Critical Annotated Webliography by Julie Lam

Question 3: Frankenstein continues to occupy the popular imagination as a monstrous scientist. Analyze some of the ways in which Frankenstein continues to haunt discussions of recent technologies.

Many of nowadays science or futuristic movie is an adaptation of Frankenstein. Frankenstein is the surname of Victor Frankenstein. He is a scientist who becomes obsessed with the creation of life. Frankenstein play a god-like power, he animated his creation and yet immediately horrified by what he has done. The creature is a horrible monstrosity, a caricature of a man. His hideous looks draw screams everywhere, and even his good acts brought him punishment. He owns a human like outlook but being treated as a non-human object. Frankenstein shuns the creature but soon he felt offensive and seek his creature around to destroy it. Most of the movie both depicted Frankenstein’s monster as a bulky moron but also a humanity with emotion and feeling. The monster originally named as Adam in Mary Shelley’s book, but often shown nameless in the movie.

Story become an artificial creature turns upon to its creator. Such a conflict happened in between human and created science object led to our nowadays’ concern: As the prosperous and rapidly growth science technology, is there a possibility when one day human lose control to it entirely? Since recent “Frankenstein” technologies continues obsess our daily life, let’s see how people look into this.

Frankenstein films: Mad Scientists and Monsters
According to an in-depth analysis of Frankenstein science films, Andreas Rohrmoser listed several futuristic films which mirror from Frankenstein. Such as, one of the best movie about artificial human – Blade Runner (USA, 1982), and also another Frankensteinian product – Robocop (1987). “Artificial human beings and their creators have become a standard ingredient of modern science fiction/horror films and literature”. From past to now, the artificial presented in science film tends of lacking the monstrous and scary features of the Frankenstein’s monster and appear to be more mechanized form as robots, androids and cyborgs. As the phenomenon, the idea and image of Frankenstein does affect the afterward creations of futuristic movie. Which science technology is also being accepted and transform in nowadays.

Literary Essay on Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley
In this source, Jean-Philippe Pellet has overcome some controversial argument between human and scientific knowledge, such as “can science find solutions to all human problems?”, and also she pointed out what makes Frankenstein still being popular today and how it related to our life. It is because, according to Jean’s reading to the story of Frankenstein, in order to achieve his goal, he makes an extensive use of knowledge and science that ultimately led him to desolation, loneliness and result in a complete failure. Jean proven the reason of the popularity of Frankenstein is that “there is something universal in Victor’s attempt to reach this God-like level”. This is human’s aggression towards science and technology. Scientists believed they construct science and technology, and the also have the entire power to control or terminate it. They thought themselves own the ability before God. “Man’s ambition, man’s desire for glory pushes him beyond the ‘human borders”. There, should be no “omnipotent science” in the world.

Technology in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and William Gibson's Neuromancer
Here, Orlin Damyanov cited two science films: Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and William Gibson's Neuromancer to discuss the dangerous effects on nature and human life perceived by science and technology. As Orlin’s mentioned about Mary Shelley's Frankenstein to technology and some of the other crucial issues, also the exploration of the dangerous implications of human acts of creation. Technology and human life are being merged together without any consideration on moral stage. However, both authors have been able to clearly predict the consequences of immoral technological utilization. The nature of humanity was unscrupulously to be reconstructing as a mechanical object. Orlin once again described today’s scientist like Frankenstein, shun to think about the consequences of hybridize technology. This make me thing about the cloning technology in this century.

'Frankenstein Science' Row Over Cloned Embryos Plan
"PRO-LIFE campaigners have described a project to clone Britain's first human embryos by North-East scientists as 'Frankenstein science'". So far, technology of cloning is being seen as unethical action. It goes against to the world’s and humanity nature. Some religious scholars said this may blaspheme their god and demolish the circle of life. I am so agree to this article that the manipulation of human life should never be tolerated, no Frankenstein science is needed in this world. Somehow, I appreciated the invention of cloning technology since it is just a basic science technique, and it does help a huge convenience for some patients such as body part implant. I have never feeling proud when the cloning sheep Dolly is being “created”, and so as if one day a cloning human named no matter what is “birth”.

The Frankenstein Syndrome
“The message of Frankenstein that attracted people in 1818 and still energizes us today is: How much is too much in science?” Question upraised by Bob Calverley on USC Health Magazine. There are billions possibilities but there are some that we should never try to get the answer or experiment. Control, is what we need. Bob is talking about currently generic engineering which is seems to be unethical as cloning. These up-to-date technologies are gradually corroding moral standards. Bob indicated that like Anderson stated, educate and inform the public is the only way to protect human from technology.

The Curse of Frankenstein --The Campaign in Defense of Industry and Technology
If you think those generic engineering, or cloning technology is too complicated, too far away from our daily life, so what about the myth of “Frankenfood”? Have you ever think about science of Frankenstein is invading our daily life including what going to eat into our stomach? Compare to many other science technology, genetic food is not something very gorgeous and tremendous. However, how many people know about the harmfulness brought to human? As Robert W. Tracinski dressed in his writing, genetic modify on food is just an easy and beneficial method. This already helps lot of peasants on their agricultural and harvest. This also has been proven with a lot of successful result. For instance, genetic seeds may survive in some place that it should be able to grow, or they may inbuilt a strong defense of harmful insects. Yet, may be some years later, what we eat originally are something that is not possible to be eaten. Horrible?

From all the above, Frankenstein myth, and its theme of the dangers of science consists of unknown number of risks. Science and technology have no doubly improved human life in countless ways. From the steam engine to the pasteurization of milk, from electrical power to antibiotics. On the other hand, human life is indeed on top of the manipulation of science and technologies. Frankenstein has been told and retold, present and represent in hundreds of times, and has probably been adapted in one way or another thousands more. We do not mind if there are more new versions of Frankenstein, but what about next Frankensteinian, “Franken-man”?

References:
1. Andreas Rohrmoser (1999). “Mad Scientists and Monstrous Creations: The Continuation of the Frankenstein Myth in Modern Science Fiction and Horror Films”http://members.inode.at/359743/frankenstein/frankenstein-madprofs.htm (accessed 29 March 2008)
2. Jean-Philippe Pellet (2001). “Literary Essay on Frankenstein, by Mary Shelley” http://www.gymnase-morges.ch/docs/Eleve/frankenstein.html (accessed 30 March 2008)
3. Orlin Damyanov (1996). “Technology in Mary Shelley's Frankenstein and William Gibson's Neuromancer” http://www.geocities.com/Paris/5972/gibson.html (accessed 30 March 2008)
4. Northern Echo (2003). “'Frankenstein Science' Row Over Cloned Embryos Plan” http://health.mappibiz.com/mpelembe/Frankenstein_Science.html (accessed 30 March 2008)
5. Bob Calverley (2001). “THE FRANKENSTEIN SYNDROME” http://www.usc.edu/hsc/info/pr/hmm/01fall/frankenstein.html (accessed 30 March 2008)
6. Robert W. Tracinski. “The Curse of Franken” http://www.moraldefense.com/protech/Archives/Curse_of_Frankenstein.htm (accessed 30 March 2008)