Critique of Nature vs Nurture by Mary Shelly - Essay Example

?Nature vs nurture- Mary Shelly Nature versus nurture is a theme that has fascinated literature and philosophy for a long time. In Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein also, there is a pattern of verbal imagery that examines life from this view point. To what extent a human being is his or her real self and to what extent he or she is socially and culturally conditioned is a question which evades simple answers. Mary Shelly’s literary monster Frankenstein has a monstor’s body but a loving human’s mind. But the hostility that humans show towards him leads him to act in monstrous ways. In the end, his acts prove him to be a monster in the onlookers’ eyes, but still the readers who come to know his inner dilemma can understand his humane side. This story can be seen as an allegory about the theme nature versus nurture. It shows that even monsters are capable of love and even a harmless creature can be turned into a monster, given the treatment that he or she receives from his or her creator or the people around him or her. To give more clarity to the theme, nature versus nurture, in Frankenstein, Shelly has used a set of verbal imagery including the images of fire, light, gloomy weather, remote settings, violence and finally death. The way in which the narrator in the story get cast away from mythical stories, which are very close to nature and get drawn towards science which was in some way opposite to nature, is by watching a lightning burning down a tree to ashes (Shelly, 56-58). Here, the light and fire is metaphoric of the transformation of the author from being a person fascinated by nature into someone who has the confidence to command nature, who believes in nurture rather than nature. And when Frankenstein narrates his own inner story to his creator, the imagery of fire is repeated and the reader hears the monster wondering about the nature of fire in the following words: I found a fire…and was overcome with delight at the warmth I experienced from it. In my joy, I thrust my hand into the live embers, but quickly drew it out again with a cry of pain. How strange, I thought, that the same cause should produce such opposite effects (Shelley, 218). This is a profound depiction of the basic contradiction involved within the evil-good duo, which can also be interpreted as a reflection of nature- nurture duality as well. Because in nature there is no evil or good as such and they exist only within a frame created by human beings. So it can be argued that evil is an after-effect of nurture. And the fire teaches that simple lesson to the monster who is just like a new born baby unaware of good and evil, and who is just learning to tread the earth and the landscape of humanity. Throughout the story, people are seen seeking refuge around a wood fire to talk, to understand the contradictions of life better (Shelley, 257). Similarly, there is also mention of the “feverish fire” glimmering in the eyes of Frankenstein even when his health is failing him (Shelley, 254). Here, fire is the life force, the passion that keeps one alive. Fire is the boundary between life and death, between nature and nurture. In the same way, light is used as an imagery that represents knowledge- the point at which humans depart from nature and enters the realm of nurture. This is why Frankenstein is seen observing that “I began also to observe, with greater accuracy, the forms that surrounded me, and to perceive the boundaries of the radiant roof of light which canopied me” (Shelly, 217). Again the reference to knowledge is made when narrator says, “as exemplified in the change from life to death, and death to life, until from the midst of this darkness a sudden light broke in upon me” (Shelly, 84). This was the moment of knowing the secret of life. This was the point of transition from simply living the nature to nurturing life. But the same light becomes “oppressive” for Frankenstein because it is the growing existential knowledge that becomes an unbearable curse for him (Shelly, 214). And this is why, towards the end of the story, when Frankenstein leaves for ever all human contact; he allegorically talks about the fading of the light (Shelley, 280). Allusion to moody weather can also be seen repeatedly in the narrative. Autumn fills the heart of lonely Frankenstein with thoughts of decay and death and he struggles not to be overtaken by the “bleakness of the weather” (Shelly, 41). All the protagonists are seen awaiting a favorable change of weather either in their physical or in the emotional environment. It is as if there is reciprocal relationship between weather and human minds. It is as if nature is giving a warning to humans of the possible consequences of choosing nature to nurture. Weather is also used as a metaphor to represent the hostile environment that surrounds creatures like Frankenstein as well as nonconformists like his creator in the society, both of whom being common ‘offenders’ who think they can outrun the limitations of nature through nurture. All the twists and turns in the story is told to be happening in remote settings. The narration begins from the far North of London and remote places in Russia. It is in another remote corner of earth that Frankenstein rediscovers his creator and demands that he create a female for him in the likeness of him (Shelly, 74). Here, the basest of the feelings of humans are exposed in the lap of nature, far away from modern civilization. It is the conflict between nature and human nurture that is ultimately being exposed in these circumstances. The creator of Frankenstein is also seen somewhat fleeing from his creation to a far away place in Scotland where though he creates another similar being half way, then he destroys it. It can be seen that the creator chooses such a remote place to hide from the eyes of the society, what he was attempting to do. But he arrives at a conviction that it was wrong to go against the rules of nature. He thus submits his intellect before the command of nature. It is as if he realizes that whatever scientific advances human beings make, it is impossible to erase the internal contradiction of good and evil, inside a human being. The remoteness of the settings in which the story is being told is also an entry into the world of remote fears that humans experience about life and death. Violence is the basic element that weaves the fabric of the narrative- whether it be the physical violence that the creator imparts to nature by creating a monster, the emotional violence involved with the arrogance of the creator towards his creation, and the physical violence to which Frankenstein becomes a slave to, through the circumstances. Violence is depicted as something inseparable from human character. Frankenstein acquires his ability to act violently not through his real emotions but through the bad treatment that he receives from humans including his creator. In this way, another dimension of violence is revealed. It is shown as something that is wrongfully attributed to an outsider by the insiders of human race. It is a consequence of prejudice. It is in the basic nature of humanity and not in the basic nature of the monster. In this way, violence in this story is a reflection of human nature. Death is the single cause that justifies this whole narrative. It is because death is a part of nature still incomprehensible for humans that the efforts to prevent it become an obsession for humans. In the beginning of the story, the protagonist is seen gaining victory over nature by creating life. But towards the end of the story, again, it is by accepting death that the protagonists are conquering their own basic nature. The entire circle can be drawn as an endless cycle- nature- nurture-nature continuum. It is through death that both the creator and the creature relieve themselves of the agony of knowledge, which is simply a product of nurture. Works Cited Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, Frankenstein: or, The Modern Prometheus. 1818. Oxford University, London: G. and W.B. Whittaker, 1823. Print. Read More