James Whale’s Frankenstein portrays the eponymous doctor (named Henry in this adaptation) as being sexually indefinite, for lack of a better word. His is a grey and complex sexuality, brimming with hints and nuances, but difficult to pin down exactly. Strong arguments could be made that he is heterosexual, homosexual, bisexual, or even asexual; but speaking solely of the movie’s depiction, it’s likely that he lies somewhere within the spectrum of bisexuality. Henry’s heterosexual tendencies are most obviously exhibited in his relationship with Elizabeth, his fiancée. Their romance is evidently quite intimate, as Elizabeth feels Henry important enough to embark on a strange and potentially perilous journey to locate him – even after Dr. Waldman informs her that Henry has lost his mind. The fact that Elizabeth, despite these grave warnings, presses on anyways in pursuit of him, suggests their intimacy, which in turn suggests his genuine attraction to …show more content…
Shelley did include a section about Frankenstein creating a female companion for the creature in the original novel, but unlike in the movie, Victor destroys it before it is complete. In that vein, Whale’s and Universal’s retelling may be even more radical and morally fraught than Shelley, but they endeavor to mitigate their culpability as much as possible. By opening with a scene depicting the real Mary Shelley telling the story to others – as if she’s the one who is making the movie, not Whale and Universal – the filmmakers immediately indemnify themselves by passing on authorship credit to Shelley. Such a sociopolitical and moral calculus of blame-shifting frees Whale up to essentially make up whatever new story or addenda or subplot or continuation he wants, all the while attributing it to