UNEPortfolio

Month: January 2019

Blog #1

I have only read Frankenstein once previously to this and it was done in a very quick, sort of half-hearted fashion. We looked at and interpreted the novel as a sort of Gothic horror on the dangers of the possibilities of science and in this way it was rather a subset of romanticism. We also looked briefly at the implications of philosophy within the novel, in particular we asked questions regarding whether or not one should use science in such a way. This is especially interesting because many of the critiques regarding the philosophical aspects surround Shelley’s biographical life and her relation with her father and thus the relationship between author and world and author and text is prominent in this interpretation. It is difficult to position myself within the critical history as it seems as though there are many lenses with which to look at such a text, however, I found that looking at the gender roles and how male and female interactions are depicted within the novel provides an interesting way to critique such literature. Most of this, given the Critical History, was not looked at until the later part of the 1980’s. However, given that the story has been around for much longer, I think that some of the previous interpretations are also important to look at; including the concerns about Frankenstein’s moral effects in which there is some controversy regarding sympathy with the monster. One thing which surprised me in the history, was that there were continuous arguments for the novel’s high culture status which, given how the author is a woman and the time in which it was written, makes me wonder if this would be even a question had Shelley been a man.

Blog 1

I have only read Frankenstein once previously to this and it was done in a very quick, sort of half-hearted fashion. We looked at and interpreted the novel as a sort of Gothic horror on the dangers of the possibilities of science and in this way it was rather a subset of romanticism. We also looked briefly at the implications of philosophy within the novel, in particular we asked questions regarding whether or not one should use science in such a way. This is especially interesting because many of the critiques regarding the philosophical aspects surround Shelley’s biographical life and her relation with her father and thus the relationship between author and world and author and text is prominent in this interpretation. It is difficult to position myself within the critical history as it seems as though there are many lenses with which to look at such a text, however, I found that looking at the gender roles and how male and female interactions are depicted within the novel provides an interesting way to critique such literature. Most of this, given the Critical History, was not looked at until the later part of the 1980’s. However, given that the story has been around for much longer, I think that some of the previous interpretations are also important to look at; including the concerns about Frankenstein’s moral effects in which there is some controversy regarding sympathy with the monster. One thing which surprised me in the history, was that there were continuous arguments for the novel’s high culture status which, given how the author is a woman and the time in which it was written, makes me wonder if this would be even a question had Shelley been a man.

© 2020 Sinead

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑