It is difficult to define evil. As a society, it is easier to find examples of evil people than it is to define the force itself. Ted Bundy, the Zodiac Killer, John Wayne Gacy and many more, are all considered in our society to be evil and to be sociopaths. In today’s culture, word sociopath is almost synonymous with evil, someone who acts without regard for others and cannot foresee the consequences of his actions. So is the case with Victor Frankenstein. He was not only wicked, but was a full-blown sociopath. Victor fits a majority of the seven diagnostic criteria outlined by the DSM-IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), although only 3 are necessary for a diagnosis for the following purposes: “failure to conform to social norms,” “reckless disregard for safety of self or others,” and “lack of remorse, indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.”(Tami Port). From the time Victor Frankenstein began studying the books of Agrippa, he became not only evil but also a sociopath.
Frankenstein admitted that he never had many friends, a fact that yields to his nonconformity. He was obsessed with books of the occult, which despite his father telling him that they were “sad trash,” he still delved into (Shelley 40). “The raising of ghosts or devils was a promise liberally accorded…[to] the fulfillment of which I most eagerly sought.” Frankenstein said that he often tried to raise the dead as a child (Shelley 42). Now that young Victor believed every word of these books as law and studied them as such, did he think of what might happen to himself or anyone around him if a demon did spawn? Of course not. He had no concern for the adverse effects of his actions. While recounting his tale Victor finds himself totally blameless for his fate. According to him, his father should have explained to him why the book was bad, his guardian angel should have done a better job, and he was even narcissistic enough to think that the combined forces of destiny conspired against him (Shelley 41-43). Never did he blame himself for his insatiable need for knowledge and glory.
When Victor matured and the veil of childhood was lifted, his sociopathy could no longer be considered childish actions. At Ingolstadt he still related to the professors that he had studied the schools of the occult, “I replied carelessly; and, partly in contempt, the alchemists which I had studied.” Even in conversation he found himself unable to conform to the norm (Shelley 47). Once again Frankenstein found himself friendless. Sure he had associates, but no friends to speak of, and he took no time to take care of his own health, so dedicated was he to his sick ambitions. He occupied his time with grave robbing and experimentation on rotting flesh, “a churchyard was to me merely the receptacle of bodies…I was led to examine the cause and progress of this decay” (Shelley 53). This is hardly normal behavior breaking again and again the taboos of typical society. Echoing the days of his youth he nefariously attempted to raise the dead. Not through an incantation, but by the work of his own hands and “modern” technology, Frankenstein was completely blind to any repercussions. All he saw was a challenge and glory for himself nothing beyond that (Shelley 54). When Victor actually succeeded in raising his monster he, instead of facing up to his creation, ran. When the monster left he was so unable to think that what he did was wrong, his body could not handle it and he fell ill.
Frankenstein rationalized all the travesties that befell him as acts of the monster, even when he returned to Geneva and William was killed. “I had turned loose into the world a depraved wretch whose delight was in carnage and misery” (Shelley 78). Frankenstein proceeded to spend the night out in the rain without concern for his own well being. He recognized that he created the monster, but blamed the creature itself above all other things. His rage for the monster was unequaled; it was responsible for what happened to William, it was responsible for what happened to poor Justine, and yet again, in his own mind, Frankenstein was blameless but for his creations acts. Not once did he apologize for his actions; he only suffered because of them.
Victor was the abomination, not his creation. He was raised in polite society and still turned into the sociopathic villain of the story—his creation never new anything else. Frankenstein could not live with the social norms in his society, could not think of the safety of himself or others in his fervor, and could not put the blame where it belonged—on himself. Victor Frankenstein truly was a sociopath, and therefore, he was truly evil.
Port, Tami. "What Is Antisocial Personality Disorder?" Symptoms, Diagnosis & Prognosis of APD, ASPD, and Psychopathy. 17 Aug. 2007. 20 Jan. 2009
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein : Or, the Modern Prometheus. Ed. Maurice Hindle. New York: Penguin Books, Limited, 2003.
5 comments:
Hey, thanks for your help last week, this class isn't exactly my forte if you haven't figured that out yet, so thanks for being patient with me.
Your argument is clearly stated in your thesis statement, though I would probably refer back to the 3 criteria that he met, to kind of outline the things you're essay is going to be focusing on. You also might want to more clearly link the idea of evil and sociopath--why is the word sociopath almost synonymous with evil (maybe mention how because the people you mentioned were sociopaths, they killed people, which are evil actions in our society).
So from what I understood from your intro paragraph is that you're using his 3 mental characteristics to classify him as evil. It seems that you touch on all of these in each paragraph, which makes it occasionally hard to follow. It often seems like more of a summary of the novel with a few comments inserted, maybe if you provide the evidence for each mental state separately your argument will be stronger--because the quotations from the book and the reasoning that you have found do support your argument very well.
I do have to question your reasoning behind the third critera: "lack of remorse, indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another". Though I do understand your point in that Frankenstein blamed the monster for the evil actions, I feel like a lot of the novel goes into description of his hatred and remorse for his own actions, and wishing that he had never created the monster. I also thought that he blamed himself for the death of William and Justine, which is why he took that trip up the mountain--in my opinion he was definitely affected by having indirectly hurt other people. I feel like that perspective might hurt your argument, so maybe briefly take that into consideration.
Other than those suggestions, you have a very good argument and an interesting way of approaching it.
Hey thanks alot, yeah this class isn't exactly my thing either but i think well be alright. i guess i found myself trying to get away from the three body paragraphs and doing it anyway...ahh the fun
It is difficult to define evil. As a society, it is easier to find examples of evil people than it is to define the force itself. Ted Bundy, the Zodiac Killer, John Wayne Gacy and many more, are all considered to be evil for the countless and brutal murders they have committed without remorse. They are sociopaths. In today’s culture, word sociopath is almost synonymous with evil, someone who acts without regard for others and cannot foresee the consequences of his actions. So is the case with Victor Frankenstein. He was not only wicked, but was a full-blown sociopath. Victor fits a majority of the seven diagnostic criteria outlined by the DSM-IV-TR (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders), although only 3 are necessary for a diagnosis for the following purposes: “failure to conform to social norms,” “reckless disregard for safety of self or others,” and “lack of remorse, indifferent to or rationalizing having hurt, mistreated, or stolen from another.”(Tami Port). From the time Victor Frankenstein began studying the books of Agrippa, he became a sociopath and therefore evil.
Frankenstein admitted that he never had many friends, a fact that yields to his nonconformity. He was obsessed with books of the occult, which despite his father telling him that they were “sad trash,” he still delved into (Shelley 40). “The raising of ghosts or devils was a promise liberally accorded…[to] the fulfillment of which I most eagerly sought.” Frankenstein said that he often tried to raise the dead as a child (Shelley 42). Young Victor believed every word of these books as law and studied them as such, did he think of what might happen to himself or anyone around him if a demon did spawn? Of course not. He had no concern for the adverse effects of his actions. He showed a complete disregard for his own safety and the safety of those around him. While recounting his tale Victor finds himself totally blameless for his fate. According to him, his father should have explained to him why the book was bad, his guardian angel should have done a better job, and he was even narcissistic enough to think that the combined forces of destiny conspired against him (Shelley 41-43). Never once did he blame himself for his insatiable need for knowledge and glory that drove him on.
When Victor matured and the veil of childhood was lifted, his sociopathy could no longer be considered childish actions. At Ingolstadt he still related to the professors that he had studied the schools of the occult, “I replied carelessly; and, partly in contempt, the alchemists which I had studied.” Even in conversation he found himself unable to conform to the norm (Shelley 47). Once again Frankenstein found himself friendless. Sure he had associates, but no friends to speak of, and he took no time to take care of his own health, so dedicated was he to his sick ambitions, showing once again both his total disregard for his own safety and his ability to fit in. He occupied his time with grave robbing and experimentation on rotting flesh, “a churchyard was to me merely the receptacle of bodies…I was led to examine the cause and progress of this decay” (Shelley 53). This is hardly normal behavior breaking again and again the taboos of typical society. Echoing the days of his youth he nefariously attempted to raise the dead. Not through an incantation, but by the work of his own hands and “modern” technology, Frankenstein was completely blind to any repercussions. All he saw was a challenge and glory for himself nothing beyond that (Shelley 54). When Victor actually succeeded in raising his monster he, instead of facing up to his creation, ran. Frankenstein could not confront the idea that he created this, and passed any thought of responsibility from his mind. He simply opted to leave and hope the situation would attend itself, absolutely disregarding the repercussions for the population of Ingolstadt.
Frankenstein rationalized all the travesties that befell him as acts of the monster, even when he returned to Geneva and William was killed. “I had turned loose into the world a depraved wretch whose delight was in carnage and misery” (Shelley 78). Frankenstein proceeded to spend the night out in the rain without concern for his own well being. He recognized that he created the monster, but blamed the creature itself above all other things. His rage for the monster was unequaled; it was responsible for what happened to William, it was responsible for what happened to poor Justine, and yet again, in his own mind, Frankenstein was blameless but for his creations acts. Not once did he apologize for his actions; he only suffered because of them.
Victor was the abomination, not his creation. He was raised in polite society and still turned into the sociopathic villain of the story—his creation never new anything else. Frankenstein could not live with the social norms in his society, could not think of the safety of himself or others in his fervor, and could not put the blame where it belonged—on himself. Victor Frankenstein truly was a sociopath, and by relation, evil.
Port, Tami. "What Is Antisocial Personality Disorder?" Symptoms, Diagnosis & Prognosis of APD, ASPD, and Psychopathy. 17 Aug. 2007. 20 Jan. 2009 .
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein : Or, the Modern Prometheus. Ed. Maurice Hindle. New York: Penguin Books, Limited, 2003.
Amanda - this was a good response, with some nice details.
Josh - I think that, without really meaning to, you ended up writing a paper about why Frankenstein was a sociopath; you equate that with evil, but you also discuss sociopaths using the DSM - equating evil with mental illness needs at least a little justification, though!
Good discussion of his childhood and the sociopathic characteristics he shows there.
Later on in the paper, I feel like that, while you don't quite lose your focus on sociopathy, it becomes a little more blurred - as I think Amanda's comments on the original versoin indicate, you're not offering as much of a *structured* argument that Frankenstein is a sociopath for reasons x, y, and z as you could.
Overall: Writing a paper on how Frankenstein is a sociopath, and therefore evil, is a really good idea. The actual details have strengths and weaknesses - your use of the DSM starts out strong, but weakens over the course of the paper. The other weakness, of course, is that you don't really justify the sociopath=evil connection (some of us might be tempted to tall sociopaths amoral, which is arguably/probably a distinct category).
guess i should have made a connection between Websters definition of evil "something which is morally abhorrent" and sociopathy
Post a Comment