Khan

Ramsha Hussain Khan Mr. Stewart Hawley ENGL 1302 18th August 2011 A Marxist Criticism of Frankenstein Marxist literary criticism exemplifies what the French philosopher Paul Ricouer terms as the Hermeneutics of Suspicion (Ricouer). This type of criticism approaches not what the text says but what it hides. Ideological oppression of a dominant economic class over a subordinate class is usually a prominent feature of literary pieces. This essay will marginalize social class issues dominant in Mary Shelleys fiction novel Frankenstein, as seen through Marxist critique essays. Every literary work is a reflection of the historical, social and economic context that surrounds it. Main historical events that took place during the 1790s were the French revolutions and the Haitian Revolution. The foremost goal of the idealistic French Revolution was to establish a social order based on reason and justice, and the Haitian Revolution started off as a slave riot for independence. As is reflected by this historical context, one of the main themes of Mary Shelleys Frankenstein was that of oppression and social upheaval. The characters of this novel bring forward overriding social and political implications, with several class distinctions. Karl Marx, a German revolutionary socialist, who developed the socio-political theory of Marxism, explains in his Communist Manifesto that only two true social classes exist, the bourgeoisie, or the owners of the means of production, and the proletariat, or the working class.

Khan (Marx Manifesto p.220). Mary Shelly has established the complete dynamics of her novel around two central characters: Victor Frankenstein and his created monster, which symbolizes the two extreme class boundaries. Dr. Frankenstein in this novel is depicted as an educated character from a wealthy

business background, so he is clearly the ruling class. Furthermore he is shown to have the power of creating a creature just like Karl Marx believes that the bourgeoisie tend to create the proletariat. Modern bourgeois society, with its relations of production, of exchange and of property, a society that has conjured up such gigantic means of production and of exchange, is like the sorcerer, who is no longer able to control the powers of the nether world whom he has called up by his spells. (Marx Manifesto p.225). Thus Dr. Frankenstein is a symbol of the oppressive society. Gain of economical and social power is another concern of this whole upper and lower class prejudice. Victor Frankenstein can be seen as an arrogant evil man, who uses his superiority to gather all the resources of creating life. By doing so he is messing around with dead bodies, collecting unusual body parts and going against the nature, just because he can. These are all traits of the higher social class of oppressive people. One more aristocratic attribute identified in Shellys novel is Victors abandonment of the creature. Although for two years he has tortured living animals and gathered anatomical parts from fresh graves, he flees from the laboratory when the monster comes to life, scared of his own creation. This is one of the most important Marxist criticisms. Another interesting quality that Mary Shelly has incorporated into the Victor character is his defiance of taking responsibility over his actions. Not only once but throughout the novel, he escapes being held responsible for creating the monster, and he even lets an innocent women take the blame of killing his brother, who he knows was killed by the

Khan monster created through the manifestation of his imagination. That is exactly how the Marxists

criticized the rich people to be, who due to their unjust behavior first create proletariat out of the poor, less powerful people, and then when the deprived rebel, they put up their hands not owning up to anything. Similarly the monster is a symbol for the oppressed class of the society. Mary Shelly has portrayed it as the proletariat that revolts against the bourgeoisie in the class struggle. The monster is created from various parts such as bones from charnel-houses, body parts from dissecting rooms and pieces from the slaughter houses. This is similar to the proletariat in that it is recruited from all classes of the population (Marx Manifesto p.228). Its lifestyle reflects that of a working class peasant who does not need the luxury of the aristocrats but merely a small amount of food to keep him going and a bed to sleep in. Thus its very existence in the novel is associated to that of a physically stronger worker who is less dependent on comfort as compared to the upper class. Luisa Umana, in her essay Mary Shelleys Frankenstein: A Marxist Reading mentions that the monster draws sympathy from the readers, which further demonstrates Shelleys criticism of capitalism. The creature begins his life with good intentions but, after repeatedly experiencing malicious treatment from humans, understandably turns to violence. (Umana 9597). This is in comparison to how the working class had started the French Revolution with high hopes of ending poverty, and beneficent intentions of throwing over capitalism, but it grossly ended up in violence, an era of terror and slaughtering of many people. Also the physical size and prowess the monster are meant to symbolize the huge population and the strength of the working class during the revolution.

Khan The monster is said to be nave in the beginning, when it starts learning stuff from Frankensteins texts and DeLaceys family. It feeds off of their ideas and views, harboring no opinion of its own. Throughout the novel, the creature is presented as an example of discrimination prevalent in the society, and is ostracized for its ugly looks. This represents how the society outrageously discriminates against the minority and pushes them to the brink of

revolting openly. The monster after denial from so many people, including its own creator, rebels and seeks vengeance by killing innocent people. The feelings of kindness and gentleness, which I had entertained but a few moments before, gave place to hellish rage and gnashing of teeth. Inflamed by pain, I vowed eternal hatred and vengeance to all mankind. (Shelly p.96) This in turns make the monster more powerful than even its creator. Dr. Frankenstein becomes a slave to the product of his own labor. This concrete example is an abstract portion of the Marxist Doctrine. Another perfect display of the Marxist Class theory is in Justines character. She is considered a maid of the family and Shelly signifies her dehumanization by letting Justine take the blame for a death she is definitely not guilty of. Justine even ends up confessing for the murder and asking for people to forgive her. This is not only a social injustice, but even reflects the sublime patient nature of a woman. The reorganization of self-identity is a very crucial issue in the Marxist critism. (Pokhrel p.76). The process of self-identification is so that a person understands his/her own significance in the society. Self indicates a persons personality or character that makes them different from other people. (Hornby 1376). The Monster, an antagonist does not recognizes his own Self and that is why that even until the end of the novel he has a conflicting personality, when he mourns over Victors death and decide to die itself also. The story of this ugly, larger

Khan than life monster raises complex questions of not only social classes, but also those of gender, motherhood and fatherhood.

According to Marx, The ideas of the ruling class are in every epoch the ruling ideas: i.e., the class which is the ruling material force of society is at the same time its ruling intellectual force. (Marx German 656). This is evident from Shellys novel Frankenstein where Victor who belongs to the ruling class is enforcing his ideas on the society. And this enlightenment of new ideas is not only symbolizing the creation of life, but even other scientific technologies. In 1818 when Shelly wrote this novel the world was going through the tussle war between science and nature. Therefore at that time such an idea seemed a lot far-fetched, but in todays time with animal cloning and development of synthetic body organs, the thought of artificial life is not just an idea of the ruling class, but it holds out to be a reality. In an article by Raymond Braford, English Literature Professor, at Westminster College Utah, he directly compares Shellys Frankenstein to Karl Marxs Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. He says, Shelleyss Frankenstein implicitly upholds aspects of Marxs doctrine of estranged labor by highlighting the alienation Victor experiences when he reduces his self-expression to a tool in a dehumanizing and all consuming quest for undiscovered knowledge. (Bradford 7-10). The tale of Frankenstein goes beyond economical criticism of the society; its a tale of the oppressive institutions that guide our society; institutions including slavery and capitalism. It reciprocates the role of master and slave. Victor had created the creature to improve life for humanity, but he ended up being threatened by the intimidating physique of his own creation, which eventually tries to kill him. This is what the society during the early 1800s was going through, and it was clearly reflected in Mary Shelleys novel.

Khan Therefore we might conclude that this novel is not just a gothic fiction novel for an

entertaining read, but it has denial of the crippling subjugation of the society, and exploitation of the less privileged at the hands of those who possess more power. A class barrier had existed at that time with the poor rebelling against those in power and trying to overthrow them. But through Frankenstein, especially its ending, where the monster regrets and mourns over Victors death, Shelly implicates that fighting over this class division is not futile and is baseless.

Khan

Works Cited Ricoeur, Paul. Paul Ricoeur (1913-2005). Iep.utm.edu. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 4 Aug. 2003. Web. 18 Aug. 2011. Marx, Karl and Friedrich Engels. The Communist Manifesto. London: Penguin Classics, 2002. Print. Umana, Luisa. Mary Shellys Frankenstein: A Marxist Reading. 8 May 2009. Web. 18 Aug. 2011. Shelley, Mary. Frankenstei. New York: W.W. Norton and Company, A Norton Critical Edition, 1996. Print. Hornby, A.S. 2005. Ed. Oxford Advanced Learners Dictionary of Current English. 8th ed. New York : OUP Pokhrel, Mohan Kumar. Manifestation of The Self in Shelleys Frankenstein. Journal of The Department of English Mahendra Multiple Campus, Dharan. Volume. III. (2011): 76-80. Print. Marx, Karl. The German Ideology. Literary theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan, Malden: Blackwell, 2005. 643-646 Bradford, Raymond. When an End Becomes a Means: Self-Expression in Marx and Shelley. Westministercollege.edu. Westminister College, Salt Lake City. Utah. N.d. Web. 18 Aug 2011. Marx, Karl. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844 (in part) From Plato to Derrida. Ed. Forrest E. Baird and Walter Kaufmann. 4th ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 2003. 1011-1019.