A literatura romântica inglesa se constituiu basicamente de poesia, pois foi produzida em uma época em que ficção em prosa era vista como mero entretenimento. Alguns romancistas, excepcionalmente, são rotulados como “românticos”, mas Mary Shelley não aparece entre eles. Durante mais de um século, sua obra permaneceu restrita às sessões dos livros que tratam da exótica literatura gótica. A presente dissertação argumenta que a crítica literária não tem reconhecido a óbvia relação de Frankenstein com o romantismo inglês. Para evidenciar tal envolvimento, será apresentada uma análise do conjunto de imagens do romance que busque revelar os elementos românticos ali contidos. A análise se baseia, principalmente, nas idéias de Northrop Frye a respeito da natureza e função de imagens na literatura. O conceito de intertextualidade também será utilizado como ferramenta para a análise da inserção de imagens no romance e da inserção do romance no contexto do romantismo inglês. O trabalho é dividido em três partes. A primeira explora as relações de Frankenstein com a vida de Mary Shelley e com o romantismo inglês. A segunda expõe a base teórica em que esta dissertação se apóia. A última apresenta a minha leitura da teia de imagens do romance. Ao final, espero poder validar a tese proposta: que Frankenstein incorpora os valores estéticos e filosóficos do romantismo e merece, portanto, ser situado no seu devido lugar no cânone literário inglês como o representante legítimo do romantismo em prosa. / Romantic English literature – written at a time when prose fiction was predominantly a medium for sheer entertainment – is rooted in poetry. One or two novelists may exceptionally be granted the adjective “Romantic”, but Mary Shelley is not ranked among them. For centuries, her work has been restricted to that section in handbooks reserved for exotic Gothic literature. This thesis argues that literary criticism has failed to recognize Frankenstein’s obvious relation with the movement. The argument will be fostered by a brief look at such handbooks, and developed through the analysis of the imagery of the novel, so as to trace the Romantic elements there contained. The analysis relies mainly on the frame developed by Northrop Frye concerning the nature and function of imagery in literature. The concept of intertextuality will also be useful as a tool to account for the insertion of images in the novel, and for the novel’s insertion within the Romantic context. The work is divided into three parts. The first contextualizes the main issues set forth by Frankenstein, establishing connections with the life of the author and with the Romantic movement. The second exposes the theoretical basis on which the thesis is grounded. The last presents my reading of the novel’s web of images. In the end, I hope to validate the thesis proposed, that Frankenstein embodies the aesthetic and philosophical assessments of the English Romantic agenda, and therefore deserves to be situated in its due place in the English Literary canon as the legitimate representative of Romanticism in prose form.

A literatura romântica inglesa se constituiu basicamente de poesia, pois foi produzida em uma época em que ficção em prosa era vista como mero entretenimento. Alguns romancistas, excepcionalmente, são rotulados como “românticos”, mas Mary Shelley não aparece entre eles. Durante mais de um século, sua obra permaneceu restrita às sessões dos livros que tratam da exótica literatura gótica. A presente dissertação argumenta que a crítica literária não tem reconhecido a óbvia relação de Frankenstein com o romantismo inglês. Para evidenciar tal envolvimento, será apresentada uma análise do conjunto de imagens do romance que busque revelar os elementos românticos ali contidos. A análise se baseia, principalmente, nas idéias de Northrop Frye a respeito da natureza e função de imagens na literatura. O conceito de intertextualidade também será utilizado como ferramenta para a análise da inserção de imagens no romance e da inserção do romance no contexto do romantismo inglês. O trabalho é dividido em três partes. A primeira explora as relações de Frankenstein com a vida de Mary Shelley e com o romantismo inglês. A segunda expõe a base teórica em que esta dissertação se apóia. A última apresenta a minha leitura da teia de imagens do romance. Ao final, espero poder validar a tese proposta: que Frankenstein incorpora os valores estéticos e filosóficos do romantismo e merece, portanto, ser situado no seu devido lugar no cânone literário inglês como o representante legítimo do romantismo em prosa. / Romantic English literature – written at a time when prose fiction was predominantly a medium for sheer entertainment – is rooted in poetry. One or two novelists may exceptionally be granted the adjective “Romantic”, but Mary Shelley is not ranked among them. For centuries, her work has been restricted to that section in handbooks reserved for exotic Gothic literature. This thesis argues that literary criticism has failed to recognize Frankenstein’s obvious relation with the movement. The argument will be fostered by a brief look at such handbooks, and developed through the analysis of the imagery of the novel, so as to trace the Romantic elements there contained. The analysis relies mainly on the frame developed by Northrop Frye concerning the nature and function of imagery in literature. The concept of intertextuality will also be useful as a tool to account for the insertion of images in the novel, and for the novel’s insertion within the Romantic context. The work is divided into three parts. The first contextualizes the main issues set forth by Frankenstein, establishing connections with the life of the author and with the Romantic movement. The second exposes the theoretical basis on which the thesis is grounded. The last presents my reading of the novel’s web of images. In the end, I hope to validate the thesis proposed, that Frankenstein embodies the aesthetic and philosophical assessments of the English Romantic agenda, and therefore deserves to be situated in its due place in the English Literary canon as the legitimate representative of Romanticism in prose form.

A literatura romântica inglesa se constituiu basicamente de poesia, pois foi produzida em uma época em que ficção em prosa era vista como mero entretenimento. Alguns romancistas, excepcionalmente, são rotulados como “românticos”, mas Mary Shelley não aparece entre eles. Durante mais de um século, sua obra permaneceu restrita às sessões dos livros que tratam da exótica literatura gótica. A presente dissertação argumenta que a crítica literária não tem reconhecido a óbvia relação de Frankenstein com o romantismo inglês. Para evidenciar tal envolvimento, será apresentada uma análise do conjunto de imagens do romance que busque revelar os elementos românticos ali contidos. A análise se baseia, principalmente, nas idéias de Northrop Frye a respeito da natureza e função de imagens na literatura. O conceito de intertextualidade também será utilizado como ferramenta para a análise da inserção de imagens no romance e da inserção do romance no contexto do romantismo inglês. O trabalho é dividido em três partes. A primeira explora as relações de Frankenstein com a vida de Mary Shelley e com o romantismo inglês. A segunda expõe a base teórica em que esta dissertação se apóia. A última apresenta a minha leitura da teia de imagens do romance. Ao final, espero poder validar a tese proposta: que Frankenstein incorpora os valores estéticos e filosóficos do romantismo e merece, portanto, ser situado no seu devido lugar no cânone literário inglês como o representante legítimo do romantismo em prosa. / Romantic English literature – written at a time when prose fiction was predominantly a medium for sheer entertainment – is rooted in poetry. One or two novelists may exceptionally be granted the adjective “Romantic”, but Mary Shelley is not ranked among them. For centuries, her work has been restricted to that section in handbooks reserved for exotic Gothic literature. This thesis argues that literary criticism has failed to recognize Frankenstein’s obvious relation with the movement. The argument will be fostered by a brief look at such handbooks, and developed through the analysis of the imagery of the novel, so as to trace the Romantic elements there contained. The analysis relies mainly on the frame developed by Northrop Frye concerning the nature and function of imagery in literature. The concept of intertextuality will also be useful as a tool to account for the insertion of images in the novel, and for the novel’s insertion within the Romantic context. The work is divided into three parts. The first contextualizes the main issues set forth by Frankenstein, establishing connections with the life of the author and with the Romantic movement. The second exposes the theoretical basis on which the thesis is grounded. The last presents my reading of the novel’s web of images. In the end, I hope to validate the thesis proposed, that Frankenstein embodies the aesthetic and philosophical assessments of the English Romantic agenda, and therefore deserves to be situated in its due place in the English Literary canon as the legitimate representative of Romanticism in prose form.

This essay analyzes the theme of “Otherness” in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein through three different lenses: queer readings, feminist readings, and disability studies, which will offer multiple perspectives of the “Otherness” present in the novel. The essay will engage with critics such as Benjamin Bagocius, Fuson Wang, and Colleen Hobbs. The aim of this essay is to utilize analyzed passages in Upper Secondary classrooms to cultivate critical thinking among students on issues of oppression and privilege in order to foster Anti-Oppressive education. The essay begins by introducing the concept of “Otherness” and its significance in Frankenstein. It then delves into the three different lenses and their perspectives on the theme of “Otherness.” Through these different readings, the essay demonstrates the complex and multi-layered nature of “Otherness” in Frankenstein. Furthermore, the essay argues that this analysis can be used to establish an Anti-Oppressive education in the Upper Secondary classroom. By critically examining how oppression and privilege operate in the novel, students can learn to recognize and challenge oppressive systems in society.  The essay then moves into a discussion of why an Anti-Oppressive education is necessary. Specifically, it briefly critiques the Swedish curriculum for addressing oppression in a way that increases tolerance towards marginalized groups, rather than recognizing privilege and challenging the systemic roots of oppression.

Although nearly every secondary school English teacher includes film as part of the English/language arts curriculum, there is, to this point, nothing published about effectively studying the relationship between film adaptations and their print source texts in secondary school. There are several important works that inform film study in secondary English classrooms. These include Alan Teasley and Ann Wilder's Reel Conversations; William Costanzo's Reading the Movies and his updated version, Great Films and How to Teach Them; and John Golden's Reading in the Dark. However, each of these mention adaptation briefly if at all. Rather, they approach film as a text that students need to learn how to “read." While I certainly agree with this position, I argue that students also must learn how to productively investigate the relationship between films and their literary source texts. To make this case, I survey the field of adaptation theory generally, beginning with George Bluestone's seminal Novels into Film and moving towards contemporary theory, like Robert Stam's work, which suggests theoretical paradigms beyond fidelity analysis. I rely, particularly, on Mikhael Bakhtin's dialogism as a theoretical frame for studying adaptations in school. I also suggest four specific areas that act as foundations for successfully approaching adaptations with secondary English students: (1) economic analysis, (2) intertextualities (the matrix of cultural influences on a text), (3) Gérard Genette's notion of transtextuality (the relationship of one text to others), and (4) an expansion of adaptation to include the relationships of print texts to new media adaptations. In order to further develop ways that secondary school English teachers can specifically approach adaptation in their classrooms, I include two case studies. The first focuses on pairing Laurie Halse Anderson's award-winning young adult novel Speak with Jessica Sharzer's film adaptation. The second suggests methods for teaching Mary Shelley's Frankenstein along with James Whale's film adaptation. Because so little has been written about effectively incorporating film adaptations into the secondary school English curriculum, this project seeks not only to analyze the theoretical foundation for adaptation study, but also to suggest specific methodology that can be utilized by teachers.

The word "necrophilia" brings a particular definition readily to mind – that of an act of sexual intercourse with a corpse, probably a female corpse at that. But the definition of the word did not always have this connotation; quite literally the word means "love of the dead," or "a morbid attraction to death." An examination of nineteenth-century literature reveals a gradual change in relationships between the living and the dead, culminating in the sexualized representation of corpses at the close of the century. The works examined for necrophilic content are: Mary Wollstonecraft’s Mary, A Fiction, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Emily Brontë’s Wuthering Heights, and Bram Stoker’s Dracula and The Jewel of Seven Stars.

A presente dissertação tem como objetivo estabelecer um diálogo entre três obras da literatura britânica do século XIX: o romance Frankenstein (1818), da autora Mary W. Shelley; a novela O Médico e o Monstro (1886), de autoria de Robert Louis Stevenson; e o romance A Ilha do Dr. Moreau (1896), de H. G. Wells. Tal comparação será feita com base nas convenções advindas dos gêneros Gótico e Ficção científica, presentes nas obras. Como principal alicerce teórico para a definição de gêneros entendem-se as considerações de Tzvetan Todorov, que defende que os gêneros são inevitáveis como horizonte de interpretação, além de serem entidades em constante mudança numa cadeia de influências através da qual novos gêneros são criados a partir de outros pré-existentes. O presente trabalho parte desse pressuposto para determinar de que maneira os gêneros Gótico e Ficção científica estão presentes nas obras, observando como os traços do Gótico, ao se adaptarem através do tempo, deram lugar a convenções ainda semelhantes, mas que já apontavam para o que posteriormente seria considerado um novo gênero literário. Primeiramente, são feitas considerações sobre conceitos de gênero textual/literário através do tempo, as quais mostram o quanto seu estudo permaneceu constante. A seguir são definidas certas convenções dos dois gêneros, assim como o modo como dialogam entre si. A segunda parte do trabalho analisa as duas primeiras obras em ordem cronológica, Frankenstein e O Médico e o Monstro, de maneira a perceber a predominância de convenções do Gótico – especialmente relacionadas ao conflito interior dos personagens, como o "duplo" – ao mesmo tempo que a emergência de temas da ciência, como os de criador/criatura e ambição científica. O último capítulo verifica como a primeira fase da Ficção científica de H. G. Wells em geral e A Ilha do Dr. Moreau em particular resgatam convenções dos dois gêneros supracitados, ao mesmo tempo servindo como consolidador das convenções do último. Conclui-se, portanto, que houve uma evolução que possibilitou a emergência de um novo gênero ligado ao contexto histórico das obras, o que legitima a consideração dos gêneros como entidades mais livres e não restritivas, que podem estar presentes em diversas obras ao mesmo tempo e ampliar seu horizonte de interpretação. / This thesis establishes a dialogue among three books from 19th century British literature: the novel Frankenstein (1818), by M. W. Shelley; the novella Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886), by Robert Louis Stevenson; and the novel The Island of Dr. Moreau (1896), by H. G. Wells. This comparison is made based on the specific Gothic and Science fiction conventions present in the books. The main theoretical support for the definition of genres employed here comes from Tzvetan Todorov. The author argues that genres are inevitable as horizons of interpretation, entities in constant change which tend to create new genres from pre-existent ones, in a chain of influences. This thesis considers this supposition to determine how Gothic and Science fiction make themselves present in the works analyzed, in a way that Gothic traits, being adapted through time, give way to similar but yet innovative conventions, which subsequently would be considered a new literary genre. Primarily, considerations concerning the concept of genres through history are made, all of which show how this study was kept constant. Hereafter, certain conventions regarding both genres are defined, as well as the manner they dialogue amongst themselves. The second part of the thesis is dedicated to the analysis of Frankenstein and Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and establishes the predominance of Gothic conventions – especially the ones related to the inner conflict of the characters, such as the "double" –, while considering the emergence of scientific themes, such as the creator/creature relationship and scientific ambition. The last section verifies how the first cycle of H. G. Wells' Science fiction in a broad sense, and The Island of Dr. Moreau in a strict sense, reemploy conventions of both genres, serving to consolidate the latter. Therefore, it is concluded that there was an evolution which enabled the emergence of a new genre, considering the historical contexts and the books analyzed. This consideration justifies genres as wide-ranging, non-restrictive entities, which may be present in various works simultaneously and broaden their horizon of interpretation.

This dissertation explores the reoccurrence of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein within twentieth-century American novels. While the inaccurate 1931 film version by James Whale remains the best known adaptation of Frankenstein, I argue that Willa Cather, Ralph Ellison, Toni Morrison, and Chuck Palahniuk return to Shelley’s 1818 novel to critique racist and misogynistic responses to anxieties about gender and racial power in the age of industrial consumer culture. In doing so, I extend existing scholarship on the American Gothic to demonstrate that The Professor’s House, Invisible Man, Beloved, and Fight Club represent a specifically Shelleyan Gothic tradition in twentieth-century American literature. My project draws upon influential feminist and postcolonial readings of Frankenstein and on the theoretical work of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and later critics who have developed her theory to show how the twentieth-century novels echo themes and motifs from Shelley’s novel to critique the destructive effects of male homosociality. Each novel contains a protagonist that resembles Victor Frankenstein and responds to historically specific anxieties about gender, race, and industrial technoscience by creating a doppelgänger who enables participation in a homosocial bond that is initially empowering but proves destructive to women, racial minorities, and eventually the creature and creator figures themselves. My reading reveals unexpected similarities between Cather’s The Professor’s House and Palahniuk’s Fight Club. Cather’s novel appears to glorify Tom Outland as the ideal masculine hero but ultimately reveals him to be a monstrous doppelgänger who acts out the Professor’s oppressive impulses; similarly, Fight Club seems to romanticize the male violence instigated by the doppelgänger figure Tyler Durden but actually echoes Shelley’s critique of male homosociality as monstrous. My reading also reveals previously overlooked similarities between Invisible Man and Beloved, both of which feature a black protagonist who surprisingly resembles Victor Frankenstein by creating a doppelgänger to challenge his or her disempowerment by the structures of white male homosociality but end up emulating the destructive homosocial structures they critique. My dissertation shows how all of these writers share Shelley’s critique yet move beyond it by offering alternatives to the destructive cycle of violence, embodied in each case by a female figure who resists or reclaims the position of the abject other in the homosocial triangle.

This dissertation explores the reoccurrence of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein within twentieth-century American novels. While the inaccurate 1931 film version by James Whale remains the best known adaptation of Frankenstein, I argue that Willa Cather, Ralph Ellison, Toni Morrison, and Chuck Palahniuk return to Shelley’s 1818 novel to critique racist and misogynistic responses to anxieties about gender and racial power in the age of industrial consumer culture. In doing so, I extend existing scholarship on the American Gothic to demonstrate that The Professor’s House, Invisible Man, Beloved, and Fight Club represent a specifically Shelleyan Gothic tradition in twentieth-century American literature. My project draws upon influential feminist and postcolonial readings of Frankenstein and on the theoretical work of Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick and later critics who have developed her theory to show how the twentieth-century novels echo themes and motifs from Shelley’s novel to critique the destructive effects of male homosociality. Each novel contains a protagonist that resembles Victor Frankenstein and responds to historically specific anxieties about gender, race, and industrial technoscience by creating a doppelgänger who enables participation in a homosocial bond that is initially empowering but proves destructive to women, racial minorities, and eventually the creature and creator figures themselves. My reading reveals unexpected similarities between Cather’s The Professor’s House and Palahniuk’s Fight Club. Cather’s novel appears to glorify Tom Outland as the ideal masculine hero but ultimately reveals him to be a monstrous doppelgänger who acts out the Professor’s oppressive impulses; similarly, Fight Club seems to romanticize the male violence instigated by the doppelgänger figure Tyler Durden but actually echoes Shelley’s critique of male homosociality as monstrous. My reading also reveals previously overlooked similarities between Invisible Man and Beloved, both of which feature a black protagonist who surprisingly resembles Victor Frankenstein by creating a doppelgänger to challenge his or her disempowerment by the structures of white male homosociality but end up emulating the destructive homosocial structures they critique. My dissertation shows how all of these writers share Shelley’s critique yet move beyond it by offering alternatives to the destructive cycle of violence, embodied in each case by a female figure who resists or reclaims the position of the abject other in the homosocial triangle.

A presente dissertação tem como objetivo estabelecer um diálogo entre três obras da literatura britânica do século XIX: o romance Frankenstein (1818), da autora Mary W. Shelley; a novela O Médico e o Monstro (1886), de autoria de Robert Louis Stevenson; e o romance A Ilha do Dr. Moreau (1896), de H. G. Wells. Tal comparação será feita com base nas convenções advindas dos gêneros Gótico e Ficção científica, presentes nas obras. Como principal alicerce teórico para a definição de gêneros entendem-se as considerações de Tzvetan Todorov, que defende que os gêneros são inevitáveis como horizonte de interpretação, além de serem entidades em constante mudança numa cadeia de influências através da qual novos gêneros são criados a partir de outros pré-existentes. O presente trabalho parte desse pressuposto para determinar de que maneira os gêneros Gótico e Ficção científica estão presentes nas obras, observando como os traços do Gótico, ao se adaptarem através do tempo, deram lugar a convenções ainda semelhantes, mas que já apontavam para o que posteriormente seria considerado um novo gênero literário. Primeiramente, são feitas considerações sobre conceitos de gênero textual/literário através do tempo, as quais mostram o quanto seu estudo permaneceu constante. A seguir são definidas certas convenções dos dois gêneros, assim como o modo como dialogam entre si. A segunda parte do trabalho analisa as duas primeiras obras em ordem cronológica, Frankenstein e O Médico e o Monstro, de maneira a perceber a predominância de convenções do Gótico – especialmente relacionadas ao conflito interior dos personagens, como o "duplo" – ao mesmo tempo que a emergência de temas da ciência, como os de criador/criatura e ambição científica. O último capítulo verifica como a primeira fase da Ficção científica de H. G. Wells em geral e A Ilha do Dr. Moreau em particular resgatam convenções dos dois gêneros supracitados, ao mesmo tempo servindo como consolidador das convenções do último. Conclui-se, portanto, que houve uma evolução que possibilitou a emergência de um novo gênero ligado ao contexto histórico das obras, o que legitima a consideração dos gêneros como entidades mais livres e não restritivas, que podem estar presentes em diversas obras ao mesmo tempo e ampliar seu horizonte de interpretação. / This thesis establishes a dialogue among three books from 19th century British literature: the novel Frankenstein (1818), by M. W. Shelley; the novella Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde (1886), by Robert Louis Stevenson; and the novel The Island of Dr. Moreau (1896), by H. G. Wells. This comparison is made based on the specific Gothic and Science fiction conventions present in the books. The main theoretical support for the definition of genres employed here comes from Tzvetan Todorov. The author argues that genres are inevitable as horizons of interpretation, entities in constant change which tend to create new genres from pre-existent ones, in a chain of influences. This thesis considers this supposition to determine how Gothic and Science fiction make themselves present in the works analyzed, in a way that Gothic traits, being adapted through time, give way to similar but yet innovative conventions, which subsequently would be considered a new literary genre. Primarily, considerations concerning the concept of genres through history are made, all of which show how this study was kept constant. Hereafter, certain conventions regarding both genres are defined, as well as the manner they dialogue amongst themselves. The second part of the thesis is dedicated to the analysis of Frankenstein and Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and establishes the predominance of Gothic conventions – especially the ones related to the inner conflict of the characters, such as the "double" –, while considering the emergence of scientific themes, such as the creator/creature relationship and scientific ambition. The last section verifies how the first cycle of H. G. Wells' Science fiction in a broad sense, and The Island of Dr. Moreau in a strict sense, reemploy conventions of both genres, serving to consolidate the latter. Therefore, it is concluded that there was an evolution which enabled the emergence of a new genre, considering the historical contexts and the books analyzed. This consideration justifies genres as wide-ranging, non-restrictive entities, which may be present in various works simultaneously and broaden their horizon of interpretation.