Peter Brooks' essay "What is a Monster" addresses many complex ideas within Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and the main concept which is the title of the essay itself. What is the definition of a monster or monstrous being? Is a monster the classic representation we know, green skin, tightened neck, grunts and moans? A cartoon who wants to deliver sugary cereal? or someone we detest so much that their qualities invade our language and influence our interpretation of their image and physical being? Brooks' essay addresses this question by using Shelley's narrative structure to examine how language, and not nature, is primarily responsible for creating the idea of ​​the monstrous body. Brooks begins his argument by analyzing the relationships in the novel and how they create tension between the characters. . He talks about how the narrative structure itself positions the reader to "integrate" the story of the "speaker," which in the case of Frankenstein is both the text itself and the characters' individual narration. More importantly, it explains how the narrative framework of Frankenstein, essentially a series of conversations that connect one character's unresolved issues to another, begins to create the concept of the monster. The creation of the monstrous, in Brooks' idea, occurs exclusively through language, a medium deemed corrupt and insufficient. This is the origin of the monstrous, as Brooks reveals that through exposing the Monster to the world, he no longer takes part in the imaginary order as he finds that he cannot be accepted in appearance alone, and instead uses language as a tool to express. his desires. However this proves insufficient, since once the monster uses the symbolic power of language, an expression of consciousness, he is no longer able to...... middle of the card...... no meaning generated to compensate the lack of completeness in the relationships built by language. The excess of meaningless meaning, seeking a solution for a false desire (such as creating a mate) pushes the Monster to irrational actions as he cannot understand how language, which he sees as superior to imagery, cannot satisfy his requests while seeing them satisfied. while watching the De Lacys. Finally, Brooks' argument about "What is a monster?" explores how we negotiate the fundamental "lack" of meaning in life and how our displacement from the totality of the imaginary order and from our mother generates a search for completion. Through what we think are meaningful connections and uses of language to satisfy our needs, we are actually moving away from our goal by placing excess meaning between ourselves and our unconscious desires..