Durham E-Theses
A more comprehensive and commanding delineation:
Mary Shelley's narrative strategy in Frankenstein
Durrant, Simon Nicholas Colin
How to cite:
Durrant, Simon Nicholas Colin (1993)
narrative strategy in Frankenstein,
A more comprehensive and commanding delineation: Mary Shelley's
Durham theses, Durham University. Available at Durham E-Theses
Online: http://etheses.dur.ac.uk/5772/
Use policy
The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or
charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:
•
a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source
•
a link is made to the metadata record in Durham E-Theses
•
the full-text is not changed in any way
The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.
Please consult the full Durham E-Theses policy for further details.
Academic Support Oce, Durham University, University Oce, Old Elvet, Durham DH1 3HP
e-mail: [email protected] Tel: +44 0191 334 6107
http://etheses.dur.ac.uk
2
Simon ITicholas C o l i n D u r r a n t
M.A.
t h e s i s , 1993
A Xbre Comprehensive and Camioandlng D e l i n e a t i o n :
Mary S h e l l e y ' s F a r r a t i v e S t r a t e g y i n Frankenstein
T h i s t h e s i s argues t h a t t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n o f Frankenstein challenges
c o n v e n t i o n a l r e a d i n g by employing
what Simpson i n Irony and Authority In
Romantic Poetry c a l l s Romantic i r o n y , where t h e absence o f a s t a b l e
' metacomment• p r e c l u d e s an a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g .
The novel h i n t s a t
such r e a d i n g s b u t p r e v e n t s them.
The
i n s i g h t s o f f e r e d by Tropp's }tary Shelley's Monster, B a l d i c k ' s In
Frankenstein's Shadow, Poovey's The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer and
Swingle's,
' F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s Monster and i t s R e l a t i v e s :
Problems o f
Knowledge i n E n g l i s h Romanticism' a r e c o n s i d e r e d , b u t none recognises
t h e f u l l i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e i n s t a b i l i t y d e r i v i n g from m u l t i p l e
person n a r r a t i v e s .
first-
C l e m i t ' s The Godwinian Navel acknowledges the
n o v e l ' s i n d e t e r m i n a c y , b u t reads a s p e c i f i c i d e o l o g i c a l purpose i n i t .
Paradise Lost p r o v i d e s a language t o d e s c r i b e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
between t h e monster and F r a n k e n s t e i n , but proves t o o u n s t a b l e t o f i x
i d e n t i t y o r e s t a b l i s h moral value.
S i m i l a r l y , Necessity u l t i m a t e l y
f a i l s t o p r o v i d e a s t a b l e e x p l a n a t i o n i n terms o f cause and e f f e c t .
The
s t a t u s o f n a t u r e s h i f t s between f o r e g r o u n d and background, never
allowing f i n a l
definition.
These u n c e r t a i n t i e s d e s t a b i l i s e knowledge which i s compromised by
i t s p r o v i s i o n a l nature;
no a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g i s p o s s i b l e , y e t the
novel has n a r r a t i v e coherence.
The reader i s encouraged t o t r y t o
develop a r e a d i n g t h e s t r u c t u r e prevents.
The
r a d i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n i s h i g h l i g h t e d by comparison
w i t h t h e 1831 e d i t i o n , which removes much o f t h e ambivalence and g i v e s
t h e novel a c l e a r e r
The
morality.
novel c h a l l e n g e s c o n v e n t i o n a l methods o f d e r i v i n g a u t h o r i t y by
' d i s t u r b ( i n g ) t h e r e a d e r ' s orthodox o r i e n t a t i o n i n t h e world around him'
(Simpson) i n o r d e r t o a f f o r d 'a p o i n t of view t o t h e i m a g i n a t i o n f o r the
d e l i n e a t i o n o f human passions more comprehensive and commanding than any
which t h e o r d i n a r y
Shelley).
r e l a t i o n s o f e x i s t i n g events can y i e l d '
(Ifery
Simon N i c h o l a s C o l i n DURRAITT
M.A. Thesis, 1993
U n i v e r s i t y o f Durham
School o f E n g l i s h and L i n g u i s t i c s
A more c o m p r e h e n s i v e and commanding
Mary S h e l l e y ' s
narrative
strategy
delineation:
In
FranJcenstein
The copyright of this thesis rests with the author.
No quotation from it should be published without
his prior written consent and information derived
from it should be acknowledged.
'The event upon which t h e i n t e r e s t o f t h e s t o r y depends i s exempt f r o m
t h e disadvantages o f a mere t a l e o f s p e c t r e s o r enchantment.
I t was
recommended by t h e n o v e l t y o f t h e s i t u a t i o n s which i t developes; and,
however i m p o s s i b l e as a p h y s i c a l f a c t , a f f o r d s a p o i n t o f view t o t h e
i m a g i n a t i o n f o r t h e d e l i n e a t i o n o f human passions more comprehensive and
coramanding t h a n any which t h e o r d i n a r y r e l a t i o n s o f e x i s t i n g events can
yield.' [6]
0 MAY 1994
Contents
3.
ITote on t h e Text
p. 4
Introduction
p. 5
C r i t i c a l Review
p. 16
Paradise Last
p. 31
ffecessity
and I n t e l l e c t u a l Development
p. 46
ITature
p. 68
5.
Knowledge
p. 83
6.
The 1831 Changes
p. 96
Conclusion
p. 110
Notes
p. 115
Bibliography
p. 121
I c o n f i r m t h a t no p a r t o f t h e m a t e r i a l o f f e r e d has p r e v i o u s l y
been s u b m i t t e d
by me f o r a degree i n t h i s o r i n any o t h e r
University.
Signed
Date
The c o p y r i g h t of t h i s t h e s i s r e s t s w i t h t h e author.
q u o t a t i o n f r o m i t s h o u l d be p u b l i s h e d
No
without h i s p r i o r
written
consent and i n f o r m a t i o n d e r i v e d f r o m i t s h o u l d be acknowledged.
Mote on t h e Text
References t o t h e 1818 e d i t i o n a r e t o James Rieger's Chicago
U n i v e r s i t y Press e d i t i o n
(Chicago and London, 1982) and a r e g i v e n i n
the t e x t i n r o u n d b r a c k e t s ( x ) . References t o t h e 1831 e d i t i o n a r e
t o M.K.
Joseph's O x f o r d e d i t i o n
g i v e n i n square b r a c k e t s ixl.
(Oxford and New York, 1969) and are
References t o Paradise Lost i n t h e
Oxford S t a n d a r d Authors e d i t i o n , e d i t e d by Douglas Bush (London,
1966) a r e g i v e n i n square b r a c k e t s thus:
I PL Y, 1. x] .
Introduction
Frankenstein i s a h i g h l y ambiguous and s l i p p e r y t e x t .
The
e x p e r i e n c e o f r e a d i n g t h e n o v e l , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e e a r l i e r 1818
edition,
i s an u n s e t t l i n g one f o r t h e novel t h r o w s up d i f f i c u l t i e s
which
l e a v e t h e reader u n c e r t a i n about what he has read.
There a r e a number o f immediate problems produced by e x p e c t a t i o n s
r a i s e d by t h e n o v e l ' s form.
The s t r u c t u r e o f c o n c e n t r i c n a r r a t i v e s
would l e a d t h e r e a d e r t o expect t h a t t h e n a r r a t o r o f t h e f r a m i n g
n a r r a t i v e , V a l t o n , would have made some advance i n u n d e r s t a n d i n g by t h e
end o f t h e n o v e l .
However, i t i s n o t c l e a r whether he has o r not.
His
r e a c t i o n t o h i s e x p e r i e n c e g i v e s no i n d i c a t i o n one way o r t h e o t h e r .
There i s moral a d v i c e o f f e r e d , b u t i t i s ambiguous and i n c o n c l u s i v e .
T h i s stems i n p a r t f r o m t h e f a i l u r e t o f u l f i l a n o t h e r e x p e c t a t i o n .
The
r e a d e r would expect F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s n a r r a t i v e and t h e monster's c o n t a i n e d
w i t h i n i t t o comment i r o n i c a l l y upon each o t h e r , b u t t h e r e i s
i n s u f f i c i e n t common f o c u s t o a l l o w f o r comparison.
I t i s , moreover,
d i f f i c u l t t o i d e n t i f y a p r i o r i t y o f a u t h o r i t y o f one over t h e o t h e r .
T h i s i n d e t e r m i n a c y extends t o t h e area o f moral e v a l u a t i o n .
It is
not c l e a r whether t h e monster's s e l f - j u s t i f i c a t i o n i s t o be b e l i e v e d .
F r a n k e n s t e i n a s s e r t s i t s malevolence,
The moral value o f h i s r e s e a r c h e s
b u t h i s judgement i s questioned.
i s also questionable.
H i s motives
i n i t i a l l y seem l a u d a b l e , b u t t h e r e i s an e g o t i s t i c a l m o t i v a t i o n .
Having
once c r e a t e d t h e monster, i t i s n o t a t a l l c l e a r t o t h e reader how
F r a n k e n s t e i n s h o u l d proceed.
S i m i l a r l y , i t i s n o t c l e a r why he ignores
t h e danger t o E l i z a b e t h a f t e r h i s marriage.
There a r e o t h e r q u e s t i o n s which a r i s e .
Paradise Lost p l a y s an
i m p o r t a n t r o l e i n t h e n o v e l , b u t i t s r e a d i n g i s ambiguous.
Similarly,
N e c e s s i t y appears t o e x p l a i n t h e way i n which c h a r a c t e r s develop, but
does n o t answer a l l t h e q u e s t i o n s r a i s e d by t h e v a r i o u s n a r r a t i v e s .
What i s t h e c o n n e c t i o n between F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s e d u c a t i o n and h i s l a t e r
acts?
How f a r i s t h e monster's v i o l e n c e an i n e v i t a b l e consequence o f
h i s e a r l y experiences?
self-justificatory;
has no f i n a l p r o o f .
The c o n f l i c t i n g f i r s t - p e r s o n n a r r a t i v e s c o u l d be
t h e r e a d e r i s i n c l i n e d t o suspect as much, b u t he
Another q u e s t i o n t h a t a r i s e s i n a novel d e d i c a t e d t o W i l l i a m Godwin
has t o do w i t h t h e j u s t i c e o f t h e t r e a t m e n t o f t h e monster.
This brings
c o n s i d e r a t i o n back t o t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e monster's moral v a l u e ,
which
i s u n c l e a r and a p p a r e n t l y u n d i s c o v e r a b l e .
The s t r u c t u r e o f t h e n o v e l seems d e l i b e r a t e l y m i s l e a d i n g .
There are
t h r e e s e p a r a t e n a r r a t i v e s , V a l t o n ' s , F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s and t h e monster's,
which do not c o r r o b o r a t e each o t h e r .
The
i r o n i c e f f e c t o f one
narrative
p r o v i d i n g a coanaent on t h e o t h e r s , which might enable t h e development of
a s i n g l e c l e a r r e a d i n g , f a i l s t o do so.
the
This t h e s i s w i l l investigate
reasons f o r and t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h i s a p p a r e n t
s e e i n g i t as a source o f s t r e n g t h .
disfunction,
I n a sense t h e word ' s t r a t e g y ' i n
the
title
i s misleading i n that i t Implies a single overt intention,
the
word 'commanding' suggests a coherent and a u t h o r i t a t i v e purpose,
n e i t h e r o f which i s t h e case.
as
So f a r f r o m h a v i n g a c l e a r i d e o l o g i c a l
purpose, Mary S h e l l e y ' s i n t e n t i o n i s t o d i s a b l e s t r a t e g y .
The
n o v e l ' s c o m p l e x i t y o f f o r m has a number o f u n s t a b l e i r o n i c
effects.
There i s a c l e a r n a r r a t i v e but a t h e m a t i c incoherence
e s s e n t i a l t o i t s success and e f f e c t i v e n e s s .
which i s
I t appears t o be d e v e l o p i n g
towards a d e f i n i t e moral judgement - o r 'metaconment' - but by i n d i r e c t
means; i t t h e n f a i l s t o a l l o w any metacomnent t o be d e r i v e d .
s i m i l a r t o t h e s t r a t e g y of some Romantic poets.
This i s
A comparable p a t t e r n
can a l s o be seen i n Godwin's Caleb Villlams. A l t h o u g h many c r i t i c s have
recognised the i n s t a b i l i t y inherent i n the form of the novel, nearly a l l
of them have a s c r i b e d i t t o some i d e o l o g i c a l purpose.
I b e l i e v e the
n o v e l i s d e l i b e r a t e l y t o o p o l y v a l e n t t o conform a d e q u a t e l y t o any
s p e c i f i c i d e o l o g i c a l l y focussed r e a d i n g , r a t h e r i t c a l l s i n t o q u e s t i o n
and s u b v e r t s i d e o l o g y .
There are t h r e e t e x t s o f Frankeastein, e x c l u d i n g t h e second (1823)
edition .
edition.
The two major v e r s i o n s are t h e e d i t i o n o f 1816,
The
and t h e
1831
I m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e changes made f o r t h e 1831 e d i t i o n w i l l
be d i s c u s s e d i n a s e p a r a t e c h a p t e r as t h e y are e x t e n s i v e and i n v o l v e a
major s h i f t of emphasis of a n a t u r e germane t o t h i s t h e s i s .
a l s o a copy o f t h e 1818
Thomas i n 1823,
There i s
e d i t i o n s w i t h autograph emendations g i v e n t o Mrs
known as t h e 'Thomas Copy'.
James Rieger's Chicago
U n i v e r s i t y Press e d i t i o n (Chicago and London, 1974)
i n c l u d e s b o t h the
Thomas v a r i a n t s and t h e changes made f o r t h e 1831 e d i t i o n .
The Thomas
v a r i a n t s m o s t l y a m p l i f y o r c l a r i f y t h e o r i g i n a l , r a t h e r t h a n change i t s
emphasis.
Where t h e y a r e r e l e v a n t t h e y w i l l be c o n s i d e r e d i n t h e
c o n t e x t o f t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f t h e 1818 e d i t i o n t o which t h i s t h e s i s
refers.
Ronantic
Irony
The s o r t o f d e l i b e r a t e l y i n c o n c l u s i v e i r o n i c e f f e c t apparent i n
Frankenstein i s d e s c r i b e d w i t h r e f e r e n c e t o Romantic p o e t r y by David
Simpson i n Irony and Authority in Romantic Poetry.
Simpson's account o f
i r o n y i n Romantic p o e t r y r e s t s on t h e concept o f t h e 'hermeneutic
circle'
which
o p e r a t e s on t h e paradox o f past and p r e s e n t , p a r t and whole, whereby
each i s seen o n l y t h r o u g h t h e o t h e r . Ve 'read' a t e x t , i t suggests
- and t h i s ' t e x t ' can be an event i n h i s t o r y - b u t t h e order which
t h a t t e x t w i l l compose i s a l r e a d y l a t e n t w i t h i n us as some k i n d o f
preconception.
Because we o n l y see t h i s o r d e r as i t i s experienced,
we can never see i t f r o m a c r i t i c a l d i s t a n c e , never comment upon i t
as an ' o b j e c t ' ; t h u s we cannot ever a c h i e v e a t h e o r e t i c a l command
over i t s ' o r i g i n s ' , which a r e p o s i t e d s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n past and
p r e s e n t . The v e r y idea o f an o r i g i n , i t must be noted, i m p l i e s
investment i n t h e model o f cause and e f f e c t ( i . e . a h i s t o r i c a l
sequence), a model which can o n l y be a p p l i e d t o t h e experience o f
s i m u l t a n e i t y by d i s r u p t i n g i t w i t h a c o n s c i o u s i m p o s i t i o n o f
priorities.^
The
p a t t e r n o f Frankenstein appears t o i n d i c a t e an a u t h o r i t a t i v e
metacomment b u t s i m u l t a n e o u s l y i n d i c a t e s t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y of
c o n s t r u c t i n g such a meaning i n a number o f ways.
t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s of discourse i t s e l f
F i r s t of a l l , the
i s c a l l e d i n t o question:
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s w a r n i n g a g a i n s t eloquence undermines a l l discourse:
'He
i s e l o q u e n t and p e r s u a s i v e ; and once h i s words had even power over my
heart:
b u t t r u s t h i m not' (206).
T h i s w a r n i n g d e c o n s t r u c t s any moral
o r i e n t a t i o n because V a l t o n d e s c r i b e s F r a n k e n s t e i n as e q u a l l y eloquent:
'His eloquence i s f o r c i b l e and t o u c h i n g ; nor can I hear him, when he
r e l a t e s a p a t h e t i c i n c i d e n t , o r endeavours t o move t h e passions o f p i t y
or love, without t e a r s '
(208).
Secondly, t h e exact r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e monster and
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s n o t made u n e q u i v o c a l l y c l e a r .
Paradise Lost i s used t o
define t h e i r r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n s , but t h e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of Frankenstein
and t h e monster w i t h p a r t i c u l a r c h a r a c t e r s i n t h e poem s h i f t s .
t h e source which p r o v i d e s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s u n r e l i a b l e :
Finally,
Frankenstein
makes a number o f judgements which do not t a k e i n t o account
the
monster's n a r r a t i v e , o r which a r e shown t o be absurd by the eventual
outcome, f o r example, h i s i n s i s t e n c e on the goodness of t h e s p i r i t s t h a t
he c l a i m s are g u i d i n g him towards h i s revenge (201), evidence f o r whose
e x i s t e n c e i s t h e f o o d p r o v i d e d by t h e monster.
There are guides t o
judgement w i t h i n t h e n a r r a t i v e , but t h e r e i s no p r i o r i t y of c r e d i b i l i t y ,
so t h e r e a d e r i s g i v e n no b a s i s f o r t r u s t i n g one n a r r a t i v e r a t h e r than
another.
Simpson argues t h a t 'Romantic p o e t r y i s o r g a n i s e d t o make us
c o n f r o n t t h e q u e s t i o n of a u t h o r i t y , e s p e c i a l l y as i t p e r t a i n s t o the
c o n t r a c t between a u t h o r and r e a d e r ' . ^
concerned
Frankenstein i s s i m i l a r l y
and b o t h i t s s t r u c t u r e and t h e a l l e g o r y of Frankenstein's
s e a r c h f o r t h e n a t u r e of l i f e warn a g a i n s t s e e k i n g an a u t h o r i t a t i v e
reading.
The t e c h n i q u e i n v o l v e d i s a f o r m of i r o n y :
The s i t u a t i o n as I see i t i s t h a t , i f a w r i t e r says 'X', then we
q u e s t i o n t h e meaning of what he says b o t h as we r e c e i v e . i t i n t o our
own codes and canons o f s i g n i f i c a n c e and as i t r e l a t e s t o the
c o n t e x t of t h e r e s t o f h i s u t t e r a n c e s , t h e i r moods and voices. This
double f o c u s i s l i k e l y t o produce a paradox o f t h e hermeneutic s o r t ;
how a r e we t o be sure where one begins and t h e o t h e r ends? This i s
Romantic i r o n y . ' ="
I n Frankenstein Mary S h e l l e y s t i m u l a t e s t h i s q u e s t i o n i n g i n a number
o f ways.
The most obvious of these i s by t h e polysemous nature of the
narrative:
t h e novel p u r p o r t s t o be a s e r i e s o f l e t t e r s f r o m Captain
Walton t o h i s s i s t e r , Mrs S a v i l l e ; however, these l e t t e r s t u r n I n t o a
j o u r n a l , w i t h i n which Walton i n c l u d e s t h e s t o r y t h a t he i s t o l d by
F r a n k e n s t e i n , who
i n t u r n r e p e a t s what t h e monster has t o l d him of h i s
s t o r y - Chapters XI - XVI.
Furthermore, Chapter XIV c o n s i s t s of the
h i s t o r y of t h e De Lacey f a m i l y recounted by t h e monster.
However, what
i s s a i d i n one n a r r a t i v e i s not c o n f i r m e d by c o r r o b o r a t i v e d e t a i l s i n
another, but each n a r r a t i v e tends t o c a l l t h e o t h e r s i n t o q u e s t i o n .
One
d e t a i l i m p l i e s a coherence and completeness i n Frankenstein's
s t o r y , w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n h i m s e l f the o n l y c o n t a c t w i t h the w o r l d
i n h a b i t e d by Walton (and by i n f e r e n c e t h e r e a d e r ) :
F r a n k e n s t e i n d i s c o v e r e d t h a t I made notes c o n c e r n i n g h i s h i s t o r y :
he asked t o see them, and t h e n h i m s e l f c o r r e c t e d and augmented them
i n many p l a c e s ; b u t p r i n c i p a l l y g i v i n g t h e l i f e and s p i r i t t o t h e
c o n v e r s a t i o n s he h e l d w i t h h i s enemy. "Since you have preserved my
n a r r a t i o n , " s a i d he, " I would n o t t h a t a m u t i l a t e d one s h o u l d go
down t o p o s t e r i t y . " (207)
However, t h i s n a r r a t i v e i n t e g r i t y i s i l l u s o r y .
The monster i s seen
by Walton a t a d i s t a n c e s h o r t l y b e f o r e F r a n k e n s t e i n h i m s e l f appears
(17).
A f t e r t h e d e a t h o f F r a n k e n s t e i n , t h e monster appears t o V a l t o n
(216).
The r e a d e r appears t o have some b a s i s f o r t e s t i n g t h e t r u t h o f
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s n a r r a t i v e , b u t t h e boundaries between d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f
the
n a r r a t i v e a r e b l u r r e d , making i t e a s i e r , perhaps, f o r t h e reader t o
be drawn i n t o t h e w o r l d o f Walton, t h e v o i c e o f apparent n o r m a l i t y , who
is
i n f a c t as much o f a f i c t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t as F e l i x and S a f i e , t h e
c h a r a c t e r s most d i s t a n c e d f r o m t h e reader, b u t whose l e t t e r s V a l t o n
c l a i m s t o have, seen (207),
There a r e o t h e r ways i n which t h e r e a d e r ' s sense o f s e c u r i t y i s
d i s r u p t e d . • V a l t o n ' s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n and h i s u n c r i t i c a l
acceptance o f h i s r e a d i n g o f h i s s t o r y (217) i m p l y an a u t h o r i t y ,
which
i s c l e a r l y u n r e l i a b l e i f t h e monster's p o i n t o f view i s considered.
Walton's f a i l u r e t o a p p l y F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s warning a g a i n s t eloquence t o
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s own s t o r y , d e s p i t e u s i n g i t as a touchstone
i n his
meeting w i t h t h e monster (218), a l s o c a l l s h i s o b j e c t i v i t y
into
question.
Percy S h e l l e y ' s r e v i e w o f Frankenstein t r e a t s t h e o v e r t moral
as s i m p l y i r o n i c , and draws o u t t h e s t r a i g h t f o r w a r d moral,
person i l l and he w i l l become wicked'."*
simplistically.
stance
'Treat a
T h i s reads t h e novel t o o
I t a l s o suggests a coherence i n t h e monster's make-up,
which he l a c k s , and a m a l i c e i n F r a n k e n s t e i n which he c l e a r l y l a c k s .
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s b o t h s i m i l a r t o and c o n t r a s t e d w i t h V a l t o n , o f whom we
know no i l l ,
return.
and who does f i n a l l y g i v e i n t o t h e demand o f h i s crew t o
However, we cannot r e a l l y t e l l
i f Walton's r e t u r n i n g t o England
i s a v i c t o r y f o r good sense o r f r u s t r a t i o n o f s e l f i s h a m b i t i o n . ^
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p o s i t i o n i s e q u a l l y ambiguous, as h i s attempt t o
j u s t i f y h i m s e l f when he i s about t o d i e shows:
I n a f i t of e n t h u s i a s t i c madness I c r e a t e d a r a t i o n a l c r e a t u r e and
was bound towards him, t o assure, as f a r as was i n my power, h i s
happiness and w e l l - b e i n g . T h i s was my duty; b u t t h e r e was another
s t i l l paramount t o t h a t .
My d u t i e s towards t h e beings o f my own
s p e c i e s had g r e a t e r c l a i m s t o my a t t e n t i o n , because t h e y i n c l u d e d a
g r e a t e r p r o p o r t i o n o f happiness o r misery. (214-5)
T h i s i s a c o n v i n c i n g u t i l i t a r i a n argument.
Frankenstein represents
h i m s e l f as b e i n g f a c e d w i t h a c h o i c e between two e v i l s .
The
situation
i s one t h a t does not p e r m i t a p e r f e c t s o l u t i o n ; the ending of the novel
l e a v e s t h e s i t u a t i o n n i c e l y p o i s e d between t h e two a l t e r n a t i v e s .
Even
i f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s arguments a r e d i s m i s s e d , t h i s deathbed speech c r e a t e s
doubt.
T h i s doubt i s emphasised i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s f i n a l i n j u n c t i o n t o
Walton - i n which he e x p l i c i t l y p l a c e s Walton i n t h e same p o s i t i o n w i t h
r e g a r d t o h i s n a r r a t i o n as Walton i m p l i c i t l y p l a c e s the reader w i t h
r e g a r d t o t h e whole n o v e l :
But t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f these p o i n t s , and t h e w e l l b a l a n c i n g of
what you may esteem your d u t i e s , I l e a v e t o you; my judgement and
i d e a s are a l r e a d y d i s t u r b e d by t h e near approach of death.
I dare
not ask you t o do what I t h i n k r i g h t , f o r I may s t i l l be m i s l e d by
p a s s i o n . (215)
J u s t a t the moment when F r a n k e n s t e i n appears t o be e s t a b l i s h i n g some
s o r t o f a u t h o r i t a t i v e metacomment, he d e c o n s t r u c t s t h e moral scheme he
seemed t o be c r e a t i n g and l e a v e s Walton and t h e reader f l o a t i n g f r e e .
Simpson sees t h e same process i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between the t e x t
t h e n o t e s i n 'The
and
Rime o f t h e A n c i e n t Mariner':
One d i s c o u r s e o f f e r s o r appears t o a c t as a c l o s u r a l f o r c e upon the
o t h e r - o f f e r i n g i t s e l f as a 'metacommentary' - but t h i s g e s t u r e I s
not v i n d i c a t e d when we b e g i n a c l o s e r survey and an attempted
r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of d i v e r g e n t meanings. The v o i c e which i s
s u p e r f i c i a l l y a u t h o r i t a t i v e i s t h u s seen not t o belong t o the
'author' a t a l l , because i t does not meet t h e demands o f
i n t e r p r e t a t i v e coherence. The a u t h o r , who a t t h i s p o i n t i s a t r u e
' i r o n i s t ' , has a b d i c a t e d h i s h a b i t u a l r o l e and l e f t an empty space
which t h e reader must occupy (but o n l y t o leave f r e e once more?)
w i t h h i s own t r i a n g u l a t i o n s . ^'
F r a n k e n s t e i n appears t o be drawing out a moral which c o u l d be
assessed i n t h e l i g h t of Walton's r e a c t i o n t o i t .
However, because
F r a n k e n s t e i n does not s e t t l e a t e i t h e r p o l e of t h e o p p o s i t i o n he
e s t a b l i s h e s between condemning h i s achievements and e n d o r s i n g them,
t h e r e i s no s t a b l e p o s i t i o n f o r Walton t o respond t o .
The reader i s
' l o o k i n g f o r a v o i c e which c o u l d speak f o r a coherent p e r s o n a l i t y ,
one
i n t o which he c o u l d c o m f o r t a b l y read h i m s e l f ' , ^ but f i n d s t h e r e i s none.
Walton might a c t as a n o t h e r p o s s i b l e a u t h o r i a l v o i c e , but he o f f e r s no
10
explicitly
moral comaent, o n l y 'You
s t o r y , Margaret;
like
have read t h i s s t r a n g e and
terrific
and do you not f e e l your b l o o d congeal w i t h h o r r o r ,
t h a t which even now c u r d l e s mine? (206-7)', which i s , i f a n y t h i n g ,
a r e f u s a l t o p r o v i d e moral guidance.
I t evades t h e i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n s
thrown up i n t h e novel and c o n c e n t r a t e s upon i t s a f f e c t i v e q u a l i t i e s .
T h i s i s s u e i s c o m p l i c a t e d by t h e q u e s t i o n o f eloquence r a i s e d
earlier.
but,
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s v e r s i o n o f events c o n f l i c t s w i t h the
apart from the f i n a l
monster's,
scene, t h e o n l y source we have f o r t h e
monster's p o i n t o f view i s F r a n k e n s t e i n because he t e l l s t h e monster's
s t o r y as p a r t o f h i s own.
his
He has t a k e n care t o c o n t r o l the r e c e p t i o n of
s t o r y by r e w r i t i n g p a r t s t o make them more e f f e c t i v e (207).
Consequently,
h i s warning a g a i n s t eloquence (206) and Walton's
r e p e t i t i o n of i t (218) d e s t a b i l i s e t h e whole novel by c a l l i n g
into
q u e s t i o n t h e t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s o f t h e medium of communication.
This
r a i s e s a n o t h e r i s s u e h i g h l i g h t e d i n Simpson's argument.
Simpson c o n s i d e r s the q u e s t i o n of t o n a l i t y i n p o e t r y and shows how
the
p o e t s , and Wordsworth p a r t i c u l a r l y , a v o i d e d p r o v i d i n g a s t a b l e
metacomment by making t h e language of t h e i r p o e t r y i r o n i c i n i t s e l f :
'It
i s i n f a c t e x a c t l y t h e i n t r u s i o n of t o n a l i t y , w i t h t h e i m p l i e d
primacy o f speech over w r i t i n g , which r e n d e r s t h e w r i t t e n form an
' i r o n i c ' one, s u p p l y i n g h i n t s and h a l f meanings which the w r i t t e n word
a l o n e cannot s a t i s f y o r b r i n g t o completion'.®
By c a s t i n g doubt on eloquence F r a n k e n s t e i n u n s e t t l e s the reader i n
the
same way.
Even p u r e l y n a r r a t i v e d e t a i l s are suspect because they
might be m i s l e a d i n g o r loaded i n some sense.
Because the reader i s t o l d
t o suspect those elements i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s h i s t o r y a s c r i b e d t o the
monster, and because t h e warning about t h e monster's eloquence a p p l i e s
e q u a l l y t o F r a n k e n s t e i n , he i s l e f t w i t h no means of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g
between r e l i a b l e and u n r e l i a b l e language;
i t i s a l l merely
language.
The c o n f l i c t between t h e d e s i r e t o p l a c e c o n f i d e n c e i n the medium and
the
q u e s t i o n i n g of i t s p r o b i t y c r e a t e s t h e u n c e r t a i n t y Simpson suggests
the
Romantics used t o a v o i d t h e i m p o s i t i o n of an a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g .
Another aspect of F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s n a r r a t i v e makes i t d i f f i c u l t t o
e s t a b l i s h a s a t i s f a c t o r y b a s i s f o r Judgement.
Simpson r e f e r s t o
'Blake's polemic, shared ...by o t h e r Romantics, a g a i n s t the t y r a n n y of
the
eye,
imposing, as i t t r i e s t o do, a s i n g l e v i s i o n on the mind and
11
a c t i n g i m p r o p e r l y as t h e c h i e f among the senses'.^
the
T h i s s u s p i c i o n of
v i s u a l , and i t s domineering among t h e senses, s e r v e s f u r t h e r t o
undermine t h e c r e d i b i l i t y
of Frankenstein's t a l e .
I t i s t h e mere s i g h t
of t h e monster t h a t i n s p i r e s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s l o a t h i n g f o r him (52-3), and
his
second g l i m p s e o f h i s c r e a t i o n convinces F r a n k e n s t e i n o f h i s g u i l t
and malevolence
(71-2).
When he has f i n a l l y completed h i s t a s k , h i s enthusiasm f o r which has
led
F r a n k e n s t e i n t o suspend normal moral judgement ( 5 0 ) , h i s r e a c t i o n i s
' b r e a t h l e s s h o r r o r and d i s g u s t ( 5 3 ) .
s u p e r f i c i a l v i s u a l judgements.
However, i t i s a h o r r o r based upon
F r a n k e n s t e i n d e s c r i b e s what he
has
c r e a t e d i n t h r i l l i n g terms:
His l i m b s were i n p r o p o r t i o n , and I had s e l e c t e d h i s f e a t u r e s as
beautiful.
B e a u t i f u l ! - Great God!
His y e l l o w s k i n s c a r c e l y covered
the work o f muscles and a r t e r i e s beneath; h i s h a i r was o f a l u s t r o u s
b l a c k , and f l o w i n g ; h i s t e e t h o f a p e a r l y whiteness; but these
l u x u r i a n c e s o n l y formed a more h o r r i d c o n t r a s t w i t h h i s watery eyes,
t h a t seemed o f t h e same c o l o u r as t h e dun-white s o c k e t s i n which
t h e y were s e t , h i s s h r i v e l l e d complexion and s t r a i g h t b l a c k l i p s .
(52)
The y e l l o w s k i n suggests p u t r e f a c t i o n , as does i t s transparency
which a l l o w s t h e s t r u c t u r e s beneath t o be seen.
o f f e n s i v e f o r m o f nakedness?
I s t h i s a g r e a t e r and
The eyes are watery, and t h e y c o n t r a s t
w i t h t h e dun-white and, by i m p l i c a t i o n , sunken s o c k e t s .
The
'shrivelled
complexion' suggests t h a t t h e t h e face l o o k s as i f i t has been dead f o r
some t i m e , as do t h e b l a c k and, one supposes, d r y l i p s .
p o r t r a y e d as i f dead, and y e t i s a l i v e .
Frankenstein's chief
i s s p e c i f i c a l l y t o t h e appearance o f h i s c r e a t i o n :
s u p p o r t t h e h o r r o r o f t h a t countenance.
'Oh!
response
no m o r t a l c o u l d
A mummy a g a i n endued w i t h
a n i m a t i o n c o u l d not be so hideous as t h a t wretch'
the
The monster I s
(53).
However, a l l
reader o r Walton has t o respond t o i s a v e r b a l d e s c r i p t i o n .
Furthermore, these v i s u a l judgements i n v o l v e a moral dimension:
the
monster l o o k s r e v o l t i n g , and i s c r e a t e d by ' f i l t h y ' means, t h e r e f o r e i t
is essentially evil.
Only Walton, who i s forewarned. I s a b l e t o
overcome h i s i n s t i n c t i v e r e v u l s i o n f o r l o n g enough t o hear t h e monster
out
(216).
V a r i o u s reasons are put f o r w a r d by d i f f e r e n t c r i t i c s t o
e x p l a i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s r e v u l s i o n towards h i s c r e a t i o n :
the monster i s
u g l y as t h e p r o d u c t o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s botched i m i t a t i o n o f God^"^' - a
12
r e a d i n g s u p p o r t e d by t h e monster's own a t t e m p t s t o f i t
i t s e l f into the
scheme o f Paradise Last; i t can be seen as monstrous because, having
been c r e a t e d f r o m elements f r o m o t h e r bodies, i t does n o t possess
o r g a n i c - u n i t y ; ^ ' i t can a l s o be seen, as Percy S h e l l e y saw i t ,
as a
c r e a t u r e i n i t i a l l y o f f - p u t t i n g , b u t possessing a p o t e n t i a l f o r good
u n t i l p e r v e r t e d by m i s t r e a t m e n t by humanity;'^
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f woman.''^
o r even as a
However, these r e a d i n g s of. t h e monster do
not r e a l l y r e f l e c t t h e way i n which, by t h e employment o f c o n f l i c t i n g
f i r s t - p e r s o n n a r r a t i v e s , t h e monster i s presented as s e l f - c o n t r a d i c t o r y
i n what i t s i g n i f i e s and i n i t s moral value.
A l t h o u g h t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f making such judgements i s questioned by
t h e n o v e l , t h e monster i s r e j e c t e d a g a i n and a g a i n r e g a r d l e s s o f i t s
t r u e w o r t h and s i g n i f i c a n c e and d e s p i t e h i s good i n t e n t i o n s , when humans
merely s i g h t him.
When he makes h i s b i d t o o b t a i n t h e f r i e n d s h i p o f
t h e De Laceys, h i s g e s t u r e o f e n t r e a t y and submission i s i n t e r p r e t e d by
F e l i x as t h r e a t e n i n g h i s f a t h e r ' s l i f e
(134).
Yet De Lacey h i m s e l f ,
u n f e t t e r e d by t h e t y r a n n y o f e y e s i g h t , shows no consciousness
o f any
t h r e a t , b u t r a t h e r i n t e r e s t s h i m s e l f i n t h e w e l f a r e o f t h e l o n e l y and
i n d i g e n t c r e a t u r e who has begged h i s a i d (130).
T h i s k i n d o f one-dimensional
judgement i s analogous t o t h e one
Simpson suggests t h e Romantics were a t t e m p t i n g t o s u b v e r t , o r a t l e a s t
c a l l i n t o question.
I n t h e same way t h a t c h a r a c t e r s i n t h e novel Judge
t h e monster on s i g h t a l o n e , so t h e reader i s i n c l i n e d t o reach f o r an
obvious and c o n v e n i e n t metacomment and i g n o r e o r r a t i o n a l i s e away those
elements which c o n t r a d i c t
it.
For a l l these reasons any s e r i o u s a t t e m p t t o e s t a b l i s h a s t a b l e
r e a d i n g o f Frankenstein i n terms o f any s p e c i f i c i d e o l o g i c a l o u t l o o k
w i l l n o t succeed c o m p l e t e l y .
The n a r r a t i v e s t r a t e g y o f Frankenstein
conforms t o Simpson's d e f i n i t i o n o f ' E n g l i s h Romantic i r o n y '
which
b r o a d l y p u t , c o n s i s t s i n t h e s t u d i e d avoidance on t h e a r t i s t ' s p a r t
o f d e t e r m i n a t e meanings, even a t such t i m e s as he might wish t o
encourage h i s reader t o produce such meanings f o r h i m s e l f ; i t
i n v o l v e s t h e r e f u s a l o f c l o s u r e , t h e i n c o r p o r a t i o n o f any
p o t e n t i a l l y a v a i l a b l e 'metacomment' w i t h i n t h e p r i m a r y language o f
t h e t e x t , t h e p r o v i s i o n o f a l i n g u i s t i c s i g n which moves towards o r
verges upon a ' f r e e ' s t a t u s , and t h e consequent r a i s i n g t o s e l f consciousness o f t h e a u t h o r i t a r i a n element o f d i s c o u r s e , as i t
e f f e c t s b o t h t h e a u t h o r - r e a d e r r e l a t i o n and t h e i n t e n t i o n a l
13
m a n i p u l a t i o n , f r o m b o t h s i d e s , o f t h e m a t e r i a l t h r o u g h which t h e y
communicate. ^
I n Frankenstein, t h e r e i s a c l e a r i n t e n t i o n t o a v o i d 'determinate
meanings'.
The t e c h n i q u e o f i r o n y i s t o i m p l y metacommentary by showing
t h e u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e d i s c o u r s e presented.
However, i n Frankenstein
t h e p o s s i b l e metacommentaries are c l e a r l y presented i n o t h e r d i s c o u r s e s
i n t h e n o v e l , a l l of which a r e shown t o be e q u a l l y u n r e l i a b l e .
Consequently,
w h i l e t h e i r o n i c n a t u r e of the o r i g i n a l d i s c o u r s e i s
i n d i s p u t a b l e , t h e metacommentary shares i t s u n r e l i a b l e s t a t u s .
Mary
S h e l l e y c r e a t e s a moral w o r l d whose o r i e n t a t i o n i s f a r f r o m c l e a r ,
q u i t e r e s i s t a n t t o t h e i m p o s i t i o n o f 'determinate meanings'.
The
and
ending
o f t h e novel does not p r o v i d e any c l a r i f i c a t i o n e i t h e r , w i t h the monster
d i s a p p e a r i n g i n t o 'darkness and d i s t a n c e ' (221) a p p a r e n t l y t o d e s t r o y
himself.
w i s e r man',
consented
While Walton might be read r e t u r n i n g
home 'a sadder and a
h i s o n l y comment on t h e m a t t e r I s :
t o r e t u r n , i f we a r e not destroyed.
by cowardice and i n d e c i s i o n ;
'The d i e i s c a s t ; I have
Thus are my hopes b l a s t e d
I come back i g n o r a n t and d i s a p p o i n t e d .
It
r e q u i r e s more p h i l o s o p h y t h a n I possess, t o bear t h i s i n j u s t i c e w i t h
patience'
(213).
However, t h i s i s b e f o r e he meets t h e monster.
end o f t h e novel he p r o v i d e s t h e reader w i t h no guidance
At the
whatsoever.
The novel does not so much eschew metacommentary, as p r o v i d e an
excess o f i t w i t h i n c o n f l i c t i n g n a r r a t i v e s d e r i v e d from c h a r a c t e r s whose
t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s i s g e n u i n e l y ambiguous.
The s t r u c t u r e o f Frankenstein
p a r o d i e s t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l l y i r o n i c novel i n which t h e p r e t e n s i o n s of the
n a r r a t o r are exposed by t h e p r o d u c t i o n of a metacomment t h a t r e v e a l s h i s
self-deception.
The r e a d e r I s c o n d i t i o n e d by h i s experience t o read
what t h e monster says as an i r o n i c commentary on
misguided o v e r - r e a c h i n g .
However, what happens i s t h a t t h e two
n a r r a t i v e s prove e q u a l l y u n r e l i a b l e .
circumstances
Frankenstein's
The normal s t r a t e g y under such
i s t o r e l y upon t h e f r a m i n g n a r r a t i v e , but Walton seems
u n c l e a r about what p r e c i s e l y i s happening and d i s i n c l i n e d t o pursue the
most i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n s .
What i s more, F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s warning
t h e eloquence of t h e monster, e n t i r e l y understandable
about
i n one sense i n
view o f t h e Romantics' m i s t r u s t o f language which a t t e m p t s t o impose an
a u t h o r i t a t i v e p o i n t of view, removes the a b s o l u t e s i g n i f i c a n c e t h a t
14
one
might be tempted t o a t t a c h t o any p a r t i c u l a r p o i n t o f view, and i n s t e a d
draws a t t e n t i o n t o t h e n a t u r e o f u t t e r a n c e , r a t h e r t h a n i t s c o n t e n t .
I n o r d e r t o e x p l o r e these ideas more f u l l y ,
I s h a l l examine t h e
n o v e l i n d e t a i l t o show how t h i s e v a s i o n o f imposed meaning can be
d e r i v e d from t h e t e x t .
A f t e r l o o k i n g a t a number o f c r i t i c a l views, I
s h a l l c o n s i d e r how Paradise Lost a c t s as a 'Romantic i r o n i s t ' by
d e s t a b i l i s i n g t h e r e a d e r ' s awareness o f t h e r e l a t i v e p o s i t i o n s o f
F r a n k e n s t e i n and h i s monster.
of
I s h a l l t h e n examine Mary S h e l l e y ' s view
human development i n t h e n o v e l and t h e e x t e n t t o which Godwinian
ITecessity i s used t o e x p l a i n t h e m o t i v a t i o n o f t h e a c t i o n s o f t h e
central figures.
I s h a l l l o o k more b r i e f l y a t t h e r o l e o f n a t u r e and
characters' a t t i t u d e s t o i t .
examining
I n these t h r e e c h a p t e r s I s h a l l be
t h e way i n which elements which t h e reader i s encouraged t o
t r y t o use t o c l a r i f y t h e i s s u e s i n t h e novel t u r n o u t t o be m i s l e a d i n g
g u i d e s because t h e y do n o t a l l o w d e t a i l e d e x a m i n a t i o n o f themselves, but
act
as 'Romantic i r o n i s t s ' . I
s h a l l then look a t a t t i t u d e s t o
knowledge i n t h e n o v e l and t h e i r i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e reader's knowledge
of
Frankenstein.
Finally,
I s h a l l l o o k a t t h e changes made i n t h e 1831
e d i t i o n t o examine what t h e change o f emphasis f o r t h e second e d i t i o n
r e v e a l s about t h e f i r s t ,
of
p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e way i n which t h e t h e p a t t e r n
e v a s i o n o f a u t h o r i t y i s an e s s e n t i a l p a r t o f t h e meaning o f t h e f i r s t
e d i t i o n of t h e novel.
15
Chapter 1:
Four c r i t i c a l
G r i t l e a l Review
works have been p a r t i c u l a r l y h e l p f u l i a d e v e l o p i n g t h e
response t o Frankenstein advanced i n t h i s t h e s i s .
Both M a r t i n Tropp i n
Mary Sbelley's Monster and C h r i s B a l d i c k i n In Frankenstein's Shadow are
concerned w i t h t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p o f Frankenstein t o t h e t r a d i t i o n
stemming f r o m i t .
M a r t i n Tropp approaches t h e novel f r o m a
p s y c h o l o g i c a l a n g l e , s e e i n g i t as an
o f t h e dangers o f s o l i t a r y s t u d y .
a t t a c k on technology and warning
C h r i s B a l d i c k takes a l e s s
s p e c u l a t i v e and more s t y l i s t i c approach i n h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the the
myth and t h e l a t e r l i t e r a r y m a n i f e s t a t i o n s he i d e n t i f i e s .
By c o n t r a s t ,
Mary Poovey c o n s i d e r s t h e novel f r o m a f e m i n i s t s t a n d p o i n t i n her book.
Tie Proper Lady and the Voaan Writer. L i k e M a r t i n Tropp, she i d e n t i f i e s
t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between community and i n d i v i d u a l a s s e r t i o n as an
i m p o r t a n t concern.
Finally,
i t s Romantic R e l a t i v e s :
i n h i s essay 'Frankenstein's Monster and
Problems o f Knowledge i n E n g l i s h Romanticism' ,
L.J. Swingle c o n s i d e r s knowledge i n a way t h a t a l s o l i n k s w i t h t h e ideas
o f David Simpson.
I n a d d i t i o n , Pamela C l e m i t ' s r e c e n t book The
Godwinian Novel a d o p t s a s i m i l a r approach t o t h i s t h e s i s , but comes t o a
d i f f e r e n t conclusion.
These works r a i s e i m p o r t a n t q u e s t i o n s about how t h e novel should be
read.
I n p a r t i c u l a r , they d i f f e r about t h e way i n which t h e monster
s h o u l d be viewed, and t h e way i n which t h e ending should be i n t e r p r e t e d .
T h i s disagreement i s symptomatic o f t h e c o m p l e x i t y o f s t r u c t u r e o f
Frankenstein,
I n Mary Shelley's Monster, M a r t i n Tropp by d e c l a r e s t h a t t h e monster
and F r a n k e n s t e i n a r e two s i d e s o f one p e r s o n a l i t y [ T 83.
i d e n t i f i e s Walton's encounter
He then
w i t h t h e monster as a form o f t e s t
which
Walton passes by c o r r e c t l y i d e n t i f y i n g t h e e s s e n t i a l l y e v i l nature o f
t h e monster CT 8 ] .
Using t h e dream on t h e n i g h t o f t h e monster's
c r e a t i o n as h i s guide, Tropp t r i e s t o e x p l a i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster i n p s y c h o l o g i c a l terms.
He suggests
t h e monster r e p r e s e n t s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s unacknowledged d e s i r e s .
that
Thus the
monster k i l l s E l i z a b e t h f o r ending F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s g l o r i o u s c h i l d h o o d i n
which he was i d o l i s e d by h i s p a r e n t s and f o r b e i n g r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s
16
mather's death by i n f e c t i n g her w i t h s c a r l e t f e v e r CT 2 2 - 3 ] .
suggests
Tropp
t h a t t h e reason V i l l i a m d i e s i s a l s o f o r h a v i n g t a k e n
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s mother's l o v e , symbolised by h i s wearing of t h e l o c k e t ,
and t h a t J u s t i n e a l s o d i e s f o r r e p l a c i n g h i s mother [ T 263.
L i k e C l e m i t , Tropp c o n s i d e r s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e monster
and F r a n k e n s t e i n as d o u b l i n g .
He p o i n t s out t h a t t h e monster d e s t r o y s
d u r i n g p e r i o d s when F r a n k e n s t e i n i s , f o r one reason o r another,
f u l l y conscious
not
CT 4 0 ] , q u o t i n g f r o m Locke t o t h e e f f e c t t h a t humans
have t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r two d i s t i n c t p e r s o n a l i t i e s :
conscious and c o n t r o l l e d person
t h e one
the
(Frankenstein), the other the secret
d e s i r e s masked by t h e s o c i a l f a c e ( t h e monster) CT 383.
He
suggests
t h a t t h i s dual p e r s o n a l i t y and t h e c o m p e t i t i o n f o r l o v e between them
( F r a n k e n s t e i n d e s t r o y s t h e monster's b r i d e , so t h e monster d e s t r o y s h i s )
are common f e a t u r e s of double t a l e s CT 403.
He a l s o l i n k s t h i s t o the
i m p o r t a n t r o l e of water, which he sees as s y m b o l i s i n g t h e depths of Mary
S h e l l e y ' s own p e r s o n a l i t y CT 413.
I n c o n t r a s t , C l e m i t c o n s i d e r s the
ways i n which d i f f e r e n t d o u b l i n g s are used t o develop c r i t i q u e s of
d i f f e r e n t contemporary concerns [C
1603.
The water symbol p o r t r a y s t h e t r a n s f e r of power from F r a n k e n s t e i n t o
t h e monster [ T 443:
u n t i l Frankenstein casts himself a d r i f t
Orkney, he becomes g r a d u a l l y more surrounded
d r i f t s t o I r e l a n d t o leave i t a broken man
by water.
I T 463.
from
F i n a l l y he
Tropp reads the
c l a r i t y of the l a k e on t h e wedding voyage as an image of the s e l f d e l u s i o n which l e a d s F r a n k e n s t e i n t o mistake t h e t r u e n a t u r e of the
monster's t h r e a t t o be w i t h him on h i s wedding n i g h t ; t h e c l a r i t y of the
water s u g g e s t i n g t h a t he can see e v e r y t h i n g as i t r e a l l y i s , whereas he
i g n o r e s obvious i n d i c a t i o n s which are c l e a r t o t h e reader CT 463.
Vhen
Walton meets F r a n k e n s t e i n , he i s f l o a t i n g on a r a f t of i c e t h a t i s
m e l t i n g beneath him CT 473.
Tropp f e e l s t h a t t h i s doppelganger myth of
t h e s e l f and double drawn t o and r e f l e c t e d i n water and i c e i s p a r t of
what c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e v i t a l i t y o f t h e F r a n k e n s t e i n myth CT 473.
For
him t h e monster hangs suspended between t h e t r u e s e l f and the r e a l
w o r l d , n e i t h e r f u l l y i m a g i n a r y nor t a n g i b l y c o n c r e t e , not q u i t e
nor f u l l y r e a l C T
illusion
483.
Tropp c o n s i d e r s next t h e r o l e of t e c h n o l o g y i n t h e novel.
He
d i s t i n g u i s h e s between Percy S h e l l e y ' s o p t i m i s t i c view of science as a
17
means o f e x p r e s s i n g man's u n l i m i t e d p o t e n t i a l , and Mary S h e l l e y ' s h o r r o r
of man's mockery o f God i n i m i t a t i n g H i s c r e a t i o n o f man CT 543.
Tropp
i d e n t i f i e s t h e monster as 'a t e c h n o l o g i c a l double', p a r a l l e l l i n g t h e
dream s e l f seen e a r l i e r CT 633.
He sees F r a n k e n s t e i n as t h e embodiment
of t h e megalomaniac t e n d e n c i e s o f modern s c i e n c e which l e a d t o t h e
abandonment o f human c o n t a c t s CT 633.
A f t e r technology, Tropp d i s c u s s e s t h e monster i t s e l f .
He begins by
s e e i n g t h e monster as a p r o j e c t i o n o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s p e r s o n a l
and h a t r e d CT 673.
He r a i s e s t h e q u e s t i o n o f whether t h e monster
deserves t o l i v e o r not.
his
isolation
Percy S h e l l e y sympathised
w i t h t h e monster i n
r e v i e w o f Frankenstein, b u t f o r Tropp t h e q u e s t i o n i s how f a r t h e
monster i s t o be seen as human CT 673.
evil;
I f i t i s , then i t s treatment i s
i f n o t , t h e n i t i s t r e a t e d as i t s h o u l d be.
I t s h o r r o r f o r Tropp
i s underscored by t h e f a c t t h a t i t has no name and t h u s no place i n the
o r d e r o f t h e u n i v e r s e CT 673.
Tropp e x p l o r e s t h e M i l t o n i c p a r a l l e l s o f Frankenstein.
the
He compares
monster w i t h Satan, s e e i n g them b o t h as p r o j e c t i o n s o f t h e i r
c r e a t o r s , L u c i f e r and F r a n k e n s t e i n CT 68-93.
S h e l l e y have a sense o f t h e necessary
Both M i l t o n and Mary
o r d e r o f t h e u n i v e r s e which i s
d i s r u p t e d by Satan/the monster CT 693.
The monster wishes t o be good,
t o grow up a c c o r d i n g t o Rousseau's d o c t r i n e s , b u t h i s environment
t o s u p p o r t him CT 713.
fails
The De Lacey episode, which p a r a l l e l s Satan's
envy o f Adam and Eve i n Book IV o f Paradise Lost, i s c r u c i a l .
The
monster, u n l i k e Satan who r e c o g n i s e s h i s own e v i l n a t u r e , wishes t o J o i n
the
human w o r l d , b u t i s r e p u l s e d CT 763.
Consequently,
l i k e Satan, he
t u r n s t o d e s t r u c t i o n , e i t h e r because h i s i n s t i n c t s f o r good have been
t h w a r t e d , o r because he now d i s p l a y s h i s t r u e n a t u r e CT 76-73.
monster has two p o s s i b l e s t r a t e g i e s :
seduction.
The
overt destruction, or covert
L i k e M i l t o n ' s Satan, h i s eloquence i s p o t e n t i a l l y dangerous,
as F r a n k e n s t e i n warns, because o f i t s c a p a c i t y t o make t h e reader
sympathise
w i t h e v i l CT 783.
V a l t o n r e c o g n i s e s t h e monster's e v i l and r e j e c t s i t a g a i n from t h e
human p a r a d i s e CT 813.
'the
He l e a r n s f r o m h i s experience t h e need t o eschew
i c y r e g i o n t h i s h e a r t e n c i r c l e s ' and t u r n s away f r o m
p o l a r / t e c h n o l o g i c a l i s o l a t i o n towards t h e w o r l d o f men CT 82-33.
18
The
p r o b l e m w i t h Tropp's r e a d i n g i s t h a t i t r e l i e s on a c o n t e n t i o u s
b i o g r a p h i c a l i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s m o t i v a t i o n f o r w r i t i n g t h e
novel.
He d e s c r i b e s t h e novel i n terms o f h e r p e r s o n a l i t y , u s i n g as h i s
key t h e comparison o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s p e r s o n a l i t y t o i c e CT 14]:
'This
l a y e r i n g Eof t h e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f n a r r a t i v e ] leads, s t e p by step,
t h r o u g h t h e c o n c e n t r i c c i r c l e s o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s complex p e r s o n a l i t y past t h e face she showed t o t h e w o r l d and deep i n t o t h e s e l f she c o u l d
'hate and d i s g u i s e ' t o t h e monster t h a t o n l y appeared i n nightmare' [ T
15].
He c o n s t r u c t s an e l a b o r a t e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n between elements i n
•JIary S h e l l e y ' s complex p e r s o n a l i t y ' and aspects o f t h e novel.
This i s
f l a w e d p a r t l y by h i s use o f t h e 1831 e d i t i o n and by t h e unconvincing,
and a t t i m e s c o n f u s i n g , neatness o f h i s argument.
He i d e n t i f i e s t h e
monster as e v i l on t h e b a s i s o f t h i s r e a d i n g , b u t i t i s c l e a r l y more
ambiguous.
F i n a l l y , he does n o t d i s c r i m i n a t e c l e a r l y between t h e
o r i g i n a l t e x t and o t h e r l a t e r a c c r e t i o n s t o t h e myth - a p o i n t B a l d i c k
p i c k s h i m up on.
H i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e double theme i s u s e f u l and he i s aware o f
the complexity of t h e novel.
He a l s o sees t h e c o n f l i c t between
i n d i v i d u a l and community as i m p o r t a n t .
However, he f a l l s i n t o t h e t r a p
o f a t t e m p t i n g t o f o r c e t h e novel i n t o a p a t t e r n i t does not f i t ,
a l t h o u g h t h e 1831 v e r s i o n , t o which he r e f e r s e x c l u s i v e l y , i s more
amenable t o h i s r e a d i n g .
Nevertheless,
he o f f e r s a c l e a r and
c o n v e n t i o n a l r e a d i n g , which a c t s as a touchstone,
albeit limited i n i t s
own scope, a g a i n s t which o t h e r accounts can be judged.
I t might
almost
be suggested t h a t , u s i n g , as he does, t h e 1831 e d i t i o n , he, l i k e
C h r i s t o p h e r Small i n Ariel Like a Harpy, r e p r e s e n t s t h e popular response
t o t h e novel and t h e myth.
I n h i s book, In Frankenstein's Shadow, C h r i s B a l d i c k begins by
c o n s i d e r i n g t h e s t a t u s o f Frankenstein as a modern myth.
i m p o r t a n t d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e myth i t s e l f ,
He makes t h e
which i s adapted t o many
d i f f e r e n t s i g n i f i c a t i o n s a t d i f f e r e n t t i m e s and t h e l i t e r a r y t e x t which
g i v e s r i s e t o t h e myth, which, a l t h o u g h p o l y v a l e n t , i s f i x e d i n i t s own
p a r t i c u l a r f o r m I B 1-2].
He i s c a r e f u l t o d i s t i n g u i s h between r e a d i n g s
o f t h e novel I t s e l f and r e a d i n g s o f t h e novel as seen i n t h e l i g h t of
subsequent developments o f t h e myth CB 4-6].
19
For t h i s reason he r e j e c t s
a t t e m p t s t o o v e r - u n i v e r s a l i s e t h e novel and a l s o those r e a d i n g s which
see t h e novel as a response t o inhuman t e c h n o l o g i c a l development, such
as Tropp's,
6-83.
a r g u i n g t h a t t h i s i s a subsequent development o f t h e myth CB
T h i s i s a v a l u a b l e c a u t i o n a r y note.
B a l d i c k c o n s i d e r s t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e monster's m o n s t r o s i t y .
He
d e r i v e s i t s h o r r i f i c q u a l i t i e s f r o m i t s l a c k o f o r g a n i c u n i t y , and
r e f e r s t o C o l e r i d g e ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f t h e f a n c y CB 143.
the
He a l s o l i n k s
m o n s t r o s i t y w i t h t h e monstrous images used t o d e s c r i b e t h e French
R e v o l u t i o n CB 193.
He i d e n t i f i e s t h e monster b o t h w i t h Burke's v i s i o n
of t h e monstrous mob CB 213, and a l s o w i t h what Paine CB 213,
W o l l s t o n e c r a f t CB 213 and Godwin CB 253 saw as t h e monstrous p r o v o c a t i o n
f o r t h e mob - t h e a r i s t o c r a c y , p r i m o g e n i t u r e , government i t s e l f .
Finally
he c o n s i d e r s t h e p a r a l l e l s between Frankenstein and Caleb
Williams i n t h e way t h e y d i s s o l v e c l e a r moral b e a r i n g s and d e s t a b i l i s e
I d e n t i t i e s CB 26-73.
The f i n a l stage i n h i s argument b e f o r e he branches o f f onto a
d i s c u s s i o n o f l a t e r v e r s i o n s o f t h e myth i s h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f t h e
monster i t s e l f .
He d e s c r i b e s t h e novel as d o u b l y s e l f - r e f e r e n t i a l : i t s
w r i t i n g i s t h e c r e a t i o n o f a monster, and a l s o i t s subsequent c u l t u r a l
s t a t u s has monstrous elements CB 30-313.
between Mary S h e l l e y and her monster:
He develops t h e p a r a l l e l s
i t s o r i g i n l e s s n e s s ; her
m o t h e r l e s s s t a t u s ; t h e many images o f b i r t h and pregnancy i n t h e
n a r r a t i v e and i t s s t r u c t u r e CB 313.
He r e c o g n i s e s 'an abundant excess
of meanings which t h e novel cannot s t a b l y accommodate, a s u r p l u s o f
s i g n i f i c a n c e which o v e r r u n s t h e e n c l o s u r e o f t h e n o v e l ' s f o r m t o a t t r a c t
new and competing
mythic r e v i s i o n s ' CB 333.
surplus of s i g n i f i c a t i o n ,
This i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of the
which he shares w i t h C l e m i t , i s i m p o r t a n t .
He
r e c o g n i s e s t h e e x t e n t t o which problems o f e p i s t e m o l o g y a r e h i g h l i g h t e d ,
a l t h o u g h he, l i k e C l e m i t , does n o t see i t as c e n t r a l t o t h e novel.
Ifext he e x p l o r e s t h e reasons f o r t h e monster's u g l i n e s s by
c o n s i d e r i n g t h e elements f r o m which t h e novel was c o n s t r u c t e d .
the
monster's loathsome appearance d e r i v i n g f r o m V i c t o r ' s
i s o l a t i o n and g u i l t y secrecy' CB 353.
admission o f t h e book's patchwork
He sees
'tormented
He p o i n t s o u t Mary S h e l l e y ' s
n a t u r e CB 353:
names are drawn from
Percy S h e l l e y ' s and her own c i r c l e s ; passages f r o m her own experience;
c h a r a c t e r s f r o m Percy S h e l l e y ' s work; elements come f r o m her own dreams.
20
He a l s o I d e n t i f i e s l i t e r a r y sources:
Caleb Villiams [ B 3 7 ] ; St Leon f o r
t h e dangers o f s e c r e t and i s o l a t e d knowledge [ B 38] .
He sees Mary
V o l l s t o n e c r a f t ' s Vindication of the Rights of Voaan as a source f o r t h e
importance
o f e a r l y i n f l u e n c e s on b o t h F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster, and
f o r t h e q u e s t i o n i n g o f h e r o i c e x e r t i o n I B 3 8 ] ; The Rime of the Ancient
Mariner f o r t h e c o n f e s s i o n a l mode and t h e s t r u c t u r e CB 3 9 ] ; Mme de
G e n l i s ' s Pygmalion and Galatee f o r t h e t e c h n i q u e o f s o c i a l c r i t i c i s m i n
t h e De Lacey episode CB 4 0 ] .
F i n a l l y , he i d e n t i f i e s Paradise Lost as
t h e source o f t h e c o n n e c t i o n between a myth o f c r e a t i o n and one o f
t r a n s g r e s s i o n which Mary S h e l l e y c o n f l a t e s CB 4 0 ] .
She a l s o uses t h e
c h a r a c t e r s o f God, Satan and Adam t o p r o v i d e i d e n t i t i e s f o r Frankenstein
and t h e monster, b u t w i t h t h e c r u c i a l p r o v i s o t h a t h e r p r o t a g o n i s t s a r e
not q u i t e sure which o f t h e c h a r a c t e r s t h e y r e p r e s e n t CB 40-1].
This
s h i f t i n g c a l l s i n t o q u e s t i o n t h e s t a b i l i t y o f t h e i r i d e n t i t i e s CB 44].
T h i s i s an i m p o r t a n t p o i n t , and capable o f f u r t h e r development.
Baldick discusses
dismissing suggestions
v a r i o u s r e a d i n g s o f Frankenstein.
He begins by
t h a t i t i s e i t h e r a t e c h n o l o g i c a l prophecy or a
moral f a b l e o f blasphemous human presumption
CB 4 4 ] , p r e f e r r i n g l i k e
Tropp t o see Frankenstein as a d r a m a t i s a t i o n o f doubts about t h e rewards
o f knowledge CB 4 5 ] , and more p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e dangers o f knowledge i n
s o l i t u d e CB 4 6 ] .
H i s approach i s c o n v e n t i o n a l i n t h a t he reads t h e
novel t h e m a t l c a l l y , whereas, as Clemit r e a l i s e s , i t needs t o be read
structurally.
presumption,
He p o i n t s o u t t h a t t h e 1831 e d i t i o n i s more o f a f a b l e of
b u t t h a t t h e c o n c l u s i o n i s d e l i b e r a t e l y e v a s i v e CB 4 6 ] .
c o n s i d e r s v a r i o u s p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e a d i n g s , p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e Freudian
of ' t h e r e t u r n o f t h e repressed'
CB 48-93.
He
idea
However, he a l s o a l l o w s f o r
s o c i o l o g i c a l , f e m i n i s t and p o l i t i c a l r e a d i n g s , c o n c l u d i n g w i t h an
acceptance o f t h e m u l t i p l i c i t y o f codes w r i t t e n i n t o t h e novel and
o u t l i n i n g t h e a v a i l a b i l i t y o f t h e s t o r y t o v a r i e d r e a d i n g s as t h e myth
develops away f r o m t h e o r i g i n a l t e x t CB 5 6 ] .
I n some r e s p e c t s B a l d i c k ' s r e a d i n g i s no r e a d i n g a t a l l ,
he a l l o w s f o r a g r e a t many p o s s i b i l i t i e s .
t h e novel I n t o any one p a t t e r n .
but r a t h e r ,
He does n o t attempt t o f o r c e
However, h i s concern w i t h l a t e r
v e r s i o n s o f t h e myth means t h a t he does not f o l l o w t h i s p r o f i t a b l e
of enquiry t o i t s l o g i c a l conclusion.
line
Consequently, a l t h o u g h he sees
t h e n o v e l ' s a v a i l a b i l i t y t o d i f f e r e n t r e a d i n g s , he does n o t consider t h e
21
i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h i s i n the l i g h t
o f h i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f i t s over-
abundance of s i g n i f i c a t i o n and so he f a i l s t o r e c o g n i s e f u l l y the I r o n i c
n a t u r e o f the n o v e l .
In
The Proper Lady and
the
Voman Writer, Mary Poovey c o n s i d e r s Mary
S h e l l e y ' s view of h e r s e l f as an a u t h o r i n comparison w i t h t h e s e l f images o f her mother,
She
the
Mary V o l l s t o n e c r a f t , and Jane Austen.
begins by d i s t i n g u i s h i n g c l e a r l y between t h e 1818 e d i t i o n and
1831 v e r s i o n , which she sees as b e i n g compromised by a d e s i r e on the
p a r t o f Mary S h e l l e y t o conform t o c o n v e n t i o n a l p r o p r i e t y CP 117-1213.
She suggests t h e n o v e l i s i n t e n d e d l e s s as a means o f p r o v i n g her worth
t o her husband, but r a t h e r as a c r i t i c i s m o f t h e e g o t i s t i c a l
a s s e r t i o n i n v o l v e d i n a r t i s t i c c r e a t i o n CP 1223.
self-
For Poovey, Mary
S h e l l e y i s l e s s a p p r o v i n g o f Promethean d e s i r e t h a n o t h e r Romantics CP
1223
and sees t h e i m a g i n a t i o n as an a p p e t i t e t h a t must be r e g u l a t e d by
s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s CP 1233.
A c c o r d i n g t o her, Mary S h e l l e y saw n a t u r e as
e n c o u r a g i n g t h e s o r t of i m a g i n a t i v e p r o j e c t i o n t h a t the monster
r e p r e s e n t s , which she sees as an e v i l
CP 1263.
I n d i v i d u a l s mature by
e s t a b l i s h i n g a network of r e l a t i o n s h i p s r a t h e r t h a n by t h e more
c o n v e n t i o n a l Romantic s t r a t e g i e s of i m a g i n a t i v e p r o j e c t i o n ,
c o n f r o n t a t i o n and s e l f - c o n s c i o u s n e s s CP 1263.
For h e r , t h e monster
r e p r e s e n t s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s l i b e r a t e d d e s i r e , which i s d e s t r u c t i v e
1273.
I n t h i s she d i f f e r s f r o m Tropp who suggests t l i a t
CP
Frankenstein's
d e s i r e s are p e r v e r t e d i n h i s c h i l d h o o d ; i n Poovey's r e a d i n g , Mary
S h e l l e y sees d e s i r e as d e s t r u c t i v e per
se.
By t h e end of the n o v e l ,
F r a n k e n s t e i n has r e a l i s e d t h a t f u l f i l m e n t d e r i v e s from s e l f - d e n i a l ,
r a t h e r t h a n s e l f - a s s e r t i o n CP
1253.
T h i s i s a more u n e q u i v o c a l r e a d i n g t h a n t h e t e x t w i l l a c t u a l l y
permit.
Vhen F r a n k e n s t e i n addresses Walton's mutinous crew (212),
he
i s adamant t h a t h i s s e l f - a s s e r t i o n and c o n f r o n t a t i o n p r o v i d e a model f o r
a l l men
to follow.
His h i g h l y r h e t o r i c a l address c o n t a i n s a l l t h e
c o n v e n t i o n a l u r g i n g s t o s i n g l e - m i n d e d b r a v e r y and p e n e t r a t i o n of the
unknown.
The crew are not convinced, a l t h o u g h Walton s t i l l
w o r t h proceeding
(213).
thinks i t
N e v e r t h e l e s s , he submits t o a m a j o r i t y
d e c i s i o n , r e g r e t t i n g t h e l o s s o f t h e knowledge he might have gained.
The c o n c l u s i o n i s ambiguous.
I s t h i s t h e moment when Walton i s
22
r e s t r a i n e d w i t h i n t h e boundaries o f what i s reasonable
that
F r a n k e n s t e i n , p o s s i b l y enabled by t h e s o l i t a r y n a t u r e of h i s e x p l o i t ,
transcended?
I s t h i s the moment when s o c i a l p r e s s u r e s serve t o prevent
Walton f r o m t r a n s g r e s s i n g ?
unregenerate d e s i r e s ?
Or i s t h i s t h e h e a l t h y t h w a r t i n g of Walton's
I t i s not c l e a r .
Walton s e t s t h e mutiny and F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s d e a t h i n c o n t e x t when he
says,
' I have l o s t my hopes o f u t i l i t y and g l o r y ; - I have l o s t
friend'
(213).
He s t i l l
my
b e l i e v e s t h a t h i s e n t e r p r i s e was u n s e l f i s h t o
some e x t e n t , and he sees F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s acquaintance as the s a t i s f a c t i o n
of t h e s o c i a l want he expressed a t t h e o u t s e t o f h i s Journey (13).
However, F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a t t i t u d e J u s t b e f o r e he d i e s makes a c l e a r
reading s t i l l
more d i f f i c u l t .
I n i t i a l l y he i s condemnatory when he
hears t h a t Walton i s t o r e t u r n :
You
may
g i v e up your purpose;
I dare n o t ' (214).
complete
h i s quest.
'Do so, i f you w i l l ; but I w i l l not.
but mine i s a s s i g n e d t o me by heaven, and
He f e e l s bound by a g r e a t e r , p e r s o n a l I m p e r a t i v e t o
However, s h o r t l y b e f o r e he d i e s , F r a n k e n s t e i n
e x p l a i n s himself thus:
I n a f i t of e n t h u s i a s t i c madness I c r e a t e d a r a t i o n a l c r e a t u r e , and
was bound towards him, t o assure, as f a r as was i n my power, h i s
happiness and w e l l - b e i n g . T h i s was my d u t y ; but t h e r e was another
s t i l l paramount t o tlaat.
My d u t i e s towards my f e l l o w - c r e a t u r e s had
h i g h e r c l a i m s t o my a t t e n t i o n , because t h e y i n c l u d e d a g r e a t e r
p r o p o r t i o n of happiness o r misery . . .
When a c t u a t e d by s e l f i s h and v i c i o u s motives, I asked you t o
undertake my u n f i n i s h e d work; and I renew t h i s request now, when I
am o n l y induced by reason and v i r t u e . ' (214-5)
Apart f r o m t h e d i f f i c u l t y a reader may
have i n knowing how f a r t o t r u s t
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s f i n a l argument, which smacks of t h e persuasive eloquence
he warned Walton a g a i n s t (206), t h i s speech u n i t e s h i s s i n g l e n e s s of
purpose and t h e s o c i a l involvement Poovey sees opposed i n t h e novel.
H i s f i n a l speech adds more c o n t r a d i c t i o n :
happiness
in tranquillity,
' F a r e w e l l , Walton!
and a v o i d a m b i t i o n , even i f i t be o n l y the
a p p a r e n t l y i n n o c e n t one of d i s t i n g u i s h i n g y o u r s e l f i n science
discoveries.
Seek
Yet why do I say t h i s ?
these hopes, y e t another may
and
I have myself been b l a s t e d i n
succeed' (215).
The reader i s l e f t
whether Mary S h e l l e y i s a d v o c a t i n g o r eschewing
self-assertion.
unsure
He
wants some a u t h o r i t a t i v e v o i c e t o guide him, but the novel r e f u s e s t o
23
provide t h i s comfort.
I t encourages t h e r e a d e r t o l o o k f o r a
metacomment i n o r d e r t o demonstrate
i t s impossibility.
Poovey sees t h e novel i n more m o r a l i s t i c terms.
She sees the
n a r r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e of t h e n o v e l as s u p p o r t i n g her r e a d i n g .
The
reader
i s encouraged t o p a r t i c i p a t e b o t h i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s o f f e n c e ( i n
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s n a r r a t i v e ) and i n i t s p r o d u c t
CP 1283.
( t h e monster's n a r r a t i v e )
The monster has no complete e x i s t e n c e o f i t s own;
F r a n k e n s t e i n CP 1253.
nor does
The monster's appearance r e v e a l s i t s nature: i t
i s i n c o m p l e t e and t h e r e f o r e i s o l a t e d .
I t s r e j e c t i o n by the human
community i t a s p i r e s t o r e l e a s e s t h e d e s t r u c t i o n i t symbolises CP
1283.
But because t h e monster t e l l s i t s s t o r y , t h e r e a d e r i s f o r c e d t o
i d e n t i f y w i t h i t s anger and f r u s t r a t i o n .
Poovey suggests t h a t Mary
S h e l l e y ' i d e n t i f i e d most s t r o n g l y w i t h t h e p r o d u c t (and the v i c t i m ) of
Frankenstein's transgression:
a l o n e ' CP
t h e o b j e c t i f i e d i m a g i n a t i o n , h e l p l e s s and
1293.
By c o n t r a s t i n g Mary S h e l l e y ' s view o f t h e i m a g i n a t i o n w i t h t h a t o f
her husband, Poovey shows how she sees t h e i m a g i n a t i o n as an arena f o r
r e l a t i o n s h i p s , r a t h e r t h a n as a moral guide CP 1303.
For her, the
s o c i a l p r e s s u r e s w i t h i n s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s d e v e l o p an understanding of
duty.
The n a r r a t i v e s t r a t e g y o f Frankenstein a m p l i f i e s t h e importance of
s o c i a l contact.
The d i f f e r e n t mouthpieces enable Mary S h e l l e y b o t h t o
express and e f f a c e h e r s e l f s i m u l t a n e o u s l y CP
i d e n t i f i e s t h e way
1313.
Poovey a l s o
i n which Walton f o l l o w s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s path:
as h i s
s h i p s a i l s f u r t h e r f r o m human l i a b i t a t i o n and s o c i a l c o n t a c t , h i s l e t t e r s
become more o f a J o u r n a l , a more s e l f - a s s e r t i v e and i s o l a t e d form CP
1323.
H i s s e l f - a s s e r t i o n a l s o masquerades, as d i d Frankenstein's, as a
d e s i r e t o h e l p mankind CP 1323.
However, a f t e r t h e s a l u t a r y experience
of h i s meeting w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n and h i s d e c i s i o n t o t u r n back, he
r e t u r n s t o a d d r e s s i n g h i s s i s t e r , r a t h e r t h a n h i s f u t u r e s e l f CP
1333.
As suggested above, t h i s seems t o be t o o neat a r e a d i n g o f the ending o f
the
novel.
L i k e Tropp and B a l d i c k , Poovey f a i l s t o a p p r e c i a t e the f u l l
i m p l i c a t i o n s of t h e s t r u c t u r a l c o m p l e x i t y o f t h e novel.
However, her
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of i t as b e i n g t o some e x t e n t a c r i t i q u e of Romantic
a t t i t u d e s i s e x t r e m e l y u s e f u l , as i s her i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of t h e ambiguous
24
n a t u r e of t h e monster.
Where her r e a d i n g f a i l s i s i n i t s attempt t o t i e
t h e novel t o o p r e c i s e l y t o one i d e o l o g i c a l concern.
She
reads the novel
f r o m a f e m i n i s t s t a n d p o i n t , but f a i l s t o see t h e way
i n which the novel
embodies a f a r more f u n d a m e n t a l l y f e m i n i s t p o s i t i o n i n i t s indeterminacy
and r e f u s a l of a u t h o r i t a t i v e s t a t u s .
There are s i m i l a r i t i e s o f approach between Poovey and L.J.
i n h i s essay ' F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s Monster and i t s R e l a t i v e s :
Knowledge i n E n g l i s h Romanticism*.
Swingle
Problems of
Swingle sees t h e novel as concerned
w i t h t h e l i m i t s o f t h e human mind t o know t r u t h f u l l y and c o m p l e t e l y
51],
He suggests
CS
t h a t Mary S h e l l e y develops t h i s t h r o u g h m u l t i p l e
n a r r a t i o n and what he c a l l s a ' s t r a n g e r ' CS 573,
a 'Romantic i r o n i s t ' .
wtiat Simpson would c a l l
He resembles B a l d i c k , who a l s o suggests t h a t the
novel i s about knowledge, but who
i s l e s s concerned w i t h the reader's
grasp o f t h e n o v e l t h a n t h e knowledge c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s of
the t e x t .
Swingle
begins by p o i n t i n g out t h a t t h e monster has no name, and
t h a t i t i s i d e n t i f i e d w i t h b o t h good and e v i l CS 5 1 ] .
Although what the
monster says of i t s e l f suggests benevolence, t h e r e i s no c o r r o b o r a t i o n
f r o m any o t h e r source CS 5 2 ] .
Thus, a l t h o u g h t h e monster appears
c o m p l e t e l y i n n o c e n t , we a r e not j u s t i f i e d i n assuming t h a t Mary S h e l l e y
saw
i t as an a u t h o r i a l mouthpiece.
T h i s r a i s e s a g a i n t h e problem of
eloquence and t h e q u e s t i o n of t o n a l i t y r a i s e d by Simpson.
I n Swingle's
r e a d i n g of t h e n o v e l , F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s dilemma a r i s e s f r o m h i s doubt about
t h e monster's r e a l n a t u r e , which he i d e n t i f i e s as t h e c e n t r a l issue of
t h e novel CS 5 3 ] .
When he meets t h e monster a t t h e end of the novel,
Walton r e p e a t s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s doubt; but t h e monster vanishes before he
can s o l v e the problem CS 5 5 ] .
For Swingle,
t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e moral n a t u r e o f t h e monster i s
c r u c i a l t o any r e a d i n g o f t h e n o v e l , but Mary S h e l l e y ensures t h a t the
reader has an over-abundance of c o n t r a d i c t o r y i n f o r m a t i o n on the
s u b j e c t , and i n s u f f i c i e n t guidance CS 5 5 ] .
The
p a t t e r n i s again of an
absence o f r e l i a b l e metacomment p r e c l u d i n g any a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g .
Swingle
i d e n t i f i e s t h e monster w i t h a v a r i e t y of f i g u r e s i n Romantic
p o e t r y , p a r t i c u l a r l y w i t h Porphyro i n 'The
suggests
Eve o f St Agnes' CS 573.
t h a t t h e r e i s an a m b i g u i t y about Porphyro,
25
as t o h i s
He
benevolence o r m a l i g n i t y CS 583.
S i m i l a r l y , on t h e b a s i s o f t h e t e x t
a l o n e we cannot be s u r e about t h e ' s t r a n g e r ' c r e a t e d by F r a n k e n s t e i n .
F i n a l l y , Swingle
i d e n t i f i e s an o p p o s i t i o n between E l i z a b e t h and
C l e r v a l , who remain w i t h i n t h e boundaries o f c o n v e n t i o n a l b e l i e f ,
and
Walton and F r a n k e n s t e i n , who a t t e m p t t o t r a n s c e n d them CS 61-23.
C l e r v a l and E l i z a b e t h are happy u n t i l t h e y are d e s t r o y e d by the
consequences o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s t r a n s g r e s s i o n CS 623.
However,
F r a n k e n s t e i n f i n d s t h a t h i s r e s e a r c h leads t o a k i n d o f mental s u i c i d e
as t h e harder he searches f o r c e r t a i n t i e s , t h e more he merely
his
u n c e r t a i n t i e s CS 633,
quest on t o V a l t o n , who
multiplies
I n t h e end, F r a n k e n s t e i n d i e s and passes h i s
reaches no more c e r t a i n c o n c l u s i o n and
f u r t h e r m o r e , i s f o r c e d back t o t h e w o r l d of men
CS 643.
who,
In this
r e s p e c t . Swingle's r e a d i n g d i f f e r s f r o m t h e o t h e r t h r e e r e a d i n g s
c o n s i d e r e d , which see Walton as h a v i n g l e a r n e d f r o m h i s experience
returning willingly.
and
There i s no c o n c l u s i v e evidence w i t h i n the novel
f o r any change o f h e a r t on Walton's p a r t .
T h i s seems an attempt by
these c r i t i c s t o impose a metacomment which t h e t e x t w i l l not s u p p o r t .
Swingle concludes by d e s c r i b i n g Frankenstein as a v e r s i o n of t h e
myth o f t r a n s g r e s s i o n f o r a g o d - l e s s w o r l d where r e t r i b u t i o n comes from
the
mind i t s e l f CS
653.
Swingle's f o c u s s i n g on t h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l i s i m p o r t a n t and
r e c o g n i s e s t h e e s s e n t i a l unknowableness of t h e monster and t h e t e x t
itself.
The reader i s c h a l l e n g e d t o develop a r e a d i n g , but the attempt
i s t h w a r t e d every t i m e i t i s made.
Swingle's c o n c l u s i o n u n f o r t u n a t e l y
f a l l s i n t o t h e same t r a p as t h e o t h e r works c o n s i d e r e d of n a r r o w i n g i t s
f o c u s t o d e r i v e a metacomment f r o m a work t h a t s p e c i f i c a l l y p r e c l u d e s
such determinacy.
These d i f f e r e n t and c o n t r a d i c t o r y r e a d i n g s d e r i v e t h e c e n t r a l issue
of
t h e novel f r o m two l i n k e d dilemmas.
There i s t h e q u e s t i o n of whether
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s researches are good o r e v i l ,
t h a t i s , whether such s e l f -
a s s e r t i o n can be s a n c t i o n e d ; and t h e r e i s t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e moral
n a t u r e o f t h e monster:
i f t h e monster i s good, then F r a n k e n s t e i n should
c h e r i s h i t ; but i t s e f f e c t s are e v i l :
s h o u l d d e s t r o y i t ; but i t i s h i s own
26
i f i t is evil,
child.
then F r a n k e n s t e i n
The r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e monster's appearance and i t s n a t u r e
makes c l e a r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n more d i f f i c u l t .
appearance s y m b o l i s e s i t s n a t u r e .
Poovey suggests t h a t i t s
However, our source f o r i t s
appearance i s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s n a r r a t i v e , and we i n s t i n c t i v e l y m i s t r u s t
his
immediate
judgements,
because t h e y come t o o q u i c k l y and we a r e aware
of h i s c a p a c i t y f o r s e l f - d e l u s i o n .
uncorroborated v i s u a l
They a l s o r e l y t o o much on
evidence.
For example, when t h e monster cones i n t o h i s bedchamber,
Frankenstein runs i n h o r r o r (53).
the
monster's g e s t u r e s mean.
However, i t i s f a r from c l e a r what
I n f a c t , Frankenstein's
immediate
judgement a s c r i b e s t o o much c a p a b i l i t y t o t h e monster so soon a f t e r h i s
creation.
The monster does n o t even mention t h i s i n c i d e n t , but suggests
he was i n c a p a b l e o f behaving w i t h any purpose a t t h i s stage (97).
F r a n k e n s t e i n mistakes t h e monster's c o n f u s i o n f o r d e l i b e r a t e ,
rational
action.
A s s o c i a t e d w i t h these dilemmas o f moral e v a l u a t i o n a r e a number o f
o t h e r concerns.
How f a r can knowledge ever be sure?
Frankenstein i s
not
sure about t h e n a t u r e o f t h e monster;
t h e reader i s not sure about
the
r e l a t i o n s h i p between d i f f e r e n t d i s c o u r s e s i n t h e n o v e l ; Walton i s
not
s u r e about t h e n a t u r e o f t h e monster which disappears b e f o r e he can
t e s t i t a g a i n s t F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p r e j u d i c e ; t h e reader i s n o t sure about
what happens t o Walton a t t h e end o f t h e n o v e l .
The n a r r a t i v e succeeds i n t h a t t h e r e i s a c o m p e l l i n g and coherent
sequence o f events, b u t t h e r e i s a gap between t h e c l a r i t y o f t h e s t o r y
and t h e o v e r l o a d o f p o s s i b l e meanings t h a t i t c a r r i e s w i t h i t .
This i s
l a r g e l y a consequence o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e n o v e l , which suggests
guidance
that
i s a v a i l a b l e about how t o read i t , b u t i t f a i l s t o p r o v i d e i t .
Swingle and B a l d i c k a r e r i g h t t o suggest t h a t t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e novel
i s knowledge i t s e l f ,
b u t wrong i n s u g g e s t i n g t h a t i t p r o v i d e s a c l e a r
answer.
I n c o n t r a s t , p a r t o f t h e reason f o r t h e endurance o f t h e myth and
i t s a v a i l a b i l i t y t o a v a r i e t y o f r e a d i n g s i s t h a t i n essence t h e myth i s
so s i m p l e and fundamental:
acts.
c r e a t i o n and t r a n s g r e s s i o n as simultaneous
To see t h e myth as h a v i n g a n a r r o w l y t e c h n o l o g i c a l and p r o p h e t i c
meaning i s t o narrow i t s a p p l i c a t i o n and t o make i t t o o s p e c i f i c , but t o
deny t h e presence o f t h i s aspect i n t h e n o v e l , as B a l d i c k does, i s t o
27
i g n o r e p a r t o f t h e n o v e l ' s moral overtones:
Tropp's s u g g e s t i o n t h a t t h e
c r e a t i o n o f a l i v i n g c r e a t u r e f r o m dead m a t t e r p o r t r a y s an
m e c h a n i s t i c view o f human n a t u r e CT 633 i s c o n v i n c i n g .
unreasonably
The a m b i g u i t y of
the
ending, i n which i t i s n o t c l e a r what Walton has l e a r n e d and what
his
a t t i t u d e towards h i s experience
i s , i s due t o t h e s l i p p e r y n a t u r e o f
the
n o v e l , as opposed t o t h e myth.
The myth p r e s e n t s t h e consequences
of
d a b b l i n g i n f o r b i d d e n knowledge; t h e novel seems t o suggest such
simple m o r a l i t i e s , but u l t i m a t e l y prevents t h e i r f o r m u l a t i o n .
These f o u r d i f f e r i n g r e a d i n g s o f f e r much t h a t i s v a l u a b l e f o r an
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e n o v e l , b u t a l l o f them f a i l
t o recognise the
e s s e n t i a l l y e v a s i v e n a t u r e o f t h e novel as w r i t t e n by Mary Shelley.
B a l d i c k ' s d i s t i n c t i o n between t h e myth and t h e novel i s a very h e l p f u l
one i n t h i s r e s p e c t , as i s Swingle's
knowledge w i t h i n t h e n o v e l .
h i g h l i g h t i n g of the i n s t a b i l i t y of
However, t h e value o f these d i f f e r e n t
r e a d i n g s f o r t h i s t h e s i s l i e s i n t h e i r v a r i e d , n o t t o say i n c o m p a t i b l e ,
p a r t i a l readings.
the
A l l o f them f a i l
t o r e a l i s e t h a t t h e novel
f i n a l a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g a l l f o u r o f them f e e l c o n s t r a i n e d t o
provide.
ICo m a t t e r how much they r e c o g n i s e t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s of
g e n e r a t i n g some f i n a l coherent statement,
d e r i v e such a metacomment.
the
t h e y a l l f e e l t h e need t o
They each, i n t h e i r d i f f e r e n t ways, f o l l o w
p a t t e r n o f t h e novel up t o t h e p o i n t where i t i n s i s t s upon i t s t r u l y
dynamic n a t u r e .
the
precludes
Each o f them i d e n t i f i e s much t h a t i s i l l u m i n a t i n g about
i s s u e s r a i s e d i n t h e n o v e l , and t h e way i n which t h e y a r e discussed,
but each o f them i n s i s t s upon t h e f i n a l outcome as p r o d u c t , r a t h e r than
process.
the
I t i s o n l y i n t h e l i g h t o f Simpson's 'hermeneutic
t r u e n a t u r e o f t h e novel becomes apparent.
circle'
that
I t i s not even so much
knowledge, o r i t s n a t u r e t h a t i s t h e s u b j e c t o f t h e n o v e l , b u t t h e
process o f r e a d i n g I t s e l f and t h e g e n e r a t i o n o f knowledge as a r e s u l t .
I n c o n t r a s t . I n The Godwinian Novel Pamela C l e m i t recognises t h e
f u l l e x t e n t o f t h e d e s t a b l l i s a t i o n o f meaning i n t h e novel and a l s o t h e
f u l l e x t e n t o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s debt t o and development o f her f a t h e r ' s
ideas.
However, her a t t e m p t t o t i e t h e s t r u c t u r a l u n c e r t a i n t y o f t h e
novel t o a s p e c i f i c i d e o l o g i c a l concern seems t o o narrow a focus.
C l e m i t begins by i d e n t i f y i n g t h e e x t e n t t o which t h e group o f novels
she i d e n t i f i e s as 'Godwinian' take as t h e i r s t a r t i n g p o i n t Godwin's
28
b e l i e f i n ' t h e s a c r e d and i n d e f e a s i b l e r i g h t o f p r i v a t e Judgement (PJ
11. 449)' CC 53.
She r e c o g n i s e s t h e way i n which ' t h e i n b u i l t
u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e f i r s t - p e r s o n n a r r a t i v e t h r o w s t h e burden o f
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n and d e c i s i o n onto t h e reader, s o l i c i t i n g h i s or her
active participation'
i n Godwin's novels CC 6] and she suggests
that
'Mary S h e l l e y ' s e a r l y a n a l y s i s o f t h e oppressed psyche g a i n s i t s immense
power because she i s a l r e a d y w r i t i n g w i t h i n a genre d i s c u s s i n g s o c i a l
i s s u e s and r e v o l u t i o n a r y change, b u t a t t h e same t i m e t h e novel's
s t r u c t u r a l complexity b r i n g s t o the fore the r a d i c a l i n s t a b i l i t y of
meaning a l r e a d y l a t e n t i n Caleb Villiams' CC 8 ] .
I n t h i s respect her
a n a l y s i s o f t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e novel i s more s o p h i s t i c a t e d than t h a t
o f o t h e r c r i t i c s who t e n d t o s t r e s s t h e t h e m a t i c dimensions a p p r o p r i a t e
t o t h e i r p a r t i c u l a r i d e o l o g i c a l concerns.
i n t e l l e c t u a l Involvement
She emphasises Mary S h e l l e y ' s
w i t h t h e ideas o f her f a t h e r ' s c i r c l e and she
p a r t i c u l a r l y s i n g l e s o u t f e m i n i s t r e a d i n g s o f t h e novel f o r t h e i r
s e l e c t i v e approach CC 141].
The Godwinian r e s p e c t f o r p r i v a t e judgement
tias i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e p e r s o n a l and I n d i v i d u a l n a t u r e o f reading.
She suggests
t h a t 'Mary S h e l l e y e x p l o i t s t h e f i r s t - p e r s o n n a r r a t i v e
as a means o f i n t e r n a l i s i n g p u b l i c i s s u e s ' CC 1443.
it
i s n o t a l l t h e f i r s t p e r s o n - n a r r a t i v e achieves.
T h i s i s t r u e , but
She emphasises the
way t h a t 'Mary S h e l l e y ' s s c e p t i c i s m i s n o t c o n f i n e d t o a e s t h e t i c and
p r i v a t e concerns:
i n s t e a d she pursues t h i s q u e s t i o n i n g o f s u b j e c t i v i t y
i n t o a l l c a t e g o r i e s o f knowledge' CC 1453.
J u s t as o t h e r s have pursued
t h e i n f l u e n c e o f Paradise Lost t h r o u g h t h e n o v e l , C l e m i t h i g h l i g h t s t h e
importance
o f Volney's Ruins; or, A Survey of the Revolutions of Empires
i n Mary S h e l l e y ' s t h o u g h t , b u t s t r e s s e s t h a t ' u n l i k e Percy, Mary S h e l l e y
remains p r o f o u n d l y s c e p t i c a l about Volney's f a i t h i n t h e u l t i m a t e
t r i u m p h o f reason'
CC 1523.
Thus she sees Frankenstein very much as a
c r i t i q u e o f contemporary ideas CC 154-53.
By f o c u s s i n g on one o f t h e
many elements c o n t r i b u t i n g t o Frankenstein, C l e m i t upsets t h e d e l i c a t e
balance
i t embodies, i n which t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f v a r i e d and c o n f l i c t i n g
elements,
each p r o v i d i n g i t s own p a r t i c u l a r s t r a i n o f s i g n i f i c a n c e ,
s e r v e s t o detach t h e n o v e l f r o m any u n i l a t e r a l r e a d i n g and leaves i t
f r e e t o p r o v i d e a c r i t i q u e o f t h e a c t o f r e a d i n g and meaning g e n e r a t i o n
a t a more fundamental
level.
29
For her, what Mary S h e l l e y has done i s t o r e c a s t ' t h e Godwinian p l o t
as a c r e a t i o n s t o r y , r e - w o r k i n g b o t h t h e Greek and Roman myth o f
Prometheus and t h e J u d a e o - C h r i s t i a n myth as mediated by Paradise Lost,
and adding a c r i t i c a l commentary on Godwin's r a t i o n a l account o f s o c i a l
o r i g i n s i n Political Justice CC 1553.
she sees an i d e o l o g i c a l dimension
T h i s emphasises t h e way i n which
t o t h e novel.
She sees t h e v a r i o u s
d o u b l i n g s as c r i t i q u e s o f o t h e r c u l t u r a l and s o c i a l themes; f o r example,
she reads t h e V i c t o r / C l e r v a l
r e l a t i o n s h i p as a ' b r i e f r e t r o s p e c t
p o e t r y o f her Romantic c o n t e m p o r a r i e s '
psychological i s revealing
CC 1603.
of the p o l i t i c a l
much t h e s p e c i f i c a p p l i c a t i o n s
on t h e
I n her r e a d i n g , t h e
CC 1623.
This stresses too
o f t h e n o v e l , b u t C l e m i t does a t l e a s t
r e c o g n i s e t h e way t h a t meaning i s permanently
destabilised:
Shelley foregrounds t h e issue o f u n r e l i a b i l i t y i n a h i g h l y
'Mary
sceptical
manner t h a t has more i n common w i t h Hogg's Confessions of a Justified
Sinner t h a n w i t h Caleb Williams' CC 1593.
which ' t h e o c c a s i o n o f t h e l e g a l t r i a l
She a l s o c o n s i d e r s t h e way i n
focusses l a r g e r e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l
i s s u e s ' CC 1723, b u t narrows h e r own f o c u s t o ' t h e r a d i c a l s c e p t i c i s m a t
the h e a r t o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s p o l i t i c a l a n a l y s i s '
CC 1723.
C l e m i t summarises Mary S h e l l e y ' s t e c h n i q u e i n t h e novel and p a r t l y
e x p l a i n s i t s success when she says,
' I t s multiple first-person narrative
seeks t o place t h e reader as t r u e a r b i t e r o f p o l i t i c a l J u s t i c e i n
Godwin's manner.
But Mary S h e l l e y l a c k s Godwin's o p t i m i s t i c f a i t h i n
man's c a p a c i t y f o r r a t i o n a l Judgement' CC 1733.
Nevertheless, t h i s
narrows t h e scope o f t h e n o v e l t o o much and, w h i l s t t h e metacomment she
draws f r o m t h e s t r u c t u r e and method o f t h e novel i s l e s s unequivocal
t h a n i n o t h e r r e a d i n g s , even t h i s r e p r e s e n t s an a u t h o r i t a r i a n
imposition
of t h e k i n d t h a t t h e novel eschews.
C l e m i t ' s response t o t h e novel i s much more r e s p e c t f u l o f t h e
n o v e l ' s r a d i c a l c o m p l e x i t y , b u t even she f i n d s h e r s e l f unable t o accept
t h e l e v e l o f i n d e t e r m i n a c y w r i t t e n i n t o ( o r o u t o f ) t h e novel.
exploring
In
t h e n a v e l ' s r e j e c t i o n o f a u t h o r i t y f u l l y , aspects from each o f
these r e a d i n g s w i l l be i n c o r p o r a t e d i n t o t h i s t h e s i s .
What they have t o
say i n s p e c i f i c areas i s v a l u a b l e and i l l u m i n a t i n g , even i f they
develop
t h e i r own p a r t i c u l a r r e a d i n g s a g a i n s t t h e g r a i n o f t h e novel's o v e r a l l
structure.
30
Chapter 2:
Paradise Lost
Mary S h e l l e y ' s use o f Paradise Lost i n Frankenstein seems
i n c o n s i s t e n t , a l l o w i n g f o r a v a r i e t y o f readings.
Modern r e a d i n g s tend
not t o f o l l o w a Romantic view o f t h e poem where Satan i s seen as t h e
hero f o r h i s i n d o m i t a b l e r e f u s a l t o succumb t o t h e t y r a n n y o f God.
However, t h i s i s a view r e c o g n i s e d by Mary S h e l l e y , even i f t h e i m p l i c i t
c r i t i c i s m o f S a t a n i c a d v e n t u r i n g and e g o t i s m i n t h e novel^ suggests
i t was n o t t h e one she supported.
that
I n The Godwinian Novel, Pamela C l e m i t
shows t h e way i n which Volney's Ruins i s used i n a s i m i l a r l y e q u i v o c a l
way.
I t i s n o t i m m e d i a t e l y apparent
read Paradise Lost.
how t h e reader o f Frankenstein should
I n a sense t h e t e x t o f Paradise Lost, l i k e t h e
monster h i m s e l f , i s a c t i n g as a 'Romantic i r o n i s t ' .
I t i s t h e monster
who makes most use o f M i l t o n ' s poem t o p a t t e r n h i s own experience.
However, Paradise Lost i s r e f e r r e d t o t h r o u g h o u t t h e novel.
Frankenstein can be seen as a r e - r e a d i n g o f t h e same myth f o r l a t e r
times. ^
Paradise Lost i s most i m p o r t a n t i n Volumes I I and I I I . The
o c c a s i o n s when t h e r e i s a r e f e r e n c e o r echo i n Volume I c o u l d as e a s i l y
d e r i v e f r o m unconscious v e r b a l resemblance o r from a r c h e t y p a l
p a t t e r n i n g s t o o g e n e r a l i n t h e i r n a t u r e t o j u s t i f y any s p e c i f i c
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n with Milton.
T h i s can be seen when F r a n k e n s t e i n f i r s t i n f o r m s Walton o f t h e
nature of h i s discovery:
I see by your eagerness, and t h e wonder and hope which your eyes
express, my f r i e n d , t h a t you expect t o be informed o f t h e s e c r e t
w i t h which I am acquainted; t h a t cannot be: l i s t e n p a t i e n t l y u n t i l
the end o f my s t o r y , and you w i l l e a s i l y p e r c e i v e why I am r e s e r v e d
on t h a t s u b j e c t . I w i l l n o t l e a d you on, unguarded and ardent as I
t h e n was, t o your d e s t r u c t i o n and i n f a l l i b l e misery.
Learn from me,
i f n o t by my p r e c e p t s , a t l e a s t by my example, how dangerous i s t h e
acquirement o f knowledge, and how much h a p p i e r t h a t man i s who
b e l i e v e s h i s n a t i v e town t o be t h e w o r l d , than he who a s p i r e s t o
become g r e a t e r t h a n h i s n a t u r e w i l l a l l o w . (48)
T h i s i s a r e f u s a l t o tempt on t h e p a r t o f Frankenstein.
There a r e
s i m i l a r i t i e s w i t h t h e F a l l , b u t t h e y a r e a r e g e n e r i c , r a t h e r than
31
specific:
b o t h works embody t h e same myth o f t r a n s g r e s s i o n i n d i f f e r e n t
forms.
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s next warning o f t h e dangers o f o v e r r e a c h i n g can
s i m i l a r l y be seen t o resemble t h e p a t t e r n o f Paradise Lost:
I f t h e s t u d y t o which you a p p l y y o u r s e l f has a tendency t o weaken
your a f f e c t i o n s , and t o d e s t r o y your t a s t e f o r those simple
p l e a s u r e s i n which no a l l o y can p o s s i b l y mix, t h e n t h a t s t u d y i s
c e r t a i n l y u n l a w f u l , t h a t i s t o say, n o t b e f i t t i n g t h e human mind.
I f t h i s r u l e were always observed; i f no man a l l o w e d any p u r s u i t
whatsoever t o i n t e r f e r e w i t h t h e t r a n q u i l l i t y o f h i s domestic
a f f e c t i o n s , Greece had n o t been enslaved; Caesar would have spared
h i s c o u n t r y ; America would have been discovered-more g r a d u a l l y ; and
t h e empires o f Mexico and Peru had n o t been destroyed. (51)
Here a g a i n t h e warning i s r e l a t e d t o t h e l o n g - t e r m consequences o f
the F a l l .
F r a n k e n s t e i n compares h i s own f a i l u r e t o r e s i s t t e m p t a t i o n t o
other s i m i l a r f a i l u r e s .
There i s a s i m i l a r p a t t e r n t o Paradise Lost,
but not a d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p .
domestic contentment.
Temptation i s seen as d i s t r a c t i o n from
T h i s m o t i f can be seen i n Eve's d e p a r t u r e from
Adam i n Book IX o f Paradise Lost, b u t i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r i l y r e f e r r e d t o
here.
The p a t t e r n o f t h e F a l l i n Paradise Lost of d e s i r e , consummation and
d i s g u s t i s r e p e a t e d i n Frankenstein.
When he has completed
t h e monster,
F r a n k e n s t e i n comments, ' I had d e s i r e d i t w i t h an ardour t h a t f a r
exceeded moderation; b u t now t h a t I had f i n i s h e d , t h e beauty o f t h e
dream vanished, and b r e a t h l e s s h o r r o r and d i s g u s t f i l l e d my h e a r t ' (523).
H i s dreams 'were now become a h e l l t o me' ( 5 4 ) , a term r e m i n i s c e n t
o f Satan's d e s c r i p t i o n o f h i s predicament
i n Book IV o f Paradise Lost:
'Which way I f l y i s h e l l ; myself am h e l l ' L PL IV 1.751.
A l t h o u g h F r a n k e n s t e i n p r e s e n t s h i s h i s t o r y as comparable w i t h
Adam's, t h e r e i s a v e r b a l l i n k i n g w i t h Satan.
The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n
between t h e c h a r a c t e r s o f Frankenstein and Paradise Lost, which i s
i m p o r t a n t i n t h e i r o n i c p a t t e r n o f Frankenstein, i s confused a l r e a d y .
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s l i k e Adam i n having f a l l e n ,
and i s i m p l i c i t l y a l i g n e d w i t h Satan.
l i k e God i n having c r e a t e d ,
H i s d e s i r e f o r revenge on h i s own
c r e a t u r e makes him s i m u l t a n e o u s l y a parody o f God and a l s o Satanic.
When he meets t h e monster, t h e i r M i l t o n i c r o l e s o v e r l a p .
32
II
The monster's d i s c o v e r y o f a cache o f books develops h i s
u n d e r s t a n d i n g beyond what he l e a r n s f r o m experience and f r o m t h e example
o f t h e De Laceys, b u t i t a l s o p r o v i d e s him w i t h a model f o r h i s sense o f
personal i d e n t i t y .
psychology
H i s l e a r n i n g begins w i t h Goethe, who i l l u s t r a t e s t h e
of the i n d i v i d u a l .
The monster i s e x c i t e d i n f a v o u r o f
s i m p l e v i r t u e by P l u t a r c h , b u t M i l t o n i s t h e most i m p o r t a n t .
But Paradise Lost e x c i t e d d i f f e r e n t and f a r deeper emotions.
I read
i t , as I had r e a d t h e o t h e r volumes which had f a l l e n i n t o my hands,
as a t r u e h i s t o r y .
I t moved every f e e l i n g o f wonder and awe, t h a t
t h e p i c t u r e o f an omnipotent God w a r r i n g w i t h h i s c r e a t u r e s was
capable o f e x c i t i n g .
I o f t e n r e f e r r e d t h e s e v e r a l s i t u a t i o n s , as
t h e i r s i m i l a r i t y s t r u c k me, t o my own. L i k e Adam, I was c r e a t e d
a p p a r e n t l y u n i t e d by no l i n k t o any o t h e r b e i n g i n e x i s t e n c e ; but
h i s s t a t e was f a r d i f f e r e n t f r o m mine i n e v e r y o t h e r respect. He
had come f o r t h f r o m t h e hands o f God a p e r f e c t c r e a t u r e , happy and
prosperous, guarded by t h e e s p e c i a l care o f h i s Creator; he was
a l l o w e d t o converse w i t h , and a c q u i r e knowledge f r o m beings o f a
s u p e r i o r n a t u r e : b u t I was wretched, h e l p l e s s , and alone.
Many
t i m e s I c o n s i d e r e d Satan as t h e f i t t e r emblem o f my c o n d i t i o n ; f o r
o f t e n , l i k e him, when I viewed t h e b l i s s o f my p r o t e c t o r s , t h e
b i t t e r g a l l o f envy rose w i t h i n me.(125)
The
monster acknowledges h i s use o f Paradise Lost t o p r o v i d e a s e t
o f c a t e g o r i e s t o d e s c r i b e Frankenstein; but Frankenstein p a r o d i e s
Milton.
There i s c o n f l i c t between c r e a t e d and c r e a t o r , b u t beyond t h a t
p r i n c i p l e i d e n t i t i e s a r e f a r from c l e a r .
omnipotent;
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s not
p h y s i c a l l y t h e monster i s t h e more p o w e r f u l o f t h e two.
monster s h i f t s h i s own i d e n t i f i c a t i o n between Adam and Satan.
a f f e c t s h i s view o f h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n .
The
This
I n the t h i r d
volume he i s more l i k e Satan as he d e s t r o y s ' t o f i n d ease t o ( h i s )
r e l e n t l e s s t h o u g h t s ' i PL IX 11. 129-301.
However, he i s a l s o God-like.
F r a n k e n s t e i n can a l s o be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h Satan, i n h i s d e s i r e f o r
revenge, and w i t h Adam, i n t h a t he might be s a i d t o have f a l l e n , as w e l l
as w i t h God.
The r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e c l e a r c a t e g o r i e s i n Paradise
Lost and Frankenstein i s ambiguous and s h i f t i n g .
The moral e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s r e p r e s e n t e d by God, Adam,
Satan (and Eve) i s i t s e l f a source o f a m b i g u i t y .
The Romantics
i d e n t i f i e d w i t h Satan as a Promethean hero i n r e v o l t a g a i n s t the
t y r a n n i c a l r u l e o f God; t h e y found Promethean energy more a t t r a c t i v e
33
than s e l f - r i g h t e o u s a u t h o r i t y .
However, Poovey reads Frankenstein as a
c r i t i q u e o f t h e e g o t i s t i c a l s e l f - p r o j e c t i o n shown by Satan (and
F r a n k e n s t e i n ) , and an argument f o r domestic
contentment.
This morality
i s s u b v e r t e d by t h e s h i f t i n g i d e n t i f i c a t i o n s between Frankenstein and
Paradise Lost, but not denied.
Because t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p i s not s t a b l e
what appears t o r e s o l v e a m b i g u i t y o n l y deepens i t .
Paradise Lost s e r v e s two f u n c t i o n s w i t h i n t h e monster's account of
himself.
He uses i t t o p a t t e r n h i s experience and as a key f o r h i s
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h Frankenstein:
b o t h F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster
a t t e m p t t o d e f i n e t h e i r r o l e s i n M i l t o n ' s terms.
At v a r i o u s times they
a r e more o r l e s s conscious o f t h e i r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h God,
Satan.*
Adam and
The monster e s p e c i a l l y t r i e s t o d e f i n e h i s experience by exact
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Paradise Lost.
However, he i s t r y i n g t o g i v e a more
r i g i d r e a d i n g of M i l t o n t h a n t h e r o l e o f t h e poem i n Frankenstein w i l l
allow.
I f Frankenstein does f u n c t i o n by encouraging,
but p r e v e n t i n g ,
a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g s , t h e n t h e monster's a t t e m p t t o e n f o r c e h i s
p a r t i c u l a r r e a d i n g o f Paradise Last i s a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of the s t r a t e g y
the
reader i s encouraged t o adopt, but prevented f r o m c a r r y i n g out.
The
c o n f l i c t between t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l Romantic r e a d i n g o f t h e poem, which
h i g h l i g h t s Satan's h e r o i c s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t t h e a r b i t r a r y t y r a n n y of
God,
and t h e sympathies o f Mary S h e l l e y i n f a v o u r of 'the amiableness of
domestic
affection'
i n any one-sided
(7) produces t o o g r e a t an i r o n i c gap t o be ignored
reading without other i n d i c a t i o n of p r i o r i t y .
no guidance g i v e n .
There i s
The u n s t a b l e n a t u r e of t h e t e x t used as f o u n d a t i o n
d e s t a b i l i s e s any c o n s t r u c t i o n s b u i l t upon i t .
Vhen F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster meet on t h e Mer de Glace, the
monster
a t t e m p t s t o e x p l a i n t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between c r e a t o r and
created:
I am t h y c r e a t u r e , and I w i l l be even m i l d and d o c i l e t o my n a t u r a l
l o r d and k i n g , i f thou w i l t a l s o p e r f o r m t h y p a r t , the which thou
owest me.
Oh, F r a n k e n s t e i n , be not e q u i t a b l e t o every o t h e r , and
t r a m p l e upon me alone, t o whom t h y j u s t i c e , and even t h y clemency
and a f f e c t i o n , i s most due.
Remember, t h a t I am t h y c r e a t u r e : I
ought t o be t h y Adam; but I am r a t h e r t h e f a l l e n angel, whom thou
d r i v e s t f r o m Joy f o r no misdeed. Everywhere I see b l i s s , from which
I alone am i r r e v o c a b l y excluded.
I was benevolent and good; misery
made me a f i e n d .
Make me happy, and I s h a l l a g a i n be v i r t u o u s . (95)
34
T h i s i s t h e f i r s t o c c a s i o n when terms s p e c i f i c a l l y drawn f r o m
Paradise Lost are
used.
The monster r e f e r s t o h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h
F r a n k e n s t e i n as a ' n a t u r a l ' one,
but a l s o r e p r e s e n t s t h e c r e a t o r - c r e a t e d
r e l a t i o n s h i p as i n v o l v i n g mutual r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s .
The c r e a t u r e should
be ' m i l d and d o c i l e ' ; w h i l e t h e ' l o r d ' ought t o show even-handed
j u s t i c e , clemency and a f f e c t i o n .
to
The monster, by h i s e x p l i c i t r e f e r e n c e
c h a r a c t e r s i n Paradise Lost and t h e echoes of Satan's s o l i l o q u i e s i n
Books IV and IX,®
shows where these ideas come from.
The monster behaves s i m i l a r l y t o t h e t h e a d u l t speaker i n
Vordsworth's
'Ve are Seven' o r 'Anecdote f o r F a t h e r s ' , who
attempts
u n s u c c e s s f u l l y t o impose h i s i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f circumstances upon a
c h i l d who
e i t h e r r e s i s t s o r who c o m p l i e s w i t h t h e a d u l t request w i t h o u t
understanding.^'
Here t h e monster i s t r y i n g t o impose upon F r a n k e n s t e i n
a view o f t h e i r r e l a t i o n s h i p d e r i v e d f r o m h i s p a r t i c u l a r r e a d i n g of
Paradise Lost.
Regardless
t h i s i s an a c t o f t y r a n n y .
to
of t h e e x c e l l e n c e of the monster's e d u c a t i o n ,
Because t h e monster's p r e c i s e r e l a t i o n s h i p
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s u n c l e a r t o him, he a t t e m p t s t o d e f i n e i t i n terms
f a m i l i a r t o him, which he t r e a t s as a b s o l u t e l y s t a b l e .
view o f t h e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of ' l o r d ' and
However, t h i s
' c r e a t u r e ' , which he b e l i e v e s
s e l f - e v i d e n t , i s not shared by F r a n k e n s t e i n .
The monster's account uses Paradise Lost as a template f o r h i s own
experience.
Sometimes t h i s i s o v e r t and a t o t h e r s i m p l i c i t .
a l r e a d y been seen i n t h e p a t t e r n o f d e s i r e and g u i l t i n t h e
volume, but these echoes a r e more pronounced i n 'Volume
T h i s has
first
Two'.
However, as Paradise Lost i s not an unambiguous source of r e f e r e n c e ,
r a t h e r t h a n c l a r i f y i n g , as t h e y appear t o do, these borrowings make
c l e a r r e a d i n g more d i f f i c u l t and add t o t h e u n c e r t a i n n a t u r e of the
text's significance.
The monster's account
of h i s f i r s t s e n s a t i o n s i s not drawn f r o m
Paradise Lost, b u t , as h i s d i s c o u r s e develops,
t h e reader g r a d u a l l y
becomes aware of t h e way M i l t o n ' s work i s used t o s t r u c t u r e h i s view of
the
world.
T h i s i s a case o f q u i t e c o n s c i o u s l y u s i n g subsequent
e x p e r i e n c e - h i s r e a d i n g of M i l t o n - t o g i v e a f o r m t o h i s experience,
but more s p e c i f i c a l l y i t c a s t s e x p e r i e n c e i n a l i t e r a r y form.
Vhen the
monster f i r s t encounters a human b e i n g , he uses a s i m i l e d e r i v e d from
35
M i l t o n t o d e s c r i b e t h e c o m f o r t o f t h e shepherd's shack:
t o me t h e n as e x q u i s i t e and d i v i n e a r e t r e a t
' I t presented
as Pandaemonium appeared t o
the daemons o f h e l l a f t e r t h e i r s u f f e r i n g s i n t h e l a k e o f f i r e '
The monster i d e n t i f i e s h i m s e l f w i t h Satan,
(101).
r a t h e r t h a n Adam by h i s
use o f t h e comparison w i t h Pandaemonium t o convey h i s pleasure.
This
suggests t h a t a t t h i s stage i n h i s s t o r y - t e l l i n g he i d e n t i f i e s
F r a n k e n s t e i n as t h e c r u e l God, a u t h o r o f h i s m i s f o r t u n e s ; i t i m p l i e s a
f a v o u r a b l e and s y m p a t h e t i c view o f Satan.
T h i s i s o f course a
r e t r o s p e c t i v e view, a subsequent o r d e r i n g o f experience i n t h e l i g h t o f
l a t e r events.
The monster i s a p p l y i n g t h e p a t t e r n drawn from Paradise
Lost, which he has y e t t o read, t o t h i s e x p e r i e n c e when he r e c o u n t s i t •
to Frankenstein.
However, he has a l r e a d y I d e n t i f i e d h i m s e l f w i t h Adam
i n h i s i n i t i a l address t o F r a n k e n s t e i n and suggested
his
h i s c o n f u s i o n about
role.
The monster's use o f Paradise Lost as h i s t e m p l a t e f o r understanding
the
w o r l d p r e s e n t s problems.
H i s e f f u s i v e comments upon t h e poem when
he d e s c r i b e s i t s d i s c o v e r y show how f a r i t convinced him, but a l s o
i n d i c a t e t h e d i f f i c u l t i e s i t p r e s e n t s as a source o f s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n :
I o f t e n r e f e r r e d t h e s e v e r a l s i t u a t i o n s , as t h e i r s i m i l a r i t y s t r u c k
me, t o my own. L i k e Adam, I was c r e a t e d a p p a r e n t l y u n i t e d by no
l i n k t o any o t h e r b e i n g i n e x i s t e n c e ; b u t h i s s t a t e was f a r
d i f f e r e n t f r o m mine i n every o t h e r r e s p e c t . He had come f o r t h from
the hands o f God, a p e r f e c t c r e a t u r e , happy and prosperous, guarded
by t h e e s p e c i a l care o f h i s c r e a t o r ; he was a l l o w e d t o converse
w i t h , and a c q u i r e knowledge from beings o f a s u p e r i o r nature: but I
was wretched, h e l p l e s s , and alone. Many t i m e s I c o n s i d e r e d Satan as
the f i t t e r emblem o f my c o n d i t i o n ; f o r o f t e n , l i k e him, . . . t h e
b i t t e r g a l l o f envy rose w i t h i n me. (125).
T h i s d i f f i c u l t y a f f e c t s n o t o n l y t h e monster, b u t has s i g n i f i c a n t
i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e reader a l s o .
The monster's I d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Satan i s deepened by h i s r e a c t i o n
t o F e l i x and S a f i e .
I n Paradise Lost, Book IV, Satan bemoans t h e b l i s s
f r o m which he r e a l i s e s he i s excluded when he sees Adam and Eve, 'enjoy
their fill/Of
8] .
b l i s s on b l i s s , w h i l e I t o h e l l am t h r u s t '
The monster wishes t o be Adam r a t h e r t h a n Satan.
innocence,
I PL IV 11. 507-
He i s Adam i n h i s
b u t as h i s e x p e r i e n c e grows he becomes more Satanic i n h i s
envy and f r u s t r a t i o n .
The monster i s p r e s e n t i n g an apologia, which
e x p l a i n s and j u s t i f i e s h i s n a t u r e a t t h e t i m e o f u t t e r a n c e , when he has
36
been e m b i t t e r e d by h i s complete r e j e c t i o n .
Any account o f h i s own
innocence must n e c e s s a r i l y be d i s t o r t e d i n t h e l e n s o f h i s experience.
The past i s u n r e c o v e r a b l e
except as an aspect
o f t h e present.
A f t e r h i s r e j e c t i o n by t h e De Laceys, t h e monster's response takes
t h e f o r m o f Satan's s e l f - t o r m e n t i n g f u r y i n Book IV o f Paradise Lost
[11.
73-5]:''
'All,
save I , were a t r e s t o r i n enjoyment:
a r c h f i e n d , bore a h e l l w i t h i n me; and, f i n d i n g myself
I , l i k e the
unsympathized
w i t h , wished t o t e a r up t h e t r e e s , spread havoc and d e s t r u c t i o n around
me, and t h e n t o have s a t down and enjoyed t h e r u i n '
(132).
L i k e Satan
i n t h e Garden, t h e monster i s f r u s t r a t e d because h i s s u r r o u n d i n g s do not
correspond
w i t h h i s mood.
The monster's p r e c i s e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Satan i s c o n t i n u e d by h i s
t o r c h i n g o f t h e De Lacey's abandoned c o t t a g e :
'only i n destroying I
f i n d ease/To my r e l e n t l e s s t h o u g h t s ' I PL IX 11. 129-301.
his
j o u r n e y c o n f i r m h i s misanthropy.
when r e s c u i n g t h e g i r l
A f t e r b e i n g shot by t h e peasant
f r o m t h e r i v e r , he no l o n g e r b e l i e v e s i n t h e
p o s s i b i l i t y o f contentment (138).
off
I n c i d e n t s on
The monster r e p r e s e n t s h i m s e l f as c u t
f r o m God and f r o m a l l p o s s i b i l i t y o f f u l f i l m e n t l i k e Satan.
H i s murder o f V i l l i a m a l s o i d e n t i f i e s him w i t h Satan.
Eve i n Paradise Lost, t h e c h i l d i s not h i s opponent.
Like Adam and
His f i r s t
i s t r i u m p h , and a r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f revenge:
response
' I gazed
on my v i c t i m , and my h e a r t s w e l l e d w i t h e x u l t a t i o n and h e l l i s h triumph:
c l a p p i n g my hands, I exclaimed,
i s n o t impregnable;
' I , t o o , can c r e a t e d e s o l a t i o n ; my enemy
t h i s death w i l l c a r r y d e s p a i r t o him, and a thousand
o t h e r m i s e r i e s s h a l l torment and d e s t r o y him'*
(139).
The monster's i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Satan i s developed f u r t h e r when he
discovers the m i n i a t u r e o f Frankenstein's
mother.
H i s immediate
r e a c t i o n i s r e m i n i s c e n t o f Satan's f i r s t r e a c t i o n t o s e e i n g Eve i n
F a r a d i s e Lost Book IX 111. 455-4661,
I n s p i t e o f my m a l i g n i t y , i t s o f t e n e d and a t t r a c t e d me. For a few
moments I gazed w i t h d e l i g h t on her dark eyes, f r i n g e d by deep
lashes, and her l o v e l y l i p s ; but p r e s e n t l y my rage r e t u r n e d : I
remembered t h a t I was f o r ever d e p r i v e d o f t h e d e l i g h t s t h a t such
b e a u t i f u l c r e a t u r e s c o u l d bestow; and t h a t she whose resemblance I
contemplated would, i n r e g a r d i n g me, have changed t h a t a i r of d i v i n e
b e n i g n i t y t o one e x p r e s s i v e o f d i s g u s t and a f f r i g h t . (139)
37
As i n Paradise Lost, t h e s i g h t o f goodness and beauty p e r s o n i f i e d
i n i t i a l l y i n s p i r e s an i n c l i n a t i o n towards good, b u t s u b s e q u e n t l y r e s u l t s
i n an augmented a n g u i s h by r e m i n d i n g t h e monster what he i s d e p r i v e d o f :
'the
more I see/Pleasures about me, so much t h e more I feel/Torment
w i t h i n me I PL IX 11. 119-21].
However, h i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f h i s Satanic
q u a l i t i e s c o n f l i c t s w i t h h i s e x p l i c i t i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Adam, which he
uses t o t r y t o persuade F r a n k e n s t e i n o f h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s towards
him:
' I ought t o be t h y Adam'
(95).
Before t e s t i n g h i s s o c i a l a c c e p t a b i l i t y by r e v e a l i n g h i m s e l f t o De
Lacey, t h e monster f a n t a s i s e s about about what might happen i f he were
t o g a i n s o c i a l acceptance.
He uses t h e imagery o f Paradise Lost t o
define h i s vision:
Sometimes I a l l o w e d my t h o u g h t s , unchecked by reason, t o ramble i n
the f i e l d s o f Paradise, and dared t o f a n c y amiable and l o v e l y
c r e a t u r e s s y m p a t h i z i n g w i t h my f e e l i n g s and c h e e r i n g my gloom; t h e i r
a n g e l i c countenances b r e a t h e d s m i l e s o f c o n s o l a t i o n .
But i t was a l l
a dream: no Eve soothed my sorrows, o r shared my t h o u g h t s ; I was
alone.
I remembered Adam's s u p p l i c a t i o n t o h i s C r e a t o r ; but where
was mine? he had abandoned me, and, i n t h e b i t t e r n e s s o f my h e a r t , I
cursed him. (127)
The r e f e r e n c e t o Paradise Lost emphasises F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s n e g l e c t by
comparison w i t h God's s y m p a t h e t i c response t o Adam.
monster c r a v e s companionship;
provide i t .
L i k e Adam, t h e
b u t he has no benevolent c r e a t o r t o
Once a g a i n , t h e monster's i d e n t i f i c a t i o n i s s p l i t between
Adam and Satan.
T h i s r a i s e s t h e q u e s t i o n o f t h e n a t u r e o f God i n
Paradise Lost, and whether he i s t o be seen as benevolent, as M i l t o n
i n t e n d e d , o r t y r a n n i c a l , as t h e Romantics o f t e n read him.
The reader i s
a l s o reminded o f F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster's d i f f e r i n g views o f t h e i r
r e l a t i o n s h i p and mutual r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s .
The monster's d e s i r e f o r a companion i s i n s p i r e d by h i s envy o f
Adam, as w e l l as h i s r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t Satan t o o had f e l l o w s (126).
suggests t h a t companionship would r e f o r m him:
He
' I f I have no t i e s and no
a f f e c t i o n s , h a t r e d and v i c e must be my p o r t i o n ; t h e love o f another w i l l
d e s t r o y t h e cause o f my c r i m e s , and I s h a l l become a t h i n g , o f whose
e x i s t e n c e e v e r y one w i l l be i g n o r a n t "
his
(143),
With another, he suggests
I d e n t i t y would s t a b i l i s e , and he would cease t o be Satan and remain
o n l y Adam.
38
This i s a persuasive
argument, b u t t h e r e i s no p r o o f , because i t
never happens i n t h e n o v e l .
The
I t can o n l y remain a l i k e l y p o s s i b i l i t y .
monster's concern i s s p e c i f i c a l l y t o a l l e v i a t e h i s l o n e l i n e s s and t o
a l l o w himself t o reform.
He sees companionship as a necessary
p r e c o n d i t i o n f o r v i r t u e ; he appears t o have no thought
procreation.
The i d e a o f t h e monster's b r e e d i n g ,
o f sex or
which
Frankenstein
uses t o J u s t i f y h i s f i n a l d e c i s i o n t o d e s t r o y t h e female monster comes
from Frankenstein
The
himself
(163).
monster's i s o l a t i o n i s emphasised a f t e r h i s d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e
c o t t a g e by h i s p r e s e n t a t i o n o f h i m s e l f i n parody o f Adam and Eve a t t h e
end o f Paradise Lost:
should
'And now, w i t h t h e w o r l d b e f o r e me, w h i t h e r
I bend my s t e p s ?
misfortunes;
I r e s o l v e d t o f l y f a r from t h e scene of my
but t o me, hated and despised, every c o u n t r y must be
equally horrible'
(135).
T h i s echoes M i l t o n ' s
The w o r l d was a l l b e f o r e them, where t o choose
T h e i r place o f r e s t , and Providence t h e i r guide:
They hand i n hand, w i t h wand'ring s t e p s and slow.
Through Eden took t h e i r s o l i t a r y way. L PL X I I 11. 646-9]^
U n l i k e Adam and Eve, t h e monster i s alone and unguided by
Providence. He s e t s o u t w i t h ambiguous i d e n t i f i c a t i o n and ambiguous
i n t e n t i o n s towards h i s c r e a t o r .
H i s s i t u a t i o n i s l i k e Adam and Eve's,
but h i s mood and o u t l o o k a r e more l i k e Satan's.
The
monster's r e c o g n i t i o n o f h i s own d e f o r m i t y adds another l a y e r t o
h i s m u l t i p l e i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h c h a r a c t e r s i n Paradise Lost:
How was I t e r r i f i e d , when I viewed myself i n a t r a n s p a r e n t pool! At
f i r s t I s t a r t e d back, unable t o b e l i e v e t h a t i t was indeed I who was
r e f l e c t e d i n t h e m i r r o r ; and when I became f u l l y convinced t h a t I
was i n r e a l i t y t h e monster t h a t I am, I was f i l l e d w i t h t h e
b i t t e r e s t s e n s a t i o n s o f despondency and m o r t i f i c a t i o n .
Alas! I d i d
not e n t i r e l y know t h e f a t a l e f f e c t s o f t h i s miserable d e f o r m i t y ,
(109)
T h i s echoes t h e passage i n Paradise Lost Book IV i n which Eve d e s c r i b e s
her r e a c t i o n t o c a t c h i n g s i g h t o f her newly c r e a t e d s e l f i n a pool:
As I bent down t o l o o k , j u s t o p p o s i t e
A shape w i t h i n t h e w a t ' r y gleam appeared
Bending t o l o o k on me:
I s t a r t e d back.
I t s t a r t e d back, b u t pleased I soon r e t u r n e d .
Pleased i t r e t u r n e d as soon w i t h answering l o o k s
Of sympathy and l o v e ; t h e r e I had f i x e d
39
Mine eyes t i l l now, and p i n e d w i t h v a i n d e s i r e .
Had not a v o i c e t h u s warned me: 'Vhat thou seest.
What t h e r e thou seest, f a i r c r e a t u r e , i s t h y s e l f .
With thee i t came and goes; b u t f o l l o w me.
And I w i l l b r i n g thee where no shadow s t a y s
Thy coming, and t h y s o f t embraces, he
Whose image thou a r t , him thou s h a l t e n j o y
I n s e p a r a b l y t h i n e ; t o him s h a l t bear
M u l t i t u d e s l i k e t h y s e l f , and thence be c a l l e d
Mother o f human race, i PL IV 11. 460-751
Here Paradise Lost enables t h e monster t o o r d e r h i s experience.
The
l i n e s a s s o c i a t e t h e monster w i t h Eve, r a t h e r t h a n w i t h e i t h e r Adam or
Satan, h i s two u s u a l comparisons and s u p p o r t Poovey's i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of
the
monster w i t h t h e female.^
There i s a l s o a s t r o n g n a r c i s s i s t i c
s u g g e s t i o n , a l t h o u g h t h e e f f e c t on t h e monster o f c a t c h i n g s i g h t o f
h i m s e l f i s q u i t e t h e o p p o s i t e o f t h e e f f e c t on Eve.
However, t h e
c o n t r a s t between Eve's experience and t h e monster's i s s t r e n g t h e n e d by
what happens next.
Eve meets an Adam who w i l l care f o r her and dote on
her; b u t t h e monster's r e c o g n i t i o n o f h i s own d e f o r m i t y o n l y emphasises
the
u n l i k e l i h o o d o f h i s g a i n i n g s o c i a l acceptance.
The comparison between t h e monster and Eve a l s o r a i s e s the i m p o r t a n t
q u e s t i o n o f p e r s o n a l i d e n t i t y and t h e e x t e n t t o which i t a r i s e s from
social recognition.
of
Poovey d i s c u s s e s t h i s i n c o n n e c t i o n w i t h t h e death
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s mother:
' S h e l l e y t h e r e f o r e t i e s t h e f o r m a t i o n of
p e r s o n a l i d e n t i t y t o s e l f - d e n i a l r a t h e r than s e l f - a s s e r t i o n ;
personal
i d e n t i t y f o r her e n t a i l s d e f i n i n g o n e s e l f I n terms o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s (not
it,
one, but many) - not as W o l l s t o n e c r a f t and Wordsworth would have
i n terms o f s e l f - a s s e r t i o n , c o n f r o n t a t i o n , freedom, and f a i t h i n the
i n d i v i d u a l i s t i c I m a g i n a t i v e act.'^"^' The monster wishes t o d e f i n e
h i m s e l f i n r e l a t i o n t o o t h e r s , but i s not a b l e t o because he cannot
d i s c o v e r h i s own s o c i a l c o n t e x t .
Narcissism i s the only p o s s i b i l i t y f o r
him, but h i s r e f l e c t i o n i s loathsome t o him.
The d i s c o v e r y o f t h e d e t a i l s o f h i s own c r e a t i o n increase h i s s e l f disgust:
Cursed c r e a t o r ! Why d i d you f o r m a monster so hideous t h a t even you
t u r n e d f r o m me i n d i s g u s t ? God i n p i t y made man b e a u t i f u l and
a l l u r i n g , a f t e r h i s own image; but my f o r m i s a f i l t h y type of
y o u r ' s , more h o r r i d f r o m i t s v e r y resemblance. Satan had h i s
companions, f e l l o w - d e v i l s , t o admire and encourage him; but I am
s o l i t a r y and d e t e s t e d , (126)
40
I n t h i s passage t h e r e f e r e n c e t o Paradise Lost d e f i n e s t h e monster's
m i s e r y more s h a r p l y .
H i s p h y s i c a l appearance i s s t a b l e , b u t h i s s e l f -
i d e n t i t y s h i f t s between Adam and Satan.
The r e a d e r ' s doubts about t h e
monster a r e shared by t h e monster h i m s e l f .
There i s a c o n f l i c t between
t h e s t a b i l i t y o f h i s appearance and t h e u n c e r t a i n t y o f h i s I d e n t i t y t h a t
i s a k i n t o t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t e x t and r e a d i n g generated by t h e
novel.
The
to
monster's e n c o u n t e r s w i t h human beings ought t o p r o v i d e t h e key
h i s r e a l nature.
However, these encounters a r e ambiguous, both f o r
t h e r e a d e r and f o r t h e monster a t f i r s t .
g u i l t l e s s Adam:
He p r e s e n t s h i m s e l f as a
i n c l i n e d t o v i r t u e and c o r r u p t e d by e x t e r n a l i n f l u e n c e .
I f t h e monster i s Adam, t h e n he i s redeemable; however, i f he i s r e a l l y
Satan, t h e l o g i c o f Paradise Lost suggests t h a t he i s e t e r n a l l y damned.
T h i s r a i s e s t h e q u e s t i o n o f who i s God.
Frankenstein
appears t o be God
s i n c e he c r e a t e s ; b u t he f a i l s t o take r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h i s c r e a t i o n
and appears powerless over I t , as i f he r e g r e t s , o r had f a i l e d t o
anticipate i t s free
The
will.
monster's l a c k o f acceptance by e i t h e r t h e De Laceys, t h e
peasant who s h o o t s him o r V l l l i a m emphasises h i s i s o l a t i o n and l a c k o f
self-definition.
T h i s f a i l u r e o f e x t e r n a l l y d e f i n e d i d e n t i t y means t h a t
he i s t r u l y t h e 'Other' d e s c r i b e d
by Mary Poovey,'' p r o v i d i n g a means o f
d e f i n i t i o n f o r o t h e r c r e a t u r e s by c o n t r a s t , b u t p r o v i d e d w i t h no basis
for
self-definition.
character.
Consequently, h i s i d e n t i t y s l i p s from c h a r a c t e r t o
I n t h e absence o f a s o c i a l c o n t e x t t o d e f i n e him. Paradise
Lost p r o v i d e s t h e monster w i t h i d e n t i t y t o read h i m s e l f i n t o .
does n o t p r o v i d e
Vhat i t
i s stability.
Ill
Frankenstein can be read as a p e s s i m i s t i c v e r s i o n o f Paradise Lost.
In
she
Paradise Lost, Adam i s accused by God o f p l a c i n g Eve above God:
t h y God, t h a t her thou d i d s t obey/Before h i s v o i c e . . . ? '
145-6].
Frankenstein
goes f u r t h e r than Adam.
' Vas
C P I X 11.
He s u b s t i t u t e s not
a n o t h e r and i n f e r i o r human f o r God, but emulates Satan by p r e s e n t i n g
h i m s e l f as s u f f i c i e n t i n h i m s e l f by p r o c r e a t i n g by h i m s e l f .
seen as Adam, Satan and God.
41
He can be
He i s Adam-like i n h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h E l i z a b e t h which i s
p r e s e n t e d as a p p a r e n t l y equal and m u t u a l l y b e n e f i c i a l
(30-1).
However,
he f a i l s t o see any analogy between h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h E l i z a b e t h and
the
monster's s i t u a t i o n .
Thus, no t h o u g h t s o f E l i z a b e t h a f f e c t h i s
d e c i s i o n t o d e s t r o y t h e female monster.
more o f j e a l o u s y .
Were t h e monster t o be a b l e t o p r o c r e a t e , then
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s r o l e would be f i n i s h e d .
species
H i s r e a s o n i n g smacks r a t h e r
I n h i s d e s i r e t o c r e a t e 'a new
(which) would b l e s s me (him) as i t s c r e a t o r and source'
F r a n k e n s t e i n wanted t o l i m i t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f f r e e w i l l .
i n Book I I I o f Paradise Lost God s t r e s s e s t h e importance
(49),
I n contrast,
of free w i l l :
Hot f r e e , what p r o o f c o u l d they [ t h e e t h e r e a l Powers and
S p i r i t s ] have g i v ' n s i n c e r e
Of t r u e a l l e g i a n c e , c o n s t a n t f a i t h o r l o v e .
Where o n l y what t h e y needs must do, appeared,
ffot what t h e y would? [ P i I I I 11. 103-61
Because he i s a f r a i d t h a t b e i n g a b l e t o p r o c r e a t e might l e a d t h e
monsters t o become f u l l y independent,
of
F r a n k e n s t e i n abandons t h e chance
r e c e i v i n g b l e s s i n g by t u r n i n g f r o m h i s c r e a t i o n .
When t h e monster
d e s c r i b e s F r a n k e n s t e i n as 'generous and s e l f - d e v o t e d ' (217) a t t h e end
of
t h e n o v e l , he draws a t t e n t i o n t o t h e egotism t h a t denies
freedom.
true
T h i s has i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r t h e d i s c u s s i o n o f N e c e s s i t y . ' ^
When c r e a t i n g t h e second monster F r a n k e n s t e i n i s w o r r i e d by s c r u p l e s
which d i d not concern h i m b e f o r e :
I was now about t o f o r m another being, o f whose d i s p o s i t i o n s I was
a l i k e i g n o r a n t ; she might become t e n thousand times more malignant
t h a n h e r mate, and d e l i g h t , f o r i t s own sake, i n murder and
wretchedness. He had sworn t o q u i t t h e neighbourhood o f man, and
h i d e h i m s e l f i n d e s e r t s ; b u t she had not; and she, who i n a l l
p r o b a b i l i t y was t o become a t h i n k i n g and r e a s o n i n g animal, might
r e f u s e t o comply w i t h a compact made b e f o r e h e r c r e a t i o n . (163)
What F r a n k e n s t e i n f e a r s i s t h a t , i n c r e a t i n g a companion f o r h i s Adam,
he might be c r e a t i n g another Eve, who would not observe a p r o h i b i t i o n
imposed b e f o r e her b i r t h .
He f e a r s a c h a r a c t e r s i m i l a r t o h i s own who
w i l l n o t accept t h e t y r a n n y o f a p r e - e x i s t i n g c o n v e n t i o n , but w i l l
challenge i t .
I n t h i s sense, F r a n k e n s t e i n can be i d e n t i f i e d w i t h Eve.
At d i f f e r e n t t i m e s F r a n k e n s t e i n can be read i n t o each o f t h e f o u r
c e n t r a l c h a r a c t e r s i n Paradise Lost.
42
A f t e r t h e d e s t r u c t i o n o f t h e female monster, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p
between t h e monster and F r a n k e n s t e i n changes.
Vhen F r a n k e n s t e i n
a t t e m p t s t o d i s m i s s t h e monster, t h e monster r e p l i e s , 'Slave, before I
reasoned w i t h you, b u t you have proved y o u r s e l f unworthy o f my
condescension.
Remember t h a t I have power; you b e l i e v e y o u r s e l f
m i s e r a b l e , b u t I can make you so wretched t h a t t h e l i g h t o f day w i l l be
h a t e f u l t o you.
(165).
You a r e my c r e a t o r , b u t I am your master;- obey!'
P r e v i o u s l y t h e monster has always i d e n t i f i e d h i m s e l f as one o f
t h e s u b s i d i a r y r o l e s i n Paradise Lost:
Satan, Adam, Eve.
assuming a God-like r o l e .
t h e s o r t o f god r e p r e s e n t e d by
Furthermore,
How he i s
t h e monster i s a harsh p u n i t i v e god who g i v e s commands and expects
obedience.
The monster's f i n a l comment - 'You a r e my c r e a t o r , but I am
your master' - d i s t i n g u i s h e s between two d i f f e r e n t aspects o f God.
At t h e same time t h e r e i s a l s o a change i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p e r c e p t i o n
of t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p .
There i s a r e v e r s a l o f r o l e s s i m i l a r t o t h a t i n
Caleb Williams. F r a n k e n s t e i n becomes more S a t a n i c :
'The hour o f my
weakness i s past, and t h e p e r i o d o f your power i s a r r i v e d .
Your t h r e a t s
cannot move me t o do an a c t o f wickedness; b u t t h e y c o n f i r m me i n a
r e s o l u t i o n o f n o t c r e a t i n g you a companion i n v i c e '
(165).
At t h e same
t i m e as r e c o g n i s i n g t h e monster's s u p e r i o r s t r e n g t h , l i k e Satan
r e l u c t a n t l y r e c o g n i s i n g God's omnipotence i n Paradise Lost [ I V 11. 845 ] , F r a n k e n s t e i n begins t o demonstrate some o f Satan's f r u s t r a t e d energy
and commitment t o f u t i l e and s e l f - d e f e a t i n g a c t i o n .
T h i s i s another
m a n i f e s t a t i o n o f t h e i n s t a b i l i t y o f r o l e s as d e f i n e d by Paradise Lost.
J u s t as t h e r e i s no e a s i l y i d e n t i f i a b l e primacy o f one n a r r a t i v e
over
another, now t h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p between c r e a t o r and c r e a t e d i s unbalanced
as t h e c r e a t e d begins t o a s s e r t a u t h o r i t y over i t s c r e a t o r .
The
monster has r e f e r r e d t o h i m s e l f as F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s master, y e t he
next r e f e r s t o F r a n k e n s t e i n as h i s ' t y r a n t and t o r m e n t o r '
(165).
He
p r e s e n t s h i m s e l f as a Promethean hero l i k e Satan, Promethean i n t h e
r e b e l l i o u s sense, r a t h e r t h a n Prometheus p l a s t i c a t o r . ' ^
t h e monster i s demanding a female o f r i g h t :
On t h e one hand
a l l o t h e r c r e a t u r e s have a
companion, why s h o u l d t h e monster be d e p r i v e d o f such a source o f
happiness?
On t h e o t h e r hand, t h e monster i s p r e s e n t i n g a moral
j u s t i f i c a t i o n i n o p p o s i t i o n t o tyranny.
These two c o n s i d e r a t i o n s can
c o i n c i d e , b u t they make i t harder f o r t h e reader t o f i n d a b a s i s f o r h i s
43
moral judgement.
He i s f a c e d w i t h a l t e r n a t i v e s which demand a response,
but which do not p e r m i t
The
one.
monster's i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Satan i s s t r e n g t h e n e d by the
s l i g h t l y heavy-handed image he uses i n t h e exchange j u s t r e f e r r e d t o :
'I will
watch w i t h t h e w i l i n e s s of a snake, t h a t I may
venom' (165).
T h i s encapsulates
s t i n g with i t s
t h e a m b i g u i t y o f t h e serpent symbol.
The unspoken r e f e r e n c e t o t h e garden o f Eden i s unmistakable, but i t i s
not c l e a r whether t h e r e f e r e n c e i s t o t h e p r e - o r p o s t - l a p s a r i a n
Serpent.
The monster's snake i s more e q u i v o c a l than M i l t o n ' s .
A f t e r t h e d e a t h o f E l i z a b e t h , F r a n k e n s t e i n completes h i s
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Satan.
he
R e f e r r i n g t o h i s r e l e a s e f r o m t h e madhouse,
says:
But l i b e r t y had been a u s e l e s s g i f t t o me had I not, as I awakened
t o reason, a t t h e same t i m e awakened t o revenge. As t h e memory of
past m i s f o r t u n e s pressed upon me, I began t o r e f l e c t on t h e i r cause
- t h e monster whom I had c r e a t e d , t h e m i s e r a b l e daemon whom I had
sent abroad i n t o t h e w o r l d f o r my d e s t r u c t i o n .
I was possessed by a
maddening rage when I thought of him, and d e s i r e d and a r d e n t l y
prayed t h a t I might have him w i t h i n my grasp t o wreak a g r e a t and
s i g n a l revenge on h i s cursed head. (196)
There i s something inanic i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s enthusiasm
f o r revenge.
L i k e t h e monster, h i s whole e x i s t e n c e i s now devoted t o h i s u l t i m a t e l y
s e l f - d e f e a t i n g rage.
He i s t r u l y S a t a n i c , d i s p l a y i n g g r e a t and h e r o i c
m i s a p p l i e d energy (198-9).
But t h e consequence i s t o increase h i s
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Adam and Eve:
'My
f i r s t r e s o l u t i o n was t o q u i t
Geneva f o r ever; my c o u n t r y , which, when I was
dear t o me,
now,
happy and beloved,
i n my a d v e r s i t y became h a t e f u l .
...
wanderings began, which are t o cease but w i t h l i f e '
'And
now
was
my
(199).
Here F r a n k e n s t e i n i s p o r t r a y e d I n the same way as the monster i s
e a r l i e r i n t h e novel
(135).
As they devote themselves t o Satanic
revenge, b o t h F r a n k e n s t e i n and h i s monster d i s c o v e r t h e emptiness of
l o s s f o l l o w i n g t h e F a l l when t h e y s e t out t o wander the e a r t h .
Unlike
M i l t o n ' s c h a r a c t e r s , s e c u r e l y embedded w i t h i n t h e i d e o l o g i c a l c o n t e x t o f
C h r i s t i a n i t y , which g i v e s a purpose t o t h e i r s u f f e r i n g and o f f e r s an
u l t i m a t e l y o p t i m i s t i c outcome, F r a n k e n s t e i n and h i s monster, e n t h r a l l e d
by t h e i r e g o t i s t i c obsession w i t h each o t h e r and t h e i r m u t u a l l y
p o i n t l e s s revenge, have no f u t u r e ahead of them but a n n i h i l a t i o n .
44
T h e i r s i m i l a r i t y i s emphasised by F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s comment d u r i n g h i s
wanderings,
' I was cursed by some d e v i l , and c a r r i e d about w i t h me my
eternal h e l l '
(201), which echoes t h e monster's ' I , l i k e t h e a r c h f i e n d ,
bore a h e l l w i t h i n me' ( 1 3 2 ) , " * which i n i t s t u r n echoes Satan's 'Me
m i s e r a b l e ! which way s h a l l I f l y / I n f i n i t e wrath, and i n f i n i t e
despair?/Which way I f l y i s H e l l ; myself am H e l l ...'IPL IV 11. 73-5].
Both F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster demonstrate t h e i r complementarity o f
n a t u r e by t h e i r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h Satan.
i d e n t i t i e s , t h e y a r e opposed.
Yet w i t h i n t h e i r s i m i l a r
At t h e end o f t h e novel t h e c l e a r
o p p o s i t i o n s between c h a r a c t e r s i n Frankenstein, d e r i v e d from Paradise
Lost a r e shown t o be d e l u s i o n s .
Mary S h e l l e y uses M i l t o n ' s c h a r a c t e r s
o u t s i d e t h e i r t h e o l o g i c a l framework.
Without t h i s c o n t e x t t h e i r moral
e v a l u a t i o n s a r e n u l l i f i e d and t h e y r e a c t upon each o t h e r w i t h o u t t h e
o v e r - a r c h i n g sense o f Providence t h a t g i v e s M i l t o n ' s e p i c i t s cohesion.
Whereas i n Paradise Lost t h e c h a r a c t e r s e x i s t i n a known
r e i t e r a t e d by God i n Book IV [ 1 1 . 80-342],
time-frame
i n Frankenstein t h e
c h a r a c t e r s seem a t t h e end almost t o be t r y i n g t o cheat time by t h e i r
chase.
I n t h e event, t i m e catches up w i t h them and t h e i r p u r s u i t i s
l e f t u n f i n i s h e d so t h a t t h e r e i s no f i n a l outcome t h a t p o i n t s any c l e a r
moral.
As t h e i r f u t i l e chase alone g i v e s them any meaning,
Frankenstein's
d e a t h d i s s o l v e s b o t h t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n and t h e i r
resemblance.
Paradise Last's u l t i m a t e i n d e t e r m i n a c y makes i t f u n c t i o n i n
Frankenstein
as a 'Romantic i r o n i s t ' i n Simpson's terms.
I t seems t o
be a means o f d e f i n i n g and f i x i n g i d e n t i t y t o p r o v i d e an a u t h o r i t a t i v e
r e a d i n g , b u t i n f a c t i t s i n s c r u t a b i l i t y p r e v e n t s such a reading. I t
appears t o p r o v i d e a means o f d e f i n i n g t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between
F r a n k e n s t e i n and h i s monster i n moral terms,
t o be r e l i a b l e .
b u t i t proves t o o unstable
Because t h e r e a d i n g o f Paradise Lost assumed by t h e
novel i s ambiguous, an a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g i s f u r t h e r precluded.
double v a r i a b i l i t y o f i r o n y means t h a t t h e reader cannot s e t t l e
c o m f o r t a b l y on any s i n g l e r e a d i n g o f t h e t e x t , b u t i s f o r c e d t o
acknowledge i t as a dynamic, r a t h e r than a f i x e d a r t e f a c t .
45
This
Chapter 3:
H e c e s s i t y and I n t e l l e c t u a l Development
Frankenstein i n c o r p o r a t e s t h e l i f e h i s t o r i e s o f two beings,
F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster.
Victor
T h e i r e d u c a t i o n s a r e v e r y d i f f e r e n t , and
result i n quite d i f f e r e n t personalities.
I f Mary S h e l l e y b e l i e v e d i n
her f a t h e r ' s d o c t r i n e o f N e c e s s i t y , - and Percy S h e l l e y thought she d i d
i n h i s r e v i e w o f Frankenstein'' - t h e n t h e d e t a i l s o f a c h a r a c t e r ' s
u p b r i n g i n g a r e o f c r u c i a l importance
i n evaluating the adult.
However, t h e r e a r e t o o many v a r i a b l e s i n Frankenstein.
The reader
wants t o e s t a b l i s h t h e moral v a l u e o f t h e monster and F r a n k e n s t e i n and
hopes t h a t Godwin's t h e o r y w i l l enable him t o draw some c o n c l u s i o n s from
their l i f e histories.
The s t r u c t u r e o f t h e novel suggests t h i s i s
p o s s i b l e , but a c t u a l l y p r e v e n t s i t and i n d o i n g so q u e s t i o n s t h e t h e o r y
itself.
Godwin d e f i n e d N e c e s s i t y t h u s i n Political Justice:
t h a t a l l a c t i o n s a r e necessary
all
'He who a f f i r m s
means t h a t t h e man who i s a c q u a i n t e d w i t h
t h e circumstances under which a l i v i n g o r i n t e l l i g e n t being i s
p l a c e d upon any g i v e n o c c a s i o n I s q u a l i f i e d t o p r e d i c t t h e conduct he
w i l l h o l d , w i t h as much c e r t a i n t y as he can p r e d i c t any o f t h e phenomena
of
inanimate n a t u r e ' . ^
T h i s d e f i n i t i o n denies t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f
f r e e w i l l because a l l human a c t i o n s a r e seen t o be necessary as t h e
i n e v i t a b l e consequence o f t h e i n f l u e n c e s on t h e i n d i v i d u a l .
I f the
n o v e l were t o operate a c c o r d i n g t o Necessity, then a l l t h e a c t i o n s o f
F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster s h o u l d stem d i r e c t l y from t h e i r
and t h e i n f l u e n c e s o p e r a t i n g upon them.
experience
Although i n r e a l i t y i t i s not
p a s s i b l e t o d e s c r i b e a l l t h e I n f l u e n c e s , nor t o assess t h e i r
relative
importance, t h e n a r r a t i v e o f Frankenstein appears t o g i v e adequate
j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the characters' actions.
Both F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster g i v e d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n s o f
t h e i r e a r l i e s t i n f l u e n c e s and t h e novel begins w i t h an account o f
C a p t a i n Walton's e a r l y years.
Walton's development i s dominated
f a t h e r ' s p r o h i b i t i o n a g a i n s t g o i n g t o sea (11).
s t i m u l a t e d by h i s Uncle's books:
by h i s
His i n t e r e s t i s
'These volumes were my s t u d y day and
n i g h t , and my f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h them i n c r e a s e d t h a t r e g r e t which I had
felt,
as a c h i l d , on l e a r n i n g t h a t my f a t h e r ' s d y i n g i n j u n c t i o n had
f o r b i d d e n my uncle t o a l l o w me t o embark i n a s e a - f a r i n g l i f e ' ( 1 1 ) ,
46
T h i s a p p a r e n t l y a r b i t r a r y p r o h i b i t i o n seems t o c o n t a i n t h e
implicit
i n c i t e m e n t t o t r a n s g r e s s i o n t h a t Godwin noted i n Caleb Villiams:
what i s f o r b i d d e n always has i t s charms, because we have an
'To
do
indistinct
a p p r e h e n s i o n o f something a r b i t r a r y and t y r a n n i c a l i n the p r o h i b i t i o n " .
Walton's d e t e r m i n a t i o n seems t o stem f r o m t h i s t h w a r t e d purpose.
T h i s e x p l i c i t p r o h i b i t i o n i s l i k e t h e one
i m p l i c i t i n Frankenstein's
f a t h e r ' s o f f - h a n d d i s m i s s a l of C o r n e l i u s Agrlppa
The
(32/33).
books read by each o f t h e c e n t r a l c h a r a c t e r s i n t h e novel are
l i s t e d by Mary S h e l l e y .
Walton reads t h e accounts o f voyages o f
e x p l o r a t i o n and wishes t o emulate t h e e x p l o r e r s .
Frankenstein,
by
chance, reads t h e works o f a l c h e m i s t s ; he a s p i r e s t o develop a l t e r n a t i v e
forms o f science.
The c r e a t i o n o f a man
w i t h o u t a i d of woman i s , i f not
t h e d i s c o v e r y of t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s stone or t h e e l i x i r of l i f e ,
w i t h i n t h e scope o f alchemy.
well
I n c o n t r a s t , t h e monster's e d u c a t i o n ,
based upon Volney, P l u t a r c h , Goethe and M i l t o n , i s more
balanced,
d e a l i n g w i t h man's r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h h i m s e l f and o t h e r s , and emphasising
his social responsibilities.
However, h i s r e a d i n g develops a d e s i r e t o
do good t h a t h i s p h y s i c a l r e p u l s i v e n e s s denies.
I n Caleb Villiams the
s o u r c e o f F a l k l a n d ' s unhapplness i s s p e c i f i c a l l y i d e n t i f i e d by Caleb as
h i s excessive
r e a d i n g of c h i v a l r i c romances i n h i s y o u t h , * which g i v e s
r i s e t o h i s sense of s o c i a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and h i s quickness
t o take
offence at s l i g h t s .
For a l l Walton's a s p i r a t i o n s , he i s aware of h i s own
limitations:
You may deem me romantic, ray dear s i s t e r , but I b i t t e r l y f e e l the
want o f a f r i e n d .
I have no one near me, g e n t l e y e t courageous,
possessed of a c u l t i v a t e d as w e l l as a capacious mind, whose t a s t e s
a r e l i k e my own, t o approve or amend my plans. How would such a
f r i e n d r e p a i r t h e f a u l t s of your poor b r o t h e r ! I am t o o ardent i n
e x e c u t i o n , and t o o i m p a t i e n t of d i f f i c u l t i e s .
But i t i s a s t i l l
g r e a t e r e v i l t o me t h a t I am s e l f - e d u c a t e d :
...
Now I am twentye i g h t , and am i n r e a l i t y more i l l i t e r a t e than many school-boys of
fifteen.
I t i s t r u e t h a t I have thought more, and t h a t my day
dreams are more extended and m a g n i f i c e n t ; but they want (as the
p a i n t e r s c a l l i t ) keeping; and I g r e a t l y need a f r i e n d who would
have sense enough not t o despise me as romantic, and a f f e c t i o n
enough f o r me t o endeavour t o r e g u l a t e my mind. (13/4)
Walton connects two c o n s i d e r a t i o n s here:
e d u c a t i o n and h i s want of a f r i e n d .
h i s l a c k of f o r m a l
He asks f o r a mentor who
' r e p a i r t h e f a u l t s ' he suggests he possesses.
47
would
He c o n t r a s t s h i s more
m a g n i f i c e n t i m a g i n a t i o n w i t h h i s l a c k of f o r m a l l e a r n i n g and
suggests
t h a t t h e f u n c t i o n o f a f r i e n d would be t o keep h i s t h o u g h t s i n
p r o p o r t i o n (' keeping' ).
Consequently, V a l t o n views F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a r r i v a l as f o r t u n a t e .
What h i s f i n a l Judgement on h i s encounter
w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n and h i s
monster i s i s not made c l e a r a t t h e end of t h e n o v e l .
His
encounter
w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n c o u l d be seen as one more i n a s e r i e s of
disappointments;
his father's prohibition; his l i t e r a r y failure; his
crew's mutiny; F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s e q u i v o c a l judgement on h i s own
exploit.
V a l t o n i s happy t o have found a companion; he hopes t h a t
F r a n k e n s t e i n w i l l guide him.
a l t h o u g h not r e j e c t e d .
the
L i k e t h e monster, V a l t o n f e e l s f r i e n d l e s s ,
However, t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e monster and
two human c h a r a c t e r s i s t h a t t h e y have f r i e n d s of t h e same sex,
whereas t h e monster d e s i r e s a mate.
same apparent
There appears t o be i n V a l t o n the
s e l f - s u f f i c i e n c y t h a t i s symbolised
c r e a t i o n o f o f f s p r i n g w i t h o u t female a s s i s t a n c e .
i n F r a n k e n s t e i n by h i s
He c h a r a c t e r i s e s
h i m s e l f as o f a d i f f e r e n t n a t u r e t o h i s s i s t e r , whom he p i c t u r e s as
embedded i n her domestic environment
(210).
ITevertheless, V a l t o n makes a c o n n e c t i o n between h i s l a c k of f o r m a l
e d u c a t i o n and h i s need f o r a f r i e n d :
One day I mentioned t o him t h e d e s i r e I had always f e l t of f i n d i n g a
f r i e n d who might sympathise w i t h me, and d i r e c t me by h i s counsel.
I s a i d , I d i d not belong t o t h a t c l a s s o f men who are offended by
advice.
" I am s e l f - e d u c a t e d , and perhaps I h a r d l y r e l y s u f f i c i e n t l y
upon my own powers.
I wish t h e r e f o r e t h a t my companion should be
w i s e r and more experienced t h a n myself, t o c o n f i r m and support me;
nor have I b e l i e v e d i t i m p o s s i b l e t o f i n d a t r u e f r i e n d . "
" I agree w i t h you," r e p l i e d t h e s t r a n g e r , " i n b e l i e v i n g t h a t
f r i e n d s h i p i s not o n l y a d e s i r a b l e , but a p o s s i b l e a c q u i s i t i o n .
I
once had a f r i e n d , t h e most noble of human c r e a t u r e s , and am
e n t i t l e d , t h e r e f o r e , t o Judge r e s p e c t i n g f r i e n d s h i p . (23)
V a l t o n f e e l s u n d e r c o n f i d e n t and t h e r e f o r e l o o k s f o r someone whom he
r e s p e c t s t o endorse h i s d e c i s i o n s , whereas F r a n k e n s t e i n keeps h i s
e x p l o i t s c o m p l e t e l y s e c r e t ; but Walton's adventure
s h o c k i n g n a t u r e than F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s .
Indeed,
i s of a f a r l e s s
t h e novel p u r p o r t s t o be
V a l t o n ' s account f o r h i s s i s t e r of h i s voyage as i t i s happening.
I t is
t r u e , as Mary Poovey p o i n t s o u t , ^ t h a t what begins as a s e r i e s of
l e t t e r s becomes t h e much more " s e l f - d e v o t e d " f o r m of the j o u r n a l ,
48
but
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s account
o f t h e monster's c r e a t i o n , which t h e monster
f i n d s i n h i s pocket, seems t o be i n t e n d e d f o r no-one, whereas V a l t o n
does acknowledge t h a t h i s i n t e n d e d audience
i s someone e l s e - 'This
manuscript w i l l d o u b t l e s s a f f o r d you t h e g r e a t e s t p l e a s u r e '
Furthermore,
h i s voyage i s n o t a s o l i t a r y v e n t u r e .
(25).
He i s e v e n t u a l l y
persuaded t o r e t u r n by t h e mutiny o f h i s crew who remind him o f h i s
social
responsibilities.
A l t h o u g h F r a n k e n s t e i n and V a l t o n a r e i m p l i c i t l y presented as being
comparable, t h e s i m i l a r i t y cannot be developed
n o t h i n g shameful
too far.
There i s
o r s e c r e t i n t h e books o f voyages read by V a l t o n any
more t h a n t h e r e i s a n y t h i n g f o r V a l t o n t o f e e l ashamed o f i n h i s attempt
t o s a i l t o t h e I l o r t h Pole.
I n c o n t r a s t , t h e a l c h e m i s t s were engaged
upon s e c r e t and f o r b i d d e n s t u d i e s t o a c q u i r e s e l f i s h power.
Valton's
e x p l o i t and i t s m o t i v a t i o n seem t o d e r i v e l o g i c a l l y from t h e d e t a i l s he
reveals of h i s upbringing.
There i s n o t h i n g i n c o n s i s t e n t w i t h Necessity
i n t h e f r a m i n g n a r r a t i v e , a l t h o u g h t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between V a l t o n ' s
d e c i s i o n t o r e t u r n and F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s n a r r a t i v e i s n o t e n t i r e l y c l e a r .
II
Doubts about t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e p e r s o n a l accounts i n t h e novel
are i n e v i t a b l y r a i s e d by t h e use o f t h e f i r s t - p e r s o n , w i t h i t s p o t e n t i a l
f o r I r o n i c e f f e c t s i n t h e way t h e n a r r a t o r shapes h i s own s t o r y .
However, t h e r e i s a double i r o n i c focus i n Frankenstein i n t h a t , not
o n l y i s t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e n a r r a t o r ' s account b e i n g o f f e r e d f o r
c r i t i c a l s c r u t i n y , b u t a l s o t h e p r i n c i p l e , N e c e s s i t y , upon which i t i s
constructed.
The u n c e r t a i n t y produced by t h i s double
instability
c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l problems t h a t a r e t h e c e n t r a l issue
i n t h e novel.
F r a n k e n s t e i n begins h i s account
of himself with a detailed
e x p l a n a t i o n o f h i s o r i g i n s , commencing w i t h h i s f a t h e r .
For subsequent
events t o be J u s t i f i e d i n terms o f Necessity, t h e d e t a i l e d d e s c r i p t i o n
of t h e c h a r a c t e r and c i r c u m s t a n c e s o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p a r e n t s i s
important.
I t i s g i v e n i n d e t a i l , and t h e i r v i r t u e s a r e s p e l t out.
The e f f e c t o f marriage on F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s f a t h e r i s t o cause him t o
withdraw f r o m p u b l i c l i f e .
However, t h e passage d e s c r i b i n g t h i s i s one
49
o f t h e passages most a l t e r e d by Mary Shelley.
d i f f e r e n t forms:
the o r i g i n a l 1818
Thomas copy and c o m p l e t e l y r e c a s t
I t e x i s t s i n three
v e r s i o n , the emended form i n the
i n fundamental d e t a i l s i n the
1831
e d i t i o n , ^•
The
and
f i r s t published
v e r s i o n reads, 'Vhen my
f a t h e r became a husband
p a r e n t , he found h i s t i m e so occupied by t h e d u t i e s o f h i s
new
s i t u a t i o n , t h a t he r e l i n q u i s h e d many o f h i s p u b l i c employments,
devoted h i m s e l f
t o the education of h i s c h i l d r e n '
Alphonse F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s r e t i r e m e n t
However, i n 1823,
a l t e r e d the reasons:
'As
This presents
from p u b l i c o f f i c e as a p r a c t i c a l
response t o growing c a l l s upon h i s time.
complete.
(29).
I t i s a l s o r e p r e s e n t e d as
i n the Thomas copy, Mary S h e l l e y
my
f a t h e r ' s age
o f h i s c h i l d r e n ' (29).
devoted h i m s e l f
Vhilst s t i l l
c h i l d r e n ' s e d u c a t i o n , Alphanse has
not
has
encreased he became more
a t t a c h e d t o the q u i e t of a domestic l i f e , and he g r a d u a l l y
h i s p u b l i c employments, and
and
relinquished
w i t h ardour t o the education
i n t e n d i n g t o devote h i m s e l f
to his
abandoned h i s p u b l i c r o l e c o m p l e t e l y
because o f h i s d e s i r e f o r r e t i r e m e n t .
I t seems t h a t i n emphasising the
o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n , which i s what the Thomas emendations do p r i m a r i l y ,
Mary S h e l l e y
has chosen t o make F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s f a t h e r appear more g u i l t y
o f s e l f - c e n t r e d d e s i r e and
l e s s concerned w i t h h i s p u b l i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
i n h i s foreshadowing of F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s w i t h d r a w a l from s o c i e t y t o
construct
the monster.
His f o c u s s i n g
e x c l u s i v e l y on h i s own
family
can
be viewed as an abandonment o f a wider r e s p o n s i b i l i t y .
The
b e n e f i c i a r y of M.
these [ c h i l d r e n ] I was
l a b o u r s and
mine.
My
utility.
the e l d e s t , and
No c r e a t u r e
improvement and
I remained f o r s e v e r a l
Frankenstein's retirement
public office.
'Of
successor t o a l l h i s
c o u l d have more t e n d e r p a r e n t s t h a n
h e a l t h were t h e i r c o n s t a n t care, e s p e c i a l l y
years t h e i r o n l y c h i l d '
i n t h e f i r s t comment here.
f a t h e r ' s ' l a b o u r s and
the d e s t i n e d
i s Victor:
(29).
There i s an
as
irony
V i c t o r i s i n t e n d e d t o succeed t o h i s
utility';
but h i s f a t h e r has j u s t r e t i r e d from
V i c t o r becomes the s o l e o b j e c t o f h i s
parents'
a t t e n t i o n , a t l e a s t f o r t h e f o u r years u n t i l E l i z a b e t h Lavenza i s
adopted.
T h i s c o u l d be a poor p r e p a r a t i o n
f o r p u b l i c s e r v i c e , but a
l i k e l y b a s i s f o r the development of egotism.
As Tropp p o i n t s
out,
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s Jealous a t t i t u d e towards E l i z a b e t h stems f r o m the
d e s t r u c t i o n of t h i s cosy and
Victor-centred
50
relationship.'^
In praising
E l i z a b e t h , F r a n k e n s t e i n l e t s s l i p t h e comment, ' I have o f t e n heard
my
mother say, t h a t she was a t t h a t t i m e the most b e a u t i f u l c h i l d she
had
ever seen' ( 2 9 ) , r e v e a l i n g how
he saw
t h e a r r i v a l of E l i z a b e t h as
d e s t r o y i n g h i s i n f a n t p a r a d i s e because she usurped h i s p o s i t i o n as the
c e n t r e of a t t e n t i o n .
l e v e r t h e l e s s , F r a n k e n s t e i n sees E l i z a b e t h and
h i m s e l f as complementary c h a r a c t e r s :
I was more calm and p h i l o s o p h i c a l than my companion; y e t my temper
was not so y i e l d i n g .
My a p p l i c a t i o n was o f l o n g e r endurance; but i t
was not so severe w h i l s t i t endured.
I delighted i n investigating
t h e f a c t s r e l a t i v e t o t h e a c t u a l w o r l d ; she b u s i e d h e r s e l f i n
f a l l o w i n g t h e a e r i a l c r e a t i o n s of t h e poets.
The w o r l d was t o me a
s e c r e t , which I d e s i r e d t o d i s c o v e r ; t o her i t was a vacancy, which
she sought t o people w i t h i m a g i n a t i o n s of her own. (30)
F r a n k e n s t e i n r e v e a l s here a number of d e t a i l s t h a t p r e - f i g u r e h i s
adult self.
Read l e s s s y m p a t h e t i c a l l y , t h i s passage r e v e a l s a c h i l d of
c o l d emotions - 'more calm and p h i l o s o p h i c a l ' , i n f l e x i b l e and o b s t i n a t e
- 'my
temper was not so y i e l d i n g ' - and q u i t e obsessive -
a p p l i c a t i o n was o f l o n g e r endurance'.
'my
Frankenstein f u r t h e r
c h a r a c t e r i s e s h i m s e l f as l a c k i n g i n i m a g i n a t i o n i n comparison t o
Elizabeth.
However, t h e r e creeps i n a g a i n an element of p o t e n t i a l
j e a l o u s y i n the comment t h a t t h e w o r l d was
' t o her a vacancy, which
sought t o people w i t h i m a g i n a t i o n s of her own.'
she
T h i s suggests V i c t o r ' s
d e s i r e t o emulate E l i z a b e t h ' s f e c u n d i t y i n h i s clumsy and e a r t h y
creation.
The a c t u a l e d u c a t i o n o f f e r e d t o V i c t o r and E l i z a b e t h and
s i b l i n g s seems t o conform t o Godwin's p r i n c i p l e s as expressed
their
i n The
Enquirer.'^ However, The Thomas copy a l t e r s t h i s s e c t i o n s i g n i f i c a n t l y .
The
o r i g i n a l published e d i t i o n
reads:
ITo y o u t h c o u l d have passed more h a p p i l y t h a n mine. My p a r e n t s were
i n d u l g e n t , and my companions amiable.
Our s t u d i e s were never
f o r c e d ; and by some means we always had an end placed i n view, which
e x c i t e d us t o a r d o u r i n t h e p r o s e c u t i o n o f them. I t was by t h i s
method, and not by e m u l a t i o n , t h a t we were urged t o a p p l i c a t i o n .
E l i z a b e t h was not I n c i t e d t o a p p l y h e r s e l f t o drawing, t h a t her
companions might not o u t s t r i p her; but t h r o u g h the d e s i r e of
p l e a s i n g her aunt, by t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of some f a v o u r i t e scene
done by her own hand. We l e a r n e d L a t i n and E n g l i s h , t h a t we might
read t h e w r i t i n g s i n those languages; and so f a r f r o m s t u d y being
made odious t o us t h r o u g h punishment, we l o v e d a p p l i c a t i o n , and our
amusements would have been t h e l a b o u r s of o t h e r c h i l d r e n .
Perhaps
we d i d not read so many books, o r l e a r n languages so q u i c k l y , as
51
those who are d i s c i p l i n e d a c c o r d i n g t o t h e o r d i n a r y methods; but
what we l e a r n e d was impressed t h e more d e e p l y on our memories. (31)
Rieger argues c o n v i n c i n g l y i n a f o o t n o t e concerned w i t h the Thomas
emendations (31) t h a t t h i s was
following
i n t e n d e d t o be c a n c e l l e d and the
inserted:
V i t h what d e l i g h t do I even now remember t h e d e t a i l s of our domestic
c i r c l e , and t h e happy years o f my c h i l d h o o d . Joy a t t e n d e d on my
s t e p s - and t h e a r d e n t a f f e c t i o n t h a t a t t a c h e d me t o my e x c e l l e n t
p a r e n t s , my beloved E l i z a b e t h , and Henry, t h e b r o t h e r of my s o u l ,
has g i v e n almost a r e l i g i o u s and s a c r e d f e e l i n g t o t h e r e c o l l e c t i o n
of a p e r i o d passed beneath t h e i r eyes, and i n t h e i r s o c i e t y . (31)
I n t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s c h i l d h o o d i s i d y l l i c because of
the
n a t u r e o f h i s e d u c a t i o n ; i n t h e emended v e r s i o n , t h a t d e t a i l
been removed.
T h i s suggests
t h a t by 1823,
F r a n k e n s t e i n t o seem so w e l l brought up.
has
Mary S h e l l e y d i d not wish
T h i s suggests e i t h e r a s h i f t
i n her c o n c e p t i o n of t h e b a s i s f o r F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s crime, or, more l i k e l y
a f e e l i n g t h a t one so w e l l prepared f o r a d u l t l i f e would be more l i k e l y
to
overcome h i s egotism.
Thus t h e n o n - c o m p e t i t i v e and r a t i o n a l scheme
of
e d u c a t i o n t h a t she d e s c r i b e d i n t h e o r i g i n a l v e r s i o n i s o m i t t e d and
r e p l a c e d by a g e n e r a l i s e d a s s e r t i o n of c h i l d h o o d innocence which
c o n f l i c t s l e s s w i t h the l a t e r p i c t u r e given of Frankenstein.
F r a n k e n s t e i n p r e s e n t s t h e sequence o f events l e a d i n g t o h i s d e s i r e
to
the
to
c r e a t e t h e monster as e n t i r e l y l o g i c a l and necessary (32).
However,
c o n n e c t i o n t h a t seems so c l e a r t o F r a n k e n s t e i n appears f a r l e s s so
t h e reader.
He suggests
f o r g o t t e n sources
t h a t minor d e t a i l s ( i g n o b l e and
( 3 2 ) ) combine t o produce an i r r e s i s t i b l e f o r c e d r i v i n g
him towards a c e r t a i n course of a c t i o n ( t h e t o r r e n t which,
course,
almost
has swept away a l l my hopes and Joys ( 3 2 ) ) .
ini t s
He c l a i m s t h a t
i n t e n d s t o account f o r h i s i n t e r e s t i n N a t u r a l Philosophy,
he
yet the
sequence of events he r e l a t e s does not seem t o cohere i n t o what the
r e a d e r can e a s i l y i d e n t i f y as cause and
effect:
I chanced t o f i n d a volune of t h e works of C o r n e l i u s Agrippa.
I
opened i t w i t h apathy; t h e t h e o r y which he a t t e m p t s t o demonstrate,
and t h e w o n d e r f u l f a c t s which he r e l a t e s , soon changed t h i s f e e l i n g
i n t o enthusiasm.
A new l i g h t seemed t o dawn upon my mind; and,
bounding w i t h j o y , I communicated my d i s c o v e r y t o my f a t h e r ... My
f a t h e r looked c a r e l e s s l y a t t h e t i t l e - p a g e of my book, and s a i d ,
"Ah! C o r n e l i u s Agrippa!
My dear V i c t o r , do not waste your time upon
t h i s ; i t i s sad t r a s h . " (32)
52
Alphonse F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s d i s m i s s i v e comment i s presented as h i g h l y
s i g n i f i c a n t , as F r a n k e n s t e i n goes on t o suggest:
I f , i n s t e a d o f t h i s remark, my f a t h e r had t a k e n t h e p a i n s t o e x p l a i n
t o me, t h a t t h e p r i n c i p l e s of Agrippa had been e n t i r e l y exploded,
and t h a t a modern system o f s c i e n c e had been i n t r o d u c e d , which
possessed much g r e a t e r powers than t h e a n c i e n t , because the powers
of t h e l a t t e r were c h i m e r i c a l , w h i l e those o f t h e former were r e a l
and p r a c t i c a l ; under such c i r c u m s t a n c e s , I s h o u l d c e r t a i n l y have
thrown Agrippa a s i d e , and, w i t h my i m a g i n a t i o n warmed as i t was,
s h o u l d p r o b a b l y have a p p l i e d myself t o t h e more r a t i o n a l t h e o r y of
c h e m i s t r y which has r e s u l t e d f r o m modern d i s c o v e r i e s . I t i s even
p o s s i b l e t h a t t h e t r a i n o f my ideas would never have r e c e i v e d the
f a t a l impulse t h a t l e d t o my r u i n . (34)
F r a n k e n s t e i n s u g g e s t s t h a t h i s f a t h e r ' s f a i l u r e t o e x p l a i n was
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s i n f a t u a t i o n w i t h alchemy.
H i s obsession g i v e s r i s e
t o h i s l a t e r a m b i t i o n t o s t r e t c h t h e boundaries o f s c i e n c e .
This
process has some a n a l o g i e s w i t h Walton's f a t h e r ' s p r o h i b i t i o n of h i s
sea-going which, w i t h h i s u n c l e ' s books, i n s p i r e s h i s d e s i r e t o e x p l o r e .
A t i m e l y e x p l a n a t i o n would have d i v e r t e d F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a t t e n t i o n from
alchemy t o c h e m i s t r y .
The p o i n t has been l a b o u r e d , but i t throws
light
upon t h e causal e f f e c t F r a n k e n s t e i n sees t h i s i n c i d e n t having i n the
process of d i r e c t i n g him towards h i s l a t e r
purpose.
I n terms o f h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l p r o g r e s s , t h e e f f e c t of h i s s t u d i e s
seems t o have had l i t t l e r e a l e f f e c t .
His s t u d y o f the a l c h e m i s t s i s i n
c o n f o r m i t y w i t h t h e p r i n c i p l e s of h i s e d u c a t i o n :
he i s encouraged t o
read f o r h i m s e l f and t h u s t h e c o n t e n t of h i s r e a d i n g m a t t e r
impressed
the more deeply on our memories' ( 3 1 ) .
'was
There seems t o be some
s o r t of i m p l i c i t c r i t i c i s m here of the freedom a l l o w e d young
F r a n k e n s t e i n i n h i s r e a d i n g matter.
T h i s i s a p o i n t made by Anne
Mellor:
While Alphonse F r a n k e n s t e i n i n i t i a l l y f o l l o w e d Godwin's pedagogic
p r e c e p t s - he i n s p i r e d h i s c h i l d r e n t o l e a r n i n a non-competitive
atmosphere by encouraging t h e i r v o l u n t a r y d e s i r e t o please o t h e r s
and by g i v i n g them p r a c t i c a l g o a l s ... - he f a i l e d t o monitor
s u f f i c i e n t l y c l o s e l y t h e books t h a t V i c t o r F r a n k e n s t e i n .. . read.
I n s t e a d of The Bible, Aesop, and Robinson Crusoe, recommended by
Godwin, Locke and Rousseau, V i c t o r devoured t h e m i s l e a d i n g
a l c h e m i c a l t r e a t i s e s of C o r n e l i u s Agrippa, Paracelsus, and A l b e r t u s
Magnus, books which encouraged, not an awareness o f human f o l l y and
i n j u s t i c e , but r a t h e r a h u b r i s t i c d e s i r e f o r human omnipotence, f o r
t h e g a i n i n g of t h e p h i l o s o p h e r ' s stone and t h e e l i x i r of l l f e . ' ^
53
By a l l o w i n g h i m s e l f t o be i n t e r e s t e d i n t h e a l c h e m i s t s , F r a n k e n s t e i n
sows i n h i s mind t h e seed t h a t w i l l grow l a t e r when he possesses t h e
power t o proceed
f u r t h e r t h a n t h e a l c h e m i s t s ever c o u l d by employing the
knowledge o f modern c h e m i s t r y t o t h e i r ends.
importance
i s transient.
At t h i s stage
their
Before p a s s i n g on, F r a n k e n s t e i n makes an
i n t e r e s t i n g l y a m b i v a l e n t comment on h i s i n t e r e s t .
p h i l o s o p h e r ' s stone and t h e e l i x i r o f l i f e ,
o b t a i n e d my most u n d i v i d e d a t t e n t i o n :
Referring t o the
he says,
'But t h e l a t t e r
w e a l t h was an i n f e r i o r o b j e c t ;
but what g l o r y would a t t e n d t h e d i s c o v e r y , i f I c o u l d banish disease
f r o m t h e human frame, and r e n d e r man i n v u l n e r a b l e t o any b u t a v i o l e n t
death!'
(34).
T h i s i n t e n t i o n w i l l be echoed i n h i s j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r
his
c r e a t i o n o f an a r t i f i c i a l man, when he a g a i n masks h i s egotism under
the
guise of a l t r u i s m (49).
He l o s e s f a i t h i n t h e a l c h e m i s t s when he d i s c o v e r s t h a t they a r e
unable t o e x p l a i n c e r t a i n phenomena, and Alphonse i n t r o d u c e s h i s son t o
the
p r i n c i p l e s of e l e c t r i c i t y .
F r a n k e n s t e i n p r e s e n t s t h e i r d e f e a t as
Incomplete:
T h i s l a s t s t r o k e completed t h e overthrow o f C o r n e l i u s Agrippa,
A l b e r t u s Magnus, and Paracelsus, who had so l o n g r e i g n e d t h e l o r d s
of my i m a g i n a t i o n . But by some f a t a l i t y I d i d n o t f e e l i n c l i n e d t o
commence t h e s t u d y o f any modern system; and t h i s d i s i n c l i n a t i o n was
i n f l u e n c e d by t h e f o l l o w i n g circumstance.
My f a t h e r expressed a wish t h a t I s h o u l d a t t e n d a course o f
l e c t u r e s upon n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h y , t o which I c h e e r f u l l y consented.
Some a c c i d e n t p r e v e n t e d my a t t e n d i n g these l e c t u r e s u n t i l t h e course
was n e a r l y f i n i s h e d .
The l e c t u r e , being t h e r e f o r e one o f t h e l a s t ,
was e n t i r e l y incomprehensible t o me. ... I became d i s g u s t e d w i t h the
s c i e n c e o f n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h y ' (35/6),
F r a n k e n s t e i n p r e s e n t s t h e circumstances o f h i s f a i l u r e t o develop a
r e a l u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h y as a s o r t o f t r a g i c a c c i d e n t 'by some f a t a l i t y '
- as a r e s u l t o f which t h e ideas o f t h e a l c h e m i s t s
remain dormant i n h i s memory.
for
what he does i n l a t e r l i f e .
his
f a t h e r merely suggested
T h i s i m p l i e s t h a t he i s not r e s p o n s i b l e
H i s l o g i c appears t o r u n thus;
c a r e l e s s l y t h a t C o r n e l i u s Agrippa,
because
with
whose t h e o r i e s and aims V i c t o r had a l r e a d y become f a s c i n a t e d , was not
w o r t h t h e r e a d i n g , and d i d n o t e x p l a i n t h e e x t e n t t o which h i s ideas had
been shown up by subsequent developments, t h e aims o f t h e a l c h e m i s t s
still
remain w i t h h i m when he d i s c o v e r s t h e inadequacy
54
of t h e i r
p r i n c i p l e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y as he does not a t t h i s stage develop a
s a t i s f a c t o r y u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f modern n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h y .
Frankenstein's
e x p l a n a t i o n f o r h i s i n c o m p l e t e u n d e r s t a n d i n g reads l i k e an e x e r c i s e i n
s e l f - e x c u l p a t i o n on a grand s c a l e .
Rather t h a n accept
personal
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r h i s own a c t i o n s , even when he i s p o r t r a y i n g h i m s e l f
t o Walton as a r u i n e d man, F r a n k e n s t e i n seems u n w i l l i n g o r unable t o
conceive o f h i s own g u i l t .
T h i s r a t h e r e v a s i v e argument can be j u s t i f i e d by r e f e r e n c e t o
Necessity.
I f a l l human a c t i o n s a r e necessary,
held accountable
will
then no one should be
f o r h i s a c t i o n s , because t h e r e I s u l t i m a t e l y no f r e e
i n the decision t o a c t or not t o act.
Here we b e g i n t o see t h e
i r o n i c ambivalence i n t h e t r e a t m e n t o f Godwinian ideas i n t h e novel.
I f , as S h e l l e y suggests
i n h i s r e v i e w , ^ ' t h e novel does embody t h e
concept o f l e c e s s i t y , then F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s s e l f - f l a g e l l a t i o n i s not
justified.
However, a l t h o u g h he i d e n t i f i e s a t r a i n o f consequence t h a t
l e a d s t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n s he i s o u t l i n i n g t o Walton, t h i s i s o v e r l a i d
w i t h so c l e a r a b a s i s f o r condemning him f o r h i s egotism and l a c k o f
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a t a c o n f l i c t i s generated between c o n v e n t i o n a l moral
judgement on t h e one hand and an e v a s i o n o f a c c o u n t a b i l i t y t h a t can be
d e r i v e d f r o m N e c e s s i t y on t h e o t h e r .
I t i s , i n any case, d i f f i c u l t t o
see q u i t e how t h e d e t a i l s o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s u p b r i n g i n g r e s u l t i n h i s
adult personality.
He a s s e r t s t h e i r causal i n f l u e n c e , but t h e l o g i c o f
t h e c o n n e c t i o n i s n o t so c l e a r as he suggests.
I n a d d i t i o n t o t h e elements d e r i v e d from f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n ,
F r a n k e n s t e i n i d e n t i f i e s c e r t a i n o t h e r f a c t o r s t h a t determine h i s f u t u r e
career.
L i k e t h e De Lacey household
F r a n k e n s t e i n household
all
i n t h e monster's account, t h e
i s p o r t r a y e d as a p e r f e c t Godwinian s o c i e t y where
l i v e i n harmony and where t h e l e s s a t t r a c t i v e aspects o f human
n a t u r e a r e s u b o r d i n a t e d t o t h e g e n e r a l w e l f a r e (37).
However,
Frankenstein can be seen as a s t u d y i n e g o t i s m produced by a model
Godwinian community.
subsequent f a l l
The q u e s t i o n i s r a i s e d whether
Frankenstein's
f r o m grace i n h i s i s o l a t i o n i n I n g o l s t a d t r e p r e s e n t s a
deep-seated c r i t i c i s m o f Godwin's p h i l o s o p h y , s u g g e s t i n g t h a t human
n a t u r e cannot demonstrate c o n s i s t e n t l y t h e s e l f l e s s n e s s r e q u i r e d - t h a t
is,
t h a t Mary S h e l l e y b e l i e v e d i n some k i n d o f o r i g i n a l s i n - or whether
55
i t was
t h e i s o l a t i o n f r o m t h e s u p p o r t of t h e r e s t of h i s f a m i l y t h a t
a l l o w e d V i c t o r t o engage i n such dangerous a c t i v i t i e s .
H i s d e p a r t u r e f r o m h i s f a m i l y i s d e s c r i b e d i n p o r t e n t o u s terms:
d e p a r t u r e was
'My
t h e r e f o r e f i x e d a t an e a r l y date; b u t , b e f o r e the day
r e s o l v e d upon c o u l d a r r i v e , t h e f i r s t m i s f o r t u n e of my l i f e occurred an omen, as i t were, o f my f u t u r e misery'
(37).
I t i s not made c l e a r i n
what sense t h e death o f h i s mother i s seen as ominous.
Frankenstein
laments t h e d e a t h o f . h i s mother and appears t o get over i t .
He i s a l s o
aware o f t h e r o l e p l a y e d by E l i z a b e t h f r o m whom h i s mother c o n t r a c t e d
s c a r l e t fever.
sublimated
for
F r a n k e n s t e i n suggests
(38).
that his g r i e f i s eventually
However, when he i s a t I n g o l d s t a d t h i s J u s t i f i c a t i o n
h i s s t u d i e s suggests
i t i s not c o m p l e t e l y assuaged:
' I thought,
t h a t i f I c o u l d bestow a n i m a t i o n upon l i f e l e s s matter, I might i n
process o f t i m e ( a l t h o u g h I now found i t i m p o s s i b l e ) renew l i f e where
death had a p p a r e n t l y devoted t h e body t o c o r r u p t i o n '
(49).
His u l t i m a t e
aim seems t o be t o develop some means of r e s t o r i n g h i s mother t o l i f e ,
as he r e s t o r e s l i f e t o t h e elements of o t h e r corpses
the
monster.
i n h i s c r e a t i o n of
I n b o t h cases t h e impulse I s e g o t i s t i c , not t o say
necrophillac.
F r a n k e n s t e i n p r e s e n t s h i s l i f e a t u n i v e r s i t y as a choice between
human c o n t a c t and t h e a c q u i s i t i o n of knowledge (39-40).
brought up under such secluded c i r c u m s t a n c e s
Having been
by a f a t h e r who
has
eschewed h i s p u b l i c r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s , F r a n k e n s t e i n f e e l s d i s i n c l i n e d t o
develop new
t i e s , and t h i s i n p a r t e x p l a i n s h i s r e t r e a t i n t o the
s o l i t a r y search f o r knowledge.
himself.
His s c i e n t i f i c s t u d i e s are e x c l u s i v e t o
Thus he f e e l s no compulsion
t o share h i s knowledge but t r e a t s
i t as s e c r e t and i s r e l u c t a n t t o r e v e a l what he knows about the monster.
T h i s can be read as a consequence of h i s e d u c a t i o n .
Frankenstein's
u n i v e r s i t y t e a c h e r s are suggested
f a c t o r s i n f l u e n c i n g F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s development.
as the f i n a l
M. Krempe's abrupt
response upon l e a r n i n g what F r a n k e n s t e i n had s t u d i e d i n h i s f i e l d ,
echoes Alphonse F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s d i s m i s s a l of C o r n e l i u s Agrippa:
The t e a c h e r , t h e r e f o r e , d i d not prepossess me i n f a v o u r of h i s
doctrine.
Besides, I had a contempt f o r t h e uses of modern n a t u r a l
philosophy.
I t was v e r y d i f f e r e n t , when t h e masters of the science
sought i m m o r t a l i t y and power; such views, a l t h o u g h f u t i l e , were
grand:
but now t h e scene was changed. The a m b i t i o n o f the i n q u i r e r
56
seemed t o l i m i t i t s e l f t o t h e a n n i h i l a t i o n o f those v i s i o n s on which
my I n t e r e s t i n s c i e n c e was c h i e f l y founded.
I was r e q u i r e d t o
exchange chimeras of boundless grandeur f o r r e a l i t i e s of l i t t l e
worth. (41)
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s h u b r i s i s apparent here.
Rather t h a n h i s research being
seen as an e f f o r t t o i l l u m i n a t e a s m a l l p a r t o f t h e w o r l d f o r o t h e r s , he
d e s i r e s grand and t r a n s c e n d e n t d i s c o v e r i e s .
The r e s u l t o f h i s v i s i t t o
M. Krempe i s a contempt f o r t h e modesty of contemporary
science and a
s t r e n g t h e n e d d e s i r e f o r e x t r a - o r d i n a r y leaps i n t o t h e f u t u r e .
M. Waldman r e d r e s s e s t h e balance somewhat by acknowledging
Although
the valuable
c o n t r i b u t i o n s made by t h e a l c h e m i s t s t o t h e development of modern
c h e m i s t r y , h i s own j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r h i s i n t e r e s t i n h i s s u b j e c t
a t t r a c t s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a t t e n t i o n f o r t h e same e x t r a v a g a n t
'Chemistry
reasons:
i s t h a t branch o f n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h y i n which t h e g r e a t e s t
improvements have been and may
be made; i t i s on t h a t account t h a t I
have made i t my p a r t i c u l a r s t u d y ' (43).
M.
Waldman's a d v e r t i s i n g of h i s
s u b j e c t i n t h i s way appeals t o F r a n k e n s t e i n because i t opens up the
p o s s i b i l i t y of g r e a t achievement.
I n c o n t r a s t t o t h e s u r l y Krempe,
Valdman i s encouraging.
I n t h e Thomas copy t h e r e i s a note, quoted and i l l u s t r a t e d i n the
Rieger e d i t i o n
( 4 4 ) , by Mary S h e l l e y a t t h e end of t h e second chapter:
' I f t h e r e were t o be a n o t h e r e d i t i o n of t h i s book, I s h o u l d r e - w r i t e
these two f i r s t c h a p t e r s .
The i n c i d e n t s a r e tame and i l l - a r r a n g e d - the
language sometimes c h i l d i s h . - They are unworthy o f the r e s t of the . . .
narration'
(43).
C l e a r l y by 1823 Mary S h e l l e y f e l t unhappy about the
way these f i r s t two c h a p t e r s prepared f o r t h e a c t i o n t o f o l l o w .
Her
comments r e f e r s p e c i f i c a l l y t o the manner of w r i t i n g - the arrangement
and t h e m a t u r i t y of t h e language.
I n 1831 she changed a g r e a t d e a l ,
r a d i c a l l y a l t e r i n g t h e whole n a t u r e o f t h e n o v e l .
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s unorthodox and p o t e n t i a l l y dangerous i n t e r e s t i n h i s
s u b j e c t i s emphasised i n t h e t h i r d c h a p t e r which n a r r a t e s how
succeeded a t u n i v e r s i t y :
he
'A mind of moderate c a p a c i t y , which c l o s e l y
pursues one s t u d y , must i n f a l l i b l y a r r i v e a t g r e a t p r o f i c i e n c y i n t h a t
s u b j e c t ; and
I , who c o n t i n u a l l y sought t h e a t t a i n m e n t of one o b j e c t of
p u r s u i t , and was s o l e l y wrapped up i n t h i s ...
(46).
Frankenstein
r e v e a l s here, what he has not e x p l i c i t l y s t a t e d b e f o r e , t h a t h i s
57
i n t e r e s t i n modern n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h y i s n o t t o advance t h e knowledge o f
n a t u r a l phenomena f o r t h e g e n e r a l good, b u t t o seek t o emulate t h e
alchemists.
A l t h o u g h t h e a u t h o r s o f h i s e a r l i e r r e a d i n g have been shown
t o be misguided,
he s t i l l
c l i n g s t o t h e i r aims.
However, i t i s n o t
c l e a r whether t h i s outcome i s t h e r e s u l t o f t h e f a c t o r s t h a t have come
t o bear upon h i m ( N e c e s s i t y ) , o r o f an i n n a t e p r e d i s p o s i t i o n t o s o l i t a r y
s e a r c h i n g a f t e r grand e f f e c t s , o r o f f r e e w i l l .
Ill
The problems o f d e t e r m i n i n g t h e causes o f t h e monster's a c t i o n s are
as d i f f i c u l t as t h e y a r e i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s case.
source o f evidence
i s a first-person narrative.
Once a g a i n t h e major
This f a c t gives r i s e t o
d i f f i c u l t i e s i d e n t i f i e d by Simpson:
Ve can never be sure o f t h e degree t o which we a r e t h e generous
t r a n s c r i b e r s o f f a c t , and o f how f a r we remain t h e a r c h i t e c t s of
p e r s o n a l l y and s o c i a l l y determined p a t t e r n s . The awareness o f t h e
unconscious has o n l y compounded t h i s problem, f o r i t s v e r y
t h e o r i s a t i o n presupposes a r e s e r v o i r o f i n a r t i c u l a b l e d e t e r m i n i n g
i n f l u e n c e s w i t h i n and around t h e conscious mind; t h e ' w i l l ' o r
e t h i c a l f a c u l t y can t h u s o n l y t e n t a t i v e l y d e f i n e one ' s e l f out o f
an i n d e f i n i t e number o f p o s s i b l e s . Ve do n o t possess t h e f i x e d
s e l f - a v a i l a b i l i t y necessary t o c o n s t r u c t a past f r o m a s t a b l e
'moment' i n our own t i m e , so t h a t t h e p r o s p e c t o f an a r t i c u l a b l e
m e d i a t i o n between now and t h e n becomes even more remote.'^
Vhat i s b e i n g s a i d here a p p l i e s as much t o t h e monster's r e a d i n g o f h i s
own past as i t does t o t h e reader's r e a d i n g o f t h e monster's d i s c o u r s e .
The monster d e s c r i b e s h i s e d u c a t i o n and a s c r i b e s causes t o h i s l a t e r
a c t i o n s i n t h e same way t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n d i d , b u t i n n e i t h e r case can
t h e reader be e n t i r e l y convinced by t h e e x p l a n a t i o n .
As Anne M e l l o r
suggests, t h e e d u c a t i o n which t h e monster r e c e i v e s i s complete where
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s i s f a u l t y . T h e monster i s I n f l u e n c e d by t h e example o f
t h e De Laceys, and l e a r n s o t h e r lessons f r o m h i s r e a d i n g :
From P l u t a r c h ' s Lives of the Sable Ramans he l e a r n s t h e nature o f
heroism, p u b l i c v i r t u e and c i v i c j u s t i c e ; f r o m Volney's Ruins, or A
Survey af the Revolutions of Empires, he l e a r n s t h e c o n t r a s t i n g
n a t u r e o f p o l i t i c a l c o r r u p t i o n and t h e causes o f t h e d e c l i n e o f
c i v i l i z a t i o n s ; f r o m M i l t o n ' s Paradise Lost he l e a r n s t h e o r i g i n s o f
human good and e v i l and t h e r o l e s o f t h e sexes; and from Goethe's
Verther he l e a r n s t h e range o f human emotions, f r o m domestic l o v e t o
58
s u i c i d a l d e s p a i r , as w e l l as t h e r h e t o r i c i n which t o a r t i c u l a t e not
o n l y ideas b u t feelings.^"*T h i s l a y s g r e a t s t r e s s on t h e development o f s o c i a l
responsibility.
However, as i s shown i n t h e p r e v i o u s c h a p t e r w i t h r e g a r d t o Paradise
Last, and as C l e m i t demonstrates i n The Gadwinian Novel w i t h r e f e r e n c e
to
Volney's Ruins, Mary S h e l l e y ' s r e a d i n g s o f these works were f a r from
unequivocal.
I n Scientific Attitudes in Xary Shelley's 'Frankenstein', Samuel
Holmes Vasbinder shows how Mary S h e l l e y used Locke's tabula rasa as
developed by C o n d i l l a c i n h i s Treatise an the Sensations and H a r t l e y ' s
seven p r o g r e s s i v e c a t e g o r i e s o f development f r o m Xan, his Frame, his
Duty, and his Expectations.''^ The monster shows a g r a d u a l development
f r o m t h e n a t u r a l s t a t e as he develops t h r o u g h t h e f i r s t
categories.
few o f H a r t l e y ' s
However, he r e c o g n i s e s t h e need t o go beyond t h e merely
n a t u r a l s t a t e when he observes t h e c o t t a g e r s .
The monster's f i r s t e x p e r i e n c e
o f humanity i s d i s c o u r a g i n g .
e n c o u n t e r s a shepherd who f l e e s f r o m him (100).
v i l l a g e whose a t t r a c t i o n s a r e apparent
t o him.
He
Then he comes across a
However, t h e v i l l a g e r s
r e a c t more a g g r e s s i v e l y t h a n t h e shepherd and d r i v e him o f f (101).
The
monster l e a r n s t o i d e n t i f y h i s l o n e l i n e s s l a t e r on, b u t t h i s i t s f i r s t
manifestation.
He l e a r n s o f t h e a t t r a c t i o n s o f companionship f r o m h i s
d i s c o v e r y o f i t s absence.
Having been d r i v e n o u t o f t h e v i l l a g e , and d e p r i v e d o f t h e f i n e
housing and good f o o d he saw t h e r e , t h e monster f i n d s a l t e r n a t i v e
accommodation (101-2).
he l o s e s h i s innocence.
He p r e s e n t s h i m s e l f as l e a r n i n g wretchedness as
Knowledge comes f r o m b i t t e r experience.
He has
l e a r n t t h e d e s i r a b i l i t y o f s h e l t e r , b u t a l s o t h a t h i s mere appearance
rouses humanity a g a i n s t him.
As a r e s u l t he r e a l i s e s t h a t d i s c o m f o r t i s
an i n e v i t a b l e consequence o f h i s appearance.
The monster s t r e s s e s h i s s i m p l i c i t y and s e n s i t i v i t y .
The p a t t e r n o f
a t t r a c t i o n and r e j e c t i o n seen i n h i s v i s i t t o t h e v i l l a g e has been
o u t l i n e d p r e v i o u s l y i n h i s attempt t o i m i t a t e birdsong
(99).
His
i n i t i a l d e s c r i p t i o n s o f t h e De Laceys (102/3) present him as a c r e a t u r e
of
pronounced f e e l i n g .
T h i s c o u l d be a product o f h i s l a t e r r e a d i n g o f
Verther, t h a t i s t h a t h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i o n o f them i s shaped by h i s
r e a d i n g o f Goethe.
H i s response t o t h e scene i n which Agatha p l a y s t h e
59
g u i t a r f o r her f a t h e r , which he observes t h r o u g h the crack i n the w a l l
i s t o u c h i n g (103/4).
presented thus f a r .
the
T h i s i s q u i t e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the c h a r a c t e r
He has responded t o h i s s e n s a t i o n s i n r e c o g n i s i n g
beauty of t h e moon (98) and the p l e a s u r e he d e r i v e s from I t , and the
birds.
I n c o n t r a s t t o h i s response t o music, he i n i t i a l l y shows an
i n s e n s i t l v i t y t o language:
'The
y o u t h began, not t o p l a y , but t o u t t e r
sounds t h a t were monotonous, and n e i t h e r r e s e m b l i n g t h e harmony o f the
old
man's i n s t r u m e n t o r t h e songs of t h e b i r d s ;
I s i n c e found t h a t he
r e a d a l o u d , but a t t h a t time I knew n o t h i n g of t h e science of words or
letters'
(105).
The monster r e f e r s here t o h i s l a t e r d i s c o v e r y of
language and t h e sense i t enables him t o make of h i s e a r l i e r experience.
There i s a s i m p l e I r o n y i n h i s comment on t h e medium he i s u s i n g t o
express h i s a p o l o g i a , and i n Mary S h e l l e y ' s s e l f - c o n s c i o u s comment upon
her medium.
the
way
As w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s account,
t h e reader i s made aware of
i n which t h e past i s p r e s e n t e d a t a l a t e r time.
monster uses a medium, spoken language,
Here the
t o d e s c r i b e h i s l a c k of
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e same medium a t an e a r l i e r stage.
The past i s
p r e s e n t e d as o n l y h a v i n g e x i s t e n c e i n terms of t h e present.
As has been
seen w i t h the monster's use of Paradise Lost t o s t r u c t u r e p a r t s of h i s
d i s c o u r s e , h i s account
significance.
i s c o n s c i o u s l y p a t t e r n e d t o p r o v i d e s t r u c t u r e and
At t h i s stage the monster i s s t r e s s i n g h i s innocence,
i g n o r a n c e and t h e h a r d s h i p s he i s s u f f e r i n g as a consequence of h i s
creation.
By o b s e r v i n g t h e De Laceys t h e monster l e a r n s how he ought t o
behave, but a t the same time the r e c i p r o c a l n a t u r e of the r e l a t i o n s h i p
he craves.
He wishes t o have the reward t h a t he sees De Lacey pare g i v e
t o h i s c h i l d r e n (106).
However, t h e monster i s i n i t i a l l y confused
by
the
f a c t t h a t d e s p i t e seeming t o have a l l the n e c e s s i t i e s f o r happiness,
the
two younger De Laceys are not c o n t e n t .
The
monster assumes t h a t
F e l i x and Agatha ought t o be happy, possessing as they do a l l t h a t he
deems necessary
f o r happiness
(106).
However, t h i s i s b o t h the
p e r f e c t i o n and t h e l i m i t a t i o n of h i s p u r e l y n a t u r a l s t a t e a t t h i s stage.
As Anne M e l l o r p o i n t s out, the c i v i l i s a t i o n t h a t f a s c i n a t e s him i n the
De Laceys, and the speech he develops
60
' e n t a i l s a l o s s of freedom, a
f r u s t r a t i o n o f d e s i r e , and an e n c l o s u r e w i t h i n t h e prisonhouse o f
language o r what Lacan has c a l l e d t h e symbolic o r d e r ' , ^«^'
As he a c q u i r e s language, which might enable h i m t o f u n c t i o n
s o c i a l l y , h i s d e v e l o p i n g sense o f h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s r e s t r i c t s h i s
free w i l l
(106-7);
' I found t h a t these people possessed a means of
communicating t h e i r experience and f e e l i n g s t o one another by a r t i c u l a t e
sounds.
I p e r c e i v e d t h a t t h e words they spoke sometimes produced
p l e a s u r e o r p a i n , s m i l e s o r sadness, i n t h e minds and countenances of
the
hearers.
T h i s was indeed a g o d l i k e s c i e n c e , and I a r d e n t l y d e s i r e d
t o become a c q u a i n t e d w i t h i t ' (107).
means o f p r e v e n t i n g d i s c o m f o r t .
friends.
P r e v i o u s l y a l l he d e s i r e d were t h e
Now he d e s i r e s t o speak and t o have
He i s d e v e l o p i n g beyond t h e n a t u r a l s t a t e i n which h i s d e s i r e s
are r e g u l a t e d by b o d i l y c o m f o r t .
He wishes t o l e a r n language, w i t h a l l
i t s i m p l i c a t i o n s o f freedom and r e s t r a i n t .
The
monster's f i r s t
l i n g u i s t i c experience
i s n e u t r a l , but soon he
a c q u i r e s t h e means o f making h i m s e l f unhappy.
of
F i r s t he l e a r n s t h e names
t h e members o f t h e c l o s e - k n i t f a m i l y , b o t h t h e i r personal names and
their relationships
relations.
(107-8).
The monster has n e i t h e r name nor
Even h i s c r e a t o r , w h i l s t h i s f a t h e r i n some r e s p e c t s , i s
a l s o h i s mother, and by h i s a c t i o n s l i k e n e i t h e r p a r e n t , f o r , i n s t e a d of
d e m o n s t r a t i n g t h e s o r t o f f a m i l y l o v e and l o y a l t y t h e monster observes
amongst t h e De Laceys, V i c t o r F r a n k e n s t e i n has abandoned h i s c r e a t i o n i n
horror.
The monster hopes t h a t language w i l l be t h e means o f overcoming the
a n t a g o n i s t i c response he has experienced thus f a r from
humanity:
I a p p l i e d my whole mind t o t h e endeavour [ o f l e a r n i n g t o speak];
f o r I e a s i l y p e r c e i v e d t h a t , a l t h o u g h I e a g e r l y longed t o d i s c o v e r
myself t o t h e c o t t a g e r s , I ought not t o make t h e attempt u n t i l I had
become master o f t h e i r language; which knowledge might enable me t o
make them o v e r l o o k t h e d e f o r m i t y o f my f i g u r e ; f o r w i t h t h i s a l s o
the c o n t r a s t p e r p e t u a l l y presented t o my eyes had made me
acquainted. (109)
He
has a t o u c h i n g f a i t h i n t h e e f f i c a c y o f language t o c r e a t e
r e l a t i o n s h i p s and t o overcome d i f f i c u l t i e s .
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o f t h e t r u e n a t u r e o f language.
the
c e n t r a l concerns o f t h e whole novel.
As y e t he has no r e a l
T h i s i s o f course one of
The monster t h i n k s of language
as a s i m p l e means o f communication; however, t h e q u e s t i o n i n g o f t h e
61
i n f l u e n c e o f r h e t o r i c and t h e warning t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n i s s u e s t o V a l t o n
(206) make i t v e r y h a r d f o r t h e reader not t o q u e s t i o n t h e medium of
coramunjcation i t s e l f .
The monster hopes t h a t language w i l l serve t o
dissolve his d i f f i c u l t i e s ,
difficulties.
whereas i n f a c t i t r e p r e s e n t s h i s
He hopes t o e x p l a i n t h e reasons f o r h i s development
by
i d e n t i f y i n g t h e causes, r e g a r d i n g language as a t r a n s p a r e n t medium of
communication.
However, what he sees as necessary development
i n e v i t a b l y appear so t o F r a n k e n s t e i n or t h e reader.
the
subjective nature of h i s perceptions.
does not
He does not r e a l i s e
The c o n f l i c t between the
n a r r a t i v e s d e r i v e s f r o m t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y of complete communication:
F r a n k e n s t e i n can o n l y see m a t t e r s f r o m t h e monster's p o i n t o f view by
i n h a b i t i n g t h e monster's v i e w p o i n t ; but he cannot abandon the p r e j u d i c e s
and e x p e r i e n c e s t h a t make him what he i s . No m a t t e r how c l e a r l y the
monster o u t l i n e s h i s argument,
it fully
the
Frankenstein w i l l
not be a b l e t o accept
because t h a t would i n v o l v e abandoning s e l f and s t e p p i n g o u t s i d e
hermeneutic c i r c l e , which he cannot do, any more t h a n can the
reader, a p p a r e n t l y detached though he may t h i n k h i m s e l f t o be.
The monster's response t o F e l i x ' s j o y on t h e a r r i v a l o f S a f l e i s of
a more s o p h i s t i c a t e d k i n d t h a n h i s response has h i t h e r t o been (112).
i s now d e r i v i n g p l e a s u r e f r o m t h e p l e a s u r e o f o t h e r s .
He
I n terms of the
c h a r a c t e r t h e monster wishes t o p o r t r a y h i m s e l f as, t h i s i s an Important
stage i n h i s development.
Not o n l y does he respond t o t h e Joy of
o t h e r s , but h i s f o r m a l e d u c a t i o n , which s t a r t s a t t h i s s t a g e , develops
his
u n d e r s t a n d i n g and response.
Volney's Ruins of Empires.
F e l i x teaches S a f i e French from
T h i s m e d i t a t i o n on t h e d e c l i n e of v a r i o u s
forms o f t y r a n n y enables t h e monster t o develop f u r t h e r t h a t f e e l i n g of
sympathy he demonstrated so c l e a r l y on S a f i e ' s a r r i v a l
(115).
I t means
a l s o t h a t f o r him language i s i n e x t r i c a b l y bound up w i t h ideas o f s o c i a l
J ustice.
At
the
t h i s stage two elements combine i n t h e monster's development.
On
one hand he b e g i n s t o develop towards t h e next of H a r t l e y ' s
c a t e g o r i e s , but a t t h e same t i m e he i s used as a k i n d o f h o l y f o o l to
expose the v i c e s o f mankind:
'Vas man,
indeed, a t once so p o w e r f u l , so
v i r t u o u s , and m a g n i f i c e n t , y e t so v i c i o u s and base?
... For a long time
I c o u l d not conceive how one man c o u l d go f o r t h t o murder h i s f e l l o w , or
even why t h e r e were laws and governments;
62
but when I heard d e t a i l s of
v i c e and
bloodshed, my wonder ceased, and
loathing'
(115),
I t u r n e d away w i t h d i s g u s t
and
His moral sense d e r i v e s from h i s sense of sympathy, as
H a r t l e y suggests i t s h o u l d . ' ^
However, he i s a l s o being
presented
i r o n i c a l l y , because the reader i s a l r e a d y aware of the way
monster has been r e s p o n s i b l e f o r bloodshed.
response as a naive and
innocent
one - who
good? - but he i s aware of t h e way
The
i n which the
monster presents
would do e v i l
his
i f he c o u l d
do
t h a t experience imposes s u f f e r i n g .
Although presenting himself disingenuously,
the monster i s c o n t r o l l i n g
t h e r e a d e r / l i s t e n e r ' s response v e r y s k i l f u l l y .
T h i s i s one of the key passages f o r the c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the monster
as benevolent and good.
account of the i l l
The
treatment
hard t o c r e d i t t h a t man
monster responds s y m p a t h e t i c a l l y t o the
of the American I n d i a n s (115), and f i n d s i t
would v o l u n t a r i l y debase h i m s e l f t o v i c e .
However, the monster i s not c o m p l e t e l y
developed.
process of l e a r n i n g has been remarkably smooth.
I n an odd way
his
True, he has been
d r i v e n f r o m the v i l l a g e , but a p a r t from t h a t he has l e a r n t i n i s o l a t i o n
and almost v i c a r i o u s l y .
His den
i n the hovel has d i s t a n c e d him
from
a c t u a l human c o n t a c t so t h a t h i s l e a r n i n g has been t h e o r e t i c a l .
sense t h i s detachment resembles the way
the reader r e c e i v e s
In a
the
monster's s t o r y embedded i n o t h e r n a r r a t i v e s t h a t i s o l a t e i t and keep i t
at a distance.
The
monster's e d u c a t i o n c o n t i n u e s
l e s s o n s he l e a r n s t o h i m s e l f .
w i t h h i s a p p l i c a t i o n of the
He soon r e a l i s e s t h a t he possesses none
o f t h e g i f t s of f o r t u n e t h a t would enable him t o a t t a i n any s o r t of
s t a n d i n g i n human s o c i e t y (115/6),
p o o l , so now,
Just as when he saw
h i m s e l f i n the
when he sees h i m s e l f i n h i s i m a g i n a t i o n , the monster f i n d s
h i m s e l f unable t o cope w i t h h i s own
image;
' I cannot d e s c r i b e t o you
the agony t h a t these r e f l e c t i o n s i n f l i c t e d upon me;
them, but sorrow o n l y i n c r e a s e d
w i t h knowledge.
I t r i e d to dispel
Oh,
t h a t I had f o r ever
remained i n my n a t i v e wood, nor known or f e l t beyond the s e n s a t i o n s
hunger, t h i r s t and,
heat!'
(116),
The
monster r e a l i s e s t h a t knowledge
i s a p a i n f u l a c q u i s i t i o n , but i r r e v o c a b l e ,
has
l e a r n e d w i l l have an inescapable
Necessity
means t h a t v/hat he
i n f l u e n c e on him i n h i s l a t e r
but i t w i l l not n e c e s s a r i l y be b e n e f i c i a l .
The
t h e necessary e f f e c t i s the problem of p r i o r i t y ;
life,
d i f f i c u l t y of a n a l y s i n g
a l l a c t i o n s and
have an e f f e c t , but the i n f l u e n c e of some i s g r e a t e r than o t h e r s ,
63
of
events
Not
o n l y does t h e monster's a c q u i s i t i o n o f b i t t e r experience have an
influence,
b u t so t o o does t h e d e s p a i r i t provokes.
The g r e a t problem
w i t h any f i r s t person n a r r a t i v e o f necessary i n f l u e n c e s
can
l i s t a l l the influences
i s t h a t no-one
o p e r a t i n g upon them, one o f which must be
the process o f l i s t i n g i t s e l f .
n e c e s s i t y must i n e v i t a b l y remain an
unprovable t h e o r y because o f t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f e s t a b l i s h i n g any
external
The
vantage p o i n t and t h e d i f f i c u l t y o f a b s o l u t e comprehensiveness.
monster p r e s e n t s t h e De Lacey's s t o r y o f d i s i n t e r e s t e d
benevolence as a c r u c i a l element i n h i s e d u c a t i o n .
They a c t as p a r e n t s
t o h i m i n t h a t i t i s from them t h a t he l e a r n s t h e h i g h e r q u a l i t i e s o f
intellectual activity.
They a r e b e t t e r p a r e n t s t o him t h a n Alphonse
F r a n k e n s t e i n appears t o have been t o V i c t o r .
unselfish, providing
They a r e honourable and
t h e monster w i t h a model o f behaviour t h a t he a t
f i r s t a t t e m p t s t o f o l l o w , crowned as i t i s i n t h e De Laceys' case w i t h a
f i t t i n g reward f o r t h e i r v i r t u e i n t h e form o f companionship.
The
example o f t h e De Laceys i s r e - i n f o r c e d by t h e monster's
d i s c o v e r y o f t h e cache o f books:
The Sorrows of Verther (123).
Paradise Lost, Plutarch's Lives and
Between them, P l u t a r c h
and Goethe develop
t h e monster's a b i l i t y t o understand t h e f e e l i n g s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of
human beings on a wider s c a l e .
By l i v i n g next t o t h e De Laceys t h e
monster has l e a r n e d g r a d u a l l y
so t h a t by t h e t i m e he f i n d s these books
he
t h e t e a c h i n g they have t o o f f e r .
i s capable o f a p p r e c i a t i n g
Even so,
a l t h o u g h t h e monster's emphasis on what he has l e a r n t from Goethe and
Plutarch
s u p p o r t s h i s argument w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n w e l l , i t i s harder t o
i d e n t i f y what he i s s a y i n g i n h i s r e f e r e n c e s t o Paradise Lost.
I t is
not c l e a r which aspects o f Paradise Last are i n f l u e n c i n g him. Paradise
Lost appears once again t o c l a r i f y ,
The
but s e r v e s i n s t e a d
monster a s s e r t s t h a t i t i n f l u e n c e d
to destabilise.
him g r e a t l y , but even he i s
unsure whether i t i s Adam o r Satan's r o l e he i s most impressed by (125).
I n h i s s i m p l e s t r o l e as c o n v e n t i o n a l i r o n i s t t h e monster i d e n t i f i e s
v i r t u e w i t h p l e a s u r e and v i c e w i t h pain.
evil
i f i t i s so l i t t l e a t t r a c t i v e ?
Vhy t h e r e f o r e
should man do
The monster a l s o recognises t h e
importance o f t h e o r d e r i n which he developed h i s understanding:
p a t r i a r c h a l l i v e s o f my p r o t e c t o r s
'The
caused these impressions t o take a
f i r m h o l d on my mind; perhaps, i f my f i r s t
64
i n t r o d u c t i o n t o humanity had
been made by a young s o l d i e r , b u r n i n g f o r g l o r y and s l a u g h t e r , I should
have been imbued w i t h d i f f e r e n t s e n s a t i o n s ' (125).
However, t h e monster's d e v e l o p i n g awareness of t h e p o s s i b i l i t i e s of
benevolence i s d e s t r o y e d by t h e f a i l u r e of h i s a t t e m p t t o e s t a b l i s h
r e l a t i o n s w i t h t h e De Laceys.
He e x p l a i n s h i s moral d e g e n e r a t i o n as a
consequence of h i s t h w a r t e d Impulse t o good which h i s appearance
m i l i t a t e s against.
His c y n i c i s m develops on h i s j o u r n e y towards Geneva when he i s shot
by t h e peasant.
H i s gloomy mood has l i g h t e n e d somewhat i n empathy w i t h
the
coming s p r i n g (137), but he p r e s e n t s h i m s e l f as v e r y much a f r a i d of
his
emotions.
to
H i s use of e x p r e s s i o n s l i k e ' a l l o w e d m y s e l f
be happy' suggests
freely.
and
'dared
t h a t he i s a f r a i d of t h e consequences of f e e l i n g
He u s u a l l y o n l y t r a v e l s by n i g h t , but on t h i s occasion he
v e n t u r e d out by day and f e e l s p l e a s u r e i n the sun.
has
However, being shot
by t h e peasant as recompense f o r s a v i n g t h e l i f e of the g i r l evokes a
b i t t e r and s a r c a s t i c r e t r e a t i n t o h i s former i m p l a c a b l e s t a t e :
' The
f e e l i n g s of kindness and g e n t l e n e s s , which I had e n t e r t a i n e d but a few
moments b e f o r e , gave p l a c e t o h e l l i s h rage and gnashing o f t e e t h .
I n f l a m e d by p a i n , I vowed e t e r n a l h a t r e d and vengeance t o a l l
mankind'
(138).
The monster a t t r i b u t e s h i s malevolence
his
account.
effect.
t o human a c t i o n s throughout
However, t h i s i s t o o simple an e x p l a n a t i o n of cause and
I t has i t s o r i g i n s i n t h e d e t a i l e d account of the monster's
p s y c h o l o g i c a l development, but I f the novel i s s p e c i f i c a l l y
a n y t h i n g i t i s about
closely.
of
about
the dangers of i d e n t i f y i n g cause and e f f e c t too
As Swingle p a i n t s o u t , i n Frankenstein we have p o s s i b i l i t i e s
meaning w i t h o u t t h e necessary
confirmatory proof.
The monster
a s s e r t s , but we have o n l y h i s word f o r i t .
The monster suggests t h i s c o n f i r m s him i n h i s misanthropy.
r e p r e s e n t s h i m s e l f as c u t o f f from God and f r o m a l l
fulfilment
(138).
He
p o s s i b i l i t y of
His a t t e m p t t o b e f r i e n d W i l l i a m i s presented as a
l a s t a t t e m p t t o a v o i d complete
d e s p a i r (138).
He hopes t h a t the
i n n o c e n t V i l l i a m might not respond a d v e r s e l y towards him.
response (139) suggests one of two p o s s i b i l i t i e s .
wrong i n h i s assumption
of V i l l i a m ' s innocence;
Vllliam's
The monster might
be
V i l l i a m might be o l d
enough and e x p e r i e n c e d enough t o recognise t h e monster w i t h the s o r t of
65
adult perception that w i l l i n s t i n c t i v e l y react antagonistically.
A l t e r n a t i v e l y , t h e appearance o f t h e monster i s so h o r r i f i c ,
i n t h e ways
Chris B a l d i c k suggests.'* t h a t V i l l i a m r e a c t s i n s t i n c t i v e l y ,
lacking the
s o r t o f c o n d i t i o n e d a d u l t c u r i o s i t y t h a t V a l t o n shows a t t h e end o f t h e
novel.
V i l l i a m ' s r e a c t i o n q u i t e cures t h e monster o f h i s benevolence.
However, t h e f i n a l stage o f h i s d e g r a d a t i o n i s q u i t e s e l f - i n d u c e d , and
i n response t o no a c t i o n o f anyone e l s e .
His destruction of Justine i s
h i s f i r s t c o l d - b l o o d e d and p u r e l y m a l i c i o u s a c t .
I t i s appropriate,
g i v e n t h e r o l e o f Paradise Lost i n t h e novel t h a t , l i k e Satan u s i n g
Adam f o r h i s revenge on God, t h e monster o p e r a t e s t h r o u g h t h e medium o f
o t h e r s t o conduct h i s vengeance on F r a n k e n s t e i n :
'Here, I thought, i s
one o f those whose s m i l e s a r e bestowed on a l l b u t me; she s h a l l not
escape:
thanks t o t h e lessons o f F e l i x , and t h e sanguinary laws of man,
I have l e a r n e d how t o work m i s c h i e f
(140).
The monster p r e s e n t s h i s
t r e a t m e n t o f J u s t i n e as d e r i v i n g from what he has l e a r n t .
He a s s e r t s
h i s l a c k o f r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and i n e f f e c t t h e necessary b a s i s f o r h i s
development.
IV
A f t e r h e a r i n g t h e monster's account o f h i s development, Frankenstein
suggests t o t h e monster t h a t t h e malice a l r e a d y d i s p l a y e d by him i s
grounds enough t o m i s t r u s t him.
f o r m t h e argument developed
The monster's r e p l y p r e s e n t s i n concise
i n t h i s s e c t i o n o f t h e book, t h e argument
t h a t Percy S h e l l e y i d e n t i f i e d as being t h e moral o f t h e novel as a whole
i n h i s review:
'lor a r e t h e c r i m e s and malevolence o f t h e s i n g l e Being, though
indeed w i t h e r i n g and tremendous, t h e o f f s p r i n g o f any unaccountable
p r o p e n s i t y t o e v i l , b u t f l o w i r r e s i s t i b l y f r o m c e r t a i n causes f u l l y
adequate t o t h e i r p r o d u c t i o n . They a r e t h e c h i l d r e n , as i t were, of
N e c e s s i t y and Human Nature.
I n t h i s t h e d i r e c t moral o f t h e book
c o n s i s t s , and i t i s perhaps t h e most i m p o r t a n t and o f t h e most
u n i v e r s a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f any moral t h a t can be e n f o r c e d by example T r e a t a person i l l and he w i l l become wicked.
Requite a f f e c t i o n
w i t h scorn; l e t one b e i n g be s e l e c t e d f o r whatever cause as t h e
r e f u s e o f h i s k i n d - d i v i d e him, a s o c i a l b e i n g , f r o m s o c i e t y , and
you impose upon h i m t h e I r r e s i s t a b l e o b l i g a t i o n s - malevolence and
selfishness.'^°
66
Percy S h e l l e y here p r e s e n t s t h e novel as i f i t embodies a
straightforward morality.
However, t h i s o v e r - s i m p l i f i e d view of the
novel g r e a t l y misrepresents i t .
The monster o u t l i n e s h i s p o s i t i o n , emphasising
the
necessary
consequences o f i t .
I t h o u g h t I had moved your compassion, and y e t you s t i l l r e f u s e t o
bestow on me t h e o n l y b e n e f i t t h a t can s o f t e n my h e a r t , and render
me harmless.
I f I have no t i e s and no a f f e c t i o n s , h a t r e d and v i c e
must be my p o r t i o n ; t h e l o v e o f another w i l l d e s t r o y t h e cause of my
crimes, and I s h a l l become a t h i n g , of whose e x i s t e n c e everyone w i l l
be i g n o r a n t . My v i c e s a r e t h e c h i l d r e n o f a f o r c e d s o l i t u d e t h a t I
abhor; and my v i r t u e s w i l l n e c e s s a r i l y a r i s e when I l i v e i n
communion w i t h an e q u a l .
I s h a l l f e e l t h e a f f e c t i o n s of a s e n s i t i v e
b e i n g , and become l i n k e d t o t h e c h a i n of e x i s t e n c e and events, from
which I am now excluded. (143)
I n many senses i t i s t h i s s e l f - d e f i n i n g statement t h a t t h e monster's
d i s c o u r s e leads up t o .
H i s account
of h i s development f o l l o w s a s t e p -
by-step progression e x e m p l i f y i n g a s i m i l a r n e c e s s i t a r i a n i n e v i t a b i l i t y
t o t h e account o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s development i n Book I .
However, i n h i s
demand f o r companionship, t h e monster seeks t o use N e c e s s i t y f o r h i s own
purposes as a p r e d i c t i v e mechanism.
He a s s e r t s , t h a t companionship would
r e v e r s e h i s moral d e p r a v i t y and t h a t happiness would make him goodF r a n k e n s t e i n ' s J u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r h i s d e s t r u c t i o n of the female monster
q u e s t i o n s t h i s by o f f e r i n g an a l t e r n a t i v e necessary
outcome (163).
Taken on t h e i r own these b i o g r a p h i e s e x e m p l i f y Godwin's p r i n c i p l e ;
but t h e e f f e c t of t h e book as a whole i s t o c a s t doubt on the
e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h e t h e o r y of N e c e s s i t y as an e x p l a n a t i o n f o r human
actions.
67
Chapter 4:
Sature
I n Frankenstein, n a t u r e i s seen f r o m s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n t v i e w p o i n t s
which a s c r i b e t o i t d i f f e r e n t f u n c t i o n s and s i g n i f i c a n c e .
I t i s seen
b o t h as a n e u t r a l background and as a p a r t i c i p a n t i n t h e n a r r a t i v e . I t s
t r e a t m e n t i s dependent upon t h e n a r r a t o r and i s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h
questions o f personal i d e n t i t y .
At times i t echoes t h e n a r r a t o r ' s mood
and s t a t u s , and a t o t h e r t i m e s i t c o n t r a s t s w i t h them.
t h i s c o n t e x t u a l f u n c t i o n , w i t h i t s importance
the
In addition to
i n r e l a t i o n t o t h e idea o f
p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y and t o Godwinian n e c e s s i t y , n a t u r e i s a l s o
p r e s e n t e d as a resource t o be plundered, o r raped.
There a r e times when
b o t h t h e monster and F r a n k e n s t e i n seem almost d r i v e n t o a c t i o n by
nature.
I t i s as i f t h e i r disharmony w i t h n a t u r e can o n l y be r e s o l v e d
by some f o r m o f v i o l e n t s e l f - p r o j e c t l v e a c t i o n .
The most obvious example o f s e l f - p r o j e c t i o n i s Frankenstein's
c r e a t i o n o f t h e monster.
recesses
T h i s i s r e p r e s e n t e d as ' p e n e t r a t e i n g ] i n t o the
o f n a t u r e , [ t o ] shew how she works i n her h i d i n g places' ( 4 2 ) .
However, i f one accepts Simpson's r e a d i n g o f Romantic i n t e n t i o n s
( d e s c r i b e d below), what F r a n k e n s t e i n i s a t t e m p t i n g t o do i s not p o s s i b l e
because he cannot separate h i m s e l f from t h e o b j e c t o f h i s study.
In
for
Irony and Authority in Romantic Poetry, Simpson p o i n t s out t h a t
t h e Romantics, ' t h e r e i s no ... p e r s p e c t i v e o u t s i d e , which i s not i n
fact within'.^
I n o r d e r f o r t h e r e t o be any f o r m o f a u t h o r i t y t h a t can
p r o v i d e a metacomment, i t i s necessary t o be a b l e t o s t a n d o u t s i d e t h e
f i e l d o f d i s c o u r s e and observe.
However, t h e p e c u l i a r i t y o f Romantic
i r o n y , as he d e f i n e s i t , i s t h a t because t h e f i e l d
r e q u i r e s t h e hermeneutic
c i r c l e t o be completed
i s not complete, but
by t h e reader, i t i s not
p o s s i b l e f o r t h e reader t o s t a n d back and observe t h e process.the
Thus
reader i s p e r p e t u a l l y engaged i n t h e two m u t u a l l y c o n t r a d i c t o r y
e x e r c i s e s o f advancing
t o complete t h e c i r c l e and w i t h d r a w i n g t o observe
what i s produced.
He d e s c r i b e s t h e process o f apparent
n a t u r e becomes mind w i t h nature'.-"
itself
d i s c r i m i n a t i o n as 'Mind i n
As t h e mind a t t e m p t s t o d i s t i n g u i s h
f r o m i t s c o n t e x t , so i t becomes p a r t o f t h a t c o n t e x t i t s e l f .
a t t e m p t t o d e f i n e i n o p p o s i t i o n t o n a t u r e produces d i f f i c u l t i e s
Any
because
'As soon as t h e mind f i n d s i t s e l f d e s c r i b i n g n a t u r e as an o b j e c t i n the
68
r e f l e x i v e r e c o g n i t i o n of i t s e l f ,
t h e n i t r i s k s i n t e r n m e n t i n a discourse
whose terms a l l o w o n l y f o r p e r p e t u a l moving between o p p o s i t e poles'."I n Frankenstein both F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster t r y t o use nature
as a background a g a i n s t which c e r t a i n elements a r e foregrounded.
- 4 r i e i Jii-e a Harpy, C h r i s t o p h e r Small suggests
In
t h e r e i s a reversed
v e r s i o n o f t h e p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y i n o p e r a t i o n , u s i n g Godwinian n e c e s s i t y
as h i s J u s t i f i c a t i o n :
Man, a "necessary being" - t h a t i s t o say one i n t h e g r i p o f
n e c e s s i t y - i s dependent even f o r t h e s t a t e o f h i s emotions on t h e
circumstances o f t h e t i m e ; j u s t because, u n l i k e t h e beasts, he
cannot l i v e by bread alone b u t i s s e n s i t i v e t o more than p h y s i c a l
e f f e c t s , he i s t h e h e l p l e s s v i c t i m o f "every wind t h a t blows".
The
c o n v i c t i o n t h u s borne i n upon F r a n k e n s t e i n i s o f g r e a t importance i n
t h e moral scheme o f t h e n o v e l ; t h e p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y here t u r n e d
upside down i s , ... a way o f t h i n k i n g upon which t h e novel as a
whole makes p r o f o u n d comment. But i t s u p p l i e s n e v e r t h e l e s s the mode
i n which, as a work o f a r t , i t i s w r i t t e n ;
man, t h e landscape and
t h e v a g a r i e s o f weather, and t h e i r i n t e r a c t i o n i n t h e metaphorical
language o f t h e work, i s not t o be seen i n terms o f cause and
effect. ^
Small's r e a d i n g o f N e c e s s i t y suggests
human emotions,
i t c r e a t e s them.
t h a t , r a t h e r than nature echoing
as i n t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l v e r s i o n o f t h e p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y ,
T h i s idea i s a m p l i f i e d i n Simpson:
Ve do not have a c o g n i t i v e grasp on t h e t h i n g s t h a t make us what we
a r e . . . p r e c i s e l y because we have a l r e a d y d e f i n e d these t h i n g s as
undiscoverable.
Ve cannot proceed i n ignorance o f t h e hermeneutic
c i r c l e , b u t we cannot s o l v e t h e q u e s t i o n s i t r a i s e s .
I shall t r y to
argue t h a t t h e poets themselves thought and c r e a t e d w i t h i n the
shadow o f t h i s problem, and t h a t t h e i r awareness o f i t l e d them t o
f a s h i o n a r t e f a c t s wherein t h e issue i s r e p e a t e d and t r a n s f e r r e d , i n
a f i n e r tone, r a t h e r t h a n d e f i n i t i v e l y s o l v e d . "^^
Because o f our involvement
i n t h e c o n t e x t , and our consequent i n a b i l i t y
t o see o b j e c t i v e l y f r o m o u t s i d e i t ,
we cannot know a l l t h e f a c t o r s t h a t
determine our a c t i o n s , and thus cannot e x p l a i n t h e i r causes e f f e c t i v e l y .
A c c o r d i n g t o Simpson, any attempt t o e x p l a i n our o r i g i n s i s impossible;
so F r a n k e n s t e i n , i n a t t e m p t i n g t o d i s c o v e r t h e 'causes o f l i f e '
engaged i n t h a t which i s a g a i n s t nature.
(46), i s
He wishes t o i d e n t i f y cause
and e f f e c t , b u t he o n l y succeeds i n r e f i n i n g t h e problem:
i t is
'repeated and t r a n s f e r r e d ' , b u t what he produces i s not an improvement.
He i s bound t o produce a monster i f he t h i n k s he i s r e v e a l i n g the cause.
69
Simpson makes f u r t h e r s u g g e s t i o n s which e x p l a i n t h e d e f i c i e n t
o f what F r a n k e n s t e i n d i s c o v e r s :
'The p r i m a r y experience
form
... i s
t h r e a t e n e d and reduced by secondary d i s c o u r s e , and t h e l e v e l o f c l o s u r e ,
o f 'metacomment', which t h a t d i s c o u r s e might be t h o u g h t t o p r o v i d e , i s
i n f a c t o n l y a faded v e r s i o n o f t h e events which made i t p o s s i b l e . " " I n
Frankenstein t h e p r i m a r y e x p e r i e n c e
discourse.
i s v e r y o f t e n another secondary
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a c t o f c r e a t i o n does n o t a c t u a l l y c r e a t e , but
r e p e a t s i n debased form.
He says he wants t o r e s t o r e l i f e ,
but can o n l y
copy female r e p r o d u c t i o n , and n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y s u c c e s s f u l l y .
seems t o be q u e s t i o n i n g t h e v e r y p o s s i b i l i t y o f c r e a t i o n .
The novel
Even normal
b i o l o g i c a l c r e a t i o n does n o t occur i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s g e n e r a t i o n .
I n t h i s same area. Small suggests t h a t ,
'To know a t h i n g p r e v i o u s l y
unknovm i s t o b r i n g i t i n t o e x i s t e n c e and a t t h e same tims t o dominate
i t as c r e a t o r does creature'.®
However, t h i s c o n t r a d i c t s t h e idea o f
t h e r e v e r s e d p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n N e c e s s i t y because i t
suggests
t h a t man can dominate a t l e a s t p a r t o f h i s c o n t e x t .
This i n
many r e s p e c t s i s t h e key i s s u e i n c o n s i d e r i n g t h e f u n c t i o n o f n a t u r e i n
Frankenstein.
There a r e two p o s s i b l e r e a d i n g s , each m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e .
I n one, man i s dominated by h i s environment,
impose some c o n t r o l over i t .
i n t h e o t h e r he i s able t o
T h i s p a t t e r n i s analogous t o Simpson's
e x p l a n a t i o n o f t h e hermeneutic
circle.
The paradox i s n e a t l y e x p l a i n e d
by M u r i e l Spark:
S h e l l e y ... would see F r a n k e n s t e i n , i n h i s r o l e o f c r e a t o r , as t h e
p e r p e t r a t o r o f human m i s e r y and t h e r e f o r e an o b j e c t o f h a t r e d . And,
Mary added, he i s t h e s u f f e r e r o f human misery and t h e r e f o r e an
object of p i t y .
But, she a l s o added, he i s an amoral product o f
n a t u r e , on whom no r e s p o n s i b i l i t y can be a t t a c h e d , towards whom no
p a s s i o n can l o g i c a l l y be e n t e r t a i n e d . ' ^
She r e c o g n i s e s t h e r e a d i n e s s w i t h which c h a r a c t e r s i n t h e novel can
s i m u l t a n e o u s l y r e p r e s e n t m u t u a l l y e x c l u s i v e ideas.
The monster can be
b o t h c h a r a c t e r i s e d as Satan and Adam, as w e l l as a t t i m e s p e r f o r m i n g t h e
r o l e o f God; F r a n k e n s t e i n can a l s o f u n c t i o n as b o t h God and Satan,
T h i s apparent
c o n t r a d i c t i o n can be seen c l e a r l y i n t h e monster's
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h nature:
C h r i s t o p h e r Small r e f e r s t o t h e monster's
• i n b u i l t a f f i n i t y w i t h t h e n a t u r a l w o r l d ' , s u g g e s t i n g he i s t h e i d e a l
Rousseau/Godwinian c h i l d ; b u t he i s a monster,
Vhen he c o n s i d e r s Percy
S h e l l e y ' s judgement i n h i s r e v i e w o f Frankenstein, Small i d e n t i f i e s t h e
70
weakness i n h i s argument:
wicked."
'"Treat a person i l l and he w i l l become
S h e l l e y d i d not i n q u i r e why
monster t o demonstrate
sympathies
this.'''
i t s h o u l d be necessary t o i n v e n t a
Small i m p l i e s t h a t Percy S h e l l e y ' s
were t o o much engaged on the s i d e of the monster, t o a l l o w
him t o see o t h e r r e a d i n g s o f t h e n o v e l .
variables.
the
way
To prove Percy S h e l l e y ' s moral, i t s h o u l d be enough t o show
i n which a c h i l d o f n a t u r e , pure i n o u t l o o k as a r e s u l t of the
innocence
the
L o g i c a l l y , t h e r e are t o o many
of i t s e d u c a t i o n , c o u l d be p e r v e r t e d by a d v e r s i t y .
c h i l d of n a t u r e i n t h i s novel i s an u n n a t u r a l c r e a t u r e .
However,
The
simple
moral i s s u b v e r t e d by t h e d o u b t f u l n a t u r e of i t s v e h i c l e , s u g g e s t i n g the
i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f e x t r i c a t i n g a c l e a r and u n e q u i v o c a l m o r a l i t y from the
c o n f l i c t i n g mass o f d e t a i l .
T h i s on a simple l e v e l i s another way i n
which Mary S h e l l e y a v o i d e d t h e i m p o s i t i o n of a c l e a r metacomment.
However, i t a l s o r a i s e s t h e more complex q u e s t i o n o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s
m o t i v a t i o n f o r her own c r e a t i o n of t h e n o v e l , which i s c u r i o u s l y
analogous t o F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a c t i o n , and of t h e moral v a l u e of nature
itself.
T h i s can be examined by c o n s i d e r i n g the r e l a t i o n s h i p between the
monster and h i s s u r r o u n d i n g s a f t e r h i s r e j e c t i o n by t h e De Laceys.
He
b u r s t s out i n borrowed r h e t o r i c a f t e r he has d e s c r i b e d h i s r e j e c t i o n .
He sees h i m s e l f as mocked by n a t u r e around him - 'the c o l d s t a r s shone
i n mockery' (132) - and he c a s t s h i s t h o u g h t s i n t h e f o r m of Satan's
f u r y i n Book IX o f Paradise Lost:^^
enjoyment:
I l i k e t h e a r c h f i e n d , bore a h e l l w i t h i n me;
myself unsympathised
and,
finding
w i t h , wished t o t e a r up t h e t r e e s , spread havoc and
d e s t r u c t i o n around me,
(132).
' A l l , save I , were a t r e s t o r i n
and t h e n t o have s a t down and enjoyed t h e r u i n '
The monster's f r u s t r a t i o n d e r i v e s f r o m h i s i n a b i l i t y t o cause
his
s u r r o u n d i n g s t o respond
i n sympathy w i t h h i s mood.
the
f a i l u r e of t h e p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y , r e g r e t t i n g h i s own
He i s b e w a i l i n g
Individuality.
I f t h e s o r t of e g o t i s t i c a l s e l f - p r o j e c t i o n e x e m p l i f i e d i n Satan i s being
condemned i n t h e n o v e l , as Poovey suggests, t h e n t h i s i s where the
monster exchanges hopes of domestic contentment
for destructive self-
assertion. ' ^
However, when t h e monster begins t o become a c t i v e , n a t u r e seems i n
tune w i t h him once more.
I n s p i r e d by a v i o l e n c e i n n a t u r e t h a t
imitates
and i n f l a m e s h i s t h o u g h t s - 'As t h e n i g h t advanced, a f i e r c e wind arose
71
f r o m t h e woods, and q u i c k l y d i s p e r s e d t h e c l o u d s t h a t had l o i t e r e d i n
t h e heavens:
t h e b l a s t t o r e a l o n g l i k e a mighty avelanche,
and produced
a k i n d of i n s a n i t y i n my s p i r i t s , t h a t b u r s t a l l bounds of reason
reflection'
and
(135) - , t h e monster d e s t r o y s t h e s i t e o f h i s attempted
co-
o p e r a t i o n w i t h and r e j e c t i o n by humanity and s e t s out t o attempt t o
f o r g e h i s own d e s t i n y , as Rieger p o i n t s o u t , l i k e Adam and Eve a t t h e
end o f Paradise Lost (135).
He seems now
i m p e l l e d towards a c t i o n by the
i n f l u e n c e of nature.
T h i s s e c t i o n o f t h e n o v e l appears t o suggest t h a t n a t u r e i s i n
sympathy w i t h s e l f - a s s e r t i o n .
However, t h e r e a r e i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s :
monster wishes i n i t i a l l y t o c r e a t e havoc, but i t i s not u n t i l
the
'the b l a s t
. . . produced a k i n d o f i n s a n i t y i n my s p i r i t s . , . ' t h a t he a c t s .
does n o t f u n c t i o n i n sympathy u n t i l he wishes t o a s s e r t h i m s e l f .
a t t e m p t t o i d e n t i f y cause and e f f e c t here must f a i l .
The
Any
monster's
i n n e r t u r m o i l comes b e f o r e and might be seen t o i n s p i r e the tempest,
he blames n a t u r e f o r b u r s t i n g 'the bounds o f reason and
Alternatively,
ITature
but
reflection".
t h e monster might have s e i z e d upon c o i n c i d e n t a l f a c t o r s
t o p r o v i d e some f o r m of s e l f - j u s t i f i c a t i o n .
II
F r a n k e n s t e i n cannot be seen as a c h i l d of n a t u r e .
towards n a t u r e appears more o b j e c t i v e :
His a t t i t u d e
he s t u d i e s n a t u r a l philosophy.
H i s t e a c h e r M. Valdman c o n t r a s t s modern s c i e n c e w i t h t h e a l c h e m i s t s read
by F r a n k e n s t e i n i n h i s c h i l d h o o d i n ambiguous terms:
The a n c i e n t t e a c h e r s o f t h i s s c i e n c e ...promised I m p o s s i b i l i t i e s ,
and performed n o t h i n g . The modern masters promise very l i t t l e ; they
know t h a t m e t a l s cannot be transmuted, and t h a t t h e e l i x i r o f l i f e
i s a chimera.
But these p h i l o s o p h e r s , whose hands seem o n l y made t o
dabble i n d i r t , and t h e i r eyes t o pour over t h e microscope or
c r u c i b l e , have indeed performed m i r a c l e s . They p e n e t r a t e i n t o t h e
recesses o f n a t u r e , and shew how she works i n her h i d i n g places.
They ascend i n t o t h e heavens; t h e y have d i s c o v e r e d how t h e b l o o d
c i r c u l a t e s , and t h e n a t u r e of t h e a i r we breathe. They have
a c q u i r e d new and almost u n l i m i t e d powers; t h e y can command t h e
t h u n d e r s o f heaven, mimic t h e earthquake, and even mock t h e
i n v i s i b l e w o r l d w i t h i t s own shadows. (42)
T h i s p r e s e n t s t h e achievements of modern c h e m i s t r y as both l e s s e r and
g r e a t e r t h a n t h e a l c h e m i s t s c o u l d manage.
72
I t c o n t a i n s t h e paradox
between t h e source o f knowledge ('to dabble i n d i r t ' ) and i t s outcome
('new and almost u n l i m i t e d powers') t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n w i l l l a t e r make
more e x p l i c i t
('to examine t h e causes o f l i f e ,
r e c o u r s e t o death'
(46)).
we must f i r s t have
I t also presents the gathering of that
knowledge i n s e x u a l terms ('penetrate i n t o t h e recesses o f n a t u r e ' ) .
Nature i s p r e s e n t e d as female and capable o f b e i n g raped.
M. Valdman does n o t suggest,
However, what
b u t what F r a n k e n s t e i n develops,
i s the
p o s s i b i l i t y o f t u r n i n g t h i s s t e r i l e p e n e t r a t i o n i n t o some s o r t o f
reproduction.
The o t h e r image f o r t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f knowledge i n t h e novel i s
pursuit.
his
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s ' i n p u r s u i t o f some d i s c o v e r i e s ' (45) p r i o r t o
rape o f n a t u r e , f r o m which t h e o f f s p r i n g i s t h e monster.
H i s human
s e x u a l p a r t n e r , E l i z a b e t h needs no w i n n i n g , b u t r e p r e s e n t s t h e u l t i m a t e
d o m e s t i c i t y o f near i n c e s t , so he d i r e c t s h i s a s s e r t i v e e n e r g i e s
nature.
clear:
Nature's
towards
r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n two a p p a r e n t l y d i s t i n c t forms i s
i t i s a r e s o u r c e which F r a n k e n s t e i n p l u n d e r s , and a backdrop
a g a i n s t which t h e a c t i o n i s p l a y e d out.
f r u s t r a t e d by h i s i n i t i a l
J u s t as t h e monster i s
i n a b i l i t y t o persuade n a t u r e t o sympathise
w i t h him, so F r a n k e n s t e i n f i n d s h i m s e l f o u t o f sympathy w i t h n a t u r e when
engaged i n h i s a c t o f c r e a t i o n / v i o l a t i o n :
'Winter, s p r i n g , and summer,
passed away d u r i n g my l a b o u r s ; b u t I d i d n o t watch t h e blossom o r t h e
expanding leaves - s i g h t s which b e f o r e always y i e l d e d me supreme
d e l i g h t , so d e e p l y was I engrossed i n my o c c u p a t i o n .
The leaves o f t h a t
year had w i t h e r e d b e f o r e my work drew near t o a c l o s e ' ( 5 1 ) . I n
c o n t r a s t , he f o c u s e s on t h e s e c r e t p e n e t r a t a t i v e aspects o f h i s
occupation.
the
of
He 'appeared r a t h e r l i k e one doomed by s l a v e r y t o t o i l i n
mines' ( 5 1 ) .
He sees h i s a c t i v i t y as b e i n g a mining i n t o t h e depths
theearth.
A s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h i s p e n e t r a t i o n image t h e r e i s an aspect o f
illness.
I n t h e 1818 v e r s i o n i t i s merely
'a slow f e v e r ' (51); t h e
Thomas copy develops t h i s i d e a r a t h e r f u r t h e r :
'My v o i c e became broken,
my t r e m b l i n g hands almost r e f u s e d t o accomplish
t h e i r t a s k ; I became as
t i m i d as a l o v e - s i c k g i r l ,
and a l t e r n a t e tremor and passionate
ardour
t o o k t h e p l a c e o f wholesome s e n s a t i o n and r e g u l a t e d a m b i t i o n ' (51).
more p r e c i s e r e f e r e n c e t o t h e ' l o v e - s i c k g i r l '
c o n n o t a t i o n s o f h i s labour.
73
emphasises t h e sexual
The
I f t h i s a c t i v i t y r e p r e s e n t s a rape o f n a t u r e by F r a n k e n s t e i n ,
he
p o r t r a y s n a t u r e i n i t s o t h e r g u i s e when he i s r e c o v e r e d f r o m h i s
sickness.
I n h i s n a r r a t i v e he seems t o be a t t e m p t i n g t o separate the
two a s p e c t s of n a t u r e :
of
t h e d i v i n e background f r o m which he i s capable
d e r i v i n g a s o r t of V o r d s w o r t h i a n u p l i f t ,
and t h e dark and s e c r e t
i n n e r recesses where he conducts h i s ' f i l t h y '
creation.
Vhen he r e c o v e r s f r o m h i s s i c k n e s s he r e c o g n i s e s t h a t s p r i n g has
arrived:
I remember t h e f i r s t t i m e I became capable o f o b s e r v i n g outward
o b j e c t s w i t h any k i n d of p l e a s u r e , I p e r c e i v e d t h a t t h e f a l l e n
l e a v e s had disappeared, and t h a t t h e young buds were s h o o t i n g f o r t h
f r o m t h e t r e e s t h a t shaded my window. I t was a d i v i n e s p r i n g ; and
the season c o n t r i b u t e d g r e a t l y t o my convalescence.
I f e l t also
s e n t i m e n t s o f j o y and a f f e c t i o n r e v i v e i n my bosom; my gloom
disappeared, and i n a s h o r t t i m e I became as c h e e r f u l as before I
was a t t a c k e d by t h a t f a t a l passion. (57)
I t i s p o s s i b l e t o see a n a t u r a l c y c l e i n h i s c r e a t i o n o f t h e monster:
the
p r e v i o u s year has been devoted t o t h e s l o w g r o w t h o f h i s c r e a t i o n
c u l m i n a t i n g i n h i s , r a t h e r l a t e , h a r v e s t of t h e n c n s t e r .
Frankenstein
has been dormant f o r t h e w i n t e r and now t h a t t h e s p r i n g has come he i s
ready t o b e g i n t h e w o r l d a g a i n as i f h i s p r e v i o u s year's l a b o u r s had not
occurred.
T h i s n a t u r a l c y c l e c o n t r a s t s w i t h t h e u n n a t u r a l q u a l i t y of
what F r a n k e n s t e i n was d o i n g .
the
monster and suggests
I n t h i s passage he represses h i s memory of
t h a t t h e n a t u r e he had seen t h e p r e v i o u s year
as a dark o b j e c t f o r p e n e t r a t i o n i s now something e l s e c o m p l e t e l y .
even suggests
t h a t n a t u r e has a b e n e f i c i a l e f f e c t - 'the season
c o n t r i b u t e d g r e a t l y t o my convalescence.'
nature.
He
However, i t i s s t i l l
the same
He seems t o be a t t e m p t i n g t o conceal f r o m Walton t h a t he
has
p e n e t r a t e d w e l l beneath t h e p e t t i c o a t s o f t h e seemly n a t u r e t h a t he
describes
now.
Frankenstein r e j e c t s h i s e a r l i e r studies C I
wished t o f l y from
r e f l e c t i o n , and h a t e d my former s t u d i e s ' ( 6 4 ) ) and pretends t h a t he i s
quite free.
However, i t i s not u n t i l t h e f o l l o w i n g year t h a t
a c t u a l l y prepares t o r e t u r n t o h i s f a m i l y i n Geneva.
t a k e s a w a l k i n g t o u r w i t h C l e r v a l d u r i n g May
c o n c l u d i n g h i s complete r e c o v e r y .
he
P r i o r t o t h i s he
which he p r e s e n t s as
He c o n t r a s t s h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h
C l e r v a l w i t h h i s s o l i t u d e w h i l s t s t u d y i n g t o c r e a t e t h e monster - 'A
74
s e l f i s h p u r s u i t had cramped and narrowed me, u n t i l your g e n t l e n e s s and
a f f e c t i o n warmed and opened my senses' ( 6 5 ) , and he shows h i m s e l f i n
tune w i t h n a t u r e and soothed and gladdened by i t .
He i s a t t e m p t i n g t o
l o s e h i m s e l f i n n a t u r e i n a s u p e r f i c i a l way, as opposed t o h i s p r e v i o u s
d e l v i n g i n t o her s e c r e t s - 'A serene s k y and verdant f i e l d s f i l l e d me
w i t h ecstasy'
(65).
He even c l a i m s , i n h i s a t t e m p t t o r e p r e s s h i s
t r a u m a t i c memory o f what he has brought i n t o b e i n g , t h a t he i s a b l e t o
r e t u r n t o t h e innocence o f h i s c h i l d h o o d - ' I became t h e same happy
c r e a t u r e who, a few years ago, l o v i n g and beloved, had no sorrow o r
care' (65).
A f t e r t h e deaths o f V i l l i a m and J u s t i n e , F r a n k e n s t e i n a t t e m p t s t o
r e c r e a t e t h i s mood t o r e p r e s s h i s knowledge and h i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e
monster's r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r them:
O f t e n ... I t o o k t h e boat, and passed many hours upon t h e water.
Sometimes ... I was c a r r i e d by t h e wind; and sometimes ... I l e f t
the boat t o pursue i t s own course, and gave way t o my own miserable
reflections.
I was o f t e n tempted, when a l l was a t peace around me,
and I t h e o n l y u n q u i e t t h i n g t h a t wandered r e s t l e s s i n a scene so
b e a u t i f u l and heavenly, i f I except some b a t , o r t h e f r o g s , whose
harsh and i n t e r r u p t e d c r o a k i n g was heard o n l y when I approached the
shore - o f t e n , I say, I was tempted t o plunge i n t o t h e s i l e n t l a k e ,
t h a t t h e waters might c l o s e over me and my c a l a m i t i e s f o r ever. (867)
F r a n k e n s t e i n a t t e m p t s t o a l l o w n a t u r e t o absorb him as i t seemed i t had
on h i s w a l k i n g t o u r .
However, i t i s no l o n g e r p o s s i b l e f o r him t o f o r c e
n a t u r e t o f i t t h e mould he chooses.
P r e v i o u s l y , he was a b l e t o r e p r e s s
his
memory o f t h e c r e a t i o n o f t h e monster, b u t he i s n o t a b l e t o r e p r e s s
his
memory o f t h e consequences o f t h a t r e p r e s s i o n f o r which he accepts
some l i m i t e d r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
(88).
emphasises h i s i n d i v i d u a l i t y .
isolation literally
However, abandoning h i m s e l f t o nature
He suggests
t h a t he i s tempted by h i s
t o immerse h i m s e l f i n h i s n a t u r a l surroundings.
J u s t as F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a t t e m p t t o e x p l o r e causes from w i t h i n t h e c o n t e x t
cannot succeed, so t o o h i s a t t e m p t t o submerge h i m s e l f t o t a l l y i s
impossible.
The terms o f t h e hermeneutic
c i r c l e prevent b o t h complete
a b s o r p t i o n i n t o and complete s e p a r a t i o n f r o m c o n t e x t .
pushes a t t h e boundaries,
the
Frankenstein
b u t i s i n e v i t a b l y doomed t o o s c i l l a t e between
two p o l e s . ' *
75
A f t e r d e s t r o y i n g t h e female monster, F r a n k e n s t e i n a g a i n c a s t s
h i m s e l f a d r i f t a t t h e mercy o f n a t u r e .
he i s unsure and m i s e r a b l e .
Vhen he i s d r i f t i n g on t h e l a k e ,
He i s tempted by s u i c i d e , but he i s
e s s e n t i a l l y i g n o r a n t of what he has c r e a t e d .
Vhen he c a s t s o f f from
Orkney he has made a d e l i b e r a t e c h o i c e t h a t he does not wish t o be
changed - ' I banished
different
f r o m my mind every t h o u g h t t h a t c o u l d l e a d t o a
c o n c l u s i o n ' (168); however, he p r e s e n t s h i s abandonment t o the
wind and waves as a l u x u r y , almost t h e d e l i b e r a t e abandonment t o
pleasure of the f a l l e n :
w i t h such agreeable
the
water...'
' i t ( t h e breeze) r e f r e s h e d me,
me
s e n s a t i o n s , t h a t I r e s o l v e d t o p r o l o n g my s t a y on
(168).
Vhereas on Lac Leman, F r a n k e n s t e i n sought comfort
i n d r i f t i n g on t h e l a k e , but f a i l e d t o achieve i t , now,
contentment,
and f i l l e d
having
found
by abandoning what he had p r e v i o u s l y thought of as h i s
d u t y , F r a n k e n s t e i n now
f i n d s t h e sympathy i n n a t u r e he sought before.
As i n t h e case of t h e monster, t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between speaker and
n a t u r e can be read i n v a r i o u s ways.
For F r a n k e n s t e i n , n a t u r e i s b o t h a resource and a background.
the
As
n a r r a t i v e proceeds he l o s e s h i s t a s t e f o r t h e former and f a i l s t o
disappear
i n t o the l a t t e r .
T h i s can be seen i n t h e two s e c t i o n s drawn
f r o m Mary S h e l l e y ' s j o u r n a l , t h e t r i p t o Chamonix and t h e Journey down
the
Rhine.In
each case F r a n k e n s t e i n f i n d s a c o n f l i c t between the
c o n v e n t i o n a l response t o n a t u r e which ought t o i n s p i r e sublime
and h i s own m i s e r a b l e thoughts.
abandon h i s own
the
His e g o t i s m w i l l not a l l o w him t o
i d e n t i t y and l o s e h i m s e l f c o m p l e t e l y .
paradox of t h e hermeneutic
circle:
s e p a r a t e from, but a l s o p a r t of n a t u r e .
desire f o r i n d i v i d u a l i t y
f o r m of t h e monster.
feelings
This
dramatises
F r a n k e n s t e i n both wishes t o be
He a t t e m p t s t o s a t i s f y
his
by s e t t i n g f r e e some p a r t of h i m s e l f i n the
The c r e a t i o n of t h e monster i s t h u s an attempt t o
m a i n t a i n a degree of what might be seen as masculine
separateness.
monster's i n a b i l i t y t o g a i n acceptance i n human s o c i e t y can almost
seen as i t s r a l s o j : d'etre.
distinct
The
be
Acceptance would r e p r e s e n t a l o s s of
i d e n t i t y on F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s b e h a l f .
The monster wishes t o be
p a r t o f a f a m i l y c i r c l e , y e t I s denied the o p p o r t u n i t y by h i s hideous
appearance,
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s g r e a t l y beloved y e t c l i n g s f a s t t o h i s
personal I s o l a t e d i d e n t i t y ,
others,
which i s d e f i n e d i n terms of o p p o s i t i o n t o
F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster d e f i n e themselves i n terms of
76
t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n t o each o t h e r i n a k i n d o f s o l i p s i s t i c e q u i l i b r i u m .
Mary Poovey, v i e w i n g t h e n o v e l f r o m a f e m i n i s t p e r s p e c t i v e , c o r r e c t l y
i d e n t i f i e s t h e monster as a k i n d o f ' o t h e r ' a g a i n s t whom F r a n k e n s t e i n
d e f i n e s himself,'^' b u t o m i t s t o mention t h e way i n which
Frankenstein
o p e r a t e s as an ' o t h e r ' a g a i n s t whom t h e monster's I d e n t i t y i s d e f i n e d .
Both a r e d e f i n e d i n o p p o s i t i o n t o n a t u r e , and b o t h t o g e t h e r represent an
a t t e m p t t o e s t a b l i s h a p o s i t i o n between complete a b s o r p t i o n i n c o n t e x t
and t o t a l
isolation.
However, n e i t h e r F r a n k e n s t e i n n o r t h e monster has a c o n s i s t e n t
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h nature.
They seem t o be imposing d i f f e r e n t
on i t a t d i f f e r e n t t i m e s .
N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e n a t u r e o f n a t u r e remains
unknowable d e s p i t e t h e i r a t t e m p t s t o d e f i n e i t .
I n t h i s respect i t s
e f f e c t i s as i f i t were a k i n d o f 'Romantic i r o n i s t '
d e s c r i b e d by Simpson:'^
readings
l i k e the c h i l d
i t f u n c t i o n s w i t h i n t h e n o v e l , b u t i t l a c k s any
f o r m o f ' s t a b l e i d e n t i t y ' , f o r i t does n o t seem t o f u n c t i o n c o n s i s t e n t l y
i n accordance w i t h t h e p r i n c i p l e s o f Necessity.
I t i s available t o
F r a n k e n s t e i n f o r h i m t o ' p e n e t r a t e ' , o r sympathise w i t h , b u t i t i s n o t
d e f i n e d by e i t h e r o f these s t r a t e g i e s .
ascribe a value t o i t .
I t e l u d e s t h e clumsy attempt t o
S i m i l a r l y , i t i s p r e s e n t e d by t h e monster as a
necessary i n f l u e n c e on h i s development, b u t i t operates both w i t h and
against h i s desires.
The monster encounters n a t u r e as he begins t o d i s c r i m i n a t e t h e
o b j e c t s s u r r o u n d i n g him.
He d e r i v e s g r e a t and i n n o c e n t pleasure from
t h e sun which warms h i m and t h e songs o f t h e b i r d s :
'Sometimes I t r i e d
t o i m i t a t e t h e p l e a s a n t songs o f t h e b i r d s , b u t was unable.
Sometimes I
wished t o express my s e n s a t i o n s i n my own mode, b u t t h e uncouth and
i n a r t i c u l a t e sounds which broke f r o m me f r i g h t e n e d me i n t o s i l e n c e
again'
(99).
Here t h e monster wishes t o emulate n a t u r e , b u t f i n d s
h i m s e l f excluded by h i s m o n s t r o s i t y .
H i s d e f o r m i t y prevents him from
becoming l i k e t h e b i r d s i n t h e same way as i t w i l l prevent h i s
acceptance by t h e De Laceys.
Although t h e monster has been c r e a t e d by
p e n e t r a t i o n o f t h e inmost p a r t s o f n a t u r e , n a t u r e does n o t recognise him
as i t s own, any more t h a n does humankind.
elements,
other.
and
He i s a h y b r i d o f two
man and n a t u r e , t h a t d e f i n e themselves by o p p o s i t i o n t o each
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s o b j e c t i f i c a t i o n o f n a t u r e determines h i s i d e n t i t y
n a t u r e can be seen as t h a t which i s n o t man.
77
The monster i s
composed o f I r r e c o n c i l a b l e o p p o s i t e s , p r o d u c i n g t h e l a c k o f organic
u n i t y t h a t C h r i s B a l d i c k suggests
i s t h e h a l l m a r k o f h i s monstrosity.'®
The monster's i n v o l u n t a r y i s o l a t i o n i s r e v e a l e d by h i s experience
the
with
b i r d s and i t m i r r o r s t h e v o l u n t a r y i s o l a t i o n o f Frankenstein.
Although F r a n k e n s t e i n i s o n l y conscious o f h i s s e p a r a t i o n from humanity
d u r i n g h i s s e c r e t s t u d i e s , h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h t h e r e s t o f humanity i s
b l i g h t e d by t h e consequences o f h i s a c t i o n .
the
The e f f e c t o f h i s r e t u r n t o
w o r l d o f human r e l a t i o n s i s t o b r i n g death.
The c r u c i a l moment i n t h e monster's r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h nature i s h i s
r e j e c t i o n by t h e De Laceys.
He becomes f u l l y aware o f h i s own
I n d i v i d u a l i t y when h i s hopes o f human companionship a r e d i s a p p o i n t e d .
At t h i s p o i n t he f i n a l l y accepts t h a t h i s p e r s o n a l i d e n t i t y i s c r e a t e d
by o p p o s i t i o n t o what he i s surrounded
by.
S e l f - a s s e r t i o n i s both
d e s t r u c t i v e and i n e v i t a b l e .
The monster's i n i t i a l l a c k o f sympathy w i t h n a t u r e and subsequent
i n s p i r a t i o n by t h e s t o r m t o d e s t r o y t h e c o t t a g e p r e s e n t s a problem f o r
the
reader t o decide how f a r n e c e s s i t y e x p l a i n s h i s a c t i o n s .
I s i t the
monster's l a c k o f sympathy w i t h calm n a t u r e t h a t makes him become
v i o l e n t , o r i s i t h i s sympathy w i t h t h e storm?
H i s i d e n t i t y seems t o be
d e f i n e d i n two ways, as a f u n c t i o n o f h i s o p p o s i t i o n t o nature, i e . i t
i s d e r i v e d f r o m h i s i n d i v i d u a l n a t u r e , and as a consequence o f h i s
action.
Both p o s s i b i l i t i e s a r e r e i n f o r c e d by t h e monster's two
responses.
Does e i t h e r h i s passive misery o r h i s a c t i v e d e s t r u c t i o n
r e i n f o r c e h i s i n d i v i d u a l i t y most?
The o t h e r p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t u n d e r l i e s
a l l such s p e c u l a t i o n i s t h a t t h e r e i s no a c t u a l causal
between n a t u r e and t h e monster's p e r s o n a l i t y .
connection
T h i s i s suggested
by both
Simpson and S m a l l . A n y attempt t o i d e n t i f y causal p a t t e r n s s u f f e r s
f r o m t h e i m p o s s i b i l i t y o f d e v e l o p i n g an o b j e c t i v e d i s t a n c e from t h e t e x t
t o see i t f r o m an a u t h o r i t a t i v e s t a n d p o i n t .
And y e t t h e r e i s a sense i n which n a t u r e ' s sympathy and t h e
monster's mood a r e connected
by t h e monster i n h i s n a r r a t i v e (132; 135).
A s s o c i a t e d w i t h t h i s i s t h e e x t e n t t o which he i s a c t i v e o r passive.
Thus, h i s misery a f t e r r e j e c t i o n can be r e p r e s e n t e d by t h e dissonance
between h i s mood and t h e elements o f n a t u r e he observes.
At t h e same
t i m e he seems t o be a s s o c i a t e d w i t h c e r t a i n seasons and weather
patterns.
78
Such a p a t t e r n
can be seen on t h e monster's r o a d t o Geneva.
As the
w i n t e r develops, so does h i s b i t t e r n e s s :
Nature decayed around me, and t h e sun became h e a t l e s s ; r a i n and snow
poured around me; m i g h t y r i v e r s were f r o z e n ; t h e s u r f a c e o f the
e a r t h was hard, and c h i l l , and bare, and I found no s h e l t e r .
Oh,
e a r t h ! how o f t e n d i d I i m p r e c a t e curses on t h e cause o f my being!
The mildness o f my n a t u r e had f l e d , and a l l w i t h i n me was t u r n e d t o
g a l l and b i t t e r n e s s .
The n e a r e r I approached your h a b i t a t i o n , the
mare deeply d i d I f e e l t h e s p i r i t o f revenge e n k i n d l e d i n my heart.
Snow f e l l , and t h e w a t e r s were hardened, but I r e s t e d not. (136)
A l t h o u g h t h e monster
for
i s e x p e r i e n c i n g h a r d s h i p , h i s mood o f d e t e r m i n a t i o n
revenge i s i n k e e p i n g w i t h t h e coldness and harshness o f the season.
However, he does a l s o r e v e a l t h e p o t e n t i a l f o r m a n i p u l a t i o n o f apparent
cause and e f f e c t i n h i s n a r r a t i v e :
no r e s p i t e :
not
'The agony o f my f e e l i n g s a l l o w e d me
no i n c i d e n t o c c u r r e d f r o m which my rage and misery c o u l d
exact i t s f o o d '
(136).
H i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f t h e way i n which h i s
s u b j e c t i v e n a r r a t i v e imposes a r e a d i n g on c i r c u m s t a n c e s c a l l s
into
q u e s t i o n a l l such judgements and d e s t a b i l i s e s f u r t h e r any c l e a r r e a d i n g
of
t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e monster and n a t u r e .
can be seen i n t h e c o n t i n u a t i o n o f t h i s passage.
This indeterminacy
The monster appears t o
wish t o d e s t r o y any p o s s i b i l i t y o f l o s i n g t h e keen edge o f h i s anger:^°
The day, which was one o f t h e f i r s t o f s p r i n g , cheered even me by
the l o v e l i n e s s o f i t s sunshine and t h e balminess o f t h e a i r .
I felt
emotions o f g e n t l e n e s s and p l e a s u r e , t h a t had l o n g appeared dead,
r e v i v e w i t h i n me.
H a l f s u r p r i s e d by t h e n o v e l t y o f these
s e n s a t i o n s , I a l l o w e d myself t o be borne away by them; and,
f o r g e t t i n g my s o l i t u d e and d e f o r m i t y , dared t o be happy. S o f t t e a r s
a g a i n bedewed my cheeks, and I even r a i s e d my humid eyes w i t h
t h a n k f u l n e s s towards t h e b l e s s e d sun which bestowed such j o y upon
ne. (137)
Expressions l i k e ' a l l o w e d m y s e l f
the
to
monster
and 'dared t o be happy' suggest
i s a f r a i d o f t h e consequences o f f e e l i n g f r e e l y .
c o n t r o l h i s own response t o h i s environment.
He
that
wishes
His spontaneous
response t o t h e scene around him i s soon c o r r e c t e d by t h e consequences
of
h i s humane a c t i n s a v i n g t h e g i r l
from the r i v e r .
He seems
d e l i b e r a t e l y t o be p r e v e n t i n g h i m s e l f f r o m f e e l i n g p l e a s u r e and
optimism:
'The
l a b o u r s I endured were no l o n g e r t o be a l l e v i a t e d by the
b r i g h t sun o r g e n t l e breezes o f s p r i n g ; a l l j o y was but a mockery, which
79
i n s u l t e d my d e s o l a t e s t a t e , and made me f e e l t h a t I was not made f o r the
enjoyment of p l e a s u r e '
(138).
Abandoning h i s hopes o f human acceptance, the monster a t t e m p t s t o
compromise by demanding o f F r a n k e n s t e i n a mate w i t h whom he might
f o r South America.
However, F r a n k e n s t e i n i d e n t i f i e s t h e
f a l l a c y i n t h e monster's p l a n :
sympathy o f man,
persevere
'How
can you, who
i n t h i s exile?
You
depart
apparent
l o n g f o r t h e l o v e and
w i l l r e t u r n , and
seek t h e i r kindness, when you w i l l meet w i t h t h e i r d e t e s t a t i o n ;
again
your
e v i l passions w i l l be renewed, and you w i l l have a companion t o a i d you
i n t h e t a s k of d e s t r u c t i o n '
(142-3).
c l e a r l y f o r opposing t h e monster.
the
o t h e r argument:
'My
Here F r a n k e n s t e i n argues t h e case
However, i n r e p l y , the monster puts
e v i l passions w i l l have f l e d , f o r I s h a l l meet
w i t h sympathy; my l i f e w i l l f l o w q u i e t l y away, and,
I s h a l l not curse my maker'
reasonable;
Both these arguments are e q u a l l y
t h e y are c e n t r a l t o t h e n o v e l , but they are q u i t e
i n c o m p a t i b l e as arguments.
environment
(143).
i n my d y i n g moments,
F r a n k e n s t e i n suggests t h a t the monster's
w i l l compel him t o break h i s word, t h e monster t h a t I t w i l l
enable him t o keep i t .
Each focusses on a d i f f e r e n t aspect of t h e
monster's proposed e x i l e and argues i t s primacy over the o t h e r ; but
t h e r e i s no b a s i s f o r the reader t o d i s c r i m i n a t e between them.
Vhat i s
h i g h l i g h t e d i s t h e d i f f i c u l t y of u s i n g n e c e s s i t y as an e x p l a n a t i o n of
behaviour.
The
ice,
f i n a l s e c t i o n of t h e n a r r a t i v e i s s e t i n a w o r l d of snow and
which can be seen e i t h e r as an absence o f n a t u r e because of the
white s t e r i l i t y ,
o r as n a t u r e i n i t s harshest guise.
On the Mer
de
Glace t h e monster d e s c r i b e s t h i s as h i s i n e v i t a b l e d w e l l i n g - p l a c e i n an
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n t h a t i s a k i n t o the p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y :
mountains and d r e a r y g l a c i e r s are my r e f u g e .
'The
desert
I have wandered here many
days; t h e caves of i c e , which I o n l y do not f e a r , are a d w e l l i n g t o
and t h e o n l y one which man
for
does not grudge.
me,
These bleak s k i e s I h a i l ,
t h e y are k i n d e r t o me t h a n your f e l l o w beings'
(95).
This landscape
i s a p p r o p r i a t e f o r him as i t expresses i n i t s i c i n e s s the l a c k of human
c o n t a c t t h a t has become h i s dominant concern.
T h i s adds another l a y e r
t o t h e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of n a t u r e i n the n o v e l .
Here t h e monster i s s e l f -
conscious about t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f t h e p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y .
J u s t as he d i d
a f t e r h i s r e j e c t i o n by t h e De Laceys and a f t e r being shot by t h e
80
peasant, t h e monster appears t o be m a n i p u l a t i n g n a t u r e , almost as i f he
were w r i t i n g h i m s e l f I n t o a work of f i c t i o n .
There i s a t e n s i o n between
a n a r r a t i v e l y a p p r o p r i a t e p r e s e n t a t i o n of n a t u r e and an o b j e c t i v e
truth
t h a t t h e monster seems u n w i l l i n g t o m i s r e p r e s e n t t o o f a r .
The
A r c t i c s e t t i n g f o r t h e novel symbolises an e q u a l l y s e l f -
conscious s e p a r a t i o n f r o m human c o n t a c t .
The monster has
lured
F r a n k e n s t e i n o n t o h i s t e r r i t o r y , as he emphasises on one o f the
i n s c r i p t i o n s he l e a v e s f o r h i s c r e a t o r :
'Follow me,
I seek the
e v e r l a s t i n g i c e s o f t h e n o r t h , where you w i l l f e e l t h e misery of c o l d
and f r o s t , t o which I am impassive'
(202).
The monster has h a b i t u a t e d
h i m s e l f t o t h e b l e a k c o n d i t i o n s t h a t symbolise h i s r e j e c t i o n by man
t h e anger he f e e l s towards F r a n k e n s t e i n .
He uses n a t u r e i n a h i g h l y
conscious way t o p u n i s h F r a n k e n s t e i n , as he has been punished
mankind.
by
Mankind and n a t u r e can here be seen b o t h as o p p o s i t e s and
p a r a l l e l i n g each o t h e r .
and
They are opposed i n t h a t Frankenstein's
as
misery
i s c a s t i n t h e p h y s i c a l terms a p p r o p r i a t e t o n a t u r e , whereas the
monster's unhappiness d e r i v e s f r o m h i s r e j e c t i o n by man.
However; these
two a l t e r n a t i v e s a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of t h e same l a c k of human c o n t a c t .
T h i s can once more be r e l a t e d t o t h e p a t h e t i c f a l l a c y , or the
i n v e r t e d f o r m Small sees t h e novel employing.
F a t u r e imposes an
e m o t i o n a l response on F r a n k e n s t e i n and echoes i t f o r t h e monster.
However, these a r e merely aspects of t h e power w i e l d e d by each of the
c h a r a c t e r s over t h e o t h e r one.
The monster has chosen t o a s s o c i a t e
h i m s e l f w i t h f r o s t and i c e because t h e y most a c c u r a t e l y r e f l e c t h i s
emotions.
He t h e n i n f l i c t s them on F r a n k e n s t e i n i n o r d e r t o b r i n g home
t o him more f o r c i b l y t h e s t a t e t o which he i s reduced,
and t o a c t as
p h y s i c a l reminders of t h e s u f f e r i n g s t h e monster f e e l s have been
i n f l i c t e d upon him by F r a n k e n s t e i n .
I f n a t u r e a c t s a p p a r e n t l y as 'a background a g a i n s t which
elements a r e f oregrounded',
certain
what t h e monster succeeds i n d o i n g a t the
end o f t h e novel i s t o f o r e g r o u n d the background.
Nature no longer a c t s
e i t h e r as a moral guide, nor as a passive backdrop t o be p e n e t r a t e d f o r
t h e s e c r e t s i t might h o l d , but becomes an i n s t r u m e n t of revenge w h i l s t
still
r e t a i n i n g i t s vastness and detachment.
But n a t u r e can o n l y be
seen i n i r o n i c terms because of i t s u n k n o w a b i l i t y .
I t i s apparently
m a n i p u l a t e d by b o t h F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster, but i t eludes
81
their
c o n t r o l , and h i g h l i g h t s t h e i r a t t e m p t s t o manipulate i t because of t h e i r
incomple te c o n t r o l over i t .
82
Chapter 5:
One
Eoowledge
of t h e ways i n which a f i r m r e a d i n g o f Frankenstein i s precluded
i s by c a l l i n g i n t o q u e s t i o n t h e process of knowledge.
The
novel
p r o v i d e s i n f o r m a t i o n and e x p l a n a t i o n s of v a r i o u s k i n d s but the reader's
mastery over t h i s m a t e r i a l i s d e s t a b i l i s e d i n a number of ways.
The
process o f r e a d i n g i n v o l v e s t h e a c q u i s i t i o n o f knowledge about the
c h a r a c t e r s and s i t u a t i o n s p o r t r a y e d .
Frankenstein c a l l s the v a l i d i t y of
the
knowledge i n t o q u e s t i o n i n a v a r i e t y of ways, some a consequence of
the
n a r r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e , o t h e r s by o t h e r forms o f i r o n i c e f f e c t .
a r e problems w i t h t h e r e l i a b i l i t y
There
of t h e p e r c e p t i o n on which assumptions
are made and t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f the d i s c o u r s e i t s e l f .
O f t e n the reader
r e c o g n i s e s t h e u n r e l i a b i l i t y o f what a c h a r a c t e r c l a i m s , but has
no
means of e s t a b l i s h i n g any a u t h o r i t a t i v e a l t e r n a t i v e .
The monster's a c q u i s i t i o n of knowledge c o n t r a s t s w i t h the way i n
which F r a n k e n s t e i n d i s c o v e r s .
sees how
From h i s account of h i m s e l f , the reader
t h e o r d e r o f h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y develops as he l e a r n s t o
i d e n t i f y a wider range o f s e n s a t i o n and t o experience h i g h e r l e v e l s of
mental a c t i v i t y .
Each s t e p o f t h e monster's developnent
and l o g i c a l p r o g r e s s i o n .
shows a gradual
I n c o n t r a s t , F r a n k e n s t e i n determines
the moral
d e p r a v i t y of h i s c r e a t i o n i n i n s t a n t a n e o u s f l a s h e s of i n s i g h t .
The most
prominent
and e x p l i c i t o f these i s when he sees t h e monster a t some
d i s t a n c e when he i s r e t u r n i n g t o Geneva a f t e r t h e death of W i l l i a m :
A f l a s h of l i g h t n i n g i l l u m i n a t e d t h e o b j e c t , and d i s c o v e r e d i t s
shape p l a i n l y t o me; i t s g i g a n t i c s t a t u r e , and t h e d e f o r m i t y of i t s
aspect, more hideous t h a n belongs t o humanity, i n s t a n t l y Informed me
t h a t i t was t h e wretch, t h e f i l t h y dsEmon t o whom I had g i v e n l i f e .
Vhat d i d he t h e r e ? Could he be ... the murderer of my b r o t h e r ?
No
sooner d i d t h a t idea c r o s s my i m a g i n a t i o n , than I became convinced
of i t s t r u t h ; ...
He was t h e murderer!
I c o u l d not doubt i t . The
mere presence of t h e idea was an i r r e s i s t a b l e proof of the f a c t . ( 7 1 )
The d i f f i c u l t y
at
w i t h t h i s i n c i d e n t i s t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n appears t o a r r i v e
t h e r i g h t c o n c l u s i o n , but f o r the wrong reasons,
reasons a t a l l .
or r a t h e r w i t h o u t
T h i s has a K e a t s i a n r i n g about i t - '¥hat t h e
I m a g i n a t i o n s e i z e s as Beauty must be t r u t h - whether i t e x i s t e d before
o r n o t ; f o r I have t h e same Idea of a l l our Passions as of Love - they
are a l l i n t h e i r sublime c r e a t i v e of e s s e n t i a l Beauty'.'
83
The
uncritical
endorsement o f t h e p r o d u c t s o f t h e i m a g i n a t i o n i s being q u e s t i o n e d
F r a n k e n s t e i n Jumps t o h i s c o n c l u s i o n .
here.
The r e a d e r i s n o t g i v e n any proof
of t h e c o r r e c t n e s s o f what appears a mere guess u n t i l Chapter V I I I o f
the
second volume.
The n o v e l ' s s t r u c t u r e i s a warning t o t h e reader not
t o t r y t o emulate F r a n k e n s t e i n .
As Swingle demonstrates i n
' F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s Monster and i t s Romantic R e l a t i o n s ;
Problems o f
Knowledge i n E n g l i s h Romanticism', t h e reader i s never g i v e n
s a t i s f a c t o r y p r o o f t o enable h i m t o determine
problems thrown up by t h e n o v e l .
t h e answers t o t h e c e n t r a l
The f i n a l stages o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s
n a r r a t i v e seem t o c o n t a i n a warning a g a i n s t t h i s s o r t o f r a s h Judgement.
F r a n k e n s t e i n a s c r i b e s t h e v a r i o u s c l u e s t o enable him t o pursue t h e
monster and t h e f o o d t o keep h i m a l i v e t o t h e o p e r a t i o n s o f benevolent
spirits,
when i t i s c l e a r t h a t these have been l e f t f o r h i m by t h e
monster i t s e l f .
The
evidence
t r u s t w o r t h i n e s s o f d i s c o u r s e and i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h v i s u a l
i s a l s o commented upon.
of t h e Medieval
T h i s can almost be seen as a r e w o r k i n g
debate about ' a u c t o r i t e e ' and ' p r e f .
When he i s
p o n d e r i n g h i s response t o what t h e monster has t o l d h i m about h i s
development,
for
F r a n k e n s t e i n i d e n t i f i e s t h e d i f f i c u l t y t h e monster poses
those who come i n t o c o n t a c t w i t h him:
e f f e c t upon me.
'His words had a s t r a n g e
I compassionated him, and sometimes f e l t a wish t o
console him; b u t when I looked upon him, when I saw t h e f i l t h y mass t h a t
moved and t a l k e d , my h e a r t s i c k e n e d , and my f e e l i n g s were a l t e r e d t o
those o f h o r r o r and h a t r e d ' (143).
There i s a c o n f l i c t between t h e
v i s u a l and t h e i n t e l l e c t u a l here which r e p e a t s F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s
r e j e c t i o n o f t h e monster.
original
A l t h o u g h b l i n d e d d u r i n g t h e process by h i s
p a s s i o n t o c r e a t e , F r a n k e n s t e i n i s h o r r i f i e d by what he sees when he has
f i n a l l y formed t h e monster; and i t i s t h i s t h a t seems t o l e a d him t o
abandon h i s c r e a t u r e .
Here he 'compassionates' t h e monster i n t h e o r y ,
but h i s sympathy i s d e s t r o y e d by t h e s i g h t o f him.
the
When he i s c r e a t i n g
female monster, i t appears t o be a v i s u a l s t i m u l u s t h a t a l l o w s h i s
d i s g u s t t o g e t t h e b e t t e r o f h i s promise (164),
He has p r e v i o u s l y
overcome t h e o b j e c t i o n s t h a t he now uses t o J u s t i f y h i s d e s t r u c t i o n o f
the
female monster; b u t he has a l s o p r e v i o u s l y r e v e a l e d an i r r a t i o n a l
l o a t h i n g o f t h e monster t h a t s u b v e r t s t h e i n t e g r i t y o f h i s l o g i c .
84
T h i s i n c o n s i s t e n c y i s a l s o i n d i c a t e d by F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s r e f e r e n c e t o
t h e 'sophisms' o f t h e monster when he q u e s t i o n s h i s motives f o r
b e g i n n i n g work on t h e female monster.
The power of language i s s e t
a g a i n s t t h e v i s u a l , and t h e c a p a c i t y o f e i t h e r t o convey the t r u t h i s
questioned.
On t h e Mer de Glace F r a n k e n s t e i n i s convinced by the
monster's arguments, but h i s response i s c h a l l e n g e d by i t s appearance.
H i s f i n a l judgement of t h e monster's p r o b i t y i s based on an assessment
o f t h e balance of t h e argument:
I paused some time t o r e f l e c t on a l l he had r e l a t e d , and the v a r i o u s
arguments which he had employed.
I t h o u g h t o f t h e promise of
v i r t u e s which he had d i s p l a y e d on t h e opening of h i s e x i s t e n c e , and
t h e subsequent b l i g h t o f a l l k i n d l y f e e l i n g by the l o a t h i n g and
s c o r n which h i s p r o t e c t o r s had m a n i f e s t e d towards him.
His power
and t h r e a t s were not o m i t t e d i n my c a l c u l a t i o n s :
a c r e a t u r e who
c o u l d e x i s t i n the i c e caves of the g l a c i e r s , and hide h i m s e l f from
p u r s u i t among t h e r i d g e s of i n a c c e s i b l e p r e c i p i c e s , was a being
possessing f a c u l t i e s i t would be v a i n t o cope w i t h . A f t e r a l o n g
pause o f r e f l e c t i o n , I concluded, t h a t t h e J u s t i c e due both t o him
and my f e l l o w - c r e a t u r e s demanded o f me t h a t I should comply w i t h h i s
request.(143-4)
T h i s i s c l e a r l y an I n t e l l e c t u a l e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e arguments f o r and
a g a i n s t complying
w i t h t h e monster's request.
At t h i s p o i n t
F r a n k e n s t e i n responds t o t h e c o n t e n t of t h e monster's argument r a t h e r
t h a n t h e form.
However, he a r r i v e s a t t h e o p p o s i t e c o n c l u s i o n when
d i s g u s t e d by t h e method of c r e a t i n g t h e female monster and l a c k i n g the
eloquence of t h e monster t o r e i n f o r c e h i s a p p a r e n t l y i n t e l l e c t u a l
judgement.
At t h i s stage he c a s t s doubt on t h e r e l i a b i l i t y of the
monster's d i s c o u r s e by f i n d i n g t h e eloquence t h a t convinced
sophistical.
Vhen he t h e n catches s i g h t of t h e monster, he responds
o n l y t o t h e v i s u a l i m p r e s s i o n i n t h e same way as he decided
t h a t t h e monster was r e s p o n s i b l e f o r W i l l i a m ' s death:
him, h i s countenance expressed
treachery.
him
'As
t h e utmost e x t e n t of malice
immediately
I looked on
and
I thought w i t h a s e n s a t i o n of madness on my promise of
c r e a t i n g another l i k e t o him, and,
t r e m b l i n g w i t h passion, t o r e t o
p i e c e s t h e t h i n g on which I was engaged' (164).
I t i s Frankenstein's
s u b j e c t i v e v i s u a l Judgement t h a t leads him t o abandon h i s task.
The
mere s i g h t of the monster has been enough t o convince him of i t s malice.
On t h e Mer de Glace t h e persuasiveness
of t h e monster's argument
overcomes h i s p h y s i c a l r e p u l s i v e n e s s , now
85
h i s h o r r i f i c appearance
precludes discussion.
The murder o f C l e r v a l c o u l d be advanced as proof
of t h e e s s e n t i a l l y malevolent n a t u r e o f t h e monster.
However, i t c o u l d
e q u a l l y be argued t h a t t h i s was t h e i n e v i t a b l e consequence o f another
rejection.
I n c o n t r a s t t o F r a n k e n s t e i n , t h e monster appears t r u t h f u l .
t h i s s i m p l e o p p o s i t i o n i s more convenient t h a n t r u e .
However,
When a t t e m p t i n g t o
win t h e s u p p o r t o f Pere De Lacey, t h e monster does n o t l i e , but he
manipulates t h e i n f o r m a t i o n he r e v e a l s f o r h i s purpose i n a way t h a t
might j u s t i f y F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s s u s p i c i o n o f h i s
De Lacey i s i n i t i a l l y convinced by him:
eloquence.
' I am b l i n d , and cannot
judge o f your countenance, b u t t h e r e i s something
persuades me t h a t you a r e s i n c e r e ' (130),
i n your words which
This h i g h l i g h t s a central
problem o f knowledge i n t h e novel:
t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f language and i t s
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h v i s u a l evidence.
De Lacey's b l i n d n e s s evades t h e
problems a s s o c i a t e d w i t h what Blake r e f e r r e d t o as t h e 'tyranny o f t h e
eye',^ b u t t h e u n c e r t a i n t y he expresses due t o h i s i n a b i l i t y
t o see t h e
monster's e x p r e s s i o n suggests t h a t t h e v i s u a l i s a necessary
c o r r o b o r a t i o n o f t h e v e r b a l f o r him.
T h i s suggests a need f o r some s o r t
of a u t h o r i t y t o p r o v i d e a metacomment.
can o n l y be i n t h e f o r m o f language,
However, w i t h i n t h e novel t h i s
which i s compromised by t h e
subjective nature of f i r s t - p e r s o n narrative.
V a l t o n i s convinced by
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s eloquence,
b u t F r a n k e n s t e i n warns V a l t o n a g a i n s t t h e
monster's persuasiveness;
De Lacey i s convinced by t h e monster's words:
but he i s b l i n d and a l l who see t h e monster a r e convinced o f h i s
malevolence.
Only V a l t o n , who has been prepared i n some measure f o r t h e
shock, overcomes h i s repugnance f o r l o n g , and h i s f i n a l judgement, as
Swingle p o i n t s o u t i n h i s essay,-'' i s e q u i v o c a l .
The v i s u a l i s n o t o n l y used t o judge t h e monster.
Vhen Frankenstein
i s i n p r i s o n i n I r e l a n d , accused o f t h e murder o f C l e r v a l , t h e
m a g i s t r a t e r e l i e s h e a v i l y on v i s u a l evidence.
he i s observed k e e n l y (173).
eye t o c o n f i r m t h e ear.
F r a n k e n s t e i n notes t h a t
T h i s a g a i n suggests a r e l i a n c e upon t h e
Vhen t h e monster p r e s e n t s h i s own case
F r a n k e n s t e i n f i n d s i t c o n v i n c i n g (144), b u t l a t e r a s c r i b e s i t s
effectiveness t o rhetorical trickery
(206).
Yet t h e power o f o r a l
p e r s u a s i o n i s a l l t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n can muster i n h i s own defence.
86
The c o n f l i c t between t h e v i s u a l and t h e spoken as sources o f
knowledge r e p r e s e n t s one d i f f i c u l t y f o r t h e reader, b u t another d e r i v e s
from Frankenstein's s e l f - d e c e i t .
Before he leaves f o r England, he
contemplates t h e danger t o h i s f r i e n d s , b u t b e l i e v e s t h a t t h e g r e a t e r
danger w i l l
be t o him:
D u r i n g my absence I s h o u l d l e a v e my f r i e n d s unconscious o f t h e
e x i s t e n c e o f t h e i r enemy, and u n p r o t e c t e d f r o m h i s a t t a c k s ,
exasperated as he might be by my d e p a r t u r e . ... Through t h e whole
p e r i o d d u r i n g which I was t h e s l a v e o f my c r e a t u r e , I a l l o w e d myself
t o be governed by t h e Impulses o f t h e moment; and my present
s e n s a t i o n s s t r o n g l y i n t i m a t e d t h a t t h e f i e n d would f o l l o w me, and
exempt my f a m i l y f r o m t h e danger o f h i s machinations. (151)
There i s a c o n f l i c t here between t h e a c t i v e and t h e passive l i k e t h a t
between F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s d e s i r e t o p r o j e c t h i m s e l f i n t o n a t u r e and t o be
absorbed by i t which a f f e c t s a l l l e v e l s o f h i s c o n s i d e r a t i o n . * He
contemplates r e v e a l i n g what he has done, but decides t o do n o t h i n g . I t
i s u n c l e a r how f a r h i s r e c o g n i t i o n t h a t t h e monster w i l l
f o l l o w him i s a
specious argument t o j u s t i f y h i s r e l u c t a n c e t o r e v e a l i t s e x i s t e n c e .
He
might g e n u i n e l y t r u s t t h e monster's word o r r e c o g n i s e i t s i n t i m a t e
attachment
the
t o him, a l t h o u g h t h i s seems u n l i k e l y because i t operates a t
l e v e l o f those d e s i r e s he i s u n w i l l i n g even t o acknowledge t o
himself.
T h i s concealment can a l s o be seen i n t h e way t h a t
Frankenstein's
p r o g r e s s i v e j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r d e s t r o y i n g t h e female has a l o g i c about
it,
him.
but i t i s t h e l o g i c o f a growing r e f u s a l t o do what i s f o r c e d upon
He p r e s e n t s h i s d e c i s i o n as one based upon a b s o l u t e moral
c o n s i d e r a t i o n s , b u t i t i s c l e a r t h a t i t i s i n f l u e n c e d by h i s personal
desires:
Had I a r i g h t , f o r my own b e n e f i t , t o i n f l i c t t h i s curse upon
e v e r l a s t i n g generations?
I had b e f o r e been moved by t h e sophisms o f
the b e i n g I had c r e a t e d ; I had been s t r u c k senseless by h i s f i e n d i s h
threats:
b u t now, f o r t h e f i r s t t i m e , t h e wickedness o f my promise
b u r s t upon me; I shuddered t o t h i n k t h a t f u t u r e ages might curse me
as t h e i r pest, whose s e l f i s h n e s s had n o t h e s i t a t e d t o buy i t s own
peace a t t h e p r i c e perhaps o f t h e e x i s t e n c e o f t h e whole human race.
(163)
H i s m a n i p u l a t i o n o f t h e moral argument i s r e v e a l e d when i t i s compared
w i t h F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s comments on t h e c r e a t i o n o f t h e monster:
87
L i f e and death appeared t o me i d e a l bounds, which I should f i r s t
break t h r o u g h , and pour a t o r r e n t o f l i g h t i n t o our dark world. A
new s p e c i e s would b l e s s me as i t s c r e a t o r and source; many happy and
e x c e l l e n t n a t u r e s would owe t h e i r being t o me. No f a t h e r c o u l d
c l a i m t h e g r a t i t u d e o f h i s c h i l d so c o m p l e t e l y as I should deserve
their's.
Pursuing these r e f l e c t i o n s , I thought, t h a t i f I c o u l d
bestow a n i m a t i o n upon l i f e l e s s matter, I might i n process o f time
( a l t h o u g h I now found i t i m p o s s i b l e ) renew l i f e where death had
a p p a r e n t l y devoted t h e body t o c o r r u p t i o n . (49)
Vhen he f i r s t c r e a t e s a l i v i n g b e i n g F r a n k e n s t e i n b e l i e v e s i t w i l l be
good and w i l l b l e s s him; on t h i s second occasion he f e a r s t h e
malevolence o f t h e c r e a t u r e .
He w i l l not t r u s t t h e words o f t h e
monster, y e t he expects h i s own e x p l a n a t i o n t o be t r u s t e d .
I n both
cases he i s concerned about t h e f u t u r e e f f e c t s o f h i s a c t i o n s , b u t uses
the
same c o n s i d e r a t i o n s t o come t o o p p o s i t e c o n c l u s i o n s .
There i s , then, a c e r t a i n simple i r o n y i n Frankenstein's
a g a i n s t t h e monster's eloquence.
warning
I f F r a n k e n s t e i n cannot t r u s t t h e
r h e t o r i c o f t h e monster, s h o u l d t h e reader t r u s t h i s ?
some f o r m o f a u t h o r i t y t o p r o v i d e guidance.
The reader wants
A f t e r t h e murder o f
E l i z a b e t h , F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s language g i v e s f u r t h e r d i f f i c u l t y :
I would have s e i z e d him, b u t he eluded me. ...
I burned w i t h rage t o pursue t h e murderer o f my peace, and
p r e c i p i t a t e him i n t o t h e ocean.
I walked up and down my room
h a s t i l y and p e r t u r b e d , w h i l e my i m a g i n a t i o n c o n j u r e d up a thousand
images t o torment and s t i n g me, Vhy had I not f a l l o w e d him and
c l o s e d w i t h him i n m o r t a l s t r i f e ? But I had s u f f e r e d him t o depart.
(166)
There a r e echoes here o f t h e opening o f t h e scene on t h e Mer de Glace,
p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e phrase used t o d e s c r i b e t h e monster's avoidance o f
b e i n g caught:
'he eluded me' compared w i t h 'he e a s i l y eluded me'
Frankenstein's
language does n o t convince t h e reader o f h i s a b s o l u t e
d e t e r m i n a t i o n because o f i t s pomposity - ' p r e c i p i t a t e '
and
'mortal s t r i f e ' ,
(95),
i n t o ' t h e ocean'
Whether I n t e n t i o n a l o r not, t h i s e f f e c t
suggests
an u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o a c t an h i s d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o d e s t r o y h i s c r e a t u r e .
He makes speeches i n s t e a d o f a c t i n g .
However, a Judgement such as t h i s
i s o f t h e k i n d t h a t t h e novel seems t o be warning a g a i n s t , based as i t
i s on s t y l i s t i c grounds.
The e q u i v o c a l warnings a g a i n s t eloquence
d e s t a b i l i s e a l l such Judgements,
88
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s u n w i l l i n g n e s s t o d e s t r o y h i s own c r e a t i o n becomes
even more apparent
towards t h e end o f t h e n o v e l when he s e t s o f f across
Europe a f t e r t h e monster.
monster who
I t i s c l e a r t o the reader t h a t i t i s the
i s keeping h i s c r e a t o r a l i v e , but F r a n k e n s t e i n b e l i e v e s i t
t o be benevolent s p i r i t s .
By t h e end of t h e n o v e l , the chase has become
almost t h e s o l e j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h e c o n t i n u e d e x i s t e n c e o f e i t h e r
F r a n k e n s t e i n o r t h e monster.
When i t ends w i t h the death of
F r a n k e n s t e i n , a l l t h e r e i s l e f t f o r t h e monster t o do i s t o d e s t r o y
himself.
However, F r a n k e n s t e i n cannot admit t o h i m s e l f , nor t o V a l t o n ,
t h a t he might not d e s i r e t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of h i s c r e a t i o n .
T h i s k i n d of s e l f - d e c e p t i o n a l s o a f f e c t s Frankenstein's m e d i t a t i o n
on t h e monster's t h r e a t a f t e r he has d e s t r o y e d t h e female monster:
"7 will be with yau on your wedding-night." That then was the
p e r i o d f i x e d f o r t h e f u l f i l m e n t of my d e s t i n y . I n t h a t hour I
s h o u l d d i e , and a t once s a t i s f y and e x t i n g u i s h h i s malice.
The
p r o s p e c t d i d not move me t o f e a r ; y e t when I thought of my beloved
E l i z a b e t h , - o f her t e a r s and endless sorrow, when she should f i n d
her l o v e r so b a r b a r o u s l y snatched f r o m her, - ... I r e s o l v e d not t o
f a l l b e f o r e my enemy w i t h o u t a b i t t e r s t r u g g l e . (166)
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s immediately convinced t h a t t h e monster i n t e n d s t o k i l l
him, d e s p i t e h i s unconscious r e c o g n i t i o n of t h e mutual
of
interdependence
h i m s e l f and h i s c r e a t i o n - ' I s h o u l d ... a t once s a t i s f y
e x t i n g u i s h h i s malice.'
the
and
Even though the monster's next murder f o l l o w s
same p a t t e r n of k i l l i n g
those near t o F r a n k e n s t e i n ,
Frankenstein's
e g o c e n t r i s m i s such t h a t he reads t h e monster's t h r e a t i n a q u i t e
d i f f e r e n t way
kill
t o t h e way
t h e monster i n t e n d e d i t .
He says he wishes t o
t h e monster, but h i s e f f o r t s t o do so have been more r h e t o r i c a l
than a c t u a l .
The
monster appears r a t h e r more aware of the bond between
h i m s e l f and h i s c r e a t o r , and seeks o n l y t o cause F r a n k e n s t e i n pain.
t h i s stage t h e monster has abandoned any hope of persuading
By
Frankenstein
t o g i v e him t h e companionship he d e s i r e s , and he has s e t t l e d f o r the
s t e r i l e and u n s a t i s f y i n g compulsion
t o revenge of a Satan. ^
F r a n k e n s t e i n misreads t h e monster's t h r e a t , and so hopes t o be able
t o defend h i m s e l f a g a i n s t i t .
of
the
He sees t h e murder o f C l e r v a l as a s i g n
t h e monster's d e p r a v i t y , but i t can e q u a l l y be seen as a warning of
nature of the t h r e a t .
The monster w i l l a t t e m p t t o make F r a n k e n s t e i n
as f r i e n d l e s s and unconnected as h i m s e l f .
89
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s d e s t r u c t i o n of
t h e monster's b r i d e - t o - b e w i l l be emulated by t h e monster's murder of
E l i z a b e t h , but F r a n k e n s t e i n f a l l s t o make t h e c o n n e c t i o n which seems
obvious f r o m t h e monster's s t a n d p o i n t :
'He had vowed to be with we
on
my wedding-nigbt, y e t he d i d not c o n s i d e r t h a t t h r e a t as b i n d i n g him t o
peace i n t h e mean t i m e ; f o r , as i f t o shew me t h a t he was not yet
s a t i a t e d w i t h b l o o d , he had murdered C l e r v a l I m a f i d l a t e l y a f t e r the
e n u n c i a t i o n of h i s t h r e a t s '
(186).
Almost l i k e Emma Voodhouse i n Jane Austen's novel p u b l i s h e d two
years b e f o r e Frankenstein, F r a n k e n s t e i n seems d e l i b e r a t e l y t o misread
the s i t u a t i o n he f i n d s h i m s e l f i n .
to
h i s egotism.
His m i s r e a d i n g of t h e t h r e a t i s due
However, i t can a l s o be read as a f a i l u r e t o
understand t h e monster's language.
By t h i s s t a g e i n t h e novel the o n l y
f o r m of a u t h o r i t y t h a t g i v e s any c l e a r guidance
i s t h e sequence of
e v e n t s i n t i m e , but t h i s i s compromised by b e i n g c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n
Frankenstein's n a r r a t i v e only.
There i s no c o r r o b o r a t i v e source t o
c o n f i r m t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between cause and e f f e c t a s s e r t e d by
F r a n k e n s t e i n , whose u n r e l i a b i l i t y i s s u s t a i n e d t o t h e end by h i s
i n a b i l i t y t o draw a c l e a r metacomment from h i s own n a r r a t i v e (215).
T h i s absence o f a secure a u t h o r i t a t i v e v e r s i o n o f events i s c e n t r a l
t o the novel.
I t can best be e x p l o r e d by c o n s i d e r i n g t h e f u n c t i o n
s t a t u s o f t h e monster's n a r r a t i v e .
and
By t h e t i m e t h e monster begins t o
speak, t h e r e a d e r has a l r e a d y developed an i n t e r e s t i n i t s n a t u r e , and a
d e s i r e t o f i n d o u t how f a r F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s Judgements about i t are
correct.
He has on two s i g n i f i c a n t occasions l e a p t t o c o n c l u s i o n s about
the monster's malevolence.
The f i r s t o f these occasions i s when the
monster e n t e r s h i s bedroom when F r a n k e n s t e i n awakes from h i s dream a f t e r
c r e a t i n g t h e c r e a t u r e , t h e second i s on h i s r e t u r n t o Geneva a f t e r
W i l l i a m ' s death.
However, t h e monster's f i r s t words d i s a p p o i n t :
I t i s w i t h c o n s i d e r a b l e d i f f i c u l t y t h a t I remember t h e o r i g i n a l eera
of my being: a l l t h e events of t h a t p e r i o d appear confused and
indistinct.
A s t r a n g e m u l t i p l i c i t y of s e n s a t i o n s s e i z e d me, and I
saw, f e l t , heard, and s m e l t , a t t h e same t i m e ; and i t was, indeed, a
l o n g t i m e b e f o r e I l e a r n e d t o d i s t i n g u i s h between t h e o p e r a t i o n s of
my v a r i o u s senses. (97)
The ideas here are i n c o n f o r m i t y w i t h the Lockean t h e o r i e s t h a t Mary
S h e l l e y was
i n t e r e s t e d i n , but t h e y a l s o serve a n o t h e r purpose.
90
I t is
c l e a r t h a t t h e monster i s n e i t h e r capable o f sensing, nor a c t i n g
deliberately.
night.
Yet, F r a n k e n s t e i n f l e e s when he sees t h e monster i n t h e
He b e l i e v e s t h e monster t o have more I n t e n t i o n t h a n t h e monster
suggests i t was capable o f :
I beheld t h e w r e t c h - t h e m i s e r a b l e monster whom I had c r e a t e d . He
h e l d up t h e c u r t a i n o f t h e bed; and h i s eyes, i f eyes t h e y may be
c a l l e d , were f i x e d on me. H i s jaws opened, and he m u t t e r e d some
i n a r t i c u l a t e sounds, w h i l e a g r i n w r i n k l e d h i s cheeks. He might
have spoken, b u t I d i d n o t hear; one hand was s t r e t c h e d o u t ,
seemingly t o d e t a i n me, b u t I escaped, and rushed down s t a i r s . (53)
T h i s suggests t h a t t h e monster i s responding t o what i t sees; y e t t h e
monster c l a i m s t o have been a t t h a t time unable t o d i s t i n g u i s h between
senses;
F r a n k e n s t e i n responds t o t h e g r i n and t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f speech
when subsequent e v e n t s suggest
r a t i o n a l processes
t h e monster t o be I n c a p a b l e o f t h e
he a s c r i b e s t o i t .
The divergence between t h e
monster's comment and F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s account o f t h e scene i s one o f a
number o f occasions when one d i s c o u r s e c o n f l i c t s w i t h , o r f a i l s t o
r e i n f o r c e , a n o t h e r one.
i n s t i n c t i v e assumption
T h i s same p a t t e r n can be seen i n Frankenstein's
o f t h e monster's e v i l n a t u r e , i n h i s misreading
o f t h e monster's t h r e a t t o be w i t h him on h i s wedding n i g h t , i n h i s
r e a d i n g o f t h e a s s i s t a n c e t h e monster g i v e s h i m d u r i n g t h e chase a t t h e
end o f t h e book as t h e a s s i s t a n c e o f benevolent s p i r i t s , and i n t h e
monster's d e p a r t u r e b e f o r e V a l t o n can q u e s t i o n him.
An i n c i d e n t i s
p r e s e n t e d , b u t i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e i s shown t o be ambiguous.
Ifo i n d i c a t i o n
i s g i v e n by a c o n f i r m i n g n a r r a t i v e o f any c o r r e c t r e a d i n g .
The reader
t r i e s t o I n t e r p r e t t h e t e x t i n t h e same way as F r a n k e n s t e i n t r i e s t o
make sense o f what happens, b u t t h e novel i n s i s t s t h a t any d e f i n i t i v e
r e a d i n g i s wrong.
Thus a l l knowledge i n t h e novel i s presented
I r o n i c a l l y , c a l l i n g i n t o q u e s t i o n t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f a l l knowledge.
Frankenstein s u p p o r t s t h e i d e a o f t h e hermeneutic
c i r c l e proposed by
Simpson,*^ which suggests t h a t knowledge i s o n l y complete
with the
reader's p a r t i c i p a t i o n .
There a r e c e r t a i n elements which span t h e d i f f e r e n t d i s c o u r s e s t h a t
compose t h e n o v e l .
letters.
The most obvious example i s F e l i x ' s and S a f i e ' s
These l e t t e r s c r o s s t h e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f t h e novel because
t h e y e v e n t u a l l y come i n t o t h e hands o f V a l t o n :
'His t a l e i s connected,
and t o l d w i t h an appearance o f t h e s i m p l e s t t r u t h ; y e t I own t o you t h a t
91
t h e l e t t e r s o f F e l i x and S a f i e , which he shewed me, and t h e a p p a r i t i o n
of t h e monster, seen f r o m o u r s h i p , brought t o me a g r e a t e r c o n v i c t i o n
of
t h e t r u t h o f h i s n a r r a t i v e t h a n h i s a s s e v e r a t i o n s , however earnest
and connected' (207).
T h i s h i g h l i g h t s t h e q u e s t i o n o f epistemology so
c e n t r a l t o t h e novel.
Walton p r e s e n t s h i m s e l f as being concerned f o r
t h e r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h e s t o r y he I s t e l l i n g , b u t can p r o v i d e no b e t t e r
evidence t h a n t h e mere a s s e r t i o n common t o a l l t h e n a r r a t o r s .
These l e t t e r s apppear t o p r o v i d e a k i n d o f s t a b i l i t y ,
but i n f a c t
t h e y do n o t , because t h e y do n o t a l l o w t h e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f n a r r a t i o n
t o f l o a t q u i t e f r e e l y a g a i n s t each o t h e r .
They appear t o o f f e r some
p i v o t a g a i n s t which t h e r e s t o f t h e novel can be l e v e r e d i n t o r e v e a l i n g
some f o r m o f s t a b l e metacomment; b u t t h e y a r e no more than an i r o n i c
t r i c k t h a t seems t o o f f e r i l l u m i n a t i o n , b u t f a i l s t o do so.
appear on t h e s u r f a c e o f t h e n o v e l :
They do not
t h e monster and Walton t a l k about
them, b u t t h e reader never reads them.
They a r e a form o f 'Romantic
i r o n i c a l d e v i c e ' i n Simpson's sense, s i m u l t a n e o u s l y o f f e r i n g t h e
p o s s i b i l i t y o f an a u t h o r i t a t i v e v o i c e and p r e c l u d i n g i t .
The
o t h e r element t h a t crosses t h e d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s o f t h e novel i s
t h e monster h i m s e l f , as Walton emphasises above.
Romantic i r o n i s t '
ironised.
The monster i s t h e '
The monster's moral n a t u r e i s c r u c i a l t o
t h e n o v e l , b u t t h e reader cannot determine
i t p r e c i s e l y , because o f t h e
l a y e r s o f n a r r a t i v e s e p a r a t i n g h i m f r o m t h e monster, which a l l o w f o r t h e
p o s s i b i l i t y o f t o o many I r o n i c r e v e r s a l s .
However, t h e monster f a i l s t o
m a i n t a i n h i s p o s i t i o n i n t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e n o v e l , b r e a k i n g through a t
t h e end t o appear i n Walton's n a r r a t i v e and h i n t i n g a t , b u t f a i l i n g t o
p r o v i d e a key t o t h e n o v e l .
t h e s t o r y o f f e r e d t o him:
monster.
Walton c i t e s two reasons f o r h i s b e l i e v i n g
h i s s i g h t o f t h e l e t t e r s and h i s s i g h t o f t h e
Both o f these c o n f i r m a t o r y d e t a i l s r e l y upon s i g h t ; b u t t h e
l e t t e r s a r e n o t r e v e a l e d and t h e monster, as Swingle s t r e s s e s , ^ does not
say a n y t h i n g t o p r o v i d e any o t h e r source o f p r o o f f o r F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s
tale.
T h i s o p p o s i t i o n between t h e v i s u a l and t h e l i n g u i s t i c i s compounded
by t h e o p p o s i t i o n between t h e spoken and t h e w r i t t e n i n t h e s t r u c t u r e o f
the novel.
The reader i s r e a d i n g Walton's w r i t t e n r e c o r d o f
Frankenstein's
spoken d i s c o u r s e .
Even Walton's account i s i n two forms:
he b e g i n s by w r i t i n g t o h i s s i s t e r i n a mode, t h e l e t t e r ,
92
that
i d e n t i f i e s a s p e c i f i c audience, but l a p s e s i n t o t h e j o u r n a l , a much more
s e l f - c e n t r e d form, b e f o r e r e t u r n i n g u l t i m a t e l y t o t h e l e t t e r .
A g a i n s t t h i s must be s e t t h e concept o f t h e
i d e n t i f i e d by Eve Kosovsky Sedgewick
'Unspeakable',
i n The Coherence of Gothic
Conventions as an i m p o r t a n t element i n G o t h i c f i c t i o n :
"Unspeakable," f o r i n s t a n c e , i s a f a v o r i t e G o t h i c word, sonetimes
meaning no more t h a n " d r e a d f u l , " sometimes I m p l y i n g a range of
r e f l e c t i o n s on language. The word appears r e g u l a r l y enough, i n
enough c o n t e x t s , t h a t i t c o u l d be c a l l e d a theme i n i t s e l f , but i t
a l s o works as a name f o r moments when i t i s not used: moments when,
f o r i n s t a n c e , a c h a r a c t e r drops dead t r y i n g t o u t t e r a p a r t i c u l a r
name. At a n o t h e r remove, i t i s p o s s i b l e t o d i s c e r n a p l a y o f t h e
unspeakable i n t h e n a r r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e i t s e l f of a novel t h a t
o s t e n s i b l y comprises t r a n s c r i p t i o n s o f m a n u s c r i p t s t h a t are always
i l l e g i b l e a t r e v e l a t o r y moments.®
There a r e s e v e r a l l e v e l s o f t h e 'unspeakable' i n F r a n k e n s t e i n .
The
monster has no name, and t h e r e f o r e cannot be addressed d i r e c t l y ;
F r a n k e n s t e i n r e f e r s t o i t v a r i o u s l y as 'the w r e t c h ' , 'the f i e n d ' and
enemy' and by o t h e r u n c h a r i t a b l e terms.
'my
F r a n k e n s t e i n cannot, u n t i l
a f t e r t h e d e a t h o f E l i z a b e t h , b r i n g h i m s e l f t o admit p u b l i c l y t o h a v i n g
c r e a t e d t h e monster, and then, when he does c o n f e s s t o t h e m a g i s t r a t e
(197-8), i t i s o f no use.
the
F i n a l l y , and s t r u c t u r a l l y most I m p o r t a n t l y ,
d i f f e r e n t n a r r a t i v e s do not c o r r o b o r a t e each o t h e r t o produce an
a u t h o r i t a t i v e metacomment.
At t h e end o f t h e n o v e l , when t h e monster
might r e c o n c i l e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between h i s and F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s
n a r r a t i v e s , he a s s e r t s h i s and F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s interdependence and h i s
i s o l a t i o n and t h e n d i s a p p e a r s i n t o t h e d a r k i n t e n d i n g t o k i l l
and r e a c h u l t i m a t e unspeakableness.
himself
The monster can a l s o be read as the
embodiment o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s unacknowledgeable and t h e r e f o r e unspeakable
desires.
I f a l l knowledge
i n t h e novel i s compromised
by t h i s dependence upon
c e r t a i n i n a r t i c u l a b l e , or u n a r t i c u l a t e d ideas, t h e n a l l knowledge can be
no more t h a n a l i k e l y p o s s i b i l i t y .
The p r o o f o f V a l t o n ' s argument
depends upon v i s u a l evidence, which i s o n l y communicable
by a s s e r t i o n .
t o the reader
As shown elsewhere,^ d i s c o u r s e i s s u b v e r t e d by the
q u e s t i o n i n g o f i t s eloquence and by i t s n e c e s s a r i l y secondary nature.
M a r t i n Tropp reads t h e water symbolism i n t h e novel as an image f o r
this.
He l i n k s i t t o t h e i d e a o f t h e doppelganger:
93
'There the hero i s
o f t e n drawn, not t o t h e water, but t o a m i r r o r , and t h r e a t e n e d w i t h
a b s o r p t i o n by h i s m i r r o r image.''"^
Frankenstein's d e c i s i o n t o t r a v e l
a c r o s s t h e l a k e , b e f o r e he consummates h i s marriage i s c l e a r l y
s i g n i f i c a n t i n t h i s context.
However, the l a k e ceases t o be a m i r r o r
and E l i z a b e t h I d e n t i f i e s t h e d e c e p t i v e c l a r i t y o f t h e water (190),
Tropp comments, 'The
seems t o suggest
water no l o n g e r r e f l e c t s h i s s e l f ; i t s c l a r i t y
t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s unconscious
hides nothing.
This
s e l f - d e l u s i o n a l l o w s t h e monster t o s t r a n g l e h i s b r i d e ' . ^ '
The emendations i n t h e Thomas copy on t h i s passage c o n t a i n another
more s u g g e s t i v e image o f water:
Then g a z i n g on t h e beloved f a c e of E l i z a b e t h on her g r a c e f u l form
and l a n g u i d eyes, i n s t e a d o f f e e l i n g t h e e x u l t a t i o n of a - l o v e r - a
husband - a sudden gush o f t e a r s b l i n d e d my s i g h t , & as I t u r n e d
away t o h i d e t h e i n v o l u n t a r y emotion f a s t drops f e l l i n the wave
below. Reason a g a i n awoke, and s h a k i n g o f f a l l unmanly - or more
p r o p e r l y a l l n a t u r a l t h o u g h t s o f mischance, I s m i l e d . . . (190)
The
image of b l i n d n e s s i s more a p p r o p r i a t e t h a n t h e image of c l a r i t y .
Mary S h e l l e y seems t o have f e l t t h e aspect of d e l u s i o n i n s u f f i c i e n t l y
c l e a r l y d e l i n e a t e d and emphasised the p o i n t i n t h e Thomas emendations.
The t e a r s t h a t b l i n d F r a n k e n s t e i n f a l l
i n t o t h e water J u s t before
E l i z a b e t h comments on t h e c l a r i t y of i t .
his
Frankenstein's reference t o
'thoughts of mischance' as 'unmanly' i s c o r r e c t e d t o ' n a t u r a l ' .
The
word 'unmanly' emphasises h i s obsessive m a s c u l l n i s m t h a t seeks t o
exclude a l l female elements from h i s c r e a t i o n .
d e s i r e i s t h e d e s t r u c t i o n of E l i z a b e t h .
of
T h i s i s why h i s unspoken
He wishes t o evade the thought
mischance, which he t h e n c h a r a c t e r i s e s as ' n a t u r a l ' , but u n d e s i r a b l e .
I n o t h e r words, a t t h i s stage he i s s e e k i n g t o evade t h e n a t u r a l and t o
c l i n g t o t h e u n n a t u r a l , i e . he wishes t o r e p l a c e E l i z a b e t h w i t h t h e
monster.
I n t e r e s t i n g l y , E l i z a b e t h ' s f i n a l comnent on t h e c l a r i t y of the
water i s , 'What a d i v i n e day! how happy and serene a l l n a t u r e
(190),
appears!'
L i k e t h e l a k e , t h e novel appears c l e a r , but i t s c l a r i t y i s
seductive.
The r e a d e r i s encouraged t o make Judgements, o n l y t o f i n d
t h a t t h e y are i r o n i c a l l y s u b v e r t e d , w i t h o u t b e i n g r e p l a c e d by a n y t h i n g
else.
U l t i m a t e l y , t h e novel a c t s as a m i r r o r r e f l e c t i n g back t o the
reader.
94
Chapter 6;
I n t h e 1818
The
1831
Changes
e d i t i o n of Frankenstein, t h e t e x t i s preceded by a
p r e f a c e , w r i t t e n by Percy S h e l l e y , which i s i n c l u d e d i n the l a t e r
edition.
However, i n 1831 t h e p r e f a c e f o l l o w s an i n t r o d u c t i o n which
a p p a r e n t l y supersedes i t .
I n the preface i t i s explained that
Frankenstein w i l l be an u n c o n v e n t i o n a l
novel.
At t h e same time as
r a t h e r f l i p p a n t l y d i s m i s s i n g any s e r i o u s purpose - ' I t was commenced,
p a r t l y as a source o f amusement, and p a r t l y as an expedient f o r
e x e r c i s i n g any u n t r i e d r e s o u r c e s of mind' (7) - t h e preface g i v e s a
c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s
aim:
I am by no means i n d i f f e r e n t t o t h e manner i n which whatever moral
t e n d e n c i e s e x i s t i n t h e s e n t i m e n t s or c h a r a c t e r s i t c o n t a i n s s h a l l
a f f e c t t h e reader; y e t my c h i e f concern i n t h i s respect has been
l i m i t e d t o t h e a v o i d i n g t h e e n e r v a t i n g - e f f e c t s of the novels of the
present day, and t o t h e e x h i b i t i o n of t h e amiableness of domestic
a f f e c t i o n , and t h e e x c e l l e n c e of u n i v e r s a l v i r t u e .
The o p i n i o n s
which n a t u r a l l y s p r i n g f r o m the c h a r a c t e r and s i t u a t i o n of the hero
are by no means t o be conceived as e x i s t i n g always i n my own
c o n v i c t i o n ; nor i s any i n f e r e n c e t o be drawn f r o m t h e f o l l o w i n g
pages as p r e j u d i c i n g any p h i l o s o p h i c a l d o c t r i n e of whatever k i n d .
(7)
T h i s i s more t h a n t h e customary a u t h o r i a l d i s c l a i m e r .
has been devoted
Much a t t e n t i o n
t o t h e ' e x h i b i t i o n of t h e amiableness of domestic
a f f e c t i o n , and t h e e x c e l l e n c e of u n i v e r s a l v i r t u e ' ; ' but of e q u a l l y
g r e a t importance
i s t h e concern w i t h ' a v o i d i n g the e n e r v a t i n g e f f e c t s of
t h e n o v e l s of t h e p r e s e n t day.'
T h i s idea i s not developed f u r t h e r .
It
c o u l d mean s i m p l y as a d e t e r m i n a t i o n t o a v o i d a narrow s u b j e c t matter
and o % ' e r - s e n t i m e n t a l i t y .
On t h e o t h e r hand, i t c o u l d e q u a l l y w e l l be an
i n d i c a t i o n of the k i n d of n a r r a t i v e s t r a t e g y Mary S h e l l e y employs t o
a f f o r d 'a p o i n t o f view t o t h e i m a g i n a t i o n f o r t h e d e l i n e a t i n g of human
passion more comprehensive and commanding t h a n many which the o r d i n a r y
r e l a t i o n of e x i s t i n g e v e n t s can y i e l d '
impose an a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g :
(6).
Such a s t r a t e g y does not
' [ n o t ] p r e j u d i c i n g any p h i l o s o p h i c a l
d o c t r i n e of any k i n d ' ( 6 ) .
The
impact of t h i s d i r e c t and concise a s s e r t i o n o f i n t e n t i o n i n the
f i r s t e d i t i o n i s d i s s i p a t e d by the ' I n t r o d u c t i o n ' i n c l u d e d i n the second
e d i t i o n w i t h i t s m i s l e a d i n g account of how
95
t h e novel came t o be
w r i t t e n . =^ Vhereas i n 1818 t h e 'Preface' i s concerned t o emphasise t h e
l i k e l i h o o d o f t h e events o f t h e novel - 'not o f i m p o s s i b l e
occurrence'
(5) - i n 1831 t h e s t o r y i t s e l f was w e l l known.
There had
been s e v e r a l stage p r e s e n t a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g i n 1823 Fresuisptlon; or the
Fate of Frankenstein by R i c h a r d B r i n s l e y Peake, which was o f t e n r e v i v e d .
Consequently, Mary S h e l l e y ' s f i r s t concern
i s t o answer a q u e s t i o n t h a t
p r e s e n t s t h e novel i n a w h o l l y new l i g h t :
'How I ,
t h e n a young g i r l ,
came t o t h i n k o f , and t o d i l a t e upon, so v e r y hideous an idea?' C53.
T h i s r e p r e s e n t s a major s h i f t i n t h e way i n which t h e novel i s presented
t o t h e reader.
What was b e f o r e c o n s i d e r e d more f o r i t s p h i l o s o p h i c a l
i d e a s , i s now t r e a t e d as a Gothic shocker.
Also, a l t h o u g h t h e r e i s an
acknowledgement o f her e a r l i e r d e s i r e ' t o o b t a i n l i t e r a r y r e p u t a t i o n ' ,
Mary S h e l l e y c a s t s doubt upon i t s d e s i r a b i l i t y by s a y i n g 'though s i n c e
t h e n I have become i n f i n i t e l y i n d i f f e r e n t t o i t ' [ 6 ] .
T h i s s h i f t i s e x e m p l i f i e d i n t h e s t o r y o f t h e dream.
t h e novel l i e s n o t i n t h e props and scenery,
The t e r r o r o f
as i n a c o n v e n t i o n a l Gothic
h o r r o r s t o r y - 'a mere t a l e o f s p e c t r e s o r enchantment' ( 6 ) , b u t i n t h e
i n e s c a p a b i l i t y o f t h e consequences o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a c t i o n .
A l b e r t J.
L a v a l l y d i s c u s s e s t h i s when comparing f i l m s o f t h e s t o r y w i t h t h e novel
itself:
'The book g i v e s us a c r y p t i c account o f t h e Monster's " b i r t h , "
so b r i e f as t o leave us wandering how i t was done.'='
L i k e Godwin's f i c t i o n , Mary S h e l l e y ' s novel d i s t u r b s because o f t h e
reader's r e c o g n i t i o n of the psychological h o r r o r of the protagonists'
r e l a t i o n s w i t h each o t h e r .
Her advance upon Caleb Williams is i n
p r e s e n t i n g t h e s t o r y f r o m b o t h Caleb's and F a l k l a n d ' s p o i n t s o f view.
The s t o r y o f t h e genesis t o l d i n t h c 3 ' I n t r o d u c t i o n ' , with i t s
e x c u l p a t o r y dream, suggests
f a l s e l y that the horror l i e s i n action:
My i m a g i n a t i o n , unbidden, possessed and guided me, g i f t i n g t h e
successive Images t h a t arose i n my mind w i t h a v i v i d n e s s f a r beyond
t h e usual bounds o f r e v e r i e .
I saw - w i t h shut eyes, but acute
mental v i s i o n , - I saw t h e pale s t u d e n t o f unhallowed a r t s k n e e l i n g
beside t h e t h i n g he had p u t t o g e t h e r . I saw t h e hideous phantasm of
a man s t r e t c h e d o u t , and then, on t h e working o f some p o w e r f u l
engine, show s i g n s o f l i f e , and s t i r w i t h an uneasy, h a l f - v i t a l
motion.
F r i g h t f u l must i t be; f o r supremely f r i g h t f u l would be the
e f f e c t o f any human endeavour t o mock t h e stupendous mechanism o f
the C r e a t o r o f t h e w o r l d . H i s success would t e r r i f y t h e a r t i s t ; he
would r u s h away f r o m h i s odious handiwork, h o r r o r - s t r i c k e n .
He
would hope t h a t , l e f t t o i t s e l f , t h e s l i g h t spark o f l i f e which he
had communicated would fade; t h a t t h i s t h i n g , which had r e c e i v e d
96
such i m p e r f e c t a n i m a t i o n , would subside i n t o dead m a t t e r ; and he
might s l e e p i n t h e b e l i e f t h a t t h e s i l e n c e o f t h e grave would quench
f o r ever t h e t r a n s i e n t e x i s t e n c e o f t h e hideous corpse which he had
l o o k e d upon as t h e c r a d l e o f l i f e .
He s l e e p s ; but he i s awakened;
he opens h i s eyes; behold t h e h o r r i d t h i n g s t a n d s a t h i s bedside,
opening h i s c u r t a i n s , and l o o k i n g on him w i t h y e l l o w , watery, but
s p e c u l a t i v e eyes. [ 9 ]
Uot o n l y does t h i s m i s r e p r e s e n t t h e source o f t h e h o r r o r i n the novel
and suggest t h a t i t s i n t e r e s t i s more s u p e r f i c i a l t h a n i t a c t u a l l y i s ,
but
i t makes moral Judgements - 'unhallowed a r t s ' ;
frightful';
'supremely
'mock t h e stupendous mechanism o f t h e C r e a t o r o f the world';
'odious handiwork' - o f a k i n d d e l i b e r a t e l y eschewed i n the e a r l i e r
edition.
A l t o g e t h e r t h e view o f Frankenstein p r e s e n t e d here i s much
more m o r a l l y d i r e c t e d and c o n v e n t i o n a l t h a n t h e m o r a l l y n e u t r a l
1818
version.
I f t h e ' I n t r o d u c t i o n ' i s t o be t r u s t e d , Mary S h e l l e y ' s ' p o i n t of
view t o t h e I m a g i n a t i o n f o r t h e d e l i n e a t i n g o f human passions more
comprehensive
the
and commanding' has a l t e r e d .
As Mary Poovey p o i n t s out,
new e d i t i o n i s r a t h e r more o f an apology f o r t h e f i r s t and,
while
i t s b a s i c s t r u c t u r e has not changed, t h e r e i s an a l t e r a t i o n i n i t s
effect.'*
The view o f t h e i m a g i n a t i o n p r e s e n t e d i n t h e I n t r o d u c t i o n
suggests t h i s .
I t i s seen as detached - 'My
possessed and g u i d e d me'
Imagination,
unbidden,
- t h u s e x c u s i n g Mary S h e l l e y f r o m blame f o r her
p r e s u m p t i o n i n w r i t i n g t h e n o v e l and c o n c e i v i n g such h o r r i f i c ideas a t
so young an age; and y e t p r o v i d e s a more d i r e c t i v e m o r a l i t y f o r the
novel.
The m a j o r i t y o f t h e changes made f o r t h e l a t e r e d i t i o n are i n word
choice or t o syntax.
account o f h i m s e l f .
There are v e r y few changes t o t h e monster's
These are merely changes i n word choice and an
a l t e r a t i o n o f emphasis i n t h e scene i n which t h e monster s h i f t s the
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r W i l l i a m ' s death onto J u s t i n e Moritz,'^ which serves t o
make i t more melodramatic, and a l t e r s t h e m o t i v a t i o n a l i t t l e ,
but which
does n o t s i g n i f i c a n t l y a l t e r t h e s t r u c t u r e o f t h e novel.
The f i r s t
emphasis.
volume o f t h e 1831 e d i t i o n shows a s u b s t a n t i a l s h i f t i n
There a r e f o u r main areas i n which t h e two e d i t i o n s d i f f e r
significantly.
There i s c l e a r evidence o f some s o r t o f d i v i n i t y .
97
There
are a l s o changes t o t h e c h a r a c t e r o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p a r e n t s and h i s
u p b r i n g i n g and t o t h e r o l e and r e l a t i o n s h i p o f E l i z a b e t h , who ceases t o
be F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s c o u s i n .
F i n a l l y , t h e r e i s a g r e a t e r sense of
F r a n k e n s t e i n as an o v e r - r e a c h e r , whose t r a g e d y can be a s c r i b e d t o a
s p e c i f i c h u b r i s on h i s p a r t .
The novel l o s e s i t s f i n e l y
balanced
ambivalence.
The f i r s t r e f e r e n c e t o any s o r t of d i v i n e agent comes a t the end of
'Chapter 11' of t h e 1831 e d i t i o n .
T h i s i s e q u i v a l e n t t o t h e end of the
f i r s t c h a p t e r of t h e o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n .
The f i n a l two paragraphs
of the
1831 e d i t i o n read.
Thus s t r a n g e l y a r e our s o u l s c o n s t r u c t e d , and by such s l i g h t
l i g a m e n t s a r e we bound t o p r o s p e r i t y o r r u i n .
When I l o o k back, i t
seems t o me as i f t h i s almost m i r a c u l o u s change of i n c l i n a t i o n and
w i l l was t h e immediate s u g g e s t i o n of t h e g u a r d i a n angel of my l i f e the l a s t e f f o r t made by t h e s p i r i t of p r e s e r v a t i o n t o a v e r t the
s t o r m t h a t was even t h e n hanging i n t h e s t a r s , and ready t o envelope
me.
Her v i c t o r y was announced by an unusual t r a n q u i l l i t y and
gladness of s o u l , which f o l l o w e d t h e r e l i n q u i s h i n g of my a n c i e n t and
l a t t e r l y t o r m e n t i n g s t u d i e s . I t was t h u s t h a t I was t o be taught t o
a s s o c i a t e e v i l w i t h t h e i r p r o s e c u t i o n , happiness w i t h t h e i r
disregard.
I t was a s t r o n g e f f o r t o f the s p i r i t o f good; but i t was
ineffectual.
D e s t i n y was t o o p o t e n t , and her immutable laws had
decreed my u t t e r and t e r r i b l e d e s t r u c t i o n . [41-42]
T h i s i s r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e e a r l i e r v e r s i o n which
necessity i n a l l
l e v e l s of i t s n a r r a t i o n .
accepted
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s career i s now
p r e s e n t e d as a t r a g e d y o f f a t e i n a w o r l d i n which moral good and
evil
are c l e a r l y d e f i n e d .
T h i s c l e a r p o l a r i s a t i o n between the good and t h e e v i l , c h a r a c t e r i s e d
by F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s d e s c r i p t i o n of W i l l i a m and J u s t i n e as 'the f i r s t
hapless v i c t i m s t o my unhallowed a r t s ' C89],
i s not present i n the
1818
e d i t i o n , where t h e p o s s i b i l i t y i s a l l o w e d t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s s t u d i e s
might be of b e n e f i t .
There i s a hardening of t h e m o r a l i t y i n the l a t e r
edition.
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p r o g r e s s i o n towards h i s s t u d i e s , which i s seen as
I n e v i t a b l e i n b o t h e d i t i o n s , i s presented as s u p e r n a t u r a l l y determined
i n 1831.
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s f i r s t c a l l i n g upon M. Krempe i s d e s c r i b e d i n
f a t a l terms;
'Chance - or r a t h e r the e v i l i n f l u e n c e , t h e Angel of
D e s t r u c t i o n , which a s s e r t e d omnipotent sway over me f r o m the moment I
98
t u r n e d my r e l u c t a n t s t e p s f r o m my f a t h e r ' s door - l e d me f i r s t t o M.
Krempe ...'
[451.
ffot
o n l y i s t h e language here more
melodramatic
(compare t h e r e s t r a i n e d and m a t t e r of f a c t tone o f 1818:
morning
'The
next
I d e l i v e r e d my l e t t e r s of i n t r o d u c t i o n , and p a i d a v i s i t t o some
of t h e p r i n c i p a l p r o f e s s o r s , and among o t h e r s t o M. Krempe ...'
(40)),
but F r a n k e n s t e i n i s t r e a t e d as a puppet of d i v i n e i n f l u e n c e s , r a t h e r
t h a n b e i n g f u l l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s own d e c i s i o n s .
He i s presented as
b o t h l e s s t o blame, i n t h a t h i s a c t i o n s are i n f l u e n c e d by s u p e r n a t u r a l
f o r c e s over which he has no c o n t r o l , and more t o blame, i n t h a t whereas
N e c e s s i t y a s c r i b e s no blame, but i s m o r a l l y n e u t r a l , r e c o g n i s i n g the
i n e v i t a b i l i t y of a l l a c t i o n s , i n t h i s v e r s i o n he seems t o have more
c o n t r o l over h i s own c a r e e r .
The d e t e r m i n i s m o f t h e 1818 e d i t i o n
has
been r e p l a c e d by a t r a g i c i n e v i t a b i l i t y which a l l o w s of some p o s s i b i l i t y
of an a l t e r n a t i v e course o f events.
The e f f e c t of M. Valdman's l e c t u r e , which t u r n s F r a n k e n s t e i n back t o
the
s t u d y of U a t u r a l P h i l o s o p h y i s presented d i f f e r e n t l y i n the two
editions.
I t i s r e s t r a i n e d and u n - m o r a l i s t i c i n 1818:
' I departed
h i g h l y pleased w i t h t h e p r o f e s s o r and h i s l e c t u r e , and p a i d him a v i s i t
the
same evening'
(42).
Mary S h e l l e y a l l o w s i n c i d e n t s t o develop
own s i g n i f i c a n c e and seems t o have more c o n f i d e n c e i n her p l o t .
t h e r e i s a bombastic
their
I n 1831
and p o r t e n t o u s expansion a t t h i s p o i n t :
Such were the p r o f e s s o r ' s words - r a t h e r l e t me say such the words
of f a t e , enounced t o d e s t r o y me.
As he went on, I f e l t as i f ray
s o u l were g r a p p l i n g w i t h a p a l p a b l e enemy; one by one t h e v a r i o u s
keys were touched which formed t h e mechanism of my being:
chord
a f t e r chord was sounded, and soon my mind was f i l l e d w i t h one
t h o u g h t , one c o n c e p t i o n , one purpose.
So much has been done,
exclaimed t h e s o u l of F r a n k e n s t e i n , - more, f a r more, w i l l I
achieve: t r e a d i n g i n t h e s t e p s a l r e a d y marked, I w i l l pioneer a new
way, e x p l o r e unknown powers, and u n f o l d t o t h e w o r l d t h e deepest
m y s t e r i e s of c r e a t i o n .
I c l o s e d not my eyes t h a t n i g h t .
My i n t e r n a l being was i n a
s t a t e of i n s u r r e c t i o n and t u r m o i l ; I f e l t t h a t o r d e r would thence
a r i s e , but I had no power t o produce i t . By degrees, a f t e r the
morning's dawn, s l e e p came. I awoke, and my y e s t e r n i g h t ' s thoughts
were as a dream. There o n l y remained a r e s o l u t i o n t o r e t u r n t o my
a n c i e n t s t u d i e s , and t o devote myself t o a s c i e n c e f o r which I
b e l i e v e d myself t o possess a n a t u r a l t a l e n t .
On t h e same day I p a i d
M. Valdman a v i s i t . [ 4 8 ]
Again t h e r e i s r e f e r e n c e t o f a t e as p a r t o f t h e melodramatic
of F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s compulsion
to evil.
99
development
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s presented as a
megalomaniac who
i s p r e d e s t i n e d t o o f f e n d and whose subsequent h i s t o r y
i s J u s t punishment f o r h i s h u b r i s .
To emphasise F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s changed r o l e , a l t e r a t i o n s have are made =
t o o t h e r c h a r a c t e r s , c h i e f l y t o E l i z a b e t h , t o F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p a r e n t s and
also t o Frankenstein's e a r l y l i f e ;
J u s t over t h r e e pages i n Rieger's
e d i t i o n are c a n c e l l e d and c o m p l e t e l y r e - w r i t t e n .
E l i z a b e t h ceases t o be
t h e abandoned daughter o f Alphonse's younger s i s t e r and becomes the
daughter of a Milanese nobleman, v i c t i m of A u s t r i a n domination
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a t t i t u d e t o her changes a l s o .
an e q u a l :
C35].
I n 1818 he t r e a t s her as
'From t h i s t i m e E l i z a b e t h Lavenza became my p l a y f e l l o w ,
as we grew o l d e r , my f r i e n d .
and
... While I admired her understanding and
fancy, I l o v e d t o t e n d on her, as I s h o u l d on a f a v o u r i t e animal; and I
never saw so much grace b o t h of person and mind u n i t e d t o so
pretension'
(29-30).
little
T h i s r e s p e c t f o r E l i z a b e t h as an autonomous
i n d i v i d u a l , whose f a c u l t i e s he admires,
means t h a t h i s l a t e r a t t i t u d e t o
her, when he t r e a t s her more as o b j e c t C I
possessed a t r e a s u r e ' (186))
b e f o r e h i s marriage t o her, i s a c o r r u p t i o n of h i s e a r l i e r respect.
In
1831, by c o n t r a s t , h i s a t t i t u d e t o h i s f u t u r e w i f e i s suspect from t h i s
e a r l y stage.
'Everyone l o v e d E l i z a b e t h . The p a s s i o n a t e and almost r e v e r e n t i a l
attachment w i t h which a l l regarded her became, w h i l e I shared i t , my
p r i d e and my d e l i g h t .
On t h e evening p r e v i o u s t o her being brought
t o my home, my mother had s a i d p l a y f u l l y , - ' I have a p r e t t y present
f o r my V i c t o r - to-morrow he s h a l l have i t . '
And when, on the
morrow, she p r e s e n t e d E l i z a b e t h t o me as her promised g i f t , I , w i t h
c h i l d i s h s e r i o u s n e s s , I n t e r p r e t e d her words l i t e r a l l y , and looked
upon E l i z a b e t h as mine - mine t o p r o t e c t , l o v e , and c h e r i s h . A l l
p r a i s e s bestowed upon her, I r e c e i v e d as made t o a possession of my
own.
We c a l l e d each o t h e r f a m i l i a r l y by t h e name of cousin. ITo
word, no e x p r e s s i o n c o u l d body f o r t h t h e k i n d of r e l a t i o n i n which
she s t o o d t o me - my more than s i s t e r , s i n c e t i l l death she was t o
be mine o n l y . [35-36]
E l i z a b e t h i s i n t r o d u c e d t o F r a n k e n s t e i n as h i s possession and
c o n t i n u e s t o t r e a t her as such.
Consequently
he
h i s possessive and
selfish
a t t i t u d e towards her l a t e r i n t h e novel i s not so s u r p r i s i n g as i t might
have been.
I n t h e l a t e r v e r s i o n , a l s o , E l i z a b e t h i s presented as more
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r Madame F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s death.
I n 1818,
E l i z a b e t h i s not s e r i o u s l y
100
ill:
E l i z a b e t h had caught the s c a r l e t f e v e r ; but her i l l n e s s was not
severe, and she q u i c k l y recovered.
D u r i n g her i l l n e s s , many
arguments had been urged t o persuade my mother t o r e f r a i n from
a t t e n d i n g upon her. She had, a t f i r s t , y i e l d e d t o our e n t r e a t i e s ;
but when she heard t h a t her f a v o u r i t e was r e c o v e r i n g , she c o u l d no
l o n g e r debar h e r s e l f f r o m her s o c i e t y , and e n t e r e d her chamber long
b e f o r e t h e danger of i n f e c t i o n was past. The consequences of t h i s
imprudence were f a t a l . (37)
I t i s s i g n i f i c a n t t h a t E l i z a b e t h ' s i l l n e s s was not dangerous and
that
C a r o l i n e B e a u f o r t ' s d e a t h was the r e s u l t of her own
Any
resentment
imprudence.
f e l t s u b c o n s c i o u s l y by F r a n k e n s t e i n f o r t h e death of h i s
mother would t h e r e f o r e be unreasonable.
repressed resentment
The
1831 changes make V i c t o r ' s
towards E l i z a b e t h f o r t h e death o f h i s mother more
understandable:
Before t h e day r e s o l v e d upon c o u l d a r r i v e , t h e f i r s t m i s f o r t u n e of
my l i f e o c c u r r e d - an omen, as i t were, of my f u t u r e misery.
E l i z a b e t h had caught the s c a r l e t f e v e r ; her i l l n e s s was severe,
and she was i n t h e g r e a t e s t danger. D u r i n g her i l l n e s s , many
arguments had been urged t o persuade my mother f r o m a t t e n d i n g upon
her. She had, a t f i r s t , y i e l d e d t o our e n t r e a t i e s ; but when she
heard t h a t t h e l i f e o f her f a v o u r i t e was menaced, she c o u l d no
l o n g e r c o n t r o l her a n x i e t y . She a t t e n d e d her s i c k bed, - her
w a t c h f u l a t t e n t i o n s triumphed over the m a l i g n i t y of the distemper, E l i z a b e t h was saved, but t h e consequences o f t h i s imprudence were
f a t a l t o her p r e s e r v e r . C 42]
Elizabeth's l i f e
version.
i s exchanged f o r t h a t of her a d o p t i v e mother i n t h i s
Furthermore,
t h e Oedipal aspects o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s
r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h h i s mother are emphasised when h i s mother's d y i n g
a c t i o n i s t o express her hopes of t h e i r marriage C43].
In this
later
v e r s i o n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s mother appears more noble, and E l i z a b e t h ' s l i f e
i s presented as b e i n g purchased
by her demise.
However, t h e g r e a t e s t a l t e r a t i o n t o t h e r o l e of t h e o t h e r members of
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s f a m i l y i s t h e omission of E l i z a b e t h ' s t i r a d e a g a i n s t the
i n j u s t i c e of J u s t i n e M o r i t z ' s death.
i m p o r t a n t f i g u r e i n the l a t e r e d i t i o n .
E l i z a b e t h becomes a much l e s s
I n t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n she i s
presented as more a c t i v e and as much more necessary
family.
f o r t h e Frankenstein
I n 1831, her e f f o r t s (38-39) t o cheer t h e f a m i l y a f t e r the
d e a t h of t h e mother are o m i t t e d , and her r e a c t i o n t o J u s t i n e ' s death i s
a l s o not i n c l u d e d .
The
1818 v e r s i o n reads.
Yet heaven b l e s s thee, my dearest J u s t i n e , w i t h r e s i g n a t i o n , and a
c o n f i d e n c e e l e v a t e d beyond t h i s w o r l d . Oh! how I hate i t s shews and
101
mockeries! when one c r e a t u r e i s murdered, another i s immediately
d e p r i v e d of l i f e i n a s l o w t o r t u r i n g manner; then the e x e c u t i o n e r s ,
t h e i r hands y e t r e e k i n g w i t h t h e b l o o d of innocence, b e l i e v e t h a t
t h e y have done a g r e a t deed. They c a l l t h i s retribution. H a t e f u l
name! When t h a t word i s pronounced, I know g r e a t e r and more h o r r i d
punishments are g o i n g t o be i n f l i c t e d t h a n t h e g l o o m i e s t t y r a n t has
ever i n v e n t e d t o s a t i a t e h i s utmost revenge.
(82-83)
T h i s i s v e r y b i t t e r and t o some e x t e n t more passionate t h a n i s
c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e c h a r a c t e r of E l i z a b e t h as she i s presented.
However, i t g i v e s her c h a r a c t e r d e f i n i t i o n and shows she possesses
strong feelings.
I t a l s o h i g h l i g h t s t h e c e n t r a l theme of the d i f f i c u l t y
o f a c c u r a t e Judgement and a c t s as a warning t o t h e reader not t o emulate
t h e Genevese judges.
By 1831, Mary S h e l l e y e i t h e r f e l t t h a t such
a n a r c h i c views would not be approved of by her readers, or she no longer
b e l i e v e d i n them.
I t may
a l s o be t h a t l i k e o t h e r s t r o n g l y
expressed
p o l i t i c a l a s s e r t i o n s i n t h e n o v e l , t h i s was v e r y much i n f l u e n c e d by
Percy S h e l l e y , i f not a c t u a l l y w r i t t e n by him.
I n 1831, a l l t h a t i s
s a i d of E l i z a b e t h ' s f i n a l r e a c t i o n t o J u s t i n e ' s condemnation i s
' E l i z a b e t h a l s o wept and was
innocence,
unhappy; but hers a l s o was the misery of
which, l i k e a c l o u d t h a t passess over the f a i r moon, f o r a
w h i l e h i d e s but cannot t a r n i s h i t s b r i g h t n e s s ' [ 8 8 ] .
As w i t h the death of F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s mother, the emphasis has been
changed t o f o c u s more s p e c i f i c a l l y upon F r a n k e n s t e i n h i m s e l f .
v e r y much t h e p a t t e r n of t h e l a t e r e d i t i o n .
t h i s s h i f t i s i n t h e t r i p t o Chamonix.
This i s
The c l e a r e s t example of
I n 1818
t h i s was a f a m i l y
o u t i n g , p r i m a r i l y f o r t h e b e n e f i t of E l i z a b e t h and Ernest, who had not
been t h e r e b e f o r e (89).
However, i n t h e l a t e r e d i t i o n , i t becomes a
s o l i t a r y t r i p embarked by F r a n k e n s t e i n t o ease h i s g u i l t i n the sublime
landscape:
' I ... sought
i n t h e magnificence, the e t e r n i t y of such
scenes, t o f o r g e t myself and my ephemeral, because human, sorrows' [ 9 4 ] .
I n t h e e a r l i e r v e r s i o n t h i s t r i p i s p a r t of f a m i l y l i f e ,
h o l i d a y t o recover t h e i r s p i r i t s ;
of t h e tormented Romantic hero.
now
taking a
i t becomes the r e s t l e s s
wandering
I n s t e a d of d e m o n s t r a t i n g 'the
amiableness of domestic a f f e c t i o n '
( 7 ) , which i s b l i g h t e d by
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s encounter w i t h t h e monster (who i s i r o n i c a l l y a r g u i n g i n
f a v o u r of t h e 'amiableness o f domestic a f f e c t i o n ' ) , the t r i p t o Chamonix
102
becomes p a r t o f t h e o p p o s i t i o n t o 'domestic a f f e c t i o n ' , t h e s o l i t a r y ,
haunted j o u r n e y i n g s o f a g u i l t - r i d d e n s o u l .
The l a t e r e d i t i o n a l t e r s t h e c h a r a c t e r o f F r a n k e n s t e i n
substantially.
There a r e changes t o h i s m o t i v a t i o n f o r c r e a t i n g t h e
monster and a l s o t o t h e way i n which he i s presented i n t h e c o n t e x t of
his story.
I n 1831, Mary S h e l l e y emphasises t h e vehemence o f
Frankenstein's
temper C37], and suggests t h a t i n h i s c h i l d h o o d t h e
c o n t r a s t i n g c h a r a c t e r s o f E l i z a b e t h and C l e r v a l serve t o r e s t r a i n h i s
tendency t o excess:
'The s a i n t l y s o u l o f E l i z a b e t h shone l i k e a s h r i n e -
d e d i c a t e d lamp i n o u r p e a c e f u l home.
l o v e t o s o f t e n and a t t r a c t :
... She was t h e l i v i n g s p i r i t o f
I might have become s u l l e n i n my study,
rough t h r o u g h t h e ardour o f my n a t u r e , b u t t h a t she was t h e r e t o subdue
me t o a semblance o f her own g e n t l e n e s s '
[38].
Frankenstein
presents
t h e a n t i s o c i a b i l i t y t h a t comes t o t h e f o r e d u r i n g h i s c r e a t i o n of t h e
monster as an e s s e n t i a l p a r t o f h i s n a t u r e , r a t h e r t h a n as an a t t r i b u t e
a c q u i r e d d u r i n g h i s obsession.
leads t o h i s transgression.
Thus i t i s p a r t of t h e environment which
The d i f f e r e n c e between t h e two v e r s i o n s
means t h a t , whereas i n 1818 F r a n k e n s t e i n i s r e s p o n s i b l e f o r h i s a c t i o n s
w i t h i n t h e c o n f i n e s o f t h e n e c e s s i t y t h a t c o n s t r a i n s a l l men, i n 1831 he
appears a much more sympathetic
f i g u r e s t r u g g l i n g against the
i n e s c a p a b l e consequences o f one misguided a c t .
I n keeping w i t h t h i s , F r a n k e n s t e i n i s p o r t r a y e d as more c a r r i e d away
and l e s s o v e r t l y s e c r e t i v e about h i s r e a d i n g o f t h e a l c h e m i s t s [ 3 9 - 4 0 ] .
I n t h e e a r l i e r e d i t i o n he i s calmer, but more aware o f h i s r e a d i n g as a
forbidden pleasure
(33-34).
university i s altered.
Consequently h i s a t t i t u d e t o h i s s t u d i e s a t
I n 1818, F r a n k e n s t e i n r a t h e r f a l l s i n t o h i s
d e s i r e t o go beyond c o n v e n t i o n a l boundaries,
i n 1831 i t i s present
from
t h e moment he r e - d i s c o v e r s h i s i n t e r e s t i n n a t u r a l p h i l o s o p h y [ 4 8 ] .
However, h i s awareness o f i t s dangers i s apparent
w i t h M. Valdman:
i n h i s conversation
' I expressed myself i n measured terms, w i t h t h e
modesty and deference
due f r o m a y o u t h t o h i s i n s t r u c t o r , w i t h o u t
l e t t i n g escape ( i n e x p e r i e n c e i n l i f e would have made me ashamed) any of
t h e enthusiasm which s t i m u l a t e d my i n t e n d e d l a b o u r s ' [ 4 9 ] .
He i s
p r e s e n t e d here as a y o u t h c a r r i e d away w i t h u n f o r t u n a t e enthusiasm who
p r e v e n t s h i s e l d e r s , who might be a b l e t o r e s t r a i n him, f r o m knowing
what he i s doing.
103
T h i s consciousness o f y o u t h f u l e r r o r b l i g h t i n g t h e a d u l t ' s career,
i s r e p e a t e d i n t h e f r e q u e n t comments the mature F r a n k e n s t e i n makes t o
Walton t o p o i n t t h e moral.
I n 1818 these a r e n o t p r e s e n t .
The s t o r y i s
i n t r o d u c e d i n r e m a r k a b l y n e u t r a l terms:
You seek f o r knowledge and wisdom, as I once d i d ; and I a r d e n t l y
hope t h a t t h e g r a t i f i c a t i o n o f your wishes may n o t be a serpent t o
s t i n g you, as mine has been. I do not know t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n of my
m i s f o r t u n e s w i l l be u s e f u l t o you, y e t , i f you a r e i n c l i n e d , l i s t e n
t o my t a l e .
I b e l i e v e t h a t t h e s t r a n g e i n c i d e n t s connected w i t h i t
w i l l a f f o r d a view o f n a t u r e , which may e n l a r g e your f a c u l t i e s and
understanding.
You w i l l hear o f powers and occurrences, such as you
have been accustomed t o b e l i e v e i m p o s s i b l e : but I do not doubt t h a t
my t a l e conveys i n i t s s e r i e s i n t e r n a l evidence o f t h e t r u t h of the
, e v e n t s o f which i t i s composed. (24)
There i s no s u g g e s t i o n
t h a t Walton w i l l
i n e v i t a b l y s u f f e r as
F r a n k e n s t e i n has, nor does i t i n s i s t t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s t a l e i s
necessarily morally valuable.
I t suggests t h a t i t might be, but l a y s
g r e a t e s t s t r e s s on t h e apparent i m p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e events d e s c r i b e d
and t h e i r a c t u a l
truth.
I n t h e second e d i t i o n t h i s passage begins i n t h e same way but
develops v e r y d i f f e r e n t l y :
You seek f o r knowledge and wisdom, as I once d i d ; and I a r d e n t l y
hope t h a t t h e g r a t i f i c a t i o n o f your wishes may not be a serpent t o
s t i n g you, as mine has been. I do not know t h a t t h e r e l a t i o n of my
m i s f o r t u n e s w i l l be u s e f u l t o you, y e t , when I r e f l e c t t h a t you are
p u r s u i n g t h e same course, exposing y o u r s e l f t o t h e same dangers
which have r e n d e r e d me what I am, I imagine t h a t you may deduce an
apt moral f r o m my t a l e ; one t h a t may d i r e c t you i f you succeed i n
your u n d e r t a k i n g , and console you i n case o f f a i l u r e .
Prepare t o
hear o f o c c u r r e n c e s which are u s u a l l y deemed m a r v e l l o u s . Were we
among t h e tamer scenes o f n a t u r e , I might f e a r t o encounter your
u n b e l i e f , perhaps your r i d i c u l e ; but many t h i n g s w i l l appear
p o s s i b l e i n these w i l d and m y s t e r i o u s r e g i o n s , which would provoke
the l a u g h t e r o f those unacquainted w i t h t h e e v e r - v a r i e d powers of
n a t u r e : - nor can I doubt t h a t my t a l e conveys i n i t s s e r i e s
i n t e r n a l evidence o f t h e t r u t h o f t h e e v e n t s o f which i t i s
composed. [29-30]
The balance o f i d e a s i n t h e passage i s more or l e s s s i m i l a r , but t h e r e
are
two main changes.
The second v e r s i o n a m p l i f i e s t h e idea of the
i m p r o b a b i l i t y o f t h e events t o be d e s c r i b e d , and i n t r o d u c e s the concept
t h a t t h e improbable w i l l be more r e a d i l y b e l i e v e d i n an e x o t i c
of
i c e and snow.
landscape
T h i s seems an unnecessary s e n s i t i v i t y , and d e t r a c t s
104
f r o m t h e c r e d i b i l i t y o f t h e s t o r y , which depends upon t h e n o r m a l i t y of
i t s setting.
To suggest t h a t sublime s u r r o u n d i n g s a r e needed t o be able
t o accept t h e s t o r y s t r e s s e s i t s i n c r e d i b i l i t y ,
rather than i t s
bellevablllty.
However, t h e major s h i f t i n t h e l a t e r e d i t i o n i s t h a t now t h e s t o r y
i s p r e s e n t e d i n t h e e x p e c t a t i o n t h a t a moral can be drawn f r o m i t .
The
i d e n t i f i c a t i o n between V a l t o n and F r a n k e n s t e i n i s made q u i t e e x p l i c i t ;
i f a n y t h i n g , i t i s exaggerated:
Walton's s i t u a t i o n i s not so e x a c t l y
t h e same, nor f r a u g h t w i t h p r e c i s e l y t h e same dangers as F r a n k e n s t e i n
asserts.
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s o f f e r i n g an e x p l i c i t warning t o V a l t o n , and by
i m p l i c a t i o n t o t h e reader.
T h i s warning can be I d e n t i f i e d a t v a r i o u s p o i n t s t h r o u g h t
Frankenstein's n a r r a t i o n i n a d d i t i o n s t o the e a r l i e r t e x t .
Vhen
d i s c u s s i n g h i s nervous s t a t e d u r i n g h i s c r e a t i o n o f t h e monster,
F r a n k e n s t e i n a l l u d e s t o t h e f o r b i d d e n n a t u r e o f h i s a c t i v i t y by
s u g g e s t i n g he 'shunned' h i s ' f e l l o w - c r e a t u r e s as i f ... g u i l t y of a
crime' [ 5 6 ] .
Vhen c o n s i d e r i n g t h e u n l i k e l i h o o d o f J u s t i n e ' s c o n v i c t i o n
f o r t h e murder o f V i l l l a m ,
i n s t e a d o f t h e s i m p l e c o n f i d e n c e o f 1818 - ' I
liad no f e a r , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t any c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence c o u l d be
brought f o r w a r d s t r o n g enough t o c o n v i c t her, and i n t h i s assurance,
I
calmed myself, e x p e c t i n g t h e t r i a l w i t h eagerness, but w i t h o u t
p r o g n o s t i c a t i n g an e v i l r e s u l t '
(75) - F r a n k e n s t e i n l a y s t h e ground f o r
her c o n v i c t i o n by r e c o g n i s i n g h i s own g u i l t and t h e I m p o s s i b i l i t y of
admitting
it:
I had no f e a r , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t any c i r c u m s t a n t i a l evidence c o u l d be
brought f o r w a r d s t r o n g enough t o c o n v i c t her. My t a l e was n o t one
t o announce p u b l i c l y ; i t s a s t o u n d i n g h o r r o r would be looked upon as
madness by t h e v u l g a r . D i d anyone indeed e x i s t , except I , the
c r e a t o r , who would b e l i e v e , u n l e s s h i s senses convinced him, i n the
e x i s t e n c e o f t h e l i v i n g monument o f presumption and rash ignorance
which I had l e t loose upon t h e world? [ 8 0 ]
J u s t i n e ' s predicament,
his fault.
and her death, i s r e c o g n i s e d by F r a n k e n s t e i n as
T h i s s t r e s s e s t h e moral o f f e n s i v e n e s s o f what he has done i n
i t s r e f e r e n c e t o t h e monster as a ' l i v i n g monument o f presumption and
r a s h ignorance'.
The e a r l i e r e d i t i o n eschews such c l e a r a u t h o r i t a t i v e
statements.
105
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s admission
o f h i s g u i l t and t h e l e s s e q u i v o c a l
m o r a l i t y t h a t stems f r o m i t makes t h e ending o f t h e novel l e s s ambiguous
and more s t a b l e .
H i s f i n a l comment, 'Yet why do I say t h i s ?
I have
myself been b l a s t e d i n these hopes, y e t another may succeed ( 2 1 5 ) [ 2 1 8 ] ,
becomes t h e f i n a l spark o f an e x t i n g u i s h e d f i r e ,
e x p r e s s i o n o f passion.
r a t h e r than a p o w e r f u l
The f r e q u e n t emphasis on h i s r e s p o n s i b i l i t y
t h r o u g h o u t h i s s t o r y i m p l i e s t h a t he no l o n g e r f e e l s t h e same d e s i r e s as
he d i d when younger.
He r e v e a l s h i s consciousness o f h i s g u i l t a g a i n when he makes t h e
remark a t t h e end o f Cliapter V I I I p r e v i o u s l y r e f e r r e d t o , d e s c r i b i n g
' W i l l i a m and J u s t i n e [ a s ] t h e f i r s t hapless v i c t i m s t o my
unhallowed
a r t s ' [ 8 9 ] , and a l s o on h i s r e t u r n t o mainland Europe from I r e l a n d .
1818
In
h i s reasons f o r a v o i d i n g London and t h e p l a c e s he had been w i t h
C l e r v a l were t o p r e v e n t h i m s e l f f r o m s u f f e r i n g f u r t h e r h u r t (181-2).
In
1831 t h e d e t a i l s o f t h e i r Journey change i n o r d e r t o i n c o r p o r a t e a
s l i g h t l y s e n t e n t i o u s note:
I abhorred t h e f a c e o f man. Oh, not abhorred! t h e y were my
b r e t h r e n , my f e l l o w beings, and I f e l t a t t r a c t e d even t o t h e most
r e p u l s i v e among them, as t o c r e a t u r e s o f an a n g e l i c n a t u r e and
c e l e s t i a l mechanism. But I f e l t I had no r i g h t t o share t h e i r
intercourse.
I had unchained an enemy among them, whose Joy i t was
t o shed t h e i r b l o o d , and t o r e v e l i n t h e i r groans.
How they would,
each and a l l , abhor me, and hunt me from t h e w o r l d , d i d they know my
unhallowed a c t s , and t h e c r i m e s which had t h e i r source i n me!
[184-5]
T h i s i s an example o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s s e l f - d e c e p t i o n , b u t w i t h i n a
framework o f a d m i t t e d g u i l t .
humanity,
The monster does n o t wish t o d e s t r o y a l l
but t o h u r t Frankenstein.
There a r e a l s o i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s :
s h o r t l y a f t e r t h i s F r a n k e n s t e i n i s t o wed E l i z a b e t h , b u t h i s f e a r s
b e f o r e marriage a r e connected
w i t h h i s g u i l t [189-192].
This r e v i s i o n
i s not well i n t e g r a t e d i n t o the t e x t .
Even though F r a n k e n s t e i n becomes l e s s s e n s i t i v e about h i s g u i l t i n
b o t h e d i t i o n s - 'As t i m e passed away I became more calm:
misery had her
d w e l l i n g i n my h e a r t , b u t I no l o n g e r t a l k e d i n t h e same i n c o h e r e n t
manner o f my own crimes; s u f f i c i e n t f o r me was t h e consciousness o f
them' ( 1 8 3 ) [ 1 8 6 ] , t h e l a t e r v e r s i o n emphasises h i s r e c o g n i t i o n o f h i s
d i r e c t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n a way t h a t t h e e a r l i e r does n o t .
106
The o t h e r change i n F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s a t t i t u d e concerns h i s view o f t h e
c r e a t i o n o f t h e female monster.
I n 1818 he d e t e r m i n e s t o c r e a t e a
companion f o r t h e o r i g i n a l t o f u l f i l
h i s word, which he subsequently
breaks - 'The promise I had made t o t h e daemon weighed upon my mind'
(145).
I n 1831, h i s r e s o l v e seens more r e p e n t e n t :
' I f e l t as i f I were
p l a c e d under a ban - as i f I had no r i g h t t o c l a i m t h e i r sympathies - as
i f never more might I e n j o y companionship w i t h them.
Yet even t h u s I
l o v e d them t o a d o r a t i o n ; and t o save them, I r e s o l v e d t o d e d i c a t e myself
t o my most a b h o r r e d t a s k ' [ 1 4 9 ] .
The t a s k o f c r e a t i n g t h e female i s now
necessary f o r t h e p r o t e c t i o n o f h i s f a m i l y .
I t can be seen as p a r t o f
an a t t e m p t on F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p a r t t o atone f o r t r a n s g r e s s i n g .
the
I n 1818
c r e a t i o n o f t h e female i s more due t o t h e monster i n j u s t i c e .
It is
almost as i f Mary S h e l l e y ' s a t t i t u d e towards t h e monster has been
a f f e c t e d by t h e p o p u l a r response t o i t , so t h a t she r e p r e s e n t s i t as
more d i r e c t l y t h r e a t e n i n g t o 'domestic a f f e c t i o n ' .
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s j o u r n e y t o England i s a l s o s u b j e c t t o a changed
motivation.
I n 1818 he went t o England t o r e s o l v e t h e m a t t e r w i t h t h e
monster so t h a t he might r e t u r n t o h i s f a m i l y f r e e (150); i n 1831 p a r t
of
h i s m o t i v a t i o n i s so t h a t he would n o t upset h i s f a m i l y [ 1 5 2 ] .
This
i s a g a i n i n k e e p i n g w i t h h i s h e i g h t e n e d consciousness o f t h e moral
dimensions o f what he has done.
T h i s more o v e r t l y moral tone has i t s e f f e c t on V a l t o n .
I n 1818 h i s
response t o F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s t a l e i s t o r e s o l v e t o be more s t o i c a l ;
The brave f e l l o w s , whom I have persuaded t o be my companions, look
towards me f o r a i d ; b u t I have none t o bestow.
There i s something
t e r r i b l y a p p a l l i n g i n our s i t u a t i o n , y e t my courage and hopes do not
d e s e r t me. Ve may s u r v i v e ; and i f we do n o t , I w i l l repeat t h e
l e s s o n s o f my Seneca, and d i e w i t h a good h e a r t . (210)
V a l t o n ' s response does n o t i m p l y t h a t he has r e a d F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s h i s t o r y
as an unambiguous warning a g a i n s t t h e dangers o f o v e r - r e a c h i n g .
F r a n k e n s t e i n a l s o merely suggested t h a t h i s t a l e might be u s e f u l t o
V a l t o n i n t h e event o f success o r f a i l u r e
(24).
Thus t h e a l t e r n a t i i v e
c o n c l u s i o n s o f f e r e d by F r a n k e n s t e i n , t h a t he s h o u l d 'seek happiness i n
t r a n q u i l l i t y ' , b u t t h a t 'yet a n o t h e r might succeed'
(215) a r e c o n s i s t e n t
w i t h t h e c o n t r a d i c t o r y a t t i t u d e o f f e r e d t h r o u g h o u t , which i s t h e most
important s t r u c t u r a l p r i n c i p l e o f t h e novel.
107
1831 p r e s e n t s Walton's view o f h i s s t a t e o f a f f a i r s on September 2d
in a different light:
The brave f e l l o w s , whom I have persuaded t o be my companions, look
towards me f o r a i d ; b u t I have none t o bestow. There i s something
t e r r i b l y a p p a l l i n g i n o u r s i t u a t i o n , y e t my courage and hopes do not
d e s e r t me. Yet i t i s t e r r i b l e t o r e f l e c t t h a t t h e l i v e s o f a l l
these men a r e endangered t h r o u g h me. I f we a r e l o s t , my mad schemes
are t h e cause. [ 2 1 2 ]
Here Walton appears t o have l e a r n e d t h e moral t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n was
t r y i n g t o teach.
The s t r u c t u r a l ambivalence
i s n o t so n e a r l y w e l l
balanced and t h e n o v e l must be read as more o f a s t r a i g h t condemnation
of a s p i r a t i o n .
T h i s agrees w i t h Poovey's r e a d i n g when she sees t h e
second e d i t i o n as an apology on Mary S h e l l e y ' s p a r t f o r having had t h e
temerity
t o w r i t e such a n o v e l , her hideous progeny.
O b v i o u s l y t h e r e i s a d i f f i c u l t y i n t a k i n g t h e m o r a l i t y o f one l e v e l
of n a r r a t i o n i n a polysemous novel and i d e n t i f y i n g t h a t as t h e moral of
the n o v e l .
T h i s i s p a r t i c u l a r l y dangerous i n a novel where t h e
d i f f e r e n t l e v e l s c l a s h w i t h each o t h e r as t h e y do i n Frankenstein.
This
i s a l s o what Percy S h e l l e y d i d i n h i s r e v i e w o f t h e f i r s t e d i t i o n . ^
N e v e r t h e l e s s , t h e changes made f o r t h e 1831 e d i t i o n s h i f t t h e balance so
much i n f a v o u r o f t h e r a t h e r more simple and e x p l i c i t
h i g h l i g h t e d by F r a n k e n s t e i n and echoed by Walton,
morality,
t h a t t h e r e i s an
i n c o n s i s t e n c y c r e a t e d between the s t r u c t u r e o f t h e novel which c a s t s
doubt upon each l e v e l o f n a r r a t i o n and t h e moral message embodied w i t h i n
it.
I t i s i r o n i c t h a t i t i s t h e l a t e r , and l e s s s a t i s f a c t o r y e d i t i o n
t h a t has been r e p r i n t e d a g a i n and a g a i n u n t i l Rieger's e d i t i o n was
p u b l i s h e d i n 1974.
Yet i t i s n o t s u r p r i s i n g .
The 1831 e d i t i o n i s a
much more c o m f o r t a b l e book, s u g g e s t i n g t h a t c e r t a i n forms of endeavour
s t e p beyond t h e bounds o f n a t u r e and r e s u l t i n r e t r i b u t i o n f o r t h e
offence.
The e a r l i e r v e r s i o n operates i n a l e s s m o r a l l y a b s o l u t e w o r l d
and p r e s e n t s genuine d i f f i c u l t i e s t h a t can o n l y be r e s o l v e d through t h e
mechanism o f t h e hermeneutic
c i r c l e , which r e q u i r e s a g r e a t e r
p a r t i c i p a t i o n f r o m t h e reader.
The g r e a t d i f f e r e n c e
between t h e 1818 and 1831 e d i t i o n s c o n f i r m s t h e
d e l i c a t e and a m b i v a l e n t s t r u c t u r e o f t h e n o v e l .
more o f a h y b r i d ,
i t s unsatisfactory
The second v e r s i o n i s
b u t i t s c o m f o r t i n g message and s i m p l e r r e a d i n g prevent
n a t u r e f r o m being t o o apparent.
108
Because t h e reader
i s l e s s i n v o l v e d i n t h e n o v e l ' s more s i m p l i s t i c moral i s s u e s , he i s
happier t o accept a more c o n v e n t i o n a l m o r a l i t y .
The e a r l i e r e d i t i o n i s
the g r e a t e r achievement, and i t i s o n l y t o t h a t t h a t t h e e l a b o r a t e and
d e l i c a t e mechanisms o f e v a s i o n o u t l i n e d i n t h i s t h e s i s apply.
edition
The l a t e r
i s more d e f i n i t e i n i t s m o r a l i t y and more l i m i t e d i n i t s scope.
109
Conclusion
Frankenstein encourages t h e reader t o t r y t o do what i t p r e v e n t s him
f r o m doing.
The s t r u c t u r e o f t h e n a r r a t i v e and t h e o p p o s i t i o n s
c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n i t suggest t h a t i t i s p o s s i b l e , by a process o f i r o n i c
mathematics, t o e s t a b l i s h some s o r t o f 'metacomment' , some f i n a l
knowledge d e r i v e d f r o m t h e n o v e l .
such a r e a d i n g f r o m t h e n o v e l .
Other r e a d e r s have attempted t o i n f e r
T h e i r f a i l u r e t o agree i s more than a
s i m p l e academic d i f f e r e n c e o f o p i n i o n , b u t symptomatic o f what t h e novel
as a whole i s about.
Tropp, B a l d l c k , Mary Poovey and Swingle a r e g u i l t y
of a t t e m p t i n g t o impose a r e a d i n g on t h e t e x t .
T h e i r f a i l u r e i s a warning about t h e dangers o f o v e r - c o n c e n t r a t i o n
on what seem p u r e l y o b j e c t i v e r a t i o n a l s t r a t e g i e s o f r e a d i n g .
Simpson
suggests i n t h e f i r s t c h a p t e r o f Irony and Authority in Romantic Poetry
that the f i r s t
l i n e o f Keats's 'Ode on a Grecian Urn* - 'Thou s t i l l
u n r a v i s h e d b r i d e o f q u i e t n e s s ' - r e f e r s not o n l y t o t h e composite u r n
Keats had imagined,
The
b u t a l s o t o t h e poem t h a t embodies t h a t c r e a t i o n .
poem i t s e l f has n o t been ' r a v i s h e d ' by t h e attempt t o impose meaning
on i t , because i t has r e j e c t e d any a t t e m p t s t o f o r c e i t t o be o t h e r than
itself.^
The a t t e m p t t o draw f r o m Frankenstein any p r e c i s e or
a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g i s s i m i l a r l y a f o r m o f rape.
Or, t o p u t i t i n
terms more a p p r o p r i a t e t o t h e n o v e l , i t i s an u n l a w f u l study.
Consequently, Frankenstein can be seen as t h e q u i n t e s s e n t i a l
Romantic novel because o f t h e way t h a t i t c h a l l e n g e s c o n v e n t i o n a l forms
of sense-making by d i s r u p t i n g t h e 'easy a t t r i b u t i o n o f cause and
effect'.''^'
for
As t h i s t h e s i s demonstrates, i t o f f e r s p o s s i b l e mechanisms
c o n s t r u c t i n g a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g s but then compromises them by a
v a r i e t y of strategies.
Paradise Last seems t o o f f e r i t s e l f as a key t o t h e n o v e l , but the
monster's u n i l a t e r a l use and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f i t i s n o t shared by
F r a n k e n s t e i n , and t h e monster's r e a d i n g a l t e r s as he changes h i s
identification within i t .
F r a n k e n s t e i n , whom t h e monster i d e n t i f i e s as
God, can a l s o be seen t o s h i f t h i s i d e n t i f i c a t i o n w i t h i n t h e framework
of
t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p s i n t h e poem.
U l t i m a t e l y a l l Paradise Lost s u p l i e s
i s a language t o d e s c r i b e t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between t h e monster and
F r a n k e n s t e i n , but w i t h no f i x e d moral value a t t a c h e d t o i t s s i g n s .
110
The t h e o r y o f n e c e s s i t y might seem t o p r o v i d e some f o r m o f
s t r u c t u r e , p r e d i c a t e d as i t i s upon t h e p r i n c i p l e o f cause and e f f e c t .
All
t h r e e c e n t r a l f i g u r e s , Walton,
F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster, o f f e r
e x p l a n a t i o n s f o r t h e i r a c t i o n s based upon t h e i r e d u c a t i o n and e a r l y
experiences.
There a r e two d i f f i c u l t i e s :
the f i r s t
i s t h a t t h e y cannot
be comprehensive i n t h e i r accounts o f t h e i n f l u e n c e s b e a r i n g upon them,
and t h e second i s t h a t i t i s n o t p o s s i b l e i n a f i r s t - p e r s o n n a r r a t i v e t o
e s t a b l i s h a s u f f i c i e n t l y detached s t a n d p o i n t f r o m which t o view one's
own h i s t o r y because t h e a c t o f r e v i e w c o n s t i t u t e s p a r t o f t h a t h i s t o r y
and has an i n f l u e n c e upon t h e scheme o f p r i o r i t y being o u t l i n e d .
Furthermore,
t h e c o n f l i c t between F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s e d u c a t i o n and t h e
monster's g i v e s r i s e t o a c l a s h o f p r e c o n c e p t i o n s and p r e j u d i c e s t h a t
r e s u l t s i n t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n throughout t h e novel.
N e c e s s i t y presupposes a c o n s i s t e n t r e l a t i o n s h i p between i n f l u e n c e
and e f f e c t , b u t t h e r e a r e i n s u f f i c i e n t grounds f o r comparison.
This
c r e a t e s a p o s i t i o n l i k e t h a t warned a g a i n s t by Percy S h e l l e y i n h i s
Essay an Life;
I t i s s u f f i c i e n t l y easy, indeed, t o f o r m any p r o p o s i t i o n
c o n c e r n i n g which we a r e i g n o r a n t Just n o t so absurd as not t o be
c o n t r a d i c t o r y i n i t s e l f , and d e f y r e f u t a t i o n .
The p o s s i b i l i t y
of whatever e n t e r s i n t o t h e w i l d e s t i m a g i n a t i o n t o conceive i s
thus t r i u m p h a n t l y vindicated.
But i t i s enough t h a t such
a s s e r t i o n s s h o u l d be e i t h e r c o n t r a d i c t o r y t o t h e known laws o f
n a t u r e , o r exceed t h e l i m i t s o f our experience, t h a t t h e i r
f a l l a c y or i r r e l e v a n c y t o our c o n s i d e r a t i o n s h o u l d be
demonstrated.
They persuade, indeed, o n l y those who d e s i r e t o
be persuaded.®
I n Frankenstein, Mary S h e l l e y has b o t h a s s e r t e d t h e p r o p o s i t i o n of
I f e c e s s i t y and demonstrated
i t s i r r e f u t a b i l i t y , aware o f t h e c o n d i t i o n a l
n a t u r e o f t h a t which can be n e i t h e r proven nor d i s p r o v e n .
One o f t h e more obvious d i f f e r e n c e s between t h e monster and
F r a n k e n s t e i n i s i n t h e i r responses t o n a t u r e .
i s ambiguous:
Frankenstein's a t t i t u d e
he sees i t as a resource f r o m which he can draw what he
wants; b u t he a l s o wishes i t t o be a background i n t o which he can merge
at
will.
H i s e g o t i s m o s c i l l a t e s between extreme s e l f - a s s e r t i o n and
extreme u n o b t r u s i v e n e s s , n e i t h e r o f which o f f e r a s a t i s f a c t o r y s t r a t e g y .
The monster a l s o s t r u g g l e s w i t h h i s r e l a t i o n s h i p t o n a t u r e .
An
u n n a t u r a l c r e a t i o n , he i s n o t o f n a t u r e and h i s a t t e m p t s t o become p a r t
111
of i t ,
by f o r example i m i t a t i n g t h e song o f t h e b i r d s ( 9 9 ) , o r l o o k i n g
at h i s r e f l e c t i o n i n a pool
(109) o n l y emphasise h i s i n d i v i d u a l i t y
without defining h i s i d e n t i t y .
However, he i s a l s o i n f l u e n c e d g r e a t l y
by t h e n a t u r e s u r r o u n d i n g him, both by i t s sympathy w i t h and antagonism
to his feelings.
U l t i m a t e l y , n a t u r e i s p r e s e n t e d t o o i r o n i c a l l y t o be
knowable i n t h e n o v e l .
A l l these processes have i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r knowledge.
Both
F r a n k e n s t e i n and t h e monster r e l y upon d i f f e r e n t and m u t u a l l y
c o n t r a d i c t o r y explanations o f t h e i r world.
o t h e r i n terms o f t h e i r own codes.
They each seek t o read t h e
So, f o r i n s t a n c e , when the monster
comes i n t o F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s room on t h e n i g h t o f h i s c r e a t i o n (53),
F r a n k e n s t e i n a s c r i b e s t o h i m i n t e n t i o n s and p o t e n t i a l s t h a t i t i s c l e a r
f r o m t h e monster's account he cannot possess.
S i m i l a r l y , t h e monster
a s c r i b e s t o F r a n k e n s t e i n c e r t a i n r o l e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s w i t h i n t h e
framework o f Paradise Lost (95) t h a t F r a n k e n s t e i n does n o t recognise.
A l l knowledge i n t h e novel i s compromised by i t s p r o v i s i o n a l nature:
a
r e a d i n g can o n l y be generated by i g n o r i n g i n c o n s i s t e n c i e s , y e t t h e novel
as a whole has t h e appearance o f coherence.
t r y t o impose an a u t h o r i t a t i v e r e a d i n g on i t ,
The reader i s encouraged t o
b u t prevented from doing
so.
The p a r a d o x i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e 1818 v e r s i o n o f t h e novel i s
h i g h l i g h t e d by comparison w i t h t h e 1831 e d i t i o n which removes much o f
the ambivalence and g i v e s t h e novel a f a r c l e a r e r moral edge.
F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s e a r l y e d u c a t i o n i s c o m p l e t e l y r e c a s t t o suggest t h e
p o s s i b i l i t y o f a d i v i n e dimension
c o n t r o l l i n g h i s f a t e , and he i s made
b o t h more r e p r e h e n s i b l e and more sympathetic.
He i s made t o conform
more t o t h e p a t t e r n o f t h e c o n v e n t i o n a l overreacher,
but the influence
o f N e c e s s i t y i s down-played i n o r d e r t o a p p o r t i o n blame.
What Mary S h e l l e y p r e s e n t s i s a p a t t e r n which can be viewed from an
i n f i n i t e number o f d i f f e r e n t p o s i t i o n s , f r o m each o f which i t looks
different.
The reader i s f o r c e d t h e r e f o r e t o q u e s t i o n every causal
assumption he has made and t h e whole p r i n c i p l e o f c a u s a l i t y i s thus
c a l l e d i n t o question.
One might w e l l argue t h a t t h e reason f o r t h e
p o p u l a r i t y o f t h e second e d i t i o n i s because o f i t s more c o m f o r t i n g
nature:
i t o f f e r s more o f a coherent e x p l a n a t i o n and p u t s t h e reader I n
an e a s i e r p o s i t i o n .
The 1818 v e r s i o n has t h e e f f e c t o f ' d i s t u r b ( i n g )
112
t h e r e a d e r ' s o r t h o d o x o r i e n t a t i o n i n t h e w o r l d around him'* i n order t o
a f f o r d 'a p o i n t o f view t o t h e i m a g i n a t i o n f o r t h e d e l i n e a t i o n o f human
passions more comprehensive and commanding t h a n any which t h e o r d i n a r y
r e l a t i o n s o f e x i s t i n g e v e n t s can y i e l d ' ( 6 ) .
When t h e monster i s d e s c r i b i n g h i s development he p a t t e r n s h i s
e x p e r i e n c e on Paradise Lost, a l i t e r a r y work he has n o t read a t t h e time
he i s d e s c r i b i n g .
monster's s t r a t e g y .
However, t h e r e a r e two d i f f i c u l t i e s w i t h t h e
F i r s t o f a l l , t h e p a t t e r n he uses i s not t h e s t a b l e
p a t t e r n o f r e l a t i o n s h i p s he b e l i e v e s i t t o be; b u t secondly, he, a
f i c t i o n a l c o n s t r u c t i s s e l f - c o n s c i o u s l y f i c t i o n a l i s i n g h i s own
experience.
here:
Ve b e g i n t o d e v e l o p uncountable l a y e r s o f n a r r a t i v e i r o n y
a c h a r a c t e r p a t t e r n s h i s experience i n terms o f Paradise Lost i n
his discourse,
which i s c o n t a i n e d
w i t h i n h i s c r e a t o r ' s discourse,
which
i s i n c l u d e d as p a r t o f a J o u r n a l , a l t h o u g h checked by i t s speaker, which
i s i n c l u d e d as p a r t o f a s e r i e s o f f i c t i o n a l
l e t t e r s sent t o a f i c t i o n a l
l a d y i n England by h e r b r o t h e r .
The
whole process i s so s e l f - c o n s c i o u s , a judgement encouraged by
the apparent c o r r o b o r a t i n g d e t a i l s - F e l i x ' s and S a f i e ' s
letters,
Walton's meeting t h e monster - t h a t t h e reader must be s u s p i c i o u s .
reliability
The
o f t h e f i r s t - p e r s o n n a r r a t i v e i s v e r y much c a l l e d i n t o
q u e s t i o n , f o r t h e novel
i s e n t i r e l y composed o f c h a r a c t e r s g i v i n g
accounts o f t h e i r own experience.
The novel i t s e l f
specifically
h i g h l i g h t s t h e problems o f r h e t o r i c and o f u s i n g f i c t i o n a l models.
However, w h i l s t t h e r e may appear t o be a balance o f p r o b a b i l i t y
the t r u t h o f what t h e c h a r a c t e r s say and t h e r e l i a b i l i t y
discourse
and,
o f t h e novel's
as a whole, i t i s always p o s s i b l e t o read i t a t face
There a r e two opposing f o r c e s h e l d i n balance by t h e v e r y
against
value.
existence,
one might a l s o add, by t h e p o p u l a r i t y o f t h e book i n whichever
edition.
On t h e one hand t h e r e a r e t h e s u b s t a n t i a l reasons f o r doubting
e v e r y t h i n g i n t h e book, b u t on t h e o t h e r hand t h e r e i s e q u a l l y s t r o n g l y
the f a c t o f t h e n a r r a t i v e i t s e l f .
i n t o question the r e l i a b i l i t y
A fictional
n a r r a t i v e which c a l l s
o f f i c t i o n a l n a r r a t i v e s i s nonetheless
capable o f s u s t a i n i n g i n t e r e s t i n a sequence o f events.
Whilst the various discourses
h e l d t o g e t h e r i n t h e novel c l a s h w i t h
each o t h e r by t h e i r r e f u s a l t o r e i n f o r c e each o t h e r t o e s t a b l i s h any
form o f a u t h o r i t y , t h e y a r e h e l d i n e q u i l i b r i u m by t h e v a r i o u s
113
d e s t a b i l i s i n g d e v i c e s which s u b v e r t the complete r e l i a b i l i t y
them.
of any of
Paradise l o s t , n a t u r e and N e c e s s i t y a c t as 'Romantic i r o n i s t s '
by
a p p e a r i n g t o p r o v i d e c l e a r e x p l a n a t i o n s , but p r o v i n g so unknowable and
s l i p p e r y t h a t t h e p o s s i b i l i t y o f knowing a n y t h i n g i s s e v e r e l y
compromised.
What i s produced i s a m u l t i p l i c i t y of r e a d i n g s , none o f which i s
complete i n i t s e l f , a l l of which are s u b v e r t e d by o t h e r s and t h e i r
i n t e r n a l i n c o n s i s t e n c y , which are r e l i a n t upon each o t h e r .
S h e l l e y ' s ambiguous r e f e r e n c e t o "my
own
Mary
hideous progeny', which can
refer
b o t h t o t h e monster and t h e n o v e l , has an a p p r o p r i a t e n e s s i n terms t h a t
B a l d l c k would r e c o g n i s e :
J u s t as t h e monster l a c k s o r g a n i c u n i t y
because o f t h e m a t e r i a l s o f which i t i s made, so does t h e novel l a c k a
c l e a r metacomment because i t b i n d s t o g e t h e r a spectrum
codes.^
of c o n f l i c t i n g
However, t h e monster's e x i s t e n c e i n t h e novel cannot be
denied
any more t h a n t h e n o v e l ' s coherence as a c o m p e l l i n g f i c t i o n .
U l t i m a t e l y , t h e novel emphasises the s u b j e c t i v i t y of a l l a p p a r e n t l y
o b j e c t i v e r a t i o n a l processes,
but r e c o g n i s e s t h e e s s e n t i a l l y s u b j e c t i v e
n a t u r e o f t h e response t o i t s e l f .
Rather than advancing
an i d e o l o g y or
p r e s e n t i n g a c r i t i q u e of i d e o l o g y , Frankenstein s u b v e r t s a l l c e r t a i n t y
and balances p r e c a r i o u s l y a number of c o n t r a d i c t i o n s :
i t emphasises the
dangers of s o l i p s i s m , w h i l e d e m o n s t r a t i n g the i m p o s s i b i l i t y of o b j e c t i v e
Judgement, i t balances
i t s own n a r r a t i v e coherence a g a i n s t the arguments
c o n t a i n e d w i t h i n i t f o r t h e l a c k of any form of coherence.
I t s success
i s t o dramatise t h e paradox o f i t s own e x i s t e n c e i n t h e l i g h t of the
d i s i n t e g r a t i v e forces i t contains, h i g h l i g h t i n g the f r a g i l e
p r o v i s i o n a l n a t u r e of a l l knowledge.
114
and
Fotes.
Introduction:
References t o t h e 1818 e d i t i o n (ed. James Rieger (1974) a r e g i v e n i n
t h e t e x t i n round b r a c k e t s ( x ) and t o t h e 1831 e d i t i o n (ed. M. K.
Joseph (1969)) i n square b r a c k e t s Cxi. References t o Paradise Lost
i n t h e Oxford Standard Authors e d i t i o n , e d i t e d by Douglas Bush
(1966) a r e g i v e n i n square b r a c k e t s t h u s : L PL Y, 1. x l .
Ronantlc
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15
Irony:
David Simpson, Irony and Authority in Romantic Poetry (1979) p. i x .
Simpson o p . c i t . p. x i .
Simpson o p . c i t . p. x i i .
Percy S h e l l e y ' s 'Review o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s Frankenstein' i n Shelley's
Prose ed. David Lee C l a r k (1966) p. 307.
L.J. Swingle, ' F r a n k e n s t e i n and i t s Romantic R e l a t i v e s : Problems o f
Knowledge i n E n g l i s h Romanticism' i n Texas Studies in Literature
and Language, 15 ( S p r i n g 1973) p. 64
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 102-3.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 11.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 65.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 78.
C h r i s B a l d l c k , In Frankenstein's Shadow (1987) p.43.
B a l d i c k o p . c i t . p. 34-35.
Percy S h e l l e y ' s 'Review o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s Frankenstein' i n Shelley's
Prose ed. David Lee C l a r k (1966) p. 307.
Mary Poovey, The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer (1984) p. 128.
The monster's ambiguous and u n s t a b l e s t a t u s makes i t d i f f i c u l t a t
t i m e s t o f i n d a c o n s i s t e n t l y a p p r o p r i a t e pronoun.
Frankenstein
h i m s e l f changes h i s pronoun f o r t h e monster w i t h i n t h e same sentence
on one occasion (53 11. 32-5).
I have used 'he' and ' i t ' t o r e f e r
t o t h e monster as t h e y have seemed a p p r o p r i a t e .
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 190.
Chapter 1:
C r i t i c a l Reading
References t o t h e works d i s c u s s e d i n t h i s c h a p t e r w i l l be i n d i c a t e d by
the use o f square b r a c k e t s and t h e i n i t i a l l e t t e r o f t h e author. Thus,
Tropp w i l l be CT x ] ; B a l d i c k [ B x ] ; Poovey [ P x ] ; Swingle CS x ] ; Clemlt
[C x ] .
Chapter 2:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Paradise Last
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 126.
B a l d i c k o p . c i t . p. 40.
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 126.
B a l d i c k o p . c i t . p. 40-3,
P a r a d i s e Lost IV 11. 32-113; IX 11. 49-178.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 39-40. I n o t h e r r e s p e c t s , as a 'Romantic
i r o n i s t ' , t h e monster i s l i k e t h e c h i l d .
115
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
quoted by Rieger (132).
quoted by R i e g e r (135).
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 139.
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 126.
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 139.
see Chapter 4.
C h r i s t o p h e r S m a l l , Ariel like a Harpy (1972) p. 48.
i d e n t i f i e d by Rieger (201)
Chapter 3:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
V e c e s s i t y and I n t e l l e c t u a l Development
Percy S h e l l e y ' s 'Review o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s Frankenstein' i n Shelley's
Prose ed. David Lee C l a r k (1966) p. 307. See a l s o note.
Political Justice ed. Kramnlck (1976) p. 336/7.
Caleb Villlams ed. Maurice K i n d l e (1988) p. 112.
Caleb Vllllams ed, Maurice H i n d l e (1988) p. 336/7.
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 132.
See Chapter 5.
M a r t i n Tropp, Mary Shelley's Monster (1976) p. 17-21.
The Enquirer, quoted i n The Anarchist i?eader p. 270-3.
(Full details
u n o b t a i n a b l e , b u t see photocopy i n Appendix.)
Anne K. M e l l o r , Mary Shelley, Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters
(1988) p. 50.
Percy S h e l l e y ' s 'Review o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s Frankenstein' i n Shelley's
Prase ed. David Lee C l a r k (1966) p. 307.
See Chapter 6.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 20.
M e l l o r o p . c i t . p. 50.
M e l l o r o p . c i t . p. 49.
The Monster's account o f h i s development o f p e r c e p t i o n s and
i n t e l l e c t u a l c a p a c i t i e s i s i n accordance t o Lockean t h e o r y as
developed by C o n d i l l a c . Samuel Holmes Vasbinder i n Scientific
Attitudes in Mary Shelley's 'Frankenstein' summarises t h e process
thus:
An a n a l y s i s o f c h a p t e r I I I [of Volume II] o f Frankenstein shows
that the s e n s a t i o n a l i s t theory i s the underlying p r i n c i p l e
beneath e v e r y t h o u g h t and d i s c o v e r y o f t h e a r t i f i c i a l man's
emerging consciousness. Mary has used t h e p h i l o s o p h y o f
C o n d i l l a c and pinned i t f o r complete e x p o s i t i o n t o t h e
c a t e g o r i e s o f H a r t l e y . C o n d i l l a c s u p p l i e d t h e t h e o r y and
H a r t l e y t h e method whereby she e x p l a i n e d t h e e a r l y mental l i f e
of t h e a r t i f i c i a l man. (p. 45)
He i d e n t i f i e s Mary S h e l l e y ' s use o f Locke's tabula rasa as
developed by C o n d i l l a c i n h i s Treatise on the Sensations. However,
he a l s o r e c o g n i s e s Mary S h e l l e y ' s use o f H a r t l e y ' s c a t e g o r i e s from
Observations on Man, his Frame, bis Duty, and his Expectations.
H a r t l e y i d e n t i f i e s seven c a t e g o r i e s :
1.
Impressions made on t h e e x t e r n a l senses.
2. N a t u r a l or a r t i f i c i a l beauty o r d e f o r m i t y .
3. The o p i n i o n s o f o t h e r s c o n c e r n i n g us.
4. Our p o s s e s s i o n o r want o f t h e means o f happiness, and
s e c u r i t y from, o r s u b j e c t i o n t o hazards o r misery.
116
5.
6.
7.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
The p l e a s u r e s and p a i n s o f our f e l l o w c r e a t u r e s .
The a f f e c t i o n s e x c i t e d i n us by t h e c o n t e m p l a t i o n o f t h e
Deity or
Moral beauty o r d e f o r m i t y .
(D. H a r t l e y , Observations on Man, his Frame, his Duty, and
his Expectations (1749) p. 3, quoted by Vasbinder p. 41)
These g i v e r i s e p r o g r e s s i v e l y t o t h e s e n s a t i o n s , f o l l o w e d by the
i m a g i n a t i o n , a m b i t i o n , s e l f - i n t e r e s t , sympathy, and theosophy and
the moral sense.
M e l l o r o p . c i t . p. 50.
see note 14.
Swingle o p . c i t . p. 52.
B a l d i c k o p . c i t . Chapter 2.
Percy S h e l l e y ' s 'Review o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s Frankenstein' i n Shelley's
Prose ed. David Lee C l a r k (1966) p. 307-8.
Chapter 4:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Vature
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 102.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 98.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 114.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 116.
Small o p . c i t . p. 44.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 21.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 100-1.
Small o p . c i t . p. 255.
M u r i e l Spark, Child of Light (1951) p. 139.
Small o p . c i t . p. 62.
Small o p . c i t . p. 62.
quoted by Rieger (132).
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 126.
Tropp o p . c i t . p. 41-47 passim.
i ) D u r i n g t h i s j o u r n e y , I sometimes J o i n e d E l i z a b e t h , and e x e r t e d
myself t o p o i n t o u t t o her t h e v a r i o u s b e a u t i e s o f t h e scene. I
o f t e n s u f f e r e d my mule t o l a g behind, and i n d u l g e d i n t h e misery
of r e f l e c t i o n . At o t h e r times I s p u r r e d on t h e animal before my
companions, t h a t I might f o r g e t them, t h e w o r l d , and, more than
a l l , myself.
When a t a d i s t a n c e , I a l i g h t e d , and threw myself
on t h e grass, weighed down by h o r r o r and d e s p a i r . (90)
ii)
On h i s j o u r n e y t o England he f a l l s t o respond t o what he sees.
T h i s i s o l a t i o n f r o m beauty and i t s i n f l u e n c e i s i n marked c o n t r a s t
t o C l e r v a l ' s mood when t h e two f r i e n d s j o i n each o t h e r a t
Strasbourg:
'How g r e a t was t h e c o n t r a s t between us! He was a l i v e
t o every new scene; J o y f u l when he saw t h e b e a u t i e s o f t h e s e t t i n g
sun, more happy when he beheld i t r i s e , and recommence a new day.
... " T h i s i s what i t i s t o l i v e ; " he c r i e d , "now I e n j o y
e x i s t e n c e . " ' (151-2).
C l e r v a l responds t o t h e n a t u r a l beauty around him, whereas
F r a n k e n s t e i n seems t o attempt t o impose h i s dark mood on h i s
s u r r o u n d i n g s , y e t , as n a r r a t o r , he i s aware o f t h e beauty o f t h e
landscape t h r o u g h which they a r e passing:
' I was occupied by gloomy
117
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
t h o u g h t s , and n e i t h e r saw t h e descent o f t h e evening s t a r , nor the
golden s u n - r i s e r e f l e c t e d i n t h e Rhine' (152).
The mere n a t u r a l landscape and the sublime i n n a t u r e does not
i n f l u e n c e F r a n k e n s t e i n , but t h e presence o f man i n n a t u r e seems t o
be more f o r c e f u l :
' Ve t r a v e l l e d a t the time o f t h e v i n t a g e , and
heard the songs o f t h e l a b o u r e r s , as we g l i d e d down the stream.
Even I , depressed i n mind, and my s p i r i t s c o n t i n u a l l y a g i t a t e d by
gloomy f e e l i n g s , even I was pleased' (152-3).
Poovey o p . c i t . p. 139.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 33.
B a l d i c k o p . c i t . p. 14.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 113-37 passiw, Small o p . c i t . p. 44.
cf.
Thoughts, w h i t h e r have ye l e d me , w i t h what sweet
Compulsion t h u s t r a n s p o r t e d me t o f o r g e t
Vhat h i t h e r brought us? Hate, not l o v e , nor hope
Of Paradise f o r h e l l , hope here t o t a s t e
Of p l e a s u r e , but a l l p l e a s u r e t o d e s t r o y .
Save what i s i n d e s t r o y i n g ; o t h e r Joy
To me i s l o s t .
( P a r a d i s e Lost Book IX, 11. 473-479)
21. see p. 69.
Chapter 5:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Keats, L e t t e r t o Benjamin B a i l e y , 22nd November, 1817.
R e f e r r e d t o by Simpson o p . c i t , p. 78.
Swingle o p . c i t . p. 55.
see Chapter 4.
P a r a d i s e Lost Book IX, 11, 115 - 139.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. x - x i .
Swingle o p . c i t . p. 55.
Eve Kosovsky Sedgewick, The Coherence of Gothic Conventions p.
see I n t r o d u c t i o n .
Tropp o p . c i t . p. 43.
Tropp o p . c i t . p. 46.
Chapter 6:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Knowledge
4-5
The 1831 Changes
e.g. among o t h e r s , Poovey, Spark.
see Rieger, The Mutiny Vithin (1967), Appendix p. 237-47, 'Dr
P o l i d o r i and t h e Genesis o f Frankenstein' .
'The Stage and F i l m C h i l d r e n o f Frankenstein: A Survey' i n The
Endurance of Frankenstein ed. Levine and KnoepfImacher (1979) p,
243,
Poovey o p . c i t . p.132-42.
T h i s i n c i d e n t occurs J u s t a f t e r the monster has k i l l e d W i l l i a m and
r e a l i s e d t h a t he can r e t a l i a t e :
' I , t o o , can c r e a t e d e s o l a t i o n ; my
enemy i s not Lmpregnable; t h i s death w i l l c a r r y d e s p a i r t o him, and
a thousand o t h e r m i s e r i e s s h a l l torment and d e s t r o y him' (139). I n
t h e 1831 e d i t i o n , t h e word 'impregnable' i s changed t o
' i n v u l n e r a b l e ' [ 1 4 3 ] , which suggests a more personal defensiveness
on F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s p a r t .
118
But t h e r e i s a f u r t h e r a l t e r a t i o n .
The monster d i s c o v e r s the
minature o f F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s mother which w i l l l e a d t o the death of
J u s t i n e M o r i t z . His immediate r e a c t i o n i s r e m i n i s c e n t of Satan's
f i r s t r e a c t i o n t o s e e i n g Eve i n Paradise Lost Book IX:
I t was a p o r t r a i t o f a most l o v e l y woman. I n s p i t e of my
m a l i g n i t y , i t s o f t e n e d and a t t r a c t e d me.
For a few moments I
gazed w i t h d e l i g h t on her dark eyes, f r i n g e d by deep lashes, and
her l o v e l y l i p s ; but p r e s e n t l y my rage r e t u r n e d : I remembered
t h a t I was f o r f o r e v e r d e p r i v e d o f t h e d e l i g h t s t h a t such
b e a u t i f u l c r e a t u r e s c o u l d bestow; and t h a t she whose resemblance
I contemplated would, i n r e g a r d i n g me, have changed t h a t a i r of
d i v i n e b e n i g n i t y t o one e x p r e s s i v e of d i s g u s t and a f f r i g h t .
(139)
The s i g h t of t h e p i c t u r e of C a r o l i n e B e a u f o r t , i n one sense the
monster's grandmother, almost has t h e e f f e c t of s o f t e n i n g the
monster's h e a r t . One might argue t h a t , i n a sense, i t was
C a r o l i n e ' s death t h a t p r e c i p i t a t e d t h e monster's c r e a t i o n by
d e p r i v i n g V i c t o r F r a n k e n s t e i n of t h e l o v i n g c o n t r o l of a mother, and
by c r e a t i n g i n him t h e resentment towards t h e female sex t h a t l e d
him t o c r e a t e o f f s p r i n g w i t h o u t maternal a s s i s t a n c e and t h a t l a t e r
l e a d s him, i n h i s egotism, t o i g n o r e the t h r e a t t o h i s w i f e - and
p o t e n t i a l mother t o h i s c h i l d r e n - from h i s c r e a t i o n .
As w i t h Eve's e f f e c t on Satan ( P I IX, 11.455-471), the s i g h t of
goodness and beauty i n i t i a l l y i n s p i r e s an i n c l i n a t i o n towards good,
but subsequently r e s u l t s i n an augmented anguish by reminding the
monster what he i s d e p r i v e d o f . L i k e Satan, the monster's response
t o t h i s e f f e c t i s a r e d o u b l i n g o f h i s d e s t r u c t i v e thoughts.
However, the f i n a l stage o f h i s d e g r a d a t i o n i s q u i t e s e l f - i n d u c e d ,
and i n response t o no a c t i o n o f anyone e l s e . The consequence of
t h i s i s t h e monster's f i r s t c o l d - b l o o d e d and p u r e l y m a l i c i o u s a c t :
h i s murder by proxy o f J u s t i n e : 'Here, I thought, i s one of those
whose s m i l e s are bestowed on a l l but me; she s h a l l not escape:
thanks t o t h e lessons o f F e l i x , and t h e sanguinary laws of man, I
have l e a r n e d how t o work m i s c h i e f (140).
I n 1831, i n s t e a d of r e m a i n i n g c o n t e n t w i t h t h e simple resonance
of t h i s u n d e r s t a t e d i n c i d e n t , Mary S h e l l e y developed the i r o n i e s and
implications further.
She i n s e r t e d a f t e r 'she s h a l l not escape' i n
the p r e v i o u s q u o t a t i o n
And then I bent over her, and whispered 'Awake, f a i r e s t , t h y
l o v e r i s near - he who would g i v e h i s l i f e but t o o b t a i n one
l o o k of a f f e c t i o n f r o m t h i n e eyes: my beloved, awake!'
The s l e e p e r s t i r r e d ; a t h r i l l of t e r r o r r a n t h r o u g h me.
Should she indeed awake, and see me, and curse me, and denounce
the murderer? Thus would she a s s u r e d l y a c t , i f her darkened
eyes opened, and she beheld me.
The thought was madness; i t
s t i r r e d the f i e n d w i t h i n me - not I , but she s h a l l s u f f e r :
the
murder I have committed because I am f o r e v e r robbed of a l l t h a t
she c o u l d g i v e me, she s h a l l atone.
The crime had i t s source i n
her: be hers the punishment! [143-144].
T h i s c o m p l i c a t e s t h i s scene, and makes t h e monster appear l e s s
r a t i o n a l t h a n he has appeared t h u s f a r . The 1818 t e x t p r e s e n t s a
malevolent a c t which i s t h e consequence of a r a t i o n a l p r o g r e s s i o n ;
119
6.
7.
the 1831 t e x t g i v e s us a warped psychology t h a t e x u l t s i n t h e
e x q u i s i t e c r u e l t y o f i t s a c t i o n and t h a t p r e s e n t s a specious
argument t o J u s t i f y t h a t a c t i o n .
I n the e a r l i e r text Justine i s
k i l l e d because she i s human and b e a u t i f u l - and c o i n c i d e n t a l l y a
s u r r o g a t e mother t o t h e F r a n k e n s t e i n f a m i l y ; i n t h e 1831 e d i t i o n
J u s t i n e i s k i l l e d p a r t l y because o f her beauty, b u t a l s o because by
some process o f deformed l o g i c t h e monster has come t o see her as
responsible f o r h i s p l i g h t .
T h i s must reduce t h e sympathy f o r the
monster on t h e p a r t o f t h e reader.
Poovey o p . c i t . p.137.
Percy S h e l l e y ' s 'Review o f Mary S h e l l e y ' s Frankenstein' i n Shelley's
Prose ed. David Lee C l a r k (1966) p. 307-8.
Conclusion
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Simpson o p . c i t . p, 1-14.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 113.
Percy S h e l l e y 'Essay on L i f e ' i n Shelley's Prose ed. David Lee C l a r k
(1966) p. 178.
Simpson o p . c i t . p. 113:
Simpson suggests t h a t i n Romantic p o e t r y , ' I n s t e a d o f cause and
e f f e c t we have c o n s t a n t c o n j u n c t i o n ; n o t t r u t h b u t p r o b a b i l i t y , and
e p i s t e m o l o g y i n g e n e r a l i s p l a c e d under s t r a i n as a v i a b l e way o f
p r o d u c i n g meaning ... To upset t h e easy a t t r i b u t i o n o f cause and
e f f e c t i s t o d i s t u r b t h e reader's o r t h o d o x o r i e n t a t i o n i n t h e w o r l d
about him.
B a l d i c k o p . c i t . (p. 14) suggests t h a t t h e monster's c r e a t i o n i s
analogous t o t h e o p e r a t i o n o f t h e Fancy i n C o l e r i d g e ' s d e f i n i t i o n :
Fancy, on t h e c o n t r a r y , has no o t h e r c o u n t e r s t o p l a y w i t h , but
f i x i t i e s and d e f i n l t e s .
The Fancy i s indeed no o t h e r than a
mode o f Memory emancipated f r o m t h e o r d e r o f time and space;
w h i l e i t i s blended w i t h , and m o d i f i e d by t h a t e m p i r i c a l
phenomenon o f t h e w i l l , which we express by t h e word Choice.
But e q u a l l y w i t h t h e o r d i n a r y memory t h e Fancy must r e c e i v e a l l
i t s m a t e r i a l s ready made f r o m t h e l a w o f a s s o c i a t i o n .
(.Biographia Literaria p. 160)
C o l e r i d g e emphasises t h e s t a t i c and e m p i r i c a l n a t u r e o f t h e Fancy,
i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e secondary I m a g i n a t i o n , o f which he says, ' I t i s
e s s e n t i a l l y vital, even as a l l o b j e c t s ( a s o b j e c t s ) a r e ' e s s e n t i a l l y
f i x e d and dead' (.Biographia Literaria p. 160).
The consequence o f any attempt t o impose a r e a d i n g on the novel
- an e s s e n t i a l l y i n t e l l e c t u a l a c t i v i t y - w i l l be t h e c r e a t i o n o f a
monster, composed o f b i t s o f t h i n g s t h a t do not cohere.
Any such
imposed r e a d i n g w i l l be p a r t i a l i n b o t h senses and incomplete.
120
Bibliography
Texts:
S h e l l e y , Mary. Frankenstein or, the Modern Prometheus. The 1818 Text,
ed. James Rieger ( l e w York:
Bobbs M e r r i l l , 1974; Chicago:
University
o f Chicago Press, 1982).
S h e l l e y , Mary. Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus (1831), ed. M. K.
Joseph (Oxford and ITew York: O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1969 repr. 1988).
Related O r i g i n a l Texts:
C o l e r i d g e , Samuel T a y l o r . Biographia Literaria (Everyman E d i t i o n ) ed.
A r t h u r Symons (London, T o r o n t o , P a r i s : J.M. Dent and Sons L t d . ; Sew
York: E.P. D u t t o n & Co. , 1906 r e p r . 1917).
Godwin, W i l l i a m .
Enquiry Concerning Political Justice, ed. Isaac
Kramnick.
(Harmondsworth:
Penguin Books, 1976 r e p r . 1985).
Godwin, W i l l i a m .
Caleb Williams, ed. Maurice H i n d l e
Penguin Books, 1988).
(Harmondsworth:
Godwin, W i l l i a m .
-S"* Leon: A Tale of the Sixteenth Century
C o l b u r n and B e n t l e y , 1831, 1799).
Keats, John.
Selected Poems and Letters ed. Roger Sharrock
O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1964).
(London:
(London:
M i l t o n , John.
Paradise Lost, ed. Douglas Bush i n Poetical Works
(London:
O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1966 r e p r . 1973).
S h e l l e y , Mary. Mary Shelley's Journal, ed. F r e d e r i c k L. Jones (Iforman,
Oklahoma: U n i v e r s i t y o f Oklahoma Press, 1947).
S h e l l e y , Percy Bysshe. Poetical Works, ed. Thomas Hutchinson,
c o r r e c t e d by G.M. Matthews (London, Oxford, KTew York: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y
Press 1970).
S h e l l e y , Percy Bysshe. Shelley's Prose or The Trumpet of a Prophecy,
ed. David Lee C l a r k (London:
F o u r t h E s t a t e , 1988).
C r i t i c a l Studies:
Baldick, Chris.
1987).
In Frankenstein's Shadow (Oxford:
Clarendon Press,
Bloom, Harold. 'Frankenstein' i n The Ringers in the Tower, (Chicago and
London: Chicago U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1971).
121
Butler, Marilyn.
Romantics, Rebels and Reactionaries: English
Literature and its Background, 1760-1830 (Oxford: Oxford U n i v e r s i t y
Press, 1981).
Butler, Marilyn.
'The F i r s t Frankenstein and R a d i c a l Science', The
Times Literary Supplement, 9.iv.93.
C l e m i t , Pamela.
1993).
The Godwlnian Movel (Oxford:
O x f o r d U n i v e r s i t y Press,
Dunn, Jane. Moon in Eclipse - A Life of Mary Shelley (London:
V e i d e n f e l d and N i c h o l s o n , 1978).
G i l b e r t , Sandra and Gubar, Susan.
Yale U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1979).
G r y l l s , R. Glynn.
1938).
The Madwoman in the Attic (New Haven:
Mary Shelley (London:
Oxford U n i v e r s i t y Press,
Holmes, Richard. Shelley: The Pursuit (London:
Weidenfeld and
N i c h o l s o n , 1974; Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1987),
K i e l y , Robert.
The Romantic Novel in England' in Modern Critical Views;
Mary Shelley ed. H a r o l d Bloom (New York: Chelsea House P u b l i s h e r s ,
1987).
Levine, George.
Critical Views:
1987).
'Frankenstein and t h e T r a d i t i o n o f Realism' i n Modern
Mary Shelley ed. H a r o l d Bloom (New York: Chelsea,
M e l l o r , Anne. Mary Shelley, Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters (New
York and London: Routledge, 1988).
Murray, E.B.
' S h e l l e y ' s C o n t r i b u t i o n s t o Mary's Frankenstein.'
Shelley Memorial Bulletin (Rome), No. 29 (1978).
Keats-
Nelson, Lowry J r . . 'Night Thoughts on t h e G o t h i c Novel' i n Modern
Critical Views: Mary Shelley ed. H a r o l d Bloom (New York: Chelsea House
P u b l i s h e r s , 1987).
Nitchie, Elizabeth.
Mary Shelley - Author of "Frankenstein" (New
Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1953).
Poovey, Mary.
The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer - Ideology as Style
in the Works of Mary Wollstonecraft, Mary Shelley and Jane Austen
(Chicago and London: Chicago U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1984).
Rieger, James. The Mutiny Within: The Heresies of Percy Bysshe Shelley
(New York: George B r a z i l l e r , 1967).
Sedgwick, Eve Kosofsky.
The Coherence of Gothic Conventions (New York
and London: Methuen St Co L t d . , 1986).
122
Simpson, David.
Irony, and Authority in Romantic Poetry (London and
Basingstoke: Macmillan, 1979).
Small, C h r i s t o p h e r .
Ariel Like a Harpy (London:
Gollancz, 1972).
Spark, M u r i e l .
Child of Light - .4 Reassessment of Mary Vollstonecraft
Shelley ( H a d l e l g h , Essex: Tower B r i d g e P u b l i c a t i o n s , L t d . , 1951).
Swingle, L.J. ' F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s Monster and i t s Romantic R e l a t i v e s :
Problems o f Knowledge i n E n g l i s h Romanticism. ' Texas Studies in
Literature and Language 15 ( S p r i n g 1973): 51-65.
Tropp, M a r t i n .
Mary Shelley's Monster (Boston:
Houghton, 1977).
Vasbinder, Samuel Holmes. Scientific Attitudes in Mary Shelley's
F r a n k e n s t e i n (Ann Arbor, Michigan: UMI Research Press, 1976).
W a l l i n g , W i l l i a m A..
' V i c t o r F r a n k e n s t e i n ' s Dual Role' i n Modern
Critical Views: Mary Shelley ed. H a r o l d Bloom (New York: Chelsea House
P u b l i s h e r s , 1987).
123
Appendix
S is i l l
^1
5 .S 5
^ - «
I
=
S
•2
"5
«i
C
a si
— J)
11^
.9 <=
U
« S i i JJ
3 b to •«
pp ?
•
>ss§
Ei 8 «
H S n
p a a-3
u O *
a •£ s
0
c
8i-
13
.a b S u
K
6
« 8 «
o
ll^ll
a S
o
>p -* u
<9
^1 (2 r "2
3
••3 .5
J
6 & £
a E a.
JO
«• 2 !S •S
a3
u •=,
3 •=
111
l-H
si's
.2 « > §
CO
9 o
J3
O *' T3
U
Q
S
O
D
O
« M
S
H
2
O
H
5
o:SS
ti
3-22
"
llll
124
I ^1 -
<
O
D
Q
J I » 5.1
a S.
I
C
2 8.3 3 S
5 3 «
3
1°
E E
^2
O i
cU
i - l»)
o,
M
E
>>
Eo
S2 S
.2? u
5 'a
Q.
11
§5 4 8
S 3 ^.-O
>
."S.E •o 8 -2 T3
-s
a o 9 a
O
c u o
a
?, T3 a o -a
1
^ a
a
3 §5
u r3
^31
O T3
"3 2 £ ^
•c
11
«9
2 c 2
S^
8
<B
•a c
a
•s.s
I-
X) - J j a
1-2
E o
a
8
O o o S
J3
g 2 . 3O
u >
o> 2
o
3 E
.a
•a
a
rr-o
41
_o o
o o H -g
li
1-2
C
U
« Sis
-5
3 2
O U f o g
>^<^
(U u
c o J3
-S 2 P
s-s!
M
o o
,13
3
2 5 -
.0
lag
If
^ -a
U
-a IS
S^"^
C <
u
so
- 3 •
O J3
al
4>
o
<»j Bi
d
•O
a
(d
-« iS 8 a
£ £ •So
•;3
a
- 5 •§ 3 i S ^ § 5 «>
5260
a
£•2
c
u
•o
a
u
i00 lj> l2" . " ? ' ' s
- - a u
£ 5
c
eo
S
2E
s-g §^o
u ^
•52 2
S o
5-5 2
3
a p
8:^
•>
-.2 Q. *
.13
•5 §•3
is 5 « ^ 2 i 2 g |
125