Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, usually credited as the first true work of science fiction, stresses the fairly common themes of man’s overweening pride, his error in overstepping boundaries, and the often horrific events that follow such actions.
In Shelley’s day, early 19th century, many in the field of “natural philosophy,” or science, were trying to discover the “life impulse,” or the origin of the life. This was the time that Dr. Galvin (see Galvinism) was attempting to resurrect dead bodies. It was commonly believed that electricity, also newly discovered, was the spark of life and experiments were conducted making a dead frog’s legs jump, for instance. Percy Shelley’s first wife, the pregnant Harriet, drowned herself in the middle of London in a pond upon learning that her husband was having an affair with Mary. Doctors tried new methods of resusitation on her to no avail.
Many, like Shelley and her atheist husband, Percy the poet and her philosopher parents the Godwins, had abandoned a belief in God, so substitiute answers to fundamental questions were sought. Elaborate salon discussions were held at the Godwin home where Percy and Mary met.
However, the Shelleys held Romantic worldviews. While denying the Judeo-Christian God, they also distrusted pure science and favored a more transcendental view and certainly believed, like all Romantics, in the sanctitiy of Nature — capital N. Tamperings with nature, its fundamental laws, would surely open a Pandora’s box.
Hence, when the married Percy, Mary, Lord Byron and Mary’s half-sister and another friend were vacationing at the Vila Diodati, a contest was proposed. It was raining and philosophy is only fun for so long. Everyone go away and write your best ghost story.
The boys got bored with the project and left it in favor of throwing the football, but the 18-year-old Mary invented the monster we are all so familiar with today: Frankenstein’s monster. (Frankenstein is actually Victor Frankenstein, the dubious creator. The monster is unnamed.)
The novel was and still is a hit and has been produced and parodied in many genres, including Gene Wilder as “Young Frankenstein” in Mel Brooks’s comedy. But Mary was dead serious. Her point: Don’t mess with Mother Nature. Victor’s fascination with the “unhallowed arts” digging around in cemeteries searching for body parts was even to the atheist a despicable act. Further, Victor’s experiment playing God (Shelley’s Nature) results in the death of his little brother, a family friend, and his own bride on their honeymoon, all victims of the monster and Victor’s pride.
Last weekend I visited a museum where the Bodies exhibit is on display. This exhibit has stirred global controversy, one side lauding its educational value, its magnification of the glories of the human body, the other side declaring it an exploitation of human dignity. In the museum I visited, the exhibit was adjacent to the children’s museum. A uniformed employee steered children away, loudly warning parents to keep to the right.
No wonder. Twenty-one real human bodies and 260 body parts are displayed in “dynamic” positions that mimic everyday activities. Some hold that the Church kept the world in the scientific dark ages through its squeamish approach to the human body. Others, like me, believe that there is a sanctity to life and death and the body itself. To display real people, though dead, without names, without identity, and reportedly without their permission (possibly Chinese prisoners,) is an invasion of privacy (current battle cry du jour) in the most extreme manner.
In an article by Paulette Miniter for SmartMoney.com, the following financial statistics shed more than a little light.
“Provocative ideas are often lucrative ones, and though Premier [Geller runs Premier Exhibitions (PRXI: 4.68, -0.34, -6.77%), a $463 million company that operates "Bodies" shows around the globe.] has been public since 1993, it’s just starting to get respect on Wall Street. Shares have gained 158% year to date to $15.65 as of Wednesday’s close. “We believe the company’s stock price has only recently begun to reflect its potential for significant sales and earnings growth,” Chris Krueger, an analyst at Northland Securities in Minneapolis, said in a research report in late July. Shares hit a 52-week high of $18.62 on July 18.
“In Premier’s fiscal first quarter, ended May 31, revenue nearly doubled to $11.4 million and earnings about tripled to $3.3 million. Cash and cash equivalents are up to $19.7 million, a substantial increase from $2.5 million a year earlier.”
The National Enquirer pulls in big bucks, too. This display appeals to man’s base, morbid curiosity. It’s a freak show. Anyone who wants to study the human body for educational purposes will find no shortage of material. Exhibit viewers see more than medical students do.
Who are these “bodies?” Victor used the random recently dead and buried. “Bodies” uses anonymous cadavers, too. From China. According to an AP article by Mitch Stacey published by the Washingtonpost.com August, 2005,
“The company says it legally obtains specimens from the Dalian Medical University Plastination Laboratories in China, but there’s been media speculation that some of the bodies are those of executed prisoners or other victims of an underground anatomy market. Premier maintains the bodies used in its shows are unclaimed cadavers.”
Anything for a profit. Imagine your father’s body, privates and all, on display for millions of gawking viewers. Without his permission. He has no name any more. He has no grave with a tombstone marking the resting place of his mortal body. He has been plasticized by a firm in China and is viewed at $2o.oo a peep in a carnival side show. Hardly dignified. It’s dehumanizing and recalls everything we hated about Nazi experimentation, doesn’t it?
Where is the Church on this? It holds the corner on these issues and should make the traditional Judeo-Christian view on this subject known. (I saw some Catholic anti-exhibit press.)
I appreciate the navy burial service and offer it here. Note the careful, reverent protocol. But what were we thinking. Look at the “Bodies” stock figures. The Department of Defense could make billions! The exhibit: War . . . What is it good for?
5 responses so far ↓
Bob // February 21, 2008 at 10:42 pm |
I once did a burial at sea with the official ceremony. The deceased had been cremated and the family was on board. I wore my sword and armband, we fired the volleys. Quite a contrast to the exhibit you describe. Where is the church? I think it still preaches the sanctity of human life. We live in an era where human life is not dignified, whether it is abortion, euthanasia (I hate that term), or display of cadavers. Quite a world we live in.
Daughter Dearest // February 26, 2008 at 2:30 pm |
I love Shelley, as you know. I love Frankenstein. I love the Romantics. In my poetry class, we referred to Percy as “Bysche” and chatted about them like old friends. I even kinda like the idea of a funeral pyre, but I suppose it’s that old Anglo-Saxon blood, eh?
While Branaugh’s film version (yeah, I’m still hung up on Branaugh, I mean I’m in Much Ado!) of Frankenstein isn’t entirely accurate, it comes pretty close. One of the most powerful scenes that captures the feelings you’re writing about (I think) is the scene where the creature comes to life. Victor is excited, euphoric almost. Almost immediately, upon seeing the distorted face and features, Branaugh’s face becomes a picture of revulsion. It’s great. You should rewatch it.
paisleyandplaid // February 26, 2008 at 3:02 pm |
Branaugh titled it Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. You’re right. It’s the closest to the novel the others being sensational in a Hollywoodish, superficial vein.
You have nothing on the “Bodies” exhibit? Frankenstein was employed as the backdrop for that discussion.
Daughter Dearest // February 26, 2008 at 4:02 pm |
Oh, I think it’s deplorable, and on top of that, it’s gross. I have had MANY discussions in my college experience about what constitutes art and what is ethical and things of that nature. I would always say to err on the side of human dignity- you never know if it’ll be you on that display someday if you’re in a random nautical accident.
Discussion of Frankenstein is more in my vein, though.
Karen Tanner // February 29, 2008 at 11:39 am |
The fact that these are “unclaimed” bodies does not justify dipping them in plastic and posing them playing ring around the rosey! What has happened to human nature….where is our empathy? What happened to death with dignity. I would like to ask everyone who leaves this exhibit — how would you feel if that was your Mother dissected, posed and on view for everyone? Why are we not teaching our children respect for the dead? Maybe if we emphasized respect for the dead …respect coudl resurge among the living!!
When I saw the 20/20 story I cried. I called the office of my congressman, senator, state representative and mayor stated the reason for my call, the reason for my outrage and left my name and number with all of them — not one of them has had enough respect to even acknowledge my phone call.