Frankenstein's Monster: A Complex Moral Character?

Frankenstein's Monster, created by Victor Frankenstein in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, is a character that defies simple categorization. His story raises profound questions about morality, human nature, and the consequences of our actions. This essay explores both arguments for and against the idea that the monster can be considered a 'good person,' and delves into the multifaceted nature of his character.

Arguments for the Monster as a Good Person

Innocence and Yearning for Acceptance: On his journey, the monster is depicted as initially innocent, seeking nothing more than love, companionship, and a place in the world. He longs for connection and believes that understanding and empathy would bring him acceptance. This desire for human connection indicates that he is fundamentally a good person, or at least had that potential before his experiences with society.

Victim of Circumstance: The monster is abandoned by his creator and rejected by society based solely on his appearance. This isolation and rejection significantly influence his behavior, leading him to become vengeful. His actions are often a direct response to the cruelty he faces, rather than any inherent evil within him. BySetTextIWantToExpressHere, the monster's actions can be seen as a necessary response to a challenging environment rather than a reflection of his true character.

Moral Reflection: Through the course of the novel, the monster contemplates his own existence and the morality of his actions. He demonstrates moments of empathy and understanding, such as when he observes the De Lacey family, where he learns about kindness and familial love. These instances suggest that the monster is capable of moral reasoning and, when guided by it, could have acted benevolently.

Desire for Understanding: The monster's pursuit of knowledge and understanding reflects a fundamentally human trait. His quest for comprehension of his existence and the world around him highlights a deeper aspect of his character. This intellectual curiosity is not merely futile but is a sign of his good nature, as it demonstrates a desire to learn and understand his place in the world.

Arguments Against the Monster as a Good Person

Acts of Violence: Ultimately, the monster commits violent acts, including the murder of Victor's loved ones. These actions can be seen as morally reprehensible, suggesting that he is capable of evil. The fact that he resorts to such extreme violence indicates a transformation from an innocent creature into a dangerous one.

Revenge Motive: His quest for revenge against Victor, who created him and then abandoned him, illustrates a darker side of his character. This desire for vengeance can overshadow his initial innocence and indicate a shift towards a more vengeful and malevolent disposition.

Manipulation: At times, the monster manipulates Victor's emotions, using his creator's feelings against him. This behavior raises questions about the monster's moral integrity, suggesting that his actions are not always guided by benevolent intentions.

Conclusion

Ultimately, whether Frankenstein's monster is a good or evil person is a matter of perspective. His journey from innocent and well-intentioned to vengeful and dangerous highlights the complexities of human nature and the impact of societal rejection and abandonment. While his initial actions indicate a good nature, his ultimate actions and motivations present a more nuanced and morally ambiguous character. Understanding and compassion, as demonstrated in his interactions with the De Lacey family, offer glimmers of hope that he could have led a better life had he been granted a chance to live and grow in a supportive environment.