The well-known 1831 revision of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein has several meaningful differences from its original 1818 edition. Mary Shelley made revisions to the book to appease conservative readers who objected to the book’s first examination of science and its repercussions (Butler 313). By including lengthy passages in which Frankenstein expresses religious guilt, Shelley turned the emphasis away from scientific desire and curiosity and towards a more sympathetic portrait of the characters (Butler 303). However, it is debatable whether these revisions are an improvement, as they contradict Shelley’s original intent for the novel.
These changes may have improved the book’s appeal to conservative readers, but they have detracted from its original investigation of science and its effects. Through highlighting Frankenstein’s regret, less onus is placed on the novel’s central themes of the perils of science and the results of human ambition. This arguably detracts from the novel’s original message. For this reason, although the revision might have served its purpose of placating Shelley’s peers, it can hardly be called an improvement.
As it stands, certain events can be identified as the reasons for these revisions. According to Butler, they were most likely implemented as a damage-control measure due to the public panic caused by the Edinburgh murders of Burke and Hare (313). By adapting Frankenstein’s motivations, Shelley hoped to downplay the radical impression that the novel initially left on its readers and thus escape the negative associations.
Personally, my response to the events and characters of the novel has also been changed by these revisions. I find the novel’s original exploration of science and its consequences more thought-provoking and ultimately compelling. Unfortunately, despite the fact the revisions emphasize Frankenstein’s remorse in an attempt to change him to a sympathetic character, I feel they also serve to make him less intriguing as a character.
It can be concluded that Mary Shelley’s changes in the 1831 edition do not seem to be an improvement to the original version. It is true that some might argue that the changes make the book more approachable and less contentious. However, they detract from the book’s original themes, such as the exploration of science, human ambition, and its repercussions, ultimately divorcing the novel from its roots.
Works Cited
Butler, Marilyn. “Frankenstein and Radical Science”. Frankenstein. A Norton Critical Edition, edited by Paul J. Hunter, Norton, 1993, pp. 302–313.