It’s interesting to see how Frankenstein’s monster has
changed over time. Pretty much all the incarnations of Frankenstein’s monster I
was exposed to while growing up, which mostly consisted of cameos in cartoons,
were referred to as Frankenstein and many years passed before I learned that
the monster actually had no name in the original story. I’d never read Frankenstein before taking this class
but having now done so, I see that it wasn’t just the monster that was changed
over time. The entire story was altered.
There is no doubt that the monster in Mary Shelley’s
novel Frankenstein plays a major role
in the story. That’s obvious. However, Victor Frankenstein’s role is just as
important. A large portion
of the story is from his viewpoint and so it naturally goes into a lot of
detail on his life, his hopes and dreams, his thoughts on the monster he has
created, and the way the monster ultimately ruins his life. The monster gets a
chance to offer its perspective as well, but both viewpoints are crucial for
the reader to consider as it is by analyzing each that you conclude who the
real monster is. There is a definite focus on the relationship between
Frankenstein and his monster and how they interact with each other.
This relationship seems to have been drastically
changed in the later adaptations of the novel, such as in the 1931 film. Though
I haven’t watched the movie, judging from the Wikipedia summary, the central
focus of the movie’s plot has shifted more to the monster. Though it still
revolves around how the monster’s actions effect Frankenstein’s life, the
doctor does not die in the end, nor is his life necessarily left in shambles.
He receives a happier ending. This was probably changed because it was assumed
that people usually like happy endings to their movies but doing so made the
movie almost an entirely different story from the book. The fact that the
monster also does not ever get to a point where it can talk or communicate its
thoughts was a major contributor to this change as well. The movie went more
for the physical horror while toning down the psychological issues that both
the monster and Frankenstein were facing in the novel. Psychological issues can’t
really be explored without speech so the relationship between the monster and
Frankenstein was simplified. Focusing more on the physical horror of
Frankenstein’s monster simplified the monster in general, turning it into the “Frankenstein”
we know today: dumb, incapable of speech, and committing violent acts for
reasons an abused dog would (because it was treated badly) rather than revenge.
I think this is the main reason Frankenstein’s name
was transferred to the monster over time. The novel takes its name from Victor
Frankenstein so it’s obvious that he’s an important and central character to
the story. The later iterations switched the focus to the monster but still
named the movie Frankenstein. With less importance placed on the actual character
of Frankenstein, audiences probably remembered the monster more than the doctor
so the title Frankenstein became associated
with the monster. The decrease in focus on the doctor can be seen in modern
cameos of Frankenstein’s monster. Take the animated movie Hotel Transylvania. Dr. Frankenstein doesn’t even appear in it,
just his monster. And the monster’s name is Frankenstein. Of course, this is a
children’s movie so it’s not concerned with being faithful to the source
material. But the choice to include only the monster shows what the filmmakers
assume we, the audience, will know and recognize. Victor Frankenstein is no longer a major
focus in his own story.
Comments
Post a Comment