Rilee Hoch

In his essay “The Workshop of Filthy Creation’: A Marxist Reading of Frankenstein.” Warren Montag seems to state many ways that Frankenstein’s monster seems to represent the emergence of the middle class (proletariat). Yet, at the end of his essay he says The Creature is, “Not so much the sign of the proletariat as of its unrepresentability” (480). I do agree with Warren’s interpretation of the novel in the sense that he cannot represent the proletariat. I believe that the Creature struggles with identity and simply cannot be anything but himself. It is almost a paradoxical sort of way of thinking, but The Creature represents the proletariat in the sense that he cannot find proper representation. Like the proletariat there is no explanation for his creation and there is no existing group he can identify with. He is new and never before been seen by human kind, just as the proletariat is to the bourgeoisie.

The Creature goes into detail of his loneliness which is a prominent theme throughout Frankenstein, and the story is conveyed to us through Victor and then Walton in the frame style of the Novel. He says, “Nature decayed around me, and the sun became heatless; rain and snow poured on me.. and I found no shelter” (124). Interestingly enough he cries out, “Oh earth” (124) asking why he is suffering this coldness from humanity. He does not mention, where he going, only his current isolation from the world around him. This is just like the unknown future and social alienation of the new class. The image this conveys to me is quite like Sandra Bullock’s role in the movie Gravity. Existing in space alone with nothing to grab on to, no one to relate to you, and no set place to belong. So just like the proletariat who came into being from nothing and struggled to find a place to exist in a society that rejected them, The Creature too could not be represented by anything known to man. Therefore the monster does just as Walton has said, and represents their unrepresentability.