Misrepresentation In Mary Shelley's Frankenstein
2536 Words11 Pages
The story of a Swiss scholar who creates a man-like creature which then proceeds to haunt him is extraordinarily well known. Frankenstein has become a cultural phenomenon since its first publishing in 1818, and its subsequent republishing in 1831, functioning as the inspirational material for many films, theatre plays and more. It is interesting to see how a story that is as popular as Frankenstein can be so misrepresented in popular culture and in everyday conversations. Calling the novel’s creature by its creator Victor Frankenstein’s name is still an error commonly committed. However, there seems to be a growing awareness of that mistake, as it is, rather comically, usually immediately corrected by a listener or even a passer-by. This may seem like a hopeful transition towards a greater general and public understanding of Mary Shelley’s novel. Yet, there are still misconceptions and common mistakes revolving around Shelley’s most famous novel. For instance, Daniel Cabrera uses Frankenstein’s creature and Rabbi Loew’s Prague Golem as an analogy to modern technology. He does not confuse Frankenstein and his creature, but he describes the creature as a “nameless monster made by a Dr. Victor von Frankenstein out of electricity and body parts.” (Cabrera 107). While this might be true, the certainty with which this statement is presented is certainly misleading, as the text does not explicitly state neither what the creature is made from nor what is used to bring it to life.