The Man Who Wrote Frankenstein
John Lauritsen
Pagan Press 2007
Gay Humanist Quarterly
(London) Spring 2007
Reviewed by
Jim Herrick
John Lauritsen
is a gay scholar who has challenged many received truths. He has
questioned the Boswell thesis that homosexuality was recognised in
early Christianity, and has written originally on early homosexual
rights, and his view that HIV does not cause AIDS has produced a
disapproving stir. Now he has got his teeth into what he regards as
another myth. The powerful novel Frankenstein was
not written by Mary
Shelley, as all the world's libraries will have you believe, but by
Percy Bysshe Shelley himself.
He presents
mountains of evidence, much of which is startlingly persuasive. He
considers that Mary Shelley's lack of formal education would not have
fitted her for such a literary composition. This ignores the
intelligence of her parents Mary Wollstonecraft and William
Godwin.
But the most stunning evidence comes when you
put Frankenstein,
a masterpiece, beside her other novels, for instance
Valperga
and The Last Man,
the turgid, pallid, banal novels she wrote
after Percy Bysshe Shelley's death. This argument is reinforced when
the edition revised in 1831 by herself and William Godwin is put beside
the 1818 edition: almost every alteration weakens the text of the
original. Perhaps it would be worth using computer textual analysis to
settle the authorship.
She did her husband's oeuvre great disservice
by bowdlerising later editions, turning him into a Victorian angel
‘suitable for enshrinement among the gods of respectability and
convention’. She prettified the radical, whose unorthodox beliefs
covered politics, sexual relationships, marriage, diet, and religion.
Perhaps the summit of Lauritsen's case is the
evidence of ideas relating to revolution, forgiveness, science,
revenge, psychology, and nature, which are so characteristic of Percy
Bysshe Shelley. Mary Shelley showed no intellectual interest in
such topics.
The extra-textual evidence is examined
carefully and I am convinced that the three friends who in Switzerland
agreed each to write a story of the supernatural are Byron, Polidori
and Percy Bysshe Shelley. The original of Frankenstein is
found in Mary
Shelley's handwriting, but this is no argument for her authorship,
because she often acted as scribe for Percy Bysshe Shelley.
The most substantial chapter deals with Male
Love in Frankenstein. Lauritsen is convincing that Percy Bysshe Shelley
had homoerotic feelings and deep friendships for men. He demonstrates
that Frankenstein contains potential homosexual relationships,
particularly between the letter writer whose account enclosed the story
and deeply desired a close friendship with a man. There is also
Frankenstein's close friendship with the young Clerval. I find the idea
that the monster represents the sexual side of gay love less convincing
— he longs for a wife. He does however represent the ostracised,
alienated individual, who illustrates the psychological view that he
who is despised and hurt will turn back in revenge.
Percy Bysshe's interest in and acceptance of
homosexuality is seen in his translation of Plato's The Banquet
(Symposium) with its introduction entitled A Discourse on the Manners
of the Ancient Greeks Relative to the Subject of Love (Published by
Lauritsen in 2001, Pagan Press). This translation was done at a time
when punishment for homosexual activity could lead to execution. It was
not published until 1931 and then only for a private readership. The
poem which seems the most erotic is Julian and Maddalo, where the two
characters represent Byron and Percy Bysshe Shelley. I suspect that
like other deeply imaginative writers such as Shakespeare, Percy Bysshe
Shelley was omnisexual.
A minor weakness of the book is its tiresome
jibes at feminist academics. I cannot either accept that Frankenstein
was primarily written for gay men.
The strongest argument for Percy Bysshe
Shelley's authorship is the imagination and ideas and poetry of
Frankenstein,
and Lauritsen presents this powerfully. In the monster's
discussion with a blind old man, in the prayer for vengeance, in the
description of the craggy Swiss scenery (which demonstrates a
pantheistic tinge typical of Percy Bysshe Shelley) the novel has
enormous sweep. Lauritsen's book does readers a great service by
bringing out Frankenstein's
stature as a ‘profound and moving
masterpiece’.
Jim
Herrick is the author of several books, the most recent being Humanism: An Anthology
(2005). He was for many years Editor of The Freethinker
(London) and then the New Humanist
(London). Herrick studied English Literature at Cambridge.
Return to Booklist.
Home.