Often times in society people become what we label them. Frankenstein’s monster was born without sin, an innately innocent being. His grotesque form is what the people around him see, and that is the only thing they choose to accept. He is chastised despite his inner feelings and slowly fits the mold created for him by society. Within him is this constant struggle of whether he should do the right thing, in his mind, or if he should succumb to the stereotypes of being a monster. There are points were the beast takes over, such as when he kills those around him, William Frankesnstein, and Elizabeth Lavenza.
The aspect I specifically want to talk about is how the Monster conformed to the stereotypes he was given. In this regard a comparable character would be Severus Snape, from Harry Potter. Since the time Snape was a child he was made fun of for his greasy hair, long nose, and dirty clothing. He was never given the opportunity to show the goodness within him. At school he was cast into the dark arts, drawn in by this sense of power they seemed to hold. A power that he had never had. It created the farce of respect from his peers when really it was fear. However, if it hadn’t been for the torment of the other children he never would of gone to the dark side. With his dying breath he shows Harry how all he ever cared about was his mother, Lily.
Both the Monster and Snape never have a fighting chance. They are cast in their roles and no one gives them the chance for their potential to come out. No one gives them the opportunity to show that they are not monsters, but human, just like those around them.
Shelley, Mary W, and Marilyn Butler. Frankenstein, Or, the Modern Prometheus: The 1818 Text. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994. Print.
Rowling, J.K.. Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows. New York: Scholastic, 2007. Print.
What I like is that you are very clear about what it is you see in the Frankenstein text and how you see that in the Harry Potter text. My biggest concern (b/c it will mess you up in a paper) is that you’re not specific enough in your actual references to either text. You haven’t located a specific passage or a specific device in either text. You stay at the level of general plot or premise. I also want to challenge your use of the word “stereotype.” Having a stereotype implies that we have a preconceived idea (often an over simplified and very limiting idea) of something. However in our discussions of the monster we have repeatedly noted that what is so scary about him is that he can’t be categorized, that there is no place for him. As bad as stereotypes can be, they are in fact about categorization, so how can the monster be stereotyped if he cannot be categorized?