Shelley and Ishiguro present monstrosity as an accentuated premise in Frankenstein and Never Let Me Go with the characters acting as mouthpieces for society’s ills. The authors were writing with an overwhelming backdrop of scientific discovery; Frankenstein coinciding with the Industrial Revolution, which was a threat to the contemporary fundamentalism of the Church, and Never Let Me Go concurring with the achievement of cloning. Accordingly, the texts are allegorical by warning against the possibly destructive power of science, with a particular focus on the artificial creation of life.
Monstrosity is first explored through the writers’ emulation of the ‘Fall of Man’ to show the peripeteia that both creations experience; the decline of their self-perception shows the extent to which monstrosity is self-inflicted. Despite the fact that both the creature and the clones physically mirror their natural counterparts much like “God created man in his own image” , their perceptions of self-worth become warped by society’s abhorrence. In Never Let Me Go, Ishiguro establishes a parallel with the book of Genesis when Ruth sees her ‘possible’. By placing the latter in an Eden-esque “smart, cozy, self-contained world” with “shiny machines and swooping lamps”, Ruth and the other clones are likened to a pre-lapsarian Adam and Eve; their basking in the pride of having derived from a human certainly preludes their fall as the clones gain self-awareness of their artificiality. This heightens the allegorical nature of the text, as their pride overtures their fall from grace and social acceptance. The sibilant references to Satan’s serpent foreshadows Ruth’s deference of her ‘possible’ creator being strewn as she exclaims “If you want to look for possibles, if you want to do it properly, then you look in the gutter. You look in rubbish bins. Look down the toilet, that’s where you’ll find where we all came from.” The emphatic listing of derogatory locations the clones could have been genetically derived from shows the detachment between creation and creator as the former are made aware of their disparity from society and resent their existence. Much like Adam and Eve are usurped out of Eden by Satan, the clones lose their illusion of self-worth by the damaging gaze of society. The creature in Frankenstein undergoes a similar descent, his “admiring [of] the perfect form of the cottagers – their grace, beauty, and delicate complexions” resulting in his own self-loathing – “but how was I terrified, when I viewed myself in a transparent pool!…and when I became convinced that I was in reality the monster that I am, I was filled with the bitterest sensations of despondence and mortification” showing that like the clones, the creature’s pseudo-Eden is also usurped by the figurative Satan of societal perception and he is unable to eradicate his title amongst society as an ignominy. This perception is reiterated by Tsao’s Tyranny of Purpose, who suggests that the creature’s acquisition of Paradise Lost is symbolic of “the monster’s longing to take part in the De Laceys’ world [which] is described specifically as a desire to partake in the realm of the divine: their ability to speak is ‘a godlike science’ and he ‘look[s] upon them as superior beings, who would be the arbiters of my future destiny’.” This is seen by the creature identifying with Milton’s Adam, which suggests that in isolation he is the first consecrated creation by a superior and omnipotent power. However, upon interacting with natural humans, he likens himself to the Miltonic Satan as he laments “God in pity, made man beautiful and alluring after his own image; but my form is a filthy type of yours, more horrid even from the resemblance. Satan had his companions, fellow devils, to admire and encourage him, but I am solitary and abhorred”, suggesting that the creature is made fully aware of his own abominate form. This invokes pathos from the readers who recognize society’s mistreatment of the creature. His comparison to Satan juxtaposes his moral nature later on, as he is persecuted despite his heroism in Geneva. Whilst injured, the creature recognizes that his innocent virtuousness is bound to continually be met with malevolence, allowing the reader to envision the creature as Jesus. His role as a savior results in his figurative crucifixion by the misjudgment of society, with the creature’s attainment of knowledge from Paradise Lost being symbolic of the apple in the book of Genesis – further emulating the parallel of post-lapsarianism to the defilement of the creations. Never Let Me Go harbors its own book of knowledge for the clones, in the form of Kathy’s discovery of the pornographic magazine which catalyzes the clones’ awakening, giving Kathy the inspiration to search for her ‘possible’. Thus, just as the creature uses Paradise Lost as a tool to discern his belonging in civilization, the clones use the magazine to acquire their ‘true’ formation in society.
However, Frankenstein’s creature undergoes a more poignant transition as its nature is increasingly permeated by monstrosity in experiencing social contempt, thus becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy. Indeed, “we bring into the world with us no innate principles: consequently, we are neither virtuous nor vicious as we first come into existence” , an ideal which is manifested in the creature’s subsequent immorality being nurtured rather than being part of its nature during conception. Indeed, the duality of the creature is emphasized in the text’s “call for a double reading of the Monster ‘as evil incarnate [and] a social product that reflects evil back on society that produced it'” which resonates with both creations, as the clones’ social rejection is monstrous and inhumane in itself – especially given their purpose of organ donation to preserve the life of the very society that condones their existence. Therefore, the writers’ disdaining parallels of Creationism show the nature of monstrosity in society; whilst the creations were both designed in their respective deity’s image, they are still shunned and persecuted for their genetic makeup as both societies are rife with “biopolitical racism” .
Shelley and Ishiguro also exhibit monstrosity in the form of the respective creators in the texts and explore how their creations become extensions of themselves. In Frankenstein, Victor’s sophistication and philanthropy masks a highly conceited and sadistic demeanor, with an accompanying hamartia of a God complex. This is most evident when he states, “life and death appeared to me ideal bounds, which I should first break through and pour a torrent of light into our dark world.” His initial messianic statement that the forces of life and death “appeared to me” suggests that he is set apart from humanity by appearing prophetic, before he goes onto emulate the voice of God from the Book of Genesis – “let there be light – showing the extent to which Victor is consumed by his hubris. Meanwhile, the visual oxymoron of “light” with “dark” is a reference to the continual battle that he undergoes over the course of the text – although Victor has accomplished an awe-inspiring act of scientific discovery, his toeing of moral boundaries at his own ethical expense echoes constantly throughout the novel with rich references to the hellfire that inevitably awaits him. Shelley portrays Victor’s creative omnipotence as both inventive and monstrous, as the creature becomes a disfigured mirror of the natural cycle of life. By doing so, it embodies Victor’s own distortion of nature’s organic cycle in his quest for superficial glory and pride. This venal approach to the artificial creation for life for the supposed benefit of worldly gains is reflective in Never Let Me Go as Madame states “Poor creatures. What did we do to you? With all our schemes and plans?” toward the end of the novel, her emphatic rhetorical questions heightening the poignancy of her lament. The very use of the word ‘creatures’ is directly comparable to Shelley’s language which is used to describe Victor’s creation in Frankenstein as it is served to dehumanize the clones. By doing so, Madame discerns the wickedness that rationalised the creation of the clones, who were treated for self-fulfilling purposes and the monstrous disregard for human life that Hailsham normalised. Indeed, the fact that religion or morality is never taught or discussed at Hailsham suggests that it was being deliberately avoided lest the clones ever challenged the morality behind their life’s morbid purpose.
The monstrosity of the creators is also explored on a more vivid, descriptive front, with the writers appealing to the physical barriers that are distorted in the texts as opposed to purely the moral. Shelley’s graphic accounts of Victor’s galvanism creates a vivid and shocking image for the readers. The Nineteenth Century attitude to the construction of a creature methodically from dead matter and then the subsequent instilling of life into it by electrocution would have been nightmarish and sacrilegious. In the novel, Victor’s chilling account of “I collected bones from charnel-houses and disturbed, with profane fingers, the tremendous secrets of the human frame” would have horrified the contemporary readership on multiple levels, as body snatching was rife during the period. The gruesome tests and unethical practices carried out in Victor’s quest to reanimate the dead “who shall conceive the horror of my secret toil as I… tortured the living animal to animate the lifeless clay” makes the doctor appear maniacal – the juxtaposition of “conceive” with “torture and “lifeless” showing his distortion of the traditional maternal act of childbirth. By subverting this miracle into a hellish rendition in which death preludes life, Shelley’s own miscarriages and personal experiences with death are made incredibly poignant. Ishiguro also conveys the grotesque practices of society with the prospect of systematically producing numerous clones for the sole purpose of organ donation. This is evident as Kathy says that there will be nothing to do after Tommy’s fourth donation “except watch your remaining donations until they switch you off”. The use of the word “switch” suggesting a mechanical approach to death which further dehumanizes the clones. It is with this that Hailsham and Victor’s cold-blooded indifference to the pain and suffering of others is evident – they are irrefutably seen as an embodiment of monstrosity. This mechanical outlook to life is further emphasized through the fact that Shelley’s Frankenstein was the forerunner of the Romantic movement, which was a reaction to the Industrial Revolution and scientific discovery; its devaluating of the human spirit and the embracement of the soulless operation of the revolution makes the literary movement a social response and demonizes the mechanization of the worth of human life.
In addition to this, Victor heartlessly neglects his own creation as he flees in disgust after the creature’s awakening and says, “his jaws opened, and he muttered some inarticulate words… He might have spoken, but I did not hear; one hand was rushed out, seemingly to detain me, but I escaped and rushed downstairs.” This imagery can be seen to mirror Michelangelo’s ‘The Creation of Adam’ in which God and Adam reach out to one another, which is the visual embodiment of Victor’s initial interaction with his creation, underlining the responsibility and burden of omnipotent power that Victor undertakes with his creation but fails to assume. Moreover, Ishiguro portrays a similar rejection of responsibility on behalf of the creator in Madame upon seeing the clones as Kathy explains, “she just froze and waited for us to pass by. She didn’t shriek, or even let out a gasp.” In both instances, the creators are shown to emotionally neglectful in their attitudes to their creations whilst still expecting entire devotion from them. Victor’s expectation that his creature would “bless me as its creator and source… No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs” makes evident his selfish desires and self-gratifying pursuit of knowledge. Meanwhile Miss Emily’s labelling of the clones as “lucky pawns” is just as dismissive and derogatory and resonates with Julia Ray’s ideal that Hailsham is an institute that carries out a ‘clone holocaust’ – her comparison of Kathy to Anne Frank and the confinement that both girls experience that occurs on both a spatial and social level highlights the effects of an upbringing in a morally corrupt world. Therefore, Miss Emily’s use of the clones for organ donation, despite her previous furor with the system, mirrors that of the contemporary bystanders of Nazi Germany. This is a recurring theme in Ishiguro’s novels, with Remains of the Day showcasing Stevens’ indifference to servicing the needs of his Nazi-sympathizing master; Stevens, like the clones, can be seen to be a product of his environment and a result of lifelong brainwashing which allows them both to sympathize with their respective persecutions in a society that benefits from their abuse – systems that are created and maintained by egocentric and sadistic creators.
Egocentrism continues throughout the novels, with Victor neglecting and risking the lives of others for his own security. The deaths of Justine, William and Elizabeth somewhat become epigraphs of the novel for the monstrous acts of Victor in the story, which is evident as Victor says, “William and Justine become the first hapless victims to my unhallowed arts.” This can be seen to directly correlate to Madame’s hollow comprehension, her supposedly epiphytic recognition of humanity’s moral depravity that is inflicted on the clones contravening with her insistence that the cycle of abuse continue. Moreover, Madame’s scapegoating of James Morningdale shows the extent of her hypocrisy. Like Victor, Morningdale recklessly pushes the boundaries of scientific progression without regard for any repercussions. In doing so, both scientists alienate society in their unhallowed pursuits of self-gratifying knowledge which creates a series of “hapless victims” who suffer on behalf of the unwitting progressionists. This is directly reflective of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, in where Dr. Jekyll in his vanity, pushes scientific boundaries creating a serum to suppress his evil nature becomes reliant on it instead to remain conscience. “The pleasures which I made haste to seek in my disguise were, as I have said, undignified; I would scarce use a harder term. But in the hands of Edward Hyde, they soon began to turn toward the monstrous… his every act and thought centred on self . This passage supports the Freudian theory of the desires banished to the unconscious mind, motivate the behaviour of the conscience mind and supports the argument of the creator’s ego leading to guilt through scientific invention. As another gothic novella following the Romantic era, the themes discussed throughout this essay such as the creator’s guilt, self infliction, and the physically descriptive representation of monstrosity by the author are all conclusive within this text.
Victor’s pursuit of “unhallowed arts” is a derivation of Shelley’s contemporary scientific pioneers – Erasmus Darwin, Luigi Galvani and Giovanni Aldini . Darwin’s presentation of ‘spontaneous generation’ in The Temple of Nature proposed that life could be restored out of seemingly inert matter, while Galvani coined galvanism by conducting electrical experiments in which he proved that electrical impulses could animate the muscles of dead animals – which was furthered by his nephew Aldini who galvanized the corpse of an executed mass murderer much to the backlash of society and the death of an onlooker. Meanwhile, Ishiguro was similarly inspired by the 1997 cloning of Dolly the sheep which was hallowed as “wondrous, [but] also carried the ominous implication that scientists had finally pried open Pandora’s box”. The direct parallel of Madam to Pandora shows the danger that innocuous discovery born from the selfish need to satisfy curiosity can have, while Shelley’s sub-titling of her allegory as ‘The Modern Prometheus’ is in reference to the hubristic Greek titan whose peripeteia was resultant of his reckless ignorance. Thus, both pieces of literature pursue these mythical references to signal the purity of the ancient world in contrast to modernity. The regarding of scientific discovery with suspicion made Frankenstein a forerunner in its position as a cautionary tale about the artificial creation of human life, whilst Never Let Me Go acts as a social commentary on the monstrous effects the artificial creation of human life can have on humanity.
The classical allusions continue to resonate through the texts, with Levine’s view that “despite his moral inability to cope with the result of his technical power, Victor’s search to discover the secrets of life and death in matter is emphatically presented as heroic in the novel. Therefore, as a celebration of the Promethean impulse in man, Victor’s project cannot be seen as unequivocally evil” suggests that Shelley is not prevailing Victor’s Promethean rationality as a fatal flaw, but instead as a celebratory message championing the pursuit of knowledge on an unencumbered front. This allows Victor to be conveyed, not as the underlying monster in Shelley’s novel, but overtly as a hero and revolutionary. The fact that he “might in process of time… renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption” subverts the monstrous contemporary 19th century view of ‘renewing life’ to a more progressive and empowering one. Indeed, both writers scrutinize and subvert the typically maternal miracle of childbirth through their notions of artificial conception. This particularly resonates with Shelley due to her own personal complications with motherhood and childbirth. Shelley’s own mother died as a result of complications from the writer’s birth, who later on life experienced difficulties of her own; out of four subsequent pregnancies, only one of her children survived. This misfortune may henceforth illuminate Shelley’s depiction of creationism in Frankenstein, as birth is seen to be both creative and wondrous, but also destructive and monstrous. Shelley referred to the book as her own child in her introduction to the 1831 edition of Frankenstein as she wrote, “I bid my hideous progeny go forth and prosper. I have an affection for it, for it was the offspring of happy days”. The use of the word ‘prosper’ can be seen to reference Edmund, one of William Shakespeare’s most contentious antagonists, whose statement “I grow, I prosper. Now gods, stand up for bastards” epitomizes his struggle of illegitimacy in a rigidly moral society. Likewise, Shelley’s novel – which she dubs as her ‘offspring’ – can be seen to be similarly illegitimate and abhorred by society for its progressive outlook on scientific discovery, while the creature of her imagination is also condoned for its sacrilegious birthright and consumed by the hateful gaze of society which nurtures its immorality, arguably just like Edmund. The lamentation of natural childbirth also occurs in Never Let Me Go, the title of which derives from Kathy’s favorite song which she presumes is about a mother’s inability to have a child. This causes Madame to weep once she sees Kathy singing and dancing to this song, whilst pretending to hold an imaginary baby. The sibilant effect of Madame “sobbing and sobbing, staring at me through the doorway with that same look in her eyes she has had when she looks at us” makes the moment particularly heart-wrenching and explicitly highlights the subversion of the role of women in the natural birth cycle. Moreover, the clones’ inability to reproduce and the mother in the titular song is directly reflective of Shelley and her own misfortunes with childbirth. Thus, by contesting the matriarchal position of women in society with the artificial creation of illegitimate life and the suggestion that the creations may not be compellingly humanistic as a result of this, insinuates that they are instead monstrous due their role as a threat to the natural order of life.
In conclusion, the viewpoint that ‘Literature often reveals that the only real monsters are ourselves; the characters used reveal what we find abhorrent about ourselves as a society’ is certainly exhibited throughout the duration of the texts. Indeed, the fact that both were written against a backdrop of overwhelming social disdain towards scientific discovery reiterates this and shows that monstrosity is not only a physical ‘wretchedness’, but a moral malevolence. De Bonald stated that ‘literature is an expression of society’ which is displayed through Shelley’s trailblazing of Romanticism – an era born through the malcontent of the increasing industrialisation that was a threat to the value of human life. Similarly, Ishiguro was writing allegorically in the aftermath of fruitful artificial life borne from the innovation of embryonic stem cell research. Consequently, both novels were birthed in climates of social monstrosity which was overseeing the devaluation of human life and the subversion of the natural order. Therefore, the notion that “the only real monsters are ourselves” is echoed gravely through the discourse of both texts, with the supposed monstrosity of the creatures being – not an insight into their natures – but merely reflections of their surrounding society’s damning gaze.
2018-3-5-1520250214