In Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein”, there are many parallels between Victor Frankenstein and his monster. One of which that really stood out to me was their shared interest in reading and learning. However, the differences between the two characters can be seen clearly from what books they are interested in. The first book to be introduced was in a sense, Victor Frankenstein’s pathway to creating the monster. “In this house I chanced to find a volume of the works of Cornelius Agrippa. I opened it with apathy; the theory which he attempts to demonstrate and the wonderful facts which he relates soon changed this feeling into enthusiasm.” This moment coupled with his father’s dismissal of the book led him to his fascination with alchemy, natural science, and the creation of life. He continued to study this type of mystical science all the way into his university years.
On the other hand, Frankenstein’s monster was learning about the world through a completely different perspective. Victor was someone that had everything in life; friends, family, education, a lover whereas his creation, and in a way, his son, had nothing. They both were finding themselves through literature, but coming from two different worlds. The monster’s favorite book was “Paradise Lost” and he felt like his situation and Adam’s were the same. In Chapter 15, the monster explains, “I often referred the several situations, as their similarity struck me, to my own. Like Adam, I was apparently united by no link to any other being in existence; but his state was far different from mine in every other respect. He had come forth from the hands of God a perfect creature, happy and prosperous, guarded by the especial care of his Creator; he was allowed to converse with and acquire knowledge from beings of a superior nature, but I was wretched, helpless, and alone.”
The most interesting aspect I found about the Cornelius Agrippa volume and “Paradise Lost” is that one character took something real and tried to make it fake, and the other takes something fake and tried to make it real. Basically, Victor was a man of science, but he kept trying to apply alchemy and mystical science as fact and truth. Meanwhile, the monster does the the opposite of that, by taking “Paradise Lost” as a “true history” but it actually was a work of fiction. My analysis of this is that Victor lived a world of reality but was pursuing a fantasy of these philosophies. This ultimately leads to him going along this path of “magic” and creating the monster. The monster is the fantasy in this real world, desperately trying to validate his own existence. The irony is that he connected to a work of imagination, like he himself was.
Both Victor Frankenstein and the monster were young in their lives when finding the books that defined their characters. They were both impressionable at the time of reading the books. I feel like Mary Shelley included this parallel of reading on purpose, but made what they were reading different in order to show where the lines of similarity between the creator and creature are blurred.
Full textual moments:
Chapter 2- In this house I chanced to find a volume of the works of Cornelius Agrippa. I opened it with apathy; the theory which he attempts to demonstrate and the wonderful facts which he relates soon changed this feeling into enthusiasm. A new light seemed to dawn upon my mind, and bounding with joy, I communicated my discovery to my father. My father looked carelessly at the title page of my book and said, “Ah! Cornelius Agrippa! My dear Victor, do not waste your time upon this; it is sad trash.”
If, instead of this remark, my father had taken the pains to explain to me that the principles of Agrippa had been entirely exploded and that a modern system of science had been introduced which possessed much greater powers than the ancient, because the powers of the latter were chimerical, while those of the former were real and practical, under such circumstances I should certainly have thrown Agrippa aside and have contented my imagination, warmed as it was, by returning with greater ardour to my former studies. It is even possible that the train of my ideas would never have received the fatal impulse that led to my ruin. But the cursory glance my father had taken of my volume by no means assured me that he was acquainted with its contents, and I continued to read with the greatest avidity. When I returned home my first care was to procure the whole works of this author, and afterwards of Paracelsus and Albertus Magnus. I read and studied the wild fancies of these writers with delight; they appeared to me treasures known to few besides myself.
Chapter 15-“But Paradise Lost excited different and far deeper emotions. I read it, as I had read the other volumes which had fallen into my hands, as a true history. It moved every feeling of wonder and awe that the picture of an omnipotent God warring with his creatures was capable of exciting. I often referred the several situations, as their similarity struck me, to my own. Like Adam, I was apparently united by no link to any other being in existence; but his state was far different from mine in every other respect. He had come forth from the hands of God a perfect creature, happy and prosperous, guarded by the especial care of his Creator; he was allowed to converse with and acquire knowledge from beings of a superior nature, but I was wretched, helpless, and alone. Many times I considered Satan as the fitter emblem of my condition, for often, like him, when I viewed the bliss of my protectors, the bitter gall of envy rose within me.