Moral Implication of Frankenstein

The message, merits, and moral implications of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein have been long debated and discussed. Many recurring themes which are apt to surface in these conversations are those such as the woes of artificial creation and the “man is not God” argument. These themes have been so thoroughly explored and exploited that this essay could not possibly generate and original thought within the realms covered by these topics. In order to formulate something remotely fresh and at least relatively interesting, this essay seeks to shift the focus to the less explored dilemmas which Shelley may have purposely or subconsciously woven into the classic novel. The very fact that Mary Shelley is a woman casts the already remarkable tale in an entirely new light. To read it objectively is improbable, if not impossible, because stories like this are simply not written by women. As a matter of fact, there are some things—focusing on a thrilling plot for the sake of the thrill, centralizing characters like monsters and ghosts, prominently showcasing a male to male bond—that are seen from female authors so infrequently, the appearance of one or multiple aspects in a story would be a true shock. This is certainly not a knock against female authors! It is not at all an insult, actually. It is simply an analysis of the female niche in literature at a glance. The fact that Shelley annihilated this mold with Frankenstein is a testament to her creativity, uniqueness and skill, setting her apart from all authors, male or female, and elevating her to a position of respect and glory which spans generations and gender. When taking into account the female psychology, attempting to ascertain what a female would consciously or subconsciously attempt to prove with the novel is interesting. While several smaller points are made by Shelley in the text, the most important and overall message of the novel is this: no man or laboratory can replace the natural maternal nature of