As a huge horror fan growing up with the old black and white
Universal monster movies, I’ve always wanted to read the original stories that
not only inspired these classic films but also ultimately led to the popularity
of the horror genre today. Reading Frankenstein was a great opportunity to
examine the rise of popular horror as well as the beginnings of science
fiction.
Monsters
are by far one of my favorite aspects of horror, especially when stories deal
with the idea of the tragic monster. In Frankenstein we have this creature that
is brought to life by Dr. Victor von Frankenstein while in his deep study of
the natural scientists thinks himself capable enough to create life where it
has ceased. Although he is successful he is appalled by the monster and flees,
but later in the story we find out his creation is articulate and wants to
learn. What’s unfortunate is that despite his good intentions, he is rejected
by all those he comes into contact with because of his appearance; this leads
us to the question of who really is the monster in the story. Victor’s disgust
and rejection leads to the monster’s anger and to him ultimately killing
Victor’s bride as well as a few of his other friends, but is it his fault for
not taking responsibility for his creation and teaching it right from wrong, as
morals are not genetic and must be learned.
In the end good and evil are not as black and white as they
seem. In the story, light is a symbol for progress and life. But there is a
duality to it as light is also linked to fire that may bring warmth and also
pain if you venture too close to the flames. One of the monster’s first
sensations is the feeling of light being pushed upon his nerves. Light also
reveals his appearance to others and causes them to fear him.
There is no plain answer to who is at fault for the deaths
of his friends and the misfortune that falls around Victor, but in some ways I
think it’s better that there is no clear answer. It’s the duality in themes
like these that I really enjoy in horror and sci-fi because it lets the reader
decide how to interpret it and brings up excellent topics to question and
discuss.
In order to expand upon this theme of monsters and society
through my revision, I decided to go back and watch all of No Such Thing with
Stephanie Rohrbach. One of the main things we noticed was that throughout the
movie there were many characters introduced, but none of them were as lively or
as emotional as The Monster was. I’m not sure if it was just the acting or if
it was intentional, but it really says something when the monster acts like
more of a human than the rest of the humans do. That can also be said with how
they treated the Monster. They showed him off treated him like some sort of
media fad, which is exactly what The Boss of the media center wanted to do to
Beatrice when they found out she had survived the plane crash.
The media wants to sensationalize anything to make a quick
profit. They focus on any kind of flaw someone might have and blow it up, criticizing
it for the world to see. The Monster basically showed what happens when the
media gets their hands of you, he isolates himself, turns to alcohol and becomes incredibly
violent. So although the pacing in the movie was odd as well as the acting, it
still made some great points about society and how the media create their owns
monsters for the worlds entertainment.
No comments:
Post a Comment