Evaluation of “Frankenstein” Critiques Essay (Critical Writing)

Introduction

The primary critique used for the current evaluation essay is the article by Walter Scott published in Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine in 1818. The author argues that Mary Shelley succeeded in composing a literary piece about supernatural forces that changed the conventional representation of fiction writing. The narrative of the novel uses elements of superstition, but the writer acknowledges that giving life to the lifeless matter could potentially be possible. As a result, some readers in the early 19th century perceived Frankenstein not as a piece of fiction but a natural continuation of science. Walter Scott demonstrates that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein alternates the laws of nature to create a captivating narrative and make readers conscious about the possibility of bestowing animation on the lifeless matter.

Supernatural Forces in Fiction

I agree with the author’s thesis primarily due to the setting of the 19th century. While the question raised by Walter Scott might seem like an obvious concept today, it was a thought-provoking message at that time. The author clearly distinguishes between “the marvelous and the effects of marvelous” while examining the narrative of the novel (Scott 614). In other words, the only supernatural concept is Frankenstein’s creature; however, his behavior and actions are rationalized. He acts similar to humans and wishes for love, companionship, and safety. However, when he is stripped of these feelings due to his appearance, he plots an act of terrible life-long revenge on Frankenstein, which is also a human-exclusive trait. Thus, the author demonstrates that even though the creature is a consequence of supernatural forces, he behaves exactly like humans, bringing the supernatural narrative closer to reality.

Consequently, Walter Scott draws some parallels with the outside sources, such as the story of Gulliver, concerning fiction tropes. However, he also states that Frankenstein is a fundamentally different type of literature that has elements of fiction but develops the narrative via rationalized actions. Scott successfully integrates the conventional tropes of supernatural writing in his critique to demonstrate the uniqueness of Frankenstein’s narrative. Ultimately, I believe that the author provides sufficient arguments both from the novel and outside sources to support the thesis.

Morality of Frankenstein

The complementary critique from La Belle Assemblée published in 1818 provides a similar perspective, indicating that Frankenstein is an excellent literary piece that raises intriguing questions. The article primarily focuses on the issue of morality, implying that the point of the novel might be misunderstood by the readers. It raises such questions as, “Should not an author, who has a moral end in view, point out rather that application which may be more generally understood?” (“Review of Frankenstein” 139). As mentioned briefly before, the creature behaves similar to humans and commits terrible acts of planned and deliberate cruelty. Therefore, the article by La Belle Assemblée acknowledges the captivating story but claims that the morality of the novel might be lost on readers. However, in my opinion, the morality of the novel is more transparent than the publisher La Belle Assemblée assumes. At the end of Frankenstein, the readers can see the pain and anguish that the terrible deeds brought upon the creature. Ultimately, I slightly disagree with the position of the second critique and do not believe that it significantly affects the thesis.

Conclusion

The examined article by Walter Scott provides sufficient arguments to prove that Frankenstein is a unique type of fiction that alternates the laws of nature to captivate readers. He thoroughly analyzes the narrative and compares the novel with outside sources to prove its irregular but highly fascinating tropes. The second critique by La Belle Assemblée supports this position by claiming that Frankenstein is an original and excellent piece of art. However, the article also raises the question of the creature’s morality and how it might be perceived by the readers, further separating “the marvelous and the effects of marvelous.” Ultimately, Walter Scott proved the thesis of Frankenstein’s novelty by analyzing the narrative and comparing it to the famous works of the past.

Works Cited

“Review of Frankenstein.” La Belle Assemblée, 1818, Web.

Scott, Walter. “Review of Frankenstein,” Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine 2, Web.