Frankenstein's Female Trouble

The embodiment of the female presence in Frankenstein is addressed in many ways which correspond with our readings on Feminist and Queer theory. Although we cannot say how Mary Shelley viewed her own position as a woman and cannot therefore comment on how she sought to depict the female entity in her novel, the positions of the female characters in the story are reflective of long enduring social perspectives which Shelley could have been perpetuating subconsciously in her writing. This analysis is in no way a defense of that perpetuation, but an examination of the social mores which would have been accepted as common during the time period in which the story was written

The women of Frankenstein maintain the archetypal roles as the over-romanticized objectified “muse” as well as the economically disenfranchised waif and the defeminized, ugly old woman. The entire novel would not have been able to take place if it weren’t for Mrs. Margaret Saville whose existence is merely served as an object for her brother to direct his self-indulgent musings to. Robert Walton addressed his sister throughout his beginning letters: “Heaven shower down blessings on you, and save me, that I may again and again testify my gratitude for all of your love and kindness.”(9); “Continue to write me every opportunity: I may received your letters (though the chance is very doubtful) on some occasions when I need them most to support my spirits.”(11,12) For the reader, Mrs. Saville’s existence remains cloaked in what Simone De Beauvior would call “feminine mystery.”(1268) We know nothing about Saville; we never hear a response to her voice in any of the letters. We know nothing about her as a living subject besides the fact that she serves as an object that is directly at the disposal of her wandering brother. As De Beauvior would say in “The Second Sex”, Mrs. Saville’s time is afforded to her by her brother, “he gives her the time he passes with her.”(1269)

Moving on from Mrs. Saville, almost all of the remaining women mentioned in the story began at some form of economic disadvantage before a man came to liberate them from their positions of poverty into a position of masculine enslavement. Adrienne Rich in her essay “Compulsory Heterosexuality and Lesbian Existence” highlights this practice within Points 5 and 6 of a rubric created by Kathleen Gough to describe in specific ways different forms of exercised male power:

“5. to confine them physically and prevent their movement—[by means of…keeping women off the streets;…enforced economic dependence of wives]

6. to use them as objects in male transactions—[use of women as ‘gifts’; bride price; pimping; arranged marriage; use of women as entertainers to facilitate male deals”(1595)

In the very beginning of Victor’s part of the story, we learn of how his mother was acquired by his father. His mother was at the mercy of a sick father who had lost all of his wealth and was subjected to a life of plaiting straw poverty until Elder Frankenstein came to her rescue: “He came like a protecting spirit to the poor girl, who committed herself to his care, and after the interment of his friend he conducted her to Geneva, and placed her under the protection of a relation. Two years after this event Caroline became his wife.”(19)

Elizabeth Lavenza enters into the story in a similar fashion. After her mother dies, her father intends to marry another woman and offers her to his brother-in-law. Along with this offer also comes her mother’s fortune, which I think should be noted. From the time Elizabeth enters into the Frankenstein home, she is described as “that she was at that time the most beautiful child she had ever seen, and shewed signs even then of a gentle and affectionate disposition.” “She was docile and good tempered, yet gay and playful as a summer insect.”(19) These feminine qualities that she displays serve as reassurance to the fact that she will never function as a “masculinized” self-determining female. She remains at the disposal of Victor, as his mother plans to marry them once they become of marrying age, and bides her time for the rest of the novel serving only as an object that pines over his health and the health of the household that took her in.

Saphie, on the other hand, is a very interesting character. Within her story, we discover a tale of defiance on behalf of her and her mother regarding her mother’s “enslavement by the Turks”(83) According to Saphie’s story, her mother “instructed her daughter in the tenets of her religion, and taught her to aspire to higher powers of intellect, and an independence of spirit, forbidden to female followers of Mahomet.” Ironically, after all of this talk of freedom, Saphie processes the idea of freedom as marriage to a Christian. “The prospect of marrying a Christian, and remaining in a country where women were allowed to take a rank in society, was enchanting to her.”(83)

According to Adrienne Rich, by entering into a marriage from Saphie’s position, she would be again reinforcing her disadvantage; exiting one institution of what she views as female slavery for another. Rich states “a woman seeking to escape such casual violations along with economic disadvantage may well turn to marriage as a form of hoped for protection, while bringing into marriage neither social nor economic power, thus entering into that institution also from a disadvantaged position.”(1598) Rich continues this thought quoting Kathleen Barry “female sexual slavery is present in ALL situations where women or girls cannot change the conditions of their existence; where regardless of how they got into those conditions, e.g., social pressure, economic hardship, misplaced trust or the longing for affection, they cannot get out; and where they are subject to sexual violence and exploitation.”(1599)

I turn now to Judith Halberstam’s “The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly” when analyzing female masculinity and leading into queer theory as represented in Frankenstein. As we can all tell from the novel, Victor’s opinions on the functions the functions of females in his life are only that they serve him faithfully, that they be kind, gentle, and understanding, that they wait for him for however long it takes for him to figure himself out. However, when he finally meets one woman who won’t tolerate his neurotic, afflicted, and self-involved personality, this is what he has to say about her: “She was a hired nurse, the wife of one of the turnkeys, and her countenance expressed all those bad qualities which often characterize that class. The lines on her face were hard and rude, like that of persons accustomed to see without sympathizing in sights of misery. Her tone expressed her entire indifference; she addressed me in English, and the voice struck me as one that I had heard during my sufferings.”(123) Because of her blunt attitude with dealing with Victor as a supposed murder, Victor himself could not sympathize with her position of having to care for a miscreant and turned away from her with “loathing.”

Like many women who do not follow the believed social standards for female conduct, the hired nurse falls within what Halberstam regards as women not being viewed as feminine who are “either foreign, working class, oddly gendered, or sexually corrupt.”(2651)

When applying Queer Theory to the novel, we can see many similarities drawn to Halberstam’s description of the presence of love triangles between Victor, Clerval, and Elizabeth. We can also delve into how the Creature’s body is representative of what Butler states as “a prediscursive multiplicity of bodily forces that break through the surface of the body to disrupt the regulating practices of cultural coherence imposed upon that body by a power regime.”(2544) Butler as makes an intriguing reference to drag performance which I think can be applied to the Creature “Her/his performance destabilizes the very distinctions between the natural and the artificial, depth and surface, inner and outer through which discourse about genders almost always operates.”(2541)

The question I propose for Wednesday’s class is How is the Creature representative of an Ultimate Otherness which embodies both the female socio/cultural dilemma as mentioned in our readings and that of the questioning gender performances? Do be more descript about that last part of the question, the Creature is denied of sexual reproduction as well as a position in society; He can neither plant a seed nor create; How can we analyze his position in regards to Butler’s discourse on gender distinction?