This dissertation examines Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) and The Last Man (1826), and H. G. Wells’s The Time Machine (1895) and The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) as examples of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature. Specifically, I argue that these four novels perform as what Kenneth Burke calls “equipment for living”—that is, literary works that interrogate and explore the sociocultural crises concurrent with their production. Mary Shelley wrote her novels immediately after the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars, and her works reflect and respond to these crises. H. G. Wells, a biologist, wrote his novels as arguments for the threat of evolutionary degeneration, a prevalent concern at the end of the century. I contextualize these four novels by examining them alongside some of the non-fiction discourse that both inform, and are informed by, Shelley’s and Wells’s fiction.
Drawing on the socio-rhetorical theories of Kenneth Burke and the historiography of Hayden White, I perform sociological, historical, and rhetorical criticism in order codify the literature of Shelley and Wells as “strategies” for how we cope with our perceived view of the world and our function within it (109). In other words, my work aims at a conception of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature as a social force. The fictional works of Shelley and Wells act as artifacts in an almost ritualized sense, in that they are instrumental in helping their readers order their existence during crises.
","abstract_html":"<p>This dissertation examines Mary Shelley’s <em>Frankenstein</em> (1818) and <em>The Last Man</em> (1826), and H. G. Wells’s <em>The Time Machine</em> (1895) and <em>The Island of Doctor Moreau</em> (1896) as examples of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature. Specifically, I argue that these four novels perform as what Kenneth Burke calls “equipment for living”—that is, literary works that interrogate and explore the sociocultural crises concurrent with their production. Mary Shelley wrote her novels immediately after the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars, and her works reflect and respond to these crises. H. G. Wells, a biologist, wrote his novels as arguments for the threat of evolutionary degeneration, a prevalent concern at the end of the century. I contextualize these four novels by examining them alongside some of the non-fiction discourse that both inform, and are informed by, Shelley’s and Wells’s fiction.</p> <p>Drawing on the socio-rhetorical theories of Kenneth Burke and the historiography of Hayden White, I perform sociological, historical, and rhetorical criticism in order codify the literature of Shelley and Wells as “strategies” for how we cope with our perceived view of the world and our function within it (109). In other words, my work aims at a conception of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature as a social force. The fictional works of Shelley and Wells act as artifacts in an almost ritualized sense, in that they are instrumental in helping their readers order their existence during crises.</p>","abstract_has_math":false,"creators":["Alber, Catherine R."],"institution":null,"degree_name":"Ph.D.","degree_level":"Dissertation","degree_discipline":null,"degree_department":null,"school":null,"contributors":["Eleanor McNees"],"advisors":[],"committee_chairs":[],"committee_members":[],"year":2017,"date_issued":"2017-11-01T07:00:00Z","date_published":"2017-11-01T07:00:00Z","updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:01:25Z","subjects":["Literature","Horror","Frankenstein","The Last Man","The Time Machine","The Island of Doctor Moreau","Arts and Humanities","Creative Writing","English Language and Literature","Fiction","Literature in English, British Isles"],"languages":["en"],"rights":["Copyright is held by the author. This work may only be accessed by members of the University of Denver community. The work is provided by permission of the author for individual research purposes only and may not be further copied or distributed. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.
"],"rights_urls":[],"identifier_entries":[]},"links":{"outbound_url":"https://digitalcommons.du.edu/restrictedetd/2","outbound_label":"Repository record","outbound_source":"dc:identifier"},"metadata_groups":[{"id":"people","label":"People","entries":[{"key":"dc:contributor","label":"Contributor","values":["Eleanor McNees"]},{"key":"dc:creator","label":"Author","values":["Alber, Catherine R."]}]},{"id":"academic_context","label":"Academic Context","entries":[{"key":"thesis:degree_level","label":"Degree Level","values":["Dissertation"]},{"key":"thesis:degree_name","label":"Degree Name","values":["Ph.D."]}]},{"id":"subjects_keywords","label":"Subjects and Keywords","entries":[{"key":"dc:subject","label":"Dc Subject","values":["Literature","Horror","Frankenstein","The Last Man","The Time Machine","The Island of Doctor Moreau","Arts and Humanities","Creative Writing","English Language and Literature","Fiction","Literature in English, British Isles"]}]},{"id":"language_rights","label":"Language and Rights","entries":[{"key":"dc:language","label":"Dc Language","values":["en"]},{"key":"dc:rights","label":"Dc Rights","values":["Copyright is held by the author. This work may only be accessed by members of the University of Denver community. The work is provided by permission of the author for individual research purposes only and may not be further copied or distributed. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.
"]}]},{"id":"identifiers","label":"Identifiers","entries":[{"key":"dc:identifier","label":"Identifier","values":["https://digitalcommons.du.edu/restrictedetd/2"]}]},{"id":"additional","label":"Additional Metadata","entries":[{"key":"dc:description.abstract","label":"Abstract","values":["This dissertation examines Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) and The Last Man (1826), and H. G. Wells’s The Time Machine (1895) and The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) as examples of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature. Specifically, I argue that these four novels perform as what Kenneth Burke calls “equipment for living”—that is, literary works that interrogate and explore the sociocultural crises concurrent with their production. Mary Shelley wrote her novels immediately after the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars, and her works reflect and respond to these crises. H. G. Wells, a biologist, wrote his novels as arguments for the threat of evolutionary degeneration, a prevalent concern at the end of the century. I contextualize these four novels by examining them alongside some of the non-fiction discourse that both inform, and are informed by, Shelley’s and Wells’s fiction.
Drawing on the socio-rhetorical theories of Kenneth Burke and the historiography of Hayden White, I perform sociological, historical, and rhetorical criticism in order codify the literature of Shelley and Wells as “strategies” for how we cope with our perceived view of the world and our function within it (109). In other words, my work aims at a conception of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature as a social force. The fictional works of Shelley and Wells act as artifacts in an almost ritualized sense, in that they are instrumental in helping their readers order their existence during crises.
"]},{"key":"dc:format","label":"Dc Format","values":["application/pdf"]},{"key":"dc:title","label":"Title","values":["Monsters at the End of the World: A Socio-Historical Analysis of Nineteenth-Century Horror and Apocalypse Literature"]}]}],"canonical_facts":{"dc:contributor":["Eleanor McNees"],"dc:creator":["Alber, Catherine R."],"dc:description.abstract":["This dissertation examines Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) and The Last Man (1826), and H. G. Wells’s The Time Machine (1895) and The Island of Doctor Moreau (1896) as examples of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature. Specifically, I argue that these four novels perform as what Kenneth Burke calls “equipment for living”—that is, literary works that interrogate and explore the sociocultural crises concurrent with their production. Mary Shelley wrote her novels immediately after the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars, and her works reflect and respond to these crises. H. G. Wells, a biologist, wrote his novels as arguments for the threat of evolutionary degeneration, a prevalent concern at the end of the century. I contextualize these four novels by examining them alongside some of the non-fiction discourse that both inform, and are informed by, Shelley’s and Wells’s fiction.
Drawing on the socio-rhetorical theories of Kenneth Burke and the historiography of Hayden White, I perform sociological, historical, and rhetorical criticism in order codify the literature of Shelley and Wells as “strategies” for how we cope with our perceived view of the world and our function within it (109). In other words, my work aims at a conception of nineteenth-century horror and apocalypse literature as a social force. The fictional works of Shelley and Wells act as artifacts in an almost ritualized sense, in that they are instrumental in helping their readers order their existence during crises.
"],"dc:format":["application/pdf"],"dc:identifier":["https://digitalcommons.du.edu/restrictedetd/2"],"dc:language":["en"],"dc:rights":["Copyright is held by the author. This work may only be accessed by members of the University of Denver community. The work is provided by permission of the author for individual research purposes only and may not be further copied or distributed. User is responsible for all copyright compliance.
"],"dc:subject":["Literature","Horror","Frankenstein","The Last Man","The Time Machine","The Island of Doctor Moreau","Arts and Humanities","Creative Writing","English Language and Literature","Fiction","Literature in English, British Isles"],"dc:title":["Monsters at the End of the World: A Socio-Historical Analysis of Nineteenth-Century Horror and Apocalypse Literature"],"thesis:degree_level":["Dissertation"],"thesis:degree_name":["Ph.D."]},"updated_at":"2026-07-24T02:01:25Z"}