In both the play The Tempest by William Shakespeare and the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, certain characters are presented as victims of circumstance. A range of literary techniques are employed by the authors to portray the monster of Frankenstein and Caliban of The Tempest as unfortunate victims of circumstance, allowing readers and the audience alike to gain an understanding of the injustice faced by those who have suffered as a result of happenings that are out of their control. The authors have done this through a range of techniques—through the use of many language devices and certain structural components. While Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban are presented as victims of circumstance it is oddly difficult to find literal elements of the text that refer to them as such. Instead, both Caliban and Frankenstein’s monster are illustrated as anything but protagonists to the storyline. After analysis this is even more apparent especially as both characters are not made clearly to be victims of circumstance instead their ‘evil’ sides are more prevailing. However they are victims of circumstance where one feels pain or suffering through no fault of his own and without the ability to control the situation. The writers have used a number of techniques as previously mentioned to present them as such. Comparatively, there is a range of between the two texts with similarities in the techniques, language device and structural, by both writers but there are also differences. Within the following essay, I shall discuss these similarities and differences and eventually conclude stating which is more apparent. Nevertheless it can be definitely stated that Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban are presented as victims of circumstance.

 

The authors of Frankenstein and The Tempest both employ imagery to depict the harsh reality that Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban face every day through no fault of their own. This language device is key to not only the narrative but also readers’ and audience’s understanding of the characters themselves. Imagery has been used in both works to show that the pain Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban feel has not been caused by themselves but others. Thus they are victims of circumstance. In The Tempest, Caliban is illustrated in this way by his moaning of pain and intolerance as he says ‘for every trifle are they set upon me’; ‘their pricks at my footfall’. This is use of imagery where the reader is forced to envision a disgruntled and enduring Caliban who is suffering as a result of events that are out of his control. The ‘pricks’ at his footfall, suggest that whenever he does something which does not please his master Prospero or his followers, he is made to experience agony. This imagery correlates with being a victim of circumstance as his pain as stated is through no fault of his own but actually that of his master Prospero. In Frankenstein, the monster towards the end of the novel speaks in pain at his creator by exclaiming ‘I ought to be thy Adam but I am a rather fallen angel’ and ‘which drivest me from joy for no misdeed’. This directly links to Frankenstein’s monster being a victim of circumstance as a ‘fallen angel’ describes Satan being pushed out of heaven. Frankenstein was supposed to an ‘Adam’, a new wonderful creation but inevitably this was not the case. A ‘fallen angel’ would infer that Frankenstein’s monster did wrong, as Satan but we also know from that narrative and ‘for no misdeed’ that this was not the case either. Frankenstein’s monster was not received by the world as a wonder, but a monster and this is not his fault but his creator’s. Therefore through the use of this language device, imagery, both William Shakespeare and Mary Shelley have portrayed both Caliban and Frankenstein’s monster being victims of circumstance. The fact that Frankenstein’s monster is a victim of circumstance may occur from contextual influences concerning Mary Shelley. She, as a woman, at a time of great hardship in 1818 with limited rights, can be regarded as a victim of circumstance. In the Victorian era, she and many other women were unable to publish, mainly because of their inferior status in society to men. Being a woman at this time meant that—through no fault of her own—she was born the incorrect gender to be allowed to publish her work.to suit her work. In accordance to Frankenstein’s monster being the antagonist, Mary Shelley’s own position as being different from the rest of society because she was a woman may have been an influence onto Frankenstein’s monster as a victim of circumstance also. Overall, there is a distinct similarity where both writers have displayed the characters Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban as victims of circumstance through the use of the language device, imagery.

 

Within both texts the writers employ hyperbole to portray the characters Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban as victims of circumstance. One way the characters are victims of circumstance is that the control of their lives and futures have been taken away. In Frankenstein, Shelley uses hyperbole in ‘he was ugly then’ and ‘but when those muscles and joints moved he rendered capable of a motion even Dante could have not perceived’. This narration by Victor Frankenstein elaborates on the hideous appearance of his creation. Hyperbole, where exaggeration is used as device in figurative speech, is in this case used to elaborate extensively but unnecessarily upon the appearance of the monster. This shows the audience that the appearance of the monster is extremely appalling and to understand the severity of it all hyperbole must be used. But not only is the appearance of the monster grotesque, so is the care he has had from his creator. The care of which Frankenstein’s monster received was so appalling at his creator’s fault it certainly makes him a victim of circumstance with being brought up in this manner he had no control over himself. This occurs as the appearance of the monster is so hideous (displayed by hyperbole) it has led to the creator running at soon as he realises his creation’s appearance. Hyperbole here also figuratively describes the event of being unable to control your own life and those who you thought you could trust choosing to alienate you at every possible moment. You cannot grow into something properly successful without care and decent welfare, but this is intensified as the creator has also made him hideous. Shown by ‘even Dante could not have perceived’ the monster’s appearance.’ Appearance is literally impossible to change, so we are left with the fact that this hyperbole has portrayed the monster as a victim of circumstance, by the author’s intention. This is also apparent with Caliban in The Tempest, as hyperbole has also been used in a similar manner and for similar effect. Hyperbole as a device has also been used to illustrate to the reader that Caliban is a victim of circumstance. It is presented by ‘he that Caliban whom I now keep in service’ then ‘thou best know’st what torment I did find thee in’ and ‘thy groans did make wolves howl’. Such hyperbole when analysed is more a narrative piece of Caliban’s story than anything else however it does still cause the reader to see this character of a victim of circumstance. Similar to how it is used in Frankenstein, hyperbole shows that the control of Caliban’s life is taken away and placed in the hands of his master, Prospero. In a literal sense, Caliban is a victim of circumstance as he is in ‘debt’ and awaiting to fulfil a meaningless lifelong service to his master. But through the hyperbole which is the continuation figuratively (and slightly unnecessarily) of the description concerning the disgraceful situation that Caliban was in previously, we can continue to perceive him as a victim of circumstance. The ‘groans’ heard by Prospero, seem to give Caliban an animalistic nature. What separates man from animal is man’s ability to shape and understand his future. If Caliban is presented in this way then surely he is of this nature and thus unable to have a say in his life. As Caliban is unable to control his future and is at the mercy of his master, the audience can conclude that the character is a victim of circumstance. The attitude to people who were different or of a lower class at the time could have been a factor which influenced Shakespeare. As within the early 1600s the status of different people, mainly those who were black, was extremely insulting to a human. Racism was extreme at this time, with a black person being at the lowest ranks of society. Shakespeare, appeared to have narrated this through Caliban being the antagonist. But in contrast with the perception of black people at the time, Shakespeare has made sure to present Caliban as a victim of circumstance, as many black people were in Europe at the time: having no control over their appearance and circumstances, but still subject to ridicule and torment just as Caliban was. Shakespeare opposed the negativity, stated the view as a character and gave him an evil and good side. Nevertheless, the point of control of the character’s lives and futures being taken away is repeated in Frankenstein and The Tempest as shown by the use of the similar language feature in both texts, hyperbole.

Both works use foreshadowing to evidence that powerful God-like forces will impact the lives of the characters. In addition, the simple use of foreshadowing by the authors implies a certain sealed fate for these characters, further reinforcing the notion that their destinies are out of their control, and that they can do no more than suffer through whatever circumstances they are thrown into. In Frankenstein, this is simply illustrated by ‘the whole village was roused’. There is clear use of foreshadowing here, with Shelley warning the user how the monster will continue to feel excruciating alienation. More simply, this is a metaphor for all the pain that the monster is having to experience. And that if the whole ‘village’ is ‘roused’ then the whole world at the sight of the monster will do the same. As this is the world This will continue to occur, and never will the monster find love or even companionship. Another way that the author can be seen as foreshadowing Frankenstein’s monster to be a victim of circumstance is that if he has a creator then ultimately all of his problems will also be the consequence of this initial act of creation. This means that Frankenstein’s monster is definitely a victim of circumstance as the majority of the problems and issues surrounding his life are not in his control. This device of foreshadowing is repeated in The Tempest to make Caliban also seem a victim of circumstance.  This is done by the title: ‘The Tempest’. A tempest is a violent and windy storm. At the end of such storms, there is usually little that remains unscathed. This foreshadows what will happen to Caliban, especially as he is a foil character, looking to the contrast with as many ideals as possible the protagonist, Prospero holds. Those usually not the protagonist, at the end of the narration have been dealt the most harm which is exactly what occurs to Caliban. And this is simply warned to the audience by the use of foreshadowing. Foreshadowing also means a sealed fate of which powerful forces control what happens to the characters such as Caliban and not themselves. Thus Caliban is also a victim of circumstance through use of the structural component, foreshadowing. Caliban as a character is presented as primarily ‘evil’ with aspects such as being a victim of circumstance presenting the side of his personality that is less ‘evil’. Shakespeare has done this to give his views on unjust prejudice in the 1600s. As previously mentioned, there was extreme racism at this time but there was also prejudice to anyone not of high status. Meaning that people such as Caliban are also targeted because of their economic and social status. However Caliban was primarily victimised through the play because of his different appearance. Contextually, workers of the lower-class were at the time looked down upon with very little welfare. Perhaps this may be an influence as to why Shakespeare has developed Caliban over the course of the play. Generally, there is a definite similarity which is the use of the structural component, foreshadowing in both texts Frankenstein and The Tempest for effect that is the representation of Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban appearing as victims of circumstance.

In conclusion, evidently both Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban are victims of circumstance. The writers Shakespeare and Mary Shelley had presented their characters by use of language and structural methods. This essay was in regards to the comparing such methods and I am finally able to define both texts as very similar in the manner of how the characters Frankenstein’s monster and Caliban are presented as victims of circumstance. The similar techniques of language which are imagery, hyperbole and rhetoric devices are used in both scripts and so is the structural component foreshadowing. The only major difference where characters being portrayed as victims of circumstance is the frame story in Frankenstein and the use of an aside in The Tempest. Otherwise, in terms of character representation there is no such differences between the texts. But as society and culture changes our interpretation may also and we may come to believe the way Caliban and Frankenstein’s monster are presented as victims of circumstance is different after all. However after this essay and through comparison it definitely true that for now the majority of ways and techniques the authors have illustrated certain characters as victims of circumstance are similar for Frankenstein and The Tempest.