Frankenstein

Frankenstein : 

-Ecrit par Mary Shelley en 1816, publié en 1818 (elle s’est fait griller comme première femme romancière par notre amie Jane Austen).

Lors d’un séjour sur les bords du lac Léman, Mary (19 ans), son mari, Percy Bische Shelley (un des plus grands poètes de son temps), leur ami Lord Byron (un autre grand poète incontournable) le docteur Polidori étaient « confinés » par le mauvais temps, et les hommes ont décidé de faire une compétition pour voir lequel arriverait à écrire la meilleure « gothic story ».

Les « gothic novels », à la mode depuis la fin du 18^ème siècle, sont des romans dans lesquels le surnaturel et les monstres jouent un rôle important, avec une atmosphère sombre et effrayante.

Mary, qui s’ennuyait, s’est elle aussi lancée dans la « compétition », pour passer le temps. Mais c’est elle qui a écrit le meilleur récit, Frankenstein, qui est devenu un grand classique. Le texte du docteur Polidori, encore très incomplet, sera repris, développé et amélioré bien plus tard par Bram Stoker pour écrire Dracula. Ces deux personnages sont donc nés la même nuit, au même endroit. « It was on a dreary night of November », comme le dit la créature de Frankenstein.

-Structure: it is a Russian-doll story : a story in a story in a story in a story. The narrator, Robert Walton, is an explorer in the North Pole region, and he writes to his cousin the story told to him by Victor Frankenstein, whom he met on the ice, almost dead. Victor tells his story, and in the narration switches to what the creature told Victor. And in this story, some people talked to the creature. What they said is reported by the creature to Victor, who reports it to Walton, who reports it to his cousin (the reader, really).

-Plot in short: Victor Frankenstein was a student in medicine, at the university of Ingolstadt (home of the group known as the Illuminati), but his mother died and he was devastated. Refusing the idea of death, he decided to fight it. Digging up corpses and working hard, he gave birth to his famous creature thanks to electricity (a science then hardly studied). When he saw the creature (obviously ugly), he fled and left the creature to tend to itself. The creature was rejected by everybody and finally found shelter, dressed only with a coat Victor left in the room where the creature was born, in a shack, where he observed the inhabitants through a hole in the wall. He learnt to speak and read (in a Bible) thanks to these observations, but when they found him, they kicked him away. The creature found Victor’s diary in the pocket of his coat, and decided to find his creator: Victor, according to the creature, had duties towards his creation. Of course, Victor refused to help him, but the creature warned: “I shall be with you on your wedding night”. On, during the wedding, he killed Victor’s wife. Victor decided to yield (to avoid more killings) and gave new life to his wife’s corpse, so she could be a companion for the creature, but at the last minute he recanted and destroyed the body. In retaliation, the creature killed Victor’s relatives, and Victor spent the rest of his life hunting the creature to kill it. That is how he arrived in the region where Walton found him. Walton did not quite believe Victor’s story but when Victor died, the creature came on board and took the body. Walton talked with it and understood Victor’s story was true.

-The text: when it was hiding in the shed, the creature (I VERY STRONGLY INSIST: THE CREATURE HAS NO NAME. FRANKENSTEIN IS THE MAN WHO CREATED IT, NOT THE CREATURE) observed the people in it. A young couple and an old man lived together. The old man was blind and the others read to him, mainly the Bible. In the day, when the young were away working, the creature borrowed the Bible and learnt to read thanks to his memory of what they had read aloud. One day, he discovered the reason of their unhappiness: they were poor. The text is clear about their condition.

-After the text: the creature helped them, by leaving on their doorstep animals he had hunted for them, so they could have food. One day, he dared talk to the old man. Everything went well until the young returned. They saw the creature (the old man could only hear it) and chase him away with stones.

-Style: the creature speaks in a very literary and elegant way, contrary to Victor, which shows the more civilized of the two is not who one might think. The book is a reflection on responsibility and the nature of the Humans. Rousseau’s “good savage” was in Mary’s mind. Her mother and father were writers of the Enlightened Age and read Rousseau to her.

-Attention, pour bien comprendre le texte il faut se défaire des idées reçues sur “le monstre”. Le livre a été adapté au cinéma plusieurs fois. Si « Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein » de Kenneth Branagh est relativement fidèle au livre, ce n’est pas le cas de l’adaptation la plus célèbre, celle de James Whale en 1931. La séquence « he’s alive » et le visage de Boris Karloff (faciles à trouver sur le net) ont modelé notre imaginaire. Dans le film, la créature reçoit le cerveau d’un criminel et devient donc méchante, criminelle et incapable de parler. C’est exactement l’inverse de ce qu’on trouve chez Mary Shelley.

Le passage que je propose. C'est le moment où on voit que la créature est intelligente, sensible, sans malice (elle n'a pas été corrompue par l'argent) et qu'elle veut aider. 

‘I lay on my straw, but I could not sleep. I thought of the occurrences of the day. What chiefly struck me was the gentle manners of these people; and I longed to join them, but dared not. I remembered too well the treatment I had suffered the night before from the barbarous villagers, and resolved, whatever course of action I might hereafter think it right to pursue, that for the moment I would remain quietly in my hovel, watching, and endeavouring to discover the motives which influenced their actions.

‘The cottagers arose the next morning before the sun. The young woman arranged the cottage and prepared the food; and the youth departed after the first meal.

‘This day was passed in the same routine as that which preceded it. The young man was constantly employed out of doors, and the girl in various laborious occupations within. The old man, whom I soon perceived to be blind, employed his leisure hours on his instrument or in contemplation. Nothing could exceed the love and respect which the younger cottagers exhibited towards their venerable companion. They performed towards him every little office of affection and duty with gentleness, and he rewarded them by his benevolent smiles.

‘They were not entirely happy. The young man and his companion often went apart, and appeared to weep. I saw no cause for their unhappiness; but I was deeply affected by it. If such lovely creatures were miserable, it was less strange that I, an imperfect and solitary being, should be wretched. Yet why were these gentle beings unhappy? They possessed a delightful house (for such it was in my eyes) and every luxury; they had a fire to warm them when chill, and delicious viands when hungry; they were dressed in excellent clothes; and; still more, they enjoyed one another’s company and speech, interchanging each day looks of affection and kindness. What did their tears imply? Did they really express pain? I was at first unable to solve these questions; But personal attention and time explained to me many appearances which were first enigmatic.

‘A considerable period elapsed before I discovered one of the causes of their uneasiness of this amicable family: it was poverty, and they suffered that evil in a very distressing degree. Their nourishment consisted entirely of the vegetables of their garden and the milk of one cow, which gave very little during the winter, when its masters could scarcely procure food to support it. They often, I believe, suffered the pangs of hunger very poignantly, especially the younger cottagers; for several times they placed food before the old man when they reserved none for themselves.’

Mary Shelly, Frankenstein, 1818