A THREEFOLD RELENTLESS RIVALRY: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MASCULINITY AND NARRATIVE RELIABILITY IN MARY SHELLEY’S FRANKENSTEIN OR THE MODERN PROMETHEUS

Authors

  • Hogar N. Abdullah Dept. of English Language, College of Languages, University of Duhok, Kurdistan Region – Iraq.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.26436/hjuoz.2026.14.1.1630

Keywords:

Narrative Reliability, Frame Narrative, Mise-En-Abyme Narrative Technique, Mary Shelley, Frankenstein or The Modern Prometheus, Masculinity Studies

Abstract

This paper delves into the intricacies of the multilayered narrative aspects of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus to draw connections between reliability and the assertive power of masculinity. The narrative unfolds in accordance with the appearance of Rebert Walton, Victor Frankenstein and the monster in the novel respectively. Through a three-leveled narrative, Shelley represents an interconnected story that provokes readers’ sense of curiosity to untangle it by following its main male characters’ plot lines. She painstakingly makes the readers engrossed in a close observation of how these characters compete to demonstrate the trustworthiness of their stories as an attempt to construct their status as men of integrity. While the three male characters take turns in narrating the story, their efforts of being able to make their narratee(s) believe their stories remains a key task for them. The three narrators are portrayed in a fierce rivalry; each trying to add credibility to their narrative and outdo the others. That is, they strive to defy masculine subordination by presenting the most reliable version of events. This paper posits that for these characters to assert their masculine power, they rely on being believed, understood, and most importantly, accepted by other characters. Accordingly, the paper adopts narrative theory to explore certain concepts of masculinity studies. It argues that the masculinity of these characters is constructed vis-à-vis the reliability of their narrative in the novel. The consequences of the relentless competition between these men are often dire and their pursuit of male hierarchy leads to calamities. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Baldick, C. (2001). The concise Oxford dictionary of literary terms (2nd ed.). Oxford University Press.

Beghetto, R. G. (2022). Frankenstein and the “birth” of secularized modernity. In Monstrous liminality: Or, The uncanny strangers of secularized modernity (pp. 21–46). Ubiquity Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2b6z8fb.5

Beghetto, R. G. (2022). Strange gender and post-humanism. In Monstrous liminality: Or, The uncanny strangers of secularized modernity (pp. 145–168). Ubiquity Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv2b6z8fb.10

Benford, C. (2010). “Listen to my tale”: Multilevel structure, narrative sense making, and the inassimilable in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. Narrative, 18(3), 324–346. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40856416

Berlatsky, E. (2009). Lost in the gutter: Within and between frames in narrative and narrative theory. Narrative, 17(2), 162–187. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25609361

Bordo, S. (1993). Feminism, Foucault and the politics of the body. In J. Price & M. Shildrick (Eds.), Feminist theory and the body: A reader (pp. 179–202). Routledge.

Clark, A. E. (2014). “Frankenstein”; or, the modern protagonist. ELH, 81(1), 245–268. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24475594

Crook, N. (2017). Frankenstein: The book that keeps on throwing up puzzles. Keats-Shelley Journal, 66, 77–87. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48592271

Guyer, S. (2006). Testimony and trope in Frankenstein. Studies in Romanticism, 45(1), 77–115. https://doi.org/10.2307/25602035

Hatfield, G. (1994). Psychology as a natural science in the eighteenth century. Revue de Synthèse: IV's, 3-4, 375–391. https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/131202743.pdf

Holt, D. B., & Thompson, C. J. (2004). Man-of-action heroes: The pursuit of heroic masculinity in everyday consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(2), 425–440. https://doi.org/10.1086/422120

Kimmel, M. (2005). The history of men: Essays on the history of American and British masculinities. State University of New York Press.

Korfonta, M. P. (2021). Frankenstein: A critique on masculinity [Documents]. Trinity College Digital Repository; Trinity Student Scholarship. https://jstor.org/stable/community.38593885

London, B. (1993). Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, and the spectacle of masculinity. PMLA, 108(2), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.2307/462596

Modiano, R. (1978). Coleridge and the sublime: A response to Thomas Weiskel’s The romantic sublime. The Wordsworth Circle, 9(1), 110–120. http://www.jstor.org/stable/24039647

Newman, B. (1986). Narratives of seduction and the seductions of narrative: The frame structure of Frankenstein. ELH, 53(1), 141–163. https://doi.org/10.2307/2873151

Pasquesi, C. (2013). “Of monsters, creatures and other queer becomings.” The Journal of the Midwest Modern Language Association, 46/47(2/1), 119–125. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43264545

Rimmon-Kenan, S. (2002). Narrative fiction: Contemporary poetics (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Salotto, E. (1994). “Frankenstein” and dis(re)membered identity. The Journal of Narrative Technique, 24(3), 190–211. http://www.jstor.org/stable/30225415

Schmeink, L. (2016). Science, family, and the monstrous progeny. In Biopunk dystopias: Genetic engineering, society and science fiction (pp. 119–145). Liverpool University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1ps33cv.7

Shelley, M. (2024). Frankenstein; or, the modern Prometheus. Global Grey. https://www.globalgreyebooks.com/frankenstein-ebook.html

Sherwin, P. (1981). Frankenstein: Creation as catastrophe. PMLA, 96(5), 883–903. https://doi.org/10.2307/462130

Downloads

Published

2026-02-23

How to Cite

Abdullah, H. (2026). A THREEFOLD RELENTLESS RIVALRY: THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN MASCULINITY AND NARRATIVE RELIABILITY IN MARY SHELLEY’S FRANKENSTEIN OR THE MODERN PROMETHEUS. Humanities Journal of University of Zakho, 14(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.26436/hjuoz.2026.14.1.1630

Issue

Section

Humanities Journal of University of Zakho