『프랑켄슈타인』: 서술의 사슬, 관계의 사슬

Abstract

Monstrosity is what has been the most frequently yet most diversely discussed issue in relation to Frankenstein. Critics' chief concerns have been focused on the provocative questions of “Who is the Monster, as embedded in the abyss of narration?” and “What does the hideousness of the Monster represent?” A wide spectrum of answers have been made: to name a few, the materiality not allowed to enter the Symbolic Order of language, women's fertility and creativity oppressed and rendered ugly, the position of proletariat in the society, the racial Other, or homosexual desire and homophobia. To these, this paper opens up an argument that monstrosity is nothing less than the tendencies to be voluntarily isolated from and overpower others as depicted through the secret desires of Walton and Frankenstein in the novel. As an opposing power for this solitary and self-empowered monster of instrumental reason, Shelley suggests a model of Self-in-relation that lives and works with nature, seeking for “simple pleasure” from the perfectly harmonious communion with others. In this respect, what Percy Shelley has selected as the moral of the novel, the “amiableness of domestic affection,” can possibly become an example of “simple pleasure,” the enjoyment of which Shelley considers as the necessary condition for genuine human happiness. This paper also argues that the significance of such relational self is embodied through the so-called concentric narrative form of the novel. Shelley not only endows Walton, Frankenstein and the Monster with uniquely individual voices but also ties these three narratives in an interconnected chain of narrations. The fact that these three narratives are intricately related with each other, instead of forever running parallel without an encounter, shows that virtue is found in relation not in isolation in this novel.