Self-Unity and Doubles in "Transformation," "Doppelgangland" and "The Replacement"

The beginning of Mary Shelley’s “Transformation” seems to bring out an element of “Doppelgangland” and “The Replacement” that adds to what we’ve talked about already in class. Specifically, the first sentence of “Transformation” makes the reader into the recipient of information and also renders the story a direct result of something sinister and of the mind: “I have heard it said that when any strange, supernatural, and necromantic adventure has occurred to a human being, that being, however desirous he may be to conceal the same, feels at certain periods torn up as it were by an intellectual earthquake, and is forced to bare the inner depths of his spirit to another.” We’re aware that “Transformation” bears overtones of Romeo and Juliet; using that knowledge, I would argue that doppelgangers in Gothic literature are not merely representations of magnified character traits, but that they also help us understand this vexing phenomenon Shelley describes – the drive to communicate, whether with oneself (i.e., interacting freely with an aspect of the self) or with others. Furthermore, I think that the Shakespearean inflection in Shelley’s story asks us to think about things like distinguishability and unity amongst (and within) people, and what those things really mean.

In both “Doppelgangland” and “The Replacement,” Willow’s and Xander’s doppelgangers (respectively) are different enough from their more recognizable selves that they are almost entirely different people. In the latter case, Xander’s double is a positive reincarnation of his slightly awkward, less confident self. In the former, vamp Willow is obviously a negative expression of her usual friendly side. However, in both cases, the doubles get a bit chummy with their partners (whether or not it’s always reciprocated). Why does this happen? I don’t think it’s just that we like ourselves, or that we especially comfortable with ourselves. On the contrary, I suspect that it has something to do with both the opening passage of “Transformation” and with the presence of Romeo and Juliet in it. There’s a sense, I think, that doppelgangers force us to confide in or be in touch with one of our many selves – and that this can be a good thing. But the question arises: do we feel a connection with this other being because he or she is actually just a replica of ourselves? Or do we determine that something is our doppelganger because we feel that connection? It’s a chicken-and-egg question, but I think it brings up some important questions about interpersonal intimacy (as well as compassion for the self), whether or not other people can function has our own doppelgangers in the process of becoming closer to us, and the dangers of being too close with someone (i.e., like in Romeo and Juliet – do they effectively become the same person?) And what would that mean?). I guess this doesn’t directly compare “Transformation” to these two episodes, but in a way it sort of does because it address points that are implicit because of these Shakespearean allusions.