Aspects

of

Social

Criticism

in

Mary

Frankenstein; or, the Modern Prometheus

Hausarbeit als Abschlussprfung des Methodenmoduls

zum Seminar 19th Century Women Writers
Dozent: Dr. Friedrich-K. Unterweg

Bachelorstudiengang
Anglistik und Amerikanistik
der Heinrich-Heine-Universitt Dsseldorf

Vorgelegt von
Sonja Littmann
Elbruchstrae 4,
40589 Dsseldorf
0211-29361375
Matr.-Nr. 2097451
Sonja.Littmann@hhu.de
BA Anglistik KF, 3. Semester

Shelley's

Table of Contents

I.

Introduction

II.

Feminist criticism in Frankenstein

III.

1.

Definition of literary feminist criticism

2.

Depiction of women in Romantic literature

3.

Division of gender roles

4.

Devaluation of female sexuality

Ethical and socio-political criticism

1.

Perception of the creature

2.

Social order

10

3.

Class selection

11

IV.

Conclusion

13

V.

Works Cited

14

I. Introduction
Although Mary Shelley's novel Frankenstein, or the Modern Prometheus was published
almost two hundred years ago, the novel is highly relevant still today. The ethical issues
raised in Frankenstein, such as creating life artificially, are much discussed in school
lessons and made directors create a great variety of film adaptions. Based on the claim
that Frankenstein is a product of criticism, not a work of literature1, this research paper
attempts to examine the novel for two subsets of social criticism, namely feminist and
socio-political criticism.
Therefore, feminist criticism and its different branches will be defined, followed
by an overview of the literary situation regarding gender in the Romantic Period. A
closer look into the novel will be taken by analysing the consequences that result from
the strict division of sex roles and the denial of female sexuality in the Frankenstein
society. Secondly, three decisive socio-political points will be analysed, which are the
figures reactions to the monster, the social order and class selection.
The paper at hand wants to prove that Mary Shelley implied her criticism covertly
rather than overtly, by narrating that the oppressive social systems in Frankenstein lead
the characters into disaster.

Fred Botting, ed., Frankenstein/Mary Shelley. New York: St. Martin's, 1995, p. 1.

II. Feminist criticism in Frankenstein

1. Definition of literary feminist criticism
In general, feminist critics question the representation and the role of women in literature
as well as the use of language as a tool of classifying gender. Furthermore, women's
literary works are reread to work out women's experiences. Two main branches are important: the Anglo-American and the French critics.
The Anglo-American critics state that women have different views on the world
than men. Thus, they read and write differently. These views on the world result from the
roles that Western societies have forced upon women and men2. They cal l themselves
resisting readers3 who examine those techniques in literary works that make the
reader accustom him- or herself to the role expectations that society imposes on the
sexes. As a possible solution, the Anglo-American critics emphasize texts which show a
different, in their opinion better, dealing with gender identity.
French feminist critics concentrate more on language. In their opinion, the ways of
writing and language in general are predominated by men. This situation neglects and
often deliberately omits women's points of views. Therefore, women should invent their
own language, l'criture feminine, a special feminine form of language that is based on
female subjectivity and the physiology and bodily instincts of women.4
Moreover, women should not be regarded as the other as described in the binary
opposition system. The French critics postulate that the Other -the female- must be resituated, not in opposition but within.5 Women must not be objectified.
These two branches of feminist criticism are both represented in Frankenstein.

Cp. Anne K. Mellor, On Romanticism and Feminism. In: Anne K. Mellor (ed.), Romanticism and
Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1988, p. 3.
3
Judith Fetterley, The Resisting Reader: A feminist Approach to American fiction. Bloomington: Indiana
UP, 1978.
4
Diane Long Hoeveler, Frankenstein, Feminism, and Literary Theory. In: The Cambridge Companion to
Mary Shelley. Cambridge, England: Cambridge UP, 2003, p. 45.
5
Mellor, On Romanticism and Feminism, p. 5.
2

2. Depiction of women in Romantic literature

In general, the predominance in education, publishing and reviewing was in the hands
of men in the Romantic Period, which lasted from 1780 till 1832 in England. Mary Shelley had to publish her novel anonymously because it would not have been accepted otherwise and she had it reviewed by her husband, Percy Bysshe Shelley. However, in the
time, a new tradition arose. Male writers began to imply female features in their works
which was probably because the literacy rate among women increased. These features
were taken from the authors' experiences with their mothers. Women were regarded as
passive, quasi-natural objects, objectified as the other and made property by the male
subject.6 In other words, women were depicted as sensible beings with a sense for
nature and intuition.
This can be seen in Frankenstein, too. Elizabeth Lavenza is described as a saintly
soul []. Her smile, her soft voice and the sweet glance of her celestial eyes were ever
there to bless and animate us.7 She is fascinated by the sublime shapes of the mountains; the change of the seasons.8 She is even given to Victor as a present and Victor
consequently objectifies her: I received [her] as made to a possession of my own.9
French critics see an oppression of women by maintaining patriarchal structures through
the use of language here. Mary Shelley also criticises this oppression, but she does not
criticise overtly. Women writers in the Romantic Period struggled against the prejudice
of being nothing more than a sensible, nature-related object, because if women were
valued for natural, intuitive feeling, so were children and idiots10. They wanted to
show their common sense. Mary Shelley uses Victor Frankenstein's lack of common
sense as a device of showing her common sense. Victor as a well-educated man is extremely interested in achieving scientific insights. However, when he fulfils his aim to
create life, he lacks the common sense to educate his creature which leads to several
catastrophes and the downfall of the whole Frankenstein family.

Alan Richardson, Romanticism and the Colonization of the Feminine. In: Romanticism and Feminism
(1988), p. 13.
7
Mary Shelley. Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Ditzingen: Reclam, 2013, p. 62. Hereafter referred to as Frankenstein.
8
Frankenstein, p. 58.
9
Ibid.
10
Mary Jacobus, The Buried Letter: Feminism and Romanticism in Villette. In: Women Writing and
Writing about Women. London: Croom Helm, 1979, p. 58.

3. Division of gender roles

In the nineteenth-century Romantic society and thus also in the novel, there was a strict
division of gender roles. Work was separated into two areas: the domestic work at home
represented by women and the work in public, outside the house, represented by men.
In Frankenstein, the female figures function as housewives, babysitters, nurses or servants. Elizabeth does not even have a special task, she is kept as a kind of pet.11 In
contrast, the male figures have their work place away from home, as merchants, scientists or explorers. When Elizabeth is not permitted to travel to England with Victor, she
regrets this possibility of broadening her horizon. The Anglo-American feminist critic
Anne K. Mellor evaluates this situation as a division of emotional from intellectual
work: As a consequence of this sexual division of labour, masculine work is kept
outside of the domestic realm; hence intellectual activity is segregated from emotional
activity.12 This strict segregation leads to Victor's egoism and his inability of taking
responsibility and having empathy. For instance, he separates his scientific work from
his family, not only spatially but also emotionally:

[...] but my eyes were insensible to the charms of nature. And the same feelings
which made me neglect the scenes around me caused me also to forget those
friends who were so many miles absent.13
Because of his emotionless state, Victor cannot feel love for his creature. He curses and
abandons it which eventually results in chaos and destruction. The other way round, the
women fail to function in public14. Justine Moritz is falsely accused of having murdered
William, but she is not able to defend herself:
I know [] how heavily and fatally this one circumstance weighs against me, but
I have no power of explaining it; [] it might have been placed in my pocket. But
here I am also checked. I believe that I have no enemy on earth, and none surely
would have been so wicked as to destroy me wantonly.15
The creature had put a portray that William had taken with him on the murder night into
Justine's pocket to throw suspicion on her. Although Justine knows that she is innocent,

Cp. Anne K. Mellor, Possessing Nature. The Female in Frankenstein. In: Romanticism and Feminism
(1988), p. 221.
12
Mellor, Possessing Nature, p. 221.
13
Frankenstein, p. 89.
14
Cp. Mellor, Possessing Nature, p. 221.
15
Frankenstein, p. 133.
11

she excludes the only possible, rational solution that the murderer deliberately put the
picture in her pocket, because she relies on her feelings that tell her that no one could be
this malicious rather than using her intellect. With these two fatal examples, Mary Shelley criticises the segregation of intellectual activity from emotional activity. Women
should be represented in the public sphere and men should spend time at home so that a
balance is created. This is can be seen as a forerunner of later feminist criticism which
demands the possibility for women to have a professional career rather than the obligation to stay at home as housewives.

4. Devaluation of female sexuality

The key process in Frankenstein is Victor giving birth to a kind of human being without
a female womb. By doing this, he flouts the laws of nature. Bearing children is an innate
function and prerogative of women. Moreover, Victor decides against creating a female
creature. Thus, he intends to create a patriarchal environment that consciously omits
women and consists only of men as women are not needed any longer. The fact that all
three narrators in the novel are male underlines this point. Since Victor's procreation develops to become the murder of Victor's whole family, Mary Shelley specifically portrays the consequences of a social construction of gender that values the male above the
female.16
If women are omitted in the procreation process, their sexuality is denied at the
same time. In fact, no hints of female sexuality can be found in the novel. Victor and
Elizabeth consider each other to be cousins, Felix and Safie who love each other appear
only in chaste family situations and Victor has his closest relations to men, namely Clerval, Walton and the creature. Many critics judge these relations as homosexual and therefore as further proof of the denial of female sexuality in Frankenstein.
The most important scene that actually reveals the basic fear of female desire is
the one in which Victor destroys the woman creature that he had promised to his monster.
He begins to create it, but then becomes aware of the possibility that she could have a
will of her own and hence, she would not accept the male creature as her companion.
Victor fears that she could have desires and opinions that cannot be controlled by the

16

Frankenstein, p. 133.

male creature17 and furthermore, she would probably be able to bear children. This imagination of a race of devils18terrifies Victor and again, female sexuality is eliminated
since he destroys her unfinished body in a most violent way: trembling with passion [I]
tore to pieces the thing on which I was engaged19. Thus, Victor restores male control
over the female creature who might have threatened the male supremacy with her uncontrolled female desires. The degree of violence that he exercises on her body underlines
the oppression of women and especially of their sexual desires. The remains of the halffinished creature, whom I had destroyed, lay scattered on the floor, and I almost felt as
if I had mangled the living flesh of a human being.20
Mary Shelley reveals and criticises the patriarchal Romantic society she lived in
that denied women their sexuality. Anne K. Mellor states:

Uninhibited female sexual experience threatens the very foundation of patriarchal

power: the establishment of patrilineal kinship networks together with the transmission of both status and property by inheritance entailed upon a male line.21

17

Frankenstein, p. 225.
Ibid.
19
Ibid.
20
Ibid., p. 261.
21
Mellor, Possessing Nature, p. 225.
18

III. Ethical and socio-political criticism

1. Perception of the creature
The creature that Victor Frankenstein made can neither be classified as a human being,
nor as an animal. The figures in the novel perceive him as something that has not been
seen before, he is the first and only representative of his species. And from the very
beginning on, they judge him as evil although they do not know his character traits. This
behaviour is probably based on the traditional Christian belief that everyone is evil from
birth on. However, the creature thinks that the human mind is innately good which follows the ideas of the philosophers Rousseau and Condorcet.22 Thus, the creature rates
himself good, too. Not until he sees his face for the first time does he realise why others
reject him:
[H]ow was I terrified, when I viewed myself in a transparent pool! [] and when I
became fully convinced that I was in reality the monster that I am, I was filled with
the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification.23
The reaction to the monster is continuously rude and violent. He is being attacked several
times. A concept that adds to this harsh rejection is the physiognomy theory which was
widely spread in the late eighteenth century. It states that the outward appearance is determined by character, meaning that for instance a vicious soul would produce a repulsive
appearance. On the other hand, another theory was known at the time, namely the phrenological theory. It claims that the contours of the skull determines character and moral
nature24.
Mary Shelley was opposed to these unjust ways of judging people from their physical appearance. She displays the moral consequences of our ways of reading or seeing
the world, [] of imposing meanings on that which we cannot truly know25.

Cp. Anne K. Mellor, Making a Monster. In: The Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley. Cambridge,
England: Cambridge UP, 2003, p. 20.
23
Frankenstein, p. 177.
24
Mellor, Making a Monster, p. 21.
25
Ibid., p. 22.
22

2. Social order
In Frankenstein, several social classes are represented which constitute the social order.
The monster does not fit into a class, he is called a savage inhabitant of some undiscovered island26. Because of the fact that his father and everybody else reject him, he does
not have any community that he belongs to. He is excluded from society and thus represents the dispossessed27. The monster is deeply shocked when he becomes aware of
his status and the constant refusals that he has to face embitter him. In consequence, an
evil side develops in his soul which had originally been good, sympathetic and devoted,
especially towards the De Lacey family. It is the unjust society that turns him into a
monster, excluded from any social community.
A very low class is represented by the Orkney Islanders. Victor describes them
appraisingly: the senses of the cottagers [had] been benumbed by want and squalid poverty28.
The Frankenstein family is a member of the aristocratic upper class. Victor describes his family origins: My ancestors had been for many years counsellors and syndics; and my father filled several public situations with honour and reputation29.Three
women were adopted to the family: Caroline, Elizabeth and Justine. Elizabeth and Justine
are saved from poor rural living standards in low-class families, selected by Alphonse
and Caroline, so that they manage to rise in social status. The conditions for their selection may be called superficial and unfair. They were chosen because of their fair skin
colour and beautiful looks: she [] bloomed in her rude abode among dark-leaved
brambles30. Nevertheless, Justine remains in a servant position in the Frankenstein
house. Furthermore, she is accused of ingratitude towards her benefactors when the trial
against her begins. A public lynch mentality rises. Belonging to the Frankenstein house
turns out to be fatal for Justine and Elizabeth. Both die and thus, the social order is reestablished.

26

Frankenstein, p. 40.
Anca Vlasopolos, Frankensteins Hidden Skeleton: The Psycho-Politics of Oppression. In: Science
Fiction Studies. 10.2, 1983, p. 130.
28
Frankenstein, p. 252.
29
Ibid., p. 51.
30
Ibid., p. 57.

27

10

3. Class selection
The upper class in Frankenstein is constantly working on maintaining itself and its power
by class selection. This is most successful by marrying within the same class. In the case
of the Frankensteins this means incest:
In Frankenstein, class selection- and, implicitly, rejection- is practiced as a form of
aristocratic protectionism that encourages, in fact engineers, incest among the wellborn.31
Victor had promised his mother to marry Elizabeth on her dying bed. Moreover, Elizabeth
should replace her as the mother of their younger brothers and sisters. Victor considers
her to be his sister, they have the same mother and Elizabeth becomes the mother of their
siblings. Victor is afraid of this incestuous process. Although he praises Elizabeth's lovely
spirit and the happiness she brings to his home, he is not in love with her. After his
promise, he leaves the family for two years. He is constantly avoiding his union with
Elizabeth. This fear of incest eventually leads to the creation of the monster as Victor
wants to procreate without Elizabeth and due to his promise cannot unify with another
woman.
Class selection takes place outside the family, too. For instance, Henry Clerval, son
of a merchant, is actually below Victor's status. Nevertheless, Victor excuses his roots,
because he is good-looking, has fine manners and does not occupy himself with merchant
issues but with liberal arts. Also Robert Walton, the seafarer to whom Victor tells his story,
complains that he has no friend of his intellectual and social status: I have no one near
me, gentle yet courageous, possessed of a cultivated as well as of a capacious mind32.
The consequence of incest and other tools of class selection is the collapse of the
Frankenstein family:
The link thus created refers to the original patterns of class selection and suggests
the fatal consequences of preservation at such cost. While Victor creates the
monster out of an overwhelming psychic fear involving only his family, the
monster's existence serves as a reminder of the havoc created by the upper class in
its militant allocation of human value strictly upon those conforming to aristocratic
norms.33
31

Vlasopolos, p. 126.
Frankenstein, p. 31.
33
Vlasopolos, p. 129.
32

11

The De Laceys are the only ones who do not participate in this system of choosing family
members. Safie, a Turkish woman, is happily welcomed to the family, without prejudices.
To some extent, they represent Mary Shelley's ideal of a community and society: This is
an ethic of care that would sympathize with and protect all living beings, that would live
in beneficial cooperation with nature.34

34

Mellor, Making a Monster, p. 23-24.

12

IV. Conclusion
It can be stated that Mary Shelley very much disagreed with the oppressive social systems
that prevailed during her time, the Romantic Period. These systems are the division of
emotional and intellectual work according to gender role expectations and the devaluation of female sexuality on the feminist criticism side. Concerning the socio-political
criticism, I worked out the unjust ways of judging fellow beings from their outward appearance and classifying them into a social order, as well as the strong will of the aristocratic upper class to maintain its power by class selection. The device that Shelley uses
for her criticism is that every single character is led into disaster as a consequence of one
of the named malicious systems. This seems to me like a vicious circle and at the same
time as the covert logic of the novel. Shelleys criticism is not obvious, but hidden, which
I find very intelligent.
In my opinion, Frankenstein is in general a very sophisticated and beneficial novel
that should be compulsive reading in school. By showing the reasons and symptoms of a
sickened society, Frankenstein has the ability to teach us how to live together. The crucial
point for this purpose is the treatment of the other, for instance the other gender, social
class or origin. If the characters in Frankenstein had treated the creature differently, he
would not have become evil. We have the responsibility to include those who might stand
outside and to shape our society to a tolerant, open-minded community. These issues
make the novel so important and relevant for today as our world still has to deal with
social inequality, racism and intolerance.

13

V. Works Cited
Botting, Fred (ed.): Frankenstein/Mary Shelley. New York: St. Martins, 1995.
Fetterley, Judith: The Resisting Reader: A Feminist Approach to American Fiction.
Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978.
Hoeveler, Diane Long: Frankenstein, Feminism, and Literary Theory. In: The Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press, 2003, p. 45-60.
Jacobus, Mary: The Buried Letter: Feminism and Romanticism in Villette. In: Women
Writing and Writing about Women. London: Croom Helm, 1979, p. 42-60.
Jacobus, Mary (ed.): Women Writing and Writing about Women. London: Croom Helm,
1979.
Mellor, Anne K.: Making a Monster. In: The Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley.
Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2003, p. 9-24.
Mellor, Anne K.: On Romanticism and Feminism. In: Mellor, Anne K. (ed.): Romanticism and Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988, p. 2-8.
Mellor, Anne K.: Possessing Nature. The Female in Frankenstein. In: Mellor, Anne K.
(ed.): Romanticism and Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988,
p. 221-230.
Mellor, Anne Kostelanetz (ed.): Romanticism and Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1988.
Richardson, Alan: Romanticism and the colonization of the feminine. In: Mellor, Anne
K. (ed.): Romanticism and Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press,
1988, p. 13-22.
Schor, Esther: The Cambridge Companion to Mary Shelley. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
Shelley, Mary: Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Ditzingen: Reclam, 2013.
Vlasopolos, Anca: Frankensteins Hidden Skeleton: The Psycho-Politics of Oppression. In: Science Fiction Studies. 10.2, 1983, p. 125-134.

14

VERSICHERUNG
Hiermit versichere ich, diese Arbeit selbstndig verfasst und keine anderen als die
angegebenen Quellen benutzt zu haben. Mir ist bewusst, dass ein Zuwiderhandeln
gegen diese Versicherung eine Ordnungswidrigkeit darstellt, die mit einer Geldbue
geahndet werden kann.

Dsseldorf, den 02. Juni 2014

________________
Unterschrift