Frankenstein,
Based on the first one third of the novel, the extreme changes of Victor Frankenstein’s emotion are shown. Especially chapter 4 describes how Victor is passionate in creating a human and how enjoyable to spend time with this. According to the chapter, “The summer months passed while I was thus engaged, heart and soul, in one pursuit. It was a most beautiful season; never did the field bestow a more plentiful harvest, or the vines yield a more luxuriant vintage: but my eyes were insensible to the charms of nature(49).”
Like one who, on a lonely road,
Doth walk in fear and dread,
And, having once turned rounds, walks on
And turns no more his head;
Because he knows a frightful fiend
Doth close behind him tread. (53)
On the other hand, after he creates his creature, he spends long time in the sickness of fair. above those seem to describe Victor’s loneliness and horror. Even though he collects materials to create him as beautiful, his creature is not actually beautiful. Just his creature is really shocking to him. When this literature was written, a trend of art was romanticism. I guess that this is why Mary used a lot of brilliant words and wrote her novel metaphorically. Especially chapter 4 that explains Victor’s excitement is a device to emphasize his despair by putting a lot of much fancy words. It makes much easy to feel his despair. According to the chapter 5,
I intended to use the second method
You are calling our attention to a lot of things. You are highlighting the contrast between the luxurious nature and Victor’s not noticing that luxuriousness in his own passionate experiment (even though he must have noticed enough to give record of it). You are highlighting in your quote (with the poem) how Frankenstein feels haunted and compelled on. You are also putting this frenzy in contrast to the after horror he will feel about his creation once it takes a life of its own. You are doing a lot!
It seems to me like you are most interested in the way Frankenstein’s elation pre-creation contrasts to his post creation horror. If I’m correct, then I think a side by side reading of two passages (one passage that exemplifies his pre-creation excitement and one that emphasizes his post creation horror) would be a stronger and more focused argumentative move.
Right now your own explanation of the text seems to be a little vague and kind of outside of the actual reading of the passage. I think focusing on a side by side would encourage focus on the specific text.