He did literally nothing wrong

who is prometheus in the context of the myth?

Was vic (zeus) worried that the wretch (prometheus) would give fire (life) to man (his superior master race children with his wife)? The discovery in natural science that he had to travel to England for was surely the mechanics of creating functioning reproductive system right? Probably why he bitched out at the last moment in Scotland.

did he raped elizabeth.....

Well the concept of love is inherently what humans make of it, and the definition isn't particularly mutable. What the monster was born with was a clean slate, to move past the squabbles of man. Victor, whilst he experienced love in some form, was still fundamentally apart of the vile human nature that inherently lies at the core of the novel. Victor should have put his scorn over the deaths of William and Justin aside and just built his waifu. He was arrogant and selfish, and constructed this remote possibility of 'sacrificing all of man' to justify the fact that he was perma salty after their deaths and couldn't move past it, and continued the cycle of hatred.

Attached: 145728165.jpg (182x268, 8K)

*immutable

He did though. He murdered them specifically because he knew it would hurt Victor.

I think the whole mess was actually unsolveable from the beginning. Victor was probably more or less right, "fate" was the only real victor. I don't think there was ever a point where the desires and lives of Victor and the Creature could have both been satisfied and repaired. The Creature was fundamentally immature and thought having a female would solve the crisis of his existence.

>the creature was fundamentally immature
what makes you say this? his grasp of language and comprehension from a base of zero is phenomenal, to the point where Victor acknowledged his eloquence and intelligence, despite such a short period of life. Victor too relied on a female to solve the crisis of his existence. When he couldn't resolve the crisis through purpose and 'work' it was Elizabeth that was his only outlet purposefulness. The male cottager's existential crisis was resolved by the arrival of his lady love. Personal relations can and do salvage petty existences. The creature had a greater grasp of beauty than Victor did, and to deny this was to create great hate. Victor even till the end refused to accept his blame in abandoning the creature to a harsh world that fundamentally rejected it with extreme prejudice.

Of course, the Creature was demonically intelligent and gifted. But he was still essentially a child. Still growing and learning. He is as desperate as a child that needs love from its creator, and as impulsive - his petulant violence. This is not to demean the needs and sufferings that propel him, it's just that he is ultimately immature in believing the deception he could ever achieve their satisfaction. It's very humanising.

This user has a point

So maybe Victor was the one who did nothing wrong?

universal for destroying the monster and turning him into some zombie idiot

The question is whether it’s “wrong” for him to do something if he has no way of knowing what we humans consider right and wrong. Killing people is universally considered bad, but he’s an abomination with no sentient thought.
Is it “wrong” for an elephant to trample a person who scares them?

>but he’s an abomination with no sentient thought.

You should probably read the book before trying to talk about it.

Frankenstein is a brainless abomination with no self awareness faggot

>Frankenstein is

You went too far with it

He murdered the kid, who was as innocent as he was before this act. If I remember correctly he admits to Victor that he knew it was wrong and did it out of spite anyway.
How would you have made him look?
imagine being this retarded

This is the real redpill.

>How would you have made him look?
different user but the way he's described in the book anticipates the notion of uncanny valley: all the parts meticulously sculpted to be beautiful and yet they add up to something inexplicably disturbing. he's also built to a slightly increased scale and with partially translucent skin, being therefore a kind of exaggerated specimen of a human. this is the source of the horror: that he is not a subhuman monster but human in a radically exaggerated way that forces upon us the revolting awareness of what we really are.

congrats user, you've shitposted your way to true insight and don't even realize it

>murdered innocent kid
Not true. He thought that a child would be free from the taint of vileness that caused the villagers to turn in fear. The child was guilty of judging the creature.

One of the things that surprised me the most having not read the book before, but hsving been exposed to pop culture's idea of the monster, was the agility of the thing. He can move at superhuman speeds with surprising grace. The media always portrays him as a lumbering mess incapable of fluid motion, but he's really the ubermensch.