Victor’s character is complicated. He grows from a young, innocent, hopeful boy into a jaded, vindictive, vengeful man. Driven by a desire for knowledge and an exploratory nature, Victor’s crime is one of obsession. He oversteps the bounds of science in becoming the creator of a being that never should have lived.
His ultimate flaw – aside from being shallow, foolish, and generally unaware of the threats posed to his loved ones – is not providing for the creature to whom he gives life. But that’s not all. He is also unable to rectify the consequences of his inquiring mind. He doesn’t take responsibility for the monster, ever. He goes back on his promises, runs away from his problems, and seems to have no compassion for the creature of his own making.
So do we hate Victor? Actually, no. You could say that we understand Victor. We sympathize with his plight in a way that he is never able to do with his monster. You could even say, if you were feeling super gutsy, that Victor is the monster of our own making, of society’s making. He is born out of our own fears of technology and science. He encapsulates our negative qualities, our shallowness, and our ugliness. Or at least he did in the nineteenth century.
Another gutsy direction you could go is to say that Victor is a self-sacrificing hero, maybe even a Christ figure. What’s the rationale? He chooses to give his own life to save mankind from what he believes to be evil in the world. If said evil isn’t actually evil so much as loveably ugly, then he’s a misguided Christ figure. However, at the same time, he is a most wretched villain, bringing pain to the thing most dear in his life – the product of his own creativity.
Does this sound like about five different, irreconcilable interpretations? Good. That’s the point.