Break out the champagne! Frankenstein (’s monster) at 200!!
Well, in case you haven’t heard, the literary world is positively abuzz with the arrival of the 200th anniversary of the creation of Mary Shelly’s mythic creature, Frankenstein’s “monster”. To explain, for those not in the know, the Boris-karloff, flat-topped, bolt-necked, green chappie is NOT Frankenstein, but, in fact, the being who was constructed by the scientist Victor Frankenstein. Any confusion in this regard is the result of conflation in the popular imagination.
The creature was conceived by Mary Shelley on June 16th, 1816, and the work was published in early 2018 as Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Shelley’s story was clearly focused on the scientist Frankenstein and his effort to uncover the secret of life. Prometheus was the figure in Greek mythology who was punished by the gods for fashioning man out of clay and then, more audaciously, granting him the gift of fire.
When it comes to Mary Shelley’s story, most of us have at least a passing familiarity, if not with the original, then with one of its many imitations. A “mad” scientist, ignoring warnings and the constraints of social norms, manages to cobble together body parts and animate them into a living creature. The creature, for whatever reason, goes berserk and presents a very daunting challenge to those who would control it.
A recent article in the Times Literary Supplement (March 16), deals with the power of this metaphor. According to the critic, the real fascination of Mary Shelley’s story is how it has captured the popular imagination over the past two hundred years. Especially in our modern times of global warming, nuclear mishaps, threats from pollution, we witness almost constant reference to the “what-hath-man-wrought?” question. We can readily understand new coinages like “frankenfoods”, “frankenfish”, “frankenbabies” etc, again attesting to the degree to which the metaphor endures.
It is interesting to note that one of the factors in the begetting of the story was the Indonesian volcano Tamboro in April of 1815, which caused a subsequent year without a summer. (Side note: Rumour has it that a Township’s farmer froze to death in his field in mid-summer that year!) In the case of Mary Shelley, the resulting cold favoured indoor evenings in the Geneva of June 1816, with her, her lover Percy Shelley, George Gordon (Load) Byron and several others gathered around a blazing fire for warmth. In that atmosphere, a challenge was issued (by Byron) that they should each write a ghost story. Mary Shelley was one of the few who actually produced one.
Her personal circumstances were exceptional. She was a child of the two radical philosophers William Godwin and Mary Wollstonecraft. By the age of seventeen she had taken up with Percy Bysshe Shelley, hugely prolific and accomplished poet of the Romantic Movement. She had, by the age of nineteen, already born and lost a child by him. She was plagued by dreams of trying to revive her dead child, images which no doubt played into the substance of the story.
Her parents and peers played an active part in the larger social and political context— the turn of the 19th century was a time of great turbulence. (The 1960’s would be our closest approximation, although, truth be told, they put a little more reflection into the movement back then!) The American and French Revolutions, the scientific revolution, the almost globally scaled Napoleonic wars, the continued impact of enlightenment philosophy and radical political philosophy all gave rise to very profound questions about the nature of humanity, its moral underpinnings, freedom, social order, the foundations for the pursuit of happiness and good.
Shelley’s story explores the extent to which human nature can be fashioned in accordance with science, philosophy, and/or rational principles. Frankenstein combines a fascination with traditional mysticism and alchemy with a thirst for knowledge. Much is made in the story of Frankenstein’s creature’s sense of loss as he is shunned by his creator, and then of his efforts to painstakingly learn reality, language, social interactions by observation, only to be met with revulsion and horrified reactions. Then we see the creature vengefully wreak havoc on the loved ones of the guilty Frankenstein.
The advocates of liberty, equality, and fraternity watched in dismay as the triumph of human freedom in the French Revolution was succeeded by years of bloody upheaval and mindless mob violence. Then, throughout the twentieth century we saw transformative social theory result in years of death and destruction in Europe, in China, Viet Nam, and Cambodia. Sadly, we now see the ideals of freedom and democracy being perverted by the forces of greed, exploitation, and wealthy elitism in many Western countries. The Frankenstein metaphor endures as we find, à la Pogo, that we have met the enemy and he is us!
By our standards what is really amazing about the figure of Frankenstein is how little Mary Shelley made on the deal. In our times, with successful print runs and movie spinoffs and merchandizing, Mary would probably be lunching out with J.K. Rowling and Jerry Seinfeld. Think Frankenstein II? The Return of Frankenstein? Frankenstein and the fight with ISIS? And spin-offs? The Adams Family? (Cha-ching!), The Munsters? Milton the Monster? (Cha-ching! Cha-ching!)
Instead, her work saw comparatively slow sales, and although she happily saw play adaptations and other literary imitations she benefitted little financially. In subsequent publications she was able to put the authorial gloss “By the Author of Frankenstein” but overall she benefitted very little from the Frankenstein “brand”.
—Stephen Sheeran
Editions of Frankenstein, along with pale imitators, can be found at your local library.