THE SIGNIFICANCE OF FRANKENSTEIN
E.
NAGESWARA RAO
Mary
Shelley’s Frankenstein is an extraordinary novel in many ways. It was
the first novel of a nineteen-year-old girl with an unusual background. Mary’s
mother was the author of the first feminine document Vindication of the
Rights of Woman. Her father’s Political Justice influenced the
thought of his time considerably. Her husband was reputed to be an atheist and
a socialist. Among her friends was Lord Byron.
Mary
wrote Frankenstein in
Prometheus’s
modern counterpart, Frankenstein, “stole” another vital secret of the gods by
animating a corpse through scientific experiments. He was motivated by a desire
for knowledge: “….if I could bestow animation on lifeless matter, I might in
process of time...renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to
corruption.” 2
But
he viewed the moment of his triumph as a “catastrophe.” He racked by guilt and
fear because of his subconscious realization of his crime against God’s
creation. His sense of guilt becomes accentuated with every incident in the
novel. Because of bitter remorse he abandoned making a female companion for the
Monster. He had realized the “wickedness” of his deed, repented for it, and
tried to annihilate the Monster. In this, the modern Prometheus is rather
different from the ancient one.
Frankestein’s guilt introduces the
theme of The Ancient Mariner into the novel. The hero in Coleridge’s poem had killed an Albatross and had brought
swift retribution upon himself and his companions. The burden of the lonely
mariner’s guilty soul could be relieved only by confessing his wicked deed and
by communicating his agony to a sympathetic listener. Frankenstein is another
version to the travelling mariner. He had not killed any of God’s creatures.
But he had broken the same divine law indirectly. The Monster was his creature
and the Monster’s crimes were his crimes. His anguish and alienation
increase with every murder committed by his creature. When innocent Justine was
condemned to death for supposedly killing his brother, Frankenstein says:
“Anguish and despair had penetrated into the core of my heart; I bore a hell
within me, which nothing could extinguish.” (p. 73)
Like
Coleridge’s mariner, Frankenstein was also tortured
by “deep, dark, deathlike solitude.” William, Justine, Clerval
and Elizabeth were taken away from him by his own creature. He was desolate.
His redemption also came through suffering. The death of his
relatives and friends, imprisonment, illness, isolation and mental distress
have cleansed his soul somewhat. He unburdened guilt-ridden soul like
the ancient mariner by telling his story Captain Walton.
Frankenstein’s
alienation from society may be interpreted as a punishment for his attempt to
cross human limitations. His intellectual curiosity tempted him to seek
forbidden knowledge even as Adam was tempted to eat the fruit of the forbidden
tree. Adam lost paradise for his sin. Frankenstein lost his happiness and
became a pitiable wanderer. Adam’s salvation comes through suffering and
confession.
Mrs.
Shelley had used her knowledge of Paradise Lost extensively. The forest
near
The
portrait of the Monster is a careful blending of Adam and Satan. On reading Paradise
Lost, the Monster himself observed what he shared with each of them.
Like
Adam, I was apparently united by no link to any other being in existence; but
his state was far different from mine in every respect. He had come forth from
the hands of God a perfect creature, happy and prosperous, guarded by the especial
care of his creator; he was allowed to converse with, and acquire knowledge
from, beings of a superior nature: but I was wretched, helpless, and alone.
Many times I considered Satan as the fitter emblem of my condition; for often,
like him, when I viewed the bliss of my protectors [the cottagers] the bitter
gall of envy rose within me. (p. 112)
Frankenstein
refers to his brain-child as the Wretch, Devil Abhorred Entity, Detested Form,
Odious Companion, Horror, Hideous Phatasm and Vile
Insect. Most of these terms are descriptions of
The
Monster is clearly meant to be an unusual combination of Adam and Satan. He had
epitomized the long, slow development of man’s civilized life of many millennia
into a few months and had learnt many things very fast. He had developed a
thirst for knowledge and was self-educated. Tender feelings of affection welled
up in him and he craved for companionship. He had made desperate attempts to
befriend the cottagers and others. But his physical appearance terrified and
repelled others. Even the cottagers who were themselves victims of injustice
denied him friendship. His alienation is even more terrible than his maker’s.
So he complained bitterly: “Satan had his companions, fellow-devils, to admire
and encourage him; but I am solitary and abhorred.” (p. 112) As for Adam, Eve
was there to comfort him. But the Monster was shunned and despised by all
mankind including his “father”.
He
was also a victim of injustice and ingratitude like the cottagers in whose
proximity he had lived a very fruitful life. His repulsive shape and consequent
isolation were blamed on his creator. His benevolent actions like saving a
drowning child were misunderstood and this alienated him even more. He vowed
vengeance on his maker and on mankind for his undeserving fate. He persistently
questioned his creator as Adam had questioned God:
Did
I request thee, Maker, from my clay
To
mould me Man? did I solicit thee
From
darkness to promote me...?
Paradise Lost, X, 743-745.
Frankenstein
and the Monster represent a psychological conflict between parent and child.
The Monster’s revolt and vengeful chase of his maker is a rebellion of creature
against creator, a re-enactment of Satan’s rebellion against God, a repetition
of Adam’s disobedience, a reflection of Frankenstein’s own violation of the divine
law. The Monster had probably greater reason to revolt than any of the others,
for as he complained, be did not have any of the advantages that all of them
have had. By demanding a female companion, he had asserted his right to
happiness.
From
chapter V to the end, pursuit is another important theme. In the beginning, the
Monster follows Frankenstein wreaking vengeance on him by killing three of his
dearest ones. But the murder of Elizabeth, Frankenstein’s bride, reverses their
roles in the pursuit. It is now Frankenstein who sought out the Monster over
ice-bound lands and oceans. While the Monster’s vengeful murders and his sudden
ghost-like appearances do not look like a consistent pursuit, Frankenstein’s
difficult journey is presented as a continuous hunt in the last few chapters,
Curiously, the hunter was urged and sustained by the hunted.
It
is in the course of this two-way chase that we become aware of yet another
theme. Frankenstein and the Monster are not really two independent entities.
They are “complementary” and “antithetical.”3 The creature is an
extension of the creator in that he represents the destructive potentialities
latent in Frankenstein. The two may be seen as two aspects of a disintegrated
personality, an anticipation of the theme of Dr. Jekyll
and Mr. Hyde. Frankenstein becomes a disintegrated personality after his
dangerous experiment. He becomes more of an emotional and imaginative person
and the Monster represents intellect. In their several confrontations, the
Monster’s arguments stand out for their unassailable logic.
However,
it is wrong to see the Monster as an unfeeling, unthinking robot. He had voiced
concern for the poor and the suffering and aired views on political justice and
education. He had frequently given expression to his emotions. His affection
and jealousy were roused when he observed the life of the cottagers. His
compassion made him save a drowning child. He revenges himself on Frankenstein
by killing three persons. He had felt hunger and thirst the same way as other
humans feel. He even had sexual urges when he saw Felix and Safie
making love to each other.
If
the Monster is Frankenstein’s own reflection, or at least some aspect of him,
Captain Walton is a projection of Frankenstein. He too has something in common
with Frankenstein. He was bound for “the unexplored regions” in search of
dangerous and forbidden knowledge. His quest parallels Frankenstein’s earlier
quest for the secret of life. Therefore, Frankenstein counsels the Captain:
Are
you mad, my friend?….or whither does your senseless curiosity lead you?
Would you also create for yourself and the world a demoniacal enemy? Peace,
peace! Learn my miseries, and do not seek to increase your own. (p. 189)
Frankenstein
and Captain Walton erroneously assume that knowledge is a higher good than love
or sympathy and that can be independent of a compassionate society. 4
Both of them started off with benevolent and selfless motives which tend to
degenerate into Satanic pride. Self-glory made Walton nearly endanger the lives
of his companions. Observe Frankenstein’s admission to Captain Walton:
When
I reflected on the work I had completed, no less a one than the creation of a
sensitive and rational animal, I could not rank myself with the heard of common
projectors. But this thought, which supported me in the commencement of my
career, now serves only to plunge me
lower in the dust. All my speculations and hopes are as nothing; and, like the
archangel who aspired to omnipotence, I am chained in an eternal hell...” (p.
190)
Captain
Walton shares with Frankenstein and the Monster, a terrible sense of isolation.
He wrote to his sister early in his voyage:
But
I have one want which I have never yet been able to satisfy; and that absence
of the object of which I now feel as a most severe evil. I have no friend,
Margaret: ...I desire the company of a man who could sympathise
with me; whose eyes would reply to mine. You may deem me romantic, my dear
sister, but I bitterly feel the want of a friend. (pp. 6-7)
The
Monster, Frankenstein and Captain Walton are bound one to the other since they
are aspects and segments of the same personality. 5 It is therefore
appropriate that they should merge into one another towards the end of the
novel.
The
narrative structure of the novel is also significantly based on these three
principal figures. Captain Walton who was literally on the rim of the world
represents the external reality and he starts telling the story of his quest
and his encounter with Frankenstein. Then Frankenstein tells his story from
chapter I through chapter X. The core of the novel, chapters XI through XVI, is
told by the Monster. This narrative pattern may be likened to a series of three
concentric circles. The innermost circle represents the Monster and his
horrors. The outermost circle represents reality. This Chinese-box structure in
the narrative underscores the merging of themes and characters on yet another
level.
The
foregoing discussion of the themes, characters and structure or Frankenstein
brings us to the question: Is this a Gothic novel? It has few of the
conventions and devices of that genre of fiction. In a Gothic novel, the action
takes place in the past, usually in the Middle Ages, in and around a haunted
castle. The action in Mrs. Shelley’s novel is not in the past, nor is it
located In a medieval castle, though some critics tried to establish a tenuous link
between it and Frankenstein’s laboratory. There is no ghost, though the Monster
is ghost–like in his demeanor. There is no monk, no magic and no witchcraft in Frankenstein.
There is no incest. There are no clanking chains, no trap doors, no
underground passages, and no charnel houses in this novel. There are, however,
terror and horror, but they are not of the melodramatic variety as the typical
Gothic novel.
But
the novel is a powerful tragedy. It is Frankenstein’s tragedy presented
somewhat in the Greek manner. Frankenstein is exceptional in his
intelligence and makes a significant choice, accomplishes something unique with
completely good intentions. But once his goal was reached, he swelled with
pride on his own admission. It is this hubris which, in his judgment,
led to his fall. 6 Like the fall
of a Greek tragic hero, his destruction was brought through mental anguish.
Frankenstein’s reanimation of a dead body was a blasphemous act just like
Prometheus’s act of stealing fire from Zeus or Captain Ahab’s vengeful pursuit
of a dumb brute. Frankenstein also evokes the emotions of pity and fear,
pity for the hero’s plight and fear or the monstrosities of his
creature.
What
then is the true significance of this novel written by a teenager of rare
imagination? Its moral implications an important to us in the twentieth
century, hundred and fifty years after its first publication. To Mary, the
romantic, the rational mind seemed to be evil, breeding only evil. Hence the
Monster who represents the rational mind is presented as abominable.
7 Frankenstein’s story is also a reworking of the
Faustus myth where a person barters away his soul for
doubtful and dangerous knowledge. Frankenstein is a tragedy of Mary’s
own life, 8 of her age, of the
irreconcilable conflict between emotion and intellect, faith and doubt, mind
and matter, and science and religion The Space Age has brought this conflict
into clear focus once again. Hence Frankenstein has a relevant meaning
and a significant message to us.
1 See
Burton R. Pollin, “Philosophical and Literary Sources
of Frankenstein,” Comparative Literature, XVII. 98.
2 Frankenstein;
or The Modern Prometheus (London, 1831). P. 40. Hereafter citations
to this novel will be found in the text.
3 Muriel
Spark, Child of Light (Hardleigh, 1951). p.
134.
4 M.
A. Goldberg, “Moral and Myth in Mrs. Shelley’s Frankenstein,”
Keats-Shelley Journal, VIII, Part I (Winter 1959). P. 33
5 In
Jungian terms, Walton may be identified as the subjective psyche
(consciousness), Frankenstein as the personal unconscious, and the Monster as
the objective psyche (collective unconscious). These three have a complementary
and compensatory relationship.
6 There
are few indications of hubris in Frankenstein’s life after the creation of the
Monster, though he reasoned thus.
7 Critics
have suggested that Frankenstein is Mary’s reproach to father’s and her
husband’s belief in the ‘perfectibility’ of man.
8 Mary
Graham Lund, “Mary Godwin Shelley and the Monster,” The University of Kansas
City Review, XXVII (Summer 1962). p. 253