Thursday, August 30, 2012
"The Reading Monster" by Patrick Brantlinger
1. Brantlinger claims that Frankenstein can be considered a political novel in some aspects. The novel was published only a couple decades after the French Revolution and the Enlightenment in Europe. Brantlinger believes that Victor Frankenstein can represent aristocratic oppression of the Ancien Regime. Likewise, the monster is a representation of the working-class. With these comparisons in mind, Victor can be seen as the powerful aristocracy overpowering the poor, in this case, the monster.
2. Frankenstein is a novel evaluating education, or rather "miseducations" in regards to science and literature. Both are very prevalent in the novel; Victor is constantly pursuing knowledge, in particular science. Brantlinger evaluates Mary Shelley portrayal of science -- she expresses the transformation from alchemy to modern science. Brantlinger claims that in the novel it is unclear as to whether the monster's creation is contributed to science or "black magic."
Literature is a very important aspect in the monster's life. Through his self-taught education by his accidental exposure to literature and his exposure to the family, he able to gain not only literacy, but human reason. Brantlinger does acknowledge that may be difficult for readers to accept the monster's literacy. Regardless, the monster's desire to join the family is similar to Victor's desire to obtain scientific glory, both of which fail in their pursuits.
3. Brantlinger also acknowledges the confusion about the monster's identity. The majority of those not familiar with novel assume that monster's name is that of his creator's. Although this is a shorter point in Brantlinger's essay, it still brings up an interesting point... why has the monster taken on the name Frankenstein? He believes that "because the monster is nameless, it makes sense to give him his father-maker's name." Brantlinger claims that the monster can be a representation of Victor's identity, or possibly Victor's alter-ego.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Spot on for three key points in this piece by Brantlinger. I wrote about the same three points in my blog. Very interesting information acknowledging the confusion about the monster's identity. I think that Brantlinger didn't mention the fact that many people probably have not even read the novel; they therefore follow what is common, regarding the Monster's identity as Frankenstein himself.
ReplyDeleteYour #3 stood out to me the most when reading the article because of how interesting it was that Victor put so much of his time and energy into creating this creature, but failed at creating an original name for the monster. You would think the opposite. But taking on "Frankenstein" can be, in a different way, understood by the reader because of Victor's arrogance and ego.
ReplyDeleteJust like I said to Jackson and Hannah, it really is obvious you read and understood this passage that I may, or may not, have read. I think you bring some interesting thoughts and perspectives to this criticism to the table.
ReplyDelete