Den här uppsatsen jämför Mary Shelleys Frankenstein: eller den moderna Prometeus med Kenneth Branaghs film Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein från 1994. Uppsatsens syfte är att se hur vissa av förändringarna från text till film kan spåras till tidigare Frankensteinadaptioner, specifikt Frankenstein och Bride of Frankenstein (1931 respektive 1935) av James Whale, och The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) av Terence Fisher. Undersökningen visar att vissa förändringar som gjorts i tidigare filmer på grund av filmernas samtid och omgivning har blivit en del av den allmänna bilden av Frankensteinberättelsen, och på så vis lever kvar även i senare filmatiseringar. Slutsatsen dras att Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein inte bara är en adaption av Mary Shelleys text, utan kan även ses som en adaption av tidigare filmskapares verk. / This essay compares Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus with Kenneth Branagh’s 1994 film Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. The purpose of the essay is to examine how some of the changes from text to film can be traced to earlier Frankenstein adaptations, specifically Frankenstein and Bride of Frankenstein (1931 and 1935, respectively) by James Whale, and The Curse of Frankenstein (1957) by Terence Fisher. The research shows that certain changes made in earlier films due to the films’ time and place in history have become part of the general image of the Frankenstein story, and thus survive even in later film adaptations. The conclusion is drawn that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is not only an adaptation of Mary Shelley’s text, but can also be seen as an adaptation of previous filmmakers’ works.

For centuries utopian and science fiction has allowed women to engage with dominant discourses, especially those which have been defined as the “domain” of men. Feminist scholars have often characterized this genealogy as one which begins with the destabilization of Enlightenment ideals of the rational subject in the Romantic Revolution, with the publication of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein (1818) in particular. This thesis demonstrates that there has in fact been an enduring history of women’s cognitive and rational attempts to explore key discourses such as science, technology and architecture through Reason, as opposed to rage. This is a genealogy of women writing utopian science fiction that is best illuminated through Darko Suvin’s of the novum. Chapter One reveals how the innovative utopian visions of Margaret Cavendish (1626-1673) proffer a highly rational and feminist critique of seventeenth-century experimental science. Chapter Two demonstrates how Sarah Scott’s Millenium Hall (1762) explored the socio-political significance of the monstrous-looking “human” body some fifty years before Shelley’s Frankenstein. Following this, Chapter Three re-reads Frankenstein in light of the early nineteenth century zeitgeist of laissez-faire economics, technological advancement and global imperialism and argues that these were also the concerns of other utopian science fiction works by women, such as Jane Loudon’s The Mummy! (1827). Chapter Four analyses how the function of the novum is integral to L.T. Meade’s (1854-1915) depictions of male/female interaction in the scientific field. Chapter Five considers how important it is to acknowledge the materialist concern with popular science that informs texts such as Joanna Russ’s The Female Man (1975) and Pat Cadigan’s cyberpunk novel Synners (1991). This is the history of how women have used the form of utopian science fiction as a means with which to present a rational female voice. In addition to the historical works by women, it employs a range of utopian and science fiction theory from Suvin and Fredric Jameson to historical and contemporary feminism.

This paper examines the relationship between literature and philosophy, with special regards to how literature can contribute to deepen the understanding in philosophical matters. This is executed by a comparison between how a work of fiction, versus works of philosophy, can tackle the issue of personhood. Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein is being compared with philosopher Lynne Rudder Baker’s Persons and Bodies and Jacques Maritain’s The Person and the Common Good in order to map out how literature can contribute to the philosophical discourse regarding personhood. The paper finalizes that the main character in Frankenstein, “the monster” displays several issues that may show up when trying to define what it means to be a person, and where the line is to be drawn between a person and a non-person. The paper thus serves a two-folded purpose: to expand and challenge the traditional philosophical methodology, and find new understanding within the subject of personhood.

This thesis explores elements of science fiction in three gothic novels, Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, Robert Stevenson’s The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, and Bram Stoker’s Dracula. It begins by explicating the important tropes of science fiction and progresses with a discussion that establishes a connection between three gothic novels and the science fiction genre. This thesis argues that the aforementioned novels express characters’ fear of technology and offer an analysis of human nature that is literarily futuristic. In this view, each of the aforementioned writers uses extreme events in their works to demonstrate that science can contribute to humanity’s understanding of itself. In these works, readers encounter characters who offer commentary on the darker side of the human experience.

This thesis details the Costume Design process for David Emerson Toney’s Frankenstein: Dawn of a Monster at Virginia Commonwealth University. Toney’s original adaptation interprets Mary Shelley’s genre-defying novel as biography, directly influenced by the tragic events of her young life. Costumes differentiate the two narratives, with Mary Shelly in gray scale, regency-inspired modern dress and the novel in period and color. This follows the design process from concept to production to execution.

This essay is a feminist analysis of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus (1818) that shows how Shelley criticizes society through presenting feminist viewpoints. I argue that Shelley critiques traditional gender roles by punishing characters subscribing to them. Most of the characters conform to traditional gender stereotypes. The male characters are ambitious and self-centered while the female characters are self-sacrificing and docile. The main protagonist Victor Frankenstein represents patriarchal belief and is incapable of any feminine attributes which leads to the demise of everyone he cares for, and himself. The male-only narration emphasizes how insignificant the male characters deem women to be, as they are rarely heard of and most of the time ignored. In the novel, nature is represented as active and feminine, and it punishes or rewards characters in accordance with their actions.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-28T20:37:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Bruno Rolim Baggio.pdf: 563984 bytes, checksum: bacbc930b8db14015fc8617c7de43e1e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2011-08-08 / Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico / This work observes the story of the scientist Victor Frankstein, and his creation, to propose a clinical discussion of essential contemporary experience questions. Mary Shelley s novel express, as only a few have done, the transformations of human s condition in the present day, and discuss, by exploring the intricate relationship established between the creator and his creation, about the risk of objectification of the human being as part of modernity s scientific project. Frankenstein s novel reveals an universe where human creativity has no place and the felling of being cannot be reached. The comprehension about the phenomenon presented in the novel is deepened with the theory and clinical experience of D. W. Winnicott, an english pediatrician and psychoanalyst exceptionally concerned with the fundamentals of human nature. The present study focuses in the contrast between the good enough environment, described by Winnicott, and the sterile world, presented in Shelley s book, proposing a discussion involving philosophers like Heidegger, Bachelard, Bakhtin, Pessanha e Arendt, psychoanalysts like Freud, Khan e Safra, and poets like Fernando Pessoa, Drumond e Clarisse Lispector. The themes are presented according to Franskstein s narrative, showing the most important moments of his life, from his birth to his death, what facilitates the comprehension of the human phenomenon in its totality / Esse estudo acompanha a história do cientista Victor Frankenstein e sua criatura, discutindo clinicamente questões fundamentais da experiência contemporânea. A obra de Mary Shelley expressa, como poucas, as transformações da condição humana na atualidade e discute, a partir da complicada relação que se estabelece entre criador e criatura, o risco de objetificação do humano presente no projeto científico da modernidade. No exagero de tendências atuais, o romance Frankenstein revela um universo onde a criatividade humana já não tem mais lugar e o sentimento de ser não pode ser alcançado. A compreensão sobre os fenômenos apresentados no romance é enriquecida pelas contribuições clínicas e teóricas de D. W. Winnicott, um pediatra e psicanalista inglês que se revelou extremamente preocupado com os fundamentos da natureza humana. É a partir do contraste entre o ambiente suficientemente bom, descrito por Winnicott, e o mundo estéril, apresentado na obra de Shelley, que a discussão foi realizada, num diálogo que conta com a presença de filósofos (como Heidegger, Bachelard, Bakhtin, Pessanha e Arendt), psicanalistas (como Freud, Khan e Safra) e poetas (como Fernando Pessoa, Drumond e Clarisse Lispector). Os temas são apresentados de acordo com a narrativa de Frankenstein e acompanham os momentos fundamentais de seu ciclo vital, do nascimento à morte, favorecendo uma compreensão do fenômeno humano em sua totalidade

This essay – Discourse and Dissonance – deals with Mary Shelley’s gothic novel Frankenstein; or, the Modern Prometheus (1818). The focal point is the construction of “Them and Us”, as defined by scholars such as Stuart Hall, viewed in terms of the following categories: race, gender and family, class, and sexuality. Rather than applying an outside perspective, e.g. a feminist or Marxist one, to the text, I use Cultural Criticism as described by Arthur Asa Berger in order to deconstruct and reconstruct the discourse, as explained by Michel Foucault, within Shelley’s work. In doing so, I view the hermeneutics of suspicion as the starting point due to its recognition of every text’s hidden truth. Stephen Greenblatt’s term dissonance is useful for the study’s aim of finding the differences and similarities in the voices of the novel’s characters. Intersectionality functions as the tool with which I intertwine the above categories in my analysis.     In conclusion Frankenstein; or, the Modern Prometheus does not convey a message of conformity. Its class-, race- and gender-bound discourse is reproduced in the text, but simultaneously challenged. The dissonant voices of the novel show the discourse from different perspectives and make it obvious that there are cracks on the surface of the discourse, which Shelley deepens by putting it into writing – whether she was aware of it or not.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, Santa Cruz, 1988. / Typescript. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 407-414).

Submitted by Maike Costa (maiksebas@gmail.com) on 2016-06-22T13:23:45Z No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivo total.pdf: 1294009 bytes, checksum: 10450e213eb5804e1ffb8903bd34aedd (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-22T13:23:45Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 arquivo total.pdf: 1294009 bytes, checksum: 10450e213eb5804e1ffb8903bd34aedd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-07-27 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES / This research has as objective to analyze Frankenstein (1818), written by the English writer Mary Shelley (1797-1851), from a perspective of the concept of monstrosity allied to the feminist criticism, based on Gilmore (2003), Cawson (1995), Fay (1998), Gilbert & Gubar (1984), among others. Published in 1818, Frankenstein remains attractive, among other points, due to the social critic that its lines transpires when decentralizes the narrative motif out of haunted castles, family curses and ghosts that torments the characters, as the English traditional gothic novels did. Frankenstein begins a new period of the gothic novels centering the focus on the psychological limits of its characters; exploring the monstrosities from the attitudes and intentionality as a reflex of the society from the historical period that the novel is product. The fiction of Mary Shelley overflows the feminine experience originated from the contact with a society haunted for the masculine domination. Thus, our analysis is centered on the otherness of Victor Frankenstein‘s Creature as a representation for the feminine condition of its time. / Esta pesquisa tem por objetivo analisar Frankenstein (1818), da escritora inglesa Mary Shelley (1797-1851), sob uma perspectiva do conceito de monstruosidade aliada à crítica feminista, tomando como base os estudos de Gilmore (2003), Cawson (1995), Fay (1998), Gilbert e Gubar (1984), dentre outros. Publicado em 1818, Frankenstein permanece atraente, entre tantos pontos, pela crítica social que suas linhas transpiram ao decentralizar o foco da narrativa de castelos assombrados, maldições de família e fantasmas que atormentam os personagens, como havia se solidificado os romances góticos ingleses. Frankenstein inaugura uma nova fase do gótico de romances centrado nos limites psicológicos de seus personagens; explora as monstruosidades das atitudes e das intencionalidades como reflexo da sociedade do período do qual o romance é produto. A ficção de Shelley transborda a experiência feminina advinda do contato com uma sociedade assombrada pela dominação masculina. Assim, nossa análise está centrada na construção da alteridade da Criatura de Victor Frankenstein como representação da condição feminina da época em o romance foi escrito.