Examining Literary Criticism: Mary Shelleys Frankenstein - Essay Example

Examining Literary Criticism: Mary Shelley's Frankenstein This critique on Mary Shelley's Frankenstein is certainly one of an assured position. Inother words, it is blatantly obvious as to what this particular critic's point of view is on this subject. I agree with the feeling which is put towards Victor and his father, "Christopher Small sees in Victor's upbringing an 'atmosphere of perfect love, harmony, and parental indulgence'." "he calls Victor's father 'benevolentwisealtogether un-authoritarian." (103). I find the attention drawn to "the many ways in which Frankenstein portrays the consequences of the failure of family, the damage wrought when the mother or a nurturant parental love is absent" (1968, 39) to be extremely interesting, especially because this is a point which the average reader may not actually take into consideration at all. I also believe that this is a significantly strong point in this story, and that it encompasses much of the morale of the story itself. There are many other significantly relevant and important theories and points made in this critique; one of these being "I invoke an object relations perspective that explores the centrality of an infant's early experiences with primary caretakers and of the intense feelings of love and hate that, even on the surface, are the main concern of Frankenstein (3). With this is discussed "how the 'facilitating environment' shapes these relationships." Also, one of the most emphasizing comments made on this subject in the critique, I believe, is: "The infant's disposition is important, but for Winnicott much depends upon the child's earliest relations with others who may respond either in a 'good-enough' way that allows his or her 'true self' to emerge or by imposing rigid structures that leave the child in a 'false' position, caught between an endangered inner world that can't be made known and an unresponsive external world that refuses to know it." (p.2). The thought provoking statements made in this critique truly give another life in a way to the Frankenstein story, making a reader of this critique, whether they agree or not, at least have an array of new and inspired impressions on the story. The feelings of this writer seem to be very psychoanalytic, in that they continuously compare the Frankenstein story to morale and ideals in the real world, and bring the story very much to life. The matter of social obligations and responsibility, family obligations, and emotions are all brought out strongly. It speaks predominantly about the 'ideal' infant's life, and how Victor's "father's 'smile of benevolent pleasure' and mother's 'tender caresses' might ordinarily suggest recognition and love, but that doesn't square with Victor's being objectified as a 'plaything' or the sense of 'duty' and 'owing' that defines his relationship to his parents." (p.3). This particular comment strongly evokes in me a feeling of emotion towards Victor, and how his relationship is towards his parents. I feel as though Victor saw through the external showings and felt as though he was not appreciated by his parents the way he would like to have been. The relationship between Victor and his father is shown as being especially tense: "Alphonse doesn't get the point of his son's enthusiasm: 'My father looked carelessly at the titlepage of my book, and said, Ahl Cornelius Agrippal. My dear Victor, do not waste your time upon this; it is sad trash'." (44). In this, we see that by failing to receive his son's eagerly profound communication, "Alphonse cannot present the external world in a way that recognizes and affirms the inner one; what might have become a 'potential space' between subject and object instead remains a vacuum." (p.4). Through this we see that Alphonse's lack of recognition towards his son was incredibly more relevant than perhaps one would take it at first; his ignorance towards his son's enthusiasm brings great negativity to an already dire situation. The effects of Victor's infantile dilemmas are spread thoroughly across this critique, and are proven in various different circumstances, such as how it haunts his later years during "his awakening from delirium in an Irish jail, imprisoned under suspicion of killing Clerval." (p.5). The writer goes on to state how "His condition here approximates an infant's not only in his helplessness, but also in his having to contend with intense anxiety and guilt and in his difficulty in establishing the external world as external." (p.5). I agree wholeheartedly with these opinions, and am especially enlightened in regards to the opinion on Victor and how even later on in his life he felt and acted like an 'infant'. This truly affected my reading and understanding of the novel in that it made me see the novel in an entirely different way. By methodizing and capturing the true essence of the story, what one might miss without actually taking the time to consider it; Victor's emotions and his feelings towards his parents - these are both truly significant 'hidden' meanings in the morale of the story. I am again enlightened by the pointed argument about Victor's strife to learn about the "secrets of heaven and earth" (p.6). This thirst for knowledge reveals a rather premature instrumentality modeled on his father's, and "a 'temperature' forced by a rigid 'law' to forego the playing that, Winnicott holds, constitutes a precondition for authentic living." (p.6). These statements make it seem that Victor experiences the self he presents to others as fake or fraudulent. The most significant comment made in this entire critique is that of the following: "his (Victor's) real need for the world to meet him half way, and his rage at its duty-bound refusal to do so, remains hidden and inexpressible, and is ultimately disowned by being projected into the monster." (p.6). This single comment truly ejects the entire story into one, by expressing to the reader the actual reason for Victor becoming the monster. Victor's position and that of how he considers to have a 'false self' is that of great importance, not only in relation to the fact that that is what caused him to turn into the monster, but also for more simpler facts, such as all of this truly seemed to stem originally from his infant and child life, where he felt ignored and reputed by his parents. Works Cited Shelley, Mary. 1831. Frankenstein. Ed. Johanna M. Smith. Boston: Bedford Books, 1992. Read More