Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Ecological Responsibility

Abstract

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 ecologies (of which they are an integral part). Attention is given to evidence of the effects of technoscientific practices on these ecosystems, in particular the case of biotechnological 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 program can be discerned, confirming the prescience of Mary Shelley’s novel.  

Opsomming

 Die huidige artikel is ’n poging om die volgende vraag te beantwoord: watter lig sou Mary Shelley se gevierde roman van 200 jaar gelede (1818), Frankenstein, werp op die dringende ekologiese krisis wat die mensdom vandag in die gesig staar? Na ’n kort oorsig van die narratief verskuif die aandag na daardie aspekte van die roman wat relevant is vir die ekologiese kwessie, naamlik die opvatting van wetenskap en tegnologie wat onderliggend is aan Victor Frankenstein se verhaal (en in ’n mindere mate Kaptein Walton s'n), sowel as die kreatuur se verhaal, waarin hy Frankenstein smeek om vir hom ’n vroulike wese te skep ten einde die ellende wat hy as gevolg van mense verduur het, te versag. Terselfdertyd betig hy dr. Frankenstein vir sy weiering om verantwoordelikheid vir “sy” skepsel (wat nie eens ’n naam het nie) te aanvaar. Die teenstelling tussen Frankenstein se verknogtheid aan instrumentele rasionaliteit, enersyds, en sy gebrek aan empatie met en besorgdheid oor (Gilligan) die kreatuur, andersyds, word beklemtoon. Vervolgens word daarop gewys dat Frankenstein se opvatting van wetenskaplike en tegniese rasionaliteit (wat die heersende Verligtingsmodel van die tyd waarin Shelley die roman geskryf het verteenwoordig) wesenlik met die huidige opvatting in die verband ooreenstem. Tydgenootlike mense kan dus grootliks verstaan word as verteenwoordigers van Frankenstein, vir sover hulle ’n vergelykbare onbekwaamheid en onwilligheid vertoon om verantwoordelikheid te aanvaar ten opsigte van die nadelige ekologiese gevolge van hul wetenskaps-gebaseerde tegniese praktyke, spesifiek in die geval van bio-tegnologiese industrieë. Die artikel word afgesluit met ’n oorweging van wat as “transhumanisme” bekendstaan, waar die rigting en waarskynlike gevolge van die “Frankensteiniaanse” moderne wetenskaplike en tegnologiese program waargeneem kan word, en waar-deur Mary Shelley se voorkennis bevestig word.