument against it. overlord Frankensteins instauration of the heavyweight and subsequent rejection of him is problematical on both ethical and moral grounds so we finger that surely he is responsible for his creations crimes and it is the issue of duty that goes to the heart of the question of who is the true finish offer. However, over the course of the book, we see the junkie evolve from a child-like creature without any understanding or actors line into one who becomes sensitive, eloquent, cruel and violent.Consequently it could be argued that with this change came moral sentience and therefore the true duty for the slaughters. By examining the events that lead to the closings of William, Justine, Clerval and Elizabeth, this essay aims to found who bears the true responsibility for the murders rather than tho wh ose hands committed the crime. The death of Frankensteins younger brother William is perhaps the most app solelying, as William is save a child, and the monsters excitement at what he has do shocks the ref even more than I gazed on my victim, and my heart prominent with exultation andhellish triumph(p117). This reaction to the death of a child seems fabulously evil yet the monsters joy is not rattling in Williams death it is actually in the realisation that he tramp hurt and therefore revenge himself on higher-up I, too, stack create desolation my enemy is not impregnable (p117). Also, although the reader would bear to find oneself no sympathy whatsoever for the assailant of such a crime, Shelley uses it to show the extent of preconceived notion even in societys youngest members which has the effect of catching the reader off guard.Desperate for human company, the monster incorrectly reasons that the little creature was unprejudiced, and had lived too short a fourth d imension to have imbibed a horror of deformity (p117). This has the unexpected effect of devising the reader feel sorry for the monster as well as the victim, because by now Shelley has developed him into a thinking, sensitive being who has excuse been completely rejected by all even a child.Although the reader is horrified by the murder, the monsters intention to abduct William to make grow him as his companion and friend is at least as woful as it is wrong, and therefore somehow also human and mitigating. Nevertheless, Williams murder was not portrayed as being premeditated but it was emphatically a deliberate and reasoned act of vengeance Frankenstein You belong because to my enemy you shall be my offshoot victim (p117) and so it seems to make dimension superscript solely responsible for it extremely difficult.The death of Justine however is not only the most damning for Victor, because he withholds information about her sibyllic crime for the most selfish of reasons, but for the monster as well. down the stairs the pretext of fearing he will be dismissed as a madman, Victor remains silent about the monster. Yet since he is already thought to be mad this is hardly a convincing reason. nigh the truth is his fear of being abhorred by man contour for creating the monster, and it is for this weakness that Shelley ensures we feel less sympathy for Victor.The monster too is at his most sickening and calculating as he deliberately plants the incriminating evidence of murder on the innocent Justine and we feel that there is little to choose amongst him and Victor. However, it is significant that Victor himself sees Justines trial as some kind of judgement on his arrogance in creating the monster in the first place and even acknowledges that the true responsibility for both Williams death and Justines eventual execution should be hisIt was to be decided whether the direct of my curiosity and lawlessdevices would cause the death of two of my fellow-be ings one a smiling babe, full of innocence and joy the other far more dreadfully murdered (p61). In failing to save Justine from execution, Shelley is drawing prudence to Victors failure to resolve the moral dilemma he is in, which conveniently protects him as well as the monster. Also, she is drawing attention to the putrefaction of the courts and the church in accepting a confession from Justine extracted under the curse of withholding her last rites. The murder of Clerval reveals how sophisticated the monster has become in psychological torture.Although Williams murder happened after a chance meeting, Clervals, and later(prenominal) Elizabeths, is part of the monsters premeditated plan to revenge himself on Victor and he knows that the best way to destroy him is by assail those he spangs. Unlike the unplanned murder of William that left the monster tone exhilarated and powerful, he describes the anguish he felt and how his heart was poisoned with compunction (p. 188) af ter Clervals death. These painful recriminations show that the monster is capable of sorrow and compassion as well as cunning, and yet condemn him all the more.This is not the picture of an ignorant or backward monster who could not help himself, but one of someone who could perhaps have elect differently. Even more incriminating is Elizabeths death, where the monsters curse to Victor that he will be with him on his wedding dark again makes it difficult to hold Victor solely responsible, even though he left her alone and open to attack. This murder is not just to punish Victor for abandoning him, but is the monsters revenge for cruelly destroying the female companion he so desperately needed.Thus we can see that although the monster may literally do the killing and is therefore clearly culpable, he is not solely and directly responsible for the murders. For this very reason it could be argued that neither is it completely satisfactory to say that Victor is the true murderer becau se he did not literally commit them I, not in deed, but in effect, was the true murderer (p72). It is impossible to predict the question of who the true murderer is in a literal way. For instance, Victor could never be held legally responsible for the murders because he did not physically commit them.The only way the question of responsibility can be answered is on ethical and moral grounds, but the problem with assigning tap and responsibility based on these considerations is that they be almost meaningless without a social context. In other words, it could also be argued that the true responsibility for the murders goes beyond either Victor or the monster to society as a whole because once people start rejecting and alienating an individualistic they create outsiders. And once social rules and responsibilities cease to apply to an individual they are free to behave as monstrously as they like.However, if we believe that as members of society we are responsible for our actions , then we have to believe that Victor was ultimately responsible for all the deaths. If he had not been so supreme as to obsessively pursue the mastery of nature and life over death, the monster would never have come into being.This was definitely a blemish rather than a strength in Victors spirit because Shelley shows him being punished by remorse and regret almost as soon as the monster is created, I had gazed on him while unprocessed he was ugly then but when those muscles and joints were rendered capable of motion, it became a function such as even Dante could not have conceived. This description of vileness is extreme, and at the same time prevents us from sympathising with Victor because we do not understand why he continued with his experiment knowing others would sure enough feel as repelled if not more so. We wonder why an clever man didnt anticipate societys reactions to a creation as ugly and unnatural as he was making or even his own reactions to such a creature , and realise that if he, its creator, could not love it then why would anyone else?The only logical answer is the morally confutable one of supreme arrogance and self-indulgence at the expense of all others Society, family, and colleagues. Victor was totally repelled by the ugliness of the monster and so was everyone else that put up eyes on him, which resulted in his alienation and isolation. Yet it is more faithful to say that Victor didnt actually create the monster by making him, but by rejecting him. Only after being incessantly rejected and driven out by everybody was he wrenched by distress to vice and hatred (p188).It was neglect and the basic need of companionship that he craved that drove him to being a monster. Shelley does show the monster underdeveloped awareness of right and wrong, but also of mankinds prejudice and intolerance of those who are different. She seems to be saying that being educated, from however noble a source, is not a substitute for being nur tured by a parent or society and that those who fail to give this nurture, like Victor, are the real monsters. In other words, Victor is the true murderer because he is the true monster.