Frankenstein and I am Legend: A Psychoanalytical Reading of the Novels - Essay Example

of Frankenstein and I am Legend: A Psychoanalytical Reading of the Novels Frankenstein asa work of fiction is important for many reasons. The novel has been interpreted in many ways and many schools of interpretation have dissected it according to their respective ideologies. This paper shall seek to look at the psychoanalytic criticism that has been done with regard to Frankenstein. Apart from the dreams that are a part of the novel, the subtexts of the novel that may have been unconsciously inserted by the author, Mary Shelley, shall form a part of the analysis of the novel. A psychoanalytic reading of the novel would result in an uncovering of many of its aspects that may have remained concealed earlier. A psychoanalytic reading makes the conflicted relations between the author and her patriarchal surroundings evident. I am Legend too makes the innermost desires of the civilization that the protagonist Dr Robert Neville is a part of. The idea of the monster is very important and the monster has often been seen as a symbol of the repressed self of the author surfacing. The need to break out of a patriarchal mould is something that Mary Shelley felt throughout her life. Even within the radical group of people that she lived in (Percy Shelley, William Godwin, and Lord Byron, to name a few), the idea of gender equality was not as prevalent as she would have liked it to be. Apart from this, the death of her mother Mary Wollstonecraft during childbirth was always laid at her door by her autocratic father, Godwin. All of this may have combined in creating a great amount of repressed anger within Mary Shelley (henceforth referred to as Shelley) that found expression in the monster of the scientist Victor Frankenstein. These were beliefs that were not permitted in the society that Shelley was a part of and hence she may have had to drive them underground. According to Johanna M. Smith, “much of what lies in the unconscious mind has been put there by consciousness, which acts as a censor, driving underground unconscious or conscious thoughts or instincts that it deems unacceptable (263-264)”. The outrage that the novel created upon its arrival is also something that points towards its origin in the unconscious of the human mind. In the final pages of the novel, the monster exclaims, I, the miserable and the abandoned, am an abortion, to be spurned at, and kicked, and trampled on (Shelley). In these lines can be seen the unconscious of the author, someone who was unwanted from her birth and was spurned by her father. The author’s angst at such irresponsible creation can be seen in lines such as these. These ideas were once held by Sigmund Freud and were later on challenged by many. One amongst these many voices of dissent was that of Carl Gustav Jung, who was a friend and colleague of Freud. He argued that repression operates not only at the level of the individual but also at that of the collective. He held that “a great work of literature is not a disguised expression of its author’s personal, repressed wishes; rather, it is a manifestation of desires once held by the whole human race but now repressed because of the advent of civilization (Smith 266)”. If one is to take this point of view, one may also think that Frankenstein represents the fear of revolution in an entire generation of the English. The revolution in France had created a fear of the revolution in many sections of the English public. In forms of the media that were prevalent then, the revolution was often caricatured as a monster that could not be tamed. The revolution in France had created an atmosphere in England that was tense as the upper classes constantly felt the fear of the lower classes. The monster in Frankenstein can then be seen to be a representation of this fear that the English felt. It is the supposedly civilizational fear that was felt by the aristocracy of England. I am Legend too talks of this very civilizational fear. The virus that causes the human race to descend into a state that resembles vampirism can be interpreted to be a catalyst for the destruction of the super ego. It is a situation where the unconscious takes over and the repressed urges are allowed to surface. The fear of such a change in the civilizational mechanism can be seen in the urge to bring back civilization even after much of humanity has been decimated. The aim of Dr Neville seems to be the re-establishment of civilization and the repression of the urges that the virus had let loose. The book by Richard Matheson argues against a dystopic future that it feels may have as a defining characteristic hysteric anarchy. The hysteria that is referred to is the result of the breakdown of the mechanism of repression. Freud himself had suggested that it is repression that enables the creation and sustenance of civilization. In its absence, he argued, civilization would give way to man’s animal instincts. This is exactly what is shown in the movie I am Legend (Matheson). This does not mean that the unconscious that is presented in the novel is not that of Shelley’s too. Shelley was a part of the aristocracy but was a supporter of revolution. At the same time, even within the aristocracy, she was marginalized as a result of her gender belonging. All of this led to a detachment with the aristocracy as far as Shelley was concerned. Her marginal status within the aristocracy and her own family may have led to the surfacing of a supposedly repressed lower class desire within her narrative. The desire that the monster expresses for populating the world with his kind is one such desire. Shelley however, undercuts this desire as a utopia created through only a father (Victor Frankenstein) would be one that she did not approve. Her angst against paternalistic figures is evident even in the foiling of Frankenstein’s plans and this can again be seen to be a surfacing of her anger against her own father, Godwin. Within the narrative, Victor Frankenstein the narrator often has apocalyptic dreams that can be seen to be a part of his own unconscious desires. The workshop that he uses for his scientific experiments can be seen to be a representation of his own unconscious where he creates his repressed self. The inability to come to terms with his own repressed desires are what can be seen through Frankenstein’s unwillingness to accept the monster as his own. Here again, the workings of the super ego can be seen. The super ego is the part of the mind that is created after one’s interactions with the society. It acts as a censor and a moralizing force. It keeps the unconscious desires of the mind under repression. It is this part of Frankenstein’s mind that leads to his reluctance to accept his own creation and take a moral high ground in relation to the ‘monster’. By the end of the novel, Dr Neville comes to terms with his own death. He feels so since the new civilization can exist without him. He seems to thus, prefer the sustenance of civilization over his own survival. This can be seen to be an extreme case of the super-ego’s control over the id. This is seen when Dr Neville says of himself, I’, the abnormal one now….A new superstition entering the unassailable fortress of forever (Matheson 239-240) The importance of psychoanalytic criticism lies in its ability to apply itself to many works of literature. It is able to extract meanings and interpretations that were hitherto unthought of. This ability has made critics embrace it and apply it to most new theories as well. Many aspects of Frankenstein, especially that of the intentionality of the author, have been discovered following the application of psychoanalytic criticism to the text. This has enabled the academic community to place the relationship between Mary Shelley and other members of her community in relation to the text of Frankenstein. This has thus enabled a closer understanding of the unique position that Shelley holds in literary history. Works Cited Matheson, Richard. I am Legend. New York: IDW, 2005. Print. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Ed. Johanna M. Smith. London: Bedford, 2000. Print. Smith, Johanna M. “Psychoanalytic Criticism and Frankenstein”. Frankenstein. Ed. Johanna M. Smith. London: Bedford, 2000. Print. Read More