When Faced – Ableism: 1st Project 3/16

When Faced with Unfathomable Evils, Such as My Own

Author’s Note/Reflection:

[Post Disclaimer: I am a novice when it comes to poetry; having only recently found appreciation for the medium in the past year. Nevertheless, this “unessay” project proved to be just as entertaining as it was challenging.]

The purpose of this poem is to tackle Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein through the lens of CDS (Critical Disability Studies/Theory) in a timely format. Coming off from our class reading of Hamlet into Frankenstein, it seemed very fitting to write an English/Shakspearian-inspired sonnet. Authors that helped me narrow down my poem’s formatting to match [relatively] the period of Frankenstein would be the likes of Charlette Smith, Lord Tennyson, and of course, Shakespeare. Respective poet profiles are listed as such:

Charlotte Smith – https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/charlotte-smith

Alfred, Lord Tennyson – https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/alfred-tennyson

William Shakespeare – https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poets/william-shakespeare

 The hope is that When Faced with Unfathomable Evils, Such as My Own, emulates similar theming of imagery and mortality, like how the prior authors above did. The purposely long title is even akin to early 1800’s works!

Before dissecting the poem’s meaning, allow Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy to define CDS:

“Critical disability theory refers to a diverse, interdisciplinary set of theoretical approaches. The task of critical disability theory is to analyze disability as a cultural, historical, relative, social, and political phenomenon.”

Hall, 2019

The facet of this discipline that I want to shed light on in my poem is disability myths, more specifically the old fallacy of ‘Kill-or-Cure’ regarding modern British literature. More on that later as we uncover this piece stanza by stanza.

“I see me, abridged and hapless,

Conversing with evils of woe.

Sight of him erected, senseless,

He spun out a tune of love’s flow”

In the first stanza, the current narrator and proceeding speaker aren’t necessarily established and are instead left ambiguous to mask their real identity. The idea is that the narrator could be Frankenstein’s creature recalling what Victor said to him, the creature talking to himself, or even Victor reflecting on his own self-view. This poses the argument of the “abridged” narrator’s true being, to the merit of Victor’s ever-dynamic mental state, or to the literal creation (abridging) of Frankenstein’s creature. For any combination, “love’s flow” remains true as the speaker’s message has devoted intention for both Victor and his creature, resulting in the same icy grave.

“Malignant life, tainted with scorn,

Art thus feral intentions just?

Mortality hath end by thorn,

And you, its societal crust.”

This stanza describes the crimes caused by Frankenstein’s creature and his subsequent ostracization from society. Being his creator, Victor has bloody hands by association and could just as easily apply as subject to this scenario. Murder by thorns sets up the “withered rose” metaphor coming in the next stanza. Frankenstein’s creature was not ostracized for his crimes but rather, for his appearance and lack of social experience; referencing how society saw and dealt with disabled people in the 1800s (The Minnesota Governor’s Council on Developmental Disabilities, nd).

“The coil of a withered rose

Levy mere splinters in commune.

Might I implore one final pose?

For thine bloom be hidden in dune”

A “withered rose” will try to show its beauty but inadvertently exposes its thorns, and only thorns, applying mere scratches to the “commune” i.e., society. The dying flower is given no opportunity to grow – learn – when the environment is not allowing for such. Victor and/or his creature are given one final (scare quotes) ‘solution’ to their troubles, death. As the 1800’s consensus on disability was bleak, so were their actions for ‘curing’ mental/physical disability. This brings us back to the disability myth of “Kill-or-Cure”, the notion that disability is not something that should be accommodated for, more so that disabled people, specifically in literature, could only be cured of their disability or die (Chaloupka, 2017).

 “Icy sands in which you cherish,

Be the scene for where you perish.”

These final lines call back to both Victor’s, and presumedly his creation’s resting place – the ‘solution’ to their problems.

The poem, in its entirety, is a statement on how older societal customs often vilified disability and how ableism dictated/complicated disabled people’s lives. Though there is still much work to be done for disability rights and CDS, the overall reception of ableism is a far cry from what it once was, and certainly for the better.

Works Cited:

Chaloupka, Evan. “Intersubjectivity and Narrative Technique in Of Mice and Men and ‘Johnny Bear’.” Journal of Narrative Theory, vol. 47 no. 3, 2017, p. 403-426.

Hall, Melinda C. “Critical Disability Theory.” Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Stanford University, 23 Sept. 2019, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/disability-critical/#:~:text=Ableism%20erases%20disability%2C%20as%20%E2%80%9Cableistnormativity,%E2%80%9D%20(2009%3A%204).

Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Arcturus Publishing Limited, 2018.

The Minnesota Governor’s Council on Developmental Disabilities. “The Rise of Institutions 1800-1950.” Parallels in Time A History of Developmental Disabilities, The Minnesota Governor’s Council on Developmental Disabilities, nd, https://mn.gov/mnddc/parallels/four/4a/1.html.