E X T E N S I O N THE BIRTH OF A MONSTER (II) Mary s account of the creature s moral and intellectual development follows the theories of John Locke, David Hartley and Jean-Jacques Rousseau. Mary Shelley read Rousseau s Emile in 1816. Rousseau stated that: God makes all things good; man meddles with them1 and they become evil. Rousseau specifically attributed moral failings to the lack2 of a mother s love. Without mothering3 and a loving education a man left to himself from birth would be more of a monster than the rest. Thus, Mary Shelley is suggesting that a rejected and unmothered child can become a killer, especially a killer of its own family. Even without the proper nurturing the creature manages to get an education. Mary alludes to Rousseau s theory of the natural man as a noble savage, born free but in chains and corrupted by society. In the battle of nature vs. nurture for development, Mary definitely sides4 with nurture. The creature is Rousseau s natural man, a creature no different from the animals responding only to physical needs. It is only later through contact with the De Laceys (society) that the creature develops a consciousness and realizes that he is a societal outcast. While alluding to a couple of Rousseau s ideas, in particular the natural man, Mary Shelley utilizes the theories of Hartley and Locke for the development and education of the creature. The creature s moral development follows David Hartley s theories in 1. meddles with them: ci mette le mani. 2. lack: mancanza. John Locke (1632-1704) 3. mothering: cure materne. 4. side: schierarsi. David Hartley (1705-1755) 94 J. J. Rousseau (1712-1778)