Revision 1: Frankenstein and The Movies

      Mary Shelley's Frankenstein introduces us to Victor Frankenstein, a spoiled, rich, passive, megalomaniac with a god-complex and with no heed of consequence. He is exactly as his creator intended him to be. It is because he is this egotistical maniac that the story line of the book is held together and Victor becomes a prototype and example of a mad genius for future authors. Why then is his video adaptation never true to what the author intended? Kenneth Branagh's 1994 film "Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" is arguably the closest to being true to the book, but it still does not represent Victor as Mary Shelley intended. Perhaps the most glaring distortion of Victor comes from his interactions with the expanded role of his Chemistry Professor, Waldman. Through these interactions, the great complexity of Victor, and thus the story itself, is greatly thinned probably to make it more watchable for a 1994 audience. Although this may have helped Branagh sell tickets, this film should hardly be called "MARY SHELLEY'S Frankenstein" but “Kenneth Branagh's Frankenstein.” If this was the Frankenstein Mary Shelley had intended, he would not be such a literary cornerstone.

      When we are first introduced to him, Waldman's appearance differs greatly from what is described in the novel. Shelley presents to us a distinguished man in his 50s with black hair touched by gray, with excellent posture, a look of benevolence and "his voice the sweetest I have ever heard" (41). In the movie, we are presented with a somewhat wild looking man with long gray-white hair and a somewhat gruff voice. This change of appearance was likely done to give us a Waldman who is already a bit off, because of the topic of his research, and slightly on the fringe of society, but also because Branagh wants to give us the vision of another lone mad scientist with whom this Victor can relate. It is also likely that Branagh thought his audience would write off the anti-hero that is Shelley's Frankenstein, and decided to thin him down into a more likable and more sympathetic character. Although this probably did help a movie being released to an audience who may have found the superficial Victor appalling, I find this difference to be significant because of Victor's nature. It is made very clear that Victor does not take to Professor Krempe because of his appearance and voice. I doubt that the Victor of the novel would have taken such a keen interest in the teachings of the professor portrayed in the film after his write off of the "little squat man (Krempe), with a gruff voice and repulsive countenance" (40). This more accepting version of Victor may not seem like such a big deal, but it changes Victor's character completely. Mary Shelley's Victor is rich, spoiled, privileged, sheltered and very judgmental. Growing up, he is, in his own words, his parents' "plaything and their idol... the innocent and helpless creature bestowed on them by Heaven..." and "so guided by a silken cord that all seemed but one train of enjoyment..."(24). This spoiled and privileged upbringing gives us a Victor who is unable to deal with consequences of actions and passive to the point of inaction even in dire circumstances. In other words, the fact that he is a spoiled, judgmental, megalomaniac brat is a major driving force of the entire story. To remove some of that through his acceptance of this wild and uncouth Professor Waldman is to remove some of the fabric of the novel. It takes someone who sees himself as an endowment of Heaven to us lowly creatures here on Earth to contemplate creating a race of super-beings who would look to him as a God.

      The ambitions and professions of several of the main characters change in this film. In the novel, Victor is sent to school in Ingolstadt for nothing more explicit than to "be made acquainted with other customs than those of [his] native country" (35). In the film, however, Victor is going to Ingolstadt to become a doctor just like his father. Consequently, Waldman is no longer just a professor of Chemistry, but a medical doctor involved in his own research and even in the preservation of the health of the town. This takes some of the mystery and intrigue away from Victor's character. Instead of learning to apply his education on his own, we see him, instead, learning how to dissect cadavers under the skilled tutelage of Professor Waldman. Instead of a vision of Victor alone in his apartment contriving of the means to create life through the use of dead tissue and some arcane "spark" of life, we have a student trying to complete the last step in a research process his teacher just didn't have the hardihood of nature to complete. Waldman is almost a Frankenstein-lite in his portrayal. In the film, Victor is introduced to the idea of electric current in the reanimation process by the professor and even shown that it works through the reanimated arm of some primate creature. The professor is also shown to aid Victor in the formation of his theories. This was presumptively done, again, to give us a more relatable and thus human Victor. Movie fans like relatable characters, and even like larger than life characters, but they usually don't like arrogant, privileged, and almost villainous larger than life characters. However, this thinning of Victor's great intelligence and creativity also served to thin Victor's character as a whole. It has to be Victor creating the monster in seclusion using his own vast intelligence. It has to be Victor Frankenstein, not only because his megalomania drives the story, but because of the impact that his character, as written, had on the very archetype of the mad scientist. "Dr. Jekyll, Dr. Moreau, Dr. Cyclops, Dr. Caligari, Dr. Strangelove, Dr. Rukh, Dr. Bluthgeld" and a host of mad scientists owe their fictional lives to Victor creating that monster on his own (Haynes, 245). It is much harder to believe that these fictional giants would have turned out quite the way they did if instead of a lone mastermind alone in his lab toying with nature, we had a student, fulfilling the culmination of his mentor's work. 

 

      The motivation for the creation or restoration of life is described to us in the novel as being a mix of wanting to feel what it is to be a creator and the renewal of life where it has departed. "No father could claim the gratitude of his child so completely as I should deserve theirs. Pursuing these reflections, I thought, that if I could bestow animation upon lifeless matter, I might in the process of time... renew life where death had apparently devoted the body to corruption" (49). The arrogance and grandiose plans of creating a race of beings is completely left out of the film. After his mother dies in child birth, not from Scarlet fever, Victor chooses to devote his study at medical school to preventing another of his loved ones from ever dying and finds, as I have already described, a mentor in Professor Waldman. However, the director decided to use the expanded role of the professor in another way as well: as another catalyst in Victor's passion. While attempting to prevent an outbreak of Cholera in Ingolstadt, the professor is stabbed by a vagrant, who doesn't want anything to do with the doctor's needles, and dies while Victor tries in vain to save his life. This episode leads Victor to attack his work with even more ardency than before. Branagh, no doubt, was well aware that adding a god-complex into the mix would make the character far less likable. Instead, he furthers the idea of a grieving son trying to prevent losing another loved one by giving him a shocking reminder that death is always looming. Anyone who has ever lost a loved one knows that in that moment, we would do anything to prevent or reverse the event. In the the loss of the god-complex in his endeavors Victor's character is rendered more human and... less intriguing. Sure, the death of his mother was definitely a catalyst but, as I have already described in some detail, Victor's megalomania is a, if not the, driving force behind the entire novel. Removing the desire to become a benevolent creator destroys yet another part of this force. Here we lose a Victor who hikes through the Alps imagining the mountains as grand structures and as the homes of omnipotent creatures and seemingly placing himself among them (100). A man who thinks of himself this way is absolutely necessary to maintain Shelley's complex story, but instead we have a man driven by very non-God-like emotions like grief and anger; a relatable but deflated fleetingly-mad scientist. 

 

      Finally, but probably most astounding, even in death Waldman's presence continues. Victor, in his quest to procure "materials" for his work, robs Waldman's grave and uses his brain for the creation. This is absolutely astounding. I do not doubt that Victor desired to give the creature the best brain he could find. It was described in the novel how he picked what he thought would be the very best skin, muscles, and hair (53). However, there was never a personal connection with any of the parts Victor used. Although a personal connection to the monster beyond its creation may seem to make the plot of the movie more complex or to further the expression of Victor's mad passion, this move does not seem to fit Victor's character as someone detached from the reality and consequences of what he is doing and what is happening around him. In fact, as a teaser for the film, the director seemed to put a conscious effort into eliminating the detached passivity of Victor's character. In the film, he is often “saved” from action by circumstances outside of his control so he cannot be viewed as passive, just stuck. Passivity, as has been mentioned over and over on this Blog, is a central, if frustrating, theme throughout the novel. It is this detachment from consequences that serves to make Victor more and more wretched throughout the novel. He immediately flees from his creation upon seeing what he has done (though in the film, this is more out of his control) and hides from it, even allowing himself to slip into comfort again until he is jogged back to reality by the death of William (67-71). He refuses to intervene on Justine's behalf during her trial (though in the movie, he has no chance as she is immediately lynched) even though he knows who actually killed William (92). Instead of pursuing resolution, he goes for a pleasant hike in the Alps (99). It is this passivity that keeps the book going. Furthermore, it is very possible that Shelley was trying to use Victor's passivity to highlight the passivity of her own culture (Shrader-Frechette and Westra, 145-146). Instead, the film takes several opportunities to remove the fault of inaction from Victor, removing hubris and replacing it with unavoidable circumstance. Branagh, doubtless, wanted to remove this passivity to give us a Victor who is victim of circumstance and not of his own inaction or ineptitude. What is striking is that even in 1994, almost 200 years after the novel was published, Branagh could have made the same point but chose instead to make the character more likable.

      Kenneth Branagh chose to give us a more relatable, deflated version of Victor Frankenstein. This was probably a ploy to sell movie tickets and VHS cassettes, but it does not deserve to be called “Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.” This is not the character Mary Shelley wrote nor would Victor Frankenstein be one of the literary cornerstones of the Mad Scientist archetype if this was what she intended. A mad scientist is not supposed to be relatable, that's why they aren't commonplace and they're intriguing to read about and see adapted to film.

_______________________________________________________________

Haynes R (2003) From alchemy to artificial intelligence: Stereotypes of the scientist in Western literature. Public Understanding of Science 12: 243–53.

Shrader-Frechette, K., and Westra, L. Technology and Values. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield, 1997. eBook. 

Revision 1: DADES and Aldiss

           When one hears the term “science fiction”, images of the pulp aspect of it immediately come to mind. Although the lasers, androids, and hover-cars might be at the forefront of the genre, the content underneath the quick prose and action sequences is primarily Gothic. Brian Aldiss, a prolific science fiction writer and accredited “Grand Master” of the genre, spoke to its Gothic themes, as well as its, “search for the definition of mankind and his status in the universe which will stand in our advanced but confused state of knowledge.” Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, by Phillip K. Dick is no exception to this definition. It tells of an Earth reduced to radioactive wastelands, and follows a day in the life of a bounty hunter as he hunts eight advanced androids and evaluates the merits of his actions. Dick utilizes this unique technological future to display an unconventional take on gothic horror and a powerful view on humanity that attests greatly to the validity of Aldiss’ description of the genre.

            The “advanced but confused state of knowledge” that provides the backdrop for gothic horror and questioning of humanity stems primarily from the present state of android technology in D.A.D.E.S. Since their adaptation from pre-war “Synthetic Freedom Fighters” to common laborers, butlers, and maids meant to entice humans to emigrate to Mars, androids remain in a kind of “uncanny valley”, in which they are physically identical to humans, but differ emotionally and socially (Dick 9). Furthermore, the ways in which androids differ from humans go directly against current social norms, such as an inability to practice Mercerism, feel camaraderie with humans or other androids, or have empathy for other beings. Previously, androids blatantly showed these differences, but more recent models such as the Nexus-6 that Deckard hunts require in-depth empathy tests to determine whether or not they are androids (Dick 19). Still, the Rosen Corporation continues to revise the androids, with their goal being to eventually create an android that “can’t be distinguished,” from humans, complete with true empathetic responses, which is in direct opposition to the overwhelming social opinion that androids should always remain separate from humans (Dick 115). This in turn creates the ever-present and perpetual suspicion over who is a human and who is an android, which is central not only to aspects of horror throughout the novel, but D.A.D.E.S.’ evaluation of humanity as well.

            The social issues concerning real and electric animals run parallel to the authenticity evaluations of the androids, and expresses a more trivial and straightforward example of humanity’s current confusion regarding the novel’s forms of “artificial life”. As denoted by the conversation held between Deckard and Barbour concerning the colts, Mercerism dictates that all people should own and care for an animal, as it exemplifies the religion’s radical example of empathy in addition to preserving species that otherwise might have gone extinct due to radiation (Dick 30). However, this seemingly pious expectation of caring for an animal is spun on its head due to seemingly endless vanity and profitable economy present within the live animal market, both in Sidney’s catalog, which Deckard constantly carries with him, and on animal row. Animal salesman constantly upsell for more exotic animals similarly to an unscrupulous car salesman, such as when Deckard inquires about a family of rabbits and the salesman replies, “Sir, if you have a down payment of three thou, I can make you the owner of something a lot better than a pair of rabbits,” (Dick 133).

The social pressure to own an animal combined with both the high wages required and desire to own rare species leads many people to secretly purchase ersatz animals to fool others, like when Deckard covertly inquires about an electric ostrich which costs less than eight hundred dollars instead of the full thirty thousand dollar price of a real ostrich (Dick 45). Similar to the androids exist within, the electric animals are also nearly identical to real animals physically, so much so that Isidore mistakenly brings real cat back to the ersatz animal repair shop, believing that it was just a malfunctioning machine instead of a sick animal (Dick 73). This overall confusion concerning what life is real, what life is fake, and what the difference means within the context of D.A.D.E.S.’s society appears with such high frequency that even Aldiss comments that, “unrealities have multiplied to such an extent that the result is a confusion we are tempted merely to reject as abnormal,” and is central in setting the stage for the gothic horror present in the narrative (Aldiss 48).

Although horror within D.A.D.E.S. flows from many different areas, the most apparent of them is the new Nexus-6 android themselves, which are “more adroit than [their] master”, and “surpassed several classes of human specials in terms of intelligence,” (Dick 19). Although Deckard seems to have success in using the Voigt-Kampff scale, the androids continue to show their ability to express the empathetic reactions that it searches for, albeit with a slight lag that eventually gets them “retired” (Dick 38). Earth is slowly becoming invaded by these beings that look, talk, and act like humans, all of which are fugitives due to the slayings of their human masters. Throughout the novel, they are constantly referred to as having no empathy for neither fellow androids nor humans. Deckard even goes as far as to call them “solitary predators” and that they accurately represent “The Killers” from the teachings of Mercerism (Dick 22). This fear of invasion by an undetectable, nonhuman force is a large factor in the horror present in the novel, and serves as a vehicle for humans to distance themselves from the behaviors of androids.

Another aspect of Gothic horror throughout the novel is simply through the everyday lives of the human characters. Emotions, although they are the one thing androids cannot have, are taken for granted by humans so much so that they manufacture them through “mood organs”, experiencing everything from “self-accusatory depression” to “ecstatic sexual bliss” with the turn of a dial (Dick 3). People left on Earth live in such fear of radiation altering their genes that they wear heavy, lead codpieces over their genitals, as well as the possibility that they may test below a certain IQ threshold, a be reduced to a “chickenhead”. Not only does this bar them from ever emigrating from the now-Hell that is Earth, but they will be scorned for the rest of their lives (Dick 13). The torture that humans go through every day as a result of World War Terminus lends to the desensitization of the facets of humanity that their society appears to hold most dear, empathy and emotion.

            Throughout the story, a hard line is drawn between androids and humans, but through the accounts of Deckard and Isidore, it certainly does not always appear that way. From the opening chapter, it can be seen that humans have become more and more desensitized to their emotions, something that, along with empathy, they uphold as a religion with Mercerism. Deckard constantly reiterates that androids cannot feel these emotions, commenting, “An android… could make no sense out of the fusion which took place routinely among followers of Mercerism,” but yet he relies on his mood organ simply to get out of bed in the morning and drag himself to work (Dick 21). Later, after Deckard has joined forces with Phil Resch, he questions how Resch can be a human when he kills Garland and Luba on the earliest suggestion of permission and with a subtle kind of enjoyment, even after Resch passes the Voigt-Kampff test (Dick 88). Deckard also reveals that he gives empathetic responses to female androids, buys a gift for Luba Luft with his own money, and even expresses to Resch that he was sexually attracted to Luba Luft in some capacity. To his surprise, Resch consoles Deckard, explaining to him he once felt the same way and saying, “You wanted to go to bed with a female type of android – nothing more, nothing less,”(Dick 87).

            The lines that dictate what is typically android or human behavior is obviously not as clear as it is made out to be by law enforcement agencies, empathy tests, and even bounty hunters like Deckard. Even the android called Garland, who in the same speech denies that androids possess any form of empathy, admits that they cooperate with one another in running a fake police agency on Mission Street (Dick 78). Later still, when Isidore meets Pris’ friends, Roy and Irmgard, he observes Pris crying and her and Irmgard embracing, and they then discuss the state of affairs as if all the androids care for one another, just like a group of humans would in a survival situation (Dick 99). When Deckard finally finds and begins retiring the renegade group of androids, Roy “lets out a cry of anguish” when his wife is shot and killed, showing again that androids are indeed capable of at least showing some type of camaraderie or possibly even love for one another (Dick 169). Rachel Rosen also exhibits possibly the strangest contradiction to “normal” android behavior when she kills Deckard’s new goat, seemingly out of either revenge for the retired android group, or out of jealously and anger towards him regarding his brief affair and subsequent attempted murder with her (Dick 172). On the other side of the coin, Deckard, who as a bounty hunter should exemplify society’s steadfast opinion against android “life”, comes to respect the artificial, stating, “The electric things have their lives too,” (Dick 181).

            This fundamental contradiction concerning the authenticity of different types of life and societies expectations of them that permeates through the narrative is at the same time both the key aspect of Gothic horror and of humanity. Mercerism and the legal system demand that androids and humans be seen as completely separate and radically different beings, but humans continually show their capacity to devolve to what even they define as an android, while the androids themselves show more and more “human” characteristics, such as camaraderie, revenge, and possibly even empathy and love. It is this conflict, when cast in front of the novel’s unique state of technological progress and societal morals, which fulfills Aldiss’ requirements for true science fiction, showing Phillip K. Dick as a “Grand Master” in his own right.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Works Cited:

Dick, Philip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? London: Millennium, 1999. Print.

Aldiss, Brian W. The Detached Retina. Liverpool: Liverpool UP, 1995. Print.

"The Locus Index to Science Fiction Awards: Index of Literary Nominees." LocusMag.com. Locus Publications. Web. 16 Sept. 2013.

Revision 1: Androids as a Metaphor

Androids: The Communist Spies

Philip K. Dick was born in 1928 and lived in a world dominated by two superpowers for the majority of his life. His book, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, was first published in 1968, in the midst of the Cold War. This conflict was a century long standoff between the Soviet Union and the United States, which included rampart spying and paranoia. These countries are still in existence in the book’s world which has obviously been devastated by nuclear war (Dick 15,28); something that never happened in our world but was very much a possibility. The androids that populate Earth are a metaphor for the spying that occurred in the U.S. and the hysteria that came along with it.

McCarthyism is a term used to describe the efforts of Senator Joseph McCarthy to oust Communist spies living in the United States. He handed out accusations left and right and led investigations of many celebrities. Although he could not prove most of his accusations, it still fueled fear among Americans that spies have infiltrated the United States and could be controlling everything around them (Miller). The characters in the book feel this sentiment as well. Just as many celebrities were accused of being spies, such as actor Charlie Chaplin and Harlem Renaissance writer Langston Hughes; prominent opera singer Luba Luft is accused of being an android (Dick 89), and is later retired (Dick 134). McCarthy’s allegations even spread into the Truman administration when McCarthy accused over fifty members of the State Department of being part of the Communist Party in a telegram to President Truman (McCarthy). Spies in a position of power in the United States’ government can be compared to androids being in power of the Rosen Association. Rachael Rosen is a higher up of the company and an android herself(Dick 59-60). Androids controlling the production and programming of other androids could be deleterious to humans living  on Earth. With each generation, the Rosen Association makes the androids more human-like, making them harder to detect. What if the androids in charge of the company are purposefully doing this to deceive humans? Communists in the United States government certainly were not looking out for the United States’ best interest, such as Klaus Fuchs, a German physicist who worked on the Manhattan Project, and fed the Soviets information on constructing a hydrogen bomb (Klaus Fuchs). Spies or androids in a position of power in any situation is not good for the society they working against.  With all of these investigations happening in the United States, mass paranoia hit the American public. If Communists are able to wedge themselves into the government, what was to stopping them from simply living alongside average citizen? This hysteria that anyone could be a spy can be felt in the Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. Anyone in the book could be an android and we would have no way of knowing unless they were administered the Voigt-Kampff test. This test, like polygraphs that would have been used on suspected Communist spies, has its legitimacy called into question many times (Dick 52-53, 119). Androids acting so much like humans, thanks to the Nexus-6, and the supposed flakiness of the Voigt-Kampff gives the reader suspicions that an American would have had of other citizens during the 1950’s.

The hysteria surrounding not knowing who is a spy or android isn’t the only detail that relates the Cold War to the book. Bounty hunters can be viewed as American spies trying to find and kill Soviet spies. Both androids and bounty hunters seem to have specialized weaponry (the laser tube) (Dick 106) like a spy would have specialized gadgets. Bounty hunters work for a police department, which can be likened to the United States’ Central Intelligence Agency (CIA). The androids even have their own secret police (Dick 123), which is unknown to most humans. This secret police is similar to the actual Soviet secret police, the KGB, which launched many infiltrations into Western nations. In the time leading up to the book’s publishing, there had been suspicions of brain washing prisoners of war (which include caught spies) to accept communist regimes (Hunter). This can be seen as a metaphor of androids having memories implanted in their pseudo-brains (Dick 122), or going a step further, a metaphor for Phil Resch. Resch is a human who works as a bounty hunter for the android secret police  (Dick 114) but whole-heartedly believes he is working for the good of humans. We have no knowledge of Resch’s actions before Rick shows up, but being under the direction of Garland, another android, he couldn’t have been doing anything productive like going after actual androids.

It’s evident that androids are a metaphor for Communist spies and what they represent, but what in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep represents the actual ideology of Communism? Buster Friendly certainly fits the bill. Buster, who is allegedly an android himself (Dick 211), uses propaganda through attractive women and other guests to try and win over his audience. He is playing on television essentially twenty-four hours a day and is intolerant of other ideologies such as Mercerism (Dick 206-207). Androids, such as the Baty’s and Pris, are captivated by him and can’t get enough (Dick 203-204). Communism during the Cold War was a profound user of propaganda to mislead its people. Even today, the Communist regime in North Korea forces it’s people to listen to state radio that cannot be turned off, only turned down (Gordon). The Soviets were also known for being intolerant of any religion. They were determined to make their populace more scientific and literate rather than religious (Shepler). Religion in the book is personified as Mercerism. Mercerism is all about empathy for Wilbur Mercer and coming together with fellow humans. Mercerism, along with the religions in our world, inspires humans and brings them together for worship. The Soviets obviously didn’t want a separate entity existing within their communist state that could pull people away from their ideology as Buster Friendly wouldn’t want another ideology pulling viewers away from his show. The counterpart of Communism is capitalism. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep does not have a direct metaphor for capitalism, but it can still be indirectly discerned from how humans live their everyday life. Rick and most humans are attached to material possessions in the book. Brand names are attached to items he and his wife use around the house (Dick 1), he carries around a pricing book everywhere he goes(Dick 10), and androids are continuously going obsolete (Dick 57); all of these details point to consumerism which is a main facet of capitalism. Whereas the Soviets were concerned about hard work and making their share of money while contributing to the state, Americans were and are very much today materialistic. Animals in the book are treated as that shiny new Model T every man wanted to own in America. Humans in the book also are able to feel empathy and worship Mercer. Most capitalist societies did and do not today  put restrictions on religion and their people are free to worship at they please. Knowing the metaphors for religion and these ideologies is important in understanding how the androids can exist as a metaphor for Communist spies.

An ongoing theme in Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep is the unknown. The reader doesn’t know which animal is fake or real, if the Voigt-Kampff test is legitimate, or who is an android and who is a human. These unknowns can lead to fear and assumptions as to who the actual androids are, otherwise known as hysteria. This is exactly what happened during the time period it was written. Fear of the unknown was a big issue for the United States when Cold War tensions were at their height. United States citizens did not know what a Sputnik was flying around Earth beeping at them, they didn’t know when or if the Soviets would ever use their nuclear weapons, and they didn’t know who was a spy. In Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep, androids attempt to infiltrate and blend in with the human, and metaphorically capitalistic, society just as Communist spies would have done during the Cold War. The societies and details of the Cold War and the book are an allegory, and it is easy to see the environment that Phillip K. Dick grew up.

Works Cited

Dick, Phillip K. Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep. New York: Random House, 1968. Print.

McCarthy, Joseph. "Telegram from Senator Joseph McCarthy to President Harry S. Truman."National Archives. National Archives, 09 Feb 1950. Web. 4 Oct 2013. <http://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/mccarthy-telegram/>.

"Klaus Fuchs." FBI Records: The Vault. FBI, n.d. Web. 4 Oct 2013. <http://vault.fbi.gov/rosenberg-case/klaus-fuchs>.

 Gordon, Daniel, dir. "North Korea: A State of Mind." BBC: . Web. 4 Oct 2013. <http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b0074q9w>.

           Link to actual video on YouTube (1:43): http://youtu.be/QSrcLC6Zz54?t=1m44s

Shepler, Ryan. "The Bolshevik Campaign against Religion in Soviet Russia: 1917-1932." Diss. Ohio State University, 2008. Web. <https://kb.osu.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1811/32192/Honors_Thesis_PDF.pdf;jsessionid=5CD14ACD0F84F6BCB18C49C3D1D14E8D?sequence=1>.

 Miller, Arthur. "McCarthyism." American Masters. PBS, 23 Aug 2006. Web. 4 Oct 2013. <http://www.pbs.org/wnet/americanmasters/episodes/arthur-miller/mccarthyism/484/>.

 Hunter, Edward. Interview by Richard Arens. "COMMUNIST PSYCHOLOGICAL WARFARE (BRAINWASHING)."COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES. 13 Mar 1958. Mar . Web. 4 Oct 2013. http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globalism/Congress.htm.

Frankenstein and Consequences

In Mary Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, the character Victor Frankenstein has trouble dealing with and even acknowledging the consequences of his actions. This view of the world is much like the one that online interface fosters. Although the root cause of this issue is different, the result is fundamentally the same. Both Victor and some of today’s youth refuse to recognize that their actions may affect and alter the lives of others. The lack of consequences has made them immune and indifferent to the adverse effects of their actions. Victor’s ignorance of the consequences comes from his upbringing and social status, while the emergence of video games and online interactions, rather than real-world interactions, has produced the same ignorance.

 In Frankenstein, Victor tells the story of his childhood. His parents regarded him as both “their plaything and their idol” (Shelley 24); these praises suggest that his parents did not instill a true sense of responsibility in their child. Victor even remarked, “life seemed but on train of enjoyment to me” (24), again showing his lack of contact and therefore understanding of consequences. As he gets older, his wealth and social status create an environment where he never has to deal with his actions. Because of his money, he has the ability to literally run away from his problems to relieve his guilt, for example, leaving to Belrive after Justine’s conviction allows Victor to avoid dealing with the issues he created. Most people would not have this option to travel but Victor’s family wealth creates the opportunity. His family’s social status permits him to escape from his responsibilities time after time. He is acquitted from charges in England, even after he admits his guilt several times, calling himself the “murderer of William, of Justine, and of Clerval” (202). Compared with the life of the monster, who is accused of crime and assumed guilty for every action he takes, the affluence of Victor’s life seems even more extreme. The monster saves a young girl from drowning in the stream and then gets punished for his actions (158), while Victor is never really held accountable for any of his actions, good or bad. The monster is basically the polar opposite of Victor in terms of social status: where Victor has a highly regarded family, the monster has none whatsoever, where Victor has wealth, the monster has only the clothes on his back; and on top of that, the monster’s appearance puts him beneath even the most unfortunate of people. The contrast of the two emphasizes the lace of responsibility Victor is held to, including an ignorance to repercussions of his actions, which leads him to create the monster in the first place. He does not expect any sort of punishment or adverse effects from the construction of the monster because all of his life he has never experienced either. So when he encounters the reality of his actions, he instantly abandons the situation and continually blames “destiny…and her immutable laws” for his misfortune rather than taking responsibility (34). Victor’s hasty departure essentially leaves the monster with the consequences of Victor’s actions. This abandonment has a much greater effect on the monster than on Victor at this point. Victor is allowed to integrate directly back in to his society. He does get sick after the creation of the monster, but even then Clerval nurses him back to health. Yet again, Victor’s wealth and social status allows him to avoid the consequences of his actions. The monster, however, is left completely alone, “confused and indistinct” with “a strange multiplicity of sensations” (110). He has to figure out how to survive all on his own. Essentially, he is punished for Victor’s actions.

The monster and Victor have completely differing views of the world and personalities stemming from their difference in treatment and consequences. The monster experiences immediate punishment for his good deeds, such as helping the De Lacey family with their daily chores or helping the little girl out of the stream. According to psychology, immediate punishers are often more effective than delayed punishers (Cerutti 1). The effect of these immediate punishers is that the monster is much less likely to repeat the actions punished. The repeated reinforcement of the negative consequences for the monster molds his hardened view of the world that we see at the end of the novel. He receives no positive reinforcement for his good actions so he is left without a clear sense of right and wrong. The monster acknowledges that “evil thenceforth became my good” (Shelley 255), even he realized his sense of good had become so warped by the end of the novel. This is a direct result of the constant stream of consequences the monster faced: after so much punishment for his actions, the monster’s behavior is bound to reflect this view of the world.

“Sensitivity to the consequences of one's own behavior is among the most significant evolutionary innovations—a sort of ontogenetic natural selection to local aspects of ecology—extending the process of adaptation throughout the life of the individual” (Cerutti 1). This sensitivity is one that Victor Frankenstein lacks, and this in turn shapes his behaviors later in life and in the book. Frankenstein has never been exposed to consequences for his actions and therefore has not been allowed to evolve or adapt. He has not been able to learn from his mistakes because they were never presented to him as mistakes. Without consequences, Victor’s life has been one in which he can do as he pleases all of the time without regard for anyone or anything else, especially when faced with the monster he has created. When the monster enters his life, Victor is at a loss because he has not developed a sensitivity to consequences and, ultimately, this leads to his demise. Victor’s lack of consequences early in life as a result of his wealthy upbringing creates an ignorance of consequences altogether that results in his creation of the monster and his actions in dealing with him. The monster, on the other hand, develops a hardened and frustrated view of the world because of a constant stream of consequences for actions he meant to be helpful. The monster’s relationship with consequences and punishment highlights Victor’s lack of both. Together they show the need for a delicate balance between consequences and freedom in life.

The world of online social networking allows Victor Frankenstein’s ignorant view on accountability and consequences to come into the real world. The same issue that Victor deals with, a lack of direct and immediate consequences or any at all, can be found in cyberspace, as well. Cyber bullying is a real problem among today’s youth. During a recent study, it was found that cyber bullying “affected 56.1 percent of students” in this study and “89 percent of the respondents reported knowing a friend that had been targeted” (Hoff and Mitchell 655). The reasons that many of the respondents believed that cyber bullying is so prevalent is that “the anonymity of cyber bullying contributes to the phenomenon because of the power it gives bullies, emboldening them beyond what they might do on a face-to-face basis” (657).   This lack of face to face contact results in a lack of direct consequences for actions, such as observing the immediate effect on the victims or the possibility of authority figures seeing.

Another problem in the fight against cyber bullying is that it is extremely difficult to catch “the anonymity of the perpetrator and the students’ skill in using technology have made it more difficult for schools to…track down cyber-bullies” (Hoff and Mitchell 622). This lack of consequences mirrors Victor’s experiences due to his wealth and social status. He is even allowed to admit to crimes without any consequence in England just as cyber bullies are allowed to commit a sort of crime without taking any responsibility. Another reason found in the study that contributes to the rise of cyber bullying is that “adults, who normally would be supervising the lives of teens are left on the outside” (661). This again is much like Victor’s early life. He is generally left without an authority figure because his parents treated him as “their plaything and their idol” rather than enforcing necessary consequences on him (Shelley 24).

 Both online interactions and Victor’s life present a world virtually free of consequences. The longer one goes without consequences for their actions the more likely they will stop thinking about them all together or even being aware them. Victor Frankenstein and cyber bullies in society today experience this same phenomenon that creates a real danger in their lives.

 Like Victor’s creation of the monster, cyber bullying has tremendous effects on the lives of those around. Just think of  15-year-old Phoebe Prince who “is suspected of killing herself in January after being subjected to name-calling and bullying by students at her school and through social networking Web sites” (Bock 1) in addition to the string of deaths in the Frankenstein. Virtually all of the people Victor loves end up dying as a result of his creation and his abandonment of the monster. The need for consequences becomes clear and the lack of comprehension of them leads to dangerous and horrible effects on a large scale.

Both Victor and many cyber bullies today have issues with understanding the results of their actions. This issue is apparent in the fact that both create circumstances for themselves completely unaware of the dangerous consequences that often result. Victor creates the monster and more extreme cases of cyber bullying are coming into view. The lack of understanding may not spawn from the same place, but it does end with the same result. Victor is repeatedly taught that his actions yield no consequences by both his parents and society.  Online social networking teaches people this same idea through the continual disregard of punishment.  Victor and people in today’s society act expecting no adverse effects, only thinking about how they can benefit from these actions. When faced with the consequences of their actions, they are unable to make smart decisions and often ignore those repercussions completely.  Victor Frankenstein in Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein has trouble understanding the full extent of the consequences of his actions and the online world produces the same trouble. Although the root cause differs slightly, the end result is the same.

Sources

Bock, Linda. "Cyberbullying; Emerging as a public health crisis." TELEGRAM & GAZETTE (Massachusetts). (April 7, 2010 Wednesday ): 711 words. LexisNexis Academic. Web. Date Accessed: 2013/10/01.

Cerutti, Daniel T. "Reinforcement, Reward, and Punishment." Encyclopedia of the Human Brain. Oxford: Elsevier Science & Technology, 2002. Credo Reference. Web. 28 September 2013.

Dianne L. Hoff, Sidney N. Mitchell, (2009) "Cyberbullying: causes, effects, and remedies", Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 47 Iss: 5, pp.652 – 665

Shelley, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Lynd Ward. Frankenstein: The Lynd Ward Illustrated Edition. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications, 2009. Print

Comments & Questions on Marcuse and/or Portal

Post your questions/thoughts as comments to this post.  Again:  a paragraph is fine, or a couple if you feel so moved.  You are posting on a question, problem or topic of your choice.  Citing a particular passage is recommended but not required.

Prompts on Marcuse and Portal (Philip K. Dick and Modern Times optional)

Note:  I added some hints and a third prompt Monday night.

Prompt 1 (Recommended if you didn't finish Portal)

Clearly quoting or citing a location in Marcuse's text (just citing the chapter number, or prologue, is fine for Marcuse, since we all have access to the electronic text), identify an idea or concept, used by Marcuse, which you believe can and should be used to better understand some aspect of Philip K. Dick's *Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep*, or *Modern Times*.  Then, do exactly that:  show how and why that concept from Marcuse can be used to understand the novel/film, beyond what we discussed in class.  Be sure to show and understanding of, and cite material from, both texts.

Hint:  chapter three in Marcuse is a good starting point, if you're having trouble, because many of the concepts there directly concern art and/or the conjunction of art and technology.

Prompt 2 (most flexible)

Use Marcuse, including specifics, to analyze *Portal*.  Alternatively, you may analyze *Portal* in relationship with one other work of "popular culture" (I am using the term loosely, not precisely). You should, as usual, have a specific argument, in this case at least inspired by Marcuse (if you disagree in some fundamental way with Marcuse, this essay might help explain why).  The most obvious question you might begin with is:  "does my chosen work engage in, or try to engage in, the Great Refusal"?  Another example:  you might argue that Portal helps us challenge Marcuse's argument that we [cannot] "really distinguish between the mass media as instruments of information and entertainment, and as agents of manipulation and indoctrination?"

In other words, the most obvious approach (although by no means the only one) is to use Portal as an example or possibly counterexample of what Marcuse sees as the problems of the modern mass media, either alone or in comparison with another work of mass culture.

Hint:  Not to sound like a broken record, but there is abundant material on chapter three concerning art in the modern age which is highly useable here.

Prompt 3 (Recommended if you did finish Portal)

Really, this could be taken as a specific example of something that you could do with Prompt 2.  Please do not do this prompt without having played through all of Portal - be able to speak articulately about the game as a whole, as well as specific segments of it.  Include precise references to Portal as well as Marcuse - a screen shot, a clip of video, whatever.  Figure it out.

The premise of this prompt is that, following Marcuse's reading of Brecht in chapter three, "the total character of the established society confronts the playwright with the question of whether it is still possible to 'represent the contemporary world in the theater' - that is, represent it in such a manner that the spectator recognizes the truth which the play is to convey."  In other words, Portal is not just pure entertainment (read on in Marcuse for some context), but a struggle to represent aspects of our world which resist easy representation.

If you accept this premise - that is, if you at least partially agree with it - show us what truth(s) of our world Portal is trying to represent.

Pay attention to what Marcuse writes and sites about the estrangement-effect, the things which are absent, etc.  Do not rely too much on the script of the game (that is, the words) - use visuals and/or gameplay!

Edit:  replaced references to chapter four with chapter three, which is more what I had in mind.

For Class Today

First, here's a link to Frederick Winslow Taylor's Principles of Scientific Management
Second, here's a link to Metropolis
Third, here's a link to Modern Times
Fourth, here's a link to your instructions for the games.


Fifth, here's an essay to be workshopped:

Examining Frankenstein Through the Lens of Walton

Examining the novel of Frankenstein through the lens of another character creates an interesting contrast to my own views. Examining Frankenstein’s story through Walton’s eyes will cloud some of Frankenstein’s errors and overlook some of his mistakes. This I believe to be true because Walton already seems almost obsessed with his new companion, and indeed is very fascinated and enamored with him. Walton, who mentions his loneliness in the beginning of the book in his letters to his sister, which start out as hopeful and as they continue turn more melancholy, as Walton begins to feel more alone and out of sorts. He realizes that he is very alone, and even claims to Margaret that he “greatly [needs] a friend” who would understand him and his fancies, rather than just the crewmen that he has found himself surrounded by (6). It is in this mindset that he meets Victor Frankenstein, though originally he does not know who his new companion is. Such is my belief that delving into Frankenstein’s story with the lens of Walton on will show how different circumstances and scenarios would be changed, or viewed in a different light.

The first major event that Victor lights upon, which Walton would also identify with, is the telling of how Elizabeth came to join Victor’s family. In Walton’s letters to Margaret a deep love is evident, and seeing such a connection between Victor and Elizabeth would spark another sense of camaraderie felt by Walton, fixing more deeply in Walton’s mind that he and Victor are kindred spirits. Walton sees this in Victor’s saying that Elizabeth was his “more than sister,” (27) which Walton parallels how he addresses his dear sister; in one letter Walton says, “Heaven shower down blessings on you, and save me, that I may again and again testify my gratitude for all your love and kindness, ” clearly showing Walton’s own love for his sister, which consequently allows him to connect more deeply with Victor (5). In Walton’s accounts he addresses his sister as “dear Margaret,” (2) which mirrors the way that Elizabeth speaks to Victor: “dear Victor” is seen in a letter that Victor recounts for Walton, but is never seen in the way Victor talks to Elizabeth (107). These particulars may not be noticeable to Walton, but as a reader it becomes apparent that Victor and Elizabeth’s relationship is not exactly equal. Through Walton’s eyes we could read that Victor’s preoccupation with the monster he has created overshadows his feelings for Elizabeth, but this may not be the case. Victor’s lac of connection to someone who he eventually marries and claims to love is not as noticeable as one might expect in Victor’s narrative.

Walton’s identifying with Victor would cloud his judgment and taint his opinion about Victor. As a reader we can see things that Walton in his infatuations glosses over. As Victor discusses his early life and his thirst for knowledge and books Walton can again relate to his own life and how he spent so much time devoting himself to maps in his uncle’s library. So when Victor sets out on his quest for knowledge Walton again sees himself in Victor and rejoices in these similarities. When Victor finishes his creation and abandons it, the scene can be viewed as cruel and a way of avoiding responsibility. Victor seemed to hope that the situation would just remedy itself if he left it alone. Here Walton would disagree with this reading and again align himself with Victor, allowing that achieving his goal after toiling for months and months at it and finding it horrific (indeed not what Victor wanted at all), a reasonable response to avoid the issue at hand until one saw in his soul the strength to face the problem. Walton’s displays an example of this when he exclaims: “How can I see so noble a creature destroyed by misery, without feeling the most poignant grief?” stating that his relationship with Victor was so strong that he felt his own moods affected rather strongly by this newfound companion (16). Indeed, I believe Walton so desperately craves the friend he lacks that he supposes more from his relationship with Victor that is really there, and therefore laments at seeing Victor in pain. Even at the end of the novel when Victor has revealed all his faults and mistreatments of the people around him Walton writes to his sister, “Margaret, what comment can I make on the untimely extinction of this glorious spirit? What can I say that will enable you to understand the depth of my sorrow?”

indicating that his iconic viewing of Victor does not allow Walton to see Victor’s flaws (123). The abandonment and cursed existence Victor bestows upon his creation is overlooked by Walton and he is so overcome with grief at losing Victor that he does not see any faults. This distorted vision of Victor contrasts sharply with what someone who has closely read the novel feels for Victor. Instead of ever trying to repair any of his mistakes, Victor goes off on a quest to track down his foe without any regard for the people he claims to “care about.” This can be read as a selfish act on Victor’s part, another way that he avoids responsibility to satisfy his own desires, though that is certainly not the way Walton views the story.

Using Walton’s sympathetic lens allows readers to see Victor in a more positive light, and although his choices were different from ones others might make in similar situations, there are many ways to read the text that invite multiple different interpretations. Walton’s ability to see good in this creature allows one realizes that Victor may not be as deplorable a character as they originally found him. The parallels that allow Walton to relate to Victor such as through the love of his sister and his obsession with exploration and knowledge allow a bond that not everyone is able to relate to, and thus it provides fresh insight. Though some may still find Victor and his actions unsavory, they might not feel as negatively towards him based on the ability to justify and relate to his actions through the eyes of someone else.