Spivak's Essay about Frankenstein

Initially, I was somewhat confused after reading the entirety of this essay, as the author proposes many philosophical and literary allusions that I had otherwise been unaware of. However, after a second read-through, I think I can grasp some of the major ideas better...

Spivak first intimates that it is absolutely crucial to remember that "the role of literature in the production of cultural representation should not be ignored" (262). This, to me, means that literature has a huge impact on how we view society, as well as how we define ourselves as a culture, and even as individuals. If we ever separate the two notions, Spivak believes we can never truly understand ourselves, let alone the literature we are reading. I think this is incredibly eloquent and a great way of viewing literature; I know from my personal experience that every time I finish reading something, I walk away from it feeling different... changed in some way... I love that feeling that a book, a simple story, can have on me in my everyday life and how I approach certain situations.

Spivak continues by explaining an absolutely fascinating notion about the three main characters (not including the monster). He parallels the lives and roles of these characters as "Kant's three-part conception of the human subject: Victor Frankenstein, the forces of theoretical reason or "natural philosophy;" Henry Clerval, the forces of practical reason or "the moral relations of things;" and Elizabeth Lavenza, that aesthetic judgement--"the aerial creation of the poets..." (264). This notion of a three-part human subject is absolutely intriguing to me, as I never really saw the three characters in that way. Frankenstein, as we've discussed in class, obviously has an affinity for natural philosophy and science. Henry Clerval, especially along his travels with Frankenstein, always had a conscience that we heard from often, requesting that they continue traveling, or that he had a bad feeling about something. And Elizabeth was clearly the aesthetic character, as she was the only person that truly made Frankenstein, a possibly senseless and feeling-less character, have feelings of passion, other than towards his affairs in science. Elizabeth had the moral reasoning, and seemed to reinforce the ideas of knowing right from wrong, especially during times when Victor was looking for help/ an answer to his problems.

While the rest of this essay has more key points and interesting parallels and aspects, I find this one to be most intriguing.