Quotation: “He [Brooks] reads the monster very much as a transphobic audience might ‘read’ a transsexual where ‘being read’ is the opposite of passing. He has very specific suspicions, fixating on genitals for the assurance of gender definition. Brooks questions the monster’s gender and suggests that transparency is the only sufficient answer, that only ‘those parts’ can assure. Of course, visibility cannot offer transparency; ‘those parts’ could ultimately assure ‘us’ of nothing (not the monster’s gender, nor his fertility, not even his sex). The very vagueness of the formulation of ‘those parts’ signals the persistent uncertainty. Even if revealed, they cannot ground the monster’s claim to human recognition or gender.” (Koch-Rein)

Comment: This specific quote emphasizes the main idea of the article but only one of the many brilliant points Koch-Rein makes in the trans-lating of Frankenstein. The author essentially is analyzing another essay by Brooks who suggests that The Creature is never implied to be anything but male, but the only way to be sure is to know the genitalia of The Creature. Koch-Rein criticizes this heavily as it is a very common transphobic ideal used in everyday life for transgender people, “what’s in your pants?”.

I picked this specific quote because I feel it really encompasses how Frankenstein can be seen through a transgender lens, even as far as through the criticism it receives. Koch-Rein’s analysis of how The Creature’s main feeling of shame (mostly about the body) encompasses the disconnect trans people have with their body and the shame they are made to feel by societal expectations.

Question: Could Shelley have known what she was doing when writing Frankenstein and making it very relatable to trans people? Perhaps it could have been for people who see themselves as outcasts in general?