Who Is Mary Shelley's Frankenstein?

1502 Words4 Pages

Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, at its most simplistic level, tells the story of Victor Frankenstein and his creation. Through adaptations in many different mediums, the creature is often incorrectly referred to as “Frankenstein” by the general public. Despite this misnomer, the creature having a name is never present within the text, and brings forth an interesting look into the conscious choice both by Mary Shelley as an author, as well as Victor Frankenstein as a character. In Shelley’s case, her choice not to give the creature a name at any point serves a metaphorical purpose, emphasizing the ostracization of the creature from its surroundings. With Frankenstein, the act of not naming his creation serves to detach him from them and dehumanize …show more content…

The simple act of naming undeniably creates an immediate bond between the namer and the named, to omit this is Shelley’s way of showing Victor’s rejection of his creation. “Names signify the essence of being human as they encompass our unique identities and ultimately define us as individuals.” (Strid, 8) Presuming that Shelley understands the cultural importance of names it becomes easy to understand the decision to make the creature nameless. The creature is representative of outcasts, and Victor is representative of the typical bourgeois society. Viewing the text with this dynamic established allows the reader to engage with the specific rhetoric used by Frankenstein when talking to or about his creation and apply it to broader themes presented within the text. The “othering” of the creature, in the context of its namelessness, reflects real-world ostracization that marginalized groups face. Whether this was specifically intended by Shelley or not is not as important, but its significance in the characterization of the creature is undoubtable. Frankenstein never naming his creation is a deliberate act of …show more content…

The specific names that Frankenstein refers to the creature include words like “daemon” and “monster” which suggests something more supernatural. “The signifier monster constructs an ultimate Other, the natural antagonist to everything human, good, and familiar.” (Strid, 4) It is an interesting distinction due to the ‘science’ that Frankenstein utilized to create the creature in the first place. The immediate association of the unknown to evil again ties into the dehumanization that the creature is representative of. The creature is not inherently evil, but has suffered at the hands of those above him to a degree that has permanently tarnished any trust there may have been in this relationship. “When I looked around, I saw and heard none like me. Was I then a monster, a blot upon the earth, from which all men fled, and whom all men disowned?” (Shelley, 111) In this line the creature discusses their internal state, and the struggle they are going through. The concept of an individual’s singularity in the context of their identity, compared to those around them, is on full display within the

Open Document