More Frankenstein
This is sort of random, but I just thought it might create an interesting discussion. I was telling my dad about how there were doubts surrounding whether or not Mary Shelley actually wrote all of Frankenstein, and he dismissed them, saying how those doubts arose simply because of sexism and an underestimation of female abilities. So I was wondering if you think these doubts are accurate or are they simply sexist statements?
~Aviva
~Aviva
posted by L Lazarow | 2:45 PM
7 Comments:
While I'm not sure if these doubts are accurate, I understand their origins. Like I had said in class, while reading the book, I found it amazing that a woman wrote this novel. I did not think this for any sort of "women are inferior to men" reasoning, but rather, the subject matter is hardly feminine. As children, its always the boys writing stories about monsters and aliens taking over the world and what not. While this may be a generalization, it is what society believes and expects, thus for a nineteen year old, Mary Shelley to write this novel (also new and complex at the time) in 1816 hardly seems plausible for the time period. Society would have expected more of a Jane Austen/Charlotte Bronte type novel from her - if at all they expected a novel from a woman. Her being a woman adds something to the novel in my mind. The emotions of each character are so vividly potrayed. If a man had written the novel, I feel as though the emotional aspect of the novel would be lacking. I feel she wrote the book. For her to write such a novel on her first writing attempt is extraordinary and demonstrates her talent. After all, she is a woman. ;)
I don't think it is a purely sexist theory. Given a lot of aspects of the literature mentioned in class (the feministic emotionality of Victor, the fact that Mary Shelley had never written before or after this work, the use of apostrophe which was popular with Percy), I think there was more basis to a lot of these theories rather than just an attempt to belittle the work of a woman.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I don't think sexism is the only driving force behind Mary's questionable identity. Even great male writers, like Shakespere, have had their identities questioned. In the case with WS though, many postulate that a woman wrote under his name; the circumstances of the time period did not allow her to do so herself. In the case of Frankenstein though, nothing was keeping Shelly from writing it herself. If Byron and Percey did indeed write it, wouldn't it be in their best interest to put their OWN names on it? They are certainly not held back by the social norms which the Shakespearean she-writer would have faced.
We also know that publishers (like all great books) originally rejected the idea. Had Percy or Byron published their names as authors, the book probably would have been an automatic best seller (ie: everyone will buy JK Rowlings first non-Harry Potter book, no matter how terrible it is). Why wouldn't they have taken advantage of this?
I did a little research and found that the first version of Frankenstein was published anonymously. I don't know if that adds anything to the discussion, but I found it interesting. The author's name was not published until the 2nd (maybe 3rd?) edition.
I also read that the critics who feel Mary Shelley did not write the novel and that her husband, Percy, is the author believe so because many of the lines within the text are viewed as "classic Percy Shelley." Of course, there are also critics who just feel Mary Shelley was too stupid to write this novel. Many authors have a difficult time believing Mary Shelley, as a young woman of 1816, had the potential to write what is considered the very first science fiction novel.
As I read both the introduction and the back of the book, both parts emphasize how Marh Shelley concived this idea while talking with her husband on a "dready" day. I think that this may also add to some of the skepticism about her writing the novel. I think that considering the time period it was written in some of the doubts of her authorship do originate from slighty sexist reasons, but the majority of doubt probably comes from what everyone else mentioned as well as the fact that Percy is documented as being there when the idea was concieved.
ARGH I hate it when everything you write is suddenly deleted when the browser screws up. What I wrote, in brief, on why Frankenstein has "Percy's Voice":
-When people spend a lot of time together, their linguistic foibles and affectations are frequently subconsciously shared and traded. (ex: Laz and his wife probably speak different after x years of marriage; ex2: who hasn't started using a word they liked from a friend?).
-If you are writing a book, and your spouse is an author too, why wouldn't you give it to him/her to look over, do some preliminary editing, etc. Of course Mary used the guidance and council of her husband, and during early editing we can only expect that some of Percy's "voice" might be transfered into the final product.
I really don't know enough about the issue to say whether the doubts are sexist, but I do think it's sexist when it's said that Mary probably didn't write it because it deals with "non-feminine" things like science fiction, complex themes, horror, etc. I think woman are just as capable as men, then and now, of writing things that deal with blood, gore, war, etc. I think it's because of the pressures society puts on its people to fulfill characteristics of certain "gender roles" that make it less likely that a woman of Mary's time would write such a novel as Frankenstein. Mary was probably able to overcome it by intellectual encouragement from Percy and Byron and the other people in her life who raised her to be academically interested.
Post a Comment
<< Home