This blog task is assigned by Megha Trivedi Ma'am (Department of English, MKBU).
Q |1. What are some major differences between the movie and the novel Frankenstein?
Kenneth Branagh’s 1994 film adaptation of Frankenstein diverges significantly from Mary Shelley’s original 1818 novel, not only in plot details but in tone, philosophical depth, and character portrayals. While the film claims to follow the original story closely, it ultimately reshapes the narrative to fit a more melodramatic, romantic, and action-driven cinematic format. One of the most striking differences is how the characters particularly Victor Frankenstein and the Creature are portrayed. In the novel, Victor is introspective, tormented by guilt, and consumed by the consequences of his unchecked ambition. His obsession is intellectual and moral. In the film, however, Victor is more emotionally expressive, driven as much by personal loss and romantic passion as by scientific ambition. Branagh portrays him almost as a tragic hero, rather than as the morally ambiguous figure Shelley created. Similarly, the Creature in the novel is articulate, philosophical, and tragic he reads Paradise Lost, contemplates his existence, and pleads for compassion. He becomes vengeful only after repeated rejection by society and his creator. The film’s Creature, played by Robert De Niro, retains some intelligence but is more grotesque, emotional, and physically violent, often acting out of immediate rage rather than deep reflection. The film introduces scenes entirely absent from the book, such as Victor reanimating Elizabeth after her death transforming her into a monstrous creation who ultimately destroys herself in horror. This dramatic subplot emphasizes romantic and physical horror rather than the novel’s psychological and existential concerns. The ending is also altered: where the novel ends with the Creature disappearing into the Arctic darkness after Victor’s death, symbolizing the eternal consequences of Victor’s ambition, the film ends with a more emotional and cinematic scene in which the Creature immolates himself and Victor together in a funeral pyre. This change shifts the theme from one of cold moral reckoning to one of redemption and tragic love. Ultimately, while the novel is a meditation on the dangers of unchecked ambition, human isolation, and the responsibilities of creation, the film reinterprets it as a gothic tragedy filled with passion, spectacle, and visceral emotion sacrificing much of Shelley’s philosophical subtlety for cinematic drama.
Q |2. Who Do You Think Is the Real Monster?
In Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, the question of who the real monster isvVictor Frankenstein or his Creature is one of the central themes of the novel. There's no single correct answer, but here's a breakdown of both sides to help you decide:
Victor creates life but immediately abandons his Creature, horrified by its appearance. He takes no responsibility for its well-being or education. He plays God, trying to control life and death, and becomes consumed by ambition, ignoring the consequences of his actions. Victor refuses to empathize with the Creature, even after hearing its story. He breaks his promise to create a companion for the Creature, which leads to more tragedy. His inaction and secrecy lead to the deaths of his brother William, Justine, Henry Clerval, Elizabeth, and ultimately his father. Some argue Victor is the real monster because of his moral failures, selfishness, and refusal to take responsibility.
The Creature kills several people, including William, Henry, and Elizabeth. He also frames Justine, an innocent girl, leading to her execution. Although he starts out kind and gentle, the Creature becomes vengeful, threatening Victor and seeking to destroy his life. The Creature tries to emotionally manipulate Victor into creating a female companion and swears revenge when denied. Some argue the Creature is the real monster because he ultimately chooses violence and revenge, becoming the thing Victor feared. Victor may be the true monster in terms of moral responsibility and consequences. The Creature may be a monster in terms of his actions, but he was made that way by society and his creator’s neglect.
"I ought to be thy Adam, but I am rather the fallen angel…"
— The Creature
This quote shows that the Creature could have been good, but was turned into a "monster" by rejection and suffering.
Q |3. Do you think the search for knowledge is dangerous and destructive?
Yes, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein presents the search for knowledge as both dangerous and potentially destructive especially when it’s pursued recklessly or without moral responsibility.
1. Victor’s Obsession Ruins Lives:
Branagh’s film makes it painfully clear: yes, it can be especially when morality doesn’t guide ambition. Victor’s desire to conquer death is noble on the surface but becomes destructive when it turns into obsession.
2. Knowledge Without Responsibility:
Victor gains powerful knowledge but refuses to accept the consequences. He acts more out of pride and ambition than compassion or wisdom, showing how knowledge without ethical boundaries can lead to destruction.
3. The Creature’s Experience:
Even the Creature, who seeks knowledge of human society and emotions, ends up devastated. Learning about humanity makes him realize he is hated and rejected, which turns his desire for connection into bitterness and revenge.
4. Warning from Walton’s Journey:
The novel begins and ends with Captain Walton’s Arctic exploration. Walton’s own pursuit of knowledge parallels Victor’s, and Victor warns him not to make the same mistake:
“Learn from me... how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge.”
The movie shows how the quest for knowledge when divorced from empathy and responsibility leads to death, destruction, and madness. Victor loses his family, his love, and ultimately his life. Even the Creature, who desires knowledge of the world and his origins, ends up devastated by what he learns. In this story, knowledge isn’t inherently evil but how we use it matters deeply.
Mary Shelley doesn’t say that all knowledge is bad, but she warns that unchecked ambition and the reckless pursuit of knowledge especially without considering the consequences can be deeply destructive.
Q |4. Do you think Victor Frankenstein's creature was inherently evil, or did society's rejection and mistreatment turn him into a monster?
No, Victor Frankenstein's creature was not inherently evil. At first, he is kind, curious, and wants to connect with others. However, society’s rejection and Victor’s abandonment push him toward hatred and violence.
At the beginning of Frankenstein, the Creature is not born evil he begins his life as an innocent being. Victor Frankenstein creates him from body parts in a secret experiment, but the moment the Creature comes to life, Victor is terrified and immediately abandons him. Left alone and confused, the Creature is like a newborn—he has no understanding of the world or of himself. He hides in the woods and slowly learns about life by watching the De Lacey family from a distance. Through them, he learns to speak and read, and he understands deep human values like love, friendship, family, and the desire to belong. He even learns words like “friend,” “family,” and “father,” and wishes to have those things for himself. He dreams of being accepted and loved.
But when he finally reveals himself to the De Laceys, they are horrified by his appearance and reject him violently. This is his first real heartbreak, and it begins to change him. The Creature then seeks out Victor and asks for a companion, someone who would love him and not judge him. Victor agrees at first but later destroys the second creature, leaving the first even more alone and hopeless. After this, the Creature becomes filled with anger and revenge. He kills Victor’s loved ones, including his brother William, his best friend Henry, and his wife Elizabeth. He does these terrible things not because he was born evil, but because rejection, loneliness, and pain twisted him into a vengeful figure.
In this film, the Creature is not born evil. He’s curious, intelligent, and desperate for affection. His descent into violence happens only after he is repeatedly rejected, feared, and attacked by Victor, by villagers, and even by those he tries to help. This interpretation echoes the novel’s message: monsters are made, not born. The movie shows that if the Creature had received compassion instead of cruelty, he could have lived a peaceful life.
Q |5. Should There Be Limits on Scientific Exploration? If So, What Should Those Limits Be?
Yes, Frankenstein strongly suggests that there should be limits on scientific exploration, especially when it comes to ethics, responsibility, and the consequences of that knowledge.
Yes, there should be limits on scientific exploration especially when discoveries could harm people or cross moral boundaries. In Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein pushes science too far by creating life without thinking about the consequences. He is so focused on his ambition that he forgets his responsibility to the life he creates. As a result, his Creature is rejected, suffers deeply, and eventually becomes violent. Victor’s actions show what can happen when scientists act out of pride or curiosity without considering the ethical impact of their work.
Science should always aim to help people, not hurt them. That means scientists need to think about who might be affected, whether their work is truly necessary, and how it could be used or misused. Just because something can be done doesn’t always mean it should be done.
● What Should the Limits Be?
1. Ethical Responsibility – Scientists must think about how their work affects others (including future generations).
2. Long-Term Consequences – Exploration should not continue if the risks are unknown or too dangerous.
3. Respect for Life and Nature – Creating or altering life must be done with great care and humility.
4. Accountability – Scientists must take responsibility for the outcomes of their work, good or bad.
The film’s events serve as a powerful cautionary tale about unchecked scientific ambition. It suggests that there must be ethical boundaries, especially when dealing with human life and biotechnology.
● So what limits should exist?
1. Informed Consent: Creating life without the knowledge or agreement of the being created is a violation of autonomy.
2. Accountability: Scientists must be held responsible for their creations and experiments.
3. Ethical Oversight: There must be clear ethical frameworks especially in fields like genetic engineering, AI, and cloning.
4. Respect for Nature and Death: Trying to control death or “play God” without wisdom or humility leads to disaster.
The film doesn’t say science is bad it says science without ethics, responsibility, and empathy is what leads to horror. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, and Branagh’s 1994 film adaptation, are stories about hubris, loss, and the dangers of blind ambition. The film may have its dramatic flourishes and deviations from the novel, but its message is loud and clear: what makes us human is not knowledge, but how we choose to use it. The Creature is not the villain of this story he is its victim. And Victor Frankenstein? He is the cautionary figure who reminds us that creation, without compassion, leads only to ruin.
Reference:
1. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Directed by Kenneth Branagh, TriStar Pictures, 1994.
2. James A. W. Heffernan . “Looking at the Monster: “Frankenstein” and Film.” Critical Inquiry , Vol. 24, No. 1 (Autumn, 1997), pp. 133-158 JSTOR . https://www.jstor.org/stable/1344161
3. M.A. English MKBU: Study Matarial:2020 - Literature of Romantic.
No comments:
Post a Comment