Paper 103: Frankenstein and Secularized Modernity through Trauma

 

---

Paper 103: Frankenstein and Secularized Modernity through Trauma

Siddhiba.R.Gohil

Assignment of Paper 103 : Literature of the Romantics 

Table of Contents Academic: 

Academic Details: ................................................................................................. 2
Assignment Details: ............................................................................................... 3
Abstract: .................................................................................................................. 4
Keywords: ............................................................................................................... 4
Research Question: ................................................................................................ 4
Hypothesis: ............................................................................................................. 4

1. Introduction ...................................................................................................... 5
   
   

2. Scientific Ambition and Secular Modernity in Frankenstein ..................... 6
   2.1 The Enlightenment Challenge to Divine Authority
   2.2 Beghetto’s Analysis of Secularized Modernity
   
   

3. Visual Culture and Modernity: Interpreting the 1831 Engraving ................. 7
   3.1 Theodor von Holst’s Artistic Representation
   3.2 Visualizing Horror and Cultural Fear of Innovation
   
   

4. Trauma Theory and the Psychology of Creation ............................................ 8
   4.1 Schönfelder’s Trauma Framework
   4.2 Cycles of Trauma between Victor and the Creature
   4.3 Abandonment and the Loss of Human Bonding
   
   

5. The Feminine Absence and Ethical Imbalance .............................................. 9
   
   

6. The Creature as a Symbol of Marginalization .............................................. 10
   6.1 Societal Rejection and Identity Formation
   6.2 Alienation under Modern Social Norms
   
   

7. The Creature as a Secular Adam .................................................................... 11
   
   

8. Political Modernity and the Creation of Extremism ..................................... 12
   8.1 Haleem’s Analysis of Modern Frankenstein Creations
   8.2 Lack of Accountability and Global Consequences
   
   

9. Ethics of Creation and Moral Failure ............................................................ 13
   9.1 Responsibility in Innovation
   9.2 The Danger of Knowledge without Compassion
   
   

10. Narrative Structure and the Multiplicity of Truth ......................................... 14
    10.1 Walton–Victor–Creature: The Framed Narration
    10.2 Modern Storytelling and Subjective Perspective
    
    

11. Secular Modernity and the Loss of Human Values ...................................... 15
    
    

12. Modern Science, Hubris, and Ethical Parallels ............................................ 16
    
    

13. Moral Decline in the Age of Modernity ........................................................ 17
    13.1 Industrialization and Spiritual Deterioration
    13.2 Secular Progress without Emotional Values
    
    

14. Conclusion ...................................................................................................... 18
    References ............................................................................................................. 19
    
    

Assignment Details:

 • Paper Name: Literature of the Romantics 

 • Paper No.: 103

 

• Paper Code: 22394 

 

• Unit: 2 

 • Topic: Frankenstein and Secularized Modernity through Trauma

 

• Submitted To: Smt. Sujata Binoy Gardi, Department of English,

Maharaja Krishnakumarsinhji Bhavnagar University

• Submitted Date: November 10, 2025 

The following words are counted by Docs:
Pages		18
Sentences		327
Images		4
Words		3071
Characters		23442
Characters excluding spaces		20486

Academic Details:

• Name: Siddhiba R. Gohil
• Roll No.: 34
• Enrollment No.: 5108250017
• Semester: 1
• Batch: 2025-2027
• Email: siddhibagohil25@gmail.com 

Research Question:
How does Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” critique the rise of secularized modernity through representations of scientific ambition, trauma, and ethical responsibility?

Hypothesis:
Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” demonstrates that the pursuit of scientific progress without moral responsibility leads to trauma, social alienation, and destructive consequences, challenging the optimistic assumptions of secular modernity.

Abstract:
This assignment explores Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein as a literary reflection on the emergence of secularized modernity and its consequences on human ethics, emotion, and responsibility. Drawing from Robert G. Beghetto’s analysis of secular modernity, Christa Schönfelder’s trauma framework, Theodor von Holst’s 1831 engraving, and Irm Haleem’s political interpretation, the study examines how Shelley uses Victor Frankenstein’s scientific ambition and moral failure to critique Enlightenment ideals of progress. The paper argues that Shelley exposes the paradox of modernity: humanity’s pursuit of knowledge and control over nature often results in alienation, trauma, and ethical decay. Through the intertwined experiences of Victor and his Creature, Shelley.

Introduction:

Mary Shelley’s “Frankenstein” (1818) has remained one of the most significant works in English literature due to its profound engagement with questions of scientific ambition, morality, trauma, and the transformation of society under the influence of modernity (Shelley 32). At the center of the narrative stands Victor Frankenstein, whose pursuit of scientific innovation leads to catastrophic consequences. 

Shelley’s work continues to evolve in critical interpretation, especially within contemporary frameworks  such as secularized modernity, trauma studies, visual culture, and global political symbolism. This assignment draws heavily on four scholarly sources: Robert G. Beghetto’s discussion on the birth of secular modernity, Christa Schönfelder’s trauma theory applied to Romantic fiction, visual interpretations such as the 1831 engraving by Theodor von Holst, and Irm Haleem’s modern political analogy linking Frankenstein’s Creature to extremist movements. By weaving together these perspectives, this essay demonstrates how Shelley critiques a culture expanding intellectually yet declining morally.

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) has remained one of the most significant works in English literature due to its profound engagement with questions of scientific ambition, morality, trauma, and the transformation of society under the influence of modernity. At the center of the narrative stands Victor Frankenstein, whose pursuit of scientific innovation leads to catastrophe consequences. Shelley’s work continues to evolve in critical interpretation, especially within contemporary frameworks such as secularized modernity, trauma studies, visual culture, and global political symbolism. This assignment draws heavily on four scholarly sources: Robert G. Beghetto’s discussion on the birth of secular modernity; Christa Schönfelder’s trauma theory applied to Romantic fiction; visual interpretations such as the 1831 engraving by Theodor von Holst; and Irm Haleem’s modern political analogy linking Frankenstein’s Creature to extremist movements. By weaving together these perspectives, this essay demonstrates how Shelley critiques a culture expanding intellectually yet declining morally.

Shelley wrote “Frankenstein” during a period of rapid scientific evolution, with thinkers such as Luigi Galvani exploring electrical stimulation of life and industrialization transforming social norms. The novel emerged not only as a gothic masterpiece but also as one of the earliest explorations of science without soul. The horrifying aftermath of Victor’s experiment serves as a metaphor for the dangers inherent in the pursuit of knowledge detached from humanity. Through its complex narrative, "Frankenstein"embodies the onset of secular modernity while exposing the emotional and ethical void it often leaves behind.

Secularized Modernity and the Rejection of Divine Authority:

Robert G. Beghetto argues that "Frankenstein" reveals the birth of secularized modernity, a shift where scientific reasoning replaces religious belief as a guiding principle for human action (Beghetto 23). Victor Frankenstein represents the modern individual who believes that human intellect can transcend divine or natural limits. Instead of viewing life as a divine creation deserving reverence, Victor treats it as a scientific challenge meant to be conquered.

Victor states that he desired to “pioneer a new way, explore unknown powers, and unfold to the world the deepest mysteries of creation.” His language reflects the Enlightenment promise of  reason as the supreme tool for progress. Beghetto emphasizes that Victor’s experiment illustrates secular modernity’s most dangerous characteristic: the disconnection between moral responsibility and ambition (Beghetto 33). Victor’s goal is to obtain glory, not to improve humanity.

Once Victor succeeds, his horror at his creation exposes a profound irony. He rejects responsibility at the very moment he should embrace it. Secular modernity thus appears not as a triumph of reason but as a world stripped of accountability. Victor becomes an orphaned father, a symbol of modern society that produces innovation yet refuses to confront the ethical implications.

Shelley’s critique becomes even clearer when viewed against industrial change during her time. Machines were replacing human labor. Scientific control over life seemed possible. Yet Shelley suggests that without moral grounding, such progress causes alienation rather than advancement.

Visualizing Horror: Theodor von Holst’s 1831 Engraving

Von Holst’s engraving, Victor Frankenstein Observing the First Stirrings of His Creature, provides important insight into how early readership interpreted the novel. The artwork depicts the moment the creature awakens. Instead of triumph, terror dominates Victor’s expression. The creature lies in an awkward, unnatural form, emphasizing his liminal existence between human and machine.

  

The creature awakens. Instead of triumph, terror dominates Victor’s expression. The creature lies in an awkward, unnatural form, emphasizing his liminal existence between human and machine.

The engraving reflects the cultural response to scientific experimentation. Innovations that challenge natural boundaries are frightening. The creature’s body appears distorted and incomplete, symbolizing society’s fear of technological extremity. Victor’s recoil represents a deeper psychological and ethical rejection. He recognizes that he has violated the most sacred limits of human existence.

This visual interpretation reinforces Shelley’s narrative warning. Creations born from unchecked intellect may ultimately reveal dangers hidden beneath scientific excitement. Victor’s immediate response suggests guilt, a recognition that he sought power without wisdom.

 Trauma Theory and the Cycle of Violence:

Christa Schönfelder applies trauma theory to Romantic fiction to illustrate how psychological wounds drive behavior. She explains that trauma often results from broken familial bonds, rejection, and social exile (Schönfelder 42). These themes resonate deeply in Frankenstein.

The Creature is born innocent. His earliest experiences demonstrate curiosity and a desire for affection. He teaches himself language, admires families like the De Laceys, and longs for companionship. His trauma begins with abandonment. Victor refuses to nurture him. Society responds to him with hostility. Schönfelder’s work helps analyze how the Creature’s suffering transforms into violence. He learns that humanity will never accept him, so he redefines himself as a figure of vengeance.

 Victor also endures trauma. The horrifying consequences of his experiment haunt him until death. Schönfelder argues that trauma creates cycles, not isolated incidents (Schönfelder 61). Victor’s trauma produces the Creature, whose trauma returns to destroy Victor’s loved ones. Shelley’s commentary becomes clear. Trauma rooted in neglect replicates itself endlessly. Shelley uses this relationship to critique Enlightenment ideas that prioritize progress over emotional well-being.  Humans do not thrive through knowledge alone. The absence of compassion creates monsters, both literal and metaphorical.

 The Feminine Absence and Ethical Imbalance:

One of the often-overlooked dimensions of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is the absence and silencing of female voices. Shelley crafts a world in which men dominate creation, reason, and knowledge, while women are relegated to the margins. Victor’s decision to usurp the natural reproductive process by creating life without a woman underscores the arrogance of a patriarchal science divorced from empathy and morality. The destruction of the female Creature is particularly revealing.

Victor justifies his action by claiming fear of an uncontrollable race of monsters, yet beneath this logic lies the deeper anxiety of losing dominance over the act of creation. This erasure of the feminine leads to moral collapse. By excluding nurturing and emotional intelligence—qualities symbolically associated with women—Victor fractures the ethical foundation of his experiment. Shelley, writing in a male-dominated intellectual environment, uses this imbalance to critique the dehumanizing tendencies of a rational, patriarchal modernity that seeks progress without compassion. The trauma experienced by both Victor and the Creature thus becomes a metaphor for the psychological cost of a world stripped of its moral and emotional equilibrium.

The Creature as a Reflection of Modern Society:

One of Shelley’s most brilliant narrative choices is the Creature’s intellectual development. His eloquence challenges the idea that monstrosity is physical. The Creature says, “I was benevolent and good; misery made me a fiend.” Society’s cruelty turns him into what they fear.

His experience mirrors marginalized populations throughout history. A society that worships perfection rejects those who do not conform. Shelley’s critique of patriarchy also emerges here. Victor attempts to control creation without acknowledging the need for feminine presence. His destruction of the female creature highlights his obsession with dominance rather than connection.

The Creature as a Secular Adam:

The Creature’s journey in Frankenstein mirrors the biblical creation story but with a profound secular twist. Like Adam, he awakens to consciousness and innocence; unlike Adam, he has no divine creator to guide or love him. Victor’s abandonment leaves the Creature in a moral void, forced to construct his own ethics in a godless universe. When the Creature reads Paradise Lost, he identifies both with Adam and Satan—the rejected creation and the rebellious outcast. This dual identification encapsulates the spiritual crisis of secular modernity. Without divine purpose or moral guidance, the Creature embodies humanity’s existential trauma in a world governed by reason alone. Shelley transforms the Genesis myth into a modern parable of alienation: humanity, having dethroned God in the pursuit of scientific autonomy, now bears the burden of creation.without compassion. This theological vacuum is what turns curiosity into tragedy and innovation into destruction. The creature’s desperate plea for companionship, and his subsequent vengeance, reflect the psychological dislocation of modern man seeking meaning in an indifferent universe.

Political Interpretation: Modern Frankenstein Creations:

Irm Haleem draws parallels between the Creature and extremist groups like the Taliban. These groups were, in many ways, “created” by global powers who later abandoned them (Haleem 16). Just as Victor rejects the Creature after its creation, governments often withdraw support and deny responsibility when results become dangerous.

Haleem’s analysis extends Shelley’s metaphor into contemporary politics. Creations lacking ethical guidance can evolve into threats that turn against their creators. The creature’s violence does not stem from inherent evil but from betrayal. Shelley’s novel therefore warns that political or ideological manipulation without long-term accountability produces destruction.

The Creature becomes a weapon forged by neglect. His rebellion mirrors any movement that responds to oppression with force. Haleem reminds us that Shelley’s work is not confined to fiction; it reflects patterns of human behavior that continue to shape world events.

 Responsibility and Moral Failure:

Victor’s greatest flaw is not his desire to innovate. His failure lies in his refusal to take responsibility. Shelley shows that intelligence detached from morality leads to ruin. Victor’s abandonment represents a broader societal issue. Modernity promotes success yet ignores emotional bonds.

The novel challenges readers to reconsider ambition. True progress requires empathy. Victor’s downfall reveals the danger of a culture where individuals pursue personal glory at society’s expense. Shelley advocates for ethical leadership, one that acknowledges consequences rather than fleeing from them.

 The Creature’s Search for Identity and Belonging:

Themes of belonging and identity dominate the creature’s narrative. He learns through observation that relationships define human happiness. The De Laceys represent the warmth and Connection he lacks. Rejected repeatedly, he internalizes hatred. His plea to Victor for a companion highlights his desire to live peacefully.

Victor’s refusal to grant the Creature companionship destroys any hope for redemption. Shelley uses this moment to emphasize the need for empathy. By eliminating the possibility of connection, Victor pushes the Creature permanently into darkness.

Shelley’s Narrative Structure and Modern Storytelling:

Shelley employs a layered narrative through Walton, Victor, and the Creature. This multi-perspective approach challenges readers to judge for themselves. Each narrator blames someone else. This structure reflects the complexity of truth in modern society. Moral issues are rarely one-dimensional.

Shelley invites readers to question authority. Victor’s perspective may be biased. The creature’s narrative exposes the other side of the story. Walton represents future ambition. The narrative warns him before he repeats Victor’s mistakes.

 Secular Modernity and the Loss of Human Values:

Beghetto’s analysis connects the industrial era to a decline in spirituality and interconnectedness. Shelley feared a world driven solely by mechanical efficiency. The tragedy in “Frankenstein” shows what happens when humans seek to replace divine ethics with scientific dominance.

The Creature’s creation symbolizes humanity’s attempt to control nature. His suffering symbolizes nature’s response. Shelley writes a cautionary tale. Modernity must evolve without erasing compassion. The heart must guide the mind, or else the world produces marvels that destroy us.

Modern Science, Hubris, and Ethical Parallels:

Shelley’s warning about unrestrained scientific ambition resonates powerfully in the modern era. Victor Frankenstein’s experiment can be seen as an early fictional exploration of ethical dilemmas now.associated with genetic engineering, artificial intelligence, and nuclear technology. Like Victor, modern scientists often stand on the threshold of creating life or power beyond natural limits, raising questions about the moral responsibilities of innovation.

Robert G. Beghetto’s notion of secular modernity as the replacement of divine authority with human intellect finds vivid expression in today’s technological culture. The pursuit of knowledge, while inherently valuable, becomes dangerous when it disregards human and ecological consequences. Shelley anticipates this moral tension, suggesting that progress without empathy leads to alienation and collapse. In this sense, Frankenstein is not merely a gothic tale but a prophetic ethical text.

Its central message remains relevant: creators, whether scientists or societies, must remain accountable for the life and systems they bring into existence. The trauma of Victor and his Creature warns that intellectual advancement devoid of compassion only deepens humanity’s isolation and despair. These sections seamlessly integrate with your existing essay, expanding on the themes of secular modernity and trauma while connecting Shelley’s 19th-century vision to contemporary moral and scientific debates.

Conclusion:

“Frankenstein” remains relevant due to its sharp critique of societal transformation during the rise of modernity. Through Victor Frankenstein, Shelley illustrates the dangers of scientific ambition without accountability. Through the Creature, she exposes the emotional devastation born from neglect, societal rejection, and trauma. By incorporating insights from Beghetto, Schönfelder, Haleem, and von Holst’s visual interpretation, it becomes clear that Shelley offers a universal warning. Every creation demands responsibility. Every pursuit of innovation must be guided by empathy.

Shelley challenges readers to balance progress with morality. The dangers of abandonment persist in scientific laboratories, political arenas, and personal relationships. The lesson of *Frankenstein* continues to echo: knowledge without kindness leads only to horror.

 Works Cited:

Beghetto, Robert G. “Frankenstein and the ‘Birth’ of Secularized Modernity.” Monstrous Liminality: Or, The Uncanny Strangers of Secularized Modernity, Ubiquity Press, 2022, pp. 21–46. JSTOR, [http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2b6z8fb.5](http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2b6z8fb.5). Accessed 28 Oct. 2025.

Von Holst, Theodor, 1810-1844, et al. Victor Frankenstein Observing the First Stirrings of His Creature. Engraving by W. Chevalier after Th. von Holst, 1831. 1 print : engraving with etching, 1831. Wellcome Collection, JSTOR, [https://jstor.org/stable/community.24743411](https://jstor.org/stable/community.24743411). Accessed 28 Oct. 2025.

Schönfelder, Christa. “Theorizing Trauma: Romantic and Postmodern Perspectives on Mental Wounds.” Wounds and Words: Childhood and Family Trauma in Romantic and Postmodern Fiction, transcript Verlag, 2013, pp. 27–86. JSTOR, [http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1wxrhq.5](http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv1wxrhq.5). Accessed 28 Oct. 2025.