Ethnocentrism And Paternalism In Frankenstein

Mary Shelley published her novel, Frankenstein, in 1818. She not only came from a history of reformers, but she also married Percy Shelley who was heavily involved in political and social debates of the time. Britain had just abolished the slave trade in 1807 however, slavery was not abolished until 1833 and Percy was often writing works critiquing slavery during this time. Both Mary and Percy spent a lot of time reading the history of slavery in Britain and in particular the Parliamentary debates between the abolitionists and planters of cash crops such as sugar that relied heavily on the use of slaves. In Shelley’s novel, Frankenstein, she addresses how slavery was ultimately fueled by racism, ethnocentrism, and paternalism, through Victor’s

Victor and male characters voice their longing for companionship throughout the novel and Victor while imprisoned says, “no one was near me who soothed me the gentle voice of love; no dear hand supported me” (Shelley, 170). Later in the novel, the monster after being abandoned by Victor has no choice but to be on his own and determine what life is about for himself. The monster then returns to Victor to tell him that he no longer wishes to be the “monster” he has been perceived to be and that all he wants is to have a companion. Victor is persuaded by the monster initially because he relates the monster in wanting a companion, but Victor’s preconceived ideas about the monster’s intentions lead to Victor destroying the companion the monster asked for. Looking at ethnocentrism in Frankenstein through this lens, the planters and members of parliament that were against the abolition can be compared to Victor and the abololitionists are represented by the monster. In an article written by Padraic Scanlan, thre is a quote from an abolitionist in Britain who said, “the negro likes his comforts fully as much as the white man... Human nature is pretty much the same in all countries.” It is hard to deny that the slaves in Britain not only wanted to, but deserved to be members of society just as much as anyone else however, there was still the question in the planters’ and Parliament’s mind of if the emancipated slaves could transition back into