In 1999, Gayatri Spivak complained that, ”[l]et me say at once that there is plenty of incidental imperialist sentiment in Frankenstein. My point, within the argument of this essay, is that the discursive field of imperialism does not...
moreIn 1999, Gayatri Spivak complained that, ”[l]et me say at once that there is plenty of incidental imperialist sentiment in Frankenstein. My point, within the argument of this essay, is that the discursive field of imperialism does not produce unquestioned ideological correlatives for the narrative structuring of the book”1 On the one hand, within the novel, the visibility and depiction regarding imperialism is unquestioned. On the other hand, it does not, at least not in Spivak's interest, provide an ideal perspective from which to interpret Shelley's motivation behind the narration in the text. Her judgement is convincing, but, in 2008, Graham Allen claimed that there were hopeless desires to determine a single, closed, interpretatively finalized reading for the novel.
So what is Frankenstein? In recent years, once again, the aspect of imperialism in Frankenstein has brought attention, in light of the creation of the European Union (EU).2 It is important not to ignore that Mary Shelley treated Britain and Europe, in the Frankenstein's manuscript, as an “imagined community” in 18183; however, seeing colonialism and imperialism as a binary co-existence4, I would argue that the discourse of colonialism captivates the world's, or specifically Europe's attention. Therefore, regarding Frankenstein, why and how does the creature becomes 'the Other' in the colonial discourse? Why he is the monster throughout the whole of the narrative as well as in the literariness aspect ? Using Homi Bhabha's discussion of colonialism, this paper will endeavor to answer these questions.
Keywords: Subaltern, Colonialism, Race, the Other, Violence.