Publishing of Frankenstein; Or, The Modern Prometheus
In 1818, Mary Shelley anonymously
published her novel, Frankenstein; Or,
The Modern Prometheus. Like many writers, especially female writers, in the
nineteenth century, she chose to not declare herself as the author of her
creation for fear that, like the creature in her book, it would be rejected by
society for superficial reasons. In the early nineteenth century, despite a
growing number of female authors, writing and literary reviewing were still male
dominated fields. In reviews of a female writer’s work, her gender was often
brought in to the review. Most notably were the reviews of Anna Barbauld’s poem,
“Eighteen Hundred and Eleven, a Poem.” Published only six years before Frankenstein, the reception of
Barbauld’s controversial political poem was extremely negative, and reviews
patronized Barbauld for, as a woman, stepping outside her domestic sphere and
delving into the realm of politics. Despite Frankenstein’s
author, like the creature, not being given a name, several of the reviews guess
at the identity of the author. Though the novel’s connection to William Godwin,
as made clear by the dedication, seems to be the most influential factor in the
bias of the reviews, the two reviews that correctly assumed the identity and,
therefore, gender of the author demonstrate a clear negative bias based on the
author being female.
The Quarterly Review, January 1818
The first
review of Frankenstein to be
published was in the January 1818 issue of The
Quarterly Review and written by John Wilson Croker. Croker’s review was
undoubtedly unfavorable, which can be seen in his initial comments provided
after his summary of the novel, “Our readers will guess from this summary, what
a tissue of horrible and disgusting absurdity this works presents.” Despite an
overall dislike, or perhaps disgust for the novel, Croker admits the way in
which the novel was written—the quality of the language—has merits as he
prefaces the samples of the novels by calling them, “a very favorable specimen
of the vigor and fancy of the language with which this work is written,” and,
again, at end of the review complimenting the talent of the author but
condemning the content, “It cannot be denied that this is nonsense -- but
nonsense decked out with circumstances and clothed in language highly terrific:
it is, indeed, ‘a tale / Told by an
idiot, full of sound and fury, Signifying nothing -’” What Croker objects
to are the Godwinian messages.
La Belle Assemblée, March 1818
No author is given for the
review of Frankenstein in the March
1818 issue of La Belle Assemblée. The
critique compliments the novel and predicts its success, “… its originality,
excellence of language, and peculiar interest, is likely to be very popular.”
Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine, March 1818
Walter Scott wrote the review of
Frankenstein for the March 1818 issue
of Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine. Though
Scott puts the novel in the ‘Godwinian School’ by likening it to Godwin’s work,
“Frankenstein is a novel upon the same plan with Saint Leon,”[1] Scott seems to not focus
so much on how the work is Godwinian as much as how it is poetic, “… the author
seems to us to disclose uncommon powers of poetic imagination” and “… the
author possesses the same facility in expressing himself in verse as in prose.”
Concentrating on the poetic nature of
the novel most likely stems from Scott mistakenly assuming the novel was
written by Percy Shelley. In the review, he even identifies Percy Shelley as
the author, “… it is said to be written by Mr. Percy Bysshe Shelley” (15). Scott
also praises the skill in which the author, presumed to be Percy Shelley,
writes about the landscape, “… his descriptions of landscape have in them the
choice requisites of truth, freshness, precision, and beauty.”
The Edinburgh Magazine, and Literary Miscellany;
A New Series of the
Scots Magazine, March 1818
The Scottish magazine, The Edinburgh Magazine and Literary
Miscellany (EMLM), published an
anonymous review of Frankenstein in
its March 1818 issue. The review focuses on the morality of the tale and the
merit of the writing itself. Moreover, the reviewer’s critique swings back and
forth between praise for the writing, most of the time, and condemnation of the
content.
The British Critic, April 1818
In April 1818, The British Critic published an
anonymous review of Frankenstein. The
reviewer hints at the identity of the author, and, moreover, includes
commentary regarding the author’s gender. In the final paragraph the reviewer
states, “The writer of it [the novel] is, we understand, a female; this is an
aggravation of that which is the prevailing fault of the novel; but if our
authoress can forget the gentleness of her sex, it is no reason why we should;
and we shall therefore dismiss the novel without further comment.” The reviewer
never explains how the author being female is “an aggravation of that which is
the prevailing fault of the novel” nor how she has forgotten “the gentleness of
her sex.” However, these misogynistic comments unquestionably prove a gender
bias in the review.
The Gentleman’s Magazine, April 1818
The Gentleman’s Magazine published an anonymous review of Frankenstein in April 1818. The
extremely short review does not mention Godwin in any way. As for the gender of
the author, none is indicated. Therefore, presumably from a neutral standpoint,
the review provides a positive critique with special attention given to the
landscape writing, “THIS Tale is evidently the production of no ordinary
Writer, and though we are shocked at the idea of the event on which the fiction
is founded, many parts of it are strikingly good, and the description of the
scenery is excellent.”
The Literary Panorama, and National Register, June 1818
An anonymous
review of Frankenstein was published
in the June 1818 issue of The Literary
Panorama, and National Register. The review, the last contemporary review
of the 1818 release of Frankenstein,
is less than favorable and contends the novel has “gross and obvious inconsistencies”
and “a strong tendency toward materialism” (39). This review is the only one
that does not, in some manner or other, praise the quality of the writing of
the novel. The only half compliment given in the review is, “The main idea on
which the story of Frankenstein
rests, undoubtedly affords scope for the display of imagination and fancy, as
well as knowledge of the human heart; and the anonymous author has not wholly
neglected the opportunities which it presented.” As there are no overt
political or ideological biases against the novel, perhaps this reluctance to
offer any positive criticism derives from the assumed gender and identity of
the author. At the end of the review, the author is discussed, “We have heard
that this work is written by Mr. Shelley; but should be disposed to attribute
it to even a less experienced writer than he is. In fact we have some idea that
it is the production of a daughter of a celebrated living novelist.” Not only
is the author revealed, by the reviewer’s assumption, to be female but to also
be, if we connect the dots laid out by the reviewer, Mary Shelley.
[1]
Saint Leon: A Tale of the Sixteenth
Century is a novel by William Godwin published in 1799 and has
philosophical themes of mortality, family, and social responsibility.
No comments:
Post a Comment