Brown 1

Jordon N. Brown

16 April 2015

EH 469

Dr. Kevin Dupré

An Imperial Monstrosity

Colonialism in Frankenstein

There an inhuman and uncultured raceHowled hideous praises to their Demon-God;

They rushed to war, tore from the mother’s wombThe unborn child

-qtd. From “Queen Mab” Percy Bysshe Shelley

1. Introductory thoughts on the novel and its place in the modern world.

Frankenstein has, in many ways, outshone the author. Mary Shelley and her genius has

been lost to the grandeur of her masterpiece. In this regard she is akin to the likes of Van Gogh

and his Starry Night. In this respect both artists lost contact with their works. Van Gogh’s

painting is plastered upon umbrellas, shoes, and infant mobiles. Starry Night is a scene of sorrow

and heartache. Contained in its frames is a view from the artist’s third floor bedroom in Saint-

Paul-de-Mausole lunatic asylum. He wrote to his brother that, “Through the iron-barred

window…I can see an enclosed square of wheat . . . above which, in the morning, I watch the

sun rise in all its glory” (qtd. in Naifeh and Smith 747). Later he wrote to his brother that, “This

morning I saw the countryside from my window a long time before sunrise with nothing but the

morning star, which looked very big” (qtd. in Van Gogh Letters Project). In this light, the

magnificent painting known worldwide has, like Frankenstein, taken a life of its own. The novel

in the public sphere is largely about the horror and science fiction associated with the Creation.

Brown 2

Horror is present, as Mary Shelley notes in her introduction, “Frightful must it be; for supremely

frightful would be the effect of any human endeavour to mock the…mechanism of the Creator of

the world. His success would terrify the artist; and he would rush away from his odious

handywork, horror stricken” (9). This notion of fright and horror is primarily the only aspect of

the novel known to modern audiences. Maurice Hindle argues that Mary Shelley is not merely

showcasing a commonplace gothic ghost story; no, Shelley presents the reader with something

much greater. As Hindle remarks in the introduction to the Penguin Classics edition of

Frankenstein, “She [Mary Shelley] set out in her story to ‘speak to the mysterious fears of our

nature and awaken a thrilling horror’” (xi). Through this, one may posit that the horror

Frankenstein awakes in the reader is being of our own nature, present in all of humanity. During

Shelley’s lifetime, a great horror was sweeping the world: slavery and colonialism. These

grievous tragedies are at the heart of Frankenstein.

Mary Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, is at its heart, a work of colonial literature. Due to

the pervasiveness of the novel and its overarching influence on society, the novel has been

observed, although seldom in a colonial light. This is largely due to the novels aspects of science

fiction. The novel is then disregarded when analyzing the effects of imperialism and colonialism.

However, the novel discusses these issues head on, and many a devoted scholar of colonial

narrative will readily pinpoint these aspects. For one, colonial narratives speak to one another. In

this respect, Joseph Conrad’s, Heart of Darkness is akin to Frankenstein. For instance, Kurtz’

assertion of his godhood seen in his creation of a miniature world in the center of Africa is

strikingly similar to Frankenstein’s creation of the Monster. Furthermore, both Promethean

figures when confronted with the truths of their actions back away in fright. Kurtz’ “’The

Brown 3

Horror! The Horror!’” (116). What has come to be the slogan or adage of postcolonialism, the

horror experienced by Kurtz and Marlow is at its heart, the same horror Shelley was speaking of.

However, the majority of casual readership has brushed over these issues and pushed

them aside. Therefore, when analyzing Frankenstein in a colonial lens the reader will be faced

with a daunting task. In studying the text the reader will be curious as to how, exactly, this work

of science fiction relates to the issues of slavery and colonialism. Many will ask why bother

studying the novel in this light. These same individuals will argue that Frankenstein does not

deal with colonialism outright. This is due to the novel not being a colonial manuscript akin to

Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart or Joseph Conrad’s Heart of Darkness. Instead, the novel

eschews other work’s obvious and blatant reflections on the effects of imperialism. With the

common understanding that the novel is nothing more than a gothic horror and science fiction

narrative, Frankenstein, like colonialism itself, has been embedded in the psyche of the Occident.

As a result Frankenstein has been absorbed in the national conscience. Like the over-arching

affects of colonialism, Frankenstein is known and yet not seen nor analyzed.

To fully understand the novels relevance with the colonial narrative, the reader has to

understand the world in which it was written. Although writings on the impact slavery and

colonialism had on Mary Shelley are rare, they do exist. In John Clement Ball’s essay Imperial

Monstrosities, he makes note of the influences on Mary Shelley. “She would certainly have been

aware of the issue, not only because of its high public profile, but through Shelley's personal

relations. Coleridge…who probably had the greatest influence on Mary as a child” (33).

Reminiscent of numerous poems, such as “Queen Mab” by Shelley’s husband, Frankenstein too

evokes colonialism through its descriptions of the monster. Furthermore, it is important to note

the events occurring in the world during the novels timeline. Ball notes that, “The historical

Brown 4

moment of Frankenstein coincides with the anti-slavery movement: Shelley composed it between

the abolition of the slave trade in 1807 and the emancipation of slaves in 1833. Indeed, she began

writing just after the longest slave rebellion had taken place in May 1816 in Barbados” (33). This

“contrapuntal reading”, as Said describes it, of Frankenstein allows the novel to be read in a

colonial light. For as Said argues,

‘contrapuntal reading’…means reading a text with an

understanding of what is involved when an author shows, for

instance, that a colonial sugar plantation is seen as important to the

process of maintaining a particular style of life in England.

Moreover, like all literary texts, these are not bounded by their

formal historic beginnings and endings….The point is that

contrapuntal reading must take account of both processes, that of

imperialism and that of resistance to it… (721)

Colonialism, therefore, is portrayed in Frankenstein, in the same way colonialism is in

Jane Eyre. Although the Orient is never visited or actually seen in Charlotte Brontë’s novel,

nonetheless the Orient and the West Indies both play a crucial role in the narrative. Seen in the

opening pages of the novel, the reader first finds Jane describing herself as, “mounted into the

window-seat: gathering up my feet, I sat cross-legged, like a Turk; and, having drawn the red

moreen curtain nearly close, I was shrined in double retirement” (10). In this beginning scene of

the novel, the reader at once finds a colonial narrative. Although easily and understandably

mistaken for a mere descriptive passage, this Jane’s record of her sitting like a Turk displays a

profound impact of colonialism upon the writing and reading of the novel. As will be discussed

at length later in this essay, seemingly inconspicuous passages like these are directly correlated

Brown 5

to the impact of imperialism upon the world. For if the image of a Turk sitting cross legged in a

type of shrine had not been embedded into the culture of imperialist Britain, then Charlotte

Brontë would have used a far different image. However, due to the intrepid explorers of imperial

Britain, any reader of Jane Eyre, past or present, immediately recognizes such an image of a

cross-legged Turk (an Americanized re-wording would be ‘Indian style’). This reading of Jane

Eyre directly falls into a contrapuntal reading of the text. This type of understand of the impact

of colonialism upon both the native and imperial subjugator is required for a similar reading of

Frankenstein. Although a seemingly daunting task, nonetheless it is quite simple in that

colonialism has in large part built the Occident world; and, as a result, the colonialist narrative is

ingrained in the psyche of the Occident.

Unfortunately, modern society’s perversion of Frankenstein has made such a reading

difficult, as the uninformed audience has been told a distorted version of the story. The novel has

been altered in large part due to Hollywood’s involvement. Over time with the distortion of who

the monster truly is, many confuse the creator and the monster. As a result the Monster is

oftentimes referred to as Frankenstein. A walk through any Halloween costume store will make

this clear. However, the conception, or misconception of Frankenstein, is oftentimes recognized.

Even in the new sitcom created by the comic genius Tina Fey entitled, Unbreakable Kimmy

Schmidt, Frankenstein has an effect. In it, one of the shows main characters, a black actor named

Titus Andromedon gets a job as a ‘Frankenwolf’ at a theme restaurant in New York City. To his

dismay, he realizes that people actually treat him better when in costume. Furthermore, people

are less scared of him as a monster than a black man walking down the street. Although taken to

the comedic level, nonetheless, this is a direct reference not only to the level of which

Frankenstein has gained, but is also a critique on American culture. Society, like colonialists,

Brown 6

have claimed the novel for their own. Because of the perversion of Mary Shelley’s story, the

novel becomes that much more difficult to study and analyze. Especially in a theory as

supposedly linear as postcolonialism. Postcolonialism, the theory alluded to, is a broad theory

dealing with the impacts of Western Imperialism. In this respect, the postcolonialist argues that

the terms mentioned above evoke a nature of slavery, control, economic empowerment, nation

building, wars, and hardship. In Frankenstein a myriad of themes are found which coexist with

other colonial works. Ideas on the subaltern, mimicry, as well as identity are all present in

Frankenstein; thus allowing the novel to fall in line with postcolonial theory. These three tools

and tropes of colonialist literature appear time and again in Frankenstein. This is imperatively

seen in the characters of Robert Walton, Victor Frankenstein, Elizabeth Lavenza, and of course,

the Monster.

2. The critical perspective

The postcolonial and feminist theorist, Anne McClintock eloquently defines colonialism

and the affect it has had on society. She states that, “From the outset, people's experiences of

desire and rage, memory and power, community and revolt are inflected and mediated by the

institutions through which they find their meaning - and which they, in turn, transform” (Imperial

Leather, 154). This then comes to be the heart of postcolonial thought. On the surface these

over-arching elements represent both sides of colonialism, the colonizer and colonized. The

colonized exists in the margins and liminal spaces of society. In this, the idea of the colonized is

static and in no way fixed. The colonized comes to be not only the slave, but also many other

subjugated individuals. The Indonesian woman, the Palestinian child, the Native American, all

and many others would fall neatly into the category of the colonized person.

Brown 7

However, being that postcolonialism as a theory began in the postmodernist era, the

issues dealt within postcolonial thought are not always didactic. The colonized and colonizer

become in a way meshed. The colonized becomes at once an enigma. This thought is evoked in

Henry Louis Gates Jr.’s essay, Talking Black: Critical Signs of the Times. He asks, “In what

languages shall we choose to speak, and write, our own criticisms? What are we now to do with

the enabling masks of empowerment that we have donned as we have practiced one mode of

formal criticism or another?” (743). The theories following in the wake of deconstruction all

appear to take on the confounding synchronal layers of identity. In Of Grammatology, Jacques

Derrida lays the foundation for the argument of deconstruction of the prevailing notions of

truths. He states in the opening chapter that:

In all senses of the word, writing thus comprehends language. Not

that the word ‘writing’ has ceased to designate the signifier of the

signifier, but it appears, strange as it may seem, that ‘signifier of

the signifier’ no longer defines accidental doubling and fallen

secondarity….This, strictly speaking, amounts to destroying the

concept of ‘sign’ and its entire logic (98-99).

Therefore, it comes as no surprise that the identity associated with the titles given to the

colonized by the colonizer come to have no meaning. This will at once be clear when discussing

the relationship between Frankenstein and the Monster. In the real world nation of Burkina Faso

Derrida’s theory has played out for the world to see. Initially a French colony, the nation gained

independence in 1960 and was named by the colonizer as Upper Volta. This delineation by the

colonizer comes to be the real life example of how titles and words are broken under the

postcolonial lens. As Frantz Fanon states, “Colonialism is not satisfied with snaring the people in

Brown 8

its net or of draining the colonized brain of any form or substance. With a kind of perverted

logic, it turns its attention to the past of the colonized people and distorts it, disfigures it, and

destroys it” (On National Culture 629-630). Once France removed themselves from the area,

they left behind not only physical reminders in the buildings and infrastructure, but also in the

forced reappropriation of an entire national conscious. France and other European powers

vacating of colonized lands left behind a people with no identity. The identity which was left for

Africa was essentially created by the various imperial powers. In Burkina Faso, France left

behind a pseudo identity in the region. Not until August of 1987 with the leader Thomas

Sankara’s renaming of the country did the nation experience this removal of a colonial presence.

The Monster too, experiences the dilemma of not having a name. From this he questions his very

existence, asking himself, “’What was I?’ The question again recurred, to be answered only with

groans” (124). And later the Monster makes clear how the lack of identity has affected him,

telling his creator that, “I found myself similar, yet at the same time strangely unlike to the

beings concerning whom I read….My person was hideous and my stature gigantic. What did this

mean? Who was I? What was I? Whence did I come? What was my destination? These questions

continually recurred, but I was unable to solve them” (131).

Not only in Burkina Faso, but throughout the colonized world, the reappropriation of

another’s culture created a mythic image of Africa and other colonized groups. This can be seen

in Joseph Conrad’s novella, Heart of Darkness, a work oftentimes compared along with

Frankenstein. As Said argues in Narrative and Social Space, “Conrad’s Africans…come from a

huge library of Africanism, so to speak, as well as from Conrad’s personal experiences. There is

no such thing as a direct experience, or reflection, of the world in the language of a text” (722).

The world idealized and captured in literature has had a profound effect on the Occidental’s

Brown 9

views of the Orient, Africa, the Americas, and other regions. This is why the passage of Jane

Eyre sitting like a Turk is crucial in the understanding of the work as a colonialist work.

Furthermore, Frankenstein’s understanding of the Orient, and Robert Walton’s knowledge of the

distant North, are all based on the assumptions made by the colonizers before them. This is

evident in Walton’s beliefs of the Far North and existence of a North West Passage. He writes to

his sister that, “There…I will put some trust in preceding navigators-there snow and frost are

banished; and, sailing over a calm sea, we may be wafted to a land surpassing in wonders and in

beauty every region hitherto discovered on the habitable globe” (15). Walton goes on to write

that,

I shall satiate my curiosity….This expedition has been a favourite

dream of my early years. I have read with ardour the accounts of

various voyages which have been made in the prospect of arriving

at the North Pacific Ocean through the seas which surround the

pole. You may remember that a history of all the voyages made for

purposes of discovery composed the whole of our…library (16).

Said discusses this notion of Africanism, the term I believe can be used for the limited

understand of not only African cultures but also those of other colonized lands, further in the

text. He argues that,

What we have in Heart of Darkness-a work of immense influence,

having provoked many readings and images- is a politicized,

ideologically saturated Africa which to some intents and purposes

was the imperialized place….To most Europeans, reading a rather

rarefied text like Heart of Darkness was often as close as they

Brown 10

came to Africa, and in that limited sense it was part of the

European effort to hold on to...Africa (722).

Imperialism and colonialism have, like Frankenstein, been absorbed in society to an

almost invisible level. This is evident from the first pages of the novel, with Robert Walton’s

journey to the margins of the world. Walton writes to his sister that, “I shall satiate my ardent

curiosity with the sight of a part of the world never before visited, and may tread a land never

before imprinted by the foot of man (16). In this, Mary Shelley is not only foreshadowing the

inherent connection between Walton and Frankenstein, but in doing so, she connects their ideals

and dreams. Both seek to discover what has never been seen, and both attempt to create life. One

through the inherent power of maps and empire; and, the other through the manifestation of life.

Anne McClintock makes this same connection when delving into the impacts of ‘discovery’. She

posits that, “During the eighteenth century…‘planetary consciousness’ emerged. Planetary

consciousness drawing the whole world into a single “science of order,” in Foucalt’s phrase. Carl

Linne provided the impetus for this immodest idea with the publication in 1735 of Systema

Natura, which promised to organize all plant forms into a single genesis narrative” (34). Through

this, the connection between the explorer, scientist, and artist all working with the empire is seen.

McClintock continues this assertation with the statement that, “Inspired by Linne, hosts of

explorers, botanists, natural historians and geographers set out with the vocation of ordering the

world’s forms into a global science of the surface and an optics of truth. In this way, the

Enlightenment project coincided with the imperial project” (34). This is the cause of Walton’s

journey north. In expanding the scientific knowledge accumulated within the boundaries of

empire, he is furthering its control over the world. Frankenstein defines this notion of the

sciences furthering empire when he tells Walton that, “…if no man allowed any pursuit

Brown 11

whatsoever to interfere with the tranquility of his domestic affections, Greece had not been

enslaved; Caesar would have spare his country; America would have been discovered more

gradually; and the empires of Mexico and Peru had not been destroyed” (56). Through the ages,

the subversive policies of the various empires to control the colonized has allowed the actions

used to go unseen and unimpeded.

The nature and outcome of colonialism has become invisible in the respect that it has

become a part of the world’s subconscious. As the effects of colonialism have been embedded in

the psyche of Western minds, the nature and arguments put forth in postcolonial theory were, for

a long period, evaded. The supposed authorities of the Occidental world have for the large part of

history have not ignored the effects of colonialism. One merely has to look at the decadence

attributed to colonization to note how the West never ignored colonization. Instead, however,

they evaded the nature and implications of colonization. In doing so, by not coming forthright on

the non-monetary outcomes attributed to Imperialist expansion, the colonizer comes to obfuscate

the impacts of colonialist exploitation. For is it not easier to evade the procedures that grant

wealth and power? By only focusing one’s attention on the outcomes, the means do not matter.

In this limited analysis on the history of colonial thought, the makings of postcolonial thought

begin to show. This is at the heart of Frankenstein’s warning to Walton. Although dissimilar in

their experiments, they two men are alike in reason and resolve. Walton shows his unease

outright in the second letter to his sister when he writes with what appears to be an uneasy hand

that,

I have one want which I have never yet been able to satisfy; and

the absence of the object of which I now feel as a most severe evil.

I have no friend, Margaret: when I am glowing with the

Brown 12

enthusiasm of success, there will be none to participate my joy….I

shall commit my thoughts to paper, it is true; but that is a poor

medium for the communication of feeling (19).

Walton, like Frankenstein; and they like the empire, are alone in their successes and

struggles. The colonized do not care about the successes of the colonizer, just like Walton’s crew

cares not for his success. This is what the Frankenstein seen at the beginning of the novel has

come to understand. Frankenstein’s opening remarks to Walton being, “You may easily perceive,

Captain Walton, that I have suffered great and unparalled misfortunes ….You seek knowledge

and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification of your wishes may not be a

serpent to sting you, as mine has been” (30-31).

3. Literary Analysis

The Frankenstein seen here, at the beginning of the novel is far different from the

Frankenstein of legend, the man who conquered what all have tried to, and yet none can. That

being death. The Frankenstein seen at the beginning of the novel is one burdened with the

creation of life, and has become the embodiment of the greatest of postcolonial phrases, “The

White Man’s Burden”. Seen in what McClintock refers to as the domesticity associated with

imperialism, this burden affects the entirety of the colonialist’s mission. Seen in the Pears’ Soap

advertisement found in McClure’s Magazine, published in 1899. The domesticity portrayed

herein is directly connected with the supposed cleanliness, superiority, and power of colonialism.

These notions of cleaning and purifying the empire are held to the outskirts of the empire. These

spaces are the margins and liminal spaces of the empire, set between the colonized and home

land of the empire (33). The soap advertised then ascends to a higher plane, for as McClintock

asserts it, “purifies and preserves the white male body from the contamination in the threshold

Brown 13

zone of empire….In imperial fiction…boundary objects and liminal scenes recur ritualistically.

As colonials traveled back and forth across the thresholds…crises and boundary confusion were

warded off and contained...” (33). Frankenstein is at once torn because he broke this precarious

and balanced state associated with colonialism. Similar to the evils of slavery brought into the

empires of England and America, the monster created by Frankenstein too ‘defiles’ the home

empire. Frankenstein’s burden is described to Walton throughout the novel. From the beginning

with Frankenstein’s rescue, to the end with his final appeal to Walton to end his journey, “See

happiness in tranquility, and avoid ambition, even if it be only the apparent innocent one of

distinguishing yourself in science and discoveries” (220). Through the Frankenstein narrative,

the Promethean legend comes full circle in Frankenstein. He, like the colonizing powers of the

Occident, attempted to ascend to the level of the gods. His creation of life is at once a horror, and

in the end of his life, Frankenstein, like the colonizer experiencing “The White Man’s Burden”

seeks to purify the empire of his creation. This pursuit of Frankenstein’s is a difficult trial, and is

seen when analyzing the impacts of colonization upon the real world. For this is because, the

entirety of the Occidental world has been crafted upon the backs of the colonized individual.

Therefore, the colonization of foreign cultures has in large part built Western society.

Edward Said discusses this very issue in Culture and Imperialism. In this text, he argues that,

“Modern imperialism was so global and all-encompassing that virtually nothing escaped it…the

nineteenth-century contest over empire is still continuing today” (68). In this respect it is of no

surprise to find the works of poets and authors mirroring the current events. Moreover, this is

why readers find the works written during the period of European expansion so accessible and

relatable. The themes of colonizing and slavery echo across the world’s stage. This is readily

witnessed in the travelogues popularized in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Brown 14

The explorer and scholar, Richard F. Burton is a shining example of these explorers. In A

Pilgrimage to Al-Madinah and Meccah, Richard F. Burton acts like our modern travel guides,

and through his writings, the public conscious was saturated with tales of ‘wild’ and ‘uncivil’

tribes and lands. In this work Burton not only details his exploits in the Near East in a scholarly

fashion, but does so in a way that has captivated the minds of readers then and today. Published

in the late 19th century, the work is monumental in understanding just why Europe was (and is)

fascinated with foreign and colonized lands. He describes the minutest detail of the lives of

Muslims living in the Near Orient. Furthermore, Burton is key in connecting their lives to those

in England. In describing the slaves, Burton does this very thing. “Black slave girls here [Al-

Medinah] perform the complicated duties of servant-maids in England; they are taught to sew, to

cook, and to wash…” (Volume 2, 12). Here, Burton is quick to point out the slaves in the

Muslim world share much in common with English servants. This description aids the

contemporary reader in finding connections with the Muslim world. In his writings, Burton

echoes the biases held by Frankenstein and others. No, he does falter in his nature of superiority.

In describing the work ethic of the people in Al-Madinah, he states that their, “…procrastination

belongs more or less to all Orientals” (21). Later on once in Mecca, Burton describes them to,

“display none of that doggedness of vice which distinguishes the sinner of a more stolid race”

(236-237). In this, Burton acknowledges that the empire is fraught with problems and sinners,

and yet still distinguishes them to be different and of a ‘more stolid race’. Richard Burton is

connected back with the explorer Robert Walton of Frankenstein. Although Burton and Robert

Walton did not set out to write a manifesto on the superiority of the Occident, nonetheless, they

like other authors of the time inherently draw these same conclusions. For Mary Shelley these

connections are immediately seen in Frankenstein.

Brown 15

The issues and outcomes of colonialism are so ingrained in Occidental culture that they

reverberate through every page of its discourse. Edward Said argues this notion in many of his

works. In, Orientalism, Said brings forth the notion that Colonialism and the Occidental view of

the Orient has formed Western civilization. He argues in the introductory essay that,

“Orientalism is a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction

made between ‘the Orient’ and… ‘The Occident’” (2). Said goes on to write that nearly all

intellectuals and writers “…have accepted the basic distinction between East and West as the

starting point for elaborate theories, epic novels, social descriptions, and political accounts

concerning the Orient, its people, customs, ‘mind’, destiny, and so on. This Orientalism can

accommodate Aeschylus …Victor Hugo, Dante, and Karl Marx” (2-3).

This disparity between the Orient and Occident is overarching on the world’s stage.

From the relationships between slaves and whites in Huckleberry Finn to the entirety of Jane

Eyre, the nature of colonization and dominance radiates. Colonialism is so ingrained in our

Occidental worldview that it has become largely overlooked when analyzing works that do not

inherently take on the issue. The influences of Imperialism and the resulting views of the Orient

came to a head in the 19th century as England and the rest of Europe as these colonial powers

turned away from the Americas and instead looked towards Africa and the East. Richard F.

Burton once more takes center stage in explaining the European enthusiasm for all things

Oriental. Said describes the reasoning for Burton’s influence by stating,

As a traveling adventurer Burton conceived of himself as sharing

the life of the people in whose lands he lived….Disguised as an

Indian Muslim doctor, accomplish[ed] the pilgrimage to

Mecca….Thus his accounts of travel in the East reveal to us a

Brown 16

consciousness aware of these things and able to steer a narrative

course through them: no man who did not know Arabic and Islam

as well as Burton could have gone as far as he did… (195)

Through Burton, the everyman living in Europe had access to a world completely removed from

his own. John Clement Ball discusses the affects of colonialism upon Mary Shelley herself. In

his essay, he argues that, “Frankenstein was written at a time when European expansion and rule

over ‘darker’ places and races had long seemed part of the natural order to most Europeans- as

aristocracy and monarchy had” (33). With the dynamic relationships and changing status quo

occurring during the time, it is no wonder that a genius such as Mary Shelley should engulf

everything. The Orientalia and impacts of empire were coming to light. In this way, Orientalism

has, as Said argues, “Quite aside from the scientific discoveries of things Oriental made by

learned professionals during this period in Europe, there was the virtual epidemic of Orientalia

affecting every major Poet, essayist, and philosopher of the period” (51). Thus, it comes as no

surprise for a reader to find Orientalism strewn across so many works of literature. As made note

of before, Walton’s journey, although on the surface scientific, is nonetheless imperial. Found

once more in his letters to his sister, the reader finds that Walton’s ship is named ‘Archangel’

(19). This is a direct foreshadowing to not only his saving of Frankenstein amongst the ice flows,

but also both mens journeys. They hope to save their way of lives through their creations. In

doing so, they are acting the role of colonizer. From the colonizing of foreign lands, the study of

the Orient, and scientific marvels, these issues grabbed not only the attention of Mary Shelly and

her peers, but also the modern audience today.

As mentioned previously, popular culture has appropriated Frankenstein, and

transformed it to fit the needs of an entertainment seeking audience. In this world, Frankenstein

Brown 17

is the enemy held up in a lightning struck castle, with a reanimated blubbering idiot coming to

life. In reality the only spark found in the awakening of the Monster is metaphorical.

Frankenstein reminisces on the night his Creature awoke, telling Walton that,

It was on a dreary night in November….With an anxiety that

almost amounted to agony, I collected the intsruments of life

around me, that I might infuse a spark of being into the lifeless

thing that lay at my feet. It was already one in the morning; the

rain pattered dismally against the panes, an my candle was nearly

burnt out, when, by the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I

saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open; it breathed hard, and

a convulsive motion agitated its limbs….now that I had finished,

the beauty of the dream vanished, and breathless horror and disgust

filled my heart….I rushed out of the room (58).

Instead of this scene, the public’s image of the creation of the Monster typically deals with a

strong storm, angry peasants, a hunchback assistant, and a monster with two screws in his neck.

With this perversion of the novel, it comes as no surprise that the average reader has overlooked

the novel in its place among colonial literature. For many ask, “How then is a work of Science

Fiction, a novel set in a different world, colonial? How can a novel in which man does the

impossible and pseudo magical, have anything remotely to do with colonization or the Orient?”

When looking at the issues and nature of colonization head on it is of no difficulty to see these

issues head on. The world in Frankenstein is not sci-fi as popular culture would implore you to

read it as; no, instead it is set in the world of our own. What Victor Frankenstein does in creating

life is no different from what the English attempted (and in ways accomplished) during the

Brown 18

Victorian Age. Furthermore, what Victor Frankenstein seeks to achieve is considered by others

in the text to be impossible, even to them. When telling his story to Robert Walton, Frankenstein

states that, “In my education my father had taken the greatest precautions that my mind should

be impressed with no supernatural horrors” (52). In this easily overlooked statement, Mary

Shelley is guiding the reader, no imploring the reader, to view the novel as though it were set in

the real world. Not in a world of magical realism or fantasy, no this world is fraught with the

same limitations and rules as our own. Victor Frankenstein merely achieves what the imperialist

has been trying for a millennia. “Remember” Frankenstein says, “I am not recording the vision

of a madman. The sun does not more certainly shine in the heavens, than that which I now affirm

is true. Some miracle might have produced it, yet the stages of the discovery were distinct and

probable….I succeeded in discovering the cause of generation and life; nay, more, I became

myself capable of bestowing animation upon lifeless matter” (53). So here Shelley subtlety

shows the reader the world of her novel. Robert Walton is so amazed and bewildered by the tale

that Frankenstein feels the need to interject in this way. Would they have had this discourse if the

world was full of the supernatural? If this were a world of magic and myth then Walton’s

amazement would not be so profound as to make Frankenstein pause his story to appease and

calm Walton.

Merely a paragraph later traces of Orientalism are readily found when Frankenstein

describes himself to be, “…like the Arabian who had been buried with the dead and found a

passage to life, aided only by one glimmering and seemingly ineffectual light” (53). This passage

is key in understanding how the issues of Orientalism and colonialism are approached in the

novel. Mary Shelley is in no way the typical blatant imperialist colonizer expected of a work in

which colonial influences are present. She is no Rudyard Kipling, Joseph Conrad, or modern day

Brown 19

Dave Edgars. One would be hard pressed to place her even remotely near these authors. In no

way am I saying that Mary Shelley is defending, applauding, or celebrating European

colonization and expansion. Instead, Shelley is an author whom William Faulkner would adore.

Through Victor Frankenstein, she writes of the conflicts of the heart. In this light, Frankenstein is

emblematic, as mentioned before of the colonizer experiencing “The White Man’s Burden”. In

creating life, Frankenstein soared amongst the gods, only to fall from grace. He is the one

damned; not the creation. In doing so, by having Victor Frankenstein come to embody the very

nature of the world around him, the novel comes to be a realization of the world. Although surely

containing fantastical elements, by having the core struggle being about mankind’s nature, this

work is realized in our own world. Victor Frankenstein becomes the embodiment of European

colonization. Victor Frankenstein’s efforts to create life are at the core the soul of colonization.

By stripping another cultures way of life and replacing it with your own, is the colonizer not

creating life? By taking individuals who have lived a particular way for years and replacing it

with another’s has there life not been destroyed and they give a new one? In The Inhuman, Jean-

François Lyotard writes on the very subject of dehumanization. In the opening pages, he writes

that “Dehumanized still implies human- a dead human, but conceivable: because dead in human

terms, still capable of being sublated in thought” (10). In this respect, it is no wonder that

Frankenstein’s creation of the Monster evokes a sense of colonization, in that to give life to the

deceased is in effect sublated in thought. Therefore, the creation of new culture by the colonist is

asking to the creation of life. In this respect with Frankenstein’s creation of the Monster, he is the

acting colonizer. He has colonized life itself. Not by conquering a civilization, but instead by

conquering the very fabric of the universe. In doing so he follows the path of the colonizer.

Brown 20

Victor Frankenstein immediately warns Walton of pursuits of science and glory, stating,

“You seek for knowledge and wisdom, as I once did; and I ardently hope that the gratification of

your wishes may not be a serpent to sting you…” (31). The Frankenstein seen in the beginning of

the novel is a weary, broken, and defeated man. All has crumbled around him, and everything he

has known has fallen. This Frankenstein comes to represent the weight of guilt that burdens the

colonizer. Frankenstein is Europe at its supposed height. He has conquered the unconquerable,

and yet cannot find any solace. In his dying breaths he implores Walton to cease his enterprise.

Frankenstein tells Walton that, “‘When younger’ said he, ‘I believed myself destined for some

great enterprise…. This sentiment of the worth of my nature supported me….But this thought,

which supported me in the commencement of my career, now serves only to plunge me lower in

the dust…I am chained in an eternal hell….I must pursue and destroy the being to whom I gave

existence; then my lot on earth will be fulfilled. And I may die” (214-215). The imperialism that

these two men display is inherently linked. One is the outward view of colonialism, that it is

bring ‘light’ into the dark world. That through colonization, England and other nations are able

to teach and civilize the area. Walton and Frankenstein in the beginning represent this facet of

Imperialism. The Frankenstein portrayed at the end of the chronology represents a different view

of colonization. The Frankenstein picked up by Walton and his crew is emblematic of the

problems and issues that colonialism faces. Gayatri Spivak discusses this in her essay, Three

Women’s Texts and a Critique of Imperialism. She states that, “I propose to take Frankenstein…

and focus on it in terms of that sense of English cultural identity…. Within that focus we are

obliged to admit that, although Frankenstein is ostensibly about the origin and evolution of man

….Let me say at once that there is plenty of incidental imperialist sentiment in Frankenstein”

(254). The two separate colonists come to represent this evolution in society that Spivak is

Brown 21

discussing. Following this passage, Victor Frankenstein begins his story of how he too, once

searched for glory.

Victor Frankenstein’s experience with colonization first stems from his childhood.

Born into a wealthy aristocratic family, he was expected to act properly and behave like those in

his position are deemed to live. Furthermore, the addition of Elizabeth Lavenza brings a new

dynamic into the relationship between the colonizers and colonized. Spivak describes the family

of Frankenstein as, “She [Mary Shelley] presents…three characters, childhood friends, who seem

to represent…the human subject: Victor Frankenstein, the forces of theoretical reason or "natural

philosophy"; Henry Clerval, the forces of practical reason or "the moral relations of things"; and

Elizabeth Lavenza, that aesthetic judgment” (256). These three representing humanity display

how flawed colonialism is. Notice how Elizabeth is described by Spivak as the “…aesthetic

judgment”. To Frankenstein this girl is a prize. Victor describes the family first meeting her in

the second chapter of the novel. Frankenstein describes to Walton how when they saw her as a

toddler among the gypsies as “…of a different stock…. Her hair was the brightest living gold…

despite the poverty of her clothing, seemed to set a crown of distinction on her head….none

could behold her without looking on her as of a distinct species…” (36). At first a reader may

come to view this merely as Frankenstein describing how lovely she is. What is important is that

she fits into the imperialistic view of beauty. She, Elizabeth is surrounded by gypsies who look

far different than she. Furthermore, Frankenstein later alludes that Elizabeth was, “the daughter

of a Milanese nobleman. Her mother was a German…” (36). In this respect, Elizabeth is not only

of like appearance to Frankenstein, but also of the right social status. By being able to appear like

the colonizers in the nobility of Frankenstein’s household, Elizabeth is at once able to stand

within their home. She is not equal with them, however. Frankenstein tells Walton that, “When

Brown 22

my father returned to Milan, he found playing with me...a creature…” (36-37). Frankenstein does

not initially refer to Elizabeth as a sister or human when referring to her in his home. Note that

while living with the poor villagers she is a child. Different from those around her but in a good

way. Once she comes to live with the Frankenstein’s in their manor in Milan, she is not close to

being like them. Elizabeth comes then to represent the awkward space the colonized sits. She is,

as Frankenstein relays receiving Elizabeth from his mother, “…a pretty present for my Victor….

She presented Elizabeth to me as her promised gift, I with childish seriousness, interpreted her

words literally and looked upon Elizabeth as mine – mine to protect, love, and cherish” (37).

Elizabeth is looked upon like a present, a creature, and being for the enjoyment of the

Frankenstein household. This is why Spivak eloquently described her as an artist’s muse.

Elizabeth gives inspiration to the colonist that they are doing good deeds. Remembering the state

in which Frankenstein is in while relaying this story to Walton gives insight into the reasons why

he refers to his beliefs as “childish seriousness” (37). His outlook on life and his past when

meeting Robert Walton displays a new understanding of life and humanity. This is why he

looked at Elizabeth with a childishness. His parents too looked at Elizabeth with childish views

believing her to be nothing more than a prize, a creature, and inspiration.

Elizabeth is the ‘reformed’ colonized. Outside of the novel, Elizabeth can be thought of

as being similar to Indian’s who were educated in English-Medium schools and further taught in

Cambridge. Taught to speak with British Accents, at one point in the British Empire, these

individuals were shining examples of the supposed glorious and good work the colonizer did.

This is who the Frankenstein’s are trying to create in Elizabeth. Gayatri Spivak mentions

Macaulay’s Infamous Minute, stating that, “At the intersection of European learning and colonial

power, Macaulay can conceive of nothing other than ‘a class of interpreters between us and the

Brown 23

millions we govern….in other words a mimic man’” (670). However, these individuals, like

Elizabeth were never viewed as full members of the colonial power. Elizabeth is able to rest in

the liminal space between fully a member of the Imperial authority, and also the oppressed

colonizer. Frankenstein’s creation, however, is unable to fill this space like Elizabeth is. He is

immediately unrecognizable and unable to assimilate with the creator. In this respect, the

Monster is unable to mimic the colonizer and therefore is shunned away from being in human.

She is nearly able to mimic the colonizer, and yet falls short at the same time. In Homi K.

Bhabha’s essay, On Mimicry and Man; The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse, describes the

efforts of the colonized to mimic the colonizer. He quotes Sir Edward Cust’s “Reflections on

West African Affairs” from 1839,

…every colony of the British Empire a mimic

representation of the British Constitution. But if the creature so

endowed has sometimes forgotten its real insignificance…. To

give to a colony the forms of independence is a mockery; she

would not be a colony for a single hour if she could maintain an

independent station (668-669).

Bhabha takes this belief that the colony is unable to sustain itself without the help of the

Empire and transforms it into a prevailing notion of colonization. Bhabha argues that mimicry is

the efforts of the colonizer to create a ‘recognizable’ Other. In doing so, the colonizer has

achieved its duty in reforming and helping the barbaric savages. Bhabha states that, “mimicry

emerges as one of the most elusive and effective strategies of colonial power and knowledge”

(669). He goes on to point that there is a menacing truth in mimicry, that of a loss of identity. He

labels this as “mimicry’s double vision”. He argues that, “its double vision which in disclosing

Brown 24

the ambivalence of colonial discourse also disrupts authority….these are the appropriate objects

of a colonialist chain of command, authorized versions of otherness” (671). The appropriate

objects seen by the colonizer depends on them. This also applies to the Creature in Frankenstein.

In being visually startling and different, the Monster is separated from his creator and world

around him. Frankenstein describes the Monster’s hideousness remarking, “Oh! No mortal could

support the horror of that countenance…. He was ugly then… it became a thing such as even

Dante could not have conceived” (59). Frankenstein alluding the creature to a denizen of Hell

from The Inferno encapsulates the view of the subaltern in imperialist society. To Frankenstein

and the colonial powers, the creature can never be human. No matter how educated it is, the

creature will always be as such. Elizabeth, however, is the very authorized version of the Other,

whereas her family who looks different is not. Frankenstein comes to the troubling conclusion

later in the novel that his creation to is not a recognizable Other.

The monster seen in Frankenstein is perhaps the most widely known character

from literature and film, and yet is still misunderstood. Even to the only family that had any

chance of looking past his form, the Monster is still shunned by society. Frankenstein comes to

represent the Other that is beyond changing. He tries to mimic those around him, but is incapable

of shedding the body he was given. This comes to symbolize the efforts of the colonized

assimilating to the colonial power. Unlike Elizabeth, however, no one is willing to teach the

Monster, and he is forced to learn on his own. The Monster describes trying to blend in,

exclaiming, “I ardently desired to understand them, and bent every faculty towards that purpose,

but found it utterly impossible” (121). The Creature will forever be an outsider because of the

color of his skin. Robert Sawyer compares the Monster with Caliban of Shakespeare’s The

Tempest. Sawyer writes in Mary Shelley and Shakespeare: Monstrous Creations, “…that both

Brown 25

creatures are racialized outsiders, both fear isolation and loneliness, both lament the lack of a

mate, and both struggle with language. Of all these, the most significant may be that both

creatures possess many of the conventionally racist traits often attributed to people of color,

stereotypes specifically applied to black slaves” (20). Edward Dauterich furthers this argument

of racism symbolized in the Monsters appearance. Dauterich expands the argument of racially

charged tension in the novel Frankenstein. He argues in the essay, Black Frankenstein: The

Making of an American Metaphor that, “The black Frankenstein monster is a key figure in the

history of monsters as politically charged forms, as well as in the history of monstrosity as a

constitutive feature of the language of politics”, he further adds that, “in which the metaphor has

been used politically to demonize slaves and other African Americans, challenge existing

hierarchies of race and gender, and influence cultural change in the United States” (765-766).

These statements about the Creature’s life and efforts to be like his master can be seen in

the lives of the colonized Indian nation. In the essay, Can the Subaltern Speak? Speculations on

Widow-Sacrifice, Gayatri C. Spivak discusses the troubles of the Indian culture under the regime

of English colonialism. She argues that, “…the post-colonial intellectual systematically

‘unlearns’ her privilege…” (676). The Creation, albeit learned will never understand those who

created him, and never be understood himself. Just like the self-immolating widow sacrifice of

the Sati in India that Spivak describes, to the same action taking by the Creature, the colonized

will die unable to become the colonizer.

4. A conclusion to the ideas put forth

The notions put forth of a novel known worldwide for its horror and mysticism can be,

when viewed on the surface, hard to swallow. However, when understanding the text in a

contrapuntal light, the thoughts posited by Mary Shelley are at once known. In understanding the

Brown 26

issues brought forth in the wake of colonialism, Frankenstein takes on a much more profound

meaning in the English cannon. No longer is the novel confined to the ghost stories told while on

vacation; no, instead the novel mirrors the issues faced in the hearts of both the colonized and

colonizer. The narrative is woven into the fabric of our own time, and is not weighted in to the

framework of a distant universe. Frankenstein is a novel to question the beliefs and ideologies of

an entire culture and world.

Through the lens of postcolonialism, Frankenstein becomes a mirror to the society and

events that shaped the world since before the discovery of the Americas. Since colonization

began, the world has been changed forever, and cannot go back. The effects of colonization can

still be felt all across the globe; and, one does not have to read a novel from the 19th century to

understand. Mary Shelley does not come forth with a manifesto on the horrors of colonialism.

Instead, she gives them a life of their own. Like Frankenstein creating life, Mary Shelley, too,

has created life: the life of colonialism. In her magnum opus, colonialism take on a horrific and

mysterious quality. Yet, this is what makes Mary Shelley’s work unique among others. She takes

the issues of colonialism and covertly discusses them with the reader. By not having the horrors

associated with colonialism, the issue is not held to a mere thirty minute lecture. Unlike essay on

the colonies, such as Macaulay’s, Frankenstein flourishes in its ability to confound, disturb, and

provoke the minds of its readers. This is why the novel is beloved by so many. All have

experienced the same wants and desires of Robert Walton. All have aspired great machinations

like Victor Frankenstein. And all have felt the longing and despair of the Creature. Through the

journeys of Frankenstein, Walton, Elizabeth and the Creature, postcolonialism is reflected.

Works Cited

Brown 27

Ball, John Clement. “Imperial Monstrosities: Frankenstein, The West Indies, And V. S.

Naipaul”. ARIEL 32.3 (2001): 31-58. Web. 12 May 2015.

Bhabha, Homi K. “On Mimicry and Man: The Ambivalence of Colonial Discourse”. Critical

Theory: A Reader for Literary and Cultural Studies. Ed. Robert Dale Parker. New York:

Oxford University Press, 2012. 668-675. Print.

Brontë, Charlotte. Jane Eyre. London: Penguin Books, 2006. Print.

Burton, Richard F. Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al-Medinah and Meccah: Vol II. Ed.

Lady Burton. London: G. Bell and Sons, 1913. Print.

Conrad, Joseph. Heart of Darkness. American University of Beirut. Pdf.

Dauterich, Edward. "Black Frankenstein: The Making of an American Metaphor." African

American Review 43.4 (2009): 765-6. ProQuest. Web. 12 May 2015.

Derrida Jacques. “The End of the Book and the Beginning of Writing (1967)”. Trans. Gayatri

Spivak. Critical Theory: A Reader for Literary and Cultural Studies. Ed. Robert Dale

Parker. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. 96-114. Print.

Fanon, Frantz. “On National Culture”. Critical Theory: A Reader for Literary and Cultural

Studies. Ed. Robert Dale Parker. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012. 627-645.

Print.

Gates, Henry Louis Jr. “Talking Black: Critical Signs of the Times”. Critical Theory: A Reader

for Literary and Cultural Studies. Ed. Robert Dale Parker. New York: Oxford University

Press, 2012. 740-748. Print.

Lyotard, Jean-François. The Inhuman: Reflections on Time. Trans. Geoffrey Bennington and

Rachel Bowlby. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1991. Print.

Brown 28

McClintock, Anne. Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest. New

York: Routledge, 1995. Print.

Naifeh, Steven, and Gregory White Smith. Van Gogh: The Life. New York: Random House,

2012.

Sawyer, Robert. “Mary Shelley and Shakespeare: Monstrous Creations”. South Atlantic Review

72. 2 (2007): 15-31. JSTOR. Web. 12 May 2015.

Said, Edward W. “Narrative and Social Space”. Critical Theory: A Reader for Literary and

Cultural Studies. Ed. Robert Dale Parker. New York: Oxford University Press, 2012.

718-734. Print.

---. Orientalism. New York: Random House, 1979. Print.

---. “Preface to Orientalism”. New York: Random House, 2003. Print.

Sherwin, Paul. “Frankenstein: Creation as Catastrophe.” PMLA 96. 5 (1981): 883-903. JSTOR.

Web. 12 May 2015.

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. London: Penguin Books, 1992. Print.

Shelley, Percy Bysshe. “Queen Mab”. London: W. Clark. 1821. Extracted to the University of

Pennsylvania. Pdf.

Spivak, Gayatri Chravorty. “Can the Subaltern Speak? Speculations on Widow-Sacrifice”.

Critical Theory: A Reader for Literary and Cultural Studies. Ed. Robert Dale Parker. New

York: Oxford University Press, 2012. 675-693. Print.

---. “Three Women's Texts and a Critique of Imperialism”. Critical Inquiry 12. 1 (1985):243-261.

JSTOR. Web 30 Nov. 2014.

"Van Gogh Letters Project". Vincent van Gogh: The Letters. Web. 15 April 2015.