Consider the last speeches of Frankenstein and the monster (on pages 274-75 and 279-82 respectively) as their closing arguments, so to speak.
How do they use ethos/pathos/logos?
With whom do we sympathize more and why?
Ultimately, who is guilty? Of what? Who is innocent?
Responses due by Wednesday at 9:30am. :)
Frankenstein’s near-death speech combines ethos and pathos, with hints of logos to explain to Walton his last dying wish and reasoning behind such wish. The hints of logos that serve to lay a foundation to this narrative come from Frankenstein’s attempt to justify his supposed innocence, as well as trying to convince Walton why he should carry out his final wish. Frankenstein says that he had spent a few days occupying his mind in “examining my past conduct; nor do I find it blameable” (274), clearly showing Frankenstin’s last opinions on the situation he is living in. With this Frankenstein wishes to justify his actions, and prove why Walton should carry out the wish he later asks for. Frankenstein uses ethos, with his persuasion and intelligence, to persuade Walton into carrying out the wish of killing the monster on sight. It is known that Frankenstein used his words to initially prevent the ship from returning to England, and with his words he indeed was able to convince Walton and the crew to remain in the cold, harsh North. He yet again his significant traces of persuasion, knowing in fullness that if he were to persuade Walton with childish words, even a consideration from Walton would never have been imaginable. Finally, Frankenstein uses pathos with the use of his dying situation, attempting to induce pity on Walton. He says that his dying hour “is the only happy one which I have enjoye for several years” (275) which induces pity into the readers, and most likely Walton living in this situation. Walton even says, addressing Margaret, “What can I say that will enable you to understand the depth of my sorrow?” (276). Walton is clearly despondent, and Frankenstein is aware that he made a major platonic impact on Walton as a close friend, which amplifies the effects pathos has on Walton. Although I feel that Frankenstein is guilty, I feel that the monster should be sympathized in fullness. My Smart Squad decided that if in court, the monster would easily be convicted as guilty, yet the reasoning behind why he commits murder is just. In his previous and elongated narrative to Frankenstein, we learn that in a small year he goes through numerous heartbreaks induced by society. He went through trauma that some never even experience in a full lifetime. He is the definition of loneliness, and simply wants Frankenstein to just “copy and paste” the process he did in creating the first monster. Yet, the monster never has one, simple wish granted, resulting in his benevolence to his extreme malevolence. Ultimately, the monster is guilty of numerous counts of murder. And although not reasonably innocent, Victor is innocent in the sense that he never directly conducted murder, yet an argument could be easily made that he created and provoked the source of this murder. However, in a direct view Victor does not do anything wrong physically, and would certainly not be convicted as guilty in court.
ReplyDeleteJulia Gazdik
ReplyDeleteVictor Frankenstein and the monster close their stories with a final testament in the last chapter in Frankenstein. During their final statements they try to convince Robert Walton and the reader that they are not guilty and deserve sympathy. Frankenstein uses pathos, ethos, and logos in an extremely intriguing way throughout his last message. While explaining how he nears death Frankenstein says, “in the last moments of my existence I feel that burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge” (274). Frankenstein uses pathos in the expert; pathos is a word or passages an author uses to activate emotions. A few words in this quote that express deep pathos is burning and ardent. These words make the reader feel many emotions such as power and passion. The few words let the reader feel what Frankenstein has had in his heart since he created the monster. Frankenstein then uses these words to lead the readers and Walton to believe him and stand on his side.
Frankenstein also uses ethos in his final speech also conveying the reader to stand with him. Frankenstein speaks to Walton and says that he doesn’t want Walton to spend his life fulfilling Frankenstein's revenge but would want him to think about it for himself (275). In this quote Frankenstein uses ethos to relate and build trust between him and Walton. Ethos is how a speaker or writer builds credibility and trustworthiness. Frankenstein relates to Walton by telling him how much he understands Walton and only wants the best of him. By building up Frankenstein's credibility it helps getting Walton on his side and helps Walton understand Frankenstein.
Logos is also demonstrated in Frankenstein's last passage. Frankenstein's continues his last statement saying “[ the monster] destroyed my friends; he devoted to destruction beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom” (275). The represents Frankenstein's use of logos. Logos is using logic and reason to convey a point. Frankenstein is relaying the facts that had happened the years ago to prove that fact the monster is egregious. Frankenstein shows Walton how the monster has done horrible things to good people and it is not an opinion, but it truly happened.
Julia Gazdik
ReplyDeleteThe monster also uses a compilation of pathos, egos, and logos just like Frankenstein. While describing his treacherous journey the monster explains “the hours and months of misery which I endured wasting in impotent passions” (280). In this quote the monster utilizes pathos. He makes the reader feel the pain and sadness he has endured on his journey. The use of misery is deep and expresses the pain and loss of hope more than just saying sad. The monster uses this so that the reader and Walton will understand him and understand why he did what he did. The monster also wants sympathy and by having the reader and Walton feel what he felt will help the monster receive the sympathy he desires.
The use of ethos is also evident in the passage. While reasoning with Walton the monster states “it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered the lovely and the helpless” (280). This quote displays ethos by reasoning with Walton. The monster is speaking back to what Walton knows and addresses the fears and mistrusts his might have. This shows ethos because the monster is building trust between him and Walton by talking to him using what he knows helping him understand the different sides of the one stories he knows.
The monster also uses logos by stating facts to the reader and Walton. The monster talks to Walton saying that he has murdered the innocent and hurt people that do no harm and also hurt his creator who only deserved love (280). The monster is showing logos by stating the facts of what has happened and the horrors that have taken place. By doing this he is having Walton understand that he knows what he has done and feels remorse. The monster is also showing that he understands the harm and ruin that he has caused. This helps show that he is not superior to what happens, but he is understanding.
Thus, I believe we sympathize more with the monster because he did not choose the form of life he has taken. The monster could not choose his beginning whereas Frankenstein chose to make the monster and chose the many mistakes he made after. Although the monster did choose to cause harm in the world, he felt bad and wanted forgiveness. Thus, Frankenstein is guilty because he chooses to create the monster and to put his friends and family in harm's way by not dealing with his creation right away. The monster is not guilty because he did not choose his appearance or how people would react and the series of unfortunate events of being treated bad lead the monster to take revenge on the creator who made him the way he is. However, no one is truly guilty or not because each character chose a path which hurt and put down innocent people.
Frankenstein uses Ethos, Pathos and Logos in his closing speech. He uses Pathos by explaining emotions to Walton. He states, "My duties towards the beings of my own species had greater claims to my attention because they included a great proportion of happiness or misery."(274). Here, Victor is saying that he owes more to humans than to his monster because they have stronger feelings. He also says, "Farewell, Walton! Seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition..."(275). This quotation elucidates how Victor tells Walton to be happy with peace in life and to not make his mistake of becoming overambitious. Victor also uses Ethos to try and show Walton he is the one who is morally correct. He states, "During these last days I have been occupied in examining my past conduct; nor do I find it blamable."(274). This quotation demonstrates how Victor tries to make Walton believe in his innocence. Finally, Frankenstein uses Logos. Frankenstein refuses to create a companion for his monster as contended, "Urged by this view, I refused, and I did right in refusing, to create a companion for the first creature."(275). Victor used logic to determine that releasing another malevolent, dangerous monster on the world would be even more harmful to society.
ReplyDeleteThe monster uses these three elements in his speech as well. He uses Pathos by stating, "I shall no longer feel the agonies which now consume me or be the prey of feelings of unsatisfied, yet unquenched."(281). The monster tells Walton he will pass away and no longer feel the agony or despair society cast upon him. He also is saying his feelings are still unsatisfied. He uses Ethos to try and sympathize with Walton. He says, "Blasted as thou wert, my agony was still superior to thine; for the bitter sting of remorse will not cease to rankle in my wounds until death shall close them forever."(282). The creature is displaying to Walton how no matter how much Frankenstein said he suffered, the monster actually had much greater agony. He uses Logos to tell Walton how Victor abandoned him and how he never actually got to experience life. He demonstrates this by saying, "For while I destroyed his hopes, I did not satisfy my own desires."(280). The monster says this to show that even though he ruined Frankenstein's life, he was still abandoned and left to misery.
Frankenstein tells Walton "Think not, Walton, that in the last moments of my existence I feel that burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge I once expressed; but I feel justified in desiring the death of my adversary." (274). Frankenstein does not feel guilty and he rationalizes the deaths of his family and friends by saying he did not create a second monster to wreak havoc on the world. Frankenstein says his only mistake was not destroying the monster he created. In the end, he asks Walton "...to undertake my unfinished work, and I renew that request now..."(275). Frankenstein places all the blame on the monster and is unlikeable and selfish throughout the novel.
In contrast, the monster was violent towards society, but perhaps felt guilty and shouted "wild and incoherent self-reproaches."(277). "No guilt, no mischief, no malignity, no misery, can be found comparable to mine."(280). The monster is remorseful, unlike his maker, Frankenstein. Therefore, we are more sympathetic towards the monster than Frankenstein.
Continued:
ReplyDeleteBoth Victor and the monster are complicit in their guilt. Frankenstein created the monster and then abandoned him. He left an ugly creature alone to face the despair and injustice of humanity. The monster committed murders and is also guilty. The monster states, "Evil thenceforth became my good. Urged thus far, I had no choice but to adapt my nature to an element which I had willingly chosen. The completion of my demoniacal design became an insatiable passion."(278). This displays how after society shunned the monster, he turned malevolent. Ultimately Frankenstein is the guilty one. He created the monster and thereafter abandoned him. The monster had no control over who or what he was. Victor had a choice in everything he did. He chose to create the monster and he chose to be selfish and abandon him. So, overall Frankenstein bears the burden and most of the guilt.
The Monster and Frankenstein both hold such anger and determination in their final moments and portray their emotions by intertwining eloquent speech with ethos, logos, and pathos into their final speech's that make readers question whether who is really at fault. In the book, the readers read the development of both characters personalities and what traits we can attribute to them by their actions. Frankenstein's whole thought process is from logos with his reasoning and logic for everything that he does, but in his final moments he shows pathos with his speech of desperation and anguish that can persuade the readers from the monsters' eloquent words. His speech persuades those too fell for him however he is known to be able to use ethos in his words to make his speech sound more enticing to those he needs to sway. During the monster's time of vengeance against Frankenstein, he was driven by rage and put reasoning as to why he would go to certain extremes by blaming Frankenstein for his failure to intergrade successfully into society. We as readers do not see words written in description of the monster as pathos unless he feels extreme emotions or pressure from society. In his last moments the monster regrets all that he has done even if he presumed his actions to be logical but now before his death, he speaks to Walton with words laced with ethos and pathos to make him and readers understand what he has gone through and why he felt the urge to take revenge so severely. But, regrets his decisions and follow his creator into the depths of the afterlife only to have been in a world that he never felt loved. Both the monster and bis creator felt similar emotions right before there passing but while the monster uses pathos to try to get Walton to understand his pain, Frankenstein uses pathos to warn Walton so that he doesn’t go on a similar path as Frankenstein. -part 1-
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein's upbringing was made up of descriptions with ethos and pathos which gave readers a sense of understanding of his personality and backgrounds. Frankenstein's emotions and actions were mainly ethos and pathos, but he was very interested in things pertaining to logos which brought him to the creation of the monster. Meanwhile, the monster's actions and emotions are usually associated with descriptions of logos and ethos because of how he is very articulate and persuasive in speech and uses logic to give reason to his action even if they seem immoral. Frankenstein had a normal childhood while the monster never got to experience the love and nurture that Frankenstein received. Additionally, the monster never felt cherished and only felt despair which made his emotions turn colder and caused others to portray him as malicious even in times of need. Frankenstein abhorred the monster only from his actions and doesn’t understand that he does this because of the pain he experienced from the rejection he felt from the one person who could truly understand. These signs of desperations make Victor seem guilty because of how uncapable he is taking responsibility for problems that he made. Victor doesn’t seem to understand the bigger picture which is the emotional damage that he has inflicted on the monster to leave a scar that left a lasting effect on the monster and morph him into the wretch that everyone assumes he is. However, the monster also has flaws that he inflicted onto himself by making the choice of killing Victors companions which made the monsters heart darker. Victor uses pathos to describe himself as the victim and blames his mistakes on others but his whole story isn't credible because there is no proof during pivotal moments in the story that could be confirmed. Overall, the obvious choice for most of the guilt is on Victor with his narrow-minded personality which started this problem that ended up with a tragic ending. However, not all the guilt can be put on Victor because the monster chose to do certain actions that he felt were logical to get back at the one person who caused him all this pain and misery. There are many grey spots in there story as to who can be confirmed as guilty since they both have such different thought processes that it is hard to pinpoint who really lost in this battle of cat and mouse. Both the monster and his creator are extremely different and in their own point of views which can be seen through the three artistic proofs that shows what led them to have similar fates that not only ruined their chance of forgiveness but also died with a life filled with regret and failure.-part 2-
ReplyDeleteIn Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein Shelley utilizes logos, ethos, and pathos in Frankenstein and his monsters final words. After the telling of Frankenstein’s tragic story his exhaustion overcomes him and he begins to utter his final words. He weakly informs Walton that he holds no “burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge” (274), however, he still wishes death upon his creation. He reminds Walton to seek happiness and to avoid ambition hoping his newfound friend does not make the same mistakes he made. His passing is a solemn moment for Walton as he thought he had found a individual who truly understood him and his ambition and in a timely fashion the creature appears to witness his creators lifeless form. The creature goes on to express a mixture of many emotions ranging from despondency over his creator’s death to self hatred because of the crimes he has committed.
ReplyDeleteIn both of their so to speak monologues they both use logos, ethos, and pathos to win Walton’s sympathy. Frankenstein uses logos when acknowledging his creation of the wretched monster and admits, “In a fit of enthusiastic madness I created a rational creature and was bound towards him to assure, as far as was in my power, his happiness and well being” (274). Through the course of his story the reader witnesses his tendency to blame parts of his experience on other people or the creature. Seeing him acknowledge his faults contributes to his use of ethos and establishes a sense of reliability to the reader. Frankenstein then establishes pathos by acknowledging his failure in not taking care of his creation forming a sense of pity. Noting the immense misery and loss he went through in his story forms a sense of sympathy and to some degree excuses him for his rash decisions and malicious actions toward his creation.
On the other hand, the creature defends by, foremost, recognizing the horror of his crimes and the effect they have caused. By admitting to this he establishes the factuality of his crimes and shows he is a reliable being by displaying self reflection. The creatures main way of earning the favor of Walton, however, is using pathos. Through his lengthy speech he continually emphasizes how disconsolate and horrified he is by himself and successfully gains the reader’s pity. One of the most powerful quotes from his speech was, “Once my fancy was soothed with dreams of virtue, of fame, and of enjoyment… But now crime has degraded me beneath the meanest animal” (279). This exclamation reminds the reader of the purity of this creatures intentions which were corrupted by feelings of hatred and isolation. This makes the reader sympathize more with the creature because of the cruel misery he encountered while simultaneously pointing the blame towards his creator for his neglectful actions.
When faced with the question of who is guilty there is no clear answer because both are partially guilty. However, when assigning the guilt the origin of the problem must be addressed. It was Frankenstein’s unquenchable thirst for knowledge, recognition, and power that led him to create his monster. Since he created the problem it was his responsibility to control and solve it which he chose not to do. Instead he treated the innocent monster with spite and ignored him and therefore fueling the problem. When examining these aspects the blame can be placed upon Frankenstein. But, reader must look at the doings of the creature as well. Although, the creature was treated poorly by his creator he chose to take his feelings of misery and isolation and express them by violently murdering all those Frankenstein loved. Whereas he could have dealt with his feelings of isolation in alternate ways. So when looking at the situation as a whole it can clearly be said that Frankenstein holds most of the blame since he caused and fueled the problem. Yet the creature is partially to blame since he chose to commit gruesome crimes when acting upon his feelings of resentment.
-Ananya C
Both Frankenstein and the monster utilize the structure of pathos-logos-ethos in their final arguments, both to console their own lost hopes and ambitions as well as to try to elicit sympathy from Walton and the readers. Frankenstein first appeals to Walton with logos, expressing his need to justify his past actions and decisions. He reveals that he “feels justified in desiring the death of my adversary” (274), and that although he may have created the monster, he later had prioritized humanity over the well-being and happiness of his creature. He credits himself with making the right choice in his decision to deny the monster a mate, as he says the monster showed “unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil” (275). In this argument, Frankenstein also employs ethos, as he recalls how he thoroughly considered both options in his decision to not create a mate for the monster, and eventually came to the most sensible conclusion. Frankenstein also uses ethos when he requests for Walton to continue his quest for the monster, as he is fair-minded and concedes that he “may still be misled by passion” (275). In saying this, he acknowledges that he may be not in a sensible state of mind, and leaves the ultimate decision up to Walton. However in his request, Frankenstein also utilizes the final method of persuasion, pathos. He becomes less formal in his language, and more open and descriptive, making his words seem more desperate. He exclaims that the long awaited moment of his death “is the only happy one which I have enjoyed for several years” (275). He is wishing to draw out some reaction of sympathy from Walton, in the hope that he may feel the need to avenge Frankenstein’s death. However, through the monster’s final argument, Walton sees that this request is no longer necessary.
ReplyDeleteThe monster also first uses logos in his reasoning, he appeals to Walton’s ability to think rationally as he says “think you that the groans of Clerval were music to my ears?” (278). He is implying that no rational human would enjoy the action of murdering others, much less a creature whose heart was supposedly “fashioned to be susceptible of love and sympathy” (278). The monster then employs pathos, unleashing a description of the pain and torture he endured with passion, revealing that he had no choice in his actions, that they were a part of the necessary “completion of my daemoniacal design” (278). Lastly, when the monster sees that Walton is determined not to be swayed by the emotion he is showing, the monster uses ethos, and reflects on his past, weighing both the good and evil deeds that he has committed. He seems almost to be talking to himself, as he accepts that although Walton may not be able to see from his perspective, he himself is “content to suffer alone while my sufferings shall endure” (279).
Maddie Yeh
Although both of these “final arguments” contain valid points, they are also both unreliable due to the fact that they are heavily influenced by narrator’s bias, or the fact that these characters are retelling their actions in light of the current situation as well as their audience. However, as readers, we are able to look beyond the literal meaning in these final arguments, and are able to construct our own unbiased opinions of these characters, their virtues and flaws. Personally, I tend to sympathize more with the monster than with Frankenstein. This is mainly because the monster had no choice in his own creation and rejection in human society. Although Frankenstein might describe his creation of the monster as fate or destiny, in reality he made the conscious decision to “play god” and create a sentient being. As the monster continued to be rejected by society, and especially by the humans whom he loved and cared for, it is easy to see how anyone would become spiteful and want to take revenge. In his final argument, the monster reveals that he was acting against his will when he murdered Frankenstein’s friends and family, however he felt that it was only right to do so. This shows that the monster himself is innocent, however the influence of the sinful humanity around him led him to believe that justice and revenge must be sought, one must fight evil and ignorance with violence. Ultimately, it is Frankenstein and his ambition, however well intentioned it was in the beginning, that led to this trail of loss and destruction. Although the monster did horrible deeds, he was overcome by society’s need for hatred and revenge, and driven to commit these acts of evil. In the end, it was Frankenstein who held the ultimate authority, and who, blinded by ambition, caused a path of destruction and devastation to those around him.
ReplyDeleteMaddie Yeh
How do they use ethos/pathos/logos?
ReplyDeleteWith whom do we sympathize more and why?
Ultimately, who is guilty? Of what? Who is innocent?
Mary Shelley uses ethos, pathos, and logos in unique ways. Some she does not use in Frankenstein; others for the creature are not used. Frankenstein has nothing going for him, all of Victor's logic had true, but in this situation nonsense, as it did not quite help carry his point in an intellectual way. Most of it was demeaning, and showed just how narrow-minded humans had been surrounding him. Furthermore, Frankenstein after saying egregious blasphemy (summarized as; “Humans have more emotion, and significance then you”) Tried to chastise The Creature for going after most of his family with malicious intent. When in reality, Frankenstein provoked the monster after destroying the wife he had promised he would create her. Everything destroyed is a side effect of Victor Frankenstein’s carelessness and disgust for his creation. If he had taken the time to raise his creature it would not be malicious, rather it would be compassionate, and most importantly Justine, William, Henry, Alphonse, And Elizabeth would not be dead. With this said, neither Frankenstein, nor The Creature are innocent; It’s just a fact that Frankenstein started this debacle of what happened to the people he held dearly. On the other hand, The Creature had obtained a great understanding of the human world, so when he killed Victor’s family it was out of spite and revenge for how the world treated him, not out of being a being of lesser intelligence. In the end it’s easier to sympathize with Frankenstein as how marry Shelley portrays the story. It Portrays Victor as the victim, not actually what he was. Ultimately, Frankenstein sealed his own fate, He is responsible for the deaths of his family, and his own death.
Mary Shelley uses ethos, pathos, and logos to persuade the reader to sympathize with either Victor Frankenstein or the monster. She also displays a strong, trustful image that portrays Frankenstein as guilty and the monster as innocent. Even though the monster chose to kill multiple people, it was Frankenstein's idea to create the monster, not knowing it would cause the monster to act out in a violent way. Mary Shelley uses pathos to engage the reader by using the appropriate emotion in the characters narrative. The monster describes his existence as “No guilt, no mischief, mo malignity, no misery, can be found comparable to mine” (279-280). When the monster states this it provokes the reader to immediately feel bad for him. As for Frankenstein, he immediately blames the monster saying, “During these last days I have been occupied in examining my past conduct; nor do I find it blameable” (274). This statement uses both ethos and pathos as Frankenstein drives the reader to question if we should trust him. Him not blaming himself is very conflicting as he was the one to create this awful monster. Mary Shelley states that we shouldn't trust Frankenstein. He is not a trustworthy character especially because he is telling Walton a story while trying to make sense of the whole occurrence. Lastly, Mary Shelley shows logos by making sense of the whole conversation between Frankenstein and the monster. During the final statements of both characters we see Frankenstein forcing an image of innocence, hinting at his guilt, by creating a monster that is not sensible of its emotions. The monster exemplifies innocence by rawly explaining his terrible experiences that have stemmed from Frankenstein. Mary Shelley clearly displays ethos, pathos, and logos which ultimately displays the guilt of Frankenstein and the innocence of the monster. Frankenstein is guilty because he has created a monster. If Frankenstein hadn’t left the monster and had stayed with him to comfort him when neglected from others, Frankenstein would be innocent; but Frankenstein didn't do that, he left the monster. This lead the monster to be alone, witnessing the brutality of people's opinions. The monster suffered these terrible actions and hated the response so he decided to take his anger out on his enemy, Frankenstein, for creating him.
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein by Mary Shelley presents itself as a novel regarding tragedy and ambition. In the beginning of the novel, Victor Frankenstein becomes consumed with the overwhelming feeling of creation. If he could create a being that would solve all problems about disease and sickness, he would become the most renowned scientist in the world. But as the novel proceeds, the reader begins to realize that Frankenstein’s plan did not come into fruition. Contrary to his wishes, the monster tears his soul apart, killing his family members one by one. As Frankenstein and his creature are on their death beds, they each proceed to say their final thoughts.
ReplyDeleteVictor Frankenstein is the first out of the two characters to pass away. With no remaining strength left, he says his last words to Robert Walton. In order for the reader to find credibility in his final statements, he establishes a sense of trustworthiness in the audience. Frankenstein states that “(his) duties towards the beings of my own species had greater claims to my attention because they included a greater proportion of happiness or misery” (274). This statement provides an accurate viewpoint regarding Frankenstein’s moral integrity. It demonstrates his rational and clear point of view. Thus, this provides the reader with a sense of trust and reliability. With the reader’s trust now established, Frankenstein reveals his raw emotions shortly before his death. He tells Walton that he feels “…that burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge I once expressed; but I feel myself justified in desiring the death of my adversary” (274). When reading this, one has feelings of pity and regret for Frankenstein. The author enhances the already somber tone of the novel. To conclude, Frankenstein rationalizes all of his feelings and thoughts by using logos, logic and reasoning. He explains to Walton that he fell into a fit of madness and created a “rational” creature that was destined for happiness and well-being. This personal anecdote displays Frankenstein’s own viewpoint of all that has occurred. This statement is almost his way of rationalizing everything that went on in his last years of life. Through his closing statement, a dying Victor Frankenstein effectively uses ethos, pathos, and logos to justify and explain his final thoughts.
On the other hand, the creature’s closing statement elucidates how he truly feels before deciding to end his own life. He builds up his credibility by using ethos. He himself verbalizes what the audience has thought of him since day one. The creature states that he “…strangled the innocent as they slept and grasped to death his throat who never injured me or any living thing” (280). With this statement, Frankenstein’s monster shows comprehension and understanding of the situation. Thus, one can justify his claims as somewhat valid and credible. Next, the creature uses pathos in order to demonstrate his heavy emotion towards all that has occurred. He compares his conversion of benevolence to malevolence like a “fallen angel” becoming a “malignant devil”. Shelley’s use of vivid imagery evokes a sense of sadness in the reader. His overwhelming sense of sadness stems from his valid reasoning of being cast away from society since the beginning of his life. He questions Walton by saying, “Am I thought to be the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against me?” (280). His personal theory galvanizes the reader into thinking about everything from the creatures point of view. With the creatures effective use of ethos, pathos, and logos, it invites the reader into a different perspective.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, both characters can be viewed as guilty in this situation. Frankenstein will forever hold the guilt of his ambition. If it were not for his yearning for more, his life would not resolve the way that it has. However, once the monster was created, he was his own being. With that being said, one could say that the monster should be rendered guilty for all of the pain that he has caused for himself and for his creator. Personally, I believe that Victor Frankenstein would be rendered guilty if this case ever went to a trial. It was his selfish human nature that galvanized him to create something that had major ramifications. This creature was born benevolent, and other factors turned him into a malevolent creature, including Victor Frankenstein himself. The monster was born innocent, and truly had no control over his circumstances during his life. On the other hand, Frankenstein was born into a rich family and had the world in his hands. His selfishness and ambition became the ultimate downfall to his wealthy and pure life. Although both characters can be perceived as guilty and innocent, I believe that Victor Frankenstein can be justified as guilty based upon the circumstances at which he created his monster.
In Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, the debate between who is guilty and who is innocent is truly undecidable. Both the monster and Dr. Frankenstein are guilty of different deeds; therefore no one is truly innocent. Shelly attempts to redeem their actions in their parting speeches using ethos, pathos, and logos. Frankenstein attempts to convince Walton, and in some ways himself, that the way he treated the creature. Frankenstein explains since the first time he attempted to create this creature, it went terribly, and the creature was ugly and insane, why would he create another. He uses this to justify the monster's loneliness and does not believe that he is at fault for leaving the monster. Frankenstein also explains using logos, that the monster needs to be stopped and that Walton needs to do it. During Frankenstein's retelling of the story Walton had heard about every terrible thing that the creature had done, and this appeals to Walton's logic to attempt to stop the creature. Victor also uses pathos, by telling Walton to do it for him since he is dying. This evokes sympathy from Walton and the reader, even though he will not do the job.
ReplyDeleteThe creature rather than using ethos, pathos, and logos, uses mainly pathos. This also reveals that the creature does not really understand logic, even though it may have been unintentional. Unlike Frankenstein, the creature is not attempting to get Walton to do something; he is just explaining why he acted in a malicious way. The creature tells Walton about how lonely he was and that all he wanted was for people to care about him. This especially would evoke sympathy from Walton because at the beginning of the novel Walton writes to his sister about how desperately he wants a friend. The creature is not intentionally attempting to manipulate Walton, whereas Frankenstein was attempting to make Walton kill the creature. This shows that the creature's speech was truly formed from the little emotions that he could understand.
The fact that Frankenstein's speech was an attempt to manipulate Walton into doing what he wanted, makes me sympathize with the monster more. Frankenstein gave him life and does not even care for him and granted the what them monster did in response to his loneliness was totally wrong; I can see why he did it. The monster just wanted someone to love him whereas Frankenstein "was in it for" the glory. Frankenstein wanted to use the monster to benefit himself and the monster just wanted him to care.
In terms of this trial, neither one is truly innocent; they are both at fault. Frankenstein created the monster and the monster murdered several people. However, one of them is guiltier than the other. Dr. Frankenstein is guiltier than the creature. The creature murdered these people because of how Frankenstein treated him. The creature would not have murdered Frankenstein's family if Frankenstein had been kinder. Frankenstein's actions directly correlate to the creature's actions. The creature is found guilty by society's law, but Victor Frankenstein is found guilty by the laws of ethics.
In Frankenstein, from pages 274-275, Victor Frankenstein talks about all of the things that he has done wrong since creating the monster. Using pathos, the scientist conveys his true heartfelt confessions and creates a somewhat emotional tie between himself and Walton, leading the audience to side more with Frankenstein and against the monster. Victor Frankenstein says, “my judgement and ideas are already disturbed by the near approach of death. I dare not ask you to do what I think right, for I may still be misled by passion.”(275) In this sentence, the audience mainly takes the stance of empathy towards the scientist, in saying that he has failed to complete his one true goal in life and is now dying. By showing that he still has passion towards the hopeful death of the monster, Frankenstein is able to gain a sense of sympathy from the Walton and the reader because he seems to be begging for forgiveness on his deathbed. Next, using logos, the scientist also states that his whole vendetta against the monster is caused by the murder of almost everyone in his family by the monster. He states, “he destroyed my friends; he devoted to destruction beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom; nor do I know where this thirst for vengeance may end.”(275) Using logic, he provides ample reasons for his devotion to killing to monster and his willingness to go to extreme lengths to achieve his goal. Again, with a pairing of logos and pathos, Frankenstein is able to pull the reader to his side of the conflict in saying that he carried out all of these actions to basically avenge the deaths in his family.
ReplyDeleteOn the flip side, in the monster’s last monologue, he speaks of the despair that he feels when he is abandoned by Victor Frankenstein, his own creator. Originally, all that he wanted was to be loved and wanted by anyone, and when he was pushed aside more malevolent feelings arose. Appealing to the reader using pathos, the monster argues that he doesn’t expect to be loved or sympathized with. He accepts his faults and doesn’t place them on anyone but himself, saying, “in what should I seek for sympathy? I am content to suffer alone while my sufferings shall endure…” (279). Not taking a whining tone, the reader may take into account the monster’s argument and sympathize with him more, recognizing that everyone wants to feel loved and accepted. If the reader acknowledges the pain that the monster must have felt when he was forcefully pushed aside, they can understand the angle at which the monster is approaching the argument. Also using logos, the monster conveys the idea that if any being were to be pushed aside and shunned from the world, then they would probably act out too and take a malevolence to society. He says, “still I desired love and fellowship, and I was till spurned. Was there no injustice in this? Am I to be thought the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against me?” (280) Again, bringing up another topic, the monster forces the reader to question Frankenstein’s now seemingly one-sided story. Although the monster has committed bad acts, hasn’t Frankenstein done the same? By shunning the monster when he could have at least tried to get to know him, Frankenstein should also be held accountable for the deaths and terror that have been caused. By bringing up this point, the monster has used logic to make Walton and the reader question if Frankenstein is the only victim in this story.
Kaitlyn Ho: PART TWO
ReplyDeleteUltimately, the reader sympathizes with the monster over Walton. This is because the monster presents more points in his “case”. While Frankenstein’s main point is that the monster has killed most of his family, the monster delves deeper and explains why he did so. He committed these acts because he felt shunned by his creator, the only person that he thought he could befriend. Feeling betrayed and isolated, he seeks revenge by killing everyone that Frankenstein valued dearest. So, although Frankenstein depicts himself to the reader and to Walton as the victim of the monster’s crimes, it is also imperative that the audience view the other side of the story that the monster presents. When they do, they will see that the real source of all of Frankenstein’s despair is indeed in Frankenstein’s acts alone. It was Frankenstein who created the monster. It was Frankenstein who shunned the monster. Then, Frankenstein can be depicted as the antagonist, who doesn’t want to acknowledge his wrong doings and pins the blame on the creature who didn’t know any better in the beginning. Because of this, the monster captures the most sympathy from the reader. In the end, Frankenstein is the “guilty” party. Once again, it was he that started the whole conflict. Frankenstein is at fault for not accepting the fact that he is guilty and that he brought upon himself the disaster that he blames on the monster. The monster is the one being bullied, and although he does commit horrifying sins, he admits to them and states why he did so. In the end, all roads can lead back to Frankenstein and his pride. After all, Frankenstein’s pride is the thing that doesn’t allow him to claim his wrong doings and that allows him to pass the blame to the monster, who frankly doesn’t have the benefit of the doubt (because of his appearance).
The monster and Frankenstein both use all three of these devices in an attempt to get the reader to sympathize with them. Frankenstein uses pathos a lot in his final speech, by telling Walton about all the things that he did wrong. He use pathos because he is trying to get Walton to feel bad that Frankenstein had to go through all of these troubles. Throughout his whole speech, Frankenstein is constantly repeating his thoughts that what happened to him should never happen to anybody. Frankenstein also use logos in his argument by urging Walton to believe that his actions were the only logical ones to take. Frankenstein said that he is "only induced by reason and virtue,"(275) which shows his train of thought. Frankenstein said that he was guided by reason, and he is now asking Walton to kill the monster because it was the only logical thing left to do. Frankenstein believed that he was right in refusing to make the monster because, based on logic, it was the only sensible choice for him to make. Frankenstein makes use of ethos and he recognizes that on the inside, he really had selfish and vicious motives. The monster constantly makes use of pathos through his telling of his own story and all of the hardships and misery that he had to go through. He blamed all of his horrible actions on the fact that his past experiences had made him the way that he was. He also blamed Frankenstein, and tried to get Walton to sympathize with him because of the bad treatment that the monster received from Frankenstein. In this way, the monster attempts to evoke pity by telling us how bad of a "childhood" that he had. The monster does not use logos as much, but he does mention the phrase that "even so; the fallen angel becomes a malignant devil"(280). The monster is arguing that before he turned into the killing monster that he was, he used to be an "angel", who only had good thoughts and saw the world as extremely good. The monster therefore implies that because his world views were destroyed, the only logical thing for him to do was to destroy others' worlds so that they could experience the same pain that he felt. The monster uses ethos as he explains to Walton that he believes that he is a wretch, and he recognizes that what he did was not good. Through both of their persuasive speeches, I believe that we sympathize more with Frankenstein because we are once more reminded of all the pain and hardships that he had to deal with, and we take pity on him because of all of this. I feel like most people cannot sympathize with the monster because of all of the horrific things that he did. Because he killed many people, I think that a lot of people stopped thinking that he was an innocent monster. In a way, both of them are guilty, and you could argue that one is more innocent than the other. WE view the monster as guilty because he is the one that is actually doing all of the killing. So, i a literal sense, the monster is guilty because he committed all of these crimes. However, one could also argue that Frankenstein is guilty because he was the one responsible for creating the dreaded monster in the first place. So, in a way, Frankenstein is ultimately responsible for causing all of this death and pain to others and himself. You could also argue that the monster is innocent because he did not know how to think for himself, or even what to think, and his first impression of humans made him hate all people from then on. Making a case to say that Frankenstein is innocent is very difficult, because every time you look deeper into the actions of the monster, it will always lead back to Frankenstein. Because Frankenstein created this monster and abandoned it, then the monster had a bad outlook on life.
ReplyDeleteToby Wakefield-Carl
Who is the villain, and who is the victim? This answer depends on the perspective of the reader. Neither character is one hundred percent innocent or guilty. Both have a problem admitting their faults. Yet, I sympathize more with the creature than his creator.
ReplyDeleteVictor’s argument is mostly based on pathos to suede the reader to his side. Victor abandoned his creature due to him realizing he had defiled nature creating a hideous monster. If it had been beautiful, then he would not have cast him out. The creature was caste out of all society of men to live alone in its wretchedness. The once benevolent creature turned with its malicious desires for revenge; “the fallen angel becomes a malignant devil.” This beast is abhorred by its creator due to looks and his crimes. In his final moments, he beseeched Robert Walton with these words,” I asked you to undertake my unfinished work,” (275) to kill the creature. He had always possessed strong feelings toward the creature. This aspect relates to pathos, when Victor declared how ardently he wished for revenge. He hated it; he mistook ugliness for evil. Now, he wants to destroy the very creature he had created.
Yes, the monster had murdered all that Victor held most dear. However, Victor had brought him into this world. Victor ran from his responsibility introducing a monster into the world. Man had wronged the monster to a breaking point from which there was no turning back. He murdered to torment the man who had taken everything from him. This was the monster’s logic. It took no pleasure in the killings, but for these crimes the creature condemns himself to death. The monster portrays his character (use of ethos) this way to gain the pity of the reader. We are a product of our environment. Yet, we still contain free will. Victor’s selfish ambitions was his downfall.
Frankenstein is a novel that discuss the most radical and important questions within our society, with Mary Shelley using these imperative tools in order to fully grasp these ideas. Some of these such tools are Pathos-Logos-Ethos. Within the book, characters, such as Dr. Frankenstein and the monster, use these in their arguments in order to prove their point. During the last stages of the book, these really come to play to support these characters views. First, both main characters are shown using Pathos in their arguments. Both characters are trying to appeal to the readers emotional aspect, trying to get the audience to truly understand their point of view.
ReplyDeleteDr. Frankenstein, for instance, in his last moments has one of his last moments, sharing some of his darkest regrets and sadness with Walton. He appeals to the audience through his confession and warnings he gives. He warns Walton asking him to "seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition"(275). He also morns all he has lost, bring a sense of sadness which persuades the reader to feel sympathy for someone in his situation and even for a second to forget all that he has done that led him to the place he is right now. He also uses Logos, through his use of logic and reasoning. He tells Walton specifically the people he lost that he cared about, due to the hands of the monster. Logos relates back to Pathos hitting the reader with extreme amount of sadness and pity for his situation. Lastly, there is even a hint of Ethos in the mixture. Frankenstein isn't necessary the most secure or reliable narrator throughout the story. Towards his last moments, he is the most vulnerable and is most likely trying to get his last thoughts out there before he passes. He also deliberately chooses his diction, trying to make the biggest impact that he can during this situation. He uses words such as, "When actuated by selfish and vicious motives...I am only induced by reason and virtue...I may still be misled by passion..."(275). Shelley purposely uses impactful words, really trying to reach out to the readers.
The monster uses similar techniques when talking to Walton after discovering his last victim. He tries to get Walton to understand that this was not his doing but that he was rather controlled by outside forces. Also, the Monster uses similar tools such as Frankenstein. He mainly focuses on Pathos, trying to persuade the readers to fully grasp his ideas. He claims that his upbringing was less than ideal, being shut out from the world that sees him as wretched and unwanted. He appeals to the readers by explaining his abuse and how all he wanted was to be loved and accepted in society. He explains that he "the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on. Even now my blood boils at the recollection of this injustice"(280). He also mentions how even after all this abuse, he still feels guilty for all he did and that he will die soon, and his sorrow will leave him. This can go to the idea of Ethos, trying to see just how reliable the character is in this time of distress and sadness. He explains that instead of fearing this phenomenon, he mentions that "I should have wept to die; now it is my only consolation"(281). In this time of distress, he is very upset and concerned with much and uses these motives and thoughts in order to prove his innocence.
Part 2:
ReplyDeleteBoth characters bring up many arguments, but I sympathize more with Monster. During Frankenstein's last moments, he was still consumed with vengeance even among the sadness and distress. He asked Walton to "undertake my unfinished work..."(275). Instead of coming with terms of what is happening, his last thought was to make sure that he puts forth the actions and make sure that his goal will be achieved with or without him. However, in the last moments that the Monster shares with the audience, he feels guilt and remorse. He regrets many of his actions and even though sees a motive for his actions, he doesn't support the sin he created. On the other hand of what Frankenstein wanted, the Monster plans to die and join a virtuous world where he could finally be accepted and at peace.
Both characters are guilty of some crime. Dr. Frankenstein is guilty of trying to perform actions that only god could achieve. He meddled with mother nature and natural selection and tried to take this power into his own hands. After this power gets out of his control, he pays for his mistakes in the highest regard. Everything that he loves was taken from him and all that was left is instability and vengeance. The Monster was the cause of all this. He committed some of the worst sins. However, he was guilty and innocent up to a point. He was guilty due to his actions but innocent because of all the outside forces that played within the events. He felt guilt and remorse at the end, showing his sympathy and agony. Both characters play an impactful role in the story. They both have oppressing arguments, each giving a little part to the story and being hugely impactful with the theme and the ideas that come across in Frankenstein.
-Ema Straser
Under their burdened circumstances, both Frankenstein and his Monster had reasons to detest the other and possessed malevolent intentions to exact their revenge by delivering pain and misery to one another. Despite their malicious intentions, nonetheless, they describe their actions as being justified given their predicaments, and they seek to defend their actions through their last speeches. First, Frankenstein delegates his situation to Robert employing all Pathos, Ethos, and Logos to strengthen his argument. He commences by establishing trust within himself. By declaring that he no longer "(felt) that burning hatred and ardent desire for revenge"(274) he hopes to certify himself as no longer holding a desire for revenge from the monster. His actions mirror those of witness in court who swear to say the truth only. Furthermore, he strengthens Roberts trust within himself by stating that he no longer desires Robert to pursue the monster, reaffirming his claim that his present words are not characterized by malice towards the monster. After having convinced Robert of the impartiality of his speech he then invokes Robert's emotion by stating that all of his decision to refuse the monsters wish for a companion, was a service to humanity. Thus Frankenstein hopes that a friend who had similar intentions to his own would be able to relate to him and soothe and comfort him in his feelings of self-contempt. Lastly, Victor describes the monster's crimes, hoping that its malicious actions would overweigh his own. Alternatively, the monster relies on emotional influence to convince Robert of his purity. He describes the sorrow and his hatred towards his own actions with intent to persuade his judge of the yet present kindness in his soul, which was only overwhelmed under the humanity's abhorrence towards him. He claims that his sole desire was to receive love and acceptance, but his miserable condition turned him into a monster. Next, he relies on the factual description of his life to influence Robert into putting himself in the monster shoes. The monster's constant suffering and rejection from humanity transformed the once benevolent being into a malevolent one. However, Robert seems unconvinced and considers the monster's words as the persuasive powers that Victor had warned him against.
ReplyDeleteDeciding who I sympathize more with proved to a difficult choice, with my mind vacillating constantly as the story progressed. Although pure at birth, the monster's purity at birth gradually appeared to fade away and having murdered countless individuals, he began to appear as a being with an insatiable thirst for vengeance. With every loss that Victor suffered, his position as the victim and the culprit seemed to strengthen. Despite his countless misdeeds, however, we realize that he had been subjected to miserable situations in the past himself. Thus, given that the only response he received from mankind was that of hatred, was he not justified to return the same feelings? Had he been destined to suffer, by the hands of his creator who had abandoned any correlation to him on the basis of his elevated stature, and hideous appearance? Having undergone rejection from his own master, therefore gave him plenty of reasons to exact revenge from those who he shared no personal commitment. After considering the creature's final words, I am convinced that although both are guilty of committing countless crimes, Victor was the improper parent who couldn't guide his child on the right path. If life is pure at birth, is it not social injustice or support which eventually determine the development of one's beliefs. Had only Victor accepted Frankenstein despite physical deformities, he would have perceived the internal beauty that the creature initially possessed. Lastly, considering both of their sinful transgressions neither can be called innocent but simply less sinful than the other.
Within this last argument between Frankenstein and the monster, both characters shed light on their opinions. Both approach the situation with completely different mindsets and thoughts as to why the other is so horrible, and pretty much why they deserve to die. Now amongst these different opinions ethos, pathos, and logos, are seen in the author’s choice of words said by each character. These Aristotelian appeals cause the reader to go back-and-forth about whom they sympathize with and who they dislike.
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein uses logos to explain to the reader why he is the more innocent character, and in fact says that he does not “find it blameable”(274), referring to his conduct. He states this in a reasonable way, that is not very indignant. Frankenstein is also confident in the fact that he is innocent and even states, “I feel justified in desiring the death of my adversary” (274), indicating that he has reason for his behaviors and thoughts. The reader can also believe this based on the use of ethos, and how it is used to talk about Frankenstein’s past. After learning about Frankenstein’s past, one can come to have more compassion or pathos for him. The fact that we know Frankenstein is well-educated and civilized creates a sense of credibility and trustworthiness.
Next, the monster shares his sentiment about why he is the more innocent character, after Frankenstein dies. First of all the monster’s demeanor is completely different than that of Frankenstein. The monster actually interrupts Walton to say that what Frankenstein told him was incorrect. The monster actually does use logos to explain more of his story and how love and sympathy were taken away by his creator. The monster, however, unlike Frankenstein does not have ethos, or a very credible background. He did not grow up and become educated like Frankenstein did, and was never taught the morals of man, and therefore how to be civilized. This is shown by how the monster’s life was stricken with crime and treachery. The monster explains that “ crime has degraded me beneath the meanest animal”(279), indicating how his personality became that of an animal. Finally pathos is used by the monster to make the readers pity his experiences and how his life was miserable because of Frankenstein. He tries to convince the readers of this through examining his past and saying that, “once my fancy was soothed with dreams of virtue, of fame, and enjoyment” (279). He then goes on to explain how this was disrupted by Frankenstein.
The most clear form of sympathy would definitely reside with Frankenstein after listening to a recount of his entire life, and for the simple fact that us readers are all humans. Since we are all humans, we relate to Frankenstein a lot more than we do to the monster. His childhood and educational background also can relate to our own lives, and therefore makes us sympathize with him. It is harder to sympathize with the monster because he is clearly an antagonist that shares character traits with many different “bad guys” we know of. However, it is possible for one to sympathize with the monster. After all he is a monster because he was unwillingly created by man. He also never had a nice childhood or expansive education like Frankenstein. Most importantly, the monster was never loved or cared for by anyone. He was an outcast who lived on the rim of society, never centralizing and making acquaintances. Many people can relate to this lifestyle, or feeling of never really “fitting in” or having many friends. Such experiences can cause a reader with a similar background to sympathize more with the monster. So overall, most of us sympathize with Frankenstein, or even the monster, or at different times of the book even with both. (Part 1 of 2)
Similar to the question of whom we sympathize with, arises the question of who is innocent, and who is guilty. The more common answer to this question would be that Frankenstein is innocent while the monster is guilty. This shallow answer would obviously not take into account the crimes committed on a deeper level. For example one can say that Frankenstein is clearly innocent because he never did anything harmful to the monster, while the monster destroyed his life. This however, is not entirely true. First of all, Frankenstein created the monster, therefore bringing him into a life of despair with (or who knows) without knowing it. This fact alone shows how Frankenstein is selfish, and only cared about his own advances, and not of the life he had just bore. Next Frankenstein did not help the monster. Instead he made a false-promise and betrayed the monster. Such a betrayal was unbearable for the monster leading him down his path of destruction and murder. Had Frankenstein actually cared for the monster just as his mother had cared for him, chances are the monster would not have turned out the way he did. Frankenstein did not provide the monster with the moral support he needed, and pretty much left him out to die. Of course Frankenstein never predicted the next few events that would occur to him, but these events were self-inflicted. It makes sense that a creature who was never cared for and never received any education on morals/principles would do what he did. Overall, this question of innocence and guilt can be looked at through many different lenses and either character can be seen as either. (Part 2 of 2)
ReplyDeletePart 1: The finale of Frankenstein ends with the final arguments Victor Frankenstein and the monster both dispute to Robert Walton. This last question of who is the most at fault stands undetermined and lands into the opinions of the readers, should Frankenstein be blamed for the creation of the monster or the monster for malevolently killing so many innocents for his revenge against humanity. Reading both arguments, Frankenstein and the monster have at least one thing in common; they both utter their final words eloquently and full of reasonable explanations of why they did what they did. To begin this comparison, the analysis of each character’s use of logos, ethos, and pathos will create a better sense of who is guilty and who is the innocent. Starting with Frankenstein, he details his final thoughts on his life as he sits on his deathbed waiting to reunite with his friends and family he indirectly ruined. His use of logos seems to be quite effective due to the fact that the monster is the one who actually kills all of Frankenstein’s most beloved people. This is displayed when Frankenstein explains how the monster, “showed unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil; he destroyed [his] friends…” (275). Frankenstein is arguing the point that the monster is the creature who actually decided to murder everyone he loved. This proves as a logical argument since the monster, being furious towards the love humanity had for each other but not for himself, acted revenge against Frankenstein for just giving him life into a world unsuited for him. However, a factor that may decrease this point’s effectiveness is Frankenstein’s use of ethos. Understanding that Frankenstein was pulled from a freezing environment not a long time before arguing his innocence as well as him being on the brink of death, the credibility could possibly alter the facts in which he states. Yet, Frankenstein is also a highly educated individual, shown through his scientific studies at Ingolstadt, so this could very well balance out the trustworthiness and sensibility Frankenstein may still possess. Adding on, throughout the journey in which Frankenstein describes to Walton, the emotion in which he expresses when describing certain events or people vividly elucidates his strong feelings. This expressiveness now extends onto his last speech towards Walton when he states, “the forms of the beloved dead flit before me, and I hasten to their arms. Farewell, Walton!” (275). The imagery that Frankenstein illustrates emotionally connects the audience of the despondency and joy in which he feels to join his friends and family in the afterlife. This imagery can possibly add to Frankenstein’s reasoning behind his innocence since it shows how loving a man he is and that he never intended to wreck harm onto anyone.
ReplyDeleteTo create an opinion on where the real guilt should be placed upon, evaluating both sides paint a better visualization of this terrible incident. In the monster’s argument for innocence, he brings up the fact that he was at first a benevolent creature seeking affection from humans. This transition from an innocent child to a revenge-seeking creature is displayed when he details, “when I first sought [sympathy], it was the live of virtue … but now that virtue had become to me a shadow … what should I seek for sympathy? I am content to suffer alone while my sufferings shall endure …” ( 279). This argument the monster brings up is a logical one since it is indeed a fact that the monster started more benevolent but the rejection of sympathy from humanity created his current malevolent state.
Part 2: If the monster did receive the companion in which he was promised, there would be a possibility of fewer deaths and the well-being of Victor and his to-be family would be certain. However, similar to the case of Frankenstein, the trustworthiness the monster possesses may influence false and unreliable statements from him as well. Since the monster was indeed brought up by the works of many authors and the observance of unrelated members of society, the information in which he learned could be potentially biased. Also, since his existence in this world is significantly less than that of Frankenstein, the ethos portion of both arguments probably would lean more towards that of Frankenstein. Throughout the novel, the monster seems to be quite emotional when discussing the rejection in which he faces from all of humanity. In his last testimony, his use of pathos relocates again when he talks to Walton. During his last moments with Walton, he explains how “these burning miseries will be extinct. I shall ascend my funeral pile triumphantly and exult in the agony of the torturing flames” (282). The imagery he speaks with highlights his despondent mood and the idea that he will now die lonely and never understanding the feeling of companionship.
ReplyDeleteWith all said and done, I believe that as the audience, the character in which we sympathize with the most would have to be Frankenstein. The reason behind this conclusion is merely due to the gruesome murders in which the monster inflicted onto all of the people in Frankenstein’s life who he really cared for. Yet, examining this case more closely, both characters are guilty of certain aspects and it feels right that both should receive the same amount of guilt for the actions they committed. For example, the blame for the start of this whole tragedy begins from the over-ambition of Frankenstein. When he blocked out all forms of communication from even his only family and solely concentrated on the end goal of his project, Frankenstein is clearly the one to blame in this instance. However, once the monster is created and is introduced to this world he can never adapt to, he takes revenge on his social outcasting and murders William and frames Justine, which resulted in her death. In this case, the blame should be placed upon the monster due to his foggy mind and inability to control his emotions. Going back to every aspect that blame can be inflicted, both Frankenstein and the monster are equally guilty which is shown not only through their actions but through their confession as well since both can comprehend the harm in which they brought upon each other.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein reveals a complex series of events following the creation of Victor Frankenstein’s creature that invokes readers to ponder the delicate line between right and wrong. The end of the novel is inconclusive in declaring which character is good or bad; however, it is also when Victor Frankenstein and his creature share with Walton their justifications for their actions. Victor displays pathos in his reasoning by acknowledging his fast-approaching death. To Walton, Victor has appeared as nothing less than a God among men and so Walton is devastated by the deathly state of his friend. Victor’s emphasis on his failure to catch and kill the creature is also moving to us readers and Walton due to our knowledge of Victor’s struggles at the hands of his own creature. Victor also uses logos when he states that he, as the creator, should be the one to destroy the creature. He makes a convincing case when he explains that his duties as a human to protect all of mankind are greater than his duties to provide for and nurture his creation, which also reflects ethos since he is credited with bringing the creature to life in the first place. The creature, on the other hand, implements pathos through his remorse over Victor’s death despite seeking vengeance on him so passionately. His emotions are sincere in which they stem from loneliness and he only becomes lonelier when the one human who understood him, though despised him, died. He further demonstrates pathos through his desire for happiness and love yet all he received was hatred and negligence.
ReplyDeleteAs readers, we have heard the entire story told in Victor’s words thus causing us to sympathize more with him. While we learn about the creature’s experiences, it is still portrayed from Victor’s memories as he narrates it to Walton. Victor provides copious details of his childhood and through this we can relate to him. The creature, however, is not so relatable. It is true that in his beginning he was an innocent and awestruck creature but Victor has already described the atrocity of his creation to the extent that we are not able to view the creature as innocent.
Ultimately, it is Victor who is guilty. Despite all of the creature’s murderous tendencies towards Victor’s family, he is still a creation of Victor’s. By designing a being with capabilities that are beyond human, Victor subjects himself to danger and solidifies this by neglecting his creature. The creature is innocent because he did not choose to exist in the first place. Throughout his existence he experienced misery and abuse that was not provoked by him but by the cruelty of human nature. This caused him to become malicious and vengeful. Victor had indeed brought a monster to life, but the monster was only monstrous after encountering human viciousness enough times to reflect it.
The final words of both Frankenstein and the monster contain many examples of ethos/pathos/logos. Frankenstein uses ethos when trying to prove his point that not fulfilling the monsters wishes and creating a companion by describing the monster as “selfish” and “Malignity”. He also conveys how he destroyed his friends and was devoted to the destruction of his happiness. These are phrases that insight some kind of emotion in the reader whether it be pitty for Frankenstein or horror at the monsters action. He also displays logos in his reasoning of why he cannot demand that the crew continue their search for the monster. He cites aspects of his life or facts of his existence that once again give certification to his beliefs. After passing away the monster appears and gives his closing statement. The monster show logos when similar to frankenstein he gives factual evidence from his own life to provide support for his point that he is the cause of frankenstein's death. The monster also use ethos in his use of diction. Words like “repentance”, ”sorrow”, and “misery” show how sorry and regretful the monster is about the actions he made in his life that have lead up to this moment. In this state of sadness and despair for his fallen creator he decides he will destroy himself on a funeral pyre his “ashes swept into the sea by the winds. My spirit will sleep in peace.”
ReplyDeleteThe expression of emotion that truly shows remorse and regret from the monster makes me sympathize with the monster more. In the end he chooses to rid the world of himself instead of living with the chance of causing more harm to the human race. He is prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice as penance for what he has accomplished in his life. Frankenstein is not willing to do the same. Though on his deathbed he is brought confessing of his wrong doings and admits it was his fault it is not until he is on the verge of death he is willing to do this. The monster is not on the verge of passing but already shows more humility through his words and in the end his final actions.
In the end Frankenstein is responsible for all that went wrong in the book. You could go back as far as to say in his ambition to create life he wasn't rational and if he hadn't done this the monster would have never existed, but a more likely explanation is that in frankenstein's abandonment of this creature which had the knowledge of a newborn he is causing the monster to learn about humanity in the wrong sense and gain a hatred of both his creator and the rest of the human race. The monster though he commits a series of heinous crimes was unable to be taught the love and care of a benevolent being. Instead he was cast out by society and even his creator causing him to get a negative perspective of humanity and become a malevolent creature. This in turn proves the innocents of the monster since he was not properly taught right and wrong by his creator Frankenstein who is truly to blame.
Ewan Macfarlane
Both Dr. Frankenstein and the creature use the elements pathos, logos, and ethos in their final speeches to Robert Walton. They attempt to persuade the reader into agreeing with their side of the story. Dr. Frankenstein uses ethos quite a bit in his argument. He explains that he “feel[s] [him]self justified in desiring the death of [his] adversary”(274). He uses ethos to build up his credibility by providing examples of why he was in the right. Frankenstein mentions that he was a scientist earlier in the book, who grew up learning and reading books on science. Therefore, he believes that the creature was made in “a fit of enthusiastic madness”(274). He hopes that his excuse of enthusiastically studying science will help him seem like a more reliable narrator. Frankenstein additionally makes it clear that he had the full intention of carling and loving for this creature. However, Frankenstein realized he had no control over what this creature will do; its unpredictable actions scared Frankenstein away from the creature. Frankenstein then goes on affirm that ignoring the creature was better for the safety of humanity as a whole. Frankenstein’s speech additionally has pathos in it. After Frankenstein explains that he did not make another creature because of the threat to humanity, he lists off the emotions and actions that the creature had induced upon Frankenstein’s life. The monster “...devoted to destruct[ing] beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom”(275). These words have an effect on the reader, as now they further understand the extent to which the monster hurt him, as well as others who got taken away from the world too soon. It evokes feelings of sympathy and empathy in the reader. The monster attempts to encourage the reader on his side as well with the elements of pathos, logos, and ethos. Pathos is shown greatly through the monster’s elaborate descriptions of the pain he has had to endure. He does admit that murdering innocent people was very uncalled for, but still tries to win over the sympathies of Walton by explaining how cruel humans were to him. He asks Walton, “Am I to be thought the only criminal, when humanity has sinned against me?”(280). This leads to the monster’s use of Logos in his speech. He provides several examples to Walton of instances in which humanity has clearly been unjust to the monster. The greatest example of this that he provides is him talking about saving the girl by the river. The monster saved that girl’s life, and in return, the monster gets shot at by the guy that was with the girl. The monster was clearly doing the right thing, but logic lets the reader know that humanity was at fault in this instance. The element of ethos is weaved throughout the monster’s speech. The monster takes time to explain that he was once a man who had high hopes for the goodness of people, as he was new to the world. As time went on and events occurred, though, his instincts were changed from that of benevolent man to a malevolent creature.The ethos provides some credibility and explanation for his actions.
ReplyDeleteWe sympathize with Frankenstein more than we do the monster. As he has lived longer than the monster, the story of his life was more detailed and provided more insight on Frankenstein. The reader had the chance to really get to know Frankenstein more. We walked through his childhood with him. We met his father and his mother whose kind souls caused great joy for little Victor. We got to learn about his drive to learn, and how he grew up in a place with books and knowledge all around him. We were with him when he met Elizabeth for the first time; we felt our breath being taken away by the descriptions of her beauty and grace. We were there in his times of despair upon creating the creature and becoming horrified of the thought that the creature was alive. Soon after we were comforted by our beloved Henry Clerval, who stuck by our side through it all! Like I said, we became attached to the characters as if they were our own. The hated daemon takes that all away from us. He destroys Frankenstein’s life, one person at a time. We shudder as we find out the terrible thing the monster has done to Elizabeth; a sob comes out as we realize that our best friend Clerval has had the life sucked out of him. Sure, a little bit of sympathy goes out to the monster for having to endure being hated by humanity. Even so, the reader sympathizes with Frankenstein much more, as we have grown to love his life and the people that he has lived it with.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, the monster is guilty. He has killed far too many innocent people out of revenge. The monster talks about not being understood, but what if the monster is not even making an effort to understand Frankenstein’s position? Frankenstein, a man who wishes to be a real scientist, could not possibly show this creature to the world. No one would accept the creature into their society. Fear would take over, and the danger risk would be too high. The monster then proceeds to kill all of Frankenstein’s loved ones, just out of vengeance. Even after he has successfully killed many of Frankenstein’s friends, the monster wishes to just die. This means that killing those innocent people did not even make the monster feel better about his situation, it just made him feel guilty. The monster indeed is guilty, and he had murdered those innocent people selfishly. This would lead Victor Frankenstein to being innocent of purposely creating the creature to inflict harm upon the world. He did it purely out of the excitement for science, not stopping to think of the ramifications that would come with creating an unnatural being.
Ethos, Pathos, Logos in the closing arguments of Frankenstein and the monster
ReplyDeleteIn both Frankenstein and the monsters final speeches to Walton they both argue that they are innocent of their crimes. Frankenstein centers it on his destiny being written and his actions being justified by him trying to fix the problem he created. The monster focus on the lost sympathy and affection he never had justifying his actions by his lack of knowledge making him slave to his thirst for revenge and haunting him through his actions that made him more empty. Through Ethos, Pathos, and Logos both Victor and the Monster present and argue themselves as innocent. Frankensteins’s death bed being his final argument to Walton to continue his work of pursuing the monster uses many models of persuasion. Frankenstein first uses Ethos to establish himself as a reliable source of information by saying he doesn’t have much time left and that “ In a fit of enthusiastic madness I created a rational creature and bound towards his assure, as far as was in my power, his happiness a well-being”(274).” In this quote Frankenstein tries to justify his actions appealing to the reader by makings think that it wasn’t Frankensteins fault for creating the monster because he is knowledgeable and tried to help the monster as best he could. Later in his argument Frankenstein also lays out that he did his best to try to terminate the monster but he has failed making himself seem better than he and highlights his efforts appealing to the reader and making him ethically likable for trying to end what he brought to life. In contrast to the monsters use of Ethos, appealing to the readers through his credibility of the appropriate subject and being ethically likable through his background. Another passage in which we see Ethos is when the monsters says that beneath all his gore lies a raw and vulnerable monster. This makes the monster more reliable in the readers eyes as a moral and seeking justice “being”. Pathos in Frankenstein’s argument is used throughout Frankensteins argument making it the dominating model of persuasion. Frankenstein first states that he is dying making the reader already have empathy for him, Frankenstein states“in the last moments of my existence I feel that burning hatred and ardent desire for revenge I once expresses; but I feel myself justified in desiring the death of my adversary”(274) The reader can feel emotional examples of Frankenstein and that through them they “justify” Frankensteins actions of seeking revenge. Frankenstein makes an emotional connection to the reader by telling us he lost all his family and friends and was left with nothing and proving his acts were right by having the reader sympathize with him.
Part 1
Part 2
ReplyDeleteFrankensteins monster also uses Pathos predominantly throughout his argument. By setting himself up as a helpless monster who was abandon, the monster through emotion show that it wasn’t the helpless monsters fault he murdered everyone. The monster argues that even he felt dread an sorrow after murdering Frankenstein’s family. The monsters describes his unspeakable torments and proves his good side. The monster argues that “ I had cast off all feelings, subdued all anguish to riot in the excess of my despair”(278) He argues that evil then took over and became the good. The reader can sympathize more with the monster through these emotions that the monster admits and displays through his justification of emotional actions. The monster proves that through his strong feelings of despair he was blinded.
Lastly Logos, which is the appeal Victor Frankenstein uses more then the monster. Through logic Victor points out that the monster was going to get what was coming for him basically if he killed Victors family he was going to kill the monster. A quote by Frankenstein that supports this is “ H showed unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil; he destroyed my friends; he devoted to destruction beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom; no ego I know where this thirst for vengeance will end”(275) The logical reasoning is that even though in frankensteins view he had the right to refuse to make a partner to the monster the monster still inflicted terror and death to Victor’s family. Lastly, the monster show Logos through not satisfying his desires for love and fellowship yet he was still shunned by society and driven away from his maker, to the monster this would make anyone mad. This statement applies to the reader through logic because the reader can make the assumptions that from rejection came his hate for humanity. Ultimately we can see both sides but I think we sympathize most with the monster. Emotion appeal really drives humanity in preferences and I think through the monster using emotional persuasions he effectively argues his point through all the models of persuasion. We are shown that the monster is guilty of his actions because he was blinded and scorned by the actions of his maker and society making him a monster. With the reverse actions the monster feels it would have been different. The monster blames and charges Frankenstein with the murder of himself and his entire family for inflicting this upon himself. The monster thinks that victor used all of this mess to scapegoat his feelings of defeat and misery
In the novel Frankenstein, written by Mary Shelley, Frankenstein and the monster show countless uses of ethos, pathos, and logos as they recount their story to Robert Walton. In regards to pathos, Frankenstein explains that he realizes it is his responsibility to ensure the well being of the monster he created, but that he considered his duty to not bring undue misery upon his own species to be of much greater value. Frankenstein’s argument effectively appeals to the reader, as it protects the interests of humanity, producing relatable and easily understood logic. Frankenstein also uses ethos to build up his credibility, by not only explaining his motives for continuing this quest, but also leaving the decision of whether or not to continue on this journey completely up to Walton. Frankenstein elucidates that although his task of killing the monster was originally driven by vicious and selfish motives, his motives now stem from reason and virtue. This explanation makes Frankenstein seem trustworthy as he emphasizes how he has learned from his mistakes and reflected on his past behavior. Furthermore, Frankenstein stresses that he does not wish to force this quest upon anyone and makes no attempt to persuade Walton into pursuing this endeavor. Frankenstein continues his explanation, understanding that Walton may be unsettled by Frankenstein’s imminent death. This shows a development in Frankenstein’s character and further adds to his trustworthiness. Previously, Frankenstein had showed very little sympathy for the monster’s misfortunes and even added onto the monster’s misery by shunning it. Frankenstein now displays keen awareness to the feelings of others as he puts himself in Walton’s shoes and, even on his own death bed, realizes that standing in the presence of someone about to pass away could serve as a disturbing experience. In addition to logos and ethos, Frankenstein incorporates pathos into his speech by relaying the horrible crimes the monster has committed and prompting the reader to envision what this monster might be capable of if it is not stopped. Frankenstein activates emotions within the reader by using harsh phrases such as “unparalleled malignity” (275) and “thirst for vengeance” (275) to describe the monster. These phrases cause the reader to recall the evil crimes of the monster has committed upon innocent human beings. This drives the reader to abhor the monster.
ReplyDeleteOnce Frankenstein has passed away, the monster appears and delivers his final speech to Walton. The monster uses pathos by explaining that although he may not look the part, he is a creature capable of emotions and yearns to feel like part of a community, but because no one has ever shown him any kindness, the monster felt the need to turn to the opposite end of the spectrum and seek revenge on all humankind. This argument clarifies the monster’s reason for causing such horrible death among humanity. The monster also argues that his crimes made him miserable, but he was a slave to these destructive impulses created by his thirst for revenge. In this argument, the monster attempts to shrug off his terrible crimes by claiming they were a result of impulses he had no control over. Although, the monster tries to use this reasoning to justify his actions, this argument only highlights the monster’s refusal to own up to his crimes. The monster also uses verbal irony to explain that although he considers himself a criminal, he is not the only one to have sinned. The monster specifically refers to Felix, who upon seeing the monster, beat it up. The monster claims that it is unfair for all of humanity to share none of the guilt which the monster experiences because of its crimes, when humanity is what drove him to commit these crimes in the first place. From the reader’s standpoint, this argument proves to be invalid as the monster entered Felix’s home without first introducing himself and subsequently chose to present his unknown presence to a blind old man, who had no way of defending himself if the monster posed an immediate threat. Felix’s response was the natural human response to encountering a strange creature beside a helpless family member. The monster incorporates ethos by explaining that he understands the extreme level of evil his crimes have reached. In addition to his admission of his evil crimes, the monster emphasizes that his thoughts are filled with beautiful and good visions, but the vengeful thoughts have overwhelmed his good nature. This builds up the monster’s credibility as it proves he is able to take responsibility for his actions and reflect on who he is as a creature. The monster’s self awareness makes him appear to be trustworthy. Lastly, the monster uses pathos similar to Frankenstein by brutally describing himself using words such as “I...am an abortion,” (280). This causes the reader to sympathize with the monster who has reached such a low point that he considers himself something that should have never existed. The monster also includes lengthy descriptions of his plans to end his life. Instead of simply stating he will die, the monster launches into a speech filled with emotion about how he will never see the starry sky again or feel the wind upon his cheeks. These vivid descriptions make the reader feel as if they are in the monster’s position and thus produces an even greater level of sympathy for the monster’s situation.
ReplyDeleteWe sympathize more with Frankenstein than the monster because while Frankenstein appears to have truly learned from his mistakes and be fair-minded, the monster seems to be unable to fully own up to his actions and continues to blame all of humanity around him. When Frankenstein gives his final speech to Walton, the clearest development is seen in his temperament. Although this could be a result of malnourishment, Frankenstein calm nature could also indicate his dynamic character. Originally, Frankenstein would become heated just at the sight of his creation, but now, he is able to calmly speak about the monster. Furthermore, Frankenstein chooses to not pressure Walton into continuing this arduous journey. This proves that Frankenstein realizes how dangerous it could be to drag other human beings into completing his goal. The monster on the other hand chooses to continually blame the crimes he committed as results of humanity’s abhorrence of him. Instead of fully accepting his crimes as his own, the monster uses his thirst for vengeance and sudden impulses as a scapegoat. Furthermore, although Frankenstein was the creator of this monster and therefore lit the spark that set off the whole chain of events, the monster murdered innocent people who never harmed anyone. The fact that the monster took innocent lives and refuses to fully take responsibility for his crimes cause us to not sympathize with it as much as with Frankenstein.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, the monster is guilty of taking innocent lives. Humanity’s disdain towards the monster played a part in driving the monster to commit these crimes, but ultimately it was the monster’s choice to wrap his fingers around all the necks he snapped. Frankenstein is guilty of not keeping his ambition under control and thus creating a monster who he could not handle and refused to provide for. Frankenstein’s lack of parental care for the monster contributed to his many family members’ deaths, but Frankenstein himself is not directly guilty of murdering anyone. Between Frankenstein and the monster, neither individual is innocent. The innocent people are the family members of Frankenstein whose only crime was being related to Frankenstein himself, whose monster swore revenge on humanity.
part 1
ReplyDeleteAt first, one understands the logos of Frankenstein’s point in which “[the monster] destroyed my friends; he devoted to destruction beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom” (275). These beings that Frankenstein refers to are all of his loved ones who his creation has vowed to murder in order to make the scientist miserable. He has seen malignance in the monster, and therefore believes he cannot trust him to keep his word of not harming anyone once his companion has been created. Frankenstein states that he has a duty to the beings of his own species to protect them from any malice coming from the monster, and that duty includes a greater amount of beings’ happiness or misery than that of the monster. Even he understands that what he says is not be completely trusted as Frankenstein mentions that his judgement and ideas are disturbed by the oncoming of his death. His amount of passion in his mission to find and kill his own creation decreases his ethos as well since readers know the monster’s perspective of the misfortunes that have befallen Frankenstein. This causes us to question the credibility of his tale and the amount of exaggeration used to describe the malevolence of the monster. The scientist does not use much pathos in his closing statement because he has not created the time to understand the monster or his motives to cause his misery. Frankenstein’s self-centeredness makes him unable to feel the complex emotions that the monster feels, ironically. He wishes to kill the creature without any knowledge of the consequences; he is “only induced by reason and virtue” (275), which is not a plausible explanation to murder a being. Many of his decisions are based on what he believes to be the greater good, and he cannot feel compassion for the monster due to the fact that Frankenstein does not know the monster in the way that his own creation knows him. Frankenstein presents a weak argument overall with his amount of ethos and pathos, and strong emotion is required for readers to sympathize with a character.
part 2
ReplyDeleteThe monster includes a large amount of pathos in his argument, causing readers to have greater reason to sympathize with him because they also feel similar emotions. Knowing the monster’s story and how he has gone about his life until the point of his mourning Frankenstein on the boat is crucial to feel compassion for him as well. Throughout his short life from the moment of his creation, he has been hated simply because of his appearance; he even attempted to show kindness to his first victim of murder. Though the monster did cause harm and misery to Frankenstein and his family, he is not the only one to blame for the outcomes. How can he “be thought the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against [him]?” (280) He has been treated with nothing but malevolence, so it is no wonder that he desired love from a companion which he requested from his creator. Had it not been for Frankenstein, the monster would never have been created and he would not have had to endure the hardships that he brought on himself when he first experimented with its creation. The monster feels complex emotions, and he grieves over the death of his creator, believing that he was worthy of love and kindness that he did not receive. He kills the family of Frankenstein out of indignance for the injustice that has been done to him. Yet, he does understand that he has sinned and thus, he is trustworthy. He admits to all of his wrongs and even calls himself a wretch when Frankenstein cannot admit that he is in the wrong in any way. While both the monster and Frankenstein are equally at fault for the harm they have caused each other and the rest of the world, readers sympathize more with the monster because he also feels compassion for the other and can admit that he is at fault. He has not been treated with love or kindness for his entire life though he born with “thoughts filled with sublime and transcendent visions of the beauty and the majesty of goodness” (280). Society and its attitude towards him have caused him to become a malevolent character, and he would not have become this way had Frankenstein reached out to him with kindness and put his needs and happiness above all others, as a creator is expected to do.
Ultimately, Dr. Frankenstein is at fault for allowing the monster to become the way he makes him out to be. He has not taken the responsibility given when he created a life, and his neglect causes his creation to believe that all of humankind is evil. Had he simply taken the time to understand the thoughts and emotions of his own child (basically), Frankenstein would have had another person in the world who cared about him as his family did and not a vicious monster that he needed to destroy. At the end of the novel, readers find out that the monster has loved Frankenstein and believed him worthy of love during their many encounters and simply wished to make him miserable to have his attention. The monster is innocent, and he acts childlike in the way that he wants to understand and be given love from the world. The job of his creator is to fulfill his wishes and make him as happy as he can to the best of his ability. Frankenstein is guilty of neglecting his responsibility to the new life he creates and then again not taking responsibility for the consequences of his actions. Readers are more likely to sympathize with the monster as Frankenstein exhibits the traits familiar to readers as those of an antagonist. What with the weak argument of Frankenstein as well as his copious amount of selfishness, one could not possibly sympathize with his extremely shallow and narrow-minded character.
I sympathize with Frankenstein rather than the monster because when Victor created the monster, he had not planned for something so horrifying to be created and for the first time witnessing a creature who he was inferior to abandoned it due to human instincts. Excessive loneliness and rejection are reasons why the monster took his rage out on Frankenstein. He expressed his anger by killing Victor’s family and best friend. The monster made sure that Victor suffered like he did and would not allow him to be live happily without consequences because he didn’t receive that privilege. The monster did make a request for a female partner who he could spend the rest of his life with, and at first Victor agreed to this proposal. But as he reminisced about the terrible things the monster had done he refused to make another wretch. Frankenstein uses logos while the monster uses pathos. Based on their closing arguments it is apparent that Frankenstein is engulfed by revenge and all he desires is the death of the monster he created. Without showing remorse he encourages Walton to continue his task and kill the monster for him. On the other hand, the monster feels no remorse either. He knows what he did was wrong but believes that it is only fair that his creator endures pain and suffering like he did. Due to the fact that the monster succeeded in his goal to make Victor miserable, as he passes away, the monster decides to end his life because he has nothing else to live for. Thus, I must say that the verdict has been made and it states that both Frankenstein and the monster are guilty by death. I do believe that Victor was pushed to this point by the monster and if he hadn’t allowed his ambition to consume him or if he had not abandoned the monster he wouldn’t have had to suffer so much. It is also tragic that the monster didn’t have the choice to be different or disgusting and at the beginning of the novel he had a pure, innocent heart but was was made miserable by society. Neither the monster or Frankenstein are innocent.
ReplyDeleteThe use of ethos/pathos/logos is a method that has been tried and deemed true and is used by authors and politicians alike to persuade audiences. Shelley purposefully writes it so that both Frankenstein and the monster each deliver a final speech before leaving it up to the reader to form judgements about the two characters. Both Frankenstein and the monster use the ethos/pathos/logos method in their speech, almost as if in a last-ditch attempt to persuade the reader to sympathize with them over the other. It makes the story compelling and requires the reader to truly ponder the words of the characters.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in Frankenstein’s speech, he states, “During these last few days I have been occupied in examining my past misconduct; nor do I find it blamable” (274). He then lays out the reasoning behind his creation of the monster and the reasons he had for refusing to make another companion. Here, Frankenstein effectively uses logos, appealing to the rational side of the audience and persuading them to understand him. Frankenstein also uses ethos in this speech, saying, “I created a rational creature and was bound towards him to assure, as far was in my power, his happiness and well-being" (274). In this line, sandwiched within logic, Frankenstein speaks with good moral aptitude. He claims and owns to the responsibility of the monster he created, appealing to the audience once more as this seems to shine positively on his moral character. Although his actions do not necessarily perfectly match up with what he is saying, it is evidenced by this speech that, at least according to Frankenstein, he always had good intentions and ethically moral. At the end of his dialogue, Frankenstein uses pathos to evoke emotions and sympathy for himself. He tells Watson, “The forms of the beloved dead flit before me, and I hasten to their arms. Seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition...Yet why do I say this? I have myself been blasted in these hopes, yet another may succeed” (275). Frankenstein conveys a lot in these few lines, and it undoubtedly leaves an impression by the sympathy that it provokes. Frankenstein first draws sorrow and sympathy, as he tenderly recalls the ghosts of his loved ones (an unspoken reminder they were killed by the monster) and expresses joy at the prospect of soon being reunited with them. I know it is not just me who feels particularly fond of this line, because it comes across as so genuine. Regardless of how much one believes Frankenstein himself is at fault, it can be agreed upon that this line is an instant tear-jerker, and therefore an effective use of pathos. Frankenstein goes on further to warn Watson, whom the reader has also grown to care for, by subtly reminding the audience of Frankenstein’s tragic life and the ultimately sorrowful result of his ambition. One cannot help but feel for Frankenstein in this scene and wish for him to feel peace at last. (1/2)
The monster, in a surprising twist, seems to express similar sentiments. The monster is repentant of his creator’s death, and when Walton reprimands him for such feelings, the monster uses ethos/pathos/logos to defend himself. The monster first uses pathos, stating, “No sympathy may I ever find...But now that virtue had become to me a shadow, and that happiness and affection are turned into bitter and loathing despair, in what should I seek for sympathy?” (279). These lines immediately evoke sympathy for the monster, though it is ironic that in the passage he is stating he will never earn such feeling, when his words are meant to elicit it. The monster’s speech is much longer than that of his creator, and he spends much of it using pathos to subtly persuade the reader to sympathize with him. Because of this, the reader inevitably sympathizes with the monster a great deal more. Still, the monster also deploys logos, stating “Am I to be though the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against me? Why do you not hate Felix, who drove his friend from his door with contumely?” (280). The monster logically points out the hypocrisy of both Walton and Frankenstein, effectively making the reader begin to doubt Frankenstein’s innocence and side with the monster. The monster then uses ethos when he says, “But it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered the lovely and the helpless; I have strangled the innocent as they slept...” (280). The monster proves he has some kind of moral compass and acknowledges his wrongdoings regretfully. Much like Frankenstein, the monster is aware he acted immorally and looks back on those actions with regret. In fact, it is almost unsettling how similar the monster and Frankenstein’s language are. This was very likely a conscious choice made by Shelley, and it further deepens the connection between the two characters as well as their struggle.
ReplyDeleteThe conflict between Doctor Frankenstein and his monster is one that has been the subject of both intellectual and philosophical debates since being published. It is easy to misconstrue both Frankenstein and his monster, embellishing and exaggerating certain character traits to make one seem clearly worse than the other. However, the truth of the matter is that the answer to the question of which one the true monster is, was intentionally left inherently unclear by Shelley, and meant to be discussed and debated. Still, for the sake of the argument, I believe that the monster is the guiltier individual. While Frankenstein is technically responsible for creating the monster and ultimately abandoning it, it was never his intention for such a being to be so detrimental and destructive. The monster is guilty of consciously murdering several innocent individuals, all in a vain attempt to gain vengeance. The monster eventually gained enough sense and human emotion to realize his actions were immoral, yet the monster was so bent on revenge that he ignored such sense and instead chose to harm others. It is difficult to definitively side against the monster, but I think the character dynamic between Frankenstein and his monster, and the way they both foil and parallel each other, makes Frankenstein a philosophically and ethically stimulating read. (2/2)
As Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein comes to an end, she uses methods intended to inflict change on her readers. These methods include the use of logos, ethos, and pathos to which she includes in both Frankenstein and the monster’s last few words. Although Frankenstein’s speech was cut short compared to the monster’s goodbye, he makes some brief and contrasting points within his last pages. First, Frankenstein opens with the use of ethos to prove his credibility. He does so by simply listing all he has done including the creation of the monster which he respectfully takes the blame for. Not only this but by saying that he is soon to die gives him a sense of trustworthiness by proving how experienced and rather sagacious he truly is and how these experiences have affected his overall perception of his surroundings. Frankenstein then moves on to more of a logos reasoning, meaning that he uses logical reasoning to persuade the readers of looking through his point of view. His argument should come together when he is finished, and it thoroughly does. Frankenstein speaks of how the monster destroyed him and how the monster deserves death as an equal punishment. He seeks revenge and tells his dear friend Walton, who is carefully clinging to every word, that if he ever encounters the monster, kill him. Frankenstein then drifts towards the pathos side and becomes picky with his choice of words to become more emotionally connected with both Walton and the readers (in Shelley’s case). This is where the vivid descriptions and emotionally loaded language come in and where the material will start to become heavy. For example, Frankenstein says,” That he should live to be an instrument of mischief disturbs me: in other respects, this hour, when I momentarily expect my release, is the only happy one which I have enjoyed for several years,” (275). This reflects upon how much Frankenstein is looking forward to death, he is welcomed into its arms. By speaking this way, he emotionally reaches the readers and cause sympathy for this bed-ridden, dying man. He even goes as far as giving advice to Walton, warning him of his faults that lead him to his death. Despite these significant persuasions of Frankenstein, the monster appears to be more successful in delivering his final speech.
ReplyDeleteThe monster, after seeing the lifeless body of his so hated creator, uses logos, pathos, and ethos as well. He tends to focus more on the pathos side, especially towards the end of his final words. The reason behind the monster being so successful in this is simply that his use and choice of words highly affect the way he is trying to sound. Even his vocabulary not only displays pathos, but also some ethos, that meaning that the monster is credible in his knowledge of these words and concepts. In his last and final paragraph, the monster speaks of how death is upon him and how he too is greatly welcomed by its outreaching arms. The monster speaks to Walton, saying,” I shall die, and what I now feel be no longer felt. Soon these burning miseries will be extinct. I shall ascend my funeral pile triumphantly and exult in the agony of the torturing flames. The light of the conflagration will fade away; my ashes will be swept into the sea by the winds. My spirit will sleep in peace, or if it thinks, it will not surly think thus. Farewell,” (282). Regret is felt through this passage and much of his previous speech. Remorse is a continuous cycle in which the monster constantly experiences. He speaks of “flames” and “burning” more than once, this connects to hell in which the monster believes he belongs to. By the monster ending this way, it establishes pity within the readers. His choice of excess pathos was overall the right decision, as his words will pierce through any previous doubts the readers saw within him.
*i have one more paragraph
continued...
ReplyDeleteBased on this, we sympathize more with the monster rather than Frankenstein himself. Yes, his whole family was murdered leaving him with ultimately nothing to live for, however, by being the creator of the very thing that destroyed him we can only place the fault on him and only him. The monster, on the other hand, never chose this life to which he was placed in. He never chose to be, well, a monster. Never did he want to kill anyone but was rather forced to based on his unfortunate first experiences of humankind. In this case, Frankenstein is completely guilty of plenty of things, including ambition and selfishness. This story honestly could have ended on a good note; however, Frankenstein was blind sighted by his own expectations for what he could create. He never had a plan for what he was going to do if his experiment were to work and he was never concerned with the fact that this monster was out in the world until it affected his family and therefore himself. On his death bed, Frankenstein recognizes these faults and warns Walton to not follow his footsteps, even if, “-it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries,” and well as saying,” I have myself been blasted in these hopes, yet another may succeed,” (275). He knows he is to blame, he knows that his creation is the fault of his ambition. Frankenstein wishes he had known what this mere idea would become and hopes to warn others of his untimely mistakes.
In Frankenstein’s final speech many emotions are evoked, ultimately proving the aspect of logos, ethos, and pathos. Frankenstein states that the monster “destroyed his friends…nor do I know where his thirst for vengeance may end. This is a lucid and reasonable statement because the monster did indeed kill his friends and continually did so, therefore, the ending is not clear. It is logical evidence because these points were previously shown in the novel, therefore proving the logos in Frankenstein’s speech. Frankenstein portrays ethos by inserting that he “did right in refusing, to create a companion for the first creature.” Although this is an arguable claim, if history were to repeat itself, creating a second monster would bring egregious effects to all of society. Frankenstein shows his credibility of his thought and becomes ethically likeable (depending on which position the reader is on). His admittance to his duty of taking care of humanity over the monster helps the reader view Frankenstein as reliable and competent, showing ethos. Finally, in his final speech, Frankenstein expresses sorrowful emotions, displaying the author’s pathos. For example, Frankenstein admits that “The task of his destruction was mine, but I have failed.” In order for a person to say he or she had failed takes a lot of effort and because he owns up to his mistakes, the reader may feel pity towards him. In addition, the reader already has the feeling that Frankenstein is on the verge of death, so even more pity is felt for the poor man who made a detrimental mistake.
ReplyDeleteThe monster displays logos, ethos, and pathos in his final speech as well. Logos is clearly shown when the monster states that “When I first sought it, it was the love of virtue…that I wished to be participated.” This illuminates that the monster simply wants to be included in order to feel happiness and love, showing the reasoning behind his actions. This exemplifies the creature’s use of logos for logical evidence to the reader. On the other hand, the monster admits that “But it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered the lovely and the helpless.” The monster feels obvious guilt for what he had done. The creature’s admittance to his wrongdoings help the reader realize the monster is being sincere, leading to the author’ portrayal of the monster to be reliable and competent. The monster’s final speech impacted me, personally, the most when he questions “…Why do you not hate Felix, who drove his friend from his door with contumely? Why do you not execrate the rustic who sought to destroy the savior of his child?” These questions impact the reader because it sounds as if the monster would be crying for why all of the terrible things have happened to him. It slightly brakes the reader’s heart because he/she knows the monster tried to fit in and to be a benevolent creature, showing pathos.
We tend to sympathize more with the monster. It is not his fault that Frankenstein happens to create him as a horrendous creature. Not only does his very own creator/father abandon him, but all the humans reject him as well. This tears down a person mentally and emotionally, so it is understandable that the monster may feel vengeance towards his creator. Throughout the novel, Frankenstein even admits that his loved ones got killed because of him. If Frankenstein had either not created the monster in the first place, or showed the poor creature love from the beginning, the outcomes would most likely have been drastically different. Thus, showing a slight extreme to the monster’s ways of approaching the situation. Ultimately, both Frankenstein and the monster are guilty. Nobody in the novel is innocent, because all situations lead to any circumstances. Frankenstein is clearly guilty of creating then rejecting his own creation, and the creature is obviously guilty of murdering all of his creator’s loved ones. Therefore, every person’s approach in certain situations may vary, which is why the hasty decisions of both characters lead to the worst possible circumstances.
Throughout the book, I felt that we sympathize more with the monster than Victor. Victors actions factor into the results of the monster, since he was the one who devoted all his time and efforts into the creation of the monster. If Victor did not create the monster, then none of these deaths would have occurred. The monster can’t help himself from feeling the rage he does against humanity, because he can’t fit in anywhere. Wherever the monster goes he is judged by his external appearance rather than his internal appearance, so how can he fit in with people who look nothing like him. The monster can’t help himself, he did not cause the pain he is feeling, but Victor did. Victor ultimately created the monster that caused the pain he is feeling, he caused his own pain along with the monsters. Ultimately both Victor and the monster are guilty for the deaths, because the monster should have controlled his rage in a better way, and Victor created the monster. The monster is innocent for his rage, because Victor made him different from the rest of humanity. Pathos, or emotion is shown for the monster on page 280, because the monster is looking back on his past mistakes, and he is using both Pathos, and Logos, by examining how Walton blames only the monster for the monster’s pain, and not the cottagers. On page 275, in Victors letter, Pathos is being used and Logos by him trying to convince Walton to destroy the monster, by using logical examples from the monsters past as convincing efforts. Ethos is used on page 175, because Victors credibility is not certain since he is close to dying, and on pages 179-180 Ethos is used to call in question the monster’s stability.
ReplyDelete- Kiana Rad
The deaths of Frankenstein and his creation, the monster, left the readers with many different opinions on the two impactful characters. Both characters, in their last dialogue before they die, criticize each other by blaming them for the actions they took. In the last passage spoken by Frankenstein, he incorporates the usage of logos, ethos, and pathos to support his claim of why in the end, he has earned his innocence as a human and the monster is guilty. One example in Frankenstein’s ending speech is a description of the monster’s past actions to compare to his “innocent” past. He uses the idea that the monster, although not human, had the ability to understand and comprehend what actions he can attempt, proving that the past events were not accidents but with a purpose, to revenge Frankenstein. Additionally, he uses specific examples of what he has done to show evil behavior, for example, “destroyed my friends”. He points out his only action that would cause him violence was the simple declare of no to creating a companion for the creature. In his last conversation with Walton, there is only one time where Frankenstein states that he may have been in the wrong but very minimal. This is described when he believes that his passions of searching for the creature may have gone too far and believes the journey is a burden for Walton to carry on. Frankenstein shows very little ethos in this passage, presenting to the readers that this character has a difficult time being honest about himself and others. This is also shown very rarely in this passage because of his inability to show the monster any mercy for his actions. However, the use of pathos is also very limited, only being used in his last few sentences, when he advises Walton to not follow his foolish ways and how Frankenstein wasted his life. This creates a connection between Frankenstein and the readers, now knowing of his past events and sharing his sufferings and troubles. The creature on the other hand, because of his inability to connect real life situations with logical explanations, relies mostly on his emotions and opinions to pinpoint all the tragic events to Frankenstein. The creature persuades Walton that he only performed these actions because of the lack of emotional support and human interaction he has gotten since his creation. He explains this with emotional attached, describing this as his “months of misery” and “endured wasting in impotent passions”. But additionally, he states to Walton that he knows that he was wrong doing, saying that it was unjust to be taking innocent lives just to get revenge on one man. The creature knows and understand that he is deserving to die because of his sins which then results in him taking his own life.
ReplyDeleteAlthough of all the past events Frankenstein has gone through, in the ending passages, the readers will most likely feel more empathy towards the creature instead. The readers now know what has caused his disgraceful actions but cannot blame the creature too much because of his unawareness of human life and interactions. In addition to this, the readers can see from the creature’s point of view that with the consent abuse from others in the society and being rejected by his own creator, there is no wonder why the creature did not act on his problems. The creature brings all these points in his ending passage, which persuades the readers to not be one sided with the “protagonist” (Frankenstein”, but to look at the other character’s point of view. The creature makes it clear that these actions were cause because of the Frankenstein himself. Because of the causes of effects of both characters, both characters are guilty but additionally has a rational excuse behind these actions, which causes them to be more innocent than perceived.
Frankenstein and the creature’s closing remarks of the novel, defend their innocence and explicate their rationale for their course of actions. In this “closing argument”, Frankenstein and the monster uses what is known as rhetorical appeals to convey their vindication of the behavior that they had displayed. Frankenstein appeals to the reader by using logos to persuade Walton and the readers of the malignity of the creature. He states that the monster “showed unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil; he destroyed my friends”(275). By stating that the evidence of the creature’s malevolence was the dead bodies of his family and friends, Frankenstein uses factual evidence of the physical deaths of those around him to defend his argument. In comparison, the creature’s final remarks elucidate the use of pathos to justify his conduct. Walton even claims that he was “at first touched by the expression of [the creature’s] misery”(278-279). Despite his gruesome appearance, the creature appeals to his audience through his eloquent words to evoke emotions of sympathy. The creature depicts his despondency, loneliness, and misery through his desire for happiness, love, affection, and admiration. By expressing his emotions, the creature develops an emotional connection to his audience, be it Walton, or the readers. Therefore, readers are more likely to sympathize with the creature because of their recognition of these emotions that can be reflected in themselves. The rejection and isolation of the monster allows the reader to believe that the creature’s tragic background justifies his malicious behavior. While Victor Frankenstein can be believed to have had a choice in making a creature from the dead, the being had no choice in his creation and rejection from society. Yet, the creature had a choice in his revenge to destroy those associated with Frankenstein. Ultimately, the monster is guilty of homicide because he commited the murder, despite the justification of his tragic background. He deliberately sacrificed the innocent lives of Frankenstein’s family and friends with the intentions of revenge against his creator. Frankenstein, although innocent of murder, abandoned his creation and neglected his responsibilities as a son, brother, friend, and creator. Hence, the violation of the nature of the creation of life can be seen as the source of corruption against the innocence of humanity.
ReplyDeleteIn the final speeches of Frankenstein and the monster, both try to convince Walton that they are innocent while the other is at fault. They attempt to sway Walton by using a mix of ethos, pathos, and logos, using some more effectively than others. When Frankenstein lays dying, he uses logos by stating all the terrible things the monster has done; “he destroyed my friends; he devoted destruction to beings who possessed exquisite sensations” (275). In sharing the crimes the monster has committed, the reader reasons that the monster must be a malevolent being in order to commit such atrocities, while Frankenstein is the guiltless victim. Frankenstein uses pathos by evoking pity in the reader when saying “I feel I shall soon die” (274). The reader grieves for Frankenstein and his mournful life that was cut too short, one in which he will never find revenge for the death of his loved ones. Frankenstein finally uses ethos when he tells Walton to “seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition” (275). Giving advice and wishing a near stranger well on his deathbed causes the reader to admire and respect him, and makes Frankenstein seem more trustable than the monster.
ReplyDeleteThe monster attempts to sway Walton to his side mainly by trying to make Walton feel pity and by blaming others. In using logos, the monster states that he is not the only criminal, since all mankind was up against him. “why do you not hate Felix, who drove his friend from his door with contumely” (280). His attempts at using logos ultimately fails however, because in placing the blame on all of mankind, he seems almost desperate to convince Walton that it is not only him who is at fault. The monster then attempts to evoke pity by describing himself as “miserable, abandoned, abomination, to be spurred at, kicked, and trampled on” (281). His use of pathos is especially clear when using words as powerful and impactful as miserable, and abomination. The reader can lament for the monster, because he seems to hate himself as much as Frankenstein did. Finally, the monster uses ethos when boldly claiming that “your abhorrence cannot equal that with which I regard myself (281). The monster tries to present himself in the way he is now, which is someone who deeply regrets and is disgusted with his past actions. However, his behavior is almost pathetic, in trying to put forth that his actions should be excused only because he realized that what he did was wrong. It almost seems that the monster knows that the only way he can convince Walton that he is benevolent is in making him feel sorry for him, and this only makes him more deplorable than ever.
Hence, after both the monster’s and Frankenstein’s argument, the reader can sympathize with Frankenstein more because they know that he is innocent. Even though Frankenstein may have created the monster, it was still with the monsters free will that he kills Frankenstein's family. The monster is the one who caused direct harm, and his only argument was that it was everyone else's fault for hating him and that people should pity him because he is so alone. Although the reader may sympathize with the monster because we can all relate to the fear of solitude and the craving of affection, it was still ultimately the monster who destroyed a loving family, including the amiable Henry, and sweet Elizabeth. Frankenstein is able to elicit a strong sense of pathos in the reader, because his speech is made as he lays dying, with everyone he loves dead, and his one wish in life unfulfilled. All Frankenstein's woe is because of the monster, and so the reader ultimately sympathizes more with Frankenstein, and perceives that the monster is fundamentally guilty.
-Rachel Vetchtein
Overall, the final speeches of Victor Frankenstein and the Monster are employed with great senses of logos, ethos, and pathos, but each character finds their strength through the different rhetorical devices. The Monster's great strength is rooted in his ethos. Throughout the novel, he has been portrayed as suffering, despondent because he never found love and had his one possible companion killed by Frankenstein, and past experiences such as the incident with the blind man and his family point to his suffering. Nonetheless, the monster was also filled with great intelligence and eloquence. This evokes a sense of credibility from readers, who also sympathize and feel for him. The emotional sorrows of the Monster in his past evoke sympathy and pity in the readers, tie into pathos, or emotional rhetoric. Readers look at the Monster's past and see his misfortunes and sympathize with him, because nothing in his life went right, which was technically attributable to Frankenstein. The monster's logos does not fare well with him, however, due to the terrible crimes he committed and his murders of Henry, Elizabeth, etc. This evidence shows the facts of the bad deeds he did from a one-sided perspective, but although limited, they are facts nonetheless. From the perspective of Victor Frankenstein, his strength lies in his logos. Contrary to the Monster, Frankenstein's strength grows from the cold, hard facts portraying the creature as a murderer. However, that approach was very one-sided and easily looked over by his lack of ethos. Victor Frankenstein drove himself to the brink of insanity and eventually death by his creating of the Monster. From this it can be inferred that Frankenstein is not a reliable narrator, further proven by his emotional torturing of his creature. He tried so hard to create it, but he still managed to be horrified by his creation and scorned it. He deprived the Monster of his one true chance at happiness, a companion, when he said he would create one. This also speaks to Frankenstein's pathos and its faults, including the readers' lack of sympathy for him because of his lack of compassion regarding the monster. Ultimately, because it is easier for people to be swayed through emotional means, there is a greater sense of sympathy for the Monster, a creation who knew only loneliness and hate and fear. Due to that reasoning, Frankenstein is guilty of ruining so many peoples' lives due to his own ambition and causing the Monster to be filled with hate rather than love. However, although the Monster is innocent of this particular crime, he is still guilty of murder. Overall, though, the only way the Monster could have been truly innocent was if he were never created, and therefore, the creator of the Monster is to blame.
ReplyDeleteThey Both Are Guilty
ReplyDeleteDuring their last moments, Mary Shelley writes both Frankenstein and the monster last speeches that she intends will have a lasting effect on the reader. However, she uses different methods of getting this point across with both Frankenstein and the monster. Shelly uses the methods of logos and ethos to allow the reader to understand Frankenstein, while focusing on pathos when depicting the monster. When portraying Frankenstein, the logical reasons in which Frankenstein did not create a female companion for the monster are stated, along with Frankenstein’s warning to Walton about avoiding ambition due to the perils ambition has caused himself. These statements combine to cause the reader to establish Frankenstein as a reliable narrator due to its facts making sense with the rest of the novel and its clarity. Thus, through the logos in Frankenstein’s speech, the reader views Frankenstein as trustworthy and reasonable, but lacks sympathy towards him. In addition, Frankenstein’s credibility, established through reason above, hint at the use of ethos in Frankenstein’s last words. Frankenstein states, “My duties towards the beings of my own species had greater claims on my attention because they included a greater proportion of happiness or misery” (274). In the excerpt, Frankenstein states that he put all human beings above his own needs and wants when deciding whether to make a mate for the monster. Thus, Frankenstein’s speech possesses ethos due to it displaying Frankenstein’s benevolent ethics and morals. On the contrary, the monster’s speech contains the persuasive technique of pathos. As the monster describes his change from a benevolent to a malicious creature, he states it in a way that makes it seem that only outside factors, such as unkindness from humans, have caused this change in the monster’s demeaner. This forces the reader to sympathize with the monster since it is human nature to sympathize with the helpless or needy, which is what the monster is purposely portraying himself as in his speech. Therefore, the reader sympathizes much more with the monster due to the monster’s eloquent use of pathos.
Frankenstein and the monster are both guilty and innocent simultaneously. Frankenstein is guilty of creating a murderous beast simply out of ambition. However, the monster is guilty of murdering several humans and causing furthermore destruction. One could even blame human nature for this catastrophe, as it was human nature for Frankenstein to thrive to build the monster without contemplating the consequences of creating such an anomaly. Also, it is human nature to run away from what is unknown, which is just what every human did in sight of the monster, causing the monster to feel alone and malicious. However, if there had to be one chosen to blame for these catastrophes, it would be Frankenstein, as if it were not for him none of these tragic events would have taken place. Thus, Frankenstein is guilty of not considering the consequences of his creation. Hence, the monster possesses innocence, as he came into this world full of virtue, only to find out that he is an abomination among man-kind.
The monster uses pathos while Frankenstein uses logos in the closing arguments. This is very clear in both of their closing arguments. The monster uses emotions and tries to make Walton sympathize for him by using vivid descriptions and emotional examples of how he is miserable and will never find sympathy. The monster references the terrible events that he has gone through during his life and attempts to activate the emotions of Walton. Frankenstein uses logos by using logical evidence in his closing argument. He uses examples of the terrible things that the monster did to his friends and family. Frankenstein also includes rational responses in his argument.
ReplyDeleteI sympathize with Frankenstein more than the monster because Frankenstein was not as harmful as the monster. The monster killed many people because he wanted to make Frankenstein miserable for abandoning him. The monster should not have taken the lives of other people to make Frankenstein unhappy. Frankenstein wanted to get revenge on the monster since he killed his friends and family, so he vowed to get follow the monster and kill him. It is understandable that Frankenstein was angry at the monster because the monster caused a lot of harm and ruin.
Hence, I believe that Frankenstein and the monster are both guilty. The monster is guilty because he caused most of the terror. The monster took the lives of innocent people and made Frankenstein’s life terrible. Victor also made the monster’s life miserable by abandoning him and not creating a new monster. Victor did not purposely make the monster’s life miserable, but he decided not to make another monster due to the emotions that the monster displayed when he was angry.
In the farewell speech of Frankenstein, logos is used he describes his right for refusing to make a companion for the monster. He lists the evidence and reasons why it would be a terrible idea. Ethos is used throughout the entire speech when he takes responsibility for the monster and it’s actions. The reader trusts Frankenstein more after he displays acts of responsibility. Pathos is used in the beginning of the speech when describing the state of health Frankenstein is currently in, making the reader sympathize with him. The reader can feel sorry for him due to his poor health. In the monster’s farewell speech, logos is used when he questions why he was treated so horribly while doing nothing wrong. He reasons that he is a victim of injustice and that others deserving of the treatment failed to receive it. Ethos is displayed when the monster takes responsibility for all the horrible things he’s done. The reader trusts him more knowing that he is a competent source. Pathos is represented throughout the entire speech. The monster’s inner anger and feelings of hatred spark a fire in the reader making them feel with the monster what he went through on a more personal plain.
ReplyDeleteAs a reader, I sympathized more with the monster because I naturally tend to follow my emotions. The monster’s feelings of hatred is displayed through his words as well as his tone. So, I sympathized with his feelings more because they were on display the entirety of his speech and were made very obvious. I believe that Frankenstein could have handled being a creator of the monster better and not have neglected him. The monster should have controlled his emotions better and not resorted to killing others as a way to get back at Frankenstein. He should have not brought others into a personal issue between him and Frankenstein. In the end, I believe that the monster is at fault of killing innocents because he could have stopped himself anytime. Frankenstein was not making him do anything. The monster should have taken the high road and not resorted to killing the innocent.
Tiffany Cha
ReplyDeleteWho is guiltier? The sinner or the sinner’s creator? If a gun killed a person, then who is to blame— the gun or the owner of the gun? Although Victor Frankenstein used logos to support why he created an abomination, and how the support of science was reason enough for defying nature and basic creation, he tries to minimize his role in the situation and sweep his portion of blame under the rug. The mere existence of the gun (a creature stronger than man) should be reason enough for all the unspeakable crimes. He created the creature that killed all those people. By logos, reasoning dictates that if Victor created the monster, then he is to blame for the deaths just as much as the monster who did the deed. The ethos of the monster is agonizing in its sadness. The monster did not ask to be born stronger than man. He did not ask to be born ugly, nor did he ask to be created at all. So ultimately, I strongly believe that Victor is guilty and the monster was innocent. Victor was guilty creating and not taking responsibility for a thing abnormal to nature, which had the capabilities to destroy and ruin humanity. If Victor had taken responsibility, then the murders that occurred in this novel would have been avoidable. Though the monster was the one who committed the horrendous crimes, he is not as entirely at fault because he did not ask to be born.
Evident in both speeches from the monster and from Frankenstein, self- blame is a common reoccurrence. Frankenstein states that the fault of this outcome lies solely on his mad thought process which in turn creates the monster. Juxtaposing Victor’s attempt at self-pity, the monster also claims to hate himself for murdering Clerval. In both cases, I believed that these acts were just a facade to garner Walton’s acceptance. Their intention of playing upon the sympathy of Walton demonstrates pathos. In fact, the majority of the monster’s case or side is built upon pathos. The monster tries to “guilt trip” Walton into understanding its neglected childhood. The monster even goes so far as to blame Frankenstein for not creating a female counterpart to accompany it. As for logos, Frankenstein dominates more aspects of this region. He describes the monster as the “instrument of destruction” meaning that Frankenstein solely places the burden of blame of the monster. In addition, previous to this passage, Frankenstein has claimed multiple times of the monster’s chaos and death. These straight cut facts support Frankenstein’s logos argument. In comparison, the monster does not hold any substantiated claims of logic. Finally, moving towards ethos, both characters display a basic level benevolence. The monster nearing the end of the novel decides to jump out of the boat into the water, therefore begins to uphold his promise of solitude. Prior to this passage, the monster was helped out the DeLacey family building his credibility as a being originating from good. Frankenstein also had a convincing background as a wide-eyed, curious researcher. Both characters started out with good intentions and eventually and unfortunately, wound down the wrong path.
ReplyDeleteAs for my opinion on who we sympathize more, that answer lies with each reader. Each reader contains a different set of genes and experiences, therefore leaving the debate open ended. My sympathy sides with that of the monster’s hardships. His neglected childhood is almost the antithesis of mine. My parents supported and cared for me throughout my life and still do. However, a situation where my parental influences were removed poses a daunting challenge. Thus, I believe I would act in the same fashion as the monster, lashing out at all around him.
Personally, I believe both parties are guilty of at least a certain crime. However, the overall blame falls on Victor Frankenstein. First, his curiosity spawns the being therefore, he lies in the center of all the problems that arose. Moreover, instead of caring for his new creation, Frankenstein decides to abandon it upon first sight merely based on its superficial appearance. His lack of care for raising the creature demonstrates his irresponsibility and his shortcomings. I believe Frankenstein is not guilty for all the death of his family members but more for the monster he created. Focusing on the monster, he shoulders the responsibility for all the physical deaths throughout the novel but besides that the monster holds no burden. His upbringing causes these deaths, not his mindset. Therefore, I think that neither party is truly innocent.
Frankenstein and the monster both use ethos, pathos, and logos to help draw in the reader to be more sympathize with their side of the story. They both use ethos well to set up their argument about one another later in their logos. Their logos are both used to show their side of the story and give of examples of why they are the victims here. Both Frankenstein and the monster use a lot of pathos to get their points across. But ultimately the one who wins this battle of being the victim is the monster. Ultimately the one who is most guilty of this whole situation is Frankenstein. He said it himself, he’s guilty of the death of Justine, Elizabeth, and the others. He was the one that created the monster but also the one who put the ideals of a devil inside the monster’s head. Then we would find the monster being the innocent one here as he was a creature that was born in the wrong environment and the wrong father. Ever since the birth of his creation, Frankenstein showed no love or sympathy for the monster. This caused the monster to be more confused on his self being. The monster starts to ask questions about his meaning and his birth as he sees that he’ll never be able to fit in with people as first seen from the first reaction with his creator. During the speech of the monster, it’s shown that the story that was presented to us may have shown the struggle of Frankenstein being harsh and painful, but it’s revealed that the monster went through the same or even worse ordeal. The monster describes his thoughts during the time he made the promise with Frankenstein showing how lonely he was and how bad he wanted a companion. And it hurts him even more as he sees that Frankenstein didn’t even fulfill his side of the promise. This was the ultimate reason for the monster to go haywire and do the evil deeds he did. In the end, this caused more harm to Frankenstein and the people around him than creating another creation that could of gone off with the monster to the north and never be seen again.
ReplyDeleteChristopher Leng
Near the end of Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, the last speeches of Victor Frankenstein and the monster express the characters’ underlying plead for innocence. They use ethos, logos, and pathos to sway Walton’s view on the story.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the story, Frankenstein proves his credibility by presenting past accomplishments; the reader becomes accustomed to his trustworthiness, which conveys ethos. As Frankenstein describes his journey through school and his relationship with M. Waldman, he uses proper syntax and appropriate language to display his intelligence and class. Over the course of the novel, readers are assured that Frankenstein is trustworthy through the way he acts during various events that occur. If he has something to say, Frankenstein almost always backs his words up using evidence. During his final moments spent with Walton, the two become acquainted and Walton learns to trust him; on his deathbed, Frankenstein’s last words to Walton about his “. . . burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge [he] once expressed. . .” (274) led Walton to begin to hate the monster as well. Readers’ preexisting abhorrence, in addition to Walton’s hate, towards the monster grows, although the monster utilizes logic to strengthen his view.
After Frankenstein passed away, the monster visited Frankenstein’s body. Throughout his speech, the monster presented information and logical ideas causing readers to sympathize with the monster. He told Walton of the misery and despondence of his life; he used logos by explaining that his depression derived from his loneliness which was due to Frankenstein’s lack of sympathy as Frankenstein did not make the monster a mate. The readers now sympathize with the monster because Frankenstein basically forced this fate upon the monster, displaying pathos. The novel ends while the reader is not sure who is innocent or not, but readers sympathize more with Frankenstein as his family was killed by the monster.
As the novel Frankenstein draws to a close, Dr. Frankenstein and his monster both give their final speeches, each trying to present themselves as the the moral and righteous character to the reader. While the monster’s argument revolves around the morals of his creation and immediate abandonment, Frankenstein’s argument centers around the ethnic of revenge and upholding the decisions he made. In their arguments, both Frankenstein and the monster use pathos, logos, and ethos to convince the reader that their viewpoint is the “correct” one. Ultimately, one ends up sympathizing with the monster due to his clear remorse and self reflection.
ReplyDeleteLogos, ethos, and pathos literally translate to logic, ethics, and emotion, all of which are evident in both Frankenstein and the monster’s closing arguments. Frankenstein ends up telling Walton, “Think not...that in the last moment of my existence I feel that burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge” (274). Here, Frankenstein utilizes pathos to convey a deep emotion in the reader. After following the story up to this point and reading about the atrocious crimes committed by the monster, one is able to feel this same “burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge” as they see the monster from Frankenstein’s perspective. Frankenstein then continues by saying, “During these last days I have been occupied in examining my past conduct; nor do I find it blameable. In a fit of enthusiastic madness I created a rational creature and was bound towards him to assure, as far as was in my power, his happiness and well-being. This was my duty; but there was another still paramount to that. My duties towards the beings of my own species had greater claims to my attention because they included a greater proportion of happiness or misery” (274). In this quote, Frankenstein uses ethos in his self-assessment of his actions and tries to tie in his ethic to the choices he made. At this point, Frankenstein also realizes it was ethically and morally incorrect to create a being and simply abandon it. This also leads us to paint a clear picture of Frankenstein’s character as one that does take responsibilities and is able to self-reflect and learn from his actions. The whole argument that Frankenstein provides from the bottom of page 274 to the top of page 275 also show Frankenstein’s attempt at logic (logos). Frankenstein sets up his argument first with an admittance to fault followed by his explanation and reasoning. It becomes clear that Frankenstein does indeed attempt to create a logical case from his point of view. However, due to his outburst of impassioned and hateful emotions at the beginning of his speech, one ends up seeing Frankenstein as a person who possesses wit, logic, and intelligence, but is controlled by his emotions and heartstrings.
As the reader moves on to the monster’s concluding speech, one finds a better balance of ethos, pathos, and logos. “‘That is also my victim!’ he exclaimed. ‘In his murder my crimes are consummated; the miserable series of my being is wound to its close! what does it avail that now ask thee to pardon me? I, who irretrievably destroyed thee by destroying all thou lovedst…’” (277). From the monster’s narration, the reader immediately feels the monster’s sorrow and his genuine remorse. The monster utilizes pathos here in order to make this scene relatable to the reader causing the reader to experience the pain and hurt that the monster is facing. His responses to Walton’s questions further strengthens the appearance of his repentance and makes it so that it is extremely believable. The monster then goes on to address his points one at a time starting from Frankenstein’s abandonment to his neglect and refusal to create another being for his love, thus showing logos. Lastly the fact that the monster, a creature that has been scorned and hated his whole life, is able to find it in his heart to recognize his wrongs and ask for forgiveness builds up a strong character for the monster. It becomes clear that the monster takes full responsibility of his actions and realizes what he has caused. Because the monster ends up behaving more similar to humans, dictated by a combination of emotion and logic, the readers are thus able to sympathize more with the monster instead of Frankenstein who shows himself as a being driven by emotion.
ReplyDeleteI believe in a case such as this, there is no one member truly innocent or guilty and I think that both parties are guilty to a certain degree. However, neither party is innocent. Frankenstein is guilty of refusing his responsibilities and the monster is guilty of murder. This leads us to the conclusion that the monster is more guilty, but because of his more human behavior and characteristics, is sympathized more.
Throughout Frankenstein, the doctor often used pathos to justify his actions, citing fear, fantasy, or fate as viable reason for his deeds. However, Frankenstein utilizes mainly logos in his closing speech, and uses logical reasoning to prove the validity of his point of view. Each of his points leads to one another and Frankenstein comes across as an intelligent, sane individual simply recording the facts of an event. He first explains how “In a fit of enthusiastic madness, [he] created a rational creature” (274). Because Frankenstein states this in such an honest and blatant way, this statement is regarded as purely fact and his creation of the creature is justified by his own insanity. He then validates his rejection of Frankenstein through proof of humanity’s greater need, as opposed to the needs of his monster. Frankenstein shows that he was compelled to abandon his creature and protect humanity from such a monster because the human race “included a greater proportion of happiness or misery” (274), and so required more immediate and greater attention. Through this explanation, the reader grows to understand the motives of Frankenstein; we see motives as justice and duty, rather than fear and irresponsibility. Frankenstein further justifies his refusal to create a companion for the monster through his explanations of possible effects of such an action. Because the monster “showed unparalleled malignity and selfishness” (275), Frankenstein reasons that a similar creation would likely show similar emotions, and so may engage in similar destructive actions. The listing of all the monster’s destructive traits spells out the danger of a second creature for the reader, and completely justifies Frankenstein’s refusal. In this argument, the doctor validates every action he carries out using logical reasoning and fact and takes wholehearted responsibility for his actions, leading the reader to believe him and perhaps even agree with his arguments. His vulnerability leads me to believe he is telling the truth, and so I sympathize here with Frankenstein.
ReplyDeleteMost of the novel is told from Frankenstein’s point of view, so the reader does not often see the true motives or wishes of the creation. However, in its final speech, the monster mainly uses pathos to display why he carried out certain actions and as justification for his deeds. The monster first explains his turn to malevolence and destruction after being rejected by most of human society. He shows that he first sought only ”the feelings of happiness and affection” (279), but that these virtuous emotions were “turned into bitter loathing and despair” (279). This explanation shows that the monster largely blames outside forces for turning his own emotions and causing his actions. In this instance, the monster places blame on those who rejected him, indicating that this was the cause for his turn to destruction. The use of human emotion provokes an emotional response from the reader and allows us to sympathize with the monster, as all of humanity can relate to love, happiness, rejection, and despair. The creature continues, explaining his continuous murders and destruction of those close to Frankenstein. He justifies these horrific actions with the reasoning that he never killed to “satisfy his own desires” (280), but that he was spurned on by some outside force, pushing him to receive retribution for his unjust creation and abandonment. In this sentence, and throughout the speech, the monster uses the passive voice, insinuating that these occurrences simply happened to him, and were outside of his control. He relies on fate and destiny to excuse his actions; while this may inspire sympathy, it also causes disbelief and skepticism in that the monster simply deflects blame rather than taking responsibility for his actions. This leads me to distrust the monster, and to somewhat reject his justifications. As a result, I sympathize less with the monster and feel his arguments are somewhat fabricated, or simple excuses for losing control over his being.
JJ Abele 1
Ultimately, both parties carry guilt for the debacle of Frankenstein and his monster. Frankenstein himself possesses guilt for the creation of the monster. He did not plan his reaction and his actions in regards to the creation, and instead allowed his ambition to blind him from the true effects of his goals. Too focused on glory and recognition, he forgot morality. His abandonment of Frankenstein eventually led to his turn to malevolence and destruction, as the monster did not know how to interact with humans in a loving or peaceful way. He knew only violence and vengeance, and so carried out such actions. If Frankenstein had parented the creature properly, the monster could have learned proper interactions with humans and would have received the love he desired. In this way, Frankenstein is guilty of the predisposed aggressive and hostile nature of the creature. However, the monster is not entirely free of guilt. While he had never experienced peace with humans himself, he saw such interactions between other humans. He knew how this process worked, and could have carried it out if he truly took the time to reflect and consider his actions. Just as many children with insufficient parenting turn out to be wonderful human beings, the monster could have learned from outside sources and remain a benevolent force. In addition, the monster seemingly overreacted to Frankenstein’s refusal to create another being like him. Based off the monster’s actions, such a refusal was entirely justifiable. Had the monster conferred peacefully with humanity and with Frankenstein from the beginning, such creation may have been possible. However, he dug his own grave, in a sense, and created a destructive image of his kind. As such, the monster is guilty of rash, uniformed decision-making and so is responsible for many deaths.
ReplyDeleteJJ Abele 2
Miya Kaiser P.5
ReplyDeleteOn death, Dr. Frankenstein and his creation both share their last speeches in life as if they were convincing the reader that they were innocent. The strategy of using the ethos, pathos, and logos is to appeal to the audience and to persuade then by connecting with them on a intellectual, emotional, and truthful level. In his last words, Dr. Frankenstein offers advice to Walton, or deeper, the reader. He claims to “Avoid ambition”(275) and to “Seek happiness”(275) like he was offering advice to prior experiences with life that he had before. These words of advice would fall under ethos, because Dr. Frankenstein is proving that he is knowledgeable and trustworthy because he claims that he’s seen it all and been through it all. Dr. Frankenstein uses pathos in a way most wouldn’t realize. He claims that he felt certain powerful feelings like “burning hatred and ardent desire of revenge”(274) before the incident of his death and is now “justified”(274). In these phrases, Dr. Frankenstein uses a mix of both pathos and ethos. He’s showing both that he felt these extremely strong emotions but as well proving he can overcome the challenges of dealing with these ardent feelings, showing maturity and trustworthiness. Furthermore, Dr. Frankenstein uses logos in an interesting way. He proceeds to shy away from strict data and case studies and focuses more on proving himself through reason and his own knowledge. He offers reason and a extremely strong quote upon death, “But the consideration of these points, and the well balancing of what you may esteem your duties, I leave to you; my judgment and ideas are already disturbed by the near approach of death. I dare not ask you to do what I think right, for I may still be misled by passion” (275). The wretch, aswell, uses logos by asking many questions that galvanize the reader to further look and reason on how his life was and if he was really malignant or not. Pathos is used many time throughout the wretch’s speech in an attempt to make people feel sympathy and empathy towards him. “My blood boils at the recollection of this injustice.”(280). The wretch says this to try and persuade the reader into relate to him in some way. Ethos is used in an extremely powerful quote at the bottom of page 280; “But it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered the lovely and the helpless; I have strangled the innocent as they slept and grasped to death his throat who never injured me or any other living thing. I have devoted my creator, the select specimen of all that is worthy of love and admiration among men, to misery; I have pursued him even to that irremediable ruin. There he lies, white and cold in death. You hate me, but your abhorrence cannot equal that with which I regard myself”. This quote shows extreme self awareness and maturity in the monster. He understands he's a horrible creature, but it's because of circumstance and he doesn’t want to be as malignant as he was before.
Miya Kaiser P.5 Part 2
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, Dr. Frankenstein and the wretch are both innocent and guilty of behavior and action. It is purely Dr. Frankenstein's fault that he neglected his family and cause ruin on himself and that of others, but maturity isn’t shown in immediate action, but in taking responsibility for it and furthermore changing oneself for the better. The wretch is also guilty of this, but he proved his maturity and change in the quote previously mentioned on page 280. The wretch deems innocence because Dr. Frankenstein’s mad way of dealing with fear and responsibility caused the wretch to behave a certain way, but it is also partly on him for not being able to control himself. I believe people would sympathize more with Dr. Frankenstein, although they might not know it, people do a lot of the same things as he did prior to his death. It's very common that one can focus on one particular task and have everything else ignored. While it is also shown that people aren't in their right minds while frightened or stressed, as Dr. Frankenstein was during the creation of his monster. The wretch its creator both have extreme flaws, but one is not more or less guilty or more “correct” than the other.
As Frankenstein nears an end, Mary Shelley’s use of ethos, pathos, and logos aims to invoke an internal conflict within the reader. This internal conflict stems from the decision between Frankenstein and his creation over the dispute on who we sympathize more with and who is more-or-less innocent. In Victor’s and the monster’s final interactions, Shelley uses ethos, pathos, and logos, in order to persuade the audience to take into consideration their viewpoint and sympathize with them.
ReplyDeleteFrankenstein begins stating his wrongful actions in which he rightfully blames himself. By providing information on his imminent death, Frankenstein also creates trust for he has no reason to lie anymore. Doing so, Frankenstein builds trust within the reader by showing that he is not biased and is a credible narrator. This is ethos because Shelley is building credibility in the reader. Next, Frankenstein uses logos, or a more logical appeal. He restates all the events that occurred and how the monster killed William, Elizabeth, and Henry. He argues that the only suitable punishment is death of the monster. Finally, Frankenstein uses pathos, or an emotional appeal. As Frankenstein nears death, he tells Walton “He showed unparallel malignity and selfishness in evil; he destroyed my friends; he devoted to destruction beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom; nor do I know where this thirst for vengeance my end” (275). Frankenstein states the cause of his grief and how the monster destroyed his life, to get Walton to sympathize with him. The monster also uses ethos, pathos, and logos when he finds Frankenstein dead. Like Frankenstein, the monster uses ethos builds credibility by stating his imminent death and how he longs for it to come. As stated earlier, this increases a sense of trust because it tells the audience that he has no real reason to lie anymore. Although the monster used ethos, pathos is mostly used by him through his emotionally-charged diction. “I shall die, and what I now feel be no longer felt. Soon these burning miseries will be extinct. I shall ascend my funeral pile triumphantly and exult in the agony of the torturing flames. The light of the conflagration will fade away; my ashes will be swept into the sea by the winds. My spirit will sleep in peace, or if it thinks, it will not surly think thus. Farewell” (282). In his melancholic description of his death, the monster states that he wishes to leave and no longer experience his current pain. He also describes himself in “the agony of the torturing flames” which is a clear reference to hell where he believes he belongs. The monster’s use of pathos in the his conversation with Walton causes the reader to sympathize him more than Frankenstein.
However, feeling sympathy for the monster does not cause him to be more-or-less innocent. In the end, both Frankenstein and his creation are incredibly guilty. The monster killed William, Elizabeth, and Clerval. This along with the death of his parents leaves Frankenstein with no reason to live. Everything had been taken from him by the monster. However, Frankenstein’s demise stems from his ambition. It is his doing that created the monster that would soon destroy his family. One might argue that the monster did not choose to be created, but neither did Frankenstein or anybody else in the world. It was their parent’s decision as it was Frankenstein’s decision to create the monster. But like a parent, it is Frankenstein’s duty to take responsibility for his child. Ultimately, Frankenstein is more guilty because it is his doing which created the monster and caused his own demise.
Part 1
ReplyDeleteIn Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, both Victor and his creation use ethos, pathos and logos to persuade Walton and the reader to sympathize them. Frankenstein mainly uses pathos and logos while the monster uses the same to back his actions. The reader is more likely to sympathize Frankenstein. This is because the book focuses on his struggle with the death of his loved ones. The death leaves Frankenstein in misery and often causes the reader to overlook his actions that cause the tragedy. For example, the monster’s malevolent behavior is a direct product of Frankenstein’s neglection of the creature. At the end, the creature is given the opportunity to share his struggles and misery, and in doing so, he persuades Walton not to kill him. In the end, both characters are guilty. Frankenstein is guilty for neglecting the creature, causing him to become malevolent. The creature is guilty of using his anger to kill Frankenstein’s loved ones.
Frankenstein uses pathos and logos in his final attempt to persuade Walton to finish what he could not. Frankenstein is on his death bed talking to Walton and says, “He showed unparallel malignity and selfishness in evil; he destroyed my friends; he devoted to destruction beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom; nor do I know where this thirst for vengeance may end” (275). This is an example of pathos. Frankenstein is stating the evil and crimes that the creature has committed and how he took everything from him. He attempts to share his sorrow and sadness with Walton. Frankenstein once again asks Walton to finish what he has started and uses the pathos to help pressure him into being persuaded. Frankenstein says “Yet I cannot ask you to renounce your country and friends to fulfil this task; and now that you are returning to England, you will have little chance of meeting with him. But the considerations of these points, and the well balancing of what you may esteem your duties, I leave to you; my judgement and ideas are already disturbed by the near approach of death. I dare not ask you to do what I think right, for I may still be misled by passion” (275). This is logos because Frankenstein uses his opinion and ideas into making a decision. Frankenstein says that he wouldn’t ask Walton to fulfil this arduous task, but then proceeds to do so in an oblique manner. Overall, Frankenstein is trying to persuade Walton to fulfil his duty as a dying request. However, Frankenstein is unsuccessful, and Walton does not kill the creature when given the opportunity.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteThe monster uses pathos and logos into persuading the reader and Walton that he went through more misery than Frankenstein did. The creature says “Yet such must be the impression conveyed to you by what appears to be the purport of my actions. Yet I seek not a fellow feeling in my misery. No sympathy may I ever find. When I first sought it, it was the love of virtue, the feelings of happiness and affection with which my whole being overflowed, that I wished to be participated” (279). This is logos because the creature is sharing his past experiences with human interaction and his benevolent attempts to become apart of it. The monster portrays his sorrow and misery as a result of Frankenstein’s actions, which do appear to be a considerable theory. The creature says “You, who call Frankenstein your friend, seem to have knowledge of my crimes and his misfortunes. But in detail which he gave you of them he could not sum up the hours and months of misery which I endured wasting my impotent passions” (280). This is an example of pathos because the creature is trying to show the immense amount of time he spent in misery similar to Frankenstein but greater. The monster tries to justify his actions and clear his name, which has been diminished by Frankenstein’s stories. The monster is seeking sympathy from anyone for his extreme efforts that have left him in despair. The reader often tends to sympathize Frankenstein because he goes through a great deal of death and change however, he is not innocent. Neither Frankenstein nor the creature are innocent, but both are guilty. Frankenstein’s neglection of the creature led to the creatures turning point in behavior and morals. However, this neglection is no reason for him to turn to becoming a murderer.
The final speeches by Frankenstein and the monster characterize each of them. For Frankenstein, even to his dying breathe, he expressed hatred towards his creation; he was all about the anger and livid feelings he felt rather than despondent guilt and regret. Frankenstein's speech most heavily used logos and pathos. The claims he states are true, and his reasoning makes sense. As a reader, his anger is understandable. Also, he uses pathos, maybe not intentionally, but either way, his anger permeates through the book to the audience. He makes the reader angry and agre with what he is saying. He doesn't use this very much and rather the opposite, for if a reader steps back and looks at his speech with a neutral mind, he seems quite insane.
ReplyDeleteThe last speech by the monster is very despondent and depressing. It's full of regrets and guilt and almost seems like he was trying o reason with himself and make himself feel better a boout what he has committed. He uses pathos the most for the audience is forced to feel bad for him. All the struggles he's endured and the guilt and sad times he felt are forced to be felt. The monster tries to make the reader pity him and feel bad for him; make himself look less guilty after all he's done. He also uses logos for ethos. He uses logic and reasoning to gain credibility and the trust of the reader, so he can be forgiven and accepted.
I sympathize more with the monster for all he's been through. Because of his appearance, readers tend to forget how young and inexperienced he is. He might be strong, but he is ignorant, and it was Frankenstein's responsibility to take care of him. If the monster is thought of like Frankenstein's child, which in a way he is, he was ignored and hated even before he did anything. The only thing he ever really wanted was his parent's affection and care, yet he only got hatred and abuse. If someone's parents not only neglected them but hated them and turned against hem for nothing more than being "ugly", that would absolutely tear the child's heart. Although the monster's crimes were extreme, like murder, a child's mistakes are the responsibility of the parent. Maybe not completely in this case, but Frankenstein's denial of responsibility shows his lack of maturity and moral sense. Therefore, ultimately, Frankenstein is guilty and the monster is innocent. It's not really possible to take sides because both are guilty to a certain degree, but it more heavily lies on Frankenstein. He neglected his responsibilities, and thus he himself created an actual monster, not physically and through science, but by his actions afterward and how he treated him.
The monster and Frankenstein Take on opposite approaches at an attempt to sway the listener. With both utilizing a different aspect of ethos/pathos/logos, we can see the contrast between the two approaches. The differing approaches allow the reader to more clearly decipher who is telling more truth and who is just trying to gain sympathy and place the blame on the other. Throughout the entirety of this story, Mary Shelly has been clever in her characterization, or ethos for the two characters. She has caused us to question the credibility of both sides of the story, primarily Frankenstein. In a general sense, Frankenstein uses logos as an attempt to sway the listener, while the monster utilizes pathos. Frankenstein’s use of logos is his way of laying forth all the “facts” and logical evidence regarding his wrongdoings as an attempt to gain the listener’s trust, and ultimately sympathy. The monster uses the opposing approach. In his final speech, the use of pathos is heavy and it is obvious that the monster may present a better case for himself by excluding logical evidence and going straight for the listener’s emotions. I order to gain sympathy, the monster subtly places blame on Frankenstein and plays himself as the victim who had no choice but to do what he did. Ultimately, due to the nature of the use of pathos, we sympathize more with the monster because of his sad story and delivery of his loneliness as an excuse for his actions. Frankenstein’s factual approach using logos instils a greater trust in him as a character, but fails to sway the listener to sympathize more with him due to the lack of emotions being brought forth. Ultimately, both individuals are guilty of different crimes. Frankenstein brought into the world an incontrollable being and abandoned it without thinking, while on the other hand the monster is guilty of the murder of numerous individuals and has and will not receive punishment. While both sides are guilty of different crimes, the crimes committed by the monster were a product of Frankenstein’s treatment towards him. Frankenstein is ultimately guilty of underestimating the consequences of his scientific actions, and for failing to repair the damages before anyone else had to die. If Frankenstein had not refrained from complying with the monster’s request, or if he had refrained from the creation of such a being in the first place the deaths of those close to him would not have occurred. Furthermore, if Frankenstein had taken responsibility for his creation and controlled him as opposed to abandoning him in an unfamiliar world, the monster would have likely been more compliant and compassionate resulting in no deaths as a result of vengeance and distain for his creator.
ReplyDeleteIn literature, the ideals of ethos, logos, and pathos are all essential techniques that one can use to convince their audience of the truth in what they say. With the final statements made by the monster and Frankenstein in the conclusion, it can be seen that both strive to morally justify their many far from ethical choices using these techniques of persuasion. By presenting themselves in the most appealing light, the characters attempt to remedy their malevolent actions, and appear as the true “hero” of the novel despite their deeds. Throughout, the author constantly tries to transform the audience’s perspectives of right and wrong, as multiple viewpoints and scenarios are shared to slowly develop characters.
ReplyDeleteWith the description from the monster from his own perspective, he gains appeal with the audience due to his inability to have chosen to be created, as well as his inability to be included in human society due to his deformities. However, the audience quickly loses sympathy with the descriptions of his coping mechanisms for abandonment; killing people, threatening other’s lives, and helping to frame innocent people for murder. With this, throughout the storytelling by the monster, Frankenstein is portrayed as the antagonist. He is shown as an evil scientist who let his ambition get the best of him, and who left the monster rejected. Frankenstein constantly ridicules the monster for his ugliness, and seems to lose sight of humanity as the book continues on.
-fiona part 1
Both the monster and Victor Frankenstein use their closing arguments to better explain their side of the story before they are unable to fight for themselves anymore. In both of their final testimonies, they attempt to persuade Walton into what they want. For Victor, he tries to convince Walton to continue his hunt for the monster and to keep on working on his passion for science and discoveries. For the monster, he simply tries to make Walton see the story from his perspective instead of only focusing on all the trouble he caused for Victor.
ReplyDeleteVictor uses logos to point out all the horrendous crimes that the monster has commited. As a reader, one would immediately assume that because that creature has done all those horrible acts, he surely must have a terrible heart. As Victor victimizes himself by telling the tales of the monster “destroying his friends”, Walton immediately sympathizes with him and makes it his goal to fulfill Frankenstein’s duty to end the monster. The creature utilizes logos to prove how his complete isolation and the discrimination he felt all his life is why he commited all those crimes. At first, when Walton sees the monster hovering over Frankenstein’s body, his rage falls upon him, but as he hears the creature’s story, he is overcome with compassion and curiosity. The creature also uses logos to blatantly point out all the crimes he has committed but to also prove how all the misfortunes he has gone through has caused him to act out so violently.
Frankenstein uses ethos to prove that he is commendable source. He frequently speaks of his power and intelligence and how although those are both extremely important, they were his major downfalls in life. The monster utilizes ethos to belittle his character slightly. He is quite self-deprecating and admits to all of his major faults, which in the end makes all readers, and in the end Walton, much more sympathetic towards him.
Victor utilizes pathos to slightly victimize himself and make a sort of “sob-story”. He only shares the hardships and problems that have risen from the monster and how it has made his life absolute hell, but in the end, he is one that created the creature. He also shows lots of aggression and rage, even in his very last words. On the contrary, the monster uses pathos to show his regret towards the whole situation. He is extremely saddened over the death of his creator. He compliments Frankenstein on being generous and wishes for him to wake up. When he realizes that his creator is dead, he immediately blames himself and calls Frankenstein one of his victims. He continues to talk about how his isolation has made him to be who he is today. All he ever wanted was a companion with which he could share love and friendship. When that simple right was denied to him by his own creator, he fell into a pit of rage and vengeance. The creature goes on to talk about how he will no longer be an “instrument of future mischief” and that his journey will end soon enough.
Personally, I sympathize more with the creature, because instead of constantly victimizing himself and speaking of all the horrible things that have happened to him, he owns up to his mistakes and realizes his faults. Frankenstein was also extremely vengeful and aggressive in his final testimony while the creature was filled with regret, which is much easier to sympathize with. The monster is very self-deprecating of his character, which is also much more relatable.
ReplyDeleteUltimately, I believe that Frankenstein is guilty of the majority of the situation. I don’t believe anyone in this “case” is innocent because both the monster and Frankenstein commited many malevolent acts. Frankenstein is more guilty than the monster because, in the end, Frankenstein is the one that created the creature. If he were to never have created the creature in the first place, he could have saved 4 people’s lives and his own due to his exhaustion. Yes, the monster is guilty of having personally killed 3 people, but if there were never a monster, then that wouldn’t have happened. Overall, no one in this situation is innocent, but they are both guilty to different degrees.
Though neither side is completely innocent, is can be clearly seen by the end of the novel and supported by his concluding argument that Frankenstein is not the true villain at hand. While the results of his passionate scientific endeavors may have had unforeseen consequences, Victor always strived to create beauty and goodness, with no intentions of harmful or wicked creations. Despite the monster’s feelings of abandonment, the creature never made attempts to deal with his seclusion from society in a healthy way. Instead, he almost immediately decided that he would be more useful enacting revenge. Ultimately, the thoughtless and immoral decisions made by the monster that drove his malevolent behavior caused the audience to lose sympathy with him. The inhuman, automatonymous revenge machine that became the monster ultimately led to its downfall in the reader’s eyes, and led them to a further understanding of the logical actions of Frankenstein.
ReplyDeleteTo further support his actions, in the conclusion, Frankenstein uses Logos, Ethos, and Pathos to reasonably explain his actions. To justify his reasons for acting out against the monster by abandoning him, he explains that he never had the intent to do so; that he wanted to make sure the creature would be happy and content. When things didn't go as planned, he realized there were more important things than one monster’s joy; his “duties towards the beings of [his] own species had greater claims to [his] attention because they included a greater proportion of happiness or misery” (274). After he realized the malicious actions that could be acted out by the monster, he chose the prosperity of the human race as a whole over one creature who had swore revenge on his whole family. To use ethos, while not explicitly stated in the conclusions themselves, Frankenstein’s abundance of wisdom in the field of science and as an educated person alone acts as convincing evidence of his expertise. His education and upbringing overall evidently suggest that he's more knowledgeable than the monster, and thus, a more credible character.
Finally, pathos is implemented for Frankenstein to emotionally appeal to the audience. Victor’s human emotions of grief and despondency as a reaction to death or tragedy are much more relatable than the treacherous and murderous tendencies of the monster. His final words speak of his lost loved ones and his hopes to join them in death, and says “the forms of the beloved dead flit before me, and I hasten to their arms” (275) By channeling his emotions into his passion for his work and his desire to absolve his wrongdoings, Frankenstein morally and healthily resolves his feelings, unlike the monster. Frankenstein does not kill a single thing during the novel besides the Frankenstein bride, while by the end of the story, the monster is the cause of several deaths. By having justified, human emotions to logically drive his actions, Frankenstein is most definitely not the true antagonist. Furthermore, in his final words he addresses the guilt he felt for the lives lost, as well as his choice to not go through with his desires of enacting revenge on the monster. Despite the endless pain and suffering inflicted on him by the creature, he continues to strive for peace and solutions to his problems.
ReplyDelete-Fiona part 3
Towards the end of the novel, both Frankenstein and the monster attempt to prove that they deserve sympathy through how they deliver their speeches. To begin, Frankenstein uses logos to show that the monster clearly did things to ruin and destroy his life such as killing everyone that he loves. Frankenstein first uses in an attempt to make it appear as if he is innocent and the monster is solely responsible for his problems. He also utilizes ethos in his diction to make the monster’s terrible actions seem more intense, further showcasing why he should be given sympathy rather than the creature. However, Frankenstein primarily uses pathos in the delivery of his speech to show that the creature is truly an evil being that has made his life absolutely miserable. Frankenstein uses these methods of persuasion to try to convince the reader that he is the victim in the situation and does not deserve any blame, but sympathy instead. On the other hand, the creature takes blame for his wrongdoings but does so in a way that makes him able to be sympathized with. The creature acknowledges the troubles he causes in his presentation of the facts using logos. He uses logos to show that while he did do bad things it is in response to how Frankenstein originally gave him a terrible life. In addition to logos, the creature also uses ethos to show that his decisions were done with fair intent relative to his life, causing the reader to understand that he is morally and ethically likable in several ways. The creature shows that he acted in the ways he did because of how Frankenstein and others caused misery in his life. The monster also uses pathos in his speech to exhibit how he truly feels about his life and decisions. He shows that he expresses remorse for what he has done and even blames himself, but also is deserving of sympathy because he was the one to first be given trouble. The creature communicates through his speech that he is not the one to blame for all the mishaps that have happened, yet he still takes responsibility for it.
ReplyDeleteAfter understanding how Frankenstein and the monster reflect on their lives, each other, and who is to blame, it is made clear that the monster is easier to sympathize with because he is ironically more human and likable. Frankenstein shows through his final speech that he is self-centered and makes himself the victim instead of taking responsibility and accepting his mistakes. The creature shows through his final speech that he is much more competent, rational, and emotional. This is exemplified by how he rationalizes his decisions, takes the blame, and shows regret for his terrible actions. Overall, Frankenstein portrays himself as unlikable through his lack of competence while the creature does everything to make himself an individual with qualities of one that would have earned sympathy.
Ultimately, the creature is not guilty and is worthy of compassion and care. So, Frankenstein is found guilty of being the cause of the troubles that arise in his life. Frankenstein is the one who gave life to the monster and the monster then acted only in response to how Frankenstein treated him. The creature even ends his days of causing terror with the death of his creator, showing that Frankenstein is truly responsible for the problems. In the end the creature, while being involved in the occurrences of the difficulties in Frankenstein’s life, is only driven to do so by Frankenstein himself. The blame can be placed on Frankenstein for being the true cause of the misery and his life and even the creature’s.
In Victor Frankenstein’s final speech, he uses a mixture of ethos, pathos, and logos to attempt to convince Walton that he was doomed by fate, and his sins were the fault of his passion. There is an argument for both sides, so he is partially guilty and partially innocent. Victor when talking about taking care of the monster says, “This was my duty; but... my duties towards the beings of my own species had greater claims to my attention” (274). He is using logos here to say he chose his human species over one monster. This makes sense, but when the monster came to life, his first reaction was to run away from it and try to find safety. He assumed the monster was bad and did not give it a chance. This assumption shows his failure of his first duty. He did not have to choose between the human species and the monster, he could have chosen to have both live in harmony. On the other hand, it was partially the evil acts of man that drove the monster into this depressed and maniacal state. From these human's perspective, a nine-foot-tall monster came out of the woods. Because Victor created him, it would be his job to help the monster fit into the world. So, it was both Victor and the judging humans' fault.
ReplyDeleteAdditionally, Victor uses pathos when talking about how he was, “misled by passion” (275). Not only is that an attempt to gain Walton’s sympathy, this is another example of Victor dodging blame and saying it was the fault of passion and not himself. If he had realized that what he was doing was not right from the start, he would have stopped making this monster, but instead he was too focused on becoming rich and famous. He was blessed with an incredible ambition and passion but should have applied it in a more responsible way.
The monster mainly uses pathos to gain sympathy from Walton. He says, “No sympathy may I find” (279). He is merely trying to show Walton that nobody will ever look at the story from his point of view, and he did not stand a chance in this world. He next says, “Once I falsely hoped to meet with beings who, pardoning my outside form, would love me for the excellent qualities I was able to unfold” (279). This is conveying the feeling that the monster started off as a loving creature, but the malicious actions of man drove him to this state.
The views of the monster make more sense and are further backed up. The monster really tried to make friends with the people in the cottage, and when they started beating him, he left and did not kill any of them. Even at this point, he does not go rogue. He makes a very reasonable request of another creature of his species, (which portrays more sanity), and only turns into an evil being when Victor tears this monster up. It was wrong to kill all of the people he killed, but he never had anyone, and nobody ever trusted him. It would be impossible to live like this, and so Victor is guilty to being blind to this and is responsible for any damage the monster created.
-Michael Callaghan
In the concluding statements of the monster and Frankenstein in the last chapter they both try use Ethos, Pathos, and Logos to justify their actions. In the monsters bit he uses Pathos the most to try to convince the reader of his actions. The monster does this by telling Walton how as soon as he was created, he was cast out and hated so that is the reason for his terrible actions. This implies the use of Pathos because Shelley is trying to make the reader feel bad for the monster and therefore trying to evoke emotion out of the reader. The monster also uses Logos and says to Walton how if Victor would have showed him love and compassion from the beginning, then the monster wouldn’t have been forced to take the path that he did. However, Frankenstein’s Logos to that claim is that the attention of his own species came first because it offered more happiness or sadness to him then the monster did. When Victor uses Pathos, he says that the monster ruined his life by killing all his friends and family. This also gets a emotional reaction from the reader because we feel sympathy for Victor because throughout the story he has lost everything. The use of Ethos is the same for both, in their final lines both characters try to prove their credibility by basically saying that the other ruined their life more.
ReplyDeleteI think in the end I sympathize more with the monster and I think that his actions were more justified. I feel that if victor had been kinder and taken more responsibility for his creation then he could have avoided all the problems that arose. If he had done even the littlest bit more to try and communicate with the monster, then it would have felt more welcomed. However, Victor didn’t even try and just left his lab with only disappointment because he didn’t get what he wanted. Being the egotistical man that he is, Victor couldn’t bear the fact that he failed and he just left hoping his problem would go away. Furthermore, this readiness to abandon his problems is what got him into the mess in the first place and it also didn’t help that he was even relieved when the monster had escaped. For this reasoning I feel that Victor is guilty and is the person who caused the problems to occur in the story. I think that victor is guilty of neglect towards the monster. However, I don’t think that the monster is completely just either in his actions I just believe that Victor is guiltier because he caused the monster to hate him. The monster is not in the right for killing Victors family and friends, but victor forced the monster's hand in that the only way that the monster would get a person to love him is if another one of him was made. In my final thoughts, for the story to have been a happy one Victor would have needed to treat the monster like his own son from the beginning. However, if that didn’t happen the monster shouldn’t have just resorted to killing everyone Victor cared about just because he was angry.
Cole Bradley
Frankenstein uses ethos through his speech about how he led to this devastation. He begins by retelling the story and pointing out the errors he made throughout the story. Frankenstein then blames himself for the creature’s malignity and the deaths of his family, causing the audience to sympathize him for the misery he had gone through. In addition, Frankenstein utilizes pathos for his closing argument. In one of his final statements, he says, “Seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition…”, meaning ambition can lead people to sacrifice crucial matters such as bonding with families. Frankenstein has undergone this feeling of ambition, and it only led to despondency and distress for him. He delivers this final advice to Walton as a warning to him to not let his desires consume him since Walton is searching for the Northwest passage. His virtuous, cautionary message creates an idea that Frankenstein understands his flaws and he stays righteous by informing Walton.
ReplyDeleteThe monster shows ethos in his address by building up an argument for his defense. In his defense, the monster describes how all humans fear and detest him even if he is a benevolent being. He also says how other human beings do not receive this treatment, setting as an example of why the monster must be targeted for this unjustness. The monster’s justification provokes the audience to recognize the unfairness and suffering the monster had gone through. Moreover, he displays pathos in his message to describe his feelings. The creature tells how all the happiness and warmth disappeared, and only despair remains in his body. He shows the audience how deeply regretful he felt after murdering innocent people for his revenge. He had become a criminal and the only way to find comfort is death. The creature shows pathos by describing and building up his regret for the crimes he has caused.
Overall, the person who will be sympathized more is Frankenstein because the literature was in the perspective of him most of the time. In his point of view, he highlights the terror and horror the creature caused and despises him for the deaths of his family. His emotions are also shown such as vengeance for the deaths and hatred for the monster. However, Frankenstein is ultimately the guilty one and the monster is innocent because Frankenstein did not show any affection to the monster. According to the monster, he was a benevolent being, who was influenced to be malevolent by all the hatred from everyone. If Frankenstein expressed love towards the creature, he would have been a person filled with affection and warmth.
-Nanako Tanisaka
In the final speech by Frankenstein, Logos is used for Victor’s reasoning behind his death. It is used to back up is actions and give examples for why he believes he died. He feels as if the responsibilities that came with creating the monster, was bounded towards misery. His lack of attention, responsibility, and creation of another creature was the right thing, according to Victor. On page 274, Victor states, “During these last days I have been occupied in examining my past conduct; nor do I find it blamable” (274). This proves how once again, Victor is showed blaming everyone but himself, even when he a time to really think it through. On the other hand, during the monster’s final speech, pathos is used to set an emotional mood and setting, and his emotional speech forces the readers to also feel emotional and sympathetic towards him. Throughout the monster’s final speech, there is an abundant amount of sorrowfulness that is present, that builds up, and attaches the readers to everything the monster says. For example, “No sympathy may I ever find. When I first sought it, it was the love of virtue, the feelings of happiness and affection...But now that virtue had become to me a shadow, and that happiness and affection are turned into bitter and loathing despair” (279). Immediately after reading Victor’s final speech and only this statement by the monster, it is coherent that we should feel sympathetic towards the monster. His whole life has been filled with denial, and rejection, when he was just trying to find, and be loved. And because everything he sought was denied, “I am content to suffer alone while my sufferings shall endure; when I die, I am well satisfied that abhorrence and opprobrium should load my memory” (279). This is the ultimately saddest conclusion one can come up with, though it was forced upon by all his rejections to society and even his creator. All these bad thoughts clouded his desires to find sympathy. This causes the rage and the deaths of all of Victor’s loved ones. Whereas Victor’s life had been filled with his overly ambitious experiments, and his desire to become this godly-like figure. He essentially created his own life, his own being, and just abandoned it, along with everyone else in society. Even after all his wrongdoings towards the monster, he still feels that he should not be the one to be blamed, and for that, I believe Victor is guilty. He is guilty of all the deaths, the monster’s loneliness, misery, and abandonment, and even his own loneliness, and misery. I feel that no one is completely is innocent; the monster committed all those sins, though the monster is more innocent than Victor because he was a victim of abandonment and rejection ever since he was born.
ReplyDeleteThese final monologues encompass the truth to both Frankenstein and his monster. Using logos, or evidence, to support these final remarks, Shelley allows the reader to view both perspectives and observe how both parties are placed at fault. Frankenstein justifiably dismisses his guilt, with included acknowledgement to his considerable mistakes. He ultimately allows Walton to determine the monster’s fate, with the strong hope he’ll put an end to the creation. In response to the neglect of providing the monster with a content lifestyle, Frankenstein claims that “This was [his] duty; but there was another still paramount to that. [His] duties towards the beings of [his] own species had greater claims to [his] attention because they included a greater proportion of happiness or misery…[The monster] showed unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil; [the monster] destroyed [his] friends” (274-75). Frankenstein is speaking this logical reason for hatred, for the monster has killed those that he has loved, therefore he despises it. However, broken down Shelley is using ethos to allow one to see beyond the text, and to observe the possibility of a skewed perspective here. Frankenstein deprived his own creation of any happiness, when that was this creature’s only request. Countless times throughout this novel, the creation asks for warmth and simple acceptance from the person who brought him into existence, and yet that person, Frankenstein, being the only one with the capability of loving him, rejects him with the automatic assumption of the worst, just as society does. It is this clear lack of sympathy and extreme defensiveness that allows one to doubt Frankenstein’s innocence. He acknowledges the ignorance of his actions, yet he does not take responsibility for them.
ReplyDeleteThe monster’s final message elicits a more emotional response. Using pathos, Shelley heavily expresses the monster’s insistence on him being the one who suffered the most, despite his malevolent actions. “For while I destroyed his hopes, I did not satisfy my own desires. They were forever ardent and craving; still I desired love and fellowship, and I was still spurned. Was there no injustice in this? Am I to be thought the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against me” (280)? Shelley stresses the idea that society collapses the benevolent intentions in individuals. Her novel ends with the monster’s own suicide, which further adds to the dramatic and emotionally charged response that the reader is intended to have. One gains a deeper understanding for this creature’s actions. He had nothing in his life to live for, but revenge, yet even he sees the wrong in this.
However, the debate remains as to the extent of such blame, and who is more guilty; Frankenstein, or the abhorred creature? Shelley steers the audience in the direction of siding with the monster through the use of ethos. Frankenstein has a shorter response, and ends still with hatred in his heart . This ultimately testifies to his overly ambitious and demoralized character. He was unwilling to do a simple thing, he was unable to accept his creature, therefore more destruction came. If he didn’t deny the monster of his rights as a living being, the monster wouldn’t have acted like Frankenstein essentially set him up to be. A human without rights, isn’t human. Without individual freedoms to love and feel love, there is nothing keeping the monster from his actions. He’s told he’s a monster, so he acts like a monster. Observation of the fact that both are at reasonable fault is evident. Frankenstein denied him of love and care, so the monster killed his family. At first glance, it’d be obvious to assume that the monster is at greater fault, however, as readers , we sympathize more with the monster, for in various ways this monster is less of a monster than the man that created him.
Part 1
ReplyDeleteIn the ending of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, both Victor and the monster perform a speech that expresses their state as a final justification for themselves in this case of “man vs. nature”. Robert Walton, the audience of their speeches, represents the readers’ view in the story, where Victor and the monster try to persuade him to believe the justice in their stories. Walton first encounters Victor, who informs him about the story. In Victor’s speech, his words are expressed effectively through an emotional way. The description of his raging abhorrence towards the monster, the injustice he feels from the unfinished revenge, and the deep despair he’d fell into since the death of his beloved friends and family all contribute to the pathos that is conveyed to Walton and the readers. Through connotative diction such as “burning hatred” and “unparalleled malignity”, Victor expresses his speech in an impassioned tone, which conveys strong connection with his audience, Walton. As a result, Walton is more likely to express sympathetic emotions toward what he’d experienced, and supports his side. In addition, Victor integrates some logic and reasoning in his explanation of his deeds. By referring to the choice of society’s peace over the monster’s own selfish desire, he justifies his decision on rejecting the monster where it resulted in deleterious consequences. The logical reasoning behind the choice further upholds Victor’s role in the situation and expresses his points more effectively. The monster, on the other hand, expresses his speech with a more convincing tone through apt use of logos and ethos. He explains that his egregious deeds are resulted only from the lack of care and responsibility from Victor, his creator. The virtuous kindness that he originally possesses has gradually obliterated by the abhorred abandonments he received from humankind and the society. Thus, the melancholic traits that he expresses are not the true nature of himself. Such sequence of rational reasoning builds up the monster’s argument persuasively. Moreover, the monster realizes and acknowledges the detrimental means he’d done and shows deep remorse toward them: “But it is true that I am a wretch. I have murdered the lovely and the helpless”, where he seeks death at the end: “I shall die. I shall no longer feel the agonies which now consume me or be the prey of feeling unsatisfied, yet unquenched.” In the monster’s speech, both sides of this argument are considered, which increases the credibility of his words since he is fair-minded in the situation. The use of ethos further emphasizes the trustworthiness of the monster’s narrative in comparison to Victor’s, which only contains his views and feelings of the story.
Part 2
ReplyDeleteFrom the different narratives of Victor and the monster, I, as a the reader, sympathize with the monster. Although he did show threatening traits toward the society in terms of his exceeding strength and his melancholic deeds, such manner is more a consequence of the lack of parenting and love. Right after he was “born”, the monster was abandoned by his creator, his “father”, who supposed to take the responsibility of taking care of him. Instead, Victor neglected him before he even had the chance to truly know the nature of the monster. As the monster himself expresses through out his narrative, it is misery that male him a true, egregious “monster” who everyone fears. The monster is more like a rebel child who seeks love and affection, but only receives hatred from others and thus attempts vengeance in return. His wretched and despondent experience not only indicates to the despairing consequence of parent’s irresponsibility, but also reflects the prejudice towards appearance and the dark, cruel side of humanity. If the society is more tolerable toward the monster regardless of his ghastly look, he might result in a more virtuous and ethical nature and expresses gracious characteristics toward people around him. He would not seek revenge on Victor’s friends and families, who were innocent victims under his blinding rage. Thus, I believe the monster’s detrimental deeds are just a result of Victor’s failure as a parent. Ultimately, both Victor and the monster are guilty in some sense, but Victor in more terms are responsible for such consequence. Although he did suffer from the death of his family and died miserably at the end, he never tried to find his own guilt on the cause of this dreadful result. He blamed he monster’s “unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil” but never thought about how and why the creature turned out like this under his hands. If he put down his immense pride and his prejudice towards the monster’s horrified appearance before he abandoned him, the innocent, generous nature that was initially filled inside the monster would’ve been expressed fully. Though the monster is not truly innocent in terms of what he’d done towards Victor’s friend and family, he wouldn’t be lost in violence and revenge if Victor takes the responsibility of “assure his happiness and well-being”. Once again, one major theme of this novel that Shelly wanted to express is emphasized through the tragic endings of both Victor and the monster: the role of the parent in development of the child’s character is essential toward the potential impacts that it might have on the society in the future.
The way in which Frankenstein and his monster conducted their actions to fit their morals is vastly disparate, and in their final words considering their lives, they justify their own morality. Frankenstein claims that he, a human man, did what was best for humanity. He lists the monster’s foul transgressions and justifies his refusal to make the monster a companion as a desire to do the most good to every creature in creation; the monster is one being - the human race is many. In stark contrast to Frankenstein's argument, however, the monster does not defend the actions he took - he openly calls them abhorrent and against his morals. His is a plea for sympathy rather than justification. Referring to himself as a fallen angel turned a devil, he uses grandiosity to shield from responsibility. To elicit compassion the monster plainly states that if he were treated with kindness, he, the most wretched thing in existence, would show nothing but kindness in return. Frankenstein uses ethos, pathos, and logos to establish his moral character, illustrate the horrors of the monster’s morality, and then explain his actions in the frame of favoring the many over the few. The monster does not take such a structured approach. He establishes no ethos, his logic has gaps and deep faults, and the argument he makes is a simple appeal to the human sympathies - perhaps he can be remembered as something other than a monster.
ReplyDeleteThe monsters morality was compromised when he first deliberately hurt another. His evil come not from bad goals, but from bad application. Lack of reason lead to the monster’s transgression - the same cannot be said about Frankenstein. The only fault one can find in his morals and actions is not bad logic causing bad decision, but possibly discriminatory foundational principles. Assuming the following premises are true - the monster is innately evil, and building a second monster would allow that evil to persist thereby doing more harm to the world than one monster could do - don’t build a second monster is perfectly sane logic. The monster's actions are immutably evil, but Frankenstein's actions can be debated. Frankenstein should draw more sympathy from the reader.
In the end Frankenstein could only be considered guilty of negligence and racism, whereas the monster murdered three people and caused the death of two others.
-Connor
The last speeches of Frankenstein and the monster use ethos, logos, and pathos, however, each argument favors one out of the three. Frankenstein's speech leans more logos. Frankenstein believes that his duty was towards his own species and he uses this belief to justify his abandonment of the monster. Frankenstein also mentions that the monster “showed unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil” (275). In this part of his speech, Frankenstein does not accept or mention that the monster became evil because of its abandonment. Frankenstein shifts the blame and makes the monster appear evil from the start. Frankenstein's ethos is strong as well. Frankenstein got educated and grew up in a family. He is also smart since he was able to create the monster. Frankenstein also uses pathos in his speech. Most of the pathos he uses is sympathy. Frankenstein tries to earn sympathy by mentioning that the monster “destroyed my friends; he devoted to the destruction of beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom” (275). Frankenstein is declaring his speech to Walton who is the same species as Frankenstein. By mentioning that the monster wants to destroy humans he gets sympathy from his audience.
ReplyDeleteThe monster, on the other hand, focuses a lot of his speech on emotion and uses mostly pathos. Throughout his speech, the monster makes himself the victim. He describes himself as an “abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on” (280). By making himself victim he earns sympathy from the audience. The monster also expresses sadness in his speech when he mentions that he shall die. This earns him even more sympathy from the audience. The monster does not use a lot of logos in his speech since the speech’s purpose is to make the audience sympathies the monster. Additionally, the monster’s ethos is also weak. He was abandoned by Frankenstein and got his knowledge by watching a family live their lives. He was also corrupted by humans and this caused him to seek revenge on humankind especially, Frankenstein. The audience member, Walton is Frankenstein's friend. He was already swayed by Frankenstein and he has heard the story from his point of view. Walton is already influenced by Frankenstein which hurts the monster’s chance of persuading the audience.
We sympathize with the monster more than we sympathies with Frankenstein. Frankenstein created the monster. The monster did not choose to be created by Frankenstein. After being created Frankenstein then abandoned the monster and does not care for him as a father or creator should. This starts a chain of events that causes the monster to seek revenge on humankind and especially Frankenstein because of his mistreatment and abandonment. At the end of the book, both characters are miserable because of the choices Frankenstein made. Overall both the monster and Frankenstein are guilty. Frankenstein is guilty because of the mistakes he made in his early life when he created the monster. However, the monster is also guilty. Even though the monster could not choose whether his creator abandoned him or not he could have chosen to forgive Frankenstein instead of seeking revenge. Both of the characters are guilty because they both have committed sins during their lives however, the monster is more innocent than Frankenstein.
Victoria Oginski
Victor Frankenstein primarily focuses on logos in justifying his past conducts. In doing so he strengthens the appeals of his moral virtues, or ethos to give credibility to his reasoning. He attempts to rationalize claiming, “my duties towards the beings of my own species had greater claims to my attention because they included a greater proportion of happiness or misery. Urged by this view, I refused, and I did right in refusing, to create a companion for the first creature” (274 -275). He argues that the suffering of the monster was inevitable because he chose the prosperity for his own species over the monsters, and thus should be considered benevolent. He gives a logical view that's served justice for his own sense of contributing to the greater world. Additionally, he elucidates and gives evidence to the benevolence of the monster with the use of pathos, attempting to draw compassion. “ I feel myself justified in desiring the death of my adversary.”(274), he says as the monster “showed unparalleled malignity and selfishness in evil; he destroyed my friends; he devoted to destruction beings who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom” (275). In order to reason his state of wretched vengeance, in which he recognizes, he overemphasizes the monster as something that epitomizes malevolence against all of humanity, all “who possessed exquisite sensations, happiness, and wisdom”. This contributes to formulating the absolute evil Frankenstein proposes.
ReplyDeleteThe monster begins with the use of ethos, claiming he initially seeked, “love of virtue, the feelings of happiness and affection with which my whole being overflowed, that I wished to be participated.” (279). He builds credibility for his morals and assures Walton of his initial sense of benevolence. He gives reason for the blame outside forces where nothing in his path allowed for that to happen. By doing so it creates a path for the monster to persuade compassion, or pathos, in his own suffering. To Walton, he speaks, “but in the detail which he gave you of them he could not sum up the hours and months of misery which I endured wasting in impotent passions. For while I destroyed his hopes, I did not satisfy my own desires. They were forever ardent and craving; still I desired love and fellowship, and I was still spurned.” (280). Amidst the malevolent acts, nothing served to replace his desires to exercise virtue. He evokes pity in Walton by suggesting that benevolent or not his doom was predestined. To reason, he questions the audience of the absence of consideration given to his sufferings. “Was there no injustice in this? Am I to be thought the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against me? Why do you not hate Felix, who drove his friend from his door with contumely? Why do you not execrate the rustic who sought to destroy the savior of his child? Nay, these are virtuous and immaculate beings! I, the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on. Even now my blood boils at the recollection of this injustice” (280). He states that there is no justice in ruling him a malevolent being, if the ones who judged were evil themselves.
Alyssa M (part 1)
Through his intelligent and compelling argument, I am able to sympathize more with the monster. His words “no guilt, no mischief, no malignity, no misery, can be found comparable to mine” draws contrast to that of Frankenstein. He successfully communicates misery and guilt while Frankenstein failed to do so. As evident by Frankenstein's request to finish his unfulfilled vengeance, he remained narrow minded and selfish to the end. The monster sought love for his own creator and expresses intense guilt of damage to innocent people. While Frankenstein argued complete justice in his actions which attributes to his malevolence, the monster fails to completely come to terms with his actions and promises destruction upon himself. Ultimately, it is unfair to place blame on either character. Both pursued their own sense of righteousness, which caused conflict and engendered malevolence in both Frankenstein and the monster .
ReplyDeleteAlyssa M (part 2)
Kristie Lee
ReplyDeleteperiod 1
In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the concluding chapter of the book is one that truly allows the reader to deeply understand the mindset and nature of these two disparate characters. Towards the end of Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein and the monster are both seen attempting to persuade Walton of their innocence in ways that reveal much about their personality. On his deathbed, Frankenstein tries to persuade Walton and the reader that he is innocent. First, Frankenstein uses ethos to strengthen his point in this scene. The fact that he was an educated scientist and a very eloquent man clearly proves that ethos is being used to show an increase in credibility.. Frankenstein is clearly uses logos to try and persuade the reader of his innocence. He uses logic and reason to explain what would have happened if he agreed to grant the monster’s wish. Next, after Frankenstein passes away, the monster enters the scene and immediately feels devastated for killing Frankenstein’s loved ones, and eventually blames himself for the death of Frankenstein. He regrets his intolerable actions he made because of his anger. In addition, it is clear that the monster exhibited pathos to persuade the readers of his innocence, which can be proven once Walton stated that, “I was at first touched by the expressions of his misery…” (278). In this scene, the monster uses pathos in order to receive pity and understanding from the readers.
I would initially sympathize the monster first due to the fact that humans are naturally more sensitive towards anyone that uses pathos as opposed to logos. Frankenstein’s logic and rationality does not make as large of an impression on the reader in comparison to the monster’s raw and true feelings that were portrayed in quite a histrionic manner. However, looking at the larger picture of this book as a whole, Frankenstein is the character that is most guilty. Towards the beginning of the novel, Frankenstein had the clear choice to make the monster. He clearly failed to process and ran away from his mistakes, and completely neglecting his creation. The monster never had the conscious choice to be created. Rather, the decision of bringing a creature to life was in the hands of Frankenstein. His pride and ambition blinded him in seeing the danger of the consequence. Frankenstein would have indubitably been able to avoid bringing a creature to life, as well as the murder of his family. In addition, the fact that Frankenstein made and abandoned the monster is another point proving Frankenstein’s guiltiness. Throughout the book, the audience learns from the monster’s anecdote, that the reason for all of his cruel actions were due to the fact that he was miserable. All he had known was rejection and hate. He never experienced or felt love in his life. Therefore, it is immoral and unjust for the reader to expect one who was unloved and rejected to display acts of amity. In conclusion, it is apparent that Frankenstein is guilty because the root cause of the murder of his loved ones was because of something that he created and neglected.
Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, concludes in the perspective of Robert Walton providing his last words with both Victor Frankenstein and his monster. The two characters attempt to argue their innocence and make a case of justice for their wrong-doings. Frankenstein and the monster lived similar lives of loneliness, frustration, guilt, and misery, but they leave the Earth with different mindsets and goals.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the novel, Victor Frankenstein has relied on destiny and fate to take the blame for his creation of the monster and his future thereafter. Victor’s final speech to Walton, while on his deathbed, consists of the conclusion that his wish to see the monster dead is justified, along with a request to Walton to finish the job if ever possible. Dr. Frankenstein’s credibility is brought into question the entire novel due to his unstable mental state and especially in his final words, as they are spoken in illness and defeat. Though Victor is not the most morally respected, he uses ethos through eloquent speech and a strong education. He commonly includes a combination of pathos and ethos, in which he persuades the listener to deem him credible by loading his words full of emotion. The creator relies heavily on conveying his pain to others in a way to justify his actions. “That he should live to be an instrument of mischief disturbs me: in other respects, this hour, when I momentarily expect my release, is the only happy one which I have enjoyed for several years,” (275) is one of Victor’s final phrases. This confession that evokes a response of sympathy towards the scientist’s story on top of his listing of all the monster’s crimes committed against him helps make sense of Victor’s quest for vengeance that occupied many years of his life.
Logos comes into play when Victor exclaims his failure to satisfy the monster was rooted in his realization that tending to humanity, his “own species” (274), was of greater importance. There is logic presented here, as caring for his own family and friends would undoubtedly come before pleasing a horrid looking monster. He constructs a further argument in favor of himself, pleading his right-mindedness in refusing to create another creature alike the first. Victor’s use of logic in his decision to deny another creation helps to support his rational thought, as well as his ethical likability. Overall, he always comes back to the goal of killing the monster and implies one of his only failures was not being able to end the creature’s life. It is clear Frankenstein feels the guilt of the monster’s actions that brought harm to his loved ones, but he falls short of taking responsibility for creating the monster and neglecting it since first sight.
Part 1, Lauren Larking
Part 2, Lauren Larking
ReplyDeleteThe monster takes a different approach of last words, confessing his admiration of Victor, the despondency of his creator’s death, and admits to all his harmful actions and wrongful objectives. Presenting himself with shame and regret of his murders and metamorphosis into an evil being, the monster speaks on his miserable life and self hatred. He explains his suffering by exclaiming that “I, the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on.” (280) Using a similar combination of pathos and ethos as Frankenstein, the monster speaks of his life with eloquent words. In particular, the monster titles himself an “abortion,” which carries a large amount of heavy emotion. Although the monster has a lack of education, proper upbringing, and reliability, the listener sympathizes with his story more. Neglected by humanity and his own maker ever since his creation, the monster still expresses his story in an accepting manner. Logos is shown in the creature’s ramble of questions including, “Am I to be thought the only criminal, when all humankind sinned against me?” (280) The monster was truly excluded from a chance at joining society, even when he was solely good-intentioned and a curious soul. Pathos and logos work hand in hand here, connecting his emotional approach to providing relevant reasoning for his transformation to a malevolent force. Finally, the monster ends with his plan to seclude himself for the benefit of humanity and eventually lay to rest in peace. Paying respects to Frankenstein and admitting his crimes were two of the monster’s final actions, rising above vengeance and blame as his creator failed to.
Overall, the monster’s use of ethos, pathos, and logos proved more effective than Frankenstein’s, leading the reader to sympathize more with the creature. Ultimately, neither is innocent, meaning their final impressions depend on confessions and explanations. Both characters are guilty of committing multiple crimes, but it is the monster that demonstrates the most growth and peace in his final words. The authentic guilt and remorse that pained the creature towards the end failed to haunt Frankenstein to the same degree on his deathbed. The monster earned sympathy, leaving behind the most candid and impactful words.
In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, there are many examples of ethos, logos, and pathos. In Frankensteins speech at the end of the book, Frankenstein uses pathos by explaining to Walton that the reason why he wants to hunt down the monster is because his family and friends were murdered by the monster. Frankenstein is using ethos to persuade Walton and the readers that his reasoning is justified. Frankenstein is trying to appeal to the readers emotions and have the readers sympathize with him. Frankenstein also shows ethos, by taking fluently and intellectually. By doing so, the readers are more likely to believe what Frankenstein is trying to communicate and side with Frankenstein because his language is more eloquent and the manner of speech is more fluent. Frankenstein also uses logos, by explaining to the reader that because the monster killed his family, the only logical response would be to avenge their deaths. I believe that Frankenstein had won the argument because he had a stronger argument and used more ethos, pathos and logos.
ReplyDeleteWhile both Victor Frankenstein and the monster are at fault for the string of murders, Victor is ultimately to blame. He executes certain deeds, such as the creation of the monster, the inability to confess during Justine’s trial, and the dismantling of the female monster, that stem from his own selfishness and cowardice. Throughout the novel Victor proves, by even expressing to Robert Walden himself, that he is aware of the consequences of his decisions. On the other hand, the monster is more innocent but not completely free of blame. He is a rational creature that possess free will and the ability to distinguish between right and wrong. Therefore it is important to note that the monster is aware of and chooses to murder the innocent loved ones of his creator. However, in contrast to Victor, the monster’s decisions are carried out in response to the malignity of humanity.
ReplyDeleteOn his deathbed Victor peruses his past conduct and delivers a final speech to Robert Walden. He uses pathos by including strong words and phrases such as “enthusiastic madness” and “burning hatred” while trying to increase his persuasion. He mainly devotes his speech to the use of ethos and logos. Again, throughout the novel Victor proves that he is aware of the consequences and sees himself at fault. Despite this, he remains selfish to the very end and only wishes to gain the sympathy of Walden by rationalizing in any way possible that his past conduct is not blameable. He tries to prove his trustworthiness by rationalizing that he did not comply to the demand of the monster because his lied in protecting his loved ones. This completely contradicts his mindset earlier in the novel, as he knew that he could only protect his loved ones by loving his creation and complying to his demand for a female creature. In the end, Victor only blames himself for not destroying his creation. On the other hand, the monster uses pathos to reveal his true feelings about himself and his creator through his speech. He evokes sympathy from the audience by expressing just how much pain and suffering the prejudiced treatment he received gave him. Yet he also shows an understanding of his culpability and looks upon the hands which executed the deeds with great abhorrence. He reveals his love for Victor and is pained by the misery he had caused his creator.
During the final conversation between Walton and Frankenstein right before Frankenstein dies shows how Frankenstein is finally using logos to talk to Walton. Frankenstein finally uses Logos when talking to Walton because he uses logic to tell Walton that he probably won’t encounter the monster because the ship is leaving the North Pole unless they renounce their country and selfishly hunt the monster. Frankenstein knows that the explorers won’t renounce their country so tells Walton on page 275 that “I cannot ask you to renounce your country and friends to fulfil this task; and now that you are returning to England, you will have little chance of meeting with him.” This is one of the first times that Frankenstein uses logos in the whole book besides destroying the monster’s companion. Frankenstein is finally thinking logically as he is dying as he knows that the monster escaped his grasps, but he will still hate him for all the malicious deeds the monster did against his family and Frankenstein. One of Frankenstein’s last words was “Seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself science and discoveries” as shown on page 275 which is Frankenstein warning Walton to not get caught up in being overambitious and chasing all the glory. These final words from Frankenstein tell us that he has learned from his mistakes and is ready to die what he has created. While in Frankenstein's dying moments, he relies on logos when talking to Walton, the monster when seeing his creator’s dead body lashes out and only shows pathos or emotion. When the monster snuck on Walton’s boat and saw the dead body of Frankenstein he starts ranting to Walton, who sees the monster for the first time, about how he is some fallen angel that has fallen from grace, even using the devil as an example of himself as the devil is a fallen angel that turned evil and corrupted. The monster then talks to Walton about how he is justified for his actions and that there was a good reason for the monster to commit all those murders because he was alone and trampled on. The monster is speaking just from pathos as he just saw his creator, dead in a coffin making the monster alone in the world with nobody to understand him even though Frankenstein was hunting him. Eventually the monster comes to some of his senses and tells Walton that he will leave and travel to the north arctic to die alone so that nobody else can create a monstrosity like himself.(1/2)
ReplyDeleteThis is a little bit of logos as the monster finally come to terms that he will always be alone and that nobody will ever be able to relate to him. I personally sympathize with Frankenstein more over the monster because I feel for him as he just lost everything he had, especially the love of his life. With nothing left he might as well hunt the monster to the end of the earth out of pure emotion to get revenge on thing that ruined his life. While I can also sympathize with the monster a little bit because of how he is neglected and hunted just because he looks different. However, I can’t sympathize with him after he started murdering innocent people that was close to Frankenstein's life just to make him hurt comes off to me as the monster has turned maniacal just because he has lost so much and that nobody will except him. Overall, I sympathize more for Frankenstein because of one little mistake ruined his life while the monster was the mistake but turned out to ruin his life because there was nobody else like him. Ultimately, I think that Frankenstein is guilty of being overambitious and wanting all the glory for himself, ultimately not caring for anybody but himself. The monster is guilty of being neglected and abused so much that he turned into a crazed murderer on the hunt for revenge. But I feel that Frankenstein is more innocent than the monster just because of how far the monster went to get revenge, murdering innocent people that were close to Frankenstein just to make him feel the pain he went through. I feel like both characters are guilty of their actions, I just feel that the monster is guiltier.(2/2)
ReplyDelete