UNIVERSIDAD DE ANTIOQUIA

INSTITUTO DE FILOSOFA
LITERATURE AND PHILOSOPHY SEMINAR: XIXth CENTURY ENGLISH LITERATURE
ESSAY I. FRANSKENSTEIN: A ROMANTIC NOVEL
Popular culture has made it impossible not to be aware of Frankenstein's story, not to have at least a
mental image of the monster, which usually consists of the classical green giant with screws on his
neck. What we retain from movies, TV shows and video games is of course a simplified version of its
characters, and there's really no room for some interesting questions that rise from this story; questions
about moral authority and the limits of reason and science. What I have perceived, so far, is that
although these questions are important, there are perhaps more relevant ideas in the novel that serve as
a tighter unifying string. What I hope to achieve in this essay is to propose a reading of the novel as an
example of the aesthetic standards of romanticism; and to expose the ways in which the romantic
conception of the self is present throughout the book.
We, modern readers, recognize as romantic writers and philosophers those who worked during the last
half of the 18th and the first half of the 19th century. These thinkers and artists focused their work in
reacting to the economical and industrial growth that took place in the cities of Europe in this period of
time. Actually, to be more precise, they reacted to this growths consequences. They contrasted the need
for rational thought of their time with a new reading of what the divine should be. They, more or less
aware of their pourpuses, tried to construct a new vision of life. This should be taken in its more
general implications: their works concerned both the moral and the aesthetic standards of the epoch.
This sort of classifications often seem arbitrary or convinient, but although this might not be a complete
exception, there are, in fact, books that explicitly formulate what the goals and characteristics of the
romantic movement are. For instance, and perhaps most importantly, Schelgel's Gesprch ber die
Poesie and Schelling's System of Transcendental Idealism. These books were published in the year
1800 and Mary Shellys Frankenstein was immersed in this movements social repercusions.
Viktor Frankenstein's thirst for knowledge, and his pretences of domination towards nature and its
secrets are typical features of the sort of man the romantics criticize and reject. The influence in society
of the idea of god was dimmed by the promises of science, and technological developments changed
the way people lived their lives. But although the spirit of free reasoning produced a more comfortable

way of life and, it could be said, a kind of social liberation, the romantics felt that this spirit produced a
narrowing conception of humanity; pragmatism got in the way of people answering important
questions about their own existence.
It is in this sense that what turns out to be Frankenstein's punishment is an example of a new way of
thinking about science introduced by the romantics. Science is now something to be sceptical about, it
doesnt provide all the answers, as we thought it did, and our human limits are just as intact as ever.
The scientist is punished by his own creation, I believe not so much because his actions were a
transgression towards a higher power, but because he was naive enough to expect too much from
science.
If anything, his transgression is towards nature. The new connotation of the divine is, namely, a
profound relationship with the natural world; profound not in terms of knowledge, but of spirit.
Examples of this feature are found almost in every character. Viktor, when describing his cousin
Elizabeth, makes clear that her dispositions, in opposition to his, are more ethereal and light, that she is
satisfied with contemplating nature and the appearances of things. He himself finds solace while
grieving in the icy mountains of his homeland; his monster, when filled with feelings of vengeance and
hatred, still is sensible to the beauty of the spring. Nature is then magnified, and the landscape is moral
support for the characters' misfortunes, as well as a reflexion of their inner life.
In regarding nature as an expansion of the self, the romantics opposed themselves to the alienation that
was growing in the everyday life in the cities. Nature gave the proper material conditions for reflexion,
for deep thought and an overall better existence, as it seemed. But this new take on how life was to be
lived was, I believe, a theoretical achievement of the movement, and what really got deep into the
culture was a cult of the self. Frankenstein's characters, for example, display this new kind of
individuality; love, hatred, grieve, dispair, are all externalized with extreme passion. The individual is
awfully aware of his feelings, and he lives his life by them. Passion justifies almost everything, and
while this may seem like a noble statement, as if men were to live with conviction and strenghth, it may
also be the cause of selfishness, carelessness and vanity.
Goethe's Werther is the archetypal portrait of the romantic, but Frankenstein and his monster are not
that far from him. Werther's main concern in life is his dispair, he is almost paralyzed from it. His
belovedes's feeling are never to be thought of, not really, because what is important is his destiny in

melancholy. With this, I'm not saying that his sensibility is to be fully condemned as a flaw; I mean that
this negative aspects derive also from the way his individuality is displayed. The monster, as well,
justifies his violence with the hatred of which he was object, with his primitive innocence, but it is
important to note that the family in the cottage was of extreme relevance in his moral education; he
knew kindness and love were possible, but was vengeful because he was selfish, because his
individuality was hurt, because he dwelled too much in his sadness. Victor, his creator, as everyone
around him died, claimed that his pain was to be worse, for he was guilty. He also dwelled in his
dispair, and was thoughtless because of it.
In conclusion, I identify what could be two sides of romanticism. One that aims for the man that
reflects upon his own existence, and lives aware and sensitive of his context; a man that creates and
explores life and art in order to make the most of it, and to rise above the intrinsic discomforts of the
human condition. And another side, that emphasizes pain and stays there; that serves as an excuse for
vanity, and comes in the form of trends and social phenomenon (such as the suicides that followed the
popularity of Goethe's novel). Works of romantic literature may rely more strongly in one side or
another, but this is a question perhaps dependent of the reader's particular experience. So, in
Frankenstein's case, an iconic romantic novel, I'll just leave the question open.