By Jorge Mazariegos Jr
Gayatri Spivak’s essay “Three Women’s Texts and a Critique of Imperialism” seeks to understand the operation of what she calls “wording,” influencing another land or culture or causing change and assimilation. She takes a structuralist approach to the readings, stating that a deconstructive approach would “undo the opposition between verbal text and the biography of ‘Charlotte Bronte’ and see the two as each other’s ‘scene of writing.'” Spivak refers to the contextual relationship between the text and the author and believes that a deconstructive reading of the text makes the risk of a fallacy easy. In her readings, Spivak points out that feminism as a theory is a critical lens to understanding imperialism because imperialism merely opens the reader’s mind to the interpretation involving imperialism’s history and economic and governmental intentions. However, a feminist lens allows the reader to understand what is beyond the moral-ethical intentions of the superiority of one culture toward another and how it is reminiscent of man’s nature to dominate in Society (as a feminist would argue). Concerning Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Spivak believes that the novel portrays the idea of male domination of Society starting in Victor’s laboratory, which represents a replacement for the womb. She furthers her interpretation in her argument concerning the ‘oriental’ nations in their assimilation into Western Society, arguing that Western Society and the idea that it is the path to better futures for people of the ‘oriental’ origin is a form of indoctrination that results in the discrimination of other cultures and backgrounds.
Shelley’s Frankenstein does explicitly portray a representation of the subaltern, a lower social/ethnic class. Pages 108-109 of Frankenstein focus on the creature telling of his observation of the DeLacey family. He learned of “the division of property, immense wealth, squalid poverty; rank, descent, and noble blood.” Next, the creature observes Safie, a young Turkish refugee who moved west to marry a European and is now being taught everything about the Western world without understanding the language of the Western lands. Here, Safie is a version of the subaltern because she is of an oppressed culture with no voice, as she does not speak any language that citizens of western lands would understand. Being in the same position as Safie, not speaking any language that anyone would understand, and being devoid of any prior knowledge about western land, the creature is a reflection of Safie as we hear his thoughts and opinions of Western Society, such as his discontent with the necessity of laws and government and the unequal distribution of wealth. Even when hearing about the natives, the creature and Safie are moved to tears because they both understand what it is to be oppressed by Western Society. However, when revealing himself to the DeLaceys, Frankenstein is rejected even by Safie. Safie is the story of ‘oriental,’ third-world citizens making their way to Western Society where they can experience the freedom to receive education and work for their living. Safie should understand what it is like without property, wealth, and constant fear of unchosen circumstances. However, she shows no sympathy or understanding for the creature. Spivak argues that this is because of a form of ideological indoctrination stemming from her Western Education as it is taught to her by a Western man who seeks to destroy her sentiments and understandings toward her origins. Thus, the reality of Safie’s seemingly uncharacteristic reaction to the creature shows the disconnect and corruption that Western Education creates when teaching its values and history.
Foundations of Literary Studies: Reading Frankenstein Two Hundred Years Later 