I have to talk about the theme of responsibility in each book. I just need proof-reading. It's definitely not finished. I have at least another page just discussing All Quiet. Thank you.
Frankenstein and All Quiet on the Western Front are books based on responsibility; what happens when someone selfish is given complete power? How do they handle the responsibility? In Frankenstein, the person in power who does not act responsibly is Victor Frankenstein. In All Quiet on the Western Front, the person in power is not directly talked about but it is whoever the head of Germany is.
In Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein is so adamant to create life by his own hands. He invests, literally, his entire life for two years to creating life. He does not think of anything else. Victor manages to create life, a monster more specifically.
Victor does not accept responsibility. When people have children, (usually) they accept responsibility of bringing a life into the world, take care of the child, and teach the life lessons. Victor creates this thing and he's so terrified of it that he runs into hiding (Shelley, 57). He does not want to believe that he created life and it turned out to look so hideous. He denies that he ever created the monster and for a while acts like nothing happened (Shelley, 73).
Because of this, the monster is not taught anything. He is not given a name and he does not how to interact with people. The monster terrifies anything that sees him (Shelley, 121). He eventually has to take it upon himself to learn how to interact with people in an indirect approach (Shelley, 128-129). He begins to learn what is right, and what is wrong. He begins to learn language and how to read. The monster takes the responsibility into his hands in learning the ways of the world (Shelley, 138-139). He was actually able to hold an intelligent conversation with the old man in the cottage until the old man's family comes home (Shelley, 157-160).
Each person in the book is directly affected when the monster starts to kill off Victor's family strictly because Victor did not take full responsibility for his reactions (Shelley, 141). Victor's brother, William is killed by the monster (Shelley, 76). Justine was executed for the murder of William when it was clear the monster committed the crime (Shelley, 101). Henry Clerval is killed by the monster because Victor did not go through with his promise in making the monster a mate (Shelley, 213). Elizabeth is also killed by the monster (Shelley, 241). Victor's father dies of grief for the numerous loses of William, Justine, Henry, and finally Elizabeth (Shelley, 245). Finally, Victor takes on his responsibility for the monster by the end of the book when he decides that it must be stopped (Shelley, 251).
In All Quiet on the Western Front, the person in power is the Parliament in Germany who decided to start a war (along with the rest of Europe). It is obvious that the state does not take responsibility for the war. They do not see the German war heroes, such as Paul Baümer. To the state, the war is all about politics, making other countries mad, and power. To the people fighting the war, the war is all about surviving, and doing what is demanded. The soldiers do not understand the politics of the war; they just fight and attempt to survive because it is what they are told to do.
There is a sense of responsibility between the soldiers. The soldiers take care of each other. They look out for each other. There is a sense responsibility in being a good friend and doing what is right even in war.
In the second paragraph, the word "literally" seems redundant as it doesn't add to your point, really, since you explain anyway. In the same paragraph, "Victor manages to create life, a monster more specifically." is a comma splice. You could instead correct it with a dash. That would get the point across and put the emphasis you want on that point.
In the next paragraph, "usually" should be taken out. Instead, you could write that they are meant to accept responsibility. That will imply that that is not always true.
In the next paragraph, instead of "the old man in the cottage", perhaps write "an old man in a cottage". It flows better with the rest of what you're writing and it's usually best to write something as if the person reading it will have no previous knowledge of the subject.
In the next paragraph, "the numerous loses of William, Justine, Henry..."... it should be spelled "losses". Also, saying "the numerous losses" and then listing the losses is redundant. It should either be "his numerous losses" or "the losses of william, etc..." [omg, writing about "loss" so much makes it look like such a weird word to me now... x_X]
"They do not see the German war heroes, such as Paul Baumer." What do you mean? They do not physically see them, they do not hold conference with them, or they don't see them as heroes? "...surviving, and doing what is demanded." There shouldn't be a comma there.
Haha. There ya go. I hope you don't feel like what you wrote is crap just because I corrected a lot. D: That's how most people feel after I read what they write, anyway. >.<
