Despite the inclusion of an introduction providing personal and cultural context and an allusive sub-title, Mary Shelley’s 1931 Standard Novels Edition of Frankenstein insinuates deliberate obscurity. An assortment of specifically selected devices and structures are employed to do so. This includes the utilisation of a framed narrative structure, unreliable narration, preface and ambiguous narrative content. When, in 1831, Mary Shelley rereleased her revised novel Frankenstein, one of the most noticeable additions was the introduction. This introduction seemingly provides clarification as to the circumstances under which the novel was created and the personal experiences that shaped it. She addresses how she, “then a young girl, came to think of and dilate upon so very hideous an idea”. Despite the information presented in the introduction that appears to minimise obscurity, it also raises questions as the content of the novel is not directly addressed. Shelley describes envisioning a story of a, “pale student of unhallowed arts kneeling beside the thing he had put together.” No mention is made of Walton, which has the potential to baffle readers, particularly modern readers anticipating a tale of a horrific creature and crazed scientist. Shelley also included a carefully considered subtitle, The Modern …show more content…
This distancing of the reader from the narrator establishes concerns of the narrators reliability. When the story has to pass through more than one character to reach the reader, the characters motives come into question and whether or not the story is as it is being told cannot be established. When Walton’s timeline finally intersects with Frankenstein’s, the events depicted by Frankenstein are relayed to the reader by Walton. This provides the opportunity for not one, but two characters to manipulate the information being