In “Prometheus Unbound” Percy Bysshe Shelley expresses his enthusiasm for revolutionary change through the plot device and resulting thematic element of generational upheaval taking place through the poem’s specific action of Jupiter’s own progeny being the force which brings about his downfall. Demogorgon may stand for the nebulous spirit of children of tyranny who lay in wait for judgment day against their autocratic fathers. Panthea describes Demogorgon as having “neither limb, / Nor form, nor outline-yet we feel it is / A living spirit” (II, iv, 5-7). The spirit of those living under tyranny is a palpaple thing which cannot be denied and Percy Shelley may be making reference to that here.
Demogorgon then, becomes the personification of this move toward revolution and he encapsulates as Jupiter’s son the allegorical extension of children (the populace) rising up to revolt against their fathers (governmental or religious authority) and chart a new course in history. In this case the revolution is accomplished and Percy Shelley is once again showing his idealistic side, which in this case lies in his wholehearted belief that the dismal failure of the French Revolution does not in any way lead to the conclusion that there needs to be a failure of revolution in general. If the children of the French Revolution failed in their attempts to unbalance tyrannical rule, there is always the hope that their grandchildren will rise to the occasion. Percy Bysshe Shelley is relying on the understanding that revolution and change is a generational occasion caused by children’s natural inclination to rebel against the oppressive rule of their parents, and in “Prometheus Unbound” he uses the figures of Demogorgon rebelling against Jupiter to allegorize this constant state of affairs, thereby revealing his own undying enthusiasm for that revolution and change.
Interestingly-notice I didn’t use the word ironically-Percy’s wife Mary Shelley confronts some of these same themes in her great gothic novel Frankenstein. Contrary to popular opinion and the ease with which Hollywood screenwriters yield to cliches, the creature that Victor Frankenstein creates is not inherently evil. In fact, there is a mythic aspect to the creature’s turning into a symbol of evil. It is only after he receives knowledge that he engages in evil acts; in more than a few respects the creature is a latter day Adam who was effectively banished from the Garden of Eden by his creator. Knowledge as a dangerous and destructive tool therefore bears more than a passing resemblance to what God warned against partaking from the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. Victor Frankenstein is, as usual, shortsighted when he blames his downfall upon a search for knowledge; his downfall should actually be blamed on Victor’s utter incapacity to understand how the knowledge that he has gained should be used. The story of the creature turning against its creator can be read as a thematic bookend to the idea of the rebellion against tyrannical parents among children being a natural state without which evolution of the species cannot continue.
