Science
revolves around the idea of the unknown: The concept of exploring frontiers
that have never before been encountered by other humans. Particularly in its
fictionalized versions, the field presents the various endeavours of man in
taking nature and manipulating it to create something new, ultimately playing
God in the process. The morality of the act and the limits of humans are thus put
into question.
Marie Shelley’s Frankenstein and its subsequent adaptations take this a step
further by presenting the man-facilitated creation of another human being and
the aftermath. Through the character of Doctor Frankenstein, we look at the
lengths to which man will go for the purpose of satisfying their ego and
discovering, regardless of whether or not others are harmed. As the inventor
descends into insanity, we see how limits are completely disregarded and
forgotten as he pursues his goal of venturing into the unknown. Furthermore,
the story questions what comprises humanity, what makes up a human being.
Because of this, the more emotional aspects of science are taken into account.
In adapting the source material,
many new versions of the story saw the portrayal of the creation as a dumb
creature, a counterpart to the book’s seemingly intelligent monster. Analyzing
this decision, I believe that a number of interpretations can be taken into
account. One can say that the monster was portrayed this way in order to
recognize the fallibility of man and his abilities, and how science and
technology can also have their faults. It can also be seen as a way of
portraying how man’s desire for superiority is satisfied in the most gruesome
of ways. In the end, Frankenstein pushes
the reader to take a closer look at science, and to delve for humanity in the
chaos that it can create.
Rillo 2013-14388
No comments:
Post a Comment