Burkhalter1

Cheyanne Burkhalter
Ms. Albrecht
Advanced Composition

The Blame in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

The Creature often escapes the fault in Mary Shelleys Frankenstein, or Modern
Prometheus, but the majority of the time its because everyone sympathizes with him. Of course,
thats a normal reaction. After all, he was a wretch who woke up in some crazy guys laboratory,
and as soon as he sat up the lunatic ran away with his metaphorical tail between his legs. The
thing is, The Creature was able to learn things quickly; he read novels, and he learned how to act
human by watching the DeLaceys. By the time he committed his first murder, he had learned
how the world worked in its general aspects; this is why its his fault. He had a functioning,
working mind, and he had used it to study human interaction for months through a hole in the
wall. Obviously not an ideal way to see the world, but he still knew how he should be, and how
he wanted to be.

In the beginning of the novel, there are a handful of letters by a man named Robert
Walton, and he is apparently on a journey to the North Pole when he encounters a strange man
on a dog sled heading towards his ship over the ice that has them stranded. After the man is
brought aboard the ship, we learn that his name is Victor Frankenstein, and that he plausibly has
one of the most uncanny stories to tell our adventurer. From then on, the novel is in Victors
point of view, up until the eleventh chapter. From there, until the seventeenth chapter, we

Burkhalter2
discover what The Creature had been up to for the past two years since Victor had abandoned
him. .
Heres where things get tricky. The reader wants to sympathize with the monster, but that
was obviously his goal when telling Victor his tale of sorrow. How miraculous did this
appear!The huts, the neater cottages, and stately houses engaged my admiration by turns. . .One
of the best of these I entered, but I hardly placed my foot within the door before the children
shrieked, and one of the women fainted. (Shelley 101) Yes, this is sad, but imagine a short
European from the 18th century sitting in their cottage when an eight foot, deformed person steps
into their house. Theyre not going to understand whats going on. One could blame society for
this, but at the same time science could be to blame. It wasnt very advanced, and people with
deformities were often looked down upon because no one understood what had happened to
them. Only the scholarly had any minute idea of what could cause such things, and even then
they probably were scared of those poor people to some degree as well.

Now, Victor is often blamed for The Creatures actions, but The Creature had free will.
Yes, Victor often ran away from responsibilities, but the creature obviously knew what he was
doing. There was a passage in the novel where the monster is beaten by one of the cottagers. I
could have torn him limb from limb, as the lion rends the antelope. (Shelley 129) This proves
that The Creature knows right from wrong. He wants to be good, but why cant he? The Creature
does many things that contradict his motives.

At another point in the novel, The Creature saves a little girl from drowning. I rushed
from my hiding place, and with extreme labour, from the force of the current, saved her and
dragged her ashore. (Shelley 134) Could anyone without morals do such a thing? No. So,

Burkhalter3
obviously The Creature has a conscience, and how could someone with a conscience that strong
kill an innocent boy several pages later just out of revenge? Its honestly unsettling, and if he just
ignored his conscience, then that just further proves that the fault is his to bear.

After he kills Victors brother, The Creature finds a woman sleeping in a barn. At first, he
is delighted by her presence, and loves her beauty. Then he gets a terrible idea that will frame
Justine, the maid for the Frankensteins, for the boys murder; he places a small picture in one of
the folds of her dress. Victors little brother had been clutching it before he was last seen. Placing
the item on Justine would frame her as the murderess. This move was calculated. Obviously,
only someone who knew what they were doing would do something so dastardly.

Later on in the novel, The Creature kills Victors best friend Henry Clerval out of
vengeance. Another calculated move from our friendly neighborhood monster. Okay, not so
friendly considering the death keeps coming. Not very many good people kill out of spite or
vengeance. One could argue that his environment was a key role in how he turned out, but many
people grow up in terrible environments, but they grow up to be the nicest person anyone could
ever meet. The Creature made a choice to be this way. Therefore, the blood of Victors brother,
Justine, Henry, and Elizabeth were on his hands.

On the topic of Elizabeth, this death was a mixture of jealousy, and vengeance. After all,
the monster had wanted his own bride, but Victor had denied him. After Henry, who was the
next obvious step? Elizabeth. She was simply a way to hit Victor the hardest. The Creature
wanted to take something that had shaped Victor, and the one thing that consoled him. The

Burkhalter4
Creature wanted Victor to feel just as lonely as he was. Once again, another calculated move by
The Creature. How does that not show intent, let alone fault?

The last few pages of the novel, the monster tries to paint himself as the martyr. You,
who call Frankenstein your friend, seem to have a knowledge of my crimes and his misfortunes.
But in the detail which he gave you of them he could not sum up the months of misery which I
endured wasting in impotent passions. (Shelley 210) Given his past, it seems so. Maybe he was
both the martyr and destroyer of the innocent, in the sense that he caused so much pain. Still, he
knew what he was doing, he had learned that what he had done was wrong, and he took the fault
of his actions. Maybe things could have been different if Victor had taken care of him, but they
werent. The Creature still did those things to innocent people instead of going to the direct
source of the problem. Instead, he had to hurt innocent people to get his point across, and that is
not okay. No matter how tragic your backstory is.

Burkhalter5

Works Cited
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. New York: The Penguin Group, 1963. Print.