I once was asked by a friend of mine, a first-time reader of Frankenstein, and, although an admirer of science-fiction, not a student of literature:
“If Victor wanted to find the principle of life and defy death, why didn't he infuse life into a dead body instead of putting himself through the gut-churning business of collecting dead body parts and stitching them together?” What would you answer to this question?
Chloé
9/4/2018 10:49:28
I have two answers:
Swaha
9/4/2018 15:41:07
My answer goes along the lines of Chloe's. I think there is a kind of egocentric dimension to Frankenstein's undertaking. Not only does he want to find the principle of life, but I think he literally wants to give life. Therefore, only infusing life in a dead body seems to put aside the creating part of the process. Assembling himself the limbs, first marks a rupture with what these parts were before he got involved but also allows him to have a greater implication with the final product; infusing life but also a bit of himself through the process so that he can take greater credit for what will be emerging from the experience.
Olena
10/4/2018 14:49:58
Victor seems to indicate many motivations for his process of creation, though one seems to address the given question directly: ‘if I could bestow animation upon lifeless matter, I might in process of time (although I now found it impossible) renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption.’ We see here that within the novel, a difference is made between giving life and reversing death. As such, Victor’s decision to compose a being, rather than resuscitate a body, depends on his scientific knowledge, and what is actually capable of.
Giulia
14/4/2018 08:59:52
I think the answer to that question is more psychological than anything. Comments are closed.
|
Details
AutorArchiv
May 2018
Kategorien |