Door Number One or Door Number Two?

Breana Roberts

Blog Entry #2 Passage from Frankenstein

Door Number One or Door Number Two?

Frankenstein, by Mary Shelly, is a dark novel that ends in a sad, twisted way. I believe that the fatal ending was a result of Victor Frankenstein’s decision making. Victor ultimately made the decision to ignore his creature, but I do not believe that decision is the sole factor that ruined his life. Victor made many decisions during his tumultuous life. I believe, however, that the first fatal decision he chose was to take the easy pathway. Victor had two options at the beginning of his college career: he could start over and learn (natural philosophy) science in an entirely new approach, or he could continue to search for a new type of life. Clearly, Victor chose the latter of the two and the creature was created. If Victor chose the other option of restarting, his creature would have “never” been formed and his life would have been entirely different. Basically the idea behind my curiosity is that Victor chose door number two, what would have happened if he opened number one? Would his life have vastly improved? Did he choose the easy way out because otherwise his prior hard work would have gone to waste? Who was right Krempe or Waldman? This scene is important because Victor’s life could never again be the same. However, the question remains if Victor would have went with Krempe there is a slight possibility that he would have still created the creature anyway, therefore the uncertainty is as follows, was the creature a part of Victor Frankenstein’s fate? (See passage below)

Passage from Mary Shelly’s Frankenstein:

He asked me several questions concerning my progress in the different branches of science appertaining to natural philosophy. I replied carelessly, and partly in contempt, mentioned the names of my alchemists as the principal authors I had studied. The professor stared. "Have you," he said, "really spent your time in studying such nonsense?" I replied in the affirmative. "Every minute," continued M. Krempe with warmth, "every instant that you have wasted on those books is utterly and entirely lost. You have burdened your memory with exploded systems and useless names. Good God! In what desert land have you lived, where no one was kind enough to inform you that these fancies which you have so greedily imbibed are a thousand years old and as musty as they are ancient? I little expected, in this enlightened and scientific age, to find a disciple of Albertus Magnus and Paracelsus. My dear sir, you must begin your studies entirely anew." So saying, he stepped aside and wrote down a list of several books treating of natural philosophy which he desired me to procure, and dismissed me after mentioning that in the beginning of the following week he intended to commence a course of lectures upon natural philosophy in its general relations, and that M. Waldman, a fellow professor, would lecture upon chemistry the alternate days that he omitted. I returned home not disappointed, for I have said that I had long considered those authors useless whom the professor reprobated; but I returned not at all the more inclined to recur to these studies in any shape. M. Krempe was a little squat man with a gruff voice and a repulsive countenance; the teacher, therefore, did not prepossess me in favour of his pursuits. In rather a too philosophical and connected a strain, perhaps, I have given an account of the conclusions I had come to concerning them in my early years. As a child I had not been content with the results promised by the modern professors of natural science. With a confusion of ideas only to be accounted for by my extreme youth and my want of a guide on such matters, I had retrod the steps of knowledge along the paths of time and exchanged the discoveries of recent inquirers for the dreams of forgotten alchemists. Besides, I had a contempt for the uses of modern natural philosophy. It was very different when the masters of the science sought immortality and power; such views, although futile, were grand; but now the scene was changed. The ambition of the inquirer seemed to limit itself to the annihilation of those visions on which my interest in science was chiefly founded. I was required to exchange chimeras of boundless grandeur for realities of little worth. Such were my reflections during the first two or three days of my residence at Ingolstadt, which were chiefly spent in becoming acquainted with the localities and the principal residents in my new abode. But as the ensuing week commenced, I thought of the information which M. Krempe had given me concerning the lectures. And although I could not consent to go and hear that little conceited fellow deliver sentences out of a pulpit, I recollected what he had said of M. Waldman, whom I had never seen, as he had hitherto been out of town. Partly from curiosity and partly from idleness, I went into the lecturing room, which M. Waldman entered shortly after. This professor was very unlike his colleague. He appeared about fifty years of age, but with an aspect expressive of the greatest benevolence; a few grey hairs covered his temples, but those at the back of his head were nearly black. His person was short but remarkably erect and his voice the sweetest I had ever heard. He began his lecture by a recapitulation of the history of chemistry and the various improvements made by different men of learning, pronouncing with fervour the names of the most distinguished discoverers. He then took a cursory view of the present state of the science and explained many of its elementary terms. After having made a few preparatory experiments, he concluded with a panegyric upon modern chemistry, the terms of which I shall never forget: "The ancient teachers of this science," said

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein