Our interest in the parallels between Frankenstein and Blade Runner is further enhanced by consideration
of their marked differences in textual form.
Evaluate this statement in the light of your comparative study of Frankenstein and Blade Runner.
Sample response: Prose fiction and Film
Prescribed texts:
Frankenstein, Mary Shelley, 1819
Blade Runner (Director’s cut), Ridley Scott, 1982
Introduction
sets out the
main
argument:
that the texts
share common
content, but
changes in
context,
audience and
form mean
that the
content is
handled
differently
There are many parallels between Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein and Ridley Scott’s Blade
Runner. They both explore major questions about the nature of being human, personal
identity and whether or not people should “play god” by creating other life. They share
the technique of interior narrative, so we understand what the major characters are
thinking and what the motivations are for their actions. However, while the big questions
about human nature may not have changed substantially since the early 19th century, the
world is now a very different place and the textual forms clearly express that difference.
Shelley’s Gothic novel becomes Scott’s film noir/crime fiction/sci-fi film, and the way
the ideas are explored, and the audience for these ideas, are both very different.
Frankenstein was published in 1819, when political upheaval in parts of Europe and
major advances in science and medicine were challenging established ideas about people
and society. The novel asks us to consider what it means to be a human being – can a
human being be “made”, as the Creature is?; how is identity formed?; are scientific and
medical advances incompatible with religious views?; what responsibilities do we owe to
others? These are much the same questions that Scott asks in Blade Runner, although he
does not address the conflict between science and religion in the same terms as Shelley.
The interest in the texts lies in comparing how the same ideas are explored differently,
through different mediums and for different audiences in different times and places.
How Shelley
treats the ‘man
playing god’
concept
The Christian understanding of God as the creator of all life underpins Shelley’s novel.
Frankenstein is the anti-hero, whose acts of creation are so obscene and corrupt he must
perform them alone and well out of sight. In true Gothic style, these unacceptable acts
are performed in secret locations, rooms within rooms where decent people cannot find
out what is going on. The secrecy, deception and Shelley’s language – “charnel-houses”,
“decay and corruption” – tell us that Frankenstein’s actions are intrinsically wrong. His
new-found knowledge of science and anatomy is disturbing and “astonishing”. He
hesitates about what to do with it, not because he thinks that creating life is inherently
wrong, but more because he wonders if “science and mechanics” are advanced enough to
work. His qualms are all about the technical aspects, and not about the inherent morality.
How the same
concept is
treated in film
In Scott’s film we do not have such a specific view of the moral argument about creating
life though there are religious allusions in the images of Roy’s death. Tyrell has been
handsomely rewarded by society for creating replicants; this is a multi-cultural, postindustrial world where there are many beliefs and non-beliefs. Tyrell’s personal god,
capital, is the dominant ideology, so what he does is a mark of success and does not need
to be hidden away like Frankenstein’s work. Tyrell’s headquarters is a ziggurat, a temple
to capitalism. However, Tyrell himself does hide away in this temple – he lives in as much
of a Gothic cloister as Frankenstein, because the world he has helped to create is now so
toxic he cannot venture out into it. He imagines he is safe from the monsters he has
made, but Roy breaches his defences and has his revenge. Scott shows us that the
seemingly-impregnable fortress can be breached, just as Shelley tells us that no matter
how much Frankenstein hides away, he can’t hide from the Creature or from knowledge
of what he has done.
The search for
identity in the
Both texts consider how identity and a sense of self are shaped. In the novel, we learn
that the Creature is self-taught. Rejected by his creator and by society, he must learn
novel
about people and the world from books. He remains unsatisfied, however, because he
cannot form a meaningful relationship with anyone, and it is Frankenstein’s refusal to
help him in this that tips him from the reasonable to the vengeful. We learn about the
Creature’s development through his conversations with Frankenstein, told from his own
personal perspective. In the novel, we are given the Creature’s perspective and
Frankenstein’s perspective, both mediated through Captain Walton’s narration. The prose
fiction form allows Shelley to develop her ideas at length and convey the inner feelings of
the characters in some detail, as well as provide commentary on the action and morality
via Walton.
How identity
is represented
through image
in the film
Scott also deals with questions of the self, showing us the importance of identity to the
replicants through images. These constitute their implanted memories and create the
sense of self, in a much more personalised way than the Creature derives from books.
The replicants know the importance of these images of memories – on the run, they still
carry their photos with them. We are not specifically told by any external narration in the
film – the audience must pick up the clues from the images presented. In both texts, the
importance of these memories and relationships is conveyed quite differently. The
Creature tells us in his narrative that he learns about himself and others through reading –
all information is conveyed through words. In the film, the replicants say nothing about
the photos, but the fact that they are always with them connotes their significance – we
see that they are important. Rachael is the one who comments on the importance of
memory in building identity. Her whole sense of self hinges on whether the childhood
memories she has are real or implanted. We see that her memories are blurred, which is
ambiguous – are they blurred because of the passing of time or because they are unstable
and unreal?
Setting and the
relationship
between
internal and
external
worlds in both
texts
In response to their different audiences, the texts have some marked differences beyond
the thematic similarities. In particular, Blade Runner comments on the external world in
ways that Frankenstein does not. In the novel, setting is used to show how Frankenstein
has distanced himself from the world. He rejects the ordinary, normal world that his
friends and family live in and instead inhabits the remote and unusual places – the remote
Alps, the northern wastes, his laboratory hide-away. In contrast, the everyday
environment in 2019 in Blade Runner is so contaminated by human greed and stupidity
that only those who cannot afford to escape it go into it. The film opens with scenes of
ravaged, polluted Los Angeles, adding another dimension to the notion of people
“playing god”. We see the dire effects when human beings believe that they can interfere
with nature. At the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, neither Shelley nor her
audience knew about environmental degradation – her concerns were only with
corruption of the soul. Scott shows in his film what damage can result, not just to people
but to the environment, when science, technology and capitalism run unchecked.
Different
genres bring
out different
aspects of plot
and theme
Both texts share a similar idea about the created beings – in some sense they are
dangerous and must be stopped. Shelley uses this idea to explore notions of right and
wrong and consider Frankenstein’s moral failings, especially when contrasted with the
Creature’s earnest attempts to understand life and morality. She poses the question,
“Who is the monster?” Scott exploits this ambiguity about right and wrong using
elements of film noir, where the “crimes” are political and environmental as well as the
more typical law-based actions. As in Frankenstein, the heroes and villains are not always
clearly identifiable. The darkness of film noir suits the ideas in the film: the moral
ambiguity, the destructive abilities of human beings, the sense of lawlessness and chaos
that characterises Los Angeles in 2019.
Conclusion
comments on
the most
marked
While there is a great deal in common between the two texts, Frankenstein and Blade
Runner, there are also marked differences. The difference of almost two centuries in the
production means that similar ideas are dealt with in different ways, taking into account
changes in context, audience knowledge and expectation and the textual forms. While
similarities and
differences
both texts share some features of genre, such as narrative perspective, one is verbal and
the other visual, requiring very different approaches to the same material.