I thought it was more so about the reader seeing that Dr. Frankenstein was the real monster?
I always thought it was a meditation on the responsibilities of the scientist, and the dangers of ignoring them.
All he wanted was a name!!
@megamanx181x, if you’re going to create life, you better be ready for the responsibility.
Does that mean that the story of pro-abortion?
@Bad Suggestions, ....... we should ask the scholars...
@megamanx181x, that’s a pretty good summarization. Given that “having a name” meant, at the time (1818), being part of a family and being loved and cared for and acknowledged. The monster is profoundly lonely, like the author herself.
@shnickelfritz, seriously that ending where the monster cries over his body regretting what he did because he was rejected by him. And he tells the captain and the crew that he never gave him a name was heart breaking to understand how cruel men can be to things they don’t understand
I always felt the morale of the story was that not all books can be judged by their cover, and to not go against god’s wishes. (Because of the era of the time and all that.)
Literally no one thinks the moral of Frankenstein is "graverobbing is kind of creepy." Literally no one thinks that. There are comatose dyslexics unaware that books exist who know that's not the moral of Frankenstein.
Pretty sure it’s about not playing God.
For some reason I can reply to original posts, but not the replies
So... is Frankenstein’s monster technically a zombie?