Shelley’s Monstrosity

Although Frankenstein is commonly misconstrued as the story of a mad scientist’s creation of an inarticulate and largely destructive monster, one need only read Mary Shelley’s introduction to her novel to understand that the story is in fact a much more complicated account of man’s potential for monstrosity.  Whether implicitly or explicitly, Shelley alludes to her protagonist, Frankenstein, and to his creation as she describes to her readers the process by which she came to create her novel. In doing so the reader gains a better understanding of both Shelley and Frankenstein.

On the first page of her introduction Shelley feels encumbered upon to explain not only the premise for her novel but to elucidate some of her own history as well. As the daughter of “two person’s of distinguished literary celebrity” and the wife of the poet Percy Shelley, she is encouraged to “prove [herself] worthy of [her] parentage, and enroll [herself] on the page of fame” (Shelley, 21). The echo of words like “fame” and “reputation” appear reminiscent of Victor’s desire for “glory” and “power” (Shelley 21, 47, 57). Shelley’s husband was “anxious” that she should seek a “literary reputation” and this anxiety must certainly have been felt and translated to his wife who describes her inability to produce literature as “mortifying” (Shelley, 23). Shelley whether by intent or by chance has Victor similarly shamed by his professors. Victor spent years studying the works of Albertus Magnus and Paracelsus and upon reaching university was told that it was all for naught. He was chastised for learning “exploded systems and useless names” and for living in a “desert land” reading texts as “musty as they are ancient” (Shelley, 52). Both Shelley and Victor sought to overcome these criticisms and thus their creations were brought to life.

I have taken the liberty to extend the similarities between the two “creators”, the author and the scientist, further and have found that mankind treated both “creations” monstrously. Both the novel and Frankenstein’s progeny contain intelligence and sentiment that have been largely ignored and treated to the superficial tendencies of man. The “monster” was condemned for his hideous figure; his intelligence and potential were ignored for his unfortunate countenance. Shelley’s novel was embraced and interpreted on stage and on screen in a way that largely ignored the complexity of her “monster” character. The horror of its corpse-composed body seems too fantastic of a fiend to complicate with intelligence and thus filmmakers and playwrights misconstrue Shelley’s novel entirely, for what set off to be a ghost story quickly became a story of man’s inhumanity. What sets Shelley’s creation apart from Victor’s is the “affection” she feels for her novel, for “it was the offspring of happy days” (Shelley, 24). Victor treated his creation with the same contempt as his fellow man and thus his creation, his “monster” with the potential for good, became “hellish… full of treachery and fiendlike malice” (Shelley, 178).

Much of the interpretation of Shelley’s introduction is merely conjecture, for despite the fact that the purpose of an introduction is to clarify an author’s intent, Shelley leaves her reader with more questions than answers. As she writes, explanations are “for myself; my readers have nothing to do with these associations” (Shelley, 25). One can, however, form the connection between creators and creations when Shelley refers to her novel as her “hideous progeny” which she encourages to “go forth and prosper” (Shelley, 25).

Advertisement