How does Shelley use parallelism in Frankenstein?

Author: Martin Munyao Muinde
Email: ephantusmartin@gmail.com

Introduction

Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is one of the most influential novels of the nineteenth century, not only because of its thematic richness but also because of its stylistic and structural techniques. Among the various literary devices Shelley employs, parallelism stands out as one of the most powerful methods she uses to draw comparisons, highlight contrasts, and underscore moral and philosophical arguments. The novel’s intricate use of parallelism goes beyond simple structural symmetry; it penetrates into character development, thematic construction, and narrative form. By weaving parallel patterns between Victor Frankenstein and his creation, between Walton and Victor, and even within recurring themes of ambition, isolation, and transgression, Shelley enriches the novel’s meaning and makes it resonate across centuries. This essay explores how Shelley uses parallelism in Frankenstein, examining its impact on narrative design, character relationships, thematic clarity, and moral undertones.

Parallelism between Victor Frankenstein and the Creature

One of the most striking uses of parallelism in Frankenstein is the mirroring relationship between Victor Frankenstein and the creature. Shelley constructs Victor and his creation as doubles whose lives reflect and refract each other’s experiences, ultimately illustrating the destructive consequences of unchecked ambition and isolation. Victor’s obsessive pursuit of knowledge and his desire to transcend human limitations is paralleled by the creature’s obsessive desire for companionship and recognition. Both characters experience rejection: Victor is rejected by the limits of natural law when his scientific endeavors unleash a being he cannot control, while the creature is rejected by society due to his hideous appearance. Through this parallel structure, Shelley highlights the irony of creator and creation sharing the same existential struggles, suggesting that the boundary between human and monster is not as absolute as Victor believes (Mellor, 1988).

Shelley also aligns their emotional trajectories to deepen the impact of this parallelism. Both Victor and the creature experience profound loneliness, which drives them toward destructive choices. Victor isolates himself in his laboratory, distancing himself from family and society, while the creature is forced into solitude after repeated rejection. Their loneliness culminates in vengeance: Victor dedicates himself to destroying his creation, while the creature commits acts of violence against Victor’s loved ones. Shelley’s parallelism reveals that their suffering is mutually reinforcing, with each man’s downfall mirrored in the other’s trajectory. This mirroring challenges the reader to question who is truly responsible for the chain of tragedies, suggesting that Victor and the creature are bound together by a shared moral culpability (Levine, 1973).

Walton and Victor as Parallel Characters

Shelley also employs parallelism by establishing connections between Robert Walton, the Arctic explorer who frames the narrative, and Victor Frankenstein. Walton’s letters serve as both the introduction and conclusion of the novel, and his story reflects many of Victor’s ambitions and vulnerabilities. Both characters embody the Romantic ideal of the questing individual who seeks knowledge beyond ordinary limits, yet both also confront the dangers of such ambition. Walton, like Victor, dreams of glory and discovery, but unlike Victor, he is granted an opportunity to reflect and make wiser choices. This parallel serves not only as a narrative device but also as a moral lesson, suggesting that Shelley offers Walton as an alternative model who learns from Victor’s mistakes.

The Walton-Victor parallel also functions to universalize the novel’s themes. Walton is a mirror through which the reader is invited to judge Victor’s life. His sympathetic fascination with Victor reflects how easily human beings can be drawn into destructive pursuits, while his eventual decision to abandon his voyage signifies the possibility of redemption. In this way, Shelley uses parallelism to structure the novel as both cautionary tale and philosophical reflection. The doubling of Walton and Victor demonstrates that the dangers of overreaching ambition are not confined to one man but are inherent in human nature, especially in an era of rapid scientific advancement (Knudsen, 2009).

Thematic Parallelism: Ambition and Transgression

Shelley further employs parallelism at the thematic level by repeatedly juxtaposing ambition with transgression. Throughout the novel, characters who pursue knowledge or power beyond their natural bounds pay a price. Victor Frankenstein’s ambition to create life results in death and misery, while the creature’s ambition to find companionship leads him into a cycle of violence. Walton’s ambition for discovery, though ultimately curtailed, parallels these destructive desires. Shelley presents ambition as a universal trait, and by placing these ambitions side by side, she warns of its potential to destabilize both individual lives and broader social structures.

This thematic parallelism also resonates with the Romantic critique of Enlightenment rationality. Shelley mirrors Victor’s scientific ambition with the mythological transgressions of Prometheus, whose punishment for giving fire to humanity becomes a metaphor for Victor’s fate. Both Prometheus and Victor overstep natural boundaries, and both endure tragic consequences. By reinforcing the parallel between myth and modernity, Shelley situates her novel within a broader cultural discourse on the ethics of knowledge, technology, and power (Gigante, 2007). In doing so, she crafts a narrative where ambition and transgression echo across multiple characters and contexts, creating a web of parallels that enhance the novel’s coherence and symbolic depth.

Parallelism in Narrative Structure

The structure of Frankenstein itself reflects Shelley’s reliance on parallelism. The novel is famously framed as a story within a story, with Walton recounting Victor’s tale, which in turn contains the creature’s narrative. This narrative layering is not arbitrary; it reflects Shelley’s use of parallel voices to reinforce key themes. Walton, Victor, and the creature all serve as narrators at different points, and their accounts are marked by similar patterns of suffering, longing, and regret. The repetition of narrative motifs across these voices strengthens the reader’s perception of the universality of the novel’s concerns.

Moreover, the parallel narrative voices serve to blur the boundaries between truth and subjectivity. Victor’s account is paralleled with the creature’s, allowing the reader to weigh their competing perspectives. Walton’s final reflections mirror and amplify these narratives, leaving the reader to judge whose voice holds the most authority. This structure ensures that no single perspective dominates the novel, instead presenting a series of parallel experiences that highlight the multiplicity of truth. Shelley’s structural parallelism therefore enhances the philosophical complexity of the novel by resisting simplistic moral binaries (Botting, 1991).

Parallelism in Relationships and Emotions

Shelley’s use of parallelism also extends to interpersonal relationships and emotional experiences. The family is a recurring motif in the novel, and Shelley draws parallels between Victor’s rejection of the creature and the creature’s longing for a family of his own. While Victor is raised in a loving home, he denies his creation even the basic recognition of kinship. This contrast, framed in parallel terms, emphasizes the irony of Victor’s failure to provide what he himself received in abundance. The creature’s desire for a mate parallels Victor’s eventual loss of Elizabeth, suggesting a cycle of frustrated longing and destructive consequences.

Similarly, Shelley aligns emotional experiences such as grief, guilt, and vengeance across multiple characters. Victor grieves the loss of his loved ones, while the creature grieves his inability to form connections. Both characters are consumed by guilt: Victor for creating the creature and indirectly causing deaths, and the creature for his violent retaliation. These shared emotions parallel their inner lives and reveal that the supposed opposition between creator and creation collapses into a shared humanity. Shelley thus uses parallelism not only at the structural and thematic levels but also at the psychological and emotional level, weaving a tapestry of mirrored experiences that reinforce the novel’s tragic dimensions (Favret, 1987).

Moral and Philosophical Implications of Parallelism

The pervasive use of parallelism in Frankenstein serves an important moral and philosophical purpose. By paralleling Victor and the creature, and by aligning Walton with Victor, Shelley demonstrates that the human condition is characterized by recurring struggles with ambition, loneliness, and responsibility. These parallels suggest that monstrosity does not lie solely in external appearance but in repeated patterns of human failure. Shelley’s narrative structure compels readers to recognize themselves in both Victor and the creature, raising unsettling questions about accountability, morality, and the limits of human aspiration.

Furthermore, the parallelism underscores the novel’s warning against extreme individualism. Victor’s obsession isolates him from human relationships, while the creature’s rejection leaves him outside social structures. These mirrored experiences highlight the destructive potential of severing ties with community and kinship. Shelley suggests that human flourishing depends on relational responsibility rather than solitary ambition. By structuring her narrative in parallel terms, she conveys this philosophical message in a way that is both aesthetically compelling and ethically urgent (Mellor, 1988).

Conclusion

In Frankenstein, Mary Shelley’s use of parallelism is central to the novel’s narrative, thematic, and philosophical design. By paralleling Victor and the creature, aligning Walton with Victor, and reinforcing ambition with transgression, Shelley constructs a narrative architecture that emphasizes repetition, mirroring, and doubling. This technique enables her to deepen character development, highlight the universality of human flaws, and challenge readers to grapple with complex moral questions. Shelley’s parallelism is not merely a stylistic flourish but a profound structural principle that shapes the novel’s enduring relevance. By exploring human ambition, isolation, and responsibility through mirrored relationships and themes, Shelley ensures that Frankenstein continues to resonate as a cautionary tale about the dangers and possibilities inherent in the human pursuit of knowledge.

References

• Botting, F. (1991). Making Monstrous: Frankenstein, Criticism, Theory. Manchester University Press.

• Favret, M. (1987). Romantic Correspondence: Women, Politics, and the Fiction of Letters. Cambridge University Press.

• Gigante, D. (2007). Life: Organic Form and Romanticism. Yale University Press.

• Knudsen, A. (2009). “Framing Ambition: Walton, Frankenstein, and the Self in the Pursuit of Knowledge.” Studies in Romanticism, 48(3), 375–400.

• Levine, G. (1973). The Realistic Imagination: English Fiction from Frankenstein to Lady Chatterley. University of Chicago Press.

• Mellor, A. K. (1988). Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters. Routledge.