Before I read Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, I did not understand the loopholes female authors in the 19^th century had to create. Of course, the hardships strong female woman (even up to this day) have to go through are evident in society, and the clever things that Mary Shelley had to do to get her opinions out there were also clever and ingenious. I read an article last night (one of the many I printed off in hope to find a good article that would be appropriate for Frankenstein) that explained how many people believed Mary Shelley was a male after reading her extraordinary novel and, if she had not gone anonymous, her extraordinary work would not have been seen as “extraordinary” because people would know she was a female. But keeping her name anonymous is only the tip of the iceberg compared to the deeper tactics she had to put in the novel to avoid sexism.

                In an interview many years ago, an interviewer asked J.K. Rowling (who, coincidentally, went by ‘J.K’ to avoid sexism and judgment for being a female as well) why she made the main character, Harry Potter, a male. Many authors make the main character their own gender because they like to live through their own main character and put a piece of themselves in the main character. She said, simply, that people would only see the “female” in the main character, instead of the deeper themes that she was trying to get out toward the world. For instance, instead of seeing the dark evils of the wizarding world and the prejudice themes that came along with it, they would only see a girl and connect all of the themes with her gender instead of the soul of the character (which, no matter what gender, the themes she wanted to create had nothing to do with the gender of her main character). I believe Mary Shelley was thinking the same exact way. She did not just make a male character as the scientist so that people would take the character seriously (though I am sure it was also a reason), but because any theme or message she would put into it would be automatically connected to the main character’s sex. Coincidentally, I had an argument about this exact topic with my cousin the other day. My cousin (a girl) thought it was because all female characters are weak and a writer cannot possibly make a strong female character when it comes to fiction because of “media”, but I think my cousin is wrong. I think it is because writers are afraid that people will not see the true messages that they are trying to bring out if the make the main character a female. Instead of seeing the romanticism in Shelley’s work, they would assume “it’s just a girl who admires nature because it appeals to females more than it does to males. It’s not a symbol. End of the story”. The messages would be ruined.

                The feminism in Shelley’s work is not seen inside of it, but in the construction of it. We, as feminists and fighters for equality, wait for the day that somebody can write a female character and not have every reader assuming that everything has to do with the main character’s struggles as a female and that all themes have to do with the gender. Instead, they can see the light and dark themes; romanticism, individuality, friendship, selfless sacrifice, and a thousand more topics that deserve to be discussed which, I promise you, have nothing to do with the character’s gender.