2002. Morally ambiguous characters -- characters whose behavior discourages readers from identifying them as purely evil or purely good -- are at the heart of many works of literature. Choose a novel or play in which a morally ambiguous character plays a pivotal role. Then write an essay in which you explain how the character can be viewed as morally ambiguous and why his or her moral ambiguity is significant to the work as a whole. Avoid mere plot summary.
Love is the center of so many human conflicts, but other animals fight for the love of a female, so maybe it isn’t just humans who desire love enough to kill for it. We see this in Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein. Frankenstein’s monster is very morally ambiguous because he does good and bad things, this is significant to the work as a whole because it helps show us a meaning in the novel.
Frankenstein’s monster is sensitive and caring, all he wants is love and acceptance. If he was human we would call him a good guy, not morally ambiguous, but straight up good. However, he isn’t human, he is a “monster” and because of that he is never accepted by society. After being rejected time after time by society the monster gives up on trying to get what he wants that way. Instead he decides to fight to get love, to kill people close to Dr. Frankenstein to try to get back at him. After that point he becomes viewed as the bad guy, he really becomes a monster in the readers’ mind.
Frankenstein’s monster manages to stay morally ambiguous because when he starts killing people he gains more pity from the reader. He had asked Dr. Frankenstein to make him a wife, and when he was denied his one dream he resorted to the only other thing he knew. Violence. So because it isn’t his fault he is the way he is, the reader doesn’t see him as evil, but they also can’t overlook the fact that he is killing people, and as such the monster is continually viewed as morally ambiguous.
This is very significant to the work because it makes the reader ask questions. What is ok in real life? Do circumstances justify crimes? Is it ok to kill for love? Shelley uses the monster to show the world how ambiguous crimes can be. Frankenstein’s monster is one of the main characters in the novel, and by making a main character morally ambiguous we see that Shelley is discussing a larger issue. To use a smaller character to question something we know that the author is only questioning on smaller level. Using this knowledge we see that Shelley is questioning not only crimes, but the world as a whole. She questions value systems of her culture, maybe she’s discussing corruption in the monarchy.
All in all Frankenstein teaches us that we should question morals, see the gray areas, and decide for ourselves the truth of the matter.
I think the intro could use some work. I was a little confused on your opening sentence and I think the thesis could be more specific. You did a good job describing Frankenstein's morally ambiguous character. I agree that, despite his acts of evil, it's hard to hate his character and you often find yourself sympathizing with him. I think it's only natural for humans to feel bad when they understand the underlying reason for crimes. I'm not very familiar with this work, but I think Shelley may be creating a meaning more than just that humans should question what is right or wrong. It's pretty black and white that killing is wrong. I do agree, however, that Shelley is making a main point by making the main character ambiguous, I'm just not sure what it is. Good job!
ReplyDeleteIntro
ReplyDeleteDon't really understand what the first sentence have to do with anything. What is the meaning? what bad/good things does he do?
Paragraph 1
What evidence supports that he is a good guy? Maybe a quote? Perhaps? From all that I've heard of Frankenstein's monster, he doesn't seem to have wanted love
Paragraph 2
I feel pity for him, but there is never an excuse to take a life unless yours is threatened and I would actually have to call him "evil" based on this paragraph, not in the middle.
Paragraph 3
What is significant? if you start a new paragraph, start a new idea too
Try not to use maybe, it makes you sound unsure of what you are talking about.
Good work tying it all together though! I don't know about some f your points though.
Nice job answering hte questions.
The opening sentence doesn't necessarily have to mention animals. This somewhat distracts the reader and detracts from the intention of hooking and whatnot.
ReplyDeleteThe second sentence should provide background on the matter you are discussing and writing about, and it seems bland as it is now.
You may wish to have a conjunction between 'things, this' in the thesis.
The second paragraph seems to primarily summarize the plot, although it does comment on the monster's intentions and his public perceptions. If you worked in a literary technique here and expanded off that, you are not far off from a good paragraph.
The third paragraph does demonstrate some key points about why he can be viewed as morally ambiguous, but continues to lack any literary technique reference and does not assess meaning.
The final paragraph does raise important and broad questions that the novel may bring up, but does not assess the meaning of the work and its relationship to the monster's morally ambiguous nature.
The conclusion seems short and does not recap on any learned information, or come full circle, or connect dots. You may wish to add to it to that effect.