Abstract

Student readers often switch, with a taste for the unambiguous, from presuming Mary Shelley's monster to be wholly bad, to exonerating him completely, and sometimes swinging back to "evil." Both sympathy and condemnation—the "whose fault is it" debate—curtail the kind of critical thinking and application that is the goal of most of the courses in which Frankenstein is taught. The students' imagination of the heart and the professor's conceptual framework, sympathy and analysis, run parallel to and often counteract or resist each other. This essay proposes the importance of emphasizing the monster himself, returning to the monster as a monster, refusing to allow him to melt into a symbol in the classroom; it further suggests a practice of "teaching the monster" as a pedagogy of alienation that can be applied beyond Frankenstein.

pdf

Additional Information

ISSN
1542-4286
Print ISSN
0093-3139
Pages
pp. 106-120
Launched on MUSE
2010-07-17
Open Access
N
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.