Film Adaptations Of Mary Shelley's Frankenstein
Frankenstein: Creature Turned Monster
Lauren Williams
Hammond High Magnet School
2nd Block PDP English II
Mrs. Duncan
Word Count: 1195
“”
“Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, written 198 years ago still effects and shapes popular culture today. In 2007, Thomas Leitch said that Frankenstein’s creature had, at that time, been played by 102 actors in film adaptations (Leitch, 207). Since 2007, this number has increased due to publication of films such as The Frankenstein Theory (2013) and I, Frankenstein (2014). Such adaptations of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein date back as far as 1823 with the first theater production, Presumption (Florescu 151) and the first film version in 1910 by J. Searle Dawley. Showing that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein …show more content…
has been one of the most influential works of literature.
Although the adaptations, of both film and theater, are what popularize the novel, at least now.
These adaptations are what change societies ideas of the themes and characters in the novel. During the first hundred years after the novel was released, there were various changes made to the creature on stage, as well as eventually on film. Though, in 1931, James Whale’s Universal Pictures’ Frankenstein film, with actors such as Boris Karloff, created a new paradigm. Since then, through the 1930s and 1940s, and somewhat through the 1970s, Frankenstein’s creature has been depicted as a stumbling hideous colossal devoid of intelligence, a bolt in its neck, a scar on its forehead and a psychopathic tendency to murder. In Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, the description of the monster is drastically different. Not only does she describe him physically Shelley also gives us further descriptions of the creature as moving with “superhuman speed” (Shelley, 67) and as having “long locks of ragged hair” (Shelley, 158). Even when Victor Frankenstein confronts the creature after the creature escaped from his lab, the creature has learned to talk intelligently. Even the creature attested to his intelligence, by saying “while I improved in speech, I also learned the science of letters, as it was taught to the stranger; and this opened before me a field for wonder and delight” (Shelley, 82). Whale’s monster completely changes this articulate and sympathetic character into a different kind of monster and one that has successfully replaced the
original.
When an audience watches a film adaptation of a book, they have certain hopes for the film, based on either the book or the knowledge of previous adaptations. Normally, people who have read a book before seeing an adaptation, rather the book over other versions. Whereas, people who have not read the book are more likely to compare the adaptation to others like it. Julie Sanders says that it is impossible for film adaptations of Frankenstein to be entirely true to Shelley’s novel, therefore, the creature is going to change. She also says that in order for something to be an adaptation it must remain somewhat true to the book however most of the film is of course again, subject to change. This supports the postmodernist belief that modern works of fiction, whether books, poems, or films, are all variations on well-recognized themes. James Whale’s film introduced many ideas that are not found in the book such as the creature’s sluggish walk, its incapability to communicate and its lethal nature, which fixed themselves to the stereotype that is familiar to us today. A character named Fritz was even added to a stage production and the infamous lines “It lives”! It lives!” were written in (Hitchcock 83). Although, there are hundreds of thousands of people that have read Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, when referencing the creature most seem to overlook or completely bypass Shelley’s description of the creature. If the theatre productions of the nineteenth century had not strayed so far from the book, we might actually have the true form of the creature today.
A series of cultural and socio-economic events have resulted in some of the most drastic changes, including form and behavior of the monster. Whale’s version of the creature was created during one of the most influential times for art, the Great Depression, and when audiences “wanted entertainment to take them into the realm of fantasy, to raise their heart rates without reminding them of real-world dangers” (Hitchcock 142). Artistic license coupled with the knowledge of what the audience of the time wanted led to the creation Whale’s own Frankenstein’s monster and it is this creature that has become the stereotype linked not only to the film and other representations, but also with the name Frankenstein, shifting the name of the creator to the creature. The idea of Whale’s monster was reinforced by eight more Frankenstein movies, ending in 1948 with Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948). It is interesting, that although this last film is in fact a comedy, the change of genre had no effect on the creature’s appearance. This fact shows, that if they were in fact to change the look of Frankenstein’s monster, the audience might be confused as to what that thing actually is. Meaning that if there were to be an actual true to the story adaptation made, the audience would reject it, because it would not be the ‘real Frankenstein’.
To conclude although adaptations popularize a novel, they affect the way a novel is perceived and the ideas presented in the novel. After polling the 8th block ATTL class, the majority of students said that, before they read the novel they thought of Frankenstein as the monster, as well as him being green. Showing that the adaptations are what most, or the percent of the population that has not read the novel, base their opinion on. Which in turn can affect a 198-year-old novel. Showing yet again how society and popular culture affect literary works. “
Work Cited
Shelley, M. W. (1999). Frankenstein, or, The modern Prometheus. New York: Modern Library
Barton, C. (Director). (1948). Abbott & Costello meet Frankenstein [Motion picture on DVD]. Hammond, Ia.: Universal Pictures
Bortolotti, G., & Hucheon, L. (2006). On the Origin of Adaptations: Rethinking Fidelity Discourse and “Success” – Biologically (Vol. 38.3, New Literary History ).
Hitchcock, S. T. (2007). Frankenstein: a cultural history. New York: W.W. Norton.
Leitch, T. M. (2009). Film adaptation and its discontents: from Gone with the Wind to The Passion of the Christ. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Malchow, M. L. (1997). Frankenstein's Monster and Images of Race in Nineteenth-Century Britain. Past & Present 139.
Sanders, J. (2016). Adaptation and Appropriation. The New Critical Idiom. London: Routledge.
Brookes, M. (Director). (1974). Young Frankenstein [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: 20th Century Fox.
Lauren Williams
Hammond High Magnet School
2nd Block PDP English II
Mrs. Duncan
Word Count: 1195
“”
“Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, written 198 years ago still effects and shapes popular culture today. In 2007, Thomas Leitch said that Frankenstein’s creature had, at that time, been played by 102 actors in film adaptations (Leitch, 207). Since 2007, this number has increased due to publication of films such as The Frankenstein Theory (2013) and I, Frankenstein (2014). Such adaptations of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein date back as far as 1823 with the first theater production, Presumption (Florescu 151) and the first film version in 1910 by J. Searle Dawley. Showing that Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein …show more content…
has been one of the most influential works of literature.
Although the adaptations, of both film and theater, are what popularize the novel, at least now.
These adaptations are what change societies ideas of the themes and characters in the novel. During the first hundred years after the novel was released, there were various changes made to the creature on stage, as well as eventually on film. Though, in 1931, James Whale’s Universal Pictures’ Frankenstein film, with actors such as Boris Karloff, created a new paradigm. Since then, through the 1930s and 1940s, and somewhat through the 1970s, Frankenstein’s creature has been depicted as a stumbling hideous colossal devoid of intelligence, a bolt in its neck, a scar on its forehead and a psychopathic tendency to murder. In Shelley’s novel Frankenstein, the description of the monster is drastically different. Not only does she describe him physically Shelley also gives us further descriptions of the creature as moving with “superhuman speed” (Shelley, 67) and as having “long locks of ragged hair” (Shelley, 158). Even when Victor Frankenstein confronts the creature after the creature escaped from his lab, the creature has learned to talk intelligently. Even the creature attested to his intelligence, by saying “while I improved in speech, I also learned the science of letters, as it was taught to the stranger; and this opened before me a field for wonder and delight” (Shelley, 82). Whale’s monster completely changes this articulate and sympathetic character into a different kind of monster and one that has successfully replaced the
original.
When an audience watches a film adaptation of a book, they have certain hopes for the film, based on either the book or the knowledge of previous adaptations. Normally, people who have read a book before seeing an adaptation, rather the book over other versions. Whereas, people who have not read the book are more likely to compare the adaptation to others like it. Julie Sanders says that it is impossible for film adaptations of Frankenstein to be entirely true to Shelley’s novel, therefore, the creature is going to change. She also says that in order for something to be an adaptation it must remain somewhat true to the book however most of the film is of course again, subject to change. This supports the postmodernist belief that modern works of fiction, whether books, poems, or films, are all variations on well-recognized themes. James Whale’s film introduced many ideas that are not found in the book such as the creature’s sluggish walk, its incapability to communicate and its lethal nature, which fixed themselves to the stereotype that is familiar to us today. A character named Fritz was even added to a stage production and the infamous lines “It lives”! It lives!” were written in (Hitchcock 83). Although, there are hundreds of thousands of people that have read Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, when referencing the creature most seem to overlook or completely bypass Shelley’s description of the creature. If the theatre productions of the nineteenth century had not strayed so far from the book, we might actually have the true form of the creature today.
A series of cultural and socio-economic events have resulted in some of the most drastic changes, including form and behavior of the monster. Whale’s version of the creature was created during one of the most influential times for art, the Great Depression, and when audiences “wanted entertainment to take them into the realm of fantasy, to raise their heart rates without reminding them of real-world dangers” (Hitchcock 142). Artistic license coupled with the knowledge of what the audience of the time wanted led to the creation Whale’s own Frankenstein’s monster and it is this creature that has become the stereotype linked not only to the film and other representations, but also with the name Frankenstein, shifting the name of the creator to the creature. The idea of Whale’s monster was reinforced by eight more Frankenstein movies, ending in 1948 with Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1948). It is interesting, that although this last film is in fact a comedy, the change of genre had no effect on the creature’s appearance. This fact shows, that if they were in fact to change the look of Frankenstein’s monster, the audience might be confused as to what that thing actually is. Meaning that if there were to be an actual true to the story adaptation made, the audience would reject it, because it would not be the ‘real Frankenstein’.
To conclude although adaptations popularize a novel, they affect the way a novel is perceived and the ideas presented in the novel. After polling the 8th block ATTL class, the majority of students said that, before they read the novel they thought of Frankenstein as the monster, as well as him being green. Showing that the adaptations are what most, or the percent of the population that has not read the novel, base their opinion on. Which in turn can affect a 198-year-old novel. Showing yet again how society and popular culture affect literary works. “
Work Cited
Shelley, M. W. (1999). Frankenstein, or, The modern Prometheus. New York: Modern Library
Barton, C. (Director). (1948). Abbott & Costello meet Frankenstein [Motion picture on DVD]. Hammond, Ia.: Universal Pictures
Bortolotti, G., & Hucheon, L. (2006). On the Origin of Adaptations: Rethinking Fidelity Discourse and “Success” – Biologically (Vol. 38.3, New Literary History ).
Hitchcock, S. T. (2007). Frankenstein: a cultural history. New York: W.W. Norton.
Leitch, T. M. (2009). Film adaptation and its discontents: from Gone with the Wind to The Passion of the Christ. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Malchow, M. L. (1997). Frankenstein's Monster and Images of Race in Nineteenth-Century Britain. Past & Present 139.
Sanders, J. (2016). Adaptation and Appropriation. The New Critical Idiom. London: Routledge.
Brookes, M. (Director). (1974). Young Frankenstein [Motion picture on DVD]. United States: 20th Century Fox.