Thesis statement about narrative/interpretive authority in Frankenstein and Poor Things
I'll soon have my final B.A. oral exam in English Studies, and one of my two topics is something along the lines of "The Legacy of Frankenstein." I thought of the following thesis statement (using Mary Shelley's novel, the GdT adaptation, and Alasdair Gray's novel Poor Things (as well as its adaptation; not sure about it yet, tho); maybe someone has any insightful thoughts on it:
Guillermo del Toro’s Frankenstein highlights the issue of interpretive authority present in the (re)telling of a story by allowing the Creature to narrate its own story to both Victor and Captain Anderson, the film’s equivalent of Walton, as well as to the audience. This change alters the story’s outcome towards a more reconciliatory ending in which Victor seeks and receives the Creature’s forgiveness. Similarly, Alasdair Gray’s novel Poor Things adapts and alters the narrative structure of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and gives its ‘Creature’, Bella Baxter, narrative authority both within the central frame narrative, the fictitious novel within the novel, and beyond, casting doubt in the entire story.