Criticism of Frankenstein
Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein evoked fiery responses when it first surfaced in 1818. Two articles; one anonymous from The Quarterly Review and the other written by Sir Walter Scott published in Blackwood’s Edinburgh Magazine use language to convey a compelling point of view. In The Quarterly Review article, the anonymous writer’s usage of high vocabulary words such as “diseased”, “repelled” and “loathing” make the article’s diction high level. Examples of syntax used in this article would be found in line 16, in which the writer criticizes the work as a “tissue of horrible and disgusting absurdity.” The analogy the writer uses to describe Shelley’s work is found in lines (34-42) “Our taste and our judgment alike revolt at this kind of writing and the greater the ability with which it may be executed the worse it is—it inculcates no lesson of conduct, manners, or morality; it cannot mend, and will not even amuse its readers, unless their taste have been deplorably vitiated—it fatigues the feeling without interesting the understanding; it gratuitously harasses the sensations.” Sir Walter Scott’ article also has high level diction by his usage of high level words including “lamenting”, “extremity”, “perused” and “hyperbolical Germanisms”. The syntax that he uses can be found in line (14-26) where Sir Walters really touched basis on Frankenstein’s feelings and what he wanted. His analogy towards Shelley’s work is more of admiration towards the novel, than that of disgust as the anonymous writer felt. “The ideas of the author are always clearly as well as forcibly expressed and his descriptions of landscape have in them the choice requisites of truth, freshness, precision and beauty.” (Lines 54-57)
The points of view used in both passages are 1st person and 3rd person omniscient. When you begin reading the anonymous article, the first paragraph is a summarization of Frankenstein. The point of view is demonstrated in 3rd person...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document