Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Ecological Responsibility
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 20156178 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Bert Olivier (0000-0002-3138-1948, University of the Free State, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2018 |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 1-25 |
| Publication date | 2018-10-02 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Journal of Literary Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0256-4718 • E-ISSN: 1753-5387 |
| Publisher | Unisa Press (PUBLISHER • ZA) |
| DOI | 10.1080/02564718.2018.1538075 |
| OpenAlex | W2905367735 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
| References cited | 7 |
This article addresses the following question: what light might Mary Shelley's celebrated 1818 novel, Frankenstein, cast on the pressing ecological crisis faced by humanity in the present era? After providing a brief outline of the narrative plot, the focus shifts to those aspects of the novel that are germane to the ecological issue, namely the conception of science and technology that underpins Victor Frankenstein's narrative (and to a lesser extent Captain Walton's) as well as the creature's narrative, in which he entreats Frankenstein to create a female companion to assuage the misery he has suffered at the hands of humans, and simultaneously upbraids him for not accepting responsibility towards him, “his” creature (who does not even have a name). The contrast between Frankenstein's adherence to instrumental rationality, on the one hand, and his inability to empathise with the creature and adopt a caring attitude towards it (Gilligan), on the other, is explored. A parallel is then drawn between Frankenstein's notion of scientific and technical rationality (which draws on the prevailing one at the time, namely that of the historical Enlightenment) and the one which prevails today, which, it is argued, is still essentially the same as when Mary Shelley wrote the novel. Contemporary human beings, therefore, could be understood as representatives of Frankenstein insofar as they have shown a comparable inability and unwillingness to accept responsibility for the deleterious effects of their science-based, technical creations on natural eco-logies (of which they are an integral part). Attention is given to evidence of the effects of techno-scientific practices on these ecosystems, in particular the case of bio-technological industries. The article concludes with a consideration of what is known as “transhumanism”, where the direction and probable consequences of the “Frankensteinian” modern scientific and technological programme can be discerned, confirming the prescience of Mary Shelley's novel
Aesthetics · Art · Enlightenment · Environmental ethics · Epistemology · Humanity · Literature · Narrative · Rationality · Sociology · Theology · Contemporary Literature and Criticism · Philosophy · Science Education and Perceptions · Utopian, Dystopian, and Speculative Fiction
| Unique citing works | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,5 |
| Citation span | 2024 - 2024 (1) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 1 |