Like all works that have been taught in English classes, Frankenstein has been explicated and analyzed by students and teachers alike for much of the twentieth and all of the twenty-first century. Academia is correct for doing so because Frankenstein can appeal to the interests of students. Students, teachers and experts in the areas of medicine, psychology, and sociology can relevantly analyze Frankenstein in their respective fields. However, Peter Brooks explains in “Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts: Language and Monstrosity in Frankenstein” that Shelly had presented the problem of “Monsterism” through her language. According to Brooks, Monsterism is explicitly and implicitly addressed in Shelly’s language. While this may be correct, Brooks does it in such a way that requires vast knowledge of subjects that many readers may not be knowledgeable in. After summarizing and analyzing the positive and negative qualities of Brooks’ work, I will explain how the connection of many different fields of study in literature creates a better work.
Brooks attempts to prove his thesis by first explaining how the language in parts of the book relates to how the Creature is monstrous. He alludes to how the descriptions of nature in Frankenstein are more fearful when the Creature is around. For instance, a terrible storm occurs during the Creature’s creation and the “cold gales” in the icy glaciers of Mont Blanc surround Frankenstein when he meets the Creature for the first time after its creation (Shelly 80). Also commenting on the Creature’s story, Brooks finds that his lack of spoken language and attempt to understand these languages allude to the Enlightenment’s noble savage (594). Brooks then associates the Creature with Satan and many top...
... middle of paper ...
...ttempts to relate many fields to his paper so that even if the reader didn’t know some of the scholars that were cited, the reader could glean the basic idea and then truly understand a section that interested you if you knew about the sources he was using.
Works Cited
Brooks, Peter. "Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts: Language and Monstrosity in Frankenstein." New Literary History 9.3 (1978): 591-605. JSTOR. Web. 15 Oct. 2010. .
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, Walter James Miller, and Harold Bloom. Frankenstein, Or, The Modern Prometheus. New York: New American Library, 2000. Print.
Yale Office of Public Affairs. Humanities and Social Sciences. Yale Professor Peter Brooks Wins Prestigious Mellon Award. Yale University News. Yale University, 16 Jan. 2008. Web. 21 Oct. 2010. .
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: the original 1818 text. 2nd ed. Ed. D.L. Macdonald and Kathleen Scherf. Peterborough: Broadview, 1999.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ed. D.L. Macdonald and Kathleen Scherf. Orchard Park, NY: Broadview Press, 1999.
Works Cited Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein: A Norton Critical Edition. ed. J. Paul Hunter. New York: W. W. Norton, 1996.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is a nineteenth century literary work that delves into the world of science and the plausible outcomes of morally insensitive technological research. Although the novel brings to the forefront several issues about knowledge and sublime nature, the novel mostly explores the psychological and physical journey of two complex characters. While each character exhibits several interesting traits that range from passive and contemplative to rash and impulsive, their most attractive quality is their monstrosity. Their monstrosities, however, differ in the way each of the character’s act and respond to their environment. Throughout Frankenstein, one assumes that Frankenstein’s creation is the true monster. While the creation’s actions are indeed monstrous, one must also realize that his creator, Victor Frankenstein is also a villain. His inconsiderate and selfish acts as well as his passion for science result in the death of his friend and family members and ultimately in his own demise.
Peter Brooks' essay "What Is a Monster" tackles many complex ideas within Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, and the main concept that is the title of the essay itself. What is the definition of a monster, or to be monstrous? Is a monster the classic representation we know, green skin, neck bolts, grunting and groaning? A cartoon wishing to deliver sugary cereal? or someone we dislike so greatly their qualities invade our language and affect our interpretation of their image and physical being? Brooks' essay approaches this question by using Shelley's narrative structure to examine how language, not nature, is mainly accountable for creating the idea of the monstrous body.
Tropp, Martin. “The Monster.” Bloom’s Modern Critical Interpretations: Frankenstein, Updated Edition. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House, 2007. Print.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus, explores the monstrous and destructive affects of obsession, guilt, fate, and man’s attempt to control nature. Victor Frankenstein, the novel’s protagonist and antihero, attempts to transcend the barriers of scientific knowledge and application in creating a life. His determination in bringing to life a dead body consequently renders him ill, both mentally and physically. His endeavors alone consume all his time and effort until he becomes fixated on his success. The reason for his success is perhaps to be considered the greatest scientist ever known, but in his obsessive toil, he loses sight of the ethical motivation of science. His production would ultimately grieve him throughout his life, and the consequences of his undertaking would prove disastrous and deadly. Frankenstein illustrates the creation of a monster both literally and figuratively, and sheds light on the dangers of man’s desire to play God.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, unconsciously adopted a major role in creating a precedent for future monsters. This story has fascinated readers throughout many years. Although now we see Frankenstein as a “classic”, it wasn’t always this way. The novel first introduced the genre of science-fiction to literature. It has been declared as the pioneer of the genre. In modern times, the creature's continued omnipresence is still remarkable.
The individual identified as the monster in Frankenstein demonstrates, through his own problems with understanding and being understood by the world, the importance and power of language on the one hand and of outward appearance on the other. As this essay will show, the novel shows these two factors to have very different functions indeed.
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or; The Modern Prometheus, published in 1818, is a product of its time. Written in a world of social, political, scientific and economic upheaval it highlights human desire to uncover the scientific secrets of our universe, yet also confirms the importance of emotions and individual relationships that define us as human, in contrast to the monstrous. Here we question what is meant by the terms ‘human’ and ‘monstrous’ as defined by the novel. Yet to fully understand how Frankenstein defines these terms we must look to the etymology of them. The novel however, defines the terms through its main characters, through the themes of language, nature versus nurture, forbidden knowledge, and the doppelganger motif. Shelley also shows us, in Frankenstein, that although juxtaposing terms, the monstrous being everything human is not, they are also intertwined, in that you can not have one without the other. There is also an overwhelming desire to know the monstrous, if only temporarily and this calls into question the influence the monstrous has on the human definition.
Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Maurice Hindle. Frankenstein, Or, The Modern Prometheus. London: Penguin, 2003. Print.
Butler, Marilyn. "Frankenstein and Radical Science." Reprinted in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein. Norton Critical Edition. 1993; New York: W. W. Norton, 1996. 302-313.
Mary Shelley’s novel “Frankenstein” is infused with metaphors, revealing the state of the world during 1818 when the first edition was published. Firstly, through the initial dialog between Victor Frankenstein and the monster he created, an image of a repulsive creature is depicted, revealing the destructive relationship possible between a creator and his offspring. Secondly, it can be observed that the metaphor of the monster reveals Shelley’s criticism of the displacement of religion during the era of the enlightenment. Thirdly, Frankenstein can be seen as a condemnation of the treatment given to those with a visible difference within society. Additionally, Shelley’s creation of the monster in her novel could be seen to reveal the toxic effect of a world without female influences. Finally, Victor Frankenstein’s creation of his monster may have been to reveal the detrimental effects isolation can have on any living being. Thus it is revealed that Mary Shelley’s novel, through the creation of the monster, has many allegories to comment on society’s condition.
Mary Shelley in her book Frankenstein addresses numerous themes relevant to the current trends in society during that period. However, the novel has received criticism from numerous authors. This paper discusses Walter Scott’s critical analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein in his Blackwood's Edinburgh Magazine Review of Frankenstein (1818).
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus. Edited with an Introduction and notes by Maurice Hindle. Penguin books, 1992