A obra Frankenstein, da escritora britânica Marry Shelley, teve inúmeras adaptações para o cinema no século passado. Escrita entre 1816 e 1817 - quando Shelley tinha apenas 19 - Frankenstein foi publicada pela primeira vez em 1818. Trata-se de um romance gótico com inspirações românticas. A obra narra a história de Victor Frankenstein, um estudante de ciências naturais que dá vida a um monstro. O romance obteve grande sucesso e gerou um novo gênero de horror, tendo grande influência na literatura e cultura popular ocidental. O link abaixo é de uma adaptação de 1910, como pode ser visto no vídeo que segue. Confira!

Environment can play a crucial role to the development of the behavior of each human being. The social milieu has the capacity to influence a person in many different ways. These influences happen due to the power of the elements that are intrinsic to this aspect of the society, which include people and their habits. On the novel Frankenstein, written by Mary Shelly, one of the main characters, the monster, is negatively influenced by the environment wherein he tries to participate and as a consequence, he changes his good attitudes to evil ones for having no other way out.

These changes turn his existence miserable, which begins right when Victor Frankenstein completes his task of creating a living creature. At that moment, misery appears as the rejection that this being would suffer throughout his life. The appearance of the monster is extremely scary and because of that he is seen as a disaster by his creator. At the time Victor sees that fiend, he feels frightened and hides from him. The monster is not given the opportunity to interact with his creator in any way. Moreover, he did not have the chance to be known, due to his appearance that was so terrifying to Victor, who could not see that the fiend might have something else besides it.

Abandoned by Victor, his creation had to learn to survive by himself lonely in the world. He gives his impressions about the beginning of that period:

According to this excerpt, he lives a total lack of familiarity with the world that surrounded him. Although there was a slight sign that he could feel pleasure with the elements of that environment, the strongest things that he felt were related to biological needs. The monster was able to supply these needs because he collected food in the woods and kept warm by the use of a fire left by some wandering beggars. However, after some time, food became scarce at the region where he had inhabited; consequently he had to look for a place where his needs would be satisfied. At this period, his mind was not yet influenced by the environment because he was still living away from the inhabitants the world that he was put in.

As the creation of Frankenstein left the woods, his contact with the environment and its people started to occur and for the first time he saw human nature. At that moment, the monster had contact with the second human being in his existence. By this contact he witnessed an attitude that he was already familiar with: when the inhabitant of the hut where he entered saw him, he immediately quit his residence and rushed across the fields. As Frankenstein’s creature continued his walk he found a village, wherein he describes his reception:

After these events the creature realized that it would not be easy to live in that society. He was aware that he had not done anything wrong to be treated in that cruel manner for the people that he crossed by. The occurrence of these facts made him become afraid of other reactions people might have as they see him. As we can note, this contact with the environment adds to his being the feeling of apprehension that was before unknown by him.

Hiding in an asylum he knew he could not be accepted by the family he observed. However his observations made him believe that his acceptance could be possible, though. The family was composed by three members, a blind father, his daughter and his son. They lived in a cottage very close from where Frankenstein’s creature had taken refuge. Due to this closeness the monster could listen to everything they say, which allowed him to learn their language, background and understand all the problems that the family faced. They did not always have enough to eat and the monster was touched by their situation. Moved by this feeling, he stopped stealing their food and started collecting wood for them. Through the monster’s actions, we can note that he was a good creature and had noble feelings; this reinforces the idea that what prevented him to join that family was the fear of not being accepted. By the time the monster got rid of this fear, he decided to talk to the blind men, while his children were out. As the man could not see the monster, he let him in, but his family arrived some time later and his contact with that cottagers occurred:

At this moment the monster had the biggest deception of all his existence, the only hope he had of being accepted by people from the world that he was put in had totally disappeared. He could have killed Felix if he wanted, but his heart sank with “bitter sickness” (115) and he escaped unperceived to his hovel.

Filled with this disappointment, the feeling of revenge first appeared in the monster’s mind. However this desire was still not strong enough in his soul:

When I thought about my friends […], these thoughts vanished and a gushed of tears somewhat soothed me. But again when I reflect that they had spurned and deserted me, anger returned, a rage of anger, and unable to injure anything human I turned by fury towards inanimate objects. (118)

As we can see, although the dark side of the monster was starting to appear, his noble feelings were still alive. The presence of these feelings is reaffirmed when Frankenstein’s creature saved a little girl that had fallen into a stream. However this good action had its consequences, because when he was seen by this girl’s relative, he was shot. The monster performed a very good action, he saved a human being. Nevertheless, his benevolence was rewarded with the pain caused by that shot. That was the last time the monster tried to be good, from that day on he vowed his eternal hatred and vengeance to all mankind.

At that point, the evil side of the monster was totally uncovered and his disappointment with the human race stimulated him to make his first victim, William Frankenstein, his creator’s younger brother. This was the beginning of the monster’s actions to destroy Victor’s life, the responsible for all his miseries.

I gazed on my victim, and my heart swelled with exultation and hellish triumph; clapping my hands I exclaimed, I can too create desolation; my enemy is not invulnerable; this death will carry despair on him, and a thousand other miseries shall torment and destroy him. (122)

By this excerpt we can see that this murderer had not caused any kind of regret to the monster. He was extremely taken by a revenge feeling that was provoked by all negative reactions of the human beings towards him.

Conscious of the fact that he would never be accepted by human race; he turned to his maker and demanded the creation of a company. He believed that “the love of another will destroy the cause of my crimes, and I shall become a thing of whose existence everyone will be ignorant” (126). However, Victor did not fulfill his promise. As an answer to his creator’s attitude, the monster snatched from him every hope of future happiness, by killing his best friend and his loved wife. That was the way the monster found to diminish his pain of knowing that he would never fit that society. By destroying the people that Victor loved, he could cause the same misery that he felt in another human being.

Thus, we can see that the changes in the behavior of the monster happen due to the way people reacted with his presence. The more he missed the hopes to become accept in a certain way in society, the more he turned against humanity. The monster’s, was by nature good, as Rousseau defines men, however the society that he was put in caused all his vice and corruption.


REFERENCES:

http://www.philosophyprofessor.com/philosophers/jean-jacques-rousseau.php
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: Signet Classics, 2000.

To go beyond human limits can be seen as responsible for the arrogance attitude of the human beings, which leads them to a subversion of the established order of the world. In such way, men seek to break the limits that are imposed to humanity. Nevertheless, they are castigated by daring to go over human boundaries and transgress a natural order. On the novel Frankenstein, written by Mary Shelly (1797-1851), the historic tragedy of life and death of Victor Frankenstein, whose obsession for knowledge and creation shows his hybris, seems to be a manifestation of a self-destructive desire of the human being. Victor dared to infringe the order of the cosmos by giving life to a monster, reproducing through a blasphemy act of the west culture Christian divine creation. Consequently, he ended up being punished for disobeying the natural laws.
In this manner, we can admit that this narrative consists on the transmission of an ancestral world-view, which reduces the human quest and experience, by punishing drastically the one who dares to go beyond it. However, Frankenstein is not the only work where we can find this attitude of the human being. In fact, this element can also be seen on the biblical reference of the angel Lucifer, on the tragedy of Oedipus and on the classic German legend of Doctor Faust. To this effect, it is possible to make some considerations of this similarity, in order to establish some connections among the myths that belong to the Human History and the Western Literature.
The first character is Lucifer who appears in the Old Testament. He was the strongest and the most handsome of all the cherubins. For this reason, God gave him a position of eminence among all his helpers. However, Lucifer became proud of his power and got revolted against God, as we can read in the book Isaiah:

How art thou fallen from heaven, Oh Lucifer, son of the morning! [how] art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thy heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the hights of the clouds; I will be like the Most High. (14, 12-14)

There is a similarity among the actions of Lucifer and Victor: both characters have the desire to be like God. Similar to the fallen angel that tries to be like the “Most High”, Victor is guided by his wish of discovering the secrets of creation. For this reason, he seeks to overtake the human limits and perform what was considered impossible:

...with all my ardour, I was capable of a more intense application and was more deeply smitten with the thirst for knowledge. […] the world was to me a secret that I desired to divine. Curiosity, earnest research to learn the hidden laws of nature, gladness akin to rapture, as they were unfolded to me, are among earliest sensation I can remember. (22)

The craving for the knowledge concerning the creation act leads him – taken by arrogance – to cross the boundary that establishes the limits allowed by natural law. Like Lucifer, he tries to enter the dominion of the Christian God. Consequently, the origin of the punishment of both characters comes from their excessive conduct, that is, Lucifer is expelled from Heaven and Victor meets his own destruction.
Another dialogue is with the Greek tragedy Oedipus the King. The protagonist is the king who was responsible for saving Thebes from the Sphinx and gave life back to it. Oedipus is praised by the clergyman. He is considered “the best of the men”. Nevertheless, the tragic mistake of the king of Thebes is originated in a blind arrogance, which leads him to strictly condemn the causer of all disgraces in Thebes. In the same manner, Victor is guided by a blind desire that goes beyond his own reason. The character-narrator haughtily uncovers the enigma of creation as Oedipus uncovers the sphinx’s enigma:

After days and nights of incredible labour and fatigue, I succeeded in discovering the cause of generation and life; nay, more, I became myself capable of bestowing animation upon lifeless matter. […] After so much time spent in painful labour, to arrive at once at the summit of my desires was the most gratifying consummation of my toils. What have been the study and desire of the wisest men since the creation of the world was now within my grasp. (38)

As we can read, Victor is completely taken by his eager desire of “discovering the cause of generation and life”. As a result of the state of his spirit, he is not able to perceive the terrible mistake that he made by giving life to the monster.
However, Victor is not only equal to Oedipus concerning his capacity to uncover the enigmas of the world. Another aspect of similarity among them is related to the fact that Victor blames the monster by his own actions, like Oedipus blames the murderer of Laius and causer of all the troubles in Thebes. In other words, if Oedipus is the true murderer of Laius, Victor Frankenstein can be seen as a monster by blaspheming the divine act of creation:

No one can conceive the variety of feelings which bore me onwards, like a hurricane, in the first enthusiasm of success. Life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through, and pour a torrent of light into our dark world. A new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me. (40)

The two stories warn against audacious acts from those who find in the desire the impulse to overtake the allowed boundaries. Oedipus and Victor Frankenstein are tragically punished by their irreparable actions and by their hybris.
On the other hand, the story of Victor and his creation can be likened to the narrative of Doctor Faust. To this effect, Frankenstein can be seen as a repetition of Faust, because certainly there is something of Victor in doctor Faust, whose eager desire to overcome the scientific knowledge leads him to call Mephistopheles. In this sense, we can not forget that Frankenstein was written during a crucial movement in the history of the humanity, that is, the progress of the scientific knowledge. For Susan Tyler Hitchcock, “the story of Victor Frankenstein was written at a decisive moment in the Western history. In that time, the advancement of sciences promised the control of the knowledge that, for centuries, belonged only to God (10)”. In Frankenstein: myth and philosophy, Jean-Jacques Lecercle sees on the novel of Mary Shelley an “inedited Faust”, composed by Goethean elements in a renewed way (20). In both narratives, the characters are impelled by an incessant desire to go beyond the possible limits. Victor wanted to overcome his simple human condition, getting himself side by side with the Christian God. The same happened to doctor Faust who ended up making a deal with Devil to achieve his objectives, excepting that Victor, living in the XIX century, could appeal to the scientific rationality.
However, there is an impelling force that leads both of them to commit the act of subversion, that is, doctor Faust’s pact with the Devil and the irreparable act of the creation of Victor. Both are profanes and make us remember the decadent human nature that drives the human being to make mistakes. As a result of this action, there is a punishment:

I prophesied truly, and failed only in one single circumstance, that in all the misery I imagined and dreaded, I did not conceive the hundredth part of the anguish I was destined to endure. […] ...often, I say, I was tempted to plunge into the silent lake, that the waters might close over me and my calamities forever. (78)

The myths shown above warn against the eager desire that takes human beings to break a moral rule, i.e., “the set of rules to participate in this game of life” (23), as Lecercle states. It is the connecting thread present on the biblical story of the fallen angel, on the tragedy of the Theban king, on the classic legend of doctor Faust and, evidently, on the narrative of the life of Victor Frankenstein.
The eager desire for transgressing the human limits can be considered an element of human nature. In the history of humanity, men have dared to infringe to established laws, whether established by Greek gods, by the Christian God, by Nature or by social rules. Notwithstanding, these stories show us the destructive effects caused by craving of human being to wish, in an arrogant way, to go beyond the permitted boundaries.


REFERENCES:

Hitchock, Susan Tyler; [trad.] Monteiro, Amat Rêgo. Frankenstein: as muitas faces de um monstro. São Paulo: Larousse do Brasil, 2010.
Lecercle, Jean-Jacques; [trad.] Strausz, Rosa Amanda. Frankenstein: mito e filosofia. Rio de Janeiro: José Olympio, 1991.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: Bantam Book, 2003.