Chemistry Reference
In-Depth Information
Shelley narrated the life of her tragic hero in parallel with a quasi-
historical account of science. 44 The parallelism allowed her to transfer
the biographical determinism of Frankenstein's life (“Destiny was too
potent, and her immutable laws had decreed my utter and terrible
destruction” [p. 28]) to the historical determinism of scientific develop-
ment. In the final step, however, she encountered serious difficulties
when chemistry needed to turn into the artificial creation of human
beings (chap. 4). In fact, the step is obscured by letting Victor say that
these dangerous secrets must not be disclosed. All we learn is that Victor
makes “some discoveries in the improvement of some chemical instru-
ments” (p. 37) and turns towards “those branches of natural philosophy
which relate to physiology” in order to “examine the causes of life” (p.
37), which might reflect the actual interest of contemporary chemists and
physicians in galvanism and mesmerism. In order to continue her deter-
ministic account, Shelley presented the crucial discovery as the natural
offspring of the state of the art, since it is “so simple, that […] I was
surprised that among so many men of genius who had directed their
inquiries towards the same science, that I alone should be reserved to dis-
cover so astonishing a secret” (p. 38). On the other hand, she employed
all the well-known details from the medieval 'mad alchemist' when she
described Frankenstein's obsession and thoughtlessness in pursuing his
'great work'.
Unlike the authors of most of the later 'mad scientist' and earlier
'mad alchemist' stories, Shelley let her hero remorsefully recant his
'fiendish ambition' in the face of the disaster he caused. This enabled her
to put a Stoic message into the mouth of dying Frankenstein (chap. 24, p.
196): “Seek happiness in tranquility and avoid ambition, even if it be
only the apparently innocent one of distinguishing yourself in science
and discoveries.” The message once more emphasises the determinism,
now on the psychological level. Once you allow yourself to have an am-
44 Since the first appearance of the novel, there has been much debate as to whether
Shelley's Frankenstein is a representative of old alchemy and occult science or of
modern science; see Botting 1991, chap. 10, which also provides an interesting
reflection on the relationship between technology and the humanities. Samuel H.
Vasbinder (1984) rightly points out that Frankenstein is a representative of modern
science, but does not appreciate the complete account of Shelley's history of science
and wrongly identifies Frankenstein's science with “Newtonianism”.
Search WWH ::




Custom Search