Olivia Martinez

Professor Bruce
March 24, 2020
English 307
Frankenstein: It Was A Gender Smash!

After reading ​Frankenstein​ for the first time, I sat at my living room wondering

what gender might have meant for the monster. It is a strange thought but it would be

stranger to assume Frankenstein’s monster saw gender through the same lens we see

it. Afterall, Mary Shelley wrote this book before the major boon of modern colonialism

and new contemporary ideas about gender often get liberally anachronized in history so

a gender analysis of ​Frankenstein​ is worth review.

Currently, Gender is facing a revolutionary change within society. And while I do

not think Mary Shelley was in the know about how gender would expand in society, her

writing shows an intrinsic understanding worth analyzing. Although ​Frankenstein​ was

written before the Victorian age, the gender dynamics between Victor Frankenstein and

the monster reveal a contemporary understanding on the purpose of gender roles and

gender identity; namely, that an individual’s role and function in society precedes their

possible identity.

Before we jump into the analysis of the text, I think it is important to clarify my

approach and understanding of both gender roles and gender identity. Gender identity,

as I understand it, is the gender by which an individual identifies with whereas a gender

role is a social archetype by which an individual is assigned at birth. This distinction is

made by gender constructionists in an effort to realize that gender is a social construct,

that is, constructed by society rather than any other biological essence. For my analysis
I will follow this stance; I consider myself a gender constructionist rather than a gender

essentialist (although we will see later that even this binary is not concise). I believe that

the differences between the genders “are characteristics not of the male and female

sex…but, rather, of the masculine and feminine” gender roles. Gender essentialists

“‘deny that the meaning of gender or sexuality has ever significantly changed’” which

often creates a static and immobile view of gender ("Gender Criticism" 383). As a result,

the historical construction of gender identity as a social and political tool is completely

erased and instead an ahistorical view is adopted.

These distinctions are important to our analysis as Victor’s understanding of

gender molds how the creature is left to shape their identity. Victor, feeling exalted by

the scope of his life-bringing powers, “began the creation of a human being” as his

contribution to the world with high hopes (Shelley 57). This feeling quickly leaves him

upon seeing the “the dull yellow eye of the creature open” when he finally brings his

creation to life (Shelley 59). It is between these two emotions that Victor’s language can

show us his views on gender. He sees his creation as a separate species adjacent to

man, opting between male and neuter pronouns depending on his conviction. This

separation of species already removes the monster from society so the pronouns used

are more telling than they first lead on. In “Decolonial Feminist Movidas” Xhercis

Méndez brings up Maria Lugones’ idea of the modern colonial gender system to explain

how gender “becomes racialized and a marker of humanity for colonizers” (7). And

although Lugones’ idea is contextualized around the Americas, her understanding of

gender provides an avenue for us to reflect on. While the monster seems gendered to
us, it might be more concise to say that they are sexed.

There is no doubt that race also plays a role in

Frankenstein​ but my concern is solely within gender. By

having the monster sexed, Victor is able to speak of the

monster as a beast where they once were considered a

man. The integral humanity vested in each individual

once they are gendered is robbed from the monster.

However, this is only one perspective. If the

monster is to be understood through gender we must

look at how they relate to others; the monster’s desire for

a companion is a clear indication that they perceive

gender as a function between prescriptive and

descriptive borders. When the monster meets Victor they

demand him to create “a creature of another sex” as their

companion in light of their exile (Shelley 129). While this reflects Victor’s understanding

of gender it also conveys how relationality creates identity. Charlotte Witt coins the term

uniessentialism​ in “What is Gender Essentialism?” as a form of gender essentialism that

posits gender as “a relationship of normative unity among our various social position

occupancies” (10). That is, our relationships in society are unified as one cohesive

identity through gender. It is important to note that this does not discredit the position of

social constructionism; social origin is the underlying base in Witt’s term; she is simply

describing a possible lens on how gender essence exists. This deviation from gender’s
prescriptive role is indeed the same as that of the monster’s. By asking Victor to create

another being like them, the monster is expanding their identity in relation to others.

While we see the monster recreating prescriptive gender roles, it might be worth

mentioning that companionship could have also been accomplished with another

monster of the same sex. I cannot say how the monster understood sexuality, if they

saw it as a part of gender or if they had one to begin with. However, it might be of use to

note that opposites construct binaries from which humans typically create. The monster

might seem to only

follow prescriptive

gender roles but to

say so is to rob them

of their autonomy;

the monster is

creating their own

society.

Gender is so ever present in everyday life it blinds us. We see it in nature and we

create it in language. Yet how it defines us is often at the hands of circumstance; not

everyone will agree on the division between gender’s prescriptive and descriptive nature

and how they play in the creation of identity. Frankenstein’s monster clearly made their

own attempt and saw that relationality helps create an identity centered around gender.

How we understand our own gender is up to us.

 Works Cited

Méndez, Xhercis. "Decolonial Feminist Movidas: A Caribeña (Re)thinks 'Privilege,' the Wages

of Gender, and Building Complex Coalitions." ​Theories of the Flesh: Latinx and Latin

American Feminisms, Transformation, and Resistance​, edited by Andrea J. Pitts et al.,

Oxford UP, pp. 1-27.

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft. ​Frankenstein​. 3rd ed., Boston, Bedford/St. Martin's, 2016.

Universal Studios. ​The Bride of Frankenstein​. 1935. ​Heritage Auctions​,

movieposters.ha.com/itm/horror/the-bride-of-frankenstein-universal-1935-one-sheet-27-x

-41-style-d/a/667-29167.s. Accessed 5 Apr. 2020.

---. Promotional Photo of Boris Karloff from the Bride of Frankenstein as Frankenstein's

Monster. 1935. ​Doctormacro,​

www.doctormacro.com/Images/Karloff,%20Boris/Karloff,%20Boris%20(Bride%20of%2

0Frankenstein,%20The)_01.jpg. Accessed 5 Apr. 2020.

Witt, Charlotte. "What Is Gender Essentialism?" ​Academia,​

www.academia.edu/33925865/WHAT_IS_GENDER_ESSENTIALISM. Accessed 5

Apr. 2020.