“We rest; a dream has power to poison sleep.
We rise one hand wand’ring thought pollutes the day.
We feel, conceive, or reason; laugh or weep,
Embrace fond woe, or cast our cares away;
It is the same; for, be it joy or sorrow,
The path of its departure still is free.
Man’s yesterday may ne’er be like this morrow;
Nought may endure but mutability!”
– Percy Shelley’s “Mutability” quoted in Frankenstein
Stories are highly mutable, they shift and change with each retelling as they are forwarded; every new idea is essentially a retelling of an old concept. The same is true of new media. Hypertexts, videos, audio essays are all extensions of the physical print and page novel which is an extension of the oral tradition of story-telling. Writers working in new media are essentially modern-day Frankensteins, stitching together new life from old raw materials. The novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley served as a warning against mutability and change, and as new media grows and the story of Frankenstein begins to shift into video and hyperlink forms, how does this change the story of the ill-fated creator and his woeful creature? Permanence not only becomes an impossibility within the confines of Frankenstein’s experience but also in the way the novel has been perceived and retold. The instability in this text, which is represented by Frankenstein’s various misfortunes and life changes, extends to its creation and evolution. Mary Shelley’s original Frankenstein existed as a short horror story, evolving and changing into a rumination on the nature of humanity, mutability, and hubris. It has now taken on new life in electronic media. The motif of mutability in the novel Frankenstein has taken on even greater significance in this evolving realm of new media writing, creating a cautionary tale for the new media writer. He must be mindful of what he sends out into the world.
Within Shelley’s novel, the poem “Mutability” serves to highlight an essential theme throughout the novel – that every aspect of one’s life is subject to change. Victor’s moods are a highly changeable state throughout the novel, representing the fragility that his actions have caused. At the time his monster is created after great toil and struggle, he suddenly grows despondent, and the young scientist notes, “the different accidents of life are not so changeable as the feelings of human nature” (Shelley, Frankenstein 60). Realizing that even in overcoming the most seemingly permanent aspect of life – death – Victor perceives that human moods are still far more fickle. Additionally, Frankenstein refers to the “accidents” of life, although his creation of the monster seems intensely deliberate. In this way, Frankenstein distances himself from the choice he has made to create the monster, blaming instead his fickle feelings. However, from Frankenstein’s eventual fate, the author implies that choice plays a large role in the mutability of life and that one cannot distance himself from the choices he makes in changing the world around him. As a result of his choices, Frankenstein descends into what appears almost to be a sort of madness, which Elizabeth notes as “an expression of despair, and sometimes revenge” (Shelley, Frankenstein 88), followed by the inner peace he feels during his excursion into the wilderness is what prompts the inclusion of this poem as a commentary on the transience of objects and states. Frankenstein claims that his heart “before sorrowful, now swelled with something like joy” (Shelley, Frankenstein 92). From the juxtaposition of these two mental states, Frankenstein emotions seem deeply instable and subject to change, highlighting Shelley’s undercurrent of mutability, which extends to the tenuous connection between life and death. The lives taken from Frankenstein, young William and Justine, also become reminders of a changing world wherein today may bear no resemblance to tomorrow, and the choices on makes impacts those around him. William, the youngest brother of Frankenstein’s family, dies, presumably at the hands of the creature which Frankenstein creates, and Justine is hanged on suspicion of his murder. Both cases are of very young lives, which are full of opportunity, taken before their potential can be fulfilled. Upon receiving the news of William’s death Frankenstein laments: “One sudden and desolating change had taken place; but a thousand little circumstances might have by degrees worked other alterations, which although they were done more tranquilly, might not be the less decisive” (Shelley, Frankenstein 74). While acknowledging the shock of his brother’s death, the scientist also ruminates on the nature of small changes in everyday life, imperceptible but none the less devastating when amassed into one. In pointing out the inevitability of small changes within his life, Frankenstein acknowledges that some change is inevitable. However, in juxtaposing these small changes with the larger shock of William’s death, he suggests that the result of his hubris is far more detrimental than any other everyday mutability. In this idea one can perceive a type of warning for pushing change upon the world. Frankenstein pays for tampering with the seemly permanent force of death with the lives of the young who, for them, life still seems almost permanent because they yet have so much life to live. Not only do Frankenstein’s actions cause the creator inner turmoil but he also causes great pain and suffering to those around him, reinforcing the concept of caution when dealing with matters of change, which become even more pronounced when dealing with matters of science and technology.
The internal and external mutability of Frankenstein’s world mirror that of scientific advancements of his time and of the changeability the text itself has witnessed in the face of technological progress. Both Frankenstein and his foil, Robert Walton, experiment in new advancements in the fields of natural science and exploration respectively, and both risk the lives of others in their thirst for novelty and knowledge. However, Walton is ultimately spared from a fate similar to Frankenstein’s loss. At the outset of Walton’s journey into the Arctic he asks, “Why not still proceed over the untamed yet obedient element? What can stop the determined heart and resolved will of man” (Shelley, Frankenstein 34)? Immediately following this daring exclamation, Walton comes upon Frankenstein, a haunted man seeking revenge who has already experienced the horrors of his own resolved will, lacking in concern for caution much like Walton’s own adventurous spirit. The contrasting visions Shelley presents of these two men, seeming so much alike and yet so different, presents a warning. For Walton the danger is yet ahead, while for Frankenstein, his downfall has already come to pass. Frankenstein, at times, urges Walton forward but deters him from making a mistake similar to his own, seeking experimentation at the cost of caution. Walton eventually turns back, ignoring his friend’s urgings, making an argument for permanence in regards to the boundaries that man is not meant to cross, sparing his men and himself from further horrors. A parallel can be drawn between the scientific advances in the novel and the technological ones that impact the novel. The way in which text is produced is changing rapidly and opens up new opportunities for writers to experiment with hypertext, video, and audio writing projects. Not only is mutability in technology a theme within Frankenstein but it is also present in the changing world of the novel.
The story of Frankenstein has mutated from its original medium. It is no longer only a book, but also takes the shape of movies and hypertext. Since the story’s original conception, it has not yet ceased evolving to meet the needs and demands of a new generation. The current common conceptions of the Frankenstein narrative, reinforced by movies and popular culture of the electronic age, involve a grotesque green creature, incapable of thought and seemingly stitched together with the very worst of materials. In the Frankenstein text, however, the monster is crafted from features seen as “beautiful” (Shelley, Frankenstein 60), and although Frankenstein later remarks on the hideous quality these features take, the eloquent swift creature that results from his work does not resemble the slow-moving zombie-like vision usually associated with Frankenstein’s monster. In this way, Shelley’s own “hideous progeny” (Shelley, Frankenstein 25) has taken on an evolving life of its own as it changes to meet the desires of different media of story-telling. It can be said that the life of a novel itself is far from stagnant and unchanging. New media plays a large role in Frankenstein’s mutability. Writers have forwarded the story in new ways that fundamentally change the story. The medium matters in understanding the ever evolving conception of Mary Shelley’s most famous narrative.
The story of Frankenstein has morphed beyond its original print and paper medium, becoming a more compelling case for if technology and advancement opens a Pandora’s Box of problems. Since the publication of Shelley’s novel in 1811, the story has been adapted to numerous other media, including hypertextual websites and a myriad of movies and television versions. In mutating the medium of Frankenstein, one also changes its essential message, as the dangers of technological advancement become a more pronounced theme. In examining the electronic edition of Frankenstein, it becomes clear that the original and the hypertextual versions have different purposes in mind. The electronic version of the story allows the reader to select words or phrases of the text and an explanation or analysis pops up on a separate window of the screen, somewhat obscuring the text (Shelley, Curran, Electronic Frankenstein). It becomes clear that this website is not meant to be a leisurely escape into the story but rather a highly detailed analysis of the text. Marshall McLuhan – author of the book The Medium is the Massage, which itself combines old and new media – argues for awareness of new media in shaping its uses. He asserts that “all media work us over completely” and that mindfulness of how visual and textual pieces work together is important in the technological age (McLuhan 26). The choice of the writer, or in this case the rewriter, is a greater control over how his thoughts and ideas further envelop and “work over” the reader. The medium of the web-based Frankenstein makes it less effective as a story but more effective as an analysis. Different media are meant to influence the reader in different ways. Likewise, video adaptations of Frankenstein tend to distort the story in order to produce a more sensational effect than the novel. In one miniseries adaption, the creation scene is very much extended and furthered in order to put more emphasis on the scientific aspect of his creation (Shelley, Kruger, Frankenstein). Shelley writes in Walton’s voice that “my candle was nearly burnt out, when, by the glimmer of the half-extinguished light, I saw the dull yellow eye of the creature open” (Shelley, Frankenstein 60). The author chose to relay to the audience only the product of Frankenstein’s work as opposed to the process. For many film directors working with the story of Frankenstein the process is given greater emphasis with violent flashes of lightning, violent outbursts, and an exclamation of “It’s alive!” Similarly, in the miniseries, the camera sweeps across Frankenstein’s laboratory, showing the instruments and methods of his labors. When working with new media in a video format, the story of Frankenstein is somewhat altered by its medium. The medium is technological, and, thus, more emphasis is put into the idea of technology as an inherent evil. The theme is thus forwarded in order to create a more sensational scene. The purpose of old and new media is not the same, and although the story of Frankenstein was adapted from a novel, it has been stitched together into a new creature that has a different purpose its old collective pieces. This concept is important in determining whether or not the creator has control and understanding over his creation.
Much like Frankenstein’s monster, some new media texts are released into the world without a full understanding of their impact, and mutability once again becomes dangerous to its creator. Mere experiments like these texts are not as successful as ones that have been given deliberate thought and care. A parallel can be drawn to Frankenstein’s own experiment in “authorship.” He resolves, “contrary to [his] first invention, to make the being of a gigantic stature; that is to say, about eight feet in height and proportionately large” (Shelley, Frankenstein 58). One could say that Frankenstein was unaware in this instance of how his medium, a monstrously large, potentially violent creature, would affect his purpose, to bring loved ones back from the dead. Similar to Frankenstein, writers often experiment in this genre in a way that is not effective for their purpose. For example, in an article entitled “Is Google Making Us Stupid by Nicolas Carr, the author argues against new media, partially because it is misused by authors. Of the internet, Carr notes that “it injects the medium’s content with hyperlinks, blinking ads, and other digital gewgaws, and it surrounds the content with the content of all the other media it has absorbed…the result is to scatter our attention and diffuse our concentration” (Carr). The internet has become the ultimate mutable medium, but some writers have yet to learn how to use this tool. Certainly, some of these experiments in hypertext deserve to have stayed on the laboratory floor, so once again one my return to Shelly’s warning. Mutability in Frankenstein’s life ultimately results in despair for himself and his family because he does not exercise caution. These writers must learn from his mistakes and be more aware of this new medium. As illustrated by the mutations through which the Frankenstein text has evolved, electronic media is meant to perform different tasks than print media. In order for writers to adapt to mutability in the literary world, they must learn from the mistakes of Frankenstein.
Mutability plays a large part within the novel of Frankenstein and in the changing world of new media that has forwarded the story into new areas and has created a whole new monster. New media authors have, in some way, assumed the role of the ill-fated scientist. Frankenstein becomes a cautionary tale for new media. With the wide range of choice available to writers, they need to be cautious of their medium and of what they are sending out into the world. Frankenstein may be one of the most poignant examples of the forwarding of the old into the new, but it is not the only one. For example, the story of “Little Red Riding Hood” has been adapted into a hipper version with an interactive hypertext. The high-tech medium transforms the sweet young girl into a cooler, more modern version, a satire on the genre (Leishman). This example is obviously merely a taste of all that new media is forwarding for a modern, tech-savvy generation, but it is clear that it follows the trajectory of many of its fellow online texts. Frankenstein, Red Riding Hood, and other fictional characters are given new life from the page of a book to the screen of a computer. The lives of humans and books are immutable in their mutability.
Works Cited
Carr, Nicolas. “Is Google Making Us Stupid?” The Atlantic. N.p., 1 July 2008. Web. 24 Apr.
2013.
Leishman, Donna. “RedRidinghood.” Elierature. N.p., 2001. Web. 3 May 2013.
MacLuhan, Marshall. The Medium Is the Message. Corte Madera: Gingko Pr., 2005. Print.
Shelley, Mary, and Mark Kruger. “Frankenstein.” Frankenstein. Prod. Robert Haimi Jr. Dir. Kevin Conner. Hallmark. 2004. Television.
Shelley, Mary and Stuart Curran. “Frankenstein – Electronic Editions – Romantic Circles.
Romantic Circles. University of Maryland, n.d. Web. 1 May 2013.
Shelley, Mary. Frankenstein. Boston: Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2000. Print.
I pledge my honor that I have completed this work in accordance with the Honor Code.
Alex Smythe
Alex Smythe's Blog 