Introduction
Frankenstein’s work has been criticized by many scholars who have tried to come up with other ideas concerning the Novel. Her book contains critical information which cannot be underestimated in the current contemporary society. Her use of hypothetical questions and fiction in the setup of her ideas can be utilized in recent literary works. This essay discusses two critiques by Professor Naomi Hetherington’s and Walter Scott’s analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.
Walter Scotts Critique
Walter Scott, who was a British national, wrote the Romantic Circle Critiques. He was born in Edinburg and attended Edinburgh High School. He further went to Edinburgh University to study arts and law (Romantic Circles). He was involved in the Romantic Movement and participated in various occupational Walter was conducted, including poetry, historical novelist, clerk session, and advocate. His first poem was entitled Minstrelsy of the Scottish Border. Additionally, he published novels like Waverley, Guy Mannering, and Tales of My Land.
Mary’s novel is featured in the romantic fiction of nature which depicts family values and fundamental laws of nature. The author aims to explain the romantic nature by explaining unusual settings and nature components (Romantic Circles). The perceptions which drove Frankenstein, such as the change of species Belle Assemblee are explained. Furthermore, the difficulties and challenges Frankenstein and encounters with demons are illustrated. The changes that occur from life to death and death to stamina are explained. Themes of creation and revenge run across the novel in the urge of Frankenstein to avenge his originator for all the miseries.
Scoots’ analysis goes in hand with the settings and perceptions of Mary’s fiction. The element of imaginary setting and magical narration is the primary focus of the author’s critique. They bring about a better understanding of this novel in a relevant manner. The author supports Mary’s work and critically analysis the novel with matching arguments in a necessary way. He uses romance fiction and the element of vengeance and anger due to demons’ control which generally gives a good narration based on historical events. I agree with the critique since it uses Frankenstein’s ideas and themes which support his arguments. The similarity in the content and the settings are valid and authentic.
Naomi Hetherington’s Critique
Another critique is from Professor Naomi Hetherington, who has a Ph.D. from Southampton University. She has been a teacher in Birkbeck for almost five years at the University of London, where she earned a teaching and scholarship award for her incredible contribution to literature. Naomi’s thesis illustrates that Mary wanted to use myths through fiction, the meaning of being a human being in a universe full of troubles (Hetherington 42). Additionally, she suggests that Mary revised her work to deviate from Lawrence and compare it with Christian Orthodox etiology.
Naomi’s thesis statement is relevant since it illustrates a step-by-step analysis of the novel. The first section of her research relates Frankenstein to Milton’s Paradise Lost and Prometheus legend. On the other hand, the last section describes the book to the religious nature of Mary after her husband dies (Ozherelyev 63). The Miltonic illustrations seen throughout the novel are used to emphasize the origin of evil in the world. The presence of a deity who creates human beings is seen. I agree with Naomi’s Critique since it relates outside resources such as Frankenstein to Milton Paradise Lost and Prometheus legend to support her arguments. She further identifies other themes related to the main content making these resources valid.
Conclusion
In summary, the two critiques by Naomi and Scoot give a better review of the novel provide literature and comprehension of the past event. Factors that contribute to environmental changes are discussed. The themes of creation and vengeance are illustrated to give a clear perspective of Mary’s main aim in writing her book. After the death of her husband, Mary becomes religious and seeks Christian Orthodox etiology ideas. The existence of a deity who creates human beings indicates the origin of life, and its end is seen by death.
Works Cited
Hetherington, Naomi. “Creator And Created in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.”Taylor & Francis, vol, 12, no. 5, 2022, pp. 32-85
Ozherelyev, Konstantin A. “Philosophical Contexts in Mary Shelley’S Novel «Frankenstein.» Herald Of Omsk University, vol 25, no. 3, 2020, pp. 61-66. Dostoevsky Omsk State University,
Romantic Circles. “Belle Assemblee Review of Frankenstein. March 1818, Romantic Circles”. Romantic-Circles.Org, 2022, Web.