Frankenstein: How was the monster's actions the result of society?
465232
Society sometimes fears the unknown, supernatural or grotesque. Frankenstein was perhaps all of these.\nHe was created from a dead body, given life, and was grossly large and deformed in appearance.\n\nHow many people in society would accept disfigured people without fear? Add to this that it was in more ancient times, when fear was more prevalent than in today's culture.
271525
You should try reading "Flesh and Machines" by Rodney Brooks.  He does a nice cursory overview of the history of robotics and the implications on society of their existence.
272281
the plague killed about 1/3 of the population of europe.\nConsider that in our society.  What would it do?
615135
Well, first of all, if genetic engineering had been popular at the time, she would probably have used it in her book, somehow.  HOW Frankenstien's monster is created is not the point, it's the consequences that the book explores.\nShelley would probably see genetic engineering as equivalent to other medical and bio-technology.  No better, no worse.  Frankenstien would still be relevant, as a warning about creating things we can't control.  However, I think she would be encouraged by the fact that many scientists have read, or are at least familiar with, Frankenstien.  In this she succeeded in warning us about the product of our technology.
936444
Negative - there's still a lot of the "Frankenstein complex" to get over.\n\nIssac Asimov's Three Laws are a start...but the REAL "I, Robot" (NOTHING to do with the movie - but DON'T get me started there) indicated that even WITH them, there would still be problems...
418104
Not sure if this is what you're looking for, but Mary Shelley is the author of Frankenstein, also known as The Modern Prometheus.
971188
The SCIENTIST was Frankenstein.  The monster had no name.  Just for that, I'll assume that you don't know the rest of what you're talking about, either.
1029658
The monster in which you are in reference too isn't called Frankenstein...he is never named in the book written by Mary Shelly, he is merely the Monster or Dr. Frankenstein's Monster. \nAlso the Monster within Mary Shelly's book had the mind of a normal man, no real "abnormal" strength, and certainly no super-human abilities. What the book is actual in reference to is how far will humanity go in it's own inhumanity to become like gods; i.e. the creator/creatrix of life itself...\nBut in answer to your question, I would have to go with the Wolf-man...because according to Oriental tradition (which is where we get werewolves and such) they are super-entities powered by the realms of the dead feeding on the damned.
866464
I would do a search on amazon.com under their books category using the terms "Goth", "Mr. Hyde", and "Dr. Jekyll". If that doesn't help, use "Goth" and "Frankenstein".
880643
Definitely the  past like the early 1900s, things were harder but you didnt have to deal with all this technology and all the time conserving appliances, but still somehow nobody has any time not to mention people were naturally born conservationists it wasnt a throw away society. I would hate to be born in the future not unless society reverted somehow.
984596
This page has links involving behavior and attire expected from people in the Victorian era.  You can find at least 5 things on here.\n\nhttp://www.victoriaspast.com/VictorianGentlemen/dadsdesk.html
1031695
The book concerns the structure of society.\n\nSee the Wikipedia article below.
706092
There are a couple of things wrong with your understanding of Frankenstein. \n1. Frankenstein (Viktor) was the man who created the 'monster', not the monster himself.\n2. The 'monster' is just a human who is big, ugly, and has been made rather than born. Therefore, he can be killed just like any other person.\nViktor Frankenstein dies from illness in the North Pole. We never see the monster die, but we assume that he is killed by Walton, the sailor to whom Viktor has been retelling his tale.
761147
This question results from the widely (but wrongly) held belief that the arts are the CAUSE of societal behaviors. Sociologists and historians have long been well aware of the FACT that the arts do NOT cause social change -- they merely REFLECT it!\n\nRAP, tatooes, burn scarring, body piercing, violence against women and children, recreational drug use, and all of our other "social ills" are NOT causes, -- they are REFLECTIONS of what is already going on in society!\n\nTo discover CAUSES people must look at what has changed in family structure, child care, work environments, discretionary income, politics, health care, and most of all, the QUALITY OF EDUCATION!\n\nHistory will probably show that this period in American society was riddled with loss of strong moral values, lowered educational expectations, and many other symptoms of the decline of family structure, political integrity, and willingness of the population to accept personal responsibility for individual behaviors.\n\nAnd finally, religion is NOT the answer, -- things like honesty, integrity, reason, social responsibility, logic, and LOVE are! To the extent that religion leads us to these things, it is very useful.
1041645
nature = genetics\nnurture = upbringing/social influences\nFrankenstein's monster would be a combo - his was built by man so you know that there would be some problems but then societies reaction to him because he was different also affected him
879133
1-The earliest social effects were the loss of  jobs and the  scarisity of hard cash. A shortage of good folowed fast and even if you had the cash you were short of goods and scared to spend. The big guy sit down on the money and it went out of circulation fast. People lost homes, families, so many died, and suffered malnutrion due to simply no food. Parents saw children die of starvation, mothers and wives saw  husbands go the suicide route be cause he was helpless to feed his family.\nSchool for many came to a stand still., many school nationwide were closed,and millions of children went without education.\nMy grandparents pulled their corn and gave the griss mill half of it as payment for turning the rest into corn meal. They were oneof the lucky ones.\nMedicine and medical care suffered.\nFamilies split up and the great movement west started. Before the depression Georgia's population was much more  than that of California.  The promise of work in the produce fieldsand fruit grovesof California sent many people there to go humry  with out even shelter over their heads.\nMen left their homes, looking for work and started the great "hobo" rides to nowhere. This usually meant they left a wife and children at home of on the roads. with nothing. Transients were usually refused help in cities and forced from small towns where people protected what little they had left.\nAll of the  old films of the soup kitchens show the men who were fathers, husbands, sons ect  getting a bare meal to just survive past starvation so you can imagine what the women  left behind with children suffered. Many families were suffering. Most familes on the move left or were thrown off their farms with what ever they could carry. \nThe depression meant the beganning of the end of the small farm dominance in America, and the beganing of large corporations.  Homes and farms which had been in the family for generations even back to the revolution were taken for token taxes of a few dollars. many farms went under the tax mans auction for under 5 bucks.\n\n2-Radical groups (like Hitler did in Germany) gained support because they gave the poor, and displaced something to blame their troubles on. They had seemingly good answers to soemhard  questions. They found the scapegoat the public was looking for and usually they were right in that it was the rich guy. This is what gave such a rise to such ideologys as socialism,and communism.  The public had no jobs like in Germany/europe (and as  always plenty of beer or boose) and they had plenty of mad, upset, and hungry people with plenty of time on their hands to listen to them.&#92;\n\n3-I heard  my father talk of some folks on the road getting help from strangers. My grandfather told him of walking and asking people for work for food.While he mentiond many towns would force you out if you were not a native some (especially farm families) would share their last with you. There were new bonds formed, new friends made, and a better appreciation of life and everything material after the depression started. My father as a young boy remebers when things began to pick up and people began to hope again. \n\n4- When people went to the banks and found them closed all at once they did not under stand what happened. Every bank only keeps a percentage their value in money on hand.  The rest is on loan for proifit. when the news began to filter down those on the inside withdrew theirs leaving nothing. When people woke up with no job,and no money this signaled the end of the 20s. and it nearly happened over night  which is why so many people suffered so fast.\nLitterially no goods for consumers,and no funds to purchase what there was brought in the 30s. Government for the most part became non functional and allowed those who did have money and power to later control the country. People like the Kennedys began their wealth during this time and used the depression to do so. Prohibition saw the small farmers who manuf
246563
Dracula, or the concept of Dracula, was based on a real man. He was prince over Wallachia, which today is Romania, northernmost of the Balkan countries. He was also known as Vlad the Impaler...this name given because he would impale his victims (said to be between 60,000 to 100,000 people of both sexes and all ages). He also was rumored to have drunk the blood of his victims. \nThus is how the concept of "Dracula" or vampires was created. I think it was Bram Stoker who furthered the idea of vampires (good movie by the way). \n"How did he come to be called Dracula? It was a sobriquet, an unofficial title derived from the simple fact that his father was called Dracul. 'Drac' means 'devil' in Romanian. It also means 'dragon.' 'Ul' is a suffix denoting the fefinite article 'the.' La is a diminutive ending meaning 'son of.' Dracula, therefore, son of Dracul, was also Son of the Devil or Son of the Dragon." (Page 7)\n\nVampires DO exist, just not in the ways we are used to through TV or movies. They are still people with severe mental illnesses...there's quite a few terms for them and different levels or stages. Some have actual "covenants" where they drink each other's blood. Some people have their teeth filed, and some take it the the extreme by never going outside during the day (for fear they will die).\n\nHope the info has been helpful.