A Critical Analysis Frankenstein

Frankenstein Critical Analysis

Professor Naomi Hetherington critiqued the novel ‘Frankenstein’ 1818 version. The professor herself is a University tutor in English and Humanities at the University of Sheffield (“Dr. Naomi Hetherington”). She also co-leads the Gothic Bible project in the same institute. The research interests of the critic have remained religion and gender from the beginning, particularly from the late-Victorian period. Further expanding on these interests, she shows interest in various representations of the religion with its Gothic side in the famous TV series Buffy the Vampire Slayer (1997-2003).

Further, she is found to be the General Editor of a 4-volume unique text called Nineteenth Century Religion, Literature, and Society that is published by a well-known firm, Routledge (“Dr. Naomi Hetherington”). Since she is a researcher, her current work is writing a lengthy piece of research directed towards female freethinkers from the New Woman fiction, which is almost the length of a book. This shows an amalgamation of female gender and religion connected with the beliefs of sexual transgression so that long-held notions of the human mind could be explored deeply (“Dr. Naomi Hetherington”).

From the selected critique written by professor critic, a reflection of God and the created entity by him is signified in her thesis (“Creator and Created”). The thesis tells about the wrath that powers could bring. These powers were given to the created entity by God; however, careless use of them leads the created entity into the suffering that cannot be undone. The same elucidation is observed in the Professor’s critique of Frankenstein’s novel in the given article, where Victor is the God of the created entity called Franskenetien, who seemingly created a ‘monster.’ The idea critic wants to make about is that Frankenstein was made after the virtuous qualities of God. However, the creator was blamed for making him more like a human, considered monstrous due to his actions as the man did not understand those powers given to him by God and became an animal, just like Frankenstein (Peters 146).

I agree with the thesis since God made humans with His likeness, which means God-like attributes of love, care, kindness, etc., were embedded within human nature when he was brought into this world (“God Created Us”). However, it is by his actions that man becomes a monster. The relationship between God and man became weak as man started exhibiting more evil-like features by killing each other, being dishonest, and becoming the worst form that never looked anything similar to God (“Genesis 1-11 and Work”). The worldly desires and outward pretensions lured him from what he was created for. Man’s mission and godly virtues started to alter as soon as he busied himself in worldly activities that were entirely different from where he came from above. The pursuit of man’s self-interest causes threats to the people surrounding him as it is solely upon man’s discretion on how to use his powers. The similar power of God is ingrained within the man of creating and nurturing, just like sowing a plant’s seed, helping it grow, and taking care of it to nurture. It is upon man’s wish whether he wants to destroy the natural environment to inhabit through his powers or damage it for his self-esteem (“Genesis 1-11 and Work”).

Moreover, the references used by the critic in the selected article are valid as she uses several references profusely to validate her opinion. For example, Naomi indicated that the 1818 version of the said novel is rarely read today despite being the most comprehensive religious elaboration of the concept of Frankenstein’s creation (“Creator and Created”). The religious insinuation of her tale presented in 1818 was closer to Christian iconography of human inclination of materialism in contrast to what he was created beforehand by God Himself.

A similar critique presented by David Soyka has the same idea that man was good until he was in the hands of God and started behaving animal-like as soon he left God and came into this world (“Frankenstein and the Miltonic Creation”). He has enforced his thesis statement by quoting several philosophers and readings that clarify the same human wickedness seen in the world characterization of himself, cited by Jean-Jacques Rousseau, a Swiss philosopher. Individual control is evident when he becomes a victim of worldly circumstances and tries to win over them with his good or bad use of the powers. He gradually strays sway from the God-like features that God created close to Himself, which later turn things upside down (“Frankenstein and the Miltonic Creation”).

Naomi has presented the critique with an exposition and substantiation of texts that do not leave the reader confused that man was made God-like, but with his misuse of powers, he turned evil. Frankenstein, just like man, blamed God for making him like that and did not want to admit that he was immersed in worldly attractions and possessions. Frankenstein and the man became victims of their actions, their innocence turned into miserable lives, and blame still is put upon God. Naomi created an association of theological works with Biblical indication of the thesis’s rationalism and a comparison of different versions of the novel that reiterate the thesis with clarification of what man as divine injustice regardless of accepting his victimization of God-given powers.