We see monsters played out millions of ways in film, art, music, and literature, but what exactly is the determining factor in their monstrous label? Asma's retelling of the coffee bar story made me wonder if someone with Silva's mental capacity could be a monster, and in a sense, I guess the term doesn't discriminate. It kind of reminded me of a Law & Order episode where a mentally handicapped man ended up killing numerous people because he was convinced they were all agents for the KGB who were trying to keep him out of the Olympics (he was a roller skater, but that's a longer discussion) so he had to kill them to protect himself. Does that make him a monster?
Honestly, I don't know the answer. Obviously killing someone else is morally wrong, but what if your mind convinces you that there is no other choice and you're doing it for the "greater good," or simply to protect your own life? I think the lines get blurry when your mental capacity is handicapped.
After reading Grimley's Frankenstein, I couldn't help but feel sorry for the "monster" who never asked to be created in the first place. I've never read Shelley's novel before, but I would imagine that the illustrations in Grimley's text make it easier to swallow... Although I think the particular illustrations towards the end of our reading made it even harder for me to see the monster as a true monster, and just made me feel even worse for him.
 |
| The Monster, longing for interaction. Picture taken from Pinterest |
These kinds of conversation about monstrosity and how much we can or can't look past it remind me of something my mom always says: "It helps explain the action, but it doesn't excuse it." One of parallels we draw between stories like Frankenstein to our real world is the grey territory of mental illnesses with Silva and the character from Law & Order. Because we're reminded that our initial condemnation of these perpetrators of violence have backstories and redeemable qualities and explanations for why felt they had to kill people. And that understanding, I think, helps us take a step back and respond to those individuals with less hate; they become more human than monster in our minds.
ReplyDeleteI've read the original novel and while I definitely did emphasize with the monster then, I did even more when reading this novel. there's something about seeing the hope and love in his eyes when watching the family, then his sorrow when he is rejected. very powerful stuff.
ReplyDeleteI think one possible answer to your question is that certain factors make people (or creatures) more sympathetic. I think "monster" is too strong of a term to be applicable in most situations, aside from the extreme. You specific example of Law and Order can be viewed by most as a more sympathetic situation, and no I do not believe that man could be labeled as a monster. Similarly, I do not think we can label the "creature" as a monster because he has not be taught right from wrong. Perhaps that is an important defining feature: what is the individuals capacity for knowing the consequences of their choices?
ReplyDeleteI always thought someone could be considered a monster if they did something horrendous and I think there are different scales to this. If someone hurt or killed a child compared to someone who hurt or killed an adult. I think we compare that person to what we believe is to be morally right, but also we try to understand why they did what they did. Like the example you gave from the Law and Order episode.
ReplyDeletea bit of etymology... "monster" comes from the Latin verb "monere," which means "remind, advise, warn; teach; admonish; foretell, presage." (I don't have my Latin dictionary to hand as it's in my office, so definition courtesy of William Whitaker's Words (http://archives.nd.edu/words.html). How does this etymology help us to think about what a "monster" is or does?
ReplyDeleteThat etymological origin is very helpful in the literary context, since Greek myths often use monsters as either admonishments for some sin against the gods or as some sort of direct warning about some sort of human trait that should be suppressed or avoided.
ReplyDeleteI'm so glad you posted this particular page in the book, because I think it's the key point where the book begins a fascinating take on the monster, particularly "the eye" illustration! Once we see that eye, it becomes a signal to us to see the world from the monster's point of view. What an incredible idea to show this monster's point of view AND begin to create sympathy for the monster!
ReplyDelete