Examples Of Scapegoat In Frankenstein

Firstly, a scapegoat is defined as “One who is blamed or punished for the sins of others” (OED). In biblical scripture, the goat symbolises and stands for evil, with lambs being sacrificial beasts (Kearney 28). Rene Girard: “any community that has fallen prey to violence or has been stricken by some overwhelming catastrophe hurls itself blindly into the search for a scapegoat” (qtd in Sørensen 19). Additionally, in agreement with Sørensen, there is a rationale behind an individual making someone or something a scapegoat, which the writer views as a defence mechanism: “a safety valve used to rid our mind of the anxieties that can be eliminated with the destruction of the monster” (Sørensen 19-20). This idea that these scholars refer to is highly

evident in all three Gothic texts, but especially Shelley’s Frankenstein and Stoker’s Dracula. Christopher Craft’s view on monsters asserts that monsters are the cause of destruction. However, there is a psychological tendency to scapegoat monsters when there can be good monsters or bad monsters. This can be said for Frankenstein’s creature as he feels guilt and remorse for the murders he has committed, indicating he has humanity and emotions. Moreover, it is difficult to argue this case for Dracula as he does not feel any guilt over his perverse actions, but rejoices in them. This can also be said for Ambrosio near the conclusion of The Monk he accepts his actions and surrenders to Satan. According to Richard Rankin Russell, “Gothic monstrosity becomes a sort of national scapegoat” (117). This is so as the monster represents a social and political pandemic that society blames for the fall or destruction of societal normalities. For example, in Dracula characters such as Jonathan and Van Helsing blame Dracula for their anxious feelings of perversity. Therefore, they use Dracula as a scapegoat.
Furthermore, the use of monsters as scapegoats further emphasises their ‘Otherness’ within societal constructions.

Therefore, what makes an individual a scapegoat, whether they are a human, a monster or both is their ‘Otherness’ or their inability to fit in fundamentally. For example, in relation to Frankenstein, it is important to note that the creature uses Justine, Frankenstein’s servant as a scapegoat to cover up the fact that he murdered Frankenstein’s brother, William. He does so by placing a photograph that William was carrying in her pocket. This works in the creature’s advantage as Justine falsely admits to committing the crime because she fears sin. “I did confess; but I confessed a lie. I confesses, that I might obtain absolution; but now that falsehood lies heavier at my heart that all my other sins. The God of heaven forgive me!” (Shelley 66). Justine also acts as Frankenstein’s scapegoat. This is so as he knows that she did not murder his brother. However, this works in his favour as it covers Frankenstein’s secret that he created the creature. In a sense, it could be argued that the creature acts as Frankenstein’s scapegoat. Though the creature committed evil crimes, he is doing so to gain the attention of his creator. Frankenstein lacks the authority to take responsibility for his creature and his actions. Therefore, he lets the creature be his scapegoat. In relation to The Monk, Ambrosio demonstrates a duality within his own self. This is so as he

segregates his leadership as a pious and praised monk and his perverse and sexual nature as a demonising criminal. Therefore, it could be argued that his duality as the criminal is his scapegoat. This is evident as his evil and immoral side lets him act out perversely without tarnishing his reputation as a monk.
As it has been stated previously, anxiety and perversion is caused by the actions of the monster, but not the monster itself. The monster cannot help his or her actions because it is in their make up to act the way they act. The animalistic qualities of monsters have sexual connotations, which cause anxiety in society. This is because the characters or civilians do not know how to cope with perversity. Therefore, coping with the sexual perversity of the monster causes the characters to be sexually anxious and to act out perversely unwillingly. This is exemplified throughout all three Gothic texts. Firstly, in The Monk, Ambrosio copes with Matilda’s perversity and his lack of belonging or identity by relieving himself from sin and giving into his perverse and desires for Antonia. This occurs when he visits Antonia and her mother (Lewis 261-63). However, as the text progresses, Ambrosio no longer uses perversity to cope with his anxiety and guilt as he adsorbs the powers of witchcraft and sells himself to the devil (Lewis 274-73). At this stage of the text, it could be argued that Ambrosio has lost all remorse and sympathy from the reader. More specifically, it could be argued that the characters in the text struggle with sexual desires because of the Catholic setting of the monastery and well as the relegations it enforces. For example, the nun Agnes is punished by the Prioress, the head of the nunnery because she submitted to the sexual actions of Raymond. “This law decreed, that the Offender should be plunged into a private dungeon” (Lewis 351). Therefore, to cope with the enclosure of their sexuality, they submit to it. As a result, their sexuality has a perverse nature because it has never been explored before. Additionally, Agnes further exemplifies that sexual actions are seen as monstrous. This is evident as the Prioress calls Agnes a “disgrace to the Convent” and a “monster” because of her anti-Catholic perversity (Lewis 353).
It is clear in Dracula that new technological advancements are used to cope with the perversity and anxiety that Dracula creates.

As it has been established by Mighall, Jonathan’s sexual and perverse writings of his experience in Dracula’s castle are to compensate for and explain the high level of anxiety as well as to contain it one place: “eroticizes the monstrous to contain it or explain it? Writing up his accounts of how he thinks monsters should be represented. He dwells on the sexual, transforming the supernatural into ‘an erotic spectacle’” (Mighall 228-9). Dracula represents larger political and social issues such as the fear and anxiety of reverse colonialism as well as the collapse of the British Empire. He further symbolises the collapse of patriarchal society with the New Woman idea. Count Dracula serves “as a reminder to Britain of the undesirable “diversity” of Eastern nations” (Gelder 11). Stoker presents Britain’s view on the foreign and unknown through Jonathan Harker’s perspective. At the beginning of the text, he notes in his journal: “It seems to me that the further east you go to the more unpunctual are the trains. What ought they to be in China?” (Stoker 2). However, it could be argued that Dracula views the modern world as monstrous and perverse. This is evident as Van Helsing and his group are trying to destroy his existence with the help of new technologies. Therefore, technology is monstrous as it is taking over the person as well as outsmarts

humanity. As a result, Dracula is coping with the world’s advancement by invading and ceasing it through his sharp bite.
In relation to Frankenstein, Frankenstein copes with the terror of his creature by ignoring it. It must be noted that the creature is the product of reason, but becomes a monster in the moral sense. This is because it is abandoned by an “irresponsible science” (Botting 164). Despite his moral inability to cope with the result of his dangerous knowledge, Frankenstein’s search to discover the secrets of life and death in matter is emphatically presented as heroic (Levine 33). However, it could be argued that Frankenstein does not take responsibility for the creature until it is too late. Therefore, Frankenstein is a giver that creates but also destructs, which parallels with Prometheus as he was both a giver of both creation and destruction (Johnson 61). It is evident in the text that Frankenstein is overwhelmed and filled with anxiety after creating the creature. To cope he falls asleep and enters a dream like state: "I thought I saw Elizabeth, in the bloom of health...I embraced her, but as 1 imprinted the first kiss on her lips, they became livid with the hue of death;...and I thought that I held the corpse of my dead mother in my arms; a shroud enveloped her form, and I saw the grave-worms crawling in the folds of the flannel. I started from my sleep with horror" (Stoker 34). His mother’s death whilst nursing Elizabeth parallels with Elizabeth’s death contracted by the creature. It emphasises Frankenstein’s lack of need of Elizabeth as he created a new life form without Elizabeth’s reproductive aid. This section of the text introduces perversity amongst the feelings of anxiety as death parallels with the sexuality and beauty of the woman. As well as that, there is a supernatural element to Frankenstein’s dream as Elizabeth dies in a perverse environment.