I first learned about the origins of Frankenstein last October when I read the annotated Dracula, which provided a history of the vampire story. When weather dampened their vacation in Geneva, Switzerland, the literary quadruplet, Mary and Percy Shelley, John Polidori and Lord Byron kept themselves entertained by telling scary tales and then challenged each other to concoct their own. While Polidori was inventing the vampire, Mary Shelley was crafting her own invention, Frankenstein.
If you ask most people what they think of when they hear “Frankenstein,” they’ll probably describe something like this:
Over the years, Frankenstein has morphed into a cultural myth, but that’s not Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. In fact, he is not the monster at all, but a driven student of chemistry who is eager to uncover the source of life. Eagerness turns into obsession when Victor Frankenstein transcends beyond mere study and attempts to create life. Driven by his pursuit, he isolates himself at the expense of his health, his family, and his friends. He envisions being honored as a god by a new race, but when his inventive desires are fulfilled, he is repulsed by his creation and abandons it.
Victor Frankenstein’s monster, physically hideous though he is, is molded into a kind, compassionate creature by the human affection that he witnesses from afar while homeless and wandering. He performs generous deeds in order to aid the family he’s been observing, yet when he attempts to cross over into their realm, he is rejected at first sight. The monster is cast off by his own creator and the loving family through whom he learned compassion based on his looks. He is superficially judged solely on his appearance, without any attempt at investigating his character. It is only after this rejection and the ensuing loneliness that the monster truly becomes scary.
“If I cannot inspire love, I will cause fear.”
I was completely drawn in by Frankenstein. It was so different from what I expected. I anticipated a great, plot-driven thriller with twists and turns and suspense. And it certainly delivered on that, but what I found was more than a sensation novel. Frankensteinis a beautifully written work with complex social and philosophical themes.
Shelley grapples with some of the very same issues posed by the likes of Locke and Rosseau surrounding the effects of society on behavior. Rosseau postulated that humans are naturally peaceable and that the abuse of society is what brings forth violence and wickedness. Similarly, Locke suggested that we are a blank slate (tabula rasa) on which society writes, the nature of those “writings” – whether kind or cruel – contribute to an individual’s character.
Shelley’s writing satisfies on so many levels. One can be captivated by a thrilling story and awed by eloquent prose while simultaneously engaging with ideas. Through her characters, she provoked questions and explored thoughts without commenting on them directly, which allows the reader to contemplate the ethics of her novel and draw their own conclusions.
—–
Frankenstein as a Romantic Novel
The writers of Romanticism dwelled in fantasy rather than perceivable reality. The Romantic Movement (1783 – 1830) was a step away from and perhaps an antidote to the rationalism of the preceding Enlightenment and the mechanization of the ensuing Industrial Revolution. Writers became more concerned with expressing the sublime rather than stating the discernible.
In Percy Shelley’s A Defense of Poetry, he emphasizes the importance of the imagination, elevating the ordinary, making “familiar objects be as if they were not familiar.” For the Romantics creative expression was everything. Mary Shelley explored what might be considered the height of creative expression, the creation of man.
Like the philosophical questions that she poses, Shelley grapples with the tenants of Romanticism without falling in line or conforming to them. Her story reminds readers that even with the sublime and fantastical, things can go awry, it doesn’t all end in roses. She reminds us that there is a measure of futility in striving after an unattainable ideal. And creators are obliged to take responsibility for the result of their creations, for good or for evil.
“Did I request thee, Maker, from my clay
To mould me Man, did I solicit thee
From darkness to promote me?”
-Paradise Lost (these lines appear on the title page of Frankenstein)
—–
Nature was also important to the Romantics. In Frankenstein, the natural world often coincides with individual moods and events. When Victor reflects on his privileged youth, it is with the warmth and fondness of growing up in the beauty of the Swiss countryside, which likely resembled this:
That setting is contrasted with the bleakness of the Orkney Islands where he retreats to begin the dreaded task of creating a second monster, where his sentiments match his dreary and desolate surroundings.
“I thought of Switzerland; it was far different from this desolate and appalling landscape. Its hills are covered with vines, and its cottages are scattered thickly in the plains. Its fair lakes reflect a blue and gentle sky, and when troubled by the winds, their tumult is but as the play of a lively infant when compared to the roarings of the giant ocean.”
-Victor Frankenstein, Chapter 19
At the novel’s conclusion, the landscape is at its most barren as Victor pursues his monster into the Arctic desert, where clearly man does not belong. Maybe this suggests that man has pushed too far and lingered too long outside of his element, which can only lead to catastrophe.
—–
A Brief look at Mary Shelley:
Mary’s ability to craft an equally thrilling and thought provoking tale should come as no surprise considering that her life was padded with literary influence. While growing up, she was surrounded by the likes of literary greats such as William Wordsworth and Samuel Coleridge. She descended from two great thinkers William Godwin, a philosopher who propelled ideas on political justice and Mary Wollstonecraft, author of A Vindication of the Rights of Woman. She would go on to marry the Romantic poet, Percy Shelley.
In her father’s words she was;
“singularly bold, somewhat imperious, and active of mind. Her desire of knowledge is great, and her perseverance in everything she undertakes almost invincible.”
Given the intellectual and literary forces at work in her life, I wonder if Mary was conscious of the complex issues she was raising in Frankenstein, or if they were so inherent in her being and her thinking that they were just a natural result of her creative process?
Unfortunately, with greatness came great tragedy. Mary only knew her mother from the work that she left behind, as Wollstonecraft died just days after giving birth to her. As for her own children, only one of four survived past childhood. She would also lose her husband Percy to a drowning accident in 1822. She died at age 54, possibly from a brain tumor, from which she suffered headaches and paralysis. It’s amazing how a life could be marked simultaneously by such ingenuity and such heartache.
“Life, although it may only be an accumulation of anguish, is dear to me, and I will defend it.”
-Frankenstein, Chapter 10
———-
I am participating in the October 2011 Classics Circuit Tour. Click the image to see other posts from the tour.




I’m always excited to read about someone loving Frankenstein like I did! As you said, there is so much depth in the book. I could think about the symbolism for days and days with joy.
Me too! This is definitely a book that I will revisit. I’m sure that I’ll get much more out of the second reading as I’ll know what to expect and look for from the beginning.
Oh, what a great review! I’m signed up to read this one for the Classics Circuit and am excited to sit down with it next week. I had the same idea of the book you did, and am glad that it is very different.
Aarti,
It was very different from what I had anticipated. In fact, I think that Frankenstein will go down as one of my favorite reads of 2011. I hope you enjoy it too!
Nicki
WoW! This is such a lovely and detailed review!….I’ve been reading a few positive reviews on Frankenstein these past few months, but haven’t been tempted to try it until now. The book really does sound so much deeper than I have read it to be.
I especially like the whole Romantic section. Do you think, subconsciously, Mary Shelley did not subscribe to the whole Romantic theory?…that at heart she was really a realist? It certainly sounds that way from your review/essay. I think I’ll be looking out for this novel now…. Thank you for this lovely piece…it’s been a great read.
Thanks Risa!
I do think that Shelley defies some Romantic conventions. For one, she paints her hero as selfish and irresponsible. I haven’t read a great deal of Romantic literature, but my guess is that other writers from the movement portrayed that kind of individualism in a more positive light, idealizing it even, whereas Shelley reminds us that there’s a down side to creative ambition.
I would definitely recommend giving Frankenstein a try. It’s more complex than it appears and is definitely going on my re-read list.
Thank you for stopping by and leaving your positive comments!
Much appreciated,
Nicki
Oh wow! I feel like I really, really want to read biographies on Percy and Mary Shelley, after reading the above. I had no idea Percy drowned!!
Great post. Frankenstein is a favorite work of mine. I also wonder if Mary Shelley knew what she was really saying (or seemed to be really saying) as she crafted this novel. We covered this book in a recent lit class and went heavily into the Romantic elements. SOOOO interesting.
I know, this book and the info about it really made me want to read Tomalin’s bio of P. Shelley. I would love to discuss this book in a literature course. I’m jealous.
Frankenstein is definitely a favorite.
And who was really more the ‘monster’? Victor or the poor Monster? I think Shelley’s subtitle is important too– “A Modern Prometheus”; and again, one has to ask, who is the one that is ‘bound and suffering’? Is it Victor, or is it the Monster? Everytime I read Frankenstein I peel back the layers a little bit more. I find it intriguing that Percy Bysshe Shelley is working on his play/poem Prometheus Unbound shortly after Mary Shelley wrote this novel. I also have to believe that both of them have done a close reexamination of Aeschylus’ play, Prometheus Bound–I mean, it is a creation myth, after all. Importantly, I think, the notion of Prometheus rebelling against the Divine Order and defying the gods by providing humankind with fire had to appeal enormously to the revolutionary spirit within the second-generation poets and writers (especially in a Europe that was just coming out of nearly two decades of ‘world war’ in the titanic struggle with Napoleon). No pun intended, but I think Aeschylus and his Prometheus Bound and his lost play Prometheus Unbound had to have been a significant ‘lightning rod’ to both Mary and Percy Bysshe, and Byron too. Great posting, Nicki, very thought-provoking. I really enjoyed reading your thoughts and observations. Cheers! Chris
I think that Frankenstein will definitely hold up to rereading. I’m already looking forward to delving into it again.
Thanks for the information on Prometheus – I find that whole aspect / parallel fascinating as well. How interesting to think about how this novel would have been / was perceived in the European social / political climate that you described! Thanks for your thoughts, Chris!
This was simply a lovely review. I read the work many years ago, but this provided a lot of depth into the context surrounding the author’s life, and I really appreciated it.
For some reason, I knew this review was important so I set it especially aside to come back to it today. Well worth it – thanks again.
Thanks! I definitely found Frankenstein to be a deeper novel than it appears on the surface. I appreciate your positive feedback.
I wish I could get past my annoyance with Victor Frankenstein and like this novel as much as everyone else seems to. When I read it a couple years ago, I spent the whole time frustrated with Victor and never really moved on from there.
Thanks for posting those pictures of the settings–that really sets it in my minds eye, and I can get a better feeling for Shelly’s use of setting vs. mood than I had when I read it.
I also found Victor to be a frustrating character. You just want to shake him sometimes.
This was such and educational and wonderful post. I listened to Frankenstein in the past. It was an audio-book with commentary by an English teacher, which helped to point out the finer things to me. Frankenstein is so much more than what people think.
Thanks Jenny!
Frankenstein delivered way more than I thought it would – I was so pleasantly surprised and impressed.
I should check on an annotated Frankenstein. I could not get past the flowery moralistic tone to this book – but I was listening to the audio. I think I need a new approach.
I read this for the first time this year and compltely fell in love with it. There was something so tragic about the story, but so real. I felt so much for Frankenstein’s monster – and yet also couldn’t help but wonder whether he really deserved it in the end.
I loved reading the different layers to your review, especially what you said about the Romantic Movement. One thing I think I sometimes lack when I read classics is an understanding of where they fit and i found it really interesting to read about how this one fit into the romantic movement