Frankenstein: Gothic Novel, Feminist Manifesto, and Guide to Parenting Zachary Hopper
aegis 2008 80
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein subverts the social order of nineteenth century British society in two ways: it accuses society of being patriarchal and emphasizes the importance of a female self, and it criticizes single parenting and unorthodox child-rearing techniques. Shelley challenges the status quo not because of the sensitive topics she addresses, but because she does so as a woman. For a man to debate these topics is nothing out of the ordinary, but a woman’s viewpoint is rarely heard. In Frankenstein, Shelley gives voice to the voiceless; she speaks against the male-oriented society and does so in the tradition of her mother, Mary Wollstonecraft. Her critique on how children are raised goes against the social norms of her time, which emphasize that women be the primary caretakers of children, and as Barbara Johnson notes in her essay “My Monster/My Self,” the result is that “human infants are cared for almost exclusively by women” (Johnson 241). By challenging society’s views of women and its stance on nurturing children, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein breaks the mold of the typical novel, becoming part attack on parents and part feminist manifesto. In their essay “Mary Shelley’s Monstrous Eve,” Sandra M. Gilbert and Susan Gubar note that, “Though it has been disguised, buried, or miniaturized, femaleness—the gender definition of mothers and daughters, orphans and beggars, monsters and false creators—is at the heart of this apparently masculine book [Frankenstein]” (Gilbert and Gubar 232). This is a bold claim to make, considering that Frankenstein’s three main characters—Walton, Victor, and the Monster— are men. These males are portrayed as being rational, strong, educated, and goal-oriented. The women in the novel, on the other hand, are irrational, emotional, weak, and have no future plans (besides marrying, having children, and serving a man, of course). Elizabeth, the female with the largest role in the story, rarely leaves her home and certainly never strays out of town. Her role is to wait for Victor until he comes home to marry her; only then, under the supervision of her husband, will she be able to leave her town. We see from the language she uses in a letter to Victor both her role at home and her hopes for the future: “return to us,” “the growth of our dear children,” “my trifling occupations take up my time and amuse me,” (Shelley 57-58, chap. 6). She then hints at marriage by relating to Victor news of recently wed couples. From this letter we can see that Elizabeth’s life is confined to menial tasks, caretaking, and waiting for marriage, which will lead to children, more caretaking, and more trivial tasks. With these things in mind, how can Gilbert and Gubar claim that Frankenstein is about femaleness? Notice that Gilbert and Gubar state that the story is about femaleness, not female characters. This femaleness is apparent when Victor removes himself from society in order to create the Monster, which can be seen as his offspring. Gilbert and Gubar argue that, “His [Victor’s] “pregnancy” and childbirth are obviously manifested by the existence of the paradoxically huge being who emerges from his “workshop of filthy creation,”” filthy meaning obscenely sexual in this context (Gilbert and Gubar 232-233). Shelley uses specific words to illustrate Victor’s “pregnancy”: “incredible labor and fatigue,” “painful labour,” “emaciated
