I have a research paper and was wondering if anyone would be willing to give it a glance for glaring errors, I’ve stared at it for so long my mind isn’t working…
<p>well if u could, thatd be awesome!</p>
<p>Written in the era of Enlightenment amidst unprecedented scientific discovery, the tale of Frankenstein contains a cautionary undertone on the implications of sought-after knowledge. A century after the publication of Frankenstein, Grendel: a deeply philosophical book on the meaning of life followed. Both Frankenstein and Grendel pose the universal question: do we want to be informed beings, or are we better off naeve? Additionally, both novels explore the vilification and heroism of inhuman antiheros and the anthropocentric nature of humans. Despite these significant overlapping themes, Frankenstein and Grendel each have one thematic focus that stands in sharp contrast to the other: while the monster in Frankenstein eventually gains dominion over his creator, Grendel ultimately fails. Moreover, Shelley's Frankenstein and Gardner's Grendel share similar themes, but each novel has its own respective theme about the fate of the oppressed, resulting in a somewhat skewed moral vision of their respective authors.
In Frankenstein, Shelley warns her readers of the dangers of tampering with the intrinsic. I find little room to doubt that Shelley is trying to instill some sense of fear in her reader. For not only does Victor Frankenstein loathe his own creation -- and let us not be mistaken, the work of the doctor is without question a symbol for the larger body of work of all Enlightenment scientists, seeking knowledge they do not understand in order to perform tasks previously thought impossible -- but the creation curses himself as well, speaking of the grotesqueness of his appearance and admitting freely to having willfully done evil. This coincides with the whole notion of ignorance being superior to knowledge, a theme that is also made manifest in Grendel. Seduced by the captivating noise of the Shaper, Grendel seeks knowledge of the outside world of the Danes. Prior to his encounter with human beings, Grendel led a content life, spending his time passively with his mother in the mere. After witnessing the Danes, however, Grendel is unconsciously immersed into the human thought process and suffers a loss of innocence- a 'pleasure' that his simplistic prior life with his mute mother had afforded him. Whereas he once had nothing in life to worry about, after observing the Danes and listening to the dragon's edifications on life, Grendel finds himself dealing with the deep and depressing philosophical issues of nihilism and existentialism, all of which contribute to his nihil ex nihilo? (nothing out of nothing) mentality (150 Gardner). By demonstrating that a character's quest to obtain knowledge is detrimental to his overall happiness, Frankenstein and Grendel both make the case that ignorance is preferable to knowledge.
Though antiheroes in theory, Frankenstein's Monster and Grendel are destined to be heroic. Submerged in cultures where they are the only one of their kind, the monsters cope with adversity by using violence and the reader cannot help but sympathize with these creatures. Abandoned by his parent and marginalized by society because of his grotesque appearance, Frankestein's Monster longingly seeks for companionship in a world which has vilified him, but his efforts prove to be futile after his first encounter with humans: "Felix darted forward, and with supernatural force tore me from his father, to whose knees I still clung: in a transport of fury, he dashed me to the ground and struck me violently with a stick. I could have torn him limb from limb, as the lion rends the antelope. But my heart sunk within me as with bitter sickness, and I refrained. I saw him on the point of repeating his blow, when, overcome by pain and anguish, I quitted the cottage . . .." (129 Shelley) This clearly exemplifies the anthropocentric mentality of humanity. The older man, who was the first to befriend the creature did so because he [was unable] to judge his countenance? and states it will afford [him] great pleasure to be in any way serviceable to a human being.? (129 Shelley) But when Felix, the son, arrives and sees the Monster in his beastly physical state, all hospitality is abandoned and once again the creature enters a lonely life of melancholy and his reception by the DeLaceys develops his spiritual monstrosity: Many times I considered Satan as the fitter emblem of my condition; for often, like him, when I viewed the bliss of my protectors, the bitter gall of envy rose within me. (125 Shelley) Grendels first run-in with civilization is handled in much the same way; after observing the Danes for a long time, he finally meets Hrothgar, the leader whom he has come to admire. This admiration, however, is not reciprocated, and after catching sight of the hideous beast, the king tries to kill Grendel by chopping him out from a tree. "The king (Hrothgar) snatches an ax from the man beside him and, without any warning, he hurls it at <a href="27%20Shelley">Grendel</a> "I staggered out into the open and up toward the hall with my burden [a human body for whose death Grendel is not responsible], groaning out, 'Mercy! Peace!' The harper broke off, the people screamed . . . Drunken men rushed me with battle-axes. I sank to my knees, crying, 'Friend! Friend!' They hacked at me, yipping like dogs." After being rejected by the anthropocentric people he had began to admire so much, the reader gravitates toward Grendel, and his forthcoming violent actions become acceptable, just as Frankensteins readers feel sympathetic towards the ruthless Monster created by Victor. Both the Monster and Grendel are characters possessing the traits of an anti-hero, but gain the sympathy of a hero because of their abandonment in a society that has respect only for members of its own race.<br>
Though Victors Monster and Grendel were alike in the fact that they were marginalized by society, they each have their own unique demise. Grendel, having lost the support of his mother, is ultimately defeated after being struck by the Danes, Mama, Mama! Im dying But her love is history. (173 Gardner) Dying a lone death, without his one supporter in life, his mother, the end of Grendels existence is not one to be celebrated. The Monster in Frankenstein, on the other hand, has a more favorable outcome. He obtains control over his creator and spearheads a chase that brings Victor all the way to the Arctic Circle. The monster is at once more intellectual and more emotional than his maker; indeed, he excels Frankenstein. . . The greatest paradox and most astonishing achievement of the novel is that the monster is more human than his creator. Finally after his master dies, the Monster appears, mourning all of the havoc he had wreaked upon society, insisting that he could not have prevented it because of all the torture he was faced to deal with. He then goes away, promising that he will construct a funeral pyre for himself, thus the Monster ultimately surpasses his creator. This stands in contrast to Grendel who is subjugated and killed by his enemy. Furthermore, Shelley displays an optimistic outlook on the outcome of the villain, while Gardner shows the fate of his parallel character as bleak.
Shelley and Gardners works contain many moral subtleties. Rohrmoser argues the value of Mary Shelley's novel lies not in presenting a clear morale but in encouraging the readers to make up their own. Mary Shelley's husband, the romantic poet Percy B. Shelley, saw Frankenstein as a summing up of one of the central ideas of the enlightenment movement: the moral qualities and faults of a human being are mainly the products of his/her private and social environment (cf. Gassenmeier 1994: 28). This idea, that a creature is a product of his environment, is echoed by Gardner when he suggests that the sheltered life of Grendels mother has resulted in his inability to cope rationally with confrontation.
Though one hundred years spanned between the publications of Frankenstein and Grendel, the universal themes that each contain make the two books very interconnected. Today, the issue is still addressed whether knowledge really is superior to knowledge. Also, still today in the 21st century, creatures that deviate from normalcy are still shunned by society. Though the eventual outcome of the antiheroes in each of these books may be different, their progression is very similar; Grendel and Victors Monster are two characters that the reader can still relate to today. Furthermore, the concept that a being is molded by its creators and environment is one still widely held to be true today.</p>