Worksheet-Frankenstein-Mary Shelley

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein v/s Kenneth Branagh's movie Frankenstein:

PRE-VIEWING TASKS

 "Gothic scientific fiction" : It is a sub-genre, where irrational with supernatural and rational foundation of scientific fiction weave together a revealing story where the universe can still surprise us: 

For example:here "the Monster" of whom we don't know, how it can be originated only by stitching only the covering outer parts of the anatomy, and solely by stimulating galvanizing effect it can be generated and can live as a human being in the society, concerning his humanly structure.

It seems as a result of over-imagination, which isn't based on rational foundation of scientific novel.If perhaps it is literally based on science then perhaps it would be generated technically/mechanically rather than chemically as the Monster is created in the novel. 

It also comprises terror, horror, thriller, the grotesque or macabre effect. Which we can see literally by watching movie.

Frame Narrative: It is a technique, utilised in Frankenstein novel's narrative style, based on story within the story technique/box within the box technique. Where Monster passes to Victor, he hand overs  to Captain and from him to Saville.

Can be said as when one has his frame work, it is seen by someone's point of view and in this respect, it has a form of a new edition, which is handed over to another one and the another also has his own reflection to reflect and in this manner it passes on from person to person, the difference is "the style of narration/mannerism of particular thing".
Hence can be said the specific style of narration.

Coming to the point of view of the Author: Perhaps here "Marry Shelley" wants to show that how when an individual pre-maturely tries to do anything, what will be its consequences, as Victor Frankenstein is also facing(he has to pay the price in the form of his wife, his brother, Henry only for generating "Monster" with the help of science) or perhaps we may assume here that "the aspect of science&technology" at that time was in a raw form(with forethought).

Through "Monster" perhaps she is trying to show "the societal aspect" that how when one is peculiar to others(here specifically by his ugly look) one is ignored and humiliated, how for his sole survival he has to constantly strive, and besides this he isn't accepted as the human beings are given acceptance.

We can assume here as she has also tried to put forward her point of view of how when one goes against one's nature, disaster is going to follow him/her.(e.g:Victor)

She has also tried to show that how a person can be considered as "monster" on what aspects/views/attitude(e.g: we have 3 characters in the novel to identify, whether who is the real monster).

Hence she has tried her best to give the touch of society, their attitudes, relationships(Victor&Elizabeth), nonacceptance of one's own generated thing as one doesn't similarizes one and so thrown to one's own fate, but eventually how one's karmas follow that particular person till his own ultimate end. We also have patriarchal aspect, prevailing at that particular time and perhaps she, through "monster" trying to symbolize 'science' which was perhaps not abruptly accepted by the people of that time.

Coming to the view points of different characters, we have four main characters in the novel; 
Captain Robert, Victor, Saville and Monster. But we will specifically discuss solely two characters, named Victor & Monster:
Victor, who has a main role to play in the novel as he is the sole creator of the monster. Perhaps when seen his mother, died after giving birth to the baby, he may be thinking that if he can technically generate human being then perhaps a human mightn't die when giving birth to any of the other human being. But didn't think that it is the law of nature and one shouldn't try to change it otherwise one is to face unaware consequences of committed deed and as tried to take nature in his hands, he met the lethal end, which according to him is unexpected, unassumed and undigestive.

He seems to be rigid follower of patriarchy(e.g: when Elizabeth is coming to his lab, where he is mechanizing monster, and he refrains her from reaching there). We find in this novel that he creates monster by denying to accept it as his own part(son) seems as not taking responsibility of what he himself has done and trying to put that thing in fate's hand, while doesn't realizing that unnatural beginning has, unnatural(unusual end) beyond one's understanding.

While monster seems to be alone, and wants to live as human beings are living(inspired by the particular family shown in the movie) but doesn't know, who is his sole creator and to associate himself in this particular arena, he also learns the language, read "Paradise lost" but whenever strived to survive usually he faces contemptuous gestures from the society(e.g: When eating food from one of  the stalls, and hitted by the societals due to his ugly look). What he wants? A usual life, for  which humanbeings are given priviledge and he isn't !

Hence we see here two contrasting characters, who are striving but to make their own ways.

Coming to the confusion for the title of the novel called "Frankenstein": When refering to the novel, question arises in our mind that: to whom we should consider a monster. We must consider here only the interconnected characters known as "Victor" and "Monster". 
Victor who is the creator of the monster, but denies to take the responsibility of his own part and throws him to his fate. Pragmatically if we see this character creates a contemptuous effects on the readers/audience side. While aparting ourselves from all these designs of evaluation we may see here that it was only his creation, which perhaps he was willing to do, though got succeeded but not in the same consistency as he himself has thought about and that perhaps lead him to anxiety and guilt. Perhaps if he would have accepted that Monster, he may have struggled a lot to give the monster his deserving position and perhaps the movie/novel was ended in very different manner.
While seeing this same aspect from the monster's side, we see here it is only the society that leads him to do such things in his life, which according to the audience "leviathan" can do, no one dare to attempt such type of deeds in their lives. When he came to know of his creator from the book, and when seeing "Henry" tries to talk with him but suddenly he moves away from their and "victor's locate" fells down and that stimulates in him the "hatred aspect" and gives more density to contemplate this emotions upon "Victor".
Hence we see here both are made such due to their willingness/circumstances, nobody wants to end their life in such a manner as being reflected in the novel by the author.

Reaching to the conclusion of "the real monster" creature or the creator:

You can refer to the aforementioned answer to understand this question's answer in a better way. Perhaps through director's point of view this idea seems to be justifiable but not by the audience, and as the reader differs in their point of views, their ideas are on equal measures, going to differ, concerning "the real monster identification".

Tabula Rasa:
It has relation in regard of this novel: As it has been said: "a child can be nurtured in his/her parents lap/particular environment". While here Monster is Victor's son and as he is to influence Monster as per her personality in respects of attitude, behaviour, actions towards society, he isn't. But his denial leads him to brutality and cruelty and he kills people on a large scale in the novel, with ignorant passionate attitude.
Hence it gives an idea as when one fails to perform one's responsible duty, then only something unaccepted is happened which is beyond repairing. While  Tabula Rasa gives a thrilling effect as it is effected when internally something dark, gloomy is happening, which can't be narrate to anyone, but the readers/audience who are fully aware of all these things are getting pleasure when documenting the respective characters.

Significance of the subtitle called "the modern prometheus": In "Ancient Greek Mythology" Prometheus is credited for bringing knowledge and enlightenment to the mankind. He has stolen fire from "Olympus" the God, who wants to keep fire for themselves, but as he went against the God, he was chained to the rock, where in day his heart was eaten out by the eagle and at night it was transformed back as it was before.
With reference to the novel, we may see here that "Mary Shelley" is also serving accordingly through his novel, as we have already seen the contemplation of the knowledge and when well-documented the characters with all positive and negative aspects, it serves enlightening to the readers/audience.
Also we can relate this "moral approach". Victor's wrong(perhaps not his creation was responsible for his downfall, but his attitude of denying his own karmical responsibility to shoulder)deed lead him to disaster, similarly Monster's deed were unfair but we can say here lack of proper training, which can be done by his father, wasn't taken into consideration and the circumstances, while there wasn't his own individual idea to reflect and so that it may have good/bad consequences. But Monster can't be evaluated on this respective approach.
Thus is the enunciation of "modern Prometheus subtitle".

Does Mary Shelley's Frankenstein stands on the brick of revolutionary changes:

One may say this by referring to this novel, as Victor's evolution of "Sapien" seems to be a pre-mature and raw experiment, and so it has dire/terrific consequences.

Thus it can be assumed it must haven't much developed at that time but it is taken perhaps to show the people that how anything in raw form works.

Thankyou!

Sources:
To refer "Galvanism" switch on to the site: https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/galvanism

Wikipedia: the concept of frame narrative(something from ma'am's lecture)tabula rasa(something added from my own understanding), Gothic scientific novel(as usual).