PART I
Labs, Bots, and Punks
TRANSMEDIATING TECHNOLOGY AND SCIENCE
CHAPTER 1
Frankenstein and Science Fiction
Gino Roncaglia
FRANKENSTEIN AND THE ORIGINS OF SCIENCE FICTION
In discussing the relationship between Mary Shelleyâs Frankenstein and science fiction (SF), the first question to be addressed is whether Frankenstein itself should be considered an example (possibly, the very first example) of a SF novel.
The most common characterization of Frankenstein in terms of literary genresâeven if not a wholly undisputed oneâplaces it squarely in the field of Gothic novels.1 And despite the many defenders of the thesis of âthe Gothic origins of science fictionââto quote the title of the influential essay by Patrick Brantlinger2âit is quite clear that no definition of SF, however broad, could possibly include most Gothic novels. Should we decide to consider Frankenstein both as a Gothic novel and as an early (or the earliest) example of SF, it would be necessary to attribute to it features which go beyond the traditional characterization of Gothic literature. At the same time, it would be necessary to define SF in such a way as to render it compatible with some features traditionally attributed to Gothic literature (and present in Frankenstein).
The first task is relatively easy, and is usually accomplished by pointing to the role of science in Mary Shelleyâs novel. Frankenstein is, quite literally, a tale of scientific imagination. The very first lines of the Preface to the 1818 edition (written by Percy Shelley) clearly mark the distance from previous Gothic novels, by underscoring the scientific background of the story:
The event on which this fiction is founded has been supposed, by Dr. Darwin, and some of the physiological writers of Germany, as not of impossible occurrence. I shall not be supposed as according the remotest degree of serious faith to such an imagination; yet, in assuming it as the basis of a work of fancy, I have not considered myself as merely weaving a series of supernatural terrors. The event on which the interest of the story depends is exempt from the disadvantages of a mere tale of spectres or enchantment.3
Mary Shelleyâs novel is therefore consciously adding something new to the Gothic tradition: âFrankensteinâs claim to originality is its rejection of the supernatural,â and âscience fiction can only exist when it is possible to distinguish in this way between natural and supernatural,â states Paul K. Alkon; on these grounds, he can confidently assert that âscience fiction starts with Mary Shelleyâs Frankenstein. Its first critic was Percy Shelley.â4 The Gothic mood, however, is still present, since âterror remains a desirable effect. It is only supernatural terrors that are to be avoided.â5 Patricia S. Warrick summarizes this point, observing that Frankenstein is generally regarded as SF âbecause its protagonist, Victor Frankenstein, has been educated as a scientist, and he builds a creature not through any unexplained magic but through his knowledge of chemistry, anatomy, physiology, and electricity.â6
The second taskâproviding a definition of SF that connects it to the Gothic traditionâis much more complex, given the broad array of definitions proposed for the SF genre, the complexity of its historical evolution, and the extreme variety of its sub-genres.7 As Adam Roberts points out, âall of the many definitions offered by critics have been contradicted or modified by other critics, and it is always possible to point to texts consensually called SF that fall outside the usual definitions.â8
The topic is only relevant here insofar as the proposed definitions might be of help in discussing the relationship (or the lack thereof) between Gothic literature and SF, and the possible role of Frankenstein in assessing such a relationship. From this point of view, among the different definitions or characterization of SF that have been proposed,9 the most useful is probably the one suggested by Brian Aldiss, a SF writer and one of the most influential historians of the genre: âScience fiction is the search for a definition of mankind and his status in the universe which will stand in our advanced but confused state of knowledge (science), and is characteristically cast in the Gothic or post-Gothic mode.â10
âScience fictionââstates Aldiss elsewhereââwas born from the Gothic mode and it is hardly free of it now. Nor is the distance between the two modes great. The Gothic emphasis was on the distant and the unearthly.â11 I will not discuss here Aldissâs conception of Gothic, but two further quotations may help to elucidate his idea of the transition from Gothic to SF: âOne strong Gothic theme is that of descent from a ânatural worldâ to inferno or incarceration, where the protagonist goes, willingly or otherwise, in search of a secret, an identity, or a relationship.â12 Aldissâs prototype of a Gothic novel seems to be (here as elsewhere) Matthew G. Lewisâs The Monk (1796), and he stresses that many SF or proto-SF stories share âsuch motifs, from famous exercises such as Jules Verneâs adventures at the centre of the earth to Frankensteinâs descent into charnel houses, Draculaâs descent to his earth-coffins, or the journey to Trantor, in effect a total underground planet.â13 In this process, âthe archetypal figures of cruel father and seducing monk were transformed into those of scientist and alien.â14
Given this conception of the relationship between Gothic and SF, it is not surprising that Aldiss should share the same opinion expressed more recently by Alkon (Aldiss was in fact the first to advance it in a reasoned and convincing way): Frankenstein is not just one among many possible âancestorsâ of SF, it is its first (and one of its best) examples, thus making Mary Shelley âthe first science fiction writer.â15 And a few years later, in their history of SF, Robert Scholes and Eric Rabkin tellingly labeled the early, pre-pulp era of SF âthe first century a.F.â (after Frankenstein).16
In a somewhat more refined way, Brian Stableford includes Frankenstein among the first instances of a more specific tradition of speculative fiction, that of the British scientific romance, which in his opinion will fully merge with US science fiction only after World War II.17 But the role of the novel as key constituent of a tradition thatâdirectly or notâis of immediate relevance in understanding contemporary SF, remains unimpaired.
The thesis that sees Frankenstein as the first SF novel has, however, not gone unchallenged. Adam Roberts âdoes not concur with the beliefâso universally acknowledged by critics as almost to approach dogmaâthat âScience fiction starts with Mary Shelleyâs Frankenstein.â â18 As he states, âthe identification of the point of origin for SF is as fiercely contested a business as defining the form.â19 Yet the two questions are clearly connected.
Roberts identifies three possible âhistoriesâ of SF, partially overlapping but based on different conceptions of the genre: 1) a âlong history,â stressing the presence of SF themes in literary works as remote from us and from one another, both in time and in nature, as the Epic of Gilgamesh, Ciceroâs Somnium Scipionis, and Ariostoâs Orlando Furioso, and dating the convergence of literary fantasy and science back to Keplerâs Somnium, sive Astronomia Lunaris (first published in 1634); 2) a âGothicâ history of SF, with Frankenstein as its starting point, justified by considerations similar to Aldissâs, Warrickâs, and Alkonâs; 3) what we might call an âeditorialâ history of SF, starting with the pulp magazines of the 1920s and the founder and first editor of Amazing Stories, Hugo Gernsback.20
The âlong historyâ is clearly based on a broadly âthematicâ conception of SF: interplanetary travel and, more generally, otherworldly imagination are typical SF themes, and can be recognized as such even when they are present in literary works not directly connected with modern science or with the use of the label âscience fiction.â The âeditorialâ history, on the contrary, is closer to the circular but undoubtedly effective definition proposed by John W. Campbell, the best knownâand the most influentialâamong the editors working in the âgolden ageâ of the 1930s and 1940s: âScience fiction is what science-fiction editors publish.â21 As we have seen, the âGothicâ history is basically linked to the presence in SF of Gothic themes âenhancedâ in such a way as to include scientific imagination. This kind of âenhancementâ could be explained in terms of one of the most authoritative definitions proposed for SF, that of Darko Suvin. According to his analysis, SF is âa literary genre or verbal construct whose necessary and sufficient condition are the presence and interaction of estrangement and cognition, and whose main device is an imaginative framework alternative to the authorâs empirical environment.â22 In elaborating on this definition, Suvin introduces the notion of ânovumâ: a new element, usually in the form of a rationally justifiable scientific innovation, which is used or presupposed in the story. And it is precisely the ânovum,â constituted by the unexplained but purportedly scientific procedure used by Victor Frankenstein in giving life to the Creature, that would both distinguish Frankenstein from earlier Gothic novels and allow for its inclusion among the ranks of SF works.
FRANKENSTEINIAN DESCENDANTS
The discussion of the role of Frankenstein in the critical assessment of the nature and the early history of SF, however interesting, does not and cannot exhaust the question of the influence of Mary Shelleyâs work on contemporary SF. This is a question that deserves a...