Danielle Elisha F. Ching
Embracing science doesn’t necessarily mean giving up on one’s set of morals. Throughout history and elsewhere in the world, this had been the scientific community’s stand on humanity. In the multitude versions and adaptations of the book and movie “Frankenstein,” the same views were shown. What Dr. Frankenstein did (bringing the dead back to life) was clearly a taboo for the people, and was therefore considered as inhumane. The townspeople feared the unfamiliar, and hunted down the Creature when it was discovered. Dr. Frankenstein also did his experiment in hiding, implying that he knew the possible repercussions once his experiment is discovered by the common folks. In light of this belief on morality and science, the true horror in the story was not caused by the Creature, but by the experiment. The experiment alone, challenging the laws of nature and life, was the horrifying aspect of the story. Moreover, the Creature was not the true monster, but the creator. Just like how God created men in his own image, or how the Greek gods created mortals alike, the Creature in the story of Frankenstein is only the reflection of the creator—a monster. That’s why this story is known as the story of Frankenstein, and not the Creature.
The monster, in this case I personally prefer to address as the Creature, was created to be dumb in one of the film adaptations, “The Bride of Frankenstein.” One of the possible reasons behind was so that Dr. Frankenstein could control his creation, which unfortunately did not happen. It could be seen that Dr. Frankenstein had no control over the Creature, as it just went berserk when he tried to control it. The Creature was also considered as on the loose, and not even the guards could keep it in a cell. This originally-designed dumb creation soon learned how to behave and talk like a normal person when he met the blind hermit.
What happened to the Creature goes to show that anyone or anything is capable of great things beyond its original blueprint, just like how science and technology shape our lives everyday by exceeding limits. However, there are certain kinds of limits, like morality, that borders science. And that conflict between morality and science, in some of the more controversial advances in the present age, is the present-day scientist’s real monster.