Through our readings, we analyzed the effects that technology has upon individuals. In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, one can notice a great schism in the relationships between Victor and his Monster. As Victor utilizes his own knowledge to create something outside of human imagination, he is scared off by what his technology allowed him to do. However, as the two meet for the first time, the only way in which they come to be on the same level, on the human level, is when the monster utilizes his verbal eloquence as a way to make Victor feel compassionate about him. In Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts: Language and Monstrosity in Frankenstein by Peter Brooks, the author argues that the language spoken by the monstrous (Frankenstein’s monster) will never be able to “arrive at meaning”. Because the monster is “monstrous”, he can only employ language as a medium to “pass on the desire and the curse of meaning”, rather than meaning itself. In saying this, Brooks thinks that though the Monster can speak and request for his desires to come true, his words will never allow him to obtain what he wants (just because he is a monster). In his argument, he references psychoanalysts such as Freud and Lacant to expand upon his notion that language through monsterism does not provide direct meaning to one’s wants. Ultimately, I believe that his research topic can allow me to view at past readings with a new set of eyes. The importance of language in literature is reflected through its power to establish meaningful connections that could relate to the identity of characters. For instance, in saying that language does not allow the Monster to convey his wishes, one can argue that the monster is emotionally repressed and unable to show love to its surroundings because they are realistically cruel.

http://www.jstor.org/stable/468457?seq=14#page_scan_tab_contents