Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

The Palgrave Literary Dictionary of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley pp 55–92Cite as

Palgrave Macmillan

F

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 316 Accesses

Part of the book series: Palgrave Literary Dictionaries ((PAZ))

Abstract

Untitled manuscript poem in MWS’s hand, beginning with this line, dated 10 September 1833 and first published in 1997. The speaker is not seeking ‘that smiling day’ of earlier ‘love, hope & joy’ once experienced in ∗Italy, but its ‘fair fields enfold the sacred clay’ and she longs to rest by the ‘lowly bed’—evidently PBS’s tomb in Rome—until her soul seeks ‘a clime than thine more blest -/Bidding farewell to Earth and Italy!’ (LL 4.145).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   119.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD   159.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Bibliography

  • Aldiss, Brian W. (1986), with David Wingrove, Trillion Year Spree: the History of Science Fiction (London: Victor Gollancz).

    Google Scholar 

  • Allen, Graham (2008), Mary Shelley (Critical Issues) (Houndmills: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Barbour, Judith (2008), ‘The Professor and the Orang-Outang: Mary Shelley as a Child Reader’, in Knellwolf and Goodall (2008), pp. 33–48.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, Betty T. (1998), Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley: an Introduction (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bewell, Alan (1988), ‘An Issue of Monstrous Desire: Frankenstein and Obstetrics’, Yale Journal of Criticism 2, pp. 105–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Billington, Michael (2011), ‘Frankenstein – review’, The Guardian, 24 February.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloom, Abigail Burnham (2010), The Literary Monster on Film: Five Nineteenth Century British Novels and their Cinematic Adaptations (Jefferson, NC: McFarland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bohls, Elizabeth A. (1995), Women Travel Writers and the Language of Aesthetics, 1716–1818 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brantlinger, Patrick (2016), ‘Race and Frankenstein’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 128–42.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caird, Mona (1892), ‘A Defence of the So-called “Wild Women”’, Nineteenth Century 31, pp. 811–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, Julie A. (2007), England’s First Family of Writers: Mary Wollstonecraft, William Godwin, Mary Shelley (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Chatterjee, Ranita (2007), ‘Filial ties: Godwin’s Deloraine and Mary Shelley’s Writings’, European Romantic Review 18, pp. 29–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clemit, Pamela (2003), ‘Frankenstein, Matilda, and the Legacies of Wollstonecraft and Godwin’, in Schor (2003), pp. 26–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, Mary Jean (1993), ‘Reading Mary Shelley’s Journals: Romantic Subjectivity and Feminist Criticism’, in Fisch, Mellor and Schor (1993), pp. 73–88.

    Google Scholar 

  • Craciun, Adriana (2011), ‘Writing the Disaster: Franklin and Frankenstein’, Nineteenth-Century Literature 65, pp. 433–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Craciun, Adriana (2016), ‘Frankenstein’s Politics’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 84–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, Nora (2000a) ‘In Defence of the 1831 Frankenstein’, in Eberle-Sinatra (2000), pp. 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crook, Nora (2012), ‘Mary Shelley, Author of Frankenstein’, in Punter (2012), pp. 110–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crouch, Laura E. (1978), ‘Davy’s A Discourse, Introductory to a Course of Lectures on Chemistry: a Possible Scientific Source of Frankenstein’, Keats-Shelley Journal 27, pp. 35–44.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cutchins, Dennis R., and Perry, Dennis R. (eds) (2018), Adapting Frankenstein: the Monster’s Eternal Lives in Popular Culture (Manchester: Manchester University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Davison, Carol Margaret (2018b), ‘Monstrous, Mortal Embodiment and Last Dances: Frankenstein and the Ballet’, in Davison and Mulvey-Roberts (2018), pp. 109–29.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, Wheeler Winston (1990), ‘The Films of Frankenstein’, in Behrendt (1990), pp. 166–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Douthwaite, Julia V. (2012), The Frankenstein of 1790 and Other Lost Chapters from Revolutionary France (Chicago: Chicago University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Eberle-Sinatra, Michael (1998), ‘Science, Gender and Otherness in Shelley’s Frankenstein and Kenneth Branagh’s Film Adaptation’, European Romantic Review 9, pp. 253–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foscolo, Ugo (1933–1994), Edizione nazionale delle opere, 22 vols (Firenze: Le Monnier): vol. 22, Epistolario 9, ed. Mario Scotti (1994).

    Google Scholar 

  • Franklin, Caroline (2013), The Female Romantics: Nineteenth Century Women Novelists and Byronism (New York and Abingdon: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Frayling, Christopher (2017), Frankenstein: the First Two Hundred Years (Reel Art Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedman, Lester D. and Kavey, Allison B. (2016), Monstrous Progeny: a History of the Frankenstein Narratives (New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, Sandra M., and Gubar, Susan (1979), The Madwoman in the Attic: the Woman Writer and the Nineteenth-Century Literary Imagination (New Haven: Yale University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Glut, Donald F. (1984), The Frankenstein Catalog (Jefferson, NC: McFarland).

    Google Scholar 

  • Guerra, Lia (2005), ‘Mary Shelley’s Contributions to Lardner’s Cabinet Cyclopaedia: Lives of the Most Eminent Literary and Scientific Men of Italy’, in Bandiera and Saglia (2005), pp. 221–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haggerty, George E. (2016), ‘What is Queer about Frankenstein?’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 116–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hammond, Kim (2004), ‘Monsters of Modernity: Frankenstein and Modern Environmentalism’, Cultural Geographies 11, pp. 181–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellsten, Iina (2006), ‘Focus on Metaphors: the Case of “Frankenfood” on the Web’, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2003.tb00218.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hill-Miller, Katherine C. (1995), ‘My Hideous Progeny’: Mary Shelley, William Godwin, and the Father-Daughter Relationship (Newark: University of Delaware Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Hogle, Jerrold E. (2016), ‘Romantic Contexts’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 41–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holmes, Richard (2017), ‘Out of Control’, New York Review of Books, 21 December 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hopkins, Lisa (2005), Screening the Gothic (Austin: University of Texas Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobus, Mary (1986), Reading Woman: Essays in Feminist Criticism (London: Methuen).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jennings, Luke (2016), ‘Frankenstein review – a monster hash from the Royal Ballet’, The Observer, 5 May.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joffe, Sharon L[ynne] (2007a), ‘“The Instinct of Nature Spoke Audibly”: Representations of the Mother-Child Bond in Mary Shelley’s Fiction’, in Staub (2007), pp. 117–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joffe, Sharon Lynne (2007b), The Kinship Coterie and the Literary Endeavors of the Women in the Shelley Circle (New York and Oxford: Peter Lang).

    Google Scholar 

  • Joseph, Gerhard (1975), ‘Frankenstein’s Dream: The Child is Father of the Monster’, Hartford Studies in Literature 7, pp. 97–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jowell, Sharon L. (1997), ‘Mary Shelley’s Mothers: The Weak, the Absent, and the Silent in Lodore and Falkner’, European Romantic Review 8, pp. 298–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lau, Beth (2009b), ‘Romantic Ambivalence in Frankenstein and The Rime of the Ancient Mariner’, in Lau (2009a), pp. 71–98.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauritsen, John (2007), The Man Who Wrote Frankenstein (Dorchester, MA: Pagan Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Leader, Zachary (1996), Revision and Romantic Authorship (Oxford: Clarendon Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Lew, Joseph W. (1991), ‘The Deceptive Other: Mary Shelley’s Critique of Orientalism in Frankenstein’, Studies in Romanticism 30, pp. 255–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lipking, Lawrence (1996), ‘Frankenstein, the True Story; or, Rousseau Judges Jean-Jacques’, in Hunter (1996), pp. 313–31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd Smith, Allan (2004), ‘“This Thing of Darkness”: Racial Discourse in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’, Gothic Studies 6, pp. 208–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malchow, Howard (1993), ‘Frankenstein’s Monster and Images of Race in Nineteenth-Century Britain’, Past and Present 139, pp. 90–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markley, A.A. (1997), ‘“Laughing That I May Not Weep”: Mary Shelley’s Short Fiction and her Novels’, Keats-Shelley Journal 46, pp. 97–124.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markley, A.A. (2000), ‘“The Truth in Masquerade”: Cross-Dressing and Disguise in Mary Shelley’s Short Stories’, in Eberle-Sinatra (2000), pp. 109–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, Mrs Julian (Florence Ashton Marshall) (1889), Life and Letters of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley, 2 vols (London: Richard Bentley).

    Google Scholar 

  • McGavran, James Holt (2000), ‘“Insurmountable Barriers to Our Union”: Homosocial Male Bonding, Homosexual Panic, and Death on the Ice in Frankenstein’, European Romantic Review 11, pp. 46–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mellor, Anne K. (1988), Mary Shelley: Her Life, Her Fiction, Her Monsters (London: Methuen).

    Google Scholar 

  • Mellor, Anne K. (1990a), ‘Choosing a Text of Frankenstein to Teach’, in Behrendt (1990), pp. 31–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, Rosemary (2014), ‘“Diamonds by which the eye is charmed”: Facets of Romantic Historiography in the Works of Richard Parkes Bonington’, in Fermanis and Regan (2014), pp. 179–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moers, Ellen (1977), Literary Women (Garden City, NY: Doubleday).

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, Lucy (2004), ‘Writing the Self in Others’ Lives: Mary Shelley’s Biographies of Madame Roland and Madame de Staël’, Keats-Shelley Journal 53, pp. 127–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morton, Timothy (2016), ‘Frankenstein and Ecocriticism’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 143–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newman, Beth (1986), ‘Narratives of Seduction and the Seductions of Narrative: the Frame Structure of Frankenstein’, ELH 53, pp. 141–163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulson, Ronald (1981), ‘Gothic Fiction and the French Revolution’, ELH 48, pp. 532–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peacock, Thomas Love (2001), The Letters of Thomas Love Peacock, ed. Nicholas A. Joukovsky (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Peck, Walter Edwin (1927), Shelley: his Life and Work, 2 vols (London: Ernest Benn).

    Google Scholar 

  • Polidori, John William (1911), The Diary of Dr. John William Polidori 1816, Relating to Byron, Shelley, etc., ed. William Michael Rossetti (London: Elkin Mathews).

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollin, Burton R. (1965), ‘Philosophical and Literary Sources of Frankenstein’, Comparative Literature 17, pp. 97–108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poovey, Mary (1984), The Proper Lady and the Woman Writer: Ideology as Style in the Works of Mary Wollstonecraft, Mary Shelley and Jane Austen (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Punter, David (2016), ‘Literature’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 205–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, Tilottama (2014), ‘A Peculiar Community: Mary Shelley, Godwin and the Abyss of Emotion’, in Falflak and Sha (2014), pp. 147–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rauch, Alan (1995), ‘The Monstrous Body of Knowledge in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’, Studies in Romanticism 34, pp. 227–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richard, Jessica (2003), ‘“A paradise of my own creation”: Frankenstein and the Improbable Romance of Polar Exploration’, Nineteenth Century Contexts 25, pp. 295–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richardson, Alan (1994), Literature, Education and Romanticism: Reading as Social Practice, 1780–1832 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, Marie (1990), Gothic Immortals: the Fiction of the Brotherhood of the Rosy Cross (London and New York: Routledge).

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, Charles E. (2016), ‘Frankenstein: its Composition and Publication’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 13–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Saunders, Julia (2000), ‘Rehabilitating the Family in Mary Shelley’s Falkner’, in Eberle-Sinatra (2000), pp. 211–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft (1994a), Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus: the 1818 Text, ed. Marilyn Butler (Oxford: Oxford University Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft (2012), The Annotated Frankenstein, ed. Susan J. Wolfson and Ronald L. Levao (Cambridge, MA: Belknap).

    Google Scholar 

  • Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft (2018), Frankenstein: the 1818 Text, ed. Charlotte Gordon (New York: Penguin).

    Google Scholar 

  • Sites, Melissa (2005b), ‘Utopian Domesticity as Social Reform in Mary Shelley’s Falkner’, Keats-Shelley Journal 54, pp. 148–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Andrew (2016b), ‘Introduction’, in Smith (2016a), pp. 1–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, Don G. (1992), ‘Frankenstein: a Possible Source for Poe’s “MS. Found in a Bottle”’, Poe Studies/Dark Romanticism 25, pp. 37–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty (1985), ‘Three Women’s Texts and a Critique of Imperialism’, Critical Inquiry 12, pp. 243–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sterrenburg, Lee (1979), ‘Mary Shelley’s Monster: Politics and Psyche in Frankenstein’, in Levine and Knoepflmacher (1979), pp. 143–71.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, Beatrice (2017), Romantic Childhood, Romantic Heirs: Reproduction and Retrospection, 1820–1850 (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan).

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, Lisa (2012), ‘Mary Shelley’, in Burwick, Goslee and Hoeveler (2012), pp. 1216–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Veeder, William (1986), Mary Shelley & ‘Frankenstein’: the Fate of Androgyny (Chicago: University of Chicago Press).

    Google Scholar 

  • Webster-Garrett, Erin (2000), ‘Recycling Zoraida: the Muslim Heroine in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’, Cervantes: Bulletin of the Cervantes Society of America 20, pp. 133–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zonana, Joyce (1991), ‘“They will prove the truth of my tale”: Safie’s Letters as the Feminist Core of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein’, Journal of Narrative Technique 21, pp. 170–84.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Independent Scholar, Cambridge, UK

    Martin Garrett

Authors
  1. Martin Garrett
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Garrett, M. (2019). F. In: The Palgrave Literary Dictionary of Mary Wollstonecraft Shelley. Palgrave Literary Dictionaries. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-56639-3_6

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation