Why Frankenstein's Creator Didn't Give His Monster a Name

Mary Shelley’s iconic novel, Frankenstein, has captivated readers for centuries. The story of a mad scientist who brings a monster to life has become a classic in literature and popular culture. However, one aspect of the tale that often puzzles readers is the absence of a name for the creature. Why didn’t Frankenstein’s creator give his monster a name? This article aims to explore the possible reasons behind this decision.

Firstly, it is important to understand the context in which Frankenstein was written. The novel was published in 1818, a time when discussions surrounding the ethics of science and the nature of humanity were gaining traction. Shelley was heavily influenced by Romanticism, a literary and artistic movement that often explored the dark aspects of human existence. In this light, the omission of a name for the monster could be seen as a deliberate choice to emphasize the creature’s status as an emblem of broader human fears and concerns.

Moreover, Shelley may have intentionally left the monster unnamed to highlight the disconnect between the creator and the creation. Victor Frankenstein is obsessed with the pursuit of knowledge and scientific discovery, placing little importance on the emotional and ethical implications of his actions. By denying his creature a name, Frankenstein further distances himself from any sense of responsibility or emotional attachment. This lack of naming serves to accentuate the unnatural and unsettling relationship between the two characters.

Furthermore, the absence of a name could be interpreted as a commentary on society’s tendency to dehumanize and cast out those who are considered different or monstrous. The monster, despite its inherent intelligence and capacity for emotions, is constantly rejected and subjected to cruelty by society. By refusing to give the creature a name, Shelley may have intended to underline the dehumanization that occurs when individuals are unable to see beyond physical appearances. The absence of a name becomes a representation of the monster’s lack of identity and its inability to find acceptance in a society that fears and shuns it.

Additionally, it is possible that Shelley intentionally left the monster unnamed to evoke a sense of universal dread and suspense. By not providing a specific name to the creature, the author allows readers to project their own fears and anxieties onto it. This ambiguity contributes to the lasting power of the novel, as it becomes an exploration of the human psyche and the consequences of playing with forces beyond our control.

In conclusion, the decision of Mary Shelley to exclude a name for Frankenstein’s monster in her novel holds various interpretations and significance. The absence of a name serves to accentuate the inner fears and ethical dilemmas explored throughout the narrative. It highlights the disconnect between creator and creation, society’s capacity to dehumanize the other, and creates a sense of universal dread. Regardless of the reasons behind this choice, the nameless monster of Frankenstein has become an enduring symbol of humanity’s hubris and moral responsibilities.