Monstrosity In Frankenstein

What makes a monster? Is monstrosity purely physical or is monstrosity a term used to denote immoral behavior? However one chooses to answer this question one must inevitably speak about the “monster” in relation to other beings in a given society at a particular time. In this essay I attempt to not only capture the “monster” as an engineered body, but also highlight the connection and possible tension between scientific knowledge and the morality of scientists and society during the Scientific Revolution/Enlightenment period. Traveling back in time to the 1700’s I will show readers that all that is needed to create a monster is an engineer, parts, a spark, society and a little science. Lastly, I will reflect on how advancements in science
No longer were monsters a product of supernatural forces, monsters were created. Yet, in order for a monster to become a monster, it cannot exist in isolation. Relating my idea of the connection between knowledge and morality in the Scientific Revolution/Enlightenment period to the monster and his body in Frankenstein, I argue that society’s knowledge of the monster is formed in one of two ways; one, through scientific creation or two, through social construction. Now, it is through (1) physical features which differ drastically from others or (2) immoral actions that one becomes a monster in their own society. In part, “monsters” are products of their own environment. What makes the creature in Frankenstein a monster is that he is both a scientific creation and his physical features and his actions of murder deviate from society’s expectations. Throughout the novel Frankenstein’s creation is never given a real name. Instead, he is called; a “demoniacal corpse, wretch, daemon, devil, monster, ogre, the being and creature” (36, 68, 102, 164, 165). Besides not having a name, Frankenstein’s creature is also described using the term deformity and monster. After society’s constant negative response to his physical appearance, the creature himself
With the development of genetic modification scientists have created a chicken that has a dinosaur leg in a reverse evolution experiment, a goat that produces spider silk, featherless chicken, glow in the dark cats, sheep and monkeys and recently in February 2016 British scientists were granted permission to genetically modify human embryos. Just as Etienne Geoffroy St. Hilaire and his son Isidore Geoffroy St. Hilaire created malformations in chicken embryos, scientists in the 21st century are creating malformations in animals in the name of science – for “the good” of human beings. Wherever a person situates themselves in time, whether it is in the 18th century or 21st century, people need to understand that there will always be consequences for what we choose to do with the knowledge we gain. Knowledge can create and knowledge can destroy- both in the physical realm and in the moral realm. Morally speaking, knowledge can change how individuals (and collectively human beings) view themselves in the world and how individuals view other animals and material things in the