How does Mary Shelley make the description of the monster waking in chapter five of "Frankenstein" powerful and dramatic

Authors Avatar

Danny Burgess                10MPi

How does Mary Shelley make the description of the monster waking in chapter five powerful and dramatic?

Frankenstein was written by Mary Shelley, in the year 1816. It was decided upon, one stormy night in Geneva, that her, her husband and two others would all write horror stories for each other. Mary then got her inspiration from sciences at the time, like Galvani’s theories of electricity’s effect on animal bodies and muscles reaction to a stimulus. The type of gothic literature that Shelley wrote is a prime example of the dark and dismal writing of that period. Shelley went on to write the epic piece of gothic horror – Frankenstein.

Chapter five is a very important chapter in the play, Frankenstein’s struggle is finally over, and the monster finally lives. However, not everything turned out the way Frankenstein wanted to, and answers to his questions such as “where does life begin” have not been found.

Shelley uses lots of informative adjectives to make the chapter seem more dramatic, for example, she says the monster has “watery eyes” and “black lips”. This tells us how Frankenstein had tried to make the monster beautiful, but in the process had made the monster grotesque by bringing the different body parts together. This creates a very powerful image in our minds of what the monster looks like.

Join now!

Shelley also creates a very dramatic atmosphere by using pathetic fallacy to set the mood of the chapter by using the weather as a powerful tool to mimic how Frankenstein is feeling. For instance “It was a dreary night in November” and also “Morning, dismal and wet” makes us feel the depressed mood of the opening paragraph, and doing so adds a dramatic air of tension to the play.

When the monster begins to come to life, the sense of unknown that we get also creates dramatic tension; we don’t know what will happen, which is a very ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

Here's what a teacher thought of this essay

Shows some understanding of the character of Frankenstein and some comments on the language Shelley uses in chapter 5. More detailed analysis is needed and better focus on the set question. ***

Here's what a star student thought of this essay

This essay has a basic structure. The introduction is poor, as it is not relevant to the question whatsoever. Examiners dislike bolted on paragraphs about context, and this is a great way to differentiate yourself by including a strong introduction. The second paragraph would be a better start to an introduction as it is focused on the question, but even then it could be improved by placing more importance on Shelley's constructions rather than commenting on the plot. The style here is basic, and doesn't have the most sophisticated approach. Using the first person is avoidable and stating "I think" and "I believe" only gives the impression your argument is opinion based. Try and use phrases such as "the evidence clearly shows" or "it is argued that" to have a more critical voice.

The analysis here is sound. However, I do feel as if there is a tendency to feature spot rather than look at techniques and how they shape meanings. For example "Shelley uses lots of informative adjectives to make the chapter seem more dramatic" is correct. But, if I were answering this question, I would rather dedicate a whole paragraph to the descriptive language in the chapter, building up some analysis to look at the narrative technique as a whole, and how it is effective. It is this progression from feature spotting which is required to score highly in GCSE. As mentioned above, there needs to be more focus on the reader's response to this chapter as a whole. If I were an examiner, I'd be asking what effect does "using pathetic fallacy" have, and why has Shelley used this technique specifically? It was strange to see the style of analysis switch here. Sometimes this essay writes about Shelley's constructs, for example "Shelley uses lots of informative adjectives". But, it then falls into narrating when saying "Frankenstein hated the monster, and everything to do with the experiment". I would note that the former is the best way to approach analysis, as it shows you understand Shelley is constructing the novel for a purpose, which naturally forces you to explore why she uses techniques.

This essay responds well to the question. There is a clear awareness of Shelley's techniques contributing to the dramatic effect of this chapter. I would've liked to have seen this essay attempt at commenting on their effectiveness, looking at the reader response of the techniques rather than simply stating they are present. This would've shown to the examiner that you understand why the techniques are being used, rather than simply being able to analyse their use by Shelley. There is some attempt to explore the significance of the chapter, but this is not beyond the plot itself. If I were answering this question, I would be looking at how this contributes to the gothic genre whilst looking at the form and structure of the novel.