"It’s pronounced ‘Fronkensteen.’ ” (Young Frankenstein,1974). Throughout the years Frankenstein's monster has taken many different forms and has been represented tonally different in each incarnation. When looking into the the past of this well-known monster, one will of course look to the original short story written by Mary Shelley as challenge against Lord Byron. This story was, of course, like no other story written at that time and created one of the essential monsters of history. As the novel aged, many different incarnations started to pop up over the years. To date their have been at least two Hollywood movies directly depicting Frankenstein and his monster [1931, 1994] and a very well known satire written in 1974 by Mel Brooks by the name Young Frankenstein as well as many other sequels and parodies. In each of these incarnations, save for Young Frankenstein, the nameless monster created by Dr. Frankenstein has taken on a new personality and has been depicted rather differently. To simplify analysis, I shall take a look at the two incarnations mentioned above as well as Young Frankenstein.
One such detail that can be observed as different between each movie as well as the book is in the communion abilities of the Monster. In the novel, the monster takes to modern language very easily and can converse not only with his creator, but in a narrative capacity. In contrast, the 1931 movie depicts the monster as only capable of grunting to communicate with the world. Lastly, Young Frankenstein agrees with the novel in that the monster can talk, but that the monster has the mind of child and is thus incapable of effective communication.
Similarly, the capacity of communication available to the monster can be considered along with how it was treated to establish why the monster was considered to savage in the first place. In the novel, Shelley depicts the monster as savage and was thus sent away but acknowledged the fact that the monster was capable of consciousness. In contrast, the 1931 movie presented the monster as truly savage and showed the monster being locked away in a dungeon and therefore had no consciousness. Finally, Young Frankenstein allows for an acceptance of the monster, albeit in child form.
In terms of why the monster is often referred to as Frankenstein? I feel that much of this association has to due with how the monster was treated. For those who have read the book, it becomes pretty apparent that it is Dr. Frankenstein that should be considered the monster rather than the monster itself. From this it may be appropriate to assume that a monster can be sourced from a father who generally considered monstrous
Overall, the variances in the representations of Frankenstein's monster can enrich the interpretations drawn about both the doctor and the monster.
.
Similarly, the capacity of communication available to the monster can be considered along with how it was treated to establish why the monster was considered to savage in the first place. In the novel, Shelley depicts the monster as savage and was thus sent away but acknowledged the fact that the monster was capable of consciousness. In contrast, the 1931 movie presented the monster as truly savage and showed the monster being locked away in a dungeon and therefore had no consciousness. Finally, Young Frankenstein allows for an acceptance of the monster, albeit in child form.
In terms of why the monster is often referred to as Frankenstein? I feel that much of this association has to due with how the monster was treated. For those who have read the book, it becomes pretty apparent that it is Dr. Frankenstein that should be considered the monster rather than the monster itself. From this it may be appropriate to assume that a monster can be sourced from a father who generally considered monstrous
Overall, the variances in the representations of Frankenstein's monster can enrich the interpretations drawn about both the doctor and the monster.
.
The variances in the representations of Frankenstein's monster kind of changes the whole premise of the story. Having a monster without consciousness gives you a villain that is violent just because that's all he knows what to do. If you have a monster who is capable of speaking, understanding, love and empathy then you have a villain who chooses to be violent with the intention of causing harm for whatever reason. Good job explaining the different variations of the monster Frankenstein!
ReplyDelete