Althusser, Lukacs, and Spivak on History and Imperialism

Althusser's theory "Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses" and Lukacs "The Historic Novel" can be applied to Gayatri Spivak's critical essay "Frankenstein and a Critique of Imperialism." Setting her essay within this framework, I think it would be easier to understand the point she was trying to make of thinking of the Monster as the country being imperialized. However, regarding the evidence Althusser and Lukacs present, it could be said that Victor's Monster resists any form of imperialization because he exists outside of the state and outside of an historical setting.
According to Lukacs, "even the great realistic social novel of the eighteenth century, which in its portrayal of contemporary morals and psychology, accomplished a revolutionary breakthrough to reality for world literature is not concerned to show its characters as belonging to any concrete time. The contemporary world is portrayed with unusual plasticity and truth-to-life, but its accepted naively as something given: whence and how it has developed have not yet become problems for the writer." (NA 910) Frankenstein was created before the time period in which Lukacs determines the true historical novel was created. Because of this, it may reflect in essence the society in which the writer existed, but its goal was not to portray any true historicity nor was it to be considered commentary regarding the historic time in which it was created on behalf of the author.
According to Althusser, Ideological State apparatuses represent " specialized institutions" which according to the Norton Anthology "operate primarily in the private sphere, and they attain their power not by means of explicit coercion or force but through implicit consent realized in accepted 'practices'". He outlines these apparatuses as religious, educational, family, legal, political, cultural, etc...None of these institutions apply to the Monster because he was created outside of the society and was rejected by the society in which Spivak would have suggested Victor Frankenstein, his creator, represents. The Monster is exposed to these systems when he observed the behaviors of Felix's family, Victor even tried invoking the legal apparatus when trying to capture him, but, as we can see from the novel, the Monster evaded all of these measures.
Taken outside of the context of Althusser and Lukacs, I am sure there is a way you could imply the mechanics of the imperialized nation-state to the Monster, but given the evidence presented by Althusser, the Monster in himself can be viewed much in the same way the revolution could have been viewed in France. From his creation he took part in the building of his own history, with only the rejection of the former imperialist influence as the foundation of his self creation.

P.S. I deeply apologize for this being late. I have been experiencing internet problems all week and have been catching up on the time lost because of it.