Wednesday, September 11, 2013
The creature and DNA
Something that has been perplexing me is the idea of the creature reproducing. It was the initial fear of Frankenstein that if he were to create a mate for his creation, that there was a chance that the two would reproduce. The idea I can't seem to grasp is how. As stated by Bate in "Frankenstein and the State of Nature," "Frankenstein is like a genetic engineer a century and a half before the discovery of DNA." (477) Which leads me to believe that no real knowledge of DNA was relevant in the situation. If the creature was composed from various decomposing parts of other humans, what would his DNA makeup be? Would he even have one? How would it be reflected in his current state? If the creature and his created mate were to procreate, wouldn't the DNA be reflected in the parts they are assembled of and not their physical makeup themselves?
1 comment:
I think the concern on Frankenstein's part was simply that because his monster WAS stitched together from other people and thus if he were to hook up with a chick of the same human stitching, the child would be an abomination. Thus why. I don't think DNA was the law he was following. Simply what he thought of natural law. My critical essay piece touched upon the basic idea that since he had man parts he could reproduce. Another reason why the female counterpart would be an abomination: Frankenstein would've had to rewire a uterus and reproductive system for her which I don't see working out. Thus, quite a large chance there was no chance in a child monster being produced at all. Either way there was HUMAN DNA involved. Who knows? maybe a normal kid would've popped out? How'd THAT be for a dysfunctional family?
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.