Resurrecting Frankenstein: Peter Ackroyd’s The Casebook of Victor Frankenstein and the metafictional monster within

Q2 Social Sciences
Ashleigh Prosser
{"title":"Resurrecting Frankenstein: Peter Ackroyd’s The Casebook of Victor Frankenstein and the metafictional monster within","authors":"Ashleigh Prosser","doi":"10.1386/ajpc_00004_1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article examines Peter Ackroyd’s popular Gothic novel The Casebook of Victor Frankenstein (2008), which is a reimagining of Mary Shelley’s famous Gothic novel Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus ([1818] 2003). The basic premise of Ackroyd’s narrative seemingly\n resembles Shelley’s own, as Victor Frankenstein woefully reflects on the events that have brought about his mysterious downfall, and like the original text the voice of the Monster interrupts his creator to recount passages from his own afterlife. However, Ackroyd’s adaption is\n instead set within the historical context of the original story’s creation in the early nineteenth century. Ackroyd’s Frankenstein studies at Oxford, befriends radical Romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, moves to London to conduct his reanimation experiments and even accompanies\n the Shelleys, Byron and Polidori on that fateful holiday when the original novel was conceived. This article explores how Ackroyd’s novel, as a form of the contemporary ‘popular’ Gothic, functions as an uncanny doppelgänger of Shelley’s Frankenstein. By blurring\n the boundaries between history and fiction, the original text and the context of its creation haunt Ackroyd’s adaptation in uncannily doubled and self-reflexive ways that speak to Frankenstein’s legacy for the Gothic in popular culture. The dénouement of Ackroyd’s\n narrative reveals that the Monster is Frankenstein’s psychological doppelgänger, a projection of insanity, and thus Frankenstein himself is the Monster. This article proposes that this final twist is an uncanny reflection of the narrative’s own ‘Frankenstein-ian’\n monstrous metafictional construction, for it argues that Ackroyd’s story is a ‘strange case(book)’ haunted by the ghosts of its Gothic literary predecessors.","PeriodicalId":29644,"journal":{"name":"Australasian Journal of Popular Culture","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australasian Journal of Popular Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1386/ajpc_00004_1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article examines Peter Ackroyd’s popular Gothic novel The Casebook of Victor Frankenstein (2008), which is a reimagining of Mary Shelley’s famous Gothic novel Frankenstein, or, The Modern Prometheus ([1818] 2003). The basic premise of Ackroyd’s narrative seemingly resembles Shelley’s own, as Victor Frankenstein woefully reflects on the events that have brought about his mysterious downfall, and like the original text the voice of the Monster interrupts his creator to recount passages from his own afterlife. However, Ackroyd’s adaption is instead set within the historical context of the original story’s creation in the early nineteenth century. Ackroyd’s Frankenstein studies at Oxford, befriends radical Romantic poet Percy Bysshe Shelley, moves to London to conduct his reanimation experiments and even accompanies the Shelleys, Byron and Polidori on that fateful holiday when the original novel was conceived. This article explores how Ackroyd’s novel, as a form of the contemporary ‘popular’ Gothic, functions as an uncanny doppelgänger of Shelley’s Frankenstein. By blurring the boundaries between history and fiction, the original text and the context of its creation haunt Ackroyd’s adaptation in uncannily doubled and self-reflexive ways that speak to Frankenstein’s legacy for the Gothic in popular culture. The dénouement of Ackroyd’s narrative reveals that the Monster is Frankenstein’s psychological doppelgänger, a projection of insanity, and thus Frankenstein himself is the Monster. This article proposes that this final twist is an uncanny reflection of the narrative’s own ‘Frankenstein-ian’ monstrous metafictional construction, for it argues that Ackroyd’s story is a ‘strange case(book)’ haunted by the ghosts of its Gothic literary predecessors.
复活的弗兰肯斯坦:彼得·阿克罗伊德的维克多·弗兰肯斯坦的案例书和里面的元虚构怪物
这篇文章研究了彼得·阿克罗伊德的流行的哥特小说《维克多·弗兰肯斯坦案例录》(2008),这是对玛丽·雪莱的著名的哥特小说《弗兰肯斯坦》或《现代普罗米修斯》([1818]2003)的重新想象。阿克罗伊德叙事的基本前提似乎与雪莱自己的故事相似,维克多·弗兰肯斯坦(Victor Frankenstein)悲伤地反思导致他神秘堕落的事件,就像原著一样,怪物的声音打断了他的创造者,讲述了他自己死后的故事。然而,阿克罗伊德的改编是在19世纪初原著创作的历史背景下进行的。阿克罗伊德饰演的弗兰肯斯坦在牛津大学学习,成为激进浪漫主义诗人珀西·比希·雪莱的朋友,搬到伦敦进行他的复活实验,甚至陪伴雪莱、拜伦和波利多里度过了最初构思小说的那个重要假期。这篇文章探讨了阿克罗伊德的小说,作为当代“流行”哥特式的一种形式,是如何作为雪莱的《弗兰肯斯坦》的神秘doppelgänger发挥作用的。通过模糊历史和小说之间的界限,原著及其创作背景以一种不可思议的双重和自我反思的方式困扰着阿克罗伊德的改编,这说明了弗兰肯斯坦对流行文化中哥特式的影响。阿克罗伊德叙述的变化揭示了怪物是弗兰肯斯坦的心理doppelgänger,是精神错乱的投射,因此弗兰肯斯坦自己就是怪物。这篇文章提出,这最后的转折是叙述本身的“弗兰肯斯坦式”可怕的元虚构结构的离奇反映,因为它认为,阿克罗伊德的故事是一个“奇怪的案例(书)”,被它的哥特文学的幽灵所困扰。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Australasian Journal of Popular Culture
Australasian Journal of Popular Culture Social Sciences-Cultural Studies
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信