Social isolation as a major contributor to the despair inherent in the central characters is presented in Frankenstein through the confinement synonymous with social isolation. Victor Frankenstein self-imposes his detachment from society, as a result of his parochial quest for knowledge: 'I, who had ever been surrounded by amiable companions...I was now alone...I ardently desired the acquisition of knowledge' (Shelley, p. 28). Essentially, it is this obsession in which the creature is derived from, and Victor later addresses this as the initial cause of his despair: 'how dangerous is the acquirement of knowledge, and how much happier that man is who believes his native town to be the world, than he who aspires to become greater than his nature will allow' (Shelley, p. 35). In his creation, Victor has usurped the omnipotent position of God in order to transcend the barriers of nature, excluding himself literally from society, and metaphorically from humanity.
Similarly, the creature's desire to be educated contributes to his sense of social isolation, and by implication existential isolation, which contributes to his melancholy: 'although I eagerly longed to discover myself to the cottagers, I ought not to make the attempt until I had first became a master of their language; which knowledge might enable me to make them overlook the deformity of my figure' (Shelley, p. 90). This quest for knowledge instigates the creature's existential angst; he attempts to educate himself through works of literature such as Milton's Paradise Lost in which he identifies many parallels to his own being: '[Adam] was allowed to converse with, and acquire knowledge from beings of a superior nature: but I was wretched, helpless, and alone' (Shelley, p. 105). Through the characterisation of both Victor and his creation, Shelley portrays the acquisition of knowledge as a destructive force, one that contributes to the demise of the two central characters.
As a contrast to Victor, the creature's isolation is imposed upon him by an accumulation of social and moral injustices. For example, he is immediately rejected by his creator whom the creature believes to 'bound by ties only dissoluble by the annihilation of one of [them]' (Shelley, p. 77). The creature's despair is further augmented in his rejection by society as a whole: 'There was none among the myriads of men that existed who would pity or assist me' (Shelley, p. 111). The accumulation of these moral and social injustices essentially leads to the creature's 'only link that held [him] to the world' being 'broken' (Shelley, p. 113); he is completely isolated from any sense of community, from humanity, from his creator and from his own self-identity and has therefore relinquished all hope of social assimilation: 'am I not shunned and hated by all mankind? You, my creator, would tear me to pieces...tell me why I should pity man more than he pities me?' (Shelley, p. 119). The creature has no moral stability or a sense of collective identity; he has no defined purpose in life and is completely alienated from all forms of community.
In conclusion, through the characterisation of Victor and his monster in Frankenstein, Shelley explores the detrimental effects that social isolation, both self-imposed and socially imposed, together with self-denial and ambiguous or undefined self-identity has on individual expression, self-worth and ultimately the fate of the character. The despair that results from the guilt and isolation presented in conjunction with the central characters is essential to the reader's understanding of the characterisation employed by Shelley, and provides the central platform in which the demise of the characters is explored and understood.
Word count: 884
Bibliography
Bronfen, Elisabeth, ' Rewriting the family : Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein’ in its biographical/textual context in Frankenstein, creation, and monstrosity ed, by Stephen Bann (London: Reaktion Books, 1994), pp. 16-38.
Brooks, Peter, '”Godlike Science/Unhallowed Arts”: Language, Nature, and Monstrosity' in The Endurance of Frankenstein ed. by George Levine and U.C. Knoepflmacher (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 205-220.
Ellis, Kate, 'Monsters in the Garden: Mary Shelley and the Bourgeois Family' in The Endurance of Frankenstein ed. by George Levine and U.C. Knoepflmacher (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 123-142.
Gilbert, Sandra M. and Gubar, Susan, 'Horror’s twin : Mary Shelley’s monstrous eve.' in The madwoman in the attic : the woman writer and the nineteenth-century literary imagination(New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000), pp. 213-247.
Levine, George, 'The Ambiguous Heritage of Frankenstein' in The Endurance of Frankenstein ed. by George Levine and U.C. Knoepflmacher (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 3-30.
Moretti, F. 'Dialectic of fear' in Signs taken for wonders : essays in the sociology of literary forms (London: Verso, 2005), pp. 83-90.
Shelley, Mary, Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus (New York: Oxford University Press, 2008)
Sterrenburg, Lee, 'Mary Shelley's Monster: Politics and Psyche' in The Endurance of Frankenstein ed. by George Levine and U.C. Knoepflmacher (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 143-171.
Kate Ellis, 'Monsters in the Garden: Mary Shelley and the Bourgeois Family' in The Endurance of Frankenstein ed. by George Levine and U.C. Knoepflmacher (Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1979), pp. 123-142.