As it is wednesday evening, and my last name begins with H, I must write a blog post before midnight tonight. I would first like to qualify this post with the fact that it is currently 11:30. so I am going to try be at the very least “not stupid.” I cannot promise intelligence. But I want to at least promise “not stupidity.”
ANYWAY. I am choosing to talk about the 1818 vs 1831 volume 1, chapter 3 comparison posted on the the class website. Specifically, the textual variation in the first paragraph.
In the 1818 version of the book, one quote reads, “It was, perhaps, the amiable character of this man that inclined me more to that branch of natural philosophy which he professed, than an intrinsic love for the science itself. But this state of mind had place only in the first steps towards knowledge: the more fully I entered into the science, the more exclusively I pursued it for its own sake. That application, which at first had been a matter of duty and resolution, now became so ardent and eager, that the stars often disappeared in the light of morning whilst I was yet engaged in my laboratory.”
In the 1831 revision, it is changed to: “In a thousand ways he smoothed for me the path of knowledge, and made the most abstruse enquiries clear and facile to my apprehension. My application was at first fluctuating and uncertain; it gained strength as I proceeded, and soon became so ardent and eager, that the stars often disappeared in the light of morning whilst I was yet engaged in my laboratory.”
What struck me about this, and I do wish that I had a chance to read the other version to see if this pans out, is that this changes Frankenstein’s personality and the importance he places on beauty.
He is still horrified by the appearance of the “monster.” However, it may change the way the reader interprets that horror. It may be more easy to argue that he is horrified not by the appearance of the monster, but by the fact that he has actually created life.
Having the creator less influenced by beauty could really shift the overall external beauty vs internal worth argument, and could (if it is a consistent thematic change through out the entire novel) change the entire focus of the novel from a combo “creator vs creation”/”external beauty vs internal worth” to just a focus on the concept of creator vs. creation. Which might make it considerably less dimensional, and would probably effect every other binary in the book.
But then again, this all may just be exhausted conjecture.
And so, at 11:41, with 19 minutes to spare…
Goodnight.
