From Reason and Labor a Romantic Was Born
A historical analysis of Frankenstein
Beatriz E. Saldana Farias
Dr. J. Ivey
HUM 2052
March 17, 2016
In Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, Victor, the protagonist, was the perfect
embodiment of the Scientific Revolution. He naively focused on the rationalization of nature,
which led to his mastery of the sciences and ultimately, to his demise. Early in his scientific
career he became fascinated by the secret of life and ardently perused his endeavor to discover it.
Using science as his inspiration, he embarked on a journey of innovation, analogous to the
Industrial Revolution, which in turn gave birth to a Romantic. Frankenstein was written at the
beginning of the Romanticism movement, an artistic crusade that was inspired as a response to
the Industrial Revolution and the Enlightenment. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is an allegoric
critique of the inhumane moralities of the Industrial Revolution, and its part in the execution of
the benevolent principles of the sciences and the creation of Romanticism.
The study of history provides insight into the intertwined realities of cause and effect,
allowing scholars to understand humankind with a sense of lineage. During the age of
Enlightenment, in the early eighteenth century, philosophical focus was turned to reason and
consequently inspired a movement that led to the propagation of the Scientific Revolution. The
fundamental renovation in the scientific ideology of nature stimulated not only a thirst for
knowledge, but also one for innovation. The quenching for this starvation was brought upon by
the Industrial Revolution, which used science as its foundation for the utter transformation of
civilization. This was the point in history when scientists turned towards invention and designed
“power-driven machinery [to] replaced hand labor” (Ashton 10). The increase in production
efficiency prompted large migrations from rural lands into urban locations, instigating the rise of
a new working class who experienced a dramatic drop in their quality of life. This event led to
global urbanization, and slowly pushed industrialization to where it is today (O'Brien, and
Quinault).
2 The Industrial Revolution was not a philosophical movement pursuing the proliferation of
change as other large social-impacting processes had been in the past; it was the result of
scientific contemplation and the answer to the call for action that all preceding discoveries
yearned for. Industrialization was first approached with a scientific heart, but proceed to be
blindly maneuvered by illustrious entrepreneurs. It first dissipated through England, but
eventually devoured the entire population of Europe in a fume of socioeconomic disparity and
labor. As described in the British Parliamentary Papers, people of all ages were being exposed to
tremendously dangerous working conditions combined with extraneous physical labor and low
wages. Children were sent to work in the mines and factories, where they became vulnerable to
physical deterioration from the harshness of their labor (British Parliamentary Papers). The
Industrial Revolution insulted humanity with its disposable perspective of the individual; it
degraded the basic qualities of freedom and focused purely on economic prosperity. This extreme
degradation of humankind cultivated a social reaction known as Romanticism: an artistic, literary,
and intellectual movement that began at the end of the eighteenth century (Berlin).
Romanticism was characterized by its emphasis on the individual, the importance of the
emotional and aesthetic experience of life, and the mystery rather than the rationalization of
nature. It called for a passionate indulgence in the arts, and profoundly influenced the music,
literature, and visual arts of the time period. Musicians such as Beethoven, Schubert, and Chopin
emerged during this time period, composing profoundly moving orchestral and solo pieces
(Grout, et.al.). This movement also presented a different approach to science, one with less
methodological rigidity (Cunningham, and Jardine). Romanticism offered an alternate perspective
to life, one that was not focused on financial wealth, but rather on the riches that the individual
had to offer, placing a greater value on the prosperity of humanity. Esteemed writers, such as
3 Shelley, Goethe, and Dumas began producing literary works with central themes consisting of
Romantic values. Marry Shelley’s Frankenstein was written at the beginning of the Romantic
movement, and served as a metaphoric analysis of the events that gave birth to Romanticism
(Sunstein).
The various characters of Frankenstein depicted the specific historical movements
intended for criticism, and the plot exemplified the analytical opinions of Mary Shelley. Victor
Frankenstein began as a blissful child with a romanticized focus that was “turned not towards
childish pursuits but to an eager desire to learn” which unfortunately was mislead by his “child’s
blindness, added to a thirst for knowledge” (Shelley 19, 21). When he finally attended the
University of Ingolstadt he was first received with a destructive criticism of the “lords of [his]
imagination”, but eventually became acquainted with the “modern masters” and immersed
himself in their works (Shelley 22, 27). Victor promptly mastered all realms of natural philosophy
and developed an acute obsession with chemistry, which “became nearly [his] sole occupation”
(Shelley 29). This sprouted profound philosophical questions within Victor and inspired his
studies of physiology, life, and death, until he became “capable of bestowing animation upon
lifeless matter” (Shelley 31). Victor was the impeccable personification of the ideals of the
Scientific Revolution until his scientific pursuit shoved him into Industrialization, where he traded
his humanity for ambitious innovation.
As Victor tells the story of his demise, a dramatic shift in his opinion of science is
exemplified, representing Mary Shelley’s critique not of the nature of science, but rather of the
corruptive potential of obsession and unrestrained passion (Hindle). Despite Victor’s incessant
disdain of “how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge” Mary Shelley placed a higher
emphasis on the atrociousness of the process of Victor’s laborious construction, rather than on
4 science itself (Shelley 31). It was the act of creation that bestowed wretchedness upon Victor’s
life, not his scientific knowledge that merely served as an inspiration. Through Victor’s abysmal
perspective of science, Mary Shelley attempted to correct some of society’s common
misconceptions (Schneider). Many believed that science was the cause of suffering but Shelley
instead presented industrialization as such. She described Victor’s life prior to his creation as
admirable, and therefore believed the fundamentals of sciences to be pure. Another example of
this belief was the manner in which Mary Shelley introduced another character engulfed by
scientific pursuits. M. Waldman, a professor at the University of Ingolstadt, was presented as
having “an aspect expressive of the greatest benevolence” and as a caring mentor to Victor’s
scientific career (Shelley 27). Therefore, it was not science that Mary Shelley wished to critique,
but rather she desired to convey disgust for the Industrial Revolution.
As Victor dove into his creation, analogous to the Industrial Revolution, there was a
physical shift in the language and structure Mary Shelley used to describe the event. She relied
more on cacophonous language and rough imagery to convey the malevolent thunder clouding
Victor’s perspective using words such as “hurricane” and “torrent” (Shelley 32). She also
prolonged her sentences to accelerate the speed at which the story is presented and simulate a
sense of disorganization and recklessness. The language used to describe Victor’s thoughts was
presented with a tone of arrogance, denoting a distinct shift in Victor’s personality, where
humility was spoiled by industrialization. Victor’s arrogant pursuit of recognition became evident
when he stated that “a new species would bless [him] as its creator and source; many happy and
excellent natures would owe their being to [him]”, thus exemplifying Victor’s novel thirst for
admiration. (Shelley 32). It was not the mere shift in language that denoted Mary Shelley’s
metaphoric critique of the Industrial Revolution, this was also represented in the way in which
5 Victor recollected the event. As soon as he saw “the dull yellow eye of the creature open” he
realized his mistake and “breathless horror and disgust filled [his] heart” (Shelley 35). Through
his devoted labor Victor had brought to life a Romantic spirit; therefore completing the analogy of
science inspiring the Industrial Revolution, which gave birth to Romanticism.
Although often times depicted as monstrous, Victor’s nameless creation was born a
benevolent spirit only to be corrupted by the prejudices of mankind. The creature placed great
importance on the aesthetics of nature, was profoundly moved by the cottager’s music, and
experienced childlike emotional vulnerability, thus exemplifying the ideologies of the Romantic
era; from Victor’s reason and labor a Romantic creature was born. Just like the Romantic
ideologies of the era placed a great emphasis on the social degradation brought upon by the
Industrial Revolution, so did the creature. Every aspect of the creature’s creation angered the
creature, his unexplained origin, his build, and his abandonment, again exemplifying Mary
Shelley’s despise of the Industrial Revolution and revealing yet another important aspect of her
perspective. Mary Shelley disagreed with the abandonment of the Industrial Revolution by the
sciences, exemplifying, through her characters, that the overtaking of industrialization by
economic passions corrupted it, that although inspired by science, the Industrial Revolution had a
crushing effect on society due to the lack of a scientific spirit. If Victor would have taken care of
his creation instead of allowing it to be immediately exposed to the harsh realities of mankind, all
of his misfortune could have been avoided; thus, if science would have continued to guide
Industrialization, a more humane approach could have been implemented.
The Industrial Revolution presented a new perspective of science, one that was focused on
innovation rather than discovery, and placed a greater emphasis on economic prosperity rather
than on the acquisition of knowledge. This drained Industrialization of true science, killing the
6 passion for knowledge and replacing it with one for wealth, essentially corrupting science at is
foundation. The Industrial Revolution did not only kill pure science, but it also destroyed the
individual and any fleeting glimpse of personal success. This was perfectly depicted in
Frankenstein by Victor’s downfall; his Industrialization destroyed his passion for life and
knowledge. Romanticism was the response to this degradation, and Mary Shelley warned of the
potential corruption of the newly found Romantic perspective by depicting a creature whose
benevolent spirit became tainted with contempt. By the end of the story, all evidence of a purely
scientific and innovative spirit died with Victor, yet the embodiment of Romanticism and its
industrial origins prevailed; thus further expressing the metaphoric analysis of humanity’s
decadence brought upon by the scientifically inspired Industrial Revolution explored in
Frankenstein, which abused individuality and sparked the Romantic Movement.
7 Bibliography
Ashton, Thomas S. The industrial revolution 1760-1830. Vol. 109. In the Hands of a Child, 1966.
Berlin, Isaiah. The roots of romanticism. Princeton University Press, 2013.
Cunningham, Andrew, and Nicholas Jardine. Romanticism and the Sciences. CUP Archive, 1990.
Grout, Donald Jay, and Claude V. Palisca. A history of Western music. No. Ed. 5. WW Norton &
Company, Inc., 1996.
Hindle, Maurice. "Vital matters: Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and Romantic science." Critical
Survey (1990): 29-35.
O'Brien, Patrick, and Roland Quinault. The industrial revolution and British society. Cambridge
University Press, 1993.
Schneider, Edward F. "Man and Machines: Three Criticisms." (1995).
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. Frankenstein, Or, The Modern Prometheus 1818.
Sunstein, Emily W. Mary Shelley: Romance and Reality. JHU Press, 1991.
Labour of Children in Factories. British Parliamentary Papers: Reports from Committees. Vol.
15. (1832): 6-13.
8