
Welcome to day one of Frankenstein Week here on White Rose of Avalon, my Darlings. I thought that the ideal topic to start off this week was to discuss the Monster himself!
I think that it is often surprising when someone first reads the original novel by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, for the Monster, or the Creature (as he is sometimes called), is not very akin to the early cinematic portrayals. Most of us grow up with the idea of Frankenstein’s Monster as a slowly moving, shambling creature with a flat-topped head and bolts in his neck. Of course, that is how he is depicted in the Universal Monsters films, but that particular look was invented for the 1931 film. In fact, there were multiple different make-up looks considered, as in the novel the Monster is not described in very great detail. He is described as being abnormally large, as Victor Frankenstein purposefully made him so, and having watery eyes and a grotesque appearance that frightens humans who see him. But that is about all we get when it comes to a description of his appearance. That means that adaptations can really get creative in how they portray this Monster made up of the body parts of cadavers. However, given the cultural impact of the Universal Monster films, it is not a surprise that the very specific image of Frankenstein’s Monster invented for those films has really been what has endured.
Now, other than appearance, what is probably even more surprising to someone who has only watched the Universal films, or someone who only knows of Frankenstein through cultural osmosis and seeing the imagery around, is the behavior of the Monster. As I stated above, the Monster in the original novel is not how he is portrayed in the Universal films, and in most film adaptations. Most notably, the Monster speaks; in fact, he is incredibly intelligent. We have an entire section of the novel from his point of view, when he told Victor about what became of him when he was abandoned by his father. For that is what Victor is: his father; he created the Monster and fled in revulsion at what he had done! That is why I called the Monster an abandoned son in the title of this post.
That section of the novel puts the reader directly in the perspective of the Monster, whom Victor had been speaking of as a true villain and calling a fiend (and continued to do so throughout the narrative when it shifted back to his perspective). The reader gets to see what the Monster went through, from being lost in the woods, to discovering the beauty and harshness of nature, to trying to find empathy from humans (who only shunned him for his hideous visage), and to finally taking up the role of villain to punish Victor! However, the Monster is never painted as wholly evil; he is given a large depth of character. He described how much he loved a family of French exiles who lived in a cottage, and he observed them and learned language from watching them. He even helped them and empathized with them. The Monster described how he found books in abandoned luggage in the woods, near where he hid. Luckily, these books were also in French, so he could learn to read them. One of the books was a translation of Milton’s Paradise Lost. This had a huge impact on the Monster, who confessed that he wished to empathize with Adam, but he had been abandoned by his father and found himself relating to Lucifer instead. The allegory here is quite obvious: Victor had played God, and now he would pay the price for it.
The Monster did not immediately seek retribution; instead, he attempted to reveal himself to the family he had watched and aided in friendship. The father, who was blind, could have possibly accepted him, but the children were horrified when they came home to find him in the cottage with their father. Due to his ugliness, the Monster was immediately thought to be evil and to be out to kill the father. It was after this that the Monster knew he must leave his sanctuary and sought out Victor, as he had Victor’s diary from when he left Victor’s apartment after Victor had abandoned him. That is how he found his way to Victor’s hometown, traveling carefully to hide himself from human sight. However, even his killing of William (Victor Frankenstein’s youngest brother) was not planned. He approached the boy because he thought him a lovely child, and that maybe a child had not learned to fear someone who was ugly. But he was called a Monster by the boy, and then the boy’s tragic fate was sealed when he revealed that his last name was Frankenstein. Of course, that is the end of the Monster’s tale, as the Monster spoke to Victor after he had returned home following his brother’s death.
Yet, even then, when the Monster desired retribution, he did not immediately seek to enact further vengeance. The Monster asked Victor to create him a woman that would be like him, so that he would have a companion and not be lonely. Of course, Victor was appalled by the request, but eventually did agree to what was asked of him. In the end, Victor could not bring himself to create another Monster whom he thought could be worse than the one he already created, even with the Monster’s promise that if he had another like himself, they would go and live in a remote area and not harm anyone. So, that is why Victor destroyed the partially finished female Monster. It is that act which sealed his first Monster’s decision to be the true villain of Victor’s story.
Victor’s friend, Henry Clerval, was killed by the Monster, who made sure that Victor would be thought guilty of the crime before being acquitted. Then Victor is left with the fear of the Monster’s final promise to be with him on his wedding night. Of course, Victor assumed it would be he who was killed that night, and he chose to marry Elizabeth anyway. Instead, the Monster killed Elizabeth, taking away Victor’s wife, as he had done to him by not finishing his creation of the female Monster!
Yes, the Monster does horrific and vile things, but there is a reason and a cause for this in the original narrative. That does not mean his actions are not still firmly painted as wicked, but that the Monster is given nuance. That is why, even at the end of the novel, the Monster explained to Captain Walton (to whom Victor had told the whole tale, and the man who wrote it down) that he hated himself for the vile things he did. The Monster never wanted to do evil things; he only wanted love, and it is made clear he feels remorse for everything that happened with Victor Frankenstein. With Victor finally dead, the Monster explained that he was going to build a funeral pyre and burn himself along with it, to finally be released from suffering!
In the 1931 Universal film, this emotional complexity is shown through an almost childlike sweetness and lack of understanding, instead of the calculated actions of the novel. So, with all of that being said, is it any wonder that there are so many who have felt like outcasts and have identified with the Monster in this novel? I do not find it surprising at all, as I have always thought that Victor Frankenstein himself, with his hubris, is the real villain of the story. I think that this is clearly how Guillermo del Toro felt, and why his adaptation so explicitly painted Victor as the villain and the Monster in an incredibly empathetic light! That adaptation is wonderful, if not as book-accurate as some may have thought it would be. I will further explore Victor’s character in a post later this week.
I hope that you have enjoyed reading my thoughts on Frankenstein’s Monster. Do you empathize with the Monster? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below!
Note on Image: The image at the top of the post is an image from Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus (Revised Edition 1831), which I have added text to. I found the art on https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Frankenstein,_or_the_Modern_Prometheus_(Revised_Edition,_1831)_006.jpg.
LINK TO AVALONIAN ROSE FAERY MYSTERIES PATREON: patreon.com/AvalonianRoseFaeryMysteries
Further Reading/Watching
- Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus by Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley
- Frankenstein (1931)
- Bride of Frankenstein (1935)
- Frankenstein (2025)

2 responses to “Frankenstein’s Monster: Abandoned Son”
Maranda, I really enjoyed this post—especially the reminder that the Creature is articulate, self-educated, and morally conflicted, not just the shambling movie monster we grow up imagining. I do empathize with him: he’s abandoned, judged purely by appearance, and taught cruelty by rejection, yet he still longs for love and feels genuine remorse. That’s what makes him tragic rather than simply evil. I completely agree that Victor’s hubris and abandonment are the real moral center of the novel, and your point about Paradise Lost and the blind father is spot on. Great piece—I’m looking forward to your post on Victor!
I am so glad that you enjoyed reading my thoughts. I completely agree that the Monster is tragic rather than simply evil! As always, thanks for reading and commenting.