Themes
Key
LitCharts assigns a color and icon to each theme in Frankenstein in Baghdad, which you can use to track the themes throughout the work.
Truth, Lies, and Storytelling
Good vs. Evil
Power, Authority, and Social Divisions
Family, Friendship, and Home
Superstition and Religion
Summary
Analysis
While in possession of the digital recorder, the Whatsitsname recorded his story. When introducing himself, he compared himself to the batteries in the recorder, which had very little time left. He described himself as a savior for poor people such as Elishva, waiting for an opportunity seek revenge. His goal, he declared, was to punish criminals and allow justice to reign on earth.
Even though storytelling can be an opportunity to reveal one’s deepest thoughts, it is also a platform for self-presentation: it allows people to present themselves in a positive light, even if this image does not perfectly align with reality. In the case of the Whatsitsname, it remains unclear to what extent he is truly committed to justice, and to what extent he simply seeks to take revenge on those who have personally harmed him.
Themes
The Whatsitsname claimed that that representing him in the press as a dangerous monster was unfair, because his goal was actually to put an end to evil attitudes prevalent in the country, such as greed and a thirst for violence. As he was recounting these objectives, someone told him the batteries had died. This interlocutor, who called the Whatsitsname his “lord and master,” agreed to go buy batteries for him.
Although the Whatsitsname might be correct in identifying people’s harmful behaviors, it is uncertain whether the creature’s actions make the situation better—or, as is more likely, contribute to cycles of violence. The interlocutor’s deference toward the Whatsitsname signals that, like the leaders he so strongly criticizes, the Whatsitsname might also enjoy a certain degree of power and authority over others.
Themes
The Whatsitsname explained that he was currently living in a half-destroyed building in the neighborhood of Dora, where three groups were fighting each other: the Iraqi National Guard, allied with the American military, against Sunni and Shiite militias. The Whatsitsname used holes in the houses to walk around the city without being seen, traveling through a complex series of paths to avoid running into armed groups.
The fact that the Whatsitsname uses the destruction in the city to stay hidden suggests that his very existence derives from the conflicts that humans have created amongst each other. The opposition of different branches of Islam—Sunni and Shiite—in armed conflict shows that, in certain contexts, religious affiliations can lead to violence instead of peaceful cooperation.
Themes
The Whatsitsname explained that he was living with a series of assistants. The most important was the Magician, who claimed to have worked for the old regime. He had been employed to use his powers to keep the Americans from entering Baghdad, but the Americans had too many djinns (supernatural spirits), which were able to crush the Magicians’ djinns. The Magician was then evicted from his former apartment because of atrocities that the former regime committed. Now dedicated to the Whatsitsname’s cause, he was in charge of designing secret routes for the creature to move around the city.
The Magician’s interpretation of the U.S. invasion of Iraq places emphasis on supernatural occurrences: a fight between different kinds of spirits. This interpretation gives an aura of fatality to events that were in fact the result of human operations—for example, the strength of one military power over another. The Magician’s involvement in war crimes suggests that the Whatsitsname is already veering away from a fight for justice, as he enlists former criminals in his team.
Themes
Get the entire Frankenstein in Baghdad LitChart as a printable PDF.
The second most important assistant was the Sophist, a specialist at making any idea, good or bad, extremely convincing. The Sophist, who did not have convictions of his own, was effective at reassuring people around him, because he found convincing arguments for whatever creed they believed in. He was devoted to the Whatsitsname precisely because so many others in the city did not believe in him.
The Sophist’s attitude toward belief is marked by a cynical, nihilist attitude. He considers that no ideas are inherently bad or good. Rather, the success of an argument is the result of persuasion, not moral worth. The Sophist’s lack of moral convictions discredits the Whatsitsname’s invocation of lofty concepts such as justice: it suggests that the Whatsitsname’s actions might actually have no moral foundation.
Themes
The third assistant was the Enemy, the current member of a counterterrorism unit. Given his position as an insider in government activities, he was able to provide important information to help the Whatsitsname in his activities. The Enemy decided to join the Whatsitsname out of frustration, because he no longer believed that the government was capable of bringing justice to the people.
The Enemy’s frustration with the government’s actions suggests that there is no high moral authority reigning in Iraq: rather, individuals must decide which group to support, in the hope that they might bring about positive change. However, it is doubtful that any one group is truly capable of achieving justice—let alone in setting up a stable rule of law—in a context of such widespread violence.
Themes
The Whatsitsname also mentioned three additional participants: the young madman, the old madman, and the eldest madman. The young madman was the one who interrupted the Whatsitsname as he was recording his story. He was convinced that the Whatsitsname represented the model Iraqi citizen: a combination of various ethnical, racial, tribal, and class affiliations, created through the diversity of backgrounds of his body parts. In this sense, the Whatsitsname represented a multicultural mix, a “true” Iraqi citizen, that had never before been realized.
The madmen’s interpretations of the Whatsitsname’s purpose on earth adds an element of humor to the narrative, but it also indicates underlying political dynamics. The fact that three madmen are in charge of determining the Whatsitsname’s role signals that their discourse might be pure delusions. At the same time, the conflict between the three madmen mirrors the armed conflict between three groups in Iraq, all vying for power. Through this analogy, the novel suggests that these armed groups might be, in a sense, “mad”: convinced of a reality they seek to impose on others, regardless of the actual validity of their beliefs.
Themes
The old madman, by contrast, believed that the Whatsitsname foreshadowed the arrival of the savior that all religions believe in. The Whatsitsname would bring destruction to the earth in order to clear the way for the true savior. But the eldest madman trusted that the Whatsitsname was the savior itself, and that he would play an important role in shaping the history of the world. The Sophist concluded that, because of his extreme insanity, the eldest madman’s mind was comparable to a blank page and thus most capable of reflecting the truth, beyond the abstraction of reason.
The divergence in opinion between the old and the eldest madmen mirrors the religious conflict between Sunni and Shia Islam, which is over 1,000 years old. The main difference between these two branches of Islam stems from their interpretation of the successor of Muhammad, the founder of Islam. In the novel, the two madmen’s disagreement about the role of the Whatsitsname on earth mirrors this theological disagreement over the purpose and succession of the prophet Muhammad.
Themes
The Whatsitsname would leave his hiding at night. He wore special clothing and makeup to hide his appearance. He explained that he only had two targets left: an al-Qaeda member and a Venezuelan mercenary. He recalled some of his past difficulties: although bullets did not harm him, he noticed that his flesh started melting once he had succeeded in exacting revenge on the people responsible for those body parts.
The mention of an al-Qaeda member and a mercenary confirm that most—if not all—of the Whatsitsname’s victims engage in harmful, violent deeds against the population. However, it remains unclear whether the Whatsitsname’s actions actually reduce violence in the city, or simply punish relatively arbitrarily chosen targets.
Themes
The Whatsitsname felt that his body was disintegrating into fetid, sticky liquids that were oozing out of his body. Aware that this might cause him to melt away entirely, he concluded that he needed new body parts. A fight then broke out in the neighborhood. An armed group captured two men from an enemy faction and executed them in the street. When the Whatsitsname started losing some of his fingers, the Magician encouraged the assistants to use body parts from these recent victims—whose bodies were left in the street—to replace their creature’s melting flesh.
The fact that the Whatsitsname has such little trouble finding spare body parts suggests that, in the same way he benefits from the holes left in destroyed houses, he also benefits from the savage, sectarian violence taking place in the streets of Baghdad. In this sense, the Whatsitsname can be seen as a product of human divisions: were there no armed fights taking place in the city, the creature would run out of body parts to keep him alive.
Themes
After they stitched these new parts onto the Whatsitsname’s body, the creature woke up reinvigorated the next day. Enthusiastic about his renewed energy, he left the building to exact revenge on the gang that murdered the two people the day before. He succeeded in entering the group’s hiding spot. There, he killed all but one man who, after seeing his companions ferociously murdered, looked terrified. According to the Whatsitsname, this man knew that God’s justice had come to punish them: it is because of the man’s guilt that he submitted to his brutal death without trying to resist, as his companions had done.
The Whatsitsname’s conviction that he is a conduit for divine justice gives him a sense of impunity and keeps him from critically examining the moral worth of his actions. In this sense, his violent deeds—particularly cruel in this episode, where he shows no mercy for a scared, vulnerable victim—mirror those of religious armed groups, who act in the name of a certain interpretation of their creed. In other words, the Whatsitsname’s confidence makes him just as intolerant as the groups responsible for the sectarian violence in the city.
Themes
In the next few days, the Whatsitsname killed his two previous targets: the Venezuelan mercenary, who had been in charge of recruiting suicide bombers such as the one who organized the Sadeer Novotel attack, and an al-Qaeda leader responsible for the bomb in Tayaran Square. However, as old body parts were replaced by those of new victims, the Whatsitsname realized that he would never have a finalized list of targets to assassinate: the list simply filled with new names. Secretly, he hoped that no more victims would appear in the streets, so that he could finally melt into nothingness. However, the fighting in the streets only intensified, leaving dead bodies all over.
The Whatsitsname’s actions are, to a certain degree, rational: he wants to punish people responsible for the deaths of innocent victims. At the same time, the Whatsitsname realizes that the fighting in the country is beyond his control: however many people he might succeed in killing, new conflicts are bound to sprout on the streets anyway. This discouraging conclusion highlights the apparent inevitability of the city’s descent into chaos and the ineffective nature of the Whatsitsname’s actions, as killing a few leaders does not actually eradicate the roots of violence in the country.
Themes
In this context, the Whatsitsname’s group of followers kept on increasing, divided into the three groups led by each madman. Each leader lived on a different floor. Their followers abided scrupulously to the madman leader’s interpretation of the Whatsitsname’s role on earth. The eldest madman’s followers, who believed that the Whatsitsname was a representation of God, which they were not allowed to see, always bowed and covered their eyes when they ran into him.
The evolution of the groups of the Whatsitsname’s followers shows that, instead of finding unity in their common leader, the groups become even more detached. This mirrors the processes taking place at a societal level, where the growth of sectarian groups only causes more conflict. The eldest madman’s followers’ behavior reflects a rule common to many branches of Islam: the avoidance or prohibition of visual representations of the prophet Muhammad.
Themes
The Magician found these developments worrisome. He argued they made the group much more visible and, therefore, easier for the authorities to catch. The Sophist disagreed with the Magician, because he believed the Magician sought to control the Whatsitsname. In the meantime, the Enemy warned the Whatsitsname that an internal investigation was taking place in his department. The Americans held serious accusations against him, such as associating with terrorist groups. This was the last time the Whatsitsname heard from him.
The internal disagreements between the Magician and the Sophist shows how difficult it is to keep a large group—religious, political, or otherwise—united, as it is likely that some leaders are going to compete for power. The Enemy’s disappearance reveals that government authorities are increasingly becoming aware of activities related to the Whatsitsname—which seemingly confirms the Magician’s worries about the group’s visibility.
Themes
Over time, the Magician began to wonder whether the body parts that composed the Whatsitsname were truly innocent. He argued that everyone was at least partially criminal: someone who became the victim of violence might have engaged in violence themselves at another moment in their life. Although the Sophist disagreed with the Magician, the Whatsitsname had already wondered the same thing himself, because he sensed that some of his body parts came from criminals. He attributed some of his feelings of anger and confusion, as well as his occasional loss of eyesight, to this phenomenon.
The Magician’s reflections on the fragile boundaries between innocence and criminality create a central dilemma for the Whatsitsname. Indeed, the supposed moral validity of the creature’s murders depends on the notion that the people he kills deserve it—because they have engaged in violent deeds and because they have killed innocent people. As soon as these criminals are considered partially innocent, and the innocent as partially criminal, the Whatsitsname’s actions lose any pretense of moral worth.
Themes
The Whatsitsname discussed the matter with the Magician, who told him that there was no doubt he was made up of the body parts of criminals: anyone who carries a weapon was a criminal, the Magician argued, even if he was the victim in a battle. Angered by this discourse, the Sophist concluded that, if the Whatsitsname was made of criminal parts, he would become a “supercriminal,” the most powerful of all. This discussion left the Sophist furious, and he became the Magician’s enemy.
Beyond aiming to determine the validity of the Whatsitsname’s actions, the conversation between the Magician and the Whatsitsname identifies a central problem to the political situation in Iraq: in a country ravaged by violence, does engaging in violence oneself make one a criminal? Where is it possible to draw a line between aggression and self-defense? This moral dilemma questions different levels of complicity in criminal activities.
Themes
In the meantime, the Whatsitsname was amazed to note that the eldest madman’s followers converted him into the prophet of a new religion. The young madman’s followers, by contrast, considered entering politics.
The increasing efforts to turn the Whatsitsname into the leader of an organized, visible movement mirrors the development of many armed groups in Iraq, which evolve from grassroots organizations to active political and religious forces.
Themes
One day, after killing a militia leader in his home, where the man’s mother, wife, and sisters loudly expressed their grief, the Whatsitsname returned to Dora and heard the sound of gunfights. While walking in pre-established routes among half destroyed buildings, he noticed his eyesight suddenly deteriorate. When he touched his right eye, he felt a dough-like substance, which he removed, thus detaching the entire eye.
Despite engaging in brutal acts, the Whatsitsname never expresses empathy for his victims. This emotional void reflects his conviction that he is acting in the name of justice, but also a certain lack of humanity: he does not seem to care that his actions also affect innocent people—such as, in this case, the militia leader’s family.
Themes
Worried of losing both of his eyes, the Whatsitsname then noticed a man who was walking toward him in the distance. This man, in his 60s, was carrying bags that later revealed to contain only bread and fruit. It was unusual for someone like him to be in this area. After following him, the Whatsitsname, convinced of the man’s innocence, decided to shoot him.
This murder marks a turning point in the Whatsitsname’s killings. However brutal they might have seemed until now, they have always been aimed at a notion of justice. Here, the Whatsitsname’s actions are gratuitous: they are aimed at his own survival rather than upholding justice.
Themes
In that moment, the Whatsitsname lost eyesight in his other eye and, with his knife, removed the dead man’s eyes. He wondered what his assistants would say about this. The Sophist, he concluded, would argue that, as the Magician had predicted, the Whatsitsname had indeed turned into a murderer, killing innocent people. The Magician, by contrast, would say that the Whatsitsname was simply following the desires of the criminal parts of his body.
The possibility of interpreting this murder in multiple ways reflects a certain moral cynicism concerning human actions. Indeed, it is always possible for the Whatsitsname to convince himself of his own innocence, however savage his actions might be. Depending on how much control he is considered to have over his own body, the distinction between criminality and innocence becomes largely a matter of perspective.
Themes
After placing these new eyes in their sockets, the Whatsitsname looked at the dead man’s body and concluded that he was a “sacrificial lamb.” The man would have died anyway, he argued, given the violent fighting taking place around him. By contrast, killing the man in these circumstances had a positive outcome: it allowed the Whatsitsname to be certain of his victim’s innocence, which would have been more difficult had the man died among criminals. The Whatsitsname thus concluded that he was not actually a murderer: he simply hastened death for this person.
The Whatsitsname’s justification for this murder mirrors his previous description of the four beggars’ deaths, where he considered that these men had been contemplating suicide anyway. The Whatsitsname’s conclusions are self-serving: he prefers to believe that these people’s deaths were inevitable, instead of considering that he deprived them of precious moments of life.
Themes
When the Whatsitsname reached his building, he realized that the fighting did not come from the armed groups in the area, as he had anticipated, but from his own followers. As the Magician had predicted, disagreements among the three madmen’s groups caused violence to erupt. The Whatsitsname found the Magician’s dead body, with a bullet hole in his head, in front of the building. After walking up the balcony and seeing the Magician’s body right underneath it, he realized that someone must have pushed the Magician off the balcony after murdering him.
The fact that violence erupted among the Whatsitsname’s followers instead of between pre-existing armed groups is deeply ironic. It suggests that, instead of curtailing violence in the city, the Whatsitsname has only added a new form of violence, based on new divisions. These events confirm that creating new political or religious does not lead the country toward peace: rather, what Iraq needs is more unity, not more sectarian divisions.
Themes
The next day, the Whatsitsname realized that the young madman was the only person still in the building. The young madman confirmed the Whatsitsname’s suspicions: it was indeed the Sophist who had killed the Magician and, later, escaped. With his new, innocent eyes, the Whatsitsname saw the young madman as a murderer and a criminal. The only reason the young madman survived such vicious fighting, the Whatsitsname concluded, was because he was even more evil than the others.
The shift in the Whatsitsname’s perspective concerning his own followers—in this case, the young madman—shows that, until now, he’s been unable to understand the violent nature of these groups’ actions. The Whatsitsname realizes that it is not a common fight for justice but a mere struggle for power that has led to the growth of his group: those who survive are not morally worthy but, on the contrary, morally corrupt.
Themes
The batteries in the digital recorder then died again, and the young madman told the Whatsitsname that they had none left. When noticing the Whatsitsname’s behavior, the young madman suddenly begged for his life, saying that he was his master’s “slave” and “servant.” His voice then died out, and the Whatsitsname now spoke alone in the recorder. Impatiently, he noted that he was now running out of time.
Despite criticizing the young madman for being more evil than others, the Whatsitsname does not realize that he behaves in exactly the same way: the only reason he is still alive is because he is able to feed off of the violence around him. His sudden murder of the young madman, for no apparent reason, shows that he, too, survives because he is even crueler than those around him.
Themes
