This term paper explores how the ‘monster’ in Mary Shelley’s original 1818 edition of Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus develops a sense of subjectivity through the act of storytelling and the acquisition of language, with a focus on chapters 10 to 17, which would be Volume II Chapter II to Volume III Chapter I in other Editions. These chapters are essential because the creature tells his own story, which mark a decisive turning point in the novel. The monster, previously seen as mute and terrifying, turns into a reflective subject capable to express itself, think about right and wrong and show feelings.
The central research question therefore is: How do language and narration enable the creature to claim a voice, negotiate his identity and assert his subjectivity in the novel’s narrative structure?
To answer this question, the paper will closely have a look at the creature’s own story and how Shelley shows the importance of language, storytelling and recognition.
The study argues that the creature’s story questions simple ideas of monstrosity and highlights the importance of voice and representation. By using narratological analysis and theories of subjectivity and voice, the paper’s thesis is that the creature transforms from an object of horror into a subject with a claim to recognition, which makes both the characters in the novel and the readers to rethink the line between monstrosity and humanity.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
1.1 Research Question and Objectives
1.2 State of Research
1.3 Methodological Approach
1.4 Overview of the Novel
2. Recognition and the Formation of Subjectivity
2.1 Narrative Structure and Multiplicity of Voices
2.2 Recognition as a Philosophical Condition
2.3 Position and Significance of the Creature’s Narrative
2.4 Shifts of Narrator and the Process of Subjunctivization
2.5 Toward an Application in Frankenstein
3. The creature’s voice in chapters 10-17
3.1 Linguistic Acquisition and the Creature’s Education
3.2 Learning Humanity: The Creature’s Moral Awakening
4. Narration as Subjectivization
4.1 Storytelling as Self-Justification
4.2 Emotional Dimension: Suffering, Longing and Solitude
4.3 Language, Power and the Demand for Relationship
5. Mediation and the Fragility of the Creature’s Voice
6. Conclusion
6.1 Summary and Interpretation of Findings
6.2 Outlook: Relevance for Voice and Agency in Literature and Culture
Objectives & Topics
This paper investigates how the creature in Mary Shelley’s original 1818 edition of Frankenstein develops a sense of subjectivity through language acquisition and the act of storytelling, specifically focusing on chapters 10 to 17. The primary research question examines how language and narration enable the creature to claim a voice, negotiate his identity, and assert his subjectivity within the novel’s layered narrative structure, ultimately questioning traditional notions of monstrosity.
- The role of language acquisition and autodidactic education in shaping self-consciousness
- Philosophical theories of recognition derived from Hegel, Honneth, and Taylor applied to literary analysis
- Narratological framing, focalization, and the layered "Russian doll" narrative structure
- Storytelling as rhetorical self-justification and an ethical claim to relational connection
- The structural fragility and mediation of the creature's voice through Victor Frankenstein and Robert Walton
Excerpt from the Book
2.2 Recognition as a Philosophical Condition
Philosophical theories of recognition help illuminate why this narrative shift matters so proudly. Hegel in the ‘Phenomenology of Spirit’, argues that “self-consciousness attains its satisfaction only in another self-consciousness.” (Hegel 140) Subjectivity is not an isolated property but emerges in relation to another who acknowledges it. Without recognition, self-consciousness remains incomplete. The creature’s predicament fits this model, although he acquires language and reflection, his subjectivity remains fragile because Victor and society refuse him acknowledgement. His eloquence demonstrates striving for selfhood, but without recognition it cannot be fulfilled. (Hegel 149)
Axel Honneth develops Hegel’s idea into a social theory of recognition with three dimensions. The first dimension is love, which refers to primary emotional relationships such as those between parents and children, friends or intimate partners. Honneth states that only in such strong bonds, individuals can gain the basic self-confidence necessary to engage with the world. (Honneth 174) In Frankenstein, the creature is denied this source from the very beginning. Abandoned by Victor at the moment of his creation, he never experienced the recognition that stems from love or care. His longing for affection, seen in his desire for the De Laceys’ kindness and later in his plea for companion marks the absence of his first form of recognition.
The second and third dimensions, rights and solidarity, establish social equality and esteem. To be recognized as a person with rights means to be respected as an equal, while solidarity affirms one’s unique contribution to a community. The creature however denies both. Without legal status or social value, he remains excluded from the moral community that would make subjectivity viable. (Honneth 178, 284)
Charles Taylor further stresses “we become full human agents only through acquiring rich human languages of expression.” (Taylor 38) A lack of recognition, risks being trapped “in a false, distorted and reduced mode of being.” (32) The creature’s long narrative to Victor is such an attempt to form his identity through dialogue. He addresses his creator by stressing their relationship. “Remember that I am thy creature; I ought to be thy Adam; but I am rather the fallen angel, whom thou drivest from joy for no misdeed.” (Shelley 90) Since Victor rejects it, the creature falls back into isolation and alienation. (Shelley 91, 123, 200)
Chapter Summaries
1. Introduction: Outlines the research question, the state of academic research on Mary Shelley's novel, the narratological methodology, and provides a contextual summary of the plot.
2. Recognition and the Formation of Subjectivity: Establishes the theoretical framework by combining narratology with philosophical theories of recognition by Hegel, Honneth, and Taylor to examine how voice constructs subjectivity.
3. The creature’s voice in chapters 10-17: Analyzes the creature’s language acquisition, his observations of the De Lacey family, his moral awakening, and the intellectual influence of classical literary texts.
4. Narration as Subjectivization: Explores the creature's storytelling as a rhetorical tool for self-justification, an expression of profound emotional suffering, and a demand for relational acknowledgment.
5. Mediation and the Fragility of the Creature’s Voice: Investigates the narrative constraints imposed on the creature, demonstrating how his voice remains precarious and structurally filtered through Victor Frankenstein and Robert Walton.
6. Conclusion: Summarizes the central paradox of narrative subjectivity in the novel and discusses the broader implications for voice, agency, and cultural marginalization.
Keywords
Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, subjectivity, narratology, recognition theory, creature's voice, self-narration, Axel Honneth, G. W. F. Hegel, Charles Taylor, framing narrative, focalization, marginalization, agency, Romanticism
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this paper?
The paper examines how the creature in Mary Shelley's 1818 novel Frankenstein constructs his identity and claims subjectivity through language acquisition and storytelling in chapters 10 to 17.
What are the primary thematic areas explored in the analysis?
The work focuses on narratological framing, the acquisition of human language and ethics, philosophical concepts of social recognition, and the tension between monstrous representation and emotional agency.
What is the main research question addressed by the author?
The primary research question asks how language and narration enable the creature to claim a voice, negotiate his identity, and assert his subjectivity within the novel's complex narrative framework.
Which methodological approach is utilized in the study?
The paper combines close textual reading with Gérard Genette’s narratological concepts of narrative levels and focalization, integrated with philosophical theories of recognition from Hegel, Axel Honneth, and Charles Taylor.
What key insights are presented in the main body chapters?
The main body demonstrates that while the creature masters speech, moral reasoning, and emotional expression, his selfhood remains tragic and precarious because society refuses him relational recognition and his voice is mediated through hostile narrators.
Which keywords best encapsulate the core subject of the paper?
Key terms include Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, subjectivity, recognition theory, narratology, creature's voice, framing narrative, and agency.
How does Axel Honneth’s theory of recognition apply to the creature's situation?
Honneth identifies three spheres of recognition—love, rights, and solidarity; the paper demonstrates that the creature is denied all three, lacking parental affection from Victor, legal equality, and membership in a human moral community.
What role does the reading of Milton's Paradise Lost play in the creature's self-perception?
Reading Paradise Lost provides the creature with a moral and expressive vocabulary, prompting him to oscillate between identifying with Adam as a created being and Satan as an outcast condemned to eternal solitude.
Why is the creature's narrative voice described as structurally fragile?
His voice is fragile because it is never directly presented to the reader; it is embedded within Victor's oral confession, which in turn is transcribed and framed by Robert Walton's epistolary letters.
- Quote paper
- Anonymous (Author), 2025, Language and Narrative as the Foundation of Subjectivity, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/1724068
