Since Edward W. Said proposed the idea of "the Other" in his work "Orientalism", the term became popular in recent cultural and literary studies. Othering describes the process of forcing an individual or a group in the role of "the Other" by portraying and defining it as fundamentally different. This essay will examine inhowfar the notion of othering can also be found in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.
It will be shown that the creature is othered by his representation as inhuman throughout the novel. By studying the description of the creature's appearance, the language and setting of the novel and the interaction with the other characters, it can be understood how Victor Frankenstein's creation is made alien and is denied the status of a human being.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. The Creature's Appearance
3. Othering through Diction and Language
4. Choice of Setting
5. Contact with Society
6. Conclusion
Research Objectives and Key Topics
This essay explores the concept of 'the Other' as presented in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, analyzing how the protagonist's creation is systematically dehumanized and marginalized through various narrative and social constructs.
- Physical appearance and biological unnaturalness as markers of otherness.
- Dehumanization through disparaging language and the denial of a name.
- The impact of geographical and environmental settings on the creature's isolation.
- Social prejudices and the failure of society to integrate the creature.
- The dichotomy between civilised human society and the 'Other'.
Excerpt from the Book
2. The Creature's Appearance
An important role for othering the creature plays his visual nature. Inherently, his creation itself is an unnatural act which paves the creature's further way in life as an outsider (Weitze 37). On the one hand, he can be considered as artificial because he is created and not born, on the other, as biological because he is made of organic material with “the dissecting room and slaughter-house furnish[ing] many of [his] materials“(Shelley 43). As a result, Victor Frankenstein creates a composition of animal and human body parts. Because of this mixture of species, the reader can not consider him as fully human. Furthermore, according to Hanoch Livneh the construction of the creature induces the human fear of death: “Frankenstein’s monster is assembled from dead body parts; Dracula is the undead (...) and the Mummy is, of course, a dead king (…) they all imply death” (281).
Shelley explicitly describes his physiognomy. It requires the reader to visualise the creature's appearance. “Yellow skin cover[ing] the work of muscles and arteries beneath”, “hair (…) of a lustrous black” and “teeth of pearly whiteness” (Shelley 45) describe his features as distinctively different from that of human beings. Frankenstein's remarks on the appearance can be seen as an attempt to differentiate in species (McLane 963). The eyes of the creature are “watery” and “almost of the same colour as the dun-white sockets in which they were set” (Shelley 45). Following the proverb that “the eyes are the windows to the soul” it could be said that “the non-transparent, 'depthless' eye blocks out our access to the 'soul', to the infinite abyss of the 'person'” (Žižek 240). The assumption of Žižek that the creature's vacuous eyes equal soullessness distinguishes him from the idea of what defines a human being, namely a soul.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: Introduces the concept of 'the Other' based on Edward W. Said and outlines the essay's focus on how Shelley's creature is rendered inhuman.
2. The Creature's Appearance: Analyzes how the creature's artificial and grotesque physical nature and lack of human physiognomy contribute to his status as an outsider.
3. Othering through Diction and Language: Examines how the use of derogatory terms, the label of a different 'species', and the denial of a name facilitate the dehumanization of the creature.
4. Choice of Setting: Discusses how the European landscape serves as a backdrop of civilization, highlighting the creature's alienation in contrast to the civilised human sphere.
5. Contact with Society: Explores how prejudice and social conventions, including the reactions of characters like Frankenstein and William, solidify the creature's exclusion.
6. Conclusion: Summarizes the findings, concluding that the creature's otherness is a result of the constant contrast between him and human beings throughout the novel.
Keywords
Frankenstein, Mary Shelley, Othering, The Other, Dehumanization, Creature, Monstrosity, Social Exclusion, Alienation, Physiognomy, Diction, Species, Civilization, Identity, Literary Analysis.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the central focus of this essay?
The essay investigates the literary concept of 'the Other' as applied to the central creature in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, analyzing how the narrative frames him as fundamentally non-human.
Which theoretical framework is primarily used?
The study relies on the concept of 'the Other' as proposed by Edward W. Said, adapted to analyze the cultural and literary representation of the monster.
How is the creature's physical appearance linked to his status as an outcast?
The essay argues that his artificial construction and non-human aesthetic features, such as his eyes and stature, function as visual signifiers that differentiate him from humanity.
Does the creature's ability to use language change how others perceive him?
No, the author concludes that even when the creature uses sophisticated language, he is still perceived as inhuman because his visual appearance overweighs his intellectual articulation.
What role does the setting play in the creature's dehumanization?
The setting emphasizes the creature's incompatibility with civilized European society, marking him as a savage figure who does not belong in the human sphere.
How do other characters contribute to the process of othering?
Characters contribute by using dehumanizing language, projecting their own fears onto the creature, and applying social norms that deny him status and family connections.
Why is the creature's namelessness significant?
Namelessness is presented as a mechanism that robs the creature of a personal identity and a connection to humanity, thereby reinforcing his status as an object rather than a person.
What does the author conclude regarding the creature's 'otherness'?
The author concludes that otherness is not an inherent trait of the creature, but rather a construct produced by the constant contrast with human characters and their subjective interpretations.
- Arbeit zitieren
- Helena Engelbert (Autor:in), 2018, The "Other" in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein, München, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/457176
