Frankenstein and Westworld

After finishing the second volume of Gris Grimsly’s Frankenstein, I started watching the first season of the new HBO show Westworld. Without spoiling too much, Westworld is based on a 1973 movie of the same name where a western-style amusement park filled with humanoid robots begins to experience “malfunctions”. Many modern science fiction stories, including Westworld, barrow heavily from Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein. Frankenstein established two major themes which have been retold countless times; Those being “creation as the monster” and the “creator as the monster”.

Stories of imperfect creations going awry go back to ancient creation mythology. In Judeo-Christian mythology, Adam and Eve were banished from the Garden of Eden for their sinful nature. On page 101 of Grimsly’s Frankenstein, you can even see Frankenstein’s monster reading John Milton’s Paradise Lost. Like Adam, Frankenstein’s monster was created with flaws which resulted in evil behavior. In order for this theme to work, the actions of the creation must be unexpected to the creator like how Frankenstein had no idea his creature would end up murdering people, and the hero in this story must vanquish the corrupt creation. Other movies, like Terminator and The Matrix, are also examples of this theme. In those movies, artificial intelligence originally created by humans rebel against their makers and its the job of the protagonist to find a way to stop it.

I have only seen the first episode of Westworld, but I can tell they are focusing on the latter theme. Westworld is a place which allows you to live out your western fantasies. If you want to be a rancher for a day, you can do that. If you want to be a sheriff for a day, you can do that. If you want to rape, pillage, and murder every one in town, you can do that. Everything is allowed with the excuse that nothing is real. All the characters in this amusement park are automatons and are reset, memories completely wiped out, at the end of the day. Things begin to get interesting when the robots begin to become aware of their reality. In this story, the creators are the monsters as they use their creation for mere pleasure and vicious satisfaction. While watching, I found it hard to not sympathize with the automatons as they often seemed more human than the actual humans.

When I first read Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein, I had an easier time sympathizing and finding humanity in Frankenstein’s monster than in Frankenstein himself. Grimsly’s art from chapters 3 to 5 only made it easier to see the humanity in the monster. What I enjoy most about the Frankenstein story is how it explores both the “creation as the monster” and the “creator as the monster” themes. I think Victor is the true monster of the story. He created life to satisfy his own desires without taking into account the implications of such an act, similar to the designers of Westworld. What do you think? Who is the real monster? The creation or the creator?

Sources:

Grimly, Gris. Gris Grimly's Frankenstein. New York: Balzer & Bray, 2013. Print.

https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/hostedimages/1382798290i/6204317._SY540_.jpg

http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/articles/arts/television/2016/09/160928_TV_Westworld-01.jpg.CROP.promo-xlarge2.jpg 

http://www.joblo.com/newsimages1/westworld-hbo-1.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Ct8464GWgAAWNE_.jpg

Chicken | Egg

So we have two-thirds of Frankenstein down, and one-third left to go. I feel like most people are familiar with the plot of the novel, in various degrees of depth, so I find it interesting to see how our familiarity with the narrative affects how we view and consider it. Warning: this post, argument-wise, might be a little inconsistent; I have a tendency to constantly debtate myself and I think it tends to show in class and in my blogs.

Frankenstein, as a novel, compels us to think outside our normal morals or ethics. Victor and his monster are the biggest examples of this - I feel sorry for Victor, but at the same time, I have to question why on earth he thought trying to make a person would be a good idea? He was so consumed with whether or not he could, he didn't really stop to think if he should. He loses loved ones, but he readily belives that it is, ultimately, his own fault - whether it is or isn't is up for us to decide. Either way, I feel that this is the number one lesson of Frankenstein, folks: know your limits.

I feel pity for Frankenstein's monster, which I think he would find irritating. He is a lot like Grendel, in a way - ugly, unloved (although Grendel had his mom) by men, excluded and shunned - yet I don't find myself feeling as sorry for him as I think I could? I don't know why, and I can't explain it - there's just something about him (maybe his entitlement?), and I can't quite put my finger on it.

FRANKENSTEIN'S MONSTER: 

SAME. We've all been there, right?

A big theme of Frankenstein is, overall, the idea of blame. Who is to blame for what happens? It's a complex question, and it has no easy answer. I would argue Frankenstein's monster is as much a victim of Victor as William and Justine are victims of the monster himself, but does that excuse his (the monster's) actions? His history might help explain him, but is it a reason for what he does? Does Frankenstein's monster ever stop being a victim of Frankenstein's machinations even when he takes revenge on him? Like I said: who is to blame? It's a variant of the eternal question: which came first, the chicken or the egg?

Another theme I've noticed in the book, and one I've not really thought through completely yet, is how trauma seems to perpetuate trauma. Where does that cycle end, and how did it start?

"It's Frawnk-un-steen"

References to other pieces of media aside, I have been thinking about Frankenstein and what we can learn from it quite a bit these past few days.  While I'm sure we're going to go over the major points of the remaining story in class, there is one particular incident that sticks out to me in Frankenstein.  I believe it can be argued that one theme of the book can be the dangers of man's creation. In this case, the creation of Victor Frankenstein's monster.  I also believe that there is an examination of human nature that can be observed throughout the book.  In fact, I believe the entire book, alongside its obvious horror undertones and the fact that it addresses the dangers of the mind of man, can be seen as an insight to human nature on all fronts - how creation, fear and how instinct play into our lives.

The aforementioned incident I wish to discuss is the moment in which Frankenstein gives life to his creation.  Here was Victor Frankenstein - a brilliant scientists, who toiled endlessly to reach his goal of bringing life from nothingness. The reader would almost think him to be smarter than the rest of us, given his scientific achievements and pedigree.  However, when he is presented with the true reality of his creation, he flees.  Despite all of the sophistication, academia and brilliance, Frankenstein is still subject to human nature like the rest of us.  In his case, his nature told him to run from the monster and hide - but, most importantly, it commanded him to not acknowledge the monster's existence; at least outwardly.

I feel that this is important because if we view the book as an insight on human nature (the fear of the perceived abhorrent) it may reveal the root cause of all of Frankenstein's problems.  Had he just sat down and talked to the thing (as it attempted to do with him - probably trying to ask why it was created) he perhaps could've avoided the death of his sibling and the pain the monster would go on to cause.  But he did not.  He ran, tried to forget all about the monster and move on with his life.  Out of sight, out of mind, one could say.  However, this did not just make his problems disappear - rather, his failure to address his creation from the start would come back not only to haunt him, but his family and town as well.  It is human nature to flee from one's problems, but this flight will surely come back to bite us in the future, as it did for Frankenstein.  This is why, perhaps, I believe the book can be seen as an axiom against fleeing from your problems - especially if you created them.

We're all monsters

As we discussed in our presentation last week, and in our class discussion, this unique graphic novel of "Frankenstein" offers us a whole new way of looking at Mary Shelly's version of the original text. Whether you like this graphic novel or not, we can all agree that reading this story through a different medium affects what we understand and take away from the story. Now that we've established the differences in writing styles and plot, we have to begin to explore the characters a bit more.

Maybe it's because I've been reading a lot of "Hamlet" lately in my English seminar, but I can't help but feel some sympathy for Victor Frankenstein. He's a brilliant scientist who is also extremely lonely and wants to make something of himself. So he creates this extraordinary being, and what does it do? It starts killing people! Now of course this is not what Victor Frankenstein intended to happen, but does that make it okay? We've mentioned many times throughout the semester how we don't like to attribute human-like qualities to monsters, but the truth is, humans can be monsters too. But where is the line drawn between monster and "a guy who makes a mistake that ends terrific boy"? Is there a difference between good and bad intentions in terms of who is and is not a monster. You would probably say a man today who is in prison for life for killing 5 teenagers is a monster (hypothetical situation here) but what if that wasn't his intention? What if he claims it was self defense, would we still say he is a monster?

I think our answers to these questions connect back with our morals-what we believe to be right and wrong. But, as we've mentioned after reading Asma's article, when we are actually in a dangerous or scary situation, we may end up acting differently than we thought we would've. As much as we with things were black and white, they're not. So, if like me you have some sympathy for Victor Frankenstein, that's okay. But if you think he's a monster, that's okay too. It's all a matter of opinion, but we can't ignore the fact that anyone has the potential to have monster-like qualities.

It's All About Love

I didn't start to really appreciate Gris Grimly's art work until I read further after our first discussion on Frankenstein. The longer I stared at the drawings the more if the story came to life and it amazed me. I felt the emotion and sadness of Victor but also his monster's emotions though every detailed line on their faces. Victor never intended for so many things in his life to go crashing down because of him. But the moment that Justine died due to the actions of his monster, why didn't he try to kill the monster he created? I believe that he truly loved his creation. .

When Victor confronted his monster for being a murderer, his monster was quite convincing. The monster was so close to human that it was amazing how convincing the monster could be. He was able to make Victor think that if he were to kill him that he would also be a murderer. The monster says, "Listen to me Frankenstein. You accuse me of murder, and yet you would, with satisfied conscience, destroy your own creature." The monster was able to make Victor feel even more guilt for what he had done. For one, creating the monster in the first place. But also that he had never "felt what the duties of a creator towards his creature were." I thought it was interesting how chapter two turned so much anger into so much sadness in so few pages.

In chapter three I was surprised at how so many pages were solely drawings in continuation of the story. I loved that slowly the monster realized how much he just wanted to be loved. He did so much for Agatha and Felix but he knew he would never be accepted by them. What really broke my heart was when the monster said, "Cursed Creator! Why did you form a monster so hideous that even you turn from me in disgust." At this point in the story the monster can be seen as relate-able in that many people have felt like some sort of outcast in their lives or have felt alone. When he blind father meets the monster, it's perfect because he doesn't judge the monster for what he looks like but just talks to him like any other person. But once Felix sees him they just automatically assume he's bad.

In the monsters request for his creator to make him a female companion, I am excited  to read on to see what happens next. I have not read the book before so I truly hope the monster finds what he is looking for which I see is to just be loved and accepted. But also to be himself and not judged upon his looks. But seeing how much the monster has ruined Victor's life, Victor may come to the conclusion that making another monster probably wouldn't be for the best.

References:

 Grimly, Gris. Gris Grimly's Frankenstein. New York: Balzer & Bray, 2013. Print.