This is the term that, as his narrative proceeds into Volume 3, Victor will increasingly
use to denominate his Creature. But to have it thus introduced here without any preparation,
and in this peculiar period spelling, is to raise a serious question as to what exactly
Victor may intend by the term. Walton's interpolation, "as he called him," emphasizes
the importance of perspective in any such definition and may even indicate his own
lack of assurance about what is meant by Victor's usage.

Samuel Johnson's Dictionary (1755) is uncharacteristically reductive in its definition:

DEMON, n.s. [dæmon, Latin; daimôn.] A spirit; generally an evil spirit; a devil.

The Oxford English Dictionary, in contrast, exhibits the full range and complexity
of the word's history. (The examples are here abridged.)

DEMON

demon 1. Also 6-9 dæmon. In form, and in sense 1 a, a. L. dæmon (med.L. demon) spirit,
evil spirit, a. Gr. dai'mwn divinity, genius, tutelary deity. But in sense 1 b and
2, put for L. dæmonium, Gr. daimo'nion, neuter of daimo'nioj adj. '(thing) of divine
or dæmonic nature or character', which is used by the LXX, N. Test., and Christian
writers, for 'evil spirit'. Cf; Fr. dimon (in Oresme 14th c. dimones); also 13th c.
demoygne = Pr. demoni, Ital., Sp. demonio, repr. L. dæmonium, Gr. daimo'nion.

1.

a. In ancient Greek mythology (= dai'mwn): A supernatural being of a nature intermediate
between that of gods and men; an inferior divinity, spirit, genius (including the
souls or ghosts of deceased persons, esp. deified heroes). Often written dæmon for
distinction from sense 2.

b. Sometimes, particularly, An attendant, ministering, or indwelling spirit; a genius.
(Chiefly in references to the so-called 'dæmon of Socrates'; Socrates himself claimed
to be guided, not by a dai'mwn or dæmon, but by a daimo'nion, divinum quiddam (Cicero),
a certain divine principle or agency, an inward monitor or oracle. It was his accusers
who represented this as a personal dæmon, and the same was done by the Christian Fathers
(under the influence of sense 2), whence the English use of the word, as in the quotations.
See tr. Zeller's Socrates iv. 73; Riddell, Apology of Plato, Appendix A.).

2. An evil spirit.

a. (Representing daimo'nion of the LXX and N.T. (rarely dai'mwn); in Vulgate dæmonium,
dæmon). Applied to the idols or gods of the heathen, and to the 'evil' or 'unclean
spirits' by which demoniacs were possessed or actuated. A Jewish application of the
Greek word, anterior to Christianity. Daimo'nia is used several times by the LXX to
render shedim 'lords, idols', and secirim 'hairy ones' (satyrs or he-goats), the latter
also rendered ma'taia 'vain things'. It is also frequent in the Apocrypha (esp. in
Tobit), and in the N.T., where in one instance (Matt. viii. 31) dai'monej occurs in
same sense. In the Vulgate generally rendered dæmonium, pl. -ia, but once in O.T.
(Lev. xvii. 7), and in 10 places in N.T. (8 in St. Matthew) dæmon, pl. -es. These
words are indiscriminately translated deofol in the Ags. Gospels, feend or deuil in
Wyclif, and in all the 16-17th c. versions devil; the Revisers of 1881-5 substitute
demons in Deut. and Psalms, but in the N.T. retain devil, -s, in the text, with the
literal translation demon, -s, in the margin. Quite distinct from this is the word
properly translated 'Devil', dia'boloj, which is not used in the plural. It is owing
to this substitution of devil in the Bible versions, that demon is not found so early
in this, as in the popular sense b, which arose out of this identification.

b. In general current use: An evil spirit; a malignant being of superhuman nature;
a devil.

c. Applied to a person (animal or agency personified), of malignant, cruel, terrible,
or destructive nature, or of hideous appearance. (Cf. devil.)

d. fig. An evil passion or agency personified. spec. an alcoholic drink. Also attrib.

e. Applied to a being of superhuman or 'diabolical' energy, skill, etc. (cf. 3 a spec.);
also to an action, etc.

Accordingly, although Victor Frankenstein obviously wishes to "demonize" his Creature
as a kind of fiend or devil (as in 2b), in both his actual encounters with him, the
Creature acts as a kind of conscience in the sense of 1a (II:2:7, III:3:13), reminding
him of his duties as a creator. In later chapters of the novel, where a complex doubling
effect occurs, it seems at times as if the Creature were, indeed, an inner genius,
as in 1b. The Creature does, of course, have the hideous appearance defined in 2c,
and he exhibits the extraordinary energy and skill noted in 2e, aspects that remind
us that Victor himself fabricated his Creature to be superhuman. This sense of his
own responsibility for the Creature's nature is exactly what is canceled by Victor's
calling him a demon.

The initial posing of a highly problematic theme of the novel, the thirst for knowledge
as an end in itself. The same theme implicates "Alastor," Percy Bysshe Shelley's major
poem written in 1815, and published in March of the next year, four months before
Mary Shelley conceived the idea for Frankenstein, as well as William Godwin's first
great success in fiction, The Adventures of Caleb Williams (1792): whose fourth paragraph
begins, "The spring of action which, perhaps more than any other, characterised the
whole train of my life, was curiosity."

Mary Shelley reverts to the characteristic (and problem) of human curiosity first
broached in Walton's Letter (I:L1:2) and continued in the opening chapter of Victor's
narrative. Late in the novel Walton's curiosity will also function to establish for
the first and only time a momentary bridge between Victor's Creature and humanity
(III:WC:38).

As Victor exactly echoes the diction used by Walton to explain his eagerness to hear
the account to which he now listens (I:L4:31, and note), Mary Shelley reverts to the
notion of curiosity as being, for better or worse, a fundamental human trait that
impels the actions of all the major characters in the novel. Often, as here, the interest
is wholly idle and unmotivated.

The container in which during experiments various chemical powders would be mixed.

The "lifeless thing" of the previous sentence has suddenly been brought into being
as a "creature," a neutral term, but "it" immediately undergoes a process of construction
that will continue in a remarkably exact progression over the next two paragraphs.
From the very first the "new species" Victor had promised himself in the previous
chapter (I:3:8) is not to be denominated with a human pronoun—is, rather, an "it."

In conventional human terms a child is the offspring of two parents. Victor, in absolute
contrast, contemplates being—like God—the sole source of his creation.

Elizabeth is represented here as having a strong sensibility and an artistic temperament,
conventional attributes of early nineteenth-century notions of femininity. However,
the emphasis on her "mind" in the previous paragraph (of 1818, excised in 1831) may
suggest the tempering influence of Mary Wollstonecraft.

The undertone of narcissism here has less motivated critical attention than has Victor's
anticipation of reproducing himself in an issue without female intervention.

Many other elements that Victor does not mention might restrain such inquiry, from
fear of divine retribution to worry over the possible ethical consequences of scientific
intervention. Upon a closer look, the reader may wish to recognize an abiding egotism
underlying Victor's exclusive concentration on the efficacy of an individual scientist's
endeavor, without regard for its extrinsic contexts or its social impact.