A Marxist analysis of Frankenstein highlights the novel’s role in challenging and denouncing oppressive economic and ideological structures in society. The fear depicted in the novel actually represents a fear of revolution. Through the years, subsequent generations interpret this thought-provoking novel which originally caused horror and terror in a significantly altered perspective. What was once considered a transgression in the 19th century is now widely embraced by the contemporary society.
Within the text, there are multiple allegories that question and mock society’s fundamental beliefs and motivations. This essay will examine how Shelley portrays the mindset of human society and civilization in one of the first science fiction novels. The primary storyline of the novel corresponds to a historical period marked by oppression, as significant social unrest occurred during its writing. The English, French, and Haitian revolutions deeply impacted Shelley’s thoughts, particularly due to her parents’ abolitionist stance that greatly influenced her perspective.
In Shelley’s work, she explores society’s anxiety about the consequences of creating uncontrollable monsters that can incite revolutions. This theme is evident in the portrayal of the creature, who serves as a symbol for the oppressed individuals. Similar to the proletariat, the creature is made up of various body parts, reflecting its recruitment from all segments of society. This repugnant concept challenges humanity’s sensibilities. However, Victor, the creator, disregards the creature’s well-being and is solely focused on gaining respect and power within the scientific community.
In the same way, the people of 19th century Britain and France are ruled by authoritative figures whose main goal is their own benefit. According to Marxism, the creature symbolizes the working class who are physically larger and stronger; “Due to the small size of the parts, it greatly hindered my ability to move quickly, so I decided, against my initial plan, to create a being that was enormous in size; specifically, around eight feet tall and correspondingly large”.
Victor, who is weak but wealthy and educated, can be seen as a representation of the bourgeoisie. This resemblance can be compared to certain aspects of both working and upper-class societies in 18th and 19th century Europe. The creature, with its physical superiority, constantly reminds Victor of the fact that “thou hast made me more powerful than thyself; my height is superior to thine; my joints more supple”. This reflects the bourgeois perception of life, wherein they do not require the luxuries and comforts of the upper class; rather, they only need a place to take shelter and enough nourishment to function.
The composition illustrates the powerful laborers outnumbering the upper-class and revolutionizing the capitalist system. The creature’s statement, “You are my creator, but I am your master,” indicates its awareness of social class and the potential of its physical strength to rebel against its creator. Additionally, the characterization of the creature arouses sympathy in the reader.
The creature starts off with pure intentions, similar to a child relying on its creator. However, after enduring savage mistreatment from humans, the creature unfortunately turns into a violent being. One can argue that the transformation of the creature into a monster is not his own fault. According to the social learning perspective, Bandura’s Bobo doll experiment illustrates that when a child observes an authoritative and influential person exhibiting malicious behavior, they are highly likely to imitate that behavior.
Just like the French revolution began with the working class having good intentions, hope, and desperation but ultimately turned into a reign of terror, the rebellion in Frankenstein reflects a similar transformation. The working class aimed to overthrow the capitalist system, just as the creature initially fought for acceptance in society. The creature laments to Frankenstein, explaining that his early intentions were benevolent and filled with love and humanity, but now he feels miserably alone and abandoned by his creator.
Shortly after expressing kindness and gentleness, the creature experiences a sudden shift in temperament. He describes this shift as a transformation from positive emotions to intense anger and hostility. The creature’s emotions are inflamed by pain, leading him to swear everlasting hatred and revenge against all humans. It is important to note that these repressed feelings are not of his own volition, but a result of the mistreatment and cruelty he has endured from humans. Given this context, the creature is justified in fighting for his own survival as he does make an effort to conform to societal norms.
Shelley portrays the proletariats’ attempt to resist exploitation and achieve a meaningful and harmonious existence. The novel suggests that humans exhibit aggression, violence, and anger only when hope is jeopardized and the meaning of life is at stake. Moreover, the portrayal of the creature mirrors Rousseau’s theory on child development, challenging the prevalent concept of ‘Tabula rasa’ in the 18th century society.
Rousseau posited that infants possess two innate instincts: self-preservation and compassion. According to him, unless exposed to the deleterious impact of civilization, children are naturally predisposed to goodness. Thus, Rousseau advocated for isolating and nurturing children under the guidance of a single educator. This educator’s role would involve teaching the significance of avoiding desires for unnecessary things, which ultimately leads to personal freedom. Through this process, the child would develop independence from seeking validation from others and learn to maintain self-love. Simultaneously, they would gradually become acquainted with the moral and emotionally challenging aspects of adulthood.
According to this theory, it is evident that the creature was initially introduced to the world with kindness and empathy. However, his mentor Victor has deserted him, making him susceptible to the negative influences of society, such as the desire for unnecessary things and the pursuit of others’ approval. The creature expresses this by saying “I have immense love within me and unimaginable rage.”
If I cannot satisfy one, I will indulge the other. Victor is responsible for the education of his creature. However, he has exposed him to the morals and religions of society before allowing him to emotionally develop and become mentally stable. This leads to the inevitable transition from creature to monster. Victor himself never received such education in self-development and nurturing. Instead, he was raised to strive and want without considering the consequences.
The use of shadowing in Shelley’s novel can be seen as representing moral upbringing, mirroring Rousseau’s novel, “Emile.” Through this technique, Shelley might be indicating her disapproval of the way children are raised to pursue knowledge and progress, which ultimately contributes to the emergence of a capitalist society and even the French revolution. Additionally, the relationship between Victor and the creature may symbolize Shelley’s own beliefs or rebellion against Rousseau’s theory, given that Rousseau himself abandoned five of his children to a public welfare facility.
Although Rousseau achieved the distinction of being the first “developmentalist” in the 18th century and his political philosophy had a significant impact on the French revolution, as well as contemporary political, sociological, and educational thought, he did not adhere to these principles personally. Consequently, Shelley’s perspective on society is heavily influenced by Rousseau’s concepts, prompting her to draw from other literary works such as “Julie, or the New Heloise” and “Paradise Lost” to enrich and mold her novel.
Shelley uses a common literary technique to depict modern political events in a chronological manner. The concept of framing narratives serves as a metaphorical picture frame, enabling a seamless emphasis on the illustration and creating differentiation and correlation between the external and internal aspects, such as the working class and middle class. This can be seen as an allegory for the upheaval faced in Geneva during the French revolution. Robert Walton defies societal norms by choosing an adventurous life of exploration instead of conforming to social expectations and domestication.
In stating, “My life might have been passed in ease and luxury; but I preferred glory to every enticement that wealth placed in my path,” Walton expresses his determination to resist a comfortable and privileged existence and instead pursue fame in order to establish a new set of societal standards. This mirrors the behavior of European aristocrats in the late 17th century who acted freely, disregarding any negative impact on the lower classes. In defying his late father’s wish for him to avoid the perilous depths of the sea, Walton acts upon his longing to travel and explore.
Walton’s somewhat selfish nature, which is also seen in the Aristocrats of the 17th century, is exposed. This could mean that the picture within the frame featuring the monster’s narrative represents the damage caused by the revolting peasants. Frankenstein appears to cause extreme destruction to the people of society who imprison his horrifying existence. The monster utters a curse: “You can destroy my other desires, but revenge will always remain – revenge, from now on more precious than light or food! I might die, but before that, you, my tyrant and tormentor, will curse the sun that witnesses your suffering.”
This passage illustrates the protagonist’s desire for revenge against the person responsible for his suffering and misery. Similarly, in Europe, the peasants seek revenge by rebelling against those who controlled their destinies. Since the author, Shelley, lived in Geneva while writing the novel, it is reasonable to assume that one of the purposes of using the Russian doll technique was to highlight her views on Geneva’s political state. While Frankenstein provides entertainment and a form of escape for readers, it is also a rejection of society’s oppressive and exploitative nature. Shelley’s underlying message is that capitalism and oppression are monstrous acts that can give rise to actual monsters, which could potentially be the pillars of a hopeful and strong society. When analyzing the novel, it is crucial to recognize that any downfall of the proletariat is equally detrimental to the bourgeoisie. Any pursuit of self-gain will ultimately lead to moral destruction. The certainty of exploiting the oppressed and vulnerable creates widespread devastation and generates a timeless fear in readers, regardless of the era they belong to. – Bec Cartwright
