#frankenyapping

[respected-coconut]

Being really into Frankenstein while at the same time being Chinese is so funny because every time Lord Byron gets brought up, the way his name is pronounced always makes me think of the word 白人 (bái rén), which translates into “white guy”. Lord White Guy.

[respected-coconut]

Crazy how so many feminist readings of Frankenstein are consistently so heteronormative and lowkey sexist in it of themselves.

Like, the whole “the women of Frankenstein are boring and docile” argument, while has its amount of merit, feels more like an excuse to just further ignore and over-generalize the women in the book instead of actually trying to analyze them. Elizabeth especially is the main victim of this reading because she’s always read as the subservient woman that doesn’t have much say in the book, yet one of her most defining instances is her standing up for Justine in front of a court of law when others were too frightened to.

She literally dropped “They call this retribution. Hateful name! When that word is pronounced, I know greater and more horrid punishments are going to be inflicted than the gloomiest tyrant has ever invented to satiate his utmost revenge” and people still want to dumb her down and define her solely through her “reliance on men”.

And the whole “Victor usurped the biological/feminine power of women to give birth.” I’m sorry, but I kinda really hate this reading so bad. Not only does it read as incredibly transphobic, but at the same time it further pushes the idea that the only power/purpose a woman has is to give birth. How can you condemn Elizabeth for being “docile and subservient to men” but then turn around and say she and women are powerful through their ability to give birth and be mothers/wives? Does that imply Victor should’ve just married and impregnated his sister/cousin? Would that have “preserved Elizabeth’s power”? because it seems to me her marriage to Victor destroyed whatever power or autonomy she had. And what about how Mary Shelley herself was struggling with pregnancies and childbirth before and while writing Frankenstein? Was she a weaker woman for not being able to give birth properly?

The women in Frankenstein are obviously less active than the men, and that is a point to be made, but at the same time, we do such a disservice by making broad and disconnected assertions without actually giving the women the time of day for what they do do.

Can we talk about how Elizabeth was groomed into the role of a mother/bride since she was four? How she had dreams and wanted to “people [the world] with imaginations of her own”? How she lost hope in those dreams following the wrongful execution of her “more than sister”? What about how Caroline Frankenstein haunts the whole narrative; how her death influences Victor’s obsession with the dead and how she forced her children into an incestuous, (mutually) non-consensual relationship? Why is it so common that people will read Justine’s existence as solely a character to bring Victor guilt rather than looking deeper into how her conviction and execution affected Elizabeth’s perception of the world? Why is there so much focus placed on what these women aren’t instead of what they are?

Ok sorry for the messy ranting. Just had a burst of energy. As usual, I’m sorry for coming off as hostile and kinda confusing but at the same time I’m just a bit frustrated with the common interpretations of Frankenstein and wanted to yap. Feel free to add more ideas, I like talking abt this kinda stuff.

[respected-coconut]

How come when Victor realizes the bride he’s making will have her own conscience and might refuse to marry the monster, it’s “he’s sexist bc he doesn’t want an independent and defiant woman to exist and he only sees them as reproductive tools” but then a line later he also hates the idea of them reproducing and it turns into “Victor still hates women because he doesn’t want them to give birth”? Like I’m genuinely kinda confused how so many feminist readings of him destroying the bride say it’s a bad thing bc, honestly, isn’t he right not to make a female creation for the sole purpose of being a bride? Like is he not kind of rebelling against the traditional and misogynistic perception of women by recognizing her autonomy and finding the idea of her complying to the role of a bride/mother for a man reprehensible?

I always kinda saw it as him empathizing with his female creation and offering her a level of respect his mom refused him and Elizabeth, considering they’re all kinda in a similar boat when it comes to being forced into marriages they don’t want/didn’t consent to; especially since he would be doing the same thing as his mom if he did go through with his promise to make a bride out of his basically-daughter (?) for the sole purpose of gifting her to his son.

And please please PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF GOD - I get that it’s a joke but at the same time - can we stop with the whole “why didn’t he just remove her reproductive organs?” comment bc not only does it fail to address the fact that there’s a chance the bride might not want to marry the monster but it ironically also augments the denial of her autonomy by saying “well the Monster needs a wife but Victor doesn’t want her to reproduce so let’s just omit certain parts of her body before passing her off so those two men can be happy regardless of what she wants”.

Sorry if this came off as kinda hostile and messy; I don’t wanna discredit anybody else’s interpretations. I just kinda get frustrated with how we repeat the same ideas over and over again and they more often than not just constantly view the situation from a perspective of demonizing Victor. But like idk I might be missing something; can someone please explain if I’m just being a bit stupid about this?