A Film Purified by Fire (Frankenstein by Jams Whale)

            In James Whale’s film Frankenstein, many iconic moments were born that set the stage for horror films to come, one of these moments being the end scene where the monster is left to burn in the windmill of his birth.  This is a motif that has survived since the beginning of scary fables and continues today.  In The Horror Film: An Introduction, by Rick Worland, specifically the second chapter, “A Short History of the Horror Film: Beginnings to 1945,” the author describes this motif at length.  In pairing this reading with the film a better appreciation can be had for the flames and confluence of events, as opposed to the simplistic shock value with which it is most frequently taken.

            The film is to have some great injustice that sets the whole thing in motion.  In Frankenstein this would be the moment when the little girl is murdered.  Once this injustice occurs the town folk get together and try to kill the monster to absolve the town of the evil within it.  But in order to truly purify the town of this entire chain of events it has to come back full circle to the moment the monster was created.  So the town people follow the monster to his ‘home’ and he becomes trapped.  With the fact that the monster fearing fire having been brought up earlier in the film it is clear why he doesn’t just trample through the fire.

            In his book, Worland discusses the need for the house in which the evil was born to be gone, be it by fire or by being swallowed up by the earth as with the film Carrie.  In Frankenstein the laboratory and the monster are consumed by fire, therefore finishing the story and putting a neat little bow so the audience and the towns people can feel the wrongs have been set right and everyone is safe from their fears.  The house where the evil was born burns.

            The last part to this formula according to Worland is that a valuable lesson was taught to the main character, the whole cast, and the audience.  In Frankenstein this lesson could be, on the surface, man ought not to meddle in the affairs of life and death.  Another lesson would be, any man who deems himself god is fated to burn in the eternal fires of hell.  In a deeper reading it could be, bad parenting can have horrific unforeseen consequences.  Regardless of which lesson it is clear that some moralizing has occurred due to the film.

            If the moralizing lesson was the bad dad idea this can be clearly seen throughout the film as the cause of many, if not all, of the issues that develop throughout the film.  The starting point of the mayhem for this issue is when Frankenstein allows his monster to be tormented mercilessly.  This drives the monster to commit his first murder.  Frankenstein then leaves his monster with the malicious Doctor he once studied under, who tries to dissect him whilst he is alive, dying in the process.  The monster is then a fairly traumatized infant on the loose in this town leading him to the small innocent girl playing with flowers.  He is unable to understand the fragility of life due to the absentee father and any lessons on such issues.  This event seals the fate of the monster.

            If the moralizing idea is more geared at teaching man to not try and replicate the powers of nature/God.  This can be seen in the violent moment when monster is given life.  This juxtaposed to the natural birth gives a clear indication to the wrongful nature of this form of birth.  The following events could be seen as nature/God acting out vengeance on those involved in the creation of the monster.  The assistant that helped in the building of the machine, the monster, and the carrying out of the ‘birth,’ murdered. The doctor who led to Frankenstein’s fascination with the reanimation of dead tissue, murdered.  And an innocent child to underline the gravity of the situation, murdered.  This case is less strong as it is not made clear whether Frankenstein is killed and if this lesson were the case it would follow that he die just as the others did.

            In looking at various film and media critiques and analysis I believe I have gained a deeper and more meaningful understanding of the film and the director’s intentions behind filming decisions.  In regards to the filming decisions I really enjoyed the subtle ways the director accentuated the otherness of the monster.  In making the monster only audible in shrieks and groans he is similar yet different from us, creating the very foundation of Freud’s idea of the uncanny.  This paired with his fear of fire makes him different enough from us that we can feel separate and moral in the event of his murder.  Though it simultaneously gives us a sort of pity towards him, resulting in a want for the town people to put him out of his misery.  This type of feeling comes also from the harsh lighting they place on him whilst he is masked in thick dehumanizing make up.  All of these director choices allow us to see the monster how he would like us to so we might gain the feelings he intends to evoke.