In-Depth Notes on the Historicist Turn in Romantic-Era Disability Studies

• The field of disability studies has evolved to encompass a historicist perspective, integrating disability into mainstream literary analysis. This integration allows for a deeper understanding of how societal norms influence literary creation and interpretation.

• Romantic studies have been notably slow to adopt discussions surrounding disability, prompting an analysis of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein (1818). Shelley's work serves as a critical case study due to its complex themes of monstrosity, the human condition, and societal rejection, helping to bridge the gap between disability studies and Romantic literature.

Thematic Intersectionality

• Traditional literary criticism often interprets themes of disability as primarily allegorical or metaphorical without considering the broader implications of disability representation and social marginalization in society. This oversight misses how disability can reflect structural inequalities and cultural anxieties of the time.

• Disability studies highlight the socio-political dimensions of these narratives, thus challenging the conventional portrayals of characters with disabilities as mere objects of pity or tragedy. This approach encourages readers to see them as fully realized individuals, often grappling with societal perceptions and responses to their difference.

Historical Context and Key Works

• Early framework: Lennard Davis’s Enforcing Normalcy sets the stage for examining how societal norms have shaped perceptions of disability, focusing on the historical shifts in the understanding of normalcy and abnormality post-1840. Davis argues that concepts of normalcy are socially constructed and historically contingent.

• Important publications have emerged, such as Recovering Disability in Early Modern England and Disabling Romanticism, contributing to the discourse on disability within literature. These works consider how literature not only reflects but also critiques existing societal attitudes towards disability, emphasizing the necessity for a historical and contextual reading of Romantic texts.

Major Arguments Against Conventional Readings of Frankenstein

1. Blindness and Insight: Blindness in Frankenstein is not just a metaphor; it reflects deeper societal issues regarding perception and acceptance. Critics traditionally interpret Victor Frankenstein’s blindness as merely a moral failing without connecting it to societal ableism and the Enlightenment's valorization of vision as a form of knowledge.

   • This connection invites analysis of how blindness serves as a critique of Enlightenment ideals, questioning the notion that sight equates to understanding and moral superiority.

2. Sympathy and Representation: Previous academic perspectives often focus on the tragedy of the creature’s existence without recognizing the historical context of disability representation. The assumed nobility of the creature, as discussed by Heffernan, misrepresents the narrative focus, which truly emphasizes the creature's profound suffering in a world that refuses to accept him.

   • Such analysis of sympathy shifts attention to societal structures that define monstrosity and moral judgment, illustrating how the creature embodies both the rejected aspects of humanity and the consequences of societal othering.

3. Structural Approaches: Current readings must incorporate rich historical detail to better understand representations of disability within their context. Archival research and close reading of texts are essential to grasp how social norms of the Romantic period impacted interpretations of the text.

   • This involves examining contemporaneous views on disability, mental health, and social exclusion, thus situating Shelley’s work within a broader cultural and historical landscape.

Shelley’s Narrative Techniques

• Strategic Obscurity: Shelley deliberately limits the creature's appearance to underscore prejudice, forcing readers to confront their biases about deformity and humanity. This narrative choice serves to highlight the societal tendency to dehumanize those who do not conform to normative standards of beauty or capability.

• Enlightenment Philosophy’s Role: Shelley's engagement with Enlightenment ideals regarding sight and knowledge reveals profound shortcomings in how characters understand difference. The novel critiques the Enlightenment's tendency to equate rationality and humanity with visibility, suggesting that mental and moral insight can exist outside of physical appearance.

• The Problem of Difference: The novel critiques how Enlightenment concepts of normality are enforced through visual perception, suggesting that reality is filtered through subjective interpretations of beauty and acceptance. This critique resonates with modern discussions on how society often privileges certain bodies while marginalizing others based on arbitrary standards.

Conclusion and Future Directions for Research

• The implications of Shelley’s work extend beyond individual character studies, providing a platform for reconceptualizing disability in Romantic literature. By analyzing Frankenstein through a disability studies lens, scholars can uncover how narratives of monstrosity reflect societal fears surrounding those deemed different.

• Future scholarship should embrace intersectionality, acknowledging how gender, race, and class interact with disability in Romantic texts. This approach could deepen understanding of the complexities surrounding identity and representation within literature.

• New interpretations of Frankenstein can challenge traditional views by inviting a broader understanding of the implications of monstrous representation and societal exclusion, ultimately contributing to a richer discourse on humanity and empathy.

Biography of the Author

• Fuson Wang: An expert in British Romantic literature and the medical humanities, Wang argues for the necessity of interdisciplinary approaches to literary studies. He emphasizes the importance of understanding historical contexts of disability in literature, advocating for a more nuanced reading of Romantic texts that considers the intersections of disability, culture, and politics in shaping