Gender and Patriarchy in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein

Introduction: Bakhtin, the Novel, and Frankenstein's Contested Themes

Mikhail Bakhtin distinguished the literary form of the novel as distinct from other genres because of its rendering of the dynamic present — not in a separate and unitary literary language, but in the competing and often cosmic discord of actual and multiple voices — thus making contact with contemporary reality in all its open-endedness (Bender et al., p. x). Bakhtin's definition of the novel is important because it serves to illuminate the reason why Mary Shelley's Frankenstein has come to be regarded as connecting important, but widely disparate, elements of nineteenth-century culture in Victorian England (Fisch et al., p. 186).

With many apparently conflicting themes — such as the domestic ideology of the bourgeois family and parenting on the one hand, and the fear of pregnancy, childbirth, and forbidden emotions ranging from the desire to play God to incest on the other — Shelley's Frankenstein is often seen as a complex mosaic that lends itself to varying interpretations. A closer look at the pieces within the mosaic, however, reveals a common thread that questions the prevailing assumptions of gender roles in culture. One possible resolution to the seemingly conflicting themes in Shelley's work, therefore, lies in analyzing the disparate, often contradictory elements from a single contextual framework: the male-dominated, patriarchal culture in existence during the time. Given this hypothesis, the objective of this paper is to explore whether the adoption of such a contextual framework will help to clarify the divisions in Shelley's work between conformist and challenging views of gender-balanced roles both in society and within the make-up of the individual personality.

Patriarchal Culture in Early Nineteenth-Century England

The existence of a patriarchal culture during Mary Shelley's lifetime has been well established in a wide body of work in the fields of sociology, cultural studies, and literature. The study of such works helps us understand the historical antecedents of a patriarchal culture and the forces in operation during the time Shelley was writing Frankenstein. Masculinity and femininity had, over generations, been defined and shaped by men through the medium of patriarchal culture. Furthermore, the beginning of the nineteenth century and the Industrial Revolution accelerated the masculinization of culture due to the exponential increase in the production of knowledge by men and the multiplication of cultural codes and languages written in a male script (Aker & Morrow, p. 25).

Though the nineteenth century was actually a period of great progress in basic human rights — the seeds of which were sown in the late eighteenth century — it still remained a patriarchal culture: "Paine's stress on individual rights...drew on the classical tradition of Locke.... But Locke's concept of the individual agent never extended beyond men...further reinforced the differences between men and women by arguing that within the family men would inevitably carry greater authority." (Shiach, p. 187)

The Idealized Domestic Woman and Bourgeois Family Values

The prevalent social culture that valued the bourgeois family as the correct environment for the "proper lady" (Fisch et al., p. 221) explains Shelley's vision of the idealized De Lacey and Frankenstein families. In particular, attention needs to be paid to her characterization of three women formed on the idealized model of the times. Caroline Beaufort, Elizabeth Lavenza, and Justine Moritz all display the stereotypical traits of the domesticated woman, totally dependent on the patriarchal family structure. This dependence is especially marked in Caroline Beaufort and Elizabeth Lavenza, who perceive Alphonse Frankenstein as their rescuer from a life otherwise destined for poverty and hardship. The portrayal of such devotion has, in fact, been interpreted by feminist critics of female-authored fiction as symptomatic of the triumph of patriarchal domestic ideology:

"Basing their conclusions primarily upon conduct books and religious tracts...including Addison and Steele's Spectator, they have eloquently argued that women writers of the Romantic era were either forced to accommodate...indirectly subvert, or gain power wholly within a cultural construction of the proper lady as a modest, domesticated woman...." (Bender et al., p. 328)

Shelley's depiction of the typical Victorian heroine was not, however, solely due to the cultural preferences of her time. She also seems to have genuinely believed in the ideal family as holding the key to humanity's salvation. Throughout Frankenstein, Shelley espouses the importance of loving parents in the development and nurturing of children. This is apparent in the abandoned offspring of Victor Frankenstein, who longs for human affection and acceptance and turns vicious only after he is repeatedly rejected: "The novel thereby argues that a battered, rejected child becomes a battering, abusive parent." (Bender et al., p. 346–347)

Implicit in Shelley's story is the message that humanity needs to develop the feminine qualities of empathy and caring, both at home and in the pursuit of knowledge and power. Indeed, this view is made explicit in Victor's advice to Walton: "...if no man allowed any pursuit whatsoever to interfere with the tranquility of his domestic affections, Greece had not been enslaved...the empires of Mexico and Peru had not been destroyed." (Shelley, p. 48)

Given Shelley's emphasis on the need for loving parents and the nurturing of domestic affections even in the pursuit of affairs in the outside world, it is apparent that she was arguing in favor of viewing feminine emotions in a positive light. As Anne Mellor points out, Mary Shelley, along with Jane Austen, Maria Edgeworth, Charlotte Smith, Susan Ferrier, Helen Maria Williams, and Felicia Hemans, advocated a revolution in "female manners" — emphasizing the rationality of women, celebrating community, conceiving of nature as an ally, preferring gradual and evolutionary reform, and espousing an ethic of care rather than an ethic of individual justice (Fisch et al., p. 8).

Works Cited

Aker, D.L. & Morrow, F. Unleashing Our Unknown Selves: An Inquiry into the Future of Femininity and Masculinity. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1991.

Bender, J., David, D., Richetti, J.J., & Seidel, M. The Columbia History of the British Novel. New York: Columbia University Press, 1994.

Caine, B. English Feminism, 1780–1980. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1997.

Fisch, A., Mellor, A.K., & Schor, E.H. The Other Mary Shelley: Beyond Frankenstein. New York: Oxford University Press, 1993.

Hobbs, C. "Reading the Symptoms: An Exploration of Repression and Hysteria in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein." Studies in the Novel. 1993. Vol. 25: 2, p. 152+.

Shelley, M. Frankenstein: Or, the Modern Prometheus. New York: Collier Books, 1961.

Shiach, M. Feminism and Cultural Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.