Can we create a human from scratch?

Do you know who Frankenstein is? Probably yes, but I would like to remind you. Victor Frankenstein is the protagonist of the novel, Mary Shelley's "Frankenstein or the Modern Prometheus." In the novel, Victor Frankenstein is a young student from Geneva. When you are citing the document, use the following link http://essuir.sumdu.edu.ua/handle/123456789/2868

\u3cem\u3eFrankenstein\u3c/em\u3e, Feminism, and Literary Theory

Cave ab homine unius libri, as the Latin epigram warns us: beware the author of one book. Frankenstein has so overshadowed Mary Shelley\u27s other books in the popular imagination that many readers believe - erroneously - that she is a one-book author. While this is decidedly not the case, Frankenstein has figured more importantly in the development of feminist literary theory than perhaps any other novel, with the possible exception of Charlotte Bronte\u27s Jane Eyre. This essay will discuss the major feminist literary interpretations of the novel, beginning with Ellen Moers\u27s landmark reading in Literary Women and then move to the more recent approaches taken by critics engaged in post-colonial theory, cultural studies, queer theory, and disability studies. In the process we will explore the provocative claim made by Fred Botting, who noted, Frankenstein is a product of criticism, not a work of literature

Frankenstein Lives!

In lieu of an abstract, here is the article\u27s first paragraph: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein has remained in print ever since it was published two hundred years ago this year, and has been the basis for innumerable adaptations. While most novels from so long ago have been forgotten, Shelley’s lives on. Why has it remained so popular? Perhaps, at least in part, it’s due to the philosophical themes it addresses: tampering with nature, the dereliction of duties, and the importance of taking responsibility for one’s actions. The tale of a being born without a mother, written by a young woman whose own mother died a few days after giving birth to her, it is perhaps most of all an examination of the need for love in order to survive in a harsh and unforgiving world. It is also a cautionary tale of a man who achieves what he sought to do, only to have his creation turn on him and all he loves

Frankenstein Lives!

In lieu of an abstract, here is the article\u27s first paragraph: Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein has remained in print ever since it was published two hundred years ago this year, and has been the basis for innumerable adaptations. While most novels from so long ago have been forgotten, Shelley’s lives on. Why has it remained so popular? Perhaps, at least in part, it’s due to the philosophical themes it addresses: tampering with nature, the dereliction of duties, and the importance of taking responsibility for one’s actions. The tale of a being born without a mother, written by a young woman whose own mother died a few days after giving birth to her, it is perhaps most of all an examination of the need for love in order to survive in a harsh and unforgiving world. It is also a cautionary tale of a man who achieves what he sought to do, only to have his creation turn on him and all he loves

Victor Frankenstein, um prometeu moderno? Sob o olhar do imaginário educacional

A nossa abordagem de Frankenstein centrou-se na revisitação do personagem Victor Frankenstein mais do que na sua criação pois só podemos compreender e explicar quem o monstro se tornou através do seu criador. O mito de Frankenstein é passível de múltiplas leituras. Dentro delas privilegiamos a educacional. Neste contexto desenvolvemos a nossa argumentação com base em três perguntas: 1. Quem era esse Victor Frankenstein segundo Mary Shelley?; 2. Quem pensamos nós ser Victor Frankenstein?; 3. Será que Victor Frankenstein é, verdadeiramente, um novo Prometeu, ou esse Prometeu, de facto, nunca se chegou a cumprir? Concluímos com um enfoque educacional respondendo negativamente à terceira pergunta.Our study of Frankenstein is centered in the person of Victor Frankenstein and not in his creature for we can only understand and explain his monster’s nature and behavior through his creator. This myth affords multiple readings and ours is an educational one. We ask three questions: 1. Who was this Victor Frankenstein according to Mary Shelley? 2. Who do we think he is? 3. Is Victor Frankenstein really a new Prometheus or an unfulfilled one? Always focused on an educational perspective we answer negatively the third question

El Frankenstein de Mary Shelley (1797-1851)

1.- Introducción. Frankenstein En El Imaginario Colectivo; 2.- La Génesis Defrankenstein. Lo Antiguo Y Lo Nuevo En La Gestación De La Obra; 3.- ¿Qué Tienefrankenstein Que Aportar A La Historia De La Humanidad?; 4.- Las Ediciones Defrankenstein.1.- Introduction. Frankenstein And Popular Belief; 2.- Frankenstein?S Genesis.Ancient And New In The Making Of The Tale; 3.- Frankenstein?S Contribution Tothe History Of Mankind; 4.- Frankenstein S Author Editions

Science and the Scientist in Frankenstein: From Literature to Film Adaptation

In the following study, I analyze the figure of the scientist and the scientific process in Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein as well as in five different cinematographic adaptations: Frankenstein(1931), by James Whale; The Curse of Frankenstein (1957), by Terence Fisher; The Young Frankenstein (1974), by Mel Brooks; Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1994), by Kenneth Branagh; and Victor Frankenstein (2015), by Paul McGuigan. I also carry out a review of the scientific background in the nineteenth century and of Mary Shelley’s education and the scientific influences she may have had while writing the novel. Then each representation of the scientist is classified according to Haynes’ classification in From Faustus to Strangelove. Afterwards, I analyze the way in which the scientific process is carried out in each film adaptation. Finally, I conclude outlining the homogeneous depictions of Victor Frankenstein and the free, detailed representations of the scientific process made by the different film adaptations.En el siguiente estudio, analizo la figura del científico y del proceso científico llevado a cabo en la novela de Mary Shelley, Frankenstein, así como en cinco de sus adaptaciones cinematográficas: Frankenstein (1931), de James Whale; La maldición de Frankenstein (1957), de Terence Fisher; El Jovencito Frankenstein (1974), de Mel Brooks; Frankenstein de Mary Shelley (1994), de Kenneth Branagh; y Victor Frankenstein (2015), de Paul McGuigan. Mi análisis comienza con una breve presentación de los avances científicos del siglo XIX relacionados con la novela, así como de la educación y las posibles influencias científicas que Mary Shelley pudo tener cuando la escribió. Catalogo cada representación de la figura del científico siguiendo la clasificación que Haynes realiza en From Faustus to Strangelove. A continuación, analizo la manera en la que el proceso científico se ha llevado a cabo en cada adaptación cinematográfica. Finalmente, concluyo mi estudio destacando cuestiones como la homogeneidad en las representaciones de Víctor Frankenstein y el libre y detallado desarrollo del proceso científico que se realiza en las diferentes adaptaciones cinematográficas.Departamento de Filología InglesaGrado en Estudios Inglese

Frankenstein as a figure of globalization in Canada’s postcolonial popular culture

This essay analyzes the cultural functions of Frankenstein as a figure of globalization in postcolonial popular culture. Focusing on the case of Canadian film production, I begin by contextualizing Canadian film as a postcolonial site of globalized popular culture, characterized by ‘technological nationalism’. In this context, I consider three Canadian films that adapt Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein to represent globalization. David Cronenberg’s Videodrome (1983) borrows from Frankenstein and Marshall McLuhan to critique new media in the ‘global village’; Robert Lepage’s Possible Worlds (2000) quotes from the Universal Frankenstein film; and Mark Achbar and Jennifer Abbot’s The Corporation (2003) uses Frankenstein as a recurring analogy for the modern corporation. This essay signals a starting point for a more interculturally and transnationally comparative investigation of how Frankenstein adaptations provide a powerful repertoire of representational devices for a postcolonial theory of globalization.SSHR

Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein

In lieu of an abstract, here is the article\u27s first paragraph: Years after writing Frankenstein, Mary Shelley published her Rambles in Germany and Italy in 1840, 1842, and 1843. Early on in it she states her therapeutic intent: “Travelling will cure all: my busy, brooding thoughts will be scattered abroad; and, to use a figure of speech, my mind will, amidst novel and various scenes, renew the outworn and tattered garments in which it has long been clothed, and array itself in a vesture all gay in fresh and glossy hues, when we are beyond the Alps.” (Part I, Letter I, p.2) Even if the classic 1948 comedy Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein deviates from Mary Shelley’s novel too much, it is spot-on regarding her larger project of how best to navigate in the pilgrimage of life. By pilgrimage here I mean not a predetermined track, but rather just the opposite, since what is most abhorrent is to let someone else determine your proper path, instead of having a keyed-up watchfulness for the full range of possible futures