Comparing Shelley's Purity And Danger

Society is formed around monsters. Whether it is acknowledged or not, monsters shape the world’s perception – the world’s views on right and wrong. Without monsters, there would be no limits, bounds, or guidelines for the decent and indecent, the good and bad. Monsters, whatever their literal forms, are considered a stain on society – something “bad” to be covered up, cleaned up, or disposed of – like dirt.

Mary Douglas discusses dirt in both a literal and metaphorical sense in her book Purity and Danger: An Analysis on the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. When bodily boundaries are crossed, it can be seen as wrong, or “dirty.” Douglas speaks of four kinds of social pollution, beginning with external but minor infringements on society and

broadening to major levels that stem from within a single body and spread to influence society as a whole (Douglas 123-124). Negative perceptions of these breaches of our boundaries stem from the fact that many people are simply xenophobic – they fear and shun the unknown – and crossing personal boundaries falls into the realm of the foreign and unknown. The extent of the “dirt” caused by violations of boundaries is determined by the level of “social pollution” (Douglas 123), and the effects of the pollution are felt throughout society as a whole, as “the body is a model that can stand for any bounded system” (Douglas 116) – any aspect of our civilization.
The fist danger, or pollution, is “pressing on external boundaries” (Douglas 123), presumably from another source. It is an infringement of one’s limits, but it is generally common, so it is something society as a whole learns to deal with. Because of how common it is, this kind of danger tends to go ignored, which simply creates the opportunity for more “dirt” and pollution, for the longer a “mess” is ignored, the more significant it becomes. This first kind of pollution may be thought of in terms of a theft. If someone were to steal something from a private citizen, they would be violating that person’s boundaries and taking something. This action is something that causes discomfort for the citizen, but it is something that can be overcome and eventually forgotten.
The second danger, “transgressing the internal lines of the system” (Douglas 123), is more notable, because it causes disorder from within. It is putting pressure on the foundations of the system, which can cause instability. This instability, however, can sometimes go unnoticed. Following the crime metaphor, the second kind of pollution would be an infringement on a wider range of people. For instance, the hacker group “Anonymous” reveals private information to the public, causing uproar, but not in an extreme level. There are sometimes protests, but these events never make an impact on a national scale. These somewhat minor transgressions may go unnoticed and lead to more stark offenses, which then lead to the third kind of pollution.
The third danger, which stems from the “margins of the lines” (Douglas 124), is even more dangerous than the first two, as it comes from the margins, from the “in-between” areas that may be unclear. When the origin of a danger is unknown, it can cause those affected to be more vulnerable, and it prevents the riddance of the danger. For example, terrorist groups such as ISIS, Al Qaeda, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Irish Republican Army cause extreme disorder amongst nations and societies. Each of these extremist organizations plan and launch attacks at random times and sometimes in random locations. These attacks cause the third danger – constant fear of the unknown – and leads to the fourth and final type of pollution.
The last form of pollution, “internal contradiction” (Douglas 124), is perhaps the most significant. It indicates a kind of internal corruption, be it moral or otherwise, that can impact not only the individual but also the society. It is the dirtiest form of pollution, as it comes not only from within, but it also comes from outer influences that cause the discrepancies in one’s own mind. Internal contradiction within a single body can cause societal disruption, and contradiction within a societal body, a “bounded system” (Douglas 116), can cause chaos. Internal contradiction may be internal within a person, nation, or even the world. Within a nation, the fourth kind of pollution would be something like a civil war. On a global scale, the fourth pollution would be a world war.
David Carroll references Mary Douglas’ theories on dirt and pollution in his “Pollution, Defilement, and the Art of Composition”. However, Carroll refers to the “pollutions” as behaviors instead of states, or as actions rather than consequences. These behaviors are responses to infringements on the borders of the system and the familiar, and result in corruption of society (Carroll). Monsters are created and born to warn society about and prevent these “pollution behaviors”, each monster acting as a cautionary tale, sometimes literally (Carroll).
Jeffrey Cohen’s fifth thesis in his analysis “Monster Culture (Seven Theses),” is “The Monster Polices the Borders of the Possible” (Cohen 12). He discusses how monsters in classic literature and lore lose their humanity, especially when the monsters are “shape shifters,” like werewolves (Cohen 13). The loss of humanity, mercy, and conscious parallels the breaching of borders, both physical and metaphorical. Cohen’s fifth thesis suggests that monsters are lessons, taught to warn us against the kinds of perils Douglas discusses in Purity and Danger: An Analysis on the Concepts of Pollution and Taboo. The monster symbolizes what society is taught not to be – “transgressive, too sexual, perversely erotic, a lawbreaker” (Cohen 16). It is the result of the borders crossed, of pollution, and this has proved true for centuries. As early as the Middle Ages, monsters have stood as warnings. According to Dorothy Yamamoto’s “Deformed Discourse: The Function of the Monster in Mediaeval Thought and Literature”, monsters are treated as a method of “purging the mind of…temptations”, even citing saints and classic heroes like Oedipus and Sir Gawain as examples.
Minor actions or breaches in the boundaries of society lead to more severe breaches that produce monsters. Such monsters include Frankenstein’s monster – or Frankenstein himself depending on one’s definition of “monster” - and classic creatures such as the Sirens from Homer’s The Odyssey.
In Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Victor Frankenstein attempts to “play God” by creating a man.

As A.D. Nuttall summarizes in his “Ethics, Evil, and Fiction”, Frankenstein is “the story of a scientist subjected to a gnostic temptation” (Nuttall). While this almost sounds as though Frankenstein is motivated by religious reasons, he is in fact merely obsessed with the idea of creating life. He claims his experiments are for the betterment of mankind, but his arrogance is later revealed in his statement “a new species would bless me as its creator and source; many happy and excellent natures would owe their being to me” (Shelley 54). This statement shows that he is actually in pursuit of glory, worship, and/or recognition – like a god. He is unable to attain this reverence from the people around him, so he resorts to making his own people. Of course, his attempts at a new species backfire, and his creation comes to resent him, just as he resents his creation. Ultimately, both Frankenstein and his creation die, ending their seemingly endless agony, which is inspired by the other’s existence. The true monster – the “human” Frankenstein – in his endeavor for praise, inflicts harm and suffering on his creation. Frankenstein’s attempt to gain recognition results in the opposite of what he wants – resentment rather than worship. The inhumanity of Frankenstein’s actions shows that seeking commendation is detrimental to one’s surroundings and one should never try to alter the natural

processes of life. Frankenstein crosses the line between what man creates and what “God” creates, resulting in a new creature that is deemed a monster by all those who encounter it. In reality, Frankenstein is the monster, as he breaches the border of what is considered possible as he was overcome by “intellectual temptation” (Nuttall).
The Sirens have long stood as a representation of the moral predicaments faced by society. They also show that monsters are not necessarily ugly or hideous. As the Bible states in Corinthians 11:14, “Satan himself masquerades as an angel of light” (Bible Hub), and Satan is, of course, the epitome of what society is taught not to be. If the worst monster of all is capable of hiding behind beauty and goodness, “lesser” monsters likely can as well. The Sirens have been described by Ovid in Metamorphoses and more famously by Homer in his famous epic, The Odyssey. They lure men to their deaths with their beautiful songs and sometimes with their beautiful forms – because even the fiercest monster may appear as “an angel of light” (Bible Hub). In The Odyssey, it is said of the Sirens that “if any one unwarily draws in too close and hears the singing of the Sirens, his wife and children will never welcome him home again, for they sit in a green field and warble him to death with the sweetness of their song” (Homer Book XII). Odysseus commands his men to tie him to the mast and stuff their ears with wax so that he might hear the Sirens’ song. Despite his pleas, they refuse to untie him. The Sirens sing, “he who listens will go on his way not only charmed, but wiser” (Homer Book XII), though all know “he who listens” will simply go on his way to death.
It has been speculated that the Sirens are cannibals or that they are simply unable to provide sustenance for their guests/hostages and they starve to death while listening to the Sirens’ songs.

Either way, they represent the temptations of the world. According to B. Pauline Nugent in her in her essay “The Sound of Sirens”, the Sirens sing of knowledge, and “to be Greek was to seek to know”, so naturally Odysseus would be attracted to the Sirens’ songs (Nugent). Thus, the songs of the Sirens are meant to lure men by appealing to their thirst for knowledge – a temptation that is still relevant today. As Nugent states, the Sirens “emulate the BBC World Service of the 21st century”, as they sate man’s desire to know of the entire world and its happenings (Nugent). The wants of humans have obviously changed very little over time, and this is proven through the relevance of centuries old monsters that were created as a lesson to those who lived long

ago.
The Sirens also act as a metaphor for those adulterous members of society. For centuries, men have left their families and women have left their men cuckolded. As insinuated in The Odyssey, if a person is lured by the Sirens (or, in real life terms, cheats on one’s partner) the person’s spouse and children will not welcome them home again. Renata Salecl’s article “The Sirens and Feminine 'Jouissance’” discusses the role of the Sirens in society as indicators of danger and disruption in social relationships. According to Salecl, “The Sirens present danger to particular men's lives while also presenting a challenge to the social order as such, especially the family structure” (Salecl). The Sirens pose a threat to “traditional” family life, or traditional society, and thus stand past the line of what is socially acceptable, and if one should venture past the line, they too will become a monster.
Monsters are stains on society. They are everything we are taught not to be: “Do not infringe on the bounds of nature.” “Do not commit adultery.” “Do not be tempted.” Those who fail to adhere to these rules are considered monsters – dirt. Dirt, be it literal or metaphorical, builds in layers, much like the different levels of pollution that are defined by Douglas. As stated in Douglas’ Purity and Danger: An Analysis of the Concepts of Pollution and the Taboo, “dirt is essentially disorder” (Douglas 2), and it creates chaos and bedlam wherever it accumulates – on bodies or within societies. Monsters are society’s way of teaching us to stay clean.