Sorry, but copying text is forbidden on this website!
We see that it is not their fault that they want to spread all over the world and get released out of the cage of an island they are in now, it is not their fault that they are being so cruelly treated, they want freedom and so they must escape for it, this leads to the destruction of the park and ironically with the park John Hammond himself, it is ironic how Hammond is destroyed by his own creatures, and not the big T-rex but the small velociraptors, that bring an end to his life.
We see the velociraptors as birds, which are sublime, which makes it even more ironic. But its not the destruction of the park or the destruction of Hammond which we are upset about, but it is the dying of the creatures that we are upset about, because we build a feeling of them being just innocent subjects of a cruel experiment, and we want them to survive and Hammond to die. But in the end it is justified that everything is destroyed, creator, creations and habitat.
It signals an end to a disaster, which was long predicted by Ian Malcolm who is the hero of the show at the end. In Frankenstein similar views are created in the readers mind about the creations of Victor, at first we see him as an outcast in community, and we see him as an inhumane figure just because he does not look like a human. In reality he is bigger than human, he is greater, he is actually very intelligent and physically very big, actually ironically, he is bigger and better than his miniscule creator and most around him.
Victor’s creation receives a lot of sympathy from the readers, at first in the beginning he is seen as an ugly creature whom everyone abhors but as soon as he starts to talk we understand him inside and why he does what he does, after killing victors family he talk to us but we understand him and see what is going on. We feel very sympathetic towards him. It is in the end just a tragedy that the creature has to dies, but it is also justified that Victor must dies with him.
As we can see that both stories end in the same way, with both creators, creation and habitat all being destroyed, this is what we learn from the playing of god and how wrong it is and why we shouldn’t do it. The incidents, which lead up to the climax in each story, are systematically and cleverly put there to build up the reader’s thoughts for the end of the book. The final scene in Jurassic Park is the destruction of the Park and in Frankenstein it is the Final Confrontation between Victor and his creation. Either way they lead up to dramatic scenes.
In Jurassic Park, at the beginning there are scenes to inform us of the dinosaurs these include sightings of the dinosaurs and how they bite a young girl and how a mauled down by a Raptor. Reading these scenes makes you think that there will be dangerous animals I the book and that it will be full of violence. Afterwards when it is clear to the reader that a park has been built for the dinosaurs and the awareness of the dinosaurs becomes apparent, the death scenes get more violent and destructive and frequent.
As the scenes get more brutal we seem to think that the dinosaurs are getting way to out of control but later we realise that this is the way that dinosaurs behave and it is inhumane and not possible to make them act another way, so then we feel sorry for them. In the end this stupid ness to think that the dinosaurs could be manipulated to act in a way that they will not cause destructiveness is foolishness and because nothing is done about it, it is inevitable that in the need the dinosaurs just over rule the park and destroy everything and everyone and ironically their own creator in the process.
As the death scenes get more frequent, they just keep on growing in frequency and eventually the dinosaur’s crack and all the dinosaurs attack at once and the park is destroyed. Only a few people get away, one of these is Ian Malcolm the theorist who beloved none of this was possible and how right he was, everyone thinks he is genius for this. In Frankenstein there are many deaths too until the final confrontation, but these deaths are al the same, except one which is the death of Justine Moritz.
This death is different because she gets hanged for a murder which she did not commit, and which Victor’s creation committed. This fires up a lot of tension, and show that the creation is a evil person and also creates a bigger gap between Victor and his creation. We now see the monster as an evil man, but later on when we hear from him, we see that he is not actually what we think of him, he is quite the opposite, we hear that he thinks he is a clever man and is not accepted in society which is an effective method of making us feel sorry for him.
In the end we can see that the book is not climaxed like in Jurassic park with the build of scenes of violence and destruction but with the points of view of both men and finally a confrontation. Either way in both books the climax is not what is ideal. It is a lesson that both writers are trying to convey, it is a message that playing god will eventually lead to deaths, and overall destruction. I n the end both characters in each book are as we can see victims of their own ideas, creations. They both fail because they act selfishly and do not listen to the advice of others.
Both men assume the place of god, not just in the act of “playing god” but in the way they view their control their creatures as if they possessed God’s powers. They lack God’s love; neither Frankenstein, nor Hammond proves capable of loving and respecting his “offspring. ” English/Literature GCSE Course Wider Reading Unit Comparison of “Frankenstein” (Pre-1900) and “Jurassic Park” (Pro-1900) Page 2 By Sheryar Majid Show preview only The above preview is unformatted text This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Mary Shelley section.