After agreeing to his deal with the monster, Frankenstein begins to question his decision and starts to have cold feet. The prospect of creating yet another monster seems impossible to him but he also sees no other option. He concludes that he has to travel to England to complete his task and is joined by Henry. The incessant need to rid himself of the monster is eating away at him. Finally, he settles in Scotland where he spends his days in a small laboratory. The closer he becomes to finishing his task, the more he dreads the consequences that will inevitably follow. His attitude throughout this process is the antithesis of his first attempt earlier in the book.

When making the deal with Victor, the monster promised that if given a companion he would never cause harm again. However, what is stopping his companion from becoming destructive? Or what if they decide to have children and continue their horrible bloodline? The possible answers to these questions were so terrifying to Victor that he immediately stopped and destroyed his work. Upon seeing this, the monster vows to ruin his wedding night. Later, Victor receives a letter from Henry asking that they continue their travels. Victor agrees and goes about erasing any trace of his presence. He even goes as far as to deposit his tools in the ocean where he is eventually pushed out to sea by a strong storm. He finally reaches land and is immediately berated by a group of hostile townspeople who accuse him of murder. After hearing many witnesses testify against him, Victor is lead to the body where, to his horror, he discovers that yet another one of his friends has fallen victim to his creation. At the sight of Henry’s body, he falls deeply ill and is moved to a prison cell for two months. Victor is found innocent on the grounds of lack of evidence and returns to Geneva with his father.

Victor receives a letter from Elizabeth asking if he has found someone else who holds his affections to which he responds that she is the only reason for his happiness. With the monster’s threat in his head, Victor decides his wedding to Elizabeth will bring an end to his misery no matter who is victorious. With this realization, he and Elizabeth get married and leave to spend their first night alone together in a family cottage by a lake. Filled with paranoia over the impeding confrontation with the monster, Victor advises Elizabeth to retire for the night so that she will not see the monster’s horrifying appearance. Yet his plan is ruined when the monster takes Elizabeth as his victim rather than Frankenstein. Soon after, consumed with grief, Frankenstein’s dad dies. Finding that he has nothing to lose, Frankenstein makes it his mission to find and destroy the monster. His task proves too much for him as he eventually dies after regaling Walton with his story and begging him to continue his quest for vengeance.

Walton resumes the role of narrator and discusses Frankenstein’s last few days from his point of view. He describes his men losing their courage to continue with their expedition and how Frankenstein was able to inspire them to persevere and continue on. After his death, the monster returns and shows a great deal of remorse for his actions. He regrets all the crimes he has committed and feels that because his master is dead, he is dead.

The passage that stuck out to me was on page 122 where the monster addresses Victor in a very demanding and dominant way. He calls him “slave” and emphasizes of the power that he holds over his emotions. The monster finishes with the words, “you are my creator, but I am your master; – obey!” This power shift contrasts the actions of the monster earlier in the story when he refers to Frankenstein as his lord and king. The monster has been rejected by his master and now seeks the only comfort he knows which is in the misery of others. Although his words seem strong and commanding, it further emphasizes the decay of both the monster and his creator.

Harriet Sidford

Scope: I want to examine our definitions of happiness and success and how they are both related to our obsession with materialism in America. Happiness is acknowledged when it is associated with concrete objects. Materialism is often mistaken for happiness because we think it can be achieved through the acquisition of things. People strive for happiness but these goals usually stem from greed, selfishness, or desperation. Similarly, success is measured in wealth or power, which we promote yet we ignore the fact that some are succeeding while others are suffering. We see this success as positive and use it to overshadow the issues festering in our world today such as poverty, racial tensions, and global warming. This is another extension of the materialistic idea of happiness: success measured in power whether it be political, economical, or social.

 Value: Can you have success without happiness or vice versa? Does one depend on the other? Which comes first? When you think of happiness what do you picture? When you say you want to succeed in life what do you mean? Can anyone achieve happiness and success or is it limited to a certain type of person? Where does happiness and success originate? These questions are difficult to answer because our concepts of success and happiness are constantly evolving and adapting to our changing values. Further, materialism taints our beliefs because it shifts our focus and limits our thinking. Once we see the hypocrisy in our perspectives we can adjust our priorities and improve the standards of our world. After all, how can we claim that happiness or success when a large part of the world is suffering?

Originality: I think that happiness and success have always been difficult to define as singular emotion or one idea. Everyone sees things differently and considers certain things more important than others. However the variety in people’s thinking is not the issue but rather our evaluation of what is important in life. Our values have shifted and we have lost sight of what it means to truly be happy and that’s assuming that we ever actually had it in sight. Work relating to this subject usually focuses on either happiness or success but not both and does not focus on materialism as a connecting factor between the two. If we can divert our attention from materialism we may able to have a more pure and wholesome understanding of happiness.

Practicality: There are many sources that will support and expand on my research. The two books that were most useful so far were The Happiness Industry and The Happiness Hypothesis because they look at happiness in two different ways. The first suggests taking a scientific approach to happiness because it will make the idea more universal. The second focuses on the origin of happiness and why unhappiness exists. Both of these books and the rest of my sources are available in the library or online. I am also going to look at “how to” books that discuss success because I can use the tips in there as evidence to support my idea that success is measured in money and power. These will give me concrete examples of what people view success as. Finally, recent articles from newspapers and journals would also be useful because they are current and deal with the issues of today.

Bibliography:

Davies, William. The Happiness Industry: How the Government and Big Business Sold             Us Well-Being. London: Verso, 2015.

Demott, Benjamin. “Beyond the Dream of Success.” Change 8, no. 7 (1976): 32-37.

Haidt, Jonathan. The Happiness Hypothesis: Finding Modern Truth in Ancient Wisdom.             New York: Basic Books, 2006.

Saveth, Edward N. “Apostles of the Self-Made Man: Changing Concepts of Success in             America.” Civil War History 13, no. 2 (1976): 184-186.

Schafer, Roy. “The Pursuit of Failure and the Idealization of Unhappiness.” American             Psychologist 39, no. 4 (1984): 398-405.

Bob Weick’s performance as Karl Marx in the play Marx in Soho, by Howard Zinn, shines a light on the man behind the controversial ideas and shows how relevant his ideas are in our world today. Communism is associated with either corrupt leaders or tumultuous times in history. Marx is thought of as a madman, who should be feared because of his radical views. Weick shatters this stereotype and shows a different side of Marx. His concern as a father is clear as he introduces his three children. He promotes his thoughts because he believes they will allow his children to have a better life. His adoration for his wife is evident as he lovingly recalls her endless support of his work. Most importantly, he shows his humbleness as he regrets his infidelity and his inability to provide for his family. He is not this untouchable figure who thinks he is superior to everyone. Marx is only a person who wants to the world to reach its full potential.

This play forces the audience to confront reality and see the validity in Marx’s view: that capitalism is killing society with its voracious appetite for more. Some disregard his ideas because they fail to see how applicable they are in our world. However, his ideology may have even more truth now than it did when he wrote it. Those who hold all the money and power are few and far between. The majority works for the advancement of the minority and receive very little in return. The solution to this fraudulent system seems easy yet we have been brainwashed into thinking there is no necessity for a solution. Thus, Weick preaches these ideas in the hopes of provoking a response from the audience and helping them discover the root problem.