Frankenstein - how far can our bodies go? (Q3)

This picture could be a good reflection for us – human beings created Frankenstein, is he just some technologized-product, is he a cyborg, or already became part of us ?

It’s all begun with Mary Shelley's novel about a brilliant but frenzied scientist constructing a hideous creature from human parts stolen from graveyards. The outcome was called Frankenstein, which is considered as a classic, ugly, lumbering and murderous monster which the book never named. After the novel was published, it had an influence across literature and popular culture, some considered it as one of the very first science fictions and movies. It had also sparked a lot of controversies regarding the over-reaching technologies of modern man, which still affecting nowadays’ discussions of technologies.

Promise and Peril provides some ideas for us to ponder before starting the discussions. The term “Frankenstein”, whether monster, scientist, novel, film, image, or myth is often unclear – whenever some powerful new technology poses risk to humankind or challenges our ideas of what it means to be human. It also provides some more ideas regarding whether the society should balance the benefits of new technological discoveries against ethical or spiritual questions they may pose – for example, biomedical knowledge of tobacco withheld from the public similarly post harm and risks to human beings; or the cloning that whether scientists could hold the kind of power cloning represents proceed without constraint.

Thus there is a term called The “Frankenstein Complex”, which is well explained in the article Countering the Frankenstein Complex. McCauley discusses the“Frankenstein Complex” – meaning the technophobia not against robotics or mad scientists, but of artificial humans, the fear that artificial intelligence would soon overtake humanity and would, inevitably, take control of the planet for one purpose or another. She also points out the possibility of technology misuse and irresponsibility on the part of robotics and AI researchers that, while not resulting in the obliteration of humanity, could be disastrous for the people directly involved. (In this sense, Frankenstein, also stands for the acquisition of scientific power foolishly pursued with the wisdom of the world.) The creation of Frankenstein – technologized the trajectory of living entities through galvanization, had also suggested an open-ended nature of the body’s becoming that worth us to think about.

Responding to McCauley’s article, Imagining Futures, Dramatizing Fears has similar ideas, it argues the notion of ‘knowledge carries risks’, and talked about the fear that people afraid of knowing too much, and may perhaps even fear intelligence. It also discusses the 'The Three Laws of Robotics' first appeared explicitly in a story in 1942 : First, a robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction allow a human being to come to harm. Second, a robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. And lastly, a robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law. These three rules are a kind of ‘safeguard’ for human beings from advanced technologies. (To further understand these rules, I recommend you to watch the movie “i-robot” starring Will Smith).

In this sense, Hollywood and the media had sensationalize and fuel our fears because it makes for an exciting story. Movies like Edward Scissorhands is also a good example of Tim Burton’s take on the Frankenstein story. Edward, who is an unfinished creation, has scissors for hands. In Gothic Genre-Edward Scissorhand and Frankenstein comparison, the author makes a comparison of Scissorhands and Frankenstein regarding Scissorhands plays with the same notions of creation and idea of the monster or ‘outsider’ as Frankenstein did. The different responses of society when faced with these monsters gives insight into societal norms and viewpoints of acceptance- the two ‘monsters’ are abandoned and, seeking company, finds its way into the community. It also lead to associations like whether Frankenstein or Scissorhand should be considered as cyborg or not.

Body Parts That Matter: Frankenstein, or The Modern Cyborg? points out one important misconceptions that Frankenstein is always being considered as cyborg. It explains the differences between the two, for instance, while the cyborg may not function in quite the same ways as Frankenstein monster, it does serve as a precursor to the cyborg. Specifically stating that what Donna J. Haraway writes -“ While the cyborg may not function in quite the same ways as Frankenstein's monster, it does serve as a precursor to the cyborg”. Specifically stating that Frankenstein's creature is not a cyborg, though Frankenstein did occupied a position that opens up the possibility of the cyborg. The article further explains the cybog is a condensed image of both imagination and material reality, the two joined centres structuring any possibility of historical transformation, it is a figure not only for borders, but one involving a certain amount of responsibility. Moreover, the cyborg is not regarded as ‘other’ like Frankenstein was, they are part of us.

Frankenstein is not considered as a cyborg, rather it holds similar controversies as cloning. In Frankenstein vs. Cloning - Man: Created or Creator, it states that cloning is just the modern Frankenstein, that cloning creates something that was not given to humanity. It talks about the possibility of human cloning was raised when Scottish scientists at Roslin Institute created a sheep called "Dolly" in 1997. Since cloning also involves the creation of beings by man, it also sparkled lots of controversies as Frankenstein did. It also tells us the relationship between cloning and Frankenstein, just like when Dr. Richard Seed announced that he was going to start a human cloning clinic, what his opponents called him was "modern-day Dr. Frankenstein." People fear of Frankenstein as well as cloning because a clone is an imperfect imitation of the real thing.

In respond to the previous sites, Thinking Though Technology: Frankenstein’s Problem (or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Technology) says we are all living in this technological-advanced age that new technologies are inevitable, and they already became part of us. This site provides meaningful outlook for readers to ponder the balance between human and technologies. The author points out that though we are living in an era that scientific, technological dominance over much of our social and economic life, it is important for us to stop focusing in new technologies. Since the author notes, we are creating beings that we are sending out into the world with little concern for how best to include them in the dynamic and changing human community- just as Mary Shelley's novel created Frankenstein but people just have too little concern about what kind of destructiveness technology could bring. Instead, we should pay more attention on how values, ideas, and interests embodied in technologies remain hidden from view becomes a bit less mysterious if we reflect that many technologies take their place comfortably as part of the ordinary everydayness of our surroundings.


REFERENCES


Daniel, C. “Imagining Futures, Dramatizing Fears”, http://www.aber.ac.uk/media/Documents/SF/sf03.html (Accessed 26 February 2009)

“Frankenstein vs. Cloning – Man: Created or Creator”, http://harmoniousglow.blogspot.com/2007/06/frankenstein-vs-cloning-man-created-or.html (Accessed 24 February 2009)

“Gothic Genre-Edward Scissorhand and Frankenstein comparison”, http://www.echeat.com/essay.php?t=33361 (Accessed 26 February 2009)
Harold E. Varmus. “Frankenstein – penetrating the secrets of nature”, http://www.nlm.nih.gov/hmd/frankenstein/frank_promise.html (Accessed 23 February 2009)

Lee, M. “Countering the Frankenstein Complex”, http://www-robotics.usc.edu/~tapus/AAAISpringSymposium2007/submissions/aaai_ss_07_id06.pdf (Accessed 2 February 2009)

Robert, W. A. “Body Parts That Matter: Frankenstein, or The Modern Cyborg?”, http://www.womenwriters.net/editorials/anderson1.htm (Accessed 26 February 2009)

Shari, P. “Thinking Though Technology: Frankenstein’s Problem (or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Technology)”,
http://www.viterbo.edu/analytic/Vol%2019%20no.%201/thinking%20through%20tecnology.pdf (Accessed 24 February 2009)

Source of picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/94177846@N00/312296494/