After reading “The ‘Workshop of Filthy Creation’: A Marxist Reading of Frankenstein,” I concluded that the creature was not so much a proletariat, rather more of “a factitious totality assembled from (the parts of) of a multitude of different individuals (Goldner), in particular, the “poor,” the urban mass….” (473) This creature does not belong in any class thus he’s and outsider and was created in a lab where he was later abandoned and was left to fend for himself. As Montag described the “monster is a product rather than a creation, assembled and joined together…” (473) Hence, the monster is not remotely human although he tries to be he fails immensely and is instead consider a product where he doesn’t fit in any of the classes. Warden Montag argues that Frankenstein’s creation was “not so much the sign of the proletariat at its unrepresentablilty,” and I agree with his interpretation because the creature was not a working-class individual, however he represented the ideal of the proletariat throughout the novel.

The creature was created by Mary Shelley to up rise toward the (bourgeoisie) which was Victor Frankenstein in this case and demand the power the monster should have received. Along the same lines, Montag included “But in going so they found that they had conjured up a monster that, once unleashed, could not be controlled.” (471) This quote shows how once the proletariats join in multitude they can unleash their power then lead to anarchy. Going back to the creature he is portrayed as a proletariat and ready to claim back what he should have received when he was created by his creator. The monster illustrates this when he reverses the characters and when “his creation, far more powerful than he, calls him “slave.” This indicates how with enough power and dignity one could lead demands that go way beyond rational. In a way this quote also symbolizes irony because the creator usually has the upper hand and in this case the creature revolutionized and ended up switching positions.

 

Guadalupe Andrade