The “Quest” for Mythology and Archetypes in Frankenstein

Northrop Frye concedes in The Archetypes of Literature that his tables of archetypes are “not only elementary but grossly over-simplified” (1315), but these tables can still be of use in analyzing Shelley’s Frankenstein. One reason why Frye’s examples translate well to Shelley’s piece is that Frankenstein is conspicuously mythological. It is, consciously, a creation myth, a myth of the fall, and, in some ways, “the return of chaos.” The novel also embodies some of what Frye refers to as the “central pattern” of tragic visions.

The early portions of Victor’s narrative are not necessarily defined by season, but they certainly have a spring-like quality—what Frye refers to as “the birth phase.” Frankenstein was born to a noble father (the father is often a subordinate character in these ‘spring’ myths according to Frye) and enjoyed a somewhat idyllic youth. But the birth phase is not consummated in what Frye refers to as “zenith” or “triumph phase,” because the marriage to the would-be archetypical bride is delayed by Victor’s education.

During this education, the novel takes on the form of the “autumn and death phase” (1312). This is “the archetype of tragedy” in which we see Victor confined to his laboratory/apartment—the “isolation of the hero” (perhaps the antihero?).

Finally, the text seems to arrive at the “winter and dissolution phase” characterized by the archetype of “the ogre.” It is no surprise that we see Victor’s demise in frigid and wintry terrain. This area of the novel represents both the fifth pattern of tragic vision, the flood myth set at sea (Victor’s death is on a boat), and the fourth, set in a desert of sorts—sometimes characterized by “sinister geometrical images,” which makes the Norton version’s choice of cover art all the more interesting.

Just as Frye says his examples may be oversimplified, this is a rather simplistic view of the novel. It fits nicely in many ways, but the text is far too complex to be so easily adorned in archetypes. How does Frankenstein conflict, or, as often is the case in the novel, subvert the conventional archetypes? Does the texts skillful misuse or, again, subversion of archetypes complicate the way we think about the novel?