Hauntingly Humanizing: Mary Shelley’s Use of Personal Experiences in Frankenstein

Mary Shelley’s tale of Frankenstein shows the mental isolation induced by social outcasting, the ways in which man’s ambition which can whirl into madness, and gives a commentary on human judgements made on physical perception of others. Through the analyzation of Shelley’s life, one can find where the traits of her story’s characters have been pulled from and thus how it was that a 19 year old woman was able to create arguably one of the greatest horror novels to ever exist. Frankenstein has lived on centuries after its creation due to Mary Shelley’s ability to analyse and use her personal experiences to create some of literature’s most realistic and human characters.

Born in 1797, Shelley arrived in the world at the height of the French Revolution and grew up in a post-French Revolution atmosphere (Miller, Spirit). This has deeply influenced her writings, as her parents were figureheads of the age of enlightenment. It is also prudent to mention that the writings of the time, be them political articles by the likes of her parents, or novels which reference the enlightenment ideals, were a large influence on Shelley’s writing of her novel. In the article A Troubled Legacy: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and the Inheritance of Human Rights, author Diana Reese “attributes the novel’s remarkable versatility to its emphasis on the succession of events and its open reference to eighteenth century philosophical fictions” (Reese 48). Unavoidably, the ideals of the revolution, the enlightenment and the writings which formed from it are ever present in Frankenstein.

Heavily coinciding with the influence of the enlightenment, the French Revolution was a rebellion of the French people having grown heavily weary of the state’s inability to manage funds in addition to the poor representation of the people within the state. The bourgeoisie found themselves at odds with the enlightened public who were tired of reaping the burdens of the privileges that the wealthier class received (Andress, French). Further errors in judgment of the French state lead the people to only see more tyranny within it. This resulted in mass resistance, and tensions grew so high that the people of France formed their own militia and began “purging the administration” (Andress). The Republic of France eventually came to fruition, but it was not without questionable behaviors of all involved. All of these occurrences reminded the French people that “grim and gruesome public execution was an 18th century norm,” and they did not want to continue with savage and uncivil behavior (Andress). The guillotine was invented and, for its time, was a much more affable alternative to previous execution procedures. These events resulted in French society coming to terms with their barbaric ways and put into question what it means to be civil and human.

This societal reflection on human cruelty and insensitivity to human life during the enlightenment holds absolute parallels with Shelley’s tale. Not only this, but the desire of the French people to have equality among all persons can be seen and put into question in Victor’s treatment of the monster. Seeing as the monster itself held life, it should, in this regard, be worthy of being in equal standing within society as all other living beings. Despite this, Victor’s vitriolic view of his creation puts the monster in a sub-human category. As the monster gives his exposition to Victor, the reader humanizes the monster in their mind. Empathy and sympathy are created and humanization begins to form through Shelley’s words. Regardless of how touching the monster’s words are in the reader’s eyes, they are not moving to whom it truly matters (i.e. Victor Frankenstein). Shelley’s morally conflicting tale of the monster actually draws parallels to many other humans of questionable character. Is the monster who has killed innocent humans truly worse than that of the executioner? Undoubtedly, many innocent lives have been lost in the real world due to false convictions during Shelley’s time which had to have been carried out by an executioner. Even with this actuality of Shelley’s life set aside, within Shelley’s story, the innocent Justine is executed by the hands of someone else. Yet no one questions the character of the executioner as it is viewed as them simply doing their job. This also draws parallels to those who likely killed innocent lives in the mass chaos of the French rebellion, either at the hands of the people or of the state. Yet, again, those rebelling are seen as heros and freedom fighters, not monstrous sub-human beings.

It was not only the times Shelley was living in but also those whom she lived with which helped to form the story of her novel. The perspective of Mary Shelley and thus her writing of characters in Frankenstein must be contextualized by the influence of the people in her life such as her husband, the relationships which came alongside their integration of lives as well as her familial experiences. Through educated analysis of the life of Shelley as well as her novel, one can come to see where the characters of Frankenstein as well as their motivations may have been drawn from.

The most prominent personal influence on Shelley was from her parents, Mary Wollstonecraft and William Godwin. Both outspoken political radicals of their time, Shelley’s parents without a doubt influenced her writing of Frankenstein through their ideologies. Not only that, but simple observance of the outcome of either parents life story gave Shelley inspiration to draw from. Wollstonecraft and Godwin helped shape many of the parental figures in Frankenstein, and the struggles of her parents are distinctively present in the lives of Shelley’s characters.

Shelley’s father, William Godwin, was well known for his political outspokenness. The patron of philosophical anarchism, Godwin saw the government as an overbearing and unnecessary control on the people which only furthered a community’s reliance on the wealthy and prosperous few in power (Philip, William). At this time, the age of Enlightenment was alive and roaring which validated Godwin’s utilitarian viewpoints.

Godwins dive into anarchic ideals was his folly, though he’d always felt that he lived and died by his cause. In 1800, he was quoted to have said “I have fallen (if I have fallen) in one common grave with the cause and love of liberty; and in this sense I have been more honoured and illustrated in my decline, than ever I was in the highest tide of my success” (Philip, William). In 1825, author William Hazlitt published The Spirit of The Age, a critical piece which analyzed “philosophical radicalism (‘the true spirit of the age…’)” as well as “the spirit of conservatism” (Bowerbank 418). Writer and historian Sylvia Bowerbank stated that, in Hazlitt’s eyes, Godwin fell from “intellectual prominence to infamy and oblivion” (418). Godwins fall from being politically renowned as the father of radicalism to a crumbling man is undoubtedly a fierce parallel with that of Victor Frankenstein. Victor desire for scientific glory spiraled into complete madness. Similarly, Godwin’s ideals, though well intended, were seen as revolutionary turned anarchic. The general history of the world does not specifically remember him, however it’s prudent to mention that Godwin is still favored commonly by persons of socialistic views (Philip, William). Both of these figures, by some, are seen as mad geniuses and have arguably gained a cult-like following.

In contrast to his politically motivated adult life, Godwin as a child and young adult desired to become a pastor (Philip, William) As a child, he is even noted to have written a poem titled “I wish to be a minister” and would even play pretend as a preacher (Philip). As he approached adulthood, he followed his ambition and moved away from home. In his pursuit to become a minister, conflict arose between himself and his father; much like that of Victor’s struggle with Alphonse when he expresses his interest in alchemy which is quickly disregarded by his father and is referred to as “nonsense” (Philip; Shelley 43). This happenstance is yet another similarity which Shelley likely drew from when creating Victor Frankenstein’s character. However, in contrast to Victor, Godwin, despite the dissidence with his father, pursued his childhood desire of working in the church (Philip). Though, coincidentally, his desire eventually faded and was replaced with a pleasure in expressing personal views through writing novels and political commentary.

It was in Godwin’s laxing of religious ideology which brought him to host dinner parties, these being the events which eventually led him to meeting Mary Wollstonecraft — later to be his wife in the spring of 1797 (Philip, William). In September of that same year, Wollstonecraft tragically died after giving birth to Mary Shelley (Philip). Herein lies a slight similarity to Frankenstein as Victor also lost his mother, yet this occurred at the age of 17, closer to the age of Mary Shelley when she wrote the novel. The lacking of a motherly touch is ever present in Victor’s treatment of the demon, perhaps because Shelley herself feared being inept to one day become a mother herself. The reason for this may be due to her never truly having a mother alongside her emotional and psychological pain that was brought on by the loss of her infant daughter Clara (Miller, Spirit). Despite having died before Shelley came to understand the world, Wollstonecraft undoubtedly influenced her daughter through writings which addressed the feministic ideals of herself.

Wollstonecraft’s most prominent and long lasting works is arguably her piece titled Vindication of the Rights of Women. Sylvana Tomaselli, biographer of Wollstonecraft, wrote of her stating, “[Wollstonecraft] wanted women to be transformed into rational and independent beings whose sense of worth came, not from their appearance, but from their inner perception of self-command and knowledge. Women had to be educated; their minds and bodies had to be trained. This would make them good companions, wives, mothers and citizens,” (Tomaselli, Mary). Tomaselli also explained that in Vindication of the Rights of Women, “Wollstonecraft did not simply clamour for rights, but emphasised that these entail duties; but she also insisted that none could be expected to perform duties whose natural rights were not respected,” (Tomaselli). Surely the daughter of a strong willed and feministic woman like Wollstonecraft would herself become her own strong willed and well thought out person. However popular her writing was or how much of a positive influence it held on her daughter, Wollstonecraft’s legacy, and thus her family’s standing in society, was tarnished by the public’s distaste for her radical works of writing. In honor of Wollstonecraft, Godwin published the book Memoirs of the Author of the Vindication of the Rights of Woman in 1798 (Philip, William). Unfortunately, this attempt at honor ended in many followers and friends of Godwin to denounce him due to Wollstonecraft’s “unconventional sexual mores” (Philip).

However, this loss in some followers did not take from his over all leaps in society and political influence. Godwins most noteworthy piece, Political Justice brought him to be “a central figure in radical political and literary circles of London” (Philip, William). With this, he was an influencer to a younger crowd of like minded persons including that of Percy Shelley, later to be Mary Shelley’s husband. Ironically, it was the eloping of his once cherished pupil with his own daughter in 1814 which caused pain and conflict in Godwin’s life including the death of his step-daughter, Fanny Imlay (Philip; Means, Mary).

The loss of Mary’s half-sister has been theorized to be a suicide by overdose due to Imlay being “distressed by. Mary’s estrangement from the Godwin Household” (Means, Mary). Before her suicide, Imlay had written a letter to Mary, requesting that she come home, as her leave had caused great distress to their father. On the last lines of one of her final letters to Mary Shelley, Imlay wrote “I am not well; my mind always keeps my body in a fever; but never mind me. Adieu, my dear sister. Let me entreat you to consider seriously all I have said concerning your father,” (Miller, Spirit). Fanny Imlay died by overdose in October of 1816 (Miller). Despite Godwin’s desire to keep the suicide of his step-daughter quiet, history recalls this event as a very intentional act suicide and blatantly sees her cries for help. The pain of a chosen death in Godwin’s life surely brought himself to question many of the beliefs he once held so true to himself during the height of his political career.

Before Godwin came to a point of uncertainty in his initial beliefs, his daughter found herself questioning what she had been told for her entire life. This is largely recognized in Frankenstein. Biographer of Shelley, Calvin Craig Miller, wrote that Shelley’s tale “rejected Godwin’s faith in reason to answer all problems. Victor Frankenstein, a man of science who, if Godwin was correct, would let reason dictate his decisions, is driven to destruction by an all-consuming passion for knowledge. Mary seems to be arguing that reason and rationalism only extend so far,” (Miller, Spirit). However, it was not only in her warning against extremism that Shelley found herself challenging her father’s beliefs in her novel.

The mortality of humans which Shelley found unavoidable was also a large contrast to her father’s hopes for humanity. Godwin, along with many other persons of the age of enlightenment, believed that humans would be able to mentally overcome their physical ailments and be able to “control illness and ageing and become immortal” (Philip, William). It is a belief which Shelley herself likely found laughable and thus contradicted in Frankenstein, seeing as nearly every major character of the tale comes to their death at some point in the book (Shelley and Smith, Frankenstein). Surely this is a reflection of the deaths Shelley has experienced in her own life, seeing as she lost family members and even her own child before the publishing of her novel. Caroline Beaufort, Alphonse Frankenstein, William Frankenstein, Justine Moritz, Elizabeth Lavenza and, debatably, Victor Frankenstein; All of these are characters which had motivation to live yet were unable to will themselves away from death (Shelley and Smith).

Arguably, the only character which had no motivation left to live was the monster itself. Frankenstein’s monster is the last in the book to die, having essentially committed suicide. Jumping onto a lone iceberg, doomed to float away from civilization and into the bitterly cold void of the ocean, the beast proclaimed “I shall die, and what I now feel be no longer felt. Soon these burning miseries will be extinct,” (Shelley and Smith 277). Shelley’s life had been impacted by suicide in the span of two short months. First, by the speculated suicide of her step-sister Fanny, then by the suicide of Percy Shelley’s wife, Harriet Westbrook. The method of Harriet is similar to that of the monster; as she drowned herself, the monster essentially did the same. If not by death due to extreme elements, surely at any time the monster could have chosen to drown in the icy sea. Harriet kept Mary from fully being with Percy, just as the monster kept Victor from truly living his own life. It was the suicide of both these characters that resulted in freedom for each story’s protagonists (though it is prudent to mention that Victor was not alive to feel that freedom).

Shelley’s father, William Godwin passed away in 1836, 18 years after the publication of Frankenstein. Pieces of Godwin’s life can be seen in both Alphonse and Victor Frankenstein, this being due to the idea of what a father figure means. Alphonse was the biological father of Victor, while Victor was the technical father of his own monster and creation. Shelley, like most other people, likely had mixed feelings about who her father was and how he impacted her. On one side of the spectrum, Godwin was like Alphonse in the way of having been let down by his child and having his child’s actions wear down his spirit. In this regard, Shelley likely felt guilt as she had betrayed her father through her elopement with Percy Shelley and gone against her father’s wishes and pleas (Miller, Spirit). Though Godwin did not pass away until after the initial publishing of Frankenstein, perhaps Shelley felt some degree of personal blame for the decline of her father’s health. Her projection of these feelings can be seen in Alphonse Frankenstein, as he had passed away of old age and arguably from pain brought on by his child. It is important to mention, however, that it is also in Godwin’s descent from fame and popularity that he perhaps found himself weak in the heart.

On the other end, Godwin is also like Victor, never fully receiving acceptance from his own father while also having his hard headed ambition cause his own demise. Here, Shelley saw the flaws of her father and they ways in which she very well may have believed that Godwin had failed her and her expectations. Like that of Victor when his intense ambition crumbles into hysteria and becomes a mockery of his profession, Godwin too finds himself to be viewed as a passionate political figure who had descended too far into radical ideals. The death of Victor Frankenstein was a conglomerate of the contradiction to Godwin’s belief of willing immortality as well as the comparison to Godwin’s failure in his profession causing his own demise. In the case of Godwin, demise is more notably the social outcasting and, at times, mockery which was inflicted upon himself while, for Victor, it was a fall of physical being in the hands of death. This is yet another piece which can be used to draw parallels between Victor Frankenstein and William Godwin.

Caroline Beaufort, mother of Victor Frankenstein and surrogate mother of Elizabeth Lavenza, dies of scarlet fever (Shelley and Smith 39). It is due to Caroline wishing to care for and nurture Elizabeth that she passes away. Similarly, Mary’s mother, Mary Wollstonecraft, passed away within days of her daughter’s birth due to an infection (Means, Mary). Elizabeth lives on for some time, only to become an innocent victim in her own life. Elizabeth herself was deprived of her own wedding night. Though not as severe a situation as that of her character, Mary may have written this not only as a dramatic element of the novel, but as another painful similarity to that of her own life. Mary likely felt deprived of a true wedding, as she did not truly have one until after the birth of her and Percy’s first child. Though Shelley had yet to experience many more of the pains that her life would bring, surely she felt connection with Elizabeth and likely even aspired to be as resilient as the character which she created.

The influence of Mary Shelley’s love life is nearly as influential as that of her parents. The most prominent of romantic relationships was with that of Percy Bysshe Shelley, a young atheist scholar and aristocrat (Miller, Spirit). It was in thanks to Mary’s father, William Godwin, that the two lovers came to meet, and ironically, as aforementioned, caused the conflict between his daughter and himself. Biographer of Mary Shelley, Calvin Craig Miller, wrote that, “[Percy] Shelley had enthusiastically read Political Justice, with its attacks on tradition, organized religion, and the privileges of the wealthy” and that Shelley himself post-reading the thought piece had stated that “the name Godwin has been used to excite in me feelings of reverence and admiration” (Miller). The initial relationship between Godwin and Percy Shelley started as one of mutual benefit for both involved, though the relationship between Shelley and his own father was brewed in conflict.

Shelley’s disagreeance with his father’s ideas of the “values of the wealthy nobility” and fervent belief in the ideals of atheism caused the greatest of strifes between himself and his father, Sir Timothy Shelley (Miller, Spirit). Shelley’s credence of Atheism had led him to co-author a piece titled “The Necessity of Atheism,” which soon after resulted in his expulsion from Oxford University (Miller). Shelley did not stop at only personal beliefs to upset his father, but also within personal relationships; in 1811, Shelley had eloped with Harriet Westbrook, a sixteen year old girl of lower class stature (Miller). All of these actions worked to further divide the relationship of Percy Shelley and Sir Timothy Shelley, and thusly resulted in Shelley being renounced of personal financial allowances from his father.

Shelley made the choice to borrow against his own inheritance for income. “These loans generally charged a fee of three times the sum borrowed, to be paid upon the receipt of the borrower’s inheritance” and it was this poor financial choice that later caused Shelley an intense need to escape creditors (Miller, Spirit). However, before the conflict of debt came to its peak, Shelley had been able to give a multitude of loans to William Godwin. Shelley was inclined to do so as he was a devoted follower of Godwin and “professed belief in [Godwin’s] principles, including the idea that men of great value to society should be supported by the rich” (Miller). This, of course, created a positive bond between Godwin and Percy Shelley; Godwin gained income while Shelley gained a “relationship” with a father and intellectual.

It is worth noting that all the while, Shelley was not intellectually satisfied in his relationship with Harriet. She was said to have been “more admired for her beauty than her mind. She would sit quietly, looking into the fire, as Shelley, Godwin, and other writers debated politics and ethics” (Miller, Spirit). Meanwhile, Mary Shelley — then Mary Godwin — had engaged in political and ideological conversations when around her father and his varied followers (Miller). Despite having created two children together, Percey found himself distanced and later fleeing from Harriet, soon eloping with Mary Shelley in 1814. The eloping of the two caused great conflict, not only with that of Harriet, but with Mary’s family as well. William Godwin worked to reason with Mary about the social consequences of being with Percy Shelley as Godwin had then come to the fall of his career alongside the destruction of his late wife’s name (Miller). Though initially having come to an agreement with her father, Mary was eventually worn down by the pleas of Percy.

However, it was not without grand dramatics and interpersonal conflict that Percy Shelley was able to convince Mary to go back on her word. Having received a letter from Mary explaining the dissolution of their relationship, Percy became suicidal (Miller, Spirit). Having “burst through [Mary’s] door… eyes red and clothes disheveled,” Shelley gave Mary a bottle of laudanum and exclaimed “they wish to separate us, my beloved, but we shall be united in death…Drink this and you shall escape their tyranny!” (Miller). He then “yanked a pistol from his pocket and brandished it” saying “this shall enable me to join you, and we shall be reunited for all time!” (Miller). The situation was quickly, carefully and peacefully resolved with the help of Mary’s stepmother and a family friend, though this event helped to further Mary’s decision to elope with Percy (Miller).

The grand drama in the love life of Mary Shelley up to the point of writing Frankenstein shows it’s affect on her story and the characters within. The relationship of Elizabeth and Victor was filled with conflict which can metaphorically be aligned with the relationship of Percy and Mary Shelley as well as their individual selves. The demon’s desire for companionship could be like that of Percy Shelley’s desire for someone like himself, as he had found intellectual equality with Mary. Percy was also said to have “pleaded for an angel to save his tortured soul” and like that of Elizabeth Lavenza to Victor Frankenstein, Mary was the saving grace and pure wholesome woman which Percy found solace in (Miller, Spirit).

Percy was married to Harriet Westbrook at the time that he and Mary met. Though Harriet and himself were no longer together intimately, it kept himself and Shelley from being, in their eyes, truly together. The collapse of Shelley’s marriage with Harriet was due to multiple complications, but most the noteworthy piece was that he owed her money and was constantly trying to escape debt collectors (Means, Mary). The fleeing from debt collectors holds parallels to that of Victor fleeing from the monster he created; it was his own doing, yet he never anticipated he would be so fearful for his own life due to his own actions. It was not until the suicide of Harriet in December of 1816 that Mary and Percy were able to legally marry (Means). Frankenstein’s monster could be seen as Harriet, a grand dividing figure which deprived Mary and Elizabeth of a true wedding as well as the monster in which Percy created and was trying to flee from However, the difference in each pair of lovers is that Elizabeth and Victor’s ends in tragedy, while Mary and Percy were eventually able to marry one another (though, of course, the pathway to their marriage was not without turmoil).

It was in the summer vacation taken in 1816 by Shelley, her husband, Claire Clairmont and Lord Byron that Frankenstein was conceived. Through many nights of discussing and telling ghost stories, specifically reading from the 1812 book Fantasmagoriana, the group came to challenge each other to write their own ghastly story (Miller, Spirit). Bryon looked to Mary specifically and claimed “you and I will publish our [book] together” (Miller). Mary much admired — and was frankly a bit intimidated by — Bryon, so his words added to her already fervent personal drive to create something which she deemed to be worthwhile. However, it was not without long strains of writer’s block and feelings of insufficiency that Mary found herself trying to create her horror tale. Ironically enough, it was at the height of her fatigue in attempting to write her story that she created one of literature’s most well renowned novels to this day.

The ideas surrounding mans capability of achieving unheard of scientific feats became largely apparent in Shelley’s first nineteen years of life. Science was a mere century away from the discovery of electricity, and the Enlightenment had shown signs of man’s grand strides in politics, civility and science. It was 27 years prior to the fateful summer of 1816 that Italian physiologist Luigi Galvani “found that an electric current passed through the legs of dead frogs caused their limbs to twitch” — a concept which was previously unheard of (Miller, Spirit). Though more specifically on her mind, Mary found herself listening to Byron and her husband discuss the findings of physician Dr. Erasmus Darwin who “was said to have made a piece of vermicelli, a string of pasta thinner than spaghetti, move on its own volition” (Miller). These prominent ideas of reanimation and giving life to a entirely lifeless being came to swarm her mind and keep her from sleep. On that night, her restlessness resulted in sick imaginings. Shelley had wrote “I saw the hideous phantasm of a man stretched out, and then, on the working of some powerful engine, show signs of life, and stir with uneasy, half-vital motion,” (Miller). Of her experience, Shelley concluded that “what terrified me will terrify others; and I need only describe the specter which had haunted my midnight pillow,” (Miller). From this night terror, Frankenstein was born.

There are many reasons as to why Frankenstein still resonates in the modern age. The novel poses questions which eternally haunt mankind. Biographer of Shelley, Calvin Craig Miller, theorized that Frankenstein “is perhaps the first modern myth, posing the age old question: In our search for knowledge about the mysteries of creation, are some questions better left unanswered?” (Miller, Spirit). The idea of ambition being man’s folly is a story which has been told time and time again, yet the telling of it in Frankenstein is so unique and refreshing that it allows this time old concept to remain relevant and heard. No horror tale during the time of Frankenstein’s publishing or in the present day has seemed to be as critically acclaimed or as chilling as that of Shelley’s while also maintaining metaphorical commentary of an author’s own life and the behavior of humanity.

Not only is it in the wide commentary on human beings as a whole but is it also in the chillingly humanizing storytelling that keeps Frankenstein at the forefront of modern literature studies. The reason for Shelley’s novel having relatable figures which readers could find personable was because Shelley had used her life as the inspiration to create such intricate characters and the dynamics betwixt themselves. Readers sympathize with the monster and sometimes even find themselves rooting for the beast. As Victor descends into madness, the reader too can be empathetic in his struggle and the pain which he inadvertently brought into his own life and the life of those he loves the most. The loss of innocent life is unfortunately seen in the real world, and surely was more so common in Shelley’s time before modern medicine. The sometimes unavoidable demise of an undeserving person is yet another humanizing feature of the tale, and one which readers, then and now, find themselves connecting with. To have made such characters undoubtedly required Shelley to analyze the people who she’d always known and to do so necessitated a deep personal examination and reality check on those who she was surrounded by. It is because Shelley had to dig so deeply within herself — and in those she knew — that she was able to create characters which readers found themselves caring about.

Works Cited

Andress, David. “The French Revolution: a Complete History? (Cover Story).” [“History Today”]. History Today, vol. 66, no. 2, Feb. 2016, pp. 20–28. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=khh&AN=112342822&site=ehost-live

Bowerbank, Sylvia. “The Social Order VS The Wretch: Mary Shelley’s Contradictory-Mindedness in Frankenstein.” ELH, vol. 46, no. 3, 1979, pp. 418 — 431. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/2872688.

Means, Richard. “Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley.” Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, 8/1/2017, p. 1. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=prh&AN=19358659&site=ehost-live.

Miller, Calvin Craig. “Spirit Like a Storm: The Story of Mary Shelley.” Spirit Like a Storm: The Story of Mary Shelley, 2nd Ed, 1996 Second Edition, pp. 8–41. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lfh&AN=9771329&site=ehost-live.

Philp, Mark, “William Godwin”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2017 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2017/entries/godwin/>.

Reese, Diana. “A Troubled Legacy: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and the Inheritance of Human Rights.” Representations, vol. 96, no. 1, 2006, pp. 48 — 72. JSTOR, JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/10.1525/rep.2006.96.1.48.

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Johanna M. Smith. Frankenstein: complete, authoritative text with biographical and historical contexts, critical history, and essays from five contemporary critical perspectives. Bedford Books of St. Martins Press, 1992.

Tomaselli, Sylvana, “Mary Wollstonecraft”, The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Fall 2016 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), URL = <https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2016/entries/wollstonecraft/>.

Works Consulted

Caldwell, Tracy M. “Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus..” Literary Contexts in Novels: Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’, Mar. 2006, pp. 1–8. EBSCOhost, search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=lfh&AN=18908217&site=lrc-live

--

--

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Maia Cuellar

Maia Cuellar

I work to be genuine with everything I write. I hope to get you to think for yourself. Profile photo by Sam Blaufuss (https://www.instagram.com/sambloofis)