Category: Blog Assignments

Categories
Blog Assignments

The Power of Abjection

Image result for death

Julia Kristeva’s essay is on the concept of abjection. Abjection means where a person or society casts off an entity or set of entities that it wishes to place outside of the self. The individual or society places it “beyond the scope of the possible the tolerable the thinkable (1). the abject has “only one quality of the object that of being opposed to I.” There are various types of abjection. Kristeva says “food loathing is perhaps the most elementary and most archaic form of abjection.” The ego of the individual expels things which are disgusting away from the self.

We are all born unable to distinguish between ourselves and the outside world. We look at ourselves as being one with our mothers. To establish the self, we need to have some way of distinguishing ourselves from our mother. We form our ego by a series of abjections from things in the world. One of the things we need to expel from ourselves is the idea of death. Corpses are thrust aside by the psyche as something repulsive. When you see something dead, you don’t just understand it as a rational thing, but rather it is something you drive out of your psyche. The confrontation with the corpse is a form of abjection. The corpse represents more than just a rational idea of death. It is something that is thrust out of the psyche.

Kristeva holds that when a person expels something from their consciousness, they put in a realm beyond meaning. Abjection functions in a realm where meaning collapses. It is not just that a person doesn’t think about the abject object. They put it into a realm that is beyond symbolic meaning. There are certain concepts in language that are based on subject and object. In abjection, the distinction between subject and object is lost.

In “Never Let Me Go”, Ishiguro paints a picture of a society that creates clones solely for the purpose of using their body parts to fix people as they get older. These clones are called donors because their sole purpose is the harvesting of their body parts. These clones are looked at as being without souls. As the novel says, “and none of you will be working in supermarkets as I heard you planning the other day. Your lives are set out for you. You’ll become adults, then before you’re old, before you are even middle aged, you will start to donate your vital organs (81). That’s what each of you was created to do.” The clones are looked at as being subhuman. They are the Other. This is a form of abjection for the society at large because the clones have no other purpose than to become donors for the “regular people.”

The clones go to a special school called Hailsham. They are separated from the rest of society. There is a parallel between the clones and how outcast people are looked at in society today. Unfortunate people are not looked at just as people who are less fortunate than the people in regular society. They are looked at as being subhuman. This is in line with Kristeva’s idea that abjection is not just a rational evaluation. It is a type of expelling something from the human ego which is the sense of self.

Both Frankenstein and “Never Let Me Go” have themes of abjection. In Frankenstein, the monster is an outcast because of his grotesque physique. In Never Let Me Go, although the clones are not ostracized because of their physical appearance, they are still considered outcasts because of their position in society. They are only considered to be useful for harvesting their organs. They are not considered to have a soul. Although both were created by man to mimic human beings, they were treated with such animosity and repulsion.

However, Hailsham is not just a storehouse to store clones in. It is a special program that tries to enrich the lives of the clones. The program there tries to locate the humanity in the clones. There is an effort to inspire creativity in the clones. For example, the clones produce art work that is later sold at exhibitions. The art work is inspected to try to see if the clones love some particular person. This was important because the experience of love is a sign of their humanity.

The question is if the society doesn’t value the clones as humans, why does it try to find humanity in the clones? It seems that Ishiguro was trying to portray the ambivalent feelings that the society had about the clones. On the one hand, if society denies the humanity of the clones, then it denies its own humanity. On the other hand, society needs to deny the reality of death and continue to use the clones for body parts. This creates a conflict for the human ego. In psychology, there is a concept called cognitive dissonance. The human mind cannot tolerate contradictions in the way it conceptualizes things. It must adjust its concepts to be harmonious with one another. So, society needed to experiment with whether or not the clones possess humanity, but it came out with the conclusion that they really were not human.

Another question is why the clones accepted their fate so readily that they were going to die from the donations. It is true that they were excited about the possibility of deferral but, for some reason, they didn’t protest their fate to die for organ harvest. It seems to be that Ishiguro uses this story as a metaphor as a way to portray the inevitability of society’s attitude. In other words, in order for society to live, they have to consider the clones to be subhuman otherwise society would fall apart. This is symbolized by the strange acceptance on the part of the clones that they are only valuable for the harvesting of their organs.

To conclude, we see that Ishiguro’s “Never Let Me Go” portrays the concept of abjection throughout his book. The book is about the ambivalence that society feels for the other and the outcast. There are two types of abjection that are contained in Ishiguro’s work. There is the social abjection of the outcast in society and also there is the abjection of death. Society needs to have outcast members to build its ego. Also, the clones are looked at as being something like the walking dead because people are repulsed by them. As Kathy says “Madame never liked us. She’s always been afraid of us. In the way people are afraid of spiders and things” (268).

Discussion Questions

1.Do you think the clones are human?

2.Why did the donors have to die to fulfill their job description? Why couldn’t they donate some of their organs which would allow for their survival?

3.Why is the book called “Never Let Me Go”?

Works Cited

Ishiguro, Kazuo. Never Let Me Go. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2005. Print.

Kristeva, Julia, and Leon S. Roudiez. Powers of Horror: An Essay on Abjection. New York: Columbia University Press, 1982. Print.

 

 

Categories
Blog Assignments

Oryx and Crake, Crakers, and The Uncanny Valley

In parts 12-15 of Oryx and Crake, the story is concluded for us. It bounces back and forth from Snowman’s present to his past memories as Jimmy. It starts off as Snowman is making his way to the dome and remembering how he originally got involved there in the first place. The chapter goes into how he ended up leaving his job at AnooYoo to work with Crake. The job was quite the upgrade as his best friend was in charge and they had millions of dollars in funding. It also gives us the backstory to the Crakers creation and how Crake made them immune to disease, die at 30, and are unable to be racist. He claimed he was trying to create immortality, but we see that it is immortality that fell under his own definition.

We take a tour of Paradice alongside Jimmy and see the backstory of how Crake orchestrated the eventual apocalypse. It also goes into the relationship between Jimmy and Oryx. We see how Jimmy grew so attached to Oryx and how their strange love story develops. Part 12 finishes quite violently at the height of the apocalypse with Crake slitting Oryx’s throat and saying “I’m counting on you”, and Jimmy shooting him. Parts 13-14 go into how Jimmy broke back into Paradice in an attempt to try to heal his wounded foot and his experience letting out the Crakers. He takes whatever is left and basically leads the Crakers into the world, sort of bringing Crake’s dream into fruition.

The book ends in Snowman’s present as he realizes that there are people who still exist. It is two men and a woman, interestingly enough, enough people to potentially repopulate the world. Snowman sees them in the distance and is conflicted about what to do. The part of him that remembers Crake’s words that he’s counting on him wants to kill them. The other part of him just wants to walk away.

The reading of “The Uncanny Valley: The Original Essay by Masahiro Mori” is an essay originally written in Japanese by one of the top professors of robotics talking about our levels of affinity towards robots depending on its human resemblance. It goes into what he defines as the “Uncanny Valley”. Essentially, we as humans can connect with things created that resemble humans in some form. According to his figures, the more something is human-like, the more we connect and like it. For example, we will not feel much connection to an industrial robot. But for a toy robot, that is made to look to have human features like two legs, two hands, and a head, people feel much more affinity for it. However, when something begins to look too human, our affinity for it drops aggressively. This is what he refers to as “The Uncanny Valley”.

One of the examples he uses as an example of the Uncanny Valley is a prosthetic hand. At first you think it is real, but when you reach in to shake it and realize it is fake we are filled with an eerie uncomfortable feeling. This effect is increased with things that are given movement, like moveable prosthetic hands. He talks about how the level of affinity drops when something that isn’t supposed to move, moves, like a prosthetic hand, or when something that should, doesn’t anymore, like a dead body.

Although, I cannot say that I fully agree with all of Mori’s theories of how people react to things that appear too human when they are not, I do think he brings up some valid points. I would personally agree with having an uncomfortable reaction to a robot that appears too human. However, with other things like very human looking prosthetics, I would not feel uncomfortable. I would also imagine many people would not as well. For this reason, his figures seem a little too subjective to me.

The main idea behind his essay is the human reaction that he tries to capture when we think something is human and realize it isn’t. This can connect to many of the readings that we have done in this unit such as Frankenstein or Oryx and Crake. Much like Victor Frankenstein’s reaction to seeing a creature that resembles a human but isn’t, he had an eerie, horrific reaction. In Oryx and Crake, the Crakers are “human-like” creations that can speak and reason but are not human. In his essay, Mori hopes that the future of robotics will include creations that do not fall into the Uncanny Valley. In his essay Mori says: “To illustrate the principle, consider eyeglasses. Eyeglasses do not resemble real eyeballs, but one could say that their design has created a charming pair of new eyes. So we should follow the same principle in designing prosthetic hands. In doing so, instead of pitiful looking realistic hands, stylish ones would likely become fashionable.”

In Oryx and Crake, I think it can be deduced that Crake made his Crakers to not fall into the Uncanny Valley. He did not attempt to make them seem too human. Just with certain human –like aesthetics like green eyes. Their features were designed to be as practical as possible and he did not get too hung up with making them resemble humans as much as possible, only as much as they needed to be. They looked just different enough that they were not human. The bigger question behind this is: Why do humans seem to be so disturbed from something that cosmetically captures what is natural when it really isn’t? Perhaps it tugs on some inner moral compass that we all have that demands what is natural ought to remain natural and what isn’t ought stay on it’s side.

 

 

Discussion questions:

  1. Would humans accept a creation that strongly resembles a human but isn’t?

 

  1. In Oryx and Crake, do you think that the Crakers fall into the Uncanny Valley?

 

  1. Would you prefer to see a prosthetic on someone that looks clearly artificial but stylish, or human-like to the look but not the touch?

 

 

Categories
Blog Assignments

Timothy Morton: Dark Ecology (excerpt)

 

The excerpt from the book ‘Dark Ecology’ by Timothy Morton is a complex, philosophical, often confusing piece about ecological awareness. It is anything but your cookie-cutter environmental diatribe about the evils of capitalism causing global warming.  While capitalism doesn’t get away scot-free, he sees it as more of a symptom than the root cause.  He contends that if capitalism were the cause, “then Soviet and Chinese carbon emissions would have added nothing to global warming”.  The root cause is that humans consider nature a separate entity, as something that can be managed.  This “command and control” approach, as he puts it, can be traced back to the origins of agriculture.

THE ORIGINS OF AGRICULTURE

Morton refers to us as Mesopotamians.  Although agriculture was discovered by different people in different places, this is a reference to the development of agriculture in the Fertile Crescent.  For most of human history, until about 12,000 years ago, humans were nomadic hunter-gatherers.   Learning to grow plants in soil, then harvest and replant them, allowed people to obtain and store large amounts of food, eliminating the need to gather.  Domesticating animals eliminated the need to hunt and this permitted them to stay in the same place.

Now that they no longer had to drag children around for years, until they grew old enough to keep up, they were able to have twice as many children.  Food became abundant and they could sustain a much larger population.  This led to villages, city-states, money, markets, trade routes and the invention of the steam engine to move things from place to place.  The estimated population grew from an estimated 5 million to the 7 billion we have today in only a fraction of the entirety of human existence.  Some historians blame agriculture for setting off the chain of events that led to famine, disease, wealth inequality, sexism, slavery, war and of course, the current predicament of climate change.

 

ENTER THE ANTHROPOCENE

The Sixth Mass Extinction Event: caused by the Anthropocene, caused by humans.  Not dolphins; Not jellyfish; Not coral.

It turns out that things like polluting the air, nuclear waste, industrial wastewater, the use of poisonous agricultural chemicals, the decimation of forests, bodies of water and other systems needed to sustain life in an unending quest to obtain global influence and wealth, are extremely bad for -all- of Earth’s inhabitants.  Morton uses the term ‘Anthropocene’ to describe the current geological time period where humans became a “geophysical force on a planetary scale” who had a substantial impact on Earth’s ecosystems.

Some scholars quibble that this term is too human-centric and hubristic and infers that humans have “godlike powers to shape the planet” or they argue that the term unfairly marks all humans when they believe it is Westerners or Americans who are responsible for climate change.  Morton points out that that “Humans and not dolphins invented steam engines and drilled for oil” and that actual hubris or arrogance is using other lifeforms as prosthetics for agricultural purposes.  He also argues that this cannot simply pawned off on a particular group of humans since it is humans in general who desire environmentally unfriendly things such as air-conditioning.  “Neanderthals would have loved Coca-Cola Zero”, he writes.

 

Morton argues that we will not be able to use science and geoengineering to get out of this, nor can we pollute the planet in a more responsible way.  He writes that the argument: “We have always been terraforming the planet, so let’s do it consciously from now on” is pointless and no more moral than what we’re doing now.  In order to avoid ceding the entire biosphere to big science and technocrats, which would cause an even further impact on the planet, humans are going to have to think of the concept of species differently.  Humankind will have to include the entire planet. We can not live in an “ostensibly privileged place set apart from all other beings”.

Becoming a geophysical force on a planetary scale means that no matter what you think about it, no matter whether you are aware of it or not, there you are, being that.

He maintains that people believe their actions are meaningless, since they cannot possibly pollute the entire planet all by themselves. They don’t mean to harm the Earth as they go about their daily lives.   They presume that a single key turn to start an engine is statistically meaningless, but when you scale up these actions to include “billions and billions of key turnings and coal shovelings, harm to the Earth is precisely what is happening”.  The necessary ecological thought a person needs to inhibit is that “every time I turned my car ignition key I was contributing to global warming and yet was performing actions that were statistically meaningless”.

NOIR

 

“Ecological awareness is that moment at which these narrators find out that they are the tragic criminal”.

Morton claims that we Mesopotamians are both the detective and the criminal.  He compares ecological awareness to noir, a genre of fiction where the protagonist or narrator is also the perpetrator.  Margaret Atwood’s novel also warns us about the dangers of humans believing they exist separate from nature.  In ‘Oryx and Crake’, the story was narrated through the thoughts of Snowman, the last person presumed to be alive in a world decimated by both climate change and a virus created by an out-of-control corporation.  He is also someone who was unwittingly complicit in both releasing the virus and participating in a society that allowed these destructive corporations to thrive.

Although it’s not obvious why anyone would choose him to guide the next generation of Earth’s inhabitants, he was the perfect choice for Margaret Atwood to represent humankind and it’s complacency.  Snowman (Jimmy), was once concerned about the way animals were treated.  He saw them as creatures much like himself and was “confused about who should be able to eat what”.  He also questioned why society valued students of science, but not those who studied humanities.  Jimmy would eventually go along with everyone else and forget about these concerns, frequently eating genetically modified chicken and taking a more prestigious job writing propaganda for one of the scientific corporations running society.  This appears to be a commentary on our current situation by Atwood.

I disagree with some of the Morton’s ideas.  He uses the phrase “the myth of human progress”, insinuating that everything humans have ever done is pointless and should have just went on living like animals.  Humans are self-aware and curious, not simply a bunch of self-destructive animals.  I’m not sure that natural curiosity could ever be contained.  We’re the only species capable of asking questions about our origins and the universe and through science, fill in the missing pieces and find the answers.  We don’t -have- to use science and technology to destroy everything.

I also question why he chose to write something he obviously considers important in a style that is inaccessible to most readers.  The book is full of obscure pop culture references and abstract philosophy concepts which makes me wonder whether he is interested in solving problems or simply pointing them out.  He may want to expand on what an environmentally responsible future looks like.

Questions

  1. Did Crake overlook anything when designing the Crakers or with his plan in general?
  2. Crake stated that he did not believe in God or Nature with a capital ‘N’.  What did he mean?
  3. What warnings do you see from Atwood pertaining to our current climate crisis?

 

Works cited:

Atwood, Margaret. Oryx and Crake. 2003.

Diamond, Jared.  The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race. 2 May 1987,

http://www.sigervanbrabant.be/docs/Diamond.PDF

Morton, Timothy. Dark Ecology: for a Logic of Future Coexistence. Columbia University Press, 2018.

National Geographic. The Development of Agriculture

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/development-of-agriculture/

Categories
Blog Assignments

Toxic Disclosure

TOXIC DISCLOSURE IN THE UNITED STATES

The same way buyers or consumers would like to have good information about what they buy and eat is the same way the government goes around manufacturing companies to ensure that the necessary procedures have been followed to see that the risk of exposure is reduced to a sufficient level not to cause harm to the consumer. In most cases it is the toxic substance produced and released during production is what is monitored to prevent pollution. In other cases, it is required of the manufacturer to give a detailed description of the product he or she is offering and what was done to ensure the success of the product before release to prevent health hazards.  Every country has an empowered board that Oversees this. Like in the United States, the

Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) requires companies to disclose amount of toxic substance released each year. Of course this is required as it helps prevent depletion of the ozone. This is a major step to ensure the reduction of waste and reduce the already kicked of global warming situation of the world. So far in the world today the Petroleum companies have been Known to be one of the highest contributors to global warming due to their excess release of toxic gases. Most of this companies that release a significant amount of toxic waste are unaware of the danger and harm they are causing to the biodiversity of the ecosystem. In such cases, a specific amount of waste should be allowed above which there should be a fine.

With recent advancement aimed to reduce this toxic wastes, there are has been a successful impact on the world’s global Health. Emissions of gases such as carbon dioxide, Sulfur dioxide are very dangerous to the atmosphere. This could result in falling of acid rain. Not only this but there have been several cases of Chemical spills in the United States which have resulted in the death of many.  One instance was that which happened in Bhopal India as a result of chemical spill from a chemical plant that ended up claiming the lives of many. For the purpose to prevent this, TRI was developed for the public scrutiny of some companies that pollute the water we cook with, drink etc. This program creates a good disincentive to pollute. An emergency planning act was established which stated the need to report the amount of toxic chemicals released to the environment every year which the which have been publicly available by the TRI program. The solution to this was announced by EPA (environmental protection agency) which permits companies to use shorter, less detailed forms to report little quantities of stubborn or non-transient bio accumulative toxins that are harmful at low levels along with the release of chemicals stipulated by the TRI up to 2000 pounds.

Instead of going back or slowly withdrawing from public disclosure, it would be better to continue with the success of the TRI program. This exposure approach applies to not only to the conservative economist who very well believe that the toxic information that has been disclosed can help promote consumer or citizens as a whole, empowerment and as well encourage firms to reduce harmful activities. Adhering to these instructions by the TRI and EPA comes from the ill-desire to be viewed as a negative company by targeted consumers or citizens (in other words, to avoid a negative public view), including reducing the trust of the people on the company. TRI is cost effective. They impose a minor cost on industries so that they adhere to the program. They do not determine how the companies minimize cost but as long as they do not release excess toxic chemicals, they are good. TRI promotes democratic decisions by helping citizens to be more aware on their stand with regulated entities. EPI on the other hand spends less budget implementing their programs. Both arms have the same aims and are very effective in carrying out their work. This country is ours, we should try to do our best to make the country better for us. For one it is not better when too much toxic chemicals are released to the environment.

 

Questions

  • What’s your take on the recent activity of toxic disclosure?
  • What do you feel as citizens can be done to help the TRI program to see it’s full implementation?
  • Do you think the recent advancement has helped the world and it’s environment?
Categories
Blog Assignments

Ihab Hassan, “Prometheus as Performer: Toward a Post humanist Culture?”

Prometheus as Performer: Toward a Posthumanist Culture? The Georgia Review

The article presented five different scenes with each wearing various masks in what is called a fiction or myth. Each scene has different actors describing their individual perspective as regards Prometheus and the posthumanism in the context of the universe. They considered man from the perspective of his sub consciousness and the relationship between man and the universe. They strove to ascertain the limit of man with respect to the continuity or the discontinuity of the universe at large. The article is full of several questions some of which were answered within the various scenes that characterized the story while others remained unanswered probably due to the fiction being portrayed about man. Since the article is about Prometheus and posthumanism, it is necessary for us to understand the meaning of these terms as portrayed by the article.

“Prometheus” is said to be a Titan according to myths by the Greek, who was reputed for being a trickster who in the process gave human race the gift of fire and metal work skill which resulted into being punished by Zeus by assigning an eagle to eat his liver and chained him to a rock (Cartwright, 2013; Hansen, 2005. p. 310). Furthermore, he was referred to as someone who is highly intellectual and had a foresight thus championed the battle between the Titans and the Olympian gods led by Zeus to gain dominance of the heavens and switched sides during the battle owing to his double-sidedness (Cartwright, 2013)

Back to the article, it was said that his double nature was theological, political and epistemological (page 832). Post humanism however in simple terms refers to the existence of things beyond or after human. The five different scenes have something in common as regards the way they viewed the human mind or sub consciousness with the universe bearing in mind the myths therein. We see a statement as “marriage between earth and sky” on page 835 as the foreshowing of Prometheus being an expression of one of his attributes mentioned earlier within the second paragraph. This article also challenged the Titan beyond his achievements in the past thus pushing the universe beyond what it appears to be in the present. It suggested that Prometheus should harness the limitless tricks and intellectual abilities by channelling it to benefit mankind beyond time because posthumanism is hinged on this. We see a statement to back this up:

“As for you, Mythotext I must tell you this. Prometheus may be a vague metaphor of a mind struggling with the One and the Many. Yet, I prefer to view his struggle in narrower perspective. His mind is where Imagination and Science, Myth and Technology, Language and Number sometimes meet. Or put it both prophetically and archetypically: Prometheus presages the marriage of Earth and Sky. Only then, perhaps, will post humanism see the dubious light of a new day” (page 835).

The idea behind this article is to examine the mind of a common man as that of Prometheus. Several questions were raised in the different scenes by the characters within the story all tending towards what will become of universe. All along the article, Prometheus was depicted as the one responsible for the existence of the way earth and the activities within the earth are performed and that man is exactly the aspect of his performance which will keep changing.  A statement to back the aforementioned states thus:

“Prometheus is our performer. He performs Space and Time; he performs Desire. He Suffers. We ourselves that performance; we perform and performed every moment. We are the pain or play of the Human, which will not remain human. We are both Earth and Sky, Water and Fire. We are the changing form of Desire. Everything changes, and nothing, not even Death, can tire” (page 850)

Although, the article did not deny that there were several versions to the history of the Prometheus, it gave attention to the most familiar of all the stories. For example in this statement we see this clearly stated which reads thus, “Prometheus, son of Lapetus, Titan turncoat and trickster. There are many versions of his stories, but the main outlines are familiar” (page 832). The feature that is also a very serious concern in Prometheus is that of fire which was linked to the imagination. The narrators lets us know in this article that for us to be satisfied beyond now, we must desire to experience better what we do now. In other words, for the ingenuity of posthumanism culture, we must explore beyond time and space what we see presently and that this can only be a product of our imagination or thought which will form what speaks for the universe as a whole since it constitutes “a one and a many” as mentioned on page 832. The key therefore to understanding posthumanism was hidden in the idea of changing attributes of human which can be exemplified in this quote thus, “We need to first understand that the human form-including human desire and all its external representations-may be changing radically, and thus must be re-visioned. We need to understand that five hundred years of humanism may be coming to an end, as humanism transforms itself into something that we must helplessly call posthumanism” (page 843).

The article explores the contributions of many scholars who are passionate about the human life on the earth as a whole and complete entity meaningful enough to thrive. This includes the works of philosophers, poets, scientists and mystics (page 833).

 

QUESTIONS

What is the usefulness of the attributes of Prometheus to mankind?

What are the similarities between Prometheus and Posthumanists?

Can there be a comprehension of the universe? How and in what ways?

REFERENCES

Cartwright, Mark. “Prometheus.” Ancient History Encyclopedia. Ancient History Encyclopedia, 20 Apr 2013. Web. 06 May 2018

Hassan, Ihab. “Prometheus as Performer: Toward a Posthumanist Culture?” The Georgia Review, vol. 31, no. 4, 1977, pp. 830–850. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/41397536.

William Hansen, Classical Mythology: A Guide to the Mythical World of the Greeks and Romans (Oxford University Press, 2005), pp. 32, 48–50, 69–73, 93, 96, 102–104, 140; as trickster figure, p. 310.

Categories
Blog Assignments

Anne Stiles, “Robert Louis Stevenson’s Jekyll and Hyde and the Double Brain

Robert Louis Stevenson had first read a paper in a French scientific journal about sub-consciousness, and this is believed to be the first source of where he got his inspiration to write Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. He then co-wrote a play about a town councilor who became a secret criminal at nighttime. This led to his famous novella. What is interesting is that Robert Louis Stevenson claims he had actually never heard of a case of a person with multiple personalities before writing his book. This information seems untruthful. There have been several case studies about people with multiple personalities, including a soldier who established two different personalities after his left cerebral hemisphere was impaired by a gunshot wound. The theory of the double brain is the concept that is portrayed throughout Jekyll and Hyde and is most likely the main scientific component for Stevenson’s inspiration. Multiple personalities were only a concept of discussion in the time that Robertson wrote his novella, not a clinical problem yet.

TWO BRAINS?

The dual brain theory was discussed throughout the nineteenth century postulated that there are actually two independent brains that function in different ways. The left hemisphere was associated with masculinity, reason and linguistic ability while the right brain was considered the feminine aspect of emotions, instincts, and the unconscious. Hyde resembles the right part of the brain: madness, emotion, femininity, and animalistic. Victorian scientists often argue that dual or multiple personality disorders, or other forms of insanity, resulted from an over-enlarged right brain overpowering the rational activities of the left-brain. The right hemisphere only dominated the brains of women, savages, children, criminals and the insane. Jekyll and Hyde creates the idea that the brain sometimes doesn’t only have one dominant side. In this case, Jekyll uses much of his left hemisphere and then changes to the right hemisphere dramatically, which creates asymmetry that indicates corruption and mental illness.

Since the dual-brain theory suggests that two brains work individually for balance, this questions whether people were not simply whole beings, but balancing pieces between two opposing natures in a being.

“…even if I could rightly be said to be either, it was only because I was radically both;”

But if the mind during this era was understood at the time to be a balance between both rational and irrational, what was Stevenson’s view on Dr. Jekyll? It’s possibly a very severe imbalance with the “two brains”. There is a clear distinction of appearance and actions between Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. The link between the explanation of mental disorder in the Victorian Era and the dissimilarity between Jekyll and Hyde’s identities is apparent.

Stiles talks about two patients in specific that have dual or multiple personality disorder, Félida X. and Segeant F. Félida X. is compared to Jekyll in her “young, light and happy” personality. A similarity between Jekyll and the two patients is the way their personalities transform. Félida X. experiences sharp pains and becomes unconscious before she turns to another state. Sergeant F. experiences uneasiness and a dull pain in the head. As Jekyll takes the powder and transforms into Hyde, his symptoms are as said in the novella:

“a qualm…a horrid nausea and the most deadly shuddering. These passed away, and left me faint”.

Sergeant F.’s second personality resembles Hyde because he has animalistic, abnormal qualities. Stevenson decides not to use a woman as the protagonist because it makes the story more edgy. Hyde is a violent, sexual predator, rather than a weak, fallen woman.

There are fascinating connections between the fictional Jekyll and Hyde and Proctor’s scientific case studies. Stevenson also purposely makes a male protagonist to create an irony, because apparently in the middle of the nineteenth century, a majority of psychiatric patients in asylums were women. This was a century where the “madness” or “crazy” side of the brain was feminine, and the side of the brain that had reason and understanding was considered masculine. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde can be read as a critique of some of the nineteenth century’s most respected assumptions about the diagnosis and grouping of medical subjects.

STRANGE CASES

When reading the title The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, the words “strange case” gives the audience an impression that what they are reading is a scientific case study. Jekyll and Hyde is considered a Gothic case study. An analyst suggests that Gothic “horror fiction has a generic obligation to evoke fear or suggest mystery,” whereas “science… attempts to contain fear and offer a rational explanation for all phenomena.” Stiles briefly compares Jekyll and Hyde to a few other gothic writes, including Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. I have found that there are actually a few similarities between Frankenstein and Jekyll and Hyde. As an addition to their gothic themes, the stories are essentially quite similar in themselves when you think about it. Both main characters are scientists who have a thirst for knowledge and are willing to exceed human limitations. While both Frankenstein and Jekyll had strong curiosity, their initial reactions to their discoveries were different. Frankenstein’s reaction was the abandonment and disgust of the creature he produced, and Jekyll was so intrigued with his potion that he had to see how far he could take this experiment. Both stories ended in many deaths and the inevitable destruction of the protagonists.

“WHICH BRAIN ARE YOU?’

Reading this article shows me a better understanding of the scientific theories back then. I can see how sexism did play a big role. Women were known to be empathetic while men were known to be analytical. Today, there are still theories out there that the two sides of the brain work differently, although gender isn’t really involved. Now, people would just wonder what type of person they are according to which side of the brain they use dominantly. Have you ever heard that left-brained people are more logical and analytical while right-brained people are creative and artistic? Even I am guilty of taking an online quiz on Buzzfeed or some other social media website to discover if I am “right-brained” or “left-brained”. While the two sides of the brain do work differently in some ways, research now would say that someone’s personality doesn’t depend on the functions of the two sides of the brain. All humans use their entire brain equally.

 

Discussion Questions:

Do you think the novella suffers without any female characters? What would be different about a female protagonist?

What are your thoughts on the dual-brain theory in the Victorian Era, compared to theories about the brain today?

After learning about the dual-brain theory, do you see a different meaning in Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde? Why or why not?

 

Sources

“Why the Left-Brain Right-Brain Myth Will Probably Never Die.” Psychology Today, Sussex Publishers, www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/brain-myths/201206/why-the-left-brain-right-brain-myth-will-probably-never-die.

Stevenson, Robert Louis. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde.

Wanjek, Christopher. “Left Brain vs. Right: It’s a Myth, Research Finds.” LiveScience, Purch, 3 Sept. 2013, www.livescience.com/39373-left-brain-right-brain-myth.html.

 

Categories
Blog Assignments

Vladimir Nabokov on Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde; “A Phenomenon of Style”

A PHENOMENON OF STYLE

In the essay “Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde,” Vladimir Nabokov critiques and analyzes the novel “The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde” written by Robert Louis Stevenson. The essay begins with Nabokov’s demand for people to abandon any preconceived, superficial understanding of Jekyll and Hyde they may have in order to appreciate the artistry that is illustrated in the novel. Nabokov argues that Jekyll and Hyde is more than the “bogey story” Stevenson exclaimed it be and it fails as the detective novel that some consider it. He emphasized instead that Stevenson’s writing of Jekyll and Hyde was “its own special enchantment if we regard it as a phenomenon of style.” Nabokov reinforces his claim by explaining the writing style of Jekyll and Hyde as closer to poetry than to fiction which is rare for a horror story written in the Victorian Era. He insists that the artistry of Stevenson’s writing distinguished Jekyll and Hyde from other Victorian literature without necessarily meaning to. To support this, he includes a quote expressing that Stevenson’s artistic purpose of Jekyll and Hyde was (to make) “a fantastic drama pass in the presence of plain and sensible men.” This quote refers to the plain and sensible people of the Victorian period. Nabokov asserts that Stevenson had to rely heavily on style to overcome the problems that may have been encountered when writing the story.

The Victorian Era attributed to the difficulties Nabokov claims Stevenson had to master to make the story realistic. These problems included making a magic potion plausible and making Jekyll’s evil a believable evil before and after his transformation. Nabokov notes that Stevenson efficiently attempted to conquer these difficulties by having two, ordinary but intelligent individuals such as Utterson and Enfield narrate the story before revealing Dr. Jekyll’s point of view. Establishing two logical observations of “Hyde” solidified the reality of a human monster. Nabokov also discussed how Stevenson setting the story in London and regularly referencing common characteristics of the city constructed a plausible environment for the fictional story to take place. Nabokov claims that the stable narration and relatable setting influenced how the story was to be interpreted as realistically frightening rather than mythical.

Nabokov states:

            “The question that must be asked of the work is whether Utterson and the fog and the cabs and the     pale butler are more ‘real’ than the weird experiments and unmentionable adventures of Jekyll and Hyde.”

Nabokov confidently obliterated three popular inclinations of Jekyll and Hyde. First, Nabokov believed that Dr. Jekyll as himself was not entirely good-but actually a mixture of both good and evil. Next, he states that when Jekyll consumes the potion, he does not transform into Hyde but instead Hyde emerges from Jekyll like a parasite that lives within him. Nabokov explains that this reference manifests in the physical size of Hyde being smaller than Jekyll, showing that the evil that makes up Hyde is smaller than the greater good of Jekyll. Nabokov concludes that there is a three-personality theory of Jekyll and Hyde which demonstrates how Stevenson made Jekyll’s evil apparent before and after his transformation. The three personalities of Jekyll included Jekyll, Hyde and the residue of Jekyll that exists when Hyde is active.

VICTORIAN ERA INFLUENCE

Nabokov discussed the effect that the Victorian Era had on the foundation of the story. He contemplates Stevenson refraining from describing Jekyll’s hidden desires in the first part of the book and referring to Jekyll’s home as “Black Mail House.” He questions what Stevenson’s writing would’ve included if he went further than the era allowed. Nabokov agreed with other critics such as Stephen Gwynn who also considered the Victorian Era responsible for several reasons why the story was written the way it was.

Nabokov quotes Gwynn:

               “Working as he did under Victorian restrictions,’ and not wishing to bring colours into the story alien to its monkish pattern, consciously refrained from placing a painted feminine mask upon the secret pleasures in which Jekyll indulged.”

It is beneficial to understand the climate that the story of Jekyll and Hyde was written in as the story emerges in 1885, almost directly in the middle of the Victorian Era of the United Kingdom. The Victorian Era lasted around 65 years and the society was known for having strict morals regarding family, education and work ethic. The Victorian Era had a Code of Conduct which guided principles and expectations. This code reflected in the literature resulting to include traces of romanticism combined with themes of realism and hard work. This suggests that a code of conduct existing in the time and place of Dr. Jekyll may not have been a coincidence but actually inspiration. For instance, Stevenson chose for Jekyll to specifically live in SoHo, London which was known as one of the worst parts of London in the Victorian Era. A doctor living in such a grim environment generated the foundation of good verse evil that is the essence of the story.

It can’t be said for sure if a code of conduct is what inspired Stevenson but it cannot be ignored as corrupt morals seem to encourage Jekyll to create Hyde. Dr. Jekyll feels the pressure of Victorian society to behave appropriately which weighs him down. From this pressure, emerges Hyde, who allows Jekyll to blow of stem. Hyde encompasses taboo ideations of someone living in Victorian society. The story of an honorable man exerting evil impulses was captivating in a period where society was expected to behave graciously.

CREATING A MONSTER WITH STYLE

In questioning where Stevenson’s writing would have gone if it weren’t for the Victorian Era, Nabokov compares him to other Victorians such as Tolstoy, who he also believes did not go far in pushing the limits of their work. What Nabokov does not do, is compare Stevenson’s style of writing to similar literature from other eras. One obviously similar piece being “Frankenstein” which was written 70 years prior in the Regency Era by Mary Shelley. Two similar and extremely famous storylines written in two different eras is intriguing, but what is more intriguing is the stark difference in the portrayal of the two stories which Nabokov was reluctant to emphasize when analyzing the reason for Stevenson’s style of narration.

The style of narration could be considered one of the biggest differences in the two stories. Jekyll and Hyde was narrated by unbiased sources for a large portion of the book while Frankenstein was narrated by Victor, the creature’s creator for a large part. Although the narration differs, the most trusted narrator in each story is portrayed almost the same. In Jekyll and Hyde, Stevenson takes the time to describe Utterson as “tolerant” and “inclined to help rather than to prove.” This establishes a liking for Utterson and a sense of trust in his opinion. In Frankenstein, Shelley had Robert Walton’s letters narrate the beginning and end of the story. Walton contrasted the un-stability present in Victor, giving the audience a more trustworthy character to depict the events. Both, Shelley and Stevenson took their respective audience into account when choosing how to present their stories. Nabokov brought up that Stevenson was concerned about what leaves a lasting impression on an audience, and I wonder if he took note from the impact of Frankenstein. Two prominent stories written in different eras establishes the notion that as much as humans and art progress over time, the themes that stimulate society remain consistent.

Robert Louis Stevenson’s Jekyll and Hyde shows that transformation of literature may have more to do with the evolution of the audience than the art. This is where Nabokov failed to give Stevenson enough credit for creating a conflicting story in the Victorian period. Such a storyline was risky and could have been ridiculed and deemed outlandish or too racy. However, the wide acceptance of Stevenson’s chosen portrayal of Jekyll and Hyde proved that even pretentious Victorians entertained the frightening idea that they too have the power to become pure evil.

Robert Louis Stevenson, 1885

Questions:

  1. Is Dr. Jekyll a good man?
  2. If Jekyll and Hyde were written today, would it be as famous as it was in 1885?
  3. Does the style of narration effect how the story is interpreted?

Works Cited-

-Stevenson, Robert Louis, and Katherine Linehan. Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde: an

                 Authoritative Text, Backgrounds and Contexts, Performance Adaptations,   Criticism. Norton, 2003.

– Stevenson, Robert Louis. The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Aerie Books Ltd.

-“Victorian Era Code of Conduct.” Victorian Era Life in England. Victorians Society & Daily Life 

                www.victorian-era.org/victorian-era-code-of-conduct.html.

 

 

Categories
Blog Assignments

Mary Shelley On Ghost, Robert Mitchell’s Suspended animation, Slow Time, and the Poetics of Trance.

Robert Mitchell’s Suspended Animation, Slow Time, and the Poetics of Trance talks about how during the time of the Romantic era literature had a high demand for suspense from readers which they called “willing suspension of disbelief”.  This concept was known as a phase of “undoubtedly the single most famous critical formulation in all of English Literature”. Authors like the poet Coleridge’s type of suspension was in the form of disbelief but he was also interested in another form called suspended animation. Suspended animation was created in the late eighteenth century. It was described to convince medical readers that individuals who have apparently drowned might still be alive also known as a condition we would call a coma like state. This term of suspended animation was quickly used by medical and literary authors. Throughout this reading Robert Mitchell talks about how this form of writing called suspended animation was also prevalent in many different pieces of literature such as Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, and Roger Dodsworth: The Reanimated Englishman. An example of how it was prevalent in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein was when Creature tries to “restore animation” to a small girl who has drowned in a river.

Mary Shelley’s On Ghosts shows how she responds to the lack of mystery and suspense in stories during the period. She shows this by describing several ghost stories that happened to different people. In this story, Mary Shelley asks a question to her readers on whether people in society believe in ghost or not. She explains that it is easy not to believe in the possibility of ghosts during the day time where there is light but during the times for example midnight in a house with curtains moving and a dusky passageway while reading about the Bleeding Nun there is no denying the possibility of ghost existing in society. As the story goes on Mary Shelley describes how she personally has never seen or encountered a ghost but describes different accounts of incidents where people have believed to have encountered them. For example when Mary Shelley describes the event of when Angelo Mengaldo saw a headless ghost. He describes the ghost as one of his companions who killed themselves after falling in love with a women who did not love him back.

Usually when stories are categorized as ghost stories there is an element of suspense or of a dark somewhat eerie setting. Mary Shelley’s On Ghost is an interesting example of what a typical ghost story would be like with a little bit of a twist to it.

Robert Michelle’s Suspended animation and Mary Shelley’s On Ghost are both related very closely with each other. Robert Michelle’s Suspended animation talks about the origins of how the literary element of suspense was created and how it evolved throughout the years. Mary Shelley’s On Ghost is about the different forms of ghost stories she has heard about or have encountered.

Queastions:

  1. Do you think suspense is an important element in literature even to this day?
  2. Do you believe that the demand of suspense in literature during the time was what made Mary Shelley want to write about ghost?
  3. Why do you think suspended animation became so popular during this time?
Categories
Blog Assignments

Crusades Against Frost: Frankenstein, Polar Ice and Climate Change in 1818

 

                                   

Leading Up to‘The Year Without Summer’ 

     Northern Europe during the early nineteenth century (~1790-1830) encountered severe issues of climate change, where global temperatures reached a periodically low point, below that of normal. The highly explosive eruption of mount Tambora caused after effects of volcanic debris and dust which blocked the sun from hitting earth’s surface; “triggering what H.H Lamb calls one of the greatest world disasters associated with the climate”(227). The ’empire of ice’ by 1816 had conquered the minds of the Britons, releasing their fear of climate change. The debate over climate change came down to the many questions about geoengineering; Should humans intervene with nature?  

By the beginning of the nineteenth century, the indication that climate change took place was agreed upon, but the cause was unknown. The debate started with polar ice being a sole factor in which the climatic temperatures were changing drastically, and society believed that to combat those temperatures they must all take part in agricultural improvements. Moving forward though, many started to believe that agricultural improvements instead was the “cause of climate deterioration” (Carroll, 215). In 1818 climate change still produced major social and political fears in Europe, mostly because the cause of this was still marked as unknown. In Frankenstein’s introduction, we hear from Walton who reads us letters he wrote to his sister while exploring the Arctic climate. In his travel letters, Walton mentions the “Arctic wind” which sets the stage for the entire book to follow. He also sets an example for many Europeans that seek the scientific discovery of the poles, showing them that the icy climate could be extremely dangerous. The Arctic wind mentioned here also plays a huge role in the controversy described in ‘Crusades Against Frost’ where the publics anxieties had stemmed from this ‘cold breeze’ that drifted through all northern Europe. One side of this debate believed that the ‘cold breeze’ was caused by the melting of the ice caps. When the ice caps melt, it causes the water to become colder, thus creating a colder breeze.  

Siobhan Carroll in ‘Crusades Against Frost: Frankenstein, Polar Ice and Climate Change in 1818 explores the sciences that dealt with the phenomena of the Earth’s climate and its drastic environmental changes by reviewing quarterly articles written by John Barrow. John Barrow wrote articles in the Quarterly Review expressing his curiosity and need, to endure on an Arctic exploration. Barrow resided within the British government and told the public that there was no need for government action. His articles were to raise awareness to the controversy regarding climate change. Barrow helped finance the governments arctic expedition for the sole purpose of exploration. In “Erasmus Darwin’s ‘The Botanic Garden’ (1791) it has been stated that humans could delay the apocalyptic cooling of the globe, and perhaps forge a new cosmopolitan utopia, by uniting to destroy Arctic Ice”(Carroll, 212). Erasmus Darwin, unlike Barrow, shared his opinions about the danger of the climate change, making it known that something must be done. Darwin suggested in The Botanic Garden (1791) that to combat the icy climate, all European governments must work together. He believed that it was the duty of a man to destroy the icebergs and claimed that every country should exist as one in the fight against nature. Darwin fought for the “actual implementation of geoengineering schemes” (Carroll, 219).


   The Era of Frankenstein 

     Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein could potentially be written as a reaction to human interference with nature. She writes this tale of a scientist whose greatest dream is to conquer the world of science where the limit of knowledge is unknown to mankind. Victors curiosity about discovering the secret of life lead to his downfall, where his creation ends up destroying him, and his entire world. Here, Shelley could be imitating that you get what you give, implying that human interference with nature could go one of two ways. Many believed that the climate within England had been changing, but the cause of this change posed the major question and debate. Europe’s fight against climate change had some believing that “agriculture improvement combated the dominion of frost” while others believed that “Britain’s modifications of local natures were the cause of climate deterioration.” The debate on human intervention within the natural world, along with ‘the year without a summer’ had many writers and theorists revising their previous work which before, was pro-intervene, whereas now they note that nature is not a force to be reckoned with. For example, Percey Bysshe Shelley was one to notice the “strange weather across the northern hemisphere in 1816”, causing him to change his thoughts on geoengineering and the human power to improve global climate change.  

In Volume I of Frankenstein, we are introduced to the young Victor Frankenstein, and we watch his love and curiosity for science grow; “In other studies, you go as far as others have gone before you, and there is nothing more to know; but in a scientific pursuit there is a continual food for discovery and wonder”(Shelley, 30). In chapter four we analyze the creation of this monster that turns Victor’s dream into a nightmare. Here we can picture the sight of this horrifying monster, because once created, Victor runs away with utter disgust. We don’t come across the monster again until page 50, where Victor returns home to mourn the loss of his brother. At the sight of his brother’s murder the monster appears, and here Victor learns the capabilities of his creation. In both instances here, Shelley uses a storm to capture the moments before the monster returns to his creator, what could that imply? The effect of nature is used throughout Victors downfall, relating to the relapses he encounters between the different stages of his depression. Nature places an emphasis on the romantic period in which the novel was written.  

Victors constant neglect on his creation allows for the monster to feel as if he rejected from human society; especially when in Volume II, we hear the monsters story. As the reader we come to empathize with the monster because we watch the rejection that it encounters as he ventures out into society after being neglected by his creator. In these chapters we watch the monster develop many skills involving the use of his senses. His daily secret encounter with the DeLacey’s helps him learn how to speak and eventually read as well. In his hovel, he learns all about society and what the relationship between a creator and his creation should be, thus learning what he really is, turning him against society. Since there is no one in the world who cares for him, the monster turns to Victor and asks him to make him happy, where he relates himself to the biblical Adam, as well as the fallen angel from Milton’s Paradise Lost. These references play a role in the monster’s fate from when he was brought to life, to his downfall feeling hated and sinned against by his creator. The monster asks for a mate, so he can feel love and affection, Victor argues with himself and the monster on the development of a new creation and ends up giving in only because he thinks it will get rid of his reoccurring nightmare. 

The monster created within Frankenstein is sought out to be many things since first introduced to the public 200 years ago. My supplemental article reviewed the science behind climate change in 1818, the same year that Shelley wrote the novel Frankenstein. Both the novel and my supplemental article show a relationship between human nature and society, and throughout the book we follow the monster, and watch him grow based on the knowledge he gains from human interaction. The monster represents both the best and worst of human nature and mankind. The best when he is nourished and loved, and the worst when he is rejected and failed. When the monster came across rejection he described the same gloomy weather that Europe encountered around the year 1816; “Nature decayed around me, and the sun became heatless; rain and snow poured around me; mighty rivers were frozen; the surface of Earth was hard and chill and bare, and I found no shelter”(Shelley, 114). Frankenstein explores the nature of improvement found within science where Victor intervenes and reverses death, while my supplemental article explores the role of science behind climate change regarding the future of humans and nature. Romantic writers viewed climate change as something bigger than the present world they were living in. The empire of science and the ‘year without summer’ raised many debates regarding human intervention and the reverse of decay on our planet.  

 Discussion Questions: 

1) Why do you think Shelley uses a ‘storm’ to indicate the warning that Victor will soon run into his creation? 

 

2) Do you believe that human nature can successfully intervene and alter climate change? 

 

3) What role do you believe nature plays within Frankenstein? 

 

 

Works cited:

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, 1797-1851. Frankenstein, Or, The Modern Prometheus : the 1818 Text. Oxford ; New York :Oxford University Press, 1998.

Siobhan Carroll (2013) Crusades Against Frost: Frankenstein, Polar Ice, and Climate Change in 1818, European Romantic Review, 24:2, 211-230, DOI: 10.1080/10509585.2013.766402

 

Categories
Blog Assignments

Mary Poovey, “‘My Hideous Progeny’: The Lady and the Monster”

In ‘My Hideous Progeny’: The Lady and the Monster, Mary Poovey analyzes Mary Shelley’s career as a writer and personal life behind her gothic masterpiece – Frankenstein. Poovey’s writing largely deals with the concept of egotism and imagination and how these affect Shelley’s works and characters. Poovey also argues that Shelley constantly faced the battle between the urge to create and the anxiety of meeting the “prevalent social expectations that a woman conforms to the conventional feminine model of propriety.” To support her argument, Poovey analyzes the differences between the first edition (1818) and the second edition (1831) of Frankenstein, not only to bring clarity to some stranger changes, but to understand Shelley’s career transition in those years.

Victor Frankenstein

Even though Shelley claimed that she didn’t want to change any portion of the story or introduce any new ideas or circumstances, she made significant changes to the main character – Victor Frankenstein. In both 1818 and 1838 editions, Victor Frankenstein appears as an egotistic and self-assertive protagonist who ruins his life and people around him, but Shelley changed the origin of Victor’s creative urge in later editions. Poovey describes that, in the 1818 edition, Victor is driven by his innate desire and imaginative activity and believes that “his desire to conquer death through science is fundamentally unselfish and that he can be his own guardian.” But for Shelley, desire must be regulated by domestic relationships because it can protect oneself from the external world. Shelly suggested “as long as domestic relationship govern one’s energy, desire will turn outward as love”. Victor abandons his home to pursue his desire in both editions, but domestic relationships present as an option for him in the 1818 edition.

In the 1838 revision, Shelley depicted Victor as the “helpless pawn of a predetermined ‘destiny’, of a fate that is given, not made”. Because Victor’s destiny is doomed, he is powerless and helpless to change his fate. He must leave his family to create the monster. Shelley wrote, “such a man has virtually no control over his destiny and that he is therefore to be pitied rather than condemned”.

The monster

In the monster’s narrative, Shelley indented to make the monster a symbol of the consequence of Frankenstein’s self-assertion. Animating the monster gives Victor Frankenstein’s imagination a physical form. It fulfills Victor’s innate desire, but eventually destroys his domestic relationship while the monster kills his family and friend. Poovey also argues that the monster seems simply the agent of Victor’s desire, but it also presents to be a “Godwinian critique of social injustice.” The monster’s story becomes “a symbolic extension of her comment on the ego’s monstrosity, an inside glimpse of the pathos of the human condition.”

Mary Shelley

Poovey also makes the point that we cannot understand Mary Shelley as a writer without considering her as a person. Mary Shelley was the daughter of two prominent people, William Godwin and Mary Wollstonecraft, then the wife of Percy Shelly. “Shelley was encouraged from her youth to fulfill the Romantic model of the artist, to prove herself by means of her pen and her imagination.” According to Poovey, Shelley constantly felt the pressure to be something great and as Shelley herself put it, she was “Nursed and fed with love of glory.” Shelley’s stepsister Claire Clairmont once wryly remarked, “in our family, if you cannot write an epic poem or novel, that by its originality knocks all other novels on the head, you are a despicable creature, not worth acknowledging.” Shelley faced not only the pressure to be “original” with her writing, but the pressure to meet societal expectation that a woman should be self-effacing and supportive to her family rather than to a career. Caught between these two models, Shelley developed a pervasive personal and artistic ambivalence toward feminine self-assertion.

The first edition of Frankenstein was published in 1818, when Shelley was just twenty. Even though people were praising the work’s power and stylistic vigor, they also criticized its inappropriate subject and lack of a moral, which was an essential during that time. One of the first reviewers commented “Our taste and our judgment alike revolt at this kind of writing, and the greater the ability with which it may be executed the worse it is—it inculcates no lesson of conduct, manners, or morality.” Some of the critics even assumed the author of Frankenstein to be a man who is no doubt a follower of Godwin.

Later, in the introduction of 1831, Shelley felt guilty about her “frightful” transgression and apologized for her adolescent audacity. The primary purpose of 1831 introduction was to explain and defend the audacity of what now seems blasphemy. Shelley claimed, “How I, then a young girl, came to think of, and to dilate upon, so very hideous an idea?” In the 1831 edition, Shelley wanted to assure her reader that she was no long the “defiant, self-assertive girl who, lacing proper humility, once dared to seek fame and to explore the intricacies of desire”. Shelley also claimed to be “very averse to bringing herself forward in print”. While Shelley continued to write, her work became less subversive and her characters became more meek, domestic, and feminine. She subjected her characters to pain and loneliness. This allowed her to achieve both social approval and her desire to prove herself worthy of her parents and Percy Shelley.

Discussion questions:

  • What is the effect of a series of first person narratives in the book?
  • Do you agree that there is a lack of moral in Frankenstein? If no, what is the moral of this book?
  • At the end of the Volume two, the monster asks Frankenstein to create a woman creature for him. Does Frankenstein have the duty to do that?