Victor lives through the death of his entire familial circle and is now totally isolated. He is too weak to continue his self-proclaimed duty of destroying his monster and asks Robert Walton to finish it for him. This is immoral because not only is Victor Frankenstein asking to put Robert Walton in a potentially dangerous situation, he is asking him to devote his life to a duty that could have been avoided. The monster could kill Robert Walton or his friends if he accepts his proposal. Victor did not have to create the being, and it is wrong for Victor to ask for help in destroying his problems. Victor’s mind has been isolated for so long, his lack of common courtesy, or morality, towards others, is lost. Thus, it follows that true isolation destroys …show more content…
Robert Walton is on a journey to the North Pole to discover why the compass works with his fellow crewmates. He writes to Margret, his sister, “I am, however, in good spirits; my men are bold and… firm of purpose… I will not rashly encounter danger. I will be cool and prudent“ (23). This shows that Robert has a high enough level of cognitive thinking to avoid danger. He says he is making a conscience effort to avoid misfortunate events. Unlike Victor and the monster, he is in direct contact with members of society. This allows Robert to have a higher level of thinking, which evidently leads to avoidance of danger and poor behaviors. Later on in the story, Victor, after months of chasing his creation, is too weak to continue his journey. Robert discovers Victor in the water and pulls him in. Robert Walton did not have to save him or take him aboard. This is an act of good moral, which demonstrates he still has his morality. He never loses his morality over the course of years being away from civilization, because he has his crew the entire trip. It suggests the contrapositive that companionship does not destroy