Narration Bias

Besides the obvious physical and social characteristics that relate Frankenstein’s monster to African slaves, the fact that Frankenstein’s monster did not get to narrate his own story is an even stronger correlation between these two agents. In class, we talked about how there was a progression of narrators in the book Frankenstein; the reader takes the role of Walton’s sister who is initially narrating his sequence of events. Then, when Frankenstein is introduced, he takes the narration reins and relays his perception of events including the perceptions and tales of his monster, until Frankenstein dies, at which point the narration is taken over by Walton again. The monsters human experience was ultimately filtered through the lens of Frankenstein. Sure, the reader gets direct quotes from the monster with the goal to unravel his emotional and cognitive framework, but even those quotes are marred by Frankenstein’s perception and analysis of the unfolding events. Clearly, a connection can be drawn between the monster’s lack of agency over the perception of his life and the lack of agency African Slaves had over their perception as well.

Were African slaves historians or cultural anthropologists who had a say on the actual cultural and historical underpinnings on their class of people, no, the non-oppressed white man had the say about what and how they thought and felt. The people that made up the group were not the narrators of their own story just like Frankenstein’s monster. Looking at the relationship between African slaves and Frankenstein’s monster from this perspective offers value in the conscious realization of the historical progression of bias regarding African slaves and their story. However, it doesn’t stop at race, the conscious realization of any class or group of people lacking agency in their widely held perception is a cognitive framework to understand the progression of stereotype and bias not only a historical level, but also on an intrapersonal level as well.