This brings up an interesting point and counterpoint. The work "Frankenstein" was written circa the Victorian Era, as we call it now. Looking at societal stratification, battle tactics, and market practices from that time in Europe and their empires, it was a period in which you were supposed to find your place, peg-in-hole, and *belong* at all costs, even if that meant surrendering your identity to do it.





Enter the Monster, a creature too unique to ever be able to fit into the preset definitions of his time's sociality. His size, his appearance, his mind, nothing about him was suitable for acceptable Victorian society. Likely he was at least in part inspired by Mary Wollenstonecraft Shelley's own experiences, as well as that of her husband, Percy Bysshe Shelley, and their good friend George Gordon Byron. They didn't fit in, and considering their general tendencies, they never really had a chance *to* fit in. No more chance than Frankenstein's Man.







Counterpoint: Equestria is a society with a long-lived ruler (two, now), a unified whole, yet one that is defined by the unique traits of its inhabitants. In fact, you are *expected* to be unique, and it is a biological/magical part of growing up, vis-a-vis cutie marks. This is accepted, and encouraged, and from this diversity comes a different sort of unity, one that accepts difference, with everyone using that difference to work toward the betterment of the world.





In such a setting, why not Betram? So long as he's part of that overall goal, of making life better for everyone, I doubt he'd have the same issues faced by Frankenstein's Man. Perhaps a lot of eek!-ing from those who just meet him, but with time I expect that would become steadily less common, and would probably result in more apologies at the rudeness than lingering resentment over one of the undead spending time among the living.



