Frankenstein Essay

[Mlle Bienvenu]

Frankenstein- The Birth of Science-Fiction

Science-fiction may be scoffed at by purists. It may be brushed aside as a fluffy genre of pulp fiction; fun to read, but offering little substance, with it’s fantastical flights of fancy into scientific speculation. This, however is not true. Science-fiction can and often does have a lot of depth and relevance and provides a sounding board for not just scientific thought, but also for political, sociological, and psychological thought as well.
Hopefully, by the end of this essay, some of the purists may decide to give science-fiction another chance. Much of what makes science-fiction popular is the fact that it not only addresses scientific issues of the time when it was written, but also addresses human issues that every good work of fiction attempts to communicate.
Surprisingly, science-fiction is a rather recent creation. It’s root only go as far back as a little under 200 years ago. Fairly recent when you consider the form of the play stems back to Ancient Greece, the novel, at least as far back as dynastic China, and the form of poetry even extends beyond the written word. Who is the master mind behind this new genre? Or who do we have to blame for the ‘travesty’ of science-fiction? It should come as no surprise that Mary Shelly wrought the basic rules to which science fiction uses as a framework even today. And if Mary Shelly is the creator of science-fiction, than ‘Frankenstein’, is the archetypal tome from which all science-fiction springs.

But before we address Frankenstein, we must first define science-fiction; what is it? And why bother writing it?
A work of Science fiction is composed of layers:

First, there is the layer of new science or technology. This is, of course the thing which makes science-fiction, science-fiction. The inclusion of a new scientific concept helps to create an awareness of current advancements in technology, exploring, possibilities in that particular science and making speculations on the future. This is important to point out because, all too often, the science in science-fiction tends to become the ‘eye candy’, the Bond toys, the window dressing of the story. This is part of the reason people look disdainfully upon science-fiction; people sometimes confuse ‘future fantasy’ with science-fiction. They are different. Science fantasy is any story which takes place in the future, but technology has little or no affect on the story line. Science must take an active role or affect the story in a significant way for it to be science-fiction. This is part of the value of science-fiction.
Sometimes, after a technology has been disseminated through the general public through science-fiction, it has the affect of generating new technologies. Take the cell phone for example; it’s a staple of Modern America. It was invented in part under the influence of the flip open communication devices seen on ‘Star Trek’. It’s a case of art imitating life then life imitating art.

The second layer is the impact of a technology on society as a whole. The previous layer focused on the technology itself. All good science-fiction focuses on the impact it has on the world and also the world on technology. This is a fairly fluid category and is sometimes very closely related to the previous category. Usually this category may directly talk about the influence of a particular, real-life technology or concept (Darwinism in ‘The Time Machine’ by H. G. Wells) or may include a commentary on the current socio-political issues personified by technology (the latter being the case with Frankenstein. More on that later.)

Lastly, there is the human element. This is truly the essence of any piece of good fiction, but it bears repeating, because many times, it is lost to the flashy science and cool equipment. For science fiction to be considered complete. It must tackle issues of the human psyche. This element clearly points to science-fiction’s roots in Romanticism. The Romantics tended to ask a lot of questions that science-fiction has adopted as standard. Why are we here? (addressed in C. S. Lewis’ Out of the Silent Planet’ Trilogy) What make’s a man? (I, Robot by Issac Asimov) What is reality? (Quite a few episodes of The Twilight Zone produced by Rod Serling)

It is all three of these elements put together, that truly defines science-fiction as a genre and it is amazing how clearly these elements are defined in Mary Shelly’s quintessential tale, ‘Frankenstein- Or the Modern Prometheus’.

[Mlle Bienvenu]

Frankenstein and Science-Fiction:

Frankenstein was truly a product of it’s era. It blended the psychological aspects of Romanticism, with the forward looking, technology and scientific savvy aspects of a budding Victorianism, while adding a dash of the current political issues.
Layer One:

"A flash of lightning illuminated the object. . .” (Chapter 7, pg 60)

There are several scientific issues addressed in ‘Frankenstein’. The most prominent in the story is galvanization, which was a current (ha, ha, ) theory on biological electricity, invented by Dr. Erasmus Darwin, (Charles Darwin’s grandfather). The experiment was performed on a dead frog, who leg, when a current was put through it, would thrash about as if it were alive again. It was speculated that it may be the key to the human soul, thus giving rise to the concept of a ‘Divine Spark’ rather than ‘breath’. Galvanization eventually turned out to be wrong. However it paved the way for important biological precepts; it linked electricity with human anatomy which is vital in explaining brain activity today. Mary Shelly’s choice of lightning to bring life to the Monster clearly stems from this particular experiment.







Layer Two

". . . and discovered its shape plainly to me; its gigantic stature, and the deformity of its aspect, more hideous than belongs to humanity, instantly informed me that it was the wretch, the filthy demon to whom [he] had given life.” (Chapter 7, pg 60)


The second layer really is the major subtext of the book.: The roles and responsibility of parenting. This is really a classic example of technology being used to illustrate a situation. This is the story of the irresponsible father, who does everything to make this ‘creation’ and then, horrified by the responsibility, runs away from his duties as father. It is a cautionary tale on the cause and effect of bad parenting. This issue was of the most timely nature at the time of ‘Frankenstein’s writing and stems from the women’s rights movement of the time. Unlike the women’s rights movement in the United States of the Sixties, this movement emphasized the woman’s importance as a matriarch of the home, “the Angel of the House”. It was the pushing of the awareness of this importance, to help promote women’s suffrage in England and to finally get it years before America.
Since Frankenstein’s Monster (He doesn’t even have a name!) is not brought into the world with a mother and a father. The balance of yin and yang is thrown and both Frankenstein and Monster start on a down-spiraling path to a cold and desolate hell of their own creation.
This could have been avoided by meeting the Monster’s own demand for a mate. Although what he asks for is a wife, what I think he truly is asking for is a mother. It is interesting to note that those the Monster kills in the story are a child and a woman, clearly pointing out his abhorrence to his own existence and his wish for womanly companionship. (He also wants to kill his creator, illustrating his wish that he had never been born.

This theme has gained a new relevance with the advent of cloning technology. Galvinization turned out to be false. You cannot raise the dead with electricity. But now, cloning has become the new Galvanization, and has brought with it issues very similar to those addressed in Frankenstein. Who is the mother/father of this one parented child? What affect will this have on the child? Will the lack of genetic uniqueness label the child as an outcast? These issues and more seemed to be torn from the pages of ‘Frankenstein’.

Layer Three

The most Romantic aspect of the story lies in it’s questioning of motivations. The position taken by the narrative is clearly from Victor Frankenstein’s point of view. However, through the actions of the Monster and Frankenstein, it is clear that the Monster is the more sympathetic character. Victor Frankenstien makes one poor decision after another. He decides to make the Monster, he decides not to make the female monster, and he behaves irresponsibly by abandoning the thing he has created to chance. The Monster, however, only wants to live far away from those who find him abhorrent with a companion. This begs the question, what makes a monster, and what makes a man? The true monster in the story is Frankenstein himself. It’s no wonder that the general population thinks that the monster’s name is Frankenstein.

It is rather ironic, in a way, that Frankenstein is quite literally the mother of all science-fiction. It brings aspects of cutting edge technology to the masses, speculates on them and also on current issues, and then brings home the message by illustrating it through concise characterization and plot. Even though, on the surface, science-fiction may seem like fluff, science-fiction is clearly not for sissies. It has both depth and relevance even through time.

And all of this stems from the tale of a motherless monster.