References
- Barthes, R. 1972. “The Grain of the Voice.” In The Responsibility of Forms: Critical Essays on Music, Art, and Representation. Trans. Richard Howard. New York: Hill and Wang: 267–77.
- Bishop, S. 2013. “The Read Voice.” Text 17 (1). http://www.textjournal.com.au/april13/bishop.htm.
- Britton, J. M. 2009. “Novelistic Sympathy in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein.” Studies in Romanticism 48 (Spring 2009): 3–22.
- Butler, J. 2003. Giving an Account of Oneself. Assen, Netherlands: Van Gorcum.
- Cavarero, A. 2000. Relating Narratives: Storytelling and Selfhood. Trans. Paul A. Kottman. New York: Routledge.
- Cavarero, A. 2005. For More than One Voice: Toward a Philosophy of Vocal Expression. Trans. Paul A. Kottman. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
- Comitini, P. 2006. “The Limits of Discourse and the Ideology of Form in Mary Shelley’s ‘Frankenstein.,” Keats-Shelley Journal 55: 179–198.
- Dolar, M. 2006. “The Linguistics of the Voice.” In A Voice and Nothing More. Cambridge: M.I.T. Press: 12–33. Reprinted in Ed. Jonathan Sterne. 2012. The Sound Studies Reader. New York: Routledge: 539–554.
- Felman, S. 2014. “Afterword: Barbara Johnson’s Last Book.” In B. Johnson, A Life with Mary Shelley. With a forward by Cathy Caruth, introduction by Mary Wilson Carpenter, and essays by Judith Butler and Shoshana Felman. Stanford: Stanford University Press: 123–158.
- Gigante, D. 2000. “Facing the Ugly: The Case of ‘Frankenstein’.” ELH 67 (2, Summer): 565–587. doi:10.1353/elh.2000.0015.
- Juengel, S. J. 2000. “Face, Figure, Physiognomics: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and the Moving Image.” NOVEL: A Forum on Fiction 33 (3, Summer): 353–376. doi:10.2307/1346169.
- Levinas, E. 1998. Otherwise than Being. Trans. Alphonso Lingis. Pittsburgh: Duquesne University Press.
- Macovski, M. 1994. Dialogue and Literature: Apostrophe, Auditors, and the Collapse of Romantic Discourse. New York: Oxford University Press.
- Nancy, J.-L. 2007. Listening. Trans. Charlotte Mandell. New York: Fordham.
- Newman, B. 1986. “Narratives of Seduction and the Seductions of Narrative: The Frame Structure of Frankenstein.” ELH 53 (1): 141–163. doi:10.2307/2873151.
- Nussbaum, M. 1990. Love’s Knowledge: Essays on Philosophy and Literature. New York: Oxford University Press.
- O’Dea, G. 2003. “Framing the Frame: Embedded Narratives, Enabling Texts, and Frankenstein.” Romanticism on the Net 31. Open Access. doi:10.7202/008697ar.
- Oliver, K. 2015. “Witnessing, Recognition, and Response Ethics.” Philosophy and Rhetoric 48 (4): 473–493. doi:10.5325/philrhet.48.4.0473.
- Potkay, A. 2012. Wordsworth’s Ethics. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Reese, D. 2006. “A Troubled Legacy: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and the Inheritance of Human Rights.” Representations 96: 48–72. doi:10.1525/rep.2006.96.1.48.
- Shelley, M. 1814–44. The Journals of Mary Shelley. Eds. Paula Feldman and Diana Scott-Kilvert. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Shelley, M. 1818. Frankenstein. Ed. J. P. Hunter. New York: Norton.
- Sterne, J. 2012. “Sonic Imaginations.” In The Sound Studies Reader. Ed. J. Sterne, New York: Routledge: 1–17.
- Stewart, G. 1996. Dear Reader: The Conscripted Audience in Nineteenth-Century British Fiction. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
- Szendy, P. 2009. Listen: A History of Our Ears. Trans. Charlotte Mandell. New York: Fordham University Press.